Did Jesus create the angels?

imJRR

Well-known member
As usual, you're wrong again. Here's why and how:

Mary was told first. That's glaringly obvious from Luke 1:31.
The angel's message to her was BEFORE SHE EVER CONCEIVED.
And the angel gave His name.
Therefore, you are wrong when you state that it was Joseph and not Mary that the angel spoke the name to.

Joseph was told WHEN Mary was ALREADY pregnant.
That's glaringly obvious from Matt. 1:18


The inability of your posts to accurately and truthfully talk about verses is truly...."remarkable."
 

Nathan P

Active member
As usual, you're wrong again. Here's why and how:

Mary was told first. That's glaringly obvious from Luke 1:31.
The angel's message to her was BEFORE SHE EVER CONCEIVED.
And the angel gave His name.
Therefore, you are wrong when you state that it was Joseph and not Mary that the angel spoke the name to.

Joseph was told WHEN Mary was ALREADY pregnant.
That's glaringly obvious from Matt. 1:18


The inability of your posts to accurately and truthfully talk about verses is truly...."remarkable."
It was Joseph and not Mary at Matt 1:25. Yes at Luke 1:31 the angel said you will become pregnant and have a son and you are to name him Jesus. It is not until she would have the son that he would be named Jesus.
 

imJRR

Well-known member
And the angel met with Mary BEFORE SHE CONCEIVED.
And the angel gave His name.
This was BEFORE SHE CONCEIVED.
The angel met with Joseph when Mary was ALREADY PREGNANT.

The angel met with Mary BEFORE pregnancy
The angel met with Joseph WHEN or WHILE Mary was pregnant.
That is the biblical witness.


Again - The inability of your posts to accurately and truthfully talk about verses is truly...."remarkable."
 

Nathan P

Active member
And the angel met with Mary BEFORE SHE CONCEIVED.
And the angel gave His name.
This was BEFORE SHE CONCEIVED.
The angel met with Joseph when Mary was ALREADY PREGNANT.

The angel met with Mary BEFORE pregnancy
The angel met with Joseph WHILE pregnant.
That is the biblical witness.


Again - The inability of your posts to accurately and truthfully talk about verses is truly...."remarkable."
The angel met with Mary before she conceived and said you will become pregnant and have a son and you are to name him Jesus at Luke 1:31.It means when she has the son he will be called Jesus, then at matt. 1:25 she was already pregnant but it says she remained a virgin until her son was born and Joseph named him Jesus. In both scriptures after the son is born is he to be named Jesus. Just because the angel met with them and told them the name the son would have, it still means when she has the son he will be named Jesus and not before he was born.
 

imJRR

Well-known member
You're wrong again.

In both Scriptures, His name is given BEFORE He was born.
In Luke 1, His name is given BEFORE HE WAS EVEN CONCEIVED.

What Joseph and Mary did was give Him the name He had BEFORE HE WAS EVEN CONCEIVED.



Again - The inability of your posts to accurately and truthfully talk about verses is truly...."remarkable.
 

Nathan P

Active member
You're wrong again.

In both Scriptures, His name is given BEFORE He was born.
In Luke 1, His name is given BEFORE HE WAS EVEN CONCEIVED.

What Joseph and Mary did was give Him the name He had BEFORE HE WAS EVEN CONCEIVED.



Again - The inability of your posts to accurately and truthfully talk about verses is truly...."remarkable.
What is remarkable is that both scriptures say after she has a son he will be named Jesus and not before. Again at matt. 1:25 it says she remained a virgin until her son was born and Joseph named him Jesus, and at Luke 1:31 it says you will become pregnant and have a son and you are to name him Jesus. Listen closely in both scriptures once the son is born he will be named Jesus.

He was not given the name before he was born like you claim and instead the human parents are told what he will be named.
 

imJRR

Well-known member
Nope - You're wrong again. Your post above very clearly indicates either a very serious reading comprehension inability or very deliberate dishonesty.

According to the verses, He had the name not only BEFORE He was born - He had the name BEFORE HE WAS EVEN CONCEIVED. That is what the verses say. What Joseph and Mary did was give Him the name He had BEFORE HE WAS EVEN CONCEIVED.
 

Nathan P

Active member
Nope - You're wrong again. Your post above very clearly indicates either a very serious reading comprehension inability or very deliberate dishonesty.

According to the verses, He had the name not only BEFORE He was born - He had the name BEFORE HE WAS EVEN CONCEIVED. That is what the verses say. What Joseph and Mary did was give Him the name He had BEFORE HE WAS EVEN CONCEIVED.
No he did not have the name Jesus before he was born, because say s she will have a son meaning he will be born and then he will be named Jesus.

