Teaching a Directed Study on the Septuagint

I have the privilege of doing a one-on-one directed study on the Septuagint with one of our seminary students here at BTS. I'm obviously not a Septuagint scholar nor a specialist (though I have contributed two published academic pieces on the NT use of the LXX, including an article in BBR) Consequently, this is somewhat of a learning experience for me as well.

Obviously the starting point is Septuaginta: A Reader's Edition, and the entire world of biblical academia owes Gregory Lanier and William Ross a debt of gratitude for their hard work on this! I required my student to purchase that, as well as the classic work by Jobes and Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 2nd ed., as well as Jennifer Dines' The Septuagint. In addition, I just acquired a copy of Takamitsu Muraoka's incredible achievement, A Syntax of Septuagint Greek, and I will be making it available to my student (for obvious reasons he doesn't have to buy it; it's not cheap!)

From there I have given him a ton of outside reading from other sources, some quizzes, one test, and two major projects. This is a directed study, so not how I would handle a regular class. With that in mind, here's what my syllabus looks like:

[Please don’t mind the formatting; it’s tough to copy and paste directly from a Word doc. to a blog and still retain the formatting]

[Also: I’m interested in feedback, especially if I’ve missed some “must-read”English sources].

Introduction to the Septuagint (OT 745)

Theme Scripture: LXX Isaiah 53:5—αὐτὸς δὲ ἐτραυματίσθη διὰ τὰς ἀνομίας ἡμῶν καὶ μεμαλάκισται διὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν^.παιδεία εἰρήνης ἡμῶν ἐπ᾽αὐτόν, τῷ μώλωπι αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς ἰάθημεν.

                                                                                                

A. Description: “An introduction to the Septuagint with emphasis on its social and theological significance and how it compares with the Masoretic text. The course addresses the origins of the LXX, its use by the NT writers, translation technique and theology in the LXX when compared to the MT, its theological significance for modern Christians, and its use in textual criticism.”

*Prerequisites: AL511 (“Introduction to New Testament Exegesis”) and AL632 (“Principles of Hebrew Exegesis”). Septuagint OT 745 should be considered an advanced M.Div. OT elective or, alternatively, a Th.M. class.

B.  Course objectives. Having taken this class, the student should be able to competently:

1. Explain the basic facts about the existence of the Septuagint.

2. Read and translate the Septuagint (with appropriate helps).

3. Analyze the Septuagint theologically and linguistically in comparison to the Hebrew Masoreti

text and New Testament citations (with, at a minimum, an awareness of the Dead Sea Scrolls).

4. Grapple honestly with the theological significance of both the existence and the preservation of

the Septuagint.

5. Discuss key New Testament citations that utilize the Septuagint when it differs from the MT, 

offering a reasonable rationale (when possible) for why the inspired NT author did this.

6. Know the major works that have contributed to modern scholarship on the Septuagint, and those areas where work still needs to be done.

C. Required textbooks 

1. Septuaginta: A Reader’s Edition, eds. Gregory R. Lanier and William A. Ross 

(Peabody, MS: Hendrickson, 2018).

2. Karen H. Jobes and Moisés Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 2^nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2015).

3. Jennifer M. Dines, The Septuagint, Understanding the Bible and Its World (London: T&T Clark, 2004).

*There will be a significant amount of reading from other books and articles, but the 

above three books are those that the student should personally own.

*Digital formats for all books are acceptable.

*Throughout the class the student will be required to utilize T. Muraoka, A Syntax of 

Septuagint Greek (Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2016).

D. Grading

1. LXX translation quizzes (5%)

2. LXX and MT comparative analysis quizzes (5%)

3. LXX overview exam (5%)

4. Reading (15%)

*Total reading is approx. 1,090 pages plus 17 chapters of reading in the LXX 

(with one of those chapters read side-by-side with the Hebrew), plus portions of 

five letters between Augustine and Jerome.

5. Project 1: Textual and Translation Analysis (30%)

6. Project 2: Theology of the NT Use of the LXX (30%)

7. Memorization (3%)

8. Participation (5%)

9. Guest lecture in the professor’s Spring class “Elements of Hebrew Syntax” on “The Septuagint: What it is and why it matters.” (2%) [If this lecture does not work out, grading will be recalculated accordingly]. 

E. Class progression and projects: The class is divided into four “phases” revolving around four meetings between student and teacher. Each phase will focus on specific aspects of Septuagint research and knowledge, and each phase will contain its own cluster of requirements.

Meeting 1

This meeting will focus on the expectations of the class, the required projects, and the basic facts about the Septuagint and its significance. In addition, the professor and student will together spend some time reading and analyzing select LXX texts (initially, we will focus strictly on the Greek, not yet on the Hebrew). The professor will at this point make sure the student is up to speed on some developments in the study of Koine Greek, especially verbal aspect theory and deponency, and will discuss how this may or may not be relevant for the study of the LXX. Finally, the professor will provide the student with a study guide for the sole exam in this class.

Phase 1: Introduction

This phase is meant to introduce the student to the basic facts about the LXX and its importance. The student will familiarize himself with the Septuagint by reading it in the Greek. The reading will introduce the student to the basic issues surrounding the LXX and its significance for the early church.

Assignments for Phase 1

1. Jobes and Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 2^nd ed., in its entirety (approx. 380 pages).

2. Genesis 1–3 and Psalms 1–2 in the Septuaginta: A Reader’s Edition.

3. The exchange between Augustine and Jerome:

a. Augustine, Letter 28 (to Jerome), chapter 2.

b. Augustine, Letter 71 (to Jerome), chapters 2–3.

c. Jerome, Letter 72 (to Augustine), chapter 3.

d. Jerome, Letter 75 (to Augustine), chapter 1 (part 1) and chapters 6–7.

e. Augustine, Letter 82 (to Jerome), chapter 5.

4. Timothy E. Miller, “An Evangelical Apology for the Septuagint,” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journalvol. 22 (2017): 35–55.

5. David A. deSilva, “Five Papyrus Fragments of Greek Exodus,” Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies(BIOSCS) vol. 40 (2007): 1–29.

6. Karen Jobes and Moisés Silva, “Response to James Barr’s Review of Invitation to the Septuagint,” BIOSCS vol. 35 (2002): 43–46.

7. Karen H. Jobes, “When God Spoke Greek: The Place of the Greek Bible in Evangelical Scholarship,” Bulletin for Biblical Researchvol. 16.2 (2006): 219–236. 

8. W. Edward Glenny, “The Septuagint and Biblical Theology,” Themeliosvol. 41.2 (August 2016): 263–278.

Meeting 2

During this meeting, the student and professor will discuss the material read during phase 1, as well as the various issues involved in the study of the LXX. The professor and student will spend more time reading and discussing passages from the LXX together, this time with reference to the Hebrew text. 

Phase 2: Reading, translating, and appreciating the LXX

During this phase, the student should spend a significant amount of time reading and analyzing the LXX Greek text, gain a solid understanding of the history of the LXX, its key manuscripts, and the key figures involved in its reception, begin to grapple with LXX lexicography, and develop a working knowledge of the Apocrypha and its significance for NT studies.

Assignments for Phase 2:

1. Read all of Dines, The Septuagint(approx. 150 pages).

2. Read LXX Genesis 4–10.

3. Take three quizzes (proctored) on basic LXX translation and syntactical analysis. The student will be allowed to use Muraoka’s Syntax of Septuagint Greekand oneNT syntax of his or her choice.

4. Take an exam covering the basic facts of the LXX (any time before meeting #3). No helps allowed. A study guide will be provided during “Meeting 1.”

5. Harold P. Scanlin, “Charles Thomson: Philadelphia Patriot and Bible Translator,” BIOSCS vol. 39 (2006):115–132.

6. Chapter 4, “Staying Jewish: Language and Identity in the Greek Bible,” from Tessa Rajak, Translation and Survival: The Greek Bible of the Ancient Jewish Diaspora(20 pages).

7. Jan Joosten, “Varieties of Greek in the Septuagint and the New Testament,” pages 22–45 in The New Cambridge History of the Bible: From the Beginnings to 600, eds. James Carleton Paget and Joachim Schaper (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2013).

8. Cameron Boyd–Taylor, “Lexicography and Interlanguage—Gaining our Bearings,” BIOSCS vol. 37 (2004): 55–62.

9. Martha L. Wade, “Evaluating Lexical Consistency in the Old Greek Bible,” BIOSCSvol. 33 (2000): 53–75.

10. John A. L. Lee, “Ἀποσκεγη in the Septuagint,” Journal of Theological Studies

vol. 23.2 (Oct 1972): 430–437.

