§ 3. Is the Psalm Messianic? That is, is Messiah its subject? We answer, the of this Psalm is the Mɛooíaç of the New Testament. See John i, 43; iv, 25: "He [Andrew] first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, we have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ," or the anointed. The woman of Samaria saith unto him, "I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ," ὁ Χριστός. From the word alone nothing can be certainly determined, as it is applied in other passages to kings and priests of the Jewish nation, and in one instance to a heathen prince, Cyrus. Isaiah xlv, 1. But from its connection with the other parts of the psalm, there is no room to doubt its application to Christ. In the first place there is peculiar appropriateness in the application of this name to Christ. As the high priest and the prince were inducted into office by the ceremony of anointing, (Exodus xxix, 29; Leviticus iv, 3,) they were often called "the Lord's anointed." So our Lord, when inducted into office by baptism, received the anointing of the Holy Spirit. Thus he was "God's anointed," in; this being from л, to anoint, and thus he is appropriately called. The Septuagint translated this word ὅ Χριστός. κατὰ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ κατὰ τοῦ χριστου αυτοῦ, against Jehovah and against his Christ; χριστός being from χρίω, I anoint. We observe, further, that this name is not only peculiarly appropriate to the Saviour, but its Greek equivalent, & Xororós, is the most common name by which he is designated in the New Testament, except "Inoōvs. 2. Our second reason for believing that this psalm has for its subject the Messiah, is the fact of the usage of the personal poetic pronoun third plural, in in the third verse, referring for its antecedent to in and in in the second verse. The rebellious chiefs cry out, "Let us break their bands asunder: That is, the bands and cords of Jehovah and his Anointed, of the Father and of the Son. It is hardly needful to say that the terms "bands" and "cords" are metaphorical, for government and laws; and further that it would be very puerile, as well as very impious, to refer in, thus associated with Jehovah, to any merely human or Israelitish prince. 3. Our third reason for believing that this psalm is Messianic, is that the hero of the song is so significantly addressed in the seventh verse: Jehovah declares, "Thou art my Son; This day I have begotten thee.” We are here introduced to the deep mystery of the Sonship of Messiah. He is the Son of the living God in a peculiar sense. Under the endearing relation of Son, the second person of the Trinity is here set forth. Emphatically the Father declares, "Thou art my Similar to this was the language heard from the heavens on the occasion of our Saviour's baptism, and on the mount of transfiguration, "This is my beloved Son!" See Matthew iii, 17 and xvii, 5. The Saviour himself alludes to this high relation when he asks the Pharisees, "What think ye of Christ? whose Son is he? They say unto him, The son of David. How then doth David by inspiration call him LORD?" [if he be not also the Son of God, and thus divine.] This emphatic language of Jehovah, therefore, Thou art my Son, cannot refer to any mere human being, but to Him alone who is equal with and one with the Father. 4. Our fourth reason for believing this psalm to be a prophecy of Christ, is the fact that it is referred to Christ by all the apostles in Acts iv, 23–29. We will quote the entire passage, as we regard it as conclusive of the question before us: And being let go, they [Peter and John] went to their own company, [namely, the apostles and the Church,] and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said unto them. And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that therein is; who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined to be done." Here it is declared that the very things which God had determined should be done, and had declared by his servant David, in the second psalm, a thousand years before, should be done to Christ and his servants by Herod, and Pontius Pilate, and the people of the Jews; all was actually fulfilled in the history of Christ and the disciples. So also the Apostle Paul, in Acts xiii, 33, declared that "God had fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he had raised up Jesus again; as it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." So also the same apostle testifies to the same thing in Hebrews i, 5: "To which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?" The reader is left to infer that God has not made this address to any angel, but he has made it to Jesus, his Son. So also in Hebrews v, 5: "Christ glorified not himself to be made a high priest; but he that said unto him, [glorified him, saying,] Thou art my Son, to-day have I begotten thee." And in three passages of the book of Revelation the triumph of Christ over all his foes is declared in the words of the tenth verse of this psalm: "He shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessel of the potter shall they be broken to pieces." Revelation ii, 27. And she [the woman] brought forth a manchild, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God and his throne." Revelation xii, 5. "And out of his [Christ's] mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron." Revelation xix, 15. These Scriptures of the New Testament are perfectly conclusive that the inspired writers understood the second psalm to be a prophecy of Christ. 