Regarding the question of how God could be called a "Father" before Jesus the incarnate Son was conceived, and later "begotten" in heaven as the First-born from among the dead: Wouldn't God's creation of the "sons of God" (the angels who sang together for joy when the earth was created in Job 38:7) have also made God a Father from the time those "sons of God" were created? Of course, they weren't on a par with the "only-begotten" Son Jesus at His enthronement on resurrection day, but God generated those celestial creatures in some fashion, which would make Him a Father at least from the time the angels were created, wouldn't it?
Actually, there's not really a problem with Agur prophetically asking "...what is his son's name...?" in Proverbs 30:4, and having that refer to the Son of God who would only later on be conceived in the womb of Mary. After all, every one of the prophets who spoke or wrote - Agur included - had at least something to say about the first-century days when Christ would be born on earth, suffer at the hands of His own people, and be resurrected to establish the New Covenant in His blood. Peter said so on the day of Pentecost in Acts 3:18, 21, and 24. "But those things which God before had showed by the mouth of all His prophets, that Christ should suffer, , he hath so fulfilled...whom the heavens must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began...Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days."
So we shouldn't wonder that Agur's prophecy in Proverbs 30:4 should likewise have foretold of God having a Son with an unknown name, because this is a PROPHECY about the existence of a Son of God to come later. It needn't create a contradiction to have The Word become that Son in the flesh later on at His conception in Mary, any more than it would be a contradiction for the protoevangelium promise of the coming male Seed of the Woman in Gen. 3:15 to be made long before that Son was conceived. Agur may very well have been referring to that ancient Genesis 3:15 promise of the male Seed of the Woman, who was not yet given a name at that point in time.
For Paidion, who remains unconvinced
If you propose that God's first creative act at the beginning of the world was to beget the Son, then would you say this was fulfilled on Day One of creation week, when God said "Let there be light"? We know Jesus said "I am the light of the world". Perhaps you are linking these two ideas together? If you are, then what do you do with Jesus' bold statement in John 17:5? "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." (the kosmos) Every word of this verse is saturated with vital truth. It doesn't say Jesus received this glory before the world came into being; it says He HAD that glory (eichon - imperfect tense showing continued possession) WITH God before the created world began (co-equal and co-eternal), just as John 1:1 said The Word was "WITH God". If Jesus said "...Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world (John 17:24), then He was not begotten on the first day of creation week before everything else was created.
I'm guessing you believe that the Son was begotten a bit before that creation week, though. In that case, we need to look for verses that prove that the second person of the Godhead had a co-equal standing identified with God the Creator from eternity past. We know that Ps. 45:6-7 prophesied about God the Father addressing God the Son, interpreted for us in Heb. 1:8. "But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne O God is forever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom." The second person of the Godhead may have begun the new phase of His existence as the enthroned high-priest Son of God / Son of Man, begotten in heaven at His ascension on resurrection day, but He actually had a co-equal reign with God as "The Word" from eternity past. This is why Jesus clamed the very same status as the "Alpha and Omega" and the "First and Last" in Rev. 2:8, 22:13, just like God the Father called Himself by this description in Isaiah 41:4 and other places.
This Heb. 1:8 throne of the Son which is "forever and ever" is also described in Psalms 93:2. "The Lord reigns, He has clothed Himself with honour: the Lord has clothed and girded Himself with strength; for He has established the world which shall not be moved. Thy throne is prepared of old: thou art from everlasting." If Hebrews 1:2 tells us that the Son "made the worlds", then that tells us that the second person of the Godhead also shared this throne that was "from everlasting" in Psalms 93:2. Not saying this will change your mind, Paidion, but I'm throwing it out there just the same.
For Darin,
Appreciate your taking time to respond to my question. It appears the different translations of Heb. 1:6 are divided 2 to 1 between "And again, (comma), when He bringeth in the first-begotten into the world..." OR, "...And when again (no comma) He brings in the first-born into the habitable world..." Not sure whether or not there is any critical doctrine hanging on the difference of which word that "AGAIN" is modifying, but there are thoughtful minds that interpret this differently.
