the mouth of two witnesses or of three witnesses

[Molly]

ww, show me the Greek you have for John 18:6
Joh 18:6  As soon then asG5613 G3767 he had saidG2036 unto them,G846 IG1473 amG1510 [he], they wentG565 backward,G1519 G3694 andG2532 fellG4098 to the ground.G5476.

The first quote:http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/joh18.pdf
Same rendering in:
-BNT - Novum Testamentum Graece, Nestle-Aland 27h Edition. Copyright (c) 1993 Deutsch Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart.

-TIS/TIM

These versions contain the Tischendorf NT 8th Edition with morphological tags:

Lobegott Friedrich Konstantin von Tischendorf (1815-1874) GNT 8th Edition, 1869-1872.

The text is the result of the joint work of Clink Yale and Ulrik Petersen. For details see http://ulrikp.org/Tischendorf.


That and they is missing from your text.

Also, what text are you using

The first quote: http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/joh18.pdf
The second quote: The Greek New Testament according to the Byzantine Textform, edited by Maurice A.Robinson and William G. Pierpont, 2000 edition This is the edition by Pierpont and Robinson of a Majority, or Byzantine,text of the NT.

Just checked KJV-1611 and KJV-1759

In Exodus 3:14 I AM THAT I AM is all in caps.
But in John 18:5-6 there are no caps.
"I am" instead of "I AM"
"he" instead of "He" or "HE"

18:6 ws
hOs
G5613
Adv
AS
oun
oun
G3767
Conj
THEN
eipen
eipen
G2036
vi 2Aor Act 3 Sg
He-said
autois
autois
G846
pp Dat Pl m
to-them
oti
hoti
G3754
Conj
that
egw
egO
G1473
pp 1 Nom Sg
I
eimi
eimi
G1510
vi Pres vxx 1 Sg
AM
aphlqon
apElthon
G565
vi 2Aor Act 3 Pl
THEY-FROM-CAME
they-dropped
eis
eis
G1519
Prep
INTO
ta
ta
G3588
t_ Acc Pl n
THE
the(p)


From your own text, ww--John 18:6--as soon as he said to them I AM, they...

As soon then as he had said
unto them, I am , they went
backward, and fell to the
ground


From your own text it is him saying 'I AM' that causes the reaction in the guards.

[WhiteWings]

No Molly you should apply the basic rules of English.

Jesus said "the Jesus I am"
The "I'm" is just a quote from that verse.

Q: Are you Jesus the Nazarene?
A: Yes I 'm

That's it. Nothing more nothing less.
What those soldiers heared, saw, smelled or saw is of zero importance for this topic. Jesus wasn't witnessing against Himself.

What do you think "that" is refrencing to? It refrences to verse 5.

Suprise Peter is another I am he :winkgrin:
Acts 10 [ACV]
21 And having gone down to the men, Peter said, Behold, I am he whom ye seek. What is the cause for which ye are here?

Better luck next time Molly :laughing7:

[micah7:9]

Luk 22:48  "Judas," said Jesus, "are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?"

Id say that was Jesus identifying Himself.

As for the men being knocked backward to the ground in John by the Voice of Jesus speaking, I guess you have to be a believer in the Word of God, through faith to understand and except that.

[thinktank]

ww, show me the Greek you have for John 18:6
Joh 18:6  As soon then asG5613 G3767 he had saidG2036 unto them,G846 IG1473 amG1510 [he], they wentG565 backward,G1519 G3694 andG2532 fellG4098 to the ground.G5476.

The first quote:http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/joh18.pdf
Same rendering in:
-BNT - Novum Testamentum Graece, Nestle-Aland 27h Edition. Copyright (c) 1993 Deutsch Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart.

-TIS/TIM

These versions contain the Tischendorf NT 8th Edition with morphological tags:

Lobegott Friedrich Konstantin von Tischendorf (1815-1874) GNT 8th Edition, 1869-1872.

The text is the result of the joint work of Clink Yale and Ulrik Petersen. For details see http://ulrikp.org/Tischendorf.


That and they is missing from your text.

Also, what text are you using

The first quote: http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/joh18.pdf
The second quote: The Greek New Testament according to the Byzantine Textform, edited by Maurice A.Robinson and William G. Pierpont, 2000 edition This is the edition by Pierpont and Robinson of a Majority, or Byzantine,text of the NT.

Just checked KJV-1611 and KJV-1759

In Exodus 3:14 I AM THAT I AM is all in caps.
But in John 18:5-6 there are no caps.
"I am" instead of "I AM"
"he" instead of "He" or "HE"

Isaiah 43:10
Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.


Isaiah 43:25
I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.

These words of Isiah are not in all caps wings.

Isiah is a mighty prophet who prophecied the coming of the messiah. When Jesus began his ministry he quoted from the book of Isiah.

Isaiah 48:12
Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last.

Isaiah 52:6
Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold, it is I.

John 8:24
I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

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


Revelation 1:18
I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

Luke 24:39
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

[Nathan]

Much of the latter conversation here is a great example of how we, as human, can get so caught up in our vernacular and definition searching, that we miss the power of the Word being given.  The incident happening was huge.  I think some have tried to share that but they've kinda gotten pushed aside with the scrimmaging of word usages.  The words used are merely signs pointing somewhere else.  That's both the beauty and the frustration of spiritual truth.  The message isn't about the guards realizing who Jesus was . . .the message is about the fact that at any given second, the Holy Spirit could have led Jesus out of that display of men's power and might. 

Those guards were slain in the spirit.  They didn't recognize the "I am" and decide to give him space . . .Jesus proclaimed who he was and the Spirit in him backed up his words with an exclamation point.  I don't understand why sparring over a word missing or a definition missed would be more important than the spiritual message lying within the whole story.  It was a turning point in Jesus' entire ministry.  It was the beginning of sorrows, it was the last nail the religious leaders of a great nation were putting in their own coffin.

I know I'll probably stir up some emotions by saying that, but this is a good place to remind ourselves not to lose sight of the forest in spite of the trees.  Which carries a greater significance, that we walk away with more knowledge (in which in the sparring isn't even a guarantee) or that we embrace the spiritual truth of it?  The truth for me is, those boys didn't know what hit them.  And God wanted the world to know it, that's why he had it recorded.  The same spirit that was in Jesus and protected him to the end of his earthly purpose, is the same spirit that's in us, protecting us, leading us, embracing us . . .. in spite of us.  When's the last time any of "us" had someone approach us in religious rage, only for the Spirit in us to knock them out?

[micah7:9]

"The message isn't about the guards realizing who Jesus was . . .the message is about the fact that at any given second, the Holy Spirit could have led Jesus out of that display of men's power and might. "

Now WHY would the Holy Spirit have any desire to that?

I know.... but we are very close to the post topic tho!

[eaglesway]

the mouth of two or three witnesses is about convicting someone of a capital crime(death sentence). The priests arrested Jesus for charges they could not prove even though they brought "many false witnesses against him"(Mt 26). Jesus said, "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true". The Father bore witness to the Son on many occasions, by the works he did through him and at his baptism and on the mount of transfiguration. If God testifies on your behalf, you need no other witness ;o)

It is interesting in how we assume that it was the words Jesus spoke, as opposed to the power in His voice as the Father was bearing witness on behalf of his son against those who sought to discredit him. Since "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself", there may have been other times as well when Jesus spoke and they felt the power of the Father in Him.

[micah7:9]

the mouth of two or three witnesses is about convicting someone of a capital crime(death sentence). The priests arrested Jesus for charges they could not prove even though they brought "many false witnesses against him"(Mt 26). Jesus said, "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true". The Father bore witness to the Son on many occasions, by the works he did through him and at his baptism and on the mount of transfiguration. If God testifies on your behalf, you need no other witness ;o)

It is interesting in how we assume that it was the words Jesus spoke, as opposed to the power in His voice as the Father was bearing witness on behalf of his son against those who sought to discredit him. Since "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself", there may have been other times as well when Jesus spoke and they felt the power of the Father in Him.

Not if He had to fulfill the Law.

[WhiteWings]

Luk 22:48  "Judas," said Jesus, "are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?"

Id say that was Jesus identifying Himself.

As for the men being knocked backward to the ground in John by the Voice of Jesus speaking, I guess you have to be a believer in the Word of God, through faith to understand and except that.

:LH:

While not claiming anything like being a superior believer it occurs to me that I'm the one that believes what written. I want all words found in the Greek text be part of the verse/conversation.
As for Luke 22:48.... well prove it to me. No calling yourself son of man isn't anythng of use to your cause. Things should be placed in a cultural context. During that time there where many people who called themself messiah, teacher, son of man, etc.
There were all sorts of sects at that time. They had names like The sons of the Light. That includes the Temple priests.
In a written Bible it all seems so special. Son of Man with caps. In a spoken language you don't see caps. So placed in that cultural context the words of Jesus were not that special. In the whole NT (except Revelations) Jesus is answering all questions with a question or words 'you say so'. Never anything directly.
So His final hours had come. He was arrested. And still no direct answers. Weird for someone that was supposed witnessed against Himself half an hour ago. If those soldiers were so impressed by Jesus why they didn't ran away instead of arrest Him?


Before you start using your below the belt remarks again: Yes Jesus was THE Son of Man. He was teh Messaih. He was everything the OT is about (note the caps).
There is a difference between being someone and testifying against yourself.

[WhiteWings]

Much of the latter conversation here is a great example of how we, as human, can get so caught up in our vernacular and definition searching, that we miss the power of the Word being given.  The incident happening was huge.

Really I agree with all of that.
But look it from another angle.
If I believe I want to base it on something real. On the original text placed in the original context, in the original culture.
2000 years of sweeping things under the carpet has past. If the written text doesn't fit one's idea's just look at it spiritually. Well that brought a church of great unity and agreement....
Many (on this forum) reject apocalyptical writings because they believe those writings are not divinely inspired. I can accept that view. What I don't accept, and simply refuse to be part of, is notsetting the same high standards for the translations (by looking at the original text)
All I'm doing in this thread is reading the verse. To my best capabilities I'm neither adding or taking away from the verse.
:2c:

[eaglesway]

the mouth of two or three witnesses is about convicting someone of a capital crime(death sentence). The priests arrested Jesus for charges they could not prove even though they brought "many false witnesses against him"(Mt 26). Jesus said, "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true". The Father bore witness to the Son on many occasions, by the works he did through him and at his baptism and on the mount of transfiguration. If God testifies on your behalf, you need no other witness ;o)

It is interesting in how we assume that it was the words Jesus spoke, as opposed to the power in His voice as the Father was bearing witness on behalf of his son against those who sought to discredit him. Since "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself", there may have been other times as well when Jesus spoke and they felt the power of the Father in Him.

Not if He had to fulfill the Law.

I may be misunderstanding your point, but IMO Jesus did not have to testify for himself or against himself to fulfill the law. The Pharisees broke the law in killing him tho- they never found two witnesses against him for any capital offence, who were not false witnesses.

[Molly]

No Molly you should apply the basic rules of English.

Jesus said "the Jesus I am"
The "I'm" is just a quote from that verse.

Q: Are you Jesus the Nazarene?
A: Yes I 'm

That's it. Nothing more nothing less.
What those soldiers heared, saw, smelled or saw is of zero importance for this topic. Jesus wasn't witnessing against Himself.

What do you think "that" is refrencing to? It refrences to verse 5.

Suprise Peter is another I am he :winkgrin:
Acts 10 [ACV]
21 And having gone down to the men, Peter said, Behold, I am he whom ye seek. What is the cause for which ye are here?

Better luck next time Molly :laughing7:

Suit yourself, ww.  English is my native language so I won't argue basic English rules with you.  Especially since you seem to know them better than I do.

But, as others have pointed out, it is not just the words 'I AM' that provide the proof here.  It is the reaction of the guards.   You could say, 'I think, therefore, I AM,' all day long and no one would ever fall down at your feet. :winkgrin:

[sheila]

 I understand your reasoning,WW,really. And it is true that better understanding comes by doing this...BUT THE PERFECT UNDERSTANDING IS IN CHRIST...for instance

  in His TRANSLATION..BOTH THE LAW AND PROPHETS ARE PERFECTED/GLORIFIED   Father said,"I WILL NOT GIVE MY GLORY UNTO ANOTHER" JESUS I AM" Was

  given an exalted name above all others..due to being obediant unto death[law perfected] OF WHICH HE WAS ON THE VERY BRINK OF LAYING DOWN

  HIS LIFE WILLINGLY IN OBEDIANCE TO FATHER...

   In the New Jerusalem they have 'both' the name of God and Jesus.  when we receive our new name..it will HAVE A NEW NAME TOO THAT CONTAINS BOTH

   JESUS AND FATHER

  so YESHUA[God saves,I AM}? don't know :dontknow: maybe that will be all our last names in the family of God

[eaglesway]

Only if we are who we are. That's the secret of overcoming. Being transformed into the image of the one who was the radiance of the Fathers glory and the express image(icon) of his nature...... If you have seen me you have seen the Father.(YHWH- I AM That I AM)... Having seen him(if we have) we will be like him.... For we all with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image, by the Spirit, who is the Lord.

[thinktank]

the mouth of two or three witnesses is about convicting someone of a capital crime(death sentence). The priests arrested Jesus for charges they could not prove even though they brought "many false witnesses against him"(Mt 26). Jesus said, "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true". The Father bore witness to the Son on many occasions, by the works he did through him and at his baptism and on the mount of transfiguration. If God testifies on your behalf, you need no other witness ;o)

It is interesting in how we assume that it was the words Jesus spoke, as opposed to the power in His voice as the Father was bearing witness on behalf of his son against those who sought to discredit him. Since "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself", there may have been other times as well when Jesus spoke and they felt the power of the Father in Him.

Not if He had to fulfill the Law.

I may be misunderstanding your point, but IMO Jesus did not have to testify for himself or against himself to fulfill the law. The Pharisees broke the law in killing him tho- they never found two witnesses against him for any capital offence, who were not false witnesses.

I have been following this thread but I don't understand exactly what is being said. I will present the following scripture which may disappoint many of you, but this is what I have found.


58But Peter followed him afar off unto the high priest's palace, and went in, and sat with the servants, to see the end.

59Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death;

60But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last came two false witnesses,

61And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.

62And the high priest arose, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee?
63But Jesus held his peace, And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.
64Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
65Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.
66What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death.
67Then did they spit in his face, and buffeted him; and others smote him with the palms of their hands,
68Saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote thee?


So to me the arresting in the garden was done with the hope that he would be brought to trial and convicted by the council. Unlike previous times of accusations, Jesus allowed them to arrest him, since it was his time to die for the people. He now put his life in Gods hands.

The scripture I gave shows the false witnesses are the whole council who witnessed Jesus saying he will return at the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven. They now have an occasion against him of blasphemy, where he being a man makest himself God.

They say what need we have of further witnesses. So here is the law fulfilled at this trial.

In the garden there was no trial, just an arrest. This council took place after the garden. So if Judas and Jesus are the 2  witnesess why are they not brought to trial to testify what was said in the garden, or why is there a further trial, if they were already tried in the garden?

But the text shows that they sought many false witnesses but found none.

[Molly]

64Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

65Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.
66What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death.

Hi, TT.  Glad you brought this up.  They can't find any witnesses, just false witnesses.  But, then Jesus says something and the high priest tears his clothes.  What need do they have of witnesses now?  He has just told them he is the cloud rider of Daniel 7, and they all know it.


13 "In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
[Dan 7]

[eaglesway]

Blasphemy is just a word religious leaders use when their authority is challenged  :laughing7:

[Beloved Servant]

Then they spit in his face and struck him with their fists. Others slapped him.

[eaglesway]

Then they spit in his face and struck him with their fists. Others slapped him.

Lord Jesus, I love you. What you endured for me.

[micah7:9]

Since there has been a great deal of flack as to my saying that Jesus and Judas were the two witnesses, I know longer will say on this subject. I must thank you all for your contributions and May the Lord bless.

[eaglesway]

Aflack! :happy3:

[Beloved Servant]

Then they spit in his face and struck him with their fists. Others slapped him.

Lord Jesus, I love you. What you endured for me.

He endured All flesh!

[Beloved Servant]

Amen and alleluia!
That was His purpose and goal!

[eaglesway]

Amen! And if we are among His sons, we share that purpose and goal!

"For this reason He is not ashamed to call us ....brethren!"

All things work together for good to those who love God and are called according to His purpose

According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
Having predestinated us unto the adoption of sons by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.


Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.

[Beloved Servant]

Since there has been a great deal of flack as to my saying that Jesus and Judas were the two witnesses, I know longer will say on this subject. I must thank you all for your contributions and May the Lord bless.

Could that be said as Christ in God and Christ in the Flesh?