The Trinitarian Claim

Trinitarians claim that Jesus was using special language to identify himself as God, that is, he used God's divine name to identify himself as Yahweh and since he is Yahweh he was saying that he pre-existed as a self-conscious divine person (God) before Abraham and for this reason the Jews wanted to stone him.

Examination of the Claim

Trinitarians are actually attempting to make three different claims at once with respect to this verse:

A. Jesus was invoking the Greek version of the divine name (ego eimi) given to Moses at Exodus 3:14 and istherefore identifying himself as YAHWEH God.

B. Jesus was claiming to have existed as a self conscious living divine person before Abraham existed.

C. The Jews therefore wanted to stone Jesus for claiming to be their God.

A. The Divine Name Claim

1. Ego eimi (I am)

Trinitarians claim Jesus used the Greek words ego eimi, "I am," are an intentional and direct reference to the divine name which Jesus used to identify himself as Yahweh God. This claim is easily found to be false by a simple examination of the facts.

a. In the Greek Septuagint, the actual divine name revealed to Moses was not simply, "ego eimi," but was rather, "ego eimi ho on" which means "I am the being" or "I am the existence" or "I am the existent one" or some similar idea. Also, English translations which read as, "I AM sent me to you" are not translating "ego eimi sent me to you," from the Greek. The Greek reads "ho on sent me to you." (Exodus 3:14).

The translation, "Before Abraham was, I am," is certainly appropriate. The Greek literally says, "Before Abraham comes to be I am," or "Before Abraham came to be, I am."

b. At John 8:58, Trinitarians essentially have Jesus saying, "Before Abraham was Yahweh," which is nonsensical language. Moreover, it actually sounds like Jesus is suggesting Abraham became Yahweh and is referring to a time before Abraham was Yahweh. What Trinitarians do here is mental gymnastics. They want it to mean two different things at once. They want this single reference to mean two different things at the same time: (1) "I am," and (2) Yahweh. In other words, they want ego eimi to be a reference to Jesus declaration of existence but they also want ego eimi to be a self identification as Yahweh in the same breath. Put another way, they want to define ego eimi in two different ways simultaneously.

c. At Luke 22:33, when Peter said to Jesus, "I am prepared to go to prison with you and to death," shall we then say he used the words ego eimi to say to Jesus, "Yahweh is prepared to go to prison with you and to death?" When Jesus informed his disciples that one of them would betray him, his disciples used the words ego eimi saying, "Perchance I am" Were they asking Jesus if perchance Yahweh was the betrayer? And Judas himself then said to Jesus, "Perchance I am" Was Judas also asking Jesus if Yahweh was the betrayer? (Matthew 26:22,25). If we suppose the words ego eimi were to be understood as the divine name, when John the Baptist used the words ego eimi saying, "I am not the Christ" shall we also then say John the Baptist said, "Yahweh is not the Christ" (Jn 1:29; 3:28; cf. Acts 13:23)? The Trinitarian claim results in absurd implications.

d. Jesus used the term elsewhere in John where it is quite clear he did not intend to use a divine name. For example, the Samaritian woman said to Jesus, "I know that the Christ is coming," and Jesus responded to her, "I am who speaks to you." It should be obvious to anyone that Jesus uses the words ego eimi not for the purposes of claiming to be Yahweh but to let her know he is the Christ who she just mentioned. And we should not forget that Christ is God's Christ, His Anointed one (see Acts 3:18; 4:26; Revelation 11:15; 12:10).

e. The Blind man in the very next chapter identifies himself with the words ego eimi, "I AM" (9:9). The thought never occurred to anyone that the blind man was uttering a divine name for God. This fact should alone make it obvious to anyone that this type of language was common everyday language used by Greek speakers. Greek speakers used this expression much like we would say, "It is me." For example, when the disciples saw Jesus walking on water they were terrified for they thought they were seeing a spirit but Jesus said, "Do not be afraid, I am" (Matthew 14:27; John 6:20; cf. Luke 24:39) which obviously means, "Don't be afraid, it is not a spirit, it is me." "The blind man said ego eimi for the same reason. There is no need to suppose ego eimi is a necessary reference to God's divine name otherwise the blind man also used the divine name to identify himself.

