And God said unto Moses: 'I AM THAT I AM'; and He said: 'Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: I AM hath sent me unto you.'

I've heard that in this verse is an object of great arguing. Even my philosophy lecturer told me that. He said that the problem had something to do with ancient hebrew method of understanding and classifying objects. He told me I could loan some his books on the subject. I don't know if he was annoying me on purpose, because the writings he offered were latin and german(My latin and german sucks).

I remember there was some information on the web on the verse. But googling gives only pointless christian pages without information on the strife.

Now I'm getting really interested in this verse. Can any of you provide any information on the theological dispute?

Hopefully this will help a bit, but I think that the ancient Hebrews thought that when you named something, it gave you a certain amount of power over that object. For example, in the Genesis story man names all the animals and God says that man has power over all the animals.

When God says "I am that I am", is he saying, "I am the undefinable. You can never know me. My power is infinate."

I personally think this is an argument that human language is entirely inadequate to describe God.

Here's the Wikipedia link to Philosophy of Language. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_language

Also, this verse is translated "I Shall Be As I Shall Be" in The Stone Edition Chumash and is one of the names of God according to Onkelos.

It describes God as timeless and eternal.

quote:but I think that the ancient Hebrews thought that when you named something, it gave you a certain amount of power over that object. For example, in the Genesis story man names all the animals and God says that man has power over all the animals.

yeah thats right. (remember the dude wrestling with the angel)

Chumash????

Thanks for your replies

quote:Originally posted by Run Screaming:

Chumash????

It's what the Five Books of Moses plus commentary are called.

"Despite the first of the assertions that Yahweh is indeed the God of Abraham, this is clearly a different kind of deity from the one who had sat and shared a meal with Abraham as his friend. He inspires terror and insists upon distance. When Moses asks his name and credentials, Yahweh replies with a pun which, as we shall see, would exercise monothesists for centuries. Instead of revealing his name directly, he answers: 'I Am Who Am (Ehyeh asher ehyeh).' What did he mean? He certainly did not mean, as later philosophers would assert, that he was self-subsistent Being. Hebrew did not have such a metaphysical dimension at this stage, and it would be nearly 2000 years before it acquired one. God seems to have meant something rather more direct. Ehyeh asher Ehyeh is a Hebrew idiom to express a deliberate vagueness. When the Bible uses a phrase like 'they went where they went,' it means: 'I haven't the faintest idea where they went.' So when Moses asks who he is, God replies in effect: 'Never you mind who I am' or 'Mind your own business!' There was to be no discussion of God's nature and certainly no attempt to manipulate him as pagans sometimes did when they recited the names of their gods. Yahweh is the Unconditioned One: I shall be that which I shall be. He will be exactly as he chooses and will make no guarantees. He simply promised that he would participate in teh history of his people. The myth of the Exodus would prove decisive: it was able to engender hope for the future, even in impossible circumstances" (Armstrong 21-22).

Since everyone wants sources, it's from Karen Armstrong's "A History of God" pages 21-22.

edit: fixed html



[This message has been edited by Fanglekai (edited 12-08-2004).]

Thank you! That was one darn good reply