A Center For Spiritual Learning

Home Blog Contact Moshiach Emuna Jewish worship Eitz Chayim Psalm 110 Perpetually virgin? Isaiah 7:14 Shuva Special thanks Jobs

The L-rd said unto my lord

A Psalm of David.
The LORD saith unto my lord: 'Sit thou at My right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.'

The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.
PSALM 110:1&2

This translation was copied and pasted from the english section of the Mechon Mamre edition of the Tenach.

The phrazes contained in these texts seem to tell us that G-d is relating a command to someone and it will be someone who will recieve great honor from the L-rd. But wether it is speaking about Avraham avinu or King David or perhaps King David's son Shlomo hamelech or about some other person entirely remains to be addressed and we'll get to the bottom of this Psalm as we continue.

Usaually we have seen that when a Psalm has been written by David it first begins with the opening lines "A song of David" which translated to the Hebrew reads; Mizmor l'David, but here we see something suddely different, we see "L'dovid mizmor", which means "Of David, a song". It would be incorrect to translate it as "A song of David", which would then seem to imply that it was a song written by King David. While King David wrote many psalms, it would somehow seem as if he did not write this one in partiqular, infact it would seem as if it is someone other then David entirely expressing this song to someone who is not David. The ones King David is thought of writting starts with "Mizmor l'Dovid" which again translates to "A song of David" as previously explained.

So, Pslam 110 reads: "Of David a song, the L-rd said unto my lord sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool, so if David, {and this is supposing it is David saying}: sit at my right hand so on and so forth, to his son Shlomo, how is he Shlomo Davids lord if he is the son? So this explains away this theory. And if it is G-d telling David sit at my right hand etc etc, this would also be somewhat illogical becuase we know there was no peace in Davids reign as the book of 2nd Samuel comments 1. So this too explains away this theory. But if this is a psalm written by another person entirely it would in a small way present a logical explanation to why the Hebrew word for l'adonee "unto my lord" as in the old English expression of saying the words sir or master to another human being, would then be reffering to David. Then we can derive to some what of a conclusion. That this psalm is in honor of King David by someone else other then David who tells how King David's legendary power came through divine favor which was earned through his righteousness. Even with this previously noted reasoning, we can see how this text may be used as a metaphor to acknowledge the level of kedusha of Moshiach if it came to that, which also acheived legendary power through Divine favor which was earned through his righteousness. But before we draw to any conclusions, wether or not it is someone else other then King David expressing this song in honor of King David let's keep reading further.

There is a hidden messaage contained in the following phrazes which Moshiach Yeshua has revealed to us 2. We can say that this text tells us something very different about the reason the way these words were arranged in the translation. It tells us that this text is really in honor of the Melech Hamoshiach not King David or his son.

Let's broaden the spectrum a little more to see another perspective on this matter. It would be a more logical approach if these texts were reffering to King Shlomo, if infact these verses could be acceptable in relating them to David's son Shlomo hamelech in the first place, because David hamelech never knew what peace was in his kingdom. King David as demonstrated in the Tenakh was a "man of war". Only until Shlomo became King did Israel experience this peace all around their borders 3.

But I see how there can be a misconception here with these texts if it is seen 1 demontionally, because it's really not talking about David nor his son Shlomo, reffering to the phrazes which says "unto my lord", when infact it is the ruach abeinu speaking thru David on behalf of his protogy which is Moshiach. It is reffering to someone who will come much later in an appointed time of King David's descent. Since although, Shlomo hamelech aquired peace because his father David faught wars all his life to aquire this peace we know Shlomo hamelech only sustained the peace 70 years, and when he died wars came upon Israel again 4.

So a more logical view would be that it is G-d talking about David's son "Moshiach" who will stand in G-d's right hand until he "G-d" makes his enemies his footstool. In other words, it is Moshiach ben David who will reign in the Olam Haba in peace which will be an everlasting kingdom here on earth because it is [G-d] who is bringing all resistance under his feet. Since we already know neither David nor Shlomo aquired such reign, as previously explained.

