- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,12:06) Quote (Gene @ Nov. 09 2009,08:39) thinker……..Still waiting for (ONE) scripture that says Jesus Preexisted His berth on earth, as some kind of (Being) some where. Using Davids prophetic statement to try to work a preexistence view doesn't work. We need proof not some speculations of your and WJ's., Ct is right in what he is saying.
IMOgene
Gene, he will not agree, thus the ad hominen attacks and his self proclaimed “Greek “watch dog” on this board” ruse (double standard), as if it gives him authority to denounce anything else that may be implied or added.It seems he utilizes the ad hominen style with all who disagree with him, just review his posts with those in opposition to him. It also sets a standard that he qualifies himself as a master of the Greek so that no one else on this board can possibly be counted worthy of dialogue because of a lack of understanding or education.
It is a shame.
ConBut the point is you have not touched on the Greek, neither have you addressed any points concerning scriptures where Jesus claimed preexistence.
If preexistence to you means that he had to be “Deity” then fine, but just trying to prove that Jesus is not Deity rather than touching on facts of his preexistence is proof of your willingness to turn your head from the truth!
Just because you do not believe Jesus is Deity does not change the intended meaning of the writers of the Greek text and the translators!
WJ
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 08 2009,22:19) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,01:12) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 08 2009,20:26) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 08 2009,06:51) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 08 2009,11:43) Hi All John 6:38-40
For “I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will“, but the will of him who sent me; and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that every one who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.It is obvious what Jesus meant, but men who know nothing of the construction of the Greek have set out to make themselves greater than the truth by misinterpreting the clear meaning of the text in which the authors intended and which the translators translated.
The Greek construction of the text concerning the preexistence of Jesus does not allow for a “Unitarian” interpretation.
The Greek for “I have come” is Strong's G2597 – katabainō which is defined…
1) to go down, come down, descend
a) the place from which one has come down from
b) to come down“In every place the word is used it is referring to a literal action by a person and not an abstract “thought or plan”“.
katabainō is in the “perfect” tense, and the “active voice” and the “indicative” mood!
“The perfect tense” in Greek corresponds to the perfect tense in English, and describes “an action” which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated.
Jesus' last cry from the cross, TETELESTAI (“It is finished!”) is a good example of the perfect tense used in this sense, namely “It [the atonement] has been accomplished, completely, once and for all time.”
Certain antiquated verb forms in Greek, such as those related to seeing (eidw) or knowing (oida) will use the perfect tense in a manner equivalent to the normal past tense. These few cases are exception to the normal rule and do not alter the normal connotation of the perfect tense stated above.
“The active voice” represents the subject as the doer or performer of the action. e.g., in the sentence, “The boy hit the ball,” the boy performs the action.
“The indicative mood” is a simple statement of fact. If an action really occurs or has occurred or will occur, it will be rendered in the indicative mood.
”For I came down (katabainō) from heaven”, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. John 6:38
The same word is used here…
And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God “descending (katabainō,)” like a dove, and lighting upon him: Matt 3:16
And here…
And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord “(descended (katabainō )” from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. Matt 28:2
Was the Holy Spirit and the Angel a “thought or plan” come down from heaven? Or did they really descend from heaven?
Jesus said plainly that he came “From God” and “went to God”.
Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that “he was come from God, and went to God“; John 13:3
Again the Greek word come is in the “active voice” meaning Jesus did the action, and it is the indicative mood which means “the action really occurred”.
When Jesus ascended to heaven., it was Jesus that did the ascending! The scriptures do not tell us the Father took him to heaven!
Jesus words were clear, for he never said or even in the slightest way implied that he was or came from a plan or thought of the Father!
Jesus puts the nail in the coffin for those who questioned what he was saying by the following words…
What and if ye shall see the Son of man “ascend up where he was before”? John 6:62
Again the word “Ascend” is in the present tense and active voice which means that Jesus is doing the action.
Jesus is going to “WHERE HE WAS BEFORE”!
Was he returning to a “plan or thought” or was he returning to the Father in heaven from where he came from and to the Glory that he had with the Father before the foundation of the world.
John 17:5
And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with “the glory which I had with thee before the world was“.The Greek word for “I had” is Strong's G2192 – echō which is defined as…
1) to have, i.e. to hold
a) to have (hold) in the hand, in the sense of wearing, to have (hold) possession of the mind (refers to alarm, agitating emotions, etc.), to hold fast keep, to have or comprise or involve, to regard or consider or hold as 2) to have i.e. own, possess
Again “I had” is in the “imperfect tense”, the “active voice”, and the “indicative mood”, so there is no way Jesus was saying “I shared his glory because I was in his thought and plan”!
