Matthew 22:43

Mat 22:43. Ἐν Πνεύματι, in Spirit) and therefore truly: see 1Co 12:3.—Κύριον Αὐτὸν καλεῖ, calleth Him Lord) a sign of subjection: see Php 2:11: cf. 1Pe 3:6. It was a higher honour to have Christ for his Son, than to be a king; and vet David does not say that Christ is his son, but rejoices that Christ is his Lord, and he Christ’s servant. But this joy has also been procured for us: see Luk 1:43; Joh 20:28; Php 3:3; Php 3:8. They who regard the Messiah only as the son of David, regard the lesser part of the conception of Him. A dominion to which David himself is subject, shows the heavenly majesty of the King, and the heavenly character of His kingdom.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat_22:43 f. Πῶς ] how is it possible, that, etc.

In His question Jesus starts with what was a universal assumption in His day, viz. that David was the author of Psalms 110, which, however, is impossible, the fact being that it was only composed in the time of this monarch, and addressed to him (see Ewald on this psalm). The fact that Jesus shared the opinion referred to, and entertained no doubt as to the accuracy of the title of the psalm, is not to be questioned, though it should not be made use of, with Delitzsch and many others, for the purpose of proving the Davidic authorship of the composition; for a historico-critical question of this sort could only belong to the sphere of Christs ordinary national development, which, as a rule, would necessarily bear the impress of His time. With ἐν πνεύμ. before us, the idea of accommodation or of a play upon logic is not to be thought of, although Delitzsch himself maintains that something of the kind is possible. Among the unwarrantable and evasive interpretations of certain expositors is that of Paulus, who thinks that the object of the question of Jesus from beginning to end was the historico-critical one of persuading His opponents that the psalm was not composed by David, and that it contains no reference to the Messiah.[8]

ἐν πνεύματι] meaning, perhaps, that He did not do so on His own authority, but impulsu Spiritus Sancti (2Pe_1:21); Luk_2:27; 1Co_12:3; Rom_8:15; Rom_9:2. David was regarded as a prophet, Act_2:30; Act_1:16.

αὐτόν] the Messiah; for the personage in the psalm is a prophetic type of the Messiah; as also the Rabbinical teachers recognised in him one of the foremost of the Messianic predictions (Wetstein, Schoettgen), and only at a later period would they hear of any other reference (Delitzsch on Heb_1:13, and on Psalms 110.).

ἕως ἂν θῶ, κ.τ.λ.] see on 1Co_15:25.

[8] For the correct view of this matter, see Diestel in the Jahrb. f. D. Theol. 1863, p. 541 f.; see also the pointed elucidation, as well as refutation of the other interpretations, in Keim, III. p. 154 ff.; comp. Gess, I. p. 128 f. Then there is the explanation, frequently offered since Strauss suggested it, and which is to the effect that Jesus wished to cast discredit upon the currently received view regarding Messiahs descent from David, and that He Himself was not descended from David,a circumstance which is supposed to have undoubtedly stood in the way of His being recognised as the Messiah (Schenkel, Weisse, Colani, Holtzmann); all which is decidedly at variance with the whole of the New Testament, where the idea of a non-Davidic Messiah would be a contradictio in adjecto.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 22:43 . πῶς οὖν , etc.: the question is meant to bring out another side of Messiah’s relation to David, based on an admittedly Messianic oracle (Psa 110:1 ), and overlooked by the scribes. The object of the question is not, as some have supposed, to deny in toto the sonship, but to hint doubt as to the importance attached to it. Think out the idea of Lordship and see where it will lead you, said Jesus in effect. The scribes began at the wrong end: at the physical and material, and it landed them in secularity. If they had begun with Lordship it would have led them into the spiritual sphere, and made them ready to accept as Christ one greater than David in the spiritual order, though totally lacking the conventional grandeur of royal persons, only an unpretending Son of Man .

