RE: John 8:58 (I am; Does the Hebrew reveal?)

From: Rolf Furuli (furuli@online.no)
Date: Sat Dec 25 1999 - 08:12:28 EST


Bill Ross wrote:

><Steven>
>What is clear here is that the words hO WN ("the one who is") are the key
>words here. It is the phrase hO WN which is repeated and which stand for
>the name of Yahweh, and not the words EGW EIMI. This is absolutely clear in
>the LXX:
>
><Bill>
>In English, when we want to know someone's appellation, we say "what is your
>name" and receive an answer like "Fred." But in the Hebrew mindset, one's
>name is indicative of your character asking one's "name" can result in a
>laundry list of characteristics, as in Ex 33:19.
>
>The significance of God's self-revelation to Moses in Exodus 3 is not that
>He supplied his Hebrew name, so we would know what to embroider on His
>T-Shirt, but rather it was *descriptive* of Him. In amazing brevity He
>revealed that His the "One that Is, the One the Was, and the One Who Will
>Be."
>
>When Jesus said "I AM," although He was not using the Septuagint phrase, the
>Name that is still unspoken by Jews except in prayer, He did wonderfully and
>poetically declare that He "IS" in a timeless sense.
>
>Do these verses declare the same God even though the appellation is longer?
>
>Revelations 1:8 EGW EIMI TO ALFA KAI TO W LEGEI KURIOS O QEOS ***O
>WN KAI O
>
>
>

Dear Bill,

Revelation 1:8 describes God as O WN KAI O HN KAI O ERCOMENOS, but this can
hardly be construed on the basis of the Hebrew words of Exodus 3:15, only
from English translations of these words. The rendering "I AM THAT I AM"
which is found in most modern translations is based on tradition rather
than on Hebrew idiom. The rendring of Rotherham's "The Emphasized Bible" is
much better: "I Will Become whatsoever I please.". In a note Rotherham
wrote: "Hayah (the word rendered above "become") does not mean 'to be'
essentially or ontologically, but phenomenally." This is the reason why the
imperfect of HYH always (except possibly three instances) refers to the
future; a present reference is expressed by Hebrew perfect (See C.
Gianotti,"The Meaning of the Divine Name YHWH", BSac January-March 1985) A
good example is Exodus 3:12 where HYH use to be translated as "I will be
with you" and not "I am with you.". But tradition is strong and often
overpowers knowledge. A literal rendition of Exodus 3:14 would be. "I will
become what I will become."; the words do not point to existence but to
purpose and action. Remember also that EIMI is very different in meaning
from HYH.The verb EIMI basically serves as copula while HYH indicates
"phenomenally existence" (For example,LXX has 13 times as many occurrences
of EIMI as the Hebrew text has HYH, 6469 versus 493. I therefore agree
with Steven and his sound arguments that Exodus 3:14 has nothing to do with
John 8:58.

Let me also add some comments on John 8.58 as a response to you, Steven.
The mission of Jesus was evidently in question, but this does not exclude
the time element to the effect that it was his mission and not his person
that existed before Abraham. If we accept that 8.58 represents a genuine
saying of Jesus, the words he used were either Aramaic or Hebrew. To take
this into account is just as important as to look at the circumstances. I
see three possible expressions (in Hebrew) (1) Before Abraham was born,
'ANI ("I"), (2) Before Abraham was born, 'ANI HU ("I" and "he" - "HU" used
as copula or for emphasis)." and (3) "Before Abraham was born" HAYITI
(Perfect 1. p s. of HYH).

In my view (1) is the more likely expression. None of the examples have any
implicit time element, and all three would explicitly say that Jesus
existed from before Abraham and up to speech time: All three can be
translated: "From before Abraham was born, I have been (existed)." Example
(2) can also be translated: "Before Abraham was born, it is I (or:I am the
one)." but this does not seem to make good sense. The reason why it is so
difficult to find a parallel expression with PRIN and EIMI, probably is
because the original words were Aramaic or Hebrew. Many. or most English
translations render the passage: "Before Abraham was born, I am" (or
similar). But this rendering is ungrammatical in English and can only be
defended if an element of "mysticism" is added, but there is no evidence
for such an element either in a Hebrew original or in the Greek words. I
conclude that we have two passages (Exodus 3:14, John 8:58) with strange
renderings in modern translations, one being translated contrary to Hebrew
idiom and the other in an ungrammatical way, and this is done because of
particular presuppositions.

Regards

Rolf

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo

---
B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:51 EDT