So why don't Trinitarians claim this blind man was using the divine name? The answer to that question is plainly obvious: because it does not suit the Trinitarian agenda. They simply have granted themselves a license to claim the words "I am" mean "YAHWEH" at John 8:58 but these selfsame words do not mean "YAHWEH at John 9:9. In other words, ego eimi is a reference to the divine name only when Trinitarians want it to be and ego eimi is not a reference to the divine name when Trinitarians do not want it be.

f. Jesus previously used the words "ego eimi" in this same dialogue at verse 8:24, "Unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins." Instead of supposing Jesus was using the divine name, as Trinitarians imagine, they responded by saying, "Who are you?" There was absolutely nothing about Jesus' words that caused them to suppose he was claiming to be God.

g. Jesus had just said that these Jews could not understand what he was saying and could not hear what he was saying. However, Trinitarians dismiss Jesus' own words and insist they clearly understood Jesus at John 8:58.

h. This Trinitarian claim is usually presented as if Jesus suddenly broke out the words ego eimi in a shock and awe manner which provoked the Jews to anger since they would necessarily and immediately recognize those words to be the divine name of their God. However, the contextual facts demonstrate this is absurd and just the opposite is true. During this very same dialogue with the Jews in John chapter 8, Jesus used the term ego eimi several times before he used it at verse 8:58 (8:12,16,18,23,24,28). And through all these many utterances of ego eimi by Jesus, none of these Jews at any time ever supposed Jesus was referring to the divine name of their God. For example, when Jesus said, "Unless you believe that I am you wil die in your sins," the Jewish did not respond by supposing Jesus was claiming to be their God Yahweh. Instead, they did just the opposite by responding, "Who are you?" The thought that Jesus was using a divine name never even crossed their mind. At John 8:24-25, rather than recognizing the words ego eimi to be a direct reference to their God's divine name, the Jews had absolutely no idea who Jesus was claiming to be. But Trinitarians expect people to believe the claim that when Jesus used the same term at 8:58, the Jews immediately recognized, and necessarily would have recognized, ego eimi to be a reference to the divine name of their God.

The words ego eimi are used many times in the New Testament by several people. These words were part of their common everyday vocabulary. The expression ego eimi was common to everyday language for Greeks just as the words "I am" are common to our everyday language in English. Nobody regarded ego eimi as two Greek words uniquely reserved as the divine name of their God. Trinitarians are essentially trying to turn a routine language expression into the divine name of God to suit their doctrinal purposes.

B. The Pre-existent Person Claim

1. Angels can say "Before Abraham was I am."

Trinitarians often claim that if Jesus existed as a person before Abraham that he must therefore be God since only God could possibly exist before Abraham and still be existing. However, they are quite mistaken. The folly of this argument is seen when it is realized that many angels existed before Abraham and they are still quite alive and well, including Satan and his angels, and it seems to this writer that we can be quite certain that their pre-existence would not mean any of them are God.

Another false premise Trinitarians expect people to accept is that if we suppose Jesus did somehow pre-exist before Abraham then they get to suppose he was a divine second person of the Trinity hanging out with God in heaven. The problem here is that Arians believe Jesus existed before Abraham without believing he is God. To suppose Jesus pre-existed is not a license to resort to our imaginations and imagine up a pre-existent hypostases of a three-person-God.

C. The Trinitarian Blasphemy Claim

Trinitarian apologists also have an unwarranted interpretation of John 8:59 They claim the Jews wanted to stone Jesus because he was claiming to be Yahweh and so under their Law they thought he deserved stoning. Many Trinitarians will even disingenously claim that these Jews would not have attempted to stone Jesus unless he was claiming to be God suggesting that Jesus could have only blasphemed God by claiming to be God Himself.

Under the Law, the Jews could have stoned Jesus for blasphemy. Trinitarians often suggestively imply the only way Jesus could have blasphemed is by claiming to be God. This is simply not the truth. However, religious leaders of the same ilk also stoned Stephen to death. Was Stephen claiming to be God too? Anything which would be considered a derogatory claim about their God or a lie about their God would be considered blasphemy - anything which they thought smeared God's good name. You didn't need to claim to BE God to blaspheme God.

