- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 5 days, 2 hours ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 13 2012,17:44) Quote (carmel @ Aug. 13 2012,17:37) Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 11 2012,11:34) Quote I believe we were all pre-existent Angels; all accept Jesus that is. Edj
you did not understand my question!!
HERE IT IS AGAIN”:
What were we,before creation ever existed?
BEFORE THE ENTIRE CREATION EVER EXISTED???
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Angels
Edj,Again:
What were we:
BEFORE THE ENTIRE CREATION EVER EXISTED???
BOTH HEAVEN AND EARTH NEVER MIND ANGELS
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 12 2012,01:49) Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 10 2012,17:24) Yes, I was quite aware of the question. It seems the answer to the question is way over your head!
Then by all means, dumb it down for me please, because I didn't see an answer to my question in your last response.Who are the “US”, Frank?
Mike,I can't stoop that low!
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 12 2012,01:50) Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 10 2012,17:35) Note that Philippians 2 does not say Yahshua pre-existed his birth as “a god”.
Nope. But it teaches that Jesus pre-existed his “becoming made in the likeness of a human being” as a being who was in the form of God.I assume “form of God” means “spirit being”, which God is.
Mike,Note that Philppians 2 does not teach that Yahshua:
Quote pre-existed his “becoming made in the likeness of a human being” as a being who was in the form of God. The expression “form of God” does not mean “spirit being”. Yahshua was and is a man or “son of man”.
THE MAN, YAHSHUA
Revised 3/12/12Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 12 2012,22:05) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,14:14) Perhaps you should check into it and find out the truth before making the claim?
Not interested: Perhaps you should check into it instead.
Or better yet, why don't we all just forget this claim you made without even knowing the truth of them matter:The AKJV Bible society has translated it into “ALL” the major languages of the world.
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 13 2012,03:02) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,14:16) I asked YOU what YOU think Paul meant by the word “God” in Phil 2, and then offered MY opinion that he was referring to an indivual being instead of to a species of beings. What do YOU think he was referring to?
i said phil 2.6 talks about nature or form
Okay. And which one of those things did Paul mean by using the word “God”?Did Paul mean that Jesus was in the form of “nature”? Or in the form of “form”?
jammin, to whom does the word “God” refer in Phil 2:6? You may ask for help.
Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 12 2012,22:35) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) I'm starting to get the feeling that some of you guys hold the KJV up as another god or something. I had that feeling for a while now…………..
I thought Ed was the only KJV “worshipper” on this site. It now appears that there are many.Dudes, it is just an English translation – nothing more and nothing less. (It's not even the FIRST English translation.
)Quote (jammin @ Aug. 13 2012,03:04) you are telling not the whole truth boy. what we can read in the bible is
Philippians 2:6
Amplified Bible (AMP)
6 Who,
althoughbeingessentially one with God andin the form of God [a](possessing the fullness of the attributes which make God God),
There ya go, jammin.I fixed your translation for you by striking through all the words that are not actually in the Greek text.
It seems I WAS telling the whole truth while you were ADDING your owns words to that truth.
Quote (carmel @ Aug. 13 2012,11:58) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,02:55) So God was of no use to Noah? Or Abraham? Or Moses? Or David? Sorry Charlie – no sale.
Mike,
Your eagerness to confront me destroyed you.
This is what I said…………….
Here's how it went, Charles:Quote (carmel @ Aug. 12 2012,08:23) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) The Israelites had a God long before Jesus came to earth. Mike,
I NEVER SAID that THERE WAS NEVER A GOD, BUT IT WAS OF NO USE FOR THEM SINCE THEY HAD A HEART OF STONE (Satan's)
(BTW, thank you for posting only the part you are responding to. It makes the posts less long and easier to follow.
)Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 14 2012,06:41) 
WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter OneDid Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 13 2012,22:41) Quote (terraria @ Aug. 13 2012,15:35) they do not trust Gods word
PIERRE,Please explain what exactly YOU mean here?
edjif you have faith in God and his son,and so believe what they have written ,but you still hesitate to truly believe their written words ,
then you do not trust in God or his son ,because this prove that you have not come to know them
Quote (terraricca @ Aug. 14 2012,09:11) Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 13 2012,22:41) Quote (terraria @ Aug. 13 2012,15:35) they do not trust Gods word
PIERRE,Please explain what exactly YOU mean here?
edjif you have faith in God and his son,and so believe what they have written ,but you still hesitate to truly believe their written words ,
then you do not trust in God or his son ,because this prove that you have not come to know them
I agree with you here Terra, because JESUS words has not sunk into them when he said; YOU MUST EATH MY FLESH TO HAVE ETERNAL LIFE.WHAT ARE THEY DOING,THEY THINK THAT FLESH IS TASTLESS;NOT GOOD ENOUGH; SO THEY PUT SOME DRESSINGS ON IT,LIKE PEPPER, CHILLI,TOMATO SAUCE,MUSTERD SAUCE,ALL TO THEIR OWN TASTE,AND CORRUPTING THe PURE FLESH TASTE.
