The pre-creation existence of Jesus

Originally posted by Locoman8
reply to post by doctorex

 

If Christ was Elohim before his birth, death and resurrection, why does his Father say that before the birth of His Son there was no Elohim beside him?

You do know that "Elohim" is the plural form of "God" or "Almighty" right? "Eloha" is the singular form of the word yet the plural form was used during the creation verses in Genesis." And how do you explain the phrase, "Let US make man in OUR image."? From Genesis and it was plural. Who was God talking to? It's not trinitarian. It's the fact that Jesus and God were and are two different beings.

A very God point. I know you will at least agree to what God is creating, and what Elohim is to be, the family of God. God is multiplying himself. The verse you quoted is prophecy....

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

HEBREWS 2:5 For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak.
6 But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honor, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:
8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.

[edit on 19/5/09 by doctorex]

Originally posted by jmdewey60
Micah 5:2 is proof that the ancient Jews understood the Messiah was eternal, "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."

This is just another perfect example of mistranslation.

The phrase translated as "whose goings forth have been from old" actually says in Hebrew He (the messiah) will come forth from, be descended from, the one who has been from old, the everlasting. It is saying he will be the son of God, not that he has been around since the beginning.

mowtsa'ah
Outline of Biblical Usage 1) origin, place of going out from

a) origin

b) places of going out to or from

1) privy


4163 mowtsa'ah mo-tsaw-aw' feminine of 4161; a family descent; also a sewer (marg.; Compare 6675):--draught house; going forth.

You will find that all verses that hint at Jesus's pre-existence are either mistranslations, or people simply reading something into it what it not really there.

The pre-existence of Jesus doesn't really make any sense if you take the time to think about it. He died. He was tempted. Speaking of being tempted, wouldn't Satan know if Christ had pre-existed or not? Why then did Satan try to tempt him with rulership of the Earth? Wouldn't a pre-existing Jesus, who was a God, already have ownership of it? How could he then be tempted with something he already had?

I guess it's pointless trying to discuss it, doesn't seem to stop me from trying though

Originally posted by doctorex
\john 38:[38] For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

Yes, he came from heaven, he came from his father, who is in heaven. I came from my fathers testicles, but that doesn't mean I pre-existed in his scrotum.

did your father send you too?

phil 2:[5] Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
[6] Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
[7] But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
[8] And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

This is saying nothing more than that Christ was the form of God (he was his son), took the form of a servant, just as all misinsters do, and that he humbled himself unto death. This does not say he pre-existed, you are simply reading that into it.

so we as ministers are in the form of god (spirit) and then we take the form in the likeness of men (flesh)?

thats funny, i dont remember being a spirit.

2 cor 8:[9] For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.

Again, yes he was rich spiritually, he had the fullness of Gods spirit, he was the greatest walking the earth during his life, but he humbled himself to be a servant of all. It doesn't say he pre-existed.

your explaination renders the passage null.

when did jesus become spiritually poor?

your trying to explain away these passages but you are only making the hole deeper.

John 8:58 “I tell you most solemnly, I existed before Abraham was born.” —New Testament by C.B. Williams

Another mistranslation.

ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 8:58 Greek NT: Tischendorf 8th Ed. with Diacritics
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Ἰησοῦς· ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί.
ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 8:58 Greek NT: Greek Orthodox Church
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς· Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί.
ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 8:58 Greek NT: Stephanus Textus Receptus (1550, with accents)
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί
ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 8:58 Greek NT: Westcott/Hort with Diacritics
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Ἰησοῦς· ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί.
ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 8:58 Greek NT: Tischendorf 8th Ed.
ειπεν αυτοις ιησους αμην αμην λεγω υμιν πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι εγω ειμι
ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 8:58 Greek NT: Byzantine/Majority Text (2000)
ειπεν αυτοις ο ιησους αμην αμην λεγω υμιν πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι εγω ειμι
ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 8:58 Greek NT: Textus Receptus (1550) 
ειπεν αυτοις ο ιησους αμην αμην λεγω υμιν πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι εγω ειμι
ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 8:58 Greek NT: Textus Receptus (1894)
ειπεν αυτοις ο ιησους αμην αμην λεγω υμιν πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι εγω ειμι
ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 8:58 Greek NT: Westcott/Hort
ειπεν αυτοις ιησους αμην αμην λεγω υμιν πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι εγω ειμι
he said - them - the - jesus - surely - surely - i say - to you - prior - abraham - became (was born) - I (me) - exist, i have been.

were is the mistranslation exactly?

