Where is Jesus in the Old Testament?

Many argue that Jesus is not mentioned in the Old Testament. Of course many religious Jews believe this to be the case because they do not believe he is the prophecied messiah. But there are also others who are not religious Jews who believe the Old Testament scriptures never mention or allude to Jesus being the messiah. Is this correct? Did the New Testament writers get a little too creative when they claim that Jesus fulfilled prophecies in the scriptures? Let’s take a look.

There is no argument that the New Testament contains gospels, letters, and teachings centred around the theme that Jesus is the Messiah. And we know that the Old Testament talks about the Messiah. But is there enough evidence to link this messiah to Jesus. Is there proof that he fulfilled the prophecies of the coming messiah as written in the Old Testament?

Yes indeed. There are Old Testament scriptures and prophecies that only Jesus of Nazareth has fulfilled. While his name is not mentioned for obvious reasons, Jesus Christ is certainly the only person in history to fulfil the prophecies and scriptures that we will look at.

Isaiah 51

This verse of the suffering messiah clearly speaks of Jesus. If you asked anybody who this verse is talking about, there is no doubt that the average person on the street would say it was Jesus. Even if you asked the average Jew this question, they too would say it is Jesus (Yeshua). Below is a video that proves this statement.

Next, we take a closer look at this chapter. While it seems to clearly point to Jesus Christ, some argue that it is talking about Israel. This is the go to interpretation for those who deny Jesus. Let’s imagine this is true and draw some conclusions from this interpretation to see if it makes any kind of sense. Listed below are the points this chapter makes that do not fit at all with Israel. The list comprises of 4 sentences with the word ‘Israel’ added in to see if it makes any sense. Following on from that, are the actual words of Isaiah 51.

  1. Israel has no beauty or majesty to attract us to him;
  2. Israel took up our pain,  bore our suffering, pierced for our transgressions, and by Israel’s wounds we are healed;
  3. Israel was assigned a grave with the wicked,  and with the rich in his death, though Israel had done no violence;
  4. Israel poured out his life as an offering for sin and will justify many,  and bear their iniquities.

1. Who has believed our message
    and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
    and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
    nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by mankind,
    a man of suffering, and familiar with pain.
Like one from whom people hide their faces
    he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.
4 Surely he took up our pain
    and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
    stricken by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
    he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
    and by his wounds we are healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
    each of us has turned to our own way;
and the Lord has laid on him
    the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
    yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
    and as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
    so he did not open his mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away.
    Yet who of his generation protested?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
    for the transgression of my people he was punished.
9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
    and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
    nor was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
    and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
    and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.
11 After he has suffered,
    he will see the light of life and be satisfied;
by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many,
    and he will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,
    and he will divide the spoils with the strong,
because he poured out his life unto death,
    and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
    and made intercession for the transgressors.

If you are fair and unbiased, it seems that Isaiah 51 is talking about Jesus. Further, Israel doesn’t seem to fit in this verse. While somethings could fit, points like suffering and dying for the sins of humanity doesn’t fit with Israel in the slightest.


Psalm 22

Just before Jesus died on the cross for humanities sins, he quoted Psalm 22:1. It is important to know that it was a practice to quote a scripture and the hearers recite the rest of the scripture. It was a good way to remember the scriptures. Jesus quoted the first verse in that Psalm so that the hearers might understand what was happening before their eyes. See Matthew 27:46:

About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?”
(which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).

Now look at Psalm 22:

My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
Why are you so far from saving me,
so far from my cries of anguish?
2 My God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer,
by night, but I find no rest.
3 Yet you are enthroned as the Holy One;
you are the one Israel praises.
4 In you our ancestors put their trust;
they trusted and you delivered them.
5 To you they cried out and were saved;
in you they trusted and were not put to shame.
6 But I am a worm and not a man,
scorned by everyone, despised by the people.
7 All who see me mock me;
they hurl insults, shaking their heads.
8 “He trusts in the Lord,” they say,
    “let the Lord rescue him.
Let him deliver him,
    since he delights in him.”
9 Yet you brought me out of the womb;
you made me trust in you, even at my mother’s breast.
10 From birth I was cast on you;
from my mother’s womb you have been my God.
11 Do not be far from me,
for trouble is near
and there is no one to help.
12 Many bulls surround me;
strong bulls of Bashan encircle me.
13 Roaring lions that tear their prey
open their mouths wide against me.
14 I am poured out like water,
    and all my bones are out of joint.
My heart has turned to wax;
it has melted within me.
15 My mouth is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
you lay me in the dust of death.
16 Dogs surround me,
    a pack of villains encircles me;
    they pierce my hands and my feet.
17 All my bones are on display;
people stare and gloat over me.
18 They divide my clothes among them
    and cast lots for my garment.

