Ad Fontes

Mitchell

QUOTE OF THE WEEK

Quote of the Week for Sunday, March 13th, 2022

How is the modern preacher to make sure that he is retailing week by week the fully verified results of Biblical exegesis?

Only in one way:

he must get back to the ordinary Hebrew sources and verify the results for himself. If the cause of truth is to be safeguarded from the extravagance of ἀγνωσία, the preacher of the future must sit down and grapple with the minutiæ of the text.

Adams, John. Sermons in Accents: Or, Studies in the Hebrew Text. London; New York: T&T Clark, 1906.

Acts 8:37?

New Testament textual criticism can seem esoteric, and some of it certainly is. Yet readers encounter text-critical issues and editorial decisions more often than they may realize. When you use a translation of Scripture—or any ancient text—a number of textual decisions have already been made for you. Editors and translators will sometimes alert readers to those decisions in footnotes or marginal notes.

Disclaimer: The following is necessarily a simplified introduction to textual criticism. Textual critics normally weigh both external evidence—such as the age, geographical distribution, and relationships of manuscripts—and internal evidence, including known scribal habits and which reading best explains the origin of the others. Different approaches assign different weight to these factors.

If you own an English translation of the New Testament, turn to Acts chapter 8. Is verse 37 in the main body of the text, in a footnote, or absent altogether? Does your edition provide information about the manuscript evidence? Acts 8:37 is a useful example for seeing how translators and editors communicate a textual variant to readers.

Acts 8:37 is absent from several early and important Greek witnesses and is therefore omitted from the main text of many modern critical editions and translations, though the confession represented by the verse has ancient Western and patristic attestation. For further reading, here are several discussions representing different perspectives:

CASES FOR

CASES AGAINST

NEUTRAL / EXPLANATORY

Why Is Acts 8:37 Omitted from Some Translations and not Others? https://blog.logos.com/why-some-translations-include-acts-837-and-others-dont/

What do you think? How do you read the text?

Ye shall spoil the Egyptians?

Question: In Exodus chapter 3 What does borrowing from one’s neighbor have to do with spoiling or plundering of the Egyptians?

But every woman shall borrow of her neighbour, and of her that sojourneth in her house, jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment: and ye shall put them upon your sons, and upon your daughters; and ye shall spoil the Egyptians (Exodus 3:22).

KJV (public domain in the U.S.A)

The KJV translates וְשָׁאֲלָ֨ה אִשָּׁ֤ה as “but every woman shall borrow.” To a modern reader, “borrow” is potentially misleading, because the verb שׁאל normally means to ask or request. The women are instructed to ask their Egyptian neighbors for valuables, and Exodus 3:21 says that the Egyptians will look favorably on the Israelites. The final verb, וְנִצַּלְתֶּם, comes from נצל. Although forms of this root can mean “deliver” or “rescue” in other stems and contexts, in the Piel stem used here it can carry the sense “strip” or “plunder.” That makes the traditional rendering “spoil/plunder the Egyptians” lexically defensible, even though the valuables are given in response to a request. J. H. Hertz argued for a different understanding of the construction:

its direct object is never the person or the thing from whom the saving or the rescuing or snatching has taken place, but always the person or thing being rescued… “ye shall spoil the Egyptians,” is, therefore, unwarranted, for two reasons. it takes the persons from whom things are snatched as the direct object; and furthermore, it necessitates an entire reversal of the meaning נָצַל from save into despoil!

Hertz, J.H., 2nd ed.The Pentateuch and Haftorahs. London: Soncino press, 1981

Why did the KJV translators render Exodus 3:22 the way they did? The KJV was not the first English translation, and earlier English Bibles had already established several ways of expressing the verse. Wycliffe’s translation used “nakid,” while later versions such as Matthew’s Bible (1537), the Great Bible (1539), and the Bishops’ Bible (1568) used language such as “robbe the Egyptians.” The Coverdale Bible (1535), Geneva Bible (1560), and Douay-Rheims Bible (1582) also used forms of “spoil.” This history helps explain the traditional English wording, even though the underlying Hebrew should still be evaluated on its own terms.

“and shall spoyle the Egyptians/Egypt.” which is the same as the modernized spelling KJV (1611) ‘s ‘spoil’ .

So, back to the question In Exodus chapter 3 What does borrowing from one’s neighbor have to do with spoiling or plundering of the Egyptians?

Answer: the KJV’s “borrow” is potentially misleading in modern English; “ask” or “request” better represents שׁאל here. Its “spoil,” however, is defensible: נצל in this stem can mean “strip” or “plunder.” The interesting tension in Exodus 3:22 is therefore that the Israelites ask for valuables that the Egyptians willingly give, while the resulting transfer of wealth is characterized as the despoiling of Egypt.

Exodus 24:10 (saw or feared)?

This week’s question: Does וראו in Exodus 24:10 mean ‘saw’ or ‘feared’?

The earliest Hebrew manuscripts were written primarily as consonantal texts, without the full system of Masoretic vowel points and cantillation marks used in later codices and printed editions. Torah scrolls used in synagogue worship likewise omit these vocalization and cantillation signs. Without vowel points, the consonantal string ויראו can in different contexts represent a form of ראה (“to see”) or ירא (“to fear/revere”). The cantillation marks themselves do not create that lexical distinction; the key difference is the traditional vocalization and context. Compare the following examples:

ויראו with a Munach:
Gen 37:4 ( וַיִּרְא֣וּ ), Exodus 16:15 ( וַיִּרְא֣וּ ), Joshua 4:14 ( וַיִּֽרְא֣וּ /fear), Judges 18:7 ( וַיִּרְא֣וּ ), 1 Samuel 31:7 (וַיִּרְא֣וּ), and Psalm 86:17( וְיִרְא֣וּ )

ויראו with a zaqef gadol :
Exodus 24:10 ( וַיִּרְא֕וּ ) and Judges 3:24 ( וַיִּרְא֕וּ)

ויראו With the meaning to fear:
Deuteronomy 7:13, 19:20, 21:21, 28:10, 31:12, Joshua 4:14, and 1 Samuel 4:7

However, in Exodus 24:10 the Masoretic tradition vocalizes the word as וַיִּרְא֕וּ, from ראה, meaning “and they saw.” A reading involving “fear” or “reverence” is therefore an interpretive possibility suggested by the unpointed consonantal form and by comparison with other passages, not the Masoretic reading preserved at Exodus 24:10 itself. The distinction is determined by vocalization and context, not by the cantillation marks alone.

For more interesting opinions of ideological nature on this verse check out: https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/under-gods-feet/

POSTSCRIPT (2022/08/05) 18:30 JST: I just ran across a prolific blogger (and Accordance Bible Software user) Abram J-K over at the Words on the Word blog who also just happens to have covered a very similar issue last year in another book and passage of the Hebrew Bible/OT. I have linked the pertinent post below:

https://abramkj.com/2021/12/15/fear-no-evil-or-see-no-evil-one-way-to-preach-a-textual-variant/