• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Was Jesus A Man Before the Incarnation?

Marcia

Active Member
I said: Angels are a separate category of beings; angels are called spirits in the OT and in the NT (book of Hebrews).

Webdog said:
We have spirits, and we are beings. Same with angels.

Angels are spirit beings; man is not a spirit being. These are two separate categories of creation. Man having a spirit does not make him a spirit being.

I said:
I believe that his appearances in the OT were done as the angels' appearances were - temporary human appearance and body. That is not an incarnation.


Webdog said: Tell me...after Christ rose from the dead, did He only have a "temporary" body? Everything else depends on this. When we die, and are resurrected, will we inhabit the New Earth in "temporary" bodies...or will they be real? Your thinking sounds awfully gnostic to me.

You've got to be kidding. I"m like the opposite of that! I never said what you are implying. Of course Jesus had a permanent human body after the incarnation and resurrection. In fact, I've debated very vocally on the BB about Jesus being bodily raised from the same body he lived in on earth! On the other thread, I stated over and over that being incarnated means Jesus had a human body. I believe that he had Mary's genes. I've also argued that on the BB against the more gnostic beliefs that Jesus just entered Mary's womb without any connection to her. I've argued that Jesus had to become man and had to be the seed of David physically speaking in the incarnation. Jesus was fully man and fully God.

This does not mean he had a body before the incarnation!

Bottom line: Did Jesus have a human body before the incarnation? Yes or no?
 

Marcia

Active Member
webdog said:
Human, in the Hebrew, means "species", what we are. In the same sense animals are a species, humans are too. It is said that God is 100% God and 100% Man. How? He only exists like that now, and 3000 years ago He existed as something else?

Human
HU'MAN, a. [L. humanus; Heb. form, species.]
1. Belonging to man or mankind; pertaining or relating to the race of man; as a human voice; human shape; human nature; human knowledge; human life.
2. Having the qualities of a man.

So you are saying Jesus was human before the incarnation? Yes or no?
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Angels are spirit beings; man is not a spirit being.
According to who?
This does not mean he had a body before the incarnation!
We see PROOF that He did! Remember Shadrack, Meeshak and Abednego? Who was standing in the fire with them? Who visited Abram? Who wrestled with Jacob?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Marcia

Active Member
Marcia: Angels are spirit beings

webdog said:
According to who?

According to God's word.

Are they not all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?
Heb. 1.14


Who makes His angels spirits,His ministers a flame of fire.
Ps 104.4


We see PROOF that He did! Remember Shadrack, Meeshak and Abednego? Who was standing in the fire with them? Who visited Abram? Who wrestled with Jacob

If it was Jesus, it does not mean he had a human body! Are you saying he did? Please clarify. A human body is physical and has weaknesses. Jesus did not take this on before the incarnation.
 

Marcia

Active Member
webdog, here is why I am confused about what you say. You answered that Jesus was not human before the incarnation. But shortly before that, you said this:

It is said that God is 100% God and 100% Man. How? He only exists like that now, and 3000 years ago He existed as something else?

This sounds like you are saying Jesus was God and man before the incarnation. Is that what you are saying here? Please clarify.
 

Gold Dragon

Well-Known Member
Marcia said:
I really resent what I said being compared to Mormon beliefs! What I said, DeeJay, is orthodox Christian belief - that Jesus did not have a human body before he incarnated. That is 100% totally historical, Christian, orthodox, biblical belief!

I may be wrong but I believe DeeJay was saying that both Mormons and yourself are orthodox when it comes to Christological incarnation.

Marcia said:
When Mormons say this, they mean something entirely different, as you pointed out -- about how we all were spirits and took on bodies on earth (according to LDS teachings). This is NOT what I said!!!!!

I believe DeeJay was saying that Mormons, but not youself, are unorthodox when it comes to human incarnation.
 

Jarthur001

Active Member
webdog said:
Marcia, you are totally misrepresenting what I'm trying to say. I believe Jesus had a body prior to becoming human. What that body consists of, I can only guess it's maybe the same body He ascended to Heaven with. We see where The Angel of God (different than "an" angel of God) walked, ate, wrestled, etc. God is Spirit...so who was The Angel of God (deity)? To deny that is to deny that Christ was not the third member of the Godhead...and He exists now different than He existed prior to coming to earth.
This is a wrong view. I understand why you may say this, but it is my feeling this is wrong. Jesus had only one earthy body and was born to Mary in Bethlehem.

john 1
14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth

gal 4
4There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

heb 10
5Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me

john 6
38For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me

The Son God has indeed been eternal preexistence.

john 1
30This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.

micah 5
2But 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

kinda implied here....isaiah 9
6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.


Now one passage pulls it all together for us...

col 1

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

16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Colossians 1:15-17 is said to be a hymn.

In vs. 15 the pre-existent Christ is "eikon tou theou tou aoratou" - the express image of the invisible God. In Christ the invisible God became visible to man. Notice this, Paul describes Christ as the prototokos - the firstborn. in verse 16 the pre-eminence of Christ is the point of prototokos.

J. B. Lightfoot(17) well comments:
All the laws and purposes which guide the creation and government of the Universe reside in Him, the Eternal Word, as their meeting-point. The Apostolic doctrine of the Logos teaches us to regard the Eternal Word as holding the same relation to the Universe which the Incarnate Christ holds to the Church. He is the source of its life, the centre of all its developments, the mainspring of all its motions.... The Judeo-Alexandrian teachers represented the Logos, which in their view was nothing more than the Divine mind energizing, as the topos where the eternal ideas...have their abode.... The Apostolic teaching is an enlargement of this conception, inasmuch as the Logos is no longer a philosophical abstraction but a Divine Person....

After reading Lightfoot...read Hebs 1.

1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high


The Incarnation is necessary to see in the right light because of the virgin birth. The body of Jesus did not come from any other then a virgin. (seed of man) To go beyond this would remove our Lords right to rule some day on the throne of David. Also, with no virgin birth, this would remove His saving power on the cross. I do not mean to make this a C/A debate, so no more needs to be said on this.

This leaves you with 2 choices.

1) Mary was yet not born, making the virgin birth not able
2) Mary is also eternal preexistence

Mormon doctrine has been mis-stated too. Better...it has been understated. Mormon teaching is .... "This doctrine that there is a Mother in Heaven was affirmed in plainness by the First Presidency of the Church (Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder, and Anthon H. Lund ... they said that "man, as a spirit, was begotten and born of heavenly parents ..." (Mormon Doctrine, 1966, p.516).

This Mormon doctrine is said of all men, not just Jesus. This is pegan new age.


Back to Mary. Christ came though the seed of Man. That was Jesus. Mary was the choosen mother to carry his birth. Jesus body was made in the very womb of Mary. Where you take it from here depends on how you view Mary.



In Christ...James
 
Last edited by a moderator:

NateT

Member
Jarthur001 said:
Hello Nate,

Indeed it was, therefore the debate was over the deity of Christ and not over him being human.

The OP..


Notice that the Apostles Creed was weak on the deity of Christ. The reason is not because they did not believe it, but it was overlooked because of what the creed was dealing with at the time. The Apostles Creed was dealing with Gnosticism which is the doctrine of salvation by knowledge. Gnosticism claimed Christ was not human. Therefore the Apostles Creed was address this and overlooked the deity of Christ.



This lead to many heresy including the Arian controversy that you talked about. This is something we still deal with today, with JWs and other groups. These groups point to the the Apostles Creed ..the 1st known creed, if I remember right, as proof that Christ was not God. The church had to deal with this as you rightly stated with the Arian's. It should be noted, this was not the only group. Montanism was another group and believe it or not Paulicians held to the same faith. Why I say believe it or not, some mislead Baptist claim they come from the Paulicians..or that Paulicians are early Baptist. They say this only because they (Paulicians) left the RCC. Yet the Paulicians was a very bad group... a group that the JWs love. see link..

http://experts.about.com/q/Christianity-Church-History-2348/Paulicians.htm

Anyway...the Church seeing this weakness in the creed and facing these outsdie groups held the 1st gathering of Nicea. this was in 325



Now you see a stronger statement on the deity of Christ. You are right in that the big fight was over begotten. Thus the statement.."begotten not made" as seen in bold.

sorry....I love history. :)


In Christ..James

Thanks for the post. Dr. Nettles would be ashamed to say I was in his history class :)

I guess I was tracing out the implications of the Nicean creed. I see now that it was over His divinity. But as I look at the debate over His divinity, an implication of that, as far as I understand it, would be that he wasn't human before the incarnation. Right? (I guess in this context it doesn't matter as much since the OP might have been misunderstood)
 

El_Guero

New Member
spirit beings is a Mormon doctrine . . .

I just gotta ask: Are ya'll discussing mormon or Christian doctrine?

I the Bible the being that I see described as a spirit is God or the Holy Spirit.

Angels are created and so is man.
 

Allan

Active Member
This leaves you with 2 choices.

1) Mary was yet not born, making the virgin birth not able
2) Mary is also eternal preexistence

Jarth, Am I reading you right in assuming Mary as a woman of child bearing age WAS NOT truly a virgin at conception? It is the only obvious answer as Mary is NOT God and therefore in pre-existence with God.

Please clarify, for if you are saying that - I will stand in that debate!
 

DeeJay

New Member
Marcia said:
I really resent what I said being compared to Mormon beliefs! What I said, DeeJay, is orthodox Christian belief - that Jesus did not have a human body before he incarnated. That is 100% totally historical, Christian, orthodox, biblical belief!

