The central question in the pre-existence of Christ controversy (which still amazes me that so simple and straightforward a topic could be controversial) is: When did Christ "[come] to be in the likeness of humanity?" For this is the precise wording of Philippians 2:7, followed by, "being found in fashion as a human" (verse 8).

This would be the moment at which He went from NOT looking like a human TO looking like a human. (I'm not trying to write like a 6th grader, it's simply that this is a truth graspable by a 12 year-old, and so can be easily described using language understood by a 12 year-old.)

Obviously this could not have happened at ANY time during His earthly life, because He looked like a human all THROUGH His earthly life, from the time He became a cluster of reproducing cells on the uterine walls of Mary, to His death on the cross---and even AFTER His resurrection. And yet, this strange gaggle of contrarians known as Tories (Trinity Over-Reactors) try to convince us that at some point LATE in His earthly life He finally started looking like a human being. Huh? What did He look like before? A giraffe? An octopus?

The apostle Paul tells us precisely when this happened. It happened at the moment He went from being in the form of God to the form of a slave (Philippians 2:6-7). When was He in the form of God? When He was a baby? When He was working with His Father in the carpentry shop? When He began His public ministry? None of the above. It was when He had His glory with the Father before the world was (John 17:5). When did He come to be in the form of a slave? That's an easy one: It was when He became that cluster of reproducing cells on the uterine walls of a Jewish teenager—mentioned earlier.

The teaching that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, did not preexist His birth in Bethlehem is a teaching that must be learned apart from a natural reading of Scripture. It's a teaching that can only be induced by finagling the text and changing the meaning of plain words. It is more of a philosophy than anything. It is an esotericism reserved for the supposedly complex-minded—for those always looking for some new, fantastic twist on what they must consider to be an old, boring theme.

Mark Haukaas, a friend who holds to the strange teaching, admits that he learned it from a professor at a theological seminary. I reminded him that theological seminaries are run by Satan—and who else would take such pains to undermine the glories of Christ but Satan?

Any honest person reading a good translation of Scripture on his or her own cannot help but come away knowing that Jesus Christ pre-existed His birth in Bethlehem. The anomalous teaching that He DIDN'T exist before Bethlehem requires a complicated explanation—a "getting into the weeds" (as Mr. Haukaas himself describes the process of understanding it)—and it certainly doesn't hurt signing up to learn at an institution run by the devil himself.