what of the incarnation?

[_SoaringEagle]

Behold, I come
The Bible records a pre-incarnation conversation between Son and Father on the topic of the upcoming incarnation: "So, coming into the world, Christ says: You did not want sacrifice and offering, but you prepared a body for me. In whole burnt offerings even for sin, you took no delight. Then I said: Behold, I come; in the scroll of a book it is written concerning me; to do, O God, your will." (Hebrews 10:5-7 Lattimore).

This is a quote of the Septuagint: "Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not; but a body hast thou prepared me: whole-burnt-offering and [sacrifice] for sin thou didst not require. Then I said, Behold, I come: in the volume of the book it is written concerning me, desired to do thy will, O my God, and thy law in the midst of mine heart." (Brenton Septuagint, Psalm 40:6-8 ).
A ready volunteer, Jesus stepped forward "to do...your will". Given that the flesh of the incarnation is the very topic of conversation: "you prepared a body for me" - said 'flesh' cannot also be one of the conversationalists!

The Bible nowhere say that Jesus pre-existed His incarnation as the Father, but that He was with the Father: "And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was." (John 17:5)

"I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with your father." (John 8:38 ).

He was before me
"This is He of whom I said, 'After me comes a Man who is preferred before me, for He was before me.'"(John 1:30).
When John the Baptist says that Jesus was "before" him, he cannot mean birth order; Luke's narrative records that John was born approximately six months before Jesus.


I know that my Redeemer lives
"For I know that my Redeemer lives, and He shall stand at last on the earth; and after my skin is destroyed, this I know, that in my flesh I shall see God, Whom I shall see for myself, and my eyes shall behold, and not another." (Job 19:25-27).
Job doesn't say that he knows his Redeemer will live someday, he knows that "my Redeemer lives".


Where He was Before
"What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before?" (John 6:62).
The Lord calls His hearers' attention to the fact that it was the Son of Man who was on high "before."

Came down from Heaven
* "And so it is written, 'The first man Adam became a living being.' The last Adam became a life-giving spirit....The first man was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord from heaven." (1 Corinthians 14:45-47).


* "No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven." (John 3:13).

* "He who comes from above is above all; he who is of the earth is earthly and speaks of the earth. He who comes from heaven is above all." (John 3:31).

* "For the bread of God is He who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world." (John 6:33).

* "For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me." (John 6:38 ).

* "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." (John 6:51).

If one was elsewhere at a prior time,-- whether in heaven or in Altoona,-- then surely one also existed.

This is just for starters. Also, this is from Robin Brace's websight. I will give the link soon.
SoaringEagle

[Guest]

Somehow I seem to be missing something. Several people are strongly emphasizing that Jesus pre-existed before His birth on earth.

Is someone arguing that He didn't?

[Guest]

I am(not I am, The I am).

J. A. T. Robinson articulately sums up the sense in which Jesus embodies or “incarnates” God, not as a mythological figure, but as the one whom God sent to perfectly represent Him and do His will:

Jesus is a man who incarnates in everything he is and does the Logos who is God. He is the Son, the mirror-image of God, who is God for man and in man. The “I” of Jesus speaks God, acts God. He utters the things of God, he does the works of God. He is his plenipotentiary, totally commissioned to represent him—as a human being. He speaks and acts with the “I” that is one with God, utterly identified and yet not identical, his representative but not his replacement—and certainly not his replica, as if he were God dressed up as a human being. He is not a divine being who came to earth, in the manner of Ovid’s metamorphoses, [18] in the form of a man, but the uniquely normal human being in whom the logos or self-expressive activity of God was totally embodied. [19]

Jesus makes no claims for himself in his own right, and at the same time makes the most tremendous claims about what God is doing through him and uniquely through him. Jesus never claims to be God personally; yet he always claims to bring God completely. [20]

A strong argument against the idea that God became man in order to redeem us is that there is not a single prophecy that supports the idea. Nowhere in the body of prophetic literature does it say that God ever intended to make Himself into a man in order to redeem mankind. All the prophecies foretold of a human being who would be uniquely qualified and empowered to rule and reign and establish righteousness in the earth. For this reason, Satan was continually attempting to destroy the Christ line whenever he was able to determine its course. When Abraham was singled out, Satan escalated the wickedness of Sodom and Gomorrah. When Jacob was identified as the one through whom the Christ would come, he and his children became the object of Satanic attack.

