The Trinity Doctrine

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 29 2009,05:11)

Quote (martian @ Jan. 28 2009,10:24)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 28 2009,09:59)

OK Sorry.

So if what you now say is true then his sonship only began at his anointing and not his conception?
Please correct he if I have misunderstood.

I agree with that.

We can follow him in his authority and anointing.

AS I said I have not studdied that particular concept. It may have happened at the Jordon. I believe He was annointed there for His ministry.

January 28, 2009 at 6:22 pm#119457

Participant

Quote (Cindy @ Jan. 28 2009,13:30)

Martian! Even though I do not believe in a trinity doctrine, I do believe in a preexisting of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Why God did this I am not sure, but I do speculate on that. First late me prove the preexisting to you.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God and the Word was with God.
verse 2 He was in the beginning with God
verse 3 All things were made through Him and without Him nothing was made that was made.
verse 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men
verse 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

Col. 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation

verse 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and
invisible…… All things were created through Him and for Him.
verse 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.

verse 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 may have preeminence.

Brother that believe in this are true Christian and your accusing them of not being with God, is very much uncalled for.
Jesus emptied Himself and He did become like us and became a ,man. I for one would not compare myself with Jesus, I am not worthy to touch the string on His garment, We are to grow in Love and patience and all good things and become more like Him, yes.
Since He died for us and we are now under the New Covenant spoken of in Like 22:20. John tells us if we believe that we are without sin the truth is not in us. However now we have a Mediator Jesus Christ, we can go directly to the Throne of God and ask for forgiveness of our Sins. Sins are not imputed to us.
Christ also in
John 17:5 said this ” And now O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself with the glory which I had
with You before the world was.
Rev. 3:14 says this … “These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of
the creation of God.

Who is God talking about who is this True Witness etc.

And BTW I am not worried about being robbed of my destiny just because I believe in the TRUTH.

Now I would like to make you think and this is speculation, however. After God created Jesus , through God's Holy Spirit Jesus created all and also the Angels who are higher then we are right now. When Lucifer who was in charge of this world sinned and 1/3 of the Angels went with Him, God had a second plan for us. He wants all to love and Honor Him without any attachment, so he is testing us and making us sick and tired of this ugly sin. God has tested me quit often in my 70 years here on earth. I failed lots of times, like a stupid human. But I am learning, I belief that we will never reach were we can say I am without sin, just that it is not imputed to us. I also have often wondered about all the vast Universe out there. The angels shouted for joy when God created the Universe. You know I do not believe that it was void in the beginning. Satan and His Angels lived here and were supposed have taken care of it. He destroyed it so no Human could live her. That also explains all those tall Pre–Historic Animals. So God re created this earth for us to live in.IMO

Peace and LOve Irene

You say –
Jesus emptied Himself and He did become like us and became a ,man.
Reply –
If you will read the places I have already posted about Phil 2 you will see that Christ emptied himself of his own attitudes. Look at the context –
1Therefore if there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion,
2make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose.
3Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves;
4do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others.
5Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
6who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
7but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
8Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
9For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,

The word translated attitude in verse 5 is phroneo in the Greek and has the following uses.
to have understanding, be wise
to feel, to think
to have an opinion of one's self, think of one's self, to be modest, not let one's opinion (though just) of himself exceed the bounds of modesty
to think or judge what one's opinion is
to be of the same mind i.e. agreed together, cherish the same views, be harmonious
to direct one's mind to a thing, to seek, to strive for
to seek one's interest or advantage
to be of one's party, side with him (in public affairs)

Tell me from the definition of this word, How am I supposed to have the understanding or opinion of myself that I existed as a God and became a man?

This same word is used in other places in Phillipians. The capitol letters indicate the same word.
Php 1:7 –
For it is only right for me to FEEL this way about you all, becauseI have you in my heart, since both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel, you all are partakers of grace with me.

Php 2:2 –
make my joy complete by being of the same MIND, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose.

