“Blessed Is He Who Comes”: Psalm 118 And Jesus’s Triumphal Entry

By Kenneth E. Guenter

[Kenneth E. Guenter is associate professor of Old Testament and Ancient Near Eastern History, Briercrest College and Seminary, Saskatchewan, Canada.]

Abstract

Psalm 118 was apparently so commonly associated with welcoming a Davidic king that people spontaneously hailed Jesus with cheers from it. But why remains unclear. As the psalm offers no title, author, or references to David or a king, few scholars have suggested its historical setting and even fewer have linked it with David. Nevertheless, details within Psalm 118 explain how first-century Jews would reasonably have attributed it to David upon his triumphal return from Absalom’s revolt, and their traditions for welcoming conquerors explain why they employed it to greet Jesus.

Introduction

In all four Gospels the crowd fused quotations from Psalm 118 with royal or Davidic titles as they escorted Jesus from the Mount of Olives to the temple courts. Their “hosannas” were to “the Son of David” (Matt. 21:8-9),[1] and they blessed not simply the “one who comes” in the name of the Lord, but the “king who comes” (Luke 19:38) and “the coming kingdom of our father David” (Mark 11:10). To “Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord” they added “even the King of Israel” (John 12:13).

The crowd’s intention to promote Jesus as their Davidic king and Messiah is evident in their citation of Zechariah 9:9 and in their gestures.[2] The precedents of coats strewn for Jehu, Israel’s judges riding on donkeys, David’s mule used in Solomon’s coronation, and Zechariah’s prediction of Zion’s king riding on a donkey’s colt have been appreciated in recent studies by Catchpole, Kinman, Blomberg, and France.[3] However, none of these has explained why the crowds spontaneously adapted Psalm 118 to laud Jesus as their king. The setting the crowd presumed for Psalm 118 and how that setting connected it with “the Son of David” and “the King of Israel,” has not been suggested.

The Mishnah indicates that Psalms 113-118, the Hallel, were traditionally recited by Jews during the Passover (m. Pesach. 5:7) and by pilgrims approaching Jerusalem for Tabernacles (m. Sukkah 4:5).[4] However, this does not explain why Psalm 118 was invoked to hail a king. Though the Targum of Psalm 118:22-29 associated it with David’s anointing at Bethlehem,[5] and Midrashic commentary saw David, the youngest son of Jesse, as the stone the builders rejected,[6] such a setting is at odds with the psalm’s mention of victories over hostile nations, a near death experience, entrance through the city gates, and ceremonies around the altar at the house of the Lord.

Attempts to reconstruct the setting of the psalm from liturgical practices in the ancient Near East have considered such factors. Petuchowski proposed that the cry of “Hoshi’ah na” in Psalm 118:25 arose from a liturgy at the Feast of Booths that appealed to Yahweh for the fall rains.[7] Mowinckel placed the psalm in the liturgical setting of an enthronement festival held annually at the Feast of Tabernacles.[8] In Mowinckel’s reconstruction, Yahweh, represented by the ark, ascended in procession from the gate by the Gihon spring on Jerusalem’s via sacra, passing east of the palace and through a gate into the temple courts.[9] Sanders imagined Psalm 118 as being recited as Yahweh, represented in part by the Davidic king, entered the city and the temple on the occasion of the annual fall rite of re-enthronement.[10] Sanders understood that if such a liturgy was reenacted by the crowd that welcomed Jesus, it would have been seen as “blasphemous and scandalous by those responsible for Israel’s traditions.”[11] Indeed, one might wonder how devout first-century Jews could embrace a reading of Psalm 118 built on cultic practices their forefathers had long since rejected, and could do so to such an extent that they would spontaneously adapt a liturgy that exalted Yahweh in order to hail a prophet from Nazareth. How these fall liturgies fit Jesus’s arrival in the spring is not immediately evident. Should the psalm’s setting be reconstructed from liturgies observed outside of Israel’s Scriptures or from evidence within them? Is there enough evidence within their Scriptures to reconstruct its setting?

Keil was confident that Psalm 118 was “without any doubt a post-exilic song,” and he favored the view that it was composed to celebrate the dedication of the completed temple (Ezra 6:15) with the surrounding enemies being “the Samaritans, the neighbouring peoples, and the capriciousness of the Persian kings.”[12] Leupold favored the celebration marking the dedication of the walls in Nehemiah 12.13 Neither Keil nor Leupold entertained the question of why the disciples would have used the psalm.

Many have simply classified Psalm 118 as a psalm of thanksgiving, while some have begun to view it as the psalm of a royal individual.[14] Dahood identified a pre-exilic setting for the psalm and called it “a king’s hymn of thanksgiving for delivery from death and for a military victory.”[15] Though Dahood considered the king to have had a literal encounter with both death and the Philistines, he did not connect the psalm with David as the disciples did at the triumphal entry. Seyoon Kim connected Jesus’s quotation of Psalm 118:22, 23 in Mark 12:1-12 with the oracle of Nathan and the Davidic covenant in 2 Samuel 7.[16] However, rather than exploring the psalm’s setting, Kim developed the theme of Jesus as the foundation stone of the new temple.

Among those who turn to other psalms for the setting of Psalm 118 is Blumenthal, who proposed that “the Talmud understands Psalm 107 as describing the situations where one should bring a Thanksgiving Sacrifice . . . when a person had a life-threatening experience,” and that Psalm 118 describes the ceremony connected with bringing such a sacrifice.[17] However, why the disciples would use a psalm with a sacrificial setting to laud Jesus as the king of Israel is not apparent.

Watts saw Psalm 118 as celebrating “Davidic authority over the threatening nations” and fulfilling the restoration of the temple anticipated in Psalm 2.[18] In attempting to approach Psalm 118 “from its original perspective and contemporary interpretations,” he appears to have had in mind Psalm 2 and Second Temple sources rather than Israel’s narratives.[19] Like Kim, he suggested how the New Testament developed ideas from the psalms rather than exploring the historical setting and authorship of the psalm.

