Reformed Articles vol.2 Issue 3

new

« Prev
1
Next »

Admin
Administrator

Welcome new Members, we are not fully set up, but starting up now

Posts: 4,139

Reformed Articles vol.2 Issue 3 Apr 8, 2024 21:37:06 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Admin on Apr 8, 2024 21:37:06 GMT -5

Is Psalm 8 a Messianic Psalm? Reading Psalm 8 as Christian Scripture
Andrew T. Abernethy
Associate Professor of Old Testament
Wheaton College, Illinois

A dilemma arises for Christian readers of Psalm 8.[1] On its own, Psalm 8 is an unlikely candidate to receive the label “messianic.” It focuses mainly upon God’s ways with humanity in creation, not the Davidic office.[2] It ponders reality as it is now, not hopes for the future.[3] The NT, however, applies Psalm 8, or at least parts of it, to Jesus, the Messiah, at times in view of the world to come. So, should Christians relabel Psalm 8 as a “messianic psalm” and read it exclusively through this lens? This brings us to the hermeneutical crux of interpreting most psalms. The key issue is not whether Christian readers should change the “label” (i.e., “Messianic”) that we attach to this psalm. What is most important is if and how the theological message of the psalm can be appropriated in a wide range of ways, including messianically, in light of the canonical context. From this vantage point, Psalm 8 may not have been written originally to top the charts under the category “Messianic Psalm,” but its theological message can still grant perspective on God’s ways with his messiah, along with God’s ways with humanity and his people. Therefore, though I do not think Psalm 8 is “messianic” in the strictest sense, its theological message can still be appropriated for messianic purposes, a move that started before the time of Christ. I will illustrate such an interpretation of Psalm 8 in a three stage process that considers the Psalm (i.) as a distinct unit, (ii.) as part of the Psalter and OT Canon, and (iii.) in dialogue with the NT.[4]

Reading Psalm 8 as a Distinct Unit

Any interpretation of Psalm 8 must begin with the psalm as a distinct unit. As we follow its structure, its message becomes clear. Psalm 8 opens and closes with a refrain:

O Lord, our Sovereign,

how majestic is your name in all the earth! (8:1a, 9 NSRV)

This refrain draws us into what Psalm 8 is all about. It is a corporate (“our”) expression of praise to YHWH as the Lord (“LORD, our Lord”). So, though Psalm 8 is known for its theology of humanity as rulers within creation (8:6[7]), the psalm’s main objective is to direct praise to the Lord of the lords of creation, the Lord of humanity and creation.[5] The entire earth is the arena of God’s majesty according to the refrain, and the body of Psalm 8 directs praise to God for two ways that his majesty is evident in “all the earth.”[6]

The first section (8:1b–2) of the body of Psalm 8 praises God in light of how he acts in this world through small, unimpressive, and weak avenues to silence his foes. Verses 1b–2 read:

You have set your glory above the heavens.

2 Out of the mouth of babies and infants,

you have established strength because of your foes,

to still the enemy and the avenger (ESV)

These verses are perhaps the most enigmatic in Psalm 8. Numerous questions arise. How are infant mouths a source of strength? How can such mouths cause enemies to desist?[7] While conclusive answers to these questions are not forthcoming, we can still gain a sense for what these verses are saying. At the start of this section (1b–2) and the next (3–8), the psalmist begins by looking to the “heavens” (šmym), above which God has set his resplendent glory in verse 1b. Starting with the might and expansiveness of God’s glory in the heavens prepares for a contrast in verse 2 with God’s ability to establish strength (or “praise” in the LXX) through the tiniest and weakest of all human beings— nursing infants and their tiny mouths. How this takes place is not clear, but the power stemming from the mouth of these infants—perhaps evident in their loud, forceful cries—differs from the enemies of YHWH, who will cease.[8] The psalmist is in awe of how the Lord whose majesty is above the heavens can show glorious strength through weak infants, silencing his foes.

The second section of Psalm 8 praises the Sovereign for giving seemingly insignificant humanity a privileged status within creation (8:3–8).

When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers,

the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,

4 what is man that you are mindful of him,

and the son of man that you care for him?

5 Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings

and crowned him with glory and honor.

6 You have given him dominion over the works of your hands;

you have put all things under his feet,

7 all sheep and oxen, and also the beasts of the field,

8 the birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea,

whatever passes along the paths of the seas.

As in the first section (1b–2), the psalmist begins by reflecting upon the heavens—the sky, the moon, and the stars, all of which are the works of God (vs. 3). Such splendor in the heavens leads the psalmist to ponder why God would be mindful of human beings (vs. 4). God’s attentiveness to and privileging of humanity brings the psalmist to a point of awe. Though the mention of the “son of man” in verse 4[5] could lead some Christian readers to think the messianic king is being referred to, it is important to observe that in the OT (and even intertestamental literature) “son of man” (ben-’ādām) is not a Messianic title but an expression that conveys the quality of being human.[9] The psalmist is in awe that the very God who crafted the skies has an interest in humanity. What is more, God privileges humanity by making them a little lower than heavenly beings, granting them royal attributes like glory and prestige, and by assigning them the task of ruling over everything that God has created, particularly every animal of the ground, sky, and sea (5–8[6–9]). In verses 3–8, then, the majesty of the Lord is evident because he grants humanity the royal task of governing God’s creation.

Thus, Psalm 8 praises YHWH as the Lord whose majesty fills all the earth (8:1a, 9). This majesty is apparent through how God works in unexpected ways in the earth. Though his glory is above the heavens, it is through the mouth of weak, vulnerable infants that God manifests strength while his enemies come to nothing (1b–2). Though God’s fingers have created the glories of the sky, he has remarkably directed his concern to seemingly insignificant humanity and accorded them with the privileged role of governing God’s creation, particularly the animal realms (3–8).[10]

Reading Psalm 8 as Part of the Psalter and Old Testament Canon

Although we must start with the rhetoric and theology of the psalm as a discrete unit, the canonical context of Psalm 8 as a part of the Psalter and Old Testament canon informs how we should interpret and appropriate Psalm 8. There are three points of orientation when undertaking a canonical reading of Psalm 8.

1. Read Psalm 8 in Light of Its Neighboring Psalms[11]

It is not uncommon for readers of Psalms to view the psalms like a collection of sea shells—where upon being approved, a shell is thrown into a bag with the collection of other worthy shells. Psalms are not simply 150 poems that have made the cut and are now thrown together into a random assemblage; instead, there is intentionality behind their arrangement. Although the jury is still out on how extensive the Psalter’s arrangement is, an important starting point is to read a few psalms prior to and a few psalms after the psalm of interest to gain a sense for how your psalm might fit into the theology of that particular neighborhood in the Psalter.

Reading Psalm 8 in light of Psalms 6–7 and 9–10 exposes several insights on how the Psalter might be inviting the believing community to interpret and appropriate Psalm 8. I will note two related points that are most relevant to our purposes.[12]

First, Psalm 8 shares the motif of “foes” (ṣôrēr; 6:8, 7:5, 7; 23:5) and “enemies” (’ôyēb; ’yb 3:8; 6:11; 9:4, 7) with the surrounding psalms.[13] In Psalm 6, David’s eyes melt away with tears due to his “foes” (6:7[8]), and he yearns for all of his “enemies” (6:11) to be put to shame. In Psalm 7, David wants God to act against his “foes” (7:6[7]), though if he is guilty God should allow his “foes” and “enemies” to overtake him (7:5[6]). Psalm 9 continues this focus as David asserts his trust that God will turn his “enemies” back (9:3[4], 6[7]). Set directly in the midst of these laments, Psalm 8 praises God because he can and does silence “foes” and “enemies” through unexpected means like infants (8:2[3]). It seems, then, that the theology of this rather obscure verse (8:2[3]) strategically informs the psalms around it. If God is praiseworthy for overcoming foes through unexpected means in creation in Psalm 8, surely God can intervene to ward off the foes that David is asking God to intervene against in the neighboring laments.

Second, and related to the previous point, by placing Psalm 8 in this neighborhood, there a level of mutual illumination where God’s ways in creation particularize with David and God’s ways with David accord with God’s ways with humanity. On its own, Psalm 8 praises God as the Lord in view of his ways within creation in general. If this is how God acts with humanity in general, surely this has implications for how one can trust God to act on behalf of the Davidic king who laments in the surrounding psalms. The Lord who silences his foes through infants will also act on behalf of a weak Davidic king to silence David’s and Israel’s foes. If God has granted humanity a privileged dominion over creation, then God, the King (10:16), will certainly graciously appoint David to a role of dominion within his kingdom. Thus, within this neighborhood of Psalms, Psalm 8’s theology of how God acts through unexpected means within creation serves as an analogy for God’s ways with his Davidic king to grant him victory over foes. Though not a messianic psalm, Psalm 8’s creation theology can be appropriated for messianic purposes through its placement amidst other psalms that focus on David.[14]

In summary, the resonance that derives from Psalm 8’s placement among these psalms instills confidence that God can overcome enemies and conveys the idea that God’s remarkable ways with humanity are a pattern for comprehending God’s relationship with the Davidic king. Before the time of Jesus, then, the message of Psalm 8 was already contributing to an understanding of God’s ways with the Davidic king and Israel as a whole.

2. Read Psalm 8 in Light of the Big Picture of the Psalter

Not only do neighboring psalms cast light on how to interpret Psalm 8, but the larger arrangement of the Psalter can guide our reading too. Most scholars agree that Psalms 1–2 serve as a dual introduction to the Psalter. Significant for our purposes is the observation that Psalms 1 and 2 introduce the interrelationship between humanity and the Davidic king. Psalm 1 opens the book with a vision of the blessed person being the one who meditates upon God’s law instead of going the way of the wicked; such a faithful person will flourish, while the wicked will perish. In Psalm 2, the blessed person is the one who takes refuge in God and his Davidic King, whom God has established in Zion. When one reads Psalms 1 and 2 in conjunction, several insights emerge. For one, the established Davidic king of Psalm 2 certainly, at a minimum, embodies the ideal of the faithful person in general from Psalm 1, for only such a person will last. In other words, if it is the one who faithfully lives according to Torah who will flourish according to Psalm 1, then the Davidic king who is unshakably established in Psalm 2 would certainly be faithful like the blessed person in Psalm 1. Second, Psalm 2 reminds us that it is ultimately God’s kingship (“the one enthroned in heaven …” 2:4) which offers security both for the faithful Davidic king and for the faithful from Psalm 1. When one reads Psalm 8 in light of the Psalter’s dual introduction, this endorses the possibility of reading what Psalm 8 says about God’s ways with humanity in all of creation in light of God’s ways with David, just as God ways with humanity in general in Psalm 1 inform an understanding of the Davidic king in Psalm 2. This move parallels reading Psalm 8 in light of its neighboring psalms. Additionally, with an emphasis upon God’s kingship in view from Psalm 2, a reader remembers that Psalm 8’s ultimate focus is upon how majestic is the Lord of the lords of creation. The God who silences foes through weak vessels and grants humanity dominion is also the one who can silence David’s foes and establish his rule under God’s dominion.