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Verse 43. How then doth David in spirit (or by the Spirit - by the inspiration of the Spirit of God) call him Lord? saying,

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(43) Doth David in spirit call him Lord?—The words assume (1) that David was the writer of Psalms 110; (2) that in writing it, he was guided by a Spirit higher than his own; (3) that the subject of it was no earthly king of the house of David, but the far off Christ. On this point there was an undisturbed consensus among the schools of Judaism, as represented by the Targums and the Talmud. It was a received tradition that the Christ should sit on the right hand of Jehovah and Abraham on His left. Its application to the Christ is emphatically recognised by St. Peter (Act_2:34), and by St. Paul, though indirectly (Col_3:1). In the argument of the Epistle to the Hebrews, it occupies well-nigh the chief place of all (Heb_1:3; Heb_5:6). The only hypothesis on which any other meaning can be assigned to it is, that it was written, not by David, but of him. Here it will be enough to accept our Lord’s interpretation, and to track the sequence of thought in His question. The words represent the LORD (Jehovah) as speaking to David’s Lord (Adonai), as the true king, the anointed of Jehovah. But if so, what was the meaning of that lofty title? Must not He who bore it be something more than the son of David by mere natural descent? If the scribes had never even asked themselves that question, were they not self-convicted of incompetency as religious teachers?

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And no man was able to answer him a word,.... They saw the dilemma they were reduced to, either to acknowledge the deity of the Messiah, or confess their ignorance; and neither of them they cared to do, and therefore judged it to be the wisest part to be silent.

Neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions: neither Pharisees nor Sadducees, for the same is observed by Luk 20:40 of the Sadducees particularly, and was true of all sorts, and every sect, of men among them: and thus our Lord was freed from a cavilling, captious, and troublesome generation of men, from this time forward, to the time of his sufferings, which was not very long after; for this was the third day before the passover, as appears from Mat 26:1.

Next: Matthew Chapter 23

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

43 He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,

Ver. 43. How then doth David in spirit] The Spirit possessed David after a sort, and by his mouth uttered what he would publish to the Church concerning the Godhead of Christ. "Holy men spake of old as they were acted by the Holy Ghost," as they were forcibly moved, or borne away, and, as it were, carried out of themselves by the Holy Ghost (φερομενοι), 2Pe 1:21.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

43. In spirit — That this signifies under divine inspiration is clear from Mark, who expresses it, “For David himself by the Holy Ghost said.” Our Lord decides that David was the author of the Psalm, and that he wrote under divine inspiration.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He saith. They had answered glibly enough, not knowing what was to come of their natural admission; now Christ puts a difficulty before them which might have led them to pause and reflect upon what that assertion might connote. How then? Pwv oun ; If Christ is David"s Son, how is it then, in what sense can it be said, etc.? Doth David in spirit can him Lord. "In spirit" means speaking under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit an argument surely for the Divine authority of the Old Testament, when "holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost". (2Pe_1:21) Christ proceeds to quote a passage from Ps 110, acknowledged by the Jews to be Davidic and Messianic. Both these positions have been called in question in modem days, and sceptical critics have hence presumed to infer ignorance or deceit on the part of Christ; i.e. either that he did not know that the authorship was wrongly attributed to David, and that the psalm really referred to Maccabean times, or that, knowing these facts, he deliberately ignored them and endorsed a popular error in order to give colour to his argument. The statement of such a charge against our Lord is a sufficient refutation. Universal tradition, extending to this very time, which gave to the psalm a Messianic interpretation, is surely more worthy of credit than a theory elaborated in the present century, which in no respect regards the natural signification of the language, and can be made to support the novel idea only by forced and unreal accommodations. By speaking of David as having uttered the quoted words, Christ does not formally state that this king wrote the psalm; he merely gives the accepted view which classed it as Davidic. The authorship did not matter in his application; his argument was equally sound, whoever was the writer.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

How doth David then by the Spirit - By inspiration, call him Lord? If he be merely the son (or descendant) of David? If he be, as you suppose, a mere man, the son of a man?

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Driving home the conclusion:

v. 43. He saith unto them, How, then, doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying,

v. 44. The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand till I make Thine enemies Thy footstool?

v. 45. If David, then, call Him Lord, how is He his Son?

v. 46. And no man was able to answer Him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask Him any more questions.

That the Messiah was to be an offspring of David is stated so often in the Old Testament that every Jew was accustomed to call Him by that name, as a matter of fact. But the Pharisees had never compared the various passages concerning the Messiah, His person and His work, and were for that reason ignorant of His mission. The fact of the twofold nature in Christ was plainly taught in the Old Testament, but their eyes had been blinded by their false hopes and aspirations. "Jesus refers only to that fact that David, Psa 110:1, calls Him his Lord: If, then, David, He says, calls Him Lord, how is He his Son? It sounds strange and is contrary to nature that a father calls his son a lord, that he also becomes subject to him and serves him. Now, David calls Christ his Lord, and such a Lord to whom God Himself says: Sit Thou at My right hand, etc. , that is, Be equal with Me, known and adored as very, true God; for on God’s chair or at His right hand no other may properly sit; He is so jealous that He will permit no one else to sit as His equal with Him, as He says in the Prophet Isaiah, chapter 48:11: Neither will I give My honor, etc. Since, then, He places Christ on a level with Him, the latter must be more than all creatures. " To be Lord on high, equal with God, and yet to be the Son of David, according to the flesh, to have the divinity and the humanity combined in one person, that is the Messiah of prophecy. And what the learned Jews could not understand and explain, which made them speechless and utterly discomfited, is the great comfort of the believers of all time. "That is appreciating the person of Christ and knowing whose Son He is, namely, a Son of David; for He is a man, but yet also a Lord of David, as He that is sitting at the right hand of God and has His enemies, sin, death, and hell, as a footstool for His feet. Therefore, he who is in need of salvation against such enemies, let him not seek it with Moses, not through the Law, his own works, and piety; let him seek it with the Son and Lord of David, there he will surely find it. This the blind Pharisees do not know, therefore they do not respect the Lord Christ; they are satisfied with what they know out of the Law, how one should love God and one’s neighbor. And yet it is impossible to know God, much less to love God, unless one knows Christ. As He says Mat 11:27: No one knows the Father but the Son, and to whom the Son revivals it. But here we see the riches of the superabundant goodness and mercy of God, that God spared not His only-begotten Son, but delivers Him into the death of the cross for us, in order that we, liberated from sins, through Him should live forever. That is an eternal, boundless, fathomless love and mercy, which no man can know unless he knows Christ."

Summary.Jesus tells the parable of the marriage-feast, answers the question of the Herodians regarding tribute-money, convicts the Sadducees with their denial of the resurrection, gives the Pharisees the proper information as to the greatest commandment, and proposes a question concerning the twofold nature of the Messiah which they are unable to answer.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

43. Call him Lord. David then, by inspiration, calls his own Son his Lord, which shows that he is more than David's Son.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

General Information:

Jesus quotes from the Psalms to show that the Christ is more than just "the son of David."

How then does David in the Spirit call him Lord

Jesus uses a question to make the religious leaders think deeply about the Psalm he is about to quote. AT: "Then, tell me why David in the Spirit calls him Lord" (See: Rhetorical Question)

David in the Spirit

"David, whom the Holy Spirit is inspiring." This means the Holy Spirit is influencing what David says.

call him

Here "him" refers to the Christ, who is also the descendant of David.

The Lord said

Here "Lord" refers to God the Father.

to my Lord

Here "Lord" refers to the Christ. Also, "my" refers to David. This means the Christ is superior to David.

Sit at my right hand

To sit at the "right hand of God" is a symbolic action of receiving great honor and authority from God. AT: "Sit in the place of honor beside me" (See: Symbolic Action)

until I make your enemies your footstool

This is an idiom. AT: "until I conquer your enemies" or "until I make your enemies bow down before you" (See: Idiom)

translationWords

David

Holy Spirit

lord

adversary

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

43. ἐν πνεύμ.] by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit: = ἐν πν. ἁγίῳ Mark. This is a weighty declaration by our Lord of the inspiration of the prophetic Scriptures. The expression was a Rabbinical one: see Schöttgen in loc. Mark (ver. 37) adds to this “the common people heard him gladly.” Here then end the endeavours of His adversaries to entrap Him by questions: they now betake themselves to other means. ‘Nova dehinc quasi scena se pandit.’ Bengel.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

43. He saith to them, How then does David in the Spirit call Him Lord, saying?] Mk. has: “David himself in the Holy Spirit said.”—ἐν πνεύματι] i.e. by divine inspiration. Cf. “David said in the Holy Spirit,” Schir ha-Schirim 21 (Wünsche, p. 54), and see Bacher, Exeget. Termin. ii. 202.

(M)

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.