Similarly, Beale tentatively reconstructed from the psalm a historical setting, but he was ultimately concerned with how the psalm is developed in the New Testament. He saw the stone that was rejected in Psalm 118:22 as a reference to “the righteous sufferer who has been oppressed not only by the nations (v. 10) but also by those within the covenant community (metaphorically portrayed as temple ‘builders’ who ‘rejected him as the ‘chief cornerstone’).” He supposed that “this pious victim, then, is likely a kingly figure in Israel’s history, perhaps David himself, who had been oppressed both by the nations round about as well as those within Israel. Therefore, the point of the psalm quotation is that rejection of Jesus as the ‘cornerstone’ of the temple . . . is equivalent to rejection of Jesus as the true temple . . . which is in the process of being built.”[20] How this context would inspire a crowd of first-century Jews to quote from this psalm is not suggested.

France did much to support the conclusion of this article without actually reaching it. He observed that until his final approach to Jerusalem Jesus avoided opportunities to present himself as Israel’s king, but when he sent two of his disciples to find the colt, his intention to be publicly hailed as king was immediately recognized. France went on to comment:

Matthew (like John) explains Jesus’ ride on the donkey as the fulfillment of Zech 9:9. Even without an explicit quotation of that prophecy in the text, Jewish readers of the story could hardly fail to be reminded of it and the royal ideology which underlies it. Zechariah’s prophecy of a humble and peaceful king coming to Jerusalem “vindicated and saved” is based on the story of David’s return to the city after the defeat of Absalom’s rebellion, when he came in triumph as king, yet humble and in peace.[21]

Though France appreciated David’s entrance as a precursor to Zechariah 9:9 and to Jesus’s entry, he did not connect Psalm 118 with David’s return after Absalom’s defeat or suggest how first-century Jews might have assumed a Davidic setting and found the psalm suited to the Messiah’s coronation.[22]

Lastly, it is helpful to remember that while Mowinckel did not connect Psalm 118 with David or the Passover, he did propose a pre-exilic historical setting in Jerusalem.[23] Though the liturgical enthronement of Yahweh at the Feast of Tabernacles does not explain why first-century Jews at Passover would chant from this psalm to hail Jesus as their king, the route Mowinckel posits for his liturgical procession is the one followed by David when he brought the ark up to Jerusalem.[24] In his view this became Jerusalem’s via sacra and would likely be the route taken by David on his return from Absalom’s revolt. In the time of Herod it seems to have led to the triple gates that provided the southern entrance of the temple, so that as Jesus entered Jerusalem and ascended to the temple courts he was not simply winding his way through the old city. By escorting Jesus along Jerusalem’s via sacra the crowds would have hailed him as their king just as earnestly as flag-waving sailors, airmen, and common English citizens who lined The Mall hailed Queen Elizabeth as she passed in a gilded carriage from Westminster Abbey to Buckingham Palace.

This article proposes that allusions and echoes within the first half of Psalm 118 reveal why a first-century Jewish audience would attribute this psalm to David. Allusions to David’s triumphal return from Absalom’s rebellion in the last half of the psalm match Jesus’s triumphal appearance so closely as to explain why his followers endorsed his appearance as the Son of David with cheers appropriated from Psalm 118. Furthermore, the protocols David established when he anointed Solomon were maintained by Second Temple Jews, so that both Psalm 118 and later traditions informed the crowds who welcomed Jesus.

Intertextual Method And Psalm 118

Failure to wonder why the Jews connected this psalm with a Davidic king reveals subtle weaknesses in the intertextual movement that has flourished over the last several decades. Despite broad acceptance of Hays’s criteria for identifying echoes and allusions,[25] their implementation has been limited by several perspectives.

First of all, intertextual studies have focused primarily on New Testament use of the Old Testament. Echoes of Moses and the Former Prophets within the Psalms and Latter Prophets have received less attention despite the potential for identifying echoes and allusions, especially from the covenants.

Second, the study of Old Testament intertextuality is inadvertently subverted by those who assume that “Jewish intertestamental literature is the back drop against which the New Testament use of the Old Testament should be read.”[26] While Second Temple documents are primary sources for historians, for exegetes they are secondary comments on the primary text, the Old Testament.

Third, many scholars remain unconvinced that the New Testament writers show a high regard for the original context of the Old Testament passages they referred to. These scholars do not assume that the quoted verse or phrase functions as a pointer to a larger section of Scripture, so that the total context is in view.[27] Instead, they hold that New Testament writers generally chose verses that would fit their arguments, with little regard for how these functioned in the original passage.

Given these presuppositions, Brunson concludes that the uses of Psalm 118 inevitably acquire new meanings and functions within the Gospels so that there is no clear connection to any specific historical occasion. Its connection with royalty and kingship does not depend on establishing an original setting, since its significance it is linked with the Second Temple period and beyond.[28]

Finally, the view that Jesus subverted the expectations of Second Temple Judaism by fulfilling them in unexpected ways implies that those expectations were unfounded. If they were unfounded and had been replaced, the need to pursue the study of Old Testament intertextuality was logically removed. Why would one search for the intertextual roots of a restoration that was mistaken? Similarly, the views that the New is the key to the Old and satisfaction with characterizing Israel’s narrative as a history of salvation tend to replace the pursuit of whole swaths of intertextuality that are integral to Israel’s Bible.

In light of Hays’s criteria, rather than looking to Second Temple sources or early Christian uses of the psalm, this article assumes that to appreciate why first-century Jews attributed Psalm 118 to a specific historical setting requires exploring the psalm’s intertextual roots in the narratives of Samuel and Chronicles that report on David’s life. It demonstrates how echoes from these narratives were used in Psalm 118 to celebrate David’s deliverance, first from the enemies that surrounded him, and then from Absalom’s rebellion.

How Psalm 118 Might Be Attributed To David

Why the Jews might have attributed Psalm 118:1-18 to David is suggested by a series of phrases in the psalm that are repeated two or three times. Three times the phrase “his steadfast love endures forever” is repeated in verses 2-4. Verses 6-7 repeat “the Lord is on my side,” and verses 8-9 repeat “it is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in. . . .” The phrase “in the name of the Lord I cut them off” occurs three times in verses 10-12, and verse 16 repeats “the right hand of the Lord.” Anyone familiar with the accounts of David’s life in Samuel and Chronicles, the Scriptures attributed to him, and the Scriptures available to him could have recognized the significance of this chain of echoes that linked Psalm 118 with David. These seven parallels are presented below.

Give Thanks To The Lord , For He Is Good; For His Steadfast Love Endures Forever

David was credited with coining the aphoristic lines “Give thanks to the Lord for he is good; for his steadfast love endures forever” (1 Chron. 16:34).[29] These lines appear many times in Israel’s Scriptures, including the opening lines of Psalm 118.[30] The ark’s arrival in Jerusalem is likely the earliest event first-century Jews associated with this affirmation.[31] On that occasion David composed a hymn that employs it (1 Chron. 16:7, 8, 34), and David’s musicians were called “those chosen and expressly named to give thanks to the Lord, for his love endures forever” (1 Chron. 16:41).

Solomon had the congregation and the priestly musicians repeat these lines when he installed the ark in the temple (2 Chron 5:13), and he attributed them to David: “The people of Israel worshiped and gave thanks to the Lord, saying, ‘For he is good; for his steadfast love endures forever’ . . . The priests stood at their posts; the Levites also, with the instruments for music to the Lord that King David had made for giving thanks to the Lord—for his steadfast love endures forever” (2 Chron. 7:3, 6).

These lyrics were repeated in several psalms that were not attributed to a specific author, and they continued to be sung after the exile.[32] Yet none of these suggests an author other than David, so first-century Jews would have reasonably attributed the opening lines of Psalm 118 to David.[33]

The Lord Is On My Side

Psalm 118 has also four possible echoes from the covenant the Lord made with David in 2 Samuel 7. The first, and weakest, is simply the idea “I have been with you wherever you went” (2 Sam. 7:9), which may be expressed in the refrain “The Lord is on my side” (Ps. 118:6, 7):

Psalm 118:5-7	2 Samuel 7
5 Out of my distress I called on the Lord; the Lord answered me and set me free.
6 The Lord is on my side; I will not fear. What can man do to me?	9 I have been with you,
7 The Lord is on my side as my helper; I shall look in triumph on those who hate me.	9 I have been with you,

It Is Better To Take Refuge In The Lord

In psalms attributed to David the psalmist repeatedly acknowledges that Yahweh is his refuge. This appreciation could fit with the years David was threatened by death at the hands of Saul, the Philistines, other hostile neighbors, and Absalom’s rebellion. Thirty of the forty-five instances where God is acknowledged as a refuge are in psalms attributed to David.[34] Another three occurrences appear in the song attributed to David in 2 Samuel 22 and repeated in Psalm 18, which are both prefaced with “when the Lord delivered him from the hand of all his enemies, and from the hand of Saul” (2 Sam. 22:1; Ps. 18 superscript). Just ten occur in psalms where no attribution is given.[35] Only two are specifically attributed to others.[36] Acknowledgement of God as the author’s refuge is another link between Psalm 118 and literature attributed to David.

Psalm 118:8-9	2 Samuel 22:3, 31, 33
8 It is better to take refuge in the LORD than to trust in man.	3 my God, my rock, in whom I take refuge, . . .my stronghold and my refuge, my savior
9 It is better to take refuge in the LORD	31 he is a shield for all those whotake refuge in him.
than to trust in princes.	33 This God is my strong refuge

All Nations Surrounded Me; In The Name Of The Lord I Cut Them Off!

The echoes of 2 Samuel 7 in Psalm 118:5-7 are perhaps faint and might be discounted if they were not followed by two clearer echoes from the same context. Second Samuel 7 is set in the days when Yahweh gave David “rest from all his surrounding enemies” (2 Sam. 7:1), and David was reminded, “I have . . . cut off all your enemies from before you” (v. 9). Key words and ideas from both phrases are repeated in Psalm 118:10-12.

Psalm 118:10-12	2 Samuel 7
10 All nations surrounded me; in the name of the LORD I cut them off [מוּל]!	1 all his surrounding enemies, 9 and have cut off [כרת] all your enemies
11 They surrounded me, surrounded me on every side; in the name of the LORD I cut them off!	1 all his surrounding enemies, 9 and have cut off all your enemies,
12 They surrounded me like bees; they went out like a fire among thorns; in the name of the LORD I cut them off!	1 all his surrounding enemies, 9 and have cut off all yourenemies

Yahweh’s deliverance marked David’s career more than that of any of the nation’s other kings. His deliverance was acknowledged as the context for Yahweh’s covenant with him (2 Sam. 7:1) and for his retrospective song “when the Lord delivered him from the hand of all his enemies and from the hand of Saul” (22:1). David also acknowledged this deliverance at Solomon’s coronation when he swore by Yahweh, who “delivered me out of every trouble” (1 Kings 1:29).

The Lord Is My Strength And My Song; He Has Become My Salvation

Additionally, the author of Psalm 118 acknowledged Yahweh’s deliverance with a quotation from the Song of Moses at the Red Sea and a reference to the Lord’s right hand (Exod. 15:2, 6).[37] Though these parallels originated with Moses rather than David, they echoed prominent texts that first-century readers would have presumed were available to David, who was, like them, steeped in the Exodus tradition and drew upon it in his writings.

Psalm 118:13-16	Exodus 15:2, 6
13 I was pushed hard, so that I was falling, but the Lord helped me.
14 The Lord is my strength and my song; he has become my salvation.	2 The Lord is my strength and my song, and he has become my salvation.[38]
15 Glad songs of salvation are in the tents of the righteous: “The right hand of the Lord does valiantly,	6 Your right hand, O Lord, glorious in power,
16 the right hand of the Lord exalts, the right hand of the Lord does valiantly!”	your right hand, O Lord,shatters the enemy.

I Shall Not Die But Live

Nathan’s confrontation with David for his sins against Uriah and Bathsheba seems to be echoed in verse 17. In his response to Nathan’s parable David had unwittingly pronounced his own sentence when he declared, “As the Lord lives, the man who has done this deserves to die” (2 Sam. 12:5). However, upon David’s immediate confession, Nathan assured him, “The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die” (v. 13).

