A Detailed Examination of the Original Greek, Sir Anthony Buzzard, Daniel 7:13, Spirit & Truth Fellowship International, the Revised English Version, Josiah Verkaik, and Historical Unitarian Scholarship.
The article includes:
Sir Anthony Buzzard — Daniel 7:13 and the prophetic vision interpretation.
BiblicalUnitarian.com — The resurrection interpretation.
Revised English Version (REV) — Jesus rising from the dead.
Josiah Verkaik (True Unitarian) — Resurrection and the context of John 6.
Andrews Norton and Snedeker — Historical references, clearly marked as needing further verification.
The original Greek — Examining what John 6:62 actually says.
The traditional preexistence interpretation — Examining the opposing argument fairly.
Biblical conclusions and research links — Including your existing Real Discoveries articles.
JOHN 6:62 — NEW & UPDATED RESEARCH
Did Jesus Return to Heaven, or Was He Speaking About His Resurrection?
A Detailed Examination of the Original Greek, Sir Anthony Buzzard, Daniel 7:13, Spirit & Truth Fellowship International, the Revised English Version, Josiah Verkaik, and Historical Unitarian Scholarship
Written and researched by Simon Brown — Real Discoveries
INTRODUCTION — DOES JOHN 6:62 PROVE THAT JESUS PERSONALLY PREEXISTED HIS BIRTH?
Jesus declared:
“What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?” — John 6:62, KJV
For many Trinitarians, and for some non-Trinitarians who believe in the personal preexistence of Christ, these words appear conclusive.
Their argument is simple:
Jesus said he would ascend to where he was before.
Therefore, he must previously have lived in heaven.
But is this the only interpretation permitted by Scripture?
And does the original Greek actually say that Jesus was RETURNING to heaven where he lived before his conception in Mary's womb?
In this NEW & UPDATED research, we will examine two distinct Biblical Unitarian explanations, supported or discussed by several researchers and organisations.
INTERPRETATION ONE: THE RESURRECTION EXPLANATION
Jesus was speaking about rising from the dead and returning to the life he had before his death.
This interpretation is presented by:
Spirit & Truth Fellowship International — BiblicalUnitarian.com
Revised English Version (REV) Bible Commentary
Josiah Verkaik — True Unitarian
INTERPRETATION TWO: THE PROPHETIC-VISION EXPLANATION
Jesus was speaking of his future ascension to the heavenly position in which the Son of Man had already appeared in Daniel's prophetic vision.
This interpretation is associated with:
Sir Anthony Buzzard — Who Is Jesus?
We will also investigate the historical references to Andrews Norton and Snedeker, examine the original Greek, and consider the traditional interpretation.
OUR CENTRAL QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER JESUS ASCENDED TO HEAVEN AFTER HIS RESURRECTION. SCRIPTURE CLEARLY TEACHES THAT HE DID.
The question is whether John 6:62 establishes that Jesus personally lived in heaven BEFORE his human birth.
These are two different questions.
PART 1 — WHAT DOES THE ORIGINAL GREEK ACTUALLY SAY?
The Greek text of John 6:62 reads:
ἐὰν οὖν θεωρῆτε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἀναβαίνοντα ὅπου ἦν τὸ πρότερον;
A close translation is:
“What then if you should see the Son of Man ascending where he was before?”
Let us examine the key words.
1. ἀναβαίνοντα — ANABAINONTA
This comes from the Greek verb:
ἀναβαίνω — ANABAINŌ (Strong's G305)
Its meanings include:
To go up.
To come up.
To rise.
To ascend.
It does not exclusively mean ascending into heaven.
Consider these biblical examples.
MATTHEW 3:16
Jesus came up out of the water following his baptism.
MATTHEW 5:1
Jesus went up into a mountain.
MATTHEW 13:7
Thorns grew up.
LUKE 19:4
Zacchaeus climbed up into a sycamore tree.
All these passages use forms of the same Greek verb.
Therefore:
THE GREEK VERB ANABAINŌ DOES NOT, BY ITSELF, MEAN RETURNING TO HEAVEN.
