Preexistence

[Not3in1]

Quote (david @ Sep. 25 2008,15:10)

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.

David, let's cut to the chase.

What EXACTLY do you want from me?  Give me one question to answer, please.  And thank you.

Mandy

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 25 2008,18:07)

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.

Hi Mandy

But their are a lot more scriptures that support Yeshua's preexistence than there is of him being concieved, yet you build your doctrine on just that one scritpure.

WJ

[Not3in1]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 25 2008,19:06)

Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 25 2008,18:07) 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. Hi Mandy But their are a lot more scriptures that support Yeshua's preexistence than there is of him being concieved, yet you build your doctrine on just that one scritpure. WJ

Not exactly true. I build my belief from the gospels that teach about Jesus' beginnings……

They do not teach that he preexisted.

[Tiffany]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 25 2008,19:07)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 25 2008,19:06) Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 25 2008,18:07) 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. Hi Mandy But their are a lot more scriptures that support Yeshua's preexistence than there is of him being concieved, yet you build your doctrine on just that one scritpure. WJ Not exactly true.  I build my belief from the gospels that teach about Jesus' beginnings…… They do not teach that he preexisted.

Mandy that is because you don't study it enough. Before you make up your mind, look at all the scriptures. Not just one. That will not teach you enough. It say's that He came from Heaven, to do God's will. But that He is a plan, and a plan cannot go back to God, with the glory that He had from the beginning of the world.
John 17:5
Love Irene

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 25 2008,18:11)

Would something be a “prize” if you were in possession of it prior?

If it was God's glory, yes.

God's glory is never boring and never fades. It is always new.

I know that when I left New Zealand and lived in Colombia, I couldn't wait to return to New Zealand after a couple of years. How much more the anticipation if it was Heaven.

In fact to die for something you have never seen would be quite hard even risky (for the natural mind). Perhaps Yeshua didn't have a memory of the time when he was in God's glory before the foundation of the world. Maybe he had snippets of revelations from time to time, or perhaps he did know. It could even be that the memory resides in the nature and that might explain how the old things can be forgotten.

Whatever the case, I think that he had a walk of faith.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 25 2008,18:53)

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 t8 So then Yeshua was no longer Divine? So he ceased from being the Word/God? WJ

It says:

King James Version (KJV)
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

1) Existed in the form of theos or divine nature.
2) Made himself of no reputation
3) Existed in the flesh or human nature.

For us:
1) We exist in the flesh
2) We will exist with a spirit body.

So WJ, I will let you figure it out for yourself what this all means.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 25 2008,19:05)

David, let's cut to the chase. What EXACTLY do you want from me?  Give me one question to answer, please.  And thank you. Mandy

I would like to hazard a guess at what he wants.

Your reasons for believing what you do, and what you think of certain scriptures that in light of what he is saying, appear to contradict what you are teaching.

I think he is trying to get from you an answer and if you cannot provide it, then to perhaps say that you do not have the answer and therefore by reason of that he may advise you to be at least open minded to the possibility.

1 Peter 3:15 probably sums it up best.
But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 25 2008,19:06)

Hi Mandy But their are a lot more scriptures that support Yeshua's preexistence than there is of him being concieved, yet you build your doctrine on just that one scritpure. WJ

Good point WJ.

[gollamudi]

Hi Mandy,
Sis you are bold enough to face a cloud of preexistence believers. Cheers to you and you deserve kudos. I am always with your thoughts on negating this literal preexistence of our brother Jesus the first born Son of God and you & me are also God's children. Jesus nature was not different from us what we have now and will not be different even when we all get the body similar to that of Jesus. But God is always unique in nature and glory He can not be equal to any one in this whole universe including Jesus the very image of the Only True God.

Please take care
with love
Adam

[Proclaimer]

Quote (gollamudi @ Sep. 25 2008,22:02)

Sis you are bold enough to face a cloud of preexistence believers.

Hi Gol. Nice strategy, turning it into a them versus us scenario, instead of reconciling us with scripture as it should be.

How do you you reconcile the following with your teaching gol?

Q: Are you older than Abraham?
A: "Before Abraham, I am"

"With the glory I had with you before the world began"

God made all things through him and for him, and not anything was made without him.

