John 8.58: Before Abraham Was…
May 14th, 2009 by Sean
Randy recently made the following query:
I agree with your theology regarding One God… my question today tho after reading an article is how does one explain this verse which seems to speak of the pre-existance of Christ:
John 8:55 Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. 57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? 58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
The following response was taken from Anthony Buzzard’s booklet titled Who is Jesus from pages 8 to 9:
Jesus found his own history written in the Hebrew Scriptures (Luke 24:27). The role of the Messiah was clearly outlined there. Nothing in the divine record had suggested that Old Testament monotheism would be radically disturbed by the appearance of the Messiah. A mass of evidence will support the proposition that the apostles never for one moment questioned the absolute oneness of God, or that the appearance of Jesus created any theoretical problem about monotheism. It is therefore destructive of the unity of the Bible to suggest that in one or two texts in John, Jesus overturned his own creedal statement that the Father was “the only true God†(17:3), or that he took himself far outside the category of human being by speaking of a conscious existence from eternity. Certainly his prayer for the glory which he had had before the world began (17:5) can be easily understood as the desire for the glory which had been prepared for him in the Father’s plan. The glory which Jesus intended for the disciples had also been “given†(John 17:22), but they had not yet received it.
It was typical of Jewish thinking that anything of supreme importance in God’s purpose—Moses, the Law, repentance, the Kingdom of God and the Messiah—had “existed†with God from eternity. In this vein John can speak of the crucifixion having “happened†before the foundation of the world (Rev. 13:8, KJV). Peter, writing late in the first century, still knows of Jesus’ “preexistence†only as an existence in the foreknowledge of God (1 Peter 1:20). His sermons in the early chapters of Acts reflect exactly the same view.
But what of the favorite proof text in John 8:58 that Jesus existed before Abraham? Does Jesus after all confuse everything by saying on the one hand that the Father alone is the “only true God†(17:3, 5:44)—and that he himself is not God, but the Son of God (John 10:36)—and on the other hand that he, Jesus, is also an uncreated being? Does he define his status within the recognizable categories of the Old Testament (John 10:36; Ps. 82:6; 2:7) only to pose an insoluble riddle by saying that he had been alive before the birth of Abraham? Is the Trinitarian problem, which has never been satisfactorily resolved, to be raised because of a single text in John? Would it not be wiser to read John 8:58 in the light of Jesus’ later statement in 10:36, and the rest of Scripture?
In the thoroughly Jewish atmosphere which pervades the Gospel of John it is most natural to think that Jesus spoke in terms that were current amongst those trained in the rabbinical tradition. In a Jewish context, asserting “preexistence†does not mean that one is claiming to be an uncreated being! It does, however, imply that one has absolute significance in the divine plan. Jesus is certainly the central reason for creation. But the one God’s creative activity and his plan for salvation were not manifested in a unique created being, the Son, until Jesus’ birth. The person of Jesus originated when God’s self-expression took form in a human being (John 1:14).
It is a well-recognized fact that the conversations between Jesus and the Jews were often at cross purposes. In John 8:57 Jesus had not in fact said, as the Jews seemed to think, that he had seen Abraham, but that Abraham had rejoiced to see Messiah’s day (v. 56). The patriarch was expecting to arise in the resurrection at the last day (John 11:24; Matt. 8:11) and take part in the Messianic Kingdom. Jesus was claiming superiority to Abraham, but in what sense?
As the “Lamb of God†he had been “crucified before the foundation of the world†(Rev. 13:8, KJV; 1 Pet. 1:20)—not, of course, literally, but in God’s plan. In this way also Jesus “was†before Abraham. Thus Abraham could look forward to the coming of the Messiah and his Kingdom. The Messiah and the Kingdom therefore “preexisted†in the sense that they were “seen†by Abraham through the eyes of faith.
The expression “I am†in John 8:58 positively does not mean “I am God.†It is not, as so often alleged, the divine name of Exodus 3:14, where Yahweh declared: “I am the self-existent One†(ego eimi o ohn). Jesus nowhere claimed that title. The proper translation of ego eimi in John 8:58 is “I am he,†i.e., the promised Christ (cp. the same expression in John 4:26, “I who speak to you am he [the Christ]â€). Before Abraham was born Jesus had been “foreknown†(cp. 1 Pet. 1:20). Jesus here makes the stupendous claim to absolute significance in God’s purpose.
More resources can be found be logging on to www.christianmonotheism.com and choosing a Scripture under the media center. In particular, Victor Gluckin has an audio file called Did Jesus Claim to be the “I Am” in John 8.58? which may be helpful too. Also, I had written a blog entry a while back called “Is Jesus the I AM?” and in the comments there was some discussion of the Jewish concept of pre-existence. Lastly, biblicalunitarian.com has a short entry with their take on John 8.58.
John 6:62
What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was
before?
Some may explain this statement as being understood that God
had prophesied of the ascension of Jesus which took place a number of days after Pentecost, therefore, “in that sense” Jesus
was in heaven before he come down from heaven, but I am one
that believes there is more to this scripture than that. I believe
Jesus was in fact with God from the beginning, not simply in the
sense that “it was prophesied, therefore he was there.”
Randy,
for a more balanced view, see Patrick Navas’ thoughts on this matter:
http://members.shaw.ca/homechristian/docs/articles/prehumanexistence.htm
Quote:
John 6:62
What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was
before?
Does this even say where He was before.
why must people take something unclear and add in their minds something it doesnt say.
Gods plan for mans redemption was before Abraham ,Noah and even before Adam.
God Makes No Mistakes
He Just wanted people Not robots.
He could of made us all perfect but what Glory would that be to God.
This is not About man or Jesus its About GOD.
the same God that without nothing exist
I believe the Lamb of God was willfully slain before the foundation
of the world.
If you have ever questioned Jesus humanity than this should set you str8. not only was he made , he was made lower than the angels.
now Christ which is the power of God has always been and has always been higher than angels
Hebrews 2
9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
So then do you believe that Jesus died on a cross before the earth was created? That would be the logical conclusion if you are to insist that “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” means he literally existed. You would also have to conclude that all of us as Christians existed in the beginning, since Eph. 1:4 says that “…he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world.”
The verses cited above indicate Christ Jesus preexisted and was the One through Whom God created all things and the Only Mediator between God and Man. (reference: John, Paul’s letters, specifically Hebrews)
Yet preexistence doesn’t imply “uncreated”, since preexistence is a relative term (existing before something). Revelation tells that Christ was the Origin of the Creation of God. John says that in the beginning (another relative term; beginning of time, heavens, earth) the Word was with God.
So, would it be wrong or disrespectful to claim that the Son of God, Jesus, Whom God made Christ and Lord:
1) was created;
2) existed before the creation of the cosmos and time;
3) was through Whom God created the cosmos and time.
(If I’m wrong or off base, I ask God, the Father and God of Jesus, to forgive me and help me understand. I have nothing but pure love, respect, and admiration for His Son, Jesus.)
Joshua,
If Jesus created the universe, the can you please explain these verses where Yahweh (i.e the Father of Jesus) specifically says that he created everything by himself?
Excellent question, Sean.
How do those two verses hold up against Hebrews 1:10 which quotes Psalm 102:25 and applies it to the Son of God, Jesus?
(Verse 8 of Hebrews 1 begins with “But unto the Son He saith…”, afterwhich verse 10 begins with “And: ‘Thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth and the heavens are the works of thine hands…'”.)
This is going to be a very helpful thread for me personally…
Joshua,
I am aware of Hebrews 1.10-12, which is why my question to you is so sincere. How do you interpret these Isaiah texts? I honestly don’t know how to reconcile God as sole creator with Jesus as creator. Some people have suggested that Heb. 1.10-12 is a reference to the new creation (i.e. the kingdom of God) but I find that hard to swallow.
Here’s a little piece I wrote a while back on this:
The author of Hebrews says:
Hebrews 1:2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.
He clearly states that God created this world through his Son – who is a person – and not merely through His thought/idea/council. This author repeats this later:
Hebrews 2:9,10 But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus […] For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to perfect the author of their salvation through sufferings.
It is through Jesus that God made all things. Paul says the same thing:
1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we exist through Him.
Colossians 1:16 For in Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities– all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.
So when John says that through the Word all things were created, this Word is the person of the Son of God. Through the Son of God in his pre-human state all things were created. And this ties in with what happens at the creation of man. God speaks with somebody, saying
Genesis 1:26 “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness”
God says to the Word “Let Us make man in Our image”, since the Word, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom, is his master workman, who was beside God when all things were created. The author of Hebrews, in 1:10, applies Psalm 102:25 to the Son:
Psalm 102:25 “Of old You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
Hebrews 1:10 And, “you, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands
He effectively says here that although this Psalm speaks of God creating the heavens and the earth, it is really Jesus who executed that work, because God used His Son as his master workman, through him He created all things. A common objection to this, coming from both Trinitarians and Socinians who deny the Son’s pre-existence, is Isaiah 44:24, where it is said that God acted alone in his creation. But why ignore the context? The context speaks about false gods, the gods the Jews adopted from their surrounding neighbors. None of these false gods, were with Him at creation! With the same context in mind (the false gods), verse 6 says “there is no God besides Me”, but despite this, God says that the Messiah is a god himself (Isaiah 9:6). Which just goes on to show how important is to always keep the context in mind. It is clear then what God says in 44:24: none of the false gods that the Jews and nations worship were with Him at creation, they are false gods.
