several substitutions of synonymous forms, such as the substitution of number, are also preserved in 4Q37.
Category 2. Seven differences between 4Q37 and the MT belong to category
The third addition occurs at Col 5:5 (Deut 8:7) and concerns the addition of the adjective הבח] ׄרו “and spacious.”240 The MT of Deuteronomy 8:7 describes the Promised Land 8:7 as “a good land” while 4Q37 describes the Promised Land as “a good and spacious land.” Duncan notes that the scribe of 4Q37 is likely expansionistic here in light of Exodus 3:8, which modifies the Promised Land as both “good and spacious” ץ ֶר ֶא־ל ֶא ה ָבָח ְרוּ הָבוֹט.240F241
The fourth addition is found at Col 8:4 (Deut 11:8) and reads םיטפשמהו “and judgments.” Although Duncan proposes that this addition also includes the phrase םיקוחהו
“and statutes,” this is not certain since םיקוחה has no manuscript evidence to support it.
Moreover, spatial considerations are of little help due to the textual damage of the fragment. Her reading, therefore, depends on the fact that parallel verses often include both nouns. However, the inclusion of םיקוחה “the statutes” is tentative since the MT exhibits great variety when describing God’s commandments. At times, God’s
commandments are described simply as commandments (e.g., Deut 11:8, 22; 15:5; 19:9;
27:1). Elsewhere they are described as statutes and commandments (e.g., Exod 15:26;
Deut 4:40; 27:10). Moreover, they are also described as commandments and judgments (e.g., Num 36:13; Dan 9:5; Neh 9:29). Duncan’s proposed reading is also prevalent in Scripture (e.g., Deut 5:31; 6:1; 8:11; 11:1). Thus, whether 4Q37 reads םיקוחה is uncertain.
Nonetheless, it is certain that 4Q37 reads םיטפשמהו. This change is minor.
Besides the four additions, 4Q37 also preserves three substitutions that belong to category 2. The first occurs at Col 8:2 (Deut 11:6) and concerns the substitution of prepositions. 4Q37 reads ברקמ “from the midst,” while the MT reads ב ֶרֶק ְבּ “in the midst.”
Graphic or linguistic confusion is most certainly the reason for this change. The
240 4Q41 preserves the same reading at Col 1:2 (Deut 8:6).
241 Duncan, “4QDeutj,” 86.
substitution of the prepositions bet and mem is a common phenomenon.242 Moreover, the recording of this account in Numbers 16:33 reads �וֹתּ ִמ “from the midst.” The difference, therefore, is slight.
The second substitution is preserved at Col 10:13 (Exod 13:5) and has
precedent in parallel contexts. 4Q37 reads ר] ׄשאכ “just as,” while the MT reads ר ֶשׁ ֲא “that.”
The broader context is the Lord bringing Israel to the Promised Land that (MT)/just as (4Q37) he swore to their Fathers. In the MT, the Land that God swore to give to their fathers is a relative clause. In 4Q37, the clause is a comparative clause. This is a difference, but the phrase of 4Q37 has precedent in the MT (e.g., Deut 29:12) and is conceptually similar. Thus, the difference belongs to category 2.
The last substitution occurs at Col 12:14 (Deut 32:8). Here, 4Q37 reads ינב םיהולא “sons of God” with the LXX against the MT, which reads ל ֵא ָר ְשׂ ִייֵנ ְבּ “sons of Israel.” The meaning of the phrase םיהלא ינב of 4Q37 and the phrase of the LXX υἱων θεοῦ “sons of God” likely refers to divine beings.242F243
242 For a discussion of the interchange between mem and bet, see Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 230. Here he argues that these letters are similar both graphically and phonologically. This similarity makes it difficult to determine if the interchange arose from textual or linguistic grounds.
