Preexistence

[Not3in1]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 17 2008,13:24)

Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 17 2008,07:34) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 17 2008,05:47) Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 17 2008,04:16) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 16 2008,19:24) Hi Mandy, Yes it says that once. Proof requires two witnesses. There are two to the Word being WITH GOD.[1jn1, Jn1-2] I see. Question:  does the dogma of the second coming have two witnesses?  How about other dogma's?   Using this rule of thumb would disqualify quite a few teachings, would it not? Thanks, Mandy Hi Mandy, We are not speaking of truth but proof. 2Cor13.1 So the “truth” then is that the Word was God. Alas, we have come full circle. Hi mandy, This is truth but because it is not witnessed by other verses it's full understanding is unproveable.

That is convenient for you. However I believe Keith would say that it IS witnessed to in many scriptures. Where does when go from there?

Here we go 'round the mulberry bush, the mulberry bush, the mulberry bush…..

[Not3in1]

Quote (t8 @ Oct. 17 2008,12:58)

Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 16 2008,18:03) Quote (david @ Oct. 16 2008,12:04) “Let US make man in our image.” David, This passage has many explainations (one such explaination is given in the NIV Study Bible).  This is not solid proof of Jesus' preexistence; not at all.  If this one verse convinces you, I would encourage you to rethink your theology. Love, Mandy That is right, on its own it certainly doesn't prove that. But coupled with the idea that God made all things through him and for him, then it starts to become more compelling. Add in Jesus own claim, “before Abraham, I am” and the case becomes very strong. Then add in the fact that his origins are from ancient times, and the case in now stronger again. Then consider that he is the Word of God that was with God in the beginning, that he is called the wisdom of God and the fact that wisdom was the first work of the Father and it all seems a bit of a no brainer, unless of course God intended to give us the wrong impression or there is a conspiracy to give this impression from the translators.

I would say that the verses you added to give more standing to the preexistence claim are they, themselves, in the same category as the “Lets make man in our image” passage.

They also can be explained another way that does not have to have preexistence as a qualifier.

[gollamudi]

Good points you made Mandy.
People are making 'Word' as 'a god' or a small god. Infact in Greek it is written as 'And God was the word”. That means God and word are one and the same. Now God and Jesus are separate since the word became flesh and called as Jesus. Yes every body is turning round and round around the Mulberry tree. coming to the same point again and again.

Thanks and love to you
Adam

[Not3in1]

Hi Kathi,
I have a couple responses to you. One is here on page 464 and the other one is in the Trinity2 thread (can't remember what page you'll have to scroll back to find it).

I know how busy life with kids can be, so I just wanted to put this reminder up that I've addressed some of your posts. I didn't want you to think I overlooked them. Take care, I hope all is well.

Love,
Mandy

[Lightenup]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 16 2008,01:50)

Hi Kathi, It's been a long, long day for me.  I will try to make this short. Quote My sons were not concevied by the Holy Spirit as was Jesus. True.  But my point is that The Father chose to use the concept and reality of conception for a reason.  If all Jesus needed was skin and bones (because he already had his own nature) God could have just popped a shell of a man into being and plopped Jesus inside of it. Quote When a woman conceives without the help of a human man it is a unique situation and we need not insist they bring about the same result to those who conceive with a human man. But she still CONCEIVED.  That word has to mean something.  The Father wanted Jesus' conception to mean something.  It wasn't simply a formality.   Quote If God wanted the same result, He could have had Joseph conceive with Mary. Exactly!  God wanted HIS OWN SON.  God fathered his own son.  It offends so many…. Quote He was different than John the Baptist.  John was conceived by an earthly father and an earthly mother and NO, John didn't pre-exist his conception.  I'm not sure at all why you would ask that. Sorry, I wasn't very clear.  The reason I asked if John preexisted his conception was because the angel of the LORD compared Mary's pregnancy to that of Elizabeth's (in so many words).  He sort of said, “Hey Mary, your pregnant now and guess who else is pregnant at the same time – your cousin, Elizabeth!”  We were not privy to one preexisting and the other being a status quo baby – both the pregnacies sounded comparable (and we know John didn't preexist). Quote You asked if I can seperate my son's nature from his body.  Well I surely can't, once I couldn't even seperate the bubble gum from his hair.:;):   God can do anything necessary though. Sure, God can do anything.  But what would be the logic in it?  No logic needed – some may say.  But pray tell, how are we to make sense of anything then?  If we understand conception and birth (a very basic humanistic process) then why would God mess with that and say instead, “If it walks like a duck – and talks like a duck – it's really a dove in a duck's body.” Quote Quite possibly there are two natures within man.  The nature of the flesh and the nature of the spirit (or innerman). Mark 14:38-39 38 ” Keep watching and praying that you may not come into temptation; the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” NASU I read that God can seperate the flesh from the spirit.  When we die, the flesh returns to the dust and the spirit returns to the One who gave it. So, I think that the innerman of Jesus was of a divine nature and pre-existed His conception within Mary.  The outerman of Jesus was of an earthly nature and did not pre-exist His conception within Mary, IMO. With all due respect here, Kathi, I think this is a huge leap within this simple thought process. Because you think the spirit and flesh can and are divided, you have concluded that one can preexist the other.  Where is your evidence for this? Quote For one reason that the Son of God had to be there in existence before creation was to witness the power of the Father and to witness that the Father is indeed the source of all things good. God ALMIGHTY needs a witness? Is it written anywhere? Quote One of the purposes of Jesus as a man was to explain the Father.  If He existed since before creation then He was more than qualified for that task. Jesus told the disciples that he had bread to eat of that they knew nothing about.  I'm certain he wasn't just referring to the kind of bread you can eat.  I'm sure the Father filled Jesus in adequately.  Jesus didn't need to be there from the beginning for the Father to reveal himself to his Son and get him up-to-speed, so to speak.   Quote Otherwise, if Jesus didn't exist as a living being until conception in Mary, He really couldn't explain Him any better than John the Baptist. Kathi, do you seriously believe this or are you pondering this still?  Jesus needed to preexist to have had on-the-job training?  You don't think that God ALMIGHTY could have closed the gap in the training process for his boy?  Don't you believe that sometimes God brings you along in your understanding sometimes faster than other's?  Couldn't he surely have done this for the Messiah – his own Son? Quote Being the pre-existent Son within the baby of which the Holy Spirit conceived with Mary truly gave us the Son of God within a man. Boy, say this five times fast!  😉  It won't make any more sense if you do, trust me. I don't mean to disprespect you, because I certainly DO respect you.  But a son (if language means anything) is the offspring of two parents.  TOGETHER they create a new, unique life.  One does not *just* contribute the nature, and the other *just* the skin and bones.  It doesn't work that way for us, and I'm convinced that it didn't work that way for Jesus either.  God would have told us if he was pulling a fast one on us and changing the rules.   Kathi, I sure hope you take this all with the spirit it was given (which is a tired spirit and one that doesn't mean to offend).  I'm glad to have this dialog with you. Love, Mandy

Hi Mandy,
I'm sorry that it took over a day to respond. Thank you for your patience. It is not unusual for me though, so if you don't get a speedy delivery from me it is not because I don't want to respond.

Regarding the idea that the spirit can be sep
erated from the body you might look at this passage:
Heb 4:12-13
12 For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. 13 And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do.
NASU

You can see that the soul and spirit can be divided from the joints and marrow.

Regarding being born with a spirit that existed before the body's conception you can read this:

Luke 1:15
15 “For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb.
NASU

That speaks of John the Baptist. My point is that even before John's birth, he had a pre-existing spirit within him. I do not think it to be a stretch to say that Jesus could have a pre-existent spirit within Him before His birth also.

Regarding the dove within the duck bit, I would say that the scriptures tell us in many ways that this “duck” is different. In other words, this child is different.
1. Mary gets visited by an angel telling her that she will conceive as a virgin by the power of the Holy Spirit, without the agency of a human man.
2. The angel tells Joseph the same.
3. Elizabeth speaks amazing things to Mary and calls her the Mother of “my Lord”
4. Joseph believes the angel and takes Mary as his wife
5. Prophecy is fulfilled.
6. A host of angels declare His birth and calls Him the Christ on that very day of His birth
7. The shepherds come to see the baby
8. Wise men travel by following a star in order to worship the baby. No baby announcements were even sent.
9. The wise men bring expensive gifts to someone's baby that they had never met.

If all that doesn't tell you that the “duck” isn't just a normal “duck”, I can't help you.

If God just popped a shell of a man into being without conception then it wouldn't have fulfilled prophecy. Conception had to be part of it for there to be birth from a virgin with a Jewish bloodline and of a woman betrothed to a Man from the line of David.

Regarding whether God could have clued Jesus in on who He was so that Jesus could explain Him, I say this:
A eyewitness is better that second hand knowledge. Did God need a witness, no but a witness is a huge plus isn't it. Ask any court.

I gotta run, I hope that I have addressed the main concerns here, if not, let me know.

Love,
Kathi

[NickHassan]

Hi LU,
That verse in Hebrews shows the spirit can be discerned apart from the soul.
The spirit of man returns to God.