This was the consistent story throughout the Old Testament, and it is clearly seen in the New Testament also. As soon as Herod knew that the baby had been born, Satan inspired him to have the child killed. Would Satan have been so determined to destroy the child if he had known that it was God Himself who had made Himself into a baby? Did he think that by killing the baby he could destroy God? The fact is, such a notion is completely foreign to the prophetic literature, which is radically trivialized by the idea that God meant all along that He would come Himself. Never do we read that a voice thundered down from Mt. Sinai or anywhere else: “Don’t make me come down there!”

It is true that the Messianic hope was at its root an anticipation of a human being that could completely represent God on earth. That is why the prophecy so clearly spoke “the spirit of the Lord will rest on him” (Isa. 11:2). This human being would certainly have some divine attributes in order to carry out his job, but it is going too far to say, as the New Bible Dictionary does, that:

The ascription by the Old Testament of various titles, functions and relationships to the Godhead, served to prepare the Jewish mind for the Christian doctrine of a triune Deity, which is necessarily connected with that of the Incarnation. [21]

The fact is, nothing prepared the Jewish mind for the idea of a triune godhead, as is evidenced by the millions of monotheistic Jews who still think the idea is nonsensical (See Chapter 5 of One God & One Lord for a detailed explanation of the Messiah the Jews expected from the prophecies in the Jewish Scriptures).

http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/module ... le&sid=213

[Guest]

JF, you have not dealt with the scriptures which Soaring Eagle brought forth. They clearly indicate the pre-existence of Christ.

[Guest]

OK,
John 17:5
And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began. (NIV)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. There is no question that Jesus “existed” before the world began. But did he exist literally as a person or in God’s foreknowledge, “in the mind of God?” Both Christ and the corporate be in the Body of Christ, the Church, existed in God’s foreknowledge before being alive. Christ was the “logos,” the “plan” of God from the beginning, and he became flesh only when he was conceived. It is Trinitarian bias that causes people to read an actual physical existence into this verse rather than a figurative existence in the mind of God. When 2 Timothy 1:9 says that each Christian was given grace “before the beginning of time,” no one tries to prove that we were actually alive with God back then. Everyone acknowledges that we were “in the mind of God,” i.e., in God’s foreknowledge. The same is true of Jesus Christ. His glory was “with the Father” before the world began, and in John 17:5 he prayed that it would come into manifestation.

2. Jesus was praying that he would have the glory the Old Testament foretold, which had been in the mind of God, the Father, since before the world began, and would come into concretion. Trinitarians, however, teach that Jesus was praying about glory he had with God many years before his birth, and they assert that this proves he had access to the mind and memory of his “God nature.” However, if, as a man, Jesus “remembered” being in glory with the Father before the world began, then he would have known he was God in every sense. He would not have thought of himself as a “man” at all. If he knew he was God, he would not and could not have been “tempted in every way just as we are” because nothing he encountered would have been a “real” temptation to him. He would have had no fear and no thought of failure. There is no real sense in which Scripture could actually say he was “made like his brothers in every way” (Heb. 2:17) because he would not have been like us at all. Furthermore, Scripture says that Jesus “grew” in knowledge and wisdom. That would not really be true if Christ had access to some type of God-nature with infinite knowledge and wisdom.

