Jesus was likely saying I am the Messiah as he did when he used the same words in John 4:26
Jesus is not referring to the burning bush and there is no indication that he is. If he saying he was God, he would say before creation - not before Abraham.
Nope. You are ignoring the simplest explanations and forcing an Imperial Roman belief onto the Bible.
Rome had nothing to do with Jesus saying I AM. As in Exodus God was revealing Himself to man. Sorry you missed that. I AM is God showing Himself to be 100% self sufficient needing nothing from anyone or anything.Holy and eternal not sharing His Glory with another as He Himself said.
As in Exodus God was revealing Himself to man. Sorry you missed that. I AM is God showing Himself to be 100% self sufficient needing nothing from anyone or anything.
I demonstrated that I knew and know exactly where you got it from.
Another translation is that God said "I will be who I will be". If you read the verses afterwards, God made it clear that "I will be" or "I am" is not his name. And the later prophets did not call him that either. This name is being forced onto God to support trinitarian beliefs.
The Imperial Roman Church has everything to do with your interpretation of that verse.
I demonstrated that I knew and know exactly where you got it from.
Another translation is that God said "I will be who I will be". If you read the verses afterwards, God made it clear that "I will be" or "I am" is not his name. And the later prophets did not call him that either. This name is being forced onto God to support trinitarian beliefs.
The words ego eimi formed a phrase that was in very common use by first century Christians and Jews and in New Testament scriptures. It was certainly not understood (by Jews or Christians) as declaring one’s Godhood! If it could have been understood that way, we can be sure the Jews would have never applied it to themselves (as they did so frequently)!
Notice, for example, how the former blind man (John 9:9) actually identifies himself by saying “ego eimi,” but none of the other Jews present, even for a moment, understood him to be claiming to be Jehovah!
The Jew whom Jesus had healed of blindness obviously had no knowledge of such a meaning (“He identified himself by saying, ‘I AM [ego eimi]’.”) - John 9:9, see interlinears. And even if he had made such a terrible, blasphemous slip of the tongue, the Jews who had come to question him would certainly not have ignored it as they did! And the Bible writer himself (the Apostle John) would not have written such an account without making it perfectly clear that this terrible “blasphemer” had paid dearly for his “evil” deed! And, again, the Apostle Paul would never make such a statement (Acts 26:29; 1 Cor. 15:10) if it could possibly be understood in such a blasphemous way! “I AM” simply could not have been understood by the Bible writers as a designation for God!
Obviously the first Christians never understood "I AM" as a name, title or description of God or they would never have used it as they often did! (Can you imagine any of them referring to themselves as “The Most High,” “Jehovah,” “The Heavenly Father,” or, even, “Jesus Christ”?)
Saint Augustine (354-430 A.D.) is considered by much of trinitarian Christendom to be among the best of trinitarian scholars and “the greatest of the Fathers of the Church”! To show Saint Augustine’s conception of the absolute foolishness of the “God's Name" argument we can look to p. 41 of On the Two Cities where Augustine says about himself:
“I am most certain that I AM, that I know it, and that I delight in it.” And, “certainly I am not deceived in this knowledge that I AM.” - On the Two Cities - Selections from The City of God, F. W. Strothmann (ed.), Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., New York, 1957. (Also found in the original The City of God, Book 11, Ch. 26.) [Emphasis mine – T2]
The words ego eimi formed a phrase that was in very common use by first century Christians and Jews and in New Testament scriptures. It was certainly not understood (by Jews or Christians) as declaring one’s Godhood! If it could have been understood that way, we can be sure the Jews would have never applied it to themselves (as they did so frequently)!
Notice, for example, how the former blind man (John 9:9) actually identifies himself by saying “ego eimi,” but none of the other Jews present, even for a moment, understood him to be claiming to be Jehovah!
