General Trying to understand unitarian views

[mountee]

Hi

I hope a question is okay to my unitarian friends who believe Jesus didn't have any pre-existence, how do you interpret verses like this?

John‬ ‭6:60-62 Therefore, when many of his disciples heard this, they said, “This teaching is hard. Who can accept it?” 61 Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, asked them, “Does this offend you? 62 Then what if you were to observe the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?

How did he exist before according to your doctrine?

 

[Lori Jane]

The “preexistence” statements in John (John 3:13 8; John 6:62) are connected with the Son of Man, which means human being. The most that could be proved from these verses is that Jesus was a human being alive in heaven before he was born on earth! This sort of explanation is unnecessary, however, once it is noted that Daniel had 600 years earlier seen the Son of Man in vision seated at the right hand of the Father, a position which the New Testament says Jesus gained by resurrection and ascension. As Messiah, Jesus saw himself in the role of the one who was later to be exalted to heaven, since this, according to Daniel’s inspired vision, was the destiny of the Messiah prior to his second coming in glory. Jesus does indeed “preexist” his future return to the earth. All this had been seen in advance by Daniel before the birth of the Messiah. Thus Jesus expected to ascend to the right hand of the Father where he had been seen before in vision as an exalted human being—Son of Man (John 6:62). To say that Jesus was actually at the Father’s throne in heaven as a human being before his birth in Bethlehem is to misunderstand both John and Daniel. Jesus had to be born before anything predicted of him in the Old Testament could take place!

 

[mountee]

The “preexistence” statements in John (John 3:13 8; John 6:62) are connected with the Son of Man, which means human being. The most that could be proved from these verses is that Jesus was a human being alive in heaven before he was born on earth! This sort of explanation is unnecessary, however, once it is noted that Daniel had 600 years earlier seen the Son of Man in vision seated at the right hand of the Father, a position which the New Testament says Jesus gained by resurrection and ascension. As Messiah, Jesus saw himself in the role of the one who was later to be exalted to heaven, since this, according to Daniel’s inspired vision, was the destiny of the Messiah prior to his second coming in glory. Jesus does indeed “preexist” his future return to the earth. All this had been seen in advance by Daniel before the birth of the Messiah. Thus Jesus expected to ascend to the right hand of the Father where he had been seen before in vision as an exalted human being—Son of Man (John 6:62). To say that Jesus was actually at the Father’s throne in heaven as a human being before his birth in Bethlehem is to misunderstand both John and Daniel. Jesus had to be born before anything predicted of him in the Old Testament could take place!

Hi

thanks for this but not sure I understand the logic and not sure the relevance of Daniel's vision on this,

So I think you see this as saying "son of Man ascending to where there was a vision of him before

instead of what it actually says "Son of Man ascending to where he was before?

So do you not believe he was actually in heaven before and the verse is wrong?

 

[Shelley]

"Came down from heaven" is used in this chapter to describe the manna which was a gift from God. The manna did not prexist in heaven did it? Jesus was also a gift from God. A gift that God had been promising to give. Jesus claim was that he was that gift now on earth as a human son of God.

 

[Shelley]

How many verses can you produce saying Jesus pre existed in the Hebrew Scriptures? Why is there virtually mosy only future references to his being? The jews never thought of him as being up in heaven somewhere.

 

[stignatius]

Why is there virtually mosy only future references to his being?

"But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." 1 Corinthians 2:7, 8

I think that's a solid question. At least one response is that it was something that had yet to be revealed. I would say that there are indications that Messiah would be more than human in the OT. But, I wouldn't use any of those things as proof texts. I would primarily argue for preexistence from the NT.

 

[stignatius]

Speaking of 1 Corinthians... What would a unitarian do with 1 Corinthians 10:3, 4?

 

[stignatius]

The “preexistence” statements in John (John 3:13 8; John 6:62) are connected with the Son of Man, which means human being. The most that could be proved from these verses is that Jesus was a human being alive in heaven before he was born on earth! This sort of explanation is unnecessary, however, once it is noted that Daniel had 600 years earlier seen the Son of Man in vision seated at the right hand of the Father, a position which the New Testament says Jesus gained by resurrection and ascension. As Messiah, Jesus saw himself in the role of the one who was later to be exalted to heaven, since this, according to Daniel’s inspired vision, was the destiny of the Messiah prior to his second coming in glory. Jesus does indeed “preexist” his future return to the earth. All this had been seen in advance by Daniel before the birth of the Messiah. Thus Jesus expected to ascend to the right hand of the Father where he had been seen before in vision as an exalted human being—Son of Man (John 6:62). To say that Jesus was actually at the Father’s throne in heaven as a human being before his birth in Bethlehem is to misunderstand both John and Daniel. Jesus had to be born before anything predicted of him in the Old Testament could take place!

Are you saying that when Jesus says : "the son of Man ascending to where he was before", by before he means the vision in Daniel 7 where he ascended? Or are you saying that scripture teaches that Jesus will ascend to heaven again after his second coming?

 

[mountee]

"Came down from heaven" is used in this chapter to describe the manna which was a gift from God. The manna did not prexist in heaven did it? Jesus was also a gift from God. A gift that God had been promising to give. Jesus claim was that he was that gift now on earth as a human son of God.

Hi,

Thanks for the response, could you please clarify why the reference to manna coming down is similar as I can't see the link. We are not referring to the coming down part but the fact that this verse and many other verses state "where he was before".

"Son of Man ascending to where he was before?

