Did Jesus Christ Pre-Exist? – Looking at Biblical Passages to show that it was not Literal

A Brief Exposition Of The Passages

This Article examines a commonly-held religious view which teaches the literal and personal pre-existence of Christ. It looks at oft-quoted passages, and some less quoted, trying to relate them to the rest of Scripture teaching, and showing that their apparent support for a per­sonal pre-existence is insubstantial. Although a single article of this nature cannot cover all or even most of the detailed questions which can arise, I hope it will provide some help when readers are in discussion with friends.1

Amongst those who believe in the literal and personal existence of Christ before his birth by Mary, there are a variety of conflicting views about the details of his origin. These notes endeavour to cover a wide spectrum. Because of this some of the comments may be relevant to one view and not to another.

The basis of this synopsis will be to accept what the Scriptures say as the true revelation of God, harmonious in its several parts. Man’s place is to accept in humble submission what God has said through His messengers, not to impose on the Scriptures the dogma of human thoughts as was done in the third and fourth centuries, providing a faulty legacy for all generations since. Nor is it for man to decide for himself what can be believed in our modern age. Our duty is to learn. If the Scriptures, taken as they stand, make for difficulty of understanding, let us persevere in looking for a Divine interpretation or explanation in the Scripture itself, and not as­sume an error or inconsistency.

Views about the pre-existence of Jesus Christ

A variety of conflicting views are held in the ‘Christian’ world:

  1. That Christ was the eternal Son, coexistent and complete with the Father.
  2. That Christ was created as the first of God’s creatures, being originally made in angel form.
  3. Some may hold notions lying between views 1 and 2.

As Christadelphians our understanding based on the Scriptures is different:

  1. That although Christ did not exist as a personal being before his birth by Mary, God had it in mind to achieve the reconciliation of mankind to Himself by means of a Son. By prophets He testified of His Son and by types and shadows He foretold him.

Arguments against the prior existence of Christ

  1. The doctrine of the personal pre-existence is certainly fundamental to the thinking of almost all Christian denominations, Christadelphians and Unitarians being exceptions. The doctrine almost always seems to be tied in with other unBiblical doctrines, such as a substitutionary sacrifice. It also weakens a man’s appreciation of the greatness of the victory of Jesus. The importance of holding the correct view is clear.
  2. As a major doctrine one would expect it to be clearly and directly taught in historical con­texts. However, the doctrine is absent from the Scriptures, most clearly so in the Old Testa­ment.

If Christ was the Son of God from eternity, or a pre-existing angel, the New Testament statements that the world and ages of the world’s constitution were made through him (Jno. 1:10; Heb. 1:2, etc.) have to be taken in a literal and personal sense. We would therefore expect to find much about Christ’s personal activity in the Old Testament. This is absent. Why?

There is nothing about the Son doing these things. Although the angels are particularly active in the Old Testament, there is no clear teaching about a particular angel who is in charge and later takes on the function of the Messiah.2

  1. The historical events relating to Christ’s life as described in Scripture ( especially in the Gospels) contain no mention of pre-existence. The historical sequence contained in the Bible commences with God’s gracious promises of Messiah’s coming, thus:
  • Promises made to Eve, Abraham and David;
  • God encouraged the faithful by prophecies of Messiah’s coming in the Psalms and Prophets;
  • Their fulfillment in the birth of a son to Mary, “made of a woman” ;
  • Christ’s baptism and the overshadowing of the Spirit of God;
  • A life of learning obedience to the Father. This makes little sense if the same person­ality had existed from all eternity;
  • His death, being forsaken briefly;
  • His resurrection, ascension and glorifica­tion, all showing the power and love of God for His Son. When Jesus had passed through all these stages he became suitable as a High Priest to mediate for men (Heb. 5:5-10).

The whole of this historical sequence is needed to complete the manifestation of the Father in His Son. This is the full process of the birth or creation of the Son of God and his exaltation to the name which is above every name (Phil. 2:9-11).

Some of the relevant aspects of the his­torical record are:

  • His birth is recorded as if it were the origin of a new person (Lk. 1:30-35; Mt. 1:18­25).
  • His birth is recorded as if it were the origin of the Son of God (Lk. 1:35).
  • Jesus is said to increase in wisdom (Lk. 2: 40,52).
  • The Holy Spirit is presented as the source of his begettal (Mt. 1:20; ek= out of). Note that his origin is not described as being a pre-existent Son or angel.
  1. Reading passages which seem on the surface to support pre-existence we see that they are not historical descriptions but religious statements. As such they are not intended as descriptions of literal events, but rather as statements of the wonderful Divine significance and purpose in Christ. This significance was behind the actual historical events of Christ’s life recorded elsewhere.
  2. The theory of a personal pre-existence meets grave difficulties when the nature and sacrifice of Christ and his mediatorship are examined in detail.
  3. We ought to ask, “In what sense was Christ the Son of God?”. If he was the Son co-eternal with the Father then what does his Sonship mean? Can a son be as old as his father? If he did not become Son till the incarnation, and yet was co-eternal with the Father, what relationship did he have before it? If he was an angel, created before the beginning of earth’s creation, then how was his Sonship any more special than that of any other angel?

Bible passages often misused

The rest of this article looks at Bible passages which are used to support the idea of preexistence, and seeks an explanation of them.

  1. Brief explanations

After analysing the passages involved we see that many of them are similar in their form of expression and meaning. The following four patterns can be recognised.

  • Future events are spoken of as if they exist, because of their certainty in God’s faithful purpose. This is common, especially in the Old Testament. In the mind of God, and to a lesser extent in the minds of His servants, these things can exist in this sense ( see for example Rom. 4:17; Isa. 45:1-5 (where God talks to Cyrus before Cyrus existed); Jer. 1:5; 2 Tim. 1:9; Eph. 1:4).
  • Some passages refer to the new creation, that is, the creation of immortalized humans who will see God and share communion with Him. The new creation is being brought into existence through Christ’s word (Jas. 1:18; Col. 1:23). We are progressively brought closer to the realities of the Divine nature by Christ’s death and resurrection (2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15) and ultimately by the exercise of his life-giving power at his Second Coming. Christ himself is the firstborn of this creation (1 Cor. 15:23; Col. 1:15,18).
    • Things done by God with Christ’s work in mind are sometimes said to have been done “through” Christ. The whole purpose of God is comprehended in Christ (Eph. 3:11). And so, for example, things done to promote His purpose in Christ to produce sons of God who reflect His perfect character and who inherit the earth are said to be done through Christ.
    • The names and attributes of God are associa­ted with Christ because God has become manifest in him who was and is an expres­sion of the mind and character of God:
    • when in the flesh (Mt. 1:23);
    • when in the Spirit; that is, after being perfected through sufferings, and be­coming a manifestation of Yahweh in glorified form (Phil. 2:9-11).

    In the following sections we examine the passages in detail, grouping them for conveni­ence.

    1. Passages from John’s Gospel

    ( a) The style and objectives of John’s Gospel. Matters of style and objective affect the meaning of ‘pre-existence’ passages in John’s Gospel. The Gospel harmonises with the other Gospels because the message is the same. However, John’s Gospel largely records discussions spoken in deliberately veiled language, while the other Gospels set out to appeal more generally with public parable and miracle. John emphasises the comments of Jesus, while the other Gospel writers emphasise the events.

    The Gospel of John is also careful to bring out Christ’s authority, based on the following facts:

    • Christ is the realisation of God’s purpose (Jno. 10:36).
    • Christ is the manifestation of God’s character in a man (Jno. 1:18).
    • Through Christ there is a way to God; he guards the way. (“I am the way”; “I am the door”).

    The manner of speech in John’s Gospel is highly figurative, particularly in the words of Jesus. For example, he speaks of himself as the “bread of life”, and of ‘eating his body and blood’.

    (b) The Logos (Jno. 1:1,2,14,15; Rev. 19:13). In the word logos there is the idea of both thought

    and the eventual expression of that thought. The Word made flesh (Christ) is the chief expression. But the thought itself was earlier present with God and was an essential part of Him, being derived from His character and what He is as a personality. The thought includes His intention, which of course mirrors His character. His intention was centred in the generation of a Son of like character before he was born.

    Through the ages the Word has been expressed in natural creation (Jno. 1:3; Ps. 33:6,9), in enduring life demonstrated by the resurrection of Jesus (Jno. 1:4), and in the light of salvation (vv. 4,5), but always with the perfect Man, the Son, in mind as the centre of all. Since he has been glorified the Son is poised to take his inheritance under the name “The Word of God” (Rev. 19:13-16).

    (c) The location of Christ’s origin. “I came down from heaven” (Jno. 3:13; 6:33,38,51,58, 62; 8:14,23); this important statement is not to be taken literally, but is a figure of speech. We deduce this because:

    • The Son of man was not physically in heaven when speaking to Nicodemus (Jno. 3:13), although Jesus uses the phrase, “the Son of Man which is in heaven”. (Certainly, the ascension (Acts 1:9) is to be taken literally, but the main point of John 3:13 and 6:62 is not geographical. It concerns Christ’s rela­tionship with the Father and his assumption of Divine nature. The geography only has relevance in this context because before Christ’s ascension no man had been per­mitted in heaven.)
    • The text says the Son of man came down from heaven, not the Son of God.

    Jesus uses the figure to stress his heavenly origin, and to indicate his dependence upon God. These are true in the following ways:

    • He was conceived by the Holy Spirit and was a vehicle of the Spirit The Spirit came from God, from heaven.
    • He was sent by God (Jno. 12:44) to bring life and salvation to those who believe, by his own life, death and resurrection.
    • He spoke sustaining words of salvation (see 6:63) which were not his own but his Father’s (Jno. 7:16; 12:49), and therefore he was the true Bread from heaven (6:32).
    • He was man, made in the image of God; he was a new creation.

    (d) The glorification of Christ. John 17:5: ” . . . the glory which I had with Thee before the world was”; John 17:24:” . . . Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world”.

    These verses are examples of treating future things as if they already existed, so certain is their fulfilment in the purpose of God. Verses 22 and 23 show similar speech applied to the disciples when Jesus says that he has already given them the same glory that God gave him, although they have not yet received it. They are the ones whom God has chosen in Jesus “before the foundation of the world” (see Eph. 1:4). Such statements prove the physical existence of disciples before the foundation of the world, as much as they do that of Christ Neither Christ nor his disciples are actually glorified before being proved by trial in this life.

    1. Creation passages

    In this section we look at passages having a Creation theme. In them the greatness of God as the Creator is maintained, but honour is also ascribed to Jesus Christ because Creation is arranged through, for, or because of him.

    John 1:3,10: “All things were made through him. . . the world was made through him” (RSV). These verses appear to refer to the creation of the physical world and all else by God through His agents, with His Son in mind as the centre of His purpose and its inheritor (cf. Ps. 2:6-8).

    Hebrews 1:2,3,10: The heir of all things, through whom God made the ages (tous aionas), “up­holding all things by the word of His power”; “Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth”. These verses refer to the constitutions of the various ages in God’s relationship with man, and they are recorded historically in Old and New Testaments. Christ was central to the Old Testament ages, for in him they had a significance beyond their own days. But he need not be present literally for this to be true. Because the Son loved righteousness he has been given a more excellent name than that of angels (vv. 2,4,9) and is worthy of our high honour and praise.

    Colossians 1:15: “The firstborn of every crea­ture (of all creation, RV)”. When verse 18 is placed parallel to this verse it becomes clear that the Creation referred to is the New Creation, identified with the resurrection from the dead: “the beginning, the firstborn from the dead”. The language of verse 15 is derived from Genesis, which is used as an analogy for the Creation instituted by the blood-shedding of Jesus’s sacrifice (v. 14). If this is not accepted, and the creation of Jesus is separated from this New Creation, a problem arises for the Trinitarian who claims co-eternity and coexistence for the Son within the Trinity; he can hardly be said to have been ‘created’ and to have existed co-eternally with the Father.

    Revelation 3:14 and Revelation 1:5 use similar phraseology to Colossians 1, and in referring to “the beginning of the creation of God” and “the first begotten of the dead” they point to Christ as the first of a New Creation.

    Colossians 1:16,17: “For by (RV, in) him were all things created. . . visible and invisible. . . all things were created by (RV, through) him, and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist”.