Abraham was promised that his seed would be Christ, because God knew his plan of salvation before he even created the Angels. You also have to remember, that much of what Christ said, came directly from God the Father, as he said many times, the words that I say are not mine, but the words of my Father. Many forget that. Many also forget that God said he knew Jeremiah before his birth, because he planned him before he was even in the womb, but again, Jeremiah didn't pre-exist, only figuratively in the plan of God...

JEREMIAH 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

Do you believe Jeremiah pre-existed also?

first off, were does john 8-58 say anything about god knowing jesus? it doesnt. jesus is making the very literal claim that he existed (not known) before abraham.

you even agree to the literal reading of the passage when you say "You also have to remember, that much of what Christ said, came directly from God the Father, as he said many times, the words that I say are not mine, but the words of my Father. Many forget that. "

so which is it? is jesus being figurative as you suggest through jeremiah, or is he being literal as you suggest earlier?

in other words, your argument in the strictest literal sense doesnt hold water.

I'm afraid it does.

excellent rebuttal

first, you take "beside" to mean literally beside someone, like next to.

But it's okay for you to assume that Christ was literally beside his father?

why not? both ezekial and john saw cherubs surrounding the throne. are they heretical too?

This is exactly what Yahweh is saying, there is no ther God's, he is not talking of angels. God the Father explicitly says that at this point in time there was no Elohim with him, that he was one, and there was none else. So what is your position? Was Christ not yet Elohim, or was he not yet in existence?

neither. john 1:1 clearly calls jesus a "theos" which is the greek equivalent of "el". and it states that this was "in the beginning"

what you fail to see is that isaiah 45 is refering to gods with a reference to worship.

jesus, although being called a god, is not to be worshipped.

satan, although being called a god, is not to be worshipped.

it is your literal (insanely so) interpretation that is literally calling into question the validity and inspiration of other verses.

we also KNOW that the "inspired" word of god also calls other people "god" including jesus himself.

Yes, but Christ is not called God until after his resurrection.

i already mentioned john 1:1

Originally posted by doctorex
and what Elohim is to be, the family of God. God is multiplying himself.

'elohiym - Plural of 'elowahh; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative -- angels, X exceeding, God (gods)(-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

where are you getting your definitions from?

plural can mean GOD JEHOVAH instead of god. nowhere in the bible does it say god is multiplying himself

Originally posted by doctorex
The pre-existence of Jesus doesn't really make any sense if you take the time to think about it. He died. He was tempted.

what does that have to do with pre-existence?

were not angels tempted in noah's day? wasnt satan tempted by his own desire?

there is only one person that the bible says cannot be tempted, and that is god (book of james). so jesus being tempted and dying does nothing to disprove his pre-existence.

Speaking of being tempted, wouldn't Satan know if Christ had pre-existed or not? Why then did Satan try to tempt him with rulership of the Earth?

as mentioned before, everyone was temptable accept GOD. jesus was at the weakest he would ever be. can you blame satan for trying?

Wouldn't a pre-existing Jesus, who was a God, already have ownership of it? How could he then be tempted with something he already had?

who said he already had the kingdoms of the earth? he was to be given these things.

besides, if satan had only one opportunity to tempt him, what would he tempt him with?

satan was offering everything he had. which is true that its nothing compared to what jesus was going to receive. but satan's handling of the situation does not disprove the pre-existence of jesus

Originally posted by miriam0566

Originally posted by doctorex
The pre-existence of Jesus doesn't really make any sense if you take the time to think about it. He died. He was tempted.

what does that have to do with pre-existence?

were not angels tempted in noah's day? wasnt satan tempted by his own desire?

there is only one person that the bible says cannot be tempted, and that is god (book of james). so jesus being tempted and dying does nothing to disprove his pre-existence.

