Preexistence (Part 1)

This topic contains 9,997 replies, has 92 voices, and was last updated by  Admin 3 years, 11 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #54092
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 69,480

    Hi not3,
    He was given the kingdom.
    He only asked to have the glory again.
    Jn 17
    1These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

    2As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

    3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

    4I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

    5And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

    Phil; 2
    9Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

    10That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

    11And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

    Dan7
    13I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

    14And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

    #54096
     Not3in1 
    Member
    • Topics started 14
    • Total replies 6,698

    Well, that certainly is not the glory he had before (if he was preexistent), right?

    #54097
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 69,480

    Hi not3,
    Greater glory.

    #54102
     Not3in1 
    Member
    • Topics started 14
    • Total replies 6,698

    Yep. Something to ponder….. It's so late here, I better get some sleep. Thanks for the information and chat, Nick. I am hoping to learn by defending what I think I know (ha) :) Have a good night.

    #54109
     Adam Pastor 
    Member
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 326

    Quote (Not3in1 @ May 30 2007,06:24)

    Quote (t8 @ May 30 2007,15:29)
    Micah 5:2
    “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.”


    The Father is the Ancient of Days, himself, whose origins are not even measurable.  Jesus comes from such a Father.  This does not mean that Jesus, himself, was alive during these “ancient times,” it only says that the one who comes out of Judah will have ancient origins.  Anyway, this is my take.  It certainly looks like it can lend itself to both your view and mine.


    AMEN! AMEN!  :)

    Concerning Micah 5:2

    #54112
     Adam Pastor 
    Member
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 326

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2007,00:29)
    Hi AP,
    Number 1083
    Transliteration:
    gennesis {ghen'-nay-sis}
    Word Origin:
    from 1080
    Part of Speech:
    adjective
    Usage in the KJV:
    birth 2

    Total: 2
    Definition:
    begat, engendering
    nativity, birth


    Genesis means beginning as in e.g.
    “In the Beginning
    And of course, Genesis deals with the beginning of the heavens & the earth, mankind, etc.

    (Mat 1:1)  The book of the generation (genesis i.e. beginning) of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

    (Mat 1:18)  Now the birth (genesis i.e. beginning) of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

    BTW FYI
    Because of
    (a) the obvious meaning of the word genesis; and
    (b) the fact that Matthew uses this word twice to describe
    the genesis i.e. beginning of Jesus the Christ [Matthew 1:1,18]
    which of course contradicts trinitarian (as well as arian) preexistence/theology …

    Catholic scribes therefore added an extra 'n' to genesis in verse 18 in order to change
    the context from beginning/origination to birth
    Source: The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Bart Ehrman, (1993), p. 75-76;

    Like I said, FYI

    #54115
     Not3in1 
    Member
    • Topics started 14
    • Total replies 6,698

    Quote (Adam Pastor @ May 31 2007,03:22)
    Because of
    (a) the obvious meaning of the word genesis; and
    (b) the fact that Matthew uses this word twice to describe
    the genesis i.e. beginning of Jesus the Christ [Matthew 1:1,18]
    which of course contradicts trinitarian (as well as arian) preexistence/theology …

    Catholic scribes therefore added an extra 'n' to genesis in verse 18 in order to change
    the context from beginning/origination to birth
    Source: The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Bart Ehrman, (1993), p. 75-76;

    Like I said, FYI


    Adam, interesting stuff! Thank you for adding this; I'll do some ivestigating on my own with this information.

    By the way, your Avatar (is that what our little pictures by our names are?) freaks me out a little bit – I like it :)

    Feel free to jump in here anywhere, Adam. I know that you have studied some of the same authors and Unitarians that I have and have come to some of the same conclusions that I have. What I am trying to do by chatting with Nick and t8 is to see if what I adopted as truth can stand up under their truth (which is different than mine). So far, I feel like my truth is holding it's own. It's not about pride in being right, it's about knowing God and his Son – the who and the what. That is what I desire so badly in my inner most heart. To know him and his Son who he sent.

    Have a good one, today! It's supposed to be 80 degrees here today. :cool:

    #54136
     Adam Pastor 
    Member
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 326

    Amen Not3in1
    Your approach is correct!
    When I came to the knowledge of scriptural unitarian truth; it amazed me how much of the Bible I can plainly read and let it speak for itself!

    Back in the day when I believed such things such as 'Jesus is Almighty GOD'; I had to do a lot of 'mental gymnastics'; a lot of eisegesis i.e. reading things INTO what the plain text of Scripture was saying as oppose to letting it speak for itself.

    Now that mine eyes have been opened to the plain truth of subjects such as who GOD is, who Jesus is, and their Coming Kingdom;
    I realize now just how much the Bible is indeed a literal unitarian book.
    And that many times the plain meaning of the text is the best interpretation; noting that scripture does not contradict scripture; so one should use the plain-speaking verses to interpret the ones that have obscure or apparently-contradictory statements.

