Or David: Psalm 2:
2 The kings of the earth rise up and the rulers band together against the LORD and against his anointed...“I have installed my king on Zion, my holy mountain.” 7 I will proclaim the LORD’s decree: He said to me, “You are my son; today I have become your father. 12 Kiss his son, or he will be angry and your way will lead to your destruction, for his wrath can flare up in a moment. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.
This is a perfect example of the church botching the scriptures and eisegetically rendering the text.
...rulers band together against the LORD and against his anointed.
You underline anointed as if that makes it Christological. The Hebrew word for anointed occurs 39 times in the Tanakh(OT), never once is it translated as messiah. The Christian OT translates it messiah two times, the rest anointed. Gee wonder why? This passage is speaking about David, who is G-ds annointed. Just like these other verses.
Psalm 18 Great deliverance giveth he to his king; and sheweth mercy to his anointed, to David, and to his seed for evermore.
Psalms 89:20 I have found David my servant; with my holy oil have I anointed him:
Israels Kings, Saul, David, Solomon, Hezekiah etc. were all annointed. So were Priests and even the non-Jew Cyrus the persian.
He said to me, “You are my son; today I have become your father.
This again is David. David, Solomon and Israel are all called G-ds son.
Hosea 11:1 When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called My son out of Egypt. (Yes, that is the same passage that Matthew misquotes, deliberately)
1 Chronicles 22:9 Behold, a son shall be born to thee, who shall be a man of rest; and I will give him rest from all his enemies round about: for his name shall be Solomon, and I will give peace and quietness unto Israel in his days. [10] He shall build a house for my name; and he shall be My son, and I [will be] his Father; and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel for ever.
12 Kiss his son, or he will be angry and your way will lead to your destruction, for his wrath can flare up in a moment. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.
Major mistranslation of the Hebrew here. The word that the KJV translated as "Son" is the Hebrew word "bar." This word does indeed mean "son," but not in the Hebrew language, but in the closely related Aramaic language. In Hebrew, the word means "purity." Of the 150 Psalms, not a single one of them is written in Aramaic; it's entirely in Hebrew.
The passage is about G-d. Not a messiah.
Psalm 2:11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. 12 Do homage in purity, lest He be angry, and ye perish in the way, when suddenly His wrath is kindled. {N} Happy are all they that take refuge in Him.
Sorry.... not about Jesus
Psalm 2:11-12. This passage is cited often by Christians seeking to prove the Trinity. In the King James Bible, it reads, "Serve the L-rd with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him."
Christians contend that the instruction to kiss the Son and the blessing on all who put their trust in him must mean that God has a Son Who is equal with Him in divinity.
The problem is that the verse is mistranslated.
Psalm 2:(12) Do homage in purity, lest He be angry, and ye perish in the way, when suddenly His wrath is kindled. Happy are all they that take refuge in Him. Psalm 2:(7) I will tell of the decree: YHWH said unto me: 'Thou art My son, this day have I begotten thee.
The word rendered "the Son" is "bar". In Hebrew, the word means "pure" and is correctly translated in Psalm 24 ("clean hands and a pure heart"). The Hebrew word for "son" is "ben". Confusion results from the fact that the word does mean "son" in Aramaic; but there is no Aramaic in any of the Psalms. In fact, verse 2:7, just a few verses before this passage, reads, "I will declare the decree: the L-rd hath said unto me, Thou art my Son [beni]; this day have I begotten thee", proving that the word "ben" was known and used by the composer of Psalm 2. Verses 11 and 12 should read, "Serve the L-rd with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Desire what is pure, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him." This rendering makes it clear that the pronouns in verse 12 all refer to the L-rd, with no hint of a Trinity.
Even if we assume that "bar" means "son" here, that still doesn't give us a Trinity. G-d has many sons. Israel is G-d's firstborn son (Exodus 4:22; see also Hosea 11:1). The sons of G-d took wives from among the daughters of men (Genesis 6:1-2). The sons of G-d appeared before His throne, and Satan was among them (Job 1:6; 2:1). Even Jesus says, "Blessed [are] the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of G-d" (Matthew 5:9). There is nothing in Psalm 2 which makes the "bar" any more G-d's son than the sons mentioned above.
A further point bears mentioning regarding Psalm 2:7. It is quoted in the New Testament in Hebrews 1:1-5, which reads, "G-d, who in sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the majesty on high; being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?"
There is something wrong with the author's citation of Psalm 2:7 here, and most Christians read this passage of Hebrews without even seeing it. The problem is that, even if modern Christianity is right about the Trinity, the Father should not be saying to Jesus, "This day have I begotten thee", because Jesus is supposed to have been eternally begotten of the Father. Nor can it be held that Psalm 2:7 is speaking about the birth of Jesus, as even the King James confirms that the verse is in the past tense ("the L-rd hath said unto me, Thou art my son etc.").
And what of the end of the passage I just quoted, which reads, "And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son"? This quote is from 2 Samuel 7:12-15, where Nathan the prophet quotes G-d telling King David, "And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men; but my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee." This cannot possibly refer to Jesus. Why would G-d worry about Jesus committing iniquity? Why would Jesus need mercy, that G-d should have to promise David that His mercy would never depart from Jesus? Rather, the passage must refer to David's son Solomon. Indeed, Solomon himself thus interpreted the passage, telling King Hiram of Tyre, "And, behold, I purpose to build an house unto the name of the L-rd my G-d, as the L-rd spake unto David my father, saying, Thy son, whom I will set upon thy throne in thy room, he shall build an house unto my name." Yet the author of Hebrews insists that the passage from 2 Samuel somehow refers to Jesus. Nor can it be held that the prophecy has two fulfillments, because nothing in the context of 2 Samuel 7 even hints of a second fulfillment. (And even if there were a second fulfillment, the aforementioned problems with referring the passage to Jesus would still remain.)