Sometimes we need some textual criticism

We can illustrate the need for text criticism by examining a particular text, Psalm 104:6a.

תְּהוֹם כַּלְּבוּשׁ כִּסִּיתוֹ

A wooden translation would be, “The deep like the garment you covered it.” This text, though, contains a grammatical problem and a theological problem. The grammatical problem is in the final form כִּסִּיתוֹ,, which is typically translated, “You covered it.” There is no masculine singular antecedent for the suffix. The logical antecedent is אֶרֶץ (“the earth”) in verse 5, but אֶרֶץ is feminine. 

The LXX has, περιβόλαιον αὐτοῦ (“his garment”), and the Vulgate follows suit with amictus eius (“his garment”), providing evidence for the masculine, singular suffix, but apparently reading כְּסוּתוֹ (“his garment”) for כִּסִּיתוֹ (“you covered it”). Other witnesses give evidence of a feminine, singular suffix, which the context seems to require.

The theological problem is found in the logic of the passage if we keep the text as is. Verses 5–9 are a strophe that describes God’s establishment of dry land by his containment of the sea in its proper place. First, God placed the land (אֶרֶץ) on a solid foundation, so that it would not “totter” (v. 5 nasb). Then he covered the dry land with “the deep” (תְּהוֹם) to the extent that “the deep” covered even the mountain peaks (v. 6). 

This is followed by the water’s flight from off the dry land at God’s “rebuke” (גַּעֲרָתְךָ; v. 7) and their flight to the sea (v. 8), where they were to remain, never again “to cover [לְכַסּוֹת] the dry land” (הָאָרֶץ; v. 9). Why would God cover (כסה) the land with water only to rebuke the water for being there, and then confine the water to the sea so that it can never cover (כסה) the land? 

Note also that this sequence is at variance with Genesis 1, where the dry land (אֶרֶץ) does not exist/appear until after the waters are removed and placed in the sea (Gen. 1:9).

A minor emendation elegantly solves the grammatical and the theological problems. If we emend כִּסִּיתוֹ (“you covered it”) to כִּסַּתָּה (“it covered it”), both problems are solved. The feminine, singular subject of the verb is תְּהוֹם (“the deep”), and the referent for the feminine, singular suffix is אֶרֶץ (“the land”). 

A coherent picture now emerges in Psalm 104 and paints the same picture found in Genesis 1: The deep (תְּהוֹם) covered the land (אֶרֶץ; Gen 1:2; Ps. 104:6); then God removed the deep and confined these waters to the sea (Gen. 1:9; Ps. 104:7–9).

• In conclusion, it must be said that no major doctrine is affected by either reading and that this is always the case with text-critical decisions in the book of Psalms. I’m not aware of any major tenet of the Christian faith being affected by any text-critical decision in the book of Psalms. 

Engaging in the text-critical process, however, will at times provide a better understanding of a particular text and put the preacher in a better position to rightly explain the Word of God.