Jesus the Man Before John !

[KV-44-v1]

Php 2:8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. (ESV)

yep. Why bother with specifying "human form" if Jesus isn't God? Where else are people described as being in "human form"????
This applies to Jesus BECAUSE Jesus is fully man AND fully God!

Perhaps Unitrians think God wastes words!

Scary fact: In its mad quest to belittle Jesus, Unitarianism rails against the Father, too.

 

[Runningman]

That's because He was. But that was true, not slander.

You make the same argument as the worldly world. The majority of humans push false teachings. The "Jesus not God" teaching is peddled by the world - NOT the Word. Why do you think Islam and cults try to force Jesus into a little box of "Not God"?

Oh Yes, belittling Jesus is pretty much belittling God.
If Jesus weren't God, the pharisees would not go after Him like that, and He would just be another sinful human who isnt God.

REALIZE THE IMPLICATIONS OF YOUR WORLDVIEW.

Do you really believe that "Jesus the Not-God" was magically sinless but somehow not God? That's absurd and humanistic, implying that us fallen humans on this earth can be guranteed to never sin from birth to death too.

Accurately saying Jesus isn’t God isn’t belittling Jesus or a worldly view. It’s the Biblical view and the way Jesus represented himself. Shall we go over all the times he referred to himself a man and his miscellaneous denials of being God?

We already looked at John 10 where he made a pretty good case that saying one is the son of God is not blasphemy nor a claim to being God because it’s something others can say, too, and it’s scriptural.

 

[Runningman]

False equivalence, Jesus calling them "gods" is in much a different sense than Jesus being THE Son of God.

Same sense. Read Psalm 82:6 again. “You are all sons of the most high” Carefully notice, they are not sons of the son of God, but sons of the Most High. Jesus is never called the Most High in the Bible because he isn’t.

Why does The Bible differntiate sonS of God and THE Son of God? Oh right! Jesus IS God!

Depends on context and grammar. Sometimes others are called the sons of God too. An argument based around the word “the” is quite weak, I might add.

Unitaranism is a gross lie/error designed to appease the sinful human flesh who loves making God to be at their level!

Oh the irony. You’re the one with a man god, not me. Isn’t that idolatry?

 

[brightfame52]

Not only was Christ Jesus the Man before John the Baptist Jn 1:30

This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.

But He was the OT figure the Angel of the Lord as well as Michael the Great Prince Dan 12:1

And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

I also believe that the Angel here is Christ, Michael the Arch Angel Rev 10:1-6

And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and a rainbow was upon his head, and his face was as it were the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire: See Vision of Christ here Matt 17:2

2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.

2 And he had in his hand a little book open: and he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth,

3 And cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: and when he had cried, seven thunders uttered their voices.

4 And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.

5 And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven,

6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

I believe, the Lord Jesus Christ, Michael and the Angel of the Covenant are the Same Judges 2:1

And an angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.

The Messenger of the Covenant Mal 3:1

Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts.

I believe this Angel is Michael, Christ Gen 48:16

The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.

No ordinary Angel could do this, redeem a man from all Evil, Gill writes :

The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads,.... Ephraim and Manasseh, now about twenty years old or upwards: this is not to be understood of a created angel he wishes to be their guardian, but of an eternal one, the Son of God, the Angel of God's presence, the Angel of the covenant; the same with the God of his father before mentioned, as appears by the character he gives him, as having "redeemed him from all evil"; not only protected and preserved him from temporal evils and imminent dangers from Esau, Laban, and others; but had delivered him from the power, guilt, and punishment of sin, the greatest of evils, and from the dominion and tyranny of Satan the evil one, and from everlasting wrath, ruin, and damnation; all which none but a divine Person could do, as well as he wishes, desires, and prays, that he would "bless" the lads with blessings temporal and spiritual, which a created angel cannot do; and Jacob would never have asked it of him:

I believe Jacob had an Eye to the Death of the Messiah whom Paul writes Gal 1:4

4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:

 

[LeviR]

Agreed.

Why would Jesus tell someone who already knew they were born of a woman that they needed to be born of a woman? I think people say that because they want to distance themselves from works, but water baptism and the symbolic birth are all over the New Testament. No one ever went around preaching "You must be born of a woman" and if they did I guess they would be trying to be a comedian.


