The Old Testament, as the foundational Scripture of the Judeo-Christian tradition, has undergone centuries of transmission and preservation. This process, while remarkably reliable, has not been without its challenges. Scribes, both inspired and fallible, have played a central role in copying and transmitting the sacred text. Textual criticism of the Old Testament seeks to evaluate the variants found in extant manuscripts, identify their origins, and ascertain, as far as possible, the original wording of the inspired Scriptures. This endeavor requires a thorough understanding of the historical context, linguistic characteristics, and the theological convictions underpinning the transmission of the text.
The Masoretic Text (MT) is the standard Hebrew text of the Old Testament and has been meticulously preserved by Jewish scribes known as the Masoretes from the 6th to the 10th centuries C.E. The Masoretes implemented a sophisticated system of vowel pointing and accents to safeguard the oral tradition of pronunciation and interpretation. Their work is a testament to their profound reverence for the Scriptures, as reflected in their painstaking efforts to prevent errors during transcription. The MT serves as the basis for most modern translations of the Old Testament and holds significant authority due to its accuracy and consistency.
The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) in the mid-20th century revolutionized Old Testament textual studies. These manuscripts, dating from approximately 250 B.C.E. to 68 C.E., include fragments of almost every book of the Old Testament. In many cases, they align closely with the MT, confirming its reliability. However, the DSS also reveal variants that align more closely with the Septuagint (LXX) or other textual traditions, such as the Samaritan Pentateuch.
For example, in Isaiah 53:11, the MT reads, “by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many,” while the Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa) reads, “he shall see light and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many.” The addition of “he shall see light” in the DSS provides a fuller and theologically rich reading that some scholars consider to be original, though the MT’s brevity reflects the standard Hebrew tradition.
The Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures dating from the 3rd to 2nd centuries B.C.E., provides another valuable witness to the Old Testament text. While the LXX occasionally diverges from the MT, it preserves readings that may reflect an earlier Hebrew Vorlage. These divergences are especially evident in books like Jeremiah, where the LXX’s text is shorter by approximately one-seventh compared to the MT. Jeremiah 10:10–11 in the LXX omits the section found in the MT, which could suggest either an intentional shortening in the Greek text or an expansion in the Hebrew text over time.
Textual Variants and Theological Implications
Textual variants are not merely academic; they can have profound theological implications. Consider Deuteronomy 32:8, where the MT reads, “when the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance… he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel,” while the DSS (4QDeutj) and the LXX read, “according to the number of the sons of God.” This variant has led to significant discussion regarding its implications for Israel’s unique role among the nations and the nature of the divine council.
Another example is Psalm 22:16, where the MT reads, “like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet,” while the LXX and some DSS manuscripts suggest, “they have pierced my hands and my feet.” The latter reading is messianically significant and is cited in the New Testament (John 19:37) as prophetic of Jesus’ crucifixion. The MT’s reading, while defensible linguistically, is less coherent in context and may reflect a later scribal alteration.
Criteria for Evaluating Variants
The discipline of textual criticism applies several criteria to evaluate variants:
External Evidence: This includes the manuscript’s age, geographical distribution, and textual family. Older and more widely attested readings generally hold greater weight.
Internal Evidence: This involves analyzing the context, language, and probable scribal tendencies. Readings that are more difficult or less harmonized are often preferred, as scribes were more likely to simplify or harmonize than to create difficulty.
Theological Consistency: Variants are also evaluated based on their consistency with the broader theological themes of Scripture. This is not to impose theology upon the text but to recognize that God’s inspired Word will not contradict itself.
The Trustworthiness of the Old Testament Text
Despite the presence of textual variants, the Old Testament remains remarkably consistent across its manuscript traditions. This consistency is a testament to the providence of Jehovah in preserving His Word. As Isaiah 40:8 declares, “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever.” The rigorous scribal practices of the Masoretes, the confirmatory evidence of the DSS, and the valuable insights from the LXX collectively affirm the reliability of the Scriptures.
The Importance of Faithful Textual Criticism
For evangelical scholars, textual criticism is not a threat to the integrity of Scripture but a tool to uncover its depth and truth. By engaging with the text’s historical transmission, we gain a deeper appreciation for the divine inspiration and preservation of the Word. As 2 Timothy 3:16 affirms, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” This divine origin assures believers that the message of the Old Testament remains intact and authoritative, despite human imperfections in its transmission.
Weighing the Evidence
The primary weight of external evidence generally goes to the original language manuscripts, and the Codex Leningrad B 19A and the Aleppo Codex are almost always preferred. In Old Testament Textual Criticism, the Masoretic text is our starting point and should only be abandoned as a last resort. While it is true that the Masoretic Text is not perfect, there needs to be a heavy burden of proof if we are to go with an alternative reading. All of the evidence needs to be examined before concluding that a reading in the Masoretic Text is corrupt. The Septuagint continues to be very much important today and is used by textual scholars to help uncover copyists’ errors that might have crept into the Hebrew manuscripts either intentionally or unintentionally. However, it cannot do it alone without the support of other sources. There are a number of times when you might have the Syriac, Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, Aramaic Targums, and the Vulgate that are at odds with the Masoretic Text; the preferred choice should not be the MT.
Initially, the Septuagint (LXX) was viewed by the Jews as inspired by God, equal to the Hebrew Scriptures. However, in the first century C.E., the Christians adopted the Septuagint in their churches. It was used by the Christians in their evangelism to make disciples and to debate the Jews on Jesus being the long-awaited Messiah. Soon, the Jews began to look at the Septuagint with suspicion. This resulted in the Jews of the second century C.E. abandoning the Septuagint and returning to the Hebrew Scriptures. This has proved to be beneficial for the textual scholar and translator. In the second century C.E., other Greek translations of the Septuagint were produced. We have, for example, LXXAq Aquila, LXXSym Symmachus, and LXXTh Theodotion. The consonantal text of the Hebrew Scriptures became the standard text between the first and second centuries C.E. However, textual variants still continued until the Masoretes and the Masoretic text. However, scribes taking liberties by altering the text was no longer the case, as was true of the previous period of the Sopherim. The scribes who copied the Hebrew Scriptures from the time of Ezra down to the time of Jesus were called Sopherim, i.e., scribes.
From the 6th century C.E. to the 10th century C.E., we have the Masoretes, groups of extraordinary Jewish scribe-scholars. The Masoretes were very much concerned with the accurate transmission of each word, even each letter, of the text they were copying. Accuracy was of supreme importance; therefore, the Masoretes used the side margins of each page to inform others of deliberate or inadvertent changes in the text by past copyists. The Masoretes also use these marginal notes for other reasons as well, such as unusual word forms and combinations. They even marked how frequently they occurred within a book or even the whole Hebrew Old Testament. Of course, marginal spaces were very limited, so they used abbreviated code. They also formed a cross-checking tool where they would mark the middle word and letter of certain books. Their push for accuracy moved them to go so far as to count every letter of the Hebrew Old Testament.
In the Masoretic text, we find notes in the side margins, which are known as the Small Masora. There are also notes in the top margin, which are referred to as the Large Masora. Any other notes placed elsewhere within the text are called the Final Masora. The Masoretes used the notes in the top and bottom margins to record more extensive notes, comments concerning the abbreviated notes in the side margins. This enabled them to be able to cross-check their work. We must remember that there were no numbered verses at this time, and they had no Bible concordances. One might wonder how the Masoretes could refer to different parts of the Hebrew text to have an effective cross-checking system. They would list part of a parallel verse in the top and bottom margins to remind them of where the word(s) indicated were found. Because they were dealing with limited space, they often could only list one word to remind them where each parallel verse could be found. To have an effective cross-reference system by way of these marginal notes, the Masoretes would literally have to have memorized the entire Hebrew Bible.
How We Got the Hebrew Old Testament
Earliest Translated Versions:
The Samaritan Pentateuch:
Origin: Developed by the Samaritans, who mixed Israelite worship with pagan practices. This version includes only the first five books of the Hebrew Scriptures (Torah).
Script: Written in the Samaritan script, which evolved from ancient Hebrew script.
Date: Estimated creation between the 4th to 2nd centuries BCE.
Content and Variations: Contains about 6,000 variations from the standard Hebrew Masoretic text, most minor, but still valuable for textual comparison. However, existing manuscript copies date mostly from the 13th century CE or later.
The Aramaic Targums:
Purpose: As Aramaic became the vernacular among Jews in Persian territories post-Nehemiah, these were necessary to translate or paraphrase the Hebrew Scriptures during public readings.
Nature: Not direct translations but interpretations or paraphrases, providing cultural and interpretative context to the Hebrew text.
Date: Final form likely no earlier than the 5th century CE.
The Greek Septuagint (LXX):
Origin:Began around 280 BCE by 72 Jewish scholars in Alexandria, Egypt, for the Greek-speaking Jewish community.
Significance: It’s the first major translation from Hebrew to another language. It was widely used by both Jews and early Christians.
Divine Name: Originally included the Tetragrammaton (the four Hebrew letters representing God’s name), which was later altered to Kyrios (Lord) or Theos (God).
Manuscripts: Fragments on papyrus, like the Fouad Papyri, show the use of the divine name in Hebrew characters within the Greek text. Many manuscripts exist in both uncial (large capital letters) and minuscule (cursive) scripts.
The Latin Vulgate:
Creation: By Jerome around 390-405 CE, translating directly from Hebrew and Greek.
Purpose: To provide a common Latin version for Western Christendom, understandable to the general populace.
Content: Included apocryphal books but distinguished them from canonical texts.
The Hebrew-Language Texts:
The Sopherim (Scribes):
Role:Began copying Hebrew Scriptures from Ezra’s time; they sometimes made textual alterations, which Jesus criticized.
The Masora and Masoretic Text:
Masoretes: Successors to the Sopherim who added vowel points and accents to the consonantal text for pronunciation aid, without changing the text itself.
Masora: Marginal notes detailing textual alterations made by the Sopherim, including changes to divine names and other textual emendations.
Schools: Babylonian, Palestinian, and Tiberian, with the Tiberian system becoming standard.
The Dead Sea Scrolls:
Discovery:Began in 1947 near the Dead Sea, providing texts dating back to the 2nd century BCE.
Significance: Show remarkable agreement with the Masoretic text in terms of content, despite minor spelling or grammatical differences.
The Refined Hebrew Text:
Historical Editions:
Second Rabbinic Bible: Edited by Jacob ben Chayyim (1524-25) was a standard for centuries.
Critical Study: Pioneered by scholars like Benjamin Kennicott and J. B. de Rossi in the 18th century, leading to more refined editions.
Modern Editions:
Biblia Hebraica: By Rudolf Kittel, first edition 1906, with subsequent editions improving upon the text using older, more accurate Masoretic manuscripts like those from the Ben Asher tradition.
This comprehensive approach to understanding the transmission and preservation of the Hebrew Old Testament text illustrates a meticulous process involving translation, copying, textual criticism, and scholarly refinement over centuries.
EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).
Online Guided Bible Study Courses
SCROLL THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES BELOW
BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM
BIBLICAL STUDIES / BIBLE BACKGROUND / HISTORY OF THE BIBLE/ INTERPRETATION
