The “Original” Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls
Can the scrolls help expose the original Bible language within the Masoretic Text and Septuagint?
The Song of Moses (Deuteronomy 32:8) in the Masoretic Text describes the Most High dividing the nations according to number of “the sons [children?] of Israel.” This Dead Sea Scroll fragment (4QDeutj) and the third-century B.C.E. translation of the Hebrew Pentateuch into Greek (the Septuagint [LXX]), however, say the nations were divided according to the “sons of Elohim” (God). What did the original Bible text say? Photo: IAA.
Which is the “original” Bible? How do we decide which of these two ancient texts is more authoritative? In “Searching for the ‘Original’ Bible” in the July/August 2014 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, Hebrew University of Jerusalem scholar and long-time editor-in-chief of the Dead Sea Scrolls publication team Emanuel Tov suggests we turn to the Dead Sea Scrolls to help us compare the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint.
Some of the Dead Sea Scrolls actually have more in common with the Greek Septuagint than the traditional Hebrew Masoretic Text. This suggests that the Greek translators must have been translating from Hebrew texts that resembled the Dead Sea Scrolls. Are the Dead Sea Scroll texts as trustworthy as these other two sources? Are they as close to the text of the original Bible?
The Great Isaiah Scroll is one of the most iconic of the Dead Sea Scrolls, yet it does not reflect the original language of the Bible. Tov calls it “a classroom example of what an inferior text looks like, with its manifold contextual changes, harmonizations, grammatical adaptions, etc.” Photo: John C. Trevor, Ph.D. Digital Image: James E. Trevor.
Some turn to the Dead Sea Scrolls simply because they are older: 2,000-year-old texts were less likely to be subjected to scribal corruption; they should reflect a more original Bible language. Tov supplements this chronological reasoning with a logical—and admittedly subjective—approach: He examines which text makes the most sense in a given context. Tov examines a number of textual discrepancies between Bible versions (Did God finish work on the sixth or seventh day before resting on the seventh day? How were the nations divided according to the number of the sons of God?) in his search for the original Bible.
The Dead Sea Scrolls have been called the greatest manuscript find of all time. Explore the BAS Dead Sea Scrolls page for dozens of articles on the scrolls’ significance, discovery and scholarship.
As an example, Tov asks: Did Hannah bring one bull or three bulls as an offering at Shiloh? (1 Samuel 1:24):
When the infant Samuel had been weaned and his mother, Hannah, finally came to Shiloh with her son, she also brought with her an offering for the Lord that is described in two ways in our textual sources. According to the Masoretic Text, she brought “three bulls,” but according to the Septuagint and a Qumran scroll (4QSama from 50–25 B.C.E.) she brought one “three-year-old bull.”
I believe that Hannah probably offered only a single bull (as in the Septuagint and 4QSama); supporting this choice is the next verse in the Masoretic Text which speaks about “the bull.” I believe the Masoretic Text was textually corrupted when the continuous writing (without spaces between words) of the original words prm/shlshh (literally: “bulls three”) underlying the Septuagint was divided wrongly to pr mshlsh (“three-year-old bull”).*
The evidence of the Septuagint, being in Greek, always depends on a reconstruction into Hebrew, and consequently the Qumran scroll here helps us decide between the various options. Incidentally an offering of a “three-year-old bull” is mentioned in Genesis 15:9. It shows that a Hebrew text underlying the Septuagint once existed in which Hannah brought only one three-year-old bull.
Tov uses the Dead Sea Scrolls to elucidate the original language of the Bible not only because they are the oldest Bible manuscripts, but also because they provide additional logical clues. He concludes: “In finding our way in the labyrinth of textual sources of the Bible, we must slowly accumulate experience and intuition. When maneuvering among the sources, we will find much help in the Dead Sea Scrolls. But they must be used judiciously.”
Notes
* Many thanks to Joseph Lauer for a careful reading of the text, and to Emanuel Tov for clarification. The text:
“…of the original words prm/shlshh (literally: ‘bulls three’) underlying the Septuagint was divided wrongly to pr mshlsh (‘three-year-old bull’)”
Should read:
“…of the original words pr mshlsh (‘three-year-old bull’) underlying the Septuagint was divided wrongly to prm/shlshh (literally: ‘bulls three’)”
Subscribers: Continue on the search for the “original” Bible as Emanuel Tov explores different versions of important Biblical passages. Read the full article “Searching for the ‘Original’ Bible” by Emanuel Tov as it appeared in the July/August 2014 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review.
Not a BAS Library or All-Access Member yet? Join today.
Become a BAS All-Access Member Now!
Read Biblical Archaeology Review online, explore 50 years of BAR, watch videos, attend talks, and more
This Bible History Daily article was originally published on June 27, 2014.
All-Access members, read more in the BAS Library
Dead Sea Scrolls Scandal—Israel’s Department of Antiquities Joins Conspiracy to Keep Scrolls Secret
Not a BAS Library or All-Access Member yet? Join today.
Related Posts
Must-Read Free eBooks
Unlock Unlimited Access to the Bible's Past
Unlock Unlimited Access to the Bible's Past
Become an All-Access Member to explore the Bible's rich history. Get Biblical Archaeology Review in print, full online access, and FREE online talks. Plus, enjoy special Travel/Study discounts. Don't miss out—begin your journey today!
Maybe is not profitable?
What exactly is the “Common Era”? I find it a disconnect with the period of Jesus. And why do some writers use BC/BCE. AD/CE, is it to placate those who take issue with the the term “Common “?
Tov I believe if correct here, since there is verbiage that refers to “The Bull.” There is another issue here in regards to the age of the “child”. Not once is the term child used in the Hebrew in 1 Samuel, regarding Samuel. The term is “ha-narah” is always used! This term has the meaning of “The Young man.” This term is significant, since in Hebrew “child” and “young man” are not interchangeable. To be a young man, you must have reached the age of accountability, born out by a ceremony; called a Bar-Mitzvah (son-of-the-covenant/commandment). This is accurate, for the final words of verse 24, “and The Young Man was a young man.” Thus, the meaning of “weaned” is a metaphor for the child becoming a “young man.”
Yes, Ido believe that ther is more discrepancy of the Hebrew Tanach with The Dead Sea Scrolls and Septuagint Version. Try to Compare Pslams 22:16 or 17; Isaiah 53:11; Exodus 1:5 and Gen. 46:27; Gen. 10:24; Deut. 32:8; Isaiah 61:1; Psalm 40:6.