The verb proclaimed in this verse is apparently in a tense indicating an action finished in the past though it may be repeated in the future. Thus the meaning would be that the gospel was proclaimed to every person (creature as created being) under heaven (as referring to the fulness of creation, ie, everyone!) as a finished act! The finished nature of this proclamation means that it was done! It was so proclaimed to every person!
This has never been fulfilled again as a finished action on earth so the finished action spoken of here must have been pre-earth, in the heavens ie Sheol.
The first time the Gospel was preached was by God to Adam, when He said that the devil would bruise the heel of the seed of the woman, but the seed of the woman would bruise the devil's head. This was as prophecy said by God to point toward the coming Messiah (Jesus Christ) who was to appear hundreds of years in the future. Every time the Old Testament spoke of the coming Messiah, it was preaching the Gospel. The risen Jesus showed the two disciples at Emmaus all through the Old Testament Scriptures where they spoke of Him. There is no mention of a pre-earth existence of any human being. The first human created was Adam, who had no existence before the garden of Eden. To say that that humans had a pre-earth existence, is reading into the Scripture something that isn't there.
The flim flam of eXegesis is that for anyone to get the meaning of a verse from the verse without any input from their mindset and unfiltered by existing ideas is on the order of Paul's conversion as a bright light and hearing GOD's voice. Do you claim that about your theological beliefs? Every interpretation of a verse is eisegesis, the fitting of the verse into previously accepted definitions.
Exegesis is the study of the intention of the author of the Scripture passage, how he understood it, and how his contemporary readers understood it in relation to their culture and place in history. Also, it involves the context of what was said before the passage and after it; in other words, what was the general topic spoken about? It is the consideration of who said it, what did he say, how did he say it, where was it said, when was it said, and why was it said. Once this is established, the function of hermeneutics is used to determine whether the passage was culture and history dependent, or whether is trans-cultural, and trans-historical.
So, for those who would like to take the time necessary to do the work of searching the Scriptures regarding this doctrine, I present the verses I do which witness to our pre-conception existence, along with some others which I feel make a lot more sense when they're interpreted in light of this doctrine.
To quote Scriptures to give evidence of a pre-conception existence is to twist the Scriptures out of their normal context and make them say something different to what was intended by the author.
Now, being that hardly anyone has searched the Scriptures in light of the pov of our pre-conception conception, these Scriptures have rarely been interpreted this way before. Therefore, it stands to reason that a study of these Scriptures will be new and that it will be fairly unique, that is, that almost all the other interpretations of the same Scriptures will be different with the weight of long standing acceptance.
The reason for this is that no one has ever mentioned a pre-conception existence. The notion is something dreamed up in the imagination, and some obscure verses have been shoe-horned in out of context to try and prove it.
In other words, any verse that conveys the idea of pre-earth existence has rarely been interpreted this way before because almost every exegete automatically sees a different interpretation when they read such a Scripture. This being the case, a mere list of Scriptures will not constitute proof of scriptural support for this doctrine but, to provide such proof, such a list will have to be accompanied by an in-depth explanation of the said Scriptures. Providing such a list without the accompanying new interpretation would only tend to prove to its searchers that this doctrine had no scriptural support, simply because they would tend to interpret the Scriptures against our pre-conception existence, in much the same way that everybody used to interpret the Scriptures as against the Christ King.
These ideas are coming from someone who has no knowledge or skill in exegesis. it certainly is not going through one's concordance and providing a list of "proof texts" to try and prove a premise.
Now then, most people are going to find some of these verses difficult. Therefore, I suggest that folk not enter into them lightly, but be prepared to spend some time in some hard thinking and searching of the Scriptures. Without this preparation and commitment I doubt that you will be able to understand what I am trying to say, and if you can not understand what I am saying, how can you possibly inherit the blessings that only accompany such understanding?
It is not a matter of misunderstanding. It is rather being certain that what is being said is imaginary nonsense, using random Scripture verses to give some sort of Biblical credence to it.