Its meaning must be determined by context.
2. ὅπου — HOPOU
This means:
WHERE.
It introduces the location referred to in the statement.
3. τὸ πρότερον — TO PROTERON
This means:
BEFORE, PREVIOUSLY, OR FORMERLY.
This expression must not be ignored.
Jesus genuinely speaks of where the Son of Man “was before.”
However, the expression itself does not identify the previous location as heaven.
That identification comes from the interpretation of the wider passage.
WHAT DOES JOHN 6:62 NOT EXPLICITLY SAY?
It does not explicitly say:
“I am returning to heaven where I lived before my birth.”
It does not mention Mary's womb.
It does not describe Jesus as an eternal second person of a Trinity.
Nor does it call Jesus Almighty God.
Nevertheless, the traditional interpretation has a substantial contextual argument because John 6 repeatedly speaks of Jesus coming down from heaven.
We must therefore investigate the context carefully.
PART 2 — THE CONTEXT OF JOHN CHAPTER 6
The context is essential.
Throughout John 6, Jesus teaches about the bread of life, the giving of his flesh, eternal life, and resurrection.
Consider how often resurrection appears in this discourse.
JOHN 6:39
Jesus promises to raise believers at the last day.
JOHN 6:40
He repeats the promise of resurrection.
JOHN 6:44
Again, Jesus speaks of raising believers at the last day.
JOHN 6:54
The resurrection promise appears once more.
FOUR EXPLICIT REFERENCES TO RESURRECTION!
This repeated emphasis is central to the first Unitarian interpretation we will examine.
JOHN 6:51 — JESUS SPEAKS ABOUT HIS COMING DEATH
Jesus declares:
“The bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”
Jesus is speaking about giving his life.
His hearers struggle to understand his language about eating his flesh and drinking his blood.
JOHN 6:60 — THE DISCIPLES ARE OFFENDED
They respond:
“This is an hard saying; who can hear it?”
Jesus then asks whether his teaching offends them.
Immediately afterward, he speaks the words recorded in John 6:62.
This raises an important possibility.
COULD JESUS HAVE BEEN POINTING FORWARD TO THE ASTONISHING EVENT OF HIS RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD?
Several Biblical Unitarian researchers believe so.
PART 3 — INTERPRETATION ONE: JESUS WAS SPEAKING ABOUT HIS RESURRECTION
A. SPIRIT & TRUTH FELLOWSHIP INTERNATIONAL — BIBLICALUNITARIAN.COM
Source: John 6:62 Commentary
https://www.biblicalunitarian.com/verses/john-6-62
The BiblicalUnitarian.com commentary, associated with Spirit & Truth Fellowship International, argues that John 6:62 concerns Jesus' resurrection rather than a return to a heavenly home occupied before his birth.
Its explanation centres on the Greek verb anabainō and the resurrection context of John 6.
WHAT DOES THIS INTERPRETATION PROPOSE?
Jesus was alive on earth.
He would die and be placed in the grave.
God would raise him from the dead.
He would then come up from death to the life he had previously enjoyed.
Thus:
“ASCEND” — COMING UP FROM THE DEAD.
“WHERE HE WAS BEFORE” — ALIVE BEFORE HIS DEATH.
Under this interpretation, Jesus was not describing a journey back to a prehuman heavenly existence.
He was anticipating his resurrection.
WHY DOES THE COMMENTARY APPEAL TO THE GREEK?
Because anabainō is a general verb for upward movement.
It can describe going up a mountain, coming up from water, or other upward movement.
Therefore, the word alone does not establish a journey to heaven.
The commentary argues that the immediate context supplies the meaning.
And the immediate context repeatedly concerns resurrection and eternal life.
A NECESSARY QUALIFICATION
This argument establishes that the Greek verb has a broad range of meanings.
It does not establish that anabainō is itself a technical term for resurrection.
The resurrection interpretation remains a contextual proposal.
Nevertheless, it deserves serious examination.
B. THE REVISED ENGLISH VERSION — REV BIBLE COMMENTARY
Source: John 6:62 Commentary
https://www.revisedenglishversion.com/comm/John/chapter6/62
The Revised English Version commentary also presents the resurrection interpretation.