[Lightenup]

Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 14 2008,23:58)

Hi Mandy and Nick and Irene, There are indeed many verses that state that God is invisible for sure.  From man's perspective, the Most High God has remained unseen except by Moses who saw His form and the Son of God who actually has seen Him in a way no man has seen Him including Moses. Num 12:5-8 5 Then the LORD came down in a pillar of cloud and stood at the doorway of the tent, and He called Aaron and Miriam. When they had both come forward, 6 He said, “Hear now My words: If there is a prophet among you, I, the LORD, shall make Myself known to him in a vision. I shall speak with him in a dream. 7 “Not so, with My servant Moses, He is faithful in all My household; 8 With him I speak mouth to mouth, Even openly, and not in dark sayings, And he beholds the form of the LORD. Why then were you not afraid To speak against My servant, against Moses?” NASU Heb 11:27 27 By faith he (Moses) left Egypt, not fearing the king's anger; he persevered because he saw him who is invisible. (from New International Version) John 1:18 18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.   NASU This next passage gives us a reason why God remains invisible to us: Deut 4:15-19 15 “So watch yourselves carefully, since you did not see any form on the day the LORD spoke to you at Horeb from the midst of the fire, 16 so that you do not act corruptly and make a graven image for yourselves in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female, 17 the likeness of any animal that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged bird that flies in the sky, 18 the likeness of anything that creeps on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the water below the earth. NASU He does not want us to make a form of Him to worship as those who made graven images of their gods and then worshiped them. Quote I see that Nick has given some excellent scriptures for you to look at regarding God's “form”.  This is how God exists normally.  So if Jesus is in God's form, then this rules out Jesus being an angel, the light, or a messenger of any kind. We have to look at all the scriptures including the ones at the beginning of this post. I do not know how you would know how God exists normally. I don't believe that the Son of God can be classified as an angel, a messenger-yes, but not a created angel. Just because He is in the form of God doesn't mean that He can't be the light or a messenger, I don't know where you are coming up with this stuff. Phil 2:5-6 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although HE EXISTED IN THE FORM OF GOD… NASU John 8:12 Then Jesus again spoke to them, saying, ” I AM THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life.” NASU Heb 1:1-2 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son… NASU In the above three verses we clearly see that the Son of God existed in the “form” of God and that He is the “Light” of the world and that God speaks through Him.  So you see that He can exist in the form of God and be the Light and a messenger.

Mandy,
Regarding the comments that you wanted me to address in the trinity thread, you moved the conversation to this thread and you are even making yourself dizzy
This above quote from the pre-existent thread was your response to that I believe. if not then you are going to have to point me to the correct post that you want me to address.

Have a great day, TGIF
Love,
Kathi

[Lightenup]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 17 2008,13:47)

Hi LU, That verse in Hebrews shows the spirit can be discerned apart from the soul. The spirit of man returns to God.

Hi Nick,
That's true.
LU

[Tiffany]

Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 18 2008,05:43)

Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 16 2008,01:50) Hi Kathi, It's been a long, long day for me.  I will try to make this short. Quote My sons were not concevied by the Holy Spirit as was Jesus. True.  But my point is that The Father chose to use the concept and reality of conception for a reason.  If all Jesus needed was skin and bones (because he already had his own nature) God could have just popped a shell of a man into being and plopped Jesus inside of it. Quote When a woman conceives without the help of a human man it is a unique situation and we need not insist they bring about the same result to those who conceive with a human man. But she still CONCEIVED.  That word has to mean something.  The Father wanted Jesus' conception to mean something.  It wasn't simply a formality.   Quote If God wanted the same result, He could have had Joseph conceive with Mary. Exactly!  God wanted HIS OWN SON.  God fathered his own son.  It offends so many…. Quote He was different than John the Baptist.  John was conceived by an earthly father and an earthly mother and NO, John didn't pre-exist his conception.  I'm not sure at all why you would ask that. Sorry, I wasn't very clear.  The reason I asked if John preexisted his conception was because the angel of the LORD compared Mary's pregnancy to that of Elizabeth's (in so many words).  He sort of said, “Hey Mary, your pregnant now and guess who else is pregnant at the same time – your cousin, Elizabeth!”  We were not privy to one preexisting and the other being a status quo baby – both the pregnacies sounded comparable (and we know John didn't preexist). Quote You asked if I can seperate my son's nature from his body.  Well I surely can't, once I couldn't even seperate the bubble gum from his hair.:;):   God can do anything necessary though. Sure, God can do anything.  But what would be the logic in it?  No logic needed – some may say.  But pray tell, how are we to make sense of anything then?  If we understand conception and birth (a very basic humanistic process) then why would God mess with that and say instead, “If it walks like a duck – and talks like a duck – it's really a dove in a duck's body.” Quote Quite possibly there are two natures within man.  The nature of the flesh and the nature of the spirit (or innerman). Mark 14:38-39 38 ” Keep watching and praying that you may not come into temptation; the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” NASU I read that God can seperate the flesh from the spirit.  When we die, the flesh returns to the dust and the spirit returns to the One who gave it. So, I think that the innerman of Jesus was of a divine nature and pre-existed His conception within Mary.  The outerman of Jesus was of an earthly nature and did not pre-exist His conception within Mary, IMO. With all due respect here, Kathi, I think this is a huge leap within this simple thought process. Because you think the spirit and flesh can and are divided, you have concluded that one can preexist the other.  Where is your evidence for this? Quote For one reason that the Son of God had to be there in existence before creation was to witness the power of the Father and to witness that the Father is indeed the source of all things good. God ALMIGHTY needs a witness? Is it written anywhere? Quote One of the purposes of Jesus as a man was to explain the Father.  If He existed since before creation then He was more than qualified for that task. Jesus told the disciples that he had bread to eat of that they knew nothing about.  I'm certain he wasn't just referring to the kind of bread you can eat.  I'm sure the Father filled Jesus in adequately.  Jesus didn't need to be there from the beginning for the Father to reveal himself to his Son and get him up-to-speed, so to speak.   Quote Otherwise, if Jesus didn't exist as a living being until conception in Mary, He really couldn't explain Him any better than John the Baptist. Kathi, do you seriously believe this or are you pondering this still?  Jesus needed to preexist to have had on-the-job training?  You don't think that God ALMIGHTY could have closed the gap in the training process for his boy?  Don't you believe that sometimes God brings you along in your understanding sometimes faster than other's?  Couldn't he surely have done this for the Messiah – his own Son? Quote Being the pre-existent Son within the baby of which the Holy Spirit conceived with Mary truly gave us the Son of God within a man. Boy, say this five times fast!  😉  It won't make any more sense if you do, trust me. I don't mean to disprespect you, because I certainly DO respect you.  But a son (if language means anything) is the offspring of two parents.  TOGETHER they create a new, unique life.  One does not *just* contribute the nature, and the other *just* the skin and bones.  It doesn't work that way for us, and I'm convinced that it didn't work that way for Jesus either.  God would have told us if he was pulling a fast one on us and changing the rules.   Kathi, I sure hope you take this all with the spirit it was given (which is a tired spirit and one that doesn't mean to offend).  I'm glad to have this dialog with you. Love, Mandy Hi Mandy, I'm sorry that it took over a day to respond.  Thank you for yo ur patience.  It is not unusual for me though, so if you don't get a speedy delivery from me it is not because I don't want to respond. Regarding the idea that the spirit can be seperated from the body you might look at this passage: Heb 4:12-13 12 For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. 13 And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do. NASU You can see that the soul and spirit can be divided from the joints and marrow. Regarding being born with a spirit that existed before the body's conception you can read this: Luke 1:15 15 “For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb. NASU That speaks of John the Baptist.  My point is that even before John's birth, he had a pre-existing spirit within him.  I do not think it to be a stretch to say that Jesus could have a pre-existent spirit within Him before His birth also. Regarding the dove within the duck bit, I would say that the scriptures tell us in many ways that this “duck” is different.  In other words, this child is different. 1. Mary gets visited by an angel telling her that she will conceive as a virgin by the power of the Holy Spirit, without the agency of a human man. 2. The angel tells Joseph the same. 3. Elizabeth speaks amazing things to Mary and calls her the Mother of “my Lord” 4. Joseph believes the angel and takes Mary as his wife 5. Prophecy is fulfilled. 6. A host of angels declare His birth and calls Him the Christ on that very day of His birth 7. The shepherds come to see the baby 8. Wise men travel by following a star in order to worship the baby.  No baby announcements were even sent. 9. The wise men bring expensive gifts to someone's baby that they had never met. If all that doesn't tell you that the “duck” isn't just a normal “duck”, I can't help you. If God just popped a shell of a man into being without conception then it wouldn't have fulfilled prophecy.  Conception had to be part of it for there to be birth from a virgin with a Jewish bloodline and of a woman betrothed to a Man from the line of David.   Regarding whether God could have clued Jesus in on who He was so that Jesus could explain Him, I say this: A eyewitness is better that second hand knowledge.  Did God need a witness, no but a witness is a huge plus isn't it.  Ask any court. I gotta run, I hope that I have addressed the main concerns here, if not, let me know. Love, Kathi

Kathi I want to address what you said how John was a preexisting spirit. You make it sound like that Jesus did too. That is ignoring other Scriptures that I believe all here know which ones they are, have put them up enough times.
So Mandy and Kathi what are you going to do with those scriptures?
I always was under the impression that you Kathi knew?
Was somewhat surprised. Or was that a printing error?
God wanted a fresh and humble vessel for Baby Jesus. Maria fit, She was a Virgin and pure in heart. How She conceived is second dairy.( I don't knowhow to dairy) We know it was done by God's Holy Spirit and that is all we have to know.