11. Dirk Büchner, “A Cultic Term (ἁμαρτία) in the Septuagint: Its Meaning and Use from the Third Century B.C.E. until the New Testament,” BIOSCSvol. 42 (2009).

12. Takamitsu Muraoka, “How to Analyse and Translate the Idiomatic Phrase 

יִתֵּן מִי,” BIOSCS vol. 33 (2000): 47–52.

13. Jonathan T. Pennington, “‘Heaven’ and ‘Heavens’ in the LXX: Exploring the Relationship between שָׁמַיִםand οὐρανός,” BIOSCSvol. 36 (2003): 39–59.

14. David Lincicum, “The Epigraphic Habit and the Biblical Text: Inscriptions as a Source for the Study of the Greek Bible,” BIOSCSvol. 41 (2008): 84–92.

Meeting 3

During this meeting, the professor and student will discuss the material read during “phase 2” and the methodology for cross-textual analysis. The professor and student will put this into practice by analyzing together various texts in both their Greek and Hebrew forms, discussing such matters as translator style and faithfulness (or lack thereof) to the source text, anomalies in how the LXX might differ from the Hebrew, possibilities of a different Vorlage, etc. In the process, the professor and student will discuss Hebrew vs. Greek syntax, and how the former might be appropriately rendered into the latter. Finally, the professor and student will begin to discuss the significance of NT use of the OT when such usage is clearly LXX.

Phase 3: Cross-textual analysis

At this point, the student should begin to gain competency in analyzing the Greek side-by-side with the Hebrew MT and begin to develop a methodology for analyzing NT use of the LXX including possible NT interaction with the Apocrypha.

Assignments for Phase 3:

1. Read LXX Genesis 11–15. The LXX of Genesis 15 should be read in conjunction with the Hebrew MT.

2. Three quizzes on cross textual analysis between the LXX and the MT. The student should utilize Muraoka’sSyntax, one Hebrew syntax of his choice, and one Greek syntax of his choice.

3. Anssi Voitila, “Some Remarks on the Perfect Indicative in the Septuagint,” BIOSCSvol. 26 (1993): 11–16.

4. David Cleaver–Bartholomew, “One Text, Two Interpretations: Habakkuk OG and MT Compared,” BIOSCSvol. 42 (2009): 52–67.

5. P. J. Williams, “The LXX of 1 Chronicles 5:1–2 as an Exposition of Genesis 48–49,” Tyndale Bulletinvol. 49.2 (1998): 369–71.

6. Deborah Levine Gera, “Translating Hebrew Poetry into Greek Poetry,” BIOSCSvol. 40 (2007): 107–120.

7. Arie van der Kooij, “A Short Commentary on Some Verses of the Old Greek of Isaiah 23,” BIOSCSvol. 15 (1982): 36–50.

8. Nicholas Peterson, “An Analysis of Two Early LXX Manuscripts from Qumran: 4QLXXNum and 4QLXXLeva in the Light of Previous Studies,” Bulletin for Biblical Research vol. 19.4 (2009): 481–510.

9. Chapter 2, “Identifying a Source as Greek or Hebrew,” in R. Timothy McLay, The Use of the Septuagint in New Testament Research(40 pages).

10. Paul A. Himes, “Why Did Peter Change the Septuagint? A Reexamination of the 

Significance of the Use of Τίθημιin 1 Peter 2:6,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 

vol. 26.2(2016): 71–111.

11. Jonathan A. Linebaugh, “Announcing the Human: Rethinking the Relationship Between Wisdom of Solomon 13–15 and Romans 1.18–2.11,” New Testament Studies vol. 57 (2011):  214–237.

12. Paul A. Himes, “Wisdom and the Sojourning Saints or Christ and the Wandering Sinners? The Wilderness Wandering Motif in Hebrews as a Reaction to Wisdom of Solomon,” pages 227–249 in Getting into the Text: New Testament Essays in Honor of David Alan Black, eds. Daniel L. Akin and Thomas W. Hudgins (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2017).

