Commentari biblici

As the foregoing psalm was moral, and showed us our duty, so this is evangelical, and shows us our Saviour. Under the type of David's kingdom (which was of divine appointment, met with much opposition, but prevailed at last) the kingdom of the Messiah, the Son of David, is prophesied of, which is the primary intention and scope of the psalm; and I think there is less in it of the type, and more of the anti-type, than in any of the gospel psalms, for there is nothing in it but what is applicable to Christ, but some things that are not at all applicable to David (Ps 2:6,7): "Thou art my Son" (Ps 2:8), "I will give thee the uttermost parts of the earth," and (Ps 2:12), "Kiss the Son." It is interpreted of Christ Acts 4:24,13:33, Heb 1:5. The Holy Ghost here foretels, I. The opposition that should be given to the kingdom of the Messiah, Ps 2:1-3. II. The baffling and chastising of that opposition, Ps 2:4,5. III. The setting up of the kingdom of Christ, notwithstanding that opposition, Ps 2:6. IV. The confirmation and establishment of it, Ps 2:7. V. A promise of the enlargement and success of it, Ps 2:8,9. VI. A call and exhortation to kings and princes to yield themselves the willing subjects of this kingdom, Ps 2:10-12. Or thus: We have here, I. Threatenings denounced against the adversaries of Christ's kingdom, Ps 2:1-6. II. Promises made to Christ himself, the head of this kingdom, Ps 2:7-9. III. Counsel given to all to espouse the interests of this kingdom, Ps 2:10-12. This psalm, as the former, is very fitly prefixed to this book of devotions, because, as it is necessary to our acceptance with God that we should be subject to the precepts of his law, so it is likewise that we should be subject to the grace of his gospel, and come to him in the name of a Mediator.

Section 1

The author. This psalm, like the one preceding, is without any title prefixed to it, and, like that, is without anything in the psalm itself to indicate its authorship. Its authorship must be learned, therefore, elsewhere, if it can be ascertained at all. There is, however, every reason to suppose that David was the author; and by those who admit the authority of the New Testament this will not be doubted. The reasons for supposing that its authorship is to be traced to David are the following:

(a) It is expressly ascribed to him in Acts 4:25-26 : "Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things?" etc. There can be no doubt that this psalm is here referred to, and the quotation in this manner proves that this was the common understanding among the Jews. It may be presumed that in a matter of this kind the general tradition would be likely to be correct; and to those who admit the inspiration of the apostles as bearing on points like this, the fact of its being quoted as the production of David is decisive.

(b) This is the common opinion respecting its origin among Hebrew writers. Kimchi and Aben Ezra expressly ascribe it to David, and they are supposed in this to express the prevailing opinion of the Hebrew people.

(c) Its place among the Psalms of David may, perhaps, be regarded as a circumstance indicating the same thing. Thus, to the seventy-second psalm there are none which are ascribed expressly to any other author than David (except the Psalm 50, which is ascribed to Asaph, or 'for Asaph,' as it is in the margin), though there are several whose authors are not mentioned; and the common impression has been that this portion of the Book of Psalms was arranged in this manner because they were understood by the collector of the Psalms to have been composed by him.

(d) The character of the composition accords well with this supposition. It is true, indeed, that nothing can be certainly inferred from this consideration respecting its authorship; and that it must be admitted that there are no such peculiarities in the style as to prove that David is the author. But the remark now made is, that there is nothing inconsistent with this supposition, and that there is nothing in the sentiment, the style, or the allusions, which might not have flowed from his pen, or which would not be appropriate on the supposition that he was the author. The only objection that could be urged to this would be derived from Psalm 2:6, "I have set my King upon my holy hill of Zion." But this will be considered in another place.

Section 2

The time when written. As we cannot with absolute certainty determine who was the author, it is, of course, not possible to ascertain the exact time when it was composed; nor, if it be admitted that David was the author, can we now ascertain what was the occasion on which it was written. There are no names of the kings and people who are represented as conspiring against the Anointed One who is the chief subject of the psalm; and there is no local allusion whatever except in the single phrase the "hill of Zion," in Psalm 2:6. The probability would seem to be that the psalm was not designed to refer to anything which had occurred in the time of the author himself, but, as will be seen in another part of these introductory remarks (Section 4), that the writer intended to refer mainly to the Messiah, who was to come in a distant age, although this may have been suggested by something which took place in the time of the writer.

