“But of the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. The scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your Kingdom’.” (Hebrews 1:8, ESV)

Once again, is this an explanation of the Oneness or the Trinity? Or is this a proof-text that is used for the basis of their jumped to conclusions and false dilemmas?

Here is theHere is the…

TRINITARIAN’S FALSE DILEMMA: “This can ‘only’ indicate that Jesus is God the Son, the second person in the Trinity”

And here is the…

ONENESSIAN’S FALSE DILEMMA: “this can ‘only’ indicate that Jesus is a dual-natured incarnation of the person of the Father”

So, let’s jump in and search the scriptures for verses that better explain the subject matter so we can establish our beliefs and understanding on quoted scripture rather than imaginations of men that have been superimposed upon the texts.

Consider the following Psalm as the OT prophets understood it:

“Your divine throne is everlasting; your royal scepter is a scepter of equity. You have loved righteousness and hate wickedness; rightly has God, your God, chosen to anoint you with oil of gladness over all your peers.” (Psalms 45:7–8 in Jewish Scriptures, 6–7 in Christian Scriptures)

Although later Christians attempt to reinterpret this Psalm differently, in Hebrews 1:8, above, is the way David would have understood it. This Psalm was originally written as God speaking to and about King David. Today’s theologians seem to conveniently overlook or downplay this truth. Certainly, David did not take his sworn oath from God to mean that he himself was God or that his son or future sons would be God. This is how false interpretations attempt to read into such passages what they never would have meant to the OT prophets who wrote them. Note the internal witness to what we are saying: “rightly has God, your God, chosen to anoint you…” So, when the context is taken into account, the one about whom this was written had a God above him and was anointed above his peers. The peers of course are the rest of us humans, if not David’s Israelite brothers in particular! So, once again, we find Onenessians resorting to the devil’s method of Bible interpretation.

Proof Texted Scripture	False Dilemma “Concluded” from Proof Text	Scripture Negating the False Dilemma / Conclusion
Hebrews 1:8 “Your Throne, O God”	This says that Jesus was called God by God and therefore must be “true God”	Psalms 45:7–8 “Your divine throne is everlasting” See also 1 Chronicles 29:23, JPS; “God, has anointed you…above your fellows” Hebrews 1:1-9 (explanations); Hebrews 2:9-12; Matthew 28:10; Romans 8:29; Hebrews 3:1–6; Luke 2:52; Hebrews 2:10–13; Acts 2:36

No legitimate Jew ever thought that Psalms 45:7–8 should be interpreted to mean that David was YHWH-God Himself. Why then do Trinitarians and Onenessians interpret it in such a way? Answer: because, knowingly or not, they interpret it through the lens of pagan ideas about incarnated deities, rather than through the OT Schoolmaster! For evidence of the meaning of the verse in question, there is another passage of Scripture that helps inform our understanding of what Psalms 45:7–8 would have meant to the ancient Jews:

“Then Solomon sat on the throne of YHWH as king instead of David his father, and prospered; and all Israel obeyed him.” (1 Chronicles 29:23, JPS)

Solomon sat on the throne of God! This is how the people of the Old Covenant understood the concept in Psalms 45:7–8: not that the Messiah would be an incarnation of God the Father, but that a human son of David would sit on God’s throne as God’s agent and representative. This interpretation is not jumping to conclusions, but rather it is doing what Jesus demonstrated by looking for another passage that provides more clarity.

This concept is spelled out in the first chapter of Hebrews if we really listen carefully to what it explains:

“¹God, having in the past spoken to the fathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, ²has at the end of these days spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds. ³His Son is the radiance of his glory, the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself made purification for our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; ⁴having become so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they have.⁵For to which of the angels did he say at any time, ‘You are my Son. Today have I become your father?’ and again, ‘I will be to him a Father, and he will be to me a Son?’ ⁶Again, when he brings in the firstborn into the world he says, ‘Let all the angels of God worship him.’ ⁷Of the angels he says, ‘Who makes his angels winds, and his servants a flame of fire.’ ⁸But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. The scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your Kingdom. ⁹You have loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows.” (Hebrews 1:1-9)

Notice these explanations:

Vs.2 “his son whom he appointed heir.” This doesn’t speak of Jesus being inherently coequal; rather, he was “appointed heir,” meaning, God decided to give Jesus all authority. That would be superfluous if he already was God, and already had all authority, by identity as Onenessians insist is meant.

