Foreknowledge vs. Preexistence: What the Bible Actually Says

INTRODUCTION

For many believers, the question of whether Jesus preexisted before His birth seems settled simply by reading a handful of verses. Phrases like “Before Abraham was, I am” or “I came down from heaven” are often assumed to speak of a literal personal existence of Christ before Bethlehem. But assumption is not exegesis.

What most Christians are not aware of is that Jesus was explicitly preached and taught in terms of foreknowledge, which is a thoroughly biblical and Jewish view. For example:

Acts 2:22-23 “Men of Israel, hear these words! Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved by God to you by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did by him among you, even as you yourselves know, him, being delivered up by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by the hand of lawless men, crucified and killed.” (See also Romans 8:29 & 1 Peter 1:2).

The idea of literal preexistence is foreign to Scripture, and was to the Jews. But it was a major element in practically all pagan mythologies, as the Bible itself demonstrates:

Acts 14:11: “When the multitude saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voice, saying in the language of Lycaonia, “The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men!”

This later view, of gods coming to earth in the form of men, was utterly repugnant to Paul and Barnabas. And yet, this very doctrine later entered into mainstream Christian beliefs regarding Jesus, and the biblical, Jewish view of foreknowledge got left in the proverbial dust.

In this study, we will be laying out the case that biblical foreknowledge is the lens that we should view this topic through, not the pagan literal preexistence view which was imposed upon the Scriptures and introduced as doctrine by later, non-Jewish theologians.

The Scriptures are clear that God “declares the end from the beginning” and speaks of future realities as though they were already present. Understanding this biblical pattern of foreknowledge—how God speaks of what He has determined in advance—removes the supposed proof for preexistence and restores the testimony of the prophets, Jesus, and His apostles to their proper framework.

I’ve even heard people argue that if God spoke of things that did not yet exist as though they already had, He would be lying. But the Bible itself says otherwise—and we will see this pattern throughout the Scriptures, beginning with Romans 4:17, where God is described as the One who “calls the things that are not, as though they were.”

This study will let the Bible carry the full weight of the argument. First, we will examine the biblical foundation for foreknowledge and how God consistently uses prophetic language to describe future events. Then we will look at how philosophical concepts of preexistence entered the church and displaced this biblical framework. Finally, we will walk through the key proof texts commonly used to support preexistence, letting Scripture interpret Scripture rather than importing ideas foreign to it.

1. THE BIBLICAL FOUNDATION — GOD’S FOREKNOWLEDGE AND HOW HE SPEAKS

1.1 God’s Foreknowledge Defined in Scripture

The Bible defines God’s foreknowledge not as speculation or guesswork, but as the outworking of His eternal counsel and authority. He speaks of things that do not yet exist as though they already did.

Romans 4:17–18: “(as it is written, ‘I have made you a father of many nations’) before him whom he believed, God, who gives life to the dead, and calls the things that are not, as though they were. ¹⁸Who against hope believed in hope, to the end that he might become a father of many nations, according to that which had been spoken, ‘So will your offspring be.’”

God did not wait until Abraham had many descendants before speaking it. He declared it as already done beforehand, and Abraham believed what God said even when nothing outward had yet changed. This example is not an anomaly, nor an isolated incident. This same divine pattern appears throughout Scripture. It is how God consistently speaks of what He foreknows.

Isaiah 46:9–11: “Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is no other. I am God, and there is none like me; ¹⁰declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done; saying, ‘My counsel will stand, and I will do all my pleasure;’ ¹¹calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man of my counsel from a far country. Yes, I have spoken, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed, I will also do it.”

Here God explains the principle Himself: He declares future events (“things that are not yet done”) from the beginning, and then brings them to pass in their time. This is not preexistence; it is foreknowledge and determination.

Isaiah 14:24: “Yahweh of Armies has sworn, saying, ‘Surely, as I have thought, so it will happen; and as I have purposed, so it will stand.’”

Proverbs 19:21: “There are many plans in a man’s heart, but Yahweh’s counsel will prevail.”

Psalm 33:11: “The counsel of Yahweh stands fast forever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations.”

This is the foundation. God’s foreknowledge is not passive awareness but active determination of His purpose. When He speaks of future things, He does so with such certainty that He uses past or present language to describe them. This is known as the prophetic perfect—a well-recognized biblical idiom—apparent in the original languages, but suppressed in our English translations with exceptions such as Young’s Literal—where future acts are spoken of as accomplished facts because they rest on God’s unchanging will.

1.2 God’s Plan Brought to Pass

The Bible often distinguishes between what God planned long ago and the moment when He actually brings it to pass.

Isaiah 37:26: “Have you not heard how I have done it long ago, and formed it of ancient times? Now I have brought it to pass, that it should be yours to lay waste fortified cities into ruinous heaps.”

