In Hebrews chapter 1 ,verses 10-12, the author quotes Psalm 102:25-27, and most Christians use it as proof that Yeshua is creator and hence Yahweh, conflating him with the essence of the One God who he called "father" and "my God' and "greater" and "the only one good" etc, ultimately rendering all such sentiments from Yeshua as only words to be qualified or misused to their very death. Even though the milk of the word should have already easily established for them that the father alone was creator in Genesis (Mal. 2:10), they decide to misuse Hebrews where the author says:
Hebrews 1:10 “In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11 They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12 You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end.”
The fact is that the writer of Hebrews quotes Psalm allright, but he quotes the Septuagint version and not the Hebrew. And there is a difference! In the Hebrew text, the one supplicating to Yahweh is still supplicating to Yahweh from verse 24 on. In the Septuagint, however, Yahweh begins to answer the one who has been praying from verse 24 on. And it is this version the writer of Hebrews quotes! The writer of Hebrews apparently views the suppliant as the Messiah. I think this proves without a doubt that even though the words said in Hebrews 1:10-12 could apply to Yahweh in one fulfillment, they could apply to Yeshua in a separate one.
It is common for the writer of Hebrews to apply OT texts that formerly were applicable word for word to people like David and Solomon to Yeshua in separate applications and fulfillments and never because he's a person of their essences, of course. (2 Sam 7:14, Heb. 1:5, Ps. 45:6, Heb. 1:8) So it shouldn't be any wonder that he would do the same thing with creation scriptures because there is an old one and a new one. And, lo and behold, which one is the context of Hebrews 1? Well, we have, in context, the "inhabited earth to come" (2:9), "the last days" (1:2), and a "kingdom"(1:8), etc. How apropos considering that in the context of Psalm 102 in the LXX (which is what Hebrews is quoting), we have “the generation to come” and "the people that shall be created" (v. 18) Really, nothing more should have to be said. It's obvious Yeshua is agent of the new creation. Isaiah 51:16 sheds light. Here Yahweh says prophetically:
"I have put My words in your mouth and have covered you with the shadow of My hand, to establish the heavens, to found the earth, and to say to Zion, 'You are My people.'"
Even trinitarian bias commentaries would have to admit this is about a "new economy under the Messiah."
Barnes' Notes on the Bible says about the text:
"It refers to the restoration of the Jews to their own land; to the re-establishment of religion there; to the introduction of the new economy under the Messiah, and to all the great changes which would be consequent on that. This is compared with the work of forming the heavens, and laying the foundation of the earth. It would require almighty power; and it would produce so great changes, that it might be compared to the work of creating the universe out of nothing. Probably also the idea is included here that stability would be given to the true religion by what God was about to do permanency that might be compared with the firmness and duration of the heavens and the earth."
If trinitarians were consistent (and generally they cannot possibly be while at the same time maintaining a trinity), they would be able to apply such reasoning consistently with the texts in Hebrews as well. It seems odd and kind of sad that they can reason in Isaiah, but not in Hebrews. I guess I can only make an appeal to consistency in reasoning. Quite frankly, Isaiah 51:16 could interpret Hebrews 1:10-12 for you. In which case I would again refer you to trinitarian scholars and commentaries that easily recognize a new creation there! Trinitarians also pretend to care about context, yet won't acknowledge it in some of the new creation passages. Wonder why?
A couple questions that may come to mind though when this alternative view is made known are:
How could Yahweh say in the LXX , in Psalm 102:23 & 24, "tell me the fewness of my days. Take me not away in the midst of my days?" Well, given that in context there is a "set time" (verse 13) where He will "have mercy upon Sion", Yahweh is simply asking the suppliant to acknowledge the shortness of this set time and not to summon him when it is but half expired. (For more on that, see “Heb. 1:10-12 and the Septuagint Rendering of Ps. 102:23” by B.W. Bacon.)
Another common question is:
If the texts are about a new creation, how could such ever be "changed"? Considering the poetic, as opposed to literal, sound of the texts, at least to me personally, I'm not sure this even needs to be answered because poetry isn't to be taken literally. However, as the biblicalunitarian website notes, there is a "heaven and earth of the Millennium, the 1000 years Christ rules the earth, which will perish (Isa. 65:17; Rev. 20:1-10), and then the heaven and earth of Revelation 21:1ff, which will exist forever. " In addition, Anthony Buzzard notes that "Even the millennial age of the future will be replaced by a further renewed heaven and earth (Rev. 20:11; 21:1)."
There are some brothers and sisters out there who share my essential beliefs but who would disagree on my view of these texts. There are at least two other views from the biblical unitarian community that are probably worth at least considering and noting, but this is the one I think is right, though I'm not dogmatic and won't pretend these others don't make good points worth at least considering. I will explain and provide links for the other two views below. :-)
Here's a better video than this one in agreement with this view:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dtncxnqbq6w
The second possible view is that these texts are about the father and not Yeshua at all.
From the biblicalunitarian website:
"Although we ascribe to the explanation above(and they're speaking of the same view I presented in this blog, basically), a number of theologians read this verse and see it as a reference to the Father, which is a distinct possibility. Verse 10 starts with the word “and” in the Greek text, so verse 9 and 10 are conjoined. Since verse 9 ends with, “Your God has set you [the Christ] above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy,” these theologians see the reference to “the Lord” in the beginning of verse 10 as a reference back to the God last mentioned, i.e., the Father. Norton explains this point of view:
"Now the God last mentioned was Christ’s God, who had anointed him; and the author [of the book of Hebrews], addressing himself to this God, breaks out into the celebration of his power, and especially his unchangeable duration; which he dwells upon in order to prove the stability of the Son’s kingdom…i.e., thou [God] who hast promised him such a throne, art he who laid the foundation of the earth. So it seems to be a declaration of God’s immutability made here, to ascertain the durableness of Christ’s kingdom, before mentioned; and the rather so, because this passage had been used originally for the same purpose in the 102nd Psalm, viz. [Author uses KJV] To infer thence this conclusion, “The children of thy servants shall continue, and their seed be established before Thee. In like manner, it here proves the Son’s throne should be established forever and ever, by the same argument, viz., by God’s immutability.” (Norton, Reasons, pp. 214 and 215)
Theologians such as Norton say that as it is used in the Old Testament, the verse shows that the unchanging God can indeed fulfill His promises, and they see it used in exactly the same way in Hebrews: since God created the heavens and the earth, and since He will not pass away, He is fit to promise an everlasting kingdom to His Son."
I would also like to personally add that in surrounding scriptures like Hebrews 1:5-7 and 2:5-8 there are OT passages about the father reapplied to the father again in Hebrews here. So it wouldn't be far fetched in the least in this context to see Hebrews 1:10-12 the same way. It's very possible. Since the writer switches back and forth from talking about the Son and the Father so much. As noted before, this isn't the view I subscribe to while at the same time being open minded about the possibility.
Here's a youtube with this particular view presented pretty well! He doesn't start talking about verse 10 till about 6 and a half minutes in:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuv5-OVN0k4
The third view could be summed up by saying that what is said of Wisdom in the OT could be reapplied poetically to Yeshua in the New because he became to us "wisdom from God."
From Gary Fakhoury:
"So here (in Heb. 1:10-12) we are confronted with a choice. We can believe the writer is contradicting both himself and the vast body of clear scriptural teachings that YHVH alone made the worlds, or we can conclude that v. 10-12 is yet another example of the writer seeing something in an OT passage which illuminates Christ in some important sense, even though every detail of the passage does not apply literally to Jesus. But in what sense does he see Christ in Ps. 102?
First, as we’ve noted, the NT teaches that Jesus is the embodiment of God’s creative wisdom, that “hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages” which was “established from everlasting, from the beginning, before there was ever an earth,” in that “The Lord by wisdom founded the earth…” (I Cor. 2:7; Prov. 8:23; 3:19). Thus Christ,the embodiment of creative wisdom, can be truly said to be “in the beginning, (laying) the foundation of the earth” (v. 10)."
full pdf (it would be great to read the context):
http://www.christianmonotheism.com/media/text/Gary%20Fakhoury%20-%20The%20Christology%20of%20Hebrews.pdf
I suppose even if the NT authors had passages like Proverbs 8:22-31 in mind when writing Hebrews 1:10-12 then they were simply recognizing how Christ has become that same wisdom that God created the world in.(Prov. 3:19, Jer. 10:12) Yahweh gave fruition to a plan known as the Messiah before he even made the world, again. (1 Pet. 1:20, Rev. 13:8 ) And this plan was his "wisdom" for the reconciliation of the world unto himself.(2 Corinthians 5:19) Christ at last became that *wisdom* in these last times(1 Cor. 1:30,1 Cor. 2:6,7) ,and so, again, represents (and actually fulfills to perfection and completion) what was there from the beginning.God creating in his wisdom becomes God creating in Christ because Christ became the wisdom of God. Simply stated, again, Yeshua "has become our wisdom sent from God."(1 Cor. 1:30) The father's wisdom came to life and manifest in Christ's flesh at the proper time, as opposed to some literal spirit named Wisdom crawling into a womb to become a man. To quote Karen Armstrong (from A History of God:From Abraham to the present:the 4000 year quest for God, p. 106):
"When Paul and John speak about Jesus as though he had some kind of preexistent life, they were not suggesting he was a second divine "person" in the later trinitarian sense. They were indicating that Jesus transcended temporal and individual modes of existence. Because the "power" and "wisdom" he represented were activities that derived from God, he had in some way expressed "what was there from the beginning." These ideas were comprehensible in a strictly Jewish context, though later Christians with a Greek background would interpret them differently."
