Is It Possible for Christ to Pre-exist and Still Be a Created Being?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Is It Possible For Christ To Pre-Exist, and Still Be A Created Being?

Hi A____,

Thank you for your kind words. Yes, it is obvious that we both have given this subject much thought.

You ask me:

“Have you ever thought that there was a time when Jesus was not the Son. Father and Son being human concepts, father presupposes that he is older than a son and son presupposes that he is younger than a father yet we know that both have no beginning, they have always existed.”

Yes, indeed, I have considered Christ’s origins, and I am aware that He pre-existed. But no, Christ’s pre-existence does not necessitate Him having no beginning. We are specifically told that we are to understand His eternal power and Godhead by the things that are made”, not by an unscriptural doctrine which the Catholic Encyclopedia admits was added to scripture, as I demonstrate in the paper on the trinity and in this link:
http://www.iswasandwillbe.com/can-a-lie-in-the-translation-be-weeded-out/
http://www.iswasandwillbe.com/trinity.php/

Christ specifically calls Himself “the beginning of the creation of God”.

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;

According to scripture there was never a time when Christ was not a ‘son’ in the sense of having issued forth from His Father. That fact is plainly stated for us:

1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and [besides that “one God, the Father, of whom are all things, including Christ, there is also…] one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

I simply believe that when I read, “one God the Father, of who are all things… [“all things” includes] one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things [is] the beginning of the creation… of [that] one God, the Father”. Why would I want to deny that the “one Lord by whom are all things” is not of the “one Father, “of whom are all things”?

Romans 1:20 tells us how we are to understand “the invisible things of God… even His… Godhead”:

Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.

“The things that are made” refers specifically to the marriage union, because we are told who is “the head of Christ” in this verse:

1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

“The head of every man is Christ”; surely no one believes that “every man” is “co-equal” with Christ. “And the head of Christ is God” demonstrates exactly what Romans 1:20 is teaching us and what 1 Corinthians 8:6 is telling us. They all agree that “there is but one God, the Father of whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things”. “Of… God… by… Christ” is exactly what Paul says of the man and of the woman, which is “the things that are made [by which] the invisible things of God are clearly seen… even His eternal power and Godhead”.

1 Corinthians 8:6 teaches us the principle that “there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things”. Notice the parallel Paul is making in the very same 11th chapter of 1 Corinthians:

1Co 11:12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

That is the scriptural way to understand “even His eternal power and Godhead”. Just as “the head of every man is Christ” so also “the head of Christ is God”.

You make this statement:

“Father and Son being human concepts, father presupposes that he is older than a son and son presupposes that he is younger than a father yet we know that both have no beginning, they have always existed.”

That is classic, human, circular reasoning which completely denies that “the invisible things of God are clearly seen… by the things that are made”.

Your doctrine, in the face of all these verses to the contrary, is: “We know that both have no beginning, [therefore we know] they have always existed”??? I must now choose whether to believe your doctrine that “We know that both have no beginning”, or Christ’s doctrine which tell me plainly that He is “the beginning of the creation of God”, and that “the head of Christ is God” just as “the head of every man is Christ”.

You say “Father and Son being human concepts”, and then attempt to use that fact to prove that human concepts of “the things that are made” are not used by God to explain spiritual concepts. The fact is that, according to the scriptures, Romans 1:20 in particular teaches us that the very opposite is true. I pray you are given to accept what you are about to reread concerning the mind of our “One God, the Father, of whom are all things” as He explains to us how we are given, by Him to understand what is His relationship to our “one Lord by whom are all things”. Here is how He will explain to us His eternal power and [the] Godhead, and His relationship with Christ:

Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Which “things that are made” will give us a proper understanding of the Godhead? Is this referring to the three parts of an egg? Is this verse referring to the three stages of water, as many trinitarians want us to believe?

If your belief in the trinity has become an “idol of [your] heart”, then nothing the scriptures tell us about who is, was and always will be “the head of Christ”, will change your mind, because you will just continue to believe that the Father and the Son are “co-equal, co-eternal, and co-substantial”.

I cannot agree that He had no beginning when He Himself tells me otherwise:

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;

Here is your e-mail which I will deal with in order.

