- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 29 2012,23:30) Also Kerwin, You have yet to address this:
Do you agree that the statement, “I think, therefore I am“ means, “I think, therefore I exist“? YES or NO?
Mike,I have addressed in two different ways.
1) I am x where x is the inferred word depending on context.
a} I think therefore I am [existing]
b} I think therefore I am [thinking]2) The form is different than that of before Abraham x, I am.
You have already mentioned the effects of context on meaning in relationship to the factor x in the statement before Abraham x, I am. You believe the unbelieving Jews were correct in their conclusion that Jesus saw Abraham; even though their premise that Abraham could not see Jesus' day without Jesus existing in his was flawed. I see them as being incorrect because of their lack of understanding.
As for the effects of on the words “I Am”, here are two witnesses where certain experts believe “Christ” is inferred.
Luke 21:8
King James Version (KJV)8 And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.
and
Mark 13:6
King James Version (KJV)6 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
I am curious how so many experts obtained past tense verbs out of a verb that seems to be used in future tense in most cases. I am also curious how they believe Abraham acted on his own birth/existence. I can see how he participated but that would be a passive verb and not a middle as it is. Though I am curious it is already clear what variables can be plugged into the form of the statement that render it true.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 29 2012,23:26) Quote (kerwin @ July 29 2012,02:25) In short, with the wrong voice, Jesus is teaching us that he is to be made perfect before Abraham is to be made perfect.
Kerwin,That entire post was nonsense and a diversion from the point of discussion.
Gene, look up John 8:58 in the Greek Interlinear. Here is what the last part says:
AMEN AMEN I AM SAYING TO YOU, BEFORE ABRAHAM TO COME INTO BEING, I AM
You told Kerwin, “Good point”. Could you tell me how it is a “good point” for Kerwin to conclude that Jesus is teaching “I am to be made perfect before Abraham is to be made perfect” from the Greek words as translated above?
Come on Kerwin!
How in the world do you get YOUR translation out of the Greek words of 8:58? Don't you feel even the least bit ashamed of yourself when you bulldoze the scriptures this way? You have come up with an interpretation that is IMPOSSIBLE to be reached from the Greek words we have to go on.
Mike,That is a better translation that most but words “into being” does not make sense as the verb is middle voice and not passive.
I have already revealed how I reached my understanding as is my way.
It is written that Abraham believed and it was credited to him as righteousness. That is not the end but a time will come when Abraham is made perfect through Christ; who has already been made perfect.
I will continue to test these words; for doing so is wise.
To all,
Here are some Scriptures that use an aorist infinitive middle:
Luke 1: 19
And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings.
Luke 4: 18
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
Luke 4: 43
And he said unto them, I must preach the kingdom of God to other cities also: for therefore am I sent.
Quote (kerwin @ July 30 2012,01:13) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 29 2012,23:30)
Kerwin,Do you agree that the statement, “I think, therefore I am“ means, “I think, therefore I exist“? YES or NO?
Mike,1) I am x where x is the inferred word depending on context.
a} I think therefore I am [existing]
b} I think therefore I am [thinking]2) The form is different than that of before Abraham x, I am.
Where in the world are you coming up with an “inferred word”?In the case of Descartes' statement, there is no “inferred word”. One doesn't have to say, I am EXISTING, Kerwin, for the words “I am”, in and of themselves, MEAN “I EXIST”.
But I will make you a deal: If you can find ANYONE on the face of the earth who has opined that Descartes' statement means “I think, therefore I am THINKING”, we'll discuss it a little further.
BUT IF – on the other hand, you cannot find any writing that supports your claim, you must agree with the rest of mankind that it means, “I think, therefore I EXIST”. Is that a deal?
Now, as far as John 8:58 goes, there also is no “inferred word”, because the word following “Abraham” is written for all to see. That word is “ginomai” – which has as it's #1 and most used meaning:
1) to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being
I cannot find a “perfected” meaning associated with that word anywhere. Where did you find it?
Anyway, I'll make you a similar deal: If you can show good reason for “ginomai” to mean something other than the most used meaning in 8:58, we can discuss it further. But if you cannot show any good reason for it not to mean “before Abraham came into existence”, then you must accept the logical and reasonable translation that every single English Bible since the dawn of time has accepted for it. Deal?
Kerwin, remember that, even though we all have access to Greek lexicons now, there is MUCH that goes into translating Greek to English that you and I will ever know. It is a BOLD stand for you to claim that all the EXPERTS did it wrong, and you, with only a lexicon, can translate it “right”.
Quote (kerwin @ July 30 2012,01:29) Mike, That is a better translation that most but words “into being” does not make sense as the verb is middle voice and not passive.
Read the green words in my last post, Kerwin. It's not like I'm ADDING “into being” to the text. The word “ginomai” actually MEANS “to come into being”.I don't knock you for “testing the words”. But look at the context of the passage. How does, “Before Abraham is to be [perfected], I will be [perfected]” answer the Jews question in verse 57?
I don't know all there is to know about Greek, but I do know there exist many idiomatic problems when translating one language to another. Many times the Greek perfect will work better as an English past. And that is USUALLY the case with the Greek aorist.
From NETNotes:
The aorist tense is characterized by its emphasis on punctiliar action; that is, the concept of the verb is considered without regard for past, present, or future time. There is no direct or clear English equivalent for this tense, though it is generally rendered as a simple past tense in most translations.Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 31 2012,17:43) Quote (kerwin @ July 30 2012,01:29) Mike, That is a better translation that most but words “into being” does not make sense as the verb is middle voice and not passive.
Read the green words in my last post, Kerwin. It's not like I'm ADDING “into being” to the text. The word “ginomai” actually MEANS “to come into being”.I don't knock you for “testing the words”. But look at the context of the passage. How does, “Before Abraham is to be [perfected], I will be [perfected]” answer the Jews question in verse 57?
I don't know all there is to know about Greek, but I do know there exist many idiomatic problems when translating one language to another. Many times the Greek perfect will work better as an English past. And that is USUALLY the case with the Greek aorist.
From NETNotes:
The aorist tense is characterized by its emphasis on punctiliar action; that is, the concept of the verb is considered without regard for past, present, or future time. There is no direct or clear English equivalent for this tense, though it is generally rendered as a simple past tense in most translations.
Mikegood work,it should be kerwin who should have known he broad it up,but many just throw things and see what the other does,
but I do not think he will accept this explanation for the reason that he does not want to believe in the scriptures in any way that they do not fit his personal view,but then we some times do the same thing
Mike,
Quote In the case of Descartes' statement, there is no “inferred word”. One doesn't have to say, I am EXISTING, Kerwin, for the words “I am”, in and of themselves, MEAN “I EXIST”. But I will make you a deal: If you can find ANYONE on the face of the earth who has opined that Descartes' statement means “I think, therefore I am THINKING”, we'll discuss it a little further.
Quote Descartes Cogito argument ends with the declaration “I think, therefore I am thinking.” While this may be confusing, it seems that this is enough to justify the belief in one's existence. While all thinking signifies is that one is thinking, this is enough to justify ones existence as a creature who thinks, and thus, a creature that exists. Quote Read the green words in my last post, Kerwin. It's not like I'm ADDING “into being” to the text. The word “ginomai” actually MEANS “to come into being”. It has that and other meanings such as become, made, born, come about, and happen. I chose to use “to become” as it is an equivalent English tense that is still open to interpretation, while it is in line with the other “aorist infinitive” used in Scripture. I don’t believe I have captured the aorist sense of an action as a completed unit with a beginning and an end or the middle voice which reveals that the subject is acting in his own interest or on his own behalf, or participating in the results of the verbal action.
Quote I cannot find a “perfected” meaning associated with that word anywhere. Where did you find it? It is used for the fulfillment of prophecy.
