Jehovah's Witnesses rightly assert that there can only be two types of entities in existence: a Creator and creatures. Then, following a line of reasoning first made popular in the fourth century A.D. by the heretic Arius, of Alexandria, they presuppose (a priori) that any one being cannot be more than one person, and therefore, that God cannot exist as more than one person. Since Jesus identified God as His Father, another person, Watchtower reasoning declares Jesus Christ cannot be God and must therefore be a creature. To justify their erroneous conclusions the Watchtower resorts to dangerous proof-texting, hoping to win "biblical" support.

One important passage they use is Colossians 1:15; "Who [Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:" Seen through the Watchtower's presupposition that Christ is a created being, the "firstborn" of this passage means "first created." In other words, Christ was the one first created by Jehovah God. It is only after Christ's creation that God made everything else, using Christ as an instrument. This is a very faulty interpretation.
Like me and my friend ijawkid debated on this matter and I think he is not sincere about this topic so I want any one who is reading to give their opinion on what they think and I also urge my friend to rebuttal this if he can.

Understanding the Scripture

Proper understanding of Colossians 1:15 is primarily an issue of context, both literary and historical. One must begin by understanding how words derive and convey meaning. Most words in any language are not isolated, mechanical entities with a singular meaning. They usually have at least two levels of meaning. The first level is the pool of associated meanings that may attach to any given word. For instance, in English the word "love" has a wide variety of meanings that range anywhere from emotional bliss to preference in what one eats. The meaning of, "I love my wife" is quite different from, "I love boile and pounded yam." Consider also such words as "state," "pen," "truth" or "home." Like "love," these words carry multiple nuances of meaning, depending on their usage.

This suggests the second level of the meaning of words, which is the precise meaning determined by context. Many words are somewhat nebulous in meaning until they stand in relationship to other words. When one fills out a job application and comes to the part that asks him what state he lives in, he knows to answer, for example, "Bayelsa," but not "Solid" (a state of matter). or What is your sex, he knows to answer "Male" or "Female," but not if he is gay or if he had sex etc. Words in literary context (i.e. their relationship to words around them) are what deliver meaning.

Naturally, this analysis of word meanings holds true for the scripture as well. Finding truth in God's Word depends on first finding the intention of the inspired author, based upon his word usage and its syntax (relationship to the other words in the context).

The Watchtower(Jehovah witness) neglects this understanding and basis of all language, and opts for what some call an "absurd literalism," which unnecessarily forces literal and singular meanings upon words regardless of context. This drives the meaning of some words to absurdity. Such is the fate of the word "firstborn" in the hands of Watchtower dogma lol he likes calling my doctrine dogma.

Linguistic Context

The argument that "firstborn" means "firstcreated" in Col. 1:15 can seem true when one considers the pool of meaning for the word (although "first offspring" would better reflect the meaning of the Greek word used here: prototokos). "First created" is one of the many, and even more literal meanings of the word. The problem is that the context clearly shows that "first created" was not Paul's intended meaning in Colossians.

Paul uses the same basic word for "all things" in v.16-17 as he used in his expression "every creature" (all creation) in v.15. Syntactically then, Paul says Jesus existed before (v. 17), created (v.16) and sustains (v.17) that set of things of which he is the "first born" (v.15), i.e., the set of "all creation." This agrees with John, who says, "In the beginning was the Word (literal Greek "...was existing the Word." John's use of the imperfect tense shows continuous duration of existence in the past).... All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made" (John 1:1,3).

If Paul had meant "first created" when he wrote prototokos, at Col. 1:15, then his following statements make Christ Himself a part of those very things which Paul says Christ created and sustains, and before which He existed. now this is what ijawkid and his entourage wont accept that Jesus created him self and the fact that their bible scholars or the
Watchtower leaders themselves evidently understand this fact and have felt the need to resolve the logical conflict. To justify their position, the Watchtower, in its New World Translation (NWT) of the Scriptures, does violence to the verses that follow. The word "other" is inserted four times, to alter their meaning: "Because by means of him all (other) things were created....he is before all (other) things" etc. (Colossians 1:16, 17, NWT). This is notably different from what the Apostle Paul actually wrote, an "all" inclusive of everything ever created. There is no "other" in v. 16 and 17 in the Greek text, either latent or explicit, and there is no way to justify its insertion. It is scholastic dishonesty.

