trinity

[David1701]

11 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings Roar and David1701,

I was a bit overwhelmed by the amount of material you referenced. I had a browse at the first five recommended articles, but again these contained too much matter to properly consider. These were:

Sam Schlorff's quick answer, The Trinity and you

James Arlandson's article A Brief Explanation of the Trinity

John Gilchrist's chapter on The Doctrine of the Trinity

Mr. Anderson's booklet The Trinity

Ernest Hahn's essay Our Savior God, How Great You Are! — Introducing the Muslim to the Christian Doctrine of the Holy Trinity

I decided to only give a brief response to David1701’s post as I assess that what he has stated is typical of the Trinitarian position.

There are a number of problems with this part of your response.

Firstly, I notice that you did not quote from the second occurrence of “I am” or rather in this passage “I am he”.

John 8:28 (KJV): Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.

Please note that even the KJV translators distinguish between John 8:24 and John 8:28 by comparison with John 8:58. In other words their rendition of “I am he” indicates that they do not consider that these two passages are a direct link with Exodus 3:14. A brief consideration of John 8:28 clearly indicates that Jesus is not claiming to be Deity in this passage. He states that he is dependent upon His Father.

Secondly you say that Jesus is the great I AM of the OT (Jehovah). I believe that the correct translation of Exodus 3:14 is “I will be” as per Tyndale’s translation and the RV and RSV margins and hence there is no direct reference in John 8:58 to Exodus 3:14.

Jesus is definitely our Lord and the distinction between LORD (Yahweh) and Lord is clearly shown in Psalm 110:1. The title God is given to those who represent God, and is also used for the Angels and Judges. You were careful not to quote the next verses, and this shows what John claims to be the purpose of his Gospel record:

John 20:30–31 (KJV): 30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: 31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

Jesus is not God (in the English sense of the word), or God the Son, but he is the Son of God.

Yes, Jesus fully revealed God His Father.

Kind regards Trevor

Sadly, the KJV translators added a "he", in a couple of verses, in John 8, which is not in the Greek, as shown by the fact that they put it in italics.  It has allowed anti-trinitarian heretics an apparent get-out clause; although, even in the KJV, they cannot escape John 8:58, which shows, beyond all doubt, that the Lord Jesus Christ is God.

[TrevorL]

Greetings again David1701,

11 hours ago, David1701 said:

Sadly, the KJV translators added a "he", in a couple of verses, in John 8, which is not in the Greek, as shown by the fact that they put it in italics.  It has allowed anti-trinitarian heretics an apparent get-out clause; although, even in the KJV, they cannot escape John 8:58, which shows, beyond all doubt, that the Lord Jesus Christ is God.

I was a bit intimidated when you made your first response to me quoting John 8:23,24 and John 8:58. I felt that you were almost threatening me, that unless I believed that Jesus was saying in John 8:24 that I would perish unless I accepted that Jesus was God, God the Son, the Second person of the Trinity, the Great I AM. But I suggest that Jesus is saying nothing of the sort, and even John states the following:

John 20:31 (KJV): But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

Even this is not a threat but an encouragement, that if we carefully consider what Jesus spoke, and what John recorded, then we will discover that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and thus believing we will have life through his name.

I have only noticed now that you were quoting a translation labelled “VW”, and I am not sure what this abbreviation represents, except perhaps here it is not a German car maker. Did you have to search far and wide to find a translation that suited your interpretation of John 8:24? I did a quick check of other well- known translations, and I could not find any that agreed with your “VW” rendition. The following agree with the KJV “I am he” or simply “I am he”: ESV, NASB, NRSV, NKJV, HCSB, LEB, NET, NCV, ISV, RSV, RV, ASV, Darby, YLT. A few others give the same sense, NIV: “I am the one that I claim to be” and the Message “I am who I say I am”. None of these support your perspective.

