Before Abraham Existed I AM

[ICHTHUS]

Again, even the rejection of the trinity is taught in the New Testament, because the word trinity is not mentioned in the bible.

The term Trinity is a theological one, like Incarnation, and Substitutionary Atonement, and Perseverance of the Saints, etc, etc These terms are used to define Bible Truth.

The Trinity teaches that there is only One God, which is, as in Romans 1:20, where the term "Godhead" (KJV), is in the Greek, θειότης, which denotes the "Divine Nature". The Bible also Teaches, that there are Three distinct Persons, Who are equally called GOD, Who are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. One way to see this, is 1x1x1, which = 1; and not, 1+1+1, which is 3. Jesus says, for example, in John 14, "I am in the Father and the Father is in Me" (14:11), and that "I and the Father We are one", etc. which is what 1x1x1 says. The term Trinity is the best way humanly to describe something that is not even describable. It should not be rejected simply because it is a human term, because it does teach Bible Truth.

 

[popsthebuilder]

To believe that the God of the Bible is not Three distinct Persons: God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, Who are 100% equally YHWH in their absolute Deity; is a belief in a false God, Who cannot save anyone.

The outright rejection of this as Taught in the Bible (not if someone says that they cannot understand it, and want to know), shows that the person is not truly born-again, and therefore cannot go to heaven.

Jesus' words of Himself, I believe also apply to the Holy Spirit, "I said therefore to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.” (John 8:24). Together with verse 58, it is clear that Jesus Christ is referring to Exodus 3:14-15, where He gives His Name to Moses. To deny/reject this Truth, is to reject the real God of the Bible, and a belief in a false god.

You'll have to show me where the bible teaches that one isn't a believer if they don't believe in a coeternal co equal trinity.

 

[popsthebuilder]

The term Trinity is a theological one, like Incarnation, and Substitutionary Atonement, and Perseverance of the Saints, etc, etc These terms are used to define Bible Truth.

The Trinity teaches that there is only One God, which is, as in Romans 1:20, where the term "Godhead" (KJV), is in the Greek, θειότης, which denotes the "Divine Nature". The Bible also Teaches, that there are Three distinct Persons, Who are equally called GOD, Who are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. One way to see this, is 1x1x1, which = 1; and not, 1+1+1, which is 3. Jesus says, for example, in John 14, "I am in the Father and the Father is in Me" (14:11), and that "I and the Father We are one", etc. which is what 1x1x1 says. The term Trinity is the best way humanly to describe something that is not even describable. It should not be rejected simply because it is a human term, because it does teach Bible Truth.

So you can't even describe it, but claim it must be believed or else we are damned to eternal torment?

So do we have to believe Christ's body was/ is GOD almighty? Why is it not enough in your opinion to believe that Christ was anointed by GOD with HIS Spirit?

 

[CherubRam]

I have shown in the OP, that the Hebrew verb אֶהְיֶה is use in the present, which is rightly translated as I AM.

The LXX rightly uses the Greek "ειμι", which is in the present tense, and used countless times by our AM. "Ἐγώ εἰμι", can indeed be translated as "I ever exist", or "I always exist", which is seen from the present tense. This is also clear in the use of I AM, which is the reading of the greater majority of English Bible translations. Which is also the reading of the Jewish Tankah, "I AM THAT I AM" (1917ed)

Interesting, that the Jews in the 2nd century, who saw that the Christians used this passage in Exodus 3, for the Deity of Jesus Christ as in John 8:58, used “εσομαι", which is the future.

"I am" is a INTERPRETATION and "I existed" is a TRANSLATION.

 

[shroom]

The term Trinity is the best way humanly to describe something that is not even describable.

The Trinitarian God is not describable. The God of the Bible is.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings ICHTHUS,

They very clearly understood Jesus here to claim the Divine Name, "I AM" for Himself. The Jews understood Jesus to refer to the Book of Exodus, where Moses asks God for His Name, so that he could tell the children of Israel Who had sent him to them. To which God replied, "Eheyeh asher Eheyeh" (Exodus 3:14), which is best rendered into English as "I am who I am". Attempts to weaken these words to, "I will be who I will be", etc, so that they don't apply to Jesus Christ, are quite wrong.

I consider John 8:58 is part of the theme of whether or not Jesus is the Christ and should be translated "I am he", the same as John 8:24,28 and John 4:26. I agree with the translation "I will be" for Exodus 3:14 as per Tyndale, the RV and RSV margins and AB Davidson.

