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

Viewing 20 posts - 2,861 through 2,880 (of 19,165 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #90398
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    lightenup……..What did you mean your Christ was not created then, If he wasn't created then he wasn't a man being or angle or anything else Other them Almighty God Himself right. And we Know the God Jesus The Man was praying to wasn't Himself right, so your logic fails completely. We know that all men are a creation of God, but you some how exclude Jesus the (MAN) Jesus .

    IMO…………gene

    #90399

    Hi Kathi! Can you bake me some sugar free cookies, please? And answer my question P.M.
    Love Irene

    #90400
    Not3in1
    Participant

    Quote (Lightenup @ June 01 2008,12:59)

    Quote (Not3in1 @ May 31 2008,20:25)

    Quote (Lightenup @ June 01 2008,11:42)
    I'm on a different path but I will follow the Creator and not the creature.  I follow Christ.


    If this is the path you are on, please tell me how we are on different paths?

    I also follow Christ.  I follow him all the way to his example.  I worship and pray to his Father who is also my Father.  The One, Almighty God.  There is no other…..  
    Thanks,
    Mandy


    Mandy,
    The Christ you follow is a creature, a created being, a created man.  The Christ that I follow is not created but was used to create.  Two different Christs, two different paths.

    Bless you,
    K


    Hi Kathi,

    “Bakin and debatin”, too cute!

    OK, I think I understand you now. Yes, we have two completely different ideas of who Jesus is.

    I believe Jesus is a “creature” as you put it, because he was conceived of a women. We cannot and must not forget Mary. I believe she played an important role that is bypassed with your theory. If Jesus is as you say, he could have been a part of some sort of body-snatcher's and just claimed any flesh. Anyway, that is how I make sense of what you are saying. Forgive me if I'm off base.

    Anyway, save some cookies for me! You know, I would totally give you my address if you wantedt to mail me some! :)
    Love,
    Mandy

    #90402
    gollamudi
    Participant

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 01 2008,12:40)

    seek ………..Col 1: 12.giving thanks to the fathers who enabled us to share in the inheritance of the saints of light,he has rescued us from the power of darkness and transfered us into the kingdom of hid beloved son,in whom we have redemption , the forgiveness of sins , he is the (image) of the invisible God the first born of all creation ,

    question he is in the what (IMAGE) what is the image of God, is it not what God had in mind for all humanity, but Jesus was the firstborn to become that image, and the word image does not mean exact same as , it means to reflect or mirror something, but is never the actual being it he is reflecting nor does he have the same power either. An image of the invisible God is not God Himself.

    for in him (God) all things were created in heaven and on the earth things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions  or rulers or powers- all have been created through him (God)and for him,he(GOD) himself is before all things, and in him (GOD)all things are held together. he (Jesus) is the head of the body, the church he is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things he may have preeminence.

    Your making all of the text be about Jesus when all of it was not.
    if you take all the bible into consideration all the other scriptures that show that God said He (ALONE)and By (HIMSELF) crated the earth and all thats in it. you could have easily properly understood the text. Your problem is your not taking (all) scripture into consideration before you draw a conclusion.

    All the rest of what you asked to be explained have been explained over and over, but if you don't get it, you simply don't get it.

    peace to you………gene


    Hi Gene,
    wonderful post on Col 1:15-18, I never understood this passage with such in depth meaning.
    Thank you my brother.
    Peace to all
    Adam

    #90403
    942767
    Participant

    Quote (Lightenup @ June 01 2008,12:35)
    Hi 94,
    For some reason my computer would not follow the link you provided to WJ's post.  I remember it included the NET Bible's notes from the translators.  So I have copied the verse as they have it translated and their notes.  Note that in verse 18, son is not the word to use but “God” is correct.  Technically, it can be only begotten God, (read the notes) they just can't have it that way because it throws off their theology.  

    Anyway, do you like how they translate the verse to read that Jesus is the “The only one, 45  himself God, who is in closest fellowship with 46  the Father”.  I thought he was just a man like us in your opinion doesn't that kinda mess up your theory?  

