The Great I AM -- A Fresh View of God for 2015

God has made Jesus both Lord and Christ – A Fresh View of God for 2015

The traditional Trinity Doctrine says that Jesus (the Son) has always been Lord and God, eternally Co-Equal to the Father. This presents some major problems in reconciling this doctrine with the Holy Scriptures as you can see here:

• ·         Acts 2:36 (ESV): “Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”
• ·         Matthew 28:18 (ESV): And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.”
• ·         Philippians 2:9 (ESV): Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,
• ·         Hebrews 1:4 (ESV): having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.
• ·         Acts 5:31 (ESV): God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.
• ·         Acts 10:38 (ESV): how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power. He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.
• ·         John 3:35 (ESV): The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand.
• ·         1 Corinthians 15:27-28 (ESV): For "God has put all things in subjection under his feet." But when it says, "all things are put in subjection," it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.

If Jesus has always been God Almighty, Lord of all, Co-Equal to the Father, then why and how did God the Father have to “give authority” to Jesus or to “make” Jesus become Lord? How was there ever a time when the Son did not possess His own divine name, but had to wait to “inherit” it? All of these inspired Scriptures simply do not harmonize with the idea that the Son has always been Co-Equal in authority to God the Father. That is why it is time for a…

A Fresh View of Christ Before He Became a Human

The Bible makes it clear that Jesus existed in Heaven as the Son and the Logos (Word) prior to becoming human flesh. The Trinitarians are absolutely correct on this point. (See John 1:1; John 1:10; John 1:14; John 3:13; John 6:38; John 17:5) The question remains, just what kind of being was the Son before He came to earth though?

Trinitarians will say He was the Second Person within Jehovah, the Almighty Supreme Being, co-existing equally with the Two other Persons within Jehovah: the Father and the Holy Spirit. As I have demonstrated by the Holy Scriptures listed above (and in the previous three parts in this “Rethinking the Trinity” Series), this traditional view simply does not fit the facts.

In Psalm 110:1 we see Jehovah making a promise to another Lord, the Lord of David, inviting Him to sit at His right hand until God places all of this Lord’s enemies under His feet. Jesus applied this passage to Himself, as did the Apostles and disciples. (Mark 12:36; Acts 2:34; 1 Corinthians 15:27-28) So we know that the Lord of David is Jesus. But, we can also see that at the time the words of Psalm 110:1 were spoken by Jehovah, Jesus was not yet sitting at the right hand of God because this was something God was inviting His Son to do. Why would God invite Jesus to do something which He has always been doing?

The New Testament makes it clear that God’s invitation to Jesus to sit at His right hand was actually fulfilled when Christ was resurrected and ascended to Heaven. (Acts 2:33-36; Hebrews 1:3; Ephesians 1:20-23; Acts 5:31; Hebrews 2:9; Hebrews 10:12) Nowhere does the Bible speak about Jesus being seated at the right hand of God prior to the invitation God makes to Jesus at Psalm 110:1-4.

My view is that there was a Heavenly ceremony at the time of the words of Psalm 110:1-4 (compare Daniel 7:13-14), where God anointed the Son into the position of Lord, Messiah, and High Priest, in preparation for His ministry on earth and His exaltation to Heaven afterward to sit at God’s right hand. Before this ceremony, Jesus did not have the title or position of “Lord.” This would explain why Acts 2:33-36 quotes Psalm 110:1 and says “God made Jesus be Lord and Christ.” How fitting that Jesus the Son of David, the Lord of David, would be anointed in a Heavenly ceremony around the same time David was anointed as King on earth!

(As a side-note, the reason why we can’t just say Jesus became Lord when He ascended to the right hand of God is because the Bible says Jesus was already Lord when He was born on earth [Luke 2:11; John 13:13-14], and Jesus Himself said He was Lord at the time David wrote Psalm 110 [See Matthew 22:43-45].) 

Okay, so Jesus was not “Lord” before the time of Psalm 110, then what was Jesus prior to that? Jesus was the Word of God, the Wisdom of God, the Firstborn of all creation, the Heir, the Image of the invisible God, the Artisan through whom God created the universe. (John 1:1-3; Proverbs 8:22-31; Colossians 1:15-18) God obviously loved His Son to the extreme, because Yahweh made all things FOR JESUS. (Colossians 1:16)

But if Jesus existed in Heaven before coming to earth, and if He was not the Lord God Almighty, does that mean….

