Exploring Trinitarian Logic

[Wrangler]

This is supported by Colossians 1:16

Another false witness to God’s word.
because in connection with him all things were created in heaven and on earth, the visible and the invisible—whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through him and for him

Created ’through’ him (not ‘by’ him) indicates a tool used by the Creator as one shaped metal through an anvil.

 

[Wrangler]

"The world came to be..... (caused to exist)....through HIM">.

Who is Him, in the verse?

A.) Jesus

Language usage. Created through hard work and sacrifice does not make these the Creator. If have to abuse language because you got no where else to go and will not abandon your IDOL.

For us, there is one God, the Father. Jesus said the Father is the only true God. These are explicit anti-trinitarian formulations. You have to ignore them.

 

[amigo de christo]

Am i talking to St.Steven who never uses a bible, because he believes that its created by "errors"?

Listen.

John 1:10 says that Jesus '"made the world."""

This is supported by Colossians 1:16

That is not a mistranslation of the "original koine greek".

That verse is a fact, regarding the Word who Was GOD, in Jn 1, being the same as "US and OUR" in Genesis.

let me , allow me to tell you a common mindset amongst both of them men .
Interfaith . mark them words well . But its not just them . no there are more
who are already to some degree under the influence of the influencer and it will lead them
into unification , not under doctrine , but under what they all think is love and is of God .
And marvel not that they can often even strive against some of their own doctrines
and yet still be headed right into the same direction . Not all agree upon the others doctrines
BUT WHAT THEY DO AGREE Upon is this other version of love and bythat version IT WILL MERGE the
decieved of christendom and the false religoins to do all to find common ground
believing in one way or another they are serving the same GOD through this other version of love .
OH i suppose , in truth it is the same god they be serving , but reader take heed that ONE was not captilized .
GOD will not be denied , IF JESUS THE CHRIST IS denied , GOD IS DENIED . there is only one gospel
and it aint the social justice all inclusive pipe dream . ITS THE ONE that HOLLERS bodly and loudly
OF THE ABSOLUTE DIRE NEED TO BELIEVE , have FAITH IN HE WHOM GOD DID SEND , that be JESUS THE CHRIST .

 

[CadyandZoe]

Which proves that the Triune Godhead is biblical-correct?

J.

I don't think so. What do you mean?

 

[CadyandZoe]

"The world came to be..... (caused to exist)....through HIM">.

Who is Him, in the verse?

A.) Jesus

The term "through" doesn't necessarily indicate agency.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I’m not interested in the debates of other Christian theologians; I want to hear what you personally think.

J.

Okay, but I don't want to derail the topic, which is focused on the logic of Trinitarianism. One can not understand the logic of Trinitarianism apart from the axioms that form its basis.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Yes, but only because being "found in the form of a man", He voluntarily humbled Himself and emptied Himself (as it were) in obedience to the Father and in complete reliance on Him. I think Hephzibah expressed it well. And being God, pure, holy, with no darkness in Him, He could not sin (or at the very least He just never ever would)....which means He could not go against the will of the Father. He had to be God (perfectly holy) in order to obey and do the Father's will perfectly. Like our new man cannot sin, when/if we are walking in him....our new man has been created in the image of Christ and is of His Spirit and nature.

If Jesus couldn't sin because he was God, then why did the Holy Spirit lead him into the desert to be tested? What was the point of that?

Doesn't the New Testament teach us that Jesus was tempted in every way we were? (Hebrews 4:15) If Jesus couldn't sin because he was God, then how was his temptation like ours?

 

[Pierac]

Conveniently ignoring the verses that CLEARLY affirm the Messiah's divinity.


NEW TESTAMENT QUOTES OF PS. 110:1

Psalm 110:1 reads in the KJV, “The Lord (Jehovah) said unto my Lord, ‘Sit Thou at My right hand, Until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool”. Let me begin by saying that the phrase “My right hand” is not to be interpreted literally, but figuratively. “At my right hand” is a phrase often used in the Bible to express a position of power, authority and favor.

Ps. 110:1 is quoted in the New Testament seven times. By studying all seven occurrences we will learn a great deal of what this verse has to say about Who Christ is. We will see that this verse is quoted several times by our Lord Himself to prove that Messiah is the Son of God. But it is just as true that Messiah was the Son of man. Both are equally true, and neither truth detracts from the other.

The first time Ps. 110:1 is quoted in the New Testament is in the context of Matthew 22:41-44. In verse 41 we learn that Pharisees were gathered together and Jesus asked them, “What think ye of Christ, Whose Son is He”? And the Pharisees answered, “The Son of David” (verse 42). And our Lord’s answer is significant, “He said unto them, ‘How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool’. If David then called Him Lord, how is He his Son?”

The point Christ was making to these Pharisees was that David refers to the coming Messiah as “Lord” and this proves that the Messiah was going to be much more than only man. (Some believe that the Hebrew word “adoni“translated “Lord” in the phrase “said unto my Lord” is never used of God and therefore proves, in their minds, that Christ is not God since He is referred to in this verse as “adoni”. The paper on “Adoni” will prove from Scripture that the word is indeed used of God). Who could David, the King of Israel have possibly called Lord other than God Himself? No one. Therefore, the lesson of this discourse is that the Messiah, Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Going now to the second time Psalm 110:1 is quoted in the New Testament, we find it in Mark 12:36. Once again Christ asked, this time of the common people, “How say the scribes that Christ is the Son of David? For David Himself said by the Holy Ghost, ‘The Lord said unto My lord, sit Thou on My right hand, till I make Thine enemies Thy footstool. David therefore, himself calleth Him Lord; and whence is He then his son?” (verses 35-37). This is the same point made in the same way as we read in Matthew 22. That point being that David would not have called his own son “Lord” unless He were God.

Luke 20:41-42 is the third time Ps. 110:1 is quoted and it is quoted to prove the same point as was Matthew 22 and Mark 12. That David would not have called his own son “Lord” unless He was God.

Acts 2:34-35 is the fourth occurrence of the quote and shines a different light on the quote. In this context Peter is making the point stated in verse 30, “Therefore being a prophet (referring to David) and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, He would raise up Christ to sit on His throne”. As mentioned above, Christ is the Son of man and the Son of God. One truth does not negate the other. In this context, Peter is pointing to Christ as the Son of man. So when Peter, in verse 34 quotes Ps. 110:1 it is to show that Christ fulfilled the prophecy given to David, that “the fruit of his loins” will fulfill the prophecy of Ps. 110:1. To suggest that this proves that Christ is the Son of man is true, but we must also consider the other references to this Psalm which were quoted above to prove that Christ is the Son of God. Both are true, neither cancels out the other.

CAN JESUS CHRIST BE BOTH MAN AND GOD? – Right Word Truth

rightwordtruth.com

Right @Pierac?

J.

What part of my Agency post and Two Gods post..... did you not understand....??? So try to actually read the post of those whom you disagree... Then you can Woman UP.... and show me where I AM in error.... I'm waiting on you to use my Words against me... Like I did you... so many times and showed the whole forum.... how wrong you were...!!! Can you do the same... ???

 

[Johann]

The term "through" doesn't necessarily indicate agency.

In Him:

Greek: ἐν αὐτῷ (en autō)
This preposition ἐν (en) denotes the idea of being "in" or "within" a state or condition, often indicating the means or sphere within which an action takes place. In the context of "in Him" (i.e., "in Christ"), it expresses being united or incorporated into Christ.

Through Him:

Greek: δι' αὐτοῦ (di' autou)
The preposition δι' (di') followed by the genitive αὐτοῦ (autou) denotes agency or means, often translated as "through" or "by means of." It indicates that an action is accomplished by means of or through the person or instrument referred to (in this case, Jesus).

For Him:

Greek: εἰς αὐτόν (eis auton)
The preposition εἰς (eis) often conveys motion toward or purpose. In the phrase "for Him," it expresses purpose or direction, indicating that something is done with the intention or goal of honoring or serving Christ.

Of him (ex autou), through him (di' autou), unto him (eis auton). By these three prepositions Paul ascribes the universe (ta panta) with all the phenomena concerning creation, redemption, providence to God as the
Source (ex), the
Agent (di), the
Goal (eis).
For ever (eis tous aiōnas). “For the ages.” Alford terms this doxology in Rom_11:33-36 “the sublimest apostrophe existing even in the pages of inspiration itself.”

Rom_11:36 "for from Him and through Him and to Him are all things" These phrases refer to God the Father in this context (cf. 1Co_11:12), but are very similar to other NT passages which refer to God the Son (cf. 1Co_8:6; Col_1:16; Heb_2:10). Paul affirms that all things issue from God and return to God.

