Did Jesus create the angels?

Nathan P

Member
Fallacy of Begging the Question. Thanks for finally admitting that you have no argument.
I have no argument? Another thing you can not prove is there was only a Son of God after the Word became flesh. I need to see it say Son of God before the Word became flesh? Meaning if you can not prove there was a Son of God before the Word became flesh then the trin is over and finished because there could not have always have been a Son of God.

Or there has only been a Son of God for the last 2,000 or so years.
 
Last edited:

imJRR

Well-known member
We are dealing with this scripture now and I will prove your scriptures wrong later. You need to throw those in to distract the attention away from the fact that only Jesus could have told John that information and thus the angel who told John that information had to have been Jesus. Also at rev. 1 the angel sent had to have been Jesus because only one angel was sent and John was a witness to only one about the word of God and that was Jesus.

LOL! Nope. I'm not distracting at all - I'm referring to primary verses that show and prove the Deity of Christ that you can't do anything about except deny and run from. And there are plenty more. As for you saying that vs. 9 refutes verse 8 - LOL! :LOL::ROFLMAO: You have not shown or proven that at all. You might imagine you have, but that's another matter. By the "reasoning" that you have used, God Himself is a contradicting flip-flopper; first calling the Son "God" but then not. You just feel free to go right ahead with that. My Bible says that God doesn't recognize or call others by the name "God".

As for your reference to Rev. 1, that is VERY easily refuted by Christ Himself in Rev. 22. If you ever bother to read verse 16, there are TWO beings very clearly being referred to: Christ and the angel He sent to John to testify to the churches. Here, I'll show you: "I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you" Anyone with even a modicum of reading comprehension ability can very very easily and clearly see and understand that two beings are being referred to in that verse. AND - If you bother to read the context of the verse (you can start with verse 6), you very easily see that Christ (especially starting in verse 12) is declares His Identity as God.
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
I have no argument?
Correct.
Another thing you can not prove is there was only a Son of God after the Word became flesh.
I don't recall making that claim to begin with.
I need to see it say Son of God before the Word became flesh?
I don't know. Do you?
Meaning if you can not prove there was a Son of God before the Word became flesh then the trin is over and finished because there could not have always have been a Son of God.
Your pervasive use of the negative is quite confusing. I have no idea what you're trying to say here.
Or there has only been a Son of God for the last 2,000 or so years.
Are you trying to make a point here, or are you just changing the subject?
 

Nathan P

Member
Correct.

I don't recall making that claim to begin with.

I don't know. Do you?

Your pervasive use of the negative is quite confusing. I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

Are you trying to make a point here, or are you just changing the subject?
I did not say you made the claim because I did. There has only been a documented Son of God for the last 2,000 or so years because none of you can document where it says Son of God before the Word became flesh. You admit above you do not know where it says Son of God before the Word became flesh correct?
 

Nathan P

Member
LOL! Nope. I'm not distracting at all - I'm referring to primary verses that show and prove the Deity of Christ that you can't do anything about except deny and run from. And there are plenty more. As for you saying that vs. 9 refutes verse 8 - LOL! :LOL::ROFLMAO: You have not shown or proven that at all. You might imagine you have, but that's another matter. By the "reasoning" that you have used, God Himself is a contradicting flip-flopper; first calling the Son "God" but then not. You just feel free to go right ahead with that. My Bible says that God doesn't recognize or call others by the name "God".

As for your reference to Rev. 1, that is VERY easily refuted by Christ Himself in Rev. 22. If you ever bother to read verse 16, there are TWO beings very clearly being referred to: Christ and the angel He sent to John to testify to the churches. Here, I'll show you: "I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you" Anyone with even a modicum of reading comprehension ability can very very easily and clearly see and understand that two beings are being referred to in that verse. AND - If you bother to read the context of the verse (you can start with verse 6), you very easily see that Christ (especially starting in verse 12) is declares His Identity as God.
The first angel that was sent was sent to tell John the information to write down, then in the second one Jesus sends his angel with the message for the churches or it has now been written down and is finished. Those are 2 separate incidents because in the first one it is not written down yet and it is done and being sent in the second one.
 

imJRR

Well-known member
LOL! Congratulations on totally avoiding/running away from this: If you bother to read the context of the verse (you can start with verse 6), you very easily see that Christ (especially starting in verse 12) declares His Identity as God. The total avoidance/running away was not unexpected.
 

Nathan P

Member
If you say so, but honestly, you have yet to present anything even remotely compelling to support these bizarre and blatantly pointless arguments.
When the word "of" is used it indicates it is some of his. But God's word is his word or written word.
 

