Form Cf 1040 X: Fill & Download for Free

Yes as it fits the grammar and meaning. The translation is well known and fits what the vast majority of translators have done. In addition even the KJV shows it is not a reference to the poor translation of EX 3:14 as they did not translate it “I AM” rather just the standard “I” am”. Not a name or title or it would be at least “I Am”.JOHN 8:58What was Jesus teaching at this verse? That he was someone with the title of “I Am”? A common rendering of this passage: “Before Abraham was I am.”(KJV), has caused many to think so. Or, was he testifying to the fact of his living before Abraham lived, as in: “The absolute truth is that I was in existence before Abraham was ever born.” (Living Bible) We will study both meanings.If “I Am” is a title which Jehovah used to identify Himself when speaking to Moses as at Exodus 3:14, and if Jesus wished to apply it to himself, he would have had to say: ‘I am the I am’ or ‘I was the I am’. Did he say such a thing? The answer is: No! Yet we encounter statements in religious writings to the effect that: “Jesus claimed Jehovahistic identity (John 8:58) when He announced Himself to the unbelieving Jews as the “I Am” of Exodus 3:14”, and: “Jesus literally said to them, “I am Jehovah”. (Walter R. Martin, THE KINGDOM OF THE CULTS , 1965, pp. 60, 77.)Try as one may, one cannot find such a statement coming from the lips of the Lord Jesus Christ at this, nor any other verse of Scripture. Jesus merely said, translating literally from the Greek: “before Abraham to become I am.” He did not apply any title or identification to himself. He only disclosed when he was alive; when his life started, and from when his life continued, sometime before Abraham. Not who, but when he was!In trying to connect John 8:58 with Exodus 3:14, the claim has been made: “Jesus quoted the exact words and tense in Exodus 3:1;4.”This would seem to be a very strong point for the side of the trinitarians; (if inAs to tense, the two verses are not the same. Exodus 3:14 can be diagrammed thus: ego (I) is the subject; eimi (am) is the copula (the connector, a form of “to be”); ho (the) (the article) ohn (Being) the predicate complement. This is an instance of each verb being in the present tense. John 8:58 can be diagrammed thus: prin (before) Abraam (Abraham) genesthai (to become) is an adverbial expression referring to past time, ego (I) is the subject; eimi (am) is the predicate, “am” is in the present tense. It is seen that in Exodus 3:14 the verb (“am”) which is used in connection with Jehovah, is in the present tense. At John 8:58 the description of the life of the Son of God is a combination of the past (aorist) and present tenses. The two verses are not the same as to tense.Of what import are the above facts with regard to the correct translation and understanding of the statement of Jesus? What do grammars have to tell us on this? Please note:The present [tense] with palai [long ago] or any other expression of past time denotes an action begun in the past and continued in the present, and is translated by the perfect [past tense] e.g. kei~non i*cneuvw paVlai [KAY.nohn ik.NEU.oh PAH.lie; literally, ‘I am tracking him a long time’] I have been tracking him a long time,. (e.a.)—William Watson Goodwin, revised by Charles Burton Gulick, Greek Grammar, p. 268, section 1258.The literal translation of the above would be ignoring the function of the Greek present tense serving as a perfect when accompanied by an adverbial expression of past time, as well as English idiom. We continue:The Present of Past Action still in Progress. The Present Indicative, accompanied by an adverbial expression denoting duration and referring to past time, is sometimes used in Greek ... to describe an action which, beginning in past time, is still in progress at the time of speaking. English idiom requires the use of the Perfect in such cases.” (e.a.)—Ernest De Witt Burton, Syntax of the Moods And Tenses in New Testament Greek, p. 10, section 17. (This describes the syntax (construction) of John 8:58.)Present Tense... It often stands with adverbial expressions denoting past time, such as palai ‘long since,’ arti or artios ‘just (now)’, where in English the progressive present [another term for a tense which shows an action begun and still in progress, used by some scholars, terminology varies from time to time and from country to country even in countries where the same language is used] seem to be required (I have long been looking)—A.N. Jannaris, An Historical Greek Grammar, p. 434, section 1833.2.To describe a state continuing up to the present Greek uses the present tense (echei) [he is having] where English uses the perfect; cf. viii, 58; xiv, 9,—J.N. Sanders, A Commentary of the Gospel According to St. John, p. 158, footnote 4.Sometimes the