Hebrews 1:10-12

Joshua Perez

1/27/2025

"10 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.” (Hebrews 1:10-12)

This verse is a quotation from Psalm 102:25-27, where many Trinitarians believe the author of Hebrews is applying a YHWH text to Jesus; making him the eternal, creator God. In our view, however, this is a misreading of the text. 

The context of Hebrews chapter 1 is displaying that the Son (Jesus) is greater than angels (verses 4-5). To prove this the author deploys several Davidic texts of the various kings of Israel (David, Solomon, Asaf), and applies them so Jesus to show how the anointed king of Israel is superior to the angels (verses 5-9). The most important text the author cites is Psalm 45:6-7, in Hebrews 1:8-9, which in its original context was likely about king Solomon (please see our article on this text, as it is crucial for properly understanding verses 10-12). Psalm 45:6-7 in summary states that the king of Israel has been given divine authority by God himself to rule over the nation of Israel. Therefore, the throne of said king will be eternal due to its source of establishment (God). 

"8 But of the Son, Your throne is of God, it is forever and ever," (Hebrews 1:8 - Our translation)

1. There are two primary interpretations held by Unitarians on this passage, with the former being our particular view. The assumption held by Trinitarians is that when the author conjoins verse 9 and 10 with the term "and" (kai), he wants us to mentally repeat the formula given in verse 8. Making the Son the subject of verses 10-12 as well:

"8 But of the Son, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever...10 And (also of the Son), “You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the works of Your hands..."

The issue with this assumption is that it's not what the text says. The subject of the passage in verses 10-12 is not stated in the introduction of the quotation. Therefore, we have to look at the context. Psalm 102 is originally about Hashem, and his eternal and unchanging nature.

"12 But You, O Lord (Hashem), abide forever, And Your name to all generations." (Psalm 102:12)

In Hebrews 1:8-9, the author begins talking about the reigning king of Israel who's reign is everlasting, then begins talking about the king's God; who has granted him this exalted status. 

Since the author conjoins the quotation in verses 8-9, and the one in 10-12 with "and", he could be breaking out into a doxology of praise for the eternal God who is the basis of the Son's unending reign:

"8 But of the Son, “Your throne is of God, it is forever and ever, And the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom. 9 “You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness above Your companions.” 10 And, “You, Lord (God of the king), 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.”

Therefore, the subject of verses 10-12 is the Father, not the son. The quotation is still relevant to the authors theme in his selection of quotations (that being the superiority of the Son over angels). As the son's kingdom and reign is everlasting, because it has been established by the eternal and unchanging God. This understanding is further supported by the concluding statement of Psalm 102, which states:

“The children of Your servants will continue, And their descendants will be established before You.” (Psalm 102:28)

Psalm 102 is about the unending God, who is able to establish his servants before him due to his immutable nature. This view is explained well by Unitarian scholar Andrew Norton:

"Now the God last mentioned was Christ’s God, who had anointed him; and the author [of the book of Hebrews], addressing himself to this God, breaks out into the celebration of his power, and especially his unchangeable duration; which he dwells upon in order to prove the stability of the Son’s kingdom…i.e., thou [God] who hast promised him such a throne, art he who laid the foundation of the earth. So it seems to be a declaration of God’s immutability made here, to ascertain the durableness of Christ’s kingdom, before mentioned; and the rather so, because this passage had been used originally for the same purpose in the 102nd Psalm, viz. To infer thence this conclusion, 'The children of thy servants shall continue, and their seed be established before Thee. In like manner, it here proves the Son’s throne should be established forever and ever, by the same argument, viz., by God’s immutability.'" (Norton, Statement of Reasons, pp. 214 and 215)

Some may object to this by saying it is illogical for the author to switch the subject of who is being spoken of in two connecting quotations; and that the formula "but of the Son" should logically be mentally repeated after the simple connecting phrase "and". However, this is actually something the author does numerous times, of which it would be a mistake to mentally repeat the preceding formula before each quotation. For example, in Hebrews 10:30 the author writes:

"For we know Him who said, 'Vengeance is Mine, I will repay.' And again (kai palin), 'The Lord will judge His people'" (Hebrews 10:30 NASB)

The first quotation is in the voice of Hashem, declaring vengeance to be his (Deuteronomy 32:25). However, mentally repeating the introduction "for we know him who said" after the phrase "and again" would be a mistake. As that quotation is in the voice of Moses, not God (Deuteronomy 32:26).

Another example is found in Hebrews 2:11-13 which reads:

"11 For both He who sanctifies and those who are sanctified are all from one Father; for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren, 12 saying, “I will proclaim Your name to My brethren, In the midst of the congregation I will sing Your praise.” 13 And again, “I will put My trust in Him.” And again, “Behold, I and the children whom God has given Me.”

Similarly in this example, the first quotation is in the voice of David (Psalm 22:22), speaking of his brethren the Jews in his day. However, mentally repeating the formula "he is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying" wouldn't make sense before the other two quotations which are in the voice of Isaiah (Isaiah 8:17-18). All of the authors quotations stay on a theme, but not all of them speak of the same person or subject. 

2. Although we personally subscribe to the aforementioned interpretation, a number of other Unitarians hold to a different view. As displayed in our article on Hebrews 1:8-9, New Testament "fulfillment" or usage of Old Testament texts are often not literal. For example, Matthew 2:15 states that Yeshua and his family fled to Egypt to escape Herod, fulfilling Hosea 11:1 which states, "out of Egypt have I called my son". However, Hosea 11:1 in it's original context was about God bringing Israel out of the land of Egypt in the book of Exodus.

"When Israel was a youth I loved him, And out of Egypt I called My son." (Hosea 11:1)

Matthew is not in error by applying this text to Jesus; he is simply using a different mode of Jewish exegesis called Remez (a hint/allegorical meaning). This allows Matthew to apply a reference of Israel's exodus from Egypt, to Jesus and his families personal exodus from Egypt. Similarly in Hebrews 1:8-9, the author applies a text (Psalm 45:6-7) about the king of Israel (likely Solomon's) dominion, and applies it to Jesus' future dominion as king of Israel. Therefore, a YHWH text (Psalm 102) being applied to Jesus in Hebrews 1:10-12 does not make Jesus literally YHWH. The text is being used in a looser sense. 

Since there's also a subject change from God (Old Testament) to Jesus (New Testament), it is logical to conclude that the specific actions being spoken of also changed. The scriptures explicitly state that God the Father alone created the heavens and the earth (Gen 1:1; Isa 42:5, 44:24), the creation Psalm 102 was originally in reference too. However, Jesus is a creator in his own fashion. He will one day return to the earth and establish a refurbished heavens and earth (Rev. 19-20:5), which will ultimately pass away (Isa. 65:17; Rev. 20:1-10), leading to the creation of a brand new heavens and earth which will be everlasting (Revelation 21:1). It is in this heavens and earth where God will establish his eternal tabernacle with man, as sin and death are finally defeated—something only made possible due to Jesus' death on the cross (1 Corinthians 15:25-26). Therefore, it is possible that the author is applying this text (originally about God creating the original heavens and earth), and applying it to Jesus, ascribing him as the creator of the coming heavens and earth. This is demonstrated by the proceeding statement in Hebrews, where the author states:

"5 For He did not subject to angels the world to come, concerning which we are speaking." (Hebrews 2:5)

"The beginning" does not have to be in refrence to the beginning of all time. It can be limited in scope; that being the beginning of Jesus' work of creation, as Hebrews 2:5 demonstrates.