“…through whom also he made the worlds.” This is a “whom,” not a human nature. This is speaking of God’s foreknowledge of Jesus Christ himself: 

“⁴even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and without blemish before him in love; having predestined us for adoption as children through Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his desire” (Ephesians 1:4-5)

“…even as he has said, “As I swore in my wrath, they will not enter into my rest;” although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.” (Hebrews 4:3) 

“…everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been killed.” (Revelation 13:8)

Back to the context of Hebrews 1:

Vs. 3, “the radiance of his glory, the very image of his substance.” An image is a representation of something, not that something itself. If you have a penny, you have an image of Lincoln, but you don’t have Lincoln. So, this isn’t saying Jesus is God by nature, but that he accurately reflects God’s character.

Vs. 4 “having become so much better.” Think about how ridiculous this is if it was trying to say that the true God became better than the angels by becoming a man and by being obedient to himself. In saying “having become,” this is a clear statement that Jesus whom this passage is describing was not previously what he later came to be.

Vs. 5 “‘Today I have become your father’ and again, ‘I will be to him a Father, and he will be to me a Son’.” These are both ridiculous statements to apply to an eternal son in the Trinitarian sense. But it is just as ridiculous and unbiblical for Onenessians to say, “what this really means is his human nature.” No, it’s not; it doesn’t say that here or anywhere else in the Bible at all. That would be a Oneness imagination. Rather, this is explaining in detail, that the subject matter here is the son, born to Mary, born under the law, who, Jesus, at that time became God’s son, who went on to humble himself by being obedient unto the death of the cross and because of that was ultimately given a name above all names.

Vs. 6 “when he brings the firstborn into the world.” Jesus was born, not incarnated, in Jerusalem some 2,000 years ago.

Vs. 7-8 “But of the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever… You have loved righteousness, and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows.” This is a quote from the Old Testament that referred to the throne of the Davidic King. Remember, God called men “gods” (elohim) in the Old Testament (i.e., Psalm 82:6; Psalm 97:7, Exodus 22:28). 

Before you forget the context we’ve just covered and jump to conclusions that this is saying Jesus is “true God,” read and consider the context of these two verses as well as their explanations: 

A) This Jesus was “anointed,” meaning given authority (Hebrews 5:1-5 & Matthew 28:18). Meaning he did not have authority before it was given to him; as in “you,” not his “human nature.”

B) The “reason” that Jesus was given authority wasn’t because he is inherently God, but because he has proven to “love righteousness and hate wickedness.” This is an explanation. His exaltation was performance based, not identity based. And thirdly,

C) Jesus was anointed “above your fellows,” meaning the rest of us human beings. It is ridiculous to believe that God anointed the second person of three coequal persons above the other two, or above himself. That is pure extrabiblical speculation and is unbiblical. And who would be the “fellows” of “God the Father incarnate as a man” in the Oneness sense? Did you know that we are “brothers” with Jesus? That is, with the person of Jesus, not just brothers with his human nature.

“⁹But we see him who has been made a little lower than the angels, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that by the grace of God he should taste of death for everyone. ¹⁰For it became him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many children to glory, to make the author of their salvation perfect through sufferings. ¹¹For both he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified are all from one, for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brothers, ¹²saying, ‘I will declare your name to my brothers. In the midst of the congregation I will sing your praise’.” (Hebrews 2:9-12)

“‘Do not be afraid,’ said Jesus. ‘Go and tell My brothers to go to Galilee. There they will see Me’.” (Matthew 28:10)

“For whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.” (Romans 8:29)

We are brothers with Jesus. Can a Onenessian truly say that? Let’s ask it this way, if an alien being from outer space was to possess a man, and overpower that man’s will, actions, and speech (as in a demon possession), would you speak of that alien spirit as your “brother” because he was running around in what was, effectively, a “man suit”? If you wouldn’t call that alien your brother, then you really can’t call the Oneness version of Jesus “brother” either, because in the Oneness position Jesus’ “self” comes from deity, God the Father.

Messiah as a Son of David

Now let’s consider the overall context of the Messiah as a Son of David. David wanted to build a house for God made of stone and wood. That is the one that Solomon built, known as Solomon’s temple. But the temple that God had in mind was to be the very people of God. They would be called by God’s name, and God would be housed in their hearts. In this way, Jesus is ultimately the Son of David who would build the house that God was talking about. This is why the Book of Hebrews says that Jesus is the builder of the house. As you read this passage keep in mind God’s words to David that David’s son would build the house. In other words, keep in mind that the biblical code phrase for the “Son of God” is “David’s son” instead of viewing the passage through the lenses of the traditions of men.

“¹Therefore, holy brothers, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider the apostle and High Priest of our confession, Jesus; ²who was faithful to Him who appointed him, as also was Moses in all his house. ³For he has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who built the house has more honor than the house. ⁴For every house is built by someone; but He who built all things is God. ⁵Moses indeed was faithful in all his house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were afterward to be spoken, ⁶but Christ is faithful as a Son over his house; whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the glorying of our hope firm to the end. (Hebrews 3:1–6)

According to verse 1, the subject of the passage is Jesus. The two distinct “him” pronouns in verse 2 explain that he is personally distinct from God who appointed him. He didn’t appoint himself. Jesus was faithful as a son (in contrast to Moses, a servant), and not “as to his human nature” either. Jesus was therefore, as verse 3 says, “counted worthy” of more glory and honor than Moses. This all shows clearly that Jesus was not inherently worthy by deific substance, identity, or personality. Nothing in this passage explains or hints at an idea that Jesus is a dual-natured incarnation of the Father. Rather, it explains, explicitly to the contrary of that imagination, that he had to prove himself through faith; thus, Jesus was “faithful to Him who appointed him.” The house that Jesus builds, which is the topic here, is not the whole world or all of mankind—that is what God built. The house that Jesus is building is limited to the household of the saints—us—in whom God is “templed” if we hold firm to the end.

Unfortunately, views such as Oneness destroy the wonderful truth of what this passage explains to us. Onenessians relegate Jesus’ humanity to mere flesh; but here, that flesh is a human person in distinction from his Father who is exalted for his faithful obedience to the Father. In Oneness terms, that would be like you or me exalting our bodies for going to work to provide for our needs. It is nonsensical and unbiblical to contend that God had to first be obedient to Himself to be counted worthy of glory.

The fact that Jesus had to prove himself faithful to God the Father has further witness in the NT:

“And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men.” (Luke 2:52)

How could “God” possibly increase in favor with Himself? Did God not know what He was going to do as a man? The very word “increased” used in this passage is very insightful. It originated as a navigational metaphor that means, “to drive forward by means of blows.” “Increased.” Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (Location: Eerdmans, 1990), Biblesoft, 2006.

This verse is saying that Jesus fulfilled the part of the prophecy wherein God had said, “I will be his father, and he shall be my son: if he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men; but my loving kindness shall not depart from him.” You may recall, the Scripture says, “… if you are without discipline, of which all have been made partakers, then are you illegitimate, and not sons” (Hebrews 12:8). This is a truth about sons that cannot ring true with the idea that Christ is God Himself incarnate in the flesh. It is ridiculous when we consider Oneness calling the son a “mode” of the person of the Father! Onenessians want us to believe that God disciplined Himself!

So, did God chasten himself while he was in the “mode” of the Son? Because Jesus couldn’t even be rightfully a “son” unless he was chastened by God (which Onenessians say was Himself)! Is God Himself chastening God Himself not utter confusion? While Trinitarians and Onenessians conclude by assumption that Jesus was perfect because he was God incarnate, the Bible explains his becoming perfected in a different way by explaining it as something that he had to attain, and it even explains how he had to attain it:

“¹⁰For it became him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many children to glory, to make the author of their salvation perfect through sufferings.” (Hebrews 2:10)

He was made perfect through sufferings. Is that true of God? Of course not! Why, and how in good conscience, would the writer of the Book of Hebrews say this if he believed that Jesus was an incarnation of the person of God the Father? So then, in saying that Jesus was faithful, and thereby counted worthy, the passage in Hebrews alludes to what is said in Psalms 45:7: “You have loved righteousness, and hated wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows (or peers).” It is in this context that God designates, exalts, and anoints Jesus above all his fellow human beings. So, the Oneness jumped to conclusion and false dilemma must negate the entire context in order to isolate one verse by which to use as a proof text to base their jumped to conclusion on.

Perhaps Jesus had this verse in mind when he said, “I am ascending to my Father and to your Father, to my God and your God” (John 20:17). What we can say with certainty is that this set of passages has nothing to do with teaching or articulating an incarnation of the person of God and everything to do with God’s sworn oath to David regarding the Son that would proceed out of David’s loins. And we do know that God kept his promise to David and that because of Jesus’ faithful obedience he has been exalted above the rest of his fellows, peers, and brothers; namely, us.

We know this because, in proclaiming this Jesus on the day of Pentecost, Peter said:

“Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” (Acts 2:36)

Jesus was made Lord. Think about what that means. Was God “made” God or Lord? Of course not. We teach and believe in the Jesus whom the apostles preached; that is the one who was made both Lord and Messiah, the one who was born of the offspring/seed of David. The one that was exalted to sit on the throne of God, the one that is Named, Proclaimed, Confessed, AND Explained in the Bible: Jesus Christ, the SON of the Living God!

 Print This Post