Biblical Hebrew Forum

[GregStffrd AT aol.com]

In a message dated 05/11/2001 1:39:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
dan.wagner AT netzero.net writes:

<< > I agree with you that there are several ways this could have been 
 > communicated, but I am not suggesting that God said, "I will be with you," 
 > but by defining *Himself* in this way the meaning conveyed was one that 
would 
 > give assurance to His people that as the one who would "prove to be what 
he 
 > purposes to be," 
 
 How does this conclusion, "prove to be what he purposes to be," relate to 
the grammar of the Hebrew text as it stands? It's a true statement, i'll 
grant, and fits with the context, but what relationship does it have with the 
grammar?
 
 Dan Wagner >>


Moses' question was essentially, "Who should I say sent me?" YHWH's reply 
was, literally, "I will be who I will be. . . . Tell them 'I will be' sent 
you." Now, it seems to me that this response means that the Israelites will 
know who He is by what He *will do*. By what he 'proves to be' in action on 
their behalf they will know that He is God. "I will be who I will be" leaves 
unanswered the question of who sent Moses, but makes clear the fact that the 
answer will become manifest by what He purposes to do. They will know by what 
they will see, and what they will see is what God purposes to become. The 
grammar says that God's identity is predicated on who he "will be." My 
understanding relates to the revelatory/future sense of 'EHYEH in a context 
where identity and action are bound together. 

Greg Stafford