Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Hebrews 1:10
And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
10. Thou, Lord, in the beginning ] The quotation is from Psa 102:25-27. The word “Lord” is not in the original, but it is in the LXX.; and the Hebrew Christians who already believed that it was by Christ that “God made the world” (see note on Heb 1:2) would not dispute the Messianic application of these words to Him. They are a prayer of the afflicted written at some late period of the exile. Calvin (on Eph 4:8) goes so far as to say of such passages that the Apostle “by a pious diversion of their meaning ( pi deflectione) accommodates them to the Person of Christ.” The remark illustrates the courageous honesty and stern good sense of the great Reformer; but no Jewish-Christian exegete would have thought that he was practising a mere pious misapplication of the sacred words, or have admitted the objection of Cardinal Cajetan that “in a matter of such importance it was unbecoming to use such an argument.” The writer’s object is not proof which was for his readers unnecessary; he wished to illustrate acknowledged truths by admitted principles.
in the beginning ] Heb. , “face-wards,” i.e. of old.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And – That is, To add another instance; or, to the Son he saith in another place, or in the following language. This is connected with Heb 1:8. Unto the Son he saith Heb 1:8, Thy throne, etc. – and Heb 1:10 he also saith, Thou Lord, etc. That this is the meaning is apparent, because:
(1) The object of the whole quotation is to show the exalted character of the Son of God, and,
(2) An address here to Yahweh would be wholly irrelevant. Why, in an argument designed to prove that the Son of God was superior to the angels, should the writer break out in an address to Yahweh in view of the fact that he had laid the foundations of the world, and that he himself would continue to live when the heavens should be rolled up and pass away? Such is not the manner of Paul or of any other good writer, and it is clear that the writer here designed to adduce this as applicable to the Messiah. Whatever difficulties there may be about the principles on which it is done, and the reason why This passage was selected for the purpose, there can be no doubt about the design of the writer. He meant to be understood as applying it to the Messiah beyond all question, or the quotation is wholly irrelevant, and it is inconceivable why it should have been made. Thou Lord. This is taken from Psa 102:25-27. The quotation is made from the Septuagint with only a slight variation, and is an accurate translation of the Hebrew. In the Psalm, there can be no doubt that Yahweh is intended. This is apparent on the face of the Psalm, and particularly because the name Yahweh is introduced in Heb 1:10, and because He is addressed as the Creator of all things, and as immutable. No one, on reading the Psalm, ever would doubt that it referred to God, and if the apostle meant to apply it to the Lord Jesus it proves most conclusively that he is divine. In regard to the difficult inquiry why he applied this to the Messiah, or on what principle such an application can be vindicated, we may perhaps throw some light by the following remarks. It must be admitted that probably few persons, if any, on reading the Psalm, would suppose that it referred to the Messiah; but:
(1) The fact that the apostle thus employs it, proves that it was understood in his time to have such a reference, or at least that those to whom he wrote would admit that it had such a reference. On no other principle would he have used it in an argument. This is at least of some consequence in showing what the prevailing interpretation was.
(2) It cannot be demonstrated that it had no such reference, for such was the habit of the sacred writers in making the future Messiah the theme of their poetry, that no one can prove that the writer of this Psalm did not design that the Messiah should be the sub ject of his praise here.
(3) There is nothing in the Psalm which may not be applied to the Messiah; but there is much in it that is especially applicable to him. Suppose, for example, that the Psalmist Psa 102:1-11, in his complaints, represents the people of God before the Redeemer appeared – as lowly, sad, dejected, and afflicted – speaking of himself as one of them, and as a fair representative of that people, the remainder of the Psalm will well agree with the promised redemption. Thus, having described the sadness and sorrow of the people of God, he speaks of the act that God would arise and have mercy upon Zion Psa 102:13-14, that the pagan would fear the name of the Lord, and all the kings of the earth would see his glory Psa 102:15, and that when the Lord should build up Zion, he would appear in his glory; Psa 102:16. To whom else could this be so well applied as to the Messiah? To what time so well as to his time? Thus, too in Psa 102:20, it is said that the Lord would look down from heaven to hear the groaning of the prisoner, and to loose them that are appointed to death – language remarkably resembling that used by Isaiah, Isa 61:1, which the Saviour applies to himself, in Luk 4:17-21. The passage then quoted by the apostle Psa 102:25-27 is designed to denote the immutability of the Messiah, and the fact that in him all the interests of the church were safe. He would not change. He had formed all things, and he would remain the same. His kingdom would be permanent amidst all the changes occurring on earth, and his people had no cause of apprehension or alarm; Psa 102:28.
(4) Paul applies this language to the Messiah in accordance with the doctrine which he had stated Heb 1:2, that it was by him that God made the worlds. Having stated that, he seems to have felt that it was not improper to apply to him the passages occurring in the Old Testament that speak of the work of creation. The argument is this, He was in fact the creator of all things. But to the Creator there is applied language in the Scriptures which shows that he was far exalted above the angels. He would remain the same, while the heavens and the earth should fade away. His years are enduring and eternal. Such a being must be superior to the angels; such a being must be divine. The words Thou Lord – su Kurie – are not in the Hebrew of the Psalm, though they are in the Septuagint. In the Hebrew, in the Psalm (Psa 102:24,), it is an address to God – I said, O my God – ‘Eeliy – but there can be no doubt that the Psalmist meant to address Yahweh, and that the word God is used in its proper sense, denoting divinity; see Heb 1:1, Heb 1:12, of the Psalm. In the beginning; see Gen 1:1.
When the world was made; compare notes on Joh 1:1, where the same phrase is applied to the Messiah – In the beginning was the word, where the same phrase is applied to the Messiah – In the beginning was the word. Hast laid the foundation of the earth. Hast made the earth. This language is such as is common in the Scriptures, where the earth is represented as laid on a foundation, or as supported. It is figurative language, derived from the act of rearing an edifice. The meaning here is, that the Son of God was the original creator or founder of the universe. He did not merely arrange it out of pre-existing materials, but he was properly its creator or founder. And the heavens are the works of thine hands. This must demonstrate the Lord Jesus to be divine. He that made the vast heavens must be God. No creature could perform a work like that; nor can we conceive that power to create the vast array of distant worlds could possibly be delegated. If that power could be delegated, there is not an attribute of Deity which may not be, and thus all our notions of what constitutes divinity would be utterly confounded. The word heavens here, must mean all parts of the universe except the earth; see Gen 1:1. The word hands is used, because it is by the hands that we usually perform any work.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 10. And, Thou, Lord] This is an address to the Son as the Creator, see Heb 1:2; for this is implied in laying the foundation of the earth. The heavens, which are the work of his hands, point out his infinite wisdom and skill.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
And, Thou, Lord: this connective particle joins this to the former proof, that Christ had a more excellent name than angels, even that of God. That he was God, he proved out of Psa 45:6,7. He seconds it in this and the two following verses, which he quotes out of Psa 102:25-27. The strength of which lieth thus: He who was Jehovah, and the great Creator of the world, is God; such is Christ, the great gospel Prophet. This is evident in the prayer recorded in the Psalm made to him, compared with the Spirits testimony, Heb 1:8; the very works appropriated to Jehovah there, are the acknowledged works of God the Son, as redemption, Psa 102:20,21, vocation of the Gentiles, Psa 102:15,18,22.
In the beginning; in the beginning of time, when that came to be the measure and limit of things, as Gen 1:1. Before there were any such creatures as angels, he was Jehovah, Joh 1:1; and then manifested himself to be Jehovah. The enemies of Christs Deity say that the name Jehovah is not in the verse of the Psalm quoted by the Spirit; yet thou, the relative used in all those verses, refers to God, the antecedent, prayed to in Psa 102:24, and to Jehovah, the name given him in Psa 102:1,12,15,16,18,19,21,22, of that Psalm; all importing one and the same person. And it is well known that , Lord, doth eminently decipher the Redeemer in the New Testament; he is not an instrument of Jehovah to create by, but the fountain of all being, Jehovah himself.
Hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: by founding the earth, and the heavens being the work of his hands, is meant the whole work of creation throughout the space of six days: he was the true, full, sole, and self-causality of the earths being, and all creatures in it, and of the heavens, and all beings which are in them; he was the great Architect and Founder of them all; they were his peculiar workmanship, possession, and dominion, 1Co 8:6; compare Joh 1:3; Col 1:16. If the heavens were the works of his hands, and all in them, then he was the Creator of angels, and therefore must be, for person, name, and office, more excellent than they.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
10. AndIn another passage (Ps102:25-27) He says.
in the beginningEnglishVersion, Ps 102:25, “ofold”: Hebrew, “before,” “aforetime.”The Septuagint, “in the beginning” (as in Ge1:1) answers by contrast to the end implied in “Theyshall perish,” &c. The Greek order here (not in theSeptuagint) is, “Thou in the beginning, O Lord,”which throws the “Lord” into emphasis. “Christ ispreached even in passages where many might contend that the Fatherwas principally intended” [BENGEL].
laid the foundationof“firmly founded” is included in the idea ofthe Greek.
heavensplural: notmerely one, but manifold, and including various orders of heavenlyintelligences (Eph 4:10).
works of thine handstheheavens, as a woven veil or curtain spread out.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And thou Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth,…. The person here addressed, as the Lord or Jehovah, and as the Maker of the heavens and the earth, is the same with the Son spoken to, and of, before; for the words are a continuation of the speech to him, though they are taken from another psalm, from
Ps 102:25. The phrase, “thou, Lord” is taken from Ps 102:12 and is the same with, “O my God”, Ps 102:24 and whereas it is there said, “of old”, and here, in the beginning, the sense is the same; and agreeably to the Septuagint, and the apostle, Jarchi interprets it by , “at”, or “from the beginning”; and so the Targum paraphrases it, , “from the beginning”, that the creatures were created, c. that in the beginning of the creation, which is the apostle’s meaning and shows the eternity of Christ, the Lord, the Creator of the earth, who must exist before the foundation of the world; and confutes the notion of the eternity of the world: and the rounding of it shows that the earth is the lower part of the creation; and denotes the stability of it; and points out the wisdom of the Creator in laying such a foundation; and proves the deity of Christ, by whom that, and all things in it, were made:
the heavens are the works of thine hands: there are more heavens than one; there are the airy heaven, and the starry heaven, and the heaven of heavens, the third heaven; and they were created the beginning, as the earth was, Ge 1:1 and are the immediate work of Christ; they were made by himself, not by the means of angels, who were not in being till these were made; nor by any intermediate help, which he could not have, and which he did not need: the phrase is expressive of the power of Christ in making the upper parts of the creation, and of his wisdom in garnishing them, in which there is a wonderful display of his glory; and the whole serves to set forth the dignity and excellency of his person.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Lord (). In the LXX, not in the Hebrew. Quotation (the sixth) from Ps 102:26-28 through verses 10-12. Note emphatic position of here at the beginning as in verses 11-12 ( ). This Messianic Psalm pictures the Son in his Creative work and in his final triumph.
Hast laid the foundation (). First aorist active of , old verb from (foundation) for which see Col 1:23.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Sixth quotation (10 – 12), exhibiting the superior dignity of the Son as creator in contrast with the creature. Psalm ci. 26 – 28. The Psalm declares the eternity of Jahveh.
And – in the beginning [ ] . And connects what follows with unto the Son he saith, etc., ver. 8. Kat’ ajrcav in the beginning, N. T. o. Often in Class., LXX only Psa 18:152. The more usual formula is ejn ajrch or ajp’ ajrchv.
Hast laid the foundation [] . Only here in Hebrews. In Paul, Eph 3:18; Col 1:23.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “And, thou, Lord, in the beginning,” (kai su kat’ archas kurie) “And thou Lord, at the beginnings,” according to the beginning or origin of all things; This certifies the coexistence of Jesus Christ with God from the beginning or origin of all things, even from the creation of angels, Joh 1:1-3; 1Co 8:6; Psa 102:24.
2) “Hast laid the foundation of the earth,” (ten gen ethemeliosas) “Didst found (establish) the earth;” Psa 102:25-26. The earth did not lay its own foundation or come to be established in physical form without a first great cause – That first “cause” exists as and in God and the Lord Jesus Christ, Col 1:16-17.
3)“And the heavens are the works of thine hands,” (kei erga ton cheiron sou eisin hoi ouranoi) “And the heavens are (exist as) the works (artifice) of thine hands; Psa 19:1-2; Heb 1:2; Heb 11:3. The present heaven and earth are products of the Grand Architect of the Universe by whom they are also daily sustained, held together, Col 1:17; Act 17:28.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
10. And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning, etc. This testimony at first sight may seem to be unfitly applied to Christ, especially in a doubtful matter, such as is here handled; for the subject in dispute is not concerning the glory of God, but what may be fitly applied to Christ. Now, there is not in this passage any mention made of Christ, but the majesty of God alone is set forth. I indeed allow that Christ is not named in any part of the Psalm; but it is yet plain that he is so pointed out, that no one can doubt but that his kingdom is there avowedly recommended to us. Hence all the things which are found there, are to be applied to his person; for in none have they been fulfilled but in Christ, such as the following, — “Thou shalt arise and have mercy on Sion, that the heathens may fear the name, and all the kings of the earth thy glory.” Again, — “When the nations shall be gathered together, and the kingdoms, to serve the Lord.” Doubtless, in vain shall we seek to find this God through whom the whole world have united in one faith and worship of God, except in Christ.
All the other parts of the Psalm exactly suit the person of Christ, such as the following, that he is the eternal God, the creator of heaven and earth, that perpetuity belongs to him without any change, by which his majesty is raised to the highest elevation, and he himself is removed from the rank of all created beings.
What David says about the heavens perishing, some explain by adding, “Were such a thing to happen,” as though nothing was affirmed. But what need is there of such a strained explanation, since we know that all creatures are subjected to vanity? For to what purpose is that renovation promised, which even the heavens wait for with the strong desire as of those in travail, except that they are now verging towards destruction?
But the perpetuity of Christ which is here mentioned, brings no common comfort to the godly; as the Psalm at last teaches us, they shall be partakers of it, inasmuch as Christ communicates himself and what he possesses to his own body. (26)
(26) See Appendix D.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(10) And.Heb. 1:10-12 are by this word linked with Heb. 1:8, as presenting the second part of the contrast between angels and the Son. As there we read of a divine sovereignty, so here of the work of creation, the power to change all created things, the divine attribute of changeless existence. This quotation from Psa. 102:25-27 agrees almost exactly with the text of the LXX. as we have it in the Alexandrian MS., except that the words as a garment (not found in the Psalm) must here (Heb. 1:12) be added, according to our best authorities. The only point of any difficulty in these verses is that the writer discovers a testimony to the supremacy of the Son in words which, as they stand in the Psalm, would appear to be directly addressed to God as Creator. If, however, the Psalm be examined, it will be found (see Heb. 1:13-14) to contain the expression of hopes which in reality were inseparably united with the fulfilment of the Messianic promise. The Lord shall appear to build up Zion: this is the Psalmists theme, and it is to the same Lord that he addresses the words which are quoted here. As in Jesus the Christian Jew saw Him who fulfilled all these promises of God to His people, the application of the words of adoration to the same Lord would at once be recognised as true.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
10-12 . If the reader compare these views of this passage with Joh 1:1-14; Col 1:15, and onwards; Php 2:6; 1Co 8:6; 1Co 10:4; 1Co 15:47 ; 2Co 4:4; 2Co 8:9, he will reasonably infer that the author of Hebrews agrees with John and Paul in his views of the exalted nature of the Son, or Logos, in his pre-existent being. Having thus traced the heirship and creatorship of the Son, he now penetrates even more deeply into his essential relations to the divine Essence.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
10. And Quoted from Psa 102:26-28, where see notes. Though this psalm is within the Messianic number, there is nothing in its contents which limits it to him. We are at liberty, indeed, whether applied to the Trinity or to the Son, to see that our author intends it to be an expansion of his own words in Heb 1:2, by whom also he made the worlds. It is to the Logos, the executive Maker of the worlds, that in accordance with the mind of the Church he applies them.
In the beginning Literal Greek, ’ , at beginnings. At the various commencements, whether of different things in the same world, or of serial worlds in succession. Less solemn and aboriginal than St. John’s , “In the beginning was the Word.” For even if a scientist maintains that matter is chronologically eternal, still in the order of nature and truth God, the Word, is back of it. It is dependent and phenomenal: He is independent, unconditioned, and absolute. If creation, or creations, be eternal in series, it is because He eternally and freely creates.
Laid the foundation It is not illegitimate for modern science to read into these words the definite facts comprehensively embraced in them. By the divine Word, the author of order in chaos, the work of order, whatever it was, was performed. If that chaos was a nebula, there was nothing in the mere nebula itself by which it could frame itself into an intellective system. If it condensed and hardened, without some regulative mind it would harden into an unintelligent solidity. It required an indwelling Mind, a divine Logos, to translate the unintelligent mass into intelligent forms. As easily could a pile of type lying in pi form themselves into a poem without a forming mind, as a pile of matter frame itself into a cosmos without the formative Logos. No atheistic philosophy, whether of Hume or Herbert Spencer, has been able to bridge this chasm.
