Who created the heavens and the earth? (part two)

For part one of this study, click here: That Happy Expectation: Who created the heavens and the earth? (part one)

According to the belief of most Christians (and of some believers), it was Jesus Christ – and not Jesus’ God and Father (i.e., Yahweh) – who directly brought the heavens and the earth into existence. However, this view is contradicted by what Scripture reveals concerning when God’s Son, Jesus, came into existence.

One of the clearest truths of Scripture is that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Consider, for example, the declaration of the disciples recorded in Matt. 14:33 (“Truly, you are God’s Son!”), Peter’s inspired confession in Matthew 16:16 (“You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”), or the testimony of God himself in Matt. 3:17 (“This is my Son, the beloved, in whom I delight!”). But by virtue of what could Jesus be called the Son of God on these and other occasions?

The answer to this question is provided for us in the first two chapters of Matthew and Luke (which contain the most detailed and comprehensive accounts of Christ’s origin found in Scripture). In Matthew 1:18-21 and Luke 1:31-35, we read that Jesus was generated by God’s spirit when Jesus’ mother, Miriam, became pregnant with him.

The word translated “generated” in these verses (gennao) is the same word translated “begotten” elsewhere, and refers to the event by which a father brings his child into existence, and thereby becomes the father of that child (see, for example, all of the examples of “begetting” that we find in the genealogy of Christ recorded in Matt. 1:1-16). In fact, “to bring into existence” is precisely what the English word “generate” means, while the word “beget” can be defined as, “to cause to exist,” “to produce as an effect,” “to generate,” “to procreate” or “to father.” 

When a father begets his child, he becomes the father of his child. This being the case, it follows that the generating (or begetting) of God’s Son referred to in Matt. 1:20 and Luke 1:35 was the event by which God became the Father of his Son (and thus brought his Son into existence).

In fact, according to the words of Gabriel in Luke 1:35, the very fact that Jesus was generated/begotten by God when Jesus’ mother became pregnant with him is the very reason why Jesus would be “called the Son of God.” In this verse we read the following:

“Holy spirit shall be coming on you, and the power of the Most High shall be overshadowing you; wherefore also the holy One Who is being generated shall be called the Son of God.”

Since God became Jesus’ father when the words of Luke 1:35 were fulfilled, it follows that the existence of the Son of God began when he was conceived by God. To believe that God didn’t, in fact, become the Father of his Son at this time – or that Jesus isn’t the Son of God by virtue of this historical event – is to simply disregard the very idea that the word gennaō expresses in these passages. God was not Jesus’ Father – and Jesus was not God’s Son – until the supernatural event referred to in these verses occurred. God became the Father of his Son, Jesus, when Jesus was generated, or begotten, by God. And this took place when Jesus’ mother Miriam became pregnant with him.

Consider the following argument:

1. The word gennaō in Matt. 1:20 and Luke 1:35 refers to the event by which a father brings his child into existence and thus becomes the father of his child (Matt. 1:1-16).

2. Jesus was generated/begotten by God at the time when Jesus’ mother became pregnant with him.

3. God brought his Son, Jesus, into existence (and thus became the Father of Jesus) when Jesus’ mother became pregnant with him.

Against this conclusion, it has been objected that Jesus – or rather, the pre-existent celestial being who is believed to have been given the name “Jesus” – simply “became a human” when the event in view in Matt. 1:20 and Luke 1:35 occurred. This view implies that it was merely Jesus’ human body – and not the pre-existent celestial being who became the human named Jesus – that was “generated” or “begotten” when Jesus’ mother became pregnant with him. However, this view is contrary to what we read in Luke 1:35.

Notice that, according to the words of Gabriel, it wasn’t merely Jesus’ human body that was generated when Jesus’ mother became pregnant with him. Rather, it was a person – i.e., the living, sentient individual who would “be called the Son of God” – who was generated at this time. In other words, the living human person who was given the name “Jesus” – and not merely Jesus’ human body – was “generated” or “begotten” at the time when Jesus’ mother became pregnant with her Son. Thus, just as it was not merely Christ’s body that died when Christ died (or merely Christ’s body that was restored to life when Christ was restored to life), so it was not merely Christ’s body that was generated when Christ was generated. It was a living person (and not merely a person’s living body) who was generated/begotten by God when Christ’s mother became pregnant with him.