But the situation for Trinitarians is even worse. They need everyone to accept the premise that the Jews would never have stoned Jesus unless he had broken the Mosaic Law as if to say these men would never have stoned Jesus unless they thought he had somehow transgressed the Law. Trinitarians suggest that if they attempted to stone him they had a lawful reason to do so at least in their minds. But again they are sadly mistaken. Jesus testified to the contrary. He said the Pharisees were lawless hypocrites (Matthew 23:28) and in this very same dialogue with these Jews, he said to them, "You are seeking to kill me," and Jesus tells us why, "You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies" (8:44). Jesus identified these men as Lawless hypocrites, blind guides, thieves, liars, murderers, serpents, vipers, sons of Hell and sons of Satan. At this point, it should be quite clear that the Trinitarian suggestion that these men would never transgress the Mosaic Law is pitifully ridiculous.

Trinitarians are simply denying the words of Jesus who tells us these men were NOT righteous lawkeepers but lawless sons of Satan. Trinitarians also deny the words of Jesus who tells us in this selfsame context WHY these men desired to kill him. And he also tells us plainly that they were murderers. Murderers are not Law-keepers but Law-breakers. They wanted to kill Jesus and stone him because they did the desires of their father: the devil.

To claim that these men would only stone Jesus if he was claiming to be God, not only ignores the motives that men of the same stock had when they stoned Stephen, it also assumes that these men were righteous Law abiding Jews and it completely ignores what Jesus had just said about these men. He had called them children of the devil and as such indicated they were murderers who desired to kill him. These Jews were not attempting to stone Jesus to abide by the Law; they were attempting to stone Jesus because they were murderous sons of Satan who wanted him dead. That is the testimony of the Son of God.

Analysis of the Claim

1. Jesus Glorified Himself?

Jesus and the Jews were discussing who he thought he was and Jesus testified he did not seek to glorify himself (v. 50). He also said that if he did glorify himself that his glory meant nothing (v.54). But Trinitarians deny Jesus' own testimony on this matter and absurdly claim that he did indeed glorifying himself to these Jews in the highest possibly way - claiming to be their God - and glorifying himself means everything! And so Trinitarians not only deny Jesus' witness on the matter, they betray their own heart. That is something fleshly men would do, not Jesus nor anyone led by the Spirit of God. Jesus said he did not glorify himself but it was his Father who glorified him (8:54).

Who do you make yourself out to be?” Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing; it is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God.’"

Notice carefully that Jesus is responding to the question, "Who do you make yourself out to be?" And Jesus responds to this question by saying, "If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing." Jesus tells them plainly and clearly that if he glorified himself concerning WHO he was that his glory meant absolutely nothing. So to have Jesus glorifying himself in the highest way possible - by claiming to be their God - immediately after saying such a self glorification would meaning nothing, is ludicrous.

2. Jesus spoke the words of God

Now when forty years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in a flame of fire in a bush. When Moses saw it he wondered at the sight; and as he drew near to look, the voice of the Lord came, "I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob.' And Moses trembled and did not dare to look. (Acts 7:30-33 RSV).

Stephen testified that it was an angel through whom Moses had heard the voice of the Lord when God revealed His divine name to Moses (Acts 7:30-33). Angels are messengers. It was a angel of Yahweh, Yahweh's messenger, who said, "I AM THAT I AM" to Moses. Messengers of Yahweh deliver Yahweh's message; they speak Yahweh's words. That is what messengers do. In context, we would not suppose Yahweh's messenger is Yahweh himself because he said, "I AM THAT I AM. We would understand that a messenger of Yahweh spoke Yahweh's words and His words apply Yahweh Himself not the messenger. For some reason, Trinitarians do not seem to comprehend such basic facts.

Jesus testified many times, including this selfsame dialogue with the Jews, that his words were also NOT his own words but the Father's who sent him.

Jesus was God's Apostle (Hebrew 3:1) sent (apostello) by the Father.

[YAHWEH]: I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brethren, and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. (Deuteronomy 18:18; see Acts 3:22ff.)

For he whom God has sent utters the words of God, for it is not by measure that he gives the Spirit. (3:34).

My teaching is not mine, but His who sent me. (7:16).

I do nothing from myself but as my Father teaches me I speak. (8:28).

For I do not speak out of myself. The Father who sent me has himself given me commandment what to say and what to speak. (12:49).

Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak from myself but the Father who abides in me does his works. (14:10).

He who does not love me does not keep my words and the word which you hear is not mine, but the Father’s who sent me. (14:24).

I have given them the words which you gave me, and they have received them and know in truth that I [Your Word] came from you and they have believed that you have sent me.(17:8).

[YAHWEH]: I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brethren, and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. (Deuteronomy 18:18; see Acts 3:22ff.)

