- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Jodi,
You ask.“For those who believe in a pre-existent son, I have some questions for you-
What was God’s purpose for creating a pre-existent son?”God was lonely.
He had a lot of work to do.
So the builder begat a carpenter.“What further understanding can we gain from knowing that Jesus pre-existed?”
Respect for one who gave up all he enjoyed with God for our sakes.
Respect for one who showed what it is to fear God.
Respect for one who had truly humble faith.“Was it necessary for our salvation that Jesus pre-exist?”
No.
Nonetheless it is revealed.Hi Jodi,
Exodus 20:12
Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.If Christ was not before David and Abraham then he would owe honour to them.
That was not the order ordained by God.Hi MIM,
Indeed it is the reverse.
David calls Christ his Lord.
Mt22
42Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David.43He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,
44The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
45If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 25 2007,09:10) Hi Jodi,
You ask.“For those who believe in a pre-existent son, I have some questions for you-
What was God’s purpose for creating a pre-existent son?”God was lonely.
He had a lot of work to do.
So the builder begat a carpenter.“What further understanding can we gain from knowing that Jesus pre-existed?”
Respect for one who gave up all he enjoyed with God for our sakes.
Respect for one who showed what it is to fear God.
Respect for one who had truly humble faith.“Was it necessary for our salvation that Jesus pre-exist?”
No.
Nonetheless it is revealed.
Good Afternoon, and blessings to all!I have a lot to say, but tied up right now, having to move everything out of the bedroom, including the computer, which I hope my husband will hook up in the other room for me later on tonight. We are taking out carpet and putting in laminate flooring, I am really excited about it.
Anyway, wanted to tell you thanks Nick, for getting back to me on some of my questions. I also wanted to throw another one back at ya!
Did Jesus need to pre-exist in order to be the Messiah? Thanks
Hi Jodi,
You ask
“Did Jesus need to pre-exist in order to be the Messiah? Thanks “
No.
But to be recognised as the messiah YES.
Ps 2 showed the Jews that the coming anointed one would be the Son of God.Quote (Jodi @ July 24 2007,07:42) Quote (IM4Truth @ July 24 2007,05:14) Jodi All that could be true, but what are you going to do with these scriptures that shows me that Jesus was created before the world began and not just the word of God THE Father. Col 1:15 ” Who is the image of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN OF EVERY CREATURE.”
Col 1:18 ” And He is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead that in all things he might have preeminence.”
PREEMINENCE MEANING FIRST IN EVERYTHING. So according to these scriptures Jesus existed before.
Rev. 3:14 “…these things saith the AMEN, THE FAITHFUL AND TRUE WITNESS, THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD.”
How do you get around these scriptures?
Peace Mrs.IM4Truth
I don’t get around these scriptures, I merely believe that I interpret them correctly.Romans 8:29 – because whom He did foreknow, He also did fore-appoint, conformed to the image of His Son, that he might be first-born among many brethren;
1 Peter 1:20 foreknown, indeed, before the foundation of the world, and manifested in the last times because of you,
God foreknew that when He brought Jesus into the world he would be the first born of the New Earth. When Jesus was resurrected he became the first human born into eternal life, and was the first human to dwell in God’s glorious peace. Jesus was not the first born of the corrupted earth. He was predestined to be the first born of God’s Kingdom.
Col 1:15 ” Who is the image of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN OF EVERY CREATURE.”
Jesus is the firstborn of every creature of God’s Righteous Earth that will be. He is not the firstborn of the sinful world, that we know was Adam.
Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first-born out of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth; to him who did love us, and did bathe us from our sins in his blood,
Col 1:18 ” And He is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead that in all things he might have preeminence .”
I believe that fact that it says he is first-born out of the dead is KEY
He is the first born of the dead, meaning he is the first to be resurrected from the dead and therefore is the firstborn of eternal life. Once again, he is NOT the first born of the sinful world.
Im 4 Truth you said preeminence meaning first in everything-this is not correct-read it to yourself in that light
—And He is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead that in all things he might have first in everything.
Preeminence meaning supremacy over everything granted to Him by God.
—And He is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead that in all things he might have supremacy over everything.
Rev. 3:14 “…these things saith the AMEN, THE FAITHFUL AND TRUE WITNESS, THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD.”
Surely this scripture is not applying Amen in regards to the first creation that fell into sin, but is talking about the second sinless Creation, of which Christ is the firstborn of. Christ is the beginning of God’s TRUE creation, the one that was intended/foreknown from the beginning.