Isaiah 45:18 is found in the same context, where Yahweh is contrasted with the false gods. It is Yahweh who created the earth, not the false gods. The author of Hebrews, as pointed out above, applies a Psalm that says God has founded the earth, to Jesus, because He founded it through Jesus. Even though God made all things through Jesus, the creation work is attributed to God, whose wisdom and knowledge was put into His son. The practice where a higher agency is attributed authorship despite it having employed somebody else through whom the work was done is nothing new. God is always ascribed authorship, despite He using an intermediary – and the reason is obvious: God is the source, the action planned by Him and its execution is enabled by Him. A few examples:
Luke 8:38-39 But the man from whom the demons had gone out was begging Him that he might accompany Him; but He sent him away, saying, “Return to your house and describe what great things God has done for you.” So he went away, proclaiming throughout the whole city what great things Jesus had done for him.
Jesus has done something here, but Jesus ascribes this to God, who gave Jesus this power and whose will was accomplished here.
Acts 15:12 All the people kept silent, and they were listening to Barnabas and Paul as they were relating what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles.
Acts 21:19-20 After he had greeted them, he began to relate one by one the things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. And when they heard it they began glorifying God;
There are also many instances where God does things through His angelic creatures, but the action is described as being done by God – see http://the-preexistent-son-of-god.blogspot.com/2009/01/excursus-divine-messiah-and-ancient.html#supernaturalmessengers for more.
everything that God created existed in Him from the beginning just not in is present form. all creation came forth from God. i have no problem with what became Jesus being a part of creation just as my son existed in me when i was born.without me my son could not of existed. but you have to accept what became of you existed then.
i can accept that, just can not accept anything that could be equal or greater than the One God who created everything other than Him.
It was little by little and in different ways that God spoke in old times to our forefathers through the prophets, but in these latter days he has spoken to us in a Son … – Hebrews 1:1
It seems that this supports an ideal pre-existence of the Son, in the plans & foreknowledge of God (I Peter 1: 20.) If the Son had a conscience pre-human experience, why was he not part of God’s speaking to people until latter days? For God to have created all with His son “in mind” fits the creation “through” His son references without denying God being the only Creator (or denying true monotheism.)
The idea of foreknowledge also respectfully acknowledges the clear evidence of Jesus’ literal beginning in Mary’s womb: Matthew 1:18,19/ Luke 1:28-35.
The typology of Jesus as the 2nd or latter Adam is also simple to see if Jesus did not have the advantage of eons of pre-human learning and experience (something Adam clearly did not have.)
Please see http://the-preexistent-son-of-god.blogspot.com/2008/12/nt-objections-to-son-of-mans.html#heb1,1-2
From where do you quote when you say ““in mind—? Also, God choosing to create through his Son does not “deny true monotheism”, inasmuch as God healing or resurrecting through Jesus and his disciples does not “deny true monotheism”.
Yes, that is clear evidence that the man Jesus Christ had his beginning in Mary’s womb. Please see http://the-preexistent-son-of-god.blogspot.com/2008/12/nt-objections-to-son-of-mans.html
That typology is not about Jesus and Adam having exactly the same “advantages”. The fact that I may be more learned than Adam does not make me un-human, or the fact that Methuselah may have had more experience than Adam does not make him un-human.
On the other hand, even without a pre-existence, here’s a man who walks on the water, heals the sick and raises the dead (abilities as you say, “something Adam clearly did not have”). The typology is about their nature, Jesus being being truly a sinless human – as Adam was – regardless of how many “advantages” he may have had over Adam.
Sean,
I know your question is sincere, as are mine. I’m trying to, by God’s Grace, understand this very important topic. This thread is part of my education. I think your quotations are important and must be part of this discussion.
Could it be that those verses in Isaiah are indicating the “only true God” Whose personal name is YHWH?
If so, would this conflict with Him creating things through Christ, a claim which, in my opinion, is put forth in the New Testament?
And when, as it says in Hebrews, “God brought His Firstborn into the world and said, ‘Let all the angels worship Him’.” Is that declaration / event recorded in the New Testament?
Here’s an interesting (nearly 5 hour long) debate called “Is Yeshua the One God of Israel?”
http://ministersnewcovenant.org/audio.htm
Although it isn’t directly related to the topic of this thread, it does overlap in places…
Let’s keep sharpening each other…
Sorry for the wrong formatting of the quoted text in my follow-up to Ken; the passage starting with “Ok, so I understand that Heb 1:2” until “has to be addressed to Him?” are my words.
An important note that I think should also be part of this discussion:
Matthew 22:41 ~ 45 (Good News Bible; parenthetical comments mine)
When some Pharisees gathered together, Jesus asked them, “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose descendant is he?”
“He is David’s descendant,” they answered. “Why, then,” Jesus asked, “did the Spirit inspire David to call him “Lord’? David said, “The LORD (YHWH) said to my Lord (adoni [Hebrew]; kurios [Greek]): Sit here at my right side until I put your enemies under your feet.’ If, then, David called him ‘Lord,’ how can the Messiah be David’s descendant?”
No one was able to give Jesus any answer, and from that day on no one dared to ask him any more questions.
Joshua,
I wonder what your understanding is of the verses you just quoted. Would you be willing to share it?
