I've heard Hebrews 1:8 (which quotes Ps 45:6) used as a proof-text that "Jesus is God". Most Evangelical folks and scholars interpret the text as saying this.
Psalms 45 in its own context seems to be "pausing" at v. 6 and offering a praise to God for the fact that the Throne of His kingdom will endure forever. The popular idea that King David was seen "as if he were God" here doesn't seem quite right, imo (God's representative, yes...but not as "God (Himself)"). Rather, the psalmist seems to make a brief pause to praise God for His eternal rule.
Just as the Kingdom of God was centered in David's reign during Israel's time...so the Kingdom of God is centered in the reign of the Son of God today (who also happens to be the son of David)....Hebrews 1:8 "But to the Son He says: Your throne, O God, is forever and ever..."
V. 6a: The Hebrew for God is elohim. The psalmist praises God for his throne (eternal kingdom).from NASB, Ps 45:6:
Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
V6b: David held God's scepter in his time. Now Jesus holds it.
_______________________________________________________________________
Re: elohim
I saw earlier in the thread (Paidion) that you translate this literally, at least sometimes. This is a very difficult topic: how elohim should be translated. At some point in Israel's history elohim began to be seen as "the many splendors of the One God" (in explanation of the word's plurality). No one knows for sure when this began. Of course, Jews and orthodox Christians believe this has always been the case (as all fundamentalists, most theological conservatives, and JWs? do too). I'm not "theologically conservative" in this but see the Jews as originally being polytheistic, then probably henotheistic, and finally monotheistic as it is defined today. I would date the change in Jewish theology at about the time of Josiah's Reforms and/or sometime around 500BC; keeping in mind that Israel worshipped Asherah and other deities at about the time of the Exile!
Sidebar on elohim: I read that the NT equivalent of elohim is theou (but haven't been able to verify this). I can email and ask the person who wrote it:
Biblical Topics
by Bryan T. Huie
I don't recall offhand in which article he said this. "The Heavenly Divine Council" is interesting as are other articles (btw, I don't concur with all of Huie's beliefs but he has a lot of information at his site)!
_______________________________________________________________
Going out on a limb here....
Im leaning toward seeing Jesus as Yahweh and God the Father as El (and/or El Elyon). Of course, this isn't "orthodox" and "sounds sort of JW" (a belief in two deities...though JWs make no distinction between El and Yahweh as Jews and orthodox Christians dont).
Lastly for now, I am somewhat "JW" in the sense that I believe Jesus was the Angel of the Lord in the OT. A book, by Margaret Barker, I'm reading is called: The Great Angel: A Study of Israel's Second God. In it she presents a case that some Israelites did, in fact, believe in 2 separate deities in the first century and before. In another book I have by Larry Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism, he examines the belief in the One God (of Israel) but that there were "Divine Mediator Figures" going between the God and the people. This belief was present in the NT and post-apostolic eras...or roughly in the Intertestamental Period (200BC-200AD).
For detailed analysis:
What Do We Mean by "First-Century Jewish Monotheism?"
by Larry Hurtado
N.T. Wright has commented on how Paul "redefined Jewish monotheism" citing 1 Co 8:6: "yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live, and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live." I disagree with Wright here because in the first century not all Jews were "monotheistic" in the sense that we understand it now (not all Jews "fused" Yahweh and El into a single deity)! I see hints in Paul's text (above) that he may not have made this "fusing"...and have reasons to believe Jesus may not have either.
Anyway, I've said a lot and there's so much to discuss about this! I'm the first person to admit I speculate. But my speculations are based on lots of study....
Thanx,
Rick
P.S. This is my first of two nites off from work this week...I just let 'er rip....