Part 36
his God' is in the good man's heart and 'their [Hebrew 'his'] steps do not slip' (Ps 37:31; they 'never depart from it' GNB). For 'nor have our steps departed from your way', GNB has 'we have not disobeyed your commands' (Ps 44:18; cf. also 56:6; 73:2). The vivid concrete metaphor of Ps 73: 'But as for me, my feet had almost stumbled, my steps had nearly slipped', is replaced in GNB by abstract nouns: 'But I had nearly lost confidence, my faith was almost gone'. The accusation against the wicked that 'their throats are open graves; they flatter with their tongues' is rendered 'Their words are flattering and smooth, but full of deadly deceit' (Ps 5:9), and the picture of God gathering the waters ofthe sea 'as in a bottle' becomes 'into one place' (Ps 33:7).
2. Animal Imagery. One of the delightful features of the psalms is the very large number of references to animals. Not only are they God's creatures, who offer to him their own praise (cf. Ps 104; 149), but they provide images for many different human and divine characteristics and actions. God is pictured as a mother bird, sheltering his worshippers under his wings (Ps 17:8; 36:7; 57:1; 61:4; 63:7; 91:4). The psalmist wishes he were a sparrow or swallow nesting within the temple (Ps 84:3). In his distress he likens himself to an owl in the wilderness, and a lonely bird on the housetop (Ps 102:6-7), and longs for wings like a dove to escape (Ps 55:68). God's goodness and forgiveness renews his youth 'like the eagle's' (Ps 103:5). His longing for God is like the deer's longing for flowing streams (Ps 42:1), and he urges his fellows to walk in God's way, and not to be like horses and mules which are restrained only with bit and bridle (Ps32:8-g). Someofthe most vivid similes are reserved for the psalmist's enemies. They attack him like lions (Ps 7:2; 10:9; 17:12; 22:13, 2I> 57-4) and he asks God to tear out their fangs (Ps 58:6). They are like bulls (Ps 22:12) and the wild ox (Ps 22:21), like snakes, venomous and deaf (Ps 58:4—5; 140:3) and dogs (Ps 22:16, 20; 59:6, 14), and he wishes that they would dissolve into slime like snails (Ps 58:8, if that is the meaning). The king, if it be the king, describes himself as surrounded by foreign nations as if by bees (Ps 118:12). In an elaborate simile which compares Israel to a vine, its attackers are compared to the wild boar (Ps 80:13). In a different image, the mountains skip like rams and lambs before YHWH's theophany (Ps 114:4).
16. NRSV often retains 'soul', especially when it is the subject of a verb or is in the vocative (cf. Ps 42:1-2; 103:1-2). REB has 'soul' in only seven psalms, presumably where the English would otherwise be awkward or synonyms for parallel words needed to be found (Ps 19:7; 42:4; 74:19; 103:1, 2, 22; 104:1, 35; 130:6,146:1). Various methods are adopted by modern translations to avoid using 'soul'. The most common is to have the simple pronoun (e.g. Ps 3:2 'to me'; 124:7 'we have escaped'; the practice is much more common in REB than in NRSV). Alternative concepts are sometimes adopted, such as life' (e.g. Ps 35:4; 38:12); 'heart' (Ps 10:3; 78:18); and 'will' (Ps 27:12, where REB has 'greed' and NIV 'desire'; 41:2). Short phrases sometimes represent the sense, again more often in REB (Ps 35:25 'we have got our wish' REB; 105:22 'at his pleasure'; 107:26 'courage'; 138:3 'bold and strong' REB). This is to return to the meanings which the psalms had in ancient Israel. Whether Christians are justified in retaining the 'soul' of AVand BCP in their use ofthe psalms in worship, interpreting it as the immortal part ofthe individual, is another question.
3. Hunting. A favourite way of depicting the enemies' actions is hunting. In Sumerian the sign for the hunt signified an enclosed space and originally meant 'to surround'. Hunting in the OT was mainly practised with traps and snares. Frequently the psalmists speak of traps, nets, and pits (Ps 9:15-16; 31:4; 35:7-8; 57:6; 64:5; 69:22; 141:9-10; 142:3). In Ps 124:7 the Israelites describe their rescue from their enemies who 'would have swallowed up us alive' in the image of a bird escaping from a broken snare. Keel (1978) illustrates many of these similes from reliefs from the ancient Middle East.
H. Imagery in the Psalms. 1. As has been seen, poetry is always seasick when it is ferried to another country. Translation cannot convey the rhythms, overtones, resonances, sounds, alliteration, and plays on words in the original. Metaphor and simile play a very large part in the appeal ofthe psalms, and the ultimate horror ofthe ability of translation to destroy the poetry is seen in GNB. 'Steps' and 'path' are frequent metaphors for life and conduct. The psalmist says that the 'law of
4. Images of YHWH: Shepherd. YHWH is described under a wide range of metaphors and similes. Despite the familiar 'The LORD is my shepherd', the image of a shepherd occurs only in Ps 23 and 80:1, although his worshippers are referred to as sheep in a number of other places (Ps 74:1; 78:52; 79:13; 95:7; 100:3). Sheep also represent the weakness of the psalmists in face of their enemies (Ps 44:11, 22). The psalmist declares that he has gone astray 'like a lost sheep'
365 PSALMS
(Ps 119:176), while in Ps 49:14 the shepherd is death, in grim contrast to Ps 23.
3. Secondly, and even more importantly, the psalms are the poetry of prayer and praise, not the prose of dogma. The attraction and power of the psalms lies in imagery and language, rather than in a set of theological ideas. They kindle religion rather than define it. It is possible to derive a theology from liturgy and worship, but a better way is to allow the psalms to inspire and express religious devotion. But they come from a distant age, and a few problems remain.
5. Father, Rock, Fortress. Not unexpectedly YHWH is never described as the mother of his people, but it is perhaps surprising that he is only rarely called father (Ps 68:5; 89:26; 103:13), though the king is his adopted son (Ps 2:7). More common metaphors are rock (Ps 18:2, 31, 46; 61:2; 71:3; 89:26; 144:1-2), fortress, strong tower, or stronghold (Ps 9:9; 18:2; 31:2; 61:3; 71:3; 91:2; 144:2), and shield (Ps 3:3; 28:7; 33:20; 59:11; 115:9, 10, n; 144:2). YHWH is a warrior (Ps 24:8; 78:65-6), who takes up his shield (Ps 35:2) and fights for his people. Vivid imagery describes the theophany (Ps 18:7-15; 77:16-20; 97:2-5; 98:7-8). While not exactly a metaphor, the title 'YHWH of hosts' (Ps 24:10; 46:7; 48:8; 69:6; 84:3,12; cf. 'YHWH, God ofhosts', 59:5; 80:4,19; 84:8, 89:8), is often linked with military language, although there is debate as to whether the 'hosts' are Israel's armies or the heavenly host (the stars). It seems to have been a special title given to YHWH in the Jerusalem cult.
J. Problem Features in the Psalter. 1. James Russell Lowell's comment that 'Time makes ancient good uncouth', applies as much to truth as to goodness. One change of attitude in modern times, the rejection of patriarchal society and language, has already been noted (A.g). So strong are feelings about this, that the psalms have been rewritten in all the most recent translations in order that 'masculine-oriented language should be eliminated as far as this can be done without altering passages that reflect the historical situation of ancient patriarchal culture' (NRSV: xv). Two other features often cause distress to Christians today: attitudes towards enemies and assertions of innocence.
6. The Righteous and the Wicked. Other metaphors light up the character of the righteous and the wicked. The good man is like a flourishing tree (Ps 1:3; 52:8; 92:12), and Israel is depicted as a vine (Ps 80:8—13), while the wicked are like chaff which is blown away (Ps 1:4; 35:5; 83:13; two different Heb. words are used). The shortness of human life is but 'a few handbreadths' (Ps 39:5). The sick man shrivels as quickly as grass (Ps 90:5—6; 102:4; IO3:I5—I6); the image is used as a curse on the psalmist's enemies (Ps 129:6). The days of human beings drift away like smoke (Ps 102:3), and their life is poured out like water (Ps 22:14; 5^-7)- The wicked are depicted as wearing their evil devices and dishonour like clothes (Ps 73:6; 109:18-19, 29).
2. Attitudes towards 'Enemies'. The most striking form of the hostility and even outright cruelty towards enemies is found in Ps 137:7-9 and 139:19-22, where psalms which have great appeal are wrecked by calls for vengeance (cf. Ps 104:35, with its call for the destruction of the wicked). Ps 69 and 109 contain long imprecations against the psalmist's enemies, Ps 35 and 52 are largely taken up with an appeal to God against an enemy, Ps 58 describes the wicked in violent terms and seeks divine punishment that is even more violent, Ps 83 contains a long section seeking vengeance, and other psalms contain similar expressions. Several of these psalms also find pleasure in contemplating the punishments and disasters that befall the wicked and the enemies (e.g. Ps 52:6-7; 58:10-11). Various devices have been adopted to deal with this.
7. Wife and Sons. Finally in this selection of images, a man's wife, like Israel, is pictured as a fruitful vine, his children as olive shoots (Ps 128:3), while sons are like arrows in the hand of a warrior (Ps 127:4-5; providing Anthony Trollope with Mr Quiverful!).
3. Editing out. Frequently in worship the offending verses (in the case of Ps 137 and 139) are deleted, or the psalm is never sung (in contrast to BCP, where the practice of singing through the whole Psalter is followed). Modern hymn-books, such as the Methodist Hymns and Psalms, severely limit the number of psalms they include, and even edit these with deletions.
I. The Theology of the Psalms. 1. Most commentaries include a discussion of the theology of the Psalter and whole books have been written on the subject (e.g. Gunn 1956; Ringgren 1963; Kraus 1986; McCann 19930). It is deliberately omitted here for two reasons.
4. Quotations. Some modern translations try to alleviate the difficulty by their punctuation. Thus NRSV, REB, and NJB express the view that the curses in Ps 109:6—19, or some of them, are those of the psalmist's enemies, not his own (the first two even insert 'They say' at the beginning of v. 6).
2. First, there is no unitary theology of the psalms. Rather what is found is a number of different theologies and series of theologies. On the one hand, the theology of Ps i is very different from that of Ps 73 or 88; the universalism of some of the hymns is different from the intense nationalism of others; even the three history psalms present differing views of God's activity in Israel's history and Israel's response to God. On the other hand, the interpretation of the psalms, and hence their theological teaching, has changed over the centuries. It is doubtful whether we can recover the theology of those who wrote the psalms, even if'theology' is the correct term to describe their ideas about God, for practice and worship were probably more important than explicit beliefs, and each stage in the editing and compilation of the Psalter introduced fresh theological ideas. Later, the psalms have been used by Jews and Christians in different contexts and with different meanings.
5. The Nature of the Psalms. But these expedients are no answer to the problem, which concerns the way in which Scripture is understood and interpreted. Six general comments about the nature of the psalms may be made first, (i) In some psalms the words may be the defence of those maintaining their innocence against criminal charges and thus be part of the legal setting. (2) Even if'workers of iniquity' is not a technical term for sorcerers, sometimes the psalmist may feel threatened by sorcery, and the curses may have the character of counter-spells. (3) If some psalms were actually composed by men who were seriously ill and not by priests for them, the mental strain of the illness must be taken into account. (4)
PSALMS 366
sung in its entirety as the centre of monastic prayer (Bradshaw
The easiest answer is to interpret most of the individual laments as the king's psalms, when his enemies will be the enemies of Israel and ultimately of God, so that the curses are an expression of the psalmist's opposition to evil, and part of the cultic expression of Israel's faith. (5) In the absence of any hope of a happy life after death, evil has to be defeated in the present world if right is to be triumphant. Illness and misfortune are regarded as signs of the psalmist's sin, and only restoration and the discomfiture of his 'enemies' will prove his innocence and God's just rule over the world. (6) It is sometimes also observed that the psalmists make no distinction between the sin and the sinner, whereas Christians are often taught to do so. (See Zenger 1996.)
1995}.
K. The Numbering of the Psalms. 1. The numbering of the psalms differs between the Protestant and Catholic/Orthodox traditions. The reason is thatthe LXX combined Ps 9 and 10 as a single psalm, Ps 9 (probably correctly), joined 115 to 114 (as Ps 113), and divided Ps 116 into Ps 114 (= w. 1-9) and Ps 115 (= w. 10-19), and PS 147 into Ps 146 (= w. i-n) and Ps 147 (= w. 12—20). It inserts 'Alleluia' before Ps 116:10, and repeats its expanded form of the title to Ps 147 before v. 12. This means that for most of the Psalter the psalm numbers in the LXX and the Vulgate, and hence the Catholic English versions (Douai and Ronald Knox) are one behind those of the Hebrew/Protestant text. JB and NJB, however, follow the Hebrew numbering.
6. Morality and the Culture. Behind these comments lies a recognition that ethical decisions cannot be made without reference to the society in which the actors live. Morality is part of the overarching culture. This means that ethical ideas change over the years as societies change, and moral judgements cannot be absolute. Even if complete relativity of morals is rejected, it can hardly be maintained that human ethical standards at any one time are the immutable will of God. This means accepting that we too are children of our age; and our consciences are also imperfect and moulded by the society in which we live. The psalmists belonged to their own age, and part of the problem of Scripture lies in the fact that it is the very human word of very frail and sinful human beings. No longer is it possible to defend a view of biblical authority which sees it as the infallible word of God, and attempts to do so lead to grotesque apologetics (see Kaiser 1983: 292-7, with its conclusion that 'neither Ps 137 nor any of the other seventeen imprecatory psalms present a sub-Christian... ethic').
2. In the Hebrew the titles of the psalms are treated as part of the text. This means that where the title is longer than a few words it is counted as a separate verse (or even two verses in Ps 51; 52; 54; 60). For many of the psalms, therefore, the Hebrew verse numbers differ from the English translations. Some commentaries give both numbers, but in this commentary the English numbering is followed.
Psalm i The first two psalms lack titles, which is unusual in Book i of the Psalter, and it is probable that they provide an introduction to the whole book of Psalms. Whether they originally formed a single psalm is very doubtful, however, in spite of an ancient Jewish saying that the first psalm begins and ends with a beatitude (v. i and 2:11). A few manuscripts of Acts 13:33 refer to Ps 2 as the 'first' psalm, which suggests that among some Christians either the two psalms were combined or they knew of texts which began with the present Ps 2. Certainly it seems likely that Ps i was placed here after Book i or the entire Psalter was completed.
7. Assertions of Innocence. An older and more morally sensitive age was troubled by the way in which many of the psalmists claimed that they were righteous, and demanded divine support on this ground (cf. Ps7:8; 17:1—5; 18:20—4; 2^)- Now, in an age of advertising, self-assertion, and the ubiquitous curriculum vitae, perhaps this is viewed less harshly— indeed, it may even pass unnoticed. Yet it stands in stark contrast to the humility and recognition of human sinfulness that the NT and much of the OT teaches.