Peace and Love Irene

[Not3in1]

Hi Kathi,

Thanks for getting back with me.

Quote

Luke 1:15 15 “For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb. NASU That speaks of John the Baptist. My point is that even before John's birth, he had a pre-existing spirit within him.

Where does this passage speak of a preexisting spirit for John? I don't see it.

Quote

You can see that the soul and spirit can be divided from the joints and marrow.

Yes, but the scriptures do not show that the spirit preexisted being united with the joints and marrow. This is the thrust of our argument, after all.

Quote

If all that doesn't tell you that the “duck” isn't just a normal “duck”, I can't help you.

LOL, Kathi, what you have explained are the unusual events that took place in order to produce the duck. What you did not address is the fact that the duck is still a duck! We don't want to believe that Jesus is a mere man, however he was indeed a man. We want to believe that what was inside him was a preexistent soul/nature, but how can we embrace what we are given as fact (that Jesus was a man) if we continue in our belief that he was *other* than a man on the inside? I just don't know how to reconcile those two ideas.

Quote

Regarding whether God could have clued Jesus in on who He was so that Jesus could explain Him, I say this: A eyewitness is better that second hand knowledge. Did God need a witness, no but a witness is a huge plus isn't it. Ask any court.

Certainly Jesus called on his Father to be one of HIS witnesses, but God does not need a witness. Nor would he create Jesus before he was born for that reason either, imo.

Thanks,
Mandy

[Not3in1]

Hi Kathi,

I bumped the Trinity2 response from me that I didn't think you've seen yet? Take a peak and see – I may be making myself dizzy, indeed! I've been burning the candle at both ends lately and stay up way tooooo late!

Take care and have a great weekend! I am waiting to hear about a job that I applied for (Assistant Funeral Director) at a local cemetery.

Love,
Mandy

[Lightenup]

Quote (Tiffany @ Oct. 17 2008,14:54)

Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 18 2008,05:43) Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 16 2008,01:50) Hi Kathi, It's been a long, long day for me.  I will try to make this short. Quote My sons were not concevied by the Holy Spirit as was Jesus. True.  But my point is that The Father chose to use the concept and reality of conception for a reason.  If all Jesus needed was skin and bones (because he already had his own nature) God could have just popped a shell of a man into being and plopped Jesus inside of it. Quote When a woman conceives without the help of a human man it is a unique situation and we need not insist they bring about the same result to those who conceive with a human man. But she still CONCEIVED.  That word has to mean something.  The Father wanted Jesus' conception to mean something.  It wasn't simply a formality.   Quote If God wanted the same result, He could have had Joseph conceive with Mary. Exactly!  God wanted HIS OWN SON.  God fathered his own son.  It offends so many…. Quote He was different than John the Baptist.  John was conceived by an earthly father and an earthly mother and NO, John didn't pre-exist his conception.  I'm not sure at all why you would ask that. Sorry, I wasn't very clear.  The reason I asked if John preexisted his conception was because the angel of the LORD compared Mary's pregnancy to that of Elizabeth's (in so many words).  He sort of said, “Hey Mary, your pregnant now and guess who else is pregnant at the same time – your cousin, Elizabeth!”  We were not privy to one preexisting and the other being a status quo baby – both the pregnacies sounded comparable (and we know John didn't preexist). Quote You asked if I can seperate my son's nature from his body.  Well I surely can't, once I couldn't even seperate the bubble gum from his hair.:;):   God can do anything necessary though. Sure, God can do anything.  But what would be the logic in it?  No logic needed – some may say.  But pray tell, how are we to make sense of anything then?  If we understand conception and birth (a very basic humanistic process) then why would God mess with that and say instead, “If it walks like a duck – and talks like a duck – it's really a dove in a duck's body.” Quote Quite possibly there are two natures within man.  The nature of the flesh and the nature of the spirit (or innerman). Mark 14:38-39 38 ” Keep watching and praying that you may not come into temptation; the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” NASU I read that God can seperate the flesh from the spirit.  When we die, the flesh returns to the dust and the spirit returns to the One who gave it. So, I think that the innerman of Jesus was of a divine nature and pre-existed His conception within Mary.  The outerman of Jesus was of an earthly nature and did not pre-exist His conception within Mary, IMO. With all due respect here, Kathi, I think this is a huge leap within this simple thought process. Because you think the spirit and flesh can and are divided, you have concluded that one can preexist the other.  Where is your evidence for this? Quote For one reason that the Son of God had to be there in existence before creation was to witness the power of the Father and to witness that the Father is indeed the source of all things good. God ALMIGHTY needs a witness? Is it written anywhere? Quote One of the purposes of Jesus as a man was to explain the Father.  If He existed since before creation then He was more than qualified for that task. Jesus told the disciples that he had bread to eat of that they knew nothing about.  I'm certain he wasn't just referring to the kind of bread you can eat.  I'm sure the Father filled Jesus in adequately.  Jesus didn't need to be there from the beginning for the Father to reveal himself to his Son and get him up-to-speed, so to speak.   Quote Otherwise, if Jesus didn't exist as a living being until conception in Mary, He really couldn't explain Him any better than John the Baptist. Kathi, do you seriously believe this or are you pondering this still?  Jesus needed to preexist to have had on-the-job training?  You don't think that God ALMIGHTY could have closed the gap in the training process for his boy?  Don't you believe that sometimes God brings you along in your understanding sometimes faster than other's?  Couldn't he surely have done this for the Messiah – his own Son? Quote Being the pre-existent Son within the baby of which the Holy Spirit conceived with Mary truly gave us the Son of God within a man. Boy, say this five times fast!  😉  It won't make any more sense if you do, trust me. I don't mean to disprespect you, because I certainly DO respect you.  But a son (if language means anything) is the offspring of two parents.  TOGETHER they create a new, unique life.  One does not *just* contribute the nature, and the other *just* the skin and bones.  It doesn't work that way for us, and I'm convinced that it didn't work that way for Jesus either.  God would have told us if he was pulling a fast one on us and changing the rules.   Kathi, I sure hope you take this all with the spirit it was given (which is a tired spirit and one that doesn&#39 ;t mean to offend).  I'm glad to have this dialog with you. Love, Mandy Hi Mandy, I'm sorry that it took over a day to respond.  Thank you for your patience.  It is not unusual for me though, so if you don't get a speedy delivery from me it is not because I don't want to respond. Regarding the idea that the spirit can be seperated from the body you might look at this passage: Heb 4:12-13 12 For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. 13 And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do. NASU You can see that the soul and spirit can be divided from the joints and marrow. Regarding being born with a spirit that existed before the body's conception you can read this: Luke 1:15 15 “For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb. NASU That speaks of John the Baptist.  My point is that even before John's birth, he had a pre-existing spirit within him.  I do not think it to be a stretch to say that Jesus could have a pre-existent spirit within Him before His birth also. Regarding the dove within the duck bit, I would say that the scriptures tell us in many ways that this “duck” is different.  In other words, this child is different. 1. Mary gets visited by an angel telling her that she will conceive as a virgin by the power of the Holy Spirit, without the agency of a human man. 2. The angel tells Joseph the same. 3. Elizabeth speaks amazing things to Mary and calls her the Mother of “my Lord” 4. Joseph believes the angel and takes Mary as his wife 5. Prophecy is fulfilled. 6. A host of angels declare His birth and calls Him the Christ on that very day of His birth 7. The shepherds come to see the baby 8. Wise men travel by following a star in order to worship the baby.  No baby announcements were even sent. 9. The wise men bring expensive gifts to someone's baby that they had never met. If all that doesn't tell you that the “duck” isn't just a normal “duck”, I can't help you. If God just popped a shell of a man into being without conception then it wouldn't have fulfilled prophecy.  Conception had to be part of it for there to be birth from a virgin with a Jewish bloodline and of a woman betrothed to a Man from the line of David.   Regarding whether God could have clued Jesus in on who He was so that Jesus could explain Him, I say this: A eyewitness is better that second hand knowledge.  Did God need a witness, no but a witness is a huge plus isn't it.  Ask any court. I gotta run, I hope that I have addressed the main concerns here, if not, let me know. Love, Kathi Kathi I want to address what you said how John was a preexisting  spirit. You make it sound like that Jesus did too.  That is ignoring other Scriptures that I believe all here know which ones they are, have put them up enough times. So Mandy and Kathi what are you going to do with those scriptures? I always was under the impression that you Kathi knew? Was somewhat surprised. Or was that a printing error? God wanted a fresh and humble vessel for Baby Jesus. Maria fit, She was a Virgin and pure in heart. How She conceived is second dairy.( I don't knowhow to dairy) We know it was done by God's Holy Spirit and that is all we have to know. Peace and Love Irene

Hi Irene,

In your comment to me:

Quote

Kathi I want to address what you said how John was a preexisting spirit. You make it sound like that Jesus did too.

did you mean to say this:

Kathi I want to address what you said how JESUS was a preexisting spirit. You make it sound like JOHN did too.

I hope that is what you meant and I will assume that is what you meant and I will clear that up for you hopefully. Geesh!
Between you and Mandy my head is starting to spin

This quote below is pointing out that John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit while in the womb. The Holy Spirit is from the Father, correct? That Holy Spirit existed before John was conceived, right? So my point was simply that a baby within the womb can have a spirit within him that pre-existed his conception. I am not saying that John's personal spirit pre-existed his conception but the Holy Spirit of God did.

