Dharma

Again, Weh might not be as developed as in other religions, that does not mean she doesn't exist ... again, if Yah means "I am" or "I will be", than Weh means "Who I am" or "who will be" -- again, any Hebrew scholars can correct me if I'm jumping and if it's simply behaving as an ending, but then such an ending must be in other Hebrew words as well...male and female aspect of God is quite ancient...Yang/yin, Yah-weh... there is no picture of yang/yin either... :banghead:

Sheshbazzar

"Yah" does not mean "I am", by itself, it requires the prefix "a'hah'-" to take on this meaning, independently "Yah" would only be the existence verb without any specific identity, as it is used in the various tenses of "was" "is" and "shall be" (vowel pointed to be pronounced "yeh" in the Masoretic texts)
Thus the "Yah" portion of the Name means only "was" "am", "is" and "will be"

"The "weh" suffix in the full form of the Name, has no direct etymology with the phrase "a'hah'-yah asher a'hah'-yah" in Ex.3:14, and therefor it IS NOT the suffix "weh" which makes it mean, -
"who I am"." ....or "who will be".

Sheshbazzar

"An interesting exercise is to look up those three letter Hebrew words that use "WH" as their second and third letters.

Such as; "A-W-H", Strong's #183-5
"G-W-H",...............1465-7
"H-W-H",...............1933
"T-W-H",...............2901
"K-W-H",...............3554
"L-W-H",...............3867
"O-W-H",...............5753-5
These are a few examples, each are complete words from which the "WH" elements may not be broken out or inferred to mean anything apart from what the complete word means" and I am sure many more examples can be found.

spin

I'm surprised that this is still necessary.

While Dha might get the idea that you can't separate the rest of the name from the abbreviation, Rma seems to have it in his head that you can.

Why oh why do people meddle with linguistics when they don't know anything about it?

Incidentally, just because a writer in the Hebrew bible gives a folk etymology for the meaning of YHWH, it doesn't mean that the etymology is right. We have no way to check it. It smells of folk etymology to me. Many scholars for example will swear till they are blue in the face that the origin of the word Hebrew comes from a word which appears in Akkadian as Khabiru/'Apiru (the latter in the Akkadian of Amarna), yet the bible gives the etymology of Hebrew as coming from the verb "to go across", (1 Sam 13:7 which starts (BRYM (BRW..., "the Jews went across...").

Or Israel: should we accept the biblical explanation that it came fromthe quaint story of Jacob wrestling with God )L and persevering $RH, or could it have come from "God is upright", Y$R)L, Jasher-El?

The debate here is nothing to do with the fact that there were or were not multiple gods at one stage in Jewish cultic history, but whether Dha or Rma can show their totally unsupported claims which partly involve the so far invisible term WH or not. If one doesn't have any tangible evidence to support their claims, one usually should shelve such claims. It is even the lack of evidencewhich seems to become some sort of argument here:
You are jumping.

Ex 3:14
)HYH )MR )HYH (Note the form.)
I am that I am

)HYH $LX:NY )LY:KM
I am sent me to you

The word "I" is never stated in these phrases. When at other times we find statements by God in English, such as "I am the god...", it says literally, "I the god..." We have certain grammatical needs that Hebrew doesn't.

What the sentence "I am that I am" is intended to mean in its entirety, is not transparent.

Hebrew poetry often plays with words that sound alike.

Yeah, sure.


sp & in
esspee ya nin