Psalm 30, as per verse 1, is another psalm of thanksgiving and praise. Although it has intercessory elements in e.g. verses 2 and 8-10, they are not present-tense prayers. It is David recalling earlier prayers and God’s faithfulness in answering those prayers.
My readers should recall the general structure of a prayer psalm that I have previously discussed. A standard prayer psalm (such as Psalm 18) contains a problem statement, which lays out the issue or cause for intercession, the petition for help, and praise and thanksgiving in anticipation of God’s answer.
This psalm, in contrast, focuses on praise and thanksgiving, which means that both the problem statement and the petition for help are “past tense” events that have already happened. Interestingly, this psalm follows a somewhat similar structure, except that rather than dwelling in the moment of the “petition”, it dwells on the thanksgiving and praise with the earlier elements abbreviated. I also think the structure in this psalm is more complex than usual, with some redundancy between verses 1-5 and 6-12.
In verses 1-5, the problem statement is not stated directly. However, it is implied in v. 1 when David says “[God has] not let my enemies rejoice over me” and in v. 3 when he says, “You have kept me alive that I would not go down to the pit”, i.e. into “the pit” of death. We get this vague sense of David’s enemies surrounding him and threatening him with death.
In verse 2, we see David’s petition for help, and then verses 4-5 contain praises to God for deliverance. I want to point out in particular the similarity between verse 5 and verse 11, which both contain a “reversal” sentiment and the contrast between weeping and joy, mourning and dancing, anger and favor, and sackcloth and gladness. All of these things may be regarded as the “before” and “after”, separated by David’s petition for help. That is, David prayed to God and his situation was transformed, bringing him from the weeping/mourning/sackcloth into joy/dancing/gladness. It highlights above all the transformational power of prayer, through God’s intervention in human affairs.
From a literary point of view, it also highlights the repetitive structure between v. 1-5 and 6-12 which I previously noted. I already mentioned the problem statement, petition for help and praise for deliverance in the first section (v. 1-5). We find the same elements in the second section (v. 6-12). We find a problem statement, stated indirectly and vaguely, in v. 7, “you hid your face, I was dismayed”. We find a petition for help in v. 8-10, “to you, O LORD, I called, and to the LORD I made supplication…”. Lastly, we find praise for deliverance in v. 11-12 which contains the reversal elements I mentioned.
The overall effect is that these two segments run parallel with each other, each containing a vaguely worded and ambiguous problem statement, a strong plea for help and a special focus on the transformational power of God’s intervention.
WIthin this structure, verses 6-7a stand out as somewhat anomalous, since they don’t fit into the standard pattern that I am trying to construct here. I don’t have a suitable explanation for these verses and would invite suggestions and commentary from my readers.
The title of this psalm indicates that it is for “the dedication of the house” (in NASB translation). The Hebrew word for “house” is the exact same as the word elsewhere used for Solomon’s temple, and it’s distinct from the word used for David’s tabernacle (which is the Hebrew word that literally means “tent”). As such, this is clearly a psalm for the dedication of the temple, even though it also claims to be a psalm “of David”, which lived and died before the temple was constructed. As such, we can conclude that the claim of Davidic authorship is most likely figurative, and however convenient it may be to refer to David as the author, it is unlikely to be true.
Finally, unlike most psalms, this one has a clear historical setting for its composition and recital. How does the historical setting influence our interpretation of the primary text?
I don’t see any direct relationship between the text and the historical setting. The text itself contains no references to the temple, the tabernacle, or anything else related to temple worship. The only indirect relationship I can think of is that the dedication of the temple was a moment of great joy and it stands to reason that praise and thanksgiving would figure prominently in that moment. We could perhaps view the construction of the temple itself as the moment of transformation that brings the joy, favor, dancing, etc. even though the text itself does not say that. Perhaps we can view this as an intentional de-contextualization, which we have observed commonly across many psalms. We can find ways to fit this psalm to the historical context of the temple dedication, but since it does not refer to the dedication itself the psalm is “reusable” in later worship.
Thursday, June 4, 2020
Sunday, May 31, 2020
Bible Commentary - Psalms 29
I’ve been occasionally noting patterns and regularity in different psalms. For instance, the prayer psalms show certain commonalities; other psalms are focused on praise and thanksgiving. Psalm 29 is remarkably different from everything we’ve seen so far, and if I had to assign it to a specific genre, I would probably call it a worship or praise psalm.
The psalm has an almost singular focus on “the voice of the LORD”. There are three sections in the psalm: a brief introduction (after a fashion) in verses 1-2, a long middle body in verses 3-9, and then a brief conclusion (after another fashion) in verses 10-11. The reason why I say “after a fashion” for both the introduction and conclusion is that they are not properly introducing or concluding the psalm. They do not speak in any meaningful way to the central topic.