I do believe it would make sense that when Yeshua became Yah's "wisdom", what was said of "Wisdom" could be reapplied to Yeshua in the NT. Because he "became" that Wisdom, not because he was named such in the OT as a second person of Yah's essence. It was a pattern for bible writers to apply OT truths to Yeshua in the NT. Functions that he fulfilled, ones that he was made and given. Also,foreshadowings and prefigurings that he became. Do you think that halted with Wisdom? I personally don't. I don't think this is necessarily the case in Hebrews however given the kingdom (as opposed to the Genesis) context. Just something to ponder though considering the Hebraic poeticism and personification, and subsequent fulfillment in Christ, of Yahweh's word and wisdom.
Again, not the view I personally think is most likely, but at the same time I won't readily discount or discard it.
Some of this is explained further here:
http://yahislove.blogspot.com/2011/08/wisdom-in-old-testamentperson-or.html
Showing posts with label Hebrews 1:10. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hebrews 1:10. Show all posts
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Monday, November 12, 2012
Quick Question for Trinitarians # 2
These questions aren't designed to accommodate trinitarian presupposition. They're designed to make a trinitarian reconsider his or her presuppositions with common sense, unqualified, honest, and reasonable usage of plain texts. It isn't that I don't know the typical trinitarian responses to such questions. It is that they don't seem honest, reliable, reasonable, or consistent. So when I ask such questions it is to plant seeds as opposed to gathering trinitarian responses unless those responses are going to help them see that they are abusing scripture. That they are defining God however they like whenever they like instead of just taking the explicit texts to tell them who he is without their added inference when they desire it. In other words, if Yeshua and the apostles says the father is creator, who are you to say the trinity is or to add your own ideas on top of those succint kindergarten revelations? A trinitarian's first instinct will be to run to Hebrews or Colossians chapter 1. I will provide links below the video to other videos which could help one exegete those widely misused passages.
Question # 2:
Acts 4:24 And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, 25 who through the mouth of our father David, your servant, 4 said by the Holy Spirit,“‘Why did the Gentiles rage, and the peoples plot in vain? 26 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against his Anointed’
Ok, so far would you agree that the God who is being spoken about here is the One who "made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them?" The One who spoke in the Old Testament? Keeping that answer in mind, what do you make of verses 27 and 30 in the same chapter that refer to the "holy servant Jesus" OF this One God who "made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them?" In other words, if the One God who "made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them" and spoke in the OT was a trinity, then wouldn't this mean, according to Acts, that Yeshua is the "holy servant" of the trinity? Yes, if the creator in Genesis is a triune godhead, then how can that One be said to have a "holy servant" named Yeshua when we all know Yeshua is the holy servant of the father and not of the trinity? Malachi 2:10 actually agrees with Acts chapter 4 when it says the God who created was the father. Do you agree with Malachi and Acts? If not them, then how about Yeshua who identified the creator of man and woman as a "he?" Who IS the "he" Yeshua spoke of in Matthew 19:4, the creator Malachi spoke of in 2:10, and the God the apostles prayed to in Acts 4:24 who "made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them?" A triune essence? You know, the one with the "holy servant Jesus?" This milk of the word should prove without a doubt that certain New Testament passages which seem to be talking about a new creation and not the Genesis one, are being widely misused. Unless, of course, Malachi, Yeshua, and the apostles were all simply clueless as to who created man, woman, heaven, and earth. They all propose that the father alone did, while trinitarians propose that the trinity did. I guess none of them had anything that could articulate a trinity in their vocabulary?
Hebrews 1:10-12 exegesis:
Anthony Buzzard on Hebrews 1.10 & the Age to Come, the Kingdom of God
Colossians 1 exegesis:
Question # 2:
Acts 4:24 And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, 25 who through the mouth of our father David, your servant, 4 said by the Holy Spirit,“‘Why did the Gentiles rage, and the peoples plot in vain? 26 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against his Anointed’
Ok, so far would you agree that the God who is being spoken about here is the One who "made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them?" The One who spoke in the Old Testament? Keeping that answer in mind, what do you make of verses 27 and 30 in the same chapter that refer to the "holy servant Jesus" OF this One God who "made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them?" In other words, if the One God who "made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them" and spoke in the OT was a trinity, then wouldn't this mean, according to Acts, that Yeshua is the "holy servant" of the trinity? Yes, if the creator in Genesis is a triune godhead, then how can that One be said to have a "holy servant" named Yeshua when we all know Yeshua is the holy servant of the father and not of the trinity? Malachi 2:10 actually agrees with Acts chapter 4 when it says the God who created was the father. Do you agree with Malachi and Acts? If not them, then how about Yeshua who identified the creator of man and woman as a "he?" Who IS the "he" Yeshua spoke of in Matthew 19:4, the creator Malachi spoke of in 2:10, and the God the apostles prayed to in Acts 4:24 who "made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them?" A triune essence? You know, the one with the "holy servant Jesus?" This milk of the word should prove without a doubt that certain New Testament passages which seem to be talking about a new creation and not the Genesis one, are being widely misused. Unless, of course, Malachi, Yeshua, and the apostles were all simply clueless as to who created man, woman, heaven, and earth. They all propose that the father alone did, while trinitarians propose that the trinity did. I guess none of them had anything that could articulate a trinity in their vocabulary?
Hebrews 1:10-12 exegesis:
Anthony Buzzard on Hebrews 1.10 & the Age to Come, the Kingdom of God
Colossians 1 exegesis:
Colossians1:15-19 - Jesus: Co-Creator of the New Creation - Dustin Smith and J. Dan Gill
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Anthony Buzzard on Hebrews 1:10 part 2
Since I have been covering Hebrews 1:10 in 3 other blogs(including Anthony Buzzard's commentary on it) found here(scroll down for all 3 blogs):
http://yahislove.blogspot.com/search/label/Hebrews%201%3A10
I thought I would share a video Anthony Buzzard made discussing it.I think he did a good job.
Truth is that there are too many texts to count that explicitly reveal Yahushua's father as the only Genesis creator(even some rather clear statements from Messiah himself saying his father created with no hint he did too as Anthony stated in this video..(Matthew 19:4,Mark 13:19..& GOD rested Heb. 4:3,4)Of course logically,however, Yahuwah had Christ in mind at the center of it all,as the purpose for a kingdom,before He ever made a thing.Yes,he made all things in Yahushua as the one he knew would hold it all together and make it all possible as the foreordained and decreed savior and upbuilder of a new creation.(Rev. 13:8,1 Peter 1:20,Is. 65:17,66:2,Eph. 1:10, 11,Gal. 6:15)I can't help reminding everyone that there's an alternative view also well presented to Hebrews 1:10 just for good measure and to not be so dogmatic about what I personally consider to be an ambiguous text.If you'd like to understand what that view is,go to the link above for my other blogs or click on Hebrews 1:10 under trinity texts to the side of my blog.God bless everyone.
http://yahislove.blogspot.com/search/label/Hebrews%201%3A10
I thought I would share a video Anthony Buzzard made discussing it.I think he did a good job.
Truth is that there are too many texts to count that explicitly reveal Yahushua's father as the only Genesis creator(even some rather clear statements from Messiah himself saying his father created with no hint he did too as Anthony stated in this video..(Matthew 19:4,Mark 13:19..& GOD rested Heb. 4:3,4)Of course logically,however, Yahuwah had Christ in mind at the center of it all,as the purpose for a kingdom,before He ever made a thing.Yes,he made all things in Yahushua as the one he knew would hold it all together and make it all possible as the foreordained and decreed savior and upbuilder of a new creation.(Rev. 13:8,1 Peter 1:20,Is. 65:17,66:2,Eph. 1:10, 11,Gal. 6:15)I can't help reminding everyone that there's an alternative view also well presented to Hebrews 1:10 just for good measure and to not be so dogmatic about what I personally consider to be an ambiguous text.If you'd like to understand what that view is,go to the link above for my other blogs or click on Hebrews 1:10 under trinity texts to the side of my blog.God bless everyone.
