The author of Hebrews prefixes his quotation of Isaiah 8:17–18 in Hebrews
88Kaiser also notes the forward-pointing and anticipatory significance of Isaiah and his
“children” in 8:17: “The narrator makes his prophet look far into the future, and set his hope on an event which neither he nor his sons are to experience, though they point to it with their whole person, by testifying with their actions and their words, or with their names, to the power of God over the history of his people.”
Kaiser, Isaiah 1–12, 197.
89I am indebted to my friend Samuel Emadi, whose excellent work on Moses’ literary and theological presentation of Joseph as a messianic type within Genesis stimulated my thoughts on how Isaiah and his family function typologically within Isaiah. See Samuel Cyrus Emadi, “Covenant, Typology, and the Story of Joseph: A Literary-Canonical Examination of Genesis 37–50” (PhD diss., The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2016).
2:13 with a quotation from Psalm 22:22 (MT 22:23 / LXX 21:23) in Hebrews 2:12.90 The quotation from the psalm provides a particular interpretive orientation to the citation from Isaiah. It is thus necessary to briefly examine the psalm citation in its original context to determine what bearing it has on the citation in Hebrews and the use of Isaiah 8.
The superscription of Psalm 22 indicates that it is a Davidic psalm (MT: רוֹמ ְז ִמ ד ִו ָד ְל / LXX: ψαλµὸς τῷ Δαυιδ).91 The precise Sitz im Leben of this psalm is unknown, thus making it a generic prayer that could be suitably applied to a future experience of
suffering and deliverance.92 Further, the LXX superscription, εἰς τὸ τέλος (“for the end”) gives the psalm an eschatological orientation.93 The psalm consists of two main
90In this section, I am using the terms LXX, LXX Psalter, etc, to refer to the Old Greek translation of the Psalter, as represented by Alfred Rahlfs, ed., Psalmi cum Odis, 3rd ed., Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum 10 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979).
91Virtually all the manuscript evidence for the Psalter includes the superscriptions, indicating that they were treated as part of the canonical text, and thus important for interpretation. On the necessity of reading the Psalms in light of their superscriptions, see James M. Hamilton Jr., God’s Glory in Salvation through Judgment: A Biblical Theology (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 276n12. I take the attribution in the superscription at face value as indicating the Davidic authorship of the psalm by the historical King David. Even if one does not hold to Davidic authorship of the psalm, it is nevertheless clear that the psalm has been given a Davidic orientation by virtue of its Davidic superscription, and is intended to be
understood as Davidic. Reading the psalm on its own terms therefore demands that it be understood with a Davidic lens.
92The relationship between the historical and prophetic elements of the psalm is debated. Some interpreters argue that the psalm cannot be attributed to David at all and place it in a later historical setting.
See, for instance, Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalms 1–59: A Commentary, trans. Hilton C. Oswald
(Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1988), 293–94. Such a notion, however, simply disregards both the superscription’s attribution of the psalm to David as well as the internal data of the psalm that evinces Davidic authorship. See Richard D. Patterson, “Psalm 22: From Trial to Triumph,” JETS 47 (2004): 215.
Several interpreters (especially premodern interpreters) argue that the psalm is exclusively prophetic and messianic, and thus refers exclusively and literally to the sufferings of Christ. In the premodern period, for instance, such an approach is taken by Augustine, On the Psalms (NPNF1 8:58–60), and Gregory of Nazianzus, On the Son, Fourth Theological Oration V (NPNF2 7:311). Among contemporary interpreters, a representative of this approach is H. C. Leupold, Exposition of the Psalms (Columbus, OH: The Wartburg Press, 1959; repr., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1969), 194–208. The exclusively messianic approach has much to commend it, particularly the fact that it is very difficult to pinpoint the particular sufferings and deliverance enunciated by the psalm in David’s life. The approach preferred here, however, is a typological approach, which sees the psalm as having historical meaning in David’s own life and in Israel’s corporate history, but ultimately and climactically finds its fulfillment in the Messiah, Jesus Christ. This is the view taken by John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, trans. James Anderson (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1949), 1:256; Patterson, “Psalm 22,” 213–33; Mark H. Heinemann, “An Exposition of Psalm 22,” BSac 147 (1990): 301–2; Allen P. Ross, A Commentary on the Psalms (1–41), Kregel Exegetical Library (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2011), 526–51.
