[B-Greek] eyw eimi egw eimi Isaiah 43:25

Bert de Haan b_dehaan at sympatico.ca
Mon Jan 2 16:18:35 EST 2006



Albert Pietersma <albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca>wrote;
>To: "Bert de Haan" <b_dehaan at sympatico.ca>
>CC: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>Subject: Re: [B-Greek] eyw eimi egw eimi Isaiah 43:25
>Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 12:19:58 -0500
>
>Good question, the answer to which would seem to be No.
>EGW EIMI EGW EIMI occurs three times in Esaias (Isaiah): 43:25, 45:19, 
>51:12.
>(1) In 43:25 Hebrew ANOCHI (2x) + HU + participle is rendered as EGW EIMI 
>(2x) + article + participle.
>(2) In 51:12 Hebrew ANOCHI (2x) + HU + participle + suffix  is rendered as 
>EGW EIMI (2x) + article + participle+ pronoun (acc).
>(3) In 45:19 Hebrew ANI (1x) + noun + participle + noun is rendered as EGW 
>EIMI (2x) + noun + participle + noun
>Hebrew ANOCHI ANOCHI of 43:25 and  51:12 is commonly (perhaps universally) 
>read as appositional rather than equative, therefore "I am i.e. I am" 
>rather than "I am = I am."  Greek EGW EIMI EGW would more than likely be 
>intended and understood likewise, though reading it as equative is perhaps 
>no stranger that it is in English (I AM am I AM). What is no doubt telling 
>is that in the very few Patristic comments TLG provided, so such use is 
>made of it.
>Of further interest is 45:19 where reading the repetition as equative would 
>yield I AM am I AM (the) Lord when I speak righteousness.
>Thus my No to Bert's first question. As for his second question: 
>Theoretically, making the one EGW EIMI arthrous and leaving the second one 
>anarthrous would produce an S-V-SC. Perhaps the NETS translator of Esaias 
>(who is on this list) has a view at variance with mine.
>Al
>
>
>
>while in 45:19 MT has ANI (1x) + noun.
>
>On Jan 2, 2006, at 9:19 AM, Bert de Haan wrote:
>
>>Isaiah 43:25;  EGW EIMI EGW EIMI hO EXALEIFWN TAS ANOMIAS SOU...
>>Can the double EYW EIMI  mean; I am (the) I am, the one washing your
>>transgressions...or would it need an article before the second EYW?
>>Thank you.
>>Bert de Haan.
>>
>>
Thanks for your reply.
Maybe I misunderstook you when you wrote -> reading
>it as equative is perhaps no stranger that it is in English (I AM am I AM)
This does sound strange in English but you have made it as two substantives 
joined by 'am'. This am would be then be unexpressed in Greek.
What if it is, a subject (EGW) + verb (EIMI) and then the substantive (the 
second EGW EIMI)
In English that would then not be  I AM am I AM, but I am I AM.
My apologies if I misunderstood your comment.
Bert de Haan.





More information about the B-Greek mailing list