Leaderboard

No, that's what the Pharisees came away with, but they were deliberately obstuse all chapter. Jesus was teaching when they interrupted him and tried to entrap him with sparing that woman's life. They failed, and then they interrupted him directly and repeatedly, generally misunderstanding him while making themselves sound all holy. Jesus kept saying one thing, and the Pharisees kept saying he said something else. As for me, if they claim Jesus said one thing, I'm confident that whatever he said, it was something else. John 8:51-58 (KJV) 51 Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death. 52 Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death. 53 Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? 54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: 55 Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. 57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? 58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. They said he was possessed. They said he said people would never die instead of asking what he meant. Jesus was either an idiot or meant something else. Jesus was NOT an idiot. I believe Jesus was correct, and that he was smart enough not to mean they wouldn't ever drop dead. (All his disciples dropped dead-I don't think that was a shock to him.) Jesus said Abraham saw Jesus' day. Jesus' day was either when he was speaking, or a time yet to come when he said it. Abraham most assuredly was NOT alive when Jesus was born, let alone preaching. So, Jesus didn't mean Abraham was alive watching him. Few of us would contest that Jesus said that Abraham foresaw Jesus, saw a vision of Jesus or was otherwise informed by God Almighty of Jesus. Of course, they didn't even get that far. Jesus said Abraham (in the past, dead guy) saw Jesus (in the present and future, living guy.) They said Jesus said he, Jesus (present and future) saw Abraham (past.) Did Jesus mean that? He neither said it nor confirmed it, and they had a horrible track record of reporting what he actually said and meant. We can see that right here. Jesus then said what is under much contention. "Before Abraham was, I am." First of all, we're both just addressing what's actually said, which will save a lot of time. Jesus did NOT say "Before Abraham was, I was." That would have been a clear claim of preexisting Abraham, which is odd for him to do- especially after avoiding claiming he preexisted Abraham when he said Abraham saw him/his day. Jesus easily COULD have said something like "When I saw Abraham, I was pleased" or "When I met Abraham, he was glad". Instead, it was both non-interactive and one-sided. Abraham sure sounded like he preexisted Jesus about 2 verses back. But Jesus existed in the present, and seemed to understand that he did. He used the present tense in his verb about himself. He didn't make any claims of himself and the past. Abraham WAS. Past tense. I AM. Present tense. If I WAS, then I preexisted before the present. If I AM, then I exist in the present. So far, all clear. The only thing that isn't fairly straightforward is the word "BEFORE." It's being taken to mean a reference to existing in the past. This becomes peculiar. So, since we're talking of English, we can speak of the two meanings of "before." AFAIK, they should remain consistent with the Greek. The word "before" can refer to either PREEMINENCE, or of the PAST. If Jesus meant preeminence, then he said that his (Jesus) existence in the present was preeminent to Abraham's existence in the past. Compared to Jesus, Abraham is a footnote in human history-and Abraham knew it. IF that's what Jesus meant, then there's no confusion. Jesus came much later, but was much more important. And all the verses agree. If Jesus meant the PAST, then we saw him previously AVOID claiming to exist prior to Abraham. When they claimed he said he saw Abraham, he did anything but say "Yes." Jesus was in God Almighty's plans before Adam arrived. All God's plans, as they unfolded, had Jesus in mind centuries later and were planned with Jesus taken into account. (Maintain the bloodline, keep a remnant faithful, keep humanity alive...) That was true when Abraham was alive. Jesus was still very much a future reality as concerns existence, but in God's plan, he was almost an artifact of the blueprints. Jesus existed in the present, Abraham existed in the past- but Jesus' present existence "predated" Abraham who died long before Jesus was born because Jesus was the big plan. God knew it, and planned accordingly. Pieces were on the board thousands of years earlier than Jesus' birth only to play a bit part of Jesus' life. (Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego and other Jews were kidnapped and raised away from Israel- all so they could spread teachings to "wise men" (Magi) who would later appear and play their own small, necessary part in Jesus' early life. Magi: Here's some expensive, easy-to-sell stuff, Joseph! God: Joseph, move your family immediately- Herod wants you dead. Joseph: Good thing I have enough money to move immediately and provide for my family-carpenters aren't rich... Of course, that could even go both ways- Jesus, the preeminent one, "existed" in the plans long before he was born, "existing", so to speak, before he literally existed. Naturally, some people will disagree with me. However, I see this at least as PLAUSIBLE even if I disagreed with it, and it DOES explain how one could be born at time A and be referred to before that yet not be said to have been there. It was an oddly PRECISE phrase which, I think, is commonly read IMprecisely. However one interprets the accounts, one's overall view should account for ALL the verses so that they ALL make sense. No matter one's position, that means SOME verses will be harder to explain than others. Unless one begins with the premise that some verses won't make sense. I reject that premise just as the original poster did- but some do not. I can reiterate my point here, but for now, I don't think I have to. If Jesus was part of God's Plan from before Adam, and was written into the stars, and all the prophets spoke of him, then he assuredly had glory in God before his birth. Why would it be such a jump to think that Jesus would have glory "IN GOD" (who was all that existed before "In The Beginning") when God's plan for thousands of years revolved around him, from times predating 4000 BC to times following 2012 AD?