Is Jesus the Messianic Davidide of Psalm 2?
Who is the “Son” in Psalm 2?
The NT uses Psalm 2 in a variety of contexts as a prophecy of Jesus, the Son of David. The Psalm is indeed curious as it appears to expand the land promise to David and to narrow the line promise to one definite Son. To understand the passage and its application to Jesus, let’s take a little space to set the song in its context.
The book of Psalms (Hebrew tehilîm) is the first of the collection of writings (kethubîm) in the Hebrew Tanak (Hebrew Bible). If Psalm one resembles the wisdom sayings of the Proverbs, then Psalm two would seem to be “at home among the Prophets.”[1] While it is nearly certain that the two psalms had different composers, it also seems clear that concepts established in the first psalm carry over into the second in a kind of “programmatic introduction.”[2] The reader enters the sanctum of the Psalter by first passing through the purification of Torah faithfulness (Ps 1) and is reminded that God is King seated on Heaven’s throne (Ps 2). If the first psalm performs a priestly function, allowing the worshiper entrance into the song book, then the second psalm reassures the worshiper that God is sovereign. The wise are invited to “meditate,” hagah (הגה) on the Word of the Lord which nourishes the soul (Ps 1:2), while the nations “meditate,” hagah (הגה) on how they might overthrow Yahweh and his meshiach (Ps 2:1). The righteous take heed to the decree of Yahweh that they may avoid certain destruction (2:5, 7). The foolish ignore his Word to their own detriment—blown away like wispy chaff (Ps 1:4) and shattered like earthenware by the meshiach’s iron scepter (2:9). Chapter one begins with an indicative statement about how blessed is the man who walks according to Torah (Ps 1:2). Chapter two ends with an invitation to be blessed by taking refuge in the son (2:12), forming a literary inclusio.[3]
But who is the son-king envisioned by the Psalmist in chapter two? Since neither David nor Solomon are mentioned by name, then, to whom does the vocation of viceregency belong and what is the nature of the salvation he offers to the nations? Many answers have been suggested to these questions including the nation of Israel, David’s lineage, a yet future conquering Messianic king of Israel, and Jesus, the pre-incarnate Son.[4] Historical-critical scholars have suggested that Psalm 2:1–12 (along with all the Royal Psalms) is merely a literary fiction invented to assuage the fears of a nation in a later era of decline.[5]
However, I think that Psalm 2:1–12 contains a prospective and forward-looking typology of a future “Davidide” whose inheritance is not merely the “land” or an everlasting “line” but instead consists of the whole earth, including the nations (2:2, 6, 7, 8, 12).[6] This language is not merely poetic hyperbole which mirrors or mimics Near Eastern royal ideology.[7] The Psalm introduces an expansive promise to a particular son. Yahweh’s response to the raging nations is the terrifying announcement of his world-righting salvation in the son. This future Davidide will offer refuge to all nations to escape the coming wrath and experience the blessings of Torah life.
Because this motif is intrinsic to the psalm then it need not be anachronistically read back into the text from a realized NT Christology. This can be seen in the words and phrases in the Psalm that which suggest a future, quintessential Davidic king, and the salvation he brings is not mere security and rest from border wars. After an exposition of the passage, I will briefly examine key lateral texts within the Psalter and then the prophets which project the psalm forward to a future perfected Davidic reign. If my interpretation of Psalm 2:1–12 is correct, then there should be a tradition-trajectory that emerges from the psalm in favor of its eschatological fulfillment.[8]
Overview of Psalm 2
Psalm 2 can be divided into four sections. Section one (vv. 1–3) presents the challenge of the nations. The nations rage and conspire against Yahweh and his anointed one. Section two (vv. 4–6) is Yahweh’s response. Yahweh’s ridicule is followed by his anger and wrath and the election of “a king in Zion.” Section three (vv. 7–9) contains Yahweh’s decree of a prophet-son who inherits the nations and all the earth. Section four (vv. 10-12) follows the son’s reign as he brings rebel nations into subjection; Yahweh warns and invites the nations to take refuge in the son before it is too late.
Rebellion in the Realm (2:1-3)
The first verse of the chapter poses the question, “Why rage?” lāmah rāgešu (לָ֭מָּה רָגְשׁ֣וּ) which suggests a “roiling commotion” or a “vicious murmuring” among the nations.[9] The parallelism in the first sentence balances between “the people” and “the nations” whose conspiracies are utter folly.[10] The rhetorical question presents a poetic irony—raucous, unruly (רגשׁ) nations, and chattering, conspiring (לְאֹם) people are not what the reader would initially expect from nations under the lordship of a benevolent Sovereign. But the “people” le’ummîm (לאמים) are “warriors” or better, “warring countries”[11] whose insatiable thirst for conflict is never slaked.
Verse two clarifies who it is doing the raging and plotting. It is the “kings of earth,” melechi-eretz (מַלְכֵי־אֶ֗רֶץ) who represent the raging nations, and the “rulers who convene together,” ve-roaznim nowsdu-yahad (וְרֹוזְנִ֥ים נֹֽוסְדוּ)—they are the culprits. The psalmist collapses the idea of “rulers” and “nations” together. The nations have little choice regarding the maneuvering and scheming of their leaders. As Goldingay observes, “It is always the misfortune of the former to be implicated in the actions of the latter.”[12] It is against Yahweh and his “anointed one” meshiach (מָשִׁיחַ) that the kings and rulers collude together and lead the nations into a pointless war with the only true God (2:2b).
The plot appears to be universal, clandestine, and resolute. All together the rulers “take their stand” yātsab (יצב), an irony as the people of Israel are the ones who yātsab “stand” before the LORD (Ex 2:3; 14:13; 19:17; Nu 11:16; Jr 46:4; Hab 2:1). But here the word evidently reaches back into the prologue of the Psalter. It is the wicked and ungodly who steadfastly “stand” yātsab (יצב) in the path of sinners (Ps 1:1b) and who “sit” (ישׁב) in the seat of mockers (1:1c). Chapter two offers more specificity as we discover the identity of these scoffers. In solidarity with the nations they rule, the earth-kings sit enthroned in the halls of power and authority, making a firm stand against Yahweh and his messiah.
