"Through" Another challenge

[1gr8bldr]

Last week we celebrated my grandmothers 85 birthday. My uncle said to look around and ponder that all of us here attending came "through" her. Not one of us here were here on account of ourselves. I thought about the debate of through vs by in the scriptures. By implies creator, through implies agent. Here is the challenge, like Hobbs thread, show with the scriptures that Jesus created the universe. Naturally, since I posted this, you realize I have a stand on this. It will be seen that no scripture exists to support this tradition. Even if I were trinitarian, I would feel no need to force Jesus to be the creator. As Hobbs has done, I will point out the greek from which our translations have came from when the suspect verses come up. The bases is that "the old has gone, the new has come" and that nothing new has come that has not come through/on account of Jesus.

 

[hobbs27]

I have a question first before I can go further. I know you are well studied on this so Im going to approach this as so instead of just blurting out a few verses.

Do you agree that Jesus is the Word or even the Voice of God?

 

[gordon 2]

It would seem to me that the first chapter of John's Gospel would fit the bill. God's word is the creator and the word is now made flesh, it says.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made;...

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth...

Consider this: The agent is Mary.

Also consider this: Jeremiah 31:9

With weeping they shall come,
and with pleas for mercy I will lead them back,
I will make them walk by brooks of water,
in a straight path in which they shall not stumble,
for I am a father to Israel,
and Ephraim is my firstborn.

 

[1gr8bldr]

I have a question first before I can go further. I know you are well studied on this so Im going to approach this as so instead of just blurting out a few verses.

Do you agree that Jesus is the Word or even the Voice of God?

Jesus is not "the word" but rather the word fullfilled.

In John Jesus is the light, not the word. The text actually says "and God was the word", not the word was God. Since God is Spirit, he is what he does. He created "in the beginning", he spoke things into existence by his word. Similiar to the phrase "you are what you eat". Eat healthy and you will likely be healthy. God is what he does, and in the beginning, he spoke things into existence with his word. He is what he does.

Notice John says he is not the light. That would be strange if he just said the light was God. It would also be strange to call Jesus God and then call him a created light. God promised through his word a messiah. This is seen by the expectation of the saints for the messiah. When times reached fullfillment, the word/promise came to pass. vs 14, the word became flesh.

The word word has been overlooked in John as having meaning, applying it only as in a name while denying it's meaning.

I figured we would wind up here, John 1:1 yet I had hoped last cause I realize this is not an easy sell, being that traditional thinking is hard to erase. I do concede that I will likely not gain any ground on this verse. But all the others are a slam dunk. And if someone realizes that the others are baseless, just like the gehenna verses, then they might consider a second look at the ambigious one, the only one.

 

[1gr8bldr]

My NIV says all things came into being through him. Notice that created is not at all in any means represented by the word "here"
hn 1:3 ►
Text Analysis
Strong's Transliteration Greek English Morphology
3956 [e] panta πάντα All things Adj-NNP
1223 [e] di’ δι’ through Prep
846 [e] autou αὐτοῦ him PPro-GM3S
1096 [e] egeneto ἐγένετο, emerged, V-AIM-3S
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
5565 [e] chōris χωρὶς without Prep
846 [e] autou αὐτοῦ him PPro-GM3S
1096 [e] egeneto ἐγένετο emerged V-AIM-3S
3761 [e] oude οὐδὲ not even Adv
1520 [e] hen ἕν one [thing] Adj-NNS
3739 [e] ho ὃ that RelPro-NNS
1096 [e] gegonen γέγονεν. has emerged. V-RIA-3S
Greek Texts

 

[1gr8bldr]

1096:
1096 gínomai – properly, to emerge, become, transitioning from one point (realm, condition) to another. 1096 (gínomai) fundamentally means "become" (becoming, became) so it is not an exact equivalent to the ordinary equative verb "to be" (is, was, will be) as with 1510 /eimí (1511 /eínai, 2258 /Ä“n).