Yahweh put his words in His prophet's mouth. Jesus' words were not his own; they were his Father's words. Jesus was sent by the Father to speak the Father's words. "The words I say to you I do not speak from myself but the Father abiding in me does the works." So if Jesus spoke the words of the Father, then what did the Father say to the Jews at John 8:58? The Father said, "Before Abraham was, I am." Jesus' words were not his own but the Father's. So even if we supposed, just for the sake of argument, that Jesus said ego eimi as a divine name to refer to "YHVH," the Trinitarian still would have no case because as Jesus testified many times he spoke the Father's words. "I will put MY words in his mouth."

3. The Context

The Jews had asked Jesus if he claimed to be greater than their forefather Abraham. In their minds, they were great as the leaders of Israel yet there was no one greater among them than Abraham who was counted as a friend of God. It was for this reason they made claims like, "we have Abraham as our father" to justify themselves.

Do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, 'We have Abraham for our father'; for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham. (Matthew 3:9).

4. Before means Greater

Jesus said, "Before Abraham was, I am." In this selfsame Gospel, John gives us the very principle believed by Jews which brought them to this anger:

John testified concerning him and cried out saying, "This is he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me had came to be before me since he was first of me'" (1:15; cf. 1:30).

Obviously, this is the reason the Jews were angry at Jesus and wanted to stone him and not because they thought he was claiming to be Yahweh. These Jews had just asked Jesus, "Are you greater than our father Abraham?" Jesus' answer at John 8:58 was understood by the Jews to be, "Yes." This is what angered these murderous Jews. If Jesus was greater than Abraham, he was also greater than all of them. Jesus was before Abraham and thus greater than Abraham. And this is why these murderers wanted to stone him. Something greater than Jonah was here; something greater than the Temple was here; something greater than Solomon was here (Matthew 12:6, 41-42) but he was not as great as the Father (10:29; 13:16; 14:28) who glorifies him.

5. Abraham rejoiced to see my day

Jesus had just said that Abraham had rejoiced to see his Day. This made the Jews ask whether Jesus had seen Abraham because they could not understand how Jesus could know Abraham rejoiced about him unless he had seen him doing that rejoicing. But Jesus was the promised seed that would bless all the nations of the world as God had promised Abraham and this is what Jesus is talking about. Abraham rejoiced at this promise and Jesus is the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham. He rejoiced to see Jesus' day, that is, the fulfillment of God's promise to him.

This statement is about Abraham looking toward the future to Jesus' walk when he was headed toward the cross. What did Abraham see? He saw a reality that God had already conceived because Jesus' Messianic ministry had been predestined by God. John the Baptist had testified that the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world ranked higher than him because he was before him (1:29-30). The Lamb of God is that Lamb of God who had been slain from the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8). John writes this in the perfect tense in Greek which means it was done from the foundation of the world, finished. This was a reality before Abraham was. Reality begins with God and what God has conceived is reality whether or not it has yet come to pass in our time and space of creation. "Abraham rejoiced to see my day." Having seen the reality of God's promise to him, Abraham knew it was a finished reality. The Lamb had been slain from the foundation of the world.

Because Jesus is the Lamb who had been slain from the foundation of the world, he could say, "Before Abraham was, I am." This human Lamb has always been in the bosom of the Father (1:18), foreknown before the foundation of the world (1 Peter 1:19-20) and loved before the foundation of the world (Jn 17:24).

Conclusion

When all the facts concerning ego eimi are considered, the Trinitarian suggestion that these words would be immediately recognized as the divine name are proven to be laughably false. Even if we supposed for the sake or argument that Jesus uttered the divine name, we are still confronted with the fact that his words are not his own but the Father's who sent him. The Trinitarian suggestion that these Jews would never have broken the Law to stone Jesus is also demonstrated to be utterly false by Jesus himself and the testimony he gives right here in this selfsame context.

Jesus said he was before Abraham. This is because this human being was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. This human being had been in the bosom of the Father since creation since the man Jesus of Nazareth had been conceived in the Father, the Father's logos, the expression of the Father. God has been finished all His works from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3). God's human son has always been in the bosom of the Father because he was conceived in the love of the Father's heart before creation (cf. 17:24) This human being who had been slain from the foundation of the world has always been in the bosom of the Father and for that reason could say, "Before Abraham was, I am.

Last Updated: January 29, 2014