Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Paul Zellmer" <zellmer AT digitelone.com>]

Solomon,

Although I argued that the Hebrew treats this as past-time, I trust you
do realize that I do not disagree with Rolf on how the term would best
be translated into English and other European languages.  I think his
understanding of the force of the introductory phrase is right on.

Having said that:  Rolf, you asked about translations that treated this
passage as past time.  I just glanced at the LXX (my greek has become
too rusty to sight-read, since I have concentrated on Hebrew now for the
past few years), but it seems to me as if the verbs are aorist or
possibly imperfect there.  Will that do as an example?

Paul Zellmer


----- Original Message -----
From: <Numberup AT worldnet.att.net>
To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Cc: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 1999 11:24 PM
Subject: Re: The "times" of Isaiah


> Though I also would normally translate the relevant verses in Isaiah
44 as, "Thus/This
> said/has said YHWH," I am noting with interest the points in favor of
"Thus SAYS YHWH"
> in these instances.  I wonder if  Scottish translator Dr. James
Moffatt had similar
> thoughts in mind when he rendered this Hebrew construction in Isaiah
44 as  "Here IS
> the promise of the Eternal" instead of "Thus said YHWH," and
similarly: "Here IS the
> word of the Eternal," "The word of the Eternal is...," "For this IS
the message of the
> Eternal," etc.  (The Bible, A New Translation, by James Moffatt, D.D.,
D.Litt., M.A.
> (Oxon), 1935 with revisions to 1954)