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 - 8,601 through 8,620 (of 19,165 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #206926
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (t8 @ July 30 2010,22:55)
    Another possible meaning that you can derive from saying that the Word was a god, is that there is more than one legitimate God, with differing levels of power and one who is at the top.


    Hi t8,

    And isn't that what God Himself implied in Isaiah. What else did He mean by “he will be called mighty god”?

    He never said he would be called “Almighty God” though.

    mike

    #206928
    Lightenup
    Participant

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 30 2010,23:01)

    Quote (Lightenup @ July 30 2010,16:11)
    Mike, Mike, Mike…

    Kathi doesn't fail to remember…Kathi just believes that worshiping Jesus is part of the process of worshiping the Father and it pleases the Father.


    Sadly, AGAINST what God Almighty commands.  ???


    Mike,
    You grew up around people that think that Jesus was created out of nothing. I am not surprised that you think the way you do.

    I however think that Jesus was procreated out of eternal substance within God and is the very God OF Very God.

    That explains why we think so differently on this. What do you think that Ignatius thought about this?

    #206931
    Lightenup
    Participant

    Quote (terraricca @ July 30 2010,21:44)

    Quote (Lightenup @ July 31 2010,20:28)
    terraricca,
    thanks for your answers.  Why do you say that the Son has some percent of the Father's nature.  Do you just have some percent of your earthly father's nature or are you 100% man?


    LU

    if you would have known my father ,and then known me you could swear that i was not is son.

    you see even we both are humans we are a world apart,
    flesh does count for nothing.

    in the case of Jesus Christ the WORD the first born of all creation sure he as the qualities of his father,but he is not his father,so he can not be the same,

    he as by is birth become the god to all creation ,just like Moses became god to Israel and the egyptians,

    to make it even simpler Jesus his the only connection to GOD his father we have,you see there is no one else.

    until the time come to past that we all become gods in our own right ,Jesus Christ is the only way to the true GOD.

    Pierre


    terraricca,
    Sons are never their fathers too but their nature is one and the same no matter if your personality was like your dad's or not, both of you were 100% human. Moses was 100% human. The Son of God begotten as the firstborn of all creation was 0% human but instead 100% divine. You don't seem to know this.

    #206932
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (t8 @ July 30 2010,23:03)
    To mike.

    Origen said this in the early 200s.
    (He was said to be a man who knew the languages of his time.)

    Now there are many who are sincerely concerned about religion, and who fall here into great perplexity. They are afraid that they may be proclaiming two theos (gods), and their fear drives them into doctrines which are false and wicked. Either they deny that the Son has a distinct nature of His own besides that of the Father, and make Him whom they call the Son to be theos all but the name, or they deny the divinity of the Son, giving Him a separate existence of His own, and making His sphere of essence fall outside that of the Father, so that they are separable from each other. To such persons we have to say that God on the one hand is autotheos (God of Himself); and so the Saviour says in His prayer to the Father, “That they may know You the only true God; “but that all beyond the autotheos (God) is made theos by participation in His divinity, and is not to be called simply “the” theos but rather theos.


    I don't necessarily disagree with your (and apparently Origen's) understanding.  Origen even claims the same reason for coming to his understanding as you do…….fear of people thinking “two gods”.  He says people's fear of this drives them to false doctrines.

    I completely understand this fear.  But should we make it out to be “god” instead of “a god” out of fear of what others would make of it?

    Where else in all of scripture is “god” used as a qualifier without any article or as a substitute for “divine”?

    mike

    #206933
    kerwin
    Participant

    Mike,

    Thank you for answering my question about wording.

    I feel that I should try once again to address the point you have about pronoun use as you seem to have a different idea about using pronouns than I do.  God attributed glory to Jesus in his presence before Jesus existed and therefore the Glory was the possession of Jesus even though he did not yet exist.  It was Jesus’ possession in the same way an inheritance is the possession of the one future inheritor.   As this is so, “I had” is appropriate wording in the situation.

    Now that I have addressed that issue I want to point out that Peter states the same point I am striving to make with these words from the first letter in scripture attributed to him.

    1 Peter 1:20(NIV) reads:

    Quote

    He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.

    As such I am attempting to demonstrate that one can be honored in the presence of another even when the one being honored is not present.  I used a posthumous medal ceremony to illustrate my point because it is obvious the one being glorified in the presence of others is not themselves present at the ceremony and that they are being glorified.  Yet you seem to be denying that such a thing can happen despite it being clearly observed to happen.  That type of denial is clearly irrational and there is no real way to argue with the irrational except pointing out their lack of rationality.

