John Calvin and his Bible

John Calvin and the Septuagint

Evidence Calvin Read the Septuagint (LXX):  

1. Commentaries and Comparisons:  

   - Calvin frequently referenced the Septuagint in his biblical commentaries. For example, in his Commentary on Acts 7:14, he notes the Septuagint’s variation in the number of Jacob’s descendants (75 vs. the Hebrew’s 70), attributing the difference to textual transmission while affirming the Hebrew text’s primacy.  

   - In his Commentary on Genesis 5, he compares the Septuagint’s longer lifespans for patriarchs with the Hebrew Masoretic Text, concluding that the Hebrew original is more reliable. John Calvin did not conclude the Septuagint as a devilish version. 

2. Respectful but Critical Use:  

   - Calvin acknowledged the Septuagint’s historical value but prioritized the Hebrew Old Testament. He wrote:  

     > "The Septuagint translators have sometimes wandered far from the true meaning, but their labors deserve respect as they opened the way for the Gentiles." (Commentary on Psalm 22:16).  

3. Theological Works:  

   - In the Institutes of the Christian Religion (4.16.14), Calvin cites the Septuagint’s rendering of Isaiah 3:10 to argue against merit-based salvation, showing his engagement with Greek textual traditions.  

Calvin’s Views on Bible Translations of His Day

  

1. Critique of the Vulgate:  

   - Calvin criticized the Latin Vulgate for doctrinal biases, particularly its support of Catholic teachings like purgatory. He argued:  

     > "The Vulgate is often faulty, either through the ignorance or the presumption of the translators, who have dared to twist Scripture to their own purposes." (Institutes, 4.16.14).  

2. Advocacy for Vernacular Translations:  

   - Calvin strongly supported translating Scripture into common languages. He praised the Geneva Bible (1560), which included his theological notes, as a tool for laypeople:   

     > "The Word of God is not to be imprisoned in an unknown tongue but made accessible to all." (Preface to the Geneva Bible). John Calvin did not pursue a perfect Bible in his time.

3. Emphasis on Original Languages:  

   - Calvin insisted that translations must adhere strictly to Hebrew and Greek sources: (John Calvin did not specify which Greek manuscript or text is perfect.)

     > "Translators must not deviate from the genuine sense of the Holy Spirit... even if it offends human ears." (Commentary on 2 Timothy 3:16).  

Calvin’s Opinions on Bible Translators

  

1. Praise for Faithful Translators:  

   - Calvin commended colleagues like Pierre Robert Olivétan, translator of the French Olivétan Bible (1535), for their fidelity to the original texts:  

     > "Olivétan’s work is a faithful mirror of the divine Word, free from human corruption." (Preface to the Olivétan Bible).  

French Olivétan Bible's Sources

Old Testament: Translated directly from the Masoretic Hebrew text, with occasional reference to the Septuagint (LXX) and the Latin Vulgate for difficult passages.

New Testament: Based on Erasmus’ Greek New Testament (3rd edition, 1522) and compared with Luther’s German Bible (1522).

2. Critique of Biased Translators:  

   - He condemned Catholic translators for altering Scripture to support doctrines like papal authority:  

     > "They mutilate, corrupt, and disguise the Word of God... to serve their own superstitions." (Treatise against the Libertines, 1545).  

3. Collaborative Approach:  

   - Calvin collaborated with scholars like Theodore Beza to produce accurate translations, emphasizing teamwork and rigorous scholarship: He did not see his translation perfect without error. 

     > "No single mind can grasp the depths of Scripture; we must labor together in humility." (Letter to William Farel, 1540).  

Conclusion  

John Calvin engaged critically with the Septuagint but prioritized the Hebrew Masoretic Text for doctrinal authority. He championed vernacular translations grounded in original languages, rejecting the Vulgate’s inaccuracies. While he respected diligent translators, he sharply criticized those who distorted Scripture for theological agendas. His legacy lies in balancing scholarly rigor with a pastoral commitment to making Scripture accessible, epitomized in the Geneva Bible and his influential commentaries.