1. See the section on “Royal Psalms” in the introduction and at the end of Psalm 2.
2. Note the explicit mention of the king in 18:50; 20:9; 21:1, 7. The related designation for the king (“his anointed”) also appears in 18:50 and 20:6.
3. The NIV interprets these nine imperfect forms as jussives expressing the will of the speaker. The particular forms in question, however, demonstrate no distinctively jussive features and may be taken as typical imperfects with equal justification if the context warrants. If the forms were taken this way, the army would be expressing confidence that Yahweh will assist the king in achieving victory, rather than expressing their hope and desire that he do so.
4. See NIVSB, 804, drawing on 2 Chron. 20, which suggests a “Levite.”
5. For a discussion of the term selah, see comments on Ps. 3.
6. See comments on the headings to Pss. 3 and 4 for further discussion of these terms.
7. The BHS apparatus suggests an emendation to miqqodšo (“from his holy place”), which could refer to the temple but might also be construed to indicate Yahweh’s “holy dwelling.” The mention of “from Zion” in parallel to “holy place” strengthens the case for the temple being intended, in my opinion, as does the following reference to the king’s sacrifices and burnt offerings (20:3). While it is not impossible for sacrifices to have been offered other than in the temple at this time, the most natural referent for these activities and for this language is the Jerusalem temple.
8. See Ex. 3:6, 15; 4:5; 2 Sam. 23:1; Isa. 2:3; Mic. 4:2; and Pss. 20:1; 24:6 [cf. NIV note]; 46:7, 11; 75:9; 76:6; 81:1, 4; 84:8; 94:7; 114:7; 146:5. The Isaiah and Micah passages are duplicate quotations. In Exodus, the phrase is part of the longer patriarchal formula “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” According to Ex. 3:15, God tells Moses, “This is my name forever, the name by which I am to be remembered from generation to generation.” The phrase also occurs four times in the New Testament—three times in the parallel passages in Matt. 22:32; Mark 12:26; Luke 20:37, where it refers to Ex. 3:15, and once in Acts 7:46.
9. For further discussion of this event, see comments on 8:1, 9.
10. For discussion of this and other terms for fortresses and strongholds, see comments on 9:9–14.
11. See comments on 14:7. This hill should be identified with the Temple Mount on which the Islamic shrines the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aksah Mosque presently stand.
12. Although Saul’s sacrifices earned Samuel’s condemnation here, there is no clear indication that it was the general practice of kingly sacrifices that was at fault; rather, Saul allowed his anxiety at the massing troops of the enemy to push him to override the expectation that he wait until Samuel arrive. As in the prophets at a later date, it was not sacrifices themselves but the attitude in which they were offered that rendered them illegitimate.
13. See the discussion of divine remembering in the commentary on Ps. 13:1–2. To be “remembered” or “known” by God is to be in the appropriate relationship of blessing that Ps. 1:6 contrasts with the “perishing” state of the wicked.
14. Many commentators take the imperfect verb forms in 20:5a–b as a continuation of the jussive mood established in the preceding verses and concluded by the final expression in verse 5: “May Yahweh grant all your requests.” If this interpretation is correct, then this passage would be rendered “Let us sing aloud in praise of your victory! Let us do homage to the name of our God!” (Rogerson and McKay, Psalms 1–50, 90); or perhaps, “May we shout for joy in your victory and raise a banner in the name of our God” (Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 184). Dahood (Psalms, 1:127) also reflects this tendency with a more subjunctive interpretation: “That we might exult in your victory, and in the Name of our God hold high the banners.”
15. Besides the present passage, compare Pss. 18:35; 44:3, 6, 7; 118:15; 144:10; Hab. 3:8.
16. See the discussion in Dahood (Psalms, 1:128), Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 278), and Craigie (Psalms 1–50, 184). Kraus, drawing on the LXX rendering megalynthesometha (“we will be magnified”) assumes a possible transposition of the letters -d- and -g- with a resultant Hebrew form nagdil (Hiphil imperfect of gdl) or negaddel (Piel imperfect of gdl), but ultimately opts for a more severe revision to nagil (Hiphil imperfect of gyl [“rejoice; exult”]), entirely on the basis of parallelism.
17. Another factitive use of the Piel, in which the meaning of the Qal stem (“be full”) is brought to fruition in the Piel (“make full/fulfill”).
18. The term “request” is appropriate here since the noun shares the root with the verb “ask, request.” This is different from what one might “desire” (Heb ḥepeṣ., taʾawah, or raṣon). In 21:2, Yahweh is said to have “granted [the king] the desire [taʾawah] of his heart”—a distinctive phrase that nonetheless links back to the similar idea expressed in 20:4a (where “desire” does not actually appear in the Hebrew text).
19. There is a slight possibility that the speaker in this verse might be the king referring to himself in the third person as Yahweh’s “anointed.” If so, the verse would represent the king’s humble acknowledgment of his dependence for success and victory on the “salvation” that comes from God alone.
20. Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:294.
21. The NIV’s inconsistency in translating forms of the root yšʿ, even within the context of the same psalm, illustrates the difficulty and even “slipperiness” of deciding between the alternatives of “victory” and “salvation/deliverance” in each instance. In many (if not most) passages “salvation/deliverance” provides an adequate translation with good meaning.
22. See the pertinent discussion in the sections on the “Royal Psalms” at the end of Ps. 2 and the section on “Messianic Reinterpretation” in “Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
23. A review of Israel’s early successes against the Philistines reveals a strategic use of restricted terrain—hill country, mountain passes, narrow valleys, or river crossings—where the horse-drawn chariot was least effective.
24. 1 Sam. 13:5–10 (Saul); 2 Sam. 6:17–19 and 24:18–25 (David); 1 Kings 3:3–4, 15 and 8:62–63 (Solomon); 12:31–33 (Jeroboam); 22:1–40 (Ahab of Israel and Jehoshaphat of Judah); cf. 2 Kings 3:26–27 (king of Moab).
25. Cf. 2 Sam. 24, where David’s decision to make a census of fighting men results in divine punishment of all Israel by the outbreak of plague.
26. 1 Sam. 12:20–25.
27. See the comments on the divine name at 8:1 and in the Bridging Contexts section to that psalm.
28. The implications of the divine name Yahweh are discussed in the Bridging Contexts section of Ps. 8.
29. The ark certainly was employed in this fashion during the conquest of the land (Joshua) and was lost during the time of Samuel after it had been carried into battle with the Philistines (1 Sam. 4–6). The assumption of the priestly bearers of the ark, who carried it out of the city in order to accompany David when he fled Jerusalem before the forces of his son Absalom, was that the ark implied the presence of Yahweh with the side that possessed it. David clearly distanced himself from that theology when he sent the ark back to the temple with the declaration: “Take the ark of God back into the city. If I find favor in the LORD’s eyes, he will bring me back and let me see it and his dwelling place again. But if he says, ‘I am not pleased with you,’ then I am ready; let him do to me whatever seems good to him” (2 Sam. 15:25–26). This is the kind of trust Psalm 20 describes.
30. Cf. Lev. 26:27–30; 1 Sam. 15:22–23; Amos 5:21–25.
31. Cf. Mark 11:24.
32. This kind of trust is what the Old Testament calls “fear of the LORD.” Such “fear” is far from terror; rather, it describes the core realization that in all aspects of life one is absolutely dependent on Yahweh alone.
1. Scholarly lists of the “royal psalms” exhibit much agreement and only slight variations of contents. According to Hermann Gunkel (The Psalms [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967], 23), the list includes Pss. 2; 18; 20; 21; 45; 72; 101; 110; 132; and 144:1–11. Artur Weiser, The Psalms, 45, cites Pss. 2; 18; 20; 21; 72; 89; 101; and 110. According to Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology, trans. D. M. G. Stalker (2 vols.; New York: Harper, 1962, 1965), 1:319, note 1, the royal psalms are Pss. 2; 18; 20; 21; 45; 72; 89; 101; 110; and 132. For a discussion of the interpretation of royal psalms, see the Bridging Contexts section of Ps. 20.
2. For discussions of the pertinent terms, see comments on the headings to Pss. 3 and 4.
3. The term “king” (melek) occurs some sixty-four times in the Psalter in singular and plural forms. Of these, three are abstract mentions of kings in the most general sense, twenty-six describe foreign kings, fourteen are references to Israelite rulers, and twenty-one call Yahweh/God king. It is most interesting to note that there is no reference to Israelite monarchs using the term melek after the third book of the Psalter (i.e., after Ps. 89). David does appear in the headings of a number of psalms in the fourth and fifth books and is explicitly mentioned in the text of Pss. 122:5; 132:1, 10, 11, 17; 144:10. He is even called God’s “anointed one” (132:10, 17), but never is he, or any other Israelite ruler, called melek. For more on this, see comments on Ps. 2.
4. The NIV’s translation of Ps. 20:4a as “May he give you the desire of your heart” would seem to indicate a close and possibly intended link with 21:2a, “You have granted him the desire of his heart.” However, the earlier verse translates a very different Hebrew phrase from the later one. Ps. 20:4a is more literally translated, “May he give you according to your heart,” which is less similar to 21:2 than appears from the translations. See comments on 20:4 for a discussion of the meaning of that phrase.
5. Although the Heb. word has traditionally been translated “pure/fine gold,” Holladay (CHALOT, 290) suggests a possible identification with olivine chrystoline, a semi-precious stone used for ornamentation in the ancient world.
6. See comments on Ps. 8:5.
7. While it is not clear that the term carried the modern sense of “eternity,” it certainly implied a length of time far in excess of the normal life expectancy of individuals. Coupling that extreme time period with yet another term for long time span, ʿad (“yet, still”; NIV “eternal” in v. 6), heightens the sense of permanency intended.
8. See comments on Ps. 3:3–4.
9. See Holladay, CHALOT, 77, for entries on both hod and hadar. Both terms are used in reference to the king in 45:3, while hadar along with kabod (“glory”) is one of the gracious gifts of God on all humanity (8:5).
10. Exactly which covenant relationship the psalmist has in mind here is not immediately clear. If it is the Sinai covenant between Yahweh and all Israel, then the king is confident that Yahweh will protect his people by supporting the king against his enemies. If it is the Davidic covenant, then the king is basing his confidence on Yahweh’s promise of an eternal kingdom for David and his descendants. It may well be that both covenants stand behind the confidence expressed in this psalm.
11. Holladay (CHALOT, 209) offers the meaning “to meet by chance (what presents itself to one)” for the phrase timṣaʾyad. Alternatively, the nuance of “seek out” might fit the context.
12. The return in the second half of v. 9 to third-person reference about Yahweh (“his wrath”) leads BHS to suggest this half verse is a later gloss.
13. For further discussion of theophany, see comments on 18:7–15.
14. The parallel structure of 21:10 is an artful example of the subtle expressions of affirming parallelism.
Their fruit | from the earth | you will destroy |
and their seed | from human beings |
The verb “destroy” that concludes the first line also governs the thought in the second. The subtle shifting between “fruit”—indicating the coming to fruition of their hopes for descendants—and “seed”—suggesting the beginning point from which posterity proceeds—encapsulates the whole process of begetting descendants from beginning to end. In addition, the juxtaposition of “the earth” (as the physical environment) and “human beings” (as the social environment) heightens the sense of the loss that the disappearance of future generations will make in the world.
15. The circumstance of conspiring nations joining together to attack “the king” of Yahweh is reminiscent of Ps. 2, although the words used are distinctive.
16. For further discussion of the “divine warrior,” see comments on 18:13. Cf. also Longman and Reid, God Is a Warrior, passim.
17. The use of geburah at this point links Ps. 21 back to the “saving power [gebura]” of Yahweh’s “right hand” in 20:6 (cf. also 21:8, “right hand”).
18. Most other translations employ the singular: e.g., NRSV “help” (21:1, 5); NJB “saving help” (21:1, 5); REB “victory” (21:1, 5).
19. In this instance the NIV also translates with “victory” rather than “salvation/deliverance” but shifts the nominal construction into a temporal phrase that would be more likely with an infinitive construct.
20. The theme of deliverance (using two other Heb. roots) dominates the first two-thirds of Ps. 22 (plṭ in 22:4, 8; nṣl in 22:20; yšʿ also appears in 22:21). For further discussion of the linkage between Pss. 21 and 22, see comments on Ps. 22.
21. Cf. Lev. 9:24; 10:2; Num. 11:1; 16:35; 21:28; Deut. 5:25; Judg. 9:15, 20; 2 Kings 1:10, 12, 14; Job 15:34; 20:26; Pss. 21:9; 78:63; 106:18; Isa. 10:17; 26:11; Jer. 17:27; 21:14; 49:27; 50:32; Lam. 4:11; Ezek. 15:7; 19:12, 14; 20:47; 23:25; 28:18; Hos. 8:14; Amos 1:4, 7, 10, 12, 14; 2:2, 5; Obad. 18; Nah. 3:13, 15; Zeph. 1:18; 3:8; Zech. 9:4.
22. Cf. Ex. 24:17; Deut. 4:24; 2 Sam. 22:9; Ps. 18:8; Isa. 30:27; 30:30; 33:14. Consuming fire can also have positive connotations. When used of sacrifice, it can represent the means by which right relationship is restored between sinful humans and God (cf. Lev. 6:10; 2 Chron. 7:1). Compare also the New Testament references in Heb. 10:26–27; 12:29.
23. See esp. Zeph. 1:18; 3:8, where consuming fire is clearly associated with “the day of the LORD’s wrath” and is intended as judgment of “the whole world” (Zeph. 1:18b; 3:8d).
