Hebrews 1
1 By many portions
and many modes, of old, God, speaking to the fathers in the prophets,
2 in the last of these days speaks to us in a Son, Whom He appoints enjoyer of the allotment of all, through Whom He also makes the eons;
3 Who, being the Effulgence of His glory and Emblem of His assumption, besides carrying on all by His powerful declaration, making a cleansing of sins, is seated at the right hand of the Majesty in the heights;
4 becoming so much better than the messengers as He enjoys the allotment of a more excellent name than they.
2 in the last of these days speaks to us in a Son, Whom He appoints enjoyer of the allotment of all, through Whom He also makes the eons;
3 Who, being the Effulgence of His glory and Emblem of His assumption, besides carrying on all by His powerful declaration, making a cleansing of sins, is seated at the right hand of the Majesty in the heights;
4 becoming so much better than the messengers as He enjoys the allotment of a more excellent name than they.
In a Nutshell: The “Son” whom God
“appoints enjoyer of the allotment of all,” is,
of course the Lord Jesus Christ, and his “Sonship” is inseparable from the fact
that he was generated by God in the womb of his mother, Miriam. It is Christ in
whom God has been speaking since the beginning of “the
last of these days,” and not at any time before. In accord with this
fact, “the eons”
in view in v. 2 are the eons during which Christ will be reigning after the
kingdom of God has been established on the earth. These final eons are
elsewhere referred to in Scripture as simply “the eons” (Matt. 6:13; Luke
1:33; Rom. 1:25; 9:5; 11:36; 16:27; 2 Cor. 11:31; Heb. 13:8; Jude 25) and as “the eons of the
eons” (Gal.1:5;
Phil.4:20; 1 Tim.1:17; 2Tim.4:18; Heb.13:21; 1 Pet.4:11; 5:11; Rev.1:6, 18;
4:9,10; 5:13,14; 7:12; 10:6; 11:15; 14:11; 15:7; 19:3; 20:10; 22:5). Thus, “the
eons” that God makes
through his Son are the eons that will transpire during the Son’s reign.
Expanded
Explanation:
Those who believe Christ’s life began prior to his conception usually
understand the last part of v. 2 as supporting this fact. The assumption is
that “the eons” referred to are not just the eons of the future, but the eons
of the past as well. For those who already believe (or are inclined to believe)
that scripture clearly reveals that the Son of God pre-existed his conception,
it’s not hard to see why they would want to believe that “the eons” in view
here include both those eons that are future as well as those which began before
Christ was conceived. However, if one is not already convinced of this position
(and has reasons to believe that the Son of God has never existed as a non-human
being), then it will not seem so obvious that “the eons” that the author had in
mind in this passage include those which began before Christ was conceived.
In
light of the immediate and larger context, I believe it is reasonable to understand
the writer as having had in mind the two glorious eons during which the Son of
God will be reigning. As has been argued elsewhere, Jesus is the “Son of God”
by virtue of his having been supernaturally generated by God in the womb of his
mother (Luke 1:35). Thus, when the writer tells us that it is through the Son that God “makes the eons,” it
is most reasonable to infer that the eons in view are those which Jesus Christ,
as the Son, will be involved in
making. Consider also the fact that, in the introduction to the letter to the
Hebrews, the writer is emphasizing what became true after God began “speaking to us in a Son”
in “the last of these days.” In other words,
the immediate context in which we’re told that God “makes
the eons” through the Son is not about what occurred before God began speaking to us in a Son.
It’s about what occurred after God
began speaking to us in a Son.
Moreover,
it’s reasonable (as far as scripturally-informed logic goes) to say that Christ became the one through whom God “makes
the eons” after he became “so much better than the messengers as
He enjoys the allotment of a more excellent name than they.” Did any of the
messengers – or indeed, any other created
celestial being at all - have such great authority as to be the agent
through whom God “makes the eons?” No. Not even Christ himself was given “all authority in heaven and on the earth” and graced
with “the name that is above every name” until after
his death and resurrection (Matt. 28:18; Phil. 2:8-11). The Son of God
through whom God “makes the eons” is the same Son of God who received this
preeminent authority by virtue of his having made “a
cleansing of sins” by his sacrificial death, and who (because of his obedient death) is
consequently now “seated at the right hand of the
Majesty in the heights.”
