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 - 1,961 through 1,980 (of 19,165 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #68964
    Is 1:18
    Participant

    'Word' = 'Thought of God' doesn't fit the context.

    #68969
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Was this so-called thought WITH God, or in God?

    WITH or IN?

    If the Logos was WITH God, then that makes it hard to argue for it being a thought in God.

    Also if the LOGOS is a thought, and that thought became flesh, then Yeshua must be flesh itself.

    But he had a soul, just as we do.

    We are body, soul, spirit.

    Was Yeshua just flesh?

    No. He became like us.

    He wasn't less than us, just a flesh thing. No HE came in the flesh.

    #68970
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 21 2007,02:37)
    Jos 24:2 Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, 'From ancient times your fathers lived beyond the River, namely, Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, and they served other gods.


    If Yeshua's origin was ancient times, then even if ancient times is hundreds of years ago, that still makes Yeshua preexist his coming in the flesh.

    But I would imagine ancient times, can have a wide meaning in terms of when. But I would also imagine that it couldn't refer to the future.

    #68971
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 21 2007,02:37)
    I don't know why Christians struggle so against the OT.


    Thus it could also be said, “why do Unitarians struggle against the New Testament”? And it could also be said, “Who has bewitched them”?

    1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified.
    2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?
    3 Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?

    A lot of things can be said kejonn.

    #68978
    kejonn
    Participant

    Quote (t8 @ Oct. 21 2007,05:06)

    Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 21 2007,02:37)
    Jos 24:2 Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, 'From ancient times your fathers lived beyond the River, namely, Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, and they served other gods.


    If Yeshua's origin was ancient times, then even if ancient times is hundreds of years ago, that still makes Yeshua preexist his coming in the flesh.


    Only as a prophecy, and only in his family descent from Ruth and Boaz, then Odeb, then Jesse, then King David. Even Strong's says that the word you keep clinging to, “origin”, in Mic 5:2 means “family descent”. Do you have ancestors? The Messiah has ancestors too.

    Quote
    But I would imagine ancient times, can have a wide meaning in terms of when. But I would also imagine that it couldn't refer to the future.


    What? What does the future have to do with anything? Mic 5:2 speaks of the Messiah's family descent.

    #68979
    kejonn
    Participant

    Quote (t8 @ Oct. 21 2007,05:09)

    Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 21 2007,02:37)
    I don't know why Christians struggle so against the OT.


    Thus it could also be said, “why do Unitarians struggle against the New Testament”? And it could also be said, “Who has bewitched them”?

    1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified.
    2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?
    3 Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?

    A lot of things can be said kejonn.


    Unitarians ARE Christians. I don't know about universalists, but biblical unitarians are. Unless you too are now making qualifications? You don't like trinitarians saying you are lost for being a henotheist, so now you are hinting at much the same for others?

    And don't lump me into the typical Unitarian boat. Most of the Unitarians I know ignore the Tanach as much as the rest of Christianity.

    Lastly, as far as you listing the verses in Galatians, I see you are tossing out “threat” verses. Welcome to the world of CultBuster! He would be proud of you.

    Your post is shameful t8. I thought you were above such things.

    #68980
    kenrch
    Participant

    Quote (t8 @ Oct. 21 2007,22:01)
    Was this so-called thought WITH God, or in God?

    WITH or IN?

    If the Logos was WITH God, then that makes it hard to argue for it being a thought in God.

    Also if the LOGOS is a thought, and that thought became flesh, then Yeshua must be flesh itself.

    But he had a soul, just as we do.

    We are body, soul, spirit.

    Was Yeshua just flesh?

    No. He became like us.

    He wasn't less than us, just a flesh thing. No HE came in the flesh.


    t8 your child started with a thought :D

    IS if thought the definition of WORD doesn't fit then what does?

    #68981
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    Isa1:18 and Knrch….> the problem is with the word (Became) it has the same meaning as (came to Be) and a word or throught we no is not physical , so what can it infer, there is only one conclusion .

    the word which was God the Father was in Jesus, but that doesn't make Him God, no more than if the word of God is in you or me.
    Jesus said “God is SPIRIT” and He also said the Words I am telling you are SPIRIT. So putting two and two togehter what Do you Get.

    The word (Intellegent utterance) of God was in the Flesh man Jesus.

