HelpMe
·´sociopathic meanderer`·
1The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said I am the man, and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus statement, i.e., I am. The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as I am and the other as I am the man, is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as I am (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying I am did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God.The phrase I am occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as I am he or some equivalent (I am heMark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. It is IMatt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. I am the one I claim to beJohn 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as I am only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated I am he or I am the one, like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ was speaking of himself as the Messiah of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament.
While the Greek phrase in John does mean I am, the Hebrew phrase in Exodus actually means to be or to become. In other words God is saying, I will be what I will be.*see as many translations as you can find, many will not read in ex3:14 "..i am..".also, keep in mind that ex3:14 was an 'angel' speaking on behalf of [yhwh] and not himself.
It is believed that John.8:59 further supports the position that YAHushua is the "I AM." Why else would the Jews try to stone him? He obviously blasphemed in the eyes of the Jews, a stoneable offense. Or did he? Is the mere utterance of "ego eimi" a blasphemy? Does the use of "ego eimi" automatically identify the speaker as YAHWEH, the I AM?
Several individuals aside from YAHushua used "ego eimi" as well. In Lu.1:19, the angel Gabriel said, "Ego eimi Gabriel." In John.9:9, the blind man whose sight was restored by YAHushua said, "Ego eimi." In Acts 10:21, Peter said, "Behold, ego eimi (I am) he whom ye seek." Obviously, the mere use of "ego eimi" does not equate one to the "I Am" of Ex.3:14. But perhaps the Saviors use of it was somehow different. After all, he came down from heaven.
If, in fact, YAHushua spoke Greek to the Jews (which I doubt), he used the phrase "ego eimi" at least twenty times and yet, in only one instance did the Jews seek to stone him (John.8:58). YAHushua said, "I am the bread of life" to a large crowd, in John.6:35 & 48, yet no one opposed him. In verse 41, the Jews murmured because he said, "I am (ego eimi) the bread which came down from heaven." But in verse 42, the Jews questioned only the phrase, "I came down from heaven" and ignored "ego eimi." The same is true of verses 51 & 52.
In John.8:12, 18, 24, & 28, YAHushua used "ego eimi" with Pharisees present (vs.13) and yet, no stoning. He, again, used it four times in John.10:7, 9, 11, & 14 with no stoning.
The point about Mt.26 is, why would false witnesses be sought if they had true witnesses in attendance? The arresting officers heard YAHushua say "Ego eimi." They could have stoned him right there in the garden for blasphemy, but they didn't. They could have reported the supposed blasphemy to the council, but they didn't. Why not? Because it wasn't blasphemy, nor was it a stoneable offense. He was merely identifying himself as "I am YAHushua of Nazareth."
This brings us back to John.8:58. Why did the Jews seek to stone him on that occasion? The context of John.8 shows that YAHushua;
1Accused the Jews of "judging after the flesh" (vs.15).
2Said they would die in their sins (vss.21,24).
3Implied they were in bondage (vss.32,33).
4Said they were servants of sin (vs.34).
5Said they were out to kill him (vss. 37,40).
6Implied they were spiritually deaf (vs.43,47).
7Said their father was the devil (vs.44).
8Said they were not of Elohim (vs.47).
9Accused them of dishonoring him (vs.49).
10Accused them of not knowing YAHWEH (vs.55).
11Accused them of lying (vs.55).
Aside from that, the Jews misunderstood YAHushua's words leading them to believe;
1That he accused them of being born of fornication (vs.41).
2YAHushua had a devil (vs.52).
3That he was exalting himself above Abraham (vs.53).
4That he saw Abraham (vs.56).
YAHushua's words in verse 58 were the culmination of an encounter that was so offensive to the Jews that they couldn't restrain themselves anymore. They simply couldn't take it anymore so they sought to stone him, not because of two simple words, "ego eimi," but because he was making himself out to be greater than their beloved father Abraham. They sought to stone him illegally.Keep in mind that be exalting him to the throne of the almighty, you are agreeing with the jew's whom opposed our savior.
Then in verse 56 YAHushua says Abraham "rejoiced to see my day." He did not say he saw Abraham as the Jews misunderstood. How did Abraham see YAHushua's day?
Heb.11:13 says, "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth."
They saw YAHushua's day of the reigning King, by faith.
YAHushua then resumed the context of his initial conversation by saying, "Before Abraham was, I am." "Was" is from the Greek "ginomai" meaning, "to come into being, ... to arise." What YAHushua actually meant was, "Before Abraham comes into being (at his resurrection unto eternal life), I will." Confirmation of this understanding comes to us from Figures of Speech Used in the Bible by E.W. Bullinger, pgs. 521,522. Under the heading "Heterosis (Of Tenses)," subheading "The Present for the Future," he writes, "This is put when the design is to show that some thing will certainly come to pass, and is spoken of as though it were already present."
Included among this list of examples of Heterosis is John.8:58. In other words, although properly written, "Before Abraham comes to be, I am," with "I am" in the simple present tense, the meaning points to the future, "Before Abraham comes to be, I will."
Some people believe this verse should be translated, "Before Abraham existed, I existed." However, neither Greek verb is in the perfect tense (past tense). "Was" is in the aorist tense and "am" is in the present tense. Let's look a little closer at "was." Concerning the aorist tense, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament by Dana and Mantey says, "It has time relations only in the indicative, where it is past and hence augmented." The verb ginomai (was) is in the infinitive, not the indicative. Therefore it should not be translated in the past tense. This same reference says of the infinitive, "The aorist infinitive denotes that which is eventual or particular, ..." Abraham will eventually resurrect which is why the Greek uses the aorist infinitive. The meaning is, "Before Abraham comes to be" not "Before Abraham was (or existed)."
---------------------------------------------------------------
2jesus, does not identify the bible as his word, but as his fathers.this in no way makes them equals for others throughout the bible have given this same warning
---------------------------------------------------------------
3Had YAHWEH given YAHushua the power to ressurect? YAHushua said,
"I can of my own self do nothing," "I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things," "the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works" (John.5:30a; 8:28; 14:10).
consider 1th4:16.the voice of an archangel is scripturally doing what you unscripturally claim the almighty cannot delegate to another being.
---------------------------------------------------------------
4parallels prove little to nothing, consider the titles `king of kings`=Nebudchanezzar,'elohim'=men/'angels'/the most high,'master(lord)'=men/'angels'/the most high .ect.
---------------------------------------------------------------
continued below
While the Greek phrase in John does mean I am, the Hebrew phrase in Exodus actually means to be or to become. In other words God is saying, I will be what I will be.*see as many translations as you can find, many will not read in ex3:14 "..i am..".also, keep in mind that ex3:14 was an 'angel' speaking on behalf of [yhwh] and not himself.
It is believed that John.8:59 further supports the position that YAHushua is the "I AM." Why else would the Jews try to stone him? He obviously blasphemed in the eyes of the Jews, a stoneable offense. Or did he? Is the mere utterance of "ego eimi" a blasphemy? Does the use of "ego eimi" automatically identify the speaker as YAHWEH, the I AM?
Several individuals aside from YAHushua used "ego eimi" as well. In Lu.1:19, the angel Gabriel said, "Ego eimi Gabriel." In John.9:9, the blind man whose sight was restored by YAHushua said, "Ego eimi." In Acts 10:21, Peter said, "Behold, ego eimi (I am) he whom ye seek." Obviously, the mere use of "ego eimi" does not equate one to the "I Am" of Ex.3:14. But perhaps the Saviors use of it was somehow different. After all, he came down from heaven.
If, in fact, YAHushua spoke Greek to the Jews (which I doubt), he used the phrase "ego eimi" at least twenty times and yet, in only one instance did the Jews seek to stone him (John.8:58). YAHushua said, "I am the bread of life" to a large crowd, in John.6:35 & 48, yet no one opposed him. In verse 41, the Jews murmured because he said, "I am (ego eimi) the bread which came down from heaven." But in verse 42, the Jews questioned only the phrase, "I came down from heaven" and ignored "ego eimi." The same is true of verses 51 & 52.
In John.8:12, 18, 24, & 28, YAHushua used "ego eimi" with Pharisees present (vs.13) and yet, no stoning. He, again, used it four times in John.10:7, 9, 11, & 14 with no stoning.
The point about Mt.26 is, why would false witnesses be sought if they had true witnesses in attendance? The arresting officers heard YAHushua say "Ego eimi." They could have stoned him right there in the garden for blasphemy, but they didn't. They could have reported the supposed blasphemy to the council, but they didn't. Why not? Because it wasn't blasphemy, nor was it a stoneable offense. He was merely identifying himself as "I am YAHushua of Nazareth."
This brings us back to John.8:58. Why did the Jews seek to stone him on that occasion? The context of John.8 shows that YAHushua;
1Accused the Jews of "judging after the flesh" (vs.15).
2Said they would die in their sins (vss.21,24).
3Implied they were in bondage (vss.32,33).
4Said they were servants of sin (vs.34).
5Said they were out to kill him (vss. 37,40).
6Implied they were spiritually deaf (vs.43,47).
7Said their father was the devil (vs.44).
8Said they were not of Elohim (vs.47).
9Accused them of dishonoring him (vs.49).
10Accused them of not knowing YAHWEH (vs.55).
11Accused them of lying (vs.55).
Aside from that, the Jews misunderstood YAHushua's words leading them to believe;
1That he accused them of being born of fornication (vs.41).
2YAHushua had a devil (vs.52).
3That he was exalting himself above Abraham (vs.53).
4That he saw Abraham (vs.56).
YAHushua's words in verse 58 were the culmination of an encounter that was so offensive to the Jews that they couldn't restrain themselves anymore. They simply couldn't take it anymore so they sought to stone him, not because of two simple words, "ego eimi," but because he was making himself out to be greater than their beloved father Abraham. They sought to stone him illegally.Keep in mind that be exalting him to the throne of the almighty, you are agreeing with the jew's whom opposed our savior.
Then in verse 56 YAHushua says Abraham "rejoiced to see my day." He did not say he saw Abraham as the Jews misunderstood. How did Abraham see YAHushua's day?
Heb.11:13 says, "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth."
They saw YAHushua's day of the reigning King, by faith.
YAHushua then resumed the context of his initial conversation by saying, "Before Abraham was, I am." "Was" is from the Greek "ginomai" meaning, "to come into being, ... to arise." What YAHushua actually meant was, "Before Abraham comes into being (at his resurrection unto eternal life), I will." Confirmation of this understanding comes to us from Figures of Speech Used in the Bible by E.W. Bullinger, pgs. 521,522. Under the heading "Heterosis (Of Tenses)," subheading "The Present for the Future," he writes, "This is put when the design is to show that some thing will certainly come to pass, and is spoken of as though it were already present."
Included among this list of examples of Heterosis is John.8:58. In other words, although properly written, "Before Abraham comes to be, I am," with "I am" in the simple present tense, the meaning points to the future, "Before Abraham comes to be, I will."
Some people believe this verse should be translated, "Before Abraham existed, I existed." However, neither Greek verb is in the perfect tense (past tense). "Was" is in the aorist tense and "am" is in the present tense. Let's look a little closer at "was." Concerning the aorist tense, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament by Dana and Mantey says, "It has time relations only in the indicative, where it is past and hence augmented." The verb ginomai (was) is in the infinitive, not the indicative. Therefore it should not be translated in the past tense. This same reference says of the infinitive, "The aorist infinitive denotes that which is eventual or particular, ..." Abraham will eventually resurrect which is why the Greek uses the aorist infinitive. The meaning is, "Before Abraham comes to be" not "Before Abraham was (or existed)."
---------------------------------------------------------------
2jesus, does not identify the bible as his word, but as his fathers.this in no way makes them equals for others throughout the bible have given this same warning
---------------------------------------------------------------
3Had YAHWEH given YAHushua the power to ressurect? YAHushua said,
"I can of my own self do nothing," "I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things," "the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works" (John.5:30a; 8:28; 14:10).
consider 1th4:16.the voice of an archangel is scripturally doing what you unscripturally claim the almighty cannot delegate to another being.
---------------------------------------------------------------
4parallels prove little to nothing, consider the titles `king of kings`=Nebudchanezzar,'elohim'=men/'angels'/the most high,'master(lord)'=men/'angels'/the most high .ect.
---------------------------------------------------------------
continued below
why is he still serving someone after he's back in heaven? 
