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 - 941 through 960 (of 19,165 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #61239
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    Nick …> question are we right now son's of God even as Jesus is, if not why does he call us Brothers, and why are we heirs and joint heirs with him, why do you want to seperate Jesus from you own real likeness. Listen I will always respect Jesus but I will never Make him coequal with our Heavenly Father. I will give him respect to the glory of the Father , because could have done nothing if it wern't for the Father and i am not disrespecting him by saying the , it is also what he said. it say's we can come to the full measure of Christ Jesus not a parcial measure. thanks…gene

    #61240
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Gene,
    We can now be reborn into Christ as sons of God now and his Spirit can be reborn into us as we allow, and the fullness of our adoption will be found when he returns and our bodies too are alike to his.

    #61241
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    Nick…..wrong it say's ” thou art my son (this day) i have begotten you it can be proven that the text was altered by antiadoptionest and all thre places including where is stated in the old testement should agree with this day I have begotten you, check it out….gene

    #61243
    Jodi
    Participant

    Good Work Gene, way to hang in there! You are right, I don't see how, if you call Jesus the word, that you can get around not saying or believing he is God.

    Nick you are unfairly restricting the word With. Just because something is with, does not mean it is along side them. If I were to say ‘your love was with me’, does that mean it’s riding along side me in the passenger seat, no, absolutely not, your love is With me, means it is inside me. It is something I feel, it is something that is a part of me.

    The word was in the beginning, it is what God used to create- God said let there be light and there was light. The word was with God, it was inside him, and it came forth out of Him to create earth. The word was Him, meaning that the word was much more then just being inside Him, it was also only existing from Him. Jesus received the word from God, God received the word from no one. Jesus was foreordained in the beginning to be manifested at a certain time to give us God’s word.

    It is quite simple.
    Maybe it is not what you believe Nick, but you could at least acknowledge that it makes sense…………and is scripturally accurate! :D

    #61245
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Jodi,
    With means with.

    #61246
    Bibliophile
    Participant

    Hi Jodi,

    The literal meaning of the Greek word 'with' in John 1:1 is towards; face to face, active.

    The book: The Moffatt NT Comentary, The Gospel of John says: “The Logos was with God: 'towards God,' 'not absorbed in Him, but standing over against Him as a distinct person.' The word with (in the Greek), while emphasizing the communion of the Logos with God, yet safely guards the idea of his individual personality: it expresses nearness combined with the since of movement towards God, and so indicates an active relationshop.” (Macgragor, 1928, p. 4)

    One expressive English translations by R. Frederick Harrison captures the understanding of 'with' in John 1:1. It reads: “At first, there was the Word, and the Word grew closer and closer to God until it reflected all of his qualities.” :D

    What do you think?

    #61259
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    Bibilophil……You are not reconizing all the other scriptures that shows Jesus was not the word, like when he said” the words I am telling you are not mine but the words of Him who Sent Me. well if they wern't his words then he obveously is not himself the word. It doesn't take a brain sientist to know you and your words are one and the same person, because your words express you and you are how you think, Just as God words express Him and How he thinks. this whole thing is simple, Jesus was speak God's words not his.

    It say's God was in Christ reconciling the whole world to Himself, it dosn't Say God who was the word was Jesus. If John wanted to say the word was Jesus< He certianly would would have simple said it that way, not beat around the bush and say God was the word as it say's..There are many reasons Jesus could not himself be the word these are just a few. ……gene

    #61260
    Jodi
    Participant

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 23 2007,17:31)
    Hi Jodi,
    With means with.


    Hi Nick,
    You are right with does mean with

    My friend and I are going to the movies. She is with me.
    with-physically along side me

    My Grandpa is close to my heart. He will always be with me.
    with-spiritually part of me

    Thanks

    #61261
    Jodi
    Participant

    Quote (Bibliophile @ July 23 2007,18:11)
    Hi Jodi,

    The literal meaning of the Greek word 'with' in John 1:1 is towards; face to face, active.

    The book: The Moffatt NT Comentary, The Gospel of John says: “The Logos was with God: 'towards God,' 'not absorbed in Him, but standing over against Him as a distinct person.' The word with (in the Greek), while emphasizing the communion of the Logos with God, yet safely guards the idea of his individual personality: it expresses nearness combined with the since of movement towards God, and so indicates an active relationshop.” (Macgragor, 1928, p. 4)

    One expressive English translations by R. Frederick Harrison captures the understanding of 'with' in John 1:1. It reads: “At first, there was the Word, and the Word grew closer and closer to God until it reflected all of his qualities.” :D

    What do you think?