Jesus was an Angel?

Often Trinitarians will argue that Jesus could not have been an angel, based on Hebrews chapter 1. In this chapter, it repeatedly asks the question, “To which of God’s angels did He ever say” the things which He said to Jesus. This is why many Trinitarians say it is impossible for Jesus to be an angel.

The Hebrew and Greek words for “angel” mean “messenger,” and the context determines whether it refers to a heavenly spirit messenger or to a human messenger. Hebrews 1 makes it clear that it’s referring to spirit messengers (Hebrews 1:7; Hebrews 1:14).

However, Hebrews 1 almost definitely is not denying that Jesus was a heavenly spirit being, since many other Scriptures testify to the fact that Jesus (and all beings in Heaven) are spirit in nature. (1 Corinthians 15:45-50; 1 Peter 3:18; Hebrews 12:22-24) John 4:24 even says that God is a spirit being. So it’s extremely doubtful that Hebrews 1 was saying Jesus was not a spirit being in Heaven before coming to earth.

Therefore, Hebrews 1 must have been comparing Jesus’ position of authority to those spirits who are in the position of being messengers. Hebrews 1 isn’t saying that Jesus never held the position or role of being a messenger, it is instead pointing out that Jesus was the only spirit messenger who was appointed Heir by God to inherit a far greater position and role than all of His companion spirit messengers (Hebrews 1:9), and was to inherit the Divine Family Name (authority) of Yahweh/Jehovah. (Hebrews 1:2, 4) This is why God makes a special commandment, announcing to all of the other spirit messengers that from now on, they must serve and worship the newly-appointed King, Lord, and Messiah, Jesus, who is no longer in the position of messenger. (Hebrews 1:6)

Jesus inherited the Divine Name Jehovah/Yahweh when He came to earth as a man, the long-foretold Messiah, the Davidic King, the Offspring of Abraham, the New Adam. That is why Jesus said God had given Him His Name. (John 17:11-12) Along with that Name, Jesus also was granted many new powers and much new authority as the New Adam, the Son of Man. (John 5:22-27) It was at this time, when He “brought His Firstborn into the world,” that God commanded all His angels to worship Jesus from now on, because of the new awesome power and authority He was granting Him, exalting Him above His angelic companions in position. This is why angels served and obeyed Jesus as a man on earth. (Mark 1:13; Mark 1:27; John 1:51; Matthew 26:53; Luke 22:43) 

In a sort of paradox, Jesus became lower than the angels in nature when He was on earth as a human, but He was granted new authority and power greater than all the angels in position.

Now we get to another fascinating topic: The Angel of the Lord.

Many Trinitarians, while using Hebrews 1 to argue that Jesus could not be an angel, at the same time will proclaim that Christ was “the Angel of the Lord” in the Old Testament, the special Messenger of Yahweh who spoke as Yahweh, referred to Himself as Yahweh, received worship, prayer, and sacrifices, and had the Name of Yahweh within Him. (Exodus 3:2; Exodus 23:20-22; Isaiah 63:9; Genesis 16:7-13; Genesis 18:1-22; Genesis 21:17-20; Genesis 22:11-18; Genesis 31:11-13; Genesis 48:16; Judges 6:11-24; Judges 13:15-23; Zechariah 3:2) These Trinitarians believe this Angel must have been Jesus (whom they say was Yahweh) because their doctrine and theology says only Yahweh can receive worship, prayer, and sacrifices.

I’m not sure I understand the Trinitarian logic of using Hebrews 1 to “prove” that Jesus cannot be an angel, at the same time you’re claiming that Christ was the Angel of the Lord. This seems to be a kind of cognitive dissonance on their part. But it's the same kind of cognitive dissonance I also had for about 10 years when I believed in the Trinity Doctrine. I suppose Trinitarians reason that Hebrews 1 is only comparing Jesus to created angels and not to the position of messenger. But as we’ve seen above, the argument in Hebrews was definitely about the position of the angels as compared to the position of Christ.

