Thursday 31 March 2016

Hamayim

Grammar

Word: המים
Representation: HMYM

Transliteration: HaMayim
Noun: "the waters" or "the water"
Strong Concordance: H4325


Exposition

This translates literally to "the (or that) waters (or water)".

When used in Genesis 1:2, it is clear that it is talking about the "deep" (watery-abyss), especially when you look at Genesis 1:6 through 1:10.

It is used elsewhere outside of Genesis, and in context, it usually refers to waters other than the "deep", which is rarely noted within the Torah other than for five instances.

Because "mayim" is always written in the plural form, it is sometimes speaking of "the waters of the city" and "the water is poured" - sometimes in the plural, but sometimes translated in the singular. And so, because of that, we need to give the Hebrew the same consideration as the English.

For example, in Genesis 1:2, when there is one vast body of water, we can translate it as "water" or "waters" equally well, and both are correct, but one needs to keep in mind that there were not two bodies of water at that time, just one, and that using "waters" in place of "water" is just a translation of style, and not an intent to direct an interpretation.

Merachefet

Grammar

Word: מרחפת
Representation: MRKhPT

Transliteration: Merakhfet
Verb: "hovers" "floats in the air"
Strong Concordance: H7363


Exposition

The typical KJV translation of this word is "moved", which removes visual intended.

In modern Hebrew it still is used to mean just that, whether we are speaking of weather balloons or a hummingbird remaining stationary in the air.

The Rashi commentary equates this word with the Old French word "Acoveter" (in the modern French, "couvrir", which speaks of being above something while covering it. In this case, "Elohim's directing power" was not simply hovering over one spot, but completely covered the surface of the waters (the deep).

Whether or not you want to consider that Ruach Elohim was over one spot or all of the waters is irrelevant. Either way of viewing it works within the text. And the fact that Genesis 1:2 is the only place in all of Tanach where this word is used, it makes for the vastness or smallness of the Ruach Elohim to be an interesting consideration.

Other interesting points: This word is modified to be a feminine verb because "Ruach" (spirit) is feminine. And it is in the pi'el (active) form written in the present tense, and therefore rather than "hovered", I will use "hovers" to continue that flavor.

Ruach Elohim

Grammar

Word: רוח אלהים
Representation: RUKh ELHIM

Transliteration: Ruach Elohim
Noun: "Elohim's directing power"
Strong Concordance: H7306 and H430


Exposition

This is one of the exceptional times when I will be presenting a pair of Hebrew words as a single expression.

The term "ruach" is generally translated as "spirit", "wind", "breath". And when it is combined with "Elohim", it is treated as a Divine blessing of power and direction, a sort of prophetic ability (without being a prophet) because Elohim is directing you. It only appears 5 times in the Torah, but 11 times in the other books. 

"Ruach Yahweh" also appears, nearly twice as much, but never in the Torah. It is interesting that Yahweh will give someone Ruach Elohim to do His work in the books of Torah, but not Ruach Yahweh in those same books.

Apparently having Ruach Elohim thrust upon you can be good as well as bad. In the case of King Shaul, when God was unhappy with him and removed the Ruach Elohim from the king, Shaul became emotionally unstable, wiping out an entire town out of spite, and sometimes loving David and other moments wanting to kill him.

Here are the 5 instances in the Torah where "Ruach Elohim" actually appears:
Genesis 1:2 - A force hovering over the waters in order to do the will of the Elohim
Genesis 41:38 - Pharaoh wants someone with a connection to the Gods to interpret a dream.
Exodus 31:3 - Yahweh gave Ruach Elohim to Betzalel to give him wisdom and understanding on how to create the divine instruments.
Exodus 35:31 - Moses tells the people that Yahweh gave Betzalel Ruach Elohim to make artistic designs demanded by Yahweh.
Numbers 24:2 - Bilaam was given Ruach Elohim by Yahweh in order to do His will and bless Israel.
So it should be apparent that "Ruach Elohim" is something used by Yahweh or the Elohim to cause things to happen according to His/Their will. And it is because of this, I am translating this as "Elohim's directing power" rather than "a spirit of Elohim" (there is no "the" prefix ever used).

Tahom

Grammar

Word: תהום
Representation: THOM

Transliteration: T'home
Noun: "watery-deep", "abyss", "chasm"
Strong Concordance: H8415


Exposition

This word appears 22 times in the Tanach. Interestingly enough it is never prefixed by a "ה", indicating "the watery-deep". Perhaps because it is the only watery-deep, even if it is split into two in Genesis 1:7.

