Was Jesus the first creation of God ? (page 7)

LittleToe

I don't tend to take my current state of evolution too seriously, either

FIRST BORN of creation, the FIRST of the CREATION by GOD, would give no problems to anyone not demanding a trinity...

Is that the correct contextual translation for all passages that refer to this subject?
You know it's not...

.the idea that SON is as eternal as FATHER kind of makes those terms rediculous and absurd...unless one sees SON as part of and FATHER as source or whole...in which case, joint HEIRS of GOD with Christ--- my GOD and your GOD, we as Jesus brothers... being ONE just as Jesus and GOD are one...would make sense.

None of that is under discussion in the thread title. The point is merely whether "LOGOS" is involved in creating everything, or is "himself" part of that creation.
I think that if you cast the Trinitarian / Unitarian debate aside, for a moment, you'll find that the scriptures are clear on this. I will quickly add that this may or may not have anything to do with the reality of "God", but does have a direct bearing on the biblical interpretation of the thread at hand (vis "Was Jesus the first creation of God ?").

zen nudist

The point is merely whether "LOGOS" is involved in creating everything, or is "himself" part of that creation.
I think that if you cast the Trinitarian / Unitarian debate aside, for a moment, you'll find that the scriptures are clear on this.

like most other things biblical it is not very clear

to say that because the bible says the word or Jesus was used by God to create all things, leaves him out of the things created is not as clear as trinitarians pretend...there are other instances in the bible where all is used and does not mean all in the all inclusive sense...and even some where it was felt necessary to clarify that point.

col 1:15 says Jesus is the firstborn or protokos of creation...and the first born of the dead in parallel.... it seems clear to me that first born of the dead means just that, first of all who ever lived to be re-born as an immortal after having physically died. there are others who died and were raised prior but he was the first who according to the bible never died again.... and if that sense is carried back to first born of creation it seems equally as plain that he was the very first being that came into existance as a distinct and apparently seperate entity from God...the very first being made in the IMAGE of GOD which is what it says just before this....which should tell trinitarians right away they are mistaken as it does not proclaim Jesus as God, but his IMAGE, the very same term used when Adam or mankind was made.

LittleToe

Zen:
I do get what you are trying to say, especially with that particular passage. However I think that doctrinal bias tends to have the greatest effect on how we want to translate and interpret it.

Would you agree that Paul (or an early redactor) was attempting to make a connection between Jesus / YHWH?
(I mean that without taking on any kind of Trinitarian slant, incidentally, if you take the "Father" of whom Jesus spoke as being altogether another entity, for a moment).

JosephMalik

The statement should be understood in context which most seem to ignore. The context is the world of mankind and its creation in the beginning. So Jesus the Logos that became human is the first human creation by God. How any other creation came to be prior to this is not under discussion.

Hi waiting!

Joseph

Kenneson

Malik,

If the things created on earth...the things visible are mankind, what are the things in the heavens...the things invisible...?

LittleToe

Jo:
Please tell me how you interpret Col.1 (portion by portion, if you have the time). I'm especially interested about your opinion of the "firstborn from the dead" thing, in that context...

Your opinion is that Jesus was a reborn Adam, right?

JosephMalik

The things invsible the heavens? What are they

These are the government in Rome with Caesar in charge in this case. And governments far away other than Rome. They are Invisible as a consequence of the distance involved. Local government would be those visible. Those on earth would be the ones ruled by such governments or heavens These are real things that John knew about and could write about and they existed in his day. Look carefully at what he is talking about:

be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

All these things are human governments good or bad used to maintain order here on earth until His kingdom takes over and replaces them. Such heavens were created and permitted to exist here for this reason. Such heavens can and are used by Him as needed.

Joseph

Narkissos

The things invsible the heavens? What are they
These are the government in Rome with Caesar in charge in this case. And governments far away other than Rome. They are Invisible as a consequence of the distance involved. Local government would be those visible. Those on earth would be the ones ruled by such governments or heavens These are real things that John knew about and could write about and they existed in his day. Look carefully at what he is talking about:
be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
All these things are human governments good or bad used to maintain order here on earth until His kingdom takes over and replaces them. Such heavens were created and permitted to exist here for this reason. Such heavens can and are used by Him as needed.

Sounds as clear and obvious as a classic WT explanation. Reading into the text what could never be understood by a candid reading of the text.

So the invisible in v. 16 means Rome? Why then does the only other occurrence of aoratos, in the immediate context, qualify ho theos ("the invisible God", v. 15)?

Heavens mean Rome? As in v. 5: "the hope laid up for you in heaven"?

Has the vocabulary of Colossians no connection whatsoever with texts such as:

Romans 8:38f:

For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Ephesians 6:12:

For our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.

1 Peter 3:22:

who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers made subject to him.

Yes there is a link between the heavenly and political powers in apocalyptic literature, which goes as far back as Daniel (with the invisible angels or princes behind the political powers, including Michael backing Judah). But this does not simply equate the heavenly powers with the political.

JosephMalik

Naarkissos,

Trying to match texts with similar words from other authors and from diverse places is a waste of my time. You should be following along and keeping in touch with the context given in the particular text I just discussed. It is of no interest to me if you do not like it or disagree. You asked and I answered. Your inability to understand this is not my problem.

Joseph

Leolaia

Then I guess the TDNT is a waste of time.

Was Jesus the first creation of God ?

Share this