2 edits
-Removed-Actually Jesus was claiming nothing of the sort. How do i know Jesus was claiming
nothing of the sort? because i know what he states for i have studied the Greek text.
Do you? no you do not, all you have is your dogma. Feel free to ignore the text when
matters of Christ's supposed divinity comes to the fore, it would be nothing if not
consistent. In fact, i dont believe you actually know what Jesus was claiming, do you.
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieFind a translation that supports your claims.
It is clear that you have not the slightest idea what you are talking about, here are
your words AGAIN,
Conclusion: One or two words being different, out of context, is hardly a basis for an
argument.
what words are you talking about? you dont know, do you. what context are you
referring to, you dont know do you. In fact, its not even u know so much about it, at least
enough to tell others what they know and do not know.
"Before Abraham was born, I am."
is different from
"Before Robbie called me out, tomtom slaphead I am."
I;
pron.
Used to refer to oneself as speaker or writer.
am;
v.
First person singular present indicative of be.
Conclusion: "I(subject) am(predicate)" is a complete sentence and thus it is not the construct of the sentence in error but robbie whom is in error.
4 edits
Originally posted by tomtom232well duh, there is a greater grammatical structure than the simple verb 'to be', but you
Find a translation that supports your claims.
"Before Abraham was born, I am."
is different from
"Before Robbie called me out, tomtom slaphead I am."
I;
pron.
Used to refer to oneself as speaker or writer.
am;
v.
First person singular present indicative of be.
Conclusion: "I(subject) am(predicate)" is a complete sentence and thus it is not the construct of the sentence in error but robbie whom is in error.
dont know that, because you dont know what you are talking about. Greek is not
English, just saying. You may do better if you actually look at the Greek construct,
there are two verbs in the phrase, 'before Abraham came to be, i am', both linked, by
a preposition. You really aught to stop concluding things which are nothing of the sort.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYes, Greek is not English. You cannot accurately translate Greek to English without great understanding of both languages.
well duh, there is a greater grammatical structure than the simple verb to be but you
dont know trhat, because you dont know what you are talking about. Greek is not
English, just saying. You may do better if you actually look at the Greek construct,
there are two verbs in the phrase, 'before Abraham came to be, i am, both linked, by a
preposition.
there are two verbs in the phrase, 'before Abraham came to be, i am, both linked, by a
preposition.
Whats yer point? You could say, "I am before Abraham" or, "before Abraham, I am."
"Came to be" is independent of "I am before."
4 edits
Originally posted by tomtom232yeah right, in isolation.
Yes, Greek is not English. You cannot accurately translate Greek to English without great understanding of both languages.
[b]there are two verbs in the phrase, 'before Abraham came to be, i am, both linked, by a
preposition.
Whats yer point? You could say, "I am before Abraham" or, "before Abraham, I am."
"Came to be" is independent of "I am before."[/b]
In most sentences where we see a past tense verb and a present tense verb, we
would assume that the action of the past verb is earlier in time than the action of
the present verb, (John wrote the book that I am reading. 'Wrote', happened before
'am reading'.) This is true in most cases in Greek as well as English. But in John
8:58, this is not the case, and we know its not the case because the preposition
'prin', 'before', coordinates the relationship between the two actions represented by
the verbs. This preposition tells us that the action of the verb in the present tense
'am', happened (or began to happen or was already happening) 'before', the action of
the verb in the past tense (came to be)
Professor Jason David Bedhun, Truth in translation, accuracy and bias in English
translations of the New Testament, page 105
A quick glance at Smyths Greek grammar reveals that what we are dealing with in
John 8:48 is a well known Greek idiom. The pertinent entry is section 1885
on verb tenses, which states, 'the present. when accompanied by a definite or
indefinite expression of past time, is used to express an action begun in the past
and continued in the present. The 'progressive perfect', is often used in translation.
Thus . . . . 'I have been long (and am still) wondering' . I think you can see
immediately that this entry applies to John 8:58, where the present verb . 'eimi', is
accompanied by an expression of the past tense, 'prin Abraam genesthai'.
Professor Jason David Bedhun, Truth in translation, accuracy and bias in English
translations of the New Testament, page 106
not so, i know that when someone asks me, 'what do you do'?, i do not reply, 'before
i was a submarine commander Robbie the chess player, i am.' Did it take a great
understanding of English grammar to know that? No, it is self evident. The
translators of the Greek text in producing the translation in the way they do have
ignored basic English grammatical construct.
1 edit
Originally posted by sumydidthen why dont you go do something less boring instead, like, lets see, plasticine, or
Oh no. Another thread filled with arguments over nouns, verbs, predicates, prepositions, present participles, "I know more Greek than you do" ...
😴
lego, or play with your dolls or start your own enthralling thread.