24. K. Aland, M. Black, B. Metzger, Greek New Testament (New York: United Bible Society, 1994), lists James 5:3 as a quotation of Ps. 21:9: “Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming upon you. Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days” (James 5:1–3).
25. Cf. Dan. 3:6, 11, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26.
26. For tannur as “oven,” see Ex. 8:3; Lev. 2:4; 7:9; 11:35; 26:26; Neh. 3:11; 12:38; Hos. 7:4, 6, 7; Lam. 5:10. The term also appears in Gen. 15:17, where it describes the smoking “fire pot” by which Yahweh indicates his commitment to the covenant established with Abraham.
27. See the discussion in the Contemporary Significance section of Ps. 20.
28. See 2 Cor. 12:9–10.
29. The divine gifting described in 21:3–5 has much in common with God’s exaltation of humankind in Ps. 8:5. These passages share three root words: “crowning;” “crown” (8:5, ʿṭr; 21:3, ʿaṭeret); “glory” (8:5, kabod; 21:5, kabod); and “honor/majesty” (8:5, hadar; 21:5, hadar). With the emphasis on “ruling” in 8:6, it may be that the psalmist of 21:3–5 had these images of divine gifting in mind in describing the blessing poured out on the king.
1. For the evidence suggesting that Pss. 70 and 71 should be read as a single unified composition, see comments on Ps. 70.
2. Ps. 22 figures in New Testament interpretation of Jesus at Matt. 27:35, 39, 43; John 19:23–24, 28. For Jesus’ use of this psalm while on the cross, see Matt. 27:46.
3. For discussion of these two more common elements of the psalm headings, see comments on Pss. 3 and 4.
4. The NIV’s translation “To the tune of ‘The Doe of the Morning,’ ” makes the interpretation as a tune explicit and further understands the reference to “the dawn” more generally to indicate “the morning.” For a more detailed discussion of tunes in the psalm headings, see J. F. A. Sawyer, “An Analysis of the Context and Meaning of the Psalm Headings,” Transactions of the Glasgow University Oriental Society 22 (1967–68): 26–38. For this specific element, see also Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 30.
5. Jesus’ speech, reported in Mark 15:34, is Aramaic: eloi eloi lama sabachthani.
6. The noun appears as “victory” in 18:50; 20:6; 21:1, 5. Consult the commentary on these verses for further discussion of the linkage of this theme.
7. There is no Hebrew equivalent of “yet” in the text of 22:3a. In 22:9a the author does use the Heb. particle ki (“but”) to express the adversative sense of the passage that follows. Both passages use the pronoun ʾattah (“you”) as part of the introduction, linking the two together and clarifying the adversative sense of the first passage by the clearly adversative character of the second.
8. For a discussion of the meaning of qadoš, see comments on Ps. 5:7–8.
9. This is the more natural reading of the Heb. behind the NIV’s “you are enthroned as the Holy One; you are the praise of Israel.” The verb for sitting (yšb) is a Qal active participle here, indicating that Yahweh is continuously and currently sitting. The nuance behind the NIV’s “enthroned” suggests that others are placing God on the throne. The further question concerns whether the verb is to be attached with what precedes or what follows; the Hebrew accentuation groups the verb with what follows. The noun the NIV renders “praise” is actually a plural (“praises”), although some Hebrew manuscripts exhibit the singular form. All this suggests that the better translation is to understand the first phrase as an affirmation of Yahweh’s essential character as Holy One, while the second phrase describes his continual resting on the throne provided by the praises of a faithful Israel. While the phrase “sitter of the praises of Israel” may seem awkward to us, this is an acceptable way to say “sitting on the praises . . .” in Hebrew.
10. It is certainly significant that this verb of trust is used three times within four consecutive phrases (22:4–5), emphasizing the “trust” in Yahweh that characterized Israel’s faithful reliance on their God.
11. Cf. Ex. 16:20; 25:4; Deut. 28:39; Jonah 4:7.
12. The verb translated “trust” here is difficult. The form in the text (gol) makes no sense here. According to the Greek, Syriac, and some versions of the quote in Matt. 27:43, the word should probably be taken as gal, from the Heb. gll (“roll away”). In this context it has been understood metaphorically to mean “roll away (a concern)” onto Yahweh. Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 292) suggests the Aramaic targum read an original yagil (“he shrieked ecstatically/wildly for joy”).
13. Cf. 22:5, where the ancestors’ trust leads to Yahweh’s “rescuing” them, using the same verb (plṭ).
15. Two Heb. words are used here to describe the mother’s womb: beṭen (22:9a, 10b) and reḥem (22:10a). The first—often translated “belly”—is most likely a reference to the internal “womb” or “uterus” in which the child is carried during the gestation period. The second—usually translated “womb”—is more likely a reference to the birth canal or vagina, as the rather crude soldiers’ of Judg. 5:30 suggests: raḥam raḥamatayim (“a reḥem or two for each”).
16. This cry—“Don’t be far removed!”—will return again at the end of the second major section of the psalm (cf. 22:19).
17. Cf. Deut. 32:14; Ezek. 39:18; Amos 4:1.
18. See the discussion with a thorough bibliography of resources in Craigie (Psalms 1–50, 196).
19. The sense of “gloat” is not derived from the Hebrew verb rʾh (“look, see”), but is an interpretive rendering from the context.
20. Since the Heb. of this passage simply reads “they will stare,” it is possible that the antecedent of “they” is “bones” rather than “enemies.” Although the plural of “bones” is by form feminine in this verse while the pronoun is masculine, the singular “bone” (ʿeṣem) is masculine and appears with both masculine and feminine plural forms. In this interpretation, the verse would read: “I can count all my bones, and they gaze and stare back at me.”
21. The NIV’s “come quickly to help me,” while accurate enough, is a bit pallid to catch the real urgency and desperation behind this plea. A similar imperative phrase (leʿezrati ḥušah) directed to God in desperate circumstances is found also in Pss. 38:22; 40:13; 70:1, 5; 71:12; and the similar phrase ḥušah li (“hurry to me”) appears at 141:1. (See the discussion of this phrase in the comments on Pss. 70 and 71, where it provides a connecting link between these two psalms.)
22. The term yaḥid is most often used to describe an “only child”—such as Isaac (Gen. 22:2) or (in the feminine) the only daughter of Jephthah (Judg. 11:34).
23. Note esp. the story of the near sacrifice of Isaac in Gen. 22, where the preciousness of Isaac—who came late in life to Abraham and Sarah and who represents their only hope for the fulfillment of the divine promises—is emphasized by the piling up of words in the description: “Take your son, your only son [yaḥid], the one you love, Isaac, and sacrifice him” (lit. trans.). Other uses of the term are found in Ps. 25:16; Isa. 6:2–6; and in the narrative of Jephthah, who having vowed to sacrifice the first thing that greets him as he returns home from a victorious campaign, is shocked when his only daughter (yeḥidah) runs out of the house to meet him (Judg. 11:34).
24. For a discussion of the name of Yahweh and its significance to Israel, see comments on Ps. 8.
25. For a discussion of the meaning of “fear the LORD,” see the section on “Theology of the Psalms” in volume 2 of this commentary.
26. The last imperative construction (guru mimmennu) is more accurately taken as “be afraid because of him” and is in this context a variation on the more common expression employing yrʾ (cf. 22:23a).
27. This Hebrew noun ʿenut—formed by an abstract ending (-ut) on the same root (ʿnh) as the following noun ʿani, does not appear elsewhere. Holladay (CHALOT, 278) suggests it should rather be read as the infinitive construct of the verb ʿnh (“answer”). In that case the whole phrase would be translated: “He has not . . . disdained to answer the afflicted.”
28. See the discussion of various categories of oppressed persons in the comments on 10:16–18.
29. The verb drš is the most usual way of expressing a religious inquiry into the will and purposes of God—normally involving formal ritual at the worship place. Such inquiry is not just casual questioning but represents a careful, intentional attempt to seek out and understand God’s will.
30. In Gen. 12:3 it is the (lit.) “families of the earth” (mišpeḥot haʾadamah) who find blessing through Abram, while here it is the “families of the [non-Israelite] nations” (mišpeḥot goyim) who come to worship Yahweh. The similarity, while not precise, is sufficient to link these two ideas together.
31. There may also be an intended reference to the eschatological feast (Isa. 25:6; Luke 14:15), in which all the faithful—rich or poor, Jew or Gentile—will participate on an equal footing.
32. “Going down” or “returning” to the dust is a common metaphor for death in the Old Testament (cf. Gen. 3:19; Job 17:16; 34:15; Pss. 90:3; 104:29; Eccl. 3:20). The abode of the dead, Sheol, was thought to be “down” under the surface of the earth, and in broader ancient Near Eastern mythology was thought to be a lightless place, where everything was covered with dust. The Gen. 2–3 account of creation and fall links the dust image with the earthen material from which God is said to have created the first humans. Death, then, is understood as a return to the preanimated state.
33. See comments on “righteous; righteousness” in 4:1–2.
34. Barbara Aland, Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, Bruce M. Metzger, The Greek New Testament, 4th rev. ed. (New York: United Bible Societies, 1994), 887, 895. The indices list four direct quotations (Matt. 27:46; Mark 15:34; John 19:24; Heb. 2:12), and twenty allusions or verbal parallels.
35. Cf. esp. Rom. 5:5; Phil. 3:2; 2 Tim. 4:17.
36. This literal Heb. translation is rather interpretively rendered in the NIV as, “From you comes the theme of my praise in the great assembly.”
37. See comments on 8:3–8 and compare the creation narrative in Gen. 1:26–31.
38. While Ps. 22 asks simply for deliverance from the beastly enemies, it is clear elsewhere that when we dehumanize ourselves to act like the beasts, the punishment we receive is in accord with our new status. One is not able to use reason to restrain an attacking lion but must resort to violence in order to save the life of the one attacked. For this reason the psalmists in Pss. 3:7 and 58:6 plead for God to “break the teeth” of the enemy who have the faithful in a death grip.
39. Note how in the Atrahasis Epic, when unlimited procreative abilities led the rapidly expanding human population into conflict with the gods, the ultimate solution to the conflict (after interim attempts through plague, drought, and famine had failed) was brought about by decreeing limitations on human procreativity. That these limitations included barrenness, miscarriage, still births, and high infant mortality rates indicates these phenomena were widespread facts of life in the ancient world.
40. Jesus’ final word in John’s Gospel is the Greek tetelestai (“It is finished”). The word is a perfect passive from teleo. The perfect tense in Greek expresses an action completed in the past with results continuing into the present. The Greek word is akin to the Hebrew verb šlm which it often translates in the LXX. The Hebrew carries the force of “be/make whole/complete.” The root is commonly used to describe the “peace offering” (šelamim), which might better be understood as a sacrifice that celebrates the restoration of life to proper relationship with Yahweh.
1. See comments on the heading to Ps. 3.
2. A number of texts make this connection clear. See, e.g., the following pages in Beyerlin, Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 13, 15, 26, 28, 40, 46, 102, 107, 137, 143. The prologue to Hammurabi’s Law Code makes the connection of shepherd and king especially clear.
3. Cf. 1 Sam. 16:11, 19; 17:15, 20, 34–37; 2 Sam. 7:7–8; Ps. 78:70–71.
4. See the discussion of the Yahweh malak psalms in the introduction and in the commentary on Pss. 93, 95–98.
5. It is striking that all three imperfects also occur in one of the “factitive” or “causative” stems—indicating the shepherd’s influence and authority over the flock. The normal “causative” stem is the Hiphil, which most often infers applying some causative effect on someone else. For example, the verb ydʿ (“know”), when used in the Hiphil stem, means “to cause (someone else) to know (something)” and is often translated “make known, reveal.” In comparison, the usual “factitive” stem is the Piel (although the Hiphil can also take on this force). The factitive stem normally occurs with a “stative” verb that describes existing in a state rather than accomplishing some action. An example of a stative verb would be “rest” rather than the active verb “run.” The factitive form of the stative verb just mentioned would be “make/cause to rest.” The primary distinction between causative and factitive stems is that the former occurs with active verbs, while the latter occurs with stative verbs. Both stems emphasize that the subject of the verb is exercising decisive influence over someone else, as in the case of our verse.
6. Cf. the extended discussion of the idea of “name” in the comments on Ps. 8.
7. Cf. Ex. 20:7; Deut. 5:11.
8. Cf. Prov. 22:1, where “good name” (i.e., good reputation) translates the Hebrew šem (“name”), with no modifiers attached (cf. also Eccl. 7:1).
9. The article on “Shade; Shadow” in ISBE2 is a good place to start in the exploration of the phrase “shadow of death.” Note the contrasting view presented in the article on “Shadow” in IDB, where the attempt is made to derive ṣalmawet from a root ṣlm. In either case, the meaning is the same. We encounter similar examples in contemporary expressions such as “a killer face” or a “tie to die for.”
In another example of this kind of superlative, the word “God” is also used to this end in Jonah 3:3, where the size of the city of Nineveh is described as ʿir gedolah leʾlohim (lit., “a great city unto God”). The idiomatic meaning of the phrase is clearly to emphasize the superlative size of the city “a really big city!” or more irreverently “a by God big city!”
10. Related words including mišʿan (2 Sam. 22:19; Ps. 18:18) and mašʿen, mašʿenah (Isa. 3:1) affirm the meaning of support. For mišʿenet, see Ex. 21:19; Judg. 6:21; Zech. 8:4. A ruler can also use a mišʿenet (Num. 21:18), although whether this is simply a walking stick or a royal scepter is uncertain.
11. By this interpretation the table is some form of mobile feeding unit employed in the desert or a sort of “staff” employed by the shepherd, while the act of anointing is a type of medical treatment for sick sheep. Cf. Ludwig H. Köhler, “Psalm 23,” ZAW 68 (1956): 227–34.