    And yes; now I find that when reasoning with trinitarians, oneness adherents and arians; just how much the 'truth' I have adhered to does indeed hold its own!
    This does indeed give me confidence that I am on the right track.

    I have been perusing this forum for about 3 years now; and I have attempted to show those who have an arian view of preexistence (although they deny being Arians; just as the trinitarians deny being tritheists)
    how Matthew and Luke simply have no concept that Jesus literally pre-existed his own conception. No! Both Matthew and Luke present the genesis/conception/birth of Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Mary, the son of GOD.

    Therefore, in light of this, John could not possibly be contradicting Matthew or Luke. John simply is using different language to describe a different context of the Messiah; i.e. that this man is the very wisdom and word/plan of GOD which was foreordained before the foundation of the world, embodied in flesh as a human being.

    So that there is no confusion, John calls Jesus a man more than the other NT writers; and he gives his very reason for writing his gospel in John 20.31.

    As I looked for other verification on the fact that it was customary for Jews to describe things that GOD had foreordained in His counsel as somehow therefore pre-existing in the mind of GOD.

    I have discovered that in very similar language to the pre-existent language used in John …
    the Jews in their writings/Pseudepigrapha spoke of these 7 things pre-existing the world: the Torah, repentance, the garden of eden, Topheth i.e. Gehenna fire, the throne of glory, the temple, and the name of the Messiah [Talmud, Pesachim 54a ] as being created before the world was created!
    The Jews did not think that these 7 things were literally created in Heaven; rather these 7 things were planned/foreordained in GOD's plan before the creation of the world.

    The Jews therefore taught and spoke of ideal pre-existence; and John was a Jew writing to a Jewish audience; who were well acquainted with the idea that the Messiah pre-existed ideally/notionally
    i.e. was foreordained before the foundation of the world.
    [cp. 1 Peter 1.20]

    The Jews also spoke of Moses being prepared from the beginning of the world to be the mediator!

    “For this is what the Lord of the world has decreed: He created the world on behalf of his people, but he did not make this purpose of creation known from the beginning of the world so that the nations might be found guilty . . . But He did design and devise me [Moses], who was prepared from the beginning of the world to be the mediator of the covenant
    (Testament of Moses, 1:13, 14).

    How much more then, could John speak of Jesus the Messiah; and just as the pre-NT Jews did not literally believe that Moses was literally in existence before the beginning of the world; neither did John think such a thing concerning Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah!

    So John is not at odds with Matthew and Luke who have no knowledge of a literal pre-existence of the Messiah.

    If any time you fancy some heavy reading concerning things which back up these claims; I recommend

    1) James Dunn, Christology in the Making, the Second edition
    Dunn shows many quotes from Jewish writings/Pseudepigrapha which have the word (logos) and the wisdom of GOD being personified as if they were actual persons in the presence of GOD; yet he goes on to show that this was not the intent of the Jewish writers! He shows that the pre-NT Jews did NOT believe that the word/logos or wisdom/sophia were literal pre-existing intermediary beings; but rather were ways of describing these attributes of the One GOD; and therefore used these literary devices such as personification to describe how GOD's spoken word & wisdom interact in the created world.

    This is the same kind of personification as seen in John 1:1-14

    2) I also recommend (again, quite heavy theologically)
    BORN BEFORE ALL TIME? The Dispute over Christ's Origin by Karl-Josef Kuschel

    Again, the author does a lot of research concerning the issues of the pre-existence of the Messiah.

    PS
    Oh! My Avatar is exactly my mirror-image!! :laugh:

    #54139
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 69,480

    Hi AP,
    I am surprised you would label some here as arian
    or that you would promote yourself as the arbiter of truth for all
    and try to show that it is only to be found in the myoptic biblical unitarian view.

    But then you have attacked John's writings before as corrupted by Alexandrian influence.

    However arguing is not helpful as I do agree that

    AS FAR AS OUR SALVATION IS CONCERNED THE ORIGINS OF CHRIST ARE RELATIVELY LESS IMPORTANT.

    #54141
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 69,480

    Hi AP,
    Mt1
    1The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

    2Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

    3And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;

    4And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;

    5And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

    So is established the Son of man.
    Christ is son of man
    Outer Man is flesh.
    But man is more than flesh.
    Inner man is soul\spirit.
    Christ is son of God, become son of man.

    #54142
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 69,480

    Hi AP,
    Where is the genesis of the highest heaven shown in the book of Genesis?

    #54143
     Adam Pastor 
    Member
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 326

    (Gen 1:1)  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

    OK Nick!
    You weren't meant to read anything into the extra 's'

    #54147
     Not3in1 
    Member
    • Topics started 14
    • Total replies 6,698

    Quote (Adam Pastor @ May 31 2007,07:44)
    Oh! My Avatar is exactly my mirror-image!!


