May 28, 2020

John 8:58 in Light of Muslim Objections




John 8:58 is considered by many to be the go-to text for the deity of Christ, thus it often comes into conversation with Muslims, as well as Jehovah's Witnesses, who likewise deny the deity of Christ. Lets look at the verse:

 "Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.' " (John 8:58 ESV) 

The last few words are the relevant part for our topic in this article ("Before Abraham was, I am"). This is often linked back to Exodus 3:14:

"God replied to Moses, 'I AM WHO I AM'. Say this to the people of Israel: I AM has sent me to you.' " (Exodus 3:14 ESV)

When we look at this, it is so clear that Jesus is claiming eternal preexistence before Abraham ever came into being, thus causing the Jews to pick up stones in order to kill him (v.59).

However, many Muslim apologists have attempted to provide a response. There are two main objections that I have heard over time, and I will go through only one of them in this article and show why it is not rational or evident in light of the exegetical evidence we are going to be looking at.



Objection: John 8:58 cannot be linked to Exodus 3:14 because Jesus uses the Greek words "ἐγὼ εἰμί" rather than "Ἐγώ εἰμι  ὤν" as God says to Moses in Exodus 3:14. The expression is different!



In order to evaluate this objection, we must understand the relationship between the Hebrew and LXX text of Exodus 3:14 and how they translate some of words/names used there. Here is a table to illustrate this:





אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה
Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν
אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה
Ἐγώ εἰμι 


We can deduce from this that when Jesus said "Ἐγώ εἰμι", the Hebrew equivalent would have been אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה. This appears in the other "less popular" portion of Exodus 3:14 - "I AM has sent me to you.", which many have said to be the more likely part that is being cross-referenced to John 8:58. 

In this verse, Jesus seems to be making a contrast between himself and Abraham. Here is the full phrase:

πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

The verb γενέσθαι is a form of the lexical Greek word γίνομαι, which means "to be, to come into existence". Jesus makes a contrast: Abraham came into existence and that he didn't always existed (γενέσθαι), whereas Jesus simply is, i.e. he has eternally existed (ἐγὼ εἰμί אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה).

Henry Alford in his exegetical commentary on the Greek New Testament notes the following about John 8:58:

"As Lucke remarks, all unbiased exegesis of these words must recognize in them a declaration of the essential pre-existence of Christ. All such interpretations of πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι, as 'before Abraham became Abraham,' i.e. father of many nations (Socinus and others), and of ἐγὼ εἰμί, as 'I was predestined, promised by God' (Grotius and the Socinian interpreters), are litter better than dishonest quibbles. The distinction between γενέσθαι and εἰμί is important. 'Antequam nasceretur Abraham, ego sum' (Erasmus.) The present εἰμί expresses essential existence, as in reff., especially Colossians 1:17, and was often used by our Lord to assert His divine being. In this verse, the Godhead of Christ is involved ; and this the Jews clearly understood [as a claim to deity], by their conduct to Him." (Henry Alford, The Greek New Testament [Exegetical Commentary], pg. 795-796, some italics added)


There is also evidence from the church fathers (the majority of whom were reading John 8:58 in Greek and knew the Old Testament [in this case, Exodus 3:14] like the back of their hand) that John 8:58 is a clear-cut tradition proving the deity of Jesus Christ:

