Shavua' tov all,
A question from a friend that I thought I would post here regarding the origin of Onqelos. It seems fair to say that the classical rabbinic understanding is that the Aramaic translation of the Torah, known as Targum Onqelos, was given to Moses on Sinai. For example, BT Megillah 3b introduces the targum as having been "composed by Onqelos haGer" but then clarifies that what it means is that he restored the targum which was given at Sinai but had been forgotten. Rashi adopts this position explicitly in his comment on Qiddushin 49a, s.v. harei ze meharef. On the other hand, of course, contemporary academic scholarship assumes that Onqelos, like other targumim, is a compilation of (anonymous) oral Aramaic renderings of Torah reading, beginning in the Second Temple period and evolving well into the rabbinic period.
So, the question: are there Orthodox* scholars who would agree with some version of the academic understanding of Onqelos' origin? In other words, do you know of any Orthodox scholars who deny the divinity of the targum? (For example, my friend reports that Aryeh Kaplan writes in the bibliography of The Living Torah that "the Septuagint is the oldest translation of the TaNaKh," implying that Onqelos is not from Sinai, but I haven't been able to check that).
Or is this topic as verboten as TaNaKh source criticism?
*I am using the term 'Orthodox' here with some hesitation. I know there are self-identified Orthodox scholars who (attempt to) reconcile their religious beliefs with an acceptance of modern Biblical criticism, e.g. those involved with the TABS project. Qal wahomer I assume those people would be on board with a historical approach to Onqelos. Perhaps to state the question differently: are there rabbis/scholars who maintain a "Torah mi-Sinai" approach to Biblical text while accepting the academic view on the targumim?