서론
Psalm 2 Introduction
繁體中文
英語原文
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.
1
Psalm 2:1
繁體中文
「外邦為甚麼爭鬧」——「萬國為何喧嚷?」Prof. Alexander 如是譯。此處譯作「外邦」的字——גוים gôyim——本義為「萬國」,就字本身而論,並不涉及這些國家的品格。希伯來人用這字指四圍的列國,或指自己本族以外的一切人;由於這些國家實際上是異教拜偶像之民,這字便逐漸得有此義。參見 Nehemiah 5:8;Jeremiah 31:10;Ezekiel 23:30;Ezekiel 30:11;試比較 אדם 'âdâm,見 Jeremiah 32:20。希伯來人所用的「外邦人」一詞(希臘文 ἔθνος ethnos)所表達的也是同一意思,見 Matthew 4:15;Matthew 6:32;Matthew 10:5、Matthew 10:18;Matthew 12:21 等處(et soepe)。譯作「爭鬧」的字——רגשׁ râgash——意為發出喧嚷或騷動,表達劇烈的震盪與激動。這字在希伯來文聖經中僅見於此處,但與它相當的迦勒底字——רגשׁ regash——見於 Daniel 6:6、Daniel 6:11、Daniel 6:15(Daniel 6:6 譯作「聚集在一起」,旁註作「喧嚷而來」;Daniel 6:11、Daniel 6:15 則譯作「聚集」)。詩人在此看見列國劇烈震盪、激動不已,彷彿在極度興奮之中致力於成就某個目的——奔逐以求得著甚麼,或要攔阻甚麼。一群暴民的影像,或一次騷亂無序的聚集,大概最能傳達詩人心中的意念。這字本身不足以斷定這騷動的範圍多大,但經文顯然暗示這是一場相當普遍的運動,是一場不止一國一民參與的運動。當前的事關乎萬國整體,勢必在他們中間激起劇烈的騷動。
「萬民」——לאמים Le'umiym。這字所表達的實質上是同一觀念,即人民、萬民;按希伯來詩歌對偶的法則,它在此所指的,與譯作「外邦」的字相同。這裏處於劇烈騷動中的正是這些人民;至於與他們相聯的掌權者的行徑,則述於下一節。
「謀算」——我們譯作「謀算」的詞,並不十分切合此處的觀念。我們通常用這詞指「在心中形成一個概念或觀念;幻想」(韋氏詞典,Webster)。希伯來文 הגה hâgâh 一字,在 Psalm 1:2 譯作「思想」。參見該節註釋。此處的意思是:心思在其中斟酌衡量;籌劃、設計,或立定某個目的;——換言之,所述的這些人正在思考某個目的,也就是此處稱為虛妄的那件事;他們在圖謀某項計劃,這計劃引人深思,卻終必不能成功。
「虛妄的事」——即終將顯為虛妄的事,或他們無法成就的事。這不可能是指他們在籌劃自己明知必歸虛妄的計謀——因為沒有人會這樣籌劃;而是指他們所從事的圖謀,其結果必顯為失敗。此處所指的,是萬國因神要立彌賽亞作全地之王這一神聖旨意而起的騷動,以及這旨意將在地上萬國中引起的反對。參見 Psalm 2:2 的註釋。這預言充分的應驗,見於祂道成肉身降世時所遭遇的反對,以及祂死後歷代各地對祂在地上作王的抗拒。沒有一件事曾在世上引起過更大的騷動(參見 Acts 17:6),也沒有一件事至今仍激起更頑強的抵抗。本節所教導的真理如下:
(1) 罪人抵擋神的計劃與旨意——甚至到心思劇烈激動、立定頑決目的的地步——尤其是抵擋關乎彌賽亞作王的旨意;並且
(2) 他們抵擋的計謀必歸虛妄、終必無效;他們的圖謀無論看似設計得多麼周密,他們自己無論決意執行得多麼堅決,至終必發現盡屬徒然。
此處論到針對彌賽亞之特定計謀所隱含的原則,對罪人抵擋神治理的一切圖謀,同樣適用。
英語原文
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.
2
Psalm 2:2
繁體中文
「世上的君王」——本節的目的,是要把 Psalm 2:1 中的概括敘述表達得更具體。在第一節中,詩人看見列國普遍騷動,正從事某項他明知必然徒勞的計謀;在此處,他更具體地描述了騷動的原因,並對正在發生的事作了更近的觀察。他如今看見君王和臣宰正從事一項針對耶和華並祂的受膏者的明確而具體的陰謀。「君王」一詞在此是一個統稱,適用於一切掌權者——因為當時人所知道的政體只有君主政體,列國都操在專制君王的手中。然而,只要有任何掌權者從事這裏所描述的事,便足以構成這預言的應驗。
「一齊起來」——或譯作「站穩立場」。後一個譯法或許更能傳達原文的意思。這說法所表達的,是站定立場、嚴陣以待的觀念——他們聯合起來;他們下定決心;他們在目的上堅定不移。試參 Exodus 2:4;Exodus 19:17;Exodus 34:5。此處的姿態,是堅決而頑強的抗拒。
「臣宰」——這是對「君王」一詞的輕微補充。其意思是:各階層的掌權者普遍聯合起來,要成就這裏所指明的事;這並不限於任何一個階層。
「一同商議」——即一同協商。試參 Psalm 31:13:「他們一同商議攻擊我的時候……」。此處所用的字——יחד yachad——本義是立根基、奠立基礎、建立;繼而(於 Niphal 形)指被建立、支撐自己、倚靠——例如以肘支身。這樣使用時,它用於指躺臥或倚在榻上坐墊的人,尤其是指一同商議的人,正如東方人在議事廳或議會中所行的一樣。參見 Psalm 83:3 的註釋。此處的意念,是人們聚在一起,就一件重要事務進行商議。
「敵擋耶和華」——即敵擋耶和華——我們通行譯本中「Lord」一字用小體大寫字母,表明原文的字是耶和華(Yahweh)。其意思是:他們正針對此處所指的事商議敵擋耶和華——就是祂要立祂的「受膏者」、祂的君王(Psalm 2:6)在錫安山上的旨意。這並不是說他們在其他方面也列陣與祂為敵,儘管事實上,在一件事上敵擋神,可能意味着在各樣事上都對祂心懷嫌惡;而且,那使人敵擋祂任何一項旨意的同一種心態,若任其發展,也必使人們在一切事上敵擋祂。
「並他的受膏者」——משׁיחו meshı̂ychô——即他的彌賽亞:我們所用的「彌賽亞」(Messiah)或「基督」(Christ)一詞即由此而來。這字的意思是「受膏者」,所暗指的是以聖膏油膏立君王和祭司、使他們分別就任聖職、或將他們奉獻給其職分的習俗。參見 Matthew 1:1、Daniel 9:26 的註釋。因此,「彌賽亞」或「受膏者」一詞的含義相當籠統,單憑這詞的使用,並不能確定它指的是誰——是君王、祭司,還是嚴格意義上的彌賽亞。所指的對象須由上下文來決定。這詞在此必然包含的意思只是:有一位被耶和華視為祂受膏者的——無論是君王還是祭司——地上的掌權者已列陣與他為敵。本詩隨後的部分(Psa 2:6-7)使我們能夠確定,此處所指的一位是君王,並且他與耶和華保持著兒子的關係。新約聖經,以及本詩導論(第四節)中所提出的各項考慮,使我們明白這裏所指的正是嚴格意義上的彌賽亞——拿撒勒人耶穌。Acts 4:25-27 明確宣告:這預言已應驗在希律、本丟彼拉多、外邦人和以色列民的圖謀之中——他們棄絕救主,將祂處死。沒有人能懷疑,詩篇中這一切所述,在他們聯合棄絕祂並將祂處死一事上已完全應驗;因此,我們應當看本詩為特別指着這件事說的。然而,他們的行為也正說明了掌權者與百姓對祂普遍的心態,所以把列國一般地描繪為因祂而騷動,也是恰當的。
英語原文
The kings of the earth - This verse is designed to give a more specific form to the general statement in Psalm 2:1. In the first verse the psalmist sees a general commotion among the nations as engaged in some plan that he sees must be a vain one; here he describes more particularly the cause of the excitement, and gives a nearer view of what is occurring. He now sees kings and rulers engaged in a specific and definite plot against Yahweh and against His Anointed. The word "kings" here is a general term, which would be applicable to all rulers - as the kingly government was the only one then known, and the nations were under the control of absolute monarchs. A sufficient fulfillment would be found, however, if any rulers were engaged in doing what is here described.
Set themselves - Or, take their stand. The latter expression would perhaps better convey the sense of the original. It is the idea of taking a stand, or of setting themselves in array, which is denoted by the expression; - they combine; they resolve; they are fixed in their purpose. Compare Exodus 2:4; Exodus 19:17; Exodus 34:5. The attitude here is that of firm or determined resistance.
And the rulers - A slight addition to the word kings. The sense is, that there was a general combination among all classes of rulers to accomplish what is here specified. It was not confined to any one class.
Take counsel together - Consult together. Compare Psalm 31:13, "While they took counsel together against me." The word used here, יחד yachad, means properly to found, to lay the foundation of, to establish; then, to be founded (Niphal); to support oneself; to lean upon - as, for example, to lean upon the elbow. Thus used, it is employed with reference to persons reclining or leaning upon a couch or cushion, especially as deliberating together, as the Orientals do in the divan or council. Compare the notes at Psalm 83:3. The idea here is that of persons assembled to deliberate on an important matter.
Against the Lord - Against Jehovah - the small capitals of "Lord" in our common version indicating that the original word is Yahweh. The meaning is, that they were engaged in deliberating against Yahweh in respect to the matter here referred to - to wit, his purpose to place the "Anointed One," his King (Psalm 2:6), on the hill of Zion. It is not meant that they were in other respects arrayed against him, though it is true in fact that opposition to God in one respect may imply that there is an aversion to him in all respects, and that the same spirit which would lead men to oppose him in any one of his purposes would, if carried out, lead them to oppose him in all things.
And against his Anointed - - משׁיחו meshı̂ychô - his Messiah: hence, our word Messiah, or Christ. The word means "Anointed," and the allusion is to the custom of anointing kings and priests with holy oil when setting them apart to office, or consecrating them to their work. Compare Matthew 1:1, note; Daniel 9:26, note. The word Messiah, or Anointed, is therefore of so general a character in its signification that its mere use would not determine to whom it was to be applied - whether to a king, to a priest, or to the Messiah properly so called. The reference is to be determined by something in the connection. All that the word here necessarily implies is, that there was some one whom Yahweh regarded as his Anointed one, whether king or priest, against whom the rulers of the earth had arrayed themselves. The subsequent part of the psalm Psa 2:6-7 enables us to ascertain that the reference here is to one who was a King, and that he sustained to Yahweh the relation of a Son. The New Testament, and the considerations suggested in the introduction to the psalm (Section 4), enable us to understand that the reference is to the Messiah properly so called - Jesus of Nazareth. This is expressly declared Acts 4:25-27 to have had its fulfillment in the purposes of Herod, Pontius Pilate, the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, in rejecting the Saviour and putting him to death. No one can doubt that all that is here stated in the psalm had a complete fulfillment in their combining to reject him and to put him to death; and we are, therefore, to regard the psalm as particularly referring to this transaction. Their conduct was, however, an illustration of the common feelings of rulers and people concerning him, and it was proper to represent the nations in general as in commotion in regard to him.