- St. Irenaeus


"The sacred books acknowledge with regard to Christ, that as He is the Son of man, so is the same Being not a [mere] man; and as He is flesh, so is He also spirit, and the Word of God, and God. And as He was born of Mary in the last times, so did He also proceed from God as the First-begotten of every creature; and as He hungered, so did He satisfy [others]; and as He thirsted, so did He of old cause the Jews to drink, for the Rock was Christ (1 Corinthians 10:4) Himself: thus does Jesus now give to His believing people power to drink spiritual waters, which spring up to life eternal. (John 4:14) 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. (John 8:58) And as He was the servant of God, so is He the Son of God, and Lord of the universe. And as He was spit upon ignominiously, so also did He breathe the Holy Spirit into His disciples. (John 20:22) And as He was saddened, so also did He give joy to His people. And as He was capable of being handled and touched, so again did He, in a non-apprehensible form, pass through the midst of those who sought to injure Him, (John 8:59) and entered without impediment through closed doors. (John 20:26) And as He slept, so did He also rule the sea, the winds, and the storms. And as He suffered, so also is He alive, and life-giving, and healing all our infirmity. And as He died, so is He also the Resurrection of the dead. He suffered shame on earth, while He is higher than all glory and praise in heaven; who, though He was crucified through weakness, yet He lives by divine power; (2 Corinthians 13:4) who descended into the lower parts of the earth, and who ascended up above the heavens; (Ephesians 4:9-10) for whom a manger sufficed, yet who filled all things; who was dead, yet who lives for ever and ever. Amen." (Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus of Lyons, 52)
"Inasmuch, then, as all natural precepts are common to us and to them (the Jews), they had in them indeed the beginning and origin; but in us they have received growth and completion. For to yield assent to God, and to follow His Word, and to love Him above all, and one's neighbour as one's self (now man is neighbour to man), and to abstain from every evil deed, and all other things of a like nature which are common to both [covenants], do reveal one and the same God. But this is our Lord, the Word of God, who in the first instance certainly drew slaves to God, but afterwards He set those free who were subject to Him, as He does Himself declare to His disciples: I will not now call you servants, for the servant knows not what his lord does; but I have called you friends, for all things which I have heard from My Father I have made known. (John 15:15) For in that which He says, I will not now call you servants, He indicates in the most marked manner that it was Himself who did originally appoint for men that bondage with respect to God through the law, and then afterwards conferred upon them freedom. And in that He says, For the servant knows not what his lord does, He points out, by means of His own advent, the ignorance of a people in a servile condition. But when He terms His disciples the friends of God, He plainly declares Himself to be the Word of God, whom Abraham also followed voluntarily and under no compulsion (sine vinculis), because of the noble nature of his faith, and so became the friend of God. (James 2:23) 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 [John 8:58]), but that He in His goodness might bestow eternal life upon Abraham himself, inasmuch as the friendship of God imparts immortality to those who embrace it." (St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4.13.4, emphasis mine)


- St. Theodoret of Cyrrhus

"Orth - If then He was made flesh, not by mutation, but by taking flesh, and both the former and the latter qualities are appropriate to Him as to God made flesh, as you said a moment ago, then the natures were not confounded, but remained unimpaired. And as long as we hold thus we shall perceive too the harmony of the Evangelists, for while the one proclaims the divine attributes of the one only begotten— the Lord Christ— the other sets forth His human qualities. So too Christ our Lord Himself teaches us, at one time calling Himself Son of God and at another Son of manat one time He gives honour to His Mother as to her that gave Him birth; at another He rebukes her as her Lord. At one time He finds no fault with them that style Him Son of David; at another He teaches the ignorant that He is not only David's Son but also David's Lord. He calls Nazareth and Capernaum His country, and again He exclaims Before Abraham was I am. You will find the divine Scripture full of similar passages, and they all point not to one nature but to two." (Theodoret, Dialogues [Eranistes and Orthodoxus], Dialogue 2)

- St. John Chrysostom


"But wherefore said He not, Before Abraham was, I was, instead of I Am? As the Father uses this expression, I Am, so also does Christ; for it signifies continuous Being, irrespective of all time. On which account the expression seemed to them to be blasphemous . Now if they could not bear the comparison with Abraham, although this was but a trifling one, had He continually made Himself equal to the Father, would they ever have ceased casting stones at Him?" (Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homily 55, emphasis mine)

"For this same cause, neither do we find Him teaching everywhere clearly concerning His own Godhead. For if His adding to the law was sure to perplex them so greatly, much more His declaring Himself God."(Homily 16 on Matthew; emphasis mine)


