Litigious:The claim that "prototokos" always makes Christ a part of the creation is unfounded. The term prototokos in Colossians 1:15 does not imply that Christ is a created being. Instead, the context and the biblical use of the term emphasize rank, preeminence, and authority, not chronological order or membership within the group.
Myself:I'm afraid until you produce an example of protokos being outside of his group you point remains unproven so get to work on that.
Litigious:ous:The term prototokos is used in the Septuagint to convey primacy or supremacy, not just birth order. For example:
• Psalm 89:27 refers to King David: "I will make him the firstborn (prototokos), the highest of the kings of the earth." David was not the first king, nor was he the eldest in his family. Instead, prototokos here means preeminence and highest rank.
• Exodus 4:22: God calls Israel His "firstborn son." This designation refers to Israel's unique relationship and status, not chronological order.
Similarly, in Colossians 1:15, Christ is called "the firstborn of all creation" to signify His preeminence over creation, as demonstrated in the immediate context (v. 16), where it is stated that "all things were created through Him and for Him."
Myself I am afraid that it does not matter whether first or foremost as I stated before nincs the prototokos is ALWAYS part of the group or of the same kind as his forebearer until you produce an example to the contrary you point fails.
The assertion that prototokos "always makes Christ a member of the set" leads to logical inconsistencies. If this reasoning were applied universally:
•litigious: In Psalm 89:27, David would be part of the "kings of the earth" but also their creator, which is nonsensical.
What nonsense are you talking? Of course David was one of earth's kings why would he need to be their creator?
Litigious• In Exodus 4:22, Israel would be part of a "set" of other sons of God, contradicting the unique covenant relationship.
All nations are children of JEHOVAH Descendents of the prophet Noah no contradiction there.
Litigious:• Similarly, Colossians 1:15 would make Christ both a part of creation and the creator of "all things" (v. 16), which is a contradiction. The immediate context of v. 16 excludes this interpretation because Christ is described as the one through whom all creation exists.
Myself :the propositions en and dia are never used of JEHOVAH'S Role in creation these preposition show that that Jesus is JEHOVAH'S Instrument and not JEHOVAH.
Litihious:The claim that "prototokos" makes Jesus part of creation misunderstands the Greek construction. The phrase "firstborn of all creation" (prototokos pases ktiseos) does not indicate that Christ is part of creation but rather that He is over creation. The genitive case (pases ktiseos) is most appropriately understood as a genitive of subordination, meaning that Christ is sovereign over creation, not part of it. This usage aligns with biblical examples:
Myself:The firstborn is always part of the group.
•litigious Colossians 1:18: "Firstborn from the dead" does not mean Christ is part of death but that He is supreme over it.
Myself Nobody rules the dead he is the first to be resurrected to unending life.
The dead are dead and have no ruler
•litigious: Revelation 1:5: "Firstborn of the dead" emphasizes Christ’s preeminence over death, as the first to rise in glorified form and never die again.
Myself 1Corinthians ch.15:20NIV"But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep."
That is what his being first born from the dead means.
1Corinthians ch.7:1NIV"Do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives?"
No one rules the dead.
Litigious:The text claims that the preposition dia indicates subordination and that Christ is merely a "secondary agent" in creation. This is a misunderstanding of Greek grammar and theology. The preposition dia often denotes the means or instrument by which something is accomplished but does not imply inferiority or subordination. For instance:
In JEHOVAH'S Case the one dia who he accomplishes anything is ALWAYS Subordinate because he ALONE is the one ex whom ALL things are 1Corinthians ch.8:6 NKJV"yet for us there is one God, the Father, of (ex) whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live."
JEHOVAH is the ONE God EX whom all the information an energy in the creation is that is why the propositions "en" and "dia" are never used of his role in creation.
•litigious John 1:3: "All things were made through (dia) Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made."
Myself:"Made" referring to origin.
Litigious• Romans 11:36: "For from Him and through (dia) Him and to Him are all things.
The word "exists" here does NOT refer to origin but brother Paul explains it here at acts ch.17:28NKJV"for in(en) Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring.’"
So these are two different context when it comes to origin EN AND DIA ARE Never used of JEHOVAH But JEHOVAH's Creatures sustain, strengthen themselves through JEHOVAH In that case the initiative would be with the creature.
James ch.4:8
Litigious:in both cases, dia emphasizes the active and integral role of Christ in creation. If dia implied subordination, then God the Father Himself would be considered subordinate in Romans 11:36, which uses the same preposition.
Actually both cases the the subject is instrumental JEHOVAH sustains us but we still have to show initiative ,we have work to get money to feed and clothe ourselves we have to use what JEHOVAH Has provided wisely.
On the other hand it would be ridiculous to suggest that JEHOVAH needs to be sustained by anyone,
Jesus nakes his dependence on JEHOVAH Clear. John ch.5:19 NIV"Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do NOTHING by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."