We believe that John 17:5 is a great example of a verse that demonstrates the need for clear thinking concerning the doctrine of the Trinity. The verse can clearly be interpreted in a way that is honest and biblically sound, and shows that Christ was a man, but was in the foreknowledge of God as God’s plan for the salvation of mankind. It can also be used the way Trinitarians use it: to prove the Trinity. However, when it is used that way it reveals a Christ that we as Christians cannot truly identify with. We do not have a God-nature to help us when we are tempted or are in trouble or lack knowledge or wisdom. The Bible says that Christ can “sympathize with our weakness” because he was “tempted in every way, just as we are” (Heb. 4:15). The thrust of that verse is very straightforward. Because Christ was just like we are, and was tempted in every way that we are, he can sympathize with us. However, if he was not “just as we are,” then he would not be able to sympathize with us. We assert that making Christ a God-man makes it impossible to really identify with him.

3. Jesus’ prayer in John 17 sets a wonderful example for us as Christians. He poured out his heart to his Father, “the only true God” (John 17:3), and prayed that the prophecies of the Old Testament about him would be fulfilled.

4. For Christ’s relation to the Plan of God, see notes on John 1:1. For more on Christ in God’s foreknowledge, see the note on John 8:58.

Racovian Catechism, pp. 144-146

Snedeker, pp. 424 and 425

John 1:30 means he was before him in rank.
John 8:38 speaks of the revelation Jesus got both personal and through the scripture.
Job: he is talking about God. Or perhaps a good example of the prophetic perfect, In the Hebrew and Aramaic idiom in which the Bible was written, when something was absolutely going to happen in the future, it is often spoken of as if it had already occurred in the past. Hebrew scholars are familiar with this idiom...

The Prophetic Perfect
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/module ... nt&sid=268

John 3:13
No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man. (NIV)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Jews would not have taken John’s words to mean that Christ “incarnated.” It was common for them to say that something “came from heaven” if God were its source. For example, James 1:17 says that every good gift is “from above” and “comes down” from God. What James means is clear. God is the Author and source of the good things in our lives. God works behind the scenes to provide what we need. The verse does not mean that the good things in our lives come directly down from heaven. Most Christians experience the Lord blessing them by way of other people or events, but realize that the ultimate source of the blessings was the Lord. We should apply John’s words the same way we understand James’ words—that God is the source of Jesus Christ, which He was. Christ was God’s plan, and then God directly fathered Jesus.

There are also verses that say Jesus was “sent from God,” a phrase that shows God as the ultimate source of what is sent. John the Baptist was a man “sent from God” (John 1:6), and it was he who said that Jesus “comes from above” and “comes from heaven” (John 3:31). When God wanted to tell the people that He would bless them if they gave their tithes, He told them that He would open the windows of “heaven” and pour out a blessing (Mal. 3:10 - KJV). Of course, everyone understood the idiom being used, and no one believed that God would literally pour things out of heaven. They knew that the phrase meant that God was the origin of the blessings they received. Still another example is when Christ was speaking and said, “John’s baptism—where did it come from? Was it from heaven or from men?” (Matt. 21:25). Of course, the way that John’s baptism would have been “from heaven” was if God was the source of the revelation. John did not get the idea on his own, it came “from heaven.” The verse makes the idiom clear: things could be “from heaven,” i.e., from God, or they could be “from men.” The idiom is the same when used of Jesus. Jesus is “from God,” “from heaven” or “from above” in the sense that God is his Father and thus his origin.

The idea of coming from God or being sent by God is also clarified by Jesus’ words in John 17. He said, “As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world” (John 17:18). We understand perfectly what Christ meant when he said, “I have sent them into the world.” He meant that he commissioned us, or appointed us. No one thinks that we were in heaven with Christ and incarnated into the flesh. Christ said, “As you have sent me, I have sent them.” So, however we take the phrase that Christ sent us, that is how we should understand the phrase that God sent Christ.