Quote But if you cannot show any good reason for it not to mean “before Abraham came into existence”, then you must accept the logical and reasonable translation that every single English Bible since the dawn of time has accepted for it. Deal? Quote INT: I say to ye, Before Abraham to become, Quote Literal Greek Text- “Said to them Jesus Amen amen I am saying to you Before Abraham to become I Am.” Quote Abraham to become, I am As for many of the experts, perhaps they assume it is a historic future tense. I have not found an explanation yet.
Quote 1 source.
Quote 2 source.
Quote 3 source.
Quote 4 source.kerwin
Quote Quote
Literal Greek Text- “Said to them Jesus Amen amen I am saying to you Before Abraham to become I Am.”so you would say that this was the way our Greek first believers talked
I am sure it would not mean in English what it would mean in Greek ,but you seamed to imply that ,do you speak another language beside english ??language.[/b]
Heb 11:1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.
Heb 11:2 This is what the ancients were commended for.k
Quote
In the case of Descartes' statement, there is no “inferred word”. One doesn't have to say, I am EXISTING, Kerwin, for the words “I am”, in and of themselves, MEAN “I EXIST”.But I will make you a deal: If you can find ANYONE on the face of the earth who has opined that Descartes' statement means “I think, therefore I am THINKING”, we'll discuss it a little further.
Quote
Heb 11:1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.
Heb 11:2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
Heb 11:3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command , so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.Ge 1:3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.
PS 91:11
For He will give His angels charge concerning you,
To guard you in all your ways.
PS 103:20 Bless the LORD, you His angels,
Mighty in strength, who perform His word,
Obeying the voice of His word!
PS 148:2 Praise Him, all His angels;REV 5:11 Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne and the living creatures and the elders; and the number of them was myriads of myriads, and thousands of thousands,
COL 2:18 Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind,
Col 1:15 He(Christ) is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
Col 1:16 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 30 2012,04:26) Quote (kerwin @ July 29 2012,02:25) In short, with the wrong voice, Jesus is teaching us that he is to be made perfect before Abraham is to be made perfect.
Kerwin,That entire post was nonsense and a diversion from the point of discussion.
Gene, look up John 8:58 in the Greek Interlinear. Here is what the last part says:
AMEN AMEN I AM SAYING TO YOU, BEFORE ABRAHAM TO COME INTO BEING, I AM
You told Kerwin, “Good point”. Could you tell me how it is a “good point” for Kerwin to conclude that Jesus is teaching “I am to be made perfect before Abraham is to be made perfect” from the Greek words as translated above?
Come on Kerwin!
How in the world do you get YOUR translation out of the Greek words of 8:58? Don't you feel even the least bit ashamed of yourself when you bulldoze the scriptures this way? You have come up with an interpretation that is IMPOSSIBLE to be reached from the Greek words we have to go on.
Mike ……….My point is, you can not by those words determine what Jesus meant, becasue he did not say he was talking about His existence as a living Being “Specifically” as you preexistences “suppose” he was? Had Jesus said “I was alive before Abraham was, then you would be right, but unfortunately he did not say that , so you grab straws and force the text to say what in fact it does not specifically say.The argument here is you saying it is specifically being stated there , when it is not, that is the argument Mike and nothing else.
If you could produce other scriptures of Jesus saying he was alive as a Being before Abraham or any of the apostles saying it, that would add to your case , but unfortunately for you “Preexistences” you can't produce them. You seem to only produce text you have to force to say what in fact they do not
specifically say.While i might not completely agree with Kerwin's conclusions on those scriptures He has a more valid point then you Preexistences Do that is for sure.
