Eternal Security

[gadar perets]

In John 8:58 in the kjv, the truth is clear that Jesus is breaking normal grammatical usage in order to claim that He is the great I AM.

Let's look at the context of John 8:58. It begins in verse 51 with the thought of eternal life; "If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death." The Jews thought since Abraham and the prophets were dead, Yeshua must have a devil. The context is eternal life. Then in verse 56 Yeshua says Abraham "rejoiced to see my day." He did not say he saw Abraham as the Jews misunderstood. How did Abraham see Yeshua's day? Hebrews 11:13 says, "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth." He saw Yeshua's day by faith.

Yeshua then resumed the context of his initial conversation by saying, "Before Abraham was, I am." "Was" is from the Greek "ginomai" meaning, "to come into being, ... to arise." What Yeshua actually meant was, "Before Abraham comes into being (at his resurrection unto eternal life), I will." Confirmation of this understanding comes to us from Figures of Speech Used in the Bible by E.W. Bullinger, pgs. 521,522. Under the heading "Heterosis (Of Tenses)," subheading "The Present for the Future," he writes, "This is put when the design is to show that some thing will certainly come to pass, and is spoken of as though it were already present." He then lists some examples such as Mt.3:10b, "therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is [shall be] hewn down;" and Mk.9:31a, "For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is [shall be] delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day." Included among this list of examples of Heterosis is John 8:58. In other words, although properly written, "Before Abraham comes to be, I am," with "I am" in the simple present tense, the meaning points to the future, "Before Abraham comes to be, I will."

Some people believe this verse should be translated, "Before Abraham existed, I existed." However, neither Greek verb is in the perfect tense (past tense). "Was" is in the aorist tense and "am" is in the present tense. Let's look a little closer at "was." Concerning the aorist tense, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament by Dana and Mantey says, "It has time relations only in the indicative, where it is past and hence augmented." The verb ginomai (was) is in the infinitive, not the indicative. Therefore it should not be translated in the past tense. This same reference says of the infinitive, "The aorist infinitive denotes that which is eventual or particular, ..." Abraham will eventually resurrect which is why the Greek uses the aorist infinitive. The meaning is, "Before Abraham comes to be" not "Before Abraham was (or existed)."

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Let's look at the context of John 8:58. It begins in verse 51 with the thought of eternal life; "If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death." The Jews thought since Abraham and the prophets were dead, Yeshua must have a devil. The context is eternal life. Then in verse 56 Yeshua says Abraham "rejoiced to see my day." He did not say he saw Abraham as the Jews misunderstood. How did Abraham see Yeshua's day? Hebrews 11:13 says, "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth." He saw Yeshua's day by faith.

Yeshua then resumed the context of his initial conversation by saying, "Before Abraham was, I am." "Was" is from the Greek "ginomai" meaning, "to come into being, ... to arise." What Yeshua actually meant was, "Before Abraham comes into being (at his resurrection unto eternal life), I will." Confirmation of this understanding comes to us from Figures of Speech Used in the Bible by E.W. Bullinger, pgs. 521,522. Under the heading "Heterosis (Of Tenses)," subheading "The Present for the Future," he writes, "This is put when the design is to show that some thing will certainly come to pass, and is spoken of as though it were already present." He then lists some examples such as Mt.3:10b, "therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is [shall be] hewn down;" and Mk.9:31a, "For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is [shall be] delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day." Included among this list of examples of Heterosis is John 8:58. In other words, although properly written, "Before Abraham comes to be, I am," with "I am" in the simple present tense, the meaning points to the future, "Before Abraham comes to be, I will."

Some people believe this verse should be translated, "Before Abraham existed, I existed." However, neither Greek verb is in the perfect tense (past tense). "Was" is in the aorist tense and "am" is in the present tense. Let's look a little closer at "was." Concerning the aorist tense, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament by Dana and Mantey says, "It has time relations only in the indicative, where it is past and hence augmented." The verb ginomai (was) is in the infinitive, not the indicative. Therefore it should not be translated in the past tense. This same reference says of the infinitive, "The aorist infinitive denotes that which is eventual or particular, ..." Abraham will eventually resurrect which is why the Greek uses the aorist infinitive. The meaning is, "Before Abraham comes to be" not "Before Abraham was (or existed)."

Where did you study Greek?