12. Several commentators, including Dahood (Psalms, 1:147–48) and Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 308), make reference to the passage from the Amarna letters in which a local prince pleads with the Egyptian authorities: “May it please him to give gifts to his servant while our enemies look on.” It may be this kind of visible and public evidence of divine support and acceptance that the psalmist anticipates.
13. See Pss. 26:8; 27:4; 36:7–8; 52:8; 65:4; 84:1–4, 10–12; 92:12–14, for examples of similar imagery.
14. Cf. Ex. 21:13–14; 1 Kings 1:50–53; 2:28–30.
15. See Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 308–9) as a recent proponent of this view.
16. For further information on the various uses of the Hebrew word bet (“house”), consult Wilson, “
,” NIDOTTE, 2:550–51.
17. The eschatological banquet theme is mentioned in the prophets (Isa. 25:6) and figures prominently in the New Testament teaching of Jesus as well (cf. Luke 14:15).
18. This connection with pilgrimage to the Jerusalem temple is particularly interesting in light of the following Ps. 24:3, with its emphasis on preparing to “ascend the hill of the LORD . . . [and] . . . stand in his holy place.”
19. See here Ps. 84:1–10, where once again the Jerusalem temple is the longed-for goal of pilgrimage.
20. Cf. Pss. 23:6; 26:8; 27:4; 36:7–9; 52:8; 65:4; 84:1–4, 10–12. The only occurrence outside these books is found in 92:12–14: “The righteous will flourish like the palm tree, they will grow like a cedar in Lebanon; planted in the house of the LORD, they will flourish in the courts of our God. They will still bear fruit in old age, they will stay fresh and green.”
21. Ps. 65:4 further identifies this hekal as qedoš (“holy”), making the connection with temple even more clear.
22. Cf. Num. 35:6–32; Deut. 19:1–13; Josh. 20:1–9; 21:13, 21, 27, 32, 38, where the pertinent legislation is given and the cities chosen listed.
23. 1 Kings 1:50–53; 2:28–35. The story of Joab’s execution after seeking asylum in the temple fulfills the demand of Ex. 21:13–14, since Joab was guilty of deliberate and premeditated murder of Abner and Amasa (1 Kings 2:31–33).
24. See comments on 5:11–12.
25. Cf. Num. 35:25; Josh. 20:6.
26. See also 84:10–12: “I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of the wicked. For the LORD God is a sun and shield; the LORD bestows favor and honor; no good thing does he withhold from those whose walk is blameless. O LORD Almighty, blessed is the man who trusts in you.”
27. The temple is the “place where [God’s] glory dwells” (26:8), and to dwell there is to live within the glow of God’s true essence.
28. See also 52:8: “I am like an olive tree flourishing in the house of God; I trust in God’s unfailing love for ever and ever.”
29. Cf. Heb. 4:3, 10.
30. See comments in Gerald H. Wilson, “Renewing the Image: Perspectives on a Biblical View of Creation,” Quaker Religious Thought 24 (1990): 11–21.
1. See Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 311–12, for this view.
2. See Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 211, for this view.
3. The appearance of the technical term selah accords with the proposed structure since it stands at the conclusion of both second and last sections. This may perhaps suggest a closer relationship between the first and second sections, since no selah intervenes.
4. For a discussion of both these terms, see comments on the heading of Ps. 3, where both occur for the first time. There is no immediately apparent significance for the variation in order of these two terms (mizmor ledawid in Ps. 23 vs. ledawid mizmor in Ps. 24), although the former arrangement occurs far more frequently (30 times) than the latter (only 6 times). If the psalm actually incorporates a liturgy for entering the temple precincts, this raises serious questions with the traditional attribution to David associated with the psalm heading.
5. The pair appears some twenty-five times in the Old Testament: sixteen times outside the Psalter (1 Sam. 2:8; 1 Chron. 16:30; Job 34:13; 37:12; Prov. 8:26, 31; Isa. 14:21; 18:3; 24:4; 26:9, 18; 34:1; Jer. 10:12; 51:15; Lam. 4:12; Nah. 1:5) and nine times within it (Pss. 19:4; 24:1; 33:8; 77:18; 89:11; 90:2; 96:13; 97:4; 98:9). The concentration of five occurrences (89:11; 90:2; 96:13; 97:4; 98:9) at the end of Book 3 and the beginning of Book 4 of the Psalter is suggestive of editorial concern and affirms the link between the Yahweh malak psalms (93; 95–99) and the questions regarding the demise of the Davidic covenant raised in Ps. 89. For further discussion, see comments on Pss. 89–99 and the various essays on the shape of the Psalter offered throughout this two-volume commentary.
6. For other examples of this emphasis on stability and security using ʾereṣ and tebel, see Jer. 10:12; 51:15.
7. For other passages in this vein, compare Ps. 24:1; 90:2; Prov. 8:26, 31.
8. Other passages describing Yahweh as judge of the earth include Job 34:13; Isa. 26:18; 34:1–17.
9. For additional discussion of theophany, see comments on Ps. 18:7–15.
10. For other theophany passages employing tebel and ʾereṣ, see Ps. 97:4. Human sin and evil also leave their negative imprint on the world as Isa. 24:4–5 indicates: “The earth [ʾereṣ] dries up and withers, the world [tebel] languishes and withers, the exalted of the earth languish. The earth is defiled by its people.”
11. The Heb. meloʾah (or with a masculine pronoun meloʾo) appears most frequently with the noun ʾereṣ (“earth, land”; cf. Deut. 33:16; Isa. 34:1; Jer. 8:16; 47:2; Ezek. 12:19; 19:7; 30:12; 32:15; Mic. 1:2), though on two occasions it is connected with tebel (“world”; Pss. 50:12; 89:11). In addition, the term appears three times with yam (“sea”; Pss. 96:11; 98:7; Isa. 42:10) and once with ʿir (“city”; Amos 6:8).
12. Translations of the various Mesopotamian texts of creation can be found in a variety of sources listed in most commentaries on the early chapters of Genesis. The two most significant resources are Beyerlin, Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament; Pritchard, ANETP.
13. Ugaritic texts describing the struggle between Baal and Yam are part of the Baal-Anat cycle (I AB-VI AB). English translation of these often fragmentary texts are available in ANETP and Beyerlin, Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament.
14. The kind of “purity” that bar suggests is that accomplished by “sorting” or “sifting out” so that only the good remains. “Sort, sift” is, in fact, the meaning of the verb brr, from which this adjective is derived.
15. For a discussion of the meaning of the term nepeš, see comments on 3:1–2.
16. To “lift up” has overtones of worship and praise, as numerous references to “lifting up the hands” in worship to Yahweh make clear. See e.g., Pss. 28:2; 63:4; 134:2; Lam. 2:19; 3:41. Worship is also characterized by lifting up “hearts” (Lam. 3:41) or a “cup of salvation” (Ps. 116:13) in other passages.
17. Dahood lists Ps. 26:4; 31:7; 119:37; Jonah 2:8.
18. For the former view, see Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 311–15. The latter understanding is expressed by Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 213.
19. Kraus (ibid., 314) provides the following references in support of his claim: Amos 5:5; 2 Sam. 21:1; Hos. 5:15; 2 Sam. 12:16.
20. On the various terms used to describe Yahweh’s residence among humans and the implications for understanding the relative permanence of his appearance with them, see the article on “,” NIDOTTE, 2:550–51.
21. See the discussion of “The Kingship of Yahweh in the Psalms,” in the section on “Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary. See also the comments on 5:1–3.
22. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 315.
23. See this Jubilee legislation in Lev. 25.
1. For further discussion of the alphabetic acrostic form, see the section on “Hebrew Poetry” in the introduction. The acrostic in Ps. 25 is clearly defective in verse 18, which should begin with the Hebrew letter qop but starts with the word reʾeh instead. For this reason BHS suggests an emendation to qešob (“be attentive”) or qeḥah (from lqḥ, “take”), although without textual support. Similarly Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 319) emends to qešar (“have regard”). Charles A. Briggs (C. A. Briggs and E. G. Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms, 2 vols. [ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1906–1907], 1:229) connects the existing text reʾeh with a possible original qrʾ (“meet”), with the understanding that the original qop was omitted by confusion with the following reʾeh that appropriately begins the reš line in verse 19. The latter explanation has the strength of plausibility and is picked up by Craigie (Psalms 1–50, 17). The waw verse also is reconstructed out of the short partial v. 5b, where a few manuscripts supply the word with an initial conjunction w- (“and”).
2. Hossfeld and Zenger, Die Psalmen, 163, also understand the verse, and thus the final form of this psalm, as a response to the postexilic setting.
3. See Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 317; Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 277. In BHS, the line is suggested in the apparatus at 25:5c by adding the conjunction to the word ʾotka (“you”) with the support of a few manuscripts. See also the comments of Hossfeld and Zenger, Die Psalmen, 161.
4. See comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
5. See comments on nepeš in Ps. 24:4.
6. Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 219.
7. See comments on reḥem at 22:9.
8. See comments on ḥesed at 6:1–5.
9. See comments on “remembering” at 8:3–4.
10. The NIV’s “for you are good, O LORD” (lemaʿan ṭubeka yhwh) obscures the later connection of this phrase with lemaʿan šimka yhwh (“for the sake of your name, O LORD”) in the central thematic verse 11.
11. This is the same Heb. root from which the noun torah (“instruction, law”) is derived. With the reference to Yahweh’s “covenant” and “testimonies” in 25:10b (cf. NIV “demands of his covenant”), it is clear that adherence to the Torah is expected.
12. For a discussion of the various categories of oppressed persons, see comments on 10:16–18.
13. For an extended discussion of the divine name, see comments on 8:1.
14. See the discussion of various expressions for sin in the section on “The Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary. The idea of “crookedness” associated with ʿawon stands in direct contrast to the claim that Yahweh is yašar (“straight”) in 25:8.
15. On yaḥid, see comments on Ps. 22:20. Here the emphasis of this word seems to be more on isolation and the resultant vulnerability experienced.
16. See comments on the various types of oppressed persons mentioned in the psalms at 10:16–18.
17. The NIV is reading the verb connected with this noun (“they have widened,” from rḥb) as “increased; multiplied”—a translation not entirely appropriate for this word. The form presents problems because the verb is masculine plural while the supposed subject is feminine plural. BHS suggests an emendation to the masculine singular imperative form and reads it as a plea to Yahweh to “make wide” the “strictures” of the psalmist’s heart.
18. Actually the Heb. reads “all his troubles” rather than the NIV’s “their troubles.”
19. See Hossfeld and Zenger, Die Psalmen, 163; Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 221–22.
1. See comments on dwelling in the house of Yahweh at 23:6.
2. We may find it difficult at first to recognize humility in what may seem like a rather brash and prideful statement of complete innocence, but it is there. Especially the call for Yahweh’s scrutiny is a moment of humble submission to divine authority. One does not lightly open the dark inner recesses of one’s being to God’s gaze, for the consequences of sin are real and God’s mercy is very necessary, as the psalmist clearly recognizes in 26:9–11.
3. The motif of taking refuge in the sanctuary may play a role in the background of this psalm, esp. in the central expression of the psalmist’s fear of being dragged away from it among the sinners who deserve punishment. Alternatively, this may represent the fear of the exilic community of being judged along with the foreign nations among whom they lived. See comments on taking refuge in the temple at 2:12.
4. See comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
5. See further comments on divine testing and scrutiny at 11:4 and 17:3.
6. See comments at 15:2–5.
7. See comments on divine examination at 11:4–6 and 17:1–5.
8. The root bḥn (“test, examine, probe”) appears twice in 11:4–5; also alongside the verb pqd in Job 7:18.
9. Note the similar thought expressed in different words in 17:5, which declares: “My feet have not slipped” (bal namoṭu); cf. 26:1: “I have trusted without wavering” (loʾ ʾemʿad).
10. It is interesting that the kidneys figured prominently in the ritual of sacrifice practiced throughout the ancient Near East. When animals were sacrificed, the kidneys and the surrounding fat were burned on the altar to the deity. Because of their inaccessibility deep in the inner recesses of the abdominal cavity, the kidneys provided an apt metaphor for the deep inward recesses where humans sought to hide their sin.
11. The Hithpael stem in which the verb hlk appears here can emphasize the repeated nature of an action, as in Esther, when Mordecai constantly walks back and forth before the house of women where Esther is being kept because he is concerned for her welfare and wants to know how she is faring (Est. 2:11).
12. The term ḥesed appears as well in 25:6 and 7; while ʾemet is found in 25:5.
13. The word used for “men” here appears only in plural forms; its singular form is unknown. The term means distinctly male in gender rather than a more generic “human.” The word appears most frequently in phrases such as mete mispar (“a countable [small] number of men”) and mete meʿaṭ (“a few men”), which emphasize small numbers. The phrase mete šawʾ appears in Job 11:11, describing the category of males characterized by falsehood.
14. The term naʿalamim is not well understood. The form is a Niphal participle masculine plural from the root ʿlm (“hidden”). The force of the Niphal stem in this case appears to be passive, so that the literal sense of the word is “those who are hidden.” In 1 Kings 10:3, the singular neʿalam describes the difficult philosophical issues raised by the Queen of Sheba in her conversation with Solomon, for whom no matter was too difficult to interpret. The implication seems to be issues whose true nature is not immediately apparent on the surface. In relation to humans, this may mean those who are not transparent in their relationships with others, who keep their true feelings and motives hidden.
15. A wordplay may be at work in the use of the term mereʿim (“evildoers”). The similar word mereʿim (“intimate, close friends”) shares the identical consonantal text and differs only in a single vowel point.
