A Quick Guide To Understanding Consciousness And Belief

a reply to: whereislogic

"It comes from a verb that means “to become". No, biblical Hebrew doesn't have three verb tenses (past,present,future), only two. So the exact conversion is "I am/will be" which doesn't have an english counterpart. When Moses asks God for his name that was clearly a request in present tense. So its universally agreed that a present tense response "I AM" was the correct translation to the present tense question.

Think we had a discussion long time back about relativism. I would consider everything that can be touched by time as relative. Everything that isn't affected by time as absolute. What did Jesus say, "before Abraham was, "I Am".

There be that "I AM" again!

a reply to: glend

“If anyone thinks he knows something, he does not yet know it as he should know it.” (1 Cor 8:2)

I don't like going off-topic like this and since I know people are going to fall for this whole "I am" spiel (including the capitalization you like so much), "because [they] have become dull in [their] hearing" (Heb 5:11), regardless of what I may want to share about it, I considered just posting the video below on its own. But whatever, maybe it can still be of some use to someone else who has fallen for the whole "I am" spiel and any of its related philosophies (even though it still has nothing to do with my comment that you were initially responding to, about consciousness). Concerning the behaviour of connecting the expression at Exodus 3:14 with what is said by Jesus at John 8:58 when there is no connection cause he's not saying the same thing nor is he even talking about the same subject (after 2:54):

RS reads: “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am [Greek, e·goʹ ei·miʹ].’” (NE, KJ, TEV, JB, NAB all read “I am,” some even using capital letters to convey the idea of a title; I noticed you did that as well, even going with all capitals in your final sentence). Thus they endeavor to connect the expression with Exodus 3:14, where, according to their rendering, God refers to himself by the title “I Am.”) However, in NW, the latter part of John 8:58 reads: “Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.” (The same idea is conveyed by the wording in AT, Mo, CBW, and SE.)

Which rendering agrees with the context? The question of the Jews (verse 57) to which Jesus was replying had to do with age, not identity. Jesus’ reply logically dealt with his age, the length of his existence. Interestingly, no effort is ever made to apply e·goʹ ei·miʹ as a title to the holy spirit.

Says A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, by A. T. Robertson: “The verb [ei·miʹ] . . . Sometimes it does express existence as a predicate like any other verb, as in [e·goʹ ei·miʹ] (Jo. 8:58).”—Nashville, Tenn.; 1934, p. 394.

John 8:57,58 (NW):

Then the Jews said to him: “You are not yet 50 years old, and still you have seen Abraham?” 58 Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, before Abraham came into existence, I have been.”

Sticking to proper English (syntax) in the translation seems to be quite difficult for those who want to promote the arguments of Trinitarianism and Binitarianism (in your case leading to a whole elaborate, extended and confusing philosophy around the expression "I am" that has nothing to do with what Jesus is actually talking about there, or what the Bible is talking about at Exodus 3:14, and also seeing a connection when there is none; not to mention it has nothing to do with the subject of consciousness). The phrase "before Abraham was, I am" (RS) is not proper English syntax. It becomes gibberish when translated that way (and for obvious reasons these Trinitarian Bible translators have no issue translating it as gibberish, even exposing the game they are playing by capitalizing it, when they don't do so consistently wherever the Bible actually says "I am", which it of course does numerous times because it's a common phrase, but in those cases it's someone other than Jesus using that phrase, so they can't use it that way for their purpose of promoting the 'human'* idea/philosophy that Jesus is Jehovah God). Also meaningless in response to the actual question that was asked. It's not a title, he's just answering the question, explaining that he existed before Abraham came into existence.

*: “However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, whose conscience is seared as with a branding iron.”(1 Timothy 4:1,2).

OK, partly "human" then. Popular amongst humans, not originating from them.

“Look out that no one takes you captive by means of the philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ;” “We have much to say about him, and it is difficult to explain, because you have become dull in your hearing. For although by now* [Lit., “in view of the time.”] you should be teachers, you again need someone to teach you from the beginning the elementary things of the sacred pronouncements of God, and you have gone back to needing milk, not solid food. For everyone who continues to feed on milk is unacquainted with the word of righteousness, for he is a young child. But solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use have their powers of discernment* [Or “their perceptive powers.”] trained to distinguish both right and wrong.” (Col 2:8; Hebrews 5:11-14)

We are to bring understanding in our daily lives which means healing people's hearts, ears, eyes when needed.