Psalm 2 And The Reign Of The Messiah

By George A. Gunn

[George A. Gunn is Professor of Bible and Theology, Shasta Bible College and Graduate School, Redding, California.]

Few passages of Scripture could be considered more significant for the study of the Messiah’s reign than Psalm 2. Based on New Testament quotations, allusions, and verbal parallels, Psalm 2 is one of the most frequently referred to of all the psalms. It is quoted either directly or indirectly seven times in the New Testament (Matt. 3:17 [= Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22]; 17:5 [= Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35]; Acts 4:24-26; 13:33; Heb. 1:5; 5:5; Rev. 2:27) and is alluded to at least another five times (John 1:49; Heb. 1:2; Rev. 12:5; 19:15, 19).[1] Since the psalm refers to the kingly rule of the Messiah (Ps. 2:6), these New Testament references have led amillennial scholars to conclude that Messiah’s kingly rule began at His first coming. Dispensationalists, on the other hand, maintain that the Davidic rule of Messiah awaits His second coming. This article seeks to demonstrate that Psalm 2 does not depict a coronation at Jesus’ first coming, but rather predicts the coronation of the Messiah at a later date.

Verse-By-Verse Comments On Psalm 2

Though the psalm is anonymous, it is accorded Davidic authorship in Acts 4:25. The speakers mentioned in that verse were members of the early Hebrew-Christian congregation in Jerusalem. Whether the psalm is of Davidic authorship has little bearing on the interpretation of the psalm. Nevertheless VanGemeren has noted that “the language, style, and theology fit an early monarchic date.”[2]

Until the time of Rashi[3] (AD 1040-1105) Psalm 2 was universally held by both Jewish and Christian scholars to be messianic.[4] Rashi, while still holding to an eschatological application, understood the background of the psalm as relating to King David and his early conflict with the Philistines.[5] Since the time of Rashi, many scholars, both Jewish and Christian, have sought to understand the psalm as referring to some historic Davidic king, or even a Hasmonean ruler,[6] rather than as a prophecy of a future Messiah. However, attempts to identify the specific ruler described in the psalm have not met with widespread agreement.

Some messianic psalms refer directly to the experience of the psalmist, but these experiences meet their antitype in the person or work of Christ. Other psalms, however, including Psalm 8, “can be primarily applied only to Christ. Psalm 16:10 . . . cannot fit the life of David whose body saw corruption.”[7]

V. 1, Why Are The Nations Restless?[8]

The word for “restless” (רגשׁ) is a hapax legomenon, an Aramaic loan word related to רֶגֶשׁ a term used of the noisy, jostling crowd who thronged into the house of the Lord for worship (Ps. 55:14). It is also related to רִגַשָׁה, which is used in Psalm 64:2 of the counsel of the wicked or perhaps the tumultuous meeting of the wicked, and which is parallel to סוֹד מְרֵעִים, the scheming of the wicked. Thus this term seems to connote in Psalm 2 a disorderly agitation of hostile but likely disorganized crowds.

V. 1, And The Peoples Contemplate Vanity

“Contemplate” (הגה), when used of humans,[9] refers to indistinct sounds (muttering, meditating) or what is spoken in undertones. It is used several times of plotting evil deeds against another (Ps. 38:12; Prov. 24:2; Isa. 59:3), and also of meditating on God’s Word or thoughts (Pss. 1:2; 63:6; 77:12; 143:5). In 2:1 it refers to counsels held in secret with lowered voices so as not to be heard by others. “Vanity” (רִיק, “void, empty, vain”) refers literally to an empty vessel (Jer. 51:34), and here in Psalm 2 the idea is that these disorganized, agitated masses are gathering together, voicing their complaints to each other in undertones, and coming up with ill-defined, empty plots that are unlikely to succeed. From a consideration of the disorganized and agitated masses (v. 1), the psalmist turned to the more organized and powerful political leaders of the world (v. 2).

