Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Also asking a question - Re: YHWH is Aramaic?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Awohili AT aol.com
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Also asking a question - Re: YHWH is Aramaic?
  • Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:44:21 EDT

In a message dated 06/29/2006 8:28:27 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
peter AT qaya.org writes:

Indeed, but getting (probably) even closer in time to the original, the
LXX is EGW EIMI hO WN "I am the being (one)", all present tenses. This
is because, according to many, Hebrew changed from being aspectual to
being tensed during the Hellenistic period, from the influence of Greek.
Early in this period, when LXX was translated, the original aspectual
sense was still understood. By several centuries later, the time of
Theodotion and Aquila, the aspectual sense was being lost and the verbs
were being understood as future tense forms.
***********
Yet, the LXX does not give us a literal translation of the Hebrew text's
ehyeh asher ehyeh. It is more like a paraphrase or in the modern parlance,
a
"dynamic equivalent" translation.

The intent of Aquila and Theodotion, according to several sources, was to
bring the Greek reading back in line with the Hebrew text.

Even with our current understanding of Hebrew verbal aspects, there is no
reason to *not* render ehyeh asher ehyeh as "I will be." Even the KJV does
it
at Exodus 3:12.

The divergence appears to be centered around the context. But it is quite
possible to see the context as implying that the name YHWH was a
confirmation
of what God will do in the future for the Hebrew slaves, rather than a
discussion of ontology.

Solomon Landers









Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page