Literal Pre-existence of Jesus?

The following is taken from Chapter 6 in my book, “Can We Handle The Truth?”

 Literal Pre-existence?

   Most churches argue for the literal pre-existence of Jesus. Pre-existence is defined as: “existence in a former state or previous to something else.” However, where it concerns Christ, it is regularly taught that Jesus literally pre-existed as the second person of the triune God before he became a man in the flesh. However, there is a vast difference when we have the Hebrew understanding of “pre-existence” vs. the influence of Greek culture of a “literal physical pre-existence.” To believe the literal physical pre-existence of Jesus is to abandon the Jewish concept of pre-existence.

You might be thinking at this point, “Well, what is the Jewish concept of pre-existence?” I will give you a few examples. The first example can be taken from John 17:5 where Jesus says:

Now, Father, glorify me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

This is supposed to prove that Jesus literally existed with God before he became a human being here on earth. Unfortunately, the context is ignored. The context shows us where Jesus gives this same glory to future believers who are not yet alive (v. 22):

I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in me through their word…The glory which You have given me I have given [past tense] to them.

If we were to remain consistent with the interpretation that promotes a literal pre-existence, then we would have to conclude we also pre-existed!

The passage does not establish Jesus pre-existed. Jesus was glorified when he was raised from the dead, and he speaks of it as if he already has it. If we go back to John 7:39 we read:

Now this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

In Luke 24:26 we read:

Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?

But here in John 17:5, Jesus speaks of his glorification as though he already has it. In addition, we saw that Jesus has given (past tense) this same glory to his disciple and future disciples who end up believing through their word. Therefore, the glory Jesus had “before the world was,” has to do with God’s purpose that is assured to be fulfilled.

We can have something, in Jewish ways of thinking, “with God,” meaning that it is planned and promised for the future. John 17:5 means that Jesus desired that God give him the glory which he had stored up in God’s plan for the future.

Another example can be taken from 2 Cor. 5:1:

For we know that if our temporary, earthly dwelling is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal dwelling in the heavens, not made with hands.

None of us would think that we already have an eternal body in heaven. One may talk themselves into believing that they are literally up in the heavens, but it does not make it so. Like Jesus, we have it in God’s promise. One day we will have a glorified body given to us at the resurrection when Jesus returns even though scripture says we have it now. We have it in the sense that we possess it in God’s promise.

The apostle Paul is known as the “Hebrew of Hebrews” and was not void of the Hebraic concept of pre-existence. He states in Romans 4:17:

As it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”—in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and CALL INTO EXISTENCE THE THINGS THAT DO NOT EXIST.

What Paul says here provides the strongest evidence that supports the traditional Hebraic concept and meaning of pre-existence in his description as God who calls those things that do not exist as though they did. It is not a literal pre-existence but has everything to do with God’s promises that are assured to come to pass.

For those who promote a literal pre-existence, what do they do with the book of Revelation where it says:

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb [The Messiah] SLAIN FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD. (Rev. 13:8)

For those who uphold a literal pre-existence, this would mean Christ was slain twice! The Messiah did not literally exist until he was born.

Another major proof text to try to prove the literal pre-existence of Jesus is John 1:1. It is also worth noting the blatant bias by capitalizing the W for word:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

How can we have “the word was WITH God, and then say, “the word WAS God?” The word “with” means “accompanied by.”  If the “word” is supposed to be Jesus, it should read like this:

In the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with God and the Son was God.

“The Son was with God and the Son was God?” This is a classic example of eisegesis. Jesus (Son) is read into the text when it does not mention him at all. The word “word” is “logos” in the Greek.

Lexical definitions for the Greek word logos are:

• utterance
• statement
• question
• proclamation
• command
• revelation
• decree
• plan
• expression of the mind
• creative thought
• purpose
• promise
• reason

This is not an exhaustive list, but you will notice that nowhere is the “word” (“logos”) ever referred to as a person distinct from the Father.

The word has to do with God’s utterance, his plan, his creative power. It was the logos which was in the beginning with God; it does not say it was Christ.