It is similar to Ps 19:7—14 and 119 in its delight in the 'law', and probably is post-exilic. Whether it is correctly termed a 'wisdom' psalm, and whether it was intended for use in the cult are both uncertain. Perhaps it is best understood as a poem to encourage faithfulness to the religion of the Torah. Although often described as 'The Two Ways' (cf. v. 6) its tone is set by the initial, 'Happy are those . . . '. The poet is convinced that the way of goodness is an attractive way, and it would be wrong to regard it as presenting a moralistic religion in which goodness is pursued for reward.
8. One answer lies along the lines of the previous section. In some psalms the plaintiff may be presenting a legal case that he is innocent of some particular charge, and the declarations of innocence are not to be taken as assertions of complete sinlessness. Or the king may be confessing his loyalty to the covenant and seeking God's help in the ritual combat with his (and God's) enemies. Moreover, the underlying belief that reward and punishment have to be worked out in this life increases the urgency of the plea.
The structure is clear: w. 1-3 describe the righteous, closing with the simile of a tree planted beside an irrigation canal, a comparison found in ancient Egypt and in pictures from the ancient Middle East. Although the phrases in v. i might ascend to a climax ('walk', 'stand', 'sit'; 'wicked', 'sinners', 'scoffers') they may be simple poetic parallels. If the psalm is post-exilic, the reference to the 'law' may be to the written Pentateuch. The picture is of the pious reader speaking the words of the law half aloud until they become part of his being, rather than of silent and passive meditation. The point of the tree simile is that it flourishes, not that the fruit is a 'reward', despite the last line of v. 3, which speaks of the prosperity of the good man.
9. Confession and the Penitential Psalms. It has to be admitted that the psalms are rather short on confession. Of the church's seven 'penitential psalms', only two (Ps 32; 51) clearly express a sense of the psalmist's own sin, with brief glimpses in Ps 130:3—4; and 143:2, and less certainly than NRSV suggests in Ps 38:18. They are mostly to do with the afflicted ones, rather than with those confessing their sins (Snaith 1964: 12). All the psalmists are much more ready to impute evil to their enemies and to castigate 'the wicked'. That we expect to find all the religious emotions in the Psalter is perhaps an inheritance from an age when the Psalter was
367 PSALMS
ancient world, the Israelite king was not regarded as descended from God. In the Hebrew the emphasis is upon T myself rather than 'this day' as Eng. versions.
The wicked are described more briefly in w. 4-5: the godly man is described in detail; the side glance at the wicked is but to light up the blessing of his life by contrast. The picture is of winnowing the corn, throwing it up into the air after it has been threshed by a flail or a threshing sledge, so that the wind will blow away the straw and the husks and allow the heavier grains to fall to the ground, v. 5 is uncertain. Most translations render the verbs as futures, although they do not differ from the form of many of the verbs earlier in the psalm, implying that the judgement is a future judgement by God. Some early
NRSV follows a common conjectural emendation in w. n12. The Hebrew appears to mean literally: 'and rejoice with trembling. Kiss a (the) son lest he should be angry and you perish with regard to the way' (i.e. the way you are behaving). Apart from the word for 'son' being Aramaic (the Hebrew word is used in v. 7) this makes tolerable sense, kissing the king being understood as an act of homage. Kissing the feet would be an even humbler grovelling, and accords with a practice well known in the ancient world. The LXX had a different text: 'and rejoice for him in trembling. Take hold of instruction (or chastisement, correction) lest the Lord should ever become angry and you perish from a (the) righteous way.' Some of the ancient versions understood the word translated 'son' to be a different word meaning 'pure' or 'purity', hence 'worship in purity'. The pronouns also present problems if 'kiss the son' is abandoned, for it becomes uncertain who the subject of the verbs in v. 12 is. NRSV apparently accepts the very striking metaphor of kissing God's feet. Some adopt a change of reference: Serve YHWH, kiss (the king's) feet, lest YHWH be angry. Probably the original text and meaning are irrevocably lost and all that remains certain is that the rebellious kings are warned to submit to God and his representative, the Israelite king.
Christian commentators saw a reference to the resurrection by translating the verb as 'rise up', perhaps influenced by the
LXX. Since the general OT belief was that the dead went to Sheol and remained there (see PS 0.13), this is unlikely unless the psalm were very late indeed. The reference appears to be to day-by-day judgements either by the elders in the gate, or possibly by God himself, and continues the description of the two types of people. This would form a better parallel to 'nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous'. The verb translated 'watches over' in v. 6 is 'knows', with the sense of 'takes care of: other psalmists and the writer of Job will have to question whether life is always as simple as this.
Psalm 2 The first Christians interpreted this psalm as messianic prophecy and v. 7 is quoted in Acts 13:33 and Heb 1:5; 5:5 as referring to Jesus, reflected in the capital letters for 'Anointed One', 'King', and 'Son' in NIV. The older critical scholars connected it with an Israelite king who had recently ascended the throne, and discussed the claims of David, Solomon, or some other king. Form criticism classifies it as a 'royal psalm', but there is no agreement as to the way in which it may have been used in ancient Israel—at the Davidic king's enthronement, or at an annual celebration of his accession, as the new king's first proclamation to his subjects, or spoken by a cultic prophet. Many set it within a cultic drama, in which the king is attacked by his (and God's) enemies and finally is delivered by God. Those more attracted to literary and canonical interpretations point to the concluding beatitude which forms an indusio with that in Ps 1:1, and to the repetition of some words, such as 'meditate' (1:2) and 'plot' (2:1, the same Hebrew verb), and suggest that the two psalms form a double introduction to the Psalter and represent two ways of understanding it, as teaching and as Davidic or messianic. Following the approach adopted in this commentary, the psalm will be interpreted as a poem in its own right.
Psalm 3 The psalm is a prayer to God for help against enemies,with a strong expression of confidence in his protection
(w. 3-6). w. 1-2 describe the psalmist's situation, v. 7 is the call to God for help (probably the whole verse should be translated as a plea, 'Rise up... Deliver me... Strike all my enemies ... break the teeth...', cf. NIV). The final verse widens the perspective to the whole congregation or nation. The introductory verses are held together by a threefold 'many', and three words derived from the same Hebrew root, 'help', 'deliver', and 'deliverance' link the first and last sections of the psalm.
So much is clear. Problems begin when we ask who the psalmist and the enemies might be. If the enemies are military foes, it is natural to see the Israelite (Davidic) king as the one who is appealing to God. If the title is not allowed to influence the reader, the psalmist may be an Israelite who faces attacks by fellow Israelites, a man who has been (falsely) accused of some crime (with the enemies as his accusers), or even a sufferer who regards his illness as owing to attacks by enemies, although the last interpretation is less likely. In any case there is poetic exaggeration in the 'ten thousands of people who have set themselves against me all around' (v.6).
The psalm falls into four sections: w. 1-3 describe the rebellion of the 'kings of the earth' against YHWH and his anointed king; w. 4—6 depict God's mockery and support of his king with a bold anthropomorphism; in w. 7—9 the king sets out the divine proclamation which established him as God's adopted son and promised him victory over his enemies; and w. 10—12 give a final warning to the hostile kings to submit to YHWH. The closing benediction stands apart from the rest of the psalm and some have suggested that it is an addition, fitting the psalm into later worship.
