Jesus' "pre-existence"

[Guest]

Paidion wrote:

1. Did Jesus exist in any sense prior to his birth?
2. When did Jesus become "the son of God"?

1. Only in the foreknowledge of God (1 Pet 1:20).
2. At his conception. (Luke 1:35, cf. 2 Sam 7:14)

I guessed that this was your position, Ely. I used to post on a Christadelphian site and most people their held these views.

I wondered how you would explain this exchange between Jesus and the Jewish leaders:

Jesus said:

Your father Abraham rejoiced that he was to see my day; he saw it and was glad."

Jesus seemed to be saying that Abraham saw Jesus and experienced Him. This is in fact born out in the OT story in which one of three angels who were sent to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, stayed behind and conversed with Abraham. That angel was addressed by Abraham as "Yahweh".

Okay, that's one way of understanding Jesus' words. But notice, Jesus didn't say that Abraham "saw me," he said Abraham "saw it." He was referring to "my day" What did he mean by this?

I think he was referring to the Messianic age which is often spoken of as in that day. Abraham heard and cleaved to the promise of the age of Messiah. Paul teaches that the the gospel was preached to Abraham (Gal 3:8). This gospel is the gospel of the King and of his kingdom. Abraham believed the gospel and - along with Isaac, Jacob and all the righteous saints of old - lived his life in the certain hope of partaking in the kingdom age (Hebrews 11:13-16). In that sense, they all saw "Messiah's day".

If this statement appeared in isolation, I suppose one could conjecture that his statement meant that Abraham rejoiced to see in his mind, prophetically, the day that Christ appear. However, the response of the Jews clearly indicates that they understood Jesus as saying that He had been with Abraham.

The Jews then said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham John 8:56?"

God-willing, soon, I'm going to put an article together concerning the Jews and their understandings of both Jesus' words and of the scriptures. Many people who argue that Jesus claimed to be something more than a man usually appeal to the Jews' understanding of his sayings. But if you read through John, you find the people often misunderstanding (sometimes grossly) Jesus' words. The classic example is when the hearers believed he was teaching cannibalism (John 6:52). At times, we also see some deficient understandings of the scriptures. For example, the questions posed to John the baptiser in chapter 1 reveals that the priests and levites (i.e. scripture-aware Jews) thought that the prophet spoken of by Moses was someone other than Messiah. Eve John's repsonses suggest that he too shared in this misunderstanding (Muslims often seize on this to show that the prophet could not have been Jesus). My point is that we really shouldn't rely too much on the understanding of Jesus' hearers, especially in contexts where Jesus is using less than transparent language.

Now if Jesus had meant that Abraham had seen Jesus prophetically, this would have been the time to explain this to the Jews.

I'll just stop you there and point out something using this same logic. In verse 53, the people asked Jesus "who do you make yourself out to be?" Now, this most definitely was THE perfect time for Jesus to come out and be open about who he really was. He could say something like "I am the LORD who appeared to Abraham." Now, a quick point, many people believe that the "pre-incarnate" Jesus literally appeared to the patriarchs over and over again as an angel. When we study these so called "Christophanies", we find the angel introducing himself with words like "I am the God of your father Abraham" (Gen 26:24, 28:13, 31:13, 35:11). If Jesus was this very same being, why not just say so? Again, this would have been THE time to do so.

Instead, He answered their question directly:

Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am." John 8:58

There is no doubt that Jesus was stating that He existed before Abraham, and that the Jews knew He was making that claim. For they took up stones with which to stone Him.

In saying "before Abraham, I am he," I understand Jesus to be affirming his preminence and superiority to Abraham and probably also his existence in God's foreknowledge.

But contrary to what you said, there is nothing much direct about Jesus' answer. As I said before, a direct answer would have been something like "I am God" or "I am the Messiah." In fact, the incidents recorded by John are often slightly cryptic. I believe this is because John seems to be emphasising those events which dmeonstrate how God was enacting what peopel call judicial blinding. John actually makes reference to this following one such incident in 12:37-41.

[Guest]

Hello Ely,

If you've covered this elsewhere, perhaps you can point me in the right direction.

How do you explain John 1:14?

Thanks,
Perry

[Guest]

Hi Perry,

As I understand it, the topic of John 1 is the logos of God - that is, His plans and purposes for His creation. Strong's says of logos:

"something said (including the thought); by implication a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension a computation; specifically (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (that is, Christ)"

In the begining was the logos
God had a logos before He set about His creative work, just as a carpenter has a plan for a chair before he goes about building the chair.

The logos was with God
This logos (thought, reasoning, motive) was "with God" in the sense that all his thoughts, reasoning, motives are "with" Him - that is, in His mind (speaking anthropomorphically).

And the logos was divine(cf. Moffatt)
This logos is divine because it expresses God Himself.

All things were made through him/it and without him/it nothing was made that has been made
God made all things by/through His logos (Psalm 33:6, Heb 11:3). If "he" is the intended pronoun, then I would understand this to be John personifying the logos as per wisdom in Proverbs (especially chapter 8 in which a lot of the same things are said about wisdom as are said about the logos here).

The logos became flesh and dwelt among us
This logos was most perfectly revealed/made known to men in the man Jesus Christ. Thus, God Himself was revealed/made known in Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 3:16). He is not the totality of God's logos. Rather, he is the clearest and most accurate expression of God's logos and hence God Himself, to man.

In short, Jesus is a living breathing revelation from God and all of God's plans for His creation are going to be brought realisation in him.

Hope that makes sense.

[Guest]

Hi Ely,

Thanks for the explanation. It does make sense to me.

Perry

[Guest]

The Jews then said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?"
Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am." John 8, 57,58

Ely:

In saying "before Abraham, I am he," I understand Jesus to be affirming his preminence and superiority to Abraham and probably also his existence in God's foreknowledge.

Why do you understand it this way? Does your understanding arise from a straight-forward natural reading of the text? Or does it arise from a desire to explain a text which contradicts your stance that Jesus did not exist before His birth?

Give this text to a randomly-selected sample of 1000 people and ask them what Jesus meant. How many of them would understand it in the way which you explained above? I venture to guess that the answer would be "none".

But contrary to what you said, there is nothing much direct about Jesus' answer.

What could be more direct in answering the question, "You are not yet 50 years old and have you seen Abraham?" with "I existed before Abraham"?
I cannot see why His saying "I am God" or "I am the Messiah" as you suggested, would be any more direct.

I have a question for you. Suppose Jesus did exist before His birth. What could He have said that would convince you of this? What could He have said that could not be interpreted merely as "existing only in the mind of God"?

... notice, Jesus didn't say that Abraham "saw me," he said Abraham "saw it." He was referring to "my day" What did he mean by this?

I think he was referring to the Messianic age which is often spoken of as in that day. Abraham heard and cleaved to the promise of the age of Messiah.

I think He was referring to the "day" of His pre-existence when He appeared to many people on earth as the Angel of God, the many "Christophanies" to which you referred as "so-called". In Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho, Justin, when arguing with Trypho and other Jews, emphasized these appearences a lot, and quoted OT passages in support of them. The appearance to Abraham is one of the chief ones --- where Abraham addressed the angel as "Yahweh" and where two different Individuals are called "Yahweh" in Gen 19:24.

[Guest]

The appearance to Abraham is one of the chief ones --- where Abraham addressed the angel as "Yahweh" and where two different Individuals are called "Yahweh" in Gen 19:24.



Yes and i think Jesus as the eternal high priesthood appeared to Abraham as Melchezadek, IMO.
And angel is this context means messenger.

[Guest]

Ely:

In saying "before Abraham, I am he," I understand Jesus to be affirming his preminence and superiority to Abraham and probably also his existence in God's foreknowledge.

Why do you understand it this way? Does your understanding arise from a straight-forward natural reading of the text? Or does it arise from a desire to explain a text which contradicts your stance that Jesus did not exist before His birth?

Give this text to a randomly-selected sample of 1000 people and ask them what Jesus meant. How many of them would understand it in the way which you explained above? I venture to guess that the answer would be "none".

I guess so. But suppose we gave that same sample of people the following texts:

Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do. John 5:18

My Father is greater than I. John 14:28

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. John 17:3

Would they interpret them in the same way that you do? Probably not!

But contrary to what you said, there is nothing much direct about Jesus' answer.

What could be more direct in answering the question, "You are not yet 50 years old and have you seen Abraham?" with "I existed before Abraham"?
I cannot see why His saying "I am God" or "I am the Messiah" as you suggested, would be any more direct.

Right, I see you're point. But I think Jesus' comments are deliberately designed to confound those who distrusted him abd to sift out those who were willing to follow him no matter what. Consider another very similar incident:

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world.” The Jews therefore quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?” Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. John 8:51-54

Notice, the crowds take Jesus' words concerning eating his flesh literally and are shocked. Jesus answers with words which do nothing to clarify his meaning but actually do everything to confirm the worst fears of the crowds - that he was teaching cannibalism.

Again, John's gospel is replete with these kinds of breakdowns in communication where Jesus seems to do his best to deepen the misunderstanding of his words. In light of this context, it is by no means a stretch to think that Jesus words during a similar exchange in John 8 are also not to be taken strictly literally. Again, an article/ essay will be forthcoming on this very subject - God willing.

I have a question for you. Suppose Jesus did exist before His birth. What could He have said that would convince you of this? What could He have said that could not be interpreted merely as "existing only in the mind of God"?

Well, he could have explicitly identified himself with the "Christophanies" as Justin Martyr dd. He could have said something on the lines of "I am the one who appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." This is exactly what you claim Jesus said during those previous visits to Earth, there was no need to be reticent.

[Guest]

I guess so [concerning the interpretation of 1000 randomly-selected people]. But suppose we gave that same sample of people the following texts:

Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do. John 5:18

My Father is greater than I. John 14:28

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. John 17:3

Would they interpret them in the same way that you do? Probably not!

Ely, I wasn't surprised by the rest of your post. But I was surpised by the part I quoted above. How do you imagine I interpret these words of our Lord?

I will now explain how I do understand them, and then you can comment on whether the sample of people in general would be likely to agree or disagree..

Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do. John 5:18

Jesus was born on earth as a true man. He could do no miracles or mighty works out of His own human powers. The Father worked through Him. Jesus followed the Father's leading constantly.

My Father is greater than I. John 14:28
Jesus meant what He said. The Father is greater than He. That was true while Jesus lived as a man. It was true in His pre-incarnate state, and it is true at present. Jesus didn't seem to say in which ways the Father was greater; one can only speculate about that. If Jesus had been a mere man, having come into existence when He was conceived, it would go without saying that God the Father was greater! Why would He even mention such a thing? Can you imagine any other human being making such a statement?

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. John 17:3

In this prayer, Jesus was acknowledging His Father as the only true God.
He clearly differentiated Himself from "the only true God". I fully agree that the Father is the only true God. Jesus is divine by virtue of His having been begotten by the Father as the first of God's acts. Man begets human beings. God begat a Divine Being ---- just one. Jesus is the only begotten Son --- and the only-begotten God [John 1:18 --- early manuscripts.] God the Father was unbegotten.

[Guest]

Paidion, having seen your interpretation, I stand by what I said. But my point was really that your reasoning (appeal to majority) is of no consequence when it comes to establishing the intended maning of sayings in the scripture.

[Guest]

I don’t really understand how one could possibly say Jesus only came into existence on this earth. Yuck, how could one propose such a statement?

I was studying a part in Romans a while ago and it dealt with Jesus’ sonship. Most of this is taken from a commentary on Romans by John MacArthur.

“who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead,” Romans 1:2-4

It was at the time that He became a human being, Paul says that Jesus was declared the Son of God. Though the plan was eternal, the title Son is reserved as an incarnation term, applied to Jesus in its fullness only after He put on the robe of humanity. There is, of course, no question that He is eternally God and eternally the second Person in the Godhead, but Paul says He was declared God’s Son when He was supernaturally conceived in Mary and was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh.

We could say, then, that Christ was the Son of God from eternity in expectation and was declared God’s son in fulfillment at the incarnation and forever. Quoting Psalm 2:7, the writer of Hebrews explains that in that text God was declaring to Christ, the Messiah, “Thou art My Son, today I have begotten Thee.” In the subsequent quotation from 2 Samuel 7:14, the Father goes on to say of Christ, “I will be a Father to Him, and He shall be a Son to Me” (Heb 1:5). Both verbs in the last quotation are future tense, indicating that, sometime after the psalmist’s time, Christ one day would assume a title and role He had not had before.

In His high priestly prayer Jesus said to the Father, “Glorify Thy Son, that the Son may glorify Thee,” and a few moments later implored, “Glorify Thou Me together with Thyself, Father, with the glory which I had before the world was” (John 17:1, 5) Christ has existed from all eternity.

“He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that Has come into being” (John 1:2-3). But in accord with the divine plan of redemption, which He Himself planned with the Father and the Holy Spirit, Christ “became flesh, and dwelt among us”.

As Paul goes on to explain, the most conclusive and irrefutable evidence of Jesus’ divine sonship was given with power by the resurrection from dead (Acts 13:29-33). By that supreme demonstration of His ability to conquer death, a power belonging only to God Himself (the Giver of life), He established beyond all doubt that He was indeed God, the Son.

The “Son of God” is simply another title for the second person in the Godhead, and was gained when He became a human on this earth.