The Alleged "Corruption of

the Hebrew Text.

This Is Appendix 93 From The Companion Bible.

In the modern commentaries we very frequently meet with the

objectionable word "corruption" used of the Hebrew text of the Old

Testament.

As specimens of this feature of modernism, the following are taken

at random from one of the latest commentaries:-

1. This "probably signifies not only a new paragraph but a later

hand".

2. This "leads to the conclusion that there is some original

corruption of the Hebrew text."

3. "The text in this verse is extremely difficult to interpret; and

no satisfactory translation can be given of it."

4. "The Hebrew of this verse seems to be so corrupt that there is

no satisfactory meaning to be obtained from it."

5. "It is certain that the original text must be corrupt."

6. "It is better to regard it as being in some way a corrupted

text ... but is now unintelligible."

7. "These three verses are extremely corrupt, and it is probably

impossible to restore the text with any certainty."

Such remarks abound; and very few pages are free from them.

There is a continual running confession of inability to understand the

Hebrew text. Like the schoolboy who always thinks "the book is

wrong", modern critics never seem to suspect that the difficulty lies

with themselves and not with "the Book". We must accept their

confession, whatever the explanation may be.

The object of this Appendix is to show that those who are so ready

to speak about "corruption" can have little or no knowledge of the

Massorah, or of its object.

We have explained its character somewhat in Appendix 30. We

now propose to point out that its one great special aim and end was to

make such "corruption" impossible.

Well knowing the frailties and infirmities of human nature, those

who had charge of the Sacred Text hedged it round on all sides with

regulations and information called the Massorah, because it was

meant to be " a fence to the Scripture", and because it should be,

thus, next to impossible for a scribe to make a mistake in copying it.

Some general facts are given in Appendix 30 (which should here be

consulted); but further particular features are now added from Dr. C.

D. Ginsburg's four large folio volumes, which contain the Massorah

so far as he has been able to collect, arrange, and transcribe the

writing in smaller characters at the top and bottom of every page of

most of the accessible manuscripts containing it.

I. All the letters of the Hebrew text were counted: not as a piece

of mere curiosity, but that the number of each letter in each

book being thus known to the scribe he might easily check his

work, and ascertain whether one letter had escaped or got over

"the fence". He was informed how many Alephs ( = A ),

there should be, how many Beths ( = B ), etc. in each book

respectively.

II. There are five consonants, which when they occur at the

beginning of a word must have a dot within them, called a

Dagesh. This dot in no way affects the meaning of the word.

In certain positions, other than at the beginning of a word,

these five letters may, or may not, require this Dagesh. Now,

each of these dots was safeguarded; for one might so easily be

omitted or misplaced: hence, the scribe was assisted by an

instruction that, in cases where any of these five letters should

not have a Dagesh, he must make a small mark over it, called

a Raphe. This again in no way affected either the sound or the

sense; but it reminded the scribe that in these cases he had to

do one thing or the other. He must write it (if the letter were,

say, a Beth ( = B ) either or .

III. Again: certain letters have come down with the text, from the

most ancient times, having a small ornament or flourish on the

top: for example, we find

Aleph (=A)

with 7 Taagin

Beth (=B)

with 3 Taagin

Gimel (=G)

with 4 Taagin

Daleth (=D)

with 3 Taagin

These ornamented letters were quite exceptional, and implied

no added meaning of any kind: but, so jealously was the

sacred text safeguarded, that the scribe was informed how

many of each of the letters had these little ornaments: that is to

say, how many Alephs ( = A ), and how many Beths

( = B ), etc, had one, two, three, or more.

These ornaments called Ta'agim (or Tagin), meaning little

crowns. The Greek-speaking Jews called them little horns

(Hebrew keranoth) because they looked like "horns". The

Authorized Version and Revised Version rendering of keraia

(Greek = horn) is "tittle", which is the diminutive of "title"

and denotes a small mark forming such title.

Modern commentators, and even the most recent

Dictionaries of the Bible, still cling to the traditional

explanation that this "tittle" is the small projection or corner

by which the letter Beth ( = B ) differs from kaph

( = K ); or Daleth ( = D ) differs from Resh ( = R ),

etc.

But the Massorah informs us that this is not the case, and

thus, tradition is quite wrong. We give a few examples

showing how even these little ornaments were safeguarded:-

Rubric , § 2 (Ginsburg's Massorah, volume ii, page 680-

701) says: "Aleph with one Tag: there are two instances in the

Pentateuch ( Exodus 13:5, in 'asher ( = which ), and verse

15 1, in 'adam ( = man )".