Through him (di' autou). As the intermediate and sustaining agent. He had already used en autōi (in him) as the sphere of activity.
And unto him (kai eis auton).

This is the only remaining step to take and Paul takes it (1Co_15:28) See note on Eph_1:10 for similar use of en autōi of Christ and in Col_1:19, Col_1:20 again we have en autōi, di' autou, eis auton used of Christ. See note on Heb_2:10 for di' hon (because of whom) and di' hou (by means of whom) applied to God concerning the universe (ta panta). In Rom_11:35 we find ex autou kai di' autou kai eis auton ta panta referring to God. But Paul does not use ex in this connection of Christ, but only en, dia, and eis. See the same distinction preserved in 1Co_8:6 (ex of God, dia, of Christ).



Jesus wasn't a mere "passive" Intermediatory but actively involved alongside the Father.

J.

 

[Magdala]

Because I'm not seeing the comparison at all, exact or inexact. H2O can be solid, liquid or vapor depending on temperature and pressure. How is the substance of water -- in any of its physical forms -- remotely analogous to the substance of God? After all, the "persons" of the Trinity are not forms of God.

I'm talking about how water exists in three states, each distinct, yet united as one, because they are the same substance: water. God exists in three Persons, each distinct, yet united as One because They are the same Essence: love. The purpose of this comparison doesn't go deeper than that and doesn't have to in order to help one understand that the Holy Trinity isn't three separate gods.

 

[Johann]

What part of my Agency post and Two Gods post..... did you not understand....??? So try to actually read the post of those whom you disagree... Then you can Woman UP.... and show me where I AM in error.... I'm waiting on you to use my Words against me... Like I did you... so many times and showed the whole forum.... how wrong you were...!!! Can you do the same... ???

I am a man, for the record, and what I pointed out is that you conveniently overlook the verses that clearly affirm Jesus is God. Even the ISBE, which you use, is "selectively" cited-affirming the Triune Godhead--do you understand that?

It’s not appropriate for you to correct me with that tone. You get that?

J.

 

[Pierac]

In Him:

Greek: ἐν αὐτῷ (en autō)
This preposition ἐν (en) denotes the idea of being "in" or "within" a state or condition, often indicating the means or sphere within which an action takes place. In the context of "in Him" (i.e., "in Christ"), it expresses being united or incorporated into Christ.

Through Him:

Greek: δι' αὐτοῦ (di' autou)
The preposition δι' (di') followed by the genitive αὐτοῦ (autou) denotes agency or means, often translated as "through" or "by means of." It indicates that an action is accomplished by means of or through the person or instrument referred to (in this case, Jesus).

For Him:

Greek: εἰς αὐτόν (eis auton)
The preposition εἰς (eis) often conveys motion toward or purpose. In the phrase "for Him," it expresses purpose or direction, indicating that something is done with the intention or goal of honoring or serving Christ.

Of him (ex autou), through him (di' autou), unto him (eis auton). By these three prepositions Paul ascribes the universe (ta panta) with all the phenomena concerning creation, redemption, providence to God as the
Source (ex), the
Agent (di), the
Goal (eis).
For ever (eis tous aiōnas). “For the ages.” Alford terms this doxology in Rom_11:33-36 “the sublimest apostrophe existing even in the pages of inspiration itself.”

Rom_11:36 "for from Him and through Him and to Him are all things" These phrases refer to God the Father in this context (cf. 1Co_11:12), but are very similar to other NT passages which refer to God the Son (cf. 1Co_8:6; Col_1:16; Heb_2:10). Paul affirms that all things issue from God and return to God.

Through him (di' autou). As the intermediate and sustaining agent. He had already used en autōi (in him) as the sphere of activity.
And unto him (kai eis auton).

This is the only remaining step to take and Paul takes it (1Co_15:28) See note on Eph_1:10 for similar use of en autōi of Christ and in Col_1:19, Col_1:20 again we have en autōi, di' autou, eis auton used of Christ. See note on Heb_2:10 for di' hon (because of whom) and di' hou (by means of whom) applied to God concerning the universe (ta panta). In Rom_11:35 we find ex autou kai di' autou kai eis auton ta panta referring to God. But Paul does not use ex in this connection of Christ, but only en, dia, and eis. See the same distinction preserved in 1Co_8:6 (ex of God, dia, of Christ).



