John 8:58 and Exodus 3:14

This was part of a debate. My responses are in blue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaliberCadillac

Your argument is based on the Watchtower Bible and Tract Societies objections to the deity of Christ. Are you a Jehovah’s Witness?

My argument is based on the original Greek of both the New Testament and the Septuagint.

I'm not denying that Christians believe in the deity of Jesus. I'm saying that John 8:58 is a tenuous connection to Exodus 3:14 and that this verse was not understood by the early Church Fathers (who were Greek) as Jesus calling himself YHWH.

Quote:

The problem with their argument and yours is two fold. One is that you will never get any biblical language scholar to agree with what you just said...

Why not?

Besides, it would also mean that the Church Fathers didn't understand the original Greek. They do not make the connection:

John 8:58:

"And as He was the son of David, so was He also the Lord of David. And as He was from Abraham, so did He also exist before Abraham." - Irenaeus, Lost Fragments, LII

But the Word of God did not accept of the friendship of Abraham, as though He stood in need of it, for He was perfect from the beginning ("Before Abraham was," He says, "I am") - Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book IV, XIII, 4

If, then, those who were conversant with the ancient Scriptures came to newness of hope, expecting the coming of Christ, as the Lord teaches us when He says, “If ye had believed Moses, ye would have believed Me, for he wrote of Me;” and again, “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it, and was glad; for before Abraham was, I am. - Ignatius, Epistle to the Magnesians, IX

Exodus 3:14-15:

Wherefore, as I have already stated, no other is named as God, or is called Lord, except Him who is God and Lord of all [i.e. the Father, not Jesus], who also said to Moses, “I am that I am [i.e. the Father, not Jesus]. And thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel: He who is, hath sent me unto you;” and His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who makes those that believe in His name the sons of God. And again, when the Son speaks to Moses, He says, “I am come down to deliver this people.”

For it is He who descended and ascended for the salvation of men. Therefore God has been declared through the Son, who is in the Father, and has the Father in Himself — He who is, the Father bearing witness to the Son, and the Son announcing the Father. As also Esaias says, “I too am witness,” he declares, “saith the Lord God, and the Son whom I have chosen, that ye may know, and believe, and understand that I am [Isaiah 43:10].” - Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III, VI, 2

I don't have the original Greek available of Irenaeus or Ignatius but I'm guessing you'll find that the "I am" of Isaiah 43:10 above is ego eimi that parallels John 8:58. The "He who is" in the above passage, used of the Father, will be ho on.

Perhaps talk of Trinitarian language (though the Holy Spirit is absent from mention of Father/Son in the above passage) would come in to play here but the Fathers do not draw a direct connection between Exodus 3:14 and John 8:58. From what I can tell the connection isn't made between Isaiah 43:10 and John 8:58 either.

Justin Martyr speaks in great detail of the burning bush incident in chapter LXIII of his First Apology of Justin but no connection to John 8:58 (which, perhaps, he didn't know).

I'm open to hearing thoughts on the above mentioned passages.

Quote:

...and secondly it doesn’t explain why the Jews being in the Temple courtyard “took up stones to stone him.” This reaction by Jewish leaders could only have been justified because they viewed Christ’s statement as blasphemy.(See Leviticus 24).

Maybe they misunderstood him. After all, they misunderstood him everywhere else in John's Gospel.

Quote:

Claiming to be YWVH (which is a Hebrew construction of the Hebrew form of EGO EIMI) would certainly constitute blasphemy. If Jesus was merely stating that he lived before Abraham (as JW’s contend), Jesus would have only been making a ridiculous claim. There is no Levitical Law that justifies the stoning of lunatics.

Again, maybe they misunderstood him. Or perhaps they understood that since only God pre-exists for Jesus to say he pre-existed meant he was making himself equal to God as John says elsewhere. Contextually, that makes a lot more sense then Jesus saying, "Before Abraham was, I am God" which makes no sense.

Quote:

My point to the Al Fatihah was, what Jesus claimed in John 8:58 would be analogous with a Muslim prophet walking into Mecca, and then standing in front of the Kaaba and yelling, “I am Allah!”

Are you saying Jesus said to the Jews, "I am God"?