Salmi 110:4 Commento

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.

The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent,.... What he swore about, and did not repent of, was the priesthood of Christ, as follows; and which shows the importance of it, since when Jehovah swears, as it is by himself, because he can swear by no greater; so it is about matters of great moment only that are sworn to by the Lord, as this of the priesthood of Christ was; which was concerned in things pertaining to God and his glory, as well as in making reconciliation for the sins of his people: and it shows the truth, and was for the confirmation of it; since doubts might arise whether the Aaronic priesthood was changed, seeing it was given to Phinehas for an everlasting priesthood; and since so great a person as the Son of God is said to be a priest; and since, in the human nature, he was of the tribe of Judah, of which tribe nothing was said concerning the priesthood: and this oath was not so much for Christ's sake, to establish the priesthood with him, and assure him of it, as for the sake of his people; who, by two immutable things, the word and oath of God, might have strong consolation from it; and it clearly shows the validity of his priesthood; that he was called of God to this office, and invested with it, and consecrated in it with an oath; and which is expressive of the singularity of it, and of the dignity and preference of the priesthood of Christ to that of Aaron's, Heb 7:20. What follows was said, and this oath was made, in the council of peace, when Christ was called to this office, and he accepted of it, Psa 40:6, and of this the Lord never repented; as he never does of any of his acts of grace, Num 23:19. Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek; or, "according to the word of Melchizedek" (z); that is, according to what is said of him; there being an agreement between the things said of one and of the other; so the Syriac version, "according to the likeness of Melchizedek", see Heb 7:15 of him no mention is made elsewhere, but in Gen 14:18 and in the epistle to the Hebrews. Various are the opinions of men concerning him: some think he was not a man, but an angel that appeared to Abraham: others, a divine power, superior to Christ, who were called "Melchizedecians": and others, that he was the Holy Ghost; and others, the Son of God himself, in an human form. On the other hand, some take him to be a mere man. The general notion of the Jews is, that he was Shem, the son of Noah; others, that he was a Canaanitish king, of the posterity of Ham: but others do not think it proper or lawful to inquire who he was, or from whom he descended; this being purposely hidden from men, that he might be more clearly a type of Christ. That there is a likeness between them is certain; the signification of his name, a title of office, King of righteousness, and King of peace, agrees with Christ the Lord, our righteousness and our peace: his being without father, mother, descent, beginning of days, and end of life, agree with the divinity, humanity, and eternity of Christ; and who is likewise King and Priest, as he was; and who blesses his people, as he did Abraham; and refreshes them with bread and wine, as he did Abraham's soldiers; See Gill on Heb 7:2. See Gill on Heb 7:3. Now Christ is a Priest like him; whose office is to offer sacrifice, which he has done, even himself, for the atonement of the sins of his people; to make intercession for them, which he ever lives to do; to introduce their persons to his Father, and present their petitions to him; and to call for every blessing for them, and answer all charges against them: in which office he continues for ever; there never will be any change in his priesthood, as there has been in Aaron's; nor will he ever have any successor: his priesthood is unchangeable, or does not pass from one to another, Heb 7:24, the efficacy of his blood and sacrifice always continues, and intercession is ever made by him, and the glory of his mediation is ever given him. The apostle produces this passage in proof of the change of the Aaronic priesthood, and so of the law, Heb 7:11 and about the time Christ appeared as the high priest, the legal priesthood sensibly declined, and which the Jews themselves own; for they say, "after the death of Ishmael Ben Phabi, the splendour of the priesthood ceased (a);'' which man was made priest by Valerius Gratus, governor of Judea, under Tiberius Caesar (b), (z) "super meum verbum", Montanus; "juxta verbum", Vatablus. (a) Misn. Sotah, c. 9. s. 15. (b) Joseph. Antiqu. l. 18. c. 2. s. 2. Vid. ib. l. 20. c. 7. s. 8.

