Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Colossians 1:15
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
15 17. the thought continued: greatness of the redeemer as head of creation
15. who is ] Here opens, in closest connexion with the preceding matter, a confession of truth and faith about the Person of the Redeeming Son of God, the King of the redeemed. He appears in His relation to ( a) the Eternal Father, ( b) the created Universe, especially the Universe of spirits, ( c) the Church of redeemed men. Every clause is pregnant of Divine truth, and the whole teaches with majestic emphasis the great lesson that the Person is all-important to the Work, the true Christ to the true salvation.
the image ] So 2Co 4:4. The Greek word ( eicn) occurs often in Biblical Greek, most frequently (in O.T.) as a translation of the Hebrew tselem. Usage shews that on the whole it connotes not only similarity but also “ representation (as a derived likeness) and manifestation ” (Grimm’s N. T. Lexicon, ed. Thayer; and see Lightfoot’s note, or rather essay, here). An instructive passage for study of the word is Heb 10:1, where it is opposed to “ shadow,” and plainly means “ the things themselves, as seen.” Thus the Lord Christ, the mystery of His Person and Natures, is not only a Being resembling God, but God Manifest. Cp. Joh 14:9, and Heb 1:3.
“Christian antiquity has ever regarded the expression ‘image of God’ as denoting the eternal Son’s perfect equality with the Father in respect of His substance, power, and eternity The Son is the Father’s Image in all things save only in being the Father” (Ellicott; with reff. inter alia to Hilary de Synodis, 73; Athan. contra Arian. i. 20, 21).
the invisible God ] For the same word see 1Ti 1:17; Heb 11:27. And cp. Deu 4:12; Joh 1:18; Joh 5:37; 1Ti 6:16; 1Jn 4:20. This assertion of the Invisibility of the Father has regard to the manifesting function of the Image, the Son. See Lightfoot here. The Christian Fathers generally (not universally) took it otherwise, holding that the “Image” here refers wholly to the Son in His Godhead, which is as invisible as that of the Father, being indeed the same. But the word “Image” by usage tends to the thought of vision, in some sort; and the collocation of it here with “the Invisible” brings this out with a certain emphasis. Not that the reference of the “Image” here is directly or primarily to our Lord’s visible Body of the Incarnation, but to His being, in all ages and spheres of created existence, the Manifester of the Father to created intelligences. His being this was, so to speak, the basis and antecedent of His gracious coming in the flesh, to be “seen with the eyes” of men on earth (1Jn 1:1). In the words of St Basil ( Epist. xxxviii. 8, quoted by Lightfoot) the creature “views the Unbegotten Beauty in the Begotten.”
the firstborn of every creature ] Better perhaps, Firstborn of all creation (Lightfoot and R.V.), or, with a very slight paraphrase, Firstborn over all creation; standing to it in the relation of priority of existence and supremacy of inherited right. So, to borrow a most inadequate analogy, the heir of an hereditary throne might be described as “firstborn to, or over, all the realm.” The word “ creature ” (from the (late) Latin creatura) here probably, as certainly in Romans 8, means “creation” as a whole; a meaning to which the Greek word inclines in usage, rather than to that of “a creature” (which latter Ellicott and Alford however adopt). See Lightfoot’s note.
“ Firstborn: ” cp. Psa 89:27; and the Palestinian Jewish application, thence derived, of the title “Firstborn” to the Messiah. A similar word was used of the mysterious “Logos” among the Alexandrian Jews, as shewn in the writings of St Paul’s contemporary, Philo. Studied in its usage, and in these connexions, the word thus denotes ( a) Priority of existence, so that the Son appears as antecedent to the created Universe, and therefore as belonging to the eternal Order of being (see the following context); ( b) Lordship over “all creation,” by this right of eternal primogeniture. See Psa 89:27, and cp. Heb 1:2.
“ Of all creation: ” so lit. The force of the Greek genitive, in connexion with the word “ first ” (as here “ first born”), may be either partitive, so that the Son would be described as first of created things, or so to speak comparative (see a case exactly in point, Joh 1:15, Greek), so that He would be described as first, or antecedent, in regard of created things. And the whole following context, as well as the previous clause, decides for this latter explanation of the grammar.
On the theological importance of the passage see further Appendix C.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Who is the image of the invisible God – eikon tou Theou tou aoratou. The objects. here, as it is in the parallel place in Eph 1:20-23, is to give a just view of the exaltation of the Redeemer. It is probable that, in both cases, the design is to meet some erroneous opinion on this subject that prevailed in those churches, or among those that claimed to be teachers there. See the Introduction to this Epistle, and compare the notes at Eph 1:20-23. For the meaning of the phrase occurring here, the image of the invisible God, see the Heb 1:3, note, and 2Co 4:4, note. The meaning is, that he represents to mankind the perfections of God, as an image, figure, or drawing does the object which it is made to resemble. See the word image – eikon – explained in the notes at Heb 10:1. It properly denotes that which is a copy or delineation of a thing; which accurately and fully represents it, in contradistinction from a rough sketch, or outline; compare Rom 8:29; 1Co 11:7; 1Co 15:49.
The meaning here is, that the being and perfections of God are accurately and fully represented by Christ. In what respects particularly he was thus a representative of God, the apostle proceeds to state in the following verses, to wit, in his creative power, in his eternal existence, in his heirship over the universe, in the fulness that dwelt in him. This cannot refer to him merely as incarnate, for some of the things affirmed of him pertained to him before his incarnation; and the idea is, that in all things Christ fairly represents to us the divine nature and perfections. God is manifest to us through him; 1Ti 3:16. We see God in him as we see an object in that which is in all respects an exact copy of it. God is invisible. No eye has seen him, or can see him; but in what Christ is, and has done in the works of creation and redemption, we have a fair and full representation of what God is; see the notes at Joh 1:18; Joh 14:9, note.
The first-born of every creature – Among all the creatures of God, or over all his creation, occupying the rank and pro-eminence of the first-born. The first-born, or the oldest son, among the Hebrews as elsewhere, had special privileges. He was entitled to a double portion of the inheritance. It has been, also, and especially in oriental countries, a common thing for the oldest son to succeed to the estate and the title of his father. In early times, the first-born son was the officiating priest in the family, in the absence or on the death of the father. There can be no doubt that the apostle here has reference to the usual distinctions and honors conferred on the first-born, and means to say that, among all the creatures of God, Christ occupied a pre-eminence similar to that. He does not say that, in all respects, he resembled the first-born in a family; nor does he say that he himself was a creature, for the point of his comparison does not turn on these things, and what he proceeds to affirm respecting him is inconsistent with the idea of his being a created being himself.
He that created all things that are in heaven and that are in earth, was not himself created. That the apostle did not mean to represent him as a creature, is also manifest from the reason which he assigns why he is called the first-born. He is the image of God, and the first-born of every creature, for – hoti – by him were all things created. That is, he sustains the elevated rank of the first-born, or a high eminence over the creation, because by him all things were created in heaven and in earth. The language used here, also, does not fairly imply that he was a creature, or that he was in nature and rank one of those in relation to whom it is said he was the first-born. It is true that the word first-born – prototokos – properly means the first-born child of a father or mother, Mat 1:25; Luk 2:7; or the first-born of animals. But two things are also to be remarked in regard to the use of the word:
(1) It does not necessarily imply that anyone is born afterward in the family, for it would be used of the first-born, though an only child; and,
(2) It is used to denote one who is chief, or who is highly distinguished and pre-eminent. Thus, it is employed in Rom 8:29, That he might be the first-born among many brethren. So, in Col 1:18, it is said that he was the first-born from the dead; not that he was literally the first that was raised from the dead, which was not the fact, but that he might be pre-eminent among those that are raised; compare Exo 4:22. The meaning, then, is, that Christ sustains the most exalted rank in the universe; he is pre-eminent above all others; he is at the head of all things. The expression does not mean that he was begotten before all creatures, as it is often explained, but refers to the simple fact that he sustains the highest rank over the creation. He is the Son of God. He is the heir of all things. All other creatures are also the offspring of God; but he is exalted as the Son of God above all.
(This clause has been variously explained. The most commonly received, and, as we think, best supported opinion, is that which renders prototokos pases ktiseos; begotten before all creation. This most natural and obvious sense would have been more readily admitted, had it not been supposed hostile to certain views on the sonship of Christ. Some explain prototokos actively, and render first begetter or producer of all things, which gives, at all events, a sense consistent with truth and with the context, which immediately assigns as the reason of Christ being styled prototokos, the clause beginning hoti en auto ektisthe, For by him were all things created. Others, with the author explain the word figuratively, of pre-eminence or lordship. To this view however, there are serious objections.
It seems not supported by sufficient evidence. No argument can be drawn from Col 1:18 until it is proved that firstborn from the dead, does not mean the first that was raised to die no more, which Doddridge affirms to be the easiest, surest, most natural sense, in which the best commentators are agreed. Nor is the argument from Rom 8:29 satisfactory. Prototokos, says Bloomfield, at the close of an admirable note on this verse, is not well taken by Whitby and others, in a figurative sense, to denote Lord of all things, since the word is never so used, except in reference to primogeniture. And although, in Rom 8:29, we have ton prototokos en pollois adelphois, yet there his followers are represented not as his creatures, but as his brethren. On which, and other accounts, the interpretation, according to which we have here a strong testimony to the eternal filiation of our Saviour is greatly preferable; and it is clear that Col 1:15, Col 1:18 are illustrative of the nature, as Col 1:16-17 are an evidence of the pre-existence and divinity of Christ.)
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Col 1:15
Christ the Image of the invisible God.
I. Christ is the image of God. Image signifies that which represents another, and as things are variously represented, so there is a great variety of images.
1. Some are imperfect, and express but some particular, and that defectively.
(1) Artificial images, whether drawn, sculptured, or embroidered, represent only the colour, figure, and lineaments, and have nothing of life and nature.
(2) Adam, who was called Gods image because the conditions of his nature had some resemblance to the properties of God–intellect, will, and lordship; but he had not Gods essence.
2. Some are perfect. We call a child the image of his father, inasmuch as he has not merely the colour or figure of his parent, but his nature and properties, soul, body, life, etc. So a prince has not only the appearance of his predecessors power, but its substance (Gen 5:3).
3. In which of these two senses is the figure true of Christ? Surely not in the sense that man is the image of God. For intending to exalt Christ and to show that His dignity is so great as to capacitate Him to save us, it would ill suit his design if the apostle attributed no more to Him than what holds good for any man. Read our Lords own testimony (Joh 14:9; Joh 12:45). Now where is the portrait of which it may be said that he who has seen it has seen him whom it represents? This can only be found in one which contains the nature of the original (Heb 1:3).
(1) Gods nature is perfectly represented in Christ. Hence He is called God over and over again.
(2) Christ represents the Father in His properties, eternity, immutability, wisdom, etc.
(3) In His works 1Jn 5:19; Heb 1:10; Joh 1:3, etc.).
4. Now no child perfectly represents is father; there are differences of manner, disposition, feature: but Christ represents the Father in everything.
5. This sacred truth overthrows two heresies–the Sabellian and the Arian. The former confounded the Son with the Father, the latter rent them asunder. Those took from the Son His person, these His nature. Paul demonstrates the Sabellian error here, for no one is the image of himself; and the Arian, for Christ could not be a perfect image unless He had the same nature as the Father.
II. God, whose image Jesus is, is invisible.
1. The Divine nature is spiritual, and hence invisible, inasmuch as the eye sees only corporeal objects. For this cause, Moses, in teaching that there is nothing material in the Divine essence that might be represented by pencil or chisel, remonstrates to them that when God manifested Himself they saw no similitude (Deu 4:12; Deu 4:15). Whence He infers they must make no graven image.
2. But the meaning here is also that God is incomprehensible. Seeing is often put for knowing. The Seraphim cover their faces to embody this truth (Isa 6:2). Through His grace indeed we may know something of His nature (Heb 1:1); but however clear it does not amount to a seeing, i.e., an apprehension which conceives the proper form of the subject.
3. Why is this quality mentioned here? To show us that God has manifested Himself to us by His Son. There is a secret opposition between image and invisible. God has a nature so impenetrable that without this His Image men would not have known Him.
(1) By Him He made, preserves, and governs the world. To Him we must refer the revelations of God under the Old Testament.
(2) But here the reference is to what took place in the fulness of time. In Christ we see all the wonders of the invisible Father–His justice, mercy, power, etc., in all their completeness, whereas creation only shows the edges. (J. Daille.)
The image of God
We believe in many things we never saw, on the evidence of other senses than sight. We believe in music, invisible odours, nay, in what we can neither hear, taste, smell, nor touch–our own life, our soul. Thus it were irrational to disbelieve in God because He is invisible. Still we are tempted to forget His existence, and as for the ungodly God is not in all their thoughts.
I. I would warn you against allowing God to be out of mind because He is out of sight.
1. This is a danger to which our very constitution exposes us. Hence the necessity of striving to walk by faith, not by sight. This is difficult because we are creatures of sense. The dead are out of sight and so often forgotten, the eternal world, the devil, and so God.
2. Why should the invisibility of God be turned into a temptation to sin? It should rather minister to holy care. How solemn the thought that an unseen Being is ever at our side! Were this realized, then bad thoughts would be banished, and unholy deeds crushed, and purity and heavenliness imparted to the life and conduct.
II. The visible revelations of the invisible in the old testament were most probably manifestations of the Son of God. To Jacob at Peniel, to Joshua at Jericho, to Manoah, to Isaiah (chap. 6.), and to others God appeared. How are we to reoncile this with No man hath seen God at any time? Only by regarding these appearances as manifestations of Him who is the image of the invisible God. This is in perfect harmony with other passages in the history of redemption. We know for certain that the fruits of the incarnation were anticipated, and the fruits of His death enjoyed before He died. Why not, then, the fact of the incarnation? Viewed in this light, these Old Testament stories acquire a deeper and more enduring interest. In the guide of Abrahams pilgrimage I see the guide of my own. Jacobs success in wrestling imparts vigour to my prayers.
III. The greatness of the worker corresponds with the greatness of the work. It is not always so. Sometimes God accomplishes mighty ends by feeble instruments in both nature and grace. But redemption is differentiated in greatness, grandeur, and difficulty from all the other works of God. It cost more love, labour, and wisdom than all yon starry universe. But great as is the work the Worker is greater–the visible Image of the invisible God.
IV. God as revealed visibly in Jesus meets and satisfies one of our strongest wants,
1. The second commandment runs more counter to our nature than any other.
(1) Look at the heathen world. For long ages the world was given up to idolatry with the exception of a single people. To fix the mind on an invisible Being seemed like attempting to anchor a vessel on a flowing tide. And as a climbing plant, for lack of a better stay, will throw its arms round a rotting tree; rather than want something palpable to which their thoughts might cling, men have worshipped the Divine Being through the most hideous forms.
(2) Look at the proneness to sensuous worship among the Jews.
(3) We find the evidence of this prosperity in the Christian Church. Fancy some old Roman rising from his grave on the banks of the Tiber, what could he suppose but that the Eternal City had changed her idols, and by some strange turn of fortune had given to one Jesus the old throne of Jupiter and assigned the crown which Juno wore in his days to another queen of heaven?
2. In what way are we to account for this universal tendency? It is not enough to call it folly; the feelings from which it springs are deeply rooted in our nature. You tell me that God is infinite, incomprehensible; but it is as difficult for me to make such a Being the object of my affections as to grasp a Sound or detain a shadow. This heart craves something more congenial to my nature, and seeks in God a palpable object for its affections to cling to.
3. Now see how this want is met in the Gospel by Him who knoweth our frame. In His incarnate Son the Infinite is brought within the limits of my understanding, the Invisible is revealed to my sight. In that eye bent upon me I see Divine love in a form I can feel. God addresses me in human tones, and stands before me in the fashion of a man; and when I fall at His feet with Thomas I am an image worshipper but no idolater, for I bend to the image of the invisible God.
V. In what sense is Christ the image of the invisible God?
1. It means much more than mere resemblance; it conveys the idea of shadow less than of substance. I have known an infant bear such a resemblance to his father that what his tongue could not tell his face did, and people struck by the likeness exclaimed, He is the very image of his father. Such was Adam in his state of innocence. Now it may be said that as our Lord, like the first Adam, was holy, he is therefore called the image of God; yet that does not exhaust the meaning, nor is it on that account that Paul calls Him the second Adam. Nor have they sounded the depths who say He was so called because He was endowed with power to do the works of God. For many others have been in that sense equally images of God. But where are they represented as God manifest in the flesh?
2. In Christs character and works we have a living, visible, perfect image of the invisible God.
(1) In Him we see the power of God, and notably at the grave of Lazarus. To make something out of nothing is a work more visibly stamped with divinity than to make one thing out of another–a living man out of lifeless dust, and then on that mountain side the bread multiplies.
(2) In Christ we have the image of a holy God.
(3) In Christ we have the image of a God willing and waiting to save. (T. Guthrie, D. D.)
The image of the invisible God
I draw out from my pocket a little miniature, and look upon it and tears drop from my eyes. What is it? A piece of ivory. What is on it? A face that some artist has painted there. It is a radiant face. My history is connected with it. When I look upon it tides of feeling swell in me. Some one comes to me, and says: What is that? I say, It is my mother. Your mother I should call it a piece of ivory with water-colours on it. To me it is my mother. When you come to scratch it, and analyze it, and scrutinize the elements of it, to be sure it is only a sign or dumb show, but it brings to me that which is no sign nor dumb show. According to the law of my mind, through it I have brought back, interpreted, refreshed, revived, made patent in me, all the sense of what a loving mother was. So I take my conception of Christ as He is painted in dead letters on dead paper, and to me is interpreted the glory, the sweetness, the patience, the love, the joy-inspiring nature of God; and I do not hesitate to say, Christ is my God, just as I would not hesitate to say of that picture, It is my mother. But, says a man, you do not mean that you really sucked at the breast of that picture? No. I did not; but I will not allow any one to drive me into any such minute analysis as that. Now I hold that the Lord Jesus Christ, as represented in the New Testament, brings to my mind all the effluence of brightness and beauty which I am capable of understanding. I can take in no more. He is said to be the express image of Gods glory. He reveals to us a God whose interest in man is inherent, and who through His mercy and goodness made sacrifices for it. God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son to die for it. What is the only begotten Son of God? Who knows? Who can know? That His only begotten Son is precious to Him we may know, judging from the experience of an earthly father; and we cannot doubt that when He gave Christ to come into life, and humble Himself to mans condition, and take upon Himself an ignominious death, He sacrificed that which was exceedingly dear to Him. And this act is a revelation of the feeling of God toward the human race. (H. W. Beecher.)
Christ the image of God
There is in Rome an elegant fresco by Guido–The Aurora. It covers a lofty ceiling. Looking up at it from the pavement your neck grows stiff, your head dizzy, and the figures indistinct. You soon tire and turn away. The owner of the palace has placed a broad mirror near the floor. You may now sit down before it as at a table, and at your leisure look into the mirror, and enjoy the fresco that is above you. There is no more weariness, nor indistinctness, nor dizziness. Like the Rosplglioso mirror beneath The Aurora, Christ reflects the glory of the Divine nature to the eye of man.
Christ is intended to be familiarly known
The whole value of the gospels to Erasmus lay in the vividness with which they brought home to their readers the personal impression of Christ Himself. Were we to have seen Him with our own eyes, we should not have so intimate a knowledge as they give us of Christ, speaking, healing, dying, rising again, as it were in our very presence If the footprints of Christ are shown us in any place, we kneel down and adore them. Why do we not rather venerate the living and breathing picture of Him in these books? It may be the safer course, he goes on, with characteristic irony, to conceal the state mysteries of kings, but Christ desires His mysteries to be spread abroad as openly as was possible. (Littles Historical Lights.)
The firstborn
The expression as it stands is somewhat ambiguous.
1. Does it imply that all creatures have been born, but that Jesus was born before them? Impossible. All human creatures have been born, all at least but the first; and even he was the son of God (Luk 3:38). We are all Gods offspring. But, except in poetry, we can scarcely speak of the birth of the earth, ocean, stars, etc. They have been created, not born; they are the creatures rather than the children of God.
2. Nor can the meaning be firstborn within the circle of all creation; for the higher nature of Jesus is not within that circle: it is far above it; before Abraham, and sun, moon, and stars, He was and is.
3. The apostles idea is that Jesus is the hereditary Lord of the whole creation. The representation is based on the prerogative that is still attached in many lands to primogeniture. That prerogative is great. In virtue of it the first-born of the Queen is Prince of Wales; of the Emperor of Germany, Crown Prince; of the late Emperor Napoleon, Prince Imperial. In ancient times and among the apostles people, in the days of their national grandeur, there was a corresponding privilege attached to the royal firstborn. And hence in the course of time the word came to be so employed that the ideas of birth and priority of birth got sometimes to be merged out of sight, while the ideas of special hereditary privilege, prerogative, and honour stood prominently forth. Hence God said to Pharaoh, Israel is My son, My firstborn, because they were in distinction from other peoples the recipients of the advantages which were the natural prerequisites of primogeniture. Again in Jer 31:9 the idea of priority in birth is entirely shaded off, for that priority could not be affirmed of Ephraim–the reference is to peculiarity of prerogative and honour. Take again Heb 12:22-23. Here Christians are called the firstborn, and not Christians in heaven, for they are distinguished from the spirits of just men made perfect, but Christians on earth. All such Christians, though scattered, and variously denominated, are the one general assembly and Church of the firstborn. This shows that the term may be and is used without priority of birth, and in the sense of being Gods very highly-favoured children. All the blessings of primogeniture are theirs because they are Christs, the Firstborn. As He is the Crown Prince of the universe, the Prince Imperial and hereditary Lord of the whole creation, they are constituted joint heirs with Him of the inheritance incorruptible, etc. Again, this interpretation is supported by Rom 8:29. Firstborn among many brethren is a notable expression. We cannot suppose that God desired to secure the Saviour a relation of chronological priority. Jesus was already before all. The idea is that it was the aim of God to remove from the peerless Son the condition of solitariness in the parental and heavenly home. This aim was accomplished by surrounding Him with a circle of multitudinous brethren, bearing the familiar family likeness, who might be sharers with Him in His inheritance of glory. (J. Morison, D. D.)
Christ is one of us
On the centenary of the birth of Robert Stephenson, there was a very large demonstration at Newcastle. The town was paraded by a vast procession who carried banners in honour of the distinguished engineer. In the procession there was a band of peasants, who carried a little banner of very ordinary appearance, but bearing the words, He was one of us. They were inhabitants of the small village in which Robert Stephenson had been born, and had come to do him honour. They had a right to a prominent position in that days proceedings, because he to whom so many thousands did honour was one of them. Even so, whatever praise the thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers can ascribe to Christ in that grand celebration when time shall be no more, we from earth can wave our banners with the words written on them, He was one of us.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Col 1:15-19
Who is the image of the invisible God.
This is the most exhaustive assertion of our Lords Godhead to be found in St. Pauls Writings. This magnificent dogmatic passage is introduced, after the apostles manner, with a strictly practical object. The Colossian Church was exposed to the attacks of a theosophic doctrine which degraded Christ to the rank of one of a long series of inferior beings supposed to range between man and the Supreme God. Against this assertion Paul asserts that Christ is:
I. The image of the invisible God. The expression supplements the title of the Son. As the Son, Christ is derived eternally from the Father, and of one substance with Him. As the image Christ is in that one substance, the exact likeness of the Father, in all things except being the Father. He is the image of the Father, not as the Father, but as God. The image is indeed originally Gods unbegun, unending reflection of Himself in Himself, but is also the organ whereby God, in His essence invisible, reveals Himself to His creatures. Thus the image is naturally, so to speak, the Creator, since creation is the first revelation God has made of Himself. Man is the highest point in the visible universe; in man, Gods attributes are most luminously exhibited; man is the image and glory of God (1Co 11:7). But Christ is the adequate image of God, Gods self-reflection in His own thought, eternally present with Himself.
II. As the image Christ is the first-born of all creation, i.e., not the first in rank among created beings, but begotten before any created beings. That this is the true sense of the expression is etymologically certain; but it is also the only sense which is in real harmony with the relation in which, according to the context, Christ stands to the universe. Of all things in heaven and earth, of things seen and unseen, of the various orders of the angelic hierarchy, it is said that they were created:
1. In Christ. There was no creative process external to and independent of Him; since the archetypal forms after which the creatures are modelled and the sources of their strength and consistency of being eternally reside in Him.
2. By Him. The force which has summoned the worlds out of nothingness into being, and which upholds them in being is His; He wields it; He is the one producer and sustainer of all created existence.
3. For Him. He is not as Arianism pretended, merely an inferior workman creating for the glory of a higher Master; He creates for HimSelf; He is the end of all things as well as their immediate source; and in living for Him every creature finds at once the explanation and law of its being. For He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.
III. After such a statement it follows naturally that the fulness, i.e., the entire cycle of the Divine attributes, considered as a series of forces, dwells in him; and this not in any ideal or transcendental manner, but with that actual reality which men attach to the presence of material bodies which they can feel and measure through the organs of sense (Col 2:9). Although throughout this Epistle the word Logos is never introduced, it is plain that the Image of St. Paul is equivalent in His rank and functions to the Logos of St. John. Each exists prior to creation; each is the one agent in creation; each is a Divine person; each is equal with God and shares His essential life; each is really none other than God. (Canon Liddon.)
The person of Christ
I. As related to God. Image. Some interpret this of the essential image; others as setting forth Christ as Gods messenger, or as perfect man, in allusion to Gen 1:26. But there is a great difference between man made in, after, or according to Gods image, and Christ the image itself.
1. An image
(1) differs widely from a shadow. The Old Testament discoveries of Christ are called shadows, and though a shadow presupposes substance, it is only a mere appearance (Heb 10:1).
(2) Is more than a similitude. One thing may be very similar to another in some things, and yet in others be very unlike. The sun is a similitude, but not an image of God.
(3) Corresponds entirely with that which it represents a perfect model and transcript. The cast is an exact sampler of the mould; the wax bears a correct impress of the seal, not merely in general figure, but in every line. The word therefore shows that Christ is the very form of God in whom are embodied all His perfections.
2. This suggests that
(1) the dignity of our Saviours person stamps infinite merit on His work.
(2) Since it is to the Divine image that believers have to be conformed, we have some idea of the privileges and dignity to which we shall be exalted.
(3) In Christs glorious person we may read our own defects.
II. As related to the universe.
1. He is Creator: from which it is clear that all things had a beginning, and that nothing exists that does not owe its existence to Christ; and therefore Christ is the lawful proprietor of all things. That there may be no cavil we have a particular enumeration of His works:
(1) In their universality, all things;
(2) their properties, visible and invisible;
(3) their grades in the scale of being, thrones, etc. Try to elevate your thoughts to the dignity of this subject. What an Almighty Saviour you have. He is above all human portraiture. His name is Wonderful.
2. But if Christ be all this, then
(1) here is an end of Atheism, Deism, Unitarianism.
(2) What a claim have Christs meanest creatures on our consideration.
(3) How desperate their condition who will not have Him to reign over them.
III. As belated to His Church. Head.
1. By Divine appointment; and as the natural head is the highest part of the body, so Christ has in all things the pre-eminence.
2. In respect of His wisdom. The head is the seat of mind. There are all the organs and mental phenomena: the eye to see, etc. In Him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.
3. As regards spiritual sustenation and support. The head is where most of the vital functions are which impart energy through the system, and diffuse pleasure or pain, joy or sorrow. So Christ transmits whatever supplies are required for the Churchs welfare; through Him the whole body increases with the increase of God.
Lessons: We have a Saviour–
1. Almighty.
2. Sympathizing.
3. Everlasting. (T. Watson, B. A.)
The dignity of Christ
I. Christ in his pre-incarnate state. This dignity is represented by two brief clauses dealing with–
1. His relation to the God head, image. There is a distinction between image and likeness. Likeness represents superficial resemblance, as when two leaves from the same tree are said to be like each other; image indicates resemblance by participation in the same life by reproduction of essence. Likeness is that which is superficial and partial, image that which is essential and exhaustive. Our Lord is that representation of God which God could not but have. Whatever of glory dwells in the Eternal Father is eternally imaged in His Son.
2. His relation to the universe.
(1) In Him all things were made, i.e., the creative energy not only passed through Him, as the volume of a rivers waters passes through its rock-hewn channels, but the creative energy dwells in Him, belongs to Him, as the life of His life, essentially and eternally.
(2) In Him also all things consist, stand together; in Him the universe finds its unity and coherence. We talk about the laws of nature. If it were possible for us to trace the laws of nature and of history to their point of convergence, we should find that to be nothing less than the personal sovereignty of Jesus Christ.
(3) He is the universal Governor. For Him all things exist, to serve His purpose and to manifest His glory. Jesus Christ is the first, efficient, and final cause of all created existence.
3. Now these separate clauses are dove-tailed into the clause preceding them, the firstborn, for that expression does not mean that our Lord is the first creature, either in time or in rank. The emphasis must be put upon both adjectives, firstborn. The primacy of Jesus Christ in the creation is the primacy of birth. He alone is born, not made; all other things are made, not born; and there is a very marked distinction between these two. Our thoughts are born of our intelligence; our works are the product of our hands. The things that we make are outside of ourselves; they may perish, and our being be not affected; but the thoughts that are born within us and of us are a part of our being; when you touch them you touch yourself. Our Lords place in the universe is that of the firstborn; His own being is rooted in the very being of God, as inseparable from Him as thought is from being. Therefore He is called the Eternal Word of God. Thought always precedes achievement, just as a great cathedral is born in the mind of the architect before the click of a chisel is heard. Even so is Christ the first born of creation as holding in His living thought all the realms and ages. Thus far the essential majesty of the Divine Christ. This is a glory that blinds us, but does not kindle nor transfigure us.
II. The apostle passes to the glory of Him who tabernacled in human flesh. As creation finds in Him its head, unity, and coherence, so also does the kingdom of grace. These are not two systems, joining each other as two circles might have their contact at a single point, or overlapping, but are one, because the sovereignty of each and both is invested in Christ.
1. In His relation to redemption Christ is the beginning, the firstborn from among the dead, not the first who came forth from the grave in rank or time. His relation to the kingdom of grace as to that of nature is birth, i.e., in Him the resurrection finds its original and eternal home. It is net merely said that He is risen, but that He is the Resurrection and the Life.
2. As He is said to be the source of spiritual creative energy, so also is it declared that the authority of spiritual control is vested in Him. He is Head of the Church, to whom alone our prayers are to be addressed, and through whom alone the answer of God can come to us. Between us and God there are no hierarchies of principalities and powers, no army of saints and martyrs. The way is clear through Christ. There is but one Mediator. Just as the head interprets, gathers up, and responds to the multitudinous demands of the body that are telegraphed along the nervous filaments of sensation, so also does Christ, as the Head of His Church, interpret her needs and respond to her prayers. The heart does not always pray as do the lips, and our wishes are sometimes very different from our wants: but the great Head of the Church knows how to interpret, and always pierces to the deepest need. And so when the strength of our hands fails us, and our wisdom is staggered by the problems that front us, a larger wisdom and a mightier hope come pulsing into our feebleness.
3. Great prerogatives are these, but they are not a temporary investiture. They belong to Him by eternal right, for it pleased the Father that in Him all fulness should dwell. Grace has in Him its eternal dwelling place. And so long as the redeemed shall endure will He be their loving and loved Head. For in Him both God and man find their sufficient and eternal reconciliation.
4. This great reconciliation is not merely problematical and partial, it is positive and universal. The tenses are in the past. We are living to-day, not in the dispensation of the wrath of God, but in the dispensation of His redeeming grace. God is sending forth His ministers, bidding all to repent, assuring them that the feast is ready, and that it is only waiting for the guests. The age of demoralization passed away eighteen hundred years ago. The age of reconstruction began when on the cross our Lord said, It is finished! That was the burial of the old, as it was the birth of the new; and ever since, and until the end of time, in spite of opposition and apparent defeat, all things have been and shall be working together for good, and surely, though slowly, advancing the cause of Gods eternal righteousness.
III. Practical inferences.
1. We have been led by the apostle to the most exalted conceivable position whence we can look out on the works of God and upon the history of the world. We have been led through all the grades of being, from matter in its crudest form to mind in its loftiest manifestation, and we have seen that in Christ the whole universe of created existence finds its unity and coherence, while the awful struggle of right against wrong, truth against falsehood, find in Him its consummation and ending. This is something that neither science nor philosophy can give. In Him all contradictions are solved between the seen and the unseen, the created and the uncreated, the sin of man and the righteousness of God.
2. If it be true that both creation and redemption find in Christ their living centre, then it is also plain that only in proportion as we enter into the mind of Christ can we understand aright either the works of God, or the history of the race, or the revelation of His character and purposes in Scripture.
3. Here, too, is the only solution of the vexed question of Christian union. How shall that unity be brought about? Certainly not by creeds nor by forms. There is only one name, one sign, that can subdue us all, and that is the sign that must conquer the world, the flaming cross of Jesus Christ. When we bow before that, and all our faces are turned reverently toward the One on the throne, then shall enmity perish, and we shall be one, even as He and the Father are one.
4. The incomparable dignity of our Lord should awaken in us a three-fold attachment.
(1) It should awaken in us a feeling of reverence. As no one of us would think of standing before a throned king without becoming humility, it behoves us when we come into our Creators presence to bow with reverence at His feet.
(2) But incomparable as is His dignity, it is for ever joined with our common nature; and therefore, while it calls for reverence it also calls for trust. He is the Head of the Church, and therefore we ought to come not only reverently, but confidently and boldly. There ought to be joy as well as reverence in our worship and in our service.
(3) This incomparable dignity ought also to fill us with assurance and courage. (A. J. F. Behrends, D. D.)
The Divine pre-eminence of Christ
I. Christs pre-eminence.
1. His supremacy in relation to God. Image means
(1) The supreme likeness of God.
(2) The supreme representation of God.
(3) The supreme manifestation of God.
2. His supremacy in relation to nature. We have
(1) His dignity, firstborn, telling of His age, heirship, authority.
(2) His creative and sustaining agency. All is made by Him and consists in Him. In His miracles He was the Divine Ulysses whose use of his love proclaimed him lord.
(3) His consummating glory. Creation exists for Him as well as by Him. He is its end as well as its origin.
3. His supremacy in relation to His Church. He is
(1) Its sovereign, Head;
(2) Its force, Beginning.
(3) Life, Firstborn from the dead. His risen life is the life of the Church.
II. The explanation on His pre-eminence is his Divine plenitude. He is the Pleroma, the totality of Divine attributes and powers.
1. In Him are all the Divine resources. He is the fulness of wisdom, power, love.
2. In Him all those resources permanently dwell. Because He is thus full of God, He must in pre-eminence be fully God.
III. The work of Christ in His pre-eminence and plenitude is the work of reconciliation.
1. Reconcile what? All things.
2. How? By the blood of His cross. (U. R. Thomas.)
The glory of the Son
There are here three grand conceptions of Christs relations.
I. To God. Paul uses language which was familiar on the lips of his antagonists. Alexandrian Judaism had much to say about the Word, and spoke of it as the Image of God. Probably this teaching reached Colossae. An image is a likeness as of a kings head on a coin or a face in a mirror. Here it is that which makes the invisible visible.
1. God in Himself is inconceivable and unapproachable. No man hath seen, etc. He is beyond the sense and above understanding. There is in every human spirit a dim consciousness of His presence, but that is not knowledge. Creatural limitations and mans sin prevents it.
2. Christ is the perfect manifestation of God. Through Him we know all that we can know of God. He that hath seen Me, etc. The great fathomless, shoreless ocean of the Divine nature is like a closed sea. Christ is the broad river which brings its waters to men. Our souls cry for the living God; and never will that orphaned cry be answered but in the possession of Christ, in whom we possess the Father also.
II. To creation. Firstborn.
1. At first sight this seems to include Him in the great family of creatures as the eldest, but it is shown not to be the intention in the next verse, which alleges that Christ was before, and is the agent of, all creation. The true meaning is that He is firstborn in comparison with, or reference to, all creation.
2. The title implies priority in existence and supremacy. It applies to the Eternal Word and not to His incarnation.
3. The necessary clauses state more fully this relation and so confirm and explain the title.
(1) The whole universe is set in one class, and He alone over against it. Four times in one sentence we have all things repeated, and traced to Him as Creator and Lord.
(a) In the heavens and earth is quoted from Genesis, and is intended, as then, to be an exhaustive enumeration of the creation according to plan.
(b) Things visible and invisible includes the whole under another principle of division–there are visible things in heaven, and may be invisible on earth, but wherever they are He made them. () Whether thrones, etc., an enumeration alluding to dreamy speculations about an angelic hierarchy filling the space between God and men.
(2) The language employed brings into strong relief the manifold variety of relations which the Son sustains to the universe. The Greek means all things considered as a unity.
(a) In Him, regards Him as the creative centre or reservoir in which all creative force resided, and was in a definite act put forth. The error of the Gnostics was to put the act of creation and the thing created as far away as possible from God, and is here met.
(b) But the possible dangers of that profound truth are averted by the preposition through Him. That presupposes the clear demarcation between creature and creator, and extricates the person of the firstborn from all risk of being confounded with the creation, while it makes Him the medium of the Divine energy, and so shows His relation to the Divine nature. He is the image of the invisible God, and accordingly through Him have all things been created. The express image of His person by whom He made the worlds.
(c) For Him. All things sprung from His will, and return thither again. These relations are more than once declared of the Father. What theory of Christs person explains the fact?
3. His existence before the creation is repeated. He is emphatic, He Himself; is emphasises not only preexistence, but absolute existence. He was would not have said so much as He is before all things. Before Abraham was I am.
4. In Him all things hold together. He is the element in and by which is that continued creation which is the preservation of the universe. He links all creatures and forces into a co-operant whole, reconciling their antagonisms, and melting all their notes into music which God may hear, however discordant it may be to us.
III. To the Church. A parallel is plainly intended between Christs relation to the material creation and to the spiritual. As is the pre-incarnate word to the universe, so is the incarnate Christ to the Church.
1. Christ the Head and the Church His body. Popular physiology regards the head as the seat of life. So our Lord is the source of that spiritual life which flows from Him into His members, and is sight in the eye, strength in the arm, swiftness in the foot, colour in the cheek, richly various in its manifestations, but one in its nature and all His. That thought leads to Him as the centre of unity by whom the many members become one body. The head, too, is the symbol of authority.
2. Christ is the beginning of the Church. In nature He was before all, and the source of all. So the beginning does not mean the first member of a series, but the power which causes the series to begin. The root is the beginning of flowers, although we may say the first flower is.
3. He is head and beginning by means of His resurrection.
(1) He is firstborn from the dead, and His communication of spiritual life to His Church requires the historical fact of His resurrection, for a dead Christ could not be the source of life.
(2) He is the beginning through His resurrection, too, in regard to raising us from the dead. He is the firstfruits, and bears promise of a mighty harvest. Because He lives we shall live also.
4. So Paul concludes that in all things He is first, and all things are that He may be first. Whether in nature or grace the pre-eminence is supreme. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 15. Who is the image of the invisible God] The counterpart of God Almighty, and if the image of the invisible God, consequently nothing that appeared in him could be that image; for if it could be visible in the Son, it could also be visible in the Father; but if the Father be invisible, consequently his image in the Son must be invisible also. This is that form of God of which he divested himself; the ineffable glory in which he not only did not appear, as to its splendour and accompaniments, but concealed also its essential nature; that inaccessible light which no man, no created being, can possibly see. This was that Divine nature, the fulness of the Godhead bodily, which dwelt in him.
The first-born of every creature] I suppose this phrase to mean the same as that, Php 2:9: God hath given him a name which is above every name; he is as man at the head of all the creation of God; nor can he with any propriety be considered as a creature, having himself created all things, and existed before any thing was made. If it be said that God created him first, and that he, by a delegated power from God, created all things, this is most flatly contradicted by the apostle’s reasoning in the 16th and 17th verses. Col 1:16; Col 1:17 As the Jews term Jehovah becoro shel olam, the first-born of all the world, or of all the creation, to signify his having created or produced all things; (see Wolfius in loc.) so Christ is here termed, and the words which follow in the 16th and 17th Col 1:16; Col 1:17 verses are the proof of this. The phraseology is Jewish; and as they apply it to the supreme Being merely to denote his eternal pre-existence, and to point him out as the cause of all things; it is most evident that St. Paul uses it in the same way, and illustrates his meaning in the following words, which would be absolutely absurd if we could suppose that by the former he intended to convey any idea of the inferiority of Jesus Christ.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Having touched on the benefit of Christs sacrifice, which implies his human nature, he doth here rise higher, to set forth the dignity of his person, (which made it satisfactory), both with respect to his Father and the creature. As to the former, he styles him his image, which is not to be understood of an artificial, accidental, or imperfect image, as that of the king on his coin, or as man was the feeble image of God, Gen 9:6; 1Co 11:7; Col 3:10; for the apostles arguing Christs dignity to redeem, would have no force in it, if Christ were no more than a mere man; but of a natural, substantial, and perfect image: as Seth was the natural image of his father Adam, of the same substance with him, Gen 5:3; so Christ, the eternal Word, the only begotten Son of God by nature, Joh 1:1,18, (See Poole on “Phi 2:6“), very God of very God, Joh 17:3,5, doth exactly resemble, perfectly and adequately represent, his Father, of whose person he is the express character, or perfect image, Heb 1:3. Yet more distinctly Christ is the image of God, either:
1. As he is the Second Person in the blessed Trinity, from an intrinsical relation to the Father, in regard of the same essence with him by eternal generation before the world was made. He being eternally in the Father, and the Father in him, Joh 14:10; so he is in respect of his Father his essential image, and in regard to us as invisible as the Father himself; no creature could be the eternal image of the Creator, as that Son of the only true God, the living God, was, and is, Mat 16:16; Joh 6:69, in respect of his Father.
2. As he is God-man, in whom the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily, Col 2:9, whereby he doth infinitely exceed and surpass angels and men at first, Heb 1:5,6; 2:5. The apostle in this place doth not say simply Christ the image of God, but of the invisible God, ( considered personally), i.e. the Father; because the Father cannot be known to us but in his Son, as in an image, in which he would represent or manifest himself to be seen or known, Joh 1:14,18; Joh 14:8,9; 2Co 4:4. And in this latter respect (which imports the manifestative, not essential image) is Christ the image of his invisible Father unto us; unto whom, in all his offices and works of mediation, the attributes, affections, and excellencies of God clearly shine forth, they being otherwise incomprehensible and invisible by a creature: but Christ is the complete image of them, in a transcendent way; for as they are in him, they are incommunicable to any mere creature, and therefore he is the image of the invisible God, in that he makes him visible unto us. God is a pure Spirit, without body, or bodily parts, but yet was clearly manifested in Christ tabernacling amongst us, Joh 1:14; 1Ti 3:16; he represents him to us in his understanding and wisdom, Pro 8:14,15; almightiness and eternity, Isa 9:6; Joh 1:1; 8:58, permanency and unchangeableness, Heb 1:11,12; 13:8, omnipresence and omnisciency, Joh 2:24,25; 13:18; Rev 2:13. Not (as the Lutherans strangely imagine) that Christ is omnipotent with the omnipotency of the Divine nature, or omniscient with that omnisciency, as if the manhood did instrumentally use the attributes of the Godhead; but such perfections are really inherent in and appertaining to the manhood, by virtue of its union with the Divine nature in the Second Person of the Trinity, that though they are vastly short of the attributes which are essential to the Godhead, yet they are the completest image of them, and such as no mere creature is capable of. Hence it is said, we beheld his glory, the glory of the only begotten Son of God, who did further represent and manifest his Father to us, in the works of creation and preservation which he did, Joh 1:3; 5:19; Heb 1:10. Hence the apostle in this verse considers the dignity of Christ, with respect to the creature, adding to the forementioned intrinsic, an extrinsic royalty, the first-born of every creature, which a learned man would render, begotten before all the creation, or born before every creature, which is a Hebrew phrase. The Greek scholiast and several of the Greek fathers go this way; not as if the ineffable generation of Christ had any beginning, as some falsely conceited Christ to be made in time, just in the beginning before the world, by whom as an instrument all the rest were created; but the apostle doth not say he was first made, or first created; but, Col 1:17, was, or did exist, before all things besides; (as John Baptist said, he was before me, Joh 1:15); and therefore none of the rank of all them, but of another, viz. equal with his Father, whose image he was, above all that was made or created: he was not created at all, though first-born, or first-begotten, yet not first-created, (being distinguished here from created, as the cause from the effect), as it refers to him that begets, so it may to only begotten, Christ being so begotten as no other was or could be, Pro 8:22; Mic 5:2; Heb 1:5,6, even from eternity. The word first may either respect what follows, and so notes order in the things spoken of, he who is first being one of them, 1Co 15:47; or things going before, in which sense it denies all order or series of things in the same kind: as God is first before whom none, Isa 41:4; 43:11; Rev 21:6; so Christ may be said to be first-born because the only begotten Son of his Father, Joh 1:14; so the apostle may consider him here in order to establish the consideration of him as Mediator and Head of his church, Col 1:18; he speaking before, Col 1:16, of those things more generally whose creation are assigned to him, in contradistinction to those of the church or new creation, Col 1:18. Agreeably to our translation, first-born of every creature, ( note, here is a difference in the Greek, between first-born of and for, Col 1:18), we may consider:
1. Negatively. It is not to be understood properly for the first in order, so as to be one of them, in reference to whom he is said to be the first-born. But:
2. Positively, yet figuratively in a borrowed speech: so primacy and primogeniture may be attributed to him in regard of the creatures:
a) By a metonymy of the antecedent for the consequent; he who hath the privileges of enjoying and disposing of his fathers goods and inheritance, is accounted the first-born, Gen 27:29; Gal 4:1; so is Christ, being Owner, Lord, and Prince of every creature, as he is God-man, or ordained to human nature, he hath the preeminence of the whole creation, and is the chief, Psa 2:7,8
Heb 1:2,6. The heir amongst the Hebrews was reckoned the prince of the family, and so amongst the Romans the heir was taken for the lord: so God said he would make David his first-born, Psa 89:27, compared with Job 18:13; Isa 14:30
Jer 31:9. This sovereign empire which Christ hath over all the creation, and the parts of it, is by his primogeniture, or that he is first-born, since there is left nothing that is not under him, Heb 2:8, (as Adam in this lower world, in regard of his dominion, the state of innocency, might be first-born of them created for him), for the apostle brings in the next verse as the fundamental reason of this assertion.
b) By a consideration of Christ in Gods eternal decree and purpose, as the common womb of him who is God-man, and all creatures; being fore-ordained before the foundation of the world, 1Pe 1:20, he may be looked upon as the first-born amongst those who are predestinated to be conformed to his image, Rom 8:29, with Eph 1:4,5; for upon this account he is the first-born of the first-born creatures or church, (but this, as hinted before, is considered more specially, Col 1:18), Heb 12:23, therefore the first-born of all others: and this may be one respect in which he is before them, Col 1:17, with Pro 8:22; yea, all of them of the old, as well as the new creation. The Socinians are so daringly bold as to restrain this extensive expression of
every creature, or all the creation, to the new creation of men or the faithtful only, by perverting some texts of Scripture to strain them that way; when it is plain by what follows, the Spirit of God means all created beings, either in the first or second world, Christ being the principal cause both of the one and the other; the apostle, by the general term every creature simply, without any additament, doth import all created things, viz. the heavens and the earth, with all that is made in them: neither angels, nor inanimate and irrational creatures, are excluded; as in the apostles reason immediately following this expression.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
15. They who have experienced inthemselves “redemption” (Col1:14), know Christ in the glorious character here described, asabove the highest angels to whom the false teachers (Col2:18) taught worship was to be paid. Paul describes Him: (1) inrelation to God and creation (Col1:15-17); (2) in relation to the Church (Col1:18-20). As the former regards Him as the Creator (Col 1:15;Col 1:16) and the Sustainer (Col1:17) of the natural world; so the latter, as the source and stayof the new moral creation.
imageexact likenessand perfect Representative. Adam was made “in the image of God”(Ge 1:27). But Christ, thesecond Adam, perfectly reflected visibly “the invisible God”(1Ti 1:17), whose glories thefirst Adam only in part represented. “Image” (eicon)involves “likeness” (homoiosis); but “likeness”does not involve “image.” “Image” always supposesa prototype, which it not merely resembles, but from which it isdrawn: the exact counterpart, as the reflection of the sun in thewater: the child the living image of the parent. “Likeness”implies mere resemblance, not the exact counterpart andderivation as “image” expresses; hence it is nowhereapplied to the Son, while “image” is here, compare 1Co11:7 [TRENCH].(Joh 1:18; Joh 14:9;2Co 4:4; 1Ti 3:16;Heb 1:3). Even before Hisincarnation He was the image of the invisible God, as the Word (Joh1:1-3) by whom God created the worlds, and by whom God appearedto the patriarchs. Thus His essential character as always“the image of God,” (1) before the incarnation, (2) in thedays of His flesh, and (3) now in His glorified state, is, I think,contemplated here by the verb “is.”
first-born of every creature(Heb 1:6), “thefirst-begotten”: “begotten of His Father before all worlds”[Nicene Creed]. Priority and superlative dignity is implied(Ps 89:27). English Versionmight seem to favor Arianism, as if Christ were a creature.Translate, “Begotten (literally, ‘born’) before everycreature,” as the context shows, which gives the reason why Heis so designated. “For,” c. (Col 1:16Col 1:17) [TRENCH].This expression is understood by ORIGEN(so far is the Greek from favoring Socinian or Arian views) asdeclaring the Godhead of Christ, and is used by Him as aphrase to mark that Godhead, in contrast with His manhood[Book 2, sec. Against Celsus]. The Greek does notstrictly admit ALFORD’Stranslation, “the first-born of all creation.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Who is the image of the invisible God,…. Not of deity, though the fulness of it dwells in him; nor of himself, though he is the true God, and eternal life; nor of the Spirit, who also is God, and the Spirit of the Son; but the Father, called “God”, not to the exclusion of the Son or Spirit, who are with him the one God: “and he is invisible”; not to the Son who lay in his bosom, and had perfect and infinite knowledge of him; nor, in some sense, to angels, who always behold his face, but to men: no man hath seen him corporeally with the eyes of his body, though intellectually with the eyes of the understanding, when enlightened; not in his essence and nature, which is infinite and incomprehensible, but in his works of creation, providence, and grace; nor immediately, but mediately, in and through Christ, in whom he gives the light of the knowledge of the glory of his person and perfections; and this not perfectly now, but in the other state, when the saints shall see him face to face. But chiefly the Father is said to be invisible, because he did not appear to Old Testament saints; as his voice was never heard, so his shape was never seen; he never assumed any visible form; but whenever any voice was heard, or shape seen, it was the second person that appeared, the Son of God, who is here said to be his “image”, and that, as he is the Son of God; in which sense he is the natural, essential, and eternal image of his Father, an eternal one, perfect and complete, and in which he takes infinite complacency and delight: this designs more than a shadow and representation, or than bare similitude and likeness; it includes sameness of nature and perfections; ascertains the personality of the Son, his distinction from the Father, whose image he is; and yet implies no inferiority, as the following verses clearly show, since all that the Father hath are his. Philo, the Jew f, often speaks of the , or Word of God, as the image of God. Also, this may be understood of him as Mediator, in whom, as such, is a most glorious display of the love, grace, and mercy of God, of his holiness and righteousness, of his truth and faithfulness, and of his power and wisdom:
the firstborn of every creature; not the first of the creation, or the first creature God made; for all things in Col 1:16 are said to be created by him, and therefore he himself can never be a creature; nor is he the first in the new creation, for the apostle in the context is speaking of the old creation, and not the new: but the sense either is, that he was begotten of the Father in a manner inconceivable and inexpressible by men, before any creatures were in being; or that he is the “first Parent”, or bringer forth of every creature into being, as the word will bear to be rendered, if instead of tokov, we read kov; which is no more than changing the place of the accent, and may be very easily ventured upon, as is done by an ancient writer g, who observes, that the word is used in this sense by Homer, and is the same as , “first Parent”, and , “first Creator”; and the rather this may be done, seeing the accents were all added since the apostle’s days, and especially seeing it makes his reasoning, in the following verses, appear with much more beauty, strength, and force: he is the first Parent of every creature, “for by him were all things created”, c. Col 1:16, or it may be understood of Christ, as the King, Lord, and Governor of all creatures being God’s firstborn, he is heir of all things, the right of government belongs to him; he is higher than the kings of the earth, or the angels in heaven, the highest rank of creatures, being the Creator and upholder of all, as the following words show; so the Jews make the word “firstborn” to be synonymous with the word “king”, and explain it by , “a great one”, and “a prince” h; see Ps 89:27.
f De Mund. Opific. p. 6. de Plant. Noe, p. 216, 217. de Coufus. Ling. p. 341. de Somniis, p. 600. de Monarch. p. 823. g Isidior. Pelusiot. l. 3. Ep. 31. h R. Sol. Urbin. Ohel Moed, fol. 50. 1.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The image (). In predicate and no article. On , see 2Cor 4:4; 2Cor 3:18; Rom 8:29; Col 3:10. Jesus is the very stamp of God the Father as he was before the Incarnation (Joh 17:5) and is now (Phil 2:5-11; Heb 1:3).
Of the invisible God ( ). But the one who sees Jesus has seen God (Joh 14:9). See this verbal adjective ( privative and ) in Ro 1:20.
The first born (). Predicate adjective again and anarthrous. This passage is parallel to the passage in Joh 1:1-18 and to Heb 1:1-4 as well as Php 2:5-11 in which these three writers (John, author of Hebrews, Paul) give the high conception of the Person of Christ (both Son of God and Son of Man) found also in the Synoptic Gospels and even in Q (the Father, the Son). This word (LXX and N.T.) can no longer be considered purely “Biblical” (Thayer), since it is found In inscriptions (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 91) and in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, etc.). See it already in Lu 2:7 and Aleph for Matt 1:25; Rom 8:29. The use of this word does not show what Arius argued that Paul regarded Christ as a creature like “all creation” ( , by metonomy the act regarded as result). It is rather the comparative (superlative) force of that is used (first-born of all creation) as in Col 1:18; Rom 8:29; Heb 1:6; Heb 12:23; Rev 1:5. Paul is here refuting the Gnostics who pictured Christ as one of the aeons by placing him before “all creation” (angels and men). Like we find in the Alexandrian vocabulary of the teaching (Philo) as well as in the LXX. Paul takes both words to help express the deity of Jesus Christ in his relation to the Father as (Image) and to the universe as (First-born).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
The image [] . See on Rev 13:14. For the Logos (Word) underlying the passage, see on Joh 1:1. Image is more than likeness which may be superficial and incidental. It implies a prototype, and embodies the essential verity of its prototype. Compare in the form of God, Phi 2:6 (note), and the effulgence of the Father ‘s glory, Heb 1:3. Also 1Jo 1:1.
Of the invisible God [ ] . Lit., of the God, the invisible. Thus is brought out the idea of manifestation which lies in image. See on Rev 13:14.
The first born of every creature [ ] . Rev., the first – born of all creation. For first – born, see on Rev 1:5; for creation, on 2Co 5:17. As image points to revelation, so first – born points to eternal preexistence. Even the Rev. is a little ambiguous, for we must carefully avoid any suggestion that Christ was the first of created things, which is contradicted by the following words : in Him were all things created. The true sense is, born before the creation. Compare before all things, ver. 17. This fact of priority implies sovereignty. He is exalted above all thrones, etc., and all things are unto [] Him, as they are elsewhere declared to be unto God. Compare Psa 89:27; Heb 1:2.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
EXALTATION AND RECONCILIATION WORK OF CHRIST (V. 15-23)
1) “Who is the image” (hos estin eikon) who is an image; Jesus Christ is the reflected glory of what God the Father is to become in his children. 2Co 3:18; 2Co 4:6.
2) “Of the invisible God,” (tou theou tou aoratou) “Of the God, the invisible God;” 2Co 4:4; Heb 1:3. God is not only invisible and incomprehensible in total essence of his nature but so also is Jesus Christ, 1Ti 1:17; Heb 11:27. It was this nature that enabled him to appear and disappear in houses with closed doors. Joh 20:19; Joh 20:26.
3) “The firstborn of every creature” (prototokos pases ktiseos) “Firstborn one of all creation” or over all creation” or over all creation, giving to him the priority and hereditary right to his reigning throne, Luk 1:33; 1Co 15:23-25; Rev 3:14.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
15. Who is the image of the invisible God. He mounts up higher in discoursing as to the glory of Christ. He calls him the image of the invisible God, meaning by this, that it is in him alone that God, who is otherwise invisible, is manifested to us, in accordance with what is said in Joh 1:18,
—
No man hath ever seen God: the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, hath himself manifested him to us.
I am well aware in what manner the ancients were accustomed to explain this; for having a contest to maintain with Arians, they insist upon the equality of the Son with the Father, and his ( ὁμοουσίαν) identity of essence, (303) while in the mean time they make no mention of what is the chief point — in what manner the Father makes himself known to us in Christ. As to Chrysostom’s laying the whole stress of his defense on the term image, by contending that the creature cannot be said to be the image of the Creator, it is excessively weak; nay more, it is set aside by Paul in 1Co 11:7, whose words are — The man is the IMAGE and glory of God
That, therefore, we may not receive anything but what is solid, let us take notice, that the term image is not made use of in reference to essence, but has a reference to us; for Christ is called the image of God on this ground — that he makes God in a manner visible to us. At the same time, we gather also from this his ( ὁμοουσία) identity of essence, for Christ would not truly represent God, if he were not the essential Word of God, inasmuch as the question here is not as to those things which by communication are suitable also to creatures, but the question is as to the perfect wisdom, goodness, righteousness, and power of God, for the representing of which no creature were competent. We shall have, therefore, in this term, a powerful weapon in opposition to the Arians, but, notwithstanding, we must begin with that reference (304) that I have mentioned; we must not insist upon the essence alone. The sum is this — that God in himself, that is, in his naked majesty, is invisible, and that not to the eyes of the body merely, but also to the understandings of men, and that he is revealed to us in Christ alone, that we may behold him as in a mirror. For in Christ he shews us his righteousness, goodness, wisdom, power, in short, his entire self. We must, therefore, beware of seeking him elsewhere, for everything that would set itself off as a representation of God, apart from Christ, will be an idol.
The first-born of every creature. The reason of this appellation is immediately added — For in him all things are created, as he is, three verses afterwards, called the first-begotten from the dead, because by him we all rise again. Hence, he is not called the first-born, simply on the ground of his having preceded all creatures in point of time, but because he was begotten by the Father, that they might be created by him, and that he might be, as it were, the substance or foundation of all things. It was then a foolish part that the Arians acted, who argued from this that he was, consequently, a creature. For what is here treated of is, not what he is in himself, but what he accomplishes in others.
(303) See Calvin on the Corinthians, vol. 1, p. 196, n. 1.
(304) “ Relation et correspondance;” — “Reference and correspondence.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES
Col. 1:15. Who is the image of the invisible God.In 2Co. 4:4 St. Paul had so named Christ. Beyond the very obvious notion of likeness, the word for image involves the idea of representation and manifestation (Lightfoot). Man is said to be the image of God (1Co. 11:7), and to have been created in the image of God, as an image on a coin may represent Csar, even though unrecognisable almost. Christ is the very image (Heb. 1:3) of God, able to say, He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father. Firstborn of every creature.Not that He is included as part of the creation, but that the relation of the whole creation to Him is determined by the fact that He is the firstborn of all creation (R.V.), so that without Him creation could not be (Cremer). The main ideas involved in the word are
(1) priority to all creation;
(2) sovereignty over all creation (Lightfoot).
Col. 1:16. Thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers.That Paul believed in a heavenly hierarchy can scarcely be doubted; but this letter shows that in Coloss it had become an elaborate superstition.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Col. 1:15-17
The Relation of Christ to God and to all Greated Things.
Having spoken of our redemption, the apostle, in terms of the highest significance and grandeur, dwells upon the dignity and absolute supremacy of the Redeemer.
I. The relation of Christ to God.Who is the image of the invisible God (Col. 1:15). God is an infinite and eternal Spirit, incomprehensible and invisible. No man hath seen God at any time; yet humanity yearns for some visible embodiment of Deity. Christ reflects and reveals the Father. He is the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person. It is believed that the idea of the Logos underlies the whole of this passage, though the term is not mentioned. The heretical teachers at Coloss had introduced a perverted view as to the nature of the mediation between God and creation, and the apostle aims to rectify it. The word , denoting both reason and speech, was a philosophical term adopted by Alexandrian Judaism to express the manifestation of the unseen Godthe absolute Beingin the creation and government of the world. It included all modes by which God makes Himself known to man. As His reason, it denoted His purpose or design; as His speech, it implied His revelation. When Christian teachers adopted this term, they exalted and fixed its meaning by attaching to it two precise and definite ideasthat the Word is a divine person, and that the Word became incarnate in Jesus Christ (Lightfoot). Christ as the eternal Word is the perfect image, the visible representation, of the unseen God. In addition to the idea of similitude, which is capable of a wide and general use, the word image involves two others.
1. Representation.It implies an archetype of which the image is a copy. Man is said to be in the image of God; but there is a difference between the image of God in man and the image of God in Christ. In Christ it is as Csars image in his son; in man it is as Csars image on his coin. In the God-man Christ Jesus we have a visible, living, perfect, and reliable representation of the invisible God.
2. Manifestation.The general idea of the Logos is the manifestation of the hidden. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him (Joh. 1:18, compared with Joh. 14:9-10, Joh. 6:46). The incarnate Word, in His nature, attributes, and actions, is the true epiphany of the unseen Deity, setting forth, like distinct rays of one and the same glorious light, His infinite wisdom, mercy, righteousness, and power. Our obligations to Christ for His wondrous revelations are unspeakably great.
II. The relation of Christ to all created things.
1. Christ existed prior to the creation. He is the firstborn of every creature (Col. 1:15). It is not said He was the first formed or first created of every creature, but the firstbornthe first begotten. It is plainly intimated that Christ, the Son of Gods love, was begotten before any created thing existed. There is therefore no ground in this passage for the Arians and Socinians to build up their theory of the creatureship of Christ. In relation to all created things, intelligent or unintelligent, terrene or celestial, Christ was the firstborn. In an ineffably mysterious sense He was begotten; they were created. The two ideas involved in the phrase are:
(1) Priority to all creationthe absolute pre-existence of the Son. The term first begotten was frequently used among the Jews as a term of precedence and dignity. As applied to the Son of God, it implies priority in rank in relation to all created things. Time is an accident of the creature. Therefore the origin of the Son of God precedes all time.
(2) Sovereignty over all creation. Gods firstborn is the natural Ruler, the acknowledged Head of Gods household. He is Heir of all things. He is creations supreme and absolute Lord. He brought all creatures out of nothing, and by His own will graduated the degree of being each should possess; and it is fitting He should have unlimited empire over all. As if to prevent the possibility of any misconception regarding the relation of Christ to the universe, and to show that He could not be a part of creation however exalted in degree, but was essentially distinct from it, the apostle sets forth the Son of God as the first cause, the active agent, and the grand end of all created things.
2. Christ is Himself the Creator of all things.
(1) The conception of creation originated in Christ. For by Him [or in Him] were all things created (Col. 1:16). He was the great first cause; the being, forms, limitations, energies of all things to be were bound up in Him. It rested with Himself to create or not to create. It is thought by some the Platonic idea is here shadowed forth: that the archetypes, the original patterns of all things, were in Christ before they were created outwardly. This is simply a philosophic speculation, and is readily suggested by the universal method of the mind first forming a mental conception within itself of any object it desires to body-forth to the outward eye. It is in Christ we trace the great work of creation in its beginning, progress, and end.
(2) The powers of creation were distributed by Christ. All things that are in heaven, and that are in earth (Col. 1:16). He created the heavens also; but those things which are in the heavens are rather named because the inhabitants are more noble than their dwellings. Visible, things that are evident to the outward senses; and invisible, things that may be conceived by the understanding. With a view to meet some peculiar doctrine of the false teachers at Coloss, who seem to have alleged that Christ was but one of the heavenly powers, St. Paul breaks up the things invisible, and distributes them by the words thrones, dominions, principalities, or powers. It may be difficult, and indeed impossible, for us now fully to know what the terms severally convey in connection with the several hierarchies of heaven; they seem to point to gradations of being and to distinctions of official glory. Yet all these invisible beings, so illustrious as to be seated on thrones, so great as to be styled dominions, so elevated as to be considered principalities, so mighty as to merit the designation of powers, were created by the Son of God; and they all acknowledge His supremacy and glory. The highest position in creation is infinitely below Him, and there is neither majesty nor renown that equals His. All created beings occupying the loftiest thrones throughout the vastness of immensity and amidst the mystery of life do homage and service to Christ Jesus as the firstborn, the only begotten Son of God (Spence).
(3) Christ is Himself the great end of creation. All things were created for Him (Col. 1:16). As all creation emanated from Him, so does it all converge again towards Him. The eternal Word is the goal of the universe, as He was the starting-point. It must end in unity, as it proceeded from unity; and the centre of this unity is Christ. The most elaborate and majestic machinery of the universe and the most highly gifted intelligence alike exist only to serve the ultimate purpose of creations Lord. All created things gather their significance, dignity, and glory by their connection with Him. Christ must be more than a creature, as the loftiest creature could not be the end of all created things. It is a narrow philosophy that teaches that all things were made for man. The grand end of all our endeavours should ever be the glory of Christ.
3. The unchanging eternity of Christ.He is before all things (Col. 1:17). Not only is He before Moses and before Abraham, as He declared to the Jews (John 8), but He is before all things. The words refer not so much to His eminence in rank as to duration. The terms HE IS, in the Greek, are most emphatic, the one declaring His personality, the other that His pre-existence is absolute existence. Christ existed before any created thingeven before time itself; therefore, from eternity. Knowing the tendency of men to entertain inferior notions of the person of Christ, and of the redemption He has provided, the apostle multiplies conceptions to represent His divine worth and excellency. He should be preferred before all.
4. The continued existence of creation depends on Christ.And by [rather in] Him all things consist (Col. 1:17)hold together, cohere. He is the principle of cohesion in the universe. He impresses upon creation that unity and solidarity which makes it a cosmos instead of a chaos. Thus, to take one instance, the action of gravitation, which keeps in their places things fixed and regulates the motion of things moving, is an expression of His mind (Lightfoot). The universe found its completion in Him, and is sustained and preserved every moment by the continuous exercise of His almighty power. All things hang on Christ; in Him they live and move and have their being. If He withdrew His upholding hand, everything would run into confusion and ruin. Thou hidest Thy face, they are troubled: Thou takest away their breath, they die, and return to their dust. In Him all things consist. He is the centre of life, force, motion, and rest; round Him all things revolve. He imposes their limits, gives to them their law, strikes the keynote of their harmonies, blends and controls their diverse operations. He is the All-perfect in the midst of imperfection, the Unchanged in the midst of change. He is the Author of human redemption; became incarnate, suffered, died, and rose again, and now reigns with the Father in glory everlasting. He is worthy of our loftiest adoration, our humblest submission, our strongest confidence, our most ardent love.
Lessons.
1. The supremacy of the Creator and Preserver of all things is absolute and universal.
2. Human redemption is grounded on the divinity of the Son of God.
3. Personal trust in the Redeemer brings the soul into direct personal relation to the Father.
GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES
Col. 1:15. Christ a Revelation because He is the Equal of the Father
I.
In His nature.The incarnation.
II.
In His attributes.
III.
In His will.The character of Christ and His moral system.
IV.
In His works.His miracles, His death as a sacrifice for sin, His resurrection.
1. How ungrateful and unbelieving have we been!
2. How zealous and devoted should we be!G. Brooks.
Col. 1:16. Christ the Author and the End of Creation.
I. The Author.
1. The extent. All things. The universe, natural and moral.
2. The variety.Visible and invisible. The near and the distant, the vast and the minute, the material and the spiritual.
3. The orders.Whether they be. Scale of being. Gradations in all classes.
II. The end.
1. Heaven was created for Him. As the place of His special residence and as the home of His people.
2. Angels were created for Him.Messengers of His mercy, executioners of His vengeance.
3. Hell was created for Him.The prison of His justice.
4. The earth was created for Him.The scene of His incarnation and atoning death. His mediatorial kingdom.
5. The human race was created for Him.Man created, preserved, redeemed.
(1) How exalted should be our ideas of Christ!
(2) How carefully should we learn to view everything in connection with Christ!
3. What ground for confidence, gratitude, and fear!Ibid.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
15. who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16. for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;
Translation and Paraphrase
15. (Yea further, the Son) is the (very) likeness (the picture, the manifestation and representation) of the invisible God; (and he is) the firstborn of all (the) creation (having authority over all creation as the firstborn in a tribe rules the tribe).
16. (Now Christ occupies this rank of the firstborn, not because he was the first being created by God, but) because all things were created by him, (the things) in the heavens and (the things) upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether (they be) thrones, or lordships, or rulers, or authorities (these being titles and offices among the unseen hosts in our universe), all (these) things have been created through him, and for him.
Notes
1.
Christ is so close to God that he is Gods very image (Gr. eikon), Image means likeness, or figure. The word has the added suggestion of representation and manifestation. (Thayer). 2Co. 4:4.
2.
One ancient letter preserved for us tells how a man sent a artists small sketch of himself to his family, saying that he was sending them an eikon of himself. This illustrates the meaning of the word image, Christ is the picture of God, his very likeness.
3.
Christ is the image of the invisible God. No one has ever seen God. Joh. 1:18; 1Ti. 6:15. Christ has declared and revealed unto us what God is like. (Because no one has ever seen God, no one can make an idol of Him.)
4.
The Gnostics regarded Christ as one of the intermediaries between God and men, and as inferior to God. Jesus was to them by no means unique. They further felt that if he was divine, he could not have had a material body, for divinity had no contact with material things. For the same reason Christ could not have had been involved in the creation of the universe. Note how emphatically Paul asserts that Christ was both the creator, and also the very image of God at the same time, (See the Introductory Study on Gnosticism.)
5.
Note Christs relationships to creation: (Col. 1:16)
a.
All things were created in (or by) him.
b.
All things were created through him.
c.
All things were created unto (or for) him.
6.
Christ is the firstborn of all creation. This title has little to do with time. It is more a title of rank and honor. See Psa. 89:27 and Exo. 4:22. The firstborn in a nomadic desert tribe is the ruler of the tribe. Rom. 8:29.
Observe carefully that Paul says that Christ is the firstborn of all creation NOT because he was the first thing God created, but because he, Christ, created all things. (Joh. 1:3; Joh. 1:10; Heb. 1:2). If Christ created ALL things, he is therefore not a created being himself. He was himself in the beginning with God (Joh. 1:2), and he thought it not robbery to be equal with God (Php. 2:6).
7.
Rev. 3:14 is sometimes set forth as proving that Christ is a created being. There he is called the beginning of the creation of God. The word beginning in Rev. 3:4 is a translation of the Gr. arche, which is the same word used in Luk. 20:20, where it is translated power (KJV), rule (ASV), or authority (RSV). (Arche is also applied to Christ in Col. 1:18, where it is translated beginning.) Thus it appears that both Colossians and Revelation teach that Christ has authority over creation, but that definitely neither indicates that he is a created being.
8.
As if to stress the completeness of Christs part in creation, Paul itemizes the things that Christ created: things in heaven and things on earth; things visible and things invisible; thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers. (Compare Eph. 1:10; 1Ti. 1:17; 2Co. 4:18). We suppose that the last four terms refer to ranks and offices within the unseen hosts of angels and spirits in the universe.
Observe that Christs supremacy embraces the entire universe. When astronauts land on the moon and other heavenly bodies, Christ will still be the Lord and creator of those bodies.
Note that Christs supremacy is particularly opposed to all heretical teachings that degrade him.
9.
Pauls remark that all things were created through Christ and for Him recalls the description of Wisdom in Pro. 8:22-31. There Wisdom speaks as Gods master workman in creating the world. Since Christ is Gods wisdom (1Co. 1:30), the passage in Proverbs may well picture Christs description of His part in the work of creation.
10.
Some scholars feel that Col. 1:15-20 is a unit, and was either a hymn written by Paul himself, or one used in the early church. Certainly its thoughts are presented in concise lines (stichs) like poetry, and this contrasts with the more extended paragraph Col. 1:19-23. It has been argued that Col. 1:15-17 is one stanza, emphasizing Christs preeminence in creation; and Col. 1:18-20 is a second stanza, emphasizing Christs preeminence in redemption and the church. The who is in Col. 1:15 and Col. 1:18 are alike. Both Col. 1:15; Col. 1:18 use the title firstborn. Col. 1:16; Col. 1:20 both mention the heaven and the earth, though in reverse order. These similarities point to a purposeful pattern of resemblance in the verses.
In spite of these arguments the words of Col. 1:15-20 still must be considerably forced to be made to fit a song or chant. We really do not feel that anyone has proved that this is a song.
11.
As supreme creator of the universe and as firstborn of all creation, Christ can deliver us, though we face bombs, space invaders, communism, old age, financial hardship, or the day of judgment!
Study and Review
5.
What does the word image mean? (Col. 1:15)
6.
Why is it impossible to make an idol of God?
7.
What rank does a firstborn have?
8.
According to Col. 1:15-16, why is Christ the firstborn of all creation?
9.
Explain the phrase the firstborn of all creation.
10.
Where are the things which Christ created located? (Col. 1:16)
11.
To what do thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers refer?
12.
What is the difference in meaning between the assertions that all things have been created through Christ, and created unto him?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(15) The image of the invisible God.This all important clause needs the most careful examination. We note accordingly (1) that the word image (like the word form, Php. 2:6-7) is used in the New Testament for real and essential embodiment, as distinguished from mere likeness. Thus in Heb. 10:1 we read, The law, having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things; we note also in Rom. 1:23 the distinction between the mere outward likeness and the image which it represented; we find in 1Co. 15:49 that the image of the earthy and the image of the heavenly Adam denote actual identity of nature with both; and in 2Co. 3:18 the actual work of the Spirit in the heart is described as changing us from glory to glory into the image of the glorified Christ. (2) Next we observe that although, speaking popularly, St. Paul in 1Co. 11:7 calls man the image and glory of God, yet the allusion is to Gen. 1:26; Gen. 1:28, where man is said, with stricter accuracy, to be made after the image of God (as in Eph. 4:24, created after God), and this more accurate expression is used in Col. 3:10 of this Epistle, renewed after the image of Him that created him. Who then, or what, is the image of God, after which man is created? St. Paul here emphatically (as in 2Co. 4:4 parenthetically) answers Christ, as the Son of God, first-born before all creation. The same truth is conveyed in a different form, clearer (if possible) even than this, in Heb. 1:3, where the Son is said to be not only the brightness of the glory of the Father, but the express image of His Person. For the word express image is character in the original, used here (as when we speak of the alphabetical characters) to signify the visible drawn image, and the word Person is substance or essence. (3) It is not to be forgotten that at this time in the Platonising Judaism of Philo, the Word was called the eternal image of God. (See passages quoted in Dr. Light-foots note on this passage.) This expression was not peculiar to him; it was but a working out of that personification of the wisdom of God, of which we have a magnificent example in Pro. 8:22-30, and of which we trace the effect in the Alexandrine Book of Wisdom (Wis. 7:25-26). Wisdom is the breath of the power of God, and a pure stream from the glory of the Most Highthe brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of His goodness. It seems to have represented in the Jewish schools the idea complementary to the ordinary idea of the Messiah in the Jewish world. Just as St. John took up the vague idea of the Word, and gave it a clear divine personality in Christ, so St. Paul seems to act here in relation to the other phrase, used as a description of the Word. In Christ he fixes in solid reality the floating vision of the image of God. (4) There is an emphasis on the words of the invisible God. Now, since the whole context shows that the reference is to the eternal pre-existence of Christ, ancient interpreters (of whom Chrysostom may be taken as the type) argued that the image of the invisible must be also invisible. But this seems opposed to the whole idea of the word image, and to its use in the New Testament and elsewhere. The true key to this passage is in our Lords own words in Joh. 1:8, No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son (here is the remarkable reading, the only begotten God), who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath revealed Him. In anticipation of the future revelation of Godhead, Christ, even as pre-existent, is called The image of the invisible God.
The firstborn of every creature (of all creation).(1) As to the sense of this clause. The grammatical construction here will bear either the rendering of our version, or the rendering begotten before all creation, whence comes the begotten before all worlds of the Nicene creed. But the whole context shows that the latter is unquestionably the true rendering. For, as has been remarked from ancient times, He is said to be begotten and not created; next, he is emphatically spoken of below as He by whom all things were created, who is before all things, and in whom all things consist. (2) As to the order of idea. In Himself He is the image of God from all eternity. From this essential conception, by a natural contrast, the thought immediately passes on to distinction from, and priority to, all created being. Exactly in this same order of idea, we have in Heb. 1:2-3, By whom also He made the worlds . . . upholding all things by the word of His power; and in Joh. 1:3, All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made which was made. Here St. Paul indicates this idea in the words firstborn before all creation, and works it out in the verses following. (3) As to the name firstborn itself. It is used of the Messiah as an almost technical name (derived from Psa. 2:7; Psa. 89:28), as is shown in Heb. 1:6, when He bringeth the first begotten into the world. In tracing the Messianic line of promise we notice that; while the Messiah is always true man, the seed of Abraham, the son of David, yet on him are accumulated attributes too high for any created being (as in Isa. 9:6). He is declared to be an Emmanuel God with us; and His kingdom a visible manifestation of God. Hence the idea contained in the word firstborn is not only sovereignty above all the kings of the earth (Psa. 89:28; comp. Dan. 8:13-14), but also likeness to God and priority to all created being. (4) As to the union of the two clauses. In the first we have the declaration of His eternal unity with Godall that was completely embodied in the declaration of the Word who is God, up to which all the higher Jewish speculations had led; in the second we trace the distinctness of His Person, as the begotten of the Father, the true Messiah of Jewish hopes, and the subordination of the co-eternal Son to the Father. The union of the two marks the assertion of Christian mystery, as against rationalising systems, of the type of Arianism on one side, of Sabellianism on the other.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
I. THE GLORIOUS PERSON AND REDEMPTIVE WORK OF CHRIST, Col 1:15 to Col 2:7.
1. His exalted dignity, Col 1:15-18.
Against all possible systems of human salvation, and especially that one which at Colosse assumed a position of antagonism with the gospel, and through its mediatorship of angels with Christ, it is necessary to show his absolute and unapproachable pre-eminence in himself and as Mediator, together with the entire sufficiency of what he has done. The passage, though brief, is important as one of the principal four which describe the person of our Lord. Comp. Eph 1:20-23; Php 2:6-11; and Heb 1:2-3.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
a. His relation to God, Col 1:15 .
15. Who is The subject is the Son of his love, in Col 1:13. The entire description takes in both his pre-incarnate, and his incarnate and now glorified state. The division is at the end of Col 1:17. Both before creation and after his ascension, from eternity to eternity, he is what is here asserted. The word is is the word of eternity.
Image An image of what is invisible must itself be invisible. Image is more than resemblance or likeness: it is the exact counterpart of the being imaged, perfectly representing his attributes and essential nature, with, therefore, in the present case, the same substance, power, and eternity. As Ellicott observes, “The Son is the Father’s image in all things, save only in being the Father.” In his pre-existence, his incarnation, and his glorification, all the characteristics of God are in him. In his relations to the world he reveals and manifests God; but these are not in question here. They belong to his office, not to his nature and relation to God.
Firstborn of every creature This phrase, standing alone, would confirm the Arian view, that the Son was the first created being; but the context, which ascribes to him the whole creation, with no exception, and also asserts his pre-existence, forbids that interpretation. No creature can create himself, or exist prior to any creation. He created the creation, and therefore existed before all creation. Moreover, first-created is not the word here used. Nor is the reference to our Lord’s birth of a human mother, as the for of the next verse shows; but rather to that mysterious emanation of the Son from the Father, in which he is said to be “begotten” or “born.” A correct rendering would read, the firstborn before every creature, that is, every kind of creature; and in Scripture, whatever is before any creation is from eternity. So the Nicene Creed expresses it, “begotten before all worlds,” that is, from eternity. In his eternal relation to the Father, the Son is the only begotten: in his relation to his creatures, he is before them all. Besides priority in time, he also has the priority in dignity and right which belong to the firstborn.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.’
‘Who is the image of the invisible God.’ The God of the Jews was invisible and could not be represented by any physical representation in earth or heaven, whether of supernatural being, man or beast (Exo 20:4). Such representations could only be images of a visible God, and would thus misrepresent God. So ‘the image’ is not meant to suggest God’s physical likeness. Rather it means revealing Him in His essential being. As ‘the image of the invisible God’ Christ has made the invisible God known to man in a unique way, in His life, His power and His teaching. He has shown what God is really like. He has revealed His glory.
Thus John can say, ‘we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only Son of His Father, full of grace and truth’ (Joh 1:14), and adds, ‘No man has seen God at any time, the only begotten Son Who is in the Father’s bosom, He has made Him known’ (Joh 1:18). He is the ‘monogenes (only begotten), the only One of like nature with the Father, as opposed to being a creation of God.
That is why Jesus Himself could say, ‘How do you say “show us the Father”? He who has seen me has seen the Father’ (Joh 14:9). We behold God in the things Jesus said and the things He did, in what He essentially was, for the Father was in Him and working through Him uniquely. He did not hesitate to point to Himself as revealing the Father’s full glory.
Hebrews puts it this way, ‘Who being the outshining (effulgence) of His glory and the stamped out image of His substance’ (Heb 1:3). The ‘outshining’ refers to light that comes from a glorious object, of the same essence and revealing its glory, like the rays of the sun. The ‘stamped out image’ refers to that which is an exact representation of what is stamped out by a seal. Neither should be taken too literally. God is not physical light, nor can invisibility be ‘stamped out’. Thus both tell us that He reveals the very nature and being of God, not some physical image.
We can compare how in Rom 1:20, Paul tells us that ‘the invisible things of Him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even His everlasting power and Godness’. Note that it is invisible things which are ‘seen’, that is grasped and understood in the mind, just as the invisible God is ‘seen’ through Christ. But this perceiving was not, be it noted, through small parts of that creation, which were strictly forbidden as representations of Him, but through creation seen as a whole. The very heavens and earth declared His glory, and power, and uniqueness to the receptive mind, for He was their Creator. But here now was One Who even more revealed that everlasting power and ‘Godness’ in His very nature and being.
‘The firstborn (prototokos) of all creation.’ On earth the firstborn was the one who, being of the same nature as his father, most fully revealed what his father was. He would one day stand in the place of his father, and be as his father once his father had died. He was, as it were, the reproduction of the father. In Greek philosophy also the Firstborn (prototokos) was seen as the one who fully represented the divine Reason, the Logos, in its relation to the world and as being of the same nature as the divine Reason. But in this latter case both were eternal, the one merging into the other. The stress is on likeness of nature and likeness of being, not physically but essentially.
Paul may also have had in mind the Messianic connection of the term. In Psa 89:27 God says, ‘I also will make him my firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth.’ This was interpreted Messianically by the Jews. Here the idea is of one made superior and set over all.
But He is the Firstborn ‘of all creation’ not just of the Jews. (This is part of the ‘mystery’ as we shall see shortly (Psa 89:27)). Thus as the Firstborn of all creation, Christ is seen to have precedence to, and authority over all, creation.
But this will now be related to Him creating all things, which includes the whole supernatural sphere. So His sphere of authority comes as Creator, the One Who was in existence before all things. He is superior because He is God’s ‘firstborn’, the One Who reveals Him as He is, and indeed because He is His only begotten Son. (These are human, and therefore inadequate pictures. They are intended to convey oneness of essence, not that He was ‘born later’ than the Father. Theologians use the term ‘eternally begotten’, ‘not begotten at a point in time’, to describe this).
Thus Jesus Christ as the Firstborn fully represents His Father. He is before all things, He is the heir of all things and supreme over all things, and He is the One through Whom the Father approaches the world. We might thus paraphrase, ‘ the Firstborn, He Who was before the whole of creation, who was of the same essence as the Prime Creator, who represented the Prime Creator in His external relationships and was set over all things supernatural, brought the creation into being.’ As Jesus Himself said, ‘Before Abraham was, I am’ (Joh 8:58).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Glory of Christ ( Col 1:15-20 ).
Paul now brings to their attention the glory of their Redeemer, the One Who created all things and is over all..
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Work of the exalted Christ through the Medium of the Ministry.
Jesus Christ all in all:
v. 15. Who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of every creature;
v. 16. 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 Him and for Him.
v. 17. And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.
v. 18. And he is the Head of the body, the Church; who is the Beginning, the First-born from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
v. 19. For it pleased the father that in Him should all fullness dwell;
v. 20. and, having made peace through the blood of His cross, by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself; by Him, I say, whether they be things in earth or things in heaven. This passage is one of the most wonderful and comprehensive in the entire New Testament, for the apostle has crowded into these few sentences almost the entire doctrine of Christ’s person and office. Of Jesus Christ, whose work of redemption he has just described in its chief parts, the apostle says: Who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of the entire creation. God’s essence is such as to place Him beyond the senses of man; no man has seen nor can see Him, 1Ti 6:16; 1Jn 4:12; Joh 1:18. But God had resolved to reveal Himself to mankind in Jesus Christ, His Son, as His image, in and through whom we can see the Father, Joh 14:7-10; 1Jn 1:1-3. In Jesus Christ the invisible, the unknowable God is both seen and known to us, in Him God has shined in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, 2Co 4:6. in Him, who is the eternal and living and personal image of the Father, of the same essence with the Father, the eternal love, the gracious and merciful essence of the Father, has been manifested to men. Jesus is incidentally the Firstborn of all creation; He is before them and above them in time as well as in rank, He is superior to all creatures, Heb 1:6. Luther is right in stating that to be called the first-born in this connection is to be termed true God.
Just how much is included in these words the apostle shows in the following: For in Him was created everything in the heavens and upon the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; everything through Him and for Him is created, and Himself is before all, and in Him all things subsist. The entire creation rested in the creative power of the Son of God from eternity; the entire counsel of God with regard to the creation of the world was put into execution by Him. Everything, the whole universe with all that it contains, was brought into being by His creative power, the creatures in the heavens, the angels, as well as those on earth, both the organic and inorganic creatures, with man as their glory and crown. Or, to classify these creatures according to their essence and manner of being: to Christ’s creative sphere belong the invisible creatures as well as the visible. The apostle enumerates some of the invisible creatures, the spirits: thrones and lordships and principalities and powers, both the good and the fallen angels being included. See Eph 1:21; Eph 3:10. Whether special ranks or orders of angels must be distinguished, cannot be determined from this passage; the apostle seems rather to have the object to bring out the great power of the spirits, which yet is not to be compared with the almighty, creative power of the Son of God. Therefore He summarizes once more that all things, with not a single exception, through Him, through His omnipotence, and for Him, dependent upon Him, for His glory, are created. He is also said to be the possessor of eternity: He is before all things, He was in existence before a single creature had life and being. He is Providence: all things, the entire universe, exist in Him, hold together through His providential power. He keeps all creatures in their proper place and in the right relation toward one another: He sustains the world in all its parts. Christ is thus the Creator of the world, the Preserver of the world, true God with the Father from eternity.
The apostle now describes the relation of the Mediator to the Church: And He is the Head of the body, of the Church, who is the Beginning, the First-born from the dead, in order that He Himself might become preeminent among all. Since Christ has brought about the cleansing of our sins through Himself, since the Father has rescued us from the rule of darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of His dear Son, since we have in Him the redemption through His blood, we now belong to His Church, the kingdom of Christ. The Church is the body of Christ, who is the Head. See Eph 1:23; 1Co 12:27; Eph 5:23. By their fellowship with Christ, by their union in Christ, all the believers, as members together of the body of which He is the Head, are partakers of all the blessings and glories which pertain to Him in His capacity as the eternal Son of God. He is the Beginning: without Him the Church could not exist, could not have come into being. He is the First-born out of the dead, from among the dead. Both according to time and in rank He is the first in the resurrection of the dead: He is the cause of the resurrection of the dead; through His righteousness justification of life is come upon all men, Rom 5:18; He is the First-born among many brethren, Rom 8:29; 1Co 15:20. Among all men, among all creatures, He is preeminent, supreme; that is the result of His resurrection from the dead, of His exaltation on high.
The apostle rises to ever greater heights of sustained eloquence: Because in Him it was the good pleasure that all fullness should dwell. This is the climax of the thought. Christ is the first before all creatures; Christ is the first in the redeemed congregation; Christ is the first in the resurrection and in the subsequent glory. He is the Ruler in the Kingdom of Power; He is the Ruler in the Kingdom of Grace; He is the Ruler in the Kingdom of Glory. So Christ is the vessel in which is contained, in which dwells, the fullness of all the divine counsels for creation and humanity; through Him the fullness of all divine thoughts should be expressed, so that His superiority, His preeminence, might be unquestioned in time and eternity. The thought is almost the same as in chap. 2:9.
Not only, however, is the supremacy of Christ emphasized, but also the dependence of the believers upon His work: And that through Him (Christ) everything be reconciled to Him (God the Father), He having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, whether things on earth or things in the heavens. This was also God’s good pleasure. The apostle evidently does not refer only to the reconciliation which was made through the death of Christ, by which fallen mankind was brought back into the right relation with God. The statement is too broad for that. The culmination of Christ’s work, in His state of exaltation, will be to remove the estrangement which exists ever since the evil angels first revolted against the government of God, to effect the reconciliation by which the sum total of all created things shall be restored to its primal harmony with the Creator. See Rom 8:21. The connection of thought, therefore, is this: By the fact that God reconciled us to Himself through the blood of Christ He brought about an adjustment of the relations which were thrown out of alignment by the first revolt, and this will finally result in bringing about harmony and unity between heaven and earth. Not only all those that confess the exalted Christ have entered into this state of proper relation with God, but all creatures that are now groaning under the effects of sin will finally, through the power of the exalted Christ, be delivered from their bondage, thus bringing about the union of heaven and earth, while hell with its occupants will be shut out forever from this glorious reconciliation. All this has resulted and will result from the fact that God has made peace through the blood of His Son’s cross. When Christ was nailed to the accursed tree of the cross, it was in punishment for the sins of the world. But at the same time the shedding of His holy, innocent blood atoned for our transgressions, turned the heart of the Father back to us through our Substitute, and changed the state of warfare existing between the holy, righteous God and the sinful world to one of perfect peace. As a consequence of this sacrifice of atonement the union between God and the believers will be perfect and happy throughout all eternity.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Col 1:15. Who is the image Adam is said to have been made in the image of God, and dominion given him over the creatures of the earth; by which he became Lord of this lower world. St. Paul, in Php 2:6 tells us, that Christ was in the form of God, which gave him dominion over the works of nature, which had their being from, and owe their preservation to his power. Moses gives us an account how Adam fell from the dignity in which he was created, and entailed misery upon his descendants, through his disobedience and vain ambition. St. Paul says, that Christ, through obedience and submission to the will of his Father, has made an atonement, and has set us an example, by which, if the same mind be in us, through his grace, we may recover what is lost. Moses tells us, that Adam was tempted to eat the forbidden fruit, upon the hopes which the tempter gave him, that it would make him like to God. He thought it such an advantageous proposal, that he catched at the opportunity, and eagerly embraced the offer. St. Paul’s account is, that Christ, who had a right by nature to appear in the majesty and glory of God, yet voluntarily laid it aside, and lived and died upon earth, in fashion as a man. What Adam got by his bold attempt, we all know; but Christ, for a recompence of his obedience, was highly exalted in his glorified humanity. Adam was, at best, a faint image of God; but Christ was a true, faithful, and infinitely complete image of the wisdom, power, and goodness of his Father. Adam was such an image of God, as the reflection of the sun is, when seen in the water; but Christ was such an image of the sun, as another sun would be, adorned with equal lustre and radiance. The Apostle describes our Redeemer in this and the following verses, in such lofty terms, as evidently bespeak him to be a Divine Person, truly and really God; and consequently the fittest, the only person to undertake so great and glorious a work as the redemption of a perishing world. The Father is always represented in the New Testament as invisible: but Christ is represented as visible; since he actually took upon him flesh, and was seen in the world. Indeed, his being called the image of God, in this place, and 2Co 4:4 implies his being visible, and that the perfections of the whole Godhead do most eminently shine in him. It is remarkable how expressly Philo, the Jew, in more places than one, calls the Logos, or Word, of which he speaks, the image of God.
Dr. Hammond observes, that the word , besides the ordinary notion of first-born, is used sometimes in scripture for a Lord, or person in power; who hath the privilege of the first-born, dominion over all his brethren; and according to this notion it is used commonly in scripture for a prince, or principal person; (see Psa 68:27.) and among the civilians, the heir and the lord are synonimous terms. That this is the true sense ofthe word in this place, appears probable, for the following reasons:
1. Because the Apostle immediately adds, for by him were all things created; so that the creation of all things by him is given as a reason for his being , or the first-born. Now it is not a good argument, that, because he created all things, he was therefore himself produced before them; it is sufficient for that purpose, that he had almighty power, and was before them: but it is a very good argument, that, because he created all things, he should therefore be Lord, or Heir of all things. 2nd, Because the same Apostle, Heb 1:2 hath stiled the same person Heir of all things; and probably alluded to the same reason, when he added, by whom also he made the worlds. Thirdly, Because the prophesy in Psa 89:26-27 confirms this interpretation, and shews the true meaning of the word. He shall cry unto me, Thou art my Father, my God, and the rock of my salvation; also I will make him my first-born, (in the 70: ,) higher than the kings of the earth; but, according to the Arian notion, this should have been, He is or was my first-born. See Heb 1:6. Rev 3:14. It may not be amiss to observe, that the word hath yet another signification; and is applied by Homer, Il. P. to an animal that hath brought forth its first young; in which sense it might be applied, without any great impropriety, to the Creator of all things; to Him, who, as it were at the first birth, by the exertion of his creating power, brought forth all things. The words , so naturally signifying the whole creation, [as they are translated in Rom 8:22.] (a version which gives a much nobler and more determinate sense than every creature), at least render this interpretation very remarkable. Some translate it the first-born before, or born before all the creation. See Blackwall, S.C. vol. ii, p. 173. Sherlock, vol. 4: dis. 1. Scott’s Christian Life, vol. 3: p. 559. Wallis’s Sermon on the Resurrection,Tillotson, vol. 1: serm. 43 and “The Doctrine of the Trinity,” &c. p. 16.
According to the Arians, the first-born of the whole creation, is the first-made creature. But the reason advanced to prove the Son the first-born of the whole creation, overturns that sense of this passage. For surely the Son’s creating all things, does not prove him to be the first-made creature, unless his power of creating all things originated from his being the first-made creature; which no one I think will affirm. As little does the Son’s creating all things, prove that he first of all created himself. Yet these absurdities will be established by the Apostle’s reasoning, if the first-born of the whole creation signifies the first-made creature.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Col 1:15 . As to Col 1:15-20 , see Schleiermacher in the Stud. u. Krit . 1832, p. 497 ff. ( Werke z. Theol . II. p. 321 ff.), and, in opposition to his ethical interpretation (of Christ as the moral Reformer of the world), Holzhausen in the Tb. Zeitschr . 1832, 4, p. 236 ff.; Osiander, ibid . 1833, 1, 2; Bhr, appendix to Komment . p. 321 ff.; Bleek on Heb 1:2 . See generally also Hofmann, Schriftbew . I. p. 153 ff., II. 1, p. 357 ff.; Beyschlag in the Stud. u. Krit . 1860, p. 446 f.
After having stated, in Col 1:14 , what we have in Christ (whose state of exaltation he has in view, see Col 1:13 , ), Paul now, continuing his discourse by an epexegetical relative clause, depicts what Christ is , namely, as regards His divine dignity having in view the influences of the false teachers, who with Gnostic tendencies depreciated this dignity. The plan of the discourse is not tripartite (originator of the physical creation, Col 1:15 f.; maintainer of everything created, Col 1:17 ; relation to the new moral creation, Col 1:18 ff., so Bhr, while others divide differently [23] ), but bipartite , in such a way that Col 1:15-17 set forth the exalted metaphysical relation of Christ to God and the world , and then Col 1:18 ff., His historical relation of dignity to the church . [24] This division, which in itself is logically correct (whereas Col 1:17 is not suited, either as regards contents or form, to be a separate, co-ordinate part), is also externally indicated by the two confirmatory clauses . . . in Col 1:16 and Col 1:19 , by which the two preceding [25] affirmations in Col 1:15 and Col 1:18 are shown to be the proper parts of the discourse. Others (see especially Bengel, Schleiermacher, Hofmann, comp. also Gess, Pers. Chr . p. 77) have looked upon the twice-expressed in Col 1:15 and Col 1:18 as marking the beginning of the two parts. But this would not be justifiable as respects the second ; for the main idea, which governs the whole effusion, Col 1:15-20 , is the glory of the dominion of the Son of God , in the description of which Paul evidently begins the second part with the words , Col 1:18 , passing over from the general to the special, namely, to His government over the church to which He has attained by His resurrection. On the details, see below.
. . .] It is to be observed that Paul has in view Christ as regards His present existence, consequently as regards the presence and continuance of His state of exaltation (comp. on. Col 1:13-14 ); hence he affirms, not what Christ was , but what He is . On this , comp. Col 1:17-18 , and 2Co 4:4 . Therefore not only the reference to Christ’s temporal manifestation (Calvin, Grotius, Heinrichs, Baumgarten-Crusius, and others), but also the limitation to Christ’s divine nature or the Logos (Calovius, Estius, Wolf, and many others, including Bhr, Steiger, Olshausen, Huther) is incorrect. The only correct reference is to His whole person , which, in the divine-human state of its present heavenly existence, is continually that which its divine nature this nature considered in and by itself was before the incarnation; so that, in virtue of the identity of His divine nature, the same predicates belong to the exalted Christ as to the Logos. See Phi 2:6 ; Joh 17:5 .
] image of God the invisible . Comp. on 2Co 4:4 . As, namely, Christ in His pre-existence [26] down to His incarnation already possessed the essential divine glory, so that He was as to nature , and as to form of appearance (see on Phi 2:6 ); so, after He had by means of the incarnation divested Himself, not indeed of His God-equal nature, but of His divine , and had humbled Himself, and had in obedience towards God died even the death of the cross, He has been exalted again by God to His original glory (Phi 2:9 ; Joh 17:5 ), so that the divine now exists (comp. on Col 2:9 ) in His glorified corporeal manifestation (Phi 3:21 ); and He the exalted Christ in this His glory, which is that of His Father, represents and brings to view by exact image God, who is in Himself invisible. He is (Heb 1:3 ), [27] and, in this majesty, in which He is the exactly similar visible revelation of God, He will present Himself to all the world at the Parousia (Mat 16:27 ; Mat 25:31 ; Phi 3:20 ; 2Th 1:7 ; 1Pe 4:13 ; Tit 2:13 , et al .). The predicate , placed as it is in its characteristically significant attributive position (Bornemann, Schol. in Luc . p. xxxvi.; Bernhardy, p. 322 f.) behind the emphatic , posits for the conception of the exact image visibility (Heb 12:14 ; 2Co 3:18 ; Act 22:11 ); but the assumption that Paul had thus in view the Alexandrian doctrine of the Logos , the doctrine of the hidden and manifest God (see Usteri, Lehrbegr . p. 308; comp. Bhr, Olshausen, Steiger, Huther), the less admits of proof, because he is not speaking here of the pre-existence , but of the exalted Christ, including, therefore, His human nature; hence, also, the comparison with the angel Metatron of Jewish theology (comp. Hengstenberg, Christol . III. 2, p. 67) is irrelevant. The Fathers, moreover, have, in opposition to the Arians, rightly laid stress upon the fact (see Suicer, Thes . I. p. 415) that, according to the entire context, is meant in the eminent sense, namely of the adequate , and consequently consubstantial, image of God ( , Theophylact), and not as man (Gen 1:26 ; comp. also 1Co 11:7 ; Col 3:10 ) or the creation (Rom 1:20 ) is God’s image. In that case, however, the invisibility of the is not at all to be considered as presupposed (Chrysostom, Calovius, and others); this, on the contrary, pertains to the Godhead in itself (1Ti 1:17 ; Heb 11:27 ), so far as it does not present itself in its ; whereas the notion of necessarily involves perceptibility (see above); “Dei inaspecti aspectabilis imago,” Grotius. This visibility and that not merely mental (Rom 1:20 ) had been experienced by Paul himself at his conversion, and at Christ’s Parousia will be fully experienced by all the world. Different from this is the (discursive) cognoscibility of God, which Christ has brought about by His appearance and working. Joh 1:18 ; Joh 14:9 . This applies against the view of Calvin, Clericus, and many others, including de Wette: “in His person, appearance, and operation God has made Himself as it were visible; ” comp. Grotius: “Adam imago Dei fuit, sed valde tenuis; in Christo perfectissime apparuit, quam Deus esset sapiens, potens, bonus;” Baumgarten-Crusius: “the affinity to God (which is held to consist in the destination of ruling over the spirit-world) as Christ showed it upon earth.” Thus the substantiality of the exact image is more or less turned into a quasi or quodammodo , and the text is thus laid open to every kind of rationalizing caprice. We may add that Christ was already, as , necessarily the image of God, but , in purely divine glory; not, as after His exaltation, in divine-human ; consequently, the doctrine of an eternal humanity of Christ (Beyschlag) is not to be based on . Comp. Wis 7:26 , and Grimm, Handb . p. 161 f. The idea, also, of the prototype of humanity , which is held by Beyschlag here to underlie that of the image of God (comp. his Christol . p. 227), is foreign to the context. Certainly God has in eternity thought of the humanity which in the fulness of time was to be assumed by His Son (Act 15:18 ); but this is simply an ideal pre-existence (comp. Delitzsch, Psychol . p. 41 ff.), such as belongs to the entire history of salvation, very different from the real antemundane existence of the personal Logos.
] After the relation of Christ to God now follows His relation to what is created , in an apologetic interest of opposition to the Gnostic false teachers; , ; , , Theophylact. The false teachers denied to Christ the supreme unique rank in the order of spirits. But he is first-born of every creature , that is, born before every creature having come to personal existence , [28] entered upon subsistent being, ere yet anything created was extant (Rom 1:25 ; Rom 8:39 ; Heb 4:13 ). Analogous, but not equivalent, is Pro 8:22 f. It is to be observed that this predicate also belongs to the entire Christ, inasmuch as by His exaltation His entire person is raised to that state in which He, as to His divine nature, had already existed before the creation of the world, corresponding to the Johannine expression , which in substance, although not in form, is also Pauline; comp. Phi 2:6 . Philo’s term , used of the Logos, denotes the same relation; but it is not necessary to suppose that Paul appropriated from him this expression , which is also current among classical authors, or that the apostle was at all dependent on the Alexandrian philosophic view. The mode in which he conceived of the personal pre-existence of Christ before the world as regards (timeless) origin, is not defined by the figurative more precisely than as procession from the divine nature (Philo illustrates the relation of the origin of the Logos, by saying that the Father Him), whereby the premundane Christ became subsistent and (Phi 2:6 ). The genitive , moreover, is not the partitive genitive (although de Wette still, with Usteri, Reuss, and Baur, holds this to be indubitable), because the anarthrous does not mean the whole creation , or everything which is created (Hofmann), and consequently cannot affirm the category or collective whole [29] to which Christ belongs as its first-born individual (it means: every creature; comp. on , Eph 2:21 [30] ); but it is the genitive of comparison , corresponding to the superlative expression: “ the first-born in comparison with every creature ” (see Bernhardy, p. 139), that is, born earlier than every creature. Comp. Bhr and Bleek, Ernesti, Urspr. d. Snde, I. p. 241; Weiss, Bibl. Theol . p. 424; Philippi, Glaubensl. II. p. 214, Exo 2 . In Rev 1:5 , . , the relation is different, . pointing out the category; comp. . ., Rom 8:29 . The genitive here is to be taken quite as the comparative genitive with ; see on Joh 1:15 , and generally, Khner, II. 1, p. 335 f. The element of comparison is the relation of time ( , Joh 17:5 ), and that in respect of origin . But because the latter in the case of every is different from what it is in the case of Christ, neither nor is made use of, [31] terms which would indicate for Christ, who is withal Son of God, a similar mode of origin as for the creature but the term is chosen, which, in the comparison as to time of origin, points to the peculiar nature of the origination in the case of Christ , namely, that He was not created by God, like the other beings in whom this is implied in the designation , but born , having come forth homogeneous from the nature of God. And by this is expressed, not a relation homogeneous with the (Holtzmann), a relation kindred to the world (Beyschlag, Christol . p. 227), but that which is absolutely exalted above the world and unique. Theodoret justly observes: , . At variance with the words, therefore, is the Arian interpretation, that Christ is designated as the first creature; so also Usteri, p. 315, Schwegler, Baur, Reuss. With this view the sequel also conflicts, which describes Christ as the accomplisher and aim of creation; hence in His case a mode of origin higher and different from the being created must be presupposed, which is, in fact, characteristically indicated in the purposely-chosen word . The Socinian interpretation is also incorrect [32] (Grotius, Wetstein, Nsselt, Heinrichs, and others), that denotes the new ethical creation, along with which there is, for the most part, associated the reference of . to the highest dignity (Pelagius, Melanchthon, Cameron, Hammond, Zachariae, and others, including Storr and Flatt; comp. de Wette), which is assumed also by many who understand it of the physical creation. It is decisive against this interpretation, that would necessarily require for the moral notion a more precise definition, either by a predicate ( , 2Co 5:17 ; comp. Barnabas, ep. c. xvi.: , , ), or at least by a context which admitted of no doubt; also, that never means the most excellent , and can only have this sense ex adjuncto (as at Psa 89:28 ; Rom 8:29 ), which in this passage is not by any means the case, as the context (see Col 1:16 , and in Col 1:17 ; comp. also in Col 1:18 ) brings prominently forward the relation of time . Chrysostom justly says: . , , and already Theophilus, ad Autol . ii. 31, p. 172: , , . This belongs to the high dignity of Christ (comp. Rev 3:14 : ), but it does not signify it. Comp. Justin, c. Tr . 100: . . The ethical [33] interpretation of the passage appears all the more mistaken, since according to it, even if . is understood temporally (Baumgarten-Crusius: “ is that which is remodelled , and , He who has come first under this category, has first received this higher spiritual dignity”), Christ is made to be included under the , which is at variance both with the context in Col 1:16 f., and with the whole N. T. Christology, especially the sinlessness of Christ. If, however, in order to obviate this ground of objection, is combined as an adjective with , we not only get a complicated construction, since both words have their genitival definition, but (instead of ) would be an inappropriate predicate for . This applies against Schleiermacher, who, taking as “disposition and arrangement of human things,” educes the rationalizing interpretation, that Christ is in the whole compass of the spiritual world of man the first-born image, the original copy of God; that all believers ought to be formed in the image of Christ, and thence the image of God would likewise necessarily arise in them an image of the second order. In the interest of opposition to heresy, some, following Isidore of Pelusium, Ep . iii. 31, p. 237, and Basil the Great, c. Eunom . iv. p. 104, have made the first- born even into the first- bringer-forth ( , as paroxytone, according to the classical usage, Hom. Il . xvii. 5; Plat. Theaet . p. 161 A, 151C; Valckenaer, Schol . II. p. 389), as, with Erasmus in his Annot . (but only permissively) Erasmus Schmid and Michaelis did, although in an active sense occurs only of the female sex, and the very . . of Col 1:18 ought to have dissuaded from such an idea, to say nothing of the unfitness and want of delicacy of the figure [34] as relating to Christ’s agency in the creation of the world, and of the want of reference in the to the idea of a an idea which, with the usual interpretation, is implied in .
Col 1:15 f. is, moreover, strikingly opposed to that assumption of a world without beginning (Schleiermacher, Rothe).
[23] e.g . Calovius: “Redemptoris descriptio a Deitale: ab opere creationis,” and “quod caput ecclesiae sit.” Comp. Schmid, Bibl. Theol. II. p. 299 f.
[24] Olshausen brings the two divisions under the exegetically erroneous point of view that, in vv. 15 17, Christ is described without reference to the incarnation, and in vv. 18 20, with reference to the same.
[25] In conformity with the confirmatory function of the , according to which not the clause introduced by , but the clause which it is to confirm, contains the leading thought, to which . . . is logically subordinated. Hence the two parts are not to be begun with the two clauses themselves (so Rich. Schmidt, Paulin. Christol. p. 182), in which case, moreover, ver. 15 is supposed to be quite aloof from this connection a supposition at variance with its even verbally evident association with ver. 16.
[26] Sabatier, p. 290, without reason represents the apostle as in a state of indistinct suspense in regard to his conception of this pre-existence. And Pfleiderer (in Hilgenfeld’s Zeitschr. 1871, p. 533) sees in the pre-existence a subjective product, the consequence, namely, of the fact that Christ is the ideal of the destiny of the human mind, hypostasized in a single person, to which is transferred the eternity and unchanged self-equality of the idea.
[27] This is the chief point of agreement between our Epistle and the Epistle to the Hebrews; and it is explained by the Pauline basis and footing, on which the author of the latter stood. The subsequent . ., however, has nothing to do with , Heb 1:6 , where the absolute word is rather to be explained in accordance with Rom 8:29 . We make this remark in opposition to Holtzmann, according to whom “the autor ad Ephesios as to his Christology walks in the track opened by the Epistle to the Hebrews.” Other apparent resemblances to this letter are immaterial, and similar ones can be gathered from all the Pauline letters.
[28] According to Hofmann ( Schriftbew.), the expression is also intended to imply that the existence of all created things was brought about through Him. But this is only stated in what follows, and is not yet contained in by itself, which only posits the origin of Christ (as ) in His temporal relation to the creature; and this point is the more purely to he adhered to, seeing that Christ Himself does not belong to the category of the Calvin also has understood it as Hofmann does; comp. also Gess, v. d. Pers. Chr. p. 79, and Beyschlag, p. 446, according to whom Christ is at the same time to be designated as the principle of the creature, whose origin bears in itself that of the latter.
[29] Comp. Stallb. ad Plat. Rep. p. 608 C. The article would necessarily be added, as , Jdt 16:14 , or , 3Ma 6:2 , or . Comp. also , Wis 19:6 .
[30] Hofmann, Schriftbew. I. p. 156: “In relation to all that is created, Christ occupies the position which a first-born has towards the household of his father.” Essentially similar is his view in his Heil. Schr. N. T., p. 16, where . . is held to mean “all creation,” and to signify “all that is created in its unity,” which is also the opinion of Rich. Schmidt, Paul. Christol. p. 211. The interpretation of Hofmann (comp. Gess, Pers. Chr. p. 79) is incorrect, because there would thereby be necessarily affirmed a homogeneous relation of origin for Christ and all the The would stand to Christ in the relation of the , to the , of the to the . Hofmann indeed (Heil. Schr. in loc.) opines that is simply genitive “of the definition of relation.” But this, in fact, explains nothing, because the question remains, What relation is meant to be defined by the genitive? The is not at all to be got over so easily as it is by Hofmann, namely, with a grammatically erroneous explanation of the anarthrous , and with appeal to Psa 89:28 (where, in fact, stands without genitive, and in the sense of the first rank).
[31] How much, however, the designations , , . . ., as applied to the origin of the Son, were in use among the Alexandrians (following Pro 8:22 , where Wisdom says: , comp. Sir 1:4 ; Sir 24:8 f.), may be seen in Gieseler, Kirchengesch. I. 1, p. 327, Exo 4 .
[32] The Socinian doctrine argues thus: “primogenitum unum ex eorum numero, quorum primogenitus est, esse necesse est;” but Christ could not be “unus e rebus conditis creationis veteris,” an assumption which would be Arian; He must consequently belong to the new creation, from which it follows, at the same time, that He does not possess a divine nature. See Catech. Racov. 167, p. 318, ed. Oeder.
[33] Both errors of the Socinians, etc., are already present in Theodore of Mop-suestia, namely, that . does not stand , but and signifies ; and that the following . . . does not denote , but . Comp. also Photius, Amphil. 192.
[34] , , Isidore, l.c.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Ver. 15. Who is the image ] The express image of his person, Heb 1:2 . Milk is not so like milk as this Son is like the Father. By whom also God (otherwise invisible) is manifested to us. And here, he that would see God must set the eyes of faith upon the manhood of Christ; for he “that seeth the Son, seeth the Father.” When a man looketh into a crystal glass, it casteth no reflex to him; but put steel upon the back of it, it will cast a reflex. So put the humanity (as a back of steel) to the glass of the Godhead, and it casteth a comfortable reflex to us. As without this, if we look upon God, we see indeed some small sparks of his glory to terrify and amaze us; but in Christ (God and man) we behold the lively and express face of God; not any more as a fearful and terrible Judge, but a most gracious and loving Father to comfort and refresh us.
The firstborn of every creature ] As being begotten of the substance of the Father, after a wonderful manner, before all beginnings, and as being the heir of all his Father’s goods. And so this text is parallel to thatHeb 1:2Heb 1:2 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
15 .] (The last verse has been a sort of introduction, through our own part in Him, to the Person of the Redeemer, which is now directly treated of, as against the teachers of error at Coloss. He is described, in His relation 1) to God and His Creation ( Col 1:15-17 ): 2) to the Church (18 20). This arrangement, which is Meyer’s, is far more exact than the triple division of Bhr, ‘Source of creation (15, 16): upholder of creation (17): relation to the new moral creation 18 20)’), who is ( now in His glorified state essentially and permanently: therefore not to be understood, as De W. after Erasm., Calv., Beza, Grot., Beng., al., of the historical Christ, God manifested in our flesh on earth: nor again with Olsh., Bleek on Heb 1 al., of the eternal Word: but of Christ’s present glorified state, in which He is exalted in our humanity, but exalted to that glory which He had with the Father before the world was. So that the following description applies to Christ’s whole Person in its essential glory, now however, by His assumption of humanity, necessarily otherwise conditioned than before that assumption. See for the whole, notes on Phi 2:6 , and Heb 1:2 ff.; and Usteri, Paulinisches Lehrbegriff, ii. 4, p. 286 ff.) image (= the image) of the invisible God (the adjunct is of the utmost weight to the understanding of the expression. The same fact being the foundation of the whole as in Phi 2:6 ff., that the Son , that side of the fact is brought out here , which points to His being the visible manifestation of that in God which is invisible: the of the eternal silence, the of the which no creature can bear, the of that which is incommunicably God’s: in one word the of the Father whom none hath seen. So that while includes in it not only the invisibility , but the incommunicability of God, also must not be restricted to Christ corporeally visible in the Incarnation, but understood of Him as the manifestation of God in His whole Person and work pr-existent and incarnate. It is obvious, that in this expression, the Apostle approaches very near to the Alexandrian doctrine of the : how near, may be seen from the extracts from Philo in Usteri: e.g. de somniis, 41, vol. i. p. 656, , . , , : and de Monarch. ii. 5, vol. ii. p. 225, , . See other passages in Bleek on Heb 1:2 . He is, in fact, as St. John afterwards did, adopting the language of that lore as far as it represented divine truth, and rescuing it from being used in the service of error. (This last sentence might have prevented the misunderstanding of this part of my note by Ellic. in loc.: shewing, as it does, that the inspiration of St. Paul and the non-inspiration of Philo, are as fully recognized by me as by himself)), the first-born of all creation (such, and not ‘ every creature ,’ is the meaning (so I still hold against Ellic. But see his whole note on this passage, as well worth study): nor can the strict usage of the article be alleged as an objection: cf. below, Col 1:23 , and Eph 2:21 note: the solution being, that , as our word ‘creation,’ may be used anarthrous, in its collective sense.
Christ is , THE FIRST-BORN, Heb 1:6 . The idea was well known in the Alexandrian terminology: , viz. , , , , , . Philo, de Confus. Ling. 14, vol. i. p. 414. That the word is used as one whose meaning and reference was already known to the readers, is shewn by its being predicated of Christ as compared with two classes so different, the creatures , and the dead (ver.18).
The first and simplest meaning is that of priority of birth . But this, if insisted on, in its limited temporal sense, must apply to our Lord’s birth from his human mother , and could have reference only to those brothers and sisters who were born of her afterwards; a reference clearly excluded here. But a secondary and derived meaning of , as a designation of dignity and precedence, implied by priority , cannot be denied. Cf. Ps. 88:27, , : Exo 4:22 , : Rom 8:29 , and Heb 12:23 , , where see Bleek’s note. Similarly is used in Soph. Phil. 180, . It would be obviously wrong here to limit the sense entirely to this reference, as the very expression below, , shews, in which his priority is distinctly predicated. The safe method of interpretation therefore will be, to take into account the two ideas manifestly included in the word, and here distinctly referred to priority, and dignity, and to regard the technical term as used rather with reference to both these, than in strict construction where it stands. “First-born of every creature” will then imply, that Christ was not only first-born of His mother in the world, but first-begotten of His Father, before the worlds, and that He holds the rank, as compared with every created thing, of first-born in dignity: FOR, &c., Col 1:16 , where this assertion is justified. Cf. below on Col 1:18 .
It may be well to notice other interpretations: 1) Meyer, after Tert., Chr., Thdrt., al., Bengel, al., would restrict the term to its temporal sense: ‘primogenitus, ut ante omnia genitus:’ on this, sec above. 2) The Arians maintained that Christ is thus Himself declared to be a of God. It might have been enough to guard them from this, that as Chr. remarks, not , but is advisedly used by the Apostle. 3) The Socinians (also Grot., Wetst., Schleierm., al., after Theod. Mops.) holding the mistaken view of the necessity of the strict interpretation of maintain, that Christ must be one of those among whom He is and that consequently must be the new spiritual creation which it certainly cannot mean without a qualifying adjective to indicate such meaning and least of all here, where the physical is so specifically broken up into its parts in the next verse.
4) Worst of all is the rendering proposed by Isidore of Pelusium and adopted by Erasm. and Er.-Schmidt, ‘ first bringer forth ’ ( , but used only of a mother ). See on the whole, De W.: and a long note in Bleek on the Hebrews, vol. i. pp. 43 48):
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Col 1:15-21 . THIS SON IN WHOM WE HAVE OUR DELIVERANCE IS THE MANIFESTATION OF GOD, THE LORD OF THE UNIVERSE, THE CREATOR OF ALL THINGS IN HEAVEN AND EARTH, INCLUDING THE ANGELIC POWERS, AND HE IS THE GOAL FOR WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN CREATED. AND AS HE IS THE FIRST IN THE UNIVERSE, SO ALSO HE IS HEAD OF THE CHURCH, WHO HAS PASSED TO HIS DOMINION FROM THE REALM OF THE DEAD, THAT HE MIGHT BECOME FIRST IN ALL THINGS. FOR THE FATHER WILLED THAT IN HIM ALL THE FULNESS OF DIVINE GRACE SHOULD DWELL, AND THUS THAT HE SHOULD RECONCILE TO HIM THROUGH HIS BLOOD ALL THINGS NOT ON EARTH ONLY BUT ALSO IN THE HEAVENS, IN WHICH RECONCILIATION THE COLOSSIANS HAVE THEIR PART.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Col 1:15 . With this verse the great Christological passage of the Epistle begins. Its aim is to refute the false doctrine, according to which angelic mediators usurped the place and functions of the Son in nature and grace. He, and He alone, is the Creator, Redeemer and Sovereign of all beings in the universe, including these angelic powers. The passage does not deal with the eternal relations of the Son to the Father, but with the Son’s relations to the universe and the Church. It is not of the pre-existent Son that Paul begins to speak, but of the Son who now possesses the kingdom, and in whom we have our deliverance ( refers back to . . ). The work of the Son in His pre-existent state is referred to, that the true position of the exalted Christ may be rightly understood. As in other great theological passages in the Pauline Epistles, the metaphysical element is introduced for the sake of the practical. But it would be absurd to infer from this that it had little importance for the Apostle himself. He assumes the pre-existence of the Son as common ground, and is thus applying a fundamental Christian truth, which would form part of the elementary instruction in his Churches, to a new form of false teaching. . It is the exalted Christ of whom Paul is speaking, as is suggested, though not necessarily implied by the present, but more forcibly by the previous relative clause. We could not feel confident in arguing back from the function of the exalted Son to be to that of the pre-incarnate Son, but what would be a plausible inference from this passage is asserted in Phi 2:5 . .As image of God the Son possesses such likeness to God as fits Him to be the manifestation of God to us. God is invisible, which does not merely mean that He cannot be seen by our bodily eye, but that He is unknowable. In the exalted Christ the unknowable God becomes known. We behold “with unveiled face the glory of the Lord,” and so “are changed into the same image” (2Co 3:18 ), God has “shined in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (Col 4:6 ), and it is the unbelieving on whom “the light of the Gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God,” does not shine (Col 4:4 ). These passages illustrate Paul’s language here, and show that it is not, as Oltramare argues, of physical visibility or invisibility that he is speaking. Christ is the image of God for Christians. This, it is true, is only part of His wider functions. The Son is the Mediator between God and the universe. His work in grace has its basis in His place and work in nature. But it is the aspect of His work of which Paul is here speaking. The view of some of the Fathers that the Son, as image of the invisible God, must be Himself invisible is precisely the opposite of that intended by Paul. . in its primary sense expresses temporal priority, and then, on account of the privileges of the firstborn, it gains the further sense of dominion. Many commentators think both ideas are present here. Soden and Abbott, on the other hand, deny that the word expresses anything more than priority to and distinction from all creation, while Haupt again thinks that all the stress is on the idea of dominion, the Son is ruler of all creation (similarly Ol. and Weiss, who says that no temporal prius lies in the expression). It is undeniable that the word in the O.T. had in some cases lost its temporal significance, e.g. , Exo 4:22 , Psa 89:28 . Schoettgen instances the fact that R. Bechai spoke of God as “the firstborn of the world,” though, probably, as Bleek says in his note on Heb 1:6 , this is to be regarded “nur als eine Singularitt”. The course of the argument seems to require that the stress should lie on the lordship of the Son rather than on His priority to creation. For what Paul is concerned to prove is the superiority of Christ to the angels, and for this the idea of priority is not relevant, but that of dominion is. Whether the word retains anything of its original meaning here is doubtful. If so, it might seem most natural to argue with the Arians that the Son is regarded as a creature. Grammatically it is possible to make a partitive genitive. But this is excluded by the context, which sharply distinguishes between the Son and , and for this idea Paul would probably have used . The genitive is therefore commonly explained as a genitive of comparison. Oltramare says that such a genitive after a substantive is a pure invention, but it is explained to be after the or in ( cf. Joh 1:15 , ). This, as Lightfoot says, “unduly strains the grammar,” and on this account it seems best to exclude the temporal element altogether. The pre-existence is sufficiently asserted in what follows. There seems to be no real affinity with Philo’s doctrine of the Logos as . may be taken either as a collective, “all creation” (Lightf., R.V.), or distributively, “every creature” (Mey., Ell., Haupt, Abb.). Lightfoot urges in favour of the former that . “seems to require either a collective noun or a plural”. But if . be taken in the sense of ruler, this is not so; and Haupt points out that elsewhere is used of every created thing, and that Paul uses without the article in the sense of creature. It is accordingly best to take it so here, “firstborn of every creature”. A further question is raised as to what the term includes. Haupt thinks its sense is limited to spiritual beings, since (1) Paul is proving the superiority of Christ to the angels, (2) he defines by not including heaven and earth themselves, (3) shows that animate creatures must be referred to. At the same time he is careful to point out that, according to Jewish ideas, shared, no doubt, by the false teachers, the heavenly bodies were regarded as possessed of souls and as standing in the closest relation to the spirit world. This, combined with the fact that all material things were supposed similarly to have guardian spirits, rather tells against his limitation. For Paul really was concerned to show not only that Christ was superior to the angels, but that He and not the angels was Lord of the material creation. The phrase should therefore be taken in its full sense, though probably it is the spiritual side of the universe that he has chiefly in mind. The interpretation of creation as the new creation, adopted by many Fathers to meet the Arian inference that the Son was a creature, scarcely needs refutation. It would have no point against the false teaching at Coloss, nor can it be carried through the passage, Col 1:16 being decisive against it. Paul would probably have said firstborn of the Church or of the new creation if he had meant this.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Col 1:15-20
15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. 18He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. 19For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, 20and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven.
Col 1:15-20 This wonderful poetic passage may reflect an early church hymn or creed. It deals with (1) the cosmic lordship of Jesus and (2) His redemptive acts. The same dual aspect is seen in Heb 1:2-3. It reflects several Gnostic terms, “firstborn,” “fullness,” and concepts like the angelic levels (i.e. aeons) of Col 1:16, and Jesus’ true humanity and death in Col 1:20.
Notice the term “all” is used seven times (cf. Col 1:15-16 [twice],17 [twice],18,20). Jesus’ ministry is inclusive, all that is, is from Him.
1. by Him all things were created
2. all things have been created through Him
3. He is before all things
4. in Him all things hold together
5. He himself will come to have first place in every thing
6. all the fullness to dwell in Him
7. through Him to reconcile all things to Himself (the pronoun “Himself” probably relates to the Father)
Notice how often the pronoun “Him” is presented with different prepositions.
1. “in Him,” Col 1:16-17; Col 1:19
2. “through Him,” Col 1:16; Col 1:20
3. “unto/into Him,” Col 1:16; Col 1:20 (notice this same thing in Eph 1:3-14)
Col 1:15 “He is the image of the invisible God” The same word (eikn) is used of Jesus in Col 3:10 and 2Co 4:4. A similar theological expression occurs in Joh 1:18; Joh 14:9; Php 2:6; Heb 1:3. The Heb 1:3 passage has the stronger Greek term (charakter, which means an exact representation, cf. Gen 1:26-27; Gen 5:1; Gen 9:6; 1Co 11:7; Jas 3:9). To see Jesus is to see God! The invisible God has become visible! Deity has become a man (cf. Joh 14:9).
Jesus’ ministry was to restore the image of God in humanity. In one sense Eden had been restored through Jesus, the second Adam (cf. Rom 5:12-21; 1Co 15:20-28; Php 2:6). It is even possible that heaven will be a restored Eden:
1. the Bible begins with God, mankind and the animals (cf. Genesis 1-2) and ends with God and mankind in a garden setting (with the animals by implication, cf. Revelation 21-22)
2. the prophecy of Isa 11:6-9 describes children and animals together in the new age
3. new Jerusalem comes down to a recreated earth (cf. 2Pe 3:10-13; Rev 21:2)
“the firstborn of all creation” This was an OT metaphor for Jesus’ unique and exalted position.
1. the rabbis said it meant preeminence (cf. Exo 4:22)
2. in the OT it was used for the eldest son as heir and manager of the family
3. in Psa 89:27 it was used in a Messianic sense
4. in Pro 8:22 it referred to Wisdom as God’s first creation and agent of creation. In context options #1 and #2 combined seem best
This phrase is not to be understood as Jesus being the first creation (#4). This would have played into the hands of the Gnostic teachers, who taught that Jesus was the highest angelic level next to the high god. It must be interpreted in its Jewish OT setting. Jesus was deity’s unique son (cf. Joh 1:18; Joh 3:16; Joh 3:18; 1Jn 4:9), yet Jesus was always Deity (cf. Col 1:17; Joh 1:1; Joh 5:18; Joh 10:30; Joh 14:9; Joh 20:28). He became a human in time, at Bethlehem, so that fallen mankind could comprehend and understand Deity (cf. Joh 1:14; Joh 1:18).
SPECIAL TOPIC: FIRSTBORN
Col 1:16 “by Him all things were created” Jesus was God’s agent of creation, both of the visible and invisible, earthly and heavenly spheres (cf. Joh 1:3; Joh 1:10; Rom 11:36; 1Co 8:6; Heb 1:2; Heb 2:10). This refuted the Gnostics’ world view of the antithetical relationship between spirit (God) and matter. It was Jesus who spoke the cosmos into existence (cf. Genesis 1). It was Jesus who formed Adam and breathed into him the breath of life (cf. Genesis 2).
The verb “created” is used twice in Col 1:16. The first is aorist passive indicative and the second at the end of the verse (in Greek) is perfect passive indicative. The thrust is that Jesus is the agent in creation but the Father is the primary cause. Creation was in (en) Jesus, through (dia) Jesus and for (eis) Jesus!
“thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities” In some contexts these terms could refer to earthly governmental leaders (cf. Romans 13), but in the context of Colossians they refer to the false teachers’ angelic levels (aeons, cf. Rom 8:38; 1Co 15:24; Eph 1:21; Eph 3:10; Eph 6:12; Col 1:16; Col 2:10; Col 2:15; 1Pe 3:22). The ancients saw the world not only in physical cause and effect relationships, but as a spiritual realm as well. It is impossible to have a biblical worldview and deny the spiritual realm. See Special Topic: Angels in Paul’s Writings at Eph 6:12.
SPECIAL TOPIC: ARCH
“and for Him” Jesus was not only God the Father’s agent in creation, but the goal of creation as well (cf. Rom 11:36; Heb 2:10).
Col 1:17 “He is before all things” There has never been a time when Jesus was not! Jesus is preexistent Deity (cf. Joh 1:1-2; Joh 8:58; Joh 17:5; Joh 17:24; 2Co 8:9; Php 2:6-7; Col 1:17; Heb 10:5-7)! Notice the emphatic use of “He” (autos) in Col 1:17-18, “He, Himself, is before all things” and “He, Himself, is head of the body”!
NASB, NRSV,
NJB”in Him all things hold together”
NKJV”in Him all things consist”
TEV”in union with him all things have their proper place”
This is a perfect active indicative of the “syn” compound “to stand with” (sunistmi) which implies “to continue,” “to endure,” or “to exist.”
This is the doctrine of providence (cf. Heb 1:3) and it is personal! “All things” refers to creation-material and spiritual. Jesus is the sustainer as well as creator of all things. In the OT these functions describe the work of Elohim (God).
Col 1:18 “He is also the Head of the body, the church” As Jesus was preeminent in creation; so He is in the Church. This refers to the universal church (cf. Eph 1:22-23; Eph 4:15; Eph 5:23; Col 1:18; Col 2:9). Believers are both individually (cf. 1Co 6:19) and corporately (cf. 1Co 3:16) the body of Christ (i.e., the new temple). Paul often spoke of the church as the body of Christ (cf. 1Co 12:12-27), but it is only in Ephesians and Colossians that Jesus is said to be “the Head” of that body. In reality He is Head of all things, even the principalities and powers (cf. Eph 1:22).
SPECIAL TOPIC: CHURCH (EKKLESIA)
“He is the beginning ” At first glance this looks like another allusion to creation (cf. Gen 1:1), but the context has changed to the church. In this setting the term “beginning” probably relates to the Greek sense of origin or source. Jesus is the Head or source of life of the new people of God, Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female (cf. Col 3:11; Gal 3:28). He is the new Adam (cf. Rom 5:12-21). The head of a new race, Christian (cf. Eph 2:11 to Eph 3:13).
“the firstborn from the dead” The definitive NT passage on the resurrection is 1 Corinthians 15. Jesus is preeminent, “the first born” (see Special Topic at Col 1:15) in resurrection as He was in creation (cf. Col 1:15; Rom 1:4; Rev 1:5). His resurrection is a promise and a sign that all believers will be resurrected.
In 1Co 15:20; 1Co 15:23 Jesus is called the “first fruits.” This is a synonymous OT metaphor. Jesus is the forerunner in all areas. He is both “first born” (cf. Rev 1:5) and “first fruits.”
“so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything” This summary statement is similar to Eph 1:22-23. The Father has made the Son supreme and preeminent in all things (cf. 1Co 15:27-28).
Col 1:19 This starts with “for” (hoti, a purpose clause). It states God’s will for the Messiah which is (1) the fullness of deity to be revealed in Him (cf. Col 1:19) and (2) the reconciliation of all things through Him (cf. Col 1:20).
NASB”for all the fullness to dwell in Him”
NKJV”that in Him all the fullness should dwell”
NRSV”For in him all the fullness of God. . .to dwell”
TEV”that the Son has in himself the full nature of God”
NJB”all fullness to be found in him”
This is a play on the word “full” (plerma), which was used by the false teachers to describe the angelic levels between the good high god and sinful matter (cf. Col 2:9; Eph 1:23; Eph 3:19; Eph 4:13). This was a startling statement to describe a carpenter from Nazareth who was executed for treason! To see Jesus is to see God!
Col 1:20 “and through Him to reconcile” The term (cf. Col 1:22) meant “to change from hostility to peace” especially between persons. Sin has caused a separation between the creator and the created. God acted in Christ to restore the fellowship (cf. Rom 5:18-19). This is a double compound word (apokatallass) for theological emphasis (cf. Col 1:22). Paul used the same word in Eph 2:16 and the same root in 2Co 5:18-20.
“all things” This refers to all creation, visible and invisible (cf. Rom 8:18 ff; 1Co 15:27-28; Eph 1:22-23).
“to Himself” This could theologically refer to the Father or the Son. Context is the only guide. Here the Father seems best.
“having made peace through the blood of His cross” This referred to Jesus’ sacrificial death (cf. Rom 5:9; Eph 1:7; Eph 2:13; Eph 2:16). The reconciliation was not without great cost! The emphasis was possibly on His humanity (blood) as well as His vicarious atonement (sacrifice, cf. Isaiah 53; 2Co 5:21). The false teachers would have affirmed His deity but denied His humanity and death.
SPECIAL TOPIC: PEACE (different senses)
“His cross” Deu 21:23 asserted that anyone who hung on a tree was under a divine curse (cf. Php 2:8). Originally this referred to public impaling after death instead of a proper burial. However, by Jesus’ day the rabbis interpreted it as crucifixion. Jesus took sinful mankind’s curse, the curse of the Old Covenant, on Himself (cf. Col 2:14; Gal 3:13; Php 2:8).
“whether things on earth or things in heaven” This phrase is directed to the false antithesis between “spirit” (heaven) and “matter” (earth, cf. Col 1:16).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
image. Compare Rom 8:29.
invisible. See Rom 1:20.
Firstborn. See Rom 1:23; Rom 8:20.
every creature = all creation.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
15.] (The last verse has been a sort of introduction, through our own part in Him, to the Person of the Redeemer, which is now directly treated of, as against the teachers of error at Coloss. He is described, in His relation 1) to God and His Creation (Col 1:15-17): 2) to the Church (18-20). This arrangement, which is Meyers, is far more exact than the triple division of Bhr,-Source of creation (15, 16): upholder of creation (17): relation to the new moral creation 18-20)), who is (now-in His glorified state-essentially and permanently: therefore not to be understood, as De W. after Erasm., Calv., Beza, Grot., Beng., al., of the historical Christ, God manifested in our flesh on earth: nor again with Olsh., Bleek on Hebrews 1 al., of the eternal Word: but of Christs present glorified state, in which He is exalted in our humanity, but exalted to that glory which He had with the Father before the world was. So that the following description applies to Christs whole Person in its essential glory,-now however, by His assumption of humanity, necessarily otherwise conditioned than before that assumption. See for the whole, notes on Php 2:6, and Heb 1:2 ff.; and Usteri, Paulinisches Lehrbegriff, ii. 4, p. 286 ff.) image (= the image) of the invisible God (the adjunct is of the utmost weight to the understanding of the expression. The same fact being the foundation of the whole as in Php 2:6 ff., that the Son , that side of the fact is brought out here, which points to His being the visible manifestation of that in God which is invisible: the of the eternal silence, the of the which no creature can bear, the of that which is incommunicably Gods: in one word the of the Father whom none hath seen. So that while includes in it not only the invisibility, but the incommunicability of God, also must not be restricted to Christ corporeally visible in the Incarnation, but understood of Him as the manifestation of God in His whole Person and work-pr-existent and incarnate. It is obvious, that in this expression, the Apostle approaches very near to the Alexandrian doctrine of the : how near, may be seen from the extracts from Philo in Usteri: e.g. de somniis, 41, vol. i. p. 656, , . , , : and de Monarch. ii. 5, vol. ii. p. 225, , . See other passages in Bleek on Heb 1:2. He is, in fact, as St. John afterwards did, adopting the language of that lore as far as it represented divine truth, and rescuing it from being used in the service of error. (This last sentence might have prevented the misunderstanding of this part of my note by Ellic. in loc.: shewing, as it does, that the inspiration of St. Paul and the non-inspiration of Philo, are as fully recognized by me as by himself)), the first-born of all creation (such, and not every creature, is the meaning (so I still hold against Ellic. But see his whole note on this passage, as well worth study): nor can the strict usage of the article be alleged as an objection: cf. below, Col 1:23, and Eph 2:21 note: the solution being, that , as our word creation, may be used anarthrous, in its collective sense.
Christ is , THE FIRST-BORN, Heb 1:6. The idea was well known in the Alexandrian terminology: ,-viz. , – , , , , . Philo, de Confus. Ling. 14, vol. i. p. 414. That the word is used as one whose meaning and reference was already known to the readers, is shewn by its being predicated of Christ as compared with two classes so different, the creatures, and the dead (ver.18).
The first and simplest meaning is that of priority of birth. But this, if insisted on, in its limited temporal sense, must apply to our Lords birth from his human mother, and could have reference only to those brothers and sisters who were born of her afterwards; a reference clearly excluded here. But a secondary and derived meaning of , as a designation of dignity and precedence, implied by priority, cannot be denied. Cf. Ps. 88:27, , :-Exo 4:22, :-Rom 8:29, and Heb 12:23, , where see Bleeks note. Similarly is used in Soph. Phil. 180, . It would be obviously wrong here to limit the sense entirely to this reference, as the very expression below, , shews, in which his priority is distinctly predicated. The safe method of interpretation therefore will be, to take into account the two ideas manifestly included in the word, and here distinctly referred to-priority, and dignity, and to regard the technical term as used rather with reference to both these, than in strict construction where it stands. First-born of every creature will then imply, that Christ was not only first-born of His mother in the world, but first-begotten of His Father, before the worlds,-and that He holds the rank, as compared with every created thing, of first-born in dignity: FOR, &c., Col 1:16, where this assertion is justified. Cf. below on Col 1:18.
It may be well to notice other interpretations: 1) Meyer, after Tert., Chr., Thdrt., al., Bengel, al., would restrict the term to its temporal sense: primogenitus, ut ante omnia genitus: on this, sec above. 2) The Arians maintained that Christ is thus Himself declared to be a of God. It might have been enough to guard them from this, that as Chr. remarks, not , but is advisedly used by the Apostle. 3) The Socinians (also Grot., Wetst., Schleierm., al., after Theod. Mops.) holding the mistaken view of the necessity of the strict interpretation of -maintain, that Christ must be one of those among whom He is -and that consequently must be the new spiritual creation-which it certainly cannot mean without a qualifying adjective to indicate such meaning-and least of all here, where the physical is so specifically broken up into its parts in the next verse.
4) Worst of all is the rendering proposed by Isidore of Pelusium and adopted by Erasm. and Er.-Schmidt, first bringer forth (, but used only of a mother). See on the whole, De W.: and a long note in Bleek on the Hebrews, vol. i. pp. 43-48):
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Col 1:15. , who is) He describes the glory and excellence of Christ as even above the highest angels, and hereby scatters those seeds by which he will prove, next in order, the folly of the worshippers of angels. [He teaches believers to make application to Christ Himself, as their Saviour, and at the same time the head of all.-V. g.] Those, in short, obtain this full knowledge concerning Christ, who have experienced the mystery of redemption.- , the image of God) 2Co 4:4, note.- , of the invisible) A most glorious epithet of God, 1Ti 1:17. The only begotten Son alone represents the invisible God, and is Himself His image, invisible, according to the Divine nature; visible, according to the human nature [Joh 14:9], visible even before the incarnation, inasmuch as the invisible things of God [Rom 1:20] began to be seen from the creation, which was accomplished through Him [by Him as the instrument]. To this refer Col 1:16, things visible and invisible.- , the first-begotten of every creature) He was begotten; and that, too, before the creation of all things. The , which is contained in , governs the genitive . Time is an accident of the creature. Therefore the origin of the Son of God precedes all time.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Col 1:15
Col 1:15
who is the image of the invisible God,-Those who would behold God may see him reflected in the face of the Son, for as Jesus said to Philip: He that hath seen me hath seen the Father. (Joh 14:9). The same thought is expressed in the following: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn upon them. (2Co 4:4). And again, man is called the image and glory of God. (1Co 11:7). Jesus is the idea and expression of God. God is invisible to man as even Moses learned when he asked to see the glory of God pass by. (Exo 33:19-23). God dwells in the light unapproachable, whom no one has seen or can see. (1Ti 6:16). But we see God in Christ. (Joh 14:9). God is like Christ. In the face of Jesus Christ God has given the light of the knowledge of his glory. (2Co 4:6).
the firstborn of all creation;-In respect to all creation he occupies the relation of priority. From this it follows that over all creation he occupies the relation of supremacy, such as is accorded to the firstborn, and as such as is pre-eminently due to the firstborn of all creation, because he is in his higher nature Maker and Head of all created being, representing and revealing in this way the perception of the invisible God. From this essential conception, by a natural contrast, the thought passes on to distinction from, and priority to, all created being. Exactly in this same order of conception, it is said: God . . . hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds (Heb 1:1-2), and all things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made (Joh 1:3).
[The passage before us indicates the same thought in the words firstborn of all creation, and works it out in the verses following. In tracing the Messianic line of promise, it is always prominent that, while the Messiah is always true man, the seed of Abraham, the son of David, yet on him are attributed attributes too high for any created being as is indicated by the prophet: For unto us a child is bom, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of Jehovah of hosts will perform this. (Isa 9:6-7). He is declared to be Immanuel, God with us (Mat 1:23), and his kingdom a visible manifestation of God. Hence the thought contained in the word firstborn is not only sovereignty, the highest of the kings of the earth (Psa 89:27) but also likeness to God and priority to all created being.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Chapter 4 Christ the Firstborn: Twofold Headship of Christ and Twofold Reconciliation
Col 1:15-22
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 him, and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell, (vv. 15-19)
We have had our Lord Jesus before us as the Son of Gods love in whom we have redemption. Our attention is now directed to Him as the One who has made God known to us. Coming into the world as man He is the image of the invisible God-that God who to the Gnostic could never be known or understood. We are told in Joh 1:18, No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. Five times in the New Testament He is called the Only Begotten, and this endearing term always refers to what He is from eternity, with no thought of generation connected with it. It implies unity in life and nature. Isaac is called in Heb 11:17 Abrahams only begotten son-yet Ishmael was also his son. But the link between Abraham and Isaac was of a unique character. And so, as the Only Begotten, our Lord is the unique Son, eternally that, for if He be not the eternal Son, then we lose the eternal Father too.
