Hebrews 1:8

Originally posted by sonship
I would wager that if you could conceivably get all the translators of those English versions together in a room you'd probable see many disagreements and opinions on other matters.

This is not argument ad populum. This is throwing considerable doubt upon your confidence that you and you alone know what the Greek to English of Hebrews 1:8 must be.

The quotation at Hebrews 1:8 is taken directly from psalm 45:6,7 as beetle has noted, it reads

Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.

Footnotes: Psalm 45:6 Here the king is addressed as God’s representative - NIV

How do the translators of the NIV know this? verse 7 reads, 'God, your God'.

Why then dear reader must the trinitarian insist on applying the term God to the Christ when quoting the verse in the book of Hebrews by implication of the intended verb, knowing that its a reference to Gods representative? You guessed it, religious bias. Will they admit it? Only time will tell.

If blame is placed on trinitarians or translators concerning Hebrews 1:8 blame must be placed upon the writer of the book of Hebrews for that concept that Old Testament passages about GOD applied to the Son.

The proof of this is immediately after the verse whose grammatical construction is being challenged.

Verse 10 follows right along - "And, You in the beginning Lord, laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of Your hands; They will perish, but You remain perpetually; and they all will become old like a garment, 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 fail." (Hebrew 1:10-12)

I challenge anyone to go back to the source of this quotation of the Psalm 102:25-27, consider the entire Psalm.

I see no way around the fact that the writer of Hebrews was equating Jehovah God in that Psalm with the Son in Hebrews 1:8,9 .

Christ in Hebrews is God in Psalm 102:25-27 in the revelation of the writer.

Before you go back and thoroughly digest Psalm 102 read again the seamless flow in Hebrews about the Son in 1:8-12

" ... therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of exultant joy above Your partners;

And, You have in the beginning, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth ... etc."

The whole tenor of verses 8 through 12 agree with the introduction that Christ is "the Son ... being the effulgence of His [God's] glory and the impress of His substance and upholding and bearing all things by the word of His power, having made purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high ; ... etc."

Originally posted by sonship
If blame is placed on trinitarians or translators concerning Hebrews 1:8 blame must be placed upon the writer of the book of Hebrews for that concept that Old Testament passages about GOD applied to the Son.

The proof of this is immediately after the verse whose grammatical construction is being challenged.

Verse 10 follows right along - [b]"And, You purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high ; ... etc." [/b]

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the quotation which Paul cites in the book of Hebrews chapter 1:8 is not from psalm 102, its from psalm 45:6,7 where the text actually states,

Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
therefore [b]God, your God, has set you above y ...[text shortened]... psalmist himself with 'my God'. I know who I would rather believe, Jesus Christ every time.[/b]

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the quotation which Paul cites in the book of Hebrews chapter 1:8 is not from psalm 102, its from psalm 45:6,7 where the text actually states,

Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
therefore [b]God, your God, has set you above y ...[text shortened]... psalmist himself with 'my God'. I know who I would rather believe, Jesus Christ every time.[/b]

Originally posted by sonship
I understand that.

The next three verses,(10,11,12), are from Psalm 102 about God the Creator. And they are spoken of in Hebrews in reference to the Son, Christ.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
hard for you to get away from the fact that the Christ refers to the father as 'My God', so you do what all evangelicals do, you ignore it and try to interpret some other verse in support of your paganism, its entirely typical and what we have come to expect.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It is hard to get away from the fact that God addressed the Son as God too. Why do you ignore that fact? Why would He tell all the angels to worship the Son. Do you wish to ignore that fact too?

The Instructor

Originally posted by galveston75
What scripture is that? It says to worship or honor?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you may have noticed that I provide reasons, you nothingness, what is there to debate with you if you insist on introducing logical fallacies and arguments based upon 'appeals to populace', 'every one believes it so it must be true'. I have proven here and elsewhere that you have no real way of knowing what an accurate rendering is and what is not, ...[text shortened]... top wasting my time and yours by pretending that you do. Run along, there's a good fellow.

Originally posted by josephw
Actually, my "appeals" stand to reason while your arguments are based on the ideas from the minds of the fringe elements of religious fanaticism.

Do you really think I'm going to believe you when you post such an opening argument? You didn't even cite the reference you used. Are you an authority on the origin and preservation of the Holy Scriptures? I think not robbie.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have provided reasons, both grammatically and doctrinally, you do what you can only do, cite lots of biased translations in support of your paganism, which is fine by me because its a weak and beggarly argument, a logical fallacy for sure, 'everyone translates it this way, therefore it must be the true translation', a nonsense. All you need to do ...[text shortened]... Jaywill, but it will be ok, we shall expose religious bias wherever we find it, so feel easy.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Simply another example of mangling the text to fit your doctrine.

Why must you limit God?

Robbie,

I think your latest mock campaign of encouraging people that they believe in you is a tactic to get people to stop conversing with you. A bit of sly reverse psychology. A gimmick to be left alone, perhaps.