Passages that show Paul thought Jesus was pre-existent?

[GakuseiDon]

Dunn seems to ignore or to forget that the Messiah of the parables of Enoch is also pre-existent.

In fact, most of the characteristics of Paul's Messiah are shared with the Messiah of the parables. Even his eschatological role on the day of judgment is very similar to that of the messiah of the parables.

Dunn does reference the Book of Enoch quite a few times in his "Theology of Paul the Apostle" in his section about pre-existence so he hasn't forgotten it. But he sees the name of the Messiah as preexisting rather than the Messiah himself (page 273, footnote):

For the issue of ideal preexistence see, e.g., J. Klausner, The Messianic Idea in Israel (New York: Macmillan, 1955 = London: Allen and Unwin, 1956) 460: "That the Messiah himself existed before creation is nowhere stated in Tannaitic literature ... 'the name of the Messiah' is the idea of the Messiah, or, more exactly, the idea of redemption through the Messiah. This idea did precede creation."

I downloaded the Book of Enoch pdf (original translation from Ge'ez to English by Michael A. Knibb, 1978) and looked through for references to "Messiah" and "Chosen One". The only one I found that might support preexistence is Parable 48 does seem to reference the name being preexistent:

48.1 And in that place, I saw an inexhaustible Spring of Righteousness, and many Springs of Wisdom surrounded it, and all the thirsty drank from them, and were filled with wisdom, and their dwelling was with the Righteous, and the Holy, and the Chosen.
48.2 And at that hour, that Son of Man was named in the presence of the Lord of Spirits, and named in front of the Head of Days.
48.3 Even before the Sun and the constellations were created, before the Stars of Heaven were made, his name was named in front of the Lord of Spirits.
48.4 He will be a staff to the Righteous, and the Holy, so that they may lean on him and not fall, and he will be the Light of the Nations, and he will be the hope of those who grieve in their hearts.
48.5 All those who dwell upon the dry ground, will fall down and worship, in front of Him, and they will bless, and praise, and celebrate with psalms, the name of the Lord of Spirits.
48.6 And because of this, he was chosen, and hidden in front of Him, before the World was created, and for ever.
48.7 But the wisdom of the Lord of Spirits, has revealed him to the holy and the righteous, for He has kept safe the lot of the righteous, for they have hated, and rejected, this world of iniquity. And all its works, and its ways, they have hated, in the name of the Lord of Spirits. For in His Name they are saved, and He is the one who will require their lives.
48.8 And in those days, the kings of the Earth, and the strong, who possess the dry ground, will have downcast faces, because of the works of their hands, for on the day of their distress and trouble, they will not save themselves.
48.9 "And I will give them into the hands of My Chosen Ones; like straw in the fire, and like lead in water, so they will burn in front of the Righteous, and sink in front of the Holy, and no trace will be found of them."
48.10 And on the day of their trouble, there will be rest on the Earth, and they will fall down in front of them and will not rise. And there will be no one, who will take them with his hands, and raise them, for they denied the Lord of Spirits and His Messiah. May the Name of the Lord of Spirits be blessed!

There are a lot of parallels there to Paul so I can see the attraction to view one through the lens of the other. Possibly 48.6 might suggest preexistence but that doesn't necessarily follow either, AFAICS.

Are there passages in 1 Enoch which I might have missed?

[Sinouhe]

Are there passages in 1 Enoch which I might have missed?

1 Enoch 62
7 For from the beginning the Son of Man was hidden,
And the Most High preserved him in the presence of His might,
And revealed him to the elect.

9A190915-207A-4974-8C82-ECDF63FB0618.jpeg (273.94 KiB) Viewed 771 times

7C629C15-C24E-4DFA-B243-FE48BCEE9712.jpeg (291.26 KiB) Viewed 771 times

[Giuseppe]

Even with all his fundamentalism, McGrath raises a problem:

it was most likely the pre-existent Messiah he had in mind, a view not incompatible with his also having had a normal birth (which Paul also mentions) and having been fully human. How the prior existence related to the historical human one, no one seems to have yet been concerned to answer.

no one seems to have yet been concerned to answer because there is simply no solution to the problem: if one is born, then he is not pre-existent, and vice versa.

We are titled to doubt a priori about "Pauline" passages talking about a birth of Jesus (Romans 1:3 and Galatians 4:4).

[neilgodfrey]

Even with all his fundamentalism, McGrath raises a problem:

it was most likely the pre-existent Messiah he had in mind, a view not incompatible with his also having had a normal birth (which Paul also mentions) and having been fully human. How the prior existence related to the historical human one, no one seems to have yet been concerned to answer.

no one seems to have yet been concerned to answer because there is simply no solution to the problem: if one is born, then he is not pre-existent, and vice versa.

