Preexistence

[Proclaimer]

Hippolytus (ca. 230 A.D) wrote this:

The first and Only, both Creator and Lord of all, had nothing coeval with Himself… He was One, Alone in Himself…. this Solitary and Supreme Deity, by an act of reflection, brought forth the Word first, not the Word in the sense of being expressed by voice, but as a Reason of the cosmos, conceived and residing in the Divine mind. Him alone He produced from existing things, for the Father Himself constituted existence, and the being born from Him was the cause of all things that are produced. The Word was in the Father Himself, bearing the will of his Progenitor, and not being unacquainted with the mind of the Father. For simultaneously with his procession from His Progenitor, inasmuch as he is this Progenitor's firstborn, he has, as a voice in himself, the concepts conceived in the Father. And so it was, that when the Father ordered the world to come into existence, the Word one by one completed each object of creation, thus pleasing God…. God, who is the source of all authority, wished that the Word might render assistance in accomplishing a production of this kind…. The Word alone of this God is from God himself, wherefore also the Logos is God [that is, “deity,” in the sense of nature of substance], being the substance of God…. Now the Word of God controls all these, the first begotten child of the Father, the voice of the Dawn antecedent to the Morning Star…. This Word, the Father in the latter days sent forth, no longer to speak by a prophet, and not wishing that the Word, being obscurely proclaimed, should be made the subject of mere conjecture, but that He should be manifested, so that we could see Him with our own eyes. This Word, I say, the Father sent forth…. This Word we know to have received a body from a virgin, and to have refashioned the old man by a new creation…. This Man we know to have been made out of the compound of our humanity…. He did not protest against his Passion, but became obedient unto death, and manifested his resurrection. Now in all these acts He offered up, as the first-fruits, his own manhood, in order that you, when you are in tribulation, maye not be disheartened, but, confessing yourself to be a man, may dwell in expectation of also receiving what the Father has granted unto this Son. (Against all Heresies, 10).

[Arnold]

Quote (JustAskin @ June 10 2010,17:26)

I agree with Gene on the tenor of his post. Irene 'qoutes' Jesus being 'born'… Just throttle back a bit and say that again…'Jesus was 'born' before time'… Say it again… Adam was not 'born', and he was human. Adam was created… Born – created, created – born! How was Jesus 'born' as a Spirit in Heaven…? Gene doesn't believe Jesus preexisted his being 'born' of Mary. I do believe he preexisted but that he was part of a group of created beings, God's special Sons, the Princes, the Mighty Ones, spoken of, not the normal angels, but the 'Stars', the Mighty Princes, Principle Sons of God of whom 'Lucifer' was one also. Just like all 'fractal' Scriptures, the 'first born' Son somehow sins…and another is raised up in from his brothers to become 'Firstborn' by the principle of 'Spiritual Begetting' or 'being raised in prominence', hence Jesus now becomes the 'Begotten Son of God', this means 'first by rank', 'first in order', not what it reads like: 'first by birth'. When reading the Scriptures it is important to understand and descern the difference…use the context to do so. The Scriptures says that God 'WILL make HIM' his 'Firstborn'…. Please check two things here.. 1: 'Will Make', that means He is not yet so, … So who IS the 'firstborn' and who IS the 'First born'? Sorry, do you ask why I repeated 'firstborn'? Remember that the Scriptures say that Jesus was 'raised to a higher position' and the angels were told to do obeisance to him. Where the angels doing obiesance to him before he came to earth? Or only after he was raised from the dead in triumph and seated at the righthand of 'his and their' father? So, he was not 'at the righthand of his father before this, meaning, any more powerful than his heavenly brethren….but just more loved than all his brethren (The deeds of the 'nonfirstborn' are not chronicled so as to not overshadow the 'firstborn') and for that reason was chosen and willingly accepted the commission that would lead to the throwing off of his divine spirit nature, become mortal flesh, suffer and 'DIE' (Can anyone imagine what 'death' sounds like to one who is immortal?) but that he had complete faith (Only a minor moment of doubt..'father, if there is any way that this cup can be taken away from me…but not [by] my will but yours') If Jesus was 'First born' what need is there to make him also 'firstborn', for the 'first born' is naturally also the 'firstborn' unless the 'first born' becomes no longer so by sinning..didn't 'Lucifer' sin? When the 'first born/firstborn' is no longer the 'firstborn' then another who is not 'first born' is begotten, taken up by rank order, adopted, into the position of 'firstborn', the head of his brothers, principle heir to the inheritance. Are there any examples of this principle in the Scriptures? Are there one, two or more? What is the difference, if any, between them, the examples…is there any, even in a small way? Yes, there is one…which one is that and why?

