It could be that the LXX understood שׁם are ‘there’ rather than ‘name’, making the translator refer back to the cities mentioned. The apparent omission, therefore, might not be an accidental omission, but rather an intentional one.
Fred, the proto-MT is probably the oldest textual tradition of the Hebrew Bible we have. The close similarities (for the most part) between the MT and the LXX demonstrate that the proto-MT is older than the LXX. In any case, age is not always the most reliable factor in determining a ‘correct’ text (if that term is appropriate to use). I highly recommend that you read a book or two on the production of the Hebrew Bible and textual criticism. It will really illuminate your perspective. GEORGE ATHAS Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia) www.moore.edu.au (currently in Cairo, Egypt) _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