I suggest that your foray into Greek seems to call in question all the scholars who contributed to the above translations, even though many of them were Trinitarians. The same word occurs in the following, and the blind man is not claiming to be the “I AM”:

John 9:9 (KJV): Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he.

I understand John 8:58 as Jesus continuing the theme that he is the Christ the Son of God, and that he was in the plan and purpose of God before Abraham appeared upon the scene. For example he is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15. I would therefore be happy to render John 8:58:

John 8:58 (KJV adapted by TL): Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am he.

Kind regards Trevor

[David1701]

9 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again David1701,

I was a bit intimidated when you made your first response to me quoting John 8:23,24 and John 8:58. I felt that you were almost threatening me, that unless I believed that Jesus was saying in John 8:24 that I would perish unless I accepted that Jesus was God, God the Son, the Second person of the Trinity, the Great I AM. But I suggest that Jesus is saying nothing of the sort, and even John states the following:

John 20:31 (KJV): But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

Even this is not a threat but an encouragement, that if we carefully consider what Jesus spoke, and what John recorded, then we will discover that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and thus believing we will have life through his name.

I have only noticed now that you were quoting a translation labelled “VW”, and I am not sure what this abbreviation represents, except perhaps here it is not a German car maker. Did you have to search far and wide to find a translation that suited your interpretation of John 8:24? I did a quick check of other well- known translations, and I could not find any that agreed with your “VW” rendition. The following agree with the KJV “I am he” or simply “I am he”: ESV, NASB, NRSV, NKJV, HCSB, LEB, NET, NCV, ISV, RSV, RV, ASV, Darby, YLT. A few others give the same sense, NIV: “I am the one that I claim to be” and the Message “I am who I say I am”. None of these support your perspective.

I suggest that your foray into Greek seems to call in question all the scholars who contributed to the above translations, even though many of them were Trinitarians. The same word occurs in the following, and the blind man is not claiming to be the “I AM”:

John 9:9 (KJV): Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he.

I understand John 8:58 as Jesus continuing the theme that he is the Christ the Son of God, and that he was in the plan and purpose of God before Abraham appeared upon the scene. For example he is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15. I would therefore be happy to render John 8:58:

John 8:58 (KJV adapted by TL): Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am he.

Kind regards Trevor

The point is that the Lord Jesus was stating that the people need to believe that He is who He says He is.  He is God manifest in the flesh; He is Emmanuel (God with us); He is the great I AM from the OT.  If you do not believe that, then you do not believe in the real Lord Jesus Christ, but in an idol, to whom you have given the same name.

Any Jew would have recognised the allusion to Moses' encounter with I AM, at the burning bush.  It's true that many translations add "he" to a couple of the verses, in John 8, but that word is not in the original, so it is an interpretation and not a literal translation.  This is why I quoted the VW translation (it stands for Voice in the Wilderness), because, although it is not very common, it translates this part more literally.

You will find that almost all translations do not add a "he" in John 8:58, because, there, the allusion to the OT I AM is completely unambiguous.  It means that the Lord is the eternally existing One, God, who has no beginning and no end, He simply IS.

I do not want to see you stay in religious deception; but I want you to be delivered from it, because there is no salvation outside of the real Lord Jesus Christ, who is God and man and I would not want you to end up in hell.  I won't lie to you, this is a matter of life and death, not simply something to debate.

[David1701]

20 hours ago, Roar said:

I use "The Word: The New Testament from 26 Translations" a lot as well as the Bible Gateway website. I often quote different translations but everyone should check as many translations as they wish as there are approximately a hundred and twenty in total I believe. Trying to quote them all would be ponderous.

I've been using Biblegateway for a number of years.  I also have quite a few translations at home and on my PC; but thanks for the recommendations.

[TrevorL]

Greetings again David1701,

5 hours ago, David1701 said:

The point is that the Lord Jesus was stating that the people need to believe that He is who He says He is.

