Psa 2:1-3 | KD | STEP | The didactic which began with אשׁרי, is now followed by a prophetic Psalm, which closes with אשׁרי. It coincides also in other respects with , but still more with Psalms of the earlier time of the kings ( ; ) and with Isaiah’s prophetic style. The rising of the confederate nations and their rulers against Jahve and His Anointed will be dashed to pieces against the imperturbable all-conquering power of dominion, which Jahve has entrusted to His King set upon Zion, His Son. This is the fundamental thought, which is worked out with the vivid directness of dramatic representation. The words of the singer and seer begin and end the Psalm. The rebels, Jahve, and His Anointed come forward, and speak for themselves; but the framework is formed by the composer’s discourse, which, like the chorus of the Greek drama, expresses the reflexions and feelings which are produced on the spectators and hearers. The poem before us is not purely lyric. The personality of the poet is kept in the background. The Lord’s Anointed who speaks in the middle of the Psalm is not the anonymous poet himself. It may, however, be a king of the time, who is here regarded in the light of the Messianic promise, or that King of the future, in whom at a future period the mission of the Davidic kingship in the world shall be fulfilled: at all events this Lord’s Anointed comes forward with the divine power and glory, with which the Messiah appears in the prophets. The Psalm is anonymous. For this very reason we may not assign it to David (Hofm.) nor to Solomon (Ew.); for nothing is to be inferred from , since in the New Testament “hymn of David” and “psalm” are co-ordinate ideas, and it is always far more hazardous to ascribe an anonymous Psalm to David or Solomon, than to deny to one inscribed לדוד or לשׁלמה direct authorship from David or Solomon. But the subject of the Psalm is neither David (Kurtz) nor Solomon (Bleek). It might be David, for in his reign there is at least one coalition of the peoples like that from which our Psalm takes its rise, vid., : on the contrary it cannot be Solomon, because in his reign, though troubled towards its close (1Ki 11:14.), no such event occurs, but would then have to be inferred to have happened from this Psalm. We might rather guess at Uzziah (Meier) or Hezekiah (Maurer), both of whom inherited the kingdom in a weakened condition and found the neighbouring peoples alienated from the house of David. The situation might correspond to these times, for the rebellious peoples, which are brought before us, have been hitherto subject to Jahve and His Anointed. But all historical indications which might support the one supposition or the other are wanting. If the God-anointed one, who speaks in , were the psalmist himself, we should at least know the Psalm was composed by a king filled with a lofty Messianic consciousness. But the dramatic movement of the Psalm up to the ועתה ( ) which follows, is opposed to such an identification of the God-anointed one with the poet. But that Alexander Jannaeus (Hitz.), that blood-thirsty ruler, so justly hated by his people, who inaugurated his reign by fratricide, may be both at the same time, is a supposition which turns the moral and covenant character of the Psalm into detestable falsehood. The Old Testament knows no kingship to which is promised the dominion of the world and to which sonship is ascribed ( ; ), but the Davidic. The events of his own time, which influenced the mind of the poet, are no longer clear to us. But from these he is carried away into those tumults of the peoples which shall end in all kingdoms becoming the kingdom of God and of His Christ ( ; ). In the New Testament this Psalm is cited more frequently than any other. According to , and have been fulfilled in the confederate hostility of Israel and the Gentiles against Jesus the holy servant of God and against His confessors. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, and stand side by side, the former as a witness of the eternal priesthood of Jesus after the order of Melchisedek, the latter as a witness of His sonship, which is superior to that of the angels. Paul teaches us in , comp. , how the “to-day” is to be understood. The “to-day” according to its proper fulfilment, is the day of Jesus’ resurrection. Born from the dead to the life at the right hand of God, He entered on this day, which the church therefore calls dies regalis , upon His eternal kingship. The New Testament echo of this Psalm however goes still deeper and further. The two names of the future One in use in the time of Jesus, ὁ Χριστὸς and ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, Joh 1:50; (in the mouth of Nathanael and of the High Priest) refer back to this Ps. and , just as ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου incontrovertibly refers to and Dan 7:13. The view maintained by De Wette and Hupfeld, that the Psalm is not applicable to the Christian conceptions of the Messiah, seems almost as though these were to be gauged according to the authoritative utterances of the professorial chair and not according to the language of the Apostles. Even in the Apocalypse, Ps 19:15; , Jesus appears exactly as this Psalm represents Him, as ποιμαίνων τὰ ἔθνη ἐν ῥάβδῳ σιδηρᾷ. The office of the Messiah is not only that of Saviour but also of Judge. Redemption is the beginning and the judgment the end of His work. It is to this end that the Psalm refers. The Lord himself frequently refers in the Gospels to the fact of His bearing side by side with the sceptre of peace and the shepherd’s staff, the sceptre of iron also, Mat 24:50., , Luk 19:27. The day of His coming is indeed a day of judgment-the great day of the ὀργὴ τοῦ ἀγνίου, , before which the ultra-spiritual Messianic creations of enlightened exegetes will melt away, just as the carnal Messianic hopes of the Jews did before His first coming.

