www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Psalm 2.7 ... TODAY?

How does one make any sense out of the New Testament versions of Psalm 2.7?

I will tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to me, "You are my son, TODAY I have begotten you.� (Psalm 2.7)


This Psalm verse states that TODAY the Lord begot His Son. The word TODAY is kept in Acts 13.33; Heb 1.5,5.5 as Psalm 2.7 is quoted.

� this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, 'Thou art my Son, TODAY I have begotten thee.' (Acts 13.33)

For to what angel did God ever say, "Thou art my Son, TODAY I have begotten thee"? Or again, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son"? (Hebrews 1.5)

So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, "Thou art my Son, TODAY I have begotten thee" (Hebrews 5.5)


Later, when the Gospels were written (c 70-95 AD), the word TODAY was removed and the Lord is stating that He is �well pleased� instead. No direct reference to the Psalm verse.

� and a voice came from heaven, "Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased." (Mark 1.11)

� and the Holy Spirit descended upon him in bodily form, as a dove, and a voice came from heaven, "Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased." (Luke 3.22)


Why the change? Was it because the earlier documents suggested a form of adoptionism?

Joe

Dear Joe,

Glory to Jesus Christ!

Why need it be a change, that the Father's voice heard at the Theophany does not directly quote the psalm?

If he wanted to quote the psalm, he would have. He had another message!

In the psalm qouted in the other places, "Today" could be the eternal NOW, the everlasting present, in which the Father, Son and Spirit relate to each other, in a perfect, and changeless way. It is fittingly applied to Christ, and suggests no adoptionism.

But what the Father said was, "Thou art my beloved Son... "

So many questions we might ask the Father one day (if God allows), but meditating on the mystery of the Father's love for the Son, and the Son's love for the Father, may keep us too busy for many questions...

in Christ,

Christian

Christian,


Thank you for your comments.


//Why need it be a change, that the Father's voice heard at the Theophany does not directly quote the psalm?//

Who heard the Father�s voice if none of the Evangelists were present? None of the other Apostles were called either. With this in mind, the �change� seems to reflect a growing christological understanding of Jesus. Of course, many stories were passed on orally. The earlier use of �TODAY� was dropped when the Gospels were written later on. But why? Any good Jewish person would have known this verse in its original wording and would have cried �Foul!�


//If he wanted to quote the psalm, he would have. He had another message!//

The problem doesn�t seem to stem from our Father�s forgetfulness as much as it does with the Evangelist�s twists on it. Paul, who was not an Evangelist, quoted the Psalm correctly. Luke quotes it correctly in his Acts but not in his Gospel. The other Evangelists removed any hint of adoptionism in their use of Psalm 2.7. Interesting enough, Luke and Matthew do not mention an oxe and an ass in their infancy narratives; yet we find these two beasts in every icon and nativity set. They were added later to our Christmas scene where they were taken from the Psalms. We can see how the Christian use of �Holy, Holy, Holy� also changed from the original Davidic OT verse.


//In the psalm qouted in the other places, "Today" could be the eternal NOW, the everlasting present, in which the Father, Son and Spirit relate to each other, in a perfect, and changeless way. It is fittingly applied to Christ, and suggests no adoptionism.//

You are theologizing here. The early writings don�t seem to reflect a Johannine understanding of the preexistence of Christ. Mark, who has no Prologue or Infancy Narratives, begins his Good News with Jesus� baptism in the Jordan River, whence Jesus began his ministry. I don�t think the meaning of �today� meant an eternal NOW as you say. The eternal supposes a linear way (chronological) of looking at time. Did the Jews think time was linear � with an eternal beginning � or as a cycle? In all of this I can see how people can easily be led to Adoptionism or some form of Arianism by using the same scriptures their fellow orthodox Christians used.


//But what the Father said was, "Thou art my beloved Son... "//

This is common to all traditions. But what the Father said following this statement differs among the writers of the epistles and gospels � �today� or �pleased.� BTW, the word �pleased� sounds anthropomorphic and has nothing to do with the today-ness spoken of in Psalm 2.7. On THAT DAY (TODAY) in the River Jordan, Jesus was baptized by John � an event. Our Father had many opportunities to speak of His Son, but His words spoke on this particular event-locus, the Baptism of His Son.

Joe