But here is where it get's tricky, according to the book of Mathew which I quoted from previously, Yeshua made refferance to this Psalm asking some of the teachers from the sect of the Pharasees to explain why; if the Messiah is the son of Daivid how is the Messiah then his lord, if he is his son? Since we know this was spoken by Yeshua to these men from the sect of Pharasees, we know that the Pharasees use to agree that this Psalm [in it's intended context] spoke of Moshiach, or why did they not apose this expression Yeshua stated to them because they lacked the comprehension of Torah? Really? Yet these are the men, this was the generation which inspired the gemara, talmud and mishna and they didn't have a correct argument to contridict his view? Yeshua here though is recanting a very curious expression, only those of us who believe in him have this answer. No one else can or will ever admit to this because it takes something special of which G-d has imparted to you. Consider yourself blessed of G-d in knowing this, for it is G-d, echad hakodesh baruch hu who has revealed it to you.

The Hebrew word L'adonee the second phraze saying "unto my lord" does not reffer to G-d on the contrary this is an expression common folks use, like the Brittish people reffering to one another as in sir or master as had been explained previously for this is an olde english translation. So again if the L-rd G-d said unto my lord, who is the person saying the word "to my lord" in this verse? It is David. And who is his lord? It is Moshiach.

Because it certainly cannot be neither David expessing it to his son Shlomo or another completely different person entirely singing this in honor of King David since we already established the [facts] that King David was a "man of war" and didn't have peace in his kingdom, and King Shlomo although aquiring that peace only sustained it 70 years.

Then we can determine that it is G-d who is telling Moshiach to sit at his right hand until [He] makes his enemies his footstool, because it is David hamelech who is speaking in the ruach hakodesh, in Moshiach's honor. Then we can come to understand that what Stephen proclaimed and saw in the Holy Temple at Yerushalayim was undeserving of the death he recieved by the hands of the Pharrasees 5.

When you deal with this translation then you will come to understand the key of unlocking the mystery, which has already been revealed to those of us who have actually accepted the fact that it is Yehoshua hamoshiach whom this text is reffering too.

I would also like to share these scriptures with you so that those who read can understand that both men share simiularities. I'm implying to Moshiach and Moishe rabbeinu.

Moishe rabbeinu said: A prophet among you who will be "like me" him you will follow 6. "Surely I am brutish, unlike a man, and have not the understanding of a man; And I have not learned wisdom, that I should have the knowledge of the Holy One.

Who hath ascended up into heaven, and descended?
Who hath gathered the wind in his fists? Who hath bound the waters in his garment?
Who hath established all the ends of the earth?
What is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou knowest"? 7

We know that Moishe ascended up to G-d and brought down the Torah, which is analagous to Moshiach who is also analogous to the manna which came down from heaven to feed his people Israel. Moshiach is the true manna not like the manna which had to be picked and eaten that same day, but the manna which once eaten gives eternal life.

So whatever proverbs 30 may say implicating Moishe rabbeinu it is also implicating Moshiach. Moishe rabbeinu is a picture of the moshiach who brought us out of exile to recieve the Torah at Har Sinai, so too the moshiach will be one who will usher in the Olam Haba and free us from the exile that we have been in for just about 2,000 years or so. I have included these texts to illustrate connections.

I would also like to add something else to this message. There is a strong apposition about a term used by Christians which arouses contention with Jews, implying that to believe in the term son of G-d when directing it to Moshiach constitutes going contrary to Torah. But it is obviously enforced to devide Judaism from Christianity, and we know that the beleif in Moshiach does not constitute a division within Torah unless Judaism has no place for Moshiach which is absurd!

Eventhough Judaism is vastly different from Christianity according to there practices, it is only because the majority of Christians are non-jews, so they will obviously look different from their counter part Judaism. Halacha teaches us that non-jews should not be practicing Jewish commands in the first place because it can create internal struggle. One only needs to reason with this to understand it's implications. Christians should not follow Jewish traditions because these practices are based on rules given to us specifically by G-d and obviously only pertaining to Jews. Christians should also not alter the commandments of G-d by introducing new ones such as following the birth of the messiah, christmas, st. Patricks day, April fools day or Easter etc etc. These are all alterations and called commandments of men and very harmful to a follower. The Torah is very precise to what should be followed and anything else we do follow should not have any religous overtones or else it will become a breech in our walk towards truth.

