"Before Abraham Was, I AM"

[MonoBiblical]

The Bible tells is that not only does God have Agape for us (Rom. 5:8, 1 John 3:1) – but that He IS Agape (1 John 4:8). Your heretical objections are pathetic . . .

God despises and disregards the wicked. If we are righteous, we will have his consideration. A God without hate or disregard of evil, is one without consideration for the righteous.

 

[BreadOfLife]

God despises and disregards the wicked. If we are righteous, we will have his consideration. A God without hate or disregard of evil, is one without consideration for the righteous.

This only proves that you do NOT understand Scripture.

Luke 14:26 tells us that we cannot follow Christ unless we HATE our father. Either this is a direct contradiction of Exod. 20:12, which tells us that we must HONOR our father and mother – OR, it’s just hyperbolic language.

The Bible is filled with hyperbolic statements that are NOT meant to be taken literally (Deut. 1:28, Judges 20:16, Matt. 5:29, Matt. 19:24, Luke 6:41). Hyperbole is used to stress a point or the emotional impact of a statement. LEARN to discern the difference . . .

 

[MonoBiblical]

This only proves that you do NOT understand Scripture.

Luke 14:26 tells us that we cannot follow Christ unless we HATE our father. Either this is a direct contradiction of Exod. 20:12, which tells us that we must HONOR our father and mother – OR, it’s just hyperbolic language.

The Bible is filled with hyperbolic statements that are NOT meant to be taken literally (Deut. 1:28, Judges 20:16, Matt. 5:29, Matt. 19:24, Luke 6:41). Hyperbole is used to stress a point or the emotional impact of a statement. LEARN to discern the difference . . .

Your interpretation is poor. Jesus was saying if someone considered their parents too much rather than disregarding them; miseo is the verb, that they were unworthy and shouldn't follow him. It is not as you view it, lamely. There seems to be no hyperbole in any your quotes of scripture. Move away the log from thy eye, sir.

 

[rvmb]

God despises and disregards the wicked. If we are righteous, we will have his consideration. A God without hate or disregard of evil, is one without consideration for the righteous.

""If we are righteous""
Who are righteous today ?
Those who are saved & sealed by the Gospel 1 Cor 15:1-4, Eph 1:13
Is that person still 'righteous' if they sin again ?
Is that person then still saved & sealed ?
If not, what must they do according to Paul ?

 

[Davy]

Remember brethren, this Thread topic is about what Lord Jesus said to the blind scribes and Pharisees at the end of John 8 when He told them that Abraham rejoiced to see His day. The Pharisees mocked Jesus by His saying that, and said Jesus wasn't even yet 40 and had He seen Abraham?

And that is when Jesus said, "... before Abraham was, I AM." which The I AM THAT I AM is one of GOD's sacred names. The Pharisees then took up stones to stone Jesus because they understood by Jesus saying that He was claiming to be GOD.

 

[TrevorHL]

Greetings Davy,

Lord Jesus said to the blind scribes and Pharisees at the end of John 8 when He told them that Abraham rejoiced to see His day.

Jesus was alluding to the events and outcome of Genesis 22, where Abraham rejoiced at the future day, and this helps to understand the correct meaning of John 8:58, that Jesus is claiming to be the Christ, the true seed of Abraham. Abraham foresaw the day when Jesus would be revealed to be the true burnt offering, the lamb provided by God, and by his death and resurrection opening the way to the blessing promised to Abraham.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Davy]

Greetings Davy,

Jesus was alluding to the events and outcome of Genesis 22, where Abraham rejoiced at the future day, and this helps to understand the correct meaning of John 8:58, that Jesus is claiming to be the Christ, the true seed of Abraham. Abraham foresaw the day when Jesus would be revealed to be the true burnt offering, the lamb provided by God, and by his death and resurrection opening the way to the blessing promised to Abraham.

Kind regards
Trevor

That interpretation above is TRULY... FUNNY!

Lord Jesus claimed to be GOD when He responded to those blinded Jews...

John 8:57-58
57 Then said the Jews unto him, "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast Thou seen Abraham?"
58 Jesus said unto them, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am."
KJV

According to Apostle Paul in Hebrews 7, Lord Jesus was the Melchisedec who met Abraham, and offered Abraham "bread and wine" (Gen.14:18-19). And Abraham tithed to Him. Lord Jesus was also The LORD that met Abraham having appeared before Abraham's tent door along with two other men per Genesis 18. And Jesus stood there with Abraham debating on the destruction of the wicked in Sodom and Gomorrah while the other two men (two angels) appeared to Lot in the next Genesis 19 chapter.

Thus Jesus WAS... in the days of Abraham! Literally! Jesus simply had not been born yet through woman's womb. Jesus was in His Spirit body, for like John said, "God is a Spirit." (John 4).

 

[TrevorHL]

Greetings again Davy,

That interpretation above is TRULY... FUNNY!
Lord Jesus claimed to be GOD when He responded to those blinded Jews...
John 8:57-58 57 Then said the Jews unto him, "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast Thou seen Abraham?"
58 Jesus said unto them, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." KJV

I consider that Trinitarians are also blind in their misunderstanding of what Jesus is saying and are also ready to mock the true teaching of Jesus. The difference here is that the Pharisees knew that they were deliberately giving a false interpretation to what Jesus stated concerning Abraham, and the crowd could see that they were only trying to muddy the waters and the crowd did not accept their subterfuge. The crowd did not pick up stones, only the Pharisees and they would have been scared of the reaction of the crowd and based on the earlier event of John 8 no one was wiling to cast the first stone. Trinitarians on the other hand fully endorse the subterfuge. Yes, the whole situation is both sobering and TRULY...FUNNY!

I suggest that John 8:58 should be translated as "I am he", the same as John 8:24,28 and is part of the theme of whether or not Jesus is the Christ. As well as my explanation of Abraham seeing the future day of Christ and his sacrifice as the Lamb of God and as the perfect burnt offering to usher in the Abrahamic blessings, I suggest you also read the build up to John 8:58 by reading carefully ALL of John chapters 7 and 8.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Davy]

Greetings again Davy,

I consider that Trinitarians are also blind in their misunderstanding of what Jesus is saying and are also ready to mock the true teaching of Jesus. The difference here is that the Pharisees knew that they were deliberately giving a false interpretation to what Jesus stated concerning Abraham, and the crowd could see that they were only trying to muddy the waters and the crowd did not accept their subterfuge. The crowd did not pick up stones, only the Pharisees and they would have been scared of the reaction of the crowd and based on the earlier event of John 8 no one was wiling to cast the first stone. Trinitarians on the other hand fully endorse the subterfuge. Yes, the whole situation is both sobering and TRULY...FUNNY!

I suggest that John 8:58 should be translated as "I am he", the same as John 8:24,28 and is part of the theme of whether or not Jesus is the Christ. As well as my explanation of Abraham seeing the future day of Christ and his sacrifice as the Lamb of God and as the perfect burnt offering to usher in the Abrahamic blessings, I suggest you also read the build up to John 8:58 by reading carefully ALL of John chapters 7 and 8.

Kind regards
Trevor

The New Testament gives plenty of Biblical written proof that Jesus claimed to be GOD, and the Scriptures confirm it, especially in Matthew 1:23, so you really don't have a leg to stand on, so to speak.

 

[TrevorHL]

Greetings again Davy,

The New Testament gives plenty of Biblical written proof that Jesus claimed to be GOD, and the Scriptures confirm it, especially in Matthew 1:23, so you really don't have a leg to stand on, so to speak.

I have had many discussions on the One God, Yahweh, God the Father and am not really interested in jumping to every supposed verse that are used by Trinitarians. I would be interested in any response to my understanding of John 8:58. Relevant to this thread is my strong belief and advocacy that Exodus 3:14 should be translated "I will be".