16. The whole confession is bracketed at beginning and end with verbs of sitting that exhibit the same alternation between perfect-imperfect, past-future: “I have not sat . . . I will not sit.” This gives the whole statement a sort of completeness of effect.
17. The Wailing Wall is the western supporting wall of the Temple Mount, on which the temples of Solomon and Herod originally stood. Since access to the top of the Temple Mount (now the site of the Islamic shrines the Mosque of Omar and the Al Aksah Mosque) is officially prohibited for Orthodox Jews, the Western Wall provides the closest encounter now available with the ancient temple. As a result it has become a particularly revered place of worship for the international Jewish community.
18. Although the Hebrew words for “pure” employed in these verses are not from the same root (24:4, from brr; in 73:13, from nkh), the thought world expressed is similar. The connection of a pure heart and innocent hands in the context of worship preparation is striking and certainly is a way of stressing inward and outward integrity.
19. See the discussion of the “wonderful works of Yahweh” in the commentary on Ps. 9:1–3.
20. Circling about a central cult object is also part of the Haj (“pilgrimage”) in Islam. There the faithful individuals join with the large international congregation of pilgrims in circling the Kaaba—the sacred shrine in Mecca—as one of the first activities of the pilgrimage experience.
21. Cf. Ps. 24, where the two halves bring together the worshiping community and the victorious God.
22. For a further discussion of the “glory” of God, see “Responding to divine holiness” in the Bridging Contexts section on Ps. 5.
23. See my discussion of the temple as Yahweh’s dwelling, “,” NIDOTTE, 2:550–51.
24. Cf. Ex. 21:13–14; 1 Kings 1:50–53; 2:28–30.
25. The expression ʾanše damim appears five times in the biblical text: four times in the Psalter (Pss. 26:9; 55:23; 59:2; and 139:19), and once in Prov. 29:10. Perhaps this term originally described those who wished to consummate a blood vendetta upon an innocent person seeking asylum. By the time of the postexilic period, these passages would have been broadened to include all those who represented enemies of God (see esp. Ps. 139:19–22). David is called a “man of blood” twice by Shimei son of Gera, descendant of Saul, as David fled Jerusalem before the troops of Absalom (2 Sam. 16:7–8). This accusation attempts to put David into the category of the ʾanše damim, who are guilty of spilling innocent blood. Later, David’s desire to build a temple for Yahweh is frustrated because, according to Yahweh, David has poured out blood (damim) before God in his many military campaigns (1 Chron. 22:6–10; 28:3). He is not, however, called a “man of blood” in this context.
26. See, e.g., the venal judges who seek to seduce Susanna in the Apocryphal additions to Daniel.
27. One other piece of evidence in support of a postexilic reading of the psalm is the use in 26:12 of the term maqhelim (NIV “great assembly”). Although the noun is a plural form, the NIV chooses to translate it as a singular reference to the gathering at the Jerusalem temple. Might this plural form instead refer to the plural “places of assembly” among the exilic communities (i.e., the synagogues)?
28. The link between this singular plea for redemption and the similar plural plea at the end of the preceding Ps. 25:22 (“redeem Israel, O God”) is clear. In the postexilic reading of such psalms, singular voices could be understood as mirroring the collective concerns of all Israel.
29. The NIV’s translation of maqhelim as “great assembly” flies in the face of the fact the word is plural and the adjective “great” does not appear here. It is at least possible that the postexilic pilgrim, anticipating ultimate return to the Diaspora setting removed from the Jerusalem temple, here promises to spread praise of Yahweh among the exilic gathering places—the synagogues.
30. The near synonym dyn (“judge, decide”) is also translated “vindication” by the NIV in Gen. 30:6; Pss. 54:1; 135:14.
31. The Greek verb for “justify” (dikaioo) has the same sense of “acquitted, declared not guilty” associated with the Heb. verb ṣdq.
1. Ps. 27:4–6; cf. 23:6; 24:3–6; 26:8; 28:2; 29:9; 30:0; see comments on 23:6.
2. See the discussion of Davidic attribution in the introduction and comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
3. As we have seen in other contexts, yešaʿ can also mean “deliverance.” Cf. comments on the related word yešuʿah at 3:1–2.
4. For a discussion of the concept of “refuge” and the terms related to it, see comments on 5:11–12; see also section “Refuge in the Psalms” in “Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
5. When the psalmist in 27:1b, d asks, “Whom shall I fear . . . of whom shall I be afraid?” the obvious answer is “Fear Yahweh, not humans!”
6. To “stumble” is the prelude to disaster as our psalm and the similar context in Ps. 9:3 (“My enemies turn back; they stumble and perish before you”) indicate. In contrast, those who trust in Yahweh do not stumble or fall. “Though he stumble, he will not fall, for the LORD upholds him with his hand” (Ps. 37:24); “Great peace have they who love your law, and nothing can make them stumble” (119:165).
7. The second occurrence of “seek” in v. 4 results from emending the Hebrew text lebaqqer (“inspect sacrifices”) to lebaqqeš (“seek”) by connection with the verb ʾabaqqeš (“I will seek”) earlier in the verse.
8. See comments on bqš at 4:1–2, and especially footnote 11.
9. The emphasis in the phrase benoʿam yhwh (NIV “beauty of Yahweh”) is on the gracious kindness of Yahweh as host, not the physical or essential beauty. One can observe kindness and grace as well as beauty.
10. A Qal imperfect from ṣpn (“store up, treasure; hide, shelter”).
11. A Hiphil imperfect from str (“hide, secret”).
12. The word is from sukkah “[temporary] shelter” with the unusual third masculine singular pronominal suffix -oh attached. Coupled with the parallel noun ʾoholo (“his tent”) these phrases may refer to the mobile “tabernacle” shrine mentioned in the Exodus narratives. It is unlikely that these references to the “tent” reflect a premonarchical origin for this psalm. Certainly in its final form the composition is aware of the temple (cf. hekalo in 27:4). It is through the use of these terms that the psalmist brings the memory of the Exodus together with the current experience of pilgrimage to the temple.
13. See esp. comments on 18:1–3, where this term and others relating to the theme of refuge are discussed.
14. Note that the psalmist’s cry to be heard mimics the fundamental call to Israel to hear and obey Yahweh (šemaʿ yiśaraʾel [“Hear, O Israel . . .”], Deut. 6:4; see also Deut. 4:1; 5:1; 6:3; 9:1; 20:3, most of which appear to be section headings recalling the primary call in 6:4). Outside the Psalter the phrase is used of Yahweh only in Deut. 33:7 (“Hear, O LORD, the cry of Judah”). Within the Psalter, the exact phrase šemaʿ yhwh occurs only twice; here and in Ps. 30:10 (“Hear, O LORD, and be merciful to me”). A similar use of the alternative form of the Qal imperative (šimʿah) does occur once in 17:1 (“Hear, O Lord, my righteous plea”); on five other occasions similar constructions appear, although with significant variations in order (cf. 39:12; 84:8; 102:1; 130:2; 143:1). This seems a rather audacious use of the imperative to call Yahweh to obedience to his covenant obligations.
15. Literally, the text reads, “Of you has said my heart, “Seek MY face!’ ”
16. The psalmist’s “seeking” Yahweh connects back to his earlier “seeking” to dwell in Yahweh’s house in 27:4, but it also provides links to the approved “generation of those who seek him” in 24:6.
17. The string of negative jussive forms ties the whole entreaty together as a unit.
18. Cf. the similar use of the verb “teach, instruct” in 25:8, 12, to describe the instruction of both sinners and the one who fears Yahweh in the right “way.”
19. The verb “lead” appears also in 23:3.
20. The “straight path” the psalmist seeks has thematic linkages throughout this group of psalms, beginning with the “paths of righteousness” in 23:3. The “straight path” of 27:11 is also reminiscent of the “level ground” on which the psalmist confidently stands in 26:12, since both use the same Heb. word mišor (“straight, level”).
21. The Hebrew is difficult and interpreted variously as “a violent witness” (Hosfeld and Zenger, Die Psalmen, 174 [Gewaltzeuge]), “raging” (ibid., 173 [wüten]), or the NIV’s “breathing out violence”—the last two both taking the word from the root ypḥ (“gasp for breath; groan”) or pwḥ (“blow; blast”). The “violence” these enemies breathe out is the Heb. ḥamas (“violence that spills blood”). See also 25:19, where this same word describes the “fierce” hatred the enemy has for the psalmist.
22. The base text underlying BHS (i.e., Codex Leningradensis) begins 27:13 with the Heb. word luleʾ (“unless”), which normally introduces a protasis clause responding to a preceding apodosis (if) clause. Because no apodosis is present prior to this verse and because the peculiar marking of this word in the Masoretic Text indicates strong suspicion regarding its presence—a suspicion confirmed by its absence in a number of manuscripts—most commentators and translations omit it entirely.
23. The more unusual form ṭub (“goodness, well-being, success”) links Ps. 27 back to 25:7 and forward to 31:19, which also describe the goodness of Yahweh. That goodness (using the more common form) appears also in 23:6 and 25:8.
24. The phrase “land of the living” occurs some fifteen times in the Old Testament, seven of which are in Ezekiel (Ezek. 26:20; 32:23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 32), four in the Psalms (Pss. 27:13; 52:5; 116:9; 142:5), two in Isaiah (Isa. 38:11; 53:8), and one each in Job (Job 28:13) and Jeremiah (Jer. 11:19). In all cases it clearly refers to this present life as opposed to the vague nonexistence of Sheol.
25. Coupled as imperatives of encouragement these verbs occur twelve times in the Old Testament: once when God directs Moses to encourage Joshua (Deut. 3:28), three times in Moses’ actual instructions to Joshua (Deut. 31:6, 7, 23), five times in Joshua’s instructions to Israel in the conquest of the land (Josh. 1:6, 7, 9, 18; 10:25), twice as David encourages Solomon to complete the building of the temple (1 Chron. 22:13; 28:20), and a final time in Hezekiah’s instructions to his troops in the face of the Assyrian invasion (2 Chron. 32:7). These verbs are also paired in slightly different constructions in 2 Chron. 11:7; 13:7; Ps. 31:24; Isa. 35:3; Nah. 2:1, and these roots occur together as nouns in Isa. 28:2 and Amos 2:14.
26. The NIV’s translation of ʾohel as “tabernacle” interprets the term here as a reference to the miškan (“tabernacle”), which is also called the “Tent of Meeting” (ʾohel moʿed).
27. Egypt is called an “iron-smelting furnace” in Deut. 4:20; 1 Kings 8:51; Jer. 11:4.
28. See comments on 23:5–6 and the Bridging Contexts and Contemporary Significance sections for this psalm.
29. See the report of George Barna in Southern California Christian Times 11/2 (February 2000): 1, 11.
30. Andrew Murray, Waiting on God (New York: Revell, n.d.), 46–47.
31. C. S. Lewis, “Meditation in a Toolshed,” God in the Dock (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), 212–15.
1. See comments in the NIV Study Bible notes to Ps. 28.
2. See comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
3. The NIV has “mercy” here. There is a subtle but significant difference to my way of thinking in “mercy” and “favor.” The former is unmerited and undeserved, while the latter may be based on some perceived reason—such as Job’s righteous behavior.
4. The lifting of the hands to God is a gesture of prayer (141:2) and can be associated either with praise (63:4; 134:2) or supplication (28:2; Lam. 2:19; 3:41).
5. The reference in this verse is to the “rear room of the temple where the holiness of Yahweh resides.” The term debir is employed more generally in the ancient Near East to designate the rear room or inner niche “of a Syrian type of temple,” which later came to be called in Hebrew parlance the “Holy of Holies”—qodeš haqqedašim (Holladay, CHALOT, 66; the NIV translates this phrase as “the Most Holy Place”).
6. The verb “drag” is the Hebrew also employed in Gen. 37:28 to describe Joseph’s brothers “dragging” him roughly out of the pit in order to bundle him off into slavery with the Midianites.
7. As mentioned in relation to 26:9 (see comments), there may be a connection here with the idea of asylum in the temple. If the one seeking asylum was determined to be guilty, he would be “dragged” out of the temple and executed. Here the psalmist disassociates himself from those who would suffer such a fate.
8. For similar attempts to disassociate from wicked persons, see 1:1; 26:4–5, 9 and comments. The word that the NIV translates “cordially” is šalom, the common word for “peace; wholeness; well-being.” The point seems to be that the evildoers outwardly express concern for the well-being of their neighbor, but in their hearts they desire to hurt him.
9. The same demand for transparent consistency between one’s inner attitudes and outward actions motivates much of the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7), where Jesus heightens the demand of righteousness associated with the Pharisees by pointing away from external obedience to the law to the inner attitude of repentance and reliance on the mercy of God.
10. The Heb. gemul is often translated “reprisal, reward,” but as a contextual interpretation from a root meaning “deeds, doings” (Holladay, CHALOT, 62).
11. While this passage probably was not originally intended to speak to the exilic destruction of the Jerusalem temple, it likely resonated in a reverse manner with the postexilic Jewish community and came to express a sort of appropriate hope for retribution against those who “tore down” the temple and “did not rebuild it.” The shift to communal language in the final verses of the psalm (28:8–9) suggests this individual plea for deliverance was reinterpreted in light of the exilic experience. Cf. also Jer. 1:10, where two of the same verbs (hrs [“overthrow, throw down”] and bnh [“build”]) are used to describe God’s judgment and restoration.
12. Once again the Hebrew psalmist has no problem envisioning humans “blessing” God. The NIV’s consistent translation of brk in this kind of context is “praise.” This may indicate some theological hesitation on the part of the NIV translators to describe humans as capable of blessing the almighty, immutable, unchanging, and entirely complete Yahweh (see the comments on 16:5–8).