Please do not just jump to the conclusion that this is all about the memory or idea of future things. Just read it for what it says (with no bias). It truly is a no brainer when you read what it says and not what your head is saying.

At the end of the day, if Jesus didn't pre-exist and that was the truth, then I would embrace it because all that matters is the truth. I don't lose money on Jesus pre-exisiting or not. I only see that he did exist from what is written in scripture.

In order to prove your case, you need to explain why quite a lot of scriptures seem to say the opposite of what you are saying. So far you and others haven't delivered. Either you and others have made a hash of it, or you just can't prove it because it isn't true. As it stand now, I haven't truly heard a good reason to believe what your view about those scriptures that appear to teach directly or indirectly that Jesus existed with the Father in the beginning.

I think many of us are still waiting for your smoking gun evidence. But I think I will be waiting the same amount of time for the reason why the Trinity doctrine is true. i.e., it probably will never happen. I have been here for years and no one has given conclusive evidence that the Trinity doctrine is true or that Jesus didn't have glory with the Father before the world began.

The good thing about these forums is that there is ample opportunity to prove what you are saying. You and others are not censored or banned because of your view on such things. But I think I can speak for quite a few people here and say, “where is the smoking gun?“.

[Lightenup]

Hi Mandy,
I might not remember this accurately but I believe that one of your questions you wondered was why Jesus should pre-exist, what was His purpose beforehand? The thought just came to me to ask you this question:
If the adoption agency that arranged for you to adopt your children asked you “would you like to have your children now, as babies, or when they are say 18 or 19?” I would bet the answer is obvious, it would be as soon as you can possibly have them, as babies.

Forgive me if you weren't wondering that, maybe it was someone else. My point is that I believe God wanted His Son as soon as He could have Him rather than thousands of years later too.

Love,
Kathi

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (t8 @ Sep. 25 2008,21:19)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 25 2008,18:53) 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 t8 So then Yeshua was no longer Divine? So he ceased from being the Word/God? WJ It says: King James Version (KJV) 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 1) Existed in the form of theos or divine nature. 2) Made himself of no reputation 3) Existed in the flesh or human nature. For us: 1) We exist in the flesh 2) We will exist with a spirit body. So WJ, I will let you figure it out for yourself what this all means.

t8
You didn't answer the question.

Quote (t8 @ Sep. 25 2008,21:19)

It seems that he swapped his nature from divine to human.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 25 2008,18:53)

So then Yeshua was no longer Divine? So he ceased from being the Word/God?

It is a simple yes or no answer. But I understand that you do not have an answer because it would not line up with scriptures that says he is God.

WJ

[Proclaimer]

Um wrong again WJ.

I am saying this.

1) Existed in the form of theos or divine nature.
2) Made himself of no reputation
3) Existed in the flesh or human nature.

It appears from the above that he existed with one nature then took on another with the view of humbling himself.

Now notice that my original post says “It seems”.

So I am open minded and teachable regarding what others have to say.

It's just that what you say is just a rehash of an ancient conspiracy to lead believers away from the truth that Jesus is the son of God, the foundational belief that underlies the Church, so I have lisitened but you are not convincing me. Rather, I am looking at the scripture objectively and saying it seems to say this, so I can provoke a response that could lead to further identifying what the verses are saying.

But you are trying to turn it into some kind of confession and pushing me to make a mistake. Sorry but I refuse to take the bait.

I stand on this:

1) Existed in the form of theos or divine nature.
2) Made himself of no reputation
3) Existed in the flesh or human nature.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (t8 @ Sep. 26 2008,10:52)

Um wrong again WJ. I am saying this. 1) Existed in the form of theos or divine nature. 2) Made himself of no reputation 3) Existed in the flesh or human nature. It appears from the above that he existed with one nature then took on another with the view of humbling himself. Now notice that my original post says “It seems”. So I am open minded and teachable regarding what others have to say. It's just that what you say is just a rehash of an ancient conspiracy to lead believers away from the truth that Jesus is the son of God, the foundational belief that underlies the Church, so I have lisitened but you are not convincing me. Rather, I am looking at the scripture objectively and saying it seems to say this, so I can provoke a response that could lead to further identifying what the verses are saying. But you are trying to turn it into some kind of confession and pushing me to make a mistake. Sorry but I refuse to take the bait. I stand on this: 1) Existed in the form of theos or divine nature. 2) Made himself of no reputation 3) Existed in the flesh or human nature.