You are avoiding what the word is actually saying. It either means “I am he”, that is “He is who He says He is”, that is what He claimed in John 8:24,28 and before, that is the Christ, the Son of God, or He is saying “I AM”, that is the “I AM” of Exodus 3:14, thus proclaiming to the audience that He is God Eternal, existing from before Abraham. Even though He had told Peter not to openly disclose that He was the Christ, the Son of the Living God, you really want me to swallow that Jesus is really claiming here and proclaiming to be God the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity. 

5 hours ago, David1701 said:

He is God manifest in the flesh; He is Emmanuel (God with us); He is the great I AM from the OT.  If you do not believe that, then you do not believe in the real Lord Jesus Christ, but in an idol, to whom you have given the same name.

Any Jew would have recognised the allusion to Moses' encounter with I AM, at the burning bush.  It's true that many translations add "he" to a couple of the verses, in John 8, but that word is not in the original, so it is an interpretation and not a literal translation.  This is why I quoted the VW translation (it stands for Voice in the Wilderness), because, although it is not very common, it translates this part more literally.

No, it is not more literal. The VW translation of John 8:24 is wrong. The KJV John 8:58 rendition is only a possible interpretation based upon their Trinitarian bias, and using your expression, the really “sad” thing about the KJV on this subject is that they translated “Ehyeh” in Exodus 3:14 as “I AM” instead of “I will be” as per Exodus 3:12 and as per Tyndale. As they did with “Congregation” to “Church”, they altered Tyndale’s translation which was a correct translation. Yes God exists, but God was telling Moses and Israel that He would be active in delivering Israel out of Egyptian bondage and would bring them into the Land. There is no such evidence that there was a Jewish acceptance of the Trinitarian version of Exodus 3:14 as “I AM”. It may have occurred in the Early Church fathers, or a translation before the KJV, but Tyndale did not recognise this version of Exodus 3:14, and he was true to the correct rendition of a future tense and its context.

5 hours ago, David1701 said:

You will find that almost all translations do not add a "he" in John 8:58, because, there, the allusion to the OT I AM is completely unambiguous.  It means that the Lord is the eternally existing One, God, who has no beginning and no end, He simply IS.

I reject that "I AM" is the correct translation of Exodus 3:14. Exodus 3:6 gives the present tense from the Hebrew "I am". Moses had already witnessed the existence of God by the appearance of the Angel in the burning bush, but now God is instructing Moses about the fact that He would be with him to deliver Israel out of Egypt.

5 hours ago, David1701 said:

I do not want to see you stay in religious deception; but I want you to be delivered from it, because there is no salvation outside of the real Lord Jesus Christ, who is God and man and I would not want you to end up in hell.  I won't lie to you, this is a matter of life and death, not simply something to debate.

I appreciate your concern for my spiritual wellbeing, and despite your ready denunciation to call me a heretic, and label my understanding as religious deception, and threatening me with hell (fire) as "hell" is the grave where Jesus slept for three days, (now you will really send me to hell), I have examined this question carefully, and especially the various “I am” occurrences in John’s Gospel, and the rendition of “Ehyeh” in Exodus 3:14. .

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Edited June 11, 2020 by TrevorL

[David1701]

18 minutes ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again David1701,

You are avoiding what the word is actually saying. It either means “I am he”, that is “He is who He says He is”, that is what He claimed in John 8:24,28 and before, that is the Christ, the Son of God, or He is saying “I AM”, that is the “I AM” of Exodus 3:14, thus proclaiming to the audience that He is God Eternal, existing from before Abraham. Even though He had told Peter not to openly disclose that He was the Christ, the Son of the Living God, you really want me to swallow that Jesus is really claiming here and proclaiming to be God the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity. 

The Lord is proclaiming both that he is who he says he is and that that is the I AM of Exodus.  As I said to you, the "he" of some verses has been added by translators; but almost none add it in John 8:58.

Quote

No, it is not more literal. The KJV John 8:58 rendition is only a possible interpretation based upon their Trinitarian bias...