Present includes also a past tense ... when the verb expresses a state which commenced at an earlier period but still continues - a state in its duration; as, Jn. xv.27 ... viii.58,—George Benedict Winer, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, (Luneman translation), 1893, p. 267.According to Greek grammar, “eimi” (“am”, in the present tense) at John 8:58, because of its being accompanied by and expression of past time, (prin Abraam genesthai) “before Abraham to become”), should be rendered, in English, in the perfect tense. See: James Strong’s “Greek Dictionary ...” in his Exhaustive Concordance Of The Bible, word 1510. The word is e*imiv some of the definitions of it are: “have been ... was”.It has been said: ‘The word “am” at John 8:58 expresses no predicate [action] but is a title.’ What do the lexicons have to tell on this? Please observe:[E]imi, with various uses and significations, like the English verb to be...I. As substantive verb. 1 Of persons and things, to be, exist...John 8:58—George Abbot Smith, Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 132.[A]s predicate to be 1. be, exist ... Of Christ prin Abraam genesthai, ego eimi before Abraham was born, I am [John] 8:58—Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich, p. 222.The verb eimi...Sometimes it does express existence as a predicate like any other verb, as in ego eimi (Jo. 8:58)—A.T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, p. 394.At Isaiah 41:4 and 46:4, in the LXX, the words ego eimi are applied to Jehovah. Jesus at John 8:24, applied ego eimi to himself. The man cured from blindness from birth, as recorded at John 9:9, applied ego eimi to himself. In none of these citations is ego eimi used as a title. The use at Isaiah 41:4, is in answer to Jehovah’s questions: “Who raised up righteousness? (vs. 2) “Who has wrought and done these things?” (vs. 4) Jehovah responds to His own inquiry,“ego eimi” (I am, with ‘the one who has’, being understood). The context of Isaiah 46:4 relates the promise of Jehovah to continue to be the one who would bear up and deliver His people. He showed He would be “the same” to future generations as He had been to those in the past.Jesus’ use of ego eimi in the eighth chapter of John (excepting the 58th verse), had to do with what he had claimed about himself earlier in that chapter. Such as: “I am the light of the world” and that he was “from the realms above”. Then he added: “if you do not believe that I am he, you will die in your sins.” Yes, if they did not believe that he was “the light of the world” and “from the realms above”, they would die in their sins.In John 9:9, some of the people were denying that the man born blind was the one who could now see. He responded to them saying “ego eimi”; with the words “he”, “the one” or “the man” added in some translations to complete the sense. (NWT, NASV, NIV, NEB, RSV) The above usages of “ego eimi” are not of the same syntax as that of John 8:58. They are examples of what is called a predicate absolute. They are not examples of the present of past action still in progress.A word such as “eimi” is said to be a predicate absolute when it is used without an object being stated. In the above quotations, the expression “I am” is not followed by a noun or pronoun telling who the subject is; the subject is understood. “Eimi” at John 8:58, is not used as a predicate absolute; it does not tell who Jesus was, it is used, at this verse, to show that the Son of God was alive before Abraham.Using “eimi” as a predicate absolute at John 8:58 would not be appropriate to the context. The people asked Jesus, after he had told of the joys of Abraham contemplating the blessings which would be brought about of the work of the Messiah: ‘How could have seen Abraham, and known his thoughts, you are too young!’ The questions had to do with the age of the Son of God; not his identity. The answer Jesus gave them let them know that he was in existence and was looking down on the earth at a time before, and during, the time of Abraham, so could know what Abraham felt about the blessings from the work of the promised Messiah. (Compare vss. 56–57.)We see, then, while “ego eimi” in the LXX at Isaiah 41:4; 44:4; John 8:24 and 9:9 are predicates absolute and answer the question “who” without the use of a stated object. Exodus 3:15 and John 8:58 are not examples of a predicate absolute. Exodus 3:l4 in the LXX shows identity by use of a title “the Being” or, “the Existing (one)”. John 8:58 tells of existence, not identity.Shifting our attention from the Greek to the Hebrew, this question comes to mind: ‘Does the Hebrew lend any support to the claim of some, that: “I Am” as found in many English translations of Exodus chapter three, has the same meaning as “I Am” in various English translations of John 8:58 ?The