Quote:
Originally Posted by seekerman
Sure. As I've said, I've asked the same questions myself.
The image, whoever He is, is identified as the firstborn of God, not God Himself who is firstborn. In your view, is the term firstborn a reference to God the Father or to the image of God the Father? It's my position that this image, who was the firstborn of God, was a likeness, resemblance to God the Father, not God the Father Himself.
In fairness, do you see a problem with the view that God is the firstborn of all creation?
|
If I were saying the the firstborn was God the Father then yes I could see the problem, but as a trinitarian I would put forth that it is speaking of Jesus both the Son of God and yet fully man fully God equal to the Father but not the Father. As is clear from this post and others I am a trinitarian but I also am not attempting to start a oneness vrs trinity argument just trying to answer the question asked me.