3
Psalm 2:3
繁體中文
「我們要掙開他們的捆綁」——即耶和華與他的受膏者的捆綁。那些參與這結盟或密謀的人,視耶和華與他的受膏者為一體,有同一個目標——要在世上建立統治權。因此,他們一同商議反對二者;又本着同一目的和圖謀,竭力擺脫二者各自的權柄。「捆綁」一詞在此指他們的權柄所施加的約束。這比喻大概取自給牛套上軛,或耕作時所用的帶子或繩索——軛上的帶子象徵他們服於他人的權柄或意志之下。救主在 Matthew 11:29 也用了同樣的比喻:「你們當負我的軛。」這裏的意思是:耶和華與他的受膏者定意在世人身上建立統治權,而這裏所指的君王和統治者同樣定意不容這事成就。
「脫去他們的繩索」——同一觀念的另一種表達——「繩索」所指的,不是捆綁囚犯的繩索,而是把牛繫於犁上的繩索或皮帶;因此也指那將人繫於事奉神之本分的東西。譯作「繩索」的詞,比譯作「捆綁」的詞語義更強。它本義指扭成或交織而成的東西,指製繩的通常方式。或許,在「我們要脫去」這話中,還表達了一種以為這事輕而易舉的意念:他們只需願意,事就成了。這些表達合起來,指的是世人要擺脫神之治理的企圖,尤其是他治理中關於在彌賽亞之下建立國度的那部分。因此,這顯明人心一種普遍的狀態:難以忍受神的約束與權柄,尤其是難以忍受他受膏為王之子的統治。
這段經文(Psalm 2:1-3)證明:(1)耶和華真神與彌賽亞即基督的治理本是同一的;(2)反對彌賽亞、即反對基督,實際上就是反對真神的旨意;(3)可以預料,人必反對那治理,並在企圖擺脫它時引起騷動與擾亂。
這段經文若視為指彌賽亞而言,已在以下諸方面得着充分的應驗:(a)大祭司、希律和彼拉多定意要處死他,以及他的同胞普遍棄絕他;(b)世人普遍的行為——他們難以忍受神律法的約束,尤其是救主所頒布、要求人順服並聽從他的那律法;(c)個別罪人的行為——人心對主耶穌權柄的敵擋。
我們面前的這段經文,如今之於世界,正如當年救主親自降世之時一樣適用。
英語原文
Let us break their bands asunder - The bands of Yahweh and of his Anointed. They who are engaged in this combination or conspiracy regard Yahweh and his Anointed as one, and as having one object - to set up a dominion over the world. Hence, they take counsel against both; and, with the same purpose and design, endeavor to cast off the authority of each. The word "bands" here refers to the restraints imposed by their authority. The figure is probably taken from fastening a yoke on oxen, or the bands or cords which were used in plowing - the bands of the yoke being significant of their subjection to the authority or will of another. The same figure is used by the Saviour in Matthew 11:29 : "Take my yoke upon you." The idea here is, that it was the purpose of Yahweh and his Anointed to establish a dominion over men, and that it was equally the purpose of the kings and rulers here referred to that it should not be done.
And cast away their cords from us - The same idea under another form - the cords referring not to that which would bind them as prisoners, but to the ropes or thongs which bound oxen to the plow; and, hence, to that which would bind men to the service of God. The word translated "cords" is a stronger word than that which is rendered bands. It means properly what is twisted or interlaced, and refers to the usual manner in which ropes are made. Perhaps, also, in the words "let us cast away" there is the expression of an idea that it could be easily done: that they had only to will it, and it would be done. Together, the expressions refer to the purpose among men to cast off the government of God, and especially that part of his administration which refers to his purpose to establish a kingdom under the Messiah. It thus indicates a prevalent state of the human mind as being impatient of the restraints and authority of God, and especially of the dominion of his Son, anointed as King.
The passage Psalm 2:1-3 proves:
(1) that the government of Yahweh, the true God, and the Messiah or Christ, is the same;
(2) that opposition to the Messiah, or to Christ, is in fact opposition to the purposes of the true God;
(3) that it may be expected that men will oppose that government, and there will be agitation and commotion in endeavoring to throw it off.
The passage, considered as referring to the Messiah, had an ample fulfillment
(a) in the purposes of the high priests, of Herod, and of Pilate, to put him to death, and in the general rejection of him by his own countrymen;
(b) in the general conduct of mankind - in their impatience of the restraints of the law of God, and especially of that law as promulgated by the Saviour, demanding submission and obedience to him; and
(c) in the conduct of individual sinners - in the opposition of the human heart to the authority of the Lord Jesus.
The passage before us is just as applicable to the world now as it was to the time when the Saviour personally appeared on the earth.
4
Psalm 2:4
繁體中文
「那坐在天上的必發笑」——神被描繪為以天為祂的居所、座位、寶座,從那裏管理世事。本節開始本詩的第二節詩段;這詩段(Psalm 2:4-6)在結構上與第一段(Psalm 2:1-3)相對應。前段描述那些想要甩脫神治理之人的感受與目的;本段按同樣的次序描述神的感受與目的;因為在兩段中,詩人都先描述所行的,再描述所說的:列國喧嘩騷動(Psalm 2:1-2),然後說(Psalm 2:3):「我們要掙開他們的捆綁。」神平靜地坐在天上,對他們徒然的嘗試報以微笑(Psalm 2:4),然後莊嚴宣告(Psalm 2:5-6):儘管他們百般抵擋,祂「已經立祂的君在錫安祂的聖山上了」。這描述極其莊嚴崇高。當人喧囂騷動、抵擋祂的計劃時,祂在自己天上安然靜坐,不為所動。參 Isaiah 18:4 類似之處的註釋。
「必發笑」——對他們徒然的嘗試報以微笑;不因他們的努力而受擾或激動;要平靜地繼續執行祂的目的。參上文所引 Isaiah 18:4。並見 Proverbs 1:26;Psalm 37:13;Psalm 59:8。當然,這是按人的方式說的,意思是:神必穩步向前,成就祂的目的。其中也含有祂必輕看他們虛妄無益之努力的意思。
「主必嗤笑他們」——同一個意思在此以變化的形式表達,這是希伯來詩平行體的慣例。希伯來文 לעג lâ‛ag 一詞,本義是口吃;繼而指以蠻音或外邦言語說話;再而指藉模仿人口吃的聲音來嘲弄或譏笑。(格塞尼烏斯,《詞典》。)這裏用於神,當然不能按字面理解,正如論到神有眼、有手、有腳時一樣。意思是:在神的心意中,事情的結果,正如祂嗤笑或譏誚人們徒然的嘗試一般;就是說,祂平靜地繼續執行自己的目的,並把他們的努力看作虛空,正如我們嗤笑或譏誚別人時看待他們的努力一樣。本節所教導的真理是:神必不顧人一切阻撓祂計劃的嘗試,而推進自己的計劃。這普遍的真理可以兩種方式陳述:
(1)當人向神喧嘩、聯合要甩脫祂的權柄時,祂在天上安然不動。
(2)祂不顧他們,仍推進自己的計劃。祂這樣作:
(a)直接地——不顧他們的嘗試而成就自己的計謀;
(b)藉着使他們的目的附從於祂自己的目的,使他們成為成就祂計劃的工具。參 Acts 4:28。
英語原文
He that sitteth in the heavens - God, represented as having his home, his seat, his throne in heaven, and thence administering the affairs of the world. This verse commences the second strophe or stanza of the psalm; and this strophe Psalm 2:4-6 corresponds with the first Psalm 2:1-3 in its structure. The former describes the feelings and purposes of those who would cast off the government of God; this describes the feelings and purposes of God in the same order, for in each case the psalmist describes what is done, and then what is said: the nations rage tumultuously Psalm 2:1-2, and then say Psalm 2:3, "Let us break their bands." God sits calmly in the heavens, smiling on their vain attempts Psalm 2:4, and then solemnly declares Psalm 2:5-6 that, in spite of all their opposition, he "has set his King upon his holy hill of Zion." There is much sublimity in this description. While men rage and are tumultuous in opposing his plans, he sits calm and undisturbed in his own heaven. Compare the notes at the similar place in Isaiah 18:4.
Shall laugh - Will smile at their vain attempts; will not be disturbed or agitated by their efforts; will go calmly on in the execution of his purposes. Compare as above Isaiah 18:4. See also Proverbs 1:26; Psalm 37:13; Psalm 59:8. This is, of course, to be regarded as spoken after the manner of men, and it means that God will go steadily forward in the accomplishment of his purposes. There is included also the idea that he will look with contempt on their vain and futile efforts.
The Lord shall have them in derision - The same idea is expressed here in a varied form, as is the custom in parallelism in Hebrew poetry. The Hebrew word לעג lâ‛ag, means properly to stammer; then to speak in a barbarous or foreign tongue; then to mock or deride, by imitating the stammering voice of anyone. Gesenius, Lexicon Here it is spoken of God, and, of course, is not to be understood literally, anymore than when eyes, and hands, and feet are spoken of as pertaining to him. The meaning is, that there is a result in the case, in the Divine Mind, as if he mocked or derided the vain attempts of men; that is, he goes calmly forward in the execution of his own purposes, and he looks upon and regards their efforts as vain, as we do the efforts of others when we mock or deride them. The truth taught in this verse is, that God will carry forward his own plans in spite of all the attempts of men to thwart them. This general truth may lie stated in two forms:
(1) He sits undisturbed and unmoved in heaven while men rage against him, and while they combine to cast off his authority.
(2) He carries forward his own plans in spite of them. This he does:
(a) directly, accomplishing his schemes without regard to their attempts; and
(b) by making their purposes tributary to his own, so making them the instruments in carrying out his own plans. Compare Acts 4:28.
5
Psalm 2:5
繁體中文
「那時,他要在怒中責備他們」——這表面上的冷漠與漠不關心不會持續到永遠。祂不會始終平靜地觀看,也不會任憑他們成就他們的目的而不介入。當祂表明了自己怎樣看他們的圖謀——他們何等無能,他們作為擺脫祂權柄的嘗試,何等可受譏誚——之後,祂必介入,宣告祂自己的旨意——祂決意在錫安山上設立祂的君。這都包含在「那時」一詞之內。
「在怒中」——即發怒。祂對他們計謀的輕蔑,必繼之以對他們本人的義憤,因為他們竟制定這樣的計謀,又竭力付諸實行。這兩者並不矛盾,因為叛離者的圖謀可以十分軟弱無益,而他們制定這計謀的罪惡卻可以十分重大。計謀的軟弱、及其終歸徒然的事實,並不改變制定者的品格;他愚昧這一事實,並不能證明他不邪惡。神必按他們所當得的對待這計謀和制定計謀的人——對前者施以輕蔑,對後者施以怒氣。「怒」這字在此,幾乎不必說,當照 Psalm 2:4 的「笑」字同樣的方式解釋:不是指與人心——人既受非理性情緒支配——中所有的完全相同的情感,而是照適用於神的講法——對罪之邪惡的強烈確信(沒有激動或個人的情意),並以適合顯明那邪惡、攔阻別人犯罪的方式表達祂的旨意。其意是:祂對他們說話,將如發怒一般;或說祂對待他們的方式,將如人在別人發怒時所經歷的一樣。
「在烈怒中驚嚇他們」——這裏譯作「驚嚇」的字——בהל bâhal——在原形(Qal)意為發抖;在此所用的形式(Piel)意為使發抖、使驚恐、使惶亂。這可以藉威嚇成就,也可以藉某種表明不悅或怒氣的審判成就:Psalm 83:15; Daniel 11:44; Job 22:10。此處的意思是:祂要使他們驚惶,或使他們恐懼戰抖,乃是憑祂旨意中所定的——即憑祂決意在祂的聖山上設立祂的君,並將地的權杖交在祂手中。這樣,他們的圖謀必受挫;他們若不服於祂,就必滅亡(見 Psalm 2:9-12)。
「在烈怒中」——直譯是祂的「熱」或「焚燒」,即祂的怒;如同我們說一個人怒火中燒、或因義憤而焚燒;或如我們論情緒時說,燃成火焰。此處的意思是:神不喜悅他們的圖謀,而祂旨意的表明,必適合使他們充滿最深的驚惶。當然,這一切字眼都當照我們所知道的神的性情解釋,而不是照人心中同樣的情緒解釋。神反對罪,並將表明祂的反對,如同發怒一般,但那必是在最平靜的方式中,而不是出於激動;只因為理當如此。
英語原文
Then shall he speak unto them - That is, this seeming indifference and unconcern will not last forever. He will not always look calmly on, nor will he suffer them to accomplish their purposes without interposing. When he has shown how he regards their schemes - how impotent they are, how much they are really the objects of derision, considered as an attempt to cast off his authority - he will interpose and declare his own purposes - his determination to establish his king on the hill of Zion. This is implied in the word "then."
