I see your point, but they justify this by grammatical rules. In other words, it can't be translated word-for-word, literally, but grammatically correct. I think most people take the middle road—if for no other reason than for the ease of reading—sometimes stretching the rules and sometimes opting for a more literal translation for a variety of reasons (doctrinal, personal taste, etc.).
I'm no great student of Greek (I'll save all the trouble of saying that's obvious)’ but why infinitive?
Because of the ending -mai. :) But it is difficult to argue that genesthai of John 8:58 should be interpreted as past tense any more than eimi should, when we have Matthew 24:6, Mark 1:17, Luke 9:36, John 1:12, John 13:19, etc. to suggest otherwise.
In the Catholic teaching of the trinity there are three persons in one Godhead, Father, Son, Spirit. So which of the three persons was speaking to Moses at Ex. 3:14? Father? Son? Spirit? All three? Two out of three?
The Creed leaves no doubt that it had to be the Holy Spirit ("he spoke through the Prophets").
I take Ps. 2 as prophetic of the Christ, of Jesus, since I accept that he was the Christ. But if a person doesn't believe any of the Bible is prophetic then even a cursory reading is a waste of time. Father? So.
For one, verse 7 makes no sense in that context (remember also this is supposed to be David's writing): "I will surely tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to Me, 'You are My Son..." Who is saying this? Jesus?
Not to say anything of verse 9 "9'You shall break them with a rod of iron, you shall shatter them like earthenware.'"
How Christ-like is that?
It's difficult to argue otherwise. Abraham had died, the Prophets had died, past tense, yet Jesus says Abraham rejoiced in the prospect of seeing Jesus’ day.
On the face of it, how else would one interpret it other than as past tense without doing greater violence to what Jesus said.
I would have to ask if there something in the account that would lead me to think that some other tense would be a better fit and the answer is ‘no’.
Psalms chapter 2.
“For one, verse 7 makes no sense in that context (remember also this is supposed to be David's writing): “I will surely tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to Me, ‘You are My Son...” Who is saying this? Jesus?”
It makes perfect sense given the Hebrew usage at 2 Sam. 7:14.
Here God says of Solomon, “I will be his father, and he shall be my son.”
Wasn't Solomon and every other male, a Son?
At Psalm 2:7 it is David speaking and it is prophetic of the Christ, Jesus, and I suspect most Christians would agree to that.
Christ like? Of course it is! Christ is going to “shepherd the nations with an iron rod”.
“The Creed leaves no doubt that it had to be the Holy Spirit (”he spoke through the Prophets”).”
I'll hold off on that till Catholics comment on it. Had to be?