Podcasts about zeilinger

Luise Meier über ihren Roman 'Hyphen' und kommunistisches Utopisieren. Future Histories LIVE Das Gespräch mit Luise Meier ist Teil des Formats ‚Future Histories LIVE‘. In unregelmäßigen Abständen werden hierbei einzelne Episoden live – soll heißen vor Publikum – aufgezeichnet. Diese Folge Future Histories ist am 3. August 2025 auf Einladung des Hamburger Künstler*innenkollektivs Zollo entstanden. Shownotes Luise Meiers Website: http://www.luisemeier.com/ Meier, L. (erscheint am 30.10.2025). Proletkult vs. Neoliberale Denkpanzer. Matthes & Seitz Berlin. https://www.matthes-seitz-berlin.de/buch/proletkult-vs-neoliberale-denkpanzer.html Meier, L. (2024). Hyphen. Matthes & Seitz Berlin. https://www.matthes-seitz-berlin.de/buch/hyphen.html Meier, L. (2018). MRX Maschine. Matthes & Seitz Berlin. https://www.matthes-seitz-berlin.de/buch/mrx-maschine.html Müller, T. (2024). Zwischen friedlicher Sabotage und Kollaps. Wie ich lernte, die Zukunft wieder zu lieben. Mandelbaum. https://www.mandelbaum.at/buecher/tadzio-mueller/zwischen-friedlicher-sabotage-und-kollaps/ Eiden-Offe, P. (2017). Die Poesie der Klasse. Romantischer Antikapitalismus und die Erfindung des Proletariats. Matthes & Seitz Berlin. https://www.matthes-seitz-berlin.de/buch/die-poesie-der-klasse.html zu Ernst Bloch: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Bloch Mazzini, S. (2012). Kältestrom – Wärmestrom. In: Dietschy, B., Zeilinger, D. & Zimmermann, R. (2012). Bloch-Wörterbuch: Leitbegriffe der Philosophie Ernst Blochs. De Gruyter. S.224-231. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110256710.224/html zu „the purpose of a system is what it does” (POSIWID): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does zu Stafford Beer: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stafford_Beer zu Beers Teich-Computer Experiment: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/YBbcKg5AeX3tot3cC/cybernetic-dreams-beer-s-pond-brain zu Kybernetik: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kybernetik https://monoskop.org/Cybernetics zu Alexander Bogdanov: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Alexandrowitsch_Bogdanow https://monoskop.org/Alexander_Bogdanov Völkel, M. (2024). Kybernetik in der Sowjetunion. Ein politisches und gesellschaftliches Modernisierungsprojekt? LIT Verlag. https://lit-verlag.de/isbn/978-3-643-15541-2/ Noorizadeh, B. (2018). After Scarcity. https://vimeo.com/296563987 zum theoretischen und politischen Konflikt zwischen Bogdanov und Lenin: https://jacobin.de/artikel/alexander-bogdanow-revolutionaerer-denker-und-sci-fi-pionier Sochor, Z. A. (1988). Revolution and Culture. The Bogdanov-Lenin Controversy. Cornell University Press. https://monoskop.org/images/6/6f/Sochor_Zenovia_Revolution_and_Culture_The_Bogdanov-Lenin_Controversy.pdf Bogdanov, A. A. (1923). Der rote Stern. Ein utopistischer Roman. Verlag der Jugendinternationale. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/62985 zum “Prolekult“: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proletkult zu Cybersyn: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersyn https://www.the-santiago-boys.com/ Medina, E. (2011). Cybernetic Revolutionaries. Technology and Politics in Allende's Chile. MIT Prress. https://direct.mit.edu/books/monograph/2129/Cybernetic-RevolutionariesTechnology-and-Politics zu Salvador Allende: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende zum Putsch in Chile 1973: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putsch_in_Chile_1973 zu Victor Turner: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Turner Turner, V. (2005). Das Ritual. Struktur und Anti-Struktur. Campus Verlag. https://www.campus.de/buecher-campus-verlag/wissenschaft/kulturwissenschaften/das_ritual-2418.html zu Thomas Müntzer: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_M%C3%BCntzer zu Anatoli Wassiljewitsch Lunatscharski: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoli_Wassiljewitsch_Lunatscharski zu Maxim Gorki: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxim_Gorki zum „Gotterbauertum“: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God-Building Thematisch angrenzende Folgen S03E44 | Anna Kornbluh on Climate Counteraesthetics https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e44-anna-kornbluh-on-climate-counteraesthetics/ S03E33 | Tadzio Müller zu Solidarischem Preppen im Kollaps https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e33-tadzio-mueller-zu-solidarischem-preppen-im-kollaps/ S03E32 | Jacob Blumenfeld on Climate Barbarism and Managing Decline https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e32-jacob-blumenfeld-on-climate-barbarism-and-managing-decline/ S03E30 | Matt Huber & Kohei Saito on Growth, Progress and Left Imaginaries https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s03/e30-matt-huber-kohei-saito-on-growth-progress-and-left-imaginaries/ S02E26 | Andrea Vetter zu Degrowth und Technologie https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e26-andrea-vetter-zu-degrowth-und-technologie/ S02E25 | Bini Adamczak zu Beziehungsweisen https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s02/e25-bini-adamczak-zu-beziehungsweisen/ S01E16 | Richard Barbrook on Imaginary Futures https://www.futurehistories.today/episoden-blog/s01/e16-richard-barbrook-on-imaginary-futures/   Future Histories Kontakt & Unterstützung Wenn euch Future Histories gefällt, dann erwägt doch bitte eine Unterstützung auf Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories   Schreibt mir unter: office@futurehistories.today Diskutiert mit mir auf Twitter (#FutureHistories): https://twitter.com/FutureHpodcast auf Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/futurehistories.bsky.social auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/futurehpodcast/ auf Mastodon: https://mstdn.social/@FutureHistories   Webseite mit allen Folgen: www.futurehistories.today English webpage: https://futurehistories-international.com   Episode Keywords #LuiseMeier, #JanGroos, #FutureHistories, #Podcast, #Klimakrise, #Sozial-ökologischeTransformation, #Klimabewegung, #Kapitalismus, #Gesellschaft, #PolitischeImaginationen, #Zukunft, #Utopie, #Solidarität, #Literatur, #Kybernetik, #StaffordBeer, #Cybersyn, #AlexanderBogdanov, #ErnstBloch, #Marxismus, #Klimakollaps, #Kollaps

