The pre-existence of Christ.

I’m wanting to ask a few questions about the pre-existence of Christ as I am preparing a sermon on Colossians. One of the areas is in how was Christ the Logo’s. How did he pre-exist. I have no doubt about his divinity and have no doubt about his humanity.

Yet, I have a question or should that be questions about  Christ’s pre-existent nature. Could it be that Christ is referred by John as the WORD because Christ is the fulfilment of God’s words. God spoke and the world came into being. God spoke and things happened. God spoke about Christ and his coming. Therefore Jesus is fully God because he is God’s word. And he fully existed as God’s word in the fullness of God’s word. And because he was and is the word, God created all things through Christ, because Christ is the word of God.

Because Christ is the word of God, he therefore could clearly say – he and his father were / are one and could clearly say he could only do what he see’s the father doing. Within this framework of pre-existence; could it be argued that Christ existed as God, as God’s word – which is distinct to God – just like our words exist, are of us and yet are distinct to us. I’m speaking in human terms which are left wanting.  Yet our words are still distinctly us.

Therefore because Christ is the fulfilment of God’s word – and is God’s word – He fully existed as God prior to the incarnation and because he is God’s word and the fulfilment of God’s word he was able to become incarnate as fully human and fully God…and totally fulfils God’s word to save humanity and is now interceding before the Father as the fulfilment of his word as the word.

Therefore Christ is the word of God – fully God, and totally was with God and was God and pre-existed as God’s word and so Christ  was and is God and yet was and is distinct from the father who spoke the word, because the father isn’t the word and yet the word and the father are one.

How do you understand the pre-existence of Christ?  Any thoughts?

Enhanced by Zemanta

You Might Also Like

24 Replies to “The pre-existence of Christ.”

  1. Logos doesn’t mean “word.” Understand Logos and you will have a better question. One suggestion is that Logos can mean founding principle or the original logic. In this view, Christ is the founding logic for the cosmos.

  2. Hi Adam…could you expand more on what your saying there; it doesn’t help much in explaining Christ’s pre-existent state.

    Jason…your posts were a good read…again though it doesn’t address what I’m asking for in regards to Christ’s pre-existent state…

    Is what I said ‘heretical’! Is it outside the normal parameters of the Trinity. If so why?

      1. Hi Joel. I am yet to fully develop my view as its something I haven’t read about. I have read plenty about the divine/ human nature of Christ and am content there. I am thinking that there could be a lot in the way I have proposed it… but would really like to be challenged and shown how I am wrong, if I am wrong.

        But what I have posted is some thoughts I have been thinking on and off for a while and decided to put it out there.

  3. Sorry, I have no idea about the pre-existence of Christ, as I am not a theologian. Simply, I doubt that Christ is God’s WORD because he fufills God’s words. I can’t think of one instance where LOGOS=Word. In some places it means phrase or saying, but I don’ think that this is any different than the platonic sense. In other words, an idea that is the foundation for anyway of thinking is always in the form of a phrase or saying, therefore LOGOS came to mean such. To suggest that John’s prologue is not influenced by Plato or Greek Philosophy is a long jump off a slippery slope.
    I don’t really think John’s prologue is trying to tell us about the state of Christ before the existence of the cosmos, but simply that Christ existed before the cosmos. In Colossians 1 as well, I think the point is that Christ existed before the rulers and thrones of this world, giving Christ the preeminent authority. I’m not sure how Christ’s state before the existence of the cosmos are effected by either of those two passages. But I’m ready to learn.

  4. I come across interesting articles on Perichoresis. It seems that the church councils never worked out, nor considered how exactly Christ pre-existed, only that he did. So the questions I need to ask of myself is if my reasoning is different to that of Arius who denied that Christ was eternal and therefore there was a time when he was not. …which we get Arianism – Mormons, JW’s etc.

    I think that my position can stand against this position, therefore is still within the grounds of standard orthodoxy.

    1. That’s why I think we need to get back to the Scriptures – because that is not a concept contained therein, and only needed after the Trinity was more fully developed.

      1. Yes! I totally agree. While I do believe in the Trinity and its concept…conceptually it seems past /current theology has been getting unwieldy. I think there is a need for simplification – which means getting back to the Scriptures.

        Within the Trinitarian framework, the role of the Spirit also needs to be factored in. Which is cause for some more thought and another post. 🙂

  5. Read Richard Rubenstein’s “When Jesus Became God” for a historical look at how the doctrine was developed. It aint pretty.

    My take: you had two sides arguing whether jesus was human or divine. Neither side could win, so it was decided that both were right. It didn’t make sense, but the sides were tired of fighting to the death.

  6. Hi Pf, I think it goes deeper than just an argument about Jesus being human or divine…rather they argued and worked through that Jesus was:

    * Fully Human
    * Fully Divine
    * Was God and not a god.
    * Was always God…and therefore always existed – though how he pre-existed was not really established.

    The subject really has some deep theological ramifications on the nature of salvation, the work of the cross, forgiveness etc. For instance if Jesus was only human and not divine it would mean that God sacrificed a human for our sins. If Jesus was only divine and not human it means that he couldn’t really suffer and know the full extent of humanities weakness and frailties…

    While this is only a quick over view of the deeper issues, it does have many ramifications as to how we understand the Bible… and Jesus himself called himself one with God and called himself God…which is why they tried to stone him and ended up crucifying him.

Leave a Reply, Please!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.