The next two lines in the poem depict the intention and motivation of the earth-kings: “let us tear off their fetters mōserāh (מוֹסֵרָה) and throw off their ropes abōt (עֲבֹת)” (2:3). Goldingay states, “Literal ‘fetters’ are the ropes by which human beings constrain animals to get them to serve them (e.g., Job 39:5), specifically the ropes linked to a yoke (e.g., Jer. 27:2).”[13] Craigie agrees, “The words ‘fetters’ and ‘cords’ may simply imply captivity (viz. the foreign nations were vassal states), but G [LXX] implies the imagery of a yoke, attached by cords, which the nations cast off like rebellious oxen.”[14] Undoubtedly, the reign of God is unwanted and perceived to be a burdensome and oppressive yoke.[15]
The rulers, in solidarity with the nations they represent, collaborate, and conspire together in a worldwide scheme against Yahweh and his messiah to throw off the yoke of divine rule. This unexpected uprising requires a response. The next stanza will make clear why scheming against Yahweh is ill-advised.
Yahweh’s Response (2:4–6)
The content of the next stanza contrasts with the first but matches its structure. The first stanza introduced what the nations were plotting to do with two lines, recording their words in a third line. The psalmist parallels that structure here in vv. 4–6. The first two lines describing Yahweh’s response and a third line recording God’s words.[16] Yahweh is the “the one enthroned in heaven” (2:4a). Enthroned is yoseb ba’samayim (יֹושֵׁ֣ב בַּשָּׁמַ֣יִם) literally “he who sits in heaven.” Yahweh’s enthronement in the heavens both signifies his exalted position over them and his ability to eavesdrop on their internal machinations.[17] The nations’ efforts evoke Yahweh’s “laughter” yitzach (שׂחק) and the “Lord’s derision” yilag adonai (אֲ֝דֹנָ֗י יִלְעַג). The one who is enthroned in heaven is the Sovereign Lord against whom there is no hope of waging war, the very suggestion of which is laughable. To do so is to choose a tragic end.
Yahweh is initially amused at their conspiracies, though this laughter soon morphs into severity. He speaks “in wrath and in his displeasure” be’apow uvaharono (בְאַפֹּ֑ו וּֽבַחֲרֹונֹ֥ו) which “terrifies” bahal (בהל) the earth-kings (2:5). His wrath is af (אַף), originally meaning “to smell” or “snort” as in a frightening warhorse who snorts in anger, clacking his hoofs at the sight of an imminent battle (Job 39:19–25).[18] This is the same strong hand that brought Israel out of Egypt with bahal (בהל) “terrifying power” (Dt 26:8; 34:12). Yahweh strikes fear in the hearts of the earth-kings because he himself is bahal (בהל) “terrifying” (Job 13:11; Isa 2:19, 21; Isa 6:1–6).[19] In contrast to the gods of the Ancient Near East who were often depicted in ghastly therianthropic forms, the “terror of Yahweh” was most often portrayed in terms of his absolute power and supremacy. He is the God who is clothed in majesty, wrapped in light, in whose glorious presence the whole earth trembles (Ps 104). The various “Enthronement Psalms” depict Yahweh in grandiose terms, his terror is an effect of his effulgence rather than the grisly forms of primordial eastern gods (Ps 47; Ps 93).[20]
The surrounding nations were well aware of the fame Yahweh brought himself through Israel’s conquest in the land.[21] His glory and honor remain intact irrespective of the shameful ations of Israel’s kings or leaders, and the dishonor those actions might bring them in succeeding reigns.[22] The unleashing of God’s divine power is a frightening prospect but should not be mistaken for a mere dreamy or ponderous abstraction. God instantiates his wrath in the rule of a divine son, “I have installed my king on Zion, my holy mountain” (2:6). This has the intended effect of heightening the earth-kings’ alarm. In response to the nations’ plan to cast off Yahweh’s yoke the God of heaven has an earthly counterpart—a viceregent installed on his holy mount Zion (צִיּוֹן), presumably in Jerusalem but the word can also be used as a metonym for the whole of Israel.[23] The true God of heaven is planning a response of war, the goal of which was always to bring “rest” to his creation—to restore it to harmony and alignment under his sovereign care.
How could God’s installed meshiach “rest” from war? Given Israel’s history, war and spirituality had a symbiotic relationship, “as a sacred act that often-required spiritual preparation (Num. 21:2; Dt 23:9-14; Josh. 3:5).”[24] Yahweh was always understood to be a divine warrior who goes into battle ahead of his people to secure their victories. Next to Moses’ song of deliverance, the song of national victory (Ex. 15:1-12) is arguably the nations’ most prominent psalm.[25] This supreme and exalted “war-God” is epitomized in the ark of the covenant, a symbol that was central to Israel’s worship and their wars against the nations (Joshua 3:6, 11).
The God who is enthroned in heaven scoffs at any attempt to shake off his rule, and responds to these vain plots with a panic-inducing message: He has installed a son-king in Israel. How blessed would the nations be if they did not walk in the counsel of the wicked, nor stand resolutely in the pathway of sinners nor sit enthroned in the company of mockers (Ps 1:1). But sadly, should the earth-kings persist in their rebellion, they will neither be blessed nor happy.
Yahweh’s Decree (2:7–9)
Yahweh’s decree is now on the lips of the anointed meshiach (2:7a). God’s appointed king speaks: “He said to me, ‘You are my Son; today I have become your Father’” (2:7b). The decree is unambiguously from Yahweh. It voices the son’s investiture of divine authority. Yahweh’s viceregent is his “son” ben (בֵּן) which is a loan word from Aramaic. To some this suggests its anachronistic function. Craigie rejects this view and reminds the reader that the message was originally addressed to Aramaic speaking kings and as such the “theme nicely counteracts the rulers’ rebellion, which was said to be directed against both God and his anointed.”[26] The son is begotten yelad (ילד) of the LORD. Yelad can mean “to give birth” in a literal sense (Gen 3:16, עֵת לֶדֶת Job 39:1).[27] But can also be used metaphorically to “conceive of trouble” (Job 15:35; 7:15) or of God conceiving the nation of Israel (Num 11:12; Deut 32:18) and even the “birthing” of God’s decree (Zeph 2:2). As far back as Exodus 4:22–23, Israel can be spoken of collectively as “the firstborn son” of whom God says, “It is out of Egypt that I have called my son” (Hos 11:1). Kings in David’s line could be referred to as “royal sons” despite their venality and subsequent judgment (Ezek 21:10). As far as adjacent cultures, in “both art and text, Egyptian royal ideology consistently maintains that the king is the image and offspring of the deity.”[28] This can be seen in depictions of royal heirs holding the king’s scepter, such as the tomb portrait from abd el-Qurna, during the reign of Thutmose IV (1400-1390 BC).[29] Neo-Assyrian texts indicate that divine son-kings were the “shepherds” of their people and the under-shepherds of the gods.[30] In any case, the decree to “become my son” is most often used as a coronation rite.