Hi t8

Quote (t8 @ Sep. 26 2008,10:52)

But you are trying to turn it into some kind of confession and pushing me to make a mistake. Sorry but I refuse to take the bait. I stand on this: 1) Existed in the form of theos or divine nature.

You just made it.

The definition of “Theos” is not divine!  

So no, you are not anymore teachable than I am. You have not changed your mind on a single thing that I know of.

WJ

[david]

Quote

David, What are you doing here? Have you lost your mind….Mumfort? Mandy

Hi Mandy. I was trying to start over. You were getting annoyed at Dave.

[david]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 25 2008,19:06)

Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 25 2008,18:07) 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. Hi Mandy But their are a lot more scriptures that support Yeshua's preexistence than there is of him being concieved, yet you build your doctrine on just that one scritpure. WJ

Exactly Mandy. We need to look at the 40 or so scriptures that most would understand to mean that Jesus pre-existed. Phil 2:5-8 is a rather clear one to me. Hence, my frustration when it is dismissed and not really discussed at all.

For me, it seems you have about one scripture you are using to support your belief, from Luke. It mentions that Jesus was “conceived.”
And, you also believe that Jesus couldn't have been a real man if he pre-existed, but this just isn't based on any scripture anywhere.
True, no doctrine should be built on one scripture. But isn't it also true, that if you have to exclude one scripture to make your doctrine work, something is wrong?

[david]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 25 2008,18:18)

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

Mandy, you're missing my point. Nowhere did I ever suggest in the least that Adam pre-existed. But you have repeatedly said that Jesus could not be considered a real human if he pre-existed, because, you say, a human is someone who is truly the offspring of a man and woman.

But, that definition is clearly wrong…. Note Adam. He wasn't the offspring of a man and woman, but he is definitely human. If he isn't human, none of us are, for we are his offspring.

So, my only point, again, was that in these rare odd examples, where GOD IS INVOLVED, we can't always rely on the usual definitions.
Yes, a human is someone who is the offspring of the union of a man and woman. But, GOD DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO CREATE AN ACTUAL TRUE REAL HUMAN…..Adam…Jesus, both true humans, real actual humans….but neither were the result of a man and woman's sexual relations.

So, you cannot say or argue as you do that Jesus could never ever be a considered truly human because of the way he was brought about.
That argument is false, for WE KNOW that Adam was a human and WE KNOW that he wasn't made a human in the usual way.

This is one of your two main arguments regarding pre-existence.

That only leaves the word “conceiving.” I believe I have already commented on that. I would appreciate your thoughts on what I said.

David.

[david]

Quote

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?

I prefer David. But perhaps you're more comfortable with mumfort.

[david]

Quote

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).

Her words were correct of course. That is the conclusion and the point we are to draw from this scripture–we should act like Jesus, (in this case, with humility.) You should commend her. But I wonder if she could explain how Jesus showed humility? She, like most people who have read a verse the first time (without the indoctrination as you say) will focus on the last thing they heard, or read. Often, by the time they get to the end of a few verses, they can't remember the beginning. She seems to have focused on the last verse. I wonder how she would understand these verses:

who, although he was existing in God’s form, . . . .he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and came to be in the likeness of men.

She doesn't seem to have commented on these verses, the verses in question. If you were to read her the above (from your own Bible) I wonder what conclusion she would draw about Jesus. We know she has the main point, about humility and that Jesus death was an act of humility. But it's the verses above that we are actually wondering about.

Mandy, could you humor me and ask her this. I'm actually curious as to what she would say.

david

[david]

Quote

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”.

I know anyone can write it down mandy. Yet, after asking you a few times, I'm not so sure. And Mandy, the reason I keep repeating the scripture, is because I still have a theory that you actually can't see parts of it. And while it doesn't count for discussing the scripture in detail, as you say, I've discussed it infinitely more than it has been discussed in the first 50 or so pages of this thread. (I've only made it that far.) First, I want to know why it's discounted and largely ignored.

[Author]

Posts