Foundation Geology reveals such “foundation” in the primitive rocks, and in the strata of successive ages.
Heavens The atmospheric expanse; and we may add, as speaking optically from our earth-centre, the firmament and the starry heavens.
Works of thine hands Spoken anthropomorphically, that is, under momentary conception, as if God were an infinite man; which abstracting away from him all imperfection, and adding all perfection, we rightfully do. Weak-minded pseudo-philosophers raise a great protest against such anthropomorphism, showing a sudden sensitiveness at our degrading God a God in whom they themselves do not believe. And yet Mr. Spencer, who leads in this outcry against anthropomorphizing “the Absolute,” thinks he elevates him by denying to him the attribute of intelligence. A better philosopher, Sir Isaac Newton, says, (at the close of his “Optics,”) that the entire universe, including all material things from the planets down to animal bodies, the organs of sense and motion, and the instinct of brutes and insects, “can be the effect of nothing else than the wisdom and skill of a powerful everliving Agent, who, being in all places, is more able by his will to move the bodies within his boundless, uniform sensorium, (of space,) and thereby to form and reform the parts of the universe, than we are by our will to move the parts of our own bodies.” In his “Principia” he says: “It is confessed that God supreme exists necessarily. By the same necessity he is always and everywhere. Whence he is all similar to himself all eye, all ear, all brain; all perceptive, intellective, and active force; but in a manner not at all human or corporeal, but in a mode to us unknown.” Liber iii, De Mundi Systemate.
That acute Christian philosopher, Tayler Lewis, rebuking the squeamish avoidance of anthropomorphisms by later Jewish writers, as Philo and the Rabbis, shows that the divine mind is truly competent to see things as man sees them, and to realize the human feeling. If God knows how things appear to our human thought he must be able to see them not only as he absolutely sees them, but as we finitely see them; that is, he thinks our thoughts. “May not God come actually into the human sphere and the human finity? May he not, if it pleases him, tabernacle in the human mind, knowing things as we know them, feeling them as we feel them? For, unless he thus knows them as we know them, feels them as we feel them, there would be a knowledge unknown to him as it really is that is, as it exists in our mind.” And yet, Moses, who uses the strongest anthropomorphisms, (and we may add, Newton, as in the above quotation,) “knew that God was infinite as well as Spinoza” knew it.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And,
“You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the works of your hands.
They will perish, but you continue,
And they all will wax old as a garment does.
And as a mantle you will roll them up,
As a garment, and they will be changed.
But you are the same,
And your years will not fail.”
This next quotation is taken from Psa 102:25-27. Having described His supremacy over all rulers and powers, the writer now stresses His supremacy over creation. If ‘God’ can be seen as a suitable address for ‘the One Who is Son’ (Heb 1:8), so certainly can ‘Lord’ (as found in the text of the Psalm in LXX), a regular ascription by the writer to Jesus Christ (Heb 2:3; Heb 7:14; Heb 13:20). The Psalm is here quoted as having in mind the Son’s upholding of all things by His powerful word (Heb 1:3). Once He withdraws His word they perish and He ‘rolls them up’. For He is here seen as Lord of creation, and controller of its destiny. Both heavens and earth will be taken off like a cloak and rolled up, or stripped off like used clothes and changed, while He remains the same and goes on for ever, never growing old, and having no beginning or end. As such He is superior to the angels, who while they could devastate the earth with wind and fire, were unable either to create the earth or to effect its final destiny. (And once the world ceased there would be no more wind and fire for them to control).
We note also that in the fifth quotation reference was made to His enduring throne. Here in the sixth reference is made to His own enduring. He is the Enduring One.
In the original Psalm the One addressed is Yahweh. But the writer has already made clear that Jesus is the outshining of Yahweh, and the express image of what He is. And Paul also makes clear that Jesus bears the name of Yahweh (Php 2:9-11). So that as Jesus is constantly called ‘Lord’ (Yahweh) regularly in the New Testament, and therefore in the early church, and is regularly depicted as the Creator in the New Testament (Heb 1:2; Joh 1:3; Col 1:16), this action with regard to creation can be assigned to the Son. The writer has no difficulty in applying the words to Him.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Heb 1:10-12 . A second citation co-ordinate with the Scripture testimony adduced, Heb 1:8-9 derived from Psa 102:26-28 (25 27) according to the LXX. The psalm is a lamentation, belonging probably to the first century after the Captivity. The words of address refer in the original to God. The author, however, mainly indeed misled [40] by the in the LXX., which was the ordinary appellation of Christ in apostolic time, takes the utterance as an address to Christ, the Son of God. This interpretation must the more have appeared to him unquestionable, inasmuch as the scope of the utterance fully harmonized with his own conception of the Son of God as the premundane Logos. Comp. Heb 1:2-3 . When, for the rest, Hofmann ( Schriftbew . I. p. 169 f., 2 Aufl.) supposes that the author found no address whatever to Christ designed in the of the psalm, but only meant to say in the words of Scripture what was true of Jesus according to his own belief and that presupposed in the readers, this is a freak of fancy without anything to justify it, and even opposed to the context (comp. , Heb 1:8 ). For the author can have been concerned only about this very object of proving the higher attestation given to his assertion by the Scriptures.
] not a constituent part of the citation, but a brief formula of connecting, when a further passage of Scripture is linked to that which precedes, comp. Act 1:20 .
, , ] LXX. Cod. Alex.: , , , ; Cod. Vatic.: , , , . It is probable the author changed the position of the words in order to make the more emphatic.
] in the beginning . With the LXX. elsewhere only Psa 119:152 , instead of the more usual or , but frequently met with in Philo and the classics (see Raphel, Wetstein, and Munthe ad loc .). In the Hebrew stands the more general , “formerly,” or “of old.”
[40] According to Delitzsch, indeed, it would be “a poor look-out” if that were “true.” But when, following in Hofmann’s steps, he objects against it that “we may already see from Heb 8:8 ff., Heb 12:6 ff., that the author is far from everywhere understanding Christ to be intended by the O. T. ,” these passages naturally prove nothing, since the usual practice is never the constant and invariable practice. When Delitzsch further adds: “such perversity originating in ignorance is not to be laid to the charge of an author who shows so deep an insight into the innermost core of the O. T.,” that is a prejudiced verdict, arising from subjectivity and dogmatic partiality, to the establishing of which it would have been necessary first of all to bring forward the proof that the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews in reality possessed an accurate knowledge not only of the Greet text of the LXX., but also of the original text of the O. T., a proof which even Delitzsch has not been able to afford.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
DISCOURSE: 2271
CHRISTS SUPERIORITY TO ANGELS
Heb 1:10-12. Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: they shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; and as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.
THE Old Testament speaks much of Christ: the Psalms, in particular, abound with expressions relating to him: and, previous to his coming, the learned Jews, who looked forward to the advent of their Messiah, and longed for his appearance, interpreted them in their true and proper sense. This is clear; because we never find, in any one instance, that the construction put upon these passages by the Apostles of our Lord was controverted, or the application of them to him doubted. The Jews of later ages, in order to weaken the force of these passages as proving the Messiahship of the Lord Jesus, have invented other explanations of them; determining to put any sense whatever upon their own Scriptures, rather than admit the validity of his claims. But it is not to be conceived that the Apostle Paul, at the very time that he withheld the signature of his name from this epistle, (lest, by the mention of it, he should excite the prejudices of his countrymen to whom he wrote,) should, in the very outset of his epistle, cite passages in a sense which none of his opponents were ready to admit; and that he should go on to build the whole weight of his arguments on passages so adduced, and so interpreted. Yet we find, that he has applied to Jesus many expressions, which, if his construction of them be true, prove, beyond a doubt, not only the Messiahship of Jesus, but the infinite superiority of his dispensation to that which had been established among the Jews. The Jews gloried in the Mosaic dispensation, as having been given to them, not only by the hands of Moses, but through the instrumentality of angels [Note: Heb 2:3. Act 7:53. Gal 3:19.]. St. Paul shews them, in the beginning of this epistle, that, however much they might glory in this honour, the Christian had far higher reason to glory; because his religion was revealed by Christ himself, who, both in his nature as God, and in his office as the appointed Mediator between God and man, was infinitely above the angels.
In confirmation of the Apostles statement, I shall set before you,
I.
The majesty of Him by whom the Gospel was revealed
Great and glorious things are spoken of him in the preceding context. But we shall wave all mention of those things, and confine our attention to the passage before us; and notice,
1.
The passage cited by the Apostle
[The words in my text will be found towards the close of the 102d Psalm. In that psalm, the writer, personating the Church, speaks of the afflictions under which he groaned [Note: Psa 102:1-11.], and of the consolations which he derived from contemplating the future glories of the Messiahs kingdom, which should extend over the whole world, and endure for evermore [Note: Psa 102:12-28. He speaks of the heathen fearing the name of the Lord, and all the kings of the earth beholding his glory: and of a people who should be created to praise the Lord. ver. 15, 18, 22.]. The person of whom he speaks, he calls his God: I said, O my God, take me not away in the midst of my years: and then he immediately adds, Of old hast thou laid the foundations of the earth, and so on. Now, no one ever doubted but the Person whom the Psalmist there addresses, was the God of heaven and earth: and the Jews themselves were wont to interpret the psalm as referring to the Messiah. St. Paul confirms that interpretation, by expressly applying the text to the Lord Jesus Christ. As for saying that he applied the passage to Christ in a subordinate sense, there is no intimation given of any such thing: nor would the passage have been at all to his purpose, if it were not understood in its full sense: for the Apostles object was, to establish the superiority of Christ above all the angels of heaven: and to have asserted that the Father was superior to them, would have been of no use. It is clear, then, that the Lord Jesus Christ is the true God, even God over all, blessed for ever.]
2.
The sublime truths contained in it
[The Person here addressed has two attributes ascribed to him; namely, omnipotence, as the Creator of the universe; and immutability, as being ever the same: and both of these belong to the Lord Jesus Christ; for it was He who created all things, both in heaven and earth. If an idea be suggested, that he might have merely been an agent deputed to this work, as any angel might have been; and that the execution of it is not sufficient to prove his Godhead; I answer, that though I will not undertake to say what works God might devolve on a creature, there can be no doubt but that he was God who made the worlds: for it is said, In the beginning was the Word; and the Word was with God; and the Word was God: the same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made [Note: Joh 1:1-3.]. And this was no other than the Lord Jesus Christ: for the same Apostle adds, The Word was made flesh, and dwelt amongst us [Note: Joh 1:14.].
To the same Person, also, is immutability ascribed: as it is said, They (the works of creation) shall perish, but thou remainest: and they all shall wax old, as doth a garment; and as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail. Now this, also, is an incommunicable attribute of the Deity! I, the Lord, change not. To no creature whatever can this perfection be assigned: the highest archangel, if left to himself, would fail, even as myriads of once-holy angels did in heaven; from whence they were expelled for their transgression, and were doomed to an eternity of misery in hell. But to Jesus it essentially belongs; because, though a man, as to his human nature, he is Jehovahs Fellow, God manifest in the flesh, Emmanuel, God with us.]
The whole scope of the Apostles argument leads me, from speaking of the Majesty of Christ, to shew, in the next place,
II.
The excellency of the Gospel as revealed by him
Why, when the Law was committed to us by the ministry of angels, should the Gospel be spoken to us by God himself? Is there any thing in the Gospel that calls for such a distinction? I answer, There is an immense disparity between the two, even such as may well account for the high honour conferred upon the Gospel. Consider what the Gospel is: consider,
1.
The depth of its mysteries
[The law was not without its mysteries: but they were all veiled from human sight; in token of which, Moses put a veil upon his face. But in and through the Lord Jesus Christ, that veil is taken away, and we behold his glory with unveiled face [Note: 2Co 3:14; 2Co 3:18.]. We are led even to the council-chamber of the Most High, where the Father and the Son concerted together for the recovery of mankind, even millions of years before they fell. We hear the Son undertaking to become a man, in order that he might suffer in the stead of his offending creatures, and expiate their guilt by his own obedience unto death. We see this very Saviour become incarnate: we behold him sojourning on earth, as the accredited Ambassador of heaven. We hear his voice; we trace his footsteps; we witness all his sufferings unto death. We see him yet again, raised from the dead, and ascending up to heaven; and sending down the Holy Ghost, to testify of him, and to establish his kingdom upon earth. We behold his kingdom actually established, and maintaining its pre-eminence on earth, in despite of all possible opposition from men and devils. And, finally, we behold in this stupendous mystery every perfection of the Deity, shining in harmonious and united splendour.
Here then was a mystery, which deserved to be marked with all the honour conferred upon it. True, this treasure might well, at a subsequent period, be put into earthen vessels: but at its first exhibition it was well that it should be displayed by our incarnate God, and that the word which unfolded it should at first begin to be spoken by the Lord himself [Note: Heb 2:3.].]
2.
The richness of its provisions
[In this is contained all that man can need, and all that God himself can bestow. We were fallen, even our whole race, like the apostate angels themselves: and being partakers with them in transgression, we were doomed to partake with them also in their punishment. We were sunk even to the very precincts of hell: yet, behold, from thence are we taken, to be restored to the favour of our God, and to inherit a throne of glory. Could we conceive of the fallen angels, as taken from their sad abodes of misery, and restored to the felicity from which they fell, we might have some idea of the blessings imparted to us by the Gospel of Christ. But who can declare all that is comprehended in pardon, and peace, and holiness, and glory? Eternity itself will not be sufficient to compute and estimate the mighty sum.]
3.
The duration of its benefits
[Eternity! Amazing thought! eternity! Yes, eternity shall be the duration of blessedness to every believing soul. The benefits of the Mosaic dispensation soon passed away: but not so those which we inherit by the Gospel. As long as the believing soul shall retain its capacity for enjoyment, and the Saviour himself exist upon his throne, so long shall He who bought us with his blood, dispense to us all the blessings that he has purchased for us: and the inheritance that shall be accorded to us, shall be incorruptible, and undefiled, and one that fadeth not away.]
Observe, then, from this subject,
1.
How worthy of acceptation is the Gospel of Christ!
[When we consider who it is that has proclaimed the Gospel to us, even the true and faithful Witness, the Lord Jesus Christ, we cannot entertain a doubt either of its truth or excellency. Take all the promises and invitations; take them in all their freeness, and in all their fulness; which of them is not worthy to be embraced with our whole hearts, and to be relied upon with our whole souls? Well did St. Paul say of the Gospel, It is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation. O that we could receive it as we ought! O that we felt our need of it, and that we were duly mindful of the authority and veracity of Him who has revealed it to us! We should not then dare to slight it; nor should we hesitate to rest in it with most implicit confidence.]
2.
How worthless are all things, in comparison of it!
[Let crowns and kingdoms be put into the balance against it, and they will all be found lighter than vanity itself. What is become of all that the greatest monarchs ever enjoyed? It is vanished away as a dream. And what will soon become of the whole world? It will all pass away, as a morning cloud; and be as though it had never been. Of this we are all sensible; but yet we find it difficult to realize our own principles. In opposition to our better judgment, we are carried away after some worthless objects, which often elude our grasp; or, if enjoyed, are no sooner possessed than they perish. But if we seek for Jesus and his kingdom, all will be secured to us. No one ever sought eternal things in earnest, and was disappointed of his hope: no one ever suffered loss for them, but he found it to be gain in the end. To all then, I say, Labour not for the meat that perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of Man shall give unto you; for him hath God the Father sealed.]
Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)
(10) And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: (11) They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; (12) And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail. (13) But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? (14) Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?
