Under Construction

Patristic and Other Early Christian Guidance for the Translation of the Septuagint into English
Last modified:  June 8, 2004
Recent additions at the bottom of the page.


 
The table below is illustrative of a methodology, but does not follow that methodology through in a comprehensive manner.  Ideally, one would prefer to act on the basis of a patristic consensus as to the meaning of a given text, rather than on the writings of one or two early Christian writers. 

 
Verse Reference
Brenton's Translation
(except where noted)
Modified Translation
-------------------------Comments-------------------------
Gn 1.20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth reptiles having life, and winged creatures flying above the earth in the firmament of heaven, and it was so. And God said, “Let the waters bring forth moving creatures having life, and winged creatures that fly above the earth in the firmament of heaven.” And it was so.  Brenton uses “reptiles” for the things swimming in the waters.  Basil (Hexaemeron 7) explains that fish “creep” through the water.  A better translation is thus “moving creatures.”
Gn 32.31-32 And Jacob called the name of that place, the Face of God; for, said he, I have seen God face to face, and my life was preserved.  And the sun rose upon him, when he passed the Face of God; and he halted upon his thigh. And Jacob called the name of that place, the Form of God; for, said he, I have seen God face to face, and my life was preserved.  And the sun rose upon him, when he passed the Form of God; and he halted upon his thigh. The Greek word eidoV translated “Face” in Brenton is more commonly given as “shape,” “fashion,” or “form.”  Athanasius (Discourse 3.16) contrasted Jacob, who had seen God’s Form (whom he identified with the Word), with Jesus’ audience in John 5.37-38.  To preserve the contrast, it is important that eidoV be rendered in the same way in both John and Genesis.  So in John, “Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his form.”
Ex 12.41 And it came to pass after the four hundred and thirty years, all the forces of the Lord came forth out of the land of Egypt by night. And it came to pass after the four hundred and thirty years, all the power of the Lord came forth out of the land of Egypt by night. “Forces” should be replaced with “power.”  See justification at note on Joel 2.25.
Ex 33.19 And God said, I will pass by before thee with my glory, and I will call by my name, the Lord, before thee. And God said, "I will pass by before thee with my glory, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee." Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lecture 9.8), evidently followed the text of Codex Alexandrinus (as represented in the modified translation).  He argued: “Being Himself the Lord, what Lord doth He proclaim?  Thou seest how He was covertly teaching the godly doctrine of the Father and the Son.”  The reading of Alexandrinus thus supports Trinitarian theology.
Lv 23.40 And on the first day ye shall take goodly fruit of trees, and branches of palm trees, and thick boughs of trees, and willows, and branches of osiers from the brook And on the first day ye shall take goodly fruit of trees, and branches of palm trees, and thick boughs of trees, and willows, and branches of agnos from the brook Brenton ended the list of arboreal items to be brought during the Feast of Tabernacles with “branches of osiers from the brook.”  The word translated osiers is actually agnos, which is very much like the Greek word for chastity.  Methodius (Banquet 4) provided a figurative reading of this passage in which he noted that the agnos is “by its very name the tree of chastity.”  Hence, it seems best to leave the tree with its Greek name, add a footnote to explain its significance, and thus preserve the allusion.
Nu 23.19 God is not as man to waver, nor as the son of man to be threatened. Not like a man is God suspended, nor like a son of man does he suffer threats A translation from the Masoretic Hebrew reads, “God is not a man, that he should lie, neither the son of man, that he should repent.”  This could be read as a denial of the deity of the Son of Man, Christ, and a denial of His Incarnation.  Brenton's translation is an improvement.  But the Greek verb in the first clause can be translated in any of these ways:  to be suspended, to waver, to be deceived.  Since Cyprian (Treatise 12.2.20) understood the first part of the verse to mean that the crucifixion (suspension) of Christ from the cross would not be like other crucifixions, the quite literal rendering (to be suspended) is preferable in this case.  Thus an improved translation is:  “Not like a man is God suspended, nor like a son of man does he suffer threats”;  as if to say, “God may be crucified, but not with impunity, not as though he were a mere man.”
Dt 13.18, 14.1 if thou wilt hear the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep his commandments, all that I charge thee this day, to do that which is good and pleasing before the Lord thy God.
    Ye are the children of the Lord your God: ye shall not make any baldness between you eyes for the dead.
If thou wilt hear the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep his commandments, all that I charge thee this day, to do that which is good and pleasing before the Lord thy God, ye are the children of the Lord your God.
    Ye shall not make any baldness between your eyes for the dead.
    Athanasius (De Decretis 6) plainly read the passage as follows:  “If thou wilt hear the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep his commandments, all that I charge thee this day, to do that which is good and pleasing before the Lord thy God, ye are the children of the Lord your God.
    “Ye shall not make any baldness between your eyes for the dead.”
    Thus, where Brenton connected “ye are the children of the Lord your God” with the sequel, Athanasius understood it to form the apodosis of 13.18.
Ps 4.5 (4.4) feel compunction upon your beds for what ye say in your hearts No modification. Rahlf, following Cyprian (Treatise 4.5), presents a text that could be translated, “Speak ye in your hearts and upon your beds be grieved [or pierced]”; or “Speak ye in your hearts and upon your beds:  be grieved.”  It would appear, however, that most early Christian writers followed texts that agree with Brenton.  Hence, Brenton’s translation should not be altered materially.
Ps 5.4 (5.3) In the morning thou shalt hear my voice: in the morning will I wait upon thee, and will look up. in the morning thou shalt hear my voice: in the morning I will stand beside thee, and I will see. According to Augustine (On the Psalms 5.4-5), commenting on this verse in a Latin translation of the LXX, a man stands by God when he does not lie in earthly pleasures, and he sees God “when the night of iniquity is over.”  An alternate translation of the Greek agrees with this understanding:  “in the morning thou shalt hear my voice: in the morning I will stand beside thee, and I will see.” (There is no need to understand this to imply that a vision of God’s essence results.)
Ps 5.12  (5.11) But let all that trust on thee be glad in thee: they shall exult for ever, and thou shalt dwell among them. But let all that trust on thee be glad in thee: they shall exult for ever, and thou shalt dwell in them. Augustine (On the Psalms 5.16) understood this verse to speak of Christ as our indweller (as in Ephesians 3.17).  Thus, “But let all that trust on thee be glad in thee: they shall exult for ever, and thou shalt dwell in them.”
Ps 6.5 who will give thee thanks in Hades? in Hades who will confess to thee? The Apostolic Constitutions (Book 2, Chapter 13) employed this verse to prove that there is no repentance after death.  Thus, “in Hades who will confess to thee?” (The same argument applies to Psalm 29.10 (30.9): “Shall the dust give praise to thee?” becomes “Shall the dust confess to thee?”) This rendering is bolstered also by Cyprian who, using a Latin translation based on the LXX, understood Ps 6.5 to refer to confession (Epistle 61.17).