    1:14 Now 34  the Word became flesh 35  and took up residence 36  among us. We 37  saw his glory – the glory of the one and only, 38  full of grace and truth, who came from the Father. 1:15 John 39  testified 40  about him and shouted out, 41  “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am, 42  because he existed before me.’” 1:16 For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another. 43  1:17 For the law was given through Moses, but 44  grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ. 1:18 No one has ever seen God. The only one, 45  himself God, who is in closest fellowship with 46  the Father, has made God 47  known. 48

    tc The textual problem μονογενὴς θεός (monogenh” qeo”, “the only God”) versus ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός (Jo monogenh” Juio”, “the only son”) is a notoriously difficult one. Only one letter would have differentiated the readings in the mss, since both words would have been contracted as nomina sacra: thus qMs or uMs. Externally, there are several variants, but they can be grouped essentially by whether they read θεός or υἱός. The majority of mss, especially the later ones (A C3 Θ Ψ Ë1,13 Ï lat), read ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός. Ì75 א1 33 pc have ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, while the anarthrous μονογενὴς θεός is found in Ì66 א* B C* L pc. The articular θεός is almost certainly a scribal emendation to the anarthrous θεός, for θεός without the article is a much harder reading. The external evidence thus strongly supports μονογενὴς θεός. Internally, although υἱός fits the immediate context more readily, θεός is much more difficult. As well, θεός also explains the origin of the other reading (υἱός), because it is difficult to see why a scribe who found υἱός in the text he was copying would alter it to θεός. Scribes would naturally change the wording to υἱός however, since μονογενὴς υἱός is a uniquely Johannine christological title (cf. John 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). But θεός as the older and more difficult reading is preferred. As for translation, it makes the most sense to see the word θεός as in apposition to μονογενής, and the participle ὁ ὤν (Jo wn) as in apposition to θεός, giving in effect three descriptions of Jesus rather than only two. (B. D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, 81, suggests that it is nearly impossible and completely unattested in the NT for an adjective followed immediately by a noun that agrees in gender, number, and case, to be a substantival adjective: “when is an adjective ever used substantivally when it immediately precedes a noun of the same inflection?” This, however, is an overstatement. First, as Ehrman admits, μονογενής in John 1:14 is substantival. And since it is an established usage for the adjective in this context, one might well expect that the author would continue to use the adjective substantivally four verses later. Indeed, μονογενής is already moving toward a crystallized substantival adjective in the NT [cf. Luke 9:38; Heb 11:17]; in patristic Greek, the process continued [cf. PGL 881 s.v. 7]. Second, there are several instances in the NT in which a substantival adjective is followed by a noun with which it has complete concord: cf., e.g., Rom 1:30; Gal 3:9; 1 Tim 1:9; 2 Pet 2:5.) The modern translations which best express this are the NEB (margin) and TEV. Several things should be noted: μονογενής alone, without υἱός, can mean “only son,” “unique son,” “unique one,” etc. (see 1:14). Furthermore, θεός is anarthrous. As such it carries qualitative force much like it does in 1:1c, where θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (qeo” hn Jo logo”) means “the Word was fully God” or “the Word was fully of the essence of deity.” Finally, ὁ ὤν occurs in Rev 1:4, 8; 4:8, 11:17; and 16:5, but even more significantly in the LXX of Exod 3:14. Putting all of this together leads to the translation given in the text.

    tn Or “The unique one.” For the meaning of μονογενής (monogenh”) see the note on “one and only” in 1:14.

    tn Or “of the unique one.” Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clem. 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant., 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God, Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).

    If you read the notes carefully, it explains why the translations that say “only begotten Son” is not the preferred reading and why.
    Also, you will see that it is technically possible for it to read that Jesus is the only begotten God.

    LU


    Hi Lightenup:

    John 1:18 in the interlinear bible does read the way that you have stated, but there has to be an explanation because there is no begotten God. I will have to do some studying and some praying about this. “Begotten God” is just not consistent with the rest of the scriptures that tell us that Jesus is the “Only Begotten Son of God”.

    God Bless

    #90406
    gollamudi
    Participant

    Hi 94,
    You are on right track brother. No where in New Testament Jesus mentioned as if he was 'begotten God' rather he confirmed that he was the 'Son of God'. No need to get confused on these mistranslations.
    Peace to you
    Adam

    #90409
    Lightenup
    Participant

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ May 31 2008,22:46)
    lightenup……..What did you mean your Christ was not created then, If he wasn't created then he wasn't a man being or angle or anything else Other them Almighty God Himself right. And we Know the God Jesus The Man was praying to wasn't Himself right, so your logic fails completely. We know that all men are a creation of God, but you some how exclude Jesus the (MAN) Jesus .

    IMO…………gene


    You really haven't been reading many of my posts have you?

    The spirit of the only begotten God was BORN not created of the Most High God before He was used to make all things in heaven and on earth and way before He emptied Himself and took on the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. By the way, He wasn't killed to accomplish that. His spirit just passed from one realm to another. Our spirit will do that someday also.

    The spirit of Christ (the spirit of the only begotten God) is what I follow, not the skin and bones that at one time covered Him.