The Greek version of the Old Testament, the Septuagint (LXX), which was completed some 150 years before the Birth of Jesus Christ

I consider the LXX a poor translation of the Hebrew of Exodus 3:14.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[ICHTHUS]

Greetings ICHTHUS,

I consider John 8:58 is part of the theme of whether or not Jesus is the Christ and should be translated "I am he", the same as John 8:24,28 and John 4:26. I agree with the translation "I will be" for Exodus 3:14 as per Tyndale, the RV and RSV margins and AB Davidson.

I consider the LXX a poor translation of the Hebrew of Exodus 3:14.

Kind regards
Trevor

Firstly, there is no HE in the Greek text, and it can only read I AM (ἐγὼ εἰμί), as in I Always Exist, as the Greek verb, εἰμί , is in the present, continuance.

Secondly, AB Davidson was a Liberal theologian, so his bias is always there! His Hebrew for Exodus 3:14 reflects this bias.

Thirdly, you say "I will be", but surely, it is the continued presense of Yahweh with the Children of Isarel, that is their assurance, and not something in the future? I have shown in the OP, where the Hebrew “’ehyeh”, is used in the Old Testament, as the PRESENT tense. If the Hebrew did mean "I will be", then there would have been no reason for Aquila and Theodotion, in the 2nd century, who were opponents of Christians, to translate in Greek, “εσομαι (ὃς) εσομαι”, using the future? They also perverted, for theological reasons, Isaiah 7:14, where the LXX reads, "παρθένος", by using "νεᾶνις" (young woman).

Fourthly, the LXX was the work of the best Hebrew scholars at the time, so there can be no doubt that it is an excellent work.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Firstly, there is no HE in the Greek text, and it can only read I AM (ἐγὼ εἰμί), as in I Always Exist, as the Greek verb, εἰμί , is in the present, continuance.

Secondly, AB Davidson was a Liberal theologian, so his bias is always there! His Hebrew for Exodus 3:14 reflects this bias.

Thirdly, you say "I will be", but surely, it is the continued presense of Yahweh with the Children of Isarel, that is their assurance, and not something in the future? I have shown in the OP, where the Hebrew “’ehyeh”, is used in the Old Testament, as the PRESENT tense. If the Hebrew did mean "I will be", then there would have been no reason for Aquila and Theodotion, in the 2nd century, who were opponents of Christians, to translate in Greek, “εσομαι (ὃς) εσομαι”, using the future? They also perverted, for theological reasons, Isaiah 7:14, where the LXX reads, "παρθένος", by using "νεᾶνις" (young woman).

Fourthly, the LXX was the work of the best Hebrew scholars at the time, so there can be no doubt that it is an excellent work.

Of course He would say that if He was filled with the Spirit of GOD and given every word to speak by GOD.

 

[ICHTHUS]

"I am" is a INTERPRETATION and "I existed" is a TRANSLATION.

do you think that you know better than the Jews themselves?

"And the Lord said unto Mosheh, He who spake, and the world was; who spake, and all things were. And He said, This thou shalt say to the sons of Israel, I AM HE WHO IS, AND WHO WILL BE, hath sent me unto you"

Targum Jonathan on Exodus 3:14

And the Lord said unto Mosheh, He who spake, and the world was; who spake, and all things were. And He said, This thou shalt say to the sons of Israel, I AM...

www.sefaria.org

"And God said unto Moses: 'I AM THAT I AM'; and He said: 'Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel: I AM hath sent me unto you."

Exodus 3 / Hebrew - English Bible / Mechon-Mamre

 

[ICHTHUS]

Of course He would say that if He was filled with the Spirit of GOD and given every word to speak by GOD.

Jesus Christ could NOT say I AM with clear reference to Exodus 3:14, if He is not Yahweh! It would be the highest blasphemy. You continue to use your strawman agguments as you cannot accept that Jesus Christ IS Almighty God!

 

[popsthebuilder]

Jesus Christ could NOT say I AM with clear reference to Exodus 3:14, if He is not Yahweh! It would be the highest blasphemy. You continue to use your strawman agguments as you cannot accept that Jesus Christ IS Almighty God!

Straw man argument? Really? Why not show me what I said that you think is a straw man argument? Go ahead and show what I've stayed that is not biblical.

As if GOD didn't give Him every word to speak. As if He wasn't well pleasing to GOD, and therefore was anointed with the Spirit of GOD to the extent of His vessels capacity. As if the body of Christ is GOD as opposed to the Spirit of Christ.

Refute anything I have said here. Anything.

 

[ICHTHUS]

Refute anything I have said here. Anything

show from John 1:1, that Jesus Christ is not COEQUAL to God the Father!