John 18:5-6

Because YHWH calls himself “I am”  in Exodus 3:13-14, did Jesus claim to be Yahweh when he said “I am” in John 18:5-6?

5 “Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “I am he,” Jesus said. (And Judas the traitor was standing there with them.)
6 When Jesus said, “I am he,” they drew back and fell to the ground.

Exodus 3:13-14 says the following:
13 Moses said to God, “Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, `The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, `What is his name?’ Then what shall I tell them?”
14 God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: `I AM has sent me to you.'”

But what does Yahweh say in Psalm 2:7
“I will declare the decree: Yahweh hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

and in Acts 13:33
33 he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm:
” ‘You are my Son; today I have become your Father.

Also look at Hebrews 1:5 & Hebrews 5:5

So Yahweh is the Father of Jesus. Jesus is the Son of Yahweh. Jesus is not Yahweh and therefore he is not God. Rather Jesus is the son of Yahweh, otherwise known as the Son of God.

Back in John 18 we can see that the Jews came to arrest Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane. They first took him to Annas (vs.13). Then they took him to Caiaphas (vs.24) and eventually to Pilate (vss.28,29). A parallel account is found in Matthew 26:57-68. Notice, in particular, verse 59. The same men that had fallen backward to the ground were in attendance when the council sought false witnesses against Jesus to put him to death. Verse 60 says they couldn’t find any. Eventually two came forward. Interestingly, they didn’t bear false witness about what Jesus said in Jn.8:58, but about his reference to destroying the temple and building it again in three days, then Jesus was condemned for claiming to be the Son of God in Matthew 26:63-65.

The point about Matthew 26 is, why would false witnesses be sought if they had true witnesses in attendance? The arresting officers heard Jesus say “Ego eimi.” They could have stoned him right there in the garden for blasphemy, but they didn’t. They could have reported the supposed blasphemy to the council, but they didn’t. Why not? Because it wasn’t blasphemy, nor was it a stoneable offense. He was merely identifying himself as Jesus of Nazareth.

It is believed by some that the account recorded in John 8:48-59 further supports the position that Jesus is the “I AM.” Why else would the Jews try to stone him (v59)? He obviously blasphemed in the eyes of the Jews.

“I am” is a translation from Greek words “ego eimi”. Is the mere utterance of “ego eimi” a blasphemy? Does the use of “ego eimi” automatically identify the speaker as Yahweh, the I AM? In Luke 1:19, the angel Gabriel said, “Ego eimi Gabriel.” In John 9:9, the blind man whose sight was restored by Jesus said, “Ego eimi.” In Acts 10:21, Peter said, “Behold, ego eimi (I am) he whom ye seek.” Obviously, the mere use of “ego eimi” does not equate one to the “I Am” of Exodus 3:14.

Jesus used the phrase “ego eimi” at least twenty times and yet, in only one instance did the Jews seek to stone him (John 8:58). Jesus said, “I am the bread of life” to a large crowd, in John.6:35-48, yet no one opposed him. In verse 41, the Jews murmured because he said, “I am (ego eimi) the bread which came down from heaven.” But in verse 42, the Jews questioned only the phrase, “I came down from heaven” and ignored “ego eimi.” The same is true of verses 51 & 52

In John 8:12, 18, 24, & 28, Jesus used “ego eimi” with Pharisees present (vs.13) and yet, no stoning. He, again, used it four times in John 10:7, 9, 11, & 14 with no stoning. Jesus said to his disciples, “that ye may believe that I am (ego eimi)” in John 13:19 without them batting an eye.

This brings us back to Jn.8:58. Why did the Jews seek to stone him on that occasion? The context of Jn.8 shows that Jesus;

  • accused the Jews of “judging after the flesh” (vs.15).
  • said they would die in their sins (vss.21,24).
  • implied they were in bondage (vss.32,33).
  • said they were servants of sin (vs.34).
  • said they were out to kill him (vss. 37,40).
  • implied they were spiritually deaf (vs.43,47).
  • said their father was the devil (vs.44).
  • said they were not of Elohim (vs.47).
  • accused them of dishonoring him (vs.49).
  • accused them of not knowing Yahweh (vs.55).
  • accused them of lying (vs.55).
 

