Understanding the psalm’s meaning and imagery helps paint a portrait as to why first century CE authors were drawn to this lament in confronting the realities of the first century. Thematically the psalm addresses tragedy, while implementing a unique combination of images such as:
128
enthronement on the cherubim, wild beasts, vine, Gentiles and Son of Man. Israel’s ongoing efforts to regain the prominence they possessed under David and Solomon weighed heavily on their national identity. The first century CE devastation at the hands of Rome, and the
development of the Danielic Son of Man, made Psalm 80 a prime candidate for use in the wake of the temple’s destruction.
Israel is faced with a national crisis and indisputably needs God to act against foreign invaders to save the vineyard.450 The catastrophe Israel faces transcends standard notions of encountering an enemy. The psalmist blames God for Israel’s catastrophic condition as God has been angry with the prayers of his people (verse 5), placed Israel in contention with their
neighbors (verse 7) and has not come to deliver them as their walls are broken down and the enemy is devouring them (verses 13—14). Assyria’s advancement on Israel resulted in cataclysmic horror for the northern kingdom as 27,290 captives were forcefully dispersed.451 Psalm 80 is the last desperate cry of a kingdom before their extinction as the psalmist pleads with Yahweh that Israel will remain faithful to him if he will only return (verses 19—20).
A multi—psalm compositional scheme may be at work across several Asaphite psalms following the format: corporate complaints, God’s answer and personal complaint.452 In this theory Psalms 79 and 80 present the corporate complaint to God, which God responds to in Psalm 81 and 82.453 There are indeed elements of response in which God says that he would
respond if Israel would listen (81:9) and quickly subdue their enemies (81:15). Nevertheless,
450 S.E. Gillingham, Psalms Through the Centuries: Volume One (Malden: Blackwell, 2008), 5; G. Ravasi, Il libro,
675.
451 S. Lyman, ‘The Lost Tribes of Israel as a Problem in History and Sociology’, IJPCS 12:1 (1998): 8.
452 E. Zenger, ‘Zur redaktionsgeschichtichen Bedeutung der Korachpsalmen’, in K. Seybold & E. Zenger, eds., Neue
Wege Der Psalmenforschung (Freiburg: Heder, 1994), 189.
129
Israel continues to walk about in darkness, and they have been called gods they shall die like mortals (82:6—8). Lastly, the psalmist again complains that God’s enemies hate him and have conspired against his people (83:3—4). Several people groups including Edom, Philistia and Assyria, among others, have united in this conspiracy against Israel and the psalmist implores God to dispose of them as he did Midian (83:6—10).
The multi—psalm scheme has merit, though it is unclear whether these psalms were written as a unit or share common themes and authorship while being written as individual works. Their placement in the Hebrew Psalter evinces a block of common thought that is intentionally placed together, and whether written together or not provides mutual edification of reading, without sacrificing the meaning of the individual psalms themselves. They demonstrate a range of emotions and responses indicative of a nation facing destruction. Yahweh is not acting in the manner the psalmist wants him to as bestial nations thrive while Israel, the chosen, suffers at the hands of these anti—Yahwists. God is also clear that the lack of response is based on Israel’s failure, not his own. The hope of restoration is bound up in Israel’s fidelity, though in Psalm 80 there is little focus on repentance. The psalmist is more interested in God’s response, promising that Israel will be faithful if Yahweh acts on their behalf (80:19—20).
The Son of Man and the vine have become central elements of the interpretative analysis as they were the elements most used by later authors. Understanding the psalmist’s Son of Man in contrast to the Danielic use is important. The two are not identical, but they would later be amalgamated in Matthew. Who or what is the Psalm 80 Son of Man, and is what is that Son of Man’s relationship to the vine? Deciphering the meaning of the images presents a window into
130
the way later authors saw and used the psalm to meet the changing religio—political climate of the first century CE.
The ם ָד ָא־ן ֶב of Psalm 80 has been interpreted as both an individual and corporate figure in conjunction with the vine. The first possibility is the ם ָד ָא־ן ֶב refers to the king of Israel and its kingship, with the vine representing Israel. ‘The vine is the defining image of Psalm 80 with a full nine verses devoted to it, but it is also the most richly textured, leading to a great deal of ambiguous imagery.’454 Plants are a common image in the Old Testament for God’s people (Isaiah 5:1—7, Jeremiah 2:21, Ezekiel 17) where shoots and branches are symbols for royal or representative figures (Isaiah 11:1, Jeremiah 23:1—8, Ezekiel 19:11). Additionally, flourishing vines and plants can represent the restoration of Israel’s fortunes (Hosea 14:5—9).