    Ah Ha!

    God's word is ACTIVE

    God's word is a special force within Him, and you better watch out, cause if He speaks and says flood the earth, it will be done simply by the act of Him speaking.

    Our words are just words, God's words are literal actions.

    To say that they have to be a person that then carries out what God says is to undermined God and His power. It is to undermine who He is, and His incredibale uniqueness.

    That rain that is coming down we know came from God, that rain is with God, it is a product of the power of His spoken words.

    The action from His words are along side Him, we recognize they came from Him.

    When I invision God, I see Him, and I see His power along side Him. I see His incredible ability to create and destroy through the use of using mere words.

    Jesus was foreordained to be born and given these powers, not to become the powers themselves, but to have the powers. Jesus spoke and healed, he spoke and calmed the waters. If Jesus was the literal word, then he would have had the power to do these things ALL BY himself, and it would have not been said that he did them through God.

    If you say that God made His powerful word Jesus, then God's word would then be like ours, and He would have to go through Jesus in order to do that which he pleased.

    What a doctrine of absurdity and confusion.

    #61262
    IM4Truth
    Participant

    Jodi All that could be true, but what are you going to do with these scriptures that shows me that Jesus was created before the world began and not just the word of God THE Father.

    Col 1:15 ” Who is the image of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN OF EVERY CREATURE.”
    Col 1:18 ” And He is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead that in all things he might have preeminence.”
    PREEMINENCE MEANING FIRST IN EVERYTHING. So according to these scriptures Jesus existed before.
    Rev. 3:14 “…these things saith the AMEN, THE FAITHFUL AND TRUE WITNESS, THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD.”
    How do you get around these scriptures?
    Peace Mrs.IM4Truth

    #61264
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Quote (Jodi @ July 24 2007,02:32)

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 23 2007,17:31)
    Hi Jodi,
    With means with.


    Hi Nick,
    You are right with does mean with

    My friend and I are going to the movies. She is with me.
    with-physically along side me

    My Grandpa is close to my heart. He will always be with me.
    with-spiritually part of me

    Thanks


    Hi Jodi,
    Actually PROS as others have shown, often is read AGAINST or TOWARDS rather than WITH.

    MT 4
    ” And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against[PROS] a stone.”

    EPH 6
    “11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against [PROS]the wiles of the devil.
    12 For we wrestle not against [PROS]flesh and blood, but against [PROS]principalities, against[PROS] powers, against [PROS]the rulers of the darkness of this world, against [PROS]spiritual wickedness in high places . “

     So those who would make it mean AS or IN are on a rather weak foundation.

    #61265
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 24 2007,01:08)
    Bibilophil……You are not reconizing all the other scriptures that shows Jesus was not the word, like when he said” the words I am telling you are not mine but the words of Him who Sent Me. well if they wern't his words then he obveously is not himself the word. It doesn't take a brain sientist to know you and your words are one and the same person, because your words express you and you are how you think, Just as God words express Him and How he thinks. this whole thing is simple, Jesus was speak God's words not his.

    It say's God was in Christ reconciling the whole world to Himself, it dosn't Say God who was the word was Jesus. If John wanted to say the word was Jesus< He certianly would would have simple said it that way, not beat around the bush and say God was the word as it say's..There are many reasons Jesus could not himself be the word these are just a few. ……gene


    Hi Gene,
    You need to acknowledge that WORD has several applications and not just restrict it to spoken WORDS.

    The WORD certainly spoke about the WORDS given him by God. They were not his WORDS but GOD'S WORDS

    #61266
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi GENE,
    More on
    “ANTIADOPTIONISM”

    This is from another site quoting Ron Cote, an avid David Koresh fan it seems.

    “Dr. Bart D. Ehrman, Chairman of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, has contributed much towards the world's better understanding of NT texts. While not all of his conclusions are 'new,' and not by any means exclusively 'his,' they inadvertently punch many holes into traditional Christian doctrine. Essentially, what traditional Christians have relied upon for nearly 2000 years is often wrong. Conversely, the more that is revealed concerning the actual writings of the NT, the more the NT supports the beliefs which we've lived by for many years.

