Originally posted by JS357
Are you referring to the Hebrew original or the koine Greek translation? The references I find refer to the Greek translation as the Septuagint, not the Hebrew original. Also there seems to have been some rejection of the Greek translation by some Jewish scholars, early on. (Don't mistake me for a scholar.)
Were the actual original 12 apostles Hellenized J ...[text shortened]... than the Hebrew? I have looked into this a little bit but would be interested in learning more.
For what this is worth, I understood that the septuagint referred to a translation into Greek commissioned by Ptolemy II in Alexandria, as part of his project to collect all of the great books of that time in his library. In a book concerning the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are documents reliably dated to the period from maybe 200 BCE up to 68 CE, one finding reported is that these documents confirm that the Septuagint was a faithful translation and matched well with the Dead Sea Scrolls evidence. So on that score there is no good reason to challenge the Septuagint translation - indeed, it is considered excellent.
As regards the later compilations of books by Christians and (separately and for their own purposes) by Jews, there is no question that some were included and others excluded on grounds that can still be debated.
As to what was read by the Apostles and by Jesus, I wonder just what evidence we have for this? It seems terribly ambitious to claim to know the answer definitively. Clearly, one debate raised by the Dead Sea Scrolls (and doubtless other sources like Josephus) would be about what was available at the time for them to have read and what influences were present in that period. We do know that some of the material attributed to Jesus was present in earlier sources, such as the "blessed are the ..." passage. His teachings were not explosively original and out of the blue, even though he clearly did have a very particular voice. He also lived in a period of turmoil with a great number of different sects active among the Jews. It would be incredible to imagine he was impervious to their influence or that he would ignore their influence on his audiences.
Incidentally, everyone in that period was Hellenized. Following the conquests of Alexander the Great and the successor regimes of the Ptolemies and the Seleucids respectively, that simply was a major factor in the cultural evolution of the region and while one might wish it absent or welcome it fully, it was very much present and a huge influence on the way people thought.