- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 01 2013,04:31) Quote (jb2u @ Aug. 28 2013,07:56) My response was to answer your question on Paul's reason for stating such. I believe that Paul was telling us that although Jesus is in the image of God (just like us), He did not seek to be equal with God (unlike us).
I've never thought I was equal with God. Nor have I ever tried to be equal to God. Nor did Paul, who wrote this down, think he was equal with God.So I think my understanding that Paul was deliberately CONTRASTING “form of God” with “form of a slave” makes a lot more sense than this thing you've concluded.
Quote (jb2u @ Aug. 28 2013,07:56) If we sin, we are not “reflecting” (ie: the image of God) God as we should.
Even after God decided that the thoughts of mankind were evil all the time and so flooded the earth, He still told Noah, after he came out of the ark, “for in the image of God has God made mankind.” (Gen 9:6)It seems to me that you are purposely rejecting what your conscious already knows to be the best understanding of “form of God” versus “form of a slave”, and reaching for anything and everything it COULD alternately mean.
Not sure I am following you.“form of God” equals “image of God”
We are in the image of God and thus form of God.
We “seek equality” by doing our will, by serving ourselves. I would say you do NOT “try to make yourself equal with God”, but our “fallen sin nature” is that from Adam..who sought equality with God by eating of the fruit of knowledge of Good and Evil.
Again, I am not “reaching” for anything. Form of God..clearly means the same as Image of God. This is exactly how I translate Phil 2:6..Reaching for an alternative meaning would be translating it as “WAS existing” “before becoming a man”!
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 01 2013,04:18) Quote (jb2u @ Aug. 28 2013,07:45) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 28 2013,12:20)
Have in you the mind of Jesus, who, existing (present tense form) as the only begotten Son of God on earth, didn't allow that prestige to keep him from serving sinners and prostitutes.
Paul did not state that Jesus' “being in the form of God” was AT THAT TIME a PAST event. We know this because Paul did NOT use the past tense when saying that “Jesus existing in the from of God..”
No, we don't “know this” – because in my example, I used the present tense “existing”, even though I was clearly speaking of the PAST – when Jesus was ON EARTH as the only begotten Son of God.We also know that, even at the time Paul wrote those words, everything he depicted happened in the PAST. The being made as a man, the humbling himself, the dying on a tree. They were all PAST events – even at the time Paul wrote the letter.
Quote (jb2u @ Aug. 28 2013,07:45) You are CHANGING #1 to say Paul said “Jesus existed in the form of God..and then was CHANGED into a man.” The problem with this statement is that is NOT what Paul actually said! Quote Are you aware that verse 7 starts with the CONTRASTING conjunction “but”? So the flow of the statement is that Jesus was existing in the form of God……… BUT…….. emptied himself by taking on the form of a servant (actually “a slave”).
I think this may be the beginning of your misunderstanding here.
The “but” is NOT contrasting “form of God” from “emptied himself”!!
The “but” is actually contrasting the “did not seek equality” from the “emptied himself.”
Do you really not see that?
Quote Is Jehovah a slave, jb? Can anyone be in the form of God AND in the form of a slave at the same time? God is NOT a slave..BUT..Jesus was in the image of God AND a servant!! WE are in the image of God and should also be servants!! This is ALL that Paul is trying to say here!!
Have this mind in you just like Christ..He is in the image of God, but He was a servant. He is the Son of God, but washed your feet!! Do you see how I said He IS the Son of God, but washED your feet!!
Quote Paul is making a CONTRAST here – which is why he used the conjunction “but” instead of “and”. Jesus was in the form of God, but took on the form of a slave. Again, that was NOT the contrast!! Please, please, please reread that verse!!
Quote This doesn't mean Jesus stopped being “godlike” while on earth as a man. But Paul is clearly showing a CONTRAST between “form of God” and “form of a slave”. Paul is making the point that we should “let this mind be in you, which was ALSO in Christ Jesus.” So what follows should be all things that we ALSO can do, right?
How..please answer this question without skipping it..HOW can we also be of the same mind that we existed first in heaven with God, but don't seek equality, instead empty ourselves, and become men”?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 01 2013,05:22) Quote (jb2u @ Aug. 28 2013,08:26) It is EASY if you do not maintain that there is some kind of “chronological order” to these verses.
But they ARE in chronological order.Quote (jb2u @ Aug. 28 2013,08:26) You did not answer HOW the order can be different in verse 7 and 8.
You are only imagining a “reverse order” here. Let me do it again.In chronological order:
1. Was existing in the form of God – WHERE he didn't consider equality with God something to be grasped.2. BUT INSTEAD, made himself of no account BY taking on the form of a servant BY being made in the likeness of a human being.
3. And AFTER being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself [even further] BY becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross!
So there are really only three steps in the chronological order. And the third step is right in line with the first two.
I don't know where you're seeing something that is out of chronological order in verses 7 and 8.
You REALLY do not see it?Again..
verse 7..humbled, servant, man
verse 8..man, humbled, servant
If we pretend that these words are names of buildings and..
Ron says..take a right at “humbled”, then turn left on “servant”, then take a right on “man”
Is this the SAME directions as if..
Mike says..take a right on “man”, then turn left on “humbled”, then take a right on “servant”
Clearly, you would end up at two DIFFERENT places following these directions!! You have two DIFFERENT orders here!! And thus, only one order can be correct..IF there is an order.
Quote Quote (jb2u @ Aug. 28 2013,08:26) Furthermore, since you maintain that it is a chronological order, was Jesus still with God in heaven when He made Himself of no reputation. Was Jesus made a servant BEFORE He was made a man? Absolutely. Jesus has always been a servant of God. But Michael the archangel is a servant of God who can be said to exist “in the form of God” – meaning he is a powerful spirit being like God is.
And it would be quite an “emptying” experience for Michael, as a powerful spirit servant of God, to take on the much lower form of a human slave of God. (It would be like you, a human, being asked to lower your existence and live as a cockroach for a while.)
The “emptying” would be great..but that is NOT what Phil 2 says..now is it?
Quote And then after being made a human, Michael would have to humble himself even further to walk willingly right into his sure death on a tree. (Like you, after being made as a cockroach, humbling yourself even further by obeying God and walking right under the shoe that you knew was going to squash you.) Notice that the “humbling yourself even further” in the second parenthetical clause above is in perfect chronological order with the previous “lowering your existence” in the first parenthetical clause.
Yes..and what is the point? You can not give a separate fictitious story that is chronological in order to “prove” that Phil 2 is chronological!!
Quote Quote (jb2u @ Aug. 28 2013,08:26) Yes, Jesus was in every step a human.
But since the whole thing IS in chronological order, surely you will be able to adjust your previous understanding, and see that anyone who existed in any form whatsoever BEFORE being made in the likeness of a human being, must, by necessity, have pre-existed that human likeness.Of course, you still have the option of pretending that verse 8 is out of order with verses 6 and 7. But a man who is truly after scriptural truth wouldn't do a thing like that, right?
Ouch! I assure you that I am not “pretending” verse 8 is in a different order. I have proven that it is in a different order!! I am truly looking for scriptural truth every day of my life..not just on this website.
Quote And that is only ONE scripture, jb. There are 50 more that support the teaching of Phil 2. I hope some of those answer my 4 questions that I asked to be answered!!
Quote nd since you agree that there isn't a single scripture in the entire Bible that specifically PROHIBITS the pre-existence of Jesus, it's time we move on to John 17:5 – as we both have expressed an interest in that one. I will give you a chance to respond to this post before starting 17:5.
I NEVER said that there is NOT scripture that prohibits a pre-existent Jesus. I only said those 4 passages that I quoted earlier, they did not prohibit, necessarily, a preexistence!!
I have given you SOLID verses that certainly show a non-preexistent Jesus, but YOU asked if it prohibits it 100%. I was honest and said..NO..one can READ into it and infer that there COULD be a preexistence. That is NOT to say that I believe it does. It would be like saying..well does any verse “prohibit” Jesus from being 6 foot tall. Just because it doesn't does not then “prove” that he IS 6 foot tall.
Here our my questions again from page 14..
A couple questions for you both that I believe have not been answered..1. Why does it not say Jesus was “transformed” or “changed” into a man?
2. What does Jesus mean when He says He “came out from” God?
3. God only talked to us “in these last days”; so, who/what was Jesus before these last days?
4. Why is the word “preexist” not used in the Bible anywhere to explain/describe Jesus?
We can “move on” to John 17:5..BUT a simple, brief, statement about the above 4 questions would be GREATLY appreciated.
I am just trying to understand both of your views. It helps me to understand “where you both are coming from”. We can
get into the verses that support your belief later. Just tell me your THOUGHTS on the above 4 questions, please.Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 01 2013,08:35) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) Paul is making a CONTRAST here – which is why he used the conjunction “but” instead of “and”. Jesus was in the form of God, but took on the form of a slave. Again, that was NOT the contrast!! Please, please, please reread that verse!!
I agree that this is where THE misunderstanding is. But the misunderstanding is not mine.Form #1: Existing in the form of God, at which time he did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.
Get it? WHILE he was existing in the form of God, he DIDN'T consider equality something to be grasped.
Now for the CONTRAST to that first statement:
Form #2: BUT INSTEAD made himself of no account BY taking on the form of a slave BY being made as a human being.
#1 and #2 are both COMPOUND statements, jb. The WHOLE of #1 CONTRASTS the WHOLE of #2.
Not only does “didn't consider equality” contrast “emptied himself”, but “form of God” also contrasts “form of a slave”.
So YES, that WAS the contrast!
Let's try it your way:
Have in you the mind of Jesus, who, although he has CONTINUALLY existed in the form of God since the moment he was created as a human being, didn't consider equality with God something to be grasped, but instead emptied himself by taking on the form of a servant by being made in the likeness of a human being.
Either way you slice it, you have Jesus existing as a human being BEFORE he was made in the likeness of a human being.
Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 01 2013,08:35) How..please answer this question without skipping it..HOW can we also be of the same mind that we existed first in heaven with God, but don't seek equality, instead empty ourselves, and become men”?
The teaching is very simple, jb.The mind of Jesus is that he was existing in a very prestigious position, but thought nothing of being made into a much lower existence to serve his God and others.
We are called to be willing to give up all the niceties that we have in our lives for the salvation of others. The teaching is summed up by Jesus here:
Matthew 19
21 Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”22 When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.
If that man had the mind of Jesus in him (if he wanted to be perfect like Jesus was perfect), he would have went away rejoicing to sell all he had. He would have been willing and eager to lower himself for the good of others – knowing that God would replace those earthly treasures with treasures in heaven.
Instead, he was saddened by the thought of giving up his niceties and making himself of no account.
Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 01 2013,08:56) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 01 2013,05:22)
In chronological order:
1. Was existing in the form of God – WHERE he didn't consider equality with God something to be grasped.2. BUT INSTEAD, made himself of no account BY taking on the form of a servant BY being made in the likeness of a human being.
3. And AFTER being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself [even further] BY becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross!
You REALLY do not see it?Again..
verse 7..humbled, servant, man
verse 8..man, humbled, servant
No, no, no, jb.
Let's use the cockroach thing again.
1. jb existing as a human being.
2. jb emptied himself by being made as a cockroach.
3. AND AFTER being found in appearance as a cockroach, humbled himself even further by walking right under the shoe he knew would squash him dead.You see? There is no “flopping back and forth”. It is a continual chronological order.
So in the analogy above, did you exist as something other than a cockroach BEFORE being made in the likeness of a cockroach? Or do you assume that you were already a cockroach before being made in the likeness of a cockroach?
Now, apply this to Phil 2.
1. Existing in the form of God.
2. Emptied himself by taking on the form of a slave by being made in the likeness of a human being.
3. AND AFTER being found in appearance as a human being, humbled himself even further by willing walking a path that he knew would lead him to his death.Again, the only “flip-flopping” here is in your imagination. In reality, all three happen in continual chronological order.
And just like there is no way you could have existed as a cockroach BEFORE being made in the likeness of a cockroach, there is no way that Jesus could have existed as a human being BEFORE “being made in the likeness of a human being”.
Yet, according to Paul, he DID exist “in the form of God” BEFORE “being made in the likeness of a human being”, just like, according to my analogy, you DID exist “as a human being” BEFORE “being made in the likeness of a cockroach”.
Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 01 2013,08:56) I NEVER said that there is NOT scripture that prohibits a pre-existent Jesus. I only said those 4 passages that I quoted earlier, they did not prohibit, necessarily, a preexistence!!
My bad. I assumed that you listed those four because they were the best you had.Why not just post the scripture that DOES prohibit the pre-existence of Jesus right now then?
Because if there exists such a scripture, then I will admit that I've been wrong all this time and adjust my beliefs to align with that scripture.
On the other hand, if there exists no such scripture, you are heavily outgunned.
Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 01 2013,09:01) 1. Why does it not say Jesus was “transformed” or “changed” into a man? 2. What does Jesus mean when He says He “came out from” God?
3. God only talked to us “in these last days”; so, who/what was Jesus before these last days?
4. Why is the word “preexist” not used in the Bible anywhere to explain/describe Jesus?
1. It says he was existing in one form before being made in the likeness of a human being. Scripture doesn't specifically say Elijah and Enoch were “transformed” into heavenly beings when taken to God. But we can safely assume that they don't exist with God in heaven as flesh and blood human beings, right?2. In Jesus' case, it means he came out from the presence of God.
3. The only begotten and firstborn Son of God…….. just like he continues to be.
4. How could we possibly answer that? The teaching is there all throughout scripture as plain as day. Does the fact that they didn't use the word “pre-exist” eliminate all those scriptures that say the same thing in other words?
Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 02 2013,03:01) 1. Why does it not say Jesus was “transformed” or “changed” into a man? 2. What does Jesus mean when He says He “came out from” God?
3. God only talked to us “in these last days”; so, who/what was Jesus before these last days?
4. Why is the word “preexist” not used in the Bible anywhere to explain/describe Jesus?
1. It is fundamental to our faith to believe that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. That is the same Jesus by whom God made the cosmos.2. John 8:42: Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me.
Notice how he came from God and then said, “now I am here”.
If I was in the USA and I said, “I came from New Zealand and now I am here”, that could only mean one thing right.3. The Word of God, perhaps the Angel of the LORD, Wisdom. It is sketchy because we know that the revelation of the son was hidden but is now revealed.
4. There may not be a Greek word for 'preexist'. Why does it not say that Elijah and Moses preexisted when they appeared to men after their deaths. And Jesus himself preexisted when you consider that he was on Earth and now he is in Heaven right, and still you do not see the word 'preexist' even there.
The lack of a particular word doesn't negate the concept it represents. The Bible also doesn't mention the microscopic world (I think) yet it talks about the treasures of the snow.
Jesus answer to your question is here:
“I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”What was the question?
“You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”So the context was questioning him about him not being old enough to see Abraham and instead of giving the same explanation that you or others who believe that Jesus began life as a man would give, Jesus speaks words these peculiar words, which are words that support what we believe.
“I am” (ego eimi) means “I exist”. So you ask where is the word “preexist? It uses the word “exist” and puts it in a context way before his birth as a man. In other words the concept of preexist is right here.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 02 2013,02:59) I agree that this is where THE misunderstanding is. But the misunderstanding is not mine. Form #1: Existing in the form of God, at which time he did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.
Get it? WHILE he was existing in the form of God, he DIDN'T consider equality something to be grasped.
Now for the CONTRAST to that first statement:
Form #2: BUT INSTEAD made himself of no account BY taking on the form of a slave BY being made as a human being.
#1 and #2 are both COMPOUND statements, jb. The WHOLE of #1 CONTRASTS the WHOLE of #2.
Not only does “didn't consider equality” contrast “emptied himself”, but “form of God” also contrasts “form of a slave”.
So YES, that WAS the contrast!
Let's try it your way:
Have in you the mind of Jesus, who, although he has CONTINUALLY existed in the form of God since the moment he was created as a human being, didn't consider equality with God something to be grasped, but instead emptied himself by taking on the form of a servant by being made in the likeness of a human being.
Either way you slice it, you have Jesus existing as a human being BEFORE he was made in the likeness of a human being.
No. No. No.We have to remember that He never at any point gave up being “in the image of God” anymore than we do.
Paul is telling them to be of the same mind of Christ.
He, like us, while existing in the image of God, did not try to be equal, but rather made Himself of no reputation, and took on the image of a servant, being made a man.
In case you did not get it..Paul clarifies it for us..
And being made a man, He humbled Himself, and was obedient even to His death.
That is the mind that we should all have!!
We are ALL “in the image of God”
BUT..now think about this…are we ALL “in the image of a servant”? NO, of course not. Many of us do not humble ourselves and serve others, as we should. This is exactly what God wants us to do. That is exactly what He COMMANDED Jesus to do!Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 02 2013,03:06) Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 01 2013,08:35) How..please answer this question without skipping it..HOW can we also be of the same mind that we existed first in heaven with God, but don't seek equality, instead empty ourselves, and become men”?
The teaching is very simple, jb.The mind of Jesus is that he was existing in a very prestigious position, but thought nothing of being made into a much lower existence to serve his God and others.
We are called to be willing to give up all the niceties that we have in our lives for the salvation of others. The teaching is summed up by Jesus here:
Matthew 19
21 Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”22 When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.
If that man had the mind of Jesus in him (if he wanted to be perfect like Jesus was perfect), he would have went away rejoicing to sell all he had. He would have been willing and eager to lower himself for the good of others – knowing that God would replace those earthly treasures with treasures in heaven.
Instead, he was saddened by the thought of giving up his niceties and making himself of no account.
Yes..BUT..it does not say that Jesus “existed in a higher place..”It doesn't even say “existed”..it says “EXISTING”.
Again, you keep having to change the sentence in order to make your point. That SHOULD be the first thing that gives you pause!
It is a great thing to be “in the image of God.” That is why He created us “in His image.” He wants to dwell with US. He loves man!! And yet, the first man sought to be equal with Him.
The contrast is in the second Adam, who did NOT try to be equal. Even though He,..JUST LIKE THE FIRST ADAM..,existed in the image of God. Notice that they BOTH existed in the image of God!! You have to see that. The fact that He existed in the form of God does NOT mean that He existed as a being up there with God!!
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 02 2013,03:23) No, no, no, jb. Let's use the cockroach thing again.
1. jb existing as a human being.
2. jb emptied himself by being made as a cockroach.
3. AND AFTER being found in appearance as a cockroach, humbled himself even further by walking right under the shoe he knew would squash him dead.You see? There is no “flopping back and forth”. It is a continual chronological order.
So in the analogy above, did you exist as something other than a cockroach BEFORE being made in the likeness of a cockroach? Or do you assume that you were already a cockroach before being made in the likeness of a cockroach?
Now, apply this to Phil 2.
1. Existing in the form of God.
2. Emptied himself by taking on the form of a slave by being made in the likeness of a human being.
3. AND AFTER being found in appearance as a human being, humbled himself even further by willing walking a path that he knew would lead him to his death.Again, the only “flip-flopping” here is in your imagination. In reality, all three happen in continual chronological order.
And just like there is no way you could have existed as a cockroach BEFORE being made in the likeness of a cockroach, there is no way that Jesus could have existed as a human being BEFORE “being made in the likeness of a human being”.
Yet, according to Paul, he DID exist “in the form of God” BEFORE “being made in the likeness of a human being”, just like, according to my analogy, you DID exist “as a human being” BEFORE “being made in the likeness of a cockroach”.
Quote 1. jb existing as a human being.
2. jb emptied himself by being made as a cockroach.You see.. the problem is that it does not say..
Jesus existing as a being in heaven.
Jesus emptied himself by being made a man.Now, does it?
Quote ..humbled himself even further by willing.. Here we go again..you are adding “even further” in order to make your point. Can I add words on to in order to prove my point..or would you say that is “adding on” to the Bible?
Quote there is no way that Jesus could have existed as a human being BEFORE “being made in the likeness of a human being”. I agree..and..that is not what Paul said. He came in to existence at the very moment that He became a human being!! The difference is in your interpretation of Philippians 2.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 02 2013,03:35) Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 01 2013,08:56) I NEVER said that there is NOT scripture that prohibits a pre-existent Jesus. I only said those 4 passages that I quoted earlier, they did not prohibit, necessarily, a preexistence!!
My bad. I assumed that you listed those four because they were the best you had.Why not just post the scripture that DOES prohibit the pre-existence of Jesus right now then?
Because if there exists such a scripture, then I will admit that I've been wrong all this time and adjust my beliefs to align with that scripture.
On the other hand, if there exists no such scripture, you are heavily outgunned.
Although I am sure you will disagree, we can start at the beginning of the Gospels..Matthew 1
The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.The word here (generation) is an “origin” or “a beginning.” The same Hebrew equivalent word is found here..
Genesis 5:1
This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;Now..both Adam and Jesus both had an origin. Adam's was from the dust of the earth and Jesus' was in Mary's womb..according to the GOD's word!!
To me this proves that Jesus did NOT preexist. How can His origin begin in Mary's womb AND have a preexistent life? Now, you have to believe that Matt1:1 is a lie or at least misleading..which to God is still a lie.
2) Now we can move to Rom 1:3
Romans 1:3
Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;The Greek manuscript actually says “having come of the seed of David..” In Greek, the word “having come” is “genomenou” which means..TO COME INTO BEING. I think this, too, PROVES that Jesus did not preexist. One can only “come into being” ONCE!!
3) How about..
Isaiah 49:1
Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The Lord hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.
Isaiah 49:5
And now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my God shall be my strength.Clearly, to me at least, if God formed Jesus “from the womb to be His servant” then that means He did NOT preexist. Otherwise, it would say “the Lord that formed me IN HEAVEN to be His servant.”
3) How about the fact that Jesus is “the first BEGOTTEN”?
Consider, Adam was not begotten. The angels were not begotten. They were created/made. Only mankind is begotten. To be begotten is to be born. And yet, God calls Jesus His only BEGOTTEN Son? If He preexisted, then who begot Jesus in Heaven? An angel? I don't think so! Jesus is said to be God's firstborn and I believe just that. I believe what the Bible tells me and NOT what I can “read into” it.4) Also, not found in one particular verse, but instead, scripture as a whole. I see it clear that God had a plan from the beginning. He accomplished what He wanted and now time just has to catch up! We will get into all of these verses.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 02 2013,03:50) Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 01 2013,09:01) 1. Why does it not say Jesus was “transformed” or “changed” into a man? 2. What does Jesus mean when He says He “came out from” God?
3. God only talked to us “in these last days”; so, who/what was Jesus before these last days?
4. Why is the word “preexist” not used in the Bible anywhere to explain/describe Jesus?
1. It says he was existing in one form before being made in the likeness of a human being. Scripture doesn't specifically say Elijah and Enoch were “transformed” into heavenly beings when taken to God. But we can safely assume that they don't exist with God in heaven as flesh and blood human beings, right?2. In Jesus' case, it means he came out from the presence of God.
3. The only begotten and firstborn Son of God…….. just like he continues to be.
4. How could we possibly answer that? The teaching is there all throughout scripture as plain as day. Does the fact that they didn't use the word “pre-exist” eliminate all those scriptures that say the same thing in other words?
Thank you for answering.Quote 1. It says he was existing in one form before being made in the likeness of a human being. Scripture doesn't specifically say Elijah and Enoch were “transformed” into heavenly beings when taken to God. But we can safely assume that they don't exist with God in heaven as flesh and blood human beings, right? Yes, but it doesn't say “and then he was transformed into a man.” What it says was that He was “made a man.” Do not change what the scripture says.