God existed from all eternity as three Persons-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-but never became visible to created eyes whether of angels or men until the Holy Babe was born in Bethlehem. The Son was as truly the invisible God as the Father or the Spirit until the incarnation. Then He was seen of angels, and later on by men. As thus begotten of God of a virgin mother without any human father, He is Son of God in a new sense. And it is as such He is owned of the Father as the firstborn of every creature, or perhaps the expression would be better rendered, the firstborn of all creation. It is not that He is Himself created, but He is the Head of all that has been created.
It will be seen from what has been said above that the title Firstborn is not to be taken solely as a divine title, though He is divine who bears this name. But it is as Man He is owned of God the Father as the Firstborn. And how right it is that such a title should be conferred upon Him, for by him were all things created. Coming into the world as Man, He takes that place in virtue of the dignity of His person. His is the glory of the Firstborn because He is the Creator. The firstborn is the heir and preeminent one. It is important to remember that in Scripture the firstborn is not necessarily the one born first. Many instances might be cited where the one born first was set to one side and the right of the firstborn given to another. One only needs to mention the cases of Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, Reuben and Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim, to which many more might be added. The first man is set aside and the second man is acknowledged as the firstborn. And so Adam and all his race are set to one side as unfit to retain authority over the world in order that Christ, the Second Man, the Lord from heaven, may be acknowledged as the Firstborn.
It will be seen how tremendously all this would weigh against the Gnostic conception of a created Jesus to whom the Christ, a divine emanation, came upon His enlightenment following His baptism, and who left Him again at the cross. It was the eternal Son who stooped in grace to become the Son of God as born of a virgin. It should never be lost sight of that His Sonship is spoken of in these two distinct ways in Scripture. As the Eternal Son, pre-incarnate, He is called the Son, the Son of the Father, and also the Son of God, but the latter term generally refers to what He became when He took humanity into relation with deity and became God and Man in one Person with two natures, in accordance with the word of the angel, addressed to His virgin mother, That Holy One, who shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God. It is necessary to be very accurate in our thinking when considering this great mystery, and not to let our thoughts run beyond Holy Scripture. It was of the virgin-born Savior that Micah prophesied, saying, But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting, or, as the margin puts it, from the days of eternity (Mic 5:2).
The five passages in which He is called the Only Begotten, if carefully weighed, will make this clear.
The Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth. (Joh 1:14, literal rendering)
No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, subsisting in the bosom of the Father, he hath told him out. (Joh 1:18, literal rendering)
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (Joh 3:16)
He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (Joh 3:18)
In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. (1Jn 4:9)
The five other passages referred to in which He is called the Firstborn, or First Begotten, are as follows:
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. (Rom 8:29)
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature [or, of all creation]. (Col 1:15)
And he is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. (Col 1:18)
And when he bringeth the firstborn into the habitable earth, again he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. (Heb 1:6, literal rendering)
Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of [or, from among] the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. (Rev 1:5)
It was He who brought all things into being. Without him was not anything made that was made. All the inhabitants of heaven and of earth owe their lives to Him. Beings visible or invisible are all the creatures of His hand. Angels, no matter how great their dignity, whether thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers, all were created by Him and for His glory. The Gnostics placed these varied ranks of exalted beings between Him and God, but He is shown to be superior to them all, for He brought them into being. He is Himself the uncreated Son who became Man to accomplish the work of redemption. Higher than all angels, He was made a little lower than they for the suffering of death.
In verse 17 His priority is insisted on in another way. He is before all things. By the term all things we understand all that has been created, whether personal or impersonal. He Himself existed as the eternal Word before them all. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Full Deity is ascribed to Him, yet distinct personality. Moreover, it is He who sustains the universe, for by Him all things consist, or, hold together. It is His hand that holds the stars in their courses, directs the planets in their orbits, and controls the laws of the universe. How great is His dignity, and yet how low did He stoop for our salvation!
But He is firstborn in another sense in verse 18. Man rejected Him saying, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours. So they slew Him, hanging Him on a tree. But it was then that God made His soul an offering for sin, and He accomplished the great work of redemption for which He came. [He died], the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God. But having been delivered on account of our offenses, He was raised again on account of our justification. As brought again from the dead He became the Firstborn in a new sense, the Head of the new creation. As Man on earth in incarnation there was no union with Him. Union is in resurrection. He was alone as the Incarnate Son here in the world. As He Himself says: Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it shall bring forth much fruit. It is in resurrection that He is hailed as the Firstborn from among the dead. As such He becomes the Head of the body, the church; the Beginning of the creation of God; Firstborn among many brethren; the Resurrection King-Priest; the One who is yet to rule the world in manifested glory; the Melchizedek of the age to come, as Hebrews shows us.
Verse 19 is admittedly difficult to translate euphoniously, and in our English version the words the Father have been supplied in order to complete what seems like an incomplete sentence. But it should be carefully noted that there is nothing in the original to answer to the term the Father. It is rather the fulness that was pleased to dwell in Jesus. And if this verse is connected with verse 9 of chapter 2 we shall understand at once what is in view. In him all the fulness [of the Godhead] was pleased to dwell. Deity has been fully manifested in Jesus our adorable Lord. This is the mystery of godliness of 1Ti 3:16. The Gnostics used this term, the fulness, or pleroma, for the divine essence, dwelling in unapproachable light; and in a lesser sense for the illumination that comes when one reaches the higher plane of knowledge. But all the divine pleroma dwelt in Jesus. All that God is, He is, so that we may now say, We know God in knowing him. He has fully manifested Him.
As we ponder the wondrous truths brought before us in these verses the spiritual mind will feel more and more that we have here mysteries of a character beyond the ability of the human mind to grasp. Here is truth for pious meditation, to stir the soul to worship and thanksgiving, not at all for the exercise of the intellect in theological speculations. As we read we would bow our hearts in lowly adoration and thus gaze upon the face of Him who has come forth from the glory that He had with the Father in all the past eternity in order to bring us into the knowledge of God.
In the next section we are told of a twofold reconciliation.
And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight, (vv. 20-22)
In the portion we have just considered, Christ has been presented as the Firstborn in two distinct ways. We have had His twofold Headship: first over all creation and then as Head of the body, the church. In the verses now before us we have reconciliation presented in a double aspect. First, we have the future reconciliation of all things and then present individual reconciliation. He in whom all the fullness dwells has made peace through the blood of His cross. Man is never called upon in Scripture to make his own peace with God. He is viewed as alienated and an enemy, manifestly so, through wicked works.
Sin has come in between God and man, requiring expiation before the guilty rebel could be received by God in peace. Not only on earth, but in heaven has sin lifted up its serpenthead. In fact, it was in heaven that sin began, when Lucifer apostatized, leading with him a vast number of the angelic hosts. Therefore the heavens themselves were unclean in the sight of God and had to be purified by a better sacrifice than those offered under the law. On the cross Christ tasted death, and so far-reaching are the results of His work that eventually all things in earth and in heaven will be reconciled to God upon the basis of what He there accomplished. Whether for the universe or for the individual sinner, He made peace through the blood of His cross. Yet rebels remain in spite of the fact that peace has been made.
We may understand it if we remember that two nations which have been at war with one another may through their plenipotentiaries have agreed on terms of peace, and yet guerilla bands may insist on fighting, ignoring the peace that has been made. So men and demons still persist in refusing to own the divine authority, notwithstanding the fact that,
Jesus blood, through earth and skies,
Mercy, free boundless mercy, cries.
For angels the terms of peace offer no pardon, but to the sinful sons of Adam clemency is extended, and he who will may trust in Christ and thus be reconciled to God. Being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom 5:1).
The reconciliation of all things includes two spheres, and two only. The time will come when all in earth and all in heaven will be happily reconciled to God. When it is a question of subjugation, as in Php 2:10, there are three spheres. Heavenly, earthly, and infernal beings are at last to own the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ. But there is no hope held out in Scripture that the sad inhabitants of the infernal regions will ever be reconciled to God.
The reconciliation of verse 20 carries us on to the new heaven and the new earth where righteousness will dwell and the tabernacle of God shall be with men, and all the redeemed with the elect angels abide with Him in holy harmony. Sin has ruptured the state of peace and harmony that once existed between God and His creatures. Christ in death has wrought reconciliation, and so made it possible for that lost concord to be reestablished, but in new creation.
This reconciliation is already accomplished for individual sinners who were sometime alienated and enemies in their mind by wicked works, but who through infinite grace have been reconciled to God by the death of His Son. It is the souls apprehension by faith of the infinite love of the offended Deity manifested in the death of the cross that destroys the enmity and draws out the affections of the renewed man to God revealed in Christ. Well may the apostle exclaim elsewhere,
And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; to wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christs stead, be ye reconciled to God. (2Co 5:18-20)
It is not the holy, wondrous life of Christ that has thus reconciled us. It is His sacrificial death. And as a result of that death we shall eventually be presented before God the Father unblameable in holiness and unreproveable in His sight. The sentence is not concluded in verse 22, but the passage that follows introduces a new subject and therefore must be considered in a different connection.
In leaving the verses which we have been considering, let us bear in mind the great outstanding truths that they would teach us. He who is the image of the invisible God has made peace for us by the blood of His cross. Now in resurrection He is our exalted Head, and we are the members of His body. As Head, He is concerned about every redeemed one here on earth, who has thus, through grace, been united to Him. To own Him as Head is our first responsibility. We are to let nothing put Him at a distance or hinder our loyal subjection to Him through whom we have been reconciled to God.
Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets
the image: Exo 24:10, Num 12:8, Eze 1:26-28, Joh 1:18, Joh 14:9, Joh 15:24, 2Co 4:4, 2Co 4:6, Phi 2:6, Heb 1:3
the invisible: 1Ti 1:17, 1Ti 6:16, Heb 11:27
the firstborn: Col 1:13, Psa 89:27, Joh 1:14, Joh 3:16, Heb 1:6
of every: Col 1:16, Col 1:17, Pro 8:29-31, Rev 3:14
Reciprocal: Gen 1:26 – in our Gen 1:27 – in the image Gen 32:30 – I have Deu 4:12 – no similitude 1Ch 5:1 – birthright Neh 9:6 – thou hast Psa 45:2 – fairer Isa 40:18 – General Isa 46:5 – General Jer 32:17 – thou Zec 13:7 – the man Luk 11:31 – a greater Joh 6:46 – any Joh 8:19 – if Joh 12:45 – General Joh 14:7 – ye Joh 17:5 – glorify Joh 17:10 – all Act 7:35 – by Act 10:36 – he is Rom 1:20 – For the Rom 8:29 – that he might Rom 11:36 – of him Eph 1:21 – principality Col 2:2 – of the Father
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
(Col 1:15.) . 2Co 4:4. The clause dazzles by its brightness, and awes by its mystery. We feel the warning-Draw not nigh hither, for the place is holy ground. One trembles to subject such a declaration to the scrutiny of human reason, and feels as if he were rudely profaning it by the appliances of earthly erudition. The invisible God-how dark and dreadful the impenetrable vail! Christ His image-how perfect in its resemblance, and overpowering in its brilliance! We must worship whilst we construe; and our exegesis must be penetrated by a profound devotion.
The relative carries us back at once to , in Col 1:13, and in its connection with the intermediate verse it may bear a causal signification, inasmuch as He is, etc. Bernhardy, p. 292. The noun does not require the article, being clearly defined by the following genitive. Winer, 19, 2, (b). That this term was a current one in the Jewish theosophy, is plain from many citations. Hesychius defines by and . Chrysostom speaks of it as , a faithful likeness in every thing; and Theophylact describes it as , without change.
The epithet , as applied to God, refers not, perhaps, to the fact that He is and has been unseen, but to His invisibility, or to the fact that He cannot and will not be seen. Joh 1:18; Rom 1:20; 1Ti 1:17. Perhaps the Great God remains concealed for ever in the unfathomable depths of His own essence which, to every created vision, is so dazzling as to be dark with excess of light. There needs, therefore, a medium of representation, which must be His exact similitude. But where shall this be found? Can any creature bear upon him the full impress of Divinity, and shine out in God’s stead to the universe without contraction of person or diminution of splendour? Could the Infinite dwarf itself into the finite, or the Eternal shrink into a limited cycle? May we not, therefore, anticipate a medium in harmony with the original? The lunar reflection is but a feeble resemblance of the solar glory. So that the image of God must be Divine as well as visible-must be -of the same essence with the original. A visible God can alone be the image of God, possessing all the elements and attributes of His nature. The Divine can be fully pictured only in the Divine. The universe mirrors the glory of God, but does not circumscribe it. His invisible things assume a palpable form and aspect in the objects and laws of creation. Man is made in the image of God-in his headship over the earth around him, he is the image and glory of God-but he was only a faint and fractional miniature, even in his first and best estate, and now it is sadly dimmed and effaced. But Christ is the image of God-not -a shadowy or evanescent sketch which cannot be caught or copied, but , a real and perfect likeness-no feature absent, none misplaced, and none impaired in fulness or dimmed in lustre. The very counterpart of God He is.
Now, this Image of God is not Christ in His Divine nature, or as the eternal Logos, as Olshausen, Huther, Bhr, Usteri, and Adam Clarke, and many of the Fathers, suppose, for the apostle is speaking of the Son, and of that Son as the author of redemption and forgiveness of sin. It is therefore Jesus in His mediatorial person that the apostle characterizes as being the image of God. For it is a strange notion of Chrysostom, and some of his followers, such as Clarius, that as invisibility is a property of God, it must also be a property of His image, if that image be an undeviating similitude. Our Lord Himself said, even when He dwelt upon earth robed in no mantle of light, and with no nimbus surrounding His brow, He who hath seen me hath seen the Father. Visibility is implied in the very notion of an image. The spirit of the statement is, that our only vision or knowledge of the Father is in His Son. No man knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son shall reveal Him. The Socinian hypothesis, advocated even by Grotius and Heinrichs, that only because He revealed so fully the will of God is He called the image of God, is far short of the full meaning, though as the image shines upon us we look and learn. To Him, as Angel of the Presence, we are indebted for those glimpses of the eternal power and Godhead which creation discloses-those glimpses of sovereignty throned upon boundless power, fathomless wisdom, and unwearying goodness, which are presented by the universe above us and around us. The elements of the Divine nature and character which are mirrored out to us in providence are derived from the same source. Christ, as Creator and Preserver, is the palpable image of God. In this aspect, it is not visibility of person that can be maintained, but the embodiment of attribute in visible result, as in Rom 1:20, where it is said, the invisible things of the Creator are clearly seen.
But especially in Himself and as Redeemer is He the representative of God. His prophetic epithet was Immanuel, God with us. In His incarnate state He brought God so near us as to place Him under the cognizance of our very senses-men saw, and heard, and handled Him-a speaking, acting, weeping, and suffering God; He was, as Basil terms it, , a living image. He held out an image of God in the love He displayed, which was too tender and fervent, too noble and self-denying, to have had its home in any created bosom-in the power He put forth, which was too vast to be lodged in other than a Divine arm, and also in His wisdom and holiness, and in those blessed results which sprang from His presence. When he moved on the surface of the billows, did not the disciples see a realization of the unapproachable prerogative of Him who treadeth upon the waves of the sea? When the crested waves were hushed into quiet, as He looked out upon the storm and spoke to it, His fellow-voyagers felt that they had heard the voice of Divinity. When the dead were evoked by His touch and word from their slumbers, the spectators beheld the energy and prerogative of Him who says of Himself, I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal. When the hungry were satisfied with an immediate banquet in the desert, the abundance proved the presence of the Lord of the Seasons, who, in the process of vegetation, multiplies the seed cast into the furrow in some thirty, in some sixty, and in some an hundred fold. In those daily miracles of healing was there not manifest the soft and effective hand of Him who is abundant in goodness? and in those words of wondrous penetration which touched the heart of the auditor was there not an irresistible demonstration of the Divine omniscience? Still, too, at the right hand of the Majesty on high, is He the visible administrator and object of worship. Thus, the Son of His love is a visible image of the invisible Father, not the copy of an image-distinct from Him, and yet so like Him, making God in all His glorious fulness apparent to us-showing us in Himself and His works the bright contour and likeness of the invisible Jehovah. This glory is not merely official, but it is also essential, not won, but possessed from eternity. O the grandeur of that redemption of which He is the author, and the magnificence of that kingdom of which He is head! Not only is He the image of God-but the apostle adds-
– The first-born of every creature. [, Eph 2:21.] The meaning of this remarkable phrase is not easily discovered to our entire satisfaction. Only, it is clear, from the previous clause, and from the succeeding verse, that the apostle cannot mean to class Jesus Himself among created things. It is an awkward expedient on the part of Isidore, Erasmus, Fleming, and Michaelis, to propose to change the accentuation , and by making it a paroxyton, to give it the sense of first-producer. But the term, with such a meaning, has only a feminine application, and it cannot bear such a sense in the eighteenth verse.
1. Many of the Fathers, and not a few of the moderns, understand the epithet as denotive of the generation of the Logos, or Divine Son. Thus, in OEcumenius occurs the phrase , begotten co – eternally, and Chrysostom says of Him- . Athanasius describes Him- , the unchangeable from the unchangeable, a statement preceded by another to this effect- . Theophylact puts the question-first-born of every creature, how? and is his reply. Tertullian, too, uses similar phraseology-primogenitus ut ante omnia genitus; and again, primogenitus conditionis, i.e. conditorum a Deo.Ambrose writes-primogenitus, quia nemo ante ipsum, unigenitus quia nemo post ipsum.We cannot readily accept the interpretation, though defended by Calovius, Aretius, Bhr, Bhmer, von Gerlach, and Bloomfield, etc. As Bengel admits, it makes the genitive depend on in composition. The syntax is not impossible, as with the simple adjective, Joh 1:15; Joh 1:30, but the following similar phrase- , shows that such an exegesis cannot here be adopted, for it is plain that it cannot mean begotten before all the dead. The comparison there is not one of time even, as Meyer erroneously takes it-but one of rank. The sense assigned by this class of critics is, that Christ was the begotten of the Father, and became His Son prior to the work of creation. But we doubt if this be the form of truth intended by the apostle, for we should have expected the noun , or some other term denoting relationship, to have occurred in the clause. Christ is called in reference to His mother, but never in connection with His Divine Father, in any place where any semblance of the doctrine of eternal filiation is referred to, and in such a word derived from , the reference is to maternal, not to paternal origin.
2. The antagonist exegesis is that of the Arians and Socinians, which presumes that Christ is, in this phrase, classed as a portion of creation. Even Athanasius, in his second discourse against the Arians, admits that Christ has got the name . A common argument in favour of this exegesis is, that where this epithet is used, it is implied that he who bears it is not only compared with others, but is one of them. Thus, in the phrase first-born among many brethren, the inference is, that the first-born is one of the family, though his rank be pre-eminent; and in the phrase first-born from the dead, Jesus is plainly regarded as having been one of the dead Himself, though He now be exalted above them. So that the deduction is, if He is called the first-born of every creature, then He is, in the comparison, and from a necessary , regarded as one of the creatures. Why then, it is confidently asked, shrink from such a conclusion?
We might give the reply of Basil to Eunomius, who had adopted such an exegesis-if He be called the first-born of the dead, because He is the cause of their resurrection, then, by parity of argument, he is the First-born of the whole creation, because He is the cause of its existence. Theodoret puts the question-if He is only-begotten, how can He be first-begotten: and if first-begotten, how can He be only-begotten? And he guards against the Arian inference by adding- , that is, He cannot have a brotherly relation to the creation, and be at the same time its maker. The ancient critics also observe that the epithet employed by the apostle is not , first-created. Besides, in the cases in which the term marks him who bears it, as one of a class referred to, such a class is usually expressed in the plural number, as in the 10th verse, and Rom 8:29, Rev 1:5, but the apostle does not here say .
Yet, even assuming for a moment the Socinian hypothesis, we would not be nonplussed. We reckon it very wrong on the part of Usteri to translate the Pauline term by Erst-geschaffene, first-created, and it is easy to see what must be the theological conclusions drawn from such a rendering. Anselm explains that the words apply to Jesus only as man, for as God He is unigenitus non primogenitus. Now, we have shown that the preceding clause, image of the invisible God, implies Christ’s divinity, and we might say with Anselm that this refers to His humanity. That body was created by the Holy Ghost-it was a creature, and still is so, as we believe. Though on the throne, it is not deified-is not so covered nor interpenetrated with divinity as to cease to be a humanity. Nay, the last and loftiest prerogative is to be exercised by the MAN whom He hath ordained, so that even with this construction we are under no necessity to adopt the Arian or Socinian hypothesis. If in the former clause there is express proof of Christ’s divinity, in the latter there is no less assertion of His real humanity, a humanity which stands out in special preeminence over the entire creation, as its Lord and proprietor.
3. Our own view is a modified form of that which takes in its figurative meaning of chief or Lord-begotten before all creation. This view is held by Melancthon, Cameron, Piscator, Hammond, Rell, Suicer, Cocceius, Storr, Flatt, De Wette, Pye Smith, Robinson, and Whitby. Theodore of Mopsuestia held the same opinion- -but he understood by the new creation. The famous Photius, of the ninth century, in the 192nd question of his Amphilochia, has given a similar view, referring, however, the phrase to His human nature, and His resurrection from the dead. Some critics conjoin both the first and second views. We apprehend that the apostle selects the unusual word for a special reason. It seems to have been a prime term in the nomenclature of the Colossian errorists, and the apostle takes the epithet and gives it to Him to whom alone it rightfully belongs. Traces of the same idiom are found in the Jewish Kabbala-in which Jehovah Himself is called the first-born of the world, that is, in all probability, the Divine representative of essential and immanent perfection to the world. Thus the first heavenly man was called Adam Kadmon-the first-begotten of God-He who is Messiah and the Metatron of the burning bush. Not that Paul merely borrowed his language, but the terms which the errorists were perverting he refers to Jesus in their full truth and legitimate application. In a similar theological dialect, Philo names the by the epithet . The diction of the Old Testament in reference to the Hebrew , H1147 is in harmony, and is based upon the familiar rights and prerogatives of human primogeniture. The Hebrew adjective is applied to what is primary, prominent, and the most illustrious of its classis, Job 18:13; first-born of death-alarming and fatal malady, Isa 14:30; first-born of the poor-a pauper of paupers. Still more, we find the term in the Messianic oracle of the 89th Psalm-I will make him my first-born-will invest him with royal dignity, and clothe him with pre-eminent splendour, so as that he shall tower in majesty above all his kingly compeers. Israel elevated above the other nations, brought into a covenant relation, and reflecting so much of the Divine glory, is Jehovah’s first-born, Exo 4:22, Jer 31:9. The church of Christ, blessed and beloved, and placed nearer the throne than angels, is the church of the first-born, Heb 12:23. And when believers are regarded as sons-as a vast and happy brotherhood-He who loved them, and died for them, who has won for Himself special renown in their adoption, and has imprinted His image on all the children, stands out as chief in the family, and is the first-born among many brethren, Rom 8:29. Again, in Heb 1:6, Jesus receives the same appellation, inasmuch as the spirits of the heavenly world are solemnly summoned to do Him homage as His Father’s representative. Moreover, when He is styled, as in the 18th verse, and in Rev 1:5, the first-born of the dead, the reference is not to mere time or priority, but to prerogative, for He is not simply the first who rose, no more to return to corruption, but His immortal primogeniture secures the resurrection of His people, and is at once the pledge and the pattern of it. The genitive then may be taken as that of reference. Bernhardy, p. 139. The meaning therefore is, first-born in reference to the whole creation. The phrase so understood is only another aspect of the former clause. The first-born was his father’s representative, and acted in his father’s name. Christ stands out as the First-born, all transactions are with Him, and they are equivalent to transactions with the Sovereign Father. The Father is invisible, but the universe is not left without a palpable God. Its existence and arrangements are His, and the supervision of it belongs to Him. He is the God who busies Himself in its affairs, and with whom it has to do. He is its First-born, its chief and governor. As the first-born of the house is he to whom its management is entrusted, so the First-born of the whole creation is He who is its governor and Lord, and whose prerogative it is to exhibit to the universe the image and attributes of the unseen Jehovah. He is manifested Deity, appearing, speaking, working, ruling, as in patriarchal times when He descended in a temporary humanity, and held familiar discourse with the world’s grey fathers, and as under the Mosaic economy, of whose theocracy He was the head, of whose temple He was the God, and of whose oracles He was the inspirer. Now He is exalted to unbounded sovereignty, as Lord of all, rolling onwards the mighty and mysterious wheels of a universal providence, without halting or confusion; seated as His Father’s deputy on a throne of unbounded dominion, which to this world is its tribunal of judgment-wearing the name at which every knee bows, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth-the acting President of the universe, and therefore the First-born of every creature. His Father’s love to Him has given Him this pre-eminence, this double portion, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten Thee. It is plainly implied at the same time that He existed before all creatures, for He has never stood in any other or secondary relation to the universe – to the many mansions of His Father’s house.
Fuente: Commentary on the Greek Text of Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Phillipians
Col 1:15. No man can see the face of God and live (Exo 33:18-23), yet he needed to be shown how to conduct himself. The situation was met by having Christ come into the world in the nature of man, hut in the form or image of God. That is why Paul calls Christ the image of the invisible God. Firstborn of every creature means that Christ existed before all other persons or things in all creation. That enabled Him to take part with the Father in the creaiton of the universe, and it accounts for the plural form of the pronoun (us) in Gen 1:26 Gen 3:22 Gen 11:7. (See also Joh 1:3; Eph 3:9; Heb 1:2).
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
The Apologists Bible Commentary
Colossians 1
15 – 16He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities– all things have been created through Him and for Him.
C o m m e n t a r yfrom Adam Clarke’s Commentary … Who is the image of the invisible God – The counterpart of God Almighty, and if the image of the invisible God, consequently nothing that appeared in him could be that image; for if it could be visible in the Son, it could also be visible in the Father; but if the Father be invisible, consequently his image in the Son must be invisible also. This is that form of God of which he divested himself; the ineffable glory in which he not only did not appear, as to its splendor and accompaniments, but concealed also its essential nature; that inaccessible light which no man, no created being, can possibly see. This was that Divine nature, the fullness of the Godhead bodily, which dwelt in him. The first-born of every creature – I suppose this phrase to mean the same as that, Phi 2:9 : God hath given him a name which is above every name; he is as man at the head of all the creation of God; nor can he with any propriety be considered as a creature, having himself created all things, and existed before any thing was made. If it be said that God created him first, and that he, by a delegated power from God, created all things, this is most flatly contradicted by the apostle’s reasoning in the 16th and 17th verses. As the Jews term Jehovah becoro shel olam, the first-born of all the world, or of all the creation, to signify his having created or produced all things; (see Wolfius in loc.) so Christ is here termed, and the words which follow in the 16th and 17th verses are the proof of this. The phraseology is Jewish; and as they apply it to the supreme Being merely to denote his eternal pre-existence, and to point him out as the cause of all things; it is most evident that St. Paul uses it in the same way, and illustrates his meaning in the following words, which would be absolutely absurd if we could suppose that by the former he intended to convey any idea of the inferiority of Jesus Christ (Clarke ). from Jamieson, Fausset, Brown… Col 1:15 – They who have experienced in themselves “redemption” (Col 1:14), know Christ in the glorious character here described, as above the highest angels to whom the false teachers (Col 2:18) taught worship was to be paid. Paul describes Him: (1) in relation to God and creation (Col 1:15-17); (2) in relation to the Church (Col 1:18-20). As the former regards Him as the Creator (Col 1:15-16) and the Sustainer (Col 1:17) of the natural world; so the latter, as the source and stay of the new moral creation. image–exact likeness and perfect Representative. Adam was made “in the image of God” (Gen 1:27). But Christ, the second Adam, perfectly reflected visibly “the invisible God” (1Ti 1:17), whose glories the first Adam only in part represented. “Image” (eicon) involves “likeness” (homoiosis); but “likeness” does not involve “image.” “Image” always supposes a prototype, which it not merely resembles, but from which it is drawn: the exact counterpart, as the reflection of the sun in the water: the child the living image of the parent. “Likeness” implies mere resemblance, not the exact counterpart and derivation as “image” expresses; hence it is nowhere applied to the Son, while “image” is here, compare 1Co 11:7 [TRENCH]. (Joh 1:18; Joh 14:9; 2Co 4:4; 1Ti 3:16; Heb 1:3). Even before His incarnation He was the image of the invisible God, as the Word (Joh 1:1-3) by whom God created the worlds, and by whom God appeared to the patriarchs. Thus His essential character as always “the image of God,” (1) before the incarnation, (2) in the days of His flesh, and (3) now in His glorified state, is, I think, contemplated here by the verb “is.” first-born of every creature– (Heb 1:6), “the first-begotten”: “begotten of His Father before all worlds” [Nicene Creed]. Priority and superlative dignity is implied (Psa 89:27). English Version might seem to favor Arianism, as if Christ were a creature. Translate, “Begotten (literally, ‘born’) before every creature,” as the context shows, which gives the reason why He is so designated. “For,” &c. (Col 1:16-17) [TRENCH]. This expression is understood by ORIGEN (so far is the Greek from favoring Socinian or Arian views) as declaring the Godhead of Christ, and is used by Him as a phrase to mark that Godhead, in contrast with His manhood [Book 2, sec. Against Celsus] (JFB ).
F u r t h e r R e a d i n gArticles… Old Testament Background of the Firstborn : Dr. Robert Keay on Col 1:15 The Structure and Rhetoric of Colossians 1:15-20 : Luis C. Reyes (hosted by Bible Studies on the Web ) The Latest JW Argument from Col 1:15 Ray Goldsmith Is Prototokos a ‘Partitive Word?’ Luis C. Reyes Dialogs… Ray Goldsmith and Wes Williams on Col 1:15
Fuente: The Apologists Bible Commentary
Col 1:15. Who is. In Col 1:15-20 we have a description of the person of Christ (the Son of His love), well adapted to counteract the errors which the Apostle wishes to oppose. The subject is the Son of God, but in Col 1:15-17, the reference is rather to the pre-incarnate Son in His relation to God and to His own creatures, in Col 1:18-20 to the incarnate and now glorified Son in His relations to His Church (Ellicott). The clauses beginning because (Col 1:16; Col 1:19, for, E. V.) give the proof respectively for the two leading thoughts in Col 1:15; Col 1:18. Meyer, however, says: The only correct reference is to His whole Person, which in the theanthropic status of His present heavenly Being is continuously what His Divine Nature (considered in itself) was before the Incarnation, so that by virtue of the identity of His Divine Nature, we can attribute the same predicates to the Exalted One as to the Logos. But this virtually concedes all that is claimed above. On the entire passage, comp. Heb 1:3, etc.
The image of the invisible God. This indicates the relation to God, immanent and permanent. On this relation rests the actual revelation of God in the Person of Christ, but the immediate reference here is not to the latter. It is true that invisible, which is emphatic in the original, suggests that the image becomes visible, as indeed all the terms used to express the relation of the Son to the Father seem to imply revelation (word, effulgence, very image, form), but a careful comparison of all such expressions forbids our making this the essential thought. The Fathers generally regard these words as an assertion that the Son is of the same substance as the Father, against the Arians. Meyer and others, who refer the verse to the Exalted Christ, still admit the correctness of this patristic explanation.
The firstborn of (or, before) every creature (or, all creation). The first born with respect to every creature; He was born before every creature. He is not the first created, the previous clause as well as the terms here chosen forbid such a view. Every creature is a more exact rendering than all creation. The former individualizes, the latter sums up as a whole. The polemic purpose of the Apostle also sustains the former sense. The term first born expresses here priority in time, although there maybe an inferential reference to superiority in rank. The objections to making the latter the main thought are: (1.) that it gives the preference to a secondary and figurative meaning, where the primary one is very appropriate; (2.) it throws into the background the relation to the Father, which is not only indicated by the word itself, but given decided prominence by the close connection with the preceding clause. Hence those who adopt this view of first born consistently refer that clause also to the revelation of the Father in Christ rather than to the relation of the Son to the Father. But it must be added that while His priority in time shows His independence of creation, creation is not independent of Him, as He is here described. In this relation of the Son to the Invisible God is to be found the ground or condition of the whole creation. The next verse asserts that He is the conditional cause of the Universe, but this one seems to intimate that in virtue of His immanent relation to the Father, as the Image and First born, He holds the relation to the creation, which is subsequently defined. Although not included in the category of creation, He is most intimately linked with every creature.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
The apostle having mentioned our redemption in the former verse, describes the person of our Redeemer in this and the following verses, in such lofty characters, as evidently bespeak him to be a divine person, truly and really God, and consequently the fittest person to undertake so great and glorious a work, as the redemption and salvation of a lost and perishing world.
Note here, 1. The Redeemer described by his eternal relation to God, he is the image of the invisible God, that is, his natural and essential image; thus he is, in respect of his eternal generation as God; as a child whom we call the express image of the father, is of the same nature with his father, so is Christ of the same essence and nature with God; his nature is the same, his attributes are the same, his works the same, the worship given him the same; faith and affiance in him the same: Ye believe in God, believe also in me Joh 14:1.
Again, Christ is the image of the invisible God, as God-man; by him, as a lively image, did God the Father set forth unto us his glorious attributes of wisdom, mercy, righteousness, and power. The first person in the God-head is called invisible to the patriarchs; but the Son frequently apperared, as a preludium to his incarnation, in which he appeared visibly to all.
Note, 2. Christ is here described, as by his eternal relation to God, so by his eternal relation to the creatures; He is the first born of every creature; that is,
1. He was before every creature, and therefore he himself cannot be a creature: The apostle says expressly, That he is before all things, Col 1:17 that is, Christ had a being before there was any created; he was before all creature, both in point of dignity, and in point of duration.
Thus, Chirst calls himself the beginning of the creation of God, Rev 3:14 that is, the principal and efficient cause of the creation, and so could not be a creature himself, but consequently must of necessity have been God from all eternity with the Father:
Or else, 2. By the first-born of every creature, may be understood, that he was the Lord and heir of all the creatures; in allusion to the first born among the Jews of old, who were Lords over their brethren, Behold I have made him thy Lord Gen 27:37; the first-born is natural heir, and heir did anciently signify Lord.
Now Christ is said in to be Lord of all Act 10:36, and He is called heir of all things Rom 4:14 : Now, how well may Christ be said to be the Lord and heir of all things, when all things were made by him, and without him was not anything made that was made!
Learn hence, That the Socinians have no ground from this text to reckon Christ amongst the number of creatures, he having a being antecedent to all creatures; yea, being Lord of the whole creation; and accordingly the apostle styling him here the first born of every creature, never designed to insinuate, that the Son of God is a creature, as most evidently appears by the next verses.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
The Preeminence of Christ
Though man has not seen God, he can clearly see the likeness of the Father in the Son ( Joh 14:9 ; 2Co 4:4-6 ). Vine says the word “firstborn” is used in reference to Christ’s “relationship to the Father, expressing His priority to, and preeminence over, creation, not in the sense of being the first to be born.” He goes on to say Christ’s “eternal relationship with the Father is in view, and the clause means both that He was the Firstborn before all creation and that He Himself produced creation” ( Joh 1:1-3 ; Heb 1:1-2 ).
Gen 1:1 tells us God created, while this verse tells us Christ was the particular member of the Godhead who did the creating. Weed says heaven and earth would be the Jewish concept, while visible and invisible is the Greek. Both of these expressions are just means of furthering the thought that Jesus created everything in the universe. Thrones, dominions, principalities and powers may have been special designations used by the false teachers at Colossae to describe the hierarchy of the universe. Christ is above all such because He created all ( Col 1:15-16 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
Col 1:15. Who That is, the Son of God, in whose blood we have redemption; is the image of the invisible God By the description here given of the glory of Christ, and his pre-eminence over the highest angels, the apostle lays a foundation for the reproof of all worshippers of angels. The Socinians contend that Christ is here styled the image of the invisible God, merely because he made known to men the will of God; and that in this sense only Christ said to Philip, (Joh 14:9,) He that hath seen me hath seen the Father. But it should be considered, that in other passages in Scripture, the word image denotes likeness, if not sameness of nature and properties, as 1Co 15:49 : As we have borne the image of the earthly, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Certainly, as Dr. Whitby observes, the more natural import of the phrase is, that Christ is therefore called the image of God, because he made him, who is invisible in his essence, conspicuous to us by the divine works he wrought, they being such as plainly showed that in him dwelt the fulness of the Godhead bodily; for the invisible God can only be seen by the effects of his power, wisdom, and goodness, and of his other attributes. He who, by the works both of the old and new creation, hath given such clear demonstrations of the divine power, wisdom, and goodness, is, upon this account, as much the image of God as it is possible any person or thing should be; and to this sense the expression seems here necessarily restrained by the connective particle , for. He is the image of God, for by him all things were created. Moreover, this passage in exactly parallel to that in the beginning of the epistle to the Hebrews, as will evidently appear on a comparison of the two. Here he is said to be the image of God; there, the brightness (, effulgence) of his Fathers glory, and the express image of his person, or substance, as more properly signifies: here he is called the firstborn, or Lord, of every creature; there, the heir of all things: here it is said that all things were created by him; there, that he made the worlds: here, that by him all things do consist; and there, that he upholdeth all things by the word of his power. Now, that he is there styled the image of Gods glory, and the express image or character of his person, or substance, by reason of that divine power, wisdom, and majesty, which shone forth in his actions, some Socinians are forced to confess. It is not, therefore, to be doubted that he is here styled the image of God in the same sense. And it is highly probable that he is called the image of the invisible God, as appearing to the patriarchs, and representing to them the Father, who dwells in light inaccessible; (1Ti 6:16;) according to what is frequently observed by the ante-Nicene fathers, that God the Father being invisible, and one whom no man hath seen or can see, appeared to the patriarchs by his Son. Add to this, that the Son is likewise called the image of God, because he manifested the divine perfections in the flesh visibly, by that fulness of grace and truth which shone in him during his abode on earth. This St. Johns words evidently imply: No man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. See the notes on Joh 1:14; Joh 1:18. In which sense Christs words to Philip also (Joh 14:9) are to be understood: He that hath seen me hath seen the Father, as our Lord manifestly shows, when he adds, I am in the Father, and the Father in me: the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. And 2Co 4:4, he is plainly styled the image of God, for the like reason, because (Col 1:6) the light of the knowledge of the glory of God is reflected from his face, or person, as signifies. See the notes there.
The firstborn Or first-begotten, (,) of every creature Or rather, of the whole creation, as is translated Rom 8:22, existing before it, and the heir and Lord of it. According to the Arians, the firstborn of the whole creation is the first-made creature. But the reason advanced to prove the Son the firstborn of the whole creation overturns that sense of this passage; for surely the Sons creating all things doth not prove him to be the first-made creature; unless his power of creating all things originated from his being the first-made creature; which no one will affirm. As little does the Sons creating all things prove that he created himself. Yet these absurdities will be established by the apostles reasoning, if the firstborn of the whole creation signifies the first-made creature. But it is proper to observe, that , the firstborn, or first-begotten, in this passage, may signify the heir, or Lord: of the whole creation. For, anciently, the firstborn was entitled to possess his fathers estate, 2Ch 21:3. The firstborn was likewise lord of his brethren, who were all his servants. This appears from what Isaac said to Esau, after he had bestowed the rights of primogeniture on Jacob, Gen 27:37. Hence, among the Hebrews and other nations, firstborn, heir, and lord, were synonymous terms. See Gal 4:1. According to this interpretation of the terms firstborn and heir, the apostles reasoning is perfectly just: for the creation of all things, (Col 1:16,) and the making of the world, (Heb 1:3,) through the Son, is a direct proof that he is the firstborn, heir, or Lord of the whole. See Whitby and Macknight.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Col 1:15-20. A Paragraph of Christology (in tacit Opposition to the False Teaching at Coloss).Christ is the derivative and visible manifestation of God who is unseen. He is the heir-in-chief of the created universe, for in Him is the principle of the creation of all thingsthings in the heavens as well as things on the earth, things seen and things unseen also, the angelic orders not excluded. He is in fact the source and goal of every created thing, Himself supreme over them all. It is in Him that all things have their basis of existence. So likewise in respect of the Church He stands in the relation of head to body, being, as He is, the Beginning, the firstborn from among the dead. His supremacy, therefore, is universal: it was the Divine pleasure in Him to cause the entire Fulness to dwell, and through Himhaving made peace by the blood shed on the crossto reconcile completely all things to Himself: so that He is the source of reconciliation not only for the things on the earth but for the things in the heavens as well.
Col 1:15. image of the invisible God: cf. 2Co 4:4.firstborn of all creation: Paul is not necessarily ranking Christ among created things: the thought is rather of the privileges of a firstborn son as heir and ruler, under his father, of a household: such, Paul would say, is Christs relation, under God, to the created universe.
Col 1:16. in him . . . through him and unto him: in Christ is the clue to the creationthrough His agency it came into being, He is the goal to which it tends (cf. Eph 1:10). This doctrine of the cosmical significance of the Christ is peculiar to late Paulinism, and seems to have been developed in conscious opposition to syncretistic tendencies such as were exhibited in the Colossian heresy. Probably there was growing up, side by side with the worship of God in Christ, a cultus of angelic powers (cf. Col 2:18), and a tendency to ascribe to them a mediatorial rle in the creation and redemption of the world, which to Pauls mind imperilled that supreme lordship of Christ which was his profoundest religious conviction. For the reference to celestial hierarchies cf. Eph 1:21.
Col 1:17. before all things: an assertion of pre-existence. But the words may be taken rather as an assertion of supremacy, and translated over all things.
Col 1:18. firstborn from the dead: cf. 1Co 15:23.
Col 1:19. it was the good pleasure: the subject of the verb is suppressed in the Gr., but RV is probably right in supplying a reference to God the Father.all the fulness: perhaps already a current catchword (Eph 3:19*); here either, as in Col 2:9, the plenitude of Deity, or, as others suggest, the whole treasure of Divine grace.
Col 1:20. Angels were not in late Judaism regarded as necessarily sinless beings (1 Corinthians 6*), but the Book of Enoch represents them as interceding on behalf of men (En. 15:2), and it seems to have been taught at Coloss that they shared in Christs work of reconciliation. For Paul they are not the authors, but the subjects, of reconciliation with God. [Cf. Exp., May and June 1918.]
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Verse 15
The image of the invisible God; imbodying, and manifesting to men, the attributes and characteristics of God; or, as it is expressed in 1 Timothy 3:16, God manifest in the flesh.–The first-born of every creature, the head of the whole creation; the expression “the first-born” denoting the chief or head.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
DIVISION II THE TRUTH CONCERNING CHRIST.
CHAPTER 1:15-2:3.
SECTION 4. CHRISTS RELATION TO GOD, AND TO THE UNIVERSE. CH. 1:15-17.
Who is the image of the Invisible God, firstborn before every creature. Because in Him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or principalities, or authorities: all things have been created through Him and for Him, And Himself is before all things: and in Him all things stand together.
WITH stately words Paul now begins his exposition of the nature and work of the Son of God; and pursues this august topic, in its various relations, to Col 2:3, where it finds a suitable conclusion, The purpose of this exposition, as stated in Col 2:4, is to guard the Colossian Christians against persuasive errors. Naturally these errors must have moulded the exposition designed to combat them. We shall therefore seek for indications of their nature in the features peculiar, among the Epistles of Paul, to the important teaching now before us. Fortunately for us and for the Church in all ages, Paul meets these errors, not by direct attack which would have been intelligible only to those acquainted with the errors attacked, but by positive truth instructive to all men in all ages. This method gives to the epistle before us abiding and universal value. It is, moreover, an example to us. Error can be effectively met only by statement and proof of corresponding and opposite truth.
Paul states first the Sons relation to God, Col 1:15 a; then His relation to the created universe, Col 1:15 b, 16, 17; then His relation to the Church, Col 1:18-20; and especially to the Colossian Christians, Col 1:21-23; lastly Pauls relation to these last in Christ.
Col 1:15 a. Who is: solemn assertion touching the abiding nature, relations, and state, of the God-Man.
Image: a similitude derived from an original, and presenting it more or less accurately and fully to those who behold the similitude, So Mat 22:20, a stamp on a coin; Rev 13:14, a statue.
Who is image of God: word for word as in 2Co 4:4, where see note, Cp. 1Co 11:7; Col 3:10; Gen 50:26. Here, however, we have the added word invisible God, shedding light upon the significance of the phrase image of God as a manifestation of an unseen person. These words assert that the glorified Son sets forth, to those who behold Him, the nature and grandeur of the Eternal Father. The image includes the glorified manhood in which the Eternal Son presents in created and visible form the mental and moral nature of God. Men knew the Father because they had seen the Incarnate Son: Joh 14:9. The possibility and fitness of this mode of presenting the divine nature flow from mans original creation (Gen 1:26) according to the image and likeness of God. And the emphatic word is, which asserts an abiding reality, and the following assertion about the creation of the universe, suggest that the words image of God describe also all eternal relation of the Son to the Father. The same is suggested in Heb 1:3, outshining of His glory and expression of His substance: a close and important parallel. Probably, whatever the Son became by His incarnation was but a manifestation in human form of His essential nature and His eternal relation to the Father; these being an eternal archetype of His human nature. They are also the archetype of man as originally created, and in some sense (1Co 11:7; Jas 3:9) of man as he now is; and of the future glorified humanity of the servants of Christ. If so, the revelation of God to man in time has its root in eternity and in God, i.e. in the existence within the Godhead of a person other than the Father, derived from Him, and sharing His divine nature.
God is invisible, as being beyond reach of human sight: 1Ti 6:16. And the context of the word invisible in 1Ti 1:17 suggests very strongly that He is essentially invisible to all His creatures. (Joh 1:18; 1Jn 4:12, God, no one has ever seen, may or may not deny that others besides men have seen God.) If the words image of God describe an eternal relation of the Son to the Father, the word invisible must refer, as apparently does 1Ti 1:17, to the eternal essence of God. Just as only through the Son came the creatures into being, even the earliest and the highest of them, so probably only through the Son is the Father known even to the highest of His creatures. Thus the word image is correlative to visible. The essentially invisible Father has in the Son an eternal organ of self-manifestation, an eternal counterpart and supplement to His own invisible nature. His manifestation began when time began, by the earliest act of creation. And each later act of the Son, before His Incarnation, His Incarnation itself, the acts of the incarnate Son, and of the glorified Son, is a further manifestation of the Father. If so, touching the entire nature and relations of the God-Man, Pauls words are in their fullest extent true: He is the Image of God.
The word image suggests the existence of others outside the Godhead. For there can be no manifestation without persons capable of apprehending it. In this sense the Son became the image of God when the earliest intelligent being contemplated Him. But what then became actual fact existed in Him potentially in eternity. This first indication of the existence of creatures prepares a way for further reference to them in Col 1:15 b, and for the explicit mention of them in Col 1:16.
Col 1:15 b. Further description of the Sons relation to the Father, and to the entire created universe, which here finds definite mention; and a further step in Pauls transition from the invisible Creator, through the Son, to His creatures.
Firstborn: same word in Col 1:18; Rom 8:29; Heb 1:6; Rev 1:5; Luk 2:7; referring to Christ; also Heb 11:28; Heb 12:23; Exo 13:2; Exo 13:15; Num 18:15, etc. It denotes earliest-born, in contrast to others later-born, or not born but created. The earliest creatures are spoken of by Clement of Alex. and others as first-created. The syllable -born describes evidently, without further limitation, the Sons relation to the Father; in close harmony with the word similar in meaning, though different in form, rendered only-begotten in Joh 1:14; Joh 1:18; Joh 3:16; 1Jn 4:9. The syllable first needs further specification; and finds it in the following words every creature.
Creature or creation: same word in Rom 8:19, where see note; Rom 1:25; Rom 8:39. [The practical difference between the renderings all creation (Lightfoot and R.V.) and every creature (Meyer and Ellicott) is very slight. The former looks upon the created universe as one whole; the latter as consisting of various created objects. The latter rendering is preferable. For in Col 1:16 Paul distributes created objects into categories, thus suggesting that he thinks of them singly. And this is the more usual significance of the phrase here used: e.g. 1Pe 2:13; Col 1:28; Php 1:4; Php 2:10-11; Php 4:19; Php 4:21; Eph 1:21; Eph 2:21; Eph 3:15; Eph 4:14, etc. A genitive after , specifying the later objects with which the first is compared, is found also in Joh 1:15; Joh 1:30; Joh 15:18. This use of the genitive after a superlative to denote comparison forbids us to infer that the firstborn is Himself a creature. So Thucydides (bk. i. 1) speaks of the Peloponnesian War as the most worthy of mention of those which had happened before it.] Paul says simply that in relation to every created object the Son is firstborn. Moreover, that in Col 1:16 even the blessed ones of heaven are included in every creature, whereas the Son is first-born, suggests that His mode of derivation from the Father is essentially different from theirs. Otherwise the transition cannot be explained. (This transition is a close harmony with Joh 1:14; Joh 1:18.) And this suggestion is confirmed by the statement in Col 1:16-17 that through the Son were all things created and that He is before All things.
Col 1:16 a. A great fact, justifying the foregoing title of the Son. He is rightly called firstborn before every creature because in Him were created all things.
Created: akin, in Greek as in English, to creature in Col 1:15, which it recalls and expounds. The Hebrew word rendered create (e.g.
Gen 1:1; Gen 1:21; Gen 2:3-4; Gen 5:1-2) is predicated only of God; except that in Jos 17:15; Jos 17:18; Eze 23:47 another grammatical form of the same word has its apparently original sense of cut, and in Eze 21:24 (A.V. Eze 21:19) the same form denotes human workmanship. This restriction of its use to the work of God suggests that to create is to make as only God can make; not necessarily to make out of nothing, (cp. Wisdom xi. 18, created the world out of a shapeless mass,) but at least to bring into existence new forms. In Gen 1:1; Gen 1:21; Gen 1:27; Gen 5:1-2; Gen 6:7 this Hebrew word is poorly represented in the LXX. by a Greek word meaning only to make. But in Deu 4:32; Psa 51:12; Psa 89:13; Psa 89:48; Isa 22:11; Isa 45:8, etc. we find the word used here. In classic Greek the same word denotes frequently the origin of a town or colony or institution the idea of original ways being present. In the N.T. the verb is found only in Col 1:16; Col 3:10; Eph 2:10; Eph 2:15; Eph 3:9; Eph 4:24; Rom 1:25; 1Co 11:9; 1Ti 4:3; Rev 4:11; Rev 10:6; in each case describing the work of God. So in the LXX. and the Apocrypha. This constant use of the word, the exposition immediately following, and the cognate word creature in Col 1:15 to which this word evidently refers, fix beyond doubt its meaning here. Paul asserts of the Son that in Him all things originally sprang into being.
All things: the entire universe rational and irrational, animated and inanimate, consisting of various parts but looked upon here as one definite whole. Certain of its component parts are at once enumerated. The words in Him, so frequent with Paul and especially in this group of epistles to describe the relation of the incarnate Son to His servants on earth and to their salvation, assert here that the Eternal Son bears to the creation of the universe the same relation. (Col 1:17 asserts this touching the abiding state of the universe.) The personality of the Eternal Son is the encompassing, pervading, life-giving element in which sprang into being and assumed its various natural forms whatever exists. In His bosom the world began to be. In Him was from eternity its possibility: and in Him the possible became actual. A close coincidence in Rev 3:14, the beginning of the creation of God.
In the heavens and upon the earth: further specification in detail of the all things created in Him, dividing created objects according to their locality and thus revealing the wide compass of Pauls assertion. A more accurate specification in Rev 10:6 : the heaven and the things in it, etc. Here the heavens etc. are looked upon not as themselves created objects but as mere notes of locality. Perhaps this mode of speech was prompted by Pauls thought being directed, as we learn from the words following, not so much to the material universe as to its inhabitants. He does not find it needful to mention here and in Eph 1:10 the things under the earth, Php 2:10. For the dead were once alive and are therefore covered by the foregoing assertion.
The things visible and the things invisible: another very conspicuous division of all things; suggested by, but not exactly coincident with, the foregoing division. The visible includes all persons and things within reach of the human eye: the invisible includes, most simply understood, all objects beyond its reach.
Whether thrones or lordships etc.: further details included in all things. It is not an exhaustive division as was the last, visible and invisible, but a mere enumeration of possible examples belonging apparently or chiefly to the invisible things. The list recalls Eph 1:21, principality and authority and power and lordship; 1Pe 3:22, angels and authorities and powers. The words principality and authority are found, in singular or plural, and in the same order in Col 2:10; Col 2:15; Eph 1:21; Eph 3:10; Eph 6:12; 1Co 15:24; Tit 3:1; Luk 12:11; Luk 20:20; the last three places referring expressly to earthly rulers. These cannot be excluded from the universal assertion of this verse. And in Rom 13:1 Paul teaches that even political power has its ultimate origin in God. But the other quotations refer evidently to superhuman persons in the unseen world. And this evident reference of the other passages quoted above, together with the word invisible immediately foregoing, leaves no doubt that to these chiefly Paul refers here. And, if so, these various titles designate various successive ranks of angels. That there are bad angels bearing these titles, and therefore presumably of different rank, Eph 6:12 asserts. And, if there are superhuman enemies, there must be also successive ranks of superhuman servants of God. In this verse, however, the existence of angelic powers is not absolutely assumed. Paul merely says that if there be such, be they what they may, they were created in the Son of God.
The distinction between these various titles, and their order in rank, cannot be determined with any approach to certainty. From the titles themselves very little can be inferred. The word thrones suggests a position of conspicuous and secure dignity, like that of the twenty-four elders (Rev 4:4) sitting on thrones around the throne of God. This is better than the suggestion that they combine to form by their own persons the throne of God, as themselves the bearers of the divine Majesty.
Lordships: last word in the list of Eph 1:21; found also in 2Pe 2:10; Jud 1:8. It is akin to the word lord, and to the word rule in Rom 6:9; Rom 6:14; Rom 7:1; Rom 14:9; and suggests an authority to which others bow as servants. The word rendered principality denotes sometimes beginning as in Joh 1:1; Php 4:15; and sometimes the position of a ruler or officer. A cognate word is rendered ruler in 1Co 2:6; 1Co 2:8; Eph 2:2; Rom 13:3, and frequently in the Gospels and the Book of Acts. This last word designates in Dan 10:13; Dan 10:20-21; Dan 12:1 certain angel-princes, or angels of superior rank, standing severally in special relation to the kingdoms of Persia, Greece, Israel. The word used in Col 1:16 is the first syllable of archangel. And Michael, one of the chief princes in Dan 10:13, is in Jud 1:9 (cp. 1Th 4:16) called an archangel. The word authority (cp. authority of darkness in Col 1:13, authority of the air in Eph 2:2; Mar 6:7; Joh 17:2) suggests angelic powers exercising sway over certain portions of the material or immaterial universe. The frequent connection of principality and authority in this order (1Co 15:24; Eph 1:21; Eph 3:10; Eph 6:12; Col 2:10; Col 2:15; Tit 3:1; Luk 12:11; Luk 20:20) suggests that this was their order of rank. But it is impossible to define the relation of this pair to the thrones and lordships. All these titles are twice mentioned together by Origen in his work On First Principles (bk. i. 5. 3, 6. 2) as of angelic powers. But he refers evidently to the passage before us, and contributes nothing to its elucidation. Nor is reliable evidence beyond the above scanty inferences from the words themselves to be derived from Jewish literature. All we know is that Paul believed that there are successive ranks of angelic powers, and declares here that all these, whatever they may be, were created in the Son.
Col 1:16 b. An emphatic repetition, and development, and summing up after exposition in detail, of the opening words of Col 1:16.
All things: word for word as in Col 1:16 a.
Through Him: by His instrumentality or agency; see under Rom 1:5. It describes constantly Christs relation to mans salvation: Rom 5:1-2; Rom 5:11; 2Co 5:18. The same relation, Paul here asserts, the Eternal Son bears to the creation of the universe. Similarly, both to redemption and creation He bears the relation described by the phrase in Christ: Col 1:16 a. That these two phrases alike describe His relation both to the Church and to the universe, makes very conspicuous the identity of His relation to these two distinct and different objects. A close coincidence in 1Co 8:6 : through whom are all things, and we through Him. A still closer coincidence in Heb 1:2; Joh 1:3. [ with the genitive is used even where the agent is also the first cause: so Gal 1:1; Rom 11:36, where God is said to be the Agent of the resurrection of Christ, and of all things. But the use of the same preposition constantly to describe the Sons relation to the work of creation and also to mans redemption, of both which the Father is expressly and frequently (e.g. Col 1:20) said to be the First Cause, suggests very strongly that the preposition was deliberately chosen because the Son is only the Agent, and the Father is the First Cause, of the created universe. This different relation of the Father and the Son is asserted, or clearly implied, in 1Co 8:6. Thus the preposition before us describes the Sons relation to the entire activity of God.]
And for Him: to please and exalt the Son, and to work out His purposes. The Agent of creation is also its aim. Close coincidence in Heb 2:10. That Christ is only its mediate aim, we infer with certainty from the entire New Testament. The Fathers eternal purpose is the ultimate source, and His approbation is the ultimate aim, of whatever good exists and takes place. And, just as the Son is the divine channel through which the Fathers purpose passes into actuality, so only through the Son and through His exaltation does creation attain its goal in God. So 1Co 8:6; 1Co 15:28; Eph 1:14. in this real sense all things are for Him.
