"I AM THAT I AM"
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 лют 2024
- What exactly is the meaning of Exodus 3:14, where God shares His name with Moses?
For more on the meaning of divine necessity, see this article: www.reasonablefaith.org/writi...
For more information visit: www.reasonablefaith.org
We welcome your comments in the Reasonable Faith forums:
www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/
Be sure to also visit Reasonable Faith's other channel which contains many full-length videos, debates, and lectures: / reasonablefaithorg
Like the Reasonable Faith Facebook Page: / reasonablefaithorg
Follow Reasonable Faith On Twitter: / rfupdates
Follow Reasonable Faith on Instagram: / reasonablefaithorg
Follow Reasonable Faith on TikTok: www.tiktok.com/@reasonablefai...
Look up the Tetragrammaton. It's really fascinating stuff!
YHWH (I Am that I Am)
Yud-Heh-Wa-Heh
"Behold the Hand Behold the Nail."
I think it just means He *IS* EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE, ALL THE TIME. Rather simple.
Good points.
'YHWH' that is God reveals Himself to Moses at the Burning bush.
Amazingly, our Lord Jesus Christ, says in John 8: 58 "Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”
This, along with John 14: 6 and 15:5 are divine claims, as 'God in the Flesh,' that is Christ, reveals Himself to us.
The resurrection the confirms, these spoken claims, and we have absolute truth, found in and through Jesus Christ only.
Blessings to you.
Pastor John
I believe it was to show that God so powerful and infinite that nothing in our language can describe who God is. God is infinitely larger than everything, to condense him into a few words, or even a book, would not do justice to the Being of God. The only thing God could compare Himself to was Himself, and thus, He said I AM WHAT I AM. This is a great verse to meditate on and marvel at how glorious and magnificent God is, a being that can never be fully grasped by our human brain
👏 very well.
Why would God reveal these things to us and have them recorded in such an ambiguous language? Is there no one who understands the language well enough to give us a definite answer on what it means?
Language changes and evolves. If it becomes harder to interpret, that's because of us. "Let" has a different meaning back then, apparently. The way we use some words changes. And sometimes, the meanings or parts of it change. That's not God's fault. It's us. We can certainly try to recover the meaning, or at least the essential part.
Here's the other thing. Many people complain about things being ambiguous in a way that suggests that they're too lazy or unwilling to try to figure it out. If you're just going to complain instead of trying to figure things out, then you might as well just be a quitter. People who don't try are by definition lazy.
If you have to be the one to figure it all out, then there is no need for God to be involved; nothing left for God to do.
Or it could just be "I am what I am, [and that's all you need to know, nosy mortal]."
Could it though? How do you know it could be translated like that?
Considering how relational God is, how he reaches out to humanity requesting us to know Him, and what He did for us on the cross, I think it's pretty evident that's not what He meant by that. It's hard to think of God being snooty and also letting Himself be born as a man to serve and die for us.
I’m reminded of Jesus’s response to those that came to arrest Him that caused them all to fall backwards to the ground, “I Am”.
It's my understanding that in Hebrew the actual text is; "I will be whatever I will be." I love God. 😊
Thank you Craig
The meaning he prescribes is essentially the same as Aquinas. Surprised he doesn't see that.
Soham is a Sanskrit Hindu mantra, meaning 'I am That.' In Vedic philosophy, it signifies identifying oneself with the ultimate reality or God. Thomas Aquinas might be onto something with his metaphysical interpretation of the Exodus.
Thomas aquinas? U mean that forgery of a gnostic “gospel”?
Or it could just be God trolling Moses. Moses: “what shall I tell them (who are you)” God: “I am who I am”
Love this!!!!
I would mostly agree that we do eisegete the passag when we read divine metaphysical simplicity into the passage, however I believe that when God said that it remains perfectly consistent with and provides some evidence for divine simplicity described by Aquinas
Very interesting!
God will be with Israel!
forever
Consciousness, I am.
Another explanation I heard: i’am unique there is no one to compare me with.
Based and Christ pilled 👽
Dr.Craig I do recall your reference to Stephan Cranes "A Man Said to the Universe" in several of your debates throughout the entirety of this video as somewhat of a familiarity to God's expression to Moses simply stating He exists as Himself & there was, is, nor will be another like Him although the poem is neither here nor there in compatibility. This is a good one.
I think that the best translation is "All EXISTENCE" or "I AM EXISTENCE", "I AM PAST PRESENT FUTURE EVERPRESENT", "I EXIST".
What is your NAME so that I can tell them that you sent me?
"I AM EXISTENCE/I EXIST".
All other "gods" were either created by mankind or by some idiot who thinks he is god and he isn't.
JESUS THE CHRIST IS FOREVER
Isaiah 57:15 For thus says the high and lofty One that inhabits eternity!
I decided to make one of my old videos on this subject public again. ua-cam.com/video/qw7mD9zfR04/v-deo.html
It seems to me that God is upporting the Thomist doctrine that God's essence is just existence.
If the Bible is objectively claiming to be true but is personally and subjectively evaluated and interpreted, then what is true? Is the Bible God's word or did you write it?
I AM is the present tense of the verb TO BE. God here is literally identifying with BEING -- ALL BEING. Including anyone reading this.
Come to New Zealand and debate Gregg Dawes!
Also everyone across all our universities! Please!!! Thinking Matters will super look after you now, entirely new management! =)
LOL what do OT scholars know about philosophy Bill?
I am that one to come
👍👍
Ipsum esse. Not en summum esse. My horrible Latin aside, I'm sticking with Aquinas, Doc.
But I have a metaphysical argument that there really is a real distinctiin between existence and essence and any contingent beings have existence and essenxe distinct and require some cause. leading me ti conclude that a necessary being can't have its existence distinct from its essence.
//But I have a metaphysical argument that there really is a real distinctiin between existence and essence and any contingent beings have existence and essenxe distinct and require some cause. leading me ti conclude that a necessary being can't have its existence distinct from its essence.//
Even if that were the case, the point of the video is that Exodus 3:14 - often cited by Thomists in support of the Thomistic doctrine of divine simplicity - does not yield as much as many think it does.
Moreover, if God's existence is identical to his essence, then we simply lose all grasp of what we're even talking about, since the identity relation is reflexive, transitive, Euclidian, and symmetric. So, if they are in fact identical in God, then it makes no sense to say that there is such a distinction between existence and essence in creatures, since this would entail that the two are not in fact identical. - RF Admin
Dr Craig's least insightful short. I think "I am that I am" goes well with Colossians 1:17, "He existed before anything else, and he holds all creation together." NLT
No. It is described in the rabbinic text as I am that I am or I will be who I will be. In other words, He is or will be many things to many different people at many different times. When Moses asked this question, God finally reveals who He was to Israel in their first encounter. I am the Lord your God, who delivered you out of Israel. But as time goes on He became their refuge, shield or mighty warrior. The situation dictates who God is, but no name can accurately describe Him because he's so much more. To try and do so is to limit Him. As a side note, notice in the New Testament He's referred to as a "savior" Interesting.........
So many different interpretations
If there is nothing new under the sun cycles can repeat. So let me know what you say on the matter.
Jesus came teaching a new understanding and if there is nothing new under the sun and God does not change. Then the understanding Jesus was teaching was the same understanding moses got from God. So obviously that understanding had been lost over time. Enoch said he worte a book for a later generation and because God does not change Enoch had the same understanding as moses and jesus so if the church say Enoch is not holy inspired Scripture it is because they don't understand it. So obviously the teaching have been lost over time so we need to aline our understanding with Enochs book the holy spirit inspired him to write it for a later generation so lets not deny the holy spirit and study his writing's the books was lost to us we have it back now lets bring Christ's teachings back and follow God not men.
Try the guide book for the elect get to know God's word spiritually gby all
What does it mean with, “this generation shall not pass until these are all fulfilled.” ?
If it was godly and God’s will for it to happen then, then obviously something against God’s will, and godliness had to happen, for us to exist.
The question is "which generation is Jesus talking about?"
It's likely he was referring to the generation that will experience those signs. In other words, from when the signs START to when the signs FINISH, there will be (at least) one generation who witnesses it all.
That is why he says this generation (a future generation that will see the signs) will not pass until all the signs are fulfilled. He was NOT referring to the generation in which he lived.
@@unsightedmetal6857
If there’s any doubt which generation, trying writing some story/book, for a people you have little hope to even exist. Make sure you have a bunch of things going for you, you have no children, be past the age for ever having any, kind of like Kazsinski, despise progress, knowledge and science. And, make sure it reads like scripture, everything can be backed up, then include a similar sentence. This is the final generation.
See how that works out for you. Make sure people think their faith in what will happen, can only be validated by incomprehensible finality. They’ll never consider what they would face or have to explain if they came back after 80 to 100 years, and have to be reminded that their faith still hasn’t been verified as the one and true faith.