Its explanation agrees substantially with the position found at BiblicalUnitarian.com.
The REV understands Jesus' words as referring to coming up from death to the condition of being alive, as he had been previously.
THE IMPORTANCE OF JOHN 6:39–54
The REV's interpretation places particular importance on the surrounding resurrection promises.
Jesus had already explained that he would raise believers from the dead.
He had spoken about giving his flesh for the life of the world.
His disciples were struggling to understand these difficult teachings.
The REV therefore interprets verse 62 within the same life-and-resurrection framework.
A CONNECTION WITH JOHN 6:63
Immediately afterward, Jesus declares:
“It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing.”
The word “quickeneth” means gives life.
Compare Romans 8:11, where Paul describes God raising Jesus from the dead and giving life through His Spirit.
This provides a theological connection with resurrection.
It does not, however, prove that John 6:62 must refer to resurrection.
The passage must still be weighed against John's wider use of ascending and descending language.
WHY THIS INTERPRETATION MATTERS
The REV offers an alternative to the assumption that “where he was before” must refer to a conscious prehuman life in heaven.
It suggests that Jesus' previous condition was simply his life before death.
THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES WHETHER THIS UNDERSTANDING BEST FITS THE LANGUAGE AND CONTEXT.
C. JOSIAH VERKAIK — TRUE UNITARIAN
Source: Preexistence Passages in John
https://trueunitarian.com/preexistence-of-christ/preexistence-passages-in-john/
Josiah Verkaik also discusses John 6:62 in his examination of passages commonly used to support the personal preexistence of Jesus.
His approach agrees with the resurrection interpretation.
VERKAIK'S CENTRAL ARGUMENT
The Greek word anabainō is not restricted to heavenly ascension.
The context of John 6 repeatedly concerns resurrection.
Consequently, Jesus' words can be understood as referring to his coming up from the dead.
AN ADDITIONAL OBSERVATION ABOUT JOHN'S GOSPEL
Verkaik also draws attention to the frequent misunderstandings of Jesus' language in John's Gospel.
For example:
JOHN 2:19–21
Jesus speaks of destroying the temple and raising it in three days.
His hearers think he means the physical temple.
John explains that Jesus was speaking about the temple of his body.
JOHN 3:3–4
Jesus speaks of being born again.
Nicodemus initially understands the expression as another physical birth.
JOHN 4:10–15
Jesus speaks of living water.
The Samaritan woman initially understands him in terms of ordinary water.
These examples demonstrate that John's Gospel frequently contains language that requires deeper interpretation.
Verkaik's broader argument is that we should not automatically assume every statement about heavenly origin must be understood as literal personal movement from heaven.
AN IMPORTANT CAUTION
The existence of figurative language elsewhere in John does not establish that John 6:62 is figurative.
Each passage must be interpreted on its own evidence.
Nevertheless, Verkaik's discussion contributes an important literary consideration.
PART 4 — HISTORICAL UNITARIAN REFERENCES: ANDREWS NORTON AND SNEDEKER
Modern Unitarian discussions of John 6:62 sometimes cite earlier authors.
Two names appear in the research trail:
ANDREWS NORTON
A Statement of Reasons for Not Believing the Doctrines of Trinitarians
Referenced pages: 248–252.
SNEDEKER
Our Heavenly Father Has No Equals
Referenced page: 215.
These references are worth preserving because they may help establish the historical development of non-preexistence interpretations.
However, we must be precise.
The original passages have not yet been independently checked for this article.
Therefore, we should not attribute specific quotations, detailed Greek arguments, or definite positions on John 6:62 to these writers without examining their original texts.
HISTORICAL REFERENCES ARE USEFUL, BUT ACCURATE ATTRIBUTION IS ESSENTIAL.
They are included here as avenues for further research rather than as independently verified endorsements of every argument presented above.
PART 5 — INTERPRETATION TWO: SIR ANTHONY BUZZARD AND DANIEL'S PROPHETIC VISION
SIR ANTHONY BUZZARD — WHO IS JESUS?
