What is Jesus saying in John 8:58 and what is he not saying?

Lon said:

See below * you cannot use English, to try and translate back into, or correct Greek. Translation only works one way.

In addition, most of these are paraphrases, rather than translations. The Living Bible, for example, wasn't done by a man who knew Greek, just wanted to make a bible his kids could read and understand.

No K. L. MCKAY, MA., you are incorrect. #1 The context is given, clearly,concerning the divinity of Jesus Christ. John 8:41 "God is our Father!"
⁵⁸ “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” ⁵⁹ At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.
#2 εἰμί (eimi) PIA (present, indicative, active), thus I "am" (not "was"). The only time you'd change this (AND CAREFULLY) is if a Greek expression didn't translate an idea well, in English.

*You cannot, then, use a translation (Tigger), in retrospect, to try and correct the Greek. That is a slippery slope and huge problem, as it'd allow anyone to rewrite meanings, which many without a language background attempt.

Kenneth McKay could probably teach me a thing or two regarding biblical language, but on this, the context as well as present active form of the verb, are in disagreement with the assertion. It simply means, as good of a Greek professor as he happened to be, he is incorrect on this particular. Could he teach me Greek? Sort of, but I'd be afraid of learning bad habits from him at this point and would have to pass. I'd have to decline. A present active state of being, in Greek, is familiar in English (Am) as well, thus it does invoke Exodus 3:14, if not for you, for most.

Click to expand...

Continuation of my post #8 for Lon:

I Am (ego eimi)

From my personal in-depth study of the 'I Am' trinity 'proof':
http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/i-am-part-1.html

Dr. Walter Martin, the much-heralded trinitarian “cult-buster,” has been quoted as publicly declaring that

“there is no rule or precedent in Greek syntax to allow a present [tense] to equal a perfect [tense].” (Cf. KOTC, p. 89.)

However, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by J. H. Moulton, Vol. III (by Nigel Turner), p. 62, Edinburgh, 1963, comments specifically on this meaning at John 8:58:

“The present [tense] which indicates the continuance of an action during the past and up to the moment of speaking is virtually the same as perfective [perfect tense], the only difference being that the action is conceived of as still in progress.... It is frequent in the NT: Lk 2:48, 13:7... John 5:6, 8:58 (eimi), 14:9 ... 15:27” - T&T Clark, 1963.

G. B. Winer (“the great Greek grammarian of the 19th century” - Wallace) also tells us:

“Sometimes the Present includes also a past tense (mdv. 108), viz. when the verb expresses a state which commenced at an earlier period but still continues, - a state in its duration as, Jno. xv. 27 [Jn.15:27]..., viii. 58 [Jn 8:58].” - A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, Andover, 1897, p. 267.

Blass and Debrunner also list the following as NT instances of present tense verbs indicating the duration of an act up to and including the present: Lk 13:7; 15:29; Jn 8:58 (eimi);15:27 (este); 2 Cor. 12:19. - p. 168 (#322), A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, University of Chicago Press, 1961.

Trinitarian A. T. Robertson also agrees with this understanding of the Greek present tense. He calls it “The Progressive Present” and tells us that such a present tense verb often

“has to be translated into English by a sort of ‘progressive perfect’ (‘have been’)...” - p. 879, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research.

Even A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament by trinitarians Dana and Mantey confirms this understanding:

“b. The present [tense] approaches its kindred tense, the perfect, when used to denote the continuation of existing results [D&M’s emphasis in italics]. Here it refers to a fact which has come to be in the past, but is emphasized as a present reality, as we say, ‘I learn that you have moved’ (that is, information has come to me in the past which I now possess). ....

“To say that this use is ‘present for perfect’ (Gildersleeve: Syntax, p. 87) is not accurately representing the case. It does approach quite closely the significance of the perfect [tense], but stresses the continuance [D&M’s emphasis] of results through present time which the perfect [tense] would not do, for the perfect stresses existence of results but not their continuance. To say [manthano auton elthein], ‘I learn that he has gone,’ has a force which is approximated only by ... ‘I have learned that he has gone’.

“c. Sometimes the progressive present [tense] is retroactive in its application, denoting that which has begun in the past and continues into the present. For the want of a better name, we may call it the present of duration. This use is generally associated with an adverb of time [as ‘from the beginning’ in Jn 15:27 and ‘before Abraham came into existence’ in John 8:58 which both act as ‘adverbs of time’ - RDB], and may best be rendered by the English perfect. [Examples of this usage as given by Dana and Mantey are Jn. 15:27 (literally in the NT Greek: ‘from beginning with me you are’ and usually rendered into English as: ‘you have been with me from the beginning’ - RSV); Lk. 13:7; 2 Cor. 12:9 - RDB].” - pp. 182, 183, The Macmillan Company, 30th printing, 1965. [material in brackets has been added by me]

Kenneth L. McKay wrote in his, A New Syntax of the Verb in New Testament Greek, An Aspectual Approach:

"Tense...4.2.4. Extension from Past. When used with an expression of either past time or extent of time with past implications (but not in past narrative, for which see 4.2.5), the present tense signals an activity begun in the past and continuing to the present time: Luke 13:7...Lu 15:29....Jn 14:9 [Tosouton khronon meth muoon eimi]..have I been with you so long...? ; Ac 27:33...Jn 8:58 [prin Abraam ego eimi], I have been in existence since before Abraham was born...."

Perhaps even more surprising is this admission by hyper-trinitarian NT Greek scholar, Daniel B. Wallace:

A. Extending-from-Past Present (Present of Past Action Still in Progress)
1. Definition
The present tense may be used to describe an action which, begun in the past, continues in the present. ....

.... It is different from the progressive present in that it reaches back in time and usually has some sort of temporal indicator, such as an adverbial phrase [such as ‘before Abraham came into existence’], to show this past-referring element. Depending on how tightly one defines this category, it is either relatively rare or fairly common.

2. Key to Identification
The key to this usage is normally to translate the present as an English present perfect. [And the presence of a ‘temporal indicator, such as an adverbial phrase, to show this past-referring element.’] Some examples might not fit such a gloss, however. [Wallace’s examples include Luke 13:7; Luke 15:29; John 5:6; 1 Jn 3:8.] - pp. 519-520, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, 1996. [As in all other cases, bracketed material and emphasis are added by me.]

Some NT Greek Grammars which acknowledge the "durative" or "progressive" present tense wherein the present tense verb [such as eimi] is understood to be continuing and, hence, may be properly rendered into English as a present perfect tense [such as "I have been"]:

Blass & DeBrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, #322.

Brooks & Winberry, Syntax of New Testament Greek, p. 84.

Ernest De Witt Burton, Syntax of Moods and Tenses in N.T. Greek, #17

Dana & Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p. 182-183

William W. Goodwin, Greek Grammar, p. 270, #1258, 1900 ed.

Kenneth L. McKay, A New Syntax of the Verb in New Testament Greek

C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom Book of N.T. Greek, p. 8

J. H. Moulton (Nigel Turner), A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Vol. 3, p. 62

Wesley J. Perschbacher, NT Greek Syntax, p. 284-285

A. T. Robertson, Grammar of the Greek NT in Light of Historical Research, pp. 879-880

Herbert Weir Smyth, A Greek Grammar For Colleges, #1885

Gerald L. Stevens, NT Greek, p.78

Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, p. 519

G. B. Winer, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, p. 267.

Richard Young, Intermediate New Testament Greek, pp. 111-112

Brooks/Winbery, Syntax of New Testament Greek, pp. 84-85
..........................

When a trinitarian Grammar scholar or translator (whether paraphrase or more literal) translates the Greek text in a way that contradicts the usual trinity 'proof,' that is significant! (And although many of the Bibles listed in post #8 above are not paraphrase Bibles, it matters little as to the understanding of the trinitarian translator's understanding of said trinity 'proof.')

Most trinitarians will simply dismiss a non-Trinitarian scholar's translation or grammar studies, but since we are quoting mostly trinitarian scholars and translators, it should be taken seriously. And the more we find the more significant it is.

Tigger 2 said:

Continuation of my post #8 for Lon:

I Am (ego eimi)

From my personal in-depth study of the 'I Am' trinity 'proof':
http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/i-am-part-1.html

Dr. Walter Martin, the much-heralded trinitarian “cult-buster,” has been quoted as publicly declaring that

“there is no rule or precedent in Greek syntax to allow a present [tense] to equal a perfect [tense].” (Cf. KOTC, p. 89.)

However, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by J. H. Moulton, Vol. III (by Nigel Turner), p. 62, Edinburgh, 1963, comments specifically on this meaning at John 8:58:

“The present [tense] which indicates the continuance of an action during the past and up to the moment of speaking is virtually the same as perfective [perfect tense], the only difference being that the action is conceived of as still in progress.... It is frequent in the NT: Lk 2:48, 13:7... John 5:6, 8:58 (eimi), 14:9 ... 15:27” - T&T Clark, 1963.

G. B. Winer (“the great Greek grammarian of the 19th century” - Wallace) also tells us:

“Sometimes the Present includes also a past tense (mdv. 108), viz. when the verb expresses a state which commenced at an earlier period but still continues, - a state in its duration as, Jno. xv. 27 [Jn.15:27]..., viii. 58 [Jn 8:58].” - A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, Andover, 1897, p. 267.

Blass and Debrunner also list the following as NT instances of present tense verbs indicating the duration of an act up to and including the present: Lk 13:7; 15:29; Jn 8:58 (eimi);15:27 (este); 2 Cor. 12:19. - p. 168 (#322), A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, University of Chicago Press, 1961.

Trinitarian A. T. Robertson also agrees with this understanding of the Greek present tense. He calls it “The Progressive Present” and tells us that such a present tense verb often

“has to be translated into English by a sort of ‘progressive perfect’ (‘have been’)...” - p. 879, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research.

Even A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament by trinitarians Dana and Mantey confirms this understanding:

“b. The present [tense] approaches its kindred tense, the perfect, when used to denote the continuation of existing results [D&M’s emphasis in italics]. Here it refers to a fact which has come to be in the past, but is emphasized as a present reality, as we say, ‘I learn that you have moved’ (that is, information has come to me in the past which I now possess). ....

“To say that this use is ‘present for perfect’ (Gildersleeve: Syntax, p. 87) is not accurately representing the case. It does approach quite closely the significance of the perfect [tense], but stresses the continuance [D&M’s emphasis] of results through present time which the perfect [tense] would not do, for the perfect stresses existence of results but not their continuance. To say [manthano auton elthein], ‘I learn that he has gone,’ has a force which is approximated only by ... ‘I have learned that he has gone’.

Click to expand...

Correct, thus 'before Abraham was, I am' is both the past expression AND the ongoing form of this particular verb that is still going. It isn't even in the form of the past, but in the form of active indicative. It is the contrast with the past and the ongoing 'now' of Jesus' being that needs to be expressed.

Tigger 2 said:

“c. Sometimes the progressive present [tense] is retroactive in its application, denoting that which has begun in the past and continues into the present. For the want of a better name, we may call it the present of duration. This use is generally associated with an adverb of time [as ‘from the beginning’ in Jn 15:27 and ‘before Abraham came into existence’ in John 8:58 which both act as ‘adverbs of time’ - RDB], and may best be rendered by the English perfect. [Examples of this usage as given by Dana and Mantey are Jn. 15:27 (literally in the NT Greek: ‘from beginning with me you are’ and usually rendered into English as: ‘you have been with me from the beginning’ - RSV); Lk. 13:7; 2 Cor. 12:9 - RDB].” - pp. 182, 183, The Macmillan Company, 30th printing, 1965. [material in brackets has been added by me]

Kenneth L. McKay wrote in his, A New Syntax of the Verb in New Testament Greek, An Aspectual Approach:

Click to expand...

I can agree with Kenneth on this particular, but as I said, if there are mistakes, we'd want to be careful how we present his work. Your previous selection from him was overstated and wrong as far as I've ever read in any Greek discussions, classes, etc.

Tigger 2 said:

"Tense...4.2.4. Extension from Past. When used with an expression of either past time or extent of time with past implications (but not in past narrative, for which see 4.2.5), the present tense signals an activity begun in the past and continuing to the present time: Luke 13:7...Lu 15:29....Jn 14:9 [Tosouton khronon meth muoon eimi]..have I been with you so long...? ; Ac 27:33...Jn 8:58 [prin Abraam ego eimi], I have been in existence since before Abraham was born...."

Perhaps even more surprising is this admission by hyper-trinitarian NT Greek scholar, Daniel B. Wallace:

A. Extending-from-Past Present (Present of Past Action Still in Progress)
1. Definition
The present tense may be used to describe an action which, begun in the past, continues in the present. ....

.... It is different from the progressive present in that it reaches back in time and usually has some sort of temporal indicator, such as an adverbial phrase [such as ‘before Abraham came into existence’], to show this past-referring element. Depending on how tightly one defines this category, it is either relatively rare or fairly common.

2. Key to Identification
The key to this usage is normally to translate the present as an English present perfect. [And the presence of a ‘temporal indicator, such as an adverbial phrase, to show this past-referring element.’] Some examples might not fit such a gloss, however. [Wallace’s examples include Luke 13:7; Luke 15:29; John 5:6; 1 Jn 3:8.] - pp. 519-520, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, 1996. [As in all other cases, bracketed material and emphasis are added by me.]

Some NT Greek Grammars which acknowledge the "durative" or "progressive" present tense wherein the present tense verb [such as eimi] is understood to be continuing and, hence, may be properly rendered into English as a present perfect tense [such as "I have been"]:

Blass & DeBrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, #322.

Brooks & Winberry, Syntax of New Testament Greek, p. 84.

Ernest De Witt Burton, Syntax of Moods and Tenses in N.T. Greek, #17

Dana & Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p. 182-183

William W. Goodwin, Greek Grammar, p. 270, #1258, 1900 ed.

Kenneth L. McKay, A New Syntax of the Verb in New Testament Greek

C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom Book of N.T. Greek, p. 8

J. H. Moulton (Nigel Turner), A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Vol. 3, p. 62

Wesley J. Perschbacher, NT Greek Syntax, p. 284-285

A. T. Robertson, Grammar of the Greek NT in Light of Historical Research, pp. 879-880

Herbert Weir Smyth, A Greek Grammar For Colleges, #1885

Gerald L. Stevens, NT Greek, p.78

Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, p. 519

G. B. Winer, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, p. 267.

Richard Young, Intermediate New Testament Greek, pp. 111-112

Brooks/Winbery, Syntax of New Testament Greek, pp. 84-85

Click to expand...

Yet this verb is given as Present, Active, indicative which means 'now' 'still' and indicative means 'really taking place.' Thus, while context may make sense to say "Before Abraham was, I existed' it ONLY done so if it genuinely DOESN'T affect theology and conveys better grammatically, in English. It is a translation constraint, thus only a debate in circles where most rely upon translation. In Greek, the only discussion is "what is the best way to convey this in (whatever translated language).

Tigger 2 said:

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

When a trinitarian Grammar scholar or translator (whether paraphrase or more literal) translates the Greek text in a way that contradicts the usual trinity 'proof,' that is significant! (And although many of the Bibles listed in post #8 above are not paraphrase Bibles, it matters little as to the understanding of the trinitarian translator's understanding of said trinity 'proof.')

Most trinitarians will simply dismiss a non-Trinitarian scholar's translation or grammar studies, but since we are quoting mostly trinitarian scholars and translators, it should be taken seriously. And the more we find the more significant it is.

Click to expand...

When the NIV and NASB were being translated, both Greek and English scholars were used (less so English on the NASB because it was going for transliteration similar to the KJV rather than going beyond attempt at one-word-for-one-word translation). The KJV and NASB are better Greek than English at that point, but both serve fine, for English conveyance for the most part.

In the case of most of your examples, there wasn't a group, but individuals who made the paraphrases/translations. Some with little language experience (or none) and many without English degrees. What you'd then want to ask, is whether they intended a particular meaning, but as I've said, we certainly cannot give single scholars overt weight in such important scripture rendering, certainly not mine. There are a good many B-Greek websites dedicated to these discussions, but the most important conveyance here is "Present" (a verb that applies to 'now'), Active (Jesus as the speaker is talking about Himself) and Indicative (means 'me, now (I am) in reality.' In Him -Lon

oatmeal said:

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

What was Jesus saying?
Who or what is he saying that he is?
Is he saying that he is something?
Or is he simply saying that “Before Abraham was born, I am” That is, since I was foretold of in Genesis 3:15, well before Abe showed up on the scene or in scripture, and what God says will be will be, I was in that sense, before Abraham both in planning for man’s redemption and salvation and in priority?

Let us look at other examples where Jesus uses the words “I am” ego eimi, and what he follows up with saying he is.

Jesus said “I am good”
Matthew 20:15
Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?

Is Gabriel claiming to be the “I am”?
Luke 1:19
And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings.
Jesus said I am or I am the bread of life?
John 6:35
And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
John 6:48
I am that bread of life.
John 6:51
I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
Did Jesus say I am or I am the light of the world?
John 8:12
Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
Did Jesus claim to be the I am or did he claim to be one that bears witness of himself?
John 8:18
I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.
Who does Jesus he is?

So far, bread of life, light of the world, one that bears witness of himself and other things.
John 8:24
I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
John 8:28
Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
Did Jesus claim to be the “I am” or the door of the sheep?
John 10:7
Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
God or the good shepherd?
John 10:11
I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

Based on Jesus being able to speak complete sentences as in the examples above when he speaks saying “I am” and telling us what he is, if Jesus was telling us that he is the “I am”, that is claiming to be God, he most certainly would have said so!!

He would have said, Before Abraham was, I am the I am


Do you not think that Jesus knew the Old Testament Scriptures? Do you not know that the 'I Am' statement is just for God the Father in the Old Testament?


Or if he used God’s full phrase
Before Abraham was, I am the I am that I am.

Why didn’t Jesus say what he was in John 8:58?

Because he was simply speaking of him being the redeemer and savior spoken of in Genesis 3:15 and throughout the word of God.

Click to expand...

Jesus says he is I am, and he knows the Jews know God the Father says He is the I am.

Jesus says he is I am because he is God the Father who is the I am.


John 8:58 "Truly, truly, I tell you," Jesus declared, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

Exodus 3:14 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.'"

John 8:24 That is why I told you that you would die in your sins. For unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins."

John 8:28 So Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know thatI am He, and that I do nothing on My own, but speak exactly what the Father has taught Me.

John 4:26 Jesus answered, "I who speak to you am He."

Zechariah 12:10 "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.

John 13:19 I am telling you now before it happens, so that when it comes to pass, you will believe that I am He.



God the Father in the Old Testament says about Himself that "They will look on me, the on they have pierced."



John 18:6 When Jesus said, "I am he," they drew back and fell to the ground.



Do you not think that Jesus knew the Old Testament Scriptures? Do you not know that the 'I Am' statement is just for God the Father in the Old Testament?

This is God the Father speaking in the Old Testament:

Isaiah 48:12 [ Israel Freed ] “Listen to me, Jacob, Israel, whom I have called: I am he; I am the first and I am the last.

This is Jesus calling himself I am he and I am the first and the last.

John 18:6 When Jesus said, "I am he," they drew back and fell to the ground.

Revelation 22:13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

oatmeal said:

Why do you ask what I mean?

The important question is what does the word say?

What is the meaning of the words God used in scripture.

The Father is God, Jesus is not. Jesus is the son of the Father, not the Father, not God who is the Father.

The Holy Spirit is clearly just another name that God uses to describe himself for God declares that He is holy and that He is spirit

That the Holy Spirit and the Father are identical is made clear in Luke 1:35

³⁵ And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

If the Holy Spirit is a separate person then all claims that God the Father is the Father are false

Click to expand...

That is right when you say God the Father and the Holy Spirit are the same.

Now believe the scriptures that say the Lord is the Spirit. The Lord is Jesus Christ in the scriptures that say the Lord is the Spirit.

The one and only divine Spirit.


2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.

2 Corinthians 3:18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into His image with intensifying glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

Ephesians 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called;

oatmeal said:

Jesus then did not know who his Father is for this verse clearly tells us that the Holy Ghost (Spirit) would be the one to overshadow Mary

Thus for the Father to be the Father and the Holy Spirit to be the Father, the Holy Spirit is the Father and the Father is the Holy Spirit, they are the same entity, not separate persons


How do you read John 10:33

³³ The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

Did Jesus make himself out to be God?

No, he did not.

He clarfiied by repeating what he said in John 10:36, what he said is that he is the son of God.

³⁶ Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Based on the fact that these and other Judeans were hell bent on destroying Jesus, do you really think they were interested in the truth?

They plotted to murder the way the truth and the life. and they were happy to do so

Click to expand...

Jesus wasn't God as if God is no longer in heaven. Jesus is God the Father come in the flesh as a son. God the Father came as a man in the flesh while also in heaven in unapproachable light.

When a human sends forth a person from themselves in the flesh that person is called a son,or a daughter.

Jesus is God the Father come in the flesh and is called a son.

TrevorL said:

Greetings again 7dengo7, Well it is pretty obvious to me (and everyone else) that when oatmeal says 'Jesus is not God', he does not “mean God the Father”. He rejects your claim that Jesus is God, and one way to express this is God the Son. Jesus is the Son of God, not God the Son.

Kind regards
Trevor

Click to expand...

There is only one God, and He is the Father.

Jesus is God the Father who also comes as the Son of man in the flesh.

