Chizuk Emunah (Pt 2) Under the Microscope: Chapter 68

Acts 13:33, Paul proves that Jesus is the Son of God, by quoting from the second Psalm: "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."

The reference to that psalm is objectionable, since the royal psalmist spoke here of his own person. It was against himself that the Gentiles raged, and carried on their warfare, when he had commenced his government. See 2 Samuel 5:17, "And the Philistines had heard that they had anointed David king over Israel, and all the Philistines came to seek David," etc.

He called himself justly the Messiah, Anointed of the Lord, for that title was lawfully given to him as the ruler of his people. Having been established as the chief of Israel; by the express command of the Lord, he was justified to mark those rebelling against him as rising "against the Lord, and against His Anointed." The words in Psalm 2, "And I have anointed my king," occur in the actual history of David, in 1 Samuel 16:1, "I shall send thee to Jesse, of Bethlehem, for among his sons I have seen for myself a king." "Zion, my holy mountain," (Psalm 2), which was the metropolis, and was called "the city of David." It was that king to whom it was said, "Thou art my son, I have this day begotten thee." The title Son, was given to all those who, by faithful obedience, attached themselves to the service of God. In Exodus 4:22, Israel was called "my first-born son"; and in Hosea 1:10, "It will be said unto them. Ye are the sons of the living God." On the day when Samuel anointed David as king of Israel, "he was changed into another man"; and we read in 1 Samuel 16:13, "And Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren, and the Spirit of the Lord descended upon him." The adoption of man by God is called, in biblical language, "to beget." See Deuteronomy 32:18, "Thou hast forgotten the rock that begat thee." The words, "Ask of me; and I shall give nations for an inheritance," were fulfilled to David, who humbled the Philistines (2 Samuel 8), and made Amon, and Moab, and Edom, tributary to himself. With reference to Jesus, he had no dominion whatever to merit the title of a Messiah (Anointed King).

He said of himself that he was "not come to be ministered (served) unto, but to minister "(serve others). Moreover, why should Jesus have been invited to "Ask of me, and I will give nations for an inheritance," since as the incarnate Son of God, the whole earth ought to have belonged to him, and not some selected portion of it?

Troki is referring to Paul's speech again to the people of Antioch. Here is the relevant section.

“Brothers, sons of the family of Abraham, and those among you who fear God, to us has been sent the message of this salvation. For those who live in Jerusalem and their rulers, because they did not recognize him nor understand the utterances of the prophets, which are read every Sabbath, fulfilled them by condemning him. And though they found in him no guilt worthy of death, they asked Pilate to have him executed. And when they had carried out all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree and laid him in a tomb. But God raised him from the dead, and for many days he appeared to those who had come up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses to the people. And we bring you the good news that what God promised to the fathers, this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus, as also it is written in the second Psalm, “‘You are my Son, today I have begotten you.’ (Acts 13:26-33) 

Where, exactly, is Paul using Psalm 2:7 to prove that Jesus is the Son of God. Paul is arguing that just as Psalm 2 was written as a coronation psalm for the ancient kings, it applies in its ultimate sense to Jesus, the king of kings.

One of the flaws of the Jewish anti-missionaries is that they think that the New Testament is using quotes from the Hebrew Bible as prooftexts, the way that modern Christians apply them. Instead, the New Testament is generally proclaiming Jesus as the supreme king and God in the flesh, and is applying these quotations in order to reveal their hidden meaning.

The New Testament is not the first set of documents to do so. The practice was a well-known form of interpretation called pesher, which took ancient prophecies and applied them to current times. Advocates did not necessarily think that their pesher interpretations were according to the original intent of the author, but instead used them as a technique to make these prophecies relevant to later times.

A. Lukyn Williams gives a much more extensive reply, quoting numerous rabbinic commentaries on Psalm 2. The short summary is: Rashi and Ibn Ezra both argued that this refers to King Messiah. The Talmud in Berachot and Sukkah both refer to this psalm being about Messiah. The apocryphal writings in Second Temple Judaism, such as Esdras and Psalms of Solomon also argue that this refers to King Messiah. David Kimchi states in his commentary "our teachers interpreted this Psalm of Messiah." Maimonides also quotes this verse in his introduction to tractate Sanhedrin as referring to King Messiah.

When the twin pillars of Rabbinic Judaism (Rashi and Maimonides) both agree that this verse refers to Messiah, it's hard to find fault with Paul for doing so as well.

We need to recognize the double standard. The rabbis will criticize the New Testament writers for taking creative liberties when interpreting the Bible, and then themselves take creative liberties far in excess of anything the New Testament church has done.