Runningman
Well-known member
One problem, while it's true Jesus is called the one Lord, he is not called the one God. Now what?
Salvation and Unitarians
- Thread starter praise_yeshua
- Start date
John 8:58 rebukes you.
Your unitarian paganism is foreign to the Bible.
The Cross didn't make amends for our sins? That's your point? There are lots of verses rebuking you. Tell us more about your heresies.
101G
Well-known member
Correct, for I AM is a Verb which shows the Lord Jesus Title as Father, as well as Son, (in Flesh).
101G.
Runningman
Well-known member
Which confirms Jesus was not referring to himself as the I am. Acts 3:13 proves Jesus isn't the God of Abraham, Issaac, and Jacob.
Ironic. The trinity's mother are the false pagan gods of old. It was created by them. You are in over your head in non-Christian beliefs and practices.
"Marie Sinclair, Countess of Caithness, in her 1876 book Old Truths in a New Light, states: "It is generally, although erroneously, supposed that the doctrine of the Trinity is of Christian origin. Nearly every nation of antiquity possessed a similar doctrine. [The early Catholic theologian] St. Jerome testifies unequivocally, 'All the ancient nations believed in the Trinity'" (p. 382).
Notice how the following quotes document belief in a divine trinity in many regions and religions of the ancient world.
Sumeria
"The universe was divided into three regions each of which became the domain of a god. Anu's share was the sky. The earth was given to Enlil. Ea became the ruler of the waters. Together they constituted the triad of the Great Gods" (The Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology, 1994, pp. 54-55)Babylonia
"The ancient Babylonians recognised the doctrine of a trinity, or three persons in one godâas appears from a composite god with three heads forming part of their mythology, and the use of the equilateral triangle, also, as an emblem of such trinity in unity" (Thomas Dennis Rock, The Mystical Woman and the Cities of the Nations, 1867, pp. 22-23).India
"The Puranas, one of the Hindoo Bibles of more than 3,000 years ago, contain the following passage: 'O ye three Lords! know that I recognize only one God. Inform me, therefore, which of you is the true divinity, that I may address to him alone my adorations.' The three gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva [or Shiva], becoming manifest to him, replied, 'Learn, O devotee, that there is no real distinction between us. What to you appears such is only the semblance. The single being appears under three forms by the acts of creation, preservation, and destruction, but he is one.'"Hence the triangle was adopted by all the ancient nations as a symbol of the Deity . . . Three was considered among all the pagan nations as the chief of the mystical numbers, because, as Aristotle remarks, it contains within itself a beginning, a middle, and an end. Hence we find it designating some of the attributes of almost all the pagan gods" (Sinclair, pp. 382-383).
Greece
"In the Fourth Century B.C. Aristotle wrote: 'All things are three, and thrice is all: and let us use this number in the worship of the gods; for, as the Pythagoreans say, everything and all things are bounded by threes, for the end, the middle and the beginning have this number in everything, and these compose the number of the Trinity'" (Arthur Weigall, Paganism in Our Christianity, 1928, pp. 197-198).Egypt
"The Hymn to Amun decreed that 'No god came into being before him (Amun)' and that 'All gods are three: Amun, Re and Ptah, and there is no second to them. Hidden is his name as Amon, he is Re in face, and his body is Ptah.' . . . This is a statement of trinity, the three chief gods of Egypt subsumed into one of them, Amon. Clearly, the concept of organic unity within plurality got an extraordinary boost with this formulation. Theologically, in a crude form it came strikingly close to the later Christian form of plural Trinitarian monotheism" (Simson Najovits, Egypt, Trunk of the Tree, Vol. 2, 2004, pp. 83-84).Other areas
Many other areas had their own divine trinities. In Greece they were Zeus, Poseidon and Adonis. The Phoenicians worshipped Ulomus, Ulosuros and Eliun. Rome worshipped Jupiter, Neptune and Pluto. In Germanic nations they were called Wodan, Thor and Fricco. Regarding the Celts, one source states, "The ancient heathen deities of the pagan Irish[,] Criosan, Biosena, and Seeva, or Sheeva, are doubtless the Creeshna [Krishna], Veeshnu [Vishnu], [or the all-inclusive] Brahma, and Seeva [Shiva], of the Hindoos" (Thomas Maurice, The History of Hindostan, Vol. 2, 1798, p. 171).The Surprising Origins of the Trinity Doctrine
Few understand how the Trinity doctrine came to be accepted - several centuries after the Bible was completed! Yet its roots go back much farther in history.