The Jew whom Jesus had healed of blindness obviously had no knowledge of such a meaning (“He identified himself by saying, ‘I AM [ego eimi]’.”) - John 9:9, see interlinears. And even if he had made such a terrible, blasphemous slip of the tongue, the Jews who had come to question him would certainly not have ignored it as they did! And the Bible writer himself (the Apostle John) would not have written such an account without making it perfectly clear that this terrible “blasphemer” had paid dearly for his “evil” deed! And, again, the Apostle Paul would never make such a statement (Acts 26:29; 1 Cor. 15:10) if it could possibly be understood in such a blasphemous way! “I AM” simply could not have been understood by the Bible writers as a designation for God!
Obviously the first Christians never understood "I AM" as a name, title or description of God or they would never have used it as they often did! (Can you imagine any of them referring to themselves as “The Most High,” “Jehovah,” “The Heavenly Father,” or, even, “Jesus Christ”?)
Saint Augustine (354-430 A.D.) is considered by much of trinitarian Christendom to be among the best of trinitarian scholars and “the greatest of the Fathers of the Church”! To show Saint Augustine’s conception of the absolute foolishness of the “God's Name" argument we can look to p. 41 of On the Two Cities where Augustine says about himself:
“I am most certain that I AM, that I know it, and that I delight in it.” And, “certainly I am not deceived in this knowledge that I AM.” - On the Two Cities - Selections from The City of God, F. W. Strothmann (ed.), Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., New York, 1957. (Also found in the original The City of God, Book 11, Ch. 26.) [Emphasis mine – T2]
I believe Tigger mostly cuts and pastes, so I'll answer for him.
Here are some of the major problems with your interpretation.
1. The Jews never recognized that Jesus claimed to be God.
In that very next chapter,
John 9:22 NLT
His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jewish leaders, who had announced that anyone saying Jesus was the Messiah would be expelled from the synagogue.
The Jews recognized that Jesus claimed he was the Messiah - not God.
2. Identifying God as the one who came before Abraham is an insult to God. An atheist would identify Jesus this way - not a Jew. An atheist would say, "A monotheistic god is something humans invented some time before Abraham."
A Jew who believed in God would identify God as the one who was there at the creation of the world.
So, why did Jesus identify himself as coming before Abraham if as I explained, it obviously wasn't because he was identifying himself as God. It served two possible purposes.
A. In saying this, Jesus was saying he was more important than all the prophets - including Abraham. Look at the Bible
B. In saying this, Jesus was emphasizing that God meant to save his creation since before Abraham.
These are possible interpretations - the trinitarian interpretations make no sense.
3. "I am" or "I will be" is not the name for God. God says this to explain who he is.
Exodus 3:13-14 NLT
But Moses protested, “If I go to the people of Israel and tell them, ‘The God of your ancestors has sent me to you,’ they will ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what should I tell them?”
[14] God replied to Moses, “ I AM WHO I AM. Say this to the people of Israel: I AM has sent me to you.”
At this point all the trinitarians stop and say, "See! I told you so! Just believe what it says."
However one should examine the context and understand that God is saying that he is not tied to any sphere of influence or to any region. The Jews were coming out of a pagan nation - Egypt - and they needed to be retaught.
And then God tells Moses his name.
Exodus 3:15 NLT
God also said to Moses, “Say this to the people of Israel: Yahweh, the God of your ancestors—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you. This is my eternal name, my name to remember for all generations.
And YHWH is the proper name of God used in the old testament - not "I am" or "I will be"
I haven't seen "I am" become a name for God until the 4th century when Jesus is declared to be God.
Jesus saying before Abraham was I Am does NOT imply or mean that Jesus isn’t eternal it actually means He has always been. You miss the obvious to stay stuck in an agenda.