    Case in point: I was talking to Kristin over lunch today regarding the debate in Christian circles over whether Christ was born the Son of God or was adopted at the point of baptism. The debate, as I knew it previously, used existing translations of texts to support one view over another. But, low and behold, Luke 3:23 was altered by early antiadoptionists in texts that originated in Alexandria. Instead of reading “You are my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased,” – which is presented in the context of God speaking to Christ at the point of baptism, the text should read “You are my Son, today I have begotten you.”

    Other changes to the original texts of the Gospel of Luke were made in Alexandria as well. Scribes conspired against adoptionist theory by omitting numerous references to Christ's “parents” – both Mary and Joseph. Luke 2:33 today reads “And Joseph and his mother marveled at those things which were spoken of him.” There is an obvious, and as it turns out deliberate, distinction made between Christ's “mother,” who was Mary, and Joseph – who according to Christian doctrine was not to be considered Christ's father. But, alas! The text should read “And his father and his mother marveled at these things . . .” Other references to Joseph as Christ's “father” in the Gospel of Luke were omitted altogether.

    Interesting, perhaps sadly typical of Christian theology, but so what? At least that's what Kristin asked me over lunch today. Why was I gloating?

    Christ stated, according to the Gospel of Luke 24:44, that all things must be fulfilled in scripture – specifically the psalms. Psalm 51:5 gives a bit of that prophesy: “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.” That's certainly not speaking of Christ – immaculate conception or not. We know this speaks of Vernon Howell, who took the name David Koresh when he was adopted as God's son later in life.

    We likewise understand the role of Christ and Koresh in the fulfillment of prophesy within the framework provided by the Daily Sacrifice. While Christians readily label Jesus Christ as “the Lamb” – after the daily sacrificial lamb offering that was a part of Jewish Law – they conveniently forget (or never learn) that two lambs were actually sacrificed each day: one in the morning and one in the evening (I'll elaborate, scripturally, on this in a later post). We accept that Christ was the first lamb offering, while David Koresh was the second – in the evening, in the latter days.”

    #61267
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi,
    More from a mormon site on Mr Erhman
    “Misquoting Jesus
    Just finished Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (HarperCollins, 2005), a review of the current scholarship on the textual state of the New Testament. The author, Bart D. Ehrman, a professor of religious studies at UNC Chapel Hill, has written an eye-opening but amazingly readable presentation detailing just how much damage early scribes did to the text of the New Testament. Any Mormon who has an Evangelical every-word-of-the-Bible-is-true neighbor or work colleague who gives them a hard time about the Book of Mormon ought to consider this book as a Christmas gift. Their criticisms will likely become decidedly more restrained after they read it.

    In the Introduction, Ehrman recounts his personal journey from born again Christian to New Testament scholar:

    In short, my study of the Greek New Testament, and my investigation into the manuscripts that contain it, led to a radical rethinking of my understanding of what the Bible is. This was a seismic change for me. Before this … my faith had been based completely on a certain view of the Bible as the fully inspired, inerrant word of God. Now I no longer saw the bible that way. The Bible began to appear to me as a very human book.

    You have to commend Ehrman for being very open right up front about his personal perspective on the New Testament. The seven chapters of the book flesh out the details of what led him to modify his view of the New Testament. Chapter 1, “The Beginnings of Christian Scripture,” shows how quickly early Christians came to use written accounts and documents to advance the new faith, and how the Christian canon emerged. Ironically, most early Christians were illiterate. They “read” early Christian documents not by themselves but by hearing a public reading of, for example, a letter from Paul, probably at a Christian worship service. A literate Christian who could read in church on Sunday was as valuable to those early congregations as a talented pianist is to Mormon meetings today.

    Chapter 2, “The Copyists of the Early Christian Writings,” goes through how the early manuscripts were prepared. Every Christian congregation naturally developed their own collection of writings (for public readings) and would try to obtain copies for writings they wanted but did not possess. Copying by hand was not cheap, so rather than hire professional scribes (the kind that didn't make mistakes), educated Christians did the job themselves. Think a “ward copyist” calling.

    Because the early Christian texts were not being copied by professional scribes, at least in the first two or three centuries of the church, but simply by educated members of the Christian congregation who could do the job and were willing to do so, we can expect that in the earliest copies, especially, mistakes were commonly made in transcription. Indeed, we have solid evidence that this was the case ….