How should we understand the words, “in him all things were created” in Col 1.16? Although commonly taken to mean Christ created the universe, this view has contextual, structural, and exegetical problems. In what follows I’ll name six problems with old-creation readings before laying out why a new creation approach makes sense. I presented this talk at the 2025 Unitarian Christian Alliance (UCA) conference in Uxbridge, England. Scroll down to see the full-length paper. For those listening to the audio, here’s a quick reference to Colossians 1.15-20 Strophe 1 (Col 1.15-18a) 15a      who is (the) image of the invisible God, 15b      firstborn of all creation 16a      for in him were created all things 16b                  in the heavens and upon the earth, 16c                  the visible and the invisible, 16d                  whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities 16e      all things have been created through him and for him 17a      and he is before all things 17b      and all things hold together in him 18a      and he is the head of the body of the Church,[12] Strophe 2 (Col 1.18b-20) 18b      who is (the) beginning, 18c      firstborn from the dead, 18d                  in order that he may be first in all things, 19        for in him was pleased all the fulness to dwell 20a      and through him to reconcile all things in him, 20b      making peace through the blood of his cross 20c                  whether the things upon the earth 20d                  or the things in the heavens Here’s Randy Leedy’s New Testament Diagram Here are the slides in the original PowerPoint format Download [13.82 MB] Here are the slides converted to PDF Loading... Taking too long? Reload document | Open in new tab Download [3.16 MB] To read the paper, simply scroll down or read it on Academia.edu.   Listen on Spotify   Listen on Apple Podcasts —— Links —— Check out these other papers by Sean Finnegan Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Finnegan on X @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play it out on the air Who is Sean Finnegan?  Read his bio here Get Finnegan’s book, Kingdom Journey to learn about God’s kingdom coming on earth as well as the story of how Christianity lost this pearl of great price. Get the transcript of this episode Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Below is the paper presented on July 25, 2025 in Uxbridge, England at the 2nd annual UCA UK Conference. Access this paper on Academia.edu to get the pdf. Full text is below, including bibliography and end notes. Colossians 1.16: Old Creation or New Creation? by Sean P. Finnegan Abstract  How should we understand the words, “in him all things were created” in Col 1.16? Although commonly taken to mean Christ created the universe, this view has contextual, structural, and exegetical problems. In what follows, I will explain the difficulties with the various old creation readings of Col 1.16 along with five reasons for a new creation approach. Then I'll provide a new creation reading of Col 1.16 before summarizing my findings in the conclusion. Introduction  Colossians 1.15-20 is a fascinating text of great importance for Christology. Commonly understood to be a hymn, it is fascinating in its cosmic scope and elevated Christology. Although many commentators interpret Paul[1] to say that Christ created the universe in his pre-existent state in Col 1.16, not all scholars see it that way. For example, Edward Schillebeeckx writes, “There is no mention in this text of pre-existence in the Trinitarian sense.”[2] Rather he sees “an eschatological pre-existence, characteristic of wisdom and apocalyptic.”[3] G. B. Caird agreed that Paul's focus in Col. 1.15-20 was not pre-existence (contra Lightfoot), rather, “The main thread of Paul's thought, then, is the manhood of Christ.”[4] In other words, “All that has been said in vv. 15-18 can be said of the historical Jesus.”[5] James Dunn also denied that Paul saw Christ as God's agent in creation in Col 1.15-20, claiming that such an interpretation was “to read imaginative metaphor in a pedantically literal way.”[6] James McGrath argued that “Jesus is the one through whom God's new creation takes place.” [7] Andrew Perriman likewise noted, “There is no reference to the creation of heaven and earth, light and darkness, sea and dry land, lights in the heavens, vegetation, or living creatures,”[8] also preferring a new creation approach.[9] To understand why such a broad range of scholars diverge from the old creation interpretation of Col 1.16, we will examine several contextual, structural, and exegetical problems. While explaining these, I'll also put forward four reasons to interpret Col 1.16 as new creation. Then I'll provide a fifth before giving a new creation reading of Col 1.15-20. But before going any further, let's familiarize ourselves with the text and structure. The Form of Col 1.15-20  To get our bearings, let me begin by providing a translation,[10] carefully structured to show the two strophes.[11] Strophe 1 (Col 1.15-18a) 15a      who is (the) image of the invisible God, 15b      firstborn of all creation 16a      for in him were created all things 16b                  in the heavens and upon the earth, 16c                  the visible and the invisible, 16d                  whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities 16e      all things have been created through him and for him 17a      and he is before all things 17b      and all things hold together in him 18a      and he is the head of the body of the Church,[12] Strophe 2 (Col 1.18b-20) 18b      who is (the) beginning, 18c      firstborn from the dead, 18d                  in order that he may be first in all things, 19        for in him was pleased all the fulness to dwell 20a      and through him to reconcile all things in him, 20b      making peace through the blood of his cross 20c                  whether the things upon the earth 20d                  or the things in the heavens Here I've followed the two-strophe structure (1.15-18a and 18b-20) noted more than a century ago by the classical philologist Eduard Norden[13] and repeated by James Robinson,[14] Edward Lohse,[15] Edward Schweizer,[16] James Dunn,[17] Ben Witherington III,[18] and William Lane[19] among others. By lining up the parallel lines of the two strophes, we can clearly see the poetic form. Strophe 1 15a who is (the) image… 15b firstborn of all creation 16a for in him were created all things… 16e  all things have been created through him… Strophe 2 18b who is (the) beginning, 18c firstborn from the dead … 19 for in him was pleased all… 20a and through him to reconcile all things in him… Such striking repeated language between the two strophes means that we should be careful to maintain the parallels between them and not take a grammatical or exegetical position on a word or phrase that would disconnect it from the parallel line in the other strophe. Some scholars, including F. F. Bruce,[20] Michael Bird,[21] David Pao,[22] among others proposed vv. 17-18a as an independent transitional link between the two strophes. Lohse explained the motivation for this unlikely innovation as follows. Above all, it is curious that at the end of the first, cosmologically oriented strophe, Christ is suddenly referred to as the “head of the body, the church” (1:18a κεφαλή τοῦ σώματος τῆς ἐκκλησίας). Considering its content, this statement would have to be connected with the second strophe which is characterized by soteriological statements. The structure of the hymn, however, places it in the first strophe.[23] For interpreters who prefer to think of the first strophe as cosmogony and the second as soteriology, a line about Christ's headship over the church doesn't fit very well. They restructure the form based on their interpretation of the content. Such a policy reverses the order of operations. One should determine the form and then interpret the content in light of structure. Lohse was right to reject the addition of a new transitional bridge between the two strophes. He called it “out of the question” since vv. 17-18a underscore “all things” and “serve as a summary that brings the first strophe to a conclusion.”[24] Now that we've oriented ourselves to some degree, let's consider old creation readings of Col 1.16 and the problems that arise when reading it that way. Old Creation Readings  Within the old creation paradigm for Col 1.16 we can discern three groups: those who see (A) Christ as the agent by whom God created, (B) Wisdom as the agent, and (C) Christ as the purpose of creation. Although space won't allow me to interact with each of these in detail, I will offer a brief critique of these three approaches. As a reminder, here is our text in both Greek and English. Colossians 1.16 16a      ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα 16b                  ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, 16c                  τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ τὰ ἀόρατα, 16d                  εἴτε θρόνοι εἴτε κυριότητες εἴτε ἀρχαὶ εἴτε ἐξουσίαι· 16e      τὰ πάντα δι' αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται· 16a      for in him were created all things 16b                  in the heavens and upon the earth, 16c                  the visible and the invisible, 16d                  whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities 16e      all things have been created through him and for him 1. Christ as the Agent of Creation Scot McKnight is representative in his claim that “The emphasis of the first stanza is Christ as the agent of creation … and the second is Christ as the agent of redemption.”[25] This view sees the phrase “in him were created all things” as Christ creating the universe in the beginning. However, this position has six problems with it. Firstly, the context of the poem—both before (vv. 13-14) and after (vv. 21-22)—is clearly soteriological not cosmogonical.[26] By inserting vv. 15-20 into the text after vv. 13-14, Paul connected the two together.[27] V. 15 begins with ὅς ἐστιν (who is), which makes it grammatically dependent on vv. 13-14. “It is widely accepted,” wrote Dunn, “that this passage is a pre-Pauline hymn interpolated and interpreted to greater or less extent by Paul.”[28] By placing the poem into a redemptive frame, Paul indicated how he interpreted it. The fact that God “rescued us from the authority of darkness and transferred (us) into the kingdom of his beloved son” is the controlling context (v. 13).[29] As I will show below, I believe vv. 15-20 are ecclesiology not protology, since ecclesiology naturally flows from soteriology. Rather than remaining in the old domain of darkness, vulnerable to malevolent spiritual powers of this age, Colossian Christians are transferred into the new domain of Christ. The context makes it more natural to interpret the creation language of vv. 15-16 in light of Christ's redemptive work—as references to new creation rather than old creation. Doing so retains the contextual frame rather than jumping back to the beginning of time. A second problem arises when we consider the phrase “image of the invisible God” in v. 15. Although some see a Stoic or Wisdom reference here, I agree with F. F. Bruce who said, “No reader conversant with the OT scriptures, on reading these words of Paul, could fail to be reminded of the statement in Gen. 1:26f., that man was created by God ‘in his own image.'”[30] Immediately after making humanity in his own image, God blessed us with dominion over the earth. Philo also connected humanity's image of God with “the rulership over the earthly realms.”[31] But if the Christ of v. 15 is the pre-existent son prior to his incarnation, as the old creation model posits, “How can he be the ‘image of God,'” asked Eduard Schweizer, since “the one who is thus described here is not the earthly Jesus?”[32] It is precisely by virtue of his humanity that Jesus is the image of God not his pre-existence.[33] Thus, image-of-God language points us to the creation of a new humanity. A third problem is that “firstborn of all creation” prima facia implies that Christ is a member of creation (a partitive genitive). This is how Paul thought about Christ as firstborn in Rom 8.29 when he called Christ “firstborn among many brothers and sisters.” Clearly he saw Christ as a member of the “ἀδελφοῖς” (brothers and sisters). Furthermore, “πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως” (firstborn of all creation) in v. 15 parallels “πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν” (firstborn from the dead) v. 18. Although the former (v. 15) can be taken as a genitive of subordination (firstborn over creation) or as a partitive genitive (firstborn of creation), the latter (v. 18) is unambiguously partitive. Because v. 18 includes the word ἐκ (from/out of), instead of a multivalent genitive, it must mean that Jesus was himself a member of the dead prior to his resurrection. Likewise, he was the firstborn member of creation. To take v. 15 as a genitive of subordination and v. 18 in a partitive sense allows theology to drive exegesis over against the clear structural link between v. 15b and v. 18c. In fact, as the BDAG noted, Christ is “the firstborn of a new humanity.”[34] He is chronologically born first and, by virtue of that, also preeminent.[35] Fourthly, the phrase, “ἐν αὐτῷ” (in him), implies soteriology not protology as it does throughout the Pauline corpus. The prepositional phrases “in Christ,” “in the Lord,” “in him,” and others that are similar occur more than a hundred times in Paul's epistles. McKnight elucidated the sense nicely: “This expression, then, is the inaugurated eschatological reality into which the Christian has been placed, and it also evokes the new-creation realities that a person discovers.”[36] Creation in Christ is not likely to refer to Genesis creation. In fact, apart from Col 1.16, there is no text within Paul or the rest of the Bible that speaks of the origin of the universe as something created “in Christ.”[37] Sadly translators routinely obscure this fact by translating “ἐν αὐτῷ” as “by him.”[38] Amazingly, the NASB and ESV render “ἐν αὐτῷ” as “in him” in every other usage apart from Col 1.16![39] For the sake of consistency, it makes better sense to render “ἐν αὐτῷ” as “in him” and let the reader decide how to interpret it. Fifthly, the line, “and he is the head of the body, the Church” (v. 18a) clearly roots the first strophe in redemptive history not creation. Our English translations follow Robert Estienne's verse divisions, which confusingly combine the last line of the first strophe (v. 18a) and the first line of the second (v. 18b), obscuring the native poetic structure. As I made the case above, the structure of the text breaks into two strophes with v. 18a included in the first one. As I mentioned earlier, vv. 15-20 are a pre-existing poem that Paul has modified and incorporated into the text of Colossians. Ralph Martin pointed out that the poem contains “no less than five hapax legomena” and “about ten non-Pauline expressions.”[40] Additionally, there appear to be awkward additions that disrupt the symmetry. These additions are the most explicitly Christian material. It is likely that the original said, “and he is the head of the body” to which Paul appended “the church.” Edward Schillebeeckx commented on this. In Hellenistic terms this must primarily mean that he gives life and existence to the cosmos. Here, however, Colossians drastically corrects the ideas … The correction made by Colossians is to understand ‘body' as a reference to the church, and not the cosmos. This alters the whole perspective of the cultural and religious setting … The cosmic background is reinterpreted in terms of salvation history and ecclesiology. In fact Christ is already exercising his lordship over the world now … however, he is doing this only as the head of the church, his body, to which he gives life and strength. Thus Colossians claims that the church alone, rather than the cosmos, is the body of Christ.[41] If this is true, it shows Paul's careful concern to disallow a strictly old creation or protological reading of the first strophe. For by inserting “of the church,” he has limited the context of the first strophe to the Christ event. “The addition of ‘the church,'” wrote Dunn, “indicates that for Paul at any rate the two strophes were not dealing with two clearly distinct subjects (cosmology and soteriology).”[42] Karl-Joseph Kuschel wrote, “The answer would seem to be he wanted to ‘disturb' a possible cosmological-protological fancy in the confession of Christ … to prevent Christ from becoming a purely mythical heavenly being.”[43] Thus Paul's addition shows us he interpreted the creation of v16 as new creation. Lastly, theological concerns arise when taking Col 1.16 as old creation. The most obvious is that given the partitive genitive of v. 15, we are left affirming the so-called Arian position that God created Christ as the firstborn who, in turn, created everything else. Another thorn in the side of this view is God's insistence elsewhere to be the solo creator (Isa 44.24; cf. 45.18). On the strength of this fact, modalism comes forward to save the day while leaving new problems in its wake. However, recognizing Col 1.15-20 as new creation avoids such theological conundrums. 2. Wisdom as the Agent of Creation Dustin Smith noted, “The christological hymn contains no less than nine characteristics of the wisdom of God (e.g., “image,” “firstborn,” agent of creation, preceding all things, holding all things together) that are reapplied to the figure of Jesus.”[44] Some suggest that Col 1.15-20 is actually a hymn to Wisdom that Paul Christianized.[45] The idea is that God created the universe through his divine Wisdom, which is now embodied or incarnate in Christ. Dunn explained it as follows. If then Christ is what God's power/wisdom came to be recognized as, of Christ it can be said what was said first of wisdom—that ‘in him (the divine wisdom now embodied in Christ) were created all things.' In other words the language may be used here to indicate the continuity between God's creative power and Christ without the implication being intended that Christ himself was active in creation.[46] Before pointing out some problems, I must admit much of this perspective is quite noncontroversial. That Jewish literature identified Wisdom as God's creative agent, that there are linguistic parallels between Col 1.15-20 and Wisdom, and that the historical Jesus uniquely embodied Wisdom to an unprecedented degree are not up for debate. Did Paul expect his readers to pick up on the linguistic parallels? Afterall, he could have just said “in her were created all things” in v. 16, clearly making the connection with the grammatically feminine σοφία (Wisdom). Better yet, he could have said, “in Wisdom were created all things.” Even if the poem was originally to Wisdom, Paul has thoroughly Christianized it, applying to Christ what had been said of Wisdom. However, the most significant defeater for this view is that applying Wisdom vocabulary to Christ only works one way. Wisdom has found her home in Christ. This doesn't mean we can attribute to Christ what Wisdom did before she indwelt him any more than we can attribute to the living descendants of Nazis the horrific deeds of their ancestors. Perriman's critique is correct: “The point is not that the act of creation was Christlike, rather the reverse: recent events have been creation-like. The death and resurrection of Jesus are represented as the profoundly creative event in which the wisdom of God is again dynamically engaged, by which a new world order has come about.”[47] Once again a new creation approach makes better sense of the text. 3. Christ as the Purpose of Creation Another approach is to take ἐν αὐτῷ (in him) in a telic sense. Martha King, a linguist with SIL, said the phrase can mean “in association with Christ everything was created” or “in connection with Christ all things were created.”[48] Lexicographer, Joseph Thayer, sharpened the sense with the translation, “[I]n him resides the cause why all things were originally created.”[49] William MacDonald's translation brought this out even more with the phrase, “because for him everything … was created.”[50] The idea is that God's act of creation in the beginning was with Christ in view. As Eric Chang noted, “Christ is the reason God created all things.”[51] G. B. Caird said, “He is the embodiment of that purpose of God which underlies the whole creation.”[52] The idea is one of predestination not agency.[53] Christ was the goal for which God created all things. A weakness of this view is that purpose is better expressed using εἰς or δία with an accusative than ἐν. Secondly, the parallel line in the second strophe (v. 19) employs “ἐν αὐτῷ” in a clearly locative sense: “in him all the fullness was pleased to dwell.” So even though “ἐν αὐτῷ” could imply purpose, in this context it much more likely refers to location. Lastly, Paul mentioned the sense of purpose at the end of v. 16 with “εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται” (for him has been created), so it would be repetitive to take “ἐν αὐτῷ” that way as well. To sum up, the three positions that see Col 1.16 as a reference to old creation all have significant problems. With these in mind, let us turn our attention to consider a fourth possibility: that Paul has in mind new creation. Reasons for a New Creation Reading I've already provided four reasons why Col 1.15-20 refers to new creation: (1) calling Christ the image of God points to the new humanity begun in Christ as the last Adam;[54] (2) since the firstborn of the old creation was Adam (or, perhaps, Seth), Jesus must be the firstborn of the new creation; (3) saying Jesus is the head of the church, limits the focus for the first strophe to the time following the Christ event; (4) the context of the poem, both before (vv. 13-14) and after (vv. 21-22) is soteriological, making an old creation paradigm awkward, while a new creation view fits perfectly. The Catholic priest and professor, Franz Zeilinger, summarized the situation nicely: “Christ is (through his resurrection from the realm of death) Lord over the possession granted to him, of which he is the ἀρχή (beginning) and archetype, … and head and beginning of the eschatological new creation!”[55] Additionally, a new creation paradigm fits best with Paul's elaboration of what visible and invisible things in heaven and on earth he has in mind. Once again, here's our text. 16a      for in him were created all things 16b                  in the heavens and upon the earth, 16c                  the visible and the invisible, 16d                  whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities 16e      all things have been created through him and for him By specifying thrones, dominions, rulers, and authorities, we discern Paul's train of thought. Form critics are quick to point out that v. 16d is Paul's addition to the poem. Without it, the reader may have thought of sky, land, and animals—old creation. However, with v. 16d present, we direct our attention to political realities not God's creative power or engineering genius. Martha King noted the two possible meanings for εἴτε: (1) specifying the “invisible things” or (2) giving examples of “all things.” Taking the second view, we read “in him were created all things, including thrones, dominions, rulers, and authorities.”[56] Randy Leedy also presented this position in his sentence diagrams, identifying v. 16d as equivalent to v. 16c and v. 16b, all of which modify τὰ πάντα (all things) at the end of v. 16a. (See Appendix for Leedy's diagram.) Perriman pressed home the point when he wrote: The fact is that any interpretation that takes verse 16 to be a reference to the original creation has to account for the narrow range of created things explicitly listed. … The Colossians verse mentions only the creation of political entities—thrones, lordships, rulers and authorities, visible and invisible—either in the already existing heaven or on the already existing and, presumably, populated earth. What this speaks of is a new governmental order consisting of both invisible-heavenly and visibly-earthly entities.”[57] Understanding v. 16d as equivalent to “all things” in v. 16a nicely coheres with a new-creation paradigm. However, taken the other way—as an elaboration of only the invisible created realities—v. 16d introduces an asymmetrical and clumsy appendix. A New Creation Reading of Col 1.16 Now that we've considered some problems with old creation views and some reasons to read Col 1.16 from a new creation perspective, let's consider how a new creation reading works. New creation is all about the new breaking into the old, the future into the present. G. F. Wessels said, “Paul made clear that there is a present realized aspect of salvation, as well as a future, still outstanding aspect, which will only be realized at the eschaton.”[58] New creation, likewise, has future and present realities. Exiting Old Creation Before becoming part of the new creation, one must exit the old creation. “Our old humanity was co-crucified“ (Rom 6.6). “With Christ you died to the elemental principles of the world” (Col 2.20). “As many as were baptized into Christ Jesus, were baptized into his death” (Rom 6.3). We were “co-buried with him through baptism into the death … having been united with the likeness of his death” (Rom 6.4-5). Our death with him through baptism kills our allegiance and submission to the old powers and the old way of life “in which you formerly walked according to the zeitgeist of this world, according to the rule of the authority of the air, the spirit which now works in the children of disobedience” (Eph 2.2). Entering New Creation As death is the only way out of the old creation, so resurrection is the only way into the new creation. “You have been co-raised with Christ” (Col 3.1). God “co-made-alive us together with him” (Col 2.13).[59] By virtue of our union with Christ, we ourselves are already “co-raised and co-seated us in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus” (Eph 2.6). The result of this is that “we also may walk in newness of life” (Rom 6.4). For those who are “in Christ, (there is) a new creation; the old has passed away, behold (the) new has come into existence” (2 Cor 5.17). “They have been ‘transported,'” wrote Schillebeeckx, “they already dwell above in Christ's heavenly sphere of influence (Col 1.13)—the soma Christou … that is the church!”[60] Community For the people of God, “neither circumcision is anything nor uncircumcision but a new creation” is what matters (Gal 6.15). Those who “are clothed with the new” are “being renewed in knowledge according to the image of him who created, where there is no Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, slave, (or) free, but Christ (is) all and in all” (Col 3.10-11). Through Christ God has nullified the law “in order that he might create the two into one new humanity in him” (Eph 2.14-15). Thus, within new creation, ethnic identity still exists, but it is relativized, our identity in Christ taking priority ahead of other affiliations and duties. Lifestyle When the lost become saved through faith, they become his creation (ποίημα), “created in Christ Jesus for good works” (Eph 2.10). This means we are to “lay aside the former way of life, the old humanity corrupted according to deceitful desires” and instead be clothed with “the new humanity created according to God in righteousness and holiness of the truth” (Eph 4.22-24). Rather than lying to one another, we must “strip off the old humanity with its way of acting” and “be clothed with the new (humanity), renewed in knowledge according to the image of the one who created it” (Col 3.9-10). “The ones who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the passions and the lusts” and instead “walk by the spirit” (Gal 5.24-25). Ultimately, All Creation Although new creation is currently limited to those who voluntarily recognize Jesus as Lord, all “creation is waiting with eager expectation for the unveiling of the children of God” (Rom 8.19). Because of the Christ event, the created order eagerly awaits the day when it will escape “the enslavement of corruption” and gain “the freedom of the glory of the children of God” (v. 21). Like a bone out of joint, creation does not function properly. Once Christ sets it right, it will return to its proper order and operation under humanity's wise and capable rulership in the eschaton. Eschatology God predetermined that those who believe will be “conformed to the image of his son, that he be firstborn among many brothers and sisters” (Rom 8.29). Thus, the resurrected Christ is the prototype, “the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1 Cor 15.20). Whereas “in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive” (v. 22). We await Christ's return to “transform the body of our humble station (that it be) shaped to his glorious body according to the energy which makes him able to also to subject all things to himself.” (Phil 3.21). This is the end goal of new creation: resurrected subjects of God's kingdom joyfully living in a renewed world without mourning, crying, and pain forevermore (Isa 65.17-25; Rev 21-22). The Powers Taking Col 1.16 as a new creation text adds key information about the present governing powers to this richly textured picture. In Christ God created thrones, dominions, rulers, and authorities. He made these through Christ and for Christ with the result that Christ himself is before all things, and in Christ all things hold together (Col 1.17). He is the head of the body, the Church (Col 1.18). We find very similar language repeated in Ephesians in the context of Christ's exaltation.