Wrangler
Well-known member
But not the almighty God. See how that works? We know this because Jesus has a God. (John 20:17. Rev 1:1, Rev 3:12))
The continued spread of the Arian Heresy (that Jesus is not God) in JW and Unitarian Churches.
- Thread starter synergy
- Start date
By referring to Jesus as "my God," Thomas spoke what was always applied by believers in reference to the Almighty in the OT.
Jesus would have known this as well.
Do you believe that Jesus existed before the lifetime of Abraham, as "I Am"?
Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”
APAK
Active member
Synergy there is no scripture that says the Son of God is 'THE I AM.' In some maybe more that a few, these 2/3 words were added in this form for Trinitarian bias as it needs all the help it can to attempt to stay afloat.
I can explain it further if you wish....
Wrangler
Well-known member
That’s not true. If it were true, there would be a narrative comment to that effect. See Mark 1:1.
John 8:58 is very clear without any need of bringing in Jesus' other titles such as Son of God, Son of Man, Word of God, Lamb of God, etc... My question is very simple. I will understand if you don't want to answer it.
Jesus saw Nathanael before He had met Nathanael. He saw Nathanael under the fig tree, but what not within viewing distance. Jesus saw Nathanael omnisciently.
John 1:48 KJV
Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.
Jesus is God
John 1:48 KJV
Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.
Jesus is God
Wrangler
Well-known member
It sure is God’s requirement. Do you know the difference between Tommy’s words and the words of your Creator or do you hold what Tommy says above your Creator?
APAK
Active member
Just like yourself and some others, I do not get email notifications that you sent me a post...I just so happed to browse buy...oh well..
Ok you want my take on John 8:58. John, the one who wanted to reveal the Son of God more that any other writer.
(Joh 8:58) Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. (KJV)
(Joh 8:58) Jesus said to them: Truly, truly, I say to you: I am of higher status than Abraham ever was (NEV)
So, to the two parts of unneeded contention.
1. Using KJV...."Before Abraham".....
This means that even before Abraham was born, Jesus existed to be the Savior of all, and much higher in status, in the mind of his Father. There is no basis to leap to a conclusion that Jesus existed before he was actually physically born, or even worse, that he is tied to running around and creating the Universe etc.
2. Using KJV.."I am"....
To answer this part I must look at the Greek and Hebrew language. The Greek transliterated expression ‘ego eimi’ means "I am."
For some reason that I do know of course (the Trinitarian bias and therefore the deliberate skewing of selective scripture) verse 58b has become distorted by many. Because the way verse 58 is structured into its English translation, many want to see Jesus as the Almighty in the expression "I am." It is just that, wishful thinking. They thus try to force and say that YHWH called himself (the) 'I AM.' Notice they even capitalize these two words to persuade with vigor. They look at Exodus 3:14 and state, YHWH calls himself the great "I AM" and Jesus said the same, here in verse 58. Nothing could be further from the truth however.
In Exodus 3:14, YHWH called himself to Moses, in Hebrew, אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה, to ’ehyeh ’ăšer ’ehyeh . If we wanted to translate this expression into Greek, to compare what is said in verse 58b, we see they are completely different expressions in translation and meaning. It would translate into English as: ‘ego eimi ho ōn’ This is different from ‘ego eimi’ at all. YHWH gave an expression of himself, of his personal name. A rough English translation would be like: ‘I am who I am,’ ‘I am that I am,’ ‘I am the being’ or ‘I am the existing one’ or ‘I am existing,’ and other words for this effect – never just ‘I am.’ You see in Greek, ‘ego eimi’ is a common expression used by ALL people and not just Jesus. It literally means that I am he or she, the one who is the subject at hand, and usually in a very emphatic and prejudicial way. Ex: I am the one who stole the pie, no one else...It was I who won the race and not he or she......
To add further ridicule for the Trinitarian claim, here are examples of how absurd it is to think and use ‘I am’ as the divine name of God in the New Testament.
Can you imagine if we searched for and replaced every ‘I am’ found with YHWH in the New Testament?
