II Chronicles 4:3 · Bible study
2 Chronicles 4:3 Commentary: Oxen or Knops? Textual Variant Explored
Hebrew · 9 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why does II Chronicles 4:3 say 'oxen' while 1 Kings 7:24 says 'knops'? Dive into the scribal history and meaning of this temple ornament.
Research Summary
- Meaning: Describes a double row of ornaments, either oxen or knops, that ran under the rim of the bronze basin (molten sea) in Solomon's temple.
- Key words: Likeness (demut), oxen (bekarim), under (tahat), row (tur), cast (yatsaq).
- Main debate: Whether the Chronicler originally wrote “oxen” or “knops”, and whether the difference is a scribal error or an intentional theological shift.
- Theological theme: God's detailed provision for worship; the reliability of Scripture amid minor textual variations.
- Best use: As a case study in textual criticism and the relationship between parallel accounts in Kings and Chronicles.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
Below the rim, figures of oxen encircled it, ten per cubit all the way around the Sea, cast in two rows as a part of the Sea.
WEB World English Bible 2000
Under it was the likeness of oxen, which encircled it, for ten cubits, encircling the sea. The oxen were in two rows, cast when it was cast.
KJV King James Version 1769
And under it was the similitude of oxen, which did compass it round about: ten in a cubit, compassing the sea round about. Two rows of oxen were cast, when it was cast.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
And under it was the likeness of oxen, which did compass it round about, for ten cubits, compassing the sea round about. The oxen were in two rows, cast when it was cast.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
And the likeness of oxen is under it, all round about encompassing it, ten in the cubit, compassing the sea round about; two rows of oxen are cast in its being cast.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And under it was the similitude of oxen, encompassing it round about, ten in a cubit enclosing the sea round about, two rows of oxen, cast when it was cast.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
And under it there was the likeness of oxen, and certain engravings on the outside of ten cubits compassed the belly of the sea, as it were with two rows.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Y debajo de él había figuras de bueyes que lo circundaban, diez en cada codo todo alrededor: eran dos órdenes de bueyes fundidos juntamente con el mar.
E debaixo dele havia figuras de bois que o circundavam, dez em cada côvado todo ao redor: eram duas ordens de bois fundidos juntamente com o mar.
Des figures de bœufs l’ entouraient au-dessous de son bord, dix par coudée, faisant tout le tour de la mer; les bœufs, disposés sur deux rangs, étaient fondus avec elle en une seule pièce.
Und Knoten waren unter ihm umher, je zehn auf eine Elle; und es waren zwei Reihen Knoten um das Meer her, die mit gegossen waren.
Onder dezelve nu was de gelijkenis van runderen, rondom henen, die omsingelende, tien in een el, omringende de zee rondom; twee rijen dezer runderen waren in haar gieting gegoten.
Sotto all’orlo lo circondavano delle figure di buoi, dieci per cubito, facendo tutto il giro del mare; erano disposti in due ordini ed erano stati fusi insieme col mare.
A pod niem zewsząd w około były podobieństwa wołów, których było dziesięć w łokciu, a otaczały morze w około; a były dwa rzędy tych wołów odlanych pospołu z morzem.
и литые подобия волов стояли под ним кругом со всех сторон; на десять локтей окружали море кругом два ряда волов, вылитых одним литьем с ним.
海 周圍有野瓜（野瓜：原文是牛）的樣式，每肘 十 瓜，共有兩 行，是鑄 海的時候鑄上的；
And under it was a design of flowers all round it, ten to a cubit, circling the water-vessel in two lines; they were made from liquid metal at the same time as the water-vessel.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · II Chronicles 4:3
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Most commentators agree that the word "oxen" in II Chronicles 4:3 is likely a scribal error or corruption, while the original reading referred to buds or gourds (knops). Adam Clarke notes that in 1 Kings 7:24 the word is פּקעים (peka'im), meaning knops, probably grapes, mushrooms, or similar ornaments. He suggests that a copyist mistakenly substituted the more familiar word בּקרים (bekarim, “oxen”) for the rarer one, possibly due to letter confusion. Barnes adds that an early copyist, expecting to hear of oxen (since the sea was supported by twelve oxen), changed the reading. The Cambridge Bible holds that "oxen" has the support of the Septuagint but can hardly be correct; it prefers knops. Keil and Delitzsch treat the occurrence of בּקרים as an orthographical error in the Chronicle. Thus the consensus leans toward identifying the original ornament as knops rather than oxen, though the Chronicler's text as it stands has oxen.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Scribal error view: Clarke and Barnes argue that a copyist mistakenly changed 'knops' (a rare word) to 'oxen' (a common word), confusing letters or anticipating the oxen in verse 4.
- Harmonizing view: Some interpreters (e.g., Houbigant, per Clarke) propose that 'oxen' could refer to a type of large grape or fruit, making both readings compatible.
- Theological emphasis: A few suggest the Chronicler intentionally used 'oxen' to connect the sea to the sacrificial system or the living creatures (Ezekiel 1:10), though this view is not strongly supported in the supplied excerpts.