Ps 6.8 (6.7) I am worn out because of all my enemies. I am grown old among all mine enemies Augustine (On the Psalms, 6.9) remarked that the “enemies” were sins, and Paul had written that we must put off the old man and his deeds (Colossians 3.9-10).  Hence, “I am grown old among all mine enemies,” a more literal rendering of the Greek, in agreement with Charles Thomson’s version
Ps 7.5  (7.4) if I have requited with evil those who requited me with good. if I have repaid them that requited me evil Augustine (On the Psalms, 7.3), commenting on this verse, wrote, “He then who repayeth not them that recompense evil, is perfect.”  Thus, in his view, the verse is an admonition against returning evil for evil (not evil for good, as Brenton has it), and an appropriate translation would be:  “if I have repaid them that requited me evil.”  Or, as Charles Thomson has it, “if I have requited them evil who did me wrong.”
Ps 7.14 (7.13) he has completed his arrows for the raging ones. he hath wrought his arrows for them that burn. Augustine (On the Psalms 7.14) understood the arrows to be the apostles, who set afire those they taught with a “great love of the kingdom of heaven.”  Thus the more literal rendering, “he hath wrought his arrows for them that burn.”
Ps 7.15 (7.14) Behold, he has travailed with unrighteousness, he has conceived trouble, and brought forth iniquity. Behold, he has travailed with unrighteousness, he has conceived toil, and brought forth iniquity. Augustine (On the Psalms 7.16) took this to be a reference to the toil that came as a consequence of Adam’s sin.  Hence, “Behold, he has travailed with unrighteousness, he has conceived toil, and brought forth iniquity.”
Ps 9.27 (10.6) For he has said in his heart, I shall not be moved, continuing without evil from generation to generation. For he hath said in his heart, “I shall not be moved from generation to generation without evil. Augustine (On the Psalms 10.4) interpreted a more literal translation as follows:  “A mind vain and full of error supposes that it cannot come from the mortal generation to the generation of eternity but by bad arts.”  Thus, “For he hath said in his heart, “I shall not be moved from generation to generation without evil.”
Ps 9.36 (10.15) his sin shall be sought for, and shall not be found. his sin shall be sought, and he shall not be found because of it. Brenton’s text omits two Greek words, included in Rahlfs, that transform the verse thus:  “his sin shall be sought, and he shall not be found because of it.”  With this Augustine (On the Psalms 10.12) agreed:  “that is, he shall be judged for his sins, and himself shall perish because of his sin.”
Ps 11.6 (12.5) Because of the misery of the poor, and because of the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the Lord, I will set them in safety; I will speak to them thereof openly. Because of the misery of the poor, and because of the sighing of the needy, now will I arise,” saith the Lord. “I will set them in salvation; I will speak boldly in him. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lecture 14.4) understood the first part of this verse to refer to the resurrection of Christ.  With this in mind, “safety” can be replaced with “salvation,” which better suggests Christ’s work.  Then the final clause can be translated in a straightforward way as, “I will speak boldly in him”; for, as Augustine wrote (On the Psalms 12.7), this is “according to that in the Gospel, ‘For he taught them as one having authority, and not as one of their scribes.’[Mt 7.29]”  Hence, “Because of the misery of the poor, and because of the sighing of the needy, now will I arise,” saith the Lord. “I will set them in salvation; I will speak boldly in him.”
Ps 16.4 (17.4) I am purposed that my mouth shall not speak amiss. As for the works of men, by the words of thy lips I have guarded myself from hard ways. That my mouth shall not speak the works of men, for the sake of the words of thy lips I have kept hard ways In his Institutes (Book 4.15), John Cassian referenced this verse when he determined to treat “with silence those things of which it is a shame even to speak.”  Elsewhere (Conference 24.22), the second part of the verse is contrasted with Christ’s saying, “My yoke is easy, and my burden is light” (Matthew 11.30).  A translation more literal than Brenton’s, and one that comports with Cassian’s understanding, is:  “That my mouth shall not speak the works of men, for the sake of the words of thy lips I have kept hard ways.”
Ps 16.13 (17.13) deliver my soul from the ungodly: draw thy sword, because of the enemies of thine hand. deliver my soul from the ungodly: thy sword from the enemies of thine hand. Augustine (On the Psalms 16.13) commented as follows:  “My soul is Thy weapon, which Thy hand, that is Thy eternal power, hath taken to subdue thereby the kingdoms of iniquity, and divide the righteous from the ungodly.  This weapon, then ‘deliver from the enemies of Thine hand.’ ”  A more literal translation is, “deliver my soul from the ungodly: thy sword from the enemies of thine hand.”
Ps 17.41 (18.40) And thou has made mine enemies turn their backs before me. Thou hast also given me a back of mine enemies. Augustine (On the Psalms 18.41), reading a literal Latin translation of the Greek, interpreted the verse to mean that God had “made them [the enemies] to be a back to” the psalmist, “that is, to follow” him.  Thus, “Thou hast also given me a back of mine enemies.”
Ps 18.6 (19.6) His going forth is from the extremity of heaven, and his circuit to the other end of heaven: and no one shall be hidden from his heat. His going forth is from the height of heaven, and his goal unto the height of heaven: and no one shall be hidden from his heat. Brenton thus tied the meaning of this verse to the movement of the sun mentioned in the previous verse:  “he [the sun] will exult … to run his course.”  However, Irenaeus said that when the Psalmist expressed himself in this way,  he “announced that very truth of His being taken up again to the place from which He came down, and that there is no one who can escape His righteous judgment. (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4.33.13)”   The verse was read not as a description of astronomical phenomena but as a prophecy of Christ’s Incarnation, Ascension back into heaven, and future judgment of mankind.  Thus a revised translation, which is in fact closer to the Greek, reads, “His going forth is from the height of heaven, and his goal unto the height of heaven: and no one shall be hidden from his heat.”
Ps 27.8 (28.8) The Lord is the strength of his people, and the saving defender of his anointed. The Lord is the strength of his people, and the shield of the salvation of his Christ. Augustine (On the Psalms 27.8) commented as follows:  “That, having saved them by His Christ, after the strength of war, He may protect them at the last with the immortality of peace.”  A more literal translation supports Augustine’s interpretation:  “The Lord is the strength of his people, and the shield of the salvation of his Christ.”  The Lord, then, is the protector of the salvation that comes through Christ, not the saving protector of his Christ.  (Notice also that “salvation” here is actually plural:  “salvations”.)
Ps 29.10 (30.9) What profit is there in my blood, when I go down to destruction? What profit is there in my blood, when I go down to corruption? Athanasius (Letter 6.4) referred this verse to the Lord, who “for our sakes … came down, and being incorruptible, put on a corruptible body for the salvation of all of us.”  He went on to explain that the verse “does not mean that the descent of the Lord was without profit, for it gained the whole world; but rather that after He had thus suffered, sinners would prefer to suffer loss than to profit by it.”  In his view, then, the verse is a caution to sinners, showing them the Word’s dismay that they should reject him, and make his sacrifice of no profit to them.  But since this is the world of corruption, not destruction, the following is preferable: “What profit is there in my blood, when I go down to corruption?”
