The following is taken from chapter 6, “An Examination of Certain Biblical Verses Which Illustrate With Reasonable Certitude That Theological Corrections Did Really Take Place”
1. “Seeing
the Face of God” or “Appearing before God?”
There
are certain passages in the Bible, which, in their present niph’al form
of punctuation, are connected with “appearing before the LORD” [i.e., Ex 23:15;
34:20; Deut 16:6b//Ex 23:17; 34:23; Deut 16:16a//Ex 34:24; Deut 31:11; Is
1:12//1 Sam 1:22//Ps 42:3]. There seems to be no doubt that this niph’al
punctuation represents a deliberate emendation or theological correction, the
aim of which was to render the anthropocentric expression of “seeing the fact
of God” in a theologically more acceptable formula, in keeping with a more perceptive
outlook which was mindful of Ex 33:20. S. D. Luzzatto puts it well in his
commentary on Is 1:12 as follows:
“When
you come to appear before the LORD”. The intention of the prophet is to say, “To
see the face of”. This is a metaphorical figure of speech, as when a man comes
to visit his superior, comparable to “For truly, to see your face is like
seeing the face of God” (Gen 33:10). However, the punctuators (according to the
tradition in their possession from the sages of the Second Temple) corrected
the expression out of respect, on account of the ordinary simple folk, for they
do not understand metaphorical usage . . .
He
rightly points out that the present construction with the niph’al and
the particle את is awkward. This fact is best seen in those cases where the
infinitive construct is punctuated in a niph’al form but lacks the usual
he (Ex 34:24; Deut 31:11 and Is 1:12). If one compares these three forms
with other normal niph’al infinitive constructs (cf. Judg 13:21; 1 Sam
3:21; 2 Sam 17:17; 1 Kings 18:2; Ez 21:29) one notices that:
(a) the
he is present in all these other forms;
(b) it is absent only in those forms which are specifically concerned with
coming to the sanctuary “to appear before the LORD”.
The
simplest explanation for this is that these three forms were originally qal
forms which required no he for the infinitive construct. Examination of
the contexts of other pentateuchal passages shows that they too are concerned
with the statutory pilgrimage to the Temple, and that the awkwardness of the
expression is removed once the qal punctuation is restored. . . .
That
this type of theological correction took place at an early stage, and that the
Masoretes are merely preserving a very ancient traditional emendation becomes
evident on examination of the textual situation for these passages. The pentateuchal
passages have scarcely any hint of an original qal. The LXX and Vulgate textual
tradition faithfully record the MT niph’al punctuation in their
renderings. The same is true for the Targums of Onqelos, Pseudo-Jonathan and
Neofiti, with one slight exception in the last mentioned. The Fragmentum Targum
for Ex 34:20 also attests an active verbal form, למחמי, “to see”. One may
rightly ask whether these two isolated targumic readings constitute sufficient
textual evidence as to warrant the adoption of the “original” reading
throughout the eight pentateuchal passages?
This
question becomes more acute in the case of 1 Sam 1:22. Hannah does not go up to
Shiloh to join in the yearly sacrifice of the LORD, explaining to her husband,
that “as soon as the child is weaned, I will bring him, that he may appear
in the presence of the LORD” (MT). there is no textual evidence for
anything other than the MT niph’al punctuation. Yet, the similarity of
the consonantal phrase, ובראה את פני, together with the awkwardness already
mentioned when this is pointed as niph’al, as well as a typical context
of pilgrimage to the sanctuary, makes it almost certainly a case where the original
phrase must have been “Then we shall see the face of the LORD”. The ease
with which the change could be made from the first person plural qal
(cohortative) to the third person singular, niph’al (perfect), together
with the sequence of events involved, probably accounts for the total success
of this particular emendation. Here is a textual situation parallel to that
observed above in the case of 1 Sam 20:16. It is probably most prudent and, at
the same time, consistent, to adopt the same approach here as there.
The
textual evidence for an original qal in Is 1:12 and Ps 42:3 is a little
more encouraging, although not spectacular. In the case of Is 1:12, de Rossi
notes on MS as attesting a qal punctuation, which is also the reading of
the Syriac. Ps 42:3 has both Targum and Syriac attesting an original qal,
as well as a small number of de Rossi’s MSS. One might add that the New Testament
statement in Rev 22:4: “They shall see his face”, which occurs in a context of
messianic fulfilment, appears as a direct answer to the psalmists’s question: “When
shall I enter and see your face?” In both cases then, there is a minimal amount
of textual evidence for the original qal punctuation, which, when taken
in conjunction with the observations made above concerning the awkwardness of
construction and the obvious theological motivation behind the change of
punctuation, makes it possible to adopt the qal for these two readings. (Carmel
McCarthy, The
Tiqqune Sopherim and Other Theological Corrections in the Masoretic Text of the
Old Testament [Orbis Biblicus Et Orientalis; Fribourg: Biblical
Institute of the University of Fribourg, 1981], 197-200, comment in square
brackets added for clarification)
Neofiti
at Deut 31:11 attests an active form, למחמייה, “to see”, in contradistinction to
the other pentateuchal passages it has the passive/reflexive form, למתחמייה, “to
appear”. It is a pity that the Spanish, French and English translations in Diez
Macho’s edition of Neofiti (Neophyti I, Vol. V, Deuteronomio, Madrid
1978) do not recognise the existence of this variant at Deut 31:11, but
assimilate their translations to the other seven passages, “to appear before”
(even if the variant be only the result of an inadvertent omission of a single
constant, tau). (Ibid., 199 n. 8)