7djengo7 said:

You understand what oatmeal means by his stonewalling against the question, "By the word 'God', when you say, 'Jesus is not God', do you mean God the Father?" So do I.

Click to expand...

There is only one God and He is the Father.


1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Ephesians 4:6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.


There are no scriptures that say there is one God and son of all.

There is no scripture that says the word 'God' is now plural meaning a Father and a Son who are different and separate.

Since there is only one God and He is the Father, then Jesus who is God must be the one and only God the Father come as a son in the flesh.

Greetings God's Truth,

God's Truth said:

There is only one God, and He is the Father. Jesus is God the Father who also comes as the Son of man in the flesh.

Click to expand...

How do you understand Psalm 110:1 which seems to indicate that there are two individuals, Yahweh, God the Father and seated next to Him is David's Lord, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God. I once heard that Pentecostals are very strong on the Trinity, but I have only been to one Pentecostal meeting, and they were Oneness Pentecostals. Are you a Oneness Pentecostal?

Kind regards
Trevor

TrevorL said:

Greetings God's Truth,How do you understand Psalm 110:1 which seems to indicate that there are two individuals, Yahweh, God the Father and seated next to Him is David's Lord, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

Click to expand...

This is a good question and at the right time.

Now consider carefully the scriptures that say the First and the Last, and the Beginning and the End.

God the Father says He is the First and the Last and the Beginning and the End.

Jesus also says that he is the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

That alone proves the Father and Jesus are the same person. but now think on this:

God the Father who is a Spirit and lives in unapproachable light whom no one has seen made Himself a body and that body is an immortal body. That body God the Father made Himself is the First Immortal Body, the body is the body Jesus got back when he returned to heaven after dying, raising again, and sending. Jesus is the First and the Last.

TrevorL said:

I once heard that Pentecostals are very strong on the Trinity, but I have only been to one Pentecostal meeting, and they were Oneness Pentecostals. Are you a Oneness Pentecostal?

Click to expand...

No, I am not a Oneness Pentecostal. I only heard of it and studied it after others asked me if that is my beliefs. Oneness Pentecostals do not believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit live simultaneously. I do not believe like that. I know that God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all live at the same time and are still the same One.

God's Truth said:

Jesus says he is I am, and he knows the Jews know God the Father says He is the I am.

Jesus says he is I am because he is God the Father who is the I am.


John 8:58 "Truly, truly, I tell you," Jesus declared, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

Exodus 3:14 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.'"

John 8:24 That is why I told you that you would die in your sins. For unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins."

John 8:28 So Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know thatI am He, and that I do nothing on My own, but speak exactly what the Father has taught Me.

John 4:26 Jesus answered, "I who speak to you am He."

Zechariah 12:10 "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.

John 13:19 I am telling you now before it happens, so that when it comes to pass, you will believe that I am He.



God the Father in the Old Testament says about Himself that "They will look on me, the on they have pierced."



John 18:6 When Jesus said, "I am he," they drew back and fell to the ground.



Do you not think that Jesus knew the Old Testament Scriptures? Do you not know that the 'I Am' statement is just for God the Father in the Old Testament?

This is God the Father speaking in the Old Testament:

Isaiah 48:12 [ Israel Freed ] “Listen to me, Jacob, Israel, whom I have called: I am he; I am the first and I am the last.

This is Jesus calling himself I am he and I am the first and the last.

John 18:6 When Jesus said, "I am he," they drew back and fell to the ground.

Revelation 22:13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

Click to expand...

If indeed, Jesus was saying, I am the I am, why didn't he say, "I am I am"

He had no problem saying "I am the resurrection" and I am the light of the world" etc. Why would he have a problem saying "I am I am"????

Greetings again “God's Truth”,

God's Truth said:

This is a good question and at the right time.
Now consider carefully the scriptures that say the First and the Last, and the Beginning and the End.
God the Father says He is the First and the Last and the Beginning and the End.
Jesus also says that he is the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
That alone proves the Father and Jesus are the same person.

Click to expand...

No, I do not equate this. Jesus was a human, born by the power of the Holy Spirit upon Mary and as such he was the Son of God Matthew 1:20-21, Luke 1:34-35, John 1:14. I do not view the first and last by a simple a=b=c concept. Jesus reveals the One God, the Father, who is the first and the last. Jesus speaks on God's behalf.