Ps 34.12 (35.12) They rewarded me evil for good, and bereavement to my soul. They rewarded me evil for good, and barrenness to my soul. “Bereavement” is more literally “barrenness.”  Augustine (On the Psalms 35.13), commenting on this verse, identified this barrenness with “the tree He cursed, when seeking fruit He found none” [Mt 21.19]. 
Ps 34.18 (35.18) in an abundant people I will praise thee. in a weighty people I will praise thee. The Greek word translated “abundant” is, more literally, “heavy.”  Augustine (On the Psalms 35.21) contrasts the “weighty people of God” with those whom the wind carries away like chaff.  Hence, “in a weighty people I will praise thee.”
Ps 35.9 (36.8) They shall be fully satisfied with the fatness of thy house. They shall be drunken with the fatness of thy house Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures 17.19) understood this verse as a prophecy of the day of Pentecost: “But Peter who had the Holy Ghost, and who knew what he possessed, says, ‘Men of Israel, ye who preach Joel, but know not the things which are written, these men are not drunken as ye suppose. (Acts 2.15)’ ”  Thus the translation, “They shall be drunken with the fatness of thy house,” which is also closer to the Greek.
Ps 37.8 (38.7) For my soul is filled with mockings; and there is no health in my flesh. For my soul is filled with delusions; and there is no health in my flesh. There are variant readings in the Greek.  Rahlfs prefers “For my loins are filled with mockings …”, which brings the Greek closer to the modern Hebrew (as Rahlfs is wont to do).  In some manuscripts, the “mockings” is replaced with a word that can also mean “delusions.”  Even without this variant, it would appear that a soul filled with “mockings” could be described as delusional.  Thus, “For my soul is filled with delusions …” is a third possible translation.  This appears to be Augustine’s understanding of his Latin, for he wrote (On the Psalms 38.10), “Let mourning be our portion, until our soul be divested of its illusions, and our body be clothed with soundness.”  (Jerome’s Latin (Against the Pelagians 3.14) appears to have read “loins,” as in the Douay translation.)
Ps 37.21 (38.20) [Brenton omits the last line of this verse.] and they cast me forth, the beloved, as a loathsome carcase Brenton omits the last line of this verse.  However, the following appears in Psalterium Graeco-Latinum Veronese, which dates to the sixth century, at the end of the verse:  “and they cast me forth, the beloved, as a loathsome carcase.”  Augustine (On the Psalms 38.25) read these words in his Latin version, and commented, “Was it not enough that he was ‘dead’? wherefore ‘in abomination’ also?  Because he was crucified.”
Ps 39.7 (40.6) Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not; but a body hast thou prepared me. No modification. Rahlfs text, following the Gallican Psalter, replaces “a body” with “ears,” though the three most ancient uncials have “a body” in agreement with Hebrews 10.5.  Irenaeus (Against Heresies, 4.17) also apparently read the psalm as Rahlfs has it, though the difference is not critical to his argument.  In Athanasius (Letter 6), the incarnational aspect of the verse is important as it is in Hebrews, and the reading is as in Brenton.  Thus, Brenton’s underlying text here seems preferable to Rahlfs.
Ps 43.13 (44.12) Thou hast sold thy people without price, and there was no profit by their exchange Thou hast sold thy people without price, and there was no multitude in their jubilations The word Brenton renders with “exchange,” alalagmasin, appears to be the dative plural of “jubilation” or “loud noise”; while “profit” is more commonly rendered “multitude.”  Hence Augustine (On the Psalms 44.11):  “For when the Christians were flying before the pursuit of enemies, who were idolaters, were there then held any congregations and jubilees to the honour of God?”  Thus, “Thou hast sold thy people without price, and there was no multitude in their jubilations.”  (The reading “exchange,” allagmasin, is present in Rahlfs, based on the Bohairic.)
Ps 44.8 (45.7) God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above them that partake of thee. In reference to this verse Athanasius (Discourse 1.46) wrote, “The Singer speaks of us all as 'fellows' or 'partakers' of the Lord: but were He one of things which come out of nothing and of things originate, He Himself had been one of those who partake.  But, since he hymned Him as the eternal God, saying, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever,’ and has declared that all other things partake of Him, what conclusion must we draw, but that He is distinct from originated things, and He only the Father’s veritable Word, Radiance, and Wisdom, which all things originate partake, being sanctified by Him in the Spirit?”  Athanasius’ understanding of metocouV sou is reminiscent of Hebrews 3.14 (metocoi ... tou cristou, partakers of Christ) and 6.4 (metocouV ... pneumatoV agiou, partakers of the Holy Spirit) in the Authorized Version.  Thus, the alternate translation, “God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above them that partake of thee.”
Ps 45.8 (46.7) The Lord of hosts is with us. The Lord of powers is with us.  “Hosts” should be replaced with “powers” for the reasons given in the note at Joel 2.25.  This change should occur at several other places in the Psalms as well.
Ps 48.3 (49.2) both the sons of mean men, and sons of great men; the rich and poor man together both the earthborn, and the sons of men; the rich and the poor man together A more literal translation is, “both the earthborn, and the sons of men; the rich and the poor man together.”  With this Augustine (On the Psalms 49.3) agrees:  “For whosoever pertain to Adam, are ‘earthborn’: whosoever pertain to Christ, are ‘sons of men’.”
Ps 48.12 (49.11) And their sepulchres are their houses for ever, even their tabernacles to all generations: they have called their lands after their own names And their sepulchres are their houses for ever, even their tabernacles to all generations: they have invoked their names upon their lands  The more common meaning of epikalew is to invoke, so an alternate translation would read, “And their sepulchres are their houses for ever, even their tabernacles to all generations: they have invoked their names upon their lands.”  And with this Augustine (On the Psalms 49.14) agrees: “They shall take bread and wine to their tombs, and there they shall invoke the names of the dead.”
Ps 55.14 (56.13) that I should be well-pleasing before God in the land of the living   that I should be well pleasing before God in the light of the living The Greek quite plainly reads “light of the living”; and Augustine (On the Psalms 56.18) made much of this word:  “ ‘Light of the living’ is light of the immortal, light of holy men.  He that is not in darkness, is pleasing in the light of the living.”  Hence, “that I should be well pleasing before God in the light of the living.”
Ps 67.12 (68.11)  The Lord God will give a word to them that preach it in a great company. The Lord God will give a word to them that preach the gospel in much power. Eusebius (Demonstratio Evangelica 3.1) quoted this verse to prove that “they [the disciples of the Lord] did not use human words to persuade their hearers, but that it was the power of God that worked with them in the Gospel preaching.”  Thus, “The Lord God will give a word to them that preach the gospel in much power.”
Ps 67.5 (68.4) make a way for him that rides upon the west (the Lord is his name) make a way for him that hath ascended into the west (the Lord is his name) According to Cyprian (Treatise 12.2.6), this is a proof that Christ is God.  But the proof depends on the identification of the Lord with the one who ascends into, not rides upon, the west.  Hence, “make a way for him that hath ascended into the west (the Lord is his name).”  (See note on Psalm 67.34.)