This verse captures the pattern succinctly: “long ago I have done it… now I have brought it to pass.” The act was settled in God’s plan from the beginning, but only later executed in history. This same distinction is crucial for understanding Christ. He was foreknown in God’s plan long before His birth, but He did not exist as a person until “the fullness of time.

Hebrews 1:1–2: “God, having in the past spoken to the fathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, ²has at the end of these days spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the ages.”

The text does not say God spoke with the Son in the past, but “has in these last days spoken by His Son.” The Son is the final revelation, not a co-speaker in the past. God created the ages through the Son in the sense that His entire redemptive plan was framed with the Messiah as its focal point.

Matthew 1:18: “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was like this. After his mother, Mary, was engaged to Joseph, before they came together, she was found pregnant by the Holy Spirit.”

The genesis (Greek: genesis, meaning origin or beginning) of Jesus, used in Matthew 1:1, is described plainly. There is no hint of a heavenly being entering a human body; it is the miraculous conception of a real human child by God’s Spirit.

Luke 1:31–32: “Behold, you will conceive in your womb, and give birth to a son, and shall name him ‘Jesus.’ ³²He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father, David.”

This is when the Son begins to exist: in Mary’s womb. The angel does not announce that an eternal Son is coming down from heaven, but that she will conceive and give birth. The title “Son of the Most High” is applied to the one who is about to be conceived.

Hebrews 2:14–17: “Since then the children have shared in flesh and blood, he also himself in the same way partook of the same, that through death he might bring to nothing him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, ¹⁵and might deliver all of them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. ¹⁶For most certainly, he doesn’t give help to angels, but he gives help to the offspring of Abraham. ¹⁷Therefore he was obligated in all things to be made like his brothers, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make atonement for the sins of the people.”

The writer emphasizes that Jesus was made like us in all things. If He were already a divine person who merely clothed Himself in flesh, these statements lose their meaning. Instead, He became what God had foreordained Him to be.

Galatians 4:4: “But when the fullness of the time came, God sent out his Son, born to a woman, born under the law.”

The sending happens when the fullness of time came, not before. “Born of a woman” is the decisive marker of His origin in time and space. God’s plan was ancient; its fulfillment took place in history.

1.3 Jesus and Foreknowledge Language

The language Jesus and the apostles used about His mission consistently reflects foreknowledge, not personal preexistence. When understood through the lens of prophetic idiom and God’s eternal plan, the supposed “preexistence” proof texts align seamlessly with the biblical pattern established earlier.

John 3:13: “No one has ascended into heaven but he who descended out of heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven.”

Many read this verse as if Jesus is claiming to be simultaneously in heaven and on earth, proving preexistence. But when read in light of the prophetic pattern, it is not a metaphysical riddle — it is a statement of divine authority rooted in God’s foreknowledge and commissioning.

“No one has ascended into heaven” refers to human initiative; no one climbs up to bring down revelation (cf. Deuteronomy 30:12). Instead, God is the one who sends revelation. “He who descended out of heaven” refers to the heavenly origin of the message, not the physical location of the messenger before birth. Jesus is the Son of Man — a messianic title from Daniel 7 — and the one who is in heaven is not His body floating above the clouds but His identity as the One who existed in God’s counsel before creation. He belongs to heaven by origin of mission, not by pre-incarnate residence.

Historian Adolf von Harnack explains the semitic, Jewish view:

“Earthly occurrences and objects are not only regarded as ‘foreknown’ by God before being seen in this world, but the latter manifestation is frequently considered as the copy of the existence and nature which they possess in heaven, and which remains unalterably the same, whether they appear upon earth or not. That which is before God experiences no change…so the Tabernacle and its furniture, the Temple, Jerusalem, etc., are before God and continue to exist before him in heaven, even during their appearance on earth and after it.
“This conception seems really to have been the oldest one. Moses is to fashion the Temple and its furniture according to the pattern he saw on the Mount (Exod. XXV. 9. 40: XXVI. 30: XXVII. 8: Num. VIII. 4). The Temple and Jerusalem exist in heaven, and they are to be distinguished from the earthly Temple and the earthly Jerusalem…
“Most Jews…conceived the Messiah as a man. We may indeed go a step further and say that no Jew at bottom imagined him otherwise; for even those who attached ideas of pre-existence to him, and gave the Messiah a supernatural background, never advanced to speculations about assumption of the flesh, incarnation, two natures and the like.” -Adolf von Harnack, Adolf von Harnack, History of Dogma, Vol. I, Appendix I.

In other words, God always “foreknew” what would ultimately appear on earth. This view of God’s foreknowledge comes from biblically influenced Judaic thought. God’s foreknowledge includes the temple and its furnishings, and Jerusalem, earthly and heavenly. These are all symbols of the body of believers, which is Christ’s bride (see Hebrews, especially 12:18, 22–24; 8:5; 9:1–10:22). As the assembly appeared in heaven in God’s foreknowledge, so exactly did the Messiah. Thus, Jesus Christ appeared in God’s foreknowledge as nothing greater or lesser than what he appeared to be on earth. That is to say, Jesus’ human existence was always distinct from God-the-Father. This is how Jesus was always God’s Word, or plan before that word was made felsh. The man was always in God’s mind, and when the fullness of time came, he was born and entered history.

This understanding fits perfectly with the parallel Jesus gives elsewhere:

Matthew 21:25: “The baptism of John, where was it from? From heaven or from men?”

John’s baptism clearly originated on earth through a man, but its authority and commissioning originated “from heaven.” This is an explanation by Jesus of what “from heaven” means. In the same way, Jesus “came down from heaven” in the sense that His mission and authority were divine in origin. No one thought John literally preexisted in heaven because his baptism was “from heaven.” Likewise, Jesus’ heavenly commissioning does not imply personal preexistence.

Revelation 13:8 provides another key example:

Revelation 13:8: “…the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.”

Some read this as if Jesus was literally slain before the world existed. But Hebrews corrects that assumption:

Hebrews 9:26: “But now once at the end of the ages he has been revealed to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.”

The Lamb was slain in God’s plan “from the foundation of the world,” but the actual event took place “once at the end of the ages.” This is foreknowledge language, not metaphysical preexistence.

Acts 2:22–23 is decisive:

Acts 2:22–23: “Men of Israel, hear these words! Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved by God to you by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did by him in the midst of you, even as you yourselves know, ²³him, being delivered up by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by the hand of lawless men, crucified and killed.”

Peter identifies Jesus of Nazareth, a man, as the one foreknown by God’s determined counsel. His death and role were not improvised but preplanned. Yet Peter never suggests Jesus personally preexisted. The focus is entirely on God’s foreknowledge and purpose.

This same concept is echoed in 1 Peter 1:19–20:

1 Peter 1:19–20: “but with precious blood, as of a lamb without blemish or spot, the blood of Christ; ²⁰who was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but was revealed at the end of times for your sake.”

Foreknowledge is a biblically named and explained doctrine. Christ was foreknown before the foundation of the world, not existing alongside God as a second person. His revelation happened “at the end of times.” This language cannot be twisted into preexistence without violating Peter’s clear distinction.

1.4 Summary Table — Biblical Foreknowledge in Action

Passage	Future Event	Spoken As	Key Insight
Romans 4:17–18	Abraham’s fatherhood	Past tense	God calls future realities as if present
Isaiah 37:26	Destruction of cities	Past tense	God plans long before He acts
Revelation 13:8 / Hebrews 9:26	Slaying of the Lamb	From foundation / end of ages	One event foreknown early, fulfilled later
John 3:13 / Matthew 21:25	Jesus’ heavenly mission / John’s baptism	“From heaven”	Commissioning language, not literal preexistence
1 Peter 1:19–20	Christ’s redemptive role	Foreknown then revealed	Foreknowledge, not personal existence

This table highlights a consistent, unmistakable biblical pattern: God speaks of future events as present realities because His counsel is unchanging. Once this pattern is understood, none of the supposed “preexistence” verses actually teach what they are claimed to teach.
This pattern of God speaking of future events as though already accomplished appears throughout Scripture. When God told Moses that Aaron “is coming out to meet you” (Exodus 4:14), Aaron hadn’t yet left Egypt. He said to Joshua, “I have given Jericho into your hand” (Joshua 6:2) before the battle even began. He told Abraham, “A father of many nations have I made you” (Genesis 17:5) long before Isaac was born. The prophets spoke the same way: Isaiah declared, “For unto us a child is born” (Isaiah 9:6) and “He was wounded for our transgressions” (Isaiah 53:5) centuries before Christ’s birth and crucifixion. These are all examples of what Hebrew scholars call the prophetic perfect—the practice of using past-tense language for future events to express their absolute certainty in God’s plan. God’s Word is not descriptive—it’s declarative. When He speaks, the event’s fulfillment is as sure as if it had already happened.

2. HISTORICAL CONTRAST — BIBLICAL FOREKNOWLEDGE VS PAGAN PHILOSOPHY

The language of Scripture is Jewish. Its conceptual framework is covenantal, prophetic, and rooted in God’s unchanging counsel. The earliest believers—Jews who confessed Jesus as the Messiah—understood Him in the same way their Scriptures spoke of the temple, the kingdom, or the Lamb: as foreknown and foretold realities brought to pass in their time. But as the gospel moved into the Greek-speaking world, something subtle but profound happened. Gentile converts began to reinterpret Jewish prophetic language through the lens of Greek philosophy, especially the dualistic ideas of Plato and the Stoics. This shift did not happen overnight; it developed over the second and third centuries, eventually redefining how people read passages about Christ.

2.1 Adolf von Harnack on Jewish vs Greek Conceptions

Few historians have articulated this contrast as clearly as Adolf von Harnack, whose historical observation devastates the preexistence framework. Harnack notes that the Jewish understanding of something “existing with God” referred to God’s knowledge and counsel, not to literal personal existence in another realm. By contrast, Greek thought imagined real entities or persons existing in a spiritual world before appearing on earth.

To understand what early Greek-influenced Christians imported into their readings of John and Paul, we must grasp how the Greeks themselves conceived of preexistence. Harnack explains it this way:

“According to the Hellenic conception, which has become associated with Platonism, the idea of pre-existence is…based on the conception of the contrast between spirit and matter…. In the case of all spiritual beings, life in the body or flesh is at bottom an inadequate and unsuitable condition, for the spirit is eternal, the flesh perishable…In the case of the higher and purer (spirits)…if they resolved for some reason or other to appear in this finite world, they cannot simply become visible, for they have no ‘visible form.’ They must rather ‘assume flesh,’ whether they throw it about them as a covering, or really make it their own by a process of transformation or mixture. In all cases—and here the speculation gave rise to the most exciting problems—the body is to them something inadequate which they cannot appropriate without adopting certain measures of precaution…” -Adolf von Harnack, History of Dogma, Vol. I, Appendix I, p. 320.

I’ll try to simplify what von Harnack has said. In classical philosophy, spirit and matter were incompatible. Spirit beings were believed to be invisible. If they wanted to show themselves, they would have to do one of two things. They either would have to robe themselves in flesh or somehow mix with flesh. In short, they preexisted in one form and had to change form to become visible in the material world. The pagan view is thus the opposite of what Paul explained. In the Bible, the spiritual is second and last.

Von Harnack pointed out that the pagan idea was contrary to the biblical, Jewish view of God’s foreknowledge. He characterized the Jewish and Greek concepts as being ‘as wide apart as the poles.’ The biblical Jewish view contained no assumption of the flesh or mixing of spirit and flesh. Von Harnack had this to say about the Jewish view of foreknowledge in contrast to the pagan view of preexistence.

“In becoming visible to the senses, the [Jewish] object in question assumes no attribute that it did not already possess with God. Hence its material nature is by no means an inadequate expression of it, nor is it a second nature added to the first. The truth rather is that what was in heaven before is now revealing itself upon earth, without any sort of alteration taking place in the process. There is no assumptio naturæ novæ, and no change or mixture. The old Jewish theory of pre-existence is founded on the religious idea of the omniscience and omnipotence of God, that God to whom the events of history do not come as a surprise, but who guides their course. As the whole history of the world and the destiny of each individual are recorded on His tablets or books, so also each thing is ever present before Him.” –ibid.318.

This explains exactly how to identify the originating source of the various views.

As Harnack observed, the Jewish view of pre-existence refers to existence in God’s counsel, while the Greek view refers to actual metaphysical existence in a heavenly realm — concepts he described as fundamentally opposed.

This distinction alone dismantles most preexistence interpretations if we simply read John or Paul as Jews rather than Greeks. When John writes that the “Word was with God,” he is using a Jewish idiom—the Word existed with God as His plan and purpose. When Greek interpreters later read John, they interpreted “with God” as a separate conscious being existing alongside Him, because that’s how their philosophical categories functioned.

This difference can be summarized visually in a table.

Visual Table: Biblical Foreknowledge vs Pagan Preexistence

Biblical / Jewish Foreknowledge	Pagan / Greek Preexistence
Future things exist in God’s counsel and foreknowledge	Beings exist in a spiritual realm before appearing on earth
Based on God’s omniscience and sovereignty	Based on spirit–matter dualism
Language is prophetic and figurative	Language is ontological and literal
Messiah foreknown as a future man	“Logos” or spiritual entity personally preexists and enters flesh

Notice how Jesus’s words align perfectly with this Jewish understanding:

“No one has ascended into heaven but he who descended out of heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven.” (John 3:13)

If read from the Jewish understanding, His words align perfectly with the idea, expressed by Harnack:

“That which is before God experiences no change…so the Tabernacle and its furniture, the Temple, Jerusalem, etc., are before God and continue to exist before him in heaven, even during their appearance on earth and after it.”