Besides passively waiting beneath a coat of darkness in Genesis 1:2, we read in Genesis 7:11 that it is from this very watery-deep that its pools of water did burst forth, flooding the world from the windows in the firmament/heavens. And in Genesis 8:2, these same windows of the firmament/heavens are closed and the pools of water in the watery-deep are closed off.

We also read in Genesis 49:25 that Shaddai will bless Joseph (which is repeated in Deuteronomy 33:13) with blessing of the deep from below. This speaks of wonderful streams and rivers for irrigation. It should be noted that in Genesis 1:6-7, the Elohim separate the deep, making it into upper waters and lower waters. The upper waters were held back by the firmament/heavens, and the land floated upon the lower-waters/deep.

In Ezekiel 26:19, God threatens to have the deep-waters come up and cover the land. While God did promise not to flood again like he did, the raining of the water-deep from above, there was no promise to use the watery-deep from below. He repeats in 31:4 that the source of the streams and rivers are from the watery-deep below, and in 31:15, He threatens to close the watery-deep and cause the trees to die.

The list goes on this way: תהום is an expression of a deep-abyss of water, water that will be split to be held aloft by a firmament/heavens, and upon which floats the land. From the upper watery-deep are fountains that create the rains, and from the lower water-deep is the source of rivers and other land-associated water.

The Biblical view of the world is different than the realistic view, and one needs to keep that in mind.


Tuesday 29 March 2016

Pnei

Grammar

Word: פני
Representation: PNI

Transliteration: P'nei
Noun: "face", "surface"
Strong Concordance: H6440


Exposition

This word expresses a speaks of a solid object's outer covering. When speaking of a person, we typically use it in the plural form in Hebrew, while using the singular form "face" in English.

When speaking of inanimate non-anthropomorphic objects, we normally use the term "surface".

In either case, it never refers to something that is immaterial ("the surface of the air"), but only physical objects ("the surface of the firmament"). Things that can be felt and touched can have a surface (or face). Things that have no physical form do not use this term.

Ahl


Grammar

Word: על
Representation: AhL

Transliteration: Ahl
Preposition: "on", "over", "upon", "by", "at", "beside", "near"
Strong Concordance: H5921


Exposition

This word expresses a relationship in position between two object. Based on the context and how you want the translation to flow, any number of words can work to express "nearness".

For example, if a bird is resting "Ahl" a windowsill, we would use "upon". If it is "Ahl" some food, it is most likely near or beside it. 

So long as the word maintains such a relationship, then any suitable English substitution is fine. 

When it says that flying creatures can fly "Ahl" the surface of the firmament, we will assume that they did not crash into it, but flew near its surface.

Khoshekh

Grammar

Word: חשך or חושך
Representation: ChoShCh

Transliteration: Kho-shekh (the "kh" is gutteral)
Noun: "darkness" or "a tangible darkness"

Strong Concordance: H2822


Exposition

This word appears more than 100 times in the Tanach. Sometimes it is prefixed with "ה" ("the") and sometimes not, which appears to be more of a stylistic choice than a modifier of the meaning.

In the first place that is appears (Genesis 1:2) it is presents as almost a form of a blanket draped over the waters. And in Genesis 1:4, this physical darkness was mixed with light, and the Elohim needed to make a separation between the light and darkness to be used for other things.

The attributes of "darkness" are also quite physical:

It can be felt (Ex. 10:21)
It is thick (Ex. 10:22, Ex. 20:18, Deut. 4:11, Deut 5.19, etc.)
As a barrier (Joshua 4:7)
It is deep (Job 24:17)

The use of this Hebrew word has cause a lot of interpretation of Scripture. According to the Ramban, the darkness of Genesis was a black fire, distinguishing it from other darknesses, and that the darkness of Genesis was the darkness that was brought into Egypt that could be felt.

There are Hebrew terms for "dark" (not "darkness"), and those are never physical like חושך.

So sometimes I will use "tangible-darkness" when the context is clear that it has a form.
"EVEN DARKNESS WHICH MAY BE FELT (Exodus 10:21). How thick was this darkness? Our Sages conjectured that it was as thick as a denar, for when it says EVEN DARKNESS WHICH MAY BE FELT, it means a darkness which had substance." - Midrash Rabbah Exodus 14:1
For more about the darkness, and it's relationship to night and the moon, click here.