I just checked in what I did say, and I did not say born, I said firstborn of all creation, there is a difence, mind you….If that what you are saying then you and Gene are denying a lot of Scriptures that clearly tells me that Jesus is the firstborn and not born.  There is a difference you know.  Col. 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN OF ALL CREATION. NOT BORN, BUT FIRSTBORN OF ALL CREATION.  NKJ Bible says that also in Rev. 3:14 ..”These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD.” AGAIN NOT BORN BUT FIRSTBORN… THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.  Also He is the only one that directly was brought forth from the Father.  All others that Jesus created did not, they were created….tell me something were did I say born, rather I think I said firstborn…. there is a difference……… Irene

[JustAskin]

T8,

Can I just ask, did you write all that from your own understanding or copy it..it is not quoted nor referenced.

---

And, I did say that the deeds of the nonfirstborn are not chronicled so as not to overshadow the deeds of the firstborn.

---

And, by inheritance, all things are by the firstborn, through the firstborn, and for the firstborn.

[Proclaimer]

It should be interesting to note that before all things, God must have done a work first that was entirely composed of himself and without any created matter. Can your understanding explain this interim step between God and creation?

If you deny that the Word who we know as Jesus the son of God was the first and then all else that followed was created by God through him, then please explain who was the first that was entirely composed from God himself?

[Proclaimer]

Quote (JustAskin @ June 10 2010,19:18)

T8, Can I just ask, did you write all that from your own understanding or copy it..it is not quoted nor referenced. And, I did say that the deeds of the nonfirstborn are not chronicled so as not to overshadow the deeds of the firstborn. And, by inheritance, all things are by the firstborn, through the firstborn, and for the firstborn.

Hi JA.

You should be able to google all this.

Try

[JustAskin]

Irene,

Sorry if I misquoted you. If anything, it was only a lead-in to what else I wrote so no harm really, sorry.

Ok, you say that Scriptures says that Jesus is the 'firstborn of all creation' but then say Jesus was 'brought forth' from God, (Not created) but all the rest were created.

You say Jesus was 'created', but not created but brought forth…which is it?

What you are really saying is 'I want to say that Jesus was not created but I can't quite reconcile the verse that says he is the first of God's creation'

Am I wrong, again?

By the way…I don't claim to be putting what I said as a decree. I am testing the theory as it is something I have been looking into for quite some time.

I am testing it against the 'fractal' Scriptures, the ones where Sons are made firstborn and why they were firstborn over 'the firstborn' of their brothers.

Did that come through what I wrote.

Also, I have posted such before but no one responded for discussion.
In fact, no one has responded even here on the 'fractal scriptures' element again.

Is there a reason for that…perhaps because it might be too close to the truth and that would be obhorent against current belief, like 'the earth isn't flat with four corners. But I thought scriptures said …to the four corners of the earth, that must mean it is square…or rectangular, at any rate. Well, at least it is still the center of the solar system…ha ha…  or you just gonna tell us that the earth is just another planet, but the most loved most beautiful planet, but it still only revolves round the sun…like the other planets? JA, you do make us laugh sometimes…ha ha, good one, that! '

[Proclaimer]

My guess is that she is interpreting scriptures like these, as they are obviously referring to Jesus Christ:

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.

16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities–all things have been created through Him and for Him.

17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

18 He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.

And this:

Acts 3:15
You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this.

New International Version
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

If Jesus as the Word was made, then how was he made through himself?

[gollamudi]

Quote (kerwin @ June 08 2010,03:30)

Adam, I use Jewish sources to gain understanding into the worldview of that Jesus and his Jewish students that write or were featured in the scriptures in the New Testament.  They also help me understand the Jewish opponents of the Way.  I strive to be careful not to get confused on the beliefs of those who opposed the Anointed One's sect and of the sect itself as there are a variety of beliefs in the Jewish culture and were even in the First Century.   On the issue of preexistence,  I found in scripture first that Jesus did not preexist because he conceived in Mary and is a human being just like I am.  Those who claim he preexist have not found a satisfactory explanation how that does not contradict the two points I mention though they may have one that satisfies themselves.

Hi brother Kerwin,
I know you use Jewish sources to refute their beliefs but that doesn't mean your logics are correct. The religion of the Hebrew Bible is strict monotheism. It doesn't allow any iota of adding any person's worship other than God as Himself. You see for yourself how Chrisitanity incorporated Jesus into such strict monotheism in addition to God in worship. You can not simply negate the evidence for this in NT even in the earliest available writings like Pauline Epistles. Your Monotheism is not oriented towards the true religion of Jesus the Jew.

Peace and love to you
Adam

[kerwin]

Adam,

I realize that the Jewish beliefs of today and sometimes in the earlier ages were not internally consistent and I strive to point that out when it occurs. I do not disagree with all of their beliefs but only those that are contradict scripture.