But just say he had the name Jesus before he was conceived it is talking about here on earth. You need to prove he had the name Jesus before the Word became flesh and the Word was in heaven.
 

imJRR

Well-known member
Nope - You're wrong again, and your post is nothing more and nothing less than deliberate dishonesty.
In other words - the usual.
He had His name even before conception.


As for 'the Word' in John 1:1 referring to Jesus Christ - It most certainly most definitely does.
First of all - as has already been explained - This is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The book is about Him. He is the subject
Secondly - and very related - verses 1-14 show that the word is Jesus Christ very, very clearly to anyone with even a modicum of reading comprehension ability. Verse 1 openly declares that the Word was with God even before creation. The word "with" - as has already been explained - shows that the Word was in an open, face-to-face, relationship of equality with God before creation began. You just give the word, Nathan, and I'll re-post the quotes from A.T. Robertson that prove that for you. It will be no trouble at all to do that again. As for His having the name "Jesus" in Heaven - Just where do you think the angel came from that visited Mary that gave His name before she conceived? It's really not difficult to figure out.
 

Nathan P

Active member
Nope - You're wrong again, and your post is nothing more and nothing less than deliberate dishonesty.
In other words - the usual.
He had His name even before conception.


As for 'the Word' in John 1:1 referring to Jesus Christ - It most certainly most definitely does.
First of all - as has already been explained - This is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The book is about Him. He is the subject
Secondly - and very related - verses 1-14 show that the word is Jesus Christ very, very clearly to anyone with even a modicum of reading comprehension ability. Verse 1 openly declares that the Word was with God even before creation. The word "with" - as has already been explained - shows that the Word was in an open, face-to-face, relationship of equality with God before creation began. You just give the word, Nathan, and I'll re-post the quotes from A.T. Robertson that prove that for you. It will be no trouble at all to do that again. As for His having the name "Jesus" in Heaven - Just where do you think the angel came from that visited Mary that gave His name before she conceived? It's really not difficult to figure out.
Again John 1:14 refers to when the Word became human. You have to prove there was a Son of God before the Word became human. John 1 is referring to the Word because the Word had not become human. Only when the Word becomes human is there a documented Son of God named Jesus. All you can mention is the Word in vss 1-14 and you can not provide definite proof there was one named Jesus before the Word became flesh. You have to provide more proof than say he is the subject because it is clearly saying the Word was the subject?
 

imJRR

Well-known member
Nope - You're wrong again, Nathan. The definite proof for any honest and reasonable reader has already been presented.You simply don't like or accept it. That means nothing at all - It's mere denial of reality.

This is what it means and is to be a JW.

As for John 1, the Word = Jesus Christ. Any honest reader very, very easily sees this. And verse 1 declares that He was with God the Father before creation in a face-to-face relationship of equality and intimacy. Here are some of A.T. Robertson's comments again, and I believe it is very, VERY safe to say that the earth will stop rotating before you demonstrate any ability at all whatsoever to show in any way that he is in error:

In the beginning. "Here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity."
The Word existed before creation.

Was. "Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of ειμ to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence."

With God (προς τον θεον). "Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. Προς with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other".

You will reject and say "No" to all this, because that's what it is and means to be a JW. It's also totally and completely irrelevant.
 
Last edited:

Nathan P

Active member
Nope - You're wrong again, Nathan. The definite proof for any honest and reasonable reader has already been presented.You simply don't like or accept it. That means nothing at all - It's mere denial of reality.

This is what it means and is to be a JW.

As for John 1, the Word = Jesus Christ. Any honest reader very, very easily sees this. And verse 1 declares that He was with God the Father before creation in a face-to-face relationship of equality and intimacy. Here are some of A.T. Robertson's comments again, and I believe it is very, VERY safe to say that the earth will stop rotating before you demonstrate any ability at all whatsoever to show in any way that he is in error:

In the beginning. "Here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity."
The Word existed before creation.

Was. "Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of ειμ to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence."

With God (προς τον θεον). "Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. Προς with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other".

You will reject and say "No" to all this, because that's what it is and means to be a JW. It's also totally and completely irrelevant.
No the Word at John 1 does not equal Jesus. You know you can not document that Jesus existed until after the Word became flesh. That is why you keep using the title the Word. If Robertson is so smart tell him to help you find clear evidence Jesus existed before the Word became flesh instead of trying with no evidence to make the Word Jesus when it says no such thing?
 

imJRR

Well-known member
LOL! Nathan, your mere denial above is nothing. All it does is openly show that you deny both the Bible and the explanation by a Greek scholar of the meaning of the words.
In other words - What it does is openly show what it is and means to be a JW.
You imagine that just because you type "No" that the Bible doesn't say and show what it says and shows.
Nope.
 

