Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | I am Who I am in New Testament | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234494 | ||
Hey Tim, I don't understand your logic. Titles and participial forms don't mix. Let's start over. You said that "I AM" (ego eimi in the greek) is the Divine Title of Yahweh. Let's look at Exodus 3:14 in the Septuagint. "And God said to Moses, I AM THE BEING (ego eimi ho on); and He said, "Thus you shall say to the sons of Isreal, THE BEING (Ho on) has sent me to you." It is a HUGE stretch to connect John 8:24 to Ex. 3:14. If Jesus was "clearly making that connection Himself" John 8:24 would read "...for unless you believe that THE BEING (HO ON), you shall die in your sins". Titles to names use the exact words and not participial forms. So the title using the Septuagint is THE BEING (HO ON). We definitely disagree on this as you say "God uses it in a unique way in Ex. 3:14. I don't think so. I believe this connection was made by our biased translators. In fact, I believe that this connection perverts the gospel as it adds to the doctrine of salvation making it a requirement to believe that Jesus is Yahweh (John 8:24). Finally, I can't tell you what to believe. If you think the verb "hayah" should be translated as "I am" that's your choice. But I think it is very suspicious that it is only translated as "I am" in 1 verse out of 72 (Ex. 3:14). My source for that is BlueLetterBible. The evidence is clear. Knowledge is increasing because of the internet. I thank God I can check into this stuff through the use of incredible online Bible tools. God Bless, Andy |
||||||
2 | I am Who I am in New Testament | John 8:24 | Morant61 | 234502 | ||
Greetings Andy! Let's address this point in more detail. First of all, could you share with us your language background? The reason I ask is because many people who have not been trained in Greek or Hebrew (or really any other language than their native language) tend to view translation as simply taking one definition and plugging it into the text anytime a certain word is used. But this doesn't work! Allow me to illustrate. Take the English word 'level'. It can be a noun referring to the horizontal condition of a surface, a tool used to ensure that a surface is level. It can refer to rank or position in a game. It can even be a verb and refer to the acting of making something level, or the attaining of a new rank. My point is that words are fluid and varying contexts and combinations affect the meaning. So, a unique translation is not necessarily a bad thing or wrong. However, a unique translation is not necessarily correct either. So, how about Ex. 3:14. Consider the evidence for this translation. 1) The most basic meaning (according to Strong's) of the verb is 'to exist' or 'to be'. It also has a lot of other meaning depending upon the context. The translation 'I am who I am' does justice to the root meaning of the verb. So, it is not a far stretch. As you mentioned in an earlier text there are some other possibilities. Some view the verbs as future, "I will be who I will be." But, the basic meaning is "I am." By the way, this is not the only place in the Old Testament where this verb is translated as "I am." It is also translated this way in Ps. 31:12, Ps. 71:7, Ps. 88:4, Ps. 102:6, and Ps. 102:7. These are just the examples I found in the KJV of the Psalms. Thus, the translation "I am" is not really far stretched at all. It holds true to the basic meaning of the verb and is actually translated in that manner several times in the Old Testament. 2) A further piece of evidence is the LXX translation itself. You contend that Ex. 3:14 was stretched to make a connection between it and John 8:58, but the Jewish scholars who translated the Hebrew for the LXX did so before Jesus ever uttered these words. They translated Ex. 3:14 as, "I am He who is". I always try to translate a definitive participle as 'He who..." Their translation differs from Ex. 3:14 in that they could have just translated it as "I am who I am", but they maintain the concept of eternal existence that is at the heart of Ex. 3:14. Clearly, they had no Christological axe to grind. It is also clear that while Jesus did not use the entire phrase 'I am who I am', He was definitely alluding to it. It is also clear from the reaction of the Jewish leaders that they understood Him to be alluding to it. After all, one does not try to kill someone for simply stating that they exist. :-) Well, I have to run now my friend! I look forward to our discussion. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
3 | Is their a good LXX translation | John 8:24 | servetus | 234516 | ||
Tim, I have been following the forum here and there for about 6 months and decided to jump on because I am passionate about John 8:24. I even use John 8:24 when I witness to people because I don't think people are truly saved until they believe that Jesus is Jehovah, the One True God. I agree with you that people need to know the nature of Jesus and that He is God and Jehovah. I just e-mailed my pastor who knows a lot about the Septuagint (LXX) and he says that the word ego eimi is in the Septuagint so I don't know why you don't give Andy this Septuagint translation and this debate would be over. Is their a good Septuagint translation online? Thanks, Servetus |
||||||
4 | Is their a good LXX translation | John 8:24 | Morant61 | 234526 | ||
Greetings Servetus! Welcome to the forum and to the discussion my friend! Andy is aware of the Septuagint translation. It translates Ex. 3:14 as 'I am He who is'. They use 'ego eimi' but they also add the definitive participial form of 'eimi'. This differs from the form in Ex. 3:14. I agree with you that the LXX translation is strong evidence that Jesus is referring to the Divine Name in John 8:24. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
5 | Is their a good LXX translation | John 8:24 | servetus | 234547 | ||
Hi Tim, I have really looked into this because John 8:24 is a verse that I use for witnessing to people as I think it's important to believe that Jesus is Jehovah. However, I have always felt a little uncomfortable trying to get people to accept and understand that Jesus is the Son of God and God at the same time. I'm also following your other feed called "die in your sins" and might jump in from time to time as I see this feed has moved. I found a good greek Septuagint online and it seems Andy is right in that the text reads "Thus you shall say to the sons of Isreal, HO ON has sent me to you". I e-mailed my pastor and he said he "misspoke" and thought that EGO EIMI was in the place of HO ON. I have actually heard other preachers preach on this and have said that Jesus claimed the same name EGO EIMI that's in the LXX. I have thought a lot about this today and think that Andy has a great point on this as far as titles go. It convicted me that I should be researching a lot more for myself especially since I found some great websites. I hope you had a good turkey day! Servetus |
||||||
6 | Is their a good LXX translation | John 8:24 | Morant61 | 234551 | ||
Greeting Servetus! The LXX translation is only relevant for two reasons. 1) Andy questioned whether or not 'I am' is a good translation of the Hebrew verb 'hayah'. I used the LXX to demonstrate that the first occurrence of 'hayah' in Ex. 3:14 is in fact translated by the Jews in the LXX with the Greek phrase 'ego eimi'. Thus, 'I am' is certainly a legitimate translation of 'hayah'. 2) Andy also questioned whether or not the 'I am' translation of the Hebrew word was done to make it conform with Jesus' statement in John 8:24. I brought up the LXX translation to illustrate that the Jews translated the first occurrence of the verb 'hayah' as 'ego eimi' and they certainly had no Christological axe to grind, especially since they translate the verse prior to Jesus' birth. As for titles, I pointed out in the other thread that God Himself didn't use exactly the same form of the title either. Look at Ex. 3:14-15. First God calls Himself 'I am Who I am'. Then, says that Moses should say to the Israelites that 'I am' has sent me to you. Then, He says to say to them that 'the Lord, the God of your father's has sent me to you.' So, it doesn't seem as though God was too hung up on some exact form of a title. :-) So, the important thing is not whether Jesus claimed the 'ego eimi' of the LXX (which is there too by the way). It is important that Jesus is alluding to the 'I am' of Ex. 3:14. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||