Jesus: Creator and Savior
In Col 1:15-20, Paul records focusing on Jesus Christ. It is considered one of the most outstanding christological hymns in the NT:
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross.
God created everything including humanity. It took only a few days to be completed. The fall changed not only humanity's relationship with God and introduced death to creation, but also altered the entire ecosystem.
The OT points to Christ as the creator in a hidden way: e.g. the plural in Gen. 1:26 and wisdom in Prov. 8.
In the NT makes clear that Jesus Christ, fully human and fully divine, is the creator of all things—John 1:3; Col 1:15-16; Heb. 1: 2,10. These texts exclude Jesus from the realm of created beings:
- Jesus brings about salvation.
- Created humankind and has a personal interest in each human being.
- The cosmic perspective is spelled out quite clearly in the NT.
- Jesus' own statements about creation:
-- Sabbath was made for humanity (Mark 2:27-28).
-- He confirmed the creation account: "from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother, and the two shall become one flesh" (Mark 10:6-8).
-- Jesus talked about "the creation that God created" (Mark 13:19).
-- He also mentioned Abel, the son of Adam of Eve and understood him to be an actual person that lived on earth (Matt 23:35).
The NT authors connected creation, fall, and salvation. One is dependent on the other. CM
Comments
-
One should notice that in Jesus' own statements about creation, Jesus NOT EVEN ONCE said anything even close to an idea that he himself was the one who created anything.
Need more Biblical evidence that Jesus is NOT the Creator ??? is plain straight forward reading and understanding of what Jesus himself stated sufficient to settle the matter?
-
Can you not interact with the passages given that counter your claim? So just because the recorded words of Jesus do not explicitly say that he created it must not be so? That's pretty pathetic exegesis.
-
Wolfgang,
How did Christianity got it so wrong? From you and most likely, Bill:
- Jesus is not God.
- No Virgin Birth of Jesus.
- Jesus is not the Creator.
- Holy Spirit is not God.
- Joseph is Jesus' father.
- No miracles
- Some portions of Scripture makes no sense in light of human reasoning.
- The disciples believed that Jesus was not God.
- All of the Bible is not inspired.
- Debate is the highest form of teasing out biblical truths.
Please add to the list if I missed something. The two of you seem to hold views contrary to main-stream Christianity. Is it that she needs to correct herself or the two of you need to get on board. Is Christianity a cult? In addition, please tell us, factually, how Christianity got so much wrong, for so long? CM
PS. If any misstatement of your positions forgive me, in advance. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
How did Christianity got it so wrong? From you and most likely, Bill:
Jesus is not God.
No Virgin Birth of Jesus.
Jesus is not the Creator.
Holy Spirit is not God.
Joseph is Jesus' father.
No miracles
Some portions of Scripture makes no sense in light of human reasoning.
The disciples believed that Jesus was not God.
All of the Bible is not inspired.
Debate is the highest form of teasing out biblical truths.
Please add to the list if I missed something. The two of you seem to hold views contrary to main-stream Christianity. Is it that she needs to correct herself or the two of you need to get on board. Is Christianity a cult? In addition, please tell us, factually, how Christianity got so much wrong, for so long? CM
In another thread, about three hours before you posted this inquiry and quasi-critique of Wolfgang's (and my) views on a wide variety of issues, you asked, "Do we have to debate everything?" Given the breadth of your presentation and seeming criticism of our views here, I think you're more willing to "debate everything" than your post in that other thread suggests. Am I wrong?
-
@reformed wroet:
Can you not interact with the passages given that counter your claim?
?? I did interact with the passages given which quoted Jesus' words and what he said about creation and who created ... and pointed out that Jesus in his words does NOT counter my claim but rather that my claim is supported by the very words of Jesus himself. Did you not read what I wrote?
So just because the recorded words of Jesus do not explicitly say that he created it must not be so? That's pretty pathetic exegesis.
Well, should one go by imagined words of Jesus which are no recorded (in other words, put one's own ideas into Jesus' mouth) instead?? One could fantasize anything and claim that Jesus said it but unfortunately it wasn't recorded ? I would consider such an approach to be pathetic.
-
well, ask Christianity how and why they got so many things so wrong? Have a good look at church history and the developments of dogmas and you might see rather clearly what went wrong, what doctrines were not biblical but rather "church politics", etc.
Also, you got a few points wrong in your list of what you ascribe to me in your list of doctrines/ideas ... When you read what I write more carefully, you can easily see to which points I refer.
-
Bill,
Thanks for your response. My first thought were in posting the list of your views and Wolfgang's. It's not my intent to "carry your water" of the various subject matters. You know my views on debates. My reflective (mirror) list were an invitation to inquiry of any historical support for your various views. Given your convictions on the various subjects; where, when and by whom do you perceive the wheels coming off Christianity? To ask such, is an invitation to debate? Again, every conversation is a debate?