The opposition made to David himself by surrounding nations, their attempts to overwhelm the Hebrew people and himself as their king, the fact that God gave him the victory over his foes, and established him as the king of his people, and the prosperity and triumph which he had experienced, may have given rise to the ideas and imagery of the psalm, and may have led him to compose it with reference to the Messiah, between whose treatment and his own there would be so strong a resemblance, that the one might suggest the other. If conjecture may be allowed where it is impossible to be certain, it may be supposed that the psalm was composed by David after the termination of the wars in which he had been engaged with surrounding nations, and in which he had struggled for the establishment of his throne and kingdom; and after he had been peacefully and triumphantly established as ruler over the people of God. Then it would be natural to compare his own fortunes with those of the Son of God, the future Messiah, who was to be, in his human nature, his descendant; against whom the rulers of the earth would also "rage," as they had against himself; whom it was the purpose of God to establish on a permanent throne in spite of all opposition, as he had established him on his throne; and who was to sway a scepter over the nations of the earth, of which the scepter that he swayed might be regarded as an emblem.

Thus understood, it had, in its original composition, no particular reference to David himself, or to Solomon, as Paulus supposed, or to any other of the kings of Israel; but it is to be regarded as having sole reference to the Messiah, in language suggested by events which had occurred in the history of David, the author. It is made up of the peaceful and happy reflections of one who had been engaged, in the face of much opposition, in establishing his own throne, now looking forward to the similar scenes of conflict and of triumph through which the Anointed One would pass.

Section 3

The structure and contents of the psalm. The psalm is exceedingly regular in its composition, and has in its structure much of a dramatic character. It naturally falls into four parts, of three verses each.

I. In the first Psalm 2:1-3 the conduct and purposes of the raging nations are described. They are in the deepest agitation, forming plans against Yahweh and His Anointed One, and uniting their counsels to break their bands asunder, and to cast off their authority, that is, as Psalm 2:6 shows, to prevent the establishment of the Anointed One as King on the holy hill of Zion. The opening of the psalm is bold and abrupt. The psalmist looks out suddenly on the nations, and sees them in violent commotion.

II. In the second part Psalm 2:4-6 the feelings and purposes of God are described. It is implied that he had formed the purpose, by a fixed decree (compare Psalm 2:7), to establish his Anointed One as king, and he now calmly sits in the heavens and looks with derision on the vain designs of those who are opposed to it. He smiles upon their impotent rage, and goes steadily forward to the accomplishment of his plan. He solemnly declares that he had established his King on his holy hill of Zion, and consequently, that all their efforts must be vain.

III. In the third part Psalm 2:7-9 the King himself, the Anointed One, speaks, and states the decree which had been formed in reference to himself, and the promise which had been made to him. That decree was, that he should be declared to be the Son of Yahweh himself; the promise was that he should, at his own request, have the nations of the earth for a possession, and rule over them with an absolute scepter.

IV. In the fourth part Psalm 2:10-12 the psalmist exhorts the rulers of the nations to yield to the claims of the Anointed One, threatening divine wrath on those who should reject him, and promising a blessing on those who should put their trust in him.

The psalm is, therefore, regularly constructed, and the main thought is pursued through the whole of it - the exalted claims and ultimate triumph of him who is here called "the Anointed;" the vanity of opposition to his decrees; and the duty and advantage of yielding to his authority. "The several sentences are also very regular in form, exhibiting parallelisms of great uniformity." - Prof. Alexander. The psalm, in its construction, is one of the most perfect in the Book of Psalms, according to the special ideal of Hebrew poetry.

Section 4. The question to whom the psalm refers. There can be but three opinions as to the question to whom the psalm was designed to refer:

(a) That in which it is supposed that it refers exclusively to David, or to some other one of the anointed kings of Israel;

(b) that in which it is supposed that it had this original reference, but has also a secondary reference to the Messiah; and

(c) that in which it is supposed that it has exclusive and sole reference to the Messiah.