"The origin of the conception is entirely pagan"
Egyptologist Arthur Weigall, while himself a Trinitarian, summed up the influence of ancient beliefs on the adoption of the Trinity doctrine by the Catholic Church in the following excerpt from his previously cited book:"It must not be forgotten that Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon [the Trinity], and nowhere in the New Testament does the word 'Trinity' appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord; and the origin of the conception is entirely pagan . . .
"The ancient Egyptians, whose influence on early religious thought was profound, usually arranged their gods or goddesses in trinities: there was the trinity of Osiris, Isis, and Horus, the trinity of Amen, Mut, and Khonsu, the trinity of Khnum, Satis, and Anukis, and so forth . . .
"The early Christians, however, did not at first think of applying the idea to their own faith. They paid their devotions to God the Father and to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and they recognized the mysterious and undefined existence of the Holy Spirit; but there was no thought of these three being an actual Trinity, co-equal and united in One . . .
"The application of this old pagan conception of a Trinity to Christian theology was made possible by the recognition of the Holy Spirit as the required third 'Person,' co-equal with the other 'Persons' . . .
"The idea of the Spirit being co-equal with God was not generally recognised until the second half of the Fourth Century A.D. . . . In the year 381 the Council of Constantinople added to the earlier Nicene Creed a description of the Holy Spirit as 'the Lord, and giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and Son together is worshipped and glorified.' . . .
"Thus, the Athanasian creed, which is a later composition but reflects the general conceptions of Athanasius [the 4th-century Trinitarian whose view eventually became official doctrine] and his school, formulated the conception of a co-equal Trinity wherein the Holy Spirit was the third 'Person'; and so it was made a dogma of the faith, and belief in the Three in One and One in Three became a paramount doctrine of Christianity, though not without terrible riots and bloodshed . . .
"Today a Christian thinker . . . has no wish to be precise about it, more especially since the definition is obviously pagan in origin and was not adopted by the Church until nearly three hundred years after Christ" (pp. 197-203).
James Bonwick summarized the story well on page 396 of his 1878 work Egyptian Belief and Modern Thought: "It is an undoubted fact that more or less all over the world the deities are in triads. This rule applies to eastern and western hemispheres, to north and south.
"Further, it is observed that, in some mystical way, the triad of three persons is one. The first is as the second or third, the second as first or third, the third as first or second; in fact, they are each other, one and the same individual being. The definition of Athanasius, who lived in Egypt, applies to the trinities of all heathen religions."
source: https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/bible-study-aids/is-god-a-trinity/how-ancient-trinitarian-gods-influenced-adoption-of-the-trinity
So you don't have verses to support your theology? Got it no surprise coming from a trinitarian pagan.
civic
Well-known member
one problem while its true the Father is called the one God, He is not called the One Lord.One problem, while it's true Jesus is called the one Lord, he is not called the one God. Now what?
now what ?
next
hope this helps !!!
Runningman
Well-known member
civic
Well-known member
Runningman
Well-known member
Jesus is not even remotely in the context of this passage. Contextually the One Lord is the Father who is the One God.
False. Jesus explicitly referred to himself as the "I Am". John 8:58 rebukes you.
Right off the bat you can see how your theory falters. They believed in "Gods". Trinitarianism doesn't. Your theory crashed and burned before it could even take flight!
Here is where Christ has the authority to make amends for sin and to forgive sins:
Hebrews 10:12: "But He (Jesus), having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God"
Matthew 9:6: "The Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins"
Of course you will run away from these verses as you always do as the Runningman.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Now what?
Are you both discussing here deity or lordship?
If you are discussing deity, then the question is who is the one that receives the title "God", when such title could be assigned to any of them or to both of them.
Now, if you want to discuss lordship, that could be the good subject of a different thread. Deity and lordship do not mean the same in the New Testament.
If both things meant the same, Paul would have freely swapped the titles from time to time. He had plenty of opportunity to do it.... perhaps 50% of the times.... perhaps 20% (which would be already suspicious)... perhaps 10% (which would be even more suspicious)... but Paul does it zero percent of the times (which makes clear who of the two he considered God).
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
In John 8:58 Jesus is not saying explicitly "I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob". However, synergy thinks He said it implicitly.
In contrast, in Acts 3:13 Peter is saying explicitly "The God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified His Son Jesus". @Runningman is not interpreting anything implicitly. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob has a Son... his Son.
If we are to believe that Jesus said implicitly what our brother synergy thinks he meant
and that the explicit statement of Peter does not say what it says,
these are the possible explanations to what Peter said. Let me know if you have alternative explanations.
- Peter didn't hear Jesus saying "I Am"
- Peter hadn't understood what Jesus said, despite the pouring of the Holy Spirit in Pentecost
- Peter heard and understood, but he was preaching his own, wrong interpretation of things
- Peter had taken a logical leap, and now thought that the God of Israel was his own son, and that the God of Israel had died and raised himself from the dead.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Polytheism believes in gods.
Trinitarism believes in divine persons.
That's a huge difference. Let's look:
- In Polytheism, each god has his own thinking, while in Trinitarism, each divine person... well... ha! perhaps this was not the best example.
- In Polytheism, each god can make his own choices, while in Trinitarism, each divine person... well... oops... let me try one more.
- In Polytheism, the deity of each god must be recognized by men, or else suffer consequences, while in Trintarism, the deity of each divine person must be... you know... must be recog... I mean... Grrrrrr! Bear with me, bear with me. One last attempt! One last attempt!
- In Polytheism, gods sometimes differ and quarrel among themselves, or make conflicting demands. In Trinitarism, the three divine persons always agree, never quarrel among themselves and their demands are always compatible. This time I think I got it right!
Last edited:
Huh? This is John 8:58 in my Bible:
(John 8:58) Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I AM!
Which Bible version are you using? The Unitarian Standard Version?
civic
Well-known member
And then we have the Septuagint which confirms Ego Eimi is the Greek word for YHWH in the O.T.
Another problem they have
The Septuagint translates the Koine Greek phrase egĹ eimi (áźÎłĎ ξ៰Οί) as "I am" or "It is I" in several places in the Bible, including:
- Isaiah 47:10: Babylon says, "I am, and there is none else beside me".
- Exodus 3:14: God says to Moses, "I am (ego eimi) THE BEING".
EgĹ eimi is an emphatic form of the verb eimi. In the Gospel of John, Jesus uses egĹ eimi to refer to himself as a name, not a verb. In the Gospel of John, Jesus says "eimi" 45 times, but only 24 of those are egĹ eimi. The deliberate addition of "ego" ("I") alerts the reader that something special is being said
Correct. We've already gone through all this with @Pancho Frijoles and @Runningman . If they offer nothing new then this is Case Over!And then we have the Septuagint which confirms Ego Eimi is the Greek word for YHWH in the O.T.
Another problem they have
civic
Well-known member
More biblcal facts about Christs claims !
áźÎłĎ ξ៰ΟΚ, EgĹ Eimi (âI Amâ)
Matt. 14:27: âBut immediately Jesus spoke to them, saying, âTake courage, it is I [egĹ eimi, âI amâ]; do not be afraidââ (NASB et seq.).