The best explanation is simply that before the Heavenly ceremony of Psalm 110, the Son was in the position of “angel” or “messenger,” (see Galatians 4:14; 1 Corinthians 10:4) but was the greatest of all the other “messengers.” The Bible definitely does speak of an angel who was the Captain or Chief of all the other angels. It refers to him as Michael the Archangel, the Prince of Israel. (Joshua 5:13-15; Daniel 10:21; Daniel 12:1-2; Revelation 12:7-13)

Now, there are many Christians who do not believe Jesus was “the Angel of the Lord” in the Old Testament, and that this special Angel was a created representative of Jehovah who held a highly-honored position of being able to use God’s Name and receive worship and prayer on Jehovah’s behalf. This is definitely a legitimate possibility.

The problem with this interpretation for Trinitarians is that it shows God’s representatives can receive worship and prayer on God’s behalf without committing blasphemy or violating the Shema. Thus they no longer have a leg to stand on with many of their favorite arguments. To quote Simon & Garfunkel and apply it to Trinitarian logic: “Any way you look at this you lose.”

Jesus may have been Michael the Archangel and the Angel of the Lord, or He may not have been. I definitely lean toward the belief that He was, based in large part on 1 Corinthians 10:4, Galatians 4:14, and Jude 1:5. Jude declares that it was Jesus who led the Israelites out of Egypt. This fits in perfectly with Christ being the Angel of the Lord who was inside the Pillar of Cloud. (Exodus 14:19) 

Either way, the Scriptures are very clear that Jesus was a spirit being living in Heaven before He came to earth, and two of His names or titles were “The Word” and “The Son.” (John 1:1-3; John 17:5)

Christ’s preexistence in Heaven as a spirit being also explains why Jesus said…

“Before Abraham Came Into Existence, I AM!”

In John Chapter 8, the Jewish leaders/Pharisees were in the middle of yet another public heated debate/argument with Jesus about His identity. Many things were brought up in this debate, but the heart of the argument was the true identity of Jesus and who He claimed to be and then the discussion shifted to how old Jesus is.

At John 8:24, 8:28, and especially John 8:58, many Trinitarians believe Jesus was using a form of Jehovah’s Divine Name “I AM WHO I AM” (Exodus 3:14-15), thus proving that Jesus is Jehovah. Other Trinitarians disagree. They think Jesus was quoting Jehovah’s Name from Isaiah, “I AM HE,” and others have a different view, that Jesus was using a phrase from Psalm 90:2 or perhaps one in Genesis. First we will examine John 8:58, then we’ll look at 8:24 and 8:28.

Some Trinitarian scholars don’t believe the “I AM” used by Jesus is a Divine Name at all, but they still say the unique structure of the sentence in Greek, with Jesus using the present tense instead of the past tense, and contrasting that with Abraham coming into existence, shows that Jesus was claiming to be eternal, having no beginning, thus still proving that He is Jehovah the Supreme Being.

Other scholars, at various times in the past, have disagreed with all of the above regarding John 8:58, and believe it should be translated in the past tense, with Jesus saying “I have existed.” (See the 1996 edition of the NLT, the Living Bible, the CEV, and other Bible versions).

So we can see that there isn’t a universal agreement on John 8:58 among scholars. The book entitled “Truth in Translation” (by Jason BeDuhn, Ph.D, historian of religion and culture and Professor of Religious Studies at Northern Arizona University) says that the action Jesus is describing (His existence) should be translated in a way which shows that it began to happen in the past before Abraham, and continues happening now. BeDuhn suggests that rendering it “I have been” is the closest and best equivalent we can get in English. BeDuhn quotes Smyth’s Greek Grammar to show that John 8:58 is in the “progressive perfect” tense or idiom, the same as is used in John 14:9 and John 15:27. (This is also referred to as “the historical present” by Koine Greek scholars) Those two verses have the exact same grammatical construct as John 8:58 in the Greek. In both of those passages, modern translations render the phrase as “have been” not “I am.” Why do modern Bible translators insist on rendering John 8:58 as “I AM” instead of “I have been,” as they translate those other two verses?

In addition, most modern English Bibles, even “thought-for-thought” versions, when they get to John 8:58, for some reason choose to keep the Greek word order, which makes for a strange reading in English. Why don’t they consistently render John 8:58 into English word order like they do for most other verses?

A further point on John 8:58: if Jesus was intending to use “I AM” as a Name here, it makes for a bizarre reading, since, shouldn’t He have said “I am the I AM,” instead of “I AM?” In other words, if we go with the argument that many Trinitarians are using for this verse, we end up with Jesus saying “Before Abraham came into existence, JEHOVAH!” instead of “Before Abraham came into existence, I am JEHOVAH!”

A major problem for the popular Trinitarian claim that Jesus was applying Exodus 3:14 to Himself, is that in the Septuagint (the Greek version of the Old Testament which existed in Jesus’ and the Apostles’ day) Exodus 3:14 has Jehovah declare “I am the Being” or “I am the One who Exists,” (EGO EIMI HO OHN in Greek) not “I AM.” (EGO EIMI) So Jesus was not quoting from the Septuagint, unless you want to claim that Jesus started a sentence and left it without an object. 

Additionally, at 2 Samuel 2:20 in the Septuagint, Asahel uses the exact same Greek phrase as Jesus at John 8:58, yet no one believes that Asahel was claiming to be Yahweh here.

Furthermore, many Trinitarian scholars are now agreeing that it may be best in English to translate the Hebrew Masoretic version of Exodus 3:14 as “I WILL BE,” not “I AM.” (See the ESV Study Bible and HCSB Study Bible notes on Exodus 3:14) Wikipedia says this: “Ehyeh asher ehyeh literally translates as "I Will Be What I Will Be", with attendant theological and mystical implications in Jewish tradition. However, in most English Bibles, in particular the King James Version, this phrase is rendered as I am that I am. … The word Ehyeh is used a total of 43 places in the Hebrew Bible, where it is often translated as ‘I will be.’”

If this is accurate, if Exodus 3:14 should be translated as “I WILL BE,” then there would be no connection at all to Jesus’ words at John 8:58. One might well ask, why would Trinitarians base such a huge doctrine as the Deity and Dual-Nature of Christ, on how the King James Version (and Latin Vulgate) translated a verse, and not on what the actual meaning from the Hebrew and Greek is?

Speaking of the Latin Vulgate, from my research, it appears that none of the Early Church Fathers ever claimed that Jesus was using the Divine Name in John 8:58 up until Saint John Chrysostom, around the time of the Nicene Council and the time that the Latin Vulgate was made, which rendered both Exodus 3:14 and John 8:58 with “I AM.” Prior to this, the Early Church Fathers simply said that John 8:58 proved that Jesus existed before Abraham was born. But, beginning with John Chrysostom, the idea began circulating that Jesus quoted the Divine Name from Exodus 3:14. Why did it take over 300 years for Christians to see a connection between John 8:58 and Exodus 3:14? The most reasonable answer is that the Nicene Council and, later, the Latin Vulgate had a great influence on how Christians began to interpret and understand the Scriptures.

The bottom line for John 8:58—Jesus was answering the Jews’ question about how old He was and how He was able to interact with Abraham (whom they viewed as the greatest human ever to live). Jesus was explaining that He was alive before Abraham was even born, that is how He was able to interact with Abraham. Nothing in the Greek or the context that shows Jesus was using the Divine Name or claiming to be without beginning. In fact, both Micah 5:2 and Proverbs 8:22 appear to show that Jesus did have an origin.

Now let’s discuss John 8:24. A common Trinitarian claim about 8:24 goes like this:

"At John 8:24, Jesus refers to Himself by the Divine Name 'I AM,' and then says that anyone refusing to accept Him as the I AM will die without having their sins forgiven. Therefore, Jesus must be the Great I AM, Yahweh, Jehovah, the Almighty."

When I was a strong Trinitarian for about 10 years, John 8:24 was the primary verse which, in my mind, showed the absolute importance of belief that Jesus was Yahweh. This verse would constantly come to the forefront in my thoughts whenever I had a doubt about the Trinity Doctrine or the Dual-Nature of Christ doctrines. I wanted my sins to be forgiven, and based on this verse, I was convinced that would only happen if I believed Christ to be Yahweh. (This verse is even used by some Trinitarians to say that everyone who doesn’t believe in the Trinity and/or that Jesus is Yahweh, will go to Hell for eternity.) Now I can say that I have a totally different outlook on John chapter 8 after a careful study in the Gospel of John (starting in 2013) and much research online and in Greek dictionaries, commentaries, and books by experts.

Many modern Bibles put the words “I AM” or “I AM HE” in all capital letters in John 8:24 because they are trying to show a connection to Exodus 3:14—they’re trying to show you that Jesus was using the Divine Name. However, there is simply no good reason to assume that He was doing this here. In the Greek, John 9:9 is worded the same way as John 8:24, yet John 9:9 was spoken by a regular human being. So, if saying "I AM" (ego eimi in Greek) means that a person is Yahweh, then the person in John 9:9 is also Yahweh. Also, John 9:9 is usually rendered in modern Bibles as “I am he” or “I am that one,” not “I am.” So really there’s nothing in the context requiring us to say Jesus was using the Divine Name at John 8:24.