In his wrath - In anger. His contempt for their plans will be followed by indignation against themselves for forming such plans, and for their efforts to execute them. One of these things is not inconsistent with the other, for the purpose of the rebels may be very weak and futile, and yet their wickedness in forming the plan may be very great. The weakness of the scheme, and the fact that it will be vain, does not change the character of him who has made it; the fact that he is foolish does not prove that he is not wicked. God will treat the scheme and those who form it as they deserve - the one with contempt, the other with his wrath. The word "wrath" here, it is hardly necessary to say, should be interpreted in the same manner as the word "laugh" in Psalm 2:4, not as denoting a feeling precisely like that which exists in the human mind, subject as man is to unreasonable passion, but as it is proper to apply it to God - the strong conviction (without passion or personal feeling) of the evil of sin, and the expression of his purpose in a manner adapted to show that evil, and to restrain others from its commission. It means that he will speak to them as if he were angry; or that his treatment of them will be such as men experience from others when they are angry.
And vex them - The word here rendered "vex" - בהל bâhal - means in the original or Qal form, to tremble; and then, in the form used here, the Piel, to cause to tremble, to terrify, to strike with consternation. This might be done either by a threat or by some judgment indicative of displeasure or anger. Psalm 83:15; Daniel 11:44; Job 22:10. The idea here is that he would alarm them, or make them quake with fear, by what is specified of his purpose; to wit, by his determination to set his King on his holy hill, and by placing the scepter of the earth in his hands. Their designs, therefore, would be frustrated, and if they did not submit to him they must perish (see Psalm 2:9-12).
In his sore displeasure - literally, in his "heat" or "burning," that is, in his anger; as we speak of one that is inflamed with anger, or that burns with indignation; or, as we speak of the passions, kindling into a flame. The meaning here is, that God would be displeased with their purposes, and that the expression of his design would be adapted to fill them with the deepest alarm. Of course, all such words are to be interpreted in accordance with what we know to be the nature of God, and not in accordance with the same passions in men. God is opposed to sin, and will express his opposition as if he felt angry, but it will be in the most calm manner, and not as the result of passion. It will be simply because it ought to be so.
6
Psalm 2:6
繁體中文
「我已經立我的君」——「已經」一詞前的語氣詞不過是連接詞「並(and)」的翻譯。武加大譯本譯作「但……autem」;七十士譯本亦然,δέ de。或許譯作慣常的「並」更好:「並且我已立了我的君」,等等。這話當視為神自己的宣告;是祂對他們所宣明之目的(Psalm 2:3)的答覆,也是 Psalm 2:5 所預告的。其意是:祂要在怒中向他們說話,說:「儘管你們有這一切的目的、這一切的反對,我已立了我的君在錫安山上。」就是說:他們有他們的計劃,神有神的;他們想要擺脫祂的權柄,攔阻祂立彌賽亞為王的旨意;祂卻定意要成全祂的目的,並且必成全。譯作「立」的字——נסך nâsak——字義是傾倒、澆奠,如向神奠祭,Exodus 30:9; Hosea 9:4; Isaiah 30:1;繼而指膏立君王或祭司時澆油,因此引申為奉獻、就職等義。見 Joshua 13:21; Psalm 83:11; Micah 5:5。此處的意思是:祂已莊嚴地立彌賽亞就職為王;即祂已定意如此,因此祂說得彷彿已經成就。「我的君」一語當然是指那位受膏者、彌賽亞(Psalm 2:2)。這不單是一位君王,或那君王,而是「我的君」——意思是祂的職任出於神,且祂被立在那裏是要執行神的旨意。這表明受膏者與立祂者之間何等親密的關係,並為下一節稱祂為祂的兒子作了準備。
「在錫安─我的聖山上了」——錫安是耶路撒冷城內南面的山。見 Isaiah 1:8 的註釋。它是這城所建諸山中最高的。大衛立它為王國的京都,因此稱為大衛城,2 Chronicles 5:2。詩人和先知常以它指耶路撒冷本身,Isaiah 2:3; Isaiah 8:18; Isaiah 10:24; Isaiah 33:14 等。直到大衛從耶布斯人手中奪取之後,它才得這地位,2 Samuel 5:5-9; 1 Chronicles 11:4-8。大衛把約櫃遷到那裏,又在耶布斯人亞勞拿的禾場上為耶和華築了一座壇,2 Samuel 24:15-25。自此錫安成為王國的京邑,這名也轉用於全城。本節所指的正是這事;其意是:在那京邑、那都城中,神已立祂的彌賽亞為王,或已派定祂治理祂的子民。這不可能指大衛本人,因為嚴格說來,他並非在耶路撒冷受膏就職為王;即並沒有這裏所指的那種就職典禮。錫安稱為「聖山」,或(希伯來文)「我聖潔的山」,因為自大衛把約櫃遷到那裏起,它就被分別為神政的所在、神的居所。那成了神作王、受敬拜之地。這必是指彌賽亞,並指神已分派祂治理祂的子民,進而治理全地。本段所教導的真理是:神必成全祂自己的旨意,無論人如何反對;祂明確的定意,是要使祂的受膏者——彌賽亞——作萬有之王。
英語原文
Yet have I set my king - The word "yet" is merely the translation of the conjunction "and." It is rendered in the Vulgate "but ...autem;" and so in the Septuagint, δέ de. It would be better rendered perhaps by the usual word "and:" "And I have set or constituted my king," etc. This is properly to be regarded as the expression of God himself; as what he says in reply to their declared purposes Psalm 2:3, and as what is referred to in Psalm 2:5. The meaning is, he would speak to them in his anger, and say, "In spite of all your purposes and all your opposition, I have set my king on the hill of Zion." That is, they had their plans and God had his; they meant to cast off his authority, and to prevent his purpose to set up the Messiah as king; he resolved, on the contrary, to carry out his purposes, and he would do it. The word rendered set - נסך nâsak - means, literally, to pour, to pour out, as in making a libation to the Deity, Exodus 30:9; Hosea 9:4; Isaiah 30:1; then, to pour out oil in anointing a king or priest, and hence, to consecrate, to inaugurate, etc. See Joshua 13:21; Psalm 83:11; Micah 5:5. The idea here is, that he had solemnly inaugurated or constituted the Messiah as king; that is, that he had formed the purpose to do it, and he therefore speaks as if it were already done. The words "my King" refer, of course, to the anointed One, the Messiah, Psalm 2:2. It is not simply a king, or the king, but "my king," meaning that he derived his appointment from God, and that he was placed there to execute his purposes. This indicates the very near relation which the anointed One sustains to him who had appointed him, and prepares us for what is said in the subsequent verse, where he is called His Son.
Upon my holy hill of Zion - Zion was the southern hill in the city of Jerusalem. See the notes at Isaiah 1:8. It was the highest of the hills on which the city was built. It was made by David the capital of his kingdom, and was hence called the city of David, 2 Chronicles 5:2. By the poets and prophets it is often put for Jerusalem itself, Isaiah 2:3; Isaiah 8:18; Isaiah 10:24; Isaiah 33:14, et al. It did not obtain this distinction until it was taken by David from the Jebusites, 2 Samuel 5:5-9; 1 Chronicles 11:4-8. To that place David removed the ark of the covenant, and there he built an altar to the Lord in the threshing-floor of Araunah the Jebusite, 2 Samuel 24:15-25. Zion became thenceforward the metropolis of the king dom, and the name was transferred to the entire city. It is to this that the passage here refers; and the meaning is, that in that metropolis or capital God had constituted his Messiah king, or had appointed him to reign over his people. This cannot refer to David himself, for in no proper sense was he constituted or inaugurated king in Jerusalem; that is, there was no such ceremony of inauguration as is referred to here. Zion was called the "holy hill," or "the hill of my holiness" (Hebrew), because it was set apart as the seat of the theocracy, or the residence of God, from the time that David removed the ark there. That became the place where God reigned, and where his worship was celebrated. This must refer to the Messiah, and to the fact that God had set him apart to reign over his people, and thence over all the earth. The truth taught in this passage is, that God will carry forward his own purposes in spite of all the opposition which men can make, and that it is his deliberate design to make his anointed One - the Messiah - King over all.