As far as Elijah and Enoch, I would say that they do not really have anything to do with it. Maybe they were not transformed! Maybe that is why it doesn't say that!! I KNOW that it says it is appointed for man to die once, and I KNOW that it says the two witnesses will die in revelations. So, maybe Elijah and Enoch will be the two witnesses and that is why God took them without them dying. I can only speculate though. However, one thing I am sure of is that Phil 2 does NOT say that Jesus was “transformed” into a man, NOR does it say that He existed as a different being in heaven BEFORE being made a man.
Quote 2. In Jesus' case, it means he came out from the presence of God. BUT..Jesus does not say He came out from the presence of God. He says He came OUT FROM GOD.
And, what does God say..”My word will go OUT OF my mouth.”
Isaiah 55:11
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.Think about this for a second!!
Quote 3. The only begotten and firstborn Son of God…….. just like he continues to be. One can ONLY be BORN of a woman!! So, what woman gave birth to Jesus before Mary?
Quote 4. How could we possibly answer that? The teaching is there all throughout scripture as plain as day. Does the fact that they didn't use the word “pre-exist” eliminate all those scriptures that say the same thing in other words? It neither proves or disproves anything..BUT, I would think that IF Jesus preexisted..somewhere in the 66 books of the Bible there would be at least one, not 30 or 1000, but at least ONE time that God would use the word “preexist”. It is a VERY simple word and it would be a legitimate way to describe Jesus without any controversy..if He did in fact preexist. The fact that that word appears NO WHERE in the Bible should at least get you to stop and at least think about it. If the Bible NEVER once used the word “man” to describe Jesus, I would at least pause at those telling me that Jesus was a man!!
Again, thank you for answering.
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 04 2013,08:51) Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 02 2013,03:01) 1. Why does it not say Jesus was “transformed” or “changed” into a man? 2. What does Jesus mean when He says He “came out from” God?
3. God only talked to us “in these last days”; so, who/what was Jesus before these last days?
4. Why is the word “preexist” not used in the Bible anywhere to explain/describe Jesus?
1. It is fundamental to our faith to believe that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. That is the same Jesus by whom God made the cosmos.2. John 8:42: Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me.
Notice how he came from God and then said, “now I am here”.
If I was in the USA and I said, “I came from New Zealand and now I am here”, that could only mean one thing right.3. The Word of God, perhaps the Angel of the LORD, Wisdom. It is sketchy because we know that the revelation of the son was hidden but is now revealed.
4. There may not be a Greek word for 'preexist'. Why does it not say that Elijah and Moses preexisted when they appeared to men after their deaths. And Jesus himself preexisted when you consider that he was on Earth and now he is in Heaven right, and still you do not see the word 'preexist' even there.
The lack of a particular word doesn't negate the concept it represents. The Bible also doesn't mention the microscopic world (I think) yet it talks about the treasures of the snow.
Jesus answer to your question is here:
“I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”What was the question?
“You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”So the context was questioning him about him not being old enough to see Abraham and instead of giving the same explanation that you or others who believe that Jesus began life as a man would give, Jesus speaks words these peculiar words, which are words that support what we believe.
“I am” (ego eimi) means “I exist”. So you ask where is the word “preexist? It uses the word “exist” and puts it in a context way before his birth as a man. In other words the concept of preexist is right here.
Thank you for answering.Quote 1. It is fundamental to our faith to believe that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. That is the same Jesus by whom God made the cosmos Well, it is fundamental to our faith to believe that Jesus came in the flesh, but I am not sure about the second part!! I believe that scripture states clearly that it was “because of” and “for” Jesus that He created everything, but not “BY” Him.
Quote 2. John 8:42: Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. Notice how he came from God and then said, “now I am here”.
If I was in the USA and I said, “I came from New Zealand and now I am here”, that could only mean one thing right.Yes, BUT..God is not a location!! Jesus said He came out from God!! NOT out from heaven!! Think about exactly what it is that the scripture says!!
Quote 3. The Word of God, perhaps the Angel of the LORD, Wisdom. It is sketchy because we know that the revelation of the son was hidden but is now revealed. 1) He can't be the “word of God” because it clearly says that He has ONLY talked to us in these last days by His Son. The word of God came to many in the past..so that can NOT be Jesus..or the scripture is false!!