Further support for this understanding of when Christ’s existence began can be found in the fact that the same word used to refer to Christ’s conception (gennaō) was also used to refer to Christ’s resurrection. In Acts 13:32-33 (cf. Heb. 1:5; 5:5), we read the following:

“And we are bringing to you the evangel which comes to be a promise to the fathers, that God has fully fulfilled this for our children in raising Jesus, as it is written in the second psalm also, ‘My Son art Thou; I, today, have begotten Thee.’”

Since Christ ceased to exist when he died (which is in accord with what Scripture reveals concerning the nature of death), we can conclude that Christ’s resurrection was the second time that Christ was brought into existence by his Father. It is for this reason that the word gennaō was used to refer to Christ’s resurrection (again, when used in reference to that for which a father is responsible, the word gennaō denotes the event by which a father brings his child into existence, and thereby becomes the father of his child).

Thus, a correct understanding of the nature of Christ’s death and resurrection leads to the conclusion that Christ didn’t exist as the Son of God before he was generated/begotten by God at the time of his conception. Just as Jesus wasn’t alive in another state of existence when he was begotten by God at the time of his resurrection, so Jesus wasn’t alive in another state of existence when he was begotten by God at the time when his mother became pregnant with him.

A brief consideration of three commonly-misunderstood passages

Three passages of Scripture that are commonly appealed to in support of the view that Jesus Christ (rather than Jesus’ God and Father) directly brought the heavens and the earth into existence are John 1:1-3, Colossians 1:16 and Hebrews 1:10-12. However, the commonly-held interpretation of these three passages contradicts the scriptural fact that the creation of the heavens and the earth was the work of Jesus’ God and Father alone (who, as we’ve seen, spoke the heavens and the earth into existence). And not only this, but – as argued in the previous section – we know that God brought his Son, Jesus, into existence (and thus became the Father of his Son) when Jesus’ mother became pregnant with him. From this fact it necessarily follows that Christ was not personally present at the time of (or in any way involved in) the event of which we read in Genesis 1:1. Instead, Christ was “foreknown” by God during this time (1 Pet. 1:20; cf. Romans 8:29 and 11:2, where Paul used the same word “foreknew” when referring to both the body of Christ and Israel).

With regard to what we read in John 1:1-3, the Greek word translated “word” in these verses (“logos”) literally denotes the spoken declaration by which a complete thought is expressed, or the communication of a thought through speech (see, for example, John 6:60). Although God’s word can be personified, it is not literally a living, conscious person (whether created or uncreated). Rather, the “word” of which we read in John 1:1-3 is the same literal word of God of which we read in the following verses:

Psalm 33:6, 9

 “By the word of Yahweh the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their host … For He [Yahweh] spoke, and it came to be; He commanded, and it stood firm.”

2 Peter 3:5, 7

“By the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water…by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire…”

Consider also Isaiah 55:10-11:

For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there but water the earth, making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, so shall My word be that goes out from My mouth; it shall not return to Me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.

It was through this divine word that everything was brought into existence by God.[i] Jesus did not “pre-exist” as God’s word (which, given the literal meaning of the term “word,” is literally impossible); rather, God’s word – i.e., the spoken declaration by which God expresses his thoughts and accomplishes his purpose – came to be represented and embodied by Jesus (as is expressed in the following words of John 1:14: “And the Word became flesh and tabernacles among us…”). Even when John referred to Christ as “the Word of God” in Rev. 19:3, it is not literally true that Christ is God’s “word” (for examples in which John used the expression “the the word of God” to refer to God’s literal word, see 1 John 2:14; Rev. 1:2, 9; 6:9; 20:4). Rather, Christ – as the One through whom God has chosen to most fully reveal himself and carry out his redemptive purposes – perfectly represents God’s word.

Moreover, the preposition prós (translated “with” or “toward” in John 1:1) can convey the idea of being before someone’s face, or in their immediate presence. Thus, the use of this term here is highly appropriate, and beautifully expresses how intimately God is connected with the word he speaks, and by which he makes known and accomplishes His divine purpose.

