[b-hebrew] "I Am" vs. "I Will Be"
kwrandolph at email.com
Thu Jun 29 18:34:51 EDT 2006
The answer is because of how Biblical Hebrew
differs from modern English. Modern translators
merely try to approximate the aspectual nature of
Hebrew with a short, pithy, easily read translation
in tensual English that can't reproduce the
fullness of the Hebrew original. If we really
wanted to give the full meaning of the Hebrew, we
would need to write a sentence or two for the three
words in Exodus.
Karl W. Randolph.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Awohili at aol.com
> In a message dated 06/29/2006 10:58:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> dwashbur at nyx.net writes:
> I don't know that anybody said it's not "acceptable," most have just said
> it's preferrable to
> translate it as present tense.
> That just begs the question. Why is it any more "preferable" to translate
> ehyeh as "I Am" at Exodus 3:14 than at Exodus 3:12, where KJV, NIV, NRSV,
> NASB, NAB and others render it as "I will be"? It's the same word, and the
> context hasn't changed.
> Obviously, many translators find it "preferable" to render ehyeh as "I will
> be" at Exodus 3:12. Yet, two verses later, it's "I Am."
> I see nothing convincing here.
> Solomon Landers
Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/
More information about the b-hebrew