1. 2 Samuel Chapter 8 2. Mathew 22:41-45 3. 1 Kings 5:5 1 kings 4:25 4. 2 chronicles 12:2

5. Acts 7:54-60 6. Deuteronomy 18:15 7. Proverbs 30 8. Zechariah 14:16-20 9. Psalms 2:7

10. Exodus 4:17

Donations accepted

Christians should only observed one Jewish holiday the name of this holiday is Succot known in english as "the feast of tabernacles" 8. Now, no matter how different they both are in there observances, they should not be different in their doctrinal beliefs of the Moshiach. This should actually be simillar to each other, because the same Moshiach will rule both the Children of Israel and the Children of Noach. So, no matter what is done to conceal the term "son of G-d" it is only confirmed later in Jewish litterature.

The Hebrew word for son of G-d "Ben Eloikim" is not an unjewish concept. It does not go contrary to the Jewish law what so ever. It is however rejected by Jews in an attempt to hide the fact or not give alligance to the fact that Yeshua is Moshiach.

Infact, we are all G-d's creation which means we are all sons & daughters of G-d. So what is it about the term Son of G-d being implicated to Moshiach that creates such an uproar amongst Jews? Eventhough I've already explained it in other pages of this website, I will do it again just to raise the awareness of it's implications.

It's really simple. It is because they refuse to beleive in him as Moshiach that causes them to apose him. Anything we might have as proof of demonstrating him as such, will only further their apposition. This only means that we have no control over their will just as Moishe rabbeinu had no control over the will of the Pharro in allowing the children of Israel to go to the wilderness to offer up sacrifices unto G-d. This only means, one choses to accept while others chose to reject. So where is this term {son of G-d} found in Torah?

T'hillim states: I will tell of the decree: the LORD said unto me: 'Thou art My son, this day have I begotten thee. 9

Here we find a very curious expression, " G-d is telling [me] You are My son", very curious expression indeed. Then ending with the words, "this day I have begotten you". One would say that this Psalm is reffering to King David or perhaps Israel, and both arguments may be correct because since the narrator who is David, would present a logical reason for the Psalm being spoken of by G-d saying "You are my son, could actually be reffering to David or even perhaps his tribe Yihuda. Because David says: the L-rd said unto [me] and since he represents his tribe too, this is why it could be speaking of the tribe of Yihuda as well.

However, this could prove somewhat illusive, because David is actually speaking in the ruach hakodesh "the Spirit of Holliness" meaning, that it is the spirit of hashem, echad hakodesh baruch hu, who is speaking thru his mouth in a paquliar way in order to teach his people Israel. G-d is giving us a much deeper and far more reaching implication here other than it's surface meanning. So, what about Israel you ask? Could it be reffering about b'nei Yisroel?

Well, yes. No child of Israel is fully integrated to the House until he has gone thru the bris mila on the 8th day of his life. So it can be reasonable to sugguest that G-d calls every Jewish chlid his begotten son on the day of his bris mila as entering into the covenant with Him.

However logical and true the nature of these possitions are, there still exists one other possible approach. Since it could be speaking about David for being a King chosen by G-d to rule over his people Israel, and since it could also be speaking about b'nei Yisroel who are G-d's chosen people, their remains the importance of the acknowledment of "his chosen one", the Melech hamoshiach who is the corralation of [all] Israel therefore logically implicating him in this Psalm for his Honor.

To conclude with the topic of the Psalm of David in verses 2 this also makes refferance to the Moshiach reffering too as the rod of G-d and not just the rod of G-d but the word of G-d, because he will rule with rightousness and justice with Torah being the center of his ruling, because "Out of [Zion] came the Law "Torah" and the Word from Yerushalyim "Jerusalem."

We know that the word of G-d is Moshiach according to the book of John 1st chapter, we know He went forth from Yerushalayim. It was there where he was murdered, buried but ultimately rose from the grave and went to shamayim where he now sits at the right hand of his father until He makes his enemies his footstool.

When seeing this passage reffering about the "rod of thy strength" we should remember that Moses picked up the rod and used it as an extention of the stregnth of G-d to be manifestted on the land of mitzraim "Egypt" 10. So the metaphor of the rod is really a metaphor implying to the melech ha-Moshiach which is the strength Of G-d, and the sign buy which G-d has revealed his power to the whole world.

Don't forget to note, that if you'd like to enter into discussion about any topic in this website just go to my blog section, where we can discuss any issues you might have to argue about.

Back to the top