In the heart of the Judeo-Christian tradition lies a mystery as ancient as it is profound — namely, the nature of God from the Biblical perspective. In surveying the Bible and its traditions, one reasonably asks: who is God, and what is his essence?

When God introduces Himself to Moses in Exodus 3:14 with the enigmatic declaration “I AM THAT I AM,” and centuries later, Jesus echoes this divine self-identification in John 8:58, stating, “Before Abraham was, I am,” we stand before the threshold of eternity, invited to ponder the essence of being itself.

These scriptural moments are not merely historical footnotes but foundational to understanding divinity’s nature. Through the philosophical concepts of Natura Naturans and Non-Aliud, we find unique lenses to explore this revelation. We must examine these proclamations’ linguistic and philosophical underpinnings to understand this revelation properly.

Philological Connotations of Exodus 3:14

In Exodus 3:14, God’s self-identification to Moses as “I AM THAT I AM” (אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה, Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh) is rich with ontological significance. The Hebrew verb אֶהְיֶה (Ehyeh) is derived from הָיָה (hayah), meaning “to be” or “to become.”

This phrase denotes God’s self-existence and His dynamic and ever-present nature. God is not a static being confined to past actions or future promises; He is perpetually in the act of being, underscoring His immanence and transcendence.

The repetitive structure of “I AM THAT I AM” emphasizes the absoluteness and singularity of God’s existence, setting Him apart from creation's contingent and temporal beings. Just as the name revealed in Exodus carries deep meaning, so does Jesus’s self-defined divine title in the New Testament.

Philological Connotations of John 8:58

In John 8:58, Jesus’s declaration, “Before Abraham was, I am” (πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγὼ εἰμί, prin Abraam genesthai, egō eimi), resonates deeply with the aforementioned Exodus passage. The Greek phrase ἐγὼ εἰμί (egō eimi), “I am,” echoes the Septuagint’s rendering of God’s name in Exodus.

The use of the present tense εἰμί (eimi) contrasts sharply with the aorist infinitive γενέσθαι (genesthai), “to become,” associated with Abraham. This contrast is not merely temporal but ontological, distinguishing Jesus’s eternal existence from Abraham’s created and historical existence. Jesus’s use of ἐγὼ εἰμί directly ties His identity to the divine name revealed to Moses, asserting His pre-existence and unity with the God of Israel.

In addition to the rich linguistic foundations of the divine name, philosophical conceptualizations also provide a window into God’s essence.

God as Natura Naturans: The Self-Creating Nature

In his rational conceptualization of God, Baruch Spinoza introduced the term Natura Naturans to describe nature's active, self-creating aspect, or nature in its creative, dynamic action. This concept illuminates God's self-sufficiency and eternal creativity when applied to the divine “I AM” of Exodus 3:14.

As Spinoza articulates in a Short Treatise on God, Man & his Wellbeing:

Here, before we proceed to anything else, we shall briefly divide the whole of Nature into Natura naturans and Natura naturata. By Natura naturans we understand a being that we conceive clearly and distinctly through itself, without needing anything other than itself (like all the attributes which we have so far described), that is, God. The Thomists have also understood God by this phrase, but their Natura naturans was a being (as they called it) beyond all substances. We shall divide Natura naturata in two: a universal and a particular. Unlike anything else, God’s being is not derived from another; He is the uncaused cause, the primal force behind all creation. In this light, the biblical God emerges not as a being among beings but as Being itself, continuously in the act of self-creation and the sustenance of all that exists. The universal consists in all those modes which depend on God immediately. We shall treat them in the next chapter. The particular consists in all those singular things which are produced by the universal modes. So Natura naturata requires some substances in order to be conceived properly. Turning now to universal Natura naturata, or those modes or creatures which immediately depend on, or have been created by God-we know only two of these: motion in matter, and intellect in the thinking thing. We say, then, that these have been from all eternity, and will remain to all eternity, immutable, a work truly as great as the greatness of the workman. With regard particularly to motion, it belongs more properly to a treatise on natural science than here, [to show] that it has been from all eternity, and will remain to all eternity, immutable, that it is infinite in its kind, that it can neither exist nor be understood through itself, but only through extension. So we shall not treat any of these things here, but shall say only that it is a Son, product, or effect, created immediately by God. As for intellect in the thinking thing, this too is a Son, product, or immediate creature of God, also created by him from all eternity and remaining immutable to all eternity. Its sole property is to understand everything clearly and distinctly at all times. From this arises immutably a satisfaction infinite, or most perfect, since it cannot omit doing what it does. And though what we have just said is sufficiently clear through itself, we shall nevertheless prove it more clearly later when we treat of the affections of the soul. So we shall say no more about it here.

