I personally stay away from ANYONE who says, “He was in the beginning. He was there with God, not created by God.”
Another one…
“This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.” Acts 2:23
“For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.” Romans 8:29-30
“God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don’t you know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah—how he appealed to God against Israel:” Romans 11:2
“who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance.” 1 Peter 1:2
“For He [Christ] was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you.” 1 Peter 1:20 NASB
This last verse is quite interesting since the context is speaking of Christ’s sacrifice being something already chosen or foreordained before the world.
The inspired authors could have also used the following language if all they wanted to say was that God had chosen or foreordained Christ for his mission long before he was created in his mother’s womb:
“The word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.’” Jeremiah 1:4-5
“I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ. For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man,” Galatians 1:11-16
Yet, unfortunately for both Badawi and Wierwille, neither Jesus nor the NT ever use such language, but speak quite plainly and unambiguously about his prehuman existence with the Father, just as the following verses amply testify:
“No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.” John 3:13
“Jesus then said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.’ … Jesus said to them, ‘I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst… FOR I HAVE COME DOWN FROM HEAVEN, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me.’ … So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, ‘I am the bread that came down from heaven.’ They said, ‘Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, “I have come down from heaven”?’” John 6:32-33, 35, 38, 41-42
Notice here that even Jesus’ contemporaries understood that Christ was claiming to have actually existed in heaven from whence he came down.
“This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh… As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven, not as the fathers ate and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” John 6:50-51, 57-58
“Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?” John 6:62
"Jesus said to them, ‘If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came FROM/OUT OF God (ego gar EK tou theou) and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me… Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.’ So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?’ Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham came into being (prin Abraam genesthai), I am.’ So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.” John 8:42, 56-59
Here, Jesus says that he came out of (ek) God and was existing even before Abraham’s creation!
“do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?” John 10:36
“Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come FROM God and was going back to God (kai pros ton theon),” John 13:3
“for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came FROM God. I came FROM the Father and have come INTO THE WORLD, and now I am leaving the world and going to the Father (kai poreuomai pros ton theon).” John 16:27-28
The foregoing examples conclusively demonstrate that Jesus was emphatically affirming that he actually and personally existed in heaven even before he became a man. John himself makes the very same point in his prologue:
Read the full article.
J.
Well, since he is God, as the Holy Spirit is God, they are all together in the beginning. Not really hard to understand, as I pointed out through scriptures a few posts back. If you have a different take, let’s talk about it.
May God be with you.
Peter
1 Like
The Rabbinic and Christian Understanding of Messiah’s Preexistence
Suffice it to say, texts such as Micah 5:2 led some of the Jews to embrace the notion of the Messiah’s preexistence, or at least the preexistence of his name, e.g. Jews understood from such passages that even before the universe was created God had already determined to send the Messiah into the world.
Note, for instance, how the following Aramaic paraphrase of the Hebrew Bible interprets Micah 5:2:
“And you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, you who were too small to be numbered among the thousands of the house of Judah, from you shall come forth before me the anointed One [Messiah], to exercise dominion over Israel, he whose name was mentioned from of old, from ancient times.”
(Kevin J. Cathcart & Robert P. Gordon, The Targum of the Minor Prophets: The Aramaic Bible [Liturgical Press, 1989], Volume 14, p. 122; italic emphasis ours)
Another passage that was understood in this same sense is Psalm 72, specifically v. 17:
“Composed by Solomon, uttered in prophecy. O God, give your just rulings to the King Messiah, and your righteousness to the son of King David… May his name be invoked for ever; and before the sun came to be his name was determined; so all the peoples will be blessed by his merit, and they shall speak well of him.”
(Targum Psalms: An English Translation, by Edward M. Cook)
Here is another version of the Targum:
“May his name be remembered forever, his name which was made ready even before the sun came into being.”
(Samson H. Levey, The Messiah: An Aramaic Interpretation [Hebrew Union College, New York 1974], Targum to the Hagiographa, p. 117)
And:
Yet was the fire of the Gehenna created on the eve of the Sabbath? Surely it was taught: Seven things were created before the world was created, and these are they: The Torah, repentance, the Garden of Eden, Gehenna, the Throne of Glory, the Temple, and the name of the Messiah. The Torah, for it is written, The Lord made me [sc. the Torah] as the beginning of his way. Repentance, for it is written, Before the mountains were brought forth, and it is written, Thou turnest man to contrition, and sayest, Repent, ye children of men.27 The Garden of Eden, as it is written, And the Lord planted a garden in Eden from aforetime.28 The Gehenna, for it is written, For Tophet [i.e., Gehenna] is ordered of old. The Throne of Glory and the Temple, for it is written, Thou throne of glory, on high from the beginning, Thou place of our sanctuary. The name of the Messiah, as it is written, His [sc. the Messiah’s] name shall endure for ever, and has exited before the sun! — I will tell you: only its cavity was created before the world was created, but its fire [was created] on the eve of the Sabbath.
Pesahim 54a
Finally:
Resh Lakish said: Where is visiting the sick indicated in the Torah? In the verse, If these men die the common death of all men, or if they be visited after the visitation of all men etc. How is it implied? — Raba answered: [The verse means this:] If these men die the common death of all men, who lie sick a-bed and men come in and visit them, what will people say? The Lord hath not sent me for this [task]. Raba expounded: But if the Lord make a new thing: if the Gehenna is already created, ‘tis well: if not, let the Lord create it. But that is not so, for it was taught: Seven things were created before the world, viz., The Torah, repentance, the Garden of Eden, Gehenna, the Throne of Glory, the Temple, and the name of the Messiah. The Torah, for it is written, The Lord possessed me [sc. the Torah] in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.6 Repentance, for it is written, Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world . . . Thou turnest man to destruction, and sayest, Repent, ye sons of men. The Garden of Eden, as it is written, And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden from aforetime. Gehenna, as it is written, For Tophet is ordained of old. The Throne of Glory, as it is written, Thy Throne is established from of old. The Temple, as it is written, A glorious high throne from the beginning is the place of our sanctuary. The name of the Messiah, as it is written, His name [sc. of Messiah] shall endure for ever, and [has existed] before the sun! — But Moses said thus: If a mouth has already been created for it [sc. Gehenna], ‘tis well; if not, let the Lord create one. But is it not written, There is no new thing under the sun? — He said thus: If the mouth is not near to this spot, let it draw near.
Nedarim 39b
There are also references which say that the Messiah was actually born before the world and that he has been in heaven ever since!
As the following scholar explains:
J.
1 Like
Thanks again @Johann I will be reading up on it.
Peter
1 Like
Remember, our Bible is a Jewish book with a Jewish Messiah, and I have all these Jewish sources and highly recommend Sam as well as other {few} apologists.
Unfortunately, most here don’t read “secondary sources”.
Shalom achi.
J.
1 Like
@NeutralZone, but the doctrine of the Trinity did show up long before the 4th century A.D. It shows up in the Old Testament about the oneness of God and then in the Gospel of John most clearly in the New Testament, where John’s account emphasizes Jesus’ many claims to be God and yet to be distinguished from the Father, @The_Omega.
Deu 6:4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
John 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
John_10:30 I and the Father are one.”
John_6:35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.
John_6:41 So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.”
John_6:48 I am the bread of life.
John_6:51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”
John_8:12 Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
John_8:42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me.
John_10:11 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
John_10:14 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me,
Jhn_10:36 do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?
John_10:37 If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me;
John_10:38 but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.”
John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.
The doctrine of the Trinity is based correctly and squarely on the Bible. The Triune God is a mysterious Being, but the Bible says that he is three Persons in one God. Therefore, I believe that he is.
1 Like
Every spot in OT where GOD or LORD( all capitols) God put the tetragrammaton=YHWH or YHVH=Jehovah. It is Jesus’ Fathers will for his name to be in his bible over 7000 spots. What occurred= Wicked men by satans will removed Gods name, they had no right. Thus everyone’s religion shows whose will they support by the translation they use. Its 100% fact if Jesus were on Earth he would use a translation with his Fathers name in all of those over 7000 spots, because he supports his Fathers will 100% in everything. Thus so does his real religion and all true followers. Not to difficult to see who supports Jesus’ Fathers will( Matt 7:21)
I understand why some people feel that way about these discussions. Trinity debates can easily become repetitive, and I agree that no one benefits if the conversation turns into people just repeating slogans at each other. But I do want to gently push back on the idea that simply holding a firm theological conviction means someone is trying to force the text to say what they already believe.
All of us come to Scripture with conclusions we currently think are correct. Trinitarians do. Unitarians do. Oneness believers do. Catholics do. Mormons do. The real question isn’t whether someone has a position; the question is whether the arguments being presented are grounded in the text and open to examination.
From my side, I’m not appealing to an extra book, a modern prophet, or a new revelation outside the Bible. I’m working from the same passages everyone else is discussing. My reasoning simply starts with two things I see consistently emphasized in Scripture:
First, the absolute oneness of God as understood within 1st Century Jewish monotheism. The prophets repeatedly stress that God is one and that there is no other beside Him.