To deny the preexistence of Jesus is to deny the simple truths of the scriptures that tell us that Jesus was with the Father in the beginning of all of creation!
The Jews murmured among themselves because Jesus said he was the Bread of Life that came down from heaven and many turned back because it was a hard pill they could not swallow!
John 6:61, 62
When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? What and if ye shall see the Son of man “ascend up where he was before“?WJ
Where did Adam come from when he was created?
Hi KWFrom the dust of the earth, Jesus came from heaven?
The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. 1 Cor 15:47, 48
The clear Biblical teaching of the scriptures concerning his preexistence with the Father is indisputable because the Greek does not allow for a “Unitarian” interpretation.
No one has addressed the scriptures where Jesus claims he came from heaven and that he would return back to where he came from!
To deny
his preexistence and that he came in the flesh is the Spirit of antichrist.“Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. 2 John 1:7
Notice John who also wrote John 1:1, 14 uses the term “coming in the flesh” a term that is never used in describing the nature of any other man and it agrees with the Apostle Paul’s writing in Phil 2:6-8 where he says…
Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, “being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man“, he humbled himself and became obedient to death- even death on a cross!
The term “”being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man“, is a death blow to the “Unitarian” for these terms are never found anywhere in describing the origin or nature of any other man!
Jesus was born without sin and had the Spirit without measure because he came from heaven by taking on the likeness of sinful flesh.
To deny this is antichrist! John confirms his writings in 2 John and their intended meaning by the Gospel of John which came later!
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and “the Word was with God, and the Word was God“….
Vrs 10 “He was in the world“, and though “the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him“.
Vrs 14 “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us“. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Vrs 15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, '”He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' “
WJ
Isaiah 42:1-9 Clear tells us who the Messiah is.v.1 Yahweh clearly speaks saying,
“Here is my servant, the one I support. He is the one I chose, and I am pleased with him. I have put my Spirit upon him, and he will bring justice to all nations.”
1 Corinthians 15:27-28 for this tells of Messiah’ place.
“20But the Messiah has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22For as in Adam all die, so in the Messiah all will be made alive. 23But each in his own turn: the Messiah, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to Yahweh the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include Yahweh himself, who put everything under the Messiah. 28When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that Yahweh may be all in all.”
You will clearly note a hierarchy. All things are put under the Messiah, excluding Yahweh himself and then the Messiah puts himself under Yahweh. This is clearly two different person with different levels of Authority.
The Messiah referred to himself as possessing ‘divinity’ it was invariably in terms of the indwelling Father, not the incarnate ‘Yahweh the Son’. He never speaks of ‘the Son that dwells in me’. Instead, the Messiah was indwelt by his Yahweh in the same way the ark of the covenant was.
In John 17:3, the Messiah clearly sets himself in contrast to ‘the only one who is truly Yahweh’, the Father (see also John 5:44).
Where the title ‘god’ is applied to the Messiah by others, it harmonises far better with the Hebrew Bible to read it in terms of a functional equality, as opposed to an identity of substance.
Moses was made a god to Pharaoh (Exodus 7:1) because he acted as Yahweh’s stand-in for his dealings with Egypt.
In the same way, Paul describer the Satan as ‘the god of this age’ in that he occupies the dominion, usurped from Adam, that the Son will enjoy in the age to come.
The distinction between ‘small-g’ and ‘big-G’ in our English translations is artificial, since there was none in the original Hebrew or Greek manuscripts.
The concept of the Messiah as being ‘god’ in a ‘homoussian’ sense, a being of the same substance as God the Father, a Greek term not found anywhere in the Bible.
It divides the godhead, violating what according to the Messiah was the first and greatest commandment. Mark 12:29-30
ConAnd what does your post have to do with the points I made in my post?
We are discussing the preexistence of Jesus not his divinity.
Of couse the nature of an oppologist is to create a smoke screen in hopes of hiding the truth with a multitude of words that doesn't even address the facts!
WJ
If divinity has or has not any bearing on the pre-existance of the Messiah then what was the Messiah if he pre-existed?A Spirit? A Cherubim? Flesh and Blood?
99% of Christianity equates Divinity to explain the Messiah and his pre-existance, destroy the Divine Nature and you destroy pre-existance.
If he pre-existed as a Spirit, then why was the Holy Spirit involved in the virgin birth, the Spirit Messiah could have done it himself.
If he was a Cherubim, then maybe the Holy Spirit would possibly be needed, but then the Jehovas Witness's would be correct that he was a created being and therfore not God, and that all along he was an Angel.
If he was pre-existant as flesh and blood then he would not have been in heaven to begin with.
