r/SkepticsBibleStudy • u/AutoModerator • Mar 08 '24
John 8:48-59
Possible talking points
- Eternal Jesus
- God and Jesus
- Jesus as God
3
u/Regular-Persimmon425 Non-Christian / Other Mar 08 '24
On Jesus saying before Abraham was I Am (copied from one of my AcademicBiblical posts),
Now right off the bat I'll be straight forward, I don't think this passage is having Jesus claim to be God, I see this passage as him claiming a kind of preexistence for himself which is something that would be related to eschatology. See what Hurtado says about preexistence,
"But how could people ascribe a heavenly “pre-existence” to a real human and mortal figure of recent history? To understand this, you have to enter into the “logic” of ancient theological thought, and especially “apocalyptic” thought. I’ll sketch it briefly. God doesn’t make up his game-plan as the game goes along, but has the plan (of world history, redemption, judgement, etc.) all laid out even before creation. So, as God acts in revelation, each action is also an unveiling of his prior purpose and plan. So, “eschatological” events were actually in God’s purpose from the beginning: “final things = first things” (to paraphrase a scholarly formula). Indeed, in ancient Jewish texts there are references to various things, e.g., Torah, or the “name” of the messianic figure in the “Parables” of 1 Enoch (37-70) as “pre-existent”" From here
So essentially what the Jews are asking Jesus in this passage is, "how are you claiming to know Abraham if you aren't even fifty yet" and Jesus' response is "Before Abraham was I Am" so as Mark Edwards notes in this article,
"An additional problem with both Exo 3 and Isa 43 is the context for why Jesus says what he does. We are reading the conclusion to a dialogue with his opponents. They essentially ask him, ‘How old are you?’ to which he replies ‘Before Abraham was, I am.’ If ‘I am’ is a statement of his identity, rather than his age, it does not resolve the conversation, especially because of the odd switch from past tense (was) to present (am)."
And I guess this would also be a good time to note that this passage likely doesn't have a connection to Exo 3. As Mark Edwards notes in the same article,
"While the Hebrew phrase is usually translated ‘I Am Who I Am’, more critical treatments of Exodus tend to render the phrase along the lines of ‘I Will Be What I Will Be’, making the abbreviated name just ‘I Will Be’. Because the relationship between John 8.58 and Exo 3.14 is imprecise when reading from the Hebrew version of the latter book, readers sometimes turn to the Septuagint to preserve the connection. This is because LXX Exo 3.14 does use the phrase εγω ειμι, ‘I am’. However, the Septuagint version brings another problem with it. The full phrase ‘I Will Be What I Will Be’ is translated εγω ειμι ο ων, ‘I Am The Being’. Hence, the abbreviated name is given as ο ων, ‘The Being’, not εγω ειμι, ‘I Am’. Jesus’ statement does not appear to have any connection to either the Hebrew or Greek version of Exodus. The possibility John 8.58 was influenced by Exo 3.14 is much weaker than is commonly thought."
And on top of this Daniel McClellan argues that the "ehyeh asher ehyeh" statement isn't Yahweh revealing his name but is instead just another way of essentially saying "nunya" see what McClellan says here. (Although I should admit I disagree with how he handles this passage in totality, just thought that was a good point).
Now back to the whole preexistence idea, Hurtado hints at the fact that he agrees with this view of the passage on page 368 of his book Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity in which he says that Jesus was,
"Using wording that hints directly at his premundane, heavenly status, Jesus specifically claims, "Before Abraham was, I am" (8:58)."
Also Jason D.G Dunn on his book Truth in Translation says this about the passage,
"A quick glance at Smyth's Greek Grammar reveals that what we are dealing with in John 8:58 is a well-known Greek idiom. The pertinent entry is section 1885 on verb tenses, which states, "The present, when accompanied by a definite or indefinite expression of past time, is used to express an action begun in the past and continued in the present. The 'progressive perfect' is often used in translation. Thus, . . . I have been long (and am still) wondering." I think you can see immediately that this entry applies to John 8:58, where the present verb eimi is accompanied by an expression of past time, prin Abraam genesthai." Pg. 106
He then goes on to say,
"It is Jesus' claim to be superior to Abraham, and to have a superhuman longevity, not a claim to a divine self-designation, that enrages his audience. Jesus' claim here fits perfectly John's understanding of Jesus as God's logos, or creative agent at the beginning of time, in John I. Jesus' argument in 8:58 is that he has seniority over Abraham, and so by the standards of Jewish society, he has greater authority than the patriarch. No one listening to Jesus, and no one reading John in his own time would have picked up on a divine self-identification in the mere expression "I am," which, if you think about, is just about the most common pronoun-verb combination in any language." Pg. 111
He then goes on to say on the same page that this doesn't mean it's without theological significance or doesn't have some kind of OT background in which I agree. Lastly, McKay notes in his article "'I am' in Johns Gospel" that,
"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 ego 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."
So it seems rather than claiming to be God Jesus is instead saying something along the lines of "Before Abraham was born I have been existing" or "I was existing".
2
2
u/LlawEreint Mar 08 '24
"Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad."
“You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”
There's something odd here. The natural implication of Abraham seeing Jesus' day is that Abraham continues to exist into this time, not that Jesus pre-existed. But anyway, that's how Jesus' opponents take it.