Comparison to other psalms has been used to validate the possibility of this kingship view. Rowe concludes that Psalm 110:1 is used to describe the king of Israel sitting at Yahweh’s right hand, an obvious parallel if individuals are being described in both passages. 455 Psalm 110
is a royal psalm featuring divine decrees that are suitable for inaugurating a king’s rule.456 The right is a metaphor for both a place of honour and the routing of the king’s enemies by
Yahweh.457 However, Psalm 110 is also a difficult psalm to interpret, containing textual conundrums.458
454 A. Streett, The Vine, 26.
455 R. Rowe, ‘Is Daniel’s “Son of Man” Messianic?’, 81.
456 W. Brown, ed, The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 209, 329; S.E.
Gillingham, Psalms, 5.
457 W.D. Tucker, ‘The Role of the Foe in Book 5: Reflections on the Final Composition of the Psalter’, in N.L.
deClaisse´—Walford, ed., The Shape and Shaping of the Book of Psalms (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2014), 187.
131
The oracle appears to speak of a coronation in Jerusalem, and a revelation from Yahweh delivered to David by Nathan as seen in 2 Samuel 7:8—11.459 Verse 4 refers to the person on Yahweh’s right being forever a priest in the order of Melchizedek. The reference to
Melchizedek could be reference to the enigmatic figure of Genesis 14, or it could be a
misunderstanding to indicate ‘my king is legitimate’, not the figure of Genesis.460 By the time of the New Testament, the author of Hebrews understood the Melchizedek reference as the man from Genesis, demonstrating Jesus’ superior priesthood over the Levitical priests.461 This
establishes a correlation for Hebrews that Jesus is priest and king.
An objection is raised that Psalm 110:2b features ה ֵּד ְר, which is more commonly used of exercising authority in a labor supervisory role than a kingly rule.462 Wilson argues this is an homage to Genesis 1:26 and 28, with reference to Yahweh in Psalm 110:4a putting the focus on God, not on the Davidic king.463 A sudden reversal takes place in the passage as the one
commissioned is a priest, meaning an enduring priesthood is replacing an eternal kingship.464 Thus the Davidic descendant is a Melchizedek priest eternally proclaiming Yahweh’s righteous kingship.465 Wilson’s theory rests on unsure footing as an appeal to Melchizedek makes more sense in relationship to the earthly monarch than it does the heavenly king. Psalm 110 is a royal psalm emphasising the establishment of the king, making the correlation to the Genesis figure of an earthly king more suitable for interpretation than God’s heavenly kingship.
459 W. Holladay, The Psalms, 23. 460 W. Holladay, The Psalms, 24.
461 H. Attridge, ‘The Psalms in Hebrews’, in S. Moyise & M. Menken, eds., in The Psalms in the New Testament
(London: T&T Clark, 2004),197—198.
462 G.H. Wilson, ‘King, Messiah, and the Reign of God: Revisiting the Royal Psalms and the Shape of the Psalter’,
in P.D. Miller & P.W. Flint, eds., The Book of Psalms: Composition and Reception (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 399.
463 G.H. Wilson, ‘King, Messiah’, 399. 464 G.H. Wilson, ‘King, Messiah’, 399—400. 465 G.H. Wilson, ‘King, Messiah’, 400.
132
The person on the right hand in Psalm 110 is a participant in Yahweh’s universal
kingship, sitting on his throne while Yahweh fights for him.466 Assyrian king Esarhaddon is said to have placed his son Assurbanipal on his right in language similar to Psalm 110.467 If Psalm 110 is a reinterpretation of Psalm 2, then the son has moved to Yahweh’s right hand, magnifying his royal role in Psalm 110.468 It is further suggested that the image is not static but dynamic, with the possibility that God moves to the right of the king in verse 5, though the likelihood is this interplay reflects the kings participation in Yahweh’s power.469 Psalm 2:6—9 highlights the important role of the king in pre—exilic tradition, making it possible that Psalm 110 is a post— exilic divine speech remembering a pre—exilic tradition now suspended.470 Psalm 110 is a royal enthronement psalm, but whether it was a Davidic coronation psalm is uncertain.471
Likewise Psalm 20:6 (19:7 LXX) states, Now I know the Lord saves his anointed. He will answer from his holy heaven, in the saving power of his right hand. The anointed one is presumably the king being saved by God’s right hand.472 Israel’s king is a military figure
responsible for protecting Zion, thus the psalmist prays for God’s power with the king as he goes to war.473 Psalm 89:14 also speaks of Yahweh’s throne and 89:13 his right hand, which
combined with Psalm 110:1 makes the connection of ם ָד ָא־ן ֶב as Israel’s king even stronger.474
466 R. Watts, ‘The Psalms in Mark’s Gospel’, in S. Moyise & M. Menken, eds., in The Psalms in the New Testament
(London: T&T Clark, 2004), 36.
467 J. Hilber, ‘Psalm CX in Light of Assyrian Prophecies’, VT 53 (2003): 357.
468 R. Watts, ‘The Lord’s House and David’s House: The Psalms and Mark’s Perspective on Jesus’, BI 15 (2007):
317—318.
469 A. Cordes, ‘Spricht Ps 109 LXX Von Einem Messias Oder Nicht?’ in M.A. Knibb, ed., The Septuagint and
Messianism (Leuven: University Press), 255—256.
