1. This, of course, assumes that the attribution lišlomoh (“to Solomon”) in the heading of Ps. 72 does not mean that Solomon is the author of the psalm but that the psalm is written in his behalf (“for/to Solomon”).
2. It is true that many lament psalms conclude with an expression of confidence or praise for anticipated deliverance. That may be the result of a later reworking of an earlier lament after deliverance was experienced.
3. A poem by Gelett Burgess.
4. From a sonnet by Sir Philip Sidney.
5. From Evangeline by W. W. Longfellow.
6. Traditionally, this form of parallelism has been called synonymous parallelism. That description is not very apt, and confusion arises especially with the addition of the other terms to be introduced later, antithetical and synthetical parallelism—terms that are often associated with a particular form of philosophical reasoning. For this reason I prefer the more accurately descriptive terms employed here.
7. The contrasting discussions of Alter and Kugel are helpful in this case, especially to highlight the fact that affirming parallelism is not mere repetition but actually “seconds” or heightens the force of the initial sentence. Kugel expresses the relationship between two affirming lines as “A, and what’s more, B.” Note that in all the following examples, I will be using my own translation of the biblical text to bring out the points under discussion.
8. The traditional terminology is in this case antithetical parallelism. The confusion that arises with the Hegelian philosophical method of “thesis-antithesis-synthesis” renders this term less than useful or helpful.
9. The expansion preserves the relative balance in length between the two lines of the couplet—an indication that, while we know no universally accepted system of meter in Hebrew poetry, relative line length was still a matter of sufficient significance as to require some compensation in this circumstance.
10. James Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and Its History (New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press, 1981).
11. See Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Poetry (New York: Basic Books, 1985), 12–14, 28. James Kugel also offers an extended discussion of the phenomenon in The Idea of Biblical Poetry, 27–40. P. B. Yoder, in his “A-B Pairs and Oral Composition in Hebrew Poetry,” in Poetry in the Hebrew Bible, ed. David E. Orton (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 90–109, understands the presence of such fixed word pairs in Hebrew poetry as indicating an extended period of oral transmission and composition. See also Wilfred G. E. Watson, Traditional Techniques in Classical Hebrew Verse (JSOTSup 170; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), 28–30.
12. For just a few examples of Auffret’s extensive work on the psalms, see P. Auffret, The Literary Structure of Psalm 2 (JSOTSup 3; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1977), 1–41, and “Note sur la structure littéraire di Psaumes CXXXVI,” VT 27 (1977): 1–13.
13. Watson, Traditional Techniques in Classical Hebrew Verse, 262–312.
14. Translations of the Krt Epic can be found in: H. L. Ginsberg, The Legend of King Keret: A Canaanite Epic of the Bronze Age (BASORSup 2–3; New Haven, Conn.: American Schools of Oriental Research, 1946), and J. C. L. Gibson, Canaanite Myths and Legends, 2d ed. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1977).
15. See the discussion of this and other acrostics in P. Skehan and A. Di Lella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira (AB 39; New York: Doubleday, 1987), 74.
16. It may be that in the case of acrostic psalms adding a final verse, the waw line is also omitted. See the comments of Peter C. Craigie, Psalms 1–50 (WBC; Waco, Tex . . . : Word, 1983), 128–31, 216–17 (on Ps. 25:5a and Excursus III).
17. The LXX actually combines these two psalms into a single composition.
18. A brief introduction in English to the essentials of Gunkel’s approach is available in: Hermann Gunkel, The Psalms, trans. Thomas M. Horner (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967). A recent translation of Gunkel’s original Einleitung in den Psalmen is now available in Hermann Gunkel and Joachim Begrich, An Introduction to the Psalms: The Genres of the Religious Lyric of Israel, trans. James D. Nogalski (Macon, Ga.: Mercer Univ. Press, 1998).
19. A good introduction to Mowinckel’s thought in relation to the psalms can be found in Sigmund Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 2 vols., trans. D. R. Ap-Thomas (Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon, 1962).
20. For an English version of Weiser’s own discussion of his views on the covenant-renewal festival, see Artur Weiser, The Psalms: A Commentary, trans. Herbert Hartwell (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962), esp. 23–51.
21. See the section “Praise and Thanksgiving” in the materials preceding the commentary to Pss. 90–106.
22. For further discussion, see “The Laments” at the end of the comments on Ps. 3.
23. See “Praise and Thanksgiving” in the materials preceding the commentary on Pss. 90–106.
24. This phrase (or its near surrogate malak ʾelohim) is also found in Pss. 47:8; 96:10.
25. This is, of course, a double merism, indicating Yahweh’s authority over the whole earth.
26. Ps. 47 is part of a Psalter subcollection known as the Elohistic Psalter. The chief characteristic of this subunit is that it employs more frequently the more generic term for God (ʾelohim), often in place of the more particular Yahweh.
27. The wisdom books of the Hebrew Bible are Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Job. The Apocrypha contains additional wisdom books, including the Wisdom of Ben Sira (Sirach) and the Wisdom of Solomon. Outside the Bible, wisdom was an international phenomenon known in Egypt and Mesopotamia, producing its own literature that is similar but not identical to biblical wisdom literature.
28. See esp. Proverbs, but also the discussions in Job and Ecclesiastes. Jesus’ conclusion to the Sermon on the Mount follows in the wisdom tradition with his illustration of the contrasting fates of those who enter the wide or narrow gates and the two houses built on rock and sand.
29. Pss. 9–10; 25; 37; 111; 112; 119; 145.
30. See esp. Sir. 24 and 39 for this complete identification. The process of identification may already be seen in its earlier stages in Prov. 1–9, where the commandments of the sages and wisdom are spoken of in terms similar to those normally reserved for the commandments of Yahweh. See Gerald H. Wilson, “The Words of the Wise: The Intent and Significance of Qohelet 12:9–14,” JBL 103 (1984): 175–92.
31. See Wilson, The Shape and Shaping of the Psalter, 72–82.
32. For further discussion of this wisdom shaping of the whole Psalter, see “The Shape of the Psalter” in volume 2 of this commentary.
33. Haim M. I. Gevaryahu thinks that the psalm headings were originally colophons appended to the end of their psalm. He notes the psalm in Hab. 3, which has material normally included in psalm headings both at the beginning and the end (Hab. 3:1, 19) as evidence in this regard. For an English version of Gevaryahu’s theory see H. M. I. Gevaryahu, “Biblical Colophons: A Source for the ‘Biography’ of Authors, Texts, Books,” in Congress Volume: Edinburgh 1974 (VTSup 28; Leiden: Brill, 1975), 42–59. For a more complete discussion of the function of superscripts and postscripts in Israel and the ancient Near East, see Gerald H. Wilson The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter (SBLDS; Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985), 139–55.
34. It is of note that these Davidic psalms in Book 2 exhibit the greatest concentration of historical notices linking psalms to specific events in the life of David found anywhere in the Psalter. This certainly has the effect of heightening the Davidic character of the collection they conclude. Note also that Ps. 71, which separates the last Davidic psalm in Book 2 from Ps. 72 and its superscript, has considerable manuscript evidence of having been combined with Ps. 70.
35. It is interesting to speculate that the strong reference to the conclusion of the prayers of “David son of Jesse” that ties this collection closely to the specific human king David may suggest that later attributions of psalms to David in the succeeding books are increasingly intended to be taken as eschatologically focused references to the messianic David.
36. “As Moses gave five books of laws to Israel, so David gave five Books of Psalms to Israel,” in William G. Braude, The Midrash on Psalms (New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press, 1954), line 5.
37. For further discussion of the relationship of the Psalter books and the synagogal lectionary cycle see: Anton Arens, “Hat die Psalter seine ‘Sitz im Leben’ in der Synagogalen Leseordnung des Pentateuch?” in Le Psautier, ses origines, ses problemes litteraires, son influence, ed. Robert de Langhe (Orientalia et Biblica Lovaniensia 4; Louvain: Louvain Univ. Press, 1962); idem, Die Psalmen in Gottesdienst des Altes Bundes (Trier: Paulinus-Verlag, 1968); N. H. Snaith, “The Triennial Cycle and the Psalter,” ZAW 10 (1933): 302–7; Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, 199–203.
38. See Åke Sjöberg, The Collection of Sumerian Temple Hymns (Texts from Cuneiform Sources 3; Locust Valley, N.Y.: J. J. Augustin, 1960). My own comments on the Sumerian Temple Hymn Collection are included in Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, 13–24.
39. For a more detailed discussion of why the doxologies in the Psalter ought to be considered purposeful indicators of division, see Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, 182–86.
40. Pss. 1; 2; 10; 32; 42; 71; 91; 93; 94; 95; 96; 97; 99; 104; 105; 107; 114; 115; 116; 117; 118; 119; 136; 137.
41. Hallelujah introduces Pss. 106; 111; 112; 113; 135; 146; 147; 148; 149; 150. Hallelujah concludes Pss. 104; 105; 106; 115; 116; 117; 135; 146; 147; 148; 149; 150. This distinctive phrase functions like neither superscript or postscript. It is rather a liturgical shout within worship.
42. The debate has found its way into the modern translations of the psalm headings. Compare, e.g., the NIV translation of the heading of Ps. 50 (“A psalm of Asaph”) with that of the REB (“A psalm: for Asaph”). The NIV’s use of the translation “of” allows more ambiguity, since it can be understood both in the sense “psalm written by David” or “psalm written in the style of the Davidic psalm type.” The REB, however, has eliminated the possibility of a reference to authorship by its use of “for.” The ancient Greek translation of the LXX has chosen to render the Heb. preposition le- with the dative case (tō rather than tou).
43. BHS suggests the halleluyah postscript at the end of Ps. 113 should instead be taken as the superscript of the following Ps. 114—the only psalm in the sequence of Pss. 111–117 not to bear either a halleluyah superscript or postscript. If this shift were made alone, the total number of halleluyah psalms would be 16. However, BHS (following the Greek and Syriac versions) also recommends that Ps. 115 should be read together with 114 as a single psalm and that the postscripts of Pss. 115–117 should all be shifted to superscripts of the following psalms (Pss. 116–118). In this reconstruction the number of halleluyah psalms would remain 15, but would be expanded to include Ps. 118.
44. One of the better and more consistent discussions of the terminology of the psalm headings is found in J. F. A. Sawyer, “An Analysis of the Context and Meaning of the Psalm-Headings,” in Transactions of the Glasgow University Oriental Society 1967/1968 (Leiden: Brill, 1970), 26–38. Also useful and insightful is the extended treatment of the psalm titles in the commentary by H.-J. Kraus, Psalms 1–59: A Commentary (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1988), 21–23.
45. The thirteen psalms with historical notices are: Pss. 3; 7; 18; 34; 51; 52; 54; 56; 57; 59; 60; 63; and 142.
46. See Gevaryahu, “Biblical Colophons,” 42–59; idem, “Notes on Authors and Books in the Bible,” Beth Mikra 43 (1970): 368; Jesús Encisco Viana, “¿Como se formo la primera Parte del libro de los Saomos?” Bib 44 (1963): 129–58; idem, “Los titulos de los Salmos Y la historia de la formacion del Salterio,” Estudios Biblicos 13 (1954): 135–66; Brevard S. Childs, “Psalm Titles and Midrashic Exegesis” JSS 16 (1971): 137–50; Shemaryahu Talmon, “Pisqah beʿeṃsaʾ pasuq and 11 Q Psa,” Textus 5 (1966): 11–21.
47. Viana, “Los titulos de los Salmos,” 135–66.
48. The LXX includes references to Jeremiah and Ezekiel in the heading of Ps. 65 (LXX 64) and mentions Haggai and Zechariah in the headings of four psalms (LXX 145 = MT 146; LXX 146 = MT 147:1–11; LXX 147 = MT 147:12–20; LXX 148 = MT 148). The LXX includes Davidic references in LXX 70 = MT 71 and LXX 90 = MT 91, which the Heb. text leaves completely untitled. A historical reference to the “Assyrian” appears in the heading to LXX 79 = MT 80. Pss. 93–95, which are untitled in the Heb., receive liturgical headings in the LXX (92–94). A historical reference in LXX 143 = MT 144 mentions Goliath.