There are few who maintain the first of these opinions. Even Grotius, in respect to whom it was said, in comparison with Cocceius, that "Cocceius found Christ everywhere, and Grotius nowhere," admits that while, in his view, the psalm had a primary reference to David, and to the Philistines, Moabites, Ammonites, Idumeans, etc., as his enemies, yet, in a more "mystical and abstruse sense, it pertained to the Messiah." The reasons why the psalm should not be regarded as referring exclusively to any Hebrew king are conclusive. They are summed up in this one: that the expressions in the psalm are such as cannot be applied exclusively to any Hebrew monarch. This will appear in the exposition of this psalm. For like reasons, the psalm cannot be regarded as designed to refer primarily to David, and in a secondary and higher sense to the Messiah. There are no indications in the psalm of any such double sense; and if it cannot be applied exclusively to David, cannot be applied to him at all.

The psalm, I suppose, like Isaiah 53:1-12, had an original and exclusive reference to the Messiah. This may be shown by the following considerations:

(1) It is so applied in the New Testament, and is referred to in no other way. Thus, in Acts 4:24-27, the whole company of the apostles is represented as quoting the first verses of the psalm, and referring them to Christ: "They lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God ... who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things. The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together." If the authority of the apostles, therefore, is to be admitted in the case, there can be no doubt that the psalm was intended to refer to the Messiah. This statement of the apostles may also be adduced as proof that this was, probably, the prevailing mode of interpretation in their age.

Again, the psalm is quoted by Paul Acts 13:32-33 as applicable to Christ, and with reference to the fact that it was a doctrine of the Old Testament that the Messiah was to rise from the dead: "And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. And again, in Hebrews 1:5, the same passage is quoted by Paul to establish the exalted rank of the Messiah as being above the angels: "For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?" These quotations prove that in the estimation of the writers of the New Testament the psalm had an original reference to the Messiah; and the manner in which they make the quotation proves that this was the current belief of the Jews in their day, as they appear to have been under no apprehension that the propriety of the application which they made would be called in question.

(2) But, besides this, there is other evidence that such was the prevailing interpretation among the ancient Hebrews: "In the older Jewish writings, as the Sohar, the Talmud, etc., there is a variety of passages in which the Messianic interpretation is given to the psalm. See the collections by Raym. Martini, Pug. Fid. ed. Carpzov., in several places, and by Schottgen, de Messia, pp. 227ff. Even Kimchi and Jarchi confess that it was the prevailing interpretation among their forefathers; and the latter very honestly gives his reasons for departing from it, when he says he prefers to explain it of David, for the refutation of the heretics; that is, in order to destroy the force of the arguments drawn from it by the Christians." (Hengstenberg, Christ., i.77.)

(3) That it refers to the Messiah is manifest from the psalm itself. This will be apparent from a few subordinate considerations.

(a) It cannot be applied to David, or to any other earthly king; that is, there are expressions in it which cannot be applied with any degree of propriety to any earthly monarch whatever. This remark is founded particularly on the remarkable use of the word "Son" in the psalm, and the promise that "the uttermost parts of the earth" should be placed under the control of him to whom that word is applied. The word "son" is, indeed, of large signification, and is, in a certain sense, applied to the righteous in the plural number, as being the sons or the children of God by adoption; but it is not so applied in the singular number, and there is a peculiarity in its use here which shows that it was not intended to be applied to an earthly monarch, or to any pious man considered as a child of God. That appellation - the Son of God - properly denotes a nearer relation to God than can be applied to a mere mortal of any rank (compare the notes at John 5:18), and was so understood by the Jews themselves. It is not used in the Old Testament, as applied to an earthly monarch, in the manner in which it is employed here. The remark here made is entirely irrespective of the doctrine which is sometimes supposed to be taught in this passage, of "the eternal generation" of the Son of God, since what is here said is equally true, whether that doctrine is well-founded or not.

(b) There is an extent of dominion and a perpetuity of empire promised here which could not be applied to David or to any other monarch, but which is entirely applicable to the Messiah (see Psalm 2:8, Psalm 2:10).

(c) Such, too, is the nature of the promise to those who put their trust in him, and the threatening on those who do not obey him Psalm 2:12. This is language which will be seen at once to be entirely applicable to the Messiah, but which cannot be so regarded in respect of any earthly monarch.

