Introduction
The temple is crowded with people going bustling about to worship and sacrifice. A new popular Rabbi has entered the temple. Crowds begin to surround him and sit to hear what he has to say. As he begins to preach, some scribes and those of the Pharisaical order bring women caught in adultery. Yet the Rabbi is unfazed and maneuvers the trap set for him. As he continues to teach and begins to preach, he testifies to who he is and calls himself the Light of the world. He tells the Jews who believe, that they must abide in his word. The Rabbi calls God his Father, and some from the crowd call out that they are Abraham’s children and God is their Father. Tension builds, and then the Rabbi makes a statement that causes some in the crowd to pick up stones. The Rabbi declares, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am. (Jn. 8:58 [ESV])”
In Jesus’ declaration that he was before Abraham in John 8:58, the idea of the preexistence of Jesus is brought into the conversation of who he was. Jesus declared himself far older than those in the crowd he spoke to and even those the crowd had read about in the Scriptures. When using the “I am” language, Jesus connected himself to the God of the Hebrews. This fact was not lost on the ears of the religious leaders, and they picked up stones to end this perceived blasphemy. Of the blasphemous idea that there could be a being that preexisted along with God, Jon D. Levenson writes, “Indeed, this notion of a figure who existed before the creation of the world and will eternally remain in God’s presence seems to collide head-on with what most Jews consider the very animating essence of Judaism …” Even today, there are those who have proposed that Jesus could not be preexistent because, as Adela Yarbor Collins points out, the idea does not fit the Old Testament or Jewish thought. This paper will show that the doctrine of Christ's preexistence is consistent with the Old Testament revelation of other preexistent figures and the Jewish interpretation of those figures during the intertestamental period.
Overview of the Doctrine of the Preexistence of Christ
In his article, “He Came Down from Heaven,” Douglas McCready states, “The preexistence of Christ is part of the foundation of Christian faith on which these other doctrines depend.” McCready’s understanding of preexistence “…means not that the man Jesus existed in any real sense before the incarnation but that God the Son existed apart from and prior to the incarnation. Without the Son’s preexistence there can be no incarnation.” Greg Lanier agrees with the essentiality of the doctrine of Christ’s preexistence when he writes, “One of the prerequisites for a full doctrine of the divinity of Jesus Christ is that he exists forever in the past … For him to be divine, he somehow must also have had a real, eternal existence even prior to his human birth to Mary.” Friederike Kunath puts the doctrine of preexistence into perspective, stating, “Kuschel and other scholars think of the notion of preexistence as something which, at its core, is not connected to temporality. Talk of preexistence might use the language of temporality, but its actual meaning concerns Jesus’s significance and his belonging to the realm of God.” A simple definition comes from another scholar, Charles C. Ryrie, who states, “Preexistence of Christ means that He existed before his birth.” This makes clear that when Christ’s preexistence is discussed, the whole scope of the eternity of God is to be associated with Christ before the event of the incarnation.
Millard J. Erickson points out several New Testament passages that stand as the foundation for the preexistence of Christ. These passages include John 3:13, in which Jesus speaks to Nicodemus about being from heaven. Other preexistent passages in the Gospel of John include the seven “I am” statements that David A. deSilva connects to Exodus 3:14 and the covenantal name of God. deSilva states that by making the “I am” statements, Jesus is actually “excepting” himself in light of this Old Testament image of covenant. Erickson also points to Jesus’ first trial before the high priest Caiaphas, where Jesus’ words, “… you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven. (Matthew 26:64),” makes a direct and unequivocal connection between himself and God. If this connection is true, then Jesus’ preexistence is assured because whatever attributes are connected to God are rightly Christ’s as well.
However, as McCready points out, several objections exist to the doctrine of Christ’s Preexistence. This paper seeks to address the primary objection of the Religionsgeschichtliche Schule or History-of-Religions school. This school of thought came about around the latter part of nineteenth-century Germany when several faculty at the University of Göttingen. This school believed that the history of Christianity had been corrupt, leading to Jewish ideas of the actual historical Jesus being mixed with those of the pagan Greco-Roman world. They sought to find the historical Jesus by stripping him of anything that would seem pagan by Jewish standards. Yet, in the search for the historical Jesus that Erickson points out, the early man of Jesus being a good teacher tends to do away with his preexistent state. The school rejected the idea that Jesus could be preexistent because the concept was foreign to Judaism and was a later addition to Christianity by pagan influences.