Some
may be inclined to object that “the eons” spoken of aren’t specifically
referred to as future eons, and that
the most “natural” way to interpret the expression “the eons” is as a reference
to all of the eons. However, this sort of objection fails in
light of the simple fact that the two future eons are, in other contexts,
referred to as both “the eons of the eons” (Gal.1:5; Phil.4:20; 1 Tim.1:17;
2Tim.4:18; Heb.13:21; 1 Pet.4:11; 5:11; Rev.1:6, 18; 4:9,10; 5:13,14; 7:12;
10:6; 11:15; 14:11; 15:7; 19:3; 20:10; 22:5) as well as simply “the eons” (Matt. 6:13; Luke 1:33; Rom. 1:25; 9:5;
11:36; 16:27; 2 Cor. 11:31; Heb. 13:8; Jude 25). Thus, I see no compelling
reason why the reference to “the eons” in Heb. 1:3 can’t be a reference to the
future eons of Christ’s reign.
Concerning the last
set of verses referenced above (where we read of “the eons”), A.E. Knoch
remarks as follows on page 175 of his book All
in All:
“That there are
eons in the future is clearly shown by Christ’s reign over the house of Jacob
for the next two eons (Luke 1:33). It is during these two eons that the results
of His suffering and shame and death will reap its rich fruition. They are the
eons of blessing in a very notable way – such as could not be the case now and
as will hardly be appropriate after the consummation. And this fact it is that
blends in blessed harmony with the doxologies which sing of His conquest over
sin (Rom. 1:25), His relationship to the eonian nation (Rom. 9:5), the truth
that not only all is out of Him and through Him, but will be for Him in these
eons (Rom. 11:36), the full realization of the reconciliation (Rom. 16:27), and
its ministry by the apostle (2 Cor. 11:31).”
In
light of what Knoch wrote above, one cannot object to the fact that the writer
of Hebrews doesn’t explicitly tell us that the eons in view in v. 2 are future
eons, since the plural “eons” is used elsewhere in Scripture in reference to
eons that we can reasonably conclude are future without the writer explicitly
having to inform us of this fact (in the same way, the next eon – i.e., that
which will begin when Christ returns to earth - is not always referred to as
the eon that is “to come,” yet we know from the context that the next eon is in
view without having to be explicitly told so). The immediate context in which
the plural “eons” is used in these verses informs us that they’re to be
understood as the eons that are to come, during which Christ will be reigning
until the consummation. And, I believe, the same can be said for Hebrews 1:2.
The eons that we’re told God “makes” through his Son are, I submit, the eons
during which the Son will be reigning.
Hebrews 1
10 And, Thou, originally, Lord, dost found the
earth, And the heavens are the works of Thy hands.
11 They shall perish, yet Thou art continuing, And all, as a cloak, shall be aged,
12 And, as if clothing, wilt Thou be rolling them up. As a cloak also shall they change. Yet Thou art the same, And Thy years shall not be defaulting.
11 They shall perish, yet Thou art continuing, And all, as a cloak, shall be aged,
12 And, as if clothing, wilt Thou be rolling them up. As a cloak also shall they change. Yet Thou art the same, And Thy years shall not be defaulting.
13 Now [or “Yet”] to which of the messengers has He declared at any time, “Sit
at My right, till I should be placing Thine enemies for a footstool for Thy
feet”?
14 Are they not all ministering spirits
commissioned for service because of those who are about to be enjoying the
allotment of salvation?
In a Nutshell: Verses 10-12 are a
quotation of Psalm 102:25-28, and in these verses the Psalmist was addressing
God (i.e., Yahweh). The “Lord” being addressed in v. 10 is, in other words, the
same person referred to as “He” in v. 13 (i.e., the Father of Jesus). The
writer’s point in quoting Psalm 102:25-28 before Psalm 110 (which the writer quotes
in v. 13) is to demonstrate that the same transcendent relationship to, and
absolute authority over, “the works of [God’s] hands” (which God is described as having in Psalm
102:25-28) has been given to the Messiah
(who, in fulfillment of Psalm 102, now “sits at God’s
right,” having been given all authority in heaven and on earth and
placed over the works of God’s hands).
Expanded
Explanation:
This entire passage (i.e., verses 5-14) is a scripture-based defense of the
claim made in v. 4 that Jesus, the Son of God, is superior to the messengers of
God. The passage also has a certain logical structure, with different verses
being linked together to form a distinct argument for the overall position
being advanced by the writer of this letter. Below is how I understand the way in which the
writer’s scripture-based arguments should be grouped (notice how the first
section begins with the word “For” and the last two sections begin with the
word “And”):
First Argument
Section
5 For
to whom of the messengers said He at any time, "My Son art Thou! I, today,
have begotten Thee"? And again, "I shall be to Him for a Father And
He shall be to Me for a Son"?
6 Now [or
“Yet”],
whenever He may again be leading the Firstborn into the inhabited earth, He is
saying: And worship Him, all the messengers of God!
Second Argument
Section
7 And,
indeed, to the messengers He is saying, "Who is making His messengers
blasts, And His ministers a flame of fire."
8 Yet to the Son: "Thy throne, O God, is for the eon of the eon, And a scepter of rectitude is the scepter of Thy kingdom.
9 Thou lovest righteousness and hatest injustice; Therefore Thou art anointed by God, Thy God, with the oil of exultation beyond Thy partners."
8 Yet to the Son: "Thy throne, O God, is for the eon of the eon, And a scepter of rectitude is the scepter of Thy kingdom.
9 Thou lovest righteousness and hatest injustice; Therefore Thou art anointed by God, Thy God, with the oil of exultation beyond Thy partners."
Third Argument
Section
10 And,
Thou, originally, Lord, dost found the earth, And the heavens are the works of
Thy hands.
11 They shall perish, yet Thou art continuing, And all, as a cloak, shall be aged,
12 And, as if clothing, wilt Thou be rolling them up. As a cloak also shall they change. Yet Thou art the same, And Thy years shall not be defaulting.
11 They shall perish, yet Thou art continuing, And all, as a cloak, shall be aged,
12 And, as if clothing, wilt Thou be rolling them up. As a cloak also shall they change. Yet Thou art the same, And Thy years shall not be defaulting.
13 Now [or
“Yet”] to
which of the messengers has He declared at any time, “Sit at My right, till I
should be placing Thine enemies for a footstool for Thy feet”?
14 Are they not all ministering spirits
commissioned for service because of those who are about to be enjoying the
allotment of salvation?
(It
should be noted that v. 14 can be understood as a conclusion to all three
sections/units, and not just the conclusion of the last.)
A
few things may be said in defense of this understanding of the structure of the
passage. First, the writer used the word “for” (gar) to introduce his first
scripture-based argument (found in verses 5-6), and then used the word “and” (kai)
to introduce his second argument (found in verses 7-9). Moreover, when the writer
of Hebrews contrasted a verse or passage with another, he used the word de (which, in the CLNT, is translated as
two different words in Hebrews 1: “now” in verses 6 and 13, and “yet” in v. 8).
Moreover,
when the writer quoted an additional Old Testament verse
to support the same point being made by the verse previously quoted, he linked
the verses with the word “again” (palin)
rather than the word “and” (kai) alone (Heb.
1:5; for other examples of this use of palin,
see Heb. 2:13, 4:5, 10:30; cf. Romans 15:9-12). Thus, had the author intended
his quotation of Psalm 102 in verses 10-12 to be understood as another example
from the Old Testament of how Christ is superior to the angels, he would’ve
most likely used palin (“again”) or kai
palin (“and again”), and not merely kai (“and”) alone. It can
therefore be inferred that, by using kai
alone in v. 10 (rather than using palin
or kai palin), the writer is beginning
a new argument (which, again, means
that verses 10-12 are linked with verse 13). We should not, therefore, understand
verses 10-12 as making the same sort of point, and as serving the same purpose,
as verses 8-9. It’s most reasonable to understand v. 10 as the beginning of a
new argument (an argument which includes v. 13 as well).
But
what purpose do verses 10-12 serve in the writer’s argument? In order to answer
this question, we first need to identify the person being addressed in these
verses. Verses 10-12 are a quotation of Psalm 102:25-28:
Beforetime You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of
Your hands. They shall perish, yet You shall stand. All of them shall decay
like a cloak; Like clothing, You shall change them, and they shall pass by. Yet
You remain the same, And Your years shall not come to end.