- St. Augustine 

“… But from the tribe of Judah there came Our Lord Jesus Christ. For He is, as the Scripture says, and as you have but now heard, out of the seed of David born of Mary. (2 Timothy 2:8) But as regards the Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, wherein He is equal with the Father, He is not only before the Jews, but also before Abraham himself; (John 8:58) nor only before Abraham, but also before Adam; nor only before Adam, but also before Heaven and earth and before ages: for all things by Himself were made, and without Him there was made nothing. (John 1:3…) Nevertheless because Christ Himself is of the seed of David after the flesh, but God above all things blessed for ever, (Romans 9:5) He is Himself our King and our God; our King, inasmuch as born of the tribe of Judah, after the flesh, was Christ the Lord, the Saviour; but our God, who is before Judah, and before Heaven and earth, by whom were made all things, (John 1:3) both spiritual and corporal. For if all things by Himself were made; even Mary herself, out of whom He was born, by Himself was made….” (Augustine, Exposition on Psalm 76, emphasis mine)


- Origen


"In what follows, some may imagine that he says something plausible against us. If, says he, these people worshipped one God alone, and no other, they would perhaps have some valid argument against the worship of others. But they pay excessive reverence to one who has but lately appeared among men, and they think it no offense against God if they worship also His servant. To this we reply, that if Celsus had known that saying, I and My Father are one, and the words used in prayer by the Son of God, As You and I are one, he would not have supposed that we worship any other besides Him who is the Supreme God. For, says He, My Father is in Me, and I in Him. And if any should from these words be afraid of our going over to the side of those who deny that the Father and the Son are two persons, let him weigh that passage, And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul, that he may understand the meaning of the saying, I and My Father are one. We worship one God, the Father and the Son, therefore, as we have explained; and our argument against the worship of other gods still continues valid. And we do not reverence beyond measure one who has but lately appeared, as though He did not exist before; for we believe Himself when He says, Before Abraham was, I am. Again He says, I am the truth; and surely none of us is so simple as to suppose that truth did not exist before the time when Christ appeared. We worship, therefore, the Father of truth, and the Son, who is the truth; and these, while they are two, considered as persons or subsistences, are one in unity of thought, in harmony and in identity of will. So entirely are they one, that he who has seen the Son, who is the brightness of God's glory, and the express image of His person, has seen in Him who is the image of God, God Himself."(St. Origen, Against Celsus, Chapter 12)



- Gregory Thaumaturgus

How could it be said that the Son of God who is before the ages, and He who has appeared in these last times, are different, when the Lord Himself says, Before Abraham was, I am; John 8:58 and, I came forth from God, and I come, and again I go to my Father? (Gregory Thaumaturgus, Twelve Topics on the Faith, Topic 5)


- Athanasius


"It is plain then from the above that the Scriptures declare the Son's eternity; it is equally plain from what follows that the Arian phrases 'He was not,' and 'before' and 'when,' are in the same Scriptures predicated of creatures. Moses, for instance, in his account of the generation of our system, says, 'And every plant of the field, before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew; for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground Genesis 2:5.' And in Deuteronomy, 'When the Most High divided to the nations Deuteronomy 32:8.' And the Lord said in His own Person, 'If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, I go unto the Father, for My Father is greater than I. And now I have told you before it come to pass, that when it has come to pass, you might believe John 14:28-29.' And concerning the creation He says by Solomon, 'Or ever the earth was, when there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills, was I brought forth Proverbs 8:23.' And, 'Before Abraham was, I am John 8:58.' And concerning Jeremiah He says, 'Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you Jeremiah 1:5.' And David in the Psalm says, 'Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever the earth and the world were made, You are, God from everlasting and world without end. ' And in Daniel, 'Susanna cried out with a loud voice and said, O everlasting God, that know the secrets, and know all things before they be. ' Thus it appears that the phrases 'once was not,' and 'before it came to be,' and 'when,' and the like, belong to things originate and creatures, which come out of nothing, but are alien to the Word. But if such terms are used in Scripture of things originate, but 'ever' of the Word, it follows, O you enemies of God, that the Son did not come out of nothing, nor is in the number of originated things at all, but is the Father's Image and Word eternal, never having not been, but being ever, as the eternal Radiance of a Light which is eternal. Why imagine then times before the Son? Or why blaspheme the Word as after times, by whom even the ages were made? For how did time or age at all subsist when the Word, as you say, had not appeared, 'through' whom 'all things have been made and without' whom 'not one thing was made John 1:3?' Or why, when you mean time, do you not plainly say, 'a time was when the Word was not?' But while you drop the word 'time' to deceive the simple, you do not at all conceal your own feeling, nor, even if you did, could you escape discovery. For you still simply mean times, when you say, 'There was when He was not,' and 'He was not before His generation.' (St. Athanasius, Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse 1: Chapter 4:14) 