Notice that Jesus said it was “the Son of Man” who was both on earth and in heaven at the same time, and it was the “Son of Man” (meaning the offspring of humanity) not a preexistent divine being, that “came out of heaven” (just as John’s baptism, or the manna came from, or out of heaven.) This is how Jesus’s words match Harnack’s observation precisely: “That which is before God experiences no change…and continue to exist before him in heaven, even during their appearance on earth and after.”

Now contrast that with the pagan view as described in the Bible:

“When the multitude saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voice, saying in the language of Lycaonia, ‘The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men!’” (Acts 14:11)

Do you see the difference? Here the gods are said to have come down in the likeness of men: they had to change form to make themselves visible to humans. Whereas, with Jesus, He didn’t change form because who and what He was on earth was exactly the same as He was foreknown be—just as the case would be with the manna or John’s baptism.

3. REBUTTING THE MAJOR PROOF TEXTS FOR PREEXISTENCE

Many who hold to preexistence treat certain verses as trump cards. Instead of letting the whole counsel of Scripture speak, they build a theology on assumed meanings imported into a few passages, often read through the lens of later philosophy. But every single one of these passages fits perfectly within the biblical framework of foreknowledge once they are read in their original contexts, using biblical categories, not Greek ones.

3.1 John 1:1–14 — “The Word was with God”

This passage is often treated as if John were unveiling the metaphysics of a preexistent Son. In reality, John is using Jewish prophetic language to describe the Word (Logos) of God—His plan, utterance, and purpose—brought to fulfillment in Jesus Christ.

John 1:1–3: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ²He was in the beginning with God. ³All things were made through him. Without him was not anything made that has been made.”

The Word (Logos) here is not a separate person “alongside” God, but God’s own self-expression and decree. John uses language deliberately echoing Genesis 1: “And God said…” Creation came about through God’s spoken Word, not through a second person. Jewish interpreters spoke of God’s Wisdom, Word, or Name as “with Him” in the sense of residing in His counsel (cf. Proverbs 8; Isaiah 55:11).

To read “the Word was with God” as “the Son personally existed alongside God” is to commit the very error Harnack highlighted: replacing Jewish foreknowledge language with Greek hypostasis language.

John 1:14: “The Word became flesh and lived among us. We saw his glory, such glory as of the one and only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth.”

Notice the sequence: the Word became flesh, not “the Son became flesh.” John does not say “the Son was with God in the beginning”; he says the Word was. The Son is what the Word became when God’s plan was fulfilled in Jesus. The eternal Word = God’s counsel. The Son = the man born of Mary. Confusing those two is the root of the preexistence error.

John 1:18 reinforces this distinction: “No one has seen God at any time. The one and only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him.”

The Son declares the Father; He is not the Father’s eternal partner. The imagery of being “in the bosom” reflects unique closeness in mission and relationship, not co-eternality.

3.2 John 6:38 — “I have come down from heaven”

John 6:38: “For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me.”

At first glance, this sounds like a heavenly being descending to earth. But Jesus explains this language Himself within the same chapter. Notice the key expository words: “not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me.” For those willing to hear with their ears, this is plainly saying that Jesus and the Father are not coequal because they have contradictory wills from heaven! Jesus explains this clearly, using the foreshadowing examples from the Old Testament:

John 6:31–33: “Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness. As it is written, ‘He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.’ Jesus therefore said to them, ‘Most certainly, I tell you, it wasn’t Moses who gave you the bread out of heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread out of heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.’”

John 6:41: “The Jews therefore murmured concerning him, because he said, ‘I am the bread which came down out of heaven.’”

Jesus’ language is figurative and mission-oriented. Just as manna was said to “come down from heaven” because God provided it, Jesus “came down from heaven” because His mission and authority originated from God. He was not literally in heaven and then relocated; His ministry is God-sent, not man-initiated.

Matthew 21:25 makes this idiom explicit:

Matthew 21:25: “The baptism of John, where was it from? From heaven or from men?”

John’s baptism came “from heaven” because of its divine commissioning, not because John preexisted there. In exactly the same way, Jesus’ coming “down from heaven” is about divine origin of mission, not location before birth.

3.3 John 8:58 — “Before Abraham was, I am”

John 8:58 is perhaps the most commonly wielded verse in favor of preexistence:

John 8:58: “Jesus said to them, ‘Most certainly, I tell you, before Abraham came into existence, I am.’”

The common claim is that Jesus is identifying Himself with Yahweh in Exodus 3:14 (“I AM WHO I AM”), thereby proving eternal preexistence. But the Greek phrase used by Jesus, egō eimi, simply means “I am he,” and is frequently used this way in John (cf. John 4:26; 8:24; 8:28; 13:19; 18:5). It points to His identity as the Messiah, the one foreknown and promised, not His metaphysical essence.

