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

[Wick Stick]

Language need not be complicated

If I ask you if you are the one that goes by the username Wick Stick, you could answer

a. I am

b. I am he

Either way, I would not jump to the ridiculous conclusion that you are claiming to be God.

Nor do I jump to the ridiculous conclusion that Jesus was claiming to be God

I can see that you are the sort of fellow who, when confronted with new evidence that contradicts what you have said, simply repeat what you first said.

There's not much point in continuing, then.

 

[6days]

Oatmeal "Why didn’t Jesus say what he was in John 8:58?"
Reply
If you think Jesus was someone who chose His words carefully, then you realize Jesus was saying exactly who He is.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings 6days,

Oatmeal "Why didn’t Jesus say what he was in John 8:58?"
Reply If you think Jesus was someone who chose His words carefully, then you realize Jesus was saying exactly who He is.

Yes, Jesus is stating who he is. I suggest that the expression in Greek “I am” is part of the theme in John’s Gospel of whether or not Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. The same expression in John 8:58 translated as “I AM” is the same Greek expression in John 8:24,28 translated in the KJV as “I am he”.
John 8:24–28 (KJV): 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. 25 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning. 26 I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him. 27 They understood not that he spake to them of the Father. 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.
The second occurrence above clearly shows that Jesus was not claiming to be Deity, and here he also calls himself “the Son of man”.

To remove some of the difficulty or ambiguity regarding this Greek expression, this same expression is used by the blind man showing that the English addition of “he” helps in understanding the Greek.
John 9:8–11 (KJV): 8 The neighbours therefore, and they which before had seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged? 9 Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he. 10 Therefore said they unto him, How were thine eyes opened? 11 He answered and said, A man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash: and I went and washed, and I received sight.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[JudgeRightly]

Greetings 6days, Yes, Jesus is stating who he is. I suggest that the expression in Greek “I am” is part of the theme in John’s Gospel of whether or not Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. The same expression in John 8:58 translated as “I AM” is the same Greek expression in John 8:24,28 translated in the KJV as “I am he”.
John 8:24–28 (KJV): 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. 25 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning. 26 I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him. 27 They understood not that he spake to them of the Father. 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.
The second occurrence above clearly shows that Jesus was not claiming to be Deity, and here he also calls himself “the Son of man”.

To remove some of the difficulty or ambiguity regarding this Greek expression, this same expression is used by the blind man showing that the English addition of “he” helps in understanding the Greek.
John 9:8–11 (KJV): 8 The neighbours therefore, and they which before had seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged? 9 Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he. 10 Therefore said they unto him, How were thine eyes opened? 11 He answered and said, A man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash: and I went and washed, and I received sight.

Kind regards
Trevor

Well, no. The translation is not from ego eimi to "I am he."

ego eimi translates to "I am.

There is no word for "he" in the greek phrase "ego eimi," and even in the septuagint, in Exodus 3:6, the same phrase ego eimi is used without the word "he."

You even admit that the word "he" is an addition to the text, and not an actual translation of the text.

the English addition of “he”

I have stated before that while yes, a direct, word for word translation of Greek to English is not possible due to the differences between the languages, so adding some words is necessary, that DOES NOT give anyone the right to add words that change the meaning or intent of what is said.

Jesus used this phrase multiple times in the Gospels.

Here are a few of them:

[JESUS]I am One who bears witness of Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness of Me.”[/JESUS] - John 8:18 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John8:18&version=NKJV
(No "He" here, yet it's the exact same phrase)

[JESUS]Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”[/JESUS] - John 8:24 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John8:24&version=NKJV
("He"" was added here, as indicated by italics in the NKJV)

Then Jesus said to them, [JESUS]“When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing of Myself; but as My Father taught Me, I speak these things.[/JESUS] - John 8:28 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John8:28&version=NKJV
("He"" was added here, as indicated by italics in the NKJV)

Are You greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? And the prophets are dead. Who do You make Yourself out to be?”Jesus answered, [JESUS]“If I honor Myself, My honor is nothing. It is My Father who honors Me, of whom you say that He is your God.Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. And if I say, ‘I do not know Him,’ I shall be a liar like you; but I do know Him and keep His word.Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”[/JESUS]Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”Jesus said to them, [JESUS]“Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”[/JESUS]Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by. - John 8:53-59 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John8:53-59&version=NKJV
(The NKJV correctly translates Jesus' words as "I AM" here, same phrase as used in 8:18)

And let's not loose the forest for the trees here, notice what they asked Him:

"Who do You make Yourself out to be?"

What was Jesus' response?

"I AM."

The entire chapter is Jesus claiming to be God, yet the bumbling fools didn't understand Him until verse 58.

If Jesus was not God, then why did they try to stone him? The punishment for claiming to be God when one is not is death, and the ones Jesus was speaking to knew this.

Now the son of an Israelite woman, whose father was an Egyptian, went out among the children of Israel; and this Israelite woman’s son and a man of Israel fought each other in the camp.And the Israelite woman’s son blasphemed the name of the Lord and cursed; and so they brought him to Moses. (His mother’s name was Shelomith the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan.)Then they put him in custody, that the mind of the Lord might be shown to them.And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying,“Take outside the camp him who has cursed; then let all who heard him lay their hands on his head, and let all the congregation stone him.“Then you shall speak to the children of Israel, saying: ‘Whoever curses his God shall bear his sin.And whoever blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall certainly stone him, the stranger as well as him who is born in the land. When he blasphemes the name of the Lord, he shall be put to death. - Leviticus 24:10-16 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus24:10-16&version=NKJV

So, the question comes down to this:

Is Jesus a liar claiming to be God, but is not God? Or is He LORD, claiming to be God, and is God?

In other words: Was Jesus good?

 

[oatmeal]

I can see that you are the sort of fellow who, when confronted with new evidence that contradicts what you have said, simply repeat what you first said.

There's not much point in continuing, then.

Actually, you are wrong. I look for evidence, whether that evidence supports or detracts from my conclusions. I have have been wrong before and it is only because I sought further evidence was I able to improve my conclusions.

I was taught by the RC that Jesus is God and that there is a trinity. I was a defender of that until I learned some scripture, then I rejected both errors.

I used to think that the dead are alive in heaven or fiery hell or limbo, then I learned the scriptures that the dead are dead until they are raised or resurrected from the dead.

I used to thing that Jesus died on Friday afternoon, and was raised on Sunday morning. What an out and out contradiction of scripture!

Yes, there are a lot of things that I learned from scripture that gave me truth instead of erroneous tradition.

What new evidence did you provide?

For that matter, what evidence did you provide?

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings JudgeRightly,

Well, no. The translation is not from ego eimi to "I am he." ego eimi translates to "I am.
There is no word for "he" in the greek phrase "ego eimi," and even in the septuagint, in Exodus 3:6, the same phrase ego eimi is used without the word "he."
You even admit that the word "he" is an addition to the text, and not an actual translation of the text.
I have stated before that while yes, a direct, word for word translation of Greek to English is not possible due to the differences between the languages, so adding some words is necessary, that DOES NOT give anyone the right to add words that change the meaning or intent of what is said.

I suggest that what you state above avoids the issue on a number of counts. The KJV translators saw it necessary to add he to give the proper sense in English for John 8:24,28 and John 9:9 and this rendition is in a sense an interpretation of what Jesus and the blind man are saying within the respective contexts. I have seen a translation where both John 8:24,28 are translated as “I AM”, aligning the idea with the KJV of John 8:58. I suggest that the two different renditions of the same Greek words have a different meaning, and I would like to hear from you if you consider “I AM” and “I am he” mean exactly the same in these passage, especially John 8:28, and John 9:9. How would you translate John 8:28, the same as the KJV? Your claim that he is an “addition” is incorrect, because it is not an addition but a clarification of the meaning of the Greek expression. I also suggest that “I AM” and “I am he” have different meanings.

I notice that you quote Exodus 3:6 LXX, but this shows the failure of the usual suggestion that Jesus is claiming to be the “I AM”. Exodus 3:6 is informing us who God is, but he is not saying “I AM”, but that he is the God of Abraham.
Exodus 3:6 (KJV): Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.
And notice the KJV of this verse, it puts “am” in italics “am”, as the Hebrew does not have this extra word, but I am sure you would not object to this addition in the LXX and KJV.

So you try to connect with Exodus 3:6, but the usual argument concerning John 8:58 is that it connects with Exodus 3:14, but the LXX does not support this connection. Also I believe that Exodus 3:14 should be translated as “I will be” and not as the KJV “I AM”. God is not speaking about his existence, but speaking of the fact that he was to be active in delivering Israel out of Egypt. I agree with Tyndale’s translation and this is also given in the RV and RSV margins.
Exodus 3:12–14 (Tyndale): 12 And he sayde: I wilbe with the. And this shalbe a token vnto the that I haue sent the: after that thou hast broughte the people out of Egipte, ye shall serue God vppon this mountayne. 13 Than sayde Moses vnto God: when I come vnto the childern of Israell and saye vnto them, the God of youre fathers hath sent me vnto you, ad they saye vnto me, what ys his name, what answere shall I geuethem? 14 Then sayde God vnto Moses: I wilbe what I wilbe: ad he sayde, this shalt thou saye vnto the children of Israel: I wilbe dyd send me to you.

I understand this to teach that the One God the Father will be active in achieving deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, He will become their salvation. This deliverance is typical of the future salvation that would be accomplished in Jesus, the true Passover Lamb, who would take away the sin of the world. The Yahweh Name is incorporated in the Name Jesus, Yah-Oshea, Yah’s Salvation.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[6days]

Trevor L "Yes, Jesus is stating who he is. "
Reply
Yes... And the Jews clearly understood him.

 

[oatmeal]

Oatmeal "Why didn’t Jesus say what he was in John 8:58?"
Reply
If you think Jesus was someone who chose His words carefully, then you realize Jesus was saying exactly who He is.

Because that is not what the point of his statement is all about.

For that matter, that is the point of this thread, if Jesus was claiming to be a shepherd, he would have said, "I am a shepherd" if Jesus was claiming to be the light of the world, he would have said "I am the light of the world" in John 8:58, He does claim these things in other places, but not here.

If he was claiming to be a what here, he would have stated what he was claiming to be as he did in other places in scripture

He is simply stating that he is, or in the first person "I am".

Based on the patter of his declarations, if he intended to be claiming to be the "I am " of Exodus, he would has said so. He would have said, "i am I am" or "I am I am that I am" which he did not do.
and not because it would have sounded funny. He was not afraid of what people thought, his concern was to do those things that pleased the Father, not himself

It is clear from scripture that as far as the record of Jesus Christ in scripture, He is declared before Abe in time and in priority.

As the seed of the woman, Jesus is referred to in Genesis 3:15 but Abraham not until years and chapters later.

Abraham is not God's plan for man's redemption and salvation, the seed of the woman is. Jesus Christ is.

 

[Bright Raven]

Because that is not what the point of his statement is all about.

For that matter, that is the point of this thread, if Jesus was claiming to be a shepherd, he would have said, "I am a shepherd" if Jesus was claiming to be the light of the world, he would have said "I am the light of the world" in John 8:58, He does claim these things in other places, but not here.

If he was claiming to be a what here, he would have stated what he was claiming to be as he did in other places in scripture

He is simply stating that he is, or in the first person "I am".

Based on the patter of his declarations, if he intended to be claiming to be the "I am " of Exodus, he would has said so. He would have said, "i am I am" or "I am I am that I am" which he did not do.
and not because it would have sounded funny. He was not afraid of what people thought, his concern was to do those things that pleased the Father, not himself

It is clear from scripture that as far as the record of Jesus Christ in scripture, He is declared before Abe in time and in priority.

As the seed of the woman, Jesus is referred to in Genesis 3:15 but Abraham not until years and chapters later.

Abraham is not God's plan for man's redemption and salvation, the seed of the woman is. Jesus Christ is.

He is showing that He is the "I Am."

 

[Tigger 2]

KJV: "That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth." - Psalm 83:18.

 

[oatmeal]

He is showing that He is the "I Am."

If Jesus meant to say that he is the "I am" why didn't he say that instead of stopping before he finished his thought?

If Jesus did in other places stated what he is by stating what he is, i,e I am the light of the world , I am the way .... Why didn't he state what you say he said?

Why didn't Jesus say "I am I am"?

 

[Bright Raven]

If Jesus meant to say that he is the "I am" why didn't he say that instead of stopping before he finished his thought?

If Jesus did in other places stated what he is by stating what he is, i,e I am the light of the world , I am the way .... Why didn't he state what you say he said?

Why didn't Jesus say "I am I am"?

The Jews knew exactly what He was saying. Why did they pick up stones to throw at Him?

 

[Right Divider]

KJV: "That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth." - Psalm 83:18.

Jer 23:1-8 KJV Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD. (2) Therefore thus saith the LORD God of Israel against the pastors that feed my people; Ye have scattered my flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the LORD. (3) And I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all countries whither I have driven them, and will bring them again to their folds; and they shall be fruitful and increase. (4) And I will set up shepherds over them which shall feed them: and they shall fear no more, nor be dismayed, neither shall they be lacking, saith the LORD. (5) Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. (6) In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. (7) Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that they shall no more say, The LORD liveth, which brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; (8) But, The LORD liveth, which brought up and which led the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and from all countries whither I had driven them; and they shall dwell in their own land.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the LORD.

 

[Tigger 2]

Besides Is. 9:6 (see NAME study) another name the Messiah is to be called by at Jer. 23:6 is rendered, `The LORD [YHWH] IS Our Righteousness' in the following Bibles: RSV; NRSV; NEB; NJB; ESV; JPS (Margolis, ed.); Tanakh; Byington; AT; CEB; GW; LEB; NLT; The Voice; and ASV (footnote). Of course other translations render it more literally by calling the Messiah "The LORD [YHWH] Our Righteousness" to help support a `Jesus is God' doctrine. Some of these actually render the very same name at Jer. 33:16 as "The LORD [or Jehovah] is Our Righteousness"!


(Unfortunately for "Jesus is Jehovah" advocates, the very same name given to the Messiah at Jer. 23:16 is given to a city at Jer. 33:16.)

Yes, for those trinitarians who insist that the “name” of the Messiah given at Jeremiah 23:6 (“Jehovah Is Our Righteousness”) proves that he IS Jehovah - - compare Jeremiah 33:16 where the very same “name” in the original OT Hebrew is given to a CITY. - KJV, RSV, NRSV, NASB, NEB, JB, NJB, NIV, ASV, NAB (‘70), NAB (‘91’), GNB, AB, Tanakh, JPS (Margolis, 1917), Beck, Moffatt.

This name is clearly like many other God-praising names of the Israelites (e.g.,

“Elijah” [“God Jehovah”], “Abijah” [“Father Jehovah”], “Eliathah” [“God is Come” - Young’s; “God Has Come” - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, p. 929, Vol. 2, Eerdmans, 1984;and Today‘s Dictionary of the Bible, Bethany House, p. 674], “Jehu” [“Jehovah is He”] - Today’s Dictionary of the Bible; Strong’s Concordance; Young’s Concordance; and Gesenius), etc. are also obviously not Jehovah Himself!

“Now Malchiel means ‘God is king,’ ... Gedaliah ‘Jehovah is great,’ Zerahiah ‘Jehovah hath risen in splendor,’ Jehozadak ‘Jehovah is righteous,’ and Joel, if a compound name, ‘Jehovah is God.’ A moment’s reflection makes clear that these names do not describe the persons who bear them, but in every case speak of God. They emphasize the important facts that personal names might be, and often were, memorial and doctrinal, and that personal names were a part of the ordinary speech of the people, full of meaning and intelligible to all, subject to the phonetic laws of the Hebrews, and obedient to the rules of grammar. ....

“But with Jehoshaphat, Abijah’s grandson, early in the 9th cent. [B.C.], the custom became established. Henceforth it was conventional for the king of Judah to have for his name a sentence with Jehovah as its subject. .... During the five centuries and a half, beginning near the close of Solomon’s reign and extending to the end of Nehemiah’s administration, 22 high priests held office, so far as their names have been preserved in the records. Of these pontiffs 17 bear names which are sentences with Jehovah as subject, and another is a sentence with El [God] as subject. .... evidently the priests of Jehovah’s temple at Jerusalem not only recognized the appropriateness for themselves and their families of names possessing a general religious character, but came to favor such as expressly mentioned God, especially those which mentioned God by His name of Jehovah.” - p. 2115, Vol. 3, The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, Eerdmans, 1984 printing.

It is certain that many (if not most) of the personal names of God’s people had meanings which were meant to honor God, not to glorify the person who bore that personal name. And those names were very often missing words (such as "is," "the," "of," etc.) which were to be understood.

 

[Right Divider]

Besides Is. 9:6 (see NAME study) another name the Messiah is to be called by at Jer. 23:6 is rendered, `The LORD [YHWH] IS Our Righteousness' in the following Bibles: RSV; NRSV; NEB; NJB; ESV; JPS (Margolis, ed.); Tanakh; Byington; AT; CEB; GW; LEB; NLT; The Voice; and ASV (footnote). Of course other translations render it more literally by calling the Messiah "The LORD [YHWH] Our Righteousness" to help support a `Jesus is God' doctrine. Some of these actually render the very same name at Jer. 33:16 as "The LORD [or Jehovah] is Our Righteousness"!

Selectively choosing "translations" that support your premise is not proof of anything.

Throughout scripture, Christ is the LORD.

When Christ returns to establish His kingdom...

Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south. (Zechariah 14:3-4 [KJVA])

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings Right Divider,

Selectively choosing "translations" that support your premise is not proof of anything.
Throughout scripture, Christ is the LORD.
When Christ returns to establish His kingdom...
Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle. And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south. (Zechariah 14:3-4 [KJVA])

In the following “The LORD”, Yahweh is God the Father, while Christ is David’s “Lord”
Psalm 110:1 (KJV): The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Selectively choosing one verse that seems to support your premise may not be sufficient to explain the overall picture.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[oatmeal]

yes Jesus claimed to be God but in such away that it could be denied by people like you
John 8:58
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.


no , Jesus left

Joh 8:59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him. But Jesus hid Himself and went forth out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and passed on by.

He did not say "I am God" in John 8:58.

Why do you pervert his statement, his words?

 

[oatmeal]

These translations (most by trinitarians) render ego eimi at John 8:58 as:
(1) “I HAVE BEEN”[4] - alternate reading in 1960 thru 1973 reference editions of NASB

(2) “I HAVE BEEN” - The New Testament, G. R. Noyes

(3) “I HAVE BEEN” - “The Four Gospels” According to the Sinaitic Palimpsest, A. S. Lewis

(4) “I HAVE ALREADY BEEN”- The Unvarnished New Testament

(5) “I HAVE EXISTED” - The Bible, A New Translation, Dr. James Moffatt

(6) “I EXISTED” - The New Testament in the Language of Today, 1964 ed., Beck

(7) “I EXISTED” - An American Translation, Goodspeed

(8) “I EXISTED” - The New Testament in the Language of the People, Williams

(9) “I EXISTED” - New Simplified Bible

(10) “I WAS IN EXISTENCE” - Living Bible

(11) “I WAS ALIVE” - The Simple English Bible

(12)“I WAS” - Young’s Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, 1st ed. (Also see Young’s Concise

Critical Commentary, p. 61 of “The New Covenant.”).

(13) “I WAS” - H. T. Anderson

(14) “I WAS” - Twentieth Century New Testament

(15) "I already was" - Worldwide English (New Testament) (WE)

(16) "I existed" - New Living Translation (NLT)

(17) "I WAS" - Holy Bible - From the Ancient eastern Text (Lamsa)

(18) : "I have existed." - The Documents of the New Testament, (Wade)
...........................................

4. Kenneth McKay, 'I AM' in John's Gospel　

Kenneth L. McKay, who graduated with honors in Classics from the Universities of Sydney and Cambridge, taught Greek in universities and theological colleges in Nigeria, New Zealand, and England, who taught at the Australian National University for 26 years, has written numerous articles on ancient Greek syntax, as well as authored a book on Classical Attic, Greek Grammar for Students, and A New Syntax of the Verb in New Testament Greek: an aspectual approach, provides the following in relation to the alleged "true parallel between Exodus 3:14 (LXX) and John 8:58:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

'I am' in John's Gospel

The Expository Times, 1996, page 302

BY K. L. MCKAY, MA,

FORMERLY OF THE AUSTRALIAN UNIVERSITY

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

“It has become fashionable among some preachers and writers to relate Jesus's use of the words 'I am' in the Gospel according to John, in all, or most, of their contexts, to God's declaration to Moses in Exodus 3:14, and to expound the passages concerned as if the words themselves have some kind of magic in them. Some who have no more than a smattering of Greek attribute the 'magic' to the Greek words egw eimi [ego eimi]. I wish briefly to draw attention to the normality of the Greek in all such passages, and the unlikelihood of the words egw eimi being intended to suggest any special significance of this kind. 　

“….

“Although the natural English translations differ, there are two contexts of this kind in which Jesus uses the words egw eimi alone to identify himself: in 6:20, where the disciples are afraid of the apparition they see walking on the water, and Jesus reassures them by identifying himself, quite naturally, with these words, which translate into English as 'It is I'; and in 18:5, while Jesus acknowledges that he is Jesus of Nazareth by speaking the same words, which are naturally translated into English as 'I am he'. The syntactic difference between them is that in the former egw is the complement, the unexpressed subject being something equivalent to 'what you see', and in the latter egw is the subject, the unexpressed complement being 'Jesus of Nazareth'. In both these passages egw eimi is the natural Greek response in the circumstances, as may be seen in 9:9, where the man cured of blindness uses exactly the same words to acknowledge his identity. The dramatic reaction of the arresting party in 18:6 is readily explained if we note that the confident authority of Jesus's presence was such that he defeated the merchants in the temple (2:15), and he simply walked away when the crowd was intent on throwing him over the brow of the hill near Nazareth (Luke 4:28-30).　

“The verb 'to be' is used differently, in what is presumably its basic meaning of 'be in existence', in John 8:58: prin Abraam genesthai egw eimi, which would be most naturally translated 'I have been in existence since before Abraham was born', if it were not for the obsession with the simple words 'I am'. If we take the Greek words in their natural meaning, as we surely should, the claim to have been in existence for so long is in itself a staggering one, quite enough to provoke the crowd's violent reaction.”

Thanks for your contribution

 

[oatmeal]

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.

Is that how you talk?

If you made a reference to Trump's presidency and your values before he showed up,. Would you say " before Trump, Lon"???

What sense does that make?

It doesn't.

​​​​​​When Jesus identified himself as the way to the Father did he say, "I am" and assume that we would know that he was identifying himself as the way to the Father?

No

How about when he id'd himself as the resurrection and life? Or the light of the world? Or a Shepherd? Or the door?

He would be specific every time

Why was he not specific here?

​​​​​​Based on all the other specific statements he made about who or what he is, why the break in the pattern?

Based on his track record, if he was identifying himself as the "I am" he would have said so.

He would have said, "I am I am"

He did not.

The trinitarian doctrine is pathetically weak, it has no basis in genuine rightly divided scripture whatsoever, regardless of the pathetic attempts to make it so.

 

[oatmeal]

When you say, "Did Jesus claim to be God?", either you mean something by the word, "God", or you do not mean anything by it. I ask you what (if anything) you mean by it so as to find out what (if anything) you mean by it. Is that a difficult question for you to answer: By the word, "God", when you say, "Did Jesus claim to be God?", do you mean God the Father? Yes or No?

You're the one saying the word, "God", when you say "Did Jesus claim to be God?" The word is not saying itself; you're saying it. I'm trying to find out what (if anything) you mean by it. I'm trying to find out whether or not you mean God the Father by the word, "God".

That's not a question I'd be asking you, of course. But, I don't mind asking you what you imagine is the meaning of the words God used in Scripture.

So, what other option do you have, were you to answer the question I asked you, than to say that you mean God the Father, by the word, "God", when you say, "Did Jesus claim to be God?" If you do not mean God the Father, by the word "God", when you say "Did Jesus claim to be God?", then whom, or what, do you mean?​

​

​

When I define the word "god" in the most general sense that fits every use of words translated "god, gods, God" in scripture, that definition would briefly be something like, " a being or object perceived, whether genuinely or not, as superior in some way to others being compared to that entity"

Thus, the creator is God, His human son and other humans such as Moses are referred to as god or God, as are physical objects and devils and the objects of worship they promote

That definition as far as I can tell fits all used of the word god, capitalized or not.

But since The Father alone is The God, The Lord God, Jesus is not the God, nor the Lord God, but the son of God, the son of the Lord God. Since God refers to Moses and other humans as god or gods, I certainly am not going to find fault with God calling His human son god, or Thomas referring to him as god. But that does not make Moses or any human God calls god part of The one true God. God is not schizophrenic, he does not have multiple personalities, His son is a separate being from Himself. The son of God is God's male offspring, not God Himself.

So, like I said, The Father alone is God.

Jesus is his male human son.

Being the son, the son as would any offspring of God, including ourselves as sons of God have some rights and responsibilies in the family of God that equal the rights of the Father.

For instance, God can speak God's words, so can we. Are are commissioned to do so as ambassadors for, or in behalf or in the stead of Christ, We are ambassadors for Christ because Christ is not here to preach and teach, but we are. We carry on the works of Jesus Christ and greater works than Jesus Christ, John 14:12

We have the righteousness of God in him, II Corinthians 5:21

God is eternal, we are eternal having been given the giift of eternal life.

Thus in some respects, we are equal to God, but that in no sense makes us God Himself!

I expect this brief summary helps to answer your question.

But Jesus never claimed to be God but in contrast credited God his Father for teaching him, showing him and being the source of all that Jesus had and lived.

We see the Jews, those opposed to Jesus, reading into all of his statements about himself, not because they were seeking truth but rather seeking to destroy Jesus and all of his influence.

Was Jesus making himself equal to God? No, he was not. John 5 tells us that what Jesus did and had was given to him,

John 5:

¹⁸ Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

¹⁹ Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

²⁰ For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

²¹ For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.

²² For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

²³ That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

³⁰ I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.​

​

​