    I thought so! Ha!

    To be perfectly honest, I'm not sure if I am a Biblical Unitarian? I'm not sure if I am a plain Unitarian? I know I'm not a Trinitarian. Maybe I'm a Librarian? Ha! I kill me. I just know I want more of God; I want more of Jesus. I want John 17:3. Whatever “label” that comes with – I'll take it. :)

    I will check out the book recommeded and thanks so much for everything, Adam. I always appreciate your posts.

    #54150
     WorshippingJesus 
    Participant
    • Topics started 50
    • Total replies 12,316

    Quote
    If any time you fancy some heavy reading concerning things which back up these claims; I recommend

    1) James Dunn, Christology in the Making, the Second edition
    Dunn shows many quotes from Jewish writings/Pseudepigrapha which have the word (logos) and the wisdom of GOD being personified as if they were actual persons in the presence of GOD; yet he goes on to show that this was not the intent of the Jewish writers! He shows that the pre-NT Jews did NOT believe that the word/logos or wisdom/sophia were literal pre-existing intermediary beings; but rather were ways of describing these attributes of the One GOD; and therefore used these literary devices such as personification to describe how GOD's spoken word & wisdom interact in the created world.

    This is the same kind of personification as seen in John 1:1-14

    2) I also recommend (again, quite heavy theologically)
    BORN BEFORE ALL TIME? The Dispute over Christ's Origin by Karl-Josef Kuschel

    Yes AP.

    So lets all just throw our Bibles away and go after the writtings and works of a few Unitarians!

    Heck! Lets just throw away millions of hours of work of over 600+ Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic Scholars, many of whom gave their lives litterally to bring us the purist form of scripture possible.

    I dont think so!!!

    Tell me AP, what purpose would John say…

    1 Jn 4:
    1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: *because many false prophets are gone out into the world*.
    2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that *Jesus Christ is come in the **flesh** is of God*:
    3 And every spirit that *confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the **flesh** is not of God*: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

    Why didnt he say…

    Every spirit that confesseth that *Jesus Christ is come in the **world** is of God*

    Why all the confusion about him comming in the flesh!

    Why not just say he was born in the world?

    What is the “Mystery of Godliness” if he was a simple man born in sin like you and I?

    It is a waste of words and so confusing!

    If he meant “The thought or plan came in the flesh”

    Why did he not say…

    Every spirit that confesseth that *the logos (thought or plan) is come in the **flesh** is of God*

    Why did he use “Jesus Christ” personal name!

    Are we to assume the translators are all wrong?

    Lies from the Spirit of anti-christ!

    You say…

    Quote

    PS
    Oh! My Avatar is exactly my mirror-image!!:laugh:  

    You should add a couple of horns to it…. :D :D :D

    I still love you though!  :)

    #54152
     WorshippingJesus 
    Participant
    • Topics started 50
    • Total replies 12,316

    Quote (Adam Pastor @ May 31 2007,03:22)

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2007,00:29)
    Hi AP,
    Number 1083
    Transliteration:
    gennesis {ghen'-nay-sis}
    Word Origin:
    from 1080
    Part of Speech:
    adjective
    Usage in the KJV:
    birth 2

    Total: 2
    Definition:
    begat, engendering
    nativity, birth


    Genesis means beginning as in e.g.
    “In the Beginning
    And of course, Genesis deals with the beginning of the heavens & the earth, mankind, etc.

    (Mat 1:1)  The book of the generation (genesis i.e. beginning) of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

    (Mat 1:18)  Now the birth (genesis i.e. beginning) of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

    BTW FYI
    Because of
    (a) the obvious meaning of the word genesis; and
    (b) the fact that Matthew uses this word twice to describe
    the genesis i.e. beginning of Jesus the Christ [Matthew 1:1,18]
    which of course contradicts trinitarian (as well as arian) preexistence/theology …

    Catholic scribes therefore added an extra 'n' to genesis in verse 18 in order to change
    the context from beginning/origination to birth
    Source: The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Bart Ehrman, (1993), p. 75-76;

    Like I said, FYI


    Ap

    You say…

    Quote
    BTW FYI
    Because of
    (a) the obvious meaning of the word genesis; and
    (b) the fact that Matthew uses this word twice to describe
    the genesis i.e. beginning of Jesus the Christ [Matthew 1:1,18]
    which of course contradicts trinitarian (as well as arian) preexistence/theology …

    This is a classic example of mis-representation!

    The beginnings of Jesus Christ is not a contradiction to Trinitarians, for Jesus was born in the flesh and had beginnings as a man.

    This is how you mislead your followers is that right?

    Because you full well know no Trinitarian believes that Jesus didnt have a natural birth and beginning in the flesh!

    :O

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 9,988 total)

The topic ‘Preexistence (Part 1)’ is closed to new replies.

© 1999 - 2018 Heaven Net

or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account