I believe Jesus existed with God from eternity in a more litteral
sense than if a man would say, “My whole geneology that comes
after me presently exists within me, for God does know what shall
come after me through my seed which does live within me.”
I suppose we could say that the man’s physical seed contains his
genetic material, and we could assume that there is a seed he calls
his own which may be in reference to Jesus who lives within him, as
he is the seed which was promised by God and that which the man
has received, but I believe Jesus existed with God from the beginning in a greater sense.
For those that know that the scriptures prophesied of Jesus from
the very beginning, I wish to remind them that such prophesies
do not negate the possibility of him being with God in a more actual
sense.
It seems to me that Jesus was saying in John 8:58, that according
to the flesh Abraham was before him, in time and place on this earth.
Upon hearing that, they could have said among themselves, “He’s
here! The one that Abraham believed would come according to that
which God had revealed to him by signs and wonders because he
believed God! This is the one, the Messiah that came down from
heaven! This is the one that was with God from before the creation
of the world! Truely, this is the Son of God! He’s here, we can feel
him, we can put our hands upon him and touch him, for he has
arrived in the flesh!”
I wonder how many did.
I AM was before Abraham not Jesus
God was the source of knowlege Jesus posessed
And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you
Yes God was before Abraham and so also was Jesus, yet according
to the flesh and I believe also the testimony of Christ, Abraham came first before Jesus.
Hey, Sean!
I’m still trying to understand the verses myself. I’m trying to think of possible responses from the people who heard our Lord, Jesus.
The question our Master asked:
“If, then, David called him ‘Lord,’ how can the Messiah be David’s descendant?”
If they said, “Because the Messiah comes after David”, would they be right or wrong?
If they said, “Because the Messiah is head over David”, would they be right or wrong?
If they said, “Because the Messiah existed in the heavens before David”, would they be right or wrong?
If they said, “Because the Messiah existed in the heavens before David and is therefore head over David”, would they be right or wrong?
If they said, “Because the Messiah comes after David, but is head over David”, would they be right or wrong?
If they said, “Because the Messiah existed in concept in the plan of God, the Father, but comes after David and is head over him”, would they be right or wrong?
———————————————————————–
If they said, “Because the Messiah comes after David” (which I think would be one of the first answers to the question), why would the question shut them up and keep them from saying it?
I read a lot of Anthony Buzzard’s work and I like a lot of it. I think he is right on about the Forgotten Gospel, the Kingdom of God, the absurdity of the Trinity, and other things.
However, although I’m far from being certain at all (still studying), at this point I can’t understand how John, one intimately familiar with our Master, Jesus, and His teachings, would write that the Word existed from the beginning and that Jesus somehow had no existence prior to His virgin birth in Mary.
I do affirm that He is the Visible Image of the Invisible God. God, the Father, no man has seen – not even Moses! Yet to Whom did Adam and Eve communicate with in the Garden of Eden? To Whom did Cain and Abel offer sacrifices before? (Those were, as far as I can tell, not the angel of the LORD or angels.)
I don’t have the answers because I’m still reading and still praying for understanding…
This text came up in our noon fellowship yesterday. The way generational respect worked was that one’s father had more honor than the son, etc. So, here we have the Messiah who is definitely inferior to David precisely because he is descended from David. But then in Psalm 110.1 David calls the Messiah “my Lord,” which is how one would address a superior. This is the crux of Jesus’ riddle to the scribes. Of course, Jesus does not resolve the riddle and merely lets it hang in the air before moving on to his infamous woes upon the scribes and Pharisees (esp. Matthew’s account).
But what is Jesus’ genealogy? On his mother’s side it can be traced back all the way to David then to Abraham then to Adam. However, on his father’s side his genealogical tree is rather short because God is his father! In this way Jesus is both a descendant of David and yet superior to David being that he is also the son of God (i.e. on par with Adam). I’m not sure how pre-existence would help this conundrum.
Excellent information, Sean!
I appreciate your response. I do see exactly what you mean. I’m glad you shared this.
I have been seeing problems the occur if we say Christ pre-existed, so this is all very helpful to me (and anyone who I talk to subsequently).
I believe David called Jesus Lord because he is the word of God
that lives with God in the glory, power, and majesty of God, being
subject to him from eternity. He is the son of David according to
the flesh, being his offspring.
When David received the revelation of God’s only begotten Son
being with him in heaven, he knew that he whom he received in
Zion, he whom he connected with in his worship time, would be
the ruler of all nations. David then declared the decree, “Thou art
my Son, this day have I begotten thee.” That decree applies as much to Jesus as it does David, as David believed the good news
about the Son of God that would come.
Ray,
you do not need to hit the enter key at the end of each line…
you said,
please cite a Scripture which indicates that David believed Jesus was in heaven
Psalm 2:6 tells us of the heavenly place and the king who reigns
there.
Psalm 2:6
Even I have set my King upon Zion mine holy mountain.
1599 Geneva Bible.
I believe the word “King” is capitalized because it speaks of Jesus,
though it also speaks of David who will reign with him in the throne
of God.