Since the meshiach heard the decree given to him by Yahweh, this implies an “inaugural becoming” rather than a literal statement about the son’s coming into existence. The possibility of a literal birth may still be in view, provided the son-king was present in an unembodied form to hear the decree prior to creation. But that idea, while certainly part of New Testament revelation, does not seem present in this text.[31] In the psalm, vocation, more than ontology, is in view. Goldingay concurs, “Yhwh did not bring him into being then but did enter into a fatherly commitment to him in adopting him as son. The words uttered on that occasion made him heir to his father’s wealth and authority and are the undergirding of his position now.”[32] In the surrounding ANE cultures, the equivalent phrase “you are my son” is typical coronation language, “a performative declaration of adoption.”[33] The son-king now brings about the Father-king’s will and actualizes his “heavenly” reign on the earth.
The inheritance clause (2:8) poetically directs the son to ask Yahweh who intends to give “the nations” gōyim (גֹ֭ויִם) to him. These are presumably the same gōyim who challenged Yahweh’s rule to begin with (2:1). The promise includes “the ends of the earth” apse eretz (אַפְסֵי־אָֽרֶץ), or “the ends of the land.” While the translation “ends of the lands” is certainly possible, it doesn’t quite seem to match the universality of Yahweh’s rule nor the mood of this inheritance passage.
Like Solomon, the son-king is told to “ask of me” (1 Kgs 3:5). All kings acceded to their thrones with power and authority, but “for the Davidic kings, that power and authority were received from God and exercised under his dominion.”[34] Solomon’s response to this open-ended invitation was to request wisdom. Unlike Solomon, the son of Psalm 2:7 is told to ask for the inheritance of the nations and the ends of the earth. The inheritance clause is more expansive than the original promise given to David and Solomon in 2 Sam 7:10-14 which was for a “place” and an enduring “line.” This inheritance “will be given” in the future presuming the son will ask for it. It is at this point that the eschatological character of the promise is unmistakable. Childs agrees,
The weight of the psalm falls on God’s claim of the whole earth as his possession, and the warning of his coming wrath against the presumption of earthly rulers. In other words, the psalm has been given an eschatological ring, both by its position in the Psalter and by the attachment of new meaning to the older vocabulary through the influence of the prophetic message (cf. Jer. 23.5; Ezek. 34:23)…what earthly king could have come to mind other than God’s Messiah?[35]
Psalm 2 curiously does not mention David (nor Solomon) by name, though it does trade heavily on Davidic motifs. The covenant is repeated in 1 Chronicles 17 and I reference them below:
2 Sam 7:10–11
And I will provide a place for my people Israel and will plant them so that they can have a home of their own and no longer be disturbed. Wicked people will not oppress them anymore, as they did at the beginning 11 and have done ever since the time I appointed leaders over my people Israel. I will also give you rest from all your enemies.
1 Chron 17:9–10
And I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and I will plant them, and they shall dwell in their place and be in anguish no longer. And wicked men will no longer wear them down as before, from the day that I commanded judges over my people Israel. And I will subdue all your enemies.[36]
This assurance comes as a response to David’s desire to provide God a “place” in the form of a temple (2 Sam 7:10). One cannot help but see that a strong theme of security in the land permeates the promise. Verses 10–11 end with God promising to give him “rest” nūach (נוח) from all his enemies, presumably after he has fought many wars to secure the kingdom. This word is used with reference to Noah’s nuach after the ordeal of the flood (Gen 8:4); the locusts plaguing Egypt in nuach, “resting” on all the land of God’s enemies (Ex 10:14); of Moses’s hands raised to secure victory in the battle against the king of Amalek, but when Moses’ arms fell (nuach), the tide of the war turned (Ex 17:11), the promise to Joshua that he would nuach in the promised land after a bloody and horrific war against am ha’ eretz “peoples of the lands” (Josh 1:13; 21:44; 22:4; 23:1). Of David, וַיהוָ֛ה הֵנִֽיחַ־ ל֥וֹ מִסָּבִ֖יב “and Yahweh had given him rest on every side.” The term nuach is a war term. It means to receive rest, to settle, to cease from striving as from conflict. David’s land promise is given as “rest from war” with the surrounding nations. Again, I see here a limited promise to secure him in his ancestral land. He will “rest” from war after he has conquered the regional hegemons who threaten Israel’s shalom.
The “line” promise is for an everlasting “house” which is a play on words in the Samuel text. While David’s intention was to build God a physical house (temple), God’s response is to build him an everlasting “house”—a dynasty that would continue in perpetuity,
2 Sam 7:11b–16
The Lord declares to you that the Lord himself will establish a house for you: 12 When your days are over and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, your own flesh and blood, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with a rod wielded by men, with floggings inflicted by human hands. 15 But my love will never be taken away from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. 16 Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever.
1 Chron 17:11-14
and I declare to you that Yahweh will build for you a house. And it shall be that when your days are fulfilled to go and sleep with your ancestors, then I will raise up your seed after you, who will be one of your sons, and I will establish his kingdom. He himself will build for me a house, and I will establish his throne forever. I myself will be a father to him, and he himself will be a son to me. And I will not remove my steadfast love from him as I took it away from whoever was before you. And I will establish him in my house and in my kingdom forever, and his throne will be established forever.
The passage communicates two realities with reference to the “house”: first, God will build him a dynasty by giving him a “son” or a “seed” (1 Chron 17:11) who will establish this succession of kings. It is this son who will establish the throne of David’s kingdom forever (2 Sam 7:13; 1 Chron 17:14). In this sense, David and Solomon are the “types” and the everlasting line of kings are the “antitypes.” The son of David will “do wrong” and need to be chastised and punished (7:14).[37] This “son” is typological for a temporal line of succession.[38] Yet, Psalm 2:1–12 does not envision a new “line” of kings but a definite “son” who is Yahweh’s anointed.
