Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Numberup AT worldnet.att.net]

Ancient Egyptian is classified as an Afro-Asiatic [earlier, Semito-Hamitic] language, though the extent of Semitic influence is debated.  Egyptian Xeper [Kheper], similar to Hebrew/Aramaic HWH/HYH means, "to be, to become, or the thing which has come into being." (Wallis Budge.)  Of the god with that name, it is written "xeperu kua em xeperu en xepera xeper em sep tepi":  "I am the one who came into being as Khepri.  When I came into being, being itself came into being." (Joseph Kaster's translation).  There is this play on the verb xeper/kheper in many Egyptian writings, especially the Pyramid Texts.

Theologically, Kephri was the rising sun that is "coming into being," with Ra being the sun at high noon, and Atum ["complete"] as the setting sun.

Solomon Landers

barre AT nethere.com wrote:

Then Moses said to El(ohim), "I am to go, then, to the sons of Israel and
say to them, 'The god of your fathers has sent me to you.'  But if they ask
me what his name is, what am I to tell them?  And El(ohim) said to
Moses, "I am becoming what I am Becoming.  This," he added, "is what
you must say to the sons of Israel: 'I am Becoming' has sent me to you.'"

And El(ohim) also said to Moses, "You are to say  to the sons of Israel:
'YHWH, the god of your fathers, the god of Abraham, the god of Isaac,
and the god of Jacob, has sent me to you."  This is my name for all time;
by this Name I shall be invoked for all generations to come.
 

The  unusual  rendering of the Hebrew, ´eyeh aser ´eyeh  as "I am becoming what I am
Becoming" is informed by the fact that both the form and content of this formulaic
_expression_ finds it closest parallel not in Semitic thought but in Hamitic ontological
speculation.  Its formulation, based on a theological word-play of the verb "to
be(come)," not only reveals that we are dealing with ontology in a strict sense, but also
that such a formulation is characteristically Egyptian.  Consider, for example, this
comparable formulation taken from an Egyptian grammar regarding the verb, xeper ("to
be[come]"):

xeper-a xeper xeperu ´ "I  who became
 made become
the beings who became."

We note three similarities to the formula found in the Elohist's epic.  First, the divine
name is predicated upon a repetition of a verb, the Egyptian version repeating it three
times as subject, verb and object while the Hebrew version repeats it twice with the
second occurrence functioning syntactically as an objective, subordinate predication
introduced by the relative particle, aser.  Although the syntax varies, the two
formulations are similar in the central importance of the repeated verb.  Second, the
verbs themselves, adjusting for the different cultures that produced them, are roughly
semantic equivalents, both meaning "to be" or "to become."  Third, both formulations
are theological proclamations, intended to expose the essential characteristics of a deity
based upon a distinctively Egyptian perspective.  As such, it stands apart from typical
Semitic understandings of divinity, but is demonstrably at home within Egyptian
religious tradition.