Psalm 110:3 Komentář

This psalm is pure gospel; it is only, and wholly, concerning Christ, the Messiah promised to the fathers and expected by them. It is plain that the Jews of old, even the worst of them, so understood it, however the modern Jews have endeavoured to pervert it and to rob us of it; for when the Lord Jesus proposed a question to the Pharisees upon the first words of this psalm, where he takes it for granted that David, in spirit, calls Christ his Lord though he was his Son, they chose rather to say nothing, and to own themselves gravelled, than to make it a question whether David does indeed speak of the Messiah or no; for they freely yield so plain a truth, though they foresee it will turn to their own disgrace, Mat 22:41, etc. Of him therefore, no doubt, the prophet here speaks of him and of no other man. Christ, as our Redeemer, executes the office of a prophet, of a priest, and of a king, with reference both to his humiliation and his exaltation; and of each of these we have here an account. I. His prophetical office (Psa 110:2). II. His priestly office (Psa 110:4). III. His kingly office (Psa 110:1, Psa 110:3, Psa 110:5, Psa 110:6). IV. His estates of humiliation and exaltation (Psa 110:7). In singing this psalm we must act faith upon Christ, submit ourselves entirely to him, to his grace and government, and triumph in him as our prophet, priest, and king, by whom we hope to be ruled, and taught, and saved, for ever, and as the prophet, priest, and king, of the whole church, who shall reign till he has put down all opposing rule, principality, and power, and delivered up the kingdom to God the Father. A psalm of David.

INTRODUCTION TO PSALM 110 A Psalm of David. This psalm was written by David, as the title shows, and which is confirmed by our Lord Jesus Christ, Mat 22:43 and by the Apostle Peter, Act 2:34 and was not written by anyone of the singers concerning him, as Aben Ezra and Kimchi; nor by Melchizedek, nor by Eliezer the servant of Abraham, concerning him, as Jarchi and others: for the former could not call Abraham his lord, since he was greater than he, Heb 7:7 and though the latter might, yet he could not assign his master a place at the right hand of God; nor say he was a priest after the order of Melchizedek: and as it was written by David, it could not be concerning himself, as the Targum, but some other; not of Hezekiah, to whom some of the Jews applied it, as Tertullian (m) affirms; but of the Messiah, as is clear from the quotation by Christ, Mat 22:43 and from the references to it by the apostle, Act 2:34. And that this was the general sense of the ancient Jewish church is manifest from the silence of the Pharisees, when a passage out of it was objected to them by our Lord concerning the Messiah; and is the sense that some of the ancient Jews give of it; says R. Joden (n), "God will make the King Messiah sit at his right hand, &c:'' and the same is said by others (o); and it is likewise owned by some of the more modern (p) ones; and we Christians can have no doubt about it. The psalm is only applicable to Christ, and cannot be accommodated to any other; no, not to David as a type, as some psalms concerning him may.

