Public Debate

I will also speak of Your testimonies before kings and shall not be ashamed. Psalm 119:46  NASB

Shall not be ashamed – If you’ve discovered anything at all in this vav section, it’s that each of these verses not only begins with a vav but also is a past statement of God’s faithfulness and the poet’s compliance.  Now, however, we hit a snag.  In this verse, the second verb (be ashamed) is clearly a future tense (אֵבוֹשׁ  I will be ashamed)*.  Look the the full sentence:

וַֽאֲדַבְּרָ֣ה בְעֵֽדֹתֶיךָ נֶ֥גֶד מְלָכִ֗ים וְלֹ֣א אֵבֽוֹשׁ

You see the future tense verb at the end.  Therefore, it appears that “I shall not be ashamed” is the proper translation.  And that makes the vav-conversive first verb (dābar) nonsensical.  No one would say, “I spoke Your history and I will not be ashamed.”  Proper English grammar requires the two verbs in the same sentence to be in the same tense.  So, if the first verb is truly a vav-conversive, the sentence should read, “I spoke Your history and I was not ashamed.”  How can we resolve this dilemma?

The NASB translators offer the solution by treating the vav prefix of dābar as a pure conjunctive (which they render “also”).  Thus, they can translate the first verb as a future tense in alignment with the last verb.  Robert Alter takes a different approach.  He treats the last verb (bôš) as a participle rendering “And let me speak of Your precepts before kings without being ashamed,” converting the entire thought into a future plea.  But that would require וַֽאֲדַבְּרָ֣ה to be a present tense request where the verb should be מְדַבֵּר “I speak.”  But as you can readily see, the construction is missing the critical mem (מְ), so it cannot be a present tense.  Without the vav-conversive, it must be future tense: אֲדַבֵּר “I will speak.”  Alter’s choice doesn’t resolve the issue of the first verb or the second since the second verb is not a participle.  How can we solve the problem of two different tenses in the same sentence?

Perhaps we’re making it too complicated.  Let’s continue to treat the vav-conversive as it should be, switching the future form of dābar to the past.  “I spoke of Your history before kings.”  First thought.  Second thought: “I won’t be ashamed,” but not as if the poet experiences inner distress.  “Shame” is public humiliation in the ancient world, so he’s saying that even though he spoke before kings, he will not experience (in the future) any public humiliation.  His testimony was true.  Now we have an explanation of the past tense conversive at the beginning and the future tense at the end.  He reports that his past declaration of God’s history before rulers will not result in public disgrace because what he said was the truth.

What does all this grammar teach us?  Maybe it’s as simple as “Tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may.”  And if the truth you tell is aligned with God’s actions among men, then you can’t be humiliated because you have God’s blessing.

Topical Index: bôš, to be ashamed, dābar, to speak, vav-conversive, Psalm 119:46

*I was ashamed  בֹּשְׁתִּי       I spoke   דבַּרְתִּיִּ