What did Jesus say about David?

His opponents having finished with their questions the Lord propounds to them His great question, arising out of Psalm 110. The scribes were quite clear that the Messiah was to be the Son of David; yet here is David speaking of Him as his Lord. Amongst men, and in those days, a father never addressed his son in such terms, but the reverse: the son called his father, lord. How could the Christ then be Son of David? Were the scribes wrong in what they asserted? Or could they explain it?

They could not explain it. They were silent. The explanation was exceedingly simple, but face to face with the Christ, and unwilling to admit His claims, they wilfully shut their eyes to it. He was the Son of David, and David called Him Lord by the Holy Ghost, so there was no mistake. The explanation is that it was the Son of God who became the Son of David according to the flesh, as is so plainly stated in Romans 1:3. When once the Deity of the Christ is fully acknowledged all is plain. These verses throw a good deal of light upon the statement in 1 Corinthians 12:3, that, "No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost."

And now the Lord appeals to them as they are gathered there before Him as to that which was now for them the question of questions: what do they think of Christ? "whose son is He?" To that they readily reply, "The son of David." This was the truth, and they knew He would not deny it: it was in fact a question which any child among them could have answered.

He did not deny it: it was truth, but was it the whole truth? "How then," He asks, "does David in Spirit call Him 'Lord,' saying, 'The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand until I put thine enemies beneath thy feet'? If David, then; call Him Lord, how is He his Son?"

(Vv. 35-37). Having answered all questions and silenced every opposer the Lord, Himself, asks a question of supreme importance, for it touches the glory of His Person upon which all blessing for man depends. "How say the scribes that Christ is the Son of David? For David himself said by the Holy Spirit, the LORD said to my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool." The questions of His adversaries had been based on the reasonings and imaginations of their own minds: the Lord's question is based on Scripture, and goes to the root of their solemn position, for it brings to light the mystery of His Person, which they refused to acknowledge. The scribes saw truly that the Messiah would be the Son of David, but they did not see, what the Holy Spirit distinctly states in their own Scriptures, that He was not only the Son of David but also David's Lord. How can He be both David's Son and David's Lord? There is only one answer. He is truly Man, and yet as truly a Divine Person. Refusing to own the truth of His Person they miss the blessing, and the One they reject passes to the right hand of God, there to wait until the time comes to deal with all His adversaries in judgment.

It was now the Lord's turn to propose His question in order to bring out His own position. He asks the Pharisees to reconcile the title of Son of David with that of Lord which David himself gave Him, and that in connection with the ascension of this same Christ to sit at the right hand of God until God had made all His enemies His footstool, and established His throne in Zion. Now this was the whole of Christ's position at that moment. They were unable to answer Him, and no man durst ask Him any more questions. In fact, to understand that Psalm, would have been to understand all the ways of God with respect to His Son at the time they were going to reject Him. This necessarily closed these discourses by showing the true position of Christ, who, although the Son of David, must ascend on high to receive the kingdom, and, while waiting for it, sit at the right hand of God according to the rights of His glorious Person — David's Lord, as well as David's Son.

At first the Lord’s words appear to set aside the fact that the Christ is David’s Son, yet it may be clearly seen that this is not so. Deeper and higher and greater thoughts are intended to be awakened by the question concerning His personal glory. The New Testament beautifully opens by showing us His generation, beginning with “Son of David” and “Son of Abraham.” Ten times in Matthew is He designated “Son of David,” though in the first chapter He is named Jesus or Jehovah-Saviour, also Emmanuel, or God with us, but that does not set aside the other. If He be David’s Lord He is His Son too, if He be the Root of David He is likewise His Offspring (Rev. 22:16). The foundation teaching of the gospel of God is given in Romans 1:3 “Concerning His Son [come of David’s seed according to flesh, marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of (the) dead] Jesus Christ our Lord” (N.Tr.). Nor must the word of the apostle to the young servant of the Lord be overlooked, for amidst the trials of faithful service on His behalf he is to “remember Jesus Christ raised from among the dead, of the seed of David, “according to my gospel (2 Tim. 2:8). The sure mercies promised of God are secured in David’s line by the One who is both his Son and his Lord.