 

[APAK]

No, I am not running away from any truth.

However I believe that those who go to other versions than the kjv do so primarily because of itching ears (see 2 Timothy 4:1-5).

In John 8:58 in the kjv, the truth is clear that Jesus is breaking normal grammatical usage in order to claim that He is the great I AM.

Unfortunately, the version that you were looking at avoids this clear proclamation of truth as it is biased against the Deity of Jesus Christ.

I feel it is those who avoid the kjv who are "lacking courage to face the truth," and "running from the truth".

----Good Day once more------

JBF: I see you still want to cling on to ONE verse, some use dozens more (maybe you have them all stacked ready to deploy), to deliberately change scripture from the son of God to mean God (Lord God, Almighty or YHWH) for some reason. And of course, you are in the majority with other like-minded thinkers.

At any rate, let me try and put my mind as yours and try to see what you are ‘seeing.’

The KJV for John 8:58 is as follows

(Joh 8:58) Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. (KJV)

There can only be three logic choices drawn from this verse and if read in context with what was being said, it is reduced to only one viable choice however.

I gave you one of the logic answers yesterday and here I will give you the only viable one (I neglected to complete it yesterday). The other choice is yours, I believe, even though you really have not yet clearly stated it. And I believe it is wrong.

Now I believe if you were to defend your choice, you might say, Jesus lived or existed before Abraham based on this translation. Looking at just this verse without not knowing the local speak and the context from which it was said I can even see this in my mind. But, I would want to dig a bit deeper to valid this mind-view because Jesus never said such a thing to anyone like this before in his own lips, if this is what he meant! Sounds reasonable right? We would want to really be sure that Jesus was saying he was born way back thousands of years ago, and if we really wanted to get carried away, or even before or even at creation, right, and then even throw in the famous I AM Exodus verse? to make his God. Of course, as we get carried away, we surely have to note that God said he birthed a child on earth some two thousand years ago who was called the son of God.


Now I will admit I never meant that Jesus was just much more important than Abraham.

I in keeping in your mind I will say that Jesus was ‘alive’ before Abraham was ‘alive.’ But how, is the question!

Now does this mean that Jesus was God? You decide. Ego eimi -I am, does not identify Jesus with God, but it does focus on Jesus in the sternness way possible as I said before. Here are some places the expression is used in the NT.

‘I am he’—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. ‘It is I’—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. ‘I am the one I claim to be’—John 8:24 and 28.

Let me go further and offer another choice that is in context.

Jesus was more important in the mind of God than Abraham would ever be, eons before Abraham was born and Jesus was born around 4 BC. This is the more complete answer I should have given you. What I first gave you was ½ an answer. This is the complete and scripture safe explanation.

Now I can point to at least two other pieces of scripture of the NT that supports my answer, where this is said of Jesus, with part of the answer seen explicitly and the other half implicitly. Here are two verse...

(Joh 17:5) And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. (KJV)

(Joh 17:24) Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. (KJV)

Now collectively these two verses in context tells me that God knew Jesus before he was created and now Jesus upon nearly the end of his mission wanted the glory that was coming to him – which was his immortality. Jesus wanted/ prayed that believers also become immortal in his realm, in the future. As we know this shall happen to all believers, right?

Now many folks as yourself bark at such an explanation and say, see, this proves that Jesus was created at creation or before, or he was even God.

Yet if I showed you another verse that speaks to God loving or knowing others in eons past at least, in your mind you would agree with me. Funny how that is…

The verse is 2 Tim 1:9:

(2Ti 1:9) Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, (KJV)

We know we were not 'alive' at creation or before, right? We were in the mind of God only, as WAS Jesus!

I would like you to also check this out before you attach Exodus 3:14 to John 8:58 again as your support for Jesus is God in the future. In Exodus 3:14, does not translate as you think. 'I am that I am,' is a mis-transliterated expression from Hebrew to English. It does not translate to ‘I am that (who, which) I am.’ It really says, ‘I will be what I will be.’ Exodus has the meaning of ‘to be’ and not’ I am.’ Quite different!

(Exo 3:14) And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. (KJV)


Here’s a Messianic Jewish version of Exodus 3:14 note the footnote concerning the original Hebrew language:

(Exo 3:14) And Elohim said to Mosheh, “I am that which I am.”a And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Yisra’ěl, ‘I am has sent me to you.’ ” (TS2009)

Footnote: aThe Heḇrew text reads: ’eheyeh ’asher ’eheyeh, the word ’eheyeh being derived from hayah which means to be, to exist, but the Aramaic text here in v. 14 reads: ayah ashar ayah.


