Did Jesus pre-exist before his birth on Earth?

Where did Jesus come from?

John 6:38-40
For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me; and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

The first verse suggests that Jesus came down from Heaven. This seems to contradict that belief which suggests he first existed as a man when he was born into this world. For if Jesus came into existence for the first time when he was conceived through Mary, how could he come down from Heaven? We (Man) came into existence when we are born into this world, but would it be correct to say that we came down from Heaven too? If a verse said that we came down from Heaven, would you think that we pre-existed in Heaven? If so, then why not Jesus?

John 3:17 is another verse that provides support that Jesus came down from Heaven or was sent rather than created.

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

The word ‘send’ is the Greek word ‘apostello’.

apostello {ap-os-tel’-lo}
1) to order (one) to go to a place appointed
2) to send away, dismiss
2a) to allow one to depart, that he may be in a state of liberty
2b) to order one to depart, send off
2c) to drive away

To be sent surely implies existence otherwise you would just say born or created. In fact this word (sent) is similar in meaning and sound to the word Apostle (apostolos), which means “one sent forth with orders”. To be sent forth with order, you must exist.

John 6:62
What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?

Jesus is clearly stating here that he came from above since he eventually ascended into Heaven to be at the right-hand of God.

How old is Jesus?

John 1:15
15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.‘ “

John the Baptist was six months older than Jesus Christ. So it is physically impossible for Christ to be before him in age. If this verse is referencing age, then it shows preexistence. Jesus existed before John the Baptist in the least.

John 8:58
“I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!“

Jesus claimed to exist before Abraham, the father of the Jews. The words ‘I am’ mean ‘I exist’. So Jesus claimed existence before Abraham. We can see that Jesus is getting older as we explore the scriptures. But how old?

Jude 1:25
to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.

Here we can see that majesty, power, and authority through Jesus Christ is before all ages (all worlds) and forever more into the future. This strongly implies that Jesus existed even before all things. But can we substantiate this?

Did Jesus exist before all creation?

Colossians 1:17
He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

Colossians answers the question outright. It states that “He is before all things“. But are there other verses that support this idea?

John 1:3
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

So there is nothing that was made that didn’t involve Jesus being there. This verse alone answers the question because the universe, angels, and men were made and Jesus was present when they were created according to these verses. In case that is not enough to convince you, I also add another clear verse that says the same thing.

Hebrews 1:1-2
1 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways,
2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.

Is Jesus the Word of God?

But some say that this is talking about the Word and not all believe that Jesus is the Word of God. They argue that Jesus came from the Word, but is not the Word itself that was with God in John 1:1. If you believe this, then please explain the next two verses within their wider context:

Revelation 19:13
He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.

Colossians 1:15-18
The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.

Okay, if you are honest, this is a closed case. God created all things through the Word. Jesus is called the Word of God and also the son of God. We are also told that God created all things through the son of God. Even if you do not believe that Jesus is the Word, then you still have to believe that Jesus pre-existed on account of him being the son of God. But what we know from scripture is that Jesus existed as the Word of God before he came as a man called Jesus. We know that the Word became flesh.

More proof verses

If Jesus pre-existed, then you might expect that even though the above verses are clear, there would be more verses that teach or at least imply that he pre-existed. So let’s see if this is the case.

Revelation 22:16
“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”

Here we see that Jesus is the offspring of David, yet he is also the root of David, which at appears to show existence before King David. He also claims to be the bright Morning Star and we read in Job how the Morning Stars were present when God created the Earth.

Job 38:6-7
“On what were its bases sunk? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Luke 10:18
He replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.

Comparing Luke 10:18 with Revelation 12:1-10, some say that Satan and his angels fell to the earth before the birth of Christ as a man. If this was the case, then Jesus saw an event that took place before he was born as a man. However, others argue that Satan hasn’t fallen to the Earth yet, or that he has, but Jesus saw this in a vision. Regardless, it certainly doesn’t contradict that Jesus pre-existed.

Micah 5:2
“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.”

The above verse talks about someone who will rule Israel and whose origin is from ancient times. Who but Jesus could fit that description?

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God/Divine.

John 1:14
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,[ 1:14 Or the Only Begotten] who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Clearly, Jesus was with God in the beginning as the Word of God. This places his existence as before all things and thus comes as no surprise that he was there when God created all things.

The Angel of YHWH

We know from certain scriptures that Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath and many assume that Jesus gave the Law of God. We are told in Acts:7:30-39 for instance that an Angel of the Lord appeared to Moses through whom God spoke and this is the same Angel who spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai and passed on the living words (The Law) to Moses.