49. For an interesting consideration of how the psalm headings can bring light to the arrangement of psalms and the shaping of the whole Psalter, see “The Shape of the Psalter” in the second volume of this commentary.
1. For further discussion of the ambiguity of the Heb. construction (preposition le- + personal name) that is generally assumed to indicate authorship, see the section “Psalm Headings” in the Introduction.
2. The references in the English Psalter are often one verse different from the Hebrew Psalter, since the latter often considers the title as verse 1. This commentary will follow English versification.
3. To say a psalm is “individual” is not to say that it could not have been performed as part of the communal worship of Israel. This may often have been the case, esp. when the individual was the king, who exercised a representative role within temple worship.
4. Pss. 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 12; 13; 17; 20; 22; 25; 26; 28; 31; 38; 39; 40; 41.
5. From Ps. 8 to Ps. 34, there are eighteen psalms categorized as plea, thanksgiving, or instruction, as compared to only nine psalms in the categories of praise, reliance, or entrance liturgy.
6. Gerald H. Wilson, “The Use of Royal Psalms at the ‘Seams’ of the Hebrew Psalter,” JSOT 35 (1986): 85–94; idem, “The Shape of the Book of Psalms,” Int 46 (1992): 129–42.
7. Ps. 8: “What is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him?” (8:4). Ps. 19: “Who can discern his errors? Forgive my hidden faults. Keep your servant also from willful sins; may they not rule over me. Then will I be blameless, innocent of great transgression” (19:12–13). Ps. 33: “No king is saved by the size of his army; no warrior escapes by his great strength. A horse is a vain hope for deliverance; despite all its great strength it cannot save” (33:16–17).
8. The two great collators of manuscripts of the Heb. Old Testament and their numerous variations, Benjamin Kennicott and Johannes Bernhardus de Rossi—both of whom did their work in the mid to late eighteenth century—each list a number of manuscripts in which Ps. 1 is left unnumbered as a preface to the whole Psalter. Cf. Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, 204–5.
9. We must always remember that while the psalms are now part of Scripture and accessed primarily through the act of reading and meditation, in their origin they were performance pieces, spoken out loud and thus available to the ear. It is important to consider how hearing the psalms in the context of public, corporate worship is a decidedly different experience from reading them in the course of private study and devotion.
10. The final fixation of the Psalter arrangement may have taken place as late as the end of the first century A.D. (cf. Gerald H. Wilson, “A First Century C.E. Date for the Closing for the Hebrew Psalter,” Jewish Bible Quarterly 28 [2000]: 102–10). An alternative solution is that Pss. 1 and 2 were read together as a single psalm and introduction to the Psalter. Kennicott also mentions seven Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament that do not separate between Pss. 1 and 2. The joining of untitled psalms with adjacent compositions that do have titles is relatively common in ancient manuscripts of the Psalter (cf. the chart in Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, 134–35). Others suggest that these originally independent compositions have been purposefully placed together at the beginning of the Psalter to introduce the whole collection (cf. Craig C. Broyles, Psalms [NIBC; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1999], 41–42).
11. See the discussion of the Torah psalms in James L. Mays, The Lord Reigns (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 1994), 128–35.
12. Cf. James L. Mays, “The Question of Context in Psalm Interpretation,” in The Shape and Shaping of the Psalter, ed. J. C. McCann (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 14–20; idem, “The Place of the Torah-Psalms in the Psalter,” JBL 106 (1987): 3–12.
13. Outside the Psalms, the term ʾašre is found at Deut. 33:29; 1 Kings 10:8; 2 Chron. 9:7; Job 5:17; Prov. 3:13; 8:32, 34; 14:21; 16:20; 20:7; 28:14; 29:18; Eccl. 10:17; Isa. 30:18; 32:20; 56:2; Dan. 12:12. Within the Psalms ʾašre is found at Pss. 1:1; 2:12; 32:1, 2; 33:12; 34:8; 40:4; 41:1; 65:4; 84:4, 5, 1–6; 89:15; 94:12; 106:3; 112:1; 119:1, 2; 127:5; 128:1, 2; 137:8, 9; 144:15; 146:5.
14. “Blessed” in the Beatitudes is a translation of the Greek makarios. This same Greek word is used to translate ʾašre in the LXX version of Ps. 1.
15. The verb ʿmd has more the sense of “take a stand” than simply “stand still.” There is volition (and therefore responsibility) assumed in this action.
16. The verb yšb can mean “sit down” or often “dwell, take up permanent residence” in a place.
17. This exhortation to Israel also occurs at Deut. 11:19 in almost exactly the same language—an indication that this idea of the need to keep God’s guiding instruction constantly present and in mind was an important and formative part of Israel’s religious identity.
18. This is the only occurrence of leṣ/leṣim (a Qal participle of lyṣ) in the psalms. Outside the Psalter the term occurs only once in Isa. 29:20 and fourteen times in Proverbs (1:22; 3:34; 9:7, 8; 13:1; 14:6; 15:12; 19:25, 29; 20:1; 21:11, 24; 22:10; 24:9).
19. This is not to suggest that these books were simply created wholesale during the Exile, but that the ancient traditions about Israel’s formative circumstances were given their final shaping at that time and in response to the needs of the exilic community. This final shaping is most often associated with the work of the scribe Ezra, who returned from Babylonian exile (ca. 450 B.C.) with a copy of the “Book of the Law” with which to guide the life of the fledgling religious community of returnees in Jerusalem. This Torah became the primary understanding of Jewish faith and practice.
20. James L. Mays, “The Place of the Torah Psalms in the Psalter,” JBL 106 (1987): 3–12.
21. This identification of wisdom and torah is seen in subtle ways within the canonical literature, such as when Prov. 1–9 subtly speaks of wisdom in terms normally reserved for the Torah or when Deuteronomy speaks of Israel’s obedience to the Torah as her wisdom (Deut. 4:1–6; cf. Gerald H. Wilson, “The Words of the Wise: The Intent and Significance of Qohelet 12:9–14,” JBL 103 [1984]: 175–92.) The identification of torah and wisdom is more completely and explicitly mentioned in the later apocryphal wisdom books (cf. Sir. 24; 39).
22. Brevard S. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), 513–14.
23. The reference in found in the sixth column of the Community Rule (1QSerek), lines 7–8.
24. See the discussion of parallelism in the introduction, “The Art of Hebrew Poetry.”
25. Kathleen Norris, The Cloister Walk (New York: Macmillan, 1997), esp. the chapter on “The Paradox of the Psalms.”
26. Cf. T. R. Hobbs and P. K. Jackson, “The Enemy in the Psalms,” BTB 21 (1991): 22–29; Erhard S. Gerstenberger, “Enemies and Evildoers in the Psalms: A Challenge for Christian Preaching,” HBT 4 (1982–1983): 61–77.
27. Cf. Matt. 5–7; John 13–17.
28. Matt. 9:11; Mark 2:16; Luke 5:30.
1. For a discussion of the interpretation of royal psalms, see the Bridging Contexts section of the commentary on Ps. 20.
2. The word “Messiah” is taken from the Hebrew root mšḥ (“anoint”) and means the “anointed one.”
3. See the section on “The Messianic Reading of the Psalms” in “Theology of the Psalms,” in the second volume of this commentary.
4. While it is true that four additional psalms in this segment of the Psalter evidence no headings (Pss. 10; 33; 43; 71), there is strong evidence of a tradition of combining each of these psalms with its predecessor (Pss. 9; 32; 42; 70). See Gerald H. Wilson, “The Use of ‘Untitled’ Psalms in the Hebrew Psalter,” ZAW 97 (1985): 405–13.
5. See comments on Ps. 1.
6. See the discussion in Gerald H. Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, 204–6. An alternative explanation for the reading in Acts would be that Pss. 1 and 2 were in that tradition being read as a single introductory psalm.
7. Broyles, Psalms, 41–42; but cf. John T. Willis, “Psalm 1—An Entity,” ZAW 9 (1979): 381–401.
8. See the essays on “The Shape of Book 1” and “The Shape of Book 2” in this volume, as well as the sections on “The Shape of Book 3” and “The Shape of the Psalter,” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
9. The goyim are “nations”—political entities with recognizable boundaries, while leʾummim (“peoples”) is a reference to ethnically related people groups within these national boundaries. See the discussion of these and other terms for “peoples” and “nations” in the commentary and notes to Ps. 47.
10. The role of world dominion described for the Davidic kings (cf. Pss. 2; 72; etc.) is essentially the role given to all humanity in the creation (cf. Gen. 1:26–28; Ps. 8). The Davidic kings seem to have adapted this creation command as part of their ideological raison d’être.
11. In Ps. 55:14, the noun from this same root describes the “restless throng” of pilgrims and other worshipers who approach the house of God.
12. This same verb that describes the murmuring plots of the nations here is used in Ps. 1:2 for the faithful student of torah murmuring meditatively over the words and meaning of God’s guiding words. The common element is the low murmuring of voices as the one reads aloud and the others hatch their plots.
13. The verb yṣb has connotations of “taking a stand against” someone in resistance.
14. The images of bondage here seem to assume binding by rope or chain to a stake that can be “pulled up” and then “thrown down” to the ground when removed from the body.
15. I am reminded in this connection of the song from Bob Dylan’s Christian period in the early 1980s—“When He Returns.” Faced by the turmoil of human existence and the violent pretensions to independent power of human nations and individuals, “he is unconcerned.”
16. The verb śḥq (cf. ṣḥq), “laugh; make sport,” is used in Judg. 16:25 to describe Samson providing “entertainment” for the gathered Philistines who saw their blinded and bound enemy as representing no threat. The root sense of lʿg is to “stammer” in someone’s face as if ridiculing their speech. Here the terms mock the murmuring plots of the nations and points up the futility of their united speech in 2:3.
17. The verb “installed” (nsk), in the Qal stem as here, normally means “to pour out” as with wine in a libation offering or molten metal into a mold. The sense here is unclear, and commentators resolve the issue by assuming a Niphal perfect form with the conjectural meaning “be consecrated, exalted” by a drink offering (cf. Holladay, CHALOT, 239. Use of the passive form would place this statement in the mouth of the king who would be reporting God’s exaltation of the human king (“I have been installed as his king . . .”). This would require further emendation of the pronominal suffixes accompanying “king” and “holy hill” from first person (“my”) to third person (“his”). Support for this emendation is found in the LXX as noted in the BHS apparatus. Regardless of the difficulty with the meaning of nsk, the traditional rendering seems preferable to me. (Cf. the comments of Craigie, Psalms 1–150, 63–64).
18. Because the New Testament narratives of Jesus’ birth connect his sonship with his possessing the same essence and being as God himself—God made flesh—we often forget how this title must have been understood by his contemporaries. The “son of God” was the king, and by the time of Jesus the Messiah.
19. The Hebrew behind the phrase “your possession” (ʾạhuzzatka) is derived from the verb ʾḥz “lay hold of; seize; hold fast” (Holladay, CHALOT, 8). Although it has assumed the meaning “property,” the origins of the word still reflect a context of taking by force that is consistent with the kind of conquest of territory associated with expanding kingdoms.
20. The NIV’s translation emends the text on the basis of the LXX and other versions to tirʿem (from rʿh [“shepherd; lead”]). The metaphor of shepherding seems inconsistent with the harsh smashing in the second half of the verse and would necessitate taking the “iron scepter” as some sort of iron-tipped shepherd’s staff. The Hebrew of the text (teroʿem) understands the verb as derived from the root rʿʿ (“break”)—a translation that seems to me more balanced with the second half of the verse. The resultant translation is offered in NIV’s note as an alternate.
21. The image of broken pottery is employed elsewhere for divine judgment on a rebellious people (cf., e.g., Isa. 30:12–14; Jer. 19:1–13; 25:34). Broken pottery was (and still is) endemic in the ancient Near East—the surfaces of ancient city mounds are littered with fragments, and the presence of pottery throughout the strata of archaeological excavations is one of the most reliable means of dating occupation layers. Fragments of broken pottery were put to secondary use as scrapers (Job 2:8), coal shuttles (Isa. 30:14), and for message writing (e.g., the Lachish Ostraca). Such fragments were so common that their presence eventually receded from awareness (cf. Ps. 31:12)—it was so ubiquitous than no one even noticed it.