JBF: I hope you are enjoying your new home in CA. For a short spell I lived around Santa Clara, Sunnyvale (Silicon Valley) and worked in a TS facility.

Bless you,

APAK

PS I am also not an Arian of old. I may have some aspects that coincidently are common with them.

 

[justbyfaith]

Abraham saw Jesus when He appeared to him in a Theophany/Christphany along with two angels in Genesis 18.

Genesis 18:1-2, And the LORD (Jehovah) appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day, And he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him, and when he saw them there, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground.

Here it says that God appeared to Abraham along with two angels. How can God appear to anyone in light of John 1:18? Jesus is the perfect representation of who the Father is (Hebrews 1:3); and when Jesus therefore appeared to Abraham in these verses, it was the LORD appearing to Abraham.

We know that this Christophany is an Old Testament appearance of the LORD because the following conversation is a face-to-face encounter between Abraham and the LORD (Jehovah), in which he makes intercession for his nephew Lot and by proxy for the towns of Sodom and Gommorah. When the conversation is over, we find that the two angels have gone into the towns of Sodom and Gomorrah to help Lot. Where is the third Man at this point? He went His way (Genesis 18:33) and immediately afterward you see the two angels appearing in Sodom and Gomorrah in the ensuing story of Genesis 19 (the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah). Now if you actually look up the verses referenced you will see what I did there.

re #1501 (and I think, also, #1503).

 

[justbyfaith]

@APAK,

That Jesus is the Son of God indicates to me that He is the mighty God, Jehovah (Psalms 50:1) even the everlasting Father (Matthew 28:19)...see Isaiah 9:6.

Even if you do not apply a capital letter to the S in Son of God, in Isaiah 9:6 it declares that the son (small "s") that is given shall have His name be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Now I know that your theology will here come out in an attempt to justify yourself in your not knowing and believing that Jesus is the great I AM. Your motivation, simply, in my view is that you have a theology and want to defend it even though the fact that you have it means that you are condemned via the words of Jesus. And you want to justify yourself in your belief although the scripture clearly condemns you for it since you are not believing in the Jesus of the Bible (see 2 Corinthians 11:3-4, John 3:18-19).

I, on the other hand, choose to heed the clear warning of scripture concerning the type of unbelief that you exhibit in your theology; and desire that you might be saved as the result of accepting the true Jesus of the scriptures, who is the Son of God as defined by Isaiah 9:6.

Now I know that this will take a miracle, because we find in 1 Corinthians 2:13-14 that the natural mind doesn't receive the things of the Spirit of the Lord.

So, I am praying for that miracle in your life.

Because your acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah prophesied in scripture (specifically Isaiah 9:6) for you is not an issue of the intellect, no matter how you may try to pass it off as such. It is a matter of the heart (Hebrews 3:7-8, Hebrews 3:15, Hebrews 4:7). Perhaps it will take Him speaking to you audibly from heaven. And if that is what it will take, then I pray that He does that for you.

 

[APAK]

@APAK,

That Jesus is the Son of God indicates to me that He is the mighty God, Jehovah (Psalms 50:1) even the everlasting Father (Matthew 28:19)...see Isaiah 9:6.

Even if you do not apply a capital letter to the S in Son of God, in Isaiah 9:6 it declares that the son (small "s") that is given shall have His name be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Now I know that your theology will here come out in an attempt to justify yourself in your not knowing and believing that Jesus is the great I AM. Your motivation, simply, in my view is that you have a theology and want to defend it even though the fact that you have it means that you are condemned via the words of Jesus. And you want to justify yourself in your belief although the scripture clearly condemns you for it since you are not believing in the Jesus of the Bible (see 2 Corinthians 11:3-4, John 3:18-19).

I, on the other hand, choose to heed the clear warning of scripture concerning the type of unbelief that you exhibit in your theology; and desire that you might be saved as the result of accepting the true Jesus of the scriptures, who is the Son of God as defined by Isaiah 9:6.

Now I know that this will take a miracle, because we find in 1 Corinthians 2:13-14 that the natural mind doesn't receive the things of the Spirit of the Lord.

