Comentarios bíblicos

This psalm is pure gospel; it is only, and wholly, concerning Christ, the Messiah promised to the fathers and expected by them. It is plain that the Jews of old, even the worst of them, so understood it, however the modern Jews have endeavoured to pervert it and to rob us of it; for when the Lord Jesus proposed a question to the Pharisees upon the first words of this psalm, where he takes it for granted that David, in spirit, calls Christ his Lord though he was his Son, they chose rather to say nothing, and to own themselves gravelled, than to make it a question whether David does indeed speak of the Messiah or no; for they freely yield so plain a truth, though they foresee it will turn to their own disgrace, Mt 22:41-46, etc. Of him therefore, no doubt, the prophet here speaks of him and of no other man. Christ, as our Redeemer, executes the office of a prophet, of a priest, and of a king, with reference both to his humiliation and his exaltation; and of each of these we have here an account. I. His prophetical office, Ps 110:2. II. His priestly office, Ps 110:4. III. His kingly office, Ps 110:1,3,5,6. IV. His estates of humiliation and exaltation, Ps 110:7. In singing this psalm we must act faith upon Christ, submit ourselves entirely to him, to his grace and government, and triumph in him as our prophet, priest, and king, by whom we hope to be ruled, and taught, and saved, for ever, and as the prophet, priest, and king, of the whole church, who shall reign till he has put down all opposing rule, principality, and power, and delivered up the kingdom to God the Father.

This psalm is entitled "A Psalm of David." It is also ascribed to David by the Saviour Matthew 22:43; and by Peter Acts 2:34; and there is no reason to doubt the correctness of the title. There is nothing, however, in the title, or in the psalm, to determine at what period of David's life, or on what occasion it was written. Aben Ezra supposed that it was at the time referred to in 2 Samuel 21:15-17; and others have selected other occasions in the life of David. But all this is conjecture. The psalm has no particular reference to anything in his history, and as it is wholly prophetic of the Messiah, it might have been composed at any period of his life.

The psalm is repeatedly quoted in the New Testament as referring to the Messiah, and in such a manner as to show that this was the customary interpretation among the Jews, or that it might be referred to by way of "proof" in regard to the Messiah, so that the relevancy and pertinence of the argument would be at once admitted. Matthew 22:44 (compare Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42); Acts 2:34; Hebrews 5:6; Hebrews 7:17, Hebrews 7:21. The way in which it is quoted shows that this was the prevailing and received mode of interpreting the psalm.

Yet this belief has not been uniform. DeWette supposes that it refers to David himself. Jarchi supposed that it referred to Abraham; Borhek, to Solomon; Justin Martyr and Tertullian, to Hezekiah. See Rosenmuller.

The application of the psalm in the New Testament to the Messiah is so clear and unequivocal, that we are bound to defend the opinion that it was "designed" to refer to him; and the manner in which it is quoted shows that it was in no secondary sense, and in no way of "accommodation," but that it had an original and exclusive applicability to him. Every principle of honesty in interpretation demands this. There may be difficulties in the interpretation itself, but the fact that it refers to the Messiah involves no difficulty, if it be once admitted that there is such a thing as prophecy at all, and that "any" portion of the Old Testament has reference to a Messiah. There is no part of the Old Testament that is more clearly applied to him in the New Testament than this psalm; there is no part that more naturally suggests the Messiah; there is none that is more difficult of explanation if it be maintained that it does not refer to him; there is none that is made more plain by referring it to him. It will be assumed, therefore, in this exposition, that the psalm had an original and exclusive reference to the Messiah, and that the friends of revelation are bound to show that in him who claimed to be the Messiah, and to whom it is applied in the New Testament - the Lord Jesus - there is a "fair" fulfillment of the predictions which are contained in it.

The idea in the psalm is that of the exaltation, the conquest, the priesthood, and the dominion of the Messiah. Two things - the kingship and the priesthood of the Messiah - are combined. The leading idea is that of the "priest-king" or the "king-priest," as in the case of Melchizedek, in whom the two offices of priest and king were in a very unusual manner and form united in one person. Usually they were separate, even in the earliest ages of the world. In the case of Melehizedek they were "combined," and hence, he was selected as a proper representative of the Messiah - of one who should combine these offices, apparently incongruous, in one.

The psalm embraces the following points:

I. The appointment of the Messiah - acknowledged by the author of the psalm as his "Lord" - to that high office, to be held until he should subdue all his enemies, Psalm 110:1.

