Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Translating Ehyeh (Exodus 3:14)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Translating Ehyeh (Exodus 3:14)
  • Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 10:42:20 +0100

Dear Shoshanna,

I agree with you that the verbs of Exodus 3:15 have future reference. But please note that the Hebrew verb HYH normally is not a stative verb but a fientive one (a verb of action)-it signals existence rather than being. This means that the clause in Exodus 3:15 can be translated, "I will become what I will become." This means that God signals that he in the future will do great things for his people to whom Moses was the leader. In Greek, the verb EIMI means to be (stative). It occurs 6,469 times in the LXX while HYH occurs 1,594 times in the Tanakh. So, just the numerical differences shows that the two verbs have different meanings.

When we consider meaning in connection with translation, we should not only find the lexical meaning and the aspect of a verb, but we should also consider whether the use of person may signal something. For example, for a person to say "I am" in a stative sense, is in fact a tautology. The fact that he is there-he is seen or heard- indicate that he exists-there is no need to say that. So it is not necessary to tell the audience that he exists. A reference to the existence of another person would be very different.

Please consider Exodus 3:12 where we also find )HYH. Is there any Bible translation that would render this verb with present reference? Her God promises that he will be with Moses in the time to come-not in a stative but in an active sense. If Bible translations render Exodus 3:12 with future, why do they render the same form in 3:15 with present? I remember my old professor Ebbe Knudsen saying when we discussed Exodus 3:15, "To render this verb with present is nonsensical; those who do that must have a superficial understanding of Biblical Hebrew grammar and syntax, or else they are religiously biased." (Please note that this is a quote expressing the professor's opinion, and I do not apply this to any person of this list.) A similar conclusion regarding the future meaning of )HYH was reached by C. Gianotti, "The Meaning of the Divine Name YHWH," Bibliotheca Sacra 39 (January-March) 1985:38-51.

The only possible exception seen by Gianotti is Ruth 2:13, which has been mentioned in an earlier post. A verb can be used in the indicative and refer to this world. But it can also be modal, referring to possible worlds. Thus, the normal indicative use of )HYH as future reference may be different in modal clauses (hypothetical conditional clauses). The NAB renders Ruth 2:13 this way: "She said, "May I prove worthy of your kindness, my lord: you have comforted me, your servant, with your consoling words; would indeed that I were a servant of yours!" The NETS Bible, which is a translation of the LXX, renders the last clause like this: "I shall be like one of your maidservants." The reason for this is that the LXX does not have a negative particle in this verse. The same is true with the the Syriac Peshitta where a future reference is clear. This means that there may be a textual problem in Ruth 2:13, or the use of )HYH here may be an exception. A good exercise would be to analyze all the 42 places where )HYH occurs.


Best regards,

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo






Except that G-d, who originated the Torah, Transmitted this
particular Name to us in the future tense. And as He is the Creator
of the Universe, and of you and me, and of the Torah, He is the final
authority. And if He meant this Name to be "translated" in the
present tense, He would have Said it that way. And what man has the
credentials/audacity to second guess G-d and say that He was wrong
the way He transmitted His Name?

You attribute to this phrase the meaning "I am the Eternal".

I can just as easily attribute the same meaning as yours to this
phrase, by using the future tense as G-d transmitted it thus: "I
will [continue to] be that which I will be [and have always been -
implied]" - ie; eternal - without changing the future tense as G-d
transmitted this Name, to present tense, which people, other than all
of our Rabbinical Commentaries, seem to have the need to do, to show
that they "know better" than G-d, the Owner and Originator of this
Name, in the first place.

Shoshanna Walker







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page