Col 1:15-20,23

[Craig]

In Col 1:15-20, Christ created “all things”, holds “all things” together, to reconcile “all things”. This sounds like it would include everyone without exception. But then in v23 the gospel has been proclaimed to “every creature under heaven”. This sounds like everyone without exception as well, but I don’t think the gospel would have been literally proclaimed to every single individual.
I noted the Concordant Literal Translation had “in” the entire creation for v23, which may help a little.

NIV
20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven…
23 …This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven…

Concordant Literal Translation
20 and through Him to reconcile all to Him … whether those on the earth or those in the heavens…
23 … the evangel which you hear which is being heralded in the entire creation which is under heaven …

I am just wanting to be sure that “all” means “all” in Col 1:15-20, when there is some question about “every creature” meaning “every creature” in v 23. Does anyone have any thoughts here to help? Thanks.

[Alex_Smith]

Yes, “has been proclaimed” is quite different to “being heralded in”! The question seems to be, what does
Strong’s G2784 (κηρύσσω) mean? I suspect CLV is correct, however even if it’s not, I’ve heard it said that it’s similar to Romans 1:20

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

[Cindy_Skillman]

“. . . has been proclaimed to every creature” is way different from “. . . is being heralded in the entire creation . . . .”

Maybe some of the more scholarly types will comment on the original language, but I think there’s a lot of wiggle room here.

[SLJ]

In scripture, things are often treated as if completed, while they are yet in progress. Perhaps the answer is that time is not like we think it is. Or that we perceive time differently, or give it more importance than the people of that time did.

A fact to keep in mind is that Greek verb tenses work differently than ours do. The verb here is in the aorist tense. It’s usually translated as a simple past tense, which often works, but is not really an equivalent.

Here’s a little blurb on this tense from ntgreek.org/learn_nt_greek/inter-tense.htm

For instance, outside of the indicative mood it is often customary to use the tense that implies a ‘simple occurrence’, the aorist tense. The aorist places no emphasis on the progress of the action, but only shows a simple occurrence (or summary occurrence), the action viewed as a whole. If the writer does not wish to emphasize or focus on the progress of the verb’s action (whether continuous or completed) he will use the aorist tense. The term ‘aorist’ means ‘unspecified’ or ‘unlimited’. It signifies nothing as to the progression or completeness of an action, it just indicates ‘happenedness’ or simple occurrence. If one has the mistaken concept that aorist tense means past time, many passages of the New Testament will be very confusing if not altogether nonsensical. (Only in the indicative mood does the aorist indicate past time). Many times the action of a verb in the aorist subjunctive or aorist imperative forms, for instance, will actually take place at a future time, not a past time.

Sonia

[Craig]

Thanks very much Alex, Cindy, and Sonia for your helpful replies.