Some may view your position of the list as anti-christian or "anti-christ". I speak of these terms not so much as "against" as many people's first thought, when they see or hear these words. I speak of your views as "along side" or "in place of" what is generally known, taught, and believed from the Bible. With this understanding, can you, rightly or justifiably, call yourself a Christian? If so, on what basis? Is there a collective name for those who holds your (Wolfgang's) views? Better yet, is the two of you are claiming to be today's "real" Christians? You and Wolfgang are the beginning of a new movement? Or, are your crystallized views expressed the heretical teachings of the past? I remain.
PS. I haven't forgotten about the Titus passage.
-
Some may view your position of the list as anti-christian or "anti-christ". I speak of these terms not so much as "against" as many people's first thought, when they see or hear these words. I speak of your views as "along side" or "in place of" what is generally known, taught, and believed from the Bible.
the more important question to ask is whether what is taught and believed generally in much / most of what calls itself Christianity is actually from the Bible or rather from certain later developed dogmas ,,,
With this understanding, can you, rightly or justifiably, call yourself a Christian?
Since I base my understanding on the Bible rather than church dogmas, I most certainly will consider myself a Christian.
If so, on what basis?
On the basis of Biblical Scripture ... rather than on the basis of membership in some group, church denomination, etc.
Is there a collective name for those who holds your (Wolfgang's) views?
Most likely not ...I am not aware of any
Better yet, is the two of you are claiming to be today's "real" Christians?
Have either of us ever made such claim? Is being a "real" Christian dependent on believing what generally is believed?
You and Wolfgang are the beginning of a new movement?
I don't think so. Actually, I am aware of Christians in centuries past who - for example - did not believe in the Trinity dogma (many of them lost their lives at the hands of those who claimed to be real Christians )
Or, are your crystallized views expressed the heretical teachings of the past?
False religion institutions and their followers have usually been the ones who then call and label everybody not agreeing with them "heretic".
-
@reformed said:
My first thought were in posting the list of your views and Wolfgang's. It's not my intent to "carry your water" of the various subject matters. You know my views on debates. My reflective (mirror) list were an invitation to inquiry of any historical support for your various views. Given your convictions on the various subjects; where, when and by whom do you perceive the wheels coming off Christianity? To ask such, is an invitation to debate? Again, every conversation is a debate?
Some may view your position of the list as anti-christian or "anti-christ". I speak of these terms not so much as "against" as many people's first thought, when they see or hear these words. I speak of your views as "along side" or "in place of" what is generally known, taught, and believed from the Bible. With this understanding, can you, rightly or justifiably, call yourself a Christian? If so, on what basis? Is there a collective name for those who holds your (Wolfgang's) views? Better yet, is the two of you are claiming to be today's "real" Christians? You and Wolfgang are the beginning of a new movement? Or, are your crystallized views expressed the heretical teachings of the past? I remain.
Some observations:
- If by "carry (my) water" you mean presenting or advocating for my views, then I'm grateful you have no intent to do so.
- I know much more about your views on debates than I understand about your views on debates. Surely you knew that your decision to post an unsolicited list of single sentence- and sentence fragment summaries of Wolfgang's and my views on a wide array of issues, and then to that list attach the possibility that we parrot "heretical teachings of the past," and might need to "get on board" with "mainstream Christianity" - or, alternatively, might believe Christianity is a "cult" - could prompt further exchanges between us, whether those exchanges were called "debates," "discussions," or something else. My point is, in recent posts you've seemed to lament that debates result from exchanges of views between CD members. One way to reduce the incidence of such debates is not to ask other posters to defend their views that you summarize and characterize in such fashions.
- That said, I contend that I have explained/defended my views extensively in these forums. I am, for example, quite satisfied with the evidence I've adduced in support of my Christological views. I've offered literally dozens of texts, presented my exegesis of them, and addressed every text raised by other posters. I have similarly addressed nearly every Christological question posed to me (save the occasional one I overlooked in the press of time or busy-ness) and have done it all both directly and extensively.
- Do I think the "wheels are coming off" Christianity? No. I think the institutional Church is in trouble in this age of burgeoning secularization, but that's not because "mainline Christianity" disagrees with my views on whether Jesus is God, or any other issue.
- Your assertion that "some may view (my) position as anti-(Christian) or 'anti-(C)hrist,'" calls to my mind the moment in Matthew 16 when, after hearing Peter tell him who "some" say he is, Jesus asks Peter and his followers who THEY say he is. How "some" may view my theological positions is of no more consequence to me than would my asserting how "some" might view your decision to question whether I can "rightly or justifiably call (myself) a Christian" be to you.
- Am I among today's "real" Christians? I believe so. I believe you are too. I will phrase my conviction in the language of an adage well known in my Stone-Campbell piece of the Body of Christ: I'm a "real" Christian only, but not the only "real" Christian.
- Am I part of some some "new movement"? No.
Bottom Line: I am a follower of Jesus, just as you are, CM. You and I agree on some things and disagree on others. Some of our disagreements are on issues each of us believes are important. Such disagreements arise every day within the Body of Christ, and have done so for 2,000 years. We'll both survive, as will, I hope, these forums.
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
