Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Harold Holmyard <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>]

Karl,

Here is another list of changes that is easier to see that the one from 
the Worldwide Church of God. There is also more information:
http://www.geocities.com/hebrew_roots/html/hr-2-3-02.html

      Issue 97-2 of Hebrew Roots contained an article entitled The 
Emendations of the Sopherim. This article delineated the 134 places in 
the Hebrew Scriptures where the Sopherim (Soh-pheh-reem Scribes) 
modified the Tetragrammaton (YHVH, the name of God) to read Adonai 
(Add-doh-nigh = Lord). They did this out of a zeal for God, believing 
that His name should not be used in certain contexts. However, they kept 
meticulous records of these changes so that future generations would 
know where they had made alterations to the text.
      The Sopherim recorded their notes about the changes in the 
margins of the hand written Scripture texts. These notes were placed in 
several places on the same page as the text which was altered. The notes 
are always written in smaller script than the actual Scriptures. These 
notes are called the Massorah (Mahs-sohr-ah), which is taken from the 
root word masar (mah-sahr) which means: "to deliver something into the 
hand of another". The smaller writing found in the upper and lower 
margins is called the Massorah Magna or Great Massorah, while the extra 
writing found in the side margins and between the columns is called the 
Massorah Parva or Small Massorah.
      The Massorites were a group of Jewish scholars who copied and 
handed down the text of the Hebrew Scriptures. However, they themselves 
did not make the alterations to the text, rather they merely passed on 
what had been handed down to them by the Sopherim (Soph-ehr-eem 
Scribes). E. W. Bullinger, in Appendix #30, p. 31, of The Companion 
Bible, makes the following observation about the relationship between 
the Sopherim and the Massorites.

      "The Text itself had been fixed before the Massorites were put in 
charge of it. This had been the work of the Sopherim (from saphar, to 
count, or number). Their work, under Ezra and Nehemiah, was to set the 
Text in order after the return from Babylon; and we read of it in Neh. 
8.8 (cp. Ezra 7.6,11). The men of ‘the Great Synagogue’ completed the 
work. This work lasted about 110 years, from Nehemiah to Simon the 
first, 410-300 B.C.
      "The Sopherim were the authorized revisers of the Sacred Text; 
and, their work being completed, the Massorites were the authorized 
custodians of it. Their work was to preserve it. The Massorah is called 
‘A Fence to the Scriptures,’ because it locked all words and letters in 
their places. ..."

      Later on, it was this ‘locked in’ text of the Massorites that was 
used when movable type printing began. However, the marginal notations 
were not included in the printed texts. So it was, when it came time to 
translate the Hebrew texts into other languages the Massorah Magna and 
Massorah Parva were missing. Bullinger goes on to say:

      "When translators came to the printed Hebrew Text, they were 
necessarily destitute of the information contained in the Massorah; so 
that the Revisers as well as the Translators of the Authorized Version 
carried out their work without any idea of the treasures contained in 
the Massorah; and therefore, without giving a hint of it to their readers."

~ The ‘Eighteen’ Emendations ~
~ of the Sopherim ~

      The purpose of this article is to explore the passages where the 
Sopherim saw fit to change the original text, with which they were 
working, so that it would conform more closely to what they understood 
God was communicating. In some cases they may have been correcting 
errors that had crept into the manuscripts over the centuries, while in 
other cases they were trying to produce a text that they felt was more 
respectful to their Creator God. Whatever their reasons, it can be 
safely assumed that the Sopherim did not do this to conceal anything, 
because they made clear notations of what they were doing. It was 
centuries later, when the hand written text was printed, that the 
notations contained in the Massorah were actually lost.’ This had 
nothing to do with either the Sopherim or the Massorites, since they had 
been history for a very long time.
      Although the Massorites refer to this list of emendations as 
containing ‘eighteen’ modifications, the actual list grew to contain 
twenty-six changes. Below is a listing of these changes, along with 
commentary about the change where that seems appropriate. All scriptures 
are quoted from the King James Version, the so called ‘Authorized 
Version.’ However, they are listed in the order of the Tanakh, the 
Hebrew Scriptures.



~ Emendations to the Torah ~

~ Genesis 18:22 ~

      "And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward 
Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD."
      The original text read:
      "And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward 
Sodom: but the LORD (YHVH) stood yet before Abraham."
      The reason for this change was because the Sopherim felt that it 
was demeaning to YHVH to say that He stood before Abraham, since it was 
their custom to say that the lesser figure stood before the greater 
(i.e. a subject would stand before the king).



~ Numbers 11:15 ~

      "And if thou deal thus with me, kill me, I pray Thee, out of 
hand, if I have found favour in Thy sight; and let me not see my 
wretchedness."
      The original text read:
      "And if thou deal thus with me, kill me, I pray Thee, our of 
hand, if I have found favour in Thy sight; and let me not see thy evil."