At the risk of being pedantic, EVERY bible scholar already knows what it means and has read Job many times. YOU, on the other hand, are taking a LONG way around to try to say something you likely know next to nothing about. I don't have to 'trick' rationalization out of someone. That is a less than honest tack I get often from Arians/Unitarians. If you cannot say something straightforward and honestly, it isn't from God. It is subversion. YOU are being subversive. I can think of one who works on the 'subterfuge' level. Trinitarians don't have this problem with less than straight forward 'set ups.' We are clear because scripture is clear. Israel means 'triumphs with God' among other renditions. Jacob wrestled with God, and because he was blessed by Him, renamed Israel and that mean is synonymous with His interaction with and subsequent blessing from God marked by a limp the rest of his life as to that promised blessing. So and what, Hiltrot? So and what? It literally is nothing but a 'squirrel' in your repertoire. Most every Unitarian I've ever come into discussion with also has this random, scattered concept of mixing scriptures. Be concrete sequential and STICK with one passage at a time. Concrete sequential IS how God conveys most of His thoughts to us, and immediately so in the case of Jesus' nature.
No, I haven't. You AGAIN make a faulty assumptions because this is how YOUR mind works. I'm better read than you on church history, in all likelihood. You just don't have the skills, education, or where-with-all to make these hasty conclusions. They are all immature/amateur.
This is THE mark of Unitarians and Arians. YOU just did it with "Israel" as well. You know when you said 'projecting?' Many people are prone to parroting what they've often heard themselves. NOBODY tells me that I'm out of context. This is a "YOU" problem (demonstrably "Israel" ) no one of my failings.
Another good question. Well, what's your answer? Why do you choose the most complex and least likely interpretation?
Another good question. Well, what's your answer?
Which is why I suggest you examine the Bible again and open your eyes to the possibility of a simpler explanation. The one that is explicitly stated in the Bible - not the one that had to be forced onto it.
It isn't forced. Thomas said to Jesus, "You are the Lord of me and God of me." How can YOU read that and not know??? I don't believe you honestly can, if you've a shred of intelligence. Context is everything.
Jesus is human. Jesus is the Son of God and the Messiah. Jesus died. God raise him from the dead. Is this not all explicitly and repeatedly said in the Bible? Start with that.
Jesus 'became' flesh. That is as close as you'll find to 'Jesus is human.' There is no scripture that says "Jesus is human" and I find when people begin paraphrasing scripture, this is where they depart it. Remedy? Don't do it! It is that simple to be Biblical: Simply state what IS in the Bible and try to avoid what isn't there except at to explain what you are seeing. This IS the triune position. "God raised Him from the dead" AND "Destroy this temple and 'I' will raise it." If you are 'half' right, you are also half wrong. So? Get it right and you'll NOT be half wrong. It is this simple as well.
I do. WHY do amateurs think Google stuff is out of reach of other people, let alone scholars???? It doesn't make sense that you even think this
way. Better yet, why not simply link to something like this, if you honestly believe someone else needs an education? Why attack a strawman? Instead, get the strawman out of the way with a link. Are you hear to argue or to help people? Most Unitarians are here to fight and argue THEIR heterodox/heresy and for some reason, trying to win at all costs a position highly questioned AT BEST. That portrays as humanistic and fleshly, not spiritual. It always does.
You moved to a heresy. Are you a theologian or a layman? Frankly, a layman doesn't have the tools (Greek, multiple times multiple times through the Bible etc. I don't mean to disdain laymen, but laymen that, with absolutely NO study background try and change another's theology? I've no use for these if they don't recognize their great limitations in discussion. The Triune position is the ONLY tenable positions, academically. It is why all academics but a VERY VERY few are Trinitarian. It means that most of those who HAVE studied hard, over Biblical matters AND with the demonstrable where-with-all, are convinced and convicted of Trinitarian theology.
Are you actually capable of passing a Language Arts class? You are simply wrong. "Before" and "AM" mean something specific and MUST point to reason and a cause for that reason. In a word, you are 'wrong.' It is that clear.
No, and I'm not sure you even know what 'projecting' means. I'm pretty sure you don't know word definitions. WHY would you try and depend on your subpar grammar to apprehend the truths of God? You SHOULD be leaning on others more adept at this than yourself at this point. God can, but does not give immaculate knowledge. The Holy Spirit teaches us daily and we 'study to be approved workman for God.' Anything less? It might have well-meaning motive, but it is at the least, a sin of ignorance. At worst? Damnable. The Apostles, especially Paul, said that false teaching is a grievous harm.
Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him.Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?”The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.” - John 10:31-33 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John10:31-33&version=NKJV
2. Identifying God as the one who came before Abraham is an insult to God.
"The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" by necessity implies that God came before those three men. Why is it an insult to God to recognize that fact?
An atheist would identify Jesus this way - not a Jew. An atheist would say, "A monotheistic god is something humans invented some time before Abraham."
Atheists are fools because they say "there is no God." Recognizing that there IS a God, and that He existed before Abraham doesn't classify as foolish.
A Jew who believed in God would identify God as the one who was there at the creation of the world.
I think you'll find that if you simply read the passage, in context, that it doesn't have anything to do with either of those.
Here, just read it:
Spoiler
Then Jesus said to them again, “I am going away, and you will seek Me, and will die in your sin. Where I go you cannot come.”So the Jews said, “Will He kill Himself, because He says, ‘Where I go you cannot come’?”And He said to them, “You are from beneath; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”Then they said to Him, “Who are You?” And Jesus said to them, “Just what I have been saying to you from the beginning.I have many things to say and to judge concerning you, but He who sent Me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I heard from Him.”They did not understand that He spoke to them of the Father.Then Jesus said to them, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing of Myself; but as My Father taught Me, I speak these things.And He who sent Me is with Me. The Father has not left Me alone, for I always do those things that please Him.”As He spoke these words, many believed in Him.Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed.And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”They answered Him, “We are Abraham’s descendants, and have never been in bondage to anyone. How can You say, ‘You will be made free’?”Jesus answered them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin.And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever.Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.“I know that you are Abraham’s descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you.I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with your father.”They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham.But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this.You do the deeds of your father.” Then they said to Him, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father—God.”Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me.Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word.You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me.Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me?He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”Then the Jews answered and said to Him, “Do we not say rightly that You are a Samaritan and have a demon?”Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon; but I honor My Father, and you dishonor Me.And I do not seek My own glory; there is One who seeks and judges.Most assuredly, I say to you, if anyone keeps My word he shall never see death.”Then the Jews said to Him, “Now we know that You have a demon! Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and You say, ‘If anyone keeps My word he shall never taste death.’Are You greater than our father Abraham, who is dead? And the prophets are dead. Who do You make Yourself out to be?”Jesus answered, “If I honor Myself, My honor is nothing. It is My Father who honors Me, of whom you say that He is your God.Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. And if I say, ‘I do not know Him,’ I shall be a liar like you; but I do know Him and keep His word.Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by. - John 8:21-59 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John8:21-59&version=NKJV
3. "I am" or "I will be" is not the name for God. God says this to explain who he is.
The name of God is a statement of who He is. Saying God's name does not identify Him is a contradiction.
Here is what scripture says:
Exodus 3:13-14 NLT
But Moses protested, “If I go to the people of Israel and tell them, ‘The God of your ancestors has sent me to you,’ they will ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what should I tell them?”
[14] God replied to Moses, “ I AM WHO I AM. Say this to the people of Israel: I AM has sent me to you.”
At this point all the trinitarians stop and say, "See! I told you so! Just believe what it says."
However one should examine the context and understand that God is saying that he is not tied to any sphere of influence or to any region. The Jews were coming out of a pagan nation - Egypt - and they needed to be retaught.
And then God tells Moses his name.
Exodus 3:15 NLT
God also said to Moses, “Say this to the people of Israel: Yahweh, the God of your ancestors—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you. This is my eternal name, my name to remember for all generations.
The problem with this assertion is that while it may be true, it does not inherently preclude "I AM WHO I AM" from being the name of God.