So then what does prototokos mean if not "first created?" The best way to determine this is to choose from the word's pool of meaning the idea that flows best with what Paul is saying. He uses the word again in v. 18, where he also provides forceful evidence of his intended meaning with the words, "that in all things He might have the preeminence." The literary context shows Paul's usage of prototokos in Colossians 1 refers to Christ's supremacy.

Historical Context

The historical context bears out this conclusion as well. There is a strong association of the firstborn child with preeminence and inheritance in Hebrew culture. The firstborn male inherited a double portion of his father's estate and became the new leader at his father's death (Deuteronomy 21:15-17). His right of primogeniture made him preeminent in his family.

The term gradually came to refer to the one who was the heir and had the right to rule whether or not he was literally the first one born ("first created". The most striking example of this is in the Old Testament from where the idea originally derived. Genesis 41:51-52 says, "And Joseph called the name of the firstborn Mannasseh:...and the name of the second called he Ephraim..." Yet in contrast to this, speaking in Jeremiah God says, "For I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn." Evidently, there is more to the term "firstborn" than the first offspring. Israel was also called the firstborn God so as David even though David is not the firstborn or first created.

Additional support is found in the fact that the Greek word prototokos occurs nine times in the New Testament _ ten times if you include the related word for "birthright" (prototokia). Seven of these nine times the word refers to Christ. Out of these seven only two refer to Christ as one who is firstborn in a physically literal sense, and these refer to Him being Mary's firstborn son (Matthew 1:25; Luke 2:7). Otherwise the use is obviously one of preeminence and cannot refer to some presupposed creation (e.g. Romans 8:29; 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). The key word to note here is "he might be the firstborn" if he is the firstborn already why is the verse saying he might be the firstborn? can someone explain this to me with JW logic?

(Revelation 1:5). Once this word even refers to believers as belonging to "the church of the firstborn ones" (literal Greek, Hebrews 12:23). Again, the emphasis here is on preeminence and privilege, not order of creation.

The Context for Sharing

how should one respond to Jehovah's Witnesses who attack the deity of Christ? It is most important to keep in mind that sharing the truth with a Jehovah's Witness is not merely proving a case, they have been taught not to think out of the box so it is going to be hard. I have learnt few things from ijawkids doctrine and I always tell him what I learn. but he has never learnt anything from me. so how should one respond to JWs? the only way he can learn about this "Firstborn" wahala is not go the way of grammar and linguistics, but a demonstration of the clear teaching of the scripture, in context. Start with the context of Colossians 1. Show that the word cannot have two different meanings in the same context, and then try to plug in the "first created" meaning into verse eighteen, to read "first created from the dead." This is obviously meaningless, so there must be more to the idea of "firstbornness."

If they still want to defend their ungrounded position, they should read Genesis 41:51-52. then read Jeremiah 31:9. these are the words of God, so am askong, "Did God make a mistake, or is He using 'firstborn' in the sense of 'preeminence'?" Obviously, the latter is true. This coordinates exactly with the context and obviously intended meaning of Paul in Colossians.

Paul spoke in the same manner as God had spoken in the Old Testament, making Christ the Heir of all creation, the One not only by whom, but for whom everything was made (Col. 1:16). He is the head, the ruler, the creator, the preeminent One over all creation. Indeed, the central thrust of Paul's arguement throughout the doctrinal portion of Colossians is the preeminence, superiority and sufficiency of Christ. In no way does he reduce Christ to anything less than Deity. thank you

