Jehovah's Witnesses: if Jesus was created by Jehovah, then why does John 1:3 (NWT) say, "All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existance"?
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and your passionate defense of what you believe the Bible teaches. You’ve raised several important theological questions, and I’ll do my best to respond from a historic Christian perspective (often called Trinitarian Christianity), while respecting your viewpoint as a Jehovah’s Witness.
Before I begin, I want to clarify: The goal here is not to argue, but to explain why millions of Christians (including myself) read the same Bible and come to a different conclusion than you do. I believe we can disagree respectfully.
---
## 1. On John 1:3 and the meaning of “through”
You wrote:
> *“All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence”* — and you argued that “through” means Jesus was a channel or instrument, not the Creator himself.
Christians agree that the Father is the ultimate source of all things. But John 1:3 says *“not even one thing”* came into existence apart from Jesus. If Jesus himself were a created being, then he would be part of “all things” — meaning he would have to create himself, which is impossible. That’s why historic Christianity concludes that Jesus is uncreated and eternal, not a creature.
The phrase “through him” (Greek: *di’ autou*) shows distinction of persons (Father and Son) but not inferiority of being. For example, Hebrews 1:2 says God made the universe *“through”* the Son — yet calls the Son “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (Hebrews 1:3).
---
## 2. On “firstborn” (prototokos) and “only begotten” (monogenēs)
You mentioned *prototokos* (firstborn) and *monogenēs* (only begotten). In Scripture, these terms do not always mean “first created.”
- **Colossians 1:15** calls Jesus “the firstborn of all creation.” But in biblical language, “firstborn” often refers to preeminence or inheritance rights, not chronology. For example, David is called “firstborn” in Psalm 89:27 even though he was the youngest son.
- **Monogenēs** (John 1:18, 3:16) means “unique” or “one of a kind,” not “created.” Isaac was called Abraham’s *monogenēs* (Hebrews 11:17) even though Abraham had other sons — because Isaac was the unique son of promise.
Christians see these terms as describing Jesus’ unique, eternal relationship with the Father, not a point of origin.
---
## 3. On Jesus having a God (John 20:17)
You quoted Jesus saying, “I am going to my God and your God.” Christians agree — Jesus, as a true human being, had a relationship of worship and dependence on the Father. But that does not mean Jesus is not also divine.
In Christian theology, Jesus has two natures: fully God and fully man. As man, he prayed to the Father, worshiped him, and called him “my God.” As God, he said, “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58) — echoing God’s name in Exodus 3:14.
---
## 4. On the charge that the Church is pagan and evil
You wrote strongly against “Christendom,” Roman emperors, and the Church’s history. I won’t defend every evil act done in the name of Christ. Christians have done terrible things, and we should repent of that. But the question is doctrine, not behavior.
The doctrine of the Trinity was not invented by pagan emperors. It was the church’s response to what Scripture actually teaches: that the Father is God, Jesus is God, and the Holy Spirit is God — yet there is one God. This was formalized at councils like Nicaea (AD 325) because some (like Arius, whom Jehovah’s Witnesses follow in some ways) taught that Jesus was a created being. The church fathers saw that as contradicting the Bible.
---
## 5. On reading the Bible directly
You said: *“Why do you listen to some ignorant human using pagan doctrines, instead of listening to Christ DIRECTLY from the Bible?”*
I agree that we must test everything by Scripture. But here’s a practical question: Who decides which Bible translation is correct? You use the New World Translation (NWT). I use the ESV, NASB, or CSB. We both claim to read the Bible directly. So we need to compare the Greek manuscripts and see what they actually say.
For example, John 1:1 in the NWT reads: *“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.”*
Most other translations say: *“and the Word was God.”*
The Greek text (without a definite article before *theos*) does not mean “a god” — that would require a different grammatical construction. Nearly all Greek scholars, including non-Christians, agree that the intended meaning is “the Word was God” in terms of nature/essence.
---
## 6. On Jesus being Michael the archangel
You said Jesus’ name at that time was Michael. The Bible never explicitly says that. Michael is called *“the archangel”* (Jude 9) and a *“chief prince”* (Daniel 10:13). Jesus is never called an angel. Hebrews 1:5 explicitly says: *“To which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son, today I have begotten you’?”* The answer is: none. Jesus is superior to angels (Hebrews 1:4).