I will not, (for I must not,) trespass any further in this Chapter. But oh! what a subject is here again opened to our meditation, on the eternal nature of Christ’s Person; and of the everlasting duration of his kingdom! How endeared to Christ’s Church, is the consideration of the unchangeable, unfading, and eternal nature of Christ’s love to his people. Amidst all changes, there is none can be here. Jesus lives, and loves, and reigns forever. He is the Rock of Ages. Lord! (said one of old, under the fixed conviction by grace of these things,) thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations! Psa 90:1 . And here the redeemed soul finds a safe, and sure hiding place, from every storm, and evil. What though friends die, Jesus liveth. What, though the earth be removed, or we are removed from it; this sweet view of Jesus, and an assured oneness in Jesus, brings up all. The heavens may perish, and all things below change like a vesture. Here is the believer’s confidence: But thou art the same! The same in thy Person. The same in thy love. And the same, in all the Covenant-securities forever. Hallelujah! The Lord God Omnipotent reigneth! Amen.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
Ver. 10. The works of thy hands ] Psa 8:3 , they are called the works of God’s fingers, artificially elaborated; that heaven of heavens especially, whose artificer and workman is God,Heb 11:10Heb 11:10 , . The apostle there intimates that it is curiously and cunningly contrived.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
10 .] And ( : see a similar introducing a new citation in Act 1:20 . The comma, or colon, or capital letter, as in text, should be retained after ), Thou in the beginning (Heb. . ad faciem, antea ; probably here rendered by the LXX with reference to Gen 1:1 . The expression is found in Philo, and often in the classics: cf. Herod. iii. 153, 159, and instances in Wetst.; and see Khner, Gr. Gr. 607.1), Lord ( has no word to represent it in the Hebrew. But it is taken up from in Gen 1:25 ; and indeed from the whole strain of address, in which has been thrice expressed in Gen 1:1 ; Gen 1:12 ; Gen 1:15 . The order of the words in this clause is somewhat different in our text from that of the LXX in either of the great MSS.; [12] having , , , , , , and [13] omitting . The transposition has apparently been made from the alex. text, and for the sake of throwing the into emphasis. On the bearing and interpretation of the Psalm, see below), foundedst (“A primis fundamentis terram fecisti, et simul eam firmam et stabilem fundasti.” Corn.-a-lap., in Bleek, who remarks that the verb , , is not so usual of the heavens, as of the earth. Still in Psa 8:3 , we have the Greek verb , applied to the heavens: but the Heb. is ) the earth, and the heavens (“Nil obstat,” says Bengel, “quominus sub clis angeli innuantur, quemadmodum creatio hominis innuitur sub terra prtereunte.” The same thought is implied in Theodoret’s . . Still, I would rather view the citation as made in proof of the eternal and unchangeable power and majesty of the Son, than as implicitly referred to the angels by the word . And so most Commentators. The plur. , representing the Heb. , evidently includes in the Greek also the idea of plurality: see Eph 4:10 ; 2Co 12:2 ) are works of thine hands (see Psa 8:3 . Bl. mentions an opinion of Heinrichs that the . alludes to textile work, the heavens being considered as a veil spread out. But there does not seem sufficient warrant for this).
[12] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle; it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon; nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as ‘Verc’): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are (1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as ‘Blc’); (2) that of Birch (‘Bch’), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798, Apocalypse, 1800, Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (‘Btly’), by the Abbate Mico, published in Ford’s Appendix to Woide’s edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus’ Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentley’s books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (‘Rl’), and are preserved amongst Bentley’s papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20) 1 . The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgon’s “Letters from Rome,” London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).
[13] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century . The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are: A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr 1 ; B (cited as 2 ), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; C a (cited as 3a ) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1 , it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that C a altered it to that which is found in our text; C b (cited as 3b ) lived about the same time as C a , i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here 6 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Heb 1:10 . In Heb 1:10-12 the writer introduces another quotation from Psa 102 (in LXX Psalm 101:25 7). The quotation is verbatim from the LXX except that is lifted from the fifth to the first place in the sentence, for emphasis, and that a second is inserted after in Heb 1:12 . With the introductory Weiss understands , as in Heb 1:8 . He is also of opinion that the writer considers that the words were spoken by Jehovah and that , therefore, must be the Messiah. This is possible, but it is not necessary for the justification of the Messianic reference. This follows from the character of the psalm, which predicts the manifestation of Jehovah as the Saviour of His people, even though this may only be in the far future (see Psa 103:13 : “Thou shalt arise and have mercy upon Zion. So the heathen shall fear the name of the Lord, etc.”) Prof. B. W. Bacon of Yale has investigated this matter afresh and finds that, so far from the application of these verses to the Messiah being an audacious innovation, or even achieved, as Calvin says, “pia deflectione,” “the psalm itself was a favourite resort of those who sought in even pre-Christian times for proof-texts of Messianic eschatology”; also that “we have specific evidence of the application of Psa 102:23-24 to the Messiah by those who employed the Hebrew or some equivalent text” and finally that by the rendering of in Psa 102:24 (English Psa 102:23 ) by respondit or “we have the explanation of how, in Christian circles at least, the accepted Messianic passage could be made to prove the doctrine that the Messiah is none other than the pre-existent wisdom of Pro 8:22-31 , “through whom,” according to our author, Heb 1:2 , “God made the worlds.” Indeed, we shall not be going too far if with Bruce we say: “It is possible that the writer (of Heb.) regarded this text (Psa 102:25-27 ) as Messianic because in his mind creation was the work of the pre-existent Christ. But it is equally possible that he ascribed creative agency to Christ out of regard to this and other similar texts believed to be Messianic on other grounds.” See Preuschen’s Zeitschrift fr N.T. Wissenschaft , 1902, p. 280.
In Heb 1:13-14 , we have the final contrast between the place of the Son and that of the angels in human redemptive history. This contrast is connected by the form of its statement with Heb 1:5 (“to which of the angels, etc.”). There it was the greater name that was in question, here it is the higher station and function. . . . “But to which of the angels has He at any time said ?” implying that to the Son He has said it, as is proved by the citation from Psa 110 . On this psalm (see note on Heb 1:9 ). connects this ver. with Heb 1:8 , and stands in the third place as frequently in classics when a preposition begins the sentence (Herod., viii., 68, 2; Thuc., i., 6; Soph., Philoct. , 764. See examples in Klotz’ Devarius , p. 379). , see Heb 1:3 ; . is not classical, but frequent in Hellenistic Greek, see references, . “Until I set thine enemies as a footstool for thy feet.” is a later Greek word used in LXX and N.T. The figure arose from the custom of conquerors referred to in Jos 10:24 . Here it points to the complete supremacy of Christ. This attained sovereignty is the gauge of the World’s consummation. The horizon of human history is the perfected rule of Jesus Christ. It is the end for which all things are now making. Whereas the angels are but the agents whose instrumentality is used by. God for the furtherance of this end. . “Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to serve for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation?” They have no function of rule, but are directed by a higher will to promote the interests of those who are to form Christ’s kingdom. This is true of all of them [ ] whatever hierarchies there be among them. , cf. Heb 5:5 . with its cognates has come to play a large part in ecclesiastical language. It is originally “a public servant”; from , an unused adjective connected with , meaning “what belongs to the people” and . It occurs frequently in LXX, sometimes denoting the official who attends on a king (Jos 1:1 ), sometimes angels (Psa 103:21 ), commonly the priests and Levites (Neh 10:39 ), , and Isa 61:6 . In N.T. it is used of those who render service to God or to Christ or to men ( cf. Lepine’s Ministers of Jesus Christ , p. 126). , present part., denoting continuous action. “Sent forth”; therefore as servants by a higher power ( cf. Act 1:25 , . ). originally means the ministry of a body servant or table servant ( cf. Luk 4:39 ; Mar 1:13 , ) and is used throughout N.T. for ministry in spiritual things. might almost be rendered “destined” as in Mat 3:7 ; Mat 11:14 ; Mat 16:27 ; Mat 17:12 , etc. , see on Heb 1:4 . in the classics means either preservation or deliverance. In N.T. the word naturally came to be used as the semi-technical term for the deliverance from sin and entrance into permanent wellbeing effected by Christ. See Luk 1:71 ; Luk 1:77 ; Joh 4:22 ; Act 4:12 ; Act 16:17 ; Rom 1:16 , etc. In Heb 2:3 the salvation referred to is termed . Cf. Hooker’s outburst, Eccles. Pol. , i., iv., 1, and Sir Oliver Lodge ( Hibbert Journal , Jan., 1903, p. 223): “If we are open to influence from each other by non-corporeal methods, may we not be open to influence from beings in another region or of another order? And if so, may we not be aided, inspired, guided by a cloud of witnesses not witnesses only, but helpers, agents like ourselves of the immanent God?” On guardian angels, see Charles’ Book of Jubilees , Moulton in J. T. S. , August 1902, and Rogers’ edition of Aristoph., Eccles. , 999, and the Orphic Fragment quoted by Clement ( Strom. , v.) . Cf. Shakespeare’s “Angels and ministers of grace defend us”.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Lord. App-98.
in the beginning. Greek. kat’ archas. See Joh 1:1.
hast . . . foundation. Literally didst found. Greek. themelioo. App-146.
earth. Greek. ge. App-129.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
10.] And ( : see a similar introducing a new citation in Act 1:20. The comma, or colon, or capital letter, as in text, should be retained after ),-Thou in the beginning (Heb. . ad faciem, antea; probably here rendered by the LXX with reference to Gen 1:1. The expression is found in Philo, and often in the classics: cf. Herod. iii. 153, 159, and instances in Wetst.; and see Khner, Gr. Gr. 607.1), Lord ( has no word to represent it in the Hebrew. But it is taken up from in Gen 1:25; and indeed from the whole strain of address, in which has been thrice expressed-in Gen 1:1; Gen 1:12; Gen 1:15. The order of the words in this clause is somewhat different in our text from that of the LXX in either of the great MSS.; [12] having , , , , , , and [13] omitting . The transposition has apparently been made from the alex. text, and for the sake of throwing the into emphasis. On the bearing and interpretation of the Psalm, see below), foundedst (A primis fundamentis terram fecisti, et simul eam firmam et stabilem fundasti. Corn.-a-lap., in Bleek, who remarks that the verb , , is not so usual of the heavens, as of the earth. Still in Psa 8:3, we have the Greek verb , applied to the heavens: but the Heb. is ) the earth, and the heavens (Nil obstat, says Bengel, quominus sub clis angeli innuantur, quemadmodum creatio hominis innuitur sub terra prtereunte. The same thought is implied in Theodorets . . Still, I would rather view the citation as made in proof of the eternal and unchangeable power and majesty of the Son, than as implicitly referred to the angels by the word . And so most Commentators. The plur. , representing the Heb. , evidently includes in the Greek also the idea of plurality: see Eph 4:10; 2Co 12:2) are works of thine hands (see Psa 8:3. Bl. mentions an opinion of Heinrichs that the . alludes to textile work, the heavens being considered as a veil spread out. But there does not seem sufficient warrant for this).
[12] The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209 in the Vatican Library at Rome; and proved, by the old catalogues, to have been there from the foundation of the library in the 16th century. It was apparently, from internal evidence, copied in Egypt. It is on vellum, and contains the Old and New Testaments. In the latter, it is deficient from Heb 9:14 to the end of the Epistle;-it does not contain the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon;-nor the Apocalypse. An edition of this celebrated codex, undertaken as long ago as 1828 by Cardinal Angelo Mai, has since his death been published at Rome. The defects of this edition are such, that it can hardly be ranked higher in usefulness than a tolerably complete collation, entirely untrustworthy in those places where it differs from former collations in representing the MS. as agreeing with the received text. An 8vo edition of the N.T. portion, newly revised by Vercellone, was published at Rome in 1859 (referred to as Verc): and of course superseded the English reprint of the 1st edition. Even in this 2nd edition there were imperfections which rendered it necessary to have recourse to the MS. itself, and to the partial collations made in former times. These are-(1) that of Bartolocci (under the name of Giulio de St. Anastasia), once librarian at the Vatican, made in 1669, and preserved in manuscript in the Imperial Library (MSS. Gr. Suppl. 53) at Paris (referred to as Blc); (2) that of Birch (Bch), published in various readings to the Acts and Epistles, Copenhagen, 1798,-Apocalypse, 1800,-Gospels, 1801; (3) that made for the great Bentley (Btly), by the Abbate Mico,-published in Fords Appendix to Woides edition of the Codex Alexandrinus, 1799 (it was made on the margin of a copy of Cephalus Greek Testament, Argentorati, 1524, still amongst Bentleys books in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge); (4) notes of alterations by the original scribe and other correctors. These notes were procured for Bentley by the Abb de Stosch, and were till lately supposed to be lost. They were made by the Abbate Rulotta (Rl), and are preserved amongst Bentleys papers in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge (B. 17. 20)1. The Codex has been occasionally consulted for the verification of certain readings by Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others. A list of readings examined at Rome by the present editor (Feb. 1861), and by the Rev. E. C. Cure, Fellow of Merton College, Oxford (April 1862), will be found at the end of these prolegomena. A description, with an engraving from a photograph of a portion of a page, is given in Burgons Letters from Rome, London 1861. This most important MS. was probably written in the fourth century (Hug, Tischendorf, al.).
[13] The CODEX SINAITICUS. Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf. The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:-A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us -corr1; B (cited as 2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as 3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in 1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as 3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Heb 1:10. , and) This particle connects the testimonies.- – ) Psa 102:26-28; LXX. , , , etc., the remainder in the same words. The time of the creation is intimated, to which the end of the world is opposed; and by this very fact, Dissertation 3. of Artemonius is done away with.-, Thou) The same to whom the discourse is directed in the preceding ver.-, O Lord) The LXX. have repeated that from ver. 23 of the same psalm. Christ is preached (proclaimed) even in those passages, where many might contend that the writer was principally speaking of the Father.-, the earth: , the heavens) A gradation. There is no reason why the angels may not be included in the word heavens, as the creation of man is included under the word earth, which passes away.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
In the following verses the apostle, by another illustrious testimony, taken out of Psalms 102, confirms his principal assertion, in the words ensuing.
Heb 1:10-12. , , , . , , , , .
In the last verse, for one copy hath , to answer unto and MS. T., .
The words are the same in the Greek Bibles as in this place of the apostle, nor is there any footstep of any other old translation of them in the psalm. The Syriac differs little. it renders , and again, to show that is no part of the testimony cited, but serves only to the introduction of another. Heb 1:11, for , they shall perish, , they shall pass away; alluding to that of 2Pe 3:10, , The heavens shall pass away with a noise. , but thou abidest, thou continuest; et tu stans es, et tu stas, et tu stabilis es, and thou standest, thou art standing, answering the Hebrew , in the psalm. , thou shalt roll them up, ; which words interpreters render variously, though to the same purpose. Involves, Boderianus, roll them; complicabis, Tremellius, fold them; duplicabis, De Dieu, double them up. And it is manifest that the translator reads , and not . And I doubt not but the same word was inserted into the translation of the psalm from this place of the apostle. , Thou art the same, or, Thou art, I am; . Boderianus, Et tu sicut existens es; And thou art as thou existest. Tremellius, Tu autem sicut es, eris; But thou shalt be as thou art. Properly, And thou, as thou art, art; that is, art the same. The translation of the apostle in all things material answereth the original in the psalm. Psalm (LXX) 101:25-28, , Thou, Lord, is supplied out of the verse foregoing, I said, O my God. , of old, before it was; that is, , or , in the beginning. And our translators needed not to have used any difference of expression in the psalm and this place of the apostle, as they do; there, of old ; here, in the beginning. Thou hast founded (not laid the foundation of) the earth; and the heavens are the works; , the work, which the Greek renders works, because of their variety, of thy hands.
They shall perish, , but thou shalt stand, or dost abide. The word used in our translation of the psalm (endure) doth ill answer the original, but the margin gives relief. Psalm, Yea all of them shall wax old like a garment; here, And they all shall wax old as doth a garment: a little variety without difference, and that needless, the Greek text exactly expressing the Hebrew. And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up; ; shalt thou change them. The change of a vesture, whereunto the change of the heavens is compared, being by folding up and laying aside, at least from former use, the apostle instead of , thou shalt change, renders the word by , thou shalt fold (or roll) them up. , et tu ipse, , and thou art he. And thy years shall have no end, shall not fail; , shall not consume. [10]
[10] VARIOUS READINGS. Griesbach, Knapp, and Stuart, on the strength of MSS. D. E., and a few others, read , instead of , the future instead of the present. Tischendorf retains . The Peschito version has it Thou art permanent. EXPOSITION. The manifestations of the Deity were made in the person of HIM who, in the fullness of time, became incarnate as the promised Messiah. In the deliverance from Egypt, and the march through the wilderness, he was known as the angel of the covenant, and sometimes appeared in a visible form. The blessing for which the author of the psalm prays, is the improvement and deliverance of the chosen people, by that God who had directed providence for that end. But with regard to the Divine Father, the Scriptures assure us that no one hath seen him, or can see him. Can we, then, avoid inferring that the object of the afflicted psalmists prayers was that same DIVINE PERSON who had allowed himself to be seen in a glorious human form by Abraham, by Jacob, by Moses, etc.? Pye Smith. TRANSLATIONS. . Thou shalt remain. Boothroyd, Stewart, Ebrard. Tu permanebis. Vulgate. Du bestehest. De Wette. ED.
There is no question but that these words do sufficiently prove the pre- eminence of him of whom they are spoken, incomparably above all creatures whatever. Two things, therefore, are questioned by the enemies of the truth contained in them:
1. Whether they were originally spoken at all of Christ, which the present Jews deny.
2. Whether they were spoken all of Christ, which is questioned by the Socinians. These inquiries being first satisfied, the words shall be opened, and the force of the apostles argument from thence declared.