V. 2, The Kings Of The Earth Take Their Stand

“Kings of the earth” is a frequently occurring biblical expression (Pss. 138:4; 148:11; Jer. 25:20; Lam. 4:12; Ezek. 27:33; Matt. 17:25; Acts 4:26; Rev. 6:15; 17:2; 18:3, 9; 21:24). These references in Revelation speak of those who are opposed to God’s rule, possibly an allusion to Psalm 2:1. Much of this psalm therefore seems to have an eschatological fulfillment in the tribulation. “Take their stand” (יצב)[10] describes “setting them in array” against Yahweh and His Messiah, in a “firm or determined resistance.”[11]

V. 2, And The Dignitaries Conspire Together Against Yahweh And Against His Anointed

The words translated “conspire together” (יסד) suggests a unification of earthly rulers in a grand conspiracy against God. Nations that might otherwise consider each other enemies will often unite against what they perceive as a common threat. In this case they perceive Yahweh and His Messiah as a threat to their rule and power (Zech. 12:3; Rev. 13:7; 16:12-16).

V. 3, Let Us Tear Their Fetters To Pieces

“Tear” (נתק) was the term used of Samson’s tearing apart Delilah’s binding cords (Judg. 16:9, 12). In Psalm 2:3 it reflects extreme resentment and willingness to resort to violent means by these political rulers.

V. 4, He Who Sits In Heaven Will Laugh

Here the scene shifts from earth to heaven and gives heaven’s response both to the confused, agitated, and disorganized masses, and to the more well-defined, powerful, and organized plots of the political rulers. “He who sits” (יוֹשֵׁב) is used of Yahweh enthroned in heaven (Pss. 2:4; 9:7; 29:10; 55:19; 102:12; Lam. 5:19) or of His dwelling above the cherubim over the ark of the covenant (1 Sam. 4:4; 2 Sam. 6:2; 2 Kings 19:15; Ps. 99:1).[12] “To laugh” (יִשְׂחָק) connotes a kind of sarcastic reaction.[13]

V. 5, Then He Will Speak To Them In His Wrath

The derisive mirth of the preceding verse gives way here to holy indignation. Here the Septuagint employs ὀργή, and in the next line it is θυμός. Both terms are used of divine wrath in the Tribulation (ὀργή, Luke 21:23; Rev. 11:18; θυμός, 14:10, 19; 15:1, 7; 16:1, 19; 19:15).

V. 6, And I Myself Have Installed My King On Zion, The Mountain Of My Holiness

The verb “installed” translates נסך, which literally means “to pour or pour out,” that is, to pour oil as a libation in installing a king.[14]

Some who would like to interpret Christ’s present session in heaven as the fulfillment of this verse would make “Zion” equal to heaven.[15] However, if Christ is “poured out” (“installed”) from heaven to Zion, it would seem better to understand Zion as the earthly Zion, and the fulfillment to be millennial.

Zion was the southern hill of Jerusalem, “originally a Canaanite city conquered by David (2 Sam. 5:7). Later Zion referred to the temple area and then to the entire city of Jerusalem.”[16] Zion in the Bible never refers to heaven (except in Hebrews 12:22, where it is used symbolically).

V. 7, I Myself Have Begotten You This Day

The vast majority of commentators today understand this as a coronation formula.[17] This idea was first propounded by Gerhard von Rad, who “argued that the Judean enthronement ritual was heavily dependent on the corresponding Egyptian ritual,” and that the statute (חֹק) was “the Judean counterpart of the Egyptian nḫb.t, the royal protocol that the deity writes and presents to the new king along with the crown at the time of the latter’s coronation.”[18] Von Rad’s teacher, Albrecht Alt, later expanded on this thesis and suggested that the speaker was not God, but heralds who were sent out by the royal court to announce the coronation of the new king.[19] Roberts has demonstrated quite convincingly that von Rad’s view is highly untenable. Roberts undertakes an extensive review of ancient Near Eastern literature relevant to coronation ceremonies, and shows conclusively that the adoption rituals in which the deity adopted the new king as his “son” never used the language of “begetting” in connection with such rituals. This makes it unlikely that these coronation rituals of the ancient Near East form the background to such texts as Psalm 2:7 and Isaiah 9:6.[20]

Despite the fact that nearly every commentary written since 1950 has viewed Psalm 2:7 as a coronation ritual, it is preferable to view this “decree” (חֹק) in connection with the Davidic kingship. This is based not on ancient Near Eastern custom but on the statement of 2 Samuel 7:14, “I will be his Father, and he shall be My son.” “The decree refers to the Davidic Covenant in which God declared that He would be Father to the king, and the king would be His son. So when David became king, God described their affiliation as a Father-Son relationship. So the expression ‘son’ took on the meaning of a messianic title.”[21]