Monday, November 29, 2010
Alternative view of Hebrews 1:10
Hebrews 1:10 And,“You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning,and the heavens are the work of your hands;11 they will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment,12 like a robe you will roll them up,like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same,and your years will have no end.”
found here: http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=139#null:
"Now the God last mentioned was Christ’s God, who had anointed him; and the author [of the book of Hebrews], addressing himself to this God, breaks out into the celebration of his power, and especially his unchangeable duration; which he dwells upon in order to prove the stability of the Son’s kingdom…i.e., thou [God] who hast promised him such a throne, art he who laid the foundation of the earth. So it seems to be a declaration of God’s immutability made here, to ascertain the durableness of Christ’s kingdom, before mentioned; and the rather so, because this passage had been used originally for the same purpose in the 102nd Psalm, viz. [Author uses KJV] To infer thence this conclusion, “The children of thy servants shall continue, and their seed be established before Thee. In like manner, it here proves the Son’s throne should be established forever and ever, by the same argument, viz., by God’s immutability.” ~Norton, Reasons, pp. 214 and 215.
"Theologians such as Norton say that as it is used in the Old Testament, the verse shows that the unchanging God can indeed fulfill His promises, and they see it used in exactly the same way in Hebrews: since God created the heavens and the earth, and since He will not pass away, He is fit to promise an everlasting kingdom to His Son.
Theologians such as Norton say that as it is used in the Old Testament, the verse shows that the unchanging God can indeed fulfill His promises, and they see it used in exactly the same way in Hebrews: since God created the heavens and the earth, and since He will not pass away, He is fit to promise an everlasting kingdom to His Son."
I would also like to personally add that in surrounding scriptures like Hebrews 1:5-7 and 2:5-8 there are OT passages about the FATHER reapplied to the father again in Hebrews here.So it wouldn't be far fetched in the least in this context to see Hebrews 1:10-12 the same way.It's very possible.Since the writer switches back and forth from talking about the Son and the Father so much.
And finally here's a youtube with this other view presented pretty well!He doesn't start talking about verse 10 till about 6 and a half minutes in.He disabled embedding so go to the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuv5-OVN0k4
I already had two blogs about this with a different perspective.I can't be dogmatically certain of how to view it.Both the view in this blog or the view in the linked others here from Anthony Buzzard seems possible,to be honest.A good case could be made for either without any compromise of monotheism,without demanding a preexistent agent in the old creation,much less a trinity.
http://putawaythatmeat.blogspot.com/2010/09/anthony-buzzard-on-hebrews-110-and-john.html
http://putawaythatmeat.blogspot.com/2010/09/hebrews-110-addendum-little-reasoning.html
they will all wear out like a garment,12 like a robe you will roll them up,like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same,and your years will have no end.”
found here: http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=139#null:
"Now the God last mentioned was Christ’s God, who had anointed him; and the author [of the book of Hebrews], addressing himself to this God, breaks out into the celebration of his power, and especially his unchangeable duration; which he dwells upon in order to prove the stability of the Son’s kingdom…i.e., thou [God] who hast promised him such a throne, art he who laid the foundation of the earth. So it seems to be a declaration of God’s immutability made here, to ascertain the durableness of Christ’s kingdom, before mentioned; and the rather so, because this passage had been used originally for the same purpose in the 102nd Psalm, viz. [Author uses KJV] To infer thence this conclusion, “The children of thy servants shall continue, and their seed be established before Thee. In like manner, it here proves the Son’s throne should be established forever and ever, by the same argument, viz., by God’s immutability.” ~Norton, Reasons, pp. 214 and 215.
"Theologians such as Norton say that as it is used in the Old Testament, the verse shows that the unchanging God can indeed fulfill His promises, and they see it used in exactly the same way in Hebrews: since God created the heavens and the earth, and since He will not pass away, He is fit to promise an everlasting kingdom to His Son.
Theologians such as Norton say that as it is used in the Old Testament, the verse shows that the unchanging God can indeed fulfill His promises, and they see it used in exactly the same way in Hebrews: since God created the heavens and the earth, and since He will not pass away, He is fit to promise an everlasting kingdom to His Son."
I would also like to personally add that in surrounding scriptures like Hebrews 1:5-7 and 2:5-8 there are OT passages about the FATHER reapplied to the father again in Hebrews here.So it wouldn't be far fetched in the least in this context to see Hebrews 1:10-12 the same way.It's very possible.Since the writer switches back and forth from talking about the Son and the Father so much.
And finally here's a youtube with this other view presented pretty well!He doesn't start talking about verse 10 till about 6 and a half minutes in.He disabled embedding so go to the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuv5-OVN0k4
I already had two blogs about this with a different perspective.I can't be dogmatically certain of how to view it.Both the view in this blog or the view in the linked others here from Anthony Buzzard seems possible,to be honest.A good case could be made for either without any compromise of monotheism,without demanding a preexistent agent in the old creation,much less a trinity.
http://putawaythatmeat.blogspot.com/2010/09/anthony-buzzard-on-hebrews-110-and-john.html
http://putawaythatmeat.blogspot.com/2010/09/hebrews-110-addendum-little-reasoning.html
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Hebrews 1:10 addendum + a little reasoning with Colossians 1:16
After my last blog I was faced in a comment "debate" on someone else's blog with this good,tough question from Dave Barron from scripturaltruths.com,who is,along with Patrick Navas,one of the best apologists for the view of a preexisting Christ.(not for a trinity.)Thought I would address it some here.If you haven't already read my previous blog,it should be read to make sense of this one.
He asked after my assertion that Hebrews 2:5 is the context that must be heeded for Hebrews 1:10:
"Now I'll ask you on Hebrews 1, if 2:5 is to be read back into 1:10, when will the earth to come "perish" and be "changed"? "
my response:
E-sword(easily downloadable online) says that aion for "worlds" in Heb. 1:2 can mean specifically "a Jewish MESSIANIC period present or future."And the fact is that when Christ became the "beginning of God's creation"(Rev. 3:14),which was when he became the "firstborn from the dead"(Colossians 1:18),"the firstborn of many brothers"(Rom. 8:29),a new aion,or age,was inaugurated.So even though by his accomplishments and resurrection Christ has already metaphorically "laid the foundations of the earth(the new one)" by becoming the "chief cornerstone"(Eph. 2:20) and by being the "foundation already laid"(1 Cor. 3:11),what has been accomplished and laid thus far is changeable and perishable(Heb. 1:11-12) in that ,to quote Anthony Buzzard "Even the millennial age of the future will be replaced by a further renewed heaven and earth (Rev. 20:11; 21:1)."So we have a taste of the kingdom to come and Christ has laid the foundation of the new kingdom,but it won't be perfected or fully realized till after the millennium when all evil and wickedness will have been utterly destroyed so that peace may reign without hindrance.Hebrews 1:10-12 is contrasting the imperishability and immutability of the resurrected "clothed in immortal glory" Jesus the Messiah to the perishable and mutable "age" he's inaugurated but that hasn't yet been perfected(and won't be till the kingdom at last eventually becomes “the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ"(Rev 11:15)..
To quote a webpage:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Jesus-the-Chief-Agent-of-Gods-New-Creation
"This Millennial new creation “perishes rolled up like an old garment…they will be changed” as God’s plans move on to the next ‘New Heavens and New Earth’ (Revelation 20:11; 21:1, 2) as part of the developing ages noted in Hebrews 1:2 NJB, Rotherham, and Young’s Literal. Please see the ‘New International Commentary on Hebrews’ by F.F. Bruce for further explanation of Hebrews 1:10."
Ephesians 1:21 notes that Yeshua has been seated:far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in THIS AGE but also in the ONE TO COME. (Heb. 9:8-9 also speaks of changing ages.)
So to isolate Hebrews 2:5 as the sole context for Hebrews 1:10-12 I personally think would be a mistake as Christ "creates" (currently) changeable "ages",(figuratively since all is made new IN him),which goes beyond *just* the perfected world to come.He has also laid the foundation for this current kingdom age which ISN'T precisely in totality the "world to come" and so will be changed.Hebrews 1 is current and looking ahead and isn't commenting on the Genesis ch. 1 narrative.Every single creation passage as relates to Christ has the context of our current time and the future.Though I don't discount that because Jesus perfectly represents what was there from the beginning with God(his purposes,plans,word,wisdom,and spirit) and that because Jesus was slain and foreordained before the world was even made(Rev 13:8,1 Peter 1:20) that Yahweh created the Genesis creation "in Christ" in that respect as the one He knew He would inhabit to reconcile the world unto Himself.As the one he foreknew would redeem mankind,hold all things together in his body,and make the survival and thriving of creation not only possible but assured by means of his obedience and subsequent inimitable extolling,gifted privileges,mediatorship,and high priesthood.
Because the Hebrews had positively no problem with bringing God's "wisdom" to life poetically with vivid personification,I suppose even if the NT authors had passages like Proverbs 8:22-31 in mind in Colossians ch. 1 and Hebrews ch. 1 then they were simply recognizing how Christ has become that same wisdom that God created the world in.Yahweh gave fruition to a plan known as the Messiah before he even made the world,again.(1 Pet. 1:20,Rev. 13:8)And this plan was his "wisdom" for the reconciliation of the world unto himself.(2 Corinthians 5:19) Christ at last became that *wisdom* in these last times(1 Cor. 1:30,1 Cor. 2:6,7),and so,again,represents ( & actually fulfills to perfection and completion)what was there from the beginning.I don't think this conjecture is necessary however given the kingdom(as opposed to the Genesis)contexts of Colossians and Hebrews.Just something to ponder though considering the Hebraic poeticism and personification,and subsequent fulfillment in Christ,of Yahweh's *word* and *wisdom.*
"What at first reads as a straightforward assertion of Christ's preexistent activity in creation becomes on closer analysis an assertion which is rather more profound--not of Christ as such present with God in the beginning,nor of Christ as identified with a preexistent hypostasis or divine being(Wisdom) beside God,but of Christ as embodying and expressing (and defining) that power of God which is the manifestation of God in and to his creation."-James Dunn "Christology in the Making" p.194
I've used this quote a lot because of how,well,"true blue" it rings:
"The "memra"(word) performs the same function as other technical terms like "glory,""Holy spirit",and "Shekinah" which emphasized the distinction between God's presence in the world and the incomprehensible reality of God itself.Like the divine Wisdom,the "Word" symbolized God's original plan for creation.When Paul and John speak about Jesus as though he had some kind of preexistent life,they were not suggesting he was a second divine "person" in the later trinitarian sense.They were indicating that Jesus transcended temporal and individual modes of existence.Because the "power and "wisdom" he REPRESENTED(emphasis mine) were activities that derived from God,he had in some way expressed "what was there from the beginning."These ideas were comprehensible in a strictly Jewish context,though later Christians with a Greek background would interpret them differently."-Karen Armstrong..(from A History of God:From Abraham to the present:the 4000 year quest for God,p.106)
There's no point in saying the bible doesn't give us context and scriptural precedent throughout the NT to understand the creation in the NT is a "forward thinking" one as opposed to a nostalgic one.
Here's just a sampling of some texts to place our minds in the proper focus,time,and position.
“…if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation” (2 Cor. 5:17).
“…in him all things hold together. He is the head of the body” ( Col. 1:17).
· “…to head up all things in Christ things upon the heavens and things upon the earth; in him, in whom also we were assigned” (Eph. 1:10, 11KIT).
“For in Christ Jesus...a new creation” (Gal. 6:15).
“For we are the product of His work and were created in Christ Jesus ”(Eph. 2:10).
And who wants to argue with this one?:
“I Jehovah am doing everything, stretching out the heavens by myself, laying out the earth. Who was with me?” (Isa. 44:24).
The context of Colossians 1:16:
kingdom of beloved son(verses 12-13),redemption and forgiveness(verse 14) the church(verse 18) & reconciliation(verse 20)
To quote Ray Faircloth,who has written some great studies available on http://www.biblicaltruthseekers.co.uk/
" The parallel letter of Ephesians (Eph.1:9-23 and 2:10) speaks only of the New Creation and gives a precise doctrinal correlation with Colossians 1. This further demonstrates that Colossians 1 applies to the New Creation consisting of “the Congregation of the firstborn” (Heb. 12:23) and the newly created angelic thrones, lordships, governments and authorities. (a new administration in 1 Peter 3:22). Nothing here applies to the inception of the Genesis creation. (Please also note the parallel phrases: Col.1:12/Eph.1:11; Col.1:16, 17, 20/Eph. 1:10, 21, 22).
Verse 16: “Because in (KIT) him all things were created , in the heavens and on the earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All things have been created through him and for him.”
The creating of an authority is not the physical creating of people.
‘In him’: Meaning ‘in union (or connection) with’, ‘in association with’, or ‘by reason of’ Bauer’s lexicon. In context this verse does not mean ‘by’ or ‘by means of’ "
The context of Hebrews 1:10:
First of all,it's a quote from Psalm 102 in the LXX where the context is “the generation to come” (v. 18).Then in Hebrews we have the "last days"(1:2),the inhabited earth to come(2:5) and..
Hebrews 1 mentions a kingdom,a throne and a scepter.(verse 8)This is forward thinking not Genesis narrative nostalgia.
Hebrews 9:11: But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation)
So we have the present age or "new creation" he's inaugurated then the one to come that will perfect this one entirely.That will swallow it in unfathomable glory,making it so new,enticing,and pure that we can't grasp the thought of it in it's totality with our wee pea brains.And it is when we pray for this kingdom wholeheartedly to come,while seeking to understand what it actually is while possibly discarding years of erroneous Hellenistically influenced indoctrination,that God's spirit can fill us with the purity & sincerity of his truth in it's Hebrew context & reality.Jesus was a Jew.No Jew of true faith thought an angel or God would become the Messiah.Why so readily discard their wisdom that God gave them?"Progressive revelation" only counts if what "progressed" wasn't the entire truth.NO indication whatsoever that Abraham,Isaac,Jacob,and the like didn't know who Yahweh REALLY was.That they didn't know the Messiah would be a man.(with the personality of a perfect man born from above as opposed to a millenniums old spirit creature's disposition inhabiting the vessel of what appears to be a man)No inference,speculation,councils,or anything but the bible needed for these basic fundamental truths.One question I haven't heard an Arian satisfactorily answer:How did Jesus the Messiah grow in wisdom and knowledge daily if he had the wisdom and knowledge of a millenniums old spirit creature?Could I claim to be a GENUINE 30 some yr. old "woman" if I had Gabriel's personality,disposition,knowledge and centuries of age?(except perhaps "vessel wise" ONLY)Could I expect my followers to follow my footsteps closely by walking by faith and not by sight if I walked by millenniums of "sight?"Could the LAST ADAM be the Last Adam absolutely purely if he was also "something else" before,during,or after his time on earth?
He asked after my assertion that Hebrews 2:5 is the context that must be heeded for Hebrews 1:10:
"Now I'll ask you on Hebrews 1, if 2:5 is to be read back into 1:10, when will the earth to come "perish" and be "changed"? "
my response:
E-sword(easily downloadable online) says that aion for "worlds" in Heb. 1:2 can mean specifically "a Jewish MESSIANIC period present or future."And the fact is that when Christ became the "beginning of God's creation"(Rev. 3:14),which was when he became the "firstborn from the dead"(Colossians 1:18),"the firstborn of many brothers"(Rom. 8:29),a new aion,or age,was inaugurated.So even though by his accomplishments and resurrection Christ has already metaphorically "laid the foundations of the earth(the new one)" by becoming the "chief cornerstone"(Eph. 2:20) and by being the "foundation already laid"(1 Cor. 3:11),what has been accomplished and laid thus far is changeable and perishable(Heb. 1:11-12) in that ,to quote Anthony Buzzard "Even the millennial age of the future will be replaced by a further renewed heaven and earth (Rev. 20:11; 21:1)."So we have a taste of the kingdom to come and Christ has laid the foundation of the new kingdom,but it won't be perfected or fully realized till after the millennium when all evil and wickedness will have been utterly destroyed so that peace may reign without hindrance.Hebrews 1:10-12 is contrasting the imperishability and immutability of the resurrected "clothed in immortal glory" Jesus the Messiah to the perishable and mutable "age" he's inaugurated but that hasn't yet been perfected(and won't be till the kingdom at last eventually becomes “the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ"(Rev 11:15)..
To quote a webpage:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Jesus-the-Chief-Agent-of-Gods-New-Creation
"This Millennial new creation “perishes rolled up like an old garment…they will be changed” as God’s plans move on to the next ‘New Heavens and New Earth’ (Revelation 20:11; 21:1, 2) as part of the developing ages noted in Hebrews 1:2 NJB, Rotherham, and Young’s Literal. Please see the ‘New International Commentary on Hebrews’ by F.F. Bruce for further explanation of Hebrews 1:10."
