John 6:62

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 30 2010,13:06)

Quote (martian @ July 30 2010,02:35)

You say-
But before you start, please DIRECTLY answer the bolded two parts of my last post like I asked.

Reply-
Your questions have no importance at all if I am dealing with a dishonest researcher.

Your process of interpretation is a sham, invented to snare scripturally uneducated into your false doctrine. I am not saying this personally about you but your process of interpretation disgusts me.

Coward!

Come on Martian……this is only the second of about 15 scriptures I'm going to hit you guys with. Are all 15 wrong? Am I interpreting all 15 wrong? Am I using the wrong definition in all 15? Am I missing something in the context in all 15 of them?

This is what I want to find out. So, one by one, enlighten me on the error of my ways O great one!

Show me your Hebrew and Greek culture expertise and answer my only two questions I've asked of you.

And stop trying to run using the guise of “your methods of study aren't up to my standards, so I'm not going to debate with you”.

mike

You say-
Come on Martian……this is only the second of about 15 scriptures I'm going to hit you guys with. Are all 15 wrong? Am I interpreting all 15 wrong? Am I using the wrong definition in all 15? Am I missing something in the context in all 15 of them?

Reply-
Well if you continue to interpret in the manner you have shown so far I would say yes you have all 15 wrong. It is virtually impossible for you to get them right with your methods.

July 30, 2010 at 3:02 pm#206879

Participant

Mike………..Brother to see Jesus as anything but a human being is to deny the work of GOD (IN) humanity and not only that but it denies Jesus' work as our (EXACT) example. You are not only denying God but Jesus Also. It is Antichrist to see Jesus as anything other then a Human being. IMO

peace and love……………………………gene

July 30, 2010 at 4:14 pm#206883

Participant

Mike –

You say-
“This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am, 42 because he existed before me.’”

We know John was born 6 months BEFORE Jesus was born. And Elizabeth was impregnated BEFORE Mary was, so in what sense did John think Jesus “existed before him”?

Reply-
Following your conclusion to it’s end we get this–
So according to your interpretation, Jesus is greater then John because he existed before him. So something from Christ’s preexistence made him greater then John. Something that was carried on into his earthly life.
Christ is greater then John due to his preexistence.
Funny thing is in other posts you said all Christ had that other men did not have was knowledge and that it would not effect our ability to follow him.
We cannot do greater things then Christ because part of his greatness was due to a preexistence we cannot acquire.

The Greek word for existed is eilmio and means –
to be, to exist, to happen, to be present
It is translated in the following ways –
NAS (249) accompanied, 1; accompany, 2; am, 138; amount, 1; amounts, 1; appear, 1; asserted, 1; become, 5; been, 1; being, 26; belong, 3; belonged, 1; belonging, 1; belongs, 4; bring, 1; came, 1; come, 5; consist, 1; crave, 1; depends, 1; do, 1; done, 1; exist, 3; existed, 1; falls, 1; found, 1; had, 8; happen, 4; have, 2; have come, 1; lived, 1; mean, 2; means, 7; meant, 2; originate, 1; owns, 1; remain, 3; remained, 1; rest, 1; sided, 1; stayed, 2; themselves, 1; there, 6; turn, 1;

The Greek word for before is prwÜtov and means –
1.first in time or place
a.in any succession of things or persons
2.first in rank
a.influence, honour
b.chief
c.principal
3.first, at the first

And is translated in the NAS 128; first importance, 1; first man, 1; first of all, 2; first one, 1; first things, 1; first time, 1; foremost, 5; leading, 2; leading man, 1; leading men, 5; outer, 3; previous, 1;

So this verse could be translated He existed first in time
-OR-
He is to be first in influence and honour, the chief

At the very least we know that Mikes proof text is not conclusive evidence of a preexistence.
So how do you determine which translation is correct?
Some like Mike determine which to use because of a predetermined doctrine he is hot to prove.
I determine which one by context.
15John testified about Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.'”
27″It is He who comes after me, the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie.”
Obviously the context is about Christ being first in rank. That is how you determine which of the various meanings of the Greek words are appropriate.
This also ties in nicely with all the scriptures that call Christ preeminent over all creation including all men.

You should stop asking me to answer your questions because when I do your posts end up looking idiotic.

July 30, 2010 at 4:36 pm#206885

Participant

To all,
I want to be clear that I have no personal grudge against Mike. However, I am attacking his methods for coming to his interpretations of scripture.
In my previous post I should point out a few things. Mike has stated that his methods include studying the Greek/Hebrew words and considering the context.
Mike did not follow his own stated methods because he did not use the context to determine which of the various Greek definitions to use.
This is a prime example of what I said before that he will not posts clear concise methods for interpretation because if he does he will have to break them to support his doctrine. I finally bothered him enough that he said he uses context and language word studies/definitions. These are good principles but unfortunately Mike now refuses to use them because it will negate the doctrine he is determined to prove.

July 30, 2010 at 9:02 pm#206892

http://focusonthekingdom.org/articles/preexist.htm

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 27 2010,14:28)

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

For those of you interested in a thorough study of this verse and the entire concept of Preexistence I suggest this web site. It is a bit lengthy maybe a 15 minute read. Should not be a problem for those actually seeking truth.

July 30, 2010 at 11:43 pm#206901

Participant

martian…………Good post brother, i like your through method of explaining these scriptures, Keep up the good work brother. Who know who might come to see thing about Jesus existence in a more clearer light brother. I am not as Scholarly as you are, but the spirit has shown me these thing are true and that what you are posting here on this is right brother. Hope Mike and T8 will come to realize it also.

Peace and love to you and yours……………………………….gene

July 30, 2010 at 11:49 pm#206902

Participant

Mike ………..We are waiting on your response brother. If you get ride of your Preconceived Ideologies and begin anew you will begin to see Jesus (EXACTLY) as one of Us and the encouragement will greatly increase in you. Mike Jesus was indeed in rank ahead of John the Baptist and this is exactly what John was talking about as martian explained it. My hope and Prayer is that you will recieve it brother.

peace and love to you and yours………………………..gene

July 31, 2010 at 2:06 am#206910

barley

Participant

Quote (martian @ July 30 2010,03:13)

Mike says he checks the context. This is untrue. Context means you check any other scriptures having to do with the subject. To say that Christ ascended to a literal place he was before presupposes that he was there to begin with.

John 6:33

“For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven.”

John 6:38

“I came down from heaven.”

John 6:51

“I am the living bread which came down from heaven.”

John 6:58

“This is that bread which came down from heaven.”

Problem:

These passages are considered to be proof that Jesus existed in heaven prior to his coming to the earth.

Solution:
1.The words of this chapter were an “hard saying” (vs. 60) and as a result “many of his disciples went back and walked no more with him”. (vs. 66). An understanding of the analogy with the manna provides the key to the right understanding of this passage.
2.The bread “from heaven” (vs. 31) did not mean that it was actually manufactured in heaven and descended through the atmosphere, but rather that it was produced on the earth by God's Holy Spirit power.
3.Similarly, Christ came down from heaven, not literally, since it was the Holy Spirit which descended upon the virgin Mary to effect the conception. (Luke 1:35). “From heaven” emphasizes he was sourced from God (i.e., his father was God) and his teaching was also sourced from God
4.. Unlike the manna which profited only temporarily, his words were “spirit” and “life”. (vs. 63).
To help us understand Jesus' words in John 6, it is useful to compare them with those of John 16:28-30  John 16:28 “I came forth from the Father, and have come into the world; I am leaving the world again, and going to the Father.” 29 His disciples said, “Lo, now You are speaking plainly, and are not using a figure of speech. 30 “Now we know that You know all things, and have no need for anyone to question You; by this we believe that You came from God.”  In John 16:28, Jesus stated that he “came forth from the Father”. The Father, of course, is in heaven. So when Jesus makes mention that he (Jesus) came down from heaven, it means the same thing as “coming forth from the Father”. So then, what does it mean to “come forth from the Father”? One should not take his words literally, but rather Jesus' statement should be read figuratively. How do we know this for certain? In John 16:30 notice how the disciples understood Jesus' statement. When the disciples heard Jesus say, “I came forth from the Father”, they understood these words NOT to mean that Jesus pre-existed in heaven, and came down and took up habitation in Mary's womb. No! Rather, the disciples understood Jesus' statement as meaning, “We know that you know all things, and have no need for anyone to question you; by THIS we believe that You came from God.” The disciples did not take Jesus' statement literally. They understood Jesus as speaking in figures.  This figure of speech is also repeated in John 6. In John 6:42 the Jews ask, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?” The Jews stumbled over Jesus' words, for they took Jesus statement literally. In trying to explain what he meant, Jesus quotes from the OT…  John 6:45 “It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught of God.'  So we see that “being taught of God” is what is meant by “coming forth from God”. It is a figure of speech, and not to be taken literally. If we continue to read in John 6, we will see that Jesus often speaks figuratively…  In John 6, you will see that Jesus is comparing himself to the manna from heaven. John 6:51 says, “I am the living bread which came down from heaven.” So we see that Jesus is speaking figuratively…not literally…he compares himself to bread/manna. Jesus later says that we must eat his flesh and drink his blood, but Protestants do not take his words literally, do we? In John 6:31 the manna is referred to as “bread from heaven”. The literal translation is “bread out of the heaven”. Does one think that the manna was baked by the angels in heaven, and then was hurled by the Father towards the earth at the speed of light, and then landed on the desert floor? When something (or someone) is described as having come from God, it means that its/his source can be attributed to God. The source of the manna can be attributed to God, therefore the manna is described as “bread out of heaven”. The “source” of Jesus is the Father, and therefore Jesus could correctly state that he came from heaven (i.e. from God). But such a statement does not mean that Jesus pre-existed in heaven before his birth, no more than it means that the manna pre-existed in heaven before it appeared in the desert.     Jesus was misunderstood by the Jews, for the Jews took him literally. As a result, many of Jesus' disciples forsook him. In spite of all this, it is worth noting what Peter said at the conclusion of John 6…  John 6:67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away? 68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life. 69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.  

