The Authority of Paul

Originally posted by @sonship
[b]"Before Abraham was I AM".

Show us another New Testament instance when the usage of the phrase "I Am" instantly provoked a stoning for blasphemy.

If you're clueless as to what Jesus meant, the Jews in John 8:59 weren't.[/b]

If you're clueless as to what Jesus meant, the Jews in John 8:59 weren't.

I was going to write something more lengthy, but the following gets to the heart of it.

The fact of the matter is that the reason the Jews picked up the stones at the end of John 8 and what Jesus meant were not explained: You're just speculating.

Later in John 10, things are explained.
31The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. 32Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” 33The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” 34Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I SAID, YOU ARE GODS’? 35“If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), 36do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

Jesus explicitly states the reason that He believes that they want to stone Him: For the blasphemy of saying that He is the son of God. Not that Jesus said that He is God.

The Jews said that it was for the blasphemy of "making [Himself] out to be God", but Jesus corrected them as to what He actually had been saying and that it wasn't blasphemous.

If you remain true to form, you'll continue to place your speculation and the mistaken beliefs of the Jews above what Jesus explicitly stated was the reason that He believed that they wanted to stone Him: For saying, "I am the Son of God". As for me, I'll stick with what Jesus explicitly stated.

Originally posted by @thinkofone

“For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.”

That's WHY they sought to execute Him for blasphemy.

The reply of Jesus merely suggests that God wanted many sons. And this of course is central to the Gospel.

It is exactly the same tone as appears in John 14:1 - If ONLY He could enjoy oneness in His Father and no other humans could, He would have told them so up front.

"In My Father's house are many abodes; if it were not so I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you ... " (John 14:2)

The Unique Son of God by incarnation and resurrection came to open the way to many sons of God through salvation.

He DID, in realism, make Himself out to be God SO THAT God may fulfill His eternal purpose to have many more sons like Him.

Originally posted by @thinkofone

Jesus explicitly states the reason that He believes that they want to stone Him: For the blasphemy of saying that He is the son of God. Not that Jesus said that He is God.

The Jews said that it was for the blasphemy of "making [Himself] out to be God", but Jesus corrected them as to what He actually had been saying and that it wasn't blasphemous.

He agreed with them and pointed out their lack of familiarity with their own Scriptures.

He also was reminding them that He ACTED as God as a man, not JUST said He was God as a man.

They should consider more How He actually lived, what He as actually able to do, which testified He was God as a man - the Son of God.

Originally posted by @sonship
[quote] Jesus explicitly states the reason that He believes that they want to stone Him: For the blasphemy of saying that He is the son of God. Not that Jesus said that He is God.

The Jews said that it was for the blasphemy of "making [Himself] out to be God", but Jesus corrected them as to what He actually had been saying and that it wasn't blasphemous ...[text shortened]... lly lived, what He as actually able to do, which testified He was God as a man - the Son of God.

Clearly you don't understand what was being said in John 10:31-36.

In John 5:18 the narrator explains that the Jews wanted to kill Jesus for "calling God His own Father". In their minds He was "making Himself equal with God" in doing so.

In John 10:33 the Jews state that they want to stone Him for "for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” This refers back to the idea in John 5:18 where in their minds He was "making Himself equal with God" by "calling God His own Father".

In John 10:36 Jesus revealed that He understood that that was what they had in mind when He said, "do you say of Him... ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?".

In John 10:34-35 Jesus explained why it wasn't blasphemous for Him to have said, "I am the son of God". The Jews had it all wrong and Jesus corrected them.

The discussion in John 10:31-36 wouldn't make any sense if in John 8:58 Jesus was in fact claiming literally to be God, Jesus had only claimed to be the son of God. Jesus knew this. In John 10:36 Jesus made the point that that was all He had claimed. Jesus made the point that it wasn't blasphemous for Him to claim to be the son of God.

If you remain true to form, you'll continue to place your speculation and the mistaken beliefs of the Jews above what Jesus explicitly stated was the reason that He believed that they wanted to stone Him: For saying, "I am the Son of God". As for me, I'll stick with what Jesus explicitly stated.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Clearly you don't understand what was being said in John 10:31-36.

In John 5:18 the narrator explains that the Jews wanted to kill Jesus for "calling God His own Father". In their minds He was "making Himself equal with God" in doing so.

In John 10:33 the Jews state that they want to stone Him for "for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make ...[text shortened]... Him: For saying, "I am the Son of God". As for me, I'll stick with what Jesus explicitly stated.

Clearly you don't understand what was being said in John 10:31-36.

I understand what you are saying. But it is not nearly enough to argue that the Jews persecuted Jesus in John 8 for again identifying Himself as the "I AM" - the God who appeared to Moses before this man, not yet 50 years old was born. Before Abraham came into existence - He is "I AM THAT I AM" (Exodus 3:14) .

