Jesus's preexistence

I came across a brief "debate" between Anthony Buzzard and a trinitarian and was gazing over the comments by people who had listened.I came across a couple I found compelling..Now these are edited by me to bring out what I found to be the most interesting ..if you want to see the FULL comments or to read more OR of course to listen to the debate,visit this link:

http://lineoffireradio.askdrbrown.org/2010/02/08/february-8-2010/

a man named Brad said,in relation to the preexistence of Christ:

On the issue of pre-existence, the Holy Spirit makes a special point in Jeremiah that God knew Jeremiah before he was formed in his mother’s womb. This “doctrine” of God’s confession of a “relationship knowledge” of a person prior to their birth is also set forth in detail in Psalm 139:14-17 where the infinite knowledge of God (God’s thoughts are without number) is said to encompass a knowledge of a human being prior to their birth (in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them). If Jesus as man had a greater revelation of this point than David or Jeremiah, he might well have shared it. In fact, if this point is true, we might imagine the Son of Man being filled with this understanding as he looked at himself, as David and Jeremiah had, through the eternal eyes of His Father.

If God the Father “knew” Jeremiah before he was born, and if God’s infinite knowledge and eternal point of view is accepted as a legitimate and authoritative frame of reference, and if Christ is the Logos made flesh, i.e. the self-expression of God the Father made human, one would think that such a human would have a transcendent self-image with respect to time, a vastly expanded experience of the revelation given to Jeremiah (Jer 1:5) and David (Psalm 139:14-18).

Let us ask ourselves, what was Christ’s self image like if he had a full revelation of God’s eternal perspective of him? And what if part of God’s intent in sending Christ was to give the rest of us a window into this eternal perspective — taking us to the destination that Jeremiah and David had pointed toward? Are we “seated in heavenly places” in Christ? Were we known before we were born? Were we not “created in Christ Jesus” and “chosen in him before the foundation of the world”? What if God wanted us to have a vehicle or paradigm for an eternal self-image, couldn’t He provide that in a perfect, pattern Son?

The truth is, much of Paul’s teaching extrapolates on the stated and unstated premise that we are to view our identities as eternally fixed in the Son. And the starting point for that discussion has to be some concept of a “Son” that transcends time, not as a second person of a tri-une (complex) God, but as a foreknown, prototype man who “was and is” the self expression of the ONE God– the Logos.

Brad went on to say in another comment(I'm assuming it's the same Brad!And again,this is edited.):

We try to lay out doctrines and creeds to define God; we would do better to let our hearts get to know God and His Son as individuals, as persons, as beings, and let their respective positions and personalities speak for themselves. Jesus said that His Father was “His God”; the man Christ is worshipping His God in heaven today. And God the Father is receiving that worship — which is coming from the heart of the only person, other than the Father, who is completely perfect, and pure in heart. Let’s not let doctrine rob us of such a beautiful reality!

Brad goes on to say:

God the Father distinguishes the human lineage of Christ as the basis for the honor due Christ. This is the BIG stumbling stone it seems to me, even today. At His trial, Jesus was finally found “guilty of death” when he confessed that He was the Son of the Blessed, and that as the Son of Man would be sitting at the right hand of His Father. That statement was enough to convict him.

Now, if I were to say, Jesus is one with His Father as man, and as man is due the same honor that is due His Father, based solely on His unique and profound birthright — in other words, that His human lineage and human relationship to God as human Son –puts him at the right hand of God — and gives him oneness with the Father — that God Himself accepts this as appropriate legal grounds for the honor and majesty attributable to His Son, then watch out.

And yet Jesus as man can say that God is His literal Father — and I say that this Sonship gives Jesus a birthright of Divine dimensions…that’s right, a birthright of Divine dimensions.

What is interesting is that history is repeating itself. the religious of our day are stumbled by the idea that Jesus, as MAN, is due the SAME honor that His biological Father is due. If you hang your hat on that point alone, you WILL be called a heretic by the mainstream of Christianity. It is blasphemy. You must recant, or say that He is one with God in some way other than “merely” as an only begotten human Son. Am I right?

In other words, if Jesus Christ was on (religious) trial today, and made no claims to be part of a complex unity, no claims to be a second person of God, but merely stated that he was the only begotten Son of God, as man, had been given His Father’s name, and all power in heaven and earth, and that God was requiring the world to honor Him as they Honor the Father — with only Luke 1:35 as a basis, he’d be called a heretic and a blasphemer.

How ironic…