If Jesus were Michael, then who was speaking from heaven at Jesus’ baptism? “This is my beloved Son” — not “this is my archangel.”
---
## 7. On Adam, Jesus, and “son of God”
You are right: Adam is called “son of God” (Luke 3:38), and Jesus is called “Son of God.” But Christians believe Jesus is the Son of God in a unique, eternal sense — not just as a perfect human. John 5:18 says the Jewish leaders wanted to kill Jesus because “he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.”
That’s the key: Jesus’ own words and actions led people to believe he was claiming equality with God. And he never corrected them.
---
## A final, gentle thought
You said you are a scientist. So am I (in background). Science studies the physical universe. But God, if he exists, is not bound by the physical. The question of whether Jesus is God is not a scientific question — it’s a historical and biblical one.
The earliest Christians, including those who were martyred, worshiped Jesus as Lord and God (Thomas said, “My Lord and my God!” — John 20:28). They were not pagans. They were Jews who knew the Shema: “The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” And yet they worshiped Jesus without abandoning monotheism — because they believed Jesus shared the one being of God.
I respect your sincerity and your study. I simply believe you’ve misunderstood what the Bible actually says about Jesus. If you ever want to discuss a specific verse in the original Greek or Hebrew, I’m happy to do so — respectfully and carefully.
Would you be willing to look at John 20:28 (Thomas worshiping Jesus) and ask: Why didn’t Jesus correct Thomas if Thomas was committing idolatry by calling him “God”?
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and your passionate defense of what you believe the Bible teaches. You’ve raised several important theological questions, and I’ll do my best to respond from a historic Christian perspective (often called Trinitarian Christianity), while respecting your viewpoint as a Jehovah’s Witness.
Before I begin, I want to clarify: The goal here is not to argue, but to explain why millions of Christians (including myself) read the same Bible and come to a different conclusion than you do. I believe we can disagree respectfully.
---
## 1. On John 1:3 and the meaning of “through”
You wrote:
> *“All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence”* — and you argued that “through” means Jesus was a channel or instrument, not the Creator himself.
Christians agree that the Father is the ultimate source of all things. But John 1:3 says *“not even one thing”* came into existence apart from Jesus. If Jesus himself were a created being, then he would be part of “all things” — meaning he would have to create himself, which is impossible. That’s why historic Christianity concludes that Jesus is uncreated and eternal, not a creature.
The phrase “through him” (Greek: *di’ autou*) shows distinction of persons (Father and Son) but not inferiority of being. For example, Hebrews 1:2 says God made the universe *“through”* the Son — yet calls the Son “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (Hebrews 1:3).
---
## 2. On “firstborn” (prototokos) and “only begotten” (monogenēs)
You mentioned *prototokos* (firstborn) and *monogenēs* (only begotten). In Scripture, these terms do not always mean “first created.”
- **Colossians 1:15** calls Jesus “the firstborn of all creation.” But in biblical language, “firstborn” often refers to preeminence or inheritance rights, not chronology. For example, David is called “firstborn” in Psalm 89:27 even though he was the youngest son.
- **Monogenēs** (John 1:18, 3:16) means “unique” or “one of a kind,” not “created.” Isaac was called Abraham’s *monogenēs* (Hebrews 11:17) even though Abraham had other sons — because Isaac was the unique son of promise.
Christians see these terms as describing Jesus’ unique, eternal relationship with the Father, not a point of origin.
---
## 3. On Jesus having a God (John 20:17)
You quoted Jesus saying, “I am going to my God and your God.” Christians agree — Jesus, as a true human being, had a relationship of worship and dependence on the Father. But that does not mean Jesus is not also divine.
In Christian theology, Jesus has two natures: fully God and fully man. As man, he prayed to the Father, worshiped him, and called him “my God.” As God, he said, “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58) — echoing God’s name in Exodus 3:14.
---
## 4. On the charge that the Church is pagan and evil
You wrote strongly against “Christendom,” Roman emperors, and the Church’s history. I won’t defend every evil act done in the name of Christ. Christians have done terrible things, and we should repent of that. But the question is doctrine, not behavior.
The doctrine of the Trinity was not invented by pagan emperors. It was the church’s response to what Scripture actually teaches: that the Father is God, Jesus is God, and the Holy Spirit is God — yet there is one God. This was formalized at councils like Nicaea (AD 325) because some (like Arius, whom Jehovah’s Witnesses follow in some ways) taught that Jesus was a created being. The church fathers saw that as contradicting the Bible.
