Article The Faulty Idea of a Literally Pre-Existent Jesus

Ray Faircloth

Member
Buddy
Oct 16, 2020
72
28
8
England
www.rayfaircloth.com



The Faulty Idea of a Literally

Pre-Existent Jesus



Development of the Idea of Literal Pre-Existence


We need firstly to look at how the idea of a pre-existent Jesus as a so-called ‘God the Son’ or other spirit being originated. The first thoughts about pre-existent persons originated in the pagan world with Plato and were later developed by Xenocrates (d.314 B.C). In time, the first century Middle Platonic philosopher Numenius introduced the idea of a second transcendental entity between the Supreme Being and the universe. This entity, subordinate to the Supreme God, was called the Demiurge—meaning maker or builder. Because matter was viewed as evil, God could not have any association with it. Only the Demiurge could deal with it and so he acted as builder or agent of the material creation.

Furthermore, the concept that Jesus had existed in a different form prior to his birth from Mary has been believed by many since about A.D. 150 when the Christian philosopher Justin Martyr first used the word pre-existence with reference to Jesus. However, Justin was a believer in the idea that Socrates and Plato were actually inspired by God. Justin had been thoroughly schooled in the Greek philosophical thinking of his day, including the thoughts of Numenius whose ideas he found attractive. With his mind so receptive, Justin found it easy to apply such ideas in his interpretation of New Testament Scripture. This was similar to the thinking of the Jewish philosopher Philo, who had earlier reinterpreted the Hebrew Scriptures in pagan Greek terms. In spite of the fact that the word demiourgos appears only in Hebrews 11:10 and refers to God, Justin applied the Demiurge concept to Jesus speaking of him as an “arithmetically second God” saying, “There is and there is said to be another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things; who is also called an Angel, because he announces to all men whatsoever the Maker of all things.” To develop his thinking Justin inaccurately quoted and even modified Scripture. He held that Jesus only came through Mary not from her as Matthew describes.

Justin also stated, “…though I should not be able to prove his pre-existence…For some of our race, who admit that he is the Christ, while holding him to be man of men; with whom I do not agree.” This is in direct contradiction of the Apostle John’s words that: “Every inspired expression that confesses Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh originates with God…” (1 John 4:2) i.e., a fully human Jesus. So, Catholic theologian Karl-Josef Kuschel shows pre-existence of Jesus to be the first major step away from biblical Christianity when he makes the comment that:



The Christology of Jewish Christianity which had been dominant for decades and knew of no pre-existence Christology was increasingly swept aside and was finally branded heretical.



Earlier the Apostle Paul had foretold that, “They will ... wander off into myths” (2 Tim. 4:3, 4 ESV). He also said that some would come, “preaching another Jesus” (2 Cor. 11:4). Indeed, this pagan Greek teaching of a literally pre-existent Jesus was further developed by the Gnostics who taught that Jesus was not a human but ‘a spirit being’ inhabiting a human body.



The idea of Literal Pre-Existence Is Illogical



In Greek pagan philosophical ideas, the concept of the literal pre-existence of a spirit being in heaven with an intangible body who later became the human embryo, as applied to Jesus in Mary’s womb would mean any one of the following:



The whole spirit being was transferred completely and directly into the womb of Mary. Or



The whole spirit being was changed directly into a human embryo in Mary’s womb. Or



The personality of the spirit being was transferred directly into the human embryo. Or



The life or intangible life-force of the spirit being was transferred directly into the human embryo.



In analysing the above four proposals it is evident that:





#1. If the whole spirit being had been transferred completely and directly into the womb of Mary it would create a physical hybrid i.e., part spirit/part human. This is the very Gnostic mythological teaching which early Christianity slaved to keep out of the Christian Congregation; yet it reappeared in the form of the later speculations in Trinitarianism whereby a proposed ‘God the Son’ entered Mary’s womb and was born as Jesus—a being who was a God/man.



#2. If the whole spirit being had been changed completely into a human embryo in Mary’s womb then a fully human Jesus would be the result. However, such a change would:



Be a Greek philosophical speculation which has also been used by science fiction writers.

Break God’s law for there being no crossing of the barriers of the species i.e., everything as being kept “according to its kind” (Gen. 1:21, 24) and therefore no change from angel to human is possible.

Preclude any past connection with the previous life in heaven regarding character, accumulated knowledge or wisdom, and supernatural powers because Jesus would go through the stages from embryo to child etc. So, we must ask: At what point in his actual life would Jesus have acquired such abilities? However, the Bible provides no hint of any time when he gained these, only that God did miraculous works through him (Acts 2:22, 23; 10:38; John 5:19, 14:10b). In other words, Jesus never, at any time, intrinsically had any super-powers or abilities. So, for Yahweh God to have transferred a whole spirit person to a womb would be a pointless exercise and Yahweh may just as well have directly made a replacement Adam from the dust of the ground.



#3. If the life as the personality of the spirit person had been transferred directly into the human embryo, then a hybrid human Jesus would still be the result, because of his having the character, accumulated knowledge, wisdom, and abilities of the supernatural spirit person. But this concept would mean that:



  • Personality is something separate from body? But is one’s body only the external and the personality only the internal part of a person? Such an idea smacks of the pagan Greek concept of the inner person as being a separate soul.


  • Such a person would, in some sense, be superhuman and therefore not really a human.


#4. If the life, as the intangible life-force of the spirit person, had been transferred directly into the human embryo, then, in biblical terms, an impossible scenario arises because life or life-force is impersonal and pervades all of living creation. So, there could be no transferral of the intangible life-force of any specific spirit person, which leaves the creation of a Jesus who is fully and purely human with no connection to any past life.



One Cannot Exist Before One Exists


Because no one can exist before they exist it is proposed by some Trinitarians that ‘God the Son’ gave up who he was to become a human. However, no one can give up who they are and continue to be the same person. Therefore, the connection with the so-called ‘God the Son’ is completely lost. Again, such ideas only originate in Greek mythology.

For Jesus to have been 100% human neither the former so-called spirit ‘life’ nor the personality nor the complete spirit person could be part of his constitution. So, no spirit person or his former ‘life’ or personality could have been transferred to Mary’s womb; otherwise, he would indeed have been either a hybrid or entirely a spirit having taken on human form—all of which is the stuff of science fiction and contradicts God’s law regarding species as being “according to their kinds.” These factors make the whole concept taught by many denominations impossible. In fact, the concept of a literal pre-existence really would require the creation of a single person having two natures—human and spirit and therefore being a hybrid as in some forms of Trinitarianism. Indeed, if one wishes to propose a Jesus who pre-existed, then either:

  1. Jesus was really a spirit creature clothed in an embryonic human body and who later, at his death, left that human body and returned to heaven. Or:








  1. Jesus was really a spirit being who had been re-formed into an embryonic human and so was a hybrid i.e., part man/part spirit but not 100% man. At his resurrection he was then re-formed back into a spirit being in contradiction of Acts 17:31. Or:


  1. At his conception in Mary Jesus received the life or personality i.e., characteristics of a spirit being with supernatural power and knowledge.


Scripturally, however, Jesus is begotten (i.e., fathered—brought into existence) in Mary’s womb. The term ‘begotten’ means that a completely new life came into existence (Matt 1:18, 20; Luke 1:32, 35; Gal 4:4), and so literal pre-existence is untenable. Jesus is always fully human both from birth and after his resurrection. Therefore, God as “Father” begot a human son and Mary ‘conceived’ a child—she did not ‘receive’ a child.



In #1 above Jesus is not human at all. It would amount to a transferring of a spirit life into Mary’s womb rather than a begetting of a new human life. He would have retained all past knowledge and qualities and so giving him a massive advantage when being tested.



In #2 Jesus would have been a hybrid who was part spirit and part human i.e., having two natures and being only half human. This, too, would amount to a transferring of a life into Mary’s womb rather than a begetting of a new fully human life. As the growing child’s mind developed, he would have begun to recall all past knowledge and qualities and so giving him a massive advantage when being tested and therefore he would not have been tested fairly as a human.



In #3 Jesus would also have been a hybrid by virtue of his having such supernatural characteristics of the spirit being.


ANALOGY FOR A RE-FORMED SON OF GOD

As an analogy consider that if someone removes a car engine from say a Nissan Micra and has it fitted into a Rolls Royce does one still have a genuine Rolls Royce? Absolutely not!! It is a very substandard hybrid Rolls Royce/Micra. So, if a powerful spirit being existed in heaven and then was transferred to the womb of a human woman, he still carries with him the spirit equivalent of DNA code which is then hybridized with human genetics and so is sub-standard in all respects rather than his being the perfect human that is detailed in the Scriptures. It is pointless for anyone to claim that they view Jesus as 100% human because that does not fit with their presentation of a scenario in which a pre-existent person is reformed in the womb of a human. Again, please note the impossibility of transferring a personality without its body. Indeed, trinitarians claim that Jesus is 100% God and 100% man at the same time.



