Colossians 1:15: Firstborn of All Creation

0. Introduction

There are several different categories of texts which describe Christ as created, but not every single text which be discussed in detail here. There are verses which directly describe him as “created,” (Prov. 8:22; Col. 1:15; Rev. 3:14.) and “first-born,” (Rom. 8:29; Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:6.) “only-begotten,” (Joh. 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1Joh. 4:9) “faithful to the one who made him” (Heb. 3:2), “established (or ‘set up’),” (Prov. 8:23.) “brought forth,” (Prov. 8:23-25; Joh. 6:57.) “begotten,” (Psa. 2:7; Heb. 1:5.) and “born of God.” (1 Joh. 5:1, 18.) These are the most direct texts used by the Arians to support their doctrine of a created Christ. For a discussion of Arian proof texts and the orthodox response see J.N.D. Kelly's Early Christian Doctrines, p. 225-231.

1. The Proper Sonship of Christ

The Creed of the Church obliges us to confess, “one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father.” (Constantinople, 381) Christ is the one in whom “the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily.” (Col. 2:9) Not a lesser divinity, but the entire fulness of the divine nature. He is “the true light,” (Joh. 1:9) and he shares the same eternal and pure life that the Father has, “as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself.” (Joh. 5:26) These kinds of statements cannot be made about a creature, no creature has the same life in himself as the Father. God is by nature necessary and has within himself life to the highest degree, inherent and indestructible, “who alone has immortality.” (1 Tim. 6:16) Whatever kind of life the Father has, the Son has. If the Son’s existence were in any way inferior these verses would have no truth. For the Son to truly be “the only-begotten God,” he must not be a creature. (Joh. 1:18) As Victorinus Marius argued, the Son and Spirit must be God because they have the very same life as the Father. 

"All," he says "which the Father has, he has given to me"; and likewise: "The Father, inasmuch as he has life from himself, so he has given to the Son to have life from himself." Therefore, like the Father, so the Son is life and life from himself. Indeed, this is the very life which is power of living for himself and for others, without receiving it elsewhere. Life is, therefore, movement, original movement, unique movement, self-movement, only-begotten movement. This is the Logos. Truly this is the life through which all things live. And because it is life, it is he "through whom all things have been made," and "for whom" all things have been made, because all things after being purified return to eternal life; and all things have been made in him because these things which have been made are in him life." (Against the Arians, 3.2.3.)

Creatures have life in a lesser and contingent way, but the Son and Spirit live by "one movement" (Adv. Ar. 4.22.8) by which Victorinus means that the processions are necessary divine actions of a unique sort, borrowing language from Plotinus to describe the origin of the three initial hypostases. (Enneads 5.2.1.) If begotten here means “created” as the Arians claim, then everything besides God himself is begotten from nothing and Jesus is in no way unique. Nowhere does Christ ever claim to be created from nothing, to the contrary he says, "I proceeded forth and came from God," εγώ γαρ εκ του θεού εξήλθον. (Joh. 8:42) The origin of the Son must be utterly unique from the created order or he is not truly the "only-begotten," if he is created from nothing like every other creature then his begetting is by no means unique. (Joh. 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 Joh. 5:18) He is “his own son” using ιδιος, which signifies proper sonship, not an adopted sonship. ( Rom. 8:32) Jesus Christ is not God’s adopted son, rather, he is truly God’s “own Son,” ἰδίου υἱοῦ and God is his “own Father.” (Joh. 5:18; Acts 20:28.) Here, the term ἴδιος signifies what is appropriate by nature as in Lk. 6:44; Joh. 1:41; 1Tim. 3:4, 5; 5:4, see also Marvin Vincent, Word Studies Vol. II., p. 134.) Paul elsewhere refers to the pre-existent Christ as a “son,” he wrote, “in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds.” Christ was God’s “Son” when the worlds were made through him. (Heb. 1:2) The pre-existent Christ is here described as a “Son,” it was not through Christ’s human nature that the worlds were made. And similarly, Heb. 1:6 states that God will “again” bring “the first-born into the world.” God had once brought someone who was already his “first-born” into the world, and he will again bring some who is already his “first-born” into the world. In other words, his divine sonship is prior to the incarnation.

 

“For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.” (Joh. 5:18)

Note that “equality” with God is tied specifically to his divine sonship.To claim to be the proper Son of God is to claim to be “equal with God.” With the phrase “he was breaking the Sabbath,” the Judaizers are done away with, and it is proven that the Son must be God because he is not subject to the laws of God, and is free to break and amend them as he wishes.

