No, they clearly show that Jesus is the Author of all creation. It is only through unsupported assumption that one can make the claim you made; through eisegesis, not exegesis. You are not letting the texts speak for themselves but are reading into them your own ideas.
You are ignoring the immediate context of the words, and can offer no explanation of the connection between them.
Here's a classic example:
No, it means what it clearly states: "Act 3:15 and you killed the Author of life, whom Godraised from the dead. To this we are witnesses." (ESV)
Account for the fact that 'God raised Him from the dead' is placed directly after Jesus being the Author of life. What is the relevance of the juxtaposition?
Also, as I pointed out, the Authorship of life is clearly explained by Hebrews:
Hebrews 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
Here, life = eternal salvation, which is easily understood. Without Jesus, there is no eternal salvation. He is therefore the author of our salvation from death, by virtue of his having been raised from the dead..
Contrast that with your (apparent) idea that Jesus gives life to the microbes and the fish. I think you can see that that is pure silliness, and completely irrelevant to Acts 3.15.
And you may have noticed that this was God speaking, referring to himself as "the Alpha and the Omega."
I did, and commented quite extensively on the usage of the title. God is the Alpha and Omega of all creation, while Jesus is the alpha and omega of the New Creation. A statement confirmed by Paul in Col.1, where Jesus is extensively described as the beginning, the head, the firstborn, the pre-eminent.
He is also described there, I may note, as 'the image of the invisible God.' Since he is
THE IMAGE of the invisible God, then it is perfectly clear that He cannot
BE the invisible God. I hope you can agree with that quite stunning point.
Once you recognise the allusion to Adam (who was made in the image and likeness of the invisible God), you immediately see that Jesus is being described as the last Adam, the Head of the New Creation, as Adam was the Head of the Old Creation and was given dominion over it all.
Just so, Jesus is given dominion, pre-eminence, firstborn-ship and is the beginning (=the Alpha) of all the New Creation, not the Old.
Which is the whole point of this exercise.
To show who was talking, as the bold indicates. Why else?
I didn't know. which is why I asked.
And we see Jesus referring to himself as "the first and the last," which is a parallel of "the Alpha and the Omega." It is very significant that both God and Jesus refer to themselves using the same terms.
You're right - it IS very significant, but not in the way you want it to be.
As I've shown, Jesus is the first and the last from the grave. He says so:
5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and
the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not;
I am the first = the Alpha) and the last (=the Omega):
18
I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
(Note the very close connection between the Alpha and Omega description and the death and resurrection of Christ. Why do you suppose that is so?).
He is the alpha and omega of the New Creation, by virtue of the fact that He was dead and now lives forevermore.
There's a great deal about the resurrection in Revelation 1-3. It is the pivotal point of Christianity, and assumes an enormous amount of importance in the Revelation, and explains itself, without convoluted theological contortions...
.