470 H. Spieckermann, ‘Rede Gottes und Wort Gottes in den Psalmen’, in K. Seybold & E. Zenger, eds., Neue Wege
Der Psalmenforschung (Freiburg: Verlag Herder, 1994), 157—158.
471 W. Holladay, 24.
472 Z. Zevit, ‘The Common Origin of the Aramaicized Prayer to Horus and of Psalm 20’, JAOS 110:2 (1990): 225. 473 W. Brown, ed., Handbook of the Psalms, 330.
133
These psalms share the common notion that the king is at Yahweh’s right, which is the pre— eminent position of God’s might and authority.
Based on analysis of Psalm 80, and comparative psalms, there are five key points to be noticed about the king: 1. The king is called ם ָד ָא־ן ֶב, 2. He is closely associated with Israel, 3. He is associated with his people’s tribulation, 4. He is called ם ָד ָא־ן ֶב in connection with Yahweh’s kingship, 5. The connection with Psalm 110:1 implies the enthronement of ם ָד ָא־ן ֶב.475
The extending branches and shoots of the vine in verse 12 are a reference to the borders of the Promised Land from Deuteronomy 11:24 obtained by David and kept by Solomon. Genesis 49 contains a prophecy concerning Judah and the arrival of David’s kingship, a prophecy that features a vine, wine and grapes (Genesis 40:11—12), language close enough to Psalm 80 that bears consideration in identifying the Son of Man with Davidic kingship.476
A Davidic king is not the only possibility for the ם ָד ָא־ן ֶב of Psalm 80 as both divine and corporate possibilities remain. Yahweh is possibly the enthroned king, and his role as the shepherd is a common descriptor for kings in the ancient Near East.477 The Lord is described as the king of Israel in passages such as 1 Samuel 8 and Isaiah 33:22. God is also the shepherd of Israel in passages such as Psalm 23 and Ezekiel 34, making this another possible identification. However, the psalm appears to make a distinction between Yahweh and the Son of Man/man of at his right.
475 R. Rowe, ‘Is Daniel’s “Son of Man” Messianic?’, 82. 476 A. Streett, The Vine, 36.
477 R. Rowe, ‘Is Daniel’s “Son of Man” Messianic?’ in H. Rowdon, ed. Christ the Lord: Studies in Christology
134
There are also corporate possibilities for identifying the Son of Man beyond Israel’s human or divine king. First, the man of the right hand is Benjamin from verse 2, possibly in the hope that Benjamin would rally from Judah to the aid of his brothers.478 The second option is that the man of the right hand is Israel, an alternative picture for describing the vine. This view is influenced by verse 15 where the ן ֶב is made strong by God for himself. If הָנַכ, found only here in the Hebrew text, means stock, planted by God’s right hand’, ן ֶב would refer to ‘the vine’ or Israel, which would determine the similar clause in verse 17.479 Exodus imagery and the conquest of the Promised Land are apparent in verse 9, possibly giving the Son of Man as Israel connection more validity. After recounting the exodus and the vine’s demise, verse 15 can be seen as a plea for a new exodus, with the hope that Israel will be strengthened and resettled after the fall.480 Further, verse 19 calls for God to ‘revive’ the nation as a whole, not just the king, in language that invokes what can thought of as an eschatological resurrection.481
Evaluation
Royal motifs are present in the text as the psalmist seeks a restoration of Israel’s fortunes that alludes to the blessings and curses found in Deuteronomy 28. With the looming destruction of their nation pending at Assyria’s hands, the author pleads with God to vanquish their enemies as he did in the past and as he promised in the covenant (Deuteronomy 28:7). The shoot is an allusion to the might and power Israel had under David, and the ם ָד ָא־ן ֶב is Israel’s king, whose restored fortunes represent the people’s fortunes, which is comparable to the terms used in Daniel 7.
478 R. Rowe, ‘Is Daniel’s “Son of Man” Messianic?’, 80. 479 R. Rowe, ‘Is Daniel’s “Son of Man” Messianic?’, 80. 480 A. Streett, The Vine, 27.
135
This kingship reading of the Son of Man leads to the possibility that the psalm is also messianic. If the Son of Man is the same ם ָד ָא־ן ֶב from Psalm 8, the ideal man, while the ‘man at the right hand’ is the conquering king of Psalm 110, the terms combine as a reference to a
messianic head set to bring about their restoration.482 However, this view of the Messiah is not of a redeemer or saviour, rather he is the head of a redeemed people.483 Such a messianic reading is enhanced when examining the messianic evolution that the psalm underwent in its LXX
transformation. Further, the psalm would be used in various texts of the first century CE that offers further insight into why Psalm 80 was a natural source for Matthew 25:31—46. Within Psalm 80 itself, the man of the right is the king of Israel who is too weak to address the situation facing his people and needs God’s strengthening.484