13. Edmon L. Gallagher, “Augustine on the Hebrew Bible,” The Journal of Theological Studiesvol. 67.1 (April 2016): 97–114.

14. Matthew Flannagan, “Feticide, The Masoretic Text, and the Septuagint,” Westminster Theological Journal vol. 74.1 (Spring 2012): 59–84.

15. Paul D. Wegner, “Current Trends in Old Testament Textual Criticism,” Bulletin for Biblical Researchvol. 23.4 (2013): 461–480.

16. Martin Rösel, “The Text-Critical Value of Septuagint-Genesis,” BIOSCSvol. 31 (1998): 62–70.

17. William A. Ross, “Text-Critical Question Begging in Nahum 1,2–8: Re-evaluating the Evidence and Arguments,” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft vol. 127.3 (2015): 459–74.

18. Albert Pietersma, “Septuagint Research: A Plea for a Return to Basic Issues,” Vetus Testamentumvol. 35.3 (July 1985): 296–311.

Meeting 4

During this meeting, the professor and student will chart a path for “Project A” and “Project B,” paying special attention to the theological relevance of the LXX both for the NT era and for today. The professor will encourage the student towards a balanced perspective on the LXX that avoids the two extremes of ignoring it on the one hand (or, even worse, denying its existence) and replacing the Hebrew with it as the authoritative OT text on the other hand. Finally, the professor and student will discuss the relevance (if any) of the LXX for textual criticism of the Old Testament. If there is time, the professor and student will discuss the professor’s own LXX-related projects.

Assignments for Phase 4:

1. “Project A”: A thorough textual and translation analysis of a significant portion of the LXX in comparison with the Hebrew. [A chapter from one of the minor prophets]

2. “Project B”: The development of a coherent “theology of the Septuagint” that appropriately grapples with its role in Hebrew History, its use by NT authors, and its relevance for today, all fitting within a strong independent Baptist perspective on inerrancy.

*The student is encouraged to consult with the professor and/or provide updates in the process of working on these two projects.

Guidelines for the two projects

A. Textual and syntactical analysis of an LXX passage.

1. The student will choose one chapter from one of the minor prophets that contains a NT citation (a citation that is most likely from the LXX instead of the MT, or at least a citation that could have been either). The student is free to use Archer and 

Chirichigno’s Old Testament Quotations in the New(or any other secondary sources) 

as a guide for finding a suitable chapter.

2. The point of this paper is to provide a full-scale analysis of the LXX as compared to the MT.

3. After an introductory overview of this particular book of “The Twelve” in LXX form (appropriately citing the major scholarly sources), the student will go verse-by-verse, commentary-style, and analyze the LXX in relation to the Hebrew (full Hebrew and Greek text should be provided for each verse in the paper). The student is seeking to answer the following questions:

 a. Does the LXX translation exhibit any unique characteristics?

 b. Are there any lexical or syntactical oddities? If so, would such an oddity be 

 best explained via translator style, theological interpretation, a different 

 Vorlage, or some combination of the above?

 c. Does the LXX translator exhibit any unique perspectives compared to the MT, 

 especially theological perspectives? In other words, would a sermon from the 

 LXX preach differently than a sermon from the MT?

 4. The student will pay close attention to any passage(s) cited by a New Testament 

 author, seeking to answer the following questions:

 a. Why did the NT author cite the LXX instead of the MT? The simple answer 

 may be “because it was the translation his audience was using”; however, the 

 student should be open to more complicated explanations, as well.

 b. What role does this verse play in the NT author’s theology?

 c. Does the NT author seem to be drawing from the broader context of the LXX 

 verse under discussion?

 5. The conclusion will focus on general observations that the student feels he can make about the passage, including any areas that are unresolved and need further study.

6. There is no minimum or maximum page limit. The student is expected to take as long as necessary to provide a solid analysis.

7. There is no specific required number of sources. However, the student will be expected to utilize both LXX and Hebrew syntaxes as well as the best critical commentaries (especially those that discuss the LXX). In addition, the student should evidence awareness of key articles, monographs, or dissertations which discuss this particular chapter. In other words, grading will depend less on the number of sources and more on whether or not the student has evidenced knowledge of the most important sources for this kind of work.

8. Generally speaking, the student should follow BTS formatting and guidelines for this paper. When laying out the text of Greek and Hebrew for a particular verse, however, the student should make sure they are side-by-side, either using a “Table” in MS Word or using two columns via an “insert section” option.

9. The student is strongly encouraged to use Unicode front for Greek and Hebrew (e.g., Tyndale or SBL), in order to ensure that the fonts will show up properly when the project is sent as a MS Word document to the professor.

B. The Theological Significance of the LXX

1. The student will write an essay discussing the theological significance of the LXX for Christianity in both the 1^st and the 21^st centuries AD.

2. The student will do his best to explain how the NT writers approached the 

LXX, being careful not to generalize but also looking for any broad trends.

3. In the process, the student will analyze the following passages and explain why, in 

each case, the NT author (or speaker) went with the LXX over the MT (if he did), and 

why it matters:

a. Isaiah 42:1–4 in Matthew 12:18–21

b. Genesis 11:12–13 cited in Luke 3:36.

c. Habakkuk 2:4 cited in Romans 1:17.

d. Psalm 2:9, cited in Revelation 2:27.

e. Psalm 96:7 [MT 97:7] in Hebrews 1:6.

f. Amos 9:12 in Acts 15:17 (part of a longer quotation).

4. The student will then discuss the significance of the LXX for today (21^st century), 

including any relevance it might have for pastoral and missions work.

5. There is no page limit, over or under. The student should simply ensure that he has 

adequately dealt with the topic.

6. There is no minimum number of required sources. However, the student should 

make sure he or she interacts with key articles (e.g., Glenny, “Septuagint and Biblical Theology”) and monographs (e.g., Law, When God Spoke Greek) that discuss the theological significanceof the Septuagint. When discussing the NT citations of the OT, the student should plan on consulting the top two or three commentaries for each citation, both on the side of the NT and on the side of the OT.

Bibliography: Some relevant English books for Septuagint study

*In addition to the books listed below, the student should be aware of 

(1.) “The Septuagint Commentary” series (not completed yet). The series so far has 13 books out (both canonical and non-canonical LXX). E.g., W. Edward Glenny, 

Micah: A Commentary based on Micah in Codex Vaticanus. The series is published 

by Brill (and thus, unfortunately, prohibitively expensive!).

(2.) The Göttingen Septuagintaseries (published by Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht), an ongoing project which is probably the most important source for any study of the 

Septuagint that involves textual criticism. The series is approximately 2/3 complete.

1. Brotzman, Ellis R., and Eric J. Tully. Old Testament Textual Criticism: A Practical Introduction. 2^nded. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2016.

2. Carson, D. A., and G. K. Beale. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007.

3. Chamberlain, Gary Alan. The Greek of the Septuagint: A Supplemental Lexicon. Peabody, MS: Hendrickson, 2011.

4. Conybeare, F. C., and St. George Stock. Grammar of Septuagint Greek: With Selected Readings, Vocabularies, and Updated Indexes. Reprint. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001.

5.Dines, Jennifer M. The Septuagint. Understanding the Bible and Its World. London: T&T Clark, 2004.

6. Evans, T. V. Verbal Syntax in the Greek Pentateuch. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

7. Hatch, Edwin, and Henry A. Redpath. A Concordance to the Septuagint and the Other Greek Versions of the Old Testament. 2^nded. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1998.

8. Hengel, Martin. The Septuagint as Christian Scripture: Its Prehistory and the Problem of Its Canon. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2004.

9. Hiebert, Robert J. V., ed. “Translation Is Required”: The Septuagint in Retrospect and Prospect. SBL Septuagint and Cognate Studies 56. Atlanta: SBL, 2010.

10. Jellicoe, Sidney. The Septuagint and Modern Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968.

11. Jobes, Karen H., eds. Discovering the Septuagint: A Guided Reader. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2016.

12. Jobes, Karen H., and Moisés Silva. Invitation to the Septuagint, 2^nded. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2015.

13. Law, Timothy Michael. When God Spoke Greek: The Septuagint and the Making of the Christian Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.

14. Lee, J. A. L. A Lexical Study of the Septuagint Version of the Pentateuch. SBL Septuagint and Cognate Studies. Chico, CA: Scholars, 1983.

15. Longenecker, Richard N. Biblical Exegesis of the Apostolic Period. 2^nded. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999.

16. Marcos, Natalio Fernández. The Septuagint in Context: Introduction to the Greek Version of the Bible. Trans. Wilfred G. E. Watson. Atlanta, SBL: 2009.

17. McLay, R. Timothy.  The Use of the Septuagint in New Testament Research. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003.

18. Muraoka, T. A Syntax of Septuagint Greek. Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2016.

19. Muraoka, T. A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint. Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2009.

20. Muraoka, T. A Greek-Hebrew/Aramaic Two-way Index to the Septuagint. Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2010.

21. Olofsson, S. God Is My Rock: A Study of Translation Technique and Theological Exegesis in the Septuagint. Coniectanea Biblical Old Testament 31. Stockholm: Amqvist & Wiksell, 1990.

22. Rajak, Tessa. Translation and Survival: The Greek Bible of the Ancient Jewish Diaspora. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.

23. Swete, H. B. An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek. 2^nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1914.

24. Taylor, Bernard, ed. Analytical Lexicon to the Septuagint. Peabody, MS: Hendrickson, 2009.

25. Thackeray, Henry St. John. A Grammar of the Old Testament in Greek. Vol. 1: Introduction, Orthography and Accidence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909. Note that Thackeray only completed the first volume.

26. Tov, Emanuel. The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2015.

"Why did Peter correct the Septuagint?" My first LXX-related article (Bulletin for Biblical Research vol. 26.2)

I have always been fascinated by the New Testament use of the Old Testament, especially when it comes to the two different text-types underlying the Apostolic authors' citation. That's right: the inspired authors had, in a sense, two different Bibles to draw from: the Hebrew MT (or proto-MT), and the Greek Septuagint. Quite often (some would say the majority of times), they drew from the translation most familiar to their audience of Diaspora Jews and God-fearing Gentiles: the Greek Septuagint.
Excursus: once again, for the doubters--we have manuscripts of the Old Testament in Greek that pre-date the incarnation, and a side-by-side comparison of many texts of the NT with the Hebrew force the assumption that they were citing something else. Paraphrase won't cut it, because there is actually different material in the Apostles' citations that does not exist in the Hebrew but does exist in Greek OT manuscripts. I'm not trying to be snarky here, and forgive me if this is a bit too harsh, but the Greek Old Testament existed before the Apostles and denying this is the theological equivalent of suggesting that the US never landed on the moon.
The role of the Septuagint within New Testament theology is currently a hot-button (and fascinating) issue, and the reader should be aware of W. Edward Glenny's fantastic new article in the on-line journal Themelios vol. 41.2 (August 2016). The article is entitled "The Septuagint and Biblical Theology" and may be read here. This article is an essential introductory resource for those interested in this discussion.
Recently I had an article published by Bulletin for Biblical Research vol. 26.2 (2016) entitled "Why Did Peter Change the Septuagint? A Reexamination of the Significance of the Use of Titheimi in 1 Peter 2:6." First Peter 2:6 is one of the most fascinating instances of NT use of the OT since Peter's citation does not match either the LXX or the MT. In fact, my article is not the first to focus specifically on this verse; while my article stems from a paper I gave in 2009, in 2010 Dietrich-Alex Koch published a fascinating study (going a different direction than I did) in Zeitschrift fur Neuentestament Wissenschaft vol. 101; Koch and I are alike in that we both argue 1 Peter utilized the LXX text but altered it. Whereas Koch argues that 1 Peter 2:6 altered it to correct some awkward syntax of the LXX (and thus make the text clearer), I argue that 1 Peter changed it for lexical reasons: the Greek enballw was a sub-par lexical choice to describe the Messiah being "set" as  Cornerstone, and Titheimi was much superior for theological and discourse reasons. In fact Peter ends up creating a chiasm in verses 6-8:
***A. The Set One [titheimi] is
 *****B. honor to
 ********C. The believer
but
********C' To the unbeliever/disobedient one [textual variant here]
******B' dishonor
***A.' To those who are "set" [titheimi] for the purpose of disobedience.
This article will hold a soft spot in my heart since it's my first article since becoming a full-time professor at Baptist College of Ministry (fifth overall). Also, for some reason, BBR is my "lucky" journal in the sense that I have yet to have an article rejected by them (though this latest one had to go to a tie-breaker peer-reviewer, and involved some significant revision). For BBR I'm "2-for-2," for JETS I'm "1-3," and I have a couple other journals that I"m "1-for-1." I struggle, however, submitting journals to Tyndale Bulletin and Trinity Journal--collectively "0-for-5" for those two journals! (and Tyndale, especially, is probably the cream of the crop for Evangelical journals).
Finally, for those interested in further study of NT use of the OT in 1 Peter, pride of place will probably always belong to Dr. Karen Jobes and her work, especially her Baker Exegetical Commentary on 1 Peter and her essay "The Septuagint Textual Tradition in 1 Peter" in Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scripture (SBL, 2006). Also, in addition to Koch's article in ZNW, one very good article that I cited favorably is Jocelyn Williams, "A Case Study in Intertextuality: The Place of Isaiah in the 'Stone' Sayings in 1 Peter 2," Reformed Theological Review 66 (2007). Williams, like me, sees Peter as deliberately modifying the LXX for theological reasons in 1 Pet 2:6, and I build off of her work somewhat in my own article. Finally, as mentioned at the beginning, Glenny's brand-new Themelios article is a must-read for anybody interested in the topic.

