- This topic has 25,983 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 day, 8 hours ago by
.
- Posts
All must go through Jesus to get to the Father= learning, applying and obeying all that he taught to the best of ones ability.
God gave Jesus all authority in heaven and on earth=Matt 28:18) And all authority to judge( John 5:27
One prominent scholar called Origen is sometimes quoted by Trinitarians who appeal to his wisdom for other purposes. However, they avoid this particular quotation for obvious reasons. Origen wrote in the early 200’s A.D and was a noted expert in Koine Greek.
“We next notice John’s use of the article [“the”] in these sentences. He does not write without care in this respect, nor is he unfamiliar with the niceties of the Greek tongue. In some cases he uses the article, and in some he omits it. He adds the article to the Word, but to the name of theos he adds it sometimes only. He uses the article, when the name of theos refers to the uncreated cause of all things, and omits it when the Word is named theos. Does the same difference which we observe between theos with the article and theos without it prevail also between the Word with it and without it? We must enquire into this. As the theos who is over all is theos with the article not without it, so the Word is the source of that reason (Logos) which dwells in every reasonable creature; the reason which is in each creature is not, like the former called par excellence the Word. Now there are many who are sincerely concerned about religion, and who fall here into great perplexity. They are afraid that they may be proclaiming two theos [gods] and their fear drives them into doctrines which are false and wicked. Either they deny that the Son has a distinct nature of His own besides that of the Father, and make Him whom they call the Son to be theos all but the name, or they deny divinity of the Son, giving Him a separate existence of His own, and making His sphere of essence fall outside that of the Father, so that they are separable from each other. To such persons we have to say that “the theos” on the one hand is Autotheos [God of himself] and so the Saviour says in His prayer to the Father, “That they may know Thee the only true theos [God]; “but that all beyond the theos [God] is made theos by participation in His deity, and is not to be called simply “theos” but rather “the theos “. And thus the first-born of all creation, who is the first to be with the theos , and to attract to Himself deity, is a being of more exalted rank than the other theos [gods] beside Him, of which theos is the theos [God], as it is written, “The theos [God] of theos [gods], the Lord, hath spoken and called the earth.” It was by the offices of the first-born that they became theos [gods], for He drew from the theos [God] in generous measure that they should be made theos [gods], and He communicated it to them according to His own bounty. The true theos [God], then, is “the theos ,” [“the God” as opposed to “god”] and those who are formed after Him are theos [such as the Son of God], images, as it were, of Him the prototype. But the archetypal image, again, of all these images is the word of the theos [God], who was in the beginning, and who by being with the theos [God] is at all times deity, not possessing that of Himself, but by His being with the Father, and not continuing to be theos , if we should think of this, except by remaining always in uninterrupted contemplation of the depths of the Father.”
(Origen’s Commentary on the Gospel of John, Book II, 2)The theos of John 1:1b identifies the theos of John 1:1c as the YHWH who laid the foundation of the world and the heavens were the work of His hands and not only that but that as YHWH, this theos who is the Son, will at a future time, fold them up like a garment and they will be changed in Hebrews 1:10-12.
Amazing!
More from Origen:
1. Psalm 102 → Hebrews 1:10–12 applied to the Son
Source: Contra Celsum 1.67
“In speaking of the Son he says: ‘Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth…’”2. Psalm 102 → The Son as Creator
Source: De Principiis 1.2.2
“The Son… is said in the Epistle to the Hebrews to have laid the foundation of the earth and the heavens.”3. Psalm 102 → The Son’s immutability
Source: De Principiis 1.2.8
“The Son… is said to be unchangeable: ‘Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not fail.’”4. Psalm 102 → Explicitly “said of the Son”
Source: Commentary on John 1.37
“It is said of the Son: ‘Thou, Lord, in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth…’”5. Psalm 102 → Eternal years of the Son
Source: Homilies on Jeremiah 9.4
“Concerning the Son it is written: ‘Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not fail.’”6. YHWH who appeared to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob = the Son
Source: Contra Celsum 5.39
“The God who appeared to the patriarchs was the Logos of God… not the invisible Father.”7. YHWH in the burning bush = the Son
Source: Homilies on Exodus 4.5
“The one who speaks to Moses from the bush is the Son of God.”8. YHWH who speaks through the prophets = the Son
Source: De Principiis 1.2.6–7
“It was the Son of God who spoke in the prophets… the same Christ who later became man.”9. YHWH who wrestled with Jacob = the Son
Source: Commentary on Genesis (fragment)
Origen identifies the divine figure who wrestles with Jacob as the Logos, not the Father.10. YHWH who walked in the Garden = the Son
Source: De Principiis 4.4.1
Origen says the visible God who walked and spoke is always the Son, since the Father is invisible.11. YHWH who destroyed Sodom = the Son
Source: Commentary on Genesis (fragment)
Origen says the “Lord” who rained fire from the Lord is the Logos.12. YHWH who gave the Law = the Son
Source: Homilies on Exodus 12.4
Origen says the Son is the one who gave the Law to Moses.13. YHWH who appeared to Isaiah = the Son
Source: Commentary on John 2.2
Origen affirms John 12:41: Isaiah saw the glory of Christ, the divine Lord on the throne.14. YHWH who appeared to Joshua as “Captain of the Lord’s Host” = the Son
Source: Homilies on Joshua 2.1
Origen identifies the divine commander as Christ.15. YHWH who spoke to Samuel = the Son
Source: Homilies on 1 Samuel (fragment)
Origen says the divine voice is the Logos, not the Father.SUMMARY:
Origen consistently identifies the Son as the visible YHWH of the Old Testament—Creator, Lawgiver, the One who appears, speaks, saves, judges, and reigns. He applies Psalm 102 (a YHWH text) directly to the Son multiple times and treats all divine manifestations as the work of the Logos.The theos of John 1:1b identifies the theos of John 1:1c as the YHWH who laid the foundation of the world and the heavens were the work of His hands and not only that but that as YHWH, this theos who is the Son, will at a future time, fold them up like a garment and they will be changed in Hebrews 1:10-12.
Amazing!The Jesus is G-d of the “Old Testament”?!?!?! Did the Jesus ever claim to be G-d, the Almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth? Never ONCE does he say it! I suppose you will claim the “I AM” statement in John was a reference back to Exodus 3; which couldn’t be more false, but we’ll leave that for a later time.
Who or what will be folded up like a garment and be changed in the Hebrew passage?
YHWH the Father of Jesus, identified His Son as the YHWH who laid the foundation of the earth and established the heavens as well in Hebrews 1:10-12.
Heaven and earth will be someday be rolled up like a garment by the Son.
YHWH is both God and Lord
@ lightenup,
You didn’t answer the question; who or what will be folded up like a garment and be changed?
How can YHWY be both the Father and the son (aka lord)? Keith is onto something…
I guess you kind of answered the question of who or what will be rolled up; but who or what is the “they”? If it’s simply heaven and earth as the Psalm says, what is the writer of Hebrews getting at? The Psalm is speaking of G-d lasting longer than HIS creation as HE is eternal AND what does this have to do with the Jesus?
Surely I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man.
[3] I neither learned wisdom, nor have the knowledge of the holy.
[4] Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth?👉 what is his name👈, and 👉what is his son’s name👈, if thou canst tell?Proverbs 30
Not Proverbs 30…AGAIN!!!
Have you not read the passage with comprehension? Are we really using “pointy fingers” without explaining what you’re talking about?!!!?
Reading this passage we start with Agur speaking with two others and basically calls himself stupid. He then asks them four rhetorical questions; who has gone to heaven and back, who has gathered the wind in their hand, bound water in their coat, or has established the earth? Of course the only and obvious answer is G-d; only G-d can do all these things. Then the final question asks, “what is his name?” it’s not making the conclusion it’s G-d; it’s asking the two people what man can do these things and if there is someone who can, what’s his sons name. Since the answer is no human can, there is no son of this non-existent person, either.
