YHWH / Jesus Created Alone By Himself.

[Towerwatchman]

Look from who all things came? God the Father. That means the Father is the creator and the Son isn't. The rest of the Bible supports this.

Your claim. the Father is the creator and the Son isn't.

So we should find explicit support that states the Father created and nothing that states the Son did.

Genesis 1
1In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Does not state Father.

Isaiah 64
8But now, O LORD, You are our Father;
we are the clay, and You are the potter;
we are all the work of Your hand.

Has nothing to do with creation

Malachi 2
10Do we not all have one Father? Did not one God create us? Why then do we break faith with one another so as to profane the covenant of our fathers?

Close but no cigar. No connection between one father and one God. Just because its in the same sentence does not equate that they are the same.

Matthew 5
45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.

Nothing about creation.

John 1
3Through Him all things were made, and without Him nothing was made that has been made.
14The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us. We have seen His glory, the glory of the one and only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

This is speaking of Jesus

1 Cortinthians 8
6yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we exist. And there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we exist.

You would have to explain your understanding of from whom vs through whom

Hebrews 1
1On many past occasions and in many different ways, God spoke to our fathers through the prophets. 2But in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, and through whom He made the universe.

If through whom ≠ creator.

Romans 11:36 'through Him' applies to the Father. Following your reasoning the Father is now an instrument, but of whom?
36 For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen. (Ro 11:36). (1982).

James 1
17Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, with whom there is no change or shifting shadow.

Nothing about creation here.

Revelation 4
11“Worthy are You, our Lord and God,
to receive glory and honor and power,
for You created all things;
by Your will they exist and came to be.”

Not crediting the Father with creation.

This is just a sample and it sets the precedent. When the Bible mentions God creating, it's always referring to the Father without exception, even where it doesn't specifically say Father.

As I wrote before this is an exercise in throwing everything at it hoping something sticks.

Read the OP Jesus is explicitly and literally credited with creation.

 

[Nathan P]

Instead of me guessing what you are saying. What does 'through him' mean to you?

It means the person did it through someone else.

 

[Towerwatchman]

It means the person did it through someone else.

So you’re saying that the father created and Jesus was an agent or instrument , based on through him or through whom.

 

[Runningman]

Your claim. the Father is the creator and the Son isn't.

So we should find explicit support that states the Father created and nothing that states the Son did.

Does not state Father.

Has nothing to do with creation

Close but no cigar. No connection between one father and one God. Just because its in the same sentence does not equate that they are the same.

Nothing about creation.

This is speaking of Jesus

You would have to explain your understanding of from whom vs through whom

If through whom ≠ creator.

Romans 11:36 'through Him' applies to the Father. Following your reasoning the Father is now an instrument, but of whom?
36 For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen. (Ro 11:36). (1982).


Nothing about creation here.

Not crediting the Father with creation.

As I wrote before this is an exercise in throwing everything at it hoping something sticks.

Read the OP Jesus is explicitly and literally credited with creation.

Your position is that if it doesn't say "Jesus is not God" then that's your thread of hope to keep hanging on? That seems to be what you're doing.

The way sound Biblical scholarship works is going with what the internal evidence of the Bible produces. When the God in the Bible is referred to as the one true God and called the Father then that's who God is.

You don't find it even a bit odd that there's no record of Jesus said to have created anything, never having claimed to be God, and the few alleged proofs of Jesus being God aren't bulletproof?

How about when God said He isn't a man in the Old Testament then that very same Old Testament says the Messiah is a man? That doesn't work for you?

How about how anything Jesus did or has we can have as well? Doesn't that trigger any alerts for you that if Jesus is God then how is it these created humans can do whatever Jesus did?

You're right. Nothing has stuck. May God help you.

 

[Towerwatchman]

Your position is that if it doesn't say "Jesus is not God" then that's your thread of hope to keep hanging on? That seems to be what you're doing.

Read it again and this time slowwwly

So we should find explicit support that states the Father created and nothing that states the Son did.

The way sound Biblical scholarship works is going with what the internal evidence of the Bible produces. When the God in the Bible is referred to as the one true God and called the Father then that's who God is.

We’ve been down this road many times. And your argument does not work on multiple reasons.Simplest one is that it makes Jesus a false God in Jn 1:1.

You don't find it even a bit odd that there's no record of Jesus said to have created anything, never having claimed to be God, and the few alleged proofs of Jesus being God aren't bulletproof?

The Bible is written by multiple authors, and they all have one thing in common, it funnels through the Holy Spirit. So, if an author states that Jesus is God, it carries just as much authority, as if Jesus said it himself. And there is no such thing as alleged proofs.

How about when God said He isn't a man in the Old Testament then that very same Old Testament says the Messiah is a man? That doesn't work for you?

