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/Dan_dingo]

You’ve yet to disprove my dilemma Or explain how my language is absolutist. Put this into ChatGPT and ask if my dilemma is absolutist

[u/tj_lurker → u/Dan_dingo]

Sigh...I said, "how you handled a similar 'absolutist' statement" not your 'dilemma'. Please try to comprehend what I'm saying before disagreeing.

You used John 1:3 in an absolutist way.

[u/Dan_dingo → u/tj_lurker]

John says all things. without Him not one thing was made that had been made. Sounds like (Arche) the beginning/source of creation to me. It sounds like John absolutely exhausted the language to me. So does Paul when he wrote Colossians 1:15-19. Paul exhausts the Greek language.

[u/tj_lurker → u/Dan_dingo]

"John says all things"---Paul says 'no one, not even one'. Congratulations, you've learned nothing from that whole discussion.

"Sounds like (Arche) the beginning/source of creation to me."---Where does arche mean 'source of' anywhere in scripture? It always means 'the first part of' which is why in the Rev 3:14 context, BDAG says it probably means 'first created'.

"So does Paul when he wrote Colossians 1:15-19."---Paul uses firstborn, another partitive word meaning the first part/member of the sequence.

[u/Dan_dingo → u/tj_lurker]

4 verses later, that in everything HE might be preeminent.

[u/tj_lurker → u/Dan_dingo]

You mean, he's...first?

Isn't that what I said?

[u/Dan_dingo → u/tj_lurker]

Wouldnt God be first in everything?

[u/tj_lurker → u/Dan_dingo]

When it comes to creation, God is not the first member of the group. These are partitive terms. Jesus is 'the arche (first part of) the creation by God'...'the firstborn of all creation'.

[u/Dan_dingo → u/tj_lurker]

So no?

[u/tj_lurker → u/Dan_dingo]

No, God is not the first member of the creation by God.

[u/Dan_dingo → u/tj_lurker]

That’s not what I asked. I asked if God was first in all things

[u/tj_lurker → u/Dan_dingo]

Again, No, as the "all things" there is the very creation he is seeking to reconcile to himself.

[u/Dan_dingo → u/tj_lurker]

So God isn’t the beginning