30 “After forty years had passed, an angel appeared to Moses in the flames of a burning bush in the desert near Mount Sinai.
31 When he saw this, he was amazed at the sight. As he went over to look more closely, he heard the Lord’s voice:
32 ‘I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.’Moses trembled with fear and did not dare to look.
33 “Then the Lord said to him, ‘Take off your sandals; the place where you are standing is holy ground.
34 I have indeed seen the oppression of my people in Egypt. I have heard their groaning and have come down to set them free. Now come, I will send you back to Egypt.’
35 “This is the same Moses whom they had rejected with the words, ‘Who made you ruler and judge?’ He was sent to be their ruler and deliverer by God himself, through the angel who appeared to him in the bush.
36 He led them out of Egypt and did wonders and miraculous signs in Egypt, at the Red Sea and for forty years in the desert.
37 “This is that Moses who told the Israelites, ‘God will send you a prophet like me from your own people.’
38 He was in the assembly in the desert, with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers; and he received living words to pass on to us.
39 “But our fathers refused to obey him. Instead, they rejected him and in their hearts turned back to Egypt.

So is this Angel of the Lord, Jesus? Well it seems possible. Perhaps the correct model to look at is the one mentioned in Revelation 1:1

The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John,

Here we can see that the order of the Revelation started with the Originator which is God. He then passed the message to Jesus Christ who in turn sent it to his Angel and then to John. So perhaps it is possible that the angel in Revelation is the same angel mentioned in Acts:7:30-39.

But the Angel of YHWH or Angel of the LORD is described as one like the son of gods.

Daniel 3:24-25
Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astounded and stood up in haste; he said to his high officials, “Was it not three men we cast bound into the midst of the fire?” They replied to the king, “Certainly, O king.” He said, “Look! I see four men loosed and walking about in the midst of the fire without harm, and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods!”

The idea that a preincarnate Jesus was this Angel of the LORD is a popular one. We know that this Angel of the LORD is never mentioned while Jesus is walking the earth which supports this idea. But it could also be a coincidence. One connection that can be made with Jesus being this messenger is found in Judges 13:18.

Manoah said to the angel of the LORD, “What is your name, so that when your words come to pass, we may honor you?” But the angel of the LORD said to him, “Why do you ask my name, seeing it is wonderful?”

Now read what Isaiah prophesied in Isaiah 9:6 .

For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Clearly, Isaiah was speaking of Jesus Christ and note that he was called Wonderful Counselor. Is there a connection here? Perhaps. What we do know is the word ‘angel’ is the same word messenger in the Old Testament, and while it is held that Jesus is not an angel in kind, we know he certainly was a messenger of YHWH and would be fair to say even ‘The Messenger of YHWH’.

So the idea that he may be this angel is not that far fetched. Some vehemently oppose this idea, but they are not aware that both Jesus and John are called angels in the messenger sense.

More to come here……

More proof that Jesus pre-existed

Rev 3:14
And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God.

Moving on we read the following in Philippians 2:5-11
5 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
7 but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Surely the above verses assumes preexistence. Look at verse 7: ‘but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness’. This verse points out that Jesus humbled himself to become a (or like a) human and also a servant. So this suggests to us that he preexisted in a higher state because to humble oneself is to become lower. If he started life in this humbled state, then it would be incorrect to say that he humbled himself. Further, he “found himself in appearance as a man” is a weird statement to make if he first existed as a human baby.

This verse is often used in support of the trinity doctrine because of the word ‘equal’. But if you are equal to something it means that you are not that thing, rather you are like that thing. This scripture is also very clear about the following: The Father is God and Jesus is Lord and that God exalted Jesus to the highest place.

A closer look at verse 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: Now I am not sure if Jesus was exalted higher than he was before he came to this world or whether he was exalted to the exact position that he had before. But if we look at John 17:5 again we can see that Jesus asked to return to his former glory.

John 17:5
And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

The above verse is clear about Christ’s pre-existence in glory before the world began. Just to prove this is not an isolated scripture here is a similar verse:

John 16:28
I came from the Father and entered the world; now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father.”

The next verse also confirms that Jesus pre-existed in Heaven.

John 3:12-15
12 I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?
13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven, the Son of Man.
14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,
15 that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.

Ezekiel 8:1-3
1 In the sixth year, in the sixth month on the fifth day, while I was sitting in my house and the elders of Judah were sitting before me, the hand of the Sovereign LORD came upon me there.
2 I looked, and I saw a figure like that of a man. From what appeared to be his waist down he was like fire, and from there up his appearance was as bright as glowing metal.
3 He stretched out what looked like a hand and took me by the hair of my head. The Spirit lifted me up between earth and heaven and in visions of God he took me to Jerusalem, to the entrance to the north gate of the inner court, where the idol that provokes to jealousy stood.

This verse is interesting in the sense that the description is very similar to the description of Jesus Christ in Revelation 1:12-18,

12 I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands,
13 and among the lampstands was someone “like a son of man,” dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest.
14 His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire.
15 His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters.
16 In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.
17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last.
18 I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

Have a look at the next verse. 1 Corinthians 11:3 (English-NIV)
Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

Now the word head in the Greek is ‘kephale’ which can mean head, source or master. Now if we notice the order in a time sense, we have to admit that God is the first as he is the only one who has existed for all eternity with no beginning. We also know from scripture that the man came first and the woman came from the man. So that part is correct if we use a timeline. That just leaves Christ. Did he come between God and Man. I think so, as I believe that all things came from him and this opinion does fit perfectly into this model in a time sense at least. Anyway the word Christ here is ‘Christos’ which means “anointed”. So the anointed is the head of Man.
God > Christ > Man > Woman

If God created all things for his Son and his Son was the channel for that creation to come into being, then we can only assume that Christ existed at this point. As Genesis says: Let us make Man in our image. God was talking to Christ at this point and we know that Christ is the image of God and we are the image of Christ. Therefore the image of the image of God (man) is still the image of God. But Christ is the original and first image and we can only assume again that that image existed before the image of the image. A bit like a mirror that reflects a mirror, the original mirror has to exist in order to reflect the second mirror.

