Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Acts 2:30
Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
30. knowing that God had sworn with an oath ] See Psa 132:11, “of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne.”
that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne ] The words represented by “according Christ” are omitted in the best MSS. The clause as corrected by them would be “of the fruit of his loins one should sit [or he would set one ] on his throne.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Therefore – As David was dead and buried, it was clear that he could not have referred to himself in this remarkable declaration. It followed that he must have had reference to some other one.
Being a prophet – One who foretold future events. That David was inspired is clear, 2Sa 23:2. Many of the prophecies relating to the Messiah are found in the Psalms of David: Psa 22:1, compare Mat 27:46; Luk 24:44 – Psa 22:18, compare Mat 27:35 – Psa 69:21, compare Mat 27:34, Mat 27:48 – Psa 69:25, compare Act 1:20.
And knowing – Knowing by what God had said to him respecting his posterity.
Had sworn with an oath – The places which speak of God as having sworn to David are found in Psa 89:3-4, I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant, Thy seed will I establish, etc.; and Psa 132:11, The Lord hath sworn in truth unto David, he will not turn from it, Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon my throne; Psa 89:35-36. The promise to which reference is made in all these places is in 2Sa 7:11-16.
Of the fruit of his loins – Of his descendants. See 2Sa 7:12; Gen 35:11; Gen 46:26; 1Ki 8:19, etc.
According to the flesh – That is, so far as the human nature of the Messiah was concerned, he would be descended from David. Expressions like these are very remarkable. If the Messiah was only a man, they would be unmeaning. They are never used in relation to a mere man; and they imply that the speaker or writer supposed that there pertained to the Messiah a nature which was not according to the flesh. See Rom 1:3-4.
He would raise up Christ – That is, the Messiah. To raise up seed, or descendants, is to give them to him. The promises made to David in all these places had immediate reference to Solomon and to his descendants. But it is clear that the New Testament writers understood them as referring also to the Messiah. And it is no less clear that the Jews understood that the Messiah was to be descended from David, Mat 12:23; Mat 21:9; Mat 22:42, Mat 22:45; Mar 11:10; Joh 7:42, etc. In what way these promises that were made to David were understood as applying to the Messiah, it may not be easy to determine. The fact, however, is clear. The following remarks may throw some light on the subject:
- The kingdom which was promised to David was to have no end; it was to be established forever. Yet his descendants died, and all other kingdoms changed.
- The promise likewise stood by itself; it was not made to any other of the Jewish kings; nor were similar declarations made of surrounding kingdoms and nations. It came, therefore, gradually to be applied to that future king and kingdom which was the hope of the nation; and their eyes were anxiously fixed on the long-expected Messiah.
- At the time that he came it had become the settled doctrine of the Jews that he was to descend from David, and that his kingdom was to be perpetual.
On this belief of the prophecy the apostles argued; and the opinions of the Jews furnished a strong point by which they could convince them that Jesus was the Messiah. Peter affirms that David was aware of this, and that he so understood the promise as referring not only to Solomon, but in a far more important sense to the Messiah. Happily we have a commentary of David himself as expressing his own views of that promise. That commentary is found particularly in Psa 2:1-12; Ps. 22; Ps. 69; and Psa 16:1-11; In these Psalms there can be no doubt that David looked forward to the coming of the Messiah; and there can be as little that he regarded the promise made to him as extending to his coming and his reign.
It may be remarked that there are some important variations in the manuscripts in regard to this verse. The expression according to the flesh is omitted in many mss., and is now left out by Griesbach in his New Testament. It is omitted also by the ancient Syriac and Ethiopic versions, and by the Latin Vulgate.