Everyone is thankful to William Tyndale for giving us our first English translation of the bible based on the Hebrew and Greek text. His New Testament was published in 1526 and revised to its final state in 1534. However, William Tyndale would probably be considered a heretic for translating John 1:3-4 as:

In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God. All things came into being through IT, and without IT nothing was made that was made.

When I presented this to my friend she got upset and said, “So God is now an it!

Tyndale used “it” rather than “him” and so does the Matthew’s Bible of 1537, the Great Bible of 1539, the Geneva Bible of 1560, and the Bishop’s Bible of 1568, which she probably did not realize. From what I understand, “it” is a translation of the Greek “autou” meaning “he, she, or it.” Since Tyndale did not read Jesus the Messiah into the “logos,” it shows he was not influenced by the Latin Vulgate of Jerome.

God (Yahweh) spoke creation into existence. If you read Genesis chapter 1, note how many times we read, “God said.”

I recently read where someone argued that the “beginning” in John 1:1 refers to the beginning of Christ’s ministry, and to support this interpretation he used the passage in 1 John 1:1. However, the Gospel of John in chapter 1 is drawing from Genesis 1 as we can see by verse 3, which refers to God and not Christ.

Now, in the last part of the verse we read:

and the word was God.

This is where we see that the “word” belongs to the sphere of God; it is not a separate being from God. We do not separate the word from the person. We can see samples of this In Psalm 33:6:

By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. (Ps. 33:6)

For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast. (Ps. 33: 9)

…so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it. (Isa. 55:11; see also Ps. 107:20; 147:15, 18, 19)

We cannot separate the word from God. The word was fully representative of God, “the word was God.” Author Chuck LaMattina has well stated that John 1:1-3 could accurately be paraphrased like this:

In the beginning God had a creative and redemptive plan. And this plan or purpose revealed his heart and was fully representative of all that God is. All things were made through this plan and without this divine plan nothing was made.[1]

As an architect draws his plan for a building on a roll of paper, it is not until he starts construction that the building becomes a reality. So too, it is not until we get to John 1:14 that this plan became a reality. This plan becomes a living-breathing human being revealed in the promise, by God, of the coming Messiah for God’s people. This was done by the holy spirit overshadowing the virgin Mary that resulted in a unique pregnancy.

So though the Jewish concept believes in the pre-existence of the Messiah, they did notbelieve it as a literal physical pre-existence, but rather it had to do with the plan and mind of God, which always included the coming Messiah.

 “Sent” Does Not Mean Dropping Out Of The Sky

There is another passage used to try to prove the literal pre-existence of Jesus. When trying to uphold the trinity teaching, we will often muddle the meaning of simple words by redefining them. For instance, take the word “sent.” Scripture states that Jesus was “sent into the world” by God (Jn. 10:36). This is supposed to prove he existed as the divine Son of God before he came into the world.

Now, if we are to stay consistent with the trinity teaching and its interpretation, we must also conclude that John the Baptist also pre-existed prior to his birth for we read:

There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. (John 1:6)

Being “sent” or “sent into this world” does not mean a spirit being dropped from outer space into a woman’s womb.

Jesus also said:

For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world. (John 6:33)

And:

I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” (John 6:51)

Did Jesus come down as literal bread from heaven? Also, if Jesus was a literal person on this earth, then he existed in the flesh up there in heaven prior to his birth!  Yes, it is absurd if we must think this way.

Jesus said in John 8:42:

If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me.

Think about it. If Jesus is God, how can he “come from God” and be “sent by God?”

In John 3:13 we read:

No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.

Many read these passages and think of literal pre-existence. The Biblicalunitarian Websites states accurately:

The Jews would not have taken John’s words to mean that Christ “incarnated.” It was common for them to say that something “came from heaven” if God were its source. For example, James 1:17 says that every good gift is “from above” and “comes down” from God. What James means is clear. God is the Author and source of the good things in our lives. God works behind the scenes to provide what we need. The verse does not mean that the good things in our lives come directly down from heaven. Most Christians experience the Lord blessing them by way of other people or events, but realize that the ultimate source of the blessings was the Lord. We should apply John’s words the same way we understand James’ words—that God is the source of Jesus Christ, which He was. Christ was God’s plan, and then God directly fathered Jesus.

There are also verses that say Jesus was “sent from God,” a phrase that shows God as the ultimate source of what is sent. John the Baptist was a man “sent from God” (John 1:6), and it was he who said that Jesus “comes from above” and “comes from heaven” (John 3:31). When God wanted to tell the people that He would bless them if they gave their tithes, He told them that He would open the windows of “heaven” and pour out a blessing (Mal. 3:10 – KJV). Of course, everyone understood the idiom being used, and no one believed that God would literally pour things out of heaven. They knew that the phrase meant that God was the origin of the blessings they received. Still another example is when Christ was speaking and said, “John’s baptism—where did it come from? Was it from heaven or from men?” (Matt. 21:25). Of course, the way that John’s baptism would have been “from heaven” was if God was the source of the revelation. John did not get the idea on his own, it came “from heaven.” The verse makes the idiom clear: things could be “from heaven,” i.e., from God, or they could be “from men.” The idiom is the same when used of Jesus. Jesus is “from God,” “from heaven” or “from above” in the sense that God is his Father and thus his origin.

The idea of coming from God or being sent by God is also clarified by Jesus’ words in John 17. He said, “As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world” (John 17:18). We understand perfectly what Christ meant when he said, “I have sent them into the world.” He meant that he commissioned us, or appointed us. No one thinks that we were in heaven with Christ and incarnated into the flesh. Christ said, “As you have sent me, I have sent them.” So, however we take the phrase that Christ sent us, that is how we should understand the phrase that God sent Christ.[2]

Dear reader, as you search these verses[3] in the footnote, you will begin to understand that “sent,” “sent from God,” or “send” does not prove that Jesus the Messiah literally came down from heaven and is God. Jesus “sends” his disciple in the same manner as the Father sent him into the world (John 20:21).

It is unfortunate that most churches abandon and conceal the true Hebraic concept of pre-existence. This leaves the sincere Christians in ignorance of Jewish understanding of the New Testament, especially in the Gospel of John. The New Testament was written by Jews. Could it be that the suppression of the Jewish ways of understanding the scriptures damage the orthodox dogmas that have developed over the centuries?

We have seen that the term “logos” has many definitions that are more understandable and logical than the biased rendering of the “Word” as it is defined and upheld in mainstream orthodox Christianity to this day.

It is crucial that we understand scripture from within its context of what was written because the authors, who were Jews, wrote within a Hebraic framework. Therefore, it is critical to interpreting the bible with this in mind. The prime example is the Gospel of John where most trinitarian teaching is drawn from that abandons the Hebraic mindset of the New Testament authors. When this happens, the outcome has many disastrous interpretations, the use of nonsensical language, and definitions that end up having to be explained by analogies to try to get the listener to understand a doctrine that is said to be incomprehensible by many who embrace the doctrine of the trinity. The Gospel of John ends up grossly misinterpreted and distorted because of the failure to apply the proper context and its interpretation within the Judaic mindset.

Traditional Christian theologians who choose to conceal, whether ignorantly or deliberately, the Hebraic concept of pre-existence, gives birth to students who end up believing in either a “Triune God” or in some cases, a “Biune God.” In either case, it erroneously teaches that Christ is God Almighty.

How unfortunate to have gone down this path that has led to much dissension, controversy, debate, and even believers of the truth being put to torturous death over the centuries. This perversion of the truth began at least one hundred years after the death and resurrection of Christ when false doctrines began to infiltrate and plagued the church. All because church leaders have abandoned the Hebraic understanding of scriptures and have clung to the influences of Greek philosophy (also known as “Hellenism”).

The idea of pre-existence would have us believe that Jesus was really alive and conscious in heaven and active in the affairs of the Old Testament patriarchs before his birth in Bethlehem, is a deception. Jesus is and has always been authentically a human being like us. He was not an angel who became a man or some spirit being who entered Mary’s womb and became a man, nor an eternal Son of God who gave up his heavenly realm to come to earth and become a man, or the third part of a “godhead” that made a conscious decision to come to earth.