Here's why. Read the passage again:
Then Moses said to God, “Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they say to me, ‘What is His name?’ what shall I say to them?”And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ ”Moreover God said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.’ - Exodus 3:13-15 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus3:13-15&version=NKJV
Did you catch it?
Here it is again, and I'll format it as if it were a script for a play or movie so that it's clearer:
Moses (to God): “Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they say to me, ‘What is His name?’ what shall I say to them?”
God (to Moses): “I AM WHO I AM.”
God (to Moses): “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ ”
God (to Moses): “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.’
Is that clear enough?
How about if I format it this way?
Then Moses said to God, “Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they say to me, ‘What is His name?’ what shall I say to them?”And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.”And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ ”
Moreover God said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.’
- Exodus 3:13-15 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus3:13-15&version=NKJV
Did you notice that there was a break between God's initial response to Moses after he (Moses) asked the question?
I'll highlight it for you below:
Moses asks God a question:
Then Moses said to God, “Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they say to me, ‘What is His name?’ what shall I say to them?”
God answers Moses' question:
And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ ”
God then goes on to further clarify who He is:
Moreover God said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel: ‘The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.’
Do you get it now?
God was telling Moses His name, and then He clarified further who He is.
And YHWH is the proper name of God used in the old testament - not "I am" or "I will be"
God's spirit is not the the Son. There is no scripture to support this. I don't deny you can try to eisegesis it in, but that doesn't mean the Bible support it.
In Colossians 1:19, God's spirit filled Jesus - all of God was not contained in Jesus.
Agree that Jesus was filled with the spirit of his Father, but consider that this spirit is the express image of Heb 1. God created all through this spirit. This spirit had the power of God but it is an image, all images are creations.
The Preeminence of Christ
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Col 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
Agree that Jesus was filled with the spirit of his Father, but consider that this spirit is the express image of Heb 1. God created all through this spirit. This spirit had the power of God but it is an image, all images are creations.
The Preeminence of Christ
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Col 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
You're making jumps and needless ones at that. First you're saying "this spirit is the express image" which is not explicitly in the Bible and not in Hebrews 1. So, someone has to agree with this statement you made before anything else you say falls into place. However, that is not the only premise you're making up.
"God created all through this spirit." This reeks of Platonic Logos theory. Are you assuming that I am a Platonist?
"This spirit had the power of God but it is an image, all images are creations." Also not in the Bible.
You may not be willing to explain what you know, but I will go ahead and tell you what I know at the moment.
The Holy Spirit is the name for God's power in action. Luke 1:35
While, holy spirit is the gift from God to all those who love Jesus. Ephesisans 1:13
Finally, after Jesus died, he is called the Spirit. Acts 10:19, Revelation 2:7
Now, I will admit my knowledge of the Holy Spirit, holy spirit, and Spirit is limited at the moment and I reserve the right to change my beliefs when new information is known.
But about Colossians. Keypurr, are you familiar wit Paul's descriptions of a second creation?
God's spirit is not the the Son. There is no scripture to support this. I don't deny you can try to eisegesis it in, but that doesn't mean the Bible support it.
In Colossians 1:19, God's spirit filled Jesus - all of God was not contained in Jesus.
Incorrect. "When you have seen me, you have SEEN the Father." Do YOU actually grasp that? You cannot wave a wand or a hand-wave dismissal like all Unitarians/Arians TRY to do. It cannot be done. YOU rob the Son. YOU do. Just as I, YOU will stand before Him, COMPLETELY without this arrogance, and will give account. Frankly? You are incorrect. It means 'wrong.' Isaiah 9:6, no eisegesis. It is clear as a bell what HE shall be called. YOU are the robber and thief on this account. That man is you.