From the context of Hebrew Culture –
The Bible is filled with picture stories describing certain truths and concepts. This is in line with the concrete way in which the Hebrews thought. The Gospels are full of parables taught by Christ. In this case comparing himself to the bread of life. (manna)

Jesus speaking to his disciples –
“So Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you.”
Were these disciples sent from heaven too? Are they going to ascend to where they came from?

I come to these conclusions by this method.
1. I read the verse and form a hypothesis and then I test it.
2. I considered the context both immediate and throughout all of scripture. Including any verses that talk about the same subject.
3. I studied the words in their original language.
4. I searched out any impact the Hebrew culture of the time might have.
5. I looked for any way that my conclusions might negatively impact the character of God or the mission of Christ.
6. (much like 5) I looked for fruit good or bad from my conclusions.
—AND FINALLY —
7. I researched what teachers and other students have said about these verses. (sometimes I find their words more clear and concise then mine and I use them)
Sometimes (depending on the subject) I even employ debate forums to see what other say.

How does Mike come to his conclusions? It’s none of your business!!!!!

Martian,

I am most blessed with the thoroughness by which you present the scripture.

You have clearly spent the time to read and study and review and rethink.

barley

July 31, 2010 at 3:20 am#206918

Blocked

Quote (martian @ July 31 2010,03:14)

So this verse could be translated He existed first in time
-OR-
He is to be first in influence and honour, the chief

Hi Martian,

Did you notice the word used is “en” which is the imperfect tense form of “eimi”? In most verbs, the “imperfect tense” amounts to a continual action. But used with the verb “to be”, it acts as “past tense” always.

So how could it mean “He IS TO BE first in influence…”?

Like you said, it could mean he WAS FIRST IN TIME, which would fit in well with the other scriptures that say Jesus pre-existed that we will soon be discussing……
-OR-
It could mean “He WAS, or USED TO BE the first in influence and honor.

So, based on the past tense form of the word, it either means Jesus WAS before John in time, or Jesus WAS before John in rank. But it can't mean Jesus IS, or WILL BE before John in rank.

What say you to “ASCENDED TO WHERE HE WAS BEFORE”?

mike

July 31, 2010 at 3:23 am#206919

Blocked

Quote (martian @ July 31 2010,03:36)

Not only do I use them, but I actually use them correctly.

July 31, 2010 at 3:30 am#206920

Blocked

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 31 2010,10:49)

peace and love to you and yours………………………..gene

Hi Gene,

I'm just waiting for you guys to stop patting each other on the back and come up with an explanation of what Jesus, who said he was sent FROM HEAVEN, could have meant when he said he would ASCEND TO WHERE HE WAS BEFORE.

And I'm waiting on an answer from barley about the manna question.

And I will patiently await any of your replies to how Martian's “first in influence and honor” doesn't work because of the past tense word used.

peace and love,
mike

July 31, 2010 at 2:00 pm#207043

barley

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 28 2010,10:44)

Hi JA,
Folks should dig deep and lay their foundations on rock.
Instead they plant more weeds among the thorns.
Futility on futility for most

Nick,

I like that.

Wisdom for the ages.

July 31, 2010 at 2:29 pm#207050

Participant

Mike……….It doesn't hert to encourage the brethren when they present and advance good understandings. If you have read Matian's Post and the (SITE) he ask you to read things might have begin to fall into place for you brother. Listen Jesus was sent after he was Baptized in the Jordan out into the world, But He was indeed (FOREORDAINED) No one is arguing that point , But being foreordained does not equal preexistence. We all were foreordained by GOD but we as far as we know never did preexist.

Jesus saying he was ascending to where he was before does not mean he preexisted at all, but his Glory was preordained, and so he was from GOD in (that) sense. Just as He said to God concerning the Disciples “They were (past tense) Yours and thou hast given them to me”. So in you logic we could say we also preexisted right?. Mike you and T8 both are wrong on this one brother.