Yes it does, because if you believe that the first verses of John 1 is talking about the pre-existence of Jesus, then by that interpretation, it says that Jesus was God, and God cannot be tempted, or do you believe that John 1 is not talking about Jesus, but solely about God the Father, as I do? If you believe Jesus pre-existed, what exactly do you believe Jesus was before his birth, because you don't seem to believe he was a God, if you are saying that only God could not be tempted. Do you believe he was an Angel? What was he?

And how could Jesus die, if he had pre-existed as an immortal being before his birth? How can an immortal die?

as mentioned before, everyone was temptable accept GOD. jesus was at the weakest he would ever be. can you blame satan for trying?

If Satan knew that Jesus pre-existed, which he would have if that were the case, he would have known that Jesus had far greater power than the rulership of earth, going by mainstream belief, he would have been the very creator of it, why would Satan tempt him with that. It would be like trying to tempt a millionaire with $1, to give up his fortune, it's ridiculous, and would be no temptation at all, but scripture says he was tempted.

Wouldn't a pre-existing Jesus, who was a God, already have ownership of it? How could he then be tempted with something he already had?

who said he already had the kingdoms of the earth? he was to be given these things.

My point exactly. If Jesus was the word of God before his birth, and supposedly had glory with his Father, the glory he was supposedly going back to after his death, doesn't this mean rulership or at the least greater glory than an Earthly king of the kingdoms of Earth? Satan would have known this if this was the case. One of only many things that don't make sense, if Jesus had indeed pre-existed before his birth.

[edit on 20/5/09 by doctorex]

Originally posted by miriam0566

phil 2:[5] Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
[6] Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
[7] But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
[8] And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

This is saying nothing more than that Christ was the form of God (he was his son), took the form of a servant, just as all misinsters do, and that he humbled himself unto death. This does not say he pre-existed, you are simply reading that into it.

so we as ministers are in the form of god (spirit) and then we take the form in the likeness of men (flesh)?

thats funny, i dont remember being a spirit.

You misread what I was saying, when I said "just as ministers do" I was talking of what I said just previous to that, taking the form of a servant. By the way, are you a minister?

2 cor 8:[9] For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.

Again, yes he was rich spiritually, he had the fullness of Gods spirit, he was the greatest walking the earth during his life, but he humbled himself to be a servant of all. It doesn't say he pre-existed.

your explaination renders the passage null.

when did jesus become spiritually poor?

It is talking of humility, it doesn't render it null.

your trying to explain away these passages but you are only making the hole deeper.

So you keep saying, but you're only diverting the topic of at hand, namely that this doesn't say that Jesus pre-existed, does it?

John 8:58 “I tell you most solemnly, I existed before Abraham was born.” —New Testament by C.B. Williams

Another mistranslation.

were is the mistranslation exactly?

A mistranslation in the intent of what Jesus was saying, as I explained.

first off, were does john 8-58 say anything about god knowing jesus? it doesnt. jesus is making the very literal claim that he existed (not known) before abraham.

I explained that. Read the context of what Jesus was saying. He said that Abraham rejoiced to see the day of Jesus. Did Abraham actually see this, in reality, the day of Jesus, or was it figuratively, through promise? That is obvious, because it didn't happen in the days of Abraham, did it? They asked him how this could be (Abraham rejoicing about the day of Jesus), and Jesus answered. What did Abraham rejoice about? Was it that Jesus was in existence in his day, or the promise that Jesus would come through his seed? He is saying that he "existed" an in the promise. A promise from God is as good as done. The Kingdom of God is as good as done also, it is a promise, but it is not yet here, yet we rejoice in it.

in other words, your argument in the strictest literal sense doesnt hold water.

I'm afraid it does.

excellent rebuttal

Thank you, about as good as yours

john 1:1 clearly calls jesus a "theos" which is the greek equivalent of "el". and it states that this was "in the beginning"

what you fail to see is that isaiah 45 is refering to gods with a reference to worship.

You are simply reading that into it, because you have to, if you want you belief to hold. Where exactly does it say that this verse is referring to what should be worshipped?

Yahweh says in Isaiah 45 that he is one, and that there is no Elohim beside him. So if Elohim is the plural of El, which you claim Jesus was, where then was Jesus?

jesus, although being called a god, is not to be worshipped.

Hebrews 1:6 And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

we also KNOW that the "inspired" word of god also calls other people "god" including jesus himself.

Yes, but Christ is not called God until after his resurrection.

i already mentioned john 1:1

As I already mentioned, John 1:1 is not talking about Jesus, it is talking about God the father, the one who did the creating, who was Yahweh of the old testament, who we know by the psalms, and Peter's interpretation of them in Acts 2 was the Father of Jesus.

JOHN 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

So this being being spoke of here is said to have created all?

Who does the Old testament say made all things?

Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD (Yahweh) God made the earth and the heavens,

7 And the LORD (Yahweh) God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
8 And the LORD (Yahweh) God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
9 And out of the ground made the LORD (Yahweh) God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

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

Isaiah 51:13 And forgettest the LORD thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth; and hast feared continually every day because of the fury of the oppressor, as if he were ready to destroy? and where is the fury of the oppressor?

Proverbs 3:19 The LORD by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens.

Nehemiah 9:6 Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshipeth thee.

Yahweh who did the creating, not Jesus.

Originally posted by miriam0566

Originally posted by doctorex
and what Elohim is to be, the family of God. God is multiplying himself.

'elohiym - Plural of 'elowahh; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative -- angels, X exceeding, God (gods)(-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

where are you getting your definitions from?

plural can mean GOD JEHOVAH instead of god. nowhere in the bible does it say god is multiplying himself

1John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

God is creating a family. Christ is the first fruits of that family, the first fruits of the first harvest. You say Christ is El, 1John 3:2 says that we shall be like him, El. What is the plural of El? Elohim.

You also say that only God can be worshiped? What does revelation say to the faithful of the church?

Rev 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;
8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.
9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

This says that men will come and worship at their feet, does it not? Most miss this verse. Satan has hid this truth from man, because he hates the idea of it, that mankind was to be made in the likeness of Elohim (to become Elohim in time), to above the Angels. This is exactly what caused his rebellion, his pride.

Originally posted by doctorex
Yes it does, because if you believe that the first verses of John 1 is talking about the pre-existence of Jesus, then by that interpretation, it says that Jesus was God, and God cannot be tempted, or do you believe that John 1 is not talking about Jesus, but solely about God the Father, as I do?

john 1:1 is not calling jesus god. in king james english maybe, but in greek, it says that jesus was a god.

the confusion comes from the fact that there is not indefinite article (a or an) in greek.

so your argument is flawed

If you believe Jesus pre-existed, what exactly do you believe Jesus was before his birth, because you don't seem to believe he was a God, if you are saying that only God could not be tempted. Do you believe he was an Angel? What was he?

let me clear up something for you. the word "god" is a title. it simply means mighty one. it can be attached to anyone or anything that is mighty in relation to something else.

Jehovah is called god, jesus is called god, satan is called god, even humans in the book of psalms are called gods.

james 1:[13] Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

this particular verse is referring to Jehovah as an individual, not as a position.

jesus being a god, does not mean he cannot be tempted.

jesus is not Jehovah.

so what was jesus?

1 cor 15:[50] Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

the kingdom of god is a heavenly kingdom. since flesh and blood cannot be in the spirit realm, it is obvious that jesus was a spirit creature.

1 john 4:[9] In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

jesus was god's only begotten ( μονογενὴς (monogenēs)) son. this literally means only born. now angels we know are called "sons of god" but this and other passages claim that jesus is the only born of god. so which is it?

the answer is obvious. jesus is the only creation that was directly created by Jehovah himself. in this way jesus is only begotten.

so obviously, jesus was a powerful spirit creature that was very close to god, before god sent him to earth to live and die as a perfect human.

And how could Jesus die, if he had pre-existed as an immortal being before his birth? How can an immortal die?

show me one scripture that says jesus was immortal before birth. oh wait, i never made that claim. unless of course you are assuming that all "gods" are immortal.

If Satan knew that Jesus pre-existed, which he would have if that were the case, he would have known that Jesus had far greater power than the rulership of earth, going by mainstream belief, he would have been the very creator of it, why would Satan tempt him with that. It would be like trying to tempt a millionaire with $1, to give up his fortune, it's ridiculous, and would be no temptation at all, but scripture says he was tempted.

yes it is ridiculous that satan could think he has anything to offer jesus. but you have to remember his claim.

job 2:[4] And Satan answered the LORD, and said, Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life.
[5] But put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face.

its a claim that people serve god because of blessings, not because they love god.

jesus HAD to be tried.


btw, im abit sick. so my replies will be abit slow

Originally posted by doctorex

john 1:1 clearly calls jesus a "theos" which is the greek equivalent of "el". and it states that this was "in the beginning"

what you fail to see is that isaiah 45 is refering to gods with a reference to worship.