II. His being endowed with "power" needful for the accomplishment of the design for which he was appointed, Psalm 110:2.

III. The assurance that his people would be made "willing" in the day when he should put forth his power, Psalm 110:3.

IV. The special characteristic of his reign, as that of a "priest-king," after the order of Melehizedek; combining the two functions of king and priest in his own person and office, Psalm 110:4.

V. His conquest and triumph, Psalm 110:5-7.

The Messiah sits in his kingdom at the right hand of God, his enemies being subdued under him, Psalm 110:1, Psalm 110:2. The nature and extent of his government, Psalm 110:3. His everlasting priesthood, Psalm 110:4. His execution of justice and judgment, Psalm 110:5, Psalm 110:6. The reason on which all this is founded, his passion and exaltation, Psalm 110:7.

The Hebrew, and all the Versions, except the Arabic, attribute this Psalm to David: nor can this be doubted, as it is thus attributed in the New Testament. We have in it the celebration of some great potentates accession to the crown; but the subject is so grand, the expressions so noble, and the object raised so far above what can be called human, that no history has ever mentioned a prince to whom a literal application of this Psalm can be made. To Jesus Christ alone, to his everlasting priesthood and government, as King of kings and Lord of lords, can it be applied.

The Jews, aware of the advantage which the Christian religion must derive from this Psalm, have labored hard and in vain to give it a contrary sense. Some have attributed it to Eliezer, the servant or steward of Abraham; and state that he composed it on the occasion of his master's victory over the four kings at the valley of Shaveh, Genesis 14:Others say it was done by David, in commemoration of his victory over the Philistines. Others make Solomon the author. Some refer it to Hezekiah, and others to Zerubbabel, etc.: but the bare reading of the Psalm will show the vanity of these pretensions. A King is described here who is David's Lord, and sits at the right hand of God; a conqueror, reigning at Jerusalem, King from all eternity - having an everlasting priesthood, Judge of all nations, triumphing over all potentates, indefatigable in all his operations, and successful in all his enterprises. Where has there ever appeared a prince in whom all these characters met? There never was one, nor is it possible that there ever can be one such, the Person excepted to whom the Psalm is applied by the authority of the Holy Spirit himself. That the Jews who lived in the time of our Lord believed this Psalm to have been written by David, and that it spoke of the Messiah alone, is evident from this, that when our Lord quoted it, and drew arguments from it in favor of his mission, Matthew 22:42, they did not attempt to gainsay it. St. Peter, Acts 2:34, and St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 15:25; Hebrews 1:13; Hebrews 5:6, Hebrews 5:10; Hebrews 7:17; Hebrews 10:12, Hebrews 10:13, apply it to show that Jesus is the Messiah. Nor was there any attempt to contradict them; not even an intimation that they had misapplied it, or mistaken its meaning. Many of the later Jews also have granted that it applied to the Messiah, though they dispute its application to Jesus of Nazareth. All the critics and commentators whom I have consulted apply it to our Lord; nor does it appear to me to be capable of interpretation on any other ground. Before I proceed to take a general view of it, I shall set down the chief of the various readings found in the MSS. on this Psalm.

Psalm 110:1 Said unto my Lord. Instead of לאדני ladoni, "my Lord," one MS. seems to have read ליהוה layhovah, "Jehovah said unto Jehovah, 'Sit thou on my right hand,'" etc. See De Rossi.

Thy footstool. הדם לרגליך hadom leragleycha, "the footstool to thy feet." But eight MSS. drop the prefix ל le; and read the word in the genitive case, with the Septuagint, Vulgate, and Arabic. Many also read the word in the singular number.

Psalm 110:3 Instead of בהדרי קדש behadrey kodesh, "in the beauties of holiness," בהררי קדש beharerey kodesh, "in the mountains of holiness," is the reading of thirty our of Kennicott's MSS., and fifty-three of those of De Rossi, and also of several printed editions.

Instead of ילדתך yaldutheca, "of thy youth," ילדתיך yaladticha, "I have begotten thee," is the reading, as to the consonants, of sixty-two of Kennicott's and twenty-three of De Rossi's MSS., and of some ancient editions, with the Septuagint, Arabic, and Anglo-Saxon.

Psalm 110:4 After the order, על דברתי al dibrathi, דברתו dibratho, "His order," is the reading of twelve of Kennicott's and De Rossi's MSS.

