Colossians1:15,16KJV"Who is the image of the invisible God,the firstborn of every creature: for by him were all things created,that are in heaven,and that are in earth,visible and invisible,Whether (they be) thrones,or dominions,or principalities, or powers: all things were created by(Dia) him, and for him:"
The trinity doctrine is a brain eating disease. How else can anyone read the above and conclude that it is a reference to an equal of God's and not to his most honored subordinate/representative. Let us list some of the clear indicators of Jesus Christ's subordination to his God found in this passage. Firstly he is the image(Greek eikon) of THE invisible God. There is but one God (as even our trinitarian friends insist they acknowledge) and our Lord is the 'eikon' of this most high God. So this can't refer to Christendom's version of the Father of Jesus who is not the Most high God, indeed he is no kind of God at all but merely a 'divine person who subsist within the one God. here is what some commentators have said about Greek term 'eikon'
eikṓn) assumes a prototype, of which it not merely resembles, but from which it is drawn" (R. Trench). 1504 (eikṓn) then is more than a "shadow"; rather it is a replication (F. F. Bruce, Hebrews, 226; see also Lightfoot at Col 3:10 and 2:21).
Thus the image is distinct from the original i.e distinct from the God of whom he is a copy.
Of course the first member or the foremost member of any set remains a member of the set. Hence the utter absurdity of Christendom's apologists' argument that his being the first or the foremost of JEHOVAH'S creatures must mean that he is no creature at all , there is no(and that would be'no' as in none whatsoever) instance anywhere in the scriptures where 'prototokos' is used to refer to one who is not a member of the set of which he is prototokos.
Proverbs8-22JB"YAHWEH created me, first-fruits of his fashioning, before the oldest of his works."
Some point to the fact that all things were created through (Dia) him as a counterpoint to his being numbered among the creation.
But we observe that these don't (can't?) Consistently apply their reasoning for instance :
1Corinthians ch.15:21,22NIV"For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive."
No one argues that the fact that All are resurrected through Christ Must of necessity imply that he himself could not have been resurrected.
So we have none of duplicity around the use of prototokos re:Christ relationship with the resurrected. That we do re: his relationship with the creation.
Revelation ch.1:5NIV"and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth."
Of course no one denies that the firstborn in the above quoted scripture is numbered among the resurrected although All will be resurrected through him.
A word about the preposition "Dia" from which we get the word diameter,here is strong's commentary on same:
A primary preposition denoting the channel of an act; through .
As a for instance:
John ch.1:17NIV"For the law was given through(Dia) Moses; grace and truth came through(Dia) Jesus Christ."
Thus Moses was the channel, and not the source, of JEHOVAH'S Law.
And Christ ,the foretold prophet like Moses was the channel, and not the source, of JEHOVAH'S undeserved kindness and truth.
JEHOVAH'S firstborn is also the the channel of the energy and information that made/makes the creation and the resurrection possible.
By the way the resurrection is essentially a creative act.
Thus an acknowledgment that Christ was resurrected is in effect that he was re-created:
Psalm ch.104:29,30NIV"When you hide your face,
they are terrified;
when you take away their breath,
they die and return to the dust.
30When you send your Spirit,
they are created,
and you renew the face of the ground."
Hence the scriptures equate his re-creation with a Begetting of him
Acts ch.13:33NIV"he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm:
“ ‘You are my son;
today I have become your father."
So if his re-creation in time can be regarded as Begetting there is no legitimate objection to regarding his creation in time as a Begetting. Whether All things are created through(Dia) him or not.