13. This is the only occurrence of ḥezeq in the whole Old Testament.
14. Holladay (CHALOT, 269) suggests that in some cases ʿoz may mean “fortress” rather than “strength” (cf. Ps. 59:17).
15. See comments on Ps. 3:3 for further discussion of “shield.” Yahweh is also described as magen in 3:4; 7:10; 18:2, 30; 33:20; 59:11; 84:11; 115:9, 10, 11; 119:114; 144:2.
16. This could be explained as an aural copying error since leʿammo and lamo are so close in sound.
17. The term maʿoz (“fortress”) also appears at 27:1; 31:2, 4; 37:39; 43:2; 52:7; 60:9; 108:9. The word yešuʿot (“salvation, deliverance”) is often translated “victory, victories,” as the earlier use in 18:50 demonstrates.
18. See the NIV Study Bible note on this verse.
19. See comments on 23:6.
20. Cf. Prov. 10:3, 16, 22; 11:19; 12:21; 13:21, 25; 14:11; 15:6; 16:20.
21. E.g., Prov. 11:4, 28; 15:16; 16:8, 16, 19; 19:1; 22:1; 28:6.
22. Cf. Pss. 5:9; 17:3, 10; 28:3; 55:21; 58:2; 62:4.
23. The lamenting cries of Pss. 89 and 137 fall into this category of complaint.
24. The New Testament word for “church” is the Greek ekklesia, “those called out.”
1. Altogether Yahweh appears either singly or in combination with other words a total of eighteen times in the eleven verses of the psalm, leaving no doubt that the psalmist’s focus is on the majestic power of the being of Yahweh and on his name.
2. By “mythical” I mean having to do with those narratives that intend to explain the origins of the universe and humanity—frequently in highly poetic language. The Genesis accounts of the creation and Flood share with similar ancient Near Eastern texts a focus on chaotic waters that must be controlled within boundaries before secure human existence can be assured. By being described as “enthroned over the flood,” Yahweh is proclaimed as the authoritative ruler of the chaotic waters and creator of a stable universe.
3. See comments on the heading to Ps. 3.
4. See the initial references to kabod in the comments on Pss. 3 and 8.
5. See the discussion of theophany in the comments on Ps. 18:4–19; compare other theophany passages such as 18:7–15 and 77:16–19.
6. Ancient Kadesh was located inland, about equidistant from Damascus to the south and Aleppo to the North. Rather than a “desert” of sand, the area might better be called an unoccupied “wilderness” or steppe—alternative translations of the Heb. midbar.
7. The narratives of Gilgamesh and Enkidu are available in various translation. See, e.g., ANETP, 1:40–75.
8. Another designation for Mount Hermon (cf. Deut. 3:8–9).
9. The difficulty is compounded by the fact that the plural of the word “forest/thicket” (yaʿar) is normally masculine (yeʿarim) rather than feminine as the form used here (yeʿarot). BHS offers another possible emendation of this word to yeʿalot “(female) mountain goats,” a reading that would parallel the “writhing deer” version of the first half of this verse.
10. The word mabbul occurs in Gen. 6:17; 7:6, 7, 10, 17; 9:11 [2x], 15, 28; 10:1, 32; 11:10.
11. It is no accident that the closest theophanic parallel to Ps. 29 is Ps. 93—the lead-off psalm of the Yahweh malak collection. See discussion of the Yahweh malak psalms in the section on “Psalm Types” in the introduction.
12. The noun ʾelohim is a masculine plural form and is used so frequently for the multiple gods of the polytheistic nations that only a few examples are given here (e.g., Ex. 15:11; 23:32–33; Deut. 6:14; 8:19; Pss. 82:1; 86:8; 95:3; 96:4; 97:7, 9; 135:5; 136:2; 138:1). The most striking feature in Israel’s use of this term is that the plural form came to be used when referring to the one God of Israel. In these cases, the singular nature of God was clearly indicated by the use of masculine singular verbal forms!
13. The NIV even more interpretively translates bene ʾelohim as “angels,” while supplying a textual note to the more direct rendering “the sons of God.”
14. Some scholars have suggested that the northern kings kept the early capital Tirzah as a center of exclusive Yahweh worship while Samaria allowed worship of multiple deities for the mixed population of the kingdom.
15. See the Aqhat Epic, in which Baal is described as “the Rider of the Clouds,” in ANETP, 1:127.
16. Prostrate in the slippery fish bottom of the boat, Peter had to acknowledge that he too was one of the “fish” Jesus had come to catch!
17. From the hymn “Praise to the Lord, the Almighty” by Joachim Neander, 1650–1680, translated by Catherine Winkworth, 1827–1878. Taken from The Covenant Hymnal (Chicago: Covenant Press, 1973), 29.
1. The core psalms of this group are all pleas for deliverance (Pss. 25; 26; 27; 28), while threat and divine deliverance figure prominently in Ps. 23 as well.
2. Just what dedication of the temple this has in view remains obscure—whether that of the original Solomonic temple, the restored exilic temple, the rededication in the time of the Maccabean revolution, or some other moment of purification.
3. For mizmor and ledawid see comments on the heading of Ps. 3. This is the first occurrence of the simple šir in a heading (see also headings to Pss. 45; 46; 48; 65–68; cf. also the heading of Ps. 18).
5. See also, Pss. 34:3; 99:5, 9; 107:32; 118:28; 145:1 where the exaltation of Yahweh plays an important role.
6. The NIV also uses the term “gloat” in 22:17 to interpret the phrase yabbiṭu yirʾu bi (“they look, they see me”).
7. The phrasing is a little awkward, but not impossible. The prepositional phrase miyyorede (following the Ketib and other versions) “from those who go down” might also mean “more than those descending.” The bor “pit” (like the hole into which Joseph’s brothers threw him before selling him into slavery, Gen. 37:22) is often used as a parallel to Sheol.
8. This is from the same root as ḥesed (“enduring covenant loyalty”) and emphasizes enduring loyalty and faithfulness to the covenant demands rather than what we normally associate with “holiness; piety; sainthood.”
9. The verb zmr appears again at the end of this psalm (30:12) and has occurred previously with this same sense in 27:6 (cf. also 28:7).
10. See the comments on the interconnectedness of sin and sickness in the Israelite understanding in the comments on 6:1–5.
11. On a very few occasions, humans are said to “hide their face” from God—usually out of fear of judgment deserved for their sin (cf. Ex. 3:6; Rev. 6:16). Even more rare is the use of the phrase for Yahweh “hiding his face” from human sin as a way of mercifully not acting in judgment (Ps. 51:9). Far more frequently, however, Yahweh hides his face as an act of judgment and rejection that leaves the human to face alone the consequences of sin and the lack of divine protection. See particularly the passage in Deut. 31:17–18, in which Yahweh prophesies to Moses concerning the disloyalty of Israel that will lead to divine rejection, so that the people of Israel will say, “Have not these disasters come upon us because our God is not with us?” (See also Deut. 32:20; Job 13:24; 34:29; Pss. 13:1; 27:9; 44:24; 69:17; 88:14; 102:2; 104:29; 143:7; Isa. 50:6; 54:8; 57:17; Jer. 33:5; Ezek. 39:24, 29; Mic. 3:4.)
13. This term normally has negative implications and is often translated “illegal” or “dishonest gain” (e.g., Ex. 18:21; 1 Sam. 8:3). The word is related to the verb bṣʿ (“cut off”) and may refer to a portion of a larger whole that is “cut off” as the individual’s portion in a transaction. One could imagine that as various economic commodities were transferred through “middle men,” the original value could be greatly reduced by each person “cutting off” a portion (whether openly or surreptitiously). It would seem that the word was not considered universally evil or negative, since it is here applied to the “gain” or “profit” that God might receive through human praise.
14. The “pit” (šaḥat) into which the psalmist fears descending here is different from the “pit” (bor) mentioned in 30:3. The šaḥat is a trap dug to capture animals, while the bor is a cistern intended to capture rainwater. Either could be used as an image of the burial pit in which a dead body was placed and, by extension, Sheol, the abode of the dead.
16. The interpretation of this passage continues to be difficult because of the varieties of meaning attached to the root dm. On the one hand the root dmm means “perish, be destroyed” while the similar root dmm can mean “stand still, be motionless” and the related root dmh can mean either “be like” or “be silent.”
17. See comments on 27:7 for additional discussion of this type of cry and its relationship to the central call for Israel to hear and obey Yahweh.
18. The sermon appears in two versions: Jer. 7:1–15 and 26:1–6.
19. Cf. Ex. 20:5; 34:14; Deut. 4:24; 5:9; 6:15; Josh. 24:19.
20. The author of Hebrews offers two quotations from the Old Testament in Heb. 13:5b–6: the first from Deut. 31:6, the second from Ps. 118:6–7.
1. This circumstance is, of course, more complex than can be briefly stated. Through 31:2a the two psalms are practically identical. From that point the two diverge more significantly, each offering phrases not appearing in the other but maintaining a progression of similar phrases.
2. See comments on these terms in the headings of Pss. 3 and 4.
3. In Job the identification of these terms is esp. clear, when “spirit of God” (ruaḥ ʾel) is paralleled with “breath of the Almighty” (nišmat sǎdday) on two occasions (Job 32:8 and 33:4). See also Job 34:14, where spirit and breath are linked. Eccl. 12:7 and Ps. 146:4 describe the departure of the ruaḥ at death. Eccl. 12:7 goes so far as to note the spirit returns to God, “who gave it.” In a clear reference to the account of creation in Gen. 2, Zech. 12:1 declares that Yahweh “forms” (using the same Heb. verb yṣr as in Gen. 2:7 to describe the forming of the first human by God from clay) the ruaḥ “of man within him.”
4. In Luke’s passion narrative, Jesus at the last gives himself up into the care of God with the words of this psalm: “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit” (Luke 23:46). In Acts 7:59, Stephen commits himself into the care of Jesus with much the same words.
5. The Numbers passage is the only occurrence of the phrase outside the Psalter. Within the psalms the phrase occurs at 4:6; 31:16; 67:1; 80:3, 7, 19; 104:15; 119:35, and it is consistently associated with divine favor and blessing (see also comments on 4:6).
6. Sheol is the abode of the dead and is viewed as a place of passive silence and resting. Craigie (Psalms 1–50, 262) notes connections between death and silence in 94:17 and 115:17.
7. The theme of God as “hiding place” links this psalm to the following one, where God is once again viewed as protective place of concealment from trouble. Cf. 32:7, where the same Heb. term (seter) is used of God.
8. It is generally agreed that the Feast of Booths reinterprets an originally agricultural feast in which the sukkot were temporary shelters built to shade workers during the grain harvest. This early festival was given new life and purpose by making it the time for recalling the nomadic escape from Egyptian bondage. A similar transition can be seen taking place in the Feast of Weeks, an original agricultural festival mentioned as such in the Old Testament but transformed in later years into a remembrance of the giving of the law on Mount Sinai.
9. The sort of personal reflection out of a specific context described in this verse with the Heb. phrase waʾani ʾamarti be- . . . occurs three times in the psalms (Pss. 30:6; 31:22; 116:11; cf. also Isa. 38:10). That two of three occurrences should be found in adjacent psalms is suggestive. In Ps. 30 the reflection comes out of a sense of well-being (NIV “When I felt secure . . .”), while Ps. 31 reflects a situation of stress and confusion (NIV “In my alarm . . .”). Ps. 116 employs the same wording as 31:22 (NIV “In my dismay . . .”) for a similar context of distress.
10. Cf. Pss. 4:2; 25:2, 3, 20; 31:1, 17; 34:5; 35:4, 26; 40:14, 15; 44:7, 15; 53:5; 69:6, 7; 70:2, 3; 71:1, 13, 24; 78:66; 83:16; 86:17; 89:45; 97:7; 109:28, 29; 119:6, 31, 46, 78, 80; 127:5; 129:5; 132:18.
11. Cf. also Prov. 3:14; 15:17; 16:8, 16, 19; 17:1.
12. See also the biblical books of Job and Ecclesiastes for a contrasting view to this general pattern.
13. The phrase “God of truth” is a singular one. Similar phrases occur only in Isa. 65:16 and 1 Esdras 4:40. The Hebrew of the former (ʾelohim ʾamen) is not an exact reflection of the Hebrew of our psalm (ʾel ʾemet). In Isaiah the phrase is often translated “faithful God.” The 1 Esdras passage in the Greek is an exact reflection of the LXX of Ps. 31:5 (Gk. ho theos tes aletheias). By contrast, the Isa. 65:16 passage in the LXX is rendered ton theon ton alethinon.
1. See the discussion of untitled psalms in the section on “The Shape of the Psalter” in vol. 2 of this commentary. Cf. Gerald H. Wilson, “The Use of ‘Untitled’ Pss. in the Hebrew Psalter,” ZAW 97 (1985): 405–13.
2. Ps. 32 is the second of seven penitential psalms in the Psalter (Pss. 6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143).
3. The term appears in 14:2; in the headings, it appears an additional twelve times (Pss. 42; 44; 45; 52; 53; 54; 55; 74; 78; 88; 89; 142).
4. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 25.
5. See my comments on the connections between Pss. 32 and 33 in my discussion of Ps. 33; also in Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, 174–76.
6. See Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 266; Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 369.