When Mormons say this, they mean something entirely different, as you pointed out -- about how we all were spirits and took on bodies on earth (according to LDS teachings). This is NOT what I said!!!!!

Marcia

I apologise. I did not mean it that way. I was not trying to say you had mormon beliefs. I was trying to say that, In this case, Mormons agreed with you. It was not an insult to your or saying that you are wrong just that bill had it wrong on what mormons believe.

Mormons agree with several Christian beliefs. Especaly on moral issues. I did not mean it to be offencive, and I should have worded it differently.

I also did point out that they take it to far and I assumed that you would not agree with them on that.

Sorry.
 

DeeJay

New Member
Gold Dragon said:
I may be wrong but I believe DeeJay was saying that both Mormons and yourself are orthodox when it comes to Christological incarnation.



I believe DeeJay was saying that Mormons, but not youself, are unorthodox when it comes to human incarnation.

Exactly, thank you
 

DeeJay

New Member
Marcia, Webdog

I think you both are useing different definitions and probably could agree if you clearly defined the words you are useing. I wish you would because you both are confusing me to no end. :eek:

Web I think you are saying that Jesus took a form that looked human before the incarnation but only became human after he was born from Mary? That form he took was like the perfict body He has after the reserection that He assended with?

Marcia do you agree that Jesus had any form before the incarnation or was he invisable Spirit like the Father?
 

Jarthur001

Active Member
Allan said:
Jarth, Am I reading you right in assuming Mary as a woman of child bearing age WAS NOT truly a virgin at conception? It is the only obvious answer as Mary is NOT God and therefore in pre-existence with God.

Please clarify, for if you are saying that - I will stand in that debate!
The point being............

Jesus was born of the seed of a woman.
Mary was His VIRGIN mother.
The Son of God is eternal preexistence
Mary is finite.
Mary was not around "in the beginning" for the Body of Christ to be born.

You can draw your own conclusions as to what this means.


In Christ...James
 

Plain Old Bill

New Member
I apologize for this getting twisted out of shape.My comment was not directed at Marcias beliefs but toward the poster on the other thread she was referring to.Which is why I asked marcia to ask her friend(on the other thread)who he/she thought Jesus really is.
 

Allan

Active Member
Jarth, So you hold that Jesus mother at His BIRTH was a virgin. Correct or not?

That was all I wanted to clarify. :wavey:

I hold He was BORN of a VIRGIN.

As to His celestial body, constant or temporal (as in only when needed) >>>EDIT<<< is silly to condend with as long as someone is not saying Jesus is a created being in any sense of meaning.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Marcia

Active Member
El_Guero said:
spirit beings is a Mormon doctrine . . .

I just gotta ask: Are ya'll discussing mormon or Christian doctrine?

I the Bible the being that I see described as a spirit is God or the Holy Spirit.

Angels are created and so is man.

No, it's not about Mormon doctrine! The original is issue is whether Jesus was a man before the incarnation and/or had a physical body before the incarnation.

Please read the thread and you will see the issues - this thread is not that long so it shouldn't take too much time.
 

LeBuick

New Member
Allan said:
As to His celestial body, constant or temporal (as in only when needed) >>>EDIT<<< is silly to condend with as long as someone is not saying Jesus is a created being in any sense of meaning.

He was conceived was he not? Even if it were immaculate it was still conception.
 

Marcia

Active Member
DeeJay said:
Marcia, Webdog

I think you both are useing different definitions and probably could agree if you clearly defined the words you are useing. I wish you would because you both are confusing me to no end. :eek:

I agree, but I am waiting for Webdog to clarify some statements he made. For example, I would like this clarified:
Webdog said:
Human, in the Hebrew, means "species", what we are. In the same sense animals are a species, humans are too. It is said that God is 100% God and 100% Man. How? He only exists like that now, and 3000 years ago He existed as something else?

Human
HU'MAN, a. [L. humanus; Heb. form, species.]
1. Belonging to man or mankind; pertaining or relating to the race of man; as a human voice; human shape; human nature; human knowledge; human life.
2. Having the qualities of a man.

Webdog might be away for the holiday weekend, so we may not get a response for a few days.

Posted by DeeJay:
Marcia do you agree that Jesus had any form before the incarnation or was he invisable Spirit like the Father?

Well, what does the Bible say? It does not say Jesus had a form before the incarnation. There are statements that we think refer to appearances of Jesus in the OT, which, if they were Jesus, were Jesus appearing in a human-like form, but that does not mean he was a man then, as he was in the incarnation.

I do not think, in whatever form Jesus may have appeared in in the OT, that Jesus had a human nature then or was a man at that time. There is no indication Jesus had a human nature before the incarnation, and that is really what is at issue here.
 
Top