If you look at the above scripture and particularly the verses that are bolded, you will see that they are a very apt description for the death of Jesus. Let’s read what John wrote regarding the time just after the death of Jesus. It spells out some of the prophecies that were fulfilled.

John 19

31 Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jewish leaders did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down.
32 The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other.
33 But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.
34 Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water.
35 The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe.
36 These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken,”
37 and, as another scripture says, “They will look on the one they have pierced.”

The New Testament writers certainly believed that Jesus fulfilled Old Testament scripture. If you do not believe this to be the case, then ask yourself who in history has fulfilled these. If you are rational about it, you would at least have to admit that Jesus was the lead contender. In fact the only contender to date.


Daniel 3

In the Book of Daniel, it appears that the Son of God makes an appearance with three men who have been cast alive into a furnace. A fourth person appears who King Nebuchadnezzar says “the fourth looks like a son of the gods.” In other words, if the gods had a son, then this was him. Of course, there is but one Almighty God, and yes he does have a son. It is possible that this fourth person is an angel, but throughout the Old Testament an appearance of the Angel of the LORD is frequent. Many say that this is Jesus Christ before he came in the flesh, but others say it cannot be him as the Son of God was never an angel. This view does have a lot of merit though. Let’s address it by first reading Daniel 3:15-25.

15 Now when you hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe and all kinds of music, if you are ready to fall down and worship the image I made, very good. But if you do not worship it, you will be thrown immediately into a blazing furnace. Then what god will be able to rescue you from my hand?” 16 Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to him, “King Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. 17 If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to deliver us from it, and he will deliver us[c] from Your Majesty’s hand. 18 But even if he does not, we want you to know, Your Majesty, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up.” 19 Then Nebuchadnezzar was furious with Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, and his attitude toward them changed. He ordered the furnace heated seven times hotter than usual 20 and commanded some of the strongest soldiers in his army to tie up Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego and throw them into the blazing furnace. 21 So these men, wearing their robes, trousers, turbans and other clothes, were bound and thrown into the blazing furnace. 22 The king’s command was so urgent and the furnace so hot that the flames of the fire killed the soldiers who took up Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, 23 and these three men, firmly tied, fell into the blazing furnace. 24 Then King Nebuchadnezzar leaped to his feet in amazement and asked his advisers, “Weren’t there three men that we tied up and threw into the fire?” They replied, “Certainly, Your Majesty.” 25 He said, “Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods.”

The word Angel is found throughout the Old Testament. It usually refers to heavenly creature who delivers a message from God to humans. However, it can also refer to humans as they can be messengers too. Thus, angel or messenger can be applied to many kinds of being if they are a messenger of God. So this answers the concern that Jesus is not an angel. He actually is an angel or messenger, but not the usual messenger which are usually heavenly cherubs etc.

But there is a also a specific angel called: ‘The Angel of the LORD’ who appears numerous times in the Old Testament, but never in the New Testament. One reason for this could be that this messenger is none other than Jesus Christ before coming in the flesh and who would deny that Jesus is the main Messenger of God?

If this is him, then you would expect no appearances of this messenger during the time Jesus was alive on Earth and this is the case. It is also interesting to note that persons who saw this messenger as recorded in the Old Testament often said that they have seen God even though God himself is invisible. How do we make sense of this? Well in Colossians 1:15-16 we read:

The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him.

Colossians certainly fits with Jesus being the Angel of the LORD in the sense that there is no double up of them appearing at the same time and the fact that Jesus Christ is the exact image of the invisible God in bodily form whiches matches the description of seeing God. Let’s read more about the Angel of the LORD to see if this could be the identity of Jesus before he was born into this world.

To be continued.

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 20 posts - 1,181 through 1,200 (of 1,323 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #316912
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 17 2012,04:08)

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 16 2012,09:42)
    And indeed Abraham rejoiced to see His Day (a future event), that also proves Jesus had not yet come into existence, or Abraham would have already been seeing his day, becasue he would have already been alive during his lifetime.


    Gene,

    I have rejoiced to see “The Day of the Lord”, as prophesied many times throughout scripture.  Does that mean the Lord doesn't yet exist?   ???


    Mike……it's not saying the day of The Lord now is it, it's referencing the day of Jesus the Christ.

    We all know The Lord God preexisted don't we, but Jesus is quite another subject. Good try at confusing the issue though. IMO

    Peace and love…………………gene

    #316917
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (david @ Oct. 20 2012,14:08)
    Mike.  You just don't get it.  It was a secret code, a hidden message that Jesus gave to us, which coincidentally supports the trinity belief.  “I am” mike.  It's so obvious. He said “I am,” a verb which is extremely rare and hardly ever used.  Why would he do that?  It was a secret message!


    That's what the Trinitarians keep telling me.  :)

    Kerwin isn't a Trinitarian, but a non-preexister, so the “secret code” Jesus revealed to him is different than the one Jesus revealed to the Trinitarians.

    He posted his secret code once before, but I forgot what it was.  Hopefully he will indulge me and post it again.

    How have you been, David?

    #316921
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 20 2012,15:19)

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 17 2012,04:08)

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 16 2012,09:42)
    And indeed Abraham rejoiced to see His Day (a future event), that also proves Jesus had not yet come into existence, or Abraham would have already been seeing his day, becasue he would have already been alive during his lifetime.


    Gene,

    I have rejoiced to see “The Day of the Lord”, as prophesied many times throughout scripture.  Does that mean the Lord doesn't yet exist?   ???


    Mike……it's not saying the day of The Lord now is it, it's referencing the day of Jesus the Christ.

    We all know The Lord God preexisted don't we, but Jesus is quite another subject. Good try at confusing the issue though. IMO

    Peace  and love…………………gene


    I didn't confuse the issue, Gene. I only showed you scripturally how your reasoning was flawed.

    #316923
    david
    Participant

    Quote
    How have you been, David?

    –mike

    Scale of 1-10, with 8 being great, and 10 being horrible, I would say a solid “6.”

    #316925
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    :)

    #317064
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    Quote (david @ Oct. 21 2012,07:21)

    Quote
    The teaching from Jesus was NOT, I am CURRENTLY with you, so you should know these things.   It was, I HAVE BEEN with you for such a long time that you should BY NOW know these things.  

    Kerwin, what was Jesus saying?  (If we set aside the secret message which may or may not be contained within, what was he saying to those around him?)


    David……..Have you ever thought that it was GOD himself (in) Jesus speaking that through Jesus first person. Notice the response “my Lord (Jesus)   AND my God.  God was with then all abiding in Jesus through the Christos (anointing). God was truly Present through the Anointing and So was Jesus (the man) present also. Therefore the reply my Lord “AND” my GOD IMO

    peace and love to you and yours…………………………….gene

    #317065
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 21 2012,09:09)

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 20 2012,15:19)

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 17 2012,04:08)

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 16 2012,09:42)
    And indeed Abraham rejoiced to see His Day (a future event), that also proves Jesus had not yet come into existence, or Abraham would have already been seeing his day, becasue he would have already been alive during his lifetime.


    Gene,

    I have rejoiced to see “The Day of the Lord”, as prophesied many times throughout scripture.  Does that mean the Lord doesn't yet exist?   ???


    Mike……it's not saying the day of The Lord now is it, it's referencing the day of Jesus the Christ.

    We all know The Lord God preexisted don't we, but Jesus is quite another subject. Good try at confusing the issue though. IMO

    Peace  and love…………………gene


    I didn't confuse the issue, Gene.  I only showed you scripturally how your reasoning was flawed.


    Mike…….If my reasoning was flawed then show where it was , are you saying it was not talking about the “Day of Jesus”? Then what was it talking about. Mystery Religion tries to make all kinds of things fit where it is not suppose to fit.

    Saying something “COULD” be read this way or that way when the context shows it is not read any other way is what confuses people Mike. While there are cases where that could be true, but this is certainly not one of those Mike. IMO

    peace and love to you and yours……………………………………..gene

    #317075
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 21 2012,09:30)
    Mike…….If my reasoning was flawed then show where it was………..


    1.  You said that since Abraham rejoiced to see the day of Jesus, it means Jesus couldn't have existed before that “day”.

    2.  I pointed out that the “day” of our Lord is not yet upon us, but that doesn't mean our Lord doesn't already exist.

    #317134
    kerwin
    Participant

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 21 2012,01:14)
    Kerwin,

    That is all very nice and fine.  It is clear that there is no end to the lengths to which you will go to keep 8:58 from teaching what it SO OBVIOUSLY teaches.

    Tell me……………  does rendering “ego eimi” in John 14:9 as “I have been” change the teaching?  Does it alter anything?  Or, better yet, does the present tense “I am” even make sense in the context?