Mark 6:50: Same Greek phrase as in Matt. 14:27: áźÎłĎ ξ៰ΟΚ, Îźá˝´ ĎοβξáżĎθξ, egĹ eimi, mÄ phobeisthe (lit. âI am, do not be afraidâ).
John 6:20: Same Greek phrase as in Matt. 14:27 and Mark 6:50.
John 8:24: ââŚfor unless you believe that I am [egĹ eimi], you will die in your sins.â
John 8:28: âSo Jesus said, âWhen you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am [egĹ eimi]. . . .â
John 8:58: âJesus said to them, âTruly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am [egĹ eimi].â
John 13:19: âFrom now on I am telling you before it happens, so that when it does happen, you may believe that I am He[egĹ eimi].â
John 18:5, 6 (repeat by narrator), 8: 5 âThey answered Him, âJesus the Nazarene.â He said to them, âI am Heâ [egĹ eimi]. And Judas also, who was betraying Him, was standing with them. 6 Now then, when He said to them, âI am Heâ [egĹ eimi], they drew back and fell to the ground. . . . 8 Jesus answered, âI told you that I am He; [egĹ eimi] so if you are seeking Me, let these men go on their way.ââ Note, in 13:19 and 18:5, 6, 8, the pronoun âHeâ was added by translators â indicated by italicization.
Jesusâ unpredicated áźÎłĎ ξ៰ΟΚ, egĹ eimi (âI amâ) Jesusâ unpredicated[1] egĹ eimi (âI amâ) claims are some of the clearest affirmations of the Sonâs deity and eternality. As mentioned below, in the OT, this title was a reoccurring claim of YHWH alone denoting His eternal existence (Deut. 32:39; Isa. 41:4; 43:10; and 46:4). So of course, virtually all unitarian groups (esp. Muslims, Oneness advocates, and JWs) deny this truth of the distinct person of the Son, Jesus Christ as being coequal coeternal and coexistent with God the Father (and the Holy Spirit).
However, as pointed out repeatedly, even if one rejects Jesusâ âI amâ claims as claims of deity, the deity of Christ, the Son of God, are well established in the content of Johnâs literature (John 1:1, 3, 10, 18; 3:13; 5:17-18; 6:20; 9:38; 10:27-30; 17:5; 20:28; 1 John 1:1-2; 5:20; Rev. 1:7-8, 17; 2:8; 5:13-14; 22:13).
In John 8:24, Jesus declared, â. . . for if you should not believe that âI amâ [egĹ eimi] you will perish in your sinsâ(lit. trans.). Some standard translations add either a predicated clause or the pronoun âHeâ after the âI amâ phrase (cf. KJV, NIV, AMP[2] et al.). However, all extant NT Greek manuscripts containing John 8:24 have no stated predicated clause or predicate such as âHeâ after the Greek phrase egĹ eimi. This is true of all Jesusâ egĹ eimi affirmations.[3]
Additionally, there is clear textual and contextual justification to support that Jesusâ claims of being the unpredicated âI amâ and thus, true God and true man. Any added predicate is merely a decision made by the Bible translator. Although the unpredicated divine declaration, âI am,â in John 8:58 is accepted universally as a divine claim among most biblical scholarship (esp. in light of v. 59), not all scholars agree that 8:24 is a divine claim, which is reflected in various translations.
Some translations, however, see the âI amâ claim in 8:24 in the same sense as in John 8:58ânamely, an unpredicated divine title, such as the NASB 2020 ed. Also note, the ISV 2008 ed. reading: âThat is why I told you that you will die in your sins, for unless you believe that I AM, youâll die in your sinsâ (caps. theirs); and the Aramaic Bible in Plain English 2010 ed.: âI said to you that you shall die in your sins, for unless you shall believe that I AM THE LIVING GOD, you shall die in your sinsâ (caps theirs). In fact, this translation translates every one of Jesusâ egĹ eimi phrases as, âI AM THE LIVING GOD.â So Vincent sees 8:24, 28, 58; and 13:19 as a âsolemn expression ofâ Jesusâ âabsolute divine beingââ (Word Studies).
