This clause should be understood as a kind of preview or superscription to the events reported in 3.2b-6, which are then described in chronological sequence. This is a rhetorical device occasionally used in biblical narrative. In some languages it may be necessary to make this explicit by adding the words “and this is how it happened” at the end of the clause. The And at the beginning of the verse may be understood as “There” (Good News Translation), or “In that place.” The angel of the LORD seems to refer to one specific angel, so the definite article should be retained. Some translations use an indefinite article (“an angel”), but this is not recommended. The Hebrew word for angel really means “messenger,” which is an alternative choice. The word LORD here marks the first occurrence in Exodus of the personal name “Yahweh,” so the reference is to “Yahweh’s angel,” distinct from any other angel. In some languages it will be necessary to say something like “In that place the LORD’s special messenger….” (The problem of the different participants in verses 2-4—angel, LORD, God—is discussed below at verse 4.)

LORD, with all four letters capitalized, is not to be confused with “Lord,” which translates the Hebrew ʾadon or ʾadonay. Most English translations use “LORD” for the sacred name YHWH, which in early Jewish tradition was considered too holy to be pronounced. The Jews also feared that by speaking the name aloud they might unintentionally break the commandment “You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain” (20.7). Therefore, in reading scripture aloud, they always substituted the title ʾadonay (“My Lord”) for the name YHWH, a practice that continues to this day.

Some translations have tried to retain the sacred name by transliterating it, that is, by spelling it in their own alphabet as it was originally pronounced. Thus it appears as “Yahweh” in the Jerusalem Bible (Jerusalem Bible) and New Jerusalem Bible. Some translations such as the American Standard Version use the term “Jehovah” or a form of “Jehovah,” which is a more recent attempt to combine the consonants Y, H, W, H (German J, H, V, H) with the vowels of ʾadonay. A few versions try to translate the meaning of this name, such as “the One who Is,” since it is related in form to the verb “to be.” This is clear from verse 14. (See the Good News Translation footnote there.) Thus Moffatt (Moffatt) uses “the Eternal” for YHWH, following the French tradition of l’Eternel, as in the French Segond.

There are therefore four options for the translator in deciding how to render this sacred name:

• a) Transliterate the sound of YHWH, which may have been “Yahweh.” But the exact pronunciation is not certain due to the early taboo against its oral use. Furthermore, some cultures and religious traditions react negatively to a personal name for deity, as though God were only one god among many.

• b) Translate the meaning of YHWH. But the exact meaning of this name is not certain and is widely debated. Furthermore, personal names are difficult to translate simply because they are names.

• c) Substitute another personal name from a receptor culture. There are other cultures where it may be possible to pick a personal name for God. A Handbook on Leviticus, page 10, has some helpful comments on this issue: … there may be a personal name for God distinct from the generic term for “god” but quite similar in usage to the biblical term … In such cases it may be wise to adopt this name as the equivalent for YHWH. This possibility has often been overlooked in past translations of the Bible. But even though the commonly used name in the receptor language is not an exact equivalent of YHWH, it may be wise to use it in translation and give a full explanation of the biblical name in the glossary.

• Translators considering this option, however, should be sensitive to the connotations associated with the name of a local deity. If these connotations should contradict or even distort the biblical concept of God, then one of the other options should be followed.

• d) Substitute a title similar to “Lord.” But this makes it difficult to distinguish the name YHWH from the title “Lord,” especially in public reading. Furthermore, the full meaning of certain passages depends on understanding the name as a name.

The solution to this problem requires serious study and research among the leaders of the special audience for which the translation is intended. Each of the four options is less than satisfactory. The normal choice, the one recommended as the first solution to try, is option a), but option d) has often been chosen in languages where the distinction between “Lord” and “LORD” can easily be shown, at least in printed form.

A further possibility is to combine options a) and d) in order to bring out the full meaning of each context. In this way one may transliterate the name “Yahweh” (not “Jehovah”) only at those places where the full meaning of the text is lost unless the name YHWH is clearly understood as a name rather than a title. For example, New English Bible uses “Jehovah” in 3.15-16; 6.3; 17.15; 33.19; and 34.5-6; elsewhere “LORD” is used. (King James Version uses “Jehovah” in 6.3 and 17.15 only.) There are other passages as well where this is a possibility. (See 5.2 and the discussion there.)

Appeared to him, literally, “became visible to him,” means “was seen by him” or “revealed himself to him [Moses].” This means that Moses saw more than just a mental image. But the prepositional phrase in a flame is better understood as “as a flame” (Good News Translation), for the Hebrew preposition may also mean “by,” “at,” or “as,” depending on the context. This permits the interpretation that what Moses saw was only the flame, for the angel appeared “in the shape of a flame of fire” (Jerusalem Bible).

The bush was probably some kind of thorn bush, smaller than a tree but larger than an ordinary bramble. The Hebrew word seneh is similar in sound to “Sinai,” and some scholars believe the name of the mountain was derived from the name of the bush. However, its scientific identification is impossible, since the Hebrew word is found only here and in Deut 33.16. The phrase out of the midst of a bush gives the impression that the flame was in the center of the bush. Good News Translation‘s model, “coming from the middle of a bush,” is clearer.

An alternative translation model for the first part of this verse is:

• In that place Moses saw the LORD’s special messenger. He appeared in the shape of a flame of fire coming from the middle of a bush.

Quoted with permission from Osborn, Noel D. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Exodus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1999. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .