- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
- Posts
Kenrch responded to my statements on page 42 and Mandy “ditto’d” his response.
Here’s his response:
“Jesus humbled himself not accepting any special gift as being the Word but rather became as you and I “in sinful flesh born under the law” the likeness of men.”Is that what it says?
I see no mention of “any special gifts” that Jesus could have accepted. It speaks of him existing in the morphe (nature/form/”outward appearance”–BU) of God and of him humbly taking on human form.
Also, on a side note, Jesus was born “in the flesh” but it was not “sinful flesh” as Kenrch here states. He was “without sin.” (Heb 4:15)
Then, Kenrch says:
“2Co 8:9 For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.
Was the Word who became flesh rich? YOU BET! But he denied any special treatment and emptied Himself of that privilege becoming in the same circumstances as we were born in.”To deny special treatement, you would have to pre-exist. Done. To empty Himself of any privelege as Kenrch states, he would have to pre-exist.
Kenrch asks this interesting question:
“Was Jesus the “Son of man” before becoming flesh? What was it that came down from heaven?”
Whatever or whoever it was, it/he had the ability to “deny” special treatement according to Kenrch. It/he emptied himself of any special privilege, as he says. And, it or he, was humble in doing so.As it turns out, Kenrch didn’t actually respond to my post very much. Actually, I’m not sure why he said most of what he said.
Why is it no one is actually willing to actually discuss what this scripture actually says. Why is it that when someone does attempt to discuss it, they always go off on some unrelated direction, but don't actually discuss what it says?
Quote I feel that the arguments made for Jesus not pre-existing in some form are quite lame in comparison to what scripture says. Ya. I've felt like addressing this too. And definitely regarding Phil 2:4-8. It's like people can't see the words! And often, instead of addressing the scripture, they start talking about the fact that I'm one of JW's or something else. It is quite “lame” as you say.
I think David has raised a number of good points lately, none of which appear to have been addressed.–Is 1:18, page 43.
It's frustrating when someone believes something, but has to ignore or sidestep a scripture to cling to those beliefs.
Quote A plan cannot empty itself.
Jesus was the Word/Logos before he was born. Once he was born, he was a living man. A man CAN empty himself of privileges that would otherwise be his.–p43
What did he exist as, before he was born? Yes, the Word. But is that a person? What is that? We know that whatever it is, it or he had to have the ability to act with humility, to choose the course he/it did. And we know that it/he existed in God's morphe (nature/form/or if you prefer, “outward appearance.”) All these highly suggest personage.
And yes, a man can empty himself of privileges. But that's messed up and not what the scripture says. Notice the sequence that Is 1:18 points out:
Quote I think David has raised a number of good points lately, none of which appear to have been addressed. Not3, the point you don't seem to want to face up to is this – there is a clear sequence of events in Phil 2:6-8:. . .
The sequence is as follows, Yeshua:1. Existed in the form of God
2. Emptied Himself
3. Took on the form of a bond-servant
4. Was made in the likeness of men
5. Was found in appearance as a man
6. Humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of deathBefore he emptied Himself He was in the form (morphe) God.
Before he found in appearance as a man He emptied Himself….
Do you now see why this verse so strongly speaks of His preexistence?
Quote David, this is the thing, OK, I don't believe Jesus preexisted because in the gospels we are told that Jesus was conceived and he was born. I take this literally. –p 44
I guess this would be another reason some don't believe Jesus pre-existed his human birth. But is it a good reason?
Conception: The act of conceiving in the womb.
Conceive: To become pregnant.
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/conceivingOf course, I'm guessing you prefer the definition such as:
Conception:
1. The union of the sperm and the ovum. Synonymous with fertilization.
2. The onset of pregnancy, marked by implantation of the blastocyst into the endometrium.Here's the thing. You're looking at too technical a definition. Joseph had no relations with her, we are told. Hence, this was not a normal conception, correct?
We have to remember that this was a miracle. It wasn't the normal way things are done. The physician, luke, could find the closest word “conception” and use it, but that's not really medically what happened, or at least, not as it's defined today.
If the Bible condradicts itself, none of this matters. But if it doesn't, and Joseph “had no intercourse with her until she gave birth to a son” then in we must understand the word 'conception' in a much more general sense. Also, over and over, we are told that it was by means of holy spirit that she became pregnant.
I see no mention of this in any definition of conception. So, clearly, this was no ordinary conception and we cannot limit it to how humans normally define conception.To take the word conception literally and understand it in the technical medical fashion a doctor would, we'd either have to say the Bible is wrong and ignore the fact that Joseph had no intercourse with her, and ignore the fact that it was actually by means of holy spirit, or say the Bible contradicts itself.
I'm also going to mark page 49, as a place where we were discussing the fact that Adam was a real human, despite being the result of a man and a woman conceiving him.
Quote Please let me know specifically which scriptures you would like my thoughts on. I do well with a couple scriptures at a time – not huge lists. When I'm on HeavenNet, I like to spend time reading as much as I post…….so I get overwhelmed with “answering” huge lists of scripture and questions. Thanks, David. I do appreciate you and your zeal for Jehovah God.
—page 53.
Philipians 2:5-8 And, as you said, “your thoughts.” I'd prefer your thoughts, or your child's thoughts, rather than a website that doesn't really answer any of the questions I've asked.
Ok, still awake. I found phil 2 again.
Quote Philippians tells us that while Jesus was who he was, he emptied himself of his privileges and did not seek equality with God (as a Son of a King could do). He humbled himself and “took on” the state or full human condition. Did he have to change anything to do that? Change his nature, or change his skin? No. He merely thought of others as more than himself – he humbled himself. He remained a man as we are with no special privileges. Why cannot this be true? What is wrong with this theory?
–page 59
Let's begin here:
Quote Did he have to change anything to do that? Change his nature, or change his skin? “he was existing in God’s form, . . . he emptied himself and took a slave’s form.”
Or, instead of “form/nature” insert “outward appearance” or whatever you like.This DEFINITELY was a change.
“he was existing in God’s form, . . . he emptied himself and took a slave’s form.”
How can this not be change?Quote Philippians tells us that while Jesus was who he was, he emptied himself of his privileges and did not seek equality with God
He would have to exist for him to “emtpy himself of his privileges.” He didn't do this when he was a man. If you read the scripture, you'll see an extremely clear sequence of events.Quote He humbled himself and “took on” the state or full human condition.
He would have to exist for himself to humble himself. If he didn't exist with the will to do this or that, and the choice was not his, then we cannot use the word “humble.” A plan or thought cannot humbly choose a course. I have a thought in my mind right now. Can that thought decide to humble itself? I'm beginning to think this just silly. I can have a thought to humbly MYSELF. But can a thought humble ITSELF?It seems that he swapped his nature from divine to human. He existed in the form of God, and then emptied himself and came in flesh.
Scripture also promises us that as we have a body of flesh, we will receive a spirit body.It seems to me that Christ became one of us, so that we can be one of him because it is written that he came in the flesh, and that we will be like him and see him as he is. In addition to this, he will also call us brothers.
Quote (david @ Sep. 24 2008,19:40) Quote If you believe Jesus existed prior to his birth, please give your scriptural understanding. As most of you know, I contend for the Son of God beginning his life – for the first time – at conception. –mandy.
Hi, my name is …. Mumfort.. I do believe he was “existing in God's form” prior to his birth. (Phil 2: 6) I see you don't. I'm wondering what your thoughts were on that verse, and the verses surrounding it?
M
David,
What are you doing here? Have you lost your mind….Mumfort?Mandy
Quote (david @ Sep. 25 2008,15:23) It's frustrating when someone believes something, but has to ignore or sidestep a scripture to cling to those beliefs.
And no doctrine should be built on one passage of scripture or even two or three…… The tenor of all the scriptures should be taken into account.Quote (t8 @ Sep. 24 2008,20:29) Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 16 2008,12:05) Not Superman, but it is written that he is from heaven and Adam was from the earth.
We follow Adam in our nature and being – we are from the earth.The difference is not something folks want to recognize and discuss.
He was tempted as we are. But he kept his eyes on the prize, i.e., to partake of the glory that he had with God before the world began.
Would something be a “prize” if you were in possession of it prior?Quote Yet, if Adam wasn't human, what are we, his offspring? Hence, I believe your definition of human does not take God into account.
David, I am also not arguing that Adam didn't preexist. Adam did not have a prior life. He was dirt, remember? So it's easy enough to believe God breathed like into him and created the first human being. Hey, it had to happen somehow. Which came first the chicken or the egg?Quote Or maybe I'm missing something. I'll keep reading.
It looks as if you are taking me on as your pesonal project? Since you are putting so much time and effort into this subject and me, I will do my best to answer you. But first I must know – what is your real name – is it David or Mumfort?
Mandy
Quote (david @ Sep. 25 2008,13:57) Quote They were simple people – like me. The message is simple. Last night, while laying in bed, I wondered what a child would think if he was given Phil 2:5-8 to read. I wonder what conclusions he would draw. I'm thinking, the uncomplicated right conclusions.
“Keep this mental attitude in YOU that was also in Christ Jesus,
who,
although he was existing in God’s form,
gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.
No, but he emptied himself
and
took a slave’s form and came to be in the likeness of men.
More than that, when he found himself in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient as far as death, yes, death on a torture stake.
Would a child reading this think that Jesus pre-existed?
Quote I see scripture very simply.
I'm not sure you see this scripture in the most simple way.
I asked my 9 year old what she thought this passage was saying and she told me that “….we should think like Jesus. He was really important but acted like he wasn't and he died for the people he loved.” Now that is simple. And no, she didn't even give a thought to preexistence. That requires a higher level of thinking (and indoctrination).Quote Quote
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.
–Mandy.Mandy, I don't think you did, not this scripture, Phil 2. Maybe you did, but I can't really find it.
On page 2 of this thread, you mention Phil 2, but don't actually address what it says. You counter with other thoughts.
Perhaps you would like to me to cut and paste private conversations I had with Isaiah regarding this passage? Also, David, just writing the scripture down in bold (which is what you are doing time and time again) doesn't count for discussing the scripture in detail. Anyone can “write it down”. But who is qualified to discern what the true meaning of the passage is for everyone? Apparently you think that you are qualified. So I will wait and see what your teaching is on this passage. So far you write it out in bold and declare that it means preexistence. Well, okay, but why?Quote But, that's not really what I'd call “hashing it out.”
You're funny, David. I call talking about scripture and sharing ideas about scripture – hashing it out. What do you define “hashing it out” as? So far I haven't seen you do anything different than I've done. Do you have some secrets about the passage that you plan to uncover or something? If so, do it man! 😉Quote I believe that according to the Philippians passage – Jesus was not using the privileges that he could have as the only begotten of God. In this way, he humbled himself. (Mandy)
(David) Still, for it to be humility, he would have had to pre-exist to choose whether to 'use the privileges that he could have' or not. If there was no choice, then there was no humility. And if he had the choice, doesn't this mean he had to preexist?
No. He could have used his privileges as a man – the Son of Man and the Son of God – but he chose not to. He was born a Prince, remember? His Daddy was/is the Almighty. He could have called on thousands of angels, remember? But he chose not to. Humility.Quote (david @ Sep. 25 2008,15:50) I'm also going to mark page 49, as a place where we were discussing the fact that Adam was a real human, despite being the result of a man and a woman conceiving him.
Yes, I'm glad you marked this page. Go back and review my responses to you – they would be the same responses I would give you now to the same questions. You see, we have hashed this out……I really don't see the need to do it again – do you? Honestly, I have given you my opinion on Adam and how God created him versus how Jesus became a Son. I don't have anything further (or new) to say on that topic.
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 25 2008,16:23) It seems that he swapped his nature from divine to human. He existed in the form of God, and then emptied himself and came in flesh.
Scripture also promises us that as we have a body of flesh, we will receive a spirit body.It seems to me that Christ became one of us, so that we can be one of him because it is written that he came in the flesh, and that we will be like him and see him as he is. In addition to this, he will also call us brothers.
Hi t8So then Yeshua was no longer Divine? So he ceased from being the Word/God?
WJ
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 25 2008,14:56) Quote (david @ Sep. 25 2008,14:49) Quote To humble one self is to start off in a higher place and to go down.
How could Jesus humble himself [by becoming] a man if he started life as a man?–t8, page 39
My thoughts exactly (now that I've changed the wording). I feel this question has not been addressed and that it has only been skirted around, and largely avoided throughout this thread.
I agree.I feel that the arguments made for Jesus not pre-existing in some form are quite lame in comparison to what scripture says.
Jesus said, “before Abraham, I am”.
Jesus went to the glory that he had with God before the world began.
God made all things through him and for him.
Perhaps lame…..But those of us who do not see preexistence in the hand-full of scriptures you claim speak of it so clearly – believe that those scriptures have various meanings OR can be interpreted differently. In other words, it's not clear.
You guys on the other hand take these passages literally. So for you, it's “clear”. To the rest of us it's “clear as mud”.
Quote (david @ Sep. 25 2008,15:09) Kenrch responded to my statements on page 42 and Mandy “ditto’d” his response. Here’s his response:
“Jesus humbled himself not accepting any special gift as being the Word but rather became as you and I “in sinful flesh born under the law” the likeness of men.”Is that what it says?
I see no mention of “any special gifts” that Jesus could have accepted.
I'm sure what Ken meant as “special gift” was the fact that Jesus was born a Prince and had at his disposal the very things of God. However Jesus chose not to acknowledge any of that advantage over us……true humility.Quote (david @ Sep. 25 2008,15:09) To deny special treatement, you would have to pre-exist. Done. To empty Himself of any privelege as Kenrch states, he would have to pre-exist.
I don't see the logic here, sorry.AFTER Jesus was born and grew in knowledge he realized who he was…..it was then that he humbled himself and didn't take advantage of his position. He lowered himself. He became poor. HE CHOSE to do this. But he was certainly alive when this revelation came to him.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
