LXX vs Masoretic

[redhotmagma]

I was under the impression that the Masoretic is the preffered text.  Until yesterday, I was reading something that said otherwise.  Can anyone provide a good resource for understanding this issue, or give me the bullet points.

Thanks

[WhiteWings]

Prefered usually means: We have have stick to this text to support our doctrine.
It is noteworthy that the NKJV is one of the few modern translations still based on the "Western" or "Byzantine" manuscript tradition.
While doing some digging on the subject, I learned that the New Testament, as a general rule, agrees with the Septuagint more frequently than with the Masoretic Text. But the Old Testament that I was using (the King James Version) was translated using the Masoretic Text rather than the Septuagint. I also learned that the Septuagint is more closely aligned with the biblical manuscripts found in the Dead Sea scrolls as well, and the Dead Sea scrolls date back to the 2nd century BC, well before the New Testament was written.
......
It should not be surprising to learn that the Dead Sea scrolls indicate the existence of Hebrew texts of the Old Testament other than the Masoretic Text, firstly because the Dead Sea scrolls predate the Masoretic Text by 1000 years, and secondly because the Masoretic Text was redacted by the Masoretes (who of course rejected Jesus as the Messiah).
.......
At the end of this time, all other Hebrew manuscripts except for the Masoretic Text disappeared. The fact is that they were destroyed by the same people who had gathered them up - the Talmudic, Masoretic Jews.
.......
Just read the whole article. The gist of it is that the masoretic text is corrupted on purpose to prove Jesus was not the Messaiah.
http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=32990

[WhiteWings]

More
(http://spammeat.mininiche.com/media/minispam.jpg)

http://christianjewishbible.netfirms.com/massoretic_text.htm


First, the differences between the Greek OT and the Hebrew Bible are major, not minor. Whole sections (Jeremiah and Esther), totally different chronological numbers, inclusion of apocrypha and differences everywhere. Since there is no accepted English translation of the Greek OT, and no handy-dandy inexpensive carry-around edition, we don't see the differences so easily.

http://forum.bible.org/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=5797

That should get you started Red.
There is a English LXX translation: Brenton's LXX. Many free electronic versions on Internet.