I was stating a fact, when I said that not adding a "he" is literally correct.

Here are a couple of literal translations.

John 8:23,24 (LITV)

23 And He said to them, You are from below; I am from above. You are from this world; I am not from this world.
  24 Therefore, I said to you that you will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.

John 8:23,24 (ALT)

23 And He said to them, "You* are from below; I am from above.  You* are from this world; I am not from this world.

24 Therefore, I said to you*, 'you* will die in your sins', for unless you* believe that I Am, you* will die in your* sins.".

The underlining and asterisks are in the ALT translation.  The underlining shows emphasis present in the Greek and the asterisks denote plurals.

 

Quote

...and using your expression, the really “sad” thing about the KJV on this subject is that they translated “Ehyeh” in Exodus 3:14 as “I AM” instead of “I will be” as per Exodus 3:12 and as per Tyndale.

 

I have checked more than 50 translations of the Bible and every one of them translates the relevant part of Exodus 3:14 as "I AM who I AM" or "I AM that I AM".  It refers to God's eternality and immutability.  He always IS.

Quote

As they did with “Congregation” to “Church”, they altered Tyndale’s translation which was a correct translation.

 

I agree with you that "congregation" is a better translation of "ekklesia" than "church".  A few modern translations use "assembly", which is about as good as "congregation".

Quote

Yes God exists, but God was telling Moses and Israel that He would be active in delivering Israel out of Egyptian bondage and would bring them into the Land. There is no such evidence that there was a Jewish acceptance of the Trinitarian version of Exodus 3:14 as “I AM”. It may have occurred in the Early Church fathers, or a translation before the KJV, but Tyndale did not recognise this version of Exodus 3:14, and he was true to the correct rendition of a future tense and its context.

God was telling Moses who He is, not just that he would deliver Israel.  Moses asked for God's name and God told him, "I am who I am.".  Here is the immediate context.

Ex. 3:13,14 (ESV)

13 Then Moses said to God, “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?”
  14 God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘I am has sent me to you.’”

 

Quote

 

I reject that "I AM" is the correct translation of Exodus 3:14. Exodus 3:6 gives the present tense from the Hebrew "I am". Moses had already witnessed the existence of God by the appearance of the Angel in the burning bush, but now God is instructing Moses about the fact that He would be with him to deliver Israel out of Egypt.

 

Then you think that you know better than almost every English translation ever made.  Is that what you claim?  Do you think that you know better than the Hebrew experts throughout the ages?

Here is also an English translation of the Septuagint (the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew OT, by seventy Jewish scribes).

Exodus 3:13,14 (AB)

13 And Moses said to God, Behold, I shall go forth to the children of Israel, and shall say to them, The God of our fathers has sent me to you; and they will ask me, What is His name? What shall I say to them?
  14 And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING. And He said, Thus shall you say to the children of Israel, THE BEING has sent me to you.

Literally, "I am THE BEING" is "I am the One who is."; in other words, it expresses the same meaning as "I AM".

Quote

I appreciate your concern for my spiritual wellbeing, and despite your ready denunciation to call me a heretic, and label my understanding as religious deception, and threatening me with hell (fire) as "hell" is the grave where Jesus slept for three days, (now you will really send me to hell), I have examined this question carefully, and especially the various “I am” occurrences in John’s Gospel, and the rendition of “Ehyeh” in Exodus 3:14. .

Hell is where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.  It was originally prepared for the devil and his angels; but all those who do not repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ will join them there.

The Bible is very clear that the Lord Jesus Christ is God manifest in the flesh.  If you refuse to believe that, then you are refusing to believe in him.

[BeauJangles]

On 4/18/2020 at 8:02 AM, kwikphilly said:

On 4/16/2020 at 6:27 PM, BeauJangles said:

First of all, thanks for the allowance to tighten up this post. It had a lot of wasted space or was it like a fill in thing for writing an essay? It kind of reminded me of high school exam paper. Second of all, I would only attempt to explain the Trinity to an open hearted Muslim.