Quote

Luke 1:15 15 “For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb. NASU That speaks of John the Baptist. My point is that even before John's birth, he had a pre-existing spirit within him. I do not think it to be a stretch to say that Jesus could have a pre-existent spirit within Him before His birth also.

I love your spelling BTW. Normally “second dairy” is spelled like this: secondary. Your phonetic spelling always brings a smile to my face.

So, did I clear that up for you? John the Baptist did not pre-exist his conception, I believe that the Son of God did pre-exist His conception within Mary though.

Love,
Kathi

[Lightenup]

Quote

Posted: Oct. 17 2008,15:16 ——————————————————————————– Hi Kathi, Thanks for getting back with me. Quote Luke 1:15 15 “For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb. NASU That speaks of John the Baptist. My point is that even before John's birth, he had a pre-existing spirit within him. Where does this passage speak of a preexisting spirit for John? I don't see it. Quote You can see that the soul and spirit can be divided from the joints and marrow. Yes, but the scriptures do not show that the spirit preexisted being united with the joints and marrow. This is the thrust of our argument, after all. Quote If all that doesn't tell you that the “duck” isn't just a normal “duck”, I can't help you. LOL, Kathi, what you have explained are the unusual events that took place in order to produce the duck. What you did not address is the fact that the duck is still a duck! We don't want to believe that Jesus is a mere man, however he was indeed a man. We want to believe that what was inside him was a preexistent soul/nature, but how can we embrace what we are given as fact (that Jesus was a man) if we continue in our belief that he was *other* than a man on the inside? I just don't know how to reconcile those two ideas. Quote Regarding whether God could have clued Jesus in on who He was so that Jesus could explain Him, I say this: A eyewitness is better that second hand knowledge. Did God need a witness, no but a witness is a huge plus isn't it. Ask any court. Certainly Jesus called on his Father to be one of HIS witnesses, but God does not need a witness. Nor would he create Jesus before he was born for that reason either, imo. Thanks, Mandy

Hi Mandy,
You think that the duck is just a duck because he looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, swims like a duck and dies like a duck but what you don't realize is that before he was a duck, he was a spirit duck who existed before he got put in the yolk and albumin inside the shell of an egg. I'm laughing at myself here but maybe the analogy helps lighten things up a bit.

Now, in regards to Jesus, the man, here goes:
Several may think that even though Jesus was born like a man, looked like a man, ate like a man, spoke like a man, slept like a man, was tempted like a man, died like a man, etc. that indeed He was just a man. What you have to realize regarding the man Jesus, is that He wasn't conceived like a man, existed before He was a man, laid the foundation of the world (not like a man), upholds all things by the power of His Father's word (not like a man), exactly represents His Father's nature (not like a man), existed before Abraham was born (not like a man during Jesus's life on earth), is called the Christ our Lord from birth (not like a man), was sent to die for our sins so that He could give us eternal life (not like a man), was from heaven (not like man), was bread that came down from heaven (not like a man), that was called God's only begotten Son (not like man), etc. etc.

So, He looked like a man but wasn't just a mere man. He was someone who existed beforehand as the Holy One of God, the Firstborn, that was made in the likeness of man within Mary. He was in the form of God first and had to empty Himself of something before He could take on the form of a bond-servant. I believe that He emptied Himself of His rights of having a divine nature, not the divine nature itself.

Scriptures say that He emptied Himself and then was made in the likeness of man. In that order.

Love,
Kathi

[Lightenup]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 17 2008,15:23)

Hi Kathi, I bumped the Trinity2 response from me that I didn't think you've seen yet?  Take a peak and see – I may be making myself dizzy, indeed!  I've been burning the candle at both ends lately and stay up way tooooo late! Take care and have a great weekend!  I am waiting to hear about a job that I applied for (Assistant Funeral Director) at a local cemetery. Love, Mandy

Mandy,
The response on the previous page addressed to “Mandy, Irene, and Nick” is the response to that post. I hope that you get the job.

[Not3in1]

Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 18 2008,11:38)

Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 17 2008,15:23) Hi Kathi, I bumped the Trinity2 response from me that I didn't think you've seen yet?  Take a peak and see – I may be making myself dizzy, indeed!  I've been burning the candle at both ends lately and stay up way tooooo late! Take care and have a great weekend!  I am waiting to hear about a job that I applied for (Assistant Funeral Director) at a local cemetery. Love, Mandy Mandy, The response on the previous page addressed to “Mandy, Irene, and Nick” is the response to that post.  I hope that you get the job.