7
Psalm 2:7
繁體中文
「我要傳聖旨」——我們在這裏又見到發言人的變換。受膏者親自登場,宣告那關乎祂所定的大旨意,並援引那賜給祂的應許,作為耶和華定意立祂在錫安山為王(Psalm 2:6)的根據。第一詩節(Psalm 2:1-3)以叛黨陳明他們的意圖作結;第二節(Psalm 2:4-6)以陳明耶和華的旨意作結;第三節則以彌賽亞親自的這番宣告開始。發言人的更迭,使全篇詩富於戲劇性的趣味。這裏的「我」指彌賽亞,是無可置疑的。「聖旨」——חק(chôq)——本義是所定、所規、所立之事:見 Job 23:14;比較 Genesis 47:26; Exodus 12:24。因此它等同於律法、法令、條例。這裏不是指祂所要遵守的律法,而是指關乎祂作王的一項法令或定制:就是耶和華對彌賽亞將要建立之國度的莊嚴旨意;祂國度的憲法。正如下文的解釋所示,這包含兩件事:
(a)祂要被尊為、被承認為神的兒子,要得着那身份和尊榮(Psalm 2:7);並且
(b)列國和地極要賜給祂為產業,就是說,祂的權柄要遍及全世界(Psalm 2:8)。
「傳」字的意思是,祂要親自發言,親自說明耶和華定意立祂在錫安聖山為王的緣由。這樣引出彌賽亞親自作這宣告,並以莊嚴的約或憑據的形式呈現,實有極大的美感。耶和華(Psalm 2:6)定意立祂在聖山為王,由此可見並非任意而行,而是履行早先所立的莊嚴應許,因此也彰顯了祂守約的信實和誠實。「耶和華曾對我說」,就是耶和華曾說。見 Psalm 2:2, Psalm 2:4。祂沒有說明這話是何時說的;但合理的解釋是,這是在祂要被立為錫安君王的旨意付諸實行之前說的;就是說,就彌賽亞而論,是在祂道成肉身、顯現於世執行祂的旨意之前。因此,這暗指那是在某個先在的狀態中;而且,祂是憑着那「必被認定為神之子」的應許而來的。若不承認基督在道成肉身之先已經存在,這段經文就無法理解為指着基督說的,因為以下的一切,顯然都是神定意賜祂兒子之崇高地位的結果,或是當時賜祂之應許的結果。
「你是我的兒子」——就是說,耶和華已宣告祂是自己的兒子;祂已把這名號——神的兒子——所包含的身份和尊榮賜給了祂。關於這話的一般意義及其所含內容,見 Matthew 1:1 的註釋;Hebrews 1:2 的註釋;Hebrews 1:5 的註釋;Romans 1:4 的註釋;及 John 5:18 的註釋。「神的眾子」一語,在別處常用以指聖徒、神的兒女、或尊貴有權勢的人(比較 Genesis 6:2, Genesis 6:4; Job 1:6; Hosea 1:10; John 1:12; Romans 8:14, Romans 8:19; Philippians 2:15; 1 John 3:1);有一次指天使(Job 38:7);但「神的兒子」這名號,在聖經中從不歸於彌賽亞以外的任何人。它在舊約中此前未曾出現,此後也只在 Daniel 3:25 出現一次。見該處的註釋。這使它在我們眼前這事上的使用更為引人注目,也證明了希伯來書作者(Hebrews 1:5)關於其意義的論證是合理的。因此,按照希伯來文的用法和這詞的本義,其真義是:祂與神的關係,唯有用人間兒子與父親的關係才能相比;而這詞既如此使用,就正當地暗指祂與神自己在本性上平等。這樣的詞不會加於一個純粹的人身上;也不是加於天使身上的(Hebrews 1:5);因此它必暗指一種比二者都超越的本性。
「今日」——關於新約對這話的應用,見 Acts 13:33 的註釋和 Hebrews 1:5 的註釋。這整段經文常被引來支持基督「永恆受生」的教義,意即祂是從永恆「受生」的;就是說,祂的神性在某種意義上是從父而來的流出,而這是從永恆就有的。然而,無論對那教義的明晰性或真實性有何看法,「今日」一語的用法,或新約對這段經文的應用(Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5),都沒有甚麼能支持它。誠然,這裏上下文中的言語,如上所述,確實證明祂先在,因為這話是對祂說的,是耶和華與祂所立之旨意或聖約的結果,也是立祂為錫安山君王之旨意的根據。「今日」二字自然是指這「旨意」制定、這約立定的時候;而那既是在創世以前,就必須暗指祂當時已經存在。這詞所指的時刻,是定意加冠祂為彌賽亞的時候。這是建立在祂與耶和華的關係上,並且當祂在那關係中被稱為「兒子」時已經隱含;但它對這關係始於何時,則無所斷定。在這段經文中,耶和華被視為宣告祂立祂為錫安君王的旨意;這言語乃是莊嚴地將祂獻於王職的言語。祂說到這事,是把它看作祂降世之前的一個旨意;而這旨意的執行和完成,乃是藉着祂從死裏復活,並隨之而來的高昇。比較 Acts 13:33 和 Ephesians 1:20-22。因此,作為應許或旨意,這是指道成肉身之前的時期;作為旨意的執行,這是指祂從死裏復活、被高舉在萬有之上為錫安君王的時候。無論哪一種情形,「今日」二字都不能解作等同於永恆或從永恆;因此它們對「永恆受生」的教義不能有所斷定。
「我生你」——就是說,在所論的事上,祂使「我的兒子」這話得以正當地加於祂身上,並使祂被立為錫安的「王」。其意義是,祂在這事上如此設立了父與子的關係,以致「兒子」的名號正當地歸於祂,祂也當被如此看待、如此稱呼。Alexander 教授也是這樣說:「『我生了你』這話的本義,簡單說就是:『我是你的父親。』」這當然要照着神的本性來理解;我們不可把人間關係的觀念帶進解釋裏。它的意思是,以某種恰當的意義——某種合乎神性的意義——設立了這樣一種關係,足以支持這裏對人間一切關係中最親密、最重要者的援引。至於那是甚麼意義,是值得探究的問題;但不可假定它是任何字面上的意義,也不可假定這段經文除上述教義所含的意義外別無他解,因為它不可能是字面的,而且除了「永恆受生」之外,這話還可以傳達別的觀念。譯作「生」的字(ילד yâlad)對這關係形成的方式沒有明確的斷定。它本義是:
(1)生產,如母親生子,Genesis 4:1;
(2)生育,如父親,Genesis 4:18;然後
(3)用於神時,是取創造之義——或指如此創造、造作,以致產生一種可比作父與子的關係。
Deuteronomy 32:18:「你輕忽生你的磐石。」比較 Jeremiah 2:27:「向木頭說:你是我的父,你生了我。」保羅也是這樣說,1 Corinthians 4:15:「我在基督耶穌裏用福音生了你們。」因此,若設想耶和華把這地位和身份賜給彌賽亞,以致祂正當地稱自己為父、稱受膏者為子,這字的全部意義就滿足了。使祂承受這崇高職分;差祂到世上來;使祂從死裏復活;使祂坐在自己的右邊——立祂為君王、為主——這一切還不足以支持這樣的言語嗎?這豈不正是我們所討論的事嗎?那麼,在這段經文上,還適宜掀起祂永恆受生的問題嗎?比較 Romans 1:4 的註釋。關於這段經文,加爾文(Calvin)在其評註中(in loc.)說:「我知道許多人把這段經文解釋為指基督的永恆受生,他們主張在『今日』這副詞裏,暗示着一種彷彿超越時間界限的恆久行動。但使徒保羅是這預言更忠信、更稱職的解釋者;他在 Acts 13:33 裏,把我們帶回到我所稱基督榮耀的顯明。因此,說祂被生,不是叫祂得以成為神的兒子——彷彿祂從那時才開始是神的兒子——而是叫祂作為這樣的一位向世人顯明。末了,這生應當理解為不是指父與子之間的相互關係,它只是表明:那從起初隱藏在父懷中、在律法之下隱約被預表的一位,從祂帶着對其身份的清楚宣告而顯明之時起,就被認定為神的兒子,正如 John 1:14 所說。」Alexander 教授雖然認為這是建立在父與子之間的永恆關係上,卻也說:「『我今日生了你』可以看作僅僅指彌賽亞的加冕,那是一次理想性的加冕」,見其著作卷一,頁15。因此,這段經文解釋的結果可以陳述如下:
(a)這裏所用的「兒子」一詞,是彌賽亞的特殊名號——一個唯有祂能以這意義承受的名號。
(b)這詞既在此使用,又在別處使用,就假定祂在道成肉身之先已經存在。
(c)這詞在此的使用,以及所定的旨意,都暗指在這旨意定立之先,祂已經存在,以致祂能親自受命,也能領受應許。
(d)「兒子」一詞在此不是指那先在的關係,對祂先前存在的模式——無論是本質上從永恆存在於神的本性之中;或以某種奧祕的意義受生;或是神性的流出;或是被造——均無所斷定。
(e)這詞,如加爾文所提示、Alexander 教授所主張的,在此僅指祂被立為王——指加冕之舉——無論那發生於何時。
(f)這事實上發生在祂從死裏復活、被高舉到天上神右邊之時(Acts 13:33);因此保羅在使徒行傳裏對這段經文的應用,與我們按公平解釋這段經文所得的結論相符。
(g)因此,這段經文對永恆受生的教義,無論向哪一面都無所斷定,故不能用來證明那教義。
英語原文
I will declare the decree - We have here another change in the speaker. The Anointed One is himself introduced as declaring the great purpose which was formed in regard to him, and referring to the promise which was made to him, as the foundation of the purpose of Yahweh Psalm 2:6 to set him on the hill of Zion. The first strophe or stanza Psalm 2:1-3 is closed with a statement made by the rebels of their intention or design; the second Psalm 2:4-6 with a statement of the purpose of Yahweh; the third is introduced by this declaration of the Messiah himself. The change of the persons speaking gives a dramatic interest to the whole psalm. There can be no doubt that the word "I" here refers to the Messiah. The word decree - חק chôq - means properly something decreed, prescribed, appointed. See Job 23:14. Compare Genesis 47:26; Exodus 12:24. Thus it is equivalent to law, statute, ordinance. Here it refers not to a law which he was to obey, but to an ordinance or statute respecting his reign: the solemn purpose of Yahweh in regard to the kingdom which the Messiah was to set up; the constitution of his kingdom. This, as the explanation shows, implied two things:
(a) that he was to be regarded and acknowledged as his Son, or to have that rank and dignity Psalm 2:7; and
(b) that the pagan and the uttermost parts of the earth were to be given him for a possession, or that his reign was to extend over all the world Psalm 2:8.
The word "declare" here means that he would give utterance to, or that he would now himself make a statement in explanation of the reason why Yahweh had determined to establish him as King on his holy hill of Zion. There is great beauty in thus introducing the Messiah himself as making this declaration, presenting it now in the form of a solemn covenant or pledge. The determination of Yahweh Psalm 2:6 to establish him as King on his holy hill is thus seen not to be arbitrary, but to be in fulfillment of a solemn promise made long before, and is therefore an illustration of his covenant faithfulness and truth. "The Lord hath said unto me." Yahweh hath said. See Psalm 2:2, Psalm 2:4. He does not intimate when it was that he had said this, but the fair interpretation is, that it was before the purpose was to be carried into execution to place him as King in Zion; that is, as applicable to the Messiah, before he became incarnate or was manifested to execute his purpose on earth. It is implied, therefore, that it was in some previous state, and that he had come forth in virtue of the pledge that he would be recognized as the Son of God. The passage cannot be understood as referring to Christ without admitting his existence previous to the incarnation, for all that follows is manifestly the result of the exalted rank which God purposed to give him as his Son, or as the result of the promise made to him then.
Thou art my Son - That is, Yahweh had declared him to be his Son; he had conferred on him the rank and dignity fairly involved in the title The Son of God. In regard to the general meaning of this, and what is implied in it, see Matthew 1:1, note; Hebrews 1:2, note; Hebrews 1:5, note; Romans 1:4, note; and John 5:18, note. The phrase "sons of God" is elsewhere used frequently to denote the saints, the children of God, or men eminent for rank and power (compare Genesis 6:2, Genesis 6:4; Job 1:6; Hosea 1:10; John 1:12; Romans 8:14, Romans 8:19; Philippians 2:15; 1 John 3:1); and once to denote angels Job 38:7; but the appellation "The Son of God" is not appropriated in the Scriptures to anyone but the Messiah. It does not occur before this in the Old Testament, and it occurs but once after this, Daniel 3:25. See the notes at that passage. This makes its use in the case before us the more remarkable, and justifies the reasoning of the author of the epistle to the Hebrews Heb 1:5 as to its meaning. The true sense, therefore, according to the Hebrew usage, and according to the proper meaning of the term, is, that he sustained a relation to God which could be compared only with that which a son among men sustains to his father; and that the term, as thus used, fairly implies an equality in nature with God himself. It is such a term as would not be applied to a mere man; it is such as is not applied to the angels Hebrews 1:5; and therefore it must imply a nature superior to either.