1096 (ginomai) means "to become, and signifies a change of condition, state or place" (Vine, Unger, White, NT, 109).

M. Vincent, "1096 (gínomai) means to come into being/manifestation implying motion, movement, or growth" (at 2 Pet 1:4). Thus it is used for God's actions as emerging from eternity and becoming (showing themselves) in time (physical space).

 

[1gr8bldr]

The point is that here we are talking about the new creation. Jesus portrayed as light, compared to the earth being dark in Gen one. The light sustaining all things. Nothing could exist without the light.

 

[hobbs27]

Here's youngs literal translation of 1john 1:

1 That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we did behold, and our hands did handle, concerning the Word of the Life --

2 and the Life was manifested, and we have seen, and do testify, and declare to you the Life, the age-during, which was with the Father, and was manifested to us --

3 that which we have seen and heard declare we to you, that ye also may have fellowship with us, and our fellowship [is] with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ;

4 and these things we write to you, that your joy may be full.

5 And this is the message that we have heard from Him, and announce to you, that God is light, and darkness in Him is not at all;

6 if we may say -- `we have fellowship with Him,' and in the darkness may walk -- we lie, and do not the truth;


Im going to start with it. My first thought was that if Jesus is the word of God then ofcourse he built the universe because God spoke it into existance, but then I would have to find the scripture.

I do see plainly where Jesus was involved in the making of man, but that is not the question so I will continue to search when time permits.

 

[1gr8bldr]

The point is that here we are talking about the new creation. Jesus portrayed as light, compared to the earth being dark in Gen one. The light sustaining all things. Nothing could exist without the light.

And John says that he is not the light. Strange if he were saying "I am not God"

 

[1gr8bldr]

Not getting much feedback, a sign that I have not made my point and you guys are just being nice by not responding. Maybe we should change the direction. Let's say for argument sake that the Trinity is without question. That John 1:1 is as traditionalist have stood for. So, Does the scriptures say that Jesus created anything... or does it say that all things came "through" him.

 

[StriperAddict]

Jesus Christ in Rev 1, says He is the "alpha and the mega', the beginning and the end.
He also said throughout John's gospel that He did no work... apart what the Father did thru Him;
He spoke no word, apart from what the Father spoke thru Him;
He said "He who has seen Me has seen the Father", therefore I can conclude that Jesus, coming in flesh, also existed as without the limits of time in His Person... the only One to claim that kind of Divinity, who walked on His own creation, never seperated from the Father's business, (save that when He became sin that we would be without sin).

I'm not sure 1gr8bldr, but I see a tendency toward unbelief penned by your op and subsequent posts. I'd sincerely watch the road you are trying to tread...
~~IMO

 

[1gr8bldr]

Jesus Christ in Rev 1, says He is the "alpha and the mega', the beginning and the end.
He also said throughout John's gospel that He did no work... apart what the Father did thru Him;
He spoke no word, apart from what the Father spoke thru Him;
He said "He who has seen Me has seen the Father", therefore I can conclude that Jesus, coming in flesh, also existed as without the limits of time in His Person... the only One to claim that kind of Divinity, who walked on His own creation, never seperated from the Father's business, (save that when He became sin that we would be without sin).

I'm not sure 1gr8bldr, but I see a tendency toward unbelief penned by your op and subsequent posts. I'd sincerely watch the road you are trying to tread...
~~IMO

But what would be the issue to believe that the Father created and not the son. Rather that we all came through Jesus like the example I gave about my grandmother. I believe in Jesus as the messiah, but not that he created the world. Most people will resist that the Father created. Yet, I am trying to call attention to the lack of biblical support that Jesus the son created

 

[StriperAddict]

But what would be the issue to believe that the Father created and not the son.

Well, it would be like saying Jesus the Christ is not God...