Ps 67.9 (68.8) the heavens dropped water at the presence of the God of Sina the heavens dropped at the presence of the God of Sinai Augustine (On the Psalms 68.8-9) understood the heaven itself to have dropped, and he interpreted this to refer to the manna in the wilderness and to the efficacy of the gospel among the Gentiles.  Hence, “the heavens dropped at the presence of the God of Sinai.”
Ps 67.13 (68.12) The king of the forces of the beloved, of the beloved, will even grant them for the beauty of the house to divide the spoils. The king of the powers of the beloved, even in the beauty of the house divideth the spoils. The repetition of “of the beloved” is a peculiarity of Codex B, and can be dropped.  Eusebius (Demonstratio Evangelica 3.2) connected this verse with Isaiah 53.12, which pictures the Christ dividing the spoils; in Eusebius’ interpretation, the spoils are the Gentiles, divided among the disciples.  A reading that fits his interpretation is, “The king of the powers of the beloved, even in the beauty of the house divideth the spoils.”
Ps 67.34 (68.33) Sing to God that rides on the heaven of heaven, eastward.      Sing unto God that hath ascended upon the heaven of heaven, eastward. (See note on Psalm 67.5.)  According to Augustine (On the Psalms 68.38), “in these words, he perceiveth not Christ who believeth not his Resurrection and Ascension.”  Hence, “Sing unto God that hath ascended upon the heaven of heaven, eastward.”
Ps 68.1 (69.1) for alternate strains  for them that shall be changed Augustine (On the Psalms 69.2) understood this to refer to the change made in men by Christ’s Passion.  (This revision also applies to Psalm 44.1 and 79.1.)
Ps 84.9 (85.8) I will hear what the Lord God will say concerning me.  I will hear what the Lord God will say in me. Athanasius implied (Discourse 3.2) that Asterius the Sophist used this verse in his vain attempt to draw Jesus down to the status of the prophets, by showing that God was in them as well as in Jesus.  A more literal rendering is thus in order:  “I will hear what the Lord God will say in me.”
Ps 85.16 (86.16) give thy strength to thy servant, and save the son of thine handmaid. give thy strength unto thy child, and save the son of thine handmaid. Athanasius (Discourse 2.51-52) interpreted this differently.  An alternate meaning of the word paiV, translated “servant” in Brenton, is “child.”  Athanasius explained the verse as follows: “For the natural and true child of God is one, and the sons of the handmaid, that is, of the nature of things originate, are other.  Wherefore the One, as Son, has the Father’s might; but the rest are in need of salvation.”  He then proceeded to provide examples from Scripture where paiV clearly means “child.”  Thus a translation that reflects Athanasius’ understanding of the verse as a contrast between the uncreated Son, who by nature is Mighty God, and mankind, which stands in need of salvation, is:  “give thy strength unto thy child, and save the son of thine handmaid.”
Ps 86.4 (87.4) I will make mention of Rahab and Babylon to them that know me. I will make mention of Rahab and Babylon as among them that know me. But Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures 2.9) stresses that this verse provides “Scriptural testimony of [Rahab’s] having been saved” and so proves that wicked women also may be saved through repentance.  A preferable translation is thus, “I will make mention of Rahab and Babylon as among them that know me.”
Ps 90.9 (91.9) For thou, O Lord, art my hope: thou, my soul, hast made the Most High thy refuge. For thou, O Lord, art my hope: thou hast made the Most High thy refuge Eusebius (Demonstratio Evangelica 9.7), viewing the Son as in subordination to the Father, interpreted this to mean the following:  “For thou thyself, O Lord, who art the hope of me that utter this prophecy, knowest a greater than thyself, God Most High, and thou hast made Him thy refuge.”  And though Eusebius’ viewpoint in general smacks of Arianism, there is, in fact, no “my soul” in the verse.  A straightforward translation is, “For thou, O Lord, art my hope: thou hast made the Most High thy refuge,” which can safely be understood of Christ as man.
Ps 109.3 (110.3) With thee is dominion in the day of thy power, in the splendours of thy saints: I have begotten thee from the womb before the morning. With thee is dominion in the day of thy power, in the splendours of thy holy ones: from the womb before the morning star have I begotten thee Athanasius (Discourse 4.28) argued that this prophecy could not refer to the Son’s birth of Mary, as was alleged by the Sabellians.  Instead, it deals with the Son’s ineffable generation from the Father, before he was born in the flesh as the descendant of David, the bright and morning star (Revelation 22.16).  That Athanasius read “morning star” rather than simply “morning” is made doubly certain by the fact that he refers to the birth of the stars before Adam.  (By using the expression “womb,” the prophet indicates that the Son is “proper and genuine” to the Father, and not a work (Discourse 4.27).)  Hence the translation, “With thee is dominion in the day of thy power, in the splendours of thy holy ones: from the womb before the morning star have I begotten thee.”  (“Saints” is replaced by “holy ones,” since the latter term is generally understood to include the holy angels.)
Ps 118.28 (119.28) My soul has slumbered for sorrow. My soul has slumbered for weariness. The word translated “sorrow” is akhdiaV, which would be better translated as “apathy,” “indifference,” “torpor” or “weariness.”  On this passage, John Cassian (Institutes, 10.4) remarked, “Quite rightly does he say, not that his body, but that his soul slept. For in truth the soul which is wounded by the shaft of this passion [akhdiaV] does sleep, as regards all contemplation of the virtues and insight of the spiritual senses.”  An improved translation would then be, “My soul has slumbered for weariness.”  (If the word “accidie” (spiritual sloth or sluggishness) had not dropped out of use, it would be perfect here.)  (Rahlfs suggests “slumbered” be replaced with “dripped,” but since the majority of LXX texts read with Brenton, “slumbered” is preferable.  Rahlfs appears to have been motivated by a desire to reproduce the Hebrew more accurately.)  Similar modifications may be in order for Psalm 60.2, 101.1, and 142.4; Sirach 22.13 and 29.5; Isaiah 61.3; and Baruch 3.1.
Ps 118.85 (119.85) Transgressors told me idle tales. Transgressors told me subtleties. Basil (On the Spirit, Chapter 1) spoke of his own “subtlety about syllables” and referred to this verse.  “Subtlety” seems preferable to “idle tales” in Basil, since his emphasis early in On the Spirit is on fine yet unwarranted distinctions in meaning the transgressors (the Arians) were then using to demote the Spirit to creature status.   (Earlier, Basil had referred to a proper care over the meaning of “every phrase … and syllable” as laudable.  His reference to this proper care as “subtlety … about syllables” is ironic.)  Hence, “Transgressors told me subtleties.”
Ps 130.2 (131.2).  I shall have sinned if I have not been humble, but have exalted my soul: according to the relation of a weaned child to his mother, so wilt thou recompense my soul. If I have not been humble-minded, but exalted my soul as a weaned child is to his mother, so wilt thou recompense my soul. John Cassian (Institutes 1.3) reported that Egyptian monks wore cowls “which cover[ed] only the head, in order that they may constantly be moved to preserve the simplicity and innocence of little children.” (In the ancient world, such dress was characteristic of children who had not been weaned, and of peasants.)  Cassian, reading a Latin translation of the LXX, used this verse to support the monks’ practice, and a more literal translation makes the connection clear:  “If I have not been humble-minded, but exalted my soul as a weaned child is to his mother, so wilt thou recompense my soul.”  A contrast (whether supported by the actual experience of the race in raising children or not) is implied between children who have not been weaned, whose innocence monks emulate, and weaned children, who are often rascals. 