following comments on the Hebrew expression hyha dva hyha (ehyeh asher ehyeh) which Jehovah used to make a declaration about Himself to Moses at Exodus 3:14, will be illuminating:Such a translation [in English] as “I am what I am” appears to be ruled out completely by the fact that the verbs [in Hebrew] here are imperfects. “I am” is the normal translation of the Hebrew perfect, not an imperfect. ... The translation offered here relates this explanation of the name to covenants with the patriarchs. As such it was a basis of assurance concerning Yahweh’s presence and support. This thought is made explicit in the verse that follows, and the proper name Yahweh, the memorial name, is made synonymous with the description “I shall continue to be what I have always been.” This makes the description a restatement of Yahweh’s faithfulness an assurance that he will fulfill the covenants with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.—J. Wash Watt, Professor of Old Testament, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, 1930-1968, A Distinctive Translation of Exodus With An Interpretative Outline, 1977, pp. 140–1.The translation I am [in English] is doubly false: the tense is wrong, being present; and the idea is wrong, because am [in such an incorrect translation] is used in the sense of essential existence. All those interpretations which proceed upon the supposition that the word is a name of God as the self-existent, the absolute, of which the Septuagint’s ho ohn is the most conspicuous illustration, must be set aside ... the nature of the verb [in Hebrew] and the tense peremptorily forbid them.—A.B. Davidson, “The Theology of the Old Testament”, in The International Theological Library, 1920, p. 55.Most moderns follow Rashe [Shelomoh Ben Yishaq, 1040(?)—1105; see: Encyclopedia Americana, 1956, Volume 23, page 220] in rendering ‘I will be what I will be’ i.e. no words can sum up all that He will be to His people, but His everlasting faithfulness and unchanging mercy will more and more manifest themselves in the guidance of Israel. The answer, which Moses receives in these words, is thus equivalent to, ‘I shall save in the way that I shall save.’ It is to assure the Israelites of the fact of deliverance, but does not disclose the manner.—J.H. Hertz, The Pentateuch and Hoftorahs, 1950, footnote to Exodus 3:14.This meant that this Almighty One could adapt himself to the circumstances of his people, and that, whatever he needed to become or prove to be for the sake of his people and in line with his purpose, he could and would meet any situation successfully. So, by this Hebrew expression, He was not talking about his self-existence, his being eternal.—The Watchtower, December 1, 1974, pp. 728-9.How translations reflect this knowledge:1)“I-will-be-what-I-will-be”.—MO.2) “I Will Become Whatsoever I please”—Rotherham added this footnote to Exodus 3:14 in his translation: “Hayah [“to be” root of “ehyeh”] does not mean ‘to be essentially or ontologically [i.e. what He is basically or that He exists], but phenomenally [i.e., what He will do]. ... it seems that in the view of the writer ‘ehyeh and yahweh are the same: that God is ‘ehyeh ‘I will be’ when speaking of Himself, and yahweh’ when spoken of by others. What he will be is left unexpressed — He will be with them, helper, strengthener, deliverer.”—Professor A.B. Davidson, in Hastings Bible Dictionary, Vol. II, [p.] 199.”3) “I will be what I will be”.—BY.4) “I will be that I will be”.—Leeser.5) “I SHALL PROVE TO BE WHAT I SHALL PROVE TO BE”.—NWT.6) “I shall continue to be what I have always been”.—J. Wash Watts.7) “I will be what I will be”.—NEB.8) “The meaning of the divine name (v. 12) is repeated and expanded, God’s freedom from and control of history are denoted by the phrase, “I will be what will be”.—Oxford Study Edition The New English Bible, footnote.9) “I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE”.—RSV, margin. \10) “I will be what I will be”.—NIV, margin.11) “I will be what I will be”.—LB, margin.12) “I will be what I will be (or become)”.—The Companion Bible, margin.13) “I will be what I will be”.—I.M. Ruben, 1928.14) “I will be what I will be”.—Simon Glazer, 1935.15) “I will be what I will be”.—English Revised Version, 1881–1885, margin.16) “I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE”.—ASV, margin.17) “Or, I WILL BE THAT I WILL BE.”—M.B. Glazebrook, D.D., Canon of Ely; THE LAYMAN’S OLD TESTANENT, Oxford University Press, 1913, margin.18) “I will be what I will be”.