    What is the USUAL way of saying the following, Kerwin:

    1.  For the past 3 years I AM with you……………

    2.  For the past 3 years I HAVE BEEN with you………..

    The obvious and HONEST answer is #2 – and you know it.  Jesus was wondering why, AFTER ALREADY BEING WITH PHILIP FOR SUCH A LONG TIME, Philip didn't understand certain things.

    He was not saying, “I am RIGHT NOW with you FOR SUCH A LONG TIME that you should know these things.”  

    Therefore, the way that virtually EVERY English translation renders 14:9 conveys the OBVIOUS intent of what Jesus was saying to Philip.

    Like I said, you can play word games and try to find little “alibis” based on idiomatic problems that occur when translating Greek into English if it makes your heart happy.  But you're not fooling anyone here, Kerwin.  We are all fully capable of reading between the lines and figuring out that you are only going to such great and nonsensical lengths because you don't LIKE the teaching in 8:58.

    Tell me once again what TEACHING Jesus was delivering in YOUR interpretation of 8:58.  What was he teaching the Pharisees, in your opinion?


    Mike,

    First, watch out about applying our culture standards to the people of that time and place.

    Second, “I am with you always” is not equivalent to  “I have been with you always”

    The difference is “I have been” leaves the future ambiguous while “I am” does not.   Assuming certain translator are correct,  the question becomes whether Jesus intends to leave the future ambiguous or not when the ancient present indicative is there.  That then become interpretation in addition to translation.  Interpretation is where bias finds an opportunity.

    #317136
    kerwin
    Participant

    Quote (david @ Oct. 21 2012,02:21)

    Quote
    The teaching from Jesus was NOT, I am CURRENTLY with you, so you should know these things.   It was, I HAVE BEEN with you for such a long time that you should BY NOW know these things.  

    Kerwin, what was Jesus saying?  (If we set aside the secret message which may or may not be contained within, what was he saying to those around him?)


    David,

    Literally: Truly, Truly, before Abraham is to become; I am.

    Interpretation: Truly, Truly, before Abraham is to become (the father of many nations); I am (the Seed).

    #317137
    kerwin
    Participant

    To all,

    I have coursework to do that I am putting off, so I will hopefully have less time here and more time for it. I will try to post at least a little.

    #317156
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 22 2012,20:06)

    Quote (david @ Oct. 21 2012,02:21)

    Quote
    The teaching from Jesus was NOT, I am CURRENTLY with you, so you should know these things.   It was, I HAVE BEEN with you for such a long time that you should BY NOW know these things.  

    Kerwin, what was Jesus saying?  (If we set aside the secret message which may or may not be contained within, what was he saying to those around him?)


    David,

    Literally: Truly, Truly, before Abraham is to become; I am.

    Interpretation:  Truly, Truly, before Abraham is to become (the father of many nations); I am (the Seed).


    Kerwin ……….This is correct as applying to that scripture, Jesus was implying he existed (in scripture) before Abraham did, and therefor was greater in importance to those Pharisees then Abraham , who they trusted in was.

    You have presented it correctly Kerwin IMO.

    peace and love to you and yours………………………………gene

    #317235
    kerwin
    Participant

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 22 2012,18:59)

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 22 2012,20:06)

    Quote (david @ Oct. 21 2012,02:21)

    Quote
    The teaching from Jesus was NOT, I am CURRENTLY with you, so you should know these things.   It was, I HAVE BEEN with you for such a long time that you should BY NOW know these things.  

    Kerwin, what was Jesus saying?  (If we set aside the secret message which may or may not be contained within, what was he saying to those around him?)


    David,

    Literally: Truly, Truly, before Abraham is to become; I am.

    Interpretation:  Truly, Truly, before Abraham is to become (the father of many nations); I am (the Seed).


    Kerwin ……….This is correct as applying to that scripture, Jesus was implying he existed (in scripture) before Abraham did, and therefor was greater in importance to those Pharisees then Abraham , who they trusted in was.

    You have presented it correctly Kerwin IMO.

    peace and love to you and yours………………………………gene


    Gene,

    I was interpreting it according to those nations whom are Abraham's children through faith in the Seed who is Jesus Christ.

    If you choose the past tense of to become as an translation of the aorist your understanding works and differs little from my understanding.

    If you use the NWT “I have been” it makes the claim, Jesus will be before Abraham in the future became, ambiguous but not that he is now and was in the past.  

    It appears that the preexistence believers see a “I was” where it does not exist.

    #317272
    terraricca
    Participant

    k

    Quote
    I was interpreting it according to those nations whom are Abraham's children through faith in the Seed who is Jesus Christ.

    and who are those nations ???

    #317293
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 23 2012,18:38)

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 22 2012,18:59)

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 22 2012,20:06)

    Quote (david @ Oct. 21 2012,02:21)

    Quote
    The teaching from Jesus was NOT, I am CURRENTLY with you, so you should know these things.   It was, I HAVE BEEN with you for such a long time that you should BY NOW know these things.  

    Kerwin, what was Jesus saying?  (If we set aside the secret message which may or may not be contained within, what was he saying to those around him?)


    David,

    Literally: Truly, Truly, before Abraham is to become; I am.

    Interpretation:  Truly, Truly, before Abraham is to become (the father of many nations); I am (the Seed).


    Kerwin ……….This is correct as applying to that scripture, Jesus was implying he existed (in scripture) before Abraham did, and therefor was greater in importance to those Pharisees then Abraham , who they trusted in was.

    You have presented it correctly Kerwin IMO.

    peace and love to you and yours………………………………gene


    Gene,

    I was interpreting it according to those nations whom are Abraham's children through faith in the Seed who is Jesus Christ.

    If you choose the past tense of to become as an translation of the aorist your understanding works and differs little from my understanding.

    If you use the NWT “I have been” it makes the claim, Jesus will be before Abraham in the future became, ambiguous but not that he is now and was in the past.  

    It appears that the preexistence believers see a “I was” where it does not exist.


    Kerwin…….I do agree with that also. Jesus was not referencing a Preexistence as regards to him living before Abraham.

    peace and love to you and yours………………………………….gene

    #317294
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 22 2012,02:53)
    “I am with you always” is not equivalent to  “I have been with you always


    Agreed.  Similarly, when Jehovah comissions Moses to go to Pharaoh, there is some discussion over whether Jehovah was saying, “Don't fear, for I AM with you”, or , “Don't fear, for I WILL BE with you”.

    But the same doesn't apply to John 14:9 because of the other perfect tense words used:

    John 14:9 KJV
    Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father;

    “Known”, “seen”, and “seen” are all in the perfect tense – describing things that HAVE already occured in the PAST.

    It is because of these past occurances that translators generally recognize the present tense “eimi” as an idiomatic problem, and render it as perfect tense to match the other perfect tense words in the statement.

    AM I with you so long and still you HAVEN'T KNOWN me?” doesn't make sense, Kerwin.  While, “HAVE I BEEN with you so long and still you HAVEN'T KNOWN me?” does.

    You must lose the word “always” in your above statement, because the teaching wasn't about Jesus ALWAYS being with Philip now and forever.  Instead, it was that Jesus HAD ALREADY BEEN among Philip in the past, and Philip should HAVE KNOWN him by now.

    Likewise, in 8:58, the second aorist “ginomai” indicates a past tense – ie: “before Abraham became“, not “before Abraham becomes“.

    And just like “known” and “seen” in 14:9, the past tense “became” indicates that the present tense “eimi” is an idiomatic problem of translation, and should also be translated as a perfect tense “I have been” – just like virtually every English translation renders the problematic present tense “eimi” in 14:9.

    See Kerwin?  It is because of the past tense words associated with the present tense “eimi” that we must understand “eimi” also as a past or perfect tense, so the context of the teaching flows in a consistent manner.

    The words, “BEFORE Abraham BECAME” match up with “I WAS”, or “I HAVE BEEN”.  Those words do NOT match up with “I AM”.

    Let your bias go, and try to let the scriptures teach you.  Try not to rely on idiomatic loopholes in the translation UNLESS the results render a coherent scriptural teaching.

    In the case of 8:58 and 14:9, your search for such loopholes leads you to a non-coherent bunch of illogical mish-mash.

    #317295
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 23 2012,01:38)

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 22 2012,18:59)

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 22 2012,20:06)
    David,

    Literally: Truly, Truly, before Abraham is to become; I am.

    Interpretation:  Truly, Truly, before Abraham is to become (the father of many nations); I am (the Seed).


    Kerwin ……….This is correct as applying to that scripture, Jesus was implying he existed (in scripture) before Abraham did, and therefor was greater in importance to those Pharisees then Abraham , who they trusted in was.

    You have presented it correctly Kerwin IMO.


    Gene,

    If you choose the past tense of to become as an translation of the aorist your understanding works and differs little from my understanding.


    What?!?  ???

    Kerwin is insisting on the future tense “before Abraham IS TO BECOME“.

    Gene is acknowledging the correct past tense “he EXISTED before Abraham DID“.

    And Kerwin, knowing that Gene is also a non-preexister, now says that Gene's interpretation “differs little” from his.  ???   Wow!  :)

    The fact of the matter is as NETNotes explains it here:

    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. The events described by the aorist tense are classified into a number of categories by grammarians. The most common of these include a view of the action as having begun from a certain point (“inceptive aorist”), or having ended at a certain point (“cumulative aorist”), or merely existing at a certain point (“punctiliar aorist”). The categorization of other cases can be found in Greek reference grammars. The English reader need not concern himself with most of these finer points concerning the aorist tense, since in most cases they cannot be rendered accurately in English translation, being fine points of Greek exegesis only. The common practice of rendering an aorist by a simple English past tense should suffice in most cases.

    Gene also understands it as a simple past tense in 8:58, while Kerwins hopes to buck against the system and all common logic by making the aorist “ginomai” in 8:58 a future tense.

    But Kerwin's future tense theory simply doesn't match the context of the passage:

    John 8:56
    Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”

    The bolded words above were also written in the aorist tense, yet it is clear from the context that, as usual, they should be rendered as a simple English past tense.  (Perhaps Kerwin would like to see these words in the future tense?   ??? )

    John 8:57
    “You are not yet fifty years old,” the Jews said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”

    Uh-oh Kerwin.  The bolded words in this verse were written in the PERFECT tense.  That means you can't buck the system and pretend that “have seen Abraham” could be the future tense “will see Abraham” – not to mention that, once again, the CONTEXT would not allow for such a translation.  In other words, there is no loophole for you to exploit in 8:57, right?

    Now, compare the words of the Jews in verse 57 with YOUR interpretation of verse 58:  before Abraham IS TO BECOME.

    Kerwin, how does the future tense “IS TO BECOME” match the perfect tense “have seen” in verse 57?  

    IT DOESN'T.  Your theory has been solidly debunked.

    #317381
    kerwin
    Participant

    Mike,

    I have heard what net.note states and I have also heard the Prexistarians choice of translation of the the aorist infinitive middle in John 8:58. I have studied the matter and the aorist infinitive verb is simulated in English either as the became”, “came” or the infinitive “to become” as in John 1:12 and Mark 1:17 of the KJV.

    My claim is that the choice to translate the aorist infinitive to a past tense is directed by Prexistarian translation bias. As evidence I point to the fact that the “I am” is present tence” and not the past tence “I was”.

    Gene's interpretation goes with the Prexistariarians words while essentially meaning the same thing as I understand. He appears to be technically incorrect but functionly correct.

    An interesting point, that may or may not be relevant, is that both “I say” and “I am” are present indicatives.

    There is no aorist infinitive in John 8:56 or 57 that I can see. There are aorist.

    Note: It takes me time to do research and my time is otherwise scheduled at this time.

    #317443
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 24 2012,05:12)
    Gene is acknowledging the correct past tense “he EXISTED before Abraham DID“.


    Mike……..I believe Jesus preexisted before Abraham not as a Sentential Being, But preexisted in the Plan and will of God as written in scriptures. Jesus was a Prophesied Son of Man to come into existence by a human Berth process just as all Mankind did with the exception of Adam and Eve. IMO

    Again Mike, Jesus did not preexist his berth on this earth as any kind of being in the past. IMO

    peace and love to you and yours………………………………..gene

    #317452
    terraricca
    Participant

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 24 2012,21:20)

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 24 2012,05:12)
    Gene is acknowledging the correct past tense “he EXISTED before Abraham DID“.


    Mike……..I believe Jesus preexisted before Abraham not as a Sentential Being, But preexisted in the Plan and will of God as written in scriptures. Jesus was a Prophesied Son of Man to come into existence by a  human Berth process just as all Mankind did with the exception of Adam and Eve. IMO

    Again Mike,  Jesus did not preexist his berth on this earth as any kind of being in the past. IMO

    peace and love to you and yours………………………………..gene


    G

    only men dreams God almighty does not need to dream he just do things as he pleases,

    and you never answered the questions that was put before you in the PREEXISTANCE OF CHRIST and so keep repeating over and over one single statement what his your opinion .

    and your opinion his not scriptural ,right ??? yes

Viewing 20 posts - 1,181 through 1,200 (of 1,323 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2024 Heaven Net

Navigation

© 1999 - 2023 - Heaven Net
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account