Ps 137.8 (138.8).  O Lord, thou shalt recompense them on my behalf. O Lord, thou shalt recompense on my behalf Athanasius (On Luke X.22, 2) employed this verse to bolster the thought that Christ died in man’s place, taking upon himself God’s judgment of mankind.  The incarnate Logos paid what was due on mankind’s behalf.  Hence the line should be rendered as though spoken to Christ the Lord:  “O Lord, thou shalt recompense on my behalf.”  (That this thought is fully in keeping with Athanasius’ soteriology is plain from Incarnation of the Word, section 20.)
Job 7.18 Wilt thou visit him till the morning, and judge him till the time of rest? Wilt thou visit him till the morning, and judge him in rest? Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lecture 14.5) understood this to refer to Christ’s death (a rest) and burial as a judgment of those who had rejected him.  Hence, “Wilt thou visit him till the morning, and judge him in rest?”
Job 12.24 Perplexing the minds of the princes of the earth. Reconciling the hearts of the princes of the earth. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures 13.14) connected this passage to L 23.12:  “the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together, for before they were at enmity.” Cyril wrote:  “For it became Him who was on the eve of making peace between earth and heaven, to make the very men who condemned Him the first to be at peace; for the Lord Himself was there present, ‘who reconciles the hearts of the princes of the earth.’”  This also appears closer to the Greek, but doesn’t fit the immediate context in Job as well as Brenton’s choice.  (Incidentally, Charles Thomson’s translation, “Who changeth the heart of the rulers of a land,” fits the context and is fairly close to the Greek.)  A translation based on Cyril’s understanding would read, “reconciling the hearts of the princes of the earth.”
Job 14.10, 14 But a man that has died is utterly gone; and when a mortal has fallen, he is no more. ... For if a man should die, shall he live again, having accomplished the days of his life? I will wait till I exist again? But a man that hath died is utterly gone? And when a mortal hath fallen, he is no more? ... For if a man should die, he shall live again, having accomplished the days of his life. I will wait till I be made again. Verse 10 is preceded by a description of a tree, seemingly dead, that revives.  Brenton has taken verse 10 to mark a contrast between the tree and man, who simply stays dead.  Thus he has, “But a man that has died is utterly gone; and when a mortal has fallen, he is no more.” Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures 18.15), however, saw continuity between trees and mankind.  Like trees, man will also come to life again, in the resurrection.  Thus Cyril would have verse 10 read, “But a man that hath died is utterly gone? And when a mortal hath fallen, he is no more?”  That is, if a tree can come to life again, can less be done for man, the head of creation?
    In verse 14, Brenton casts doubt on the resurrection by framing questions: “For if a man should die, shall he live again, having accomplished the days of his life? I will wait till I exist again?”  Cyril read that as an affirmation: “For if a man should die, he shall live again, having accomplished the days of his life. I will wait till I be made again.”  The problem with Cyril’s reading centers on verse 11, which appears to coordinate with 10 and include mankind with the seas and rivers, which, unlike the cut tree, are said to be gone for good when they dry up.  Verse 12, however, solves the difficulty by pointing out that man is like the rivers and trees in that he will not rise again in this creation, but definitely like the trees in that he will live again (though only in the new creation).
Job 40.19. This is the chief of the creation of the Lord; made to be played with by his angels. This is the chief [or beginning] of the creation of the Lord; made to be mocked by his angels. Of this verse, Cyril of Jerusalem wrote (Catechetical Lectures 8.4), “He rules even over the devil, but bears with him of His long-suffering, not from want of power; as if defeated … But He suffered him to live, for two purposes, that he might disgrace himself the more in his defeat, and that mankind might be crowned with victory.  O all wise providence of God! which takes the wicked purpose for a groundwork of salvation for the faithful.  For as He took the unbrotherly purpose of Joseph’s brethren for a groundwork of His own dispensation, and, by permitting them to sell their brother from hatred, took occasion to make him king whom He would; so he permitted the devil to wrestle, that the victors might be crowned; and that when victory was gained, he might be the more disgraced as being conquered by the weaker, and men be greatly honoured as having conquered him who was once an Archangel.”  From this it is plain that the alternate translation, given by Brenton in a footnote, is preferable: “This is the chief [or beginning] of the creation of the Lord; made to be mocked by his angels.”
Prv 8.30  I was by him, suiting myself to him. I was with him, disposing creation. Thomson’s version, “I was harmonizing with Him,” can be interpreted in the same way as Brenton’s.  However, Athanasius (Discourse 2.20) understood the Son to be the “Framer” of the universe, and used this verse as proof.  In his translation of Athanasius, Newman rendered the participle armozousa (Brenton's “suiting”) with “disposing,” and gives, “I was by him disposing.”  My preference is, “I was with him, disposing creation.”
Prv 18.2  When an ungodly man cometh into a depth of evils, he despiseth them. When an ungodly man cometh into a depth of evils, he despiseth. Athanasius (Against the Heathen 1.8) used this verse as an illustration for the following truth: “Just as … men who plunge into the deep, the deeper they go down, advance into darker and deeper places, so it is with mankind. For they did not keep to idolatry in a simple form, nor did they abide in that with which they began; but the longer they went on in their first condition, the more new superstitions they invented: and, not satiated with the first evils, they again filled themselves with others, advancing further in utter shamefulness, and surpassing themselves in impiety.”  Or, again, after quoting Proverbs 18.2 against the Arians (Discourse 3.1), he added: “For refutation does not stop them, nor perplexity abash them; but, as having ‘a whore’s forehead,’ they ‘refuse to be ashamed’ [Jeremiah 3.3] before all men in their irreligion.”  The thought here is not that the wicked despise some familiar evils and replace them with others more evil.  Nor is it that they despise “the depth of evils” itself.  If they did, they would repent, and the continuation of the verse, “but dishonour and reproach come upon him,” would seem out of place.  Rather, those in the depth of evils seek out new wickedness because they thirst for evil in all its forms and despise everything good.  They have an evil disposition that plunges them deeper into evil.  Hence it seems better to end the verse with “despiseth” and not supply an object.
Prv 24.32  Afterwards I reflected Afterwards I repented. Cyril of Jerusalem saw this as evidence of Solomon’s repentance (Catechetical Lectures 2.13); and, in fact, the Greek verb here is commonly translated repented.  Hence, “Afterwards I repented.”
Hosea 4.12 they have gone astray in a spirit of whoredom. they have been led astray by a spirit of fornication. In his Life of Antony (section 6), Athanasius presented an encounter between Antony and the spirit of lust, who says that the prophet Hosea wrote of him in this passage, and “by me [some] have been tripped up.”  The thought, then, is not that some erred, whose error is characterized by fornication, but that the spirit of fornication caused some to err.  Thus, “they have been led astray by a spirit of fornication.”
