Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 15:1 (Winter 1972)
Article: The Use Of Psalms 8 And 110 In I Corinthians 15:25-27 And In Hebrews 1 And 2
Author: Wilber B. Wallis

JETS 15:1 (Winter 1972) p. 25

The Use Of Psalms 8 And 110
In I Corinthians 15:25-27 And In Hebrews 1 And 2

Wilber B. Wallis*

It is proposed in this paper to examine the striking parallels between the use of Psalms 8 and 110 in I Corinthinas 15:25 and 27, and Hebrews Chapters 1 and 2. The citation of portions of these Psalms by Paul in I Corinthians 15:25 and 27 clinches his argument that Christ must conquer all His enemies, including death. Likewise, in Hebrews 2, the same theme is being pursued: Christ, through death, purposes to destroy the one having the power of death. In the course of the argument of Hebrews, Psalm 8 is quoted at length, but in conjunction with Psalm 110:1. I believe it can be shown that the exposition of these Psalms in Hebrews clarifies also the problem of the sequence of eschatological events in the Pauline apocalypse, I Corinthians 15:20–28.

The problem in I Corinthians 15:20–28 is in part whether Paul teaches that there will be one resurrection, or two. One class of students would hold that the sequence of events at and following the Parousia is of such a nature that the whole complex happens in a very brief time, so that no space can be found between the Parousia and the end for a millennium. The chiliast argues that Paul’s language implies that he envisioned a millennium, and that the parallels from the Revelation and elsewhere clearly prove the case.

Geerhardus Vos is an example of the first-mentioned group of expositors. His chapter, “The Question of Chiliasm” in the volume The Pauline Eschatology, provides an instructive example of his school’s handling of the problem. Vos approaches the Pauline Apocalypse with the strong presumption that the chiliastic interpretation is not sound. He lays appreciative emphasis on the “far-sweeping, age-dominating program of the theology of Paul,” and argues that when Paul has been satisfactorily interpreted, the problems of the Revelation may be faced. Vos thinks, “the large mould of the Pauline eschatological teaching” should not be “reduced to the narrower, picturial measures of the Apocalyptic vision.” (p. 226). Vos pursues his analysis of the passage until he comes to the You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe