Posted on Friday, October 30, 2009 - 7:29 pm:

There are so many things going on here, it's hard to know where to begin. Part of what I want to say has to do with basic Bible study methods, and part of what I want to say has to do with Psalm 89 itself. Well, let me just jot down a few ideas...

First, I would want us to clarify what we mean when we ask whether or not a given passage in the Old Testament is a "Messianic Psalm." By this term we might mean to say that the writer of the Psalm clearly used language which would have been recognized by all who read his poem that the poem was saying something about the Messiah and/or the messianic kingdom. We might, on the other hand, use the term to mean that WE can perceive -from our day, our time, Jesus having already come, New Testament in our hands- something in the psalm about the Messiah or the messianic kingdom.

In this case, I think the psalm contains some concepts which we connect to Jesus and the Kingdom of God, most notably the references to the eternal nature of the Davidic dynasty. The psalm reflects on the promises made to David (2 Samuel 7) that God would establish his kingly line, and that his kingdom would be an everlasting kingdom. As you well know, this promise to David has an immediate earthly fulfillment in that Solomon did indeed become king after David, and many generations of David's descendants ruled over the kingdom of Israel. But within the same prophecy there is a much grander, and much more remote in terms of its fulfillment, promise - that through David's biological line would come one who would establish the eternal kingdom. That one, of course, is Jesus, the son of David par excellence.

However, while there is this brief reference to the eternality of David's throne, the thrust of the psalm is actually to take up the OTHER side of the promises made to David, that is, the warnings. David was told that, yes, his very own son (Solomon) would follow him as king over Israel. BUT, if he forsook God's ways God would punish him and the nation. This is what the psalm is really about. The psalmist laments that Solomon and his descendants did indeed forsake God's laws, and brought ruin upon the nation. "You have rejected, you have spurned, you have been very angry with your anointed one. You have renounced the covenant with your servant and have defiled his crown in the dust. You have broken through all his walls and reduced his strongholds to ruins..." (vv. 38ff)

It seems to me, then, that the psalmist primarily has in mind NOT Christ, the ultimate fulfillment of the BLESSINGS promised to David, but Solomon and the other faithless kings of Israel, and the CURSES which God also announced would befall David's kingdom.

So, is the psalm messianic? I would say not, really. There is a fleeting reference to the good things that were promised, but they only serve to heighten the pain of Israel's downfall, the disobedience of those who followed David on the throne.

The reference to the "firstborn" in Ps 89:27 was not meant, so far as I can see, to be imbued with any special meaning. David's relationship with God was a special one, as the Davidic covenant suggests. God made David a great king. Indeed, he became the symbol of the truly good, righteous, godly king. So much so, that later generations thought of the Messiah as another David. Here in Ps 89:27 God says of David, "I will make him the firstborn." The NIV translates, "I will appoint him my firstborn." This is a reference to the practice, in the Ancient Near East, of people taking legal steps to determine the principal heir. In the case of God's relationship with David this is likened to a relationship of adoption, wherein the prestigious legal position of the firstborn is not a matter of biology, but is a legal matter. The head of the household appoints the adopted son as the principal heir. This is what God is doing, and as a result David becomes "the most exalted of the kings of the earth."

Not a very spiritually satisfying answer, I know. But I think that if we are guided by the actual words on the page this is what we're forced to conclude.