- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Not3,
The writer of Hebrews recorded that the Father addressed the Son with this statement:“And, “YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS” (Hebrews 1:10)
Who laid the foundation of the Earth?
The heavens are the work of whose hands?According to the writer of Hebrews and God the Father it's Jesus.
And lets not overlook the fact that the Father addressed the son as “Lord”. Why do you think that would be?
Is 1:18's proof text #1, Hebrews 1:10
God addressed Jesus as “Lord” because he made him Lord! Whew, that one was easy!
The Hebrews passage is not so easy. All I can really offer is that the beginning of Hebrews is confusing to me. I've done some varied reading on it and most non-Trinitarians agree that confusing and there are reasons why the one passage that is applied to God is applied to Jesus. The passage also goes on to imply that there are two “God's” – “….therefore God, your God….”
For me, I must stick to the clear scriptures that teach God, the Father, is the sole creator of heaven and earth. Jesus was the *reason* for which God created everything *through.*
Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 26 2007,16:38) Who laid the foundation of the Earth?
The heavens are the work of whose hands?According to the writer of Hebrews and God the Father it's Jesus.
The Father laid the foundations with his own hand.According to God the Father – the creator is Jesus?
Are you saying that Jesus is the Father?
Quote (Not3in1 @ June 26 2007,16:53) God addressed Jesus as “Lord” because he made him Lord! Whew, that one was easy!
It's not quite that simple Not3. There is a biblical principle to consider here. When “kurios” is used as an honorific (which is what you are alleging) it's always spoken by the subservient to the superior. Check the NT, you'll see this hold's true. Jesus' Father is not the subservient to Jesus in their relationship, so it's exceptionally unlikely that “kurios” is meant as an honorific in Hebrews 1:10. Which leaves one other alternative…..Quote Hebrews 1:10
And,”YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;Please note the highlighted word. Remembering that the texts from vs 5-12 are, according to the writer of Hebrews, attestations made by the Father to the Son (“But of the Son He says” – vs 8), it’s evident that the Father actually addressed the Son as “Lord.” The Greek word “kurios” is used in most LXX manuscripts to render the Divine Name, YHWH. That’s well known. But also, when used in the NT as an honorific (“lord”) it signifies that the one addressed is superior in rank or station to the addresser. The slave addresses his mater as “lord”, not the other way around. This is principal is exceptionless.
So there are two possible scenarios here:
1) The Father was addressing the Son in a way that denoted His subservience, or inferiority in rank, to Yeshua. Or,
2) He was addressing the Son as YHWH.
I assert that #1 cannot be legitimate in light of the many NT verses where the Father is spoken as being “greater than” (i.e. superior in office) to the Son. So that leave only one possibility – The Father addresses the Son as YHWH. This would align perfectly with the context of Hebrews Ch 1 as a whole, which is about the absolute supremacy of the Son. It also fits precisely within the context of verses 10-12, which are OT quotations that manifestly reference YHWH…..
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….]
I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer an explanation. It's a true conundrum for those who deny Jesus is YHWH. One of many….Quote The Hebrews passage is not so easy. All I can really offer is that the beginning of Hebrews is confusing to me. I've done some varied reading on it and most non-Trinitarians agree that confusing and there are reasons why the one passage that is applied to God is applied to Jesus.
Okay, thanks for being so candid. I agree that Hebrews 1:10 is hard to explain from a antitrinitarian's perspective. There are no good reasons why a NT writer would apply to Jesus an OT quote that exclusively references YHWH…..unless He is YHWH. This is especially true given the context into which the quote is placed. To me the whole chapter appears specifically designed to present Jesus as YHWH to the readers.https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….78;st=0
Quote The passage also goes on to imply that there are two “God's” – “….therefore God, your God….”
Yes but we know that there is only one true God. Right? So the “two God” dilemma doesn't go any way towards addressing the issue in the text. It's just obfuscation.Quote For me, I must stick to the clear scriptures that teach God, the Father, is the sole creator of heaven and earth.
Considering the Creation passages in te Bible, these two statements are, I think, undeniable:1. YHWH is the sole Creator of the Heavens and Earth (Psalms Psa 96:5, 102:25, Isa 44:24, Job 9:5-8, Jer 10:10-12).
2. The prehuman Yeshua was actively involved in the Creation (John 1:3, 1 Cor 8:6, Col 1:16, Heb 1:2) to the extent where He actually “laid the foundation of the Earth” and the heavens are the work of His hands (Heb 1:10).
How you reconcile them is up to you.
Quote Jesus was the *reason* for which God created everything *through.*
I don't recall reading that anywhere in scripture Not3. I have to assume you have some how deduced it…Quote (Not3in1 @ June 26 2007,16:55) Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 26 2007,16:38) Who laid the foundation of the Earth?
The heavens are the work of whose hands?According to the writer of Hebrews and God the Father it's Jesus.
The Father laid the foundations with his own hand.According to God the Father – the creator is Jesus?
Are you saying that Jesus is the Father?
