Ina previous post, I discussed one of the peculiarities of the use of the
vocalisation of the Hebrew consonantal texts, showing that the LXX translators
understood the correct vocalisation of Psa 110:3 (109:3, LXX) differently than
the later Masoretic scribes. Another quirk of this issue can be seen in the use
of the LXX of Psa 102:25-27 (102:26-28 in the Hebrew; 101:26-28 in the LXX) in
Heb 1:10-12, and its application to Jesus.
The
Greek of Heb 1:10-12, addressing Jesus, reads:
καί· σὺ κατ᾽ ἀρχάς, κύριε, τὴν γῆν ἐθεμελίωσας,
καὶ ἔργα τῶν χειρῶν σού εἰσιν οἱ οὐρανοί αὐτοὶ ἀπολοῦνται, σὺ δὲ διαμένεις, καὶ
πάντες ὡς ἱμάτιον παλαιωθήσονται, καὶ ὡσεὶ περιβόλαιον ἑλίξεις αὐτούς, ὡς ἱμάτιον
καὶ ἀλλαγήσονται· σὺ δὲ ὁ αὐτὸς εἶ καὶ τὰ ἔτη σου οὐκ ἐκλείψουσιν.
And, "In the beginning, Lord, you
founded the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands; they will
perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like clothing; like a cloak you
will roll them up, and like clothing they will be changed. But you are the
same, and your years will never end." (NRSV)
It
is true that the Masoretic text understands the psalmist to be speaking to
Yahweh; however, the translators of the LXX understood the vocalisation of the
verb ענה differently than the later MT scribes. The MT vocalises the
term as ‘innah, meaning “he [Yahweh]
weakened [the suppliant].” However, the LXX understood the vocalisation to be “he
[Yahweh] answered [the suppliant],” therefore, introducing a second lord (κυριος)
who is addressed in vv.25-27 of the LXX.
Sir Lancelot Brenton, in his translation
of the LXX, translates the LXX as:
He answered him in the way of his strength: tell me the fewness of my
days.
The author of Hebrews, as he is using
the LXX, is not applying a “Yahweh” text from the LXX to Jesus; instead, he is
using a text that has connotations of “Messianic eschatology.”
F.F. Bruce, in his New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans), writes:
Benjamin Bacon, in his essay, "Heb. 1:10-12 and the Septuagint Reading of Ps. 102:23" in the Zeitschrift fur die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft vol. 3 (1902), pp.280-85(*), concludes his fascinating study with the following comment (here, p.284):
F.F. Bruce, in his New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans), writes:
In the Septuagint text the person to whom these words [“of old you laid the foundation of the earth”] are spoken is addressed explicitly as “Lord,” and it is God who addresses him thus. Whereas in the Hebrew text the suppliant is the speaker from the beginning to the end of the psalm, in the Greek text his prayer comes to an end with v. 22, and the next words read as follows: “He [God] answered him [the suppliant] in the way of his strength:
‘Declare to Me the shortness of My days: Bring Me not up in the midst of My days. Thy [the suppliant’s] years are throughout all generations. Thou, lord [the suppliant, viewed here as the Messiah by Hebrews], in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth
Benjamin Bacon, in his essay, "Heb. 1:10-12 and the Septuagint Reading of Ps. 102:23" in the Zeitschrift fur die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft vol. 3 (1902), pp.280-85(*), concludes his fascinating study with the following comment (here, p.284):
Thus
instead of the application of these verses of Ps 102 to messiah being an
audacious innovation on the part of the author of Hebrews, we find evidence (1)
that the psalm itself was a favorite resort of those who sought in even
pre-Christian times for proof-texts of messianic eschatology. This is a result
which might have been anticipated from the suggestive reference to "the
set time" for Jehovah's deliverance and glorification of Zion, v. 13, and
the challenge to cryptographic interpretation of v.18, "this shall be
written for the generation to come: and a people which shall be created shall
praise the Lord." (2) We have specific evidence of the application of
verses 23-24 to the Messiah by those who employed the Hebrew or some equivalent
text. (3) Finally, in the LXX and the Vulg. rendering of ענה by απεκριθη, respondit,
we have the explanation of how, in Christian circles at least, the accepted
Messianic passage could be made to prove the doctrine of [the Messiah's
personal pre-existence].
While this pericope may not be an Old
Testament Yahweh text being applied to Jesus, at least due to the use of the
LXX in Heb 1:10-12, there are many that understand, correctly, that this
passage teaches the personal pre-existence of Jesus. Some, such as Andrew
Perry, a Christadelphian apologist and author of Before He was Born, a work arguing that Jesus did not personally pre-exist, argues that
this passage it to be understood as Jesus pre-existing typologically in the
person of Hezekiah, who he believes to be the author of Psa 102(!), which is
utterly absurd (at least he tries to deal with the passage; Duncan Heaster and
other proponents of such a Christology don’t deal with this pericope [cf.
Heaster’s The Real Christ]). Thomas
Farrar has a very good paper on the Christological implications of this
pericope here, which refutes the arguments of Parry and other proponents of
such a Socinian Christology. Of course, I would disagree with Farrar on some points (he is a Trinitarian; I am clearly not; also, he rather glibly dismisses pre-millennial eschatology), but overall, the paper is sold at showing that, in the theology of the author of Hebrews, Jesus personally pre-existed.
(*) My thanks to my friend, Dr. Bill Hamblin, for forwarding me a copy of this article.
