Buddhist stuff |
"Asher" is the conjunction "that", not the demonstrative "that" |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
The stuff recently added about Buddhist influence/interpretation is interesting for about two or three paragraphs, but it's exceedingly long and tangential to the article after that. Further, without citations, even the interesting parts seem to be original research. Anyone think it's salvageable? Anyone have a source for that interpretation? — [[User:Saxifrage|Saxifrage]] | [[User talk:Saxifrage|☎]] 22:27, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC) |
The stuff recently added about Buddhist influence/interpretation is interesting for about two or three paragraphs, but it's exceedingly long and tangential to the article after that. Further, without citations, even the interesting parts seem to be original research. Anyone think it's salvageable? Anyone have a source for that interpretation? — [[User:Saxifrage|Saxifrage]] | [[User talk:Saxifrage|☎]] 22:27, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC) |
||
== "Asher" is the conjunction "that", not the demonstrative "that" == |
|||
The Hebrew word אשר ('asher) means "that" as a conjunction, not as a demonstrative. |
|||
Stated another way, אשר can never mean "that" as opposed to "this". |
|||
The expression in Exodus 3:14, therefore, cannot possibly mean "I am 'That'", or "I am That, I am". It could, however, mean "I am what I am", or "I will be that which I will be", etc. |
|||
A discussion of the "Thatness" of God might be interesting, but it's irrelevant to the meaning of אהיה אשר אהיה. |
|||
Revision as of 00:23, 6 March 2005
For a December 2004 deletion debate over this page see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Hayah
Can we have a refrance for this please, other than a TOH refrance tooto 23:08, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- From a Google search I found that "hayah asher haya" is from Exodus 3:14, and then I checked that in one of the online King James Bibles that's linked from Bible. That line does show up in Exodus 3:14 [1]. I counldn't find one in Hebrew to allow comparison (though I can't read Hebrew). Do you think that would be a good enough reference? — Saxifrage | ☎ 02:31, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
If there were a Hebrew-English wiktionary, this word would qualify. As it is, this article seems yet another attempt by John P. Ennis to spam his imagined religion into some kind of credibility. -- Hoary 03:41, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)
As per discussion here, I am removing the Sollog reference as not notable. - Taxman 17:09, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)
The stuff recently added about Buddhist influence/interpretation is interesting for about two or three paragraphs, but it's exceedingly long and tangential to the article after that. Further, without citations, even the interesting parts seem to be original research. Anyone think it's salvageable? Anyone have a source for that interpretation? — Saxifrage | ☎ 22:27, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
"Asher" is the conjunction "that", not the demonstrative "that"
The Hebrew word אשר ('asher) means "that" as a conjunction, not as a demonstrative.
Stated another way, אשר can never mean "that" as opposed to "this".
The expression in Exodus 3:14, therefore, cannot possibly mean "I am 'That'", or "I am That, I am". It could, however, mean "I am what I am", or "I will be that which I will be", etc.
A discussion of the "Thatness" of God might be interesting, but it's irrelevant to the meaning of אהיה אשר אהיה.