Psalm 2:9 is one of the more interesting verses due to the semantic range of the words and textual issues. The Hebrew seems fairly straightforward: “You will smash them with an iron rod; you will shatter them like pottery.” Yet, the term ra’a (רעע) while it can mean “to smash, shatter,” is a loan word from Aramaic, rāʿâ, meaning “to shepherd,” the noun form of which is šēbeṭ (שֵׁבֶט), designating the shepherd’s “rod” in Psalm 23:4.[39] Also in that family of words is rāʿât (רעץ) meaning, “to subjugate, to vanquish” or to “demolish.”[40] Craigie observes,
The pointing in MT, תְּרֹעֵם, indicates the use of the root רעע, “break.” G’s [LXX] translation, on the other hand, assumes a verbal form derived from רעה, “to pasture, graze” (hence “rule”). Although either reading is possible, depending upon the vocalization of the consonantal text, the context as a whole suggests the more powerful “break them.” But this is not certain, and NT references to this verse follow G.[41]
It is possible that this textual ambiguity was intended to be a double entendre in order to set two alternative paths before the nations—they can either choose to be shepherded by the staff of the son-king or be smashed to pieces by his iron scepter.[42] This interpretation would make sense of the subsequent invitation to “wise up” and “take sanctuary” in the son (2:10-11).
While the son is planning to respond to the futile plotting of the nations against him with the iron fist of suppression, he is still graciously inviting those warlike nations to submit, to surrender, and take refuge in him. But why would they need to take refuge? What is coming in their future that they should need to avoid it?
Yahweh’s Warning and Invitation (2:10-12)
The composer ends the poem by issuing a surprising invitation and a final warning. The song began by drawing our attention to an ill-advised revolt in Yahweh’s realm by the melechim “kings” of the earth, followed by a swift promise of wrath and retribution through the installation of a son-king in Zion. Surprisingly, now the melechim are instructed to be reconciled.
The verse begins with an invitation to “be wise” shāqal (שׂכל) a hif. imperative verb meaning “to understand, comprehend; to have insight.”[43] Psalm 64:1-10, a Psalm of David, is an interesting parallel. David, in anguish, cries out for God to protect his life against the scheming plots of the wicked, the mob of evildoers who ambush the righteous (64:1-5). Just as in Psalm two, the theme of wicked men devising clandestine schemes is present, followed by God’s swift retribution resulting in the fear of God and shāqal “understanding” (64:9). The end result is that the righteous take “refuge” in God (Ps 2:12; 64:10). This insight and wisdom are the result of a life committed to Torah instruction (Ps 119:99). Similarly, David commemorated his “rest” from war with the house of Saul and “all his enemies” by taking “refuge” in God his rock and fortress (Ps 18:2; 2 Sam 22:2–3). And this is just what Yahweh offers the earth-kings and judges in Psalm 2:10–12. One of the hardest things to do is to humble ourselves and haśkîlū hiwāserū (הַשְׂכִּ֑ילוּ הִ֝וָּסְר֗וּ) “be wise, receive admonishment.”[44] Unfortunately, the pride of men’s hearts does not often allow them to take this posture before the LORD, which is regrettable.
The rulers of the nations are also invited to “serve the LORD” ‘iḇḏū ’et Yahweh (עִבְד֣וּ אֶת־יְהוָ֣ה). The term abad “serve” can simply mean to work the ground as a sedentary agriculturalist,[45] but the phrase “servant of the LORD” or “serving the LORD” is most often used in the Tanak in the context of worship. The Hebrews were called out of Egypt to “serve Yahweh” at the mountain (Ex 3:12; 4:19); “working” or “serving” for six days but not on the seventh (Ex 20:9); to “serve the LORD” through cultic sacrifice (Ex 10:26a); that the Egyptians may eventually become the “servants of Yahweh,” worshiping and making vows to God (Isa 19:21). A well-known Psalm exhorts the whole earth to “shout triumphantly to the LORD! Serve the LORD with gladness” (Ps 100:1–2). Both Moses and David are called “the servants of Yahweh” (Ps 18:title). It is likely that this is what the coronation of the son-king in Psalm 2:11 has in mind, not mere servitude as in slavery.[46]
The CSB rendering of יִרְאָה as “reverential awe” (2:11) is insufficient given the immediate context and the general usage of the word. The nations need more than mere reverence or “ponderous wonder,” they need Isaiah’s rapturous and terrifying revelation of God as the exalted King of Heaven (Isa 6). Fearing the LORD is the privilege of all mankind. Only a proper understanding (2:10) and fear of the LORD (2:11b) will bring about the repentance that is expected in the song. That God’s preference is for them to receive redemption rather than retribution is evident by the phrase “rejoice with trembling” wégîlū bir‘āḏāh (וְ֝גִ֗ילוּ בִּרְעָדָֽה). The gōyim (nations) are invited to be wise, receive admonishment for wrongheaded scheming, to serve Yahweh joyfully, and to celebrate with trembling praise. It is striking that the opportunity to repent and join the ranks of faithful Israel is really not part of David’s reign.[47] Israel’s earthly kings simply had far too many temptations when forming alliances with pagan nations, as Solomon’s reign demonstrates. By contrast, the son of Psalm 2:10 issues a summons—"be wise, become servants of Yahweh.” The call to the nations here requires a profound change of direction. Yahweh will not stand for rebellion in his realm, but neither does he wish to be merely tolerated. This call is for a universal response of worship.
A final invitation accompanied by a final warning closes the poem: “Kiss the Son, or he will be angry” (2:12a). The act of kissing conveys respect and warm affection.[48] When Esau was reunited with Jacob he ran out to kiss his brother and welcome him—an act of reconciliation (Gen 33:4; cf. Gen. 27:26ff.; 29:11; 48:10). When Moses went out to meet his father-in-law, he bowed before him and kissed him (Ex 18:7). When Samuel anointed Saul he poured a flask of oil on his head and kissed him, declaring him the King of Israel (1 Sam 10:1). This imperative command to kiss the son-king, Yahweh’s anointed meshiach, is an act of reconciliation, honor and of genuflection. Failure to do so will provoke the son’s anger (2:12a). Yahweh’s wrath is operationalized through the earthly reign of the son-king. Those who fail to pay homage sincerely to him will “perish in rebellion” weṯōḇeḏu derek (וְתֹ֬אבְדוּ דֶ֗רֶךְ), literally “and perish in the way.” The “way” here has already been identified as an active insurrection against the rule of their divine Sovereign. If the rulers of the earth’s nations fail to sincerely obey the invitation and the summons to pay homage to the son-king, then “his wrath may quickly flare up,” the inference is that they would be consumed by his anger previously referenced (2:5, 12c). This reminds the congregation that the Lord of the realm has not gone soft and the “nations are being invited to choose whether they ‘perish’ (ʾābad) or ‘serve’ (ʿābad)”[49] which is another play on words setting two paths before them.