This day - On the application of this in the New Testament, see the notes at Acts 13:33 and the notes at Hebrews 1:5. The whole passage has been often appealed to in support of the doctrine of the "eternal generation" of Christ, meaning that he was "begotten" from eternity; that is, that his divine nature was in some sense an emanation from the Father, and that this is from eternity. Whatever may be thought of that doctrine, however, either as to its intelligibility or its truth, there is nothing in the use of the phrase "this day," or in the application of the passage in the New Testament Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5, to sustain it. The language, indeed, in the connection in which it is found, does, as remarked above, demonstrate that he had a pre-existence, since it is addressed to him as the result of a decree or covenant made with him by Yahweh, and as the foundation of the purpose to set him as King on the hill of Zion. The words "this day" would naturally refer to that time when this "decree" was made, or this covenant formed; and as that was before the creation of the world, it must imply that he had an existence then.
The time referred to by the meaning of the word is, that when it was determined to crown him as the Messiah. This is founded on the relation subsisting between him and Yahweh, and implied when in that relation he is called his "Son;" but it determines nothing as to the time when this relation commenced. Yahweh, in the passage, is regarded as declaring his purpose to make him King in Zion, and the language is that of a solemn consecration to the kingly office. He is speaking of this as a purpose before he came into the world; it was executed, or carried into effect, by his resurrection from the dead, and by the exaltation consequent on that. Compare Acts 13:33 and Ephesians 1:20-22. Considered, then, as a promise or purpose, this refers to the period before the incarnation; considered as pertaining to the execution of that purpose, it refers to the time when he was raised from the dead and exalted over all things as King in Zion. In neither case can the words "this day" be construed as meaning the same as eternity, or from eternity; and therefore they can determine nothing respecting the doctrine of" eternal generation."
Have I begotten thee - That is, in the matter referred to, so that it would be proper to apply to him the phrase "my Son," and to constitute him "King" in Zion. The meaning is, that he had so constituted the relationship of Father and Son in the case, that it was proper that the appellation "Son" should be given him, and that he should be regarded and addressed as such. So Prof. Alexander: "The essential meaning of the phrase "I have begotten thee" is simply this, "I am thy Father." This is, of course, to be understood in accordance with the nature of God, and we are not to bring to the interpretation the ideas which enter into that human relationship. It means that in some proper sense - some sense appropriate to the Deity - such a relation was constituted as would justify this reference to the most tender and important of all human relationships. In what sense that is, is a fair subject of inquiry, but it is not proper to assume that it is in anything like a literal sense, or that there can be no other sense of the passage than that which is implied in the above-named doctrine, for it cannot be literal, and there are other ideas that may be conveyed by the phrase than that of "eternal generation." The word rendered "begotten" (ילד yâlad) determines nothing certainly as to the mode in which this relationship was formed. It means properly:
(1) to bear, to bring forth as a mother, Genesis 4:1;
(2) to beget, as a father, Genesis 4:18; and then
(3) as applied to God it is used in the sense of creating - or of so creating or forming as that the result would be that a relation would exist which might be compared with that of a father and a son.
Deuteronomy 32:18 : "of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful." Compare Jeremiah 2:27 : "Saying to a block (idol), Thou art my father, thou hast begotten me." So Paul says, 1 Corinthians 4:15 : "In Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the Gospel." The full meaning, therefore, of this word would be met if it be supposed that Yahweh had given the Messiah this place and rank in such a sense that it was proper to speak of himself as the Father and the Anointed One as the Son. And was there not enough in designating him to this high office; in sending him into the world; in raising him from the dead; in placing him at his own right hand - appointing him as King and Lord - to justify this language? Is not this the very thing under consideration? Is it proper, then, in connection with this passage, to start the question about his eternal generation? Compare the notes at Romans 1:4. On this passage Calvin says (in loc.), "I know that this passage is explained by many as referring to the eternal generation of Christ, who maintain that in the adverb today there is, as it were, a perpetual act beyond the limits of time, denoted. But the Apostle Paul is a more faithful and competent interpreter of this prophecy, who in Acts 13:33 recalls us to that which I have called a glorious demonstration of Christ. He was said to be begotten, therefore, not that he might be the Son of God, by which he might begin to be such, but that he might be manifested to the world as such. Finally, this begetting ought to be understood not of the mutual relation of the Father and the Son, but it signifies merely that he who was from the beginning hidden in the bosom of the Father, and who was obscurely shadowed forth under the law, from the time when he was manifested with clear intimation of his rank, was acknowledged as the Son of God, as it is said in John 1:14." So Prof. Alexander, though supposing that this is founded on an eternal relation between the Father and the Son, says, "This day have I begotten thee may be considered as referring only to the coronation of Messiah, which is an ideal one," vol. i., p. 15. The result of the exposition of this passage may therefore be thus stated:
(a) The term "Son," as used here, is a special appellation of the Messiah - a term applicable to him in a sense in which it can be given to no other being.
(b) As used here, and as elsewhere used, it supposes his existence before the incarnation.
(c) Its use here, and the purpose formed, imply that he had an existence before this purpose was formed, so that he could be personally addressed, and so that a promise could be made to him.
(d) The term "Son" is not used here in reference to that anterior relation, and determines nothing as to the mode of his previous being - whether from eternity essentially in the nature of God; or whether in some mysterious sense begotten; or whether as an emanation of the Deity; or whether created.
(e) The term, as Calvin suggests, and as maintained by Prof. Alexander, refers here only to his being constituted King - to the act of coronation - whenever that occurred.
(f) This, in fact, occurred when he was raised from the dead, and when he was exalted to the right hand of God in heaven Acts 13:33, so that the application of the passage by Paul in the Acts accords with the result to which we are led by the fair interpretation of the passage.
(g) The passage, therefore, determines nothing, one way or the other, respecting the doctrine of eternal generation, and cannot, therefore, be used in proof of that doctrine.
8
Psalm 2:8
繁體中文
「你求我」 — 即向神求。這是詩篇第二篇7節所提及的那「旨意」的一部分。那旨意不僅包括立他為兒子的設計——意即他將在錫安作王——也包括將一個涵蓋「列國」與「地極」的統治權賜給他的目的。這廣大的統治權要賜給他,條件是他必須「求」它,如此便維持了這一觀念:耶和華(雅巍)本身乃是權柄與國度的大源頭,而彌賽亞本身則居於他以下的位分。父與子的這一關係,在新約中隨處得到承認。我們既可確信彌賽亞必如此祈求,便可推知世界終必歸在他的權杖之下。還可補充一點:既然這廣大的統治權只在彌賽亞「求」它、為它禱告的條件下才應許給他,那麼更是如此——除非我們藉着懇切的祈求去尋求,否則無論是這一件事,還是神任何的恩惠,我們都不能盼望得着。
「我就賜給你」 — 我必賜給你。意即,他終必將這產業賜給他。經文沒有指明何時成就;只要在世界歷史的任何時期得着成就,這預言便算應驗了。
「列國」 — 指眾民(見 Psalm 2:1 註釋);即世界。在詩篇作者的時代,世界被視為分為希伯來人與其他各國;神的子民與外族人。新約常在「猶太人」與「外邦人」的名稱下提及同樣的劃分,正如希臘人把全世界分為希臘人和化外人。這詞如今將涵蓋一切不受真宗教影響的國家。
「為基業」 — 即你的產業;你作為我兒子的分。這裏暗指神已立他為兒子這一事實,因此稱他為萬有的承受者乃是恰當的。見 Hebrews 1:4 註釋。
「地極」 — 指世界最遠的疆域。這應許按正意涵蓋了當時所知的世界、現今所知的世界,以及將來所知的世界。
「為田產」 — 即作為君王。這在地上要成為他作為耶和華之子的產業,因他已被立為王。在此可以附帶說明,
(a) 這事只能在主耶穌基督身上得着應驗。無論是大衛,還是任何其他希伯來君王,事實上都未曾獲賜這樣的產業。他們的疆域在任何時候都只是稍稍超出巴勒斯坦的邊界,所佔的地土極為有限——即使與當時許多存在的王國相比,也不過是一小片領土。這裏所用的措辭,絕不可能應用於巴勒斯坦那有限而狹窄的國土。
(b) 這應許當理解為仍然完全有效。它從未被廢止或撤回;儘管它的應驗似乎遲延已久,但由於並未指明時間,它的精意與含義並未被忽視。事件的進展已表明,它本就不是定意要迅速成就的;而當沒有指明時間時,就當容讓事件本身作為預言原初含義的詮釋者。
(c) 這應許終必應驗。在這應許中顯然假定彌賽亞會求這事;並且鄭重地確認:他若求,這廣大的產業就必賜給他。因此,世界當視為神憑約賜給他兒子的;到了時候,他必在地上建立他的國度,統治人類。那日子將要來到:地上萬國所實際服於其下的權杖,將是神兒子的權杖;他頒佈律法、執掌王權的權利,將從日出之處到日落之處都得着承認。這是未來之事中我們唯一確知的一件,而這一件事已足以使那未來的一切都光明燦爛。
英語原文
Ask of me - That is, of God. This is a part of the "decree" or purpose, as mentioned in Psalm 2:7. That decree embraced not only the design to constitute him as his Son, in the sense that he was to be king in Zion, but also the purpose to give him a dominion embracing "the heathen" and "the uttermost parts of the earth." This wide dominion was to be given him on condition that he would "ask" for it, thus keeping up the idea that Yahweh, as such, is the great source of authority and empire, and that the Messiah, as such occupies a rank subordinate to him. This relation of the Father and Son is everywhere recognized in the New Testament. As we may be sure that the Messiah will ask for this, it follows that the world will yet be brought under his scepter. It may be added that as this wide dominion is promised to the Messiah only on condition that he "asks" for it or prays for it, much more is it true that we can hope for this and for no favor from God, unless we seek it by earnest prayer.
And I shall give thee - I will give thee. That is, he would ultimately give him this possession. No time is specified when it would be done, and the prophecy will be fulfilled if it shall be accomplished in any period of the history of the world.
The heathen - The nations (notes, Psalm 2:1); that is, the world. In the time of the writer of the psalm, the world would be spoken of as divided into Hebrews and other nations; the people of God and foreigners. The same division is often referred to in the New Testament under the terms Jew and Gentile, as the Greeks divided all the world into Greeks and barbarians. The word would now embrace all the nations which are not under the influence of the true religion.
For thine inheritance - Thy heritage; thy portion as my Son. There is an allusion here to the fact that he had constituted him as his Son, and hence, it was proper to speak of him as the heir of all things. See the notes at Hebrews 1:4.
And the uttermost parts of the earth - The farthest regions of the world. This promise would properly embrace all the world as then known, as it is now known, as it shall be hereafter known.
For thy possession - That is, as king. This, on the earth, was be to his possession as the Son of Yahweh, constituted as king. It may be remarked here,
(a) that this can have its fulfillment only in the Lord Jesus Christ. It was not true of David nor of any other Hebrew monarch that he had conceded to him, in fact, any such possession. Their dominions extended, at any time, but little beyond the bounds of Palestine, and embraced a very limited part of the earth - but a small territory, even as compared with many then existing kingdoms. The phrase used here could never have been applied to the limited and narrow country of Palestine.
(b) The promise is to be understood as still in full force. It has never been cancelled or recalled, and though its fulfillment has seemed to be long delayed, yet as no time was specified, its spirit and meaning have not been disregarded. Events have shown that it was not intended that it should be speedily accomplished; and events, when no time is specified, should be allowed to be interpreters of the original meaning of the prophecy.