(d) There is a strong probability that the psalm is designed to refer to the Messiah, from the fact that they who deny this have not been able to propose any other plausible interpretation, or to show with any degree of probability to whom it does refer. There were no Israelite kings or princes to whom it could be regarded with any show of probability as applicable, unless it were David or Solomon; and yet there are no recorded circumstances in their lives to which it can be regarded as adapted, and there is no substantial agreement among those who maintain that it does refer to either of them. It is maintained by both Rosenmuller and DeWette that it cannot relate to David or Solomon. Some of the modern Jews maintain that it was composed by David respecting himself when the Philistines came up against him 2 Samuel 5:17; but this is manifestly an erroneous opinion, for not only was there nothing in the occurrence there to correspond with the language of the psalm, but there was at that time no particular consecration of the hill of Zion Psalm 2:6, nor was that mount regarded as holy or sacred until after the tabernacle was erected on it, which was after the Philistine war. The same remark may be made substantially of the supposition that it refers to the rebellion of Absalom, or to any of the circumstances in which David was placed. And there is still less reason for supposing that it refers to Solomon, for there is no mention of any rebellion against him; of any general attempt to throw off his yoke; of any solemn consecration of him as king in consequence of, or in spite of such an attempt.

(e) The psalm agrees with the account of the Messiah, or is in its general structure and details applicable to him. This will be shown in the exposition, and indeed is manifest on the face of it. The only plausible objection to this view is, as stated by DeWette, "According to the doctrine of Christianity, the Messiah is no conqueror of nations, bearing an iron scepter; his kingdom is not of this world." But to this it may be replied, that all that is meant in Psalm 2:9 may be, that he will set up a kingdom over the nations of the earth; that all his enemies will be subdued under him; and that the scepter which he will sway will be firm and irresistible. See, for the applicability of this to the Messiah, the notes at Psalm 2:9.

(4) It may be added that the psalm is such as one might expect to find in the poetic writings of the Hebrews, with the views which they entertained of the Messiah. The promised Messiah was the object of deepest interest to their minds. All their hopes centered in him. To him they looked forward as the Great Deliverer; and all their anticipations of what the people of God were to be clustered around him. He was to be a Prince, a Conqueror, a Deliverer, a Saviour. To him the eyes of the nation were directed; he was shadowed forth by their pompous religious rites, and their sacred bards sang his advent. That we should find an entire psalm composed with reference to him, designed to set forth his character and the glory of his reign, is no more than what we should expect to find among a people where poetry is cultivated at all, and where these high hopes were cherished in reference to his advent; and especially if to this view of their national poetry, in itself considered, there be added the idea that the sacred bards wrote under the influence of inspiration, nothing is more natural than that we should expect to find a poetic composition having such a sole and exclusive reference. Nothing would have been more unnatural than that, with these prevailing views and hopes, and with the fact before us that so much of the Old Testament is sacred poetry, we should have found no such production as the second psalm, on the supposition that it had an original and exclusive reference to the Messiah.

This Psalm treats of the opposition raised, both by Jew and Gentile, against the kingdom of Christ, Psalm 2:1-3. Christ's victory, and the confusion of his enemies, Psalm 2:4-6. The promulgation of the Gospel after his resurrection, Psalm 2:7-9. A call to all the potentates and judges of the earth to accept it, because of the destruction that shall fall on those who reject it, Psalm 2:10-12.

INTRODUCTION TO Psalm 2

This psalm is the second in order, and so it is called in Acts 13:33; which shows that the book of Psalms was in the same form in the apostles' days as now, and as it ever had been; and though it is without a title, yet certain it is that it is a psalm of David, since the twelve apostles of Christ with one voice ascribe it to him, in which no doubt they the generally received sense of the Jewish Acts 4:24; and the Messiah is the subject of and that it is a prophecy concerning him, his person, office, and kingdom, appears from the express mention of the Lord's Anointed, or Messiah, in his being set as King over Zion, notwithstanding the opposition made against him; from the person spoken of being called the Son of God, and that in such sense as angels and men are not, and therefore cannot belong to any creature; and from his having so large an inheritance, and such power over the Heathen; and from the reverence, service, and obedience due to him from the kings and judges of the earth; and from the trust and confidence which is to be put in him, which ought not to be placed but in a divine Person; and more especially this appears from several passages cited out of it in the New Testament, and applied to the Messiah, Acts 4:25, to which may be added, that the ancient Jewish doctors interpreted this psalm of the Messiah (s); and some of the modern ones own that it may be understood either of David or of the Messiah, and that some things are clearer of the Messiah than of David (t); and some particular passages in it are applied to him both by ancient and later writers among the Jews, as Psalm 2:1, "Why do the Heathen rage", &c.