According to the Greek in the Septuagint, what Yahweh said was egō eimi ho ō (I am the being). He said, tell them ho ōn has sent you, not tell them egō eimi has sent you. Jesus never claimed to be ho ōn (“The Being”) from Exodus 3:14. He identified Himself as the foreknown Messiah, the one Abraham looked forward to. The Jews understood Him to be making a messianic claim, which is why they picked up stones—not because He was claiming metaphysical identity with Yahweh, but because He claimed a status they rejected.

John 8:56 provides the context:

John 8:56: “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day. He saw it, and was glad.”

Jesus is speaking about Abraham’s prophetic vision of the Messiah’s day, not His own literal existence before Abraham. In God’s plan, the Messiah’s role was settled long before Abraham. Jesus can say “Before Abraham was, I am” because His identity as the Messiah existed in God’s foreknowledge, not because He personally lived before Abraham.

In contrast to the biblically established reality of God’s foreknowledge—His way of speaking of future things as though they already exist—if we honestly consider the ramifications of Jesus literally existing before His human birth, we’re met with a deafening silence. Scripture contains no deliberate explanations, no transitional narratives, and no teaching moments that clarify such a supposed pre-human existence. If preexistence were true, the Bible would naturally address it at multiple points. Instead, what we find is a complete lack of such passages. Let’s examine the voids created by the preexistence view and how those same areas are abundantly and explicitly filled by the biblical testimony of Jesus’s human origin:

• No definition of what Jesus was before His humanity.
  Contrast: Scripture defines His origin as being conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of a virgin (Matthew 1:20–23; Luke 1:31–35). His genealogy is traced through human ancestry with no reference to a preexistent state (Matthew 1:1; Luke 3:23–38).
• No description of a transition from a pre-human to a human state.
  Contrast: Jesus is described as being begotten, not transitioning (Luke 1:35; Hebrews 1:5–6). His origin is tied to His miraculous conception, not a prior life.
• No teaching moment where Jesus or the apostles explain that or how He existed before His birth.
  Contrast: Scripture clearly affirms that Jesus shared fully in human nature—He was “obligated to be made like His brothers in all things” (Hebrews 2:17), “tempted in all points like we are” (Hebrews 4:15). These truths are explicit and stand in stark contrast to the total silence on any supposed pre-human transition. Claiming “mystery” won’t do; Romans 1:20 leaves humanity without excuse because God has made His ways clear.
• No apostolic teaching that Jesus previously existed in a different form.
  Contrast: The apostles emphasize His humanity, His role as the second Adam, and His exaltation after resurrection—not a descent from heaven (Romans 5:15–19; 1 Corinthians 15:45–47; Philippians 2:9).
• No personal memories or references by Jesus to a pre-human existence.
  Contrast: Jesus speaks only of the Father’s foreordination, not His own recollections (John 17:5, 24 reflect God’s plan, not memories; 1 Peter 1:20 says He was foreknown, not preexistent).
• No instance where Jesus’s Sonship is tied to a past existence rather than to His miraculous conception.
  Contrast: Scripture explicitly connects His Sonship to His birth (2 Samuel 7:11–14; Luke 1:35; Hebrews 1:5). His authority is granted at His baptism (Acts 10:38) and magnified after His resurrection (Matthew 28:18; Acts 2:36). It remains delegated, not absolute (1 Corinthians 15:27).
• No divine declaration of Jesus as Son prior to His human conception.
  Contrast: God publicly declares Jesus as His Son at His birth (Luke 1:32, 35), baptism (Matthew 3:16–17), transfiguration (Matthew 17:5), and resurrection (Acts 13:32–33; Romans 1:3–4). If Jesus had truly preexisted as God’s Son, God would have been the ultimate “deadbeat dad”—never once acknowledging His supposed Son for untold ages, then suddenly affirming Him after His human birth. The total biblical silence on any pre-incarnate recognition of Jesus as Son speaks volumes. Why would God only acknowledge His Son after His birth while supposedly ignoring Him before? Preexistence advocates have no legitimate answer, so they end up—perhaps unwittingly—portraying God as negligent to uphold their tradition. Meanwhile, they ignore the vast scriptural testimony to Jesus’s human Sonship and interpret those texts through the pagan lens of “the gods have come down to us in the likeness of men” (Acts 14:11).

3.4 Philippians 2:5–11 — “Existing in the form of God”

Philippians 2 is often cited as evidence that Jesus existed as God before becoming man. But Paul is actually describing the mindset of the human Jesus, not a pre-incarnate deity.

Philippians 2:5–8: “Have this in your mind, which was also in Christ Jesus, ⁶who, existing in the form of God, didn’t consider equality with God a thing to be grasped, ⁷but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men. ⁸And being found in human form, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, yes, the death of the cross.”