Less certain is the situation. If the psalm is taken as a royal psalm, it is still impossible to decide whether the psalm was composed in (or perhaps more probably, for) an actual battle or whether the attacks are part of a ritual combat in a cultic drama. If it was originally a cultic prayer for those suffering from hostility from other people, v. 5 might refer to spending the night in a sanctuary in order to receive a divine oracle, though the more natural way of taking the verse is as a mark of such total trust in God that the psalmist can sleep without fear. The early Christians found a reference to the resurrection of Jesus in the sleep and awakening. Later liturgical use has treated it as a morning psalm.
Two verses present difficulties of translation. The 'decree' in v. 7 probably declares what YHWH is performing—the act of making the king his son—and should be translated: T myself beget you today' (cf REB, 'this day I become your father'). The sonship is through adoption: unlike other monarchs in the
PSALMS 368
that YHWH has shown me his marvellous love' (cf. NEB). 'Right sacrifices' (v. 5, literally 'sacrifices of righteousness') are probably sacrifices offered with correct rites or in a right spirit, although some regard them as sacrifices which acknowledge YHWH's justice, and a very ancient Christian interpretation thought of righteousness itself as a metaphorical sacrifice.
The title probably comes from a scribe who has searched through the books of Samuel for a suitable occasion in David's life in which to place the psalm, and came up with his flight from his son Absalom (see 2 Sam 15-17, esp. 15:12, 14). Certainly there is much that fits the account in Samuel, and it might even be that the psalm was composed by a scribe as a literary response to the narrative, although the general view is that the titles were added to existing psalms rather than indicating the inspiration of them. Or it may have been written for any of the kings of Judah. The date is less certain on more general interpretations of the psalm.
Psalm 5 Usually defined as an individual lament, this psalm is clearly a petition to God. Uncertainties about the status of the psalmist, the nature of the enemies, and precisely what the psalmist is presenting 'in the morning', make it difficult to be certain about its origins and use in ancient Israel.
From a literary perspective attention may be drawn to the threefold reiteration of 'many' in w. 1-2, and the theme of 'help', 'deliver', 'deliverance' (the same Heb. root) in w. 2, 7, 8.
The title probably intends to ascribe it to David, and some scholars interpret it as a royal psalm, sung in a cultic rite. This is held to fit the identification of the enemies as also rebels against God. Those who find no evidence of authorship or original usage in the titles of the psalms commonly see it as the prayer of someone faced with false accusations, the enemies being the hostile and vindictive accusers. The situation might then be either a prayer for a just outcome to a forthcoming 'trial', or an appeal to God for a verdict (perhaps through a priestly oracle) at a hearing in the temple.
Psalm 4 At first sight this is a happy, confident little evening psalm. The many small differences among the main translations and the wide range of interpretations offered by commentators show that it is difficult to be certain about how it should be read. It offers few clues as to the speaker, the persons addressed, and the occasion on which it was spoken or sung, and although there are not a great number of textual problems, the exact meaning of several phrases is not clear.
The reference to the 'morning' in v. 3 has led to the psalm being used as a morning hymn, While the references to the morning are clear, it is uncertain what action is being performed. The Hebrew has no object to the verb 'set in order, arrange'. The older English versions (and NIV) supplied 'my prayer', 'my requests', but this is unlikely since the verb is never linked with prayer in the OT It is regularly used for presenting a case in a lawsuit and for ordering a sacrifice, hence NRSV's 'plead my case' and REB's 'prepare a morning sacrifice'.
Some see it as a companion to Ps 3: a king's psalm, which the older scholars placed in the time of Absalom's rebellion and explained as expressing David's faith in YHWH and a rallying call to his dispirited followers. There is little firm evidence to support this. More recent royal interpretations prefer a cultic interpretation, with YHWH's anointed king and representative addressing his opponents and proclaiming his glory over against those who worship false gods. The reference to harvest fits this theme, since the faithfulness of the king is linked with the prosperity of the land (cf Ps 72). Others, however, find little evidence to refer the psalm to the king, and suggest that it belongs to rulers in general, whether secular or priestly, and see the occasion as a time of drought or bad harvest. Yet others see in it confidence in the face of false accusations or the vicissitudes of life. Even form criticism is uncertain whether the dominant theme is lament or confidence. Repetitions of words ('call', w. i, 3; 'right', w. i, 5; 'hear' w. i, 3; 'heart' w. 4 (NRSV 'ponder', lit. 'say in your heart'), 7; 'bed'/'lie down' (related words in Heb.), w. 4, 8; 'trust'/'in safety' (verb and noun), w. 5, 8; and 'many'/'abound' (noun and verb), w. 6, 7) point to literary skill but are less helpful in revealing the structure of the psalm, w. 2—5 stand out as addressed to an opposing group, while w. i, 6—8 are a prayer to God. Possibly, like many Christian hymns, the very ambiguity and lack of definite allusions make it more possible for many different people to make its confident appeal to God their own.
The mention of the temple in v. 7 is equally ambiguous. It might refer to any of the local sanctuaries, but most probably is the Jerusalem temple. This is partly supported by the psalmist's address to God as 'my King', which has been widely seen as a characteristic of the Jerusalem cult. Whether the psalmist is actually present at the morning worship or describes his intention to present his case or offer sacrifice there cannot be determined.
The structure of the psalm may be analysed in several different ways. If NRSV is followed, w. 1-3 are the invocation to God and statement of the psalmist's intention, w. 4—6 describe God's character, w. 7-8 express the psalmist's confident approach to God, w. 9-10 set out the wickedness of the enemies and call upon God to condemn and destroy them, and w. ii—12 form a concluding invitation to the righteous to rejoice. Possibly the final verse should be taken as a call to God to give his blessing and defend them.
In the title, 'for the flutes' is the most probable interpretation of a phrase that is unique here, and presumably intends the psalm to be accompanied by flutes. The Babylonians had a special kind of lament called 'flute psalms of lamentation'. The LXX referred it to a different Hebrew word and translates 'concerning her that inherits'. It is possible, though unlikely, that it was the name of a melody, 'To "Inheritance" '.
In v. i the middle line either expresses the confidence upon which the two petitions are based (as most translations) or the Hebrew should be taken as a further petition ('give me relief from my distress', NIV). v. 2 appears to refer to the respect due to the psalmist within the community, although some take it to be a reference to God ('how long will you dishonour my glorious one', REB, cf. NIV marg.), who is dishonoured by worship offered to other gods. The meaning of the Hebrew in v. 3» is very uncertain (cf. the variety of modern translations); perhaps it should be read, with a small emendation, 'Know
Psalm 6 That the psalmist is gravely ill appears obvious. Less certain is the relation of the illness to the 'enemies'. It has been suggested that it was the enemies who brought about the
369 PSALMS
Psalm 7 The title describes this psalm as a 'Shiggaion of David' and links it with 'Gush, a Benjaminite'. The meaning of'Shiggaion', found only here and in a different form in Hab 3:1, is unknown. Scholarly guesses as to its meaning include a song of irregular form or varied mood, and a psalm of lamentation. One suggestion is that the word is a corruption of 'Higgaion' (Ps 9:16; 92:3), perhaps 'melody' (as NRSV in Ps 92:3) or 'meditation'. The LXX has simply 'a psalm'. The author of the title seems to have linked it with the Cushite of 2 Sam 18:19—33, or one °f David's Benjaminite enemies such as Shimei (2 Sam 16:5-14; 19:16-23, i Kings 2:36-46). This is the only reference in the psalm titles which cannot be traced to the biblical narratives about David, but it seems unlikely that he drew upon lost traditions in just one psalm.
psalmist's illness, perhaps through sorcery, but few accept this explanation, partly because the usual Hebrew word for sorcery does not occur in any of the psalms, chiefly because the psalmists regularly, as here, see God as the cause of their suffering. The suggestion that the term 'workers of evil' (v. 8) refers to sorcerers has slight support. Usually, therefore, the enemies are regarded as members of the psalmist's community who interpret his illness as divine punishment for wrongdoing, much as Job's friends did (e.g. Job n:6; 15:4-6; 22:5n), and by their hostility increase his sufferings. Even so the psalmist's reaction in v. 10 strikes modern readers as extreme. Might it not be that, with the illogicality to which we are all prone, the psalmist accepts both that the illness has been inflicted by God and also that the enemies are responsible for it?
The psalm belongs generally to the class of individual laments. Greater precision depends upon the interpretation placed upon three features, the references to enemies, who are described with animal metaphors (w. 1-2, 5, 6), the oath of innocence (w. 3-5), and the ascription of w. 12-16, which NRSV divides between God (simply 'he' in the Hebrew) and the wicked (shown by the use of the plural, although the Hebrew has singulars throughout). Those favouring royal origins note the military references in w. 4, 10, 12-13, and regard the enemies as national enemies of the Israelite king, possibly being portrayed in the cult, while those who place greatest emphasis upon the oath and the description of God as judge (w. 6, n) interpret the psalm as the plea of someone accused of some crime, possibly coming to the temple for a divine verdict through priestly decision, prophetic oracle, or an ordeal, or as a court of appeal (cf. i Kings 8:31—2). Some think that v. i shows that he sought asylum there, but in the biblical narratives asylum is sought only in cases of manslaughter and this does not seem to be the accusation in the psalm. Later use of the psalm will have separated it from the temple and generalized it into a plea for help in time of distress.
Two features in this psalm are notable. First, the psalmist fears that he is near to death. Sheol is the abode of the dead, who live on in a feeble and miserable existence in the land of no return, outside of the reach of God's love, a land of dust and darkness and silence (for other descriptions of Sheol see Ps 30:9; 88:6-12; 94:17; 115:17; PS 0.13). It seems that in ancient Israel all sickness was seen as a form of 'death', and the psalmist probably regarded himself as partly in Sheol already—hence his anguish.
Second, there is a marked change of tone at v. 8. This has been called the 'certainty of hearing', and has been variously interpreted. Some suggest that w. 8—10 are the real heart of the psalm, the earlier part recounting the suffering from which the psalmist has been delivered and now expresses his thanksgiving. The balance of the psalm hardly supports this. Others suppose that the psalmist's thanksgiving after he had been healed has been attached to the earlier petition, but there is no evidence for this. There is equally little evidence to support the claim that two separate psalm fragments have been combined in the one psalm, although Ps 40 (w. 13—17 = Ps 70); Ps 108 (w. 1-5 = Ps 57:7-11; w. 6-n = Ps 60:5-12) shows that this could occur. A popular theory is that a temple prophet or a priest uttered an oracle of assurance between the two parts of the psalm. Such oracles are found in Isa 40—55, often beginning, 'Fear not...', and cf. Ps 12:5. Possibly the change in mood is produced by the prayer itself: having uttered his plea the psalmist becomes confident that God has heard it and will answer his request. This would be the most likely view if it is thought that the psalmist is too ill to go to the temple to make his prayer to God. The answer has not yet been fulfilled, however, for the shaming of the enemies lies still in the future.
The structure is well set out in NRSV, apart from w. 12—16, where God has been gratuitously introduced, changing the meaning—the whole section should probably be referred to the psalmist's enemy or read as a general description of the wicked. After a call to God for help (w. 1—2), the psalmist protests his innocence (w. 3—5; for the form of the oath cf. Job 31), repeats his call to God and seeks divine judgement, (w. 6-8 and 9-11, perhaps to be taken as a single section with hymnic descriptions of God in w. 8 and gc—n), sets out his conviction that evil rebounds upon the wicked (w. 12—16), and concludes with thanksgiving (v. 17). Whetherthethanksgivingis theresultofasuccessfulverdictorisavowtoofferpraisewhenhis innocence is declared is impossible to determine.
The psalm is one of the seven 'penitential psalms' of the church (the others are 32, 38, 51, 102, 130, and 143; PS f.g), although there is no confession of sin but rather an appeal from frailty and humility. The reliance upon God's 'steadfast love' (v. 4) should be noted.
Psalm 8 This well-known and greatly loved psalm presents several exegetical problems. It is usually classified as a hymn, but it is unusual in having no initial call to worship God and in containing features, such as the question, 'What are human beings that you are mindful of them?' which are akin to wisdom teaching (cf. Job 7:17; 15:14, though some see the Job passages as a bitter parody of the psalm, and the book of Job itself has close links with psalmic forms). The first person passages are also unusual in hymns and are somewhat
'According to The Sheminith' in the title is found only here and in Ps 12 (cf. i Chr 15:21). The meaning is unknown. The term is usually linked with the word for 'eight'. Some have proposed that it refers to singing in octaves (but the octave does not seem to have been known in ancient Israel) or by male voices. Other suggestions are that it refers to some element in the ritual, perhaps an eighth stage, or to an instrument with eight strings.
PSALMS 37°
some of the missing letters, it seems likely that originally the acrostic was complete; but it cannot now be recovered.
reminiscent of individual laments. It is difficult, however, not to regard it as essentially a hymn that opens with the actual praise of YHWH.
Ps 9 is predominantly thanksgiving by an individual while Ps 10 is closer to individual laments. Possibly due to the acrostic form, there is no clear development of thought. Leading ideas are the call to thanksgiving, YHWH as judge of the nations and of the wicked and defender of the oppressed, and pleas for deliverance from enemies and the wicked.
There is a textual difficulty in v. ic, which NRSV has solved by emendation. An alternative suggestion is that the Hebrew letters should be read as: T will serve [worship] your glory'. This problem is linked with the question of the correct sentence division. The NRSV apparently takes v. 2 to mean that God is so powerful that the words of children are sufficient as a rampart of defence, but the meaning is not clear. Perhaps the difficult Hebrew verb should be taken as in REB, with different phrasing: 'Your majesty is praised as high as the heavens, from the mouths of babes and infants at the breast'. This has the advantage of making sense of the reference to the 'bulwark' (usually 'strength'), but at the cost of an uncertain rendering of the Hebrew verb as 'is praised'. The LXX translated v. 2: 'from the mouth of babes and sucklings you prepared praise for yourself, hence the form of the quotation in Mt2i:i6.
The setting of the psalm is equally uncertain. Those who hold that many of the psalms are to be linked with the Jerusalem king see in the references to the 'nations' (Ps 9:5,15, 17,19, 20; 10:16), who appear as the psalmist's enemies (cf. Ps 9:3, 6), support for their interpretation. Other evidence for this view is the care of the orphan and the oppressed (Ps 9:18; 10:14, I^)» a duty of the king as God's representative, and God's universal judgement (Ps 9:7-8, 12; 10:15, I7> I^)» claimed to be a feature of the Jerusalem cult. At the other extreme, the psalm has been linked to the post-exilic synagogue as the prayer of the oppressed congregation, but there is little firm evidence for this, especially as the extent to which the synagogue was a place of worship rather than teaching and meeting is contested (McKay 1994). Certain links with wisdom teaching on the retribution coming to the wicked, together with the acrostic form, may indicate that it is a late psalm, possibly written as an art form or for instruction.
