Colossians 1:15

Colossians 1:15. Who is. In Colossians 1:15-20 we have a description of the person of Christ (‘the Son of His love'), well adapted to counteract the errors which the Apostle wishes to oppose. The subject is the Son of God, but ‘in Colossians 1:15-17, the reference is rather to the pre-incarnate Son in His relation to God and to His own creatures, in Colossians 1:18-20 to the incarnate and now glorified Son in His relations to His Church' (Ellicott). The clauses beginning ‘because' (Colossians 1:16; Colossians 1:19, ‘for,' E. V.) give the proof respectively for the two leading thoughts in Colossians 1:15; Colossians 1:18. Meyer, however, says: ‘The only correct reference is to His whole Person, which in the theanthropic status of His present heavenly Being is continuously what His Divine Nature (considered in itself) was before the Incarnation, so that by virtue of the identity of His Divine Nature, we can attribute the same predicates to the Exalted One as to the Logos.' But this virtually concedes all that is claimed above. On the entire passage, comp. Hebrews 1:3, etc.

The image of the invisible God. This indicates the relation to God, immanent and permanent. On this relation rests the actual revelation of God in the Person of Christ, but the immediate reference here is not to the latter. It is true that ‘invisible,' which is emphatic in the original, suggests that the image becomes visible, as indeed all the terms used to express the relation of the Son to the Father seem to imply revelation (‘word,' ‘effulgence,' ‘very image,' ‘form'), but a careful comparison of all such expressions forbids our making this the essential thought. The Fathers generally regard these words as an assertion that the Son is of the same substance as the Father, against the Arians. Meyer and others, who refer the verse to the Exalted Christ, still admit the correctness of this patristic explanation.

The firstborn of (or, ‘before') every creature (or, ‘all creation'). ‘The first born with respect to every creature; He was born before every creature. He is not the first created, the previous clause as well as the terms here chosen forbid such a view. ‘Every creature' is a more exact rendering than ‘all creation.' The former individualizes, the latter sums up as a whole. The polemic purpose of the Apostle also sustains the former sense. The term ‘first born' expresses here priority in time, although there maybe an inferential reference to superiority in rank. The objections to making the latter the main thought are: (1.) that it gives the preference to a secondary and figurative meaning, where the primary one is very appropriate; (2.) it throws into the background the relation to the Father, which is not only indicated by the word itself, but given decided prominence by the close connection with the preceding clause. Hence those who adopt this view of ‘first born' consistently refer that clause also to the revelation of the Father in Christ rather than to the relation of the Son to the Father. But it must be added that while His priority in time shows His independence of creation, creation is not independent of Him, as He is here described. In this relation of the Son to the Invisible God is to be found the ground or condition of the whole creation. The next verse asserts that He is the conditional cause of the Universe, but this one seems to intimate that in virtue of His immanent relation to the Father, as the ‘Image' and ‘First born,' He holds the relation to the creation, which is subsequently defined. Although not included in the category of ‘creation,' He is most intimately linked with ‘every creature.'