7. An interesting assimilation of texts apparently takes place in the LXX version of Ps. 32. There the Greek text reads, “there is no deceit in his mouth” rather than the Hebrew’s “in his spirit.” This seems to modify the original text toward Isa. 53:9, “nor was any deceit in his mouth.” In the Greek text, the two Heb. words for “deceit” (remiyyah and mirmah) are translated by the same Greek word: dolos. In the New Testament, 1 Peter 2:22 clearly quotes from Isa. 53:9 as illumining the model of Christ we are to emulate. In Jesus’ first encounter with Nathanael (John 1:47–51), he praises Nathanael as “a true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false.” The theme of lack of deceit as praiseworthy was certainly well established by the time of Christ.
8. See Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 267; Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 371.
9. See, for example, Gen. 4:13; Ex. 28:38; 34:7; Lev. 5:1, 17; 17:16; Num. 5:31; 14:18; 30:15; Isa. 33:24; Ezek. 4:4, 6; 18:19; 44:10, 12; Mic. 7:18.
10. This seems a clear allusion (if not a direct quote) of Isa. 53:12, where the alternate phrase “lift up sin” is used at the end of the fourth Servant Song (52:13–53:12): “For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.” First Peter 2:24, in the midst of a discussion of the crucifixion drawing extensively on Isa. 53, agrees that “he himself [Jesus] bore our sins in his body on the tree” (italics added in both references).
11. In a strange way the Internet is eroding this cult of privacy. In order to explore the labyrinthine contents of the Web, one must submit all sorts of personal information to Web providers in order to be fully connected. “Cookies”—placed on our computers by persons unknown to us—track our moves, communicating to marketers, merchandizers, and system administrators our viewing preferences and our buying tendencies. Yet we put up with this intrusion because the Internet offers an illusion of anonymity since we can cloak our identity to other users with whom we come in contact. The illusory nature of this sense of privacy and anonymity is nowhere better illustrated than in the use of the Internet at work. Recent actions by employers to track employee Internet and e-mail usage, resulting in disciplinary actions and even dismissals for excessive use of the Web during work hours, accessing inappropriate (esp. pornographic) sites, or objections to the amount and content of e-mail messages, have made it clear that use of the Web, far from being private and secure, is subject to the scrutiny of many others.
1. See Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 374.
2. See Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 271.
3. For discussion of the acrostic psalms, see the section on “The Poetry of the Psalms” in the introduction. For a brief discussion on this psalm, see Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 271. For further literature on the subject see J. M. Vincent, “Recherches éxégetiques sur le Psaume 33,” VT 28 (1978): 442–54.
4. See the discussion of “untitled psalms” in Gerald H. Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter, 173–81.
5. Cf. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 375.
6. Cf. Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 272.
7. See Longman, “The Divine Warrior,” 290–307; cf. Longman and Reid, God Is a Warrior, 45, 191.
8. For a discussion of the terms “righteous, righteousness” and “justice,” see comments on 4:1–2; 7:6–9.
9. There may also be echoes here of Yahweh’s primeval defeat of the chaotic waters at creation by which the enduring stability of the world was ensured, but that struggle is not foregrounded (cf. Ps. 93).
10. The idea of “fearing” God can sometimes be troubling. It is clear from a thorough study of this phrase and concept that it does not mean “be afraid”; rather, it is an idiomatic expression carrying the weight of “maintain the appropriate relationship and attitude of absolute dependence on and loyalty to Yahweh.” See the discussion of “Fear of Yahweh” in the section on “The Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
11. This theme is esp. significant in the Pentateuch (cf. Gen. 17:7; Ex. 6:7; Lev. 11:45; 22:33; 25:38; 26:12; Num. 15:41; Deut. 29:13), but also appears in the prophets (cf. Jer. 7:23; 11:4; 30:22; Ezek. 36:28).
12. Pss. 19 and 104 are sometimes mentioned in this regard. The heavenly scrutiny of God is also mentioned in 14:2 and 53:2. In 85:11, “righteousness looks down from heaven.”
13. See 20:2; 30:10; 54:4; 70:5; 72:12; 107:12; 121:1, 2; 124:8; 146:5; esp. 115:9, 10, 11, where the phrase “he [Yahweh] is their help and shield” is employed as a repeated refrain. Verbal forms of the same root appear in 79:9; 109:26; 118:13; 119:86, 173.
14. This is but a partial listing of the many references to waiting/hoping for God in the psalms: 5:3; 25:3, 5, 21; 27:14; 31:24; 33:18, 20, 22; 37:7, 9, 34; 38:15; 42:5, 11; 43:5; 52:9; 119:166; 130:5, 7. At least four Heb. verbs are at work here: ṣph (“make long, endure, wait”); qwh (“wait eagerly”); yḥl (“wait, hope”); and sabr (“hope, wait”).
15. The Book of Psalms: A New Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1997).
16. See Ps. 102:26–28.
17. The challenging poem of Eccl. 1:3–11 clearly teaches what our psalmist acknowledges, that human endeavor and power is a futile source of confidence and trust. “What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one can say, ‘Look! This is something new’? It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time. There is no remembrance of men of old, and even those who are yet to come will not be remembered by those who follow” (1:9–11).
1. James A. Sanders, The Dead Sea Psalms Scroll (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell Univ. Press, 1967), 117.
2. The other twelve psalms are 3; 7; 18; 51; 52; 54; 56; 57; 59; 60; 63; 142.
3. See comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
4. See discussion of terms for the poor and oppressed in the comments on 10:16–18.
5. See comments regarding a reluctance to depict humans as able to “bless” God at 31:21–24.
6. “And where the ten are, there shall never lack a man among them who shall study the Law continually, day and night, concerning the right conduct of a man with his companion. And the Congregation shall watch in community for a third of every night of the year, to read the Book and to study Law and to pray together.” From the Community Rule (also called the Manual of Discipline), column VI. Translation is from Geza Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (New York: Penguin, 1968), 81.
7. The Heb. for “radiate”(nhr) also occurs in Isa. 60:5. While it is tempting to connect this description of radiance as the result of looking to Yahweh, with the similar description of Moses descending Mount Sinai with a radiant face because of his close contact with God, the Heb. phrase used in the latter case (“the skin of his face shone,” lit. trans. of Ex. 34:29) is distinct from that used in Ps. 34:5.
8. It is most suggestive that the only two occurrences of the angel of Yahweh in the Psalter occur in adjacent psalms. We will consider the relationship of these two psalms as the commentary proceeds.
9. See the discussion of “Fear of Yahweh” in the section on “The Theology of the Psalms” in volume 2 of this commentary.
10. In wisdom literature, this is frequently the definition of right human relationship to God and others.
11. The term behind my use of “wholeness” and the NIV’s translation “peace” (34:14) is šalom, which is regularly translated as “peace” but means far more than the cessation of war and conflict. The word has overtones of “completeness” and means to assume the kind of “right” relationship to God, the world, and others that establishes an appropriate balance that can only be understood as “wholeness.”
12. See Job 1:5, 11; 2:5; see also the related passage in 1 Kings 21:10, 13, where Naboth is sentenced to death for blasphemy after being falsely accused of (lit.) “blessing” God.
13. The Heb. text here reads yebarakeka (“he will bless you”), although the text clearly requires “curse.”
14. Of course, I am not denying that in some sense “none is righteous, no not one” (Ps. 14; 53) and that all sinners deserve divine punishment for their failings.
1. Cf. esp. Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 285.
2. Ibid.
3. See comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
4. The magen was a smaller, round shield worn on the arm and preferred by those wielding swords for the mobility it offered. The ṣinnah was a larger, rectangular shield behind which those wielding spears could hide most of their body while thrusting out at the enemy (see also comments on 3:3–4).
5. The ḥanit is a shorter, thrusting spear used in close combat. The meaning of segor is debated, with some suggesting a double axe, and others the “socket” from which a throwing spear (or javelin) is launched. If the latter is true, the image is a metonymy in which the part is used to express the whole; thus the NIV’s “javelin.” See “Spear” in EDB, 966.
6. For a discussion of the Heb. word nepeš, see comments on 3:1–2.
7. See the discussion of “shame” in the comments on 31:1–5, 17–18 and in the Bridging Contexts section for that same psalm.
8. This verse mixes agricultural and military metaphors. Chaff is the husk of harvested grain that is separated from the useful kernel by beating or running over the grain with a sledge. The grain is then tossed into the air during a breeze so that the lighter chaff is blown away and the heavier kernels fall to the ground to be collected.
9. See comments on 34:7.
10. The Heb. of 35:7–8 is particularly disjointed and difficult. The NIV assumes the transposition of the Hebrew word šaḥat (“pit”) from its awkward position in the first phrase of verse 7 (where it precedes rešet [“net”]) to a more appropriate position in the second phrase, where it provides the missing object of the verb “dig.” Some (e.g., Kraus, Craigie) omit the Heb. ḥinnam (“without cause”) from the second phrase as repetitive. Dahood (Psalms, 1:211–12) postulates (rather weakly) on the basis of Ugaritic a root for the same word that means “stealthily.” The final phrase of verse 8 is equally debated. The existing Heb. provides the difficult “into ruin let him fall into it”—the double preposition being particularly awkward. To restore the retributive balance of “ruin . . . net . . . pit,” some suggest reading the Heb. text of bešoʾah (“into ruin”) as baššuḥah (“into the pit”). The NIV’s “into the pit, to their ruin” is a conflation of these two options. Dahood suggests the Heb. word šoʾah (usually translated “ruin”) can have the sense of “pit.”
11. This kind of testimony is explicitly forbidden in Ex. 23:1, and in Deut. 19:16–19 provision is made that when such a “violent, ruthless, malicious” witness is found out, the penalty that would have been imposed on the innocent party is to be carried out on the witness instead. For this kind of “violence” God brought the great Flood to cleanse the earth (Gen. 6:11, 13), which is understood to have been “filled” and “polluted” by human bloodletting. The prophets also regularly condemn ḥamas. Cf. also Ps. 27:12, where “false witnesses” (ʿede šeqer) are described as “breathing out violence” (wipeaḥ ḥamas).
12. Prov. 17:13 describes the lasting effects of such insolent disregard on the perpetrator: “If a man pays back evil for good, evil will never leave his house” (cf. also Ps. 38:20; Jer. 18:20).
13. Dahood, Psalms, 1:213; Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 391; Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 285.
14. This verse is difficult, esp. the word nekim, since it occurs nowhere else. A variety of solutions have been suggested, ranging from reading nkym as nkrym (nekarim = “strangers”; see Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 391) to Dahood’s reading as nkym (nokim = “smiters”; see Dahood, Psalms, 1:213). Craigie’s replacement of nkym by tkym (“oppressor”) has the support of the Dead Sea manuscript 4QPsa (Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 285).
15. The attackers qareʿu (“tear up, tear away, tear apart”), perhaps referring to the effects of slander on the victim, although Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 391) prefers qrṣ (“wink [in derision]”; cf. 35:19) or qr, (“cry out”).
16. The preceding phrase is another difficult one, with no satisfactory solution.
17. Perhaps here an equivalent of our phrase “baring the fangs” like a beast of prey, either in anger or in anticipation of tearing into a victim.
18. There is some discussion regarding the precise meaning of the term translated by the NIV as “from their ravages” (Heb. miššoʾehem). Dahood (Psalms, 1:214) assumes a connection with the same root as employed in šoʾah (v. 8) and suggests the meaning “from their pits.” Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 391) draws on the parallel with “lions” in the next line to suggest an emendation to miššoʾagim “their roars.” The NIV assumes an unusual masculine plural form of the feminine noun šoʾa (“ruin, devastation”) or a related masculine noun form.
19. Verse 19 consists of two affirming parallel lines in which the two verbs (yǐśameḥu [“rejoice/gloat”] and yiqreṣu [“wink”]) are both governed by the single negative particle ʾal (“not” at the beginning of the first line). In this case both verbs would be jussives expressing the will of the speaker, “Let them not. . . .” Alternatively, the second verb can be seen as independent of the negative particle, thus serving as a relative clause, so that the second line can be translated: “My unjustified haters who wink the eye.” In either case the meaning is essentially the same.
20. The NIV’s “maliciously” is not in the Hebrew text but is an interpretive translation of the consistently negative meaning of the idiom.
21. The psalmist’s detractors are also said to “gape” (lit., “make wide against/concerning me their mouth”)—a visible distortion of the mouth in a public display of pretended astonishment or dismay intended to ridicule the object of scorn.
22. “Awake” and “arise” are not intended to suggest divine slumber; rather, they express the psalmist’s desire that Yahweh stir himself up from apparent inactivity to actively accomplish his deliverance.
23. To speak to one’s nepeš, as here, is to reflect on one’s most deeply held desires and convictions (see comments on 3:1–2).
24. The phrase can also be used of humans, marking out their superiority to others (cf. Deut. 33:29; 1 Sam. 26:15).
25. For references to the incomparability of Yahweh to other gods in a polytheistic or henotheistic context, see Ex. 15:11; Deut. 33:26; 1 Kings 8:23 = 2 Chron. 6:14; Pss. 86:8; 89:6, 8.
26. Proclamation of the exclusive existence of Yahweh is the intent of 2 Sam. 7:22 = 1 Chron. 17:20.
27. The psalmists—esp. in the laments—often reflect a similar awareness of the inconsistencies of life in relation to their profession of Yahweh’s character.
28. See esp. the comments on public vindication in the Bridging Contexts section of Ps. 26.
29. Twelve-steppers have a way of putting this in the Third Step prayer: “Take away my difficulties that victory over them may bear witness to those I would help of your power, your love, and your way of life.”
1. See comments on the headings of Pss. 3 and 4 for these terms.
2. For the statistics on the use of this expression, see note 3 in the discussion of Ps. 18.
3. It is tempting to suggest this association of David and servant of Yahweh in the psalm headings might explain the source of Jesus’ own adoption of the suffering servant as the model of his messianic role. Jesus was certainly well immersed in the psalms and often used them to interpret his own life and ministry (cf. his quotation of portions of Ps. 22 from the cross).
