interpretation on the obvious and natural meaning of the words taken in connection with

the general teaching of the Old Testament about the Messiah, on the undoubted

interpretation of the ancient Jewish Synagogue,51 on the authority of Christ, and on the

testimony of History.

Compared with this, the other question as to the authorship of the Psalm is of

secondary importance. The character of infinite, nay, Divine, superiority to any earthly

Ruler, and of course to David, which the Psalm sets forth in regard to the Messiah,

would sufficiently support the argument of Christ. But, besides, what does it matter,

whether the Psalm was composed by David, or only put into the mouth of David

(David's or Davidic), which, on the supposition of Messianic application, is the only

rational alternative?

But we should greatly err if we thought that, in calling the attention of His hearers to this

apparent contradiction about the Christ, the Lord only intended to show the utter

incompetence of the Pharisees to teach the higher truths of the Old Testament. Such,

indeed, was the case - and they felt it in His Presence.52 But far beyond this, as in the

proof which He gave for the Resurrection, and in the view which He presented of the

great commandment, the Lord would point to the grand harmonious unity of Revelation.

Viewed separately, the two statements, that Messiah was David's Son, and that David

owned Him Lord, would seem incompatible. But in their combination in the Person of

the Christ, how harmonious and how full of teaching - to Israel of old, and to all men -

concerning the nature of Christ's Kingdom and of His Work!

It was but one step from this demonstration of the incompetence of Israel's teachers for

the position they claimed to a solemn warning on this subject. And this appropriately

constitutes Christ's Farewell to the Temple, to its authorities, and to Israel. As might

have been expected, we have the report of it in St. Matthew's Gospel.53 Much of this

had been said before, but in quite other connection, and therefore with different

application. We notice this, when comparing this Discourse with the Sermon on the

Mount, and, still more, with what Christ had said when at the meal in the house of the

Pharisee in Peræa.54 But here St. Matthew presents a regular series of charges against

the representatives of Judaism, formulated in logical manner, taking up successively

one point after the other, and closing with the expression of deepest compassion and

longing for that Jerusalem, whose children He would fain have gathered under His

sheltering wings from the storm of Divine judgment.