1. That what is spoken in this psalm doth properly respect the Messiah is denied by the present Jews. That it was owned by the ancient Hebrews is sufficiently evident from hence, that the apostle, dealing with them on their own principles, urgeth them with the testimony of it. The psalm also itself gives us light enough into the same instruction. It is partly euctical, partly prophetical; both parts suited unto the condition of the church when the temple was wasted, and Zion lay in the dust during the Babylonish captivity. In the prophetical part there are three things signal:
(1.) The redemption of the people, with the re-edification of the temple, as a type of that spiritual temple and worship which were afterwards to be erected: as Psa 102:13, Thou shalt arise, and have mercy upon Zion; for the time to favor her, yea, the set time, is come: and Psa 102:16, When the Lord shall build up Zion, he shall appear in his glory.
(2.) The calling of the Gentiles to the church and worship of God: Psa 102:15, The heathen shall fear the name of the LORD, and all the kings of the earth thy glory. Psa 102:21-22, To declare the name of the LORD in Zion, and his praise in Jerusalem; when the people are gathered together, and the kingdoms, to serve the LORD.
(3.) Hereby the creation of a new people, a new world, is brought in: 2Pe 3:18, This shall be written for the generation to come (the world to come): and the people that shall be created (the new creation of Jews and Gentiles) shall praise the LORD. These are the heads of the prophetical part of the psalm, and they all respect things everywhere peculiarly assigned unto the Son, who was to be incarnate, or the days of the Messiah, which is all one; for,
[1.] The redemption and deliverance of the church out of trouble is his proper work. Wherever it is mentioned, it is he who is intended, Psalms 98. So signally, Zec 2:8-13, and other places innumerable.
[2.] The bringing in of the Gentiles is acknowledged by all the Jews to respect the time of the Messiah; it being he who was to be a light unto the Gentiles, and the salvation of God unto the ends of the earth.
[3.] Also, the generation to come, and people to be created, the Jews themselves interpret of the , world to come, or the new state of the church under the Messiah. These two last put together, the gathering of the people, and the world to come, created for the praise of God, make it evident that it is the Son whom the psalmist hath respect unto.
Grotius in this place affirms that the apostle accommodates unto the Messiah what was spoken of God. And he thinks it a sufficient argument to prove the words were not spoken of the Messiah, because they were spoken of God; whereas they are produced by the apostle to prove his excellency from the properties and works of his divine nature. And he adds, as the sense of the words, as accommodated unto Christ, Thou hast laid the foundation of the earth;that is, the world was made for thy sake. But this interpretation or violent detortion of the words destroys itself; for if they were spoken of God absolutely, and not of the Messiah, to whom they are accommodated, how can it be said that the world was made for his sake, and not by him? Both senses of the words cannot be true. But this is indeed plainly to deny the authority of the apostle.
It appeareth, then, that many things in this psalm are spoken directly and immediately of the Son; though it be probable, also, that sundry things in it are affirmed distinctly of the person of the Father. And hence, it may be, are those frequent variations of speech from the second to the third person that occur in this psalm.
2. As to the second inquiry, the Socinians, who grant the divine authority of this epistle, and therefore cannot deny but that these words some way or other belong unto the Lord Christ, yet plainly perceiving that if they are wholly understood of him, there is an end of all their religion (the creation, not of a new world, but of that which was made of old, and which shall perish at the last day, being here ascribed unto him), fix here upon a new and peculiar evasion. Some words, they say, of this testimony belong unto Christ (so much they will yield to the authority of the apostle), but not all of them; whereby they hope to secure their own error. Now, because if this pretense hold not, this testimony is fatal to their persuasion, I hope it will not be unacceptable if in our passage we do consider the distribution they make of the words according to their supposition, and the arguments they produce for the confirmation of their exposition, as they are managed by Crellius and Schlichtingius in their comment on this place.
(1.) He says that this testimony doth so far belong unto Christ, as it pertaineth unto the scope of the writer of the epistle. This scripture, saith he, as appears from Zec 2:4, is to prove that after Christ sat down at the right hand of God, he was made more excellent than the angels; whereto the affirming that he made heaven and earth doth no way conduce.
Ans. (1.) Suppose that to be the scope of the apostle which is intimated, how doth this author know that it suits not his purpose to show that the Lord Christ is God, by whom heaven and earth were made, seeing it is manifest that himself thought otherwise, or he had not produced this testimony thereof?
(2.) The testimony is not unsuited unto the scope pretended; for whereas, in the administration of his office, the Son was apparently for a while made lower than the angels, he may in these words discover the equity of his after exaltation above them, in that in his divine nature and works he was so much more excellent than they.
(3.) The true and proper design of the apostle we have before evinced; which is to prove the excellency of the person by whom the gospel was revealed, and his pre-eminence above men and angels; which nothing doth more unquestionably demonstrate than this, that by him the world was created, whence the assignation of a divine nature unto him doth undeniably ensue.
(2.) To promote this observation, he adds a large discourse about the use and application of testimonies out of the Old Testament in the New; and says that they are made use of by the writers of it, either because of some agreement and likeness between the things intended in the one and the other, or because of some subordination. In the former way, that which is spoken of the type is applied unto the antitype: and sometimes, for likenesssake, that which was spoken of one thing is applied unto another; as, Mat 15:7-8, our Savior applies those words of Isaiah to the present Jews which were spoken of their forefathers.
Ans. (1.) That which is spoken in the first place of an instituted type is also spoken of the antitype, or thing prefigured by it, so far as it is represented by the type, so that one thing teaches another; and thereon the words have a double application, first to the type, ultimately to the antitype. But herein such testimonies as this have no concernment.
(2.) The Scripture sometimes makes use of allegories, illustrating one thing by another, as Gal 4:21-25. Neither hath this any place here.
(3.) That what is spoken of one person should, because of some similitude, be affirmed to be spoken of another, and in nothing agree 244 properly unto him, is untrue, and not to be exemplified with any seeming instance.
(4.) The words of Isaiah, Isa 29:13, which our Savior makes use of, Mat 15:7-9, were a prophecy of the Jews who then lived, as both our Savior expressly affirms and the context in the prophet doth plainly declare.
Some things, he adds, are applied unto others than they are spoken of, because of their subordination to him or them of whom they are spoken. Thus things that are spoken of God are applied unto Christ, because of his subordination to him; and of this, saith he, we have an instance in Act 13:47, where the words spoken of the Lord Christ, Isa 49:6, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth,are applied unto the apostles because of their subordination unto Christ. And in this case the words have but one sense, and belong primarily unto him of whom they are first spoken, and are secondarily applied unto the other.
Ans. According to this rule there is nothing that ever was spoken of God but it may be spoken of and applied unto any of his creatures, all things being in subordination unto him; at least, it may be so in that wherein they act under him and are in a peculiar subordination to him. And yet neither can such a subordination, according to this mans opinion, be applied unto Christ, who in the creation of heaven and earth was in no other subordination to God than any other things not yet made or existing. So that this rule, that what is spoken of God is applied unto them who are in subordination unto him, as it is false in itself, so it is no way suited to the present business, Christ being, in this mans judgment, in no subordination to God when the world was made, being absolutely in all respects in the condition of things that were not. Nor doth the instance given at all prove or illustrate what is pretended. The apostle, in the citing of those words to the Jews, doth not in the least apply them to himself, but only declares the ground of his going to preach the gospel unto the Gentiles; which was, that God had promised to make Him whom he preached to be a light, and to bring salvation unto them also.
Wherefore he adds,
(3.) what is direct to his pretension, That all the words, or things signified by them, in any testimony, which are firstly spoken of one, and then are, for some of the causes mentioned (that is, conveniency, similitude, or subordination), applied unto another, are not to be looked on as proper to him to whom they are so applied; but so much of them is to be admitted as agrees to the scope of him by whom the testimony is used: as in the testimony produced, Isa 49:5, I will be unto him a father, and he shall be to me a son,the words immediately following are, If he shall offend against me, I will chastise him with the rod of men; which words, being spoken of Solomon, can no way be applied unto Christ.
Ans. What is spoken of any type and of Christ jointly is not so spoken for any natural conveniency, similitude, or subordination, but because of Gods institution, appointing the type so to represent and shadow out the Lord Christ, that what he would teach concerning him should be spoken of the type whereby he was represented. Now, no person that was appointed to be a type of him being in all things a type, it is not necessary that whatever was spoken of him was also spoken of Christ, but only what was spoken of him under that formal consideration of an instituted type. This we showed the case to have been with Solomon, of whom the words mentioned were spoken as he bare the person of Christ. Other things are added in the same place, that belonged unto him in his own personally moral capacity; and therefore those things (as that, If he offend against me) are not at all mentioned by the apostle, as not being spoken of him as a type. And this plainly overthrows the pretension of our commentator; for if the apostle would not produce the very next words to the testimony by him brought, because they did not belong unto him of whom he spake, it proves undeniably that all those which he doth so urge and produce were properly spoken of him. And I cannot reach the strength of this inference, Because in a place where all that was spoken was not spoken of Christ, the apostle makes use of what was so spoken of him, and omits that which was not; therefore of that which he doth produce in the next place, somewhat does belong to him, and somewhat does not.If any thing be offered to this purpose, it must be in an instance of a testimony produced, in the words whereof which are produced, and not in what may follow in the same chapter and psalm there is that affirmed which doth now no more belong unto Christ than the making of heaven or earth belongeth to this writer; which is the case in hand.
Having premised these general considerations, he makes application of them in particular to his interpretation of this testimony used by the apostle.
These words, saith he, being first expressly spoken of God, and here by this writer referred unto Christ, we must consider what in them makes to his scope and purpose, what is agreeable to the nature and condition of Christ, who certainly was a man; and such, certainly, is not he which the psalm speaks of about the creation of heaven and earth. And this was well known to them with whom the apostle had to do.
But any one may perceive that these things are spoken gratis, and upon the supposition that Christ was a mere man, and not God by nature, when the words themselves, ascribing a pre-existence to the world and omnipotency unto him, do prove the contrary. What is the scope of the apostle in the whole discourse under consideration hath been showed, as also how directly this whole testimony tends to the proof of what he had proposed. It is true that the words are spoken of him who is God; but no less true, the apostle being judge, that it is the Son of God who is that God. It, is true that he also was man, and nothing is ascribed unto him but what belongs unto him who was man, but not as he was man; and such was the creation of heaven and earth.
The opinion of these men is, that whereas two things are mentioned in the words, the creation of the world, which was past, and the dissolution or destruction of it, which was to come, that the latter is assigned unto Christ, but not the former; and for this division of the words, which confessedly is not in the least intimated by the apostle, he gives these reasons:
1. All the words of the psalm being manifestly spoken of the high God, and no word in the psalm declaring Christ to be that God, yet of necessity, if these words be applied unto Christ, he must be supposed to be the high God there spoken of. But if this divine writer had taken this for granted, he had been eminently foolish to go about to prove by arguments and testimonies that the Creator does excel all creatures. He should use, in a matter no way doubtful, witnesses no way necessary.
This is the first reason whereby he would prove that the apostle did not apply the words to Christ, though himself says plainly that he does; for his preface to them is, But to the Son he saith: or, that if he doth so, he doth it wondrous foolishly; for such liberty do poor worms take to themselves. That the psalm so speaketh of the high God, that it directly and peculiarly intends Christ the Son of God, hath been in part declared, and shall further afterwards be evinced. And the eulogium in these words given unto him proves him to be so. And though he affirms that it was a foolish thing in the apostle to prove from the works of him that is God that he is above the angels, the most glorious of made creatures, yet God himself most frequently from these his works, his omniscience, omnipresence, and other attributes declared in them, proves his excellency in comparison of idols, which have no existence but in the imagination of men. See Isa 41:21, etc.
By this testimony, then, the Holy Ghost with infinite wisdom proves that he who was made less for a little while than the angels, in one respect, was absolutely and in his own person infinitely above them, as being the creator of heaven and earth.
2. He adds, Those Hebrews to whom he wrote were either persuaded that Christ was God, the creator of heaven and earth, or they were not. If they were, what need of all these arguments and testimonies? One word might have despatched this whole controversy, by affirming that Christ was the creator, angels creatures, between whom there could be no comparison, nor any reason to fear that the law given by the administration of angels should be preferred to the gospel, whereof he was the author. If we shall say the latter, that they did not yet believe it, now do we suppose that he takes a great deal of pains to little purpose; for he assumes and takes for granted that that was true which was alone in question. What need he, then, to prove by so many arguments that Christ was more excellent than the angels, and to take that for granted which would have put it out of question, namely, that he was God, who made heaven and earth?
Ans. This dilemma hath as much force against the other testimonies produced in this chapter or elsewhere by the apostle as it hath against this; so that the using of it doth scarce argue that reverence to the holy word of God which is required of us. But the truth is, grant whether of the suppositions you please, nothing of inconveniency as unto the apostles argumentation will ensue. Let it be granted that they did believe, and that expressly, Christ to be God, have believers no need to have their faith confirmed by testimonies out of the word that may not so readily occur to themselves? Have they no need to be strengthened in the faith, especially in such points as were in those days greatly opposed, as was this of the eternal glory of the Messiah, concerning which the believing Hebrews had to do with learned and stubborn adversaries continually? And if the apostle might have ended the whole controversy by plainly affirming that he was the creator of all things and the angels creatures, might he not as well have ended the dispute about his pre-eminence above angels with one word, without citing so many testimonies to prove it? But had he then unfolded the mysteries of the Old Testament to the Hebrews, which was his design? Had he manifested that he taught nothing but what was before revealed (though obscurely) to Moses and the prophets; which he aimed to do, thereby to strengthen and confirm in the faith those that did believe, and convince gainsayers? Again, suppose some of them to whom he wrote did not yet expressly believe the deity of Christ, as the apostles themselves did not for a while believe his resurrection, could any more convincing way be fixed on to persuade them thereunto, than by minding them of those testimonies of the Old Testament wherein the attributes and works of God are ascribed unto him? Nor was it now in question whether Christ were God or no, but whether he were more excellent than the angels that gave the law; and what more effectual course could be taken to put an end to that inquiry than by proving that he made the heaven and earth, that is, producing a testimony wherein the creation of all things is assigned unto him, is beyond the wisdom of man to invent.
3. He adds, That Christ might be spoken of in this place either in respect of his human nature or of his divine. If of the former, to what end should he make mention of the creation of heaven and earth? Christ as man, and as made above the angels, made not heaven and earth. If as God, how could he be said to be made above the angels ?
But the answer is easy. Christ is said to be made above and more excellent than the angels, neither absolutely as God, nor absolutely as man, but as he was God-man, the mediator between God and man; in which respect, as mediator, for the discharge of one part of his office, he was a little while made lower than they; and so the creation of heaven and earth does demonstrate the dignity of his person, and the equity of his being made more excellent than the angels in his office. And this fully removes his following exception, that the remembering of his deity could be no argument to prove that the humanity was exalted above the angels; for it is not an argument of the exaltation of his humanity, but the demonstration of the excellency of his person, that the apostle hath in hand.
4. He allegeth, That it is contrary to the perpetual use of the Scripture, to affirm absolutely of Christ that he created any thing. When any creation is ascribed unto him, it is still applied to him as the immediate cause, and is said to be made by him or in him; he is nowhere said absolutely to create. And if he created the world, why did not Moses as plainly attribute that unto him as the writers of the New Testament do the new creation ? Ans. Were it affirmed in this place only that Christ made all things, yet the words being plain and evident, and the thing itself agreeable to the Scripture in other places, and not repugnant to any testimony therein contained, there is no pretense, for them who truly reverence the wisdom and authority of the Holy Ghost in the word, to deny the words to be spoken properly and directly; nor, if we may take that course, will there be any thing left sacred and in the Scripture. Besides, we have showed already the vanity of that distinction, of Gods making things by Christ, as though it denoted any subordination in causality; nor will the Socinians themselves admit of any such thing, but confute that notion in the Arians. But this is not the only place wherein it is affirmed that Christ made all things that are in the heaven and the earth. Joh 1:1-3, Col 1:16, Col 1:3 of this chapter, with sundry other places, affirm the same. For what they exact of Moses, did we not believe that God knew what revelation of himself became that dark dispensation better than they, we might consider it. But yet there are even in Moses himself, and his expositors the prophets, many more testimonies of the creation of the world by the Word, that is the Son of God; which have elsewhere been opened and vindicated.
5. He concludes, That the order and method of the apostles procedure doth evince that this creation of heaven and earth is not attributed unto him. For we see that he proves the excellency of Christ above angels from his name, that he is by the way of eminency called the Son of God; and then he proceeds to his adoration by angels; and in the third place he goes on to the kingly honor and throne of Christ; after which he produceth the testimony we insist upon; and then adds the end of that kingdom which Christ now administereth in the earth. To what end in this discourse should he mention the creation of heaven and earth, when, if that be omitted, all the series of the discourse agrees and hangs well together? For having declared the kingdom of Christ, with the continuance of his throne for ever, he asserts an eminent effect of the kingdom in the abolition of heaven and earth, and then the end of that kingdom itself.