‏ Psalms 2:1-3

The Kingdom of God and of His Christ, to Which Everything Must Bow

The didactic Psa 1:1-6 which began with אשׁרי, is now followed by a prophetic Psalm, which closes with אשׁרי. It coincides also in other respects with Psa 1:1-6, but still more with Psalms of the earlier time of the kings (Psa 59:9; Psa 83:3-9) and with Isaiah’s prophetic style. The rising of the confederate nations and their rulers against Jahve and His Anointed will be dashed to pieces against the imperturbable all-conquering power of dominion, which Jahve has entrusted to His King set upon Zion, His Son. This is the fundamental thought, which is worked out with the vivid directness of dramatic representation. The words of the singer and seer begin and end the Psalm. The rebels, Jahve, and His Anointed come forward, and speak for themselves; but the framework is formed by the composer’s discourse, which, like the chorus of the Greek drama, expresses the reflexions and feelings which are produced on the spectators and hearers. The poem before us is not purely lyric. The personality of the poet is kept in the background. The Lord’s Anointed who speaks in the middle of the Psalm is not the anonymous poet himself. It may, however, be a king of the time, who is here regarded in the light of the Messianic promise, or that King of the future, in whom at a future period the mission of the Davidic kingship in the world shall be fulfilled: at all events this Lord’s Anointed comes forward with the divine power and glory, with which the Messiah appears in the prophets.

The Psalm is anonymous. For this very reason we may not assign it to David (Hofm.) nor to Solomon (Ew.); for nothing is to be inferred from Act 4:25, since in the New Testament “hymn of David” and “psalm” are co-ordinate ideas, and it is always far more hazardous to ascribe an anonymous Psalm to David or Solomon, than to deny to one inscribed לדוד or לשׁלמה direct authorship from David or Solomon. But the subject of the Psalm is neither David (Kurtz) nor Solomon (Bleek). It might be David, for in his reign there is at least one coalition of the peoples like that from which our Psalm takes its rise, vid., 2Sa 10:6 : on the contrary it cannot be Solomon, because in his reign, though troubled towards its close (1Ki 11:14.), no such event occurs, but would then have to be inferred to have happened from this Psalm. We might rather guess at Uzziah (Meier) or Hezekiah (Maurer), both of whom inherited the kingdom in a weakened condition and found the neighbouring peoples alienated from the house of David. The situation might correspond to these times, for the rebellious peoples, which are brought before us, have been hitherto subject to Jahve and His Anointed. But all historical indications which might support the one supposition or the other are wanting. If the God-anointed one, who speaks in Psa 2:7, were the psalmist himself, we should at least know the Psalm was composed by a king filled with a lofty Messianic consciousness. But the dramatic movement of the Psalm up to the ועתה (Psa 2:10) which follows, is opposed to such an identification of the God-anointed one with the poet. But that Alexander Jannaeus (Hitz.), that blood-thirsty ruler, so justly hated by his people, who inaugurated his reign by fratricide, may be both at the same time, is a supposition which turns the moral and covenant character of the Psalm into detestable falsehood. The Old Testament knows no kingship to which is promised the dominion of the world and to which sonship is ascribed (2Sa 7:14; Psa 89:28), but the Davidic. The events of his own time, which influenced the mind of the poet, are no longer clear to us. But from these he is carried away into those tumults of the peoples which shall end in all kingdoms becoming the kingdom of God and of His Christ (Rev 11:15; Rev 12:10).

In the New Testament this Psalm is cited more frequently than any other. According to Act 4:25-28, Act 4:1 and Act 4:2 have been fulfilled in the confederate hostility of Israel and the Gentiles against Jesus the holy servant of God and against His confessors. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, Psa 110:1-7 and Psa 2:1-12 stand side by side, the former as a witness of the eternal priesthood of Jesus after the order of Melchisedek, the latter as a witness of His sonship, which is superior to that of the angels. Paul teaches us in Act 13:33, comp. Rom 1:4, how the “to-day” is to be understood. The “to-day” according to its proper fulfilment, is the day of Jesus’ resurrection. Born from the dead to the life at the right hand of God, He entered on this day, which the church therefore calls dies regalis, upon His eternal kingship.

The New Testament echo of this Psalm however goes still deeper and further. The two names of the future One in use in the time of Jesus, ὁ Χριστὸς and ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, Joh 1:50; Mat 26:63 (in the mouth of Nathanael and of the High Priest) refer back to this Ps. and Dan 9:25, just as ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου incontrovertibly refers to Psa 8:5 and Dan 7:13. The view maintained by De Wette and Hupfeld, that the Psalm is not applicable to the Christian conceptions of the Messiah, seems almost as though these were to be gauged according to the authoritative utterances of the professorial chair and not according to the language of the Apostles. Even in the Apocalypse, Ps 19:15; Psa 12:5, Jesus appears exactly as this Psalm represents Him, as ποιμαίνων τὰ ἔθνη ἐν ῥάβδῳ σιδηρᾷ. The office of the Messiah is not only that of Saviour but also of Judge. Redemption is the beginning and the judgment the end of His work. It is to this end that the Psalm refers. The Lord himself frequently refers in the Gospels to the fact of His bearing side by side with the sceptre of peace and the shepherd’s staff, the sceptre of iron also, Mat 24:50., Mat 21:44, Luk 19:27. The day of His coming is indeed a day of judgment-the great day of the ὀργὴ τοῦ ἀγνίου, Rev 6:17, before which the ultra-spiritual Messianic creations of enlightened exegetes will melt away, just as the carnal Messianic hopes of the Jews did before His first coming. Psa 2:1-3

The Psalm begins with a seven line strophe, ruled by an interrogative Wherefore. The mischievous undertaking condemns itself, It is groundless and fruitless. This certainty is expressed, with a tinge of involuntary astonishment, in the question. למּה followed by a praet. enquires the ground of such lawlessness: wherefore have the peoples banded together so tumultuously (Aquila: ἐθορυβήθησαν)? and followed by a fut., the aim of this ineffectual action: wherefore do they imagine emptiness? ריק might be adverbial and equivalent to לריק, but it is here, as in Psa 4:3, a governed accusative; for הגה which signifies in itself only quiet inward musing and yearning, expressing itself by a dull muttering (here: something deceitful, as in Psa 38:13), requires an object. By this ריק the involuntary astonishment of the question justifies itself: to what purpose is this empty affair, i.e., devoid of reason and continuance? For the psalmist, himself a subject and member of the divine kingdom, is too well acquainted with Jahve and His Anointed not to recognise beforehand the unwarrantableness and impotency of such rebellion. That these two things are kept in view, is implied by Psa 2:2, which further depicts the position of affairs without being subordinated to the למה. The fut. describes what is going on at the present time: they set themselves in position, they take up a defiant position (התיצּב as in 1Sa 17:16), after which we again (comp. the reverse order in Psa 83:6) have a transition to the perf. which is the more uncoloured expression of the actual: נוסד (with יחד as the exponent of reciprocity) prop. to press close and firm upon one another, then (like Arab. sâwada, which, according to the correct observation of the Turkish Kamus, in its signification clam cum aliquo locutus est, starts from the very same primary meaning of pressing close to any object): to deliberate confidentially together (as Psa 31:14 and נועץ Psa 71:10). The subjects מלכי־ארץ and רוזנים (according to the Arabic razuna, to be weighty: the grave, dignitaries, σεμνοί, augusti) are only in accordance with the poetic style without the article. It is a general rising of the people of the earth against Jahve and His משׁיח, Χριστὸς, the king anointed by Him by means of the holy oil and most intimately allied to Him. The psalmist hears (Psa 2:3) the decision of the deliberating princes. The pathetic suff. êmō instead of êhém refers back to Jahve and His Anointed. The cohortatives express the mutual kindling of feeling; the sound and rhythm of the exclamation correspond to the dull murmur of hatred and threatening defiance: the rhythm is iambic, and then anapaestic. First they determine to break asunder the fetters (מוסרות = מאסרות) to which the את, which is significant in the poetical style, points, then to cast away the cords from them (ממּנוּ a nobis, this is the Palestinian mode of writing, whereas the Babylonians said and wrote mimeenuw a nobis in distinction from ממּנוּ ab eo, B. Sota 35a) partly with the vexation of captives, partly with the triumph of freedmen. They are, therefore, at present subjects of Jahve and His Anointed, and not merely because the whole world is Jahve’s, but because He has helped His Anointed to obtain dominion over them. It is a battle for freedom, upon which they are entering, but a freedom that is opposed to God.