Buzzard, pp. 154-157

Norton, pp. 246-248

John 6:62
What if you see the Son of man ascend to where he was before? (NIV)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. This verse is referring to the resurrection of Christ. This fact is clear from studying the context. Because the translators have chosen to translate anabaino as “ascend,” people believe it refers to Christ’s ascension from earth as recorded in Acts 1:9, but Acts 1:9 does not use this word. Anabaino simply means “to go up.” It is used of “going up” to a higher elevation as in climbing a mountain (Matt. 5:1; 14:23, et al.), of Jesus “coming up” from under the water at his baptism (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10), of plants that “grow up” out of the ground (Matt. 13:7; Mark 4:7, 8 and 32), or of even just “going up,” i.e., “climbing,” a tree (Luke 19:4). Christ was simply asking if they would be offended if they saw him “come up” out of the ground, i.e., be resurrected, and be where he was before, i.e., alive and on the earth.

2. The context confirms that Jesus was speaking about being the bread from heaven and giving life via his resurrection. Verses such as 39, 40 and 44 confirm this: Jesus repeatedly said, “I will raise him [each believer] up at the last day.” Christ was amazed that even some of his disciples were offended at his teaching. He had been speaking of the resurrection, and they were offended, so he asked them if they would be offended if they saw him resurrected, which has been unfortunately translated as “ascend” in verse 62.

Norton, pp. 248-252

Snedeker p. 215

We Unitarians believe we can logically and scholarly resolve these things in a Biblically sound manner. You know the scriptures make a strong comparison between Adam and Jesus.

[Guest]

JF,

Do you honestly believe that when Jesus uttered the words found in John 17:5 that He really meant "Glorify Me with the glory that the figurative existance that was in your mind about me in the form of your plan before the world began"?

Especially in light of the statement of Jesus that "before Abraham was I AM" in John 8:58. Even if Jesus isn't claiming to be God there (which I think He was), do you believe that He is simply talking about the idea of Himself existing before Abraham?



God bless,
Derek

[Guest]

A few questions to ponder:

Why did Jesus say he was "no more in the world", when he actually still was? And why did he ask that the disciples should be "one" in the same way that he and the Father are "one"? How can the disciples be "one" in that way?

• John 17:11-12
  And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
  While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

Why did Jesus say that he had given the disciples the same glory that the Father had given him?

• John 17:22
  And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

What was this glory, and when did he give it to the disciples? Whatever it was, it was something that enables the disciples to become "one" in the same way that Christ and the Father are "one."

On a similar note, why did John tell us in the Apocalypse that Jesus was slain from the foundation of the world?

• Revelation 13:8
  And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

We know from the Gospels that Jesus died at the end of his earthly ministry, not at the start of creation.

So what does John mean by this?

[_SoaringEagle]

Downward Mobility
"For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that you through His poverty might become rich." (2 Cor. 8:9)
When was He rich? As a babe in the manger? No, before that.

Enduring Love
Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world. (John 17:24)

Temple Vision
The apostle John said that Isaiah had seen Christ's glory: "These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him." (John 12:41). After quoting Isaiah 6:9-10, John notes that Isaiah had said those things "when" he saw Christ's glory. It is not obvious from Isaiah's account of the temple vision that he was seeing the glory of a then non-existent party:

"In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above it stood seraphim; each one had six wings: with two he covered his face, with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. And one cried to another and said:

'Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts;
The whole earth is full of His glory!'
"And the posts of the door were shaken by the voice of him who cried out, and the house was filled with smoke."

Though it's in the nature of things for prophets to see things which are not yet, Isaiah's reaction to this visitation displays no awareness that the "LORD of hosts" Whom he has seen -- Who John says is Christ -- is not slated to exist yet for centuries:

"So I said:
'Woe is me, for I am undone!
Because I am a man of unclean lips,
And I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips;
For my eyes have seen the King,
The LORD of hosts.'" (Isaiah 6:1-5)

The Firstborn
In the widest sense, every living creature is an "offspring" of God: "...for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, 'For we are also His offspring.'" (Acts 17:28 ).

More intimately, the Bible speaks of believers as 'children of God':
"But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name..." (John 1:12); "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God." (Romans 8:14).