(u); Psalm 2:6, "I have set", &c. (w); Psalm 2:7, "I will declare the decree", &c. (x), and Psalm 2:8, "Ask of me", &c. (y); and we may very safely interpret the whole of him.

(s) Jarchi in loc. (t) Kimchi in v. 12. & Aben Ezra in v. 6. 12. (u) T. Bab. Avodah Zarah, fol. 3. 2. Pirke Eliezer, c. 19. (w) R. Saadiah Gaon in Daniel 7.13. (x) Yalkut Simeoni, par. 2. fol. 90. 2. Zohar in Numb. fol. 82. 2. Maimon in Misn Sanhedrin, c. 11. 1. & Abarbinel Mashmiah Jeshuah, fol. 37. 4. &. 38. 1.((y) T. Bab. Succah, fol. 52. 1. & Bereshit Rabba, s. 44. fol. 38. 4.

II.

As Psalms 1 describes the results of fulfilling the covenant for the individual by contrasting the condition of those who fail in their allegiance, so Psalms 2 shows how the covenant relation exalts Israel over the heathen; but some particular political situation seems to be indicated. Jerusalem appears to be threatened by a confederacy of hostile and rebellious powers—a confederacy that took advantage of the succession of a young and inexperienced monarch to throw off the bonds of subjection and tribute. David, Solomon, Ahaz, and Uzziah, have each of them been regarded as the hero and theme of the poem, but in each case there is some lack of correspondence between the history and the psalm. The psalm must therefore be regarded as expressing an ideal view of the future—an ideal which the poet felt, from his historic knowledge of the past, would not shape itself except under difficulties and opposition. Doubtless there were in his mind the prophetic words spoken of David’s son, “I will be his father, and he shall be my son”—words embodying the vital principle of the Hebrew monarchy, the essential idea of the Israelitish polity, that the king was only a regent in God’s name, the deputy of Jehovah, and the chosen instrument of His will. Starting from these words, the poet shapes an ideal monarchy and an ideal king—one who, though encountered by the worst forms of opposition, would prove himself a true son of David, and by his fidelity to his God and nation, a true son of God. Undismayed by the threatening aspect of things, and with prophetic words ringing in his ears, the youthful monarch aims at re-asserting God’s supremacy over the heathen, and imposing once more that restraint of His law and religion from which they longed to be free. Such a view of the psalm alone explains its want of exact historic coincidence, and vindicates the claims universally made for it of Messianic prevision; for there is but a step between the ideal king and the Messianic king—a step which, though perhaps unconsciously, the poets and prophets of Israel were for ever taking.

The psalm is lyric, with intense dramatic feeling. The poet begins and ends in his own person; but we hear the heathen muttering their threats, Jehovah answering them in thunder from heaven, and holding animated dialogue with His anointed, who, in turn, takes up the address, and declares His Divine mission and asserts His power. The strophical arrangement is fairly marked.

The circumstances which called forth this Psalm stand out clearly. A king of Israel, recently placed upon the throne, and consecrated by the solemn rite of anointing to be Jehovah’s representative in the government of His people, is menaced by a confederacy of subject nations, threatening to revolt and cast off their allegiance. The moment is critical: but his cause is Jehovah’s; their endeavour is futile. He asserts his high claims; and the nations are exhorted to yield a willing submission, and avoid the destruction which awaits rebels against the authority of Jehovah.

Who then was the king? and what was the occasion referred to? The king’s consciousness of his high calling, and the confidence with which he appeals to the divine promise, point to a time when that promise was still recent, and the lofty ideal of the theocratic kingdom had not been blurred and defaced by failure and defeat. For such a time we must go back to the reigns of David and Solomon.