Php 2:5 –
Have this ATTITUDE in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,

Php 3:15 –
Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, have this ATTITUDE; and if in anything you have a different attitude, God will reveal that also to you;

The entire context of chapter 2 and 3 is about the attitude we are supposed to have. How can I have the opinion about myself that I pre-existed as a God?

I do not believe that I ever said those that believe in the pre-existence were “not of God” I do not believe that particular belief is of God.
Paul makes the gospel very clear that all that is required to be saved it to believe that Jesus rose from the grave and that He is your savior.

Now to the rest of your post.
What does the term “word” in John 1 mean? You assume it means Jesus but the term is used 360 times in scripture and cannot mean that at all. Get that straight then we can discuss it with the proper definition in place.

Your next scriptures in Colossians. First let me say that even though these scriptures were penned in Greek they were still written by Hebrews. As I have tried to explain many times the Hebrew did not see things in the same way that we of the Greco-roman world do. No matter what language they ere written in the Hebrew concepts behind the words would still be in place.

Col. 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation

I have no problem with this verse. He is the image of God just like we are created in the image of God. Human just like us. I have no problem seeing him over all creation. He was given all authority in heaven and Earth. BUT – what does the word firstborn indicate. I know you I know you belie
ve based on your doctrine that it means born first before creation, but does that follow proper interpretation principles? First thing you do is look to see if that word is used anywhere else in the context. Lo and behold verse 18 makes clear what first born means. Firstborn from the dead.

verse 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible…… All things were created through Him and for Him.

This is another case of Hebrew poetry called parallelism. One subject spoken of in multiple ways.
First of all the second word in verse 16 is mistranslated. The word is not “by” it is “in”. This is according to Westcot and Hort, Nestles and A.T. Robertson. (In case you do not know, these are 3 of the top Greek translators in the world)
Paul who wrote this book was a Hebrew. Even more Hebrew then most Hebrews. The Hebrews have no concept of something coming from nothing. They did not think in those abstract terms. To them the idea of creation meant to fill up or bring to completion/ maturity. Indeed all things were brought to completion and maturity through Christ. Everything in creation centers around Christ and His mission. Without Christ nothing that existed would have any meaning. In him and through Him did all things in heaven and Earth have their meaning and fulfillment.

verse 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.

verse 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 may have preeminence.

There are no punctuations in the original Greek texts and no small case letters or verse divisions. All of these verses would be together creating a total context of thought.
Verse 15 and 16 spoke of the importance of Jesus and His mission to all of Creation. Without Him the creation has no purpose. 17 and 18 now speak of Jesus position within that creation and the church. Being before all things is not a time reference of being before creation but a position before all that will be raised, all the church. It is a position of preeminence not of time.

AS you are quite aware scripture was not written in English but Hebrew and Greek. Even the Greek scriptures are written by Hebrews from within a Hebrew culture. Only in the last 50 years have great strides been accomplished in understanding this culture. Mostly due to improved archeological discoveries like the Dead Sea scrolls. Unfortunately must reference works do not reflect this furtherance of the truth. Most were written some 100 years ago and have just been rehashed over and over.

Nothing in the NT was meant to be understood outside of the culture of the writers. Unfortunately most Christians have done little or no study on the Hebrew culture or even the Greek language. They pick up their English translation and with a Western mindset try to understand it. Even the translations themselves are often biased by the beliefs of the translators.

I have taken some time to answer your question because I perceive in you a good heart to follow Christ. I must move on to other things for now. I hope you will consider what I have said.

January 28, 2009 at 9:05 pm#119481

Participant

Martian said:

Quote

My info on image meaninf form comes from the ancient Hebrew text and verified by the Ancient Hebrew Lexicon. Where does your proof against it come from, Your doctrine? In otherwords it can't mean what I said cause it messes up your doctrine.

Martian,
You need to do two things. First, show from Scripture that “image” and “form” are synonomous. Second, show from Scripture that the two words are ALWAYS synonomous. What you are doing is called the Fallacy of Generalization. You can tell me all day what your Hebrew sources say. I have Hebrew sources too. You are generalizing with the Hebrew language and not correctly exegeting it.