—Revised English Bible, 1989, margin.The above brings even more strongly into question the correctness of trying of to link Exodus 3:14 with John 8:58.How do scholars regularly render “the present of past action still in progress” when translating from the writings of the apostles and disciples of Christ? In the following chart the literal translation of the Greek will be taken from the Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, by Alfred Marshall. The usual English rendering will be from the Revised Standard Version.LITERAL TRANSLATION GREEK PRESENT USUAL RENDERING OF GREEKOF GREEK EXPRESSION PRESENT INTO ENGISHDENOTING DURATION AND PERFECT [PAST] TENSEREFFERING TO PAST TIMELuke 13:7 (it is) since I come I have comeLuke 15:29 so many years I serve I have servedJohn 5:6 much already time he has he had hadJohn 14:9 so long time I am have I beenJohn 15:27 from beginning ye are you have beenActs 15:21 from generations has has had2 Cor. 12:19 already ye think have you been thinking2 Tim. 3:15 from a babe thou knowest you have been acquainted2 Peter 3:4 from (the) days so remains have continued1 John 3:8 from beginning devil sins has sinnedOne can see from the above and from consulting the other translations meant for general reading, the grammatical principle has been followed. The Greek present has been rendered into the English perfect when the Greek construction noted above is found in the sentence. Yet, when reviewing the renderings of most translations/versions, we find the grammatical principle has not been observed at John 8:58. Most translations/versions have rendered the Greek present into the English present even though it is accompanied by and expression in the Greek perfect or aorist denoting duration and referring to past time. Why? What has caused any scholars to ignore the government of grammar at John 8:58 when they have done so at other occurrences of the “present of past action still in progress”?We are happy to report that we do find some translations, ancient and modern, which have adhered to the grammar reflected in the construction of the Greek in John 8:58 by the wording in their works. The following list runs the theological gamut from Protestant to Unitarian to Jehovah’s Witnesses. Also we find some interesting use of the English present to represent past action, in the works of Roman Catholics, Orthodox and those of other persuasions. They use wording which show Jesus was speaking of a state or condition beginning in past time, his life, which was still continuing at the moment of his speaking. Please note the following:1) “[F]rom before Abraham was, I have been”.—The New Testament, George R. Noyes, D.D., “Professor Of Hebrew And Other Oriental Languages And Dexter Lecturer On Biblical Literature In Harvard University”, 1869.2) “[B]efore Abraham was, I have been”.—Syriac-Edition: A Translation of the Four Gospels from the Syriac of the Sinaitic Palimpsest, Agnes Smith Lewis, 1886, from a 4th/5th century manuscript. (Syriac is a form of Aramaic.)3) “[B]efore Abraham existed, I was”.—Syriac Peshita-Edition: The Syriac New Testament into English from the Peshitto Version, seventh edition, James Murdock, 1896, from 5th century manuscripts.524) “[B]efore Abraham to be, I was”.-Curetoian Syriac-Edition: The Curetonian Version of the Four Gospels, F. Crawford Burkitt, 1904, from 5th century manuscripts.5) “[B]efore Abraham cane to be, I was”.—Georgian-Edition: “The Old Georgian Version of the Gospel” of John, P. Blake, M. Briere, in Patrologia Orientallis, Vol. XXVI, faxcicle 4, Paris, 1950, from 5th century manuscripts.6) “[B]efore Abraham was born, I was”.—Ethiopic-Edition: Nouvum Testamentum Æthiopice, T.P. Platt, revised by F. Praetorius, Lepzig, 1899.7) “I was before Abraham was born”.—The New Testament Or Rather The New Covenant, Samuel Sharpe, 1881.8) “[B]efore Abraham existed I was already what I am”.—The Twentieth Century New Testa- ment, 1904.9) “[B]efore Abraham came to be, I was”.—The New Testament (in German), Curt Stage, 1907.10) “[B]efore Abraham became, I, I, am being”.—The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Southern Dialect, George William Horner, 1911.11) “[B]efore Abraham came into being, I have existed”.—The Documents Of The New Testament, G.W. Wade 1934.12) “I have existed before Abraham was born”.—The Bible A New Translation, James Moffatt, 1935.13) “Before Abraham was, I have been”.—The New Testament in Hebrew, Franz Delitzsch, 1937 edition.14) “I existed before Abraham was born”.—An American Translation, Smith and Goodspeed, 1939.15) “Before Abraham was born, I was”.— The New Testament According To The Eastern Text, George Lamsa, 1940.16) “I have been when there had as yet been no Abraham.”—Isaac Salkinson and David Ginsberg, The New Testament in Hebrew, 1941 edition.17) “I existed before Abraham was born.”—The New Testament of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, George Swan, 1947.18) “Before there was an Abraham, I was already there.”—The New Testament (in German), Friedreich Pfaefflin, 1949.19) “I am here - and I was before Abraham.”