Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Harold Holmyard <hholmyard AT ont.com>]

JAMES CHRISTIAN READ wrote:

> HH: Most scholars apparently do not think that is the best rendering, since major published 
> translations of the Bible do not have "had become." It is incongruous with the context 
> which describes things "at the beginning." There is no former state to refer to.
> JCR: But of course there is a former state. There was no heavens or earth. 
> Elohim created [perfective aspect] themand they had come into existence 
> [perfective aspect] formless and waste. I am unaware of even a single natural 
> occurence of English 'was' where the aspect is perfective.

HH: So you seem to want to translate: "Now the earth had come into 
existence formless and void." That's fine with me.

> HH:KJV: Gen. 4:21 And his brother’s name was Jubal: he was the father of all 
> such as handle the harp and organ.
> JCR: This translation simply doesn't make sense. The English 'he was the...' 
> implies that he is no longer such. No such problem is derived from the 
> perfective translation of 'he became/ended up/came to be/ the...'.
>  

HH: The translation of the NRSV, NIV, and KJV simply accepts the reality 
that he lived and died.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard