-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I and the Father are ONE
- Thread starter Fool
- Start date
Brian2
Veteran Member
I have heard people say it implies the self existent one who has always existed.
lostwanderingsoul
Well-Known Member
I do not know anything about you personally but let's just say for a minute that you are a married man. Do you think it would be correct to say that you and your wife are one family? Mr. Jones and Mrs Jones. Two completely separate people but one family. Jesus and the Father are two separate beings but one family. When you say father and son don't you immediately see the idea of a family?
Brian2
Veteran Member
I would call the Father and Son distinct instead of separate but yes the idea of a family can be a picture that would come to mind.
cataway
Well-Known Member
what about the apostles, were they to be one?
Eyes to See
Well-Known Member
God's statement in Exodus 3:14 implies more than what many think. Took the time to answer the question here in a video reply. Have only done 2 of them. And haven't done one in a long time. Thought I would do another one.
Talk me through the process by which someone or something becomes self-existent. I've never heard a clear view of the concept.
No. I am that I am is a deliberate evasion of the question, meaning only the same thing as I am me. It tells you nothing. The idea that knowing someone's name can give you power over them is widespread and ancient, and may be an element here. The idea is the engine of stories like Rumpelstiltskin.
This is the Station of the Messenger. In the Baha'i Writings, it is Bahá’u’lláh that was conversing with Moses through the Burning Bush.
The I AM is the Holy Spirit that talks through God's Messenger in each age, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End, the Alpha and the Omega.
Regards Tony
Brian2
Veteran Member
John 17:20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.
Yes all believers are being brought to complete unity.
Already we are one in the sense of all being united in spirit to Christ and being one body, one church, with the one Head.
1Cor 6:16 Or don’t you know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.” 17But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with Him in spirit.
Surely this includes the anointed class (144,000) and all other JWs. So all are united to Christ in spirit, so all have the Spirit of Christ.
its not exactly a name, its a verb, an action, being intrinsic to the nature of all things as one being
Last edited:
It seems to be universally translated as "I am that I am" which I take to mean "I am that which I am" ─ a total evasion of the question. If you have a more precise translation that actually addresses the question (what is God's name?) I'd be pleased to hear it. What did [his] ma and pa call [him]?
the word is a verb, simply I AM, or being that being, or to be, become.
so then the things that become, or will be, arose from it's beingness
we first get a glimpse of it's being in genesis 1 as the light on the first day.
subsequently everything created arose from this light and this is why it is said you are the light of the world, a city set on a hill cannot be hid.
Last edited:
There's an old Scottish expression, I hear ye, which fits well here.
Brian2
Veteran Member
It is interesting that the New World Translation has changed the translation of Ex 3:14 since my edition where it says "I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be". This seems a better translation than the newer edition which is "I will become what I choose to become" since God does not choose to become anything, God is what God is and God does not change. Nevertheless I can see the reasoning behind the newer translation that God was not speaking about what He is with His name but about what He would do, as in "I will do what I choose to do".
"I shall be what I shall be" (even if we put in the "prove to" which I don't think is in the text) does mean "I am what I am", which seems to be how 99% of translators translate the verse.
It is possible that the New World Translation translates Ex 3:14 to hide the use of "I am" at John 8:58 when the Jews wanted to stone Him no doubt for blasphemy of God's name. Interestingly the NWT translates John 8:58 as "I have been" instead of "I am" and so the Jews had no legal basis for wanting to stone Jesus, they would not have wanted to stone Him just for saying that He existed before Abraham lived. (again the JW translation of John 8:58 is in the 1% who translate it that way)
Maybe most translators have been wrong over the centuries or have been trying to hide the truth of what the Bible actually says, and the JWs could have it right but the NWT translation committee seems to have consisted of people who did not know Greek or Hebrew.
Brian2
Veteran Member
It means that that someone has always existed and did not come into being. So someone or something does not become self existent, they just are self existent.
Brian2
Veteran Member
In the 2nd half of Ex 3:14 God says to Moses to tell the Israelites that "I am" has sent him to them.
Eyes to See
Well-Known Member
The idea that God does not "chose to become" is silly. Think about it. Jehovah lived eternally in the past without having created. Then he decided to become a Creator and created things. God always has been. Then one day he decided to become a Creator. That obviously encompassed billions of years since the physical universe came into existence, but the idea that he cannot chose to become what he wants to become limits God, as if he was forced to create us? He didn't chose to create? He had no choice in the matter? Where is the logic in your statement?
Brian2
Veteran Member
I think you are basing what you just said on the JW idea that God does not know the future-------------which does not seem to be scripturally correct imo.
iows God has always known that He would create.
Parallel Verses Acts 15:18
King James Version
Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.
Darby Bible Translation
known from eternity.
World English Bible
All his works are known to God from eternity.'
Young's Literal Translation
'Known from the ages to God are all His works;