Jeffrey Gibson
jgibson@acfsysv.roosevelt.edu
Wong wrote:
> Wes.Williams@twcable.com wrote:
> >
> > Dear Ronald,
> >
> > I would recommend you research the archives for the very extended
> > discussion the list had on John 8:58 last summer. It hit all the
> > angles and was quite confrontational. Current scholarly concensus is
> > that the EGW EIMI of John 8:58 does not refer to Ex. 3:14. This belief
> > was widely held in the past but more scholars, even those of the
> > strong "Jesus is Jehovah" persuasion, are abandoning it due to lack of
> > linguistic support. Of course, there are still some who hold to the
> > link, but they are fewer.
> >
> > The principal problems are that John 8:58 is a verb of existence and
> > Ex. 3:14 is a title refelecting purpose. Ex. 3:14 in the context is
> > talking about a future time and the verb HAYAH naturally refers to the
> > future (cf. v.12 which clearly uses HAYAH as referring to the future).
> > In fact, Theodotion's LXX translates HAYAH as EGW ESOMAI "I will be"
> > and not "I am." But regardless of how one translates the subject and
> > verb of Ex. 3:14, it is the predicate that matters. The predicate of
> > Ex. 3:14 in LXX is hO WN, not EGW EIMI. Linguistically the link falls
> > apart. John 8:58 is referring to a past time up thru the present.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Wes
> >
> >
> > From: Ronald Wong <dogtoy@isgroup.net>
> > Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 09:07:02 -0500
> > Subject: Re: Pronoun Emphasis
> >
> > I certain agree that the construction is strange...yet, I believe that
> > there is a historical purpose that Jesus and the way John recorded it to
> > mean "I, I am." There is an OT pararallel. When Moses was sent back to
> > the hebrews in Egypt, he asked the question: "If they ask who sent me,
> > whom should I say?" and it says that God answered "I am."
> > I think it would be possible to say that John and Jesus are emphasizing
> > (if I can be allowed to use the word :) ) Jesus' claim of being God,
> > which is a major theme in the fourth Gospel.
> Wes...
> I don't believe I was trying to make that point that it refers to the
> passage itself...as much as I believe that the John is using it to
> identify whom Jesus is.
> as much as modern scholarship may abandon it because of lack of
> linguistic support...this doesn't sway me to believe that John doesn't
> think of Jesus as deity. Not from my own theo. posit. but because over
> and over again, John points to that... :)
> not knowing hebrew I will not argue that point. but why would God say
> "I will be"? is he not yet God? is not yet??? what? who he is? what
> kind of predicate does God need to be who he is? The link,
> linguistically may fall apart, again I'm not a linguist. who
> knows...you've tried to convince an ignorant man of with something he
> knows absolutely nothing he knows about. :)
>
> Ronald Wong
> O'Brien, FL.