Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Daniel Wagner" <dan.wagner AT netzero.net>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Shoshanna Walker <rosewalk AT concentric.net>
To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 3:30 PM
Subject: I SHALL BE


> I've just looked up a fourth commentator - the "Baal Haturim"
> 
> You are simply wrong.

Shoshanna, are you sure you are addressing my post (below) and understand it? 
I was not really intending to argue with you about the tense (or about 
anything); tense was not the issue i was addressing right now. 

If you are responding to me and understand me, then could you explain a 
little more of why you (or the commentaries you cite, which i don't have 
immediately) disagree with me concerning the function of _)aSHER_ in Ex. 3:14?

Also, the "nonsense" i alluded to is the idea i heard by a teacher long ago 
who had some knowledge of Hebrew, but only enough to be dangerous perhaps. He 
said the name of God here is:
"I AM WHO I AM"
"I AM WHO I WILL BE"
"I AM WHO I WAS"
"I WAS WHO I AM" 
"I WAS WHO I WAS"
"I WAS WHO I WILL BE"
"I WILL BE WHO....
you get the picture! (I guess his point was that Yahweh never changes, i 
don't know.)

But the common translations also still miss the point in my opinion. Any 
input from others on the list? I'm curious what others think of my post about 
the function of 
_)aSHER_  and the translation that makes only "I AM" (or whatever tense one 
prefers) to be the name of God: "I am I AM."

Also, concerning LXX, it appears to be almost the only translation that 
understands it the way i do. (NKJV, NASV, NIV, RSV, NRSV, ASV, NAB, NLT, and 
most of the German, Spanish, French vss. i have access to follow the 
traditional reading.) LXX has "ego eimi ho on," which is "I am THE ONE 
BEING/EXISTING" or "I am THE BEING."

Thanks for any feedback.

Dan Wagner

> 
> > If someone would remind me where exactly this pasuk (Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh)
> is,
> > in the Torah, I will see if I can find if any of the commentaries comment
> on
> > this.
> 
> It's Exodus 3, verse 15 i think. Also, it is a mistake to translate this as
> most translations do, "I AM THAT I AM" as if the entire clause were the
> divine name. Rather, God is answering the implied question, "Who are you?"
> (Who shall i say sent me?) by saying, "I am to be identified as I AM." So
> the name/appelative is not "I AM WHO/WHAT/THAT I AM", nor "I WILL BE WHO I
> WILL BE" or any such nonsence. (And i'm not really trying to comment on the
> verb tense here.) Rather, the name is simply "I AM" and the _asher_ clause
> serves merely to subordinate. It would not be appropriate to use an _)ETH_
> as the sign of subordination for the verb, nor could any preposition go
> before a verb. But something had to show subordiation or rather
> identification of the predicate, so the function word _)aSHER_ is used to
> indicate a clause. Had it been some other (non-verbal) name, we would expect
> simply _)EHYEH_ followed by the predicate noun/adjective.
> 
> So we should correctly translate it "I am I AM." This is supported by the
> following verse where he says simply "I AM has sent me."
> 
> Dan Wagner



NetZero Platinum
No Banner Ads and Unlimited Access
Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
http://www.netzero.net