You are simply reading that into it, because you have to, if you want you belief to hold. Where exactly does it say that this verse is referring to what should be worshipped?

last time im showing the scripture

isaiah 45:[23] I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.
[24] Surely, shall one say, in the LORD have I righteousness and strength: even to him shall men come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed.
[25] In the LORD shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory.

Yahweh says in Isaiah 45 that he is one, and that there is no Elohim beside him. So if Elohim is the plural of El, which you claim Jesus was, where then was Jesus?

learn hebrew. it'll help.

elohim can be "gods" but the plural form can also mean GOD (in a superlative sense) as in Jehovah God (Yehovah Elohyim)


serious, im too ill to run around in circles with you. im finding myself repeating myself and i tire of it.



[edit on 20-5-2009 by miriam0566]

Originally posted by doctorex
Who does the Old testament say made all things?

Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD (Yahweh) God made the earth and the heavens,

7 And the LORD (Yahweh) God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
8 And the LORD (Yahweh) God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
9 And out of the ground made the LORD (Yahweh) God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

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

Isaiah 51:13 And forgettest the LORD thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth; and hast feared continually every day because of the fury of the oppressor, as if he were ready to destroy? and where is the fury of the oppressor?

Proverbs 3:19 The LORD by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens.

Nehemiah 9:6 Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshipeth thee.

Yahweh who did the creating, not Jesus.

your right.

Jehovah did create all things. but now let me ask you a question.

who made the house: the architect or the foreman?

the foreman or the carpenter?

the carpenter or the apprentice?

does the foreman ever get credit for the architect's designs?

yes, Jehovah created all things, but that doesnt mean he didnt use other agents in the process.

john 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

"through him" is not claiming jesus himself created, it claiming that jesus was an agent that god used to create.

much like an architect's designs are realized through a builder.

reply to post by doctorex
doctorex, Chopped up and taken out of sequence and context:

This is just another perfect example of mistranslation.
I have no real interests in the beliefs of the Jews

I would imagine that if you were to give a grammar and a lexicon and text of the Bible in its original language, to someone who had no previous experience with Christianity, he would have a difficult time coming up with a translation that would be recognizable to us.
The Bible was written to be understood by the desired audience of that particular section, that is one of many that were collected and compiled to make what we might consider a whole. Centuries later, we need to go back and look at the history of things that influenced the writer and look at whatever may be available from ancient writings in order to find out what they meant by certain sayings that were understood to mean certain things to other people familiar with the concepts.
If you choose to ignore any other source than your own interpretation based on what you would like it to mean, that does not put too many points towards your credibility. When I go on with wholesale speculation without apparent restraint, there is no force of authority to it and no one can be expected to take any of it as fact. If I get into a discussion where I am backing up my claims in order to be useful for persuading someone to agree with me, that is a different type of writing. I would be expected to have something authoritative to back me up.
You seem to have no problem with mixing the two types of writing together. What I mean is you have these speculative ideas without anything to back it up, other than your claims that everyone else’s ideas are based on utter falsehoods. Is there a serious reputable Bible scholar who you can cite as a reference to support your theory? I would like to check them out for myself because I find your posts less than persuasive.


[edit on 20-5-2009 by jmdewey60]

Originally posted by miriam0566
john 1:1 is not calling jesus god. in king james english maybe, but in greek, it says that jesus was a god.

the confusion comes from the fact that there is not indefinite article (a or an) in greek.

so your argument is flawed

No it isn't, because of what is said in Isaiah 45, that there were no Elohim (talking of Gods) beside him. If Jesus was a God, and with his father, why does Yahweh say the opposite?

the kingdom of god is a heavenly kingdom. since flesh and blood cannot be in the spirit realm, it is obvious that jesus was a spirit creature.

Is a spirit creature not immortal? Aslo, the kingdom of God is only heavenly in the sense that it comes from heaven, but it will be on the earth if you understand Daniel 2 for instance....