Monday 28 March 2016

The letter Vav

Grammar

Word: ו
Representation: V

Transliteration: V, U, O
Conjunction: 
"and", "or", "but", "while", "as well as"



Exposition

This prefixing letter never stands alone. It is always used for two reasons.

In Biblical Hebrew, it may prefix a verb to change the tense from future to past and visa-versa. (This technique is known as a "vav-conversive"). 

In all forms of Hebrew, if it prefixes a noun, then it is used to create a relationship between that noun and what preceded it, as in the word "and". And while terms like "or" and "but" have their own words, the letter Vav can also mean these as well, based on context.

I may also use "while" rather than "and" if there were a number of "and" statements and I want to direct the attention to a connected statement that is still independent, as in Genesis 1:2:
"...AND darkness was upon the surface of the watery-deep WHILE Elohim's directing power hovers over the surface of the water."
There is a connection in that they are happening concurrently, and using "while" sounds better stylistically than "and". If you want to use "AND", go ahead. My intent is to have the text readable as well as accurate.

For example, if there are two unequal expressions "the land was created" and "the land was unusable", typically "but" will be used rather than "and" just to make a better translation. Also, "he had his choice between the cow and the horse", using "or" rather than "and" can be used to make the meaning more clear. And of course, if there is an enforced sequence, "and" will infer that as well.

Translating words for clarity often requires making choices that will be exact and supportive of the text that may end up being different than if used for a simple and "pure" translation.

Bohu

Grammar

Word: בהו or ובהו
Representation: Bohu (V + BoHU)

Transliteration: [va] Vohu
Adjective: 
"destroyed", "disintegrated", "ruin", "void", "unformed"
Strong Concordance: H922


Exposition

This word is unique in that when it is prefixed by "and", it should, following the rules of grammar, be pronounced "U-vohu", but it isn't. It is pronounced "Va-Vohu". That is most likely because the first letter never receives a dagesh, meaning that it is pronounced "B", but the dagesh is always omitted, so the first letter is always pronounced "V".

There is only one place where Vohu is not used to talk about the creation of the land (Genesis), which is:

Isaiah 34:11 - "...He shall stretch over [the land] stones of Vohu"

Because of this, the word is generally translated to mean that the object (stones or land) are not recognizable as such, and is unformed, a disintegrated and ruined form.


Tohu

Grammar

Word: תהו
Representation: ToHU

Transliteration: To-hu
Adjective: "desolate", "worthless/vain", "unusable"

Strong Concordance: H8414


Exposition

Tohu is one of those words for which there is no real root, and so one needs to see how it is used within the rest of Scripture in order to apply it.

It does appear 10 times without any prefixing within scripture, and in each case, it describes an object as being desolate, worthless (and in this way, something vain and without any apparent use), and unusable.

See also: 

1:Sam. 12:21, "...go after tohu, which cannot profit or deliver..."
Isaiah 24:10 - "The tohu city is broken..."
Isaiah 34:11 - "...stretch over it a line of tohu..."
Isaiah 44:9 - "Those who form idols, all of them are tohu..."
Isaiah 45:18 - "...he did not create [the land] to be tohu, but..."
Isaiah 45:19 - "...I did not say to the seed of Jacob 'seek me in tohu...'"

and so forth.

Tohu is an expression of something that might have been, or might be, but in its current state, is almost nothing.

Haytah

GrammarWord: היתה
Representation: HYTH

Transliteration: hay-tah
Verb: 
(past tense feminine singular form of "to be": "she was")
Strong Concordance: H1961


Exposition

Hay'tah (HYTH) is a past tense feminine form of of the infinitive LHYOT ("to be").

It means "she was", but is typically translated as "was", with the gender assumed based on the object that it is referring to.

Hebrew is a gender-based language, and so it is important that the verb gender matches the noun gender. There are some instances where the gender causes a problem in the traditional translation, and I will address that when these exception arise.

HaAretz


Grammar
Word: הארץ
Representation: HARTz (H + ARTz)

Transliteration: ha-aretz
Noun: 
(H + ARTz) "The land" 
Strong Concordance: H776



Exposition

Eretz is typically translated to "earth". And while that is correct, it often gets translated to "Earth" (with a capital-"E"), which is incorrect. 

There are certainly Hebrew words to describe a world, but Genesis does not use any of them, nor do any of the other books (prophets, etc.) of the Tanach.

There is no "world" in Hebrew Scripture.

It only speaks of a land mass or of land material when it is used. In Genesis 1:1 we read of this material being created, and in 1:2 it is unformed, and later we read of this material appearing after some of the upper waters drained off and were pooled to form seas. 