Now if you pre-exist him with Divinity, then he could have been in Heaven, and the Trinitarians would be correct. But the problem with the Holy Spirit comes into question again.
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) If he pre-existed as a Spirit, then why was the Holy Spirit involved in the virgin birth, the Spirit Messiah could have done it himself.
The Holy Spirit was involved in the creation of his Body, the Temple that his Spirit lived in!WJ
thinker………..To prove a point, you say when Jesus said before Abraham I am, means He existed as a (BEING) right? That is a supposition on your part , Jesus was not proving His existence as a Being , he was proving His authority in the Plan of GOD, showing he was in God's plan and purpose before Abraham was. You still have not produced any scripture that says Jesus (PREEXISTED) His berth on earth. Mystery Religion is good at adding to text and forcing text. But i want to see where Jesus or any apostle said He existed (AS) A (BEING) before His berth on earth, I have yet to find anywhere. Surely such and important thing as his preexistence would not have been over looked and would have been very clearly explained by all the apostles so there would be no confusion would it not? IMO
gene
(8:53) ” 'Surely you are not greater than our father Abraham, who died?' … (:54) Jesus answered, 'If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing; it is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, “He is our God”; (:55) and you have not come to know him, but I know him; and if I say that I do not know him I shall be a liar like you, but I do know him, and keep his word. (:56) Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it and was glad.' (:57) The Jews therefore said to him, 'You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?' (:58) Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I AM.' (:59) Therefore they picked up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple.” – John 8:53-59 New American Standard Bible (NASB).
The Thinker claims that Jesus was declaring himself to be Jehovah God because he said “I AM” (ego eimi [eyw eimi] in the original NT Greek) at John 8:58.
His reasoning probably goes something like this: Exodus 3:14 in some English Bible translations has Jehovah God revealing himself as “I AM WHO I AM” and “I AM.” So, they say, Jesus' statement at John 8:58 shows him revealing himself by the same exclusive title (name? description?) as Jehovah (“I AM” at Exodus 3:14) and, therefore, he is Jehovah God!
Right?
The Thinker probably believes the Jews understood perfectly that Jesus was claiming to be Jehovah when he used those two words because they immediately took up stones to kill him.
But these Jews of Judea had already decided beforehand to kill Jesus! (John 7:1, 25)
They needed no further incentives.
Nothing that Jesus said or did at this point would have made any difference to them.
If the Jews had really understood the phrase “I AM” (ego eimi) to mean the speaker was claiming to be Jehovah and that they should therefore kill him, they would have immediately stoned Jesus at John 8:24 or :28.
The actual Greek in the ancient Bible manuscripts is identical to John 8:58, ego eimi, but many English Bible translations properly add “he” so that it can be understood as “I am he” in English.
The Master of the Greek The Thinker should know this.
We know that even his disciples didn't believe Jesus was God simply because he said ego eimi, for he said that to them at John 6:20 (usually rendered into English as “It is I”), and their reaction was certainly not that of those who had come into the presence of God!
Look at Matt. 14:27 as well.
Uunderstand that the name “Jehovah” in English (or “Yahweh” in one suggested Hebrew form) is the only personal name of God (see Ex. 3:15 and Ps. 83:18).
This name is declared by God to be his very own name thousands of times in the Bible .
#3068 in Strong's Concordance or the New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance, or Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament
Being a personal name like “Jesus,” “John,” “Mary,” etc, this name belongs to a single individual.
This single person who is God is not the Holy Spirit. He is not the Son of God. He is the Father alone! Is. 63:16; Is. 64:8, ASV; Deut. 32:6, ASV; Ps. 89:26, 27
Also see Heb. 1:5 and Ps. 2:7, ASV
He is never called “the Son,” “the Firstborn,” “Only-begotten,” “High Priest of God,” the “Messiah” or “Christ” as Jesus is.
It is obvious that the one person with the personal name of Jehovah cannot be the Messiah who has the personal name “Jesus”.
Merely study the following scriptures preferably in a Bible that honestly translates God's personal name as “Jehovah”:
ASV, NWT, KJIIV, Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, and Byington's The Bible in Living English, or “Yahweh,” Jerusalem Bible, NJB, and Rotherham's The Emphasized Bible in all the 6900 places it's found in the original manuscripts instead of the mistranslated “LORD” found in nearly 7000 places in many translations.
These are some of the scriptures which show the relationship of Jehovah to the Messiah:
Psalm 110:1 (compare Acts 2:33-36 and Eph. 1:17, 20); Micah 5:4; Psalm 2:1, 2 (compare Acts 4:25-27); Psalm 2:7 (compare Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5); Is. 53:10
All Christian organizations recognize that all of Is. 53 refers to the Messiah.
These all clearly show that Jesus is not Jehovah.