2) An Angel.. I know that we disagree. But, I still maintain that scripture shows that Jesus was not an angel. We'll just have to call this one a disagreement for now.
3) “Wisdom”..No..God is Wisdom. God put His wisdom into Jesus, but Jesus was not wisdom..”in the beginning.”
Quote 4. There may not be a Greek word for 'preexist'. Why does it not say that Elijah and Moses preexisted when they appeared to men after their deaths. And Jesus himself preexisted when you consider that he was on Earth and now he is in Heaven right, and still you do not see the word 'preexist' even there. The lack of a particular word doesn't negate the concept it represents. The Bible also doesn't mention the microscopic world (I think) yet it talks about the treasures of the snow.
As I told Mike, NO, a “missing” word does not prove or disprove anything. I just want you to think about why it might not be there!! And yes, there is a word for preexist..it is “pro uparchon”.
Quote Jesus answer to your question is here:
“I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”What was the question?
“You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”So the context was questioning him about him not being old enough to see Abraham and instead of giving the same explanation that you or others who believe that Jesus began life as a man would give, Jesus speaks words these peculiar words, which are words that support what we believe.
“I am” (ego eimi) means “I exist”. So you ask where is the word “preexist? It uses the word “exist” and puts it in a context way before his birth as a man. In other words the concept of preexist is right here.
I have to disagree. The whole point, if you reread these verses, is that they DID NOT UNDERSTAND. The point is..He IS before Abraham. In status..not time. And, He is “before Abraham” in the Bible!! I am sure we will get more into this as we go!!
Again, I appreciate you answering these questions.
Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 07 2013,15:07) Again, you keep having to change the sentence in order to make your point. The difference is in your interpretation of Philippians 2.
I'm going to try to end this Phil 2 thing, once and for all………This is the literal translation of the Greek words of verses 6 and 7:
who, in form of god existing, not something to be grasped esteemed it to be equal with god, but himself emptied, form of servant having taken, in likeness of men being made
(From here.)
Any way you slice it, Paul's words have Jesus existing in the form of God and emptying himself BEFORE “in likeness of men being made”.
Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 07 2013,15:43) Matthew 1
The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.The word here (generation) is an “origin” or “a beginning.” The same Hebrew equivalent word is found here
Micah 5:2 says that his origins are from “days of old, from ancient times”. And that was “days of old” from MICAH'S viewpoint.At any rate, Matthew is recording the fleshly genealogy of Jesus, which is attested by your second scripture:
Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 07 2013,15:43) Romans 1:3
Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
See that? ACCORDING TO THE FLESH, Jesus was of the seed of David.jb, let's say my great grandpa's name was John. Could you imagine someone telling you that I was of the seed of John ACCORDING TO THE FLESH? Of course not.
Why then do you suppose Paul added the disclaimer “according to the flesh”? As opposed to what?
As for Isaiah 49, I've never argued that Jesus wasn't formed in the womb of Mary. But the fact he was in no way prohibits him from existing in the form of God before he was formed in the womb of Mary.
Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 07 2013,16:00) One can ONLY be BORN of a woman!!
You sure?Psalm 90:2 NIV ©
Before the mountains were born…………..(BTW, the word is “yalad”, which is also the Hebrew word for “begotten”. Apparently it is not only humans who are “begotten” after all.
Actually, the Hebrew word means “brought forth into existence”.)Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 07 2013,16:00) The fact that that word appears NO WHERE in the Bible should at least get you to stop and at least think about it.
Jesus hinted that John the Baptist was Elijah. I don't know if he meant it literally, but if he did, should we not believe him simply because John was never specifically said to have pre-existed his current flesh state?Quote (jb2u @ Sep. 07 2013,16:24) Yes, BUT..God is not a location!! Jesus said He came out from God!! NOT out from heaven!! Think about exactly what it is that the scripture says!!
John 6:38
For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me.Does that one fit your criteria? Think about exactly what it is that the scripture says!!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
