Biblical Hebrew Forum

[GregStffrd AT aol.com]

In a message dated 05/04/2001 10:09:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
cisbell AT home.com writes:

<< Why it was first perceived as an I AM is unclear to me,
 as is the question of whether such a rendition is grinding a particular
 theological axe or not.  But I AM does not work in the Hebrew text of
 Exodus, while "I WILL BE [with you]" certainly does. >>


The "I am" tradition can be traced through the Church Fathers' understanding 
of the LXX (EGW EIMI). One of my problems with what Dan is arguing for 
involves this use of 'EHYEH as the subject of a relative clause with no clear 
copula expressed. I could just as easily argue for, "I will prove to be 
[known as] I WILL PROVE TO BE."

I agree with just about everything you said. As for the theological 
motivation, that is not the main point of my email to Dan, but to determine 
what grammatical motivation (i.e., parallels of usage for 'EHYEH and 'ASHER) 
gave rise to his arguments. If there aren't any, then what other motivation 
remains but theological, given the frequent use made of this passage and 
certain NT expressions? Believe me, that last thing I want discussed is 
theology at this point, but he replied to a question put to him by another 
member, and I followed it up hoping to get at the grammatical motivation for 
this particular use of 'ASHER and the different uses of 'EHYEH for which he 
is arguing. 

 
<< On a related issue, Greg Stafford asks:  "Maybe you can explain why such a
 unique, otherwise unknown use of 'aSHER would be used instead of the more
 common Hebrew verbless clause?"
 
 This is a fair question, and I think there is a simple answer.  The phrase
 'ehyeh 'asher 'ehyeh is an idem per idem construction implying essentially
 that 'hyeh equals 'ehyeh, and this carries the sense that 'ehyeh can not be
 defined by any outside reference but may be defined only in terms of itself. 
>>>



While I grant that that is certainly possible, I see nothing to preclude the 
sense conveyed by "I will prove to be who I will prove to be," showing that 
the description for which Moses asks will be revealed by what Jehovah does 
for his people. 


<< Clearly 'ehyeh is an allomorph of yhwh in the context of Exodus 3, as the
 parallel sentences indicate:
 
     'ehyeh shlahani in 3:14
     yhwh ... shlahani 3:15 >>


I think that is quite possible. 

 
<<  In both of these sentences, regardless of what FORM is used, the FUNCTION 
of
 the two allomorphs is nominal. >>


Indeed. But the verbal idea inherent in the nominal is what would have struck 
a cord with the Israelites, not a name void of that verbal idea. 



<< I have compiled much of the biblical evidence in a 1978 article, "The 
Divine
 Name 'Ehyeh as a Symbol of Divine Presence in Israelite Traditions" [Hebrew
 Annual Review, 101-118].
 
 Shalom,
 Charles David Isbell
  >>


I have not read that article. I will read get a copy and consider it right 
away. I am about 70% finished with a book entitled, "Before Abraham Was": The 
History, Interpretation and Translation of John 8:58, in which I provide a 
chapter on Exodus 3:14. 

Best regards,

Greg Stafford