I understand your attempt to neutralize this with John 10.

However, Jesus had taught that all should honor Him and they honor His Father. He who does not honor Him does not honor the Father Who sent Him.

You and the stone gathering Jews are of the same category.
Some of them repented latter to become Christians.

See Acts.

In John 5:18 the narrator explains that the Jews wanted to kill Jesus for "calling God His own Father". In their minds He was "making Himself equal with God" in doing so.

"In order that all may honor the Son even as they honor the Father, He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him." (v.23)

They did not co-honor Father and Son because they sought to stone the Son.

You do not co-honor Father and Son, as far as I can detect, because you don't believe in the Father to begin with.

Are you an Atheist underneath this Humanism or not?

It is a simply question that if you refuse to answer you must be a coward. No ad hom, just apparent fact.

Do you even honor the EXISTENCE ... of God ????

Originally posted by @sonship

Clearly you don't understand what was being said in John 10:31-36.

I understand what you are saying. But it is not nearly enough to argue that the Jews persecuted Jesus in [b]John 8 for again identifying Himself as the "I AM" - the God who appeared to Moses before this man, not yet 50 years old was born. Before Abraham came ...[text shortened]... be a coward. No ad hom, just apparent fact.

Do you even honor the EXISTENCE ... of God ????[/b]

Hey, don't push ToO into the atheist camp. (We don't want him).

It is rather odd though that the one thing Ghost and Sonship have in common is a 'cluelessness' as to whether or not ToO 'honors the existence of God.'

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Hey, don't push ToO into the atheist camp. (We don't want him).

It is rather odd though that the one thing Ghost and Sonship have in common is a 'cluelessness' as to whether or not ToO 'honors the existence of God.'

It should not matter 2 hoots.
This is chat forum. Who cares.
A man resorts to such low dodges when his back is against a wall.

Originally posted by @sonship

Clearly you don't understand what was being said in John 10:31-36.

I understand what you are saying. But it is not nearly enough to argue that the Jews persecuted Jesus in [b]John 8 for again identifying Himself as the "I AM" - the God who appeared to Moses before this man, not yet 50 years old was born. Before Abraham came ...[text shortened]... be a coward. No ad hom, just apparent fact.

Do you even honor the EXISTENCE ... of God ????[/b]

You and the stone gathering Jews are of the same category.

Actually I am on the side of Jesus.

In John 10:36 Jesus makes it clear that He believes that the Jews want to stone Him for saying, ‘I am the Son of God’. In John 10:34-35 Jesus explained why it wasn't blasphemous.

If in John 8:58 Jesus was in fact claiming literally to be God, then why didn't He understand that that was the reason that the Jews want to stone Him? Did Jesus not understand that in uttering the common phrase "ego emi" that He was claiming literally to be God in John 8:58? Did Jesus forget?

Your speculation about John 8:58 doesn't hold up under the light of truth.

Originally posted by @thinkofone


Actually I am on the side of Jesus.

I did not ask you if you were on the side of Jesus.
I asked you if you honored the existence of God.

Do you even honor the EXISTENCE ... of God ????

As expected, that question you evaded.
I said it would be cowardly to do so.

You still have an opportunity to give a straight foward confession about this.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
[b]Hey, don't push ToO into the atheist camp. (We don't want him).

You say you don't want ToO in the Atheist camp ?
Now that's too bad. I'm not pushing.
I am asking.

Maybe you haven't learned yet, that what you want and what you GET are not always the same thing.

Originally posted by @thinkofone

Actually I am on the side of Jesus.

No you're not.
The "another Jesus" that you teach, you invented such to be on that false teaching's side.

In John 10:36 Jesus makes it clear that He believes that the Jews want to stone Him for saying, ‘I am the Son of God’. In John 10:34-35 Jesus explained why it wasn't blasphemous.

The account in John 10:34-35 is that account.
The account in John 8:59 is that account.

Your attempt to use the latter to neutralize the former fail.

"The Jews then said to Him, You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?

Jesus said to them, truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I am.

So they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus was hidden and went out of the temple." (John 8:57-58)

The man not fifty years old speaks of being the "I am" who pre-existed the patriarch Abraham.

The discussion of chapter 10 doesn't nullify the reaction of chapter 8.

And your appearing to be a stickler to the intended meaning of Jesus is hypocritical of you and arbitrary. Plenty of places where He speaks, you rationalize it away.

Your selective appeal to the authority of His speaking is dishonest.

You won't clearly confess belief in God, yet.
Anything else you propose as an understanding of Christ's teaching is not reliable, since you don't believe in God.

Or you DO believe in God ?
Not ready to confess yet, one way or the other?