Source: Who Is Jesus?
https://www.christianmonotheism.com/media/text/WhoIsJesusBook.pdf
Sir Anthony Buzzard presents a different explanation of John 6:62.
Unlike the resurrection interpretation, Buzzard connects Jesus' words with the prophetic vision of the Son of Man recorded in Daniel chapter 7.
This distinction is important.
BUZZARD DOES NOT SIMPLY IDENTIFY THE ASCENDING IN JOHN 6:62 WITH COMING UP FROM THE GRAVE.
His interpretation concerns Jesus' future ascension and the earlier prophetic vision of his exaltation.
DANIEL 7:13 — WHAT DID DANIEL SEE?
Daniel declares:
“I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.”
Notice the opening words:
“I SAW IN THE NIGHT VISIONS.”
Daniel was shown a heavenly scene involving the Son of Man.
In the next verse, the figure receives dominion, glory, and a kingdom.
DANIEL 7:14 — AUTHORITY IS GIVEN
The Son of Man receives authority.
His kingdom is described as everlasting.
The scene concerns the granting of royal dominion.
Buzzard understands this as a prophetic anticipation of the Messiah's future exaltation.
HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO JOHN 6:62?
Buzzard's proposal connects Jesus' words about ascending to where he was before with the heavenly scene Daniel had already witnessed prophetically.
In other words:
Daniel saw the future Son of Man in a vision.
Jesus was later born as the promised Messiah.
After his resurrection, Jesus ascended and was exalted by God.
The exaltation fulfilled the prophetic vision.
Under this interpretation, the Messiah's earlier presence was visionary and prophetic rather than evidence of conscious personal existence before his birth.
PROPHECY AND HISTORICAL FULFILMENT
Scripture frequently describes future realities in God's purpose before their historical fulfilment.
Consider:
1 PETER 1:20
Christ was foreordained before the foundation of the world and manifested in the last times.
EPHESIANS 1:4
Believers were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world.
These passages show that God's purposes can precede their fulfilment.
They do not, by themselves, prove Buzzard's interpretation of John 6:62.
But they establish a biblical framework in which future realities are known and appointed beforehand.
MATTHEW 26:64 — JESUS IDENTIFIES HIMSELF WITH THE SON OF MAN
Jesus speaks of the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven.
This language recalls both Psalm 110:1 and Daniel 7:13.
It strengthens the connection between Jesus' messianic identity and Daniel's heavenly vision.
ACTS 2:32–36 — GOD EXALTS THE MESSIAH
Peter declares that God raised Jesus from the dead and exalted him.
Jesus receives his exalted position from God.
This is consistent with the figure in Daniel 7 receiving dominion and glory.
THE STRENGTH OF BUZZARD'S INTERPRETATION
It recognises that Jesus' ascension to heaven was a real event.
It takes seriously the title “Son of Man.”
It connects John's language with a major Old Testament prophecy about the Messiah's heavenly exaltation.
And it does not require the Messiah to have been personally alive in heaven before his birth.
THE DIFFICULTY WITH BUZZARD'S INTERPRETATION
John 6:62 does not explicitly mention Daniel 7.
Nor does Jesus explicitly say:
“I am ascending to the place where Daniel previously saw me in a vision.”
The verse says:
“WHERE HE WAS BEFORE.”
The natural reading for many interpreters is that Jesus refers to his own previous location.
Buzzard's explanation therefore depends upon a proposed connection with Daniel's prophetic vision.
That connection is worthy of consideration, but it is not established by the Greek wording alone.
PART 6 — HOW THE TWO INTERPRETATIONS DIFFER
Although both approaches reject the necessity of personal preexistence, they should never be confused.
THE RESURRECTION INTERPRETATION
Supported by the REV commentary, BiblicalUnitarian.com, and Josiah Verkaik.
Jesus' ascending refers to coming up from the dead.
His previous condition refers to being alive before his death.
The principal contextual evidence is the repeated emphasis on resurrection in John 6.
THE BUZZARD PROPHETIC-VISION INTERPRETATION
Associated with Sir Anthony Buzzard.