I am 4 Truth, in all fairness, how do you get around these scriptures-
2 Samuel 7:12 When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me.
Luke 1:32 he shall be great, and Son of the Highest he shall be called, and the Lord God shall give him the throne of David his father,
Hebrew 1:5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you”? Or again, “I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”?
Romans 8:29 – because whom He did foreknow, He also did fore-appoint, conformed to the image of His Son, that he might be first-born among many brethren;
1 Peter 1:20 foreknown, indeed, before the foundation of the world, and manifested in the last times because of you,
Indeed these scriptures do not say that Jesus existed as a person before, but that he existed only in God's plan that was established in the beginning.
Jodi……> hang on to what you have, It's is right.gene
biophil…..I disagree with your asumpton that there were many at the time of John trying to make Jesus a mere man< Just the oppisit there were many trying to defiy Jesus and trun him in to a God. Take the Gnostics which sraing up in John and Pauls time as well as the antiadoptist, these were the Groups that has been proven by many scholars as the main antichrist influences at that time and the Gnostic believed Jesus came out from God as a lesser God to straighten out this corupted world, they believed in the diety of Jesus
and so did the antiadoptist,who changed texts to push their therories. John ties the concept of Jesus being fully Flesh and bood to us being of God or not, you have it backward as to what John was doing. And the way it's worded he was talking of Jesus comming into existence, not just comming into the world, but comming into existence in the world, seams to me is what he is emplying by his statements. And i will say again if John wanted to say Jesus was the word he simply would have written that, it doesnt take a rocket scientest to figure that out. You as well as all trinitarians are forcing the text, in order to defy Jesus.
thanks……geneHi Gene,
You can disagree with me, that's fine. Please comment about Revelation 19:13 calling Jesus the word of God.
By the way, I do not believe in the trinity doctrine at all.
Thanks
Biophil…..first let me apologise to you if i ofended you sorry.
the scriptures you are refering to is at the end of the thousand year reign of Jesus and the Saints when satan is released from the pit and goes and gathers all the nation to battle Jesus and the Saints who have retreated to Jerusalam and God Almighty Himself comes down and destorys them. He himself is God and also the word of God they are one and the same.
again sorry for my misunderstand …..peace …geneHi Gene,
No apologies needed. Please know that I wasn't upset. I was only agreeing to disagree on part of your thoughts, that's all. I hope I didn't come across angry? Writing to someone is difficult to show the right emotion at times.
I'll have to start using more smilies. I agree with you that Jesus is the word of God.
In Christ
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 25 2007,14:09) biophil…..I disagree with your asumpton that there were many at the time of John trying to make Jesus a mere man< Just the oppisit there were many trying to defiy Jesus and trun him in to a God. Take the Gnostics which sraing up in John and Pauls time as well as the antiadoptist, these were the Groups that has been proven by many scholars as the main antichrist influences at that time and the Gnostic believed Jesus came out from God as a lesser God to straighten out this corupted world, they believed in the diety of Jesus
and so did the antiadoptist,who changed texts to push their therories. John ties the concept of Jesus being fully Flesh and bood to us being of God or not, you have it backward as to what John was doing. And the way it's worded he was talking of Jesus comming into existence, not just comming into the world, but comming into existence in the world, seams to me is what he is emplying by his statements. And i will say again if John wanted to say Jesus was the word he simply would have written that, it doesnt take a rocket scientest to figure that out. You as well as all trinitarians are forcing the text, in order to defy Jesus.
thanks……gene
Hi Gene,
Jesus is not a deity to anyone except to those who would make him their [false ]god.
He is Lord of All, Master and King
under God.Quote (Bibliophile @ July 24 2007,22:25) Hi Gene, You can disagree with me, that's fine. Please comment about Revelation 19:13 calling Jesus the word of God.
By the way, I do not believe in the trinity doctrine at all.
Thanks
Bib,Do you know of any good scholars who assert that revelation was written prior to the Gospel of John? I know my Ryrie Study Bible lists the date of authorship of Revelation a few years earlier than the Gospel of John. That would lead to the use of the Word in John 1.
Isn't it odd that the Word is never used again in the Gospel of John past the 1st chapter?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 24 2007,20:41) Hi Mim,
If Jesus began life in Israel then, as we are seeing, students of the bible may begin to put Abraham and David above him as his human fathers.
Abraham and David are indeed the human ancestors/forefathers of Jesus the MessiahFYI
(Mat 1:1) The book of the generation [Gk. genesis] of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
(Luke 1:32) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
(Luke 3:31) Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
(Luke 3:34) Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Still thinking about the WITH in John 1:1
I think we can all admit that the word itself on its own can apply to being both something that is physical or something spiritual.