Your first paragraph:

“Where do I start? You are certainly a student of the scriptures and have plumbed its depths and certainly are to be commended. Yet there is always more we are learning, and only God knows all things. Col 2:3”

I could not agree more. “There is always more we are learning”. Yet while we are learning, we must be discerning what is and what is not “the voice of the… true shepherd”. Christ’s sheep know His voice and will not follow the voice of a stranger (Joh 10:26-30):

Joh 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
Joh 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
Joh 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.
Joh 10:30 I and my Father are one.

How could Christ possibly have left out and ignored the third equal person of the Godhead if the holy spirit is actually such a person?

Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

“Have you ever considered 1 Cor 12:3 no one can say Jesus is Lord (Jehovah) except by the Holy Spirit. If we have the Spirit of God, Rom 8:9,14, 27 we are walking in the light even as He is in the light. Joh 10:5 And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.”

Yes, I certainly have considered that verse, and as you yourself use the phrase, “the spirit”, you need to know that”the holy spirit is the “holy spirit of God“.

Eph 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

“There is one God, the Father, of whom are all things” certainly includes “the holy spirit of God”. It is not a separate person of the Godhead. That is why Christ and all of His apostles never refer to the holy spirit as a person, and that is why they call it, as you yourself did, “the spirit of God”.

“The gospel tells us that Jesus existed in the heavens from eternity Micah 5:2 Although He was existing in God’s form, He thought it not robbery to be equal with God but emptied Himself and became a man, the ultimate humiliation. Jesus did this because God cannot die, but as a man He could. Php 2:”

Here is what Micah 5:2 actually says:

Mic 5:2 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 [Hebrew, ‘olawm’.

Now let us examine what the translators have done with this verse to make it accord with their false doctrine of Christ having no beginning. This is something which men ought to fear to do, but which the translators did with impunity. Notice what Mr. James Strong, who was a trinitarian, shows us concerning this verse of scripture. Here is this verse with Strong’s numbers for each Hebrew word beside every English word:

Mic 5:2 But thou,H859 BethlehemH1035 Ephratah,H672 though thou beH1961 littleH6810 among the thousandsH505 of Judah,H3063 yet out ofH4480 thee shall he come forthH3318 unto me that is to beH1961 rulerH4910 in Israel;H3478 whose goings forthH4163 have been from of old,H4480 H6924 from everlasting.H4480 H3117 H5769

I have emboldened the three numbers at the end of this verse to draw attention to the fact that they are translated by but two English words, the words ‘from everlasting’. It is from this verse that you conclude: “The gospel tells us that Jesus existed in the heavens from eternity Micah 5:2”. But the translators were forced to ignore the Hebrew word to which James Strong has assigned the number H3117. Here is what Strong himself tells us that word means:

H3117
יום yôm
yome

From an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literally (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverbially): – age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever (-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (. . . live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X required, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year (-ly), + younger.

But that word does not accord with the false doctrine which teaches that Christ is not “the beginning of the creation of God” (Rev 3:14), and the Hebrew word behind the number H5769 is ‘olawm’, which is defined thusly:

From H5956; properly concealed, that is, the vanishing point; generally time out of mind (past or future), that is, (practically) eternity; frequentative adverbially (especially with prepositional prefix) always: – always (-s), ancient (time), any more, continuance, eternal, (for, [n-]) ever (-lasting, -more, of old), lasting, long (time), (of) old (time), perpetual, at any time, (beginning of the) world (+ without end). Compare H5331, H5703.

It never pays to simply accept Mr. Strong’s definitions without checking how any particular word is used in the scriptures. When we do so, we find that his added words “(practically) eternity” and “eternal” are completely wrong. This Hebrew word is translated with the Greek word ‘aion’ meaning ‘an age’, as in these verses:

Psa 45:6 Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.

Here is this verse with Strong’s numbers:

Psa 45:6 Thy throne,H3678 O God,H430 is for everH5769 and ever:H5703 the sceptreH7626 of thy kingdomH4438 is a rightH4334 sceptre.H7626

Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Here is this verse with Strong’s numbers. Notice that the holy spirit uses just one Greek word to translate the two Hebrew words ‘olawn’ and ‘ad’

Heb 1:8 ButG1161 untoG4314 theG3588 SonG5207 he saith, ThyG4675 throne,G2362 O God,G2316 is for ever and ever:G1519 G165 G165 a sceptreG4464 of righteousnessG2118 is theG3588 sceptreG4464 of thyG4675 kingdom.G932

Here now is Strong’s definition of the Greek word which Mr. Strong has assigned the number G165:

G165
αἰών
aiōn ahee-ohn’

From the same as G104; properly an age; by extension perpetuity (also past); by implication the world; specifically (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future): – age, course, eternal, (for) ever (-more), [n-]ever, (beginning of the, while the) world (began, without end). Compare G5550

The Greek word ‘aion’ is properly translated as “an age”. The “by extension pertpetutiy” is admittedly not “proper”, and is again a blatant addition to the Words of God.

