THE BOOK OF ENOCH. CHAPTER 62. CHAPTER 62: 7. For from the beginning that Son of Man was hidden, and the Most High kept him in the presence of His power, and revealed him only to the chosen. (1 Peter 1:11-13), (1 Corinthians 2:9-11)
The BOOK of Enoch With biblical references: https://bookofenochreferences.wordpress.com/2014/05/01/the-book-of-enoch-chapter-62/
But what if the Holy Prophet of GOD, Enoch’s book, turns out to be mostly genuine, and yet He has compared it with horse manure, which makes it hard for me to believe how someone can be an example of GODS love.
FOR FROM THE BEGINNING THAT SON OF MAN WAS HIDDEN, AND THE MOST HIGH KEPT HIM IN THE PRESENCE OF HIS POWER, and revealed him only to the chosen.
He instead revealed a PRIDEFUL HEART, by belittling and INSULTING people like me, the very opposite to GOD, who hates PRIDEFUL HEARTS, who instead looks on little people and blesses them revealing GOD’S BEAUTIFUL HEART, just as Jesus told us how GOD has hidden things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; Matthew 11:25.
@johnspartan98 also says:
All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made. (1599 GNV) -Nothing in the context of John 1:1-3 indicates it is referring to the Genesis creation. It relates to the RENEWAL of Creation through the GOSPEL (logos).
I also do not see anywhere in the context of John 1:1-3 indicates it is referring to RENEWAL of Creation.
Above we see @johnspartan98 makes again another clear contradiction to what My Anthony Buzzard told me that John 1:3 is referring to the Genesis creation, and NOT the NEW.
In fact just for the records, here was an email from Anthony Buzzard on 18/FEB/2019:
Simon, why are you struggling with this! The obvious ref is to Genesis Then in v, 14 we have the word not Word becoming a human persons. The word is the wisdom of God embodied in the Human being Why not just enjoy Luke 1:35 and Matt 1:18, 20 (coming into existence, begotten), the coming into existence of the Person, the SON Mary had a baby and the baby was fathered by God in Mary by miracle John is careful to speak of the Light (IT) that was with God (Dan 2:22) but a person (him) in v 10 The HIM there is a delberate ad sensum (ie breaking the rules of grammar to make the light a person) To believe in a non hu man preexistingpersons is antichrist in I John 4 No need for that. Anthony The ages were made through the SON in Heb 1 And the present new creation was through the SON in Col 1. Not so hard. I hope you are still an antitrinitarian.
johnspartan98 seems to also contradict the REV UNITARIAN web site:
“All things were made through it.” The logos is an “it,” not a “him.” God made everything through and according to His logos, His plan and purpose, and with wisdom. The logos was God’s plan and purpose, especially as it was put into action (see commentary on John 1:1). Furthermore, it was integrally tied together with His wisdom (see commentary on John 1:2).
There is also a problem with the fact that UNITARIANS say and believe John 1:3 says: “All things were made through it.” The logos is an “it,” not a “him.”
Anthony Buzzard agreed with me that (αὐτοῦ) can EQUALLY say (Him).
And we do in fact see this in John 1:10: He was in the world, and the world was made through (him αὐτοῦ), yet the world did not know (him αὐτοῦ).
We know John 1:10 is about Jesus because there is NO change of persons as we go to John 1:11: He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. 12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,
And the REV UNITARIAN web site even admit this is puzzling by saying: John 1:11 changes subjects, and although we are to understand that it is still God working, but now through Christ and not through the logos, it seems apparent that the subject changes from the logos to Christ. Although we modern English readers could wish for a clearer presentation of what is happening in the text, given the poetic style of what John is writing, we can gain sufficient clarity from the scope of Scripture.
There also seems to be a contradiction regarding Revelation 3:14 between to MAIN UNITARIANS web sites.
From my own research I find the Unitarians have good explanations against Jesus Pre-existence, and also some very poor and feeble explanations against Jesus Pre-existence.
From my now research:
We have seen in this short article just some of the Unitarian contradictions within their own faith, which is NOT at all helpful for simple minded people like me seeking the truth, but instead simply causes more confusion, uncertainty and doubt, with trying to understand the truth and who is correct.
I have added just some good explanations and proofs of Jesus Pre-existence.
But it is clear BOTH sides have good and bad explanations, and we will just have to wait and see.