Kind regards
Trevor

TrevorL said:

Greetings again “God's Truth”,No, I do not equate this. Jesus was a human, born by the power of the Holy Spirit upon Mary and as such he was the Son of God Matthew 1:20-21, Luke 1:34-35, John 1:14. I do not view the first and last by a simple a=b=c concept. Jesus reveals the One God, the Father, who is the first and the last. Jesus speaks on God's behalf.

Kind regards
Trevor

Click to expand...

Jesus came from heaven.

You have to believe all of the scriptures.

oatmeal said:

If indeed, Jesus was saying, I am the I am, why didn't he say, "I am I am"

He had no problem saying "I am the resurrection" and I am the light of the world" etc. Why would he have a problem saying "I am I am"????

Click to expand...

He said he is I am.

God's Truth said:

He said he is I am.

Click to expand...

Try reading sometime

God's Truth said:

Jesus came from heaven.

You have to believe all of the scriptures.

Click to expand...

What about John the B?

Where was he sent from?

John 1:6

There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

He was sent from God.

Where are we seated as believers?

Ephesians 2:6

And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

Is that a physical reality? or as spiritual/legal reality?

Jesus being from heaven is referring to the source of his existence, God his Father

oatmeal said:

Try reading sometime

Click to expand...

He said he is I am.

oatmeal said:

What about John the B?

Where was he sent from?

John 1:6

There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

He was sent from God.

Click to expand...

Learn to read. Where does it say John was from heaven?

JESUS WAS FROM HEAVEN.

oatmeal said:

Where are we seated as believers?

Ephesians 2:6

And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

Is that a physical reality? or as spiritual/legal reality?

Jesus being from heaven is referring to the source of his existence, God his Father

Click to expand...

Jesus plainly says that he was from heaven.


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

John 3:13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven--the Son of Man.

John 6:62
Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before!


John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

John 17:24 "Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.

God's Truth said:

He said he is I am.

Click to expand...

No, he did not.

He said, "Before Abraham was, I am"

He did not say, Before Abraham was, I am I am"

There is huge difference.

Am I am right?

I AM!

God's Truth said:

Learn to read. Where does it say John was from heaven?

JESUS WAS FROM HEAVEN.



Jesus plainly says that he was from heaven.


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

John 3:13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven--the Son of Man.

John 6:62
Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before!


John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

John 17:24 "Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.

Click to expand...

Since I am seated in the heavenlies with all the other saints

Ephesians 2:6

And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

For me to be down here right now, I had to come down from heaven.

Either God is right about me being seated in the heavenlies or he is wrong.

Please explain how I can be in the heavenlies right now and be on the earth right now. or explain how I got here since I am seated in the heavenlies

According to Ephesians 2:6 am I seated in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus?

I AM!

Am I typing a reply to you?

I AM!

Ephesians 1:4

According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:


How could I be chosen by God before the foundation of the world if I did not exist before the foundation of the world?

So, if I existed before the foundation of the world, where was I?

How did I get from there to here?

oatmeal said:

No, he did not.

He said, "Before Abraham was, I am"

He did not say, Before Abraham was, I am I am"

There is huge difference.

Am I am right?

I AM!

Click to expand...

You are wrong.

This is what GOD THE FATHER SAYS in the OLD TESTAMENT:

Zechariah 12:10 "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.

Did you read that?

God the Father says they will look at ME THE ONE THEY HAVE PIERCED.

That is JESUS and he says when YOU PIERCE HIM YOU WILL KNOW THAT I AM HE.

John 8:28 So Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing on My own, but speak exactly what the Father has taught Me.

oatmeal said:

Since I am seated in the heavenlies with all the other saints

Ephesians 2:6

And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

For me to be down here right now, I had to come down from heaven.

Either God is right about me being seated in the heavenlies or he is wrong.

Please explain how I can be in the heavenlies right now and be on the earth right now. or explain how I got here since I am seated in the heavenlies

According to Ephesians 2:6 am I seated in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus?

I AM!

Am I typing a reply to you?

I AM!

Ephesians 1:4

According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:


How could I be chosen by God before the foundation of the world if I did not exist before the foundation of the world?

So, if I existed before the foundation of the world, where was I?

How did I get from there to here?

Click to expand...

So you are just going to CLOSE YOUR EYES TO ALL THOSE SCRIPTURES I GAVE ABOUT JESUS BEING FROM HEAVEN.


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

John 3:13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven--the Son of Man.

John 6:62
Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before!


John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

John 17:24 "Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.