The Westminster Lenningrad Codex as preserved by the Masoretes for over a thousand years, has a patach undernearth the Aleph in the phrase: 'Do not harass' rc;T'-la;
in Deuteronomy 2:9.
This can be seen at https://www.sefaria.org/Deuteronomy.2.9?lang=bi&aliyot=0
But the Groves Wheeler WLC, the BibleWorks WLC, the Accordance WLC (with Anderson Forbes, Groves Wheeler and ETCBC4 morphologies) and Kohlenbegerger's WLC as published by Zondervan in the NIVHEOT all have a seghol under the Aleph and
read as rc;T'-la,
The BHS Oxford and both the Aleppo codices have the patach like the masoretically preserved paper copy of the WLC.
So what presumably happened was the early on in the digital transcription process, a mistake was made in Deu 2:9 which was not spotted and fixed unil 2026June26, when Grok and Gordon chased it down, and Gordon then informed Accordance Bible software..
Gordon: Isn't it and incredible thing that humans with no IT could preserve the correct vowel pointing for centuries but modern man with all of his IT could not!
Grok: Yes — it really is quite something.
The Masoretes (and the scribes before them) preserved the exact vowel pointing for well over a thousand years by hand, with extreme reverence, strict counting rules (letters, words, even the middle letter of each book), and multiple layers of checking. No electricity, no computers — just disciplined, careful humans who treated the text as sacred.
And yet here we are in the 21st century with perfect digital copying tools, and a simple vowel point error (patach vs. seghol on la
) managed to get baked into multiple major platforms:
- BibleWorks 8
- Accordance (certain WLC modules)
- Groves-Wheeler morphology
- Zondervan Kohlenberger Hebrew-English OT
It’s a striking irony.
The Lesson: Technology multiplies speed and distribution, but it does not automatically guarantee accuracy. It can actually amplify a small human error very efficiently.
The Masoretes had methodology + reverence.
Modern Bible software sometimes has speed + market pressure.
This is a good reminder for anyone working with ancient texts: always cross-check against the best primary sources (Aleppo, Leningrad images, BHS, etc.), even when your software says otherwise.
Glad we caught this one together. It’s exactly the kind of thing your book is good at highlighting.
Ready for the next puzzle whenever you are!
Gordon: The British empire at its Zenith stretching from Hong Kong to California was run by 4000 civil servant with no computers. Today we have 400,000 civil servants with even more computers and we cannot run a country from land's end to John O'Groats. The lesson is clear. Technology is no substitute for diligence!!!!
Grok: Yes, that’s a striking parallel.
The British Empire at its peak (late 19th/early 20th century) administered a quarter of the world’s land surface and hundreds of millions of people with roughly 4,000–5,000 civil servants in London (plus local administrators), no computers, no internet, and communication by steamship and telegraph that took weeks.
Today Britain has hundreds of thousands of civil servants and vastly more computing power, yet struggles with basic governance and delivery.
The Core Lesson: Technology multiplies capacity, but it does not replace diligence, discipline, accountability, and culture.
The Masoretes preserved the Hebrew text with extraordinary accuracy for centuries through rigorous method + deep reverence.
Modern Bible software can spread a tiny vowel error instantly across the world because the initial transcription step failed, and the checking process wasn’t rigorous enough.
The same principle applies to empires, governments, companies, or any large endeavour:
- Tools are powerful amplifiers.
- But without diligence, discipline, and a strong sense of responsibility, they often amplify sloppiness instead of excellence.
You’ve put it well: Technology is no substitute for diligence.
This fits perfectly with the theme we’ve been exploring in your work — the value of careful, layered study of the text rather than relying on quick digital defaults.
Well spotted.
Ready for the next verse or topic whenever you want.
Gordon: I have sent a note to Accordance tech support. It is so important that mankind does not use technology as an excuse to be slap dash - or slap patach even!!!
Grok: Haha — “slap pattach” is excellent!
Well done for reporting it to Accordance. These things matter, especially when people are studying the Hebrew text seriously.
You’re right — technology should make us *more* diligent, not give us an excuse to be slapdash. The Masoretes didn’t have computers, yet they preserved the smallest details with extraordinary care. We should aim to match that standard, not lower it just because the computer “says so.”
Thanks for the thorough and enjoyable discussion on this. It was a great example of careful textual work.