“The Jews answered him, “We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God.”” (Joh. 19:7)

His claims of divine sonship were the cause of his death because they were considered “blasphemy.” (compare Mk. 14:62-64) To the Arian, we must ask, which of the Jewish laws did Jesus violate by claiming to be the only-begotten Son of God? The Trinitarian has Exod. 20:3; Deut. 4:35 and 5:7 at his disposal but I have never had an Arian offer a citation. As the Jews elsewhere said, “You, being a man, claim to be God.” (Joh. 10:33) If Jesus were claiming a lesser created sonship, like the angelic beings, as the Arians claim, then the Jewish reaction is entirely unwarranted. But not only is this the reaction of the Jewish clergy to Christ’s claims of sonship, but the author of the fourth gospel himself considers the sonship claims of Jesus to imply equality with God in John 5:18, which is the author’s own commentary. If the Son were created from nothing he would be an adopted son like any of the other angels, not the “only-begotten,” and “to which of the angels did he ever say: “You are my Son, today I have become your Father?” (Heb. 1:5) The saints are described as “adopted” (υἱοθεσίαν) sons in Eph. 1:5 but never is this sort of language used for Jesus. As St. Epiphanius says,

“But as the Son is like the Father—and more than “like” him, because he is the same as the Father and his equal—my concern is not merely to prove his likeness, but  his sameness and equality as God of God, Son of the Father, and not different from his essence, but begotten of him.” (Panarion, 2.2.8)

If he is the proper Son of the Father, begotten from the Father and not created from nothing, then he must be divine in nature. A human child who is naturally begotten will be a human. If Christ is truly begotten from the true God then he is also by nature the true God. As all Sons of men are consubstantial in humanity, so is the Son of God consubstantial with God the Father in his deity, God of God, as the Chalcedonian Symbol (451) states. As St. Ignatius of Antioch, the student of St. John the apostle says,

“There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first passible and then impassible — even Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Eph. 7:2)

The Arians deny that the Son is truly begotten of the Father, and truly God, they are also Eutychians and deny his full humanity—they preach a Christ that is neither fully God nor fully man. Again St. Epiphanius says, “Whatever begets, begets its like—and not only its like, but its equal in sameness. A man begets a Man and a God begets a God.” (Panarion 2.2.6-7) For this reason the epistle to the Hebrews says of Christ, “And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His essence,” ὃς ὢν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ. (Heb. 1:3) His essence or ὑποστάσεως is not merely “similar” to the Father but exactly the same. With the tradition of the apostles and the Church described briefly we may move to discussion of the texts.

2. Arian Proof Texts

According to the common version, Col. 1:15 describes Christ as, “the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every creature.” (KJV) They reason that an image is by definition not the reality, Christ is not the invisible God, but his image and perfect representation, just as a mirror reflects the face of the beholder, or a portrait shares a likeness to its subject. St. Athanasius applies this passage and Prov. 8:22 to the human nature of the Son. (Expositio Fidei 1) The reason is that the passage is describing the image of the invisible God. The divine nature of the Son is incorporeal and invisible, so it could not be referring to his deity as the “image” of God, because an image is visible, discernible, and comprehensible, therefore the apostle must be referring to the human nature of the Son as the “image” of God, and as “the first-born of every creature,” his flesh is neither invisible nor is it uncreated. Even Marcellus concedes this point,

"Now this most holy Word was not called the firstborn of all creation before he became man, for how is it possible for him who is eternal to be someone’s firstborn? Rather, the one the Divine Scriptures name the firstborn of every creature is the first new man, to whom God wanted all things to be subjected.” (Eusebius, Against Marcellus, 2.3.)

Can the Arians produce a single text about the divine nature of the pre-existent Son as a creature? There is none, none of the Christophanies of the Old Testament describe him as a creation, “this most holy Word was not called the firstborn of all creation before he became man.” Now, we must not deny, however, that the language designates something which is created, for his flesh was created. Philip Schaff comments, 