A similar dynamic unfolds as one turns to the rest of the Psalter. While Davidic kingship seems to be rejected due to the sin of Davidic kings and Judah in Psalm 89, there is an increasing focus upon God’s kingship in Books IV and V of the Psalter. One finds, however, in Psalm 144, a psalm of David, where the psalmist uses language nearly identical to Psalm 8:

“LORD, what are human beings that you care for them, mere mortals that you think of them?” (Psalm 144:3)

Although this question probes God’s ways with humanity in general both in Psalm 8 and 144, Psalm 144 develops this question in a direction that leads to praise for God as the one “who delivers his servant David” (144:10). God, the King of creation, who cares for humanity, can be expected to continue his care for David too, according to Psalm 144. Amidst the Lord’s continuous care for humans within creation, God’s ways with humanity point to an enduring confidence that God, the King, will remain faithful to his promises to David. Thus, when one reads Psalm 8 within the larger context of the Psalter, its theology of God’s ways with humanity in creation is readily applicable for discerning how God will work wondrously through the line of David within his creation.

3. Read Psalm 8 in Coordination with Similar Concepts within the Story of the Old Testament

Psalm 8 must also be read in relationship to the rest of the Old Testament. The creation account of Genesis 1 corresponds with the concepts of in Psalm 8.[15] The psalmist, using his own language and expression, is in awe of the privileged place that God gave humans in governing over all realms of creation according to Genesis 1. Although the fall takes place in Genesis 3, Psalm 8 can still extol the wonders of God in the way he works within creation and with humanity. In addition, Psalm 8 also relates to Job 7:17, where Job asks a similar question to the one in Psalm 8 and Psalm 144:

What is mankind that you make so much of them, that you give them so much attention? (Job 7:17)

Job’s use of this conventional question has a take on it that differs from David’s. For Job, the doctrine of God’s mindfulness of humanity is a disconcerting truth. For David in Psalm 8, however, this leads him to extol God for such wondrous ways. It is apparent, then, that Psalm 8 certainly aims to offer a voice of comfort in light of God’s ways with humanity.[16]

In addition to Psalm 8 sharing an outlook with Genesis 1 and Job 7, there is also the larger storyline of the Old Testament that a reader should be mindful of. The Old Testament story is one of a creator King forming humanity to serve as his rulers within creation (Gen 1:26–28), yet these very humans rebelled against their creator (Genesis 3). Graciously, however, the Creator also set out to be a redeemer of humanity, first by establishing a covenant with Noah to re-establish God’s intentions with creation (Gen 9:1–3). While Noah’s offspring continues the track of human rebellion against the creator, God initiates redemption by promising Abraham that his offspring would be God’s chosen people, a fruitful and multiplying people who will fill the Promised Land (cf. 1:22, 28; 9:1; 17:20; 28:3; 35:11; 48:4; Exod 1:7). In a sense, Israel would become a microcosm for God’s ways with humanity in general, being fruitful and multiplying under God’s blessing in Canaan. As God’s redemptive relationship with Israel progressed, the Davidic king took on the role as the main representative of Israel (2 Samuel 7; Psalm 72), God’s head of the “new humanity.” This enables a reader to understand David both as a representative of Israel, yet also a representative for God’s plans for humanity in general. If this is a correct understanding of the storyline of scripture,[17] it is possible to understand the creation theology of Psalm 8 in light of God’s relationship with Israel (a microcosm of humanity) and also David (the head of this microcosm).

In summary, canonical reflections on Psalm 8 within the Old Testament results in probing how one might understand Psalm 8 within the book of Psalms and within the context of the Old Testament itself. All directions seem to endorse a reading of Psalm 8 that enables its creation theology to frame God’s ways with Israel and David.

Reading Psalm 8 as Testimony to Jesus in Dialogue with the New Testament

The next step in reading Psalm 8 is to ask, “How does Psalm 8 bear witness to Jesus and God’s ways with his church?” There is a major temptation at this stage in the process to domesticate the meaning of Psalm 8 to how the NT uses it. There are several problems with this, one of which is that only four of nine verses in Psalm 8 are quoted in the NT. Should we say that only those four verses can bear witness to Christ? Also, did not the early church view the OT as capable of teaching about Jesus prior to the formation of the NT (2 Tim 3:15)? In my opinion, NT quotations of Psalm 8 are just one avenue among several for considering how Psalm 8 might be interpreted “messianically,” in light of Christ.[18] In line with this, after considering the quotation of Psalm 8 in Hebrews 2, I will then reflect upon how else this psalm may bear witness to Jesus aside from NT quotations.

Hebrews 2:6–8 is the longest quotation of Psalm 8 (LXX) in the New Testament. In order to grasp its usage, the larger argument of Hebrews 1–2 must be kept in mind, particularly its concern to argue for Jesus’ superiority over angels and how this relates to inheritance in the world to come. The book of Hebrews opens by declaring that Jesus’ ascension as Son to the right hand of the Majesty in heaven reveals his superiority to angels (1:3–4). To defend this claim, the writer compiles a catena of OT quotations to expose how the Son’s exaltation over angels accords with OT expectations.[19] Angels never receive the status of being God’s “Son” (1:5; Ps 2:7; 2 Sam 7:14) and are expected to worship the Son (1:6; Deut 32:43 DSS/LXX). Also, the OT expects for there to be an everlasting kingdom with the Son in its midst (1:8–12), where all enemies will be under his feet (1:13); such expectations are never associated with any angel. Thus, the Son’s uniqueness in his status as Son and his dominion amidst an everlasting kingdom makes him superior to the angels who are to worship him.

In view of the Son’s status as superior to angels in his heavenly majesty at God’s right hand, the writer of Hebrews now explores the implications of this in chapter 2 in view of Jesus’ humanity. The current, exalted status of the flesh-and-blood Jesus above angels requires a reframing of how humanity had previously been understood. Psalm 8:4–6 serves as a typological catapult for probing the implications of Jesus’ bodily exaltation upon his ascension. For one, the claim in Psalm 8:5 (LXX) that humanity was “made a little lower than the angels” is affirmed and advanced upon. Yes, indeed, Jesus, along with humanity, was lower than angels in the present world (Heb. 2:9a). Since, however, the flesh-and-blood Son is now at the right hand of God in majesty and supreme over angels (1:3–4, 6), Psalm 8:5 cannot be the final word for human destiny. The next phase of the drama, of which Jesus is the forerunner, will position humanity, who are the recipients of salvation (2:16), with the flesh-and-blood Jesus in a status that is superior to angels.[20]

Second, the statement that humanity is “crowned with glory and honor” (Ps. 8:5) must be reframed in light of Jesus. Through Jesus’ suffering and atoning death, he now is crowned with a “glory and honor” (Heb. 2:9) that is far greater than the “glory and honor” accorded to humans as God’s rulers in this world. In fact, it is through Jesus’ suffering and exaltation that he brings “many sons and daughters to glory.” Thus, though humans have a level of glory and honor now, what Jesus has accomplished as the human Son for God’s human “sons and daughters” points to a far greater glory in Jesus and for God’s children within the world to come.

Third, Jesus’ exalted glory invites us also to reframe Psalm 8’s claim that God has “put everything under their feet.” In Psalm 8:6, the term “everything” has a restricted range; everything in the animal realms in the world today is under the feet of humanity (Ps. 8:6; Heb. 2:8b). In Jesus, however, “everything” in Psalm 8 becomes a token that points to a more extensive reality, since angels (1:3–4) and the world to come are now subject to him (2:5). By implication, though “everything,” in a more extensive sense, is not subject to humanity now (2:8b), there is a “flesh-and-blood” Son who does reign over everything and his human brothers and sisters will share in having “everything” subject to them in the world to come.[21]

Thus, Hebrews 2 reframes the theology of Psalm 8 in light of Jesus’ exaltation above angels and sovereignty over them in the world to come. Yes, in Psalm 8, humans, including Jesus in his incarnation, are a little lower than angels; humans do have glory and honor; humans do have everything in the animal realms subject to them. There is, however, more to the story. Due to Jesus taking on flesh, establishing himself as superior to angels in his ascension (1:3–4), and ruling over the world to come (2:5), humans will one day be superior to angels, share in a far greater glory with Jesus, and will find all things subject to them alongside of Jesus.

There are a few other NT quotations of Psalm 8 that could also warrant our attention. In Matthew 21, the religious leaders are furious that children are praising Jesus, saying, “Hosanna to the Son of David.” In response to the indignant leaders, Jesus quotes from Psalm 8:2[3]: “From the lips of children and infants, you, Lord, have called forth your praise.” Jesus is not claiming that Psalm 8:2 is a direct prophecy about this event, but is exposing how its theology illumines what is taking place. God is using unexpected means, namely children, for his purposes, so the leaders should know that what is transpiring in the temple aligns with God’s pattern of action. If God acts this way within creation throughout time, certainly such action can be expected around the Messiah.

In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul portrays Christ as the second Adam (15:22). Using as “greater than” typology, Paul quotes from Psalm 8:6b[7b] to speak of everything eventually being put under Christ’s feet, even death (1 Cor. 15:27). Though Psalm 8 emphasizes how everything in the natural created order is placed under the dominion of humanity, Paul argues then how much more does the resurrection of Christ usher in a dominion over all things, even death itself.

Thus, the writer of Hebrews and other New Testament writers draw upon the theology of Psalm 8 with the assumption that its creation theology can enable a comprehension of Jesus and the future of humanity in light of Christ, although the Christ-event invites an extension of this theology.