Jesus' ascending refers to his actual ascension and exaltation.
The earlier heavenly scene is connected with Daniel's prophetic vision of the Son of Man.
The principal evidence is the relationship between the Son of Man, Daniel 7, and Jesus' exaltation.
THESE ARE TWO DISTINCT INTERPRETATIONS.
Neither should be presented as the only Biblical Unitarian explanation.
PART 7 — WHAT ABOUT THE TRADITIONAL PERSONAL-PREEXISTENCE INTERPRETATION?
Fair research must consider the strongest alternative.
The traditional interpretation argues that John 6:62 refers to Jesus ascending to heaven, where he personally existed before his human birth.
This reading is supported by the broader descending-and-ascending language of John's Gospel.
JOHN 6:38
Jesus says he came down from heaven.
JOHN 6:42
His hearers question his claim because they know his earthly family.
JOHN 6:62
Jesus speaks of ascending where he was before.
JOHN 16:28
Jesus speaks of coming from the Father, entering the world, leaving the world, and going to the Father.
JOHN 17:5
Jesus refers to glory he had with the Father before the world existed.
Taken together, these passages offer a substantial argument for personal preexistence.
WE SHOULD NOT CLAIM THAT THIS INTERPRETATION HAS NO SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT.
Its strength lies particularly in the relationship between Jesus' descent and ascent.
Nevertheless, several theological questions remain separate.
Even if John 6:62 were understood as teaching personal preexistence, that alone would not prove the Trinity.
It would not, by itself, establish that Jesus is co-equal with the Father.
Nor would it establish that Jesus is uncreated.
Those conclusions require additional arguments.
PART 8 — DOES JOHN 13:3 ACTUALLY SAY JESUS WAS RETURNING TO GOD?
John 13:3 is frequently introduced into discussions of John 6:62.
Some English translations say Jesus knew he had come from God and was returning to God.
But the Greek wording deserves attention.
The relevant expression is:
πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν ὑπάγει
Pros ton Theon hypagei.
A close translation is:
“IS GOING TO GOD.”
The Greek verb hypagei means “goes” or “is going.”
There is no separate Greek word meaning “back” in this expression.
However, the full verse also says Jesus came from God.
This explains why some translators use “returning.”
Their translation expresses a contextual understanding of the whole sentence.
It is therefore important to distinguish the Greek wording from the interpretive implications of the sentence.
JOHN 13:3 DOES NOT EXPLICITLY DESCRIBE JESUS AS RETURNING TO A HEAVENLY THRONE HE OCCUPIED BEFORE HIS BIRTH.
Whether such a return is implied remains a matter of interpretation.
JOHN 6:62 — NEW & UPDATED RESEARCH
Continuation: Part 9 to Final Conclusion
PART 9 — WHAT DOES SCRIPTURE EXPLICITLY SAY ABOUT THE ORIGIN OF JESUS CHRIST?
LUKE 1:35 — THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTION OF JESUS
The angel Gabriel declared to Mary:
“The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” — Luke 1:35, KJV
Notice the important word:
THEREFORE.
The angel connects Jesus' identity as the Son of God with the miraculous conception brought about by God's power.
For Biblical Unitarians who reject personal preexistence, this is a foundational passage.
Jesus is God's Son because God miraculously brought about his conception in Mary's womb.
He is not described here as an eternal divine person entering a human body.
However, Luke 1:35 does not explicitly discuss whether the Son existed before his conception. Those who believe in preexistence understand the verse as describing the incarnation rather than the beginning of the Son's existence.
The distinction must be recognised.
MATTHEW 1:18 — JESUS WAS CONCEIVED
Matthew explains that Mary was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.
The narrative presents Jesus' human origin as a miraculous act of God.
GALATIANS 4:4 — GOD SENT FORTH HIS SON
Paul writes:
“But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.”
Those who believe in preexistence interpret “sent forth his Son” as referring to a Son who existed before being born.
Biblical Unitarians who reject personal preexistence understand God's sending of Jesus in terms of divine commissioning and the fulfilment of God's predetermined plan.
The wording itself is debated.