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest, Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life. For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest: (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec) [Psalms 110:4] By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself. For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.

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.

And unto what are You born? "The Lord has sworn, and will not repent: You are a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedec" [Psalm 110:4]. For unto this were You born from the womb before the morning star, that You might be a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedec. For in that character in which He was born of the Father, God with God, coeternal with Him who begot Him, He is not a Priest; but He is a Priest on account of the flesh which He assumed, on account of the victim which He was to offer for us received from us. "The Lord," then, "has sworn." What then means, the Lord has sworn? Does the Lord, who forbids men to swear, [Matthew 5:34] Himself swear? Or does He possibly forbid man to swear chiefly on this account, that he may not fall into perjury, and for this reason the Lord may swear, since He cannot be forsworn. For man, who, through a habit of swearing, may slip into perjury, is rightly forbidden to swear: for he will be farther from perjury in proportion as he is far from swearing. For the man who swears, may swear truly or falsely: but he who swears not, cannot swear falsely; for he swears not at all. Why then should not the Lord swear, since the Lord's oath is the seal of the promise? Let Him swear by all means. What then do you, when you swear? You call God to witness: this is to swear, to call God to witness; and for this reason there must be anxiety, that you may not call God to witness anything false. If therefore thou by an oath dost call God to witness, why then should not God also call Himself to witness with an oath? "I live, says the Lord," this is the Lord's oath...."The Lord swore," then, that is, confirmed: "He will not repent," He will not change. What? You are a Priest for ever. "For ever," for He will not repent. But Priest, in what sense? Will there be those victims, victims offered by the Patriarchs, altars of blood, and tabernacle, and those sacred emblems of the Old Covenant? God forbid! These things are already abolished; the temple being destroyed, that priesthood taken away, their victim and their sacrifice having alike disappeared, not even the Jews have these things. They see that the priesthood after the order of Aaron has already perished, and they do not recognise the Priesthood after the order of Melchizedec. I speak unto believers. If catechumens understand not something, let them lay aside sloth, and hasten unto knowledge. It is not therefore needful for me to disclose mysteries here: let the Scriptures intimate to you what is the Priesthood after the order of Melchizedec.

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.”

Daniel told a story of another hermit who used to live in the lower parts of Egypt, and who said in his simplicity that Melchizedek was the Son of God. Now when the blessed man Theophilus, the archbishop of Alexandria, heard of it, he sent a message asking the monks to bring the hermit to him. When he saw him, he realized that he was a man of vision and that every thing that he had asked for God had given him, and that he had only said this out of simplicity. The archbishop dealt with him wisely in the following manner, saying, ‘Abba, pray to God for me, because I have begun to think that Melchizedek was the Son of God,’ and he added, ‘It cannot be true, for the high priest of God was a man. But because I had doubts in my mind about this, I sent for you to pray to God for me that He may reveal the truth of the matter to you.’ Then, because the hermit had confidence in the power of prayer, he said to him firmly, ‘Wait three days, and I will ask God about this and then I shall be able to tell you who Melchizedek was.’ So the hermit went away, and returned after three days, and said to the blessed Archbishop Theophilus, ‘Melchizedek was a man.’ The Archbishop said unto him, ‘How do you know that, abba?’ The hermit said, ‘God showed me all the Patriarchs, one by one, and they passed before me one after the other, from Adam to Melchizedek, and an angel said to me, “This is Melchizedek.” That is indeed how the truth of this matter appeared tome.’ The hermit went away, and he himself proclaimed that Melchizedek was a man, and the blessed Theophilus rejoiced greatly.

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.

The perpetuity of the priesthood, here asserted on God's oath, corresponds with that of the kingly office just explained. after the order-- (Heb 7:15) after the similitude of Melchisedek, is fully expounded by Paul, to denote not only perpetuity, appointment of God, and a royal priesthood, but also the absence of priestly descent and succession, and superiority to the Aaronic order.