243 In the MT, the phrase םי ִה�ֱא יֵנ ְבּ or the related phrase םיִל ֵא יֵנ ְבּ likely only refers to divine beings (e.g., Gen 6:2, 4; Ps 29:1 89:7). See 4Q381 15:6 that also uses the phrase םילאינב to refer to angels although the evidence is fragmentary, so an exact identification is difficult. A similar phrase occurs in the non-biblical DSS, but refers exclusively to divine beings (e.g., the phrase םימש ינב “sons of heaven” at 1QS 4:22; 11:8; 4Q416 1:12//4Q118 2:4, 4Q427 7ii:18). Notice that related terms such as ןוֹיְלֶﬠ יֵנ ְבּ (Ps 82:6) and
ְבּ יֵנ
יָח־ל ֵא (Hos 2:1) refer to God’s people, not divine beings. In Greek literature, the LXX refers to God’s people as υἱοὶ ὑψίστου “sons of the Most High” (LXX Ps 81:6]) and υἱοὶ θεοῦ ζῶντος “sons of the Living God” (Hos 2:1) while Wisdom 2:18; 18.13 and Solomon 17:27 use variations of the phrase υἱοὶ θεοῦ “sons of God” to refer to God’s people, not divine beings. Odes 2:43 contains a variation of this phrase, but determining if the referent is a divine being or a human is difficult. Textual damage to column 12 prohibits context to help aid interpretation of this phrase. Nonetheless, even if one were to supply the reading of the MT and the LXX for the rest of the verse, the meaning of םיהולא ינב “sons of God” would still be
ambiguous on internal grounds. On the one hand, one may argue that the reading םיהולא ינב (referring here to divine beings) better contrasts with the phrase םדא ינב “sons of man.” On the other hand, one might argue that since this phrase has three parallels and since each of these parallels phrases refer to humans (םִיוֹגּ
“nations,” ם ָדאָ יֵנ ְבּ “sons of man,” and םי ִמַּﬠ ת�ֻב ְגּ “borders of the peoples”), then interpreting םיהולא ינב might better be interpreted as referring to human rather than to angels. Thus, internal evidence does not help determine the referent of 4Q37’s reading.
Tov asserts that the reading found in 4Q37 and the LXX is original and that the scribe of the MT gives the text a different direction by altering a single word.244
Furthermore, he asserts that the scribe of the MT altered the text in order to avoid polytheistic connotations.245 He states that the term םיהלא ינב “sons of God” referred not to the sons of the Lord, but to gods of the Canaanite and Ugaritic pantheon.246 His explanation is possible, but not certain. Tov argues that the scribe of the MT altered the text because he did not feel comfortable with the polytheistic conations of םיהלא ינב.247 His explanation provides an alleviating solution, but lacks explanatory power since the terms םיהלא ינב and םילא ינב refer to divine beings elsewhere in the MT (םיהלא ינב occurs at Gen 6:2, 4, Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7, while the term םילא ינב occurs at Ps 29:1, 89:7). Moreover, polytheistic connotations of Deuteronomy 32:8 are not limited to the phrase םיהלא ינב.
Deuteronomy 32:12 states that “no foreign god existed with him [Israel],” while Deuteronomy 32:16a reads, “They [Israel] made him [God] to jealousy with strange things” (i.e., gods). Furthermore, Deuteronomy 32:17 states clearly that “they [Israel]
sacrificed to demons that were not God: gods that they did not know.” Thus, Tov’s explanation that the MT eliminated the phrase because of anti-polytheistic tendencies is
244 Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 249. See also Rofé who explains that colon b of the LXX and 4Q44 F5ii:L7 (4QDeutq) Deut 32:43 was deleted by an ‘orthodox’ scribe “who could not admit to the existence of deities, even those belonging to a lower rank.” Alexander Rofé, Deuteronomy:
Issues and Interpretations (London: T & T Clark, 2002), 50.
245 Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 247-50. See also Emanuel Tov, “Theological Tendencies in the Masoretic Text of Samuel,” in After Qumran: Old and Modern Editions of the Biblical Texts—The Historical Books, ed. Hans Ausloos, Bénédicte Lemmelijn, and Julio Trebolle Barrera, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 246 (Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2012), 9-11.