In fact I hold to the Jewish beliefs that are taught by Jesus and his adherents and seek to understand them better. It is that desire to understand these beliefs that I was speaking of when I wrote my previous post.

You on the other hand do not seem to seem to have that desire to understand but rather appear to be striving to put the beliefs of Jesus and his students in dispute.

It is the contrast between the desire to understand and the desire to put in dispute that I was pointing out so that perhaps you would see the error of your ways and seek the path of understanding.

My monotheism is the same as that of the Jews in that I know there is one God and that Jesus is the King as David his ancestor was but that the realm of Jesus is larger and is not of this world. I do acknowledge that some Jews do not acknowledge that Jesus is King but that is their error and not mine and I have but to warn them of their error.

Your fellow student,

Kerwin

[gollamudi]

But Messiah will be the king of this world as per Jewish understanding and as per the Hebrew scriptures. There ends the matter with your logics and of Christianity.

[JustAskin]

T8 and all,

t8 quote

Quote

My guess is that she is interpreting scriptures like these, as they are obviously referring to Jesus Christ: 15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities–all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

Did anyone notice the “ALL THINGS”. Are we classing angels as 'Things'
– Is 'Lucifer' a 'Thing' or a “Person” – What of the rest of the heavenly Host – are they “Things” or “Persons”
– Are the angels holding together through Jesus – or God
– a just thought?

'Firstborn' – What does 'firstborn' mean… ha! recursive argument repeats again and again and again and a… in fact nearly 3.142 times!
“Firstborn of all creation” – says, does it not that he is the firstborn over all created being – I don't see what the problem is.
If he is the LITERAL FIRSTBORN then it should read: “HE is the firstborn OF God's creation.
but if He is FIGURATIVE FIRSTBORN then it should read: “He is the Firstborn OVER God's creation.
(I know you used “OF” above but the majority renderings say “OVER”)

Quick google ( – not my tradiotional method)

Quote

Firstborn has two meanings to the Hebrews. In Ps. 89:27 God clearly gives another meaning to the word firstborn while talking about David- “And I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth. – David was not the firstborn in his family; he was not even the first King of Israel. Firstborn can mean order but it can and does mean so much more. Firstborn can mean the right to have all authority and power . It is very easy to see what Paul was meaning if you just read all of the Colossians and see all authority and power belongs to Christ.

This only backing up what i wrote before – not new … Just support.

t8 quote:

Quote

18 He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.

First part: “Firstborn” from the dead – is irrelavant – We agree on that …
Second part; “He WILL COME TO HAVE FIRST PLACE…. Come to be FIRSTBORN … Jesus was not the first raised from the dead -Elijah raised a boy from the dead – Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead – But Jesus is PREEMINENT in being the FIRST PERMANENTLY Raised from the dead – the “First Born” – In what way was jesus “BORN” from the dead that there is any significance in that BIRTH.
Is it not that he was RAISED UP – is this not what it means – Raised UP from the dead – Where have I used “Raised UP” before… and in what context?
t8 quote:

Quote

And this: Acts 3:15 You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this.

See previous…

t8 quote:

New International Version
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

If Jesus as the Word was made, then how was he made through himself?

Now this is just silly – couldn't you phrase it better…perhaps others take this and feel a put down – I don't appreciate the cincercism.

but just to respond: Of course Jesus did not create himself… God created him and THEM :”And He created the stars” (Genesis 1); Who are the “Stars”?
And together they created the rest of creation which included the famous “Let US create Man”.

How is it that scriptures never mentions Jesus directly but mentions Lucifer/Satan” at the beginning – Why are the activities of 'the Satan' more significant than [the greater] works of “Jesus”?

Wy did God love Jesus more than his brethren? Because he loved righteousness more than them – and rightly earned the title of “Firstborn” – Senior in rank above his brethren – Thus and then -ALL [GOOD] THINGS ARE ATTRIBUTED TO HIM – To ther Firsborn – all things are for HIM as Heir, all things are OF him as Heir – and all things are FOR him as Heir.

[Arnold]

Quote (JustAskin @ June 10 2010,19:41)

Irene, Sorry if I misquoted you. If anything, it was only a lead-in to what else I wrote so no harm really, sorry. Ok, you say that Scriptures says that Jesus is the 'firstborn of all creation' but then say Jesus was 'brought forth' from God, (Not created) but all the rest were created. You say Jesus was 'created', but not created but brought forth…which is it? What you are really saying is 'I want to say that Jesus was not created but I can't quite reconcile the verse that says he is the first of God's creation' Am I wrong, again? By the way…I don't claim to be putting what I said as a decree. I am testing the theory as it is something I have been looking into for quite some time. I am testing it against the 'fractal' Scriptures, the ones where Sons are made firstborn and why they were firstborn over 'the firstborn' of their brothers. Did that come through what I wrote. Also, I have posted such before but no one responded for discussion. In fact, no one has responded even here on the 'fractal scriptures' element again. Is there a reason for that…perhaps because it might be too close to the truth and that would be obhorent against current belief, like 'the earth isn't flat with four corners. But I thought scriptures said …to the four corners of the earth, that must mean it is square…or rectangular, at any rate. Well, at least it is still the center of the solar system…ha ha…  or you just gonna tell us that the earth is just another planet, but the most loved most beautiful planet, but it still only revolves round the sun…like the other planets? JA, you do make us laugh sometimes…ha ha, good one, that! '