Jesus as the Embodiment of the Non-Aliud

On the other hand, the Catholic philosopher Nicholas of Cusa employs the term Non-Aliud — the “Not-Other” — to express the idea that God, as the absolute maximum, cannot be anything other than anything, for He encompasses all. God is Not-Other than God — i.e., not other than no other.

All things define themselves in accordance with this principle of Non-Aliud — for instance, I am not other than Daniel Lehewych.

In John 8:58, Jesus’s claim to pre-existence and unity with the “I AM” draws a direct line to this notion. In Christ, the Non-Aliud becomes incarnate, demonstrating that the divine essence, which permeates all but is not other than any, chose to manifest in human history –he is the standard by which things are defined, qua God as self-defined and self-caused.

Jesus embodies the paradox of the infinite expressing itself in the finite, inviting humanity into a relationship with the Not-Other, who is intimately connected with the fabric of our being and yet transcends all categories of existence.

Synthesis and Salvation in Finitude

In these scriptural revelations, we see an assertion of identity and an invitation into the mystery of existence. The Natura Naturans and Non-Aliud provide philosophical frameworks that help us grasp the unfathomable: a God who is both the source of all being and intimately present in the unfolding of history.

Through Jesus, this eternal “I AM” enters time and space, offering a path to salvation that is both a return to our essence and an embrace of a reality beyond ourselves. In the dialogues between Moses and God and centuries later between Jesus and the Pharisees, we encounter a divine call to recognize and align with this fundamental reality. To know God as Natura Naturans and Non-Aliud is to see all of creation, including ourselves, as expressions of the divine “I AM”.

In Spinoza’s Theological-Political Treatise, he presents Christ as the pinnacle of philosophy, embodying the highest ethical teachings and understanding of God accessible to humanity. He reflects on the unique manner in which Christ attained a supreme level of spiritual perfection, emphasizing that God communicated directly with Christ, bypassing the need for words or visions. This form of divine revelation imparted directly to Christ’s mind contrasts the way God revealed Himself to Moses and signifies a profound intimacy and understanding between Christ and the divine. Spinoza notes, “God revealed himself to the apostles through Christ’s mind as formerly he had revealed himself to Moses through a heavenly voice. And therefore, Christ’s voice, like the one Moses heard, can be called the voice of God”​​.

This passage highlights the idea that physical senses or external manifestations did not mediate Christ’s insight into God but was a direct, mind-to-mind communion with the divine essence, from which he is indistinct. Hence, sub species aeterni is a higher-order mode of self-communication, for one sees themselves therein as an aspect of the divine, not merely (nor at all) its subject or object. This exceptional mode of revelation illustrates the concept of sub specie aeterni, as temporal or physical limitations did not constrain Christ’s understanding and conveyance of divine wisdom but were reflections of eternal truths directly perceived from the divine perspective.

Spinoza argues aptly that Jesus’s unique insight into God, or sub specie aeterni, was not a claim to divinity in a traditional sense (for that is beyond the scope of Natura Naturans, qua superstition) but a profound realization of the unity with God that all humans can aspire to through understanding and virtue. This perspective suggests that while Jesus experienced an unparalleled alignment with the divine, his mission encourages us to recognize our potential to achieve a similar understanding and ethical living within our human limitations.

In the sacred encounters narrated in Exodus 3:14 and John 8:58, we are invited to explore the essence of being through sub specie aeterni, the lens through which Jesus experienced His unity with the “I AM.” While illuminating the eternal, this divine perspective also frames the human condition within its vast expanse — our limited aspect in and of eternity.

Jesus, embodying this perspective of sub species aeterni, navigated His earthly ministry with a profound awareness of the divine, yet through a human lens. This narrative invites us to recognize our own potential to tap into the divine essence — much like Elijah and Elisha in the Book of Kings or Alyosha in Dostoyevsky’s The Brother’s Karamazov — achieving a semblance of the divine power within our human limits. In doing so, we acknowledge our humanity while embracing the transformative possibility of aligning our spirit with the eternal “I AM,” guiding us towards a deeper understanding and expression of our inherent, yet finite, divine nature.