You would be hard pressed to think "all creation" does not speak of Gen. 1:1. For one, the very next verse (v. 16) speaks of thrones, dominions, rulers, both in heaven and on earth. How do you go from thinking "all creation" only means humans, when just a few short words away (even in the same breath) it goes on to speak of the heavenly and earthly authorities? The issue, is: If this does refer to Gen. 1:1, then it cannot speak of Christ as the first created thing, because it does not refer back to Prov. 8 (or Sirach 1:4), where Wisdom is said to be created before Gen. 1 ever occurs.

And further, it may be of some use of sticking to the context of Colossians or to other Pauline narratives, instead of going to outside sources like Mark. Because in Colossians, Paul speaks of "all creation under heaven," (1:23) which is equivalent to "all things created... on earth" (1:16). Thus, when he speaks of "all creation" (unqualified), he is intending his reader to think of the collective whole = "all things created in heaven and on earth."

Why don’t you see that Paul uses two entirely different terms here? v15 - Jesus is the Firstborn of all creation (pas ktisis); V16-17 - “For all things (ta panta) were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible; whether thrones, or lordships, or rulers, or authorities, all things (ta panta) have been created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things (panton), and all things (ta panta) have subsisted in Him”.

So, in spite of your downvote, I stand by my answer that “all creation” (pas ktisis) refers only to the entire humanity, of whom Jesus is the Firstfruit and “all things” (ta panta) refers to “thrones, dominions, rulers, both in heaven and on earth” as you say. [When I study the Scripture, I don’t deliberately connect or disconnect to other verses to adjust them to my theology. I perceive that Scripture establishes the true theology and I change myself accordingly].

So, NO, “all creation (pas ktisis)” does not refer to “the collective whole = all things created in heaven and on earth” as you claim. But, “ta panta (all things)” does that! [While seeking truth, I don’t limit myself only to Paul. I take the whole Scripture as the Word of God].

You said, "When I study the Scripture, I don't deliberately connect or disconnect to other verses to adjust them to my theology." But you are. Col. 1:16 is apart of a larger sentence that extends back to v. 13 and continues through to v. 17. Meaning, vv. 13-17 is apart of one long sentence. Instead of reading Paul in his proper context, you go to Mark. Why? If that's not "deliverately" connecting or disconnecting other verses to adjust to your theology, then what is?

You are simply assuming (and falsely) that if "all creation" refers to Gen. 1:1, that this equates to some type of Arian statement, but that is a faulty assumption, because Arians do not think Christ is the first one created in the series of Gen. 1. They believe that Christ pre-existed Gen. 1, and that His creation happens back in Prov. 8, long before Gen. 1 ever takes place. You are imposing a faulty paradigm by taking their belief and imposing them on your view of creation. But they do not have the same view of creation as you do.

What Paul says in 1:16 is no different than what we see in Rev. 5:13. Yet, Rev. 5:13 does not use τὰ πάντα, but "every creature" (πᾶν κτίσμα). The language Paul uses in Col. 1:16 is common language found in a number of texts (Rom. 11:36; 1 Cor 8:6; Ephesians 3:9; Heb 2:10; Gen 1:31; Neh 9:6; Eccl 3:11, 11:5; Job 8:3; Jer 10:16) where it, “belongs to the standard rhetoric of Jewish monotheism, in which it constantly refers, quite naturally, to the whole of the created reality” (Richard Bauckham, God Crucified: Monotheism and Christology, 32).

“in whom we have the redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of the sins, The Preeminence of Christ who is the image of the invisible God, first-born of all creation (pas ktisis), because in him were the all things (ta panta) created, those in the heavens, and those upon the earth, those visible, and those invisible, whether thrones, whether lordships, whether principalities, whether authorities; all things (ta panta) through him, and for him, have been created, and himself is before all (panton), and the all things (ta panta) in him have consisted” (YLT).

Here, “all creation” (pas ktisis) refers only to the entire humanity with no connection to Genesis 1:1 and “all things” (ta panta) refers to the whole creation; animate and inanimate things in heaven and earth. The “ta panta” predates and includes Gen 1:1. In both the cases, Jesus cannot be the first created. As the Firstborn or Firstfruit from among the dead humanity (pas ktisis), Jesus is not the first created. As the Creator of “all things” (ta panta), He is separate from them because ta panta were created “in Him”, “through Him”, and “for Him”.