Ephesians 1:21 notes that Yeshua has been seated:far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in THIS AGE but also in the ONE TO COME. (Heb. 9:8-9 also speaks of changing ages.)
So to isolate Hebrews 2:5 as the sole context for Hebrews 1:10-12 I personally think would be a mistake as Christ "creates" (currently) changeable "ages",(figuratively since all is made new IN him),which goes beyond *just* the perfected world to come.He has also laid the foundation for this current kingdom age which ISN'T precisely in totality the "world to come" and so will be changed.Hebrews 1 is current and looking ahead and isn't commenting on the Genesis ch. 1 narrative.Every single creation passage as relates to Christ has the context of our current time and the future.Though I don't discount that because Jesus perfectly represents what was there from the beginning with God(his purposes,plans,word,wisdom,and spirit) and that because Jesus was slain and foreordained before the world was even made(Rev 13:8,1 Peter 1:20) that Yahweh created the Genesis creation "in Christ" in that respect as the one He knew He would inhabit to reconcile the world unto Himself.As the one he foreknew would redeem mankind,hold all things together in his body,and make the survival and thriving of creation not only possible but assured by means of his obedience and subsequent inimitable extolling,gifted privileges,mediatorship,and high priesthood.
Because the Hebrews had positively no problem with bringing God's "wisdom" to life poetically with vivid personification,I suppose even if the NT authors had passages like Proverbs 8:22-31 in mind in Colossians ch. 1 and Hebrews ch. 1 then they were simply recognizing how Christ has become that same wisdom that God created the world in.Yahweh gave fruition to a plan known as the Messiah before he even made the world,again.(1 Pet. 1:20,Rev. 13:8)And this plan was his "wisdom" for the reconciliation of the world unto himself.(2 Corinthians 5:19) Christ at last became that *wisdom* in these last times(1 Cor. 1:30,1 Cor. 2:6,7),and so,again,represents ( & actually fulfills to perfection and completion)what was there from the beginning.I don't think this conjecture is necessary however given the kingdom(as opposed to the Genesis)contexts of Colossians and Hebrews.Just something to ponder though considering the Hebraic poeticism and personification,and subsequent fulfillment in Christ,of Yahweh's *word* and *wisdom.*
"What at first reads as a straightforward assertion of Christ's preexistent activity in creation becomes on closer analysis an assertion which is rather more profound--not of Christ as such present with God in the beginning,nor of Christ as identified with a preexistent hypostasis or divine being(Wisdom) beside God,but of Christ as embodying and expressing (and defining) that power of God which is the manifestation of God in and to his creation."-James Dunn "Christology in the Making" p.194
I've used this quote a lot because of how,well,"true blue" it rings:
"The "memra"(word) performs the same function as other technical terms like "glory,""Holy spirit",and "Shekinah" which emphasized the distinction between God's presence in the world and the incomprehensible reality of God itself.Like the divine Wisdom,the "Word" symbolized God's original plan for creation.When Paul and John speak about Jesus as though he had some kind of preexistent life,they were not suggesting he was a second divine "person" in the later trinitarian sense.They were indicating that Jesus transcended temporal and individual modes of existence.Because the "power and "wisdom" he REPRESENTED(emphasis mine) were activities that derived from God,he had in some way expressed "what was there from the beginning."These ideas were comprehensible in a strictly Jewish context,though later Christians with a Greek background would interpret them differently."-Karen Armstrong..(from A History of God:From Abraham to the present:the 4000 year quest for God,p.106)
There's no point in saying the bible doesn't give us context and scriptural precedent throughout the NT to understand the creation in the NT is a "forward thinking" one as opposed to a nostalgic one.
Here's just a sampling of some texts to place our minds in the proper focus,time,and position.
“…if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation” (2 Cor. 5:17).
“…in him all things hold together. He is the head of the body” ( Col. 1:17).
· “…to head up all things in Christ things upon the heavens and things upon the earth; in him, in whom also we were assigned” (Eph. 1:10, 11KIT).
“For in Christ Jesus...a new creation” (Gal. 6:15).
“For we are the product of His work and were created in Christ Jesus ”(Eph. 2:10).
And who wants to argue with this one?:
“I Jehovah am doing everything, stretching out the heavens by myself, laying out the earth. Who was with me?” (Isa. 44:24).
The context of Colossians 1:16:
kingdom of beloved son(verses 12-13),redemption and forgiveness(verse 14) the church(verse 18) & reconciliation(verse 20)
To quote Ray Faircloth,who has written some great studies available on http://www.biblicaltruthseekers.co.uk/
" The parallel letter of Ephesians (Eph.1:9-23 and 2:10) speaks only of the New Creation and gives a precise doctrinal correlation with Colossians 1. This further demonstrates that Colossians 1 applies to the New Creation consisting of “the Congregation of the firstborn” (Heb. 12:23) and the newly created angelic thrones, lordships, governments and authorities. (a new administration in 1 Peter 3:22). Nothing here applies to the inception of the Genesis creation. (Please also note the parallel phrases: Col.1:12/Eph.1:11; Col.1:16, 17, 20/Eph. 1:10, 21, 22).
Verse 16: “Because in (KIT) him all things were created , in the heavens and on the earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All things have been created through him and for him.”
The creating of an authority is not the physical creating of people.
‘In him’: Meaning ‘in union (or connection) with’, ‘in association with’, or ‘by reason of’ Bauer’s lexicon. In context this verse does not mean ‘by’ or ‘by means of’ "
The context of Hebrews 1:10:
First of all,it's a quote from Psalm 102 in the LXX where the context is “the generation to come” (v. 18).Then in Hebrews we have the "last days"(1:2),the inhabited earth to come(2:5) and..
Hebrews 1 mentions a kingdom,a throne and a scepter.(verse 8)This is forward thinking not Genesis narrative nostalgia.
Hebrews 9:11: But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation)
So we have the present age or "new creation" he's inaugurated then the one to come that will perfect this one entirely.That will swallow it in unfathomable glory,making it so new,enticing,and pure that we can't grasp the thought of it in it's totality with our wee pea brains.And it is when we pray for this kingdom wholeheartedly to come,while seeking to understand what it actually is while possibly discarding years of erroneous Hellenistically influenced indoctrination,that God's spirit can fill us with the purity & sincerity of his truth in it's Hebrew context & reality.Jesus was a Jew.No Jew of true faith thought an angel or God would become the Messiah.Why so readily discard their wisdom that God gave them?"Progressive revelation" only counts if what "progressed" wasn't the entire truth.NO indication whatsoever that Abraham,Isaac,Jacob,and the like didn't know who Yahweh REALLY was.That they didn't know the Messiah would be a man.(with the personality of a perfect man born from above as opposed to a millenniums old spirit creature's disposition inhabiting the vessel of what appears to be a man)No inference,speculation,councils,or anything but the bible needed for these basic fundamental truths.One question I haven't heard an Arian satisfactorily answer:How did Jesus the Messiah grow in wisdom and knowledge daily if he had the wisdom and knowledge of a millenniums old spirit creature?Could I claim to be a GENUINE 30 some yr. old "woman" if I had Gabriel's personality,disposition,knowledge and centuries of age?(except perhaps "vessel wise" ONLY)Could I expect my followers to follow my footsteps closely by walking by faith and not by sight if I walked by millenniums of "sight?"Could the LAST ADAM be the Last Adam absolutely purely if he was also "something else" before,during,or after his time on earth?
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Anthony Buzzard on Hebrews 1:10 and John 17:5
Found this here:
http://thefaithofjesus.blogspot.com/2010/08/count-to-one.html
This is a little edited by me to shorten it so go to the link to read about Hebrews 1 and more!
Hebrews 1:10“You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning,
and the heavens are the work of your hands;
11 they will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment,
12 like a robe you will roll them up,
like a garment they will be changed.
But you are the same,
and your years will have no end.”
These texts need to be used with this one:
Hebrews 2:5: Now it was not to angels that God subjected the world to come, of which we are speaking.