When people add up all there “assumed” scripturesthen they believe they have a “doctrine” of beliefs , when in fact that have nothing but a bunch of suppositions leading to all kinds of false conclusions. IMO
Mike don't you think that such an important thing as Jesus' Preexistence would have been spoken of often by Jesus and the apostles over and over if it were true Brother? Why is it there is not ONE SPECIFIC STATEMENT in all scriptures that says Jesus was a Live Being Before he was Born on this earth, why is there no previous activity of his shown in all scriptures . Why is it in every instance you Preexistences use you must force the text to say what in fact it is not saying , why is it you even have to tweak them slightly to fit you dogmas in the first place? Think about it Mike
peace and love to you and yours Mike………………………………..gene
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Aug. 01 2012,01:29) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 30 2012,04:26) Quote (kerwin @ July 29 2012,02:25) In short, with the wrong voice, Jesus is teaching us that he is to be made perfect before Abraham is to be made perfect.
Kerwin,That entire post was nonsense and a diversion from the point of discussion.
Gene, look up John 8:58 in the Greek Interlinear. Here is what the last part says:
AMEN AMEN I AM SAYING TO YOU, BEFORE ABRAHAM TO COME INTO BEING, I AM
You told Kerwin, “Good point”. Could you tell me how it is a “good point” for Kerwin to conclude that Jesus is teaching “I am to be made perfect before Abraham is to be made perfect” from the Greek words as translated above?
Come on Kerwin!
How in the world do you get YOUR translation out of the Greek words of 8:58? Don't you feel even the least bit ashamed of yourself when you bulldoze the scriptures this way? You have come up with an interpretation that is IMPOSSIBLE to be reached from the Greek words we have to go on.
Mike ……….My point is, you can not by those words determine what Jesus meant, becasue he did not say he was talking about His existence as a living Being “Specifically” as you preexistences “suppose” he was? Had Jesus said “I was alive before Abraham was, then you would be right, but unfortunately he did not say that , so you grab straws and force the text to say what in fact it does not specifically say.The argument here is you saying it is specifically being stated there , when it is not, that is the argument Mike and nothing else.
If you could produce other scriptures of Jesus saying he was alive as a Being before Abraham or any of the apostles saying it, that would add to your case , but unfortunately for you “Preexistences” you can't produce them. You seem to only produce text you have to force to say what in fact they do not
specifically say.While i might not completely agree with Kerwin's conclusions on those scriptures He has a more valid point then you Preexistences Do that is for sure.
When people add up all there “assumed” scripturesthen they believe they have a “doctrine” of beliefs , when in fact that have nothing but a bunch of suppositions leading to all kinds of false conclusions. IMO
Mike don't you think that such an important thing as Jesus' Preexistence would have been spoken of often by Jesus and the apostles over and over if it were true Brother? Why is it there is not ONE SPECIFIC STATEMENT in all scriptures that says Jesus was a Live Being Before he was Born on this earth, why is there no previous activity of his shown in all scriptures . Why is it in every instance you Preexistences use you must force the text to say what in fact it is not saying , why is it you even have to tweak them slightly to fit you dogmas in the first place? Think about it Mike
peace and love to you and yours Mike………………………………..gene
GeneB.Jesus purposely said I AM.
THEY MUST HAVE UNDESTOOD WHAT JESUS WAS SAYING;
THERE FORE THEY TOOK UP STONES.
He was saying that bfore Abraham was I am already.If I say; before my grand father was,I am.how would you have perceived it?
wakeup.
Quote (Wakeup @ Aug. 01 2012,04:10) GeneB. If I say; before my grand father was,I am.how would you have perceived it?
wakeup.
Hi Wakeup,That you were a foreigner with no grip of the English language.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (terraricca @ July 31 2012,14:19) kerwin Quote Quote
Literal Greek Text- “Said to them Jesus Amen amen I am saying to you Before Abraham to become I Am.”so you would say that this was the way our Greek first believers talked
I am sure it would not mean in English what it would mean in Greek ,but you seamed to imply that ,do you speak another language beside english ??language.[/b]
Heb 11:1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.
Heb 11:2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
Pierre,My source claims it to be a literal translation; but context is what give it; it's true meaning.