We should not, however, restrict a Christian reading of Psalm 8 to NT quotations. We should be asking: “How does this passage teach me about God’s ways through his Messiah and with his people today?” This will lead to insights that point us to Christ in ways besides the NT quotations. For example, since Psalm 8 is praising God in light of how God works through unexpected means, like infants or through humanity, can Psalm 8 not also lead us to worship God in light of how he has acted through the weakest and most unexpected of all means, the cross, to show his great power? Can Psalm 8 not also inform us about why God would choose the weak and unimpressive in this world to be his church (1 Cor 1:18ff)? As we look around at God’s creation in the heavens, should we still be astounded that God shows such care for humanity? Of course. Can we see this to a greater extent now that God’s care is so evident in Christ’s coming to redeem? While these points operate in concert with similar concepts in the NT, they are not directly tied to Psalm 8 by a quotation in the NT. It is vital, I believe, for Christian readers of Psalm 8 to consider deeply the rhetoric and theology of Psalm 8 and then ask how the theology of the psalm as a whole accords with Jesus Christ, whether or not a verse is explicitly quoted in the NT.

Conclusion

So, is Psalm 8 a “messianic psalm”? No and yes. It is not a messianic psalm in terms of genre or its main thrust as a discrete unit, as its focus is upon God’s glory in how he acts in unexpected ways in creation. Its theological message, however, can be appropriated to illuminate God’s ways with the Messiah and his people, as has been done since the formation of the Psalter and throughout the NT.

See Walter Moberly, Old Testament Theology: Reading the Hebrew Bible as Christian Scripture (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2013), 1–4, on the hermeneutical decision to read the Hebrew Bible as Christian Scripture. ↑
Allen P. Ross represents this sentiment: “The psalm is not a messianic psalm. It speaks of the present, that is, that God by his grace has made mankind to rule over all creation.” A Commentary on the Psalms: Volume I (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2011), 290. ↑
Richard Whitekettle, “Taming the Shrew, Shrike, and Shrimp: The Form and Function of Zoological Classification in Psalm 8,” JBL 125, no. 4 (2006): 749–765. ↑
For an exhaustive examination of Psalm 8, see Hubert James Keener, A Canonical Exegesis of the Eighth Psalm: YHWH’s Maintenance of the Created Order through Divine Reversal, JTISup 9 (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2013). ↑
“To put human dominion at the center of things without the context of God’s sovereignty is positively dangerous.” J. Clinton McCann, Jr., A Theological Introduction to the Book of Psalms (Nashville: Abingdon, 1993), 59. ↑
While all agree that the 8:1[2] and 8[9] frame this psalm, there is great debate in terms of its subdivision. Compare, for instance, Keener (and Jacobson. Keener, A Canonical Exegesis, 58, subdivides the body as:
A. Reversals One and Two (1b–3[2b-4])

Insignificant heavenly bodies (1b, 3[2b, 4])

Imbedded paradigmatic reversal: babes and infants/enemy and avenger (2[3])

Majestic heavenly bodies (3[4])

B. Reversal Three (4–8[5-9])

Insignificant human (4[5])

Majestic human (5–6[6–7])

Denouement (7–8[8–9])

Jacobson in The Book of Psalms (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2014), 120, subdivides the body as:

St. 1 Praise to God in all the earth (1a[2a])

God’s glory in creation—the question of human worth (1b–4[2b–5])

St. 2 Answer: crowned with glory—responsible for creation (5–8[6–9])

Praise to God in all the earth (9[10])

Goldingay (Psalms: Volume 1 [BCOTWP; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006], 154) divides the psalm into three sections, with vv. 1–2 praising YHWH; vv. 3–4 wondering at God’s involvement with humans; vv. 5–9 marveling at God giving humanity such glory in their dominion. I subdivide the body of this psalm at 1b–2[2b–3] and 3–8[4–9] for several reasons, which is similar to Guthrie and Quinn (George H. Guthrie and Russell D. Quinn, “A Discourse Analysis of the Use of Psalm 8:4–6 in Hebrews 2:5–9,” JETS 49/2 (2006): 235–46) and Childs, though he only speaks of 3–8 [4–9] as a body (“Psalm 8 in the Context of the Christian Canon,” Interpretation 23 [1969]: 21). ↑

Jacobson (The Book of Psalms, 123–124), Goldingay (Psalms, 155), and Mays, Psalms (Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox, 1994), 65–66, read the first half of verse 2 with the final part of verse 1. ↑
See Keener, A Canonical Exegesis, 52–57, for a helpful argument building upon the work of Lund that mouths are often an instrument of God and that “babies” can symbolize all who are vulnerable. ↑
When ĕnôš (‘mankind’) parallels ‘son of man’, as it does in 8:4, it always refers to humanity (cf. Isa 56:2) in general. “Son” (ben) can often be used to predicate an indication of a quality, this is why age is designated by “son (ben) of … years” (e.g., Gen. 12:4). “Son of man” can be applied metaphorically to Israel (Ps 80:18) and even Ezekiel (e.g., 2:1, 3). In these instances, the focus is upon how Israel and Ezekiel are human entities with whom God was relating. See Michael Goulder, “Psalm 8 and the Son of Man,” NTS 48, no. 1 (2001): 18–29. Whether or not one agrees with his conclusion that Paul came up with the title “Son of Man” for Jesus, Goulder exposes how “Son of Man” was not a title until during and after the time of Jesus. Even Daniel 7:13 is not a technical title. See also David M. Moffitt, Atonement and the Logic of Resurrection in the Epistle to the Hebrews (NTSup 141; Leiden: Brill, 2011), 121. ↑
For an exploration of how Psalm 8 might express human dominion over animals, some of which were clearly outside of the realm of physical human mastery, see Richard Whitekettle, “Taming the Shrew, Shrike, and Shrimp: The Form and Function of Zoological Classification in Psalm 8,” JBL 125, no. 4 (2006): 749–765. He argues that cognitive mastery through being able to classify these animals is one means of dominion. ↑
While many of the insights in this section derive from my own inquiry, Keener offers a number of similar reflections, though his are confined to Psalms 7–10. Keener, A Canonical Exegesis of the Eighth Psalm, 67–73. ↑
A third point might relate to the function of Psalm 8 as a hymn of praise amidst the laments in Psalm 6–7 and 9–10. Those laments anticipate a time when the psalmist (David) will praise the name (šēm) of the Lord (7:17[18]; 9:1[2]) [Patrick D. Miller, “The Beginning of the Psalter,” in The Shape and Shaping of the Psalter (ed. J. Clinton McCann; JSOTSup 159; Sheffield: JSOT, 1993), 83–92, esp. 89–90], but Psalm 8 is a hymn that praises the majesty of God’s name in the present. ↑
Cf. Miller, “The Beginning of the Psalter,” 89. ↑
The inverse is true too. The theology of David’s laments is democratized to become the words of all of God’s people (Miller, “The Beginning of the Psalter,” 89–92). Mays, Psalms, 67, however, states: “The theory of ‘democratization’ suggests that the office was transferred to all people when there was no longer a king in Israel. That does not do justice to the prominence of the anointed king in the Psalter.” A middle ground can be found in recognizing that David’s prayers can be appropriated by Israel as a whole, while recognizing that this does not automatically dissolve the office of the king. ↑
Linguistically, there are many differences between Psalm 8 and Genesis 1. Terms for dominion (rdh, mšl), birds (‘op, ṣippôr), fish (singular [dagat] vs. plural [degê]), and ways of describing the land animals (“beasts” vs “beasts of the field”) differ. ↑
Childs, “Psalm 8,” 29. ↑
For more, see Christopher J. H. Wright, Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament (Downers Grove: IVP, 1992). ↑
See Christopher R. Seitz, The Character of Christian Scripture: The Significance of a Two-Testament Bible (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2011) on this point. ↑
For an extensive analysis of the relationship between the Son’s supremacy, the world to come, and the angles, with particular attention to Hebrews 1:6 and 2:5, see David M. Moffitt, Atonement and the Logic of Resurrection in the Epistle to the Hebrews (NTSup 141; Leiden: Brill, 2011), 45–144. See, however, Guthrie and Quinn (2006: 239–240) who reserve the subjection of the world to come to Jesus, not humanity. It is unclear how the hope that many sons and daughters will come to glory through Jesus factors into their explanation. ↑
“[T]he author thinks that humanity will one day be restored to dominion over the world to come. But, as part of his understanding of the character of the penultimate age, he also believes that one human, the messianic uios anthropou, has already gone ahead of the people and entered that realm” (Moffitt, Atonement, 122). Keener cautions against overemphasizing the messianic over the anthropological, for a double focus seems to be in view (Keener, A Canonical Exegesis, 178–179). This fits with Moffitt’s schema of the penultimate world at the moment—Jesus, a human, is now exalted over the world to come, but humans at the moment are not though they will be. As Keener puts it: “In the process of moving from the heavenly exaltation of Christ to the earthly ministry of Christ, the argument also moves from focusing exclusively upon God and his glory (Hebrews 1) to focusing on Christ, redeemed corporate humanity, and their shared glory (Hebrews 2).” Keener, A Canonical Exegesis, 179. ↑
Moffitt, Atonement, 127. ↑

Admin
Administrator

Welcome new Members, we are not fully set up, but starting up now

Posts: 4,139

Reformed Articles vol.2 Issue 3 Apr 8, 2024 21:46:34 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Admin on Apr 8, 2024 21:46:34 GMT -5

Reading Psalm 40 Messianically
Brandon D. Crowe
Associate Professor of New Testament
Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia

I. Introduction[1]

What makes a Psalm messianic? This is the question we have been tasked to answer. In this essay I will focus on the messianic interpretation of Psalm 40, specifically as it is used in Hebrews 10 in reference to the bodily sacrifice of Jesus Christ.[2] Given the explicit use of Psalm 40 in Hebrews 10, I will not need to argue that Psalm 40 is used messianically in Hebrews, but instead I will focus on how and why Psalm 40 is interpreted messianically by the author of Hebrews.