I am quoting both Scriptures, in Rev, 3:14 it says firstborn and Rev, 3:14 too, but in Psalms it says in Chapter 8 verse 22-30 that He was brouth forth. Coming into existing is what Jesus did from His Father, but all other were created and mankind was created from the dust of the earth. Irene

[JustAskin]

Irene,
Psalms 8:22-30?

[Proclaimer]

Quote (JustAskin @ June 11 2010,02:11)

If Jesus as the Word was made, then how was he made through himself? Now this is just silly – couldn't you phrase it better…perhaps others take this and feel a put down – I don't appreciate the cincercism.

No time to reply to all your post, but was a little perplexed by this comment on the outset.

I thought it was a fair enough question and wasn't intended to be silly and I do not believe it is either, nor is it meant to be a put down. It is an honest question and open challenge, not a put down in the slightest.

If all things were made through him and without him was not anything made that was made, and he was the Word that was with God and preceded all things, then surely this is a valid question and one that needs to be answered.

If he was made, then how was he made through himself?

Anyway, I think your answer is probably that Jesus and angels are not things. I think that this would make an interesting discussion and need to look into that.

Cheers.

[Arnold]

Quote (JustAskin @ June 11 2010,09:00)

Irene, Psalms 8:22-30?

Yes, did you read it??? verse 30 He was beside His Father as a master craftsman. The question I have could that be Wisdom, which to me does not make sense…..You see Jesus was brought forth by His Father and then after that Jehovah God gave Him the power to create all by God's Holy Spirit IMO…..In Genesis it does say let us and our image so we know that there were two, not God alone…. Irene

[seekingtruth]

T8,
I do not believe that our reality is the only one in existence, when the Father laid the framework for our corporeal existence He was manifested as a new expression, this new image of God, was God, and had all the characteristics of the Father, but the Father was greater. This image of God although He possesses all that we can realize of God was not the source but being the arm of the Father He was used in all of creation.

My opinion – Wm

[JustAskin]

Irene,

Psalm 8…  I dont know but in my Bible Psalm 8 … Ah, did you mean 'Proverbs 8'?

Irene, and all…

Trinitarians say 'US' means Three.
Irene, you say 'US' means Two.

Can I Just point out that 'US' does not allude to any specific number EXCEPT that that number is greater than One.

Therefore, 'US' could be two, three, four, five, fifty, a thousand, one hundred and fortyfour thousand…more… and every and any number in between and above.

Now, Irene, why did you explicitly chose 'two'?

Has anyone wondered how many people it takes to make a blockbuster movie?

Yet, there are only TWO 'peoples' credited.

One is the Director, and the other are the 'Stars' and more often 'The Star'…

[GeneBalthrop]

JA………..Exactly people (assume) the Us just means two , when in fact as you say it could mean thousands of thousands. I believe it is referencing the SEVEN SPIRIT (INTELLECTS) of GOD, at work in the creation process. But that is Just my take on this and is also a speculation based on what I percieve others scripture to imply.

Like you soundness and Logic of Scriptures JA, also enjoy your humor brother.

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

[JustAskin]

Hi Gene,

We don't always agree but I accept this complement.

I am 'investigating' this theory as there is enough evidential information to make it a viable proposition.

My basis is that Scriptures is always repeating itself with slight variations , Fractalising…

Scriptures foretells what will occur, in a roundabout way.

Scriptures shows what happened before in a roundabout way.

Jesus in the grave three days and three nights
Jonah in the whale three days and three nights

David being begotten and made King
Jesus being begotten and made King

But Saul was First King, then sinned, then afterwards, David.
….then 'Satan' sinned …

Would someone answer me this?

What could it be that made 'Satan' think that he, above all his brethren, deserved to be worshipped as God by Man?

How about this then: Was 'Jesus' more powerful than 'Satan' (You may speculate)

And then this: Who are 'the Stars' that God created?

And lastly: Why is 'Jesus' called 'the Angel of God'?

[NickHassan]

Hi JA,
We saw it happen in Genesis.
The god of this world got Adam to obey him though his wife.
He overrode authority and appealed to commonsense and she fell for it … and he followed her.

[Author]

Posts