I’ve been considering yehôvâh’s fearful pronouncement: I punish (pâqad, פקד) the sons, grandsons, and great-grandsons for the sin of the fathers who reject me…^[1]  By way of review, I didn’t find anything about the Hebrew word itself that would compel anyone to translate פקד (pâqad) I punish.  While I don’t have any particular quarrel with calling the plague of Exodus 32:35 a punishment, I’m not convinced it justifies translating pâqad I punish (פקדי) and I will indeed punish (ופקדתי) beyond this limited context.^[2]

After a kind of thought experiment I concluded that the translation of פקד (pâqad) as I punish in Deuteronomy 5:9 was a perpetuation of an erroneous popular notion of religious minds that was clearly corrected in Ezekiel 18.^[3]   Though the fixation on punishment in Leviticus 18:25 is difficult for me to unravel, it hasn’t really dissuaded me from the idea that y^ehôvâh visits iniquity itself upon descendants to consign all to disobedience, so that he may show mercy to them all.^[4]

Here I’ll focus on ʽâvôn in Exodus, and though I’ve already considered Exodus 20:5 I want to start there again from a slightly different perspective.  I’m comparing/contrasting the NET and Tanakh as relatively contemporary translations of the Hebrew from Christian and Jewish perspectives respectively, and the Septuagint as a more ancient Jewish perspective.

The translators of the NET would not quite enshrine the idea that yehôvâh punishes children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren for the sins of the father in the ten commandments.  Though one might argue that—responding to the transgression of fathers by dealing—is scarcely different if one already has that idea in mind, it is a move away from: punishing the children for the sin of the parents (NIV), punishing the children for the fathers’ iniquity (CSB), I will punish your families (CEV), I bring punishment on those who hate me and on their descendants (GNT), punishing the children for the fathers’ sin (HCSB), punishing the children for the iniquity of the parents (ISV) or I punish children for their parents’ sins (GWT).^[5]  All of these translations follow the idea in the Septuagint that visiting (פקד) iniquity (עון) is equivalent to “repaying” (ἀποδιδοὺς, a form of ἀποδίδωμι) “sins” (ἁμαρτίας, a form of ἁμαρτία).

Admittedly, my own idea is more like I lay the sins of the parents upon their children; the entire family is affected in the New Living Translation.  But I didn’t come to it by reading the NLT, and I’m way too snobby to cite it as support.  The next occurrence of ʽâvôn includes an occurrence of nâśâʼ.

I won’t pretend that I understand the iniquity of the holy things or the iniquity committed in the holy things.  Nor will I chase that rabbit.  I want to stay focused.  The translators of the Septuagint took a different tack that actually makes more sense when considering the next occurrence of ʽâvôn also rather than this one alone.

In the former example Aaron will bear (nâśâʼ, ונשׁא) the iniquity (ʽâvôn, עון) of the holy things.  In the latter example Aaron and his sons wear underwear so that they bear (nâśâʼ, ישׁאו) no iniquity (ʽâvôn, עון) and die.  The translators of the Septuagint resolved this dilemma by translating ונשׁא (nâśâʼ) ἐξαρεῖ (a form of ἐξαίρω; NETS: “shall take away”) and ישׁאו (nâśâʼ) ἐπάξονται (a form of ἐπάγω; NETS: “shall…bring onto”).

And I would consider death an extreme punishment for bearing iniquity.  The next occurrences of ʽâvôn also include an occurrence of nâśâʼ.

Here the translators of the NET and Tanakh agreed that נשׁא (nâśâʼ) should be translated forgiving, while the translators of the Septuagint chose ἀφαιρῶν (a form of ἀφαιρέω; NETS: “taking away”).  One can appreciate the problem: How could yehôvâh bear iniquity (not to mention transgression and sin) if that made Aaron and his sons liable to death?  Of course, if I let the Hebrew words stand as is and learn from them, and believe that yehôvâh took on human flesh and became Jesus the Christ, I have a gospel message foretold to Moses in the long name of God.

So what did Moses know and when did he know it?  Following yehôvâh’s self-revelation Moses didn’t ask Him to bear (nâśâʼ) Israel’s iniquity.

Moses asked for וסלחת (sâlach) instead.  And yehôvâh gave them rules and rituals (Exodus 34:10-27) that when they transgressed them they might seek a remedy through confession, sacrifice and other rituals to receive sâlach.  The translators of the Septuagint, on the other hand, turned Moses’ request into a prophecy of the new covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34).

If they had the law, the rituals and the sacrifices in mind, hear what may well be Jesus’ teaching to his disciples in the days between his resurrection and ascension (Hebrews 10:1-4 NET):

For the law possesses a shadow of the good things to come but not the reality itself, and is therefore completely unable, by the same sacrifices offered continually, year after year, to perfect those who come to worship.  For otherwise would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers would have been purified once for all and so have no further consciousness of sin?  But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins year after year.  For the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away (ἀφαιρεῖν, another form ἀφαιρέω) sins (ἁμαρτίας, a form of ἁμαρτία).

A table of forms of ʽâvôn in Exodus and their translations in the KJV and NET follows.