It should also be noted that these particular occurrences of Jesusâ âI amâ claims are not syntactically the same as other claims, which include the phrase âI am,â such as, âI am the door,â âI am the shepherd,â âI am the bread,â etc., which all contain a clear and stated predicate contra the several unpredicated âI amâ statements of Christ. Thus, the burden of proof would rest on the one attempting to show otherwise.
Sometimes, JWs appeal to John 9:9 where the blind man uttered, âI amâ (egĹ eimi). However, the clause is neither syntactically nor contextually equivalent to the unpredicated egĹ eimi statements of Christ in the gospels. â See our article on John 9:9 and the JWs â also see The NWT and John 8:58
The EgĹ Eimi OT Septuagint (LXX) Background
Many associate Jesusâ egĹ eimi (âI amâ) declarations with Godâs declaration to Moses in Exod. 3:14: âGod said to Moses, âI am that I am.ââ[4] Although, the phrase in the Greek LXX of Exod. 3:14 (egĹ eimi ho Ĺn, âI am the Oneâ) is not syntactically equivalent to Jesusâ unpredicated egĹ eimi claims, it does denote the same semantic: YHWHâs eternal existence.[5]
Notwithstanding, there are places in the OT, where YHWH alone claimed to be the unpredicated egĹ eimi, which were syntactically equivalent to that of Jesusâ egĹ eimi claimsâ clearly denoting His eternal existence (Deut. 32:39; Isa. 41:4; 43:10; and 46:4, from the Hebrew, ani hu). Further, in Isa. 41:4, YHWHâs claim of being the âI amâ is joined with His claim to be âthe first, and with the lastâ (cf. 44:6; 48:12). While in the NT, only Christ claimed to be âthe first and the lastâ (Rev. 1:17, 2:8; 22:13). Hence, when Jesus claimed to be the unpredicated egĹ eimi, in John 8:58, for example, which was sandwiched between other divine implications and syntactical features,[6] the Jews, against the backdrop of the LXX, clearly recognized the semantic force of what Christ was claiming: âThey picked up stones to kill Himâ (John 8:59).
This was a legal stoning according to Jewish law (Lev. 24:16). In fact, the Jews understood and responded in the same way (wanting to kill Christ), when Jesus made other unique claims of deityâas in Mark 14:61-64- claim: Son of God and Son of Man, âcoming with the clouds of heavenâ; John 5:17-18â claim: Son of God, âmaking Himself equal with Godâ; John 10:26-33- claim: giving eternal life to the His sheep, being essentially one (hen) with the Father, and being the Son of God.
Marked Progression. Christâs claims of being the âI amâ were not isolated. In John 8, in which most of Jesusâ âI amâ claims were recorded, there are many additional claims of Christ as to His preexistence and deity (cf. 8:12, 19 [esp. the âI amâ clams in vv. 24, 28, 58], 40, 51), which led up to His crowning claim of being the absolute, âI am,â that is, I am the Eternal One who spoke to Moses in the burning bush. It is when we examine all the âI amâ statements do we see the consequence of His claim. Thus, contextually, Jesusâ âI amâ claims were unambiguous claims of being the eternal God, the YHWH of Deut. 32:39 et al. And the Jews knew thisâfor they wanted to kill Him for blasphemy (John 8:59)!
Conclusion
The unambiguous claims of Christ to be ontologically equal with God, God in the flesh, and yet distinct from the Father are abounding both in the OT (esp. as the angel of the LORD) and in the NT (e.g., Exod. 3:6, 14; Matt. 12:6; 14:27-33; Mark 6:50; 14:61-64; John 8:24, 58 et al.; 3:13; 5:17-18; 10:26-30; 17:5; Rev. 1:8, 17; 2:8; 5:13-14; 22:13 et al.)
However, as pointed out repeatedly, Even if one rejects Jesusâ âI amâ claims as claims of deity, the deity of the Son of God are well established in the content of Johnâs literature (John 1:1, 3, 10, 18; 5:17-18; 8:24, 54 et.; 9:38; 6:20; 10:27-30; 17:5; 20:28; 1 John 1:1-2; 5:20; Rev. 1:7-8, 17; 2:8; 5:13-14; 22:13 et al.). When Jesus declared He was the âI amâ at John 18:5, 6 (repeated by the narrator), and verse 8, we read that the âfearlessâ Romans soldiers âfell to the ground.â What would cause Roman soldiers to fall to the ground? So powerful were Jesusâ divine pronouncements that it caused His enemies to shudder to the ground. christiandefense.org
Believing that the person of the Son, Jesus Christ, is truly God and that His cross work is the very ground of justification (apart from works), is essential for salvation.
âYou will die in your sins, for unless you believe that I AM, youâll die in your sinsâ (John 8:24, ISV).
áźÎłĎ ξ៰ΟΚ, EgĹ Eimi (âI Amâ)
Matt. 14:27: âBut immediately Jesus spoke to them, saying, âTake courage, it is I [egĹ eimi, âI amâ]; do not be afraidââ (NASB et seq.).
Mark 6:50: Same Greek phrase as in Matt. 14:27: áźÎłĎ ξ៰ΟΚ, Îźá˝´ ĎοβξáżĎθξ, egĹ eimi, mÄ phobeisthe (lit. âI am, do not be afraidâ).
John 6:20: Same Greek phrase as in Matt. 14:27 and Mark 6:50.
John 8:24: ââŚfor unless you believe that I am [egĹ eimi], you will die in your sins.â
John 8:28: âSo Jesus said, âWhen you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am [egĹ eimi]. . . .â
John 8:58: âJesus said to them, âTruly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am [egĹ eimi].â
John 13:19: âFrom now on I am telling you before it happens, so that when it does happen, you may believe that I am He[egĹ eimi].â
John 18:5, 6 (repeat by narrator), 8: 5 âThey answered Him, âJesus the Nazarene.â He said to them, âI am Heâ [egĹ eimi]. And Judas also, who was betraying Him, was standing with them. 6 Now then, when He said to them, âI am Heâ [egĹ eimi], they drew back and fell to the ground. . . . 8 Jesus answered, âI told you that I am He; [egĹ eimi] so if you are seeking Me, let these men go on their way.ââ Note, in 13:19 and 18:5, 6, 8, the pronoun âHeâ was added by translators â indicated by italicization.
Jesusâ unpredicated áźÎłĎ ξ៰ΟΚ, egĹ eimi (âI amâ) Jesusâ unpredicated[1] egĹ eimi (âI amâ) claims are some of the clearest affirmations of the Sonâs deity and eternality. As mentioned below, in the OT, this title was a reoccurring claim of YHWH alone denoting His eternal existence (Deut. 32:39; Isa. 41:4; 43:10; and 46:4). So of course, virtually all unitarian groups (esp. Muslims, Oneness advocates, and JWs) deny this truth of the distinct person of the Son, Jesus Christ as being coequal coeternal and coexistent with God the Father (and the Holy Spirit).
However, as pointed out repeatedly, even if one rejects Jesusâ âI amâ claims as claims of deity, the deity of Christ, the Son of God, are well established in the content of Johnâs literature (John 1:1, 3, 10, 18; 3:13; 5:17-18; 6:20; 9:38; 10:27-30; 17:5; 20:28; 1 John 1:1-2; 5:20; Rev. 1:7-8, 17; 2:8; 5:13-14; 22:13).