Psalm 110:5 The Lord, אדני adonai: but יהוה Yehovah is the reading of a great number of the MSS. in the above collections.

Psalm 110:6 Instead of בגוים baggoyim, "among the heathens" or nations, גוים goyim, "he shall judge the heathen," is the reading of one ancient MS.

Instead of ראש rosh, "the head," ראשי rashey, "the heads," is the reading of one MS., with the Chaldee, Septuagint, Vulgate, and Anglo-Saxon.

Psalm 110:7 For ירים yarim, "he shall lift up," ירום yarom, "shall be lifted up," is tthe reading of six MSS. and the Syriac.

Instead of ראש rosh, "The head," ראשו rosho, "His head," is the reading of two MSS. and the Syriac.

A few add הללו יה halelu Yah, "Praise ye Jehovah;" but this was probably taken from the beginning of the following Psalm.

The learned Venema has taken great pains to expound this Psalm: he considers it a Divine oracle, partly relating to David's Lord, and partly to David himself.

1. David's Lord is here inducted to the highest honor, regal and sacerdotal, with the promise of a most flourishing kingdom, founded in Zion, but extending every where, till every enemy should be subdued.

2. David is here promised God's protection; that his enemies shall never prevail against him; but he must go through many sufferings in order to reach a state of glory.

3. The time in which this oracle or prophecy was delivered was probably a little after the time when David had brought home the ark, and before he had his wars with the neighboring idolatrous nations. The kingdom was confirmed in his hand; but it was not yet extended over the neighboring nations.

INTRODUCTION TO Psalm 110

A Psalm of David. This psalm was written by David, as the title shows, and which is confirmed by our Lord Jesus Christ, Matthew 22:43 and by the Apostle Peter, Acts 2:34 and was not written by anyone of the singers concerning him, as Aben Ezra and Kimchi; nor by Melchizedek, nor by Eliezer the servant of Abraham, concerning him, as Jarchi and others: for the former could not call Abraham his lord, since he was greater than he, Hebrews 7:7 and though the latter might, yet he could not assign his master a place at the right hand of God; nor say he was a priest after the order of Melchizedek: and as it was written by David, it could not be concerning himself, as the Targum, but some other; not of Hezekiah, to whom some of the Jews applied it, as Tertullian (m) affirms; but of the Messiah, as is clear from the quotation by Christ, Matthew 22:43 and from the references to it by the apostle, Acts 2:34. And that this was the general sense of the ancient Jewish church is manifest from the silence of the Pharisees, when a passage out of it was objected to them by our Lord concerning the Messiah; and is the sense that some of the ancient Jews give of it; says R. Joden (n),

"God will make the King Messiah sit at his right hand, &c:''

and the same is said by others (o); and it is likewise owned by some of the more modern (p) ones; and we Christians can have no doubt about it. The psalm is only applicable to Christ, and cannot be accommodated to any other; no, not to David as a type, as some psalms concerning him may.

CX.

At the first sight the authorship and purpose of this psalm are, for a Christian expositor, not only placed beyond the necessity of conjecture, but even removed from the region of criticism, by the use made of its first verse by our Lord, and the emphatic manner in which He quotes it as the Divinely inspired utterance of David (Matthew 22:41-45; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44). But it is now, even among the most orthodox, an admitted fact that, in matters of literature and criticism, our Lord did not withdraw Himself from the conditions of His time, and that the application He made of current opinions and beliefs does not necessarily stamp them with the seal of Divine authorisation.

The prominent thought in the psalm is the formal union in one person of the royal dignity and the priesthood. Now all the kings of Israel and Judah at times assumed priestly functions, but only twice in the history can the offices be said to have been formally combined—in the person of Joshua son of Josedech (Zechariah 11:12-13), and in that of the Asmonean Jonathan and his successors (1 Maccabees 11:57). The latter reference is preferable. The impression left by the psalm is exactly in accordance with the history of the Asmoneans. One whom Jehovah has declared by solemn oath a priest; one, i.e., in whom the priesthood was indubitably and firmly fixed, is exalted at Jehovah’s right hand as a king, and, as a warrior, rides on with Jehovah to triumph. And the choice of Melchizedek, as type (see Note, Psalm 110:4), does not arise from any idea of contrasting his order with that of Aaron, but from the necessity of going back to him for an instance of actual and formal priesthood combined in the same person, with kingly rank. In 1 Maccabees 14:41 the very expression of the psalm, “high priest for ever,” is used of Simon.

