In Psalm 102:25–27, the psalmist is speaking directly to God, but in Hebrews 1:10–12 suggests that it is about the Son in particular. Is there a way to know that from the Psalm itself?

This text is from a transcript of a talk by David Gooding, entitled ‘The Salvation of the Lord’ (2001).

Let's read the passage in Hebrews.

And, 'You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands; they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment, like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end.' (Hebrews 1:10–12)

That is quoted under the rubric of Hebrews 1:8: 'But of the Son', or 'Concerning the Son.' Of the Son he says. 'Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever', and so forth. Then, secondly, it says 'You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth' (Hebrews 1:10).

Many people, including many expert commentaries, say that the Christians of course believed that Jesus, being the Son of God, was the agent in creation. Therefore, though the psalm appears to be talking about God the Father, as we should call him, the Christians held that, by definition, everything that could be said of God the Father is true of the Son. And if God created, the Son created, and so that's that. In other words, they are saying that these quotations are not being offered as evidence for the deity of Christ; they are just statements that stem from your prior belief that he is the Son of God, and therefore this also would be true of him.

I myself hold the view that, no, it is not Christians just presuming that because Jesus is the Son of God you can take this psalm that was written about God and apply it to Jesus, because that kind of thing would cut no ice with the people the writer of Hebrews is talking to, and with their unconverted relatives. You have got to prove to them, from their Old Testament Scriptures, that Jesus is the Messiah and that the Messiah is God. It has got to be that way round. Therefore when the writer takes up the topic of Jesus as the high priest, it's no good saying, 'Who said Jesus is a high priest?'

Well, Peter said so.

'Who on earth is Peter, or Paul for that matter?'

To convince a Jew, you have got to cite his own Old Testament, that the Aaronic priesthood, instituted by God and defended by God when Korah rebelled against it, was eventually to be set aside. How would you prove that? Well, you quote Psalm 110, and you ask, 'When was Psalm 110 written, before Aaron or after Aaron?'

'Oh, centuries after Aaron.'

I see. But then at that time, God is speaking of another priesthood: 'You are a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek' (Psalm 100:4). And the writer to the Hebrews says, 'He does away with the first in order to establish the second' (Hebrews 10:9).

Who said that the offerings were to cease? To an orthodox Jew, that was a hideous blasphemy, for God had ordained them. Yes, but Psalm 40 said, 'Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me' (see Psalm 40:6), and Hebrews quotes it (Hebrews 10:5).

It is that kind of argumentation all the way through Hebrews. In other words, it is not just the writer saying, 'We say it is so; bother you.' He has got to show it is so from the Old Testament. Seeing that is so, I think that behind this quotation from Psalm 102 lies the considered view of the writer that this is God talking to the Messiah. It is God talking to him when God says to the Messiah, 'You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands' (see Psalm 102:25–27; Hebrews 1:10–12). However, in order to demonstrate that, I should need an hour, I should think, because it gets itself involved with the translation that is to be found in the Greek Old Testament.

In the Greek Old Testament these verses are not ascribed to God, for the Greek Old Testament has a somewhat different pointing of the Hebrew, and therefore a different interpretation of the drama of Psalm 102. Psalm 102, like many psalms, is a very dramatic psalm, just as, for instance, Psalm 2 is. First you get one speaker, and then without warning you get another speaker, and then you get the reply of a third speaker. It is a dramatic psalm. So Psalm 102, according to the Septuagint, is a similarly dramatic psalm, the result of which is that the words here quoted are referred not to God, but to the Messiah. But then I should have to demonstrate that, and that becomes complicated.