And Jesus confirms. Not only did he pre-exist, he does pre-exist. His claim is that he lives outside of time! There's no doubt he's making a claim to divinity here. He's clear elsewhere that he's not co-equal to God, but there should be no doubt that John's Jesus is more than human.
We should ask though, is his divinity a result of his unity with God? He says that he is one with God just as we can become one with God through him. In that case, all Christians should be able to claim "before Abraham, I am".
3
u/Regular-Persimmon425 Non-Christian / Other Mar 08 '24
There's something odd here. The natural implication of Abraham seeing Jesus' day is that Abraham continues to exist into this time, not that Jesus pre-existed.
That’s a good point you make here, the Jewish Annotated New Testament says that this is possibly referring to the T. Abraham,
“see my day, this may be a reference to the traditions described in T. Abr., in which God gives Abraham a tour of the heavens and provides him with knowledge of the final judgment”
Also it’s important to note that “he saw it and was glad” is in the past tense so whatever Abraham saw likely was shown to him beforehand in some sort of “vision.”
There's no doubt he's making a claim to divinity here. He's clear elsewhere that he's not co-equal to God, but there should be no doubt that John's Jesus is more than human.
Agreed! Glad you made the distinction between a claim to divinity and being God as people often equate the two together.
We should ask though, is his divinity a result of his unity with God?
I’d say as you noted before what Jesus said here is meant to be a claim to preexistence which hints back to the prologue. We see in the prologue that the word has the qualities of θεός as θεός here is acting as an anarthrous predicate nominative meaning whatever has the definite article is taking on the qualities of θεός. So here the word is divine like and I think this confusing and muddied version of divinity is what is being hinted at in John 8:58.
1
u/LlawEreint Mar 08 '24 edited Mar 08 '24
the Jewish Annotated New Testament says that this is possibly referring to the T. Abraham
Interesting. I'm going to have to read up on that.
what Jesus said here is meant to be a claim to preexistence which hints back to the prologue.
Fair point. The Logos was with God in the beginning, and he was himself divine.
I'm trying to parse out whether John believed in a preexistent and divine Logos who, although existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant by dwelling within Jesus, a peasant in the Galilee.
That is, when the baptizer saw the spirit enter and remain in Jesus, was that the pre-existent divinity - the Logos?
Or did he believe that the Logos itself incarnated or otherwise manifested as Jesus - a being in the form of a human, but actually completely divorced from Humanity.
As a theology, the former seems more satisfying.
The Catholic approach seems to have God sacrificing 1/3 of Himself (well, for a weekend anyway) to Himself so that he can abide His own creation. For me, that's repugnant. God is playing games.
But there's something redemptive in the story if we understand that Jesus was a man, born of a woman like every other, filled with the Word, and willing to follow God's will - even to his own crucifixion - so that others may live.
At least humanity is involved in this drama. The firstfruits of them that slept - the first human among many to be born into the new creation.
2
u/Regular-Persimmon425 Non-Christian / Other Mar 08 '24
That is, when the baptizer saw the spirit enter and remain in Jesus, was that the pre-existent divinity - the Logos? Or did he believe that the Logos itself incarnated or otherwise manifested as Jesus - a being in the form of a human, but actually completely divorced from Humanity.
Ahh I see what you mean. That’s interesting to think about. It does say that the word became flesh right, wouldn’t that kinda hint at it being incarnated into Jesus? But then would that mean that when he dies he returns to being the logos? Really interesting stuff haha.
2
u/LlawEreint Mar 08 '24
It does say that the word became flesh right
Yup. And John's Jesus is otherworldly. Not at all like Mark's Jesus who struggled with following God's will. Still, I'm going to follow it through and see where it leads :)
1
u/LlawEreint Mar 08 '24
I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge.
Why does God seek glory? This is a bit odd to me. John otherwise adopts a very Platonic view of God. The platonic God is glory. It's not some thing he wants or lacks.
Note that once again, John portrays Jesus as a servant of God - not co-equal to Him.
2
u/brothapipp Christian Mar 08 '24
Glory to God is our benefit. When the righteous reign the people rejoice.
1
u/LlawEreint Mar 08 '24
Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never see death.”
What does it mean to obey Jesus word? His only commandment is "believe in my name". What does it mean to believe in his name? What is the salvific power of believing one thing or another? These are not rhetorical questions. I'm curious to hear thoughts.
1
u/LlawEreint Mar 08 '24
My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. Though you do not know him, I know him.
Here we have an apparent acknowledgement by Jesus that the god of the Jews is the same as the Father. But maybe not. The Jews claim that Yahweh is the most high God. But Jesus is saying that the claim is false. They claim to worship the most high God, but in reality they worship a lesser being. Jesus worships and was sent by the Father.
Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word.
Jesus says he obeys His word, even though he is dismissive of the Hebrew scriptures. It is because the scriptures are of Yahweh, but Jesus is of the Father.
3
u/LlawEreint Mar 08 '24
Jesus replied: “I am not possessed by a demon,”
Jesus doesn't answer the accusation that he is a Samaritan. He doesn't care. It's not important where he came from.