The form of God refers to His God-given authority and representation, not to His substance or a pre-incarnate state. Jesus, as God’s anointed Messiah, was the visible representation of God’s authority on earth. Rather than grasping at power like Adam (Genesis 3), He humbled Himself in obedience.

Paul’s focus is ethical and practical, not metaphysical. He exhorts believers to imitate Jesus’ humility, which only makes sense if this refers to His earthly life. The passage nowhere says “the Son left heaven” or “descended into flesh.” Those ideas are imported and imposed on the text by false dilemma and preconceived bias.

Philippians 2:9–11 shows the sequence:

Philippians 2:9–11: “Therefore God also highly exalted him, and gave to him the name which is above every name, ¹⁰that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, those on earth, and those under the earth, ¹¹and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

God exalted Him after His obedience, not returned Him to a prior glory. There is no hint of preexistence here—only foreordination and subsequent exaltation.

3.5 Colossians 1:16–17 — All things have been created through him and for him

This verse is often thrown out like a trump card for preexistence, but the text itself contains multiple internal indicators that Paul is referring to new creation realities in Christ (His redemptive work and exaltation), not Genesis creation. Here’s a breakdown that helps us interpret by what the Bible explains rather than jumping to conclusions:

1. The immediate context is redemption, not material creation
   The surrounding verses (Colossians 1:12–14, 18–20) speak explicitly of rescue, transfer, forgiveness, and reconciliation:

• v. 13: “Who delivered us out of the power of darkness and translated us into the Kingdom of the Son of his love.”
• v. 14: “In whom we have our redemption, the forgiveness of our sins.”
• v. 18–20: Christ is “the head of the body, the church… the firstborn from the dead,” and through Him God reconciles “all things… whether things on earth or things in heaven.”
  This entire section is redemptive-historical, not the Genesis creation account (cosmology). It is about Christ’s present Lordship and re-creation through the cross, not the material origins of the universe.

2. “In him / through him / for him” is covenantal and relational language
   Colossians 1:16: “For in him were all things created… all things have been created through him, and for him.”
   The triple prepositional formula (ἐν / διὰ / εἰς) is characteristic of Paul’s language about God’s saving work through Christ (cf. Ephesians 1:10; 1 Corinthians 8:6). It denotes Christ as the sphere, agent, and goal of the new creation order—the church and redeemed humanity—not the physical cosmos. If this were about Genesis, the “for him” would be anachronistic: Genesis nowhere depicts creation as made for the Messiah; but the New Testament repeatedly depicts the new creation as centered on Him (Ephesians 1:9–10, Romans 8:29).

3. The repeated phrase “all things… in heaven and on earth” fits Paul’s reconciliation theme, not the story of the world’s physical creation
   In v. 20 Paul repeats the same “things in heaven and on earth” language explicitly in the context of reconciliation:
   Colossians 1:20: “…and through him to reconcile all things to himself, whether things on the earth or things in the heavens, having made peace through the blood of his cross.”
   This is decisive. Whatever “all things” refers to in v. 16, Paul explains in v. 20 that those same “all things” are reconciled through the cross. Genesis creation doesn’t need reconciliation; fallen creation does. That alone proves Paul has fallen, spiritual realities and redeemed community in view—not material creation ex nihilo (out of nothing).

4. Christ as “firstborn of all creation” (v. 15) is an exaltation title, not an origin statement
   “Firstborn” (πρωτότοκος) in the Old Testament refers to status and inheritance, not chronology (Psalm 89:27). Paul’s use here parallels “firstborn from the dead” in v. 18. He’s not saying Christ was the first thing created, but that He now holds supreme rank over the new creation as the resurrected, exalted Son. It’s the language of enthronement, not preexistence.

5. The verbal tenses reflect a present reality grounded in Christ’s redemptive work
   Paul uses aorist and perfect verbs to describe what God has already accomplished through Christ’s cross and what now stands true. If he were speaking of Genesis, he would likely frame it in the more distant, primordial sense. Instead, the grammar matches his new covenant and realized eschatology language.

6. Paul’s parallel teaching in 2 Corinthians 5:17 and Ephesians 1 confirms this reading

• 2 Corinthians 5:17: “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old things have passed away. Behold, all things have become new.”
• Ephesians 1:9–10: God’s purpose is “to sum up all things in Christ, the things in the heavens and the things on the earth.”
  These are direct conceptual parallels to Colossians 1. Paul is describing the new creation order inaugurated through Christ’s death and resurrection.

7. The cosmic powers interpretation fits the context better than physical creation
   In Colossians 1:16 Paul lists “thrones, dominions, principalities, powers.” These terms refer to spiritual authorities (cf. Ephesians 1:21; 6:12; Colossians 2:15), not physical objects created in Genesis. He’s saying these spiritual powers were reordered, subjected, or brought into new relation through Christ—not that He originally manufactured them as a preexistent being.