Dan 2:2 This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,
33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.
34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and broke them to pieces.
35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.

44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.
45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.

Notice that it said the stone becomes a great mountain that fills the whole earth, then the tinterpretation says that this is God setting up a kingdom.

the answer is obvious. jesus is the only creation that was directly created by Jehovah himself. in this way jesus is only begotten.

That is incorrect, the entire creation, including mankind is said in the word of God to be created by Yahweh. Jesus was begotten, and that happened at his birth.

Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD (Yahweh) God made the earth and the heavens,

7 And the LORD (Yahweh) God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

And how could Jesus die, if he had pre-existed as an immortal being before his birth? How can an immortal die?

show me one scripture that says jesus was immortal before birth. oh wait, i never made that claim. unless of course you are assuming that all "gods" are immortal.

It doesn't and that is my point. If Jesus lived for millions of years before his birth, as you believe, did he not then have eternal life?

its a claim that people serve god because of blessings, not because they love god.

jesus HAD to be tried.

Yes but that doesn't answer my question, being how could Satan believe that he could tempt Jesus of all he supposedly already had for something far less. Hardly a temptation is it, would you really call that being tried? I wouldn't. Job being chastened was a completely different situation than Jesus.

Originally posted by miriam0566

what you fail to see is that isaiah 45 is refering to gods with a reference to worship.

isaiah 45:[23] I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.
[24] Surely, shall one say, in the LORD have I righteousness and strength: even to him shall men come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed.
[25] In the LORD shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory.

Because of a blurb 20 verses away? The whole chapter is explaining who and what he is, what he has done, and the foolishness of his people, he is not simply and only explaining what is to be worshiped.

Yahweh says in Isaiah 45 that he is one, and that there is no Elohim beside him. So if Elohim is the plural of El, which you claim Jesus was, where then was Jesus?

learn hebrew. it'll help.

elohim can be "gods" but the plural form can also mean GOD (in a superlative sense) as in Jehovah God (Yehovah Elohyim)

Is what I said incorrect? Yes Elohim can mean one or many, but that doesn't change what Yahweh said in Isaiah 45. He said that before the birth of Christ there was no Elohim beside him, yet you believe Jesus was there, and that Jesus was El.

serious, im too ill to run around in circles with you. im finding myself repeating myself and i tire of it.

Because you can't admit what is staring at you in the face, you already have your belief, that is why you are running around in circles.

Originally posted by miriam0566
your right.

Jehovah did create all things. but now let me ask you a question.

who made the house: the architect or the foreman?

the foreman or the carpenter?

the carpenter or the apprentice?

does the foreman ever get credit for the architect's designs?

yes, Jehovah created all things, but that doesnt mean he didnt use other agents in the process.

Yahweh did all, he was the only one with the power to do it. Does an architect do the actual forming, the laying of foundations etc? No.

(Gen 2:7 And the LORD (Yahweh) God formed (yatsar) man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Yatsar
3335 yatsar yaw-tsar' probably identical with 3334 (through the squeezing into shape); ((Compare 3331)); to mould into a form; especially as a potter; figuratively, to determine (i.e. form a resolution):--X earthen, fashion, form, frame, make(-r), potter, purpose

JOB 38
1 Then the LORD (Yahweh) answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
2 Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
3 Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding

Yahweh is called the potter, not simply the architect

Isaiah 64:8 But now, O LORD (Yawheh), thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand.

john 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

The old testament shows who did the creating, it was Yawheh, which itself proves that John 1 is not talking about Jesus, it is talking solely about his Father.

"through him" is not claiming jesus himself created, it claiming that jesus was an agent that god used to create.

Of course not, as God's word shows, Jesus didn't do the creating, because this isn't even talking about Jesus.

much like an architect's designs are realized through a builder.


Again, God's word shows who the builder, potter, former, layer of foundations was, namely Yahweh, but you have to explain that away to hold on to your belief it was Jesus, and the only thing you have to go on on is your interpretation of John 1, but if you let scripture interpret scripture, it shows who John 1 is talking about, Yahweh.

You even contradict yourself by saying that Jesus was the only thing that Yahweh directly created, thereby stating that Jesus was made, then you say that John 1 is talking about Jesus, but what does it also say?