For example Mike makes the claim that “I am” is a historic present, while Trinitarians claim it is God's name. His claim is in line with the NWT; but that is the only one i know that has deemed the context warrants that change.
The literal translation is seemingly speaking of a future event and not a past event. In English there is either a “was” or an “is” before the “to become” but the “was” does not work with “to become” as it infers it did not happen.
The whole statement possible could be speaking of actions that took place in the past but were worded as if they were taking place in the present and future.
Even if that is the case, the translators have taken the liberty of interpreting as well as translating the passage.
Quote (kerwin @ July 31 2012,00:52) Mike, Quote In the case of Descartes' statement, there is no “inferred word”. One doesn't have to say, I am EXISTING, Kerwin, for the words “I am”, in and of themselves, MEAN “I EXIST”. But I will make you a deal: If you can find ANYONE on the face of the earth who has opined that Descartes' statement means “I think, therefore I am THINKING”, we'll discuss it a little further.
Quote Descartes Cogito argument ends with the declaration “I think, therefore I am thinking.” While this may be confusing, it seems that this is enough to justify the belief in one's existence. While all thinking signifies is that one is thinking, this is enough to justify ones existence as a creature who thinks, and thus, a creature that exists.
That was a “trick” answer, Kerwin, for the author you quoted does NOT say that the statement, “I think, therefore I am” MEANS “I think, therefore I am thinking”.Let's have a look at the WHOLE story from your source:
As [Descartes] is seeking to find the source of knowledge, he asks how unquestionable knowledge is ascertained. After deliberating this, he decides that he can know nothing for sure and so introduces the 'Evil Demon' scenario. This argument says that for all he knows, everything that he has ever perceived or thought can be a fallacy introduced into his mind by an Evil Demon. This invalidates anything perceived through the senses, and any belief that he has ever had. Descartes can no longer trust anything, and is left in a seemingly hopeless situation where he cannot attain knowledge at all, by any means.Sounds like the movie The Matrix, where humans were kept alive in cocoons, and fed information about the so-called life they were living via a computer. They weren't actually LIVING that life, but were having thoughts sent to their brains to convince them that they were.
Descartes begins his second meditation enveloped in doubt. He searches for anything that he can truly know, and invents his famous Cogito, ergo sum. He asks whether never being able to know anything can mean that he does not exist. He has come to the conclusion that he has no sense, no body, and no beliefs, and it may follow that he has no self. However, this assures him, as he is able to come to this conclusion, or any conclusion, then that means that he surely exists, as he is the one who is being convinced of this. He decides that if he is able to convince himself of anything, that means that he exists. Even the Evil Demon cannot dissuade him from this. Although the Demon is able to deceive him in all ways, then there still is a Descartes which exists to be deceived. Descartes has discovered that he thinks, and therefore he is. He sees thought as the one power that assures him that he is, although what he is, is still a mystery to him. He follows this train of though to say that what he is, is a being that thinks. As long as he is thinking, then he can be sure that he exists. However, this raises the question of whether he will cease to be if he is to stop thinking, and Descartes says that this may be the case. While he is now certain that he exists, he sees his existence as only being a thing that thinks.
Kerwin, how many times does the author use the word “exists”? How many times does he equate “he exists” with “he is”? And what is “he is”, if not the third person equivalent of “I am”?
Of course the statement, “I think, therefore I am” surely means, I think, therefore I EXIST” – and your author proves this fact many times.
But now for the part you quoted:
Descartes Cogito argument ends with the declaration “I think, therefore I am thinking.” While this may be confusing, it seems that this is enough to justify the belief in one's existence.
While all thinking signifies is that one is thinking, this is enough to justify ones existence as a creature who thinks, and thus, a creature that exists.
So the CONCLUSION Descartes came to was that since he thinks, he is thinking, and thinking is all he needed to be able to do to know HE EXISTS.
This is the CONCLUSION he came to, Kerwin. The author is not saying that the statement MEANS, “I think, therefore I am thinking”.