Blessings Brother

    Most of the time if they are not even open to the Word of God & keep trying to shove the quaran down your throat then they are not open,they are looking to convert.....you have to pray discernment & if you are lead by Holy Spirit then you really don't have to "think" too much,just love a lot...

   I really believe they often choose the Trinity to deflect & manipulate in order to persist in the "ONE GOD" , its often a deliberate "baiting" Topic  - imo  I just keep focus on our Living Redeemer

That's an excellent point, kwikphilly. Even Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons utilize this tactic of "baiting" you in order to debate and overlord the subject with their own doctrinal beliefs. I've encountered this countless times. You should never expect to sway them to the truth and it often becomes a pointless pursuit. 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again David1701,

7 hours ago, David1701 said:

The Lord is proclaiming both that he is who he says he is and that that is the I AM of Exodus.  As I said to you, the "he" of some verses has been added by translators; but almost none add it in John 8:58.

I suggest that “I am he” and “I am” are two different ideas in English, especially when the second is used to claim that Jesus is quoting and alluding to Exodus 3:14. The “he” is not added by the translators, but is necessary in some contexts, including the occurrence with the blind man. The fact that most except VW and possibly a few other Trinitarians add “he” to John 8:24 and 8:28 should be sufficient to indicate that John 8:58 can also be translated this way. I doubt that Jesus used this expression in two different ways in the same context. Actually I did a search for your VW translation to check if the VW translation of John 8:28 has “I am he” or “I AM”, but I could not find an electronic copy. Your use of the word “Jehovah” indicates to me that you have not properly looked at this subject, as “Jehovah” is a faulty representation of the YHWH Name. Does the VW translation preserve the Trinitarian KJV of 1 John 5:7? I thought that this would give a clue as to how Trinitarian biased was your obscure new VW translation. Could you check the VW rendition of the following:

John 9:9 (KJV): Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he.

7 hours ago, David1701 said:

I was stating a fact, when I said that not adding a "he" is literally correct.

Each language has its unique features, and a literal translation does not necessarily make sense or convey the correct meaning in English for a particular context. While your two literal translations do not have the he, the Young's LT has “I am he”.

7 hours ago, David1701 said:

I have checked more than 50 translations of the Bible and every one of them translates the relevant part of Exodus 3:14 as "I AM who I AM" or "I AM that I AM".  It refers to God's eternality and immutability.  He always IS.

Exodus 3:12-14 (Tyndale): 12 And he sayde: I wilbe with the. And this shalbe a token vnto the that I haue sent the: after that thou hast broughte the people out of Egipte, ye shall serue God vppon this mountayne. 13 Than sayde Moses vnto God: when I come vnto the childern of Israell and saye vnto them, the God of youre fathers hath sent me vnto you, ad they saye vnto me, what ys his name, what answere shall I geuethem? 14 Then sayde God vnto Moses: I wilbe what I wilbe: ad he sayde, this shalt thou saye vnto the children of Israel: I wilbe dyd send me to you.

The above is Tyndale’s rendition and the RV margin has “Or, I Will Be That I Will Be”, and the RSV margin has “Or, I Will Be What I Will Be”. This indicates that not only Tyndale considered “I wilbe” as the correct translation, but to my assessment some on the translating committees of the RV and RSV considered “I will be” to be correct, but could not sway the majority biased Trinitarian members. Many modern scholars support the future tense rendition.

The word “ehyeh” in Exodus 3:14 is the same in the earlier statement in v12, and here the translators give the future tense:
Exodus 3:12 (KJV): And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain.
Not only does this fix the tense, it also introduces the concept that the Name of God is also associated with some future activity.

7 hours ago, David1701 said:

God was telling Moses who He is, not just that he would deliver Israel.  Moses asked for God's name and God told him, "I am who I am.".  Here is the immediate context.