---
## 5. On reading the Bible directly
You said: *“Why do you listen to some ignorant human using pagan doctrines, instead of listening to Christ DIRECTLY from the Bible?”*
I agree that we must test everything by Scripture. But here’s a practical question: Who decides which Bible translation is correct? You use the New World Translation (NWT). I use the ESV, NASB, or CSB. We both claim to read the Bible directly. So we need to compare the Greek manuscripts and see what they actually say.
For example, John 1:1 in the NWT reads: *“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.”*
Most other translations say: *“and the Word was God.”*
The Greek text (without a definite article before *theos*) does not mean “a god” — that would require a different grammatical construction. Nearly all Greek scholars, including non-Christians, agree that the intended meaning is “the Word was God” in terms of nature/essence.
---
## 6. On Jesus being Michael the archangel
You said Jesus’ name at that time was Michael. The Bible never explicitly says that. Michael is called *“the archangel”* (Jude 9) and a *“chief prince”* (Daniel 10:13). Jesus is never called an angel. Hebrews 1:5 explicitly says: *“To which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son, today I have begotten you’?”* The answer is: none. Jesus is superior to angels (Hebrews 1:4).
If Jesus were Michael, then who was speaking from heaven at Jesus’ baptism? “This is my beloved Son” — not “this is my archangel.”
---
## 7. On Adam, Jesus, and “son of God”
You are right: Adam is called “son of God” (Luke 3:38), and Jesus is called “Son of God.” But Christians believe Jesus is the Son of God in a unique, eternal sense — not just as a perfect human. John 5:18 says the Jewish leaders wanted to kill Jesus because “he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.”
That’s the key: Jesus’ own words and actions led people to believe he was claiming equality with God. And he never corrected them.
---
## A final, gentle thought
You said you are a scientist. So am I (in background). Science studies the physical universe. But God, if he exists, is not bound by the physical. The question of whether Jesus is God is not a scientific question — it’s a historical and biblical one.
The earliest Christians, including those who were martyred, worshiped Jesus as Lord and God (Thomas said, “My Lord and my God!” — John 20:28). They were not pagans. They were Jews who knew the Shema: “The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” And yet they worshiped Jesus without abandoning monotheism — because they believed Jesus shared the one being of God.
I respect your sincerity and your study. I simply believe you’ve misunderstood what the Bible actually says about Jesus. If you ever want to discuss a specific verse in the original Greek or Hebrew, I’m happy to do so — respectfully and carefully.
Would you be willing to look at John 20:28 (Thomas worshiping Jesus) and ask: Why didn’t Jesus correct Thomas if Thomas was committing idolatry by calling him “God”?
Jehovah's Witnesses: if Jesus was created by Jehovah, then why does John 1:3 (NWT) say, "All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existance"?
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and your passionate defense of what you believe the Bible teaches. You’ve raised several important theological questions, and I’ll do my best to respond from a historic Christian perspective (often called Trinitarian Christianity), while respecting your viewpoint as a Jehovah’s Witness.
Before I begin, I want to clarify: The goal here is not to argue, but to explain why millions of Christians (including myself) read the same Bible and come to a different conclusion than you do. I believe we can disagree respectfully.
---
## 1. On John 1:3 and the meaning of “through”
You wrote:
> *“All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence”* — and you argued that “through” means Jesus was a channel or instrument, not the Creator himself.
Christians agree that the Father is the ultimate source of all things. But John 1:3 says *“not even one thing”* came into existence apart from Jesus. If Jesus himself were a created being, then he would be part of “all things” — meaning he would have to create himself, which is impossible. That’s why historic Christianity concludes that Jesus is uncreated and eternal, not a creature.
The phrase “through him” (Greek: *di’ autou*) shows distinction of persons (Father and Son) but not inferiority of being. For example, Hebrews 1:2 says God made the universe *“through”* the Son — yet calls the Son “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” (Hebrews 1:3).
---
## 2. On “firstborn” (prototokos) and “only begotten” (monogenēs)
You mentioned *prototokos* (firstborn) and *monogenēs* (only begotten). In Scripture, these terms do not always mean “first created.”
- **Colossians 1:15** calls Jesus “the firstborn of all creation.” But in biblical language, “firstborn” often refers to preeminence or inheritance rights, not chronology. For example, David is called “firstborn” in Psalm 89:27 even though he was the youngest son.