Jesus. Yeshua. Yoshua. Yahyoshua. Yah is salvation. The most vehement is salvation. The most bitterly hostile is salvation.
“I am that I am” isn’t exactly a name, and it’s not exactly the correct translation when you read it in Hebrew. With that said, that’s what God told Moses to tell to Pharaoh. But God’s real name was told to Moses who was the first human being to ever be told His name which is Yehovah (יהוה) which is a combination of three Hebrew words being Hayah, Hove, Yihyeh which means was, is, will be. His actual name points to his external, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent being.
“I will be what I will be” is probably a better translation because he was telling that to Pharaoh who was for one not worthy to know and two probably didn’t really care (as we would later see).
Yeshua/Jesus said somewhat the same thing and, again, to people who couldn’t have been bothered to care who he really was.
aka "be yourself"
?
who you are cannot be answered apart from our relationship to God.
Human can not understand God. God is Almighty and all knowing. Does God know every detail of the future events. If to day He knows it, will tomorrow God able to change the event He knows to day? If Yes then what God knows to day is not valid tomorrow. The more God knows future events the less God able to change the future events. But what is time according to God? Or can God jumping around the time, like time machines. Or even God undo the events even reset all evens from the start like we reset the computer?
I do not know. Do you?
All I care about is that Jesus revealed himself to be God when he said that "before Abraham was I am". Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father except through him.
sorry, i think you wrong this time. OT was written & told for NT, PRE-REVELATION OR PREPARATION FOR JESUS TO SAY I AM, JESUS IS I AM, YHWH GOD ELOHIM , so book of hebrew can say JESUS IS ALWAYS THE SAME YESTERDAY TODAY AND FOREVER AMEN. you forgot 1st rule, that bible must be interpreted by bible. you're more a philosopher, not theologian. your basic has too much human logic or philosophy and natural theology, not biblical meaning or understanding. my opinion and my analysis. JESUS LORD BLESS 🙏😊
lol! "I Am that I Am" *IS NOT* Creator GOD YHVH's name; Creator GOD YHVHs name is YHVH, as the first person singular pronoun *HE,* tells us *HIS* name is in Exodus 3:15. "I Am that I Am" is a state of being; *NOT* a name.
In Heaven you won't have a tongue
Too complicated, it means God is who he is. God has not given his name to mankind. Read the Bible to find out why, the reason is given in the OT and the NT.
As it's in Exodus, a book of ancient myths and legends, how can you ascribe any meaning to it?
Respectfully Disagree with your premise. As you likely disagree with mine as a Christian. It’s cool.
Supporting evidence or arguments for your contention Exodus is a book of ancient myths and legends?
@@pragmaticoptimist46
Would you say a six day creation was given for us? When the author had no idea we would get an opportunity at life.
How about those old, very old, people, (pre-flood) do you believe they actually happened? Or, could they have been used to impress, or further incite a belief in eternal life for the Egyptians?
How about the grandiose of a tower that could happen reached heaven? Probably nothing more than mockery of the Egyptians, using 100,000 men, twenty years to build a pyramid, that topped at 481 feet.
If the Bible wasn’t written for mocking progress, knowledge and any opposing belief, why is that it’s most valuable and utilized asset.
@@elmercoblentz9432 Just because something serves a purpose does not necessarily mean it is designed for that purpose.
Example: A cardboard box is designed for the purpose of containing objects for either transport or storage. But it also serves other purposes, like being able to bring something higher off the ground, even though it wasn't designed specifically to do that.
So if the Bible serves the purpose for what you say it was written, that doesn't necessarily mean that it was written for that purpose.
The Bible was instead written to document God's interactions with mankind and to show future humans how to be saved.
@@unsightedmetal6857
Perfect.
So my faith in being saved by someone who has the duties of bringing death, destruction and pain, should be the ideals of a moral standard, rather than leaving hope in an enduring planet for generations to come?
That sounds too selfish for a sound mind. One claiming to have guidance outside the natural mind could potentially have the most disgusting penchant for violence. Without even knowing it. For nothing more than the honor of fellow man.
God is Popeye
Because, according to your dogma, you god is omniscient, he must have known when he spoke those words that, thousands of years later, his followers would still have no idea what they meant, and would have wasted gazillions of hours trying, and failing, to come to a consensus view of their meaning. Quite a trickster, your god.