But only Jesus is called the "only begotten" Son:
"No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him." (John 1:18 ); "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." (John 3:16); "In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him." (1 John 4:9). "Deliver my soul from the sword; my only-begotten one from the power of the dog." (Psalm 22:20, Brenton Septuagint).

So the manner of our 'Sonship' isn't the same as the "only begotten": rather, we're adopted children:
"But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons." (Galatians 4:4-5); "For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, 'Abba, Father.'" (Romans 8:15); "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He made us accepted in the Beloved." (Ephesians 1:3-6).

Not only is Jesus called the "only begotten", He's also the "firstborn":
"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation." (Colossians 1:15); "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn." (Zechariah 12:10); "But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says: 'Let all the angels of God worship Him.'" (Hebrews 1:6).

It was at a point of time, the resurrection, that Jesus was declared to be the Son of God: "...the gospel of God which He promised before through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead." (Romans 1:1-4). But it's one thing to be, another thing to be declared to be. Jesus was the Son of God when born to Mary (Luke 1:32), as well as on the Day of Creation (Colossians 1:12-18, Hebrews 1:1-2).

[Guest]

Yes Derek I do, although I think I have pointed this out before:
John 8:58b
Before Abraham was, I am. (KJV)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. Trinitarians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. This is just not the case. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes:

Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.” [23]

2. The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he” or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be”—John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ was speaking of himself as the Messiah of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament.

At the Last Supper, the disciples were trying to find out who would deny the Christ. They said, literally, “Not I am, Lord” (Matt. 26:22 and 25). No one would say that the disciples were trying to deny that they were God because they were using the phrase “Not I am.” The point is this: “I am” was a common way of designating oneself, and it did not mean you were claiming to be God.

3. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the mind of God as God’s plan for the redemption of man. A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Verse 56 is accurately translated in the King James Version, which says: “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.” This verse says that Abraham “saw” the Day of Christ, which is normally considered by theologians to be the day when Christ conquerors the earth and sets up his kingdom. That would fit with what the book of Hebrews says about Abraham: “For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God” (Heb. 11:10). Abraham looked for a city that is still future, yet the Bible says Abraham “saw” it. In what sense could Abraham have seen something that was future? Abraham “saw” the Day of Christ because God told him it was coming, and Abraham “saw” it by faith. Although Abraham saw the Day of Christ by faith, that day existed in the mind of God long before Abraham. Thus, in the context of God’s plan existing from the beginning, Christ certainly was “before” Abraham. Christ was the plan of God for man’s redemption long before Abraham lived. We are not the only ones who believe that Jesus’ statement does not make him God:

To say that Jesus is “before” him is not to lift him out of the ranks of humanity but to assert his unconditional precedence. To take such statements at the level of “flesh” so as to infer, as “the Jews” do that, at less than fifty, Jesus is claiming to have lived on this earth before Abraham (8:52 and 57), is to be as crass as Nicodemus who understands rebirth as an old man entering his mother’s womb a second time (3:4). [24]

4. In order for the Trinitarian argument that Jesus’ “I am” statement in John 8:58 makes him God, his statement must be equivalent with God’s “I am” statement in Exodus 3:14. However, the two statements are very different. While the Greek phrase in John does mean “I am,” the Hebrew phrase in Exodus actually means “to be” or “to become.” In other words God is saying, “I will be what I will be.” Thus the “I am” in Exodus is actually a mistranslation of the Hebrew text, so the fact that Jesus said “I am” did not make him God.

Buzzard, pp. 93-97

Dana, Letter 21, pp. 169-171

Morgridge, pp. 120-21

Norton, pp. 242-246

Snedeker, pp. 416-418

[Guest]

SE, there only a few of those that the serious scholars, actually the serious scholars say it is nowhere in there. Only the likes of Arthur Murry and guys like that, that claim scholarship because they understand.

but here:
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/module ... ge&pid=128

You can look up the most common verses used and the scholarly way of looking at them with the whole of Bible exegesis.