Psalm 2:1-12
“Why are the nations in an uproar? And why do the peoples mutter in vain? (2) The kings of the earth stand up, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against His anointed: (3) ‘Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.’ (4) He that sitteth in heaven laugheth, the Lord hath them in derision. (5) Then will He speak unto them in His wrath, and affright them in His sore displeasure: (6) ‘Truly it is I that have established My king upon Zion, My holy mountain.’ (7) I will tell of the decree: the LORD said unto me: ‘Thou art My son, this day have I begotten thee. (8) Ask of Me, and I will give the nations for thine inheritance, and the ends of the earth for thy possession. (9) Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.’ (10) Now therefore, O ye kings, be wise; be admonished, ye judges of the earth. (11) Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. (12) Do homage in purity, lest He be angry, and ye perish in the way, when suddenly His wrath is kindled. Happy are all they that take refuge in Him.”
Quick out-line:
Verses 1-3 – Kings plan to revolt against G-d by an attack on his anointed
Verses 4-6 – G-d ridicules the plot, chastises and scares the schemers
Verses 7-9 – The king relates G-d’s promise of his triumph over the schemers
Verses 10-12 – The king urges the schemers to embrace G-d’s ways & choices
The general Christian commentaries on this Psalm naturally understands it to be about Christ Jesus, since the word Mashiach ‘anointed’ is used in Hebrew (where is used about ANY anointed person, a prophet, a king, a priest or person with a specific task). I am not necessarily in disagreement that this is the correct reading from the perspective of the Greek Scriptures. However, placing the Psalmist and the Psalm in their correct historical context is pertinent for the understanding of what the Psalm was written to depict and teach.
We are looking at a PRAYER in which the author in this particular case, probably a court poet under David, is railing against the enemies of God and Israel (represented by the king, the ‘mashiach’, the anointed one). First there is the description of the behavior of the enemies, verse 1-3 and then a description of God’s reaction to this, verse 4-5 and finally an affirmation of the king and an admonition to stay loyal to God and Israel, verse 6-12. This is a piece of war poetry. Plain and simple.
The historical reality of this psalm is related in 2Sa 5:17 - “And when the Philistines heard that David was anointed king over Israel, all the Philistines went up to seek David; and David heard [of it], and David went down to the fortress.” 2Sa 8:3 – “David defeated Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to extend his dominion to the Euphrates River.”
What I would like to comment on are verses 7-12.
Verse 7 “I will tell of the decree: the LORD said unto me: ‘Thou art My son, this day have I begotten thee.”
2Sa 7:14 “I will be to him for a father, and he shall be to Me for a son; if he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men;”
The Jewish Commentator Rashi says in regards to this verse:
You are My son The head over Israel, who are called “My firstborn son.” And they will endure through you, as is stated concerning Abner (2Sa 3:18): “for God said, etc., ‘By the hand of My bondsman David shall I deliver… Israel.’” And for their sake, you are before Me as a son because they are all dependent upon you.
this day have I for I have enthroned you over them.
begotten you to be called My son and to be beloved to Me as a son for their sake, as it is stated (2Sa 7:14) concerning Solomon: “I will be to him a father, and he shall be to Me a son.” We find further concerning David (Psa 89:27) “He shall call Me, ‘You are my Father, my God, and the Rock of my salvation.’”
The kings of Israel were more or less by automation considered Sons of God. This is in no way peculiar, it was common in the Middle East at the time, to think of a king of a nation as the Son of the local God, so there is nothing extraordinary about this attribution as such. We have to know and understand this in order to correctly appreciate the fact that there are only TWO kings of Israel who are so attributed in the Hebrew Scripture. David and Solomon. The origin of the Messianic Legacy.
Verse 8-9 “Ask of Me, and I will give the nations for thine inheritance, and the ends of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.’”
Interesting is that neither David nor Solomon ever make this request, at least not in a secular context. It was however realized in regards to David: 2Sa 7:1, 2Sa 7:9 – (1) “And it came to pass, when the king sat in his house, and the Lord had given him rest from all his enemies around.” (9) “And I was with you wherever you went, and I have cut off all your enemies from before you; and I have made for you a great name, like the name of the great ones who are on the earth.” 1Ch 14:17 – “And the fame of David went forth throughout all the lands; and the Lord placed the fear of him upon all the nations.” Solomon, when he has built the first temple in Jerusalem, asks of God that it may be available to the entire world, 1Ki 8:41-43 and God gave him what he asked for, Act 2:5-12.
Verse 10-11 “Now therefore, O ye kings, be wise; be admonished, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.” See the shift from the ‘king’ being offered the entire world as his dominion to ‘God’ being the One that the world should serve? There is a reason for this ’shift’. God is the one Who put the king on his throne, Who ‘gave birth’ to the king therefore He is the ultimate Authority behind the king. King Saul is made painfully aware of this in 1Sa 15:26. The God who made him king also dethroned him for violating God’s command. Saul forgot that his kingship was tightly tied in with GOD and His Law, not the people and their opinion. Because of this tight tie, the king can admonish his advesaries and loyal subjects to serve the LORD, which is behind his throne. ‘Fear’ is better rendered ‘awe’ or ‘reverence’. The later part of verse 11 is simply a parallelism that underscores the exhortation given in the first part of the verse. The Hebrew for ‘Do homage in purity’ (‘nashqu var’) in verse 12 is best translated either ‘Arm yourselves with purity’ or ‘Worship in purity’. Both renditions makes a lot more sense than ‘Kiss the Son’, which is given in the majority of non-Jewish translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.
‘Purity’ being the focal point in the author’s exhortation as an opposite to the impurity of the rebellious kings and rulers who make war on God and his anointed king.
Given that the Greek Scriptures traces Jesus’ lineage back to David as the anointed one, the capital S in ’son’ throughout this Psalm as well as the rendition of the word ‘bar’ as ’son’ in the last verse is logical. It may be as it will with the logic, it is a textual fact that ‘bar’ in Hebrew means ‘purity’, not ’son’. What has taken place in most traditional non-Jewish translations of this Psalm is that the translators have used the Aramaic meaning of the word ‘bar’, which is indeed ’son’. It seems especially significant since the Hebrew word for ’son’ – ‘ben’ is used earlier in this very Psalm and is translated correctly in those instances. It is also interesting to note that no part of the Book of Psalms is written in Aramaic. You would agree with me that it seems illogical that the author would consistently use a Hebrew word throughout a text, and then suddenly switch to Aramaic for ONE single word? I am not disputing Christian beliefs, I am just pointing out that they may not have been arrived at by honest means. To me it seems clear that those mistranslations and ‘adjustments’ has been made to correspond with Act 4:26 ; Act 13:33. As such this is not wrong, after all one may read any text to mean anything, but it is in my mind rather griveous that the original meaning of this Psalm is not being taught alongside that adaptation. It is a good and inspiring read also in the original meaning 
Amen