[61] Ephesians 1.20-23 20 Which [power] he energized in Christ having raised him from the dead and seated (him) on his right (hand) in the heavenlies 21 far above all rule and authority and power and dominion and every name named, not only in this age but also in the one to come; 22 and he subjected all things under his feet and gave him (as) head over all things in the Church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of the one who fills all things in all. The parallels are striking. Both speak of Christ's resurrection, Christ's exalted position of authority over all the powers, Christ's role as head of the church, and both mention the fullness. It's easy to miss the connection between these two passages since most think of Eph 1.20-22 as ascension theology and Col 1.15-20 as creation theology. But, if we adjust our thinking to regard Col 1.16 as new creation, we see how the two fit together. In Ephesians we see Christ's ascension to God's right hand as the reason for a cosmic reordering of authorities with the result that all rule, authority, power, and dominion are subjected to him. (Though we may be accustomed to reading these powers in Eph 1.21 as only malevolent owing to Eph 2.2 and 6.12, the list here must be mixed, since only benevolent powers will survive the final judgement and continue into the age to come.) Instead of exaltation, in Colossians Paul employed the language of creation to describe Christ's relation to the powers. Perhaps lesser terms like reassign, reorder, or establish were just too small to adequately express the magnitude of how the Christ event has changed the world—both in heaven and on earth. The only term big enough to convey the new situation was “creation”—the very same word he routinely used elsewhere with the meaning of new creation.[62] We can gain more insight by considering what the powers of Eph 1.21 and Col 1.16 mean. McKnight saw them “as earthly, systemic manifestations of (perhaps fallen) angelic powers—hence, the systemic worldly, sociopolitical manifestations of cosmic/angelic rebellion against God.”[63] I partially agree with McKnight here. He's right to see the powers as both heavenly and earthly, or better, as the heavenly component of the earthly sociopolitical realities, but he has not made room for the new authority structures created in Christ. John Schoenheit helpfully explained it this way: Not only did Jesus create his Church out of Jew and Gentile, he had to create the structure and positions that would allow it to function, both in the spiritual world (positions for the angels that would minister to the Church—see Rev. 1:1, “his angel”) and in the physical world (positions and ministries here on earth—see Rom. 12:4-8; Eph. 4:7-11).[64] We must never forget that Paul has an apocalyptic worldview—a perspective that seeks to unveil the heavenly reality behind the earthly. He believed in powers of darkness and powers of light. In Christ were created thrones, dominions, rulers, and authorities (Col 1.16). He is “the head of all rule and authority” (Col 2.10). These new creation realities make progress against the old powers that still hold sway in the world outside the Church. Although the old powers are still at work, those who are in Christ enjoy his protection. With respect to the Church, he has already “disarmed the rulers and authorities” (Col 2.15). We can don “the armor of God that we be able to stand against the methods of the devil” (Eph 6.11) and “subduing everything, to stand” (v. 13). We find glimpses of this heavenly reality scattered in other places in the Bible. Peter mentioned how Christ “is on the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, angels and authorities and power having been subjected to him” (1 Pet 3.22). In John's Revelation, he addressed each of the seven letters to the angels of their respective churches.[65] Although it's hard for us to get details on precisely what happened at Christ's ascension, something major occurred, not just on earth, but also in the spiritual realm. Jesus's last recorded words in Matthew are: “all authority in heaven and upon earth was given to me” (Mat 28.18-20). Presumably such a statement implies that prior to his resurrection Jesus did not have all authority in heaven and earth. It didn't exist until it was created. Similarly, because of his death, resurrection, and ascension, Christ has “become so much better than the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to them” (Heb 1.4). Once again, the text implies that Christ was not already superior to the angels, but “after making purification of the sins, he sat on the right hand of the majesty on high” at which time he became preeminent (Heb 1.3). Perhaps this also explains something about why Christ “proclaimed to the spirits in prison” (1 Pet 3.19). Another possibility is that Christ's ascension (Rev 12.5) triggered a war in heaven (v. 7) with the result that the dragon and his angels suffered defeat (v. 8) and were thrown out of heaven down to the earth (v. 9). Sadly, for most of the history of the church we have missed this Jewish apocalyptic approach that was obvious to Paul, limiting salvation to individual sins and improved morality.[66] Only in the twentieth century did interpreters begin to see the cosmic aspect of new creation. Margaret Thrall wrote the following. The Christ-event is the turning-point of the whole world … This Christ ‘in whom' the believer lives is the last Adam, the inaugurator of the new eschatological humanity. … Paul is saying that if anyone exists ‘in Christ', that person is a newly-created being. … In principle, through the Christ-event and in the person of Christ, the new world and the new age are already objective realities.[67] New creation is, in the words of J. Louis Martyn “categorically cosmic and emphatically apocalyptic.”[68] In fact, “The advent of the Son and of his Spirit is thus the cosmic apocalyptic event.”[69] In Christ is the beginning of a whole new creation, an intersecting community of angelic and human beings spanning heaven and earth. The interlocking of earthly (visible) and heavenly (invisible) authority structures points to Paul's apocalyptic holism. The Church was not on her own to face the ravages of Rome's mad love affair with violence and power. In Christ, people were no longer susceptible to the whims of the gods that have wreaked so much havoc from time immemorial.[70] No, the Church is Christ's body under his direct supervision and protection. As a result, the Church is the eschatological cosmic community. It is not merely a social club; it has prophetic and cosmic dimensions. Prophetically, the Church points to the eschaton when all of humanity will behave then how the Church already strives to live now—by the spirit instead of the flesh (Gal 5.16-25). Cosmically, the Church is not confined to the earth. There is a heavenly dimension with authority structures instantiated under Christ to partner with the earthly assemblies. God's “plan for the fulness of the times” is “to head up all thing in the Christ, the things upon the heavens and the things upon the earth in him” (Eph 1.10). Although this is his eschatological vision, Zeilinger pointed out that it is already happening. [T]he eschatological world given in Christ is realized within the still-existing earthly creation through the inclusion of the human being in Christ, the exalted one, by means of the proclamation of salvation and baptism. The eschaton spreads throughout the world in the kerygma and becomes reality, in that the human being, through baptism, becomes part of Christ—that is, in unity with him, dies to the claim of the στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου (2.20) and is raised with him to receive his eschatological life. The people thus incorporated into the exalted Christ thereby form, in him and with him, the new creation of the eschaton within the old! The body of Christ is thus recognizable as the expanding Church. In it, heavenly and earthly space form, in a certain sense, a unity.[71] The Church is a counter society, and embassy of the future kingdom shining the light of the age to come into the present in the power of the spirit with the protection of Christ and his heavenly powers over against the powers of darkness, who/which are still quite active—especially in the political realities of our present evil age (Gal 1.4). We bend the knee to the cosmic Christ now in anticipation of the day when “every knee may bend: heavenly and earthly and subterranean” (Phil 2.10) and “every tongue may confess that Jesus Christ (is) Lord” (v. 11). Christ's destiny is to fulfil the original Adamic mandate to multiply, fill, and have dominion over the earth (Gen 1.28). He has already received all authority in heaven and earth (Mat 28.18). God has given him “dominion over the works of your hands and put all things under his feet” as the quintessential man (Ps 8.6). Even so, “Now we do not yet see all things subjected to him” (Heb 2.8), but when he comes “he will reign into the ages of the ages” (Rev 11.15). Until then, he calls the Church to recognize his preeminence and give him total allegiance both in word and deed. Conclusion We began by establishing that the structure of the poetic unit in Col 1.15-20 breaks into two strophes (15-18a and 18b-20). We noted that Paul likely incorporated pre-existing material into Colossians, editing it as he saw fit. Then we considered the problems with the three old creation readings: (A) Christ as the agent of creation, (B) Wisdom as the agent of creation, and (C) Christ as the purpose of creation. In the course of critiquing (A), which is by far most popular, we observed several reasons to think Col 1.16 pertained to new creation, including (1) the image of God language in v. 15a, (2) the firstborn of all creation language in v. 15b, (3) the head of the Church language in v. 18a, and (4) the soteriological context (frame) of the poem (vv. 13-14, 21-22). To this I added a fifth syntactical reason that 16d as an elaboration of “τἀ πάντα” (all things) of 16a. Next, we explored the idea of new creation, especially within Paul's epistles, to find a deep and richly textured paradigm for interpreting God's redemptive and expanding sphere of influence (in Christ) breaking into the hostile world. We saw that new Christians die and rise with Christ, ending their association with the old and beginning again as a part of the new—a community where old racial, legal, and status divisions no longer matter, where members put off the old way of living and instead become clothed with the new humanity, where people look forward to and live in light of the ultimate transformation to be brought about at the coming of Christ. Rather than limiting new creation to the salvation of individuals, or even the sanctifying experience of the community, we saw that it also includes spiritual powers both “in the heavens and upon the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities” (Col 1.16). Reading Col 1.15-20 along with Eph 1.20-23 we connected God's creation of the powers in Christ with his exaltation of Christ to his right hand “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion and every name named, not only in this age but also in the one to come” (Eph 1.21). The point from both texts is clear: as “the head of the body, the Church” (Col 1.18; Eph 1.22), Christ is “before all things” (Col 1.17), “first in all things” (Col 1.18), and “far above all” (Eph 1.21), since God has “subjected all things under his feet” (Eph 1.22). Christ is preeminent as the firstborn of all new creation, “the new Adam … the starting point where new creation took place.”[72] Although the old powers still hold sway in the world, those in the interlocked heaven-and-earth new creation domain where Christ is the head, enjoy his protection if they remain “in the faith established and steadfast and not shifting away from the hope of the gospel” (Col 1.23). This interpretation has several significant advantages. It fits into Paul's apocalyptic way of thinking about Christ's advent and exaltation. It also holds together the first strophe of the poem as a unit. Additionally, it makes better sense of the context. (The ecclesiology of Col 1.15-18a follows logically from the soteriological context of vv. 13-14.) Lastly, it is compatible with a wide range of Christological options. Appendix Here is Col 1.16 from Leedy's sentence diagrams.[73] Of note is how he equates the τὰ πάντα of 16a with 16c and 16d rather than seeing 16d as an elaboration of τά ὁρατά. Bibliography Bauer, Walter, Frederick William  Danker, William F. Arndt, F. Gingrich, Kurt Aland, Barbara Aland, and Viktor Reichmann. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2000. Bird, Michael F. Colossians and Philemon. A New Covenant Commentary. Cambridge, England: The Lutterworth Press, 2009. Brown, Anna Shoffner. “Nothing ‘Mere’ About a Man in the Image of God.” Paper presented at the Unitarian Christian Alliance, Springfield, OH, Oct 14, 2022. Bruce, E. K. Simpson and F. F. The Epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians. The New International Commentary on the New Testament, edited by Ned B. Stonehouse. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1957. Buzzard, Anthony F. Jesus Was Not a Trinitarian. Morrow, GA: Restoration Fellowship, 2007. Caird, G. B. New Testament Theology. Edited by L. D. Hurst. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 2002. Caird, G. B. Paul’s Letters from Prison. New Clarendon Bible, edited by H. F. D. Sparks. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1976. Carden, Robert. One God: The Unfinished Reformation. Revised ed. Naperville, IL: Grace Christian Press, 2016. Chang, Eric H. H. The Only Perfect Man. Edited by Bentley C. F. Chang. 2nd ed. Montreal, QC: Christian Disciples Church Publishers, 2017. Deuble, Jeff. Christ before Creeds. Latham, NY: Living Hope International Ministries, 2021. Dunn, James D. G. Christology in the Making. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996. Dunn, James D. G. The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon. New International Greek Testament Commentary, edited by Gasque Marshall, Hagner. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996. Heiser, Michael S. The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2019. King, Martha. An Exegetical Summary of Colossians. Dallas, TX: SIL International, 1992. Kuschel, Karl-Joseph. Born before All Time? Translated by John Bowden. New York, NY: Crossroad, 1992. Originally published as Beforen vor aller Zeit? Lane, William L. The New Testament Page by Page. Open Your Bible Commentary, edited by Martin Manser. Bath, UK: Creative 4 International, 2013. Leedy, Randy A. The Greek New Testament Sentence Diagrams. Norfolk, VA: Bible Works, 2006. Lohse, Edward. Colossians and Philemon. Hermeneia. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1971. MacDonald, William Graham. The Idiomatic Translation of the New Testament. Norfolk, VA: Bibleworks, 2012. Mark H. Graeser, John A. Lynn, John W. Schoenheit. One God & One Lord. 4th ed. Martinsville, IN: Spirit & Truth Fellowship International, 2010. Martin, Ralph. “An Early Christian Hymn (Col. 1:15-20).” The Evangelical Quarterly 36, no. 4 (1964): 195–205. Martyn, J. Louis. Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1997. McGrath, James F. The Only True God: Early Christian Monotheism in Its Jewish Context. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2009. McKnight, Scot. The Letter to the Colossians. New International Commentary on the New Testament, edited by Joel B. Green. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2018. Norden, Eduard. Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen Zur Formengeschichte Religiöser Rede. 4th ed. Stuttgart, Germany: B. G. Teubner, 1956. Originally published as 1913. Pao, David. Colossians and Philemon. Zondervan Exegetical Commentary of the New Testament, edited by Clinton E. Arnold. Grand Rapid, MI: Zondervan, 2012. Perriman, Andrew. In the Form of a God. Studies in Early Christology, edited by David Capes Michael Bird, and Scott Harrower. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2022. Philo. The Works of Philo. The Norwegian Philo Concordance Project. Edited by Kåre Fuglseth Peder Borgen, Roald Skarsten. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2005. Robinson, James M. “A Formal Analysis of Colossians 1:15-20.” Journal of Biblical Literature 76, no. 4 (1957): 270–87. Schillebeeckx, Eduard. Christ: The Experience of Jesus as Lord. Translated by John Bowden. New York, NY: The Seabury Press, 1977. Schoberg, Gerry. Perspectives of Jesus in the Writings of Paul. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2013. Schweizer, Eduard. The Letter to the Colossians. Translated by Andrew Chester. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1982. Smith, Dustin R. Wisdom Christology in the Gospel of John. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2024. Snedeker, Donald R. Our Heavenly Father Has No Equals. Bethesda, MD: International Scholars Publications, 1998. Thayer, Joseph Henry. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996. Thrall, Margaret. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Vol. 1. The International Critical Commentary, edited by C. E. B. Cranfield J. A. Emerton, G. N. Stanton. Edinburgh, Scotland: T&T Clark, 1994. Wachtel, William M. “Colossians 1:15-20–Preexistence or Preeminence?” Paper presented at the 14th Theological Conference, McDonough, GA, 2005. Wessels, G. F. “The Eschatology of Colossians and Ephesians.” Neotestamentica 21, no. 2 (1987): 183–202. Witherington III, Ben The Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary of the Captivity Epistles. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007. Yates, Roy. The Epistle to the Colossians. London: Epworth Press, 1993. Zeilinger, Franz. Der Erstgeborene Der Schöpfung. Wien, Österreich: Herder, 1974. Footnotes [1] Since the nineteenth century biblical scholars have been divided over whether Paul wrote Colossians. One of the major reasons for thinking Paul didn't write Colossians is his exalted Christology—the very conclusion this paper seeks to undermine. A second major factor to argue against Pauline authorship is the difference in vocabulary, but this is explainable if Paul used a different amanuensis. The theologically more cosmic emphasis (also evident in Ephesians) is likely due to Paul's time in prison to reflect and expand his understanding of the Christ event. Lastly, the proto-Gnostic hints in Colossians do not require dating the epistle outside of Paul's time. Although Gnosticism flourished at the beginning of the second century, it was likely already beginning to incubate in Paul's time. [2] Eduard Schillebeeckx, Christ: The Experience of Jesus as Lord, trans. John Bowden (New York, NY: The Seabury Press, 1977), 185. [3] Schillebeeckx, 185. [4] G. B. Caird, Paul’s Letters from Prison, New Clarendon Bible, ed. H. F. D. Sparks (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1976), 177. [5] Caird, 181. [6] James D. G. Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, New International Greek Testament Commentary, ed. Gasque Marshall, Hagner (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 91. “[W]hat at first reads as a straightforward assertion of Christ's pre-existenct activity in creation becomes on closer analysis an assertion which is rather more profound—not of Christ as such present with God in the beginning, nor of Christ as identified with a pre-existent hypostasis or divine being (Wisdom) beside God, but of Christ as embodying and expressing (and defining) that power of God which is the manifestation of God in and to his creation.” (Italics in original.) James D. G. Dunn, Christology in the Making, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 194. [7] James F. McGrath, The Only True God: Early Christian Monotheism in Its Jewish Context (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2009), 46. [8] Andrew Perriman, In the Form of a God, Studies in Early Christology, ed. David Capes Michael Bird, and Scott Harrower (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2022), 200. [9] In addition, biblical unitarians routinely interpret Col 1.16 as new creation. See Anthony F. Buzzard, Jesus Was Not a Trinitarian (Morrow, GA: Restoration Fellowship, 2007), 189–90, Robert Carden, One God: The Unfinished Reformation, Revised ed. (Naperville, IL: Grace Christian Press, 2016), 197–200, Eric H. H. Chang, The Only Perfect Man, ed. Bentley C. F. Chang, 2nd ed. (Montreal, QC: Christian Disciples Church Publishers, 2017), 151–52, Jeff Deuble, Christ before Creeds (Latham, NY: Living Hope International Ministries, 2021), 163–66, John A. Lynn Mark H. Graeser, John W. Schoenheit, One God & One Lord, 4th ed. (Martinsville, IN: Spirit & Truth Fellowship International, 2010), 493–94, Donald R. Snedeker, Our Heavenly Father Has No Equals (Bethesda, MD: International Scholars Publications, 1998), 291–92, William M. Wachtel, “Colossians 1:15-20–Preexistence or Preeminence?” (paper presented at the 14th Theological Conference, McDonough, GA, 2005), 4. [10] All translations are my own. [11] Stophes are structural divisions drawn from Greek odes akin to stanzas in poetry or verses in music. [12] Throughout I will capitalize Church since that reflects the idea of all Christians collectively not just those in a particular local assembly. [13] Eduard Norden, Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen Zur Formengeschichte Religiöser Rede, 4th ed. (Stuttgart, Germany: B. G. Teubner, 1956), 250–54. [14] James M. Robinson, “A Formal Analysis of Colossians 1:15-20,” Journal of Biblical Literature 76, no. 4 (1957): 272–73. [15] Edward Lohse, Colossians and Philemon, Hermeneia (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1971), 44. [16] Eduard Schweizer, The Letter to the Colossians, trans. Andrew Chester (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1982), 57. [17] Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 84. [18] Ben  Witherington III, The Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary of the Captivity Epistles (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007), 129. [19] William L. Lane, The New Testament Page by Page, Open Your Bible Commentary, ed. Martin Manser (Bath, UK: Creative 4 International, 2013), 765. [20] E. K. Simpson and F. F. Bruce, The Epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Ned B. Stonehouse (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1957), 65. [21] Michael F. Bird, Colossians and Philemon, A New Covenant Commentary (Cambridge, England: The Lutterworth Press, 2009), 50. [22] David Pao, Colossians and Philemon, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary of the New Testament, ed. Clinton E. Arnold (Grand Rapid, MI: Zondervan, 2012), 87. [23] Lohse, 42. [24] Lohse, 43–44. [25] Scot McKnight, The Letter to the Colossians, New International Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Joel B. Green (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2018), 144. [26] Col 1.13-14: “who rescued us from the authority of darkness and transferred (us) into the kingdom of his beloved son in whom we have the redemption, the forgiveness of the sins.” Col 1.21-22: “And you being formerly alienated and hostile in thought in the evil deeds, but now he reconciled (you) in his body of the flesh through the death to present you holy and blameless and irreproachable before him.” [27] In fact, we can easily skip from vv. 13-14 to vv. 21-22. [28] Dunn, Christology in the Making, 187–88. [29] Sadly, most translations erroneously insert a paragraph between vv. 14 and 15. This produces the visual effect that v. 15 is a new thought unit. [30] Bruce, 193. [31] Moses 2.65: “τὴν ἡγεμονίαν τῶν περιγείων” in Philo, The Works of Philo, The Norwegian Philo Concordance Project (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2005). See also Sirach 17.3. [32] Schweizer, 64. [33] For a helpful treatment of how the image of God relates to Christology, see Anna Shoffner Brown, “Nothing ‘Mere’ About a Man in the Image of God” (paper presented at the Unitarian Christian Alliance, Springfield, OH, Oct 14, 2022). [34] Walter Bauer et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2000), s.v. “πρωτότοκος,” 2.a. [35] Franz Zeilnger wrote, “Christ is temporally the first of a series that essentially proceeds from him, and at the same time its lord and head.” Franz Zeilinger, Der Erstgeborene Der Schöpfung (Wien, Österreich: Herder, 1974), 182. Original: “als “Wurzel” ist Christus zeitlich der erste einer Reihe, die wesentlich aus ihm hervorgeht, und zugleich ihr Herr und Haupt.” [36] McKnight, 85–86. [37] The closest parallels are 1 Cor 8.6; Heb 1.2; and John 1.3, which employ the preposition δια (through). Upon close examination these three don't teach Christ created the universe either. [38] ESV, CSB, NASB, etc. Notably the NET diverges from the other evangelical translations. Roman Catholic, mainline, and unitarian translations all tend to straightforwardly render “ἐν αὐτῷ” as “in him” in Col 1.16; cf. NABRE, NRSVUE, OGFOMMT, etc. [39] Chang, 150. [40] Ralph Martin, “An Early Christian Hymn (Col. 1:15-20),” The Evangelical Quarterly 36, no. 4 (1964): 198. [41] Schillebeeckx, 186. [42] Dunn, Christology in the Making, 191. [43] Karl-Joseph Kuschel, Born before All Time?, trans. John Bowden (New York, NY: Crossroad, 1992), 336. [44] Dustin R. Smith, Wisdom Christology in the Gospel of John (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2024), 5–6. For more on wisdom Christology in Col 1.16 see Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 89, Roy Yates, The Epistle to the Colossians (London: Epworth Press, 1993), 18–19, 23, G. B. Caird, New Testament Theology, ed. L. D. Hurst (Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 2002), 46, McGrath, 44, 46. [45] See Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, 89. See also Yates, 18–19, 23. [46] Dunn, Christology in the Making, 190. [47] Perriman, 199. [48] Martha King, An Exegetical Summary of Colossians (Dallas, TX: SIL International, 1992), 53. [49] Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), s.v. “ἐν,” 1722. He recognized the cause was both instrumental and final. [50] William Graham MacDonald, The Idiomatic Translation of the New Testament (Norfolk, VA: Bibleworks, 2012). [51] Chang, 147. Similarly James McGrath wrote, “[I]f all things were intended by God to find their fulfillment in Christ, then they must have been created “in him” in the very beginning in some undefined sense, since it was axiomatic that the eschatological climax of history would be a restoration of its perfect, original state.” McGrath, 46. [52] Caird, Paul’s Letters from Prison, 172. [53] “God so designed the universe that it was to achieve its proper meaning and unity only under the authority of man (Gen. 128; Ps. 86). But this purpose was not to be implemented at once; it was ‘to be put into effect when the time was ripe' (Eph. 110), when Christ had lived a human life as God intended it, and had become God's image in a measure which was never true of Adam. Only in unity with ‘the proper man' could the universe be brought to its destined coherence. For one who believes in predestination it is but a small step from this to saying that the universe was created in him.” Caird, Paul’s Letters from Prison, 178. [54] See also Paul's Adam Christology in Rom 5.12-21; 1 Cor 15.21-22, 45-49. [55] “Christus ist (durch seine Auferstehung aus dem Todesbereich) Herr über den ihm verliehenen Besitz, dessen ἀρχή und Urbild er ist, … und Haupt und Anfang der eschatologischen Neuschöpfung!” Zeilinger, 188. [56] King, 54. [57] Perriman, 200. [58] G. F. Wessels, “The Eschatology of Colossians and Ephesians,” Neotestamentica 21, no. 2 (1987): 187. [59] I realize my translation is awkward, but I prioritized closely mirroring the Greek over presenting smooth English. The original reads, “συνεζωοποίησεν ὑμᾶς σὺν αὐτῷ.” [60] Schillebeeckx, 187. [61] Scholars who make this connection include Caird, New Testament Theology, 216, Caird, Paul’s Letters from Prison, 177, McGrath, 44, Perriman, 201. [62] In fact, only two of the texts I cited above explicitly say “new creation” (2 Cor 5.17 and Gal 6.15). In all the others, Paul blithely employed creation language, expecting his readers to understand that he was not talking about the creation of the universe, but the creation of the new humanity in Christ—the Church. [63] McKnight, 152. [64] Mark H. Graeser, 493. [65] Rev 2.1, 8, 12, 18; 3.1, 7, 14. [66] See Gerry Schoberg, Perspectives of Jesus in the Writings of Paul (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2013), 280–81, 83. [67] Margaret Thrall, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, vol. 1, The International Critical Commentary, ed. C. E. B. Cranfield J. A. Emerton, G. N. Stanton (Edinburgh, Scotland: T&T Clark, 1994), 423, 26–28. [68] J. Louis Martyn, Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1997), 122. [69] Martyn, 121. [70] Whether the old gods actually existed or not is a topic beyond the scope of this paper. Interested readers should consult Michael S. Heiser, The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2019). [71] “[D]ie in Christus gegebene echatologische Welt verwirkliche sich innerhalb der weiterhin existenten irdischen Schöpfung durch die Einbeziehung des Menschen in Christus, den Erhöhten, mittles Heilsverkündigung und Taufe. Das Eschaton setzt sic him Kerygma wetweit durch und wird Wirklichkeit, indem der Mensch durch die Taufe Christi Teil wird, d. h. in Einheit mit ihm dem Anspruch der στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου stirbt (2, 20) und mit ihm auferweckt sein eschatologisches Leben erhält. Die so dem erhöhten Christus eingegliederten Menschen bilden somit in ihm und mit ihm die neue Schöpfung der Eschata innerhalb der alten! Der Christusleib ist somit als sich weitende Kirche erkennbar. In ihr bildet himmlischer und irdischer Raum gewissermaßen eine Einheit.” Zeilinger, 179. [72] “Der neue Adam … Ausgangsort, in dem sich Neuschöpfung ereignete,” Zeilinger, 199. [73] Randy A. Leedy, The Greek New Testament Sentence Diagrams (Norfolk, VA: Bible Works, 2006). This is now available in Logos Bible Software.

Marie Ringler, Vizepräsidentin des Europäischen Forums Alpbach, über den Moment der Wahrheit, den wir erleben. Ist diese unsere Gegenwart eine Zeit der Entscheidung? Ein Podcast vom Pragmaticus. Das ThemaEgal ob Innovation, Wettbewerbsfähigkeit, Klimawandel oder Digitalisierung: Im Heute werden die Weichen gestellt für die Zukunft. Wesentlich sei, dass Menschen die Möglichkeit des Austauschs haben – über Grenzen hinweg. Das Forum Alpbach hat deshalb die starren Vortragsstrukturen aufgebrochen, um mehr Zufälligkeit und glückliche Begegnungen zuzulassen.Mit 4.000 Besuchern ist das 1945 gegründete Europäische Forum Alpbach heute eine der renommiertesten Diskurs- und Vernetzungsveranstaltungen Europas. Schon vor einigen Jahren änderte es seine Formate, um mehr Dialog zu ermöglichen. Das Herzstück sind immer noch die Programme für die internationalen Stipendiaten und Stipendiatinnen. In diesem Jahr werden besondere Gäste erwartet: Papst Franziskus ebenso wie die Nobelpreisträger Joseph Stiglitz und Anton Zeilinger. Unser Gast in dieser Folge: Marie Ringler ist Vizepräsidentin und Vorstandsmitglied des Europäischen Forums Alpbach und Europa-Chefin von Ashoka, einem Netzwerk zur Förderung von sozialem Unternehmertum.Dies ist ein Podcast von Der Pragmaticus. Sie finden uns auch auf Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn und X (Twitter).Weitere Podcasts von Der Pragmaticus finden Sie hier.

Er ist beharrlich seinen Weg gegangen, und am Ende hat er dafür den Nobelpreis erhalten. Anton Zeilinger ist Quantenphysiker, beschäftigt sich also mit den kleinsten Teilchen der Welt, behält aber das grosse Ganze mit im Blick. Religion und Naturwissenschaft sind für ihn kein Widerspruch. Als Kind hat er die Puppen seiner Schwester auseinandergeschnitten. Um herauszufinden, wie sie aufgebaut sind. Heute beamt er kleinste Teilchen von Materie unter der Donau durch oder trifft den Dalai Lama, um ihm die Welt der Quantenphysik näherzubringen. Denn nichts liebt der aktuelle Nobelpreisträger mehr, als anderen Menschen die Schönheit von Formeln zu offenbaren. Dass man bei diesen Nachforschungen auch an ganz elementare Grenzen der Naturwissenschaft gelangt, etwa wenn es um den Zufall geht, spornt Zeilinger umso mehr an. Genau dort komme nämlich die Theologie auf ihre Kosten. Einen Widerspruch zwischen Religion und Naturwissenschaften gibt es für den Quantenphysiker nämlich einzig, wenn beide die jeweiligen Zuständigkeitsgrenzen übertreten. Greift Gott in die Welt ein? Woher kommen die Naturgesetze? Und was treibt den Forscherdrang von Zeilinger an? Olivia Röllin im Gespräch mit dem Nobelpreisträger für Physik 2022, Anton Zeilinger. Diese Sendung ist eine Wiederholung vom 4. Juni 2023.

Wes Blalock is the award-winning writer/creator of Huittsuu “Birdie” McLaren and follows her adventures as a Park Ranger for the National Park Service. Janet Elizabeth Lynn and Will Zeilinger, writing as WILL JANNS, debuted STONE PUB, in October. This first novel of the International Crime Files series transports the reader to Ireland in 1962. Sage Hagy is a Reader from a northern suburb of Chicago. Currently hooked on C.J.Box's series featuring hero Joe Pickett , she is looking forward to attending her first Left Coast Crime in 2024.

Wes Blalock is the award-winning writer/creator of Huittsuu “Birdie” McLaren and follows her adventures as a Park Ranger for the National Park Service. Janet Elizabeth Lynn and Will Zeilinger, writing as WILL JANNS, debuted STONE PUB, in October. This first novel of the International Crime Files series transports the reader to Ireland in 1962. Sage Hagy is a Reader from a northern suburb of Chicago. Currently hooked on C.J.Box's series featuring hero Joe Pickett , she is looking forward to attending her first Left Coast Crime in 2024.

Im Oktober hat Eugen u.a. ein paar Klassiker nachgeholt, z.B. „La vita è bella“ und „Friday the 13.“! Der an diesem Tag geborene Nico hatte sowohl das Human Rights Film Festival als auch das Ukrainian Film Festival Berlin im Colosseum im Haus und spricht über den meistdiskutierten Film beider Festivals, den schwer verdaulichen „20 Days in Mariupol“! Außerdem durfte er in diesem Rahmen auch den wunderschön verspielten „Painting Dhaka“ sehen, dessen Macher Lukas Zeilinger uns in einem Gastbeitrag einen Einblick in die spannende Entstehung seines Projekts gibt, das dann zu einem Film wurde! Und nachdem sie schon unseren Blog mit ihren Reviews veredelt hat, gibt Maria in dieser Folge ihren moderativen Einstand mit ihren Highlights vom Filmfest Hamburg, u.a. den von Selina schon sehr gelobpreisten „May December“! Nicht nur Genrefilm-Fans sollten einen Blick wagen in „O“, der nächste Woche seine Premiere feiert auf dem legendären YouTube-Kanal „Alter“. Ein deutscher Kurzfilm, der vom Geist von „Eraserhead“ durchweht und dabei trotzdem sehr unique ist. Sein Schöpfer und auch einer unserer ersten Hörer Dominik Balkow erzählt euch als weiterer Gast ein wenig über sein kleines Kunstwerk und hat noch einen schönen Sci-Fi-Filmtipp im Gepäck, der eine besondere Gemeinsamkeit mit seinem Kurzfilm hat! „O“ bei Alter: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9Akkaj7-ems&pp=ygUHQWx0ZXIgbw%3D%3D Folgt uns hier: www.instagram.com/schauplatzpocast Checkt unsere Reviews: www.schauplatzblog.com Und unterstützt uns gerne: https://paypal.me/l0vewaves

Folge 201: Angeschlagen und mit Wärmflasche wird der Kater der Jugend relativiert, ebenso das postmoderne alles-ironisch-Meinen. Die Podcast Wars im Hintergrund ignorieren unsere Dimensions- und Time-Jumper einfach so gut es geht – Planeten mit Wasser, Quantenverschränkung und Jupiters Eier sind schließlich auch viel interessanter. (Theme Music von  Marilies "MAIIJA" Jagsch)

Ausgerechnet das Land, in dessen Spitzenpolitik sensible E-Mails vermehrt in falschen Posteingängen landen, stellt zum zweiten Mal in Folge den Physik-Nobelpreisträger. Was sagt die jüngste Auszeichnung über den österreichischen Forschungsstandort aus? Und bringen Krausz´ Erkenntnisse die Welt nun irgendwie weiter?

”You have to reinvent yourself every couple of years. It's absolutely important. It's necessary for me to make my life interesting. Life is too short.” – Meet physics laureate Anton Zeilinger. With an endlessly curious mind, he loves exploring new paths in the scientific field of quantum physics. He also speaks about his love of sailing and why the number 42 holds a special place in his heart. The host of this podcast is Adam Smith, Chief Scientific Officer at Nobel Prize Outreach.Nobel Prize Conversations is produced in cooperation with Fundación Ramón Areces. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Er ist beharrlich seinen Weg gegangen, und am Ende hat er dafür den Nobelpreis erhalten. Anton Zeilinger ist Quantenphysiker, beschäftigt sich also mit den kleinsten Teilchen der Welt, behält aber das grosse Ganze mit im Blick. Religion und Naturwissenschaft sind für ihn kein Widerspruch. Als Kind hat er die Puppen seiner Schwester auseinandergeschnitten. Um herauszufinden, wie sie aufgebaut sind. Heute beamt er kleinste Teilchen von Materie unter der Donau durch oder trifft den Dalai Lama, um ihm die Welt der Quantenphysik näherzubringen. Denn nichts liebt der aktuelle Nobelpreisträger mehr, als anderen Menschen die Schönheit von Formeln zu offenbaren. Dass man bei diesen Nachforschungen auch an ganz elementare Grenzen der Naturwissenschaft gelangt, etwa wenn es um den Zufall geht, spornt Zeilinger umso mehr an. Genau dort komme nämlich die Theologie auf ihre Kosten. Einen Widerspruch zwischen Religion und Naturwissenschaften gibt es für den Quantenphysiker nämlich einzig, wenn beide die jeweiligen Zuständigkeitsgrenzen übertreten. Greift Gott in die Welt ein? Woher kommen die Naturgesetze? Und was treibt den Forscherdrang von Zeilinger an? Olivia Röllin im Gespräch mit dem Nobelpreisträger für Physik 2022, Anton Zeilinger.

Er ist beharrlich seinen Weg gegangen, und am Ende hat er dafür den Nobelpreis erhalten. Anton Zeilinger ist Quantenphysiker, beschäftigt sich also mit den kleinsten Teilchen unserer Welt, behält aber das grosse Ganze mit im Blick. Religion und Naturwissenschaft sind für ihn kein Widerspruch. Als Kind hat er die Puppen seiner Schwester auseinandergeschnitten. Um herauszufinden, wie sie aufgebaut sind. Heute beamt er kleinste Teilchen von Materie unter der Donau durch oder trifft den Dalai Lama, um ihm die Welt der Quantenphysik näherzubringen. Denn nichts liebt der aktuelle Nobelpreisträger mehr, als anderen Menschen die Schönheit von Formeln zu offenbaren. Dass man bei diesen Nachforschungen auch an ganz elementare Grenzen der Naturwissenschaft gelangt, etwa wenn es um den Zufall geht, spornt Zeilinger umso mehr an. Genau dort komme nämlich die Theologie auf ihre Kosten. Einen Widerspruch zwischen Religion und Naturwissenschaften gibt es für den Quantenphysiker nämlich einzig, wenn beide die jeweiligen Zuständigkeitsgrenzen übertreten. Greift Gott in unsere Welt ein? Woher kommen unsere Naturgesetze? Und was treibt den Forscherdrang von Zeilinger an? Olivia Röllin im Gespräch mit dem Nobelpreisträger für Physik 2022, Anton Zeilinger.

MotorTrend's Ed Loh & Jonny Lieberman chat with Hyundai's EVP & Head of CV Development Tech Unit, Martin Zeilinger, and EVP & Head of Global CV Hydrogen Fuel Cell Business, Ken Ramirez. The guys discuss Hyundai's brand new XCIENT Hydrogen Fuel Cell Class 8 Tractor Trailer for the American market! 4:07 - Why bother with Hydrogen? 9:02 - Production of Hydrogen. 11:51 - Scope of Long-Haul Trucking with Hydrogen. 13:57 - How does it work? 15:40 - Safety concerns? 17:42 - Where will the Hydrogen infrastructure come from? 26:32 - Martin's background prior to Hyundai. 28:07 - Ken's background prior to Hyundai. 30:47 - Where does Long-Haul Trucking fit into Hyundai's global alternative fuels initiative? 33:08 - When did they start taking Hydrogen seriously? 36:55 - When will the Class 8 Truck hit the streets in America? 41:52 - Why Hydrogen Fuel Cell for Class 8 vehicles? 46:15 - Does Hydrogen technology work for Boats & Airplanes? 47:44 - What are the concerns they hear from companies about making the switch? 51:29 - Alternate applications for Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology. 54:02 - Is it really *that* clean?

This week we continue our a three-part series on leading worship in different-sized churches.  In this episode of The Ferment, Adam chats with Megan Zeilinger about leading worship in a midsized church, some practical steps for building a relational team, and how she dealt with a season of carrying a desire for church growth that she wasn't seeing. Megan also shares about the songs that are currently speaking to her church.  Megan Zeilinger is the worship pastor at Tehachapi Vineyard Church. She is passionate about hospitality and making space for people to experience the love and presence of God in corporate worship. She loves coffee, authentic conversations, and watching people's lives be transformed by the love and kindness of Jesus. Her husband, Jeff, leads the Production Team, and together they love serving the church with what they have been given to give away. Megan, Jeff, and their adorable two-year-old daughter live in Tehachapi, California.   Show Notes:  Vineyard Worship Essentials: https://www.vineyardworship.com/essentials

Como o trabalho pioneiro de cientistas no século XX desencadeou uma revolução na teoria quântica, na teoria da informação e na computação? Neste episódio falaremos sobre Desigualdades de Bell, o tema que agraciou com o prêmio Nobel os cientistas Clauser, Aspect e Zeilinger em 2022.

Como o trabalho pioneiro de cientistas no século XX desencadeou uma revolução na teoria quântica, na teoria da informação e na computação? Neste episódio falaremos sobre Desigualdades de Bell, o tema que agraciou com o prêmio Nobel os cientistas Clauser, Aspect e Zeilinger em 2022.

Como o trabalho pioneiro de cientistas no século XX desencadeou uma revolução na teoria quântica, na teoria da informação e na computação? Neste episódio falaremos sobre Desigualdades de Bell, o tema que agraciou com o prêmio Nobel os cientistas Clauser, Aspect e Zeilinger em 2022.

Happy New Year, friends! This January, we are replaying a few of our favorite episodes from 2022! We hope you enjoy the replay!—-Hey Friends! Today, Gernot joins Janell for another podcast! Janell talks a little about why Leonie chose not to record this episode and a little about the puddle ocean analogy when it comes to faith. Gernot shares his faith journey, how he started living his Christian faith, and his personal story about loss. Janell and Gernot talk about the question “Do you want God?” and they discuss the idea that for some, spending eternity with a God they do not love will be hell. Janell and Gernot also talk about how the goodness of God leads people to salvation, choosing to trust Jesus, and how Jesus changes everything. We hope you enjoy this episode! About Gernot Zeilinger Gernot has a B.A in International Business Administration as well as a Certificate in Theological Studies from Wycliffe Hall, University of Oxford and a Certificate in Christian Apologetics from the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics. He is currently pursuing a Masters in Systematic and Philosophic Theology at the University of Nottingham and has started the process to become ordained in the Lutheran Church in Austria. He is currently working for Campus für Christus (the Austrian subsidiary of CRU) to create an apologetics ministry there named PROFUNDUM, focused on building bridges and dialogue between Christianity and secular perspectives to show the truth and relevance of Christianity for the world.___________________We would love to thank our Patrons for all their amazing support! To learn more about supporting Finding Something REAL via Patreon, click here!FSR s5e26 with LeonieFSR s5e with Leonie and FrankFSR s5e with Leonie and StephanieFar June 2022 with AbduFSR May with Shannon MooreFSR April 2021 with Julia GarschagenThe Great Divorce- C. S. LewisLord of the Rings - J. R. R. Tolkien 1 Corinthians 3:1-9John 17:3Revelation 21:23

Das Jahr im Rückblick aus der Sicht des Leben-Ressorts: Ob die Berichterstattung rund um Corona und das Impfen, der Nobelpreisgewinn von Anton Zeilinger oder neue Beziehungstrends. Im breit gefächerten Leben Ressort haben all diese Themen Platz. Ressortleiterin Yvonne Widler blickt gemeinsam mit Moderator Elias Natmessnig noch einmal auf die meistgelesenen Geschichten des Jahres in Österreich zurück. Abonniert unseren Podcast auch auf Apple Podcasts, Spotify oder Google Podcasts und hinterlasst uns eine Bewertung, wenn euch der Podcast gefällt. Mehr Podcasts gibt es unter www.kurier.at/podcasts

In 2022, the Nobel prize for physics was awarded to a trio of scientists for their work on the fundamentals of quantum mechanics. This week, host Alok Jha asks one of the laureates, Anton Zeilinger, how he proved Einstein wrong and how his research into a phenomenon called quantum entanglement can help make sense of the universe. Plus, can “quantum teleportation” usher in a new era of technology? Anton Zeilinger is a physicist at the Austrian Academy of Sciences and professor emeritus at the University of Vienna.For full access to The Economist's print, digital and audio editions subscribe at economist.com/podcastoffer and sign up for our weekly science newsletter at economist.com/simplyscience. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In 2022, the Nobel prize for physics was awarded to a trio of scientists for their work on the fundamentals of quantum mechanics. This week, host Alok Jha asks one of the laureates, Anton Zeilinger, how he proved Einstein wrong and how his research into a phenomenon called quantum entanglement can help make sense of the universe. Plus, can “quantum teleportation” usher in a new era of technology? Anton Zeilinger is a physicist at the Austrian Academy of Sciences and professor emeritus at the University of Vienna.For full access to The Economist's print, digital and audio editions subscribe at economist.com/podcastoffer and sign up for our weekly science newsletter at economist.com/simplyscience. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Quantum computing is built on the ideas of giants. These so-called quantum foundations contain complicated concepts, including entanglement. In fact, the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to three scientists who expanded our understanding of entanglement. How does this key concept work? What are some other fascinating core ideas behind Quantum Information Science (QIS)? Join host Konstantinos Karagiannis for a chat with Bob Coecke from Quantinuum to explore quantum foundations. For more on Quantinuum, visit www.quantinuum.com/.Watch the new talk on quantum natural language processing (QNLP) that Bob references here: https://youtu.be/pFc2PmxVMt8.Visit Protiviti at www.protiviti.com/postquantum to learn more about how Protiviti is helping organizations get post-quantum ready.Follow host Konstantinos Karagiannis on Twitter and Instagram: @KonstantHacker and follow Protiviti Technology on LinkedIn and Twitter: @ProtivitiTech. Contact Konstantinos at konstantinos.karagiannis@protiviti.com. Questions and comments are welcome! Theme song by David Schwartz. Copyright 2021.

What if we're wrong about entanglement? This is the question that's been driving Carver Mead, Caltech Physicist and veteran of the semiconductor industry, and at this point, he's pretty sure that Bell's Theorem is wrong. This is a bold claim! After all, Clauser, Aspect and Zeilinger just won Nobel, the biggest prize in the world, for their work on painstaking experiments that seem to prove the spooky paradox - some information can travel faster than light! Not so fast, says Carver Mead. There's no problem with the experimental design, or the observation that the photons are "entangled." The problem lies upstream of the experiment, at the threshhold of understanding. What is a photon? What are the atoms doing when they're generating the signal that's being measured, and how does a physical understanding of the wave function change the spookiness of quantum mechanics? Support the scientific revolution with a monthly donation: https://bit.ly/3lcAasB AND by picking up Dr. Mead's book: https://amzn.to/3sJPoJi As always, let us know what you think in the comments! #physics #quantum #atomic Check our short-films channel, @DemystifySci: https://www.youtube.com/c/DemystifyingScience Join our mailing list https://bit.ly/3v3kz2S PODCAST INFO: Anastasia completed her PhD studying bioelectricity at Columbia University. When not talking to brilliant people or making movies, she spends her time painting, reading, and guiding backcountry excursions. Michael Shilo also did his PhD at Columbia studying the elastic properties of molecular water. When he's not in the film studio, he's exploring sound in music. They are both freelance professors at various universities. - Blog: http://DemystifySci.com/blog - RSS: https://anchor.fm/s/2be66934/podcast/rss - Donate: https://bit.ly/3wkPqaD- Swag: https://bit.ly/2PXdC2y SOCIAL: - Discord: https://discord.gg/MJzKT8CQub - Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/DemystifySci - Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/DemystifySci/ - Twitter: https://twitter.com/DemystifySci MUSIC: -Shilo Delay: https://g.co/kgs/oty671

Tom Turbo trifft Physik-Nobelpreisträger Anton Zeilinger

2022. aasta Nobeli füüsikaauhinna said kolm kvantfüüsikut – Alain Aspect, John Clauser ja Anton Zeilinger. Oma töödega lükkasid nad lõplikult ümber Albert Einsteini kõhklused selle kohta, et kvantfüüsika pole ikka päris füüsika aga hoopis mingi justkui mõnda praktilist laadi ülesannet lahendava puuduliku teooriaga, mis eirab peamist: Albert Einsteini arusaama selle kohta, et miski ei saa liikuda valgusest kiiremini siinses Universumis. Aga tuleb välja, et saab. Hetkega saab teleporteeruda kvantinformatsioon. Sellest, miks see nii on ja kuidas see toimub, räägivad Tallinna Tehnikaülikooli professor Jaan Kalda ja saatejuht Marek Strandberg. Kui te ennem ei ole kvantfüüsikast arus saanud, siis selle saate kuulamise järgselt on vähemalt kaks võimalust: kas asi läheb paremaks, selle arusaamise mõttes, või mitte.

Folge: Physik-Nobelpreis für Anton Zeilinger

Der Leitartikel als Podcast: Keine Angst, es geht dabei nicht um Quantenphysik.

Drei Physiker erhielten den Nobelpreis, für Experimente zur "spukhaften Fernwirkung". Was verbirgt sich dahinter? Warum war diese Forschung so bedeutsam? Und ermöglicht sie tatsächlich Beamen? Lust auf noch mehr Quantenphysik? Dann lies diesen Artikel zur Frage, wie das Universum aus Quanten entstanden sein könnte: www.pm-wissen.com/wissen/a/quantengravitation-das-raetsel-um-raum-und-zeit/13088/ +++ Unsere allgemeinen Datenschutzrichtlinien finden Sie unter https://datenschutz.ad-alliance.de/podcast.htmlUnsere allgemeinen Datenschutzrichtlinien finden Sie unter https://art19.com/privacy. Die Datenschutzrichtlinien für Kalifornien sind unter https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info abrufbar.

Wie könnten wir heute über etwas anderes reden, als über den diesjährigen Physik-Nobelpreis über die experimentelle Erforschung der Quantenverschränkung. Wie immer überall, wo es Podcasts gibt. Viel Vergnügen! #nobelpreis #Zeilinger #quantenmechanik #quantenverschränkung #quantenteleportation ********** Anmerkungen, Fragen, Kritik oder interessante Themenvorschläge bitte an physikgeplaenkel@gmail.com ********** Unsere Instragram Seite: https://www.instagram.com/physikgeplaenkel/ Unsere Facebook Seite: https://www.facebook.com/Physik-Geplänkel-1153934681433003/ Unser Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCD1CT-nTdEagwMF16P6gIKQ/ Folgt uns unter "Physik-Geplänkel" auf Spotify, iTunes, Deezer, PocketCasts oder als Amazon Alexa Skill. Oder am besten direkt unter https://physik-geplaenkel.podigee.io/

Congratulate Professor Anton Zeilinger on winning the Nobel Prize in Physics! Among other things, Zeilinger had researched the entanglement of twin photons and was able to prove that twin photons can maintain simultaneous contact with each other over any distance - and that this contact cannot be hacked by third parties.It time to heal yourself correctly. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

– we're back in the Dark Ages We start this week with commenting on the winners of the two first Nobel Prizes this year – Svante Pääbo who won the prize in Medicine or Physiology and the trio of Aspect, Clauser and Zeilinger who shares the Physics prize. We also celebrate the first ever female European commander of the ISS, Samantha Cristoforetti, before we travel back in time with our TWISH-machine and acknowledge this week's birthday bay, Denis Diderot. Then we dig into the news: UK: The dark side of social media? The Molly Russell case UK: Children's digital resilience to be approached as a collective effort to prepare young people for the future SWEDEN: MD who assisted man to die loses his license GERMANY: Voting now open for the ‘Heroes of Facts Awards‘ UKRAINE: Four regions of the country annexed by Russia following sham referendum POLAND: New-born babies are handed over through a hole in the wall The Prize for being Really Wrong goes to Jacob Rees-Mogg, British minister of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy who has no clue about the physics of energy. Enjoy! Segments: Intro; Greetings; TWISH; News; Really Wrong; Quote And Farewell; Outro; Out-Takes;

Con Alberto Aparici volvemos a una conversación entre el físico alemán Albert Einstein y el danés Niels Bohr sobre la física cuántica. ¿De qué habla la teoría de física cuántica? ¿En qué discutían Einstein y Bohr? Ambos físicos discrepaban sobre la forma de los electrones, aunque la realidad le dio la razón a Bohr a través de la llamada esfera de probabilidades. Einstein, sin embargo, contraatacó con la teoría de variables ocultas. Pero, ¿qué tiene que ver esto con el Premio Nobel del 2022?  Pues que los premiados -Aspect, Clauser y Zeilinger- se han dedicado a demostrar que las variables ocultas de Einstein no existen. Sobre todo esto hablamos con Francis Villatoro, profesor en la Universidad de Málaga y autor del blog La Ciencia de la Mula Francis. 

Con Alberto Aparici volvemos a una conversación entre el físico alemán Albert Einstein y el danés Niels Bohr sobre la física cuántica. ¿De qué habla la teoría de física cuántica? ¿En qué discutían Einstein y Bohr? Ambos físicos discrepaban sobre la forma de los electrones, aunque la realidad le dio la razón a Bohr a través de la llamada esfera de probabilidades. Einstein, sin embargo, contraatacó con la teoría de variables ocultas. Pero, ¿qué tiene que ver esto con el Premio Nobel del 2022?  Pues que los premiados -Aspect, Clauser y Zeilinger- se han dedicado a demostrar que las variables ocultas de Einstein no existen. Sobre todo esto hablamos con Francis Villatoro, profesor en la Universidad de Málaga y autor del blog La Ciencia de la Mula Francis. 

Con Alberto Aparici volvemos a una conversación entre el físico alemán Albert Einstein y el danés Niels Bohr sobre la física cuántica. ¿De qué habla la teoría de física cuántica? ¿En qué discutían Einstein y Bohr? Ambos físicos discrepaban sobre la forma de los electrones, aunque la realidad le dio la razón a Bohr a través de la llamada esfera de probabilidades. Einstein, sin embargo, contraatacó con la teoría de variables ocultas. Pero, ¿qué tiene que ver esto con el Premio Nobel del 2022?  Pues que los premiados -Aspect, Clauser y Zeilinger- se han dedicado a demostrar que las variables ocultas de Einstein no existen. Sobre todo esto hablamos con Francis Villatoro, profesor en la Universidad de Málaga y autor del blog La Ciencia de la Mula Francis. 