WE MUST LEARN TO LISTEN TO HIM.
wakeup.
Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 14 2012,10:04) Bible Correspondence Course: [PDF] Lesson 40 — The Messiah's Pre-Existence: Fact Or Fable?
Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
Bible Correspondence Course URL Correction:[PDF] Lesson 40 — The Messiah's Pre-Existence: Fact Or Fable?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2012,08:02) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 13 2012,03:02) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,14:16) I asked YOU what YOU think Paul meant by the word “God” in Phil 2, and then offered MY opinion that he was referring to an indivual being instead of to a species of beings. What do YOU think he was referring to?
i said phil 2.6 talks about nature or form
Okay. And which one of those things did Paul mean by using the word “God”?Did Paul mean that Jesus was in the form of “nature”? Or in the form of “form”?
jammin, to whom does the word “God” refer in Phil 2:6? You may ask for help.
are you blind??? LOLi told you before that the bible said form of God or nature of God in phil 2.6
why are you insisting your non sense words form of form or form of nature LOL
you are out of your mind boy LOL
why dont you finish your homework boy. did you find any translation that says individual being in phil 2.6
you may ask for help. ill wait boy LOL
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2012,08:14) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 13 2012,03:04) you are telling not the whole truth boy. what we can read in the bible is
Philippians 2:6
Amplified Bible (AMP)
6 Who,
althoughbeingessentially one with God andin the form of God [a](possessing the fullness of the attributes which make God God),
There ya go, jammin.I fixed your translation for you by striking through all the words that are not actually in the Greek text.
It seems I WAS telling the whole truth while you were ADDING your owns words to that truth.
really???you just cant accept the truth mike.
i told you to make your own bible LOLcommentaries also say that it refers to his (christ) nature as God (phil 2.6)
how about you boy? ill wait for your translation that says individual being or species in phil 2.6you may ask for help boy LOL
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2012,08:02) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 13 2012,03:02) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 13 2012,14:16) I asked YOU what YOU think Paul meant by the word “God” in Phil 2, and then offered MY opinion that he was referring to an indivual being instead of to a species of beings. What do YOU think he was referring to?
i said phil 2.6 talks about nature or form
Okay. And which one of those things did Paul mean by using the word “God”?Did Paul mean that Jesus was in the form of “nature”? Or in the form of “form”?
jammin, to whom does the word “God” refer in Phil 2:6? You may ask for help.
the Word God refers to Christ.
read well the context boy LOLthat is his form or nature.
an example of this is you are HUMAN
you have the form of HUMAN – the word HUMAN refers to you boy and not your relative LOL
go to school mike and study hard. LOL
From t8, in the “Binity” discussion he is having with Lightenup:
Most of the discrepancies between the KJV and more modern versions has little to do with writers adding in extra sentences like the instance you are now promoting, rather has more to do with the KJV using a not so old manuscript (textus receptus) while modern versions of the bible use older versions of manuscripts, multiple versions, and the addition of the Dead Sea Scrolls as a triple check.
Has anyone ever played the game in school where the teacher tells one student a sentence, and then it is passed student to student throughout the classroom until the last student repeats it aloud? We did that when I was in school, and the final sentence wasn't even close to the sentence the teacher originally spoke.
The same can happen with mss of the scriptures. Which ms is going to be closer to the actual words written:
A. A ms that has been translated and re-translated for 1000 years?
B. A ms that was only translated once from the original?
“B” is the correct answer. The closer we can get to the originals, the closer we will get to the truth of what was actually written by the Apostles and disciples. And the bottom line is that the newer English versions are translated from MANY mss which are much older than the SIX fairly recent ms that the KJV was translated from.
“More recent” means more time for ALTERATIONS to have been made through the years.
Food for thought.
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 13 2012,18:14) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2012,08:02) jammin, to whom does the word “God” refer in Phil 2:6? You may ask for help.
the Word God refers to Christ.
Ah, FINALLY, an answer to my question!So jammin, you think that the teaching in Phil 2:6 is that Christ was existing in the form of Christ?
Hmmmm………………
(And btw, you're asking the wrong question about “individual being”. You shouldn't ask if I can “find a translation” that says what I want it to say, because then I'd just be like you. You should instead ask if the GREEK TEXT says anything about “individual being”. And the answer is “NO”.
But then again, I never said it did. I simply asked you what Paul meant by the word “God” in Phil 2. Then I offered my OPINION that he was talking about the individual being who created the universe – not a “species”. Judging from the answer you just gave, you apparently don't agree with me about that.
)Did Jesus Empty Himself of Any Divine Attributes?
by Servetus the EvangelicalThe Apostle Paul wrote to the Christians at Philippi, exhorting them to be humble
and love one another (Philippians 2.1-4). Then he added what all modern scholars insist
is a pre-existing hymn whose composer remains unknown. Paul introduces this hymn by
telling readers, “Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus” (v. 5).
Then he begins the hymn by saying, “who, although He existed in the form of God, did
not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form
of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men …” (vv. 6-7).