The “I AM” (ego eimi) “evidence” which trinitarians say somehow disproves this often repeated, clearly taught scriptural knowledge of the only true God and of Jesus Christ (John 17:3).
The words ego eimi formed a phrase that was in very common use by first century Christians and Jews and in New Testament scriptures.
It was certainly not understood (by Jews or Christians) as declaring one's Godhood!
If it could have been understood that way, we can be sure the Jews would have never applied it to themselves, as they did so frequently!
The former blind man (John 9:9) actually identifies himself by saying “ego eimi,” but none of the other Jews present, even for a moment, understood him to be claiming to be Jehovah!
The Thinker, did you miss that one?
It is simply impossible that the Jews would say Jesus was claiming to be the Almighty God.
It is virtually certain, instead, that one of three things was meant by the phrase “before Abraham came into being ego eimi” spoken by Jesus at John 8:58:
“Even before Abraham was born, I was (the Christ).”
“I existed before Abraham was born.”(“I was”; “I existed”; “I have been”)
“I came into existence before Abraham was even born.”
Jn 8:58 cannot mean “I am God” or its equivalent and why one of the three other interpretations listed above must be what was originally intended.
As for the charge that the Jews were going to stone him because he claimed to be God, we should be aware that the Jews stoned people for many offenses. For example, a person pretending to be a “wizard” was to be stoned to death according to the Law (Lev. 20:27 – KJV, RSV, ASV, LB).
“Wizard, a pretender to supernatural knowledge and power …. such a one was forbidden on pain of death to practice his deceptions … Lev. 20:26, 27.”
The Jews wanted Jesus killed for blasphemy because he admitted to being the Messiah. Matt 26:59-68
It was even forbidden for others to say that Jesus was the Messiah. John 9:22.
And, in fact, that was obviously why Stephen was stoned to death.
Acts 7:55-58, Stephen looked up into heaven “and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, and he said, 'Behold, I see the heavens opened and the Son of man [synonymous with the Messiah, not God] standing at the right hand of God.' But they [the Jews] … cast him out of the city, and stoned him.” RSV.
Stephen was stoned, not because he claimed to be God, nor because he claimed Jesus was God.
Jesus “standing at the right hand of God” but because he was proclaiming Jesus to be the Messiah!
“Stephen affirms to the Sanhedrin that the prophecy Jesus made before them has been fulfilled Mk 14:62.”
Mk 14:61-64 shows Jesus declaring he is the Christ and that the Jews will see him, the son of man, at the right hand of God. This “blasphemy” of claiming to be the Messiah, whom the Jews never considered to be God, caused the Jews to condemn Jesus to death.
The Jews could have perceived him as a false prophet, or a self-proclaimed “wizard,” or, more likely, as one claiming to be the Christ or Messiah, the Son of Man, and tried to stone him because of that.
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) 99% of Christianity equates Divinity to explain the Messiah and his pre-existance, destroy the Divine Nature and you destroy pre-existance.
There it is, the whole purpose of the “Unitarian” is to destroy the Divine nature of Christ!Anathema!
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 09 2009,09:56) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:43) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 08 2009,23:36) Oh and you are incorrect on your statement of definition of an Apologists. They seek truth regardless of your Ad Homein verbage.
Also in these forums you yourself would be considered an Apologists (one in tennis shoes), but an Apoligists nevertheless.In modern times, apologists refers to anyone known for defending the points in arguments, conflicts or positions that receive great popular scrutinies and/or are minority views.
Saul (Paul of Tarsus) was an Apologists.
ConYou are right. I should have been more clear.
I didn't clarify that I was speaking of “Unitarian” oppologist!
But your patronizing remarks are noted!
WJ
My remarks were quid pro quo.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 09 2009,10:03) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,12:06) Quote (Gene @ Nov. 09 2009,08:39) thinker……..Still waiting for (ONE) scripture that says Jesus Preexisted His berth on earth, as some kind of (Being) some where. Using Davids prophetic statement to try to work a preexistence view doesn't work. We need proof not some speculations of your and WJ's., Ct is right in what he is saying.
IMOgene
Gene, he will not agree, thus the ad hominen attacks and his self proclaimed “Greek “watch dog” on this board” ruse (double standard), as if it gives him authority to denounce anything else that may be implied or added.It seems he utilizes the ad hominen style with all who disagree with him, just review his posts with those in opposition to him. It also sets a standard that he qualifies himself as a master of the Greek so that no one else on this board can possibly be counted worthy of dialogue because of a lack of understanding or education.
It is a shame.
ConBut the point is you have not touched on the Greek, neither have you addressed any points concerning scriptures where Jesus claimed preexistence.