    #90410
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi not3,
    All creation came through him.
    Does that include him?

    #90413
    Lightenup
    Participant

    Hi 94,
    Good for you to actually look it up in the interlinear and see for yourself that John 1:18 says “only begotten God”. It is good for you to pray about it. I don't imagine that you will hear anything unless you put your notions on the altar and give Him reign to show you what He wants to show you.

    God bless you, 94

    #90414
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    94…….from my studies in the past the term (only begotten) should be rendered as (Uniquely Begotten), the first Adam was also uniquely begotten of God and the Second Adam also was uniquely begotten of God, but none the less (begotten) Which means brought forth by the hand of God.

    Adam was the first Man born of God as it says and Jesus was the second Man born of God both were unique compared to normal humanity. But non the less pure Human beings, one was given the holy spirit and begotten of God as a son on the day he was baptized,Just as it say's “(This Day) (I) GOD Have begotten you not some time in the distant past as trinitarians would have you believe.

    The other, the first Adam will receive the Holy Spirit later,and become a spiritual son of God just as Jesus is.

    IMO……………..gene

    #90415
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi 94,
    So Adam did not exist when he was begotten [does scripture say so?]
    and Jesus was already a man when he was?

    #90419
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi,
    Look at the sequence of events shown in Heb 1
    5For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

    6And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

    It seems the begettal came BEFORE his being brought into the world.

    #90426
    Lightenup
    Participant

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 01 2008,01:01)
    94…….from my studies in the past the term (only begotten) should be rendered as (Uniquely Begotten), the first Adam was also uniquely begotten of God and the Second Adam also was uniquely begotten of God, but none the less (begotten) Which means brought forth by the hand of God.

    Adam was the first Man born of God as it says and Jesus was the second Man born of God both were unique compared to normal humanity. But non the less pure Human beings, one was given the holy spirit and begotten of God as a son on the day he was baptized,Just as it say's “(This Day) (I) GOD Have begotten you not some time in the distant past as trinitarians would have you believe.

    The other, the first Adam will receive the Holy Spirit later,and become a spiritual son of God just as Jesus is.

    IMO……………..gene


    Hey Gene,
    Where does it say that Adam was born of God or uniquely begotten of God? Here, I'll save you some time…it doesn't. He was “formed” of clay and yes, that was unique but that wasn't born of God. Adam was created.

    Definition from Studylight.org
    Monogenes:
    single of its kind, only
    used of only sons or daughters (viewed in relation to their parents)
    used of Christ, denotes the only begotten son of God

    Another source:
    NT:3439

    monogenes (mon-og-en-ace'); from NT:3441 and NT:1096; only-born, i.e. sole:

    KJV – only (begotten, child).
    (Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright  1994, Biblesoft and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

    Gen 1:27
    God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
    NASU

    It doesn't say uniquely begotten, it says “created”.

    Adam was created not begotten.

    I gave you two definitions that say “only begotten” and “only born”. So the term monogenes is properly rendered as only begotten or only born.

    #90427
    Lightenup
    Participant

    Hey Mandy,
    It couldn't be just any body that the Son of God took. Just any old body would have had the sin passed into it from the earthly father. Jesus could not have had a body with the inherited sin.

    Just my opinion.
    And about the cookies, why don't you come to the bbq for my son's graduation and help yourself:) I'd love to have you.
    Kathi

    #90428
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi LU,
    Mary was from our sinful estate.
    Jesus, the captain of our salvation, overcame sin.

    Rom8
    1There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

    2For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

    3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

    #90429

    Quote (Lightenup @ June 01 2008,12:35)
    Hi 94,
    For some reason my computer would not follow the link you provided to WJ's post.  I remember it included the NET Bible's notes from the translators.  So I have copied the verse as they have it translated and their notes.  Note that in verse 18, son is not the word to use but “God” is correct.  Technically, it can be only begotten God, (read the notes) they just can't have it that way because it throws off their theology.  

    Anyway, do you like how they translate the verse to read that Jesus is the “The only one, 45  himself God, who is in closest fellowship with 46  the Father”.  I thought he was just a man like us in your opinion doesn't that kinda mess up your theory?  