Nathan P

Member
LOL! Congratulations on totally avoiding/running away from this: If you bother to read the context of the verse (you can start with verse 6), you very easily see that Christ (especially starting in verse 12) declares His Identity as God. The total avoidance/running away was not unexpected.
According to you. But let me see some solid evidence and not how you want it to read?
 

Nathan P

Member
LOL! Congratulations on totally avoiding/running away from this: If you bother to read the context of the verse (you can start with verse 6), you very easily see that Christ (especially starting in verse 12) declares His Identity as God. The total avoidance/running away was not unexpected.
If you slow down and read vs 6 it says God sent his angel to tell you what will happen soon correct? The only one God gave it to, to tell them what will happen soon was Jesus at rev. 1:1. Since it was Jesus God said who was going to tell them what will happen soon, then the angel sent at vs 6 had to have been Jesus as the appointed one to tell them what will happen soon.
 

imJRR

Well-known member
LOL! Nope. Anyone who can read can very very easily see that the passage clearly shows that there are two different beings being referred to. The angel does not receive worship (the biblical witness is that Christ did) and speaks in verse 8. Christ Himself speaks in 12-17, and He is identified by what He says as God. As for Rev. 1 - Try reading verse 8. That's CHRIST speaking.
 
Last edited:

shnarkle

Well-known member
I did not say you made the claim because I did.
Well then that explains it then.
There has only been a documented Son of God for the last 2,000 or so years because none of you
Me? You just admitted that you were the one who made this claim, not me.
can document where it says Son of God before the Word became flesh.
Still not tracking on just what your point is here.
You admit above you do not know where it says Son of God before the Word became flesh correct?
Don't know and don't care, especially when you just arbitrarily came up with this idea out of nowhere.
 

Nathan P

Member
Well then that explains it then.

Me? You just admitted that you were the one who made this claim, not me.

Still not tracking on just what your point is here.

Don't know and don't care, especially when you just arbitrarily came up with this idea out of nowhere.
 

Nathan P

Member
You are not tracking the point? The point is nowhere does it say" Son of God" before the Word became flesh and only after the Word became flesh is there a documented Son of God for the last 2,000 or so years. Before the Word became flesh there was no Son of God.
 

Nathan P

Member
LOL! Nope. Anyone who can read can very very easily see that the passage clearly shows that there are two different beings being referred to. The angel does not receive worship (the biblical witness is that Christ did) and speaks in verse 8. Christ Himself speaks in 12-17, and He is identified by what He says as God. As for Rev. 1 - Try reading verse 8. That's CHRIST speaking.
No it is not Jesus who speaks at rev. 1:8 and that can be proven as you have to start from vs 4 and read on through vs 8. Listen closely and at vs 8 the one who says he is Lord God says I am the one who is, who always was, and who is still to come, the Almighty one. Now go to vs 4 and it says Grace and peace from the one who is, who always was, and who is still to come from the sevenfold Spirit before his throne and from Jesus Christ who is the faithful witness to these things etc. Since it says and from Jesus Christ Jesus can not be the one who is, who always was and who is still to come and thus it has to be the Father who is the one who is , who always was, and who is still to come. The Father has to be spoken of as the Lord God in vs 8 of rev. 1 because he is the only one there described as the one who is, who always was, and who is still to come.
 

Nathan P

Member
LOL! Nope. Anyone who can read can very very easily see that the passage clearly shows that there are two different beings being referred to. The angel does not receive worship (the biblical witness is that Christ did) and speaks in verse 8. Christ Himself speaks in 12-17, and He is identified by what He says as God. As for Rev. 1 - Try reading verse 8. That's CHRIST speaking.
Why do you jump to where it is obvious Jesus is speaking instead of dealing with since it was given to Jesus to tell them what would happen soon then the angel who was sent at rev. 22:6 to tell them what would happen soon had to have been Jesus because it was given to Jesus and no one else to tell them what would happen soon?
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
You are not tracking the point? The point is nowhere does it say" Son of God" before the Word became flesh and only after the Word became flesh is there a documented Son of God for the last 2,000 or so years. Before the Word became flesh there was no Son of God.
And this is your point? From this we can conclude that God was a bachelor prior to becoming a father, and therefore contrary to the biblical claim that God is unchanging, we now know that God does change from a bachelor to a father. Whatever. I've lost track of the point of this thread.
 

Nathan P

Member
And this is your point? From this we can conclude that God was a bachelor prior to becoming a father, and therefore contrary to the biblical claim that God is unchanging, we now know that God does change from a bachelor to a father. Whatever. I've lost track of the point of this thread.
That is all you got is God is unchanging? You need to provide clear proof of a Son of God before the Word became flesh?
 
Top