In Genesis 17:8, Young’s Literal Translation is rendered as follows: and I have given to thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land of thy sojournings, the whole land of Canaan, for a possession age-during, and I have become their God.’ [emphasis mine]
Other translations use phrases like “perpetual holding” and “everlasting possession” instead of “possession age-during” so I’m trusting that “everlasting possession” is equivalent to “possession age-during” but I’ve never read the latter phrase before…what exactly does “age-during” mean?
The prefix “la” is a preposition usually translated as “to” (indicating a destination) or “for” (indicating a purpose). “Olam” can be an adjective or noun, with the connotation of “eternal” or “universe”. These are both fairly common.
The tough one is “achuzat”. The root word is “achuz”, for which my Alcalay Hebrew-English Dictionary suggests “to hold, grasp, take, catch, grip, clutch, seize, attack, connect, fasten”.
Do you see a common idea in those? What I see is a relationship between two things, and they are strongly connected, with one of them having control of the other. For the form “achuza”, that dictionary gives “property, possession, estate”, and for the phrase “achuzat olam”, it gives “everlasting possession”.
According to my Mandelkern Hebrew Concordance, the phrase “achuzat olam” also appears in Gen. 48:4 and Lev. 25:34. Other examples of “achuza” are too many to mention.
I agree with Keeve’s analysis of olam, and my Hebrew isn’t strong enough to add anything for achuzat. If I have time later today, I can do some questing.
Meanwhile, just to support Keeve with additional input:
JPS translation uses “everlasting holding” in Gen 17:8, “everlasting possession” in Gen 48:4, and “holding for all time” in Lev 25:34.
Everett Fox’s reasonably literal translation uses “a holding for the ages” for all three sites.
Thanks for the replies! On a further note, one more of interpretation maybe than translation, does this verse imply only a divine right to ownership of the lands but that the actual legal right must be taken or acquired, as suggested by the root of “achuz” as Keeve mentions, or does the verse imply that YHWH is promising actual *occupation *forevermore? I ask because Deuteronomy chapter 9:5 (It is not because of your righteousness or the uprightness of your heart that you are going in to occupy their land; but because of the wickedness of those nations that the Lord your God is dispossessing them before you, in order to fulfill the promise that the Lord made on oath to your ancestors, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.) seems to imply that the promise was considered fulfilled only when actual occupation took place, not merely the granting of a divine right.