(1) The language of Acts 4:25 does not decide the question, for ‘David’ in the N.T. may mean no more than ‘the Psalter’ (Hebrews 4:7) or ‘a Psalmist.’ The older commentators however attribute the Psalm to David, and suppose the occasion to have been the attack of the Philistines shortly after he was anointed king over all Israel (2 Samuel 5:17 ff.), or of the confederacy of Ammonites and Syrians described in 2 Samuel 10. But the Psalm speaks plainly (Psalm 2:3) of subject nations, while the Philistines certainly were not David’s subjects at the time, and it is doubtful if the Syrians were. See note on 2 Samuel 10.

(2) On the other hand there is good reason for supposing that Solomon was the king referred to. He was anointed at Gihon, and solemnly enthroned on Zion (1 Kings 1:45). Zion was already ‘Jehovah’s holy mountain’ in virtue of the presence of the Ark there. So strongly was the theocratic character of the kingdom then realised that he is said to have sat ‘on the throne of Jehovah’ (1 Chronicles 29:23; cp. Psalm 28:5). The Psalm is based upon the great promise in 2 Samuel 7:12 ff., which, although not limited to Solomon, would naturally be claimed by him with special confidence. Solomon succeeded to the great kingdom which his father had built up. But he was young. The succession was disputed. What more likely than that some of the subject nations should threaten to revolt upon his accession? Hadad’s request (1 Kings 11:21) shews that his enemies thought that their opportunity was come. It is true that we have no account of any such revolt in the Historical Books. But their records are incomplete and fragmentary; and the language of the Psalm implies that the revolt was only threatened, and had not as yet broken out into open war. There was still hope that wiser counsels might prevail (Psalm 2:10 ff.); and if they did, we should hardly expect to find any reference in Kings and Chron. to a mere threat of rebellion. Moreover, though Solomon’s reign was on the whole peaceful, there are incidental notices which make it plain that it was not uniformly and universally so. He made great military preparations (1 Kings 4:26; 1 Kings 9:15 ff; 1 Kings 11:27, 2 Chronicles 8:5 ff.), and engaged in wars (2 Chronicles 8:3); and Hadad and Rezon succeeded in ‘doing him mischief’ (1 Kings 11:21-25).

(3) The conjectures which refer the Psalm to a later occasion have but little probability. The confederacy of Pekah and Rezin against Ahaz (Isaiah 7); and the invasion of Judah by the Moabites and their allies (2 Chronicles 20) have been suggested: but neither of these was a revolt of subject nations.

The question still remains whether Solomon was himself the writer. The king and the poet appear to be identified in Psalm 2:7 ff.; but in such a highly dramatic Psalm, it is at least possible that the poet might introduce the king as a speaker, as he introduces the nations (Psalm 2:3), and Jehovah (Psalm 2:6).

The particular historical reference is however of relatively small moment compared with the typical application of the Psalm to the Kingdom of Christ. To understand this, it is necessary to realise the peculiar position of the Israelite king. Israel was Jehovah’s son, His firstborn (Exodus 4:22; Deuteronomy 32:6); and Israel’s king, as the ruler and representative of the people, was adopted by Jehovah as His son, His firstborn (2 Samuel 7:13 ff.; Psalm 89:26-27). It was a moral relationship, sharply distinguished from the supposed descent of kings and heroes from gods in the heathen world in virtue of which they styled themselves Zeus-born, sons of Zeus, and the like. It involved on the one side fatherly love and protection, on the other filial obedience and devotion.

The king moreover was not an absolute monarch in his own right. He was the Anointed of Jehovah, His viceroy and earthly representative. To him therefore was given not only the sovereignty over Israel, but the sovereignty over the nations. Rebellion against him was rebellion against Jehovah.

Thus, as the adopted son of Jehovah and His Anointed King, he was the type of the eternal Son of God, the ‘Lord’s Christ.’ Then, as successive kings of David’s line failed to realise their high destiny, men were taught to look for the coming of One who should fulfil the Divine words of promise, giving them a meaning and a reality beyond hope and imagination. See Introd. p. lxxvi ff.

This Psalm then is typical and prophetic of the rebellion of the kingdoms of the world against the kingdom of Christ, and of the final triumph of the kingdom of Christ. To Him all nations are given for an inheritance; if they will not submit He must judge them. This typical meaning does not however exclude (as some commentators think), but rather requires, a historic foundation for the Psalm.