I went to Mark 16:15 because “pas ktisis” is mentioned there. You accused me of going outside Pauline writings, yet you yourself went to Revelation 5:13. That is okay with me. But the terminology used in there is not “pas ktisis” but “pas ktisma”. The latter refers to all the animate things including non-human living things. It doesn’t appear to include inanimate things which “ta panta” includes also. So I am waiting yet to be corrected by you.

To take "all creation" to only refer to humanity requires a great deal of reading into the text what is not present, and not allowing Paul to define his own terms. "All creation" is the same target category as "all things in heaven and on earth," and no commentary I am aware of thinks otherwise. I have just about every commentary on Colossians within the last 50 years, and I know of not a single one that suggests otherwise. The nail in the coffin for you is the equation of "all creation under heaven" (1:23) = "all things created... on earth" (1:16). You were corrected 10 comments ago.

To say that "all creation" is not a reference to Gen. 1 is an understatment in light of the fact that Gen. 1:26-28 is alluded to twice in the very sentence: Once in 1:15 ("image of the invisible God") and again in 1:16 ("all things in the heavens and on earth"). The phrase, "all creation" is wedged right between these two allusions to Gen. 1. It is contextual suicide to suggest anything else.

The Markan example is contextually displaced. There is good reason to believe that the author of Revelation was aware of Paul's letter to the Colossians (cf. Rev 3:14), because Paul specifically refers to the church of Laodecia (Col. 4:16). Contextually, Rev. 5:13 is (like Col. 1:15) in reference to the exalted Christ. The thematic connection between Rev. 5:13 and Col. 1:15-16 is what you lack with the Markan account. You need to make an argument from something thematically and contextually related, not just jolt in a direction you want to with no contextual warrant.

The reading is simple: Jesus is the Firstborn of “all creation” (pas ktisis). The meaning is clear: Jesus is the first resurrected Person from the “entire humanity” (no connection to animals or inanimate things here). Paul defines his own term here: “the gospel proclaimed to ‘every creature’ (pas ktisis) under heaven” (Col 1:23). We know the gospel is preached only to human beings; not to any animals or inanimate things. Mark also says the same thing: “preach the gospel to the ‘all creation’ (pas ktisis)”.

So, despite 50 years of commentaries, you have Paul (and Mark) defining his own terms very clearly. I didn’t say Gen 1. No, I said Gen 1:1 where the material Universe is created. That has no direct connection to “all creature” (pas ktisis). That has every connection to “ta panta” (all things). So I didn’t do any “contextual suicide”. “Contextually”, Mark 16:15 and Col 1:15 are “thematically related” because the Author of Scripture is God and it is the same Spirit who inspired all the Scripture. Both the verses, talk about gospel preached to “all humanity”.

Nephosh, this is very poor reasoning. You run to an isolated text in Mark (and ignore Mk 10:6, Mk 13:19 in the process) to explain a text in Paul, when Paul tells you precisely what he means. This is irresponsible, unless you can show how the text in Mark corresponds with what Paul says in Colossians. One of the issues, is that you are reading from the KJV, which translates Col. 1:15 as "every creature." But as I have pointed out, this same language is used in Col. 1:23 ("all creation under heaven") which is stating precisely what Col. 1:16 does ("created all things... on earth").

The way one should determine a terms use, is not just flipping to any random text that you think best suits you. Instead, exegetes should examine the immediate context (Col. 1:15, 1:23), then ask the question how the AUTHOR uses the term in other contexts (Rom. 1:20, Rom. 8:19, Rom. 8:20, Rom. 8:21, Rom. 8:22, Rom. 8:39, 2Cor. 5:17, Gal. 6:15). From there, one can expand into other source material (like Mark) but only if there is a clear thematic link to what Paul says. It would probably be advisable to also take notice of how many times Mark uses the term.

@WilliamJordan – You constantly miss my point. I am not talking about “ktisis”. Col 1:15 talks about “pas ktisis” and Paul himself qualifies his particular term in verse 23 as “gospel preached to pas ktisis (all creation)”. The same term is used by Mark 16:15 as “preach gospel to pas ktisis (all creation)”. So, Mark is not a random or an isolated verse.