Aside from that, the Jews misunderstood Jesus words leading them to believe;

  • that he accused them of being born of fornication (vs.41).
  • Jesus had a devil (vs.52).
  • that he was exalting himself above Abraham (vs.53).
  • that he saw Abraham (vs.56).

Jesus words in verse 58 were the culmination of an encounter that was so offensive to the Jews, that they couldn’t restrain themselves. They simply couldn’t take it anymore so they sought to stone him, not because of two simple words, “ego eimi,” but because he was making himself out to be greater than their beloved father Abraham.

We need to also remember that “I AM” in the Old Testament is a different set of words from different languages to the New Testament instances. It would be like saying that “I am” in English is equating one with God for it is the word used by God in Hebrew. That is simply not true. Many say “I am” in the New Testament just as they say those words today without meaning they are God.

If you were watching Mickey Mouse on the Disney channel and Goofy said to Mickey, “are you Mickey Mouse”, am I to assume then that Mickey Mouse is claiming to be God if he answers, “I am”? Of course not. He is simply identifying himself as Mickey Mouse.

Back to the Old Testament we see that it was YHWH that said “I am that I am”. He was saying that he was the ever exisiting one. So his name was actually YHWH. To equate the common words “I am” as a claim to be YHWH is indeed a big stretch of the imagination.

Here is an example of the words “I am” in everday language/

Q: Are you Peter?
A: I am.

Conclusion: If I am Peter then am I blaspheming when I say I am. I am not saying I am YHWH. I am saying that I am Peter. I am simply answering the question asked of me. This behaviour is very normal and common as you can see. In fact this paragraph alone contains 7 instances of the term ‘I am’. Yet who in their right mind would think that I was claiming to be God?
To say that Jesus claimed to be God because he said “I am” can only be at most, an unsupported and extemely weak opinion. There are no scriptures in the bible that uses this occurrence as a teaching to promote a Trinity Or to prove that Yashua is Yahweh. To hinge the Trinity Doctrine on an assumption is indeed a weak argument to make and wouldn’t get very far in a court of law. To say that we are condemned if we do not believe in a certain vague interpretation is totally unacceptable to all who earnestly seek truth. Remember that we are judged by the measures we judge others, so we shouldn’t be so unreasonable.

If you read the whole Bible without bias, would you come to the conclusion that Jn.8:58 is saying that Jesus is God and part of a Trinity. I really do not think so, therefore it is unfair to condemn someone who doesn’t hold to your opinion if you indeed believe in the Trinity Doctrine and I have to note that there are hundreds of scriptures that show us clearly that the Father is God and Jesus is the Son of God. These verses are clear teachings. The Trinity Doctrine is based on weak assumptions which come from the mind of Man. I prefer to believe the scriptures, rather than assumptions and imaginations of men.

← Go back to ‘Supporting the Trinity Doctrine‘.


Discussion

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 20 posts - 61 through 80 (of 255 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #791757
    kerwin
    Participant

    Andrew,

    I do address single points as I find it easier.

    You said.

    In Jn8:58 when he says before Abraham was I was or am,he’s plainly claiming to be greater than Abraham and giving himself a divine status whether or not one thinks he’s calling himself God-the I AM of Exodus.

    God doe tell Moses to call him “I am” when he speaks with the Israelites but it is no more his name than “the Ancient of Days” is.  His name is Jehovah though Abraham knew him by the name “El”.  I perceive it as him declaring he is the only God.  It has nothing to do with John 8:58.

     

    #791759
    AndrewAD
    Participant

    Kerwin,that’s fine that you don’t see it as having anything to do with Exodus,I really don’t either,but it very much does speak to Jesus nature in Jn 8:58.If he’s not calling himself Jehovah he’s at least claiming a preexistence and greater status than Abraham for which the Jews wanted to stone him.And St.Jn 12 speaks to that even more as the prophet Isaiah saw Jesus,the theophany/appearance of God.It also follows with other verses from Paul where he equates verses from the OT about Jehovah to Jesus.And yes I realize the synoptic verses which say things contrary.