Jesus wasn't a mere "passive" Intermediatory but actively involved alongside the Father.

J.

Really.... Beacuse God is on the Thrown in Rev 5 but not His chosen one... The Lamb of God.... He just gets to sit on the right... only after he is approved to take the Book out of the hand of HIS... GOD SITTING ON THE THRONE!!!

So in your theology... Taking a Book from God and having a seat next to God..... SOME how makes you God???

What part of... this do you not understand?
Rev 4:1 After these things I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven, and the first voice which I had heard, like the sound of a trumpet speaking with me, said, "Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after these things."
Rev 4:2 Immediately I was in the Spirit; and behold, a throne was standing in heaven, and One sitting on the throne.
Rev 4:3 And He who was sitting was like a jasper stone and a sardius in appearance; and there was a rainbow around the throne, like an emerald in appearance.
Rev 4:4 Around the throne were twenty-four thrones; and upon the thrones I saw twenty-four elders sitting, clothed in white garments, and golden crowns on their heads.
Rev 4:5 Out from the throne come flashes of lightning and sounds and peals of thunder. And there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God;
Rev 4:6 and before the throne there was something like a sea of glass, like crystal; and in the center and around the throne, four living creatures full of eyes in front and behind.
Rev 4:7 The first creature was like a lion, and the second creature like a calf, and the third creature had a face like that of a man, and the fourth creature was like a flying eagle.
Rev 4:8 And the four living creatures, each one of them having six wings, are full of eyes around and within; and day and night they do not cease to say, "HOLY, HOLY, HOLY is THE LORD GOD, THE ALMIGHTY, WHO WAS AND WHO IS AND WHO IS TO COME."

Rev 5:4 Then I began to weep greatly because no one was found worthy to open the book or to look into it;
Rev 5:5 and one of the elders *said to me, "Stop weeping; behold, the Lion that is from the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has overcome so as to open the book and its seven seals." 6 And I saw between the throne (with the four living creatures) and the elders a Lamb standing, as if slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God, sent out into all the earth.
Rev 5:7 And He came and took the book out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne.


This is why you fail.... only the chosen/ lamb can take the Book out of HIS GOD'S... Hand!!!

 

[Johann]

Really.... Beacuse God is on the Thrown in Rev 5 but not His chosen one... The Lamb of God.... He just gets to sit on the right... only after he is approved to take the Book out of the hand of HIS... GOD SITTING ON THE THRONE!!!

So in your theology... Taking a Book from God and having a seat next to God..... SOME how makes you God???

What part of... this do you not understand?
Rev 4:1 After these things I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven, and the first voice which I had heard, like the sound of a trumpet speaking with me, said, "Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after these things."
Rev 4:2 Immediately I was in the Spirit; and behold, a throne was standing in heaven, and One sitting on the throne.
Rev 4:3 And He who was sitting was like a jasper stone and a sardius in appearance; and there was a rainbow around the throne, like an emerald in appearance.
Rev 4:4 Around the throne were twenty-four thrones; and upon the thrones I saw twenty-four elders sitting, clothed in white garments, and golden crowns on their heads.
Rev 4:5 Out from the throne come flashes of lightning and sounds and peals of thunder. And there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God;
Rev 4:6 and before the throne there was something like a sea of glass, like crystal; and in the center and around the throne, four living creatures full of eyes in front and behind.
Rev 4:7 The first creature was like a lion, and the second creature like a calf, and the third creature had a face like that of a man, and the fourth creature was like a flying eagle.
Rev 4:8 And the four living creatures, each one of them having six wings, are full of eyes around and within; and day and night they do not cease to say, "HOLY, HOLY, HOLY is THE LORD GOD, THE ALMIGHTY, WHO WAS AND WHO IS AND WHO IS TO COME."

Rev 5:4 Then I began to weep greatly because no one was found worthy to open the book or to look into it;
Rev 5:5 and one of the elders *said to me, "Stop weeping; behold, the Lion that is from the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has overcome so as to open the book and its seven seals." 6 And I saw between the throne (with the four living creatures) and the elders a Lamb standing, as if slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God, sent out into all the earth.
Rev 5:7 And He came and took the book out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne.


