On Psa 110:3 (LXX: 109:3) (εκ γαστρος προ εωσφορου εξεγεννησα σε [“From the womb before the morning star I have begotten you”]), Ruben A. Būhner noted that this teaches the personal pre-existence of the Messianic King:
The given translation “before the
morning star I have begotten you” is not the only possible one. The preposition
προ in particular presents us with
two different possible understandings. The first is to understand the term as a
temporal reference (“before the morning star [was created]”). The second
suggested interpretation views προ
in the local sense “in front of the morning star,” which would mean the same as
“in the morning.”
The most likely interpretation of προ is a
temporal understanding: “Before the morning star [was created] I have begotten you.”
Two reasons are offered in favor of this reading. First, it is necessary to
note that within classical Greek the word εωσφορος normally refers specifically to the
“morning star” and not just the “morning” or “dawn,” such as the Hebrew Vorlage
שחר. (See Henry G. Liddell et al., A Greek-English Lexicon: With a
Supplement 1968, 9th ed. [Oxford: Clarendon, 1994], 752. See also Joachim Schaper,
Eschatology in the Greek Psalter. WUNT II/76 [1995], 102: “εωσφορος clearly
has the very specific meaning of ‘Bringer of the morn,’ ‘the Morning Star.’
Interpreting it as ‘dawn’ misses the point. The only exception with regard to
its use in the Septuagint is 1Reg. 30:17 where εωσφορος indeed seems to mean ‘morning’”)
Second, there are four parallels to this term within the Septuagint of the
Psalms, and in all instances the Septuagint translates שחר with a word that
clearly means “morning.” In three cases the Septuagint uses ορθρος, once it uses εωθινος, but
never εωσφορος as in Ps 109LXX. That
is why it would seem odd that the translator would have used εωσφορος instead of ορθρος or εωθινος,
if he understood προ εωσφορος only as “in the morning.” It is
indeed more likely that the translator understood προ in the
temporal sense “before” and, therefore, the whole phrase as “from the womb
before the morning star I have begotten you.” Regardless of the translator’s
understanding, this interpretation is the most natural reading of the text for
a recipient who did not have access to the Hebrew Vorlage. This last
point gets further support if one takes a look at a similar idea in 1 En.
48:2f., where it is said of the messiah son of man, “Even before the sun and
the constellations were created, before the stars of heaven were made, his name
was named before the Lord of Spirits.” Not only do we find again the notion of
the preexistence of a messianic figure, but most remarkable, the preexistence is
expressed in relation to the creation of stars in both cases (see potentially similar
also Ps 71:5, 17LXX). This does not necessarily mean that 1 Enoch is
dependent on such a reading of Ps 109LXX. Nevertheless, it
demonstrates that such an interpretation of Ps 109LXX would indeed
be the most natural one available to a Jewish reader within the group
responsible for 1 Enoch.
However, even if the figure’s preexistence is
expressed in relation to the creation of the stars, this does not necessarily
imply that the messianic king is not a created being. After all, Jub. 2:2-11,
for instance, attests to the idea that God created the angels on the first day
and the stars on the fourth day. Such a concept of the order of creation means
that the messianic king of Ps 110 could have been created before the stars (such
an idea about the creation of the messiah [among other things such as the Torah
and the throne] before the creation of the world can be found also within later
rabbinic texts; see, for instance, b. Pes. 54a Bar.). Admittedly, thoughts like
that are highly hypothetical. But they should warn against reading into the
text the motif of the messiah’s role as mediator of creation, as it can be
found with respect to Christ in the New Testament. Nevertheless, as soon as Ps
110 was interpreted within Second Temple Judaism as a messianic text, it logically
followed Ps 109LXX would be interpreted as evidence of the messiah’s
preexistence. (Ruben A. Būhner, Messianic High Christology: New Testament
Variants of Second Temple Judaism [Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press,
2021], 91-92)