The Muslim interpretation that Jesus was not claiming to be God also lacks a ton of explanatory power as to why the Jews picked up stones in order that they could kill Jesus. This proves that the Jews clearly understood (interpreted) Jesus as claiming to be God. In Aramaic, this ("Before Abraham was, I am") may have been said as the following:

'Yeshua said to them: 'Timeless truth I speak to you: Before Abraham would exist, I AM THE LIVING GOD.' " (Aramaic Bible in Plain English)

In order to try to get around the clear declaration of deity made Jesus here in John 8:58, one has to do a whole lot of hermeneutical as well as intellectual gymnastics. We see that the only fair reading of the text, in the original language, in the context, is that Jesus Christ was proclaiming himself to be Yahweh. 








Zakir Hussain Fails to Refute my Article




A few days ago, I published an article called 'Burying Zakir Hussain's Arguments against the Crucifixion', in which I give some refutations of his arguments in his debate with James White. In the last two days or so, it has become the most viewed article on my blog. Several people contacted me saying that Zakir had responded to me on Twitter. It seems as though Zakir had read my article, which I was glad to hear. I was very curious with what Zakir had to say. Here is some of his thoughts: (I apologize for the blurry quality of the picture)

                                                          



First thing I thought was "okay, anything else?".  This is far from a refutation, rather this is just saying "Nothing new here, therefore my argument prevails!". Zakir seemed to imply that my response was nothing different from the ones made my other Christians before. The only two Christians I know of that gave some responses to Zakir are Allan Ruhl and Sam Shamoun. And none of them pointed out how Zakir quoted Raymond Brown's book The Death of the Messiah completely out of context. Here is what Zakir had to say when someone asked him about how I pointed out his problem with quoting Raymond Brown's material:


          



I have to say that I am very disappointed. This is the best he has got? Really? I never said that all of Raymond Brown's views were binding on him (he would have to accept the crucifixion of Jesus if that were the case!). I simply pointed out these points:

- Zakir cited Raymond Brown as support for his argument that due to Hebrews 5:7 and Psalm 116's connection as an early Christian hymn, that because Psalm 116 is speaking about someone being saved from death by God, this must refute the crucifixion of Christ.

-James White repeatedly pointed out that "saved by death" refers to resurrection. Zakir responded by insisting that "the plain reading of the text" supports his interpretation. 

-Raymond Brown, two pages after the one Zakir quoted (pg. 228) says that "saved by death" refers to resurrection. Thus, Zakir was being either dishonest or was ignorant of the fact that Raymond Brown himself refutes him two pages later than the exact page he cited in his opening statement. 

I have great respect for Zakir, since he seems like he does his research and reads lots of books in order to understand what Christianity really teaches, rather than just accepting what Ahmed Deedat or Zakir Naik says about Christianity and its beliefs. But why quote sources out of context like this? You need to understand what a source is saying before you quote as support for your argument. In the future, I hope to see a better response to my research regarding the arguments against the crucifixion made by Zakir Hussain in his debates with Christians, whether moderated or at Speaker's Corner. 








Eutyches and the Double Consubstantiality of Christ

  During the Home Synod of Constantinople, Eutyches was summoned multiple times to appear before the assembly of bishops. On one such instan...