The word created marks the close of Pauls discussion of the creation of all things by the Son. [The Greek perfect, have-been-created, calls attention to the abiding result of the act of creation, thus differing from the aorist in Col 1:16 a which simply notes an event. By His agency and to work out His pleasure all things were created in the past and exist now in the abiding present.]
Col 1:17. A statement reasserting and supplementing the truth embodied in first-begotten in Col 1:15 just as Col 1:16 expounds and supplements every creature. The Son is the Firstborn because He is earlier than all.
He is: or Himself exists. It calls attention to an unchanging existence earlier than every other existing object. Similar words in Joh 8:58; Exo 3:14.
Before: in time rather than in rank. For this is the sense of the word Firstborn: and the clear reference of Col 1:16 to Col 1:15 prepares us for another reference here to the same verse.
Consist: literally stand together as united of one whole. It is cognate to the Greek original of parts our word system.
In Him: as in Col 1:16 in Him were created. Just as in the bosom of the Eternal Son all things sprang into being, so in Him as their encompassing element all things find their bond of union and their orderly arrangement into one whole. Similar thought in Heb 1:3 : bearing all things by the word of His power. The word here rendered consist is frequent in Plato and Aristotle to denote the orderly arrangement of the various parts of the material universe.
That the universe was created through the agency of the Son of God, is stated by Paul expressly and indisputably only here. The plain and emphatic assertions of Col 1:16-17, are therefore an invaluable addition to his other teaching. A close coincidence is found in the broad statement in 1Co 8:6. But the absence there of reference to the universe forbids us to build upon this passage a sure inference. The full statement in Col 1:16-17, given without proof evidently because proof was needless, implies, however, that this teaching had an assured place in Pauls thought. We have similar teaching in Heb 1:2, a document allied to, though in many points different from, the Epistles of Paul; and very conspicuously in Joh 1:3. All this proves that the early followers of Christ believed that their Master was Creator of the world.
This belief is an important and almost inevitable corollary from the whole teaching of Paul. The Son is ever said to be the channel through which flows forth from the Father into actuality His purpose of salvation. This salvation will rescue man from a corruption which has infected his entire surroundings. Frequently the forces of nature seem to be hostile to us. In reality they work together for our good. And the coming glorification of the sons of God will one day rescue from the corruption which now enslaves it (Rom 8:21) the entire created universe. This present and coming victory is pledged to us in the great truth that He who became Man to save man is also the Creator of man and of whatever exists.
It is worthy of note that all the great religions give an account of the beginning of the world. And naturally so: for mans highest spiritual interests are involved in the question of his origin. Hence Gen 1:1 f is a necessary prologue to the story of the Old Covenant. And its real worth is derived from the historic fact that He who made heaven and earth became the God of Abraham. That their God was the Creator of the world, was a great bulwark of Israels faith. Similarly, the teaching of Col 1:16-17 derives its whole value from that of Col 1:18-20; as does Joh 1:3 from the subsequent story of the incarnate Son. For knowledge of the God who made us would be useless had He not come near to save us. It is now the firm ground of our faith. He who made us and the universe, and He only, is able to save us from forces around which seem ready to overwhelm us.
From Col 2:4 we learn that the earlier part of this Epistle was written to guard its readers against seductive error prevalent at Coloss. This suggests at once that the verses before us, which are the most distinguishing feature of the Epistle, refer to the same error. We notice also in Col 2:18 a warning against worship of angels, a practice implying undue estimate of their place and importance. This suggests a reason why the successive ranks of angels are selected in Col 1:16 as examples of the invisible things created through the Son; viz. that they had been placed in undue rivalry to the unique honour belonging to Him. All this confirms our inference that Paul has here in view the errors at Coloss. What these errors were, we shall, at the close of our exposition, endeavour to gather from the notices scattered throughout the Epistle.
That for the more part Paul meets these errors not directly but by stating contrary truth, makes it difficult for us to determine exactly what they were, But it increases immensely the value of the Epistle by making it an assertion of great principles which bear with equal force upon the ever-varying errors of each successive age. Had Paul merely overturned the errors he had in view, his letter would have had practical value only for those among whom these errors were prevalent. But the great principles here asserted can be understood and appreciated by all men in all ages.
In Pro 8:22-31 the wisdom of God is associated with the work of creation. And certainly the wisdom of God is divine and eternal. But although in Proverbs 8, it is personified, we have there no language which implies that it is an actual Person distinct from the Father. But here the Son, in whom all things were created and through whom (Col 1:20) God reconciles men to Himself, is indisputably a Person and one distinct from the Father. For Col 1:16 is much more than an assertion that all things were made by God. And He by whose agency all things were made is identified by Paul with Him who was afterwards known as Jesus Christ. This teaching implies that with the Father from eternity and personally distinct from Him is another Person. The eternity of the Son implies His divinity. And this is confirmed by the word created which is restricted in O.T. and N.T. to God and is here predicated of the Son. Thus the passage before us is an important contribution to our proof that Christ is divine. See further in Diss. iii.
Fuente: Beet’s Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament
“Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:”
I’m sure that the Jehovah Witnesses camp on this passage. It, to some, indicates Christ was a created being. Their translation reads “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;” They and the Gnostics would suggest He is similar to God – a mere image. They would also see Him as part of the creation rather than the creator.
Vine p. 104 states “…His eternal relationship with the Father is in view, and the clause means both that He was the Firstborn before all creation and that He Himself produced creation….”
It means the first one born. The context lets you know first who. It is applied to first child, first raised to life and first group raised to life. In this text it relates to Christ’s eternal generation.
“Not a commencement of existence, but an eternal relation to the Father, … there never having been a time when the Son began to be, or when the Son did not exist as God with the Father.” Systematic Theology; Augustus Strong; The Judson Press; Valley Forge, PA; 1907; p 341
Adam was created mature, creation was created with age, and Christ was always the first begotten.
If, indeed, God is the eternal Father, then Christ must be the eternal Son.
A little logic. If Christ is the image of the invisible God, and if we are to have the mind of Christ (Php 2:5), and if Christ is to be our example (1Pe 2:21) then we can be like God – not God, but like God in our lives.
We are growing into the image of God – we can be like Him, all we have to do is begin to make life changes as indicated by the Word of God and the leading of the Holy Spirit.
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
1:15 {7} Who is the image of the invisible God, {i} the firstborn of every creature:
(7) A graphic description of the person of Christ, by which we understand, that in him alone God shows himself to be seen: who was begotten of the Father before anything was made, that is, from everlasting. And by him also all things that are made, were made without any exception, by whom also they continue to exist, and whose glory they serve.
(i) Begotten before anything was made: and therefore the everlasting Son of the everlasting Father.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
II. EXPLANATION OF THE PERSON AND WORK OF CHRIST 1:15-29
Paul next proceeded to reiterate the "full knowledge" about Jesus Christ, which the false teachers in Colosse were attacking. He did so to give his readers fuller knowledge of God’s will so they would reject the false teaching of those who were demeaning Christ and continue to grow.
"The doctrine of Christ was the principal truth threatened by the false teaching at Colossae, and this is the doctrine Paul presents to his readers before dealing specifically with the false teaching." [Note: Bruce, 562:99.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
A. The preeminent person of Christ 1:15-20
In this section Paul revealed in what senses Christ is preeminent. One writer observed that this passage "represents a loftier conception of Christ’s person than is found anywhere else in the writings of Paul." [Note: E. F. Scott, The Epistles of Paul to the Colossians, to Philemon and to the Ephesians, p. 20.] Another wrote, "No comparable listing of so many characteristics of Christ and His deity are found in any other Scripture passage." [Note: Geisler, p. 672.] Paul described Jesus Christ in three relationships: to deity, to creation, and to the church. Some writers understood this passage to be an early Christian hymn. [Note: E.g, Dunn, pp. 85-86.]
"There are given here nine marks of identification of Christ which make Him different from and superior to any other person who has ever lived." [Note: McGee, 5:338.]
I believe there are thirteen.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
2. In relation to all creation 1:15b-17
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
1. In relation to God the Father 1:15a
The concept of "image" involves three things: likeness (Christ is the exact likeness of God, a mirror image [cf. Heb 1:3]), representation (Christ represents God to us), and manifestation (Christ makes God known to us [cf. Joh 1:18]). [Note: Lightfoot, pp. 143-44; Vaughan, p. 182.] While God made man in the image of God (Gen 1:27), Christ is the image of God (cf. Joh 1:18; Joh 14:8-9; 2Co 4:4).
The Greek word translated "image" (eikon), ". . . does not imply a weakening or a feeble copy of something. It implies the illumination of its inner core and essence." [Note: Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, s.v. "The Greek use of eikon," by Hermann Kleinknecht, 2:389.]
"To call Christ the image of God is to say that in Him the being and nature of God have been perfectly manifested-that in Him the invisible has become visible." [Note: Bruce, 562:101.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
"First-born" (Gr. prototokos) may denote either priority in time or supremacy in rank (cf. Col 1:18; Exo 4:22; Psa 89:27; Rom 8:29; Heb 1:6; Rev 1:15). It may also denote both of these qualities. Both seem to be in view here. Christ was before all creation in time, and He is over all creation in authority. In view of the context (Col 1:16-20), the major emphasis seems to be on His sovereignty, however. [Note: O’Brien, Colossians . . ., p. 44.] What "first-born" does not mean is that Christ was the first created being, which ancient Arians believed and modern Jehovah’s Witnesses teach. This is clear because Col 1:16-18 state that Christ existed before all things and is the Creator Himself. Other passages also affirm His responsibility for creation (cf. Joh 1:3; Joh 3:16; Rom 8:29; Heb 1:6; Heb 11:28; Heb 12:23). In Joh 3:16 the word "only begotten" (Gr. monogenes) means alone of His kind, not "first-created" (protoktiskos).
"Though it is grammatically possible to translate this as ’Firstborn in Creation,’ the context makes this impossible for five reasons: (1) The whole point of the passage (and the book) is to show Christ’s superiority over all things. (2) Other statements about Christ in this passage (such as Creator of all [Col 1:16], upholder of Creation [Col 1:17], etc.) clearly indicate His priority and superiority over Creation. (3) The ’Firstborn’ cannot be part of Creation if He created ’all things.’ One cannot create himself. (Jehovah’s Witnesses wrongly add the word ’other’ six times in this passage in their New World Translation. Thus they suggest that Christ created all other things after He was created! But the word ’other’ is not in the Gr.) (4) The ’Firstborn’ received worship of all angels (Heb 1:6), but creatures should not be worshiped (Exo 20:4-5). (5) The Greek word for ’Firstborn’ is prototokos. If Christ were the ’first-created,’ the Greek word would have been protoktisis." [Note: Geisler, pp. 672-73.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 1
THE GLORY OF THE SON IN HIS RELATION TO THE FATHER, THE UNIVERSE, AND THE CHURCH
Col 1:15-18 (R.V.)
As has already been remarked, the Colossian Church was troubled by teachers who had grafted on Jewish belief many of the strange speculations about matter and creation which have always had such a fascination for the Eastern mind. To us, they are apt to seem empty dreams, baseless and bewildering; but they had force enough to shake the early Church to its foundation, and in some forms they still live.
These teachers in Colossae seem to have held that all matter was evil and the seat of sin; that therefore the material creation could not have come directly from a good God, but was in a certain sense opposed to Him, or, at all events, was separated from Him by a great gulf. The void space was bridged by a chain of beings, half abstractions and half persons, gradually becoming more and more material. The lowest of them had created the material universe and now governed it, and all were to be propitiated by worship.
Some such opinions must be presupposed in order to give point and force to these great verses in which Paul opposes the solid truth to these dreams, and instead of a crowd of Powers and angelic Beings, in whom the effulgence of Deity was gradually darkened, and the spirit became more and more thickened into matter, lifts high and clear against that background of fable, the solitary figure of the one Christ. He fills all the space between God and man. There is no need for a crowd of shadowy beings to link heaven with earth. Jesus Christ lays His hand upon both. He is the head and source of creation; He is the head and fountain of life to His Church. Therefore He is first in all things, to be listened to, loved, and worshipped by men. As when the full moon rises, so when Christ appears, all the lesser stars with which Alexandrian and Eastern speculation had peopled the abysses of the sky are lost in the mellow radiance, and instead of a crowd of flickering ineffectual lights there is one perfect orb, “and heaven is overflowed.” “We see no creature any more save Jesus only.”
We have outgrown the special forms of error which afflicted the Church at Colossae, but the truths which are here set over against them are eternal, and are needed today in our conflicts of opinion as much as then. There are here three grand conceptions of Christs relations. We have Christ and God, Christ and Creation, Christ and the Church, and, built upon all these, the triumphant proclamation of His supremacy over all creatures in all respects.
I. We have the relation of Christ to God set forth in these grand words:
“the image of the invisible God.”
Apparently Paul is here using for his own purposes language which was familiar on the lips of his antagonists. We know that Alexandrian Judaism had much to say about the “Word,” and spoke of it as the Image of God: and probably some such teaching had found its way to Colossae. An “image” is a likeness or representation, as of a kings head on a coin, or of a face reflected in a mirror. Here it is that which makes the invisible visible. The God who dwells in the thick darkness, remote from sense and above thought, has come forth and made Himself known to man, even in a very real way has come within the reach of mans senses, in the manhood of Jesus Christ. Where then is there a place for the shadowy abstractions and emanations with which some would bind together God and man?
The first thought involved in this statement is, that the Divine Being in Himself is inconceivable and unapproachable. “No man hath seen God at any time nor can see Him.” Not only is He beyond the reach of sense, but above the apprehension of the understanding. Direct and immediate knowledge of Him is impossible. There may be, there is, written on every human spirit a dim consciousness of His presence, but that is not knowledge. Creatural limitations prevent it, and mans sin prevents it. He is “the King invisible,” because He is the “Father of Lights” dwelling in “a glorious privacy of light,” which is to us darkness because there is in it “no darkness at all.”
Then, the next truth included here is, that Christ is the perfect manifestation and image of God. In Him we have the invisible becoming visible. Through Him we know all that we know of God, as distinguished from what we guess or imagine or suspect of Him. On this high theme, it is not wise to deal much in the scholastic language of systems and creeds. Few words, and these mainly His own, are best, and he is least likely to speak wrongly who confines himself most to Scripture in his presentation of the truth. All the great streams of teaching in the New Testament concur in the truth which Paul here proclaims. The conception in Johns Gospel of the Word which is the utterance and making audible of the Divine mind, the conceptions in the Epistle to the Hebrews of the effulgence or forth shining of Gods glory, and the very image, or stamped impress of His substance, are but other modes of representing the same facts of full likeness and complete manifestation, which Paul here asserts by calling the man Christ Jesus, the image of the Invisible God. The same thoughts are involved in the name by which our Lord called Himself, the Son of God; and they cannot be separated from many words of His, such as “he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father.” In Him the Divine nature comes near to us in a form that once could be grasped in part by mens senses, for it was “that of the Word of life” which they saw with their eyes and their hands handled, and which is today and forever a form that can be grasped by mind and heart and will. In Christ we have the revelation of a God who can be known, and loved, and trusted, with a knowledge which, though it be not complete, is real and valid, with a love which is solid enough to be the foundation of a life, with a trust which is conscious that it has touched rock and builds secure. Nor is that fact that He is the revealer of God, one that began with His incarnation, or ends with His earthly life. From the beginning and before the creatural beginning, as we shall see in considering another part of these great verses, the Word was the agent of all Divine activity, the “arm of the Lord,” and the source of all Divine illumination, “the face of the Lord,” or, as we have the thought put in the remarkable words of the Book of Proverbs, where the celestial and pure Wisdom is more than a personification, though not yet distinctly conceived as a person, “The Lord possessed me in the beginning of His way. I was by Him as one brought up- or as a master worker-with Him, and I was daily His delight and My delights were with the sons of men.” And after the veils of flesh and sense are done away, and we see face to face, I believe that the face which we shall see, and seeing, shall have beauty born of the vision passing into our faces, will be the face of Jesus Christ, in which the light of the glory of God shall shine for the redeemed and perfected sons of God, even as it did for them when they groped amid the shows of earth. The law for time and for eternity is, “I have declared Thy name unto My brethren and will declare it.” That great fathomless, shoreless ocean of the Divine nature is like a “closed sea”- Christ is the broad river which brings its waters to men, and “everything liveth whithersoever the river cometh.”
In these brief words on so mighty a matter, I must run the risk of appearing to deal in unsupported statements. My business is not so much to try to prove Pauls words as to explain them, and then to press them. home. Therefore I would urge that thought, that we depend on Christ for all true knowledge of God. Guesses are not knowledge. Speculations are not knowledge. Peradventures, whether of hope or fear, are not knowledge. What we poor men need is a certitude of a God who loves us and cares for us, has an arm that can help us, and a heart that will. The God of “pure theism” is little better than a phantom, so unsubstantial that you can see the stars shining through the pale form, and when a man tries to lean on him for support, it is like leaning on a wreath of mist. There is nothing. There is no certitude firm enough for us to find sustaining power against lifes trials in resting upon it, but in Christ. There is no warmth of love enough for us to thaw our frozen limbs by, apart from Christ. In Him, and in Him alone, the far off, awful, doubtful God becomes a God very near, of Whom we are sure, and sure that He loves and is ready to help and cleanse and save.
And that is what we each need. “My soul crieth out for God, for the living God.” And never will that orphaned cry be answered, but in the possession of Christ, in Whom we possess the Father also. No dead abstractions-no reign of law-still less the dreary proclamation, “Behold we know not anything,” least of all, the pottage of material good, will hush that bitter wail that goes up unconsciously from many an Esaus heart-“My father, my father!” Men will find Him in Christ. They will find Him nowhere else. It seems to me that the only refuge for this generation from atheism-if it is still allowable to use that unfashionable word-is the acceptance of Christ as the revealer of God. On any other terms religion is rapidly becoming impossible for the cultivated class. The great word which Paul opposed to the cobwebs of Gnostic speculation is the word for our own time with all its perplexities-Christ is the Image of the Invisible God.
II. We have the relation of Christ to Creation set forth in that great name, “the firstborn of all creation,” and further elucidated by a magnificent series of statements which proclaim. Him to be agent or medium, and aim or goal of creation, prior to it in time and dignity, and its present upholder and bond of unity.
“The firstborn of all creation.” At first sight, this name seems to include Him in the great family of creatures as the eldest, and clearly to treat Him as one of them, just because He is declared to be in some sense the first of them. That meaning has been attached to the words; but it is shown not to be their intention by the language of the next verse, which is added to prove and explain the title. It distinctly alleges that Christ was “before” all creation, and that He is the agent of all creation. To insist that the words must be explained so as to include Him in “creation” would be to go right in the teeth of the Apostles own justification and explanation of them. So that the true meaning is that He is the firstborn, in comparison with, or in reference to, all creation. Such an understanding of the force of the expression is perfectly allowable grammatically, and is necessary unless this verse is to be put in violent contradiction to the next. The same construction is found in Miltons
“Adam, the goodliest man of men since born, His sons, the fairest of her daughters, Eve,” where “of” distinctly means “in comparison with,” and not “belonging to.”
The title implies priority in existence, and supremacy. It substantially means the same thing as the other title of “the only begotten Son,” only that the latter brings into prominence the relation of the Son to the Father, while the former lays stress on His relation to Creation. Further it must be noted, that this name applies to the Eternal Word and not to the incarnation of that Word, or to put it in another form, the divinity and not the humanity of the Lord Jesus is in the Apostles view. Such is the briefest outline of the meaning of this great name.
A series of clauses follow, stating more fully the relation of the firstborn Son to Creation, and so confirming and explaining the title.
The whole universe is, as it were, set in one class, and He alone over against it. No language could be more emphatically all comprehensive. Four times in one sentence we have “all things”- the whole universe-repeated, and traced to Him as Creator and Lord. “In the heavens and the earth” is quoted from Genesis, and is intended here, as there, to be an exhaustive enumeration of the creation according to place. “Things visible or invisible” again includes the whole under a new principle of division-there are visible things in heaven, as sun and stars, there may be invisible on earth, but whatever and of whatever sort they are. He made them. “Whether thrones or dominions, or principalities or powers,” an enumeration evidently alluding to the dreamy speculations about an angelic hierarchy filling the space between the far off God, and men immersed in matter. There is a tone of contemptuous impatience in Pauls voice as he quotes the pompous list of sonorous titles which a busy fancy had coined. It is as if he had said, You are being told a great deal about these angel hierarchies, and know all about their ranks and gradations. I do not know anything about them; but this I know, that if, amid the unseen things in the heavens or the earth, there be any such, my Lord made them, and is their master. So he groups together the whole universe of created beings, actual or imaginary, and then high above it, separate from it, its Lord and Creator, its upholder and end, he points to the majestic person of the only begotten Son of God, His Firstborn, higher than all the rulers of the earth, whether human or superhuman.
The language employed brings into strong relief the manifold variety of relations which the Son sustains to the universe, by the variety of the prepositions used in the sentence. The whole sum. of created things (for the Greek means not only “all things,” but “all things considered as a unity”) was in the original act, created in Him, through Him, and unto Him. The first of these words, “in Him,” regards Him as the creative centre, as it were, or element in which as in a storehouse or reservoir all creative force resided, and was in a definite act put forth. The thought may be parallel with that in the prologue to Johns Gospel, “In Him was life.” The Word stands to the universe as the incarnate Christ does to the Church; and as all spiritual life is in Him, and union to Him is its condition, so all physical takes its origin within the depths of His Divine nature. The error of the Gnostics was to put the act of creation and the thing created as far away as possible from God, and it is met by this remarkable expression, which brings creation and the creatures in a very real sense within the confines of the Divine nature, as manifested in the Word, and asserts the truth of which pantheism so called is the exaggeration, that all things are in Him, like seeds in a seed vessel, while yet they are not identified with Him.
The possible dangers of that profound truth, which has always been more in harmony with Eastern than with Western modes of thought, are averted by the next preposition used, “all things have been created through Him.” That presupposes the full, clear demarcation between creature and creator, and so on the one hand extricates the person of the Firstborn of all creation from all risk of being confounded with the universe, while on the other it emphasises the thought that He is the medium of the Divine energy, and so brings into clear relief His relation to the inconceivable Divine nature. He is the image of the invisible God, and accordingly, through Him have all things been created. The same connection of ideas is found in the parallel passage in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where the words, “through Whom also He made the worlds,” stand in immediate connection with “being the effulgence of His glory.”
But there remains yet another relation between Him and the act of creation. “For Him.” they have been made. All things come from and tend towards Him. He is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the ending. All things spring from His will, draw their being from that fountain, and return thither again. These relations which are here declared of the Son, are in more than one place declared of the Father. Do we face the question fairly – what theory of the person of Jesus Christ explains that fact?
But further, His existence before the whole creation is repeated, with a force in both the words, “He is,” which can scarcely be given in English. The former is emphatic-He Himself-and the latter emphasises not only pre-existence, but absolute existence. “He was before all things” would not have said so much as “He is before all things.” We are reminded of His own words, “Before Abraham was, I am.”
“In Him all things consist” or hold together. He is the element in which takes place and by which is caused that continued creation which is the preservation of the universe, as He is the element in which the original creative act took place of old. All things came into being and form an ordered unity in Him. He links all creatures and forces into a cooperant whole, reconciling their antagonisms, drawing all their currents into one great tidal wave, melting all their notes into music which God can hear, however discordant it may sometimes sound to us. He is “the bond of perfectness,” the keystone of the arch, the centre of the wheel.
Such, then, in merest outline is the Apostles teaching about the Eternal Word and the Universe. What sweetness and what reverential awe such thoughts should cast around the outer world and the providences of life! How near they should bring Jesus Christ to us! What a wonderful thought that is, that the whole course of human affairs and of natural processes is directed by Him who died upon the cross! The helm of the universe is held by the hands which were pierced for us. The Lord of Nature and the Mover of all things is that Saviour on whose love we may pillow our aching heads.
We need these lessons today, when many teachers are trying hard to drive all that is spiritual and Divine out of creation and history, and to set up a merciless law as the only God. Nature is terrible and stern sometimes, and the course of events can inflict crushing blows; but we have not the added horror of thinking both to be controlled by no will. Christ is King in either region, and with our elder brother for the ruler of the land, we shall not lack corn in our sacks, nor a Goshen to dwell in. We need not people the void, as these old heretics did, with imaginary forms, nor with impersonal forces and laws-nor need we, as so many are doing today, wander through its many mansions as through a deserted house, finding nowhere a Person who welcomes us; for everywhere we may behold our Saviour, and out of every storm and every solitude hear His voice across the darkness saying, “It is I; be not afraid.”
III. The last of the relations set forth in this great section is that between Christ and His Church. “He is the head of the body, the Church; who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead.” A parallel is plainly intended to be drawn between Christs relation to the material creation and to the Church, the spiritual creation. As the Word of God before incarnation is to the universe, so is the incarnate Christ to the Church. As in the former, He is prior in time: and superior in dignity, so is He in the latter. As in the universe He is source and origin of all being, so in the Church He is the beginning, both as being first and as being origin of all spiritual life. As the glowing words which described His relation to creation began with the great title “the Firstborn,” so those which describe His relation to the Church close with the same name in a different application. Thus the two halves of His work are as it were moulded into a golden circle, and the end of the description bends round towards the beginning.
Briefly, then, we have here first, Christ the head, and the Church His body. In the lower realm the Eternal Word was the power which held all things together, and similar but higher in fashion is the relation between Him and the whole multitude of believing souls. Popular physiology regards the head as the seat of life. So the fundamental idea in the familiar metaphor, when applied to our Lord, is that of the source of the mysterious spiritual life which flows from Him into all the members, and is sight in the eye, strength in the arm, swiftness in the foot, colour in the cheek, being richly various in its manifestations but one in its nature, and all His. The same mysterious derivation of life from Him is taught in His own metaphor of the Vine, in which every branch, however far away from the root, lives by the common life circulating through all, which clings in the tendrils, and reddens in the clusters, arm is not theirs though it be in them.
That thought of the source of life leads necessarily to the other, that He is the centre of unity, by Whom the “many members” become “one body,” and the maze of branches one vine. The “head,” too, naturally comes to be the symbol for authority-and these three ideas of seat of life, centre of unity, and emblem of absolute power, appear to be those principally meant here.
Christ is further the beginning to the Church. In the natural world He was before all, and source of all. The same double idea is contained in this name, “the Beginning.” It does not merely mean the first member of a series who begins it, as the first link in a chain does, but it means the power which causes the series to begin. The root is the beginning of the flowers which blow in succession through the plants flowering time, though we may also call the first flower of the number the beginning. But Christ is root; not merely the first flower, though He is also that. He is head and beginning to His Church by means of His resurrection. He is the firstborn from the dead, and His communication of spiritual life to His Church requires the historical fact of His resurrection as its basis, for a dead Christ could not be the source of life; and that resurrection completes the manifestation of the incarnate Word, by our faith in which His spiritual life flows into our spirits. Unless He has risen from the dead, all His claims to be anything else than a wise teacher and fair character crumble into nothing, and to think of Him as a source of life is impossible.
He is the beginning through His resurrection, too, in regard of His raising us from the dead. He is the first fruits of them that slept, and bears the promise of a mighty harvest. He has risen from the dead, and therein we have not only the one demonstration for the world that there is a life after death, but the irrefragable assurance to the Church that because He lives it shall live also. A dead body and a living head cannot be. We are knit to Him too closely for the Fury “with the abhorred shears” to cut the thread. He has risen that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. So the Apostle concludes that in all things He is first-and all things are, that He may be first. Whether in nature or in grace, that preeminence is absolute and supreme. The end of all the majesty of creation and of all the wonders of grace is that His solitary figure may stand clearly out as centre and lord of the universe, and His name be lifted high over all.
So the question of questions for us all is, What think ye of Christ? Our thoughts now have necessarily been turned to subjects which may have seemed abstract and remote-but these truths which we have been trying to make clear, and to present in their connection, are not the mere terms or propositions of a half mystical theology far away from our daily life, but bear most gravely and directly on our deepest interests. I would fain press on every conscience the sharp pointed appeal-What is this Christ to us? Is He anything to us but a name? Do our hearts leap up with a joyful Amen when we read these great words of this text. Are we ready to crown Him Lord of all? Is He our head, to fill us with vitality, to inspire and to command? Is He the goal and the end of our individual life? Can we each say-I live by Him, in Him, and for Him? Happy are we, if we give to Christ the preeminence, and if our hearts set “Him first, Him last, Him midst and without end.”