- **Monogenēs** (John 1:18, 3:16) means “unique” or “one of a kind,” not “created.” Isaac was called Abraham’s *monogenēs* (Hebrews 11:17) even though Abraham had other sons — because Isaac was the unique son of promise.
Christians see these terms as describing Jesus’ unique, eternal relationship with the Father, not a point of origin.
---
## 3. On Jesus having a God (John 20:17)
You quoted Jesus saying, “I am going to my God and your God.” Christians agree — Jesus, as a true human being, had a relationship of worship and dependence on the Father. But that does not mean Jesus is not also divine.
In Christian theology, Jesus has two natures: fully God and fully man. As man, he prayed to the Father, worshiped him, and called him “my God.” As God, he said, “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58) — echoing God’s name in Exodus 3:14.
---
## 4. On the charge that the Church is pagan and evil
You wrote strongly against “Christendom,” Roman emperors, and the Church’s history. I won’t defend every evil act done in the name of Christ. Christians have done terrible things, and we should repent of that. But the question is doctrine, not behavior.
The doctrine of the Trinity was not invented by pagan emperors. It was the church’s response to what Scripture actually teaches: that the Father is God, Jesus is God, and the Holy Spirit is God — yet there is one God. This was formalized at councils like Nicaea (AD 325) because some (like Arius, whom Jehovah’s Witnesses follow in some ways) taught that Jesus was a created being. The church fathers saw that as contradicting the Bible.
---
## 5. On reading the Bible directly
You said: *“Why do you listen to some ignorant human using pagan doctrines, instead of listening to Christ DIRECTLY from the Bible?”*
I agree that we must test everything by Scripture. But here’s a practical question: Who decides which Bible translation is correct? You use the New World Translation (NWT). I use the ESV, NASB, or CSB. We both claim to read the Bible directly. So we need to compare the Greek manuscripts and see what they actually say.
For example, John 1:1 in the NWT reads: *“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.”*
Most other translations say: *“and the Word was God.”*
The Greek text (without a definite article before *theos*) does not mean “a god” — that would require a different grammatical construction. Nearly all Greek scholars, including non-Christians, agree that the intended meaning is “the Word was God” in terms of nature/essence.
---
## 6. On Jesus being Michael the archangel
You said Jesus’ name at that time was Michael. The Bible never explicitly says that. Michael is called *“the archangel”* (Jude 9) and a *“chief prince”* (Daniel 10:13). Jesus is never called an angel. Hebrews 1:5 explicitly says: *“To which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son, today I have begotten you’?”* The answer is: none. Jesus is superior to angels (Hebrews 1:4).
If Jesus were Michael, then who was speaking from heaven at Jesus’ baptism? “This is my beloved Son” — not “this is my archangel.”
---
## 7. On Adam, Jesus, and “son of God”
You are right: Adam is called “son of God” (Luke 3:38), and Jesus is called “Son of God.” But Christians believe Jesus is the Son of God in a unique, eternal sense — not just as a perfect human. John 5:18 says the Jewish leaders wanted to kill Jesus because “he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.”
That’s the key: Jesus’ own words and actions led people to believe he was claiming equality with God. And he never corrected them.
---
## A final, gentle thought
You said you are a scientist. So am I (in background). Science studies the physical universe. But God, if he exists, is not bound by the physical. The question of whether Jesus is God is not a scientific question — it’s a historical and biblical one.
The earliest Christians, including those who were martyred, worshiped Jesus as Lord and God (Thomas said, “My Lord and my God!” — John 20:28). They were not pagans. They were Jews who knew the Shema: “The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” And yet they worshiped Jesus without abandoning monotheism — because they believed Jesus shared the one being of God.
I respect your sincerity and your study. I simply believe you’ve misunderstood what the Bible actually says about Jesus. If you ever want to discuss a specific verse in the original Greek or Hebrew, I’m happy to do so — respectfully and carefully.
Would you be willing to look at John 20:28 (Thomas worshiping Jesus) and ask: Why didn’t Jesus correct Thomas if Thomas was committing idolatry by calling him “God”?
0 Comments
0 Shares
22 Views
Arabic
French
Spanish
Portuguese
Deutsch
Turkish
Dutch
Italiano
Russian
Romaian
Portuguese (Brazil)
Greek
हिन्दी