In connexion with this Psalm should be studied 2 Samuel 7; Psalms 89; and Psalms 21, 45, 72, 110.

The references to this Psalm in the N.T. should be carefully examined.

(1) In Acts 4:25-28, Psalm 2:1-2 are applied to the confederate hostility of Jews and Gentiles against Christ.

(2) Psalm 2:7 was quoted by St Paul at Antioch (Acts 13:33) as fulfilled in the Resurrection of Christ (cp. Romans 1:4): and in the Epistle to the Hebrews the words are cited (the Messianic reference of the Psalm being evidently generally admitted) to describe the superiority of the Son to angels (Psalm 1:5): and as a declaration of the Divine sonship of Christ, in connexion with the proof of the Divine origin of His high-priesthood (Psalm 5:5).[2]

[2] In D and cognate authorities the words, “Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee” are substituted for “Thou art my beloved son, in thee I am well pleased,” in Luke 3:22. This was also the reading of the Ebionite Gospel.

(3) It contains the titles ‘my Son’ (Matthew 3:17), and ‘the Lord’s Christ’ (Luke 2:26), which describe the nature and office of the Messiah. Comp. Matthew 16:16 : John 20:31.

(4) Its language is repeatedly borrowed in the Revelation, the great epic of the conflict and triumph of Christ’s kingdom. He ‘rules the nations with a rod of iron’ (Revelation 12:5; Revelation 19:15); and delegates the same power to His servants (Revelation 2:26-27). ‘Kings of the earth’ occurs no less than nine times in this book (Psalm 1:5, &c). ‘He that sitteth in the heavens’ is the central figure there (Psalm 4:2 and frequently).

These quotations sufficiently explain the choice of the Psalm as one of the Proper Psalms for Easter Day.

In a few Heb. MSS. the Second Psalm is reckoned as the First, the First being treated as an independent prologue to the whole book; in a few other MSS. the two are united. Origen says that this was the case in one of two copies he had seen (Op. ii. 537): and there was an ancient Jewish saying, “The first Psalm begins with blessing (Psalm 1:1), and ends with blessing” (Psalm 2:12). Some recensions of the LXX appear to have followed this arrangement, though Origen speaks as if all the Greek copies with which he was acquainted divided the two Psalms. Justin Martyr in his Apology (i. 40) cites Psalms 1, 2 as a continuous prophecy, and in Acts 13:33 D and cognate authorities representing the ‘Western’ text, read, ‘in the first Psalm.’

But though there are points of contact in phraseology (blessed, Psalm 1:1, Psalm 2:12; meditate, Psalm 1:2, Psalm 2:1; perish connected with way, Psalm 1:6; Psalm 2:12); they are clearly distinct in style and character. Psalms 1 is the calm expression of a general truth; Psalms 2 springs out of a special occasion; it is full of movement, and has a correspondingly vigorous rhythm. Probably the absence of a title to Psalms 2 (contrary to the usual practice of Book I) accounts for its having been joined to Psalms 1.

The Psalm is dramatic in form. The scene changes. Different persons are introduced as speakers. Its structure is definite and artistic. It consists of four stanzas, each (except the second) of seven lines.

i. The poet contemplates with astonishment the tumult of the nations, mustering with the vain idea of revolt from their allegiance (Psalm 2:1-3).

ii. But looking from earth to heaven he beholds Jehovah enthroned in majesty. He mocks their puny efforts. He has but to speak, and they are paralysed (Psalm 2:4-6).

iii. The king speaks, and recites the solemn decree by which Jehovah has adopted him for His son, and given him the nations for is inheritance, with authority to subdue all opposition (Psalm 2:7-9).

iv. The poet concludes with an exhortation to the nations to yield willing submission, instead of resisting to their own destruction (Psalm 2:10-12).

Ps 2:1-12.

The number and authorship of this Psalm are stated

(Ac 4:25; 13:33).

Though the warlike events of David's reign may have suggested its imagery, the scenes depicted and the subjects presented can only find a fulfilment in the history and character of Jesus Christ, to which, as above cited and in

Heb 1:5; 5:5,

the New Testament writers most distinctly testify. In a most animated and highly poetical style, the writer, in "four stanzas of three verses each," sets forth the inveterate and furious, though futile, hostility of men to God and His anointed, God's determination to carry out His purpose, that purpose as stated more fully by His Son, the establishment of the Mediatorial kingdom, and the imminent danger of all who resist, as well as the blessing of all who welcome this mighty and triumphant king.