Psalm 118:17	2 Samuel 12:13
17 I shall not die, but I shall live, and recount the deeds of the Lord.	You shall not die

The Lord Has Disciplined Me Severely

Two earlier echoes (Ps. 118:5-7, 10-12) of 2 Samuel 7 would have disposed first-century readers to recall in verse 18 Yahweh’s covenant warning to David that when his son did evil he would be punished, yet Yahweh’s love would never be taken away from him (2 Sam. 7:14, 15). Psalm 118 presents similar ideas in a similar couplet:

Psalm 118:18	2 Samuel 7:14-15
18 The Lord has disciplined me severely,	I will discipline him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men,
but he has not given me over to death.

Having identified echoes of lyrics attributed to David, the narrative of Yahweh’s covenant with him, and the Scriptures available to David, one can see how a first-century audience might attribute the first nineteen verses of Psalm 118 to David. But which event in his life might they have identified as the inspiration for his lyrics? When had he been chastened, but not given over to death? David had been oppressed by Saul and the Philistines, but neither had chastened him for an action that deserved death.

David was confronted for numbering his fighting men (2 Sam. 24:1-17; 1 Chron. 21:1-17). However, both Samuel and Chronicles describe how he was incited to do this (2 Sam. 24:1; 1 Chron 21:1), and the consequent pestilence destroyed “throughout all the territory of Israel” (1 Chron. 21:12) but was kept from David and Jerusalem (v. 14). The greatest danger to David came when he prayed: “Please let your hand, O Lord my God, be against me and against my father’s house. But do not let the plague be on your people” (v. 17). The pestilence is portrayed as focused on the people he had numbered rather than on David, and Yahweh responded to David’s “plea for the land” by averting the plague “from Israel” (2 Sam. 24:25).

David was chastened most severely for his adultery with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah. It was for these sins that he pronounced his own sentence, that he deserved to die, and that he should compensate for it fourfold (2 Sam. 12:5-6). David would suffer the deaths of the child born to Bathsheba, the murder of his eldest son Amnon, the slaughter of Absalom by Joab, and the execution of Adonijah under Solomon. It was primarily through Absalom’s rebellion that Yahweh chastened David. What he had done in secret happened to ten of his wives in daylight (2 Sam. 12:12; 16:21-22). Not only did four of his sons die violently, but the sword also claimed his nephews Amasa and Joab (2 Sam. 20:9-10; 1 Kings 2:28-34). These disasters are at the heart of 2 Samuel 12-20, and they fulfill the word of Yahweh against his house.

David would endure Yahweh’s discipline, survive Absalom’s rebellion, and return to Jerusalem and his throne. This return fits with the triumphal procession described in the last eleven verses of Psalm 118. Rather than David and the elders clothed in sackcloth, falling on their faces, and then building an altar on the Jebusite threshing floor (1 Chron. 21:16-18), Psalm 118 ends with a procession up to an established altar surrounded by cheers and faithful priests. This seems to be the most likely context first-century Jews would find reflected in this psalm. Assuming that they attributed Psalm 118 to David on his return from Absalom’s rebellion, the psalm’s closing verses provide evidence as to why Jesus’s disciples found in it an appropriate expression of their desire to hail him as the son of David.

David’s Triumphal Procession

The entire route of David’s return was not recorded, but 2 Samuel described his welcome at the Jordan, where courtiers and armies from the rebel tribes vied with each other to demonstrate their loyalty to the returning king (2 Sam. 19:15-43). From Gilgal this massive procession would have reached the Mount of Olives, crossed the Kidron Valley, passed the Gihon spring, and entered Jerusalem through the adjacent gate as it ascended to the palace.[39] The king would have arrived on a donkey if his return mirrored his flight (2 Sam. 15:23, 30). Ziba had provided a string of donkeys for David’s escape to the Jordan (2 Sam. 16:2), and the aging king’s triumphant ascent from the Arabah would appropriately have been on a donkey or the royal mule (1 Kings 1:44).

Whether or not the city gate was symbolically opened for the king’s return, David’s passage through it, surrounded by his warriors, signaled a new era. The king had returned, the world that had been overturned was righted, and the royal city welcomed him. The psalmist gave thanks by borrowing from Moses’s Song the same line he had used in verse 14:

Psalm 118:19-21	Exodus 15:2
19 Open to me the gates of righteousness, that I may enter through them and give thanks to the Lord. 20 This is the gate of the Lord; the righteous shall enter through it.
21 I thank you that you have answered me and have become my salvation.	he has become my salvation

When he fled from Jerusalem, David instructed Zadok the priest: “Carry the ark of God back into the city. If I find favor in the eyes of the Lord, he will bring me back and let me see both it and his dwelling place. But if he says, ‘I have no pleasure in you,’ behold, here I am, let him do to me what seems good to him” (2 Sam. 15:25-26). Because the Lord had not given him over to death (Ps. 118:18), the old king could assert, “This is the gate of the Lord; the righteous shall enter through it” (Ps. 118:20). Yahweh had vindicated him. Yahweh was his salvation.

Whereas Psalm 118:1-19 contemplated God’s deliverance from external enemies, verse 22 turns to the psalmist’s rejection by “the builders.” Kidner sees these as opponents from within Israel rather than from the surrounding nations.[40] Though there is no clear evidence from within the psalm that would lead the Jews to understand this, Peter would later read it this way (Acts 4:8-11). The palace revolt led by Absalom and the ensuing civil war involved not only David’s son, but also his counselor Ahithophel and the administrators who would have controlled Jerusalem and the nation in David’s absence. In this reading Absalom’s political entourage would then be the “builders,” and David “the stone the builders rejected,” who became “the capstone” in his triumphant return.

Until verse 21 the psalm is cast in first person singular, with the king reflecting on Yahweh’s deliverance from the nations around him (2 Sam. 8, 11), but in verse 23 its voice moves to first person plural, rejoicing at Yahweh’s salvation. These are the verses from which the Jews who welcomed Jesus appropriated their chants (Matt. 21:9, 15; Mark 11:9-10; Luke 19:38).