Yet, by rejecting Jesus’ preexistence, issues arise in understanding who Jesus thought himself and in other areas of Christian theology. In fact, Ryrie sees three issues if one rejects the preexistence of Christ doctrine. First, if Christ’s birth brought him into existence, then the eternal Trinity does not exist. This means that the doctrine of the Trinity is intertwined and cannot be hoped to be defended without the understanding that Christ preexisted the incarnation event. Second, Jesus could not claim to be God because preexistence is an essential attribute of God. Jesus’ claims to be God, as seen through the “I am” passage of John’s Gospel, need a preexistent dimension to them because one of God’s primary attributes is that he preexisted all things, for he is the Creator of all things. Finally, Jesus’ statements that speak of his preexistence, such as John 8:58, would be false, and God cannot lie. If Jesus were God, then he would not be able to lie; therefore, his statements of being preexistent would be factual. However, if Jesus was not God, then his statements would be false, and he would also not be preexistent.
To counter these issues, Ryrie puts forth evidence for Jesus’ preexistence that comes from Christ’s statements and the interpretation of his disciples. In John 3:13 & 31, the author of the Gospel shares Jesus’ words to Nicodemus on his heavenly origins. Jesus states, “No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man … He who comes from above is above all … He who comes from heaven is above all.” Jesus spoke of his heavenly origins and his equality with God. Another piece of evidence from Jesus’ disciples that points to his preexistence comes from Paul, who writes, “For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily … (Col. 2:9)” In addition to these, Jesus is as the Creator of all things, reveals Christ’s work before the incarnation.
Speaking on the preexistence of Christ in Philippians 2, Ruben A. Bühner writes, “…without Christ’s existence before his earthly life, Paul could not use Jesus’ selfless humiliation as an exhortation to the Philippians within his paraenesis.” Bühner states that although Paul does not disclose what Christ was like or what he was doing in this preexistent form, “… the idea that Christ existed in some capacity prior to his earthly life is hard to deny.”
In addition to the New Testament ideas of Christ’s preexistence, the early Church worked through the idea. Though the preexistence doctrine was not highly discussed in the early Church, there are references to an understanding that Christ was preexistent with the Father. Ignatius writes, “Await Him that is above every season, the Eternal, the Invisible, who became visible for our sake, the Impalpable, the Impassible, who suffered for our sake, who endured in all ways for our sake.” This can also be seen in the Nicene Creed, which states, “And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages; Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not created, of one essence with the Father through Whom all things were made.”
With this overview of the doctrine of Christ clearly shown, attention is now turned to the issue of the preexistence of two figures in the Old Testament.
Preexistent Figures in the Old Testament
After Jesus’ resurrection, he meets two disciples on the road to Emmaus. Here, Luke tells the reader, “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. (Luke 24:27)” For the doctrine of Christ’s preexistence to be accurate, it must be seen in the Hebrew Scriptures that there are other instances of preexistence figures who are connected to God and, in a sense, separate from him. To understand the basis of Christ’s preexistence in the Hebrew Scriptures, two figures will be explored below: the figure of Wisdom and the figure of the angel of the Lord.