It should not be claimed that Galatians 4:4 settles the entire question without further interpretation.
ACTS 2:22 — A MAN APPROVED BY GOD
Peter describes Jesus as:
“Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him.”
This passage identifies Jesus as a man through whom God worked.
It distinguishes Jesus from the God who empowered him.
1 TIMOTHY 2:5 — ONE GOD AND ONE MEDIATOR
Paul declares:
“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”
Here, the one God and the mediator are distinguished.
Jesus is identified as the man Christ Jesus.
This supports the Biblical Unitarian understanding of Jesus as the genuinely human Messiah appointed by God.
Nevertheless, those who believe Jesus possesses both divine and human natures also affirm his humanity. The passage therefore contributes to the discussion without independently resolving preexistence.
PART 10 — WHO RAISED JESUS FROM THE DEAD AND EXALTED HIM?
This question is particularly important when examining both the resurrection interpretation and Buzzard's prophetic-vision interpretation.
Scripture repeatedly identifies God as the one who raised Jesus.
ACTS 2:24
“Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death.”
ACTS 2:32
“This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.”
ACTS 3:15
“And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead.”
ROMANS 10:9
Paul speaks of believing that God raised Jesus from the dead.
EPHESIANS 1:20
God exercised His mighty power when He raised Christ and seated him at His right hand.
These passages consistently present Jesus' resurrection and exaltation as acts of God.
JESUS DID NOT EXALT HIMSELF TO THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD
Consider Philippians 2:9:
“Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name.”
Notice:
GOD EXALTED JESUS.
The Father is the one who grants the exaltation.
Jesus is the one who receives it.
This is consistent with Daniel 7:13–14, where the Son of Man receives authority and dominion.
It also agrees with Peter's declaration in Acts 2:36:
“God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
The exalted position of Jesus is therefore presented as something bestowed by God.
This does not, by itself, disprove personal preexistence, but it establishes the distinction between God and His appointed Messiah.
PART 11 — JESUS IDENTIFIES HIS FATHER AS THE ONLY TRUE GOD
Our examination would be incomplete without considering Jesus' own statements concerning his Father.
JOHN 17:3 — THE ONLY TRUE GOD
Jesus prayed:
“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.”
Here, Jesus addresses his Father as:
THE ONLY TRUE GOD.
He then identifies himself as the Christ whom the Father sent.
This distinction is central to Biblical Unitarian theology.
JOHN 20:17 — MY GOD AND YOUR GOD
Following his resurrection, Jesus told Mary Magdalene:
“I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.”
This verse is especially relevant to John 6:62.
Jesus explicitly speaks of ascending to the Father.
He also identifies the Father as his God.
Notice that Jesus' actual post-resurrection ascension does not, in this verse, include an explanation that he previously lived in heaven before his conception.
It simply states where he is going.
REVELATION 3:12 — THE RISEN JESUS STILL SAYS “MY GOD”
The exalted Jesus repeatedly uses the expression:
“MY GOD.”
This is important because the statement is made after his resurrection and exaltation.
The Father remains the God of Jesus Christ.
1 CORINTHIANS 8:6 — ONE GOD, THE FATHER
Paul writes:
“But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”
Paul distinguishes:
ONE GOD — THE FATHER.
ONE LORD — JESUS CHRIST.
Biblical Unitarians understand this distinction as evidence that Jesus is not himself the one God.
Trinitarian interpreters understand the passage differently, arguing that Paul includes Jesus within the divine identity while distinguishing him from the Father.
Our immediate purpose is to recognise that John 6:62 should be considered alongside these wider biblical statements.
PART 12 — WHAT DOES EACH RESEARCH SOURCE CONTRIBUTE?
We can now bring together the individual contributions without confusing their positions.
1. BIBLICALUNITARIAN.COM — SPIRIT & TRUTH FELLOWSHIP INTERNATIONAL
Interpretation: Resurrection from the dead.
This commentary highlights the broad meaning of the Greek verb anabainō and the resurrection context of John chapter 6.
Its central proposal is that Jesus was speaking about coming up from death to the life he possessed previously.
Source:
https://www.biblicalunitarian.com/verses/john-6-62
2. REVISED ENGLISH VERSION — REV BIBLE COMMENTARY
Interpretation: Resurrection from the dead.
The REV commentary also interprets Jesus' ascending in connection with resurrection.
Its explanation places particular emphasis on the repeated references to resurrection throughout John 6.
Source:
https://www.revisedenglishversion.com/comm/John/chapter6/62
3. JOSIAH VERKAIK — TRUE UNITARIAN
Interpretation: Resurrection from the dead.
Verkaik examines the Greek language and the wider context of John's Gospel.
He also discusses the way Jesus' statements are frequently misunderstood by his hearers.
Source:
https://trueunitarian.com/preexistence-of-christ/preexistence-passages-in-john/
4. SIR ANTHONY BUZZARD
Interpretation: Daniel 7 and the prophetic vision of the Son of Man.
Buzzard offers a different approach.
He connects Jesus' future ascension and exaltation with the earlier prophetic vision of the Son of Man in Daniel 7.
Under this explanation, the heavenly scene was revealed prophetically before the Messiah's historical birth.
Source:
Who Is Jesus?
https://www.focusonthekingdom.org/WhoisJesus.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com5. ANDREWS NORTON
Historical research reference.
A Statement of Reasons for Not Believing the Doctrines of Trinitarians, pages 248–252.
Norton's work is an important historical source for the wider development of Unitarian biblical interpretation.
However, the specific passage requires direct verification before an exact interpretation or quotation can be attributed to him in this article.
6. SNEDEKER
Historical research reference.
Our Heavenly Father Has No Equals, page 215.
This reference has been identified for further historical comparison.
The precise wording and argument should be checked against the original publication before being quoted.
7. BROTHER KEL — THE TRINITY DELUSION
Brother Kel's work contributes to the wider non-Trinitarian debate about the identity of Jesus and the interpretation of Scripture.
However, a specific explanation of John 6:62 from Brother Kel has not been independently established in the research presented here.
It would therefore be inappropriate to attribute either of our two principal interpretations directly to him without a verified source.
Website:
PART 13 — WHICH INTERPRETATION BEST EXPLAINS JOHN 6:62?
We have now examined three approaches.
INTERPRETATION A — PERSONAL PREEXISTENCE
Jesus ascended to heaven, where he personally existed before his human birth.
Strength:
The language of descending from heaven and ascending where he was before provides a natural basis for this interpretation.
John 6:38, John 16:28, and John 17:5 strengthen its contextual argument.
Difficulty:
The passage does not explicitly explain the nature of Jesus' supposed prehuman existence.
Nor does it independently establish the Trinity or the full theological claims often associated with that doctrine.
INTERPRETATION B — RESURRECTION
Jesus spoke of rising from the dead and returning to the life he had before death.
Strength:
John 6 repeatedly discusses resurrection, eternal life, and Jesus giving his flesh for the world.
The Greek verb anabainō can describe upward movement without necessarily referring to heaven.
Difficulty:
The expression “ascending where he was before” does not explicitly identify the grave as the starting point or earthly life as the destination.
The broader language of descending from heaven remains a significant interpretive challenge.
INTERPRETATION C — DANIEL'S PROPHETIC VISION
Jesus spoke of ascending to the heavenly position previously revealed in Daniel's vision of the Son of Man.
Strength:
The interpretation connects Jesus' messianic title with Daniel 7:13–14 and the biblical accounts of his exaltation.
It explains the earlier heavenly scene in terms of prophecy rather than literal personal preexistence.
Difficulty:
John 6:62 does not explicitly refer to Daniel.
The connection must be inferred from the broader biblical portrayal of the Son of Man.
MY ASSESSMENT
Both Biblical Unitarian explanations offer meaningful lines of inquiry.
The resurrection interpretation draws attention to the immediate context.
The prophetic-vision interpretation draws attention to the Old Testament background of the Son of Man.
However, neither explanation is explicitly identified by John as the meaning of verse 62.
We must not pretend that the Greek alone settles the debate.