Thy people shall be willing in the day of that power..... Or, in the day of thine army (s). When thou musterest thy forces, sendest forth thy generals, the apostles and ministers of the word, in the first times of the Gospel; when Christ went forth working with them, and their ministry was attended with signs, and miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost; and which was a day of great power indeed, when wonderful things were wrought; the god of this world was cast out, the Heathen oracles ceased, their idols were abolished, and their temples desolate; and Christianity prevailed everywhere. Or this may respect the whole Gospel dispensation, the day of salvation, which now is and will be as long as the world is; and the doctrine of it is daily the power and wisdom of God to them that are saved. Or rather this signifies the set time of love and life to every particular soul at conversion; which is a day for light, and a day of power; when the exceeding greatness of the power of God is put forth in the regeneration of them: and the people that were given to Christ by his Father, in the covenant of grace, and who, while in a state of nature, are rebellious and unwilling, are made willing to be saved by Christ, and him only; to serve him in every religious duty and ordinance; to part with their sins and sinful companions, and with their own righteousness; to suffer the loss of all things for him; to deny themselves, and take up the cross and follow him: and when they become freewill offerings to him, as the word (t) signifies; not only willingly offer up their spiritual sacrifices of prayer and praise, but themselves, souls and bodies, to him; as well as enter volunteers (u) into his service, and cheerfully fight his battles, under him, the Captain of their salvation; being assured of victory, and certain of the crown of life and glory, when they have fought the good fight, and finished their course. The allusion seems to be to an army of volunteers, such as described by Cicero (w), who willingly offered themselves through their ardour for liberty. In the beauties of holiness, from the womb of the morning: this does not design the place where these willing subjects of Christ should appear; either in Zion, beautiful for situation; or in Jerusalem, the holy city, compact together; or in the temple, the sanctuary, in which strength and beauty are said to be; or in the church, the perfection of beauty: but the habit or dress in which they should appear, even in the beautiful garment of Christ's righteousness and holiness; the robe of righteousness, and garments of salvation; the best robe, the wedding garment; gold of Ophir, raiment of needlework; and which is upon all them that believe: as also the several beautiful graces of the Spirit; the beauty of internal holiness, by which saints are all glorious within; and holiness is the beauty and glory of God himself, of angels and glorified saints. This, though imperfect now, is the new man put on as a garment; and is true holiness, and very ornamental. The phrase, "from the womb of the morning", either stands in connection with "the beauties of holiness"; and the sense is, that as soon as the morning of the Gospel dispensation dawns, these people should be born again, be illuminated, and appear holy and righteous: or, "from the womb, from the morning (x)", shall they be "in the beauties of holiness"; that is, as soon as they are born again, and as soon as the morning of spiritual light and grace breaks in upon them, and they are made light in the Lord, they shall be clad with these beautiful garments of holiness and righteousness; so, "from the womb", signifies literally as soon as men are born; see Psa 58:3 Hos 9:11 or else with the latter clause, "thou hast the dew of thy youth": and so are rendered, "more than the womb of the morning", i.e. than the dew that is from the womb of the morning, is to thee the dew of thy youth; that is, more than the dew of the morning are thy converts; the morning is the parent of the dew, Job 38:28, but the former sense is best; for this last clause is a remember or proposition of itself, thou hast the dew of that youth; which expresses the open property Christ has in his people, when made willing; and when they appear in the beauty of holiness, as soon as they are born of the Spirit, and the true light of grace shines in them; then those who were secretly his, even while unwilling, manifestly appear to belong unto him: so young lambs, just weaned, are in Homer (y) called "dews"; and it is remarkable that the Hebrew words for "dew" and "a lamb" are near in sound. Young converts are Christ's lambs; they are Christ's youth, and the dew of it; they are regenerated by the grace of God, comparable to dew, of which they are begotten to a lively hope of heaven; and which, distilling upon them, makes them fruitful in good works; and who for their numbers, and which I take to be the thing chiefly designed by this figure, are like to the drops of the dew; which in great profusion is spread over trees, herbs, and plants, where it hangs in drops innumerable: and such a multitude of converts is here promised to Christ, and which he had in the first times of the Gospel, both in Judea, when three thousand persons were converted under one sermon; and especially in the Gentile world, where the savour of his knowledge was diffused in every place; and as will be in the latter day, when a nation shall be born at once, and the fulness of the Gentiles be brought in. The sense given of these words, as formed upon the Septuagint and Vulgate Latin versions, respecting the generation of Christ's human or divine nature, is without any foundation in the original text. (s) "in die exercitus tui", Munster, Vatablus, Piscator, Gejerus; so Ainsworth; "quum educes tuas copias", Tigurine version; "die copiarum tuarum", Junius & Tremellius. (t) "oblationes voluntariae", Junius & Tremellius; "spontanea oblatio", Cocceius, Gejerus. (u) "Milites voluntarii", Bootius. (w) Epist. l. 11. Ep. 8. (x) "a vulya, ab aurora", Montanus. (y) Odyss. ix. v. 222.

