From: Dan Parker (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Mar 12 2001 - 13:05:22 EST
> At 1:33 AM -0600 3/12/01, John Wilking wrote:
> > What does EGW EIMI mean in these verses? It appears to be idiomatic.
> 8 NUN DE AKOUSON TAUTA hH TRUFERA hH KAQHMENH PEPOIQUIA hH LEGOUSA EN THi
> KARDIAi AUTHS, "EGW EIMI KAI OUK ESTIN hETERA." 9 NUN DE hHXEI EXAIFNHS EPI
> SE TA DUA TAUTA EN MIAi hHMERAi CHREIA KAI ATEKNIA hHXEI EXAIFNHS EPI SE EN
> THi FARMAKEIAi SOU EN THi ISCUI TWN EPAOIDWN SOU SFODRA. 10 THi ELPIDI THS
> PONHRIAS SU SU GAR EIPAS "EGW EIMI KAI OUK ESTIN hETERA" ...
> I think what we have here is mockery of Babylon as idolatrously claiming
> divine status in the same language used by Yahweh particularly in the
> oracles of Second Isaiah; note especially 45:18 hOUTWS LEGEI KURIOS ... EGW
> EIMI KAI OUK ESTIN ETI; 45:22 EPISTRAFHTE PROS ME KAI SWQHSESQE hOI AP'
> ESCATOU THS GHS, EGW EIMI hO QEOS KAI OUK ESTIN ALLOS; 46:9 KAI MNHSQHTE TA
> PROTERA APO TOU AIWNOS hOTI EGW EIMI hO QEOS KAI OUK ESTIN ETI PLHN EMOU.
> This would certainly seem to be with cognizance of the language of Exodus
> Carl W. Conrad
Carl, I can understand why one's theology might cause one to have
this view, but is there really a grammatical link between this and
The Hebrew text of Isaiah employs simply ani without even the hu as
found in the ani hu expressions that would normally be translated into
Greek as EGW EIMI.
The Hebrew text of Exodus 3:14 does not use ani or ani hu at all, but
Do you posit that Semitic Babylonians considered that if one used only
the first person pronoun they considered that a claim to divinity?
It is a certainty they did not say EGW or EGW EIMI!
In addition, if the Babylonians were aware of the language of Exodus
3:14 and intended to invoke this language, why did they not use Eheyeh
or Eheyeh Asher Eheyeh? And if the LXX translators understood it this
way why did they not translate the expression as found at Exodus 3:14
in the LXX, not merely EGW EIMI, but EGW EIMI hO WN?
As you are no doubt aware, EGW EIMI is used copulatively with the actual
predicate as hO WN (the being.)
Perhaps I have missed something in all of this that I should understand.
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:53 EDT