So we know that Christ preexisted before creation and now we will look at some more scriptures that show that he was born before creation itself?

Colossians 1:15-16
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
16 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.

The above verse is quite clear that ALL things were created by or through Jesus.

John 1:3
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

So again, there is nothing that was made that didn’t involve Jesus/The Word being there. Only the Father and Son were not made. God has always existed and the Son was born from God before the creation of the universe, before anything was made. The next verse describes clearly who/what was the first of God’s works.

Proverbs 8:22-30
22 “The LORD brought me forth as the first of his works, {[22] Or ; or } {[22] Or ; or } before his deeds of old;
23 I was appointed from eternity, from the beginning, before the world began.
24 When there were no oceans, I was given birth, when there were no springs abounding with water;
25 before the mountains were settled in place, before the hills, I was given birth,
26 before he made the earth or its fields or any of the dust of the world.
27 I was there when he set the heavens in place, when he marked out the horizon on the face of the deep,
28 when he established the clouds above and fixed securely the fountains of the deep,
29 when he gave the sea its boundary so the waters would not overstep his command, and when he marked out the foundations of the earth.
30 Then I was the craftsman at his side. I was filled with delight day after day, rejoicing always in his presence,

This verse is talking about Wisdom, whom many believe is Christ. This scriptures compliments other scriptures that that teach that Jesus was given birth by God and then created all THINGS though him.

So from this verse we can see the following points.

Wisdom was brought forth as the first of Gods works.
Wisdom was appointed from eternity, from the beginning, before the world began.
Wisdom was given birth before creation.
Wisdom was the craftsman at his side and rejoiced in his presence before creation.
Some say that Wisdom isn’t Christ, rather this is just wisdom in a conceptual sense and it is true that wisdom is being spoken of in that way. But from verse 22 onward it changes tempo. With terms like I was given birth, I was the craftsman at his side and I was filled with delight, we have to admit that it seems to be talking about a person. Now have a look at the following verses:

1 Corinthians 1:24 (English-NIV)
but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

1 Corinthians 1:30 (English-NIV)
It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God–that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption.

Let’s look at some other concepts that Jesus personifies:

Jesus is the Truth. Yet truth is also a concept.
Jesus is the Way. Yet the way is also a concept.
Jesus is the Life. Yet life can also be a concept.
Now look at the following mystery:

1 Corinthians 2:6-9
6 We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing.
7 No, we speak of God’s secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.
8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
9 However, as it is written:
“No eye has seen,
no ear has heard,
no mind has conceived
what God has prepared for those who love him”

Ephesians 3:8-10
8 Although I am less than the least of all God’s people, this grace was given me: to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ,
9 and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.
10 His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms,

Perhaps another scripture alluding to Jesus being the Wisdom of God.

Finally I leave you with the following OT scripture that suggests that God had a Son before the birth Of Jesus Christ on earth.

Proverbs 30:4
Who has gone up to heaven and come down? Who has gathered up the wind in the hollow of his hands? Who has wrapped up the waters in his cloak? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and the name of his son? Tell me if you know!

Discussion

This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 5 months ago by Nick.

Viewing 20 posts - 2,541 through 2,560 (of 19,165 total)

←1 2 3…127128129…957 958 959 →

Author
Posts

May 5, 2008 at 2:35 am#88771

seek and you will find

Participant

Mandy! Whatever the truth is about this subject we will one day know, until then I am given up posting about it, I am so tired of going back and forth, there is no sense in that. So lets agree we disagree.
Peace and Love Irene
P.S. Maybe Kathi will debate with you, she is much healthier then I am.

May 5, 2008 at 3:11 am#88774

Not3in1

Participant

Quote (seek and you will find @ May 05 2008,14:35)

Actually I wasn't debating you on the subject at all. I was merely pointing out that other's have addressed your scriptures (because you keep saying they haven't).

But I guess I'm being nit-picky with you and I'm sorry.

Hope you're feeling better,
Mandy

May 5, 2008 at 4:12 am#88781

Lightenup

Participant

Hello Mandy, WJ, and Ptr,
I'm overwhelmed by the questions I need to respond to during such a busy time right now for me with softball, soccer, track, end of school year stuff, and graduation details coming up for my high school senior not to mention a wood carving project coming due that has been two years in the making and work and home schooling. I guess that I am getting old and can't keep juggling as many balls up in the air as I used to. I may be slow to get to answering ya'll but your questions are on my mind. I'll try to get to some of them tonight.

May 5, 2008 at 4:32 am#88782

GeneBalthrop

Participant

To all…….I think our biggest problem is reading into text, and slightly forcing it to say what it doesn't specifically say and thats easy to do epically if the exact words were using aren't there. I have come to see that whole doctrines have been built on things that aren't really said, or on translations that aren't totally understood, in their true context, not to mention our present translations have whole sentences that have been added and due to transliterations have changed there original meanings.

Somethings are clear others are not, Preexistence to me is not clear at all.

peace to you all…………….gene

May 5, 2008 at 4:39 am#88783

Lightenup

Participant

Quote (Not3in1 @ May 03 2008,17:53)

Kathi,

What do you think “Yahweh” means?

Mandy,
I think the best definition is Yahweh = “the existing One”.

May 5, 2008 at 5:16 am#88785

GeneBalthrop

Participant

lightenup……the mechanical translation of Jeff Benner says's that also…Yahweh= He exists.

and elohyeim =Powers , a plural form of power, and Lord God , should be translated (HE Exists with powers) According to Mr. Benner, thats the way the ancient Hebrew saw God. The bible does say there are Seven Spirits of God, that go to and fro throw out the earth, maybe each Spirit equals a power he has. Just speculation but interesting.

peace to you and your…………….gene

May 5, 2008 at 6:55 am#88786

Lightenup

Participant

Quote (Not3in1 @ May 03 2008,17:52)

Hi Kathi,

Thanks for sharing all that you believe.

I will not pick a part your belief system. Suffice it to say that we do not agree with one another. I do not believe that Mary was just a flesh-factory that allowed Jesus to don skin, but that she actually contributed to her son and added her DNA. This is true conception and birth. Otherwise, why would God even bother to have his son go through this process? Why not just “beam him down”?

That being said though, I can see where the scriptures point towards your belief. I also see where they point towards mine. Nothing is, “clear” as some are led to believe. Therefore, I truly cannot find fault with your belief other than to say we do not agree and I see it a bit different, which I have shared.

Take care,
Mandy

Mandy,
Thanks for your reply.

I agree, I do not believe that Mary was just a”flesh-factory” that allowed Jesus to don skin either.

I believe that she actually did contribute her DNA to the conception. It was her ovum afterall that was fertilized by the power of the Holy Spirit with God's holy seed. This seed did not carry the sinful part of the nature of man with it.

And, just like us, this embryo was given a spirit.

Now, I understand the spirit of a man as something that God puts in him and does not come from the contribution of the sperm and egg.

It is my belief that the spirit that God put in this particular child actually had a beginning and was living and active before the foundation of the world. It was the spirit of the only begotten Son of God which possibly, before this baby, embodied a variety of “tents”.

At the appointed time, this spirit of the Son emptied himself and humbled himself to prepare for his mission as a man.

This spirit of the Son was sent by His Father and went willingly to fill this human baby “tent” and was named Jesus.

He had the limits of a baby. A baby's brain has instincts or memory and is without knowledge. So, I think that Jesus did not have knowledge of His pre-existence while he was a baby.

The Most High God, the Father of this child, took His Son and showed Him all necessary things and gave Him all necessary things and filled Him with His own spirit. God, His father,as well as Mary and Joseph taught Jesus and He grew in wisdom.

This child was much like us except that He had no inherited sin, and the spirit within Him was the spirit of the only begotten Son of God that existed long before the conception of His earthly body.

This is my understanding and I am but clay in the hands of a potter. This is not meant to appear dogmatic, it is just the way I see it through my “glasses”. I have prayerfully sought the understanding I have.

There ya go Mandy, my two cents worth

May 5, 2008 at 6:59 am#88787

Lightenup

Participant

Mandy,
I meant to say:
A baby's brain has instincts but no memory and is without knowledge.
Editing rights would be nice.

May 5, 2008 at 7:49 am#88788

seek and you will find

Participant

Kathi Just ask t8 for editing rights He will give it to you, that is how I got mine. Just send t8 a P.M. Editing rights does come in handy.
Love Irene

May 5, 2008 at 6:40 pm#88805

GeneBalthrop

Participant

lightenup…..why woulds God do it that way, what example would that be for us if He took a preexisting perfect being , killed him and rebirth him in Mary, how does that relate with Us seeing we weren't perfect in a preexisting life as you say Jesus was. He wouldn't actually be in (every way) like his brethren would he then.

Now let's look at it from the perspective of a really Human being who came into existence like us, with the only difference being God Formed His DNA in Mary's womb, and a truly human being come into existence, and God was with Him from berth, because He was the Planned child God ordainded to come from the beginning.

With that senerio i see how he was in every way like me in all things and God the Father can keep a person like me from sinning Just like He did Jesus, because Jesus had no advantage over me except the Father was with him in the beginning, and keep Him from sinning.

So i have hope God the Father can do for me what He did for Jesus and i truly can grow to the (FULL MEASURE) of Christ.