Psalm 118:22-25	Citations at Jesus’s Entry
22 The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone. 23 This is the Lord’s doing; it is marvelous in our eyes. 24 This is the day that the Lord has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it.	Matt. 21:42; Mark 12:10-11; Luke 20:17
25 Save us, we pray, O Lord![41] O Lord, we pray, give us success!	Matt. 21:9, 15; Mark 11:9, 10; John 12:13

In Psalm 118:26-27 the welcome of priests can be heard, echoing the ancient Aaronic blessing as they seem to lead the citizens in welcoming the one who comes:[42]

Psalm 118:26-27	Citations at Jesus’s Entry
26 Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!	Matt. 21:9; 23:39; Mark 11:9; Luke 19:38 Num. 6:24-26
We bless you from the house of the Lord.	The Lord bless you
27 The Lord is God, and he has made his light to shine upon us.	The Lord make his face to shineupon you
Bind the festal sacrifice with cords, up to the horns of the altar![43]

Abiathar and Zadok, with “all the Levites,” had remained with the ark during David’s exile (2 Sam. 15:24-29), and upon his return they would have emerged as the leading loyalists. They can be imagined at the head of the citizenry urging one and all to “join in the festal procession,” blessing the king as they welcomed him to his own city. If the protocols of David’s first coronation were followed, he would have renewed his pact with all the people before Yahweh while the tribal elders anointed David king over all Israel (2 Sam. 5:3; 1 Chron. 11:3).

While it is natural to read the “house of the Lord” as a reference to Solomon’s temple, the term “house” in Hebrew can refer to a tent, as when David worshiped “before the Lord” at the tent prepared for the ark (2 Sam. 6:17). The Chronicler calls it “the house of the Lord—the house called the tent,” so that if Psalm 118 reflects David’s return from Absalom’s rebellion, it would have been there that the priests blessed the king (1 Chron. 9:23; 2 Sam. 15:24-25, Ps. 118:26).[44] The altar around which the festal procession gathered would then be the same one upon which David sacrificed burnt offerings when he brought up the ark (2 Sam. 6:17-18), and upon which Solomon offered burnt offerings when he stood before the ark (1 Kings 3:15). There, on the threshing floor of Araunah, the site of the future temple, the “festal procession” would have culminated in burnt offerings, fellowship offerings, and gifts, if it resembled the celebrations that accompanied the ark’s return (2 Sam. 24:18-25; 1 Chron. 16:1-3).[45]

In its concluding lines Psalm 118 repeats its opening lines, echoing the doxology David is said to have taught the Levites.

Psalm 118:28-29	1 Chronicles 16:34
28 You are my God, and I will give thanks to you;	O give thanks to the Lord,
you are my God; I will extol you.
29 Oh give thanks to the Lord, for he is good;	O give thanks to the Lord, for he is good;
for his steadfast love endures forever!	for his steadfast love endures forever!

The assurance that Yahweh’s “steadfast love endures forever” is not simply a refrain attributed to David when he welcomed the ark. It is also Yahweh’s covenant promise: “My steadfast love will not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. And your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me. Your throne shall be established forever” (2 Sam. 7:15-16). David alluded to Yahweh’s unfailing love in the opening verse of his psalm when he turned from his sin against Uriah and Bathsheba: “Have mercy on me, O God, according to your unfailing love; according to your abundant mercy blot out my transgressions” (Ps. 51:1). In the dark days of Absalom’s rebellion Yahweh’s covenant promise of steadfast love remained David’s anchor.

From questions about the author and the context in which first-century Jews could have placed Psalm 118, we turn to events and protocols that arose in the centuries between David’s triumphal return and Jesus’s triumphal entry.

Coronations In Jerusalem

When David learned that Adonijah was promoting his own coronation, he gave instructions for Zadok the priest, Nathan the prophet, and his general Benaiah to set Solomon on the king’s mule and take him down to Gihon, the spring by the gate facing the Mount of Olives. There they would anoint him king, sound the trumpet, and shout “Long live King Solomon!” In this procession the Kerethites and the Pelethites, who had protected David when he fled from Absalom (2 Sam. 15:18), now surrounded Solomon, escorting him along what Mowinckel imagined had become Jerusalem’s via sacra (see above). With crowds playing flutes and shouting, “Long live King Solomon,” the city was “in an uproar” (1 Kings 1:41, 45). At the palace Solomon was received by his father and congratulated by court officials (1 Kings 1:33-48). By duplicating many features of his own return after Absalom’s revolt, David established the protocol for welcoming the rightful kings of Jesse’s lineage.

Revolts against legitimate kings of David’s house were rare, but one account of a coronation in the face of treason has survived. The loyal priest Jehoiada arranged for the return of David’s rightful heir, Joash, in place of the usurper, Queen Athaliah. Because of concerns for his security, the young prince was crowned at the temple rather than at the Gihon spring. “[Jehoiada] brought out the king’s son and put the crown on him and gave him the testimony. And they proclaimed him king and anointed him, and they clapped their hands and said, ‘Long live the king!’ ” (2 Kings 11:12).

Even within the temple courts the coronation attracted so many citizens that Athaliah heard the noise (2 Chron. 23:12-13). Athaliah was executed and with the succession of Joash assured, Jehoiada arranged for the traditional procession: “And he took the captains, the Carites, the guards, and all the people of the land, and they brought the king down from the house of the Lord, marching through the gate of the guards to the king’s house. And he took his seat on the throne of the kings” (2 Kings 11:19). Though the route is different and no donkey or mule is mentioned, this coronation resembles Solomon’s anointing in the presence of Israelite and Gentile guards. The joyful procession shook Jerusalem and threatened the treasonous as it proceeded to the throne.

When the prophet Zechariah pictured the appearance of Zion’s future king, it was in a similar joyful procession:

Psalm 118:15, 19-21	Zechariah 9:9
15 Glad songs of salvation	Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion!
are in the tents of the righteous: . . .	Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem!
19 Open to me the gates of righteousness, . . .	Behold, your king is coming to you;
20 the righteous shall enter through it.	righteous
21 I thank you that you have answered me and have become my salvation.	and having salvation is he, humble and mounted on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

When Judah had no king, Zechariah anticipated his return by weaving strands from David’s return and Solomon’s coronation into Israel’s messianic narrative.[46] After Jesus’s entry the apostles Matthew and John cited Zechariah’s vision and saw Jesus’s appearance as its fulfillment (Matt. 21:5; John 12:14-15).

