[b-hebrew] "I Am" vs. "I Will Be"

Karl Randolph kwrandolph at email.com
Thu Jun 29 18:34:51 EDT 2006


Solomon:

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 mailing list