And that God the Father of all would bring Christ to heaven after He had raised Him from the dead, and would keep Him there until He has subdued His enemies the devils, and until the number of those who are foreknown by Him as good and virtuous is complete, on whose account He has still delayed the consummation-hear what was said by the prophet David. These are his words: "The Lord said unto My Lord, Sit Thou at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool. The Lord shall send to Thee the rod of power out of Jerusalem; and rule Thou in the midst of Thine enemies. With Thee is the government in the day of Thy power, in the beauties of Thy saints: from the womb of morning have I begotten Thee."

And what follows in the psalm would agree with him alone, where it says, “The Lord said to me, You are my Son. Today have I begotten you. Ask of me, and I will give you the heathen for your inheritance and the utmost parts of the earth for your possession.” For surely only in him has this part of the prophecy received an indubitable fulfillment, since the voice of his disciples has gone forth into all the earth and their words to the ends of the world. And the passage distinctly names Christ, saying as in his own person, that he is the Son of God, when it says, “The Lord said to me, You are my Son. Today I have begotten you.” With which you may compare the words in the Proverbs, also spoken in his own person: “Before the mountains were established, before all the hills he brings me forth.” And also the address by the Father to him in Psalm 109 [LXX]: “I begat you from my womb before the morning star.” Understand then how the holy Scriptures prophesy that one and the same being, Christ by name, who is also Son of God, is to be plotted against by people, to receive the nations for his inheritance and to rule over the ends of the earth, showing his dispensation among people by two proofs: the one being the attacks on him and the other the subjection of the nations to him.

But since there are poorly instructed people who, while resisting the doctrine of a Son, think little of the words “from the womb before the morning star I begat you,” as if this referred to his relation to Mary, alleging that he was born of Mary “before the morning star.” Since to say that “womb” could not refer to his relation toward God, we must address the issue briefly here. If then, because the “womb” is human, therefore it is foreign to God; “heart” too clearly has a human meaning, for that which has heart has womb also. Since then both are human, we must deny both or seek to explain both. Now as a word is from the heart, so is an offspring from the womb; and as when the heart of God is spoken of, we do not conceive of it as human, so if Scripture says “from the womb,” we must not understand it in a corporeal sense. For it is usual with divine Scripture to speak and signify in the way of humankind what is above humankind. Thus speaking of the creation it says, “your hands made me and fashioned me,” and, “your hand made all these things,” and, “he commanded, and they were created.” Scripture’s language is suitable then about everything; attributing to the Son “propriety” and “genuineness” and to the creation “the beginning of being.” For the one God makes and creates, but him [the Son] he begets from himself, Word or Wisdom. Now “womb” and “heart” plainly declare what is proper and the genuine, for we too have this from the womb, but our works we made by our hands.

Plainly, divine Scripture, which knows better than any the nature of everything, says through Moses, of the creatures, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth”; but of the Son it introduces not another but the Father himself saying, “I have begotten you from the womb before the morning star”; and again, “You are my Son, this day have I begotten you.” And the Lord says of himself in Proverbs, “Before all the hills he begets me”; and concerning things originated and created John says, “All things were made by him”;50 but speaking of the Lord, he says, “The only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he declared him.” If then he is a son, therefore he is not a creature; if a creature, his is not a son; for the difference between them is great, and son and creature cannot be the same, unless his essence is considered to be at once from God and external to God.