If preexistence to you means that he had to be “Deity” then fine, but just trying to prove that Jesus is not Deity rather than touching on facts of his preexistence is proof of your willingness to turn your head from the truth!
Just because you do not believe Jesus is Deity does not change the intended meaning of the writers of the Greek text and the translators!
WJ
Jesus never claimed pre-existance. Trinitarians try to paint that picture.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 09 2009,10:12) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) 99% of Christianity equates Divinity to explain the Messiah and his pre-existance, destroy the Divine Nature and you destroy pre-existance.
There it is, the whole purpose of the “Unitarian” is to destroy the Divine nature of Christ!Anathema!
WJ
LOL, I am far from being a Unitarian, Arian maybe, but not a Unitarian.Anathema! LOL, peas and potatoes.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 10 2009,05:12) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) 99% of Christianity equates Divinity to explain the Messiah and his pre-existance, destroy the Divine Nature and you destroy pre-existance.
There it is, the whole purpose of the “Unitarian” is to destroy the Divine nature of Christ!Anathema!
WJ
Hi WJ,
The God of Israel was in the human vessel of Christ Jesus.
God is one and He has a monogenes son.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 09 2009,10:07) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 08 2009,22:19) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,01:12) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 08 2009,20:26) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 08 2009,06:51) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 08 2009,11:43) Hi All John 6:38-40
For “I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will“, but the will of him who sent me; and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that every one who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.It is obvious what Jesus meant, but men who know nothing of the construction of the Greek have set out to make themselves greater than the truth by misinterpreting the clear meaning of the text in which the authors intended and which the translators translated.
The Greek construction of the text concerning the preexistence of Jesus does not allow for a “Unitarian” interpretation.
The Greek for “I have come” is Strong's G2597 – katabainō which is defined…
1) to go down, come down, descend
a) the place from which one has come down from
b) to come down“In every place the word is used it is referring to a literal action by a person and not an abstract “thought or plan”“.
katabainō is in the “perfect” tense, and the “active voice” and the “indicative” mood!
“The perfect tense” in Greek corresponds to the perfect tense in English, and describes “an action” which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated.
Jesus' last cry from the cross, TETELESTAI (“It is finished!”) is a good example of the perfect tense used in this sense, namely “It [the atonement] has been accomplished, completely, once and for all time.”
Certain antiquated verb forms in Greek, such as those related to seeing (eidw) or knowing (oida) will use the perfect tense in a manner equivalent to the normal past tense. These few cases are exception to the normal rule and do not alter the normal connotation of the perfect tense stated above.
“The active voice” represents the subject as the doer or performer of the action. e.g., in the sentence, “The boy hit the ball,” the boy performs the action.
“The indicative mood” is a simple statement of fact. If an action really occurs or has occurred or will occur, it will be rendered in the indicative mood.
”For I came down (katabainō) from heaven”, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. John 6:38
The same word is used here…
And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God “descending (katabainō,)” like a dove, and lighting upon him: Matt 3:16
And here…
And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord “(descended (katabainō )” from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. Matt 28:2
Was the Holy Spirit and the Angel a “thought or plan” come down from heaven? Or did they really descend from heaven?
Jesus said plainly that he came “From God” and “went to God”.
Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that “he was come from God, and went to God“; John 13:3
Again the Greek word come is in the “active voice” meaning Jesus did the action, and it is the indicative mood which means “the action really occurred”.
When Jesus ascended to heaven., it was Jesus that did the ascending! The scriptures do not tell us the Father took him to heaven!
Jesus words were clear, for he never said or even in the slightest way implied that he was or came from a plan or thought of the Father!
Jesus puts the nail in the coffin for those who questioned what he was saying by the following words…
What and if ye shall see the Son of man “ascend up where he was before”? John 6:62
Again the word “Ascend” is in the present tense and active voice which means that Jesus is doing the action.
Jesus is going to “WHERE HE WAS BEFORE”!
Was he returning to a “plan or thought” or was he returning to the Father in heaven from where he came from and to the Glory that he had with the Father before the foundation of the world.
John 17:5
And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with “the glory which I had with thee before the world was“.The Greek word for “I had” is Strong's G2192 – echō which is defined as…
1) to have, i.e. to hold
a) to have (hold) in the hand, in the sense of wearing, to have (hold) possession of the mind (refers to alarm, agitating emotions, etc.), to hold fast keep, to have or comprise or involve, to regard or consider or hold as 2) to have i.e. own, possess
Again “I had” is in the “imperfect tense”, the “active voice”, and the “indicative mood”, so there is no way Jesus was saying “I shared his glory because I was in his thought and plan”!