You say “the Father” laid the foundations with his own hand, but the Bible tells me YHWH did it. You have read a presupposition into the texts. I don't even think the Father really was “the Father” until he beget His “Son”, which didn't happan before the incarnation (i.e. He wasn't the Father at the Creation). We agree on that one right?Hebrews 1:5
For to which of the angels did He ever say “YOU ARE MY SON, TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU”? And again, “I WILL BE A FATHER TO HIM AND HE SHALL BE A SON TO ME“?Tell me what you think.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 26 2007,21:12) It's not quite that simple Not3.
Yes, it is!
Yes, it is!
Yes, it is!
You just like making things difficult.
I'm kidding ya.
I'll be back later tonight to address your posts. Thanks for the information and I'll be pondering what you've said today.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 26 2007,21:12) Quote Hebrews 1:10
And,”YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;So there are two possible scenarios here:
1) The Father was addressing the Son in a way that denoted His subservience, or inferiority in rank, to Yeshua. Or,
2) He was addressing the Son as YHWH.
I assert that #1 cannot be legitimate in light of the many NT verses where the Father is spoken as being “greater than” (i.e. superior in office) to the Son. So that leave only one possibility – The Father addresses the Son as YHWH. This would align perfectly with the context of Hebrews Ch 1 as a whole, which is about the absolute supremacy of the Son. It also fits precisely within the context of verses 10-12, which are OT quotations that manifestly reference YHWH…..
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….]
I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer an explanation. It's a true conundrum for those who deny Jesus is YHWH. One of many….
Ahem! There was an explanation immediately after your post. What do you mean I couldn't offer an explanation? That remark is not true. Quote Verse 10 seems to be talking about the LORD and how he (&/or the author) sees the son. Not only is this evident from the fact that verse one starts off with the word “God” and then speaks about the son as another, followed by what He or the author says about the son in verses 8, but it is then obvious that it is God who is the HE in verse 13 because it says: “But to which of the angels has He ever said, “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET”?”
So 'HE' is obviously the one spoken of in the immediate preceeding verses, ie., verse 10 – “YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS; which then means it is a verse about the LORD, not the son.
Think about it, the LORD/God says of his son, “sit at his right hand”. So He in verse 10 cannot be the son because if it was, then 'HE' in verse 13 would also be the son and that would then break verse 13 completely and render it as a verse that makes no sense.
Read it carefully:
8But of the Son He [The Father, refer vs 6] says,
“YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER,
AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM.
9″YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS;
THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HAS ANOINTED YOU
WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS.”
10And,
“YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;
11THEY WILL PERISH, BUT YOU REMAIN; AND THEY ALL WILL BECOME OLD LIKE A GARMENT,
12AND 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.” (Hebrews 1:8-12)The word “and” in verse 10 should indicate to you that it's a further utterance made by the Father to the Son. It's not a difficult passage to interpret…..
Quote (t8 @ July 17 2007,16:24) I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer an explanation. It's a true conundrum for those who deny Jesus is YHWH. One of many….
But you're quite right t8, you did offer an explanation. I just didnlt think it was a good one. I should have written:“I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer a plausible explanation.”
Hi Is,
I'm not sure I understand the difficulty.
If I have a son, it is only natural that my son would be human, because I am human. If God has a Son, what else could he be but divine, because God is divine?
But just as an only son becomes an inheritor of his father's possessions in many cultures here on Earth, wouldn't it stand to reason that God's only Son be inheritor of all God's creation, rather than an intrinsic but distinct part of the Godhead?
Hi Cas,
I'm not completely sure why you are asking me this. I agree that Yeshua is divine. But I suppose where my view might differ from yours (from what I can infer from your post) is that I don't see His divinity (Godly essence) as being a function of a begettal (either before or during His natural birth), but that He always existed and always was divine, and that divinity was carried through in the incarnation to His Earthly existence. Deity put on humanity.Blessings
Fair enough Isaiah. But it is pure speculation and should be held as an opinion only. I invite you to teach on the rooftops that which is written, but making absolute assumptions about Christ before the beginning isn't wise in my opinion. How can any man know if it isn't revealed?
Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 17 2007,20:34) Quote (t8 @ July 17 2007,16:24) I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer an explanation. It's a true conundrum for those who deny Jesus is YHWH. One of many….
But you're quite right t8, you did offer an explanation. I just didnlt think it was a good one. I should have written:“I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer a plausible explanation.”
He he, that is better.What about saying he offered something that I didn't like or I didn't agree with?
Quote (t8 @ July 17 2007,21:49) Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 17 2007,20:34) Quote (t8 @ July 17 2007,16:24) I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer an explanation. It's a true conundrum for those who deny Jesus is YHWH. One of many….
But you're quite right t8, you did offer an explanation. I just didnlt think it was a good one. I should have written:“I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer a plausible explanation.”
He he, that is better.What about saying he offered something that I didn't like or I didn't agree with?
I disagreed with it because it was incorrect. If you were right I would have agreed with you.Quote (t8 @ July 17 2007,21:46) Fair enough Isaiah. But it is pure speculation and should be held as an opinion only. I invite you to teach on the rooftops that which is written, but making absolute assumptions about Christ before the beginning isn't wise in my opinion. How can any man know if it isn't revealed?