I believe what James said in the first chapter applies repeatedly. How could sin result in death if someone were already dead? However, sin can result in death if they were already alive or born again.

James 1
13Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. 15Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

Apostle John talked about it too:

1 John 5
16If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. 17All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.

This is going to be a bit heavy, but God is always having to bring people back to life on a spiritual level. Ever sinned and felt like a part of you had died, but you couldn't really explain it? You weren't imagining that. A part of you actually died. God has to re-establish a personal covenant with people for legal reasons, but I would say most people aren't aware this is happening.

Just to demonstrate this is actually Biblical, too, God makes many personal covenants with His people. With Noah Genesis 9:8-11, He did it with Abraham in Genesis 15:18, 17:1-2, a covenant with the house of Eli in 1 Sam. 2:35, with King David in 2 Sam. 7:12-16, etc.



amen .

My point being, someone is said to be born of water when he is baptized or immersed in water.
He is also said to be born again when raised from the dead.
Jesus says of that as being born of Spirit is Spirit.
He is saying that when someone is raised from the grave by the Spirit, the person is Spirit.
The person raised from the dead is not an immaterial Spirit, he is raised with a spirit body. The body is call spirit.
When angels are called spirits, it does not mean they don’t have bodies. They have bodies in the image and likeness of God.
And so do those raised from the dead.
The first image and likenesses was a mortal image and likeness.
The second image and likeness is an immortal image and likeness.
Both images, the first man and the second man, are in the image and likeness of God. The difference is the glory of the one is mortal and the glory of the other immortal.
Saying God is Spirit does not mean God is immaterial.

 

[LeviR]

Same sense. Read Psalm 82:6 again. “You are all sons of the most high” Carefully notice, they are not sons of the son of God, but sons of the Most High. Jesus is never called the Most High in the Bible because he isn’t.

Depends on context and grammar. Sometimes others are called the sons of God too. An argument based around the word “the” is quite weak, I might add.

Oh the irony. You’re the one with a man god, not me. Isn’t that idolatry?

Often times we find the word “the” has been added to “son of God”.
Sometimes “a” son of God is added.
Jesus is also referred to as “The Son of man” or “Son of man” and is capitalized.
You are correct, their argument that “The Son of God” means Jesus is God lacks any support.

 

[Free]

The Pharisees accused him of claiming to be God and you are making the same argument as they are by saying Jesus is God. Therefore, Jesus' answer applies to you and the Pharisees.

Contrary to the accusations against Jesus (John 10:33) he quoted Psalm 82:6 informing them that they are all gods and sons of God(John 10:34.) After that, he said he is the son of God so how could you accuse him for blasphemy for that?

John 10
36then what about the One whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world? How then can you accuse Me of blasphemy for stating that I am the Son of God?

Psalm 82
6I have said, ‘You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High.’

The point is the same thing that they accused Jesus of also applies to his accusers. The answer is they cannot rightly accuse Jesus of blasphemy anymore than they can accuse each other blasphemy for repeating the same words as Jesus. Jesus, therefore, made the best argument against his own deity possible. We have it directly from his own mouth that he is indeed not God.

I have given the meaning of the passage. The Jews rightly understand that Jesus's claim to be the Son of God is a claim to be God. Nowhere does Jesus deny this; not in this passage nor in any other. It seems that you missed the finer points of the argument and so misunderstand what Jesus was saying.

Jesus makes an argument from the lesser to the greater. He first points out that in the Law, that their human judges were called gods based on "the word of God," which they had in writing, from Moses. Second, Jesus states that Scripture is unbreakable--it is absolutely authoritative in what it says. So, he is reaffirming that the fact that human judges were called gods because they received the word of God, which was the basis by which they were to judge.

Third, Jesus says that he was consecrated, set apart for sacred purpose, by the Father. Fourth, he says he was then "sent into the world," as the Messiah, which is a significantly higher office than a mere judge or magistrate. It also contrasts

Fifth, it must be noted that John already wrote in 1:1, 14 that Jesus is the Word of God become flesh.

So, then, the argument should be clear. If God called human judges gods because they had the authoritative written word of God, how much more should they accept that Jesus is the Son of God, being that he is the Word of God in person and sent into the world on the most important mission.

Put another way, Jesus is saying that if the OT judges were called gods based on an inferior task and office, as important as they were, his task and office are vastly superior, so it is not blasphemy that he calls himself the Son of God. Note that not once does he deny or argue against the charge of blasphemy for claiming to be God.

 

[Runningman]

That's because He was. But that was true, not slander.

I might add for clarity, Jesus said their words of claiming to be God were an accusation against him in John 10:36 and he was arguing against it. Yes indeed, Jesus did deny being God.

 

[Randy]

The Mediator for Men is the Man Christ Jesus 1 Tim 2:5

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Do you deny Adam/Man in the Garden in Gen 2 had a Mediator ?

Jesus, His spirit, was before Adam. The Son of man, the new man, was born after Adam.
Anyone, whether in heaven or earth, reconciled to God will be by Christs blood in the cross. Anyone raised on the last day is by Christ Jesus. I assume His mediator role ends when the last enemy of God, Death, is destroyed and He hands over the Kingdom to God the Father. However, it's the throne of God and of the lamb forever.

OP-Jesus the Man Before John. "The Man" Jesus began when the Logos became flesh. Before that time He was not a man in any meaning of that word. He was in the form of God. God was the Logos. You seem to be advocating Jesus was a Man from the beginning. Thats what I disagree with.​

 

[Randy]

I agree that the Son of Man did not exist as the Son of Man with God in the beginning. But as the Word of God he did exist with God in the beginning.

Neither can we say that Jesus ever was the Father, since by definition the Father is distinct from His Word even though He and His Word are of the same Divine essence, or substance. Jesus is ever "the Father of Eternity" revealed in time, and not the pre-existent Father. God is referred to as the "Father of Jesus" only at the point where Jesus is incarnated as a man.

When we say that God, as a Person, has expressed Himself in the form of a distinct human person it would be confusing to say that the Father who sent the Son and the Son who was sent are the same person! That's why it is an orthodox stipulation that we say the Word, or the Son, was "with God" in the beginning at the same time we say that they are both the same transcendent Being, or Father of Eternity (Isa 9.6).

It indicates that even though we are talking about the one and the same divine Person we are also talking about His ability to express Himself as a distinct human person and reveal Himself in various ways without contradiction. The One who reveals Himself as distinct Persons is distinct from the Persons who He reveals.

I personally avoid saying what you said, that "Jesus is the Word of God. (The Father)." Scripturally we do know that Jesus was and is the Word of God. And we know the Word was and is God. But affixing names like "Father" and "Son" is the language we use to distinguish them, even though they are of one divine substance. I prefer to use the Scriptural formula....

John 1.In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning.

We are here speaking of transcendent realities and cannot get past that. So when we speak of the Father and the Son we speak of two distinct persons, made possible by the Incarnation. But prior to the Incarnation we speak of them as identified with Deity and avoid the language of "Father and Son." We speak of them as having been "together," or "with each other."

Jesus has always been the Son. Whether you state eternally begotten by the Father alone before all worlds or First begotten by the Father alone before all worlds. In Him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell. Col 1:19 - Gifted from the will of another. The other who reconciled all things to HIMSELF through Christ blood on the cross. Col 1:20 Its clear to me the Deity that dwells in the Son is the Fathers not His own. That is the eternal life found in the Son is the Father. The Logos did not end and become the Son and remain the Son He has always been the Son and has no ending. Jesus sat down with the Father on His Fathers throne.

 

[Randy]

I might add for clarity, Jesus said their words of claiming to be God were an accusation against him in John 10:36 and he was arguing against it. Yes indeed, Jesus did deny being God.

He was not denying God's Son has the Fathers nature.

 

[brightfame52]

Randy

Jesus, His spirit, was before Adam.

Thats still the Man !

1 Cor 2:11

For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

When Paul was exalted to the third heaven, he wasnt sure if he was in a body,yet he was still a man 2 Cor 12:2-3

2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth)
The Spirit of Christ existed in the OT times 1 Pet 1:11

Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

 

[LeviR]

Randy



Thats still the Man !

1 Cor 2:11

For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

When Paul was exalted to the third heaven, he wasnt sure if he was in a body,yet he was still a man 2 Cor 12:2-3

2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth)
The Spirit of Christ existed in the OT times 1 Pet 1:11

Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

Paul was unsure whether he was taken in body or in a vision without his body.