Meanwhile, I ask each one’s opinion about the interpretation of “from him.” Are we to understand these words in the sense of coming from another person, or from no one else, or are we to believe that he himself was the one to whom he was referring? They are not from another person, because they are “from him,” that is, in the sense that God does not come from anywhere else except than from God. They are not from nothing, because they come “from him,” for a nature is revealed from which the birth is derived. He himself is not meant, because “from him” refers to the birth of the Son from the Father. Moreover, when it is pointed out that he is “from the womb,” I ask whether it is possible to believe that he was born from nothing, since the true nature of the birth is revealed by applying the terminology of bodily functions? God was not composed of bodily members when he spoke of the generation of the Son in these words: “From the womb before the day star I begot you.” He spoke in order to enlighten our understanding while he confirmed that ineffable birth of the only-begotten Son from himself with the true nature of the godhead, in order that he might impart to the faculties of our human nature the knowledge of the faith concerning his divine attributes in a manner adapted to our human nature, in order that he might teach us by the expression “from the womb” that the existence of his Only-Begotten was not a creation from nothing but a natural birth from himself. Finally, has he left us in any doubt whatsoever that his words “I came forth from the Father and have come” are to be understood in the sense that he is God, that his being does not come from anywhere else except from the Father? When he came forth from the Father, he did not have a different nature or no nature, but he bears testimony to the fact that he is his author from whom, as he says, he has gone forth.

And Paul has declared his [Christ’s] proper and peculiar, natural and excellent sonship when he thus says of God: “Who spared not his own Son, but for us,” who were not his natural sons, “delivered him up.” For to distinguish him from those who are not properly sons, he said that he was his own Son. And in the Gospel we read, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Moreover, in the Psalms the Savior says, “The Lord has said to me, You are my Son.” Where, showing that he is the true and genuine Son, he signifies that there are no other genuine sons besides himself. And what, too, is the meaning of this: “From the womb before the morning I begat you”? Does he not plainly indicate the natural sonship of paternal begetting, which he obtained not by the careful framing of his manners, not by the exercise of and increase in virtue, but by property of nature? Wherefore, the only-begotten Son of the Father, indeed, possesses a flawless sonship; but the adoption of rational sons belongs not to them by nature but is prepared for them by the uprightness of their life and by the free gift of God. And it [human nature] is mutable, as Scripture recognizes: “For when the sons of God saw the daughters of men, they took for themselves wives,” etc. And in another place: “I have nourished and brought up children, but they have rebelled against me,” as we find God speaking by the prophet Isaiah.

We read that the Son is begotten, inasmuch as the Father says, “I brought you forth from the womb before the morning star.” We read of the “firstborn” Son, of the “only-begotten”54—firstborn, because there is none before him; only-begotten, because there is none after him. Again, we read, “Who shall declare his generation?” “Generation,” mark you, not “creation.” What argument can be brought to meet testimonies so great and mighty as these?

Again, immediately before the declaration “the Lord created me,” he says, “I will tell of the things that are from eternity,” and before saying, “he begat,” he said, “In the beginning, before he made the earth, before all hills.” In its extent, the preposition “before” reaches back into the past without end or limit, and so “Before Abraham was, I am,” clearly need not mean “after Adam,” just as “before the morning star” need not mean “after the angels.” But when he said “before,” he intended not that he was included in anyone’s existence but that all things are included in his, for thus it is the custom of holy Scripture to show the eternity of God. Finally, in another passage you may read, “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever the earth and the world were made, you are from everlasting to everlasting.”58Before all created things, then, the Son is begotten; within all and for the good of all is he made; begotten of the Father, above the law, brought forth of Mary, under the law.

"With You the beginning on the day of Your power" [Psalm 110:3]. What is this day of His power, when is there beginning with Him, or what beginning, or in what sense is there beginning with Him, since He is the Beginning?...

He is named Christ from being as man anointed with the Holy Spirit, and called our high priest, apostle, prophet and king. Long ago the divine Moses exclaimed, “The Lord your God will raise up to you a prophet, from the midst of you, of your brethren, like to me.” And the divine David cries, “The Lord has sworn and will not repent, you are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.” This prophecy is confirmed by the divine apostle. And again “seeing then that we have a great high priest who has passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess.”