The abrupt ending of this short psalm has led many critics to regard it as a fragment. The parallelism is very lax.

[66] Compare Driver, Lit. of O.T. p. 384; Orelli, O.T. Prophecy, pp. 153 ff.; Gore, Bampton Lectures, pp. 196 ff., 270; Gifford, The Authorship of the CXth Psalm; Sharpe, Psalm CX; Baudissin, A. T. Priesterthum, p. 259 f.

This brief but weighty Psalm—brevis numero verborum, magnus pondere scntentiarum, as it is called by St Augustine—is addressed to one whom the Psalmist styles my lord. He speaks in the language (Psalm 110:1) and with the authority (Psalm 110:4) of a prophet. He has received a Divine revelation concerning his lord, which he communicates to him for his encouragement in the work that lies before him. Jehovah has chosen him to share His throne. He purposes by His own power to subdue all his enemies. Zion is the seat of his kingdom. Zion is the centre from which goes forth his victorious might. There he is to rule, unmoved by the menaces of surrounding enemies. When he musters his people for battle, countless hosts of youthful warriors flock eagerly to his standard, animated by a spirit of loyal devotion and willing self-sacrifice (Psalm 110:1-3).

The king,—for though he is not expressly so called, it is implied that he is a king,—is also a priest: not a hereditary priest of the line of Aaron, but a priest by a special Divine appointment, whose priesthood resembles that of Melchizedek. In him the primeval unity of royalty and priesthood, seen in the ancient priest-king of Salem, reappears (Psalm 110:4).

The scene changes to the battle-field. When this king goes forth to war, Jehovah goes with him. He stands at his right hand as his champion, executing judgement upon the nations, destroying his adversaries far and wide. The Psalm closes with a picture of the king halting for a moment to refresh himself as he pursues his foes, and then pressing on with fresh vigour to complete his triumph (Psalm 110:5-7).

To whom does the Psalm refer? To some historical king, or to the future Messiah? If it could be considered by itself, apart from the New Testament use of it, we should have little hesitation in regarding it as addressed by some prophet to the reigning king, like Psalms 20, 21, 45. Lofty as is its language, it does not go beyond that of Psalms 2, 72, which we have seen reason to think have a primary historical reference. It introduces a new idea, the priesthood of the king, but all its language can be explained from the peculiar position and significance of the theocratic king, as the earthly representative of Jehovah. He was the embodiment. for the time, of God’s purpose to establish His kingdom on earth, and therefore prophets and psalmists were taught to speak of him in terms far exceeding the personal significance of any particular king, in words which were to be fulfilled after the lapse of ages with a larger, spiritual meaning.

It has however been very commonly maintained that the reference which our Lord made to this Psalm must, for the Christian student, determine its authorship and interpretation. Many who in every other case regard Messianic Psalms as having a primary historical meaning, feel that here our Lord’s authority compels them to hold that this Psalm was written by David, and was addressed by him to the future Messiah, who, he believed, would spring from his family. It is therefore necessary carefully to examine the precise nature of our Lord’s reference to the Psalm.

Pharisees, Herodians, Sadducees, Scribes, had been questioning Jesus, with the object of ensnaring Him in His talk. When they had been silenced by the wisdom of His answers, so that “no man durst ask him any question,” He proceeded to question His questioners. “How say the scribes that the Christ is the son of David? David himself said in the Holy Spirit,

The Lord said unto my Lord,

Sit thou on my right hand,

Till I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet.

David himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he his son?” (Mark 12:35 ff.). St Luke’s account (Luke 20:41 ff.) is substantially the same. St Matthew’s account (Matthew 22:41 ff.) differs somewhat in detail, and brings out more clearly the point, that the words are rather a question and a challenge than an assertion and an argument.

“While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, saying, What think ye of the Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in the Spirit call him Lord, saying,

The Lord said unto my Lord,

Sit thou on my right hand,

Till I put thine enemies underneath thy feet?

If David then calleth him Lord, how is he his son? And no one was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.”

The question assumes (1) that the Psalm was written by David, (2) that it was inspired, and (3) that it directly refers to the Messiah. The inability of the Pharisees to answer shews that these premisses were unhesitatingly admitted. If they could have replied that the Psalm was not written by David, or that it was not inspired, or that it did not refer to the Messiah, they would have had an answer ready to hand. But evidently it did not occur to them that any one of these points could be disputed. David was unquestioningly regarded as the author, if not of the whole Psalter, at least of the Psalms which bore his name; the Hagiographa, if not placed on the same level of inspiration as the Law and the Prophets, were yet held to have been written by inspiration (ברוח הקדש = ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ); the Psalm, it must be inferred, was commonly understood to refer to the Messiah.

But in assuming these premisses for the purpose of His question, does our Lord stamp them with the sanction of His authority? It has been very truly pointed out that one of His methods of teaching was “to ask men questions such as would lead them to cross-examine themselves closely in the light of their own principles[67].” It seems neither unreasonable nor irreverent to suppose that He was doing so in this instance. Taking His opponents upon their own ground, He desired to arouse their consciences to confess that if only they followed out their own beliefs to their legitimate conclusions, they must look for a Messiah who was more than a mere human descendant of David, and therefore they ought not to be scandalised at His claims. But it does not follow that He meant to endorse the correctness of those beliefs in their entirety. He accepts, for example, their reference of the Psalm to the Messiah. But could He have accepted the Messianic idea which they derived from it? We have no precise information as to the contemporary interpretation of it, but it could hardly fail to have been regarded as supporting the popular conception of the Messiah as a conquering king, who was to expel the Romans, and reign triumphantly in Zion. To such an interpretation He could not have meant to lend the sanction of His authority. But it was not necessary for him to correct it at the moment. So too with the question of authorship. He was not pronouncing a judgement in criticism. The very notion of criticism at that time was unknown. Tradition held absolute sway. Criticism would have been an anachronism and an impossibility. For His present purpose of stimulating reflection He could accept without correction or inquiry the tradition which was universally current. The Psalm was Messianic; the language of it, viewed in the light of history, pointed to the Messiah as One greater than David. The conclusion which the Pharisees ought to have drawn from their own premisses, had they been honest with themselves, was a true one, even if those premisses were not, from a literary and historical point of view, exact.

[67] Gore, Bampton Lectures, p. 198.

It would be out of place here to enter upon any discussion of the mysterious question of the limitations of our Lord’s knowledge in His life on earth. But it is undoubtedly “easier to conceive of our Lord using this sort of argument, if we accept the position that He, the very God, habitually spoke in His incarnate life on earth, under the limitations of a properly human consciousness[68].”

[68] Gore, p. 198. Cp. the important notes on p. 270. See also Sanday, Bampton Lectures, p. 419 f., on the “neutral zone among our Lord’s sayings,” i.e. “sayings in which He takes up ideas and expressions current at the time and uses without really endorsing them.”

If then it may be maintained that, in the words of Bishop Thirlwall as given by Bishop Perowne, “we are left very much in the same position with regard to the Psalm as if our Lord had not asked these questions about it,” it will not be necessary to isolate it from the other royal Messianic Psalms, which refer in the first instance to the circumstances of the time. The most natural and obvious view will be that it was not addressed by David himself to the Messiah, but by some prophet to David, or to some later king or prince.

Its date and occasion have been much disputed. (1) By some it has been supposed to refer to one of the Maccabees, who were at once priests and princes. Most plausible are the suggestions that it was addressed to Jonathan or Simon. Jonathan was chosen “prince and leader” after the death of Judas, and “took the governance upon him, and rose up in the stead of his brother Judas” (1Ma 9:30-31). Subsequently he was appointed high priest by Alexander Balas (c. b.c. 153), who also “sent him a purple robe, and a crown of gold” (1Ma 10:20). Of Simon, who succeeded Jonathan, expelled the Syrians from the Acra, and secured the independence of the Jews (b.c. 142), it is recorded that “the people made him their leader and high priest” … and “king Demetrius [2, Nicator] confirmed to him the high priesthood” … and “the Jews and priests were well pleased that Simon should be their leader and high priest for ever, until there should arise a faithful prophet” (1Ma 14:35; 1Ma 14:38; 1Ma 14:41)[69].

[69] A confirmation of the view that the Psalm was addressed to Simon has been found in the fact observed by the Rev. G. Margoliouth, Academy, 1892, p. 182, and independently by Prof. Bickell, that the initial letters of the clause Sit thou &c. and the three following verses spell the name Simon (שׁמען). But this appears to be a mere accidental coincidence. Acrostics giving the name of the poet or of the person celebrated in the poem appear to have been a comparatively late invention. No tradition of their occurrence in the O.T. has survived.

There are however at least two considerations which are fatal to the hypothesis of a Maccabaean origin for this Psalm. (a) The Maccabees were first priests and then princes. But the Psalm refers to a prince upon whom is conferred the dignity of a peculiar priesthood, distinct apparently from the hereditary priesthood of the descendants of Aaron. (b) The very terms in which Simon’s election is recorded, “until there should arise a faithful prophet,” testify to the fact that the Maccabaean age was sadly conscious that the voice of prophecy was silent (cp. 1Ma 4:46; 1Ma 9:27). How then could a Maccabaean poet presume to speak, as the author of this Psalm does, in the language (Psalm 110:1) and with the authority (Psalm 110:4) of prophecy? To these considerations it may be added that it is difficult to suppose that the action of heathen princes in the appointment of Jonathan and the confirmation of Simon could be spoken of in the lofty language of this Psalm.

(2) The coronation of Joshua, as a type of the union of the royal and priestly offices in the person of the Messiah (Zechariah 6:9-15), has been pointed to by others as the occasion of the Psalm. But here again it is the priest who is crowned, not the prince who is declared to be also priest. The triumphant tone of the Psalm moreover, presaging victory for this great ruler, is by no means what might be expected from ‘the circumstances of the struggling community of the returned exiles.

(3) It remains to refer the Psalm to the period of the monarchy. It is true that the king of Israel did not bear the title of priest; but as the head and representative of a priestly nation (Exodus 19:6) he had a priestly character; and the priesthood spoken of in the Psalm is clearly something special, something distinct from the regular hereditary priesthood. If the Psalm belongs to the period of the monarchy, there seems to be no convincing ground for refusing to refer it to the time of David. The objection that an early poem must have found a place in one of the earlier books rests upon the unproved assumption that no early poetry was preserved independently of the collections contained in these books. At any rate there is no incident recorded in the historical books so likely to have suggested the Psalm as the translation of the Ark to Zion by David. The presence of the Ark on Zion was the outward sign that Jehovah had fixed His throne there. Beside it dwelt David, sitting as it were in the place of honour at Jehovah’s right hand as His viceroy. The new king of Jerusalem must reproduce the twofold office of the ancient priest-king of Salem, and become a type of the Messianic king, in whom these offices were to be united (Jeremiah 30:21; Zechariah 6:11-13). Many of those who regard the Psalm as directly Messianic find in this and other incidents of David’s life the motive of the Psalm, for “prophecy never seems wholly to forsake the ground of history,” and “we must look to some occurrence in David’s life for the secret impulse of his song.” But if we are free to choose, it seems best to regard the Psalm as addressed to David, and possessing a primary historical meaning rich in promise and encouragement for him in the founding of his new kingdom. This view however does not diminish the profound Messianic significance of the Psalm. “God through His Spirit so speaks in the Psalmist that words not directly addressed to Christ find their fulfilment in Him” (Bp Westcott). As the ages rolled on it was seen that its words were not fulfilled in David, but pointed forward to One Who was at once David’s son and David’s Lord. And in the event it was seen that the session at God’s right hand was the exaltation of Him who had passed victoriously through humiliation and passion to His former glory; that the eternal priesthood of which it speaks was His eternal priesthood of atonement and intercession and benediction; that the victories which it predicts are His assured triumph over the spiritual enemies of sin and death. Comp. generally Introd. pp. lxxvi ff.; and the Introductions to Psalms 2, 45, 72.

No Psalm is more frequently quoted and alluded to in the N.T. It was, as we have seen, quoted by our Lord (Matthew 22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42-43); and His use of its language as recorded in Matthew 26:64 (= Mark 14:62; Luke 22:69) clearly involved (since its Messianic significance was acknowledged) an assertion of His Messiahship in answer to the High-priest’s adjuration. Psalm 110:1 is applied by St Peter to the exaltation of Christ in His Resurrection and Ascension (Acts 2:34-35), and is quoted in Hebrews 1:13 to illustrate the superiority of the Son to Angels. Cp. also Mark 16:19; Acts 5:31; Acts 7:55-56; Romans 8:34; 1 Corinthians 15:24 ff.; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; Hebrews 1:3; Hebrews 8:1; Hebrews 10:12-13; Hebrews 12:1; 1 Peter 3:22; Revelation 3:21. Psalm 110:4 serves as the basis of the argument in Hebrews 5:5 ff; Hebrews 6:20; Hebrews 7:17 ff. concerning the superiority of Christ’s priesthood to the Levitical priesthood.