Here are some examples that alters scripture:
Matt 10:16 - YHWH sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves.
Matt 16:15 - He said to them: But who do you say that YHWH/ I am that I am?
Matt 24:5 - For many shall come in my name, saying: YHWH/ I am that I am the Christ, and shall lead many astray.
Luke 1:19 - And the angel answering said to him: YHWH/ I am that I am Gabriel who stands in the presence of God..
Luke 22:33 - And he said to him: Lord, with you YHWH/ I am that I am ready to go both to prison and to death.
John 1:20 - He confessed, he did not deny, but confessed: YHWH/ I am that I am not the Christ!
John 8:58b - Before Abraham, YHWH/ I am that I am
The Greek expression ‘ἐγώ εἰμι’ and transliterated ‘ego eimi’ and in English, ‘I am’ or usually translated more completely as ‘I am he’ or ‘I am the one,’ is truly a common expression and used many times in the New Testament. And this expression is mostly placed at the front or at the end of a sentence or statement.
Some other thoughts on the subject:
Jesus just previously said in John 5:31-32 and 8:17-18 that his testimony alone does not mean anything without his Father’s testimony. Why would his Father, YHWH, agree with Jesus if he said he was YHWH, his own Father? That would be a madness indeed.
Trinitarians say the Jews wanted to stone Jesus because of his boastful claim to fame, being 'equal' with YHWH. Trinitarians contradict Jesus yet again: Jesus said these Jews could not understand what he was saying in Verse 58 because they were not of God; they were children of the devil (John 8:43-47). They thought Jesus and Abraham were with God and Jesus had higher authority that Abraham. And then for Jesus to say they were not the children of Abraham or God. That was the last straw. That’s why they picked up stones.
Jesus warned his disciples not to tell anyone he was the Messiah of God (Matthew 16:20; Luke 9:20-21). But we are now expected to believe that Jesus suddenly changed his mind, against the will of his Father, and now permitted his disciples to go around Israel declaring Jesus himself to be Yahweh their God, let alone the Messiah of YHWH? This is the most ridiculous and absurd contradiction.
Further, the ‘I am’ type (‘It is I’..) expression is designed to be placed in a sentence for emphasis only, nothing more.
Here are some examples:
Matt 26:25 - And Judas, who betrayed him, answered and said: Is it I, Rabbi? He said to him: You have said it.
Luke 1:19 - And the angel answering said to him: I am Gabriel who stands in the presence of God, and I was sent to speak to you and to bring you these good tidings.
Luke 21:8 - And he said: Take heed you are not led astray. For many shall come in my name, saying: I am he, and, The time is at hand. Do not be led astray by them.
John 6:20 - But he said to them: It is I! Be not afraid!
John 8:18 - I am he that testifies of myself; and the Father that sent me testifies of me.
John 8:24 - I replied to you, that you shall die in your sins. For unless you believe that I am he, you shall die in your sins.
John 9:9 - Others said: It is he. Others said: No, but he is like him. He said: I am he.
John 13:19 - From this time forward I will tell you before it happens, so that when it happens, you may believe that I am he.
John 18:5 - They answered him: Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus said to them: I am he (Judas, the one who betrayed him, was standing with them).
Act 10:21 - And Peter went down to the men and said: I am the one you seek. Why have you come?
Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as 'I am' (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying 'I am' did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God.
Romans 11:13 - " But I speak to you who are Gentiles- inasmuch as I am an apostle of the Gentiles, I glorify my ministry, "
Rev 2:23 - And I will strike her children dead. And all the churches will know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will repay each of you as your works deserve.
There was a man born blind and Jesus healed him. This man was not claiming to be God, as he said 'I am the man,' and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., 'I am.' in verse 58. No coincidence....it is common language usage...no YHWH to be seen here...
Abraham was told by God of Jesus in his time and that he would be the of Son of God and saviour of his people. Abraham rejoiced and could not wait for this event to occur.
And therefore Jesus could claim he was already in the mind of God before Abraham was born. He was planned to be the crucial cog of human salvation. And consequently he was more important that Abraham by far, who the Pharisees revered.
And lastly, there is no reason of any kind to capitalize the words 'I am' in verse John 8:58 except for ignorance, deception, intellectual dishonesty and or Trinity bias.
---one more thing......
A little more background:
God identifies Himself with a name having four possible meanings, each one perfectly accurate.
"I am what I am";
"I am who I am";
"I will be what I will be";
"I will be who I will be";
The reason all four translations are accurate is that in Hebrew it not have a word for the present tense of the verb "to be." In other words, there is no Hebrew word for "am" or "is" or "are." Therefore, in order to say "I am Joseph," for example, one would say "Ani Joseph" ("I Joseph")." The absence of the present tense of "to be" is not unique to Hebrew; it is also true of Arabic and Russian, among other languages. So here, when God uses the future tense of the verb "to be," it literally means, "I will be."
-----------------one more-----then
At the Last Supper, the disciples were trying to find out who would deny the Christ. They said, literally, 'Not I am, Lord' (Matt. 26:22 and 25). No one would say that the disciples were trying to deny that they were God because they were using the phrase 'Not I am.' The point is this: 'I am' was a common way of designating oneself, and it did not mean you were claiming to be God.
---stop here then-----
You are again missing context of these verses. All things were created through Jesus and in Jesus all things consist. That is who the 'Him' is in this verse.
So there is Jesus pre existing.
You gotta put the I am verse alongside the likes of these verses.
Plus... just because Jesus saying i am..does not match exactly I am the am.. does not mean it is not the same thing!
And again ... to see Jesus doing things omnisciently..you don't need just the I am statement.
He saw Nathanael under the fig tree... without being in viewing distance. That's a claim to omniscience. John 1:48
Let alone having power over sin to forgive in the 3rd person.
Let alone being Head of the disciples, yet not one of them.
Let alone sending the Comforter, with the Father sending.
Let alone giving eternal life. John 10:28
It's not in a particular verse alone that Jesus' diety is seen...it's in whole paragraphs and chapters.
But ... we can agree to disagree.
APAK
Active member
So now you have left John 8:58 abruptly and the so-called 'I am' and now have gone to another scripture Colossians 1:16 and are trying to combine John 8:58 with it as being similar. And now you say I missed the context. In John or Colossians? You know I did share some context for John 5:58. It's hard to show context when you just introduced a new area of scripture 360W.
I think you are a bit confused 360W. Reread what you posted to me and redo it with a little more thought. I think I may know what you are trying to say, although I do not want to steal your thunder here.
And you have to be careful about which translation you use for Col 1:16.....there are some that are grossly in err and can change your view, like the one you quotes in your post.
I would suggest you write out Col 1:15 also to understand who Yahshua/Jesus is as compared with God.
(Col 1:15) who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; (RV)
and creation is not the Genesis creation......figure that one out while you are at it.
Verse 15 says that Jesus is clearly the image. In the Greek: ‘eikon’- used in the OT about two dozen times. It never means manifestation as some think of it. He is completed in God and not God himself. The Father is God and therefore not the image of God as surely is his Son not God. The image is NEVER the same as the original. And therefore not of the same substance. Thus Yahshua the Son, is never YHWH, the Father (see also John 14: 9-10).
It also says Jesus is the first human being to attain immortality over all those that will follow later. He is first human ‘born’ of all humans created. Yahshua is indeed the first of the creation of the newborn, of the new adopted sons of YHWH. This was the intent of the passage.
Here are some versions of Col 1:16 to ponder:
(Col 1:16) for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him; (RV)
(ASV) for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;
(NET) for all things in heaven and on earth were created in him – all things, whether visible or invisible, whether thrones or dominions, whether principalities or powers – all things were created through him and for him.
(MKJV) For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers, all things were created through Him and for Him.