Just as, therefore, from the side of Adam Eve was created, so also from the side of Christ was created the church, which has no spot or blemish. In him, therefore, God has opened an entrance to all the sons of Abraham, and Isaac and Jacob, in order that they may profess their faith in him and have life and salvation in his name. Turn, therefore, and enter into the joy of your father Abraham, because God has fulfilled what he promised to him. Whence also the prophet says, The Lord has sworn, and will not repent: “You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek.” Christ became a priest on the cross, when he offered the whole burnt offering of his own body and blood as a sacrifice for all the world.

This Psalm may be regarded as an exposition of Psa 111:10, presenting the happiness of those who fear and obey God, and contrasting the fate of the ungodly. (Psa 112:1-10) True fear produces obedience and this happiness.

Thy people . . . willing--literally, "Thy people (are) free will offerings"; for such is the proper rendering of the word "willing," which is a plural noun, and not an adjective (compare Exo 25:2; Psa 54:6), also a similar form (Jdg 5:2-9). in the day of thy power--Thy people freely offer themselves (Rom 12:1) in Thy service, enlisting under Thy banner. in the beauties of holiness--either as in Psa 29:2, the loveliness of a spiritual worship, of which the temple service, in all its material splendors, was but a type; or more probably, the appearance of the worshippers, who, in this spiritual kingdom, are a nation of kings and priests (Pe1 2:9; Rev 1:5), attending this Priest and King, clothed in those eminent graces which the beautiful vestments of the Aaronic priests (Lev 16:4) typified. The last very obscure clause-- from the womb . . . youth--may, according to this view, be thus explained: The word "youth" denotes a period of life distinguished for strength and activity (compare Ecc 11:9) --the "dew" is a constant emblem of whatever is refreshing and strengthening (Pro 19:12; Hos 14:5). The Messiah, then, as leading His people, is represented as continually in the vigor of youth, refreshed and strengthened by the early dew of God's grace and Spirit. Thus the phrase corresponds as a member of a parallelism with "the day of thy power" in the first clause. "In the beauties of holiness" belongs to this latter clause, corresponding to "Thy people" in the first, and the colon after "morning" is omitted. Others prefer: Thy youth, or youthful vigor, or body, shall be constantly refreshed by successive accessions of people as dew from the early morning; and this accords with the New Testament idea that the Church is Christ's body (compare Mic 5:7).

