Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: _)aSHER_ in Ex. 3:14 (was "I AM")

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: GregStffrd AT aol.com
  • To: cisbell AT home.com
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: _)aSHER_ in Ex. 3:14 (was "I AM")
  • Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 02:32:58 EDT


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





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page