Order #372123 Topic: Exegetical Paper

In the middle of verse 35 of the NRSV and the NIV, the Israelites ‘ask’ the Egyptians for something. However, the time at which the Egyptians are asked differs in both versions of the text. In the NRSV, the Israelites “had asked the Egyptians,” therefore implying the action to have already taken place. So, in using the past tense to show the Egyptians as having already been asked, the NRSV attests to the idea of the Egyptians being readily informed and knowledgeable about what the Israelites wanted from them. Dissimilar to the past tense used by the NRSV, the NIV makes use of the present tense. Instead of saying “had asked” the NIV reads, “asked.” Therefore, in using the present tense, the NIV holds to the idea of the Egyptians still being unaware about what the Israelites wanted from them, for the Egyptians had not yet been asked.

Next, when looking at the translation of the KJV, it is comparable to the NIV in its use of the present tense to describe the action being exercised. However, in the KJV the Egyptians are not being “asked.” Instead, something is being “borrowed of the Egyptians.” According to Dictionary.com, the word ‘borrow’ means “to take or obtain with the promise to return the same or an equivalent” while the word ‘ask’ means “to request.” So, although the Israelites are borrowing from the Egyptians, the KJV fails to mention if the Israelites intend to return what they are borrowing. In using the present tense, the KJV also reveals the act of borrowing as not being predetermined. In other words, the Egyptians were unaware of what the Israelites were going to do before the act of borrowing was commenced. For these reasons, the KJV does not serve as a good translation, and, although the NIV and the NRSV differ in the tenses they use, these translations provide a much clearer understanding of the manner in which the Egyptians are being addressed. Both the NIV and the NRSV are equally sufficient translations in this key difference.

Directly following, at the end of verse 35, another key difference is presented in what the Israelites want from and are asking of the Egyptians. In the NRSV, the Israelites ask for “jewelry of silver and gold.” In contrast, the KJV says the Israelites borrow “jewels of silver, and jewels of gold.” In reference to Dictionary.com, a ‘jewel’ is defined as “a cut and polished precious stone” or “gem.” However, the term ‘jewelry’ is not limited to precious stones. Instead, the word ‘jewelry’ encompasses any ornaments or articles used for personal adornment (Dictionary.com). Therefore, by simply using the word ‘jewels,’ the KJV presents a narrow range of what is being taken from the Egyptians. Unlike the KJV though, the NRSV’s use of the word ‘jewelry’ allows for a much broader range and a much larger category in terms of what is being asked of the Egyptians to give.

Even more so than the NRSV, the translation of the NIV further broadens the interpretation of what the Israelites are asking for with “articles of silver and gold.” Although there is a wide variety of jewelry, the word ‘jewelry’ represents just one category under a broader umbrella of ‘articles.’ The word ‘article,’ as defined by Dictionary.com, can refer to an individual object, an item, or a particular. The word ‘articles’ can be used to describe articles of jewelry, articles of food, articles of clothing, and many other commodities. However, because the NIV portrays these articles to be made “of silver and gold,” we can obviously eliminate some of the types of articles, such as food, mentioned above.

Yet, although the NIV provides the broadest interpretation of what is being asked of the Egyptians, it is not necessarily the best interpretation. In verse 34, the people have taken food and at the very end of verse 35, clothing is another article, aside from jewelry, requested by the Israelites to be received from the Egyptians. Therefore, we can conclude these ‘articles’ to be not inclusive of what the Israelites already have or will have: food and clothing. Interpreting “articles of silver and gold” as referring primarily, or even solely, to jewelry then seems to be most probable. For this reason, the NRSV and KJV serve as a better translation than the NIV. However, the NRSV, in using the broader term “jewelry” as opposed to “jewels,” serves as an even better translation than the KJV, for it is likely the Israelites were not limited to gems, but may have also had ornaments such as necklaces, earrings, and bracelets to adorn their necks, ears, and arms with.

Just as in verse 35, the tenses used in verse 36 vary from past to present. For example, the NRSV says, “the Lord had given” the Israelites favor, implying favor to be a pre-established intention of the Lord. Similarly, the NIV also uses the past tense in saying how “the LORD had made the Egyptians favorably disposed toward the people,” again implying God’s predetermined intentions for the Israelites. However, the KJV differs from both the NRSV and NIV by describing how “the LORD gave the people favor.” By using the present tense, the KJV translation suggests Israelite’s favor to be nonexistent in the sight of the Egyptians until God gives it here.

Now, this ‘favor’ described in the NRSV and the KJV, which the Israelites had “in the sight of the Egyptians” (vs. 36), is defined as “friendly or well-disposed regard” (Dictionary.com). However, the translation in the NIV uses the words “favorably disposed.” According to Dictionary.com, the word ‘disposed’ means to be inclined and the word ‘incline’ means to have a tendency; leaning to do something. In light of the definition given for ‘favor,’ the bestowing of God’s “favor” in the NRSV and KJV seems a bit impersonal in viewing God as giving his best regards for the Israelites out of His friendliness. However, in light of the definition provided for ‘disposed,’ the NIV’s translation seems to speak of God as being much more personal, for God is seen as having a ‘tendency’ and ‘inclination’ to bestow “favor” upon His people out of the goodness of His character. Therefore, the NIV serves as the best translation in portraying a more personal God who had already pre-established “favor” upon His people.

TEXT’S CENTER OF GRAVITY:

The primary focus of the text is centered on the preparation for the Israelites departure from the land of Egypt. From the striking down of all the firstborn to the taking of dough with kneading bowls to the plundering of the Egyptians, all was in preparation of the Israelites departure. With “a loud cry” in every house (vs. 30), the Lord’s striking down of all the firstborn provoked Pharaoh to allow the Israelites the freedom to do as Moses said: to “worship the Lord” and to take their flocks and herds with them (vs. 31). However, the Israelites would not only be leaving for their sake, but for the sake of the Egyptians as well, for the Egyptians were urging the Israelites “to hasten their departure from the land” because they feared they would “all be dead” if the Israelites stayed (vs. 33). So, just as anyone who is about to engage in the act of embarkation, the Israelites prepared for their journey.

However, the preparation for their journey was not at all comparable to how one prepares for a camping trip or family vacation, but rather, the preparation for the Israelites ‘trip’ was very much like a forced collectivist movement interceded by God’s favor. Simply following instructions from their leader, Moses, the Israelites asked the Egyptians for jewelry and clothing (vs. 35). Then, as if jewelry and clothing would not suffice their needs, the Israelites further prepared for their journey by plundering the Egyptians, but all in due favor. After all, Pharaoh wanted Moses, Aaron, and the Israelites “gone” and the Egyptians were willing to “let them have what they asked” (vs. 36). In other words, the Egyptians were willing, although they had no real choice in the matter, to allow the Israelites to carry through with what Moses, or rather God, told them, so long as the Israelites carried through with what Pharaoh told them: to “go away” (vs. 31).

The process and means by which God prepares the Israelites for their departure highlights the strong relationship existing between Moses, Aaron, the Israelites, and God. There must be much in store for the Israelites as they depart from the land of Egypt. When Pharaoh says, “Go, worship the Lord,” the implications leading up to the Israelites going is signified by this idea: apparently, the Israelites will have a reason to “worship the Lord” upon departing from the land of Egypt (vs. 31).

Works Cited

Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Long, Thomas G. The Witness of Preaching. 2nd ed. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2005.

1