Hebrews 1:8 – should it be ‘god’ or ‘God’?

Question

The word God in Greek is Θεὸς ("theos") – no differentiation ‘g’ or ‘G’ & god is a righteous servant of God, a king, a prophet, or a Messiah etc…

Hebrews 1:8

8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

taking into account the following;

theos / god being satan

2 Corinthians 4:4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

&

Hebrews 1:9

9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, EVEN THY GOD, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

H 1:9 implies that Jesus has a God unless God is anointing God & does God have fellows.

&

Hebrews 1 verses 1-2 which read: 1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

Point: if Jesus created the the universe how can God speak to Jesus in the last days clearly Jesus is only the mouth piece of God. appointed heir cannot be appointed heir if you already are God and own everything.

Should Hebrews 1:8-9 read as follows

8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, o god, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. 9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

issues:

1. v9 can God anoint God
2. v9 Can God have Fellows
3. v6 - should it be Homage Not Worship - does not equate to God
4. should it be ages Not universe
5. v2 - spoke in the 'last days' not from the beginning
6. v2 - 'appointed heir'

Answer 1

Greek is NOT like Hebrew - the word god/theos is never applied to anything or anyone but the true God of heaven with the following exceptions -

• In a derogatory sense when discussing a false god such as Phil 3:19, "Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is set on earthly things."
• Quoting the Hebrew to confound the Jews such as in John 10:34 (plural)
• A reference to (false) pagan deities, Acts 28:6, 7:40, 43, 12:22, 14:11, 19:26, 37, 1 Cor 8:5, etc
• A reference to Satan being falsely attributed the attributes of God, 2 Thess 2:4, 2 Cor 4:4, Gal 4:8b.

That is, unlike the Hebrew, the NT never attributes true deity (as distinct from false deity) to a person. Thus, passages like John 1:18, Matt 1:23, 2 Peter 1:1, 1 John 1:20 (acc to BDAG), Heb 1:8, 9, John 20:28, Titus 2;13, etc, attribute full deity to Christ and so must be translated with a "G", ie, God in fullest sense.

This is confirmed in Heb 1 where Jesus is given the following attributions:

• He made the universe (v2)
• He upholds the universe by His powerful word (V3)
• He sits on the right hand of the majesty in heaven (V3)
• He is worshiped by angels (V6)
• He has an eternal throne (V8)
• He is addresses as "God" by God (V8, 9)
• The quote to "the Lord" in V10-12 is from the Psalm 102:25-27 which refers to the LORD, Jehovah. That is, Heb 1:10-12 indirectly refers to Jesus as the Jehovah of the OT.

Let there be no doubt that Heb 1 unambiguously refers to Jesus as God in the fullest and complete sense.

Answer 2

Hebrews 1:8-should it be "god" or "God" ?

Simply put, it should be "God".

Not sure why I, an unabashed non-trinitarian, am even bothering to get in again on this heavily biased towards the Trinitarian belief, site. I only do so because I have answered this Q. before (although posed somewhat differently, with the emphasis being on "case"), but it hasn't come up as a previous reference. This could have been because of it not being well received, although I prefer to think that it was hard to understand my reasoning. So, for what it's worth, here again is my answer, reproduced from last May, which also incorporates verse 9. Maybe we have some more discerning people now towards my way of thinking, or maybe not. Depending on how this is received, will be the deciding factor on whether I truly get back into the fray or not.......

Nominative, or, vocative? The answer may well be in the beholding. Names, or even titles (but not limited to these), that are being addressed directly, are said to be in the vocative case. "The Son" here is being merely referenced and is in the accusative case and is therefore the direct object and not the subject of the sentence. "God", even though the subject of the sentence, is not being addressed directly here, so does not need to be in the vocative case. Also, the definite article "the", precedes "God", in all three instances in the Greek, and in Greek, the definite article does not have a vocative case. So, as God is not being addressed directly and is preceded by the definite article, the Greek utilizes the nominative case, as is permitted.

As is often the case in the NASB, as is the case in many a modern day translation, we suffer from "Trinitarian" bias, in the translating of verse 8. The Greek for..."Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever"...(the translation being an unabashed attempt to conflate Jesus with God), is better represented in English as follows..."God is your throne for ever and ever"...and some translations even, as already pointed out in an earlier answer, lean in this direction. When then considering (in Verse 9) the other two instances, already in question, it becomes blatantly clear that God is a separate spiritual entity, and Father to (the only begotten), Jesus.... his God, who anointed him with the oil of exultation, thus singling him(not himself) out, rather than any of the other angels.

Answer 3

Since the same subject, the υἱός and θεός is said to have created the world (Hebrews 1:2; 1:10), then it is clear that this Son and God is not part of the world, and thus, uncreated, just like the Father is uncreated. And just like the Father is Uncreated-Creator, so also the Son is Uncreated-Creator of the created order of things - the universe. You can write therefore both 'god' and 'God' but with a meaning that He, the Son, has the same dignity as He, the Father, and if you hold this truthful theology, then flaws in English grammar conventions will be forgiven to you :)

Answer 4

Hebrews 8ff is a citation from the Psalms

Ps 45 7-8

Your divine throne endures for ever and ever. Your royal scepter is a scepter of equity; you love righteousness and hate wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows;

102,26-28

Of old thou didst lay the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands. They will perish, but thou dost endure; they will all wear out like a garment. Thou changest them like raiment, and they pass away; but thou art the same, and thy years have no end. The children of thy servants shall dwell secure; their posterity shall be established before thee.

Ps 110:1

The LORD says to my lord: "Sit at my right hand, till I make your enemies your footstool."

These words in the Psalms are directed to God. That is why they sound like directed to God, also when cited.

The message is not that Jesus is God, but that God has installed him as the King of His Kingdom, sitting at His right.

Answer 5

What does Jesus’ standing or sitting at the “right hand of the majesty” imply? Is it really saying that he, Jesus, is the center of heavenly power and authority, or is it saying that he is submissive to Someone higher? How are we to reconcile Heb 1:3 with Acts 5:31; 7:55 & 56; Eph 1:20 and 1Pet 3:22? Reading Matt 20:20-23 might help us form a clearer mental picture of the Father and Son and their seating arrangement.

Answer 6

Again and again we encounter analysis of a text never intended to stand alone in understanding a matter. God has provided a multi-faceted approach to revelation that is seen from Gen to Rev through authors millennia apart who corroborate one another.

Jesus is presented as a man only - never God. Certainly there are some texts that may be read into to form a view that Jesus is more than a man, or even an equal to the Highest God. But these are based on pre-conceived notions surfacing centuries after the apostles.

Even in the answers here, God's word is used to elevate Jesus to a place not his.

• He (Jesus) made the universe. The word is aiōnas (ages) and has nothing to do with universe or world, yet it gets quoted all the time anyway. Heb 1:2
• He sits on the right hand of the majesty in heaven (V3) He sits on the right of GOD ~12 verses, the Father ~2 verses. What can be deduced from this is; Jesus is not God, the Father and God are the same one, God IS the Father as the entire NT points out repeatedly.

Thus Jesus, not being God,

• is rightly raised from the dead by God,
• appointed heir of all things by God,
• exalted by God
• anointed by God

Because it is only His to give to His son. The NT, when read with humility and free from abstracts of tradition, reveal a Jesus who could never be God, a God who could never 'empty' Himself to be not God and still be a man who could do all the things Jesus did.

did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped Phil 2:5

God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name v9

glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all flesh John 17:1

So to Heb 1:8 We know there are many called god through the ages. But there is only one God. Even if we momentarily suppose a 3in1 God, they are allegedly all equal, all God.

Here Jesus is decidedly NOT equal in anything! He is granted a station he has never had before - heir, exalted above all other names and above his companions. The Father is greater in every way at every moment forever.

You have loved righteousness and have hated wickedness; because of this, God, Your God, has anointed You

Why is this such a big deal? When would God ever find Himself in a place where, 'because', and then He is made more than He presently is? Never!

Jesus as the man of flesh alone, did have to choose between righteousness and wickedness - his whole mortal life. There was NO backstop, no second chance. IF he sinned he would die and never be raised again. That isn't the Eternal God we're talking about, but His son.

Sit at My right hand, until I may place Your enemies as a footstool for Your feet

If Jesus is also God, he should, now ascended, exalted, made heir of all, be able to subdue his own enemies. But no. Again, he is but a man, now immortal, but still a man and not God - waiting on his God to follow through on His promises at the appointed time.

That's why Stephen was stoned - he saw the ascended Jesus - his Lord and Master in the place where he said he would go. Not by going there of himself, but be taken there by his God. Mark 16:19

Indeed, as v5 points out in perfect harmony -

You are my Son; today I have begotten You

God made His own son, made him Lord, made him the Christ Acts 2:36 Made him everything he needed to be Saviour and to accomplish what he was sent to do as the logos of God become flesh.

+++++++++++++++++

An honest and exegetical study of true worship will show that it may be given to anyone we choose to serve, honour and even obey. The insistence that to worship Jesus means he must be God is folly. God says to worship no other god, to worship Him only - as God! Jesus, having accomplished his mission to save all creation from doom is worthy of great praise - not because he is God - but because he is NOT!

Made like us in every respect Heb 2:17, this mortal man won against the prince of evil, how? With his God by his side. Now, rightly, he is at God's side as His amazing son - the second and last Adam.

Let all God’s angels worship him. Heb 1:6

INDEED!

