The Pulpit Commentary — Hebrews — Section 27

is that there is no intention in the Epistle of quoted or alludecl to more frequently than quoting it as addressed to him, the phrase any other psalm with that refereuoe in the "'Ph 'Tov ,,/6v (as has been seen) not of New Testament (Acts ii. 34; vii. 55, 5ti; necessity implying such intention. Accord- Rom. viii. 34 ; Eph. i. 20-22; 1 Pet. iii. 22; ing to this view, the point of the quotation eh. i. 3, 13, 14; viii. l ; x. 12, 13), and by is that the Messianic salvation is made to the introduction of its language into the rest solely on the eternity and immutability Church's earliost Creeds, but also by the of God-of him who, as he created all at authority of our Lord himself, as recorded first, so, though hearnn and earth should by all the three synoptical evangelists pass away, remains unchanged. And the (Matt. xxii. 41 ; Mark :xii. 35; Luke xx. character of the salvation, thus regarded, is 41). Hence readers of this Commentary will conceived to carrv with it the transcendent not require a confutation of the arguments 1;uper-angelic dignity of its accomplisher, of any modern rationalistic critics who have the SON. So, in effect, Ebrard, who dwells disputed the Messianic meaning of the on this as one example of the general psalm. Their arguments rest really on character of apostolical exegesis, as opposed their a priori denial of a " spirit of to rabbinical, in that, in~tead of drawing prophecy" in the psalms generally; in their inferences, often arbitrary, from isolated refusal to recognize, what the later prophets words or phrases, the apostolic interpreters recognized, an unfulfilled ideal in what the draw all their arguments from the spirit of psalmists wrote of theocratic kings. Let the passages considered in their connection, us once recognize this, and we sho.ll per- and this "ith a depth of intuition peculiar ceive in this psalm peculiar marks of the to themselves. Other commentators con- spirit of prophecy, reaching beyond any sider it more consistent with both the context contemporary fulfilment, uot only in the and tbe argument to see, in the Epistle at assignment to the King of e. seat at the right least, an intended address to the Son. If hand of the heavenly throne, but also in this be so, our conclusion must be that this his remarkable designation as a "Priest application of the psalmist's words is the after the order of Melchizedek,'' of which inspired ~iter's own; since it is certainly more will be said under eh. v. and vii. of not apparent in the psalm. It by no means this Epistle. It is to be observed also how follows that the writer of tbe Epistle foisted, prophets, long after the pee.Im was written, consciously or unconsciously, a false mean- regarded its ideal as 11till awaiting fulfil- ing into the psalm. Even apart from t!Je ment; e.g. Daniel (vii. 13, etc.), whose vision consideration of his being an inspired con- of the Son of man brought near before the tributor to the New Testament canon, he Ancient of days, and having an everlasting was too learned in Scripture, and too able a dominion given him, is referred to by our reasoner, to adduce an evidently untenable Lord (Matt. xxvi. 64) in connection with argument. He may be understood as him- the psalm, as awaiting fulfilment in himself; self applying the passage in a way which he and Zechariah (vi. 12, etc.), who takes up does uot mean to imply was intended by the idea of the psalm in speaking of the the psalmist. His drift may be," You have Branch, who was to unite in himself royalty seen how in Pa. xlv. the Sou is addressed as and priesthood. The psalm ie entitled, "A God, and as having an eternal throne. Yea, psalm of David." Thoug!J this title is pre- so Di vine is be that the address to the ever- fixed to some psalms the contents of which· lasting God himself in another psalm pro- suggest a later date, and ie not, therefore, phetic of his advent may be trnly recognized considered proof of authorship, it proves at ns an address to him." Whichever view we least the tradition and belief of the Jews tAke of this difficult passage, this at any when the Hebrew Psalter was arranged in rate is evident-that tue inspired writer of its existing form. But we have in this case the Epistle, ap:ut from the question of the evidence in the three Gospels of its universal relevancy of quotation in the way of argu- acceptance o.s a psalm of David by the Jews ment, associated Christ in his own mind with in the time of our Lord; and, what is of the unchangeable Creator of all things. more weight, of hie having himself referred Ver. 13.-Jlut to whieh of the angels said to it as such. The whole point of hi11 he (properly, hath he said) at any time, Sit argument with the Pharisees depends on on my right hand, until I make thine enemies the acknowledgment of Do.vid boing the thy footstool t A final and crowning quota- speaker, as well as of the Messiah being tion is thus adduced, in the form in which the the Person spoken of. None of the Pharisees first quotation referring to the Sm, (ver. 5) thought of disputingeitherof these premisses; had been introduced, to complete the view they were evidently received as indisput- of !,is superiority to the angels. The quo_ta- able; nor can it be conceived (as has been tion is from Pe. c..c., the reference of which irreverently suggested) that our Lord did to the J\lessiah is settled beyond controversy not thus give his own sanction to their truth. to Christian believers, not only by its being !for, further, is there in tho psalm itself any OH, I, 1-11.) 'l'HE EPIS'rLE 'l'O '!'HE HEBREWS. 17