Concerning Wisdom in the Old Testament, Aquila H. I. Lee writes, “It is widely recognized that the figure of Wisdom played an important role in the development of early christology.” From an Old Testament perspective, Wisdom is a bridge between the divine and humanity, and for the most part, can be seen in personifying God’s intelligence. In the book of Proverbs, Wisdom is said to be a woman who cries out in the streets, dwells “…with prudence …,” and builds a house. These can be simple personifications of Wisdom in keeping with the Old Testament’s use of illusion to help understand an idea. Yet it is in Proverbs 8:22-29 that Wisdom moves from personification into the realm of personhood. C. A. Gieschen comments on this when he writes, “Wisdom speaks in the first person and refers to God in the third person several times (8.22-29). A distinction exists between the origins of Wisdom and those of God; Wisdom is also distinct from the rest of creation (8.22). She is God’s companion, even a participant (“master craftsman” [MT: pax; LXX: apuoiouoa]), in the creation.” Gieschen’s argument extends further to place Wisdom as enthroned with God as an equal in divinity. This is due to the language of “… beside him …” of Proverbs 8:30, which Gieschen states is a phrase within Jewish and Christian literature to speak of enthronement with God. In this way, we can see the concept of Wisdom as both with God and separate from him. Gary M. Burge considers the connection between the Wisdom of God in the Old Testament and the Logos of the Gospel of John 1:1 when he writes, “John begins by introducing Jesus as the Word (Greek logos) … he builds on contemporary Jewish thought where the Word of God took on personal creative attributes …was personified …and known by some as the immanent power of God …” Finally, David Moser concludes that touring the Arian controversy of the 300s, “… all parties involved in the Arian controversy agreed that the subject who speaks ‘[t]he Lord created me at the beginning of his work, in Prov. 8:22 was not an impersonal divine Wisdom, but Jesus Christ …” Moser continues that Arians believe the term “at the beginning” meant a moment of creation. In contrast, Athanasius interpreted it as “… being an eternal occurrence …” This latter view won the day.
In addition to Wisdom being seen as a preexistent figure in the Old Testament, the angel of the Lord is one of the best examples of a preexistent figure. Lee writes, “The angel of the Lord is one of the most enigmatic and most prominent angelic figures in the OT … On occasions when this angel appears in these books we find a curious oscillation between this angel and God. Frequently this angel speaks and acts as a messenger of God and further along the line he speaks and acts as God himself.” The angel of the Lord is enigmatic because of how the angel speaks and interacts with people. The angel says to Hagar as if he were God, “… I will surely multiply your offspring … (Gen. 16:10)” In this interaction between the angel of the Lord and Hagar, Victor P. Hamilton writes, “The angel of the Lord and the Lord—distinct, yet the same.” It was the angel of the Lord that sat down with Gideon, to which the author of Judges notes, “… And the Lord turned to him … (Jdg. 6:14)” In the Liberty Bible Commentary, Edward E. Hindson writes about Gideon’s encounter with the angel of the Lord, “Verse 14, states the Lord looked upon him, indicating that the angel of the Lord who spoke to him was the Lord Himself!” Finally, the angel of the Lord led the people out of Egypt in the cloud, to which Jude connected to Jesus. This connection is attested to by Bebe, who states, “[Jude] is referring not to Jesus the son of Nun but to our Lord, showing first that he did not have his beginning at his birth from the holy virgin, as the heretics have wished [to assert], but existed as the eternal God for the salvation of all believers.” The angel of the Lord was connected to and separate from the Lord himself, revealing a connection that the New Testament authors saw as Christ himself.
After reviewing both Wisdom and the angel of the Lord, it is clear that the Old Testament does have a basis for seeing preexistent figures. This basis shows that the doctrine of Christ’s preexistence is consistent with Old Testament ideas. Due to these preexistent figures, Jewish thought during the intertestamental period wrestled with who these figures were and if they were truly separate from God.
Preexistent Figures in Intertestamental Jewish Thought
During the time of the Old Testament and the New Testament, though it is called the silent period, this silence is only from the perspective of God communicating in such a way that new Scripture was being produced. Yet the Jewish community was not silent in wrestling with what would become the standard Rabbinic cannon and producing additional writings in what would become known as the Apocrypha. In addition to translating Hebrew Scripture into Greek, works such as the books of Enoch, Wisdom of Solomon, and Philo’s writings were produced. The first two writings will be given a brief review concerning their understanding of preexistent figures.