(KJV-BRG) For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Verse 16 is not about the creation act depicted in Genesis by God Almighty. Trinitarians make the error of suggesting that Paul is speaking of Genesis and creation of ‘all things.’ and this time by Jesus. This is a verse they claim says that Jesus is the creator of ‘all.’
‘All’ or the Greek transliteration ‘pas’ here, has an association and a definite limitation of scope and a limited context. It is related to Christ and the scope of what his Father gave him authority to create since his ascension. These things created in heaven and earth are such things as angels governance and order with their dedicated service to Christ’s body, and the nurture of new believers in the Spirit.
The structure of verse 16 is conveyed as a beginning statement and a restate of it at the end to ensure the reader understands the context or meaning is read in between them. (Beginning) In him all things were created… things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities….’all’ (THESE things as a list are stated) things were created through him (End). So between ‘them’ spells out what this creation means, and it does not mean the creation of ‘all things’ as in Genesis. It is limited in scope and cannot mean ALL the universe etc. That exotic meaning would be way out of context.
Paul has certain expressions he used quite frequently. One is the expression “in him” as in “in Christ” or “in Jesus.”
The context and setting for verse 16, begins before it as in most cases of scripture.
The error in translation of the verse is critical.
(Col 1:16) For in him (by his Father’s word – my addition) were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things have been created on account of him and for him (by his Father’s word – my addition) . (NEV)
For through the Son (by his Father’s word – my addition) everything was created, both in the heavenly realm and on the earth, all that is seen and all that is unseen. Every seat of power, realm of government, principality, and authority—it was all created through him (by his Father’s word – my addition) and for his purpose! (TPT)
Many translations of Col 1:16 incorrectly read ‘ For by him…’ as if to say that Jesus himself actually created these things instead of his Father by his word and spirit. And then they go off context completely and extend this creation of the Son to old Genesis, and say he created the heavens and the earth.
Everything pertinent to this world runs through Jesus Christ because his Father desires it and created it all. His mission given by his Father is to establish and grow the Kingdom of his Father. To tear down all powers and authorities, and to destroy evil and eliminate death completely. When completed, Jesus shall return the Kingdom of his Father, representing the full restoration of creation to his Father so his Father can dwell in or be in ‘all’ creation.
Before,
Verses 13 and 14 speaks to the Kingdom given to Jesus who was raises to immortality. In him we have redemption.
Verse 15 is about the new creation the Kingdom of God given to the head, the first risen. He is the head of all believers.
(Col 1:17) and he is before all things, and in him all things consist.
(Col 1:18) And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
(Col 1:19) For it was the good pleasure of the Father that in him should all the fulness dwell; Meaning that the Father's spirit and his word were presence, always, within his Son, then on earth, after his ascension, and even today of course.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
You got the narrative wrong. It was clearly understood, but not accepted, by the Pharisees what Jesus was explicitly saying - that he existed before Abraham's lifespan. It's too bad you were not there to set everyone straight, including Jesus who made no attempt to set them straight. Since your understanding of the narrative fails, then everything else you allege has no basis to stand on concerning my question."
Jesus never reproved Thomas. In fact, when His followers thought He was simply a spirit in Luke 24 He did correct them.
With Thomas, there was no need to because what Thomas said was correct.
Wrangler
Well-known member
Another back door attempt to justify what is not in Scripture. AS IF Jesus has the burden to reprove! In Nazareth, Jesus did not reprove those who said he was Joseph's son.
It's so odd how you make this violation of the 1st Commandment seem like the central point of Scripture when it is not there.
Wrangler
Well-known member
To take an exclamation as a declarative statement in the narrative shows how desperate you are. edited
Last edited by a moderator:
Nope head on.
He did in Luke 24:38-39.
Different context!
This wasn't (1) after His resurrection, and (2) in reference to His believers.
Wrangler
Well-known member
Doesn't explain why he sometimes does not rebuke even when what is said is incorrect.
Wrangler
Well-known member
You mean it is OK for Jesus to not rebuke depending on the context? I agree, including Thomas personal exclamatory remark.
Drops mic