Ex. 3:13,14 (ESV) 13 Then Moses said to God, “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?”
  14 God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘I am has sent me to you.’”

I notice that you did not start with Exodus 3:12 which speaks of the fact that God was going to be with Moses to help deliver Israel out of Egypt. When the first few miracles did not seem to be successful, and Moses was almost rejected, God revealed that He would accomplish His purpose and that this purpose was associated with the YHWH Name. Abraham knew that God existed, but God had revealed His Name to Moses, and God would deliver Israel, and the future tense of the YHWH Name is associated with this:

Exodus 6:1-8 (KJV): 1 Then the LORD said unto Moses, Now shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh: for with a strong hand shall he let them go, and with a strong hand shall he drive them out of his land. 2 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD: 3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH (or Yahweh) was I not known to them. 4 And I have also established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their pilgrimage, wherein they were strangers. 5 And I have also heard the groaning of the children of Israel, whom the Egyptians keep in bondage; and I have remembered my covenant. 6 Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched out arm, and with great judgments: 7 And I will take you to me for a people, and I will be to you a God: and ye shall know that I am the LORD your God, which bringeth you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. 8 And I will bring you in unto the land, concerning the which I did swear to give it to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob; and I will give it you for an heritage: I am the LORD.

7 hours ago, David1701 said:

Then you think that you know better than almost every English translation ever made.  Is that what you claim?  Do you think that you know better than the Hebrew experts throughout the ages? Here is also an English translation of the Septuagint (the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew OT, by seventy Jewish scribes).

Exodus 3:13,14 (AB) 13 And Moses said to God, Behold, I shall go forth to the children of Israel, and shall say to them, The God of our fathers has sent me to you; and they will ask me, What is His name? What shall I say to them?
  14 And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING. And He said, Thus shall you say to the children of Israel, THE BEING has sent me to you.

Literally, "I am THE BEING" is "I am the One who is."; in other words, it expresses the same meaning as "I AM".

If the LXX is a translation of the Hebrew, then it is a poor or incorrect translation, and it was made say 1000 years after Moses. Why do you search for support from obscure and doubtful translations?

7 hours ago, David1701 said:

Hell is where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.  It was originally prepared for the devil and his angels; but all those who do not repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ will join them there.

Are the worms going to eat away at the immortal souls for eternity? I once attended a Baptist meeting and the red-haired speaker became red-faced threatening us with burning in hell for eternity. I believe that those rejected at the return of Jesus will suffer the second death, returning to the dust after some fiery judgements and tribulation.

Kind regards Trevor

[David1701]

9 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again David1701,

I suggest that “I am he” and “I am” are two different ideas in English, especially when the second is used to claim that Jesus is quoting and alluding to Exodus 3:14. The “he” is not added by the translators, but is necessary in some contexts, including the occurrence with the blind man. The fact that most except VW and possibly a few other Trinitarians add “he” to John 8:24 and 8:28 should be sufficient to indicate that John 8:58 can also be translated this way. I doubt that Jesus used this expression in two different ways in the same context. Actually I did a search for your VW translation to check if the VW translation of John 8:28 has “I am he” or “I AM”, but I could not find an electronic copy. Your use of the word “Jehovah” indicates to me that you have not properly looked at this subject, as “Jehovah” is a faulty representation of the YHWH Name. Does the VW translation preserve the Trinitarian KJV of 1 John 5:7? I thought that this would give a clue as to how Trinitarian biased was your obscure new VW translation. Could you check the VW rendition of the following:

 

John 9:9 (KJV): Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he.

 

Each language has its unique features, and a literal translation does not necessarily make sense or convey the correct meaning in English for a particular context. While your two literal translations do not have the he, the Young's LT has “I am he”.