4. The word “oracle” is normally the translation applied to the Hebrew term maśśaʾ, (“carrying, burden; pronouncement, oracle”).
5. See in the New Testament Acts 2:30.
6. 11QPsa, col. 27. The account known as David’s Compositions attributes to David a total of 4,050 psalms and songs for various occasions and purposes. The account also claims divine inspiration for these compositions: “And Yahweh gave him a discerning and enlightened spirit so that he wrote. . . . All these he wrote through the discernment that was given him from before the Most High.”
7. See the discussion of “Fear of Yahweh” in the section on “The Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
8. It is also interesting to note that the psalmist does not relate the wicked’s fear to Yahweh, as in the classic phrase yirʾat yhwh, but uses instead the more generic divine epithet ʾelohim (“God”). It is common practice in the psalms to avoid placing the divine name Yahweh in the mouth of unbelievers or severe sinners. Instead, the psalmists often substitute ʾelohim, possibly indicating the lack of understanding such people have of the true nature of Yahweh and at least protecting the divine name from association with such profane belief.
9. See the discussion of poetic technique in the section on “The Poetry of the Psalms” in the introduction.
10. The Heb. harre ʾel literally means “mountains of God.” On occasion, however, the generic terms for god/God (Heb. ʾel; ʾelohim) are used as emphatic particles with the sense of “really big!” (cf. Jonah 3:3, “and Nineveh was a great city to God” probably means “and Nineveh was a really big city!”).
11. The second term in the initial merism (NIV’s “skies”) is the Hebrew šeḥaqim. The word is normally associated with the heavenly phenomenon of clouds. Holladay (CHALOT, 366), however, suggests a connection with (clouds of) dust. This would make the double merism more complete and exact: “heavens . . . dust (of earth); mountains . . . deep.”
12. Cf. Gen. 2; Isa. 5:7; 25:6; 55:2; 58:14; Matt. 8:11; 22:1–14; Luke 13:29; 14:16–24.
13. Cf. also the related imagery surrounding the “river of the water of life” in Rev. 22:1–2.
14. See the discussion of “living water” in the Bridging Contexts section below. For Jesus’ use of related ideas, see his discussion with the Samaritan woman in John 4.
15. For placing one’s foot on an enemy as a sign of conquest and subjection, see comments on 8:6; 110:1.
16. Cf. the conflict between the herdsmen of Lot and Abraham in Gen. 13; also Moses’ rescue of the daughters of Reuel from the local shepherds in Ex. 2:16–19.
17. In this understanding, the Flood (Gen. 6–9) is a threat of uncreation, in which the chaotic waters above the earth rain down and those beneath the earth bubble up to flood and dissolve the tenuous protective habitat of humanity and all creation.
18. In Mesopotamia, the chaotic primeval waters Apsu (male) and Tiamat (female) give birth to the younger gods, while in Egypt it is the earth Geb (male) and heavens Nut (female) that accomplish the same feat.
19. “When He Returns,” words and music by Bob Dylan (Special Rider Music, 1979).
20. Cf. 2 Cor. 5:17: “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ; [there] is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!”
21. Such arrangements are noted at Qumran as well in the ritual baths uncovered in private houses from the Second Temple period in Jerusalem.
1. See the discussion of acrostic psalms in the section on “The Poetry of the Psalms” in the introduction. This balanced distribution of the acrostic psalms in the first and last books of the Psalter is a strong indication that wisdom interests have played an important role in shaping the final form of the canonical book of Psalms.
2. Except in the case of the ḥeṭ stanza (vv. 14–15), which has six lines, and the nun stanza (vv. 25–26), which includes five lines.
3. See the discussion of attribution to David in the comments on the heading of Ps. 3.
4. Compare this verse with the similar aphorism in Prov. 24:19: “Do not fret because of evil men or be envious of the wicked.” The two verses agree in all particulars in the Hebrew except in the identification of the group that is not to be envied. In Prov. 24:19 that is the “wicked” (rešaʿim) while in Ps. 37:1 it is “those who do wrong” (ʿośe ʿawlah).
5. See 37:2; 90:5; 92:7; 102:11; 103:15; 129:6, of which four are located in the important and formative Book 4 of the Psalter (Pss. 90–106). The other occurrence besides our psalm (129:6) is an apparent allusion to Isa. 37:27 = 2 Kings 19:26 (or perhaps vice versa). Outside the Psalter the image of withering grass appears in Job 8:12; Jer. 12:4; and frequently in Isaiah (Isa. 15:1–6; 37:27; 40:6, 7, 8; 51:12). Jesus used the image in his Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 6:30) as an admonition not to worry excessively (cf. Luke 12:28); it also appears in 1 Peter 1:24 as a quote from Isa. 37:27. In Rev. 8:7, a third of the grass of the earth is burned up when the seventh seal is opened.
6. The Heb. reʿeh ʾemunah (“consistent/reliable pasture”) is an apparent reference to the withering grass image used in verse 2. Although the wicked can anticipate only divine judgment and ultimate destruction, those who trust Yahweh can look forward to secure and abundant pasture for their flocks and themselves.
7. Here and in Lam. 2:16, apparently the baring of the teeth in a snarl as a beast of prey menaces its intended victim. Cf. Ps. 112:10, where the image seems more like the baring of the teeth in a grimace of pain, although the snapping of an injured animal at those who approach may also fit. In the New Testament (predominantly in Matt.), the phrase occurs for the most part in tandem with tears (“weeping and gnashing of teeth”) and seems to rely on the image of suffering and pain rather than being a predator.
8. Cf. Prov. 3:14; 8:19; 12:9; 15:16, 17; 16:8, 16, 19, 32; 17:1, 12; 19:1, 22; 21:9, 19; 22:1; 25:7, 24; 27:5, 10; 28:6. Prov. 15:16 offers a close parallel to our verse: “Better a little with the fear of the LORD than great wealth with turmoil” (cf. also 16:8; 28:6).
9. Isa. 47:14 and Mal. 4:1 both indicate that such a custom of burning stubble was practiced in Israel; each uses the practice as a potent symbol of judgment. The insubstantial character of smoke that quickly dissipates is also known elsewhere in Scripture. See Ps. 102:3 and Isa. 51:6 and the related reference in Ps. 68:2.
10. For further discussion of the meaning of this verb and related noun forms, see Gerald H. Wilson, “
,” NIDOTTE, 4:109–11.
11. Cf. the later statements of 37:37–38 to the effect that while there is “a future” for the righteous “man of peace,” the “future of the wicked will be cut off.” In light of the statement about the offspring in 37:28, most likely the later statement should be understood as a reference to the end of the line of posterity.
12. Cf. 37:10, where the disappearance of the wicked is promised in very similar terms. Experience confirms promise. What has been observed before offers the foundation for hope in the present circumstances.
13. See esp. comments on Ps. 31.
14. See comments on 44:22.
15. See, e.g., Prov. 10:16, 22; 11:19, 21, 28; 15:6, 16; 16:20; 21:6; 22:16; 23:4–5; 24:19–20; 28:8, 20, 25.
16. See, e.g., Job 4:7–9; 8:1–7, 20; 11:13–20; 15:20–35; 18:5–21; 20:4–29.
17. See, e.g., Pss. 1; 5:4–7; 7:14–16; 34:6–7, 15–16.
18. See, e.g., Job 21:7–16; 24:1–12. It is true that elsewhere Job seems to expect divine judgment ultimately to fall on the wicked (cf. 24:18–24; 27:13–23).
1. It is traditionally included among the seven penitential psalms: 2; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; and 143.
2. See Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 271; Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 374. Kraus’s term “acrostic songs” is confusing and may be the result of unwieldy translation. Beyond the number of verses, Craigie also mentions the “considerable regularity of the internal structure and balance” of the psalm as characteristic of this category.
3. See comments on the heading of Ps. 3 for discussion of this term.
4. Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Psalms, 1:20.
5. Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 303; Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 411.
6. Cf. Job 6:4 and 34:6, where Job equates God’s attack with the poison of arrows and the “incurable” wounds they left behind.
7. Kraus (Psalms 1–59, 411–12) takes the symptoms to suggest leprosy.
8. See Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 303–4.
9. Ibid., 304.
10. The reference to the “back” (kesel [“loins, area around kidneys”]) may indicate kidney pain or disease. The pain is described as burning (“searing”).
11. This word occurs over twenty times in Proverbs.
12. The verb translated as “pounds” is the unusual Pealal stem and has the meaning “keep on moving back and forth, beat violently (of heart)” (Holladay, CHALOT, 255).
13. Lit., “my contact, blow; mark, disease” (from the root ngʿ [“reach, touch, strike”]). When an illness is thought to be a divine attack, then the marks of the disease are considered blows or bruises.
14. See comments on 35:4; also 3:1–2.
15. The NIV has broken up the existing Heb. sentence to provide a set of three balanced and parallel lines, following the accentuation of the Hebrew text (lit. trans.):
They set traps, those who seek my life
and those who would harm me speak threats
and deceptions all day long they plot.
The last phrase in particular seems awkward, and the first word (“deceptions”) might best be taken with the preceding phrase, “and those who would harm me speak threats and deceptions.” For the use of the Heb. verb “murmur, meditate, plot,” see comments on 1:2 and 2:1.
16. The Heb. of this phrase, leṣelaʿ nakon (“for stumbling I am established”), suggests the stumbling of the victim is permanent and imminently final.
17. For a discussion of the different nuances represented by ʿawon and ḥaṭṭaʾat, see comments on 32:1–2.
18. In military contexts both words can be translated “victory,” although to do so often obscures linkages and wordplays being created with other forms of the root yšʿ.
19. It is interesting that tešuʿa occurs (thirteen times) only in Books 1, 2, and 5 (i.e., not in Pss. 73–106). By contrast, yešuʿa occurs forty-four times in all five books of the Psalter.
20. See, e.g., 3:8; 35:9; 37:39; 51:14; 71:15; 74:12; 80:3; 88:1; 98:3, 4; 118:14; 119:41; 140:7; 149:4.
21. See also 9:14; 70:4; 91:16; 96:2; 106:4; 119:41, 123, 166, 174.
22. The translation is mine. It is esp. interesting that here at the end of the Psalter we find a phrase that recalls and reaffirms the statement with which the collection began. At the end of Ps. 3 the reader is called to acknowledge that “salvation belongs to Yahweh” (3:8a, my translation).
23. See, e.g., 9:14; 13:5–6; 35:9–10; 51:14; 68:19; 71:15; 96:2; 116:12–14.
1. See comments on “The Shape of Book 1” at the beginning of Psalm 1.
2. See comments on the heading of Pss. 3 and 4 for discussion of these terms.
3. While Jeremiah experienced a similar extended period of silence, his eventual outbreak was into prophetic speech rather than a personal complaint to God. It is true, however, that the words that surround Jeremiah’s description and provide its literary context are just such a complaint to God (Jer. 20:7–10). It is the parallel attempt to bottle up words that are burning to be spoken that connects Jeremiah and the psalmist (and to some extent Job).
4. The NIV of 39:1a breaks into two phrases what is in the Hebrew essentially a single statement: “I said, ‘Let me guard my ways from sin with my tongue.’ ” The difference is subtle, but it refocuses the whole thought around the idea of careful speech rather than a more general “watching of the ways.” The statement employs the cohortative form of the verb, which expresses self-encouragement and exhortation to a course of action rather than a more declarative determination.
5. See, e.g., Jer. 20:7–10, as well as the comments in Amos 3:8: “The lion has roared—who will not fear? The Sovereign LORD has spoken—who can but prophesy?” The book of Jonah is an extended picture of the futility of trying to escape the divine call to prophesy.
6. Cf., e.g., Pss. 8; 102; 144; 145; 146.
7. Heb. meh ḥadel (“how close to an end”) or perhaps “how forsaken [by God].”
8. Heb. (lit.) has “a few spans of four fingers.”
9. Heb. (lit.) has “my duration [is] as if it does not exist.”
10. The Heb. is habel habalim . . . habel habalim hakkol habel, where the phrase habel habalim is a superlative expression that means “the greatest of all possible habalim.” Traditionally the term has been translated “vanity.”
11. The final phrase of v. 5 is difficult and somewhat uncertain. Taken literally it means something like “surely every vanity of every man takes a stand.” Many Heb. manuscripts omit the first kol (“every”) as is in the case of the repetition of this phrase in 39:11. If we take the lead of that second phrase, we might render 39:5 as: “Surely every human being that stands upright is meaningless.” A very harsh evaluation!
12. See the discussion of the “image of God” in the comments on Ps. 8.
13. Cf. Isa. 44:9–18.
14. An agricultural image coupled with the following verb “gather.” The phantom men “pile up” as if gathering grain into piles in the field, while others will “gather” the collected grain into their storehouses.
15. A helpful article on the Old Testament concept of the alien or stranger is found in “Sojourner; Alien; Stranger,” ISBE2, 4:561–64.
1. Cf. Cheyne, The Book of Psalms, 108, who sees as many as three poets at work in Ps. 40. Dahood, Psalms, 1:245, and Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 423, also fall into this category.
2. See the comments in Craigie, Psalms 1–59, 313–14.
3. Craigie adopts this position, ibid., 314. Rogerson and McKay also argue for the unity of Ps. 40, Psalms 1–50, 191. See also comments on Ps. 70, below.
4. See comments on the headings of Pss. 3 and 4 for discussion of these terms.
5. Two Hebrew verbs underlie this theme of waiting. The first (yḥl) carries the primary sense of endurance, the willingness to “hang in there” faithfully for a long time (37:7 [as emended in BHS]; 38:15). The second (qwh) emphasizes intent expectancy, as if the thing hoped for is about to happen now (37:34; 40:1). The two words are paralleled in 130:5, indicating that both endurance and expectancy are part of waiting for Yahweh’s deliverance.
6. See comments on 33:3 for discussion of the phrase “new song.”
7. For further discussion of the concept of the fear of Yahweh, see comments on Ps. 34 and the section on “The Fear of Yahweh” in “The Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
8. The verb used here (ʾrk) can be variously translated. It has the base meaning of “arrange in lines” and by extension comes to describe “drawing up in battle formation” and then “to confront someone.” Another possibility seized upon in many translations is the idea of comparison derived from placing things alongside one another. This last possibility, despite its popularity, seems less likely in this context than the idea of confronting God or calling him to account for the plans he has made for human beings.
9. The word in question here is the Heb. verb spr, which appears here as missapper and can be translated either “count” or “relate/declare/tell.”
10. See Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 427.
11. See Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 315.
12. Cf. various treatments of the subject in the Babylonian Talmud, including Berakot 15a–b; 17a; Sukkah 49b; Baba Batra 9a; Menaḥot 110a; cf. also ʾAbot de Rabbi Nathan 20a. One related question in light of the evidence of the Dead Sea Scrolls for the continued fluidity of the Psalter collection into the second half of the first century A.D. is: Which destruction of the temple and resulting lack of temple sacrifice does the psalm reflect? That by the Babylonians in 587 b.c.? Or the Roman destruction of A.D. 70?
13. Derek Kidner, Psalms, 2 vols. (TOTC; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1973), 1:159.
14. Craigie (Psalms 1–50, 313), referring to Delitzsch, suggests a possible understanding of krh (“pierce”), meaning that “God’s word penetrates deafness.”
15. See comments on merism in the section on “The Poetry of the Psalms” in the introduction.
16. See Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 426; Mays, Psalms (Interpretation; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1994), 168.
17. See Cheyne, The Book of Psalms, 111; Rogerson and McKay, Psalms 1–50, 193.
18. See Dahood, Psalms, 1:246.
19. See Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Psalms, 39–40; Craigie, Psalms 1–50, 314.
20. See Kidner, Psalms, 1:160; The NIV Study Bible, 826.
21. The similarity to the situation in Ps. 39 is remarkable. There the psalmist initially resists speaking out until compelled to by the inner working of God. The psalmist then confesses sin and justifies the disciplinary punishment and rebuke of God to those who are observing his distress.
22. In fact, the LXX translates bsar in this verse with a form of euangelizo, the verbal cognate of euangelion.
23. The term “efface” (from the Old French effacer [“remove the face”]) means to remove something that exists by destroying or obliterating it. Archaeology frequently uncovers examples of effacing, such as statues with their features chiseled off, reliefs with names expunged, etc. One of the more famous examples is the movement by Akhenaton (born Amenophis IV), the “heretic king” of Egypt from 1363 to 1347 b.c., to have the name of his father, Amenophis III, removed from all honorific reliefs around the nation because that name honored the old god Amun, whom Akhenaton had rejected in favor of the sun disk, Aton. I have often wondered what part the result of this censorship process, with its visible devastation of the reliefs, played in Akhenaton’s decision to build a new capitol for his reign at Ikhnaton—modern day Tel el-Amarna. Recent accounts of the destruction of 1,500-year-old statues of the Buddha at the order of the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan follow this same pattern of obliteration. The Old Testament practices its own form of literary “effacing” when it replaces the divine name element Baal in human personal names with the caustic judgment Bosheth (“shame”): e.g., Ishbaal, “Man of Baal” (1 Chron. 8:33; 9:39), the son of Saul, becomes Ishbosheth, “Man of Shame,” in other texts (cf. 2 Sam. 2:8 and twelve other times).
24. It is interesting to note that all the verbs used to describe attempts at concealment begin with the Heb. letter kaph. This type of alliterative wordplay calls attention to the verbs and intensifies their effect on the alert reader.
25. See comments on Pss. 70–71 for a discussion of how those two psalms work together.
26. See the comments of Marvin E. Tate, Psalms 51–100 (WBC; Dallas: Word, 1990), 203.
27. For more detailed discussion of 40:13–17, see comments on 70:1–5. A comparison of these verses illustrates the complexity of understanding the dynamics of what is generally understood to be an Elohistic Psalter (Pss. 42–83), in which the divine name yhwh is often replaced by the less specific and more generic designation ʾelohim. It is difficult, if not impossible, to discover any consistent method in these variations.
28. Cf. 2 Sam. 22:43; Ps. 18:42; Mic. 7:10; Zech. 9:3; 10:5, all of which use the noun ṭiṭ as in Ps. 40:2. A similar reference using ḥomer instead of ṭiṭ is found in Isa. 10:6. In other settings ṭiṭ can describe the clay used by potters: Nah. 3:14, “Work the clay [ṭiṭ], tread the mortar [ḥomer]”; Isa. 41:25, “like a potter treading the clay [ṭiṭ].”
29. Earlier in the same psalm a similar setting uses the uncommon term yawen to describe the same kind of ocean mire into which the psalmist fears sinking (69:2). The only other occurrence of yawen is in 40:2, where it appears in the construct phrase with ṭiṭ: miṭṭiṭ hayyawen (“muddy muck”?).
30. Jer. 41:4–9 describes the use of a cistern as a repository for bodies resulting from slaughter.
31. The phrase is perhaps better rendered “desolate pit,” according to Holladay (CHALOT, 356).
32. This scroll is mentioned in Deut. 17:18–20: “When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the priests, who are Levites. It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the LORD his God and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees and not consider himself better than his brothers and turn from the law to the right or to the left. Then he and his descendants will reign a long time over his kingdom in Israel.”
1. See the discussion of “Concluding Doxologies” in the “The Poetry of the Psalms” in the introduction.
2. See comments on the headings of Pss. 3 and 4 for discussion of these terms.
3. See the remarks there regarding the importance of ʾašre in binding Pss. 1 and 2 together as an introduction to the Psalter.
4. A complete listing includes 1:1; 2:12; 32:1, 2; 33:12; 34:8; 40:7; 41:1; 65:4; 84:4, 5, 12; 89:15; 94:12; 106:3; 112:1; 119:1, 2; 127:5: 128:1, 2; 137:8, 9; 144:15; 146:5.
5. The impression of significance is enhanced by the realization that the term also occurs in the final psalms of Books 3 (89:15) and 4 (106:3) and brackets the concluding psalm of Book 5 (144:15; 146:5).
6. Craig C. Broyles, Psalms (NIBC; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1999), 41–42.
7. Actually, the masculine singular form of the participle occurs most frequently in the psalms (seventeen times, of which thirteen are genre designations in psalm headings, transliterated in the NIV simply as maśkil, e.g., 32:0). Outside the Psalter, the term most regularly occurs in wisdom literature (Job 22:2; Prov. 10:5, 19; 14:35, 15:24; 16:20; 17:2; 21:12). Two appearances of the Hiphil masculine plural participle (maśkilim) occur in Dan. 12:3 and 10, where they describe a group of faithful believers privy to important esoteric knowledge about the end times.
8. The verb “bless” (ʾšr) is from the same root as the opening word of the psalm (ʾašre). The NIV follows the LXX in translating this verb in the active voice. In the Heb. of the MT, the word is pointed as a Pual (passive) verb form and would be translated “(so that) he will be blessed. . . .”
9. In the Heb., the phrase is the jussive (“let you not surrender him”), indicating a shift from description of divine protection into a plea for deliverance directed to God himself. The NIV follows the recommendation of BHS and reads the phrase as “he will not surrender him.” The emendation seems reasonable to me.
10. The Heb. for “sickness” here comes from the verb dwh (“menstruate”) and normally describes the “sickness” associated with a menstrual flow. For the Israelites, menstruation was considered polluting, rendering the woman unclean and dictating withdrawal from public association. Here the term seems to be used to suggest an ailment with particular public approbation, in which case the protective care of Yahweh to hold the patient supportively would be remarkable, since any contact with the unclean person would render the other unclean as well.
11. The Heb. verb for “change” here (hpk; NIV “restore”) probably means to turn the pallet/mattress over or to air it out rather than changing soiled bedclothes, as we might expect a nurse to do. Alternatively, it might mean to reorient the bed so that the sick person can have a change of view. Either is a way of comforting the ill.
12. This common expression for the Israelite practice designated by the verb “fulfill the responsibility of the marriage of a brother-in-law” is taken from the Latin word levir (“brother-in-law”).
13. See the discussion of “Jesus’ Use of the Psalms” in the section on “The Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
14. Cf. V. H. Koov, “Heel,” IDB, 2:577; Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Psalms, 48. Dahood’s translation—“spun slanderous tales”—relies on unusual interpretation of the words based on related Ugaritic terminology. See Craigie’s comments, Psalms 1–50, 319.
15. Koov, “Heel,” 2:577; Kraus, Psalms 1–59, 430, agrees.
16. Note the caustic irony of the wordplay between the treacherous “close associates” (ʾiš šelomi [“the one at peace/one/unity with me”]) and the anticipated pay back (ʾašallemah [“let me pay them back”]). The psalmist wishes to “settle account” with the enemies once and for all.
17. In light of the psalmist’s confession of sin (41:4), tom cannot indicate moral perfection here but a way of commitment and integrity of purpose.
18. The picture is of one holding fast to an object so tightly that it cannot be lost because of unsettling circumstances or direct attack. I am reminded of the ball carrier in football plunging into the line hugging the ball to his chest in both arms to avoid an inadvertent fumble or being stripped of the ball by an opposing player.
19. The Heb. nṣb emphasizes the firmness and enduring quality of the thing/person set up and established. For a discussion of dwelling in the presence of Yahweh, see “Dwelling with Yahweh” in “The Theology of the Psalms” in vol. 2 of this commentary.
20. The term ʾašre occurs over forty times in the Old Testament (twenty-five of these within the psalms), while baruk appears over seventy times (only seventeen of these in the psalms), a Qal passive participle.
21. For further discussion of ʾašre, see comments on 1:1 and 2:12.
22. The word ʾašre appears at 1:1; 2:12; 32:1, 2; 33:12; 34:8; 40:4; 41:1; 65:4; 84:4, 5, 12; 89:15; 94:12; 106:3; 112:1; 119:1, 2; 127:5; 128:1, 2; 137:8, 9; 144:15; 146:5.
23. I can offer no adequate explanation for the omission of ʾašre from the concluding psalm of Book 2 (Ps. 72). However, it is striking in this regard that when the kingly figure who is the focus of Ps. 72 is promised blessing by all the nations, that blessing employs a verb from the same root as ʾašre (72:17b). When, however, the nations are promised blessing from the king, it is the root brk that is used (72:17a), a probable reference to the covenant with Abraham/Israel in Gen. 12:1–3, where all the families of the earth will find blessing (brk) in their relationship to Abraham and his descendants.
24. See esp. Pss. 32 and 34 with their aphoristic instruction (binding the titleless Ps. 33 between them); Ps. 94 is also aphoristic and concerned with instruction; both Pss. 112 and 119 share the acrostic form that is associated with wisdom; Pss. 127 and 128 are both clearly wisdom instruction. The exceptions to the rule of wisdom connection are Pss. 40; 65; and 84, although 84 does include a “better than” statement (84:10), often part of wisdom aphorisms.
25. See the discussion of wisdom shaping of the Psalter in Wilson, “The Shape of the Book of Psalms,” 129–42.
26. The word dal occurs in Gen. 41:19; Ex. 23:3; 30:15; Lev. 14:21; 19:15; Judg. 6:15; Ruth 3:10; 1 Sam. 2:8; 2 Sam. 3:1; 13:4; 2 Kings 14:14; 25:12; Job 5:16; 20:10, 19; 31:16; 34:19, 28; Pss. 41:1; 72:13; 82:3, 4; 113:7; 141:3(?); Prov. 10:15; 14:31; 19:4, 17; 21:13; 22:9, 16, 22; 28:3, 8, 11, 15; 29:7, 14; Isa. 10:2; 11:4; 14:30; 25:4; 26:6; Jer. 5:4; 39:10; 40:7; 52:15, 16; Amos 2:7; 4:1; 5:11; 8:6; Zeph. 3:12.
27. See also Job 34:19; Prov. 22:16.
28. Cf. Lev. 14:21; Prov. 19:17.
29. Job 20:19 may imply that some dallim had houses that could be taken from them.
30. In contrast, the NRSV reads Ps. 41:1 as “consider the poor,” while NJB conflates the two possibilities to get “cares for the poor and the weak.” Cf. also Judg. 6:15, where Gideon resists God’s call to leadership by claiming: “How can I save Israel? My clan is the weakest [haddal] in Manasseh, and I am the least in my family.”
31. Cf. Ps. 82:3–4; 113:7.
32. The noun tom is related to the adjective tam. Both are often translated as “blameless” or “innocent.” Cf. Gen. 20:5, 6; 25:27; 2 Sam. 15:11; 1 Kings 9:4; 22:34; 2 Chron. 18:33; Job 1:1, 8; 2:3; 4:6; 8:20; 9:20, 21, 22; 21:33; Pss. 7:8; 25:21; 26:1, 11; 37:37; 41:12; 64:4; 78:72; 101:2; Prov. 2:7; 10:9, 29; 13:6; 19:1; 20:7; 28:6; 29:10; Song 5:2; 6:9; Isa. 47:9 for the varied nuances of these words.
33. See comments on Ps. 39:1 and the Contemporary Significance section of that psalm.