Hosea 10.5 and what should a king do for us, speaking false professions as his words? he will make a covenant: judgment shall spring up as a weed on the soil of the field.  The inhabitants of Samaria shall dwell near the calf of the house of On; for the people of it mourned for it: and as they provoked him, they shall rejoice at his glory, because he has departed from them. and what should a king do for us, speaking false professions as his words? he will make a covenant: judgment shall spring up as a weed on the soil of the field.  The inhabitants of Samaria shall dwell near the calf of the house of On; for its people mourned for it: and as they provoked him before, they shall again rejoice at its glory, because he hath departed from them. Given that Hosea 10.6 describes Jesus’ being led away to King Herod, how should the previous verse be translated?  Brenton’s version makes little sense (to me, at least) but does demonstrate the freedom the translator has with the Greek auton/autou, which can be represented with either “him” or “it.”  Perhaps Brenton’s version can be improved if we consider this as a prophecy of the status of Israel (Samaria) after they reject their King, who makes a new covenant as a result of which judgment springs up upon the earth, a king whom they hand over to “king Jarim,” the wild vine.  The thought of verse 5 would then be that even as the people used to provoke God by rejoicing in the glory of their idols, they shall do so again, after they reject their Messiah, when they “shall  live near the calf of the house of On.”  Verse 5 could then be translated: “The inhabitants of Samaria shall dwell near the calf of the house of On; for its people mourned for it: and as they provoked him before, they shall again rejoice at its glory, because he hath departed from them.”  This is then followed by the prophecy of Christ’s appearance before Herod.
Hosea 10.6 And having bound it for the Assyrians, they carried it away as presents to king Jarim. And having bound him for the Assyrians, they led him away as a present to king Jarim. The “it” seems to indicate the “calf of the house of On” (verse 5).  However, both Justin Martyr (Trypho 103) and Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lecture 13.14) understood this to refer to Christ being led away to appear before King Herod (Luke 23.7).  Thus: “And having bound him for the Assyrians, they led him away as a present to king Jarim.”  (Elsewhere Rufinus (Commentary on the Apostles Creed 21) explains that Jarim means “a wild vine,” and Herod was truly a wild vine in the sense that he was of an alien stock.)
Hosea 13.13-14 he is thy wise son, because he shall not stay in the destruction of thy children.  I will deliver them out of the power of Hades, and will redeem them from death. this thy son is wise; therefore he shall not stay in the destruction of thy children.  I will deliver them out of the power of Hades, and will redeem them from death. Lactantius (Divine Institutes 4.19) viewed this passage as a prophecy of Christ’s resurrection, and Brenton’s translation harmonizes with that view.  It reads, “he is thy wise son, because he shall not stay in the destruction of thy children.  I will deliver them out of the power of Hades, and will redeem them from death.”  Rahlfs’ text, on the other hand, would force a “not” into the first clause:  “he is not thy wise son”; but the majority of manuscripts support Brenton on this point.  With two alterations in the interest of accuracy, the passage can be rendered, “this thy son is wise; therefore he shall not stay in the destruction of thy children.  I will deliver them out of the power of Hades, and will redeem them from death.”
Amos 9.6 It is he that builds his ascent up to the sky.  It is he that buildeth his ascension unto heaven. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures 14.24) quotes this verse as a prophecy of Christ’s ascension.  Thus the translation:  “It is he that buildeth his ascension unto heaven.”
Micah 3.8 Surely I will strengthen myself with the Spirit of the Lord. Surely I will perfect strength with the Spirit of the Lord. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures 16.29) read the passage as though Micah spoke here for God.  Given that God has no need to strengthen himself, and the fact that the verb here is not in the middle voice, a superior translation is, “Surely I will perfect strength with the Spirit of the Lord.”
Joel 2.25 And I will recompense you for the years which the locust, and the caterpillar, and the palmerworm, and the cankerworm have eaten, even my great army, which I sent against you. And I will recompense you for the years which the locust, and the caterpillar, and the palmerworm, and the cankerworm have eaten, even my great power, which I sent against you. In his Defense of the Nicene Definition (section 20), Athanasius noted how, at the council of Nicea, the Arians agreed to call the Son the “True Power” of the Father, since created things like cankerworms were also called His “power.”  To restore this connection, and to reflect the Greek text more literally, the word “army” should be replaced with “power.”
Nahum 2.1-2 (1.15-2.1) for they shall no more pass through thee to thy decay.  It is all over with him, he has been removed, 2 one who has been delivered from affliction has come up panting into thy presence For they shall no more pass through thee to that which is old:  it is finished; it hath been removed. 2 He went up, breathing upon thy face, delivering thee from tribulation. Athanasius (Letter 1.8) noted this passage as a prophecy of Christ, who said, “It is finished” (John 19.20); who breathed upon the disciples’ faces and said, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost” (John 20.22).  And, in fact, a literal rendering is, “For they shall no more pass through thee to that which is old:  it is finished; it hath been removed. 2 He went up, breathing upon thy face, delivering thee from tribulation.”  That which is old is, of course, the old covenant, under which one had to pass through Judea to arrive in Jerusalem where the temple stood.
Hab 2.15 Woe to him that gives his neighbour to drink the thick lees of wine. Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour to drink muddy destruction. Gregory of Nyssa (Against Eunomius 11.5), applying this verse to Eunomius, exclaimed, “How does he trouble and befoul the truth by flinging his mud into it!”  Similarly, Antony (as portrayed in Athanasius’ Life of Antony 26) applied the verse to the demons who try to lead Christians, monks especially, from the life of holiness through deception.  Thus, a more literal translation seems fitting:  “Woe unto him that giveth his neighbour to drink muddy destruction.”
Hab 3.2 thou shalt be known between the two living creatures. in the midst of two lives shalt thou be known Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lecture 12.20) wrote, “And what is the sign, O prophet, of the Lord’s coming? And presently he saith, ‘In the midst of two lives shalt thou be known,’ plainly saying this to the Lord: ‘Having come in the flesh thou livest and diest, and after rising from the dead thou livest again.’ ”  Thus, “in the midst of two lives shalt thou be known.”
Zeph 3.7-8 prepare thou, rise early:  all their produce is spoilt.  Therefore wait upon me, saith the Lord, until the day when I rise up for a witness. “Prepare thyself, rise at dawn: all their gleanings are destroyed.  Therefore wait thou for me,” saith the Lord, “until the day of my resurrection at the Testimony.”  Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lecture 14.6) understood the passage as follows:  “But what says Zephaniah in the person of Christ to the disciples? ‘Prepare thyself, be rising at the dawn: all their gleaning is destroyed’: the gleaning, that is, of the Jews, with whom there is not a cluster, nay not even a gleaning of salvation left; for their vine is cut down.  See how He says to the disciples, ‘Prepare thyself, rise up at dawn’: at dawn expect the Resurrection.  And farther on in the same context of Scripture He says, ‘Therefore wait thou for Me, saith the Lord, until the day of My Resurrection at the Testimony.’  Thou seest that the Prophet foresaw the place also of the Resurrection, which was to be surnamed ‘the Testimony.’  For what is the reason that this spot of Golgotha and of the Resurrection is not called, like the rest of the churches, a church, but a Testimony?  Why, perhaps, it was because of the Prophet, who had said, ‘until the day of My Resurrection at the Testimony.’ ”  Hence the more literal translation, in agreement with Cyril’s understanding of the passage:  “ ‘Prepare thyself, rise at dawn: all their gleanings are destroyed.  Therefore wait thou for me,’ saith the Lord, ‘until the day of my resurrection at the Testimony.’ ”
Zech 3.8 I bring forth my servant The Branch. I bring forth my servant The Dayspring. See the comments to Jeremiah 23.5.