Philippians 2.6-11 has had a most profound impact on the history of Christology.
H.E. Todt says of it, “Christological doctrine has been developed in Protestantism mainly
with regard to the concepts expressed in Phil. 2. The synoptic texts were interpreted to
conform to this passage.” It should have been vice versa.
Consequently, Philippians 2.6-11 has been hotly debated among modern scholars.
N.T. Wright says the main reason is that it “is one of the most notoriously complex
passages” in all of Paul’s New Testament (NT) letters. Due to the necessary brevity of this
article, we will only be able to scratch the surface of this scholarly discussion.
Two contrasting interpretations of Philippians 2.6-11 have prevailed among scholars.
The traditional “incarnational” or “preexistent interpretation,” which still dominates to
the present, means that vv. 6-7 presents Jesus as personally existing in heaven prior to his
earthly life and being equal with God the Father. The “anthropological” or “human
interpretation,” which is gaining favor with scholars, means that vv. 6-8 refers only to
Jesus’ earthly life and therefore has nothing to do with preexistence or incarnation.
Those who adopt the preexistent interpretation of this Philippians 2 hymn view it in
three stages: preexistence in v. 6, incarnation in vv. 7-8, and heavenly exaltation in vv. 9-
11. They interpret “form of God” in v. 6 as Jesus having preexisted eternally as a distinct
hypostasis or Person, being the Logos of John 1.1-18, by possessing the same divine
nature as that of God the Father, which makes him equal with the Father.
How one interprets the expression, “in the form of God” (Gr. en morphe theou),
largely determines the interpretation of the remainder of the hymn. This critical phrase is
difficult partly because, except for cognates, morphe (“form”) occurs only twice in the
Greek NT, both being here in vv. 6-7. In most Greek literature, morphe means “outward
appearance,” that is, what can be perceived only by the senses. So, “form of God” seems
to refer to Jesus’ bodily existence rather than a pre-temporal, ontological preexistence.
Proponents of the human interpretation of Philippians 2.6-11 have searched the Old
Testament (OT) for links to this hymn as the key to understanding its author’s intended
meaning. Thus, they link Jesus existing “in the form of God” with Adam being made in
the “image (of God),” as in Genesis 1.27; 5.3. In support, Paul elsewhere describes Jesus
as God’s “image” (Greek eikon; 2 Corinthians 4.4; Col 1.15). Accordingly, the hymn
begins by saying Jesus was in the image of God, like Adam, called Adam Christology.
What does the hymn mean by saying that Jesus “did not regard equality with God a
thing to be grasped”? Scholars who adopt the preexistent interpretation usually insist it
means that prior to Jesus’ incarnation, as the Logos, he possessed “equality with God”
and relinquished it at the moment of incarnation. But if the Logos could have grasped at
equality with God, He did not possess it and thus could not have been equal with God.
Proponents of the human interpretation of this hymn link “equality with God” to
“like God” in Genesis 3.5. Recall that Adam sinned because Satan deceived Eve, saying
that if she ate the forbidden fruit, “you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” This lie
means they could attain “equality with God” regarding knowledge and wisdom (v. 6).
What does the hymn mean by saying that Jesus “emptied Himself”? Proponents of
the preexistent interpretation of the hymn have understood this mostly in one of two
ways, that at Jesus’ incarnation he divested himself of his relative divine attributes or he
merely chose not to exercise some of them during his incarnation. These suggestions are
called Kenotic Christology because the root word for “emptied” in the Greek text is
kenosis. But either of these suggestions raises serious problems. A divesture of any of
these divine attributes—for example, omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence—
would have been necessary because they are incompatible with being human, yet such
divesture necessarily results in something less than full deity.
Some proponents of the human interpretation have linked “emptied Himself” (Gr.
heauton ekenosen) with “poured out Himself to death” (Heb. nephesho lamoot herah) in
Isaiah 53.12. Joachim Jeremias convincingly championed this background for the hymn.
He said of these words in Philippians 2.7, “The use of Is. 53:12 shows that the expression
heauton ekenosen implies the surrender of life, not the kenosis of the incarnation.”
Indeed. Paul introduced this hymn by saying, “Do nothing from selfishness or empty
conceit, but with humility of mind” (Philippians 2.3), which he says was Jesus’ attitude
(v. 5). Therefore, Paul likely understood this hymn to mean that Jesus emptied Himself of
self by submitting to God’s plan for his life. It is the cross of Christ, not incarnation,
which is the epitome of Jesus’ self-denial depicted in the NT. And it is only in this sense,
rather than incarnation, that Paul can legitimately set forth an example for his readers to
follow. Therefore, Jesus did not deny himself by laying aside or suppressing certain
divine attributes at his birth, but by doing acts of moral character throughout his life that
culminated in death on a cross, resulting in salvation for all those who believe in him.
In my book, The Restitution of Jesus Christ, I devote 21 pages to the interpretation of
Philippians 2.5-11. In doing so, I cite 45 scholars and their works plus 4 church fathers.The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter OneDid Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