This
Psalm is actually the fourth Psalm quoted in Hebrews 1. The last Psalm that was
quoted by the writer of Hebrews is Psalm 45, and (unlike Psalm 102, as we’ll see below), this Psalm is clearly “Messianic”
in its focus and theme. In Psalm 45:6-7, the Psalmist was clearly addressing
and referring to the future Messiah (which likely would’ve been the opinion of
the original recipients of the letter to the Hebrews, and accounts for the
author’s use of it). The person of elevated status being prophetically referred
to in this Psalm was clearly not Yahweh himself, for he is distinguished from Yahweh (who, we’re told, is the God
who would be anointing this future ruler “with the oil
of exultation beyond his partners”).
In
contrast with Psalm 45:6-7, there is no good, contextually-informed reason to
believe that the person being addressed in Psalm 102:25-28 is anyone other than
Yahweh himself, and it’s highly unlikely that the original recipients of the
letter to the Hebrews would’ve understood it in any other way. That the person
being addressed throughout the entirety of this Psalm is Yahweh himself seems
clear from even a cursory reading of Psalm 102 (see Psalm 102:1-2 and 12-24).
Unlike in Psalm 45:6-7, there is no indication that the author of Psalm 102
understood himself to have been addressing someone other than the one God of
Israel, or that he believed himself to have been referring to the future
Messiah or Son of God. From verse one it’s evident that the Psalmist believed
himself to be addressing his prayer to Yahweh, and he clearly believed himself
to be addressing the same divine being in verses 25-27.
Moreover,
it should be noted that the words “Yet Thou art the
same, And Thy years shall not be defaulting” (v. 12) is simply a way of
emphasizing God’s inability to die.
The fact that God’s “years shall not be defaulting” (or “shall not come to end”) simply means God cannot die (and note
that this was something the Psalmist considered to be true of the person he was
addressing when he wrote Psalm 102). In fact, one proponent of the doctrine of
the preexistence of Christ has, on several occasions, referenced this very
verse from Psalm 102 as scriptural proof of the fact that God cannot die.[1] Since
this verse refers to the inherent immortality that God has always had
(including when Psalm 102 was written), it cannot be understood as a reference
to Christ. For, after being alive on the earth for approximately 33 years,
Christ died and remained dead for three days. In other words, Christ’s “years
defaulted.” God, on the other hand, has always been immortal; it was just as
true when Psalm 102 was written as it is today that his years “shall not come
to end.”
It
should also be noted that, if Psalm 102:25-28 has the original creation of the
heavens and the earth in view (as I believe that it does), then there is
scriptural evidence that undermines the view that anyone other than Yahweh
(God, the Father) was involved in this event. We’ve already looked at this
evidence in an earlier article, so the reader is encouraged to read what was
said there for a fuller defense of this point. In Isaiah 44:24, we read, “Thus says Yahweh, your Redeemer, who formed you from the
womb: “I am Yahweh, who made all things, who alone stretched
out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself…” In the article referred to, I noted that, if Yahweh had wanted to
communicate the fact that he created everything directly and without anyone
else’s involvement, there would’ve been no clearer and more succinct way of
doing so than is stated in the this verse. It is evident that only one person
was speaking these words, and the words “alone” and “by myself” rule out any
sort of intermediary agent used by the person speaking to accomplish the
creation of the heavens and the earth. If the one speaking is to be understood
as Yahweh himself, then he created everything without the involvement or aid of
a “pre-existent Jesus Christ.” If it was Jesus Christ speaking, then he created
everything without the involvement or aid of his God and Father. Since the
latter is clearly impossible, then we must understand God, the Father, to have
been the sole creator of the heavens and the earth.
That
the “Lord” being addressed in Psalm 102:25 is Yahweh, the God of Jesus Christ
(rather than Jesus, his Son), is not only evident from the context of Psalm
102, but it is also evident from how the “He” of verse 13 points back to the
“Lord” who is in view in the previous verses:
10 And, Thou,
originally, Lord, dost found the
earth, And the heavens are the works of Thy
hands.
11 They shall perish, yet Thou art continuing, And all, as a cloak, shall be aged,
11 They shall perish, yet Thou art continuing, And all, as a cloak, shall be aged,
12 And, as if clothing, wilt Thou be rolling them up. As a cloak also shall they change. Yet Thou art the same, And Thy years shall not be defaulting.
13 Now to which of the messengers has He declared at any time, “Sit at My
right, till I should be placing Thine enemies for a footstool for Thy feet”?
