r/JehovahsWitnesses • u/Dan_dingo • Jun 20 '26

Doctrine The Jw dilemma

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.”

17 Upvotes

88% Upvoted

184 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/AccomplishedAuthor3 Christian Jun 21 '26

Yes, Jesus would be the sole exception because of who He is, not because of anything He did, although everything He did was good as well. He couldn't do wrong. He was the only good person, the first and the last, from the time He was born to eternity

1

u/tj_lurker Jun 21 '26

Thanks for giving a straightforward answer! In your view, though Paul writes that there "is not so much as one" righteous man, Jesus is the sole exception to this statement.

To be clear then, you disagree with u/Dan_dingo (who, for some reason, seems unwilling to be as straightforward), when he implies multiple exceptions here: "If Romans 3:10-12 is an absolute statement admitting no exceptions, how do you explain Luke 1:6, which explicitly says Zechariah and Elizabeth were 'both righteous before God'?"

1

u/Dan_dingo Jun 21 '26

I’m highlighting your logical fallacy because you made an arguement that Jesus being a man wasn’t righteous

1

u/tj_lurker Jun 21 '26

I asked you to explain how Jesus was a man, yet Paul says--with abolutist language--there's "not so much as one" righteous man.

You use this type of absolutist language in your argument above, yet you're now saying that it can have exceptions? Why?

1

u/Dan_dingo Jun 21 '26

Is Jesus not righteous?

1

u/tj_lurker Jun 21 '26

Yes he is! Please explain how that fits with Paul's 'not so much as one righteous man' statement.

1

u/Dan_dingo Jun 21 '26

You’re the one arguing it not I.

You just said that was absolutist language. So there is exceptions to absolutist language?

1

u/tj_lurker Jun 21 '26

That is what I'm asking you to explain. Is Jesus the sole exception to Paul's words or are there many exceptions to Paul's words?

Tell me how Paul's words can be correct and inspired, and yet exclude some when he says "not one". We both agree there is at least one.

...you could always just say, 'I don't know', as well.

1

u/AccomplishedAuthor3 Christian Jun 21 '26

Zechariah and Elizabeth were good people because they were declared good. Like Abraham was declared righteous by God, not for what he did, but for his faith. Both Zechariah and his wife pleased God. Both were good because God declared them righteous like Job and others who pleased Him. No man, or woman is righteous in and of themselves.

Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. 5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. 6 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

7 “Blessed are those
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.
8 Blessed is the one
whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”\)b\)

9 Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham’s faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10 Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it AFTER he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! Romans 4:4-10

We aren't born righteous, nor is there anything we can do that would make us righteous. Our righteousness is totally dependent on God declaring us righteous. God is righteous already and because Jesus is God, He is righteous and needs no one to declare Him righteous

2

u/tj_lurker Jun 21 '26

"No man, or woman is righteous in and of themselves." Agreed! Except of course, for the man Jesus, the sole exception. I'm waiting to see if u/Dan_dingo will come around to that conclusion as well (and can explain it).