I have already given you my proof. Jesus told the Jews that they had not seen God's form (John 5:37). Therefore, the words “form” and “image” cannot be synonomous. Men were created in the image of God. But if this meant that they possess the “form” of God then Jesus was mistaken when He said that they had not seen God's form. I am still waiting for a Unitarian to overcome this argument.

Quote

It does not matter what order the things were said in because the context is still about attitude not deity.

How can you say that order does not matter? The word “became” necessarily infers chronology. Paul said that He existed in the form of God and then He became in the form of man. I say it's about deity. But in the least it proves Christ's pre-existence. You deny both Christ's deity and His pre-existence on presuppositional bases. You presuppose that God cannot change in all categories and in every way conceivable. You take statements out of context such as “I change not”. God never said that He cannot change in the absolute sense of the term. God said “I change not” in reference to a word or promise He spoke. If God meant what you think then He contradicted Himself for He said, “I will become what I will become.” You put words into God's mouth and then call on your Hebrew sources to back you up.

I am not judging your motives. It's just so evident that you are given to presupposition and that you are a poor debater.

BTW, there is a rule of debate that says if a man does not reply to an argument then he concedes that argument by default. I have asked you several times to prove your theory that God cannot change in every way conceivable and you have repeatedly failed to reply. Therefore, you have conceded that there is no such teaching in Scripture.

The teaching of Scripture is that God will BECOME what He will become. This means that He can change if He wants. He is God!

cordially,
thinker

January 28, 2009 at 9:52 pm#119491

Participant

Quote (thethinker @ Jan. 29 2009,08:05)

Martian said:

Quote

It does not matter what order the things were said in because the context is still about attitude not deity.

I am not judging your motives. It's just so evident that you are given to presupposition and that you are a poor debater.

The teaching of Scripture is that God will BECOME what He will become. This means that He can change if He wants. He is God!

cordially,
thinker

Just so I understand your position. This is ATRobertsons take on the verse in question.
Being (uparxwn).
Rather, “existing,” present active participle of uparxw. In the form of God (en morphi teou). Morph means the essential attributes as shown in the form. In his preincarnate state Christ possessed the attributes of God and so appeared to those in heaven who saw him. Here is a clear statement by Paul of the deity of Christ.

Do you agree with His take on it?

January 28, 2009 at 10:22 pm#119495

Participant

Hi Everyone:

I also encourage everyone to keep seeking the truth of God's Word. LU and Mrs. I have read what you have to say on the topic of pre-existance, but I will just simply say that I disagree with your understanding of this. Again, there is no scripture which states outright that Jesus pre-existed his virgin birth into this world, and without a scripture to substantiate this claim, this discussion from my point of view isn't going anywhere, just pages and pages of discussion.

My desire is God's very best for all on this website. I am praying for you.

Love in Christ,
Marty

January 28, 2009 at 10:51 pm#119498

Participant

942767 wrote:

Quote

…there is no scripture which states outright that Jesus pre-existed his virgin birth into this world, and without a scripture to substantiate this claim…

Jesus said: “Before Abraham was I Am” (John 8:58).

942,
This is an “outright” statement of pre-existence to me.

thinker

January 28, 2009 at 10:57 pm#119499

Participant

thethinker
In Genesis 1:27 the term image is defined by the word form. This definition is verified by Strong’s concordance.
Edermans New Bible Dictionary defines image as “The word is used throughout the Bible to denote a material representation in animal human or mixed form.”
Zondervan Pictorial Dictionary “The words “image” and “likeness” used together in Gen 1:26.27 do not differ essentially in meaning, but strengthening the idea that man uniquely reflect God.”
The Ancient Hebrew Lexicon of the Bible defines image “An image or form of something as the shadow of the original.”
The definition of image as form is also found in the book The Living Words by Jeff Benner, an expert on Ancient Hebrew.

The same word is used in Gen 1:26,27 Gen 5:3 and 9:6. Those times when depicting the “image of God”

All other times the term Image is used in the English text it is different words.

This may cause a problem with John 5:37, but it also must bring tour conclusion into question.

What are your Hebrew sources that say differently?

January 28, 2009 at 11:06 pm#119500

Participant

Martian said:

Quote

In Genesis 1:27 the term image is defined by the word form. This definition is verified by Strong’s concordance.
Edermans New Bible Dictionary defines image as “The word is used throughout the Bible to denote a material representation in animal human or mixed form.”
Zondervan Pictorial Dictionary “The words “image” and “likeness” used together in Gen 1:26.27 do not differ essentially in meaning, but strengthening the idea that man uniquely reflect God.”
The Ancient Hebrew Lexicon of the Bible defines image “An image or form of something as the shadow of the original.”
The definition of image as form is also found in the book The Living Words by Jeff Benner, an expert on Ancient Hebrew.

The same word is used in Gen 1:26,27 Gen 5:3 and 9:6. Those times when depicting the “image of God”

All other times the term Image is used in the English text it is different words.

This may cause a problem with John 5:37, but it also must bring tour conclusion into question.

What are your Hebrew sources that say differently?

Martian,
I copy and paste an argument I offered in a previous post today,

Jesus told the Jews that they had not seen God's form (John 5:37). Therefore, the words “form” and “image” cannot be synonomous. Men were created in the image of God. But if this meant that they possess the “form” of God then Jesus was mistaken when He said that they had not seen God's form. I am still waiting for a Unitarian to overcome this argument.

Are you going to answer this or not? We are discussing a statement from Philippians 2 about Jesus' subsistence in the “form” of God. I have given you an example of the use of the term “form” FROM SCRIPTURE that indicates that it is not synonomous with “image”. We are discussing the use of the expression “form” in the Greek language. But you want to take this back to the Hebrew language. Why?

thinker

January 28, 2009 at 11:51 pm#119503

Participant

Quote (thethinker @ Jan. 29 2009,09:51)

942767 wrote:

Quote

…there is no scripture which states outright that Jesus pre-existed his virgin birth into this world, and without a scripture to substantiate this claim…

Jesus said: “Before Abraham was I Am” (John 8:58).

942,
This is an “outright” statement of pre-existence to me.

thinker

Hi thethinker:

And to me it means this:

Quote

1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

God Bless

January 29, 2009 at 12:03 am#119506

Participant

Quote (thethinker @ Jan. 29 2009,10:06)

Martian said:

Quote

The same word is used in Gen 1:26,27 Gen 5:3 and 9:6. Those times when depicting the “image of God”

All other times the term Image is used in the English text it is different words.

This may cause a problem with John 5:37, but it also must bring tour conclusion into question.

What are your Hebrew sources that say differently?

Martian,
I copy and paste an argument I offered in a previous post today,

thinker

My point has been lost in all of the posts.
The discussion was on Phil 2. Paul says that Christ was in the form of God.
My contention is that this portion of scripture correlates with Genesis and the story of Adam.
In the story of Creation the term image is defined to mean form. Consequently image means form. Adam was created in the form of God. This is verified from several sources.

The comparison between the first Adam and the second Adam can be clearly seen.
Adam sought to meet his own needs
Jesus laid down his needs to obey God.
I will get back to you on the John 5 issue.

January 29, 2009 at 12:12 am#119508

Participant

Quote (942767 @ Jan. 29 2009,10:51)

Quote (thethinker @ Jan. 29 2009,09:51)

942767 wrote:

Quote

…there is no scripture which states outright that Jesus pre-existed his virgin birth into this world, and without a scripture to substantiate this claim…

Jesus said: “Before Abraham was I Am” (John 8:58).

942,
This is an “outright” statement of pre-existence to me.

thinker

Hi thethinker:

And to me it means this:

Quote

1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

God Bless

942,
Your “proof texting”. You should take Jesus' statement in the context inwhich He spoke and not read a statement from Peter into it.

