Why Jesus did not openly say this: "I AM GOD'

  • Thread starter Thread starter fredms3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tomdstone said:
Non-Trinitarians claim that this refers figuratively in the sense of the Father and the Son being “united in will and purpose," but not in essence.
Click to expand...
OK, But

How my friend does THAT change the actual TRUTH:shrug:

There are many examples of P’s not understanding God’s Truth in the Bible

Mt 16:18-19

JN 17:17-20

Mt 28:19-20

Jn 6:46-57

Jn 20: 19-23 among thme

John 12:39-40
[39] Therefore they could not believe, because Isaias said again: [40] He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart, that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.

Easter Blessings,

PJM
 
Tomdstone said:
Does εγω ειμι always denote something in the simple present tense? Some translators say it does not. This was indicated in translations above. Further, if you claim that I will be is not future, but is the present tense modal, this would seem to support the argument that εγω ειμι may denote something other than the simple present tense. The modal form I will be is different from the simple present tense I am. The present tense I am indicates certainty, whereas the modal form I will be expresses a very strong probability on the realization of the action “I am”, i.e., it is almost certain.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it is better translated as “I will to be what I will to be,” as in Aquinas’ Actus Purus or “the pure act of Being Itself.” Emphasis on the active “I will to be” rather than the more passive “I am.”
 
Tomdstone said:
Non-Trinitarians claim that this refers figuratively in the sense of the Father and the Son being “united in will and purpose," but not in essence.
Click to expand...
Then perhaps share this:

John 13:
. [13] Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan, unto John, to be baptized by him. [14] But John stayed him, saying: I ought to be baptized by thee, and comest thou to me? [15] And Jesus answering, said to him: Suffer it to be so now. For so it becometh us to fulfill all justice. Then he suffered him.[16] And Jesus being baptized,[GOD THE SON] forthwith came out of the water: and lo, the heavens were opened to him: and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove,[GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT] and coming upon him. [17] And behold a voice from heaven, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased [GOD THE FATHER]👍.
 
Tomdstone said:
The NLT (New Living Translation) says in its footnotes for John 8:58: Or before Abraham was even born, I have always been alive; Greek reads before Abraham was, I am.
Click to expand...
You are overlooking one important point. Jesus directly quoting Exodus 3:14. Ego eimi. (All these translations are trying to “correct” an obviously incorrect grammar when there is no need and their correction is an injustice to the text).

Alternately by quoting Exodus 3:14 does not of itself show “before Abraham”, Moses was some time AFTER Abraham. When Jesus says ego eimi “I AM” one could say that Jesus “the one existing” can only be dated to Moses, not Abraham. It is what Exodus 3 says next that is the clincher.

This is picked up by Justin Martyr circa 150.
 
Peter_Plato said:
Perhaps it is better translated as “I will to be what I will to be,” as in Aquinas’ Actus Purus or “the pure act of Being Itself.” Emphasis on the active “I will to be” rather than the more passive “I am.”
Click to expand...
The Septuagint has “I am the being”. “I am” which is the actor, “the being” which is the action.
 
porthos11 said:
And John 8:58.

Why else would the Jews want to stone him?
Click to expand...
It’s kind of odd, isn’t it, that almost all the “I am” statements are in John?
John 6: 35, 48 I am the bread of life
John 8: 12, 9:5 I am the light of the world
John 8: 58 Before Abraham was, I am
John 10:9 I am the door
John 10:11 I am the good shepherd
John 11:25 I am the resurrection and the life
John 14:6 I am the way, the truth, and the life
John 15:1 I am the true vine
Click to expand...
Why didn’t the authors of Matthew, Mark and Luke report these statements as well?
 
I will get to my conclusion. It seems to me it doesn’t really matter how explicit or how suggestive Jesus Christ could have been about himself, there will always be ways open to those who say “you are Elijah” or “you are John the Baptist” even “Jeremiah”.
 
As St. Irenaeus and other early Christian writers report, St. John wrote his Gospel for the benefit of (probably Gentile) Christians who didn’t understand that Matthew, Mark, and Luke were saying that Jesus was both God and Man. So John hammered the point that yes, Jesus was God, and included all of Jesus’ sayings that he could remember that hammered that point.

IIRC, the other reason that we see a lot of stuff in John that we don’t see in the other Gospels is that John’s Gospels cover all three years of Jesus’ preaching, whereas the other Gospels tend to focus on Jesus’ last year of preaching.

In the last hundred years, “edgy” Bible scholars have found it convenient to dismiss John’s Gospel as all made up, and treating Jesus as too miraculous and Godlike. But now that the scholars love to study weird Gnostic “gospels” that are full of miraculous godlike Gnostic weirdness, it has finally occurred to them that they have been ignoring a source that is much closer to Jesus’ story. I actually saw a guy point out that, if the Gospel of John had just been discovered out in the desert in Egypt, everybody in the media and academia would be sooooo excited about it! (And it’s true.)
 
fredms3 said:
What do you think brothers and sisters?
Click to expand...
I think the Holy Spirit answered this through St. John (Jn;5:31) “If I testify on my own behalf, my testimony cannot be verified. But there is another who testifies on my behalf, and I know that the testimony he gives on my behalf is true” Read further from Jn 5, 31-40
 
Mark tells us that Jesus is God.

*he made the storm be still,
and the waves of the sea were hushed.
(Psalm 107:29)

And he awoke and rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, “Peace! Be still!” And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm. (Mark 4:39)*

God calmed the sea in the Old Testament. Jesus told the sea to be calm and it obeyed,

-Tim-
 
TimothyH said:
Mark tells us that Jesus is God.

he made the storm be still,
and the waves of the sea were hushed.
(Psalm 107:29)

And he awoke and rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, “Peace! Be still!” And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm. (Mark 4:39)

God calmed the sea in the Old Testament. Jesus told the sea to be calm and it obeyed,

-Tim-
Click to expand...
No, Mark tells us that all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Jesus, that’s why the sea and everything else obey him !
 
Isaiah 9:6-7 For a son has been born for us, a son has been given to us, and dominion has been laid on his shoulders; and this is the name he has been given, ‘Wonder-Counsellor, Mighty-God, Eternal-Father, Prince-of-Peace’ to extend his dominion in boundless peace, over the throne of David …
 
Tomdstone said:
I said I don’t have the Greek original of the text, and secondly that the phrase appears only in the gospel of St. John, and not in the Synoptic gospels. Since then, I checked the original Greek and it says: ειμι which can be translated as being present. So it seems possible to translate εγω ειμι as I was present. Still unanswered is why this does not appear in the Synoptic gospels.
Click to expand...
Friend there are MANY things in John NOT found in the Synoptic’s

ALL of which are STILL included under.:

2 Tim.3 Verses 16 to 17
[16] All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, [17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

John’s Gospel is complementary to the other three Gospels.

John Chpter six

John 4:23-24 are just a few examples

God Bless you,
Patrick
 
Thorolfr said:
It’s kind of odd, isn’t it, that almost all the “I am” statements are in John?

Why didn’t the authors of Matthew, Mark and Luke report these statements as well?
Click to expand...
Matthew, Mark and Luke are not first hand accounts
 
PNEUMA said:
Matthew, Mark and Luke are not first hand accounts
Click to expand...
According to tradition, the Gospel of Matthew was also written by one of the apostles, Matthew. But most scholars do not believe that any of the gospels were first hand accounts and Mark is generally believed to be the oldest with John being written several decades later.
 
Thorolfr said:
According to tradition, the Gospel of Matthew was also written by one of the apostles, Matthew. But most scholars do not believe that any of the gospels were first hand accounts and Mark is generally believed to be the oldest with John being written several decades later.
Click to expand...
And tradition came way before modern scholarship.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top