Jesus: Son of David, Son of God

Introduction:

Everything we are depends upon Jesus.

He is essential to our theology, our understanding of history, our behavior, and our future.

If Jesus rose from the dead, then everyone is compelled to know Him.

If Jesus did not, he has no purchase on our attention.

Early discussions about Jesus’ nature revolved around the following views:

Jesus was human and divine

Jesus was imbued with divinity at his baptism but died as a human being.

Jesus was man, but not God.

The significance of Peter’s explanation from a historical perspective is that it would be the earliest argument for how to understand the evidence of the resurrection.

His explanation comports to Paul’s views of Jesus’ nature as well.

Romans 1:1ff.

Background:

So far, Peter has made the claim that God raised Jesus loosing/liberating him from the “travails of death” because he was not able to be overpowered by it.

David, in Ps. 16, is speaking with regard to Jesus.

The Psalm expresses the confidence of the subject of the Psalm.

God will not abandon the Psalm’s subject in Hades/Sheol, he will not give his holy one to see corruption.

There is something inherent about Jesus that compelled God to raise him from the dead.

Note Ps. 16 refers to the Psalm’s subject as “your holy one.”

Within the Psalm this is a stand alone term.

The subject of the Psalm differs from the larger group of holy ones.

He has a special place with God, and God will not give him to see bodily decay.

Introduction:

Part two will focus on Peter’s interpretation of the Psalm he quoted.

We will see that for the apostles, and perhaps for many of their generation, what they knew about scripture or the sacred writings was not subject merely to figurative or symbolic interpretation.

Peter will make a case rooted in known, undisputed facts.

Movement Three Begins

Peter now refers to the audience as “men” for the third time signaling the next phase of his discourse.

It will now explain Ps. 16.

Peter exercises great caution in his claims and in his word choices.

David’s Death and Tomb

He politely asks for permission because he knows the reminder about David is a hard one to take.

David both died and was buried.

His tomb was with them at that time, hence, he had been in that tomb a long time.

Historical references to David’s tomb:

Antiquities of the Jews, Book 13, Section 249

Context: This passage refers to John Hyrcanus opening David's tomb to fund military campaigns, specifically to pay mercenaries during his conquests.

Text: [249] Now when Hyrcanus had received the high priesthood, which his father had held before him, and had offered sacrifice to God, he made great haste to march against Ptolemy, who had taken his mother and brethren prisoners. But being in want of money, he opened the sepulchre of David, who was the most renowned of all the kings, and took thence about three thousand talents, with which he paid his army, and so strengthened it.

John Hyrcanus, son of Simon Maccabeus, was high priest and ruler of Judea from approximately 134 BCE to 104 BCE. The plundering of David’s tomb, as described in Antiquities 13.249, likely occurred during his reign, possibly early on when he needed funds for military campaigns, such as against Ptolemy or to pay mercenaries.

Antiquities of the Jews, Book 16, Section 181

Context: This passage describes Hyrcanus II, a Hasmonean ruler, plundering David's tomb to secure funds during a financial crisis, likely to pay tribute or support military efforts.

Text: [181] But Hyrcanus, being in want of money, opened one of the rooms of David’s sepulchre, and took thence three thousand talents, and gave part of that sum to Antipater, that he might provide for the soldiers, and part he kept for himself.

Hyrcanus II, a later Hasmonean high priest and ethnarch, ruled intermittently between, with significant periods of power around(as high priest and ethnarch) and a brief restoration under Roman influence around. The plundering of David’s tomb in16.181 likely occurred during the later period, around, when Hyrcanus II was under financial pressure, possibly to pay tribute to Rome or support Antipater’s forces during the transition to Herodian influence.Context 76 BCE and 40 BCE 76–66 BCE  63–40 BCE Antiquities  47–40 BCE

The event is typically dated to around, as this aligns with Hyrcanus II’s financial struggles and collaboration with Antipater during the late Second Temple period, before Herod’s rise to power.Approximate Years 40 BCE

David as Prophet in the Psalm:

Peter claims he was a prophet and that he knew God swore an oath to him that “from his loin he/one would sit on his throne.”

Peter refers to 2 Sam. 7:12.

Or, more likely, he refers to Ps. 132:11.

As a prophet, then, having foresaw:

He spoke about the resurrection of the Messiah.

Peter exercises great caution. It is already clear he means Jesus, but he offers an interpretation of the Psalm and what David must have been doing as he wrote it.

He spoke about the resurrection of the Messiah that:

He would neither abandon (him) in Hades/Sheol.

Nor did he see corruption.

Messiah, then, must be God’s holy one.

Peter abruptly states: God raised this specific Jesus, of whom (or of which) we ourselves are witnesses.

David: Not Exalted

If we have time:

Acts 2:33 alludes to Ps. 118:16.

Acts 2:34 quotes from Ps. 110:1, the most widely cited messianic Psalm in the NT.

He is someone superior to David. He is David’s son and David’s Lord. (Mt. 22:41-46).