Ray,
The context of that Psalm is a prophecy of the coming Kingdom. It is not referring to a pre-existent Jesus.
Sean & Joshua,
Your sharings (# 22 & 23) pose well-thought questions and make logical sense of Jesus’ question as related in Matthew 22: 41-46 (and other places), signifcantly addressed to Pharisees. Jesus (as on other occasions) did not seem interested in clarifying truth for the obstinate – he challenged them with enigmatic statements; (nevertheless, I believe that humble believers may garner insight from his statements.) – Such as the insight Sean shared in # 23.
It is interesting to me that John 8: 58 (the basic text of this blog) has similarities to the context in Matthew 22. In John 8 Jesus continually rebukes obstinate religious leaders who have no ears to hear him; they persist in misunderstanding every one of his statements. (Meanwhile there are other Jews hearing the conversation whom Jesus exhorts to continue in his word.)
At one point Jesus points out the contrast between Abraham (whom they rely on as their forefather) and these hard-hearted Jewish leaders; Jesus was indicating that Abraham would not have entertained murderous thoughts toward the Messiah (as they did.)
In this context Jesus said: “Your forefather Abraham exulted at the thought of seeing my coming. He has seen it, and it has made him glad.” (v. 56) Jesus was making the very logical point that Abraham had known about the coming Messiah and had looked forward to it with joy (a stark contrast to the murderous mindset of those who trusted in their association with Abraham while ironically hating Jesus absolutely.) Jesus points out the irony of these contrasting attitudes.
(One can surmise a couple of situations in Abraham’s life in which truths about the coming Messiah might have been revealed to Abraham: i.e. – Melchizedek’s bringing out bread and wine (Gen. 14) & the sacrifice of Isaac (Gen. 22/ Hebrews 11: 17-19.)
After Jesus’ statement (v. 56) about Abraham’s joyful anticipation of Messiah’s day, his hard-hearted hearers once again misunderstood badly: “You are not yet 50 years old, and have you seen Abraham?” (v. 57) Of course, Jesus had never implied that he had seen Abraham! They had grossly misunderstood once again as they were prone to do so frequently.
Jesus enigmatic reply (v. 58) was not a clarifying statement to meek listeners. It challenged obnoxious ones in a dramatic way. Of course I believe (as many of you) that we can glean truths from Jesus’ statement about existence before Abraham (though this context does nothing to indicate literal existence vs. foreknowledge in God’s plan.) I merely wanted to call attention to the fact that this is not an esoteric situation that occurred in a vacuum – such as a theological debate about pre-existence; Jesus handled the misunderstanding of the willfully arrogant with a challenging retort. It’s as if Jesus were implying: “Since you don’t ‘get it’ and you dishonestly twist the simple statement that Abraham looked forward to my day(v. 56)” (- since you have no heart for Biblical truth); here’s a statement that will really puzzle you (v. 58)!
Ken,
good point…we should probably not use sayings of Jesus that are spoken intentionally to confound his interlocutors as foundation stones for our understanding about who he is
Sean,
It’s good to hear from you. God bless you. Ken
When Jesus says something that is puzzling to our way of thinking,
he does so to get us onto the path of life. How often our Lord goes
against the grain of worldly thinking!
What might this mean:
Before Abraham was. Jesus is the name of God. ?
Notice I didn’t say, Before Abraham was. Jesus was the name of God, I said Jesus is the name of God.
When men say “is” they speak of the present. When men say “was” they speak of the past.
We have different translations and versions of the Bible. I use the
King James version. To me it seems as though Jesus is saying to them that Abraham was in the days of his flesh in the past, and now it’s his turn to be presently in the days of his flesh.
Abraham searched for a city that had foundations, and I believe
Jesus also was searching for those who wished to dwell in a city
that has true foundation. Abraham had his time on the earth, and
at the time of Jesus saying what is recorded in John 8:58, it was
his time to live in the flesh (according to the spirit of God of course)
on this earth.
This of course goes contrary to their view that Jesus was saying that he lived (in their opinion on the earth in the flesh?) before
Abraham, though I believe he did dwell with the Father in heaven
from eternity.
Some of you might have other versions of the Bible and might not
see why I have gathered what I have from the KJV, but that is how
it appears to me.
Ken, you are clearly reading 8:58 with your “ideal pre-existence” glasses on . You have already decided that “this context does nothing to indicate literal existence vs. foreknowledge in God’s plan”. This flagrantly contradicts the context itself. Jesus responds to the Jews’ rhetorical question that “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”.
What do they bring up? Jesus’ age. Of course, Jesus never literally said he has seen Abraham. But you seem not to understand why they say he implied that he did see him. There was no tradition about Abraham rejoicing at seeing Messiah’s day, so naturally they must have thought he implies he has somehow personally seen Abraham rejoicing at seeing Messiah’s day. Therefore they rhetorically ask him “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” That is, you could not have seen Abraham rejoicing, you don’t even have 50 years of existence!”
Yes, I certainly believe his answer is addressing their question about his age. I understand that this is not compatible with your belief system, but I don’t think that is a valid reason to come up with explanations like:
“Since you don’t ‘get it’ and you dishonestly twist the simple statement that Abraham looked forward to my day(v. 56)†(- since you have no heart for Biblical truth); here’s a statement that will really puzzle you (v. 58)!”
It is far fetched and forced (in my opinion of course) because it disconnects Jesus answer from the question addressed to him. In your version, it’s like they ask him one thing, and then Jesus responds with something that isn’t even intended to really address their question. They talk apples, he talks oranges. In your version, they ask him “how could you have seen Abraham since you’ve not even been in existence for 50 years” and he responds out of the blue “I have been foreknown by God before Abraham was” or “I have been ideally existing before Abraham ideally existed”. I’m sorry, it just doesn’t make any sense.
Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham, WAS I am.(God) (my Father)(the One who Sent ME)
the Jews he was talking to knew God by this name
why would anyone have a problem with this
all you have to understand is they can put just a comma in the wrong place to decieve you.
the people who translated the bible and set definitions for words were trinitarians,sun god worshipers and Liars
What if Jesus would have said, “Before Abraham was, JEHOVAH”?
That wouldn’t make any sense would it? We might be wondering
“Before Abraham was, Jehovah what?….Before Abraham was, Jehovah was…..patient, loving, kind?…angry, blessed, and worshiped? ……what, what else?
Suppose they were not thinking that whenever someone says,
“I am”, it means they are saying that they are God?
What if it means they simply are saying “I exist”, or “Presently,
here and now, I am here.”?
I am not a Jew. I don’t think like a Jew. I don’t know how Jews think.
Did they really think that anytime anyone said the words “I am”,
that they were saying that they were God, or is that a modern
religious idea promoted by people Robert mentioned above in his
last line?
40 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. 41 Ye do the deeds of your father.
this is about Jesus hearing the truth from His Father and glorifying His Father as before Abraham, the father they claimed to be from but were not
he just told them he heard the truth from God(I AM)
also said Abraham did not Seek to kill him,but their father did
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: [1] for he is a liar, and the father of it. 45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.
I suppose I can ascertain that at least some of them may have thought that if a man said, “I am”, or “I AM.”, that they were saying
that they were God, because isn’t that what some accused the Lord of saying when he asked them why it was that they would stone him?
Others, assumed Jesus to have been saying that he existed at the
time of Abraham, or even before his time, either in the flesh or not,
I can not tell.
Either way, it seems clear to me that they were men who didn’t hear his voice, were not of his flock, etc, so Jesus must have been
saying something other than those possibilities, which leaves what?….that Abraham existed previously to the existence of Jesus
according to the flesh, a thing that is concerning the gospel, as
Jesus said, “Abraham rejoiced to see my day.”, thus bringing them
back to the word he had already given, if they were willing to hear
him, though his patience may have been running short because
he had so long been suffering with them. Therefore his words were
short. For why should the food be laid out for those who are not
so willing to eat? The meal was cut short because they had their
chance to receive.
Brant Bosserman made a good point about Revelation 13:8. This text can be read and 2 ways. It could be saying that the lamb was slain before the foundation of the world, or that the book was written before the foundation of the world. There is one parallel passage in Revelation 17:8:
” The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction And those who dwell on the earth, whose name has not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, will wonder when they see the beast, that he was and is not and will come.”
This verse supports the reading that the book was written from the foundation of the world, not the that the lamb was slain before the foundation of the world. Revelation 13:8 is a weak text to quote to support “notional pre-existence.” It would be good to locate more verses that teach “notional pre-existence” (1 Pet. 1:20 is a good one) and more references in Rabbinic and Qumran literature that may teach the same thing.
Hello JohnE,
you wrote earlier: “He clearly states that God created this world through his Son – who is a person – and not merely through His thought/idea/council.”
Wisdom is also described as a person present during creation in Proverbs 8. Yet I don’t think anyone here believes that there is a person in heaven named Wisdom or Sophia. By analogy, can’t we also understand the Logos in the same way? God created the world through His Logos and Wisdom. The Logos then became a man, i.e. a person.
From my website:
I believe that Wisdom’s name is Jesus. That is the true character
of the wisdom of God. Just as when David, Isaiah, and others spoke of things that men later found to be concerning Jesus that
were hidden from the eyes of men, Proverbs 8 also has some
mystery of God in it.
I believe Jesus was with God in the beginning and with freedom of
will, received the plan of God’s salvation, even before the world began, and agreed to it’s demands for our salvation. Thereby he
was slain from the beginning.
Ray,
I understand that you believe that. But can you prove it from the Scriptures?
I do not believe the manna which came from heaven existed
there as Jesus did before he came down from heaven.