The first Psalm extolled the virtue of following in the way of righteousness. Those who do so will be’ašre (אַשְׁרֵי), happy or blessed. Psalm Chapter Two has put a fine point on the principle. Those who plot and lead a rebellion against Yahweh and his son-king will not be happy nor blessed. The final line of the psalm (Ps 2:12) is a pronouncement of blessing’ašrê on all those nations and their rulers who seek refuge hōsê (חסה). The invitation is to all nations to come and take sanctuary in God’s anointed king rather than experience his wrath and retributive justice.
The Identity of the Son
Psalm 2:1–12 trades on Davidic imagery and promises. The Psalm’s imagery of a “son” is a typological trajectory working in two directions: (1) in the direction of David who is the archetype-son and (2) in the direction of a future son, “seed” who will become the new quintessence of ruling in righteousness. The psalm has in view a future Davidide whose reign is both an extension and perfecting of David’s administration. Yahweh has already established his King on the holy hill (2:6). Yahweh has already decreed that his reign will be an everlasting kingdom by his “inaugural becoming” (2:7). Psalm 2:8 amplifies the original promise of “land” or a “place” (2 Sam 2:10) and mere security in the land (rest from border wars); it includes not only the nations of the world as client states, but also the promise to incorporate the “ends of the earth” in the coming messianic estate. This Davidide will accomplish a “rest” from war that David could never have achieved in his lifetime. The invitation is to be “blessed” (2:12) instead of become consumed by the anger of the son.
The Message of Salvation
The imagery in the poem is grounded in the temporality of David and Solomon’s reign and promises, but organically pushes forward to an eschatological consummation. The biblical-theological core of the psalm is its promise to deal with the raging nations through a viceregent who is the agent of God’s inevitable wrath against the empires of the earth. His inauguration and installation is Yahweh’s terrifying and saving victory. Rulers should beware and be wise. The kings and their nations are invited to convert and rejoice in fear and trembling, to take refuge in the son and so escape the Father’s wrath.
The Influence of Psalm 2 in the Psalms
As D.A. Carson states concerning 2 Samuel 7:14 and Psalm 2:7, “Both passages hint at a Davidic reign that eclipses anything in the first millennium BC. Both are elements in a trajectory of anticipatory passages that run through the Old Testament.”[50] Psalm 89:27–28 reflects the theme of the Davidide becoming Yahweh’s firstborn and the high king of all the earth.[51] Ps 89:3–4 recalls 2 Sam 7:10–14 by way of poetic summary, “You have said, ‘I have made a covenant with my chosen one; I have sworn to David my servant: 4 I will establish your offspring forever, and build your throne for all generations.’” David’s covenant is remembered and the psalmist laments that the current generation of Davidic rulers are under Yahweh’s punishment, as he had promised (89:20–45). In the middle of the psalm, God states that “I have found David, my servant; I have exalted one chosen from the people.” Given the implicit historical situation that a current king in the line of David is undergoing punishment, Ps 89:19–28 seems prospective, especially given the poetic use of future tense “I have found David…I will set his hand on the sea…I will make him the highest of the kings of the earth.”
Other Psalms establish the international scope of the Davidic reign (Ps 18:43–45; 45:17; 72:8-11; 110:5–6).[52] The king’s reign is “great” and above all the gods and nations of the earth, the shepherd-king of the people of his pasture, and only the faithful shall enter his eternal rest (Ps 95). The distinctive feature of his reign is his righteousness and unfailing morality, and his unswerving fidelity to Yahweh (Ps 72:5, 7). While poetic hyperbole is certainly possible, it is more likely that these royal psalms are anticipatory. Carson describes this international son-king,
He is preeminent among men (Ps 45:2, 7), the friend of the poor and the enemy of the oppressor (Ps 72:2–4, 12–14). He is the heir of the covenant with David (Ps 89:28–37; 132:11, 12) and of Melchizedek’s priesthood (Ps 110:4). He belongs to the Lord (Ps 89:18) and is utterly faithful to him (Ps 21:1, 7; 63:1–8, 11). He is, as we have seen, YHWH’s son (Ps 2:7; 89:27), seated at his right hand (110:1).[53]
It is unclear whether Psalm 2 was composed after the Psalter and added to it in its final compositional form. If that is the case then the hope of messianic psalms with David as the type of a future anointed and faithful king is understandable. If Psalm 2 was composed relatively earlier as an intentional introduction to the Psalter, then it would explain the many portraits of a future and perfectly faithful Davidic ruler whose reign would be international and universal in scope. In any case, the emphasis of Psalm 2:1–12 on God’s transcendent reign and his choosing of an earthly viceroy to carry out the ministry of his rule on earth casts a long shadow on the rest of the Psalter in its final compositional form.
The Influence of Psalm 2 on the Literary Prophets
Isaiah
Prophetic texts which pick up themes from Psalm 2 are particularly important. While the term “messiah” meshiach (משׁח) only occurs in Isaiah in two passages (61:1; 21:5), Isaiah does use related terms and concepts regularly (cf. 42:6, 9).[54] God’s messianic servant hears Yahweh’s words (Isa. 50:4) and because of this he suffers maltreatment (Is. 50:5, 6; 53). The expectation of Messianic governance is plentiful in passages in the Tanak and Second-temple literature.[55] The literary prophets were indebted to the various speech forms found in the poetic literature and “it is clear that the prophets both imitated cultic forms, hymns, laments and thanksgivings, and also alluded frequently to the stereotypical language of the psalms.”[56] In the prophetic literature, complaints alternate with eschatological expectations, just as they do in the psalms.[57]
In something of a royal liturgy, Isaiah 9:1–7 depicts a “child” and a “son” on whose shoulders the mantle of government will be placed (9:6). This king’s administration will experience an exponential increase resulting in universal shalom, “peace” for all nations. He is identified as on who sits “on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish and uphold it, with justice, righteousness and from this time and forever”—a kingly administration accomplished by the zeal of the LORD Almighty (Isa 9:7). This prophecy is a response to the gloomy oracles previously given (Isa 7; 8) and is a far more hopeful vision of the future. It draws upon the hope of a renewed messianic reign which would finally unite a divided Israel and Judah. Like Psalm 2, the scope of the Davidide’s kingdom is universal and his titles such as “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace” (9:6b) reflect his embodiment of God’s authority to extend and increase shalom to the governments of earth. These designations fuse the Davidic promise (2 Sam 7:10ff; Ps 2) with divine titles. Oswalt comments, “The titles underscore the ultimate deity of this child-deliverer. Although some commentators have expended a great deal of energy attempting to make these titles appear normal, they are not.”[58] This child-king will be the consummate antitype to David, making him, not David, the new archetype. John Oswalt states, “This person will not be a king among kings in Israel. Rather, he will be the final king, the king to end all kings.”[59] The prophet Isaiah foresees an ideal divine king who is also David’s successor.