22. This would be the only occurrence of this Aramaic word outside those portions of Daniel and Ezra that are composed in the Aramaic language. While other Aramaisms are found in a predominantly Hebrew context, bar is never found in such contexts, and the contrast with the previous term ben in 2:7 militates against its appearance here.
23. Since Jesus is the fulfillment of the messianic Son anticipated in this passage, the account in Luke 7:45 of the sinful woman who kisses Jesus’ feet while the Pharisees disdain his contact with a sinner has particular poignancy. The woman sees what the Pharisees resist—that Jesus is the anticipated messianic Son who must nevertheless suffer and die. With their rejection of Jesus’ messianic role, the Pharisees side with the rebellious nations.
24. Those who suggest that Ps. 2 functions together with Ps. 1 as an introduction to the whole Psalter note the appearance of the term ʾašre (“Blessed”) at the beginning of Ps. 1 and the end of Ps. 2 as evidence that these originally separate psalms were intended to be read together. In that case, this final line may easily have been attached to the end of Ps. 2 for the purpose of binding the two psalms together.
25. The theme of finding refuge in Yahweh is a dominant one—esp. in the first two books of the Psalter (Pss. 2–72), where nouns and verbs of the root ḥsh employed in 2:12 occur no less than twenty-five times. These same terms appear only once in Book 3 (73:28) and five additional times in each of the last two books. Cf. Jerome Creach, Yahweh as Refuge and the Editing of the Hebrew Psalter (JSOTSup 217; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1996).
26. See the discussion in “The Shape of the Psalter” in volume 2 of the commentary.
27. See the discussion of this latter option in Wilson, “A First Century C.E. Date,” 102–10.
28. On these psalms see the discussion in “Types of Psalms” in the introduction.
29. After appearing seven times in six psalms in the first three books (2:2; 18:50; 20:6; 28:8; 84:9; 89:38, 51), the term mešiaḥ occurs only three times in two psalms in the last two books (105:15; 132:10, 17), a slight reduction in emphasis. The term “servant” (ʿebed) also occurs in reference to kings seven times in four psalms in the earlier segment (18:0; 36:0; 78:70; 89:3, 20, 39, 50) and only two times in two psalms (132:10; 144:10) in the latter.
30. This may even offer a partial solution for the apparent confusion between king and Yahweh in such passages as 45:2–7, where the king appears in verse 5 to be called “God.”
31. Sung by Mary Travers, written by Peter Yarrow and Larry Weiss, “I Need Me to Be for Me” (Silver Dawn/Ram’s Head/ASCAP, 1979).
32. See also Jer. 5:5, where the leaders are taken to task as well: “ ‘So I will go to the leaders and speak to them; surely they know the way of the LORD, the requirements of their God.’ But with one accord they too had broken off the yoke and torn off the bonds.”
33. Cf. also Hos. 11:3–4, where Yahweh heals rebellious Israel, taking the yoke of oppression from off their neck and leading them with “cords of human kindness, with ties of love” while bending down “to feed them”—a beautiful picture of his satisfying their deepest wants and needs.
34. In addition to the priestly intercessor in Ps. 20, we hear the voice of the king himself in Ps. 72, offering intercession for his successor.
35. Cf. Pss. 21; 110; 132.
36. Cf. 1 Sam. 13:7–14; 2 Sam. 6:17–19; 24:24–25; 1 Kings 3:4, 15; 8:62.
37. For further discussion of Mowinckel’s theories, see Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 1:106–92; also see the section on “Types of Psalms” in the Introduction to this commentary.
38. Artur Weiser, The Psalms (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962), is one of the most articulate proponents of the yearly covenant-renewal festival as the context for the psalms.
39. This could, of course, be every new king or one specific king.
40. The presence in the psalm headings of this combined collection of names of persons other than David may well be explained by the Chronicler’s affirmation that indeed it was David who established and organized the temple worship system, including the Levitical servants and singers who had responsibility for all aspects of temple ritual and practice (see esp. 1 Chron. 25:1–26:1, where the names of Asaph and the Sons of Korah are mentioned prominently among those set apart for temple service by David). It is tempting in this light to consider the postscript in 72:20 to refer not to a group of private personal prayers composed by David but to a collection of pieces authorized for use in temple worship.
41. Ps. 146 is surely intended to represent the praise of David invoked in the first half of 145:21: “My mouth will speak in praise of the LORD. . . .”
42. For further comments of the significance of this structure for the shape of the first book and the whole Psalter, see “The Shape of the Psalter” in the second volume of this commentary as well as the essays on the individual books (consult index).
43. See esp. Ps. 144, in its reference to the empowerment of Yahweh (vv. 1, 10), the frailty of humans (vv. 3–4), the “new song” theme of the Yahweh malak psalms (v. 9), and its dramatic depiction of the blessings of Yahweh (vv. 12–14).
44. As in the postscript in 72:20. Might it be that the inclusion of numerous Davidic psalms after this conclusion marks a shift in the interpretation of David away from a strictly historical personage toward the king as spiritual model and guide anticipated in the Messiah?
1. The term mizmor is one of two more general designations employed in the psalm headings (the other being šir [“song”]). Taken from the Hebrew verbal root zmr, the term describes “a song sung to the accompaniment of stringed instruments.”
2. Of the forty-one psalms (Pss. 1–41) that compose the first book of the Psalter, all but four (1; 2; 10; 33) are attributed to David by the presence of this phrase in their heading.
3. Of the seventy-three psalms in the Psalter bearing ledawid (“to, for, of, by David”) in their headings, thirteen (3; 7; 18; 34; 51; 52; 54; 56; 57; 59; 60; 63; 142) also have historical notices highlighting specific circumstances in David’s life as the precipitating influence behind the psalm.
4. This is a Greek way of thinking. The Greeks used the term psyche to designate this ephemeral though eternal spiritual substance in humans.
5. The LXX casts this phrase in the second person (“no deliverance for you”), making the enemies’ intent to undermine and demoralize the psalmist even more clear.
6. In this case using the more ancient form yešuʿatah.
7. H.-J. Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 139) suggests this meaning for yešuaʿ. I like this nuance much better in this particular context since there seems to be little indication of “victory” as this passage is often translated. See also the article on “Salvation” in ISBE2, 4:287–95.
8. Cf. the ignorant pronouncement of the fool in 14:1 or the arrogant dismissal of the wicked in 10:4.
9. At least one scholar reads magan instead of magen and translates the whole phrase as “You are my suzerain. . . .” This seems overly speculative and unnecessary, since the normal understanding of magen as “shield” is entirely appropriate to the context.
10. See the NIV text note on 3:3.
11. The sixteen passages where qumah occurs are Judg. 18:9; 1 Sam. 9:26; and Jer. 46:16—these three do not address God—and Num. 10:35; Ps. 3:8; 7:6; 9:19; 10:12; 17:13; 35:2; 44:26; 74:22; 82:8; 132:8; Jer. 2:27; 2 Chron. 6:41 (which is identical with Ps. 132:8). Three of these psalms appear in the Elohistic Psalter and therefore refer to God (ʾelohim) rather than Yahweh.
12. The Heb. word leḥi is translated both “jaw” and “cheek,” depending on the verse translated or the modern translation being used.
13. The NIV translation of the Heb. phrase leyhwh hayšuʿah as “From the LORD comes deliverance,” while idiomatically correct, obscures the almost exact rebuttal made in this verse to the enemies’ denial in verse 2, where they declare ʾen yešuʿatah . . . beʾlohim: “There is no deliverance . . . with God.” The construction used in verse 8 is the common Hebrew way to express possession, and the most straightforward translation of the phrase is: “To the LORD deliverance belongs.”
14. Israel’s growing awareness that there is no other God but Yahweh on whom she could trust for deliverance is clearly exhibited in such passages as Ex. 20:3; Deut. 4:35, 39; 5:7; 1 Kings 8:60; Isa. 44:8; 45:5, 6, 14, 18, 22; 46:9; Dan. 3:29; Joel 2:27.
15. Cf. Isa. 45:22; Dan. 3:29.
16. There are a few other compositions of psalm-like nature that are known from other texts both within and outside the Old Testament. Within Scripture we find psalms in Jonah 2, Lam., and Hab. 3. Outside Scripture we know several additional psalms from the LXX Psalter and compositions from the Dead Sea Psalms Scroll (11QPsa).
17. Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 95–99) offers a particularly lucid and helpful discussion of the topic.
1. The term occurs in the headings of fifty-five psalms, beginning with Ps. 4 and ending with Ps. 140.
2. In 1 Chron. 15:20 we find the phrase binbalim ʿal ʿalamot (“with lyres according to alamoth”; cf. Ps. 46:1), and in 1 Chron. 15:21 the related bekinnorot ʿal haššeminit lenaṣṣeaḥ (“with harps, directing according to haššeminit”; cf. Pss. 6:1; 12:1). This would seem to confirm the connection of the meaning associated with nṣḥ in the Chronicler’s work with the form employed in the psalm headings.
3. Cf. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 144: “—In (my) distress you created room for me—.”
4. Pss. 17; 86; 90; 102; and 142.
5. Other verbs used beside šemaʿ include ʾzn (“listen to”) and qšb (“pay attention to”).
6. The most prominent are ʿad ʾanah; ʿad matay; and ʿad mah.
7. Cf. Pss. 79:5; 89:46.
8. Lev. 26:16 on sowing seed; Lev. 26:20 on spending strength; Isa. 30:7 on trusting in Egypt’s help; Ps. 2:1 on conspiring in rage; Ps. 73:13 on keeping the heart pure; and often with “labor” (Job 39:16; Isa. 49:4; 65:23; Jer. 51:58; Hab. 2:13).
9. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 148.
10. As when Saul and his servant seek the lost donkeys of Saul’s father, Kish, in 1 Sam. 9:3–10:16.
11. Cf. Ps. 24:6, where bqš is paralleled by drš, the more usual term for inquiring of God; also Ps. 27:8; 105:4; 1 Chron. 16:11.
12. Amos 2:4. Cf. Ps. 40:4, where the NIV and others understand śaṭe kazab to mean “turn aside after a lie [false gods].”
13. Cf. Ex. 8:22; 9:4; 11:7, where Yahweh deals differently with the Egyptians and Israelites during the plagues.
14. Even in these passages the meaning of rgz is rather obscure (cf. Gen. 45:24; Prov. 29:9; Ezek. 16:43).
15. Compare the opening description of the fool in Ps. 14:1, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ ” The Heb. for “in his heart” is the same as in our passage.
16. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 148.
17. The phrase has many connections with the traditional Aaronic blessing recorded in Num 6:25–26. Cf. also Ps. 30:7; 67:1; 104:29.
18. “My cry” (vv. 1 & 3; NIV “my call”); “righteousness” (vv. 1 & 5); “hear” (vv. 1 & 3); “heart” (vv. 4 & 7); “bed/lie down” (vv. 4 & 8); “trust/safety” (vv. 5 & 8); “many/abound” (vv. 6 & 7).
1. See the discussion of “The Kingship of Yahweh in the Psalms,” in “Theology of the Psalms,” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
2. See esp. Deut. 17:14–20, where the prohibitions listed most nearly approximate the excess for which Solomon is condemned in 1 Kings 11.
3. Compare the sentiments of Ps. 146, where human rulership is denigrated (146:3–4) in comparison to the eternal reign of Yahweh (v. 10), who is described as performing appropriately the responsibilities of the oriental monarch of the ancient Near East (vv. 6–9).
4. The daily sacrifice of a male lamb and a cereal offering with oil were offered both morning and evening.
5. See Gerald H. Wilson, “
,” NIDOTTE, 2:550–51; A. H. Konkel, “
,” NIDOTTE, 1:836–39.
6. See the discussion of “Fear of Yahweh” in the section on “Theology of the Psalms” in volume 2 of this commentary.
7. The psalmist alternates in this verse between singular and plural reference to the enemy. Here the third masculine singular pronoun (“his mouth”) is used, while the very next phrase employs the third masculine plural (“their heart”).
8. There is an interesting parallel between this image and the Ugaritic myth of the god Mot (meaning Death), who is depicted spreading his lips from sky to earth in order to convey hapless humans to the abode of the dead through his open gullet.