Here is how Rotherham has translated Micah 5:2:

Mic 5:2 Thou, therefore, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though little, to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee, shall Mine come forth, to be ruler in Israel,—whose comings forth, have been from of old, from the days of age-past time.

Mr. Rotherham was not constrained to leave out the Hebrew word ‘yom’, neither was he inclined to twist the Word ‘olawm’ into making it ‘for ever’. Christ has not always existed, and the scriptures will always bear out that Truth when they are properly translated.

“Jesus is now the son of God, He retains His humanity for ever. Have you ever thought that there was a time when Jesus was not the Son. Father and Son being human concepts, father presupposes that he is older than a son and son presupposes that he is younger than a father yet we know that both have no beginning, they have always existed. Jesus is the son because of the event 2000 years ago in Bethlehem. Jesus is the firstborn, it is a title which means first in preeminence.”

‘Father’ and ‘Son’, are both scriptural words, which are used to explain to us “by the things that are made… His eonian power and Godhead”.

“The bible tells us that the Father is greater than the Son John 14:28 This is true in regard to relationship, a father is greater than a son but this is in regard to rank not essence. The Father is not better than the son, they are both the same quality. As an example the husband is greater than the wife but he is not better than her as they are both human beings. Both the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit have the same family name, Jehovah Matt 28:19”

“The Father is greater than the Son in rank” denies that they are co-equal, which is an integral part of the doctrine of the trinity, while at the same time saying the Son is subject to the Father. It is nothing less than the forked tongue of that old serpent the devil, who denied that Adam and Eve would die, while admitting that they would be like God to “know good and evil”. By convincing them they would never die, the serpent made mankind believe the lie that mankind is also an eternal triune being, and therefore it follows that mankind’s Creator was a triune being. This false trinity doctrine is the very foundation upon which the false doctrine of eternal torment is based. If mankind truly dies like a beast, then there is no eternal torment, and if there is not eternal torment then there is no immortal soul, which is exactly what the scriptures actually teach:

Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Ecc 3:18 I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.
Ecc 3:19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; for all is vanity.
Ecc 3:20 All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.

Eze 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

1Co 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
1Co 15:18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.

“If words have meaning and the bible was inspired by God the Holy Spirirt and He chose to use the masculine pronoun ‘He’ in reference to Himself, it would be for us a contradiction and error to argue with Him.”

The masculine pronoun ‘him’ is used in scripture to personify sin:

Gen 4:7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

So the use of the masculine pronoun to prove that the holy spirit is not the spirit of God is not a valid argument when the scripture teach otherwise:

1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Eph 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God [“The Father”], whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

It would amount to nothing less than a slap in the face of a third equal person to ignore him and leave him out of every mention by the apostles of Christ and His Father, which ‘Father’ just happens to be “the holy spirit”:

Mat 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

Once again the holy spirit is “the holy spirit of God… the Father of whom are all things” (1Co 8:6).

“As I pointed out in my essay, how many Kings do you worship? How many can be First and Last? Who is the Husband, the Father or is it the Son? Or who is the Rock, Jesus or is it the Father? The correct answer is the one true God. Is Jesus part of the one true God? John 17:3 It is life eternal to know the only true God. Eternal Life lies in Jesus Christ for there is not another name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved. Jesus is certainly then a part of the one true God.”

Let’s just quote John 17:3 and see what it says:

Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

What an absolute insult it is to ignore the “third person of the Godhead” in such a disrespectful manner, if indeed there were such a “person”. But that is not how we are told to “understand His eternal power and God head” (Rom 1:20).

“The head of Christ is God… the Father, of whom are all things”, and that headship is “understood by “the head of the woman is the man”. It is not understood by ‘the head of the woman is Adam and Steve’.