In v. 5 the LXX translated the Hebrew word 'elohim, which means either 'God' or 'gods', as 'angels', possibly to avoid the idea that human beings are almost equal to almighty God. Scholars are divided as to whether the Hebrew means 'God' or 'the gods' as members of his heavenly court.
The structure is transparent: The shout of praise, addressing God by his name, YHWH, envelops the psalm (w. i and 9): w. ic—2 enlarge upon the majesty of God; and in w. 3—8 the psalmist expresses his wonder that creatures as insignificant as human beings should have been given dominion over all the rest of creation (cf Gen 1:26—8).
One of the main words for 'the poor' in the Psalter occurs here for the first time (Ps 9:12,18; 10:2, 9,12; PS G.10—12). The psalmists join with the prophets in asserting that God will defend the poor, and this is one of the duties of the king
(cf. Ps 72).
The quoting of verses from the psalm in the NT (Mt 21:16; i Cor 15:27; Eph 1:22; Heb 2:6-8) reveals that it was interpreted as messianic, but this was hardly its original meaning. Some have regarded it as a royal psalm, seeing the king beneath the references to 'man'. At the other extreme are those who find it difficult to relate the psalm to the worship of the Jerusalem temple, and see in it marks of scribes and rabbis in the postexilic community. Psalms 9—10 These two psalms are combined as a single psalm in the LXX and the Vulgate, which accounts for the differences in the numbering from Ps 10 to Ps 148 between the Protestant and Catholic/Orthodox traditions, the latter following the LXX. Despite some differences in the type and emphasis between the two parts of the psalm it was probably originally a single psalm. This is supported by LXX, the acrostic form, the lack of title to Ps 10 (rare in Book i of the Psalter), the seld in 9:20, which never elsewhere comes at the end of a psalm, and a number of unusual words common to both psalms. A few Hebrew MSS also treat the psalms as a single poem.
'Muth-labben' means literally 'Death to [of] the son'. Most regard it as the title of the melody to which the psalm was sung. The LXX, with a slight change in the text, has 'For the secrets of the son', and it has been suggested that this might refer to a royal ritual. Alternatively it might be a corruption of 'According to Alamoth' (see PS 46).
Psalm ii This psalm is usually classified as a psalm of confidence. YHWH is not addressed in prayer but spoken of in the third person, w. 1—3 set the scene, and w. 4—7 express the psalmist's trust in God. It is not easy, however, to discover a more precise setting.
Those who try to link it with the life of David point to his flight from Saul or the time of Absalom's rebellion. Others see it as a royal psalm, noting the psalmist's sense of authority, his claim to be 'righteous', and the threat of enemies, and either set it within the Jerusalem temple worship or find a reference to a foreign invasion. Yet others describe it as the plea of one falsely accused, despite the lack of direct prayer, seeing the psalmist as seeking refuge in the temple (v. i) and trusting in God to defend him. Confidence is largely restricted to the second part of the psalm (w. 4—7) and this has suggested to some that a prophet or priest declared YHWH's acquittal of the psalmist at this point. The fact is, we simply do not know. How the psalm is interpreted largely depends on the reader's view of the historical and social background into which the psalms are to be placed.
The acrostic is incomplete. The main pattern is to start each two verses with the appropriate letter of the Hebrew alphabet, but the d verse is missing, and the regular pattern is disturbed at the end of Ps 9 and the first eleven verses of Ps 10, being resumed only with q (Ps 10:12), when it continues perfectly until the end of the psalm. Strikingly each half line in 9:1—2 begins with the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet. Since difficulties in some verses show that textual corruption has occurred, and small changes in the verse division restore
Despite the surface clarity of NRSV there are some uncertainties. Does the speech in v. i continue to the end of v. 3 (as most translations, regarding w. 2—3 as the reason the speakers
371 PSALMS
For the change of tone from urgent petition to confident trust and rejoicing at v. 5 see PS 6. Was an oracle spoken by a temple prophet at this point? Or has the outpouring of prayer in itself led to a sense of calm joy?
give for flight), or is it limited to v. ib, with w. 2-3 as the psalmist's response as he rejects the call to flee, or does the speech consist of w. ib—2 (as REB)? Is the temple in v. 4 the Jerusalem temple, so that YHWH is depicted as present with his people and also the transcendent God, or it is a reference to heaven? Should we press the form of the Hebrew verb in v. 5 and translate, 'May the LORD test the righteous', thus introducing the element of prayer? And is the final clause to be constructed as, 'He [lit. 'his face'] beholds the upright', i.e. accepts the upright with his favour, rather than being taken as referring to the psalmist's experience of God? NRSV has tacitly emended the text in v. 6, where the Hebrew has 'snares, fire' (see RV) instead of'coals of fire'. Psalm 12 Prayers both by an individual and the community appear in this psalm, and it is uncertain which predominates. The divine promise in v. 5 suggests that perhaps those are right who call it a prophetic liturgy: opening with petition, having at its centre the comforting words of the prophet, to which the congregation responds with the note of certainty in w. 6—7. If this is so it may have had its origin in some temple rite. Beyond this it is impossible to go with any assurance. Perhaps the emphasis upon words, both of human beings (w. 2—4) and YHWH (w. 5—6), has led some to imagine the psalmist as the target of malicious comments, possibly even of threats and curses (which were thought to have their own power to effect the evil they declared). The psalm may come from a time of moral decadence, when honesty and truthfulness were no longer regarded as the basis of social life.
The LXX has a different text at two points: inv. 2 itreads 'day and night' (adopted by NEB), and adds at the end of the psalm: T will sing to the name of the Lord, the most high'.
Psalm 14 This psalm must have been widely popular, for it was included in the first Davidic collection (Ps 1-41) and the Elohistic collection (Ps 42-83). The differences between the two versions are relatively minor apart from 14:5—6/53:5. It is usually supposed that both go back to a single original and the differences are due to textual corruption or editorial changes. If they spring from variant traditions, it may be that the evildoers in Ps 14 are Israelites while those in Ps 53 are foreigners, v. 7 was commonly supposed to be post-exilic when the phrase which is correctly rendered 'restores the fortunes' in NRSV was held to mean 'brings back the captivity [captives]'; some still find it distinct in tone and theme and treat it as a liturgical addition.
Even if the psalm was well loved in ancient Israel, the present-day reader finds great difficulty in knowing how it should be read. It has been described variously as a prophetic liturgy, a mixture of prophetic and wisdom literature, a wisdom psalm, communal instruction, perhaps even an early synagogue speech, and an individual lament. Medieval Jewish interpreters saw it as reflecting Jewish national sufferings. Certainly the first phrase is reminiscent of the wisdom writings, where several different words for 'fool' occur, all referring to moral depravity rather than intellectual feebleness or folly, alongside 'any who are wise' (v. 2), a word commonly used in this sense in Proverbs. On the other hand the prediction of coming terror in v. 5 has the ring of a prophetic denunciation of those who oppress the poor. With such a range of possible genres to choose from, it is little wonder that there is no agreement on how it was used in ancient Israel. If it is instruction it fits naturally with Proverbs, but since there is no certainty about the existence of scribal schools in Israel or the position and function of 'the wise', this gives little help. Its presence in two collections of psalms, which presumably were connected with the temple, perhaps points to a cultic prophet uttering his oracle in some rite. If Ps 53 is a prophetic taunt song against foreigners it might have its place during some hostile attack on Jerusalem, but it is by no means certain that the two traditions are to be separated so widely.
The structure is fairly clear: appeal to God, with an account of the evil from which the psalmist seeks deliverance (w. 1—2); plea for divine judgement on the speakers of lies and flattery (w. 3-4); divine oracle of salvation (v. 5, 'safety' is related etymologically to the verb 'help' in v. i); an expression of confidence in God's protection (v. 7); and a reiteration of the evil situation in which the psalmist is placed (v. 8), possibly set as a foil to the protection God gives, unless v. 7 is to be taken as a return to petition: 'Do thou, LORD, protect us and guard us ...' (NEB, cf. RSV). Psalm 13 The fourfold 'How long?' is striking. A feature of both individual and communal laments (Ps 6:3; 74:10; 79:5; 80:4; 90:13; 94:3), it is also found in Babylonian prayers, such as a remarkably similar prayer to Ishtar: 'How long, O my Lady, wilt thou be angered so that thy face is turned away? How long, O my Lady, wilt thou be infuriated so that thy spirit is enraged?' The psalmist appears to be ill (cf. v. 3 with its fear of death), but his main emotion is anguish because he feels abandoned by God.
The structure at least is clear, w. 1-3 describe the universal godlessness and wickedness, w. 4—6 present a threat of punishment, and v. 7 is a wish for the restoration of the nation's prosperity.
In spite of a Jewish tradition that the psalm describes Israel's suffering at the hands of hostile neighbours, the intensely personal tone has convinced most commentators that it is the lament or prayer of an individual. The enemies will then not be national foes or the king's enemies, but fellow Israelites who see in the psalmist's illness divine punishment. Probably the alternation between a singular 'enemy' and the plural 'foes' (w. 2, 4) is stylistic, though it has been suggested that in v. 2 the enemy is death. The book of Job perhaps provides the best commentary on this psalm, with the psalmist's deep sense of loss in the face of God's silence.
It is almost a commonplace to stress that the 'atheism' of the 'fool' is practical—he acts as if God did not exist—and not religious or philosophical, on the grounds that pure atheism would have been impossible in Israelite society, and that the psalmist stresses the moral faults of'fools'. But how different is 'practical atheism' from a denial of the existence of God?
Paul quotes w. 1—3 in Rom 3:10—18 in an abbreviated form, followed by a series of quotations from other verses from the OT At some point these additions found their way into the
PSALMS 372
will protect the psalmist until his death at the end of a long life. Perhaps here is a leap of faith. The psalmist holds the bleak Sheol belief with his mind, but his delight in his fellowship with God moves beyond this to the hope that such intimacy cannot be ended by death. Psalm 17 The structure of this psalm is relatively clear, although the text is uncertain in a number of places, making the exact meaning doubtful, w. 1-2 are an appeal to YHWH; in 3-5 the psalmist protests his innocence; 6-12 is a further prayer, especially referring to the psalmist's enemies, against whom he seeks YHWH's help in 13—14; a final note of confidence is expressed in v. 15.
LXX and from there into the Vulgate. Curiously the catena is also found in two Hebrew MSS. Psalm 15 This psalm is similar to Ps 24, and also 13333:14—16, while listings of sins and virtues sre found in Jer 7:5-7, Ezek 18:5-9, and Mic 6:6-8. It may be that the words of the prophets were modelled on psalms such as this. To call it a 'torah psalm', however, adds little to our understanding, and even if ten moral requirements are found in it, it is not closely similar to the Decalogue. It is commonly described as an 'entrance liturgy', with the worshipper's question in v. i, followed by the conditions for entering the sanctuary in w. 2—5/7 (presumably spoken by a priest), and a closing promise in v. y. Elsewhere in the ancient Middle East temple inscriptions set out similar demands, but the two OT psalms differ in that they include no ritual requirements. Another suggestion is that the psalm sets out the conditions for those seeking asylum in the sanctuary, but this seems unlikely in view of the apparent limitation of asylum in the OT to unpremeditated homicide.
The way the enemies are described raises difficulties for a more precise interpretation than the general ascription as a 'declaration of innocence'. The psalmist may be making an appeal to the supreme tribunal in the temple (cf. Deut 17:813), or the background may be an ordeal (see ABD v. 40-2; the only description of an ordeal is Num 5:11—31, however, and despite the widespread use of ordeals in the ancient Middle East, it is uncertain how far it was a normal practice in Israel). On either view the enemies of the psalmist would be those who accuse him of some wrong—falsely, as he claims, w. 3 and 15 possibly indicate that the psalmist spent the night in the sanctuary awaiting God's verdict. Christian tradition saw in the final verse a foreshadowing of the believer's resurrection, the sleep being the sleep of death, but this was hardly the psalmist's own meaning.
The meaning is plain apart from two phrases in v. 4. Tn whose eyes the wicked are despised', imports too strong a sense into a word which means 'despised, rejected'. Possibly the sense is 'the one rejected by God', but the Targum rendered it: 'He is despised in his own eyes, and rejected', hence the Prayer Book's 'He that setteth not by himself, but is lowly in his own eyes'. At the end of the verse the NRSV's 'who stand by their oath even to their hurt' involves a forcing of the Hebrew, which is literally: 'he swears to do evil and does not change', a meaning that is hardly possible, despite Lev 5:4. It has been suggested that the Hebrew has a negative sense, 'he swears not to do evil', but this does not seem likely. The LXX (apparently reading leharcf as leharecf) has: 'who swears to his neighbour and does not set it aside', which is attractive. Psalm 16 This is a good example of the extreme difficulty in discovering the original use and meaning of many psalms, w. 8-n in the LXX version are quoted by Peter in Acts 2:25-8, who interprets the psalm as messianic prophecy, fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus. Few today would accept this as the psalmist's own intention, and most classify it as a psalm of confidence, but then unanimity fails. Is it a royal psalm, expressing the Israelite king's confidence that God protects him? Or does the reference to the allotment of land in w. 5—6 point to the psalmist as a Levite of whom it was said that YHWH is their inheritance (Deut 10:9)? But it might be the whole land that is intended, and hence the psalm would belong to the whole people of Israel. Or might it be the confession of an individual worshipper? Even the description as a psalm of confidence is not quite certain, since the petition of the first verse is closer to laments. Is the psalmist looking back on a past deliverance, and praying for God's continuing protection, or is the danger still threatening? Interpretation is not assisted by the chaotic state of the text in w. 2-4, and occasionally later in the psalm, where emendation is inevitable. So obscure are these verses that some have found traces of dialogue, or a quotation from the words of a fellow Israelite, who worships other gods as well as YHWH. The psalmist himself is utterly devoted to God.
The severe punishments which are invoked against the enemies appear extreme if they are simply those presenting a legal case against the psalmist, and it has been suggested that this, together with the heading, points to its being the prayer of a king faced with a military invasion, possibly a punitive expedition on the grounds of some accusation of disloyalty or a wrong committed against another state. Psalm 18 The outline of this long psalm is relatively clear. w. 1—3: praise of YHWH; 4—6: the distress which has befallen the psalmist; 7-19: a great theophany in which God comes to save his servant; 20-4: the ground of this salvation, the 'righteousness' of the psalmist; 25—30: a wisdom type generalization that God saves those who trust him; 31—45: God has saved
(or will save) the psalmist from the attacks of his enemies who will be defeated; 46-50: concluding praise of YHWH. The explicit reference to the king, YHWH's anointed, in v. 50 has convinced most commentators that this is a royal psalm, but there agreement ends. Differences between the sections suggest to some that at least two psalms have been combined, only w. 31-50 clearly referring to the king. Others suggest that the theophany may have been separate originally. The wisdom features of w. 25-30 also mark this section off from the myth of the theophany and the defeat of the king's enemies. And as so often the tenses present a problem, as can be seen in the past description of NRSV in w. 32—48, the present and past tenses of NIV, the predominant presents of GNB, and the presents and futures of NEB and REB.
