By Water & Blood

Theodotion

17. ^[158]Concerning Theodotion, who was from Pontus.^[158] But after this, in the time immediately following, that is, ^[159]in the reign of Commodus----I mean, of Commodus II----there was a certain Theodotion^[159] of Pontus, of the doctrine^[160] of Marcion, the heresiarch of Sinope. Having become angered^[161] with his heresy, he turned aside to Judaism and was circumcised and learned the language of the Hebrews and their writings; he also published (a translation) on his own account. He published many things in agreement with the seventy-two, for he derived many (peculiar) practices from the translational habit(s) of the seventy-two. Now you become the judge, O great lover of the good, of such a matter as this, whether the truth is more likely to be found with these three----I mean Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion ----who, moreover, were not together, but were remote from one another in both time and place; and there were not many, but only three, and yet they were unable to agree with one another. Or (was the truth) with the seventy-two, who were the first to translate, were at the same time, and were divided into thirty-six groups, according to the command of the king? And, furthermore, they did not converse with one another, but by the Holy Spirit they brought out the entire translation in absolute agreement; and where there was need for an addition in explanation of a word, it was the same among them all. Though they did not know what each one by himself was translating, |34 they agreed absolutely with one another, and the translations were identical. And where they cast out words, they translated in agreement with one another.^[162] So it is clear to those who through love of the truth seek to investigate that they were not merely translators but also, in part, prophets.^[163] For the things for which there was no need they left out of the translation----the things which Origen later inserted in their places, with the asterisks. Likewise also those that had been added he did not take away, knowing rather that there was need of them, but wherever he found one of these words employed he left it with an obelus, merely indicating by the obelus his knowledge about the reading of the passage. And by means of the lemniscus and the hypolemniscus he likewise indicated such (passages) as were found in two ways among some of the seventy-two translators in a few passages that are not unlike, but similar and having the same significance, as if a man should say "he conversed" instead of "he spoke," or "he has come" instead of "he came." And we have written for you the facts concerning the four translators.