But this analysis of the apostles discourse agreeth not to the mind of the apostle or his design in the place, nor to the principles of the men that formed it, nor is indeed any thing but vain words, to persuade us that the apostle did not say that which he did say, and which is written for our instruction. It is not, first, agreeable to their own principles; for it placeth the naming of Christ the Son of God, and his adoration by the angels, as antecedent to his being raised to his kingly throne; both which, especially the latter, they constantly make consequent unto it and effects of it. Nor is it at all agreeable to the apostles design, which is not to prove by these testimonies directly that Christ was exalted above angels, but to show the dignity and excellency of his person who was so exalted, and how reasonable it is that it should be so; which is eminently proved by the testimony under consideration. For the proof of this excellency, the apostle produceth those testimonies that are given unto him in the Old Testament, and that as to his name, his honor and glory, and his works in this place. Neither is there any reason of ascribing the destruction of heaven and earth unto the kingly power of Christ, excluding his divine power in their creation: for the abolition of the world (if such it is to be), or the change of it, is no less an effect of infinite power than the creation of it; nor doth it directly appertain to the kingdom of Christ, but by accident, as do other works of the providence of God.
These exceptions, then, being removed, before we proceed to the interpretation of the words, we shall see what evidence may be added unto what we have already offered, from the psalm, to evince and prove that this whole testimony doth belong unto him; which, were there no other (as there are very many) testimonies to this purpose, were abundantly sufficient to determine this controversy.
1. We have the authority of the apostle for it, ascribing it unto him. The word and, in the beginning of Col 1:10, relates confessedly unto, But unto the Son he saith, Col 1:8 : as if he had said, But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; and to the Son he said, Thou, O God, in the beginning hast founded the earth.
2. Again, the whole testimony speaks of the same person, there being no color of thrusting another person into the text not intended in the beginning; so that if any part of what is spoken do belong to Christ, the whole of necessity must do so. To suppose that in this sentence, Thou hast laid the foundation of the earth,….. and as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, one person is understood in the former place, another in the latter, no such thing being intimated by the psalmist or the apostle, is to suppose what we please, that we may attain what we have a mind unto. One person is here certainly and only spoken unto. If this be the Father, the words concern not Christ at all, and the apostle was deceived in his allegation of them; if the Son, the whole is spoken of him, as the apostle affirms.
3. Nor can any reason be assigned why the latter words should be attributed to Christ, and not the former. They say it is because God by him shall destroy the world, which is the thing in the last words spoken of. But where is it written that God shall destroy the world by Christ? If they say in this place, I say then Christ is spoken to and of in this place; and if so, he is spoken of in the first words, And thou, Lord, or not at all. Besides, to whom do these closing words belong, But thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail? If these words are spoken of Christ, it is evident that all the foregoing must be so also; for his enduring the same, and the not failing of his years, that is, his eternity, is opposed to the creation and temporary duration of the world. If they say that they belong unto the Father primarily, but are attributed unto Christ, as that of changing or abolishing the world, because the Father doth it by him, I desire to know what is the meaning of these words, Thou art the same by Christ, and thy years fail not by Christ ?Is not the Father eternal but in the man Christ Jesus? If they say that they belong not at all to Christ, then this is the sum of what they say: The beginning of the words, and the close of them, if spoken of Christ, would prove his infinite power, eternity, and divine nature. One passage there is in the words which we suppose will not do so, therefore we will grant that that passage concerneth him, but not the beginning nor end of the testimony, though spoken undeniably of the same person; which whether it becomes men professing a reverence for the word of God is left to themselves to judge. Besides, should we grant all these suggestions to be true, the apostle by his citing of this testimony would prove nothing at all to his purpose, no, not any thing toward that which they affirm him to aim at, namely, that he was made more excellent than the angels; for how out of these words shall any such matter be made to appear? They say, in that by him God will fold up the heavens as a vesture. But, first, no such thing is mentioned or intimated. He who made them is said to fold them. And if they say that from other places it may be made to appear that it shall be done by Christ, then as this place must be laid aside as of no use to the apostle, so indeed there is nothing ascribed to Christ but what the angels shall have a share in, and that probably the most principal, namely, in folding up the creation as a garment; which is a work that servants are employed in, and not the King or Lord himself. Indeed, he that shall without prejudice consider the apostles discourse will find little need of arguments to manifest whom he applies this testimony unto. He calls him in the beginning, using that word which perpetually in the New Testament denotes the Lord Christ, as plainly expounding the text so far as to declare of whom it speaks. Nor doth this testimony ascribe any thing to him but what in general he had before affirmed of him, namely, that by him the worlds were made. Nor was it ever heard of, that any man in his right wits should cite a testimony to confirm his purpose, containing words that were never spoken of him to whom he applies them; nor is there scarce any thing in them that can tolerably be applied unto him, and the most of it would declare him to be that which he is not at all: so that the words as used to his purpose must needs be both false and ambiguous. Who, then, can but believe, on this testimony of the apostle, that Christ the Lord made heaven and earth? And if the apostle intended not to assert it, what is there in the text or near it as a buoy to warn men from running on a shelf, there where so fair a harbor appears unto them? From all that hath been said, it is evident that this whole testimony belongs to Christ, and is by the apostle asserted so to do.
Proceed we now to the interpretation of the words. The person spoken of and spoken unto in them is the Lord: , Thou, Lord. The words are not in the psalm in this verse, but what is spoken is referred unto , my God: I said, O my God, take me not away in the midst of my days; comforting himself, under the consideration of the frailty and misery of his life, with the thought and faith of the eternity and power of Christ. For be our lives never so frail, yet as to life eternal, because he liveth we shall live also, and he is of power to raise us up at the last day, Joh 14:19; 1Co 15:20; and that is the ground of all our consolation against the brevity and misery of our lives, Whereby it also further appears that it is the Lord Christ whom the psalmist addresses himself unto; for from the absolute consideration of the omnipotency and eternity of God no consolation can be drawn. And, indeed, the people of the Jews having openly affirmed that they could not deal immediately with God but by a mediator, which God eminently approved in them, wishing that such an heart would always abide in them, Deu 5:25-29, so as he suffered them not to approach his typical presence between the cherubim but by a typical mediator, their high priest, so also were they instructed in their real approach unto God, that it was not to be made immediately to the Father but by the Son, whom in particular the apostle declares the psalmist in this place to intend. Concerning this person, or the Lord, he affirms two things, or attributes two things unto him.
1. The creation of heaven and earth;
2. The abolition or change of them.
From that attribution he proceeds to a comparison between him and the most glorious of his creatures, and that as to duration or eternity; frailty and change in and of himself, one of the creatures, being that which in particular he addresseth himself to the Lord about.
The time or season of the creation is first intimated: , for , that is, , in the beginning, or as the word is here, , of old, before they were or existed: They had their being and beginning from thee: of old they were not; but in thy season thou gavest existence or being unto them. Thou hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of thy hands, Heb 1:10.
Two things are observable in this expression of the creation of all things:
1. The distribution made of them into heaven and earth being distinctly mentioned. In the consideration of the works of God, to admire his greatness, power, and wisdom in them, or to set forth his praise for them, it is usual in the Scripture to distribute them into parts, the more to fix the contemplation of the mind upon them, and to excite it unto faith, admiration, and praise. So dealeth the psalmist with the works of Gods providence in bringing the children of Israel out of Egypt, Psalms 136. He takes, as it were, that whole curious work into its several pieces, and subjoins that inference of praise to every one of them, For his mercy endureth for ever. And so he dealeth with the works of creation, Psalms 19, and in sundry other places.
2. What is peculiar in the expressions with respect unto each of them.
(1.) Of the earth it is said he founded it, because of its stability and unmovableness; which is the language of the Scripture, he set it fast, he established it, that it should not be moved for ever. It may be, also, the whole fabric of heaven and earth is compared to an edifice or building, whereof the earth, as the lowest and most depressed part, is looked on as the foundation of the whole; but the stability, unmovableness, and firmness of it, is that which the word expresseth, and which is most properly intended.
(2.) Of the heavens, that they are the works of his hands; alluding to the curious frame and garnishing of them with all their host of glorious lights wherewith they are adorned. The , Job 26:13, the beautifulness, adorning, or garnishing of the heavens, in the curious, glorious forming and fashioning of them, is that which, in a way of distinction, the psalmist aims to express in these words, The heavens are the work of thy hands,
that which thy hands, thy power, with infinite wisdom, hath framed, so as to set off and give lustre and beauty to the whole fabric, as a master workman doth the upper and more noble parts of his building. This is the first thing assigned to the Lord in this testimony of his glory.
The second is in the change or abolition of them. Most suppose that the heavens and the earth at the last day shall only be changed, altered, or renewed, as to their quality and beauty; some, that they shall be utterly destroyed, consumed, and abolished. The discussing of that doubt belongs not directly to the interpretation or exposition of this place, neither sense of the words conducing particularly to the apostles purpose and design in reciting this testimony. It is enough to his argument that the work which was of old in the creation of the world, and that which shall be in the mutation or abolition of it, which is no less an effect of infinite power than the former, are ascribed unto the Lord Christ. Whatever the work be, he compares it to a garment no more to be used, or at least not to be used in the same kind wherein it was before; and the work itself to the folding up or rolling up of such a garment, intimating the greatness of him by whom this work shall be performed, and the facility of the work unto him. The whole creation is as a garment, wherein he shows his power clothed unto men; whence in particular he is said to clothe himself with light as with a garment. And in it is the hiding of his power. Hid it is, as a man is hid with a garment; not that he should not be seen at all, but that he should not be seen perfectly and as he is. It shows the man, and he is known by it; but also it hides him, that he is not perfectly or fully seen. So are the works of creation unto God. He so far makes them his garment or clothing as in them to give out some instances of his power and wisdom; but he is also hid in them, in that by them no creature can come to the full and perfect knowledge of him. Now, when this work shall cease, and God shall unclothe or unveil all his glory to his saints, and they shall know him perfectly, see him as he is, so far as a created nature is capable of that comprehension, then will he lay them aside and fold them up, at least as to that use, as easily as a man lays aside a garment that he will wear or use no more. This lies in the metaphor.
On this assertion he insinuates a comparison between this glorious fabric of heaven and earth and him that made them, as to durableness and stability, which is the thing he treats about; complaining of his own misery or mortality. For the heavens and the earth, he declares that they are in themselves of a flux and perishing nature; , , isti, they shall perish. The word immediately relates to the heavens, but by the figure zeugma comprehends and takes in the earth also: The earth and the heavens shall perish. This fading nature of the fabric of heaven and earth, with all things contained in them, he sets forth, first, by their future end, They shall perish; secondly, their tendency unto that end, They wax old as a garment. By their perishing the most understand their perishing as to their present condition and use, in that alteration or change that shall be made on them; others, their utter abolition. And to say the truth, it were very hard to suppose that an alteration only, and that to the better, a change into a more glorious condition, should be thus expressed, ; that word, as the Greek also, being always used in the worst sense, for a perishing by a total destruction. Their tendency unto this condition is their waxing old as a garment. Two things may be denoted in this expression:
1. The gradual decay of the heavens and earth, waxing old, worse, and decaying in their worth and use;
2. A near approximation or drawing nigh to their end and period. In this sense, the apostle in this epistle affirms that the dispensation of the covenant which established the Judaical worship and ceremonies did wax old and decay, Heb 8:13. Not that it had lost any thing of its first vigor, power, and efficacy, before its abolition. The strict observation of all the institutions of it by our Savior himself manifests its power and obligation to have continued in its full force: and this was typified by the continuance of Moses in his full strength and vigor until the very day of his death. But he says it was old and decayed, when it was , near to a disappearance, to its end, period, and to an utter uselessness, as then it was, even as all things that naturally tend to an end do it by age and decays And in this, not the former sense, are the heavens and earth said to wax old, because of their tendency to that period which, either in themselves or as to their use, they shall receive; which is sufficient to manifest them to be of a changeable, perishing nature. And it may be that it shall be with these heavens and earth at the last day as it was with the heavens and earth of Judaical institutions (for so are they frequently called, especially when their dissolution or abolition is spoken of) in the day of Gods creating the new heavens and earth in the gospel, according to his promise; for though the use of them and their power of obliging to their observation were taken away and abolished, yet are they kept in the world as abiding monuments of the goodness and wisdom of God in teaching his church of old. So may it be with the heavens and earth of the old creation. Though they shall be laid aside at the last day from their use as a garment to clothe and teach the power and wisdom of God to men, yet may they be preserved as eternal monuments of them.
In opposition hereunto it is said of Christ that he abideth, he is the same, and his years fail not. One and the same thing is intended in all these expressions, even his eternal and absolutely immutable existence. Eternity is not amiss called a nunc stans, a present existence, wherein or whereunto nothing is past or future, it being always wholly present in and to itself. This is expressed in that , Thou standest, abidest, endurest, alterest not, changest not, The same is also expressed in the next words, , , thou art he, or art the same; or, as the Syriac hath it, the same that thou art. There is an allusion in these words unto, if not an expression of, that name of God, I am; that is, who is of himself, in himself, always absolutely and unchangeably the same. And this , tu ipse, the Hebrews reckon as a distinct name of God. Indeed, , , , all the same name of God, expressing his eternal and immutable self-subsistence.
The last expression also, though metaphorical, is of the same importance: Thy years fail not. He who is the same eternally properly hath no years, which are a measure of transient time, denoting its duration, beginning, and ending. This is the measure of the world and all things contained therein. Their continuance is reckoned by years. To show the eternal subsistence of God in opposition to the frailty of the world, and all things created therein, it is said, his years fail not; that is, theirs do, and come to an end, of his being and existence there is none.
How the apostle proves his intendment by this testimony hath been declared in the opening of the words, and the force of it unto his purpose lies open to all. We may now divert unto those doctrinal observations which the words offer unto us; as,
I. All the properties of God, considered in the person of the Son, the head of the church, are suited to give relief, consolation, and supportment unto believers in all their distresses.
This truth presents itself unto us from the use of the words in the psalm, and their connection in the design of the psalmist. Under the consideration of his own mortality and frailty, he relieves himself with thoughts of the omnipotency and eternity of Christ, and takes arguments from thence to plead for relief.
And this may a little further be unfolded for our use in the ensuing observations :
1. The properties of God are those whereby God makes known himself to us, and declares both what he is and what we shall find him to be in all that we have to deal with him: he is infinitely holy, just, wise, good, powerful, etc. And by our apprehension of these things are we led to that acquaintance with the nature of God which in this life we may attain, Exo 34:5-7.
2. God oftentimes declares and proposeth these properties of his nature unto us for our supportment, consolation, and relief, in our troubles, distresses, and endeavors after peace and rest to our souls, Isa 40:27-31.
3. That since the entrance of sin, these properties of God, absolutely considered, will not yield that relief and satisfaction unto the souls of men which they would have done, and did, whilst man continued obedient unto God according to the law of his creation. Hence Adam upon his sin knew nothing that should encourage him to expect any help, pity, or relief from him; and therefore fled from his presence, and hid himself. The righteousness, holiness, purity, and power of God, all infinite, eternal, unchangeable, considered absolutely, are no way suited to the advantage of sinners in any condition, Rom 1:32; Hab 1:12-13.
4. These properties of the divine nature are in every person of the Trinity entirely; so that each person is so infinitely holy, just, wise, good, and powerful, because each person is equally partaker of the whole divine nature and being.
5. The person of the Word, or the eternal Son of God, may be considered either absolutely as such, or as designed in the counsel, wisdom, and will of the Father, by and with his own will and consent, unto the work of mediation between God and man, Pro 8:22-31. And in him as such it is that the properties of the nature of God are suited to yield relief unto believers in every condition; for,
(1.) It was the design of God, in the appointment of his Son to be mediator, to retrieve the communion between himself and his creature that was lost by sin. Now, man was so created at first as that every thing in God was suited to be a reward unto him, and in all things to give him satisfaction. This being wholly lost by sin, and the whole representation of God to man becoming full of dread and terror, all gracious intercourse, in a way of special love on the part of God, and spiritual, willing obedience on the part of man, was intercepted and cut off. God designing again to take sinners into a communion of love and obedience with himself, it must be by representing unto them his blessed properties as suited to their encouragement, satisfaction, and reward. And this he doth in the person of his Son, as designed to be our mediator, Heb 1:2-3; for,
(2.) The Son is designed to be our mediator and the head of his church in a way of covenant, wherein there is an engagement for the exerting of all the divine properties of the nature of God for the good and advantage of them for whom he hath undertaken, and whom he designed to bring again into favor and communion with God. Hence believers do no more consider the properties of God in the person of the Son absolutely, but as engaged in a way of covenant for their good, and as proposed unto them for an everlasting, satisfactory reward. This is the ground of his calling upon them so often to behold, see, and consider him, and thereby to be refreshed. They consider his power, as he is mighty to save; his eternity, as he is an everlasting reward; his righteousness, as faithful to justify them; all his properties, as engaged in covenant for their good and advantage. Whatever he is in himself, that he will be to them in a way of mercy. Thus do the holy properties of the divine nature become a means of supportment unto us, as considered in the person of the Son of God. And this is,
[1.] A great encouragement unto believing. The Lord Christ, as the Wisdom of God inviting sinners to come unto him, and to be made partakers of him, lays down all his divine excellencies as a motive thereunto, Pro 8:14-15, etc.; for on the account of them he assures us that we may find rest, satisfaction, and an abundant reward in him. And the like invitation doth he give to poor sinners: Isa 45:22, Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. They may justly expect salvation in him who is God, and in whom all divine attributes are proposed to their benefit, as they find who come unto him, Isa 45:24-25. The consideration hereof prevents all the fears and answers all the doubts of them that look up unto him.