LITIGIOUS: THE text misrepresents the relationship between the Father and the Son by asserting that Christ’s creative role is secondary. The New Testament consistently presents the Son as fully divine and equal to the Father (cf. John 1:1, John 10:30, Philippians 2:6). As Athanasius argued against Arius, the creative act belongs to God alone. If Christ participates in creation, He must be truly God.
No every single time JEHOVAH acts through someone in the Bible he is the sustaining agent never the other way around. He is never strengthened by anyone, Christ is strengthened by JEHOVAH he said so.
John ch.5:19
Among the examples of dia being used to denote instrumentality by thayers lexicon we have John ch.1:3,1Corinthians ch.8:6,Colossians ch.1:16, Hebrews ch.1:2.
https://biblehub.com/thayers/1223.htm
Nincsnevem rises again! On what thread or website did this discussion take place?
ReplyDeleteAnd he's chosen a much more appropriate handle ,fits to a T as the saying goes
DeleteI'd like to follow the thread, if I may...
ReplyDeleteGo for it but he repeats himself a lot
ReplyDeleteWhich website, please?
ReplyDeletehttps://aservantofjehovah.blogspot.com/2024/06/against-nincsnevem-ad-pluribus-xi.html?showComment=1735739200794#c1028056373778756861
DeleteI don't know if he has copies on his site but these are responses to comments he made on this blog.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe term prototokos does not exclusively refer to temporal birth order or membership within a group but instead often signifies preeminence, authority, and rank. This usage is evident in various biblical passages. For example, Psalm 89:27 refers to David as God's prototokos, declaring, "I will make him my firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth." David was neither the first king of Israel nor the eldest in his family, but the term establishes his supremacy and chosen status. Similarly, in Exodus 4:22, Israel is called God’s "firstborn son," a designation of unique status and covenant relationship, not of being the first nation chronologically.
ReplyDeleteIn Colossians 1:15, the immediate context underscores this preeminence. The subsequent verses clarify that "all things were created through him and for him," and "he is before all things" (vv. 16-17). Such language elevates Christ above creation as its originator and sustainer. The genitive construction pases ktiseos ("of all creation") is best understood as a genitive of subordination, denoting Christ's supremacy over creation rather than his inclusion within it. This interpretation aligns with the broader theological framework of the New Testament, which consistently presents Christ as the agent and sustainer of creation (e.g., John 1:3, Hebrews 1:2-3).
The claim that prototokos "always places Christ within a group" is problematic for several reasons. First, this assumption leads to logical contradictions. For instance, if Christ is both the "firstborn of all creation" and its creator (Col. 1:16), it would imply that he created himself, an illogical proposition. Additionally, in Revelation 1:5 and Colossians 1:18, Christ is called the "firstborn from the dead." This phrase emphasizes his preeminence in resurrection and eternal life, not his inclusion within the state of death. The dead have no ruler, but Christ's victory over death demonstrates his authority and unique position as the "firstfruits" of those who will rise (1 Corinthians 15:20).
Regarding the use of the preposition dia ("through") in reference to Christ’s role in creation, it is incorrect to assume that it implies subordination. The New Testament consistently uses dia to describe Christ’s integral and active role in creation (John 1:3; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2). The same preposition is used in Romans 11:36 to describe God the Father: "For from him and through (dia) him and to him are all things." If dia implied subordination, this would also subordinate the Father, which is an untenable conclusion. Rather, dia emphasizes the Son’s agency in creation as the eternal Word through whom all things came into being.
The claim that the Father alone is the source of creation (ex hou, "from whom," as in 1 Corinthians 8:6) does not diminish the Son’s divinity or creative role. In Trinitarian theology, the Father is the source (arche), but the Son is the agent through whom creation is accomplished. This cooperative activity reflects the unity and equality within the Godhead. To assert that Christ’s creative role is secondary misunderstands the relational distinction within the Trinity. The Son’s dependence on the Father, as expressed in passages like John 5:19, reflects his incarnational mission and voluntary submission, not his inferiority in essence or nature.
DeleteMoreover, the identification of Christ as the arche ("beginning") in Revelation 3:14 does not support the claim that he is a created being. The term arche has a range of meanings, including "origin," "source," and "ruler." In the context of Revelation and the broader New Testament, it is best understood as signifying Christ’s role as the source and ruler of creation, not as its first product. This interpretation is consistent with Revelation 1:8 and 22:13, where the same term is used for God, who is unquestionably uncreated. Christ shares in this divine identity, as evidenced by his titles "Alpha and Omega" and "First and Last."
Finally, the theological implication that Christ must be subordinate because "the Son can do nothing by himself" (John 5:19) ignores the context of Christ’s earthly ministry and the doctrine of the hypostatic union. In his incarnation, the Son operates in full dependence on the Father to fulfill his redemptive mission. This voluntary dependence does not negate his equality with the Father, as affirmed in John 10:30 ("I and the Father are one") and Philippians 2:6 ("though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped").