John 8:58 (I am, I have been, I was?)

Ilvgrammta at aol.com Ilvgrammta at aol.com
Wed Dec 22 17:40:48 EST 1999


In a message dated 99-12-22 15:01:53 EST, scmiller at www.plantnet.com writes:

<< I would concur with you that the Louw & Nida lexicon is an "excellent 
 work." On the other hand, I have reservations about this particular 
 example. I can understand why people, confronted with making sense of this 
 saying by the Johannine Jesus would want to translate the present tense 
 verb EIMI as a past tense in English, but the fact remains that the most 
 literal translation of these words is simply: "before Abraham was, I am 
he.">>

Let me clear up a few things here. For one, I think that the Johannine 
passage can be rendered in a number of acceptable ways. True, the most 
literal rendering is "I am he." But the most literal translation might not be 
the best one in this case. In this context, I think this verse should be 
translated in an existential manner. The emphasis should be on the 
"existence" of Abraham over against the "existence" of Jesus. Now whether one 
chooses to render John 8:58 as "I have been" or "I existed"--he or she needs 
to emphasize the notion of existence. Either way, I do not think that the 
passage is juxtaposing temporality and atemporality. 

The only objection I have to the translation, "I am he," is that it is too 
vague for the modern target audience. Besides preferring "I existed," I also 
like K.L. Mckay's treatment of this verse: "I have been in existence since 
before Abraham was born" (See Furuli, Rolf. _The Role of Theology and Bias in 
Bible Translation_. P. 238). Cf. Mckay [1994].

Best regards,

Edgar Foster



More information about the B-Greek mailing list