What do we make of the Ascension of Isaiah's account of the Beloved descending through the heavens to be "born" through Mary?

I confess I haven't been following this thread closely but what comes to my mind is the pre-existence (according to some groups) of Adam, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and Moses ... https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/arti ... eexistence --- does this tilt the scales for the OP?

[lsayre]

Would a Paul who penned "And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.", and who assures us that he does not lie, be considered to believe in such an entities pre-existence? And if so, what lower pleromic status might Paul have by necessity (in light of this passage) assigned to such a pre-existent being?

[Giuseppe]

what comes to my mind is the pre-existence (according to some groups) of Adam, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and Moses ...

Aren't Adam, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and Moses appeared the first time as euhemerized figures of previous deities?

The pre-existence was given them only in a second time. An analogy may be the Fourth Gospel, that increases highly the low christology inherited by previous gospels.

[Giuseppe]

The contradiction (because a contradiction it is) is found also in Hebrews.

[arnoldo]

Even with all his fundamentalism, McGrath raises a problem:

it was most likely the pre-existent Messiah he had in mind, a view not incompatible with his also having had a normal birth (which Paul also mentions) and having been fully human. How the prior existence related to the historical human one, no one seems to have yet been concerned to answer.

no one seems to have yet been concerned to answer because there is simply no solution to the problem: if one is born, then he is not pre-existent, and vice versa.

We are titled to doubt a priori about "Pauline" passages talking about a birth of Jesus (Romans 1:3 and Galatians 4:4).

See also 1 Timothy 3:16

[Giuseppe]

Even with all his fundamentalism, McGrath raises a problem:

it was most likely the pre-existent Messiah he had in mind, a view not incompatible with his also having had a normal birth (which Paul also mentions) and having been fully human. How the prior existence related to the historical human one, no one seems to have yet been concerned to answer.

no one seems to have yet been concerned to answer because there is simply no solution to the problem: if one is born, then he is not pre-existent, and vice versa.

We are titled to doubt a priori about "Pauline" passages talking about a birth of Jesus (Romans 1:3 and Galatians 4:4).

See also 1 Timothy 3:16

This is 1 Timothy 3:16:

Beyond all question, the mystery from which true godliness springs is great: He appeared in the flesh, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.

What is your point (apart Christian propaganda of very low league) ?

[Sinouhe]

What do we make of the Ascension of Isaiah's account of the Beloved descending through the heavens to be "born" through Mary?

It seems a late development (after Paul) or an interpolation isn’t it ?

I confess I haven't been following this thread closely but what comes to my mind is the pre-existence (according to some groups) of Adam, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and Moses ... https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/arti ... eexistence --- does this tilt the scales for the OP?

Very good point. I would like to add a few details.

From a historicist point of view, one can reconcile a historical Jesus with a pre-existent Jesus. Nevertheless, it remains that Jesus was seen as a pre-existent figure and co-agent of creation with YHWH before his incarnation. And this in the earliest available sources: the hymns and Paul.

You are right to point out that the concept of pre-existence was known in ancient Judaism.
Some points to emphasize:

- Jesus is pre-existent in the earliest sources at our disposal (Paul and Hymns). Unlike Moses or Abraham who are not pre-existent in the earliest sources. It is therefore a late development. Not for Jesus.

- The Messiah is pre-existent in the parables of Enoch, a text that inspired Paul. Also in Ezra IV, a text that is dated to the first century, after Paul.
The pre-existence of the Messiah was thus a known characteristic of second temple Judaism. In fact, Jesus ticks all the Messiah boxes and is ultimately ONLY the fulfillment of the messianic expectations of his time.

This is suspicious from a historical point of view since the historical Jesus is hopelessly absent from Paul's letters.

One could say that his death is a historical element that was not expected by the messianic Jews.
But even the suffering of the servant is a well-known concept in the Qumran eschatological texts which refer to Isaiah’s servant.
It was therefore an expected characteristic of the fantasized Messiah for some jews before Paul.
And the death + resurrection of Paul’s messiah seems to be the fulfillment of this same Isaiah’s servant.

The idea that Jesus was an itinerant preacher who was deified in the second century is therefore not admissible. He was considered a mystical figure and deified from the beginning.

Even Bart Ehrman, a dogmatic historicist, acknowledges this :

Bart Ehrman : Bart Ehrman - How Jesus Became God ? p317
I argue below that this poem presents an incarnational understanding of Christ—that he was a preexistent divine being, an angel of God, who came to earth out of humble obedience and whom God rewarded by exalting him to an even higher level of divinity as a result— »