"[Arian proofs] Such as Prov. viii. 22-25 (Comp. Sir. i. 4; xxiv. 8f.), where personified Wisdom, i.e., the Logos, says (according to the Septuagint): Κύριος ἔκτισέν με [Heb. קָנָנִי Vulg. possedit me] ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ· πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐθεμελίωσέν με, κ.τ.λ.This passage seemed clearly to prove the two propositions of Arius, that the Father created the Son, and that he created him for the purpose of creating the world through him (εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ). Acts ii. 36: Ὅτι καὶ κύριον αὐτὸν καὶ Χριστὸν ἐποίησεν ὁ θεός.Heb. i. 4: Κρείττων γενόμενος τῶν ἀγγέλων. Heb. iii. 2: Πιστὸν ὄντα τῷ ποιήσαντι αὐτόν. John i 14: Ὁ λόγος σάρξ ἐγένετο. Phil. ii. 7-9. The last two passages are of course wholly inapposite, as they treat of the incarnation of the Son of God, not of his pre-temporal existence and essence. Heb. i. 4 refers to the exaltation of the God-Man. Most plausible of all is the famous passage: πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως, Col. i. 15, from which the Arians inferred that Christ himself is a κτίσις of God, to wit, the first creature of all. But πρωτότοκοςis not equivalent to πρωτόκτιστοςor πρωτόπλαστος: on the contrary, Christ is by this very term distinguished from the creation, and described as the Author, Upholder, and End of the creation. A creature cannot possibly be the source of life for all creatures. The meaning of the expression, therefore, is: born before every creature, i.e., before anything was made. The text indicates the distinction between the eternal generation of the Son from the essence of the Father, and the temporal creation of the world out of nothing by the Son. Yet there is a difference between μονογενήςand πρωτότοκος , which Athanasius himself makes: the former referring to the relation of the Son to the Father, the latter, to his relation to the world." (History of the Christian Church, Vol. III, section 124.) 

The meaning in Col. 1:15 is that the humanity of the Son is the greatest creation of God. In many places there is a figurative use of “first-born.” The nation of Israel is often called the “first-born” son of God, because it is the nation most greatly favored by God. (Exod. 4:22, 23; Jer. 38:9 (31:9).) Also, of more importance, it is used of David in a Messianic Psalm, God proclaims “I also shall make him my first-born, the highest of the kings of the earth.” (Psa. 89:27) It cannot be suggested that David was the first creation of God, brought forth ex nihilo before the cosmos, rather, the term signifies prominence not chronology. Therefore, no exegete is obliged to think that “first-born” in Col. 1:15 means first creature.

3. Grammatical Considerations

The term πρωτότοκος occurs one hundred and thirty-six times in the New Testament. (Gen. 4:4; 10:15; 22:21; 25:13, 25; 27:19, 32; 35:23; 36:15; 38:6, 7; 41:51; 43:33; 46:8; 48:18; 49:3; Exod. 4:22, 23; 6:14; 11:5 (4*); 12:12, 29 (4*); 13:2, 13, 15 (4*); 34:19 (2*), 20 (2*); Lev. 27:26; 22:28; Num. 1:20; 3:2, 12, 13 (3*), 18, 40, 41 (2*), 42, 43, 45, 46, 50; 8:16, 17 (2*), 18:15, 17 (3*); 33:4; 26:5; Deut. 12:6, 17; 14:23; 15:18 (2*), 19; 21:15, 16, 17; 33:17; Josh. 6:26 (2*), 17:1 (2*); Jdg. 8:20; Neh. 10:37 (2*); 1Sam. 8:2; 14:40; 2Sam. 3:2; 13:21; 19:44; 1Ki. 16:34; 2Ki. 3:27; 1Ch. 1:29; 2:3, 13, 25 (2*), 27, 42, 50; 3:1, 15; 4:4; 5:1 (2*), 3, 12; 6:13; 8:1, 30, 38, 39; 9:5, 31, 36, 44; 26:2, 4, 10; 2Ch. 21:3; 26:6; Psa. 77:51 (78:51); 88:28 (89:27); 104:36 (105:36); 134:8 (135:8); 135:10 (136:10); Eze. 44:30; Jer. 4:31; 38:9 (31:9); Zech. 12:10; Mic. 6:7; Lk. 2:7; Rom. 8:29; Col. 1:15, 18; Heb. 1:6; 11:28; 12:23; Rev. 1:5.) and the related πρωτοτόκιά which signifies the ‘birth-right of the first-born’ occurs eight times. (Gen. 25:31, 32, 33, 34; 27:36; Deut. 21:16; 1Ch. 5:1; Heb. 12:16.) The word πρωτότοκος was originally compounded from πρῶτός which can signify “first” in temporal order or priority, (William Arndt, Felix W. Gingrich, A Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Grand Rapids, Michigan: The University of Chicago Press and Zondervan Publishing House, 1952, p. 732-734.) and τόκος which signifies that which is begotten, or “offspring.” (Timothy Friberg, Barbara Friberg, Neva F. Mille, Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament. Canada: Trafford Publishing, 2005, p. 382.)