After reading through your comment and the link, and doing a bit more thinking, it seems like a better fit for "And let all the angels of God worship Him" to be occurring at Christ's resurrection and ascension (not at His birth in Bethlehem or during His second coming). That angelic worship of Heb. 1:6 would match with the events of Rev. 12, when there was war in heaven and Satan and his angels were cast out into the earth, losing their access to heaven for all time (as Jesus predicted would happen soon in John 12:31). With the Blood of the Lamb having just been offered in heaven by the newly-resurrected, ascended Christ, His triumph over the "accuser of the brethren" caused those that dwelled in heaven to rejoice (Rev. 12:12).
This was also a duplicate of the same scene in Rev. 5, where the slain Lamb came to God's throne and received that "new song" of praise from the 4 beasts and the 24 elders, joined by the worship of those many angels in Rev. 5:11-12 ("Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive power..." etc.). This was when Jesus received "all power" given unto Him in heaven and in earth, as He told His disciples in Matt. 28:18 had already been given unto Him, even before He ascended that final time from the Mount of Olives. Revelation 12:10 also testified of that same power of Christ and when He had it: "NOW is come salvation and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ...", all of which happened just before Satan and his angels were cast out of heaven at Christ's ascension on resurrection morning. So it would seem that the fulfillment of "And let all the angels of God worship Him" was staged to honor the empowered Christ at His first ascension on resurrection day.
Darin, I've read through your link's material several times, especially the part about "the world to come" (oikoumene). I agree that this "world to come" was not speaking of planet earth or the globe, per se. It's the human community inhabiting the earth and the conditions they are subject to in a particular setting. This can also encompass heavenly realities related to that same setting. The author of Hebrews 2:5 was telling the believers that there was about to be a change in the way the angelic world interacted with humankind. In the "world to come" oikoumene) that Hebrews was speaking about, when the saints by resurrection were "about to inherit salvation" in the final sense of it (Heb. 1:14), and when both the heaven and earth would be changed (Heb. 1:10-12) into the New Heaven and New Earth of the New Covenant Age that Isaiah 65:17-25 had described, then at that time humankind would no longer be in subjection to angels. This speaks of a change in the ancient powers of the angelic "divine council", which God had once set up when He divided the nations in the days of Peleg (Gen. 10:25 compared to Deut. 32:8 LXX).
Angels in those days were tasked with being "the Watchers", as Daniel 4:13 and 17 called them, using delegated authority to supervise world affairs. God used the angels to implement His plans for the nations that would bring about redemption for mankind by means of His Son. But in the conditions of the "world to come" that the believers were expecting soon back in Hebrews 2:5, this angelic "divine council" would finally be disbanded - no longer necessary, because God's people each had the Spirit of God put within them forever, under the New Covenant conditions found in the New Heaven and New Earth that we are in today. The angelic "divine council" would be outmoded and redundant after that "world to come" had arrived, which I believe came at the AD 70 resurrection.
Your link's material said, Darin, that in the resurrection of Christ when He was seated on the throne, crowned with glory and honor, that all the angels were put in subjection then to the newly-risen Christ. They were commanded to worship Him in the same way they worshipped God, who had seated Christ at His right hand (Rev. 2:21), which worship those angels in heaven did render to the Lamb in Rev. 5:11-13. Your website link doesn't credit Jesus with divinity and a standing co-equal with God, that I can tell, but Heb. 1:8 seems pretty clear that God ascribed divinity to His Son. "But unto the Son He saith, Thy throne O GOD is forever and ever..."
Not sure if it was accidental or deliberate, Darin, but I noticed your link's quote of Hebrews 2:8 has this part of the verse missing: "But now we see NOT YET all things put under him." This "him" part is NOT speaking of Christ. It's speaking of fallen mankind who originally at creation was given dominion over all the works of God's hands. With the Fall, that dominion was abdicated and essentially handed over to the Serpent. "His servants ye are to whom ye yield yourselves to obey", we are told in Romans 6:16.
This yielding to Satan of the original pair made the position of Adam and Eve and their posterity subservient to Satan's kingdom in this world. "For a little while lower than the angels", Christ in the flesh voluntarily shared our subservient position to Satan's temptations and the "divine council" system God had long ago set up over mankind, but Christ's victory through death soon annulled that power of death Satan had (Heb. 2:14). Then there was a transition period given to Satan when he was cast out of heaven and loosed into the earth for a "little season" and a "short time" after Christ's AD 33 resurrection. That "little season" for the Devil and his angels was destined to end with their AD 70 annihilation in Jerusalem's second death Lake of Fire. That's what the period for the saints of "NOT YET all things put under him" was waiting for with great anticipation - the time when God would soon crush Satan under the feet of the saints in that generation (Rom. 16:20).