To deny the preexistence of Jesus is to deny the simple truths of the scriptures that tell us that Jesus was with the Father in the beginning of all of creation!
The Jews murmured among themselves because Jesus said he was the Bread of Life that came down from heaven and many turned back because it was a hard pill they could not swallow!
John 6:61, 62
When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? What and if ye shall see the Son of man “ascend up where he was before“?WJ
Where did Adam come from when he was created?
Hi KWFrom the dust of the earth, Jesus came from heaven?
The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. 1 Cor 15:47, 48
The clear Biblical teaching of the scriptures concerning his preexistence with the Father
is indisputable because the Greek does not allow for a “Unitarian” interpretation.No one has addressed the scriptures where Jesus claims he came from heaven and that he would return back to where he came from!
To deny his preexistence and that he came in the flesh is the Spirit of antichrist.
“Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. 2 John 1:7
Notice John who also wrote John 1:1, 14 uses the term “coming in the flesh” a term that is never used in describing the nature of any other man and it agrees with the Apostle Paul’s writing in Phil 2:6-8 where he says…
Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, “being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man“, he humbled himself and became obedient to death- even death on a cross!
The term “”being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man“, is a death blow to the “Unitarian” for these terms are never found anywhere in describing the origin or nature of any other man!
Jesus was born without sin and had the Spirit without measure because he came from heaven by taking on the likeness of sinful flesh.
To deny this is antichrist! John confirms his writings in 2 John and their intended meaning by the Gospel of John which came later!
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and “the Word was with God, and the Word was God“….
Vrs 10 “He was in the world“, and though “the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him“.
Vrs 14 “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us“. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Vrs 15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, '”He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' “
WJ
Isaiah 42:1-9 Clear tells us who the Messiah is.v.1 Yahweh clearly speaks saying,
“Here is my servant, the one I support. He is the one I chose, and I am pleased with him. I have put my Spirit upon him, and he will bring justice to all nations.”
1 Corinthians 15:27-28 for this tells of Messiah’ place.
“20But the Messiah has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22For as in Adam all die, so in the Messiah all will be made alive. 23But each in his own turn: the Messiah, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to Yahweh the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include Yahweh himself, who put everything under the Messiah. 28When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that Yahweh may be all in all.”
You will clearly note a hierarchy. All things are put under the Messiah, excluding Yahweh himself and then the Messiah puts himself under Yahweh. This is clearly two different person with different levels of Authority.
The Messiah referred to himself as possessing ‘divinity’ it was invariably in terms of the indwelling Father, not the incarnate ‘Yahweh the Son’. He never speaks of ‘the Son that dwells in me’. Instead, the Messiah was indwelt by his Yahweh in the same way the ark of the covenant was.
In John 17:3, the Messiah clearly sets himself in contrast to ‘the only one who is truly Yahweh’, the Father (see also John 5:44).
Where the title ‘god’ is applied to the Messiah by others, it harmonises far better with the Hebrew Bible to read it in terms of a functional equality, as opposed to an identity of substance.
Moses was made a god to Pharaoh (Exodus 7:1) because he acted as Yahweh’s stand-in for his dealings with Egypt.
In the same way, Paul describer the Satan as ‘the god of this age’ in that he occupies the dominion, usurped from Adam, that the Son will enjoy in the age to come.
The distinction between ‘small-g’ and ‘big-G’ in our English translations is artificial, since there was none in the original Hebrew or Greek manuscripts.
The concept of the Messiah as being ‘god’ in a ‘homoussian’ sense, a being of the same substance as God the Father, a Greek term not found anywhere in the Bible.
It divides the godhead, violating what according to the Messiah was the first and greatest commandment. Mark 12:29-30
ConAnd what does your post have to do with the points I made in my post?
We are discussing the preexistence of Jesus not his divinity.
Of couse the nature of an oppologist is to create a smoke screen in hopes of hiding the truth with a multitude of words that doesn't even address the facts!
WJ
If divinity has or has not any bearing on the pre-existance of the Messiah then what was the Messiah if he pre-existed?A Spirit? A Cherubim? Flesh and Blood?
99% of Christianity equates Divinity to explain the Messiah and his pre-existance, destroy the Divine Nature and you destroy pre-existance.
If he pre-existed as a Spirit, then why was the Holy Spirit involved in the virgin birth, the Spirit Messiah could have done it himself.
If he was a Cherubim, then maybe the Holy Spirit would possibly be needed, but then the Jehovas Witness's would be correct that he was a created being and therfore not God, and that all along he was an Angel.
If he was pre-existant as flesh and blood then he would not have been in heaven to begin with.
Now if you pre-exist him with Divinity, then he could have been in Heaven, and the Trinitarians would be correct. But the problem with the Holy Spirit comes into question again.