    1:14 Now 34  the Word became flesh 35  and took up residence 36  among us. We 37  saw his glory – the glory of the one and only, 38  full of grace and truth, who came from the Father. 1:15 John 39  testified 40  about him and shouted out, 41  “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am, 42  because he existed before me.’” 1:16 For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another. 43  1:17 For the law was given through Moses, but 44  grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ. 1:18 No one has ever seen God. The only one, 45  himself God, who is in closest fellowship with 46  the Father, has made God 47  known. 48

    tc The textual problem μονογενὴς θεός (monogenh” qeo”, “the only God”) versus ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός (Jo monogenh” Juio”, “the only son”) is a notoriously difficult one. Only one letter would have differentiated the readings in the mss, since both words would have been contracted as nomina sacra: thus qMs or uMs. Externally, there are several variants, but they can be grouped essentially by whether they read θεός or υἱός. The majority of mss, especially the later ones (A C3 Θ Ψ Ë1,13 Ï lat), read ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός. Ì75 א1 33 pc have ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, while the anarthrous μονογενὴς θεός is found in Ì66 א* B C* L pc. The articular θεός is almost certainly a scribal emendation to the anarthrous θεός, for θεός without the article is a much harder reading. The external evidence thus strongly supports μονογενὴς θεός. Internally, although υἱός fits the immediate context more readily, θεός is much more difficult. As well, θεός also explains the origin of the other reading (υἱός), because it is difficult to see why a scribe who found υἱός in the text he was copying would alter it to θεός. Scribes would naturally change the wording to υἱός however, since μονογενὴς υἱός is a uniquely Johannine christological title (cf. John 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). But θεός as the older and more difficult reading is preferred. As for translation, it makes the most sense to see the word θεός as in apposition to μονογενής, and the participle ὁ ὤν (Jo wn) as in apposition to θεός, giving in effect three descriptions of Jesus rather than only two. (B. D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, 81, suggests that it is nearly impossible and completely unattested in the NT for an adjective followed immediately by a noun that agrees in gender, number, and case, to be a substantival adjective: “when is an adjective ever used substantivally when it immediately precedes a noun of the same inflection?” This, however, is an overstatement. First, as Ehrman admits, μονογενής in John 1:14 is substantival. And since it is an established usage for the adjective in this context, one might well expect that the author would continue to use the adjective substantivally four verses later. Indeed, μονογενής is already moving toward a crystallized substantival adjective in the NT [cf. Luke 9:38; Heb 11:17]; in patristic Greek, the process continued [cf. PGL 881 s.v. 7]. Second, there are several instances in the NT in which a substantival adjective is followed by a noun with which it has complete concord: cf., e.g., Rom 1:30; Gal 3:9; 1 Tim 1:9; 2 Pet 2:5.) The modern translations which best express this are the NEB (margin) and TEV. Several things should be noted: μονογενής alone, without υἱός, can mean “only son,” “unique son,” “unique one,” etc. (see 1:14). Furthermore, θεός is anarthrous. As such it carries qualitative force much like it does in 1:1c, where θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (qeo” hn Jo logo”) means “the Word was fully God” or “the Word was fully of the essence of deity.” Finally, ὁ ὤν occurs in Rev 1:4, 8; 4:8, 11:17; and 16:5, but even more significantly in the LXX of Exod 3:14. Putting all of this together leads to the translation given in the text.

    tn Or “The unique one.” For the meaning of μονογενής (monogenh”) see the note on “one and only” in 1:14.

    tn Or “of the unique one.” Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clem. 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant., 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God, Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).

    If you read the notes carefully, it explains why the translations that say “only begotten Son” is not the preferred reading and why.
    Also, you will see that it is technically possible for it to read that Jesus is the only begotten God.

    LU


    Hi LU

    Quote (Lightenup @ June 01 2008,12:35)

    Anyway, do you like how they translate the verse to read that Jesus is the “The only one, 45  himself God, who is in closest fellowship with 46  the Father”.  I thought he was just a man like us in your opinion doesn't that kinda mess up your theory?  

    Maybe it will mess up his theory, but I think it messes up yours also, respectfully.

    John 1:18

    NLT
    No one has ever seen God. But his only Son, who is himself God, is near to the
    Father's heart; he has told us about him.
    Footnote:
    Some manuscripts read his one and only Son.
    New Living Translation © 1996 Tyndale Charitable Trust

    NIV
    No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only,,who is at the Father's side, has made him known.
    Footnote:
    a Or the Only Begotten
    b Some manuscripts but the only (or only begotten) Son
    New International Version © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society

    ESV
    No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
    Footnote:
    a Greek in the bosom of the Father
    b Or the only One, who is God; some manuscripts the only Son
    The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway Bibles

    NET
    No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.

    Footnote;
    tn Or “of the unique one.” Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clem. 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant., 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God, Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).

    I think contextually the Net and the above makes more sense because if John the writer believed Yeshua was the “begotten God” he could have cleared up a lot of confusion by starting the chapter with…

    In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was the “Begotten God”.

    So the term “Word was God” is consistent with the NET and others.