“The Holy Spirit longs to have fellowship with us and give to us His gifts of love, joy, peace, forbearance etc. If you come to the table and do not regard the one next to you, just what kind of relationship is there to be had?”

My point exactly! Why is this supposed third person so ignored by all the writers of the New Testament?

2Co 11:31 The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not.

Eph 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

1Pe 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

Jas 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

1Jn 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

“Jesus says, If you do not believe that I am who I say I am, ye shall die in your sins. Similarly every sin will be forgiven men except the blasphemey (sin) against the Holy Spirit Matt 12:31,32 Why would you grieve the Holy Spirit with unbelief? Eph 4:30 Isaiah 63:10”

Indeed, why would we “grieve the holy spirit of God”? by teaching that the holy spirit is a separate person, instead of simply being the spirit of God of which all ‘the things which are seen [are] made”?

Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Here is another link which demonstrates how crucial to the removing of the whole stay of bread is this false doctrine of the trinity:

http://www.iswasandwillbe.com/Free_will_fall_trinity.php
The trinity is the trunk of the tree of all false doctines.

Isa 3:1 For, behold, the Lord, the LORD of hosts, doth take away from Jerusalem and from Judah the stay and the staff, the whole stay of bread, and the whole stay of water,

While I have already covered the subject of Christ being the “beginning of the creation of God”, I will take the time to reiterate that point.

Albert Barnes, a trinitarian, in his commentary confesses that the Greek word ‘arche’ as “the author of creation, and in that sense the beginning, though expressing a scriptural doctrine… is not in accordance with the proper meaning of the word [arche] used here…”

“…it may be observed, that the first one – that he is the author of the creation, and in that sense the beginning – though expressing a scriptural doctrine Joh 1:3; Eph 3:9; Col 1:16, is not in accordance with the proper meaning of the word used here – ἀρχὴ archē. The word properly refers to the “commencement” of a thing, not its “authorship,” and denotes properly primacy in time, and primacy in rank, but not primacy in the sense of causing anything to exist. The two ideas which run through the word as it is used in the New Testament are those just suggested. For the former – primacy in regard to time – that is properly the commencement of a thing, see the following passages where the word occurs: Mat_19:4, Mat_19:8; Mat_24:8, Mat_24:21; Mar_1:1; Mar_10:6; Mar_13:8, Mar_13:19; Luk_1:2; Joh_1:1-2; Joh_2:11; Joh_6:64; Joh_8:25, Joh_8:44; Joh_15:27; Joh_16:4; Act_11:15; 1Jo_1:1; 1Jo_2:7, 1Jo_2:13-14, 1Jo_2:24; 1Jo_3:8, 1Jo_3:11; 2Jo_1:5-6. For the latter signification, primacy of rank or authority, see the following places: Luk_12:11; Luk_20:20; Rom_8:38; 1Co_15:24; Eph_1:21; Eph_3:10; Eph_6:12; Col_1:16, Col_1:18; Col_2:10, Col_2:15; Tit_3:1. The word is not, therefore, found in the sense of authorship, as denoting that one is the beginning of anything in the sense that he caused it to have an existence.”

Barnes believes in the doctrine of the trinity and goes right on to effectively deny the point he has just so profoundly demonstrated. Christ has just informed us that He is “the beginning of the creation of God”, and because of that He was able to divest Himself of “the glory [He] had with [His Father] before the world began” and die and be raised up again from among the dead.

Joh 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

“All things are of… the Father” (1Co 8:6), so there is no possible way for the Father to “empty Himself and take on Him the form of a servant [or] the likeness of men”.

Php 2:7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men;

On the other hand, Christ is called “the image of the invisible God”, and as “the image”, instead of the “one God, the Father of whom are all things”, Christ was capable of “emptying Himself… [of] the glory He had with His Father before the world began”.

Col 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

No “image” is the actual thing of which it is the ‘image. Therefore the “image of the invisible God” can be and is “the beginning of the creation of [the] one God, the Father, of whom are all things”, who ‘began his creation’ with Christ, “by whom are all [other] things”, simply because “it pleased the Father”.

1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

http://www.iswasandwillbe.com/can-a-lie-in-the-translation-be-weeded-out/

Your servant with Christ and His Father,
Mike

Other related posts