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

Awohili at aol.com Awohili at aol.com
Thu Jun 29 11:44:21 EDT 2006

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

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list