What version of the Bible are you using? Check Deuteronomy 32:43

Deuteronomy 32:43 is now my "go to" verse to see if a Bible translation reflects the original text of the Bible.

And why is the "original text" important? Because it is the original text, known as the vorlage or autographic text written by the Biblical author that is what God has inspired as His Word. He didn't inspire later copies, manuscripts, although we can know through the science of textual criticism with near certainty what the original, inspired text of Scripture is today.

What do we find in Deuteronomy 32:43?

Full disclosure - from the time I came to Christ in the 1980's I was told that there is no translation as good as the New American Standard (NASB) - the most literal, based on the oldest and best possible manuscripts. Some of what I was told was true, but as you will see in this blog post, some of what I was told is NOT true.

And yes, I am aware of the King James ONLY (KJV) crowd and their arguments against many of the other modern translations (i.e. the NASB & NIV) as corrupt, even calling them "New Age". Much of what the modern King James Only position argues is simply propaganda, but I am not personally against the King James Version. Those translators did the best with what they had at the time, but sadly they made a critical error when it came to their Old Testament text. 

The ongoing debate between, for example, the NASB and the KJV is largely based on which textual tradition we should use as the basis for our New Testament text. 

The arguments of these two camps is not where I go today to determine if my Bible translation is accurate and reflects the original, in particular for the Old Testament. I am confident that New Testament textual critics have done the hard work and that they are concerned with getting us as close to the original Greek (and some would argue Aramaic and/or Hebrew) for the books in our New Testaments.

Textual criticism has largely NOT been done in the case with our English translations of the Old Testament. As we are about to go into the year 2025, there is still not a single published critical text of the Old Testament in existence. There are a couple in the works, but they are a long way from being completed. Instead of a true critical text, most our our English Old Testaments (including both the KJV and the NASB) rely on the Hebrew of the Masoretic Text (MT) largely based upon a manuscript known as the Leningrad Codex from around 1000AD. 

How incredible to think that BOTH the NASB and the KJV (and many other modern translations) base their Old Testament translations almost entirely upon such a late manuscript when there is so much earlier material to be using to work towards the original Hebrew.

Honest textual critics can show us where the Masoretic Text does NOT reflect the original Hebrew that God inspired. I could give multiple examples but I will suffice to show in this blog post a single instance - Deuteronomy 32:43.

Thankfully, good study Bibles will include copious notes alongside their Old Testament text indicating where other textual variants exist. So even though, we do not yet possess a genuine critical text of the Hebrew Bible, students of the Bible can know what the original Hebrew almost certainly said.

Let us consider the two most main sources of Old Testament textual material that end up "correcting" the Masoretic Text.

First of all we have the Septuagint (LXX) and secondly, we have the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS).

The Septuagint was the JEWISH translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek that began around 285BC. Rabbinic Jews rejected this translation in the 2nd century AD.

The Septuagint reveals many places where the Masoretic Text differs from the original Hebrew Old Testament. 

80% of the time the New Testament quotes the Old Testament, the writers quote the Septuagint (LXX). But when it comes to our Old Testaments, rather than use the Septuagint (LXX) and the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) in the best attempt to establish the original Hebrew text, most translations simply use the Masoretic Text as the basis for their English renderings.

The oldest fragments of the LXX we possess today are as early as the 2nd century before Christ and we possess nearly full OT manuscripts in the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus from the 300s - more than 600 years earlier than the Hebrew found in the Leningrad Codex!

As for the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) we have Hebrew scrolls/fragments of the Old Testament that date as early 300BC (some have been dated as old as 385BC) - nearly 1400 years OLDER than the Masoretic Text!

A critical text of the Old Testament would take ALL of these textual traditions and seek to establish what the original Hebrew Bible was. Some modern translations do this, for example the ESV which is why it is the English translation I most trust when it comes to the Old Testament text. It isn't perfect, as it doesn't restore the original genealogies from Genesis 5 and 11. Rabbinic Judaism and subsequently the Masoretic Text removed 1500 years from those genealogies. The original Hebrew is reflected in the Greek Septuagint.

The world's leading Jewish textual critic of the Hebrew Bible, Emmanuel Tov* agrees with this assessment. He stated, "often the Greek [the Septuagint/LXX] is MORE AUTHORITATIVE and earlier, antecedent, to the Hebrew Bible [based on the Masoretic Text/MT] than what we currently have". (i.e. the LXX of Jeremiah is 15% shorter and Tov thinks the LXX reflects the [Hebrew] Vorlage [original text]. And when the LXX and the Samaritan Pentateuch agree over and against the Hebrew Bible [Masoretic Text], they are reflecting the original [the Vorlage]”

The Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) shed light on a much earlier Hebrew text, predating the Masoretic Text as I said previously by as much as 1400 years. 

For centuries a debate raged that the Christians were following a sub-standard Old Testament by following the Greek Septuagint while Rabbinic Jews had their Hebrew Masoretic Old Testament. When the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, we learned that when the LXX and the MT differed, it was the Greek LXX that preserved the Hebrew original better than the Hebrew MT.

Deuteronomy 32:43 is one such verse. And it is an extremely important verse that is quoted/referenced in Hebrews 1:6. The Masoretic Text has NOTHING about angels worshipping the person being referenced, which we know from the Apostles was Jesus Himself.

The Rabbis CHANGED their Old Testament text, which is reflected in the Masoretic Text and sadly many of our English Old Testament translations.

When the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered a Hebrew scroll that included Deuteronomy 32 was discovered in Cave 4 (Fragment 4Q44). And from it we find that the original Hebrew Bible agrees with the Septuagint. Angels (angelos) is the translation into Greek for the Hebrew word elohim (gods) which was the standard meaning of elohim when the term was not referencing God Himself.

The Hebrew Bible used by Jews today (and again, sadly many Christians) had a powerful Messianic prophecy removed, one that indicates that Messiah would be God Himself as He would be worshipped by the Angelic beings.  Of course, it doesn't take long to figure out why the Rabbis would have changed such a significant verse and why they would reject the Jewish Greek Old Testament, the LXX, that preserved the original Hebrew idea. But God in His Sovereignty allowed the Dead Sea Scrolls to be discovered to confirm what His original Hebrew version of Deuteronomy said when Moses wrote it. 

*Emmanuel Tov – Jewish. The world’s leading authority on the textual criticism of the Hebrew Bible. Editor-in-chief of the Dead Sea Scrolls Project, also an expert on Greek translations of the OT. Biblical scholar in the Bible Department at Hebrew University in Jerusalem.