 

[Lori Jane]

We are saying where he was before was in God's plan before the founding of the earth. We don't believe it was literal. This is not an uncommon Jewish understanding. The Jewish concept of foreknowledge.

This quote explains it better than I can.

However, there is a second type of pre-existence which is widely recognised by Biblical scholarship, but sadly not even heard of by most in the pew. This is a case when ignorance seems to be bliss. Such ignorance is to our shame for it distorts Jesus by ripping him out of his cultural setting. Such ignorance creates “another Jesus”, indeed a “false Christ” that our Lord Himself warned us about.

The Jewish worldview was that something planned (that is, foreknown in the counsel of God) existed notionally or ideally, but not yet in actuality upon earth in our experience. David Capes’ article on “Preexistence” in the Dictionary of the Later New Testament & Its Developments helpfully notes that,

“The pre-existent state may be described as ideal (existence in the mind or plan of God) or actual (existence alongside and distinct from God).” 1
Thus, it is well understood within Biblical scholarship that pre-existence may mean either that something or some one may literally exist in Heaven (the ‘incarnational’ model already mentioned) or may be of the Jewish ‘ideal’ type where something or someone may exist in God’s mind before He literally brings it into material existence.

There is a mountain of Jewish literature that confirms how all-pervasive “notional” pre-existence was in Jewish thinking at the time of Christ. One of the most prominent scholars in modern christological studies, Larry Hurtado, states, There is today a virtual consensus among scholars that the pre-Christian Jewish tradition provides the most important background for the idea of pre-existence in the NT. 2.

 

[mountee]

We are saying where he was before was in God's plan before the founding of the earth. We don't believe it was literal. This is not an uncommon Jewish understanding. The Jewish concept of foreknowledge.

This quote explains it better than I can.

Thanks Lori, I find it a fascinating. So if the bible was trying to communicate that Jesus was literally in Heaven before hand what should it have said instead?

 

[Lori Jane]

So if the bible was trying to communicate that Jesus was literally in Heaven before hand what should it have said instead?

I would expect to see some description similar to how in Job we see a description of the heavenly host assembling. Some reference to what Jesus did in his pre-human existence. I would expect Jesus to share stories with the apostles at the very least of what it was like to exist before, what he saw, did, experienced.

 

[Tracy Z]

The few not totally clear verses cannot trump all the obvious and straightforward verses that speak to a particular subject. The previous explanations of this "difficult" text are sufficient to understand the verse along with the rest of Scripture.

In regards to thee comment about manna, the point is that manna was said to have come down from heaven (which would imply that it was in heaven before it came down, and thus could essentially return or go back to where it was.) But we know that the manna appeared on the ground like dew and was never in heaven as pre-existent manna.

If one would consider Matthew 1.1 where it says, "genealogy" of Jesus, which is actually the Greek word "genesis," which means "origin" or "beginning," that is straightforward language as to when Jesus began his existence, clearly stating he did not exist before his BEGINNING. You cannot literally exist before you exist. You cannot begin, before you began.

So, one must accept the clear verses as the base of knowledge, and then seek an explanation of the few unclear verses in accordance of thee clear ones, otherwise the Bible would contradict itself.

 

[mountee]

I would expect to see some description similar to how in Job we see a description of the heavenly host assembling. Some reference to what Jesus did in his pre-human existence. I would expect Jesus to share stories with the apostles at the very least of what it was like to exist before, what he saw, did, experienced.

Hi

Thanks, yea if that’s the standard of evidence to hit to accept Jesus pre-existence and the usual passages like Hebrews chapter 1 and 2, Jude verse 4,5, Colossians 1, and John 1 don’t work for you then yea tricky.

I do find it a fascinating perspective and I considered it myself when initially waking up as a JW, I just swung the other way on the same evidence,

 

[Shelley]

Hi,

Thanks for the response, could you please clarify why the reference to manna coming down is similar as I can't see the link. We are not referring to the coming down part but the fact that this verse and many other verses state "where he was before".

"Son of Man ascending to where he was before?

 

[Shelley]

The manna was mentioned in verse 58 " This is the bread which came down from heaven" I usually read a fair bit a head of scriptures and a fair bit after them now. Had way too many experiences of Watch Tower cherry picking scriptures and chucking them in here and there between their words. I'm so glad you posted Mountee, I admire that and the things you had to say

 

[Shelley]

So the Manna was not there before literally just as Jesus was not there literally. Both were given, created for mankind for our salvation.

 

[stignatius]

"When the dew fell on the camp at night, the manna would fall with it." - Numbers 11:9

"and he rained down on them manna to eat and gave them the grain of heaven." - Psalm 78:24

Jesus uses a metaphor to say that he descended from heaven. I'm pretty sure Jesus was not using this metaphor to teach that he was literally bread. I don't see anything here inconsistent with the notion of his pre-human existence.

 

[Shelley]

Oh I don't see that he used this metaphor to say he came down from heaven. Just that that is where good gifts come from, from heaven, from God. I understand he used it to say manna and he himself had life giving properties. And his would be a lasting gift, not one that disappeared the next day.

 

[stignatius]

Oh I don't see that he used this metaphor to say he came down from heaven. Just that that is where good gifts come from, from heaven, from God. I understand he used it to say manna and he himself had life giving properties. And his would be a lasting gift, not one that disappeared the next day.

Sure. But, if that demonstrates anything, it's that metaphors have limitations.

P.S. He does say the following: "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." - John 6:50, 51

So, when you say: "I don't see that he used this metaphor to say he came down from heaven. " my question is, why not?