The lower waters remained unchanged, and Job 26:5 repeats that the place of the dead is below [the land] trembling in the waters. 

Yes, it is true that, later, humans would use "world" when speaking of the surface where they lived, albeit imperfectly. For example, in the 5th century CE, St. Augustine wrote of the world, calling it a non-moving sphere that was 90% below the waters, and that mankind only lived on the dry portion. Judaism would take several more centuries to accept the idea of a spherical world, accepting the scientific view that was held by the Greek polytheists in the 2nd century BCE (See Eratosthenes)

It is because of this that I am using "land" or "land mass" or "land expanse" or "land-material" when expressing ARTz, lest the modern view of the "Earth" be confused with some "earth".

The prefixing of "the" occurs about twice as often than without it. Sometimes "THE land" refers to Israel, and sometimes it does not. Sometimes it refers to the material and sometimes to acreage. In other words, the prefixing "the" is a literary device that needs to be taken in context and does not automatically mean one thing over another.

V'Et


Grammar
Word: ואת
Representation:  VAT

Transliteration: v'et
Type: Object identifier
Strong Concordance: None



Exposition
The two-letter object identifier (which may or may not have a single-letter prefix to indicate "and") really has no translation. It simply points to an object that will follow it.

In modern Hebrew, it is not acceptable to double-pronounce an object. That means you would say את (AT) following a list of objects, not multiple "AT" before each object. 

In Biblical Hebrew, however, it is quite common, and a quick scan will show you more than 1,800 instances where this indicator is used when there was no need to do so. Sometimes it certainly appears that the narrative is trying to emphasize an object, and in other times it does not.


So its use is inconsistent, and perhaps just stylistic.

The Jewish Sages of 1600 years ago, however, would selectively use this word to point out something special when a double-pronounce occurred. More often than not, they ignored it. So for them, it was not an indicator of something special, but was a literary device to provide some additional exposition. (Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yishmael took opposing views on a word being doubled, or spelled improperly. The former saw that it meant something special, while the other did not.) 

So take it for what it's worth. If this occurs when the text is speaking of a primordial object or something rather unique, then perhaps consider that AT is added to emphasize that.

Or not.

Shamayim (and HaShamayim)



Grammar

Word: השמים or שמים
Representation: HShMYM (H + ShMYM)

Transliteration: hashamayim or shamayim
Noun: 
(H + ShMYM) "The heavens" or (ShMYM) "heavens"
Strong Concordance: H8064


Exposition

The etymology of "heavens" is interesting, so let's begin with that.

Before the English word there was the Latin Vulgate of "caelum", which is a singular noun. (The Roman sky God was Caelus, based on this word). In the Vulgate its meaning was "[vault] of the sky/heaven", as in the protective shelter. The Christian fathers who accepted this included such illuminaries as Origen ("without doubt firm and solid" - First Homily on Genesis. FC71), Ambrose ("the specific solidity...is meant" - comment on Genesis 1:6 in Hexameron, FC 42.60), and Augustine ("indicate[s] not that it is motionless, but that it is solid" - The Literal Meaning of Genesis. ACW 41.1.61)

Before the Latin word there was the Greek Septuagint which used "οὐρανὸν" (ouranos) which is also a singular noun. It's original meaning was "vaulted expanse". Ouranos was also the name of the Greek God of the sky. The Greeks, like the Jews, also believed in a solid dome overhead. Greeks from Anaximens to Aristotle set it forth a fact that it was solid, and Ptolemy's Almagest explains how the stars were fixed to its underside, like nails.

And before all of these, we have the Hebrew word, which is always in plural and is but a renaming of the overhead protection from the waters above. (see Genesis 1:8 when "rakia" is renamed "shamayim"). Rabbinical writings, such as the Talmud (tractate Pesachim and other places), go into detail trying to determine its thickness, among other attributes of shamayim (which they never considered a place where the souls of the dead reside).

If you have not figured it out yet, "firmament" and "heavens" are the same thing.


The Hebrew Word "shamayim"


“Shamayim” (ShMYM) is almost always translated to “the heavens” (the prefixing “H” adds a “the” to the word, so this page will appear for "heaven" or "heavens" since the use of the prefix is inconsistently used). 

It should be noted that this Hebrew word, just like “water” (MYM), is always plural. When translating “water” into English, we sometimes use the singular, and sometimes the plural, depending on English grammar usage, and “heavens” should be given this same consideration.