My opinion is that the With in John 1:1, makes best sense looking at it in both the physical sense and the spiritual sense, simply because we know that God’s word is active. To make a comparison, I see it kinda like a robot that only does things according to it’s owner’s voice. The robot is therefore with the owner in a physical sense, and also in a spiritual sense. The robot is separate from it’s owner in a physical sense, but yet everything that the Robot does comes directly from the mind of the owner. The are physically separate yet they are one in mind, actually more accurate would be one in function.
The argument seems to be, of those who believe in pre-existence, that the With in John is represented not only as being restricted to the physical sense, but that physical sense is a person.
The word of God is active / through the use of mere words, God is able to make things happen. Therefore God’s word, like the robot, is physically separate, but one in function. Example, God speaks, ‘let there be rain’ — the rain is therefore physically separate, but it is functioning only according to God.
How is God’s word active we might ask? Is it because it is a separate being? Or is it because God’s unique powers allow his word to be so?
I think that it would have to be said that without the pre-existent Jesus, God’s word would still have the ability to be active. I believe that power would still be with Him, or should I say, to avoid confusion, the power of God making the word active would still be His.
Let’s see if I can get this right according to what the pre-existent believers think….. the word-being the pre-existent Jesus- means that God gave him the power to have active words. …OK wait a minute then those active words would be from Jesus and not from God. …OK it must be then that you believe that God communicates the word to the pre-existent Jesus (so the words will be God’s and not his) and then Jesus says the words and they are active through God giving him His powers. I’m just trying to figure out how this all goes down, Jesus being the Word and all.
I would like to know in detail what it means that a pre-existent person is the WORD. Please, clarify, so I can fully understand your doctrine. Am I even close?
I would also like to know where in the OT it shows a pre-existent being as being the Word of God. As well, I don’t think the problem has been addressed to those perpetuating pre-existence but don’t believe in the Trinity how you get around calling Jesus the word but not God, according to John 1:1? Sorry if it has already been explained.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 25 2007,09:10) Hi Jodi,
You ask.“For those who believe in a pre-existent son, I have some questions for you-
What was God’s purpose for creating a pre-existent son?”God was lonely.
He had a lot of work to do.
So the builder begat a carpenter.“What further understanding can we gain from knowing that Jesus pre-existed?”
Respect for one who gave up all he enjoyed with God for our sakes.
Respect for one who showed what it is to fear God.
Respect for one who had truly humble faith.“Was it necessary for our salvation that Jesus pre-exist?”
No.
Nonetheless it is revealed.
God was lonely? This is an interesting response from someone who does not believe in the Trinity. Usually, I get this type of response from those who believe there are “three persons” in One God. They believe God is a Trinity because somehow God was lonely and needed to show love (and you cannot show love unless there is another “person” to receive the love). HmmmmNick, I'm assuming you also know that God is capable of handling the “work load” of his creation.
Is it “truly humble faith” when you know what heaven is, and know that you will return there in 33 or so years? In my opinion, NO! Faith is believing in something that you are unsure of – something you do not have – something you are hoping for.
If Jesus was preexistent, he did not operate with “humble faith”, he operated under “assured faith” and that sounds a lot like a “lead zeppelin” to me.
JOHN 20:29
“Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet believed.”
Quote If Jesus was preexistent, he did not operate with “humble faith”, he operated under “assured faith” and that sounds a lot like a “lead zeppelin” to me. 
I Am 4 Truth,
Romans 8:29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn within a large family.Yes you are right God is talking about the foreknowledge of the Saints. That is not what is wrong with the scripture however. This scripture still goes against pre-existence. God predestined people that they would be conformed to Jesus, if they didn’t become conformed to Jesus then Jesus would not be the FIRSTBORN OF eternal life, he would simply be the ONLY BORN of eternal life.
First and foremost the person we are suppose to be conforming to is the Jesus born of Mary, we have no idea who this pre-existent Jesus is, so it would be impossible for us to be conforming to him. Why does it say that he might BE firstborn, isn’t he suppose to be the first born already?
It should be clear that the large family that we are talking about is the righteous Family of God, whom Jesus is the firstborn of for two reasons. The first, which to me is being clarified in this scripture, is that he is the firstborn out of the dead, and if others don’t follow him he will not only be the first but the last and only person to be resurrected. We know however, from this scripture that God foreknew that people would conform, thus clarifying that Jesus is a firstborn, and not an only born of the large righteous family of God.
I Am 4 Truth you said, “But there are other scriptures like Col. 1:15 Rev. 3:14 Col. 1:18 explains that He was first in all.”
