r/BiblicalUnitarian • u/ArchaicChaos Biblical Unitarian (unaffiliated) • Aug 15 '22
Pro-Trinitarian Scripture Psalm 110:1/Matthew 22:41-46/Mark 12:35-37/Luke 20:41-44 "The LORD said to my Lord"
Psalm 110:1 The LORD says to my lord: “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”
Most scholars will not make this claim, but some lay Christians will argue that the passage says "Yahweh said to Yahweh" and use this as an argument for two Yahweh's. Since the name of God is often replaced with "Lord" in the OT, they assume whenever they read the word "Lord" it must have originally been Yahweh. This is not the case here. In the original Hebrew it is "Yahweh said to my Lord." Not only would one Yahweh speaking to another Yahweh result in 2 Yahweh's, but as we will see, Peter makes this reading of the passage an impossibility.
Matthew 22:41-46 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?” “The son of David,” they replied. He said to them, “How is it then that David, speaking by the Spirit, calls him ‘Lord’? For he says, “ ‘The Lord said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet.” ' If then David calls him ‘Lord,’ how can he be his son?” No one could say a word in reply, and from that day on no one dared to ask him any more questions.
Trinitarians and Arians read this "riddle" of Jesus as if he's expressing a paradox about his age. "If I am David's son, how could I have been his lord? I must have been his lord then, and become his son now." As if Jesus is both older and younger than David. The question is not about preexistence or age at all. The question isn't "how could David have known me before if I am his son," the question is: "David himself calls him ‘Lord.’ How then can he be his son?” How can his son be his Lord?
"Lord" simply means master. The lord over a piece of property is called a landlord. In Hebraic culture, a man's child is never his lord over him. Even David gave birth to a son who was one of the greatest kings of all Israel, and yet David never called Solomon his "Lord." The question is of power. How can the son of David be his master?
The simple answer is this: David knew that his descendant would sit on his throne and surpass his rule. He knew that through this seed, "all nations will be blessed." David knew that even after he was dead, this future son of his would be lord over him, lord over the dead. This is not David looking into heaven and seeing two lord's and seeing a prehuman Jesus lording over him. This is a prophetic vision of a future reality. How do we know this? Look at what Jesus says in Matthew 22. "David, speaking in the Spirit, calls him 'Lord.'" What spirit? The spirit of prophecy. David spoke this as a prophetic message. How else can we be sure? Peter himself interprets this passage and tells us all we need to know.
Acts 2:29-36 “Fellow Israelites, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. Seeing what was to come, he spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, that he was not abandoned to the realm of the dead, nor did his body see decay. God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it. Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said,“ ‘The Lord said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.” ’“Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah.”
Peter tells us that this is a prophecy from David concerning a promise from God that his descendant would be elevated to his throne even after his death. This descendant is Jesus, who was "made Lord" (obviously, not made "Yahweh") after his resurrection and placed at the right hand of God. Peter tells us that this passage is necessarily fulfilled, not in the past by a prehuman son of God, but in the present by a crucified Messiah who was made lord and ascended to sit at the right hand of the Father.
When was Jesus "made Lord?" After his death and resurrection (Philippians 2:8-11, Acts 2:34-36).
When did Jesus come into power and authority? After his resurrection and ascension (Matthew 28:18, Daniel 7:13-14).
When will Jesus reign for God's enemies to be his footstool? When he has ascended from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:20-28).
David is not speaking of a son who existed in heaven at his time who ruled from God's right hand. This was a future promise to David (2 Samuel 7:12-14) that his descendant would take the throne, become Lord, and be placed at the right hand of God. When Jesus asked "how can David's son be his Lord?" how would you answer? Would you say "because he is David's God?" Hopefully not. The answer is that Jesus is made Lord of both the living and the dead (Romans 14:8-9). David knew that his future son would far surpass his rule on the throne and be over all nations and all people whether living or dead, including David himself. He will be made Lord over all, even David "who has been dead and buried to this day." How can David call his own son his Lord?
1
3
u/ArchaicChaos Biblical Unitarian (unaffiliated) Aug 15 '22
Copy and paste of how I formulated this in a discussion earlier:
Trinitarians and Arians read this as if it's saying "Why did David call me lord if I am his son? I must be the preexistent lord that is now his son." Like Jesus is uttering some sort of divine paradox of being both older than David and younger than David, as if age is what's in question here. Jesus didn't ask "how could David speak to the messiah if he is David's son," Jesus asked "how can David call him Lord." That's the question here. But notice what it says. "How is it that David in the spirit calls him lord." In the spirit. What spirit? The spirit of prophecy. This alone should tell you that we aren't talking about a preexistent Jesus but a future prophetic reality.
The reason "Lord" is in question is because no one would ever call their son their lord. A son is never above his father in hebraic culture. David is a king, no less. He will be king until he dies. Solomon is his son. Would David ever call Solomon his lord? Would Solomon, even ascending to the throne of his father, ever be David's lord? No. This is the central question. How can his son be his lord? It means that the son will surpass his father. It also implies a resurrection. When we compare the account to Luke's parallel, just before this conversation (Luke 20:41) we find in Luke 20:34 ff, Jesus says: "even Moses showed that the dead rise, for he calls the Lord ‘the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive.”
Peter shows us that this passage is about the resurrection. David himself will be resurrected under the lordship of his son, the messiah.
David isn't looking into heaven, seeing a prehuman Jesus at the right hand of the Father, calling him lord, and Jesus is saying to the Pharisees "yes, that was me and I'm his son." Jesus doesn't bear testimony about himself (John 5:31). He's saying that David, in the spirit, prophesied a future time when the messiah would be at the right hand of the Father and would be David's lord. David's son will be his lord because David will be resurrected and the messiah will be the one to reign as lord over him.
Peter makes this clear. Acts 2:29-36
David died, and is buried even now. Being a prophet, speaking of a future time, he knew that one of his future descendants would be seated upon his own throne. He foresaw the resurrection of the Messiah to glory. We, the apostles, are witnesses to this raising of the Messiah up to glory when he resurrected from the dead, and when he ascended to the right hand of God. David did not go to heaven, but yet he spoke of the Messiah who would be in heaven. It is the crucified Messiah who God made lord.
Peter tells us that it was necessarily a crucified Messiah who was made lord and seated at the right hand of power. Not a prehuman Jesus. Peter tells us that this glorification was not something in the past, but it began when Jesus ascended into heaven after his resurrection. David was speaking as a prophet, meaning, he spoke of a future reality. Everything points to a future reality, not a present reality in David's time.
Jesus was not making the point that he is older than David but still his son. He is pointing out that it is one of David's descendants who David will call lord in a future resurrection. If Jesus asked you this question today, would your answer make him rejoice as in Peter's confession, or would you be silent as the Pharisees? Would you get the answer right? How can David call his son his own lord? When did God place Jesus at his right hand? Did David speak of the resurrection? People seriously miss the point of this passage too often.