By: Justin Angelos | October 25, 2021
Certain religious traditions, such as the Jehovah Witness movement will claim that Jesus was created. It is argued that when Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:16) that he does not make a claim to divinity. They believe Jesus died on the cross for our sins, but they do not believe Jesus is God, and nor do they worship Jesus as God.[1] A few Jehovah Witness missionaries told me that Colossians 1:15 is proof that Jesus did not eternally exist, but that Jesus is finite and created. If we carefully examine Colossians 1:15, is the apostle Paul really saying that Jesus was created? The short answer is an emphatic no. Colossians 1:15 says, “The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.” I think the mistake the Jehovah’s Witnesses are making is looking up the phrase “firstborn” in an English dictionary. They draw their conclusion based on what the phrase means in an English dictionary, first as an adjective: in the order of birth; eldest, or as a noun: a firstborn child, a primary result or product.[2] The phrase “firstborn” in Greek, especially in Paul’s day, did not mean the same thing. The Greek word for “firstborn” (πρωτοτοκος prōtotokos) according to Greek scholars like Bill Mounce is the definition of first-born, Luke 2:7; Hebrews 11:28; in NT prior in generation, Col. 1:15; a firstborn head of a spiritual family, Rom. 8:29; Heb. 1:6; firstborn, as possessed of the peculiar privilege of spiritual generation, Heb. 12:23.[3]
If the apostle Paul wanted to communicate that Jesus was created, he could have used the Greek word for first created which is, πρωτοκτισις but Paul did not use this word, instead he used the Greek word for “firstborn.” The Jews understood the term firstborn to refer to a position or a rank, basically, firstborn in Jewish custom meant, all that his father possessed was his. The Son is the appointed heir of all things (Hebrews 1:12) [4] Even if you convince the person you’re talking to that they have misunderstood Colossians 1:15 usually missionaries from the Jehovah’s Witness church will resort to John 3:16 as a proof text that Jesus was created by saying that “begotten” means Jesus was created. I think there is a similarity between Colossians 1:15 and John 3:16 and by that, I mean, the Greek word for begotten is μονογεης, ές which means, one and only, unique, only-born in respect to a particular generation.[5]
John 3:16 is not saying that Jesus was created by God, if John wanted to communicate that Jesus was created, he could or would have used the Greek word γενναω, which means “give birth, to be born, produce.”[6] Matthew 1:20 uses the aorist of γεννηθεν which can be translated as “conceived”. So, I think it is safe to say that, the Greek words “firstborn” and “begotten” refer to the relationship between the Father and Son, and have nothing to do with Jesus being finite or created; especially, when we look at the Bible as a whole, scripture teaches that Jesus Christ is eternal, uncreated, and God incarnate. (John 1:1-14) My former professor who teaches New Testament Greek at Biola University, Dr. Gary Manning, said, “If Christian’s do not have at least a basic understanding of Greek they will always be at the mercy of those who claim to know.”
About the Author
As the newest member of Bellator Christi, Seattle native Justin Angelos brings a passion for evangelism and discipleship along with theology and apologetics. He has studied at Biola University and Liberty University. Justin focuses on providing help for those who suffer from emotional and anxiety issues.
Notes
[1] https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/believe-in-jesus/
[2] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/firstborn
[3] William D. Mounce, The Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids Michigan: Zondervan, 1993), 124.
[4] https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/definition/firstborn.htm
[5] William D. Mounce, 125.
[6] William D. Mounce, 127.
Digging Deeper
Curtis Evelo, “Biblical Hermeneutics is No Pumpkin Spice,” BellatorChristi.com (Oct. 4, 2021), https://bellatorchristi.com/2021/10/04/biblical-hermeneutics-is-no-pumpkin-spice/.
Michelle Johnson, “Athanasius of Alexandria,” BellatorChristi.com (Dec. 31, 2020), https://bellatorchristi.com/2020/12/31/athanasius-of-alexandria/.
Brian Chilton, “Essential Doctrines (Part 7): The Trinity,” BellatorChristi.com (March 4, 2014), https://bellatorchristi.com/2014/03/04/essential-doctrines-part-7-the-trinity/.
Copyright 2021. BellatorChristi.com.
FYI, your comment that Paul could have used πρωτόκτίσις if he meant to call the Son a creature introduces an anachronism to the discussion.
πρωτόκτίσις (“first-created”) wasn’t widely used until the post-Apostolic period. An acquaintance searched the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae and found the term wasn’t used until the time of Clement of Alexandria. Moreover, the distinction you are trying to assert didn’t exist when the New Testament was written.
As John Patrick observed:
“Clement repeatedly identifies the Word with the Wisdom of God, and yet he refers to Wisdom as the first-created of God; while in one passage he attaches the epithet ‘First-created,’ and in another ‘First-begotten,’ to the Word. But this seems to be rather a question of language than a question of doctrine. At a later date a sharp distinction was drawn between ‘first-created’ and ‘first-born’ or ‘first-begotten,’ but no such distinction was drawn in the time of Clement.” (Clement of Alexandria), p. 103
Here are the likely reasons why Paul called Jesus “firstborn” instead of “first-created”:
1. First-created wouldn’t imply familial primacy the way firstborn does, as the firstborn had special privileges in Jewish culture. In light of Christ’s exalted status as one second only to God himself, retaining the sense of primacy was important to Paul.
2. First-created lacks the familial relatedness and intimacy that firstborn naturally connotes. The Father/Son metaphor found throughout the NT in reference to God and Christ made it important to retain the familial relatedness and intimacy.
3. The phrase “first-created of all creation” would have destroyed the parallelism between “firstborn of all creation” and “firstborn from the dead.”
4. Paul may have felt that πρωτόκτίσις πάσης κτίσεως sounds as goofy in Greek as I think the corresponding “first-created of all creation” sounds in English. It may be catchy-cutsie when
composing a humorous ditty, but Paul may have felt it unsuitable in the more serious context of Col. 1.
5. The very suggestion that πρωτόκτίσις should have been used if Paul meant to identify the Son as a created being is anachronistic, as the later distinction between “firstborn” and “first-begotten” or “first-created” didn’t exist at the time Paul wrote his letters.
Sean,
Thank you for your very insightful comments. You have given us a lot of food for thought as we consider the nature and etymology of the term πρωτόκτίσις.
Blessings,
Dr. Brian Chilton
Thirteen English translations of Hebrews 11:17 say that Abraham offered up his “only begotten” son: KJV, ASV, BRG, DARBY, DRA, GNV, JUB, MEV, NASB1995, NMB, RGT, WYC, YLT. Others say his “only son” and “one and only”. Although I can’t read Greek, Genesis 25:1-6 (especially verse 6) tells that Abraham had other sons. Genesis also tells us Ishmael was born before Isaac and the others. Ergo, it sure seems that the original word must have a meaning other than “the one who was born before any others” and probably doesn’t mean or doesn’t always mean “the only one who was born”.
A couple of newer translations say he offered up his unique son (EXB, HCSB, ISV).
This must indicate that the original word (Strong’s G3439, transliterated monogenēs) must have carried a different meaning than our English translators used starting with Wycliffe (I think). Perhaps “one in a class by itself”, according to Michael Heiser, Unseen Realm; and probably others.
Great point!