The
nearest antecedent of the personal pronoun “He” in v. 13 is the “Lord” referred
to previously in verses 10-12. Thus, the pronoun “he” should be understood as
referring back to the person referred to in these verses as “Lord” and “Thou.”
Since the “He” of v. 13 is the Father (at whose right hand Christ is sitting),
we can understand the same divine person to be in view in verses 10-12.
This
is further evidenced from Hebrews 2:6-8, where the writer quotes from another
Psalm:
6 Yet somewhere
someone certifies, saying, "What is man, that Thou art mindful of him, Or
a son of mankind, that Thou art visiting him?
7 Thou makest him some bit inferior to messengers, With glory and honor Thou wreathest him, And dost place him over the works of Thy hands.
8 All dost Thou subject underneath his feet."
7 Thou makest him some bit inferior to messengers, With glory and honor Thou wreathest him, And dost place him over the works of Thy hands.
8 All dost Thou subject underneath his feet."
Notice
the expression “The works of Thy hands” in v.
7. This same expression was used in the author’s quotation of Psalm 102:25 (“And the heavens are the
works of Thy hands”). Even apart from what has already been said, it
would be reasonable to believe that the person being referred to with the
possessive pronoun “Thy” in Heb. 2:7 is identical with the person being
referred to as “Thy” in Heb. 1:10-12. Since the expression “the works of Thy hands” in Heb. 2:6-8 refers to the
works of God, the Father, consistency would demand that the same expression
used in Heb. 1:10 (“The works of Thy hands”) also refers to the works of God, the
Father. It is God’s “hands” that are in view in both verses, and it is
difficult to believe that any Jewish reader of this letter would’ve thought
that Jesus, the Son of God, was being referred to here.
Having
provided evidence that the person being addressed in Psalm 102:25-27 (and in
the quotation of this Psalm in Heb. 1:10-12) is none other than God (i.e.,
Yahweh, the Father), let’s return to the question asked earlier: What purpose
does Psalm 102:25-28 serve in the writer’s argument? Psalm 102:25-28 is a
passage that emphasizes God’s transcendent relationship to, and absolute
authority over, the “works of [his] hands” (i.e.,
the heavens and the earth). Let’s look at it again:
And, Thou, originally, Lord, dost found the earth,
And the heavens are the works of Thy hands. They shall perish, yet Thou art
continuing, And all, as a cloak, shall be aged, And, as if clothing, wilt Thou
be rolling them up. As a cloak also shall they change. Yet Thou art the same,
And Thy years shall not be defaulting.
Notice
that we’re not only told that God is the one who created the heavens and the
earth, but that he’s the one who will be “rolling them up” and changing them at
some future time. In other words, the idea being conveyed here (perhaps more so
in this passage than in any other passage of scripture) is that God is
absolutely sovereign over the universe. He created the heavens and the earth,
and when he decides it’s time, he will replace the heavens and the earth.
Keeping
this point in mind, let’s now consider Psalm 110:1, which is quoted by the
writer of Hebrews in v. 13. In contrast with Psalm 102, Psalm 110 is clearly a
Messianic prophecy revealing that God would give some person distinct from
himself (i.e., the Messiah) his authority. “Now [or “Yet”] to which of the messengers has He declared at any time,
“Sit at My right, till I should be placing Thine enemies for a footstool for
Thy feet”?” For Christ to be invited to sit at God’s “right” (or
“right hand”) means for him to be given that authority which formerly belonged
exclusively to God – i.e., all authority in heaven and on the earth.
Thus,
the pairing of Psalm 102 with Psalm 110 conveys the following idea: The same transcendent relationship to, and
absolute authority over, “the works of [God’s] hands”
that God is described as having in Psalm 102:25-28 has, according to Psalm 110,
been given to the Messiah. This, then, is the connection between the
writer’s use of Psalm 102 and Psalm 110. Together, these verses constitute what
is perhaps the most powerful argument that the writer of the letter to the
Hebrews makes for Christ’s superiority over the messengers. The quotation of
Psalm 102:25-28 right before Psalm 110:1 is the author’s “one-two punch,” so to
speak.