 

Exodus 3:12-14 (Tyndale): 12 And he sayde: I wilbe with the. And this shalbe a token vnto the that I haue sent the: after that thou hast broughte the people out of Egipte, ye shall serue God vppon this mountayne. 13 Than sayde Moses vnto God: when I come vnto the childern of Israell and saye vnto them, the God of youre fathers hath sent me vnto you, ad they saye vnto me, what ys his name, what answere shall I geuethem? 14 Then sayde God vnto Moses: I wilbe what I wilbe: ad he sayde, this shalt thou saye vnto the children of Israel: I wilbe dyd send me to you.

 

The above is Tyndale’s rendition and the RV margin has “Or, I Will Be That I Will Be”, and the RSV margin has “Or, I Will Be What I Will Be”. This indicates that not only Tyndale considered “I wilbe” as the correct translation, but to my assessment some on the translating committees of the RV and RSV considered “I will be” to be correct, but could not sway the majority biased Trinitarian members. Many modern scholars support the future tense rendition.

The word “ehyeh” in Exodus 3:14 is the same in the earlier statement in v12, and here the translators give the future tense:
Exodus 3:12 (KJV): And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain.
Not only does this fix the tense, it also introduces the concept that the Name of God is also associated with some future activity.

 

I notice that you did not start with Exodus 3:12 which speaks of the fact that God was going to be with Moses to help deliver Israel out of Egypt. When the first few miracles did not seem to be successful, and Moses was almost rejected, God revealed that He would accomplish His purpose and that this purpose was associated with the YHWH Name. Abraham knew that God existed, but God had revealed His Name to Moses, and God would deliver Israel, and the future tense of the YHWH Name is associated with this:

 

Exodus 6:1-8 (KJV): 1 Then the LORD said unto Moses, Now shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh: for with a strong hand shall he let them go, and with a strong hand shall he drive them out of his land. 2 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD: 3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH (or Yahweh) was I not known to them. 4 And I have also established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their pilgrimage, wherein they were strangers. 5 And I have also heard the groaning of the children of Israel, whom the Egyptians keep in bondage; and I have remembered my covenant. 6 Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched out arm, and with great judgments: 7 And I will take you to me for a people, and I will be to you a God: and ye shall know that I am the LORD your God, which bringeth you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. 8 And I will bring you in unto the land, concerning the which I did swear to give it to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob; and I will give it you for an heritage: I am the LORD.

If the LXX is a translation of the Hebrew, then it is a poor or incorrect translation, and it was made say 1000 years after Moses. Why do you search for support from obscure and doubtful translations?

 

Are the worms going to eat away at the immortal souls for eternity? I once attended a Baptist meeting and the red-haired speaker became red-faced threatening us with burning in hell for eternity. I believe that those rejected at the return of Jesus will suffer the second death, returning to the dust after some fiery judgements and tribulation.

 

Kind regards Trevor

 

I am going to stop here, since we will just be repeating ourselves.  I am free from your blood, if you continue to reject the Lord as God manifest in the flesh; but I hope that you repent and believe in the real Lord Jesus Christ, unto salvation.

[TrevorL]

Greetings again David1701,

11 hours ago, David1701 said:

I am going to stop here, since we will just be repeating ourselves.  I am free from your blood, if you continue to reject the Lord as God manifest in the flesh; but I hope that you repent and believe in the real Lord Jesus Christ, unto salvation.

I appreciate your participation, but I do not consider what I stated in my last post simply as a repetition. I was disappointed that you did not answer my questions about the VW translation, and if anyone on the forum has a copy I would be interested, and also the question if this translation is a general translation, or a translation supported by or supporting a small group with a particular view. I am the librarian for our meeting, and we have a reasonable lending and reference library, but I also have a strong interest in Bible books, both expositional and reference, and have a large personal collection in print and electronic. As far as my mention of “Jehovah” being incorrect, I recommend the introduction to Rotherham’s translation, and the fact that there are two forms of the YHWH Name in the Hebrew Bible, one with the vowel points for Elohim, the other for Adonai.

