Scholars often play off the serpent of Gen 3 against the serpent of Isa 27:1 (e.g., is Rev 21 is citing the latter not the former?) - But the doublet of Isa 11:6 in Isa 65:25 is edited to allude to Gen 3:14 ("the serpent will have dust for food"). (1/6)

So there is an issue in Isa. 14:19 where כנצר נתעב “like a despised shoot” has a variant כנפל נתעב “like a despised miscarriage.” Feels like a gloss to me: what’s "a despised shoot”? “shoot” = “offspring”, so... Then the gloss creeps into the text. (1/4) #LXX

For this readthrough of Hegel's Phenomenology, I have been using the classic Miller translation, but doing spot comparisons with Pinkard and the German. I have my issues with Miller, but I favor it over Pinkard for the places I have checked.

What are you favorite things that people think follow a genetic model, but they don't? I'll start:
1. Language change
2. Text criticism
3. Genetics