In John 8:24, Jesus declared, â. . . for if you should not believe that âI amâ [egĹ eimi] you will perish in your sinsâ(lit. trans.). Some standard translations add either a predicated clause or the pronoun âHeâ after the âI amâ phrase (cf. KJV, NIV, AMP[2] et al.). However, all extant NT Greek manuscripts containing John 8:24 have no stated predicated clause or predicate such as âHeâ after the Greek phrase egĹ eimi. This is true of all Jesusâ egĹ eimi affirmations.[3]
Additionally, there is clear textual and contextual justification to support that Jesusâ claims of being the unpredicated âI amâ and thus, true God and true man. Any added predicate is merely a decision made by the Bible translator. Although the unpredicated divine declaration, âI am,â in John 8:58 is accepted universally as a divine claim among most biblical scholarship (esp. in light of v. 59), not all scholars agree that 8:24 is a divine claim, which is reflected in various translations.
Some translations, however, see the âI amâ claim in 8:24 in the same sense as in John 8:58ânamely, an unpredicated divine title, such as the NASB 2020 ed. Also note, the ISV 2008 ed. reading: âThat is why I told you that you will die in your sins, for unless you believe that I AM, youâll die in your sinsâ (caps. theirs); and the Aramaic Bible in Plain English 2010 ed.: âI said to you that you shall die in your sins, for unless you shall believe that I AM THE LIVING GOD, you shall die in your sinsâ (caps theirs). In fact, this translation translates every one of Jesusâ egĹ eimi phrases as, âI AM THE LIVING GOD.â So Vincent sees 8:24, 28, 58; and 13:19 as a âsolemn expression ofâ Jesusâ âabsolute divine beingââ (Word Studies).
It should also be noted that these particular occurrences of Jesusâ âI amâ claims are not syntactically the same as other claims, which include the phrase âI am,â such as, âI am the door,â âI am the shepherd,â âI am the bread,â etc., which all contain a clear and stated predicate contra the several unpredicated âI amâ statements of Christ. Thus, the burden of proof would rest on the one attempting to show otherwise.
Sometimes, JWs appeal to John 9:9 where the blind man uttered, âI amâ (egĹ eimi). However, the clause is neither syntactically nor contextually equivalent to the unpredicated egĹ eimi statements of Christ in the gospels. â See our article on John 9:9 and the JWs â also see The NWT and John 8:58
The EgĹ Eimi OT Septuagint (LXX) Background
Many associate Jesusâ egĹ eimi (âI amâ) declarations with Godâs declaration to Moses in Exod. 3:14: âGod said to Moses, âI am that I am.ââ[4] Although, the phrase in the Greek LXX of Exod. 3:14 (egĹ eimi ho Ĺn, âI am the Oneâ) is not syntactically equivalent to Jesusâ unpredicated egĹ eimi claims, it does denote the same semantic: YHWHâs eternal existence.[5]
Notwithstanding, there are places in the OT, where YHWH alone claimed to be the unpredicated egĹ eimi, which were syntactically equivalent to that of Jesusâ egĹ eimi claimsâ clearly denoting His eternal existence (Deut. 32:39; Isa. 41:4; 43:10; and 46:4, from the Hebrew, ani hu). Further, in Isa. 41:4, YHWHâs claim of being the âI amâ is joined with His claim to be âthe first, and with the lastâ (cf. 44:6; 48:12). While in the NT, only Christ claimed to be âthe first and the lastâ (Rev. 1:17, 2:8; 22:13). Hence, when Jesus claimed to be the unpredicated egĹ eimi, in John 8:58, for example, which was sandwiched between other divine implications and syntactical features,[6] the Jews, against the backdrop of the LXX, clearly recognized the semantic force of what Christ was claiming: âThey picked up stones to kill Himâ (John 8:59).
This was a legal stoning according to Jewish law (Lev. 24:16). In fact, the Jews understood and responded in the same way (wanting to kill Christ), when Jesus made other unique claims of deityâas in Mark 14:61-64- claim: Son of God and Son of Man, âcoming with the clouds of heavenâ; John 5:17-18â claim: Son of God, âmaking Himself equal with Godâ; John 10:26-33- claim: giving eternal life to the His sheep, being essentially one (hen) with the Father, and being the Son of God.
Marked Progression. Christâs claims of being the âI amâ were not isolated. In John 8, in which most of Jesusâ âI amâ claims were recorded, there are many additional claims of Christ as to His preexistence and deity (cf. 8:12, 19 [esp. the âI amâ clams in vv. 24, 28, 58], 40, 51), which led up to His crowning claim of being the absolute, âI am,â that is, I am the Eternal One who spoke to Moses in the burning bush. It is when we examine all the âI amâ statements do we see the consequence of His claim. Thus, contextually, Jesusâ âI amâ claims were unambiguous claims of being the eternal God, the YHWH of Deut. 32:39 et al. And the Jews knew thisâfor they wanted to kill Him for blasphemy (John 8:59)!
Conclusion
The unambiguous claims of Christ to be ontologically equal with God, God in the flesh, and yet distinct from the Father are abounding both in the OT (esp. as the angel of the LORD) and in the NT (e.g., Exod. 3:6, 14; Matt. 12:6; 14:27-33; Mark 6:50; 14:61-64; John 8:24, 58 et al.; 3:13; 5:17-18; 10:26-30; 17:5; Rev. 1:8, 17; 2:8; 5:13-14; 22:13 et al.)
However, as pointed out repeatedly, Even if one rejects Jesusâ âI amâ claims as claims of deity, the deity of the Son of God are well established in the content of Johnâs literature (John 1:1, 3, 10, 18; 5:17-18; 8:24, 54 et.; 9:38; 6:20; 10:27-30; 17:5; 20:28; 1 John 1:1-2; 5:20; Rev. 1:7-8, 17; 2:8; 5:13-14; 22:13 et al.). When Jesus declared He was the âI amâ at John 18:5, 6 (repeated by the narrator), and verse 8, we read that the âfearlessâ Romans soldiers âfell to the ground.â What would cause Roman soldiers to fall to the ground? So powerful were Jesusâ divine pronouncements that it caused His enemies to shudder to the ground. christiandefense.org
Believing that the person of the Son, Jesus Christ, is truly God and that His cross work is the very ground of justification (apart from works), is essential for salvation.
âYou will die in your sins, for unless you believe that I AM, youâll die in your sinsâ (John 8:24, ISV).
Excellent! People like @Peterlag rant that those verses are nowhere to be seen. He needs a new pair of glasses.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Mine says the same.
So, do you recognize that you believe that Jesus said IMPLICITLY, and not EXPLICITLY, that He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?
There is nothing wrong with that.
The Bible is full of implicit statements. This could be one of them.
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Ego Eimi just means "I am".
YHWH (whatever the pronunciation) means "I am who I am" or "I am who I am being" or "I am who I can be" among other possible translations. We can check this with whatever Jewish rabbi in our neighborhood and ask him if "I am" is an appropriate translation of the sacred name.
But let's say that we cannot reach an agreement on this, and we throw away millenia of Jewish knowledge about God.
Wouldn't be interesting to know how the Septuagint translates "God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob"?
That would be key. If the way the Septuagint translates God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is the same way Luke uses for the speech of Peter in Acts 3, then it would be more than evident who the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is.
Remember, your interpretation of John 8:58 is about what you think Jesus said implicitly.
In contrast, Acts 3:13 is explicit about the God of Israel NOT being Jesus.
So, how the Septuagint renders God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?
Pancho Frijoles
Well-known member
Of which color?Excellent! People like @Peterlag rant that those verses are nowhere to be seen. He needs a new pair of glasses.
The same color of glasses you are using?
I guess we all need to take off our glasses... and if this is not attainable, at least recognize we are wearing glasses of different colors.
Similar threads
