Do you believe this statement: "Jesus is YHWH", Yes or No?

[cardiologist]

Heb 1 quotes the part with the word "God" in the Psalm.

Firstly, no he doesn't. He quotes from Verses 25-27. The God part is Verse 24. Secondly, what difference does it make? The whole psalm is a prayer to YHWH, who is God. And the writer of Hebrews applies it all to the Son. The Son is YHWH, the Son is God.

 

[HealthyShape]

My point is that in the context "I AM" is used in John it should be interpreted as a reference to YHWH (as the material I copied and pasted proves) Your point is as obvious as a blue sky. Of course John the Baptist saying "I am not the messiah" isn't a reference to YHWH.

One more thing...if you don't like copy/pasted material then just move along to the one of the "Happy threads" and stop being so snarky. I read pasted material every day because I have brains enough not to expect someone to hand type every fact they research.

I did not ask for any copy&paste, so if you want to react to my posts, react to my posts specifically, not generally. Thanks.

 

[shepherdsword]

Firstly, no he doesn't. He quotes from Verses 25-27. The God part is Verse 24. Secondly, what difference does it make? The whole psalm is a prayer to YHWH, who is God. And the writer of Hebrews applies it all to the Son. The Son is YHWH, the Son is God.

You're wasting your time. Knowledge keeps chasing this guy but he always seems to outrun it.

 

[shepherdsword]

I did not ask for any copy&paste, so if you want to react to my posts, react to my posts specifically, not generally. Thanks.

My response couldn't be more precise.

 

[HealthyShape]

Firstly, no he doesn't. He quotes from Verses 25-27. The God part is Verse 24. Secondly, what difference does it make? The whole psalm is a prayer to YHWH, who is God. And the writer of Hebrews applies it all to the Son. The Son is YHWH, the Son is God.

“Do not take me away, my God, in the midst of my days;
your years go on through all generations.
25In the beginning you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
26They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
Like clothing you will change them
and they will be discarded.
27But you remain the same,
and your years will never end.

No YHWH in the text. The context of Heb 1 is proving that Jesus is God, so it does not make much sense trying to bend it to proving something else. Psalms can change who is being addressed. Psalms can even be composed of different texts from different authors, historically.

 

[cardiologist]

Psalms can change who is being addressed.

Sure, but how do you prove it? How do you prove that the God of Verse 24 is not the same as the YHWH from Verse 1, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19, 22? Especially since the Psalm is a prayer to YHWH?

 

[JustMe]

I've been making this subject post many, many times now, over many years. As if it's now attached permanently to my dream world overnight.

I think I'll go urban speak this time instead of the formal, academic style of writing, just for fun, and to know that a child or a smart 12 year old can understand this subject, easily.

................................

Scholars argue the Hebrew "ehyeh asher ehyeh" in Exodus 3:14 loses punch with "I am." Ehyeh uses imperfect tense. It hints at future or nonstop action. "I will be" or "I shall be" hits closer.

Bible verses prove it. Ehyeh nearly always signals "I will be" or "I shall be." It spotlights God's approaching presence and rock-solid faithfulness to his people.

See "I am who I am" as a fierce repeat. Like idem per idem. God boasts pure self-sufficiency. He shuns human cages or caps.

God dodges a basic name. He unveils his endless, self-born core. He just is. Nothing binds him.

The old Greek Septuagint puts it as "Ego eimi ho on." That reads "I am the One Who Is." It nails boundless existence. Not mere now.

God hands Moses a sharp word for Israel. "I AM has sent me." It hooks to Yahweh, God's real name. Beyond lone "I am."

"I am" in Exodus 3:14 unpacks Yahweh's sense. It skips naming God outright.

Now the second chunk of this dumbed-down "great I AM" kid stuff.

In Greek, eimi for "I am" is plain talk. Folks say it daily. No secret nod to YHWH Elohim in the New Testament. Least of all the Son of God.

Third slice of this weak, fun-house error for shaky faith.

YHWH packs two-thirds of Trinity legs: Father and his own (Holy)Spirit as same person of interest. One divine force. His Son skips it. No divinity fountain there. YHWH alone pours godhood. Sole Godhead. Son stays human.

Pushing Father as lone YHWH, ditching Son, booted me from a long-time site. Hope bosses here stay sharp. Spot it as bold faith clash. No danger to their turf.

 

[cardiologist]

@HealthyShape

You do realise that YHWH is also called God in the Old Testament right? For example, Dt 5:6

I am the Lord (YHWH) your God

So, on what basis do you argue that the God in Verse 24 of Psalm 102 is not the same as the YHWH all the verses before? I want a demonstration that this is the case, not simply an assertion.

 

[HealthyShape]

Sure, but how do you prove it? How do you prove that the God of Verse 24 is not the same as the YHWH from Verse 1, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19, 22? Especially since the Psalm is a prayer to YHWH?

I do not need to prove it. It is just possible. That is why I asked you what you mean by "explicit". Now I know you did not really mean "explicit". For me, there is no point in continuing digging deeper.