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

If all things that were made, meaning anything that was made, were made by Jesus, who you also agree was made, did Jesus make himself? Of course not, because this isn't talking about Jesus, but his Father. These are the circles you are going in, not any circles I'm creating. John 1 is not talking about Jesus, but I don't know what it is that will take you to see that. Well, actually I do, and it's certainly not me

[edit on 20/5/09 by doctorex]

Originally posted by jmdewey60
doctorex, Chopped up and taken out of sequence and context:

Look into the Hebrew that Micah 5:2 is written in, and you will see I was correct, and you will see exactly what has been chopped and taken out of context.


I think it's pointless for me to keep discussing this. Everyone has there own beliefs, and it is God who reveals truth, not us, and I have faith that he will do it and clear up all that is false, all in good time.

God bless all.

reply to post by doctorex

Sorry about that apparently indecipherable quote indicator.
What I meant was, "this is what is left of doctorex's quote, after I cut it up and rearranged it to use to make my own point."
I was not trying to say that you were the one chopping things up. You actually have some good points about why some scriptures are translated the way they are. But that really does not solve any dilemmas, to just point out possible errors.

reply to post by jmdewey60


No problem, sorry for the mistake

Originally posted by doctorex
No it isn't, because of what is said in Isaiah 45, that there were no Elohim (talking of Gods) beside him. If Jesus was a God, and with his father, why does Yahweh say the opposite?

you are using circular logic. your saying your interpretation of john 1:1 is correct because your interpretation of isaiah 45 is correct, and vice versa.

but the second you include 1 cor 4:4, psalms 82:6, your interpretation of isaiah 45 falls apart.

second. ISAIAH HIMSELF prophecies about jesus and calls him "MIGHTY GOD" (isaiah 9:6)

so are you suggesting that GOD is adding god to the ranks?

Is a spirit creature not immortal?

the devil is a spirit creature, but he can die

rev 20:[10] And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
[14] And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Aslo, the kingdom of God is only heavenly in the sense that it comes from heaven, but it will be on the earth if you understand Daniel 2 for instance....

Dan 2:2 ....... Notice that it said the stone becomes a great mountain that fills the whole earth, then the tinterpretation says that this is God setting up a kingdom.

yes, but notice that that kingdom is ruled from heaven.

rev 4:[1] After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.
[2] And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.
[3] And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone: and there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald.
[4] And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.

It doesn't and that is my point. If Jesus lived for millions of years before his birth, as you believe, did he not then have eternal life?

eternal life ≠ immortality.

immortality is exemption from death. the inability to die. it is unconditional.

eternal life is conditional. you live until you disobey. adam had eternal life, but he gave it up when he sinned. satan did too, but soon he is to be destroyed.

Yes but that doesn't answer my question, being how could Satan believe that he could tempt Jesus of all he supposedly already had for something far less. Hardly a temptation is it, would you really call that being tried? I wouldn't. Job being chastened was a completely different situation than Jesus.

we have the hope of everlasting life, and yet we are tempted with things like fornication and lying. isnt eternal life better than one night of sex? and yet why do we sometimes fail?

satan doesnt have more, he never did. but he tries to appeal to the heart.

james 1:[13] Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
[14] But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

Originally posted by doctorex
Because of a blurb 20 verses away? The whole chapter is explaining who and what he is, what he has done, and the foolishness of his people, he is not simply and only explaining what is to be worshiped.

its not a blurb, lol. its the conclusion to an entire book. chapter 45 is a book. thats how it was written.

yes, hes talking about who he is and what he's done and what his people have done but its all about their worship to him.

he's saying that he is the only god who has actually helped them. he is the only god who has kept his promises. he is the only god who deserves to be worshipped.

to look at the last 3 verses as a "blurb" shows just how deep you are reading this chapter

Is what I said incorrect? Yes Elohim can mean one or many, but that doesn't change what Yahweh said in Isaiah 45. He said that before the birth of Christ there was no Elohim beside him, yet you believe Jesus was there, and that Jesus was El.

yes, and i explained this before in one of my previous posts.

Because you can't admit what is staring at you in the face, you already have your belief, that is why you are running around in circles.

no, im running around in circles because you keep repeating the same arguments, then you ignore my responses, see comment above.