Jesus said that He existed before Abraham. He did NOT say that He was ordained before Abraham though this also be true.

Martian, I'm done on this thread for today.

blessings to all,
thinker

January 29, 2009 at 12:40 am#119515

Participant

Quote (thethinker @ Jan. 29 2009,11:12)

Quote (942767 @ Jan. 29 2009,10:51)

Quote (thethinker @ Jan. 29 2009,09:51)

942767 wrote:

Quote

…there is no scripture which states outright that Jesus pre-existed his virgin birth into this world, and without a scripture to substantiate this claim…

Jesus said: “Before Abraham was I Am” (John 8:58).

942,
This is an “outright” statement of pre-existence to me.

thinker

Hi thethinker:

And to me it means this:

Quote

1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

God Bless

942,
Your “proof texting”. You should take Jesus' statement in the context inwhich He spoke and not read a statement from Peter into it.

Jesus said that He existed before Abraham. He did NOT say that He was ordained before Abraham though this also be true.

Martian, I'm done on this thread for today.

blessings to all,
thinker

Hi thethinker:

Scripture must be line upon line an precept upon precept. Too often we Christians have a tendency to form an opinion based on one scripture rather than understanding the whole of what the scriptures state:

Jesus stated this in the scriptures which you quote:

Quote

Jhn 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw [it], and was glad.

This lines up with what the Apostle Peter stated about him being fore-ordained.

My desire is God's very best for you and your family.

Love in Christ,
Marty

January 29, 2009 at 8:35 am#119570

Participant

942767 said:

Quote

Jesus stated this in the scriptures which you quote:

Quote
Jhn 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw [it], and was glad.

This lines up with what the Apostle Peter stated about him being fore-ordained.

Marty,
You missed verse 57 inwhich the Jews asked

Quote

You are not yet fifty years old and You have seen Abraham? Jesus said to them, Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was I exist.

So I exhort you to observe the “line upon line” principle in a more careful manner. For you are skipping over a line. The Jews took Jesus to mean that He had seen Abraham. So they asked Him “You have seen Abraham?” And Christ's reply was this, “before Abraham was I exist“.

You skipped over a line after saying that we should observe “line upon line”.

Btw, the word “it” is not present in the Greek text.

blessings,
thinker

January 29, 2009 at 8:38 am#119571

Participant

Martian said:

Quote

I will get back to you on the John 5 issue.

Martian, I am looking forward to it. As I said, I have been waiting for a Unitarian to overcome this.

God speed,
thinker

January 29, 2009 at 6:46 pm#119592

Participant

Quote (thethinker @ Jan. 29 2009,19:38)

Martian said:

Quote

I will get back to you on the John 5 issue.

Martian, I am looking forward to it. As I said, I have been waiting for a Unitarian to overcome this.

God speed,
thinker

Thethinker

For some reason you seem to think you have some authority to demand I answer your questions, while at the same time you post no sources for your theories.

You say –
You can tell me all day what your Hebrew sources say. I have Hebrew sources too. You are generalizing with the Hebrew language and not correctly exegeting it.

Reply-
So post your sources that say image in Gen 1 does not mean form.

You say –
Martian, I am looking forward to it. As I said, I have been waiting for a Unitarian to overcome this.

Reply – I not appreciate being labeled and put in a category by you. I am not a Unitarian and never have been.

You say –
BTW, there is a rule of debate that says if a man does not reply to an argument then he concedes that argument by default. I have asked you several times to prove your theory that God cannot change in every way conceivable and you have repeatedly failed to reply. Therefore, you have conceded that there is no such teaching in Scripture.

Reply –
You lean on a rule of debate to prove you are right? You claim that my reluctance in debating with you is because I have a weak case. Evolutionists win debates all the time simply because they are clever in debate tactics. Does that mean that evolution is true?

