P
peeteyg
Guest
I was wondering if anyone can give me any insight into this verse? I have a JW friend that is saying this proves jesus is created like the Arians thought. Can anyone help me to refute their claims? Thanks
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
P
prodigalson12
Guest
I took an extensive bible study years ago, what it focused upon was how to avoid cults, and in particular, we analyzed their version of the bible. You should start with that one, take note as to the subtle changes with their wordings. There are countless errors and out right demonic influence in their version, if you want to go toe to toe with them, there is plenty of ammo to choose from there. Sadly, most do not even read their bibles, just carry them around, and believe what they are told as being a proper interpretation. Stuff like they believe they will go to hell if they do not go door to door is a prime example.
T
Thankful10
Guest
(Luke 1:34-35) ‘How will this be," Mary asked the angel, “Since I am a virgin?”I was wondering if anyone can give me any insight into this verse? I have a JW friend that is saying this proves jesus is created like the Arians thought. Can anyone help me to refute their claims? Thanks
The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.
J
Jerok
Guest
What exactly is the issue here? Is it with the phrase ‘first-born?’
‘First-born’ doesn’t mean that Mary had other children.
Think of Egypt where all the ‘first-born’ sons were killed. This means the ‘first child born, period’ not ‘first child born of many children’
If an Egyptian family had 1 child, and he was the son, he was killed too. Being ‘first-born’.
‘First-born’ doesn’t mean that Mary had other children.
Think of Egypt where all the ‘first-born’ sons were killed. This means the ‘first child born, period’ not ‘first child born of many children’
If an Egyptian family had 1 child, and he was the son, he was killed too. Being ‘first-born’.
B
bpbasilphx
Guest
“Born” and the related word “begotten” mean something quite different from the word “created”.
A man (or an animal, for that matter) creates or makes something OF A DIFFERENT NATURE from himself. Ants build anthills, beavers build dams, men build houses or whatever.
A man begets something OF THE SAME NATURE as himself, which then gets born. Ants beget more ants, beavers beget more beavers, men beget more human beings.
And the Father begets the Son in eternity. In time the Son is conceived in the womb of the Virgin and born on earth. And the Son has the same nature as the Father.
A man (or an animal, for that matter) creates or makes something OF A DIFFERENT NATURE from himself. Ants build anthills, beavers build dams, men build houses or whatever.
A man begets something OF THE SAME NATURE as himself, which then gets born. Ants beget more ants, beavers beget more beavers, men beget more human beings.
And the Father begets the Son in eternity. In time the Son is conceived in the womb of the Virgin and born on earth. And the Son has the same nature as the Father.
P
peeteyg
Guest
It has to do with the fact that JW’s think that jesus was a created angel. He is not god and is actually the archangel michael. This passage is proof that jesus is a created being according to him.
“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation”
“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation”
J
Jerok
Guest
Huh. Well we are all born in the image and likeness of God. That’s JW for ya.It has to do with the fact that JW’s think that jesus was a created angel. He is not god and is actually the archangel michael. This passage is proof that jesus is a created being according to him.
“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation”
F
FCEGM
Guest
St. Paul’s usage of “first-born” expresses the truth that Christ is the only-begotten Son of the Father. JW’s cannot understand that there is no lapse of time in the begetting of the Son; they think of Christ as the first creature of the Father (outside of the Being of God), and read this passage of Colossians as signifying that. The eternal Father eternally begets (within His own nature and essence) an eternal Son, i.e., another Divine Person (another “Who”) with the Divine nature and essence. The Holy Spirit is the eternal Love between the two, accounting for a third eternal Divine Person in His own right.I was wondering if anyone can give me any insight into this verse? I have a JW friend that is saying this proves jesus is created like the Arians thought. Can anyone help me to refute their claims? Thanks
One of the great experts on St. Paul was that late Fr. Fernand Prat, S. J.; here is a brief excerpt from his writing on this passage: “. . .for the Son to be placed in the category of creatures, it would be necessary either for himself to have been created, or for the creature * to have been produced by generation. Now, outside of him, nothing is begotten, since he is the only-begotten Son, and, on the other hand, he is not created himself, since all that has been created in heaven and on earth has been created by him, in him, and for him,”* The Theology of St. Paul, vol. 1.
Some sites and articles that might help you in your discussions with your friend:
catholicxjw.com/
catholic.com/library/Strategies_of_Jehovah_Witness.asp
catholic.com/library/God_of_the_Jehovah_Witnesses.asp
catholic.com/library/Stumpers_for_Jehovah_Witnesse.asp
catholic.com/thisrock/1995/9502fea5.asp
catholic.com/thisrock/1990/9004fea.asp
P
peary
Guest
“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” Col.1:15I was wondering if anyone can give me any insight into this verse? I have a JW friend that is saying this proves jesus is created like the Arians thought. Can anyone help me to refute their claims? Thanks
"Then God said: “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” Genesis 1:26
I have no clue as to what the Aryans thought, or what your JW friend is talking about, actually.
