Actually my understanding comes from Jesus, Paul, Peter and John.
Jesus said there is only one true God, his God and Father, who sent Jesus to die for us. (John 3:16; 17:3)
Jesus tells us after being resurrected and glorified, he still worships his God. (Rev 3:2)
Paul tells Christians there is only one God, the Father. (1 Cor 8:5,5)
Paul tells us the God of Jesus our Lord, gives us wisdom and understanding. (Eph 1:3, 17)
Peter tells us that the God and Father of our Lord Jesus gives us hope and salvation (1 Pet 1:3)
John tells us that the resurrected glorified Jesus recommends us to Jesus' God and Father (Rev 1:5,6)
John also tells us that it was God who gave Jesus the Revelation, who gave it to an angel who gave it to John.
At least in this area Arius agreed with the original bible writers, and not Plato.
Added words at Col 1:15-19 (Added words are defined as “words that change the meaning of the original”)
NIV = 127 words; KJV = 135 words; NASB = 139 words; NWT = 160 words
Of these 4 translations, which translation added words?
Per Jason BeDuhn in “Truth in Translation”
Of these four Bibles, only the NIV, has added words that change the meaning of the original. The two words vs 15: “over all creation” & vs 19: “his [meaning God’s] fullness”.
Page 83, 84: “Yet in many public forums on Bible translation, the practice of these [NIV, TEV, Amplified, LB, NRSV] Bible translations are rarely if ever pointed to or criticized, while the NW is attacked for adding innocuous “other” in a way that clearly indicated its character as an addition of the translators. Why is that so? The reason is that many readers apparently want the passage to mean what the NIV try to make it mean. That is, they don’t want to accept the obvious and clear sense of “firstborn of creation” as identifying Jesus as “of creation”. “Other” is obnoxious to them because it draws attention to the fact that Jesus is “of creation” and so when Jesus acts with respect to “all things” he is actually acting with respect to “all other things.” But the NW is correct.”
“Rather Paul uses “all,” after identifying Christ as the first-born of creation, to refer to ”the rest.” “All” includes every being and force and substance in the universe, with the exception, of course, of God and, semantically speaking, Jesus, since it is his role in relation to the “all” that is being discussed.”
“All” is commonly used in Greek as a hyperbole, that is, an exaggeration. The “other” is assumed. . . . There can be no legitimate objection to “other” in Colossians 1 because here, too, Paul clearly does not mean to include God or Christ in his phrase “all things.” when God is the implied subject, and Christ the explicit agent, of the act of creation of these ‘all things.” But since Paul uses “all things” appositively (that is, interchangeably) with “creation,” we must still reckon with Christ’s place as the first-born of creation, and so the first-born of “all things”.
Your understanding of this verse comes from the Greek Plato and not from Paul.
“Biblegateway.com’s ‘Commentary of Colossians 1:15 which states:
“The first stanza of this confession relates Christ to creation, beginning with the claim that Jesus is the image of the invisible God. Most scholars locate the important idiom image within the Hellenistic world, where it referred to various media of divine revelation. For example, according to Platonic thought, the entire cosmos is the visible "image" of the invisible God (see Lohse 1971:47)” . . . In fact, under the influence of Plato, Hellenistic Judaism interpreted God's act of creation as informed by preexistent and eternal images or expressions of God's Wisdom. In this mythic sense, then, creation is the visible, historical counterpart of invisible, heavenly reality.