Bible Weirdness; Lessons Remain

They came to the middle of the house as if to get wheat, and they struck him in the belly; and Rechab and Baanah his brother escaped.  Now when they came into the house, as he was lying on his bed in his bedroom, they struck him and killed him and beheaded him. And they took his head and traveled by way of the Arabah all night. (2 Samuel 4:6,7 NASB)

The doorkeeper, who had been sifting wheat, became drowsy and fell asleep. So Recab and Baanah slipped past her.  They went into the house and found Ishbosheth sleeping on his bed. They struck and killed him and cut off his head. Then, taking his head with them, they fled across the Jordan Valley through the night. (2 Samuel 4:6,7 NLT)

One of the reasons I am extremely grateful to have gone through the education I did is because of situations like the one above.  My original intent with my educational choice was to finally be able to address theological controversies.  Well, that didn't happen; and by that I mean I only gained insight into the fact a controversy existed, but never really discovered anything in 10 years that was missed in the past 2,000.  Go figure.

But the process did provide me a set of skills with Scripture that enable me to examine such odd references as the one above.  The footnote in the New Living Translation states 'As in the Greek version' and sites the Hebrew translation which is what every other English translation uses.  So what is meant by 'As in the Greek version' anyway? 

A few hundred years before Jesus was born in Bethlehem, Jewish scholars in Alexandria translated the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek.  The Greek translation was the most common Jewish Scripture used outside of Palestine up through the Second Century AD (or CE whichever you use), and somewhat beyond.  So, essentially, there were a lot of them.  When Scripture was read in early Christian churches, these Greek Jewish texts were the Scriptures read.

Through the years, after Christianity gained in favor, and after the Jewish revolt of AD 125 resulting in the total destruction of a Jewish state, the Greek translation of the Jewish Scriptures fell out of favor with the Jews.  There were various reasons for this, some in response against Christianity, some because of use of the extra books included which were not as commonly used and accepted by Palestinian Jews.  It's not completely clear why decisions were made, just that by about 200 or so AD, there were 39 books in the Hebrew canon, and the Greek translation of it fell from favor among Jews.  And then dust settles.

The fall of the Roman Empire, the demise of the stabilizing influence of Europe, and the collapse of structures and institutions meant that much knowledge was lost.  In legend (if not in fact), the destruction of the Library of Alexandria was perhaps the greatest loss of knowledge in the Western world.  What remained of written texts were kept in various safe places, out of the way of wars and so on.  Eventually, as people came blinking into the sunlight of new found ancient learning, the Renaissance brought to light much that was hidden the churches and strongholds of the day.  But not everything came to light.  Scripture was held very tightly by the church in Rome, and only in Latin was Scripture to be found.

By the time that Scripture could be had for even common people, after much blood of people trying to make it available had already been spilled, there was a Hebrew text in Saint Petersburg, Russia which preserved the entire Hebrew Scripture in one book, in Hebrew.  It dated from around 1010 AD.  Ironically, there was also a Greek text in the Vatican which preserved a Greek translation of the Hebrew which was over 600 years older.  They didn't exactly agree, which is how we got our initial problem I started with.  But you see the dilemma; the Greek text sounds better and is older.  Here's the theory used by most modern translations.  An original editor would be more likely to include multiple editions within the same writing.  A transmission scribe would be more likely to 'correct' and make something more readable than to add something making it less understandable.  So more difficult reading are preferred over easier ones, when two are different.

Now that's not the only criteria used, but you can see the 'logic' behind this criteria.  The problem is that there are possible explanations which would support the older Greek text, and explain the addition/change of the newer Hebrew text.  They may not be likely, and evidence for them doesn't exist, and we don't have this passage in the found Dead Sea scrolls, so there's no older text to which we can refer to break the tie.  We're stuck.

Here's my guess.  I suspect that the older text preserves a very early correction to an editor who, given two different accounts, preserved both.  But, I also believe that this correction happened very early on, possibly in Alexandria before Jesus was born.  So, I think it also preserves what God wanted us to have to know Him better.  Basically, I believe that God not only inspired but also preserved Scripture through the centuries.  Therefore, what we have now is what He wants us to have.  With respect to the Hebrew Scriptures, there are very few texts from which to work, and they agree to an astonishing degree.  When they don't agree, then I look at both, translate with the one that is easier to explain as original, and note the 'lesson' if different from the other one.  I don't want to miss something that my Master is preserving; a lesson about Himself, or my relationship with Him.

Fortunately, that doesn't become an issue 99% of the time.  Like here, it's usually a correction that makes good sense.  It is weird to repeat so closely together, but doesn't distract from the story of David.  The point remains regardless.  Whether the doorkeeper slept or not, the event happened, and resulted in the death of the assassins.  The point that David refused to approve of 'ascension by assassination' in his kingdom is still clear either way.

I have a 'story' as a possible explanation why there is a repetition, but so what.  David didn't put his stamp of approval on assassination of a king.  So, very few kings of Judah were ever assassinated.  It worked, and it continued to show that David was a wise man, one after the heart of God.  This difference in Scripture isn't something that detracts from either the pattern of David, nor from the Character of God.  David did what he did in establishing a belief in his kingdom, and God did what He did in preserving two slightly different accounts of David doing so.  In the end, the purpose is achieved, the lesson preserved.

So, weird or not, I'm not supposed to achieve over the 'backs' of others.  I'm not supposed to destroy those between me and even what I see God wants for me.  I'm supposed to receive from my Master what He wants, but also in His timing.  Abraham also teaches this (consider Ishmael, and all that came from that mistake).  His goal and purpose His way and timing.