Before Abraham I am
- Thread starter TomL
- Start date
Runningman
Well-known member
You're referring to the Greek word archē which isn't ever translated as "going forth" in the New Testament. It typically refers to either a beginning or origin in a temporal sense. Either way, this verse supports Jesus having a beginning point whereas God does not have a beginning point. God is eternal, Jesus isn't. The below HELPS Word-studies should help.
746 arxḗ – properly, from the beginning (temporal sense), i.e. "the initial (starting) point"; (figuratively) what comes first and therefore is chief (foremost), i.e. has the priority because ahead of the rest ("preeminent").
Runningman
Well-known member
It means that Jesus pre-existed in the foreknowledge of God. That's an origin isn't it?
Runningman
Well-known member
See the previous comment where we have already debunked Jesus pre-existing as God by just quoting Micah 5:4.
Micah 5
4He will stand and shepherd his flock
in the strength of the Lord,
in the majesty of the name of the Lord his God.
And they will live securely, for then his greatness
will reach to the ends of the earth.
In any case, the word we are talking about has more the one meaning. An honest translation of Micah 5:2 is that he had origins or a beginning point.
Like said before. There would be different wording if this were just a plan and not a person existing earlier. Your argument omits logic.
That says nothing at all about pre-existence
yet once again you imagine what is not in a passage
while you deny what is
or·i·gin
[ˈôrəj(ə)n]
noun
origins (plural noun)
- the point or place where something begins, arises, or is derived:
But check other translations as well
Micah 5:2 (KJV 1900) — 2 But thou, Beth-lehem 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.
Micah 5:2 (NASB 2020) — 2 “But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will come forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His times of coming forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.”
Hello
How long will you persist in denying scripture?
Runningman
Well-known member
Do you know what a prophecy is? All of them are spoken of as if it were something that had already happened, but didn't until later.
Runningman
Well-known member
Address the refutes against your bad theology.
See the previous comment where we have already debunked Jesus pre-existing as God by just quoting Micah 5:4.
Micah 5
4He will stand and shepherd his flock
in the strength of the Lord,
in the majesty of the name of the Lord his God.
And they will live securely, for then his greatness
will reach to the ends of the earth.
In any case, the word we are talking about has more the one meaning. An honest translation of Micah 5:2 is that he had origins or a beginning point.
Sorry there is nothing denying his pre-existance in that passage and you just deny the evidence as is typical with you
yet once again you imagine what is not in a passage
while you deny what is
or·i·gin
[ˈôrəj(ə)n]
noun
origins (plural noun)
- the point or place where something begins, arises, or is derived:
But check other translations as well
Micah 5:2 (KJV 1900) — 2 But thou, Beth-lehem 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.
Micah 5:2 (NASB 2020) — 2 “But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will come forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His times of coming forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.”
Hello
How long will you persist in denying scripture?
Runningman
Well-known member
You're referring to the Greek word archē which isn't ever translated as "going forth" in the New Testament. It typically refers to either a beginning or origin in a temporal sense. Either way, this verse supports Jesus having a beginning point whereas God does not have a beginning point. God is eternal, Jesus isn't. The below HELPS Word-studies should help.
746 arxḗ – properly, from the beginning (temporal sense), i.e. "the initial (starting) point"; (figuratively) what comes first and therefore is chief (foremost), i.e. has the priority because ahead of the rest ("preeminent").
See the previous comment where we have already debunked Jesus pre-existing as God by just quoting Micah 5:4.
Micah 5
4He will stand and shepherd his flock
in the strength of the Lord,
in the majesty of the name of the Lord his God.
And they will live securely, for then his greatness
will reach to the ends of the earth.
In any case, the word we are talking about has more the one meaning. An honest translation of Micah 5:2 is that he had origins or a beginning point.
No I am not
Micah 5:2 (LEB) — 2 But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, too small to be among the clans of Judah, from you one will go out for me, to be ruler in Israel; and his origins are from of old, from ancient days.
there is no Greek here
| and | his | origins | are | from | of | old | , | ||||||
| וְ | הוּא | מוֹצָאָה | מִן | קֶ֫דֶם | |||||||||
| w | hû(ʾ) | mô·ṣā·ʾā(h) | min | qěʹ·ḏěm | |||||||||
| C | RS3MS | NCFPC | P | NC-SA | |||||||||
| 1931 | 4163 | 4481 | 6924 |
| from | ancient | days | . | ||
| מִן | עוֹלָם | 1 יוֹם | |||
| min | ʿô·lām | yôm 1 | |||
| P | NC-SA | NCMPC | |||
| 4481 | 5769 | 3117 |
There is nothing but your imagination in verse 4 denying pre-existence
Stop denying scripture
Johann
Well-known member
I'm afraid you are wrong here-and remember context.
In the beginning (en archēi). Archē is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew be reshith in Gen_1:1. But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity.
There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing.
Was (ēn). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of eimi to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence.
Quite a different verb (egeneto, became) appears in Joh_1:14 for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in Joh_8:58 “before Abraham came (genesthai) I am” (eimi, timeless existence).
The Word (ho logos). Logos is from legō, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. Logos is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (anima mundi) and Marcus Aurelius used spermatikos logos for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew memra was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in Pro_8:23. Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (The Origin of the Prologue to St. John, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John’s standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term Logos, but not John’s conception of personal pre-existence. The term Logos is applied to Christ only in Joh_1:1, Joh_1:14; Rev_19:13; 1Jn_1:1 “concerning the Word of life” (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of “the Word of God” in Heb_4:12. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Co_8:9; Php_2:6.; Col_1:17) and in Heb_1:2. and in Joh_17:5. This term suits John’s purpose better than sophia (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the aeon Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos “became flesh” (sarx egeneto, Joh_1:14) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once.
With God (pros ton theon). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. Pros with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In 1Jn_2:1 we have a like use of pros: “We have a Paraclete with the Father” (paraklēton echomen pros ton patera). See prosōpon pros prosōpon (face to face, 1Co_13:12), a triple use of pros. There is a papyrus example of pros in this sense to gnōston tēs pros allēlous sunētheias, “the knowledge of our intimacy with one another” (M.&M., Vocabulary) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, Origin of Prologue, p. 8) that the use of pros here and in Mar_6:3 is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is Koiné, not old Attic. In Joh_17:5 John has para soi the more common idiom.
And the Word was God (kai theos ēn ho logos). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying ho theos ēn ho logos. That would mean that all of God was expressed in ho logos and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (ho logos) and the predicate without it (theos) just as in Joh_4:24 pneuma ho theos can only mean “God is spirit,” not “spirit is God.” So in 1Jn_4:16 ho theos agapē estin can only mean “God is love,” not “love is God” as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, Grammar, pp. 767f. So in Joh_1:14 ho Logos sarx egeneto, “the Word became flesh,” not “the flesh became Word.” Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.
Robertson
The Prologue to John’s Gospel
¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 This one was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things came into being through him, and apart from him not one thing came into being that [Or “came into being. What …,” beginning a new sentence connected with the following verse. A major punctuation problem is involved, since the earliest manuscripts have no punctuation, but some important later ones place the punctuation before this phrase, effectively connecting it to v. 4: “What has come into being was life in him”] has come into being.
Joh 1:4 In him was life, and the life was the light of humanity. [Or “humankind”]
Joh 1:5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome [Or “comprehend” (if primarily referring to people in the world)] it.
Joh 1:6 ¶ A man came, sent from God, whose name was [Literally “the name to him”] John.
Joh 1:7 This one came for a witness, in order that he could testify about the light, so that all would believe through him.
Joh 1:8 That one was not the light, but came [The verb is implied from the previous verse, and must be supplied in the English translation] in order that he could testify about the light.
Joh 1:9 The true light, who gives light to every person, was coming into the world.
Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through him, and the world did not recognize [Or “acknowledge”] him.
Arche-
(I) When it refers to time, it means the beginning, commencement, relative to an event or a situation such as in Mat_24:8, "the beginnings of sorrows"; Mar_1:1, "beginning of the gospel"; Mar_13:8, "beginning of sorrows"; Heb_7:3, "beginning of days"; Sept.: Job_40:14; Hos_1:2. When it does not refer to a restrictive event, situation or time, it is used in an absolute sense as in
Joh_1:1, "In the beginning was the Word." It does not delineate what beginning. Here it means before there was any beginning whatsoever, the Word had been. There is no art. before the word archḗ. Before the creation of the world there had been the Creator, the Word (Lógos [G3056], which primarily means intelligence and the expression of that intelligence in making the world, the creation).
See also the use of archḗ in an absolute manner (Joh_1:2 [without the art. as also in 1Jn_1:1; 1Jn_2:13-14]; Rev_21:6; Rev_22:13). Other references with the use of archḗ as a relative beginning: Php_4:15, "the beginning of the gospel"; 2Pe_3:4, "the beginning of the creation"; 1Jn_2:7, 1Jn_2:24; 1Jn_3:8, 1Jn_3:11; 2Jn_1:5-6; Jud_1:6. In Heb_2:3, archḗn laboúsa, "which at the first began [lambánō {G2983}, to take]," having taken or made a beginning, means began. In Joh_2:11, "The beginning of signs" (a.t.) means the first miracle. In Heb_3:14, "the beginning of our confidence [hupostáseōs {G5287}]," the ground beneath or something on which one can base himself, hence "confidence" means our first confidence, our faith as at the beginning. In Heb_5:12, "the first principles" or elements of faith as also in Heb_6:1.
Word Studies.
J.
He does not know what he is talking about
He thinks Arche appears in the Hebrew scriptures at Micah 5:2
and if he is quoting from the greek septuagint
| from | the | beginning | , | from | the | days | of | eternity | .” | |||||||
| apo | archō | ek | ēmera | aiōn |
There is simply no way he can escape Christ's pre-existence
Johann
Well-known member
But he will not address the point
He does not know what he is talking about
He thinks Arche appears in the Hebrew scriptures at Micah 5:2
and if he is quoting from the greek septuagint
| from | the | beginning | , | from | the | days | of | eternity | .” | |||||||
| apo | archō | ek | ēmera | aiōn |
There is simply no way he can escape Christ's pre-existence
and he will divert
Johann
Well-known member
He will depersonalize the word
Johann
Well-known member
Yes intentionally
Johann
Well-known member
Mic 5:2 And thou, Bethleem, house of Ephratha, art few in number to be reckoned among the thousands of Juda; yet out of thee shall one come forth to me, to be a ruler of Israel; and his goings forth were from the beginning, even from eternity.
Brenton
Mic 5:2 And you, Beth-lehem, of the house of Ephratah, are very few being among thousands of Judah; from out of you to me shall come forth the one being for ruler of Israel; and his goings forth were from the beginning, from [of days eon].
ABP
Mic 5:2 [5:1] But thou, Beitlechem Ephratah, though thou be little among the Alphei Yehudah (Thousands of Yehudah), yet out of thee shall He [Moshiach] come forth unto Me [Hashem] that is to be Moshel Yisroel; whose goings forth (i.e. origins) have been mikedem, (from everlasting; see Chabakuk 1:12), mimei olam (from the days of eternity).
OJB
J.