Poster if u want to argue with a catholic over some certain things they believe in,they will get their bible and argue with u based on what is written there.protestants do so equally.so I think u should read Jehovah Witness bible,then u can hv a balanced argument with them else u will always c things from ur own point of view based on d bible u use.
We r always very good at condemnin pple and their beliefs and upholding our own yet,the world is yet to be free from both catholics and protestants and witnesses schemin for war,seekin for power, bigger nations sittin on top smaller ones and corruption here and there.
Individually,we r not better off. Atrocities everywhere.
As per bein a naija man,we r sooo corrupt and yet churches and mosques r seriously competing for space.
Still some of us hv time to condenm what others believe in.
Poster,catholics believe in pugatory and kneeling down b4 d potrait of a lady assumed to be virgin mary(jesus mother),till tomoro,u can never take that away from them, protestants believe in manifestation of gifts of d holy spirit,arguing with them that it has ceased is a waste of time,JW believe in their own doctrines, na them go gree for u abi?
So dear,can we strive and do good and allow God to resolve all these things at his own time.who knows we all might be wrong.
All these still lead to power struggle.our own is d only approved way and d best.we r d only rightful representative of God on earth and his mouth piece.God don suffer well well for our hand.live and let live pls
Gracias!

Are you not ashamed for creating this thread after being battered from all corners from the other thread??.......

Watchtower watctower watchtower.....

Oya explain how Jesus is beginning of Gods creation you run........

explanation was brought straight away from the scriptures you dodge....

You come here they come open new thread.......

........

It is either you accede to scriptural truth or you confirm yourself to be a proud person..........


I guess your mates won't make any comments here.......

Even if we decide to cling to your cemented view of firstborn how does that negate the fact that the persons or beings who were appointed firstborns never had a beginning......??......

Did isreal and david fall from heaven without a beginning.....

If you claim Jesus is firstborn as to pre-eminence alone ,how did he become firstborn??......

Who made him the firstborn??........Jesus himself??......

Again I asked a question which you never cared to answer.....

Can we address the Father too as the firstborn of all creation??.......can we??......or can we call the Father the beginning of Gods creation??.....

I want us to get down to the end of this firstborn issue.......

Again I asked:::

Can you appoint someone the beginning of someone elses work or plan??........could we say isreal and david were also called the begiNning of some one elses plan??....

Can you??.......

While you kept mute not providing answers to these questions the scriptures were opened to elucidate on these points....

But what do we see!!!!!!.....

We see you maligning the JW's and blatantly ignoring truths........

Why I ask??.....why??why??why??........

ijawkid: Are you not ashamed for creating this thread after being battered from all corners from the other thread??.......

Watchtower watctower watchtower.....

Oya explain how Jesus is beginning of Gods creation you run........

explanation was brought straight away from the scriptures you dodge....

You come here they come open new thread.......

........

It is either you accede to scriptural truth or you confirm yourself to be a proud person..........


I guess your mates won't make any comments here.......

not really watchtower watchtower or what ever... am just showing you the fact you should clap for me not persecute me... now you have left firstborn which is the discussion at hand and bringing beginning of creation which is not why I wrote this... for now could we stand inline with the topic?

I never a proud person am only pointing out the truth and the motive behind the insertion of other in the bible so that it changes the meaning to firstborn. If anything am the one being sincere here because I told you to rebuttal but you didn't all you did was condemn me for putting out such post.

I see how things are beginning to look like you are radicalize, one mention of watchtower if its not good you persecute that is never the case bro your religion is what you believe in you to condemn people for saying their point of view. trying to say am proud because I am explaining something to you doesn't count.

its not about who made him the firstborn its about firstborn doesn't mean first created. that's the whole point. I don't see how Jesus could be God's firstborn and some other people including david and israel at the same time, it just doesn't make sense no matter how you look at it. if Jesus was firstborn as in first created are you telling me he was created 2 times?

I don't care how you address the father... him and Jesus are coeternal the are before all things. the author of the bible focused on Jesus.

Israel and david are not the beginning, instead david was preeminent(firstborn) so is Israel. you should be the one answering that question

its not about JWs... its about the truth and you see JW there because that is what they believe and teach. I didn't maligning or do anything but was pointing out the insincerity done to that verse to support their doctrines. when you see Catholics or Trinitarians even RCCG do something barbaric don't you say something concerning them? have you never told me that what I believe is pagan etc? I never got bitter but I openly accept your point of view and told you why I believe something to be different.

am not maligning anything just explaining and this is a debate I wanted you to rebuttal but you didn't instead get mad at me. am sorry if that hurts you and I will talk about JWs like this again if you don't like it.

why I open this thread is because the other one has become too generic. your fellow JWs come when I tell them the discussion has gone pass the argument they will start calling me lazy or name calling me just because I said they should go back in the thread and read what we have said concerning this issue. there is nothing wrong if I hope this the title speaks why I opened this to clear the firstborn issue.

yellowpawpaw: Poster if u want to argue with a catholic over some certain things they believe in,they will get their bible and argue with u based on what is written there.protestants do so equally.so I think u should read Jehovah Witness bible,then u can hv a balanced argument with them else u will always c things from ur own point of view based on d bible u use.
We r always very good at condemnin pple and their beliefs and upholding our own yet,the world is yet to be free from both catholics and protestants and witnesses schemin for war,seekin for power, bigger nations sittin on top smaller ones and corruption here and there.
Individually,we r not better off. Atrocities everywhere.
As per bein a naija man,we r sooo corrupt and yet churches and mosques r seriously competing for space.
Still some of us hv time to condenm what others believe in.
Poster,catholics believe in pugatory and kneeling down b4 d potrait of a lady assumed to be virgin mary(jesus mother),till tomoro,u can never take that away from them, protestants believe in manifestation of gifts of d holy spirit,arguing with them that it has ceased is a waste of time,JW believe in their own doctrines, na them go gree for u abi?
So dear,can we strive and do good and allow God to resolve all these things at his own time.who knows we all might be wrong.
All these still lead to power struggle.our own is d only approved way and d best.we r d only rightful representative of God on earth and his mouth piece.God don suffer well well for our hand.live and let live pls
Gracias!

you are very correct... every bodies way is the right way. about the roman catholic I cant even whisper the thing is that we should stick for what we believe in and also be open to reason with out peoples opinion like the bible says you hear both side of the argument before making decision something like that and also Jesus was seriously criticize by people so every other thing should also be ready to be criticize not like Muslim that will kill you if you say something bad about their prophet

Good job benalvino..i will contribute to this discuss after church service.

oboy you have shikenize everything with kokoism i want to see how this can be replied from them. good job Dude.
which church i wan go for the benin today?

benalvino:

not really watchtower watchtower or what ever... am just showing you the fact you should clap for me not persecute me... now you have left firstborn which is the discussion at hand and bringing beginning of creation which is not why I wrote this... for now could we stand inline with the topic?

I never a proud person am only pointing out the truth and the motive behind the insertion of other in the bible so that it changes the meaning to firstborn. If anything am the one being sincere here because I told you to rebuttal but you didn't all you did was condemn me for putting out such post.

I see how things are beginning to look like you are radicalize, one mention of watchtower if its not good you persecute that is never the case bro your religion is what you believe in you to condemn people for saying their point of view. trying to say am proud because I am explaining something to you doesn't count.

its not about who made him the firstborn its about firstborn doesn't mean first created. that's the whole point. I don't see how Jesus could be God's firstborn and some other people including Egypt at the same time, it just doesn't make sense no matter how you look at it. if Jesus was firstborn as in first created are you telling me he was created 2 times?

I don't care how you address the father him and Jesus are coeternal the are before all things. the author of the bible focused on Jesus.

Israel and david are not the beginning, instead david was preeminent(firstborn) so is Israel. you should be the one answering that question

its not about JWs... its about the truth and you see JW there because that is what they believe and teach. aside thank you guys I didn't maligning or do anything but was point out the insincerity done to that verse to support their doctrines. when you see Catholics or Trinitarians even RCCG do something barbaric don't you say something concerning them? have you never told me that what I believe is pagan etc? I never got bitter but I openly accept your point of view and told you why I believe something to be different.

am not maligning anything just explaining and this is a debate I wanted you to rebuttal but you didn't instead get mad at me. am sorry if that hurts you and I will talk about JWs like this again if you don't like it.

why I open this thread is because the other one has become too generic. your fellow JWs come when I tell them the discussion has gone pass the argument they will start calling me lazy or name calling me just because I said they should go back in the thread and read what we have said concerning this issue. there is nothing wrong if I hope this the title speaks why I opened this to clear the firstborn issue.