Nathan P

Active member
LOL! Nathan, your mere denial above is nothing. All it does is openly show that you deny both the Bible and the explanation by a Greek scholar of the meaning of the words.
In other words - What it does is openly show what it is and means to be a JW.
You imagine that just because you type "No" that the Bible doesn't say and show what it says and shows.
Nope.
Admit it that you know you can not conclusively prove Jesus was the Word and you are relying on your hunch that since the Word (Jesus) was before creation that the Word was (Jesus) in heaven?
 

imJRR

Well-known member
LOL! I already have proven it, Nathan. I did it with Luke 1:31 and with John 1:1. Any honest person can very, very easily see this.
All you can manage is mere denial. That's all you CAN do.
And that's what it is and means to be a JW - It is to be an intentionally dishonest denier of Scripture.
You imagine that because you say the words "No, it's not there", that the Bible doesn't say and show what it says and shows.
Nope.
 

Nathan P

Active member
LOL! I already have proven it, Nathan. I did it with Luke 1:31 and with John 1:1. Any honest person can very, very easily see this.
All you can manage is mere denial. That's all you CAN do.
And that's what it is and means to be a JW - It is to be an intentionally dishonest denier of Scripture.
You imagine that because you say the words "No, it's not there", that the Bible doesn't say and show what it says and shows.
Nope.
No you did not because as it was pointed out Luke 1:31 is talking about a pregnancy on earth and you have to prove there was a Jesus long before the Word became flesh. Listen closely before the Word became flesh there is no documented Jesus and there was only the Word who would become Jesus and who was with God.





And I have proven at John 1 that the Father is the creator and Jesus did not exist and could not have created anything.
 
Last edited:

imJRR

Well-known member
LOL! Oh, yes, Nathan - I did prove what Luke 1:31 says - and also John 1.
Any honest person who can read very, very easily sees that.
All you have is "No you did not."
That's all you've ever had.
All you can manage is mere denial. That's your recorded posting history
You have shown that that's all you CAN do.
And that's what it is and means to be a JW - It is to be an intentionally dishonest denier of Scripture.
You imagine that because you say the words "No, it's not there", that the Bible doesn't say and show what it says and shows.
Nope.

As for your claim above of proving anything - LOL!
That's equal to you claiming that you can fly to the moon by flapping your arms really fast.
 
Last edited:

Nathan P

Active member
LOL! Oh, yes, Nathan - I did prove what Luke 1:31 says - and also John 1.
Any honest person who can read very, very easily sees that.
All you have is "No you did not."
That's all you've ever had.
All you can manage is mere denial. That's your recorded posting history
You have shown that that's all you CAN do.
And that's what it is and means to be a JW - It is to be an intentionally dishonest denier of Scripture.
You imagine that because you say the words "No, it's not there", that the Bible doesn't say and show what it says and shows.
Nope.

As for your claim above of proving anything - LOL!
That's equal to you claiming that you can fly to the moon by flapping your arms really fast.
It is you who is ducking the issue and that is Luke 1:31 has to deal with after the Word became flesh on earth. Like you have been told we are talking about before the Word became flesh and the Word was still in heaven and you have to prove there was Jesus and not just God and the Word?
 

imJRR

Well-known member
LOL! Nope - You're wrong again and as usual Nathan.
The Word = Jesus Christ. Any honest reader very, very easily sees and understands that.
And He had the name "Jesus" before He was even conceived.
It's a simple matter of being able to read honestly.
Your posts have repeatedly and very clearly shown total, deliberate refusal to do so, and that's ALL they've shown.
And that's just with two references. Previously, I supplied over a half dozen that deal with the Deity of Christ, and there is absolutely no reason at all whatsoever to believe that your posts will deal with them in any sort of honest manner - It will just be more willful, intentional, dishonest deny, deny, deny.
This is what it means and is to be a JW.
 

Nathan P

Active member
LOL! Nope - You're wrong again and as usual Nathan.
The Word = Jesus Christ. Any honest reader very, very easily sees and understands that.
And He had the name "Jesus" before He was even conceived.
It's a simple matter of being able to read honestly.
Your posts have repeatedly and very clearly shown total, deliberate refusal to do so, and that's ALL they've shown.
And that's just with two references. Previously, I supplied over a half dozen that deal with the Deity of Christ, and there is absolutely no reason at all whatsoever to believe that your posts will deal with them in any sort of honest manner - It will just be more willful, intentional, dishonest deny, deny, deny.
This is what it means and is to be a JW.
It is you who is still ducking the issue. Show us where it says there was one named Jesus before the Word became flesh and the Word was in heaven?
 
Top