93Albert Pietersma argues that the LXX translator’s intent in rendering the superscription εἰς τὸ τέλος must be distinguished from the reception of this phrase by readers of the LXX. On the basis of careful examination of the translation technique of the translator, Pietersma contends that the translation was just providing an equivalent rendering of חצנמל, and consequently, εἰς τὸ τέλος has no eschatological value in the original translation. The eschatological flavor of the phrase, in Pietersma’s estimation, is a function of reception rather than translator’s intent. Furthermore, Pietersma argues that the word τέλος in Classical and Hellenistic Greek does not really have a temporal value, and just because it was received that way in its
sections.94 In the first section (22:1–21 [MT 22:2–22 / LXX 21:2–22]), David voices a desperate petition to Yahweh, whom he perceives to be far from him. The initial verses alternate between cries of despair (22:1–2, 6–8 [MT 22:2–3, 7–9 / LXX 21:2–3, 7–9]) and affirmations of Yahweh’s past faithfulness at both the corporate (22:3–5 [MT 22:4–6 / LXX 21:4–6]) and individual (22:9–11 [MT 22:10–12 / LXX 21:10–12]) levels. David calls out to Yahweh in deep distress and appeals to him based on his trustworthiness demonstrated in the past. The lament section continues with David describing the intense agony he faces at the hands of those who assail him (22:12–18 [MT 22:13–19 / LXX 21:13–19]). The lament concludes with David once again pleading for help (22:19–21
reception history does not mean that the translator intended an eschatological idea. Thus an eschatological meaning must not be treated as part of the LXX’s constitutive character. See Albert Pietersma,
“Septuagintal Exegesis and the Superscriptions of the Greek Psalter,” in The Book of Psalms: Composition
& Reception, ed. Peter W. Flint and Patrick D. Miller (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 470. Despite the strength of Pietersma’s argument, the eschatological understanding of this phrase is warranted on several counts. First, the Hebrew Psalter itself—as the hymn-book of the Davidic covenant—can be shown to have an
eschatological and hopeful orientation. The Psalter is marked by a pervasive hope not just for David and Israel in the present days, but also for the house of David in the days to come (cf. Pss 45; 72; see also the recent works defending Davidic hope in books IV and V of the Hebrew Psalter: David Alexander Gundersen, “Davidic Hope in Book IV of the Psalter” [PhD diss., The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2015]; Michael K. Snearly, The Return of the King: Messianic Expectation in Book V of the Psalter, LHB/OTS 624 [New York: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015]). Since the eschatological character of the Psalter is evident within the Hebrew Psalter itself, it is not unlikely that the LXX translators could perceive this eschatological orientation and bring it over in their translation, especially given the milieu in which the LXX was translated. Second, though Pietersma’s presentation of the data is impressive, it is impossible to prove that an eschatological orientation was absolutely not intended by the LXX translator.
Pietersma’s data shows that the LXX translator was concerned about quantitative equivalence with the superscriptions, but this does not entail that he was not interested in using the superscriptions to highlight the eschatological orientation already present in the Hebrew Psalter. Furthermore, Pietersma’s data to show that the temporal sense of חצנ is not translated using τέλος all comes from outside the Psalter and thus does not prove that the translator of Psalter could not have used τέλος temporally. Third, Pietersma’s claim implies that the superscriptions were wrongly understood by the earliest interpreters, in contradiction to the intentions of the translator—and this severely weakens his argument. Finally, the eschatological
understanding of the psalm superscriptions are warranted by the context of the Psalter in Israel’s history.
The Davidic covenant already holds out an eschatological framework (2 Sam 7:16) and this eschatological hope gets further sharpened and developed by the exilic and post-exilic hope for the rise of the Davidic house and the restoration of Israel that pervades not only the Psalter, but all the Prophetic writings.
94Scholars are divided over the major structural divisions of the psalm, with some preferring to see two major sections, consisting of lament and praise (for instance, Patterson, “Psalm 22,” 216). Others discern three major sections consisting of introduction, lament, and praise (for instance, Heinemann,
“Exposition of Psalm 22,” 287), or even four major sections (Ross, Commentary on the Psalms, 529–30).
The most convincing proposal for the literary structure of the psalm is that provided by Beth Tanner, who argues for two major sections, with an alternating structure within. See Nancy Declaissé-Walford, Rolf A.