So, I am praying for that miracle in your life.

Because your acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah prophesied in scripture (specifically Isaiah 9:6) for you is not an issue of the intellect, no matter how you may try to pass it off as such. It is a matter of the heart (Hebrews 3:7-8, Hebrews 3:15, Hebrews 4:7). Perhaps it will take Him speaking to you audibly from heaven. And if that is what it will take, then I pray that He does that for you.

JBF: I believe you are too presumptuous and I think you mean well: I am a believer in Christ for over 40 years now. I'm in Christ as Jesus is in the Almighty. I was reborn or saved and it was a whole being experience indeed. I can still remember the month and year, although I forgot the exact day (+/- 3 days) now. I was really on fire for the Lord.....had 'new eyes' to see spiritual things of God...in the bible and in the world, in people and in myself. I have regained this fire over the years I'm glad to say. I always live and know especially over these last 20 years that my guide and companion is the spirit of truth of Christ within me. I know this every minute of my life.

If you want to go over the classic trinitarian support of Isaiah 9:6 that was also mis-transliterated in key areas, let me know. Yes, the way it read today was the deliberate input of trinitarians. I'm not just saying this to feed my ego, it is the truth. I've nothing to gain by not be truthful to you.

I believe you have taken some scripture and believed that they are translated perfectly. That is to be expected, unfortunately. The verses you pose to support your view of a trinity model have nearly all been tweaked to disguise really meanings and truth.

If you want to discuss a verse such as Isaiah 9:6, one at a time, then I will gladly give you my point of view.

If you want to ask me anything about my spiritual growth then fire away...all good

Bless you,

APAK

 

[justbyfaith]

Genesis 3:1,

Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

 

[gadar perets]

Genesis 3:1,

Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

I guess that means he does not want to discuss Isaiah 9:6 APAK. I think you should discuss it anyway for the sake of others that need to know.

 

[APAK]

I guess that means he does not want to discuss Isaiah 9:6 APAK. I think you should discuss it anyway for the sake of others that need to know.

JBF: can you divulge a little more information about your beliefs by answering a few more questions.

Besides the Trinity doctrine, I see your religion is into the study or theory of the appearance of a supernatural form of Christ before and after his ascension and that he is also God that appeared or still appears to people.

What religion teaches such doctrine? What is yours? Evangelical ‘Christians,’ neo-Gnostics. LDS? Spin-off Catholics?

Do you have scripture to back all your doctrine? Do you have to generate extra-scripture writings to support your beliefs, like the Catholics and even other Protestant groups? If I were a betting man I would say yes, indeed.

I have none to give you in return as I do not really support any religion configured by men. I’m a freed-spirit and follower of the way of YHWH and his son. If you want I can use a capital ‘S’ for son although that will not make one a true believer or be closer to God. It is what is in the heart that counts. And my heart says that YHWH is and has always been greater that his SON.

Did you know that the original Hebrew and Greek writings were all written down as capital symbols without spaces any punctuation?



Bless you,



APAK

 

[justbyfaith]

And my heart says that YHWH is and has always been greater that his SON.

Of course He is. The Son is Human as well as Divine. So, in His humanity, He is a less than the Father (John 14:28). In His Deity, equal (John 5:18). The doctrine is called the hypostatic union: that Jesus is 100% Man and 100% God.

 

[justbyfaith]

The church I am currently attending is a Calvary Chapel but I have some background with the Oneness Pentecostals.

My view on the Trinity is somewhere in between what is taught by the respective parties mentioned. I have thought on what it might be for quite some time and have thought to write a book on the subject.

 

[Nancy]

JBF: can you divulge a little more information about your beliefs by answering a few more questions.

Besides the Trinity doctrine, I see your religion is into the study or theory of the appearance of a supernatural form of Christ before and after his ascension and that he is also God that appeared or still appears to people.

What religion teaches such doctrine? What is yours? Evangelical ‘Christians,’ neo-Gnostics. LDS? Spin-off Catholics?

Do you have scripture to back all your doctrine? Do you have to generate extra-scripture writings to support your beliefs, like the Catholics and even other Protestant groups? If I were a betting man I would say yes, indeed.

I have none to give you in return as I do not really support any religion configured by men. I’m a freed-spirit and follower of the way of YHWH and his son. If you want I can use a capital ‘S’ for son although that will not make one a true believer or be closer to God. It is what is in the heart that counts. And my heart says that YHWH is and has always been greater that his SON.