I believe Jesus existed with God in heaven in a more real sense
than simply pre-existant doctrine of God. We might say,”Well, the manna that God gave in the wilderness existed in heaven before it came to the earth because
it was established by the word of God before God actually sent it.”,
therefore it was pre-existant in that sense, but I believe Jesus was
with God before the world began in a greater sense than simply
a pre-existant doctrine about him.
Genesis 8:2
The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were
stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;
Can we really use the “rain from heaven” as a text to prove that
Jesus did not exist with God before the creation of the world just
as the rain that fell upon the earth at the time of the flood Noah
endured?
I began looking to see if mana ever “came down” from heaven
according to the scriptures. The closest I saw was that it once
was said that it “rained down” from heaven.
Every time I saw “came down” in the scriptures, the people who
“came down” prevously existed prior to their arriving at the new
location.
I looked at the word “sent”. It seems to me that each time the
creatures whether angels, people or ravens, existed somewhere
before they were sent.
Is it just a coincidence?
If I had read that God “sent manna from heaven”, I might think that
it existed up there with him before it came to the earth, but I can’t
find that in scripture.
John 6:58
This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna and are dead: he that eateth of this bread
shall live forever.
The fathers ate manna with their physical mouths, but we eat of
the true bread of life that came down from heaven in a different
way.
I can’t say that John 6:58 says that both the breads mentioned
came down in different ways, or can I? Both came down by the
word of God, and for the wellbeing of men. Both came down by
the word of God to sustain life.
I believe one bread mentioned in John 6:58 appeared on the earth
while one existed in heaven and was sent by God to this earth.
Mark,
On the manna, we could also observe that though it came from heaven it did not rain down from heaven like snow, rather it formed on the ground in the morning when the dew evaporated. So, the idea being communicated by saying it came down from heaven is that it’s origin was from God. (The same could be said of the kingdom of heaven).
Back to John 8.58…you mention that o on is the predicate in the LXX of Ex 3.14, which is correct. I was recently in a prayer room at Boston University and was testing out the kneeling altar and when I did I came face to face with an icon of Jesus which had the I and X on either side of his head representing “Jesus” and “Christ”….and it had an omega above his head and the word on below it spelling out “the being” an obvious reference to Ex 3.14. I found this blasphemous and promptly stood up.
On another note, why do you think Jesus said “I am he” or “I am the one”? Why didn’t he say “I was he”? Why didn’t Jesus use past tense or perfect? Maybe Karl can help on this one too?
JohnE (and everyone – as a statement of courtesy in holding & debating distinct points of view,)
God bless you. I simply wanted to to respond to a couple of comments you (JohnE) made to me. I enjoy reading all the points of view regarding the various Scriptures discussed here. I have tried to communicate certain perspectives (such as keeping John 8: 58 within it’s context) NOT in order to impose my point of view on you or on anyone else, but to contribute to an ongoing conversation involving people with different perspectives.
At one time (many years ago) I fervently argued for Jesus’ literal pre-existence, using many of the arguments I’ve seen in this blog discussion. I certainly respect anyone who feels and thinks as I once did. I respect the sincere, humble effort & Scriptural path of learning anyone takes to “grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.” I respectfully do not accuse anyone of wrong or stubborn attitudes if they do not agree with me; that would not be a loving, Christian approach. I certainly don’t feel compelled to “bully” a brother in Christ into rejecting his or her present beliefs to jump on a bandwagon of different ideas or views.
My present point of view (which I’ve not really explained in depth here – no one has time or space to address any subject COMPLETELY in this format) is in a continual learning pattern and represents my effort to understand this subject (and others) comprehensively without dismissing or artificially re-explaining the verses or concepts which don’t seem to fit a pre-determined paradigm – whether one I tend to agee with or not. I am always re-evaluating how I regard the truth of Scriptures, as I’m sure many of us do.
Many of us are sharing our hearts here with people we have never even met. It would be presumptuous for any of us to condemn another’s heart, attitude,mindset, etc., based on brief sharings about partial understandings of deeply complex subjects. I pray that we are all open to learn from anyone. I am thankful to see such an effort from so many to be polite and respectful while disagreeing on certain points. with agape, Ken
We know from scriptures we have seen that there are many
that are in reference to Jesus in the Old Testament. I tend to
think of them as speaking of him in the future, as prophesy often
does.
I also think of some scriptures that speak of Jesus in the past
such as some in Proverbs chapter 8.
There were things in David’s life and in the life of Isaiah, and I am
sure in the lives of others who were writers of the scriptures that
were true of them and what they were going through that spoke
of Jesus. I also believe there are things spoken on the matter of
wisdom that is also about Jesus in Proverbs 8.
What most dont understand is God had purposed Jesus to antagonize the cheif priest and Pharisees into killing him. the Death must have the means
1 thing He says to do this is He was the Son of God.
2 He says they dont know God
3 He claims more righteousness than them
4 He says their father was not Abraham
5 He calls them murderers and liars.
6 He questioned their authority to judge.
7 then He states even if their father was Abraham that His Father was greater because He was before Abraham.