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) If he pre-existed as a Spirit, then why was the Holy Spirit involved in the virgin birth, the Spirit Messiah could have done it himself.
The Holy Spirit was involved in the creation of his Body, the Temple that his Spirit lived in!WJ
HeHe, sounds like witchcraft.Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,13:14) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 09 2009,10:03) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,12:06) Quote (Gene @ Nov. 09 2009,08:39) thinker……..Still waiting for (ONE) scripture that says Jesus Preexisted His berth on earth, as some kind of (Being) some where. Using Davids prophetic statement to try to work a preexistence view doesn't work. We need proof not some speculations of your and WJ's., Ct is right in what he is saying.
IMOgene
Gene, he will not agree, thus the ad hominen attacks and his self proclaimed “Greek “watch dog” on this board” ruse (double standard), as if it gives him authority to denounce anything else that may be implied or added.It seems he utilizes the ad hominen style with all who disagree with him, just review his posts with those in opposition to him. It also sets a standard that he qualifies himself as a master of the Greek so that no one else on this board can possibly be counted worthy of dialogue because of a lack of understanding or education.
It is a shame.
ConBut the point is you have not touched on the Greek, neither have you addressed any points concerning scriptures where Jesus claimed preexistence.
If preexistence to you means that he had to be “Deity” then fine, but just trying to prove that Jesus is not Deity rather than touching on facts of his preexistence is proof of your willingness to turn your head from the truth!
Just because you do not believe Jesus is Deity does not change the intended meaning of the writers of the Greek text and the translators!
WJ
Jesus never claimed pre-existance. Trinitarians try to paint that picture.
Really.Then please show us how Jesus is not claiming preexistence in John chapter 6?
Why don't you give it a shot and address the scriptures and the Greek tenses that I showed in the post?
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 09 2009,10:12) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) 99% of Christianity equates Divinity to explain the Messiah and his pre-existance, destroy the Divine Nature and you destroy pre-existance.
There it is, the whole purpose of the “Unitarian” is to destroy the Divine nature of Christ!Anathema!
WJ
Or maybe to destroy the heresy of the Trinitarian push to make all believers, believe in three Gods, LOLQuote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 09 2009,10:17) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 10 2009,05:12) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) 99% of Christianity equates Divinity to explain the Messiah and his pre-existance, destroy the Divine Nature and you destroy pre-existance.
There it is, the whole purpose of the “Unitarian” is to destroy the Divine nature of Christ!Anathema!
WJ
Hi WJ,
The God of Israel was in the human vessel of Christ Jesus.
God is one and He has a monogenes son.
And your dripping in Catholocism.Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,13:18) HeHe, sounds like witchcraft.
No it sounds like John 1:1, 14, Phil 2::6-8WJ
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,13:19) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 09 2009,10:12) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) 99% of Christianity equates Divinity to explain the Messiah and his pre-existance, destroy the Divine Nature and you destroy pre-existance.
There it is, the whole purpose of the “Unitarian” is to destroy the Divine nature of Christ!Anathema!
WJ
Or maybe to destroy the heresy of the Trinitarian push to make all believers, believe in three Gods, LOL
That wasnt your statement at all was it?WJ
The Gospel writers have clearly shown Jesus applying the term ego eimi to himself and meaning “I am the Christ.”
Mark 13:6 shows Jesus saying, “I am he [literally just ego eimi alone, 'I AM']” – NEB.
The parallel account at Luke 21:8 agrees.
But the other parallel account by Matthew shows what Jesus actually meant by the “absolute” ego eimi in those parallel accounts of Mark and Luke: “I am the Messiah” – Matt. 24:5 – NEB.
Jesus using the “absolute” ego eimi at Mark 13:6 and Luke 21:8.
And Matthew explains that Jesus means “I am the Messiah”!
Also see John 8:24, Living Bible – “I am the Messiah,” “I am the Christ,” and see Jn 4:26; 13:19.
Notice how Jesus admitted to being the Messiah when the Jews decided to kill him: “'Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?' 'I AM [ego eimi],' said Jesus.” – Mark 14:61-62.
Again the 'absolute' ego eimi (“I am”) as used by Jesus means “I am the Christ” and spurs the Jews to condemn him to die!
Trinitarians have admitted that they believe that Jesus' statements at John 8:56 and 8:58 are statements proclaiming himself to be the Messiah.
So when Jesus said that Abraham had seen his day, he was making a deliberate claim that he was the Messiah.
He was really saying 'I am the Messiah Abraham saw in his vision.”
Analyze the “parallel” uses of ego eimi by Jesus found in the Gospel of John “which culminate in the 'I Am' of John 8:58,” we find they all show Jesus' identity as “Jesus” or “the Christ”!
If these are really “parallel” uses of ego eimi by Jesus, as many trinitarians insist, then 8:58 should be understood as “I am [or 'have been'] the Christ”!
The phrase “I, I am” {ego eimi} occurs many other times in the New Testament, is often translated as “I am he” or some equivalent “I am he” in Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 & 8; “it is I” in Matt 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20 & “I am the one I claim to be” in John 8:24 & 28.
Translations are quite correct, but it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am”, ONLY once i.e. in John 8:58.
If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ was speaking of himself as the Messiah of God, as indeed he was, spoken of throughout the Old Testament.
Even the trinitarian believers who translated the Living Bible and CBW can interpret the “absolute” ego eimi at John 8:24 as “I am the Messiah (Christ)” – 8:28, LB, CBW, then it would not only be proper but maybe even probable that it should be so translated again at John 8:58:
“Even before Abraham was born, I am the Messiah. Therefore [since he claimed to be the Messiah] they picked up stones to throw at him.”
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 09 2009,10:28) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,13:19) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 09 2009,10:12) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) 99% of Christianity equates Divinity to explain the Messiah and his pre-existance, destroy the Divine Nature and you destroy pre-existance.
There it is, the whole purpose of the “Unitarian” is to destroy the Divine nature of Christ!Anathema!
WJ
Or maybe to destroy the heresy of the Trinitarian push to make all believers, believe in three Gods, LOL
That wasnt your statement at all was it?WJ
You used the word “Unitarian”.I am Arian, we a few.
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 10 2009,05:21) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Nov. 09 2009,10:17) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 10 2009,05:12) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) 99% of Christianity equates Divinity to explain the Messiah and his pre-existance, destroy the Divine Nature and you destroy pre-existance.
There it is, the whole purpose of the “Unitarian” is to destroy the Divine nature of Christ!Anathema!
WJ
Hi WJ,
The God of Israel was in the human vessel of Christ Jesus.
God is one and He has a monogenes son.
And your dripping in Catholocism.
Hi CON.
Try to focus on the scriptural issues.
Carnal battles are just distractions.Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 10 2009,05:35) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 09 2009,10:28) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,13:19) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 09 2009,10:12) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,02:33) 99% of Christianity equates Divinity to explain the Messiah and his pre-existance, destroy the Divine Nature and you destroy pre-existance.
There it is, the whole purpose of the “Unitarian” is to destroy the Divine nature of Christ!Anathema!
WJ
Or maybe to destroy the heresy of the Trinitarian push to make all believers, believe in three Gods, LOL
That wasnt your statement at all was it?WJ
You used the word “Unitarian”.I am Arian, we a few.
Hi CON,
Should you not claim Christ rather than these divisive human labellings?Quote (Constitutionalist @ Nov. 09 2009,13:31) “Even before Abraham was born, I am the Messiah. Therefore [since he claimed to be the Messiah] they picked up stones to throw at him.”
So the fact that Jesus said… “Even before Abraham was born” had no bearing on them?Just like the Jews they stopped their ears to Jesus claim of being with the Father before abraham!
Earlier in the chapter Jesus says…
But he continued, “You are from below; “I am from above“. You are of this world; “I am not of this world“. John 8:23
Arians totally deny these clear words. The distinction Jesus makes between his origin and the origin of every other man is a death blow to the unbelieving Jews as well as the modern day Arians!
And so Jesus says…
I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins. John 8:24
Jesus continues…
Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I “proceeded” (exerchomai) forth and “came” (hēkō) from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. John 8:42
The Greek word for Proceeded is Strong's G1831 – exerchomai and is defined as;
1) to go or come forth of
a) with mention of the place out of which one goes, or the point from which he departs
1) of those who leave a place of their own accord“Proceeded” is in the Active voice. The active voice represents the subject as the doer or performer of the action. e.g., in the sentence, “The boy hit the ball,” the boy performs the action
The Greek word for Came is Strong's G2240 – hēkō and is defined as;
1)to have come, have arrived, be present
“Came” is in the active voice also. The active voice represents the subject as the doer or performer of the action. e.g., in the sentence, “The boy hit the ball,” the boy performs the action
So Jesus claim is unambiguous that he preexisted and came in the likeness of sinful flesh!
So the Jews said…
…Thou art not yet fifty years old, and “hast thou seen Abraham?” John 8:57
Jesus answered them and said…
Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was”, I am.
Then took they up stones to cast at him. Vrs 59.
The reason they were stoning him was also because he claimed to be before Abraham.
Just like the Jews they stopped their ears to Jesus claim being with the Father before abraham!
WJ
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