Buzzard says:
In Hebrews 1:10, there is a complication due to the fact that the writer quotes Psalm 102 from the Greek version (LXX) and not the Hebrew version. The LXX (Septuagint) has a different sense entirely in Psalm 102:23-25. It introduces thoughts not found in the Hebrew text. It introduces God’s reply to the suppliant. The LXX, quoted in Hebrews 1:10, says: “He [God] answered him [the suppliant]…Tell me [God speaking to the suppliant]…Thou, lord [God addressing someone else called ‘lord’].” But the Hebrew text has “He [God] weakened me…I [the suppliant] say, ‘O my God…’”
Thus the LXX introduces a second lord who is addressed by God: “At the beginning you founded the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands” (v. 25). The writer to the Hebrews had open before him the LXX and not the Hebrew (rather as today someone might quote the NIV instead of the KJV). The New Testament often cites the LXX Greek. F.F. Bruce in the New International Commentary on Hebrews explains:
In the Septuagint text the person to whom these words [“of old you laid the foundation of the earth”] are spoken is addressed explicitly as “Lord”; and it is God who addresses him thus. Whereas in the Hebrew text the suppliant is the speaker from the beginning to the end of the psalm, in the Greek text his prayer comes to an end with v. 22, and the next words read as follows: “He [God] answered him [the suppliant] in the way of his strength: ‘Declare to Me the shortness of My days: Bring Me not up in the midst of My days. Thy [the suppliant’s] years are throughout all generations. Thou, lord [the suppliant, viewed here as the Messiah by Hebrews], in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth.’”5 This is God’s answer to the suppliant; He bids him acknowledge the shortness of God’s set time (for the restoration of Jerusalem, as in v. 13) and not summon Him [God] to act when that set time has only half expired, while He [God] assures him [the suppliant, called lord by God] that he and his servants’ children will be preserved forever…
Bacon suggested that the Hebrew, as well as the Greek, text of this psalm formed a basis for messianic eschatology, especially its reference to the “shortness” of God’s days, i.e., of the period destined to elapse before the consummation of His purpose [the arrival of the yet future Messianic Kingdom on earth]; he found here the OT background of Matt. 24:22, Mark 13:20 and Ep. Barn. 4.3 (“as Enoch says, ‘For to this end the Master [God] has cut short the times and the days, that his Beloved [Jesus] should make haste and come to his inheritance’”)…
But to whom (a Christian reader of the Septuagint might well ask) could God speak in words like these? And whom would God himself address as “Lord,” as the maker [or founder] of earth and heaven?-F.F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New International Commentary on the New Testament), Eerdmans, 1990, p.62-63.
Reading the LXX the Hebrews writer sees an obvious reference to the new heavens and earth of the future Kingdom and he sees God addressing the Messianic Lord in connection with the prophecies of the rest of Psalm 102 which speak of “the generation to come” (v. 18) and of the set time for Yahweh to build up Zion and appear in His glory. The fact that the One YHVH addresses another “lord” proves that the second lord cannot be YHVH.
The important article by B.W. Bacon (alluded to by Bruce above) stresses the fact that “The word ‘lord’ is wholly absent from the Hebrew [and English] text of Psalm 102:25.” But it appears in the LXX cited by Hebrews.
[With the translation in the LXX “he answered him”] the whole passage down to the end of the psalm becomes the answer of Yahweh to the suppliant who accordingly appears to be addressed as Kurie [lord] and creator of heaven and earth...Instead of understanding the verse as a complaint of the psalmist at the shortness of his days which are cut off in the midst, LXX and the Vulgate understand the utterance to be Yahweh's answer to the psalmist’s plea that he will intervene to save Zion, because “it is time to have pity on her, yea, the set time is come” (v. 13). He is bidden acknowledge (or prescribe?) the shortness of Yahweh’s set time, and not to summon him when it is but half expired. On the other hand he [the Messianic lord] is promised that his own endurance shall be perpetual with the children of his servants.-B.W. Bacon, “Heb. 1:10-12 and the Septuagint Rendering of Ps. 102:23,” Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 3, 1902, p. 280-285.
This is exactly the point, and it can only be made clear when we see that 1) the Hebrews writer is reading the LXX, not the Hebrew text, and finding in the second half of the psalm a wonderful prophecy of the age to come (Kingdom, restoration of Israel) which fits his context exactly and that 2) there is a Messianic Lord addressed by Yahweh and invited to initiate a founding of the heaven and earth, the new political order in Palestine, exactly as said in Isaiah 51:16. This is precisely the message the Hebrews writer wants to convey about the superiority of Jesus over angels. Jesus is the founder of that coming new Kingdom order. The Hebrews writer in 2:5 tells us expressly that it is about “the inhabited earth of the future that we are speaking.”
The important points are these: 1) Psalm 102 is about the new creation and the “generation to come.” It is a Kingdom psalm and points to the Messianic future. The psalm speaks of the time coming to build up Zion, when the nations will fear God’s name, and when God’s glory will appear, what we know as the Parousia of Jesus. Verse 19 of the LXX speaks of a new generation, and a people who are going to be created. This is all about the new creation in Christ, of which we are now already a part.
All this is really not so difficult when this difference in the LXX is explained. Both Psalm 102 and Hebrews 2:5 and indeed the whole of Hebrews 1 refer to the new order of things initiated by Jesus and it would not matter whether we think of the new order as initiated at the ascension (“All authority in heaven and earth has been given to me,” Matt. 28:18), or at the second coming. The new creation was initiated by Jesus even in this present age and it will of course be brought to a new stage of perfection in the coming age of the millennium, which is the first stage of the manifested Kingdom of God.
Psalm 102 is all about the coming age of the Kingdom and the restoration of Jerusalem in the millennium (see vv. 13-22). The writer looks forward to the restoration of the city when God appears in His glory (v. 16). The Psalm is written for the “generation to come” (v. 18) and a newly created people of the future Kingdom on earth. Hebrews 1-2 is speaking not of the Genesis creation but the “economy to come” (2:5).
The Oxford Bible Commentary (2000) is helpful when it notes that right up to Hebrews 2:5 the topic is the new creation in Christ. Hebrews 1:10 is included in that main subject:
The text at the center of Heb. 2:5ff. is Ps. 8:4-6 and it exhibits thematic connections to the scriptural catena [chain] of the first chapter [i.e. Heb. 1:10 is all part of the same reference to the new creation]…Heb. 2:5 [“the inhabited earth to come of which we speak”] is an introductory comment continuing the contrast between the Son and angels. Its reference to the “world to come” reinforces the notions of imminent judgment and cosmic transformation intimated by Ps. 102, cited at 1:10-12.
Isaiah 51:16 confirms this explanation. It speaks of an agent of God in whom God puts His words and whom He uses “to plant the heavens and earth.” The Word Biblical Commentary says:
Yahweh introduces Himself again, but this time in terms of His control of the raging sea. He addresses the one He is using to put His words into his mouth and protecting him very carefully. The purpose of this care is to allow him to plant heavens and earth. That makes no sense if it refers to the original [Genesis] creation. It uses the word NaTaH [Jer. 10:12 + 10 times], stretch out, while the verb here is NaTA, plant [establish people]. In the other instances God acts alone, using no agent [Isa. 44:24]. Here the one he has hidden in the shadow of his hand is his agent. Heavens and land here must refer metaphorically to the totality of order in Palestine, heavens meaning the broader overarching structure of the Empire, while land is the political order in Palestine itself. The assignment is then focused more precisely: to say to Zion, you are my people.”-Word Biblical Commentary: Isaiah 34-66, Word Books, 1987, p. 212.
Thus both in Psalm 102 (LXX) and in Isaiah 51 the Messiah is the agent whom God will use to establish the new political order of the age to come. Hebrews 1:10 is a prophecy, written in the past tense (as customarily prophecies are), but referring to the “inhabited earth of the future about which we are speaking” (Heb. 2:5). That is the concern in Hebrews 1:10. Jesus is the “father of the age to come” (Isa. 9:6, LXX).
Finally, in Hebrews 9:11 the writer speaks of “the good things to come” as the things “not of this creation.” By this he means that the things to come are of the new, future creation (see Heb. 2:5). That creation is under way since Jesus was exalted to the right hand of God where he is now co-creator, under the Father, of the new creation, and has “all authority in heaven and earth” (Matt. 28:18). Even the millennial age of the future will be replaced by a further renewed heaven and earth (Rev. 20:11; 21:1).
God has a new creation in Jesus and we are to be new creatures in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17). We are to join the one “new man” of the commonwealth of Israel (Eph. 2:12-13). The presently unconverted Israel will itself be renewed, at least a remnant (Mic. 2:12; Rom. 11), through the great tribulation and Jesus’ deliverance at his post-tribulation Parousia (Matt. 24:29-31). The saints of all the ages will be immortalized at the resurrection after the end of the Great Tribulation which is still ahead. There is of course no pre-tribulation gathering. Nor has the Great Tribulation been going on continuously since AD 70. The Great Tribulation is a future short period of agony just before the return of the Messiah to the earth. This event is not a drive-by episode. Jesus is coming back to the earth where as son of David he belongs installed on the throne of David.