I would also like to add a note that some of the brethren would consider it blasphemy to call Jesus a man, and therefore was just a mere man or only a man?  They like to give their spin by asking, "So you think Jesus was just a mere man or only a man?"  Well, let me ask, "Was Jesus anything other than a man?" No. He was a human being just as we are a human being. Certainly, he is a unique human being by the fact that he was directly begotten by the Father and not through the normal process of procreating. He is just as human as Adam was human. The scriptures never fail to emphasize how much Jesus is like us in every respect to his being. If Jesus is something else, then he cannot rightly be called a man. Jesus himself said he was a man and referred to himself as the son of man. In 1Tim. 2:5, Jesus is called a man. Everything about him was human. The only reason to mock the brethren who believe Jesus was a human being like the rest of us is that they hold to the belief that God became a man and therefore had two natures that made him fully man and fully God. That is why they have the problem of thinking of Jesus as a man, a human being like the rest of us. Until they can prove from scripture that teaches Jesus was ontologically different from his brethren, then they might have my ear.

[1] APPENDIX 1-John 1:1-3 by Chuck LaMattina

[2] Buzzard, pp. 154-157; Norton, pp. 246-248 as cited on Biblicalunitarian.com

[3] Matthew 10:40;  Mark 9:37; Luke 4:18; Luke 9:48; Luke 10:16; John 1:6; 4:34; 5:24; 5:30 ; 5:36; 5:37; 6:38; 6:39; 7:16; 7:28; 7:29; 7:33; 8:16; 8:18; 8:26; :29; 8:42; 9:4; 11:42; 12:44-45; 12:49; 13:20; 14:24; 15:21; 16:5; 17:18; 17:21; 17:23; 17:25; 20:21

Can We Handle The Truth?

My book now available on Amazon.com

https://www.amazon.com/dp/154089424X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1502457226&sr=8-1&keywords=can+we+handle+the+truth

But For the Grace of God Go I

Is this saying another way to blame God? One day I was reading the newspaper about a tragic accident that happened on I-95 where a six-year-old child was killed. The driver was the father who had a car load of children on their way to a church function. All came out fine except for the death of the father's child. One of the children said to another, "God was with us," which those around were in agreement and with much thankfulness. But I can't help but think, was God not there for the six-year-old who was killed? And what about the grieving family?

How many times have we heard, "There but for the grace of God go I?" Often we hear that phrase when it has to do with escaping some horrible accident, escaping death, various addictions, or some type of disaster. We may hear something similar, "By God's grace" He helped me find a job, find a spouse, pay my bills, that my house didn't get flooded during the storm, etc., etc..

I used to have a co-worker who used that phrase quite often. I couldn't help but cringe every time she said it. Finally one day I asked her, "What about those who were not as fortunate to experience all of this supposed grace? What about those who end up with flooded homes, no job, or loss of a child in some horrible accident, etc. etc.? " I could see I caught her off guard and she stumbled for an answer.

I have never noticed anyone using the phrase directly at the person experiencing the horrible tragedies in their life.  Could using the phrase be an unintentional smug remark when others are faced with disaster, disgrace, or other misfortunes, as a result of their choices or no fault of their own? Does it not imply that the person making the remark could have been in the same position but was fortunate enough to escape such disasters because God favored them more than the other? Is such an expression Biblical or implied? I have yet to find it.

I have a friend from Germany who needed help with the grammar of this expression. He could guess from the context but didn't get the exact meaning. He said the sentence would not work in his native tongue.  My reply to him is that one could explain it as a person who experiences bad things in life, but to the other person, it could have happened to them, but it didn't because God was watching over the "favored one." For example, one year my neighbors around the corner from us were flooded out of their homes from a week long rainfall. I could easily have said, "There but for the grace of God go I." It's another way of saying, "Too bad God wasn't watching over and protecting you, but God protected me instead from such disaster.

I think it is such a terrible saying for those who face a string of personal catastrophes and to think we come out unscathed because God favored us over them. It is one of the dangers of attributing an event to God's direct involvement when it could have been natural causes.

Another danger of this kind of thinking is concluding that disastrous events did not happen to you because of your good relationship with God, or by those who think they have a relationship with God. There is one thing I do know. Jesus said,

“That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust." Matthew 5:45.

It is not a matter of who is getting blessed and who isn't. Or who is enjoying life and who is not. As someone has aptly said,

"God is not rewarding the unjust with his rain, nor is he trying to frustrate the just by raining on the unjust. It is simply a testimony to God’s impartiality."

