Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Vadim Cherny" <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>]

> This is not what LXX means. ὤν WN (omega-nu) is simply the present
> participle of EIMI "to be". So Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν EGO EIMI hO WN simply means
> "I am the being one", or, as Greek participles are commonly equivalent
> to English (and presumably Hebrew) relative clauses, "I am who I am".
> This is of course rather good evidence that the Hebrew probably means "I
> am who I am", and is certainly evidence for a present tense
> interpretation of the Hebrew.
>

Using LXX, a garbled translation, for interpreting minute details of the
Hebrew text? Seems kind of odd to me. At the maximum, LXX evidences how a
particular translator or a group wanted to understand or present to Greeks
the text at the period. Not really a firm evidence; you wouldn't take even
Rashi views for granted; why take the LXX translators'?

Vadim Cherny