Oh, gotcha. I'll go check it out.
Thanks,
Mandy

[gollamudi]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 18 2008,07:23)

Hi Kathi, I bumped the Trinity2 response from me that I didn't think you've seen yet?  Take a peak and see – I may be making myself dizzy, indeed!  I've been burning the candle at both ends lately and stay up way tooooo late! Take care and have a great weekend!  I am waiting to hear about a job that I applied for (Assistant Funeral Director) at a local cemetery. Love, Mandy

Wow! that is amazing Mandy, you want to be a Asst Funeral Director ? I know you visit Cemetry whenever you find time. One time you have shared this experience on this forum.

Take care and love to you
Adam

[gollamudi]

Hi all,
When Did the Son of God Begin to Exist?

Luke had no doubt about the reason and basis for Jesus being entitled to be called the “Son of God.” It was as a consequence of the supernatural miracle wrought in the womb of Mary that Jesus is truly “the Son of God.” “For that reason indeed [dio kai] he will be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35). Luke/Gabriel did not believe in an eternal or preexisting Son. The Son was supernaturally conceived in history when Mary became pregnant. Matthew was careful to note that what occurred in the womb of Mary was the creation, the coming into existence, the begetting of the Son of God. He was not begotten before that miraculous moment. Matthew 1:20 states that “what is begotten in her is from the holy spirit.” At that moment, and not before, God became the Father of the unique Son, Jesus.

Luke 1:35 informs us that this creative act of God brought into existence the Son of God. There was therefore no Son of God until the miracle which God performed in Mary. The Son of God was begotten by the Father when Elizabeth, Mary's cousin, was six months pregnant. Professor Caird comments correctly: “What Luke is here concerned to tell us is that Jesus entered upon the status of Sonship at his birth by a new creative act of that same Holy Spirit which at the beginning had brooded over the waters of chaos. It is this new creation which is the real miracle of Jesus' birth and the real theme of Gabriel's annunciation and Mary's wondering awe.”

Other New Testament writers proclaim the same truth about how God finally spoke in a Son in New Testament times. Jesus is the fulfillment of the greatest of all God’s promises: Paul wrote to Titus (1:2) about “the knowledge of the truth…in the hope of eternal life which God who cannot lie promised long ages ago, but at the proper time manifested, namely his word in the proclamation [Gospel].” Salvation comes to us “according to His own purpose which was granted to us in Christ Jesus from all eternity, but now has been revealed, by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 1:9).

Luke and Paul are in perfect agreement about the origin of the Son of God. He is a supernaturally created human being originating in time in the womb of Mary. Thus Paul carefully writes in Galatians 4:4 of the Son, that he “came into existence (genomenos)” of a woman. Paul chooses not to use the normal word for “born” (gennao). He stresses the fact that the Son came into existence at his birth. In the 50s AD Paul was already fending off any notion that the Son did not have his beginning in the womb of his mother. After all, a person who is pre-human is non-human. One is what one is, according to one's origin. The whole point about the Messiah, Son of God, is that he is a member of the human race. As God created Adam, son of God, from the dust (Luke 3:38), Jesus was created in his mother's womb by miracle.

Please know for sure that the Son of God did not preexist literally prior to his birth except in the plan of God.

Thanks and peace to you
Adam

[Tiffany]

Kathi! Oh, well I know I know my German Heritage comes into focus at times with my spelling. Glad you at least laugh at it. Ja, I did get something mixed up. Can I blame that on my age?
I been having these horrible Headaches. For weeks now and I am getting tired of them. To much stress.
Cindy wants me to go to Her Church tomorrow. And then on Monday at 10A.M. is Her surgery.
It is going to be rough. On top of all Brian is having so much problems with His Asthma. He is taking some new Medication hopefully that will settle Him down.
Peace and Love Irene
A second dairy, lots of milk and Ice cream. Wow

[Proclaimer]

Quote (gollamudi @ Oct. 18 2008,22:51)

Please know for sure that the Son of God did not preexist literally prior to his birth except in the plan of God. Thanks and peace to you Adam

But he was WITH God and the Logos is preceded with the definite article just as Theos is in John 1:1.

Identifying Logos as next to God and not as an attribute of God makes it hard to see how it can be a plan.

Then there are all the other difficult verses that teach of Jesus glory with the Father before the world, and how God made all things through him. It is contradictory to see that God made Jesus last but yet somehow made all creation through him and for him.

Sorry but the 'plan' idea has way to many hurdles to jump over before it can be considered a candidate. Scripture doesn't seem to support this view and many others here think the same thing.

[GeneBalthrop]

T8…..If scripture says God (ALONE) created the world and everything in, How can you add someone else into the mix. Peter plainly says Jesus was (foreordained) BUT was Manifested in (OUR) time. Don't you think that something so important as Jesus' preexistence would have been explained many times by all the apostles, why is it not even spoke about in scripture. Why is there no preexistence activity of Jesus shown any where. I know you are sincere in your beliefs T8, but i think in this one you are wrong brother.

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

[Author]

Posts