[2.] An instruction how to consider the properties of God by faith for our advantage; that is, as engaged in the person of the Son of God for our good. Absolutely considered they may fill us with dread and terror, as they did them of old who concluded, when they thought they had seen God or heard his voice, that they should die. Considered as his properties who is our Redeemer, they are always relieving and comforting, Isa 54:4-5.
II. The whole old creation, even the most glorious parts of it, hastening unto its period, at least of our present interest in it and use of it, calls upon us not to fix our hearts on the small perishing shares which we have therein, especially since we have Him who is omnipotent and eternal for our inheritance. The figure or fashion of this world, the apostle tells us, is passing away, that lovely appearance which it hath at present unto us; it is hastening unto its period; it is a fading, dying thing, that can yield us no true satisfaction.
III. The Lord Christ, the mediator, the head and spouse of the church, is infinitely exalted above all creatures whatever, in that he is God over all, omnipotent and eternal.
IV. The whole world, the heavens and earth, being made by the Lord Christ, and being to be dissolved by him, is wholly at his disposal; to be ordered for the good of them that do believe. And therefore,
V. There is no just cause of fear unto believers from any thing in heaven or earth, seeing they are all of the making and at the disposal of Jesus Christ.
VI. Whatever our changes may be, inward or outward, yet Christ changing not, our eternal condition is secured, and relief provided against all present troubles and miseries. The immutability and eternity of Christ are the spring of our consolation and security in every condition. The sum of all is, that,
VII. Such is the frailty of the nature of man, and such the perishing condition of all created things, that none can ever obtain the least stable consolation but what ariseth from an interest in the omnipotency, sovereignty, and eternity of the Lord Christ.
This, I say, is that which the words insisted on, as they are used in the psalm, do instruct us in; and this therefore we may a little further improve.
This is that which we are instructed in by the ministry of John Baptist:
Isa 40:6-8, the voice cried,
All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field: the grass withereth, the flower fadeth; because the Spirit of the LORD bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass. The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
All is grass, fading grass. Though it bloom and appear goodly for a little season, yet there is no continuance, no consistency in it. Every wind that passeth over it causeth it to wither. This is the best of flesh, of all that in and by ourselves we are, we do, we enjoy, or hope for. The crown of the pride of man and his glorious beauty is but a fading flower, Isa 28:1. What joy, what peace, what rest, can be taken in things that are dying away in our hands, that perish before every breath of wind that passeth over them? Where, then, shall this poor creature, so frail in itself, in its actings, in its enjoyments, seek for rest, consolation, and satisfaction? In this alone, that the Word of the Lord abides for ever, in the eternally abiding Word of God; that is, the Lord Christ as preached in the gospel. So Peter applies these words, 1Pe 1:25. By an interest in him alone, his eternity and unchangeableness, may relief be obtained against the consideration of this perishing, dying state and condition of all things. Thus the psalmist tells us that verily every man at his best state is altogether vanity, Psa 39:5; and thence takes the conclusion now insisted on, Psa 39:7, And now, Lord, seeing it is thus, seeing this is the condition of mankind, what is thence to be looked after? what is to be expected? Nothing at all, not the least of use or comfort. What wait I for? my hope is in thee; from thee alone, as a God eternal, pardoning and saving, do I look for relief. Man, indeed, in this condition seeks oftentimes for satisfaction from himself, from what he is, and doth, and enjoys, and what he shall leave after him; comforting himself against his own frailty with an eternity that he fancieth to himself in his posterity, and their enjoyment of his goods and inheritance. So the psalmist tells us, Psa 49:11,
Their inward thought is, that their houses shall continue for ever, and their dwelling-places to all generations: they call their lands after their own names.
They see, indeed, that all men die, wise men and fools, Psa 49:10, and cannot but from thence observe their own frailty. Wherefore they are resolved to make provision against it; they will perpetuate their posterity and their inheritance. This they make use of to relieve them in their inmost imaginations. But what censure doth the Holy Ghost pass upon this contrivance, Psa 49:12? Nevertheless, saith he, notwithstanding all these imaginations, man being in honor abideth not: he is like the beasts that perish: which he further proves, Psa 49:17-20, showing fully that he himself is no way concerned in the imaginary perpetuity of his possessions; which, as they are all of them perishing things, so himself dies and fades away whilst he is in the contemplation of their endurance. And the truth proposed may be further evidenced by the ensuing considerations:
1. Man was made for eternity. He was not called out of nothing to return unto it again. When he once is, he is for ever; not as to his present state, that is frail and changeable, but as to his existence in one condition or other. God made him for his eternal glory, and gave him therefore a subsistence without end. Had he been created to continue a day, a month, a year, a thousand years, things commensurate unto that space of time might have afforded him satisfaction; but he is made for ever.
2. He is sensible of his condition. Many, indeed, endeavor to cast off the thoughts of it. They would fain hope that they shall be no longer than they are here. In that case they could find enough, as they suppose, to satisfy them in the things that are like themselves. But this will not be.
They find a witness in themselves to the contrary; somewhat that assures them of an after reckoning, and that the things which now they do will be called over in another world. Besides, the conviction of the word, with them that enjoy it, puts the matter out of question. They cannot evade the testimony it gives unto their eternal subsistence.
3. Hence men are exposed to double trouble and perplexity: First, That whereas their eternal subsistence, as to the enjoyment of good or bad, depends upon their present life, that is frail, fading, perishing. They are here now; but when a few days are come and gone, they must go to the place from whence they shall not return. They find their subsistence divided into two very unequal parts, a few days and eternity, and the latter to be regulated by the former. This fills them with anxiety, and makes them sometimes weary of life, sometimes hate it, almost always solicitous about it, and to bewail the frailty of it. Secondly, That no perishing thing will afford them relief or supportment in this condition, how should it? They and these are parting every moment, and that for eternity. There is no comfort in a perpetual taking leave of things that are beloved. Such is the life of man as unto all earthly enjoyments. It is but a parting with what a man hath; and the longer a man is about it, the more trouble he hath with it. The things of this creation will not continue our lives here, because of our frailty; they will not accompany us unto eternity, because of their own frailty. We change, and they change; we are vanity, and they are no better.
4. An interest in the omnipotency, sovereignty, and eternity of the Lord Christ will yield a soul relief and satisfaction in this condition. There is that in them which is suited to relieve us under our present frailty, and to give satisfaction unto our future eternity; for,
(1.) What we have not in ourselves, by an interest in Christ we have in another. In him we have stability and unchangeableness; for what he is in himself, he is unto us and for us. All our concernments are wrapped up and secured in him. He is ours: and though we in our own persons change, yet he changeth not, nor our interest in him, which is our life, our all. Though we die, yet he dieth not; and because he liveth, we shall live also. Though all other things perish and pass away that we here make use of, yet he abideth a blessed and satisfying portion unto a believing soul: for as we are his, so all his is ours; only laid up in him and kept for us in him. So that under all disconsolations that may befall us from our own frailty and misery, and the perishing condition of outward things, we have sweet relief tendered us in this, that we have all good things treasured up for us in him. And faith knows how to make use of all that is in Christ, to the comfort and supportment of the soul.
(2.) When our frailty and changeableness have had their utmost effect upon us, when they have done their worst upon us, they only bring us to the full enjoyment of what the Lord Christ is unto us, that is, an exceeding great reward, and a full satisfaction unto eternity. Then shall we live for ever in that which we now live upon, being present with him, beholding his glory, and made partakers of it. So that both here and hereafter there is relief, comfort, and satisfaction for believers, laid up in the excellencies of the person of Jesus Christ. And this should teach us,
[1.] The misery of those who have no interest in him, and have therefore nothing to relieve themselves against the evils of any condition. All their hopes are in this life, and from the enjoyments of it. When these are once past, they will be eternally and in all things miserable, miserable beyond our expression or their apprehension. And what is this life? A vapor, that appeareth for a little while. What are the enjoyments of this life? Dying, perishing things; and unto them, fuel to lust, and so to hell. Suppose they live twenty, thirty, forty, sixty years, yet every day they fear, or ought to fear, that it will be their last. Some die oft every day from the first to the last of the utmost extent of the life of man: so that every day may be the last to any one; and whose then will be all their treasures of earthly things? And the relief which men have against the tormenting fears that the frailty of their condition doth expose them unto is no whit better than their troubles. It is sinful security, which gives the fullness of their misery an advantage to surprise them, and themselves an advantage to aggravate that misery by the increase of their sin. In the meantime, spes sibi quisque, every ones hope is in himself alone; which makes it perpetually like the giving up of the ghost. Surely the contentment that dying man can take in dying things is very contemptible. We must not stay to discover the miseries of the life of man, and the weakness of the comforts and joys of it; but whatever they be, what becomes of them when they have serious thoughts of their present frailty and future eternity? This following eternity is like :Pharaohs lean kine, which immediately devours all the fat pleasures of this present life, and yet continues as lean and miserable as ever. The eternal misery of men will not be in the least eased, yea, it will be greatened, by the enjoyments of this life, when once it hath devoured them. And this is the portion of them that have no interest in the eternity and immutability of the Son of God. Their present frailty makes them continually fear eternity, and their fear of eternity imbitters all things that they should use for the relief of their frailty; and that security which they provide against both increaseth their misery, by sin here and suffering hereafter. [2.] This also will teach us how to use these earthly things, how dying persons should use dying creatures; that is, to use them for our present service and necessity, but not as those that look after rest or satisfaction in them, which they will not afford us. Use the world, but live on Christ.
[3.] Not to despond under a sense of our present frailty. We see what blessed relief is provided against our fainting on that account.
Fuente: An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews
Christ And His Angels
Christ our Savior
Christ Jesus is the Creator of all things (Heb 1:10). Our Redeemer, our Mediator, our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ is the sovereign Creator. These verses (10-14) are addressed to our Lord Jesus Christ. Throughout this passage great emphasis is laid upon his deity, eternality, wisdom, excellence, and glory as God the Son.
Everything in this sin cursed earth is marked for destruction (Heb 1:11). How I wish we could learn this. It is all going to be burned soon. The heavens and the earth in their present form shall pass away (Rom 8:19-22).
Soon, our Lord will come again. He will purge all creation with fire. He will remove the curse. He will create a new heaven and a new earth, purified and without sin. But Christ remains as he is, without change, the same yesterday, today, and forever (Isa 51:6; Mal 3:6; Heb 13:8).
When our clothes wear out and lose their beauty and usefulness, we fold them up, lay them aside, and replace them with new garments. That is what our Lord is going to do with this world (Heb 1:12). When it has served its purpose, he will fold it up, put it away, and create something better. Yet, he is forever immutable, unchangeable in his nature, in his person, in his offices, and in the virtue of his blood and righteousness. What a consolation this is for our souls! To rest and trust in him is never to die or be ashamed (Job 19:23-27).
Sent Forth to Minister
“To which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? (Heb 1:13). God the Father never said anything like this to a mere angel. He never promised dominion to them. He did not prepare a throne for them. This high honor is reserved for Christ, alone.
What, then, are the angels? How do we account for them? What is their purpose? Read Heb 1:14. Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? The angels are servants to the Father, to the Son, and to his people (his elect who shall be heirs of salvation). But how do the angels of God minister to those who shall be the heirs of salvation? They serve Gods elect before conversion in prevenient grace, protecting their lives. After conversion, they secretly and constantly continue to watch over and care for believing sinners. At death, the angels of God carry Gods Lazaruses up to Glory. And at the resurrection, they will gather the dust of our flesh into our bodily forms again.
Let us ever thank God for his holy angels; but we do not worship them. We worship Christ, who created, rules, and sends the angels to keep us in our ways and bring us safely into glory, where we shall be the heirs of salvation forever!
Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible
Thou: Psa 102:25-27
in: Gen 1:1, Joh 1:1-3, Rev 3:14
hast: Pro 8:29, Isa 42:5, Isa 48:13, Isa 51:13, Jer 32:17, Zec 12:1
the works: Deu 4:19, Psa 8:3, Psa 8:4, Psa 19:1, Isa 64:8
Reciprocal: Job 38:4 – I Psa 90:2 – even from Psa 93:2 – thou Psa 104:2 – stretchest Pro 8:25 – General Isa 40:12 – measured Isa 40:22 – stretcheth Isa 44:24 – by myself Jer 27:5 – made Lam 5:19 – remainest Hab 1:12 – thou not Mar 13:31 – Heaven Joh 1:3 – General Joh 8:58 – Before Joh 17:5 – glorify Col 1:16 – by him were 2Th 2:13 – from Rev 1:4 – him Rev 4:11 – for thou
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Heb 1:10. This and the following two verses are quoted from Psa 102:24-27. David was the famous ancestor of Christ, yet he recognizes him as his Lord (Mat 22:43-45). The work of creation is ascribed to Christ because he was associated with his Father in that work. It is so taught in Joh 1:1-3, and it is indicated likewise by the plural pronoun “us” in Gen 1:26 Gen 3:22.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
The Apologists Bible Commentary
Hebrews 1
10 – 1210 AND YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS; 11 THEY WILL PERISH, BUT YOU REMAIN; AND THEY ALL WILL BECOME OLD LIKE A GARMENT, 12 AND LIKE A MANTLE YOU WILL ROLL THEM UP; LIKE A GARMENT THEY WILL ALSO BE CHANGED. BUT YOU ARE THE SAME, AND YOUR YEARS WILL NOT COME TO AN END.”
C O M M E N T A R YThe author of Hebrews here introduces the sixth quotation from the Old Testament in his catena in praise of the Son (which runs from verse 1 through verse 15). This quote comes from Psalm 102:25 – 27 (LXX 101:25 – 27). This psalm begins, “Hear my prayer, O YHWH!” The psalmist and his beloved city, Zion, have been subjected to God’s judgment. He cries out in his affliction, petitioning God for mercy and restoration. While he feels the weight of his own mortality (v. 11), he nonetheless praises God. Even though the heavens and the earth will ultimately wear out like a well-worn coat, God is eternal and does not change. In Brenton’s translation of the Septuagint, the verses quoted by the Hebrews author read: Psa 102:25 (101:25) In the beginning thou, O Lord, didst lay the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands. Psa 102:26 (101:26) They shall perish, but thou remainest: and they all shall wax old as a garment; and as a vesture shalt thou fold them, and they shall be changed. Psa 102:27 (101:27) But thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail. It is God’s eternal nature that provides the psalmist comfort in the midst of his suffering, for just as God’s years “will not come to an end,” so too will God’s chosen children prosper forever (v. 28). The words of the Psalmist addresses to YHWH are here addressed to the Son. Further, it is clear that they are to be understood as being spoken by the Father Himself (the connecting “and” which begins verse 10 links what follows with “But of the Son, He says…” in verse 8) . But what does the Hebrews author intend by this? Are we to understand that the Father is attributing to the Son the same role in creation and the same eternality ascribed to YHWH in Psalm 102? Despite the claims of some (see Other Views Considered, below), we answer “yes” in both cases. There are two crucial points leading us to this conclusion: 1. The context of the quote – in both its original and Hebrews setting – is the contrast between the Creator and the creation. The Creator is eternal while the creation is temporal. The Psalmist draws comfort from this fact: God is in complete control of His creation and His eternal, unchanging nature secures for Zion the fulfillment of the promises God has made to her. The Hebrews author exalts the Son on the basis of His radical distinction from the created order of Heaven and the angels. He has already said in verse 2 that it was through the Son that the universe was made. The angels were mere spectators when the world was made (Job 38:7), but the universe came “through” the Son’s agency. Lest we understand the Son’s role in creation as being passive, the inspired author quotes the Father as saying: You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundations of the earth; And the heavens are the work of your hands Thus, the Son is given the same active role in creation attributed to YHWH in Psalm 102. The Son is both agent and active participant in creation. He is, therefore, vastly superior to the angels, who are “ministering spirits” and “servants” (verse 14). First century readers would have had no difficulty in understanding who “laid the foundations of the earth” – only YHWH was the hands-on creator of all things. If Christ is given this honor, He must have been YHWH – yet somehow distinct from the Father who here addresses Him. 2. The Father calls the Son “Lord.” While “Lord” (Greek kurios) can merely be a title ascribed to men or angels, it is also the word used in most LXX manuscripts to render the Divine Name, YHWH. This is likely the sense it carries in the LXX translation of Psalm 102. When used in the Bible as an honorific, “lord” always signifies that the one addressed is superior in rank or social station to the speaker. There are no exceptions. Thus, if the Father calls the Son “lord” in this sense, it would mean that He acknowledges the Son as superior to Himself in rank. While this usage is possible, it would seem to contradict the numerous times the Father is spoken as being superior to the Son. It is better, then, to understand “Lord” to mean YHWH, as it was in its original setting. The person here addressed, as the Lord or Jehovah, and as the Maker of the heavens and the earth, is the same with the Son spoken to, and of, before; for the words are a continuation of the speech to him, though they are taken from another psalm, from Psa 102:25. The phrase, “thou, Lord” is taken from Psa 102:12 and is the same with, “O my God”, Psa 102:24 and whereas it is there said, “of old”, and here, in the beginning, the sense is the same; and agreeably to the Septuagint, and the apostle, Jarchi interprets it by “at”, or “from the beginning”; and so the Targum paraphrases it, “from the beginning”, that the creatures were created, &c. that in the beginning of the creation, which is the apostle’s meaning; and shows the eternity of Christ, the Lord, the Creator of the earth, who must exist before the foundation of the world; and confutes the notion of the eternity of the world: and the rounding of it shows that the earth is the lower part of the creation; and denotes the stability of it; and points out the wisdom of the Creator in laying such a foundation; and proves the deity of Christ, by whom that, and all things in it, were made. (Gill ).