    Not to mention the other scriptures that would contradict this concept of “a begotten God”.

    94s link was Here.

    The Word Monogenes simply means “Unique”, “Only one of its kind”. John used this term after his incarnation. There is no scripture that says Yeshua was begotten, or born before his natural birth. If this was so then that would mean Yeshua was born again when he came in the flesh.

    I also disagree respectfully with your concept that there is a difference in being born and being created. I do not think there is a difference because of scriptures like these…

    All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. John 1:3

    If all things were made by him I assume that would include the born. Of course remember, “Without him was not anything made that was made”.

    For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: Col 1:16

    So we see that all things that were born are created, but not all things that are created are born.

    Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; Isa 44:24

    Blessings!

    :)

    #90432
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi WJ,
    The Father is the God of Jesus and of the OT.
    Is he not your god?

    #90434

    Quote (Lightenup @ June 01 2008,18:19)
    Hey Mandy,
    It couldn't be just any body that the Son of God took.  Just any old body would have had the sin passed into it from the earthly father.  Jesus could not have had a body with the inherited sin.  

    Just my opinion.
    And about the cookies, why don't you come to the bbq for my son's graduation and help yourself:) I'd love to have you.
    Kathi


    Can I come too. In Spirit I will be there. Please tell your Son
       Congratulation from Georg and Irene
    What did He graduated from High School or College?

    Peace and Love Georg and Irene

    #90438
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 01 2008,14:46)
    lightenup……..What did you mean your Christ was not created then, If he wasn't created then he wasn't a man being or angle or anything else Other them Almighty God Himself right. And we Know the God Jesus The Man was praying to wasn't Himself right, so your logic fails completely. We know that all men are a creation of God, but you some how exclude Jesus the (MAN) Jesus .

    IMO…………gene


    I could be wrong, but I think lightenup is referring to:

    2 He was with God in the beginning.
    3 Through Him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made.

    So if ALL things were made through him, then was he also made through him(self)?

    Also, Jesus partook of flesh, but that statement doesn't mean that he existed for the first time in flesh.

    In fact we are told that he existed with divine nature and emptied himself and took on the likeness of a servant in flesh.

    So when did he have divine nature or when did he exist in the form of God?

    #90439
    gollamudi
    Participant

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 01 2008,18:43)

    Hi LU

    Quote (Lightenup @ June 01 2008,12:35)

    Anyway, do you like how they translate the verse to read that Jesus is the “The only one, 45  himself God, who is in closest fellowship with 46  the Father”.  I thought he was just a man like us in your opinion doesn't that kinda mess up your theory?  

    Maybe it will mess up his theory, but I think it messes up yours also, respectfully.

    John 1:18

    NLT
    No one has ever seen God. But his only Son, who is himself God, is near to the Father's heart; he has told us about him.
    Footnote:
    Some manuscripts read his one and only Son.
    New Living Translation © 1996 Tyndale Charitable Trust

    NIV
    No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only,,who is at the Father's side, has made him known.
    Footnote:
    a Or the Only Begotten
    b Some manuscripts but the only (or only begotten) Son
    New International Version © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society

    ESV
    No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
    Footnote:
    a Greek in the bosom of the Father
    b Or the only One, who is God; some manuscripts the only Son
    The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway Bibles

    NET
    No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.

    Footnote;
    tn Or “of the unique one.” Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clem. 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant., 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God, Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).

    I think contextually the Net and the above makes more sense because if John the writer believed Yeshua was the “begotten God” he could have cleared up a lot of confusion by starting the chapter with…

    In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was the “Begotten God”.

    So the term “Word was God” is consistent with the NET and others.

    Not to mention the other scriptures that would contradict this concept of “a begotten God”.

    94s link was Here.

    The Word Monogenes simply means “Unique”, “Only one of its kind”. John used this term after his incarnation. There is no scripture that says Yeshua was begotten, or born before his natural birth. If this was so then that would mean Yeshua was born again when he came in the flesh.

    I also disagree respectfully with your concept that there is a difference in being born and being created. I do not think there is a difference because of scriptures like these…

    All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. John 1:3

    If all things were made by him I assume that would include the born. Of course remember, “Without him was not anything made that was made”.

    For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: Col 1:16

    So we see that all things that were born are created, but not all things that are created are born.

    Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; Isa 44:24

    Blessings!

    :)


    Hi WJ,
    I have to appreciate your understanding about the God of the Bible. Though I differ in Trinity. Wonderful post it is indeed.
    Peace to you
    Adam

Viewing 20 posts - 2,861 through 2,880 (of 19,165 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2026 Heaven Net

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

Create Account