(c) The promise will yet be fulfilled. It is evidently supposed in the promise that the Messiah would ask for this; and it is solemnly affirmed that if he did, this wide inheritance would be granted to him. The world, then, is to be regarded as given by covenant to the Son of God, and in due time he will set up his dominion over the earth, and rule over mankind. The period is coming when the actual scepter swayed over the nations of the earth will be that of the Son of God, and when his right to give laws and to reign will be acknowledged from the rising to the setting sun. This is the only thing in the future that is certainly known to us, and this is enough to make everything in that future bright.
9
Psalm 2:9
繁體中文
「你必用鐵杖打破他們」——顯然是指你的仇敵,因為不能設想這話的意思是:他要以這樣的權杖統治自己的子民。這裡的意思是:他必粉碎並制伏他一切的仇敵。他將擁有絕對的權柄,而那已賜給他的授命,也必伴隨著足以持守它的權威。那將要賜給他的統治權,不僅是保護他朋友的統治,也是懲罰他仇敵的統治;這裡之所以特別突出這一點,是因為本詩前文所論的乃是悖逆之人,而彌賽亞在此被描繪為擁有足以懲罰並約束他們的權柄。武加大譯本(Vulgate)把這裡譯作「你必統治」;七十士譯本(Septuagint)譯作「你必牧養」——ποιμανεῖς poimaneis;意即:你必如牧人牧養羊群那樣牧養他們;你必對他們施行牧人的看顧與保護。這譯法是由於希伯來文該字的標音略有變動而產生,不過該字最受認可的標音方式,仍是我們通行譯本所採用的那一種。DeWette、Hengstenberg、Alexander、Horsley 都採用通行的讀法。本節的話曾被引來反對把它指涉彌賽亞。DeWette 對這問題的評語,已在本詩導論第四節(3)中引述。但可以留意:雖然聖經各處都描述彌賽亞治理全地的權杖是溫和的權杖,聖經也同樣在各處宣告:他終必粉碎並傾覆他一切的仇敵。
因此,在 Isaiah 11:4 有話說:「以口中的杖擊打世界,以嘴裏的氣殺戮惡人。」又如 Psalm 110:6:「他要在列邦中刑罰惡人,屍首就遍滿各處。」再如 Revelation 19:15:「有利劍從他口中出來,可以擊殺列國。他必用鐵杖轄管他們,並要踹全能神烈怒的酒醡。」同樣,在 Matthew 25 及其他經文也說到:他將要來施行審判,並把他一切的仇敵交予當受的刑罰。聖經一面說彌賽亞的掌權將是溫和的掌權,他的國不屬這世界,又一面向我們把他描述為和平之君;同時也說他將披戴君王的一切權柄。他既有能力保護他的朋友,也就有能力降卑並粉碎他的仇敵。「用鐵杖」一語,指他所持的權杖。權杖有時以木製成,有時以金,有時以象牙,有時則以鐵。當屬後一種情形時,其含意乃是:這統治權是絕對的,沒有甚麼能抵擋它。就這一點而言,最自然浮現的想法,或許是公義或嚴厲的意念。就彌賽亞的應驗而言,這只能意味着:他的仇敵必在他面前被粉碎、被制伏。
「你必將他們摔碎」——同一個意思在此以另一形式表達,但更特別指出這事將何等輕易作成。譯作「摔碎」的那個字,意思是如瓦器般打得粉碎(Judges 7:20;Jeremiah 22:28);也用以指將嬰孩摔碎在石頭上(Psalm 137:9)。英文「砸碎」(shiver)一詞正好可以表達這裡的意思——「你必將他們砸碎」。
「如同窯匠的瓦器」——即窯匠所造的器皿;泥造的器皿。這種器皿極易打碎,用鐵杖更是如此;這裡的意思是:他粉碎並制伏仇敵,將如打碎這種器皿一樣輕易。再沒有別的意象,能更貼切地表達他制伏仇敵的輕易;這也與新約聖經的一切描述相符——基督以無限的輕易——只憑一句話——就能制伏他的仇敵,把他們交予毀滅。參 Matthew 25:41、Matthew 25:46;Luke 19:27。這裡的意思簡單說來就是:彌賽亞將是絕對的;他將有權能平息一切對神的背叛,懲罰一切起來攻擊他的人;而對那些頑梗不肯悔改的悖逆者,他必運用這權能,採取有效的手段制伏他們。這不過是一切正義政府所行的事,絕不違背這樣的政府對順從者溫和仁慈的觀念。在一切政府中,對義人的保護使對惡人的懲罰成為必需;兩者缺一,另一便無法保全。在啟示錄中,本節被應用於彌賽亞:Revelation 2:27 註;Revelation 19:15 註;參 Revelation 12:5 註(見這些經文的註釋)。
英語原文
Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron - That is, evidently, thine enemies, for it cannot be supposed to be meant that he would sway such a scepter over his own people. The idea is that he would crush and subdue all his foes. He would have absolute power, and the grant which had been made to him would be accompanied with authority sufficient to hold it. That dominion which was to be conceded to him would be not only one of protection to his friends, but also of punishment on his enemies; and the statement here is made prominent because the former part of the psalm had respect to rebels, and the Messiah is here represented as being invested with power sufficient to punish and restrain them. The Vulgate renders this "thou shalt rule;" the Septuagint, "thou shalt feed - ποιμανεῖς poimaneis; that is, thou shalt feed them as a shepherd does his flock; thou shalt exercise over them the care and protection of a shepherd. This rendering occurs by a slight change in the pointing of the Hebrew word, though the most approved mode of pointing the word is that which is followed in our common translation. DeWette, Hengstenberg, Alexander, Horsley, adopt the common reading. What is said in this verse has been urged as an objection to referring it to the Messiah. The remark of DeWette on this matter has been quoted in the introduction to this psalm, Section 4 (3). But it may be observed, while it is everywhere represented that the scepter of the Messiah over the earth will be a mild scepter, it is also everywhere stated that he will ultimately crush and overthrow all his foes.
Thus, in Isaiah 11:4 : "He shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked." So Psalm 110:6 : "He shall judge among the heathen; he shall fill the places with the dead bodies." So, likewise, Revelation 19:15 : "And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations; and he shall rule them with a rod of iron; and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God." So also in Matthew 25, and elsewhere, it is said that he will come to judgment, and will consign all his foes to appropriate punishment. While it is said that the reign of the Messiah would be a mild reign, and that his kingdom would not be of this world, and while he is represented as the Prince of peace, it is also said that he would be invested with all the authority of a sovereign. While he would have power to protect his friends, he would also have power to humble and crush his foes. The expression "with a rod of iron" refers to the scepter which he would bear. A scepter was sometimes made of wood, sometimes of gold, sometimes of ivory, and sometimes of iron. The idea, when the past was the case, was, that the dominion was absolute, and that there was nothing that could resist it. Perhaps the idea of justice or severity would be that which would be most naturally suggested by this. As applicable to the Messiah, it can only mean that his enemies would be crushed and subdued before him.
Thou shalt dash them in pieces - The same idea is here expressed in another form, but indicating more particularly the ease with which it would be done. The word rendered "dash them in pieces" means to break in pieces as an earthen vessel, Judges 7:20; Jeremiah 22:28. It is used to denote the crushing of infants on stones, Psalm 137:9. The word "shiver" would well express the idea here - "thou shalt shiver them."
Like a potter's vessel - A vessel or instrument made by a potter; a vessel made of clay. This is easily broken, and especially with a rod of iron, and the idea here is that he would crush and subdue his enemies as easily as this could be done. No image could more happily express the ease with which he would subdue his foes; and this accords with all the representations of the New Testament - that with infinite case - with a word - Christ can subdue his enemies, and consign them to ruin. Compare Matthew 25:41, Matthew 25:46; Luke 19:27. The sense here is, simply, that the Messiah would be absolute; that he would have power to quell all rebellion against God, and to punish all those that rise up against him; and that on those who are incorrigibly rebellious he would exercise that power, and take effectual means to subdue them. This is merely what is done by all just governments, and is by no means inconsistent with the idea that such a government would be mild and gentle toward those who are obedient. The protection of the righteous makes the punishment of the wicked necessary in all governments, and the one cannot be secured without the other. This verse is applied to the Messiah in the Book of Revelation, Revelation 2:27, note; Revelation 19:15, note; compare Revelation 12:5, note (see the notes at these passages).
10
Psalm 2:10
繁體中文
「現在你們君王應當省悟」——這裡應當理解為詩人的話。見本篇導言第3節。這是一段勸誡,對象是詩人所看見正在抵擋耶和華旨意的君王與首領(Psalm 2:1-3)——因而也是向一切君王與首領——勸他們行事要有智慧,不要企圖抵擋神的計畫,反倒要順服他,並得著他的友誼。詩人警告他們,鑒於彌賽亞的仇敵必將遭遇的結局,應當引以為戒;要停止抵擋他掌權的徒然之舉,並藉著及時的順服,確保他的友誼,逃避那必臨到他仇敵身上的厄運。因此,智慧之道不在於投身一場必被碾碎的嘗試,而在於立即得著那位蒙神設立、要治理全地者的友誼。
「該受管教」——就是在你們對耶和華和他的受膏者當盡的本分上受管教;也就是說,在順服這項安排、並運用你們的影響力促進這安排的本分上受管教。這裡所用譯作「be instructed」的字,本義是責罰、管教、糾正;在此處意為受勸戒、受勸勉或受警誡。參 Proverbs 9:7;Job 4:3;Psalm 16:7。
「你們世上的審判官」——你們這些施行審判的人;也就是說,你們這些掌權者。這職分從前由君王親自擔任,正如今日君主政體下一般所設想的那樣,法官奉王的名行事;而在共和政體中,審判則被視為由人民藉著他們所任命執行審判的人來施行。這裡的字相當於掌權者,這呼召乃是向那些居於職位與尊榮之位的人發出,叫他們不要抵擋耶和華的旨意,反倒要運用自己的影響力促進他的計畫。同時,無可置疑的是,這裡也隱含著他們應當尋求親身有分於他的掌權。
英語原文
Be wise now, therefore, O ye kings - This is to be understood as the language of the psalmist. See introduction to the psalm, Section 3. It is an exhortation addressed to the rulers and princes whom the psalmist saw engaged in opposition to the purpose of Yahweh Psalm 2:1-3 - and hence, to all rulers and princes - to act the part of wisdom, by not attempting to resist the plans of God, but to submit to him, and secure his friendship. The psalmist cautions them to take warning, in view of what must certainly come upon the enemies of the Messiah; to cease their vain attempts to oppose his reign, and, by a timely submission to him, to ensure his friendship, and to escape the doom that must come upon his foes. The way of wisdom, then, was not to engage in an attempt in which they must certainly be crushed, but to secure at once the friendship of one appointed by God to reign over the earth.
Be instructed - In your duty to Yahweh and his Anointed One; that is, in the duty of submitting to this arrangement, and lending your influence to promote it. The word used here, and rendered "be instructed," means properly to chastise, chasten, correct; and it here means, be admonished, exhorted, or warned. Compare Proverbs 9:7; Job 4:3; Psalm 16:7.
Ye judges of the earth - Ye who administer justice; that is, ye rulers. This was formerly done by kings themselves, as it is now supposed to be in monarchical governments, where the judges act in the name of the king. In Republics, justice is supposed to be administered by the people through those whom they have appointed to execute it. The word here is equivalent to rulers, and the call is on those who occupy posts of office and honor not to oppose the purposes of Yahweh, but to bring their influence to the promotion of his designs. At the same time, it cannot be doubted that it is implied that they should seek to be interested personally in his reign.
11
Psalm 2:11
繁體中文
「當存畏懼事奉耶和華」——存著敬意,並深深警覺不事奉、不順從他的後果。意思是:事奉他,不是抵擋,而是促進他在彌賽亞之下建立國度的旨意,並深深警覺:你們若不這樣行,他必起來,在他的忿怒中把你們壓碎。
「快樂」——Alexander 教授把這詞譯作「歡呼」,認為它指對在位君主的慣常致敬。這裡所用的詞——גיל gı̂yl——本義是繞圈移動、旋轉;繼而指繞圈跳舞、歡騰、喜樂。照 Gesenius 的說法,它隨後又指顫抖、懼怕,出於心的跳動或悸動(Job 37:1;Hosea 10:5;Psalm 29:6)。Gesenius 把它在此處譯作「懼怕中帶戰兢」。然而,通行的譯法更能表達這裡的意思。它是說:他們當迎接耶和華的旨意,在他的掌權中歡騰,但這事當懷著對他威嚴與大能的恰當警覺,並懷著公開承認神所宜有的敬意來行。
「戰兢」——存著敬意與敬畏,感到他擁有全能,感到被發現與他作對的後果必是壓倒性而可畏的。這裡加給君王和統治者的本分,是迎接神的旨意,並把他們因所居之位而得的影響力,用來促進真理在地上掌權——這本分對君王和首領,正如對其他人一樣,都有約束力。履行這本分時當有的心情,是那屬於關係到神之尊榮與掌權之事的心情。那是攙雜的心情:一方面出於神的憐憫,另一方面出於他的忿怒;一方面出於他的應許和旨意所激發的盼望,另一方面出於他的警告和威嚇所生的警覺。
英語原文
Serve the Lord with fear - With reverence, and with deep apprehensions of the consequences of not serving and obeying him. That is, serve him in not opposing, but in promoting his purpose of establishing a kingdom under the Messiah, with the deep apprehension that if you do not do it, he will arise and crush you in his wrath.
And rejoice - Prof. Alexander renders this "shout," and supposes that it refers to the customary recognition of a present sovereign. The word used - גיל gı̂yl - means properly to move in a circle, to revolve; and then to dance in a circle, to exult, to rejoice. Then, according to Gesenius, it means to tremble, to fear, from the leaping or palpitation of the heart Job 37:1; Hosea 10:5; Psalm 29:6. Gesenius renders it here "fear with trembling." The common translation, however, better expresses the sense. It means that they should welcome the purposes of Yahweh, and exult in his reign, but that it should be done with a suitable apprehension of his majesty and power, and with the reverence which becomes the public acknowledgment of God.
With trembling - With reverence and awe, feeling that he has almighty power, and that the consequences of being found opposed to him must be overwhelming and awful. The duty here enjoined on kings and rulers is that of welcoming the purposes of God, and of bringing their influence - derived from the station which they occupy - to bear in promoting the reign of truth upon the earth - a duty binding on kings and princes as well as on other men. The feelings with which this is to be done are those which belong to transactions in which the honor and the reign of God are concerned. They are mingled feelings, derived from the mercy of God on the one hand, and from his wrath on the other; from the hope which his promise and purpose inspires, and from the apprehension derived from his warnings and threatenings.
12
Psalm 2:12
繁體中文
當以嘴親子——就是神所宣告為他兒子的那位(Psalm 2:7),也是他因此定意在聖山上立為君王的那位(Psalm 2:6)。「親嘴」一詞在此按東方習俗使用,因為對尊位之人表示敬意正是用這方式。這是古代向王表示臣服或效忠的方式(1 Samuel 10:1);也是向偶像致敬的方式(1 Kings 19:18;Hosea 13:2;Job 31:27)。向王親嘴致敬的方式,有時是親他的手、他的衣袍或他的腳,如波斯人所行的(德韋特)。親吻君主之手作為效忠憑證的作法,在歐洲宮廷也不罕見。這裡的意思是:他們當以順服與效忠的合宜表記,向神的兒子表示忠誠,承認他是奉命的君王;當接受他為王,順服他的統治。應用到眾人身上,意思就是:他們當接受他作他們的救主。
恐怕他發怒——若你們不承認他的權利,不接待他為彌賽亞。
你們便在道中滅亡——這裡的「在……中」是譯者補充的。按字面是「你們便滅亡道路」。見 Psalm 1:6 的註釋。這裡的意思似乎是:或是「免得你們在道路上失喪」,即在那引往幸福與救恩的路上;或是「免得你們找不到」通往生命的路;或是「免得你們在路上滅亡」,就是說,在你們到達目的地、成就所圖之事以前。這裡似乎是要把他們描繪為正在趕一段路程、行一條道路——人生常被這樣描繪(參 Psalm 1:1)——卻在到達旅程終點之前被砍倒。
他的怒氣快要發作——即他的怒氣燃燒之時。這是把一個現今常見的說法應用於忿怒,正如我們說某人怒火中燒、怒氣正盛。
不多時——亞歷山大教授(Prof. Alexander)譯作「因為他的怒氣快要燃燒」。依我看,這與原文相符;「不多」一字大概指時間,而非指他怒氣的強度。這也與文脈更吻合,因為這裡的主旨不是要說明他的怒氣將有不同程度,而是說他的怒氣不會久延。到了時候,他必向仇敵施行審判;他的怒氣一旦開始燃燒,仇敵就必滅亡。
凡投靠他的,都是有福的——君王、臣宰、庶民;——一切年齡、一切地域的人;貧窮的、富足的、為奴的、自主的;白的、黑的、銅色的、混血的;患病或健康、順境或逆境、生或死之中的所有人;每一種處境、一切可想見境況中的人——凡投靠他的,都是有福的。人人都需要他作救主;人人都必發現他是切合他們需要的救主。凡這樣行的都是有福的(參 Psalm 1:1 的註釋);在時間與永恆裡都是穩妥的。這偉大的真理在聖經中處處陳明;使世人——軟弱、有罪、無助的世人——投靠神的兒子,正是神賜給人類一切啟示的大旨。
英語原文
Kiss the Son - Him whom God hath declared to be his Son Psalm 2:7, and whom, as such, he has resolved to set as King on his holy hill Psalm 2:6. The word "kiss" here is used in accordance with Oriental usages, for it was in this way that respect was indicated for one of superior rank. This was the ancient mode of doing homage or allegiance to a king, 1 Samuel 10:1. It was also the mode of rendering homage to an idol, 1 Kings 19:18; Hosea 13:2; Job 31:27. The mode of rendering homage to a king by a kiss was sometimes to kiss his hand, or his dress, or his feet, as among the Persians. DeWette. The practice of kissing the hand of a monarch is not uncommon in European courts as a token of allegiance. The meaning here is that they should express their allegiance to the Son of God, or recognize him as the authorized King, with suitable expressions of submission and allegiance; that they should receive him as King, and submit to his reign. Applied to others, it means that they should embrace him as their Saviour.
Lest he be angry - If you do not acknowledge his claims, and receive him as the Messiah.
And ye perish from the way - The word from in this place is supplied by the translators. It is literally, "And ye perish the way." See the notes at Psalm 1:6. The meaning here seems to be either "lest ye are lost in respect to the way," that is, the way to happiness and salvation; or "lest ye fail to find the way" to life; or "lest ye perish by the way," to wit, before you reach your destination, and accomplish the object you have in view. The design seems to be to represent them as pursuing a certain journey or path - as life is often represented (compare Psalm 1:1) - and as being cut down before they reached the end of their journey.
When his wrath is kindled - When his wrath burns. Applying to anger or wrath a term which is common now, as when we speak of one whose anger is heated, or who is hot with wrath.
But a little - Prof. Alexander renders this, "For his wrath will soon burn." This, it seems to me, is in accordance with the original; the word "little" probably referring to time, and not to the intensity of his anger. This accords better also with the connection, for the design is not to state that there will be degrees in the manifestation of his anger, but that his anger would not long be delayed. In due time he would execute judgment on his enemies; and whenever his anger began to burn, his enemies must perish.
Blessed are all they that put their trust in him - Kings, princes, people; - all, of every age and every land; the poor, the rich, the bond, the free; white, black, copper-colored, or mixed; all in sickness or health, in prosperity or adversity, in life or in death; all, of every condition, and in all conceivable circumstances - are blessed who put their trust in him. All need him as a Saviour; all will find him to be a Saviour adapted to their wants. All who do this are happy (compare the notes at Psalm 1:1); all are safe in time and in eternity. This great truth is stated everywhere in the Bible; and to induce the children of men - weak, and guilty, and helpless - to put their trust in the Son of God, is the great design of all the communications which God has made to mankind.