    It is possible that you are not explaining your position in a way that I can understand what it is but that is certainly not what looks to be the case.  Please think it through and consider that God had foreknowledge of what Jesus would accomplish and thus chose him even before Jesus existed.  That was the glory that Jesus had in the presence of God just like a dead hero is given glory in the presence of others even though they themselves are not present.

    This is the point that both Peter and Jesus are making.

    #206934
    terraricca
    Participant

    Quote (Lightenup @ July 31 2010,22:22)

    Quote (terraricca @ July 30 2010,21:44)

    Quote (Lightenup @ July 31 2010,20:28)
    terraricca,
    thanks for your answers.  Why do you say that the Son has some percent of the Father's nature.  Do you just have some percent of your earthly father's nature or are you 100% man?


    LU

    if you would have known my father ,and then known me you could swear that i was not is son.

    you see even we both are humans we are a world apart,
    flesh does count for nothing.

    in the case of Jesus Christ the WORD the first born of all creation sure he as the qualities of his father,but he is not his father,so he can not be the same,

    he as by is birth become the god to all creation ,just like Moses became god to Israel and the egyptians,

    to make it even simpler Jesus his the only connection to GOD his father we have,you see there is no one else.

    until the time come to past that we all become gods in our own right ,Jesus Christ is the only way to the true GOD.

    Pierre


    terraricca,
    Sons are never their fathers too but their nature is one and the same no matter if your personality was like your dad's or not, both of you were 100% human.  Moses was 100% human.  The Son of God begotten as the firstborn of all creation was 0% human but instead 100% divine.  You don't seem to know this.


    LU

    why is it you think i don't know that,i am surprised you don't take in account that men are not 100% flesh but part spirit as well.and also by it part of God spirit ,i do not know what the % is.

    now Christ is the first born of all creation,but different from is father ,yet is father being spirit so Christ is also spirit but not 100% because if so then he would be God or equal to it ,this would work against God s will to create,you see God did not create anything greater and more powerful than himself,but lower in power so it could not be the same and the difference is not known,but we know that there is nothing greater than GOD or more POWERFUL,

    we also know that Christ is the next powerful being created ,because all the angels were created trough him,and are weaker in power,we also know that men as been created weaker than angels so they are different as well and weaker .

    so there is no way that you can make a god to worship out of Christ or the son,or the WORD,or under his new name ,?the name
    god to me looks more like the title of MANAGER,you can managed many things,but you would never be the BIG BOS

    Pierre

    #206935
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (Arnold @ July 31 2010,00:42)
    Mike!  I don't know were Georg read but as far as LORD is concerned the Translators were afraid to take His name in vain, and therefore started using LORD instead….


    Hi Irene,

    The Jews stopped speaking the divine name YHVH for unknown reasons.  Some speculate it was because it was too holy for men to even say.  Others because, like you say, they feared accidently using it in a worthless way – “taking it in vain”.  I think it might have stemmed from the destruction of Jerusalem somehow.

    Amos 6:10 NIV
    9 If ten men are left in one house, they too will die. 10 And if a relative who is to burn the bodies comes to carry them out of the house and asks anyone still hiding there, “Is anyone with you?” and he says, “No,” then he will say, “Hush! We must not mention the name of the LORD.”

    I think they were afraid to call God's attention to them, for nothing good was coming to the Israelites from Him at that time.  He was very angry.

    Anyway, after it was not proper to SAY the name, scribes started replacing YHVH with “Adonai” or “Lord” so it wouldn't accidently be spoken out loud in a synagogue reading.  Most English translations cap all the letters in “LORD” to show that this was one of the time the Hebrew text used to read “YHVH”.

    I don't know anything about LORD OF LORDS in the Greek scriptures, though.

    mike

    #206938
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (Lightenup @ July 31 2010,15:15)
    Mike,
    You grew up around people that think that Jesus was created out of nothing.   I am not surprised that you think the way you do.

    I however think that Jesus was procreated out of eternal substance within God and is the very God OF Very God.

    That explains why we think so differently on this.  What do you think that Ignatius thought about this?


    Does it matter how Ignatius believed?  Or any of them for that matter?  The early writings are useful for determining what certain words meant closer to the time of Jesus, and some history and social climate, but not much more.

    For example, Eusebius believed how I do.  And he is useful for understanding that in 325 A.D., “prototokos pasa ktisis” actually did mean “firstborn of every creature”.  But I wouldn't dare ask any of you to believe like I do based only on the fact that Eusebius also did.

    And growing up, I didn't discuss the intricate details of God and Jesus – so that point is apparently an unnecessary attempt to imply that I believe how I do because of what I was told as a young person.  I read the Bible for the first time 2 years ago.  I read it alone in my room.  I made my own conclusions on every single thing I believe based ONLY on what the scriptures say.  I'm now in the process of taking that a step further by being challenged on those beliefs and having to delve further into scripture and lexicons and concordances, etc.

    peace and love,
    mike

    #206943
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Okay Kerwin,

    I'm getting tired of this “crazy talk” from you guys.  The scripture says, “Father glorify me in your presence”.  That means Jesus is asking to be glorified in the Father's presence in heaven.  Then he says, “with the glory I had in your presence before the world was created”.  That means Jesus, not his glory, was in the Father's presence before the world was created.

    Answer this one question:  Is it possible that it means just what it says?  Is my interpretation of it POSSIBLY what it means?

    mike

    #206951
    kerwin
    Participant

    Mike,

    It does mean exactly what it states, as I already pointed out what it litterally states, but you do not want to believe it for your own reasons.  You do not choose to believe it even when Peter rephrases the same idea in the first letter of scripture attributed to him.

    It clearly does not state that Jesus was in God's pressence before the world was created though he entered God's pressence after being crucified and received the glory God had in his, God's, pressence that was waiting for Jesus.

    I cannot put this any more plain that what it is already spoken by Jesus and written by Peter.

    #206956
    Lightenup
    Participant

    Below you can read some of what Calvin has to say about John 1:14. He tells us why the Son is called the begotten and also tells us that He was begotten before the ages. He implies that the 'word' and the 'son' are synonymous.

    John 1:14
    14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
    NASU

    Quote
    The plain meaning therefore is, that the Speech begotten by God before all ages, and who always dwelt with the Father, was made man. On this article there are two things chiefly to be observed. The first is, that two natures were so united in one Person in Christ, that one and the same Christ is true God and true man. The second is, that the unity of person does not hinder the two natures from remaining distinct, so that his Divinity retains all that is peculiar to itself, and his humanity holds separately whatever belongs to it. And, therefore, as Satan has made a variety of foolish attempts to overturn sound doctrine by heretics, he has always brought forward one or another of these two errors; either that he was the Son of God and the Son of man in so confused a manner, that neither his Divinity remained entire, nor did he wear the true nature of man; or that he was clothed with flesh, so as to be as it were double, and to have two separate persons. Thus Nestorius expressly acknowledged both natures, but imagined two Christs, one who was God, and another who was man. Eutyches, on the other hand, while he acknowledged that the one Christ is the Son of God and the Son of man, left him neither of the two natures, but imagined that they were mingled together. And in the present day, Servetus and the Anabaptists invent a Christ who is confusedly compounded of two natures, as if he were a Divine man. In words, indeed, he acknowledges that Christ is God; but if you admit his raving imaginations, the Divinity is at one time changed into human nature, and at another time, the nature of man is swallowed up by the Divinity.
    The Evangelist says what is well adapted to refute both of these blasphemies. When he tells us that the Speech was made flesh, we clearly infer from this the unity of his Person; for it is impossible that he who is now a man could be any other than he who was always the true God, since it is said that God was made man. On the other hand, since he distinctly gives to the man Christ the name of the Speech, it follows that Christ, when he became man, did not cease to be what he formerly was, and that no change took place in that eternal essence of God which was clothed with flesh. In short, the Son of God began to be man in such a manner that he still continues to be that eternal Speech who had no beginning of time.
    And dwelt. Those who explain that the flesh served, as it were, for an abode to Christ, do not perceive the meaning of the Evangelist; for he does not ascribe to Christ a permanent residence amongst us, but says that he remained in it as a guest, for a short time. For the word which he employs (ἐσκήνωσεν) is taken from tabernacles 2323 “Est deduit d’un mot qui signifie Tabernacles, c’est a dire, tentes et avillons;” — “is derived from a word which signifies Tabernacles, that is, tents and pavilions.” He means nothing else than that Christ discharged on the earth the office which had been appointed to him; or, that he did not merely appear for a single moment, but that he conversed among men until he completed the course of his office.
    Among us. It is doubtful whether he speaks of men in general, or only of himself and the rest of the disciples who were eye-witnesses of what he says. For my own part, I approve more highly of the second view for the Evangelist immediately adds:
    And we beheld his glory. for though all men might have beheld the glory of Christ, yet it was unknown to the greater part on account of their blindness. It was only a few, whose eyes the Holy Spirit opened, that saw this manifestation of glory. In a word, Christ was known to be man in such a manner that he exhibited in his Person something far more noble and excellent. Hence it follows that the majesty of God was not annihilated, though it was surrounded by flesh; it was indeed concealed under the low condition of the flesh, but so as to cause its splendor to be seen.
    As of the only-begotten of the Father. The word as does not, in this passage, denote an inappropriate comparison, but rather expresses true and hearty approbation; as when Paul says, Walk as children of light, he bids us actually demonstrate by our works that we are the children of light. The Evangelist therefore means, that in Christ was beheld a glory which was worthy of the Son of God, and which was a sure proof of his Divinity. He calls him the Only-begotten, because he is the only Son of God by nature; as if he would place him above men and angels, and would claim for him alone what belongs to no creature