O T H E R V I E W S C O N S I D E R E DJehovah’s Witnesses by Sam Shamoun Hebrews and Jesus as Creator The NT states that the Lord Jesus is the Creator of all things. For instance, the inspired author of Hebrews writes: But about the Son he says ‘In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. They will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment. You will roll them up like a robe; like a garment they will be changed. But you remain the same, and your years will never end.’ Hebrews 1:8a, 10-12. The author has the Father addressing the Son as the actual Creator of the cosmos. The inspired author applies to the Son an OT passage which refers to Yahweh’s work in creation: ‘O my God,’ I say, ‘take me not hence in the midst of my days, thou whose years endure throughout all generations!’ Of old thou didst lay the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands. They will perish, but thou dost endure; they will all wear out like a garment. Thou changest them like raiment, and they pass away; but thou art the same, and thy years have no end. Psalm 102:24-27 RSV. Amazingly, the OT elsewhere states that Yahweh ALONE stretched out the heavens: He speaks to the sun and it does not shine; he seals off the light of the stars. He ALONE stretches out the heavens and treads on the waves of the sea. Job 9:7-8 NIV. For the author of Hebrews to write that the Son personally laid the foundations of the earth and that the heavens are the work of his hands means that the author truly believed that the Son was Yahweh God (yet not the Father), the very eternal Creator himself! Note for instance the following syllogism: 1. Yahweh God created the heavens with his own hands and he alone stretched them out. 2. The Son created the heavens with his own hands. 3. Therefore, the Son is Yahweh God. Jehovah’s Witness apologist Greg Stafford takes issue with this conclusion. In his book, Stafford tries to address the inspired writer’s application of Psalm 102:25-27 to the Son: It will be shown that in 1 Corinthians 8:6 the apostle Paul makes a careful distinction between the ‘one God’ (the Father) as the one ‘out of [ ex (hereafter transliterated as ek)] whom all things are,’ and Jesus Christ as the one ‘through [di, a contraction of dia] whom’ all things came into being Clearly, then, in context Hebrews 1:10-12 could not be teaching that Jesus is the Creator, for here, in the opening words to the Hebrews, it is clearly stated that God made all things ‘through’ His Son. Since Jesus’ role in creation has already been discussed (Heb. 1:3), it is not likely that in verses 10-12 the author would return to the same point he has explained earlier. It could be that these verses from Psalm 102 are appropriately applied to the Son of God in view of his being the preexistent Wisdom spoken of in Proverbs 8. There he is described as a ‘master worker’ alongside his Creator, Jehovah. (Pr 8:22-31) B. W. Bacon acknowledges, ‘The passage could be made to prove the doctrine that the Messiah is none other than the preexistent Wisdom of Prov 8, 22-31, through whom according to our author [the author of Hebrews], v.2, God made the worlds.’ It would certainly be appropriate to refer to the heavens and the earth as ‘the work of Christ’s hands’ in a secondary sense in view of his being mediator of the creative acts of Jehovah God. Indeed, as the ‘master craftsman’ Jesus was very much involved in Jehovah’s works. (Pr 8:30, Jerusalem Bible) Still, there seems to be another reason why Paul applies verses 25-27 of the 102nd Psalm to God’s beloved Son. (Stafford , pp. 171-174; emphasis added). Stafford is operating under a certain set of assumptions that forbids him from allowing the text to say what it does in fact say. Stafford assumes that since Jesus is the instrumental cause of creation, the heavens and the earth can only be the creative works of Christ solely in a secondary sense. He reiterates this point in his response to Evangelical apologist Ron Rhodes: A conflict with ‘Christ as the Creator’? Rhodes believes that Revelation 3:14 means that Christ is the ‘beginner’ of God’s creation, thinking that this interpretation harmonizes with other New Testament passages about Christ as Creator. Rhodes then cites Colossians 1:16, 17, Hebrews 1:2, and John 1:3 as examples of other passages that he believes teach that Christ is the Creator. One of the problems with Rhodes’ argument is there are no other ‘New Testament passages about Christ as Creator.’ The three verses he cites speak of what God did through Christ. Rather than speak of Christ as the Creator, the Bible consistently uses language of Jesus that could never be used of an eternal almighty God, and which reveals the simple truth that Jesus lives ‘because of the Father’ (Joh 6:57) (Ibid., p. 239; emphasis added). Stafford has erroneously assumed that the language used in relation to Christ’s role in creating the cosmos demonstrates that he is not the almighty God. Yet an examination of how the preposition dia is used elsewhere, specifically in reference to God, shows that the biblical language affirms beyond any reasonable doubt that Jesus is the eternal almighty God! For from him and THROUGH (di’) him and FOR (eis) him are all things. To him be glory forever! Amen. Romans 11:36 NAB In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, FOR (eis) whom and THROUGH (di’) whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering. Hebrews 2:10 NIV God is not simply the efficient cause (from) cause of creation, he is also the instrumental (through) and final (for) cause of it. Paul elsewhere ascribes to Jesus the function of both instrumental and final cause of all things: 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 (di’) whom all things came and through (di’) whom we live. 1 Corinthians 8:6 NIV. For IN (en) him ALL things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; ALL things were created THROUGH (di’) him and FOR (eis) him. He is before all things, AND IN (en) HIM ALL THINGS HOLD TOGETHER. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. Colossians 1:16-18 For Jesus to be given two of God’s functions in creating all things demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt that Jesus is THE CREATOR in an active sense, which makes him Yahweh God (yet not the Father)! This identical use of language in relation to God’s role in creation emphatically affirms that the Lord Jesus is the Creator in a primary and active sense. As NT scholar Richard Bauckham states in relation to Paul’s claim that all things are from God and through Christ: The description in its undivided, unmodified form is used elsewhere by Paul, specifically in Romans 11:36a: ‘from him and through him and to him [are] all things’. Here the statement simply refers to God, whereas in 1 Corinthians 8:6 Paul has divided it between God and Christ, applying to God two of the prepositions that describe God’s relationship as Creator to all things (‘from’ and ‘for’ or ‘to’) and the third of these prepositions (‘through’) to Christ. Although Paul’s formula in Romans 11:36 does not appear precisely in this form elsewhere, there are enough Jewish parallels to make it certain that Paul there simply quotes a Jewish formulation. That God is not only the agent or efficient cause of creation (‘from him are all things’) and the final cause or goal of all things (‘to him are all things’), but also the instrumental cause (‘through whom are all things’) well expresses the typical Jewish monotheistic concern that God used no one else to carry out his work of creation, but accomplished it alone, solely by means of his own Word and/or his own Wisdom. Paul’s reformulation in 1 Corinthians 8:6 includes Christ in this exclusively divine work of creation by giving to him the role of instrumental cause. (Bauckham , p. 39 emphasis added). The Pseudepigrapha provides support for Bauckham’s claims: “O sovereign Lord, didst thou not speak at the beginning when thou didst form the earth — AND THAT WITHOUT HELP– and didst command the dust and it gave thee Adam, a lifeless body? Yet he was the workmanship of thy hands, and thou didst breathe into him the breath of life, and he was made alive in thy presence.” 4 Ezra 3:4-5 RSV. “then I planned these things, and they were made THROUGH ME AND NOT THROUGH ANOTHER, just as the end shall come through me and not through another.” 4 Ezra 6:6 RSV. “This name was very appropriately bestowed upon him by our first ancestors, in order to signify that He THROUGH whom all things are endowed with life and come into being, is necessarily the ruler and lord of the Universe. Set all mankind an example of magnanimity by releasing those who are held in bondage.” Letter of Aristeas 16 RSV. Hence, the role of Christ in creation persuasively shows that the Lord Jesus is indeed the Creator of all things . An additional problem with Stafford’s reasoning is that it commits the fallacy of false dilemma. Evidently, Stafford assumes that Jesus cannot be the Agent of creation while at the same time being the actual cause of creation. Yet, this is a dilemma that Stafford imposes upon the text since the inspired author had no problem in viewing Jesus as both the Creator as well as the instrumental Agent of creation. In relation to the Father, Christ is the Agent through which all things came into being. Yet, in relation to creation both the Father and the Son, along with the Holy Spirit, are the one Creator with all three Persons being fully responsible for bringing all things into existence (Cf. Genesis 1:2, 26-27; Job 33:4; Psalm 104:30) . Let us also not forget that according to the author of Hebrews it is the Father himself who personally addresses his Son as THE Creator of the cosmos! Stafford continues: Is it to prove that Jesus Christ is ‘Jehovah God of the Old Testament’ that the author of Hebrews makes such an application of Psalm 102? Again, those who embrace the doctrine of the Trinity would likely answer, ‘Yes, the fact that a verse was originally applied to God, and later applied to the Son proves that he is Jehovah God of the Old Testament.’ Using this type of reasoning one might feel justified in concluding that Solomon was Jesus Christ! Why? Because in the verses just previous to Hebrews 1:10-12 Paul wrote: ‘But reference to the Son: God is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of your kingdom is the scepter of uprightness. You loved righteousness, and you hated lawlessness. That is why God, your God, anointed you with the oil of exultation more than your partners.’ (Heb 1:8-9) As we have already discussed the translation ‘God is your throne’ in this chapter, we simply want to point out that these words were originally addressed to Solomon in Psalm 45:6-7, but here in Hebrews 1:8-9 they are applied to the Lord Jesus Christ. The book Reasoning from the Scriptures, page 414, adds more to the point: It should be observed in Hebrews 1:5b that a quotation is made from 2 Samuel 7:14 and applied to the Son of God. Although that text had its first application to Solomon, the later application of it to Jesus Christ does not mean that Solomon and Jesus are the same. Jesus is ‘greater than Solomon’ and carries out a work foreshadowed by Solomon-Luke 11:31. Paul no more intended to identify Jesus with Jehovah than he intended to identify Solomon with Jesus. He did, however, apply certain concepts and ideas expressed in those verses that were originally applied to Jehovah God and Solomon, to the Son of God. The application of Psalm 45:6-7 to Jesus at Hebrews 1:8-9 shows that God is the source of Jesus’ royal office and authority. Because Jesus ‘loved righteousness and hated lawlessness,’ Jehovah ‘anointed him with the oil of exultation.’ Paul’s words are, ‘God, your God [ho theos sou; lit. ‘the God of you’],’ when referring to the One who anointed Jesus. Jehovah was both the source of Solomon’s royal authority as well as his God. The same is true of the Lord Jesus Christ. Jehovah is the source of his authority and is also his God (compare Da 713,14; Mt 28:18; Php 2:9,10; Rev 3:2,12) (Ibid., pp. 172-173; emphasis added). Stafford commits several fallacies here. First, Stafford begs the question since he assumes that Yahweh is unipersonal and proceeds to read this into the text. Because of this assumption, Stafford argues that the application of Psalm 102 to Christ no more proves that Jesus is Yahweh then the application of 2 Samuel 7 and Psalm 45 to Christ prove that Jesus is Solomon. Yet, this example simply highlights Stafford’s post-biblical 19th century a priori assumption that Yahweh God is one in Being and one in Person much like Solomon is one being and one person. Hence, his analogy may work with Solomon since he is obviously a unipersonal Being, but it does not work with Yahweh unless, of course, one has already assumed that Yahweh is a unipersonal Being like Solomon. Another reason why Stafford’s analogy here is erroneous is that kingship is not a trait which was unique to Solomon alone since there were many kings in Israel. Hence, attributing to Christ a passage that originally referred to Solomon only shows that Solomon wasn’t the only person to rule over Israel. Yet, only Yahweh has the characteristics of eternity, immutability and creatorship. For a writer to therefore apply a passage that highlights some of Yahweh’s incommunicable attributes to Christ shows that the authors of the NT believed that Jesus is Yahweh God! Evangelical scholar Dr. James R. White sums it up best: The connection between the Lord Jesus and Solomon has to do with a shared characteristic: kingship. But kingship is not a unique attribute of Solomon. There have been many kings. So while citing a passage about Solomon of Jesus doesn’t make Jesus Solomon, citing a passage about a unique characteristic (creatorship, immutability, eternality) of Yahweh does make Jesus Yahweh, for no one else shares that characteristic. Being a king didn’t make Solomon who he was, but being eternal and unchangeable does define who Yahweh is. (White , p. 135) Furthermore, Stafford is seemingly unaware that his argument actually reinforces the Trinitarian position. For instance, both Jesus and Solomon were descendents of David, divinely appointed kings and royal sons of God. The two share similar titles and functions without this making them the same person. Likewise, in applying to Christ a passage originally referring to Yahweh God shows that the author of Hebrews believed that the Father isn’t the only One who is immutable, eternal and the one Creator of the cosmos; the Son is also! The application of Psalm 102 to Jesus proves that the Son, much like the Father, is the one true God. That both the Father and the Son perform works that the Holy Bible says that only Yahweh performs shows that Yahweh is a multipersonal Being. It does not show that the Son is the same person as the Father, but that the Son is the same in nature and essence. It is primarily Stafford’s erroneous and unbiblical position regarding the Father alone being Yahweh that leads him to argue in the manner that he does. He erroneously assumes that Unitarianism is a theological given, as opposed to allowing the Holy Bible to clarify the exact nature and existence of the true God; whether in fact the scriptures teach Yahweh is multipersonal as opposed to being unipersonal. Hence, Stafford’s analogy of Solomon and Jesus in trying to undermine Jesus’ identification with Yahweh only shows that his reasoning is flawed and is guilty of committing the fallacy of false analogy, as well as straw man argumentation. It does nothing to refute the Trinitarian position. In fact, it actually misrepresents what Trinitarians believe. Stafford’s criticism of the Trinitarian position serves to demonstrate the inconsistency of the hermeneutics employed by Witness apologists and severely undermines their claim that Christ is the archangel Michael. It is quite common for Witness Apologists to assert that since Michael and Jesus share similar functions they must be one and the same person. Witnesses feel that it is perfectly consistent to argue from their similarities that Jesus is Michael, despite the fact that not a single NT passage explicitly states that Jesus is Michael! The Witness then cries foul when Trinitarians conclude that Jesus is Yahweh even though this position is based on the fact that OT passages which specifically refer to Yahweh along with titles, attributes, functions and the worship given exclusively to Yahweh alone are applied to Christ! It is quite evident that the Witness apologist is guilty of a double standard, employing a methodology that they only too quickly condemn Trinitarians for using. This is simply religious hypocrisy. Stafford then commits a categorical fallacy since he assumes that since the Father is Jesus’ God and the source of his authority, this somehow proves that Jesus is not the same kind of God that the Father is. This fails to take into consideration that at the incarnation Christ truly became man and set aside his authority by taking the form of a slave. (Cf. John 1:14; 2 Corinthians 8:9; Philippians 2:5-8). By becoming man and setting aside his authority, Jesus became subject to the Father. Jesus also entered into a new relationship with the Father. Whereas prior to the incarnation Christ related to the Father specifically as a Son, now after becoming flesh the Father became Jesus’ God due to Christ willfully becoming part of the very creation he came to redeem. Since Christ retains his humanity (contrary to what Stafford would like to believe) the Father will continue to be Jesus’ God. Cf. Rev. 1:6; 3:2, 12. In order for Stafford’s argument to work he needs to present a single passage where the Father is said to be Jesus’ God even before the Incarnation. If Stafford can show such a verse he may have a case. Yet, if he cannot produce such a passage then Stafford’s claim that Jesus has a God does nothing to refute the Trinitarian position. Stafford might offer Micah 5:4 as evidence that the Father was God to the Son in His preexistence. Yet this is a messianic prophecy, and as such refers to the Messiah AFTER the incarnation. (Cf. Micah 5:1-3) Therefore the appeal to Micah 5:4 will not establish the JW position. Stafford tries to deny the immutability of Christ’s eternal Deity by claiming that Psalm 102 refers to Jesus’ exaltation during which time he became immortal. (Ibid., pp. 173-174) The problem with Stafford’s reasoning is that Psalm 102 does not refer to Christ’s post-resurrection exaltation. Rather, it refers to Jesus’ pre-incarnate state when Christ created the cosmos. The inspired author is clearly saying that from the very time that creation came into being Christ remains the same. Christ has always been and will continue to be immutable: Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday and today and forever. Hebrews 13:8 NIV. The only thing that became different is that at the incarnation Christ took on human flesh. Yet Jesus’ divine nature never changed since he never ceased being God even while on earth. At the resurrection, Christ’s physical body became immortal and no longer experiences change. It is quite evident that an accurate reading of the Holy Bible shows that the Lord Jesus isn’t simply a passive agent that God worked through to create all things. The Lord Jesus is the active agent of creation, the very One whom the Father acknowledges as the Creator of the universe. It is rather unfortunate that Stafford’s post-biblical, 19th century theology prohibits him from seeing this divinely revealed truth. Notes 1. See B.W. Bacon, “Heb 1, 10-12 and the Septuagint Rendering of Ps 102, 23,” ZNW [1902], 280-85″ for discussion on the Christological significance of the differences between the LXX and the Masoretic Text of Psalm 102. 2. In the three verses cited by Stafford (John 1:3; Hebrews 1:2; 1 Corinthians 8:6) and in the two I have cited (Romans 11:36; Hebrews 2:10), dia is followed by a genitive, and thus generally means “through, by means of.” BADG lists the first three verses under the definition, “denoting the personal agent or intermediary, through.” It lists the second two under the definition, “of the originator of an action.” However, other than the subject (Christ vs. God the Father), there is no grammatical difference between the usage of dia in each of these verses. Indeed, the Greek of Hebrews 2:10 and 1 Corinthians 8:6 is identical: di’ hou ta panta (“through whom are all things”). Thus, despite Stafford’s assertion otherwise, the Biblical authors speak of creation as coming “through” both Father and Son. 3. In an online debate with Robert Hommel on the subject of the Julius Mantey Letter (see here ), Stafford takes issue with Bauckham’s citation of these passages from 4 Ezra: 4 Ezra is preserved in Latin, Syriac, Ethiopic, Armenian and Arabic manuscripts, and portions in Coptic, Georgian and a “tiny scrap” of Greek from the 4th century CE. The oldest Latin Codex containing 4 Ezra is dated to 822 CE (Metzger, OTP1, page 518). The oldest Syriac version is the Peshitta. Metzger agrees with most other scholars in dating this book to the early part of the second century CE. Thus, dating to a time after the writing of the NT books. Mr. Hommel refers to 4 Ezra 3:4 as evidence that “2nd Temple Jews believed quite clearly that Jehovah acted alone as the Creator, to the exclusion of even a helper.” The text reads: “O sovereign Lord, did you not speak at the beginning when you formed the earth–and that without help—and commanded the dust and it gave you Adam, a lifeless body?” So, once again, we see that this refers to God’s creative acts, which Jehovah’s Witnesses DO NOT believe were shared by anyone else. God ALONE created through his Son, the Logos. That is why the PASSIVE verb forms are used in Col. 1:16-17, in relation to the Firstborn’s role. Also, since this is the work of a post-first-century Jew, it may be that he is contradicting popular view about God and the Logos, prevalent in Christian circles (Second Reply to Robert Hommel). The fact is that scholars regularly cite 4 Ezra as indicative of Jewish thought during the 2nd Temple period, and indeed in his published work, Stafford does so himself (Stafford , pp. 314, 555-56). Stafford has recently cited a Pseudepigraphal work that would seem far most susceptible to the “post-first-century” criticism than 4 Ezra: I specifically mentioned the Jewish Pseudepigraphal figure Metatron, of whom we read in 3 Enoch 48C:7: quote: ——————— I bestowed on him some of my majesty, some of my magnificence, some of the splendor of my glory, which is on the throne of glory, and I called him by my name, `The lesser YHWH, Prince of the Divine Presence, knower of secrets.’ Every secret I have revealed to him in love, every mystery I have made known to him in uprightness. ———————– Additionally, in 3 Enoch 10:3-6 we are also told that “eight” other princes are “called YHWH by the name of their King,” and 3 Enoch 30:1 speaks of “the great princes who are called YHWH by the name of the Holy One.” In 3 Enoch 30:2 the question is asked: “How many princes are there? There are 72 princes of kingdoms in the world, not counting the Prince of the World”! Clearly, then, in Jewish literature in and around the time of Jesus and the apostles one could be “called YHWH” or even be considered a “lesser YHWH” without being equal to or “one in nature” with YHWH Himself (Posted by GregStafford on Tue – May 6, 2003 – 3:52pm: ). While 4 Ezra dates to early in the 2nd Century, 3 Enoch is much later: 3 Enoch, or the Hebrew Apocalypse of Enoch, was supposedly written by Rabbi Ishmael the ‘high priest’ after his visionary ascension into heaven (d. 132 C.E.). Although it contains a few Greek and Latin loan words, there is no reason to suspect that the original language of 3 Enoch was anything other than Hebrew. Whereas some of the traditions of 3 Enoch may be traced back to the time of Rabbi Ishmael, and even earlier, the date of composition is probably closer to the fifth or sixth centuries. It was probably written in or near Babylon. (Evans, Noncanonical Writings and New Testament Interpretation, (1992) p. 24). Thus, if Stafford views a fifth century text as valuable in determining Jewish theology circa 70a.d., he can have no reasonable objection to one dating within 60 years of that date. 4. Stafford takes exception to Trinitarians distinguishing Christ’s role in creation from the Father’s role, as opposed to saying God’s role, asserting that we are somehow pouring into these terms post-biblical language and concepts. In his response to Dr. James R. White, Stafford writes: Having reviewed all the above points regarding John 1:1, it may be helpful to remind ourselves of White’s claim. He writes: Stafford notes that God created all things through the Son (Hebrews 1:2), and writes, ‘Clearly, then, in context Hebrews 1:10-12 could not be teaching that Jesus is the Creator, for here, in the opening words to the Hebrews, it is clearly stated that God made all things through His Son’ (p. 48). This is circular argumentation, for it assumes that conclusion Stafford wishes to reach. It assumes unitarianism. The fact that the Son is differentiated from the Father is admitted by all. But unless one assumes that the term ‘God’ must always and only refer solely to the Father (unitarianism), the entire argument collapses (The Forgotten Trinity, page 216, note 6) You will note that my appeal is to the first part of Hebrews 1 where God, not simply the Father, is distinguished from the Son. Of course, White again substitutes the ontological term for the personal one, and this will be discussed again under point five. However, note how my argument is presented. QUOTE FROM JWD1, pages 48-49: Clearly, then, in context Hebrews 1:10-12 could not be teaching that Jesus is the Creator, for here, in the opening words to the Hebrews, it is clearly stated that God made all things ‘through’ His Son. Since Jesus’ role in creation has already been discussed (Heb 1:3), it is not likely that in verses 10-12 the author would return to the same point he has explained earlier. It could be that these verses from Psalm 102 are appropriately applied to the Son of God in view of his being the preexistent Wisdom spoken of in Proverbs 8. Note that I do not say, Jesus cannot be the Creator because he is not the Creator; rather, I refer to fact that God is the One who made the ages (epoiesen tous aionas) through (di’) the Son (Heb 1:2-3), who is here presented as distinct from Him. I then point out on page 51 that the thrust of [Paul’s] message is to highlight Jesus’ immortality (deathlessness) since his resurrection by God. (Ro 6:9; Ga 1:1) (http://jehovah.to/exegesis/general/cri_review.htm; underlined emphasis ours) Stafford states that Christ is being distinguished from God, not simply the Father, as if this somehow undermines Trinitarianism. As White correctly pointed out, unless one assumes that God must always refer to the Father then Stafford’s entire argument collapses. In context, the God who created all things through the Son is the Father and hence it is legitimate for Trinitarians to substitute the word Father for God here. In fact, we find inspired writers doing the same thing as in the case of the Apostle John: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (een pros ton theon), and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God (pros ton theon). John 1:1-2 ESV Now contrast this with John’s first epistle: That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life-the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father (pros ton patera ) and was made manifest to us-that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. 1 John 1:1-3 ESV John had no problem substituting God with Father and neither do Trinitarians. Besides, the real issue is not whether Christ is being distinguished from God or the Father, but whether the NT teaches that Christ is God in the same sense and to the same degree as the God that he is with. If he is (and the NT data shows that he is), then the one true God is multipersonal since the plain biblical teaching is that there is only one ontological being that is God. In order to deny this, Stafford assumes that the passages that distinguish God from Christ must be in terms of their being, that they are distinct ontologically not just in person. The problem with Stafford’s claim is that he hasn’t provided any solid biblical evidence to support this view. He cannot simply assume his conclusion and proceed to read this back into the passages which show that God and Christ are distinct and then derive his argument that the distinction is ontological in nature. Stafford presumes that since distinct persons in the Holy Bible are also distinct beings, then the same applies to God. The problem with this argument is that it fails to take into consideration that God is unique in his existence and being, and that there is nothing in creation that is exactly like him: “Among the gods there is none like you, O Lord; no deeds can compare with yours. All the nations you have made will come and worship before you, O Lord; they will bring glory to your name. For you are great and do marvelous deeds; you alone are God.” Psalm 86:8-10 NIV . “The heavens praise your wonders, O LORD, your faithfulness too, in the assembly of the holy ones. For who in the skies above can compare with the LORD? Who is like the LORD among the heavenly beings? In the council of the holy ones God is greatly feared; he is more awesome than all who surround him. O LORD God Almighty, who is like you? You are mighty, O LORD, and your faithfulness surrounds you.” Psalm 89:5-8 NIV. “Who is like the LORD our God, the One who sits enthroned on high, who stoops down to look on the heavens and the earth?” Psalm 113:5-6 NIV . “Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, or with the breadth of his hand marked off the heavens? Who has held the dust of the earth in a basket, or weighed the mountains on the scales and the hills in a balance? Who has understood the mind of the LORD, or instructed him as his counselor? Whom did the LORD consult to enlighten him, and who taught him the right way? Who was it that taught him knowledge or showed him the path of understanding? Surely the nations are like a drop in a bucket; they are regarded as dust on the scales; he weighs the islands as though they were fine dust. Lebanon is not sufficient for altar fires, nor its animals enough for burnt offerings. Before him all the nations are as nothing; they are regarded by him as worthless and less than nothing. To whom, then, will you compare God? What image will you compare him to?” Isaiah 40:12-18 NIV. “‘To whom will you compare me? Or who is my equal?’ says the Holy One. Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? He who brings out the starry host one by one, and calls them each by name. Because of his great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing.” Isaiah 40:25-26 NIV. To whom will you liken me and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be alike? remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, Isaiah 46:5, 9 ESV. “No one is like you, O LORD; you are great, and your name is mighty in power. Who should not revere you, O King of the nations? This is your due. Among all the wise men of the nations and in all their kingdoms, there is no one like you. They are all senseless and foolish; they are taught by worthless wooden idols. Hammered silver is brought from Tarshish and gold from Uphaz. What the craftsman and goldsmith have made is then dressed in blue and purple- all made by skilled workers. But the LORD is the true God; he is the living God, the eternal King. When he is angry, the earth trembles; the nations cannot endure his wrath.” Jeremiah 10:6-10 NIV. In light of the foregoing, Stafford’s argument that since rational creatures are one in person and in being, or that they are distinct in terms of their being as well as their persons, this somehow also applies to God is simply erroneous. If anything, the Trinity better fits the biblical depiction of God being different and distinct from rational creatures since there are no triune creatures in creation! God alone is Triune, demonstrating how truly and utterly unique he is in comparison with his creation. Stafford’s point that Psalm 102 is applied to Christ in view of his being the Wisdom of Proverbs is astonishing since Psalm 102 refers to the role Yahweh played in creation, not Wisdom! Unless Stafford wants to claim that Yahweh is also the Wisdom spoken of in Proverbs then it becomes clearly evident that Stafford’s post-biblical unitarian theology is guiding his exegesis of the passages in question. His unitarianism does not allow him to accept the plain teaching of the passages since he would be forced to accept Jesus as Yahweh God. Besides, to say that Christ is both Yahweh God and the Wisdom of Yahweh poses no problem to the Trinitarian since Wisdom is an intrinsic aspect of God’s eternal being. Hence, for Jesus to be God’s own Wisdom proves that Christ is uncreated, and therefore God in the fullest sense of the term. Furthermore, since Jesus is not the Father or the Holy Spirit he can be the Wisdom of Yahweh since Yahweh here would refer to the Father. In other words, Christ is the Wisdom of the Father who is Yahweh God, while also being Yahweh at the same time since both the Father and the Son exist as the one true God.
Fuente: The Apologists Bible Commentary
What proof more can be desired of Christ’s Divinity, than what is here given by our apostle? the name and attributes of God are given to him, as also an everlasting throne and kingdom; divine honour is required to be paid to him: and here such divine works are ascribed to him, wherein no creature can have any share of efficiency with him; such is the making of the world, Thou, Lord, laidest the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the works of thy hands:
Here we have Christ’s omnipotency declared, Thou has laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are thy handy-works: and his eternity and immutability asserted, When the heavens perish, thou remainest: when thy wax old, and are changed thou art the same.
Learn hence, That the whole world, the heavens and the earth being made by our Lord Jesus Christ, is and evident proof that he is exalted above all creatures, and that he is and almighty and unchangeable God, Thou, Lord, hast laid, &c.
Learn, 2. That such is the frailty of man’s nature, and such the perishing condition of all created things, that nothing will or can yield stable consolation to us, but a firm belief of the omnipotency and immutability of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Heb 1:10-12. And thou, Lord, in the beginning, &c. These words, with those contained in the two following verses, are quoted from Psa 102:25-27, where they are evidently spoken of the God of Israel, the living and true God. Some have thought they are here addressed to the Father, and not to the Son. But, as the former passages are directed to the Son, it is reasonable to suppose this is so likewise: especially as it would not have been to the apostles purpose to quote it here, if it had been addressed to the Father. By affirming that these words were spoken to the Son, the apostle confuted the opinion of those Jews who held that the angels assisted in making this mundane system; an error which was afterward maintained by some heretics in the Christian Church. They Permanent as they seem, and though firmly founded; shall at length perish Of the perishing of the earth and aerial heavens, Peter speaks, 2Pe 3:10-13, where he also foretels that there shall be new heavens and a new earth, formed for the habitation of the righteous, after the old creation is destroyed. But thou remainest , continuest in undecaying glory; as a vesture , a mantle, upper garment, or cloak; shalt thou fold them up With infinite ease; and they shall be changed Into new heavens and a new earth; or thou shalt remove them out of their place, and introduce a new scene of things with as much ease as a prince lays aside one robe and puts on another. But thou art eternally the same, and thy years shall not fail Through everlasting ages, nor can thy perfections admit any possible diminution.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
10. We see here that our Savior, the second person of the Trinity, actually created this world; or, rather, that God in the person of the Eternal Son created this world, with its atmospheric environments and luminaries to vitalize it. No wonder He was not willing for Satan to wither and blight it, and add it to hell; but He generously volunteered and came to its rescue.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
1:10 {9} And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast {u} laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
(9) He proves and confirms the dignity of Christ revealed in the flesh, by these six evident testimonies by which it appears that he far surpasses all angels, so much so that he is called both Son, and God in Heb 1:5-8; Heb 1:10; Heb 1:13 .
(u) Made the earth firm and sure.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Psa 102:25-27, the sixth quotation, also referred to Messiah. The Son is Creator (cf. Heb 1:2). This verse looks back to the past. "Lord" is master (Gr. kurie) and refers to God in the passage the writer quoted.
This quotation is important to the writer’s argument also because it reveals the immutability of the Son. After God burns up the present earth and heavens, He will create new heavens and a new earth (2Pe 3:10-12; Revelation 21-22). Many people in the Greco-Roman world believed that the world and the universe were indestructible. [Note: J. Héring, L’Epître aux Hébreax, p. 8, cited by Guthrie, p. 78.] Even though the earth as we know it will end, the Son’s rule will continue eternally and with it His joy. The millennial kingdom will only be the first phase of Messiah’s endless earthly rule.
Note that the quotations tied together with "and" begin and end with the Son’s eternal nature (Heb 1:8; Heb 1:12).
"The attribute of permanence in the Creator corresponds to the durability of his throne and serves to reinforce the contrast between the mutability of the angels and the stable, abiding character of the Son." [Note: Lane, p. 30.]