May 5, 2008 at 6:51 pm#88806

Not3in1

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ May 05 2008,16:39)

Quote (Not3in1 @ May 03 2008,17:53)

Kathi,

What do you think “Yahweh” means?

Mandy,
I think the best definition is Yahweh = “the existing One”.

Hi Kathi,

Then how can two be called this? Unless, God is the existing One, and Jesus is also the existing One? That tends to lean towards trinity beliefs to me?

Hey, I comletely understand about the hectic schedule. You do what is best for you. We're always here…..debating something or other.

May 5, 2008 at 7:23 pm#88807

Not3in1

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ May 05 2008,18:55)

Wow, what a great 2 cents worth, thank you!

Regarding what you said above, ponder this and give me your thoughts when you have time:

If Jesus was a preexistent son and then placed inside of Mary, and then Mary added her DNA to the mix…..what would that make Jesus? Would he be the “same” preexistent son as before? Or would he be altered by the addition of Mary's DNA?

It is my belief that he was altered. And therefore there was really no need for him to preexistent in the first place.

When a man and women come together and create a child, that child is the product of both parents. A new individual (never before alive in any way). This child now is a fusion, if you will, of both Mom and Dad. Therefore he also carries with him the inherited values of each parent. He may look like his Dad and have the musical ability of his Mom, for instance.

Do you see how this preexistent view and the view that Jesus underwent true conception do not mix? They oppose one another, in my opinion.

Thanks, Kathi. I value your view and your time. Take care,
Mandy

May 5, 2008 at 8:35 pm#88808

seek and you will find

Participant

Quote (Not3in1 @ May 31 2007,03:55)

Quote (Adam Pastor @ May 31 2007,03:22)

Because of
(a) the obvious meaning of the word genesis; and
(b) the fact that Matthew uses this word twice to describe
the genesis i.e. beginning of Jesus the Christ [Matthew 1:1,18]
which of course contradicts trinitarian (as well as arian) preexistence/theology …

Catholic scribes therefore added an extra 'n' to genesis in verse 18 in order to change
the context from beginning/origination to birth
Source: The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Bart Ehrman, (1993), p. 75-76;

Like I said, FYI

Adam, interesting stuff! Thank you for adding this; I'll do some ivestigating on my own with this information.

By the way, your Avatar (is that what our little pictures by our names are?) freaks me out a little bit – I like it

Feel free to jump in here anywhere, Adam. I know that you have studied some of the same authors and Unitarians that I have and have come to some of the same conclusions that I have. What I am trying to do by chatting with Nick and t8 is to see if what I adopted as truth can stand up under their truth (which is different than mine). So far, I feel like my truth is holding it's own. It's not about pride in being right, it's about knowing God and his Son – the who and the what. That is what I desire so badly in my inner most heart. To know him and his Son who he sent.

Have a good one, today! It's supposed to be 80 degrees here today. :cool:

Here you said ” who He send, where did He send Him from?”
Love Irene

May 5, 2008 at 9:15 pm#88809

seek and you will find

Participant

Quote (t8 @ May 04 2008,21:57)

The real issue is that scripture teaches that Jesus had glory with the Father before the world began and when he died here on earth he returned to that glory. It doesn't say that he entered into that glory for the first time.

He is also the offspring of David. But he is also the root.

He came down from Heaven and Jesus even says “to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen”.

For me it is a matter of believing what is written rather than twisting that which is written to fit a predefined theology. If a scripture doesn't make sense to me, or contradicts what I may believe about something, then I do not ignore it or change its meaning. I believe it is better for me to change than try and change that which is inspired by God.

Mandy It really makes me sad that when scriptures states that Jesus was the firstborn of all creation, some will read something else in it. When it says that Jesus created all things
which are in Heaven and that are in the earth, some just don't get it.
When it says that Jesus was first in all, firstborn of all creation, that includes the Angels, and firstborn of the dead. So what, sO HE WILL HAVE PREEMINECE IN ALL.
What is preeminence? First in all. He now sits at the right hand of the Father in glory which He had before the world was.
Why is that so hard to understand?
When it says in John 1:1 ” In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God and He was with God. Gen. says that it was US that created man, and it was in OUR image.
Some will say that that teaches the trinity. But if you understand that God is a title, we will know the truth.
There are many God's, like the God of this world, who is Satan etc. Since there are other sciptures that tell us that the Father is greater then the Son, we have to remember that.
Not only that one day we to will be calleds God's when in 1
Corinth. 15:28……. that God will be all in all.”
One day also we all will be in unity with all of the word of God, right now only a few. Jesus on the Sermon on the Mount said that much. The road ist steep and few will find it. How few, I don't know. Neither do I think that I know it all. We all fall short of the flory of God. If we had the Holy Spirit full strenght we would understand, but not all has been revealed.
Only to the saints has God revealed all of the truth, and who they are, who knows. Again I think most of us want to believe we have all of the truth, but I don't think so.
Peace and Love Irene
P.S. You are saying He came down from Heaven but do you believe that? So much for making a short Posts.

May 5, 2008 at 9:59 pm#88810

Worshipping Jesus

Participant

Ptr

It seems to me you are not new around here. Whose alias are you?

