Exodus 12:13 in the Septuagint translates "I will protect you" instead of "I wlll pass over you."  That's quite a different meaning.  "I will protect you"  takes a more active stance than the more passive "I will pass over you."

The Septuagint is based on the Greek translation of the original Old Testament.  As far as I know it's the version Jesus and his disciples quoted from, and that's why I use it.

I can't verify it, but I've heard that most Bible translations use a later version of the Hebrew text which may or may not contain some deliberate fuckery by the Jewish leaders of the time who sought to steer people away from thinking Jesus had been the Messiah all along.

What have you read/heard?  What version do you use?  Has my analysis been incorrect?

Do you have other information about the various translations?

Learn Hebrew.  The Tanach was not written in Greek. Jesus did not use a Greek translation, lol.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-tanakh-full-text

https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/63255/jewish/The-Bible-with-Rashi.htm

The things about the LXX, is the quality of translation varies greatly from book to book.

Read through your post again, the DSS have pretty much shown that the Leningrad Codex is faithful to what are now the oldest extant OT writings.

Really? He quoted from the Septuagint, and most theologians believed that He, like most other Jews in that period and from that region, were familiar with both.

In fact, the Septuagint OT is the most quoted version in the New Testament.

Moreover, we know through the findings of the Dead Sea Scrolls that Bible translations based on the Septuagint have remained astoundingly faithful to what we find on the scrolls, or to what the Early Christians/Jews at the time were using. In addition, Judaism did not have an officially canonized OT until well after the time of Christ. Thus, when one says "use what the Jews were using", implying Hebrew, they are mistakingly making the assumption that "real Jews" were a homogeneous people who only used Hebrew. Not so.

Check out John Bergsma on the Dead Sea Scrolls.

It's a useful tool for understanding the philosophy behind the Hebrew language and how it translates to the philosophy of western languages.

A good read on how different Hebrew is: https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/language/philosophy-of-the-hebrew-language.htm

Remember that ultimately all the tools/translations in the world won't do you any good unless you make use of the only proper authority entrusted by God to discern the accurate and correct interpretation.

In my opinion, studying the Bible shouldn't be seen as a mission of "discovery", but rather of understanding. Your job isn't to interpret the Bible; that's been done completely and accurately over the last 2000 years by His Church. Your job is to read the verses, learn/see its interpretations, and reflect on the messages.

Too many people today think God gave them His Word to discern it or to "solve the riddle" of His Word. That's been done already, and one man alone can't do it anyway. The Word isn't yours to "unravel", but to "understand".

Interlinear Septuagint here: https://www.apostolicbible.com/

I didn't come around to it until recently.  Between the disciples quoting it, and it beling older than the Masoretic text before a time when there would be any incentive to revise due to Jesus, and the dead sea scrolls having better correlations to septuagint than masoretic in some cases, I've come to give it the greater weight.  Fun Fact: Septuagint says Golaith was more like 7 feet tall rather than 9.