Does Elohim Provide Evidence For God’s Uni-Plurality? Pt. 3

“Your throne, O God (Elohim), is forever and ever. The scepter of your kingdom is a scepter of uprightness; you have loved righteousness and hated wickedness. Therefore God (Elohim), your God (Eloheyka), has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions;” Psalm 45:6-7

"But of the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God (ho theos), is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God (ho theos), your God (ho theos su), has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.’” Hebrews 1:8-9

“For in Him all the fullness of Deity (theotetos) dwells (katoikei) in bodily form (somatikos).” Colossians 2:9 New American Standard (NASB)

"One verse beyond all others in the New Testament affirms that every divine attribute is found in Jesus. Paul does not say simply 'the plenitude of Deity,' but 'the entire fulness of Deity.' He emphasizes that no element of that fullness is excepted. Whatever is characteristic of God as God resides in Jesus. This includes both God's nature and his attributes. In the Greek text the verb lives (present tense) and the adverb 'in bodily form' are not found side by side but are separated, which suggests that two distinct affirmations are being made: that the entire fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ ETERNALLY and that this fullness now PERMANENTLY resides in Christ IN BODILY FORM. Thus, Paul implies both the eternal deity and the permanent humanity of Christ.” (Harris, Three Crucial Questions about Jesus [Baker Books, Grand Rapids MI, 1994], p. 66; bold and capital emphasis ours)

“… The separation of katoikei from somatikos suggests that two distinct affirmations are being made (cf. Vincent 906): that the total plenitude of the Godhead dwells in Christ eternally and that this fullness now permanently resides in the incarnate Christ in bodily form. It is true that before the incarnation the pleroma did not reside in Christ somatikos; it is not true that before the incarnation the pleroma did not reside in him at all. Thus Paul implies both the eternal deity and the permanent humanity of Christ. Moreover, katoikei… somatikos implies that both before and after his resurrection Christ ‘possessed’ a soma (cf. 1:22; 1 Cor 15:44; Phil 3:21).” (Harris, Exegetical Guide To The Greek New Testament: Colossians And Philemon [William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI 2010], p. 89; bold emphasis ours)

“… In whatever sense the king was divine, it was not an actual or intrinsic divinity that he possessed. Nor was the king regarded as an incarnation of Deity. Rather, he was ‘Yahweh's anointed,’ in the sense that he served as Yahweh's deputy on earth, exercising a delegated yet sovereign authority. And as anointed leader of God's chosen people, the king was, by the gracious divine will, God's adopted son (2 Sam. 7:14; Ps. 2:7; 89:27-28 [Engl. w. 26-27]). Yet, in accounting for this unique application of the title to a king, one must reckon with more than simply the king’s divine election and his unique role in standing in loco dei. The king may exceptionally be addressed as ‘God’ also because, endowed with the Spirit of Yahweh, he exhibits certain divine characteristics. In Psalm 45 ‘glory and majesty’ are ascribed to him (vv. 4-5a), as they are to God (e.g., Ps. 96:6); he is a defender and lover of truth and right (vv. 5b, 8a), just as God is (Ps. 33:5; 99:4; Isa. 61:8); he judges with equity (v. 7b), as God does (Ps. 67:5 [Engl. V. 4]; 99:4); just as God’s rule is eternal (Ps. 10:16; 93:2; 145:13), so is the dynasty to which the Davidic king belongs (v. 7a). Some weight must be given to the influence of the exuberant style of an oriental court (cf. v. 2: ‘my heart is bubbling over’). Psalm 45 is noteworthy for its superlatives in its description of the qualities and achievements of the king (vv. 3-8); elohim is not the only instance of hyperbolic language in the poem (see especially vv. 3, 6, 8). But verse 7 remains distinctive in that here ‘the royal compliments suddenly blossom into divine honors.’ With that said, it should also be emphasized that an occupant of the Davidic throne represented a dynasty with which God had made an eternal covenant (2 Sam. 7:13, 16) and from which God’s ideal vicegerent would come, so that these ‘divine honors’ should not be explained simply as verbal extravagance. A king of David’s line could be addressed as elohim because he foreshadowed the coming one who would perfectly realize the dynastic ideal, a godlike ruler who would embody all the ideals described in the psalm.

