// Required code

Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

god's

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • god's

    How does one view the passages that speak of human kings as God's in the OT? Such as Psalm 45:6-7:

    Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of joy above Your fellows.

    To refer to this Psalm as Messianic does not seem to detract from the fact that the king was originally called "God", albeit an inferior god, but a god nonetheless, something I wouldn't expect for strict monotheism within ancient Judaism.

    Thoughts?

  • #2
    Psalm 45:7 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated wickedness; Therefore God, Thy God has annointed Thee with the oil of joy above Thy fellows.

    Which human kings, or any of us for that matter, have loved righteousness and hated wickedness? Which man was ever righteous? Only one. Jesus.

    Comment


    • #3
      It seems like the first six verses are directed toward the king (and God is even mentioned there, clearly not as the subject), but it switches at verse 7 to be talking about God rather than the king. I don't see this as an issue.

      Incidentally, parts of the OT was more monolatrous than monotheistic. That means that it did not deny the existence of other gods, but made clear that only God was worthy of worship. (This isn't controversial, even evangelical scholars will acknowledge this.)
      "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Abigail View Post
        Psalm 45:7 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated wickedness; Therefore God, Thy God has annointed Thee with the oil of joy above Thy fellows.

        Which human kings, or any of us for that matter, have loved righteousness and hated wickedness? Which man was ever righteous? Only one. Jesus.
        So in it's original context, this verse was talking about Jesus?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
          It seems like the first six verses are directed toward the king (and God is even mentioned there, clearly not as the subject), but it switches at verse 7 to be talking about God rather than the king. I don't see this as an issue.
          The psalm is about the king: "I will address my verses to the king". The king is clearly called God - therefore God (king), your God (Creator) has anointed you..

          Incidentally, parts of the OT was more monolatrous than monotheistic. That means that it did not deny the existence of other gods, but made clear that only God was worthy of worship. (This isn't controversial, even evangelical scholars will acknowledge this.)
          Right but the issues seem problematic when humans are so closely associated with the divine - such as the begetting of the king as God's son in Psalm 2:7.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
            The psalm is about the king: "I will address my verses to the king". The king is clearly called God - therefore God (king), your God (Creator) has anointed you..



            Right but the issues seem problematic when humans are so closely associated with the divine - such as the begetting of the king as God's son in Psalm 2:7.
            Jews definitely had a belief in a supernatural hierarchy (something that many Christians today sadly seem to shun), with the Almighty at the top of the pyramid. But the only time Jews expressed belief in a human with any sort of divine qualities was the expectant Messiah (of course, there were many facets to this belief, including various characters that would play in an eschatological role), and Psalm 2 and 110 were catalysts of this belief. This is very evident in the Qumran scrolls.
            "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
              The psalm is about the king: "I will address my verses to the king". The king is clearly called God - therefore God (king), your God (Creator) has anointed you..
              Yes, pretend to ask a question and then try to start a fight over the answer (which is correct btw).
              Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

              Comment


              • #8
                John 10:35 implies that Jesus understood Ps 82:6 as applying to humans.

                I'd say that these Psalms originally referred to the King, but that it is legitimate to give them a second application to Jesus.

                The Word commentary on Ps 45 says:

                "Psalm 45 is a superb example of what C. S. Lewis has called “second meanings in the Psalms” (Reflections on the Psalms, 101–15). The primary meaning of the psalm is clear; it is a wedding song, celebrating the marriage of a king to a princess. In its original sense and context, it is not in any sense a messianic psalm. And yet within the context of early Christianity (and in Judaism before that), it becomes a messianic psalm par excellence. The express evidence for the transition is to be found in Heb 1:8–9, where Ps 45:7–8 is quoted with explicit reference to Jesus Christ. But the “second meaning” extends to the whole psalm, not merely to the two verses quoted, and it develops further the way in which the OT’s portrayal of human love and marriage may become the basis of an allegory of Christ and the Church, the Groom and the Bride. "

                Comment


                • #9
                  In the ancient world, the king of any nation was a representative on earth of the god of the country. Just as human acting in the imago dei are "gods" to the lower created order, so is the king a stand-in for God to the people, while at the same time, the person wearing the crown can still be seen as merely human.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Manwë Súlimo View Post
                    In the ancient world, the king of any nation was a representative on earth of the god of the country. Just as human acting in the imago dei are "gods" to the lower created order, so is the king a stand-in for God to the people, while at the same time, the person wearing the crown can still be seen as merely human.
                    Right I understand this, but for a king to literally be called "God" seems to imply divinity of some sort and just a stand-in position for God on earth. Also, the king for example, in Psalm 2:7 indicates that he is not just adopted, but actually born of God - "You are my son; today I have begotten you".

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by hedrick View Post
                      John 10:35 implies that Jesus understood Ps 82:6 as applying to humans.

                      I'd say that these Psalms originally referred to the King, but that it is legitimate to give them a second application to Jesus.

                      The Word commentary on Ps 45 says:

                      "Psalm 45 is a superb example of what C. S. Lewis has called “second meanings in the Psalms” (Reflections on the Psalms, 101–15). The primary meaning of the psalm is clear; it is a wedding song, celebrating the marriage of a king to a princess. In its original sense and context, it is not in any sense a messianic psalm. And yet within the context of early Christianity (and in Judaism before that), it becomes a messianic psalm par excellence. The express evidence for the transition is to be found in Heb 1:8–9, where Ps 45:7–8 is quoted with explicit reference to Jesus Christ. But the “second meaning” extends to the whole psalm, not merely to the two verses quoted, and it develops further the way in which the OT’s portrayal of human love and marriage may become the basis of an allegory of Christ and the Church, the Groom and the Bride. "
                      I agree that applying such passages to Jesus was part of the process of reinterpreting Jesus’ identity as a glorified, heavenly messianic figure. However, my point was that ascribing levels of divinity to mere mortals was something we all know pagans practiced, but it also seems to have been done in Jewish circles as well.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        On multiple occasions, the New Testament explicitly attributes the "begotten" verse from Psalm 2 to Jesus, with regard to his resurrection from the dead. I'm not sure that Psalm 2 had any direct application to an Old Testament king. Revelation also mentions a rod of iron. There weren't any Old Testament kings who made the extensive conquests of the uttermost parts of the earth that are mentioned in Psalm 2.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
                          On multiple occasions, the New Testament explicitly attributes the "begotten" verse from Psalm 2 to Jesus, with regard to his resurrection from the dead. I'm not sure that Psalm 2 had any direct application to an Old Testament king. Revelation also mentions a rod of iron. There weren't any Old Testament kings who made the extensive conquests of the uttermost parts of the earth that are mentioned in Psalm 2.
                          Do you take the view that the psalms and other OT writings were written in the following way:

                          "for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God" (2Pet. 1:21)?

                          In other words, those messianic psalms were always intended to apply to Christ (even when first written), yet that was not realized until the fullness of time came and Christ was revealed?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I think Psalm 2 was always intended to apply to Christ, and Israel realized it even back in the Old Testament.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
                              I think Psalm 2 was always intended to apply to Christ, and Israel realized it even back in the Old Testament.
                              That they realized it is brought out in the some of the post exile books, works through the Greek and Maccabean periods as well. Though not as fully developed as the Christian era, but enough to see the path of development.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by seer, Today, 12:37 PM
                              1 response
                              16 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Andius
                              by Andius
                               
                              Started by Faber, 10-13-2020, 03:13 PM
                              4 responses
                              25 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Faber
                              by Faber
                               
                              Started by Christian3, 10-09-2020, 08:37 AM
                              33 responses
                              194 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Andius
                              by Andius
                               
                              Started by mossrose, 10-07-2020, 08:10 PM
                              6 responses
                              36 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post mossrose  
                              Started by Thoughtful Monk, 09-26-2020, 07:50 PM
                              0 responses
                              6 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
                              Working...
                              X