Rubric , § 3, says: "There are seven Aleths ( = A ) in

the Pentateuch which respectively have seven Taagin".

Rubric , § 2, notes Beth ( = B ) with one Tag, as

occurring only once ( Exodus 13:11, yebi'aka = brings thee).

Rubric , § 3, notes Beth ( = B ), as occurring in four

instances with two Taagin videlicet, Genesis 27:29 (ya'abduka

= may serve thee); Genesis 28:16 (bammakom = place);

Exodus 7:14 (kabed = is hardened); Exodus 23:23 (vehayebusi

= and the Jebusites).

Rubric , § 4, gives four instances where Beth ( = B )

has three Taagin: and so on, through all the alphabet, noting

and enumerating each letter that has any Tagin: thus

safeguarding the sacred text, so that not one of these little

ornaments might be lost.

It was these Taagin the Lord referred in Matthew 5:18, and

Luke 16:17; when He said that not only the smallest letter

( =Yod = Y ), but that not even the merest mark or

ornament (Tag) should pass away from the Law until all

things should come to pass. So that our Lord Himself

recognized these Taagin, which must have been in His Bible

from which He quoted.

IV. In cases of spelling, where a word occurs a certain number of

times, but one or two cases with a slightly different spelling

(where, for example, one was with a short vowel and another

with a long or full vowel), these are noted, numbered, and thus

safeguarded.

The scribe is not left to imagine that some of these are

incorrect, and so be tempted to correct the smaller number by

making them conform with the larger number of cases in

which the word is spelt differently.

It is needless to give examples of such instances.

V. Where a certain word or expression occurs more or less

frequently in varying forms, these are all noted, numbered, and

distinguished. For example, the word bayith (= house); its

occurrences with different vowels and accents are all

safeguarded.

So with its occurrences with certain prefixes and suffixes:

that is to say, "in the house", six occurrences, where the letter

Beth has a Sheva ( ) are safeguarded against thirty-two

where it has a Pathach ( ) instead.

So with its combinations with other words: two are noted as

being "in this house which is called" ( Hebrew

beth

, § 244 ); nineteen

as being"into the house" ( Hebrew

beth

, § 245 ); twice "and within the

house" ( , § 246 ); four times "and the house of", and "and

into the house of" ( Hebrew

beth

, § 247 ); twice "the house of her

husband" ( Hebrew

beth

, § 249 ); "house of Elohim" five times without

the Article: these five exceptional cases being thus

safeguarded against the forty-eight occurrences where Elohim

has the Article ( Hebrew

beth

, § 251 )

In nine instances "House of Elohim" is followed by the

demonstrative pronoun "this": but, in five cases this pronoun

is the Chaldee dek (Ezra 5:17; 6:7, 7, 8, 12), and in four cases it

is edenah. These latter are thus safeguarded.

The occurrences of the expression "the house of Israel" are

noted separately in the Pentateuch and the Prophets

( Hebrew

beth

, §§ 254, 255 ) and in Hebrew

beth

, § 256, these are further

distinguished from the expression "the sons of Israel" (the

words beyth, "house of", and beney, "sons of", being much

alike in Hebrew).

"Shearing house" is noted as occurring twice ( Hebrew

beth

, § 258 ),

and "house of restraint" as occurring three times

( Hebrew

beth

, § 257 ).

"Jehovah Adonai" is noted as occurring 291 times; but the

fewer occurrences of "Adonai Jehovah" are safeguarded

against the more usaul form ( Hebrew

yod

, § 178 ).

Jehovah our Adonay is safeguarded against the more form

"Jehovah our Elohim" ( Hebrew

yod

, § 179 ).

In the same way, the following exceptional phrases are

distinguished: "Jehovah the Elohim", "Jehovah Elohim of",

"Jehovah Elohim Zeba'oth", "Jehovah Elohim of heaven",

"Jehovah my Elohim", etc., etc.

The expression "the sins of Jeroboam", which occurs fifteen

times, is in ten instances followed by "the son of Nebat". The

shorter phrase is thus exceptional; and the scribe is warned not

to make any of the five like the other ten by adding "the son of

Nebat".

These examples might be enumerated by hundreds from Dr.

Ginsburg's Massorah; but enough are here given to show the

Massorah was indeed "a fence to the Scriptures".

In the face of these facts one might smile (if the case were

not so serious) at the readiness of modern critics to use the

word "corruption" whenever they have to admit that they

cannot understand the text as it stands. We have no reason to

doubt the truth of their confessions; but it is better, and easier,

and happier, and safer to believe God.

NOTE

1Ginsburg gives verse 13; but volume ii shows that it is verse 15.