At what point is the Davidic descendant said to be Yahweh’s son? In the case of Solomon, Rehoboam, and most Judean kings, it may be assumed that the king’s anointing coincided with his coronation, and that therefore the day of his anointing/coronation is the same as the day on which he was considered to have become Yahweh’s “son.” That would be normal. However, this was not the case for David. In David’s case his anointing occurred in Bethlehem years before his coronation in Hebron. At his anointing, not his coronation, David was already considered God’s king. God said to Samuel, “I have seen among his [Jesse’s] sons my king” (1 Sam. 16:1). Therefore being designated as God’s king is associated with his anointing, not with his coronation. Messiah’s case parallels David’s in that His baptism preceded His coronation by many years. (However, Jesus is spoken of as king even before His baptism, e.g., Matt. 2:2; John 1:49.)

Therefore parallel to David’s experience, an extended period of time may exist between the Messiah’s anointing and His coronation. That is, the Messiah is now constituted as King (e.g., He was acknowledged at His triumphal entry as the King of Israel, John 12:13), but His reign is yet future.

V. 8, Ask From Me, And I Will Give The Nations For Your Inheritance

“The nations” are the very ones who were in rebellion against Yahweh and His anointed in verse 1! When the Messiah will inherit the nations, a fundamental change will occur. The word for “inheritance” (נַחֲלָה, “hereditary property”) signifies “in the case of conquest, hereditary division of the property between an individual or the family as their share of the booty, consisting of lands.”[22]

V. 8, And Your Property, The Ends Of The Earth

The same expression “ends of the earth” occurs in 1 Samuel 2:10 in Hannah’s song of thanksgiving. “Those who contend with the Lord will be shattered; against them He will thunder in the heavens, the Lord will judge the ends of the earth; and He will give strength to His king, and will exalt the horn of His anointed.” Other references where the phrase “the ends of the earth” occurs, probably with millennial significance, include Psalms 22:28; 59:13; 67:7; 72:8; 98:3; Isaiah 45:22; 52:10; Jeremiah 16:19; Micah 5:4; and Zechariah 9:10. The giving of the Gentile nations to the Messiah as envisioned in Psalm 2 is paralleled in Matthew 25:31-34, “But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats; and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.’”

V. 9, You Will Shatter Them With An Iron Scepter

The “rod” or “scepter” (שֵׁבֶט) refers to the rod of ruling authority, rather than the tribe that is ruled. Koehler and Baumgartner comment on the relationship between these two ideas: “It should be noted that in General Semitic the basic meaning of שֵׁבֶט is stick, staff, sceptre. . . . The sbst. then develops in meaning from ‘the sceptre of authority’ . . . to signify a group of people under the command of ‘the one who holds the scepter.’ ”[23] In Isaiah 11:4 the Messiah will strike the wicked with the “rod of his mouth” (שֵׁבֶט פִּיו). Even in the time of Saul and Jonathan an iron implement was a rarity among Israelites (see 1 Sam. 13:19-22). For David, reference to an “iron” scepter would doubtless have signified both the latest in technology and a symbol of invincible authority.

V. 9, Like A Vessel Of One Who Forms It [A Potter’s Vessel] You Will Smash Them

One who purchases a vessel would be foolish to smash it, but a potter who formed a vessel and was then displeased with the way it turned out might smash it to pieces. The figure in this psalm is of the Lord who formed the nations and has become displeased with the way they have turned out. So because of their rebellion against Him, He smashes them to pieces. The New Testament parallel might be seen in the Gentile “goat” nations of Matthew 25:41-46.

V. 10, And Now, O Kings, Understand

In this closing section of the psalm the discourse shifts from Yahweh’s speaking to the Messiah to His addressing the Gentile rulers. These rulers are exhorted to forsake their foolish conspiracy and follow the wise road of submission to Yahweh and His Messiah.

V. 10, Be Instructed, O Judges Of The Earth

This stands in contrast to “conspire” in verse 2. In their rebellion the nations took secret counsel with each other, and now they are exhorted to be instructed by the Lord. Judges, who should be the most discerning, are themselves in need of instruction.

