He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation,
“image.” The Greek word is
eikōn (
#1504 εἰκών), and it means “image.” Jesus was the image of God in the sense in which he said that if we had seen him, we had seen the Father. Trinitarians claim that this verse shows that Jesus is God, but that cannot be the case, because it speaks of Christ being “the image [
eikon] of the invisible God.” If Christ were “God,” then the verse would simply say so, rather than that he was the “image” of God. The Father is plainly called “God” in dozens of places, and this would have been a good place to say that Jesus was God. Instead, we are told that Christ is the
image of God. If one thing is the “image” of another thing, then the “image” and the “original” are not the same thing. The Father
is God, and that is why there is no verse that calls the Father the image of God. Calling Jesus the image of God is very good evidence he is not God. There are Trinitarian theologians who assert that the word
eikon (from which we get the English word “icon,” meaning “image,” or “representation”) means “manifestation” here in Colossians, and that Christ is the manifestation of God. We believe that conclusion is unwarranted. The word
eikon occurs 23 times in the New Testament, and it is clearly used as “image” in the common sense of the word. It is used of the image of Caesar on a coin, of idols that are manmade images of gods, of Old Testament things that were only an image of the reality we have today.
2 Corinthians 3:18 says that Christians are changed into the “image” of the Lord as we reflect his glory. All these verses use “image” in the common sense of the word,
i.e., a representation separate from the original.
1 Corinthians 11:7 says, “A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the
image and glory of God.” Just as Christ is called the image of God, so men are called the image of God. We are not as exact an image as Christ is because we are marred by sin, but nevertheless the Bible does call us the “image” of God. Thus, the wording about being the image of God is the same for us as it is for Christ. The words in the Word must be read and understood in their common and ordinary meaning unless good reason can be given to alter that meaning. In this case, the common meaning of “image” is “likeness” or “resemblance,” and it is used that way every time in the New Testament. Surely if the word “image” took on a new meaning when it referred to Christ, the Bible would let us know that. Since it does not, we assert that the use of “image” is the same whether it refers to an image on a coin, an image of a god, or for both Christ and Christians as the image of God. Jesus is not God, but he so closely resembled God in how he lived and acted that he is called the image of God. [For more on the image of God, see
commentary on Genesis 1:27].
“The firstborn of all creation.” This phrase refers to Christ being the firstfruits of those raised from the dead (cp.
1 Cor. 15:20). The Greek is “the firstborn of all creation” (or, “the firstborn of every creature,” since there is no article before “creation”), but the exact significance of the genitive is debated. One natural reading of the genitive case is the partitive genitive, which would be saying that Jesus is the firstborn one of the rest of creation, which is true and makes sense, since Jesus was indeed the first person ever to be raised from the dead in a new, everlasting body. However that interpretation is rejected by Trinitarians, not because of grammar, but because they claim that Jesus was not in fact part of the creation at all, but is actually the eternal God.
The genitive can also be a genitive of relation, which would mean that Jesus was the firstborn in relation to other creations, that is, that Jesus was “firstborn,” i.e., raised from the dead, before anyone else. Although that is also a natural reading of the genitive case in this context, and is certainly true, that explanation is also sometimes rejected by Trinitarians because it does not inherently recognize the Trinitarian doctrine that Jesus is God in the flesh.
Some Trinitarians prefer the genitive of comparison (cp. Lenski), because that would make the verse say that Christ was inherently better than the others who were raised from the dead. But while Christ is no doubt better than the other saved people who will be raised from the dead, that use of the genitive is not usual in a context like this, and thus is not the most natural reading of the genitive in this verse. The genitive in the verse is not naturally supportive of the doctrine of the Trinity. Nevertheless, the idea of the comparative genitive combined with the doctrine of the Trinity is why some versions translate the verse into English as “the firstborn over all creation,” which is an interpretation of what the Greek means, rather than a translation of the Greek.
God likely used the genitive in this verse because it can be understood in multiple ways, all of which are true, which is the beauty of the genitive case: it can emphasize several things at one time. As a partitive genitive it shows Jesus is part of God’s creation, which he is; as a genitive of relation it shows that Jesus was the first person raised from the dead to everlasting life, which he was; and as a comparative genitive it shows that God has given rank and privileges to Jesus Christ, which He did. In biblical society, being the firstborn had privileges associated with it that Jesus Christ, as the firstborn, certainly receives.
