I asked this question to Grok:
Why is it that Ezekiel 28:16 is sometimes translated as past tense and sometimes translated as future tense.
Thought for 24s
This was the answer:
In Biblical Hebrew, the verbs in Ezekiel 28:16 that describe God’s actions are wayyiqtol (waw-consecutive imperfect) forms, which normally indicate sequential past/narrative actions, but prophetic literature often uses past forms for future events with certainty.
tanakh.info
The Hebrew text reads roughly: “By the abundance of your trade they filled your midst with violence, and you sinned; so I profaned you from the mountain of God, and I destroyed you, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.” The relevant forms are watteḥĕṭā (“and you sinned”), wā’eḥallelkā (“and I profaned/cast you as profane”), and wā’abbedkā (“and I destroyed you”). These are classic narrative-past (wayyiqtol) constructions.
tanakh.info
Why the tense difference in English translations?
- Past-tense renderings (most modern versions: ESV, NIV, NASB, CSB, etc.) follow the grammatical past of the Hebrew. They treat the passage as describing the judgment in completed terms. In prophetic oracles and laments, Hebrew frequently uses perfect or consecutive-imperfect forms for future events (“prophetic perfect” or similar narrative-style usage). The prophet speaks as if the event has already occurred, emphasizing its certainty from God’s perspective or within a visionary/lament framework. Commentators often note that surrounding verses (28:17–18) continue in past forms and that the whole lament is spoken from the standpoint of prophecy fulfilled.
sermonindex.net
- Future-tense renderings (notably the KJV: “I will cast thee as profane… and I will destroy thee”) prioritize the overall prophetic context. Ezekiel is delivering a judgment oracle against the king of Tyre whose downfall (from the prophet’s historical viewpoint, around the early 6th century BCE) still lay ahead. Translators like those of the KJV rendered the verbs as future to match the expected outcome of the prophecy rather than the surface tense of the Hebrew forms.
This is a standard feature of Biblical Hebrew in prophetic texts: past-oriented verb forms can (and often do) refer to future events that are viewed as certain. The same phenomenon appears throughout the prophets. There is also a minor related textual/interpretive issue with the “covering cherub” phrase—some ancient versions (and a few modern ones, such as certain NET notes) handle the subject of the expulsion slightly differently—but the main tense variation comes from how English translators treat the Hebrew wayyiqtol forms in a prophetic setting, not from major differences in the underlying Hebrew text itself.In short, the Hebrew is grammatically past/narrative; the future translations reflect the prophetic certainty and future-oriented meaning of the oracle.
Now ask it if the passage could be using Lucifer's fall in the Garden of Eden to describe the coming fall of the king of Tyre.
Betcha you won't.
Looking at the universe that God created, science has discovered that time and space both began with the Big Bang. This confirms the existence of God.
I'm going to address this as a single piece:
"Science" cannot discover something that isn't true.
The Big Bang is an anti-God "solution" (for lack of a better term) to explaining the existence of God's creation without God.
Thus it cannot "confirm the existence of God," because that would be antithetical to its purpose.
Try reading Genesis 1.
It does not describe the Big Bang.
An infinite past is not possible.
Because you say so?
Sorry, but the Bible says otherwise.
I'll stick with what it says.
We would never arrive at today.
"We" have not existed for eternity past.
But also, "we" are not God.
God, on the other hand:
is - and was - and is to come - whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting - before all things - forever and ever - the Ancient of Days - from before the ages of the ages - from ancient times - the everlasting God - He continues forever - from of old - remains forever - eternal - immortal - the Lord shall endure forever - Who lives forever - yesterday, today, and forever - God's years are without number - rock of ages/everlasting strength - manifest in His own time - waiting until - everlasting Father - alive forevermore - always lives - forever - continually - the eternal God - God’s years never end - from everlasting to everlasting - from that time forward, even forever - and of His kingdom there will be no end.
(references:
https://opentheism.org/verses#time)
Consider:
Everything that has a beginning has a cause.
Likewise, nothing that has a beginning can cross an infinity.
Bertrand Russel made an error when he asked, "Well then, who made God?"
God who has no beginning (and thus has no cause), has existed through the beginningless past.
He did not come into existence.
Rather, He is "from everlasting to everlasting."
Read more here:
https://kgov.com/time#misconception-4, or just read the whole page,
https://kgov.com/time
God must have created time.
You cannot create something that is a prerequisite for creation.
And "Before the Big Bang" is a logical contradiction. But the "before" part is not the part that is false. (law of non-contradiction)
Why? Consider:
Creation means going from non-existence to existence, which itself is a sequence, a before and after. And any before and after sequence requires time. Time therefore is a precondition of creating. Thus time itself cannot be created. Scripture describes God's creation of matter and space, light and life, but not of time.
Thus, the Big Bang fails at being the "cause" of time, just as God cannot create it.
If God is on the timeline, then time transcends God. If time transcends God, then were did time come from?
False dichotomy.
The third alternative is that time itself does not exist outside of a thinking mind. It is simply a construct used to describe the relationship between two given events.
Time is an aspect of God's existence.