Yes, Jesus was first in all. Knowing this I know God is a great planner, and I can see that what He sets out to accomplish will surely come true. The purpose of creating the earth was for a Righteous Family, which is something that takes time to build. Jesus represents the type of persons who will make up the Family. The character that was developed in Jesus, from his birth to his death, made God well pleased because it exemplified the character of the people God planned to make in the very beginning. God and Jesus are currently preparing for the Coming Kingdom of God. They are strengthening the character of the First Fruits, whom God foreknew.
Character is developed by who you are and by what experiences you attain. As far as I am concerned Jesus and the pre-existent Jesus are two separate people. They are physically different, and they would have different personalities.
There has been the debate that Jesus needed to be just like us in order for us to follow him. Kejonn made a good point to the effect that, ultimately we are to be following God, and we can never be just like God, so we don’t have to be just like Jesus either, in order to follow him. This is true, however I believe that God saw it fit to make Jesus just like us for other reasons.
Kejonn asked me awhile back on this thread, after reading, “Through instruction and discipline over an amount of time is the free will mind perfected. It was not that YHWH knew that mankind would sin, and need a savior, it was that He knew it would take time to create the first perfect man, who thus would then lead the way for all mankind to become perfected, thus earning the name Savior,” if I believed God’s powers were limited. I responded by saying, “whatever YHWH sets out to accomplish it will most certainly come to pass.”
If people want to believe that I am limiting God, by saying He needs time to perfect man, that is there right, but I would like to ask them, if God can perfect man on a dime, then why not just do so? As well, why is God and Jesus taking time to establish God's future Kingdom?
I believe that the bible is clear that God wanted to perfect man, by man himself, not part man and part God, but by the use of a true human being. I believe it is limiting God by believing that He needed to create some half breed of himself and man, in order to perfect man.
As well, and most importantly I believe that Jesus had to be just like us, in order to pay for our sins. A HUMAN WAS NEEDED TO OVERCOME HUMAN SINS.
Moreover, we follow Jesus not only because he teaches us about God and His plan, but also because in Jesus, a true human being, we can know intimately HOW AND IN WHAT WAY A HUMAN BEING is to follow God.
1 Corinthians 15: 21 For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being.
Now this, as requested by I Am 4 Truth,
Colossians 1:12 giving thanks to the Father, who has enabled you to share in the inheritance of the saints in the light. 13 He has rescued us from the power of darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of his beloved Son, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;
–Attention -pre-existent believers
Your pre-existent Firstborn, did not give us redemption, Jesus of Nazareth did, whom is firstborn out of the dead and whom is head of the Father’s Kingdom, through taking over Adam’s birthright.
Who is said to be the image of the invisible God….. Jesus of Nazareth. It is Jesus of Nazareth that is being said is the firstborn of all creation, it is not saying that a non human being, was the firstborn of all creation, it is saying that the person Jesus of Nazareth was. The Jesus that we KNOW, the Jesus people spoke to and healed is the firstborn of all creation.
We know that Jesus was born of Mary however, so doesn’t that create a problem? No because we also know from scripture that God preplanned Jesus and that Jesus was His purpose for creation, and therefore before creation took place Jesus was known by God. It does not make sense to me that this scripture Col 1:15, would all the sudden start referring to the pre-existent Jesus when the rest of the verses are clearly talking about the IDENTITY of Jesus of Nazareth. These scriptures tell us who the firstborn of all creation is, a HUMAN Being. The bible clearly tells us HOW Jesus OF NAZARETH is the Firstborn. What the bible DOES NOT tell us is that Jesus pre-existed, moreover, the bible does not say that Jesus of Nazareth is firstborn because he pre-existed.
16 for in him all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He himself is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 He is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that he might come to have first place in everything.
Who were things created for? A pre-existent Jesus, or for the Jesus of Nazareth? Are we ever told that a pre-existent being is the head of the body, the church? Which Jesus is returning to establish God’s Kingdom?
The problem is that a pre-existent Jesus is not identified in the bible, he is being speculated as existing because you FAIL to see the scriptures that Identify how Jesus of Nazareth is firstborn.Even worse is that by denying these reason’s you take away what Jesus earned and you certainly take away from God’s work, of perfecting man, in order that His plan be fulfilled and be good and true. You are adding to scripture when it is not necessary. Neither do we know who or what this pre-existent Jesus was, we also don’t know, as Nick confirms, what biblical purpose he had.
Jesus being firstborn because he earned Adam’s birthright through what he accomplished on earth through God, is far greater to both God and Jesus, then Jesus gaining the throne because he existed first as a non human being. Let me ask which one is more meaningful to you?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