    I have not been a confused Christian for many years for no reason.I have studied diligently and let God damn me if that’s not so.I fear not anymore,but choose love to rule now. I am in no ways perfect but that’s my hope.

    #791760
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Andrew,

    Yes you do spout the popular theology of the day.

    But the real problem is you do not recognise when the Spirit speaks through Jesus.

     

    He did mention this a few times

    Jn 13.49

    Jn 14.10

    Jn  14.24

    etc.

    But these words remain indigestible to the theologians developing their theories

    #791761
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Andrew,

    If you do not hear the voice of the Spirit in the man Jesus how did you get on when you heard the prophets?

     

    #791763
    kerwin
    Participant

    AndrewAD,

    John 8:58 mixes a present tense with a past tense in a pattern that doesn’t sound like English.

    In one translation it is “I am before Abraham was”

    I been looking and I can find no example in English where a statement like that is revealed to be good English.

     

    #791765
    kerwin
    Participant

    AndrewAD,

    Maybe someone here knows a variation that uses good English or can why the verse is good English like it is written.

    #791768
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Andrew,

    Acts 14.11

    And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices saying in the language of Lycaonia

    The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men.”

    Unspiritual men are still doing the same.

    None hear what God says but they follow the vanity of their minds

     

    #791769
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Andrew,

    Worldly men attributed to another man what was done by God.

    The darkness is deep

    #791771
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Andrew,

    The whole bible is the story of God working by His Spirit among men.

    Men are privileged to be used as vessels for that work and get to share in the rewards if we hang in there.

     

    Jesus Christ showed the way and advised us to follow him.

    #791772
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Andrew,

    To build a trinity god from scripture requires appalling ignorance of the teaching of Jesus Christ and the prophets and apostles.

     

     

     

    #791828
    kerwin
    Participant

    One way to translate the words of John 8:58i nto good English is the following.

    I have been since before Abraham  was made.

    another way is

    I have been the him since before Abraham was made.

    I favor the second idea as it is about identity and it goes with Jesus’ last words.

    Many favor the first one because it is about existence and it agrees with the accusation the Jews just breathed previously.

     

     

    #791844
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    Andrew…….it all depends on how you apply the “I WAS”, SOME SAY IT MEANS HE WAS EXISTING BEFORE ABRAHAM AS A SENTINAL BEING , BUT IT COULD JUST AS EASLY MEAN, HE WAS IN SCRIPTURES MENTIONED BEFORE HIM. But when you concider the over context of the dialogs there, you can see, that it all was addressing “IMPORTANCE” the JEWS WERE USING ABRAHAM AS THEIR FATHER WHICH GAVE THEM IMPORTANCE IN THAT RELATIONSHIP TO GOD, AND JESUS WAS JUST SAYING HE WAS MORE IMPORTANT THEN ABRAHAM WAS TO THEM, HE NEEDED TO BE PLACED AHEAD OF ABRAHAM IN IMPORTANCE in relating to GOD. IMO

    Peace and love to you and yours. ……………gene

    #791859
    sonofGod
    Participant

    Good post.

    We might ask ourselves,  who was Jesus referring to when he said, “I am” in John 8:58?

    John 8:40 gives us a plain answer.  He is a man who is telling the truth.   Not a God who is telling the truth.

    Of whom did he hear this truth?  Himself?  No,  the man, not God, who heard the truth heard it from God, not himself.

    <span class=”verse_num”>40 </span>But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

     

    #791863
    kerwin
    Participant

    In John 8:24 & John 8:28 the translators of the AV of the KJV chose to translate the same words they translated as “I am” in John 8:58.  I am convinced they made that choice, despite the bad English that was the result, because of their doctrine about the meaning of God’s words in Exodus.    The bad English paints them as being non-credible as witnesses to the truth.

    Jesus them during this whole passage is not to prove he preexist his own genesis but rather to prove that he is the Christ and therefore those things that apply to the Christ apply to him.  His unbelieving Jewish listeners were looking for lies in his speech whether they existed or not.  They were looking for flaws because they did not want to come into the light.  Their testimony is not credible.  I also do not believe that they derailed Jesus from his theme.

    This is why I am reasonably sure that Jesus was expressing the thoughts of the words “I have been the one since before Abraham was made”.  That does not mean he existed before his generation but rather that God appointed him to be the Messiah before Abraham was both created by God and made the father of many nations.

    The only reason I placed the word “since” is that without it I do not see a way to form good English out of what is given.

    I am being technical as even with bad English many readers seem to understand the meanings of the sentence.

    #791865
    bodhitharta
    Participant

    Hi AndrewAD

    you wrote:

    Yes when Jesus answered”I am” in response to his own question of “whom do you seek?” in Jn18:5,6 it was affirmative of Jesus the Nazarene.But why should they draw back and fall to the ground over that? unless Jesus was a divine being, which is the main point of St.John’s gospel that Jesus is the Son of God.

    If that is your logic then that leads to the even more important question of why no one fell to the ground in Jn 8:58
    When applying logic you should check out the whole circuit, Keep in mind you are talking about a scenario where not only did people not react with fainting and falling but instead according to the scriptures reacted with beatings followed by a crucifixion so why you put so much emphasis on a person or two falling to the ground is amazing because it did not prevent anything at all, he still got arrested.

    #791867
    AndrewAD
    Participant

    bodhitarta, I was placing no special emphasis on people falling down,but asked the question why should or would they fall down over him claiming I am Jesus the Nazarene in John’s gospel? these people didn’t even believe in him so what is the reason they fell down? The story says they did,so why do you think they fell down?

    That has nothing to do with the fact that he was later arrested,beaten and crucified does it? Jesus claims in John’s gospel that no man takes his life from him but he lays it down of himself.Isn’t that right?

    #791868
    kerwin
    Participant

    AndrewAD,

    I am not sure they did not believe in him as they were men doing their job.  Many, when put in the position of doing evil or loosing their job will do evil.

    Luke 20:6Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

    6 But and if we say, Of men; all the people will stone us: for they be persuaded that John was a prophet.

    The people given them the orders denied Jesus was a prophet but those lower down did not.

    John makes the point that many people believed but feared the people more as can be seen in John :12-13.

    Given such secret believers exist it is reasonable to think that even some of those that came to seize him were such. Among the reasons for fainting is fear or emotional trauma which a person that believes may well feel when confronting a prophet of God.

    The soldiers that confronted Elijah were burned up until a third more humble and believing group came to arrest him instead. Knowing this history those men had reason to fear.

    There is evidence Judas believed but his belief was not spiritual in nature. He repentance after the fact but his repentance was worldly and so led him to commit suicide. Those that bribed him were more heartless than he was and they were the leaders of the people.

    #791869
    AndrewAD
    Participant

    Wow Kerwin,are you grasping at silly straws here? So those who fell down were “secret believers”maybe? If they feared men more than God then certainly they are not believers or worthy of Christ.He who denies me before men I will deny before the Father-didn’t Jesus say that? But maybe he really didn’t mean that too strictly since even Peter denied him yet became the Rock on which the church is founded.

    So maybe those who fell down were all believers and Jesus healed the ear of that timid believer who got his ear chopped off? That actually makes me feel much better about myself and maybe now I can “harmonize”all the scriptures to my personal taste.Jesus is restoring my hearing right now even.Praise God!

     

     

    #791870
    bodhitharta
    Participant

    Nick Hassan wrote

    To build a trinity god from scripture requires appalling ignorance of the teaching of Jesus Christ and the prophets and apostles.

    so far BEST QUOTE of the year*****

    #791871
    AndrewAD
    Participant

    I think St.Nick said that quote to me even! But I have never spouted trinity doctrine here,but maybe Santa still just doesn’t like what I say so I won’t be getting goodies at Christmas for not believing him. 🙁

Viewing 20 posts - 61 through 80 (of 255 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2024 Heaven Net

Navigation

© 1999 - 2023 - Heaven Net
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account