John 8:58 vs Exodus 3:14 "I AM" vs "I am"

[Shermana]

1. Why do so many people capitalize "I AM" in John 8:58 and why do they feel it deserves the same concept as if the Tetragrammaton was being translated as "Lord"? Do they capitalize "I am" when they quote Exodus 3:14? If so, why? Is Jesus saying his name is I AM? Or is he just declaring himself to exist? Shouldn't only the NAME be given capitalization? If not, when or how did this rule start of capitalizating "I AM"?

2. Does Exodus 3:14 really say "I am" or is it "I shall be"?

3. Is Jesus saying his NAME is "I am/I shall be" or is he declaring that he existed since before Abraham? If he's not saying a NAME, then is it as if Moses was receiving a name to give to the Israelites? Should the two be compared?

4. What was meant in Jeremiah "I knew you before the womb?"

5. Do all Greek Septuagints have the same translation for Exodus 3:14? If not, which one is the closest to the Hebrew?

[JehovahsWitness]

#1 Why do so many people capitalize "I AM" in John 8:58

This is an example of twisting a translation to fit a particular theology.

Do they capitalize "I am" when they quote Exodus 3:14

Yes, most do, however, in John 5, Jesus was not using the verb 'to be' as a title but rather normally in a phrase to explain his existence prior to Abraham.


#QUESTION: So how does "εγω ειμι" (ego eimi) rightly translate? Actually both "I am" and "I have been" are legitimate translations of the Greek εγω ειμι, ego eimi.

"Ego eimi" is literally simple present. However the usage of Jesus is similar to what many scholars refer to as the “historical present.� meaning that Jesus places his present tense usage in a past tense context by using the Greek word “prin�, meaning “before�. Jesus said “before Abraham� came to be existing "[lit] I am" In this situation English would use the present perfect tense ('I have been').

J. H. Moulton's Grammar of New Testament Greek states:

• "The Present which indicates the continuance of an action during the past and up to the moment of speaking is virtually the same as Perfective, the only difference being that the action is conceived as still in progress (Burton § 17).It is frequent in the NT: Luke 2:48; 13:7; 15:29; Jn 5:6; 8:58; 14:9; 15:27; Acts 15:21; 26:31; 2 Cor.12:19,2 Ti.3:18; 2 Pt.3:4; 1 Jn 2:9;3:8." (Note that Moulton includes John 8:58 in this category).

further reading
http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.co ... x-314.html
http://sahidicinsight.blogspot.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JWquestio ... ssage/1712
http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... art-1.html
http://onlytruegod.org/defense/john8.58files.htm
(non-witness site)
http://godandson.reslight.net/archives/1030.html

Discussions (blogs)
http://www.scripturaltruths.com/blog/?p=132
http://www.scripturaltruths.com/blog/?p=126

2. Does Exodus 3:14 really say "I am" or is it "I shall be"?

#QUESTION: How should "ehyah asher ehyeh" properly be rendered?

God's reply to Moses question in Ex 3: 13 in hebrew was : ’Eh·yeh′ ’Asher′ ’Eh·yeh′ (Hebrew: �היה �שר �היה) Some translations render this as “I AM THAT I AM.� However, it is to be noted that the Hebrew verb ha·yah′ (Strongs 1961), from which the word ’Eh·yeh′ is drawn, does not mean simply “be.� Rather, it means “become,� or “prove to be.� Strongs Hebrew lexicon says that this means "to exist, i.e. be or become, come to pass"

Also "Ehyeh" is in the imperfect state, first person singular, so it would be “I shall become�; or, “I shall prove to be.�

Rotherhams trys to reflect this meaning by rendering verse 14 “I Will Become whatsoever I please".

Note: The Targum Onkelos leaves the phrase untranslated and is so quoted in the Talmud (B. B. 73a).

Further reading
http://sahidicinsight.blogspot.com/2009 ... hidic.html

**Basic Hebrew.

להיות is the infinitive verb (pa'al form) of "to be". Any verb in the pa'al form (simple reflexive) that ends with ות in the infinitive contains ה as the third letter of it's root. Or, in this case, the shoresh (root) is actually היה. Now, for future tense we prefix such verbs. For "We will be" we prefix with a נ, or נהיה. For "He will be" we prefix with a י making it יהיה. And for first-person singular we prefix the verb with an � making it �היה, or "ahyeh" or "I will be.

If I want to say "I will be there tomorrow" I would write "�היה ש� מחר". (ahyeh shahm machar). There is no word in Hebrew for saying "I am" with nothing after it. You can use the personal pronoun followed by another word (I am here, I am alive, etc) but not alone.
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/archi ... 11799.html

"Notice that we do not have in v. 14 ANI ASHER ANI but a paranomastic use of the verb HAYAH. This suggests on the one hand that we ought not to translate the phrase 'I am that I am' as if it were an ontological statement, a statement about God's being, but rather we seem to be being told something about God's activity or self-revelation in his activity. The focus then is not on God's being a self-contained, self-existent being . . . God then is not speaking about what God is in the divine essence, but rather what Yahweh is or will be in relationship to his people--in his self-revelation." - Ben Witherington Laura M Ice, The Shadow of the Almighty: Father, Son and Spirit in Biblical
Perspective (pp. 10-11)


Short Youtube slideshow

Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah

Further reading
http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogs ... -name.html
http://fosterheologicalreflections.blog ... s-314.html

[Shermana]

Hey JW, just out of curiosity, why did you donate to Theoposis on the Acts 28:6 thread? You disagree? If you have some Greek knowledge that works in his favor, maybe you can go over there and put some civility into it.

I kinda figured you'd see eye to eye here, is it because what I'm saying goes against the NWT? Do you really think that "god of" means "God?"