slimboyfat: and now please read again what I have written above...
Just the point in short: according to the Trinitarian Christian theology Jesus is Christ and Messianic Lord according to his human nature, and his humanity is not God/YHWH, so as the Messianic King of course is distinct from YHWH.
By the way, it must be emphasized that before the Reformation, the Masoretic Text was never considered authoritative within Christianity.
For example, Eastern Orthodox Christianity considers the Septuagint as an inspired translation, primarily based on the Letter of Aristeas, and they argue that the apostles and evangelists considered it inspired, and it is quoted in many places in the New Testament. It can also be argued that Judaism itself considered it so, as testified by Philo and Flavius. The Babylonian Talmud - in the chapter of Moed Megillah - reports that the Lord put in the heart of all 72 rabbis the translation that is literally identical to each other. Therefore, from the perspective of Revelation, they believe that it is not significant that the LXX shows differences here and there from the Hebrew canon. Furthermore, if we approach the question from a scientific perspective, from the viewpoint of textual criticism, then - according to current scientific understanding - the LXX shows more agreement with contemporary Hebrew texts than the Palestinian canon compiled 250-350 years later, or even later.
The Palestinian canon, the Masoretic text is mostly in Hebrew (partly Aramaic) and includes fewer books than the Septuagint. For a long time, it was thought that the differences in the texts were due to translation errors in the LXX, and the deuterocanonical books were later Greek additions, therefore they were not credible. However, time and scholarship have since refuted these ideas. I have already discussed the differences in formulation, the "translation errors". Similar things can be said about the deuterocanonical books: recent archaeological excavations have literally brought to light that some of these writings existed in Hebrew as well, so they are not "Greek additions". (Although, as mentioned, the LXX does indeed contain books originally written in Greek.)
The Palestinian or Masoretic canon, the still in use Jewish Bible, the Tanakh, was assembled according to some concepts by the "Rabbinical Council" held in Jamnia, sometime at the end of the 1st century AD. We need to talk about the significant changes of that time, which fundamentally affected Judaism in many ways. The religious picture of Judaism at the time of Christ was complex, and in many cases the different directions were related to social status. However, radical changes took place in the next few decades.
On the one hand, there were independence movements from the Jews, and on the other hand, the intention to consolidate the region from the side of the empire - and the continuously growing tension eventually leads to local warfare. Many people emigrate, but the Jews also suffer other serious losses, the consequences of which are still decisive today.
The Second Temple was destroyed. The local Jews continue to visit the ruins for a long time, and they present at least the sacrifices of the major holidays, but the daily continuity of the religious life organized around the Temple is lost. With this, the societal role of the Sadducee direction practically disappears. The Zealots are crushed in the warfare with power. The secluded communities of the Essenes, for reasons not closely known, disappear without a trace during these times.
Only the Pharisaic direction remains, which becomes stronger by becoming exclusive. Rabbinic Judaism develops from it, which will henceforth be identical with the Jewish religion. The religious life of the Pharisees is organized around the synagogues, where they read the Law (Torah), the Prophets (Neviim), and the Writings (Ketuvim) in addition to the Torah, the T-N-K acronym is the Hebrew name of the Old Testament Bible, the Tanakh. The synagogue liturgy dates back to the time of the Babylonian captivity, from which it evolved and was continuously refined. During this process, it becomes clear which documents are read and which are not, although we find local differences in both liturgical practice and texts themselves. Therefore, the Tanakh is not assembled at this time, in a certain sense it already exists, but its text is only standardized and finalized.
The LXX is based on the tradition of the synagogue, representing its local - Alexandrian - version. The Palestinian canon considers 24 books to be canonical, which are also included in the LXX. There are around 20 - known today - apocryphal documents, which are rejected by both canons; and the LXX contains 10 writings that the Tanakh does not. Therefore, it is completely understandable that from its inception for a few centuries, the LXX lived parallel to the various Hebrew text versions and was highly regarded within Judaism.
However, this changes towards the end of the first century AD. The Bible of the Church becomes the LXX - since Greek is the lingua franca in the region, it is understood by the native Aramaic-speaking Jewish Christians in the Holy Land; Jewish Christians in the diaspora, and Gentile Christians understand exclusively this. As a result, as the LXX becomes more and more associated with Christianity, Judaism increasingly turns away from it. Concurrently, the Hebrew text tradition comes to the forefront, and the standardization of different text versions and different text reading practices takes place.
According to one hypothesis, this happened in Jamnia, sometime between AD 70 and 100, probably around 90. The gathered rabbis held a kind of council where they determined the exact text of the Tanakh, based on their own theology and according to their own liturgical traditions - and different from the LXX.
Others, however, believe that the above - widely known - theory cannot be scientifically substantiated. In Jamnia, if there was any kind of gathering, it could have been some sort of common ceremony, but they did not make "council" decisions. According to this hypothesis, the canonization of the Tanakh's text was an organic process, based on the text-curation activities of the Masoretes, and it was only completed in the 4th-5th centuries. By this time, the uniform and final text of the Hebrew Jewish Bible would have been formed.
Therefore, Eastern Orthodox Christians do not even accept Jerome's translation, and they almost mockingly say that the Old Testament of Western Christianity is the Tanakh. Jerome learned Hebrew, compared the Greek and Latin text versions he knew with the Tanakh, and decided to base his own Latin Bible translation on the latter. From a text-critical point of view, Eastern Christians regard Jerome's approach as commendable, with which he most likely anticipated his time. According to Eastern Christians, however, Jerome could not have known that by choosing the Hebrew text he did not choose the original, and they believe not even the one closest to it. The standpoint of modern text criticism is that the Masoretic text is a thrice-changed or altered variant of the lost original, while the LXX was created only as a single reworking - a translation - of this same original.
From a spiritual point of view, many have disputed Jerome's approach, as Jerome did not take into account the widespread view in Eastern Christianity that the LXX is also considered inspired scripture. Thus, he literally translated the Hebrew text even in those places where the New Testament, however, quotes the LXX.