Did you know that the original Hebrew and Greek writings were all written down as capital symbols without spaces any punctuation?



Bless you,



APAK

"Did you know that the original Hebrew and Greek writings were all written down as capital symbols without spaces any punctuation?" Neither were there numerals. And, smudgy pages to boot from writing right to left, lol. What an undertaking to put it all together, eh?

​

​

 

[gadar perets]

In His Deity, equal (John 5:18).

Do you have any other Scriptural support to say the Father and Son are equal deities besides the opinion of unbelieving Jews who constantly misunderstood Yeshua and who would stop at nothing to falsely accuse him?

 

[justbyfaith]

Actually, John 5:18 was a statement made by the apostle John under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.

 

[APAK]

"Did you know that the original Hebrew and Greek writings were all written down as capital symbols without spaces any punctuation?" Neither were there numerals. And, smudgy pages to boot from writing right to left, lol. What an undertaking to put it all together, eh?

​

Yeah Nancy, quite an undertaking indeed...

 

[APAK]

The church I am currently attending is a Calvary Chapel but I have some background with the Oneness Pentecostals.

My view on the Trinity is somewhere in between what is taught by the respective parties mentioned. I have thought on what it might be for quite some time and have thought to write a book on the subject.

Thanks for that. I do have a better perspective...well you know my profile pretty well JBF....Blessing to you and family..APAK

 

[APAK]

Of course He is. The Son is Human as well as Divine. So, in His humanity, He is a less than the Father (John 14:28). In His Deity, equal (John 5:18). The doctrine is called the hypostatic union: that Jesus is 100% Man and 100% God.

Of course the hypostatic union is an invention to bridge the gap of ignorance of many, then and now, created as a stop-gap measure to try and understand Christ our Lord and savior, many, many hundreds of years ago. It is about time we loosened the shackles of these false pillars as the idea of incarnation is another, and folks really read and understood their Bibles guided my the spirit of truth. Gotta say it JBF. Not many will...I know it may leave a bad-taste...well you have your religion for comfort...

Bless you brother, and I would say hello to you any time I met you...door is always open

APAK

 

[justbyfaith]

I think we will have to agree to disagree. I can't say that my door is always open to you however; not because I don't love you but because of 2 John 1:9-10 (kjv).

 

[Episkopos]

It is ironic that some believers deny Christ by using the same arguments as non-believing Jews....who have been blinded in order that all nations be given access to God through Christ.

The arguments are lame.

The Hebrew language....while very powerful to say so much in few words....can have different depths of meaning. The Lord led me to learn Hebrew about 18 years ago. It is a wonderful means of conveyance of truth.

In the same way that the NT translators show a bias towards their way of thinking.....the Jewish translators also do the same.

But the text speaks for itself. I am speaking here of the MSS.

If one reads the text without bias...the message is out of this world....so much so, that people tend to try attenuating the message through improper conventions.

One example is the difference between a name of a person and a statement.

take Immanuel for instance....

In the bible a person can have EL (God) in their name....without it relating to God. We see this all the time.....samuEL, GabriEL...etc

But Immanuel is different. It is 2 words...Imanou El...this means that it is a statement not a name. it means literally that God (El) is with us.

The same thing for describing the future Jerusalem..."The Lord is there" That is 2 words in Hebrew...again not a name but a statement.


As for Is 9...the Jews twist the meaning of the text because they don't like what it says. They break the rules of reading all other texts for this one verse...which is dishonest. So then dishonesty is the only way to deny the divinity of Jesus. It is written so that children could understand it. But only children it seems.

 

[amadeus]

I was kicked out of one Christian church because I kept the Sabbath. I was told by another church that I could not be a Christian because I reject the trinity. I was told by a third church that I will be lost if I do not return to the mother church. If Christianity doesn't want me, so be it. I know Yeshua wants me and that is all that matters. Christianity is NOT the door to the Kingdom of Heaven, Yeshua is.

Give God the glory my friend!

We are to please God rather than men... no matter what it is we believe about all of the particulars. I have never been a Sabbath keeper, at least not in the literal sense...

"One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks." Rom 14:5-6

But I am also not a trinitarian and we understand who and what the Door through which we must enter is.