Undisfellowshipped said: How can you be certain that it applied to a human king back then, and that it was not a prophecy? After all, Psalm 16 was a PROPHECY, and David was not talking about himself, even as the Apostle Peter mentioned:
Would not the Jews have taken it at face value when they sang this song? Our modern and unrealistic views of such ancient writings is what really is out of place. Suddenly they are prophecies and not practical counsel to be taken to heart when such worship is being offered in song.
Now regarding Psalm 16. It is both practical counsel and a warning for those saints (Jews) that would fall away to false worship. Many did this in times past and were still doing this when the Psalm was written. Its prophetic nature was based upon the already existing hope for a Messiah that would come at some future time. Martha both new of and expected such an outcome as this was the hope of the Jews.
Joh 11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.
Therefore viewing the Psalm as prophetic only with no application to the Jews (those saints) to whom it was written ignores the counsel and warnings given in it.
Psalm 16:3 But to the saints that are in the earth, and to the excellent, in whom is all my delight. 4 Their sorrows shall be multiplied that hasten after another god: their drink offerings of blood will I not offer, nor take up their names into my lips.
When? Why then of course as the application was to such Jews singing this song and a warning to any that fall into false worship. You seem to think words like being a prophet restricts such use. But you are simply seeing how someone in the future would look back as such statements and bring them into focus for the Jews living at that time.
Undisfellowshipped said: The only inspired application of Psalm 45 that we have is when the writer of Hebrews applies it to Jesus Christ contrasting Him with the angels. So that is the ONLY application I will make for that verse, unless you can show me some convincing reasons why I should believe that it applied to human kings prior to Jesus.
It seems very clear to me that the writer of Hebrews quoted Psalm 45 to prove that Jesus was God in a way that the angels are NOT gods. Since angels can be called "gods" as representatives of God, then the writer of Hebrews must have been saying Jesus was God
This is not the only inspired application as you teach. I already explained how angels and messengers are the same word. Why many jump to conclusions and think "non human beings" or "spirit creatures" when the word is used in Hebrews is strange since the very first verse establishes the identity and context of those under discussion in the text.
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
These prophets, these angels which included the Kings of God’s of Israel are under discussion. Our Lord, this Son that not only made the worlds (nations on the earth) and "had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;" is now being compared to such fathers and prophets over which he will over rule in the Kingdom. Hebrews was written at a higher level for Christian Jews still keeping the Law who were themselves well trained in interpretation. They should have been able to comprehend such use of "God," "angels," and "spirits" even if many of us today cannot. So the verses from 4 to 14 are about "angels" "spirits" that are human and that will some day exist in the same kingdom and place that our Lord will inhabit here on earth.1 4 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?
Undisfellowshipped said: How can Psalm 45 apply to any human king of Israel, but then at the same time, be quoted in order to prove that Jesus is SUPERIOR to those human kings? How do you explain that?
Simple. Jesus will resurrect such Kings and rule over them in the Kingdom here on earth. All this comes later in time and is what we preach to the world.
Joseph