“The psalmist’s exuberance is tempered, however, by his theological propriety. It has been suggested above that the insertion of eloheyka after elohim in verse 8 may reflect the poet’s awareness of extraordinary use of elohim in verse 7. He forestalls misunderstanding by indicating that the king is not elohim without qualification. Yahweh is the king's ‘God.’ Such an explanation doesn’t rule out the possibility that the poet is also stressing the intimate and unique relationship that exists between the king and Yahweh, although eloheyka is also used in reference to individual prophets (e.g., 1 Kings 17:12; see de Fraine 268-76)…” (Harris, Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus [Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI: First paperback edition, 1998], VIII. The Throne of God (Psalm 45:7-8), C. Objections to the Traditional Interpretation, 4. Theological, pp. 200-201; bold emphasis ours)

“The 45th Psalm, from which the quotation is made, is considered by many interpreters as a marriage song on the nuptials of Solomon with an Egyptian princess–having, however, a mystical reference to the relation between Christ and the Church. We apprehended, however, that this opinion, which is inconsistent with that both of Jewish and Christian antiquity, is not only without evidence, but opposed to evidence. There is much to prove that the sovereign here celebrated is not Solomon–is not, indeed, any mere mortal monarch, but is Messiah our Prince. The hero of this divine poem is a warrior, who girds His sword on His thigh, rides in pursuit of His flying foes, thins their ranks by His sharp arrows, and reigns at last over His conquered enemies. Solomon was no warrior, but enjoyed a long reign of forty years of uninterrupted peace. The prince here celebrated has a numerous progeny. We do not know that Solomon had any other son than Rehoboam. No earthly prince could with propriety be addressed as God; and to no mortal could belong a perpetual dominion. Every particular in the description, interpreted according to the ordinary principles on which the Old Testament prophecy is explained, is applicable to the Messiah. Though we had no direct assertion that this is one of the Psalms in which ‘it is written’ of Christ, yet on these grounds we should have been warranted to have come to this conclusion. But with all who admit the divine inspiration of the writer of this Epistle, the words before us are of themselves sufficient to settle the question as to the subject and reference of the passage quoted. ‘Unto the Son he’–i.e., the psalmist or prophet–‘saith,’–or, ‘the Scripture saith;’ or, understanding it impersonally, ‘it is said’–‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.’” (John Brown, Epistle to the Hebrews [Sovereign Grace Publishers, Inc., 2009], p. 55; bold emphasis ours)

“It may be said, that He who is here addressed as God, is represented as having Himself a God: ‘God, even thy God;’ or, ‘O God, Thy God.’ But to the person who holds the plain scriptural doctrine, that the incarnate Son, as Mediator, is subordinate to His Father, who in the economy of grace sustains the majesty of the Godhead, there is nothing unaccountable in this. He who was God, equal with the Father, was, in His assumed character of the Mediator and Saviour, placed by the Father–who was His God, as the man Christ Jesus–on a throne elevated far above every earthly throne, secured from all fluctuation, and destined to endure for ever.

“Those who deny our Lord's divinity have been greatly perplexed by this passage, and have attempted to get rid of the argument by rendering the words, ‘God is Thy throne for ever and ever.’ But this is not only contrary to the usage of the language, but it would utterly destroy the force of the Apostle's argument. If the words, ‘God is Thy throne,’ mean anything, they mean, ‘God is the support of Thy throne’–a declaration which is true of every throne. It also completely destroys that parallelism which is one of the characteristic beauties of Hebrew poetry. It is kept up when it is said, ‘Thy dominion is perpetual, Thy administration is righteous;’ but it is utterly lost when it is said, ‘God is the support of Thy dominion, and Thy administration is righteous.’” (Ibid, pp. 56-57; bold emphasis ours)

“… When in v. 6, the king is described as a mighty warrior, who subdues many nations, this does not at all suit Solomon who was engaged in no war, but agrees well with the Messiah, who likewise in Isa. 53:12. Ps. 110:5, and elsewhere, is represented under the powerful and victorious warrior. But the strongest argument for the Messianic interpretation is found in v. 7. There the king is addressed as God. The non-Messianic interpreters have here resorted to various expedients. Several of them take Elohim not as the vocative, but as the genitive. How unnatural this interpretation is, and how plainly the mere result of necessity, appears from the fact that no one of the ancient translators, among whom the Jewish certainly cannot be charged with doctrinal prejudice, ever thought of it. All translate in the vocative. The LXX: ho thronos sou ho theos eis aioona aioonos. Aquila: ho thronos sou thee eis aioona kai eti. Symmachus: ho thronos sou ho theos aioonios kai eti. The Chaldee [sic]: ‘thronus gloriae tuae, domine, stabilis in sempiternum.’ In favor of the vocative is the foregoing voc. Gibbor v. 4…” (Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg, Christology Of The Old Testament, And A Commentary On The Predictions Of The Messiah By The Prophets, Volume 1, p. 91; bold emphasis ours)

“David [sic] is clearly addressing the one true God when he says, ‘Thy throne, O God,’ because the throne of the person being addressed is ‘for ever and ever,’ i.e., eternal. Eternity is an attribute of deity.

“Also, in other psalms, David identifies that throne as Yahweh’s throne (Ps. 11:4) from which in heaven He rules over all things (Ps. 103:19) for eternity (Ps. 93:2). This cannot be applied to David or to Solomon or to any earthly king.

“If this is all the passage said, no one wild have the least difficulty in identifying God as the One to whom David [sic] is praying. The problem for the anti-Trinitarian is that David [sic] goes on to speak of God as being anointed by God!

“How can the God of Israel sitting on His throne ruling the universe be anointed by God? For the Trinitarian, this is no problem at all. But for the Unitarian, this text represents a huge problem.

“The historic Christian interpretation is that ‘it is clear from this passage that there are at least two Divine Personalities who are eternal and omnipotent.’ This was the ancient Jewish view as well…” (Morey, The Trinity: Evidence & Issues [Christian Scholars Press, Las Vegas, NV], Part II. The Old Testament Evidence, Chapter 7. A Multi-Personal God, pp. 98-99; bold emphasis ours)

“Your beauty, O King Messiah, is greater than the sons of men; the spirit of prophecy has been placed on your lips; because of this the Lord has blessed you forever. The throne of your glory, O Lord, lasts forever and ever; the scepter of your kingdom is an upright scepter. Because you have loved righteousness and hated wickedness – because of this the Lord your God has anointed you with the oil of gladness more than your fellows.” Psalm 45:3, 7-8 (Edward Cook, Targum of The Psalms: An English Translation; bold emphasis ours)

“Rise up, Lord God (YHWH El)! Lift up Your hand. Do not forget the afflicted. Why has the wicked person despised God (Elohim)? He says to himself, ‘You will not demand an account.’ But You Yourself have seen trouble and grief, observing it in order to take the matter into Your hands. The helpless entrusts himself to You; You are a helper of the fatherless. Break the arm of the wicked and evil person; call his wickedness into account until nothing remains of it. The Lord is King forever and ever; the nations will perish from His land. Psalm 10:12-16

“Come and see the wonders of God (Elohim); His acts for humanity are awe-inspiring. He turned the sea into dry land, and they crossed the river on foot. There we rejoiced in Him. He rules forever by His might; He keeps His eye on the nations. The rebellious should not exalt themselves. Selah Praise our God (Eloheinu), you peoples; let the sound of His praise be heard. He keeps us alive and does not allow our feet to slip. For You, God (Elohim), tested us; You refined us as silver is refined. You lured us into a trap; You placed burdens on our backs.” Psalm 66:5-11

“The LORD reigns forever, your God (Elohayik), O Zion, for all generations.” Psalm 146:10 – cf. Pss. 9:7-8; 29:10; 93:1-2; 102:12; 145:13; Lamentations 5:19; Micah 4:7

“… The Epistle to the Hebrews (Hebrews 1:8) proceeds on the assumption that it is the future Christ, the Son of God. It is supported in this view by a tradition of the ancient synagogue, in accordance with which the Targumist renders Psalm 45:3, ‘Thy beauty, O King Messiah, is greater than that of the children of men.’ This Messianic interpretation must be very ancient…” (Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament; bold emphasis ours)

“So this royal descendant of David is called ’elohim: ‘Your throne, O God [’elohim], will last for ever and ever’! To attempt to translate the key verse with ‘your divine throne’ or ‘your throne is God’ is forced, to say the least. The most natural and obvious meaning is, ‘Your throne, O God,’ spoken to the Davidic king!

“When I first started studying Hebrew in college, I asked my professor, a very friendly Israeli rabbi, to translate for me the words kis’aka ’elohim ‘olam wa‘ed. He replied immediately, ‘Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever,’ explaining, ‘These are praises to the Almighty.’ I then asked him to read the rest of the psalm, clearly addressed to the king, and his face dropped. How could this earthly king be called ’elohim? To repeat: This is the most natural and obvious meaning of the Hebrew, and no one would have questioned such a rendering had the entire psalm been addressed to God. How then can the earthly king be called ‘’elohim’?

“Obviously, when we apply this verse to Jesus the Messiah, there is no question or difficulty. In fact, he is the answer to the question and the solution to the difficulty. But this psalm was originally addressed to an entirely human ‘son of God’ and later applied in its fullest sense to Jesus, the last and greatest Davidic king. How can this be? …

“The answer is very important and helps to provide a key to understanding Messianic prophecy. The word ’elohim can mean God, god, gods, or angels, all of which refer in some sense to ‘divine beings.’ It is also important to note that in the Ancient Near East, the kings of Mesopotamia and Egypt were considered gods themselves. This, however, was not the case in Israel. Rather, the Davidic king was a highly exalted human, recognized as God’s unique son. Here in Psalm 45, the Hebrew language was stretched to its limit, speaking of the Davidic king as ’elohim, a ‘divine one.’ But this daring concept serves as the perfect introduction to the real divine sonship of the Messiah. He truly is ’elohim! So this verse applied in a limited sense to the earthly, Davidic king, and it applies in its full sense to Jesus, the Davidic Messiah.

“This may seem a little complex, but it really is very simple. Every time a new Davidic king was installed, there was an elaborate ceremony, and it appears that psalms such as Psalm 2 were read, proclaiming the king to be God’s son, the anointed (mashiach) of the Lord (cf. Ps. 2:2), and promising him rulership over the entire world (see Ps. 2:8-9). Eventually, these psalms became part of the Hebrew Bible, and as each new king failed to live up to the high prophetic expectations, disappointment set in. But these were God’s words and God’s promises. How could they fail to reach their fulfillment? It was this kind of tension that caused people of Israel to begin to look for a greater son of David, the anointed one (mashiach) par excellence.

“When Jesus the Messiah finally came into the world, these royal psalms reached their goal. Here was one who truly was God’s Son, who in a unique way was ’elohim among us, and who was David’s lord, to be worshiped and served by all mankind. Thus, the royal psalms had their partial application to the earthly sons of David, but they were only fulfilled through Yeshua, the greater son of David. This understanding alone does justice to the truth of the Hebrew Bible and the truth of history.” (Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus [Baker Books, Grand Rapids, MI 2000], Volume 2. Theological Objections, 3.3 God doesn’t have a son, pp. 43-44; bold emphasis ours)

“… When He again brings His Firstborn into the world, He says, ‘And all the angels of God must worship Him.’ In speaking of the angels He says, ‘He makes his angels spirits, and His servants flames of fire.’ But of the Son He says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the 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 gladness beyond Your companions.’ And: ‘In the beginning, Lord [the Son], You established the earth, and the heavens are the works of Your hands; they will perish, but You remain. They will all wear out like clothing; You will roll them up like a cloak, and they will be changed like a robe. But You are the same, and Your years will never end.’” Hebrews 1:1-3, 6-12

Let all that worship graven images be ashamed, who boast of their idols; worship him, all ye his angels. Psalm 96[Eng. 97]:7 LXX

Let this be written for another generation; and the people that shall be created shall praise the Lord. For he has looked out from the height of his sanctuary; the Lord looked upon the earth from heaven; to hear the groaning of the fettered ones, to loosen the sons of the slain; to proclaim the name of the Lord in Sion, and his praise in Jerusalem; when the people are gathered together, and the kings, to serve the Lord… In the beginning thou, O Lord, didst lay the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands. They shall perish, but thou remainest: and [they all] shall wax old as a garment; and as a vesture shalt thou fold them, and they shall be change. But thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail. The children of thy servants shall dwell [securely], and their seed shall prosper for ever. Psalm 101[Eng. 102]:18-22, 25-27 LXX

“… Here we have a vocative even in Hebrew as well as in the LXX and in Hebrews, and only the unwillingness of commentators to have the Son addressed so directly as ’Elohim, ho theos (the article with the nominative is used as a vocative), ‘God,’ causes the search for a different construction.

“When in his Psalmen Delitzsch justifies this ’Elohim he reduces its meaning by pointing to governmental authorities who are also called ’Elohim (he might have pointed to Ps. 97:7 which is discussed under v. 6 where the word is applied to angels) and by pointing to ‘God, thy God,’ in the following lines as beneath ‘his God.’ But such interpretations are inadequate: the Son is ‘God’ in the fullest sense of the word.” (Richard C.H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Epistle of James (Lenski's Commentary on the New Testament) [Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2008], p. 54; bold emphasis ours)

“For the author of Hebrews, however, the address O God, drawn from Psalm 45, is to be understood literally of the Davidic Son. His throne endures forever; his rule knows no end. He is worshipped by angels as ‘God’ (according to v. 6; Deut. 32:43), identified as the ‘Lord’ who created the universe (in vv. 10-12; Ps. 102:25-27), and here hailed as God (through Ps. 45:6a). The application of O God to the Son thus declares his superiority to angels–he is divine, he is the creator of all things, including the angels, and he is worshipped by them.” (Peter T. O’Brien, Letter to the Hebrews, p. 73; bold emphasis ours)

“There is debate over the translation of the passage, for on a strictly grammatical basis, one could render it ‘God is Your throne’ rather than ‘Your throne, O God,’ and, of course, this is exactly the argument presented by all who deny the deity of Christ. But again the context indicates otherwise. Without going into a lot of detail, the writer to the Hebrews is demonstrating the superiority of Jesus Christ to the angels. He says that all the angels of God worship the Firstborn. This is true religious worship, as the context demands. Such worship is only given to God. He contrasts the worship by the angels of the Son with the description God uses of angels as mere ‘winds’ and ‘flames of fire.’ But, in opposition to this, the description God uses of the Son is striking. Quoting from Psalm 45:6-7, God (the Father) makes reference to God (the Son), saying, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.’ … Not only is Jesus the object of divine worship in verse 6, but we will see that in verses 10 through 12 He is identified as Yahweh. Since Christ is shown receiving worship immediately before this passage, and identified with Yahweh immediately thereafter, there can be nothing strange about the Father referring to the Son as ‘God’ in verse 8.” (James R. White, The Forgotten Trinity: Recovering the Heart of Christian Belief [Bethany House Publishers, Minneapolis, MN 1998], 5. Jesus Christ: God In Human Flesh, pp. 74-75; bold emphasis)

18. Some, including Jehovah’s Witnesses, attempt to downplay the use of the verb “worship” here, insisting that it doesn’t always mean “worship” in the full sense. While this is quite true, it is also true that the context will determine the meaning of the word, and if there is any place where true and religious worship is in sight, it is here in the very heavenly realms itself. No mere “relative worship” or “obeisance” will meet the meaning of this term…

22. Another way the context dictates the understanding of this passage is seen in the parallel between the vocative (i.e., direct address) use of “Lord” in verse 10 and that of “God” in verse 8. Both passages are spoken to the Son, and in verse 10 the speaker uses the vocative. Hence, the parallel would indicate that the vocative is being used in verse 8 as well. (Ibid., p. 204; bold emphasis ours)

“But unto the Son He saith, Thy throne, O God.” This supplies us with one of the most emphatic and unequivocal proofs of the Deity of Christ to be found in the Scriptures. It is the Father Himself testifying to the Godhead of Him who was despised and rejected of men. And how fittingly is this quotation from Psalm 45 introduced at the point it is in Heb. 1. In v. 6 we are told that all the angels of God have received command to “worship” the Mediator, now we are shown the propriety of them so doing – He is “God!” They must render Divine honours to Him because of His very nature. Thus we may admire, once more, the perfect order of Scripture. (Arthur W. Pink, Exposition of Hebrews [Sovereign Grace Publishers Inc., 2002], Volume 1, pp. 58-59; bold emphasis ours)

“Related to this, in Hebrews 1:8 the Father gives His own testimony regarding Christ’s identity. Here, the Father is seen addressing the Son, and says, ‘Thy throne, O God [Greek, Theos], is for ever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom.’ This is a direct quote from Psalm 45:6-7, where ‘God’ is seen addressing ‘God’ (using the Hebrew word Elohim). Though the concept of the Trinity is inscrutable to finite minds, this and other passages show us that the Father and the Son are co-equal and co-eternal–as Elohim. Neither is greater or lesser than the other in their divinity. Neither has existed longer than the other. They are equal yet distinct. And, of course, the same is true of the Holy Spirit.” (Ron R. Rhodes & Marian Bodine, Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Mormons [Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, Oregon 1995], 15. The Person of Jesus Christ in Mormonism, pp. 279-280; bold emphasis ours)