A cultic interpretation manages to include most of the features of the psalm. The king is supposed to be the main actor in a ritual drama, in which he is almost defeated, cries out to YHWH for help on the grounds of his faithfulness and righteousness, and is both delivered and secures a crushing
The meaning of w. 10—n is disputed. While some find a reference to life after death, others believe that such a belief was alien to most of the OT, and see only confidence that God
373 PSALMS
ist may be referring to those whose self-confidence might shake his faith, but the switch to persons is rather abrupt.
victory over his enemies. The mythic features are readily accommodated into this pre-exilic worship, since the theophany is central to Israelite faith (cf Ex 19), while the extravagance of the triumph over the king's enemies fits more easily into a rite than as a reflection of some historical victory. The wisdom expressions of w. 25—30 fit less easily into this interpretation, but they can be viewed either as a reminder to the listening people that the lesson is for them as well, or as a later transformation of a psalm that originally referred to the king into a more general thanksgiving. There seems no need to regard the whole psalm as coming from the post-exilic synagogue, an expression of hope and encouragement, drawing on past expressions of faith and worship.
'Redeemer' (v. 14) has special overtones for the Christian. In Israel it referred to the next of kin who had the duty to protect any member of the family in trouble, avenging wrongs, giving support in time of poverty, and buying back the relative from slavery (see Lev 25:25,47—9; Num 35:19—28). YHWH as redeemer is a favourite theme of Deutero-Isaiah
(see ISA A.I, n; Isa 41:14; 43:14; 44:6, 24; 47:4; 48:17).
Psalm 20 The mention of'his anointed' and 'the king' (w. 6, 9) have convinced most commentators that this is a royal psalm, and the references to victory (w. 5, 6; in Hebrew the words are 'salvation' and 'save', but these often refer to victory in war) suggest that it is a prayer that accompanied sacrifice before battle. The only disagreement is whether it is a real battle (see e.g. i Sam 7:9; 13:9-12; i Kings 8:44-5; 2 Chr 20:1-19) or Part °fa cultic drama, and there appears to be no way of deciding between the two. Perhaps there is not so much difference between them, since the offering of prayer would be within the setting of worship, while if the psalm was part of a cultic drama, that itself was performed in the expectation that God would save his anointed in actual war in the same way that he was depicted as saving him in the ritual. The change to confidence in v. 6 is probably the result of some expression that God has heard the prayer, either through some symbol or the words of a cultic prophet (cf. PS 6).
The complete psalm is found in 2 Sam 22, with only minor textual differences, an indication of the way the psalms and the life of David were linked by later editors, the psalms expressing the emotions of the king and the narrative providing a setting within which they could be interpreted.
Psalm 19 Is this one psalm or two? The subject-matter, form, and metre mark off w. 7—14 from i—6, and Ps 108 shows that portions of psalms were joined together (108:1—5 = 57:7—II> 108:6-13 = 60:5-12) in the Psalter. It may be that the first section of the psalm is part of a hymn praising God as creator, and the second is a prayer to YHWH with wisdom features, centred on the law, which is referred to under six synonyms in w. 7-9. Support for this is found in the contrasting names for God (El and YHWH) in the two parts of the psalm, and the possibility that the first part is very ancient while the second part may reflect post-exilic piety. (The sun was worshipped in the ancient Middle East as a god, and even in Israel there are hints of this, see 2 Kings 23:5, n; Jer 8:2; Ezek 8:16, although in this psalm its 'tent' has been set in the sky by God, who is unambiguously the creator of the universe.)
Psalm 21 The references to the king in w. i and 7 lead most to treat this as a royal psalm, but the situation to which it refers is not clear. It may be before battle (as Ps 20, pointing to the hope of future victories in w. 8-12), after victory (with emphasis upon the confidence in w. 1—7), at the king's coronation (cf. v. 3), or at an annual celebration of his accession (noting the reference to the king's trust in YHWH and the mention of God's 'steadfast love', v. 7). Since the rites performed at the Autumn Festival are unknown, it is impossible to determine more precisely the way the psalm was used.
On the other hand modern emphasis upon the completed text of the Bible would suggest that even if the sections of the psalm were originally independent, a unity has been imposed upon them. Nature and law are both needed for a full revelation of God. Indeed, some believe that the psalm was a unity from the first, the psalmist adding his own prayer to a fragment of an ancient hymn. Some find a link between the sections in the fact that the sun was regarded in the ancient world as the giver and sustainer of justice, thus pointing forward to the law, but there is no hint of this in the text of the psalm. It is strange that there is no call to praise, the psalm opening immediately with a description of the praise uttered by the dome of the sky and by the day and the night. In the second part contemplation of the law leads the psalmist to confess his sins and pray that his words and meditation may be acceptable to God. (Some regard w. 12—14 as an independent prayer.)
To whom w. 8-12 are addressed is a major problem of interpretation—is it God or the king? Possibly these are the words of a prophet who gives this promise to the king during the liturgy. If YHWH is the subject, the reference may be to covenant curses directed against the king's (and Israel's) enemies.
The Hebrew word 'to save', which was translated as 'victory' by NRSV in Ps 20 is here rendered 'help', but REB has 'victory' in both psalms. The salvation which God gives the king is primarily the conquest of his enemies.
The Aramaic version of the psalm rendered 'king' by 'king Messiah', treating it as messianic prophecy, butthis is unlikely to have been its original meaning.
Psalm 22 The many quotations from this psalm in the New Testament, especially within the passion narratives, show that the early church regarded it as messianic prophecy (see Mt 27:39 Mk 15:29 (v. 7); Mt 27:43 (v. 8); Mt 27:351 Mk 15:24 Lk 23:34 | | Jn 19:24 (v. 18); Heb 2:12 (v. 22); Jesus may have been quoting from this psalm in his cry from the cross, Mt 27:46 | Mk 15:34).
In v. 4 REB and NJB retain the uncertain Hebrew word qawwam (which seems to mean lit. 'their string, line'), translating it as 'their sign' and 'the design'. NRSVand NIVadopt a common emendation qolam, 'their voice', making a parallel to 'their words' (see HALOT (1996), iii. 1081 for other proposals). The paradox of silent speech is unique in the OT
NRSV interprets v. 13 as a reference to 'the insolent' rather than the familiar 'presumptuous sins' (cf. marg. 'from proud thoughts')—the word elsewhere refers to people. The psalm-
Jewish tradition read the psalm as a reflection of the experience of Queen Esther, who is likened to the 'hind of the dawn' in the title, the Midrash suggesting that 'When the dawn
PSALMS 374
be that the 'paths of righteousness' should be seen as processions to the temple, 'table' as a symbol of the covenant, and 'goodnessandmercy'as referringtothe qualities of God'sreign.
awakes the stars set, and so in the court of Ahasuerus, as Esther awakened the stars of Haman and his sons set' (though this might have been adopted to counter Christian use of the psalm, see Magonet 1994: in).
Royal maximalists see the psalm as the prayer of the king, pointing to the metaphor of God as shepherd which normally relates to the nation in the OT, and would be more appropriate in the mouth of the king as representative of the nation, and the royal implications of God's protecting his vassal against his enemies. The psalm is thought to have been used either in cultic ritual or in an act of worship reflecting the king's confidence. But the evidence is far from clear, and it is not legitimate to see in the anointing in v. 5 an allusion to the anointing of the king, since a different word is used.