Zech 6.12 Behold the man whose name is The Branch; and he shall spring up from his stem, and build the house of the Lord. Behold the man whose name is The Dayspring; and he shall spring up beneath it, and build the house of the Lord. “Branch” should be replaced with “Dayspring” for the reasons given at the comments on Jeremiah 23.5.  “From his stem” is absent from the Greek, which reads “beneath it” or “beneath him.”  Hence, “Behold the man whose name is The Dayspring; and he shall spring up beneath it, and build the house of the Lord.”
Zech 13.7 smite the shepherds, and draw out the sheep. smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered. Matthew 26.31 and Mark 14.27 both give the meaning thus:  “smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.”  This was Justin’s (Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 53) understanding of the passage also: “the prophet Zechariah foretold that that this same Christ would be smitten, and His disciples scattered.” The reading of Codex Alexandrinus, “smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered,” agrees with both the New Testament and Justin.
Mal 2.10 Have ye not all one father? Did not one God create you? Did not one God create you? Have ye not all one father? Commenting on this passage, Athanasius (Discourse 2.59) wrote, “First he puts created, next Father, to shew …that from the beginning we were creatures by nature, and God is our creator through the Word; but afterwards we were made sons, and thenceforward God the Creator becomes our Father also.”  Rahlfs’ text agrees with Athanasius.  Thus, “Did not one God create you? Have ye not all one father?”
Isaiah 8.4 For before the child shall know how to call his father or his mother, one shall take the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria before the king of the Assyrians. For before the child shall know to call father or mother, he shall take the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria in the presence of the king of the Assyrians. Athanasius (Incarnation of the Word 33, 37) understood this to be a prophecy of Christ’s rule over his enemies (as is Numbers 24.5-17).  A closer translation of this verse that takes Athanasius’ interpretation into account reads, “For before the child shall know to call father or mother, he shall take the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria in the presence of the king of the Assyrians.”
Isaiah 9.4 they shall be willing, if they were burnt with fire. they shall wish they were burnt with fire: The sense seems to be that fire would persuade them [those who steal garments] to be willing to compensate the victims of their theft.  However, Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechectical Lectures 12.24) implied that this refers to Jews who are troubled because they fail to recognize their Messiah, predicted in the following verse:  “For unto us a son is born.”  In like manner, Athanasius (Defence of His Flight 12-13), when he had shown that Jesus himself avoided those who threatened him, said of his critics, “When they see these things … will they not desire, as it is written, to become fuel of fire, because their counsels and their words are contrary to what the Lord both did and taught?”  Hence, “they shall wish they were burnt with fire: for unto us a son is born ...”
Isaiah 9.5 For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel. for unto us a child is born, and unto us a son is given, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called Angel of Great Counsel, Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Potentate, Father of the Age to Come. Athanasius (On Luke X.22, 5) made the point that this verse referred to the Son as a Father, the Father of the age to come.  It seems prudent, then, to diverge from Codex Vaticanus here, which omits the reference to the Son as Father, and to follow Codex Alexandrinus:  “For unto us a child is born, and unto us a son is given, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called Angel of Great Counsel, Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Potentate, Father of the Age to Come.”  (Or one might follow Athanasius’ text, which seems to read, “For unto us a child is born, and unto us a son is given, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called Angel of Great Counsel, Mighty God, Potentate, Father of the Age to Come.”)
Isaiah 33.20 Behold, the city Sion, our refuge, thine eyes shall behold Jerusalem. Behold, city of Sion:  thine eyes shall see our salvation.  Jerusalem  … Irenaeus said that Isaiah wrote this to show “that He should Himself become very man, visible, when He should be the Word giving salvation. (Against Heresies, 3.20.4) ”  Brenton removes the Messianic content of the prophecy altogether.  An improved translation is thus, “Behold, city of Sion:  thine eyes shall see our salvation.  Jerusalem is …”  (The Masoretic version reads, “Look upon Zion, the city of our solemnities:  thine eyes shall see Jerusalem.”)
Isaiah 38.19 from this day shall I beget children, who shall declare thy righteousness. from this day shall I make children, who shall declare thy righteousness Athanasius (Discourse 2.4), arguing against the Arians, who took the literal sense of verses such as Proverbs 8.22 (“the Lord created me”), emphasized that this verse shows that natural children are sometimes spoken of as “made,” even though they are, in fact, begotten.  A more literal translation thus reads, “… from this day shall I make children, who shall declare thy righteousness.”
Isaiah 42.5 Thus saith the Lord God, who … giveth breath to the people on it, and spirit to them that tread on it. Thus saith the Lord God, who … giveth breath to the people on it, and spirit to them that trample upon it. Both Irenaeus (Against Heresies 5.12.2) and Basil (On the Spirit 53) understood this verse to mean that, although God gives life to all living things, he reserves his Spirit for those who trample earthly desires underfoot.  Hence, “Thus saith the Lord God, who … giveth breath to the people on it, and spirit to them that trample upon it.”
Isaiah 43.21 my people whom I have preserved to tell forth my praises. my people whom I have acquired to tell forth my praises. This verse is quoted in 1 Peter 2.9.  However, the thought there is that there is a new people of God, whom he has acquired (through the blood of Christ), not an old people whom he has preserved.  This is also Irenaeus’ view of the passage.  He wrote that Isaiah had “plainly announced that liberty which distinguishes the new covenant, and the new wine which is put into new bottles (Mt 9.17), that is, the faith which is in Christ, by which He has proclaimed the way of righteousness sprung up in the desert, and the streams of the Holy Spirit in a dry land, to give water to the elect people of God, whom He has acquired, that they might show forth His praise. (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4.33.14)”  Hence the revised translation, “my people whom I have acquired to tell forth my praises.”
Isaiah 45.12 I have made the earth, and man upon it: I with my hand have established the heaven; I have given commandment to all the stars. I have made the earth, and a man upon it: I with my hand have established the heaven; I have given commandment to all the stars Given the fact that Eusebius (Demonstratio Evangelica 5.3) understood Isaiah 45.12-16 to be a prophecy of Christ and the subjection of the nations to him through the gospel, consideration should be given to the following:  “I have made the earth, and a man upon it: I with my hand have established the heaven; I have given commandment to all the stars,” to emphasize that one man in particular is in view.