    • Like 2 Corinthians 5:17,18, this passage is referring to the New Creation. The “all things” are things reconciled to God through the blood of the cross, by Christ (Col. 1:20). They include the Colossians, who were created by Christ in his image (Col. 3:10). The heaven and earth (Col. 1:16,20) are metaphorical. They cannot be the literal physical Creation, else the Son would be­come the “firstborn” of what he had himself created. The context in verses 12-14 supports the interpretation put forward here: thanks be to the Father Who has made us fit to share the inheritance of the saints in light by redemption through Christ’s blood.
    • If the phrase “all things” (vv. 16,17) is taken to mean all natural and supernatural things, then the same qualification is required in the case of the Father as is made in 1 Corinthians 15:25-28: “For he (Christ) must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet . . . For He hath put all things under his feet. But when He saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that He is excepted, Which did put all things under him. And when. . . then shall the Son also himself be subject unto Him That put all things under him . . . “.
    • The phrase “before all things” (v. f7) refers to pre-eminence, as verse 18 goes on to emphasise, rather than to priority in time.

    The whole passage goes to show how Christ is central to the purpose of God and all that He has created.

    1 Corinthians 8:6: ” . . . one God, the Father, of Whom are all things (including natural and spiritual), and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him”. Paul again places natural Creation and New Creation side by side, the last embracing the believers: “we by him”. We depend upon one God, the Father, for our being and our hope of life in Him. We depend upon one Lord, Jesus Christ; because of him we have our being and through him we have hope. Unto both be the glory and praise for what has been accomplished.

    1. Passages from Isaiah

    Isaiah 44:6 (also 41:4; 48:11,12): “I am thefirst, and I am the last; and beside Me (there is) no God”. We are asked to compare these passages with Revelation 1:17 and 2:8, where these titles are applied to the “one like unto the Son of man”, and also in Revelation 1:8 to the Father. In Isaiah 41:4 the “first” is singular but the “last” (ones) is plural, indicating a development. Jesus, having prevailed over death (Rev. 1:18), was granted this title because he was found worthy and had been absorbed into the Divine nature, to become the manifestation of Yahweh in the flesh and in the spirit.

    Isaiah 11:10: The title “Root of Jesse” is quoted in Romans 15:12. In revised form, “Root of David”, it is applied to Jesus in Revelation 5:5, and claimed by him in Revelation 22:16. Christ is the ‘Root’ not by virtue of pre-existence but by virtue of him confirming the promises (Rom. 15:8) through the conquering of death. As The Root he will give the true life of resurrection to David. He will be David’s Lord, inheriting not merely the throne of David but the whole earth too. We also are able to rejoice and glorify God for our abounding hope in the Root of Jesse.

    Isaiah 8:13,14 compared with 1 Peter 2:7,8 and Romans 9:33: The phrases “Lord of hosts . . . stone of stumbling . . . rock of offence” have sometimes been quoted to show that Jesus must be the Lord Who spoke and acted in the Old Testament; he therefore must have existed then. However, the Lord (Yahweh) has the desire to manifest Himself in ‘hosts’, of which Christ is the pre-eminent example. He was sent as the manifestation of God, bearing the name of God. He was also sent as the stone upon which the true altar is built. To our Wondrous blessing the hosts will include many more men than the one Son of man.

    1. Miscellaneous passages supposed to teach pre-existence

    Exodus 24:10 compared with John 1:18: “They saw the God of Israel”, but “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son . . . hath declared Him”. Therefore, allegedly, God in Exodus 24 was the Son. In fact, in Old Testa­ment times God was represented by angels who appeared in His name. For example, “God” Who called to Moses out of the burning bush and sent him to deliver Israel from Egypt (Ex. 3:4,6,10) was an angel (Acts 7:30,35; Ex. 3:2). Similarly the “Lord” Who spoke to Moses and gave him the tables of stone (Ex. 24:12) was an angel carrying the name of God (Acts 7:38).

    Hebrews 7:3: “Having neither beginning of days . . . but made like unto the Son of God”. There­fore, some suggest, the Son of God has existed from eternity. However, for both Melchizedek and Christ the pre-existence is ideal rather than real; Christ has existed in the mind of God from the beginning, while Melchizedek’s antecedents are deliberately not recorded. Their priesthood did not need to satisfy qualifications of descent or lower and upper age limits as under the Levitical priesthood. What mattered was being made like unto the Son of God, that is, after the power of an endless life (v. 16).

    John 8:56-59: “Abraham rejoiced to see my day . . . Before Abraham was, I am”. Christ existed before Abraham both in the mind of God and as revealed in prophecy (Gen. 3:15). Abraham rejoiced because of God’s promise of Messiah’s day, which by the eye of faith he saw and by which God would bless all nations through Abraham’s seed. If Christ literally existed before Abraham, what was Christ’s day that Abraham rejoiced to see?

    Genesis 1:26: “Let us” is said to include the Son. However, the Jews have never taken the words in this way. Most likely they refer to the angels who are the instruments of the First Cause. The word for God in Genesis 1 is elohim, and is translated as “angels” in Psalm 8:5 (AV), and refers to angels in Genesis 19:29 (cf. v. 13). Some have suggested a ‘plural of majesty’; but this would mean God talking to Himself, and makes incon­sistent verse 29, which is written in the first person.

    Philippians 2:5-8 (RSV); also 2 Corinthians 8:9: ” Christ Jesus. . . though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born (made, AV, NIV, etc.) in the likeness of men”. This passage is sometimes used to support the idea that Christ began with a Divine nature which he shed to become a man. However, it speaks about “Christ Jesus” (v. 5), not about God the Son or some particular angel. The passage therefore begins after his birth. If Jesus already had equality with God it is hardly something he might set out to ‘grasp’ (v.6).

    The attitude of Jesus is being contrasted with Eve’s, who, listening to the serpent’s temptation, grasped at the idea of becoming like God (Gen. 3:5) and so took the forbidden fruit. Did Christ give up his Divine nature? If so, the Trinity is denied for the period of his mortal life. Whatever ‘very nature God’ (NIV), or ‘form of God’ (AV, RSV), means in verse 6, that state was not pursued by Jesus, but he took instead the very nature or form of a servant (v. 7). Note that it does not say he took the nature of man. It is not nature that is at issue in this passage, but status.

    The word “form” really means ‘likeness’ rather than ‘essential nature’. Jesus’s attitude (v. 5) was that of a servant, rather than one of demanding men’s compliance with his Divine authority. The imperfect tense is used, ‘being and continuing to be in the form of God’. ‘Making himself nothing’ (v. 7), Christ Jesus humbled himself to the extent of not even demanding his rights as a man when he submitted to wrongful crucifixion (v. 8). He therefore gives us a wonderful example to follow, and we rightly confess that he is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (v. 11).3

    1 Corinthians 10:1-11: ” … they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ . . . Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted . . . “. This text does not require that Christ personally followed Israel during the Exodus. The spiritual meat they ate was the manna (Jno. 6:31), the spiritual drink was the water from the rock, which followed them in that twice God gave them water from the rock. The rock was not literally Christ, but symbolic of him. Through Christ refreshing salvation is available. The word ‘spiritual’ refers to the rock, manna and water having symbolic meaning in relation to greater things to come in Christ Jesus.

    Conclusion

    Having examined briefly the Scriptural argu­ments against the ‘pre-existence’ of Christ and most of the passages which are adduced in favour, we should not end without looking at the effects on us of believing the truth. Recognising that Christ Jesus had no literal existence before his birth means that we ascribe supremacy and full praise to the One true God, the Father, Who is the cause of all things.

    We appreciate better His power and love in making His Son of a woman and sending him for the salvation of mankind. It also enables us to recognise Jesus as one of us, who understands our temptations. We perceive the pain as well as the potency of his victory on man’s behalf, and can more eagerly join in praise of him, whose name God has now exalted above every name. It also helps us to understand how, in Christ, God can create a vast number to bear His own image and His glory in the earth. In this lies our hope.

References

  1. For many of the passages much additional helpful detail can be found in Wrested Scriptures, by Ron Abel, Published by The Christadelphians, Box 1066, Pasadena, California 91102. Available from the Christadelphian Office.
  2. The case of Michael the Archangel (Dan. 12:1; Rev. 12:7) might be quoted; but that would certainly not be clear teaching in historical contexts.
  3. For useful background to this passage see The Testimony, July 1985, p. 201: “Philippians 2:6-11—A Study in History and Exposition (1)”.