Is that you kejonn? Nope can’t be kejonn, he doesn’t believe in a family of “god’s”.

Morningstar? Could be, for he definitely believes in a “family of god’s”. So who are you? Oh well, it really doesn’t matter anyway.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 04 2008,11:06)

Didn’t Jesus say…?

To day shalt thou be with me in paradise. Luke 23:43

Quote (Ptr745 @ May 04 2008,21:59)

Actually, that isn't what he said, the words have been twisted around in the English to twist what he was saying, to fit the doctrine of the English translators. This is what the Greek says…

CLV Lk 23:43 And Jesus said to him, “Verily, to you am I saying today, with Me shall you be in paradise.”

What is this obscure version “CLV”? I have looked and this is all I can find.

Wikipedia
The Concordant Literal Version is an English translation of the Bible, started by Adolph Ernst Knoch. The concordant method is an attempt to translate every Greek or Hebrew word in only one word in English, which fits in all appearances. The target is that the influence of the personal view of the translator or editor gets lower.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concordant_Literal_Version

Of course the obvious question is who is Adolph Ernst Knoch, and how is it that his “personal view” of which single English word to be used should invalidate the works of hundreds of scholars?

Wikopedia has no information on this guy. In fact there is very little info on him. The following link gives some general info on him but tells nothing of his scholarly credentials or abilities to translate Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic.
http://www.studyshelf.com/knoch.htm

However, I did find some information about some of his work which doesn’t shed a very good light on his ability to interpret the scriptures.
http://www.1john57.com/knoch.htm

Adolph Ernst Knoch, tells of his method for translation…

“Thus it was that the idea of a concordant version suggested itself to my mind. Instead of correcting current translations occasionally by a concordance, why not make a version which is already concordant, so that the simple reading of it will give all the benefits otherwise won by prolonged and arduous study?”
http://www.scripture4all.org/ISA_hel….hod.htm

So unless you can show me anymore info, from what I can see this guy “decides” which definition of a word is more accurate. Why should I trust his opinion?

It seems to me he is saying that we have no need to look anywhere else in Greek or Hebrew because the buck stops here!

So this begs the question, “I suppose he is the final authority in how a Greek word is to be translated?”

So let’s look and see how his opinion of the verse in question here stacks up.

KJV Luke 23:43
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
King James Version 1611, 1769

NKJV
And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”
New King James Version © 1982 Thomas Nelson

NLT
And Jesus replied, “I assure you, today you will be with me in paradise.”
New Living Translation © 1996 Tyndale Charitable Trust

NIV
Jesus answered him, “I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.”
New International Version © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society

ESV
And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway Bibles

NASB
And He said to him, “Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise.”
New American Standard Bible © 1995 Lockman Foundation

RSV
And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”
Revised Standard Version © 1947, 1952.

ASV
And he said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.
American Standard Version 1901 Info

Young
and Jesus said to him, `Verily I say to thee, To-day with me thou shalt be in the paradise.'
Robert Young Literal Translation 1862, 1887, 1898 Info

Darby
And Jesus said to him, Verily I say to thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
J.N.Darby Translation 1890 Info

Webster
And Jesus said to him, Verily I say to thee, This day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
Noah Webster Version 1833 Info

HNV
Yeshua said to him, “Assuredly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”
Hebrew Names Version 2000 Info

This is only a few of the translations and none of them imply what Mr. Knoch does in the CLV.

In fact I couldn’t find any other translation that matches Mr. Knock’s translation.

More translations disagreeing with CLV is found here…
http://scripturetext.com/luke/23-43.htm

Besides, it would make no sense for Jesus to say “Verily, to you am I saying today, with Me shall you be in paradise”. That would be like me saying “I am telling you today that you will be with me fishing next week.”

Further proof that he didn’t say it this way is the fact that every time he used the term “Verily to you I am saying”, he never includes Today. Check it out for your self. Whenever Jesus used the word “verily” at the beginning of a discourse it meant “truly” and he followed it up with “I say unto you”.
An example of this is…

Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, “That this night”, before the #### crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. Notice he didn’t say, “Verily this night I say unto you”, and of course it was that very night that Judas betrayed him.

There are no examples anywhere of Mr. Knoch’s rendering of the verse found anywhere in the Greek NT.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 04 2008,11:06)

Jesus also said…

Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. (John 10:17, 18) Notice the reaction of the people to these words in John 10:19-21).

Quote (Ptr745 @ May 04 2008,21:59)

And this is exactly why we are told to search the scriptures. Read the Greek, it doesn't say he will raise himself again, it says he lays down his life, but that he will get it back again…

CLV Jn 10:17 “Therefore the Father is loving Me, seeing that I am laying down My soul that I may be getting it again.
18 No one is taking it away from Me, but I am laying it down of Myself. I have the right to lay it down, and I have the right to get it again. This precept I got from My Father.”

Again the CLV has it wrong.