To sit on his throne – To be his successor in his kingdom. Saul was the first of the kings of Israel. The kingdom was taken away from him and his posterity, and conferred on David and his descendants. It was determined that it should be continued in the family of David, and no more go out of his family, as it had from the family of Saul. The unique characteristic of David as king, or what distinguished him from the other kings of the earth, was that he reigned over the people of God. Israel was his chosen people, and the kingdom was over that nation. Hence, he that should reign over the people of God, though in a manner somewhat different from David, would be regarded as occupying his throne, and as being his successor. The form of the administration might be varied, but it would still retain its prime characteristic as being a reign over the people of God. In this sense the Messiah sits on the throne of David. He is his descendant and successor. He has an empire over all the friends of the Most High. And as that kingdom is destined to fill the earth, and to be eternal in the heavens, so it may be said that it is a kingdom which shall have no end. It is spiritual, but not the less real; defended not with carnal weapons, but not the less really defended; advanced not by the sword and the din of arms, but not the less really advanced against principalities, and powers, and spiritual wickedness in high places; not under a visible head and earthly monarch, but not less really under the Captain of salvation and the King of kings.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 30. According to the flesh, he would raise up Christ] This whole clause is wanting in ACD, one of the Syriac, the Coptic, AEthiopic, Armenian, and Vulgate; and is variously entered in others. Griesbach rejects it from the text, and Professor White says of the words, “certissime delenda,” they should doubtless be expunged. This is a gloss, says Schoettgen, that has crept into the text, which I prove thus:
1. The Syriac and Vulgate, the most ancient of the versions, have not these words.
2. The passage is consistent enough and intelligible without them.
3. They are superfluous, as the mind of the apostle concerning the resurrection of Christ follows immediately in the succeeding verse.
The passage therefore, according to Bp. Pearce, should be read thus: Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath, of the fruit of his loins, to set on his throne; and foreseeing that he (God) would raise up Christ, he spake of the resurrection of Christ, c. “In this transition, the words which Peter quotes for David’s are exactly the same with what we read in the psalm above mentioned and the circumstance of David’s foreseeing that Christ was to be raised up, and was the person meant, is not represented as a part of the oath; but is only made to be Peter’s assertion, that David, as a prophet, did foresee it, and meant it.”
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Had sworn with an oath; not barely had sworn, which had been sufficient; but to show the excellency of the matter, and the necessity of our believing of it, as also the solemnity of the words, Psa 132:11.
Of the fruit of his loins; such as should descend from him, as the virgin Mary did.
According to the flesh; as to his human nature, which our Saviour did truly partake of, being in the form of a servant.
He would raise up Christ, by the power of the Holy Ghost in the womb of his virgin mother, as to his incarnation; and by the same power out of the grave, in his resurrection.
To sit on his throne; as Luk 1:32,33; not as a temporal king, for his kingdom is not of this world; but as David ruled over all the people of God, so does Christ, and shall do for ever.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Therefore being a prophet,…. Who could foretell things to come, as he did many things concerning the sufferings and death of Christ, and the circumstances attending it, concerning his resurrection, ascension, and session at the right hand of God. So the title of his “Psalms”, in the Syriac version, runs thus; the “Book of the Psalms of David, King and Prophet”: and in the Arabic version, “the First Book of the Psalms of David the Prophet, King of the Children of Israel”. Though the Jews d will not allow him, nor Solomon, nor Daniel, to be strictly and properly prophets, they make a difference between prophecy, and the Holy Spirit. They own, that the book of Psalms was written under the influence of the Holy Spirit, but not by prophecy; and therefore they place it among the Hagiographa, or holy writings, but not among the Prophets: though after all, Kimchi allows David to be a prophet, since he is called a man of God; for he says this name is not said of any but , “of a prophet” e; and Peter is right in calling him so:
and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him; as he did in
Ps 132:11.
that of the fruit of his loins; of one that should be of his seed, that should spring from him, even the Virgin Mary, who was of the house and lineage of David:
according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ; would send him forth, according to the human nature; for this phrase respects not his resurrection from the dead, but his incarnation or exhibition in the flesh, as in Ac 3:26. This clause is wanting in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions, and in the Alexandrian copy, and should be read in a parenthesis; since it is not in the text in Ps 132:11.
to sit on his throne; on the throne of David his father;
[See comments on Lu 1:32].
d Maimon. More Nevochim, par. 2. c. 45. Vid. Procop. Gazaeum in Reg. l. 2. c. 23. sect. 2. e Kimchi Praefat. ad Psalm.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
According to the flesh, he would raise up Christ. The best texts omit. Render as Rev., he would set one upon his throne.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Therefore being a prophet,” (prophetes oun huparchon) “Therefore being (existing as) a prophet,” David is here declared to be a prophet, also as an Old Testament writer referred to as an “holy man” who wrote trustworthy, reliable, prophetic matters, 2Pe 1:21.
2) “And knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him,” (kai eidos hoti orko homosen auto ho theos) “And comprehending or knowing (well) that God swore to him with an oath, Psa 89:20-21; Psa 89:27-36.