The First Book of Enoch 48 is where many scholars, such as Johannes Theisohn, find the preexistent figure of the Son of Man. Verses 2 and 3 are points of interest that read, “And at that hour that Son of Man was named in the presence of the Lord of Spirits, And his name before the Head of Days. Yea, before the sun and the signs were created, Before the stars of the heaven were made, His name was named before the Lord of Spirits.” Here, it can be seen that the Son of Man figure’s name was called out before the Lord created. However, as Michael Wade Martin points out, this does not necessarily mean the Son of Man figure is preexistent, but rather that God knew him before the world’s creation. Yet in verse 6, it reads, “In his presence, he existed, and has revealed the saints and to the righteous the wisdom of the Lord of spirits …” This shows that it was not merely the name that the Lord knew, but that the Son of Man figure was preexistent before his role in creation. The obvious connection to the Son of Man language and Jesus’ use of the Son of Man title shows a connection, yet Martin seems to skip over verse 6 and only focuses on verses 5 and 7. Yet, this does not lead Martin to reject the preexistence of the Son of Man figure in First Enoch. Instead, due to the preservation language of both First Enoch 48:6 and 62:7, Martin concludes, “… since preservation implies real existence, these phrases can only be understood to ascribe real preexistence to the Son of Man.” Martin makes a strong case for “…formal and intellectual parallelisms …” with the servant of Isaiah 49 in these First Enoch passages. Other Son of Man references between the Old Testament and the books of Enoch can also be seen. Levenson points to scholars such as Peter Schäfer, who see binitarianism in the Son of Man passage of Daniel 7 and the “Metatron” in Third Enoch. Levenson goes as far as to say, “The Younger God’ Metatron … is to the God of Israel as Jesus, the Son of God, is to God the Father in Christian theology.” Brian Ogren concurs with this reality of the Jewish mind when he writes, “… rabbis entertained the possibility of a kind of co-eternal binitarianism.” The issue then between the Jewish and Christian communities was not whether there was a possibility of a binitarianism within God, but rather, whether there was a possibility of the incarnation.
The books of Enoch’s Son of Man figure, and others like him, reveal that the Jewish mind was wrestling with the images of the Old Testament during the Intertestamental period and coming to a conclusion that there was indeed the possibility of a binitarianism within God. Yet, these books are not alone in the discussion of preexistent figures. Returning to the figure of Wisdom, the Apocrypha book Wisdom of Solomon gives insight into the Jewish interpretation of Wisdom during these “silent years.” Lee points out that 7:22-8:1 is a primary example where most scholars see a preexistent figure. Though Lee does not believe this results in “a divine hypostasis,” he cannot deny the connection and separation between God and Wisdom. This can be best seen in 9:4, 10, where Wisdom is sharing God’s throne; the sharing of throne imagery is consistent with Christ’s words in Revelation 3:21, “The one who conquers, I will grant him to sit with me on my throne, as I also conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne.”
The books of Enoch and the Wisdom of Solomon both show that the Jewish mind of the Intertestamental period was wrestling with preexistent figures, and that this thought was setting further ground work that would be realized in Jesus. It must be noted that, in addition to what has been discussed above, other documents from this period, such as the book of Baruch, the book of Sirach, and the material produced by the Qumran community, also point to a preexistent figure in the way of Wisdom and a Messianic figure. In fact Craig A. Evans who gave a series of lectures March 3-4 in 2016, showed that Qumran Scroll 4Q246, points to the direct connection that a preexistent Messianic figure was well in the Jewish thought before Jesus’ arrival. Due to these documents, a binitarianism concept was emerging before the coming of Jesus in the first century A.D. and shows that the doctrine of the preexistence of Christ would not be foreign to the Jewish mindset of this period.
Conclusion
When Jesus began his ministry and proclaimed that he was before Abraham, the Jews were not so much challenging the idea that there could be another preexistent figure, for this had been discussed and wrestled with for centuries; no, their issue was, “You are not yet fifty years old … (Jn. 8:57)” In another instance when Jesus claimed equality with God, the reaction was, “ … It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God. (Jn. 10:33)” The concept the religious leaders were calling blasphemous was that of the incarnation; they could not believe that God would become man. They might have accepted another preexistent figure becoming flesh, since, as has been shown above, preexistence figures had been shown to be revealed in the Old Testament, and the Jews had wrestled with the idea during the Intertestamental period. Yet, as has also been shown in this paper, the doctrine of the preexistence of Christ is consistent with these Old Testament revelations of other preexistent figures and the Jewish interpretation of those figures during the intertestamental period. As Peter Schäfer sought to show, there is a “… long and little-known history of a second, junior god in Judaism, showing how this idea was embraced by rabbis and Jewish mystics …” In the end McCready states, “This doctrine was not the result of early Christianity’s encounter with Hellenism. It arose out of the early Church’s Jewish roots.”
Bibliography
“Book of Enoch,” Accessed February 27, 2025, https://www.pseudepigrapha.com/pseudepigrapha/enoch.htm#CH48.
Bühner, Ruben A., Messianic High Christology: New Testament Variants of Second Temple Judaism, Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2021.
Burge, Gary M., “John,” The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary, ed. Burge, Gary M. and Andrew E. Hill, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2012.
Collins, Adela Yarbor, “The Historical Jesus: Then and Now,” in Reflections, Spring 2008, https://reflections.yale.edu/article/between-babel-and-beatitude/historical-jesus-then-and-now.
Dell, Katharine, “Wisdom in the Old Testament,” B. N. Wolfe et al., eds. St. Andrews Encyclopedia of Theology, University of St Andrews, June 20,2024, https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/WisdomintheOldTestament.
deSilva, David A., An Introduction to the New Testament: Contexts, Methods and Ministry Formation, Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2012.
Erickson, Millard J., Christian Theology, 3rd ed., Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013.
Evans, Craig A., “Jewish roots for divinity of Messiah in early Christology.” E. Earle Ellis Lecture series, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Forth Worth, TX, March 4, 2016.
Gieschen, Charles A., Angelomorphic Christology: Antecedents and Early Evidence, Leiden, NL: BRILL, 1998.
Hamilton, Victor P., “Genesis,” The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary, ed. Burge, Gary M. and Andrew E. Hill, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2012.
Hindson, Edward E., “Judges,” Liberty Bible Commentary: Old Testament, ed. Jerry Falwell, Edward E. Hindson, Woodrow Michael Kroll, Lynchburg, VA: Old-Time Gospel Hour, 1982.
“Intertestamental History,” LibGuides, Bob Jones University, Mack Library, Accessed February 27, 2025, https://libguides.bju.edu/intertestamental-history.
Kunath, Friederike, “Jesus’s Preexistence and the Temporal Configuration of the Gospel of John.” Early Christianity 8, no. 1 (2017): 30–47.
Lanier, Greg, Is Jesus Truly God?: How the Bible Teaches the Divinity of Christ, Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2020.
Levenson, Jon D., “Did Jews Really Believe There Were Two Gods in Heaven?” August 4, 2020, https://mosaicmagazine.com/observation/religion-holidays/2020/08/did-jews-really-believe-there-were-two-gods-in-heaven/.
Lim, Timothy, “Understanding the Emergence of the Jewish Canon,” Ancient Jew Review, December 2, 2015, https://www.ancientjewreview.com/read/2015/12/1/understanding-the-emergence-of-the-jewish-canon.
Laurence, Richard, ed., Book of Enoch the Prophet, London, UK: Kegan Paul Trench & CO., 1883.
Martin, Michael Wade, “Whether and Whence Preexistence in 1 Enoch ? Isa 49:1–2 and the Preexistent Servant as the Background for 1 En. 48:3, 6; 62:7.” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 32, no. 3 (March 2023): 270–84.
McCready, Douglas, “‘He Came down from Heaven’: The Preexistence of Christ Revisited.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40, no. 3 (September 1, 1997): 419–32.
Meeks, Wayne A. “The History of Religions School.” Chapter. In The New Cambridge History of the Bible, edited by John Riches, 127–38. New Cambridge History of the Bible. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
Moser, David, “Jesus’ Preexistence and Incarnation,” B. N. Wolfe et al., eds. St. Andrews Encyclopedia of Theology, University of St Andrews, June 20,2024, https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/JesusPreexistenceandIncarnation.
“New Testament Studies Research: Intertestamental Period aka ‘Silent Years,’” LibGuides, The Master’s University, Robert L. Powell Library, Accessed February 27, 2025, https://masters.libguides.com/c.php?g=820870&p=5858040.
Ogren, Brian, ed., Time and Eternity in Jewish Mysticism: That Which Is Before and That Which Is After, Boston, MA: BRILL, 2015.
