It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
RS reads: “Of the Son he says, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.’” (KJ, NE, TEV, Dy, JB, NAB have similar renderings.) However, NW reads: “But with reference to the Son: ‘God is your throne forever and ever.’” (AT, Mo, TC, By convey the same idea.)
Which rendering is harmonious with the context? The preceding verses say that God is speaking, not that he is being addressed; and the following verse uses the expression “God, thy God,” showing that the one addressed is not the Most High God but is a worshiper of that God. Hebrews 1:8 quotes from Psalm 45:6, which originally was addressed to a human king of Israel. Obviously, the Bible writer of this psalm did not think that this human king was Almighty God. Rather, Psalm 45:6, in RS, reads “Your divine throne.” (NE says, “Your throne is like God’s throne.” JP [verse 7]: “Thy throne given of God.”) Solomon, who was possibly the king originally addressed in Psalm 45, was said to sit “upon Jehovah’s throne.” (1 Chron. 29:23, NW) In harmony with the fact that God is the “throne,” or Source and Upholder of Christ’s kingship, Daniel 7:13, 14 and Luke 1:32 show that God confers such authority on him.
Hebrews 1:8, 9 quotes from Psalm 45:6, 7, concerning which the Bible scholar B. F. Westcott states: “The LXX. admits of two renderings: [ho the·osʹ] can be taken as a vocative in both cases (Thy throne, O God, . . . therefore, O God, Thy God . . . ) or it can be taken as the subject (or the predicate) in the first case (God is Thy throne, or Thy throne is God . . . ), and in apposition to [ho the·osʹ sou] in the second case (Therefore God, even Thy God . . . ). . . . It is scarcely possible that [’Elo·himʹ] in the original can be addressed to the king. The presumption therefore is against the belief that [ho the·osʹ] is a vocative in the LXX. Thus on the whole it seems best to adopt in the first clause the rendering: God is Thy throne (or, Thy throne is God), that is ‘Thy kingdom is founded upon God, the immovable Rock.’”—The Epistle to the Hebrews (London, 1889), pp. 25, 26.
Why does Hebrews 1:10-12 quote Psalm 102:25-27 and apply it to the Son, when the psalm says that it is addressed to God? Because the Son is the one through whom God performed the creative works there described by the psalmist. (See Colossians 1:15, 16; Proverbs 8:22, 27-30.) It should be observed in Hebrews 1:5b that a quotation is made from 2 Samuel 7:14 and applied to the Son of God. Although that text had its first application to Solomon, the later application of it to Jesus Christ does not mean that Solomon and Jesus are the same. Jesus is “greater than Solomon” and carries out a work foreshadowed by Solomon.—Luke 11:31.
God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth."
For I can testify that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not in line with the truth.
He didn't say anything about him "being the Word". So no, I asked the correct question & stated it exactly as I meant it. Also, your view is only one of Christianity's views on him. Some don't believe he is the Word at all and don't preach anything like that.
originally posted by: Mogzy1977
I truly believe that Christianity stems from a father's embarrassment that his daughter was a hussy, a harlot and a whore!
I don't believe you understand what I actually am saying. You are correct in that the OP said Jesus was God but what I have actually said is that, I as a a disciple of the Nazarene's, refute his belief that Jesus was God. It is not said or taught by any Apostle or true disciple of Jesus. Even though he/she claims or states a belief does not make it true. There are many people who claim Jesus was God or a god who are not Christian at all. What I am saying is that the terrestrial Jesus has never been The Most High Ell. and that the first congregation of the Jesus movement of James has never made that claim.
An open forum is an open forum and being so gives me as much right to express my theology as it does yours. Your purpose was to deny the deity of Jesus and you well know it. You simply took a spin in doing so. You based your spin on the premise that claimed He was the Most High EL which totally wrong and not in the MSS of Christianity.
originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: spacemanjupiter
You are wrong, look in the page before this one, I posted an excerpt of one of several historians, in this case a pagan Roman historian, that corroborates the fact that Jesus Christ did exist...
For crying out loud people, the motto of ATS is "[deny ignorance"... It is not "embrace ignorance"...