How about the smoking guns Titus 2:13, second Peter 1:1,John, 20:28.
How about simply address in the OP?

How about how anything Jesus did or has we can have as well? Doesn't that trigger any alerts for you that if Jesus is God then how is it these created humans can do whatever Jesus did?

Wow, I didn’t know I can walk on water, I can multiply bread and fish, I’m gonna fill my bathtub with water and turn it into wine, and after I good and happy I think I’ll raise some dead.

You're right. Nothing has stuck. May God help you.

In your dreams.

 

[Runningman]

Read it again and this time slowwwly

So we should find explicit support that states the Father created and nothing that states the Son did.

Done. None of them state Jesus did it. It’s always through him with God doing the actual creating.

We’ve been down this road many times. And your argument does not work on multiple reasons.Simplest one is that it makes Jesus a false God in Jn 1:1.

John 1:1 says nothing about Jesus.

The Bible is written by multiple authors, and they all have one thing in common, it funnels through the Holy Spirit. So, if an author states that Jesus is God, it carries just as much authority, as if Jesus said it himself. And there is no such thing as alleged proofs.

Which verse says Jesus is God? I haven’t seen any. I’ve seen you try to conflate Jesus is God many times when God and Jesus are mentioned in the same sentence. Jesus and God are two different persons in the New Testament. Nothing is sticking when I’ve shown you this.

How about the smoking guns Titus 2:13, second Peter 1:1,John, 20:28.
How about simply address in the OP?

Those verses are talking about two different persons. That’s obvious from reading them and the Bible where Jesus and God are two different persons I guess dozens of times.

Wow, I didn’t know I can walk on water, I can multiply bread and fish, I’m gonna fill my bathtub with water and turn it into wine, and after I good and happy I think I’ll raise some dead.

You could if God was doing it through you. Peter walked on water. Paul raised the dead. All Jesus did was power from God. I would show what the Bible says, but after doing so you’ve just complained. You can’t be reached on a scriptural level with reason.

Jesus said to his disciples that they could do greater works than him.

 

[Towerwatchman]

John 1:1 says nothing about Jesus.

A child with minimal reading comprehension can conclude that it speaks of Jesus.

Which verse says Jesus is God? I haven’t seen any. I’ve seen you try to conflate Jesus is God many times when God and Jesus are mentioned in the same sentence.


Those verses are talking about two different persons. That’s obvious from reading them and the Bible where Jesus and God are two different persons I guess dozens of times.

Of course, when you dishonestly ignore the grammatical rules and invent your own.

You could if God was doing it through you. Peter walked on water. Paul raised the dead. All Jesus did was power from God. I would show what the Bible says, but after doing so you’ve just complained. You can’t be reached on a scriptural level with reason

Complain about your dishonesty? No just point it out. Those miracles occurred to verify the message or messenger. Do you have verified records of that happening after the Apostles? No.

Jesus said to his disciples that they could do greater work.

Because they are His disciples. Jesus is no one’s disciple.

 

[Runningman]

Because they are His disciples. Jesus is no one’s disciple.

Jesus was a disciple of God. Jesus' relationship with God fits the definition of disciple perfectly.

John 8
28So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing on My own, but speak exactly what the Father has taught Me.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Jesus was a disciple of God. Jesus' relationship with God fits the definition of disciple perfectly.

John 8
28So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing on My own, but speak exactly what the Father has taught Me.

Do you ever find Jesus referred to as the true God like the Father is in the NT? Or the Father referring to the son as My God? I don't.

In the same way that 2 Cor 4:4 points to Satan as the God of this age, Ho Theos, representative of the people's God, so are the judges in Ex 22:8-9, where they are representative of God in judgements to the people. Jesus would be representative of God in reigning on the earth, but isn't divine as are Satan nor the Judges.

The same applies to creation. In Jewish thinking, God created with Israel and Messiah in mind.

 

[Runningman]

Do you ever find Jesus referred to as the true God like the Father is in the NT? Or the Father referring to the son as My God? I don't.

Never one time.

I occasionally see people trying to twist 1 John 5:20 into meaning Jesus is the true God. The God's Word Translation even makes that verse plainly state Jesus is the true God, but it's alone in that regard. Obviously a corrupted translation.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Never one time.

I occasionally see people trying to twist 1 John 5:20 into meaning Jesus is the true God. The God's Word Translation even makes that verse plainly state Jesus is the true God, but it's alone in that regard. Obviously a corrupted translation.

I'll have to check that out. Thanks.

 

[Runningman]

I'll have to check that out. Thanks.

A good example to cross reference is in Acts 7:

18Then another king, who knew nothing of Joseph, arose over Egypt. 19He exploited our people and oppressed our fathers, forcing them to abandon their infants so they would die.

Verse 19 begins with he and thus it could apply to either of the previously mentioned people, but the context clears it up who the pronoun he is referring to. Pronouns don't always refer to the closest noun.

1 John 5:20 is the same. The one true God is the Father.

 

[Towerwatchman]

Jesus was a disciple of God. Jesus' relationship with God fits the definition of disciple perfectly.

John 8
28So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing on My own, but speak exactly what the Father has taught Me.

What translation is that?

 

[Runningman]

What translation is that?

The one I quoted happens to be the Berean Study Bible, but the majority of English translations say Jesus was taught by God. I haven’t found one that says otherwise.

 

[Towerwatchman]

The one I quoted happens to be the Berean Study Bible, but the majority of English translations say Jesus was taught by God. I haven’t found one that says otherwise.

And Jesus said to them, “Just what I have been saying to you from the beginning. 26 I have many things to say and to judge concerning you, but He who sent Me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I heard from Him.”[Jn 8:25–26). NKJV
27 They did not understand that He spoke to them of the Father. 28 Then Jesus said to them, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing of Myself; but as My Father taught Me, I speak these things.
Jn 8:27–28).
Taught translates from the didasko which means teach, taught, instruct, etc. The question is, does this deem Jesus a Disciple of the Father just as He has disciples? One has to ask, 'what was taught?'
I did a search and found the following.
Jesus makes the same statement in another passage.

14 Now about the middle of the feast Jesus went up into the temple and taught. 15 And the Jews marveled, saying, “How does this Man know letters, having never studied?” 16 Jesus answered them and said, “My doctrine is not Mine, but His who sent Me. 17 If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God or whether I speak on My own authority [Jn 7:14–17).

Does teaching one's doctrine constitute a disciple teacher relationship?
You have a doctrine, I have a doctrine, should we be considered a disciple of the one's we learned our doctrine from?

 

[Runningman]

And Jesus said to them, “Just what I have been saying to you from the beginning. 26 I have many things to say and to judge concerning you, but He who sent Me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I heard from Him.”[Jn 8:25–26). NKJV
27 They did not understand that He spoke to them of the Father. 28 Then Jesus said to them, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing of Myself; but as My Father taught Me, I speak these things.
Jn 8:27–28).
Taught translates from the didasko which means teach, taught, instruct, etc. The question is, does this deem Jesus a Disciple of the Father just as He has disciples? One has to ask, 'what was taught?'
I did a search and found the following.
Jesus makes the same statement in another passage.

14 Now about the middle of the feast Jesus went up into the temple and taught. 15 And the Jews marveled, saying, “How does this Man know letters, having never studied?” 16 Jesus answered them and said, “My doctrine is not Mine, but His who sent Me. 17 If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God or whether I speak on My own authority [Jn 7:14–17).

Does teaching one's doctrine constitute a disciple teacher relationship?
You have a doctrine, I have a doctrine, should we be considered a disciple of the one's we learned our doctrine from?

Being a disciple has a different nuance to it than being a student or a scholar. A disciple typically follows a strict philosophy and/or way of life under the express authority of their teacher. I see that’s what Jesus did at God’s conmands, but Jesus also had to learn obedience.

 

[Jewjitzu]

And Jesus said to them, “Just what I have been saying to you from the beginning. 26 I have many things to say and to judge concerning you, but He who sent Me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I heard from Him.”[Jn 8:25–26). NKJV
27 They did not understand that He spoke to them of the Father. 28 Then Jesus said to them, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing of Myself; but as My Father taught Me, I speak these things.
Jn 8:27–28).
Taught translates from the didasko which means teach, taught, instruct, etc. The question is, does this deem Jesus a Disciple of the Father just as He has disciples? One has to ask, 'what was taught?'
I did a search and found the following.
Jesus makes the same statement in another passage.

14 Now about the middle of the feast Jesus went up into the temple and taught. 15 And the Jews marveled, saying, “How does this Man know letters, having never studied?” 16 Jesus answered them and said, “My doctrine is not Mine, but His who sent Me. 17 If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God or whether I speak on My own authority [Jn 7:14–17).

Does teaching one's doctrine constitute a disciple teacher relationship?
You have a doctrine, I have a doctrine, should we be considered a disciple of the one's we learned our doctrine from?

Only the Father is true, the true God. Interesting.

 

[Towerwatchman]

Only the Father is true, the true God. Interesting.

Notice the dishonesty. Does the verse state “only”?

 

[Jewjitzu]

Notice the dishonesty. Does the verse state “only”?

In other verses it does. Do you understand inference, deduction, and reasoning?

 

[Nathan P]

So you’re saying that the father created and Jesus was an agent or instrument , based on through him or through whom.

I am stating that because through means it was done through someone else.