I answered your question about YHWH meaning He exists. You posted opinion that it means “I will become” in such a way as to mean it exclusively. I posted sources that said in general it means He exists. Again opinion versus sources.

I already answered your question on the issue of form of God.

January 29, 2009 at 7:50 pm#119599

Participant

Thethinker —

I do not feel you will accept this explanation nor any explanation that goes against your doctrine, but for entertainment sake here goes.

I am going to repeat some info for clarity sake and then I am done, unless you choose to support your opinions or refute mine with sources.

On page 189 I posted a study on the way in which the people of the Hebrew culture perceived their world and it’s effect on how they wrote. Many on here and I suspect you too do not seem to see the significance of these facts. The Hebrew way of thinking is radically different then we of the Roman-Greco world. This difference is reflected in the way they write. Regardless of the language in which they wrote that way of thinking must be taken into account.

There have been throughout time two major cultures in the world. The Eastern or Hebrew Culture and the Western or Greek culture. The Hebrew culture had been dominant for thousands of years but about 800 BCE a new culture rose in Greece. In about 200 BCE the two cultures collided. It was not a pleasant time. Within 400 years and with the power of the Roman Empire the Western culture eventually won out and all cultures since then have derived from this Western culture’s influence.
These tow cultures were vastly different in the way they viewed their world.

Let me quote from The Ancient Hebrew Research Center
“Greek thought views the world through the mind (abstract thought). Ancient Hebrew thought views the world through the senses (concrete thought).”
“Greek thought describes objects in relation to its appearance. Hebrew thought describes objects in relation to its function.”
“Another example of Greek thought would be the following description of a common pencil: “it is yellow and about 8 inches long”. A Hebrew description of the pencil would be related to its function such as “I write words with it”. Notice that the Hebrew description uses the verb “write” while the Greek description uses the adjectives “yellow” and “long”. Because of Hebrew's form of functional descriptions, verbs are used much more frequently then adjectives.”
“The Greek culture describes objects in relation to the object itself. The Hebrew culture describes objects in relation to the Hebrew himself.”
“As in the example above of the pencil, the Greek description portrays the pencil's relationship to itself by using the word “is”. The Hebrew describes the pencil in relation to himself by saying “I write”. Because Hebrew does not describe objects in relation to itself, the Hebrew vocabulary does not have the word “is”.

Developed over thousands of years, the Hebrew language (especially the ancient pictographs) is able to portray these things easily, but to our Western thinking they seem quite foreign. For instance if I quoted a Hebrew phrase “flaring of the nostrils” it would not mean much to us, but to the Hebrew it depicts anger. He sees it not as an abstract concept in the mind but as something perceived by the five senses.

It is true that Paul wrote Phil 2 in Greek, however he still viewed his world from a Hebrew perspective. With the limits of the Greek language Paul attempted to get across very Hebrew concepts. With this in mind let’s look at these scriptures again. My comments will be in parenthesis.

1Therefore if there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion,
2make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose.
3Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves;
4do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others.
5Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,

(Notice all of the references to some way we are to function – maintaining love, do not look out only for your own interest but also the interest of others ect Paul was establishing a context here, a context of how to function.)

(Now let’s look at the rest in the way it appears in the actual Greek.)

WHO ALTHOUGH HE EXISTED IN FORM OF GOD DID NOT REGARD EQUALITY WITH GOD A THING TO BE GRASPED BUT EMPTIED HIMSELF TAKING THE FORM OF A BOND-SERVANT AND BEING MADE IN THE LIKENESS OF MEN BEING FOUND IN APPEARANCE AS A MAN HE HUMBLED HIMSELF BY BECOMING OBEDIENT TO THE POINT OF DEATH EVEN DEATH ON A CROSS FOR THIS REASON ALSO GOD HIGHLY EXALTED HIM, AND BESTOWED ON HIM THE NAME WHICH IS ABOVE EVERY NAME SO THAT AT THE NAME OF JESUS EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, OF THOSE WHO ARE IN HEAVEN AND ON EARTH AND UNDER THE EARTH

When people saw Jesus they saw one who functioned as God. Comments such as “He speaks as one in authority” point to this fact. Even though Jesus functioned as God, with all the authority in his hand, he humbles himself taking the attitude and function of a bond servant. He does not lord over the people as the Pharisees. This understanding fits the context of Philippians and falls in line with many scriptures.

