Hi again, Paidion,StevenD wrote:
Who in their right mind could see God as a throne anyway?
Everyone! Once he understands what I pointed out in an earlier post.
The throne of a king is the symbol of the king's authority. For God to be your throne forever figuratively means that God is your authority forever.
I congratulate your enthusiasm and creative efforts. On the other hand, your construal of Ps. 45:6 (Heb. v. 7) seems unnecessary.
The history of the verse's interpretation supports the idea that an intuitive glance at the Hebrew sentence yields a translation something like:
"Your throne, God, is forever and ever."
One of the most widely read medieval Jewish commentators (Rashi) maintained this same syntactical arrangement, but argued that "Elohim" should be understood differently than the Greek ο θεοσ reasonably suggests. He argued that the word should be understood as "prince/judge" instead of "God". Rashi cited Exod. 7:1 in support of his interpretation. Exod. 7:1 (cf. also 4:16) involves the idea of Moses representing "Elohim" ("God" or "judge") to Pharaoh while Aaron functioned as Moses' prophet. (For the record, while judges are not known to speak through prophets, God is.)
https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cd ... ter-45.htm
The Targum of Psalm 45 reads:
"Your throne of honor, Yahweh [some mss add: "God of the heavens"], is established from eternity of eternity."
A more formal English translation of the Targum of the Psalm is located here:
The Jerusalem Publication Society 1917 rendering of the Psalm accords with the syntax of these translations (though one may wince at the translator's flagrant bias in adding the phrase "given of"):
"Thy throne given of God is forever and ever;"
Despite theological interests that doubtlessly influenced these rabbinic translators, none among this reputable sample understood the verse with reference to God as a throne. Personally, I am not aware of any rabbinic exegetes who read the verse as you have suggested. Yet, I imagine that anyone disinclined to honor the royal Messiah as one honors God might wish to avoid interpreting the Bible as venerating the Messiah on par with God. I'll guess that your innovative approach to Psalm 45 may appeal to readers thus motivated.
To be clear, I don't assume that there's any ill motivation behind your interpretive stance. However, the translation seems counterintuitive to me. Additionally, if it didn't require such an interpretive stretch, I would expect at least some rabbinic interpreters to have made hay with it by now.