Evidence #539 | April 1, 2026
JST Evidence: Affirmation by Exclamatory Negation
Post contributed by
Scripture Central
Abstract
Changes made to Exodus 6:3 in the JST—in which a declarative statement is transformed into an affirming negative question—are consistent with a modern scholarly understanding of that verse.Before his dramatic confrontation with Pharaoh, the Lord said to Moses, “I am the Lord: And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them” (KJV Exodus 6:2–3). Nearly all modern translations of the Old Testament suggest, like the King James Version, that the revelation of the Lord’s name to Moses was new and had not previously been revealed to earlier patriarchs. Here are several similar examples:
I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty, but by my name “The Lord” I did not make myself known to them (NRSV).
And I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty, but by My name, Lord, I did not make Myself known to them (NASB).
I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as God Almighty, but by my name the Lord I did not make myself fully known to them (NIV).
I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by my name LORD I was not known to them (NKJV).
These translations, however, result in what appears to be an inconsistency with other biblical passages. Genesis 4:26, for example, states that men in the antediluvian period “began to call upon the name of the Lord,” suggesting widespread knowledge of the sacred name in a time that predated the patriarchs. Likewise, we read in Genesis 26:25 that Isaac built an altar and “called upon the name of the Lord [Jehovah]” at a certain location. One has to ask how Isaac could possibly have called upon this holy name if he wasn’t familiar with it.
When undertaking his extensive revisions of the Bible (in what is commonly known as the Joseph Smith Translation or JST), the prophet Joseph Smith introduced an interesting solution to the apparent discrepancy in Exodus 6:3. Instead of treating the key clause as a declarative statement, Smith instead transformed it into an affirming negative question: “And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob. I am the Lord God Almighty; the Lord JEHOVAH. And was not my name known unto them?” (JST Exodus 6:3).
This adjustment is consistent with a grammatical form known as “affirmation by exclamatory negation” which has been identified in ancient Near Eastern texts.1 According to Godfrey Rolles Driver, this mode of expression features “the interrogative use of the negative lōʾ ‘not’ in such a way as to acquire a strongly affirmative sense—as, for example, ‘surely, of course’ or the like.”2 Specifically regarding Exodus 6:2–3, Driver explains, “Sense can be made of this statement … if the final clause of God’s declaration of his identity is treated as an emphatic or interrogative announcement and translated, ‘I am Jehovah; and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty; and did I not [or, of course I did] let myself be known to them as to my name Jehovah[?]’”3
Driver argues that some other biblical passages should probably be read in a similar manner. Hosea 2:2 which is usually read “she is not my wife, neither am I her husband” should actually be read “is she not my wife and (am) I not her husband?” Likewise, Amos 7:14, which is usually read “I was no prophet, neither was I a prophet’s son” should be read “Was I not a prophet? Was I not a prophet’s son?”4 Driver finds additional support for such readings in other Near Eastern languages like Akkadian and Arabic.5
Nevertheless, confusion over the meaning of such passages is quite understandable when one considers the limitations of ancient written texts. Driver explains,
The speaker by intonation or gesticulation makes his meaning clear to the hearer; but an ancient manuscript without the full system of vowels, with no stops and often no divisions of the text into paragraphs or verses, and even no separation of one word from another, reduces the reader to complete confusion in seeking the sense of the passage which he is trying to understand.6
Conclusion
The rendering of Exodus 6:3 in the KJV creates a surprising inconsistency with other scriptural data. It is quite fascinating that Driver’s scholarly solution to this textual discrepancy is mirrored by Joseph Smith’s inspired rendering of this verse more than a century earlier. While not all changes in the JST appear to reflect ancient readings based on currently available textual evidence, this one seems to fit that category remarkably well.7 Even today, most modern translations appear to be ignorant of this alternative (and arguably superior) understanding of this passage. Outside of divine revelation, it seems unlikely Smith would have been aware of the legitimacy of this reading in the early 1830s.8
Kent P. Jackson, “How We Got the Book of Moses,” in By Study and by Faith: Selections from the Religious Educator, ed. Richard Neitzel Holzapfel and Kent P. Jackson (BYU Religious Studies Center, 2009), 136–147.
Scott H. Faulring, Kent P. Jackson, Robert J. Matthews, eds., Joseph Smith’s New Translation of the Bible: Original Manuscripts (BYU Religious Studies Center, 2004).
Genesis 4:26
Exodus 6:3
Hosea 2:2
Amos 7:14
- 1. Godfrey Rolles Driver, “Affirmation by Exclamatory Negation,” Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society 5 (1973): 107–114.
- 2. Driver, “Affirmation by Exclamatory Negation,” 107.
- 3. Driver, “Affirmation by Exclamatory Negation,” 109; parenthesis in original have been changed to brackets to conform better with modern style guides.
- 4. Driver, “Affirmation by Exclamatory Negation,” 108.
- 5. Driver, “Affirmation by Exclamatory Negation,” 107. For an alternative interpretation of this literary device, see Adina Moshavi, “Rhetorical Question or Assertion: The ragmatics of הלא in Biblical Hebrew,” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Society 32 (2011): 91–105.
- 6. Driver, “Affirmation by Exclamatory Negation,” 110.
- 7. As outlined in Kent. P. Jackson, Understanding Joseph Smith’s Translation of the Bible (BYU Religious Studies Center, 2022), 32–35, the various types of changes presented in the JST may fit under the following descriptions: (1) “Restoration of original text, whether from the Bible or from other ancient sacred records,” (2) “Restoration of things that were said or done but that were never recorded in the Bible” (3) “Modernizing and clarifying the text,” (4) “Editing to harmonize with previous revelations or other Bible passages,” (5) “Common-sense revisions to correct apparent errors.” See also Robert J. Matthews, “A Plainer Translation” Joseph Smith’s Translation of the Bible: A History and Commentary (Brigham Young University Press, 1985), 253.
- 8. For a discussion of the JST project timeline, see Kent P. Jackson, “How We Got the Book of Moses,” in By Study and by Faith: Selections from the Religious Educator, ed. Richard Neitzel Holzapfel and Kent P. Jackson (BYU Religious Studies Center, 2009), 128: “the Prophet progressed to Genesis 24:41, when he set aside Genesis to begin translating the New Testament as he was instructed by the Lord on March 7, 1831 (see D&C 45:60–62). He and his scribes worked on the New Testament until it was finished in July 1832, when they returned to work on the Old Testament.” It should also be noted that Smith didn’t formally study Hebrew until several years later. See Matthew J. Grey, “‘The Word of the Lord in the Original’: Joseph Smith's Study of Hebrew in Kirtland,” in Approaching Antiquity: Joseph Smith and the Ancient World, edited by Lincoln H. Blumell, Matthew J. Grey, and Andrew H. Hedges (BYU Religious Studies Center and Deseret Book, 2015), 249–302.