For a more in-depth defense of the position summarized above, see my articles on John 1:1-3 (http://www.biblestudentsnotebook.com/bsn713.pdf) and John 1:10-13 (https://www.biblestudentsnotebook.com/bsn714.pdf).

With regard to Col. 1:16, the state of affairs to which Paul was referring here is one that pertains to (and coincides with the existence of) “the Son of [God’s] love” (v. 13) – i.e., the “Man, Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 2:5). But as has already been shown, it was Yahweh – and no one else – who directly created the heavens and the earth by speaking them into existence. We also know that the One whom Paul referred to as “the Son of God’s love” in Col. 1:13 – i.e., Jesus Christ – didn’t exist as God’s Son until he was generated/begotten by his God and Father (which, again, took place when Jesus’ mother became pregnant with him). So it’s not just unlikely or improbable that Christ is the one who directly created everything in the heavens and on the earth at the time referred to in Genesis 1-2. When we keep in mind the broader, relevant scriptural context, we find that it’s impossible for this to have been the case.

So what did Paul have in mind in Col. 1:16? In the first part of Col. 1:16, we read that “in Him [Christ] is all created.” Here, Paul used the constative aorist passive indicative of the Greek verb “to create” (ktizō). The aorist tense – which is the most commonly-used verb tense in the Greek Scriptures – simply points to an action without telling us anything further about it. It leaves the exact nature of the action undetermined and undefined, and simply describes the action as a bare fact.[ii]

However, in the expression with which v. 16 concludes (“all is created through Him and for Him”), Paul used the perfect passive indicative of ktizō. The use of the perfect tense focuses on the continuance of a present state of affairs that began at some point in the past. The same tense is used in v. 17, where we read that “all has its cohesion in Him.”[iii] When did all begin to have its cohesion in Christ? Answer: when Christ was roused from among the dead and given all authority in heaven and on earth. It was not until Christ was given all authority in heaven and on earth (and thus became Lord of all) that he has been able to preserve everything in its created state.

Thus, what Paul wrote in Col. 1:16 is perfectly consistent with the understanding that it was the Father alone who brought everything into existence in the beginning (i.e., the beginning that’s in view in Genesis 1:1). Rather than referring to the past event for which only the Father was responsible, Paul was referring to an ongoing state of affairs that began after Christ was given his exalted status and universal authority. Ever since Christ was given all authority in heaven and on earth (which he received from God as a result of his obedience unto death), it has been true to say that everything in the heavens and on the earth “is created [i.e., remains created] through him and for him.” The same basic idea is being expressed in 1 Corinthians 8:6 (where we’re told that all exists “through” Christ) and in Hebrews 1:3 (where we’re told that Christ is “carrying on all by His powerful declaration” [CLNT] or “bearing up all things by the utterance of his power” [Rotherham]).

But what about what we read in Hebrews 1:10-12? Answer: These verses are a quotation of Psalm 102:25-28. In the Concordant Version of the Old Testament these verses read as follows:

“Beforetime You founded the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands. They shall perish, yet You shall stand. All of them shall decay like a cloak; You shall change them like clothing, and they shall pass by. Yet You remain the same, and Your years shall not come to end.”

In these verses the Psalmist was addressing Yahweh (the Father) rather than Christ (see verses 1, 12, 19-23). This means that the “Lord” being addressed in Hebrews 1:10 is the same person referred to as “He” in Hebrews 1:13 (i.e., the God and Father of Jesus).

Moreover, it should be noted that the words “Yet Thou art the same, And Thy years shall not be defaulting” (Heb. 1:12) are simply a way of emphasizing God’s inability to die. The fact that God’s “years shall not be defaulting” (or “shall not come to end”) simply means that God cannot die (and note that this was something that the Psalmist considered to be true of the One whom he was addressing at the time when he wrote Psalm 102).