5. Our fifth argument for this position is that the entire internal evidence of the psalm goes to this point. Behold in it an epitome of the Book of Revelation, the coming and establishment of the kingdom of God. It is not to David, as De Wette and others would have it, that the heathen are to be given, but to a greater than David, even David's illustrious Son. The uttermost parts of the earth shall be given to Him alone. It is to Him that judges and kings are to bow down and pay homage, and it is He alone who is the Judge of judges, the LORD of LORDS, and the KING of KINGS. Such is the character of the hero of this psalm, a character which belongs alone to the Son of God. It remains only to observe, that we have but reiterated the general sentiment of both the Jewish and Christian Churches. All the old Jewish interpreters agree in expounding it of Messiah, as is confessed particularly by Rabbi Solomon Jarchi, who has this remarkable passage: "Our doctors expounded this psalm of King Messiah, but that we may answer the heretics, meaning Christians, it is expedient to interpret it of David's person." § 4. Can we interpret it of David's Person. In this connection it may be proper to discuss the question suggested by the above extract from Jarchi, that is, whether we may interpret it of David's person. This mode of interpretation was adopted by the wily Rabbi, the better to refute the Christians. But it is passing strange that even a majority of modern Protestant commentators have adopted the same or similar modes of interpretation. Calvin, for example, says, giving the contents of this psalm: "David boasteth that his kingdom, although it be assailed with huge multitude of enemies and mighty power, shall, notwithstanding, be perpetual, because it is upheld by the hand and power of God. He addeth also that it shall be enlarged even to the uttermost coasts of the earth, maugre his enemies. And therefore he exhorteth kings and other magistrates to lay down their pride, and with meek hearts to take the yoke which the Lord lays upon them, because it is in vain for them to shake it off. Nevertheless this figure containeth a prophecy concerning Christ's kingdom that was to come." That is, according to Calvin, this psalm refers primarily to David, and secondarily to Christ. It has, in fact, a double meaning, and so he proceeds to interpret it. Very nearly coinciding with this view, is that of Mr. Benson and Dr. A. Clarke. Mr. Benson says: Under the emblem of the kingdom of David, the Holy Ghost here foretells the opposition which should be raised by Jews and Gentiles against the kingdom of the Messiah." Dr. A. Clarke says: "In the first place we may suppose that this psalm was written to celebrate the taking of Jerusalem and the overthrow of all the kings and chiefs of the neighboring nations [by David]. In the second place we find, from the use made. of this psalm by the apostles, Acts iv, 27, that David typified Jesus Christ." This view is substantially that of Calvin, and involves the theory of the double sense. In the first place David is meant as God's anointed, and in the second place Christ is meant as God's anointed, or typified as such. To this view we have some serious objections, which we will presently state. Mr. Wesley, with his characteristic good sense, and in his laconic style, without formally opposing the commonly received opinion, simply says: "there is nothing in this psalm which is not applicable to Christ, but some things which are not [at] all applicable to David." He then proceeds to interpret the psalm of Christ, though not exclusively so. As an example of the interpretation given by the fathers, I would refer to Augustine. There is not a word said in all his comments about David being its subject, on the contrary he interprets it, from beginning to end, exclusively of Christ. As an example among the moderns, I would refer to Hengstenberg, whose commentary on the Psalms is a complete thesaurus of good things, and highly evangelical. He says: "There are the clearest grounds that by 'the King,' 'the Anointed,' or 'the Son of God,' no other can be understood than the Messias." And he accordingly interprets this psalm exclusively of Christ. We have quoted these authorities that we might not seem rash in rejecting the view of Calvin, Benson, Clarke, and many others highly respected in the Church for learning and piety. Our exegetical inquiries compel us to adopt this course. This psalm, in our judgment, is to be interpreted exclusively of Christ. The following are some of our objections to the mixed view. 1. We object to it because it involves the impropriety of attributing to this psalm a double sense. The admission of such a principle of interpretation at once places us upon the high road to the Rabbinic absurdity, that every word of Scripture has within it "mountains of sense." On such a principle the Scriptures cease to be of value. They teach everything, and nothing with certainty. Their plain and obvious meaning is tortured to suit the fancy of every interpreter, and he that is the most fanciful and imaginative is the most expert exegete. 2. We object to this mode of interpreting this psalm, because it involves the absurdity of attributing to David that which is not true. It is not true that David ever was the ruler of the heathen nations and the possessor of the uttermost parts of the earth. His dominion never extended beyond the original grant made to Abraham, "from the river of Egypt to the river Euphrates." Gen. xv, 18. It was not even till the days of Solomon that it had even this limited extent. See 1 Kings iv, 21, 24. "And Solomon reigned over all kingdoms from the river [Euphrates] unto the land of the Philistines, and unto the border of Egypt: ... for he had dominion over all the region on this side the river, from Tiphsah [Thapsacus] even to Azzah, [Gaza,] even over all the kings on this side of the river." Thus it appears that neither Solomon nor David reigned over the Philistines, who were heathen within thirty miles of their capital. 3. This interpretation involves the further absurdity of making David a Divine person, receiving Divine honors. The kings of the |