To state my argument briefly, the author of Hebrews reads the words of the Psalms to be prophetic,[3] and Jesus himself speaks the Psalms in Hebrews.[4] This is consistent with the Christology and eschatology of Hebrews,[5] but also reveals an eschatological[6] outlook in the Psalms in accord with their inspiration by the Holy Spirit.[7] If we interpret Scripture with Scripture,[8] then Hebrews provides crucial hermeneutical guidance for readers of the Psalms today. Yet I will also argue that Hebrews does not infuse alien meaning into Psalm 40, but unpacks what is already there in Psalm 40. This means that we also should read the Psalms eschatologically, especially as focused on the anointed one, David’s greater Son.

These preceding observations anticipate the argument that follows. First, I will look at Psalm 40 in context. Second, I will consider the use of Psalm 40 in Hebrews. Third, I will conclude by considering some implications of the way Hebrews uses Psalm 40.

II. Considering Psalm 40

Context of the Psalter

As we consider Psalm 40, it will be helpful to mention a few preliminary matters that bear on interpreting individual psalms. First, Psalms 1–2 should be viewed as the introduction to the entire Psalter.[9] Therefore, the themes of Psalms 1–2 provide an important framework for understanding both individual psalms and the scope of the whole Psalter. Whereas Psalm 1 emphasizes the blessing of the law of the Lord, Psalm 2 focuses on God’s messianic king. Indeed, the LORD’s kingship as exercised through his anointed, royal son is one of the major themes of the entire Psalter. We therefore should expect that the covenantal promises to David and his house will figure prominently in the Psalter.[10] The anointed son rules on behalf of the LORD, and his kingdom will ultimately prevail.[11]

Second, the kingship of the anointed of David’s house is also idealized in the Psalter in a way that draws upon, but seems to transcend, David’s historical experiences.[12] Thus, David provides the prototype for the anticipated messianic king, but David’s kingship/kingdom was not itself the consummate realization of the kingship/kingdom envisioned in the psalms; the ideal kingship/kingdom belongs to a future beyond David.

Third, we should give careful attention to the context of each psalm in the structure of the Psalter.[13] Psalm 40 is the penultimate psalm of Book 1 of the Psalter (Psalms 1–41), which is particularly focused on the conflict facing the Davidic king(dom) in light of the Lord’s covenantal promises given to David.[14] Those who oppose David are opposing God’s anointed representative, and are therefore opposing God himself. This gives further reason for us to view the conflict of Psalm 40 preeminently as the conflict faced by the Lord’s anointed one.

Exegesis of Psalm 40

In light of these preliminary matters, we turn to Psalm 40 itself. In Psalm 40 David[15] expresses thanks for the Lord’s provision and protection of him in the past (40:1–3, 5, 9–10), and expresses confidence that the LORD would deliver him again in the future (40:11, 17), despite the iniquities that threaten to overtake him (40:12). Since David is identified as the author of Psalm 40, the deliverance in view is first of all the deliverance of God’s anointed.[16] Readers are not told what specific event(s) in David’s life may be in view, but it seems likely that intense opposition, and quite possibly a brush with death, is in view (40:2). By delivering David the LORD was demonstrating faithfulness to his covenantal promises, and provided assurance that he would continue to be faithful in the future. And by delivering David, as the anointed one, the LORD was also providing deliverance for his people. Thus we could say as the king goes, so go the people.[17] Deliverance for the king is deliverance for God’s kingdom, and therefore deliverance for the people of God’s kingdom.

Thus in Psalm 40 David thanks God for past deliverance, even as he looks forward in hope to a future deliverance. This brings us to an important observation for Psalm 40, and indeed all the psalms: by looking to God for future deliverance, Psalm 40 necessarily has an eschatological focus. In fact, we can even see this in microcosmic form in Psalm 40: David’s past deliverance was not the final deliverance.[18] So long as opposition to David and David’s kingdom persisted, final deliverance had not come. Inasmuch as final deliverance had not come, David looks forward to God’s intervention for redemption in the future. In light of this, we seem to have a view in the Psalter that final deliverance would coincide with the inheritance of the land and dwelling in perfect peace, when David’s enemies (and therefore God’s enemies) would no longer pose a threat.[19] The Psalter is an eschatological book. Indeed, as Geerhardus Vos has memorably stated: “A redemptive religion without eschatological outlook would be a contradiction in terms.”[20]

In light of this eschatology, we turn to Psalm 40:6–8, which is the strophe cited explicitly in Hebrews 10. The Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT)[21] can be translated as follows, which is the translation of the ESV:

In sacrifice and offering you have not delighted, but you have given me an open ear. Burnt offering and sin offering you have not required. Then I said, “Behold, I have come; in the scroll of the book it is written of me: I delight to do your will, O my God; your law is within my heart.

These words of David recall several passages in which God’s delight is not primarily in cultic ritual, but in those whose hearts are truly committed to the Lord.[22] A frequent problem among God’s people throughout Scripture is the dichotomy between obedience and sacrifice. Where true obedience is lacking, sacrifice is unpleasing to the LORD. In light of this, David positions himself as one who is truly obedient, truly righteous before the LORD, and is not only paying lip service to the LORD via hollow sacrifice.[23]

And yet we can say more. Just as the eschatology of Psalm 40 encourages us to look beyond God’s deliverance of David in the past to the full, final deliverance in the future, so can we see how the obedience of David in Psalm 40:6–8 also looks ahead to the fuller realization of the obedience of God’s anointed. Just as the deliverance God provided in the past was not the consummation of his deliverance, the obedience manifested by David (sincere though it was) was not the consummate realization of the obedience envisioned in Psalm 40. Thus, for example, the problems that persisted for David in 40:12 were due to his own iniquities, and he needed to be delivered from them. It is not difficult to see, then, how the need for future deliverance in Psalm 40 is also coupled with the problem of imperfect obedience.

Therefore, in light of this future-orientation to Psalm 40, we do well to read Psalm 40 in light of God’s dealings with David more broadly. The Davidic Covenant[24] is the assumed background for the Davidic, kingly focus of Book 1.[25] The messianic son of Psalm 2 is the royal son from the house of David, and the role of this figure a major thrust of the entire Psalter. The full redemption anticipated in the Psalms is portrayed in a variety of ways as coming through the rule of this anointed figure, which was anticipated by David but not realized in David himself.

But what specifically is intended in Psalm 40:6–8? The open ear[26] of 40:6 must refer to the sincere obedience of David in contrast to bare ritual.[27] Perhaps more intriguing in Psalm 40 is what David intends in 40:7: “Behold, I have come; in the scroll of the book it is written of me.” The author of Hebrews applies this to Jesus, but in what sense has David come in accord with what was written in the scroll? The most likely option for this book is the laws for the king in Deuteronomy 17:14–20.[28]

David is thus speaking explicitly and specifically as the LORD’s anointed king, and he recognizes his own role as the one who must lead and protect the people of God against her enemies (cf. Deut. 17:20). David’s royal awareness also illuminates his “I have come” statement. David recognizes the role he plays as God’s anointed in the administration of God’s kingdom and God’s purposes.[29] Additionally, the king in Deuteronomy 17 must maintain trust in the LORD without pretension; for the people to prosper and the kingdom to persevere, the king must remain obedient to Torah. David’s actions as the anointed one are therefore not to be seen in light of his own interests, but as an anointed representative who leads the people of God. If David has in view Deuteronomy 17 in Psalm 40, then it further fits well with the opening two pillar-psalms of the Psalter (focusing on God’s law and God’s king). In this case, God’s king must know and meditate on God’s law. Likewise, in Deuteronomy 17 the king must know and assiduously adhere to the precepts for the king, and this as a part of God’s law more broadly. In other words, Deuteronomy 17 is not all that the king must know and do; but adherence to Deuteronomy 17 was to be one particular and significant way in which the king was to understand and meditate on God’s entire law.[30]

In Psalm 40 we see that, as God’s king, David knows the law and understands that as God’s anointed, he has a key role to play in the congregation of God’s people (cf. 40:9–10). Implicit in David’s recognition of the importance of the law for him is the recognition that his deliverance and the people’s deliverance does not come through the autonomous strength of the king, but through the king’s trust in the LORD who brings deliverance.[31]

III. Psalm 40 in Hebrews 10[32]

Eschatology in Hebrews

In light of the eschatological outlook of Psalm 40, we turn now to the use of Psalm 40 in Hebrews 10. One encounters a myriad of issues when looking at the use of the Old Testament in Hebrews, but the following discussion will be limited to the author’s hermeneutical rationale for reading Psalm 40 in relation to Jesus as messiah. One of the keys here is the eschatology of Hebrews. The author of Hebrews begins his letter by observing that we are living in the last days (1:2) which is evident because of the climactic work of the Son as royal priest (1:3–4).

In Hebrews 10 we come to the portion of the argument where the nature of the new covenant sacrifice of Christ, as Son and Great High Priest, is exposited. The one sacrifice of Christ inaugurates the new covenant, which is a better covenant (Heb. 8–9), having been perfected once and for all by the perfect priest who did not need to offer a sacrifice first for himself before making it for others (10:1–4, 10–14). This sacrifice was possible because of the Great High Priest’s full-fledged obedience, being wholly without sin. The portion of the argument that invokes Psalm 40 is therefore focused on the uniqueness of the sacrifice of Christ as the truly effectual sacrifice. Thus Hebrews has a strong eschatological emphasis since the greater day has come.

Textual Issues

In light of this eschatology, we come to Hebrews 10:5–7, which reads:

Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me; in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure. Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’” (ESV)

Careful readers will observe several differences between the quotation of Hebrews and the Hebrew text noted earlier (along with the LXX). These are mostly minor, but one difference that has received most attention is Hebrews’s use of body (sōma) in place of ears (MT:ʾoznayim; LXX: ōtia). It is not entirely clear whether the author of Hebrews has modified the MT/LXX ʾoznayim/ōtia and inserted sōma, or if perhaps the Greek Vorlage utilized by the author of Hebrews already read sōma instead of ōtia.[33] Establishing the Vorlage, however, would not solve all the issues, since the question would remain whether sōma is a legitimate rendering of ʾoznayim. To this question—whether body is a legitimate rendering of ears—I would respond in the affirmative, based on synecdoche. As a figure of speech, synecdoche is commonly used to refer to a part that represents the whole or, in this case, the whole that represents a part. Put simply, body is a legitimate rendering of ears because ears are a part of the body. If one’s body is prepared and dedicated to God, this includes one’s ears.[34]

The Son’s Better Sacrifice

The emphasis on the body of Jesus in Hebrews 10 allows us to consider in more detail how the author of Hebrews relates Psalm 40 to Jesus as High Priest. Throughout Hebrews Jesus is seen to be superior, which is concomitant with the eschatology of Hebrews. And as the Great High Priest, Jesus’s sacrifice is better—indeed, more effectual—than the repeated sacrifices of Israel’s priesthood. Beyond this, Jesus’ “betterness” is preeminently seen in his divinity which is emphasized from the beginning of the letter. Thus the Son is better than the angels because the Son is the divine Son of God. He is the Son who is heir of all things and through whom the world was made (1:2). Moreover, he is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact imprint of his nature, even upholding the universe by his word (1:3). As divine Son he has taken his seat at God’s right hand, having made purification for sins. Thus already in the opening verses of Hebrews Jesus’ divine sonship is linked with his consummate sacrifice for final purification.

Jesus’ one sacrifice is therefore better than all previous sacrifices because Jesus is divine. But along with this, Jesus’ sacrifice is better because of the perfection of Jesus’ obedience. This is emphasized already in Hebrews 2:10 (cf. 2.9–14), where Jesus is said to have been made perfect through suffering. Indeed, in his earthly life Jesus learned obedience through what he suffered (5:8). This suffering also entails the true humanity of Jesus, which is the burden of much of Hebrews 2. Jesus is not only the divine Son of God, but is also our brother, the one who is made like us in every way, yet without sin. He is therefore uniquely qualified to be a great and merciful high priest.

Therefore, in light of the surpassing greatness of Jesus as divine Son of God, and in light of the surpassing greatness of his role as Great and Merciful High Priest, Jesus’ sacrifice is the ultimate, final sacrifice. This brings us back to Psalm 40 in Hebrews 10.[35] Jesus, the pre-existent Son (cf. 10:5), came according to what was written of him in the book.[36] That is, he came to be fully devoted to God’s will, which prominently included his role as serving himself (as the Great High Priest) as the final sacrifice, and by so doing, he eradicated the disparity between obedience and sacrifice that was so often a snare for God’s people.[37]

Key in Hebrews’s understanding of the work of Christ, then, is the body of Christ as Great High Priest. In his body Jesus was fully obedient to the will of God, and he offers himself fully—including his body—on behalf of his people. We see this summarily in 10:10: “And by [God’s] will we have been sanctified through the once-for-all offering of Jesus’ body” (my trans.). Note, then, the emphasis on the body of Jesus as in connection with this one, final, effectual sacrifice. By offering his body as the final sacrifice, Jesus “eradicated the disparity between sacrifice and obedience”[38] as the one who was always and fully committed to the obedience required in the Torah. In David we meet a man after God’s own heart, who delighted to keep the law of God. Yet in David we also encounter a man who was not able to bring final deliverance, nor was he immune from the problems that he brought on himself. David needed sacrifices for himself (cf. Ps. 51:15–16). Jesus is greater than David because he does not need a sacrifice for himself, nor did Jesus ever face a problem resulting from his own sinfulness.

This unity of the offerer and the sacrifice that is embodied in Jesus also points to a more extensive understanding of doing God’s will, deriving from Psalm 40. The ability of Jesus to offer the final, perfect sacrifice assumes the perfection of his humanity, which includes, but is not limited to, his once-for-all new covenant sacrifice on the cross. Instead, it includes all the ways he suffered throughout his life, and all the obedience he rendered.[39] This must be the case because God’s law not only demands absence of sin, but also demands the positive accomplishment of God’s will.[40] Whereas David delighted in God’s past deliverance, he also had to look ahead to future deliverance because to that point no perfect, final sacrifice had been offered. Though David came to do the will of God, especially in accord with Deuteronomy 17, he did not fully conform to all of God’s requirements, thus he required sacrifices for himself. In contrast, Jesus was fully committed to God’s law in every way, requiring no sacrifices for himself.[41] Thus the delight to do God’s will in Psalm 40, as it is used in Hebrews 10, points to the perfect sacrifice of Christ, but also his full conformity to Deuteronomy 17 and all the Torah by implication.[42]

By being at once the perfect offering and the perfect offerer, Jesus by his one act of shedding blood puts an end to the repetition of sacrifices. And by implementing this once for all sacrifice, Jesus institutes the ultimate redemption that David was looking forward to in Psalm 40. Redemption comes through the one who has come to do God’s will fully, which includes Torah conformity and also serving, in his own body, as the final, effectual sacrifice.[43]

IV. Conclusion: What Makes a Psalm Messianic?

As I conclude, I would like to summarize briefly some implications of my argument, and suggest a working explanation for what makes a psalm messianic. These should be considered provisional in the sense that much more needs to be said, but these are intended to serve as points on which to marinate, in order to get the exegetical juices flowing.

First, Psalm 40 is messianic as part of the Spirit-inspired eschatological outlook of the Psalms that anticipates a greater Son of David.[44] It is through this anointed figure that final salvation comes, though it is also through the mighty intervention of the LORD. These are united in the work of Christ, who was the faithful human, but also the divine Son of God. This also assumes the supernatural character of OT revelation.

Second, we should linger over the significance of the LORD’s anointed in the Psalter, established already in Psalm 2. It is therefore highly significant that Jesus is identified as the anointed Christ in Hebrews and throughout the New Testament. As anointed, one most naturally thinks of Christ as king. But anointed figures could be prophets, priests, or kings. Thus in Hebrews Christ is not only the royal Son, but also the anointed priest (after the order of Melchizedek), and the one through whom we encounter greater revelation. In Hebrews 10 Jesus is particularly portrayed in priestly terms, since he is both the offerer and the offering whose sacrifice inaugurates the new covenant. Thus in Hebrews Jesus fulfills the roles of prophet, priest, and king.[45] These are valuable categories to lean upon to consider ways in which Jesus relates to the Old Testament.[46]

Third, in addition to the Spirit-inspired eschatology of the Old Testament, we must consider the implications of preexistence Christology in Hebrews. It is quite striking that in Hebrews the Son is identified as the speaker of (at least some of) the Psalms.[47] This phenomenon may provide further support for the notion of an inherently forward-looking thrust to the Psalter.

To end with the question posed at the beginning of this essay, “what makes a psalm messianic?” I conclude with this (provisional) answer:

Given the Spirit-inspired eschatology of the OT, as part of God’s unified and unfolding work of redemption, all psalms are messianic because they anticipate, in various ways, God’s ultimate salvation that comes through his anointed one; we can also say, however, that some psalms have a heightened sense of messianic focus and anticipation.

To ask the question “what makes a psalm messianic,” then, is not simply to ask an ex post facto question, but one that was already intended from the beginning.[48]