3) “That of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh,” (ek tes osphuos autou) “Out of or from the loins of his own flesh; thru and by means of what is termed the Davidic covenant, 2Sa 7:12-17.
4) “He would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; (kathisai epi ton thronon autou) “To sit (reign) on his throne;” (onastesein ton Christon) “He purposed to raise up Christ; this is left out of some of the better manuscripts, yet the idea is clearly, explicitly set forth in Luk 1:32-33; Act 15:14-17; Isa 9:6-7; 1Co 15:24-28.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
30. Therefore, seeing he was a prophet He showeth, by two reasons, that it is no marvel if David do speak of things that should come to pass long after his time; the former is, because he was a prophet. And we know that things to come, and such as are removed far from the knowledge of men, are revealed unto the prophets. Therefore, it were wickedness to measure their speeches according to the common manner and order which we use in measuring the speeches of other men, forasmuch as they go beyond the long courses of years, having the Spirit for their director. Whereupon they are also called seers; because being placed, as it were, upon an high tower, (121) they see those things which, by reason of great distance, are hidden from other men. Another reason is, because Christ was promised to him peculiarly. This maxim was so common amongst the Jews, that they had ever now and then the son of David in their mouth, so often as there was any mention made of Christ. They be no such arguments, I confess, as do necessarily prove that this prophecy is to be expounded of Christ; neither was that Peter’s intent and purpose; but first he meant to prevent the contrary objection, whence David had such skill to foretell a thing which was unknown. Therefore he saith, That he knew Christ, both by prophetical revelation, and also by singular promise. Furthermore, this principle was of great (Rom 10:4) force amongst the better-minded sort which Paul setteth down, that Christ is the end of the law. (122) No man, therefore, did doubt of this, but that this was the mark whereat all the prophets did aim, to lead the godly unto Christ as it were by the hand. Therefore, what notable or extraordinary thing soever they did utter, the Jews were commonly persuaded that it did agree with Christ. Furthermore, we must note, that Peter doth reason soundly, when he gathered that David was not ignorant of that which was the chiefest point of all revelations.
He had sworn with an oath God swore not only to the end he might make David believe his promise, but also that the thing promised might be had in greater estimation. And to this end, in my judgment, it is here repeated, that the Jews may think with themselves of what great weight the promise was, which God did make so notable (and so famous.) The same admonition is profitable for us also. For we need not to doubt of this, but that the Lord meant to set forth the excellency of the covenant by putting in a solemn oath. In the mean season, this is also a fit remedy for the infirmity of our faith, that the sacred name of God is set forth unto us, (123) that his words may carry the greater credit. These words, “according to the flesh,” do declare that there was some more noble thing in Christ than the flesh. Therefore Christ did so come of the seed of David as he was man, that he doth nevertheless, retain his divinity; and so the distinction between the two natures is plainly expressed; when as Christ is called the Son of God, according to his eternal essence, in like sort as he is called the seed of David according to the flesh.
(121) “ Specula,” watch tower.
(122) “ Hoc principium quod Paulus tradit Christum esse finem legis,” etc., this principle which Paul delivers, viz., that Christ was the end of the law, was of great force, etc.
(123) “ Pignoris instar,” like a pledge, omitted.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(30) Therefore being a prophet.The words according to the flesh, He would raise up Christ, are wanting in many of the best MSS. Without them the sentence, though somewhat incomplete, would run thus: That God had sworn with an oath that from his loins one should sit upon his throne. The words claim for the Psalmist a prophetic foresight of some kind, without defining its measure or clearness. His thoughts went beyond himself to the realisation of his hopes in a near or far-off future. As with most other prophets, the precise time, even the manner of time, was hidden from him (1Pe. 1:11).
He would raise up Christ.The Greek, by using the verb from which comes the word resurrection, gives to the verb the definite sense of raising from the dead.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
30. A prophet In the sense both of speaking by inspiration and of predicting the future.
An oath In 2Sa 7:5-16, God promises to David a successorship on the throne forever; in Psa 132:11, David affirms that God had so sworn; both in consequence of David’s determination to build a house for Jehovah.
