Walking Backwards

Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go to Pharaoh and say to him, ‘This is what the Lord says: “Let My people go, so that they may serve Me.  Exodus 8:1  NASB

Go – We all know that Hebrew is backwards.  After all, it reads from right to left.  The “proper” way is to read from left to right, correct?  Ah, but then you realize that reading direction is entirely cultural.  Mandarin is read from top to bottom.  Some languages are read like loops (from right to left and the next line is left to right).  It just depends on the culture. What we might not realize is that this cultural phenomenon also affects the understanding of other directional concepts.  In the past we’ve looked at the Hebraic view of time—not linear but cycloidal.  Now we get a chance to see how cultural distinctions are affected by translation assumptions, for in this verse, God does not tell Moses to “go” to Pharoah.  He tells Moses to “come” to Pharoah, which, of course, makes no sense to us.  So the translators change the directional verb to our culture, ignoring the subtlety in Hebrew.  After all, the most important thing isn’t what God actually said, is it?  The most important thing is our understanding of what God intended to say, right? 🙂

Let’s look at the text.  The Hebrew verb is bôʾ.  It means, “to come, to enter, to bring, to lead in, be brought.”  “To go” is the verb hālak.  Why doesn’t God tell Moses to hālak to Pharoah?  Why does He say, “Come to Pharoah”?  And why do we care—doesn’t the translation actually communicate the command the way we would have said it?  Oh, yes, the “go” at the end of this verse (“let my people go”) doesn’t use the verb bôʾ.  But the translators don’t tell you that.

Questions like this remind me of the Asian hand signal that looks like “come here” but actually means “let’s go”  [You can look that one up on the web].  The obvious point is this: I can read the Bible according to my cultural expectations (the way translations usually handle the text), or I can read the Bible the way it was communicated to the original audience—and recognize that the culture of that audience isn’t mine.  I will have to change how I think about things in order to truly appreciate what God said.

I also think there are deeper issues involved here.  We looked at the same verb in Psalm 102:1.  I cited TWOT telling us that bôʾ  is used more that 2500 times for actions like “go, arrive, enter.”  But, of course, TWOT’s definitions are in our cultural understanding.  Compare this to BDB which does not list “go, arrive, enter” as the principal definitions, but rather “come in, come, go in, go,” or TLOT which offers only “come.”  Does this mean that 2500 times in the Tanakh we translate bôʾ incorrectly as “go” or “enter” when we should read “come” or “come in”?  If the purpose of translation is to communicate the idea of one language into the idea of another, then maybe bôʾ means “go.”  But if translation is also supposed to communicate the culture of the original language, then bôʾ doesn’t mean “go.”  It means “come.”

Does it matter?  Well, consider the emotional tone of “go” versus “come.”  “Go” feels like being pushed away, sent, dispatched, directed.  Yes, it might be for a good reason. Yes, it might be done with compassion or even for protection.  But it feels like creating a gap, a distance.  If God tells Moses to go to Pharaoh, it feels as if He’s sending Moses out on his own, separating Himself in the process.  Now consider “come.”  “Come” feels like companionship.  It feels like, “We’ll do this together.”  “Come” is welcoming, warm, approachable, desiring presence.  If God tells Moses to “come” to Pharaoh, it feels as if He’s telling Moses that he won’t be alone in this, and that, if fact, no matter what the outcome, God will be present in welcoming Moses before Pharaoh.

Maybe I’m wrong.  Maybe I just want it to feel different.  But I can’t help but think that God’s sovereignty overrides these circumstances and that “come” includes acknowledgement of God’s supremacy whereas “go” feels like an order to be obeyed.

What do you think?

Topical Index:  bôʾ, come, go, Exodus 8:1

 

Subscribe
Notify of
4 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sherri Rogers

Reminds me of Gen 15:5 – And He took him outside and said, “Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them.” The word translated ‘now’ is the Hebrew ‘na’ which can also be translated as ‘please’. This changes the whole meaning from a command to a request, where Abram isn’t being told to do something, he is being asked. How gracious and considerate this is from a God who allows us to choose instead of ordering us around. The choice to respond out of devotion proves YHVH is a God like no other.

Richard Bridgan

Amen! This keen perception of YHVH’s character noted in the text blessed me, Sherri… thank you for posting!

Michael Stanley

So if bôʾ means, “to come, to enter, to bring, to lead in, be brought.” Why not use “be brought”? To me that makes the most sense. Certainly one could not enter into the presence of a potentate without an invitation or an appointment. Recall Ester’s dilemma when she needed an audience with her husband, the King, to save the Jews from Hamon’s evil machinations. “All the king’s officials and the people of the royal provinces know that for any man or woman who approaches the king in the inner court without being summoned the king has but one law: that they be put to death unless the king extends the gold scepter to them and spares their lives.” While I like the poetic interpretation and explanation of using the word “come” to denote fellowship and YHWH’s abiding presence with Moses in what had to be an awkward and dangerous position, this translation may be both efficacious and politically correct (in a good sense). While I could not find any translations that use “be brought” in this context I think the use of it is reasonable. However I am not ready to offer The Stanley Bible to the world just yet.  I need a few more contestable or detestable translated words to justify the effort; though, come to think of it, I am sure you, Skip, could go back through your over 6,000 TW entries and find more than enough fodder to make a new and viable translation. It would be your Magnum Opus. While I am too poor to be a primary Benefactor I would gladly pre-order the first copy today! What do you say Skip? bôʾ