Originally posted by @sonship

Actually I am on the side of Jesus.

No you're not.
The "another Jesus" that you teach, you invented such to be on that false teaching's side.

[quote]
In John 10:36 Jesus makes it clear that He believes that the Jews want to stone Him for saying, ‘I am the Son of God’. In John 10:34-35 Jesus explained why it wasn't blasphemous. [/q ...[text shortened]... believe in God.

Or you DO believe in God ?
Not ready to confess yet, one way or the other?

Okay. I was hoping to not have to do this, but since you won't listen to reason let's see if you can understand the following:

Many references given from the Old Testament in the New Testament are excerpt from the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible: the Septuagint. This translation was the work of eminent Jewish scholars and was to be used by the Jewish, Greek speaking, Diaspora. The translation was done around 270 B.C. and was used and known in Jesus’ time.
 
In Exodus 3:14, in the Greek Septuagint, we read:

“And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM (ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν ).” And He said “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM (ὁ ὢν ) has sent me to you.”” (Exodus 3:14)
 
Thus, by reading Exodus 3:14, we see that God clearly claim his title to be I AM (ὁ ὢν ) when He says to Moses speaking of Himself: , “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM (ὁ ὢν ) has sent me to you.”
 
God’s title would then not be ego eimi (ἐγώ εἰμι ), but rather ho ōn (ὁ ὢν ).    
 
That the title ho ōn (ὁ ὢν ) belongs to the Almighty God, Yehovah, is seen clearly in Revelation 16:5. In this verse we read:
 
And I heard the angel of the waters saying: “You are righteous, O Lord, The One who is and who was and who is to be, Because You have judged these things. Revelation 16:5
 
Obviously, “The One who is and who was and who is to be” is Yehovah, the Heavenly Father as we may have confirmation by reading the entire chapter 16 of Revelation.
The Greek manuscript never used ego eimi (ἐγώ εἰμι ) in the verse. We rather find used the terms ho ōn (ὁ ὢν ).

Then, if John’s intention was to let everyone know that Jesus Christ was claiming to be Yehovah, the Almighty God, he would have used the terms ho ōn (ὁ ὢν ) instead of ego eimi (ἐγώ εἰμι ).
 
As we can see, there is no link between “I AM” in Exodus 3:14 and I am in John 8: 58.
In this last verse, Jesus doesn’t claim to be Yehovah, the Almighty One. His purpose is elsewhere and he has no intent to declare himself to be the omnipotent and all powerful Heavenly God as some claim.

Pasted from <http://www.sabbathreformation.com/article-i-am-exodus-3-14-compared-to-i-am-john-8-58-68513147.html

Originally posted by @sonship

Actually I am on the side of Jesus.

No you're not.
The "another Jesus" that you teach, you invented such to be on that false teaching's side.

[quote]
In John 10:36 Jesus makes it clear that He believes that the Jews want to stone Him for saying, ‘I am the Son of God’. In John 10:34-35 Jesus explained why it wasn't blasphemous. [/q ...[text shortened]... believe in God.

Or you DO believe in God ?
Not ready to confess yet, one way or the other?

In John 10:36 Jesus makes it clear that He believes that the Jews want to stone Him for saying, ‘I am the Son of God’. In John 10:34-35 Jesus explained why it wasn't blasphemous.

If in John 8:58 Jesus was in fact claiming literally to be God, then why didn't He understand that that was the reason that the Jews want to stone Him? Did Jesus not understand that in uttering the common phrase "ego emi" that He was claiming literally to be God in John 8:58? Did Jesus forget?

Your speculation about John 8:58 doesn't hold up under the light of truth.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
Okay. I was hoping to not have to do this, but since you won't listen to reason let's see if you can understand the following:

Many references given from the Old Testament in the New Testament are excerpt from the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible: the Septuagint. This translation was the work of eminent Jewish scholars and was to be used by ...[text shortened]... bathreformation.com/article-i-am-exodus-3-14-compared-to-i-am-john-8-58-68513147.html

Where in all this is your answer to whether or not YOU honor that God even EXISTS ?

Are you still afraid to take a stand ?

Originally posted by @thinkofone
In John 10:36 Jesus makes it clear that He believes that the Jews want to stone Him for saying, ‘I am the Son of God’. In John 10:34-35 Jesus explained why it wasn't blasphemous.

[b]If in John 8:58 Jesus was in fact claiming literally to be God, then why didn't He understand that that was the reason that the Jews want to stone Him? Did Jesus not unde ...[text shortened]... Jesus forget?

Your speculation about John 8:58 doesn't hold up under the light of truth.[/b]

Where in all this is your answer to whether or not YOU honor that God even EXISTS ?

Are you still afraid to take a stand ?