Fruit of his loins Peter speaks as if it was, as it were, through his line of descent that David was able to look prophetically as through a line of light. Thereby he identifies himself with his great descendant the Messiah, and speaks in Psalm xvi as Messiah himself. The best reading, instead of he would raise Christ to sit on his throne, would substitute, that of the fruit of his loins One should sit on his throne. With that future One Peter now (in Act 2:32) identifies Jesus.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Act 2:30. According to the flesh, &c. This is expressed in the original in such a manner, as seems to refer these words not to the loins of David, but to Christ; and so may be an intimation that it was only in respect to his human nature, that the Messiah should descend from David; while there was still a higher nature, in which he was superior to him, and was indeed to be regarded as the Son of God. See Rom 1:3-4.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Act 2:30-32 . ] infers from the previous , whence it is plain that David in the Psalm, l.c. , as a prophet and divinely conscious progenitor of the future Messiah, has spoken of the resurrection of Christ as the one who should not be left in Hades, and whose body should not decay.
] see 2Sa 7:12 .
. ] sc. . On the frequent supplying of the indefinite pronoun, see Khner, II. p. 37 f.; Fritzsche, Conject . I. 36. The well-known Hebrew-like expression (Psa 132:11 ) presupposes the idea of the uninterrupted male line of descent from David to Christ. Comp. Heb 7:5 ; Gen 35:11 ; 2Ch 6:9 ; and see remark after Mat 1:18 .
. ] to sit on His throne (Xen. Anab. ii. 1. 4), namely, as the Messiah , who was to be the theocratic consummator of the kingdom of David (Mar 11:10 ; Act 15:16 ). Comp. Luk 1:32 .
] prophetically looking into the future . Comp. Gal 3:8 .
.] since He, in fact, was not left , etc. Thus has history proved that David spoke prophetically of the resurrection of the Messiah . The subject of . . . is not David (Hofm. Schriftbew . II. l, p. 115) which no hearer, after Act 2:29 , could suppose but ; and what is stated of Him in the words of the Psalm itself is the triumph of their historical fulfilment, a triumph which is continued and concluded in Act 2:32 .
] has solemn emphasis; this Jesus , no other than just Him, to whom, as the Messiah who has historically appeared, David’s prophecy refers.
] neuter: whereof . See Bernhardy, p. 298.
] in so far as we, His twelve apostles, have conversed with the risen Christ Himself. Comp. Act 1:22 , Act 10:41 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
Ver. 30. Out of the fruit of his loins ] That is, out of the Virgin Mary; the son of whose womb Christ was, being hewn without hands out of that mountain, Dan 2:45 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
30. ] , in the stricter sense, a foreteller of future events by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
] See 2Sa 7:12 . The words are not cited from the LXX, but rendered from the Hebrew. On the principle of interpretation of this prophecy, see above on Act 2:25 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Act 2:30 . : as David could not have spoken this Psalm of himself, he spoke it of some other, who was none other than the Messiah here the word is used in the double sense of one declaring God’s will, and also of one foretelling how that will would be fulfilled. : another favourite word of St. Luke, in his Gospel, and especially in Acts; in the former it is found seven times, and in the latter no less than twenty-four times, and in all parts (excluding ), Friedrich, Das Lucasevangelium , p. 7. It is not used by the other Evangelists. In the N.T., as in later Greek, it is often weakened into an equivalent of ; Blass, Grammatik des N. G. , p. 239. Here it may indicate that David was a prophet, not only in this one instance, but constantly with reference to the Messiah. , Hebraistic; cf. Act 2:17 . Viteau, Le Grec du N. T. , p. 141 (1896); for the oath cf. Psa 132:11 , 2Sa 7:16 . , i.e. , of his offspring. It is a common Hebraistic form of expression read here, but in Ps. 131:11 (LXX); cf. Gen 35:11 and 2Ch 6:9 (Heb 7:5 ). With regard to the human element in the Person of Jesus, Peter speaks of him as a descendant of David according to prophecy, as in the Synoptists and Rom 1:3 (Schmid). The exact expression, , is not found in the LXX, but . is found, not only in the Psalm quoted but in Mic 6:7 (Lam 2:20 ), where the same Hebrew words are used as in the Psalm: in the LXX is several times a translation of another Hebrew word (dual). This partitive construction (supply ) is also a Hebraistic mode of expression, and frequent in the LXX; cf. Act 2:18 , Act 5:2 . See Viteau, Le Grec du N. T. , p. 151 (1896).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
being. Greek. huparcho. See note on Luk 9:48.
had sworn = swore. See 2Sa 7.
with = by.
according . . . Christ to sit. The texts read, “He would set (one)”.
on = Greek. epi. App-104.
