Quote:
Malachi
The above is not relevant to this discussion. I was studying the GT since I could read. I was a Trinitarian myself until I was about 26 years old and discovered thru studying the GT without the commentaries that G-d was not Triune.


I don't know where this will lead to, but OK.
I would not testify of myself to be a "Trinitarian" (though I believe trinitarian), I won't say: Hello, I'm a trinitarian christian believer. This is man-made distinction. The point is that in the historic developpement of Christianity, and in countering heresies, it became necessary to formulate Scripture-revelation in doctrines with the use of Greek philosophical concepts.

Quote:
Malachi:
First, The word "all" can carry with it the understanding of exceptions to the ALL if the context demands it, (there are many examples of this) and this context clearly does since he is first of all revealed as a creation.
Second, "Other" is a semantic part of "pas"(Greeek) according to context. As I said there are many examples of this. Col. 1:15 is one of those contexts. Now let's correctly translate this to english verse 15: he is a creation, and in verse 16: For by him were all (other) things created......all (other) things were created by him,for him; and verse 17: And he is before all (other) things, and by him all (other) things consist.


OK; I can accept that.

Quote:
Malachi
Do you agree then that wherever the phrase "firstborn OF something" is found that the firstborn is always a part of the group?


Yes.

Quote:
Malachi
Even if a firstborn possess preeminence among the group and the heir, he is still a part of the group and he is still the first one born. There are no biblical exceptions. To deny the primary meaning of the word in regard to Jesus is pure bias at work..........

The GT nor the Hebrew Bible calls YHWH the begining of the creation by G-d, where of where did you get that?
Also Revelations 3:14, proves beyond doubt that the so called 2nd person of the Trinity is a creation by G-d.
In fact, like I said before, wherever the phrase "beginning"(arche) OF something occurs, the beginning is always a part of the group or class. You have the same scenario here with "arche" as you have with "firstborn" in Colossians. Just as "firstborn"(prototokos), so it is with "arche"(beginning). If they are used with OF, then they are a PART of the same group or class as what follows the OF. Both in Colossians and Revelation, what follows the OF is CREATION.


1. It is not uncommon in Scripture that something is said about God or Jesus, and that something is only part of who He is: a matter of highlighting a specific characteristic. Now this may be the case with: he is firstborn: that is: he is the heir. And it is not said to state he was created.

2. But if it refers to his being created, it could point to his human existence, because Jesus as a man was created/generated, there is no doubt about that. It can also be that speaking of the words create/creation is confusing in relation to the Trinity.

3. There is something with the word 'creation'; Jesus, the man, was created (he was fully man). I can agree with that. But if God does something within the realm of eternity, outside our created space-time-zone, and outside the realm of the created visible and created invisible thing (God created everything visible and invisible); but if God does something within eternity, within His own domain: can you call that "creation"? I don't think so. That is why I think it is said in the The Nicene Creed: "and born of the Father before all ages. .....Begotten not made, consubstantial to the Father, by whom all things were made."

When God speaks He expresses Himself: His Word; He acts (we don't have other ways of speaking of the mystery of God); but His action is not necessarily creation. This is all 'happening' within the realm of eternity: so He is from eternity: 'before all ages'. We are trying to say something here about 'things' totally apart from creation, apart from time-space. That is where the Word was 'begotten' or 'generated' or 'brought forth', but not 'created'. 'To create' is a verb that relates to creation: what is created.

Quote:
Malachi
I have demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that the "firstborn OF something" is a member OF the SOMETHING.


From my point of view this can be understood as a compliment/confirmation: because this is exactly where it is all about in the gospel: that He has become a member of creation; he became one of His people, and one with his people.
The mystery of the Christ is about God and man, Creator and creation. Christ is both, somehow.

Quote:
Malachi
The grammar employed in Col 1: verse 16 clearly shows Christ to be the instrument of creation employed by someone else, not the originator of creation. So your misunderstanding of the Greek continues.


Christ being the instrument of creation: that I subscribe. He is.
God created everything through Him. And that was/is possible because He is the Word of God: God's Mode of Expression, and thus within God, being God, but not created:
begotten (or born) from God, not made, before all times.
A creature cannot create heaven and earth.

Quote:
Malachi:
Prov 8 shows that this "production" was from times "earlier than the earth", so that could not apply to his becoming a son at Luke. You started with that and came up again with the doctrine of man claming it is the word of G-d.


It seems to me, that if one wants to use Prov. 8 as pointing to Christ (and I think this can be done from Christian perspective), then it may refer to His pre-existence as the Word/Wisdom 'within the bosom of the Father'. For in Jesus even more then Salomon was here (Luke 11:31).

Prov.8:24 When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no fountains abounding with water.

Wisdom was 'begotten', born under woe's, when there were no depths.
Prov. 8 says: God created everything through His Eternal Wisdom. His wisdom He did not create, but He 'brought forth' His wisdom.

Greetings
Aad