The vindication of the Lord and the subjugation of all evil are involved in this exaltation. Let us consider the words of David in Psalm 110 "The Lord says to my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool." The Lord used this great saying in His conflict with the Pharisees as a challenge and a warning, giving them thereby an opportunity of discerning who He was and of repenting their enmity towards Him. The words declare His Deity, for they tell us that He was David's Lord, but they also proclaim His exaltation consequent upon His humiliation and rejection by men. Peter takes them up in this way in his Pentecostal appeal to the nation, and his appeal was most powerful; he set two ways open to his hearers, the one was that of surrender to Him whom God had set at His right hand, but refusing that, the other was to be crushed beneath His victorious feet. And it must be one or other for every soul of man.

The Pharisees were unable to answer the hard question that the Lord Jesus put to them. They agreed that the Christ (the Anointed) was of David's seed. They also agreed that Psalm 110 is a Messianic Psalm and that in verse 1 David had referred to the Lord as his Lord. How then was the Christ David's son and at the same time his Lord? The two statements appeared to be contradictory. It was an enigma to them. They could not answer the question and Jesus did not enlighten them. The answer was standing before them but they did not have faith to perceive it. Perhaps they would agree that Jesus was the Son of David. That was easily established. He was the son of Joseph who was a son of David (Matt. 1:20; Luke 3:23). They could not understand and would not believe that Jesus was the Lord referred to in Psalm 110:1. The truth of the matter lay in the incarnation of the Son of God who was the Anointed of God (Acts 10:38; Matt. 3:16). The Anointed was standing before them, come of David's seed according to flesh (Rom. 1:3; John 7:42). Jesus was David's Lord, an affirmation of the Deity of Jesus. He was also a Son of David, an indication of His true humanity. Note that Jesus never suggested that He was not of David's seed. He knew that He was. The question that He submitted to the Pharisees was a test and they failed the test. The time was future when Jesus would be seated at God's right hand in glory. This incident in Matthew 22 reveals David's influence. His psalm was used by the Lord Jesus to silence the proud Pharisees. The Lord Jesus credits David with speaking by the Holy Spirit's power and inspiration (Mark 12:36). He was among the many writers in the Old Testament who were inspired by the Holy Spirit (1 Peter 1:11; 2 Peter 1:21).

But his visit to Nob calls for more than a passing notice. Ahimelech, at David's request, gave of the showbread to him and to his men, which by the law was assigned only to the priests. The condition of things in Israel was abnormal, for the anointed of God was persecuted. "He had need, and was an hungered, he, and they that were with him." (Mark 2:25.) His act was clearly allowable under the circumstances. It showed what was the state of matters in Israel. It showed, too, that God would not allow anything to stand in the way of the carrying out of His purposes, which at that time were inseparably bound up with the preservation of David in life. For little as it was, doubtless, then, and certainly was afterwards, understood, the providing for the wants of the Lord's anointed and his company, was a matter of no small moment to God. (Compare with this portion of the history Matt. 12:3-4; Mark 2:25-26; Luke 6:3-4.) Men could not put the Lord's anointed, and those with him, into straits for the supply of their necessities by rejecting him, and then attempt to use God's institutions to prevent those wants being met. No divine ordinance was to stand in the way of God's anointed, and those with him being cared for by God. But though David evidently acted in this abnormal way in accordance with the mind of God, his story told to Ahimelech we must not justify, nor his flight to Achish, king of Gath, with the sword of Goliath in his hand. Think of the conqueror of the giant a fugitive in Goliath's native town, and with his sword! There dissembling, for fear of the Philistines, so as to be dismissed by Achish as a madman, he leaves his territory for the cave of Adullam, not far off. He has now reached his lowest condition. A fugitive from house and home, he finds shelter in a cave for himself and his men.

David, then, being in rejection, the whole relationship of God with Israel had suffered eclipse, and the sanctity of the consecrated things was departed from them: and this is, no doubt, the meaning of his words to the high-priest upon the occasion referred to: "and the bread is, as it were, common; though it were sanctified this day in the vessel." All was, for the moment, in abeyance in Israel, and that because of the rejection of the anointed of Jehovah. How much more surely, then, when the antitypical David was in their midst, only to be rejected, was it the uttermost folly to contend for a sabbath! How could the sabbath remain for those who were refusing the Lord of the sabbath?*

The expression quoted says, The Spirit by David; our next one reverses this, "David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on My right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool. David therefore himself calleth Him Lord" (Mark 12:36-37). I think there is a beautiful fitness here in this order, for it is David owning Christ's Lordship. So it is "David saith." But he speaks in or by the Spirit; he is led and guided by the Holy Spirit to declare the Lordship and glory of the Messiah.