This is a simple proverb; why make everything complicated? Now it’s your turn to explain how this passage relates to the Jesus.
In Psalm 102, the thing that “will be rolled up like a garment” is the created order itself—the heavens and the earth. Psalm 102:25–26 says that the heavens are the work of God’s hands, and that they “will perish,” and “will all wear out like a garment.”
The one who rolls them up (or “changes them like a robe”) is God—YHWH—the same subject of all the verbs in the passage (“laid,” “remain,” “change”). The imagery emphasizes that creation is temporary, but God is eternal.
Hebrews 1:10–12 quotes this passage and applies it directly to the Son, identifying Him with the eternal Creator whose years never end.
When you read the name of YHWH in the OT, the pronouns “He” or “They” or “Us”can represent the unity of the Father, Son and Spirit, or the members within the unity, the Father or the Son or their Spirit.
This is a simple proverb; why make everything complicated? Now it’s your turn to explain how this passage relates to the Jesus.
who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth?
what is his name
, and what is his son’s name, if thou canst tell?
Wow what an intellectual response; you have made me more aware of who the jesus is…loads of sarcasm!
I explained the passage, how come you can’t give your thoughts on it? Repeating the words of the passages DOES NOT EXPLAIN HOW THE PASSAGE IS A REFERENCE TO THE jESUS!!!! How do you NOT understand that?!? Why does the “christian” have such difficultly in explaining what and why they believe what they believe?
It’s almost like “christians” have been brainwashed into believing everything they have been told…tell a lie long enough and it becomes truth!
@ lightenup,
You understand Psalm 102 perfectly; why are you corrupting the meaning of it by applying it to the Jesus? It seems you are using the Hebrews 1:10-12 passage to claim G-d of the Tanakh and the Jesus of the NT are the same. To unpack what is being said in this chapter one needs to begin in verse 5, where this dialog begins? G-d is supposedly to have said in reference to the Jesus:
Verse 5a “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You” a quote from Ps 2:7; a Psalm referencing the individual David, NOT his descendants, and MOST DEFINITELY NOT the Jesus…corruption
Verse 5b “I will be a Father to Him and He shall be a Son to Me” a quote from II Sam 7:14; and G-d is speaking of David’s son Solomon, NOT the Jesus…corruption
Verse 6 G-d is speaking of bringing “the firstborn into the world” and says “And let all the angels of God worship Him” and this is suppose to be a quote from Ps 97:7; EXCEPT that’s NOT AT ALL what Ps 97:7 says “All who worship idols are ashamed, those who boast about worthless idols. All the gods bow down before him.” Finding another lie, twist, and rewriting of the Tanakh; completely changing what was actually written. Never mind the FACT the Psalm is about G-d being the sovereign, just king of the world who comes in power to vindicate his people…corruption
Verse 7 the writer claims G-d says of the angels “Who makes His angels winds, and His ministers a flame of fire” a quote from Ps 104:4; except we find another passage twisted and rewritten (what is actually written), “He makes the winds his messengers, and the flaming fire his attendant.” It’s the winds that become G-d’s messengers, NOT angels. Another Psalm that praises God as the ruler of the world and who sustains all life…corruption
Verse 8 is an interesting passage as it is suppose to be G-d is speaking about the son “But of the Son He says” and in this next part HE calls the Jesus “Oh God” and “God, your God”; G-d is calling the Jesus G-d?!?!?! That’s right the Jesus is “the god of the OT.” Looking at the passages quoted from the Tanakh, the passages have nothing to do with the Jesus let alone claiming the Jesus is equal to or is G-d.
The first part “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom.” is quoted from Ps 45:6 and is speaking specifically of G-d who’s “kingdom is a scepter of justice.”
Verse 9 continues with Ps 45:7 “You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness” is a reference to David who loved righteousness and hated lawlessness AND it’s “For this reason God, your God has anointed you (David) with the oil of joy, elevating you (David) above your (David’s) companions.” However, according to the writer of Hebrews it was G-d who anointed HIMSELF.
Verses 10-12 we’ll combine together as they are from a single passage; and according to the unknown writer is suppose to be another reference to the Jesus, but this time as the creator of heaven and earth, “You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of Your hands” a quote from Ps 102:25. According to Genesis it was G-d who did all creating, not by or thru anyone; but HE, HIMSELF did it all.
Verse 11 we continue with, “They will perish, but You remain; and they all will become old like a garment” a quote from Ps 102:26 which references G-d’s creation as being temporary when compared to G-d; which leads us into the next verse.
Verse 12 “And like a mantle You will roll them up; like a garment they will also be changed. But You are the same, and Your years will not come to an end.” a quote from Ps 102:27 and confirms this existence we call life can end and G-d will still remain.
The psalmist in 102 laments his oppressed state, but longs for a day when G-d will restore Jerusalem and vindicate his suffering people. When is the Jesus planning on doing this; when he “returns”??? The Jesus only speaks of judgment and condemnation on those who failed to believe in him.
Prove verses 6, 7 aren’t phantom verses, because I didn’t find in the Tanakh; the unknown writer cut out what he didn’t like and inserted what he thought could make the Jesus into G-d. Verses 8-9 make zero sense; G-d is calling “the son”, “G-d” and speaking of “the son” as if HE (G-d) is below him (“the son”, this is language of subservience, not authority). Verses 10-12 are stripped from the Tanakh and twisted by the unknown writer to falsely point to the Jesus and then you back track this to John 1:1-3 calling it proof the Jesus is G-d?!?!? What you’ve done is taken one piece of corruption, applied it to another piece of corruption, and called it truth.
I am dumbfounded how no one sees this or how all turn a blind eye to the corruption that is written in black and white! The NT is suppose to be the “infallible word of G-d” and we have this!
Your entire critique rests on a single assumption that is historically false:
You are comparing Hebrews to the medieval Masoretic Text (MT), finalized around 900–1000 AD.
Hebrews is quoting the Septuagint (LXX), the Jewish Scriptures used in the first century.
Every “corruption” you think you see is simply the LXX wording, not a Christian invention.Once that is acknowledged, your argument collapses.
1. “These verses aren’t in the Tanakh.”
They *are* in the Tanakh used by Jews in the time of Jesus.
Deut 32:43 (“Let all the angels of God worship Him”) appears in the LXX AND in the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QDeutq).
The MT is simply shorter. Hebrews is quoting the older Jewish textual tradition.2. Psalm 2 and 2 Samuel 7
You assert these are not Messianic.
But Jewish sources *before Christianity* apply Psalm 2 to the Messiah:
– Dead Sea Scrolls (4QFlorilegium)
– Targum Jonathan
– Rabbinic tradition (Sukkah 52a)
The same is true of the Davidic covenant in 2 Sam 7.
Your interpretation is post‑Christian, not ancient.3. Psalm 104:4
You object that “winds” are messengers, not angels.
But the Hebrew *mal’akhim* means messengers/angels, and the LXX translators (Jewish scholars) rendered it “angels.”
Hebrews quotes the LXX. Nothing is “twisted.”4. Psalm 45
The Hebrew text itself calls the Davidic king “Elohim” (“Your throne, O God…”).
This is not a Christian corruption.
It is Jewish royal theology. Hebrews applies the royal psalm to the Messiah exactly as Jewish tradition did.5. Psalm 102
Yes, the psalm speaks of YHWH.
That is precisely why Hebrews uses it.
The argument is:
– The Father speaks to the Son (Heb 1:8)
– The Father applies a YHWH‑passage to the Son (Heb 1:10–12)
This is not “corruption.” It is a theological conclusion:
If the Son shares the attributes of YHWH (eternal, unchanging, creator),
then the Son participates in the divine identity.You haven’t refuted the argument.
You’ve only assumed the conclusion is impossible.6. The real issue
You are treating the medieval MT as the original Bible and the LXX as “corruption.”
But the LXX is older, widely used by Jews, and supported by the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Hebrews quotes the Scriptures as they existed in the first century, not the Scriptures as edited in the 10th century.Your critique fails because it is aimed at the wrong text.
