Introduction
Psalm 2 is considered an introduction to the broader context and topic coverage of the Book of Psalms and is one of the most cited psalms in the New Testament. However, the broad knowledge of this text makes it somewhat controversial. Researchers and theologians have argued about the nature and message of Psalm 2 for centuries, and the lack of any indication of authorship or time period makes the understanding more challenging.
This paper will try to answer the following research question: Does Psalm 2 have a more Messianic or historical nature, and how does the perception of the text’s nature contribute to a better understanding of its communicative message? To answer the question, this paper will explore the setting of Psalm 2 and investigate some arguments for considering it more Messianic or historical, including the author’s perspective, the New Testament references, the term “son,” and an original historical setting. The question and the topic are fundamental as they can illuminate one of the most well-known and quoted psalms.
Setting
Before discussing the roles of structure, word choice, and other elements in interpreting the communicative message behind Psalm 2, it is essential to define its setting, including the authorship, date of creation, and historical and literary contexts. According to numerous researchers, it might be challenging to determine the author of the Psalm because, similar to Psalm 1, this text does not contain any prefixed title (Barnes, 1834; LeMon, 2014; Signer, 1983).
Moreover, many researchers believe nothing in the Psalm’s text could have referred to its author (Barnes, 1834; Cohen et al., 2021; Willis, 1990). At the same time, other Biblical texts allow researchers to identify the possible Psalmist and attribute the authorship of Psalm 2 to David, King of Israel (Barnes, 1834; Cohen et al., 2021; Signer, 1983; Straus, 2014). Here, it is essential to refer to the New Testament and find clarifications and references in its prophecies.
Different religious studies and theologians confirm that the New Testament is a valuable source that helps identify the authorship of Psalm 2. The Psalm starts with the following phrase: “Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain?” (English Standard Version, 2016, Psalm 2:1). At the same time, a reference to this sentence may be found in Acts 4: “You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David: ‘Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain?’” (New International Version, 2011a, Acts 4:25).
It becomes evident that the authorship of these words is attributed to David. Moreover, according to Barnes (1834), “this is the common opinion respecting its origin among Hebrew writers,” and “Kimchi and Aben Ezra expressly ascribe it to David, and they are supposed in this to express the prevailing opinion of the Hebrew people” (para. 1b). Therefore, there is a common agreement regarding the authorship of Psalm 2.
As for the exact time of the text’s creation, it is unlikely that it can be identified, regardless of whether David is the author of the Psalm. Barnes (1834) believes that the Psalmist created the text after terminating numerous wars with other nations and establishing his rule over them with the help of God. At the same time, some researchers specify the exact year when Psalm 2 was written – 1044, on the occasion of “the delivery of the promise by Nathan to David – a prophecy of Christ’s kingdom” (Blue Letter Bible, n.d., para. 2). This Psalm plays a valuable role in the literary context in general and the Book of Psalms (Bellinger, 2012).
Paralleled with Psalm 1, which refers to a contrast between sinners and righteous men, Psalm 2 describes an opposition between the virtuous Son of God and the ungodly world’s disobedience, highlighting the former’s unavoidable exaltation (Cole, 2002). Together with Psalm 1, the text under question serves as the preface for the whole Psalter and sets a historical background for the Hebrew people.
In general, researchers and theologians agree on the genre of the Psalm. Since the text is devoted to praising the king, the anointed of the Lord, it refers to the group of royal psalms (Gunkel, 1998). However, opinions about and interpretations of certain parts of Psalm 2 are inconsistent, which might affect the general understanding of its communicative message.
While some theologians highlight the “Messianic” nature of the Psalm (Gunn, 2012; Willis, 1990), others find it more rational to focus on the context of King David’s life (Signer, 1983; Straus, 2014; Willis, 1990). These two different perceptions impact the ways the structure and specific terms are understood in the Psalm. The former opinion seems more relevant and truthful as numerous substantial claims support it, which are explored further in the paper.
Discussion
To begin with, it is essential to review the primary arguments supporting the Psalm’s Messianic nature and message. According to Willis (1990), “many scholars have understood Psalm 2 as a ‘prophetic’ or predictive song announcing the coming of the (Christian) Messiah” (p. 33). Four basic components can prove that the text celebrates the Messiah’s divine proclamation of kingship, and specific counterarguments exist to oppose such claims.
References in the New Testament
Firstly, in the New Testament, there are specific applications of Psalm 2 to the Messiah. As mentioned earlier in the paper, the first verses of the Psalm are quoted in Acts 4 (New International Version, 2011a, Acts 4:25-26). The following is a quote from Acts 13: “As it is written in the second Psalm: ‘You are my son; today I have become your father” (New International Version, 2011b, Acts 13:33).