I appreciate your continuing concern for my spiritual welfare. I would like to continue and conclude if no one else takes up your cause by explaining the further development of the Yahweh Name. This is a subject that I have been interested in over many years, and was first introduced to this in a formal way at a Young People’s Weekend in the Southern Highlands of NSW Australia when I was 19 years old.

When Israel was delivered out of Egypt the Name of God remained the same, but the particular activity had been accomplished:
Exodus 15:1-3 (KJV): 1 Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. 2 The LORD is my strength and song, and he is become my salvation: he is my God, and I will prepare him an habitation; my father’s God, and I will exalt him. 3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
The future tense of God’s Name “He will be or become” had been accomplished in the initial deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, and Yahweh had become Israel’s salvation.

The initial fulfillment was not the ultimate completion of the Yahweh Name. God’s purpose with the earth was not complete with the salvation of Israel out of Egypt. God’s purpose was declared in the following, but sadly this was spoken at a time when the very generation that had been born through God”s deliverance failed.
Numbers 14:21 (KJV): But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the LORD.

The above raises the question as to how and when will the earth be filled with the glory of God. One indication is found when the Psalmist uses the same words as Moses’ Song to speak of another deliverance:
Psalm 118:14-25 (KJV): 14 The LORD is my strength and song, and is become my salvation. 15 The voice of rejoicing and salvation is in the tabernacles of the righteous: the right hand of the LORD doeth valiantly. 16 The right hand of the LORD is exalted: the right hand of the LORD doeth valiantly. 17 I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the LORD. 18 The LORD hath chastened me sore: but he hath not given me over unto death. 19 Open to me the gates of righteousness: I will go into them, and I will praise the LORD: 20 This gate of the LORD, into which the righteous shall enter. 21 I will praise thee: for thou hast heard me, and art become my salvation. 22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. 23 This is the LORD’s doing; it is marvellous in our eyes. 24 This is the day which the LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it. 25 Save now, I beseech thee, O LORD: O LORD, I beseech thee, send now prosperity.
The above is quoted at length to show that there was to be a greater salvation in fulfillment of the Yahweh Name. It is evident from the context that this salvation is by means of the crucifixion, death and resurrection of the man of God’s right hand, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

The greater deliverance is revealed even in the conception and birth of the child:
Matthew 1:20-21 (KJV): 20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. 21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
The meaning of the name Jesus is revealed: “for he shall save his people from their sins”. Was Jesus to be an independent Saviour? No, the name Jesus incorporates the Yahweh Name, Je-sous, Jo-shua, or Yah-oshea. He was to be Yahweh’s Salvation. Here then is the extension or fulfillment of the Yahweh Name, Yahweh was to be, to become. He was to “become salvation” Exodus 15:2, in and through Jesus, the Son of God. Yahweh is the Saviour, Jesus is the Saviour. In other words Yahweh, God the Father is the Saviour through His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. Yahweh has become salvation.

Salvation is now offered in the Name of Jesus Christ:
Acts 4:10-12 (KJV): 10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. 11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. 12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

The subject of God’s Name has many other aspects, but I suggest the more we understand some of these aspects, the more we realise that the spelling and pronunciation of the Name, while important, is not as important as understanding the Name. Here are a few examples of other aspects:

Psalm 9:10 (KJV): And they that know thy name will put their trust in thee: for thou, LORD, hast not forsaken them that seek thee.

John 12:27–28 (KJV): 27 Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour. 28 Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.

The reason why we do not encounter the Name Yahweh extensively in the NT is that the expression “God the Father” teaches the same as “Yahweh”, that the One God, Yahweh, God the Father was going to be active to achieve His purpose of salvation, and to accomplish this He gave birth to a Son, Jesus the Son of God Matthew 1:20-21, Luke 1:34-35, to reveal God’s character, he was full of grace and truth John 1:14 and manifest the Father’s Name John 17:6, Romans 1:1-4.

Kind regards
Trevor