Greetings again Rosenritter, At the time that this Psalm was written, it was Yahweh, God the Father that was going to judge the unrighteous Judges in Israel who were favouring the rich and despising the poor in their judgement. Ultimately Jesus will be the Judge, or Ruler when he returns to establish the Kingdom. At the time of his first coming, Jesus did not directly act as a Judge, but rather suffered at the hands of the Pharisees, Sadducees and the Romans.
I'm not sure I understand: do you mean that God
was going to judge the unrighteous judges that held power, but he changed his mind as to how this judgment would be fulfilled after the Psalm was written? I have always understood this Psalm in the context of the Judgment, because it seems fairly obvious that this is not the time that the unjust judges receive judgment.
John1:1 is before the Word was made flesh. Jesus is the name of the child born.
I understand if you maintain a distinction based on technicality, but the scripture does identify Jesus as the Word. It's a specific name introduced by John (for example John 1:1, John 1:14, 1 John 1:1, 1 John 5:7, Revelation 19:13) and as such I don't think it's incorrect to apply this name with hindsight. For example, Justin Martyr demonstrated that the name "Jesus" was revealed as the name of God in Exodus 23:21, where God specifically changed the name of
Oshea to
Joshua (Numbers 13:8, 16) and then declared "my name is in him."
Revelation 19:13 KJV
(13) And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
The Scriptures cannot disagree with each other.
Good answer.
My understanding of this is that God the Father is speaking through Jesus. God the Father raised Jesus.
Surely you don't mean that Jesus was "channeling" God so his words referring to himself don't count? But let's look at the pronouns in the passage?
John 2:19-22 KJV
(19) Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy
this temple, and in three days
I will raise it up.
(20) Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
(21) But
he spake of the temple
of his body.
(22) When therefore
he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that
he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.
"I will" has to agree with "he" between verses 19 and 21, and verse 21 uses "he" and "his body" in a way that can only apply to Jesus. If God was speaking in verse 19 (with which I agree) then we also have proof that the body of Jesus was the body of God from verse 21.
But if you have that type of explanation, why wouldn't that same reasoning work for everything else that Jesus said as well, including each and every declaration that he made that made himself equal to God in name and title and authority? Actually, that's leads to the point that
every word of Jesus was the word of God ... because Jesus was the form of God in the flesh.
If he had eternal life, then he could not die, but he did die. Acts 2:24 says that the grave could not hold him, and this is because he had done no sin, and thus God's righteousness necessitated that he would be raised from the dead. Because of God’s love and fellowship with His beloved Son also necessitated his resurrection and ascension to heaven to sit at God's right hand. Therefore God raised Jesus from the dead after three days.
Then why didn't Peter say "
Whom God hath raised up... because he had done no sin?" He actually said that it wasn't possible that he could be held by death. May we consider the possibility that Peter meant this in its literal sense?
Especially considering that he is also speaking in the context of David (the Psalmist) and the events described in Psalm 22 and Psalm 23 (the crucifixion and the valley of death). The 24th Psalm speaks of he who will ascend the hill of the Lord, and goes to specific effort to identify the King of Glory as the LORD.
Who shall ascend the hill of the LORD? (verse 3) and "lift up your heads, O ye gates; and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in" (verse 6). Who shall ascend and stand in his holy place (verse 3) and "Who is this King of glory?" (verse 8). Where else do you see a fulfillment of God ascending into his own Heaven, and why would it describe him as "receiving the blessing from the LORD" (verse 5?)
So far I have heard reasoning that seems to include:
1) God speaks of himself but it is fulfilled in Jesus
2) Jesus speaks of himself but it was actually God speaking instead
3) Jesus uses the specific identifying names and titles of God which cannot be shared with another... but it's OK because he represents God.
There seems to be a far simpler explanation: Jesus was literally God in the flesh. You must have some reason (or reasons) why you are taking the the complicated route over the simpler explanation... may I take a guess here and ask a couple questions?
Q1: Is it possible for God to be manifest in the flesh? Upon the earth, with two feet and two hands and eyes etc? Or is this beyond his power?
Q2: Is it possible for God to be in more than one place at a time? I take for granted that we agree that he can hear thousands of prayers at once, but do you limit him to one specific point in space at any given time?
A couple more questions, back on the subject of "how old is Jesus?"
Luke 10:17-18 KJV
(17) And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name.
(18) And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Q3: How does "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven" explain why even the devils are subject to his name?
Q4: Can you think of anyplace in scripture where the age of Jesus was
directly questioned?