- I agree with you that the LXX translation is more logical and contextual than the MT which says that God removed the wheels from the Egyptians' chariots. I also find that textual criticism and studying different manuscripts are very helpful in understanding the biblical text and its history.
- I see your point! I wonder that if you know about https://smashkartsio.com It is one of the best game for all
- Really well written and easy to understand. Your approach makes the content feel accessible and relevant. Looking forward to reading more! https://slope3.com
The Importance of Textual Families part 3: What Happened to the wheels of the Egyptians in Exodus 14:25
In Exodus 14:25 the Masoretic Text (MT) has a reading that does not cohere with the rest of the text, and it reads:
וַיָּ֗סַר אֵ֚ת אֹפַ֣ן מַרְכְּבֹתָ֔יו [1]
“...he removed the wheels of their chariots."[2]
In the story of Exodus 14, the Egyptian chariots continued onward toward the Israelites into the sea (v. 26-29). Thus, the reading found in the MT (KJV, NKJV, LEB) is simply incorrect in this text. For, if the wheels were removed how could the chariots continue towards the sea? Surely, they would have toppled over before reaching the sea at all. We must take an aside to speak of the Hebrew word וַיָּ֗סַר wǎy·yāʹ·sǎr. There are clear parallels to this word in the close Semitic languages of Ugaritic, Phoenician, and Old South Arabian with the meaning of “to remove.” HALOT gives the meaning of “to remove something.” [3] The KJV, NKJV, and LEB in fact supply the correct rendering here for the word from the MT: “took off"/"removed". So, it should be clear that the Hebrew word properly means "removed" and is an incorrect word to be used in this context. The solution is found in the Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch (wy’sr), the Syriac Peshitta, and the Septuagint (LXX). The LXX rendering is given below.
kai synedēsen tous axonas autōn tōn harmatōn
“He bound the axles of their chariots." [4]
"Bound" is known to have the sense of clogged by many.[5] The majority of modern translations go with either the word or sense found in the LXX (ESV, RSV, NRSV, NET, JPS, etc..) or they translate out something like "He caused their chariot wheels to swerve" (NASB95, NLT, CSB). Either way, it should be clear from the context, the manuscript evidence, and the modern consensus of commentators, translators, and linguists, that the LXX rendering is correct, and the MT is incorrect.
While this particular issue does not create any major "doctrinal" problems, it does present a bizarre logic problem for the given text. The earlier commentators try to gloss over it and give a meaning to the word in the text that it does not have because as they were aware it did not work. However, it is best to simply understand that the MT got this text wrong. It i’s possible that the scribe misread the word here as the Syriac provides a word which could possibly if rendered in Hebrew, look close to וַיָּ֗סַר wǎy·yāʹ·sǎr. that being wy’sr and, thus, it is possible the scribe simply copied incorrectly or misspelled. However, this is just speculation. In any case, it is clear that the MT is insufficient to give us a proper rendering of this text.
This demonstrates well the point of this blog series: there is no one text. The MT is by no means perfect, inspired, or correct in all points. Yes, textual criticism and textual families are important for proper translation and understanding of the biblical text. The reader need not be dismayed, however, because through the use of multiple translations, the translator footnotes therein, and perhaps either a good commentary or translation resources (like the NET Bible notes or the UBS handbooks) you, too, can easily access and be aware of the better readings and trust in your biblical text through diligent study in order to show yourself approved
Footnotes:
[1] The Lexham Hebrew Bible. (2012). (Ex 14:25). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
[2] Van der Merwe, C. (2004). The Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible (Ex 14:25). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
[3] Koehler, L., Baumgartner, W., Richardson, M. E. J., & Stamm, J. J. (1994–2000). The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 748). Leiden: E.J. Brill.
[4] Brannan, R., Penner, K. M., Loken, I., Aubrey, M., & Hoogendyk, I. (Eds.). (2012). The Lexham English Septuagint (Ex 14:25). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
[5] see, Owens, J. J. (1989). Analytical key to the Old Testament (Vol. 1, p. 302); Carpenter, E. (2012). Exodus. (Vol. 1, p. 519); Propp, W. H. C. (2008). Exodus 1–18: a new translation with introduction and commentary (Vol. 2, p. 500); The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Ex 14:25); etc.