9. The word translated in the NIV as “speak deceit” (ḥlq) is most often translated as “use a smooth tongue” in the sense of speak flattery or deceit.
10. This may explain the appearance in the first phrase of v. 9 of the doubly singular construction pihu (“his mouth”).
11. The verb ḥsh (“take refuge”) is used twenty-five times in the Psalter, most in reference to finding security with Yahweh. The noun maḥseh (“refuge”) appears an additional twelve times with similar reference.
12. See esp. Deut. 17:14–20.
13. As already mentioned in relation to Ps. 2, the kingship of Yahweh is sometimes connected to the future reign of the Messiah—the Anointed One—who will bring Yahweh’s divine reign down to earth. See also the discussion of the kingship of Yahweh before Pss. 93–99.
14. Cf. also Is. 43:14; 44:6, 24; 47:4; 48:17; 49:7; 54:5, 8; 60:16; 63:16.
1. Comments on “for the director of music” are found in the commentary on the heading of Ps. 4. For “with stringed instruments” see the heading of Ps. 4 as well. “A psalm of David” first appears in the heading of Ps. 3.
2. In Heb., negative commands or prohibitions are expressed neither with imperatives nor with jussives but with imperfect verb forms negated by the particle loʾ. The resulting construction means something like “Don’t!” or “Don’t even think about it!” The most familiar group of negative imperatives in the Old Testament are the Ten Commandments, where imperfects negated by loʾ, are traditionally rendered “Thou shalt not . . . !”
3. The New Testament word for repentance, metanoia, captures a similar sense of “changing direction.”
4. For passages about divine repentance using šwb, see Ex. 32:12; Job 6:29; Ps. 7:12; 90:13; Jer. 4:28; Jonah 3:9. Many find such changeability in God troublesome. We like to think of God as “the same yesterday and today and forever” (Heb. 13:8). Yet, change in God (from the human viewpoint) is the foundation of prayer and the source of human hope. The Old Testament’s testimony that Yahweh does change—even repents [šwb]—forms a tension with the many descriptions of his sure and unchanging nature. This tension (or paradox) marks out the boundaries of faith and is intended to be held continually together rather than resolved in favor of one or the other feature.
5. This is unfortunately what some modern hymnbooks do in their published responsive readings. Many of the more negative passages of the psalms are passed over and omitted.
6. See the discussion of divine holiness in the section on “Theology of the Psalms” in volume 2 of this commentary.
7. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 162–63.
1. An English translation is available in Walter Beyerlin, “The Negative Confession of Sin (Book of the Dead, Saying 125),” Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament, ed. W. Beyerlin et al., trans. John Bowden (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978), 63–67.
2. The NIV’s translation of Heb. škn as “make [to] sleep,” while certainly poetic and dramatic, obscures the point of the underlying Hebrew. There the meaning is certainly that the one who currently resides in the world of the living will take up residence (although a less permanent and substantial living) in the dust. It seems that something more than “sully my reputation” is called for by these phrases.
3. While the affirming parallel structure of the first two phrases of v. 6 might suggest that Yahweh’s “anger” in the first phrase ought to be balanced by his “rage” in the second, the word for “rage” is consistently a negative emotion of arrogant pride, which seems best related to the enemies who immediately follow.
4. The NIV has severely reordered this verse without much cause. The original order is “Let the evil of the wicked be at an end, but establish the righteous, O one who searches minds and hearts, O righteous God.”
5. Others direct this phrase to the enemy of the psalmist (e.g., Craigie); still others omit the phrase altogether (e.g., Kraus).
6. The question of divine repentance is complicated by the fact that more than one Hebrew term is employed to describe divine repentance. One of the most important is the verb nḥm, which is also used of both humans and God to describe repentance or change of mind. In Num. 23:19, we hear that “God is not a [mortal] . . . that he should change his mind [nḥm].” Elsewhere, however, Yahweh is described as willing to do just that (cf. Jer. 18:8, 10; 26:3, 13, 19; Joel 2:14; Jonah 4:2).
7. Others (e.g., Kraus) take this to be a portrait of the enemy preparing to continue attacks against the psalmist—an attack that will turn back in disaster on the attacker himself.
8. The first two phrases are in affirming parallelism, using two Heb. words for “be pregnant, conceive” (ḥabal, harah) for variation.
9. Cf. Gen. 14:18–22, where Abram identifies Yahweh with the god whom Melchizedek reveres as “God Most High [ʾel ʿelyon], Creator of heaven and earth.”
10. See vv. 9, 11, and 17.
11. In the first half of Isaiah (chs. 1–39), the title “Holy One of Israel” is used of Yahweh primarily in oracles of judgment on Israel. In the latter half of the book (chs. 40–66), the title is unexpectedly connected with the hopeful designation “Redeemer,” as in 41:14, “The LORD, your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel.”
1. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 180; Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 105.
2. This process led over time to some rather subtle but far-reaching misunderstandings. Hebrew Scripture was originally written without vowels present—as a consonantal text. Various ways were developed to mark out the Tetragrammaton (the four letters of the divine name Yahweh), so that readers would not mistakenly pronounce it. Among the Qumran scrolls from the Dead Sea, Yahweh is often written in archaic Hebrew script that is visibly distinct from the later square Aramaic characters adopted for the transmission of the text and later for printed versions of the Hebrew Bible. When much later (between the fourth and seventh centuries A.D.) vowel points were inserted in the consonantal text of Scripture (above and below the consonants), the divine name was not at first provided with vowels. This indicated the name was not to be pronounced out loud. The consonants of the replacement word ʾadonay were placed in the margin to indicate the appropriate remedy: “Don’t say Yahweh! Read instead ʾadonay.” This was, however, very complicated, since the divine name occurs thousands of times in the Hebrew Bible. Still later, a less difficult shorthand method was adopted by placing the vowels of ʾadonay around the consonants of the divine name yhwh in the text. The resulting hybrid formation yehowah led ultimately to confusion when it was mistakenly taken as the correct pronunciation of the divine name. This confused reading remains with us today in many circles as Jehovah. It is clear, however, that the combined form was never intended to be read in this way but was simply an abbreviated way of warning the reader to respectfully replace the divine name with ʾadonay.
3. Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 178) gives a helpful summary of the various solutions offered along with associated bibliography.
4. Mitchell Dahood, Psalms: Introduction, Translation, and Notes, 3 vols. (AB; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1966–1970), 1:49. More recently, P. Craigie (Psalms 1–50, 104–5) follows the same tack.
5. The comments of Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Psalms, trans. Francis Bolton (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, repr. 1970), 1:152, in this regard are well taken.
6. Or, perhaps, the image is a response to the restless conspiracy of the nations depicted in Ps. 2:1–3, whose murmuring is here both “silenced” and “stilled.”
7. The whole discussion in Eccl. 1:2–11 points up the contrast between the enduring natural process of the world, which continues unchanged from generation to generation, and the brief, fitful, unmemorable lives of human beings.
8. Cf. Gen. 1:26–27, where Yahweh creates ʾadam both male and female.
9. In the account of the sixth day of creation in Gen. 1:24–31, humans share the same creative day with the other animated land beasts. This provides humans with a direct and close relationship with the rest of the created order of which they are also a part. It is also significant that no individual blessing is pronounced on the land beasts as occurs for the sea and air creatures in 1:22. This leaves the impression that the similar blessing to “be fruitful and increase in number” (1:28) covers both the beasts and humans—a further indication of humans’ close and essential relationship to the rest of creation.
10. The Genesis narrative uses two different words to describe the authority and responsibility of humans over creation. I will return to these in the Bridging Contexts section.
11. Greek, ego eimi.
12. A. R. Millard and P. Bordeuil, “A Statue from Syria with Assyrian and Aramaic Inscriptions,” BA 45 (1982): 135–41.
13. Cf. Lynn B. White, “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis,” in Western Man and Environmental Ethics, ed. Ian Barbour (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1973); Gerald H. Wilson, “Restoring the Image: Perspectives on a Biblical View of Creation,” Quaker Religious Thought 24 (1990): 11–21.
14. See 1 Kings 5:16; 9:23; 2 Chron. 8:10.
15. Cf. also Rom. 8:15: “For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him [the Spirit] we cry ‘Abba, Father!’ ”
16. Marcion, a bishop of the early church, believed that the God of the Old Testament was not the same God as in the New. He devised a heavily edited version of the Gospel of Luke and of the Pauline letters that supposedly omitted references to the Old Testament. Marcion was declared a heretic, and opposition to his truncated “canon” gave impetus to the efforts to define the limits of the authoritative collection of New Testament books.
17. In fact, a recent survey conducted by George Barna indicates that “born-again Christians” are more likely to divorce than unbelievers (27 percent for born-again Christians against only 24 percent of those not born again and 21 percent of agnostics and atheists). The survey was reported in Southern California Christian Times. Inland Empire Edition, 11/2 (February 2000): 1, 11–13.
1. Research of this type was begun in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in response to growing awareness of the existence of numerous manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament scattered through monasteries and libraries throughout Europe. Comparison of these manuscripts with each another led to the discovery of thousands of variations in spelling, wording, and more extensive content, preserved by these texts; this fact led to attempts to collate, record, and categorize all these variants as the basis of textual studies. This was the beginning of modern, scientific text criticism, which seeks to establish the original version of the biblical text by comparing all variants and determining which one most likely represents the original reading. Two of the most exhaustive and painstaking attempts to collate variants in the texts of Old Testament manuscripts are Benjamin Kennicot, ed., Vetus Testamentum Hebraicum cum Variis Lectionibus, vol. 1 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1776), and Johannes Bernardus de Rossi, Variae Lectiones Veteris Testamenti ex immensa Mss. editorumq. codicum (Parmae: ex Regio Typographeo, 1784–1798).
2. These latter inconsistencies (in the yod and kaph verses) may have been affected by the division of the original poem into two parts, thus obscuring the acrostic nature of the whole.
3. The normal sequence of the Hebrew alphabet is disordered in Ps. 10 by exchanging the pe and ʿayin verses.
4. On the basis of the Hebrew alphabet of twenty-two characters, one would anticipate a complete acrostic to contain some multiple of twenty-two verses—in this case forty-four, since each letter is represented by two verses of poetry. The lack of compatibility with this expected figure is further evidence of the disrupted nature of the acrostic of Pss. 9–10.
5. The schema of the two Psalters runs like this: (a) Pss. 1–8 are the same; (b) Hebrew Pss. 9 and 10 = Greek Ps. 9; (c) Hebrew Pss. 11–146 = Greek Pss. 10–145; (d) Hebrew Ps. 147 = Greek Pss. 146 and 147; Pss. 148–150 are the same. The Greek Psalter does, of course, include the additional Ps. 151, described in its heading as being “outside the number” of the traditional psalm collection.
6. For both of these elements, see comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
7. See comments on the heading of Ps. 4.
8. Cf. NIV. Whether the tune name has any significance to the interpretation of the psalm is patently unclear. Since it is so obscure, it seems best not to make much of it.
9. Cf. Deut. 4:29; 6:5; 10:12; 26:16; 30:2, 6, 10.
10. Hannah’s song is also the model behind Mary’s Magnificat in Luke 2, which evidences a similar attitude of deep joy and thanksgiving tied to the deliverance promised by the birth of Jesus.
11. If it were not for the alphabetic structure of the psalm (v. 4 forms the second line of the bet verse begun in v. 3), it would be tempting to divide verse 4 and allow the first half to close the opening section and the second half to open the next.
12. While it is suggestive that reference to Yahweh as “refuge”—using either of the terms (ḥasah/maḥseh or miśgab) previously encountered—does not occur in the third book of the Psalter (Pss. 73–89), it remains unclear whether this distribution is reflective of some larger editorial purpose.
13. The plural damim (“blood”) is often used to describe violent blood-letting or murder (cf. 1 Sam. 25:26; 2 Sam. 16:7; 21:1).
14. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 27, 196.
15. The same phrase occurs in 7:5; this serves as an additional tether binding Pss. 7–10 together into a thematic grouping. It is suggestive that nowhere else in the Psalter (or in the whole Old Testament, for that matter) do any occurrences of Heb. qumah (“arise”) appear in consecutive psalms—let alone a grouping of psalms as here.
16. In the section on “The Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary, I explore another aspect of this broader context by asking what the psalms—taken as a whole—have to say about God, humans, the world, and the relationship of all three. This biblical theological approach assumes that the teaching of Scripture must be drawn from the whole range of scriptural texts and documents and from an understanding built up that honors each and allows tensions perceived to stand as markers of the boundaries of faith.
17. In this regard see Pss. 31:23–24; 32:1, 11; 66:16; 77:13–20; 130:7–8; 131:3.
18. Cf. Pss. 14:7; 25:22; 53:6; 57:9; 69:34–36; 102:12–22, 28; 129:5–8; 144:14–15.
19. See the discussion of “The Shape of the Psalter” in volume 2 of this commentary and the various essays describing the shape of the individual books of the Psalter scattered throughout this two-volume work.
20. I have been personally blessed by the work of Bryan Jeffery Leach, who has written numerous new hymns and additional verses to traditional hymns that reflect powerfully and artistically on the breadth of the human condition before God.
21. Cf. Rev. 7:9, where the “great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language” stood before the Lamb, wearing white robes and declaring in the words of Ps. 3:8, “Salvation belongs to our God.” Rev. 14:6 also describes an angel carrying the “eternal gospel to proclaim to those who live on the earth—to every nation, tribe, language and people.”
1. Consult the comments on the headings of Pss. 3 and 4.
2. Pss. 7:10; 11:2, 7; 32:11; 33:1; 36:10; 37:14, 37; 49:14; 64:10; 94:15; 97:11; 107:42; 111:1; 112:2, 4; 125:4; 140:13.
3. Pss. 7:10; 11:2; 32:11; 36:10; 64:10; 94:15; 97:11.
4. In Ps. 37:14, yašar is linked with the word derek (in an additional expansion of the theme of uprightness) to describe those whose “way is upright.”
5. The NIV textual note offers an alternative reading of this phrase that is equally despairing: “What is the Righteous One [God] doing?” Others (e.g., Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 131, 133) suggest, “What has the righteous done [to deserve this]?”
6. Of fifty-one occurrences of ḥzh in the Old Testament, twenty-six are found in the prophetic books and nine in the psalms, with thirteen in wisdom literature and the remaining three in the Pentateuch. The verb bḥn appears twenty-eight times in the Old Testament, with ten being in prophetic literature, nine in the psalms, six in wisdom literature, and the remaining three in Genesis and 1 Chronicles.
7. The noun “vision” is found in the titles of Isaiah, Obadiah, and Nahum. The title “seer” appears frequently in the Chronicler as well as in the prophets (Isaiah and Amos) and in 1 and 2 Samuel.
8. See the discussion of nepeš in the comments on Ps. 3:2.
9. In both Gen. 19:24 and Ps. 11:6, God rains “fire” (ʾeš) and “sulfur” (goprit). In Ps. 11:6, the term paḥim is rather awkwardly added just before ʾeš. It is generally agreed that this word (which normally means “leaves” of metal) should be emended by reversing the last two letters of the consonantal text to paḥme (“coals”), with the resulting construction translated as in the NIV’s “fiery coals.”
10. Holladay connects the Hebrew zalʿapah with “rage” rather than “scorching” and understands the passage in 11:6 as a “whirlwind” (CHALOT, 89).
11. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 204.
12. For related passages see Pss. 16:5; 23:5; 75:8; Jer. 25:15, 17, 28; Lam. 4:21; Ezek. 23:31–33; Hab. 2:16.
13. Other religions (such as Islam) are equally intolerant—claiming unique and absolute truth for their beliefs, but because they have not been traditionally associated with the dominant culture, there is less negative critique directed toward them.
14. The bombing of the government office building in Oklahoma City is one example.
15. Later revised to Eight-Nine Reasons the Lord Will Return in 1989.
16. Cf. the parallel passages in Matt. 16:25 and Mark 8:35.
1. See comments on the heading of Ps. 4.
2. See comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
3. Martin Buber, The Way of Man According to the Teaching of Hasidism (Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel, 1966), 29.
4. The Hebrew means more directly “destruction, devastation.” See Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 136, for an excellent critique of Dahood’s suggestion on the basis of Ugaritic that this term be translated “sobs.” Dahood would have the parallel halves of this verse more identical in meaning (“sobs” vs. “groaning”). There is, however, no difficulty accepting the traditional understanding that God sees the “devastation” suffered by the weak and hears the “groaning” that oppression produces.
5. Cf. on this theme of the effective word of Yahweh in Isa. 55:11, where the Hebrew term for “word” is dabar in the singular rather than the plural of ʾimrah as here in Ps. 12. The theological understanding, however, is similar and supportive.
6. More accurate than the NIV’s “flawless,” which draws from the evaluation of gemstones rather than the metallurgical context of this passage.
7. Once again the metallurgical imagery is clear.
8. This too is a metallurgical image, used in Job 28:1 of the purification of gold. It suggests the extreme care involved in sifting out true gold from any impurities in the ore.
9. A number of proverbs condemn malicious and deceptive speech (see, e.g., Prov. 26:22–26).
1. See comments on the heading of Ps. 4.
2. See comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
3. See the discussion of “Divine Hiddenness” in “The Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
4. Several Heb. interrogative phrases are translated “How long?” in the psalms. These include: ʿad ʾanah (“until where?” cf. 13:1–3; 62:3); ʿad mah (“until what?” cf. 4:2; 74:9; 79:5; 89:46); ʿad matay (“until when?” cf. 6:3; 74:10; 80:4; 82:2; 90:13; 94:3); and kamma (“like/as what?” cf. 35:17; 119:84). All of these are understood as introducing questions of divine hiddenness and delay; thus, they are rendered as temporally concerned rather than questions of spatial or relational interest.
5. In this light, the promise in 1 Cor. 13:12 that we will “know as we are known” is a promise of being established in the protective care and blessing of God. To the contrary, the pointed rejection of the faithless at the end time—“I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!” (Matt. 7:23) is an ominous consignment to destruction.
6. The picture is of the gradual glazing over of the eyes as death approaches and the life force begins to ebb. See also comments on Ps. 38:10.
7. This translation is mine. Rather than the NIV’s “when I fall,” the Heb. ʾmwṭ (“be made to stumble, totter, wobble”) preserves the image of the imminent collapse of a tottering, stumbling person (because of the effects of illness, or physical attack?) or of a wobbling wall rendered unstable by an earthquake. The psalmist is only too aware of the stability provided by the sustaining presence of Yahweh—a concrete presence that the wicked in their arrogance and independence deny (cf. Pss. 10:6; 16:8; 30:6; 60:2; 62:6).
8. Consult the section on “Lament” in the introduction; also “The Laments” at the end of Ps. 3.
9. Perhaps this is one of the “new songs” that respond to new acts of divine deliverance. See comments on 33:3.
10. See the section on “Lament” and “Thanksgiving” in the introduction.
11. See the section on “The Shape of the Psalter” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
12. Jesus’ speech, reported in Mark 15:34, is Aramaic: eloi eloi lama sabachthani.
13. In the “Index of Quotations” provided in the Aland-Black-Metzger-Wikgren Greek New Testament (New York: American Bible Society, 1966), the Psalms are quoted over 400 times, and Ps. 22 appears twenty-four times, outstripped only by Ps. 110 with twenty-five quotations. The 400 plus citations occupy approximately ten columns in the “Index”—equaled only by Isaiah (ten columns) and almost twice as many as any other book.
14. When Jezebel threatens the life of Elijah the prophet because of the defeat and execution of the 400 prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18), he flees to Horeb to consult with Yahweh. When Elijah complains that he is the only faithful follower of Yahweh left in the whole land, Yahweh responds by revealing 7,000 persons who have not forsaken Yahweh to worship Baal (19:18). The later prophets also make it clear that within the sinful nation, there yet exists a “faithful remnant,” loyal to Yahweh and his covenant.
15. A good example here is found in Dan. 9, where Daniel, an exemplary youth living in exile, turns his heart to pray for the forgiveness of the sins of his people and their ultimate restoration by God. The earlier narratives of the book describe how Daniel and his three friends (Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego) suffer in exile although they remain radically faithful, even at the risk of torture and death.
16. The tendency in Christian circles to read these Servant Songs as predictions of the events in the life and death of Jesus obscures the original thrust of these passages to identify the servant with Israel (or the remnant) and thereby call them into a redemptive relationship to the whole nation and indeed the whole world.
17. Sartre, Existentialism (New York: Philosophical Library, 1947), 25–27. See also the discussion in the Contemporary Significance section for Ps. 19.
1. See comments on the heading of Ps. 4.
2. See comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
3. See the discussion of maśkil in the comments on the heading of Ps. 32.
4. See comments on the heading of Ps. 53. The term ʿal maḥalat also occurs in the heading of Ps. 88.
5. This term appears frequently in Old Testament wisdom literature as the contrasting counterpoint to the “wise person” or “sage” (ḥakam).
6. Here, as elsewhere in the psalms, the psalmist is careful to use the more generic designation ʾelohim in the speech of unbelievers (whether Israelite or non-Israelite).
7. For a discussion of various terms for the oppressed, see comments on Ps. 10:11–18.
8. See the apt comments in Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 145, on Dahood’s contention that this means “they have formed a cabal” (referring to the evildoers).
9. Cf. Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 148; James L. Mays, Psalms (Interpretation; Louisville, Ky.: John Knox, 1994), 83; Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 222–23; T. K. Cheyne, The Book of Psalms or The Praises of Israel (New York: Thomas Whittaker, 1895), 35; Derek Kidner, Psalms, 2 vols. (TOTC; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1973), 1:79; J. W. Rogerson and J. W. McKay, Psalms 1–50 (Cambridge Bible Commentary; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1977), 62.
10. See discussion of the theme of refuge in the comments on Ps. 5:11–12.
11. See the article on “Zion” in ISBE2, 4:1198–1200.
12. See the discussion of Zion in the section on “The Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
13. Cf. Pss. 74:2; 76:2; 132:13; 135:21.
14. Cf. Pss. 9:11; 84:7; 110:2.
15. Cf. Pss. 99:2; 110:2; 149:2.
16. Ps. 110:2.
17. Pss. 128:5; 133:3; 134:3.
18. Ps. 50:2.
19. Pss. 14:7; 20:2; 53:6.
20. Ps. 87:2.
21. Pss. 78:68; 132:13.
22. Ps. 102:13.
23. Pss. 69:35; 87:5; 102:16.
24. The unknown word šibat should be emended to šebit, a cognate form of shebut (“captivity”).
25. Although the verb šqp does not appear here, the use of miššamayim (“from the heavens”) affirms the same perspective of divine scrutiny from above.
26. Again, although the verb here is yrd (“descend, go down”) rather than šqp, the perspective of divine scrutiny from a distance is identical.
27. The Flood narrative includes, of course, another example of divine scrutiny of human evil and consequent judgment. While God is described as “seeing” human wickedness and corruption in Gen. 6:5, 12, there is no mention of his “looking down from the heavens” in this case.
28. See comments on Yahweh’s essential character as “holy” (qadoš) at Ps. 5:7–8.
29. See comments on the important theme of Yahweh as refuge at Ps. 5:11–12. The idea that Yahweh is present in the midst of the oppressed poor is similar to the more positive New Testament affirmation that “whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me” (Matt. 25:40), or, “For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them” (18:20).
30. See the comments on the “image of God” in Ps. 8.
31. Cf. Rom. 3:9–12, where this very psalm passage is quoted in support of Paul’s contention that Jew and Gentile alike stand under the judgment of God for sin. Similar sentiments are found in Ps. 143:2 and Eccl. 7:20.
1. See Text 31, “The Negative Confession of Sin (Book of the Dead, Saying 125),” in Walter Beyerlin, Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978), 63–67.
2. See comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
3. See the comments on Ps. 5:4.
4. The use of škn also supports the tentative nature of human residence with Yahweh. This term describes the temporary dwelling in tents characteristic of nomadic populations without right of land ownership and therefore no fixed abode.
5. See the discussion of “The Art of Hebrew Poetry” in the introduction.
6. See the commentary on Ps. 4:1–2.
7. The phrase translated by the NIV evidences textual difficulty, mostly occasioned by the lack of clarity regarding the Qal perfect verb from rgl, which occurs only here in the whole Old Testament. Elsewhere this verb (related to the word “foot”) occurs most frequently in the Piel stem, where it has the sense of “travel about; roam around.” Dahood (Psalms, 1:84) suggests “trip over the tongue” as a possible meaning, as does Craigie (Psalms 1–50, 149). Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 225) thinks more of making “the rounds as a slanderer.” The question is whether the verb itself bears the notion of slander or if that is an implication of the context. Perhaps we can use a rendering like “roams around on his tongue”—implying an inappropriate use of the tongue for gossip or slander.
8. Hammurabi’s Code sets the rate for money transactions at 20 percent while goods could return as much as 33.3 percent. In other circumstances interest rates go as high as 50 percent.
9. For further information, consult the articles on “Interest” in ISBE2, 2:860, and EDB, 525–26, as well as the article on “Usury” in ISBE2, 4:959.
10. Cf. comments on Ps. 10:16–18.
11. Buber, The Way of Man, 36–41.
1. See the discussions in Kidner (Psalms, 1:38); Craigie (Psalms 1–50, 154); and Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 24–25) for further discussion.
2. Sigmund Mowinckel, Offersang og Sangoffer (Oslo: Aschehoug, 1951), 492.
3. See the discussion in Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 24) and Craigie (Psalms 1–50, 154).
4. See comments on Pss. 2:12 and 5:11–12. Kraus’s assumption (Psalms 1–59, 5–36) of a context of fleeing to the sanctuary for refuge from one’s pursuers seems overly specific, especially given the lack of a sense of threat and urgency in this psalm.
5. See discussion of the Elohistic Psalter in “The Shape of the Psalter” in vol. 2 of this commentary. The generic designation ʾel was employed as the name of the old high god of the Canaanite pantheon. By the time of the biblical period, El had become deus otiosus—the aged god who had in many senses been shouldered aside by the young god, Baal, who had arrived later in Canaan through the migration of Semitic peoples (Amorites) from the northeast by way of Mesopotamia at the beginning of the second millennium B.C. The character and activities of El and Baal are illuminated by the alphabetic cuneiform texts discovered at Ras Shamra, Syria, in the late 1920s. These texts reveal the existence of an extensive Canaanite kingdom known as Ugarit and provide our most thorough inside glance at Canaanite religious, political, and economic texts that have not been run through the negative sieve of biblical critique. For further information on Canaanite religion and the god El, consult P. C. Craigie and G. H. Wilson, “Religions of the Biblical World: Canaanite (Syria and Palestine),” ISBE2, 4:95–101; F. M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1973); M. H. Pope, El in the Ugaritic Texts (VTSup 2; Leiden: Brill, 1955).
6. The first difficulty is the verb translated in NIV as “I said.” The Hebrew consonantal text is ʾmrt, which could be vocalized either as first common singular (ʾamarti [“I said”]); second masculine singular (ʾamarta [“you (masc.) said”]); or second feminine singular (ʾamart [“you (fem.) said”]). The base text of BHS (the standard critical edition of the Hebrew Bible) provides vowels for the consonantal text that fix the meaning of the word as the latter of these choices (second feminine singular). This choice is difficult to square with the larger context of the psalm, but it is even more difficult to explain away according to the normal principles of textual criticism, which assume that the more difficult reading is likely to be the earlier. It is almost impossible to explain why a scribe would alter an earlier first common singular form to reflect the second feminine singular.
Most translators have chosen to emend the base text of BHS to reflect the first common singular form found in many other Hebrew manuscripts and reflected in the translations of the Septuagint and the Syriac. A significant number of commentators, however, opt for the second masculine singular possibility.
7. The pointing of the consonantal text as second feminine singular in BHS may reflect the contemporary understanding of the text. It may reflect an understanding of the word as referring to Israel speaking as the “bride” rather than the psalmist. The Targumim explain the feminine term as a reference to the psalmist’s “soul” (nepeš), assuming that this feminine word has been omitted from the text. See the comments in F.-L. Hossfeld and E. Zenger, Die Psalmen: Psalm 1–50 (Die Neue Echter Bibel; Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1993), 110.
8. See Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 153–54, 157.
9. See the comments and bibliography cited in Dahood, Psalms, 1:87–88. The NJB and Craigie also follow this option, although without discussing the evidence.
10. The difference is between the Qal jussive (desire) and the Qal imperfect (consequence). For the verb in question, it is impossible to distinguish visually between these two forms.
11. Cf. Ex. 29:40; Lev. 23:13; Num. 15:5, 7, 10; 28:14; Hos. 9:4. See also the articles on “Libation” in ISBE2, EDB, and IDB.
12. See Hossfeld and Zenger, Die Psalmen, 111.
13. See the discussion of the divine name Yahweh in the Bridging Contexts section of Ps. 8.
14. See the discussion in Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 237–38. Cf. Josh. 13:23; 14:4; 15:13; 17:5; also Num. 18–21; 26:55; Deut. 4:21.
15. Actually, in the Heb., it is the psalmist’s “kidneys” or “innermost recesses” (kilyah/kilyot) that do the instruction. Perhaps this is a description of some deep internal churning that provides insight and direction.
16. For a discussion of “glory, honor” in relation to human reputation and significance, see comments on 3:3–4.
17. The LXX reads he glossa mou (“my tongue”).
18. The Heb. verb škn (“dwell”) denotes a more temporary form of residence than the alternative verb yšb (“live/dwell”). The former is most frequently used to describe the nomadic life of tent-dwellers, who move about. The latter describes the contrasting settlement of those who farm the land and are therefore tied to it. Compare this verse with 4:8, where Yahweh is said to “make [the psalmist] dwell in safety.” The verb employed in 4:8 is yšb, indicating more permanent residence (see comments on 4:8; also see G. H. Wilson, “,” NIDOTTE, 2:550–51.
19. The term occurs only sixteen times in the whole Psalter, with thirteen of these occurrences coming in the first three books (6:5; 9:17; 16:10; 18:5; 30:3; 31:17; 49:15; 49:14 [2x]; 55:15; 86:13; 88:3; 89:48). The remaining three (116:3; 139:8; 141:7) all are found in the fifth and final book. The Hebrew concept of the abode of the dead shares much with the general Mesopotamian view illustrated by such texts as “Descent of Ishtar to the Nether World,” ANETP, 1:80–85. A place of dark, dusty, pale existence, šeʾol was considered the final resting place of all the dead, righteous and wicked, regardless of the moral evaluation of their life on earth. Like the Greek Hades, šeʾol was thought to lie underground toward the center of the earth, so that those who died went “down” to the “pit” to reach their final destination. Those who entered šeʾol did not return and so were barred from all human pursuits, including worship. See the articles on “Sheol” in ISBE2, IDB, and EDB.
20. The term ḥeleq appears to intrude in this context between menat and wekosi. See Ps. 11:6, where the shorter phrase (without ḥeleq) appears with the meaning “[a scorching wind is] the portion of their cup [menat kosam].” The larger construction is an unusual example of a construct phrase in which a single construct noun (menat) is connected to two nouns in the absolute (ḥelqi wekosi). The use of the unusual form here allows the psalmist to refer to Yahweh both as the “portion of my allotment” (menat ḥelqi) and as the “portion of my cup” (menat . . . kosi).
Hosts were known to apportion drink into the cups of their guests. It is clear that they could show favor or displeasure by how liberally or meagerly they treated each guest. In Est. 1:7–8, King Xerxes was liberal with all his guests, ordering his servants to serve each guest as much royal wine as the guest wished. Elsewhere the “cup” (kos) can be a demonstration of divine salvation, anger, or wrath. It is possible that this may reflect a Near Eastern custom of kings dispensing judgment on those who had offended them by requiring them to drink a cup of poison. The insertion of ḥeleq in this context has the effect of shifting the imagery of divine favor from the general imagery of divine largess to the more specific notion of the apportionment of the land, where ḥeleq figures prominently.
21. The term ḥebel is normally employed in the singular form rather than the plural (ḥabalim), as here. The meaning is usually rendered “share”—possibly a smaller segment within a ḥeleq (“allotment”). Cf. Josh. 17:5 “allotment” of Manasseh. Cf. Ps. 78:55, where Yahweh “causes to fall for them an inheritance with a boundary” (wayyapilem beḥebel naḥalah).
22. All these terms are used extensively throughout the narratives of the allotment of the land among the tribes following the Conquest.
23. The presence of Yahweh with Israel to counsel, instruct, and guide is a clear emphasis of the Conquest and settlement narratives.
24. The phrase here uses the less common Hebrew word ʾoraḥ (“way, path”) rather than the more usual derek (“way, path”). The phrase ʾoraḥ ḥayyim (“way of life”) is found at Prov. 5:6a and 15:24, while the similar ʾoraḥ leḥayyim (“path to life”) appears also in Prov. 10:17. The phrase derek ḥayyim appears in Prov. 6:23 and Jer. 21:8. The latter passage is closely related to the Deuteronomic exhortation, “I have set before you life and death . . . choose life” (Deut. 30:19). The Jeremiah passage reads “This is what the LORD says, See, I am setting before you the way [derek] of life [ḥayyim] and the way of death” (Jer. 21:8).
25. During the process of editing this manuscript for publication, the World Trade Center Towers in New York City were blown up by terrorists (Sept. 11, 2001).
1. The Niphal verb occurs seventeen times in the whole Psalter (10:6; 13:4; 15:5; 16:8; 17:5; 21:7; 30:6; 46:5; 62:2, 6; 82:5; 93:1; 96:10; 104:5; 112:6; 125:1; 140:10).
2. Of the thirty-seven occurrences of verbal and nominal forms of the root ḥsh in the Psalter, only here does the root appear in three consecutive psalms. On three other occasions two consecutive psalms are affected (Pss. 36:7 and 37:40; 61:3, 4 and 62:7, 8; 141:8 and 142:5). These other groupings may be significant as well. See comments on these specific psalms.
3. The heading of Ps. 86 is identical to that of Ps. 17: tepillah ledawid. While Ps. 142 is also attributed to David, the initial designation of the composition is as a maśkil, with the term tepillah appearing only at the end of the heading following a historical note. Ps. 90 is designated a “prayer of Moses” (tepillah lemošeh), while Ps. 102 is styled more generally as a “prayer of the afflicted one . . .” (tepillah leʿani . . .). The plural form of the noun (tepillot) appears in the postscript concluding the second book of the Psalter: “This concludes the prayers of David son of Jesse” (72:20).
4. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 26. The term is often coupled in the bodies of the psalms with an imperative verb of hearing, entreating divine attention to the psalmists’ pleas (cf. 4:1; 17:1; 39:12; 54:2; 55:1; 61:1; 65:2; 84:8; 86:6; 102:1; 143:1).
5. BHS suggests a variety of possible emendations, including: yhwh ṣaddiq [“righteous Yahweh”], ʾel ṣaddiq [“righteous God”], or ʾel ṣidqi [“God of my right”]. In any case the sense seems to be a plea that Yahweh take the innocent suffering of the psalmist seriously.
6. Dahood, Psalms, 1:93.
7. For a discussion of the legal character of mišpaṭ and other related terms, see comments on Pss. 4:1–2; 7:6–9.
8. Cf. comments of Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 245–246; Rogerson and McKay, Psalms 1–50, 71 in this regard.
9. The theme of divine examination is also prominent in 11:4–5, where Yahweh “examines” (bḥn) the righteous and the wicked, with the result that the wicked are found wanting and judged with “fiery coals and burning sulfur” while the “upright” will see the face of God (11:7).
10. The background is similar to that in Prov. 24:12, where God is also depicted as “weighing the heart” of those who deceitfully claim innocence by way of ignorance and concludes with the admonition, “Does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who guards your life know it? Will he not repay each person according to what he has done?” This proverb and Job 34:11 are the only places outside Ps. 17:4 where the Hebrew noun poʿal (“deed, deeds”) is used together with (ʾadam) (“humans”). The weighing of the heart is also known in Egypt, where the heart of the deceased is weighed in a scale against the “feather” of Maʿat to determine whether or not the deceased is worthy of entering the afterlife. As in Israel, the heart is the center of moral deliberation and is thought to be the place where wrong decisions or sins piled up, thus weighing the heart down.
11. Cf. also Pss. 7:9; 9:7–8; 11:4–6; 14:1–2 for similar images of divine examination.
12. Cf. Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 163, “robbers’ roads.”
13. The psalmist employs some literary variation in describing “ways” confronting humans. The “ways of the violent” (,orḥot pariṣ in 17:4c) seems to denote a bare track through the wilds where “ravenous beasts” (pariṣ—cf. v. 12 later in this psalm, where the enemies are characterized as “lions hungry for prey”; see also Isa. 35:9, where pariṣ is paralleled by “lion”) or “robbers” (cf. Jer. 7:11) lie in wait. By contrast, the “paths” (maʿgelot) of Yahweh are the more frequented wagon tracks of commerce, where the safety of numbers provides security.
14. A graphic image of straining to hear a faint or distant sound. Like a horse whose ears turn in order to locate and draw in a sound or a human cupping the hand to the ear to maximize the reception of sound, God is depicted as straining to hear—wanting to hear the psalmist’s plea.
15. See the comments on ḥesed at Ps. 13:5–6.
16. See comments on Ps. 3:1–2.
17. The term mošiaʿ occurs a total of thirty-three times in the Old Testament. Of these, eight (about 25 percent) appear in Isa. 43–63 (cf. 43:3, 11; 45:15, 21; 47:15; 49:26; 60:16; 63:8).
18. Cf. Ruth 2:12; Pss. 36:7; 63:7.
19. See comments of Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 248–49).
20. See Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 163.
21. In the “Song of the Sea” Yahweh is celebrated for his deliverance of Israel and is declared the incomparable “wonder working” (Ex. 15:1; cf. Ps. 17:7) God who saves by his “right hand” (Ex. 15:6, 12; cf. Ps. 17:7), and through his enduring loyalty (Ex. 15:13; cf. Ps. 17:7), guides his people to his “holy dwelling” (Ex. 15:13; cf. Ps. 15:1, where a different but similar idiom is employed).
22. A similar image of the fat heart closed to God is found in Isa. 6:10, although it uses a different idiom (the Hiphil of the verb šmn [“make fat”]).
23. It is clear that Jeshrun is a symbol of rebellion in the Deuteronomy passage. But it is not clear that “fatness” is an indication of rebellion on its own. It is the “kicking” along with further description of Jeshrun “abandoning” and “rejecting” God (Deut. 32:15c–d) that confirm rebelliousness. In our psalm there is no such further confirmation.
24. The Hebrew manuscripts preserve a tension between the Ketib (what is written in the consonantal text) and the Qere (an alternative pronunciation indicated by vowel pointing and marginal notes). In this case, the Ketib preserves the probable form sebabuni with a first common singular pronominal suffix (“they have surrounded me”), while the Qere indicates a similar form sebabunu with a first common plural pronominal suffix attached (“they have surrounded us”). If the plural suffix was original, it would offer evidence of a later adaptation of this psalm to speak to the larger community. It seems best to me, however, to continue with the singular reference at this point.
25. The contrast between these wicked enemies who find their “portion” (ḥeleq) in this life and the fervent psalmist of Ps. 16, for whom Yahweh is “my portion [ḥeleq] and my cup” could not be greater!
26. See the section on “Dwelling in the Presence of God” in “The Theology of the Psalms,” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
27. Cf. also 1 Chron. 16:11.
28. Cf. 2 Sam. 21:1; Pss. 24:6; 27:8; 119:58; Hos. 5:15.
29. Cf. Num. 6:25–26; Pss. 67:1; 80:3, 7, 19; 119:135.
30. Cf. Deut. 31:17–18; Job 34:29; Ps. 15:1.
31. Cf. Ex. 33:11; Num. 12:8; Deut. 34:10
32. Gerhard Lohfink, Does God Need the Church? Toward a Theology of the People of God (Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1999), vii, esp. n. 2.
33. The survey was conducted by the George Barna Research Group and was reported in Southern California Christian Times, 11/2 (February 2000): 1, 11.
34. Cf. NRSV, NJB, “mortals”; NAB, “dead men.”
35. Note esp. the contrast between the “this worldly” perspective of the wicked in this psalm and the “other worldly” focus of the psalmist in 16:5, for whom Yahweh is both “portion” (ḥeleq) and cup.
1. For a discussion of the importance of Yahweh as “refuge” in the Psalter, see the section on “Yahweh as Refuge” in “The Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
2. See comments on the headings of Pss. 3 and 4.
3. The phrase ʿebed yhwh appears twenty-two times in the Old Testament. Of these occurrences, seventeen refer to Moses as the “servant of the LORD” (Deut. 34:5; Josh. 1:1, 13, 15; 8:31, 33; 11:12; 12:6; 13:8; 14:7; 18:7; 22:2, 4, 5; 2 Kings 18:12; 2 Chron. 1:3; 24:6). Of the remaining five appearances of the phrase, two refer to Joshua (Josh. 24:9; Judg. 2:8), two to David (Pss. 18:0; 36:0), and one to the “blind servant” (probably Israel) of Isa. 42:19. It is true that the idea of servant to Yahweh is expressed in other contexts in the Old Testament, using the word ʿebed in connection with various pronominal suffixes (e.g., your servant; my servant), but the use of the whole phrase as a title (as in our passage) is less frequent and is dominantly applied to Moses. The idea of servanthood to Yahweh is particularly connected with the prophets, who are often called “my servants” (2 Kings 9:36; 14:25; Isa. 20:3; Dan. 6:20; etc.). See the articles on “Servant of the Lord” in IDB, ISBE2, and EDB, and the extensive bibliographies included there. For Isaiah, it seems clear that the Servant of Yahweh in Isa. 42:18–19 refers to the deaf, blind, and faithless in Israel. But the subtle shifting back and forth that takes place in the Servant Songs (42:1–9; 49:1–7; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12), from the servant as Israel, or the prophet, or a faithful remnant, or a future individual lends greater ambiguity than might be expected to the interpretation of this passage. On these songs, see H. H. Rowley, The Servant of the Lord and Other Essays on the Old Testament (London: Lutterworth, 1952), 1–88.
4. Shemaryahu Talmon, in his article “Pisqah beʾemṣaʾ pasuq and 11QPsa,” Textus 5 (1966): 11–21, suggests that blank spaces preserved in the text of the Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament (and esp. in Samuel-Kings) are intended to point the reader to additional texts expanding on the preceding narratives. Some of the texts Talmon suggests are out of the Psalter. In the case of Ps. 18 = 2 Sam. 22, it would seem that the expansive psalm has at last been incorporated directly into the narrative context. See also Brevard S. Childs, “Psalm Titles and Midrashic Exegesis,” JSS 16 (1971): 137–50, and Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, 73–75.
5. See the section on “Royal Psalms” at the end of Ps. 2. For a discussion of the interpretation of the royal psalms, see the Bridging Contexts section of Ps. 20.
6. This first-person address is missing in the 2 Sam. 22 version of this psalm, which begins directly with the descriptive phrase: “The LORD is my rock.”
7. See comments on 5:11. No other psalm brings together as many of these phrases as does Ps. 18, but several do offer significant concentrations. See esp. Ps. 144, where five of these eight terms appear (ṣuri in 144:1; meṣudati in 144:2; mišgabbi in 144:2; mepalṭi in 144:2; maginni in 144:2) along with the additional epithet ḥasdi (144:2, “my faithfully loyal one”). Ps. 31 also brings together a number of these terms, including ṣur (31:2), meṣudah (31:2, 3), salʿi (31:3), and adds maʿoz (“mountain stronghold,” 31:2, 4). Ps. 71 also includes three of these terms (ṣur; salʿi; meṣudah) in a single verse (71:3), while adding maʿon (“hidden lair, den,” possibly to be read maʿoz, as in 31:2).
8. For the term “shield,” see the commentary on Ps. 3:3.
9. From the related Aramaic word meṣada (“fortress”).
10. The Piel imperative of this same root appeared in 17:13 (“rescue”) and is found as well in three additional psalms (31:1; 71:4; 82:4). The Piel imperfect of this verb appears eight times in the Psalter (18:43; 22:4, 8; 37:40 [2x]; 43:1; 71:2; 91:14).
11. As Yahweh “helps (the psalmist) escape” the attacks of the enemy, so a shield “helps (the bearer) escape” the arrows, spears, and swords of the opponents.
12. See the discussion of chiasm in the section on “Poetry of the Psalms” in the introduction.
13. On two occasions in 1 Sam. (1:9; 3:3), the term hekal is used to describe “Yahweh’s temple” at Shiloh. While it is possible this may be a reference to the tabernacle tent, it is equally possible that the reference is to a more permanent shrine building associated with Shiloh, a precursor to the later Solomonic temple.
14. The term theophany (from the Greek theophaneia [“appearance of God”]) refers to primarily literary descriptions of God being manifested in the realm of human awareness. Sometimes this divine manifestation is accompanied with a spoken word of revelation. Often God’s presence has a fantastic and catastrophic effect on the creation, indicating the awesome power, glory, and otherness of God. The mountains “melt like wax,” seas “boil,” lightning flashes, winds roar. Such theophanies are most common in the Old Testament (cf. Deut. 33:2; Judg. 5:4–5; Ps. 68:7–18; Hab. 3:2–19), although they are not unknown in the New Testament—especially in Revelation (e.g., Rev. 1:12–16). See also the pertinent articles on “Theophany” in IDB, ISBE2, and EDB.
15. Coming “down” from the heavens is perhaps one further indication that the reference to the “temple” in 18:6 should be taken as meaning the heavenly abode of God rather than the Jerusalem temple. Elsewhere Yahweh is said to come from the desert of Seir and Teman (regions associated with Edom to the east of the Dead Sea) or from Mount Sinai (cf. Deut. 33:2; Judg. 5:4; Hab. 3:3).
16. Cf. similar imagery of Ps. 97:1–6.
17. Cf. Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 173–74.
18. The NIV translation “he mounted” seems to assume the Hiphil stem, while the traditional text is pointed as a Qal. The Qal is usually translated “ride” while the Hiphil is normally rendered “mount (or cause [someone else] to mount) in order to ride.” Elsewhere Yahweh is described as “riding on the clouds” (cf. Deut. 33:26; Ps. 68:4; 104:3). This has led some to assume that the “cherub” mentioned in 18:10 is actually a reference to the storm clouds, which serve as the divine chariot of God (see esp. Ps. 104:3). The NIV, however, has rendered the singular Heb. noun kerub as a plural (kerubim). This indicates the NIV translators understand the term to refer to the cherubim that stand on the ark of the covenant and between which Yahweh is understood to sit, or to the cherubim that bear the stormy throne chariot of Yahweh in Ezekiel (cf. Ezek. 1, where the beings are called “living creatures,” and Ezek. 10, where they are identified as “cherubim”).
19. See also Ps. 104:3.
20. This phrase occurs in reference to Baal in the Canaanite literature from Ugarit. A generous sampling of these texts can be found in Beyerlin, Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament, esp. 196, 198, 199, 205.
21. For more background on Yahweh as warrior, see Patrick D. Miller Jr., The Divine Warrior in Early Israel (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1973); Tremper Longman III, “The Divine Warrior: The New Testament Use of an Old Testament Motif,” WTJ 44 (1982): 290–307; Tremper Longman III and Dan G. Reid, God Is a Warrior (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995).
22. Ras Shamra is the modern name of the location on the coast of northern Syria where the first discoveries were made of clay tablets written in an alphabetic cuneiform Canaanite language closely akin to ancient Hebrew. The language was subsequently called Ugaritic, after the ancient Canaanite city Ugarit, which was uncovered through archaeological excavations on the spot. For an example of a stele bearing the image of Baal with lightning bolts, see the illustration in Beyerlin, Near Eastern Religious Tests Relating to the Old Testament, 212. A photo of the same stela can be seen in ANETP, vol. 1, #136.
23. The imagery is of the stable foundation or pillars on which the whole earth is viewed as resting. Ordinarily these foundations were covered by the waters of the seas and are related to the “foundations of the mountains” that were shaken by Yahweh’s approach in 18:7b.
24. In the Genesis account of creation (Gen. 1), the earth is initially chaotic (“formless and empty,” 1:2) and associated with the ancient waters (the “deep” [tehom], mentioned in 1:2, is linguistically related to the name Tiamat). It is Yahweh who acts on the waters to limit them and provides a secure and stable environment for human life (1:6–13).
25. Outside the psalms this struggle is also reflected in Job 38:8–11; Isa. 51:9–10; Jer. 5:22; Hab. 3:8–10.
26. This rare Heb. verb (mšh) is used elsewhere only in the parallel passage in 2 Sam. 22:17 and in Ex. 2:10, where it provides the etymology of the name Moses (Heb. mošeh).
27. I am reminded of graphic photos of the removal of U.S. personnel from Saigon at the end of the Vietnam War. As the enemy closed in, one particularly striking picture shows an American helicopter hovering above the U.S. embassy compound while desperate individuals huddle below, awaiting their turn to be lifted out to the waiting aircraft carriers at sea. The scene is heavy with gloom and near panic, with the helicopter offering the only hope of escape.
28. The opening phrases form affirming parallelism with a chiastic arrangement of members:
The LORD has dealt with me according to my righteousness;
according to the cleanness of my hands he has rewarded me.
The concluding phrases mimic the first but with subtle alterations. The secondary verb “reward” is shifted to replace the initial verb “dealt.” The loss of “reward” in the secondary phrase is compensated by the introduction of the new phrase “in his sight.”
The LORD has rewarded me according to my righteousness,
according to the cleanness of my hands in his sight.
29. Here the repeated reciprocity between noun and verb is broken at last—perhaps as an illustration of the broken relationship created by human “crookedness.”
30. It is interesting that here both “lamp” and “darkness” are considered possessively by the use of the first-person singular pronominal suffix (“my”). This emphasizes the psalmist’s personal experience of deliverance from trouble.
31. Note the connection with Ps. 17:3, where the psalmist calls on Yahweh to “test” the psalmist’s faithfulness. In both cases the verbal root ṣrp is used so that Yahweh’s word has been “tested” (ṣarup) and found true. Yahweh provides the paradigm for the psalmist’s own character.
32. This comparatively rare preposition occurs only seventeen times in the Old Testament, and only this once in the psalms. The basic meaning is “apart from” or “except for.”
33. Another relatively rare preposition that occurs only eighteen times in the whole Old Testament. This is the only appearance in the psalms. The preferred meaning is “except, besides.”
34. Compound bow // bow of bronze (see Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 176).
35. It is worth mentioning that the sequence of verbs employed in this description of the empowered psalmist defeating the enemy, which the NIV translates as a description of a past event remembered, are actually imperfect verb forms (or perhaps cohortatives?), which normally express incompleted action, usually in the future—a fact noted by only few commentators (see, e.g., Kidner, Psalms, 1:95–96). Delitzsch (Psalms, 1:265) suggests (perhaps rightly) that the context is retrospective, so that while the narrative with imperfects assumes an immediacy of narrative as if it is currently happening, the actual events are still past. [Bruce K. Waltke and M. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1990), ß 31.2b, call this type of imperfect customary non-perfectives.] However, one ought to at least consider the possibility that the psalmist is here anticipating future victories yet to be realized. Part of the pressure to understand these verses as already past comes from the identification of this psalm with David’s deliverance from his enemies, as indicated in the heading (18:0) and by the connection with the parallel psalm in 2 Sam. 22. It is also true that the parallel text in 2 Sam. 22 creates an unambiguously past reference by supplying significant verb forms with what are traditionally pointed as waw consecutives. However, the contrast created by this alternative text only serves to emphasize the alternative possibility introduced by the psalm where consecutive imperfects are not used. This would seem a conscious decision on the part of the redactor who produced the text, whether the psalm is prior to the 2 Samuel text or dependent on it. Without these links, it would not be unnatural to assume that here the author is speaking of the future rather than the past.
36. Cf. Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 168.
37. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 254–55.
38. The construction is difficult here—Kraus (ibid., 256) even suggests that it be “set aside” altogether. The parallel in 2 Sam. 22 has lišmoaʿ ʾozen (“as soon as the ear hears”; Qal infinitive construct) instead of the more obscure lišemaʿ ʾozen (“report of the ear; hearsay”; see CHALOT, 377) in the present text.
39. Perhaps the image here, rather than defeated enemy, is of prisoners set free, who come forth from their captivity uncertain of the present circumstances and their future.
40. This may also help explain the existence of destructive natural phenomena in the world. Tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes, and the like drive home convincingly that our world is not ultimately a stable environment we can rely on. As a result, we are driven to place our trust in God alone.
41. Ex. 24:17; Deut. 4:24; Isa. 33:14; Heb. 12:29.
42. See also comments on Ps. 5:4–5.
43. Isaiah 60:1–3 uses the term ʿarapel to establish a hopeful contrast between the other nations, who are covered with the gloom of God’s judgment, while Israel anticipates the rising of Yahweh’s glory over them.
44. The translation is a slight modification of the NIV translation. At the end of verse 5, the NIV translates “darkness has not understood it,” rather than the more common translation “darkness has not overcome it.”
45. See comments on Ps. 5:4–5.
46. Gerhard Lohfink, Does God Need the Church?, discusses how in Revelation creation imagery of the heaven and earth surrounded by continuing threat of the chaotic waters is reenvisioned as a new heaven and earth in which the chaotic waters are no longer present: “The first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea” (Rev. 21:1).
1. See comments on Ps. 4.
2. See comments on Ps. 3.
3. There are many English translations of the Mesopotamian creation and flood texts. See, e.g., ANETP, 1:28–39; Beyerlin, Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 80–99.
4. For a similar reverie on the night sky, with the resultant realization of divine grace and mercy poured out on humans, see Ps. 8.
5. The lexicons provide only the meaning “cord, line” for this noun. Dahood (Psalms, 1:121–22), however, supplies persuasive support for a cognate noun qaw with the meaning “call, sound, proclamation.” This would accord with the LXX and Vulgate renderings, meaning “sound.” Alternatively, it may be that the lamed of the more regular Heb. word qol (“voice,” which appears in 19:3b) has dropped out of the consonantal text.
6. Or perhaps a warrior running to battle or a messenger carrying a report.
7. See NIVSB, footnote to 19:4b–6.
8. The ḥuppah is perhaps to be connected with the “canopy” under which the Jewish rite of marriage is performed even today. The event has been popularized in theater and motion picture productions of Fiddler on the Roof and Yentl. Alternatively, the event may describe the moment in the marriage preparations when the groom leaves his home accompanied with all his friends (and indeed the whole village) to proceed through the streets to the home of his bride’s family in order to deliver the bride price and receive the father’s permission to marry. The joy and attention focused on the bridegroom at either of these occasions would supply an appropriate image for the psalmist.
9. Dahood, Psalms, 1:121; cf. the comments in Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 179–80; Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 272.
10. Cf. Nahum Sarna, “Psalm XIX and the Near Eastern Sun-God Literature,” in Papers of the Fourth World Congress of Jewish Studies (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1967), 171–75.
11. See the discussion of “Acrostic Psalms” in the section on “The Poetry of the Psalms” in the introduction. Of the six terms expounding the concept of divine guidance associated with Torah in Ps. 19 (torah, ʿedut, piqqudim, miṣwot, yirʾat yhwh, and mišpaṭim), five occur in the first seven verses of Ps. 119—and in the same order as in our psalm (torah, ʿedut, piqqudim, miṣwot, and mišpaṭim). The phrase “fear of Yahweh” (yirʾat yhwh) does not appear in Ps. 119, although references to “your [Yahweh’s] fear” do occur at 119:63, 74, 79, 120—though not as a description of Torah. In addition to the terms in Ps. 19, Ps. 119 also includes the word “decrees” (ḥuqqim) in 119:5 and often.
12. The NIV’s “soul” is misleading. See the discussion of nepeš in the comments on Ps. 3:1–2.
13. The noun ʿedut (related to the noun ʿedah, “testimony”) is completed by the abstract ending -ut and is considered singular, with an distinctive plural—ʿedot. The traditional translation of ʿedut has been “testimony”—though testimony with a decidedly warning edge (cf. Holladay, CHALOT, 266). The term is used to describe the tablets of the Ten Commandments (Ex. 31:18; 32:15; 34:29), the ark of the covenant that contains the tablets (Ex. 25:22; 39:35), and, particularly in the psalms, the Torah in general (Pss. 78:5; 81:6; 119:88; 122:4).
14. This is a factitive function of the Hiphil, in which the state described in the Qal (“be wise”) is established in the Hiphil (“make wise”).
15. Cf. comments on Ps. 9:1–3.
16. Psalms, 1:123.
17. Dahood mentions UT, 1005:2–4; see Song 6:10, along with our psalm.
18. Illumination is also linked with Yahweh in the great and traditional Aaronic blessing instituted in Num. 6:22–26, “The Lord bless you and keep you; the LORD make his face shine upon you and be gracious to you; the LORD turn his face toward you and give you peace.” Cf. also the brief allusion to this blessing in Ps. 67:1. The phrases of this blessing could be taken to reflect sun terminology and movement. Cf. the Egyptian “Hymn to the Aton,” celebrating the life-giving power of the sun disc worshiped by the pharaoh Akh-enaton (ca. 1365–1348 B.C.).
19. The dimming of the eyes is also associated with grief—an experience not far removed from death itself (cf. Job 17:7; Ps. 88:9; Lam. 5:17).
20. See Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 182.
21. See also the comments in Dahood, Psalms, 1:123–24; Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 268.
22. A common modern Israeli warning sign bears a declaration from the same root: zehirut! Warning! But it is interesting to note that the root of this participle is also found in the noun zohar, yet with an alternate meaning of “shining, splendor.” One of the most significant works of Jewish kabbalistic mysticism from the Middle Ages is known by this title HaZohar (The Splendor), since it records visions of the splendor or the glory (kabod) of Yahweh himself. In light of the linking in this psalm of the revelation of God in the heavens and the sun with the revelation in the Torah, the use of this root is suggestive, if not significantly developed.
23. The NIV translation of this verb in Job 12:16 seems to imply deliberate deception.
24. The verbal form is unusual and unexpected. A few manuscripts read ʾettam instead, which would be the regular Qal imperfect form for this verb.
25. See discussion of terms related to the theme of refuge in the comments on Ps. 18:1–2.
26. In addition to the three occurrences of ṣur (“rock”), the synonym selaʿ (“rock”) also occurs in 18:2.
27. If the suggestion to emend yirʾat yhwh (“fear of the LORD”) in 19:9 to ʾimrat yhwh (“word of the LORD”) is correct, then the verbal connection with 18:30 is more precise. Even without the exact parallel, however, the use of this synonym for Torah in 18:30 (cf. 119:38) still connects with the strong context established in 19:7–11.
28. Cf. Jer. 32:17: “Ah, Sovereign LORD, you have made the heavens and the earth by your great power and outstretched arm. Nothing is too hard for you.”
29. Jacob’s blessing to his sons recalls the blessing he received from his father Isaac: “May God give you of heaven’s dew and of earth’s richness—an abundance of grain and new wine” (Gen. 27:28).
30. This is not to suggest that the psalms are not able on occasion to exploit the ancient creation myths of chaotic waters struggling for control. Elsewhere Yahweh is described as defeating the seas or crushing the sea serpent Lotan (cf. Job 26:12–13; Ps. 74:13–14; 93:3–4). For Yahweh’s creation and control of the seas, see Job 7:12; 36:30; Ps. 33:7; 89:9; 95:5; 146:6; Prov. 8:29.
31. See also in this regard, Ps. 119:25, 37, 107 (“Preserve my life according to your word”); 119:50, 154 (“Preserve my life according to your promise”); 119:88, 159 (“Preserve my life according to your love”).
32. See the developments as described in Acts 8–15, esp. the culminating decision expressed by James and the elders of the Jerusalem church in 15:12–29.
33. Jean Paul Sartre, Existentialism, 25.
34. Ibid., 26–27.
35. Jean Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology (New York: Philosophical Library, 1956), 440.