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Davy]

Greetings again Davy,

I have had many discussions on the One God, Yahweh, God the Father and am not really interested in jumping to every supposed verse that are used by Trinitarians.

That's not really what you mean with your statement above. What you actually... mean is, that you are NOT interested in the proof of Matthew 1:23 that declares what Jesus' Name "Emmanuel" means as "God with us", which is The Word of God proving that Jesus indeed is GOD.

That means also that you DENY the Isaiah 9:6 Scripture also which is IN the Hebrew Old Testament text, and that it also declares Jesus (the "child" of Isaiah 7:14 and Matthew 1:23) as GOD, calling Him "The mighty God, The everlasting Father."

Matt 1:21-23
21 "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call His name JESUS: for He shall save His people from their sins."
22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
23 "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel", which being interpreted is, God with us.
KJV

Isa 9:6
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
KJV

All these Scriptures also are Biblical PROOF that Jesus of Nazareth is not only The Son of God, but GOD also.

Mic 5:2
2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
KJV

That above in red is in reference to that "The everlasting Father" given in Isaiah 9:6 about Jesus of Nazareth as THE CHRIST.


Matt 2:6
6 And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.
KJV

That above is another reference to the Isaiah 9:6 verse about Jesus of Nazareth, with the government being upon His shoulder. It proves that Isaiah 9:6 verse DOES EXIST in the Hebrew Old Testament manuscripts!

John 1:1-3
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made.
KJV

Jesus of Nazareth as THE CHRIST is... THE WORD, and is GOD, and "was in the beginning with God." That again is declaring Jesus Christ as GOD.


John 8:58
58 Jesus said unto them, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am."
KJV

Lord Jesus was declaring Himself as God in the above. That "I AM" is from God's Name "I AM THAT I AM" which GOD revealed to Moses.

Acts 5:31
31 Him hath God exalted with His right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
KJV

In Hosea 13:4, God said there is no Saviour except Him. The above is declaring Jesus of Nazareth as THE SAVIOUR.

Phil 2:5-8
5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7 But made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8 And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
KJV

The above subject many miss is how it declares Jesus' Divine state as GOD before He was born in the flesh like us.

1 Tim 3:16
16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
KJV

Can't get any more certain of a declaration that Jesus of Nazareth is GOD by Apostle Paul than that above verse. The Father did not do those things. Only Jesus of Nazareth did.

Heb 1:2-3
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son, Whom He hath appointed heir of all things, by Whom also He made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
KJV

Once again, those events can ONLY apply to one who was everlasting as God, and with The Father in the beginning, with all things done through Him, even God's creation.

Heb 1:8
8 But unto the Son He saith, "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom."
KJV

The Father said that, "Thy throne, O God", to The Son Jesus Christ (See Psalms 45). Thus The Father even called Jesus as God.

Rev 1:7-8
7 Behold, He cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so, Amen.
8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, Which is, and Which was, and Which is to come, the Almighty.
KJV

That above is Lord Jesus Christ proclaiming Himself as God, as The Father first applied that Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, to Himself in Isaiah 41:4, Isaiah 44:6, Isaiah 48:12.

John 14:8-9
8 Philip saith unto Him, "Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us."
9 Jesus saith unto him, "Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known Me, Philip? he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, 'Shew us the Father?'"
KJV

 

[TrevorHL]

Greetings again Davy,

That's not really what you mean with your statement above.

Oh, yes it is. You have now given fairly well the full range of the supposed Trinitarian verses and a brief synopsis of the wrong interpretation of these verses. I stated that I would be interested in discussing John 8:58, the subject of this thread, and specifically what I have already presented as my explanation. You have now ignored this, and reproduced the usual Trinitarian syllogism on this verse John 8:58 together with Exodus 3:14.

John 8:58 Jesus said unto them, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." KJV
Lord Jesus was declaring Himself as God in the above. That "I AM" is from God's Name "I AM THAT I AM" which GOD revealed to Moses.