The same reference is present in Hebrews 1:5 and Hebrews 5:5, and several other quotes of different verses of Psalm 2 are found in Revelation 2, 12, and 19 (Gunn, 2012; Willis, 1990, p. 46). Such references allow us to conclude that the New Testament highlights the Messianic nature of the Psalm in the Christian sense.
At the same time, some theologians find evidence that the New Testament does not prove the Messianic nature of Psalm 2 by simply quoting it. Therefore, according to Willis (1990), such an approach toward the New Testament references to an Old Testament text is unacceptable from an exegetical perspective. A meaning implied in the New Testament cannot be applied to the verses in Psalm 2 in the Old Testament context.
Moreover, “the exclusive Messianic interpretation of Psalm 2 ignores or fails to appreciate that the New Testament uses the Old Testament in a variety of ways,” such as midrash pesher, typology, and allegory (Willis, 1990, p. 34). Therefore, opponents of an exclusively Christian and Messianic message of the Psalm use all these claims.
The Author’s Perspective
Further, among theologians, there is an interpretation that the author of the Psalm, be it David or another Psalmist, takes a universal perspective. This perspective, for instance, refers to the following verse: “Now therefore, O kings, be wise; be warned, O rulers of the earth,” as well as some other verses (English Standard Version, 2016, Psalm 2:2, 7-8, 10).
Although not all researchers agree with this claim, others find it impossible to relate these verses to any earthly king of Israel, mainly because the time of the text’s creation or the time it refers to is unknown (Cole, 2002; Gunn, 2012; Signer, 1983; Willis, 1990). It should also be noted that some elements of Psalm 2, especially a promise to allow the king to possess the whole earth (English Standard Version, 2016, Psalm 2:8), cannot refer to real kings (Gunn, 2012). The primary reason for such a view is their limited outlook and rulings.
What is more, Messianic Psalms can be divided into two categories. Gunn (2012) refers to Psalm 2 as one that only refers to Christ, and the text in question cannot relate to David. Another proof is that there have not been any kings in Israel who would face rebellion after being crowned. Some other researchers also support this position, adding other components to it.
Thus, Barnes (1834) states that the events and behaviors described in Psalm 2 are not necessarily related to any real historical events observed by David or another writer. What the Psalm contains relates primarily to the Messiah but is explained “in language suggested by events which had occurred in the history of David, the author” (Barnes, 1834, para. 2). As a result, because no real-life situations or actual earthly kings are meant in the text, Psalm 2 is an exclusively Messianic message.
At the same time, similar to the views on the New Testament references, some theologians tend to review the message of Psalm 2 from a more historical perspective, referring to real kings and situations. For example, Willis (1990), who explores the topic of the Psalm’s nature quite in detail and objectively, provides compelling evidence to prove this perspective. In the Old Testament, the king of Israel is considered a universal ruler.
Since God is the whole world’s creator and owner, the king of Israel, as an heir of Yahweh, also has a worldwide dominion (Willis, 1990). As mentioned earlier in the paper, some researchers find it impossible for a ruler of Israel to have such extended power and domination; however, if this is impossible for a king of Israel, it similarly refers to Jesus Christ (Willis, 1990). Therefore, there is enough evidence to state that Psalm 2 can refer to an actual earthly king of Israel.
The Meaning of the Word “Son” in the Psalm
Another matter to consider is whether the word “son” in Psalm 2 refers to Jesus Christ or an actual earthly king. Saydon and Vaccari thought that only a literal meaning could be applied to the mentioned term (as cited in Willis, 1990). This literal meaning refers to the word “son” of Jesus Christ, and many scholars support this point of view (English Standard Version, 2016, Psalm 2:7, 12).
At the same time, theologians also find different interpretation options for the Psalm (LeMon, 2014; Signer, 1983). For example, according to Straus (2014), it is more likely that God’s son and anointed king is a future heir to the line of David, that is, someone who was only expected to be born at the time of the Psalm’s creation.
Signer (1983) and Willis (1990) also indicate that other biblical texts consider many royal figures, such as Solomon, Saul, and others, to be anointed by God. In turn, Cohen et al. (2021) oppose this interpretation: “In this Psalm, we are talking not about AN Anointed one, but The Anointed One,” which may only refer to Jesus Christ (p. 3). Therefore, one might admit that both arguments are strong.
An Actual Historical Setting
As mentioned earlier in the paper, theologians and researchers find it challenging to determine whether David is the true author of Psalm 2. Therefore, until there is certainty regarding this matter, establishing an authentic historical setting and time of events described in the Psalm raises concerns. At the same time, for some theologians who study the text, it is evident that it lacks any actual historical setting and refers to future events, being a prophetic message (Aranda, 2018).
According to Willis (1990) and Cohen et al. (2021), the scene portrayed in the Psalm cannot fit any known historical setting. Consequently, it only applies to the future coming of the Messiah and cannot be used to determine or describe any events that took place at the time of the text’s creation.
Interestingly, researchers can be divided into two major groups, as some state that the kingly ruling of the Messiah began at the First Coming. In the Psalms, the Messiah is already a ruler. Contrary to this perception, historic Dispensationalism “has always maintained that the Davidic rule of Messiah awaits His second coming,” which supports the idea expressed earlier in this paragraph (Gunn, 2012, p. 430).
Therefore, if the text is prophetic, it cannot and does not have to relate to any actual historical setting of the time of its creation. This was the most widespread, if not only, perception of Psalm 2 until the time of Rashi (Gunn, 2012; Signer, 1983; Willis, 1990). He lived from 1040 to 1105 and was the first scholar to develop historical readings of the Psalms.
As a result, some researchers have adopted and developed Rashi’s views, which are outlined in their studies. Therefore, Rashi believed there was no indication in the Psalm’s text that the events it described would happen in the distant future (as cited in Gunn, 2012; Signer, 1983; Willis, 1990).
While it is implied in verses 5 and 7-9 that they refer to future occurrences (English Standard Version, 2016, Psalm 2), researchers state that this future is rather immediate and expected soon after God proclaims the power of His son and king of Mount Zion (Cohen et al., 2021; Macintosh, 1976; Willis, 1990). As a result, such a reference to the events expected relatively soon suggests an actual historical setting in Psalm 2, which, however, may be challenging to identify.
Moreover, the fact that the historical setting is not mentioned in the text or logically understood from it does not mean it is absent. It similarly does not mean that a far-distant eschatological situation is described in Psalm 2. According to Rashi, the original historical setting is undoubtedly implied in the Psalm, but due to its unimportance to the Psalmist or the cult that used the Psalm, it is not stated clearly (as cited in Willis, 1990).
At the same time, according to Signer (1983), there is an adumbrated setting for the Psalm, which is when the Philistines attacked King David during his coronation (p. 275). Some other occasions that are supposed to be attached to the Psalm are the coronation of Alexander Jannaeus in 103 BCE or Aristobulus I in 104 BCE, the Philistines’ rebellion against Hezekiah in 720 BCE, and others (Willis, 1990). Since the circumstances outlined in Psalm 2 are somewhat similar to the events mentioned above, it allows some theologians to consider the argumentation for the historical nature of the text to be correct and evidence-based.
Conclusion
To conclude, the literature reviewed helps evaluate both perspectives and highlight the exclusively Messianic nature of Psalm 2. The strongest argument is that the text’s author is not indicated clearly and cannot be determined with certainty. While attempts are made to refer to the historical setting of the life of David or other historical figures, no earthly king can possess worldwide domination.
Eventually, viewing the nature and message of the Psalm as exclusively prophetic was the primary and only perspective before the time of Rashi, and this is a possible indication of the view’s correctness. Psalm 2 is an introduction to the Book of Psalms, and there are many references to it in the Acts of the Apostles, the New Testament, and other religious writings.
Thus, perceiving its nature as Messianic allows a correct interpretation of other texts that refer to Psalm 2. Answering the research question this way is key to interpreting the message clearly and learning that it refers to the Messiah, not an actual king who lived thousands of years ago. Present-day Christians need to consider this interpretation and view the message of Psalm 2 as a promise of God to keep order through his anointed one.
References
Aranda, M. G. (2018). Medieval Jewish exegesis of Psalm 2. The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 18(3). Web.
Barnes, A. (1834). Psalm 2. Bible Hub. Web.
Bellinger Jr., W. H. (2012). Psalms: A guide to studying the Psalter. Baker.
Blue Letter Bible. (n.d.). Probable occasion when each Psalm was composed. Web.
Cohen, A., Teacher, M. B., & Chadashah, B. (2021). Psalm 2. Web.
Cole, R. (2002). An integrated reading of Psalms 1 and 2. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 26(4), 75-88. Web.
English Standard Version. (2016). Bible Hub. Web.
Gunkel, H. (1998). Introduction to Psalms: The genres of the religious lyric of Israel. (J. D. Nogalski, Trans). Mercer University Press.
Gunn, G. A. (2012). Psalm 2 and the reign of the Messiah. Bibliotheca Sacra, 169(676), 427-442.
LeMon, J. (2014). Commentary on Psalm 2. Working Preacher. Web.
Macintosh, A. A. (1976). A consideration of the problems presented by Psalm II. 11 and 12. The Journal of Theological Studies, 27(1), 1-14. Web.
New International Version. (2011a). Bible Hub. Web.
New International Version. (2011b). Bible Hub. Web.
Signer, M. A. (1983). King/Messiah: Rashi’s exegesis of Psalm 2. Prooftexts, 3(3), 273–278. Web.
Straus, M. (2014). Psalm 2:7 and the concept of περιχώρησις. Scottish Journal of Theology, 67(2), 213-229. Web.
Willis, J. T. (1990). A cry of defiance – Psalm 2. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 15(47), 33-50. Web.