1. Why do the heathen, &c.--Beholding, in prophetic vision, the peoples and nations, as if in a tumultuous assembly, raging with a fury like the raging of the sea, designing to resist God's government, the writer breaks forth into an exclamation in which are mingled surprise at their folly, and indignation at their rebellion.

heathen--nations generally, not as opposed to Jews.

the people--or, literally, "peoples," or races of men.

Why do the heathen rage - "Why do nations make a noise?" Prof. Alexander. The word "heathen" here - גוים gôyim - means properly "nations," with out respect, so far as the word is concerned, to the character of the nations. It was applied by the Hebrews to the surrounding nations, or to all other people than their own; and as those nations were in fact pagans, or idolators, the word came to have this signification. Nehemiah 5:8; Jeremiah 31:10; Ezekiel 23:30; Ezekiel 30:11; compare אדם 'âdâm, Jeremiah 32:20. The word Gentile among the Hebrews (Greek, ἔθνος ethnos expressed the same thing. Matthew 4:15; Matthew 6:32; Matthew 10:5, Matthew 10:18; Matthew 12:21, et soepe. The word rendered "rage" - רגשׁ râgash - means to make a noise or tumult, and would be expressive of violent commotion or agitation. It occurs in the Hebrew Scriptures only in this place, though the corresponding Chaldee word - רגשׁ regash is found in Daniel 6:6, Daniel 6:11, Daniel 6:15 - rendered in Daniel 6:6, "assembled together," in the margin "came tumultuously," - and in Daniel 6:11, Daniel 6:15, rendered "assembled." The psalmist here sees the nations in violent agitation or commotion, as if under high excitement, engaged in accomplishing some purpose - rushing on to secure something, or to prevent something. The image of a mob, or of a tumultuous unregulated assemblage, would probably convey the idea of the psalmist. The word itself does not enable us to determine how extensive this agitation would be, but it is evidently implied that it would be a somewhat general movement; a movement in which more than one nation or people would participate. The matter in hand was something that affected the nations generally, and which would produce violent agitation among them.

And the people - לאמים Le'umiym. A word expressing substantially the same idea, that of people, or nations, and referring here to the same thing as the word rendered "heathen" - according to the laws of Hebrew parallelism in poetry. It is the people here that are seen in violent agitation: the conduct of the rulers, as associated with them, is referred to in the next verse.

Imagine - Our word "imagine" does not precisely express the idea here. We mean by it, "to form a notion or idea in the mind; to fancy." Webster. The Hebrew word, הגה hâgâh, is the same which, in Psalm 1:2, is rendered "meditate." See the notes at that verse. It means here that the mind is engaged in deliberating on it; that it plans, devises, or forms a purpose; - in other words, the persons referred to are thinking about some purpose which is here called a vain purpose; they are meditating some project which excites deep thought, but which cannot be effectual.

A vain thing - That is, which will prove to be a vain thing, or a thing which they cannot accomplish. It cannot mean that they were engaged in forming plans which they supposed would be vain - for no persons would form such plans; but that they were engaged in designs which the result would show to be unsuccessful. The reference here is to the agitation among the nations in respect to the divine purpose to set up the Messiah as king over the world, and to the opposition which this would create among the nations of the earth. See the notes at Psalm 2:2. An ample fulfillment of this occurred in the opposition to him when he came in the flesh, and in the resistance everywhere made since his death to his reign upon the earth. Nothing has produced more agitation in the world (compare Acts 17:6), and nothing still excites more determined resistance. The truths taught in this verse are:

(1) that sinners are opposed - even so much as to produce violent agitation of mind, and a fixed and determined purpose - to the plans and decrees of God, especially with respect to the reign of the Messiah; and

(2) that their plans to resist this will be vain and ineffectual; wisely as their schemes may seem to be laid, and determined as they themselves are in regard to their execution, yet they must find them vain.

What is implied here of the particular plans against the Messiah, is true of all the purposes of sinners, when they array themselves against the government of God.