Kind regards
Trevir

 

[Davy]

Greetings again Davy,

Oh, yes it is. You have now given fairly well the full range of the supposed Trinitarian verses and a brief synopsis of the wrong interpretation of these verses. I stated that I would be interested in discussing John 8:58, the subject of this thread, and specifically what I have already presented as my explanation. You have now ignored this, and reproduced the usual Trinitarian syllogism on this verse John 8:58 together with Exodus 3:14.


Kind regards
Trevir

Nah... you're simply rebellious against those Scriptures written in The Word of God, and that in favor of your belief on men's doctrines instead.

 

[Justified]

Greetings Davy,

Jesus was alluding to the events and outcome of Genesis 22, where Abraham rejoiced at the future day, and this helps to understand the correct meaning of John 8:58, that Jesus is claiming to be the Christ, the true seed of Abraham. Abraham foresaw the day when Jesus would be revealed to be the true burnt offering, the lamb provided by God, and by his death and resurrection opening the way to the blessing promised to Abraham.

Kind regards
Trevor

I suggest that John 8:58 should be translated as "I am he", the same as John 8:24,28 and is part of the theme of whether or not Jesus is the Christ. As well as my explanation of Abraham seeing the future day of Christ and his sacrifice as the Lamb of God and as the perfect burnt offering to usher in the Abrahamic blessings, I suggest you also read the build up to John 8:58 by reading carefully ALL of John chapters 7 and 8.

Kind regards
Trevor

Joh 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.”
Joh 8:57 So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?”
Joh 8:58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”
Joh 8:59 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.

Yes, Jesus was appears to be making the claim that Abraham was looking forward to the day of the Messiah, however, the text of verse 8 cannot be translated as "I am he." Jesus was asked a question based on his age versus the time when Abraham was alive. That is a question of existence.

And Jesus answers that question directly. Jesus compares Abraham's temporary existence with his own existence which is eternal and timeless. "I am" refers to continuous existence in the past; it is his state of being. That is the immediate context. For Jesus to supposedly mean "I am he" makes no sense. That doesn't answer the question.

Earlier in chapter 8, Jesus clearly states:

Joh 8:23 He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.

This is not the only time he makes this claim and John makes it as well (because Jesus did). John's consistent message, from 1:1 right through to the end, is that Jesus is the eternal, divine Son of God, being also truly God in nature himself, come in the flesh for our salvation.

 

[TrevorHL]

Greetings Justified,

however, the text of verse 58 cannot be translated as "I am he." Jesus was asked a question based on his age versus the time when Abraham was alive. That is a question of existence.

The same words are translated "I am he" in John 8:24,28 and I claim that Jesus is maintaining his position despite the deliberate muddying of the waters by the Pharisees. They understood what he was claiming concerning Abraham. Also the main basis of the claim by Trinitarians is the translation of Exodus 3:14 as "I AM", but I endorse the translation by Tyndale, and the RV and RSV Margins and Robert Alter "I will be".

Earlier in chapter 8, Jesus clearly states:
Joh 8:23 He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.

Yes, Jesus had discussed this in John 8, they were descendants of the serpent, while Jesus had his origins in the Virgin birth, when God the Father through the Holy Spirit conceived and gave birth to Jesus.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Justified]

Greetings Justified,

The same words are translated "I am he" in John 8:24,28 and I claim that Jesus is maintaining his position despite the deliberate muddying of the waters by the Pharisees. They understood what he was claiming concerning Abraham.

That those same words, ego eimi, are typically translated as "I am he" in verses 24 and 28 have no bearing on verse 58. Adding "he" in the other two verses makes grammatical sense, even though in both verses it would still make sense without it.

In verse 58, it makes no grammatical sense to add in "he." You prefer it there because you simply don't like what it plainly states.

Also the main basis of the claim by Trinitarians is the translation of Exodus 3:14 as "I AM", but I endorse the translation by Tyndale, and the RV and RSV Margins and Robert Alter "I will be".