To
make this point as clear as possible, consider again Hebrews 2:8-8 (which we quoted
earlier). Christ is the representative/ideal “man” and “son of mankind” who is
destined to fulfill (and has already begun
to fulfill) the words of the Psalm quoted in these verses. It is under the feet
of the “Man,
Christ Jesus” that God will eventually “subject all” (1 Cor. 15:24-28),
and it is the “Man,
Christ Jesus” whom God has already placed over “the
works of [his] hands.” This took place when, in accord with Psalm 110:1,
God gave Christ “all authority in heaven and on the
earth” and sat Christ at his “right hand.” Thus, keeping in mind the
fact that Psalm 102:25-28 emphasizes God’s transcendent relationship to, and
absolute authority over, “the works of his hands,” we can conclude that, by quoting
these verses just before quoting Psalm 110:1, the writer of Hebrews was simply
setting the stage to deliver a final, knock-down argument in defense of the
truth that Christ is superior to the messengers of God.
Hebrews 10:5-7
5 Wherefore,
entering into the world, He is saying, Sacrifice and approach present Thou dost
not will, Yet a body dost Thou adapt to Me.
6 In ascent approaches and those concerning sin Thou dost not delight.
7 Then said I, "Lo! I am arriving-In the summary of the scroll it is written concerning Me-To do Thy will, O God."
6 In ascent approaches and those concerning sin Thou dost not delight.
7 Then said I, "Lo! I am arriving-In the summary of the scroll it is written concerning Me-To do Thy will, O God."
In a Nutshell: Christ entered
into the world (in the sense referred to in v. 5) when he was dispatched into
the world by God, and the sense in which Christ was dispatched into the world
by God is found in John 17:18 (where we’re told that Christ dispatched his
disciples into the world just as he was dispatched into the world by God). In
other words, the “entering into the world” by Christ referred to in Heb. 10:5
took place at the beginning of his public ministry. It is at this time that
Christ declared the words quoted above.
Expanded
Explanation:
Some – but not all - who believe that Christ pre-existed his conception
understand this passage as supporting their position. It’s believed that, when
we’re told that Christ was “entering into the world,” this involved a pre-human
being being “incarnated” as a human, and being provided a human body. However,
I don’t think the language of this passage commits us to a view that essentially involves a pre-existent,
celestial spirit-being declaring the words quoted above while being transformed
into a human zygote. I
believe that everything said here is perfectly consistent with the view that
Christ’s life began when he was conceived in his mother’s womb.
First,
it should be noted that the words “entering the world” don’t necessarily
involve being conceived. In John 17:4 and 16 we read that Christ’s disciples were “not of the world” in the same sense that Christ is said to have been “not of the world.” And then, in v. 18, Christ declared
the following concerning his disciples: “According as Thou
dost dispatch Me into the world, I also dispatch them into the world.” In other words, Christ’s disciples –
who, like Christ, were “not of the world” – were dispatched into the world in
the sense in which Christ was dispatched into the world by his Father. Of
course, none of this language used by Christ implies or presupposes that Christ’s
disciples pre-existed their conception.
Thus, in whatever
sense we are to understand how Christ dispatched his disciples into the world,
it is in this sense that we are to
understand how Christ was dispatched into the world by his Father. The former
involved Christ’s (adult) disciples being dispatched into the world in order to
do the public ministry to which they had been called and appointed (and their
being dispatched into the world by Christ would’ve involved their “entering
into the world” to begin their ministry).
This, then, is how we should understand Christ’s being “dispatched into the
world” by his Father. In other words, Christ’s being “dispatched into the
world” (which resulted in his “entering into the world”) referred to the time
at which he commenced the work on earth to which his Father appointed him, and
which culminated in his sacrificial death on the cross.
It is, therefore,
at the start of Christ’s public ministry that he is said to have declared the
following words of Psalm 40: “Sacrifice and approach present Thou dost not will, Yet a body dost Thou
adapt to Me.” Christ declared these words in
full recognition of the fact that the body which God had “adapted” to him
(i.e., when he was being formed in his mother’s womb; cf. Psalm 139:13-15) would
eventually be sacrificed in an act of perfect obedience to his Father (Heb.
10:10).
[1] For example, concerning the use of
the word “eonian” in Romans 16:26, Martin Zender writes: “This verse isn’t
trying to tell anyone that God lives forever. Everyone already knows God lives
forever. Psalm 102:27 testified long ago that, ‘His years shall have no end.’ It’s old news.” (ZWTF,
Vol. 1, Issue 14, pg. 3)