Now, do you have anybody of reputation who believes that the statement, “I think, therefore I am” ACTUALLY MEANS, “I think, therefore I am thinking”?
Or are you ready to concede what you already know to be the truth of the matter – that it means, I think, therefore I EXIST?
Quote (terraricca @ July 30 2012,21:25) Mike good work………
……….I do not think he will accept this explanation for the reason that he does not want to believe in the scriptures in any way that they do not fit his personal view
Thanks Pierre.And now I've had to do a whole lot more work just to play Kerwin's game. There is NOBODY in their right mind who thinks the phrase “I am” means “I am thinking” (INCLUDING Kerwin).
Yet because he doesn't LIKE what John 8:58 actually teaches, he will have us all jumping through nonsense hoops until the cows come home – hoping that we will just give up and walk away from our point.
It's ridiculous sometimes, but thanks for your support.
Quote (kerwin @ July 31 2012,00:52) It has that and other meanings such as become, made, born, come about, and happen. I chose to use “to become” as it is an equivalent English tense that is still open to interpretation……….
Yeah, considering that Greek words in the aorist form are generally translated into English as past tense, I'd have to agree that your futuristic tense is “open to interpretation”. But when you ADD the word “perfected” to your preferred tense, you're really just re-writing the scriptures in an effort to FORCE them to come out the way you WANT them to be.Quote (kerwin @ July 31 2012,00:52) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) I cannot find a “perfected” meaning associated with that word anywhere. Where did you find it? It is used for the fulfillment of prophecy.
Can you show us a scripture where the Greek word “ginomai” is TRANSLATED AS “perfected”? YES or NO?Quote (kerwin @ July 31 2012,00:52) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) But if you cannot show any good reason for it not to mean “before Abraham came into existence”, then you must accept the logical and reasonable translation that every single English Bible since the dawn of time has accepted for it. Deal? INT: I say to ye, Before Abraham to become,
Literal Greek Text- “Said to them Jesus Amen amen I am saying to you Before Abraham to become I Am.”
Abraham to become, I am
You're kidding again, right?Which one of these translations DOESN'T have a meaning of “came into existence”? Are you really going to use the generic definition “to become” as proof of a futuristic claim about Abraham?
Matthew 7:28
And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, that the people were astonished at His teaching,The bolded words are also “ginomai” in the second aorist. Will you re-translate this scripture to say, “And TO BECOME, when Jesus had ended these sayings……..” ?
Here's another of the MANY:
Mark 15:33
Now when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.This is also second aorist “ginomai”. Shall we say, “When the sixth hour TO BECOME, there was darkness………..” ?
Kerwin, I admire your tenacity, but one needs to know when to stop playing games, and just accept the truth of the matter.
Are you willing to do that yet?
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 31 2012,08:29) Mike ……….My point is, you can not by those words determine what Jesus meant, becasue he did not say he was talking about His existence as a living Being “Specifically” as you preexistences “suppose” he was? Had Jesus said “I was alive before Abraham was, then you would be right,
Gene, the words “I have been” mean the same thing as “I was alive”. “I am”, means “I exist”, which in turn means “I am alive”.I like your use of the word “Specifically”. It shows that you're getting closer to the truth of the matter. I'll take that as, “Mike, I see what you guys are saying, and it makes sense………BUT………. I will hold on to the only thing I have left – the fact that Jesus didn't SPECIFICALLY say, 'I was alive' “.
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 31 2012,08:29) If you could produce other scriptures of Jesus saying he was alive as a Being before Abraham or any of the apostles saying it, that would add to your case , but unfortunately for you “Preexistences” you can't produce them.
Oh, you mean like if we could produce a scripture where Jesus SPECIFICALLY says, “I came down from heaven”?Or maybe one where Jesus SPECIFICALLY speaks about the glory he had alongside God before the world began?
If only we could find a scripture where Jesus SPECIFICALLY said, “No one has gone into heaven, except for the one who came from heaven – the Son of Man”.