 

[HealthyShape]

@HealthyShape

You do realise that YHWH is also called God in the Old Testament right? For example, Dt 5:6

I am the Lord (YHWH) your God

So, on what basis do you argue that the God in Verse 24 of Psalm 102 is not the same as the YHWH all the verses before? I want a demonstration that this is the case, not simply an assertion.

If YHWH is the Father and not the Son, then both YHWH/Father and Jesus/Son can be called God, but Jesus does not need to be YHWH.

Do you understand that?

 

[cardiologist]

I do not need to prove it. It is just possible.

Then everything is possible. It's possible that YHWH in Psalm 102 is not really about YHWH, but about Mohammed. I do not need to prove it. It's just possible.

 

[cardiologist]

You're wasting your time. Knowledge keeps chasing this guy but he always seems to outrun it.

Sometimes it's interesting to see what kind of evasions people are willing to undertake.

 

[HealthyShape]

Then everything is possible. It's possible that YHWH in Psalm 102 is not really about YHWH, but about Mohammed. I do not need to prove it. It's just possible.

It is about Jesus. But Jesus does not need to be the YHWH from the beginning of the Psalm, this is possible.

YHWH can refer to the Father or to true God generally (and so to all persons of Trinity) or specifically to the Son. Or even the usage of YHWH does not need to be consistent throughout the Old Testament.

That is why I was surprised when you said the New Testament says it explicitly. But you just used the term wrongly.

 

[cardiologist]

That is why I was surprised you said the New Testament says it explicitly. But you just used the term wrongly.

I googled the term, it says:

"stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt."

That's what Hebrews 1 does.

 

[JustMe]

It should be very clear that Jesus was referring to himself as YHWH.
Sometimes “I AM” is a reference to the divine name (the Tetragrammaton, YHWH),
and sometimes it is not.
It depends entirely on the context and the original language.
Below is the clearest breakdown so you can see exactly when “I AM” carries divine significance.

1. The original biblical background: Exodus 3:14​

When God speaks to Moses:

Hebrew:​

אַהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה
Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh
= “I AM WHO I AM” or “I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE.”
Then God says:
“Say to the Israelites: Ehyeh (‘I AM’) has sent me to you.”
This revelation connects directly with the next verse:
YHWH (יהוה) — the Tetragrammaton.

So in Exodus 3:14–15:​

“I AM” → Ehyeh → directly linked to YHWH.
This is the foundation for all later discussion.

2. In the Septuagint (Greek OT), “I AM” becomes ἐγώ εἰμι (egō eimi)​

The Greek translation renders “I AM” in Exodus 3:14 as:
ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν
“I am the Being” / “I am the One who is.”
This becomes extremely important for how Jews and early Christians understood references to God.

3. In the New Testament, context determines whether “I am” is divine​

The NT uses the phrase ἐγώ εἰμι (I am) hundreds of times, often in normal, non-divine grammar (“I am hungry,” “I am a man,” etc).
But there are three categories:

Category 1: Normal speech (NOT divine)​

Examples:

• “I am a voice crying…” (John the Baptist — John 1:23)
• “I am not the Messiah”
• “I am the least of the apostles”

These have no reference to the divine name.

Category 2: Metaphorical predicates (possibly divine, depending on context)​

These are the “I am the ___” statements in John:

• “I am the bread of life”
• “I am the good shepherd”
• “I am the door”
• “I am the resurrection and the life”

These echo God’s revelation but include a predicate (“the bread,” “the door”).
They hint at divine identity, but they are not direct Tetragrammaton statements.

Category 3: Absolute “I AM” statements — NO predicate (directly divine)​

These match the style of Exodus 3:14 and the Septuagint.
Examples:

John 8:58 — the clearest case​

Here, Jesus does not say “I was.”
He uses the timeless “I AM” just like Exodus 3:14 LXX.
The Jewish listeners understood this as blasphemy and tried to stone Him —
indicating they believed He was claiming the divine name.

Other absolute “I AM” passages:​

• John 8:24 — “Unless you believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.”
• John 8:28 — “Then you will know that I AM.”
• John 13:19 — “When it happens, you may believe that I AM.”

These are modeled directly on the Greek of Isaiah 40–55 (LXX), where God repeatedly says:
“ἐγώ εἰμι” = “I AM”
as a divine self-designation.

4. Conclusion: Can “I AM” be a reference to the Tetragrammaton?​

YES — when used absolutely, without a predicate.​

Like Exodus 3:14 and certain statements in Isaiah and John.

YES — when it echoes God’s covenant name (YHWH).​

NO — when it is simple grammar or part of a longer predicate.​

So the phrase can be a reference to YHWH in the right context,
but it is not automatically divine every time someone says “I am.

You are very confused. There is no Absolute Category 3 of your so-called I AM. You have made this up. There's no basis for it except in your own mind and in what you desire to believe. Stick on the path to understanding the Hebrew and the Greek languages on this subject as you've and many others have attempted to generate a potentially deadly pseudo Hebrew and Greek hybrid understanding of YHWH's unique (non) name. And the Son of God is not on this menu for consumption.