Taken together, these internal features make the “Genesis creation” reading not merely weak — but textually untenable. Paul is talking about the new creation order inaugurated by the crucified and risen Messiah, not the material universe’s origin.

3.6 Revelation 13:8 and Hebrews 9–10

As already discussed in Section 1.3, Revelation 13:8 refers to “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” Hebrews 9:26 clarifies this was foreknown, not literally accomplished. This is one of the clearest examples of how prophetic language works. If one insists on literalism here, Jesus was crucified before the world began—which no one believes.

3.7 Secondary Texts Briefly Addressed

Micah 5:2: “Whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting” refers to the ancient promises concerning the Messiah, not His personal existence. The Messiah’s role was known from ancient times.

Proverbs 8: Wisdom is personified poetically, not literally. If one takes this literally, one ends up with a fourth divine person (Wisdom distinct from Father, Son, and Spirit), which no system accepts.

Every major proof text fits comfortably within the foreknowledge framework when read in biblical categories. None of them teach personal preexistence unless Greek philosophical assumptions are smuggled in first.

4. CONCLUSION — CHOOSING GOD’S WORD OVER MAN’S PHILOSOPHY

The question of foreknowledge vs. preexistence is not merely an academic debate. It strikes at the heart of how we handle God’s Word. Do we let Scripture define its own categories, or do we impose foreign frameworks on it?

Throughout this study, we’ve seen that the biblical foundation is unmistakable. God declares the end from the beginning. He calls things that are not as though they were. His Word, His Kingdom, His Lamb, and His Messiah were all foreknown and spoken of long before their appearance in history. When the fullness of time came, God brought His plan to pass exactly as He had purposed.

Isaiah 46:9–11: “I am God, and there is none like me; ¹⁰declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done; saying, ‘My counsel will stand, and I will do all my pleasure.’”

Romans 4:17: “…God, who gives life to the dead, and calls the things that are not, as though they were.”

Acts 2:23: “…by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God…”

1 Peter 1:20: “…foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but revealed at the end of times for your sake.”

This is the language of foreknowledge, not of heavenly beings waiting to be sent. Jesus was not a preexistent spirit-person lying dormant until Bethlehem. He was the foreknown Messiah, spoken of by the prophets, born of a woman, and exalted by God after His obedience.

History shows how and when this biblical understanding was displaced. Early Jewish believers understood these idioms instinctively. But as the gospel spread into a Greek philosophical world, interpreters began reading John and Paul through Platonic eyes, turning prophetic language into ontological speculation. Figures like Tertullian laid the groundwork by importing Stoic categories, and both Arians and Nicenes built their systems on those assumptions. The original biblical framework was sidelined, replaced by a philosophical one.

The so-called proof texts for preexistence do not teach what later theology claims. John 1 speaks of the Word, not the Son. John 6 uses mission language, not relocation. John 8 points to prophetic identity, not metaphysical essence. Philippians 2 describes Christ’s humility in life, not a heavenly descent. Revelation 13 uses prophetic perfect language. Colossians, Micah, and Proverbs fit perfectly once the right categories are applied.

At the core, preexistence theology depends on adding to God’s words what He never said. It imports foreign metaphysics into inspired text.

Proverbs 30:6: “Don’t add to his words, lest he reprove you, and you be found a liar.”

1 Timothy 1:3: “…charge certain men not to teach a different doctrine…”

1 Corinthians 4:6: “…that you might learn in us not to think beyond the things which are written…”

John 15:7: “If you remain in me, and my words remain in you, you will ask whatever you desire, and it will be done for you.”

Jesus never said, “I am God.” He never said, “I existed before I was born.” He never told us to teach such doctrines. What He did say is clear: “The Father is greater than I” (John 14:28), “I can do nothing of myself” (John 5:30), and “This is eternal life: that they should know you, the only true God, and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ” (John 17:3).

To embrace preexistence is to go beyond what is written, to confuse God’s foreknowledge with Greek dualism, and to create contradictions where none exist in Scripture. To embrace foreknowledge is simply to let God be true.

Romans 3:4: “Let God be found true, but every man a liar.”

This is the choice before us. Either we accept the clear biblical framework—and live by every word of God—where Christ is explained as foreknown, promised, and revealed, or we cling to a philosophical construct foreign to Jesus and His apostles.

One path keeps us anchored in God’s Word. The other leads us to reinterpret the Bible through man’s philosophy, as happened in the second and third centuries.

The biblical testimony is clear:
• God’s plan was spoken before time.
• The Messiah was foreknown, not preexistent.
• God’s Words became flesh; the Son was born.
• Preexistence is a later intrusion, not apostolic teaching.

 Print This Post