Parousia In The Ancient World

The practice of parousia in the Jewish world of the Second Temple is a reflection of these processions.[47] Accounts of a dozen “triumphal” entries from this period have been identified by David Catchpole, and episodes from this family of stories illustrate how first-century Jews would have understood Jesus’s entry into Jerusalem within these traditions. Josephus’s account of the appearance of Alexander the Great on the Mount of Olives and his reception by Jerusalem’s high priest illustrates why Catchpole is confident their “ultimate precedents are to be found in Israelite kingship ritual, 1 Kings 1:32-40.”[48]

And when he [the high priest] understood that he [Alexander] was not far from the city, he went out in procession, with the priests and the multitude of the citizens. The procession was venerable, and the manner of it different from that of other nations. It reached to a place called Sapha, which name, translated into Greek, signifies a prospect, for you have thence a prospect both of Jerusalem and of the temple. . . . When he [Alexander] saw the multitude at a distance, in white garments, while the priests stood clothed with fine linen, and the high priest in purple and scarlet clothing . . . he approached by himself. . . . The Jews also did all together, with one voice, salute Alexander, and encompass him about. . . . And when he had . . . given the high priest his right hand, the priests ran along by him, and he came into the city. And when he went up into the temple, he offered sacrifice to God.[49]

Josephus also mentions the path chosen by “an Egyptian false prophet that . . . got together thirty thousand men that were deluded by him; these he led roundabout from the wilderness to the mount which was called the Mount of Olives, and was ready to break into Jerusalem by force from that place.”[50]

First Maccabees 13:51 records elements from a truly triumphal entry. Led by Simon Maccabaeus “the Jews entered it [Jerusalem] with praise and palm branches, and with harps and cymbals and stringed instruments, and with hymns and songs, because a great enemy had been crushed and removed from Israel.” The hymn sung at the entrance of Judas Maccabaeus is recorded as “praises to Heaven, for he is good, for his mercy endures forever” (1 Macc. 4:24; cf. Ps. 118:1-4, 29).[51] More than a century before Jesus appeared, these Jews had employed Psalm 118 to celebrate Judah’s triumphal entrance.

Jesus’s Triumphal Entry

These processional traditions and Zechariah’s prophecy were available to the disciples when Jesus sent them to fetch the colt for his descent of the Mount of Olives and his procession through the city to the temple.

Like David at the Jordan, Jesus was received in Jericho, but rather than by armies and courtiers, he was surrounded by great crowds and petitioned by two blind men who hailed him as the son of David (Matt. 20:29-30). First-century Jews anticipating their Messiah’s coming could remember that Zechariah had designated the Mount of Olives as the place where Yahweh would appear to deliver Israel from her enemies (Zech. 14:3-4), and all four Gospels agree that Jesus approached Jerusalem by way of the Mount of Olives (Matt. 21:1; Mark 11:1; Luke 19:29; John 12:12). From Jacob’s blessing of Judah and Zechariah’s depiction of Zion’s returning king (Gen. 49:11; Zech. 9:9) they would likely have expected their deliverer to arrive on a donkey’s colt, and each of the Gospels observes that he sent for or found a donkey’s colt (Matt. 21:2; Mark 11:2; Luke 19:32-33; John 12:14).

The road from Jericho forked at the Kidron Valley. The path to the south led down past the king’s garden and Ein Rogel where Adonijah had celebrated his coup (1 Kings 1:5-10), while the path on the north went up through the gate by the Gihon spring along the sacred way chosen for Solomon’s coronation. That the crowds chose this way fits best with a traditional coronation. Parallels between these celebrations are striking, as are some contrasts.

Like David’s triumphal return and Solomon’s coronation, Jesus’s appearance was received with shouts of joy by the people. However, the opposition of the priests to Jesus contrasts sharply with the loyalty of “Zadok . . . and all the Levites” (2 Sam. 15:24) and with the high priest’s reception of Alexander. No priests appeared at the Gihon spring to anoint Jesus with oil (cf. 1 Kings 1:39) or call the congregation to “join in the festal procession” (cf. Ps. 118:27, NIV). Like the coronations of David, Solomon, and Joash, the triumphal procession that welcomed Jesus was a threat to those who had usurped the kingdom. Just as Absalom’s supporters, Adonijah, and Athaliah feared the legitimate king, so the religious establishment was threatened by popular support for Jesus and so plotted his death (John 11:45-48). When these processions pushed past the palace to the temple courts, the whole city was stirred (1 Kings 1:40-45; 2 Chron. 23:12-14; Matt. 21:10). When Jesus was presented as the son of David, Jerusalem’s coming king, friends and foes alike recognized what was emerging. The streets were strewn with cloaks in the same gesture of loyalty shown to Jehu (2 Kings 9:13). Even without a ceremonial anointing, a crown, or a throne, the populace, through their reenactment of past processions, proclaimed that Jesus was their king.

Jesus’s opponents are cast as “the builders” who rejected him rather than blessing him. They demanded that he silence the children who continued to chant from Psalm 118:25, “Hosanna to the Son of David” (Matt. 21:15). Jesus, however, defended the crowd’s appropriation of the psalm to himself, and in his parable of the wicked tenants identified the chief priests and scribes as the builders who rejected the stone, who killed the owner’s son so that they could have his vineyard. Jerusalem’s leaders understood they were “the builders” when he quoted, “The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone” (Ps. 118:22; Matt. 21:41-42). Later, when confronted by the temple establishment, Peter would use Psalm 118:22 for the same purposes: “Rulers of the people and elders, if we are being examined today concerning a good deed done to a crippled man, by what means this man has been healed, let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead—by him this man is standing before you well. This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone” (Acts 4:8-11).

In his confrontation with the Pharisees, Jesus quoted from Psalm 118, “For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord’ ” (Matt. 23:39; Luke 13:35). He predicted that the very lines the temple establishment had forbidden the children to repeat would ironically rise from their own lips when the triumphal welcome would be sung again.

Jesus’s identification of himself as “the one who comes” would support the affirmation of the disciples and children who hailed him as the Son of David. It also predicted his return after his imminent rejection.

Conclusion

Finding echoes from Moses and the Former Prophets in Psalm 118 demonstrates the possibilities of charting intertextually vast and lightly explored environments within Israel’s Scriptures. It opens the prospect of surveying regions of coherence that could reveal the inherent integrity of Scripture and clarify the New Testament authors’ use of their Bible.

The convergence of echoes from the narratives of David’s life and from literature that was ascribed to him explains how first-century Jews would reasonably conclude that he was the author of Psalm 118. Details within the psalm explain how they could have connected it with his triumphal return from Absalom’s revolt. Memories of that return and the protocols he established for receiving kings were inherited from their Scriptures, and the more recent appearances of Simon Maccabaeus, false messiahs, and Alexander on the Mount of Olives were available to the populace at large. The apparent spontaneity with which the crowd of disciples employed Psalm 118 suggests that, at least within their circles, these ideas were so commonly held that, without rehearsal, they welcomed Jesus within these conventions and found within the familiar lines of Psalm 118 not only echoes of David’s triumphant return but also echoes that expressed perfectly their own longings for the appearance of the Son of David.