      Obviously, the Sopherim did not want to ascribe evil to God. Yet 
they left intact another scripture which clearly states that God is the 
creator of evil:
      "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create 
evil: I the LORD do all these things”
(Isa. 45:7)



~ Numbers 12:12 ~

      "Let her not be as one dead, of whom the flesh is half consumed 
when he cometh out of his mother’s womb."
      The original text read:
      "Let her not be as one dead, of whom our flesh is half consumed 
when he cometh out of his mother’s womb."

      The context of this passage has to do with the event when Aaron 
and Miriam were made leprous because of their derogatory comments about 
Moses marriage. The text was changed here to avoid including Aaron in 
this comment about their flesh being ‘half consumed.’ This was thought 
to be derogatory toward the High Priest, Aaron, and should not be stated 
in this manner.



~ Emendations to the Prophets ~

~ I Samuel 3:13 ~

      "For I have told him that I will judge his house for ever for the 
iniquity which he knoweth; because his sons made themselves vile, and he 
restrained them not."
      The original text read:
      "For I have told him that I will judge his house for ever for the 
iniquity which he knoweth; because his sons cursed God, and he 
restrained them not."

      The Sopherim had a problem with any scripture that stated that 
men ‘cursed’ God. Therefore, they softened this text.



~ II Samuel 12:14 ~

      "Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to 
the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto 
thee shall surely die."
      The original text read:
      "Howbeit, because by this deed thou has greatly blasphemed the 
LORD, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die."

      Here the Sopherim made a change so that king David would not be 
seen as a blasphemer, but rather as the vehicle through which his 
enemies would blaspheme. However, the grace of God is very great, and by 
restoring the original passage we learn that God can even forgive a 
person of blasphemy, since He did forgive this sin of David’s, after his 
full repentance. This correction also instructs us that adultery and 
murder are considered, by God, to be acts of blasphemy.



~ II Samuel 16:12 ~

      "It may be that the LORD will look on mine affliction, and that 
the LORD will requite me good for his cursing this day."
      The original text read:
      "It may be that the LORD will behold with His eye, and that the 
LORD will requite me good for his cursing this day."

      Bullinger comments: "This was thought to be to anthropomorphic, 
and so was altered, ..." In other words, the Sopherim believed that God 
should not be described as having human characteristics, such as an eye.



~ II Samuel 20:1 ~

      "And there happened to be there a man of Belial, whose name was 
Sheba, the son of Bichri, a Benjamite: and he blew a trumpet, and said, 
"We have no part in David, neither have we inheritance in the son of 
Jesse: every man to his tents, O Israel."
      The original text read:
      "... ‘We have no part in David, neither have we inheritance in 
the son of Jesse: every man to his gods, O Israel"

      This is the first of several scriptures which indicate that the 
northern ten tribes, the house of Israel, had already apostatized 
against YHVH and were following other ‘gods’ prior to their revolt. 
Apparently the Sopherim did not want to admit this.



~ I Kings 12:16 ~

      "So when all Israel saw that the king hearkened not unto them, 
the People answered the king saying, ‘What portion have we in David? 
neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse: to your tents, O 
Israel: now see to thine own house, David.’ So Israel departed unto 
their tents."
      The change here is identical to the one just above. The phrase 
"..to your tents, O Israel," should read: "..to your gods, O Israel." 
The fact that the last word of this verse is ‘tents’ makes it clear as 
to where the Sopherim came up with the idea to substitute ‘tents’ for 
‘gods.’



~ I Kings 21:10 ~

      "And set two men, sons of Belial, before him to bear witness 
against him, saying, ‘Thou didst blaspheme God and the king.’ And then 
carry him out, and stone him, that he may die.’"
      Here is a case where the Sopherim emended the original text to 
read ‘bless’ instead of ‘blaspheme.’ However, the King James translators 
discovered the change and rendered it correctly.



~ I Kings 21:13 ~

      This is a reiteration of the passage found in verse 10. Again, 
the King James has rendered it correctly by using the word ‘blaspheme’ 
instead of the emendation, ‘bless.’



~ Jeremiah 2:11 ~

      "Hath a nation changed their gods, which are yet no gods? But My 
people have changed their glory for that which doth not profit."
      The original text read:
      "Hath a nation changed their gods, which are yet no gods? But My 
people have changed My glory for that which doth not profit."

      Bullinger cites this change as being made out of a mistaken idea 
of reverence.



~ Ezekiel 8:17 ~

      "Then He said unto me, ‘Hast thou seen this, O son of man? Is it 
a light thing to the house of Judah that they commit the abominations 
which they commit here? For they have filled the land with violence, and 
have returned to provoke Me to anger: and, lo, they put the branch to 
their nose."
      The original text read:
      "... For they have filled the land with violence, and have 
returned to provoke Me to anger: and, to, they put the branch to My nose."

      This is another case where the Sopherim felt that it was 
derogatory to ascribe God as having a bodily human attribute. In this 
case, they did not want to admit that God had a nose.



~ Hosea 4:7 ~

      "As they were increased, so they sinned against Me: therefore 
will I change their glory into shame."
      The original text read:
      "As they were increased, so they sinned against Me: My glory they 
have they changed into shame."