Ezekiel
After his exile in 597 BC, the prophet Ezekiel emerged to deliver his “sign-acts” as prophetic messages to the rebellious Jews under Babylonian rule (2 Kgs 24:8–17).[60] Ezekiel prophesied the destruction of rebellious Hebrews, the nations, and then the ultimate restoration of God’s people. A key passage in the restoration oracles (Chs 33–48) is chapter 34:1–34. The oracle begins with a prophecy against the “shepherds of Israel” (34:1), which is code for Israel’s corrupted kings. God indicts them for failing to feed the sheep, failing to strengthen the sheep, not healing the sick, nor searching for the lost, and ruling them with harshness. As a result, the people of God have become “prey” for every imaginable from of idolatry and scattered in exile (34:2-6).
Yahweh’s remedy is to depose the line of Davidic kings, which initially appears to go back on his promise of an everlasting succession (34:7–10; cf. 2 Sam 7:10ff.). But God has a unique solution to the impossibility of a pure, righteous and unbroken line of Davidic kings: He himself will be their king (34:11, 15, 20), assuming their vocation. But how will the God of Heaven reign among them and bring his world-righting salvation? His final solution is to set up “one shepherd, my servant David” as the enduring monarch ruling over his people. A future Davidide who will embody God’s perfect rule as “prince among them” (34:24; 37:24). This will happen on the day the LORD makes a new “covenant” of peace with the people (34:25; 37:26). As a result, the people will be reestablished in their land and will multiply greatly (37:26b). This passage, like the Isaiah nine text, envisions an incarnational king who will perfectly embody Yahweh’s rule over the people, saving them from the reproach of the nations.
Honorable Mentions
A future David who would exemplify Yahweh’s reign and expand his kingdom to the ends of the earth would someday come. After a period of unfaithfulness, the people of God would seek him (Hos 3:5). After their destruction in exile, Yahweh would raise up the house of David and repair his kingdom (Amos 9:11) so that he might possess all the nations (9:12). When God would restore Israel, he would pour out on the “house of David” a spirit of grace and mercy (Zech 12:10) when the people look upon the one whom they have pierced. Yahweh will raise up a righteous branch of David who will reign with wisdom and perform justice (Jer 23:5; 30:9; 33:15), his offspring will be innumerable like the sands of the sea (Jer 33:22).
Summary and Conclusion
In this study I have essentially adopted a pre-critical view of the “anointed son” of Psalm 2:1–12. I intentionally drew upon the exegetical insights of commentaries from a historical-critical perspective (Goldingay and Craigie) to demonstrate that apart from the assumption that the Royal Psalms were composed at a later date for polemical or ideological purposes, a straightforward exegesis of the Psalm yields an eschatological trajectory for the anointed son. I have also been careful to not backdate New Testament Christology into the text, but have tried to hear the message of the Psalmist himself.
The Psalm’s eschatological character seems unavoidable. The expectation within the Psalm is for a forthcoming messiah. The Davidide will inherit the whole earth, not just the land; he will inherit the nations not just be given rest from war with them (2:2, 6, 7, 8, 12).[61] Yahweh’s response to the raging nations is the terrifying announcement of his world-righting salvation in the son. This future David will offer refuge to all nations to escape the coming wrath and experience the blessings of Torah life. What is in view is an eschatological kingdom that consummates God’s promises to Abraham to bless all the peoples of the earth through a son. This view of the song is supported by a tradition-trajectory emergent throughout the Psalter in several Royal Son Psalms, and carries through to the Prophets as well with far more specificity.
This interpretation of the psalm is likely the reason why the NT authors understood it to be ultimately fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus becomes the quintessential viceregent and image-bearer who offers salvation to the nations and thus expands the inheritance of David to include all the earth. The psalm also becomes itself a placeholder for all the messianic motifs found in the Old Testament, which is likely the reason why NT authors used it variously.
Notes
[1] John Goldingay, Baker Commentary on the Old Testament: Psalms 1–41, ed. Tremper Longman III, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006), 94, referencing the Berakot 9b of the Babylonian Talmud.
[2] William A. VanGemeren, Psalms in The Expositors Bible Commentary, Tremper Longman III & David E. Garland eds. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2008), 38.
[3] J. Clinton McCann, Jr. A Theological Introduction to the Book of Psalms: The Psalms as Torah (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1993), 41. That these two chapters comprise a literary introduction and that bless forms an inclusio is the majority opinion among Psalms scholars today.
[4] These approaches are typical of pre-critical interpretations, which accept the Psalter in its final form as inherently eschatological and forward-looking.
[5] Brevard S. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 509. Childs notes that during the last half of the 19th century, nearly all Psalms scholars rejected the traditional titles as authentic in an attempt to contrive a historical situation in the Maccabean period. It was also theorized that the traditional royal son psalms (Ps 2, 44, 72, 110) were sociological in function, not prophetic, 510.
[6] D.A. Carson, Jesus the Son of God: A Christological Title Often Overlooked, Sometimes Misunderstood, and Currently Disputed (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012), 48-49.
[7] Childs, Introduction, 517.
[8] My last course in Phase II of this PhD program is the General Epistles where I will be taking up the Hebrews 1:4; 5:5; and Rev. 2:26–27 citations of Psalm 2, exploring a typological hermeneutic to justify NT authors and Jesus’s own use of it in those contexts.
[9] Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: SESB Version., electronic ed. (Stuttgart: German Bible Society, 2003), Ps 2:1. All Hebrew words hereafter from BH
[10] Goldingay, Baker Commentary, 97.