KJV Jn 10:17
Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
King James Version 1611, 1769

NKJV – Jhn 10:17 – “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again.
New King James Version © 1982 Thomas Nelson

NIV – Jhn 10:17 – The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life–only to take it up again.
New International Version © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society

ESV – Jhn 10:17 – “For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway Bibles

NASB – Jhn 10:17 – “For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again.
New American Standard Bible © 1995 Lockman Foundation

RSV – Jhn 10:17 – For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
Revised Standard Version © 1947, 1952.
ASV – Jhn 10:17 – Therefore doth the Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
American Standard Version 1901 Info

Young – Jhn 10:17 – `Because of this doth the Father love me, because I lay down my life, that again I may take it;
Robert Young Literal Translation 1862, 1887, 1898 Info

Darby – Jhn 10:17 – On this account the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it again.
J.N.Darby Translation 1890 Info

Webster – Jhn 10:17 – Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
Noah Webster Version 1833 Info

HNV – Jhn 10:17 – Therefore the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.

Here is some more…
http://biblecc.com/john/10-17.htm

Anyway this would line up beautifully with John 2:19-21 where Jesus said…

“Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

I love the way you skirted around this when you said…

Quote (Ptr745 @ May 04 2008,21:59)

“Again, most of what Jesus said were the words of the Father, not of himself.”

But why didn’t Jesus just say my Father will raise it up? Can you give me any example where it was the Father speaking in him and not Jesus himself? John and the disciples must have been confused for John says…

But he (Jesus) spake of the temple of his (Jesus) body.

When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which **Jesus had said**.

Ptr, let me save the two of us some time. I haven’t addressed your other points for this reason.

A while back I told another brother here that if he doesn’t accept the current translations as grounds for the discussions that we were having then it was a waste of our time. Because every time he would disagree with the Translation then he would just resort to accusing the translators of corruption and bias. This in my opinion is very weak and sets up a dichotomy in which there is no level playing field.

In fact I noticed that in a previous post you quoted…

Quote (Ptr745 @ May 04 2008,17:23)

Acts 2:24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.

Acts 2:32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

Acts 3:26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

Acts 10:40 Him God raised up the third day, and showed him openly;

Acts 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

1Corinthians 6:14 And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.

1Corinthians 15:15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.

1Peter 1:21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

Psalms 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell (sheol – the grave); neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Peter explains that Ps 16:10 is a prophecy from David, not speaking of himself, but speaking of Jesus Christ….

ACTS 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.
25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:
26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:
27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell (hades – the grave), neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.
29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us unto this day.

All this was in KJV. Yet you run to the CLV for verses that doesn’t suit your belief and totally ignore all the other translations calling them corrupt and biased.

See how frustrating that could be trying to have dialogue only for one of us to claim “corrupt and biased” when a scripture doesn’t agree with our doctrine?

I am always amazed at the apologist that come here with no abilities in interpreting Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic languages who make arguments against the 100s of Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic scholars most of whom gave their entire lives and 1000,s of hours to bring us the current translations which we have with very little variances.

But if you want to bring in your CLV fine, however bring it with some solid evidence as to why it should be interpreted that way, rather than just making statements like…

Quote (Ptr745 @ May 04 2008,21:59)

Actually, that isn't
what he said, the words have been twisted around in the English to twist what he was saying, to fit the doctrine of the English translators.

and

The jesus you are speaking of is the Jesus of the English translators

Modern day Christendom is based on the current “English” translations we have. Like it or not, this is the truth. If you or anyone else doesn’t like the current versions then write a new one and start a new religion like the JWs, or at least show me some credentials for translating Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic.

At least give me some concrete evidence that can be measured against what we have, and not ambiguous apologetics.

So if you want to criticize the translators and the many English translations, that is your right, however, I do not want to chase rabbit trails or delve outside of the translations we have into some obscure world of apologetics. I would rather give you the ball and leave the field.

Blessings!

May 5, 2008 at 10:25 pm#88813

Not3in1

Participant

Quote (seek and you will find @ May 06 2008,08:35)

Quote (Not3in1 @ May 31 2007,03:55)

Quote (Adam Pastor @ May 31 2007,03:22)

Like I said, FYI

Adam, interesting stuff! Thank you for adding this; I'll do some ivestigating on my own with this information.

By the way, your Avatar (is that what our little pictures by our names are?) freaks me out a little bit – I like it

Have a good one, today! It's supposed to be 80 degrees here today. :cool:

Here you said ” who He send, where did He send Him from?”
Love Irene

Can God not send his son by giving him life and causing him to go through the birthing process? Why does he already have to exist to be “sent”? I believe this is an interpretation thing.

Where did he send him from? Where do sons come from?

May 5, 2008 at 10:33 pm#88814

Not3in1

Participant

Quote

Essentially what you are saying is that it makes you sad that other's do not believe like you do. And that other's must be lacking because they “….just don't get it.” You are still not open to hear that other has valid views of the same scriptures that you find so “clear”. There is really no discussing anything with you until you are open enough to even consider there may be another view other than your own. Sorry, but it's true.