      Here again, the Sopherim displayed a mistaken sense of reverence 
toward God and for this reason changed the meaning of the verse. From 
this verse we learn that when we claim to represent God and then sin, we 
bring shame upon the glory of God.



~ Habakkuk 1:12 ~

      "Art Thou not from everlasting, O LORD my God, mine Holy One? we 
shall not die. O LORD, Thou hast ordained them for judgment; and, O 
mighty God, Thou hast established them for correction."
      The original text read:
      "Art Thou not from everlasting, O LORD my God, mine Holy One? who 
diest not. ..."

      Bullinger states that "...it was considered offensive to say this 
of Jehovah; ..." The actual emendation was from "who diest not" to "who 
die not." According to Bullinger, this changes the sense from the second 
person to the first person and thereby transfers immortality to mortal 
man where it does not belong.



~ Zechariah 2:8 ~

      "For thus saith the LORD of hosts; After the glory hath He sent 
me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth 
the apple of His eye."
      The original text read:
      "... After the glory hath He sent me unto the nations which 
spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of Mine eye."

      Again, it was considered derogatory to speak of God as having an 
eye in a literal sense. Hence, the phrase ‘His eye’ was considered to be 
less offensive than ‘Mine eye.’



~ Malachi 1:12 ~

      "But ye have profaned it, in that ye say, ‘The table of the LORD 
is polluted; and the fruit thereof, even his meat, is contemptible.’"
      The original text read:
      "But ye have profaned Me, in that ye say, ‘The table of the LORD 
is polluted; and the fruit thereof, even his meat, is contemptible.’"

      Once again we see the Sopherim attempted to ‘protect’ God from 
the evil of the people. However, God does not need the protection of 
men, it really works the other way around.



~ Malachi 3:9 ~

      "Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed Me, even this 
whole nation."
      The original text read:
      "Ye have cursed Me with a curse: for ye have robbed Me, even this 
whole nation."

      Bullinger states: "The Sopherim say that they altered the letter 
 (Mem = M) into  (Nun = N), thus making it passive instead of active, 
and detaching it from the rest of the sentence. This was done to avoid a 
supposed irreverence.



~ Emendations to the Writings ~

~ Psalm 10:3 ~

      "For the wicked boasteth of his heart’s desire,
      And blesseth the covetous, whom the LORD abhorreth."

      The original text read:

      "For the wicked boasteth of his heart’s desire,
      And the covetous man blasphemeth, yea, abhorreth Jehovah."

      Again we see reluctance to allow any implication that might be 
considered derogatory towards God.



~ Psalm 106:20 ~

      "Thus they changed their glory
      Into the similitude of an ox that eateth grass."

      The original text read:

      "Thus they changed My glory
      Into the similitude of an ox that eateth grass."

      Once again, there is a reluctance to ‘tell it like it is.’



~ Job 1:5 ~

      "And it was so, when the days of their feasting were gone about, 
that Job sent and sanctified them, and rose up early in the morning, and 
offered burnt offerings according to the number of them all for Job 
said, ‘It may be that my sons have sinned, and cursed God in their 
hearts.’ Thus did Job continually."
      This is a case where the Sopherim changed the word ‘cursed’ to 
‘bless’ in the Hebrew text, but the translators corrected it in the 
English version. The same is true of three other verses in the book of 
Job: Gob 1:1 1; 2:5 and 2:9).



~ Job 7:20 ~

      "I have sinned; what shall I do unto Thee, O Thou Preserver of 
men? Why hast thou set me as a mark against Thee, so that I am a burden 
to myself?"
      The original text read:
      "I have sinned; what shall I do unto Thee, O Thou Preserver of 
men? Why hast thou set me as a mark against Thee, so that I am a burden 
unto Thee?"

      The Sopherim apparently did not believe that a mere man could be 
a ‘burden’ to God, yet that is what the original scriptures tell us is 
the case in this passage.



~ Job 32:3 ~

      "Also against his three friends was his wrath kindled, because 
they had found no answer, and yet had condemned Job."
      The original text read:
      "Also against his three friends was his wrath kindled, because 
they had found no answer, and yet had condemned God."

      This emendation causes the reader to a totally different 
conclusion about the discourses of Job’s three friends than does the 
original. If, in fact, they were only guilty of condemning Job, then 
what they had to say was not altogether to important. But if their words 
were considered by God to be a condemnation against Him, then we all 
need to study what they said and see why that is so. Only by 
understanding how their words condemned God, will we learn how to avoid 
making the same mistake.



~ II Chronicles 10:16 ~

      "And when all Israel saw that the king would not hearken unto 
them, the People answered the king, saying, ‘What portion have we in 
David? and we have none inheritance in the son of Jesse: every man to 
your tents, O Israel: and now, David, see to thine own house.’ So all 
Israel went to their tents."
      The original text read:
      "... every man to your gods, O Israel: ..."

This is a repeat of the emendation made in II Samuel 20:1 and I Kings 12:16.



~ Sources ~

Bullinger, LW., The Companion Bible. Zondervan Bible Publishers, Grand 
Rapids, 1974.
The Holy Bible, (King James Version), Oxford University Press, London.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard