FOR THE DIRECTOR of music. To the tune of “The Lily of the Covenant.” A miktam of David. For teaching. When he fought Aram Naharaim and Aram Zobah, and when Joab returned and struck down twelve thousand Edomites in the Valley of Salt.
1You have rejected us, O God, and burst forth upon us;
you have been angry—now restore us!
2You have shaken the land and torn it open;
mend its fractures, for it is quaking.
3You have shown your people desperate times;
you have given us wine that makes us stagger.
4But for those who fear you, you have raised a banner
to be unfurled against the bow.
Selah
5Save us and help us with your right hand,
that those you love may be delivered.
6God has spoken from his sanctuary:
“In triumph I will parcel out Shechem
and measure off the Valley of Succoth.
7Gilead is mine, and Manasseh is mine;
Ephraim is my helmet,
Judah my scepter.
8Moab is my washbasin,
upon Edom I toss my sandal;
over Philistia I shout in triumph.”
9Who will bring me to the fortified city?
Who will lead me to Edom?
10Is it not you, O God, you who have rejected us
and no longer go out with our armies?
11Give us aid against the enemy,
for the help of man is worthless.
12With God we will gain the victory,
and he will trample down our enemies.
PSALM 60 IS a national (communal) lament and plea for deliverance following a painful defeat by a foreign enemy. The defeat is viewed as divine rejection and punishment, and the plea is for restoration of divine love and favor. The middle part of the psalm is an oracle—a divine pronouncement possibly given by a priest “from the sanctuary” (60:6a)—that promises hope in the coming of God as divine warrior to defeat the enemy nations (60:6b–8). In verse 9 the human king anticipates divine empowerment to achieve military victory over Edom—perhaps the major foe in this context.
Verses 5–12 reappear in almost identical form as part of Psalm 108 (vv. 6–13), where they are preceded by five verses that are practically identical with 57:7–11.1 The comparison of these three psalms (57; 60; 108) demonstrates how psalms or psalmic segments could be recombined and reused to speak to different settings and times. The use in Psalm 108 of 60:5–12 also helps indicate structural divisions within our psalm. It has three sections: the lament proper (60:1–4),2 an oracle of divine deliverance (60:5–8), and a final plea for divine leadership and deliverance (60:9–12). This structure has the benefit of maintaining three balanced stanzas of four verses each.
The Heading (60:0)
OTHER THAN A distinctive tune title (“According to The Lily of the Testimony”),3 the heading contains only a single new term. Following an initial reference to “the director of music,” attribution to David, categorization as a miktam (the fifth and final consecutive psalm so designated in the group stretching from Pss. 55–60),4 the phrase lelammed (“for teaching”) is introduced. Since this term occurs only here in the psalm headings, it is difficult to make any conclusions regarding its meaning, and the psalm exhibits no peculiarly didactic characteristics.
Psalm 60 also contains a historical note referring the psalm to an event in David’s life.5 The connection does not appear apt in this case since the narrative passages describe a great military victory while the psalm itself seems to presume a significant defeat for Israel. Together with the similar historical notes in the headings of Psalms 56–57 and 59, this completes the kind of envelope pattern that brackets these five consecutive miktam psalms.6
Psalm 60 continues the reticence to employ the divine name Yahweh characteristic of the Elohistic Psalter, of which it is a part.7
The Lament (60:1–4)
THE PSALM LAMENTS a particularly significant defeat that is interpreted as divine judgment on Israel. God is described as the source of Israel’s suffering in a series of verbal expressions that extends through 60:3. The series begins and ends with parallel descriptions of divine rejection and judgment. God has “rejected” and “burst forth”8 against them (60:1a, b); he has “shown . . . desperate times” to his people and given them “wine that makes [them] stagger” (60:3). In between lie two descriptions of divine action countered by the psalmist’s plea for reversal:
You have been angry—now restore us!
You have shaken the land and torn it open;
Mend [heal] its fractures, for it is quaking.
You have raised a banner. Verse 4 is particularly difficult and has received a variety of interpretations. The opening phrase is clear: “You have raised a banner.” The “banner” is a type of standard or flag used in battle to provide visibility during hand-to-hand combat and to offer a rallying point. The difficulty is in how to understand God’s provision of a “banner” in this context. The preceding string of verbs have all described God in negative relation to Israel. He “rejected” them, “broke” their defenses, was “angry” with them, “shook” the land, and “tore it apart.” Now suddenly God raises a banner for “those who fear [him].”
How one understands this latest act of God depends on how the verb lehitnoses (NIV “unfurled”) is interpreted. It may be from nws (“flee, escape”), in which case the rallying banner does not provide safety but exposes Israel to the firepower of the enemy archers.9 In such an interpretation, verse 4 continues the negative actions of God toward his people begun in 60:1–3 and assumes the Hebrew noun qošeṭ (“truth”) that appears in the text is a mistake for one of the similar sounding nouns qošet (“bowman”) or qešet (“bow”).10
Other interpreters and translators (including the NIV and NRSV) understand the verse as describing a change to positive action by God. They take “unfurled” from an otherwise unknown verb that shares the same root as nws and assume it means “rally to” or “unfurled.” The resulting translation assumes a positive offer of protection from the archers to “those who fear you.”11
Oracle of Deliverance (60:5–8)
REGARDLESS WHETHER THE preceding section concluded with continued negative response from God or a hopeful sign of divine protection, the psalm now moves into a confident promise of divine power and victory. This section begins with a renewed plea for deliverance (60:5) and continues with a word from God himself—an oracle spoken from the “sanctuary” (lit., “in his holiness”). This divine word expresses God’s power and authority over all those national enemies who confront his people.
In triumph I will parcel out. The scene is sketched as a moment of divine conquest and victory—perhaps drawn from the early conquest of Canaan by the Israelites under God’s leadership. Having subdued the enemies of his people, God now divides the conquered territory among his servant people. “Shechem” is located to the west of the Jordan River while the “Valley of Succoth” lies almost directly east on the other side of the river. The parceling out of these two territories may recall the original division of the lands east and west of the Jordan among the twelve tribes.12
Gilead is mine . . . Judah my scepter. The east-west theme is continued with the reference to “Gilead” (a location east of the Jordan occupied by half of the tribe of Manasseh) and “Manasseh,” who also settled west of the river. Coupled with “Ephraim” (a northern tribe whose name came to be synonymous with the northern kingdom) and “Judah” (the southern tribe from which the Davidic dynasty came), the passage intends to include all Israel. The special relationship of all Israel with God is indicated both by the possessive claim of God that they are his and by their association with symbols of divine power (“my helmet”)13 and authority (“my scepter”). This expression of special relationship with God turns the tables in the psalm to hope of deliverance and victory over Israel’s enemies, as becomes apparent in following verses.
Moab is my washbasin. Check a Bible map and you will see that the nations mentioned—Moab, Edom, Philistia—are all ancient enemies who surrounded Israel to the east (Moab, Edom) and the west (Philistia). These nations are associated here with symbols—not of power and authority but of menial service (“my washbasin”)14 and defeat (“I toss my sandal”).15 God is depicted as claiming ownership over the enemy nations, victoriously subduing their pretensions to power and subjecting them to menial servitude. The acknowledgment that God is powerful and in control, even in the face of enemy threats, provides the readers with confidence in his ability to deliver and save.
Plea for Divine Leadership and Deliverance (60:9–12)
PSALM 60 CONCLUDES with a plea for God to act as he is capable and to enable his people to defeat their enemies. The enemy is now viewed as a fortified city under siege and is specifically identified as Edom (60:9b). The plea stands in tension between the confidence that God is able to defeat all enemies (as the preceding verses have demonstrated) and the continuing awareness that Israel is experiencing divine abandonment and rejection (60:1–3, 10). The psalmist calls on God directly to aid his people against their enemies (60:11a) and acknowledges that human power is ultimately of no avail (60:11b).
We will gain the victory. The confident assurance of the concluding verse 12 must be read as a hopeful profession of faith, standing as it does in such close proximity with the preceding pictures of divine abandonment and human powerlessness. Israel has no hope unless her God is willing to act in her behalf, as he acted in the Conquest to establish his covenant people in the land. The earlier commitment of God (depicted in 60:6–8) to subdue and divide the land for the sake of his people remains the hope that God yet has plans to fulfill and maintain his covenant promises. Thus, the psalm is able to conclude with a triumphant shout: “With God we will gain the victory,16 and he will trample down our enemies.”
Bridging Contexts
DIVINE REJECTION AND ABANDONMENT. The Old Testament is full of descriptions of divine abandonment. From Genesis 3 on, humans living in relationship with Yahweh have known times when God seemed absent or even hostile to them. Cast out of the garden, Adam and Eve no longer experienced those intimate walks and talks in the cool of the evening. Their days were spent in grueling toil to eke out a meager existence from a world grown hostile to them.
(1) Often these experiences of divine withdrawal were seen as the result of a human failure of commitment. Adam and Eve disobeyed the commandment of God. Cain killed his brother Abel. Achan violated the injunction against taking booty before the defeat of Israel at Ai. Israel’s failure of commitment resulted in an incomplete conquest of the Promised Land (Josh. 12–24). Life under the judges became a cycle of sin, judgment, oppression, repentance, deliverance, rest, and back to sin again (Judg. 2). The kings of Israel and Judah were consistently evaluated according to their commitment to Yahweh. Their success and failure against their enemies were often related to the strength of their commitment.
(2) On other occasions, however, God’s withdrawal from his people is viewed as simple abandonment on his part. In these cases Israel pleaded with God to explain his distance, to remember his covenant commitments, and to respond in renewed relationship and deliverance. Job questions God in this way because of the undeserved suffering that consumed his life. The psalms are also full of this kind of pleading with God: “Why are you so far off? How long? Will you abandon us forever?”17
While some of these accounts may reflect Israel’s failure of commitment, most stand as a reminder that true victory is possible only through the power of God. When God delays, as in the case of Job, his absence drives home the necessity of his power in ways no act of deliverance ever could. Confronted by their own human impotence in the face of attack or suffering, the psalmists are forced to approach the only stronghold and hope they have: the absent God. “Save us and help us with your right hand, that those you love18 may be delivered. . . . Give us aid against the enemy, for the help of man is worthless” (60:5, 11).
Contemporary Significance
WHEN PLANS FAIL. When our campaigns are brought up short in failure, this psalm can help us evaluate the causes and discover the way forward. When our plans fail, we must at least consider whether that is a sign God was not in it. The psalmist articulates this as rejection, even as punishment (60:1), and our experience shows that this can be the case. To act in our own strength or out of our own sinful motives can be to act out of weakness.
Often we can see the devastating consequences of sin as it works itself out in relationships over generations. Addiction to drugs can beget robbery and murder to support a habit and cover one’s tracks. Adultery can destroy marriages and warp and distort the lives of children ill-prepared to understand and deal with it. When we look at our own society and its abuses, we can even describe the consequences in much the same terms as the psalmist: The land “shaken” and “torn open,” “fractured” and “quaking,” are all appropriate terms to describe the world around us now. Much of the fragmentation we see and experience is the direct result of our own selfish choices and attempts to control and manipulate the world to our satisfaction.
But we need to be careful in our evaluation. Not all failure is the result of sin or the punishment of God. Some suffering falls on the righteous for no failing of their own. The world is a complex place, and its fallen character means that the blessings and pains of natural circumstance (refreshing rain, destructive hurricane, crop-killing drought, devastating earthquake) can come on rich and poor, righteous and wicked alike. Moreover, being righteous is no guarantee of security from the evil deeds of others and the long-term consequences of such deeds. Similarly, the failure of our hopes and plans need not always be the result of divine punishment for our sin. Only Achan was revealed as the culprit who took booty before the failed campaign at Ai (Josh. 7), but all Israel—including their leader, Joshua—experienced the defeat.
Thus, if the failure of our plans cannot tell us absolutely whether it is the result of our sin or some other circumstance, what can it tell us? Here are several ideas taken from Psalm 60, which I think are being driven home to us in a time when our plans fail.
(1) To take the fortified city requires God’s power and assistance (60:9–12). We may have certain successes in our lives by our own resources, intelligence, and strength, but the “fortified city”—the final goal of bringing the fortified outposts of entrenched evil under the rule of God—can only be accomplished in God’s power. He is the creator and sustainer of all, and he is the one who restores and heals fragmented lives undone by human evil. Relying on human strength alone is worthless (60:11).
(2) Our failures (whatever the cause) do not undermine God’s plans and purposes. No matter how broken and fragmented our world becomes because of our own and others’ sin, God can mend and heal up its fractures. Our failures do not mean that God has failed. Note that when the psalmist recalls the Conquest in 60:6–8, all the places mentioned remain the possession of God even when his people fail to take them.19 Interestingly, the account of the incomplete conquest in Judges 2:1–3:6 indicates that the failure of the Israelite conquest of Canaan was both because of Israel’s loss of commitment to Yahweh (2:1–3) and because of Yahweh’s testing of his people’s faithfulness (3:1–4).
(3) Broken relationships can be restored. Destruction, no matter how desperate, can be mended (60:2). God offers deliverance from sin. He has established a way to restore broken relationships with him. When we are tempted to label ourselves (or others) unredeemable, God steps firmly into the breach with an offer of salvation. This relentless goodness—God’s desire to see all return to him—is the source of the psalmist’s great hope. This hope also extends to those of us who have been severely damaged—in body, mind, and spirit—through the destructive, abusive evil of others against us. Rape; long term mental, emotional, physical, or sexual abuse; torture—all these leave deep life-affecting damage. Yet the psalmist offers us hope that such damage can be mended.
Anatoly Sharansky tells in his prison memoir, Fear No Evil, how God (mostly through the psalms) enabled him to maintain his sense of worth and human dignity in spite of years of torture, isolation, and attempts to rob him of his humanity in the Russian prison and Gulag system. After his father died while Anatoly was still imprisoned, when he was prevented from even writing in condolence to his mother about the loss, Sharansky embarked on a forty-day program of copying and reading the psalms from the Hebrew book of Psalms given him by his wife. The effect was remarkable. As Sharansky writes: “Day after day I reconciled myself with the past, and my feelings of grief and loss were gradually replaced by sweet sorrow and fond hopes.”20 Sharansky still languished in prison for years. The physical, mental, and psychological toll on his person was great, but his spirit remained intact, buoyed up by the power of God’s words in the psalms to mend brokenness and to retake territory occupied by evil.