Matthew 28:18 - Was This God the Son Speaking?

Zechariah 12:8 -- As HaElohim, As an Angel of Jehovah

In that day shall Jehovah defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God [ha elohim], as the angel of Jehovah before them. -- Zechariah 12:8, American Standard Version.

But [Jehovah] will protect the people in Jerusalem. Even the man who trips and falls will become a great soldier like David. And the men from David’s family will be like gods—like [Jehovah]’s own angel leading the people. -- Easy-to-Read Version; We have placed "[Jehovah]" where God's Holy Name appears in the Hebrew.

On that day Yahweh will defend those who live in Jerusalem so that even those who stumble will be like David, and David’s family will be like Elohim, like the Messenger of Yahweh ahead of them. -- Names of God Bible.

In that day, Jehovah will defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem. He who is feeble among them at that day will be like David, and the house of David will be like the mighty ones, like an angel of Jehovah before them. -- Restoration Light Improved Version.

In the Hebrew, there is no definite article attached to "angel". Translators add the definite article "the" before angel, thus making it appear to refer to one specific angel, which many, based on the false teaching that there is only one "angel of Jehovah". Many would demand that this one angel is the prehuman Jesus. Many also mistakenly link "before them" to the angel spoken of in Exodus 23:20, which refers to an angel going ahead of the Israelites. Then, based on the imagined assumption that this angel is Jesus, they claim that the angel of Zechariah 12:8 is the Lord Jesus, who they usually claim to be God. They would evidently desire HaElohim to be speaking of an angel of Jehovah, although the scripture does not actually state what is being imagined and assumed. Indeed, we haven't found anything in any version of Zechariah 12:8 that calls any "angel of Jehovah" "God" (HaElohim). That thought has to read into what is stated. 

More than likely, however, HaElohim in Zechariah 12:8 is not referring to the Supreme Mighty One. It could be referring to kings, princes, in general as a class of mighty ones, "gods", similar to the way the KJV applies it in Exodus 21:6; 22:8,9,28. It is our conclusion that HaElohim in Zechariah 12:8 refers to angels, as in Psalm 8:5 (Hebrews 2:7). 

Benson states that it refers to "angels, as the word אלהים, Elohim, is rendered, Psalm 8:3". [Evidently this was meant to be Psalm 8:5] -- Benson Commentary on the Old and New Testaments.

The Hebrew does not have the linking verb, which many translations supply as "shall be" or "will be", which matches the context of "in that day", indicating the future.

With the above in mind, we believe the better rendering to the final part of the verse should be: "the house of David shall be as the mighty beings [ha elohim], as an angel of Jehovah before them." This could be seen as paralleling "an angel of Jehovah" as representative of the ELOHIM being referred to.

Many believe the house of David refers to those of old who had faith as spoken of in Hebrews 12. Antitypical, we believe it could be seen also as referring to the church, and David himself represents Jesus, as in Psalm 16:9-11 (Acts 2:25-36) and Ezekiel 34:23,24; 37:24 (John 10:11,14,16,29; Acts 3:15; 5:30), the head of the church. Every member of the church will indeed have to become like Jehovah, in God-like character. This includes all who belong to Jesus in this age (irrespective of what reward one receives), as well as the "other sheep" of the age to come. If the antitypical "house of David" is limited to Jesus and joint-heirs with him, every one of these will not only be like the mighty ones, like an angel of Jehovah who is before the house of David, but they will evidently be exalted with Jesus above these mighty angels of Jehovah, and be given all power with Jesus.

Regardless, there is no mention in this verse, or anywhere else in the Bible, of a triune God, or that the Son of God is his own God and Father. Jehovah is definitely not presented as being more than one person. 

Even if HaElohim is referring to Jehovah, it should not be understood as applying HaElohim with such a meaning to an angel of Jehovah. 

We certainly should not conclude that the house of David is actually an angel of Jehovah, but rather that the preposition, rendered as "as" or "like", designates that the house of David is to become like the ELOHIM (angels), that is, like an angel of Jehovah. The idea that the House of David is Jehovah, or a person of Jehovah, etc, certainly has to be imagined, assumed, added to, and read into what is stated. The same is true of the expression "angel of Jehovah".

John 8:58 - Before Abraham was God?

One, evidently a Unitarian who does not believe in the prehuman existence of Jesus, has presented the idea that the Greek phrase in John 8:58, often transliterated as “prin Abraam genesthai ego eimi”,  should be rendered as “before Abraham was God”. This is based on the assumption that “ego eimi” is being used in John 8:58 as the name often transliterated as EHJEH (from the Masoretic text) in Exodus 3:14. 

