This paper compares the ancient and modern interpretations of three key texts that refer to the eternal Son: Psalm 2:7–8, John 17:5, and Romans 1:4. The difficulty each of these passages pose is the relationship between the eternal relation of the Son to the Father and the economy of redemption. They seem, if modern interpreters are correct, to make sonship or glory something that was gained by the work of Christ. By contrast, with respect to Psalm 2:7 in particular, ancient commentators claimed that the text simply pulls back the curtain to reveal the eternal generation of the Son. In favor of the ancient commentators, while also seeking to account for particular connections of these texts to the economy of redemption that are noted by contemporary biblical scholarship, this paper will show that a Reformed reading of these texts stays within the classical Trinitarian parameters while being sensitive to the redemptive-historical account given in Scripture. The paper will begin with a presentation of some contemporary commentary on each of the three passages/verses. Next, this will be set in contrast to older commentary on the same passages, showing from the ancients that there are Trinitarian challenges present in contemporary scholarship. Finally, while accepting the theological parameters set by the earlier generations of the church, I will draw on the early-modern Reformed commentary tradition to offer a more theologically and biblically robust account of these passages.