In order that he may rule thus victoriously, it is necessary that there should be a people and an army. In accordance with this union of the thoughts which Psa 110:3 anticipates, בּיום חילך signifies in the day of thy arriere ban, i.e., when thou callest up thy "power of an army" (Ch2 26:13) to muster and go forth to battle. In this day are the people of the king willingnesses (נדבת), i.e., entirely cheerful readiness; ready for any sacrifices, they bring themselves with all that they are and have to meet him. There is no need of any compulsory, lengthy proclamation calling them out: it is no army of mercenaries, but willingly and quickly they present themselves from inward impulse (מתנדּב, Jdg 5:2, Jdg 5:9). The punctuation, which makes the principal caesura at חילך with Olewejored, makes the parallelism of חילך and ילדוּתך distinctly prominent. Just as the former does not signify roboris tui, so now too the latter does not, according to Ecc 11:9, signify παιδιότητός σου (Aquila), and not, as Hofmann interprets, the dew-like freshness of youthful vigour, which the morning of the great day sheds over the king. Just as גּלוּת signifies both exile and the exiled ones, so ילדוּת, like νεότης, juventus, juventa, signifies both the time and age of youth, youthfulness, and youthful, young men (the youth). Moreover one does not, after Psa 110:3, look for any further declaration concerning the nature of the king, but of his people who place themselves at his service. The young men are likened to dew which gently descends upon the king out of the womb (uterus) of the morning-red. (Note: The lxx renders it: ἐν ταῖς λαμπρότησι τῶν ἁγίων σου (belonging to the preceding clause), ἐκ γαστρὸς πρὸ ἑωσφόρου ἐγέννησά σε (Psalt. Veron. exegennesa se; Bamberg. gegennica se). The Vulgate, following the Italic closely: in splendoribus sanctorum; ex utero ante luciferum genui te. The Fathers in some cases interpret it of the birth of the Lord at Christmas, but most of them of His antemundane birth, and accordingly Apollinaris paraphrases: γαστρὸς καρπὸς ἐμῆς πρὸ ἑωσφόρου αὐτὸς ἐτύχθης. In his own independent translation Jerome reads בהררי (as in Psa 87:1), in montibus sanctis quasi de vulva orietur tibi ros adolescentiae tuae, as Symmachus ἐν ὄρεσιν ἁγίοις, - elsewhere, however, ἐν δόξῃ ἁγίων. The substitution is not unmeaning, since the ideas of dew and of mountains (Psa 133:3) are easily united; but it was more important to give prominence to the holiness of the equipment than to that of the place of meeting.) משׁחר is related to שׁחר just as מחשׁך is to חשׁך; the notion of שׁחר and חשׁך appears to be more sharply defined, and as it were apprehended more massively, in משׁחר and מחשׁך. The host of young men is likened to the dew both on account of its vigorousness and its multitude, which are like the freshness of the mountain dew and the immense number of its drops, Sa2 17:12 (cf. Num 23:10), and on account of the silent concealment out of which it wondrously and suddenly comes to light, Mic 5:7. After not having understood "thy youth" of the youthfulness of the king, we shall now also not, with Hofmann, refer בּהדרי־קדשׁ to the king, the holy attire of his armour. הדרת קדשׁ is the vestment of the priest for performing divine service: the Levite singers went forth before the army in "holy attire" in Ch2 20:21; here, however, the people without distinction wear holy festive garments. Thus they surround the divine king as dew that is born out of the womb of the morning-red. It is a priestly people which he leads forth to holy battle, just as in Rev 19:14 heavenly armies follow the Logos of God upon white horses, ἐνδεδυμένοι βύσσινον λευκὸν καθαρόν - a new generation, wonderful as if born out of heavenly light, numerous, fresh, and vigorous like the dew-drops, the offspring of the dawn. The thought that it is a priestly people leads over to Psa 110:4. The king who leads this priestly people is, as we hear in Psa 110:4, himself a priest (cohen). As has been shown by Hupfeld and Fleischer, the priest is so called as one who stands (from כּחן = כּוּן in an intransitive signification), viz., before God (Deu 10:8, cf. Psa 134:1; Heb 10:11), like נביא the spokesman, viz., of God. (Note: The Arabic lexicographers explain Arab. kâhin by mn yqûm b-'mr 'l-rjl w-ys‛â fı̂ ḥâjth, "he who stands and does any one's business and managest his affair." That Arab. qâm, קום, and Arab. mṯl, משׁל, side by side with עמד are synonyms of בהן in this sense of standing ready for service and in an official capacity.) To stand before God is the same as to serve Him, viz., as priest. The ruler whom the Psalm celebrates is a priest who intervenes in the reciprocal dealings between God and His people within the province of divine worship the priestly character of the people who suffer themselves to be led forth to battle and victory by him, stands in causal connection with the priestly character of this their king. He is a priest by virtue of the promise of God confirmed by an oath. The oath is not merely a pledge of the fulfilment of the promise, but also a seal of the