246 Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 249. See also Tigay, who says the scribes of the MT likely changed the term םיהולא ינב to לארשי ינב for one of two reasons. First, the scribes did not want Israel to worship these beings, a possible response if Israel envisioned them as having power. See Tigay, Deuteronomy םירבד, 514. Second, he suggests that the scribes may have changed the text because they felt that the term was too similar to the Canaanite “assembly of the לא ינב.” Ibid., 515.
247 Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 249.
tentative since polytheistic connotations are pervasive in the immediate context and since this phrase occurs elsewhere in the MT to refer to divine beings.
Contrary to Tov, who argues for the originality of the LXX and 4Q37, explanations do exist in favor of reading the MT as original. For example, it is possible that the original reading was לארשי ינב “sons of Israel,” but the letters רשי were
dropped.248 Michael Heiser dismisses this suggestion since it does not explain how the letters םיהו could have been added to 4Q37. It is possible that 4Q37 was copied from memory, it was an excerpted text. This fact, plus the fact that the phrase לא ינב never occurs in the MT,249 Samaritan Pentateuch, biblical-DSS, or non-biblical-DSS,250 could have led the scribe of 4Q37 to write םיהולא as opposed to לא. Thus, it is at least possible that the MT reading is original.
Although it is difficult to determine which reading is original, both readings are connected in ancient Judaism and in Masoretic sources. Targum Pseudo-Jonathan gives helpful insight into this variant since it interprets ל ֵא ָר ְשִׂי יֵנ ְבּ רַפּ ְס ִמְל “to number the sons of Israel” of Deuteronomy 32:8 as implying both a reference to Israel and to angels.250F251 The angelic interpretation of Targum Pseudo-Jonathan depends on the scribe identifying God’s divisions of the nations in Deuteronomy 32:8 as referring to the Table of nations in Genesis 10.251F252 An ancient Jewish tradition connects the division of the nations with an angelic being. This tradition, therefore, provides the ground in which one
248 See Michael S. Heiser, “Deuteronomy 32:8 and the Sons of God,” Bibliotheca Sacra 158, no. 629 (January 2001): 58.
249 The phrase יָח־ל ֵא יֵנ ְבּ occurs at Hos 2:1.
250 The phrase may occur at 11Q13 2:14, but this spot of the line is fragmentary.
251 Tov makes this point in Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 249. See also Tigay’s comments in Deuteronomy םירבד, 514-15.
252 Eldon Clem, Targum Ps. Jonathan (English), version 1.4, electronic ed. (Altamonte Springs, FL: Accordance Bible Software; Oaktree Software, 2006), n359, n360.
could interpret Deuteronomy 32:8 as referring to either divine beings (likely meaning of 4Q37) or humanity (interpretation of MT) or both (Tag. Ps. Jo). Eldon Clem states,
There was an ancient Jewish tradition that each of the nations of the world has an angelic being watching over it, which seems to be reflected in Daniel 9:13, 20-21;
Deuteronomy 4:19; Psalm 82. In the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 there are seventy nations that came out of Noah, hence there are seventy angels (cf. Targum Pseudo- Yonatan (Jonathan) on Gen 1:16; 11:8; as well as Pirqe de Rabbi Eliezer 177).253 Thus, the two readings appear connected to an ancient Jewish tradition that is tied to Genesis 10.254
The scribe also interprets Deuteronomy 32:8 as a reference to Israel by drawing on the word “seventy.” Just as seventy nations came out from Noah, so seventy sons of Jacob went into Egypt (Gen 46:27; Exod 1:5; Deut 10:22).254F255 The Targum implies that
“God established the nations according to the number of the children of Israel.”255F256 Thus, the reading of 4Q37 and the LXX was known amongst the rabbis and derived within Masoretic sources (e.g., Tar. Ps-Jon Gen 11:8). Since this tradition is likely responsible for the difference between the MT, LXX, and 4Q35, identifying the reading of 4Q35 as non-Masoretic is questionable.256F257