This is why you fail.... only the chosen/ lamb can take the Book out of HIS GOD'S... Hand!!!

Please reread what I posted. It seems you're upset and trying to lash out, but that approach isn't going to work-Messiah is God in the flesh.

Your reaction has nothing to do with the content of my post. Stay focused. You are steel manning my case.

J.

 

[RedFan]

Take a breath and don't overthink and put words in my mouth. I'm talking about how water exists in three states, each distinct, yet united as one because they are the same substance: water. God exists in three Persons, each distinct, yet united as One because They are the same Essence: love. That's it. The purpose of this comparison doesn't go deeper than that and doesn't have to in order to help one understand the concept of the Holy Trinity.

I certainly agree that whatever God's ousia may be, it subsists in each of the three “Persons” within the Trinity. It may help to use a musical analogy here, one I am indebted to Jeremy Begbie for:

Think of a chord composed of three different notes, say the chord C major composed of the notes C, E and G. Each note is a sound, and when played together the C chord is likewise a sound. In each case the sound is recognizable as what we call “music.” By analogy of “deity” to “music,” each of the three persons, like each note of the chord, is deity (music), and together they form deity (music) through three distinct sounds (persons). But the real harmony is in the Trinity (chord). Played simultaneously, the individual notes comprising the chord are subsumed in a single identifiable sound; our ear does not immediately pick the chord apart (although we can do so intellectually, and on the sheet music). It’s just music to the ear. It’s just God.

Or maybe this one:

Consider the visible spectrum of light waves at frequencies between the limits of infrared and ultraviolet. The colors are distinct.

White is not on the spectrum, because white is not a “color” at all. Rather, white light is produced by combining the colors of the spectrum. More generally, white light is produced in combining three primary colors – red, green and blue. Thus combined, the distinct colors are not separate.

Distinct but not separate. Three colors. One light.



Similarly in the one God, "personhood" is distinct but not separate. Three persons. One God.

You see where I am going here. I am looking for a way to describe the three-in-one in a manner that preserves simultaneity. The water analogy doesn't do that.

 

[Magdala]

You see where I am going here. I am looking for a way to describe the three-in-one in a manner that preserves simultaneity. The water analogy doesn't do that.

I never said that it did, because I already know that it doesn't, but it doesn't have to in order to help anti-trinitarians understand that the Holy Trinity isn't three separate gods.

 

[CadyandZoe]

In Him:

Greek: ἐν αὐτῷ (en autō)
This preposition ἐν (en) denotes the idea of being "in" or "within" a state or condition, often indicating the means or sphere within which an action takes place. In the context of "in Him" (i.e., "in Christ"), it expresses being united or incorporated into Christ.

Through Him:

Greek: δι' αὐτοῦ (di' autou)
The preposition δι' (di') followed by the genitive αὐτοῦ (autou) denotes agency or means, often translated as "through" or "by means of." It indicates that an action is accomplished by means of or through the person or instrument referred to (in this case, Jesus).

For Him:

Greek: εἰς αὐτόν (eis auton)
The preposition εἰς (eis) often conveys motion toward or purpose. In the phrase "for Him," it expresses purpose or direction, indicating that something is done with the intention or goal of honoring or serving Christ.

Of him (ex autou), through him (di' autou), unto him (eis auton). By these three prepositions Paul ascribes the universe (ta panta) with all the phenomena concerning creation, redemption, providence to God as the
Source (ex), the
Agent (di), the
Goal (eis).
For ever (eis tous aiōnas). “For the ages.” Alford terms this doxology in Rom_11:33-36 “the sublimest apostrophe existing even in the pages of inspiration itself.”

Rom_11:36 "for from Him and through Him and to Him are all things" These phrases refer to God the Father in this context (cf. 1Co_11:12), but are very similar to other NT passages which refer to God the Son (cf. 1Co_8:6; Col_1:16; Heb_2:10). Paul affirms that all things issue from God and return to God.

Through him (di' autou). As the intermediate and sustaining agent. He had already used en autōi (in him) as the sphere of activity.
And unto him (kai eis auton).