Jacobson, and Beth Laneel Tanner, The Book of Psalms, NICOT (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2014), 227. Patterson (“Psalm 22,” 219) also sees the psalm as divided into a section of lament (vv. 1–21), comprising of the psalmist’s apparent rejection (vv. 1–10) and sufferings recounted (vv. 11–21), and a section of thanksgiving (vv. 22–31), comprising of the psalmist’s praise (vv. 22–26) and his word of prophecy (vv. 27–31).
[MT 22:20–22 / LXX 21:20–22]).
In the second section beginning in 22:22 (MT 22:23 / LXX 21:23), the mood of the psalm shifts from lament and petition to triumph and thanksgiving: “Trial has been swallowed up in triumph.”95 In 22:22 (MT 22:23 / LXX 21:23), the verse cited in
Hebrews 2:12, David resolves that he will declare God’s name to God’s people. This verse is a resolute declaration of faith. David joyfully declares his rescue from the grievous sufferings recounted in the preceding section and anticipates participating in corporate praise with the congregation of the people of God. In the next verse (22:23 [MT 22:24 / LXX 21:24]), David calls upon “all the offspring of Jacob” (בֹק ֲע ַי ע ַר ֶז־ל ָכּ / ἅπαν τὸ σπέρµα Ιακωβ), “all the offspring of Israel” (ל ֵא ָר ְשׂ ִי ע ַר ֶז־ל ָכּ / ἅπαν τὸ σπέρµα Ισραηλ), those who fear Yahweh (ה ָוה ְי י ֵא ְר ִי / οἱ φοβούµενοι κύριον) to glorify Yahweh and to revere him. David affirms that Yahweh hears the cry of the afflicted and once again declares that others who are afflicted will praise Yahweh. David even pronounces eternal life on them (22:25–26 [MT 22:26–27 / LXX 22:26–27]).
In its final movement, the psalm anticipates the worship of Yahweh growing in
“ever-widening circles.”96 In 22:27 (MT 22:28 / LXX 21:28), using words that recall the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants, David proclaims that all the “ends of the earth”
(ץ ֶר ָא־י ֵס ְפ ַא־ל ָכּ / πάντα τὰ πέρατα τῆς γῆς; see Ps 2:8) and all the “families of the nations”
(םִיוֹגּ תוֹח ְפּ ְשׁ ִמ־ל ָכּ / πᾶσαι αἱ πατριαὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν; see Gen 12:3) will worship Yahweh. The next verse declares Yahweh’s kingship over the nations and the worship ascribed to him by rich and poor alike. The final two verses extend the promise of praise to Yahweh into the future (22:30–31 [MT 22:31–32 / LXX 21:31–32]). “Offpsring” (ע ַר ֶז / τὸ σπέρµα µου) will serve him, and the praise of his righteousness will reverberate through future
generations.
95Patterson, “Psalm 22,” 226.
96Ibid., 225.
This brief survey of Psalm 22 draws attention to three crucial aspects of the psalm that have a bearing on its linkage with Isaiah 8:17–18 in Hebrews. First, the psalm is Davidic, and thus anticipates the sufferings, faith, and deliverance of the Davidic Messiah. As we have seen, in its original context, the psalm recounts the intense sufferings of David, reveals David trusting in Yahweh to rescue him, and finally ends with David praising Yahweh for his deliverance, with corporate ramifications not only for Israel, but for the nations. However, the psalm’s triumphant hopes of salvation with corporate and global ramifications are not realized in the historical David, for David and the Davidic kings after him fail disastrously, the dynasty gets snuffed out, and the nation of Israel goes into exile. When the psalm is read within the context of the Psalter as a whole, it is clear that David himself envisions the glorious hopes of the Davidic covenant will be fulfilled through a future Davidic Son (Pss 2; 45; 72; 89; 110; 112; 132). The suffering and salvation held forth in Psalm 22 are typological and await fulfillment in a future David.
As the Psalter becomes Israel’s prayer book in exile, the psalmist’s sufferings become the sufferings of Israel, the psalmist’s trust in Yahweh and his cries for
deliverance become the nation’s faith and cries, and the psalm’s promises of salvation and corporate praise become Israel’s hopes—but they all await fulfillment in the coming of a new David, through whom Yahweh will climactically fulfill his promises. There is, therefore, a typological line from the psalm to its fulfillment in Christ. The sufferings depicted in the psalm are a hyperbolic description of David’s sufferings, which find their ultimate realization in Jesus the Messiah. Psalm 22 was therefore used by Jesus himself and several NT authors as descriptive of his suffering (Matt 27:46 / Mark 15:34; Matt 27:39 / Mark 15:29 / Luke 23:35; Matt 27:43; John 19:24 [see also Matt 27:35 / Mark 15:24 / Luke 23:34]).
Consequently, David’s resolution to proclaim Yahweh’s name to his “brothers”
and to lead them in the corporate worship of God also finds ultimate fulfillment in Christ.
The proclamation of God’s name is the purpose of Christ’s mission and the participation in God’s praise is its denouement. The entirety of Psalm 22 in its movement from suffering to salvation is typologically fulfilled in Christ. David’s resolution of
proclamation and praise can be prosopologically interpreted as the words of the eternal Son who speaks them as the words that are fulfilled in his saving mission.
Second, the psalm emphasizes the solidarity between the Davidic king and the people of God, consistently characterizing them as “offspring” (22:23, 30 [MT 22:24, 31 / LXX 21:24, 31]). As soon as the psalm shifts from lament and petition to praise, the Davidic king resolves to proclaim Yahweh’s name to his “brothers” (22:22 [MT 22:23 / LXX 21:23]). The psalm continues to unpack this relation by calling forth praise from the
“offspring” of Jacob, the “offspring” of Israel, indicating that the Davidic king’s
deliverance results in the praise of Yahweh among the people of God (22:23 [MT 22:24 / LXX 21:24]). Further, the outcome of David’s deliverance extends beyond the boundaries of Israel to the “ends of the earth” and to the “families of the nations” (Ps 22:27 [MT 22:28 / LXX 21:28]), in fulfillment of promises made to Abraham and David (cf. Gen 12:3; Ps 2:8).97 The result is that future generations—“offspring”—shall serve Yahweh.
The psalm thus highlights the solidarity between David and the people of God, the
“offspring,” by rooting their praise of Yahweh in the deliverance experienced by the Davidic king.
Third, Psalm 22 from start to finish emphasizes the centrality of faith in the midst of suffering. At the beginning of the psalm, David recounts Yahweh’s rescue of
“our fathers,” highlighting the faith of the fathers by repeating three times that they trusted in Yahweh (22:4–5 [MT 22:5–6 / LXX 21:5–6]). The importance of faith is underscored again as David describes his enemies taunting him for his trust in Yahweh
97As Patterson rightly notes, “The term ‘seed’ partakes of God’s promised spiritual remnant that extends from the Abrahamic covenant to its culmination in the enactment of the New Covenant in David’s heir (cf. Ezek 37:18–21) . . . . In that glorious future the Lord’s words through Isaiah will be fully realized ‘My salvation will last forever, my righteousness will never fail . . . . My righteousness will last forever, my salvation through all generations.” Patterson, “Psalm 22,” 226.
(22:8 [MT 22:9 / LXX 21:9]). The emphasis on faith continues in David’s statement that he was made to trust in Yahweh even while he was upon his mother’s breasts (22:9 [MT 22:10 / LXX 21:10]). The psalm is thus permeated with expressions of the Davidic king’s resolute faith in Yahweh. The psalm sets forth the Davidic king’s confidence that he will be rescued from his deepest afflictions and his deliverance will have global consequences resulting in the praise of Yahweh and the fulfillment of the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants.
Each of these observations in Psalm 22 forms crucial connections with Isaiah 8. Psalm 22, like Isaiah 8, presents the Davidic house in affliction. Just as in the context of Isaiah 8, Psalm 22 emphasizes the centrality of trust in Yahweh through suffering and affliction. Psalm 22 also underscores the theme of solidarity between one who is faithful and those associated with him. Most importantly, Psalm 22 holds out the hope of
offspring that will praise Yahweh for accomplishing his saving purposes, the fulfillment of his covenant promises to Abraham and David. The thanksgiving section of Psalm 22 envisions the fulfillment of the hopes that Isaiah and his “children” embody in Isaiah 8:17–18. There is thus an organic relationship with biblical-theological significance between both these texts.
Isaiah 8:17–18 in Biblical-