8

Psalm 20:8 in the Hebrew reads:

אֵלֶּה בָרֶכֶב וְאֵלֶּה בַסּוּסִים וַאֲנַחְנוּ ׀ בְּשֵׁם־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ נַזְכִּֽיר

for which the ESV (v.7) gives:

Some trust in chariots and some in horses,
  but we trust in the name of the LORD our God.

My question is about the word translated "trust", which is a hifil from zkr ("to remember"), a fairly common form that means, as expected, "cause to remember". BDB and other lexicons describe an understandable extension to "to mention". DCH takes it as "invoke", which I also understand. I don't understand how the ESV gets "trust". I realize that by invoking the name of the LORD this is probably an expression of trust, but the ESV usually doesn't make such leaps for the reader, and there is certainly other available Hebrew vocabulary if the author intended "trust", so I'm wondering if there's something I'm missing.

Perhaps relevant, this verb only appears in the second line, and is understood in most modern translations as applying to the first as well (where "invoke" would be more difficult). The KJV apparently thought the initial verb could be deduced from context without being gapped from the following line. The italics indicate the lack of a corresponding word in the Hebrew:

Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God.

My questions, then:

  1. Is it necessary (or likely, according to normative poetic syntax, if such exists) that the same verb be understood in both lines?

  2. Can/should the hifil zkr be understood as "to trust"?

  • Apologies if that's not actually an appropriate use of the terminology of "gapping". It seems to me like backward gapping, but I don't know if that's possible, but I don't have a better word. – Susan Apr 3 '17 at 6:01
  • The introduction to the ESV states that they will sometimes defer to the LXX, Vulgate, etc., but none of these seems to indicate "trust in the name of the Lord". Were they just nostalgic for the KJV, which also translates the verse this way? – user33515 Apr 3 '17 at 13:53
  • The KJV is doing something different, though, as I'm sure the ESV translators realized. If I understand correctly, they've not translated the work zkr as "trust" but as "remember"; "trust" there is considered to be implied. While the results of the ESV overlap, the decisions behind it are completely different (ESV: zkr> trust + gapped backward vs KJV: .zkr> remember + implicit "trust"). – Susan Apr 3 '17 at 20:19
1

Preserving the Greek word order, the Septuagint reads as follows:

These in chariots and these in horses, but we in the name of the Lord our God shall call.

The verb that everything in this verse hangs on is "to call upon" (epikaleó, Strong's 1941). What does this verb actually mean--does it convey the same meaning as trust?

The Hebrew word used, nazkir, can be translated will remember, will boast, will confess, or will make mention based on context and interpretation.

Here's an analogy.

Living in the area of California ravaged by wildfires, I could say, "I trust in the fire department," or when the fires first broke out, I could say, "I called on the fire department." The second choice seems more active to me: I trust and then act on it.

Dieter

-2

Young's Literal Translation provides a better understanding of dependence upon God. In Psalm 20:6-8,

6 Now I have known That Jehovah hath saved His anointed, He answereth him from His holy heavens, With the saving might of His right hand. 7 Some of chariots, and some of horses, And we of the name of Jehovah our God Make mention. 8 They -- they have bowed and have fallen, And we have risen and station ourselves upright.

Instead of relying upon the armies of men - chariots and horses - Israel depended upon - made mention of - God and relied upon His right hand.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.