Notes

1. All Scripture quotations are from the English Standard Version unless otherwise noted.
2. James A. Sanders affirms that “every gesture reported had a significance which traditionalists would have understood very well indeed” (“A New Testament Hermeneutic Fabric: Psalm 118 in the Entrance Narrative,” in Early Jewish and Christian Exegesis: Studies in Memory of William Hugh Brownlee, ed. Craig A. Evans and William A. Stinespring [Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987], 177-90.).
3. David R. Catchpole, Jesus and the Politics of His Day (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 227-41; Brent Kinman, “Jesus’ Royal Entry into Jerusalem,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 15 (2005): 223-60; Craig L. Blomberg, Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 63-66; R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 773-774.
4. Kinman, “Jesus’ Royal Entry into Jerusalem,” 246.
5. David M. Stec, The Targum of Psalms, The Aramaic Bible (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2004), 209-10. The Targum does not indicate the author but reads, “The child the builders abandoned was among the sons of Jesse; and he was worthy to be appointed king and ruler. ‘This has come from the presence of the Lord,’ said the builders; ‘it is wonderful before us,’ said the sons of Jesse. ‘This day the Lord has made,’ said the builders; ‘let us rejoice and be glad in it,’ said the sons of Jesse. . . . God, the Lord, has given us light,’ said the tribes of the house of Judah; ‘bind the child (or lamb) for a festal sacrifice with chains until you sacrifice him, and sprinkle his blood on the horns of the altar,’ said Samuel the prophet. ‘You are my God, and I will give thanks in your presence; my God, I will praise you,’ said David. Samuel answered and said, ‘Sing praise, assembly of Israel, give thanks in the presence of the Lord, for he is good, for his goodness is everlasting.’ ”
6. “This refers to king David, for it says, The stone which the builders rejected is become the chief corner-stone” (S. M. Lehrman, trans., Midrash Rabbah, vol. 3, Exodus [New York: Soncino Press: 1983], 442).
7. Jakob J. Petuchowski, “ ‘Hoshi’ah Na’ in Psalm CXVIII 25—A Prayer for Rain,” Vetus Testamentum 5 (1955): 266-71.
8. Sigmund Mowinckel suggests, “The fundamental idea itself, the epiphany of Yahweh as a victorious king, was suggested by carrying the ark in festal procession . . . during the seven days festival of harvest, new year, and enthronement” (The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, vol. 1 [Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1962], 170).
9. Ibid., 170-71. Mowinckel translated Isaiah 35:8 to refer to “the ‘paved way’ . . . on which the processions ‘ascend’ to the temple . . . (i.e. the festal procession).” See also Psalm 84:5.
10. Sanders, “A New Testament Hermeneutic Fabric,” 179-85.
11. Ibid., 189.
12. Franz Keil, Biblical Commentary on the Psalms (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), 223-24.
13. H. C. Leupold, Exposition of Psalms (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1969), 810.
14. Among those classifying Psalm 118 as a psalm of thanksgiving are Hans-Joachim Kraus, Theology of the Psalms, trans. Keith Crim (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg, 1979), 199; Claus Westermann, The Psalms: Structure, Content and Message, trans. Ralph Gehrke (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg, 1980), 98; James L. Mays, The Lord Reigns: A Theological Handbook to the Psalms (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 1994), 144; Hermann Gunkel, An Introduction to the Psalms, trans. James D. Nogalski (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1998), 167; Leslie C. Allen agrees that “this psalm was composed as a royal psalm of thanksgiving for military victory” (Psalms 101-150, Word Biblical Commentary [Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2002], 165). John Goldingay sees it as a psalm for a king or other leader issuing from his relationship with his people and perhaps on an occasion of deliverance, rather than for an established liturgical event (Psalms 90-150, Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms [Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008], 354-59). Geoffrey W. Grogan sees it as a psalm of a “king or a national leader like Nehemiah” for a festival, probably a Passover (Psalms, Two Horizons Old Testament Commentary [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2008], 193).
15. Mitchell Dahood, Psalms III: 101-150 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1970), 155-58. Though Dahood sees a royal individual in the psalm, he interprets the stone as Israel.
16. Seyoon Kim, “Jesus—The Son of God, the Stone, the Son of Man, and the Servant: The Role of Zechariah in the Self-Designations of Jesus,” in Tradition and Interpretation in the New Testament: Essays in Honor of E. Earle Ellis for His 60th Birthday, ed. G. F. Hawthorne and O. Betz (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 134-48.
17. Fred Blumenthal, “Psalm 118, ” The Jewish Bible Quarterly 39 (2011): 115-17.
18. Rikk E. Watts, “The Lord’s House and David’s Lord: The Psalms and Mark’s Perspective on Jesus and the Temple,” Biblical Interpretation 15 (2007): 307-22.
19. Ibid., 307.
20. Gregory K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2011), 681.
21. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 773-74.
22. Ibid., 775-82.
23. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 1:180.
24. Ibid., 1:175. Second Samuel 6 is “a reflection of the ritual of this consecration festival.” The Philistines returned the ark to Beth Shemesh, west of Jerusalem, so an explanation is needed as to why it was taken around to the east of the city. Michal observed its procession from a window (2 Sam. 6:16), presumably in the palace south of Araunah’s threshing floor, suggesting that David had already chosen the street from the Gihon Gate as the via sacra proposed by Mowinckel.
25. Richard Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (London: Yale University Press, 1993).
26. Andrew C. Brunson, Psalm 118 in the Gospel of John: An Intertextual Study on the New Exodus Pattern in the Theology of John (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003), 17.
27. Ibid., 19.
28. Ibid., 37.
29. The idea of Yahweh’s enduring love appears in Torah. It was on account of his enduring love that Yahweh delivered the Israelites at the Red Sea (Exod. 15:13), chose them, and gave them the land (Deut. 7:7-9). Yahweh’s enduring love was integral to the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:6), and it was pivotal in the Lord’s response when they worshiped the golden calf (Exod. 34:6, 7) and failed to take the land (Num. 14:18). It prevented Yahweh from allowing Balaam to curse Israel (Deut. 23:5).
30. 1 Chron. 16:34, 41; 2 Chron. 5:13; 7:3; 7:6; 20:21; Ezra 3:11; Pss. 100:5; 106:1; 107:1; 118:1, 2, 3, 4, 29; 136:1-26 (26 times); 138:8; Jer. 33:11.
31. Frank Lothar Hossfeld and Eric Zenger treat 1 Chronicles 16 as exilic rather than the source of this aphorism (Psalms 3 [Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2011], 237). First-century Jews, however, would have thought of David’s song for the ark’s return in the historical setting that Chronicles describes, rather than in terms of Chronicles’ date of authorship.
32. The lyrics were sung when Jehoshaphat led the nation to battle (2 Chron. 20:21) and when the foundation of the second temple was laid (Ezra 3:10, 11), as Jeremiah predicted (Jer. 33:10-11).
33. The occurrence in Psalm 138:8 is attributed to David. Psalm 136 repeats the refrain as it reviews events that led up to David’s time; it could have been penned by David or his musicians. Psalms 106 and 107 are part of a historical series whose events led off to exile and back. Psalm 100, whose author is not named, is a psalm “for giving thanks.” Note especially verses 4 and 5
34. Pss. 5:11; 7:1; 11:1; 14:6; 16:1; 17:7; 18:2, 30; 25:20; 28:8; 31:1, 2, 4, 19; 34:8, 22; 36:7; 37:40; 46:2; 52:7; 57:1; 59:16; 61:3, 4; 62:7, 8; 64:10; 141:8; 142:5; 143:9; 144:2.
35. Pss. 2:12; 71:1, 3, 7; 91:2, 4, 9; 94:22; 118:8, 9.
36. Ps. 43:2, to the Sons of Korah and Ps. 73:28, to Asaph.
37. Derek Kidner, Psalms 73-150, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (London: InterVarsity, 1973), 414.
38. Isaiah also echoed this phrase: “Surely God is my salvation; I will trust and not be afraid. The Lord, the Lord himself, is my strength and my defense; he has become my salvation” (Isa. 12:2).
39. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 1:170-71
40. Kidner, Psalms 73-150, 415.
41. Joseph Fitzmyer concludes that the Greek ῾ωσαννά could represent an Aramaized form of the Hebrew imperative in Psalm 118:25 (Dead Sea Scrolls and Christian Origins [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000], 129). The term represents a cry used to greet pilgrims coming to Jerusalem for feasts. The Gospel texts of Mark and Matthew suggest that the term was already a cry of greeting or homage rather than the Hebrew cry for help. It cannot be demonstrated that “hosanna” was a messianic supplication in pre-Christian Judaism.
42. This reconstruction departs from Mowinckel, who holds, “The epiphany of Yahweh as a victorious king . . . was suggested by carrying the ark in festal procession . . . during the seven days festival of harvest, new year, and enthronement” (The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 1:170). Echoes of the priestly blessing are detected by Leslie Allen (Psalms 101-150, 165).
43. Brunson observes that the targum on Psalm 118:27 has Samuel the prophet saying, “Tie the lamb with chains for a festival sacrifice until you have offered it and sprinkled its blood on the horns of the altar” (Psalm 118 in the Gospel of John, 39).
44. See also Psalms 5:7; 26:8; 36:8; 65:4; 69:9, psalms attributed to David that speak of “your house,” and Psalms 23:6 and 27:4, which specify “the house of the Lord.”
45. If Psalm 118 reflects events before Solomon built the temple, then it is less likely that first-century Jews would have found in these verses a metaphor of Jesus as the new temple, as suggested by Kim, “Jesus—The Son of God, the Stone, the Son of Man, and the Servant” 134-48; Watts, “The Lord’s House and David’s Lord,” 314; and Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 681.
46. France observes the same when he notes: “Zechariah’s prophecy pictures David retracing his outward route over the Mount of Olives (2 Sam. 15:30) and riding on the donkey which has been provided for him (2 Sam. 16:1-2)” (The Gospel of Matthew, 774 n. 15).
47. Brent Kinman, “Jesus’ Parousia, a ‘Triumphal’ Entry, and the Fate of Jerusalem (Luke 19:28-44),” Journal of Biblical Literature 118 (1999): 279-94.
48. Catchpole, Jesus and the Politics of His Day, 319.
49. Josephus, Antiquities, 2.8.4-5
50. Josephus, Jewish Wars 2.13.5. See also Antiquities 20.8.6.
51. Unlike Jehoshaphat who sang the same song on the way to battle (2 Chron. 20:21), Simon sang this song on his return from battle, perhaps inspired by the prediction in Jeremiah 33:10-11. His replacement of “Give thanks to the Lord” with “praises to Heaven” may be seen as a pious avoidance of the name of God.