    I would like to note that Calvin says that the begotten always dwelt with the Father. In other words, once the Son was begotten, He dwelt with the Father and not someplace else until He was sent to earth. This doesn't have to mean that the Son always existed but when He did exist it was with the Father. I find this stuff interesting and I hope you do also.

    #206959
    Lightenup
    Participant

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 31 2010,00:09)

    Quote (Lightenup @ July 31 2010,15:15)
    Mike,
    You grew up around people that think that Jesus was created out of nothing.   I am not surprised that you think the way you do.

    I however think that Jesus was procreated out of eternal substance within God and is the very God OF Very God.

    That explains why we think so differently on this.  What do you think that Ignatius thought about this?


    Does it matter how Ignatius believed?  Or any of them for that matter?  The early writings are useful for determining what certain words meant closer to the time of Jesus, and some history and social climate, but not much more.

    For example, Eusebius believed how I do.  And he is useful for understanding that in 325 A.D., “prototokos pasa ktisis” actually did mean “firstborn of every creature”.  But I wouldn't dare ask any of you to believe like I do based only on the fact that Eusebius also did.

    And growing up, I didn't discuss the intricate details of God and Jesus – so that point is apparently an unnecessary attempt to imply that I believe how I do because of what I was told as a young person.  I read the Bible for the first time 2 years ago.  I read it alone in my room.  I made my own conclusions on every single thing I believe based ONLY on what the scriptures say.  I'm now in the process of taking that a step further by being challenged on those beliefs and having to delve further into scripture and lexicons and concordances, etc.

    peace and love,
    mike


    Mike,
    I think it is very important what Ignatius believed since he was a disciple of John who wrote John 1:1, used the term only begotten, etc. If John didn't consider the Son as the begotten God then Ignatius was completely off on his understanding. What is the likely possibilities of him not understanding this very important teaching of John? We are fortunate to have his writings.

    Btw, I agree that “prototokos pasa ktisis” means firstborn of every creature. I do not agree that it means the first created of every creature since a firstborn comes from another of its same kind.

    #206999
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    I don't know of one Christian writer who wrote in the 100s or 200s that believed that Jesus wasn't the literal first-born of all creation.
    These writers often talk about Jesus being Wisdom and the Logos. They conclude that after God himself, Jesus is the first and that God made all things through him and for him.

    https://heavennet.net/writings/trinity-06.htm

    #207007
    JustAskin
    Participant

    Here is a question that deserves a thread of its own: What did the Angels do while the creation was being effected?
    Did they just 'watch'?
    Scriptures says that the 'Stars' sang together and that the 'Sons of God shouted with joy'

    Who are the 'Stars' and who are the 'Sons of God'?

    We also know that one of the Stars has fallen. Which Star, who, might that Star be?

    And if the answer is as i feel you agree, then 'Stars' are the 'Princes', the 'PRINCiplE' Sons of God, of which 'Jesus' is PreEminent.

    This, then, clearly shows, in as much as it is believed by virtually everyone that Satan is 'PreExistent' before falling to Earth, that also Jesus must also have been PreExistent before coming to Earth.

    Michael, the Archangel, is said to be 'ONE' of the Captains of the army of God, God Himself being the 'Field Marshall', so to speak, so who are the other 'Captains of God's army, hosts of powerful angels, sons of God'.

    They, then, must be the other 'Stars', Principle sons…perhaps Twelve Sons altogether, perhaps…what Scriptural fractal might reflect this idea?