The bolded is what you would stubbornly run away from ............

And the JWs aren't insincere people...we accept truths when they are glaring and beyond reasonable doubt......we make quick adjustments when facts are all considered......

I had juxtaposed Jesus being firstborn of and beginning of to collapse every straw your clutching at by holding on to firstborn as used in isreal and davids case alone but still you press on......please find a scripture were these 2 expreSsions are used on persons and then tell me if these persons never had a beginning.......those examples given were to show you that when these expressions are used it does not exempt the individual under consideration from a group but shows this individual is part of that group but the firstfruit of it.....simple thing has become complicated.....

Jesus wasn't created twice...he was created once.......

And he remains the firstborn of Gods creation and the beginning of it........

Itsfacts: oboy you have shikenize everything with kokoism i want to see how this can be replied from them. good job Dude.
which church i wan go for the benin today?

It has been replied aeons ago.......

Benalvino has even been trying as for you you have been a disgrace and not a bible student.............

ijawkid:

The bolded is what you would stubbornly run away from ............

And the JWs aren't insincere people...we accept truths when they are glaring and beyond reasonable doubt......we make quick adjustments when facts are all considered......

I had juxtaposed Jesus being firstborn of and beginning of to collapse every straw your clutching at by holding on to firstborn as used in isreal and davids case alone but still you press on......please find a scripture were these 2 expreSsions are used on persons and then tell me if these persons never had a beginning.......those examples given were to show you that when these expressions are used it does not exempt the individual under consideration from a group but shows this individual is part of that group but the firstfruit of it.....simple thing has become complicated.....

Jesus wasn't created twice...he was created once.......

And he remains the firstborn of Gods creation and the beginning of it........

by my original post and your point of view can we all reach an agreement that God created david and Israel save time? I mean they are all is firstborn... if that is the case who is the firstborn of the firstborn? or how many firstborn do we have? see the contradiction? ok lets put it this way, Jesus was created or made. see him his self did everything that was made every creation can we kindly conclude he created him self?

finally if he was the firstborn firstcreated, does it mean he was created twice since he is the firstborn from the dead? you see all the dilemma that are coming out? either way you go you end up contradicting your self.

ps when I say JW I mean watchtower if they bring out a bible that insert words that are not there that is insincere and why do they do it is what you should be thinking of. I know you as a sincere guy but we how know how religion is.

ijawkid:

It has been replied aeons ago.......

Benalvino has even been trying as for you you have been a disgrace and not a bible student.............

lol una go kill me for Nigerian slang... which one is shekinize and kokoism again... I blame Nigerian music hahahaha

benalvino:

by my original post and your point of view can we all reach an agreement that God created david and Israel save time? I mean they are all is firstborn... if that is the case who is the firstborn of the firstborn? or how many firstborn do we have? see the contradiction? ok lets put it this way, Jesus was created or made. see him his self did everything that was made every creation can we kindly conclude he created him self?

finally if he was the firstborn firstcreated, does it mean he was created twice since he is the firstborn from the dead? you see all the dilemma that are coming out? either way you go you end up contradicting your self.

ps when I say JW I mean watchtower if they bring out a bible that insert words that are not there that is insincere and why do they do it is what you should be thinking of. I know you as a sincere guy but we how know how religion is.

You seem not to really understand it all benalvino......

When Jesus is called firstborn from the dead it simply means he is the first fruit of those whom God ressurected to heavenly life...once again firstborn is well defined......


1 corinthians 15:20

20 But Christ has indeed been raised from
the dead, the firstfruits of those who have
fallen asleep.

Now question...
1...Is Christ not part of the family of those who died but the first to be ressurected??