The selection of the Psalm as a Proper Psalm for Christmas Day needs no comment.

Ps 110:1-7.

The explicit application of this Psalm to our Saviour, by Him

(Mt 22:42-45)

and by the apostles

(Ac 2:34; 1Co 15:25; Heb 1:13),

and their frequent reference to its language and purport

(Eph 1:20-22; Php 2:9-11; Heb 10:12, 13),

leave no doubt of its purely prophetic character. Not only was there nothing in the position or character, personal or official, of David or any other descendant, to justify a reference to either, but utter severance from the royal office of all priestly functions (so clearly assigned the subject of this Psalm) positively forbids such a reference. The Psalm celebrates the exaltation of Christ to the throne of an eternal and increasing kingdom, and a perpetual priesthood

(Zec 6:13),

involving the subjugation of His enemies and the multiplication of His subjects, and rendered infallibly certain by the word and oath of Almighty God.

1. The Lord said--literally, "A saying of the Lord," (compare

Ps 36:1),

a formula, used in prophetic or other solemn or express declarations.

my Lord--That the Jews understood this term to denote the Messiah their traditions show, and Christ's mode of arguing on such an assumption

(Mt 22:44)

also proves.

Sit . . . at my right hand--not only a mark of honor

(1Ki 2:19),

but also implied participation of power

(Ps 45:9; Mr 16:19; Eph 1:20).

Sit--as a king

(Ps 29:10),

though the position rather than posture is intimated (compare

Ac 7:55, 56).

until I make, &c.--The dominion of Christ over His enemies, as commissioned by God, and entrusted with all power

(Mt 28:18)

for their subjugation, will assuredly be established

(1Co 15:24-28).

This is neither His government as God, nor that which, as the incarnate Saviour, He exercises over His people, of whom He will ever be Head.

thine enemies thy footstool--an expression taken from the custom of Eastern conquerors (compare

Jos 10:24; Jud 1:7)

to signify a complete subjection.

The Lord said unto my Lord - In the Hebrew, "Spake Jehovah to my Lord." The word יהוה Yahweh is the incommunicable name of God. It is never given to a created being. The other word translated "Lord - אדני 'Adonāy - means one who has rule or authority; one of high rank; one who has dominion; one who is the owner or possessor, etc. This word is applied frequently to a creature. It is applied to kings, princes, rulers, masters. The phrase "my Lord" refers to someone who was superior in rank to the author of the psalm; one whom he could address as his superior. The psalm, therefore, cannot refer to David himself, as if Yahweh had said to him, "Sit thou at my right hand." Nor was there anyone on earth in the time of David to whom it could be applicable; anyone whom he would call his "Lord" or superior. If, therefore, the psalm was written by David, it must have reference to the Messiah - to one whom he owned as his superior - his Lord - his Sovereign. It cannot refer to God as if he were to have this rule over David, since God himself is referred to as "speaking" to him whom David called his Lord: "Jehovah said unto my Lord." The reasoning of the Saviour, therefore, in Matthew 22:43-45, was founded on a fair and just interpretation of the psalm, and was so plain and conclusive that the Pharisees did not attempt to reply to it. Matthew 22:46. See the notes at that passage. No other interpretation "can" be given to it, consistently with the proper rules of expounding language, unless it be shown that the psalm was not composed by David, and might, therefore, be applied to someone whom the author would acknowledge as his "Lord." But there is no evidence of this, and there is no one in the Old Testament history to whom the psalm would be applicable.

Sit thou at my right hand - The position of honor and of rank. Compare the notes at Psalm 16:8. See also Psalm 45:9; Mark 14:62; Luke 22:69; Acts 7:55; Hebrews 1:3; Hebrews 8:1. The phrase is properly applicable to the Messiah as exalted to the highest place in the universe - the right hand of God.

Until I make thine enemies thy footstool - Until they are entirely subdued under time. See the notes at Matthew 22:44. The enemies here referred to are the enemies of the Messiah considered as King (see Psalm 2:1-12); and the promise here is, that "he must reign until he shall have put all enemies under his feet." See the notes at 1 Corinthians 15:25.