What is clear: The passage describes an ornamental feature in two rows cast as part of the bronze basin, and the textual difference with 1 Kings 7:24 does not affect the atonement or core Christian doctrines.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Ornamentation under the Sea | The verse describes a decorative feature under the brim of the bronze basin, consisting of two rows of cast figures. | Christians differ on whether the figures were oxen (as Chronicles reads) or knops/gourds (as 1 Kings 7:24 reads). Some see a scribal error; others see different traditions or intentional variation. |
| Relationship to 1 Kings 7:24 | Both passages describe the same temple object, and the accounts are largely parallel. | The debate involves whether the original text of Chronicles contained 'oxen' or if a copyist changed it. Commentators like Clarke and Barnes argue for a scribal mistake; Keil treats it as an orthographical error. |
| Symbolism of Oxen | Oxen had strong associations in the temple: they were used for sacrifices and supported the sea itself. | Some see oxen in the ornamentation as a deliberate link to Ezekiel's vision (Ezekiel 1:10) or to the twelve tribes; others view the presence of oxen here as a secondary scribal error and not original. |
| Textual Reliability | Both Chronicles and Kings are divinely inspired and authoritative for the church. | Some traditions emphasize the inerrancy of the original autographs and harmonize the differences; others accept the possibility of minor copyist errors without denying the text's overall reliability. |
Historical & Cultural Context
The "molten sea" was a huge bronze basin in Solomon's temple court, ten cubits (about 15 feet) in diameter and five cubits high, holding water for priestly cleansing (II Chronicles 4:2, 6; Exodus 30:17, 21). The verse describes ornaments under its brim, likely decorative knops or fruit-shaped emblems cast in a double row around the circumference. Such ornamentation was typical of Near Eastern temple furnishings, where pomegranates, lilies, and other natural forms bedecked sacred objects. In 1 Kings 7:23, 26 the parallel account uses "knops" (gourds), while Chronicles says "oxen". The Chronicler might have been influenced by the twelve bronze oxen that supported the basin (II Chronicles 4:4), leading a scribe to introduce oxen figurines into the brim decoration. The casting process, "cast when it was cast", indicates that the ornaments were not separate pieces but part of the original mould, a notable achievement of ancient bronze founding. The sea stood in the inner court, southeast of the temple, and was used by priests for ceremonial washing. Its construction reflects the lavish care given to every detail of worship, pointing to the holiness required in approaching God.”
Textual Notes
The variants in this verse relate to the word for the ornament: the MT of II Chronicles 4:3 reads “oxen” (בְּקָרִים, bekarim), while 1 Kings 7:24 reads “knops” (פְּקָעִים, peka'im). The LXX (Septuagint) of Chronicles reads βοῶν (“oxen”), supporting the MT reading in Chronicles. Most modern critical editions, however, consider the reading in Kings to be original and the Chronicles reading a scribal error, possibly a copyist’s substitution of a more familiar word for a rare one. The textual analysis in the supplied excerpts (Clarke, Barnes, Cambridge) argues for the priority of “knops”. No significant additional variant is noted by the consulted sources.
Reception History
In early Jewish and Christian interpretation, the temple furnishings were read as types of Christ or the church. The oxen supporting the sea (verse 4) were linked to the four living creatures in Ezekiel 1:10, but the ornaments under the brim received less attention. Medieval interpreters often harmonized the accounts, assuming both “oxen” and “knops” referred to the same reality. With the rise of historical criticism in the 18th-19th centuries, scholars like Houbigant and Clarke highlighted the discrepancy and attempted to resolve it through philology. The passage has since served as an example of how textual transmission can introduce minor differences without affecting the overarching message. Today, it is studied in biblical theology to illustrate the Chronicler’s perspective and the challenges of reconstructing the original text.
Preaching This Verse
Three-Point Outline
- The Faithfulness of the Chronicler: The Chronicler preserves the temple record with meticulous detail, even when his wording diverges from Kings. This shows that Scripture’s variety of expression does not dilute its authority.
- God’s Lavish Provision: The molten sea, huge, ornate, and functional, demonstrates God’s desire to provide for His people’s worship in beauty and abundance.
- Textual Transmission and Trust: The difference between “oxen” and “knops” reminds us that the Bible has a human history. Its reliability stands despite minor scribal variances, because the core message of redemption remains intact.
Five-Point Outline
- The Setting: The bronze sea in the temple court, its size, shape, and purpose for priestly cleansing.
- The Ornamentation: Under the brim, a double row of cast figures, originally knops (gourds or buds) but in Chronicles called oxen.
- The Textual Issue: Why the difference? Scribal explanation vs. intentional theological emphasis.
- Symbolic Possibilities: Oxen as creatures of sacrifice, strength, and support, tying the basin to the altar and the living creatures of Ezekiel.