第一節
作者。本篇詩與前一篇一樣,沒有加於其前的標題,也一樣沒有篇中任何內容可指明其作者。因此,其作者問題必須從別處得知——若果能得知的話。然而,有充分理由認為作者是大衛;凡承認新約權威的人,都不會懷疑這一點。認為其作者可追溯至大衛的理由如下:
(a)Acts 4:25-26 明確把它歸於他:「你曾藉著聖靈,託你僕人——我們祖宗大衛的口,說:外邦為甚麼爭鬧?萬民為甚麼謀算虛妄的事?」等。此處所指的無疑是本篇詩,而這樣的引用證明這乃是猶太人中通行的理解。可以推定,在這類事情上,普遍的傳統很可能是正確的;而對凡承認使徒在這類問題上具有默示權威的人而言,本篇詩被引用為大衛的作品,這一事實是決定性的。
(b)這是希伯來著作家關於其來源問題的通行看法。Kimchi 與 Aben Ezra 明確把它歸於大衛,而且人們認為他們在此表達的,是希伯來民中盛行的意見。
(c)它在諸大衛詩篇中所佔的位置,或許也可視為表明同一件事的旁證。例如,直到第七十二篇為止,沒有一篇是明確歸於大衛以外的任何作者的(惟 Psalm 50 除外,它歸於亞薩,或如頁邊註所記「為亞薩」),雖然其中有幾篇作者未獲記載;通行的印象是,詩篇全書的這一部分之所以如此編排,是因為彙編者明白它們出自大衛的手筆。
(d)這篇作品的特質與這一設想十分相符。誠然,從這一考量不能確切推斷其作者的問題;也必須承認,其文體並無足以證明大衛是作者的特點。但此處所要指出的乃是:沒有任何與這一設想相抵觸之處;其中的情感、文體或暗指,沒有一樣不可能是出自他的手筆,或按他是作者的假定而有任何不合宜。惟一可提出的反對,將出自 Psalm 2:6:「我已經立我的君在錫安——我的聖山上了。」但這將在別處討論。
第二節
寫作時間。我們既不能絕對確定作者是誰,當然也無法查明寫作的確切時間;而且,即使承認大衛是作者,我們如今也無法查明寫作的場合。詩中沒有那些陰謀對抗受膏者——本篇詩主要對象——的君王與百姓的名字;除了「錫安山」一語(Psalm 2:6)之外,也沒有任何地方性的暗指。可能性似乎是:本篇詩並非有意指作者自己時代中發生的任何事件,而是——正如這些引言論述的另一部分(第四節)將看到的——作者有意主要指那位要在遙遠世代來臨的彌賽亞,儘管這可能是由作者時代發生的某事所引發。
周圍列國對大衛本人的敵對、他們企圖傾覆希伯來民和他這位君王、神使他戰勝仇敵並立他作神子民之王、以及他所經歷的興盛與得勝,或許孕育了本篇詩的意念與意象,或許引導他為彌賽亞而寫作——彌賽亞所受的待遇與他自己的遭遇如此相似,以致其一可令人想起其二。若容許在無法確定之處加以揣測,或可設想本篇詩是大衛在他與周圍列國的爭戰結束之後寫成的——那些爭戰是他為建立自己的寶座與國度而進行的;也是在他平安而榮耀地被立為神子民的統治者之後。那時,他自然會把自己的際遇與神兒子、未來彌賽亞的際遇相比——彌賽亞按人性說是他的後裔;地上的君王也要照樣向他「發怒」,如同曾向他本人發怒一樣;神的旨意也是要不顧一切反對,把彌賽亞立在永存的寶座上,正如神立他在他的寶座上一樣;彌賽亞也要執掌權杖統管地上的列國,他所執掌的權杖正可視為其預表。
這樣理解,本篇詩在原先的寫作上,並非特指大衛本人,或如 Paulus 所設想的指所羅門,或指以色列的任何別的君王;它當視為單單指彌賽亞,所用語言則由作者大衛的歷史中發生的事件所引發。全篇由一個人和平而愉快的反思構成——他曾在重重反對之中建立自己的寶座,如今前瞻受膏者將要經過的相似爭戰與得勝的場景。
第三節
本篇詩的結構與內容。本篇詩的結構極其工整,其體制頗具戲劇的特性。它自然分為四部分,每部分三節。
一、第一部分(Psalm 2:1-3)描述狂怒列國的行徑與圖謀。他們處於極度的騷動之中,籌劃抵擋耶和華和他的受膏者,聯合他們的計謀,要掙開他們的捆綁、脫去他們的權柄——即如 Psalm 2:6 所示,要攔阻受膏者在錫安聖山被立為王。本篇的開端大膽而突兀。詩人驟然放眼觀看列國,見他們在劇烈的騷亂之中。
二、第二部分(Psalm 2:4-6)描述神的情感與旨意。其中暗指他已藉一項永定的旨諭(試參 Psalm 2:7),定意立他的受膏者為王,如今他安然坐在天上,以嗤笑看待反對之徒那些徒然的計謀。他對他們無能的狂怒報以冷笑,穩步前行,成就他的計劃。他鄭重宣告:他已立他的君在錫安——他的聖山上;因此,他們的一切努力必歸徒然。
三、第三部分(Psalm 2:7-9)是君王自己、受膏者發言,陳明關乎他自己的旨諭,以及所賜給他的應許。那旨諭是:他必被宣告為耶和華自己的兒子;那應許是:他必按自己的祈求,得地上的列國為基業,以絕對的權杖統管他們。
四、第四部分(Psalm 2:10-12)詩人勸勉列國的掌權者順服受膏者的主權,警告凡棄絕他的必遭神的忿怒,應許凡信靠他的必蒙祝福。
因此,本篇詩的結構規整,主要思想貫穿全篇——此處稱為「受膏者」的那位,其崇高的主權與最終的得勝;抵擋他旨諭的徒然;以及順服他權柄的本分與益處。「各句的形式也十分規整,顯出極其一律的平行體。」——亞歷山大教授(Prof. Alexander)。按希伯來詩歌的特殊理想,本篇詩在結構上是詩篇全書中最完美的篇章之一。
第四節 本篇詩所指為誰的問題。關於本篇詩究竟有意指誰,可能只有三種看法:
(a)認為它專指大衛,或指以色列某一位別的受膏君王;
(b)認為它原有這一指涉,但對彌賽亞也有次要的指涉;
(c)認為它專一而單單指彌賽亞。
持第一種看法的人極少。連 Grotius 也是如此——論到他,人們曾拿他與 Cocceius 相比而說:「Cocceius 處處找到基督,Grotius 則無處找到基督」——他也承認,雖然在他看來本篇詩首先指大衛,並指非利士人、摩押人、亞捫人、以東人等這些他的仇敵,然而「按更神秘、更隱奧的意義,它屬乎彌賽亞」。認為本篇詩不當視為專指任何希伯來君王的理由是決定性的。這些理由可總結為一點:詩中的措辭無法專用於任何希伯來君主。這一點將在本篇詩的釋文中顯明。基於同樣的理由,本篇詩也不能視為主要指大衛、而按次要且更高的意義指彌賽亞。詩中沒有任何這種雙重意義的跡象;而且,它若不能專用於大衛,就根本不能用於大衛。
在我看,本篇詩與 Isaiah 53:1-12 一樣,原有且專一地指彌賽亞。這可由以下幾點說明:
(1)新約正是這樣應用它,而且未曾以任何別的方式引用它。例如在 Acts 4:24-27,使徒的全體被記載為引用本篇詩的頭幾節,並把它們指於基督:「他們聽見了,就同心合意地高聲向神說:主啊!你是造天、地、海和其中萬物的……你曾藉著聖靈,託你僕人——我們祖宗大衛的口,說:外邦為甚麼爭鬧?萬民為甚麼謀算虛妄的事?世上的君王一齊起來,臣宰也聚集,要敵擋主,並主的受膏者。希律和本丟彼拉多、外邦人和以色列民,果然在這城裏聚集,要攻打你所膏的聖僕耶穌。」因此,若承認使徒在這事上的權威,就無可疑問:本篇詩乃是意在指彌賽亞。使徒的這一陳述,也可引來證明這大概是他們那個時代盛行的解釋方式。
再者,保羅在 Acts 13:32-33 引用本篇詩,視為適用於基督,並指明它是舊約的一項教義——彌賽亞要從死裏復活:「我們也報好信息給你們,就是那應許祖宗的話,神已經向我們這作兒女的應驗,叫耶穌復活了。正如詩篇第二篇上記著說:你是我的兒子,我今日生你。」還有,在 Hebrews 1:5,同一經文又被保羅引用,以確立彌賽亞超越天使的崇高地位:「所有的天使,神從來對哪一個說:你是我的兒子,我今日生你?」這些引用證明,在新約寫作者的心目中,本篇詩原有對彌賽亞的指涉;而他們引用的方式也證明,這是他們那時代猶太人通行的信仰,因為他們似乎毫不擔心自己所應用的正確性會受到質疑。
(2)但除此之外,還有別的證據,證明這是古希伯來人中盛行的解釋:「在較古的猶太著述中,如《索哈爾》(Sohar)、他勒目等,有許多段落把彌賽亞的解釋加於本篇詩。試參 Raym. Martini《信仰之匕》(Pug. Fid.,Carpzov 版)多處的輯錄,以及 Schottgen《論彌賽亞》(de Messia)頁227以下。連 Kimchi 與 Jarchi 也承認,這是他們列祖中間盛行的解釋;後者還極誠實地說出他偏離這解釋的理由,說他寧願把它解為指大衛,是為反駁異端;即為消除基督徒從本篇所引論證的力量。」(Hengstenberg, Christ., i.77.)
(3)本篇詩所指為彌賽亞,從詩本身即顯而易見。這可由幾點從屬的考量看出。
(a)它不能用於大衛,也不能用於任何別的屬地君王;就是說,其中有不能以任何程度的恰當性用於任何屬地君主的措辭。這一點特別基於詩中「兒子」一詞的特出用法,以及「地極」要置於那受此稱呼者掌管之下的應許。「兒子」一詞誠然含義寬廣,並且在某種意義上以複數用於眾義人,指他們因得兒子的名分而為神的眾子;但它並不以單數這樣使用,而此處的用法有其特殊之處,表明它不是要用於一位屬地君主,或任何被視為神兒女的敬虔人。那一稱呼——神的兒子——本義指與神的一種親近關係,是任何身分的凡人所不能適用的(試參 John 5:18 的註釋),猶太人自己也是這樣理解的。在舊約中,它沒有像此處這樣用於一位屬地君王。這裏所說的話,與有時被認為在此段中教導的「神兒子永恆受生」的教義全然無關,因為無論那教義是否成立,此處所說的同樣為真。
(b)此處所應許的國度之廣、政權之恆,不能用於大衛或任何別的君王,卻完全適用於彌賽亞(試參 Psalm 2:8; Psalm 2:10)。
(c)那些信靠他的人所蒙的應許,以及不順服他的人所受的威嚇(Psalm 2:12),性質也是如此。這樣的言語,一見即知完全適用於彌賽亞,卻不能對任何屬地君王作如是觀。
(d)還有一個很強的可能性表明,本篇詩有意指彌賽亞:凡否認這一點的人,都提不出任何別的合理可信的解釋,也不能以任何程度的可能性指明它究竟指誰。以色列的君王或首領中,除非是大衛或所羅門,沒有一個能以任何表面的可能性被視為其對象;然而他們生平中沒有任何記載的境遇可視為與之相稱,而且主張它指他們兩人之一的人之間,也沒有實質的一致意見。Rosenmuller 與 DeWette 二人都主張,它不可能指大衛或所羅門。有些近代猶太人主張,它是大衛在非利士人上來攻打他之時(2 Samuel 5:17)為自己而寫的;但這顯然是錯誤的意見,因為不僅那裏發生的事與詩中的言語毫無對應,而且當時錫安山(Psalm 2:6)尚未特別被分別為聖,那山也未被視為聖山,直到帳幕立在其上之後——而那是在非利士戰爭之後。對於它指押沙龍叛亂、或指大衛所處任何其他境遇的設想,實質上也可以同樣的話評斷。至於它指所羅門的設想,理由就更少了,因為聖經沒有提到任何反叛他的事,沒有提到任何掙脫他之軛的普遍企圖,也沒有提到任何因這樣的企圖(或不顧這樣的企圖)而對他所作君王身分的鄭重膏立。
(e)本篇詩與聖經對彌賽亞的記載相符,或說就其總體結構與細節而論,適用於他。這將在釋文中顯明,其實也是顯而易見的。對這一看法惟一貌似有理的反對,如 DeWette 所述:「按照基督教的教義,彌賽亞不是手拿鐵杖征服列國的得勝者;他的國不屬這世界。」但對此可以回答:Psalm 2:9 的意思可以只是:他要在地上列國之上建立國度;他的一切仇敵都要服在他以下;他所執掌的權杖是堅定而無可抗拒的。關於這一點之適用於彌賽亞,試參 Psalm 2:9 的註釋。
(4)還可補充:按希伯來人對彌賽亞所持的觀念,本篇詩正是人可預期在他們詩歌著述中見到的那種作品。所應許的彌賽亞是他們心中最深切的興趣所在。他們一切的盼望都集中在他身上。他們前瞻他以為那偉大的拯救者;他們對神子民將成為何等的種種期盼,也都環繞著他。他將是君王、得勝者、拯救者、救主。全國的目光都指向他;他們盛大的宗教禮儀預表他,他們的聖詩作者歌詠他的來臨。我們會發現有一整篇詩是指他而寫、旨在陳明他的性情與他掌權之榮耀的——這不過是我們在一個詩歌受栽培、又對他的來臨懷著這些崇高盼望的民族中,所可預期見到的;尤其是,若在這一對他們民族詩歌的看法(就其本身而論)之外,再加上聖詩作者是在默示的影響之下寫作這一觀念,那麼我們預期見到一首如此專一而單單指彌賽亞的詩作,便再自然不過。另一方面,懷著這些盛行的觀念與盼望,又面對舊約如此多部分乃為聖詩的事實,卻在「第二篇詩原有且專一指彌賽亞」的假定之下,竟不見有這樣的作品——那才是最不自然不過的事。