Consider Genisis, "let us..." (plural) "make man (an act of creation) in Our image". There's no strech at all (IMO) to consider that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were responsible for our fleshly creation AND the world's physical creation.
Christ said "I and the Father" are One. He could not make such a claim outside of Himself being God in the flesh, and as He existed with God as Alpha/Omega, He certainly was part of Creation.

I hadn't been around for other parts of your dialouge, but I assume you also dismiss (somehow) those verses in Colossians 1:16-18 - speaking of Christ's involvement in creation... ??

Most people will resist that the Father created.

Doubt that, esp if you consider the Genisis plurality verse, "let Us make man..."

 

[1gr8bldr]

Speaking of Col 1 ;16 notice the trainwreck of translating. The writer uses the same word in the same breath... yet they translate it differently. ev is in, not by. Consider the proper usuage in Eph "For we are God's workmanship, created in [ev] Christ Jesus to do good works. There is no way that he wrote the same greek word in the same sentence and meant it to be used different

Colossians 1:16 â–º
Text Analysis
Strong's Transliteration Greek English Morphology
3754 [e] hoti ὅτι because Conj
1722 [e] en �ν by Prep
846 [e] aut� α�τῷ him PPro-DM3S
2936 [e] ektisthē �κτίσθη were created V-AIP-3S
3588 [e] ta Ï„á½° - Art-NNP
3956 [e] panta πάντα all things, Adj-NNP
1722 [e] en �ν in Prep
3588 [e] tois τοῖς the Art-DMP
3772 [e] ouranois ο��ανοῖς heavens, N-DMP
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
1909 [e] epi �πὶ upon Prep
3588 [e] tēs τῆς the Art-GFS
1093 [e] gēs γῆς, earth; N-GFS
3588 [e] ta Ï„á½° the Art-NNP
3707 [e] horata ��ατὰ visible, Adj-NNP
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
3588 [e] ta Ï„á½° the Art-NNP
517 [e] aorata ἀό�ατα, invisible; Adj-NNP
1535 [e] eite εἴτε whether Conj
2362 [e] thronoi θ�όνοι thrones, N-NMP
1535 [e] eite εἴτε or Conj
2963 [e] kyriotētes κυ�ιότητες lordships, N-NFP
1535 [e] eite εἴτε or Conj
746 [e] archai ἀ�χαὶ rulers, N-NFP
1535 [e] eite εἴτε or Conj
1849 [e] exousiai á¼�ξουσίαι· authorities: N-NFP
3588 [e] ta Ï„á½° - Art-NNP
3956 [e] panta πάντα all things Adj-NNP
1223 [e] di’ δι’ by Prep
846 [e] autou α�τοῦ him PPro-GM3S
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
1519 [e] eis εἰς for Prep
846 [e] auton α�τὸν him PPro-AM3S
2936 [e] ektistai ἔκτισται· have been created. V-RIM/P-3S
Greek Texts

 

[1gr8bldr]

And notice the other incorrect use of by;

archai ἀ�χαὶ rulers, N-NFP
1535 [e] eite εἴτε or Conj
1849 [e] exousiai á¼�ξουσίαι· authorities: N-NFP
3588 [e] ta Ï„á½° - Art-NNP
3956 [e] panta πάντα all things Adj-NNP
1223 [e] di’ δι’ by Prep
846 [e] autou α�τοῦ him PPro-GM3S
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
1519 [e] eis εἰς for Prep
846 [e] auton α�τὸν him PPro-AM3S
2936 [e] ektistai ἔκτισται· have been created. V-RIM/P-3S
Greek Texts


Here is Si defined;
1223. dia â–º
Strong's Concordance
dia: through, on account of, because of
Original Word: διά
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: dia
Phonetic Spelling: (dee-ah')
Short Definition: through, on account of
Definition: (a) gen: through, throughout, by the instrumentality of, (b) acc: through, on account of, by reason of, for the sake of, because of.
HELPS Word-studies
1223 diá (a preposition) – properly, across (to the other side), back-and-forth to go all the way through, "successfully across" ("thoroughly"). 1223 (diá) is also commonly used as a prefix and lend the same idea ("thoroughly," literally, "successfully" across to the other side).