Humanity doesn't require a "divine council" of angels to keep an eradicated demonic world in check any more as it once did in Daniel's days. This is why the "world to come" (which reality we currently occupy) is not subjected any more to the angels' supervising authority program of "the Watchers" in this New Covenant Age, as Hebrews 2:5 predicted. WE are God's "house" now (Heb. 3:6); a temple made of living stones, with God the Son as the foundation and the chief cornerstone in the New Jerusalem we currently inhabit.
For Steve,
You mentioned that we are waiting for the New Jerusalem with "no curse" in it anymore. I believe scripture shows that we are living in that curse-free reality of the New Jerusalem already. The particular "curse" spoken of in Rev. 22:3 that was absent from the New Jerusalem was a curse that was put on the Old Jerusalem and those under the Old Covenant. This "curse" was pronounced first of all during the tabernacle days, with the entire nation reciting a literal list of curses from Mount Ebal in Deuteronomy 27:13 and following, should they ever depart from obeying God's laws. Later when Judah apostatized, God pronounced a curse on the city of Jerusalem and its temple in Jeremiah 26:4-6. "If ye will not hearken to me...Then will I make this house like Shiloh, and will make this city a curse to all the nations of the earth." After the post exilic return of the nation under the revival led by Ezra, Nehemiah, and Joshua the high priest, the entire nation gathered together as one man in Jerusalem once again in Nehemiah 10:29, and "entered into a curse and into an oath, to walk in God's law..."
We also have the last Old Testament book of Malachi finish that prophecy with the prophet's very last word that warns the nation of this curse (Mal. 4:6). It would come after John the Baptist's days (as the figurative Elijah) in the "great and dreadful day of the Lord", which was the AD 70 disintegration and shattering of the "holy people". Once that AD 70 conflagration in Jerusalem burned up all the "chaff" of the Old Covenant and its "weak and beggarly elements", this swept aside everything except for the unshaken kingdom of God - the "New Jerusalem" city which came down from God out of heaven as God's gift. This is a city where "every curse is no longer" (Rev. 22:3), because a city whose walls are called "salvation", and its gates "praise" (Isaiah 60:18 and 26:1) cannot ever be destroyed or corrupted - it has Christ's imputed righteousness covering it and perfecting it. Neither can the temple of this city ever be torn down, because it is made of living stones, with the deathless high priest Christ Jesus as its foundation stone.
I'm certain that Rev. 22:3's promise of "no more curse" doesn't apply to the ground under our feet; God revoked that Genesis 3:17 curse on the ground long ago, just after Noah's sacrifice, when he had emerged from the ark. As God promised in Genesis 8:21, "...I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake..." Even Lamech knew this curse on the ground was going to be lifted in his son's days, which is why he gave his son the name of Noah, (meaning rest, or comfort) in Genesis 5:29. "And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning the work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed."
This means the context of the Romans 8:22 verse saying that "every creature (ktisis) groaneth and travaileth" is not referring to a tormented planet earth writhing in distress. This verse was describing every one of the human "creatures" who were waiting for the redemption of their fleshly bodies: namely, the dead or martyred saints of the past, those living saints who were expectantly hoping for their eventual resurrection, and the already-resurrected saints - the "First-fruits" - who were waiting for their final stage of salvation ( i.e., standing in God's presence face to face in those resurrected bodies made immortal and incorruptible), with all of these saints waiting to be manifested openly as the sons of God - Heb. 8:19).
The geographical and animal worlds don't require redemption. They already have built-in, God-given cycles of death and renewal with the changing seasons, and the natural biological food-chain. Neither can those animal or geographical worlds be considered "sons of God", nor are they waiting in hope for their "adoption". This is a hope of human expectation only. The "First-born" Christ MUST share an identifiable human resemblance with the "second-born, third-born, fourth-born etc., or He cannot act as their advocate and representative in heaven. Jesus does not consider the planet or the animal world His "brethren", and neither should we apply that meaning to this Romans 8:22 context.
Just my thoughts, which no one listed above is obligated to swallow without questioning...
It's kind of like the old movie I watched this past week; I don't remember the names of the bad guy, leading lady, or side-kick, nor even the basic plot, but I remember that I thought it was a decent movie (silly and mindless though it was).