This essay arises out of the IRLBR Young Scholars Summit at Tyndale House, Cambridge (2015), subsequently presented at a special session at the annual SBL meeting (Atlanta, 2015). I am grateful to IRLBR for the opportunity to participate, and to Andrew Abernethy, Mariam Kovalishyn, and Michael McKelvey for their insights and warm collegiality. ↑
The verse numbering of the MT is different from English versions. Psalm 40:6–8 in English is Psalm 40:7–9 in Hebrew. Additionally, Psalm 40 is Psalm 39 in the LXX. Given the intended audience of this essay, I will use the English chapter and verse numbering. ↑
By which I also mean predictive. ↑
Hebrews has a Trinitarian view of God’s speech, including the psalms. See Jonathan I. Griffiths, “Hebrews and the Trinity” in The Essential Trinity: New Testament Foundations and Practical Relevance, ed. Brandon D. Crowe and Carl R. Trueman (London: IVP, 2016), 122–38. For the Father: see, e.g., Psalm 2; 45; 104; the Son: Psalm 22; 40; the Holy Spirit: Psalm 95. Also note that David is the one spoken through (Heb. 4:7). ↑
See the classic essay by C. K. Barrett, “The Eschatology of the Epistle to the Hebrews,” in The Background to the New Testament and its Eschatology: Studies in Honour of C. H. Dodd, ed. W. D. Davies and David Daube (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1956), 363–393. ↑
By eschatological I mean a forward-looking posture that anticipates a greater day of redemption in accord with God’s promises regarding the blessings of the “latter days.” ↑
The author of Hebrews uses the Psalms extensively. See the classic study of Simon J. Kistemaker, The Psalm Citations in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Amsterdam: Wed. G. Van Soest, 1961). On the eschatology of the Psalter, see Geerhardus Vos, “The Eschatology of the Psalter,” PTR 18 (1920): 1–43; O. Palmer Robertson, The Flow of the Psalms: Discovering their Structure and Theology (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2015), 48, 129.It is noteworthy that one frequently finds the superscription eis to telos in the LXX Psalter (including Psalm 39 LXX [=40 MT]), which seems to imply some sort of future orientation. See Richard B. Hays, “Christ Prays the Psalms: Israel’s Psalter as a Matrix of Early Christology,” in The Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as an Interpreter of Israel’s Scripture (Grand Rapids: Baker Eerdmans, 2005), 107; Martin Karrer, “LXX Psalm 39:7–10 in Hebrews 10:5–7,” in Psalms and Hebrews: Studies in Reception, ed. Dirk J. Human and Gert Jacobus Steyn, LHB/LOTS 527 (London: T&T Clark, 2010), 134; see also Joachim Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter, WUNT 2/76 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995). ↑
See WCF 1.9. This is a key tenet of the Reformation (“analogy of faith”). ↑
See Bruce K. Waltke with Charles Yu, An Old Testament Theology: An Exegetical, Canonical, and Thematic Approach (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007), 870–874; Robertson, Flow of the Psalms, 13–15, 54–61; Mark D. Futato, Interpreting the Psalms: An Exegetical Handbook (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007), 59–95. Note that Psalms 1–2 do not have superscriptions. ↑
As we will see, this is true of Psalm 40. ↑
Robertson (Flow, 59, 60–61, 168–70) argues that the Psalms often fuse together the kingship of the Lord and his anointed messiah. ↑
The language of “idealized” comes from Futato, Interpreting the Psalms, 76–77. ↑
See further Robertson, Flow of the Psalms. ↑
Robertson, Flow of the Psalms, 53–83. ↑
In the MT Psalm 40 is identified with David by means of a lamed, likely denoting authorship. I am not able to argue for the authenticity of the superscriptions in this essay, but I believe the burden of proof is on those that would deny their authenticity. No human author of Psalm 40 is identified in Hebrews, but David is explicitly identified as the author of Psalm 95 in Heb. 4:7 (even though no specific superscription is given in Psalm 95). Davidic authorship of the Psalms looms even larger in Acts (cf. Acts 2:30). ↑
This is not to undermine the legitimacy of the “every person” interpretation of Psalm 40, but it is to recognize that the focus on the LORD’s anointed permeates the Psalter, consistent with the guidance of Psalm 2 and other internal clues. However, David is also a sinner in need of redemption, as we all are. Further, we read in the NT that all of God’s people are kings in Christ (cf. 1 Pet. 2:9–10 [and also prophets and priests!]), which provides further basis for the “every person” interpretation. But this approach stands alongside the focus on the LORD’s anointed; it is not an either-or dichotomy. Thanks to Andrew Abernethy for his response to an earlier draft of this essay where he highlighted this question. ↑
This point is also made by Robertson, Flow of the Psalms, 63. ↑
Thus compare 40:1–3 with 40:13–15. ↑
See, e.g., Psalm 37:11; 122; 125. ↑
Vos, “Eschatology,” 3; cf. 9. See also John Calvin, Inst. 2.10.3, 16. ↑
It is well known that Hebrews generally cites something like what we know today as the LXX for OT quotations. It is nevertheless prudent to look at the Hebrew of the MT as part of the overall picture of how Psalm 40 is used in Hebrews, especially in light of the purpose of this paper, which is to trace out how and why psalms were read messianically among the early Christians. ↑
Cf. 1 Sam. 15:22; Ps. 51:15–16; Prov. 21.3; Hos. 6:6. ↑
On the unity of heart motive of the offerer and ritual sacrifice in Leviticus, see Nobuyoshi Kiuchi, “Spirituality in Offering a Peace Offering,” TynBul 50 (1999): 23–31. ↑
See 2 Sam. 7; 1 Chron. 17; Ps. 89; 132. ↑
See, for example, Robertson, Flow of the Psalms, 47–49, 53–83. ↑
The Hebrew is a bit unusual, speaking of ears that are hewn or hollowed out (ʾoznayim kārîtā lî). ↑
See also Isa. 6:9–10; 50:5; Jer. 5.21. One can also see the contrast with Saul’s disobedience (1 Sam. 15:22). Whereas Saul as God’s anointed performed sacrifice in disobedience to God, David as God’s anointed demonstrated true devotion to God, which was better than Saul’s sacrifice. See similarly Hosea 6:6. ↑
This view is also shared by many commentators. ↑
We also encounter an eschatological outlook in Deuteronomy 17—a text that anticipates a king who, to that point, had not yet come. ↑
Note the 176 verses of Psalm 119, where David considers all the ways and manners in which he meditates and acts in accord with God’s law. Clearly his concern with the law went well beyond Deuteronomy 17. ↑
Deliverance language is prominent in Psalm 40. See, e.g., 40:2, 5, 9–11, 13, 16–17. We see something similar earlier in Book 1 of the Psalter. In Psalm 20 David notes the distinction between those who trust in horses and chariots (cf. Deut 17:16) and those who trust in the name of the LORD their God (Ps. 20:7). King David recognizes that he plays a central role in leading God’s people, yet his prayers for God’s intervention reveal his conviction that deliverance ultimately comes from the LORD alone. ↑
Karrer (“LXX Psalm 39:7–10”, 136) argues that there are no known citations of Psalm 40 in early Jewish literature. For possible allusions, see George H. Guthrie, “Hebrews,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 976–977. He argues that 2 Enoch 45.3 (J) is an allusion to Psalm 40 (though dating 2 Enoch cannot be done with certainty), and similar teachings are found in Judith 16:16; Sirach 34:18–35:12. Guthrie also notes allusions to Psalm 40 in the later Targum on the Psalms and in the Talmud (b. Giṭ. 60a; b. Yebam. 77a). ↑
LXX witnesses א, A, B read sōma. For the view that the Vorlage of Hebrews read sōma, see Gert J. Steyn, A Quest for the Assumed LXX Vorlage of the Explicit Quotations in Hebrews, FLANT 235 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), 289–92, 295. Steyn’s detailed study shows how difficult the textual questions are. See also Karrer, “LXX Psalm 39:7–10,” 142–43. For the view that the author of Hebrews has modified the LXX, see Guthrie, “Hebrews,” 977; Karen H. Jobes, “Rhetorical Achievement in the Hebrews 10 ‘Misquote’ of Psalm 40,” Bib 72 (1991): 387–96. Jobes observed in 1991 that most commentators on Hebrews viewed the author’s Vorlage to read sōma (388). ↑
It was noted in our conversations in Cambridge that ears in Psalm 40 is already a synecdoche: the point is not just that David’s ears are committed to the Lord in obedience, but David himself was entirely committed to the Lord. Hebrews 10 is simply an expansion of what is already there in Psalm 40. ↑
Karrer (“LXX Psalm 39:7–10,” 128–129) argues for an inclusio focusing on Jesus’s obedience in Heb. 2:12–13 and Heb. 10. In both contexts, it is the Son who speaks the Psalms. ↑
Cf. Geerhardus Vos, Reformed Dogmatics, trans. and ed. Richard B. Gaffin, Jr., 5 vols. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012–16), 1:75; 2:85; Mark Jones, Knowing Christ (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 2015), 26–27. ↑
See similarly William L. Lane, Hebrews 1–8, WBC 47A (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1991), cxxxiv; idem, Hebrews 9–13, WBC 47B (Dallas: Word, 1991), 266. Note also the messianic/priestly emphasis of Psalm 40 in Richard P. Belcher, Jr., The Messiah and the Psalms: Preaching Christ from all the Psalms (Fearn, Ross-shire: Mentor, 2014), 177. ↑
Lane, Hebrews 1–8, cxxxiv; idem, Hebrews 9–13, 266. ↑
Harold Attridge also focuses on the obedience/faithfulness of Jesus in Hebrews, in “The Psalms in Hebrews,” in The Psalms in the New Testament, ed. Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menken, NT and the Scriptures of Israel (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 197–212, esp. 210–211. See also Kistemaker, Psalm Citations, 126–28. ↑
In rabbinic tradition the 613 commandments of the Torah included 248 positive commandments (b. Mak. 23b–24a). ↑
Kistemaker (Psalm Citations, 126–27) argues that Hebrews assumes the necessity of perfect obedience, which necessitated Christ’s final sacrifice. ↑
Notably in Hebrews Jesus is a royal priest (cf. Ps. 110:4; Heb. 5:6; 7:17, 21). Herman Bavinck synthesizes the obedience of Christ well: “Scripture regards the entire work of Christ as a fulfillment of God’s law and a satisfaction of his demand. As prophet, priest, and king, in his birth and in his death, in his words and in his deeds, he always did God’s will. He came into the world to do his will. The law of God is within his heart [Ps. 40:8]. His entire life was a life of complete obedience, a perfect sacrifice, a sweet odor to God.” Quoted from Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 3: Sin and Salvation in Christ, ed. John Bolt, trans. John Vriend (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006), 394. ↑
See also Belcher, Messiah, 176–77. ↑
Similar points have been made by many. See Edmund Clowney, The Unfolding Mystery: Discovering Christ in the Old Testament, 2nd ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2013), 16, 142, 162–68; F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 232; see also Irenaeus, Demonstration 73, which illustrates Hays, “Christ Prays the Psalms,” 110–11. ↑
Indeed, Jesus is presented as prophet, priest, and king already in Hebrews 1:1–4. ↑
This, of course, is not a new approach; it is a classic way to describe the offices of Jesus. See recently Richard P. Belcher, Jr., Prophet, Priest, and King: The Biblical Roles of Christ in the Bible and Our Roles Today (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2016). ↑
See Psalm 22:22 (Heb. 2:12); Psalm 40:6–7 (Heb. 10:5–9). ↑
Thanks to Carlton Wynne for providing informal feedback on this essay. ↑

Volume 2 Issue 3
December, 2017 | 86 pages

BACK TO ISSUE
Other Articles in This Issue
A Summit in Cambridge
Is Psalm 8 a Messianic Psalm? Reading Psalm 8 as Christian Scripture
David the Prophet? Psalm 16 in Acts 2
VIEW ALL
Other Reviews in This Issue
The Flow of the Psalms: Discovering Their Structure and Theology
The Day the Revolution Began: Reconsidering the Meaning of Jesus’s Crucifixion
The Last Adam: A Theology of the Obedient Life of Jesus in the Gospels
VIEW ALL
Copyright © 2017 Reformed Theological Seminary

Admin
Administrator

Welcome new Members, we are not fully set up, but starting up now

Posts: 4,139

Reformed Articles vol.2 Issue 3 Apr 8, 2024 21:49:02 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Admin on Apr 8, 2024 21:49:02 GMT -5

The Messianic Nature of Psalm 118
Michael G. McKelvey
Associate Professor of Old Testament
Reformed Theological Seminary, Jackson

Introduction

Psalm 118 has long been associated with the festival activities in Israelite tradition. Modern scholarship has tended to focus on the cultic and liturgical nature of the passage, especially as an entrance liturgy for worshippers coming to the temple. Other scholars have noted that it was written from the perspective of the Davidic king leading in thankful worship for deliverance from his enemies, which included the deliverance of the people. Mitchell Dahood labels it “a king’s hymn of thanksgiving for delivery from death and for a military victory.”
[1] The New Testament writers indicate their understanding of the Davidic nature of this psalm as well. In some manner, they saw the fulfillment of Psalm 118 in the life and work of Jesus. In view of the Davidic covenant, they believed this psalm pointed to the Messiah.

There are different perspectives within scholarship regarding what constitutes a “messianic psalm.” I define the term “messianic” as primarily or principally relating to the Davidic king as the “Lord’s Anointed” or “messiah,” historically and/or eschatologically. Thus, I propose that Psalm 118 should be understood as messianic for three main reasons.
[2] First, it appears that the Davidic king is the speaker in this psalm. Second, the canonical context of the Psalter supports its messianic nature. Third, subsequent communities of faith read it messianically, which is evidenced in the New Testament. With this in view, we will first examine Psalm 118 as a distinct text. Then, we will consider its canonical position within the Psalter. And finally, we will address its employment in the New Testament.

