Objection · Case 12 · Jehovah’s Witnesses

“Firstborn of all creation” is a partitive genitive: firstborn among creation, a member of the class. “Firstborn of Israel” doesn’t mean Israel is not an Israelite. Doesn’t the rank argument fail to escape the grammar?

One objection from the free evidence repository at apologetics.pro.

Suggest a correction

Response

The partitive reading is a serious grammatical option. The reply is that the genitive can also be read as a genitive of subordination (firstborn over all creation, as the NIV renders it), and that the choice between them is decided by context, which is why verse 16 matters: a for clause explaining the title by saying he created everything is a reason for supremacy over creation, not for membership in it. This is genuinely debated, and the grammar alone does not settle it; the sentence does.

About this exhibit

This objection is to Old Testament uses of “firstborn” for rank.

God calls Israel his “firstborn son” though Israel was not the first nation, and David is made “firstborn” though he was the youngest. The word marks preeminence and heirship, not order of birth.

Under Claim 06: The word translated “firstborn” in Colossians 1:15 is used in Scripture for rank and heirship, so it does not by itself prove that Jesus was created.