Second, the genuine humanity of Jesus. The New Testament doesn’t present Jesus merely appearing human. He is born in time, grows, learns obedience, prays, is tempted, and submits His will to the Father. Those are real human experiences.
Because I take those two things seriously, I interpret the relational language between the Father and the Son through the reality of the incarnation. When Jesus prays or speaks of the Father, I see the authentic human Messiah relating to God—not necessarily two eternal divine minds speaking to each other before creation.
That doesn’t mean I deny Christ’s divinity. I affirm that the fullness of God is revealed in Him. My question has simply been whether the biblical text requires us to posit multiple eternal centers of divine consciousness in order to explain that revelation.
People may disagree with that conclusion, and that’s completely fair. But disagreement alone doesn’t mean someone is unwilling to examine Scripture. It just means we’re weighing the same data differently.
If the discussion ever stops being about the text and becomes about labeling one another,
(Which I see a lot here doing) (Use text (Scripture) to show me where I’m wrong, don’t just say it and label me, without explanation grounded in the word)
then it probably does become unproductive. But if the goal is genuinely to understand what the apostles were trying to communicate about God and Christ, then I still think it’s worth having the conversation respectfully, even if we end up seeing things differently.
Good morning, afternoon, or evening @The_Omega
First, I do not remember labeling you. If I did, then I sincerely apologize. As for what you said here, I agree, I think we are all, most here are, seeking the Truth According to God. That is the whole point of the blog TAG.
I’m glad we can agree. However, Truth is truth. God is God. No matter how much someone tries to put Him in a Box.
Uh, neither am I?
This is what I mean. We have. At least I know I have done this very thing. Multiple Scriptures were presented, but they were either ignored or interpreted through the lens of pre-existing beliefs, or twisted to support a different understanding than what the text clearly states.
As I’ve mentioned before, I respect that you’ve been a part of your denomination for 30 years, and it’s understandable that changing long-held beliefs can be challenging. However, the most straightforward path to understanding God’s truth is to examine the Bible itself, to read it as it is, without preconceived notions, personal desires, or hopes, and simply allow its meaning to unfold.
Peter
1 Like
Yes and no. Yes, but a way younger version
Peter
Perhaps I missed something? What about the doctrine of election? How would that apply here?
Peter
I mentioned that I ran a search on your TAG blog for material on the doctrine of election and did not find anything relevant, but that is a discussion for another occasion and not the subject under consideration here.
J.
DEBATE: Trinity vs. Oneness w. Sam Shamoun & Roger Perkins | Part 2 | IsHeARealOne Radio
Listen to part 1, more for the members sake.
J.
1 Like
I responded in the other topic. I’m actually not sure I have talked about it directly, but touched here and there. I did give you a straight answer Pastoral Thoughts on the Doctrine of Election - #2 by PeterC
Peter
1 Like
Their unity is not found in being a single “persona,” but rather in their shared nature, purpose, and perfect love. They are “too one to be many but too many to be one”.
Aftet reading the above, to me its not One person that takes on different roles. It seems that Essence comes first.
The essence being unbodied personal power
(Side Note 4 self:And hypothetically speaking: it might just be the essence is in where power lies. )
Hence where is the “unity” if there is only one?
Unity has to be at least two to create a union; coming together. And I don’t think that’s going to look like two roles coming together for…for when Jesus prayed something like, they are to be one as we are one was He talking about the roles He played? That would be as God were talking to one man that played many roles. But He is talking about man, man that God made in His image or likeness.
And sense this is so while one man can play different roles one thing is there is not just one man there are many men.
And these are to be one as They are.
I watch Sam Shamoun and God logic…
They are the best debaters
I didnt watch the rest, but will. He lost when He tried to bait and switch… He should have conceeded at the first 2 responses from Shamoun.
I believe that doctrine of man restrict God to a box…And plays the game of who is saved.
1 Like
Objectively false.
-
No, the doctrine of the Trinity did not suddenly show up in the 4th century.
-
No, it had nothing to do with Roman emperors.
-
There were no “Roman Catholic bishops” in the 4th century. There were, however, Christian bishops who had suffered and bled as martyrs for Christ.
What are you are repeating is just anti-Trinitarian, anti-Catholic, anti-Christian propaganda. If you are a sincere person who is willing to modify your views based on facts, I am more than happy to offer historical resources to help you learn.
1 Like