For your information, I very rarely use KJV. So, I agree with you that in Col 1:23, “gospel preached to pas ktisis (all creation) under heaven” refers to the whole humanity. But I disagree that “created ta panta (all things) on earth” has the same meaning. “Ta panta” includes animals, plants, humanity and inanimate things.

Excuse me: The focus of 1:16 is not plants, and animals (though it may include them). It is the rulers, authorities, thrones, and dominions that are explicitly mentioned. The "animate" things you suggest of in 1:15, are the very things that 1:16 is speaking of. Thus, 1:15's use of "all creation" = "all things created in heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers." That is the primary focus of 1:16, though it may include the inanimate. Whichever, 1:15 is also speaking of the same target category. 1:16 (like 1:15) is all inclusive.

I am not missing your point. There is a difference in "missing" a point and disagreeing. I am the latter: I disagree. The issue for you, is: You ARE missing the point I'm making. That is: When 1:23 speaks of "ALL CREATION under heaven" that is equivalent to "ALL THINGS... on earth." There is no difference in meaning despite your bad attempt at trying to distinguish 1:15's "ALL CREATION" from 1:16's "ALL THINGS." 1:23 uses the same phraseology as 1:15, and does not mean anything semantically different than "all things... on earth."

All creation (1:15) = all things created in heaven and on earth (1:16), just like: All creation under heaven (1:23) = all things created... on earth (1:16)

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

I would also add, that Paul's use of the term, οὐρανοῖς ("heavens") in 1:16 is plural, and includes the "invisible" realms that are detailed out as the verse progresses: Rulers, dominions, and authorities (cf. Col. 2:15; Rom. 8:38-39; Eph. 1:20-21; 3:10).

My point is simple and straightforward: Jesus is the Firstborn of pas ktisis (all creation) which is the entire humanity. How do I know this? Paul defines in v23 pas ktisis (all creation) as humanity to which Gospel is preached, of which Paul became a minister. I am not aware of the Gospel ever preached by Paul, the “minister”, to things in the heavens or invisible things which together constitute ta panta (all things). So, ta panta includes more than pas ktisis. In other words, ta panta is all inclusive and connecting to Gen 1:1 but pas ktisis is not!

No, Nephesh. 1:16 exclusively mentions animate beings. Whether you want to take that as a reference to grass, trees, and other objects is one thing. But you cannot escape the fact that it includes animate beings. This is categorically the same as what is intended in 1:15. There is no distinction. Whatever distinction you are making is not derived from Pauline usage or from the immediate context.

JW's like to think there is a distinction between the terms, but you are committing the same mistake they are. They understand 1:15 as a reference to Prov. 8, but Paul never uses ktisis (or pas ktsis) to ever refer to Prov. 8, but always within the natural order of created things (invisible/visible).

There is nothing different from TA PANTA and PAS KTISIS. The terms naturally recall the same phenomenon. There is no way to get out of the fact that "all things created" (1:16) has any other meaning than "all creation" (1:15), especially in light of the fact that other authors do not make that same distinction as you try to impose back onto Paul.

You are simply trying way too hard for a solution that is so much simpler, and has twice the sting.

I think I have said enough on the difference between “pas ktisis” and “ta panta”. No more from me. You may reject it and it is okay with me. As for JW, they will not go too far with the distinction. “Pas ktisis” does not reach Gen 1:1, let alone Prov 8. “Ta panta” includes everything including Gen 1:1 and Prov 8 but then “ta panta” is created “in”, “through” and “for” Jesus. Thus Jesus is not part of “ta panta” and hence not created.

If 1:16 reaches Gen. 1:1 (and it does), then so does 1:15. The distinction you wish for is simply not there. 1:16 includes animate (and possibly inanimate) created things. And so does 1:15. Christ can be apart of creation from the vantage point of His incarnation, hence He is a man. But is now an exalted man who have been given authority over that creation. But that is because that same realm of creation was created by Him and through Him. Therefore, He is not God's "first created thing." The exaltation of Christ refutes any such notion of a lowly created Christ.

Thanks for the conversation