- Application for Worship: Every detail matters in approaching a holy God, yet our confidence rests in the unshaken gospel, not in the perfection of every transcriptional detail.
Illustration Hooks
- A master woodcarver includes a small miscut in a chair, but the chair still functions beautifully. The Bible's minor textual variations don't undermine its usefulness for teaching and salvation.
- A church building has two blueprints, one from an architect and one from the builder, both agree on the main structure but differ on a decorative molding. That difference doesn't change the purpose of the building.
- Think of a collector who owns two versions of the same rare coin, they differ in a small detail, but both are genuine and valuable.
Questions Your Congregation Is Asking
- Why does the Bible have differences between Kings and Chronicles? Does that mean we can't trust it?
- What decorations and symbols in Old Testament worship point forward to Christ?
- How should we respond when we find apparent contradictions in Scripture?
Leading a Discussion
II Chronicles 4:3 opens a window into the artistry and textual history of the temple account. This small discrepancy with 1 Kings 7:24 invites us to consider how God’s Word comes to us, both divine and human. As you discuss, focus on what the text teaches about God's provision for worship and the reliability of Scripture amid minor variations.
Discussion Questions
- What do you see in this verse? Describe the object and its decoration in your own words.
- Compare II Chronicles 4:3 with 1 Kings 7:24. What is the difference? Why might that be important for understanding the temple?
- Read the commentaries on this verse. What do scholars think caused the change from “knops” to “oxen”? Which explanation seems most plausible to you?
- The twelve oxen that supported the sea are mentioned in verse 4. How might that have influenced a scribe's choice of words in verse 3?
- What does the casting phrase “cast when it was cast” reveal about the skill of the craftsmen and the meaning of the ornaments?
- How does this passage help us trust the Bible even when we encounter textual variants? What central truths remain unchanged?
- What can the care for temple furnishings teach us about approaching God in worship today, whether in church architecture, liturgy, or personal devotion?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| I Kings 6:18 | There was cedar on the house within, carved with buds and open flowers. All was cedar. No stone was visible. |
| I Kings 7:24 | Under its brim around there were buds which encircled it for ten cubits, encircling the sea. The buds were in two rows, cast when it was cast. |
| I Kings 7:26 | It was a hand width thick. Its brim was worked like the brim of a cup, like the flower of a lily. It held two thousand baths. |
| II Kings 4:39 | One went out into the field to gather herbs, and found a wild vine, and gathered a lap full of wild gourds from it, and came and cut them up into the pot of stew; for they didn’t recognize them. |
| Ezekiel 1:10 | As for the likeness of their faces, they had the face of a man. The four of them had the face of a lion on the right side. The four of them had the face of an ox on the left side. The four of them also had the face of an eagle. |
| Ezekiel 10:14 | Every one of them had four faces. The first face was the face of the cherub. The second face was the face of a man. The third face was the face of a lion. The fourth was the face of an eagle. |
| I Corinthians 9:9 | For it is written in the law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.” Is it for the oxen that God cares, |
| I Corinthians 9:10 | or does he say it assuredly for our sake? Yes, it was written for our sake, because he who plows ought to plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should partake of his hope. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
8 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke identifies a textual discrepancy between this passage and the parallel account in 1 Kings, where "oxen" appears in one and "knops" (ornamental shapes like grapes) in the other. He argues that the difference likely arose from an ancient scribal mistake where similar-looking Hebrew letters were confused.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes argues that an early copyist, unfamiliar with the rare Hebrew word for "gourd," changed it to "oxen" while copying the description of the molten sea, expecting oxen to be mentioned there. This mistake explains the textual variation between "gourds" and "oxen" in different manuscripts.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The Cambridge commentary argues that the original text likely reads "knops" (embossed ornaments) instead of "oxen," following the Revised Version over the Authorized. It notes a probable textual corruption and points out that these ornaments were cast in two rows as part of the laver, a notable achievement of the founder's art.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva note specifies the arrangement of the oxen figures cast around the brim of the bronze sea. Two rows of oxen encircled it, with ten placed in the space of each cubit. This clarifies the precise design and density of the ornamental pattern.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB resolves the apparent discrepancy between the two accounts by distinguishing the basin's standing capacity from its operating capacity. When the fountain was active, the entire apparatus received three thousand baths, but the circular basin alone held only two thousand. The different Hebrew verbs for "received" and "held" support this reading.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch attribute the differences between the bronze sea in 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles to scribal errors in the later book, not to contradictory accounts. They defend the wording in 2 Chronicles 4:5 as a legitimate Hebrew redundancy, not a mistaken addition from Kings.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Matthew Henry reads these temple furnishings as typological symbols, each one foreshadowing the grace of the gospel with Christ as the ultimate reality. He notes that David's deep affection for God's house and courts reflects a love not for the physical objects but for the spiritual truths they pictured.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley explains the names of the two pillars by their Hebrew meanings. Jachin signifies that God will establish, and Boaz points to the strength that resides in Him. Each name proclaims a different aspect of divine power and stability.