Although "I Am" in Ex. 3:14 is a legitimate translation, that has nothing to do with my post.

Yes, Jesus had discussed this in John 8, they were descendants of the serpent, while Jesus had his origins in the Virgin birth, when God the Father through the Holy Spirit conceived and gave birth to Jesus.

Kind regards
Trevor

Jesus literally claimed to "be from above" and that he was "not of this world." He is speaking of where he was from, not of the virgin birth.

Joh 6:33 For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”
…
Joh 6:38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me.
…
Joh 6:50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die.
Joh 6:51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”
…
Joh 6:62 Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? (ESV)

Jesus had already clearly claimed to have come down from heaven, multiple times in this passage alone, even asking, "what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?". There is no doubt as to what Jesus is saying here and so what he is saying in 8:24--he literally preexisted in heaven with the Father and "came down from heaven," that he literally "was from above" and "not of this world." Again, this is throughout John's gospel.

 

[TrevorHL]

Greetings again Justified,

In verse 58, it makes no grammatical sense to add in "he." You prefer it there because you simply don't like what it plainly states.

It makes perfect sense. Jesus is maintaining what the stated in John 8:24,28 that he is the Christ.

Although "I Am" in Ex. 3:14 is a legitimate translation, that has nothing to do with my post.

It has everything to do with why Trinitarians incorrectly insist on the translation "I AM" in John 8:58.

Joh 6:38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me.

The "I" is Yahweh, "I will be". The process was the child born of Mary, not the implantation of God the Son in her womb.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Justified]

Greetings again Justified,

It makes perfect sense. Jesus is maintaining what the stated in John 8:24,28 that he is the Christ.

No, he isn't. He's answering a question about his age and the time in which he exists in contrast to Abraham's existence many hundreds of years prior.

It has everything to do with why Trinitarians incorrectly insist on the translation "I AM" in John 8:58.

No, it doesn't. It mainly has to do with the meaning of the Greek words ego eimi within the context of the question Jesus was asked in 8:57.

The "I" is Yahweh, "I will be". The process was the child born of Mary, not the implantation of God the Son in her womb.

Kind regards
Trevor

It depends on what you mean by "Yahweh." I would agree if you understood Yahweh as referring to the Trinity, but you don't. So what you end up doing is reading into the text that the Father came down from heaven. But this clearly cannot be the case as plainly seen by what Jesus plainly states:

Joh 6:38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me.

The "I" cannot be referring to the Father. How can the Father have come down from heaven to not do his own will but the will of him [the Father] who sent him? That makes no sense whatsoever. The "I" is clearly someone distinct from the Father, who came "not to do [his] own will but the will of [the Father] who sent [him]."

In addition to the multiple times Jesus claims to have literally come down from heaven, he also stated this:

Joh 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Again, John's gospel is very consistent throughout that the Son has always existed. You are making Jesus say things he didn't say simply because your theology cannot take into account what he plainly means. You must start by taking the clear things Jesus says and those the Bible says, and develop theology from those things, rather than letting your theology reinterpret what the Bible plainly states so that it no longer is what the Bible actually states.

 

[TrevorHL]

Greetings again Justified,

No, he isn't. He's answering a question about his age and the time in which he exists in contrast to Abraham's existence many hundreds of years prior.

Then you have fully swallowed the Pharisees subterfuge. The disciples and the crowd did not and this event and all of John 7 and 8 are a build up to the Pharisees' frustration which led to their ultimate decision to arrest Jesus privately and subject him to the false trials and crucify him.

No, it doesn't. It mainly has to do with the meaning of the Greek words ego eimi within the context of the question Jesus was asked in 8:57

Sounds very scholarly but Jesus is consistent.

So what you end up doing is reading into the text that the Father came down from heaven.

Jesus is what the One God, Yahweh, God the Father "became". The process was the Holy Spirit came upon Mary.

Kind regards
Trevor