Boy, it sure is too bad for us that no scriptures like that exist, Gene.
Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 01 2012,16:58) Quote (terraricca @ July 31 2012,14:19) kerwin Quote Quote
Literal Greek Text- “Said to them Jesus Amen amen I am saying to you Before Abraham to become I Am.”so you would say that this was the way our Greek first believers talked
I am sure it would not mean in English what it would mean in Greek ,but you seamed to imply that ,do you speak another language beside english ??language.[/b]
Heb 11:1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.
Heb 11:2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
Pierre,My source claims it to be a literal translation; but context is what give it; it's true meaning.
For example Mike makes the claim that “I am” is a historic present, while Trinitarians claim it is God's name. His claim is in line with the NWT; but that is the only one i know that has deemed the context warrants that change.
The literal translation is seemingly speaking of a future event and not a past event. In English there is either a “was” or an “is” before the “to become” but the “was” does not work with “to become” as it infers it did not happen.
The whole statement possible could be speaking of actions that took place in the past but were worded as if they were taking place in the present and future.
Even if that is the case, the translators have taken the liberty of interpreting as well as translating the passage.
kerwinQuote Quote Quote
Literal Greek Text- “Said to them Jesus Amen amen I am saying to you Before Abraham to become I Am.”Jn 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
Jn 8:57 “You are not yet fifty years old,” the Jews said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
Jn 8:58 “I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”is the context give credit that what is said in greek is the same of what is written in the verse 58
to me it does .understand some thing ;because you do not believe that Jesus preexisted his birth as men ,you can not see what Mike and I sees ,because you are turning all the required buttons to eliminate that understanding ,and so always looking in scriptures to justify that believe ,and so fall short of Gods truth .
this is not an external problem but an inside of you one ,you should read scriptures with a pure heart and mind so that God can open your heart so that you can see with your eyes and understand with your mind.
much time is wasted ,for looking for what is not there.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 01 2012,17:53) Quote (terraricca @ July 30 2012,21:25) Mike good work………
……….I do not think he will accept this explanation for the reason that he does not want to believe in the scriptures in any way that they do not fit his personal view
Thanks Pierre.And now I've had to do a whole lot more work just to play Kerwin's game. There is NOBODY in their right mind who thinks the phrase “I am” means “I am thinking” (INCLUDING Kerwin).
Yet because he doesn't LIKE what John 8:58 actually teaches, he will have us all jumping through nonsense hoops until the cows come home – hoping that we will just give up and walk away from our point.
It's ridiculous sometimes, but thanks for your support.
kerwin
Quote Quote (kerwin @ July 31 2012,00:52)
Mike,
Quote
In the case of Descartes' statement, there is no “inferred word”. One doesn't have to say, I am EXISTING, Kerwin, for the words “I am”, in and of themselves, MEAN “I EXIST”.But I will make you a deal: If you can find ANYONE on the face of the earth who has opined that Descartes' statement means “I think, therefore I am THINKING”, we'll discuss it a little further.
Quote
Descartes Cogito argument ends with the declaration “I think, therefore I am thinking.” While this may be confusing, it seems that this is enough to justify the belief in one's existence. While all thinking signifies is that one is thinking, this is enough to justify ones existence as a creature who thinks, and thus, a creature that exists.in one of Descartes meditations ,he said that when he rejected all of what is doubts and go be on of it ,he received thoughts and understanding that they were not from him or initiated from him ,so he ask were do they come from ;?? and his only possible answer was THAT GOD IS THE GIVER OF IT ,and so prove that you do not need religion to find God ,
but now he came to the conclusion,that if he can think about this then he his or exist = I think so I am PLEASE CONTEMPLATE THE NEXT SCRIPTURES AND UNDERSTAND
Ecc 9:4 Anyone who is among the living has hope—even a live dog is better off than a dead lion!
Ecc 9:5 For the living know that they will die,
but the dead know nothing;
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