    In Chapter 3, “Texts of the New Testament,” Ehrman reviews the various manuscripts of New Testament writings that have come down to us. The King James Version is based ultimately on the Textus Receptus, the first Greek New Testament published by Erasmus in the early 16th century. The problem is that Erasmus relied on a 12th-century manuscript that (we now know) was not a particularly good manuscript in terms of what we now see in the earliest or most reliable manuscripts. Modern translations don't just use updated English — they start with a much more reliable Greek text (or, more accurately, they have access to a much more extensive collection of Greek manuscripts, permitting the careful scholar to determine the best or most defensible reading of a disputed phrase or passage).

    Chapter 4, “The Quest for Origins,” reviews the work of several scholars who, over the centuries, developed the tools of textual analysis that permit modern scholars to use existing manuscripts to (in some cases) work backwards to what is likely the original text. There are gaps and disputes: the process requires inferences and results in probablilities, not certainties, for many passages. Chapter 5, “Originals That Matter,” continues in this vein, showing how external evidence (comparing various manuscripts and determining which are the most reliable for a given passage) and internal evidence (what the author, such as Paul, would likely have said or not said on the topic, and what a copying scribe would likely have been motivated to change) can be brought to bear on the textual choices that must be made in order to settle on a Greek text and translate it into a modern language.

    Chapter 6, “Theologically Motivated Alterations of the Text,” gets to the heart of the matter. This is Great Apostasy stuff. Ehrman reviews three particular theological issues that motivated changes in scriptural texts:

    Antiadoptionist changes — Adoptionists argued that Jesus was a man that was, at some point, “adopted” by God to become the Son of God. Antiadoptionists saw this as an attack on the full divinity of Christ, and bolstered their position by changing passages such as 1 Timothy 3:16, Mark 1:11, and John 1:18 that were relied upon by adoptionists.
    Antidocetic changes — If adoptionists were seen to view Jesus as too human, docetists were seen to view Jesus as not human enough. The term is from the Greek term dokeo, to seem or to appear, and docetists argued that Jesus only appeared to have human attributes such as feeling hunger, thirst, or pain. Ehrman argues (with reference to manuscripts) that Luke 22:43-44 — where Jesus was praying, in deep anguish, and “his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground” — is an antidocetic addition to the text. In other words, he argues that scribes added this passage to show in unmistakable terms that Christ really did suffer pain and anguish and that docetists were therefore wrong in their belief to the contrary.
    Antiseparationist changes — Separationists believed that Jesus and Christ were two separate beings, and that Christ the spirit dwelt in Jesus the man during his life, then conveniently left his body just before the crucifiction. Some Gnostics held these separationist beliefs. Texts of interest here are Hebrews 2:9 and Mark 15:34 (“My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”).

    Chapter 7, “The Social Worlds of the Text,” covers more cases where what are essentially doctrinal concerns motivate scribes to change the texts they copy and transmit. Here, what motivates the change are less strictly theological disputes than social concerns: the role of women in the early church; how Jews were portrayed in the early texts; and how pagans related to the texts. Did Paul really forbid women from speaking in church in 1 Cor. 14, or did a later scribe make that addition? Did the crowd of Jews really exclaim, “His blood be on us, and on our children” (Matt. 27:25) or did a later scribe add it to the account?

    In the Conclusion, Ehrman mellows his criticism of scribes a bit by noting that texts really do not speak for themselves. Every reading of scripture involves an act of interpretation, and the interpretation that readers do every day when reading the Bible is not that different from what scribes did when making changes or additions to the text they were copying: they were interpreting the passages according to their own best understanding. Christians reading the Bible today understand hundreds of passages in diverse and different ways. We're all scribes today, Mr. President.

    I'll close with a paragraph from Ehrman's Conclusion:

    [W]e need to face up to the facts. The King James was not given by God but was a translation by a group of scholars in the early seventeenth century who based their rendition on a faulty Greek text. Later translators based their translations on Greek texts that were better, but not perfect. Even the translation you hold in your hands is affected by these textual problems we have been discussing, wh
    ether you are a reader of the New International Version, the Revised Standard Version, the New Revised Standard Version, the New American Standard Version, the New King James, the Jerusalem Bible, the Good News Bible, or something else. They are all based on texts that have been changed in places.”

    #61268
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 23 2007,17:08)
    Nick…..wrong it say's ” thou art my son (this day) i have begotten you it can be proven that the text was altered by antiadoptionest and all thre places including where is stated in the old testement should agree with this day I have begotten you, check it out….gene


    Hi Gene,
    So can you prove this statement?

    #61269
    Jodi
    Participant

    Quote (IM4Truth @ July 24 2007,05:14)
    Jodi All that could be true, but what are you going to do with these scriptures that shows me that Jesus was created before the world began and not just the word of God THE Father.

    Col 1:15 ” Who is the image of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN OF EVERY CREATURE.”
    Col 1:18 ” And He is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead that in all things he might have preeminence.”
    PREEMINENCE MEANING FIRST IN EVERYTHING. So according to these scriptures Jesus existed before.
    Rev. 3:14 “…these things saith the AMEN, THE FAITHFUL AND TRUE WITNESS, THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD.”
    How do you get around these scriptures?
    Peace Mrs.IM4Truth


    I don’t get around these scriptures, I merely believe that I interpret them correctly.

    Romans 8:29 – because whom He did foreknow, He also did fore-appoint, conformed to the image of His Son, that he might be first-born among many brethren;

    1 Peter 1:20 foreknown, indeed, before the foundation of the world, and manifested in the last times because of you,

    God foreknew that when He brought Jesus into the world he would be the first born of the New Earth. When Jesus was resurrected he became the first human born into eternal life, and was the first human to dwell in God’s glorious peace. Jesus was not the first born of the corrupted earth. He was predestined to be the first born of God’s Kingdom.

    Col 1:15 ” Who is the image of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN OF EVERY CREATURE.”

    Jesus is the firstborn of every creature of God’s Righteous Earth that will be. He is not the firstborn of the sinful world, that we know was Adam.

    Revelation 1:5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first-born out of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth; to him who did love us, and did bathe us from our sins in his blood,

    Col 1:18 ” And He is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead that in all things he might have preeminence .”

    I believe that fact that it says he is first-born out of the dead is KEY

    He is the first born of the dead, meaning he is the first to be resurrected from the dead and therefore is the firstborn of eternal life. Once again, he is NOT the first born of the sinful world.

    Im 4 Truth you said preeminence meaning first in everything-this is not correct-read it to yourself in that light

    And He is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead that in all things he might have first in everything.

    Preeminence meaning supremacy over everything granted to Him by God.

    And He is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead that in all things he might have supremacy over everything.

    Rev. 3:14 “…these things saith the AMEN, THE FAITHFUL AND TRUE WITNESS, THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD.”

    Surely this scripture is not applying Amen in regards to the first creation that fell into sin, but is talking about the second sinless Creation, of which Christ is the firstborn of. Christ is the beginning of God’s TRUE creation, the one that was intended/foreknown from the beginning.

    I am 4 Truth, in all fairness, how do you get around these scriptures-

    2 Samuel 7:12 When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me.

    Luke 1:32 he shall be great, and Son of the Highest he shall be called, and the Lord God shall give him the throne of David his father,

    Hebrew 1:5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you”? Or again, “I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”?

    Romans 8:29 – because whom He did foreknow, He also did fore-appoint, conformed to the image of His Son, that he might be first-born among many brethren;

    1 Peter 1:20 foreknown, indeed, before the foundation of the world, and manifested in the last times because of you,

    Indeed these scriptures do not say that Jesus existed as a person before, but that he existed only in God's plan that was established in the beginning.

    #61270
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Jodi,
    The PLAN was not with God.
    God's foreknowledge of all history is another issue.

    #61271
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Jodi,
    You say
    “Rev. 3:14 “…these things saith the AMEN, THE FAITHFUL AND TRUE WITNESS, THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF GOD.”

    Surely this scripture is not applying Amen in regards to the first creation that fell into sin, but is talking about the second sinless Creation, of which Christ is the firstborn of. Christ is the beginning of God’s TRUE creation, the one that was intended/foreknown from the beginning.”

    Of course creation began before Adam and the sons of God rejoiced to see it[Jb 38].

    #61272
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Jodi,
    You say
    “God foreknew that when He brought Jesus into the world he would be the first born of the New Earth.”
    We will not see the new earth till much later[Rev21.1]

    #61273
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi Jodi,
    You say
    “When Jesus was resurrected he became the first human born into eternal life, and was the first human to dwell in God’s glorious peace. Jesus was not the first born of the corrupted earth. He was predestined to be the first born of God’s Kingdom.”

    Certainly Christ is the firstborn from the dead. He is to be first in everything in the kingdom of God. But he was born from above at the Jordan when he was anointed and filled with the Spirit of God.

Viewing 20 posts - 941 through 960 (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