    What's so hard to understand about that.
    If we just back off and Listen to what Jesus said concernig the WORDS He spoke which he said (WEREN”T) HIS everything falls into place.

    This seams to be a problem here we tend to focuse on some things to hard rather than getting all the information reguarding the our subjects and putting then together and then draw a conclusion.

    Jesus Plainly said By so many statements He wasn't God the Father, Saying things like (THOU ART THE ONLY TRUE GOD) and again (THY KINGDOM COME THY WILL BE DONE) and The words (THOU OR THY) doesen't mean (ME) , so why cant you include that in you understanding of
    John1:1 and try to get the right context from all the other things Jesus Said with reguards of the Word of God, and you will find the words He spoke were not His, so how could He himself the word. It one thing to speak the words of God and quite another to actualy be it.

    thanks ….gene

    #68982
    GeneBalthrop
    Participant

    T8….> with all respect Kejonn has given you very good reasons, by scripture to at lest admit the possibilities of Him being right, are there. You said you were open to scriptual proofs, concerning the origns of Jesus, but when given you don't except then I believe your reply to Him was out of character for you brother……gene

    #69004
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 21 2007,23:58)

    Quote (t8 @ Oct. 21 2007,05:09)

    Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 21 2007,02:37)
    I don't know why Christians struggle so against the OT.


    Thus it could also be said, “why do Unitarians struggle against the New Testament”? And it could also be said, “Who has bewitched them”?

    1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified.
    2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?
    3 Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?

    A lot of things can be said kejonn.


    Unitarians ARE Christians. I don't know about universalists, but biblical unitarians are. Unless you too are now making qualifications? You don't like trinitarians saying you are lost for being a henotheist, so now you are hinting at much the same for others?

    And don't lump me into the typical Unitarian boat. Most of the Unitarians I know ignore the Tanach as much as the rest of Christianity.

    Lastly, as far as you listing the verses in Galatians, I see you are tossing out “threat” verses. Welcome to the world of CultBuster! He would be proud of you.

    Your post is shameful t8. I thought you were above such things.


    kejonn, you judge yourself.

    You say that Christians struggle against the Old Testament and I said that Unitarians struggle with the new.

    So why is it OK, for you to say that, and not for me to say the same thing but in application to Unitarians.

    In my experience that statement is true.

    Unitarians struggle with the New Testament. They get offended when you esteem Christ higher than the Law and they cannot accept that the New Testament has a greater revelation regarding the Christ and his origins. They reject what the New Testament says about Christ, if it isn't also mentioned in the Old, then they cannot accept the new stuff. Which BTW, I have noticed you do as well. That is what has been demonstrated to me and if you look back through this discussion you will see it is so.

    Since when is speaking the truth shameful kejonn?

    If I am henotheist, then it is fair enough to call me one, but can you deny that Unitarians struggle with the things I have mentioned? If not, then I am only speaking the truth and in response to what you said about Christians.

    #69005
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 21 2007,23:52)

    Quote (t8 @ Oct. 21 2007,05:06)

    Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 21 2007,02:37)
    Jos 24:2 Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, 'From ancient times your fathers lived beyond the River, namely, Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, and they served other gods.


    If Yeshua's origin was ancient times, then even if ancient times is hundreds of years ago, that still makes Yeshua preexist his coming in the flesh.


    Only as a prophecy, and only in his family descent from Ruth and Boaz, then Odeb, then Jesse, then King David. Even Strong's says that the word you keep clinging to, “origin”, in Mic 5:2 means “family descent”. Do you have ancestors? The Messiah has ancestors too.

    Quote
    But I would imagine ancient times, can have a wide meaning in terms of when. But I would also imagine that it couldn't refer to the future.


    What? What does the future have to do with anything? Mic 5:2 speaks of the Messiah's family descent.


    whose goings forth = mowtsa'ah

  • origin
  • places of going out to or from

    New American Standard Bible (©1995)
    “But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.”

    GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
    You, Bethlehem Ephrathah, are too small to be included among Judah's cities. Yet, from you Israel's future ruler will come for me. His origins go back to the distant past, to days long ago.

    King James Bible
    But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

    American Standard Version
    But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.

    Douay-Rheims Bible
    AND THOU, BETHLEHEM Ephrata, art a little one among the thousands of Juda: out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity.

    Darby Bible Translation
    (And thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall he come forth unto me who is to be Ruler in Israel: whose goings forth are from of old, from the days of eternity.)

    English Revised Version
    But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.

    Jewish Publication Society Tanakh
    But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days.

    Bible in Basic English
    And you, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, the least among the families of Judah, out of you one will come to me who is to be ruler in Israel; whose going out has been purposed from time past, from the eternal days.

    Webster's Bible Translation
    But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, though thou art little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth to me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

    World English Bible
    But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, being small among the clans of Judah, out of you one will come forth to me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.

    Young's Literal Translation
    And thou, Beth-Lehem Ephratah, Little to be among the chiefs of Judah! From thee to Me he cometh forth — to be ruler in Israel, And his comings forth are of old, From the days of antiquity.

#69006
Proclaimer
Participant

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 22 2007,05:23)
T8….> with all respect Kejonn has given you very good reasons, by scripture to at lest admit the possibilities of Him being right, are there. You said you were open to scriptual proofs, concerning the origns of Jesus, but when given you don't except then I believe your reply to Him was out of character for you brother……gene


Of course there is always the possibility. That is why I am here.

But the evidence hasn't been forth coming yet. Just reasons to not believe what some scriptures say, because it didn't also happen to be mentioned in the Tanak. I disagree with that method.

#69007
kejonn
Participant

Quote (t8 @ Oct. 21 2007,17:23)

Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 21 2007,23:58)

Quote (t8 @ Oct. 21 2007,05:09)

Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 21 2007,02:37)
I don't know why Christians struggle so against the OT.


Thus it could also be said, “why do Unitarians struggle against the New Testament”? And it could also be said, “Who has bewitched them”?

1 You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified.
2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?
3 Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?

A lot of things can be said kejonn.


Unitarians ARE Christians. I don't know about universalists, but biblical unitarians are. Unless you too are now making qualifications? You don't like trinitarians saying you are lost for being a henotheist, so now you are hinting at much the same for others?

And don't lump me into the typical Unitarian boat. Most of the Unitarians I know ignore the Tanach as much as the rest of Christianity.

Lastly, as far as you listing the verses in Galatians, I see you are tossing out “threat” verses. Welcome to the world of CultBuster! He would be proud of you.

Your post is shameful t8. I thought you were above such things.


kejonn, you judge yourself.

You say that Christians struggle against the Old Testament and I said that Unitarians struggle with the new.

So why is it OK, for you to say that, and not for me to say the same thing but in application to Unitarians.


You can't even see what you are supporting. By separating Unitarians from Christians, you are saying that they are not Christians, and by implication, lost.

You say you don't like to be labeled but if you choose to label others, can you not see your own hypocrisy? T8, this may hurt, but you are giving yet another example of why people are fleeing Christianity in droves: hypocrisy.

Quote
In my experience that statement is true.


In my experience, Arians are considered heretics right next to Unitarians. Welcome to the club. Too bad you think that your arian ways are superior and more deserving of the appellation of “Christian” than those who do not believe as you.

Quote
Unitarians struggle with the New Testament. They get offended when you esteem Christ higher than the Law and they cannot accept that the New Testament has a greater revelation regarding the Christ and his origins. They reject what the New Testament says about Christ, if it isn't also mentioned in the Old, then they cannot accept the new stuff. Which BTW, I have noticed you do as well. That is what has been demonstrated to me and if you look back through this discussion you will see it is so.

Since when is speaking the truth shameful kejonn?


Your “truth” is highly subjective and personal. I have been around many boards on the Net and the bulk of Unitarians do not match your suppositions. You are reading an opinion of me into the typical Unitarian. I would ask that you not do that. I am not a Unitarian. I am something totally different as you may see one day.

Quote
If I am henotheist, then it is fair enough to call me one, but can you deny that Unitarians struggle with the things I have mentioned? If not, then I am only speaking the truth and in response to what you said about Christians.


You are speaking your version of the truth. Others will say it is a lie. Who is right, t8? You? Me? Only God. The rest of us are merely trying to find the way. But with your attitude the way might be obscured.

#69008
Proclaimer
Participant

Quote (kenrch @ Oct. 22 2007,01:36)

Quote (t8 @ Oct. 21 2007,22:01)
Was this so-called thought WITH God, or in God?

WITH or IN?

If the Logos was WITH God, then that makes it hard to argue for it being a thought in God.

Also if the LOGOS is a thought, and that thought became flesh, then Yeshua must be flesh itself.

But he had a soul, just as we do.

We are body, soul, spirit.

Was Yeshua just flesh?

No. He became like us.

He wasn't less than us, just a flesh thing. No HE came in the flesh.


t8 your child started with a thought :D

IS if thought the definition of WORD doesn't fit then what does?


Ken there are many things we do not know.

E.g., could you disprove that mens souls are the thoughts of God?

The point is that we may derive from God, but we have been given a will that we can call our own. It is truly the only thing that we own or that defines us as being different to God, and not some attribute or extension of him.

Jesus also has a will. The question is when did he have his own will? When he was WITH God or when he was born as a man?

Or was it at some other time?

Does a man's soul exist outside of God's thought? Can we think of anything that God hasn't thought of? But our will defines us not as God or an attribute of God, but as me, you, etc.

We can only choose what is already of God and accumulate this in a unique way. This is our character. It is what we choose to reflect of God. Of course we can also choose that which is not of God, but that is beside the point.

#69009
Proclaimer
Participant

Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 22 2007,10:50)
You can't even see what you are supporting. By separating Unitarians from Christians, you are saying that they are not Christians, and by implication, lost.


That is where you are wrong kejonn.

I do not say they are not Christian anymore than I do not say that Trinitarians are not Christian. You got the wrong end of the stick. I have never said that. You can check all my posts if you wish, and I can tell you now that you will not see such words coming from me.

I am not the one who calls them Unitarian or Trinitarian either. They give that name to themselves. And in these names do they have their own identity.

I am simply responding to this.

I would prefer that men didn't divide into their own names for such is the curse of Babel. God divides mens language so they cannot unify in their iniquity. Likewise we have many languages of Christianity called denominations.

I would prefer that all believers didn't do things in their own name or labels, but in the name of Yeshua. But that is not the reality.

I don't give myself a name for what I believe. The name for what I believe and the authority that I want to move in is in the name of Yeshua. I care naught for any other name.

But these groups come here espousing their doctrines trying to win converts to their name or label. So I respond to them from scripture. It's no more complicated than that.

#69010
Proclaimer
Participant

Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 22 2007,10:50)
In my experience, Arians are considered heretics right next to Unitarians. Welcome to the club. Too bad you think that your arian ways are superior and more deserving of the appellation of “Christian” than those who do not believe as you.


OK, so now I am an Arian. But in truth I do not know all what Arius taught, so I don't take my cue from him. In other words I do not follow Arius, even if some of his conclusions are similar to what I hold.

I think Arius believed that Yeshua was just a man only. If that is true, then I at least disagree with him on that point for a start.

Besides being led by the Spirit, my cue is scripture.

It stands to reason that the truth lines up with some groups out there, including Trinitarians, but that doesn't make me part of those groups.

These groups are defined by their own name. A name that I will not do anything under. They have creeds, but my creed is scripture, even if I do not fully understand what is written. This means that I can change when truth is presented to me.

I am not restrained by any groups motto or creed.

#69013
kejonn
Participant

Quote (t8 @ Oct. 21 2007,18:03)

Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 22 2007,10:50)
You can't even see what you are supporting. By separating Unitarians from Christians, you are saying that they are not Christians, and by implication, lost.


That is where you are wrong kejonn.

I do not say they are not Christian anymore than I do not say that Trinitarians are not Christian. You got the wrong end of the stick. I have never said that. You can check all my posts if you wish, and I can tell you now that you will not see such words coming from me.


No, you did not come outright and say it, but here is what has transpired.

Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 21 2007,02:37)
I don't know why Christians struggle so against the OT.

And your responded

Quote (t8 @ Oct. 21 2007,05:09)

Thus it could also be said, “why do Unitarians struggle against the New Testament”? And it could also be said, “Who has bewitched them”?


Now, stop and read this. I said Christian, you then said Unitarian. Therefore, you separated the two, intentionally or unintentionally.

Quote
I am not the one who calls them Unitarian or Trinitarian either. They give that name to themselves. And in these names do they have their own identity.