Peace and love to you and yours………………………..gene

July 31, 2010 at 2:41 pm#207053

Ed J

Participant

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Aug. 01 2010,01:29)

We all were foreordained by GOD but we as far as we know never did preexist.

Peace and love to you and yours………………………..gene

Hi Gene,

As far as 'you know'! (Jeremiah 1:5)
Now, at least you are being honest. (John 15:27)

Witnessing to the world in behalf of YHVH (Psalm 45:17)
יהוה האלהים (JEHOVAH GOD) YÄ-hä-vā hä ĔL-ō-Hêêm!
Ed J (AKJV Joshua 22:34 / Isaiah 60:13-15)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

July 31, 2010 at 2:50 pm#207057

Participant

ED J………..I would venture to say you know not different either. IMO

peace and love……………………..gene

July 31, 2010 at 2:53 pm#207058

barley

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 30 2010,14:13)

Quote (barley @ July 30 2010,13:57)

Does that literally mean that God has a bakery next to his throne, and some angels or cherubims were given the task of baking manna? If the manna literally came from heaven, why? Couldn't God find some way of producing it here on earth?

What if the manna ascended back up to where it was before?

Hi barley,

How do you know God doesn't have a bakery? Seriously, how do you know the specifics of how God supplied the manna?

You said:

Quote

What if the manna ascended back up to where it was before?

Now you're getting somewhere. What if it did? What would that mean to you? Think about it……..ASCENDED to where it was before, added to the fact it came FROM HEAVEN. Hmmm……Since you apparently KNOW God “made the manna on earth” somehow, how would you answer the “ascended” part?

mike

Mikeboll64,

Unless we can separate what is literal from what is figurative, we will be guessing for a life time.

Jesus Christ said that he is the bread of life that came down from heaven.

Is Jesus Christ literally a loaf of bread?

No, he is human. He is not a loaf of bread.

Well, I don't like plain bread, I want some butter on it. Who is the butter of life? Who is the pastrami of life? Who is the pepper jack cheese of life? Who is the milk of life?

Wait, we are to eat his flesh and drink his blood. So, can't JC make up his mind. Is he bread or is he flesh?

Are we supposed to have a Jesus sandwich and wash it down with his blood?

There must be a figure of speech here.

Just having fun.

What if I went up to where God says I am? Ephesians teaches that I am seated together with all the saints with Christ at the right hand of God. Am I literally there? Are we literally there? No. but from God's perspective of spiritual truth regarding our standing as the result of God's redemptive work by His son, I am, (oh, God, I said the words, “I am”, that makes me God, doesn't it?) we are. We have access to the Father, as if we were actually seated next to Him. We have the perspective of being seated there. No problem to big for us. We are to be Gods right hand men, (women and children are included).

Since we are seated in the heavenlies with Jesus Christ, where are we from? Clearly we are from heaven. I might have been from Detroit originally, but now I am from heaven. Yesterday, I was in heaven seated on the right hand of God. So, if I go up to where I was before, namely, yesterday, where does that put me?

Therefore, yesterday, I preexisted on the right hand of the throne of God.

Scripture is to held in the utmost respect. After all, it is God's words to us.

God, in His wisdom, had it expressed in purified human terms, so that we as humans could relate to it.

God wants to be intimately involved with every aspect of our lives. When you are sitting on the toilet, have you thought that God knows what you are doing? Does that embarass you? It shouldn't. God designed the human body to do that.

Do we use figures of speech to communicate? Yes, why can't God? God is a high tower, Psalm 18:2. Is God literally a high tower? If so, which high tower? Where is it located? Can we go see this high tower so that we can talk with God? God is clearly using a figure of speech here.

A high tower affords the occupant a position of power, security and oversight. God does that for us.

Jesus Christ is not literally bread. He is saying that he is a staple, a basic part of our spiritual diet.

Likewise, he was not literally with God before his beginning, Matthew 1:18. Another post covered this.

Martian does a great job of teaching from the scripture on this subject. You would do yourself a great favor to seriously consider what he offers.

We want to avoid having only a narrow focus on statements that the word of God makes. We do not want to have tunnel vision with regards to the phrases of the word. Else we have, the “There is no God” dilemma. Psalm 53:1.

Keep studying.

oatmeal

July 31, 2010 at 2:56 pm#207062

Participant

ED J……….We can always count on you to be a fly in the ointment right. Your time would be better spent getting rid of you stupid numbering system and turning to the truth of GOD' S Word. Rather to going on a witch hunt and trying to fault others. IMO

peace and love…………………..gene

July 31, 2010 at 3:04 pm#207065