V. 12, Kiss The Son

The word for “son” here (בַּר) is an Aramaic loan word. The reason for the use of this Aramaic term has been debated by commentators. In verse 7 the Hebrew בֵּן occurs. “Aramaic was used widely in Syria-Palestine from at least the ninth century BCE. Moreover, the context here presents foreign nations and their kings (Aramaic speaking?) as the ones whom the psalmist is addressing. God speaking to his chosen king uses the word בֵּן (son) in verse 7. As Craigie suggests, ‘the poet deliberately uses a foreign word (loan-word) to dramatize his poetic intent at this point’ in v. 12.’ ”'[24] As to the unlikelihood of בַּר being from a Hebrew root meaning “pure” (as in Pss. 19:9; 24:4; 73:1), Ross comments, “Unusual in the verse is the apparent use of bar, an Aramaic word for son. Therefore the versions translate it differently. Jerome rendered it, ‘Give pure (bar is a Heb. word for pure) worship,’ or ‘Worship in purity,’ rather than translating the word as ‘son.’ However, in an address to the nations an Aramaic term was not out of place. Moreover, ‘kiss’ pictures homage (cf. 1 Kings 19:18; Hosea 13:2).”[25]

New Testament References

Psalm 2:1-2 And Acts 4:24-26

O Lord, . . . who by the Holy Spirit, through the mouth of our father David Your servant, said, “Why did the Gentiles rage, and the peoples devise futile things? The kings of the earth took their stand, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against His Christ.”[26]

Following Peter’s healing of a lame man, both Peter and John were arrested and brought before Caiaphas, the priests, and the ruling authorities. On their release and return to the congregated believers, the believers cited Psalm 2:1-2 as a description of these ruling authorities’ collaboration with the Gentiles in crucifying the Messiah. “While the psalm [Ps 2] was not being fulfilled then, these verses from Acts 4 express in a preliminary sense . . . the opposition to the Messiah.”[27] This psalm is not simply a general description of any Old Testament Davidic king; it is a specific prediction that can be fulfilled only in the Messiah.

Psalm 2:7 And Matthew 3:17 (= Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22)

And behold, a voice out of the heavens said, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

At Jesus’ baptism God’s voice from heaven made this affirmation about the identity of the Messiah. The words combine Psalm 2:7 and Isaiah 42:1.[28] Some commentators assume that these words “form a kind of ‘coronation formula’ for Jesus.”[29] However, the Messiah’s career parallels in some respects the career of David. As already noted, David’s anointing preceded his coronation by many years. Similarly Jesus’ baptism seems to be an “anointing” to kingship without His beginning His kingly rule. The decree declares Him to be the Son. The baptism “anointed” the Son to be King, and at His second coming the Son will be crowned as Davidic King.

Psalm 2:7 And Matthew 17:5 (= Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35)

While he was still speaking, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and behold, a voice out of the cloud said, “This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased; listen to Him!”

Similar to the words spoken at Jesus’ baptism, these words were heard on the Mount of Transfiguration. This event fulfills His prediction that some of His disciples would not taste of death until they had seen “the Son of Man coming in His kingdom” (Matt. 16:28). This declaration of the Messiah’s Sonship is similar to what occurred at His baptism. This is not a coronation, but a declaration of the One who is destined one day to be crowned as Davidic King. The divine instruction, “listen to Him,” reflects the promise of Deuteronomy 18:15 and the coming of a prophet like Moses. This One, above all other prophets, must be heeded. As Weber comments, “The command to the disciples was ‘Listen to him,’ elevating the word of Jesus above the words of Moses and Elijah. Indeed, Moses himself commanded God’s people to heed the prophet ‘like me’ who would come (Deut. 18:15).”[30]

Psalm 2:7 And John 1:49

Nathanael answered Him, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel.”

This linking of “the Son of God” with “the King of Israel” may allude to Psalm 2:6-7. Nathaniel’s confession reflects the first-century messianic expectation that the arrival of the Messiah must coincide with His kingly rule. The fact that Nathaniel believed this does not necessarily affirm that it is correct. When Nathaniel identified Jesus as “the King of Israel,” that was not the same as saying He had been crowned or that He was exercising regal authority. For example when the wise men came to worship the one “who has been born King of the Jews” (Matt. 2:2), they did not believe He was reigning as king, even though it was appropriate to identify Him as the king.

Psalm 2:7 And Acts 13:33

That God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, “You are My Son; today I have begotten You.”