NON-HUMAN ORIGIN OF A PERSON SMACKS OF PAGANISM

However, the Scriptures show that Jesus did not have two natures, therefore making it impossible for him to have pre-existed unless we say that an entire spirit being was transferred directly into Mary’s womb with no connection being made with any of her genetic material. If so, then Mary would simply have been a surrogate rather than Jesus’ real mother and Jesus would have been fully spirit but changed into human form and so have been an incarnation. Such a concept, found within the rejected Greek Gnostic teaching of the second century, smacks of paganism inasmuch as it is associated with the idea of pre-existing souls commonly found also in Buddhism and Hinduism.



The Jews Believed in Ideal and Notional Pre-Existence

Rather Than Literal Pre-Existence


The Greek word for literal pre-existence is pro-uparchon and is used in the Scriptures on only two occasions (Acts 8:9 and Luke 23:12 both times rendered with the English word “previously”), but never in relation to Jesus or any other person. So, in the Scriptures there is no word or phrase for a non-human origin i.e., a literal pre-existence of a person. However, the Jews did express the thought of ‘conceptual,’ or ‘notional’ or ‘ideal’ pre-existence and among several definitions the term “notional” means “not existing in reality” and the term “ideal” means “existing only in the mind i.e., conceptual. So, in God’s purposes this means that He holds in mind a picture of what He intends to accomplish, how it will be accomplished, and who will be involved; none of which things actually exist until their time to come into literal existence. This means that it is a foreknowledge or foreordination of something or someone i.e., prophetic. So ‘notional’ or ‘ideal’ pre-existence is when, “God...calls the things that are not as though they are” (Rom. 4:17 LEB). This concept was demonstrated, for example, in the case of Jeremiah who was foreknown but did not literally pre-exist (Jeremiah 1:5 also see Romans 8:29; 9:2 3 and Ephesians 1:4). Additionally, hope and inheritance can be foreknown e.g., “…the hope that is laid up for you in heaven” (Col. 1:5 NASB) and Christians have, “an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you” (1 Pet. 1:4 NASB).



THE MESSIAH WAS FOREKNOWN

Certainly, the notion of Messiah’s future existence was in God’s mind as part of His predetermined plan or purpose. So, Messiah was, “delivered according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God…” (Acts 2:23 ESV) (other versions say: “predetermined plan” NASB, “determined purpose” NKJ, and “prearranged plan” NLT). In fact, Jesus was the Messiah:



“…who was foreknown (“predestined” in REB and Moffatt) before the foundation of the world, but has been revealed in these last times for you” (1 Pet. 1:20 LEB).



So, James Dunn comments on this verse that:



...in 1 Peter 1:20 the key verb (“was made manifest”) is set in antithesis with ‘predestined’. That is to say that the contrast is not between pre-existence and incarnation, but between that which was predestined and that which was revealed...In other words, Peter may well mean that what was made manifest was not so much Christ as what was predestined for Christ, God’s eternal plan. Christology in the Making, p.237.


Also, Christians are similarly foreknown because they are those: “who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God” (1 Pet. 1:1, 2) and that “he chose us in him before the foundation of the world” (Eph. 1:4 ESV). Yet Christians did not literally pre-exist, they notionally pre-existed i.e., in God’s mind, because to foreknow is to have the supernatural ability to know someone before they literally exist as with Jeremiah in 1:5.



THE LAMB
WAS FOREKNOWN

In terms of the requirement for a sacrificial death that would pay the ransom because of Adam’s sin, God could foretell what He had pre-determined concerning the one who would be that sacrifice. This means that the sacrifice existed in God’s mind i.e., it notionally pre-existed as the sacrificial human “Lamb of God. This concerns:



“…the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8).



Here the word-for-word in the UBS Interlinear of this passage reads as: “book of the life of the lamb having been slain from the foundation of the world.” This is according to the syntax of the Greek text. However, the Lamb was not literally slaughtered before the foundation of the world. Rather he, as the slain lamb, was foreknown in God’s mind. This is as Bible scholar Robert Hatch has well stated:



God’s foreknowledge of the Messiah, then, is the biblical alternative to the doctrine of personal pre-existence. Biblical foreknowledge is, in the terminology of pre-existence, best represented in terms of prophetic pre-existence. That is to say, the existence of the Messiah was, prior to his birth, a matter of prophecy. And, from a biblical standpoint, to believe that God had made a promise, conveyed by the words of the prophets (that is, in the form of prophecy), was to believe that what God had promised (and, therefore, previously purposed) had been an inevitable reality from the instant God purposed it.

The Prophetic Pre-existence of the Messiah.



§



 

Attachments

  • 7. The Faulty Idea of a Literally Pre-Existent Jesus.pdf
    199.7 KB · Views: 0