high significance of its purport. God the absolutely truthful One (Num 13:19) swears - this is the highest enhancement of the נאם ה of which prophecy is capable (Amo 6:8). He appoints the person addressed as a priest for ever "after the manner of Melchizedek" in this most solemn manner. The i of דברתי is the same ancient connecting vowel as in the מלכי of the name Melchizedek; and it has the tone, which it loses when, as in Lam 1:1, a tone-syllable follows. The wide-meaning על־דּברת, "in respect to, on account of," Ecc 3:18; Ecc 7:14; Ecc 8:2, is here specialized to the signification "after the manner, measure of," lxx κατὰ τὴν τάξιν. The priesthood is to be united with the kingship in him who rules out of Zion, just as it was in Melchizedek, king of Salem, and that for ever. According to De Wette, Ewald, and Hofmann, it is not any special priesthood that is meant here, but that which was bestowed directly with the kingship, consisting in the fact that the king of Israel, by reason of his office, commended his people in prayer to God and blessed them in the name of God, and also had the ordering of Jahve's sanctuary and service. Now it is true all Israel is a "kingdom of priests" (Exo 19:6, cf. Num 16:3; Isa 61:6), and the kingly vocation in Israel must therefore also be regarded as in its way a priestly vocation. Btu this spiritual priesthood, and, if one will, this princely oversight of sacred things, needed not to come to David first of all by solemn promise; and that of Melchizedek, after which the relationship is here defined, is incongruous to him; for the king of Salem was, according to Canaanitish custom, which admitted of the union of the kingship and priesthood, really a high priest, and therefore, regarded from an Israelitish point of view, united in his own person the offices of David and of Aaron. How could David be called a priest after the manner of Melchizedek, he who had no claim upon the tithes of priests like Melchizedek, and to whom was denied the authority to offer sacrifice (Note: G. Enjedin the Socinian (died 1597) accordingly, in referring this Psalm to David, started from the assumption that priestly functions have been granted exceptionally by God to this king as to no other, vid., the literature of the controversy to which this gave rise in Serpilius, Personalia Davidis, S. 268-274.) inseparable from the idea of the priesthood in the Old Testament? (cf. Ch2 26:20). If David were the person addressed, the declaration would stand in antagonism with the right of Melchizedek as priest recorded in Gen. 14, which, according to the indisputable representation of the Epistle to the Hebrews, was equal in compass to the Levitico-Aaronic right, and, since "after the manner of" requires a coincident reciprocal relation, in antagonism to itself also. (Note: Just so Kurtz, Zur Theologie der Psalmen, loc. cit. S. 523.) One might get on more easily with Psa 110:4 by referring the Psalm to one of the Maccabaean priest-princes (Hitzig, von Lengerke, and Olshausen); and we should then prefer to the reference to Jonathan who put on the holy stola, 1 Macc. 10:21 (so Hitzig formerly), or Alexander Jannaeus who actually bore the title king (so Hitzig now), the reference to Simon, whom the people appointed to "be their governor and high priest for ever, until there should arise a faithful prophet" (1 Macc. 14:41), after the death of Jonathan his brother - a union of the two offices which, although an irregularity, was not one, however, that was absolutely illegal. But he priesthood, which the Maccabaeans, however, possessed originally as being priests born, is promised to the person addressed here in Psa 110:4; and even supposing that in Psa 110:4 the emphasis lay not on a union of the priesthood with the kingship, but of the kingship with the priesthood, then the retrospective reference to it in Zechariah forbids our removing the Psalm to a so much later period. Why should we not rather be guided in our understanding of this divine utterance, which is unique in the Old Testament, by this prophet, whose prophecy in Zac 6:12. is the key to it? Zechariah removes the fulfilment of the Psalm out of the Old Testament present, with its blunt separation between the monarchical and hierarchical dignity, into the domain of the future, and refers it to Jahve's Branch (צמח) that is to come. He, who will build the true temple of God, satisfactorily unites in his one person the priestly with the kingly office, which were at that time assigned to Joshua the high priest and Zerubbabel the prince. Thus this Psalm was understood by the later prophecy; and in what other sense could the post-Davidic church have appropriated it as a prayer and hymn, than in the eschatological Messianic sense? but this sense is also verified as the original. David here hears that the king of the future exalted at the right hand of God, and whom he calls his Lord, is at the same time an eternal priest. And because he is both these his battle itself is a priestly royal work, and just on this account his people fighting with him also wear priestly garments.