2...is he firstborn from the dead by appointment or just pre-eminence or did Christ not experience death and ressurection and so among the group of those who had died but the first??.....

The definition of firstborn or firstfruit is so damn clear........

That is why boomark gave that astounding comment on colossians 1:15-20.......

Jesus is even the first of those who are image of GOD.........

benalvino:

lol una go kill me for Nigerian slang... which one is shekinize and kokoism again... I blame Nigerian music hahahaha

No mind itsfact....na too much azonto and timaya dey cause am....

ijawkid:

You seem not to really understand it all benalvino......

When Jesus is called firstborn from the dead it simply means he is the first fruit of those whom God ressurected to heavenly life...once again firstborn is well defined......


1 corinthians 15:20

20 But Christ has indeed been raised from
the dead, the firstfruits of those who have
fallen asleep.

Now question...
1...Is Christ not part of the family of those who died but the first to be ressurected??

2...is he firstborn from the dead by appointment or just pre-eminence or did Christ not experience death and ressurection and so among the group of those who had died but the first??.....

The definition of firstborn or firstfruit is so damn clear........

That is why boomark gave that astounding comment on colossians 1:15-20.......

Jesus is even the first of those who are image of GOD.........

you see how the meaning has change? wasn't it suppose to mean another birth or creation? that is the whole point of this anywhere you go the only outcome will be you contradicting your self. this is one example.

benalvino:
you see how the meaning has change? wasn't it suppose to mean another birth or creation? that is the whole point of this anywhere you go the only outcome will be you contradicting your self. this is one example.

You don't get it.........

Firstborn drives home the point that the subject under consideration is not exempted from a group,rather it shows that subject is part of the group but the first of it.......

Be it

1.Death
2..Creation
3..Human pro-creation(birth)
4..Animal reproduction.
5..Plants
6.Harvest


Etc.........

You have to grasp the meaning of it all....

The meaning doesn't change....circumstances can change like I have listed up there but the meaning of firstborn remains constant......

ijawkid:

You don't get it.........

Firstborn drives home the point that the subject under consideration is
not exempted from a group,rather it shows that subject is part of the
group but the first of it.......

Be it

1.Death
2..Creation
3..Human pro-creation(birth)
4..Animal reproduction.
5..Plants
6.Harvest


Etc.........

You have to grasp the meaning of it all....

The meaning doesn't change....circumstances can change like I have
listed up there but the meaning of firstborn remains constant......

So Jesus was born 2 times?
God have more than 3 firstborn at the same time?
or Jesus create him self ad you say firstborn meaning is constant.
this dilemma is not a easyone you will need a comprehensive explanation

benalvino:
So Jesus was born 2 times?
God have more than 3 firstborn at the same time?
or Jesus create him self ad you say firstborn meaning is constant.
this dilemma is not a easyone you will need a comprehensive explanation

I couldn't have said it better. you have actually covered every angle. I guess ijawkid is busy researching for an answer. He has not been able to even give me a single proof as to why we should worship Christ since God alone deserves our worship.lol

Bidam: I couldn't have said it better. you have actually covered every angle. I guess ijawkid is busy researching for an answer. He has not been able to even give me a single proof as to why we should worship Christ since God alone deserves our worship.lol

I don't think he can explain anything concerning this dilemma that wont result to Jesus creating him self.
I like to see frosbel try to make something out as well.

benalvino:
So Jesus was born 2 times?
God have more than 3 firstborn at the same time?
or Jesus create him self ad you say firstborn meaning is constant.
this dilemma is not a easyone you will need a comprehensive explanation

What don't u understand is what my problem is.........

Firstborn means Jesus is part of Gods creation but the first of it.....

The examples I gave projects the meaning of firstborn and beginning of........

U don't need frosbel on this....

The answers are right in front of you......

benalvino:

I don't think he can explain anything concerning this dilemma that wont result to Jesus creating him self.
I like to see frosbel try to make something out as well.

What dilemma??,,,na you wey dey inside dilemma and not the scriptural explanations you've been given.........

