^{page 199 note 1} The most recent extensive treatment of Ps. cx. 1 in early Christianity is to be found in the monograph of Hay, David M., Glory at the Right Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christianity, S.B.L. Monograph Series XVIII (Nashville/New York, 1973)Google Scholar, which contains reference to the wider literature. The present article is an extensive reworking of a chapter in a dissertation presented for the degree Dr. theol. to the Evangelisch-theologische Fakultät of the University of Mainz in 1972, ‘Sohn und Hoherpriester. Eine traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung zur Christologie des Hebräerbriefes’. A substantially abbreviated version awaits publication and includes the material presented here only in summary form.

^{page 199 note 2} On the use of the psalm in pre- and post-New Testament Judaism cf. Hay, op. cit. pp. 19 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 3} Bill, . IV, 1, 458 f.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 4} Similarly Hay, op. cit. p. 30.Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 1} Contra Hahn, F., Christologische Hoheitstitel (FRLANT 83), 1966 ³, 114 ffGoogle Scholar.; Fuller, R. H, The Foundations of New Testament Christology (1965)Google Scholar, 185 f. Had the designation ‘Lord’ led to the application of Ps. cx. la to Jesus, then it is agreed that this would have first occurred in the Hellenistic Jewish communities, since it is hard to conceive of being used independently as a christological title for Jesus. But when one considers the meaning: ‘the Lord said to my master’, a usage of clearly preserved in the text, then nothing stands in the way of the application of the psalm to Jesus in the Aramaic-speaking communities. They did not consider the Hebrew word as a title, but as a reference to their master. Hence as we shall see it is only secondarily that the title ό κριος comes to be linked with Ps. cx. 1.

^{page 200 note 2} Op. cit. p. 128.Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 1} Vielhauer, P., ‘Ein Weg zur neutestamentlichen Christologie?’, in Aufsätze zum Neuen Testament (TheolBüch 31), 1965, 141–98Google Scholar, 168 f.

^{page 201 note 2} Op. cit. pp. 128 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 3} See note 1 on page 200. On the relationship between exaltation and parousia in the earliest traditions cf. also Thüsing, W., Erhöhungsvorstellung und Parusieerwartung in der ältesten nachösterlichen Christologie (S.B.S. 42), 1969.Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 1} Matthew has relieved the eschatological tension somewhat by his insertion of άπ' ᾃρτı (xxvi. 64). Luke has gone further and changed the focus from the parousia to the present exalted state of Jesus by the addition of άπ ツο νν and the omission of any reference to Jesus’ coming (Luke, xxii. 69).Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 2} So Lindars, B., New Testament Apologetic (² 1973), p. 43Google Scholar; Haenchen, E., Die Apostelgeschichte (⁶ 1968)Google Scholar, ad loc.; Wilckens, U., Die Missionsreden der Apostelgeschichte (WMANT 5), ³1974Google Scholar, 151 f.; Lohfink, G., Die Himmelfahrt Jesu (StANT 26), 1971Google Scholar, 226 f.

^{page 202 note 3} So Wilckens, , op. cit. p. 151Google Scholar; Lohfink, , op. cit. p. 226.Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 4} So E., Schweizer, Erniedrigung and Erhöhung bei Jesus und seinen Nachfolgern (AThANT 28), ^z 1962Google Scholar. 59 f.; Hahn, , op. cit. p. 116Google Scholar. Contra Wilckens, , op. cit. pp. 171 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 1} Cf. Wilckens, , op. cit. p. 151Google Scholar; Lohfink, , op. cit. pp. 230 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 1} So Tödt, H. E., Der Menschensohn in der synoptischen Überlieferung (1959)Google Scholar, 274 ff. See too Higgins, A. J. B., Jesus and the Son of Man (1964)Google Scholar, 144 ff.

^{page 204 note 2} So Tödt, , op. cit. pp. 174 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 3} Cf. Kramer, W., Christos Kyrios Gottessohn (AThANT 44), 1963 I.A.Google Scholar

^{page 205 note 1} Contra Hay, op. cit. pp. 59 fGoogle Scholar., who sees the act of intercession as yet to come.

^{page 205 note 2} The Son of Man or Elect One of the Similitudes of Enoch sits on a throne both ruling and judging (I En. 45, 3; 51, 3; 61, 8; 61, 3 ff.; 69, 16). Enthronement references in no way necessarily imply references to Ps. cx. 1. On the widespread use of the throne motif cf. Hay, op. cit. pp. 52 ffGoogle Scholar., though he too seems too quickly to assume allusions to Ps. cx. I in his discussion at 26 f. Nor is enthronement necessarily linked with messianic ideas. Moses (EzekTrag 68 ff.), Metatron (III En. 10, 3) and Sophia (Wild. ix. 4) are spoken of in similar terms. The throne motif in the Son of Man traditions ( Matt, . xxvi. 31Google Scholar, xix. 28) would have made it easy for a conflation with the messianic traditions using Ps. cx. I to take place as in Mark, xiv. 61 fGoogle Scholar. parr. and Acts vii. 55 f. Cf. also Hahn, , op. cit. pp. 180 f.Google Scholar

^{page 205 note 3} On the link between station at the throne's right hand and intercession in the royal court cf. Hay, op. cit. pp. 54 f.Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 1} See note 1, p. 199.

^{page 206 note 2} Hay, op. cit. p. 88.Google Scholar

^{page 207 note 1} That both designations are traditional cf. Wilckens, , op. cit. pp. 175 fGoogle Scholar. He points out that they recur in II Clem, 20, 5.

^{page 208 note 1} Contra Hay, op. cit. pp. 60 f.Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 1} A chart giving the main elements these passages have in common is to be found on page 217.

^{page 210 note 1} The association between Ps. cx. 1 and Ps. viii. 7 is evidenced further in the influence the latter has had on the formulation of Ps. cx. 1 in Mark, xii. 35 ffGoogle Scholar. (υοκάτω instead of υοπόδιον cf. Ps. viii. 7 πάντα πέταξας ποκάτω…) and in I Cor. xv. 25 (πάντας τος έχθρος π τος πόδας ατο instead of τος έχθρος σου ππόδıον τν ποδν σου). On this cf. Hay, op. cit. pp. 35 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 211 note 1} Schille, G., ‘Zur Basis des Hebräerbriefes’, Z.N.W. 48 (1957), 270–80 notes on pp. 276 ffGoogle Scholar. common features which Heb. i–ii shares with Eph. i and I Cor. xv.

^{page 212 note 1} It is interesting to note that any reference to Ps. viii. 7 in association with the right-hand session disappears from the later creeds, though it is still to be detected in Pol. Phil. 2, I. The link with the ascension is to be found already in I Pet. iii. 22; Acts ii. 34 and Mark, xvi. 19Google Scholar. The presence of an allusion to Ps. cx. I in I Clem. 36 in a context that recalls Heb. i is much more likely to be the product of Clement's having loosely quoted Hebrews from memory, as he quoted I Cor. xiii in 49, 5 ff., than of his having an independent tradition as Theisen, G., Untersuchungen zum Hebräerbrief (StNT 2) 1969, pp. 34 ffGoogle Scholar. and Hay, op. cit. pp. 82 fGoogle Scholar. maintain. So Renner, F., An die Hebräer – ein pseudepigraphischer Brief (Münsterschwarzacher Studien 14), 1970, 35Google Scholar. In Asc. Isa. 10, 14 there is a linking of ascension, an allusion to Ps. cx. 1 and subjugation of powers. On other allusions to Ps. cx. 1 in early post-New Testament literature, cf. Hay, op. cit. pp. 164 fGoogle Scholar. and comments in the body of his text. Most allusions are dependent on the tradition of Mark, xiv. 61 f.Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 2} One of the serious omissions in Hay's treatment is his failure to deal adequately with this fact.

^{page 213 note 1} This tendency is most clearly seen in the book of Revelation. Christians too are sons (xxi. 7 using II Sam. vii. 14; cf. Heb. i. 5); receive the morning star (ii. 28, cf. xxii. 16); are clad in white garments (vii. 14, iii. 5, vi. II, cf. xix. 13); will rule over nations with a rod of iron (ii. 26 f., cf. Ps. ii. 8); will be enthroned (iii. 21, cf. Ps. cx. I); receive a name (xxii. 4, etc., cf. Phil. ii. 9). Note too the application of Ps. cx. 1 to ‘the anointed ones’ in the Apoc. Elijah 37, 2 f. and as a general expression of vindication in T. Job. 33, 3.

^{page 214 note 1} So Hay, op. cit. pp. 110 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 1} So Hahn, , op. cit. pp. 113 ff. and 259 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 2} Against Bürger, C., Jesus als Davidssohn (FRLANT 98), 1970, pp. 52 ffGoogle Scholar. who sees direct polemic against ‘Son of David’ as a title in the passage.