- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hello All,
Does John 6:62 prove Jesus pre-existed? I say yes. What say you all?
62What if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before!
mike
Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 27 2010,14:30) Hi MB,
The Spirit often spoke through this glorious human vessel.
So the spirit, which is a part OF God, was talking about ascending to where it was before? Get real Nick. I'm about done with you. You never let anyone know where you stand, you just post vague crap about spirits. Enough already. Post a complete thought or don't post to me at all.mike
Hi MB,
You cannot see Jesus Christ on earth 2000 years ago without seeing both the vessel and his God within him[Jn14, 2Cor 5.19]
He ascribed his words to his God but you disagree?Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 27 2010,15:00) Hi MB,
So it can only be understood your way?
Then why do you seek to converse with others?
I learn by conversing with others Nick. It seems pretty straightforward to me. Do you offer another explanation? Let's hear it. Perhaps something besides “the spirit is Christ”.mike
Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 27 2010,15:03) Hi MB,
You cannot see Jesus Christ on earth 2000 years ago without seeing both the vessel and his God within him[Jn14, 2Cor 5.19]
He ascribed his words to his God but you disagree?
And many prophets ascribe their words to God. Did any of them say they were ascending to where they were before? Did they have the spirit?Come on……..you can do better than that.
mike
Hi Mike,
I think that Calvin agrees with you too:Quote 62. What if you shall see the Son of man ascend to where he was before? The mean and despicable condition of Christ which they saw before their eyes, while, clothed with flesh, he was not at all different from other men, prevented them from submitting to his Divine power; but now — by withdrawing, as it were, the veil — he calls them to behold his heavenly glory, as if he had said, “Because I converse among men without honor, I am despised by you, and you recognize in me nothing that is Divine; but ere long God will adorn me with splendid power, and, withdrawing me from the contemptible state of mortal life, will raise me above the heavens.” For, in the resurrection of Christ, so great was the power displayed by the Holy Spirit, that it plainly showed Christ to be the Son of God, as Paul also shows, (Romans 1:4.) And when it is said,
Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee,
(Psalm 2:7,)
the resurrection is brought forward as a proof from which that glory of Christ ought to be acknowledged, and his ascension to heaven was the completion of that glory. When he says that he was formerly in heaven, this does not apply strictly to his human nature, and yet he speaks of the Son of man; but since the two natures in Christ constitute one person, it is not an unusual way of speaking to transfer to one nature what is peculiar to the other.Quote (Lightenup @ July 27 2010,15:19) Hi Mike,
I think that Calvin agrees with you too:
And what are YOUR thoughts, Kathi?mike
Mike,
If you believe John1:1-2 to be true then you know Jesus existed before in heaven.”Before Abraham was,I am”(this is spelt correctly as in the NT…look in your bible..because in the Old Testament God calls himself”I AM” as a title or His name,but it's spelt as a name like I have written it).The statement Jesus makes in the New Testament is written as a statement of fact(not a name,or title)that He(Jesus)existed before Abraham existed.Jesus himself says that he came “FROM the Father”,or was”sent”.Quote (The One @ July 27 2010,15:43) If you believe John1:1-2 to be true then you know Jesus existed before in heaven.”
Hello One,I agree that there are many scriptures that point blank prove Jesus pre-existed his flesh. My mission here is to take those scriptures one at a time so the “non-preexisters” can explain how they DON'T prove a pre-existence – one by one.
I have yet to hear anything from barley, Gene, or Martian on this scripture though. And I have yet to hear anything coherent from Nick. In the first scripture we analized, Phil 2, there were a lot of Greek words that could be “stretched” to mean an alternate definition instead of the main, more recognizable one – if one really wanted to try that hard.
John 6:62 has less available to “stretch”, and I'm wondering if that's why I haven't heard from Martian, Gene and barley yet.
Time will tell, but thanks for the support and encouragement.
peace and love,
mikeMike, so JustAskin is not the only one who finds Nick Hassan's post pointless and void of Scriptural essence.
I joked before that he just has a list of sayings and randomly post one to anything anyone says, even if it makes no sense or link to what the poster is talking about. Now, i think he is doing it deliberately because he has nothing of value to say.
That is sad for him because the Scriptures is full of revelation for each and everyone of us and Nick has certainly not exhausted his portion…nay, not even by half, or even a quarter!
wake up Nick. You used to make goid posts. What happened?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 28 2010,10:08) Hi MB,
Jesus is not mentioned by name before his conception.
So where is the proof?
Hi Nick,This is what I posted to Gene in “preexistent”. It applies here to you now:
Quote Hey Gene, I have an exercise for you. Go through the whole Bible (including OT prophesies) and count how many different names Jesus is called. Then try to explain how NONE of them are really about Jesus because if the writer meant “Jesus”, he would have just said “Jesus”.
Sorry brother, but that is a weak argument, especially in light of the many, many times Irene has pointed you to Rev.
mike
Are you seriously saying that the Word of God in Rev is not clearly Jesus? And if it IS, why would God need two “Words”? Isn't it self evident to you? John wrote Rev first, and then his gospel. Who else do you think he would have been calling “the Word”?
mike
Hi JA,
Yes it would be good if folks would only post what is proveable[2Cor13.1]
Meantime we point them back towards what is important.
Of course most are more interested in the pretty butterflies of speculation.Quote (JustAskin @ July 28 2010,10:14) Mike, so JustAskin is not the only one who finds Nick Hassan's post pointless and void of Scriptural essence.
Hi JA,You thought YOU were the only one? There's even a thread dedicated to it!
Just kidding with you Nick.
But seriously man, contribute something to the discussion. I know that you know scripture, so speak up. Say something of value that either gives us a chance to learn something from you, or a chance to refute your understanding of the scripture in question.You cannot presume to say John 6:62 is NOT about Jesus having a pre-existence with only “the Lord is the spirit” or “Jesus wasn't mentioned by name”.
Let's hear what you have to say, brother! Refute the pre-existence right out of John 6:62 if you can.
peace and love,
mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