You go back to the scriptures and read what firstfruit means and satisfy yourself with what ever result you get.......

I have explained what it means to be the beginning of someones work you dey hear they ask me wether God get more than one firstborn.......

Bidam: I couldn't have said it better. you have actually covered every angle. I guess ijawkid is busy researching for an answer. He has not been able to even give me a single proof as to why we should worship Christ since God alone deserves our worship.lol

The last time I checked na for your thread I been get your time.......

I don't need to do any research for a stubborn person like you.......

ijawkid:

What don't u understand is what my problem is.........

Firstborn means Jesus is part of Gods creation but the first of it.....

The examples I gave projects the meaning of firstborn and beginning of........

U don't need frosbel on this....

The answers are right in front of you......

not even close!! see what you failed to answer... How did Jesus create him self?
and what about other God's firstborn.
Jesus is part of his creation then there is error in the whole bible...
read Colossians again then read Genesis then read John 1:1 you will see Jesus is before every creature.

benalvino:

not even close!! see what you failed to answer... How did Jesus create him self?
and what about other God's firstborn.
Jesus is part of his creation then there is error in the whole bible...
read Colossians again then read Genesis then read John 1:1 you will see Jesus is before every creature.

Jesus did not create himself...he was created by Yahweh........

Other firstborns are firstborns on the level or plain they are......Jesus on the other hand is the firstborn of all creation....the firstfruit of all or the creation of GOD........

Colossians,john and proverbs have been corroborated to show the truth...you are the one fighting with it........

Its up to you....

I asked you a question u never answered.......

How come do you think Jesus is the image of GOD??........can we say the Father is the firstborn of all creation or the beginning of the creation by God??........

Answer these questions and stop this fronting of one who can't see the truth right in front of him......

ijawkid:

Jesus did not create himself...he was created by Yahweh........

Other firstborns are firstborns on the level or plain they are......Jesus on the other hand is the firstborn of all creation....the firstfruit of all or the creation of GOD........

Colossians,john and proverbs have been corroborated to show the truth...you are the one fighting with it........

Its up to you....

I asked you a question u never answered.......

How come do you think Jesus is the image of GOD??........can we say the Father is the firstborn of all creation or the beginning of the creation by God??........

Answer these questions and stop this fronting of one who can't see the truth right in front of him......

I am shocked.
"and without Him was not anything made that was made"
nothing was made... again you are saying he created him self

benalvino:

I am shocked.
"and without Him was not anything made that was made"
nothing was made... again you are saying he created him self

Smh!!!!!!!!...


Please answer the questions I asked...your problem is you still cant agree that Yahweh is the oga who has no beginning and from whom all persons came from(Jesus included).......

I asked.....

1..Can we call Yahweh the image of God as Jesus is called??...

2..Can we say Yahweh is the beginning of Gods creation??.....

3..Can we say Yahweh the Father is the firstfruit/firstborn of all creation??


Your answers to this question would tell if you want the truth or not.......

What you read in john 1 is explained further in 1 corinthians 8:6, colossians,in revelation 3:14 and finally in proverbs......

This is my final comment on this.......

I would say you go back and take a second glance at benimoores post on the other thread,digest it and fling the trinity in the thrash can......

It is obvious you are not even agreeing with Jesus being the beginning of,firstfruit of Gods creative works............

Keep fighting with this.......

John answered this issue a long time ago..... In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God... Period.
Can first born still be in the beginning?
Jesus wasn't created but was begotten....
He is co-equal with God the father and God the holy spirit. Three persons in One God, yet not three Gods but one God....

ice234: John answered this issue a long time ago..... In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God... Period.
Can first born still be in the beginning?
Jesus wasn't created but was begotten....
He is co-equal with God the father and God the holy spirit. Three persons in One God, yet not three Gods but one God....

....please explain what begotten means......

Read proverbs 8:22-24 and really see what were talking about..... ........

No long thing...!!!!!!......

ijawkid:

Smh!!!!!!!!...