    #207028
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Perhaps Gabriel. The bible doesn't really identify many angels/sons/stars. The Book of Enoch mentions a lot more.

    Some speculate that there were/are 12 tribes of angels and that Satan created the 13th tribe.

    Probably a discussion of this nature needs its own topic as you say.

    #207039
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    To All………..There is (ONLY) (ONE) Creator and that is GOD (ALONE) Jesus nor anyone else has (Never) done a Miracle in their entire lives. No one ever will either, this is the Glory of GOD and He gives His Glory to NO MAN> Jesus did not preexist his berth on earth , He did not create any thing (EVER). GOD Said He (ALONE) Created everything and He said He did it by HIMSELF. Jesus never took credit of any creation if he was the creator he sure did not think so. “THE SON OF MAN CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF, the father (IN) ME (HE) does the works”. Stealing the Glory of GOD, and applying it to Jesus is nothing but a false teaching. It is every bit as bad as the doctrine of the TRINITY in fact it is kin to it and even supports that evil teaching. IMO

    peace and love to you all………………….gene

    #207099
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Aug. 01 2010,00:35)
    To All………..There is (ONLY) (ONE) Creator and that is GOD (ALONE) Jesus nor anyone else has (Never) done a Miracle  in their entire lives. No one ever will either, this is the Glory of GOD and He gives His Glory to NO MAN> Jesus did not preexist his berth on earth , He did not create any thing (EVER). GOD Said He (ALONE) Created everything and He said He did it by HIMSELF. Jesus never took credit of any creation if he was the creator he sure did not think so. “THE SON OF MAN CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF, the father (IN) ME (HE) does the works”. Stealing the Glory of GOD, and applying it to Jesus is nothing but a false teaching.  It is every bit as bad as the doctrine of the TRINITY in fact it is kin to it and even supports that evil teaching. IMO

    peace and love to you all………………….gene


    Hi Gene,

    When did anyone (that's NOT a trinitarian) say Jesus had “GOD'S” glory?

    All miracles are done through power on loan from God.

    How does any of this say Jesus didn't pre-exist?

    mike

    #207105
    JustAskin
    Participant

    t8,

    Gabriel! Pourquoi dites-vous que? Why do you say Gabriel? How could it be Gabriel when we know he was active in God's service?

    ?

    #207109
    JustAskin
    Participant

    t8,
    Thirteen? Isn't this straying into superstition?

    Twelve Disciples (Including One that Fell…!)

    Twelve Tribes
    Twelve loaves of of bread
    12 * 12000 (144,000) in Heaven
    Twelve years old to be 'grown'
    Any others out there to list

    #207113

    The plain meaning therefore is, that the Speech begotten by God before all ages, and who always dwelt with the Father, was made man. Calvin

    Kathi you say based on the above…

    Quote (Lightenup @ July 31 2010,01:01)
    I would like to note that Calvin says that the begotten always dwelt with the Father.  In other words, once the Son was begotten, He dwelt with the Father and not someplace else until He was sent to earth.  This doesn't have to mean that the Son always existed but when He did exist it was with the Father.


    Honestly, I do not see how you come to that conclusion for Calvin didn't say…

    The plain meaning therefore is, that the Speech begotten by God before all ages, (and who afterwards) always dwelt with the Father, was made man… Did he? ???

    Again, why do you use the words of a Trinitarian who believes in the “co-equal, co-eternal” nature of the Son to support you doctrine?

    The following information is proof that John Calvin did not believe that “Begotten” meant “to literally be born” from the Father.

    If anything Calvin agrees with Jack and me.

    It is sometimes said that Calvin denied the eternal generation of the Son. This assertion is based on the following passage: “For what is the profit of disputing whether the Father always generates, seeing that it is foolish to imagine a continuous act of generating “when it is evident that three persons have subsisted in one God from eternity.” Institutes I. 13, 29. But this statement can hardly be intended as a denial of the eternal generation of the Son, since he teaches this explicitly in other passages. It is more likely that it is simply an expression of disagreement with the Nicene speculation about eternal generation as a perpetual movement, always complete, and yet never completed.
    (Quoted from Berkhof, History of Christian Doctrines, 95-96.) And found here…

    These are Calvin’s words…

    “For what is the profit of disputing whether the Father always generates, seeing that it is foolish to imagine a continuous act of generating “WHEN IT IS EVIDENT THAT THREE PERSONS HAVE SUBSISTED IN ONE GOD FROM ETERNITY.”

    WJ

Viewing 20 posts - 8,601 through 8,620 (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