Psalm 118 as a Distinct Text

There is no superscription indicating the Davidic nature of this work, but the jubilant expressions of the psalmist would be difficult to picture as originating from any other mouth than the king’s.[3] The royal/kingship themes that pervade the psalm also warrant reading it as a royal psalm. Jamie Grant has helpfully established royal nature of the work. He lists five “textual indications” that the leader in the psalm is the king:

1) The apparent setting for the deliverance received from Yahweh is one of military conflict, thus indicating that the most likely speaker is the king who would lead the people into battle.

2) The speaker refuses to trust in men or “princes” (v. 9) . . . this is probably a reference to foreign leaders and it is likely that only the king would have the opportunity to put his trust in princes by way of international alliance.

3) Verses 10-12 speak of the opposition of the nations surrounding the speaker, again indicating a military setting, where the king would lead the people in battle against other nations.

4) The representative nature of the speaker, who leads the community into Temple worship, means that the psalmist-speaker must fulfill some sort of official function on the people’s behalf—of all the known offices it is most likely that the king would fulfill the role indicated in Ps 118.

5) Finally, Eaton points out that the “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord” formula is one which is associated with kingship in OT (Kingship, 62). Therefore, it seems most likely that it is king who is the speaker-leader in Ps 118.
[4]With this in view, the Davidic king begins by saying, “Give thanks to YHWH because he is good, because his hesed is forever (לעולם חסדו).” In verses 1-4, he calls the congregation to worship YHWH, emphasizing his hesed (חסד). Three different groups—Israel, the house of Aaron, and those who fear YHWH—are summonsed to proclaim, “His hesed endures forever (לעולם חסדו).” This fourfold mention of God’s eternal hesed evokes the covenantal commitment of God to his people, and especially to David. It is within this context that the king declares that the Lord heard his cry and answered him in vv. 5-7. He knows that the Lord is on his side as his helper, and his enemies will not prevail against him. It is YHWH’s commitment to him as the Davidic king that distinguishes him from his adversaries. This leads the king to state the benefit of taking refuge in YHWH rather than in human leaders in vv. 8-9, for they can not ultimately deliver him. Though he is surrounded by nations, he will cut them off “in the name of YHWH,” because YHWH has helped him (vv. 10-13). In vv. 14-16, the psalmist confesses that the Lord is his salvation, and the righteous sing of the right hand of the Lord. The king will live and tell of God’s works, and even though this experience he has endured is YHWH’s discipline of him, God has not given him to death (vv. 17-18).

[5] The king calls for the gates to be opened to him as he enters victoriously from battle to give thanks to YHWH (v. 19). As Dahood says, “The triumphant king at the head of his army commands that the gates be thrown open.”

[6] The king says, “This is the gate of YHWH; the righteous will enter at it” (v. 19). He again thanks (ידה) God for answering him and achieving his salvation (v. 20).

A curious expression follows v. 20 about attempted treachery. This could be a reference to the nations or the king’s own subjects who betrayed him or both. Verse 22 states, “The stone the builders rejected became the head of the corner.”
[7] Who are these builders? They are the ones wanting to build the kingdom. They did not want the Davidic king, and engaged in some type of conspiracy to overthrow his reign. But instead of achieving their goal, the rejected king actually became the very one upon whom the kingdom is being built. Their rejection of him could not undermine God’s election of him: “This is from YHWH; it is marvelous in our eyes. This is the day YHWH made; let us rejoice and be glad in it” (v. 24). The Lord’s establishment of the Davidic king cannot be undermined by the attempts of human conspiracy.

The psalmist then cries out for YHWH to “save us” and “prosper us,” by which he identifies himself with the other “righteous” who are with him (v. 25). This cry is anticipatory, expressing an ongoing or coming (i.e. eschatological) need of deliverance. The statement in v. 26, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of YHWH,” constitutes a reference to the Davidic king himself, which is then followed by the identification of the king with his righteous people who say with him, “we bless you from the house of YHWH.” They are in the presence of the Lord at the temple, and the call is issued in v. 27 to place the sacrifice upon the altar. The festal worship is ready to begin.

Before the psalm comes to an end, there is one final declaration of the king’s loyal commitment to his heavenly King: “You are my God, and I will give thanks to you; My God, I will extol you!” (v. 28). But the king does not simply represent himself. He functions as the leader of the people, and his role is to lead them to YHWH. So he calls the congregation once more to worship, forming an inclusio with v. 1, “Give thanks to YHWH because he is good, because his hesed is forever (לעולם חסדו).”

Psalm 118 is a well-structured text that begins and ends by emphasizing YHWH’s covenantal faithfulness expressed by the concept of his eternal hesed. Grant recognizes the importance of remembering this:

the intimate link between חסד and covenant—particularly since the idea of לעולם חסדו, as it is found here in Ps 118, is a usage of hesed which is particularly associated with the covenant. The חסד of Yahweh is revealed to Israel primarily in his covenant with them. He has bound himself to a covenant relationship of חסד with Israel as a community (Ex 20:6) as well as with the Davidic king as his anointed (2 Sam 7:15).

[8]Thus, the king and his righteous subjects praise God for his covenant faithfulness. This faithfulness is exemplified by the Lord saving the king and, by their association with him, his righteous people. The king and his kingdom give thanks to YHWH for his eternal hesed.

With this in view, the Davidic persona in this psalm enables us to begin to see its messianic nature. James L. Mays helpfully explains,

David is the king whose throne has an everlasting future based on the promise of God. The songs he sponsored and spoke are to be read in the context of that promise. They are “messianic,” not because all of them are about the anointed of Israel, but rather in the sense that they are language to be spoken in the knowledge that God has chosen a messiah and surely keeps God’s promises.

[9]So the connection of this psalm to the king gives it a messianic nature as a distinct text. This connection provides us with the necessary background for understanding the use Psalm 118 in the New Testament. However, before moving to the New Testament, it is important to consider the function of Psalm 118 within the Psalter.

Psalm 118 in the Psalter

When considering the message and interpretation of a psalm, it is important to consider its canonical placement and function within the book of Psalms. For several decades much of scholarship has provided evidence for the intentional editorial arrangement of the Psalter, which demonstrates a thematic and theological movement from the beginning of the book through the end.
[10] While not being able to rehearse the discussion of the canonical reading of the book of Psalms, I am persuaded that there is an overall arrangement of the Psalter. This arrangement centers on an apparent narrative of the rise and fall of Davidic kingship and a theological response to that fall in an exilic and post-exilic situation, a response which is given in the light of YHWH’s covenantal promises. I have joined other scholars in making a case for the canonical study of the psalms elsewhere.

[11] In the light of this research, I believe the arrangement of the Psalter sheds light on understanding Psalm 118. I will note two things with regards to this psalm.

First, it has been shown that there is an apparent relationship between kingship/royal psalms and Torah psalms, especially in three places in the Psalter. Three pairs of royal and torah psalms repeatedly examined by scholars are Psalms 1-2, 18-19, and 118-119. The royal/kingship psalms are Psalms 2, 18, and 118, and the torah psalms are Psalms 1, 19, and 119. Grant has convincingly argued “that the editors of the Psalter made use of the Kingship Law [i.e. Deut. 17:14-20] as an intellectual paradigm in their placement of kingship psalms alongside of torah psalms at key junctures in the Book of Psalms.”
[12] He also suggested a two-fold rationale for their employment of the Kingship Law:

1) in response to the climate of messianic expectation, the editors wished to make clear that the restored Davidic king should be one who follows the ideal of kingship rather than the historical examples found in Deuteronomic history;

2) the Law of the King defined the monarch as an example of devotion to Yahweh (by way of developing a torah-centered worldview) for the whole people, and the editors of the Psalter wished to pick up on this exemplary commitment to God, and set it as a model for the readers of the psalms to follow.

[13]Secondly, with this canonical setting in view, the messianic nature of Psalm 118 is heightened, suggesting that we are not only to see the Davidic king in this psalm but also the psalm itself as portraying an anticipation of the future restoration of the Davidic king. This messianic expectation in the Psalter appears to be one of the great themes of Books IV and V. With the resounding lament in Psalm 89 over the fall of the Davidic monarchy through the exile, the books that follow address a community without nationhood and without a king. Thus, the post-exilic setting for the primary audience of Books IV and V creates a hermeneutical question for us to consider. How did they read this psalm in the light of the Davidic covenant and their present circumstances?

The answer appears to be that they read it in the light of God’s promise that a son of David would reign forever, and they yearned for a coming Davidic king who would restore them as a people. The overall theology of the Psalter maintains and conveys this anticipation, as well as the theology we find the prophetic literature of the Hebrew Bible. There is also evidence of a messianic anticipation in inter-testamental period communities and, especially, communities within Israel during the time of Jesus of Nazareth, which is corroborated by the accounts of the New Testament.

We can, therefore, say that at the very minimum there are elements in Psalm 118 that were associated with a messianic figure, and were viewed as a post-exilic foreshadowing of God’s deliverance of the messiah and the righteous people of God through the messiah. Interestingly, commenting on this psalm, Leslie C. Allen writes, “Like other royal psalms Ps 118 came to be imbued with messianic import and doubtless this is why it stands at the end of the Hallel psalms, Pss 113-118.”
[14] All these things provide us with a hermeneutical trajectory for considering the use of Psalm 118 the New Testament.

Psalm 118 in the New Testament

There are primarily two segments of Psalm 118 that are employed repeatedly in the New Testament in relation to Jesus, indicating that the New Testament authors interpreted this psalm as referring to Jesus as the Davidic King.
[15] The first passage, Psalm 118:22-23, states, “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone. This is the Lord’s doing; it is marvelous in our eyes” (ESV). Sometimes the quotations includes only vv. 22 regarding Jesus as the cornerstone. The second passage is v. 26, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of YHWH.” We will briefly consider each passage, but we will begin with the occurrences of the latter passage.

