Preexistence

[Lightenup]

Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 15 2008,22:30)

Hi all, Here are some scriptures that seem to indicate that the phrase “His angel” refers to Jesus's angel.  Also, in Rev 22:6 shows that Jesus is the “Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets.” Rev 1:1   The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John… Rev 22:6 And he said to me, “These words are faithful and true”; and the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent His angel to show to His bond-servants the things which must soon take place. Rev 22:16 “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David , the bright morning star.” Jesus is the God of the spirits of the prophets.  That's not a little “g” theos.  That is a divine theos who is the only begotten Son of the Most High Theos.  Jesus is the only begotten God. LU

Nick,
You can be fed too. Look at the scriptures I have given, they each bear witness to the other verses I have given.

LU

[NickHassan]

Hi LU,
None say the same thing.
That is the sort of support you need to define truth [2Cor13.1]

[Lightenup]

Hi Nick,
Wycliffe Bible Commentary disagrees with you. They say that Rev 22:6 is almost identical with Rev 1:1 except for “bondservant” becomes “bondservants.”

Revelation 22:6

And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.

The first statement is almost identical with the opening declaration of the Apocalypse (Rev 1:1-2), except that there one “servant” is mentioned, John, while here servants are mentioned.
(from The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright  1962 by Moody Press)

LU

[NickHassan]

No LU,
The angel of Jesus is an angel of God.

[Lightenup]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 17 2008,15:00)

No LU, The angel of Jesus is an angel of God.

Hi Nick,
In the context of Revelation, when we read “His angel” it is Jesus's angel.

Rev 22:16
“I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David , the bright morning star.”

All angels are also God the Father's angels for He owns everything but in Revelation, we see that the angel that was sent to make known the revelation from His Father was Jesus's angel.

LU

[NickHassan]

Hi lU,
The angel of Jesus is also an angel of God

[Lightenup]

Hi Nick,
Please do not seek to dimiss God's intent in Revelation by diminishing the fact that this angel is referred to as Jesus's angel.

Rev 1:1

[The Revelation of Jesus Christ] The word Apokalupsis (NT:602), from which we have our word Apocalypse, signifies literally, a revelation, or discovery of what was concealed or hidden. It is here said that this revelation, or discovery of hidden things, was given by God to Jesus Christ; that Christ gave it to his angel; that this angel showed it to JOHN; and that John sent it to the CHURCHES. Thus we find it came from God to Christ, from Christ to the angel, from the angel to John, and from John to the church.
(from Adam Clarke's Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright  1996 by Biblesoft)

LU

[NickHassan]

Hi LU,
Revelation is different.
Context is rather less compelling when at least 4 speak in it.

For example Rev 21 and 22 both have ALPHA and OMEGA in them but I do not think that in Rev 22 it should be put in the mouth of Jesus, the previous speaker, when Rev 21 clearly affirms it as a statement of God's.

If the translation showed it as a separate statement that could easily be shown.

[Lightenup]

Nick,
Read through the Alpha Omega First and Last thread and see that both Rev. scriptures which have Alpha and Omega in them can be argued that they both refer to Christ. Your point is opinion only.
LU

[gollamudi]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 16 2008,05:18)

Quote (gollamudi @ Sep. 14 2008,15:07) I praise God who has given this privillege and authority to a man Jesus who was made little lower than angels as you and me are also made like that. Hi Adam, There were men in the past who lived righteous lives and who even died for the cause of God.  A few of these men even found such favor with God that God blessed them into nations; he allowed a couple to not even see death, one to see his backside and the list goes on a bit.   I wonder what made Jesus any different than these other sons who were loved by God?  Why would he, a man, as you say, be exhalted to the right hand of God?  Why was he alone appointed to be the Savior of mankind and not the others? What do you think the difference is?  Read Hebrews, chapter 3 and get back to me. Jesus was more than just a man.  He was more than the first Adam.  He is the man from heaven! Love, Mandy

Hi Mandy,
Thanks again for your caring response to my post. I agree with you that certainly Jesus is different from all children of God but that does not mean his nature is different from other children of God since all children are human by their original nature but are transformed into God's Spiritual nature as God is Spirit. I also agree with our brother Nick on this understanding that Jesus the man was the most holy and perfect vessel for God to dwell in him and therefore was exalted above all creation of God including angels. I have read Heb 3 many times it says the same thing about Jesus that he is greater than all God's house hold including Moses.

Hope you will give more light on your understanding on Heb 3.

Thanks and love to you
Adam

[NickHassan]

Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 19 2008,00:25)

Nick, Read through the Alpha Omega First and Last thread and see that both Rev. scriptures which have Alpha and Omega in them can be argued that they both refer to Christ.  Your point is opinion only. LU

Hi LU,
Rev21
5And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

JESUS DOES NOT SIT IN THE PLACE OF GOD ALONE ON THE THRONE

6And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

7He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

WE ARE SONS OF GOD AND BROTHERS OF JESUS

[Lightenup]

Quote

Hi LU, Rev21 5And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. JESUS DOES NOT SIT IN THE PLACE OF GOD ALONE ON THE THRONE 6And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. 7He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. WE ARE SONS OF GOD AND BROTHERS OF JESUS

Hi Nick,

You do know that the Son does sit on His throne at the right hand of the Father?

Quote

5And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. JESUS DOES NOT SIT IN THE PLACE OF GOD ALONE ON THE THRONE

Matt 25:31-34

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.
(from New International Version)

The Son in His Glory will sit on His throne and gives the inheritance.

Also, the Son gives the living water.
John 4:13-14
13 Jesus answered and said to her, “Everyone who drinks of this water will thirst again;  14 but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life.”  
NASU

So, I have showed you that Christ sits on the throne, gives living water and inheritance.  He is our brother and also our God.  Here we see Him who will be called “mighty God” and “eternal Father.”
If He will be called Father, that would make us His sons.

Isa 9:6-7
6 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;
And the government will rest on His shoulders;
And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.
7 There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace,
On the throne of David and over his kingdom,
To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness
From then on and forevermore.
The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this.
NASU

LU

[NickHassan]

Hi LU,
God sits on His throne.
Of course the lamb does too but not alone.

Jesus is the one appointed as Judge of men on the White throne of Judgement

[Lightenup]

Hi Nick,
Who said anything about Him sitting on the throne alone. I'm missing your point.

LU

[Proclaimer]

Jesus sits on the Fathers throne with the Father and we can sit on Jesus throne with Jesus.

It's like an inheritance. We can rule with Christ and Christ rules with God.

[david]

Quote (Not3in1 @ May 30 2007,12:23)

Quote (t8 @ May 30 2007,10:53) What is this text [Phil 2:5-7] saying? Good question!  It depends on who you ask; you will certainly get all sorts of answers.  For you, it means that Christ preexisted and came in the guise of a man.  I do not believe this.  I do not believe the Messiah was sent into the world simply to don flesh!  In my opinion, that would not make him very human —– even if he willingly gave up prior glory.  How nice of him to stoop to my level?  No, he was a true son/Son.   No doubt this commitment to keeping a low profile about his true identity is exactly what Philippians is referring to, and removes this section of scripture from the mystical clutches of “kenotic Christology”.  This system belief, the handmaiden of “the incarnation,” teaches that Christ emptied himself of his “pre-incarnate divinity” before he was conceived.  How much simpler it is to place these verses in the specific context of the witness of Christ's life as revealed in the gospels.

Sure, some people believe this, and some people believe that.
And you seem to have your reasons for trying to understand this scripture a certain way.

But can you explain this scripture, the words in it? What do the words say?
What do the verses actually say?

It seems you don't want to comment on what they actually say.

[Not3in1]

Quote (david @ Sep. 24 2008,18:52)

Quote (Not3in1 @ May 30 2007,12:23) Quote (t8 @ May 30 2007,10:53) What is this text [Phil 2:5-7] saying? Good question!  It depends on who you ask; you will certainly get all sorts of answers.  For you, it means that Christ preexisted and came in the guise of a man.  I do not believe this.  I do not believe the Messiah was sent into the world simply to don flesh!  In my opinion, that would not make him very human —– even if he willingly gave up prior glory.  How nice of him to stoop to my level?  No, he was a true son/Son.   No doubt this commitment to keeping a low profile about his true identity is exactly what Philippians is referring to, and removes this section of scripture from the mystical clutches of “kenotic Christology”.  This system belief, the handmaiden of “the incarnation,” teaches that Christ emptied himself of his “pre-incarnate divinity” before he was conceived.  How much simpler it is to place these verses in the specific context of the witness of Christ's life as revealed in the gospels. Sure, some people believe this, and some people believe that.   And you seem to have your reasons for trying to understand this scripture a certain way. But can you explain this scripture, the words in it?  What do the words say? What do the verses actually say? It seems you don't want to comment on what they actually say.

David,

How many times has this passage been written out. Written out and commented on? It would take us all night to count up the numbers. It would take even longer to categorize all the different views and interpretations.

No, I'm not interested in contributing to that pile of theory any more. Sorry to disappoint you.

Goodnight bro,
Mandy

[david]

I'm sure Phil 2 must have come up in this thread more than on page 2, where it largely ignored.

We are to have the same attitude as Christ, who existed in God's form, and took on a slaves form.

There, done. Jesus pre-existed.

Since this scripture is speaking of having the same mental attitude of humility that Christ had, it goes without saying that Christ acted with humility in taking on a human form.
Logically, Jesus had to pre-exist as a person to do this, to show humility, to knowingly act in this fashion.

Secondly, it actually says he existed in God's form or nature. What is God's form? Is God's form a plan or a thought? Does God exist as a thought? No. The verse contrasts God's form with Jesus humbly taking on the form of a slave (a human). Jesus went from God's form to man's form–spirit to flesh.

Here's what the scripture says.

5Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
7but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—

[david]

Quote

How many times has this passage been written out.  Written out and commented on?

I have no idea how many times you've written it out, or specifically commented on what it actually says.  But I can't find any.  This is a long thread though.

You're not so much disappointing me as confirming what I believe. There is no argument against what the scripture actually says.

If you wrote it out, as I've said before, you'd have to skip sections for it to make sense with what you believe. Your refusal to do this or to copy it or to have anything to do with looking at it or putting it down in print only confirms that you do not see most of this scripture.

On page 2, when t8 commented on each of the verses and what they say, you did not contradict anything he said. You only directed attention elsewhere and used some large words.
Why?

[Not3in1]

Quote (david @ Sep. 24 2008,19:03)

Quote How many times has this passage been written out.  Written out and commented on? I have no idea how many times you've written it out, or specifically commented on what it actually says.  But I can't find any.  This is a long thread though.

Trust me. I've hashed it out with the best of them. That's why I'm tired of it. I admire your enthusiasm, David. Keep up the great debate.

Jesus preexisted. OK, I believe it. Sure, why not?

[Author]

Posts