No, you really haven't. You've simply read your bible for that long. There is a HUGE difference between reading AND HAVING THE TOOLS. You are a biblical tinkerer. I'll catch your years here shortly, but WHAT WE DID WITH THEM is of incredibly greater importance than their passage. You get no points and no reason for pride on this matter. I actually know your prowess. We've discussed your atrocious grammar on past occasions. You simply don't have the where-with-all, Keypurr. You've no reason for any kind of pride. None. You are found wanting. Harsh? A bit, but you really need a pin to pop that big head of yours. You aren't a scholar and it shows.
The words ego eimi formed a phrase that was in very common use by first century Christians and Jews and in New Testament scriptures. It was certainly not understood (by Jews or Christians) as declaring one’s Godhood! If it could have been understood that way, we can be sure the Jews would have never applied it to themselves (as they did so frequently)!
Notice, for example, how the former blind man (John 9:9) actually identifies himself by saying “ego eimi,” but none of the other Jews present, even for a moment, understood him to be claiming to be Jehovah!
The Jew whom Jesus had healed of blindness obviously had no knowledge of such a meaning (“He identified himself by saying, ‘I AM [ego eimi]’.”) - John 9:9, see interlinears. And even if he had made such a terrible, blasphemous slip of the tongue, the Jews who had come to question him would certainly not have ignored it as they did! And the Bible writer himself (the Apostle John) would not have written such an account without making it perfectly clear that this terrible “blasphemer” had paid dearly for his “evil” deed! And, again, the Apostle Paul would never make such a statement (Acts 26:29; 1 Cor. 15:10) if it could possibly be understood in such a blasphemous way! “I AM” simply could not have been understood by the Bible writers as a designation for God!
Obviously the first Christians never understood "I AM" as a name, title or description of God or they would never have used it as they often did! (Can you imagine any of them referring to themselves as “The Most High,” “Jehovah,” “The Heavenly Father,” or, even, “Jesus Christ”?)
Saint Augustine (354-430 A.D.) is considered by much of trinitarian Christendom to be among the best of trinitarian scholars and “the greatest of the Fathers of the Church”! To show Saint Augustine’s conception of the absolute foolishness of the “God's Name" argument we can look to p. 41 of On the Two Cities where Augustine says about himself:
“I am most certain that I AM, that I know it, and that I delight in it.” And, “certainly I am not deceived in this knowledge that I AM.” - On the Two Cities - Selections from The City of God, F. W. Strothmann (ed.), Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., New York, 1957. (Also found in the original The City of God, Book 11, Ch. 26.) [Emphasis mine – T2]
So and what???? It is 'excuse.' The Pharisees DID think that and picked up stones. Jesus also said "Before Abraham was" THEN "I Am." Do you unitarains/arians actually ever get good grades in English and have studied any foreign languages????? It doesn't appear so (to date, ever).
Is Jesus God? There are actually two answers to this question. One is most definitely yes! The other answer is no. And you answer depends upon what you mean by "God". Confused? There's no need to be! You see, the word "God" in the Bible refers to two things. In one instance it refers to the 'Sovereign of the universe', the 'only true God.' And in another instance it refers to the divine nature, the 'God nature' and the 'name of God'. So I will show you that while Jesus is FULLY divine and is FULLY God by nature (being begotten of the Father from eternity, Micah 5:2, Proverbs 8:22-30), and possessing the Father's own name, he is not the 'sovereign of the universe', the 'only true God' as that is His Father alone.
"The Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of the Father, is truly God in infinity, BUT NOT IN PERSONALITY."
In other words, Christ IS God in respect of being divine and eternal. But in His distinctive character and person, He is NOT the 'only true God', He is the SON OF the only true God - His Father!
Quick Note: Jesus is NEVER called 'God the Son' in the Bible. He is always called the 'Son OF GOD'.
So and what???? It is 'excuse.' The Pharisees DID think that and picked up stones. Jesus also said "Before Abraham was" THEN "I Am." Do you unitarains/arians actually ever get good grades in English and have studied any foreign languages????? It doesn't appear so (to date, ever).
) no one of my failings. 
I don't believe you honestly can, if you've a shred of intelligence. Context is everything. 