Given the immediate context of John 8:22-23, Jesus is simply saying "Unless you believe that I am the One who came down from above from God the Father, then you will die without your sins being forgiven." In the past, even the Trinitarian NIV (1984) and NLT (1996) translations have interpreted and translated this verse as "Unless you believe that I am the One that I claim to be..."

Plus, just like with John 8:58, if we go with the popular Trinitarian interpretation of 8:24, we would have another oddball or bizarre reading, “Unless you believe JEHOVAH, you’ll die in your sins.” Jesus would have needed to say “Unless you believe that I am the I AM,” but He didn’t.

Now, in regard to John 8:28, the same argument applies which I just used for 8:24. The only thing I would add here, is that this would make for another bizarre reading in the popular Trinitarian interpretation. It would mean Jesus is saying, “Then you will know that I am JEHOVAH and that I can do nothing of My own initiative.” How can it be that the Almighty Supreme Being cannot do anything of His own initiative? This is borderline nonsensical and illogical. Furthermore, the “I am He” in John 8:28 would most naturally simply refer to the title “Son of Man” which Jesus used in the same verse.

For the sake of argument, though, let’s say Jesus was referring to Himself by the Divine Name “I AM WHO I AM” in John 8. Remember that John 17:11-12 says God the Father gave His Name to Jesus, and Hebrews 1:4 says that Jesus permanently inherited that Divine Name after His death and resurrection (Compare Philippians 2:9-11). So this alone (Jesus possessing the Divine Name) would not prove anything other than the fact that God gave His family Name of Yahweh/Jehovah to His Son.

Christ—The Wisdom of God

In my previous parts in this “Rethinking the Trinity” series, I briefly commented on the idea that Jesus was known as “God’s Wisdom” before coming to earth. I need to expand on that here and build my case for the argument that Christ is the Wisdom of Proverbs 8.

Wisdom speaks as a person and says that she was the first thing created by God, and that she was with God when He made the world and the things in it. Wisdom goes on to say she was the master worker or artisan at God’s side, taking delight in the human race. But why do many say this Wisdom is Jesus?

First off, the New Testament explicitly refers to Christ as “the Wisdom of God” at 1 Corinthians 1:24 and 1:30. Secondly, the Jewish writings known as the Apocrypha refer to the person of Wisdom as the Firstborn of creation (or first one created) and the Word from God’s mouth. (See Sirach/Ben Sira 24:3-9) Both of which are said about Christ in John 1:1-3 and Colossians 1:15. Third, very similar Greek wording is used to refer to Jesus in Revelation 3:14 as was used for Wisdom in Proverbs 8:22-24. Fourth, the things said about Wisdom having a role in creation as God’s master worker or artisan sound very similar to Colossians 1:16-17 and John 1:3 where Jesus is the One through whom God created all things.

These are the main reasons why there is an almost unanimous understanding among modern Bible translators and scholars (most of whom are Trinitarians) that the Logos (Word) from John 1:1-14 is the same Person as the Wisdom of Proverbs 8 and Sirach 24. This by itself does not prove it to be a fact, but it should make us seriously consider the possibility. You can look up the ESV Study Bible notes, the NIV Study Bible notes, the NLT Study Bible notes, the Catholic NAB notes, and many other Bible reference works, which all agree that Wisdom is the same as the Logos of John chapter 1 and/or the Firstborn of Colossians 1:15.

Finally, in Proverbs 8 and in Sirach 24, it says Wisdom was created or produced by God as His first creation. If this is only speaking about God’s quality of wisdom and not a person, then it doesn’t make sense. God would always have the quality of wisdom. There couldn’t have ever been a time when the omniscient God was lacking in wisdom and thus had to create it. Furthermore, if God was lacking wisdom, how would He have had the wisdom necessary to create wisdom or to know that He needed to create wisdom?

Given all of this information, it is much more reasonable to say that Wisdom was a person, the first thing ever created by Jehovah. And this understanding of Wisdom harmonizes perfectly with the descriptions of Jesus found in John 1:1-14, Colossians 1:15-19, and Revelation 3:14.