His throne. i.e. God’s throne. Compare 1Ch 29:23, and see Psa 2:6.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
30.] , in the stricter sense, a foreteller of future events by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
] See 2Sa 7:12. The words are not cited from the LXX, but rendered from the Hebrew. On the principle of interpretation of this prophecy, see above on Act 2:25.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Act 2:30. , a prophet) Whence it follows that the 16th Psalm is prophetical.-, knowing) by the prophecy of Nathan (2Sa 7:12-13). Therefore it was after this prophecy that David composed and sang the 16th Psalm.- , with an oath He swore) Psa 132:11, with which comp. Act 2:2.- , of the fruit of his loins) Scripture speaks of propagation with wonderful correctness and delicacy. A periphrasis for, of his seed.-) to set, to cause to sit.-, his) Davids.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
being: Act 1:16, 2Sa 23:2, Mat 27:35, Mar 12:36, Luk 24:44, Heb 3:7, Heb 4:7, 2Pe 1:21
knowing: 2Sa 7:11-16, 1Ch 17:11-15, Psa 89:3, Psa 89:4, Psa 89:19-37, Psa 110:1-5, Psa 132:11-18, Rom 1:3, 2Ti 2:8, Heb 7:1, Heb 7:2, Heb 7:21
with: Heb 6:17
he: Psa 2:6-12, Psa 72:1-19, Isa 7:14, Isa 9:6, Isa 9:7, Jer 23:5, Jer 23:6, Jer 33:14, Jer 33:15, Amo 9:11, Amo 9:12, Mic 5:2, Luk 1:31-33, Luk 1:69, Luk 1:70, Luk 2:10, Luk 2:11, Joh 18:36, Joh 18:37, Rom 15:12, Rev 17:14, Rev 19:16
Reciprocal: 2Sa 7:12 – I will set 2Ch 10:16 – David Jer 30:9 – General Dan 7:9 – his throne Mat 1:1 – the son of David Mat 20:30 – Have Mat 22:43 – General Luk 1:32 – give Luk 20:41 – Christ Luk 22:18 – until Act 2:25 – David Act 4:25 – by Act 13:23 – this 1Co 12:10 – prophecy Heb 12:9 – fathers
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
0
Having explained that David was not writing about himself, Peter thought it well to account for his statements. They showed that he was personally interested in Christ because he was to be his (David’s) own famous descendant. The most significant item was that this descendant was some day to sit upon the throne (of course in a spiritual sense) left vacant by the change in dispensations.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Act 2:30. Therefore being a prophet. In the stricter sense, a foreteller of future events by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (Alford). Jesus Himself expressly speaks of David writing in the Spirit (Mat 22:43).
And knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne. The words of the prophet Nathan to King David are here referred to (2Sa 7:12-13). In Psa 132:11-12, this solemn promise of the Most High is expressly referred to. It is, of course, impossible to say what was Davids exact idea of this great One who was to descend from him. From the words of Nathans prophecy, he must have gathered that no mere man among his descendants could ever establish the throne of his kingdom for ever (2Sa 7:13), or sit upon his throne for evermore (Psa 132:12). We may conclude with certainty that the psalmist king did connect that descendant of his, of whom he spoke in the Spirit in such strange grand terms, with the idea of the Messiah.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
See notes on verse 29
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
30. Therefore being a prophet and knowing that God swore to him with an oath that one from the fruit of his loins should sit upon his throne. Peter uses this testimony of David to prove the kingship of Christ. He was born King of the Jews. Paul says (Rom 2:28-29):
He is not a Jew as one outwardly, neither is circumcision that it is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly and circumcision is that of the heart; in the spirit and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men but of God.
Hence, you see that Jesus was born King of Saints. When Pilate wrote this superscription on His cross above His head in Hebrew, Greek and Latin, the language of religion, learning and law for everybody to read, This is the King of the Jews, he wrote an eternal truth. That was the reason why he could not change it afterwards at the request of the Jews. The word Inri, which you so frequently see above crosses at Roman Catholic grave-yards and other places, is a combination of initials and stands for Jesus Nazarenus, Rex Ioudiourum, Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews.