 

[HealthyShape]

I googled the term, it says:

"stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt."

That's what Hebrews 1 does.

Heb 1 says Jesus is God, not that Jesus is YHWH. Therefore, etc. I do not like when conversation gets stuck in a loop, so I am bowing out.

 

[shepherdsword]

You are very confused. There is no Absolute Category 3 of your so-called I AM. You have made this up. There's no basis for it except in your own mind and in what you desire to believe. Stick on the path to understanding the Hebrew and the Greek languages on this subject as you've and many others have attempted to generate a potentially deadly pseudo Hebrew and Greek hybrid understanding of YHWH's unique (non) name. And the Son of God is not on this menu for consumption.

You are totally deceived. I made nothing up. Your discombobulated rambling in post#47 is impossible to digest. Chew on this and try to prove it wrong. You can't make something wrong by just some claim. You have to prove it. Jesus is YHWH.

Absolute “I AM” statements — NO predicate (directly divine)
These match the style of Exodus 3:14 and the Septuagint.
Examples:
John 8:58 — the clearest case
“Before Abraham was, I AM (ἐγώ εἰμι).”
Here, Jesus does not say “I was.”
He uses the timeless “I AM” just like Exodus 3:14 LXX
The Jewish listeners understood this as blasphemy and tried to stone Him, indicating they believed He was claiming the divine name.
Other absolute “I AM” passages:
John 8:24 — “Unless you believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.”
John 8:28 — “Then you will know that I AM.”
John 13:19 — “When it happens, you may believe that I AM.”
These are modeled directly on the Greek of Isaiah 40–55 (LXX), where God repeatedly says:
“ἐγώ εἰμι” = “I AM”
as a divine self-designation.

 

[Matthias]

 

[JustMe]

I do see there are few going around in circles again, with the typical stone-faces.

 

[JustMe]

You are totally deceived. I made nothing up. Your discombobulated rambling in post#47 is impossible to digest. Chew on this and try to prove it wrong. You can't make something wrong by just some claim. You have to prove it. Jesus is YHWH.

Absolute “I AM” statements — NO predicate (directly divine)
These match the style of Exodus 3:14 and the Septuagint.
Examples:
John 8:58 — the clearest case
“Before Abraham was, I AM (ἐγώ εἰμι).”
Here, Jesus does not say “I was.”
He uses the timeless “I AM” just like Exodus 3:14 LXX
The Jewish listeners understood this as blasphemy and tried to stone Him, indicating they believed He was claiming the divine name.
Other absolute “I AM” passages:
John 8:24 — “Unless you believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.”
John 8:28 — “Then you will know that I AM.”
John 13:19 — “When it happens, you may believe that I AM.”
These are modeled directly on the Greek of Isaiah 40–55 (LXX), where God repeatedly says:
“ἐγώ εἰμι” = “I AM”
as a divine self-designation.

I would not want you to go around today with a confused deer-in-the-headlights dazed look on you face, from all that discombobulating and rambling I apparently caused you. I hope your head does not hurt. So let me ease your pain a bit and translate what I earlier wrote, and not just to you, mind you, as I detect you are still in a shroud of confusion.
Let me make more clear to you.

------------------------translation------JustMe version--------------

Many scholars say translating the Hebrew "ehyeh asher ehyeh" from Exodus 3:14 as "I am" misses the mark. The verb "ehyeh" sits in the imperfect tense. It points to future or ongoing action. So "I will be" or "I shall be" fits better than "I am."

Bible texts back this up. "Ehyeh" almost always means "I will be" or "I shall be." It highlights God's coming presence and steady loyalty to his people.

Think of "I am who I am" as a bold echo. It repeats itself like idem per idem. God claims full self-reliance. He rejects human boxes or limits.

God skips a plain name here. He reveals his timeless, self-made essence. He just exists, free from all else.

The old Greek version, the Septuagint, says "Ego eimi ho on." That means "I am the One Who Is." It stresses endless being, not just now.

God tells Moses a clear message for Israel. It's "I AM has sent me." This ties to Yahweh, God's true name. Not "I am" alone.

"I am" in Exodus 3:14 explains Yahweh's meaning. It does not name God himself.

Now as the second part of the so-called 'great' 'I AM' kindergarten nonsense....

In the Greek, 'I am' as εἰμί (eimi) is common language spoken or called by anybody not just referring to the Son of God. It is definitely not a code expression for YHWH Elohim in the New Testament.

Now for the third part of this erroneous playful subject form the weak and the confused in spirit.

Besides YHWH's reference with the verb, to be, He in himself contains 2 of the 3 legs or corners of the Trinitarian triad, the Father and his own (Holy) Spirit, as one unique divine person. And YHWH's son is not in this category as he is not the source of divinity at all. YHWH is the only source of divinity, only one YHWH is the godhood or so-called Godhead. Again his Son is not a part of divinity or YHWH. The Son is human created and born with Godlike characteristics of his Father. He is the successful and 2nd Adam.