This is the only remaining step to take and Paul takes it (1Co_15:28) See note on Eph_1:10 for similar use of en autōi of Christ and in Col_1:19, Col_1:20 again we have en autōi, di' autou, eis auton used of Christ. See note on Heb_2:10 for di' hon (because of whom) and di' hou (by means of whom) applied to God concerning the universe (ta panta). In Rom_11:35 we find ex autou kai di' autou kai eis auton ta panta referring to God. But Paul does not use ex in this connection of Christ, but only en, dia, and eis. See the same distinction preserved in 1Co_8:6 (ex of God, dia, of Christ).



Jesus wasn't a mere "passive" Intermediatory but actively involved alongside the Father.

J.

My problem with this solution is that, first, it contradicts the first chapter of Genesis, where we read that God created the world "through" his command, "Let there be . . . . and there was . . . ." Second, Paul is discussing the man Jesus as he writes, δι᾿ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται· The man Jesus Christ didn't exist until he was born to the virgin Mary.

 

[RedFan]

I never said that it did, because I already know that it doesn't, but it doesn't have to in order to help someone have a better understanding of the concept of the Holy Trinity, because right now most antitrinitarians, if not all, think trinitarians believe in three seperate gods. The water analogys helps show that we don't.

Fine. I don't see it as helpful to a better understanding, but maybe others will. Whatever works. Isolating the “stuff” of “Godness” strikes me as impossible to express in physical terms, so I prefer to stay away from tangible analogies like water (as opposed to sound or light). The physical structure of water, primarily its density, actually changes with temperature, which is a reason to be cautious in analogizing to its states to a triune God.

 

[Johann]

My problem with this solution is that, first, it contradicts the first chapter of Genesis, where we read that God created the world "through" his command, "Let there be . . . . and there was . . . ." Second, Paul is discussing the man Jesus as he writes, δι᾿ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται· The man Jesus Christ didn't exist until he was born to the virgin Mary.

What about the explicitly clear verses that affirm Jesus' preexistence? We don’t need to be scholars to recognize this truth.

Would you agree that the Logos/Messiah was merely a concept in the mind of YHWH? That certainly cannot align with Scripture.

δι᾿ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται-this directly points to the preexistent Messiah. If you are open to it, I can show you how the grammar clearly demonstrates that Jesus was far more than a passive "vessel," brother.

J.

 

[ProDeo]

Okay, but I don't want to derail the topic, which is focused on the logic of Trinitarianism. One can not understand the logic of Trinitarianism apart from the axioms that form its basis.

Correct, the Trinity can't be understood, only believed.

 

[Johann]

My problem with this solution is that, first, it contradicts the first chapter of Genesis, where we read that God created the world "through" his command, "Let there be . . . . and there was . . . ." Second, Paul is discussing the man Jesus as he writes, δι᾿ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται· The man Jesus Christ didn't exist until he was born to the virgin Mary.

@CadyandZoe


John 1:3
πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο
"All things were made through Him"

Joh 1:3 All things πάντα came into being ἐγένετο, through δι’ Him, αὐτοῦ and καὶ without χωρὶς Him αὐτοῦ not even οὐδὲ one [thing] ἕν came into being ἐγένετο that ὃ has come into being. γέγονεν.

ἐγένετο (egeneto): The aorist indicative middle/passive verb of γίνομαι, meaning "came into being" or "were made," indicates Jesus as the agent through whom creation occurred.


Colossians 1:16
ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα
"For by Him all things were created"

ἐκτίσθη (ektisthē): Aorist indicative passive verb of κτίζω, meaning "created," shows that all things were created in Him, with Him being the active sphere of creation.

τὰ πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται
"All things have been created through Him and for Him"

ἔκτισται (ektistai): Perfect indicative middle/passive verb of κτίζω, emphasizing the completeness and enduring results of His creative work.

Hebrews 1:2
δι’ οὗ καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς αἰῶνας
"Through whom also He made the worlds"

ἐποίησεν (epoiēsen): Aorist indicative active verb of ποιέω, meaning "made" or "created," indicating Jesus' direct and active role in creation.

1 Corinthians 8:6
δι’ οὗ τὰ πάντα καὶ ἡμεῖς δι’ αὐτοῦ
"Through whom are all things, and we exist through Him"

δι’ οὗ (di’ hou): Preposition διά with the genitive case indicates the instrumental agency of Christ in creation and sustaining life.

These passages collectively demonstrate that Jesus is presented as the divine agent actively participating in the creation of all things. The verbs and grammar leave no room for the interpretation that He was merely passive or secondary in this work.

I just read this and believe it brother.

J.