[11] Peter C. Craigie, Psalms 1–50, vol. 19, 2nd ed., Word Biblical Commentary (Nashville, TN: Nelson Reference & Electronic, 2004), 63. The Hebrew word and its Ugaritic counterpart both convey this nuance. Craigie points out that the military insurrectionist context of the first verses supports this interpretation and I agree.
[12] Goldingay, Baker Commentary, 98.
[13] Goldingay, Baker Commentary, 98–99.
[14] Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 63. By “G” he is referencing the LXX, the Greek translation of the Masorah.
[15] Ibid.
[16] Goldingay, Baker Commentary, 99.
[17] Psalm 14:2 and 53:2 depict Yahweh as “looking down from heaven” upon humankind who are “fools” for doubting his existence which has led to their moral corruption.
[18] HALOT, s.v., 76. “in anger there is heavy breathing through the nose and a fire burns inside Dt 32:22, which is why the nose becomes the organ symbolic of anger.” Job doesn’t use the word per sé, but the imagery of an angry warhorse snorting at the sound of an impending battle is a spot-on depiction of the snorting anger of אַף.
[19] Isa 6:1-6 does not use the word bahal but conceptually we note it is present by the terrifying and rapturous vision of God as the high and holy king and Isaiah’s response.
[20] See “Shulgi,” the King of the Road,” lines 1–25; J. Klein, Three Shulgi Hymns, (Ramat-Gan, Israel: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1981), 85, in which Shulgi describes himself as a “fierce-faced lion, begotten by a dragon.” See also Glenn Stanfield Holland, Gods in the Desert: Religions of the Ancient Near East (Lanham, MD: Roman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2009), 71, 140. Examples include the god Enkidu who was a ghastly beast. Other gods such as Ma’at were depicted with frightening multi-beast imagery. See also, Black, J., & Green, A. Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia. An Illustrated Dictionary, 2nd ed. (London: British Museum Press, 1998).
[21] Archeological finds demonstrate that a strange nomadic people suddenly showed up in the highlands and settled there. See Richard S. Hess, “Joshua” in Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary: Vol. 2, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, John H. Walton gen. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 8.
[22] Philip J. Botha, “The 'Enthronement Psalms': a claim to the world-wide honour of Yahweh,” in Old Testament Essays: OT Society of South Africa, 11:1 (Jan. 1998): 24–29. Botha describes the Enthronement Psalms as an attempt to reconcile the regional fame of Yahweh with the relative lack of honor and influence experienced by Israel as a dominant world power. Honor was a limited commodity in the ANE, so gaining honor and fame was always at the expense of a rival god or monarch, 28.
[23] Later, it would refer to the temple mount itself (the temple mount Isa 8:18 10:12 18:7 24:23 Joel 3:5 Mic 4:7 Ps 74:2 Lam 5:18). HALOT, s.v., 1022. Can also denote the pre-exilic and post-exilic community of Israel and Judah, see Is 1:27 33:5 40:9 41:27 46:13 51:16 52:1, 7f 60:14 צִיּוֹן קְדוֹשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל, Zeph 3:16 Zech 8:2f Ps 97:8, 126:1.
[24] Hélène M. Dallaire, “Joshua,” in The Expositors Bible Commentary, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012), 846.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 64.
[27] HALOT, s.v., 411.
[28] Joel M. Lemon, “Egypt and the Egyptians,” in The World Around the Old Testament: The People and Places of the Ancient Near East (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2016), 191.
[29] Ibid., 194.
[30] Gard Granerød, “A Forgotten Reference to Divine Procreation? Psalm 2:6 in Light of Egyptian Royal Ideology,” in Vetus Testamentum 2010, vol. 60:3, 323–336, see p.326. See also Myth of the Procreation and Birth of the King, 15 reliefs that depict the god Ammon who was the king of all gods, creating a divine son to rule as viceregent. This is a cosmic act of procreation through sex with the queen, after which Ammon decrees to the god Khnum to create the kingling in his likeness and image.
[31] This certainly does not mean that a later canonical-theological reflection isn’t possible, as the Psalm would be interpreted in light of the suite of passages that illuminate the son. See Michael Straus, “Psalm 2:7 and the Concept of περιχώρησις,” in Scottish Journal of Theology 67(2): 213-229 (2014). Strauss does not see in this passage the possibility of John Damascus’ view of perichoretic theology of coinherence or coincession.
[32] Goldingay, Baker Commentary, 100.
[33] Ibid.
[34] Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 65.
[35] Childs, Introduction, 516.
[36] Jeffrey Glen Jackson, Synopsis of the Old Testament (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2009), 1 Ch 17:9.
[37] The phrase “whom I will punish when he does wrong” is redacted out of the 1 Chron 17 promise, ostensibly to paint the succession of Davidic kings in a more positive light.
[38] David experienced a temporary “rest” from all his enemies portrayed in 2 Sam 22:2-3 and memorialized in Psalm 18:2.
[39] Goldingay, Baker Commentary, 101. The BHS apparatus note reads: 𝔊(𝔖) ποιμανεῖς = תִּרְעֵם || b 𝔊AL𝔖 pl. Goldingay points out that the term in the LXX, Syriac Peshita and Latin Vulgate all translate this passage “to shepherd” not “to dash.” See the LXX Septuagint translation of the Psalms, as printed in Psalmi cum Odis, ed. Alfred Rahlfs (repr., Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979); and Syriac translation of the Psalms, in The Old Testament in Syriac according to the Peshiṭta Version, part II, 3 (Leiden: Brill, 1980); also, Jerome’s Latin translation of the Psalms as printed in Biblia sacra iuxta vulgatam versionem, 3rd ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1983).
[40] HALOT, s.v. 1271.
[41] Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 64.
[42] ANE scepters were often depicted as a shepherd’s staff, the most famous image being that of the Egyptian Pharaoh. Likewise, Shulgi, the highly successful and enlightened ruler during the 3rd Dynasty of Ur, depicted himself as the “shepherd, the pastor of the black-headed people” of Sumer. See Jacob Klein, “Shulgi, King of the Road,” in Three Shulgi Hymns.
[43] HALOT, s.v., 1328.
[44] HALOT, s.v., 418–419. This phrase can mean “to instruct” as in Ps 94:10, or to chastise, rebuke; see Lev 26:18, 28; Deut 21:18; 22:18; 1 Kgs 12:11, 14; Jer 2:19; 10:24; 30:11; 31:18; 46:28; Hos 10:10.