Psalm 118:26 is found in the account of the Triumphal entry of Jesus during the week of Passover just prior to his death. The three main passages are Matt. 21:9; Mark 11:9-10, and Luke 19:38-40. In two of the three occurrences there is the clear connection between Jesus and David:

And the crowds that went before him and that followed him were shouting, “Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!” (Matt. 21:9, ESV)

And those who went before and those who followed were shouting, “Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David! Hosanna in the highest!” (Mark 11:9-10, ESV)

It is also interesting to note that in the third occurrence, Luke records that the people praise Jesus as “the king” and that he accepts the connection that the crowd was making between him and Psalm 118.

As he was drawing near—already on the way down the Mount of Olives—the whole multitude of his disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen, saying, “Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!” And some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples.” He answered, “I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out.” (Luke 19:37-40, ESV)

Jesus’ view of his own connection with Psalm 118:26 is further underscored by his statement recorded in both Matt. 23:39 and Luke 13:35 that Jerusalem would not see him until they say, “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.”
[16]The entry of Jesus into Jerusalem was interpreted as a fulfillment of Psalm 118, and the historical setting of the Passion week reveals many correspondences between the psalm and Jesus. First, the overarching context of Psalm 118 is YHWH’s salvation/deliverance of the king and, by association, the king’s righteous people. In the gospels, the crowds anticipate that Jesus as the Davidic king will deliver them. Second, both the psalm and the New Testament contain the elements of feast, worship, and sacrifice. In Psalm 118, the king leads them in worshipful celebration of God’s deliverance at the temple. In the New Testament, the people are in Jerusalem engaged in worshipful celebration of God’s deliverance from Egypt and are hopefully anticipating his deliverance again. Third, and this is more to the point of the New Testament writers, God delivers his people through the king. So as YHWH saved the righteous through the Davidic king in Psalm 118, YHWH is now saving the righteous through the Messiah, the Son of David, the King.

Note the irony, however, in the interpretation of Psalm 118 in Jesus’ day. The people’s anticipation of God’s deliverance characterized the crowd. But they did not anticipate the manner in with God was delivering his people. It was through the king, but through his death! In other words, while the people interpreted the psalm as applying to Jesus, they did not expect the Davidic king to deliver them in this way. The unexpected manner God’s salvation through the death of king reveals a misinterpretation of the Messiah’s role in redemption. In other words, in the eyes of the New Testament writers, the crowds identified the right person but the wrong interpretation regarding how he would procure God’s deliverance.

Moving on, Psalm 118:22-23 are the other verses highlighted in the New Testament, and each reference occurs in conjunction with the rejection of Jesus by the majority of the people of his day. Jesus refers to himself as the stone the builders rejected who becomes the cornerstone in Matt. 21:41, Mark 12:10-11, and Luke 20:17. Each of these quotations take place in the light of the parable of the tenant where Jesus indicates that the religious leaders are rejecting him as the Messiah/King. Moreover, each time Jesus introduces the quotation of Psalm 118:22-23 along the lines of the scriptures foretelling that this rejection would take place:

Matt. 21:41, “Jesus said to them, ‘Have you never read in the Scriptures . . .’“

Mark 12:10, “Have you not read this Scripture . . .”

Luke 20:17, “But he looked directly at them and said, ‘What then is this that is written…’” (ESV)

It is clear that Jesus before his death and resurrection understood the psalm as a prophetic statement regarding his particular work as the Messiah. And the religious leaders of his day are the “builders” who are rejecting him. However, he will ironically become the actually cornerstone of the building, and this is all what God has purposed.

The application of Psalm 118:22-23 to Jesus also occurs in post-resurrection contexts in the New Testament. In Acts 4:11, Peter says to the religious rulers of his day, “This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone.” Ephesians 2:20 states that the household of God is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone.” And in the context of Jesus as the cornerstone of the church, 1 Pet. 2:7 says, “but for those who do not believe, ‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.’“

What can be said of the use of Psalm 118 in these NT contexts? It was read messianically in that day by much of the community of faith. There was also an anticipation that Jesus was fulfilling the psalm prior to his death and resurrection, and that he ultimately did fulfilled it after his resurrection. We also see that the psalm was not fully understood by the crowds with regard to the Messiah’s function in delivering the people, but they clearly saw a connection to Jesus as the Davidic king. Therefore, New Testament writers saw the deliverance of Christ from the grave through the resurrection as God’s deliverance of the king and, thereby, God’s deliverance of his people.

Conclusion

Is Psalm 118 a messianic psalm? This is a complicated question, and the answer is largely governed by how we define a “messianic psalm.” In one sense, it is clearly messianic. It is about the Lord’s anointed, the Davidic king, as a distinct passage in its own right. It seems clearly messianic in its canonical context, anticipating YHWH’s faithful fulfillment of his promise to David. It was clearly read messianically by the New Testament writers and by others in their day. And above all, Divine intention via the doctrine of inspiration indicates its messianic nature. So the answer is yes. It is messianically prophetic, and though we may debate whether it is directly prophetic, or typological, or analogical, or a foreshadowing, etc., its eschatological significance has been acknowledged by the community of faith (at least portions of the community) since the final arrangement of the Psalter. This psalm may not be directly prophetic in the sense that it only refers to a future messiah, but it does play a significant role in the biblical theology of God’s salvation through his coming anointed one. In some way, it dramatically foreshadows that the Messiah will procure YHWH’s deliverance for his people, by being delivered himself from death by the hand of YHWH. Note Psalm 118:17-18 as the king says, “I shall not die, but I shall live, and recount the deeds of the Lord. The Lord has disciplined me severely, but he has not given me over to death” (ESV).

More discussion is required regarding what is meant by the designation “messianic psalm.” Perhaps we need to expand our understanding of the term “messianic” altogether, and be more intentional in qualifying what is meant by it.

Mitchell Dahood, Psalms III, 101-150 (AB 17a; Garden City, NY: Double Day & Co., 1970), 155. For others works noting the kingly persona of this paslm (or its possibility), see Sigmund Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, Vol. I, translated by D. R. Ap-Thomas (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1962), 180-181; Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101-150 (WBC; Waco, TX: Word Books, 1983), 124-125; Artur Weiser, The Psalms: A Commentary, Translated by Hebert Hartwell (OTL; London: SCM Press, 1962), 725-730; John Eaton, Psalms (London: SCM Press, 1967), 270-271; Kingship and the Psalms (SBT; Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson Inc., 176), 153; John Goldingay, Psalms, Volume 3: Psalms 90-150 (BCOT; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), 354. ↑
These reasons are not to be viewed as exhaustive as there are other possibilities in determining the messianic nature of a psalm. The rationales presented in this paper simply highlight the messianic nature of Psalm 118 and add to the discussion of what constitutes a “messianic psalm.” ↑
Notably, the Talmud links Ps 118:21-28 with David as being an exchange between David, Jesse, Samuel, and David’s brothers (Isidore Epstein, ed., The Babylonian Taulmud, Seder Mo’ed Vol. II, Pesaḥim [London: Soncino Press, 1961], 615). ↑
Jamie A. Grant, The King as Exemplar: The Function of Deuteronomy’s Kingship Law in the Shaping of the Book of Psalms (AcBib 17; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004), 127-128, n. 11. ↑
Note the Lord’s “discipline” of the king, but not to death. See 2 Sam. 7:14-16. ↑
Dahood, Psalms III, 159. ↑
Interestingly, in Ps 118:22 the Targum reads, “the youth that the builders left behind . . . has become king and ruler.” ↑
Grant, King as Exemplar, 129. ↑
James L. Mays, The Lord Reigns: A Theological Handbook to the Psalms (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994), 98. ↑
Gerald H. Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter (SBLDS 76; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985); J. Clinton McCann, Jr., ed., The Shape and Shaping of the Psalter (JSOTSup 159; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993); Nancy L. deClaissé-Walford, Reading from the Beginning: The Shaping of the Hebrew Psalter (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1997); Jerome Creach, Yahweh as Refuge and the Editing of the Hebrew Psalter (JSOTSup 217; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996); Robert L. Cole, The Shape and Message of Book III (Psalms 73-89) (JSOTSup 307; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000); Grant, King as Exemplar; David M. Howard, Jr., The Structure of Psalms 93-100 (BJS/UCSD 5; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997); O. Palmer Robertson, The Flow of the Psalms: Discovering Their Structure and Theology (Philipsburg, NJ: P&R, 2015). This approach is also seen in some recent commentaries. See, e.g., J. Clinton McCann, Jr., The Book of Psalms (NIB; Nashville: Abingdon, 1996); Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Die Psalmen I: Psalm 1-50 (NEchtB; Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1993); Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51-100, translated by Linda M. Maloney (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005); Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150 (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2011). ↑
Michael G. McKelvey, Moses, David and the High Kingship of Yahweh: A Canonical Study of Book IV of the Psalter (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2010, reprinted 2014). ↑
Grant, King as Exemplar, 293. ↑
Grant, King as Exemplar, 293. ↑
Allen, Psalms 101-150, 125. ↑
Interestingly (pre-dating the New Testament period), there is evidence that during Second Temple period at least parts of Ps 118 were interpreted in view of David as the Lord’s Anointed. See David Flusser and Shmuel Safrai, “The Apocryphal Psalms of David,” in Judaism of the Second Temple Period, Volume I, eds. David Flusser and Azzan Yadin (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2007), 259-260; David M. Stec, The Genizah Psalms: A Study of MS 798 of the Antonin Collection (Cambridge Genizah Study Series 5; Leiden: Brill, 2013), 34-35. ↑
Note the different historical/chronological context of the occurrence of this statement in Matthew and Luke. ↑

Volume 2 Issue 3

Is Psalm 8 a Messianic Psalm? Reading Psalm 8 as Christian Scripture
David the Prophet? Psalm 16 in Acts 2
VIEW ALL
Other Reviews in This Issue
The Flow of the Psalms: Discovering Their Structure and Theology
The Day the Revolution Began: Reconsidering the Meaning of Jesus’s Crucifixion
The Last Adam: A Theology of the Obedient Life of Jesus in the Gospels
VIEW ALL
Copyright © 2017 Reformed Theological Seminary

Last Edit: Apr 8, 2024 22:03:07 GMT -5 by Admin

Reformed Articles vol.2 Issue 3

Post by Admin on Apr 8, 2024 21:37:06 GMT -5

Post by Admin on Apr 8, 2024 21:46:34 GMT -5

Post by Admin on Apr 8, 2024 21:49:02 GMT -5

Quick Reply