C
Catholic_Dude
Guest
The term “firstborn” does not mean “first created” - that’s the key. The “firstborn” in Hebrew (and ancient) thought is a status indicating highest rank above everyone else.I was wondering if anyone can give me any insight into this verse? I have a JW friend that is saying this proves jesus is created like the Arians thought. Can anyone help me to refute their claims? Thanks
While it usually is given to the son that is born first, there are significant situations where it is given to other sons who were not born first, indicating God’s favor was transferred to them and that they hold a special place in God’s sight. Exodus 4: Then say to Pharaoh, 'This is what the LORD says: Israel is my firstborn son
1 Chron 5: 1 The sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel (he was the firstborn, but when he defiled his father’s marriage bed, his rights as firstborn were given to the sons of Joseph son of Israel; so he could not be listed in the genealogical record in accordance with his birthright, 2 and though Judah was the strongest of his brothers and a ruler came from him, the rights of the firstborn belonged to Joseph)
1 Chron 26:10 Hosah the Merarite had sons: Shimri the first (although he was not the firstborn, his father had appointed him the first),
There are other examples in the Bible, but these should give you a good idea of what it means. It’s a status of the highest honor, though not necessarily tied to birth order.
The JW wants to read this as “first created” but that’s incorrect, because it’s a title in regards to status, not creation.
And notice how Col 1:18 uses the term “firstborn” as well, saying Jesus is “firstborn from the dead.” This doesn’t mean Jesus was the first person to come back to life (note Lazarus), but rather that Jesus came back to life in a most extraordinary way, Resurrected in a glorified body! ALL the resurrected now derive their glory from Christ’s Resurrection.
And if the JW distortion wasn’t bad enough, look at how the JW’s Bible deliberately inserts words into the text to deflect away from Christ’s Divinity in that very text of Col 1:
JW BIBLE: 16 because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities.** All [other] things** have been created through him and for him. 17 Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist,
Notice how the “translators” insert “other” repeatedly in the text when that word isn’t actually there! That’s blatant and inexcusable tampering with the Bible.
See this article for other JW stuff:
catholicnick.blogspot.com/2009/06/basic-jw-apologetics.html
T
Todd_Easton
Guest
My :twocents: …
The first part of the verse, “He is the image of the invisible God,” seems to mean that Jesus Christ, as man or with respect to his created human nature, is the visible image of the invisible God," or, in other words, “in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9); Jesus Christ has both a divine nature and a created human nature; Jesus Christ is both God and man; Jesus Christ is both Creator and creature.
The second part of the verse, “the first-born of all creation,” does not mean that Jesus Christ’s human nature was created before any other creature, since many men (creatures) had lived and died long before Jesus Christ’s human nature was created in the womb of the Virgin Mary, but “the first-born of all creation” seems to refer to the exalted dignity that Jesus’ Christ’s created human nature acquired because it was united to the divine nature (the Creator) as the verses that follow, Colossians 1:16-17, seem to make plain, where Jesus Christ’s activities as Creator are described.
The union of Jesus Christ’s divine nature with his created human nature made him “the first-born of all creation,” somewhat like the way God’s favor made King David “the first-born, the highest of all the kings of the earth,” (Psalm 89:28) even though David wasn’t the first king on the earth, wasn’t the first king of Israel, and wasn’t even his father’s first-born son; David had seven older brothers.
Similarly, Jesus Christ acquired the status of “the first-born of all creation,” because, after humbling himself and obediently accepting death on the Cross, “…God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord…” (Philippians 2:9-11)
The first part of the verse, “He is the image of the invisible God,” seems to mean that Jesus Christ, as man or with respect to his created human nature, is the visible image of the invisible God," or, in other words, “in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9); Jesus Christ has both a divine nature and a created human nature; Jesus Christ is both God and man; Jesus Christ is both Creator and creature.
The second part of the verse, “the first-born of all creation,” does not mean that Jesus Christ’s human nature was created before any other creature, since many men (creatures) had lived and died long before Jesus Christ’s human nature was created in the womb of the Virgin Mary, but “the first-born of all creation” seems to refer to the exalted dignity that Jesus’ Christ’s created human nature acquired because it was united to the divine nature (the Creator) as the verses that follow, Colossians 1:16-17, seem to make plain, where Jesus Christ’s activities as Creator are described.
The union of Jesus Christ’s divine nature with his created human nature made him “the first-born of all creation,” somewhat like the way God’s favor made King David “the first-born, the highest of all the kings of the earth,” (Psalm 89:28) even though David wasn’t the first king on the earth, wasn’t the first king of Israel, and wasn’t even his father’s first-born son; David had seven older brothers.
Similarly, Jesus Christ acquired the status of “the first-born of all creation,” because, after humbling himself and obediently accepting death on the Cross, “…God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord…” (Philippians 2:9-11)
J
JeanneH
Guest
My vs 17 reads: Before anything was created, he existed and he holds all things in unity.(JB)The term “firstborn” does not mean “first created” - that’s the key. The “firstborn” in Hebrew (and ancient) thought is a status indicating highest rank above everyone else.
:
JW BIBLE: 16 because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities.** All [other] things** have been created through him and for him. 17 Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist,
Notice how the “translators” insert “other” repeatedly in the text when that word isn’t actually there! That’s blatant and inexcusable tampering with the Bible.
They have to put in the word “OTHER” because if they didn’t they would read that Jesus created all things and all things are held together by Jesus. So who only can hold all things together? God of course.
So they put in extra words to make their bible say what they believe.
R
rdscheirer
Guest
Genesis 1::26
Then God said: Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.
Seems to me the Jewish(Hebrew) text starts out with a God that already has “parts” as in the Trinity
Then God said: Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.
Seems to me the Jewish(Hebrew) text starts out with a God that already has “parts” as in the Trinity
- Status
- Not open for further replies.