We have no scriptural reason to think that when Jesus spoke the words often transliterated as EGO EIMI in John 8:58, that he was using the Holy Name EHJEH of Exodus 3:14. Jesus was responding to the Jews' question regarding his age, stating that he, himself, had been in existence before Abraham. They did not ask if God existed before Abraham, for I am sure that they already knew that God existed before Abraham. 

It was claimed that John 8:58 should be rendered as “God (Ehyeh) was before Abraham”, because “Yeshua's life started when he was born on earth, as you can see in Luke 2:52”. Of course, there is nothing in Luke 2:52 that says that Jesus did not have a life in heaven with his God before he was made flesh, so the idea has to be assumed, added to, and read into what is stated in that verse.

The problem would be with the Greek application of the Greek verb often transliterated as “genesthai”, which is rendered as “was” in the rendering “Before Abraham was God”. This rendering would make the subject of genesthai to be “EGO EIMI”. Evidently, such an application of “EGO EIMI” is that with the thought that Ego Eimi is a name, and thus is used as a noun, and as the subject of genesthai. Evidently, this is thought to correspond with the way the third usage of EHJEH in Exodus 3:14 is used as a noun, designating the first-person verb form of God's Holy Name, which is presented in the third-person verb form, often rendered into English as “Jehovah” or “Yahweh”, in Exodus 3:15.

We do not know of any usage of Ego Eimi in the manner anywhere in the Greek NT, or even in the LXX of the Old Testament, that does such with the Greek phrase EGO EIMI. 

In the Bible, Hebrew names from the Old Testament are usually translated, but the sound of the Hebrew is adapted and given a Greek form. If Jesus had intended to use the Holy Name of Exodus 3:14, it would have been extraordinary for him to not bring that name into Greek, adapted from the Hebrew sounding of that name.

Another problem is with the word genesthai. Unlike EIMI, which pertains to being or existence, genesthai, carries with it a meaning of coming into existence.  To use EGO EIMI as the subject of genesthai would make Jesus' God appear to have come into existence before Abraham. 

I put the given rendering into Google's AI, and got the following results:

No, the Greek phrase "EGO EIMI" cannot be used as a noun and the subject of the Greek word "genesthai" in John 8:58.

Here is a grammatical breakdown of the relevant part of the Greek text (πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγὼ εἰμί - prin Abraam genesthai, ego eimi):

prin: This is an adverb/conjunction meaning "before".

Abraam: This is the noun "Abraham", in the accusative case, which functions as the subject of the following infinitive genesthai in this construction.

genesthai: This is an aorist infinitive verb, meaning "to become", "to come into being", "to be born", or "to arise". In this context, it refers to Abraham's birth or existence. The subject of an infinitive in Greek typically appears in the accusative case.

ego eimi: This is a complete clause on its own.

ego: This is the first-person singular personal pronoun, meaning "I". It is the subject of eimi.

eimi: This is the first-person singular present active indicative form of the verb "to be", meaning "I am", "I exist", or "I live". 

The phrase "EGO EIMI" functions as the main verb and its subject in the independent clause, while the entire phrase "prin Abraam genesthai" functions as an adverbial clause modifying the main clause, indicating the time of the action (before Abraham was born). "Abraam" is the subject of genesthai. 

Therefore, "EGO EIMI" is not a noun, nor is it the subject of genesthai. The structure of the sentence means: "Before Abraham came into being, I exist" (or "I have been in existence"). 

Nevertheless, Jesus' statement that his God and Father was in existence before Abraham does indeed not answer the question, “You are not yet fifty years old! Have you seen Abraham?” -- John 8:57.

Links to Related Studies

Genesis 34:7 – The Firstborn Nation, Israel

John 5:18; 10:33 - The Jews Sought the More to Kill Him

 John 5:18; 10:33 - The "Cause" to Kill Jesus

For this cause therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only brake the sabbath, but also called God his own Father, making himself equal with God. -- John 5:18, American Standard Version.

The Jews answered him, For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. -- John 10:33, American Standard Version.

Some time ago one claimed, in a post that no longer exists, that John did not say that it was the Jews who were claiming that Jesus was equal with God, but rather that they only took issue with Jesus calling God his father. This would seem to seek to separate "called God his Father" from "making himself equal to God." It appears to be saying that the Jews objected to Jesus' referring to God as his father, but did not equate this with being equal to God, but that rather it is John himself (not the Jews), who supplies the information that it is making himself equal with God, and that "the idea that it was just their [the Jews'] opinion is merely an assumption not found in the text."

Did John say that the reason that the Jews gave for killing Jesus is accurate? Would this not make make what Jesus said in John 10:32 incorrect? Actually, the ending phrase of John 10:32 gives the reason -- from the perspective of their argument -- as to why the Jews were objecting to Jesus' referring to his God as his Father. In view of the Jews' claim recorded in John 10:33, wherein they stated that Jesus was a man making himself out to be God (or a god), the default reasoning is that John was simply defining the Jewish "cause" to kill Jesus in John 5:18. Indeed, it really doesn't make sense to say that they were only objecting to Jesus referring to God as his Father, without there being some reason for such objection based on Jewish law, and such a reason would have to be such that it would offer a "cause" for killing Jesus.

Of course, the Jewish leaders could have been speaking of "god" in a more general way as the angels are referred to as "gods" (Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:7), or similar to the way the sons of the Most High are "gods". (Psalm 82:6) Jesus, by claiming to have come down from heaven from God, was indeed claiming to have been such a god -- a mighty spirit being -- before he became flesh with a glory a little lower than the angels. (John 1:14; Hebrews 2:9) John wrote of this in John 1:1, where John spoke Jesus as "the Word" before being made flesh. John used the Greek for "God/god" of Jesus, but obviously not with the meaning of being the "one God" from whom are all. (1 Corinthians 8:6) If this is what is meant in John 5:18, then the final statement is partly true, for Jesus was such a divine being before he became flesh, but it was not true at the time the Jews were making their accusation because Jesus did not have that divine glory while he was in the days of his flesh. -- John 17:5; Hebrews 5:7.

See our Links to Studies Related to John 1:1

See also our study: 
Who Are the Gods?

Nevertheless, since Jesus is not Jehovah, the "one God" from whom are all (1 Corinthians 8:6), Jesus' calling his God his Father would not make him equal to the exclusive glory of the Most High, nor equal to the Supreme Being, as possessing the glory of being "one God" from whom are all. If this is what is meant, such an assumption would be that made by the Jewish leaders, for Jehovah is called "our Father" in 1 Chronicles 29:10; Isaiah 63:16; 64:8, without any thought that this makes the people of Israel equal to Jehovah.

Jehovah Himself confirms his being a Father to Israel as recorded in Jeremiah 3:19; 31:9.

Likewise, Jesus instructed his followers to refer to God as "our Father" (Matthew 6:9) and many times referred to his God as being the Father of his disciples (Matthew 5:16,45; 6:1,4,6,8,15,18; 7:11; 10:20,29; 18:4; John 20:17, etc). Paul spoke of God as "our Father" (Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:3; 2 Corinthians 1:2; Galatians 1:3; Ephesians 1:2; Philippians 1:2; Colossians 1:2; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 2 Thessalonians 2:16; Philemon 1:3) without any thought that such makes one equal to God.

Jesus, however, was just not a son of God, he was "the" Son of God, the only one who was begotten directly from God, being the firstborn (first to be brought forth) of God. (Colossians 1:15) Whether the Jews understood this or not, the Bible does not say, but Jesus' parable indicates the Jews did know he was the heir sent from God but did not want to accept him as such. -- Matthew 21:38.

For more regarding Jesus as the firstborn creature, see:
Studies Related to Jesus as Firstborn

However, the one to whom we originally responded claims that John, by his statement recorded in John 5:18, was not just reporting any reason of the Jews for killing Jesus, but that John evidently meant that the Jews were simply "balking at what Jesus was saying". We have no reason to imagine and assume such. Indeed, we are not sure how one could read John 5:18 and come to such a conclusion, for it is plainly stated: "for this cause therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because ..., but also". John does indeed record two different legal causes that the Jews were claiming for killing Jesus. 

It was claimed that John calls Jesus "God" throughout his gospel, evidently by "God" meaning the Supreme Being, and a list of scriptures is given where, evidently, it is alleged that John calls Jesus "God", although when we look at those scriptures, we do not find what is being claimed: John 1:1; 1:18; 5:18; 5:23; 8:58; 9:38; 10:33, 36; 12:41 and 20:28. Other scriptures are given for comparison: Romans 9:5; Titus 2:13; 2 Peter 1:1; Hebrews 1:8; Philippians 2:6; Colossians 1:19; 2:9.

Most of the scriptures we have examined in studies online. One can go to our Scriptures Examined page, and follow the links to find studies related to these scriptures.

We do not believe that John ever intended anything he wrote to mean that he was saying that Jesus is the Supreme Being, the "one God" from whom are all. (1 Corinthians 8:6) In a very, very few instances, the Greek word for "God" is applied to Jesus, but obviously not with the meaning of Supreme  Being, but with a more general meaning of a mighty one. In Biblical Hebraic usage, the Hebrew/Greek words that are often translated as "God/god" can be used in other ways than simply designated the Supreme Mighty One or false gods. See our study on the Hebraic Usage of the Titles for "God".

Hebrews 2:9 and the Alleged Incarnation

Colossians 1:15 - Firstborn of the World?

Exodus 4:22 – The Firstborn Nation, Israel