Con Alberto Aparici volvemos a una conversación entre el físico alemán Albert Einstein y el danés Niels Bohr sobre la física cuántica. ¿De qué habla la teoría de física cuántica? ¿En qué discutían Einstein y Bohr? Ambos físicos discrepaban sobre la forma de los electrones, aunque la realidad le dio la razón a Bohr a través de la llamada esfera de probabilidades. Einstein, sin embargo, contraatacó con la teoría de variables ocultas. Pero, ¿qué tiene que ver esto con el Premio Nobel del 2022?  Pues que los premiados -Aspect, Clauser y Zeilinger- se han dedicado a demostrar que las variables ocultas de Einstein no existen. Sobre todo esto hablamos con Francis Villatoro, profesor en la Universidad de Málaga y autor del blog La Ciencia de la Mula Francis. 

Der Quantenphysiker Anton Zeilinger ist seit den 1970er-Jahren der erste Österreicher, der einen Nobelpreis für Naturwissenschaften erhält. Tanja Traxler aus der STANDARD-Wissenschaftsredaktion spricht heute darüber, wer Anton Zeilinger eigentlich ist und wie seine Forschungsarbeit unser tägliches Leben beeinflusst. Wir fragen nach, wie genau Quanten-Zeleportation funktioniert und welche technologischen Fortschritte sie uns in der Zukunft bringen kann. Und wir stellen die Frage, wie sich dieser Nobelpreis auf den Stellenwert von Wissenschaft und Forschung in Österreich auswirken könnte. STANDARD-Korrespondent Klaus Stimeder spricht außerdem über die Rückeroberungen in den ukrainischen Provinzen Donezk, Cherson, Charkiw und Luhansk durch die ukrainische Armee. **Hat Ihnen dieser Podcast gefallen?** Mit einem STANDARD-Abonnement können Sie unsere Arbeit unterstützen und mithelfen, Journalismus mit Haltung auch in Zukunft sicherzustellen. Alle Infos und Angebote gibt es hier: [abo.derstandard.at](https://abo.derstandard.at/?ref=Podcast&utm_source=derstandard&utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=podcast&utm_content=podcast)

Der erste Physik-Nobelpreis für einen Österreicher seit 1945: Der Quantenphysiker Anton Zeilinger bekommt gemeinsam mit dem Franzosen Alain Aspect und dem Amerikaner John Clausen den diesjährigen Nobelpreis. Wofür erhalten Sie die Auszeichnung? Was heißt sie für Österreichs Forschung? Und wie reagierte Anton Zeilinger auf die Nachricht? Thomas Kramar, Feuilletonchef und Wissenschaftsjournalist der "Presse", ist Gast im Studio.

"It's probably one of the most beautiful theories ever invented.” – Anton Zeilinger conveys his love for the elegant simplicity of quantum mechanics in this call recorded shortly after the public announcement of his Nobel Prize. “With very few symbols”, he explains, “you can explain a whole lot of things from the smallest quantum particles up to the origin of the universe.” Zeilinger emphasises that the news also sends a message of huge appreciation to all the people he worked with, and ends by introducing Adam Smith to the strange and potentially useful world of quantum teleportation. From October 3-10, don't miss our mini-season that will showcase the absolute freshest interviews with the new 2022 Nobel Prize laureates. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Thema: Zeilinger erhält den Physik-Nobelpreis

Hey Friends! Today, Gernot joins Janell for another podcast! Janell talks a little about why Leonie chose not to record this episode and a little about the puddle ocean analogy when it comes to faith. Gernot shares his faith journey, how he started living his Christian faith, and his personal story about loss. Janell and Gernot talk about the question “Do you want God?” and they discuss the idea that for some, spending eternity with a God they do not love will be hell. Janell and Gernot also talk about how the goodness of God leads people to salvation, choosing to trust Jesus, and how Jesus changes everything. We hope you enjoy this episode! About Gernot Zeilinger Gernot has a B.A in International Business Administration as well as a Certificate in Theological Studies from Wycliffe Hall, University of Oxford and a Certificate in Christian Apologetics from the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics. He is currently pursuing a Masters in Systematic and Philosophic Theology at the University of Nottingham and has started the process to become ordained in the Lutheran Church in Austria. He is currently working for Campus für Christus (the Austrian subsidiary of CRU) to create an apologetics ministry there named PROFUNDUM, focused on building bridges and dialogue between Christianity and secular perspectives to show the truth and relevance of Christianity for the world.___________________We would love to thank our Patrons for all their amazing support! To learn more about supporting Finding Something REAL via Patreon, click here!FSR s5e26 with LeonieFSR s5e with Leonie and FrankFSR s5e with Leonie and StephanieFar June 2022 with AbduFSR May with Shannon MooreFSR April 2021 with Julia GarschagenThe Great Divorce- C. S. LewisLord of the Rings - J. R. R. Tolkien 1 Corinthians 3:1-9John 17:3Revelation 21:23

Urlaub in Syrien? Undenkbar, oder? Sebastian Zeilinger ist jemand, der so etwas macht. Bereits vor dem verheerenden Krieg hat der gebürtige Bayer das Land im Nahen Osten bereist, lange bevor der Westen sämtliche Kontakte nach Damaskus abgebrochen hat und auf Sanktionen und die Unterstützung „gemäßigter Rebellen“ umsattelte. Dass Europa und insbesondere Deutschland damit aber auf die falsche Karte setzten, wissen wir heute genau – spätestens seit dem einschneidenden Jahr 2015 gehören die syrischen Migranten zum deutschen Stadtbild dazu. Zeilinger ist der Ansicht, dass das gar nicht so sein müsste: Er hat den Kontakt nach Syrien auch durch die Krisenzeiten hindurch aufrechterhalten, das Land weiterhin bereist und Gespräche geführt. Er glaubt: Rückführungen der syrischen Migranten wären problemlos machbar, wenn man das in Berlin denn wöllte. Doch gerade hier hapert es. Deswegen gründete er 2018 „AHA“ ins Leben gerufen, einem Programm, mit dem vor Ort Perspektiven ermöglicht werden sollen, die die syrischen Migranten ermutigen, in ihr Land zurückzukehren. Wir haben mit Zeilinger über seine Syrien-Erfahrungen gesprochen, welche Pläne er für sein Projekt noch hat und – natürlich – ob man selbst dort Urlaub machen sollte.

Gernot Zeilinger is our guest on the podcast today! Gernot is an Austrian husband and father of three. He grew up in a Roman Catholic family, but turned towards socialism, atheism, and punk when he was a teen. He shares his story of how his 5-year-old daughter's questions lead him to investigate Christianity, how he came to finally surrender to God, and how Christianity was set apart from fairytales. They also talk about how the Resurrection is the best explanation, how the Gospel writer's honesty points to truth, and much more! We hope you enjoy this episode! Gernot has a B.A in International Business Administration as well as a Certificate in Theological Studies from Wycliffe Hall, University of Oxford and a Certificate in Christian Apologetics from the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics. He is currently pursuing a Masters in Systematic and Philosophic Theology at the University of Nottingham and has started the process to become ordained in the Lutheran Church in Austria. He is currently working for Campus für Christus (the Austrian subsidiary of CRU) to create an apologetics ministry there named PROFUNDUM, focused on building bridges and dialogue between Christianity and secular perspectives to show the truth and relevance of Christianity for the world.___________________We would love to thank our Patrons for all their amazing support! To learn more about supporting Finding Something REAL via Patreon, click here!FSR s5e17 Totti's Intro EpisodeFSR s2e18 part 1 with Totti and BrandonFSR s2e18 part 2 with Totti and BrandonFSR s3e22 with the Exchange LadiesFSR s4e16 with Josh WhiteFSR s3e2 with Josh WhiteProfundum.Austria on Instagram Inception (2010)Surprised by Joy - C. S. LewisThe Chronicles of Narnia - C. S. LewisLord of the Rings - J. R. R. Tolkien Cover-Up in the Kingdom - Steven BaughmanNot a Fan - Kyle IdlemanWhat is a Seder Dietrich BonhoefferRavi Zacharias1 Thessalonians 4:11-12 and to make it your ambition to lead a quiet life: You should mind your own business and work with your hands, just as we told you, so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so that you will not be dependent on anybody.Matthew 22

In which Janet and Will talk about their collaborations and their solo work.

Michigan sheep produce about 325,000 lbs. of wool each year and the Zeilinger Wool Company spins much of that wool into beautiful yarn and products. Chief Operations Officer April Zeilinger shares how the 100+ year-old company got its start and some of the ways to spot quality yarn.

Andy Ogris und Franz Gruber waren einst Teamkollegen und auch Gegner. Der ehemalige Stürmer spricht über den einstigen Admira- und Austria-Goalie mit viel Respekt. "Ich habe stets den Mut der Goalies bewundert, wie sie sich furchtlos in die Schüsse und vor die Gegner werfen", sagt Ogris und ist überzeugt, dass sich in den letzten Jahren wohl kaum eine Position auf dem Spielfeld derart verändert hat wie die Aufgaben des Tormanns und der Torfrau. Davon ist auch Ex-Goalie Franz Gruber überzeugt. Der 54-jährige Oberösterreicher aus Gmunden diente unter 16(!) Austria-Chefbetreuern von Jogi Löw über Karl Daxbacher bis Peter Stöger als Tormann-Trainer. Aktuell arbeitet er als Torwartkoordinator der Violetten. Als Head of Goalkeeping konzentriert sich Grubervollständig auf die durchgängige Torhüterausbildung bei der Austria - von den Kindern bis zu den Bundesliga-Mannschaften der Frauen und Männer. Gemeinsam mit seinem oberösterreichischen Landsmann Leonhard Zeilinger, der als UEFA-A-Lizenz-Trainer über fünf Jahre bei der SV Ried als Torhüter-Trainer tätig war und das Masterstudium der Sportwissenschaften an der Uni Salzburg abgeschlossen hat, verfasste Gruber ein "Goalie-Lehrbuch" über Motorik, Technik, Taktik und Psyche. Wie es zum Buch über das komplette Training für Torhüter mit unzähligen Übungen - die via QR-Code als kleine Videos am Handy abgespielt werden können - kam, wer aktuell die besten Torhüter sind und wie das Duo die Goalies des ÖFB-Nationalteams bewerten, besprechen Franz Gruber und Leonhard Zeilinger mit Andy Ogris. Der Stammtisch moderiert von LAOLA1-Chefredakteur Peter Rietzler:

Jordan Zeilinger from Wreck My Podcast, is a fellow podcaster and a wrestling fan. We have a fun convo about wrestling, entertainment, podcasting and everything else. He even knew a very famous wrestler when he was in school! Enjoy the episode and check out Wreck My Podcast! @Brianbreakerodr on twitter @brianbreaker on Instagram ProWrestlingTees.com/brianbreaker Bbph.redbubble.com Whatamaneuver.net Patreon.com/Bbph (if decide to support me and Bayn with production costs to produce these shows) Also check out Breaker and Bayn's Power Hour every Sunday! And my new toy podcast TB Toycast every Thursday! Available wherever you get your podcasts! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

April Zeilinger shares her experience marrying into a family business, the importance of a social media presence, and the inner workings of the mill!

In dieser Folge erfahren wir, was Breathwork bewirken kann und Sascha erzählt uns von seiner Arbeit als Breathwork Coach. Wie er auf Bali während einer Auszeit zufällig die Atemarbeit entdeckt hat und seine erste Breathwork Session so tiefgreifend war, dass er sich entschied ein Teacher Training zu absolvieren um mehr darüber zu erfahren. Wie Breathwork einem hilft, sich und seinen Körper zu spüren und mit sich selbst sich verbunden zu fühlen. Wie Sascha so schön sagt: “Für mich is Breathwork so besonders, da wir ja immer nach externen Stimulanzien suchen, Breathwork ist genau andersrum, es kommt alles von innen nach aussen. “Die Atemarbeit hat ihm geholfen seine Beziehungen zu verbessern und besser mit negativen Emotionen umzugehen und in seinen Körper hinein zu spüren. In diesem sehr persönlichen Interview kann man Sascha´s Leidenschaft für das Thema Breathwork sehr spüren. Heute arbeitet als Breathwork Coach in Berlin und München und auf Festivals. https://de.spiritofbreath.net/https://www.instagram.com/spirit_of_breath/?hl=dehttps://thegardensofbabylon.com/https://agapezoe.com/de/agape-zoe/