The Hope of the Saints is Not Going to Heaven

The HOPE of the righteous is RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD. It is NOT the hope of “going to heaven,” for nowhere in scripture does it say heaven is our destination when we die no matter how this unbiblical teaching is reinforced in hymns, at funerals, in literature, in the pulpits, and Hollywood movies.

God is going to renew this earth and promised that the righteous are going to "inherit the earth." Jesus repeated this promise: 

"Blessed are the meek, for they are going to inherit the earth" (Matthew 5:5).

This renewed earth is the reward and inheritance of all the saints.

"For evildoers will be cut off, but as for those who wait for the LORD, they will inherit the earth. Yet a little while and the wicked man will be no more; and you will look carefully for his place and he will not be there. But the humble will inherit the earth and will delight themselves in abundant prosperity...The LORD knows the days of the blameless, and their inheritance will be forever... For those blessed by Him will inherit the earth, but those cursed by Him will be cut off...The righteous will inherit the land and dwell in it forever...Wait for the LORD and keep His way, and He will exalt you to inherit the land; when the wicked are cut off, you will see it" (Psalm 37:9-34).

Question:  Just curious....what about when Jesus said, "This day, you shalt be with me in Paradise?"  And, "In my Father's house there are many mansions."

Good question.  There is so much to cover, but I will try to give it to you in a nut shell. 

One of the scriptures you are talking about is John 14:1-3

Concerning preparing a place, it says, 

“Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to myself; that where I am, there you may be also” (John 14:1–3).

Just to make some points.

1.  Heaven is never referred to as "my Father's house." (Allusion to the temple)
2. Jesus is not talking about taking them to heaven when they die. If this were so, we would have Jesus “coming back” many times after each person dies and individual resurrections.
3. We know that Jesus is not literally building buildings or mansions (translated “dwelling places”) There is no construction work going on in heaven. :) 

But Jesus does promise to prepare a place for us. A question to ask is, Where is this place? It will be here on earth when he returns, thus fulfilling a prophecy given by the angels in Acts 1:11. It is also in harmony with Jesus in 1 Thess. 4:13-17 where we will be united with Christ at the “second coming.” The coming of Christ fulfills a multitude of prophecies of the “Kingdom of God” in the Old and New Testaments. 

All the saints will have important position of authority in the coming Kingdom, the Millennium, which will be initiated by Jesus’ Coming (Rev.19:11-20:6; Isa. 9:6-9; Ps. 2; Acts 3:21). The saints will judge the world and angels (1 Cor. 6:2-3). Jesus restores life to conditions seen in the Garden of Eden (Rev. 20:1-6; Is. 2:1-4; 9:6-9; 11:1-16; 51:1-8; 60-62; 65:17-25; Ps. 2:6-12; 110:1-7; Mt. 5:5; 6:10; 17:11; 19:28; Acts 1:6; 3:21).

As far as the thief on the cross, this is really no problem. The thief on the cross said to Jesus, 

“Lord, remember me when you come into your kingdom” (Luke 23:42). 

Again, there is nothing in there that says anything about going to heaven. It's about a “Kingdom.” "...come into your kingdom."

When Christ died, he didn't go to heaven, but was in the grave and it was on the third day that God raised (resurrected) him from the dead. Christ was raised to a life of immortality, which is promised to all those who believe the gospel about the Kingdom that Christ preached. 

Jesus responded to the thief,

“Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43).

We have a system of punctuation in the English that was not used in the Greek language. There is a big difference when a comma is moved or not in the correct place. The translators give us the impression that Jesus went to heaven the day he died, as well as the thief. To get a correct reading, and which “harmonizes” with other passages of scripture, it should read, 

“Assuredly, I say to you today, you will be with me in Paradise.”

Now, if paradise is in heaven, neither the thief or Jesus went to heaven that day. Christ was three days in the grave and after his resurrection Christ said to Mary Magdalene, “I have not yet ascended to My Father.” So I can say with confidence that the comma is in the wrong place. That simple comma where the translators has placed it makes other passages of scripture contradict. 

Paul received a vision of paradise (2 Cor.12:3-4), the garden of Eden. Paradise will be the restored garden of Eden, which contains the tree of life: 

“To him who overcomes, I will give to eat of the tree of life which is in the midst of the paradise garden of God” (Rev. 2:7; 22:2). 

God never promised eternity in heaven as a reward for the saved, but a promise to “enter the Kingdom.” Jesus preached about the Kingdom of God, the Kingdom of his Father. When Jesus comes again he will reign on earth and we, as coheirs, will reign with him (compare for example - Romans 8:17; 2. Tim. 2:12; Hebrews 1:1-2; 2:5-11; Rev. 5:10; Revelation 21:7). 

So ultimately, we inherit the entire universe, “inherit the earth.”

John 8:58 and Trinitarian Belief

Trinitarians claim that the Jews picked up stones to try and stone Jesus because he was claiming to be God in John 8. The fact is, they were not stoning him for that reason, but because he claimed to be the Messiah.

The Jews had an awful short memory if they were trying to say Jesus was claiming to be God here in John 8:58, but were not bright enough to bring this up at the trial where they had the perfect opportunity to recall this to everyone's attention that he was claiming to be God and set the record straight. What did they ask Jesus at the trial? If he were God? No. They knew exactly what Jesus was claiming. The High Priest said to Jesus,

“I put you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD!”

And THAT is why the Jews wanted to kill him, not because he claimed to be the Supreme God, but the Son of God, the Messiah.

“The Jews therefore came round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou hold us in suspense? If thou art the Christ, tell us plainly.” (John 10: 24)

Not if you are a third part of the Trinity and therefore one of the three gods.

What is the Gospel?

Many professing Christians cannot fully tell you what the Gospel is. It seems the only answer they can give is to quote 1 Cor. 15:1-4.

"Now I make known to you brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures . . . "

They say THAT is the whole Gospel. Well, not really. Notice what Paul says, “For I delivered to you AS OF FIRST IMPORTANCE...” Now why would Paul start off like that? Because there is much more to the story than Christ dying and raised from the dead, but since this chapter has to do with the resurrection, this is his main focus for the rest of the chapter. If the dead are not raised, then our preaching is useless and so is our faith. If Christ is not raised, our faith is simply foolish.

I’ll tell you why.

Because the Gospel of the Kingdom of God is about God’s immortality plan for human beings in the Kingdom to come which all will "inherit the earth." (Psa_37:9; Psa_37:11; Psa_37:22; Mat_5:5)  

The one major element of the Gospel that most people leave out is the Kingdom of God. Jesus came preaching the Gospel (Good News) about this kingdom and was the main purpose for which he was sent.

"I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to the other towns as well; for I was sent for this purpose." Luke 4:43

Jesus sent his disciples (seventy others - Luke 10:1-12) to preach this gospel before any of them knew about the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (which of course, later became part of the gospel...good news!). The disciples preached this gospel. (See Matt. 4:17; 4:23; 9:35; Luke 4:43; 8:1; 9:11, and also read how Jesus always spoke about the Kingdom of God before and after the cross (Acts 1:3).

Heb. 2:3, along with many other verses, attest that Jesus is the first preacher of immortality. Even Paul tells us that Jesus,

“brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel.” (2 Tim. 1:10)

Jesus is our preacher who showed us by his example and told us how we can eventually live forever. People must repent and believe this gospel about the kingdom of God.

Paul spent two years in his own hired house and,

“welcomed all who came in to him, proclaiming the kingdom of God, and teaching those things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ, with all freedom, and without hindrance.” (Acts 28:30-31)

So to sum it up, the mission statement of Jesus reveals his whole purpose, i.e., to preach the GOOD NEWS about the Kingdom of God and how to gain immortality in that Kingdom.

The devil wants to blind the eyes and promote lies that being disobedient to God will not lead to death (Gen. 3:4) But for those who believe the Gospel of the Kingdom of God and do as Jesus instructs us, though they die physically, will one day be resurrected to a life of immortality, just as Christ was.

The Kingdom of God will be inaugurated by the return of Jesus to resurrect the faithful of all ages (who are still dead in their graves) to a life of immortality.

Jesus said,

“Do not marvel at this, for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have practiced evil to the resurrection of condemnation” (John 5:28-29).