Jaareshiah,
Again, you didn't answer the question. You brought up some obscure translations that perhaps translated it the way the JW's did. This does not mean it was correct. I agree with you in that the King James translation was incorrect in adding (he)
The point is "ego eimi" is and alsways should be translated "I am"
The fact that the Jews picked up stones to stone him to death. Blasphemy was a crime punishable by stoning and by Jesus claiming I AM it was the same as making himself equal with God.
New World translation reads:
John 10:32-33 Jesus replied to them: "I displayed to YOU many fine works from the Father. For which of those works are YOU stoning me?" 33 The Jews answered him: "We are stoning you, not for a fine work, but for blasphemy,even because you, although being a man, make yourself a god."
This is of course a mistranslation because the jews were monotheistic and would never have said "a god" (another reason why John, a Jew, would never have written "and the Word was "a God" in John 1:1
This is Young's literal translation:
John 10:32
Jesus answered them, `Many good works did I shew you from my Father; because of which work of them do ye stone me?'
10:33
The Jews answered him, saying, `For a good work we do not stone thee, but for evil speaking, and because thou, being a man, dost make thyself God.'
The
evidence is there regardless of how you see it. The
King James Bible is not a Bible that anyone can "hang their hat on" due to its many inaccuracies. The
King James translators recognized at John 9:9, the need to add the word "he" for clarification and then many have tried to attach John 8:58, with its rendering of "I AM" with Exodus 3:14, with the
King James Bible reading there as "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."
But, had you
really done your homework rather than quickly assuming that this correct, you could have seen that the Hebrew "היהא רשא היהא ('
Ehˇyeh´ 'Asher´ 'Ehˇyeh´) at Exodus 3:14, is more accurately rendered as "I WILL BE THAT I WILL BE" (
Leeser); "I Will Become whatsoever I please." (
Rotherham) and by the
Scripture4all interlinear as "I shall become who I am becoming", taking into consideration the Hebrew word
hayah, which the
King James Bible does
not even recognize. The Greek
Septuagint translated the Hebrew at Exodus 3:14 as "
Eˇgo´ eiˇmi ho on, "I am The Being," or, "I am The Existing One", not just as "I AM".
Had you looked more closely, you would have considered the Hebrew word
hayah that is within Exodus 3:14 three times and it could have been seen that
hayah means "become: cause to be", with
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible rendering it as "exist, i.e. be or become, come to pass."
At Exodus 3:14,
'Ehˇyeh´ is in the imperfect state (action that is not completed), first person singular, meaning "I shall become"; or, "I shall prove to be." The reference here is
not to God's self-existence (as meant by I AM) but to what he has in mind to become
toward others. Thus, the
New World Translation accurately reads at Exodus 3:14: "I SHALL PROVE TO BE WHAT I SHALL PROVE TO BE" and not inaccurately as "I AM THAT I AM". You are not up-to-date. Proverbs 21:5 says: "The plans of the diligent one surely make for advantage, but everyone that is hasty surely heads for want."
At Matthew 26:22 in the
King James Bible, the Greek words of
ego eimi is not rendered as "I am", but as "it is I" due to the context, whereas at John 4:26, it reads "I that speak to thee am [he]" adding the word "he" there as well at John 8:24 and 28, and John 18:5, 6, 8. Sentence structure or morphology, as well as tense, has to be considered when a word is translated into another language.
Thus, the five ancient manuscripts of the fifth/sixth centuries C.E. that were in either Syrian, Georgian or Ethiopic and that were translated from Koine Greek give sound evidence of what Jesus said and meant at John 8:58: "Most truly I say to you, Before Abraham came into existence, I have been."(
New World Translation)