There are anywhere from one to seven heavens, depending on the ideology (perhaps more). In the plain text, there are 2 instances where it is defined, so one can reasonably hold it as either one or two.

When used in Genesis 1:1, it is referring to the object that will be introduced in the following verse: the upper surface of “the deep [waters]” (what will later become “the upper waters”), which is covered by a layer of darkness. And when used in Genesis 1:8, this same word is referring to the raqia or “firmament”, which is pressed against the under-surface of the upper waters, which, supposedly, can be seen from the land below.

In both cases, it identifies a watery upper-surface/under-surface or body of the upper waters
.
There are two important Midrash stories that explain this.

The first is that “shamayim” (ShMYM) is a contraction of two words: “sham” (ShM) plus “mayim” (MYM), meaning “water is there”. In other words, it is a term to explain the surface of the waters appearing in Genesis 1:2, and the under-surface in verse 1:8 that will be seen from the land below when it is revealed later on and renamed.

The other Midrash is that “shamayim” is a contraction of “aish” (AISh) and “mayim” (MYM), or fire and water. It was held by many, such as the Ramban, that the darkness that lay on the water was a fiery darkness, and so, from this point, “shamayim” is speaking only of verse 1:2, and verse 1:8 is unrelated at all.

Either position works.

It is important to remember that actual “water” is the key component of “heavens”. "Heavens", as used in the Pentateuch, is not a concept, nor another word for "atmosphere" nor a supernatural realm, but either represents the upper surface, the combination of the upper surface and the layer of darkness, or the upper and lower surfaces and the darkness or firmament that presses against them (In verse 1:2, the darkness presses against it, and in verse 1:8, it is the firmament).

And for those who believe in multiple heavens, they can be all three, and more!

Again, we are speaking of physical objects here. I explain more about what the firmament is here.

Bara


Grammar
Word: ברא
Representation: BRA

Transliteration: bara
Verb Form: Qal - Simple past-tense-masculine-single "It/He created"
Strong Concordance: H1254



Exposition
This word appears 6 times in the Torah in this form, and in those cases it refers to a form of supernatural creation. Unlike other verbs that indicate forming or building, this one has a non-natural source. It is interesting to note that the Genesis Chapter One version of Creation uses "bara" while the Chapter Two version of Creation does not. There, it has Yahweh picking up soil, molding it, and forming things.

One could also say "created" instead of "manifested", but the English word "created" can also infer a natural method rather than a supernatural one, and so "manifested" seems to be better fit for my translation.

So bara, as a supernatural act means that it was made manifest without any physical interference/assistance. 

There was no assembly of atoms or setting forces into motion to make it happen. It was intended and it came into existence through supernatural means.

Elohim


Grammar

Word: אלהים or אלוהים 
Representation: ELHYM

Transliteration: elohim
Translation: [The]-Elohim. (Transliterating)
Strong Concordance: H430



Exposition

Singular vs Plural

According to theists, Elohim, while in a plural-form (the YM in ELHYM), is treated as a singular (non-plural) when it refers to their God. When it refers to or infers the other Elohim, then it is treated as a collective of powers, typically those that have the power of life and death over others. This collective may or may not be supernatural, based on how they want to read the text.

That is a mistake, and one should be consistent in stating that Elohim always means a plurality, although the collective may express itself in a singular nature, as I shall explain.

In modern Hebrew, the verb form should match the associated noun. So a single object should have a single-person verb form, and a group should have a plural form verb. That is certainly true in modern Hebrew.

In Biblical Hebrew, that is not always the case, and Biblical Hebrew often plays loose with gender and number.

As a collective, Elohim can be properly addressed in the singular. For example, the word for "nation" (AhM), which is a collective of people. We read 
(Exodus 4:31), "And the nation believed (singular) and they heard (plural)". We have a noun with both a single and plural form of two different verbs attached to it. 

So the form of the verb is not a perfect indicator if the object is plural or singular, while context is. For example, "Water" (mayim) is always written in the plural and has plural verbs even though we normally translate it into the singular English form.

Historical Context

To understand how Elohim is used, one needs to understand its place in early theology.

First of all, Scripture is not a text about one God, and the characters in the text believed in multiple Gods. They simply were loyal to the main protagonist of the story. That form of belief is what I will refer to as "henotheism".

In Exodus 18:11 we read that Yahweh is "greater than all of the Elohim", with Jethro declaring that while there are many Elohim (each nation or tribal group having their own), Yahweh is the most powerful of them all. And in Exodus 12:12 we read that Yahweh will "do judgement amidst the Elohim of Egypt". In these cases, most theologians have no problem with considering Elohim as a collective, since it refers to some other Elohim.


All of the Gods were localized, and each one had His own territory. Scripture takes about the Elohim of Egypt, the Elohim of Canaan, and so forth. Each of these lands had a chief God, and this God may have had a pantheon of other Gods. But Elohim was not a pantheon, but a supernatural tool, a collective expression of powers that did the will of the chief God.

Because of their actions, what they do is often seen as being done by the God. When speaking, they speak for the God. It is as though the God is cloaked in the Elohim, and they are dependent upon Him, do His will, but are not Him.

As the later texts in Scripture show, the Elohim, which had a major role in the text will have less and less importance. And by the time the Book of Isaiah appears, they are nearly gone, and by the end of the book, you only have Lord Yahweh and no Elohim of any form. The expression "Yahweh, He is the Elohim!" declares His independence from them as Yahweh evolves into the sole God of the land, having chased all of the others away, in a form of quasi-monotheism. He will not evolve into the sole God of the world within the Hebrew Scripture, but within the teachings of the Rabbis only.

Such is the way of directed teaching.

For those who deny the henotheistic flavor of the text, one need only count the number of times that "other Gods" appears in the text (actually, "other Elohim"). While Rabbinical Judaism emphasizes the monotheistic content, the henotheistic references in the Torah are to numerous to ignore. It should also be noted that in many places where "Elohim" appears in the text without "Yahweh", Targum Onkelos replaces "Elohim" to "Yahweh" to emphasize the rabbinical view that it only speaks of one God and in Genesis 3:22, Onkelos removes the "us" reference altogether. 

Grammatical Usage


Because of all of this, "Yahweh Elohim" become extremely difficult to translate.

In Hebrew, two nouns beside one another indicate ownership. As in "throne David" (pretend that these are Hebrew words) would be "throne of David" or "ring mother" would be "mother's ring".

The term "Yahweh Elohim" appears quite often in Scripture. Typically it is translated as "Lord God", reducing "Yehweh" to nothing more than a sort of "Mister", rather than what it should be, which is "Yahweh of the Elohim".


But that is not a good translation either.

Yes, if we are to be consistent with our grammar, then it should be "Yahweh of the Elohim" in the manner of "The general of the battalion", where the general has a relationship with the group, they obey him, but they are not him. He also came up through the ranks as they did, and that is not a comparison that I want to make, even though the Book of Lot seems to imply that.

So while the Elohim are operating as a unit, they will normally have singular verbs applied to them. 

And there are exceptions when their plurality comes out.

For example, when they will communicate with each other, as in Genesis 1:26, "Let us make man in our image...". 

And there are times when the chief God, (in our case, Yahweh) will need to give them instructions, "Come, let us go down..." as in Genesis 11:7. Or when He says, "the man has become like us" in Genesis 1:26 before He gives them a command.

There are those who would say that Yahweh was speaking to His angels. I would argue that there is really no difference between them when Yahweh creates angels to do His will, or when the Elohim do the same. They are all supernatural collectives that serve their Source.

And all of the chief Gods had this same setup.

There is no denying their plurality and their separateness when only one of them is being referenced in a verse, either Elohim or Yahweh. 

Another example is in Genesis 20:13 when Abraham tells Avimelech that "the Elohim, they forced me to wander...". 

But when they are together, that clarity is not always so apparent. So much so that apologists will treat Elohim as just another name for Yahweh, while ignoring that "Yahweh Elohim" would make no sense in that context.

This brings me to how does one translate "Yahweh Elohim"?

I have used "Yahweh of the Elohim" in the past, and it has never been satisfactory to me. It is true, however, that Eloha, the singular form of Elohim, appears primarily in the Book of Lot, a book that might be older than the Torah, and Yahweh is being treated as one of the Eloha, part of the collective who has emerged as a Chief God in his own right.

And while that is worth pondering, and "Yahweh the Eloah" is a suitable translation (or, transliteration), it doesn't help with the later texts, those that use Yahweh Elohim. Because of this, when they appear together, I will use "Yahweh-Elohim" for lack of a better way to express that the Elohim is an expression of Yahweh.

And because of its collective nature, it may be a singular expression that should always be considered as part of a plurality.

Therefore, when they are without Yahweh, I will use "The-Elohim", which is proper for plural nouns, and when they are joined to Yahweh, I will not impose "the", since it would be grammatically clumsy.