Wrong. The only one who labeled me (or Gene or perhaps Ken) was WJ (although he did not mention our names). We did not give ourselves that label. But you picked it up and supposed we did.

Quote
I am simply responding to this.

I would prefer that men didn't divide into their own names for such is the curse of Babel. God divides mens language so they cannot unify in their iniquity. Likewise we have many languages of Christianity called denominations.


Then look over your last few posts and see where you have used such labels!

Quote
I would prefer that all believers didn't do things in their own name or labels, but in the name of Yeshua. But that is not the reality.

I don't give myself a name for what I believe. The name for what I believe and the authority that I want to move in is in the name of Yeshua. I care naught for any other name.


Then stop using labels of others, unless you are willing for others to categorize you.

Quote
But these groups come here espousing their doctrines trying to win converts to their name or label. So I respond to them from scripture. It's no more complicated than that.


Good. I hope to see you stop calling people out by Unitarian or Trinitarian then.

#69020
GeneBalthrop
Participant

T8….> do you ever take in concederation that the new testement has been translated by translators who were biased in there theology and leaned toward the Trinitarian ideology which includes a preexistenct posture.

While you said you leaned on Scripture to get you view points, but if those scriptures have been altered by translators early on when they were being first translated and carried through for almost 1800 years, you could be trusting in somthing thats not correct.

I believe the old Testement Has a less chance of error then the new, because of the way the Jew's maticulously translated their texts. And remember we get the translation from Hebrew directly in to English, but the new testement comes from Arameric to Greek or Latin to English, all the language changes and along with the Trinitarian and preexistence influences can present a big mistranslation problem. There are Scholars that found literally 1000's of errors in the New Testement translations. Thats why i try not to take any one text to get my opinion on a subject, I try to balance both old and New and simple common logic and Hopefully with God's Spirit come up with what makes sence.
My hope is that one day we all will come the the exact truth of everything, but untill then it's good we strive to continue to seek truth……Peace to you and yours…..gene.

#69021
Morningstar
Participant

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 22 2007,15:52)
T8….> do you ever take in concederation that the new testement has been translated by translators who were biased in there theology and leaned toward the Trinitarian ideology which includes a preexistenct posture.

While you said you leaned on Scripture to get you view points, but if those scriptures have been altered by translators early on when they were being first translated and carried through for almost 1800 years, you could be trusting in somthing thats not correct.

I believe the old Testement Has a less chance of error then the new, because of the way the Jew's maticulously translated their texts. And remember we get the translation from Hebrew directly in to English, but the new testement comes from Arameric to Greek or Latin to English, all the language changes and along with the Trinitarian and preexistence influences can present a big mistranslation problem. There are Scholars that found literally 1000's of errors in the New Testement translations. Thats why i try not to take any one text to get my opinion on a subject, I try to balance both old and New and simple common logic and Hopefully with God's Spirit come up with what makes sence.
My hope is that one day we all will come the the exact truth of everything, but untill then it's good we strive to continue to seek truth……Peace to you and yours…..gene.


Actually the new testament supports the teaching of the septuagint and the dead sea scrolls.

Which scholars mostly agree for more likely reflects the original text or oldest readings before the jews made alterations from 100 AD after the fall of Jerusalem.

There were two distinct traditions with the Jews. Jesus quotes the septuagint himself. Guess which tradition he favored.

They made alot of alterations. Trying to get rid of alot of the angelology and messianic passages.

The christians used the septuagint up until Jerome changed the church's official canon to match that of the Jews.

Paul used the septuagint. And Paul wrote to timothy saying in II Timothy 3:16

16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work

Yes he was talking about the Septuagint to Timothy.

#69022
kejonn
Participant

[quote=Morningstar,Oct. 21 2007,23:07]

Quote
There were two distinct traditions with the Jews. Jesus quotes the septuagint himself. Guess which tradition he favored.


You mean the angel/god man forgot how to read Hebrew? :laugh:

Which parts of the Septuagint did he quote from? Because the only version of the Septuagint around in the first part of the 1st century was the Torah. The rest of the Septuagint came much later. Most scholars feel the other books past the Torah was translated by Christians because the Jews didn't want anything more to do with it.

Viewing 20 posts - 1,961 through 1,980 (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