Psalm 2 under the Light of the New Testament

Psalm 2 is a foundational text for understanding the New Testament’s portrayal of Jesus as the exalted Son and King. While it originally spoke to events in David’s time, the way the New Testament authors invoke and interpret this psalm reveals a deeper fulfillment in the person and work of Christ. This post examines how Psalm 2 is read through the lens of the New Testament, especially in relation to Christ’s death, resurrection, ascension, and authority over the nations

Psalm 2, though rooted in the historical context of David’s time, finds its “substance” fulfilled in Christ. As Calvin writes, “But it is now high time to come to the substance of the type.”[1] Calvin’s observation rightly distinguishes substance from type and resists interpreting Psalm 2 in terms of double fulfillment. Moreover, biblical theologians must not read the Old Testament as though the New does not exist.[2] Rather, they must read the Old through the light of the New. Failing to do so can result in a “biblical” theology that outwardly affirms the authority of both Testaments, “yet in practice, the normative authority of the New is denied.”[3]

Psalm 2:1–2 asks rhetorically, “Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth take their stand, and the rulers conspire together against the Lord and his Anointed One.” The Psalmist expresses indignation at those who rebel against God and his anointed King. Luke, in Acts 4:25–26, quotes this passage and applies it directly to Christ’s crucifixion. The “kings” and “rulers” conspired to put the Lord’s Anointed to death, yet did so according to God’s predetermined will (Acts 4:28).

Psalm 2:7 reads, “I will declare the Lord’s decree. He said to me, ‘You are my Son; today I have become your Father.’” In its original context, this was royal adoption language used to install the Davidic king (cf. 2 Sam 7:14; Ps 89:26–27). But in Acts 13:33, Paul applies it to Christ’s resurrection, viewing it as the fulfillment of the promise made to the patriarchs (Acts 13:32). Hebrews also cites this verse (Heb 1:5; 5:5), interpreting it in relation to Christ’s superiority to angels and his entrance into priestly office through resurrection.

Psalm 2:9 declares, “You will break them with an iron scepter; you will shatter them like pottery.” Revelation 2:26–28 applies this promise to the reign of Christ through his saints: “The one who conquers and who keeps my works to the end: I will give him authority over the nations—and he will rule [poimanei, lit. ‘shepherd’] them with an iron scepter; he will shatter them like pottery—just as I have received this from my Father.” This last clause is especially instructive, as it mirrors Jesus’ resurrection pronouncement in Matthew 28:18: “All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth.” Luke similarly concludes with Jesus ascending into heaven (Luke 24:51) after promising his disciples they will be “empowered from on high” (Luke 24:49).

Jesus’ charge to conquer and persevere (Rev 2:26) is best understood as a call to endure Jewish persecution and “resist Judaic heresy,” holding “firm against any external pressures from ‘the synagogue of Satan’ (Rev 2:9; 3:9).”[4] The victory and vindication promised will come in the judgment and destruction of Jerusalem. The Messiah’s people will receive authority over the nations, and Israel will be “the first nation that will fall under Christ’s rule—by judgment, rather than conversion.”[5]

Taken together, these New Testament appropriations of Psalm 2 demonstrate that the psalm is fulfilled in Christ’s death, resurrection, ascension, exaltation, and rule and reign. The interpretation offered here sees the Son of Man accomplishing redemption for his people in the first century, fulfilling God’s promises to Israel (Acts 26:6; Rom 15:8), and receiving dominion, power, glory, and a kingdom from the right hand of God—for the global advancement of God’s glory.

[1] John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, trans. James Anderson (Logos Bible Software, 2010), 11.

[2] Peter W. L. Walker, Jesus and the Holy City: New Testament Perspectives on Jerusalem (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 313.

[3] Walker, Jesus and the Holy City, 314.

[4] Kenneth Gentry, The Divorce of Israel Volume I (Bravera Holdings LLC, 2023), 465.

[5] Gentry, The Divorce of Israel Volume I, 465.

Comments

St. John Chrysostom — for God is simple

Below is part of the introductory section to my exposition of John Chrysostom’s doctrine of God. I posted it because I thought it was fascinating to find such an important theologian known for avoiding (even having a disdain of) speculative theology refer to the classical doctrine of divine simplicity as common place in his thoroughly biblical doctrine of God. Toward the end I include a link to my full exposition. John Chrysostom (ca. 347–407) was the archbishop of Constantinople. Being the most prolific of all the Eastern fathers, he fought against the ecclesiastical and political leaders for their abuse of authority. He was called Chrysostom (meaning “golden-mouthed”) for his eloquent sermons. [1] This most distinguished of Greek patristic preachers excelled in spiritual and moral application in the Antiochene tradition of literal exegesis, largely disinterested, even untutored in speculative and controversial theology. [2] On the Incomprehensible Nature of G...

Gregory of Nyssa: Trinity–Not Tri-deity

Gregory, a bishop of Nyssa in 371, was part of the Cappadocian trio, and was instrumental in the development of Trinitarian orthodoxy. His theological prowess proved vital in response to the Arian and Sabellian heresies. Key to Gregory’s theology we find “an emergence of a pro-Nicene ‘grammar’ of divinity through his developed account of divine power,” [1] conceived through a nature-power-activity formulation revealed in the created order and articulated in Scripture. Understanding the Triune God in this manner afforded a conception of the Trinity that was logical and thoroughly biblical. And this letter is paradigmatic on Gregory’s account of the divine nature. (* This article was later published with Credo Magazine, titled, “ The Grammar of Divinity (On Theology). ” See link below) To Ablabius, though short, is a polemical address whereby Gregory lays out a complex argument in response to the claim that three Divine Persons equal three gods. Basically put, Ablabius (his opponent,...

“A New Heaven and New Earth” ~ A (Partial) Preterist Reading of Isaiah 65:17–25

When God says he will create a new heaven and a new earth, what will this new heaven and earth be like? Is it describing an obliteration of the material world, with a new material heaven and earth to follow? Early Church Father Jerome did not see a destruction of the elements; instead, he saw newness , a change into something better. Commenting on this passage, he writes, “The Apostle Paul said, ‘for the form of this world is perishing’ [1Co 7:31]. Notice that he said ‘form,’ not ‘substance.’”[1] Thomas Aquinas sees the new heavens and earth to be “the restoration of goods, for behold I create a new heavens , with new help from heaven, and a new earth , new benefits from the earth; this refers to the day of judgment, when the world will be renewed to the glory of the saints: the former things have passed away (Re 21:4).”[2] Closer to the immediate historical context, another understanding sees this as “a hyperbolic expression of the future restoration of the people of Judah after the ...

Clement of Alexandria: Nuances of the Classical God

Clement of Alexandria (c. 150–c. 215) was the head of the Catechetical School of Alexandria (c. 190), and the teacher of Origen. Concerned that Christianity is not seen as an unsophisticated religion, Clement sought to reconcile his faith with the best of Greek philosophy, specifically in the usefulness of Middle Platonism.[1] He believed that the kernels of truth found in Plato and Greek Philosophy were preparatory for the Gentiles in leading them to Christ, just as the Law was a guide or guardian for the Hebrews. Clement’s esoteric exegesis and speculative theology emphasized a higher knowledge, but this knowledge was obtained only through the Logos.

Gregory of Nazianzus: The Trinity - Not a Collection of Elements

Gregory of Nazianzus One of the Cappadocian fathers, Gregory of Nazianzus (c.330–389), given the title, “The Theologian,” was instrumental in the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, specifically the distinct terms to describe the Persons of the Godhead (Unbegotten, eternally begotten, and procession). Gregory’s main contribution to the development of Christology was in his opposition to Apollinarius. He argued that when Adam fell, all of humanity fell in him; therefore, that fallen nature must be fully united to the Son—body, soul, and mind; ‘for the unassumed is the unhealed’. Gregory’s Doctrine of the Trinity His clearest statement on the Trinity is found in his Oration 25.15–18. Oration 25 is part of a series of sermons delivered in 380. As a gesture of gratitude, Gregory dedicates Oration 25 to Christian philosopher Maximus the Cynic, as a sort of ‘charge’ for him to push forward and remain strong in the orthodox teachings of the faith. And these sections ar...

A Brief Exposition of Augustine's Doctrine of Divine Immutability

To much of the Western world, Augustine has no rival. He is the preeminent—uninspired—theologian of the Christian faith. When reading the titans of the church—i.e., Aquinas, Luther, and Calvin—Augustine’s theology and ideas are voluminously parroted all throughout their writings. His influence is unparalleled. Even the secular world sees Augustine as a mammoth figure in the shaping of human history. And its Augustine’s doctrine of God we will divert our attention to, looking specifically at his articulation of divine immutability Augustine’s doctrine of God is classical, through and through. He writes, “There is One invisible, from whom, as the Creator and First Cause, all things seen by us derive their being: He is supreme, eternal, unchangeable, and comprehensible by none save Himself alone” ( Ep . 232.5).[1] When reading his works, the doctrine of immutability is paramount, coming forth repeatedly. For Augustine, immutability, or God’s unchangeableness, is consequential ...

St. Basil: Identity of Language – Ekonomia and Theologia

Below is an excerpt from my exposition of St. Basil[1], from his treatise, On the Spirit . I thought it was a helpful example of doing theology correctly—the way of the Great Tradition. He begins this work examining the heretics’ (the Arians) “use of syllables” to distort the doctrine of the Trinity. They posit that when Scripture uses prepositional phrases (i.e., syllables) speaking of the activity of God, these phrases create a subordinate ranking, which makes the Son and the Spirit of a different nature from the Father. The heresy is promoted as such: In the words of the apostle: “‘One God and Father of whom are all things, . . . and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things’ (1 Cor 8:6) ‘Whatever, then,’ he goes on, ‘is the relation of these terms to one another, such will be the relation of the natures indicated by them; and as the term ‘of whom’ is unlike the term ‘by whom,’ so is the Father unlike the Son” ( Spir . 2.4). And following this manner of thought, the differing p...

Bahnsen vs. Zanchi | Scriptural Law vs. Natural Law – Part 1 of 2 – Bahnsen

Introduction In the Twitter world (actually, the “X” world), Christian Nationalism is a controversial topic. Those critical of it end up putting theonomy under the crosshairs. I am a recent convert (almost a year) to postmillennialism (PM), and theonomy has a close relationship with it. The relationship is not essential ; postmillennialism does not necessarily entail theonomy, nor vice-versa (I sound like a philosopher). Before moving to a PM perspective, I had only heard negative remarks about theonomy, such as, “theonomists believe the entire Mosaic law is binding on Christians, even stoning your children.” Or “theonomists believe we should have a theocracy like OT Israel.” And that “theonomists seek to impose the kingdom of God through use of the sword, by having a state enforced religion.” Or “theonomists see America as God’s chosen nation.” Theonomy sounds intense. Theonomy sounds extreme. Theonomy sounds un-Christian. In the spring of 2023, I immersed myself ...

Athanasius: Divine Simplicity as True Existence

Early Church Father, Athanasius (c. 296–373) Bishop of Alexandria (Egypt) was a giant figure in the advancement and preservation of orthodox Christianity. He labored more than anyone to bring about the triumph of the orthodox Nicene faith over Arianism, which promoted the view that Christ, though glorious and supreme, was a created being. Athanasius’ consistent tenacity in defending the full deity of Christ spanned forty-five years over which he was exiled five times. But his efforts kept the Orthodox faith from being eclipsed by Arian cohorts. As I have been reading through his works, in preparation for a class on the essence and attributes of God, I have been paying close attention the doctrine of divine simplicity. And so, the body of this essay will be an exposition of Athanasius’ views on simplicity from his treatise Contra Gentes ( Against the Heathens ). In this treatise, Athanasius establishes Christian theism against the pantheistic philosophies that the heathens held. Panthe...

Tertullian: God Creates in (by) Wisdom

Early Church Father, Tertullian (c. AD 160–225), whose writings were instrumental in the formation of Christian doctrine, specifically his treatment of the doctrine of Trinity, [1] the hypostatic union, original sin, and Christ’s virgin birth and bodily resurrection, also wrote a treatise defending the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo , the teaching that God created the cosmos out of nothing. Up until the second century, “the biblical presentation of the Almighty God who created the world and continued to work in history as creator, possessed for early Christianity an overwhelming self-evidence and was not perceived as a metaphysical problem.” [2] But as the preaching of Christ began to spread through the Hellenistic (and polytheistic) world, the Greek metaphysical and philosophical systems posed a challenge for Christian missionary efforts. For the early church, and for orthodox Christianity, the doctrine of “ creatio ex nihilo is a consequence of monotheism.” [3] The Apologists of t...

Read. Reflect. Write.

Search This Blog