Why I had my "Intro to NT Exegesis Students" translate from the Septuagint

Introductory note: 
For those who would deny that the Septuagint even exists (as I read once in a KJV-only journal), I would point to the following: 
1. We have LXX manuscripts that predate the Incarnation and the time of the Apostles (e.g., the Rylands 458 papyrus on Deuteronomy, dated to the 2nd century BC) 2. Plenty of passages exist in the Greek NT (whatever text-type you prefer) that actually agrees with LXX manuscripts against the Masoretic (e.g., Romans 15:12; in addition, simply go through the book of Hebrews, which is predominantly LXX, including both where it is similar to the Hebrew MT and where it isn't). This rules out the possibility that the Apostles were simply creating their own translation on the fly (at least in some cases).
End introductory note.

I recently finished teaching an excellent "Intro to New Testament Exegesis" class for the seminary here at Baptist College of Ministry. My focus on the class was twofold: 1. To provide a basic introduction to all the essential elements of exegesis, including lexical semantics, blog diagramming, some discourse analysis, and a little bit of textual criticism; 2. To push them towards expertise in handling Koine Greek.

To the latter end, I threw a "competency" exam at them the last day of class where they had to translate from a chunk of the Didache (approx. 100-130 AD, give or take a few decades). However, throughout the semester, I gave them "translation and parsing" quizzes taken straight from the canonical Septuagint (by "Septuagint," a.k.a. LXX, a.k.a. "Old Greek," I mean the version of the Old Testament translated in Alexandria over a period of many decades before the birth of Jesus. There were other Greek translations that came later).

The Septuagint is, to a significant degree, the "Bible of the early church." The average Gentile Christian (and perhaps many Hellenized Jewish Christians) would not have been able to read Hebrew. Consequently, the LXX was used by the apostles quite often (though not always) when quoting the Old Testament. Consequently, the LXX is a key part of New Testament studies. By default, the LXX usage of a particular word should be considered before (though not in exclusion of) the usage by Josephus, Philo, or secular Greek authors. Case in point: "hilasterion" in Romans 3:25 (the word only occurs twice in the NT) is used in the LXX Torah to refer to the physical Mercy Seat in the tabernacle (quite frequently!) This would obviously be in the back of the mind of the majority of Greek-speaking Christians reading Romans 3:25, at least Christians with even a cursory familiarity with the Old Testament). In other words, the LXX is in one sense the "lexical currency" of NT writers (some more than others).

How the LXX should be viewed regarding inspiration, canonicity, etc. is an open question within certain areas of Christian scholarship (which is why Augustine had his infamous debate with Jerome over the latter's new translation). Yet the most that can be said is that the NT writers viewed a translation as an adequate vehicle for conveying God's word, even if it differed somewhat from the originals.

This is hardly the tip of the iceberg, of course! LXX research is an exciting, ongoing field of study (for what it's worth, I recently had an article accepted for publication that suggests Peter "corrected" the LXX in 1 Peter 2:6 for various reasons). For the reader who's interested in this topic, I would recommend as the essential starting point the book Invitation to the Septuagint by Karen H. Jobes and Moises Silva.