From Adam to present God has Puposed everything even the deception of satan.
to understand the Word of God you have to look for Gods purposes not meanings
“We know from scriptures we have seen that there are many
that are in reference to Jesus in the Old Testament”
Ray
it is the Promises to Abraham(the Blessing) which Jesus will become you are reading about in Phophesy
Hi Karl, nice to see you post again. I see your point. But in my opinion you cannot make that analogy here, since it is going in the opposite/wrong direction – from person to non-entity. Paul and the writer of Hebrews insist on the fact that it is through “Jesus Christ”/”His son” that God created everything. If the person we know as Jesus started his existence in the 1st century, God did not create the world through “His Son”/”Jesus Christ” but through his word/thought/idea/council. I guess I have a problem when I hear people saying “sure, these Christian writings say God created the world through His son Jesus, BUT (this is a big BUT) you see dear John, there was no son at creation, there was no person (later called Jesus) at creation, through whom God allegedly created the world. In fact, God did not create the world through his Son, but through His word/thought/idea/councilâ€. I have a problem when Socinians declare flat out that no, God did not create the world through his son, there was no son yet! I’m sorry but I’ll have to go with what these ancient Christian writings say. I cannot say what Socinians are saying.
Another point worth considering is that these statements were written by these authors in order to serve as arguments in favor of the person of Christ. For example in Hebrews, they are meant to make a case of Christ, the son, the person of Jesus, being superior to angels. The entire force of the argument is wasted if it was not truly through the Son that the world was created. The writer tries to present Jesus’ personal achievements, but then the son was not exactly personally involved in this? What kind of argument is that turning out to be? It sounds like “you know guys, Jesus is really great because through him God created the world” but then the reply comes “what are you talking about, Jesus wasn’t even there and you know it! In fact, he was nowhere!” And the same argument is to be made in the case where this type of argument occurs in Paul’s writings.
One more note, about this phrase which I see is pretty popular: “the Logos then became a man, i.e. a person”. If the Son pre-existed in heaven with his Father, you cannot say “the Logos became a person”. I would simply say the Logos became flesh – because in any case, the Logos wasn’t flesh before.
Mark,
I would have to disagree, but I would first note that you seem to disagree with Ken. He assigns another significance to what Jesus meant. Anyway, what I told him is true in your case with minor modifications:
So according to this version, Jesus insists he is the Messiah even though now the Jews moved the focus from who he is and who his Father is to the impossibility that he might have known that Abraham rejoiced seeing his day. So to their question “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?†he responds “Before Abraham was, I am the Messiah”. This doesn;t make sense because Jesus does not respond to their challenge, namely how can you have seen Abraham rejoicing if he’s not even 50. A reference is made to time here, Jesus’ age. Jesus does not ignore the time element and the apparent resulting contradiction, he’s not trying to avoid the time element of this issue, but addresses it head on referring to it: BEFORE Abraham was born, I am. Yes, he exists even before Abraham was born, so yes, he knows very well Abraham rejoiced. The problem his response addresses is the time problem, he is not merely repeating he’s the one, the Messiah. He already said that (“I am he”) in verse 24, and nobody tried to kill him for that. But they do try to kill him after he says he exists even before Abraham was born. NOW they try to kill him.
I have to disagree again, specifically to the “or someone” phrase. Can you provide any verse that says SOMEONE came down from God? Whenever someTHING comes down from God (like wisdom in James), we know beforehand that we’re not talking about someBODY but someTHING. Oh and yes, usually, that which comes down from above/heaven pre-existed. The wisdom of God which comes from above existed before – and not ideally. The holy spirit that comes down on Jesus at his baptism pre-existed – and not ideally. By definition, something that comes DOWN existed before reaching it’s destination. Doesn’t rain come down from the sky? Is it materializing on the ground?
Second, where did you read that Jesus said the manna in the wilderness was bread which “came down from heaven� For sure not in John 6:49-50?
So I see no reason why I should not simply accept at face value Jesus’ simple statement that he came down from heaven. After all, his disciple also said in 1 Co 15 that the second Adam is from heaven (as opposed to the first Adam, who is from the dust of earth).
Sean,
Maybe Patrick Navas can help here as well (http://members.shaw.ca/homechristian/docs/articles/prehumanexistence.htm):
Ken, I appreciate your good intentions and your search for truth in this matter. But I’m a bit disturbed by what your written thougths imply. Have I said that you tried to impose your point of view on me or on anyone else? I hope then you’re not implying I’m trying to do such a thing? The same with this statement:
“I respectfully do not accuse anyone of wrong or stubborn attitudes if they do not agree with me; that would not be a loving, Christian approach. I certainly don’t feel compelled to “bully†a brother in Christ into rejecting his or her present beliefs to jump on a bandwagon of different ideas or views.”
Do I bully anybody here?
Proverbs 8:23 and following is concerning the Lord Jesus as much
as it is about the subject of wisdom, a silhouette if you will.
It’s a prophecy going back in time concerning Jesus, just as much
as Isaiah 53 is prophecy that went forward.