In fact, one proponent of the doctrine of the preexistence of Christ (i.e., Martin Zender) has, on several occasions, correctly referenced Psalm 102:27 as scriptural proof of the fact that God (i.e., the Father) cannot die. For example, concerning the use of the word eonian in Romans 16:26, Martin Zender wrote the following:

“This verse isn’t trying to tell anyone that God lives forever. Everyone already knows God lives forever. Psalm 102:27 testified long ago that, ‘His years shall have no end.’ It’s old news.” (ZWTF, Vol. 1, Issue 14, pg. 3)

Since Psalm 102:27 refers to the fact that God cannot die, it cannot be understood as a reference to Christ. For, after being alive on the earth for approximately 33 years, Christ died and remained dead (lifeless) for three days. In other words, Christ’s years “defaulted.” Jesus’ God and Father, on the other hand, has never died; it was just as true when Psalm 102 was written as it is today that Yahweh’s years “shall not come to end.” However this was not true of Christ at the time when Psalm 102 was written.

That the “Lord” being addressed in Psalm 102:25 is Yahweh, the God of Jesus Christ (rather than his Son, Jesus), is not only evident from the context of Psalm 102, but it’s also evident from how the pronoun “He” in v. 13 points back to the “Lord” who is in view in the previous verses:

And, Thou, originally, Lord, dost found the earth, and the heavens are the works of Thy hands. They shall perish, yet Thou art continuing, and all, as a cloak, shall be aged, and, as if clothing, wilt Thou be rolling them up. As a cloak also shall they change. Yet Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not be defaulting.

Now to which of the messengers has He declared at any time, “Sit at My right, till I should be placing Thine enemies for a footstool for Thy feet”?

The nearest antecedent of the personal pronoun “He” in v. 13 is the “Lord” referred to previously in verses 10-12. Thus, the pronoun “He” should be understood as referring back to the person referred to in these verses as “Lord” and “Thou.” Since the “He” of v. 13 is the Father (i.e., Yahweh, at whose right hand Christ is sitting), we can understand the same divine person to be in view in verses 10-12.

The writer’s point in quoting Psalm 102:25-28 before Psalm 110 (which is quoted in v. 13) is to demonstrate that the same absolute authority over “the works of [God’s] hands” (which God is described as having in Psalm 102:25-28) has been given to the Messiah (who, in fulfillment of Psalm 102, now “sits at God’s right,” having been given all authority in heaven and on earth and placed over the works of God’s hands). In other words, the idea being conveyed here (perhaps more so in this passage than in any other passage of Scripture) is that God is absolutely sovereign over the heavens and the earth. He created the heavens and the earth, and when he decides it’s time, he will replace the heavens and the earth.

For Christ to have been invited to sit at God’s “right” (or “right hand”) means that he was given the authority that formerly belonged exclusively to God – i.e., all authority in heaven and on the earth.

---

[i] Although God’s word is distinct from God himself, it is nevertheless divine in nature (and is thus referred to by John as “theos” in John 1:1). Without the Greek article ton, the word theos in John 1:1 can refer to that which is qualitatively divine (or divine in nature). Understood in this way, John was not, in v. 1, telling us WHO the Word was, but rather WHAT the Word was (i.e., the Word was divine in nature, or divine in a qualitative sense). 

[ii] For a defense of this understanding of the aorist tense, see Frank Stagg’s article “The Abused Aorist” (1972_stagg.pdf (biblicalstudies.org.uk)). 

[iii] According to Greek scholar A.T. Robertson, Paul’s use of this particular tense in v. 16 expresses the idea that everything “stands created” or “remains created” through and for Christ. 

According to A.E. Knoch, this verb form (which he refers to as the “state” or “complete” form) gives “the state resulting from an action.” 

Curtis Vaughan and Virtus E. Gideon explain the perfect tense as follows: 

“The perfect tense…represents a completed state or condition from the standpoint of present time.” (Curtis Vaughan and Virtus E. Gideon, “A Greek Grammar of the New Testament”, Broadman Press, Nashville, Tennessee, 1979, page 149) 

Similarly, according to M. Zerwick, the perfect tense indicates “not the past action as such but the present ‘state of affairs’ resulting from the past action” (M. Zerwick, “Biblical Greek Illustrated by Examples”, Pontificii Instituti Biblici, 1963, page 96).