Quote

When it says that Jesus was first in all, firstborn of all creation, that includes the Angels, and firstborn of the dead. So what, sO HE WILL HAVE PREEMINECE IN ALL.
What is preeminence? First in all. He now sits at the right hand of the Father in glory which He had before the world was.
Why is that so hard to understand?

Why is this so hard to understand? Because you have only one view on these certain scriptures and you will see no other. Still, I will say again that there are other ways to interpret “firstborn”. It doesn't have to mean that Jesus was literally the firstborn over creation (this world). Other's have interpreted as meaning that he is the firstborn (and many brothers will follow) of the second world. This to me makes more sense.

Quote

When it says in John 1:1 ” In the beginning was the Word and the Word was God and He was with God. Gen. says that it was US that created man, and it was in OUR image.

Again, if you are willing to entertain another view, pick up any NIV Study Bible and read their interpretation of those passages. You may be surprised as to what they think “us” and “our” point to.

Quote

P.S. You are saying He came down from Heaven but do you believe that?

I most certainly believe that Jesus came from his Father. His Father is in heaven. So, yes, he came down from heaven.
Thanks,
Mandy

May 6, 2008 at 3:47 am#88824

Ptr745

Participant

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 06 2008,09:59)

Ptr

It seems to me you are not new around here. Whose alias are you?

Is that you kejonn? Nope can’t be kejonn, he doesn’t believe in a family of “god’s”.

Morningstar? Could be, for he definitely believes in a “family of god’s”. So who are you? Oh well, it really doesn’t matter anyway.

I'm am nobody's alias.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 04 2008,11:06)

What is this obscure version “CLV”?

This is simply a literal concordant version, straight from the greek, with the words in there propper order, and there literal greek meanings.

This is how the KJV has it…

Luke 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradis

This is the order and meaning of the words in greek..

and he-said to-him amen to-you I-AM-Saying today with me you-shall-be in the paradise

Here is the Concordant literal version…

CLV Lk 23:43 And Jesus said to him, “Verily, to you am I saying today, with Me shall you be in paradise.”

Now which one would you say is a more accurate version?

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 04 2008,11:06)

Well if that's what he meant, why wouldn't he say “you shall be with me today in paradise”? He didn't say it like that did he? And there is a little problem with that, because Jesus himself didn't go to paradise that day did he? He went to the grave for three days and three nights. Also, there is another problem. Paul says everyone is raised from the dead in their order, and who is raised first?

1CORINTHIANS 1522 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Did the thief on the cross not have to wait for the resurrection like everybody else, and since Jesus was not raised to life again for another three days, was this thief rasied…….BEFORE JESUS?? Also, if you believe what Jesus was talking about was heaven when he said paradise, and not the coming kingdom of God, notice that even after three days and three nights, what did Jesus say?

John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

There are way too many glaring contradictions in your belief that he went that day with Christ to paradise.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 04 2008,11:06)

Again the CLV has it wrong.

NIV – Jhn 10:17 – The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life–only to take it up again.
New International Version © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society

ESV – Jhn 10:17 – “For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway Bibles

ASV – Jhn 10:17 – Therefore doth the Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
American Standard Version 1901 Info

Young – Jhn 10:17 – `Because of this doth the Father love me, because I lay down my life, that again I may take it;
Robert Young Literal Translation 1862, 1887, 1898 Info

Darby – Jhn 10:17 – On this account the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it again.
J.N.Darby Translation 1890 Info

Webster – Jhn 10:17 – Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
Noah Webster Version 1833 Info

HNV – Jhn 10:17 – Therefore the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.

Look into the meaning of the word translated as as “take”, it means to get, to take, to receive. This has nothing to do with Jesus rasing himself from the dead. Jesus earned the right to recieve his life again. Many scriptures state plainly who raised Jesus from the dead., such as…

1Peter 1:21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 06 2008,09:59)

Anyway this would line up beautifully with John 2:19-21 where Jesus said…

“Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

I love the way you skirted around this when you said…

Quote (Ptr745 @ May 04 2008,21:59)

“Again, most of what Jesus said were the words of the Father, not of himself.”

But he (Jesus) spake of the temple of his (Jesus) body.

When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which **Jesus had said**.

I've skirted around nothing…

1. Jesus said that the words, works and miracles were not his, but of his father.

2. The words the Father gave, came out of the mouth of Jesus, so yes it was Jesus who spoke them in the physical realm, and anyone referring to them would have said “the words that Jesus spoke”

4. Now if the Father speaks through Jesus, and Jesus said that he will destroy his body and raise it again in three days, and many
clear scriptures from the third person say it was God who raised Jesus from the dead, and none say that Jesus raised himself from the dead, who's words then were “destroy this body and in three days raise it again”?

To me it's not that difficult. If God did the raising, just as the scriptures plainly say, then these were the words of the Father.

As for an example of where it says God the father was talking through Christ,

John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

John 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 06 2008,09:59)

Ptr, let me save the two of us some time. I haven’t addressed your other points for this reason.

I only disagree with a verse translation when it diverges with what it says in the original greek, and contradicts other more plainly stated verses, such as who raisded Jesus, who did the creating etc, which all point point to God.