David, the brightest type of Christ in the Bible, powerfully symbolizes Him in His regal capacity. As David had two coronations, first, he was crowned king of his own tribe at Hebron, and seven and a half years afterward he was crowned king of all the tribes of Israel at Jerusalem, so Christ in His first advent was crowned King of Saints when He ascended up to heaven, when He comes in His glory He will be crowned King of all the nations upon the face of the earth. David never occupied an earthly throne. His kingdom was the divine theocracy centralized in heaven and overlapping on the earth. God said: I have found David, the son of Jesse, a man after my own heart, who will do all my wills. The reason why David was a man after Gods own heart was not because he was infallible, for he was not, but because he had one fixed and settled policy and purpose in all his administrations, and that was not to do his own will but the will of God (Act 12:22). Much has been said about the perpetuity of Davids throne; great volumes written in an attempt to substitute other dynasties, even of other nations, in lieu of what is regarded as the forfeited throne of David, and thus fulfill the Scriptures. When we undertake to help out the Bible, we always make a mistake and get into trouble. The Bible, like God, does not need any help. If you will throw away your creeds and part company with the devil, the Bible will do its own talking. Here it is positively specified that Jesus, the lineal descendant of David, was born King of the Jews in Davids royal line. To be sure, He never reigned on earth. Instead of crowning Him King they killed Him, but here Peter proves demonstratively that he was crowned in heaven King of the Jews and successor of David to sit upon his throne. The Bible is clear in this succession of David and perpetuity of his kingdom on the mediatorial throne in heaven. As to Davids earthly throne, instead of all these efforts to find it perpetuated among the Gentiles, which is utterly chimerical, turn with me to the Jerusalem council of apostles, elders and brothers, highest authority this side of heaven, and you find the matter fully explained and the problem solved. Act 15:16 : After these things [i.e., the preaching of the gospel to all the Gentiles in the present dispensation] I will return and build again the dynasty of David or the throne which hath fallen down, and will rebuild the ruins of the same and set it up again. Here we see positively that the temporal wing of Davids throne had an interregnum at the time of Christ and the apostles, which is to continue until the King returns in His glory. Then He is going to rebuild the throne of David, restore his kingdom on the earth, destined, as the same Scripture goes on to say, to encompass all the nations of the globe. Hence, we see that Davids kingdom in the earth is to have this interregnum, which obtained in the former dispensation and continued to the end of the gospel age.
Therefore it is a great mistake to think we have to find Davids kingdom perpetuated in the earth, as this would preclude the interregnum which the Scriptures positively reveal. Hence the conclusion of the problem is the simple fact that Jesus Christ, the lineal Son, royal Heir and Successor of David, was born King, and, though prohibited and crucified on earth, He was crowned King when He ascended into heaven, and actually there sitteth on the throne of David, thus perpetuating his kingdom forever. Since David really had no earthly throne, but as king of the divine theocracy, his throne was in heaven, the capital of his kingdom, while it overlapped down in the earth and gave Israel a prelibation of the blessedness of the heavenly kingdom, of which Jerusalem, in the glory of David and Solomon, proximately symbolize heaven, and Davids earthly throne was but the temporal counterpart of the heavenly. Hence the temporary dilapidation of Davids earthly throne does not invalidate the eternal perpetuity of his kingdom, realized in the mediatorial administration of Christ in heaven and destined in the coming millennial age, adumbrated in the days of David, to reach down and girdle the globe in the glory of the heavenly kingdom. We find interregnums in many of the time-honored kingdoms of the earth, such as Rome and Britain; but these interregnums do not invalidate the perpetuity of these kingdoms. Neither does the interregnum of Davids throne on earth invalidate the eternal perpetuity of his kingdom, especially in view of the fact that the heavenly nucleus of that kingdom is literally perpetuated in the glorious reign of King Jesus. The very fact that God said to Jesus on His congratulation and coronation, Sit thou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footstool, involves the unequivocal promise on the part of the Father to shake down every rival potentate in all the earth, whether political or ecclesiastical. The incarnation of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost was a positive confirmation of the coronation of Christ in heaven, as the law must be fully satisfied before the promised restitution can be consummated in the incarnation of the Holy Ghost, actually restoring the human to full spiritual freedom and ushering in the millennial victory. Of course, Luke here gives us but a brief epitome of Peters sermon, i. e., the salient points. God in the Abrahamic covenant promised the gift of the Holy Ghost. That covenant must be sealed with the blood of Christ before the Holy Ghost, the Restorer and Comforter, can be given.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 30
Of the fruit of his loins; of his descendants.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
2:30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had {x} sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
(x) Had sworn solemnly.