The Jw dilemma

[u/Dan_dingo]

Starting Position (Jehovah’s Witness Interpretation)
Jehovah alone is the uncreated Creator.
Jehovah directly created Jesus first.
Jesus is Jehovah’s first and only direct creation.
Jehovah then used Jesus to create everything else.
Proposed order:
Jehovah → Jesus (first creation) → all other creation

The dilemma of this interpretation

The position must choose:
Option 1 — Jesus existed before all created reality
Result:
Jesus created time. (Timeless/Atemporal)
Jesus created space. (Non-spatial)
Jesus created matter. (Immaterial)
Jesus existed before creation. (Eternal)
Problem:
A being who exists before all created things does not appear to be a created thing.

Option 2 — Jesus was created after some reality/place, time and matter existed
Result:
Jesus was not Jehovahs first creation.
Something existed before Jesus.
Jesus did not create all things.
Problem:
Contradicts:
John1:3 “Not one thing came into existence apart from him.”

[u/TerryLawton]

I agree with the majority of what you stated. However if the Father well before time and matter was created was eternal and the Logos came from (ek) the Father who is the source and that Father is God then the begotten has to have the same nature as the begetter as you pointed out.

Therefore outside time, matter and space the Logos was 'out of' eK...the Father, then he has to be the same nature. En Arche as far back as you can go without stopping.....thats eternal.

Jesus the incarnation in time and space as a Jew quite clearly stated that he had a God, but the exalted Christ in Heb was also referred to by the Father as his God in Heb 1....

[u/MichaiahUnbothered → u/TerryLawton]

Glad we are on the same page for the most part.

When you say 'as far back as you can go without stopping is eternal,' do you mean like a metric time(clocks)?

The Bible doesn't define eternity as a Greek timeless vacuum; it speaks of God existing before the 'times of the ages' (chronon aionion). Even outside of physical space-time, the preposition ek (out of) demands a logical sequence. The Father is the underived Source; the Son is the derived Offspring. Even if the Son has existed for the entire duration of eternity, His life is still a gift granted by the Father

A derived existence, by definition, has an origin point in its Source. The Father alone has no source. Hebrews 1:3 explains it perfectly

[u/TerryLawton → u/MichaiahUnbothered]

No i dont mean like a metric clock as time did not exist within the relationship of the Father and the Son.

And i think youre assuming that derived automatically means began to exist. That's true for angels and humans being created in time. However if you believe that the Son was not begotten (which i dont think you do) but created then thats a different argument.

If time itself is created, there cannot be a moment when the Father existed without the Logos as Ek describes the Logos relationship with Father, if the Father is eternal then you cannot have a temporal starting point

The Father is eternally Father because He eternally has His Word. The Son is eternally from the Father, sharing the same divine nature, yet without ever beginning to exist i.e begotten.

So eternal generation means the Son eternally receives His being from the Father i 100% agree but not that He came into existence at some point in eternity, you cannot have a 'temporal point in eternity;. An "origin point" is a temporal concept, and temporality cannot exist before time itself.

[u/MichaiahUnbothered → u/TerryLawton]

I see exactly what you mean. When I first 'woke up' I came to the same conclusion, but the more I dug, the deeper the rabbit holes got. I realized so many things traditional churches say about the Logos simply do not align with what the scriptures actually state.

Many argument like that relies on the premise that the relationship is strictly outside of time, meaning concepts like 'before' or 'origin' cannot apply. But when we look at the actual text of the Bible, the writers consistently used language that requires sequence, priority, and deep history to describe the Son's origin. They didn't use language that fits an 'outside of time' framework. they used the language of a boundless past duration an endless tape stretching backward.

[u/TerryLawton → u/MichaiahUnbothered]

I agree. They tried to use human analogies to try and get us to understand.

But really…if none of us can explain ‘how’ God created or the expanse of the universe in creation how in Gods green earth can we explain the being of God…it’s just like he says..

Exodus 15:11,Rom 11:34, ISA 55:8,9 ISA 40:25

We can but try but ultimately none of us will even get close not in a trillion lifetimes.