Please answer the questions I asked...your problem is you still cant agree that Yahweh is the oga who has no beginning and from whom all persons came from(Jesus included).......

I asked.....

1..Can we call Yahweh the image of God as Jesus is called??...

2..Can we say Yahweh is the beginning of Gods creation??.....

3..Can we say Yahweh the Father is the firstfruit/firstborn of all creation??


Your answers to this question would tell if you want the truth or not.......

What you read in john 1 is explained further in 1 corinthians 8:6, colossians,in revelation 3:14 and finally in proverbs......

This is my final comment on this.......

I would say you go back and take a second glance at benimoores post on the other thread,digest it and fling the trinity in the thrash can......

It is obvious you are not even agreeing with Jesus being the beginning of,firstfruit of Gods creative works............

Keep fighting with this.......

image of the invisible God... why because he(Jesus) was on earth with us all.

what kind of question is this?
why don't you right a comprehensive post linking rev 3:14, colossians 1:15-18 and 1 corinthians 8:6

again what kind of Question is this?
firstfruit now?

am happy its your final post... but I see you cant accept clear truth. All creatures all things was created through him(word of God) yet you claim he create everything...

the thing you should do is find out why new world translation translate the verse like this:
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 because by means of him all
[other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no
matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been
created through him and for him. 17 Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things
were made to exist,
New World Translation of watchtower

since they say he is created they know that makes him a thing so they insert OTHER to support their believe... insincere!!

benalvino:

image of the invisible God... why because he(Jesus) was on earth with us all.

Please when paul penned down colossians 1:15 where was Jesus??....in heaven or on earth...I believe we can say Jesus been the firstborn of all creation was as regards to his earthly life..abi??....

You are on slippery ground my brother.....clean it....

benalvino:

what kind of question is this?
why don't you right a comprehensive post linking rev 3:14, colossians 1:15-18 and 1 corinthians 8:6

Answer the question

Since you are disagrreing with scriptural definitions to escape Jesus having a beginning...can we apply these titles to God the Father??.....

benalvino:

again what kind of Question is this?
firstfruit now?

Firstfruit means firstborn......abi you never notice am??....

benalvino:

am happy its your final post... but I see you cant accept clear truth. All creatures all things was created through him(word of God) yet you claim he create everything...

Through him.......what does through him mean??,,........please read proverbs again and cling to truths benalvino......

benalvino:

the thing you should do is find out why new world translation translate the verse like this:
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 because by means of him all
[other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no
matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been
created through him and for him. 17 Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things
were made to exist,
New World Translation of watchtower

The other is there because Jesus is the beginning of Gods creation and so was created but the first of Gods creative work.....read proverbs 8:22-24 your nightmare and stop this disingenuity......scriptures have been opened to clear these facts......

benalvino:

since they say he is created they know that makes him a thing so they insert OTHER to support their believe... insincere!!

Without the other I have opened scripture to prove he was created........your problem is you're arguing with the NWT in view and so can't even see the truth in front of you........

I have never for once opened the NWT here on nairaland.......

Please go back and correct your definition of Jesus being the image of God...because its absolutely wrong......

Oya go adjust your thoughts.....

1. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith;

2. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.

3. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;

4. Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.

5. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.

6. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.

7. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.

8. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated.

9. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.

10. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.

11. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal.

12. As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensible, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible.

13. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty.

14. And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty.

15. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God;

16. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.

17. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord;

18. And yet they are not three Lords but one Lord.

19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;

20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords.

21. The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten.

22. The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten.

23. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

24. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits.

25. And in this Trinity none is afore or after another; none is greater or less than another.

26. But the whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal.

27. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.

28. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.

29. Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

30. For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man.

31. God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of His mother, born in the world.

32. Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.

33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.

34. Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.

35. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of that manhood into God.

36. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.

37. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ;

38. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead;

39. He ascended into heaven, He sits on the right hand of the Father, God, Almighty;

40. From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

41. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies;

42. and shall give account of their own works.

43. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting and they that have done evil into everlasting fire.

44. This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved.

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father [and the Son]; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.