Equally, we must not assume that a traditional interpretation automatically proves every later theological doctrine associated with it.
THE RESPONSIBLE APPROACH IS TO DISTINGUISH WHAT THE TEXT EXPLICITLY SAYS FROM WHAT DIFFERENT INTERPRETERS BELIEVE IT IMPLIES.
PART 14 — FINAL CONCLUSION: DID JESUS RETURN TO HEAVEN OR RISE FROM THE DEAD?
Let us return to the words of Jesus:
“What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?” — John 6:62
Does this verse prove that Jesus personally existed in heaven before his birth?
The traditional interpretation answers yes.
However, the research presented in this article demonstrates that there are alternative interpretations within Biblical Unitarian scholarship.
FIRST, BiblicalUnitarian.com, the Revised English Version, and Josiah Verkaik understand the verse as referring to Jesus' resurrection from the dead.
They emphasise the repeated resurrection promises in John 6 and the broader meaning of the Greek verb anabainō.
SECOND, Sir Anthony Buzzard connects the verse with Daniel's prophetic vision of the Son of Man and the Messiah's future heavenly exaltation.
These interpretations differ in important ways, yet both seek to understand Jesus' words without assuming that he consciously lived in heaven before his conception.
From my own Biblical Unitarian perspective, the clearest and most explicit passages concerning Jesus' identity remain foundational.
Jesus was miraculously conceived through the power of God.
He was the promised Messiah.
He was a genuine human being.
He was obedient to his Father.
He died for our sins.
God raised him from the dead.
God exalted him to His right hand.
And Jesus himself addressed his Father as:
“THE ONLY TRUE GOD.” — JOHN 17:3
The Scriptures also declare:
“BUT TO US THERE IS BUT ONE GOD, THE FATHER.” — 1 CORINTHIANS 8:6
I therefore do not accept that John 6:62, taken by itself, proves that Jesus is Almighty God or that the doctrine of the Trinity is true.
Nor do I believe that the doctrine of Jesus' personal preexistence should be treated as beyond examination.
Nevertheless, readers should recognise that the conventional interpretation has genuine textual support and that the alternatives presented here remain debated.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS RESEARCH IS NOT TO HIDE DIFFICULT PASSAGES, BUT TO EXAMINE THEM OPENLY, CAREFULLY, AND IN THEIR BIBLICAL CONTEXT.
The final authority must be Scripture, not tradition, theological assumptions, or the reputation of any individual scholar.
LET THE SCRIPTURES SPEAK.
RESEARCH REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING
1. The Greek text of John 6:62
https://biblehub.com/text/john/6-62.htm
2. BiblicalUnitarian.com — John 6:62
https://www.biblicalunitarian.com/verses/john-6-62
3. Revised English Version — John 6:62 Commentary
https://www.revisedenglishversion.com/comm/John/chapter6/62
4. Josiah Verkaik — Preexistence Passages in John
https://trueunitarian.com/preexistence-of-christ/preexistence-passages-in-john/
5. Sir Anthony Buzzard — Who Is Jesus?
https://www.focusonthekingdom.org/WhoisJesus.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com6. BiblicalUnitarian.com — Jesus Is the Son of God, Not God the Son
https://www.biblicalunitarian.com/articles/jesus-is-the-son-of-god-not-god-the-son
7. The Greek text of John 13:3
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/13-3.htm
8. Historical research leads
Andrews Norton — A Statement of Reasons for Not Believing the Doctrines of Trinitarians, pp. 248–252.
Snedeker — Our Heavenly Father Has No Equals, p. 215.
These two references require direct checking before exact quotations or detailed positions are attributed to their authors.
MORE RESEARCH FROM REAL DISCOVERIES
John 6:62 — Original Research Article
Why Did Jesus Not Pre-Exist His Human Birth?
Written and researched by Simon Brown
REAL DISCOVERIES — Independent Biblical Research
https://wwwrealdiscoveriesorg-simon.blogspot.com
This article presents competing interpretations for examination and discussion. The inclusion of a researcher's interpretation does not imply that all researchers cited agree with one another on every theological question.
No comments:
Post a Comment