Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Michael Abernathy <mabernathy AT isot.com>]

Vadim wrote ,"Whether a translation asnwers a particular question is 
irrelevant, though

one can prefer "I am" to "I will be" only on theological grounds."

I have to disagree. It does matter whether or not a translation fits the 
context it is found in. In this case, God spoke in response to a question.
An answer does seem reasonable.

Please explain what theological prejudice Joseph Baumgarten held when he 
wrote his article in the 1992 edition of the Jewish Quarterly Review. He
argued that ani hu is primarily used in the Hebrew Bible in statements 
made by Yahweh.

The Hebrew Bible often uses ani hu in a way that appears to be synonymous 
with YHWH.
DT 32:39 "See now that I myself am He!
   There is no god besides me.
 I put to death and I bring to life,
   I have wounded and I will heal,
   and no one can deliver out of my hand.
 ISA 41:4 Who has done this and carried it through,
   calling forth the generations from the beginning?
 I, the LORD--with the first of them
   and with the last--I am he."
ISA 43:10 "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD,
   "and my servant whom I have chosen,
 so that you may know and believe me
   and understand that I am he.
 Before me no god was formed,
   nor will there be one after me.
  ISA 43:13 Yes, and from ancient days I am he.
 No one can deliver out of my hand.
   When I act, who can reverse it?"

 ISA 46:4 Even to your old age and gray hairs
   I am he, I am he who will sustain you.
 I have made you and I will carry you;
   I will sustain you and I will rescue you.
 ISA 48:12 "Listen to me, O Jacob,
   Israel, whom I have called:  
 I am he;
   I am the first and I am the last.
 ISA 52:6 Therefore my people will know my name;
   therefore in that day they will know
 that it is I who foretold it.
   Yes, it is I."

This suggests to me that "I am" is a reasonable way to translate the divine 
name.
There is even some evidence from the Egyptian language that suggests the translation 
"I am."
Johannes De Moor stated, "the enigmatic, `I am who I am'.  For centuries people 
have puzzled over the problem of what that could mean. The solution would seem to have 
been found now in an Egyptian religious text from the New Kingdom.  Here the god Re 
says exactly the same thing, `I am who I am' (iw. i-m.i).  [268] From the context it 
appears that the meaning of this declaration is that the god Re will remain himself, in 
the sense that in the present time and in the future he will continue to act precisely 
as he had done in the past."

I would like for those better schooled in Hebrew to clarify one thing about the use of the 
imperfect. M. H. Segal's Grammar of Mishnaic Hebrew states that "The imperf. describes a 
single act or event which has not yet taken place." When the imperfect is used for the 
future tense in Biblical Hebrew does it refer to a single event as opposed to a continual state? 
If that is the case, I cannot see how one would translate God's name as "I will be."
Sincerely,
Michael Abernathy