 

[brightfame52]

Paul was unsure whether he was taken in body or in a vision without his body.

I know what Paul said

 

[LeviR]

I know what Paul said

God doesn’t have to take someone’s body to show them something. He could take their body if he so chooses.

 

[LeviR]

Randy



Thats still the Man !

1 Cor 2:11

For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

When Paul was exalted to the third heaven, he wasnt sure if he was in a body,yet he was still a man 2 Cor 12:2-3

2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth)
The Spirit of Christ existed in the OT times 1 Pet 1:11

Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

1Pe 1:11 - searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.

Christ himself was not in the prophets. The Spirit of God, the same Spirit in Christ, was testifying of the sufferings of Christ.

The prophets spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

 

[brightfame52]

God doesn’t have to take someone’s body to show them something. He could take their body if he so chooses.

You entitled to your opinion

 

[brightfame52]

1Pe 1:11 - searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.

Christ himself was not in the prophets. The Spirit of God, the same Spirit in Christ, was testifying of the sufferings of Christ.

The prophets spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

The spirit of Christ was in the prophets and Christ is a man

 

[RandyK]

Jesus has always been the Son.

It depends on which sense you mean that? If you're referring to titles that are locked on to their own time, both the names "Jesus" and "the Son" are linked specifically to Jesus' earthly existence, and not to any time before that.

If we refer to Jesus, or the Son's, preexistence, then we can say they have always existed forever, just as God and His Word have existed from eternity. The man Jesus existed in history. His preexistence is from eternity.

Whether you state eternally begotten by the Father alone before all worlds or First begotten by the Father alone before all worlds. In Him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell. Col 1:19 - Gifted from the will of another.

I don't have a problem with the creeds' statements about this. God revealed things about His creation and about Himself via His Word, which existed from eternity along with God Himself.

When the Word became flesh and dwelt among us it was God's revelation to us, His creation, about Himself. What was from eternity came to be revealed in time on our behalf so that we could know God in the form of a man, as well as in the appearances of the Holy Spirit, as well as in the form of the undefinable Deity as the source of all of His revelation.

The other who reconciled all things to HIMSELF through Christ blood on the cross. Col 1:20 Its clear to me the Deity that dwells in the Son is the Fathers not His own.

Sorry, I can't sign onto that! ;(
If Jesus emerged as a revelation not just *about* Deity, but *of* Deity Himself, then he carried with him the divine identity--not just something about God, or a small part of God. He *was* God.

This is why we're careful with terminology of the Trinity like Father, Son, and Spirit, because it confuses an aspect of God that is different from one perspective to another. With respect to the substance of Deity, or His *identity,* both the Father and the Son are God.

But with respect to the differentiation between the Father and the Son, the Son cannot be the Father anymore than what emerges from the Father can *be* the Father! Nevertheless, they can share the same identity in different places, so to speak.

Can God produce an agent that is distinct from Him, within the finitude of creation, that *is Him, ie carries His identity? Yes, that's precisely what He did with Christ. He produced a revelation that transitioned from something eternal to something revealed in time. It carried the eternal substance of God into the world in the man Jesus, who carried that same substance and was thus revealed to be God.

You might ask, How can a created revelation from God be created and still be the uncreated God? That is the nature of God's Word. It can transition into the finite world showing who God is in finite terms without sacrificing His eternal origins.

We can never get much deeper than this, but by definition, that is who God is. He can exist before creation and yet express Himself in creation. And He can also express *Himself* within creation.

That is the eternal life found in the Son is the Father. The Logos did not end and become the Son and remain the Son He has always been the Son and has no ending.

No, the eternal life the Son gives us is the gift of God to man. Jesus was the agency by which we obtained this gift, after having fallen victim to the Sin Nature. So he is called "Eternal Life" on our behalf.

Nobody thinks the "Logos" ended! The Logos is God's means of expressing God in any way God wishes to express Himself. There can never be an end to God's ability to express Himself.

 

[Randy]

It depends on which sense you mean that? If you're referring to titles that are locked on to their own time, both the names "Jesus" and "the Son" are linked specifically to Jesus' earthly existence, and not to any time before that.

