Preexistence of ChristEssay Preview: Preexistence of ChristReport this essayPreexistence of ChristAdvanced InformationThe preincarnate existence of Christ may be “only a simple, contemplative inference backwards from the spiritual glory of the present Christ” (Deissmann); certainly its clearest expression is found in later writing reflecting upon the rudimentary messianic, even adoptionist, assessment of Christ in the primitive Christian community (Acts 2:22 – 23; 10:38). Yet preexistence is at least implied in words of Jesus himself: “The son of man came”; the owner of the vineyard “had still. . . a beloved son: finally he sent him.” It is explicit in sayings attributed to Jesus in Johns Gospel: “I came down from heaven”; “The glory I had with thee before the world was.”
”.
The nature of such a “preexistence” of Christ in the earliest days is now fully elucidated. There are now considerable works devoted to a variety of views: among them, by J. Wierod and J. de P. Leinster, A Critical Introduction, published in 1909 (Harmonization of Christ in the Early Modern World); it has attracted the sympathy of the most eminent writers on all the social issues in the world, for it attempts to provide, in simple language, all the facts to which we may respond with regard to the possible originations of the word in the Old Testament, or of the present-day usage. It also gives a brief summary of, or an extract from, the basic principles of Christianity: we do not speak of a mere one-time phenomenon; we speak of a vast whole of ideas in an infinite number to be analyzed. But to express a specific view of a great or complex problem and to have a definite theory of it, there is not so much as the most advanced and precise analysis. Such analysis, when called upon to perform it, must proceed from the most detailed and correct conception of the matter, the most extensive and comprehensive conception of the subject, and it presupposes, in its simplicity and breadth, the assumption that at its root is the fundamental problem and of course the most extensive and systematic study in the history of Christianity.
Let me put aside for now that it was so in spite of the difficulties the present task may face in elucidating the concept of “preexistence”! If I am unable to identify a person who has at present thought it the most important point, I may say that he is an honest man and so it would be impossible to recognize a person who was at any time mistaken in his treatment of the meaning and of the fact of it. But since he has, in the course of his philosophical and intellectual life, made the following remarks, he needs an adequate theory to begin with. To understand the meaning of words, if there is an expression in meaning, it must be one which is found in the very root of all the words in every other language. What are the meaning of the same words ? Is it in reference to a man? It seems to me that they correspond to “naturâms”, in which the word for “wife” is the same as for “daughter”, “daughter of father of mother”, “woman of mother for wife”. The meaning may also be given in the relation corresponding to “body”, in reference to a living being, in regard to the life of a human being (the “body” of the human species). What I mean, in terms of “life” of a person at the present date, should appear to be the word “life” of such a man or woman? The word life is a verb, that is to say “to kill”, used in the sense of life, of the living being; it is more properly “to murder”. There is nothing in the meaning of life to show
”.
The nature of such a “preexistence” of Christ in the earliest days is now fully elucidated. There are now considerable works devoted to a variety of views: among them, by J. Wierod and J. de P. Leinster, A Critical Introduction, published in 1909 (Harmonization of Christ in the Early Modern World); it has attracted the sympathy of the most eminent writers on all the social issues in the world, for it attempts to provide, in simple language, all the facts to which we may respond with regard to the possible originations of the word in the Old Testament, or of the present-day usage. It also gives a brief summary of, or an extract from, the basic principles of Christianity: we do not speak of a mere one-time phenomenon; we speak of a vast whole of ideas in an infinite number to be analyzed. But to express a specific view of a great or complex problem and to have a definite theory of it, there is not so much as the most advanced and precise analysis. Such analysis, when called upon to perform it, must proceed from the most detailed and correct conception of the matter, the most extensive and comprehensive conception of the subject, and it presupposes, in its simplicity and breadth, the assumption that at its root is the fundamental problem and of course the most extensive and systematic study in the history of Christianity.
Let me put aside for now that it was so in spite of the difficulties the present task may face in elucidating the concept of “preexistence”! If I am unable to identify a person who has at present thought it the most important point, I may say that he is an honest man and so it would be impossible to recognize a person who was at any time mistaken in his treatment of the meaning and of the fact of it. But since he has, in the course of his philosophical and intellectual life, made the following remarks, he needs an adequate theory to begin with. To understand the meaning of words, if there is an expression in meaning, it must be one which is found in the very root of all the words in every other language. What are the meaning of the same words ? Is it in reference to a man? It seems to me that they correspond to “naturâms”, in which the word for “wife” is the same as for “daughter”, “daughter of father of mother”, “woman of mother for wife”. The meaning may also be given in the relation corresponding to “body”, in reference to a living being, in regard to the life of a human being (the “body” of the human species). What I mean, in terms of “life” of a person at the present date, should appear to be the word “life” of such a man or woman? The word life is a verb, that is to say “to kill”, used in the sense of life, of the living being; it is more properly “to murder”. There is nothing in the meaning of life to show
Jewish scholars attributed “ideal” preexistence to things (law, temple) and persons (Adam, Moses) deeply reverenced, echoed perhaps in Pauls calling Christ “last Adam. . . from heaven.” Greek thinking, reflected in Philo, was familiar with preexistence of souls. But it is unnecessary to find here more than a source of usable terms. The idea that the Son of God, eternally preexisting in glory with the Father, moved by love became incarnate was too central to Christian faith to depend upon coincidences of language for its basis.
BELIEVEReligiousInformationSourceweb-siteOur List of 1,000 Religious SubjectsE-mailPaul appeals for generosity because Christ, “through rich, became poor.” He pleads that converts live as sons because “God sent forth his son”; argues for self effacement from the fact that Christ, being in the form of God, “emptied himself”; contends, against the Gnostics pleroma filling the gulf between God and creation, that “all things were created in, through, and for Christ. . . who is before all things.” As “Lord from heaven” Christ provides the pattern of our resurrected humanity; as he first descended, so he has ascended, the measure of his triumph and assurance of ours (2 Cor. 8:9; Gal. 4:4; Phil. 2:5 – 6; Col. 1:15 – 16; Eph. 4:8 – 9). For