Free Bible Difficulties by Bible Difficulties Page A

Him rescue him'], deliver him
    [i.e., the psalmist in his suffering and humiliation], for He takes pleasure in him." This verse involves a rather awkward mixing of second person ("trust thou") and third person ("him"), referring to the same person in the same verse. But the LXX wording is "he trusted in the Lord' let Him deliver him." This implies repointing gol and gal , the same consonants, but a different vowel. Not only is this supported by the Vulgate ( speravit ), but it is also supported by the Syriac ( 'ettekel ). Most important of all, Matthew 27:43
    makes it third person singular: "He trusts [ pepoithen ] in God. Let God rescue him."
    Considerations of context, the early versions, and the New Testament quotation all present a very good case for amending gol and gal .

    6. Psalm 90:2 in the MT reads, "Before the mountains were born or You did give birth
    [ watteholel ] to the earth or the world,...You are God." But in almost all the early versions, the verb "give birth" is read as a passive ( watteholal , "was given birth to"), thus making the second verb a passive, harmonizing with the first verb, "were born." The LXX, Aquila, Symmachus, Jerome, and even the Aramaic Targum (which usually conforms to the MT) unite in making the second verb passive. There is even one early Hebrew manuscript from the Cario Genizah (Ecl) that reads a passive instead of an active. We may, therefore, safely adopt this emendation and make it a passive-- "were given birth to," which suggests writhing in pain, like a woman in labor.

    B. The Canons of Textual Criticism

    31

    After sampling the eleven classes of textual error just described, in summary fashion we will list the seven "canons" or procedural rules textual critics use to come to an intelligent decision about divergent readings. These canons are arranged in the order of their priority or relative value.

    Canon 1 . Generally speaking, the older reading is to be preferred over a reading found in later manuscripts. There may be, however, less reliable readings in as old a manuscript as 1QIsa, simply because the latter was a rapidly made a copy, intended for private use rather than for public worship or official instruction. But normally the older a manuscript is, the less likelihood there is of deviation from the reading of the autograph.

    Canon 2 . The more difficult reading ( lectio difficilior ) is to be preferred over the easier reading. This results from the greater likelihood on the part of a copyist to simplify a difficult word or phrase in his Vorlage , rather than to make a simple reading more difficult. But it should of course be added that when the more difficult reading seems to have resulted from confusion or inadvertence on the part of the scribe, this rule does not apply. The same is true if the reading is so difficult that it does not really make sense, or, again, if the more difficult reading expresses an idea or viewpoint quite contradictory to the sentiments expressed elsewhere in the book.

    Canon 3 . The shorter reading is generally to be preferred over the longer one. The reason for this is that copyists are more inclined to amplify or insert additional material for the purpose of clarification or embellishment than they are to leave out words already appearing in their Vorlage . But this rule does not apply if the shorter reading seems to result from haplography or homoeoteleuton, as described above.

    Canon 4 . The reading that best explains all the variants is most likely the original one.
    An excellent example of this was discussed above in connection with Psalm 22:16 (Psalm 22:17 Eng.), where we saw that a ka'ru ("they have pierced") misread as ka'ari (at a time when waw and yodh greatly resembled each other) most satisfactorily accounted for the MT reading; whereas it would be far less likely that "like the lion" would have been the original lying behind a ka'ru , which makes perfect sense in the context.

    Canon 5 . The reading with the widest