[45] Ibid., 773. to toil with acc.: a) to till the ground
[46] See also Isa 61. The prophet foresees a time when the זָרִ֔ים “strangers” and נֵכָ֔ר “foreigners” will serve Zion but no indication in the text that they will be Israel’s slaves. The oracle promises a reversal of Israel’s fortunes but not that they will become the new regional hegemons.
[47] That said, foreigners were routinely welcomed into Israel as allies or tolerated in many respects. There are multiple refrains that appear to focus on Israel as a witness and light to the nations. Their river monument was to be a witness to the nations (Josh 4:21-24). The dedication of the temple (1 Kgs. 8:60) and Israel’s presence and fidelity to the covenant will be the way that all foreign nations will know that Yahweh alone is God. And Hezekiah’s prayer in response to the looming Assyrian threat (2 Kgs. 19:19), that all the earth will know that Israel’s God, Yahweh, is the Lord. See David Firth, Including the Stranger (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2019).
[48] HALOT, 731, see Gen 33:4; 1Sam 10:1; 20:41; Prov 24:26; Song 1:2; 8:1.
[49] Goldingay, Baker Commentary, 103.
[50] Carson, Jesus the Son of God, 48.
[51] Alan J. McNicol, The Conversion of the Nations (New York, NY: T&T Clark, 2011), 78.
[52] Carson, Jesus the Son of God, 48.
[53] Carson, Jesus the Son of God, 48, 49.
[54] C. Hassell Bullock, An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophetic Books (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1986), 183.
[55] See also Isa. 9:2–7, 11:1–9; Jer. 33:14–22; Ezek. 37:24–28; 1QS. 9.11; Ps. Sol. 17:22; Ps. Sol. 17:22, 24; 2 Bar. 29f., 39–42, 72–74; 29:3. Charlesworth, OT Pseudepigrapha: Alternate Texts, Vol. 1 (New York and London: Yale University Press, 1983). xxxi. Charlesworth states, “The belief in a Messiah—a term which here means an ideal person, probably a king or priest, who will bring in perfect peace—is not found in the Old Testament, in the Apocrypha, or in Philo and Josephus (except for allusions). The belief in a future messianic Davidic king, however, is recorded in the prophets (viz. Isa 9:2–7, 11:1–9; Jer 33:14–22; Ezek 37:24–28); and the belief in a future Messiah (or Anointed One) of Aaron and Israel (CD Text B 19.10f.; cf. 1QS 9.11) is recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The term “Messiah” also appears in the later Targums (especially Pseudo-Jonathan [Jerusalem Targum].” xxxi.
[56] Sue Gillingham, “Liturgy to Prophecy: The Use of Psalmody in Second Temple Judaism,” in The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 64:3 (July 2002), 470–489.
[57] Childs, Introduction, 518.
[58] John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1–39, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1986), 246.
[59] Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, 248.
[60] Gary V. Smith, Interpreting the Prophetic Books: An Exegetical Handbook (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2014), 68.
[61] Carson, Jesus the Son of God, 48-49.
Bibliography
Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: SESB Version. Stuttgart: German Bible Society, 2003.
Black, J. & Green, A. Gods. Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia. An Illustrated Dictionary, 2nd Ed. London: British Museum Press, 1998.
Botha, Philip J. “The 'Enthronement Psalms': a claim to the world-wide honour of Yahweh.” in Old Testament Essays: OT Society of South Africa, 11:1 (Jan. 1998): 24–29.
Bullock, C. Hassell. An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophetic Books. Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1986.
Carson, D.A. Jesus the Son of God: A Christological Title Often Overlooked, Sometimes Misunderstood, and Currently Disputed. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012.
Charlesworth, James H., and Hermann Lichtenberger and Gerbern S. Oegema, Eds. Qumran- Messianism: Studies on the Messianic Expectations in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998.
Charlesworth, James. OT Pseudepigrapha: Alternate Texts, Vol. 1. New York and London: Yale University Press, 1983.
Childs, Brevard S. Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979.
Craigie, Peter C., Psalms 1–50, Vol. 19, 2nd Ed. Word Biblical Commentary. 19. Nashville, TN: Nelson Reference & Electronic, 2004.
Dallaire, Hélène M. “Joshua,” in The Expositors Bible Commentary, Rev. Ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012.
Firth, David. Including the Stranger. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2019.
Gillingham, Sue. “Liturgy to Prophecy: The Use of Psalmody in Second Temple Judaism.” in The Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 64:3 (July 2002), 470–489.
Goldingay, John. Baker Commentary on the Old Testament: Psalms 1–41, ed. Tremper Longman III, Vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006.
Granerød, Gard. “A Forgotten Reference to Divine Procreation? Psalm 2:6 in Light of Egyptian Royal Ideology.” in Vetus Testamentum 2010, vol. 60:3, 323–336.
Harris, Robert Laird, Gleason Leonard Archer, and Bruce K. Waltke. Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. Chicago: Moody Press, 1999.
Hess, Richard S. “Joshua” in Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary: Vol. 2, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, John H. Walton Gen. Ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009.
Holland, Glenn Stanfield. Gods in the Desert: Religions of the Ancient Near East. Lanham, MD: Roman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2009.
Jackson, Jeffrey Glen. Synopsis of the Old Testament. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2009.
Janse, Sam. “You Are My Son”: The Reception History of Psalm 2 in Early Judaism and the Early Church. Leuven, BE: Peeters, 2009.
Klein, John. Three Shulgi Hymns. Ramat-Gan, Israel: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1981.
Lemon, Joel M. “Egypt and the Egyptians.” in The World Around the Old Testament: The People and Places of the Ancient Near East. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2016.
McCann, J. Clinton. Jr. A Theological Introduction to the Book of Psalms: The Psalms as Torah. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1993.
McNicol, Alan J. The Conversion of the Nations. New York, NY: T&T Clark, 2011.
Oswalt, John N. The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1–39. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1986.
Smith, Gary V. Interpreting the Prophetic Books: An Exegetical Handbook. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2014.
Straus, Michael. “Psalm 2:7 and the Concept of περιχώρησις.” Scottish Journal of Theology 67(2): 213-229 (2014).
VanGemeren, Willem A. Psalms. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Winona Lake: BMH Books, 1991.
Waltke, Bruce K. “The Phenomenon of Conditionality within Unconditional Covenants.” Page 121–39 in Israel’s Apostasy and Restoration: Essays in Honor of Roland K. Harrison. Edited by Avraham Gileadi. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988.