Yes it is how I interpret the reality the scripture teaches, except I did not construct it but I was led to it and taught it...not that I can prove that to you.
No you don't, because you have demonstrated a lack of skill in the using exegesis to understand what the author of Scripture is actually saying.
I show a few verses here so you don't think I'm a complete lunatic, totally divorced from scripture. I don't dump every verse I can find, (some 3 dozen), so please understand this is just an intro so to speak. I also hope you understand that I don't claim these are PROOF verses that can't be argued. It is obvious that these verses have had their orthodox interpretations for centuries of which I am well aware. But they do contain alternative interpretations which should be answered as to how they fail if they are rejected as pce supports.
It is enough that others come to realize that the actual face value of the words in each verse CAN BE USED WITHOUT DISTORTION to promote PCE and in some cases are more true to the meaning of the words than the interpretation orthodoxy accepts.
I also repeat my desire for someone to find me a verse which claims or even hints that our pre-earth existence is impossible… After 12 years of asking, no one has found one yet.
None of the verses you can provide could ever prove your point. And the reason why no one has found a Scripture that shows that our pre-earth existence is impossible is that there is none to be found, in the same way that there are no Scriptures that show that it is possible.
There can be various reasons, especially the greatness of HIS power, that would cause even the eternally sinful to be amazed at HIS glory...which wore off quickly enough. But I agree...if the Satanic were there they were probably howling in despair at this proof of HIS divinity which augered their damnation in hell.
I know that some people of HIS creation are NOT HIS sons/children: Deuteronomy 32:5 “They have corrupted themselves; They are not His children because of their blemish but a perverse and crooked generation.
OR
their blemish is that they are not HIS children.
World English Bible
They have dealt corruptly with him, [they are] not his children, [it is] their blemish. [They are] a perverse and crooked generation.
...due to their grievous evil.
I don't know what these verses have to do with what you have been saying about a pre-earth existence.
Since I accept that the proof of HIS divinity in this way could only happen AFTER the free will decisions about HIM were finished and everyone's fate was set, then the reprobate and the sinful elect were self corrupted already when they all saw this display of HIS divinity and power.
I don't see this anywhere in Scripture. This seems to be a confused mixture of Calvinist and Arminian theology coming from someone who has limited knowledge of either. This is what you seem to be saying:
Proof of God's divinity could happen only when free will decisions about Him are completed.
The reprobate and elect were self-corrupted already when they saw the display of His divinity and power.
So, my question is, how can free will decisions prove God's divinity? How can the reprobate by self-corrupted when they made themselves reprobate by rejecting Christ? And how are the elect, who have received Christ, be corrupted? And how did God display His divinity and power to make people corrupted?
If the unforgivable eternally evil ones were at this time considered to be NOT HIS children (though they were HIS creation) due to their sinning the unforgivable sin, then they would not necessarily be counted within the phrase ALL the sons of GOD who sang HIS praise which group would then include only the holy elect and the sinful elect.
The only unforgivable eternally evil ones are the devil and his angels who rebelled against God and who was cast out of heaven. Jesus defined the unforgivable sin as attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to that of the devil. Furthermore, the Scripture does not define "all the sons of God" in that actual Scripture passage. What is generally understood is that these are the angels in heaven. Also, your definition of "holy elect" and "sinful elect" shows a lack of understanding of what the doctrine of election is all about.
Thus if you consider yourself to be an elect, you may have been there as a witness to the proof of HIS divinity and eternal power (Rom 1:20) along with the reprobate but you were singing your heart out in praise of HIM!
The person who considers himself to be an elect is the person who has received Christ as Saviour. The Pharisees witnessed acts that showed the divinity and power of Jesus, but they refused to believe in Him, therefore they remained rebrobate, so the display of divine power does not necessarily mean that a rebrobate will receive Christ and become an elect child of God.
