"Through" Another challenge

hobbs27

Senior Member
The direct greek translation

Revelation 1:8 ►
I am the Alpha and to the Omega, [the] beginning and[the] ending says Lord God,the [one]being, and who was,
and who is coming,the Almighty.

I guess it could be said that Jesus is saying that God said , Jesus is the Alpha and Omega--- either way God is saying there was no beginning and will be no end to Jesus. His existence is , was, and alays will be.

What was Jesus part in the creation? I dont know except for making man, for God said let us make man in our image. I think the us and our must have been the trinity, because I dont believe the angels had part in the creation.
 
Last edited:
Thread starter #42
The direct greek translation

Revelation 1:8 ►
I am the Alpha and to the Omega, [the] beginning and[the] ending says Lord God,the [one]being, and who was,
and who is coming,the Almighty.

I guess it could be said that Jesus is saying that God said , Jesus is the Alpha and Omega--- either way God is saying there was no beginning and will be no end to Jesus. His existence is , was, and alays will be.

What was Jesus part in the creation? I dont know except for making man, for God said let us make man in our image. I think the us and our must have been the trinity, because I dont believe the angels had part in the creation.
Man is made in God's image... but also in the image of the angels. Hollywood has painted a false image of angels having wings. But Paul said be careful when you entertain because you never know when it might be an angel. [the wings would give it away, if] And the open tomb, one account says an angel and another says a young man in white. Pslams or is it Job tells us the angels rejoiced as God created. The text is a bit vague as to who the us is. It could be "the seven spirits of God" from Rev. I'm not sure. For me, it does not default to Jesus. But I understand why trinitarians assume it.
 
I wonder how Oneness believers would answer the OP's question?If the Heavenly Father, Resurrected Son and Holy Spirit are different modes or aspects of one monadic God, then it would have to be God creating. He could do this through Jesus.

I have never understood why we don't have any Oneness believers on this forum and wished we did.
 
Is it possible for God to do something through someone before they ever existed? Could God heal someone through an apostle before that apostle did the healing? Keep in mind the concept of time is different to God than us.
 
Thread starter #45
Is it possible for God to do something through someone before they ever existed? Could God heal someone through an apostle before that apostle did the healing? Keep in mind the concept of time is different to God than us.
I think the confusion comes from the fact that we assume he is talking about the creation of the earth. I don't agree to this... but have no scripture to help my case. I think he is talking about the new creation. Putting all things old out of mind, speaking as if it never existed. "the old has gone, the new has come". So I think all these so called creation verses are pointing to the new creation. Everything came through Jesus's work on the cross. I think the original creation [of all] is meant to be thought of as they speak of the new creation through Jesus... but I don't think they mean the original creation. One comparison made is how Adam named the animals that God created. Jesus renamed those newly created. Saul to Paul and Cephas to Peter
 
Thread starter #46
Another forcing of scripture by our biased translators; Heb 1:2. My NIV says "through whom he made the universe". Now that is just plain corrupt. NASB says "worlds". Notice it should have been ages; Aion is the greek word


Strong's Concordance
aión: a space of time, an age
Original Word: αἰών, ῶνος, �
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: aión
Phonetic Spelling: (ahee-ohn')
Short Definition: an age, a cycle of time
Definition: an age, a cycle (of time), especially of the present age as contrasted with the future age, and of one of a series of ages stretching to infinity.
HELPS Word-studies
165 aiṓn (see also the cognate adjective, 166 /aiṓnios, "age-long") – properly, an age (era, "time-span"), characterized by a specific quality (type of existence).

Example: Christians today live in the newer age (165 /aiṓn) of the covenant – the time-period called the NT. It is characterized by Christ baptizing all believers in the Holy Spirit, i.e. engrafting all believers (OT, NT) into His mystical body (1 Cor 12:13) with all the marvelous privileges that go with that (Gal 3:23-25; 1 Pet 2:5,9).
 
Thread starter #47
When you look at these mis translations and realize that they were forcing Jesus to be the creator rather than the father, you have to wonder if tradition has it right. It's not a breach of faith to believe that the Father created the world rather than Jesus
 

hobbs27

Senior Member
When you look at these mis translations and realize that they were forcing Jesus to be the creator rather than the father, you have to wonder if tradition has it right. It's not a breach of faith to believe that the Father created the world rather than Jesus
I believe in the trinity. I dont have enough scripture to explain it. I now know there's a few translation errors/ biases in the bible. I used to not believe that.

I'm not real sure that I understand the difference in created by or through means--- Would it be the difference in a construction superintendent and a actual laborer?

I've been comparing scriptures with this YLT, its an 1800's translation but its new to me. Ive read it is the most literal translation of Gods word we have. Without getting into a translations debate {which is not allowed} do you have any opinions on it--you can pm me if you prefer, but look at how the creation is written in it. Does anything jump out at you like it did me?

Young's Literal Translation


The Beginning


(John 1:1-5)


1In the beginning of God’s preparing the heavens and the earth — 2the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness [is] on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters,

The First Day: Light

3and God saith, ‘Let light be;’ and light is. 4And God seeth the light that [it is] good, and God separateth between the light and the darkness, 5and God calleth to the light ‘Day,’ and to the darkness He hath called ‘Night;’ and there is an evening, and there is a morning — day one.
 
Thread starter #49
I believe in the trinity. I dont have enough scripture to explain it. I now know there's a few translation errors/ biases in the bible. I used to not believe that.

I'm not real sure that I understand the difference in created by or through means--- Would it be the difference in a construction superintendent and a actual laborer?

I've been comparing scriptures with this YLT, its an 1800's translation but its new to me. Ive read it is the most literal translation of Gods word we have. Without getting into a translations debate {which is not allowed} do you have any opinions on it--you can pm me if you prefer, but look at how the creation is written in it. Does anything jump out at you like it did me?

Young's Literal Translation


The Beginning


(John 1:1-5)


1In the beginning of God’s preparing the heavens and the earth — 2the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness [is] on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters,

The First Day: Light

3and God saith, ‘Let light be;’ and light is. 4And God seeth the light that [it is] good, and God separateth between the light and the darkness, 5and God calleth to the light ‘Day,’ and to the darkness He hath called ‘Night;’ and there is an evening, and there is a morning — day one.
I respect your belief in the Trinity. I realize that I have posted several things against the trinity, but my intentions are the hope that someone might agree that one could be trinitarian and not believe that Jesus created the world, but rather that the Father created the world. I do see the resemblance of John and Gen 1... but just not the same as you guys. I see it as John calling attention to the creation story and applying it to Jesus... as the light of the world, not as the creator
 
Last edited:
If Moses calls Israel "heavens" and "earth," why then would Genesis 1:1 be a description of the physical universe? Moses knew that "heavens and earth" is God's people, formed through God's special covenant creation.

Consider how Jeremiah speaks about "heavens and earth" in the same vein as Genesis creation:

I beheld the earth and indeed it was without form, and void; And the heavens, they had no light. (Jer. 4:23 NKJV)

What God created "in the beginning" perished at the "end." Did the physical universe pass away in AD 70? No. That fact provides a powerful demonstration that Genesis' "in the beginning" creation is not a plain-literal account of the original formation of the physical universe. Hebrews 1:10-11 tells us that Genesis is about the beginning of the covenant world God made with his people, beginning with Adam and Eve.

http://beyondcreationscience.com/index.php?pr=Introduction_to_Covenant_Creation
 
The destruction of creation? Yes! What Genesis 1-3 does, Revelation 21-22 undoes. AD 70 marked the final end of the old covenant age, the old world of types and shadows. The entire old creation has been recreated in Christ. However, the physical heavens and earth were not destroyed and recreated in AD 70. Indeed, the biblical "end" had no bearing on the physical operation of the sun, moon, stars, and planet Earth.
Neither did the biblical "beginning."

Preterists have made the transition to Covenant Eschatology. Now it is time to transition to Covenant Creation.

Could it be that consistent Full Preterism begins in Genesis 1:1?

http://beyondcreationscience.com/index.php?pr=Introduction_to_Covenant_Creation
 

hobbs27

Senior Member
The destruction of creation? Yes! What Genesis 1-3 does, Revelation 21-22 undoes. AD 70 marked the final end of the old covenant age, the old world of types and shadows. The entire old creation has been recreated in Christ. However, the physical heavens and earth were not destroyed and recreated in AD 70. Indeed, the biblical "end" had no bearing on the physical operation of the sun, moon, stars, and planet Earth.
Neither did the biblical "beginning."

Preterists have made the transition to Covenant Eschatology. Now it is time to transition to Covenant Creation.

Could it be that consistent Full Preterism begins in Genesis 1:1?

http://beyondcreationscience.com/index.php?pr=Introduction_to_Covenant_Creation
I think you're on to something.
 

Israel

Senior Member
The destruction of creation? Yes! What Genesis 1-3 does, Revelation 21-22 undoes. AD 70 marked the final end of the old covenant age, the old world of types and shadows. The entire old creation has been recreated in Christ. However, the physical heavens and earth were not destroyed and recreated in AD 70. Indeed, the biblical "end" had no bearing on the physical operation of the sun, moon, stars, and planet Earth.
Neither did the biblical "beginning."

Preterists have made the transition to Covenant Eschatology. Now it is time to transition to Covenant Creation.

Could it be that consistent Full Preterism begins in Genesis 1:1?

http://beyondcreationscience.com/index.php?pr=Introduction_to_Covenant_Creation
Anyone who has ever "made" anything understands what it means to invest one's self in something. Creation always entails the signature of the creator. It's always there.
The contention, the contest, indeed, all our trials of faith turn on this singular point, is God fully invested in man?
One voice argues "no!"... it says, "even if God got this started, he's off somewhere with something better to do than be attentive to you at every point, in every moment, for your good"
What does Jesus tell us, in so many ways...over and over again? "Your hairs are numbered..." "Your Father knows what you need before you even ask..." "I will never leave you nor forsake you..." "A sparrow..." "A lilly..."


"This is my body...this is my blood..."
Bread and wine, a place infected with "life" to keep supporting life...till true life may finally be seen...till the one, slain from the foundation of the world, can be seen in every provision.
"As often as you do this..." As often as you gather, not because you are blood related by natural birth, not because you are a member of a club, not because you have formed an organization, not because you have all agreed to "do" something...but because you have learned you cannot escape the truth (and no longer fear it) of being utterly and totally dependent on life...for life...because you have had my death for you as your life, you do this in remembrance of me...the One..."all in"...totally invested...from the beginning.

Everyone dies a little, even in the manufacture of a bird house.
To reach for the truth of something...is to die to what does not yet see it.
Hope brothers...hope.
For in a world of shame, a living hope, undoes it all.
 

hobbs27

Senior Member
I think you're on to something.
I spent a little time on this last night. The language and hermeneutic consistency does not support this. I believe it is indeed physical creation although the first verse in the ylt of Genesis makes it appear as earth was already.
 
I spent a little time on this last night. The language and hermeneutic consistency does not support this. I believe it is indeed physical creation although the first verse in the ylt of Genesis makes it appear as earth was already.
I figured you would test the spirits. I haven't looked in on it too closely. I just wanted to run it by you for another aspect of what the Heaven & Earth is and if it is related to "the end."
And to see if it's related to Jesus' creation of the "new" Heaven & Earth.
 
Thread starter #56
When you look at these mis translations and realize that they were forcing Jesus to be the creator rather than the father, you have to wonder if tradition has it right. It's not a breach of faith to believe that the Father created the world rather than Jesus
Lot of searching..... Was not as I recalled. After reading through, no real resistance to the Father being the creator
 
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.



:yawn:
I perceive that 1gr8bldr's underlying agenda in all this is to shore up his disbelief that Jesus is in the Godhead(His deity). He has already stated this disbelief directly to me in the other thread.
 
Last edited:
Thread starter #58

1gr8bldr

Senior Member
I perceive that 1gr8bldr's underlying agenda in all this is to shore up his disbelief that Jesus is in the Godhead(His deity). He has already stated this disbelief directly to me in the other thread.
No attempt at shoring up anything. That took place about 15 years ago. After I had read the NT over a thousand times, I knew much more about what was not in scriptures. So I went to CARM discussion forums looking for solid ground. The best of the trinity debaters on the trinity specific forum were of no help. It did not take long to realize I was more studied than they were..... And I eventually spent 4 years there watching them bend logic and reason in an effort to hold on. My name was Dr.Context.... chosen because I look at context rather than grab hold of one liners taken out of Context.
 
No attempt at shoring up anything. That took place about 15 years ago. After I had read the NT over a thousand times, I knew much more about what was not in scriptures. So I went to CARM discussion forums looking for solid ground. The best of the trinity debaters on the trinity specific forum were of no help. It did not take long to realize I was more studied than they were..... And I eventually spent 4 years there watching them bend logic and reason in an effort to hold on. My name was Dr.Context.... chosen because I look at context rather than grab hold of one liners taken out of Context.
Context aside, if you can't believe in the deity of Christ, there's nothing I or any other human can say to convince you otherwise. It will take resurrection power for that.
 
Thread starter #60

1gr8bldr

Senior Member
Context aside, if you can't believe in the deity of Christ, there's nothing I or any other human can say to convince you otherwise. It will take resurrection power for that.
My view is technically called a "low christology", but I say that's not a good description because my belief puts Jesus only second to God Almighty. Actually a high Christology
 
Top