From: Wes.Williams@twcable.com
Date: Tue Feb 25 1997 - 11:39:49 EST
Dear Charles,
Thanks for the response. The semantics of the context of Col 1:15 has
already been addressed in this thread (after my post) in the post by
Rolf Furuli dated 2/23/97 3:29 am in response to Lee Martin dated
2/20/1997 8:32 am.
Sincerely,
Wes
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: PROTOTOKOS
Author: CEP7@aol.com at SMTP-PO
Date: 2/25/97 7:29 AM
In a message dated 2/20/1997 10:37:03 PM, Wes.Williams@twcable.com wrote:
<<Therefore, I think Paul's audience would naturally have understood the
expression as Jesus being part of the group of creation, the first. Or
perhaps a genitive of relation where Jesus is first in time in
relation to the rest of creation which was not first in time. But to
support PRWTOTOKOS + genitive as a genitive of subordination, one
would need to step well outside the plentiful LXX examples. Therefore,
rather than being appointed or placed as PRWOTOTOKOS, he IS the
PRWTOTOTKOS of all creation.>>
I think there is one thing you are overlooking here. None of the LXX examples
are contextually similar. The PRWTOTOTKOS PASHS KTISEWS is explained by v. 15.
in other words, the firstborn of creation is also the creator Himself (TA PANT
DI' AUTOU KAI EIS AUTON EKTISTAI). The creator cannot be part of the creation.
I think the semantics of the context makes a genitive of subordination more
likely in this case.
Charles Powell
DTS
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:07 EDT