Isaiah 63.11 that brought up from the sea the shepherd of the sheep who brought up from the earththe shepherd of the sheep. Brenton has followed Codex Vaticanus.  Rahlfs’ text reads, “who brought up from the earth the shepherd of the sheep.”  Lactantius (Divine Institutes, 4.12) read the passage in the Old Latin version as Rahlfs has it and applied it to Christ, whose flesh was of the earth, and who is our shepherd.
Jer 11.19 But I as an innocent lamb led to the slaughter, knew not. But I was like an innocent lamb led to the slaughter; did I not know it? Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lecture 13.19) explained that this was a prophecy of Christ, who certainly did know what was in store for him.  “Hear then from Jeremias, and assure thyself:  ‘I was like a harmless lamb led to be slaughtered; did I not know it?’  For in this manner read it as a question, as I have read it; for He who said, ‘Ye know that after two days comes the passover, and the Son of Man is betrayed to be crucified,’ (Mt 26.2) did He not know?”  An improvement based on Cyril would then read, “But I was like an innocent lamb led to the slaughter; did I not know it?”
Jer 17.9 The heart is deep beyond all things, and it is the man, and who can know him? The heart is deep beyond all things; and he is a man, and who shall know him? The natural inference is that “it [the man]” is  “The heart” which is described as “deep beyond all things” in the clause immediately preceding.  But in Irenaeus’ understanding the question “who can know him?” in the verse in Jeremiah is similar to Isaiah 53.8’s, “Who shall declare his generation?”  Like this passage from Isaiah, Jeremiah 17.9 is a reference to the Incarnation.  In response to the question “who can know him?” Irenaeus wrote, “But he to whom the Father which is in heaven has revealed Him, knows Him, so that he understands that He who ‘was not born either by the will of the flesh, or by the will of man,’ (J 1.13) is the Son of man, this is Christ, the Son of the living God. (Against Heresies 3.19.2)”  Thus, a translation in keeping with Irenaeus’ understanding will not emphasize the unknowable nature of the human heart, but instead will state plainly that the Christ is the man (born of God) whom no one knows unless the Father reveals him.  An improved translation in the light of patristic understanding is:  “The heart is deep beyond all things; and he is a man, and who shall know him?”  (In contrast, the Masoretic text reads, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and it is exceedingly corrupt: who can know it?”)
Jer 23.5 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will raise up to David a righteous branch, and a king shall reign and understand, and shall execute judgment and righteousness on the earth. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will raise up to David a righteous dayspring, and a king shall reign and understand, and shall execute judgment and righteousness on the earth Eusebius (Demonstratio Evangelica 7.3) wrote of this prophecy: “No one, it is certain, arose after the time of Jeremiah among the Jews who could be called a righteous rising. … We must agree that the subject of this prophecy can only be our Lord and Saviour, called in other places the light of the world [J 8.12, 9.5], and the light of the nations [L 2.32].”  The Greek word Brenton renders with “branch” is anatolh, commonly used of the east, or the sunrising.  In Luke 1.78 in the Authorized Version, it is translated with “dayspring,” which matches Eusebius’ understanding here, since the “rising” in view provides light.  Hence, “Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will raise up to David a righteous dayspring, and a king shall reign and understand, and shall execute judgment and righteousness on the earth.” 
Jer 23.18, 22 For who has stood in the counsel of the Lord, and seen his word? who has hearkened, and heard? … But if they had stood in my counsel, and if they had hearkened to my words, then would they have turned my people from their evil practices. For who has stood in the substance of the Lord, and seen his word? who has hearkened, and heard? … But if they had stood in my subsistence, and if they had hearkened to my words, then would they have turned my people from their evil practices. Athanasius (To the Bishops of Africa, 4) used these verses to show that the Word is in God’s very being, and is not apart, like a creature – as the Arians asserted.  Brenton has used “counsel” to translateuposthmati and upostasei, which both pertain to what stands beneath, to underlying reality.  (After Athanasius’ time, and largely due to the Cappadician Fathers, this term became distinct from ousia, which signifies essence.)  Thus, if one were to enter God’s true being, the Word would be present.  An alternate translation is:  “For who has stood in the substance of the Lord, and seen his word? who has hearkened, and heard? … But if they had stood in my subsistence, and if they had hearkened to my words, then would they have turned my people from their evil practices.”  This is consistent with the rendering of the Reverend Ellershaw, whose translation of To the Bishops of Africa appears in Volume 4 of the Second Series of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers.
Jer 38.22 (31.22) for the Lord hath created safety for a new plantation: men shall go about in safety. for the Lord created salvation for a new planting: men shall go about in salvation. Thomson has, “Since the Lord hath created safety for a new plantation, with safety men may walk about.”  Athanasius (Discourse 2.46) commented that this verse “prophesies of the renewal of salvation among men, which has taken place in Christ for us.”  It thus seems better to translate swthria with “salvation” rather than “safety.”  Thus, “for the Lord created salvation for a new planting: men shall go about in salvation.”
Lam 4.20 The breath of our nostrils, our anointed Lord. The spirit of our countenance, the Lord’s Christ. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures 13.7) understood this passage to speak of “the Lord Christ seized by men.” Basil (On the Spirit 48) employed the same verse as he showed that the Holy Spirit received many of the same appellations as the Father and the Son: and here the Son was called  ‘spirit.’  Hence, a rendering in agreement with these Fathers (and one which is more literal as well): “The spirit of our countenance, the Lord’s Christ.”
Susannah 45 The Authorized Version translates, quite literally, “the Lord raised up the holy spirit of a young youth whose name was Daniel.” God raised up the Holy Spirit upon a young youth whose name was Daniel. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures 16.31) understood this to refer to God’s own Holy Spirit, not the spirit of Daniel, which was holy.  Thus, “God raised up the Holy Spirit upon a young youth whose name was Daniel.”  Cyril’s understanding depends on the genitive “of a young youth” being what is known as a genitive of space.  The Authorized Version is more straightforward.
Dan 4.19 Then Daniel, whose name is Baltasar, was amazed about one hour. Then Daniel, whose name is Baltasar, became mute for about one hour. Athanasius (Life of Antony 82) wrote that Antony sometimes became mute when visitors came to see him, “as it is written in Daniel.”  Afterwards, “he would resume the thread of what he had been saying before.”  Also, the plain sense of the Greek verb seems to be “became mute” rather than “was amazed.”  Thus, “Then Daniel, whose name is Baltasar, became mute for about one hour.”

 
1 Kingdoms 21.14 (1 Samuel 21.13).  Brenton has, “And he changed his appearance before him, and feigned himself a false character in that day; and drummed upon the doors of the city, and used extravagant gestures with his hands, and fell against the doors of the gate, and his spittle ran down upon his beard.”  A more literal translation is, “And he changed his appearance before him, and feigned himself a false character in that day; and drummed upon the doors of the city, and was carried in his hands, and fell against the doors of the gate, and his spittle ran down upon his beard.”  Relying on the Old Latin, Augustine (On the Psalms 34.1) interpreted the phrase “[he] was carried in his hands” as a reference to Jesus:  “Because when He commended His Own Body and Blood, He took into His Hands that which the faithful know; and in a manner carried Himself, when He said, ‘This is My Body.’ ”