—The New Testament, James A. Klist, S.J., and Joseph L. Lilly, C.M., 1954. Footnote in same: “Christ here states (1) that he “was” already “in existence” before Abraham “came into being”; and (2) that, since then he has always been, and “still is,” in existence. The two statements, fused into one grammatical expression, stress the idea of continuity from before Abraham’s time down to the presentmoment and intimate his eternity. The statement in Exod. 3:14 is different: “I am he whose essence it is to be.,” [Christ is disclosing his being before Abraham; but to say that ‘he intimated his eternity’, is reading more into the statement than is there. ed.]5320) “I existed before Abraham was born.”—The Authentic New Testament, Hugh J. Schonfield, 1958.21) “Before Abraham existed I was existing.”—Biblia Sagrada (Sacred Bible, in Portuguese), Roman Catholic, second edition, 1960.22) “[O]r, I have been”, (margin)—New American Standard Version, editions of 1960-1973. (Later removed!)23) “I existed before Abraham was born.”—The New Testament Of Our Lord And Savior Jesus Christ, Translated Into English From The Approved Greek Text Of The Church Of Constantinople And the Church Of Greece, by Metropolitan Archbishop Fan S. Noli, 1961.24) “I existed before Abraham was born.”—The New Testament In The Language Of The People, Charles B. Williams, 1963, “honored preceptor” of H.E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey. (See: A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, H.E Dana and Julius R. Mantey, 1927-57; p. x.) Mantey, in a review of his former teacher’s translation, said: “Williams’ translation, considering all the factors, is the most accurate and illuminating translation in the English language.”–“Introduction” to Williams’ translation; Moody Press. Yet Mantey condemns the New World Translation’s rendering of John 8:58, which has the same meaning as Williams’ rendering!25) “I tell you in truth,” Jesus told them, “I was before Abraham.”—The New Testament In The Language Of Today, William G. Beck, 1973.26) “The absolute truth is that I was in existence before Abraham was born.”—The Living Bible, Kenneth Taylor,1971.27) “Truly I tell you, I existed even before Abraham was born.”—The Concise Gospel and The Acts, Christopher J. Christianson, 1973.28) “I am from before Abraham was.”—The Four Gospels And The Revelation, Richmond Lattermore, 1979.29) “[T]o make sense, one must say “Before Abraham existed, I existed” or “...I have existed.”—A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of John, Barclay M. Newman and Eugene A. Nida. 1980.30) “I was alive before Abraham was born.”—The Simple English Bible, 1981.31) “I tell you for a positive fact, I existed before Abraham was born.”—The Original New Testament, Hugh J. Schonfield, 1985.32) “I existed before there was an Abraham.”—The Complete Gospels Annotated Scholars Version, R Miller editor, 1994.33) “4.2.4. Extension from past. When used with an expression of either past time or extent of time with past implications...the present tense signals an activity begun in the past (e.a.) and continuing to present time; Lu 13:7...Lu 15: 29...Jn 14:9...Ac 27:33...Jn 8:58...I have been in existence since before Abraham was born.” —K.L. McKay, A New Syntax of the Verb in New Testament Greek, Peter Lang, New York, 1994, pp. 41-2.34)“The verb ‘to be’ is used...in what is presumably its basic meaning of ‘be in existence’, in John 8:58: prin Abraam genesthai ego eimi...which would be most naturally translated ‘I have been in existence since before Abraham was born’...if it were not for the obsession with the simple words ‘I am.’ If we take the Greek words in their natural meaning, as we surely should, the claim to have been in existence for so long is in itself a staggering one, quite enough to provoke the crowd’s violent reaction.”—K.L. McKay, THE EXPOSITORY TIMES, “ I am in John’s54Gospel”, July 1996, Vol. 17, Number 10, p. 302. In the LXX at Genesis 31:38, e*gwV ei*mi is rendered as “have I been” .OTHER EXAMPLES OF THE GREEK PRESENT RENDEREDINTO THE ENGLISH PERFECTThe NWT renders John 8:58: “Before Abraham came into existence, I have been”. A footnote in the 1950 and 1951 editions states: “I have been = (e.go’ ei.mi’) after the a’orist infinitive clause [preen Ahb.rah.AHM http://gehn.ES.thai] and hence properly rendered in the perfect indefinite tense.”Objections to the above footnote have been raised, such as: (1) “At least in Greek there is no such case.”; (it is believed “tense” was meant, not “case”). (2) “The term “perfect indefinite tense” is an invention of the author of the note.” (3) “It is difficult to know the author of the note ... means, since he does not use standard grammatical terminology, nor is his argument documented from standard grammars.Replies to the above:(1) The expression “properly rendered in”, has to do with the English translation not the Greek original. “Render...to express in other words, as in another language; to translate.”—Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary, 1975. The term ‘perfect indefinite tense’ is not used to imply that there is a such a tense in Greek, but that the English translation is in the ‘perfect indefinite tense’.(2) As to the claim that: “the term perfect indefinite tense is an invention of the author of the note” and “he does not use standard terminology nor is his argument documented from standard grammars.” We have seen from the information found in standard grammars of Greek that the translation of the Greek present into an English perfect is in accord with the rules and idioms of Greek and English.(3) We will quote from English reference sources which were in use during the “school days” of some (if not all) members of the New World Translation Committee, corroborating the fact that a tense called the perfect indefinite was know in English. The tense is identified on page 105 of, A New English Grammar Logical and Historical by Henry Sweet, M.A., Ph.D.; Oxford, Clarendon Press, in at least 13 impressions (unchanged reproductions, according to the OCLC computer network) of 1891-1963 and its final printing by Meicho-Fukyu-Kai, Tokyo, 1983. It is also found on page 178 of Crowell’s Dictionary of English Grammar and Handbook of American Usage by Maurice Wessen, associate professor of English in the University of Nebraska; New York, Thomas Y. Crowell and Company, 1928, fifth printing 1939. In addition, The Oxford English Dictionary says:55So why do the Jews try to kill him? Probably for the same reasonthat they stoned Stephen. Does this mean that Stephen was claimingequality with God?Let us look at the context even more closely:Jesus says they will die (v.21)Jesus says they are killers (v.37,40)Jesus says their Father is not God (v.41)Jesus says their Father is Satan (v.44)Jesus says he is above Abraham (vss. 53-58)Says A Rabbinic Anthology, "So great is the [merit] of Abraham thathe can atone for all the vanities committed and lies uttered byIsrael in this world." (London, 1938, C. Montefiore and H. Loewe, p.676)It was only after all this, and after FIVE "I AM's" [EGW EIMI vss.12, 18, 24, 28, 58] that they tried to stone him. The Jews did notunderstand the I AM to mean that he was saying he was Jehovah, theywere upset at him for elevating himself above Abraham, and this isonly heightened by the fact that he was hurling the above rebukes atthem, simply put.Indefinite...3. Grammar...b. Applied to those tenses or inflections of verbs which merely denote an action taking place at some time (past, present, or future), without specifying whether it is continuous or complete...e.g. the Greek aorist and the English simple past...in modern French past or preterite indefinite is applied to the compound tense corresponding to that called perfect in English.”—The Oxford English Dictionary, Edition of 1971.The Oxford English Dictionary is considered the standard dictionary of the English speaking world. (Photocopies of the above—and other—references will be found on pages 214 through 218 B of this work.)It was not a matter of ‘not using standard terminology’, but of the critic of the NWT not being aware of the perfect indefinite tense in English. Whether one calls this statement by Jesus, the “perfect”, “perfect indefinite tense” or “perfect tense indicative”, all mean basically the same, an event of past time. The terms “perfect” and “perfect tense indicative” are more common than “perfect indefinite tense” and have been used in more recent editions of the NWT for the sake of using a more common term, not a more correct one.We note from the above translations, that the correct thought, inherent in the Greek text, has been conveyed into the English etc. Jesus was teaching he had lived before Abraham, he was not applying a title of “ego eimi” to himself. If he had, we would be confronted with an incomplete sentence. If the words “I am” had been used as a title, there would be no predicate to the group of words at John 8:58. But as it is, “I” is the subject and “am” is the predicate.As commented on by Barnabas Lindars in L’Evangile de Jean (The Evangel of John) M. de Jonge, Leuven University Press, p. 120, footnote 46:The suggestion that ego eimi in this verse is intended to allude to the tetragrammaton YHWH [Yehowah or, Jehovah1] is impossible grammatically, and gives the wrong sense.The Son of God had lived before he came to earth; his life began prior to Abraham’s. It can be seen from the other examples of “the present of past action still in progress” from Luke through 1 John, that one fact is common to them all; all these events had a beginning. John 8:58 is no exception. The Son of God, having a start of life, cannot be the Eternal Jehovah.