There are 2 spots in NT where more than 1 is called God or god-John 1:1-2Cor 4:4– At both spots the true God is called Ho Theos=The God–Both the Word and satan are called Theos=god in this scenario. Trinity error has God to the Word and god to satan, it cannot be translated both ways. It is 100% undeniable fact god is correct for both the Word and satan in that scenario. Catholicism put God to the Word in their 4th century translating, carried over to every trinity bible translation. Other Greek scholars in history has a god at John 1:1 long before the New world translation did. Jesus was never with Catholicism, his adversary is( 2Cor 11:12-15-2Thess 2:3)–he has mislead billions with that capitol G God to the Word. The God Israel served is the true God=YHWH(Jehovah) he is a single being God. Its recorded history fact, at the council of Constantinople( 381 ce) the holy spirit was added for the very first time to a 3 godhead. Catholicism encyclopedia is clear-The assimilation of the trinity did not occur into a Christians life until near the end of the 4th century. You best relook at the facts.
I initially started a long response to what you said, but abandoned it. I will say this in response to what you wrote, in none of your response did you address the core issue; nothing written in Hebrews chapter one is about the Jesus! It’s a twisting of the Hebrew scripture to fit the Jesus.
When have you looked into the Jewish response to what you believe is truth? In all your responses you have given the christian rote answer, you’re like a parrot squawking; what is the Jewish response? The Tanakh belongs to them, it was given to them because it’s about them and NOT christianity; yet, you believe you understand it better than they do. Listen to Michael Skobac, Stuart Federow, Lawrence Hajioff, or Tovia Singer.
Change your world or sit and be stuck in your rut.
You didn’t address anything I wrote.
You simply repeated your conclusion: “Hebrews isn’t about Jesus.”
But you didn’t engage a single textual point.Let’s be clear about what actually happened in your reply:
1. You did not answer the Septuagint issue.
Every “corruption” you claimed was shown to be the LXX wording — the Jewish Scriptures used in the first century.
You ignored this completely.2. You did not answer the Dead Sea Scrolls evidence.
Deut 32:43 (“let all the angels of God worship Him”) appears in 4QDeutq.
You ignored this too.3. You did not answer the fact that Psalm 2 was interpreted messianically by Jews before Christianity.
Dead Sea Scrolls, Targum Jonathan, and early rabbinic sources all apply Psalm 2 to the Messiah.
You didn’t touch it.4. You did not answer the grammar of Psalm 45.
The Hebrew text itself calls the Davidic king “Elohim.”
You skipped that as well.5. You did not answer the logic of Hebrews 1.
The argument is simple:
– The Father speaks to the Son (v. 8)
– The Father applies a YHWH‑passage to the Son (vv. 10–12)
You didn’t refute the argument.
You just restated your conclusion.Instead of addressing any of these points, you shifted to:
“Listen to Skobac, Federow, Hajioff, Singer.”Appealing to modern speakers is not a substitute for dealing with the actual text, the actual manuscripts, or the actual Jewish interpretations that existed before Christianity.
You said the Tanakh “belongs to them.”
Fine — then deal with the fact that *their own pre‑Christian sources* contradict your claims:– The LXX is a Jewish translation.
– The DSS preserve the longer Deut 32:43.
– Jewish tradition applied Psalm 2 to the Messiah.
– Jewish royal theology calls the king “Elohim.”
– Jewish wisdom literature presents a pre‑existent co‑creator.These are not “Christian rote answers.”
These are Jewish texts, Jewish translations, and Jewish interpretations that existed long before the NT.If you want to argue Hebrews misuses the Tanakh, then you need to engage the actual textual data — not dismiss it and tell me to “change my world.”
Right now, you’re avoiding the evidence, not answering it.
“You missed that theos in 2 Corinthians 4:4 does have the article — but the presence or absence of the article never determines whether theos refers to the true God or a false god. Greek doesn’t work that way. The article marks specificity, not deity.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