I mean God has always been His Father. Thus, He has always been the Son.

If we refer to Jesus, or the Son's, preexistence, then we can say they have always existed forever, just as God and His Word have existed from eternity. The man Jesus existed in history. His preexistence is from eternity.

I don't read the Father has always existed. I don't read the Father has a beginning either. I did read no God existed before the Father nor one after Him. Therefore "if" the Father has a beginning it could not be by any other being. He is unbegotten. Jesus however is begotten of the Father alone. A Son. Its stated true God "FROM" true God begotten but not made or eternally begotten. A mystery foundation for sure as from another but no starting point to define "from" another. I believe Jesus is first begotten. The Firstborn of all creation. The Fathers Firstborn and in Him the Father was pleased that all the fullness of "His" Deity should dwell, so the Son is the radiance of the "Fathers" glory and the exact representation of the Fathers very being. The very image of the invisible God. God the begotten. God from true God as its the Fathers Deity or nature that is in the Son. God was the Logos.

I don't have a problem with the creeds' statements about this. God revealed things about His creation and about Himself via His Word, which existed from eternity along with God Himself.

When the Word became flesh and dwelt among us it was God's revelation to us, His creation, about Himself. What was from eternity came to be revealed in time on our behalf so that we could know God in the form of a man, as well as in the appearances of the Holy Spirit, as well as in the form of the undefinable Deity as the source of all of His revelation.



Sorry, I can't sign onto that! ;(
If Jesus emerged as a revelation not just *about* Deity, but *of* Deity Himself, then he carried with him the divine identity--not just something about God, or a small part of God. He *was* God.

The only Deity you read in the Son of Man is the Father in Him doing His work. They are one.

This is why we're careful with terminology of the Trinity like Father, Son, and Spirit, because it confuses an aspect of God that is different from one perspective to another. With respect to the substance of Deity, or His *identity,* both the Father and the Son are God.

But with respect to the differentiation between the Father and the Son, the Son cannot be the Father anymore than what emerges from the Father can *be* the Father! Nevertheless, they can share the same identity in different places, so to speak.

Can God produce an agent that is distinct from Him, within the finitude of creation, that *is Him, ie carries His identity? Yes, that's precisely what He did with Christ. He produced a revelation that transitioned from something eternal to something revealed in time. It carried the eternal substance of God into the world in the man Jesus, who carried that same substance and was thus revealed to be God.

You might ask, How can a created revelation from God be created and still be the uncreated God? That is the nature of God's Word. It can transition into the finite world showing who God is in finite terms without sacrificing His eternal origins.

We can never get much deeper than this, but by definition, that is who God is. He can exist before creation and yet express Himself in creation. And He can also express *Himself* within creation.

No, the eternal life the Son gives us is the gift of God to man. Jesus was the agency by which we obtained this gift, after having fallen victim to the Sin Nature. So he is called "Eternal Life" on our behalf.

The eternal life in the Son is the Father's Deity. The eternal life in us is the Son.
John 6:57
Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me.

Nobody thinks the "Logos" ended! The Logos is God's means of expressing God in any way God wishes to express Himself. There can never be an end to God's ability to express Himself.

If Jesus always was and always was God how then did He become the Son?
Jesus calls the Father the only true God. If He always was and always was God how does this believe in one God for Jesus stated, "Father into your hands I commit My spirit"?

To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I was victorious and sat down with my Father on his throne.

The one who is victorious I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will they leave it. I will write on them the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on them my new name.

Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits a before his throne, 5and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.

To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, 6and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father—to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen.

My belief/understanding
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Jesus is not identified as our heavenly Father but as our Lord. As stated He has the Fathers very nature in Him and is one with the Father. Such a Son is called Immanual. The Father is the source of all things even His Firstborn Son.
Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

For this reason I kneel before the Father, 15 from whom every family in heaven and on earth derives its name.

Ours and Jesus's Heavenly Father
“You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being.”

It was the Father who spoke to us in these last days "by" His Son.
It was the Father who brought the creation into existence "by" His Son.
To me the creation is the same reasoning stated by Jesus in the message He gave us as in the Father living in Him doing His work. They are one.

One God the Father and One Lord Jesus Christ
The throne of God and of the Lamb forever.