Toussaint discusses Paul’s quotation of Psalm 2:7 in these words:

Do the words by raising up Jesus (v. 33) refer to His resurrection or to His exaltation? It probably refers to the latter for several reasons: (1) When the Resurrection is mentioned in the next verse it is explained as being from the dead. (2) The same verb “raise up” (anistēmi) is used in the sense of elevation in 3:22, 26; 7:37 (“send,” NIV). (3) A synonym (egeirō) is used in 13:22 to refer to David’s promotion to kingship. (4) The primary reason for taking it to refer to Jesus’ exaltation is the meaning of Psalm. This Old Testament passage, quoted by Paul (Acts 13:33), described the anointing of the King, which will find its ultimate fulfillment in the Millennium.[31]

The English translation seems to link the words of Psalm 2:7 with Jesus’ resurrection. However, the Greek text does not make this connection unambiguously. The words “in that He raised up Jesus” translate an instrumental participial phrase (ἀναστήσας ᾿Ιησοῦν). The comparative clause (“as it is also written”) likely refers not to this participial phrase but to the main clause, “God has fulfilled” (θεὸς ἐπεπλήρωκεν). In other words the identification of Jesus as the Anointed One of Psalm 2:7 affirms that He is indeed the Savior. This identification of Jesus as Savior was made at His baptism (and affirmed at His transfiguration).

Psalm 2:7 And Hebrews 1:5

For to which of the angels did He ever say, “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”? And again, “I will be a Father to Him and He shall be a Son to Me”?

The author of Hebrews here combined citations from Psalm 2:7 and 2 Samuel 7:14 as support for his assertion in Hebrews 1:4 that the Son is “so much better” (τοσούτῳ κρείττων) than the angels. Steyn remarks that “the two quotations (Ps 2 and 2 Sam 7) . . . form a chiasm (A B B´ A´). The first and last lines concern sonship and frame the second and third lines, which speak of paternity.”[32] The citation of Psalm 2:7 in this verse says nothing about whether Jesus began to exercise His kingly office at His first coming. It simply relates that Jesus’ status is higher than that of the angels. Hodges remarks concerning the significance of the title “son” in Hebrews 1:5 that “the writer was thinking of the title Son in the sense of the Davidic Heir who is entitled to ask God for dominion over the whole earth (cf. Ps. 2:8). In this sense the title belongs uniquely to Jesus and not to the angels.”[33]

Psalm 2:7 And Hebrews 5:5

So also Christ did not glorify Himself so as to become a high priest, but He who said to Him, “You are My Son, today I have begotten You.”

This is the second time the author of Hebrews cited Psalm 2:7, but this time it is in a different connection. Here in Hebrews 5 the theme has shifted to a discussion of Christ’s high priesthood, and Psalm 2:7 seems to be linked with Psalm 110:4, “You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.” The nature of this apparent link has evoked considerable discussion among exegetes. Psalm 2 has virtually no connection to a priestly ministry in its original setting. So in what sense should it be linked with Psalm 110? And if it is legitimately tied to Psalm 110, did the author of Hebrews see the coronation of the Messiah as being somehow fulfilled at His ascension? First, as stated earlier, Psalm 2:7 does not refer to the Messiah’s coronation, but to a declaration of His kingship, related to an earlier “anointing.” Second, Psalm 110 identifies the Messiah as an appointed king in waiting (vv. 1-3), a present priest like Melchizedek (vv. 4-5), and a future coming king in victory and power (vv. 6-7).[34] So while Psalm 2 does not directly relate to Messiah’s priestly ministry, it does have a connection to Psalm 110.

However, the reference to Psalm 2:7 in Hebrews 5:5 is probably not intended to be linked with Psalm 110 in Hebrews 5:6 as much as it is merely looking back to the earlier citation of Psalm 2:7 in Hebrews 1:5. The same one who exalted the Son above the angels (Heb. 1:5) has also glorified Him to become high priest (5:1-9). Ellingsworth concurs: “The same God who (as was already known) had named Jesus as his Son had also appointed him high priest, and that the giving of both titles was attested in Scripture.”[35]

Psalm 2:8 And Hebrews 1:2

In these last days [He] has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.

The word “heir” (κληρονόμον) may suggest an allusion to Psalm 2:8 with its references to “inheritance” (κληρονομίαν), and “possession” (κατάσχεσιν).[36] When τίθημι is used in the sense of “appoint,” it may possibly mean a future fulfillment. For example in Romans 4:17 Paul cited Genesis 17:5, “I have appointed you a father of many nations” (author’s translation). This meant that in the (distant) future, Abraham would be a father of many nations, but the nations were not yet in existence. Likewise in Hebrews 1:2 God had “appointed” (ἔθηκεν) the Son to be “heir of all things.” This means that Jesus will one day inherit the Gentile nations. His actual enthronement as King had not yet taken place at the time of the writing of Hebrews; it awaits a future day.

Psalm 2:9 And Revelation 2:27

And he shall rule them with a rod of iron, as the vessels of the potter are broken to pieces, as I have received authority from My Father.

In these closing lines from Jesus’ letter to Thyatira Psalm 2:9 is cited as part of Christ’s promise to those who overcome and keep His works. They, with Christ, will have “authority over the nations” (Rev. 2:26). As cited in verse 27, the main verb of Psalm 2:9 has undergone a change from second person to third person (from “you” to “he”). In His millennial rule Christ will judge with the authority the Father has given Him (John 5:22, 27).

Psalm 2:9 And Revelation 12:5

And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron; and her child was caught up to God and to His throne.

In this vision the woman (Israel) gives birth to a male child (Jesus). The birth is clearly a reference to the first coming of Christ. At the first coming His rule is said to be yet future (μέλλει + infinitive).[37] The next clause, “and her child was caught up to God and to His throne,” refers to Jesus’ ascension.[38] But His ruling all the nations refers to some time beyond the ascension. Thus Revelation 12:5 affirms the view that Christ’s kingly rule as foretold in Psalm 2 is to be fulfilled at the Second Coming. Though it is a vast expanse of time to fit into one verse, such a feature is not foreign to prophetic Scripture. As Beale notes, “That temporal telescoping is involved in v 4 is suggested by v 5. Now a snapshot of Christ’s entire life—his birth, his destiny of kingship, and his incipient fulfillment of that destiny in his ascent to God’s heavenly throne after his postresurrection ministry—is given in one line.”[39]

Psalm 2:9 And Revelation 19:15

From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty.

This final New Testament reference to Psalm 2 sees the Messiah’s ruling authority as beginning with His second coming. A futurist interpretation of Revelation places this event at the end of the tribulation. The ἵνα clause (“so that . . . He may strike down the nations”) may suggest either purpose or result. In either case it describes action subsequent to the Messiah’s arrival with the sharp sword. The future tense ποιμανεῖ (“will rule”) further emphasizes the futuristic interpretation of this fulfillment of Psalm 2.

Is Jesus’ Present Session In Heaven A Fulfillment Of His Reign As King?

Some writers view Christ’s present session in heaven as a fulfillment of Christ’s ruling with authority over the kings of the earth. They link Ephesians 1:20-22 with Psalm 2. As Paul wrote, Jesus is seated at the right hand of God the Father (Eph. 1:20) with “all things in subjection under His feet” (v. 22). Some say this means that Jesus is now ruling as King over the nations. However, in what way could Christ’s present session possibly consist of dashing the nations to pieces like a potter’s vessel (Ps. 2:9)? And in what sense could it be said that Jesus is now speaking to the nations “in His anger and . . . in His fury” (v. 5)? The statement in Ephesians 1:22, “And He put all things in subjection under His feet,” refers not to Psalm 2 but to Psalm 8. Hebrews 2:8 states that not everything is seen in subjection to mankind. But Hebrews 2:9 notes that believers now see “Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor” (v. 9) and He is “bringing many sons to glory” (v. 10). Christ’s present exercise of authority is related to the realm of spiritual redemption, not kingly rule. In other words Jesus’ present work is a priestly ministry (“You are a priest forever,” Ps. 110:4) not a kingly one (as in Ps. 2). In Psalm 110:5-7 “David anticipated the glorious victory of the Messiah. . . . When the Messiah comes He will defeat (crush) kings (cf. Rev. 16:16; 19:13-15) and judge . . . nations.”[40] But of course He is not doing those things now.