It's an opinion based on what scripture has revealed about Yeshua. He “existed in the form [Gr. morphe = essential nature] of God” (Phil 2:6) and “was [Gr. en = continuous existence] God”. Then ho Logos took on the form of a bond servant and became flesh…..What's not to get?
“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.”–Reasoning Book.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 17 2007,22:00) Quote (t8 @ July 17 2007,21:49) Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 17 2007,20:34) Quote (t8 @ July 17 2007,16:24) I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer an explanation. It's a true conundrum for those who deny Jesus is YHWH. One of many….
But you're quite right t8, you did offer an explanation. I just didnlt think it was a good one. I should have written:“I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer a plausible explanation.”
He he, that is better.What about saying he offered something that I didn't like or I didn't agree with?
I disagreed with it because it was incorrect. If you were right I would have agreed with you.
hmmmQuote (david @ July 17 2007,22:07) “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.”–Reasoning Book.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Mar. 24 2007,13:10) Hebrews 1
1God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. 3And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they. 5For to which of the angels did He ever say, “YOU ARE MY SON, TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU”? And again, ” I WILL BE A FATHER TO HIM AND HE SHALL BE A SON TO ME”? 6And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says, “AND LET ALL THE ANGELS OF GOD WORSHIP HIM.” 7And of the angels He says,” WHO MAKES HIS ANGELS WINDS, AND HIS MINISTERS A FLAME OF FIRE.” 8But of the Son He says, “YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER, AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM. 9″ YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS; THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HASANOINTED YOU WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS.” 10And, “YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS; 11THEY WILL PERISH, BUT YOU REMAIN;AND THEY ALL WILL BECOME OLD LIKE A GARMENT, 12AND 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.” 13But to which of the angels has He ever said, “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET”? 14Are they not all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?This verse comes from a chapter in Hebrews where the writer’s obvious premise was to demonstrate the absolute supremacy of the Son to his Jewish readers. It’s an apologetic work where the Hebrew OT texts are heavily drawn upon. This NT writer, like others, appeared to have no hesitancy at all applying to Yeshua OT quotations that exclusively reference YHWH. The OT quotations undoubtedly would have shocked the monotheistic Jews to the core, verses 10-12 especially so. It really is a christological tour de force, which reaches its climax in verses 8-12. It’s interesting to annotate the writer’s conveyances leading up to and immediately following verse 10. Here is a quick summary:
- The “world” was made through Him (v 2)
- He is said to be the radiance of the Father’s glory [Gr. doxa] (v 3)
- He is the exact representation of the Father’s “hypostasis” [nature/substance] (v 3)
- He “upholds [sustains] all things by the word of His power” (v 3)
- The angels are commanded to worship Him [a sole prerogative of YHWH] (v 6)
- He is called “God” (with the definite article) by the Father (v 8)
- He is contrasted from false gods (v 11)
- Is said to be immutable [an sole attribute of YHWH – e.g. Malachi 3:6] (v 12)
….and in amongst all these, what must have been startling affirmations (to the intended readers), we read this:
And,”YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;
The writer of Hebrews was quoting Psalms 102:25 which was, of course, written about the Most High God, YHWH, as the context of the Psalm unmistakably bears out:
Psalm 102:19-27
19For He looked down from His holy height; From heaven the LORD gazed upon the earth, 20To hear the groaning of the prisoner, To set free those who were doomed to death, 21That men may tell of the name of the LORD in Zion And His praise in Jerusalem, 22When the peoples are gathered together, And the kingdoms, to serve the LORD. 23He has weakened my strength in the way; He has shortened my days. 24I say, “O my God, do not take me away in the midst of my days, Your years are throughout all generations. 25″Of old You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. 26″Even they will perish, but You endure; And all of them will wear out like a garment; Like clothing You will change them and they will be changed. 27″But You are the same, And Your years will not come to an end. 28″The children of Your servants will continue, And their descendants will be established before You.”Psalm 102:25 is a verse quite obviously written about YHWH, but according to the Hebrews’ writer it was, in reality, an utterance spoken by the Father to the Son. The Hebrew's writer affirms that it was the Father Himself Who personally addresses His Son as THE Creator of the Universe! So here we have a clear elucidation of the Son’s exact role in the creation. To me this shows that the descriptive language in the OT dealing with YHWH’s act of Creation is, in the mind of the author, perfectly APPLICABLE TO the Logos.
Q) In what sense was Yeshua the Creator of the Heavens and Earth?
A) In the sense that was attributed to YHWH in Psalms 102:25!
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;t=1278Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 17 2007,22:00) Quote (t8 @ July 17 2007,21:49) Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 17 2007,20:34) Quote (t8 @ July 17 2007,16:24) I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer an explanation. It's a true conundrum for those who deny Jesus is YHWH. One of many….
But you're quite right t8, you did offer an explanation. I just didnlt think it was a good one. I should have written:“I put this to t8 and he couldn't offer a plausible explanation.”
He he, that is better.What about saying he offered something that I didn't like or I didn't agree with?
I disagreed with it because it was incorrect. If you were right I would have agreed with you.
Well yes. What is the point?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