[1223 (diá) is a root of the English term diameter ("across to the other side, through"). Before a vowel, dia is simply written diÌ“.]


NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
a prim. preposition
Definition
through, on account of, because of
NASB Translation
account (4), after (2), afterward (1), always* (2), because (111), between* (1), briefly* (1), charge* (1), constantly (1), continually* (6), during (1), forever* (1), gives (1), means (3), over (1), presence (1), reason (40), sake (41), sakes (5), since (1), so then* (1), so* (1), therefore* (16), this reason* (1), this* (1), though (1), through (225), through the agency (1), through* (1), view (2), way (3), what (1), why (3), why* (27]


Point is, this in no way implies creator but rather agent [of the new creation] Notice highlihted in red where Si is translated correctly as through 225 times....

 

[1gr8bldr]

It is easily seen that the translators forced Jesus to be the creator in these Col verses. Corrupt is all you can say. Look through the bible and see the use of ev and si and it will be used correctly. Except pertaining to Jesus as creator. All the other verses that people use to point to Jesus as the creator is the same way. With the exception of John chp 1 .... and it is ambigious as to it's meaning

 

[1gr8bldr]

What a trainwreck, Col 1:16 ev incorrectly translated as "by" which should have been "in" and si incorrectly translated as "by" when it should have been "through".

 

[1gr8bldr]

Here is another example of misuse. Here it does not change the context... but you can see the writers one word being used differently.
Colossians 1:20 ►
Text Analysis
Strong's Transliteration Greek English Morphology
2532 [e] kai καὶ and Conj
1223 [e] di’ δι’ by Prep
846 [e] autou αὐτοῦ him PPro-GM3S
604 [e] apokatallaxai ἀποκαταλλάξαι to reconcile V-ANA
3588 [e] ta τὰ - Art-ANP
3956 [e] panta πάντα all things Adj-ANP
1519 [e] eis εἰς to Prep
846 [e] auton αὐτόν, himself, PPro-AM3S
1517 [e] eirēnopoiēsas εἰρηνοποιήσας having made peace V-APA-NMS
1223 [e] dia διὰ by Prep
3588 [e] tou τοῦ the Art-GNS
129 [e] haimatos αἵματος blood N-GNS
3588 [e] tou τοῦ of the Art-GMS
4716 [e] staurou σταυροῦ cross N-GMS
846 [e] autou αὐτοῦ, of him -- PPro-GM3S
1223 [e] di’ δι’ through Prep
846 [e] autou αὐτοῦ him -- PPro-GM3S
1535 [e] eite εἴτε whether Conj
3588 [e] ta τὰ the things Art-ANP
1909 [e] epi ἐπὶ on Prep
3588 [e] tēs τῆς the Art-GFS
1093 [e] gēs γῆς earth, N-GFS
1535 [e] eite εἴτε or Conj
3588 [e] ta τὰ the things Art-ANP
1722 [e] en ἐν in Prep
3588 [e] tois τοῖς the Art-DMP
3772 [e] ouranois οὐρανοῖς. heavens. N-DMP
Greek Texts
Nestle GNT 1904

 

[hobbs27]

What a trainwreck, Col 1:16 ev incorrectly translated as "by" which should have been "in" and si incorrectly translated as "by" when it should have been "through".

Omnis Traductor Traditor!

 

[StriperAddict]

If my salvation was contingent on being a Greek scholar, I'd be as lost as a goat in a hailstorm.

I maintain my initial premise (and warning) that God in the flesh, Christ the Lord (not small L) were part of the creation of man ("let us make man in our image") and the earth.

I'll send this back and be done...
What would be the issue for the Father AND Son (and Holy Spirit for that matter) to be equally involved in creation?
Again, your premise against Christ as Creater has an undercurrent of unbelief... just saying.