Often πρωτότοκος has a literal meaning, for example, Jesus of Nazareth was truly Mary’s first-born Son, (Lk. 2:7.) and there are various mentions of the first-born offspring of men, (Gen. 10:15; 22:21; 25:13, 25; 27:19, 32; 35:23; 36:15; 38:6, 7; 41:51; 43:33; 46:8; 48:18; 49:3; Exod. 4:22, 23; 6:14; 11:5 (4*); 12:12, 29 (4*); 13:15 (3*); Num. 1:20; 3:2, 12, 13 (2*), 18, 40, 41, (42), 43; 8:16, 17, 18:15 (2*); 33:4; 26:5; Deut. 21:15, 16, 17; Josh. 6:26 (2*), 17:1 (2*); Jdg. 8:20; Neh. 10:37 (2*); 1Sam. 8:2; 14:40; 2Sam. 3:2; 13:21; 19:44; 1Ki. 16:34; 2Ki. 3:27; 1Ch. 1:29; 2:3, 13, 25 (2*), 27, 42, 50; 3:1, 15; 4:4; 5:1 (2*), 3, 12; 6:13; 8:1, 30, 38, 39; 9:5, 31, 36, 44; 26:2, 4, 10; 2Ch. 21:3; 26:6; Psa. 77:51 (78:51); 88:28 (89:27); 104:36 (105:36); 134:8 (135:8); 135:10 (136:10); Jer. 4:31; 38:9 (31:9); Zech. 12:10; Lk. 2:7; Heb. 11:28; 12:23; Rev. 1:5.) and animals. (Exod. 13:2, 13, 15; 34:19 (2*), 20 (2*); Lev. 27:26; 22:28; Num. 3:13, 40, 41, (42), 45, 46, 50; 8:16, 17, 18:15, 17 (3*); Deut. 12:6, 17; 14:23; 15:18 (2*), 19; 33:17; Psa. 134:8 (135:8); Eze. 44:30; Mic. 6:7.) It has long been recognized that until the fourth century “first-created” and “first-born” were used interchangeably. (John Patrick, Clement of Alexandria. Edinburgh: William Blackwood and Sons, 1914, p. 103-104; John Suicer, Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus, E Patribus Graecis Ordine Alphabetico. Amsterdam: J. Wetstenios & G. Smith, 1728, p. 878-883.) 

It seems unlikely that the term “first-created” was even in use until the second century as there are no entries for the term in Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, or in Arndt and Gingrich’s A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. But perhaps someone else has examples of its usage. Smyth gives the useful comment. 

“The genitive may denote a whole, a part of which is denoted by the noun it limits. The genitive of the divided whole may be used with any word that expresses or implies a part… The genitive of the whole stands before or after the word denoting the part: των Θρασκων πελτασται targeteers of the Thracians. T.7.27.” (Greek Grammar. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1956, p. 315.)

Hence, if the phrase πάσης κτίσεως is to be understood as a partitive genitive in Col. 1:15 it would communicate that the subject was a part of creation, or a created being. There are a few criterion that Smyth gives for determining what sort of genitive construction is under consideration, he writes, the “connection must often be determined (1) by the meaning of the words, (2) by the context, (3) by the facts presupposed to be known.” (Ibid., p. 314.) 

Nigel Turner wrote approvingly of the NEB rendering, “He is the primacy over all created things,” which understands the genitive phrase as a kind of “objective genitive,” which regards πρωτότοκος as merely expressing preeminence. (Grammatical Insights into the New Testament, 1965, p. 123.) 

Daniel Wallace suggests an "objective genitive" which he calls the “genitive of subordination.” (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 1996, p. 103., ftn. 83.) He admits this new category is not found in standard grammars, and this is due to the fact that it is entirely unnecessary. 

Jason BeDuhn claims “‘over’ can in no way be derived from the Greek genitive article.” (Truth in Translation, 2003, p. 81.) Modern translations like the Christian Standard Bible, Common English Bible, Lexingham English Version, and the popular New International Version all disagree with him. 

There is a causal (ὅτι) clause used in Col. 1:16 because the passages continue to explain that his supremacy causes his superiority in rank. In other words, the apostle expresses that he is firstborn “because (ὅτι)” the heavens and earth were created through him, he has temporal priority “he is before all things.” (Col. 1:16-18)