Answer 7

Simple Answers. How should Hebrews 1:8-9 be translated as

Answer: Heb 1:8 BIB+ Πρὸς Pros about δὲ de But τὸν ton the Υἱόν Huion Son [He says] : Ὁ Ho - θρόνος thronos throne , σου sou “ Your ὁ ho O Θεὸς Theos God , εἰς eis [endures] forever τὸν ton . . . αἰῶνα aiōna . . . τοῦ tou vvv αἰῶνος aiōnos and ever , καὶ kai and ἡ hē - ῥάβδος rhabdos - τῆς tēs - εὐθύτητος euthytētos justice [is] ῥάβδος rhabdos the scepter τῆς tēs of βασιλείας basileias kingdom . σου* sou Your

Heb 1:9 BIB+ ἠγάπησας ēgapēsas You have loved δικαιοσύνην dikaiosynēn righteousness καὶ kai and ἐμίσησας emisēsas hated ἀνομίαν anomian wickedness ; διὰ dia therefore τοῦτο touto . . . ἔχρισέν echrisen has anointed σε se You ὁ ho - Θεός Theos God , ὁ ho - Θεός Theos God , σου sou Your ἔλαιον elaion with [the] oil ἀγαλλιάσεως agalliaseōs of joy .” παρὰ para above τοὺς tous - μετόχους metochous companions σου sou Your

The "form" here - ὁ Θεὸς ho Theos - is in the vocative case and not the nominative. It is the usual form of the vocative in the Septuagint, and nearly the only form of it - Stuart. This then is a direct address to the Messiah, calling him God; and I see not why it is not to be used in the usual and proper sense of the word. Unitarians proposed to translate this, "God is thy throne;" but how can God be "a throne" of a creature?

πρὸς δὲ τὸν υἱός …, the quotation being from Psalms 45 in which the King in God’s kingdom is described ideally. The points in the quotation which make it relevant to the writer’s purpose are the ascription of dominion and perpetuity to the Son.

The emphatic words, therefore, are θρόνος, εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, ῥάβδος, and παρὰ τοὺς μετόχους σου. It does not matter, therefore, whether we translate “Thy throne is God” or “Thy throne, O God,” for the major point here to be affirmed is not that the Messiah is Divine, but that He has a throne and everlasting dominion.

Dealing with the Issues Raised.

1. V9 can God anoint God. Yes he can. Thats what the bible Says. However we should distinguish the Persons Speaking here. God- Father and God- Son- (in time took the name Jesus) God the Father anointed Jesus who The Father calls "God"(Qualitative use).

2. v9 can God have fellows.
   Since we have understood how the word God is used above. Then Yes. Jesus who is the world became flesh and Identified with the Humans whom he came to save. Its on this point he has Fellows. The Father still choosing to call him God(qualitative use) while speaking about his(logos) Human Adventure says alot here.

Thy fellows," in its original reference, seems most naturally to mean "thy associates in royalty," "other kings;" cf. Psalm 79:27, "I will make him my Firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth." Or it might mean the companions of the bridegroom, the παρανύμφιοι. The latter reference lends itself readily to the fulfillment in Christ, the Bridegroom of the Church, whose παρανύμφιοι the redeemed are; themselves also being, after their measure, χριστοί (cf. 1 John 2:20, 27

3. V6. Should it be Homage not worship Yes it should be Homage. But the sense is retained , Whom would God require the angels to adore? A creature? A man? A fellow-angel? To ask these questions is to answer them. He could require them to worship none but God, Moreover Two Jewish Rabbis of distinction - Rashi and Kimchi - affirm that all the Psalms Psa. 93–101 (which are the parallels of this scripture) are to be regarded as referring to the Messiah. Such was, and is, the opinion of the Jews.

4. Should it be Ages and not Universe Barnes sums this up perfectly. "The word properly means “age” - an indefinitely long period of time; then perpetuity, ever, eternity - “always” being. For an extended investigation of the meaning of the word, the reader may consult an essay by Prof. Stuart, in the Spirit of the Pilgrims, for 1829, pp. 406-452. From the sense of “age,” or “duration,” the word comes to denote the present and future age; the present world and the world to come; the present world, with all its cares, anxieties, and evils; the people of this world - a wicked generation, etc. Then it means the world - the material universe creation as it is. The only perfectly clear use of the word in this sense in the New Testament is in Heb 11:3, and there there can be no doubt. “Through faith we understand that the worlds were made by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” The passage before us will bear the same interpretation, and this is the most obvious and intelligible. What would be the meaning of saying that the “ages” or “dispensations” were made by the Son of God? The Hebrews used the word - צולם ‛owlaam - in the same sense. It properly means “age, duration;” and thence it came to be used by them to denote the world - made up of “ages” or generations; and then the world itself."

v2 - spoke in the 'last days' not from the beginning Yes. This is simply referring to Jesus Earthly Ministry. Being Gods Final Spokesman. Compare with the Holy Spirit also to speak the things of Jesus to the disciples..

v2 - 'appointed heir' The language is used to denote his rank and dignity as the Son of God. As such all things are his, as the property of a father descends to his son at his death. The word rendered “heir” - κληρονόμος klēronomos - means properly:

(1) One who acquires anything by lot; and,

(2) An “heir” in the sense in which we usually understand the word. It may also denote a “possessor” of anything received as a portion, or of property of any kind; see Rom 4:13-14. It is in every instance rendered “heir” in the New Testament. Applied to Christ, it means that as the Son of God he is possessor or lord of all things, or that all things are his; compare Act 2:36; Act 10:36; Joh 17:10; Joh 16:15 (refs4).