The world is going to be reborn and it will come under the supervision of Jesus and his followers (Matt. 19:28, Rev. 5:10; I Cor. 6:2, etc.) We must resist the temptation to be looking backwards to Genesis when the whole book of Hebrews bids us look forward to the “inhabited earth of the future” (Heb. 2:5). Note that in several places Hebrews speaks of the eternal redemption, inheritance, covenant, judgment, salvation and spirit “of the age [to come]” (aionios). Aionios refers to the Kingdom age to come and not just to eternity. Christians receive now the “holy spirit of the promise” (Eph. 1:13, NJB). We are to experience something of the future Kingdom age even now in the midst of trials and in a hostile world. Christians should not give away their inheritance to unconverted Jews! The church will inherit the land (Matt. 5:5; Rom. 4:13) and those who bless “the seed of Abraham” (Gen. 12) are those who bless the believers. “If you belong to Christ [and only then] you are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:19). What a heritage is in store for those who endure to the end. Meanwhile should we not have a heart for the billions of human beings who have not been exposed to the great truths about God and the Messiah and the Kingdom in process of restoration? Who will tell them if you don’t?
Now..for John 17:5:
John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.
This text can be reasoned with in light of ones like this one:
1 Peter 1:20: He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you
Now a little commentary by Anthony on John 17:5(one of the texts I used to think was explicit proof for the preexistence of the Lord Jesus.I have since seen keen reason outside that box my thoughts were in before with EASY scriptural precedent for the "Socinian" view.):
Things which are held in store as divine plans for the future are said to be “with God.” Thus in Job 10:13 Job says to God, “These things you have concealed in your heart: I know that this is with You” (see KJV). “He performs what is appointed for me, and many such decrees are with Him” (23:14). Thus the glory which Jesus had “with God” was the glory which God had planned for him as the decreed reward for his Messianic work now completed. The promise of glory “preexisted,” not Jesus himself. Note that this same glory which Jesus asked for has already been given to you (see John 17:22, 24), before you were even born! The promised Christian reward was given as a guaranteed future blessing by Jesus speaking around 30 AD. This is obviously glory and reward as a promise for the future.Your Christian reward was given (past tense) to you and Jesus whom God loved before the foundation of the world (v. 24). You may therefore say that you now “have” that glory although it is glory in promise and prospect. Jesus had that same glory in prospect before the foundation of the world (John 17:5). You can have something “with God,” meaning that you can have something promised by God for your future, and it is laid up in store with God now and will be delivered to you when Jesus comes back. 2 Timothy 1:9 is similar: “grace was given to us before the ages of time began.”
Christians were already “in Christ” (Eph 1:4) before the world began and foreknown by God (1 Pet. 1:2).
Paul can say that we now already “have” a new body with God in heaven — i.e. we have the promise of it, not in actuality. That body will be ours at the return of Christ. We now “have” it in anticipation and promise only. “We have a building of God,” (2 Cor. 5:1). We do not in fact have it yet. But when we do get that reward in the future, we will be able to say “give me the glorified body” which I had with you, i.e., as promised.
Peter speaks of a day being like a thousand years “with God” (2 Pet. 3:8). This is the proper sense of “with God” in John 17:5. Things which are “with God” are those things which He plans and prepares. Thus Jesus asked to receive at the end of his ministry the glory prepared for him “with God,” that is in God’s plans and in His mind. Revelation 13:8 states that the crucifixion happened long before the birth of the Messiah. The idea is of course that it happened in God’s plan, not in actuality. We must think as Hebrews, and thus with Jesus and John, and not just read our western language forms into the Bible. Of course the word was “with God,” in His mind. “With God” does not imply a Son-Father relationship at that stage. Galatians 2:5 speaks of the Gospel remaining “with” (pros) the Galatians, that is in their minds.
http://thefaithofjesus.blogspot.com/2010/08/count-to-one.html
This is a little edited by me to shorten it so go to the link to read about Hebrews 1 and more!
Hebrews 1:10“You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning,
and the heavens are the work of your hands;
11 they will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment,
12 like a robe you will roll them up,
like a garment they will be changed.
But you are the same,
and your years will have no end.”
These texts need to be used with this one:
Hebrews 2:5: Now it was not to angels that God subjected the world to come, of which we are speaking.
Buzzard says:
In Hebrews 1:10, there is a complication due to the fact that the writer quotes Psalm 102 from the Greek version (LXX) and not the Hebrew version. The LXX (Septuagint) has a different sense entirely in Psalm 102:23-25. It introduces thoughts not found in the Hebrew text. It introduces God’s reply to the suppliant. The LXX, quoted in Hebrews 1:10, says: “He [God] answered him [the suppliant]…Tell me [God speaking to the suppliant]…Thou, lord [God addressing someone else called ‘lord’].” But the Hebrew text has “He [God] weakened me…I [the suppliant] say, ‘O my God…’”
Thus the LXX introduces a second lord who is addressed by God: “At the beginning you founded the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands” (v. 25). The writer to the Hebrews had open before him the LXX and not the Hebrew (rather as today someone might quote the NIV instead of the KJV). The New Testament often cites the LXX Greek. F.F. Bruce in the New International Commentary on Hebrews explains:
In the Septuagint text the person to whom these words [“of old you laid the foundation of the earth”] are spoken is addressed explicitly as “Lord”; and it is God who addresses him thus. Whereas in the Hebrew text the suppliant is the speaker from the beginning to the end of the psalm, in the Greek text his prayer comes to an end with v. 22, and the next words read as follows: “He [God] answered him [the suppliant] in the way of his strength: ‘Declare to Me the shortness of My days: Bring Me not up in the midst of My days. Thy [the suppliant’s] years are throughout all generations. Thou, lord [the suppliant, viewed here as the Messiah by Hebrews], in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth.’”5 This is God’s answer to the suppliant; He bids him acknowledge the shortness of God’s set time (for the restoration of Jerusalem, as in v. 13) and not summon Him [God] to act when that set time has only half expired, while He [God] assures him [the suppliant, called lord by God] that he and his servants’ children will be preserved forever…
Bacon suggested that the Hebrew, as well as the Greek, text of this psalm formed a basis for messianic eschatology, especially its reference to the “shortness” of God’s days, i.e., of the period destined to elapse before the consummation of His purpose [the arrival of the yet future Messianic Kingdom on earth]; he found here the OT background of Matt. 24:22, Mark 13:20 and Ep. Barn. 4.3 (“as Enoch says, ‘For to this end the Master [God] has cut short the times and the days, that his Beloved [Jesus] should make haste and come to his inheritance’”)…
But to whom (a Christian reader of the Septuagint might well ask) could God speak in words like these? And whom would God himself address as “Lord,” as the maker [or founder] of earth and heaven?-F.F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New International Commentary on the New Testament), Eerdmans, 1990, p.62-63.
Reading the LXX the Hebrews writer sees an obvious reference to the new heavens and earth of the future Kingdom and he sees God addressing the Messianic Lord in connection with the prophecies of the rest of Psalm 102 which speak of “the generation to come” (v. 18) and of the set time for Yahweh to build up Zion and appear in His glory. The fact that the One YHVH addresses another “lord” proves that the second lord cannot be YHVH.
The important article by B.W. Bacon (alluded to by Bruce above) stresses the fact that “The word ‘lord’ is wholly absent from the Hebrew [and English] text of Psalm 102:25.” But it appears in the LXX cited by Hebrews.
[With the translation in the LXX “he answered him”] the whole passage down to the end of the psalm becomes the answer of Yahweh to the suppliant who accordingly appears to be addressed as Kurie [lord] and creator of heaven and earth...Instead of understanding the verse as a complaint of the psalmist at the shortness of his days which are cut off in the midst, LXX and the Vulgate understand the utterance to be Yahweh's answer to the psalmist’s plea that he will intervene to save Zion, because “it is time to have pity on her, yea, the set time is come” (v. 13). He is bidden acknowledge (or prescribe?) the shortness of Yahweh’s set time, and not to summon him when it is but half expired. On the other hand he [the Messianic lord] is promised that his own endurance shall be perpetual with the children of his servants.-B.W. Bacon, “Heb. 1:10-12 and the Septuagint Rendering of Ps. 102:23,” Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 3, 1902, p. 280-285.
This is exactly the point, and it can only be made clear when we see that 1) the Hebrews writer is reading the LXX, not the Hebrew text, and finding in the second half of the psalm a wonderful prophecy of the age to come (Kingdom, restoration of Israel) which fits his context exactly and that 2) there is a Messianic Lord addressed by Yahweh and invited to initiate a founding of the heaven and earth, the new political order in Palestine, exactly as said in Isaiah 51:16. This is precisely the message the Hebrews writer wants to convey about the superiority of Jesus over angels. Jesus is the founder of that coming new Kingdom order. The Hebrews writer in 2:5 tells us expressly that it is about “the inhabited earth of the future that we are speaking.”
The important points are these: 1) Psalm 102 is about the new creation and the “generation to come.” It is a Kingdom psalm and points to the Messianic future. The psalm speaks of the time coming to build up Zion, when the nations will fear God’s name, and when God’s glory will appear, what we know as the Parousia of Jesus. Verse 19 of the LXX speaks of a new generation, and a people who are going to be created. This is all about the new creation in Christ, of which we are now already a part.
All this is really not so difficult when this difference in the LXX is explained. Both Psalm 102 and Hebrews 2:5 and indeed the whole of Hebrews 1 refer to the new order of things initiated by Jesus and it would not matter whether we think of the new order as initiated at the ascension (“All authority in heaven and earth has been given to me,” Matt. 28:18), or at the second coming. The new creation was initiated by Jesus even in this present age and it will of course be brought to a new stage of perfection in the coming age of the millennium, which is the first stage of the manifested Kingdom of God.
Psalm 102 is all about the coming age of the Kingdom and the restoration of Jerusalem in the millennium (see vv. 13-22). The writer looks forward to the restoration of the city when God appears in His glory (v. 16). The Psalm is written for the “generation to come” (v. 18) and a newly created people of the future Kingdom on earth. Hebrews 1-2 is speaking not of the Genesis creation but the “economy to come” (2:5).
The Oxford Bible Commentary (2000) is helpful when it notes that right up to Hebrews 2:5 the topic is the new creation in Christ. Hebrews 1:10 is included in that main subject:
The text at the center of Heb. 2:5ff. is Ps. 8:4-6 and it exhibits thematic connections to the scriptural catena [chain] of the first chapter [i.e. Heb. 1:10 is all part of the same reference to the new creation]…Heb. 2:5 [“the inhabited earth to come of which we speak”] is an introductory comment continuing the contrast between the Son and angels. Its reference to the “world to come” reinforces the notions of imminent judgment and cosmic transformation intimated by Ps. 102, cited at 1:10-12.
Isaiah 51:16 confirms this explanation. It speaks of an agent of God in whom God puts His words and whom He uses “to plant the heavens and earth.” The Word Biblical Commentary says:
Yahweh introduces Himself again, but this time in terms of His control of the raging sea. He addresses the one He is using to put His words into his mouth and protecting him very carefully. The purpose of this care is to allow him to plant heavens and earth. That makes no sense if it refers to the original [Genesis] creation. It uses the word NaTaH [Jer. 10:12 + 10 times], stretch out, while the verb here is NaTA, plant [establish people]. In the other instances God acts alone, using no agent [Isa. 44:24]. Here the one he has hidden in the shadow of his hand is his agent. Heavens and land here must refer metaphorically to the totality of order in Palestine, heavens meaning the broader overarching structure of the Empire, while land is the political order in Palestine itself. The assignment is then focused more precisely: to say to Zion, you are my people.”-Word Biblical Commentary: Isaiah 34-66, Word Books, 1987, p. 212.
Thus both in Psalm 102 (LXX) and in Isaiah 51 the Messiah is the agent whom God will use to establish the new political order of the age to come. Hebrews 1:10 is a prophecy, written in the past tense (as customarily prophecies are), but referring to the “inhabited earth of the future about which we are speaking” (Heb. 2:5). That is the concern in Hebrews 1:10. Jesus is the “father of the age to come” (Isa. 9:6, LXX).
Finally, in Hebrews 9:11 the writer speaks of “the good things to come” as the things “not of this creation.” By this he means that the things to come are of the new, future creation (see Heb. 2:5). That creation is under way since Jesus was exalted to the right hand of God where he is now co-creator, under the Father, of the new creation, and has “all authority in heaven and earth” (Matt. 28:18). Even the millennial age of the future will be replaced by a further renewed heaven and earth (Rev. 20:11; 21:1).
God has a new creation in Jesus and we are to be new creatures in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17). We are to join the one “new man” of the commonwealth of Israel (Eph. 2:12-13). The presently unconverted Israel will itself be renewed, at least a remnant (Mic. 2:12; Rom. 11), through the great tribulation and Jesus’ deliverance at his post-tribulation Parousia (Matt. 24:29-31). The saints of all the ages will be immortalized at the resurrection after the end of the Great Tribulation which is still ahead. There is of course no pre-tribulation gathering. Nor has the Great Tribulation been going on continuously since AD 70. The Great Tribulation is a future short period of agony just before the return of the Messiah to the earth. This event is not a drive-by episode. Jesus is coming back to the earth where as son of David he belongs installed on the throne of David.
The world is going to be reborn and it will come under the supervision of Jesus and his followers (Matt. 19:28, Rev. 5:10; I Cor. 6:2, etc.) We must resist the temptation to be looking backwards to Genesis when the whole book of Hebrews bids us look forward to the “inhabited earth of the future” (Heb. 2:5). Note that in several places Hebrews speaks of the eternal redemption, inheritance, covenant, judgment, salvation and spirit “of the age [to come]” (aionios). Aionios refers to the Kingdom age to come and not just to eternity. Christians receive now the “holy spirit of the promise” (Eph. 1:13, NJB). We are to experience something of the future Kingdom age even now in the midst of trials and in a hostile world. Christians should not give away their inheritance to unconverted Jews! The church will inherit the land (Matt. 5:5; Rom. 4:13) and those who bless “the seed of Abraham” (Gen. 12) are those who bless the believers. “If you belong to Christ [and only then] you are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:19). What a heritage is in store for those who endure to the end. Meanwhile should we not have a heart for the billions of human beings who have not been exposed to the great truths about God and the Messiah and the Kingdom in process of restoration? Who will tell them if you don’t?
Now..for John 17:5:
John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.
This text can be reasoned with in light of ones like this one:
1 Peter 1:20: He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you
Now a little commentary by Anthony on John 17:5(one of the texts I used to think was explicit proof for the preexistence of the Lord Jesus.I have since seen keen reason outside that box my thoughts were in before with EASY scriptural precedent for the "Socinian" view.):
Things which are held in store as divine plans for the future are said to be “with God.” Thus in Job 10:13 Job says to God, “These things you have concealed in your heart: I know that this is with You” (see KJV). “He performs what is appointed for me, and many such decrees are with Him” (23:14). Thus the glory which Jesus had “with God” was the glory which God had planned for him as the decreed reward for his Messianic work now completed. The promise of glory “preexisted,” not Jesus himself. Note that this same glory which Jesus asked for has already been given to you (see John 17:22, 24), before you were even born! The promised Christian reward was given as a guaranteed future blessing by Jesus speaking around 30 AD. This is obviously glory and reward as a promise for the future.Your Christian reward was given (past tense) to you and Jesus whom God loved before the foundation of the world (v. 24). You may therefore say that you now “have” that glory although it is glory in promise and prospect. Jesus had that same glory in prospect before the foundation of the world (John 17:5). You can have something “with God,” meaning that you can have something promised by God for your future, and it is laid up in store with God now and will be delivered to you when Jesus comes back. 2 Timothy 1:9 is similar: “grace was given to us before the ages of time began.”
Christians were already “in Christ” (Eph 1:4) before the world began and foreknown by God (1 Pet. 1:2).
Paul can say that we now already “have” a new body with God in heaven — i.e. we have the promise of it, not in actuality. That body will be ours at the return of Christ. We now “have” it in anticipation and promise only. “We have a building of God,” (2 Cor. 5:1). We do not in fact have it yet. But when we do get that reward in the future, we will be able to say “give me the glorified body” which I had with you, i.e., as promised.
Peter speaks of a day being like a thousand years “with God” (2 Pet. 3:8). This is the proper sense of “with God” in John 17:5. Things which are “with God” are those things which He plans and prepares. Thus Jesus asked to receive at the end of his ministry the glory prepared for him “with God,” that is in God’s plans and in His mind. Revelation 13:8 states that the crucifixion happened long before the birth of the Messiah. The idea is of course that it happened in God’s plan, not in actuality. We must think as Hebrews, and thus with Jesus and John, and not just read our western language forms into the Bible. Of course the word was “with God,” in His mind. “With God” does not imply a Son-Father relationship at that stage. Galatians 2:5 speaks of the Gospel remaining “with” (pros) the Galatians, that is in their minds.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)