Hoehner comments:

There are some who think Ephesians is talking about a realized eschatology. . . . Hence, the destruction of the cosmic powers is not at the parousia but at the exaltation of Christ. Yet, in 6:12 Paul warns believers of the evil powers that presently war against them and urges them to put on the armor of God, which indicates that the cosmic powers are still active. In reality Christ is at the right hand of the Father and everything has been subjected under his feet, but the full exercise of that power will not be evident until his return. . . . At the present, the manifestation of this control is not always evident to us, for there are many inequities, injustices, disasters, unholy actions, and evidences of outright defiance against Christ and God. . . . Hence, he has the right to exercise his control but chooses not to fully exercise it immediately in every instance of violation against God’s holy character. Certainly, a basic and important illustration of his present use of authority is his current ability to rescue sinners from the most despicable powers of all, Satan and sin.[41]

The attempt to link Ephesians 1:22 and Psalm 2 creates various interpretive problems and is at variance with the way Paul and the author of Hebrews viewed Christ’s present authority.

Conclusion

Yahweh’s Messiah, Jesus Christ, will one day rule as Davidic King over all the nations of the earth. Psalm 2 is a prophetic prediction of that reign. This psalm describes Jesus’ future rule, which will be initiated at His second coming; it does not refer to His activities being carried out in the present church age. The New Testament references to Psalm 2 support this interpretation.

Christ’s present ministry is a priestly ministry designed to reconcile men to God. His rule as King awaits His coming at His second advent. Church ministry is not one of establishing a kingdom;[42] it is a ministry of reconciliation, inviting sinners to find peace with God through Jesus Christ, the Messiah. When the kingly ministry of Christ is initiated, rather than inviting sinners to find peace and reconciliation, His focus among unbelievers in the world will include His dashing nations to pieces like a potter smashing an unwanted vessel. Therefore kings should be warned (“take warning, O judges of the earth,” Ps. 2:10) and believers should “worship the Lord with reverence and rejoice with trembling” (v. 11), “do homage to the Son” (v. 12), and “take refuge in Him” (v. 12).

Notes

1. The art of recognizing quotations and allusions is far from exact; hence some discrepancies exist among the sources reporting such references. The references listed here form the basis for much of the research in this article.
2. Willem A. VanGemeren, “Psalms,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 5 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991), 64.
3. The name “Rashi” is an acronym for the esteemed medieval rabbinic scholar Rabbi Shlomo Itzhaki. Rashi, of Troyes, France, contributed extensive exegetical works on the Old Testament, as well as the Talmud. He became the standard for later Jewish exegetes.
4. M. A. Signer, “King/Messiah: Rashi’s Exegesis of Psalm 2,” Prooftexts 3 (September 1983): 274. Apparently the Qumran community also considered Psalm 2 messianic; “the combination of Psalm 2 and 2 Samuel 7” is seen “in 4Q174 [4QFlor]” (Gert J. Steyn, “Psalm 2 in Hebrews” [paper presented at a conference on the Old Testament in the New, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa, April 25-26, 2003]: <http://www.axbe 40.dsl.pipex.com/archive/372/372sample-steyn.pdf>, p. 262 (accessed April 4, 2011). For other references to the intertestamental Jewish understanding of Psalm 2 as messianic see Psalms of Solomon 17 and b. Sukkah52a.
5. Signer, “King/Messiah: Rashi’s Exegesis of Psalm 2,” 274.
6. Marco Treves finds an acronym in Psalm 2 that spells the name of Alexander Jannaeus! (“Two Acrostic Psalms,” Vetus Testamentum 15 [January 1965]: 82-83).
7. Paul Lee Tan, The Interpretation of Prophecy (Winona Lake, IN: BMH, 1974), 173. In a footnote Tan adds, “Other examples are Psalms 2 and 45.” See also Raju D. Kunjummen, “The Single Intent of Scripture—Critical Examination of a Theological Construct,” Grace Theological Journal 7 (1986): 105-6.
8. Unless indicated otherwise, all Scripture quotations are the author’s translations.
9. Elsewhere in Scripture הָגָה is used of animal noises such as the cooing of a pigeon (Isa. 38:14; 59:11) and the growling of a lion (31:4).
10. This word occurs in the Old Testament forty-eight times, but only in the hithpael stem, “to take one’s stand,” “to present oneself.” It is possibly related to the Arabic waṣaba, “to be firm.”
11. Albert Barnes, Barnes Notes on the Old Testament, Psalms, Vol. 1, ed. Robert Frew (reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1950), 13.
12. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, and Bruce K. Waltke, eds., Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody, 1999), 1:411-12.
13. Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner suggest the following as within the semantic domain of this term: “to amuse,” “to entertain with jokes,” “to serve as a joker,” “to laugh at,” “to mock,” “to ridicule,” “to be merry,” “to provide amusement,” “to play,” “to dance,” “to make fun of,” and “to jest about” (The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament [Leiden: Brill, 1996], 3:1316).
14. C. Dohmen, “נָסַך,” in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, trans. David E. Green, vol. 9 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 457. See also Richard E. Averbeck, “נָסַך,” in NewInternational Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. Willem A. VanGemeren (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997), 3:113-17.
15. For example Paul Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 112.
16. Allen P. Ross, “Psalms,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Old Testament, ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor, 1985; reprint, Colorado Springs: Cook, 1996), 791.
17. For example John H. Walton, Victor H. Matthews, and Mark W. Chavalas, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2000), 518-19; and I. Howard Marshall, “Acts,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 584-85.
18. J. J. M. Roberts, The Bible and the Ancient Near East (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2002), 143.
19. Ibid.
20. Ibid., chapter 13.
21. Ross, “Psalms,” 792.
22. Koehler and Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, vol. 2 (1995), 687.
23. Koehler and Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, vol. 4 (1999), 1388.
24. Duane Christensen, “Psalm 2:1-12 Translation, Logoprosodic Analysis, and Observations A Royal Psalm Composed for a Coronation,” <http://www.bibal.net-/04/proso/psalms-ii/pdf/dlc_ps002-001-j.pdf> (accessed January 30, 2011). The use of Aramaic rather than Hebrew also avoids the assonance of בֵּן פֵּן that would have occurred had the Hebrew word been used (Carl F. Keil and Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament [reprint, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2002], 5:58).
25. Ross, “Psalms,” 792.
26. The New Testament translations in this section are from the New American Standard Bible.
27. Stanley D. Toussaint, “Acts,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, New Testament, ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor, 1983; reprint, Colorado Springs: Cook, 1996), 364.
28. David J. MacLeod, “The Baptism of Christ, or: The Anointing of the King,” Emmaus Journal 9 (2000): 148; and Watts, “Mark,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 122.
29. MacLeod, “The Baptism of Christ,” 148.
30. Stuart K. Weber, Matthew, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2000), 270; and Watts, “Mark,” 186-87.
31. Toussaint, “Acts,” 390.
32. Steyn, “Psalm 2 in Hebrews,” 264. See also Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews, 112.
33. Zane C. Hodges, “Hebrews,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, 781.
34. George Gunn and Jerry Neuman, “Psalm 110 and Progressive Dispensationalism” <http://www.shasta.edu/admin/userfiles/resourceDocuments/psalm110full.pdf> 5-7 (accessed April 16, 2011). Hebrews 1:8 says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom.” This citation is from Psalm 45:6-7, “which describes the final triumph of God’s messianic king” (Hodges, “Hebrews,” 782).
35. Ellingworth, The Epistle to the Hebrews, 282. George H. Guthrie says the quotation of Psalm 2:7 “plays more of a structural role. . . . Its primary function is to aid in introducing Ps. 110:4, which then becomes a focus of the author's discussion on Christ’s appointment as a superior, Melchizedekian high priest,” (“Hebrews” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 960).
36. Steyn, “Psalm 2 in Hebrews,” 275-76.
37. “To take place at a future point of time and so to be subsequent to another event” (Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., rev. and ed. Frederick W. Danker [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000], 627).
38. Kendell H. Easley, Revelation, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1998), 209-10; Henry Barclay Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 2nd ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1907), 148; Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 1-7: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 1992), 126; and John F. Walvoord, “Revelation,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, New Testament, 958. G. K. Beale’s insistence that this deliverance refers to Christ’s resurrection, rather than His ascension (The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999], 639) is surely mistaken. The verb ἁρπάζω, occurring also in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 of the rapture, followed in Revelation 12:5 by the prepositional phrases πρὸς τὸν θεόν and πρὸς τὸν θρόνον αὐτοῦ, surely can refer only to the ascension.
39. Beale, The Book of Revelation, 639.
40. Ross, “Psalms,” 874.
41. Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 284.
42. The New Testament epistles only sparingly use the king/kingdom metaphor for the church age (e.g., 1 Cor. 4:8; 1 Tim. 1:17; 6:15). In a general sense God is always King over His creation, and over His people, but this is quite different from the Davidic kingship of the Messiah.