Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professors, theologians, and those interested in exegetical analysis of biblical texts. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Considering the significance of the phrases, "on the earth", and "in heaven", and the words, "through him and for him", what is Jesus being credited with here - if anything?
Colossians 1:16 (NIV): For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.
The message is clarified in the last part of the scripture: "all things have been created through him and for him"
"On earth" is in contrast to "in heaven", and represents the same idea as "visible and invisible". He created all things in heaven and also all things not in heaven (so, on earth). It's a literary figure trying to say nothing is excluded. It may be ok to argue that heaven and earth itself are not included, but this omission should not lead us to the conclusion that these were explicitely not created by Him.
GEN 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth
JOHN 1:1 In the beginning was the Word,
JOHN 1:14 And the Word became flesh
COL 1:16 For by Him all things were created [snip] All things were created through Him and for Him.
You asked ...”what is Jesus being credited with here” - Answer, All things. That is, everything. Without him there would be not be anything.
Jesus is ‘being credited’ with being the Word.
Jesus made things ON the earth and IN the heavens says Paul.
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
16 For by Him all things were created,
Rather this should be 'for in him were all things created' - as is noted further on, all things have been created through Him and for Him - not BY him.
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. Col 1:15-16
Jesus is not THE creator in this passage. Jesus is 'the reason', 'the crux' of all that came to be.
Clearly, nothing here speaks of a Genesis creation. But rather, the preceding verses talk of the Father's design and the kingdom that is imminent.
Jesus being the firstborn into this new structure - the kingdom. The church is the beginnings of the kingdom - to prepare the kings and priests to serve in that future age.
All creation has been prepared to run a course that leads to this next time, the next age, the kingdom. Jesus is the front-runner (Heb 6:20) of all to make the transition from flesh to spirit life. No one has done this before him - or he would not be the firstborn. The destiny of all men is to be reborn into spirit life - Jesus is the first to accomplish this.
For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit 1 Pet 3:18
He is also 'the firstborn of many brethren' Rom 8:29
so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. Col 1:18b
No Creator of all things could possibly - "come to have first place in everything".
For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him (Jesus), and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself (God), having made peace through the blood of His (Jesus) cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven. Col 1:19-20
Jesus came and told his disciples, “I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth. Matt 28:18
"I have been given", this too is not about being the supreme Creator, but being the one the Creator has deemed His 2IC, His Captain and Master of all under Him - exalted to the place above everything except God. 1 Cor 15:27
Finally, we have closing this passage of the saving work of the Lord Jesus, a wonderous mention of things in 'heaven' being reconciled - what that may entail is for another Q.
The following statement was made: "Jesus was not ‘in the beginning’. Actually, Jesus existed "BEFORE" the beginning of Genesis 1:1.
Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1 start out with the same words, "in beginning." The definite article "the" has been supplied. The "Word of God" (from John 1:1) was there before the creation of time, space and mass. This means John's beginning "antecedes" the Genesis "beginning."
The main thought in the Genesis 1:1 beginning is on "WHAT HAPPENED" in the beginning. The main thought of John's 1:1 beginning is "WHO EXISTED" in the beginning.
This is why at John 1:3 states, "All things came into being by/through Him, and apart (or WITHOUT Him) NOTHING came into being that has come into being."
The Apostle Paul backs this up where he wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit Colossians 1:16."For by/in/through 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 by/in/through Him and for Him."
There is a difference between "by" and "through." By is used to indicate "origin" or by the agency of. Through is used to indicate "the manner in which something is achieved.
Notice what Colossians 1:17 states, "And He is before all things, and in Him all things HOLD TOGETHER." Not only did Jesus always exist (John 1:1; 8:58), but He holds all creation together.
So, if Jesus Christ is only a man like the rest of us that God choose to die for the sins of the world (and He never preexisted His incarnation) why is He identified or presented as the Agent of creation?
This in view of the fact that God said at Isaiah 44:24, "Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, I, the Lord am the maker of all things. Stretching out the heavens BY MYSELF, And spreading out the earth ALL ALONE."
The book of Colossians was to provide a meaningful refutation of the proto-Gnostic ideology concerning spirit versus matter. The Gnostic system did not allow Jesus to be the Creator of something so inherently evil as “matter.”
In light of this, Paul provides a clear anti-Gnostic polemic by firmly demonstrating that Jesus the Son of God did in fact create all things. Note the clear and forceful (and even redundant) way he presents this:
“By Him [en autō] all things [panta] were created … all things [panta] have been created through Him [di’ autou] and for Him [eis auton]. He is before all things [autos estin pro pantōn], and in Him [en autō] all things [panta] hold together” (emphasis added).
The following grammatical aspects pointedly codify Paul’s argument:
"It is significant that Paul does not use the more popular terms pas or pan, both of which had meanings in Greek philosophy that allowed the creation to be a part of God or God a part of creation (as in pantheism). Instead, he uses a term that makes the creation a concrete, separate entity with the real existence."
Paul utilizes four different prepositions to magnify his affirmation that the Son was the Agent of creation: All things were created “by/in Him” (en + dative; vv. 16, 17); “through Him” (dia + genitive; v. 16); “for Him” (eis + accusative; v. 16); and, He is “before all things” (pro + genitive; v. 17). To say again, Paul is speaking here of the Son, not the Father (cf. v. 14).
As a final point, as with John 1:3, what immediately demolishes the “Son in view” theory is that Paul specifically states that “all things” were created “through [dia] Him [autou]” (viz., the Son). As observed above, we find the preposition dia, followed by the genitive autou grammatically revealing that the Son was the actual Creator Himself. There is no stronger way in which Paul could have articulated that the Son was the real and actual Agent of creation.
If Paul wanted to convey the idea that the Son was merely “in view” of the Father or an absent mere conceptual instrument of creation, as Oneness teachers assert, he would not have used dia followed by the genitive. Rather, he would have exclusively used dia followed by the accusative, but he does not. The Oneness theological assumption that the Son was not the Agent of creation, but merely in view of creation, cannot stand grammatically or contextually—it changes the intended meaning of the text and ignores the chief theme of Paul’s letter.