God is invisible, but we can see His effect on creation and we can see him function in and through many things and people in scripture.

Genesis 32:30?So Jacob named the place Peniel, for he said, ” I have seen God face to face, yet my life has been preserved.”

Did Jacob literally see God? NO! but Jacob did see an angel of YHWH which Hebrew scholars define as an angel with the personality of YHWH. In other words this angel functioned as God. The same is true in the following verse.

Judges 13:22?So Manoah said to his wife, ” We will surely die, for we have seen God.”

When Moses was confronted with the burning bush, scripture says that an angel of the lord was in the midst of the bush, yet Moses hides his face afraid to look at God.

6He said also, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob ” Then Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God.

This was not God but Moses reacted to him and related to him as if it were God himself. Moses dealt with the bush from a functional mindset. This Angel functioned as God therefore was reacted to as God.

Psalms 82
1God takes His stand in His own congregation;
He judges in the midst of the rulers.
2How long will you judge unjustly
And show partiality to the wicked? Selah.
3Vindicate the weak and fatherless;
Do justice to the afflicted and destitute.
4Rescue the weak and needy;
Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked.
5They do not know nor do they understand;
They walk about in darkness;
All the foundations of the earth are shaken.
6I said, “You are gods, (elohim)
And all of you are sons of the Most High.
7″Nevertheless you will die like men

God rebukes the leaders of Israel for not being Gods to the people. God calls the leaders to function as God to the people.

Jesus functioned as God John 10

30″I and the Father are one.”
31The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him.
32Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?”
33The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.”
34Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, 'I SAID, YOU ARE GODS'? (theos)
35″If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),
36do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?
37″If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me;
38but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and
understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.”

Jesus was functioning as God doing the works of His father. For this the leaders hated him because He showed by example how much they did not function as God. He quotes Psalm 82 to point to the fact that we are to function as God. It maybe revealed in us as we speak in front of thousands of people or have God wrought miracles through our hands or as simple as taking a bag of groceries to a needy neighbor.

Having a pre-existent Christ serves no purpose. It is, in essence a philosophy in which some have plugged scriptures. (IMO wrongfully plugged them into the theory) Interpreting Phil 2 as depicting some extra-humanoid creature pulls Christ farther away from us and brings into question His viability as our example. No matter how many times proponents of this theory say Jesus emptied himself of deity and became a real human, it will always leave room to speculate on whether he retained any of his former knowledge, power, or abilities into his human form. It opens a big door for Satan to bring doubt on Christ as our example.
IMO I do not believe that YHWH would allow that to happen to such an important aspect of His gospel plan.

January 29, 2009 at 10:05 pm#119614

Participant

Martian,
I'll reply tomorrow my friend.

thinker

January 30, 2009 at 12:12 am#119625

Participant

Quote (thethinker @ Jan. 29 2009,19:35)

942767 said:

Quote

Jesus stated this in the scriptures which you quote:

Quote
Jhn 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw [it], and was glad.

This lines up with what the Apostle Peter stated about him being fore-ordained.

Marty,
You missed verse 57 inwhich the Jews asked

Quote

You are not yet fifty years old and You have seen Abraham? Jesus said to them, Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was I exist.

You skipped over a line after saying that we should observe “line upon line”.

Btw, the word “it” is not present in the Greek text.

blessings,
thinker

Hi thethinker:

I am asking you and anyone else who holds the doctrine of Pre-existence. Did Jesus exist as a man before his birth into this world through the virgin Mary?

When he was speaking the Pharisees in these scriptures, he was a man.

My desire is God's very best for you and your family.

Love in Christ,
Marty

January 30, 2009 at 5:06 am#119669