The introduction sets the general tone as praising God. The conclusion is a general benediction for “his people”, the worshippers. Both the introduction and the conclusion contain allusions to priestly ministry. As such, we can make two deductions about this psalm (without yet looking at the core message in verses 3-9). The first deduction is that this is probably a psalm for tabernacle ministry or temple worship in general. This might not seem obvious, but the connection to priestly ministry makes it very likely.
Look first in verse 2. “Worship the LORD in holy array”. Other translations say “Worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness”. In both cases, most scholars agree this is an indirect reference to the priestly robes, diadem, etc. that are described at length in Exodus 28. To rephase verse 2 according to this, it says, “worship the LORD wearing a priestly uniform”. Next, look at verse 11. “The LORD will bless his people with peace”. This echoes the priestly benediction in Numbers 6:26, which also contains a blessing of peace, and as such the “blessing of peace” is distinctly in reference to priestly ministry.
Having established that it’s part of priestly ministry, a natural consequence is that it would be part of the tabernacle ministry because the priestly ministry was so deeply tied to the tabernacle (or temple) as the center of worship. Although we do see priests occasionally traveling outside of Jerusalem, there can be no doubt that the overwhelming majority of priests lived near the temple and ministered at the temple.
Secondly, we can deduce that this psalm is for public worship. Again this may not be obvious, but since the conclusion of this psalm is essentially a priestly benediction, we should understand that the benediction is designed for pronouncing blessings over the people. It is typically expected that the people would be present to receive the blessing, rather than distant or abstract. Furthermore, the fact that this is a worship song for the tabernacle suggests that it would be public because that is where the majority of priestly worship would occur, in the public courtyard. It should be expected that non-priestly worshippers would go there and listen to the worship music. It’s not a certainty, but it feels likely given the context.
Since verse 2 expects that the person singing is “in holy array”, it is probable that the priests (or possibly Levites) would be singing, and the audience would be non-priestly worshippers at the tabernacle (or later, the temple).
Moving on, the most striking aspect of this psalm is the repetition. The introduction repeats the same phrase, “ascribe to the LORD” three times. The main body repeats the phrase “The voice of the LORD” seven times. Repetition in this case is both a poetic device, it’s part of what makes the song interesting, and it is also a backbone of sorts that holds the psalm together. Some of the language describing the voice of the LORD is clear and simple, and some of it is more difficult to understand. Verses 4 and 5 are both clear, describing the LORD’s voice as “powerful” and “majestic”. In verses 7-9 it gets more difficult to follow the exact meaning, even though the general sentiment is the same. It says that God’s voice “makes Lebanon skip like a calf” and “hews out flames of fire”.
It’s not clear exactly what this means, but we can work out two generalities. The first is that this entire passage, between verses 3-9, has a single point. All it’s trying to say is that God’s voice is powerful. Shattering cedars, cutting out fire, shaking the wilderness, and so on; these are all expressions of God’s power through his voice.
The second general theme here is that David is using the metaphor of a storm cloud and thunder to describe God’s voice. Note some of the language: “The God of glory thunders”, it is “over many waters”, “breaks the cedars”, “hews out flames of fire”. If you gather these phrases together then you will get a sense of a thunderstorm, lightning bolts striking trees and exploding, wind blowing like crazy and raining heavily.
This should sound familiar to some of you. Think back to the story of Job 37-38; it’s basically the same idea, with Elihu asserting that God speaks through lightning and thunder, that God’s voice is in the thunderstorm. In Job 38:1, God speaks to Job out of the “whirlwind”, again using stormy imagery to describe God’s voice.
It’s possible this imagery helps to explain verse 10, “The LORD sits as king over the flood”. “The flood” is possibly an allusion to the rain and flooding that comes with a storm. Since the earlier passage is connecting God’s voice to the lightning and thunder, it makes sense that they would also connect God’s presence to the arrival of a storm.
We should imagine stormy clouds, the wind blowing fiercely, rivers and streams overflowing with water, pouring rain and thundering lightning. It is a tempest, and the LORD is “king”. The thunder is his voice, the storm blows and roars at his command, trees are blown over or struck by lightning. Our conclusion? God is powerful and majestic, he deserves glory and strength (v. 1-2), and in the final benediction God uses his great power to grant strength and peace to his people (v. 11).
This psalm is about God’s power. It begins with a call to worship, a call to declare the glory of God. In the middle is the “evidence”. It’s the description of God’s power and glory, manifested through a storm which is symbolic of God’s voice.
Its conclusion is a final declaration of God’s authority, and then a blessing for God’s people. God is great, and he will make his people great too. God is mighty and he will bless his people.
The psalm has an almost singular focus on “the voice of the LORD”. There are three sections in the psalm: a brief introduction (after a fashion) in verses 1-2, a long middle body in verses 3-9, and then a brief conclusion (after another fashion) in verses 10-11. The reason why I say “after a fashion” for both the introduction and conclusion is that they are not properly introducing or concluding the psalm. They do not speak in any meaningful way to the central topic.
The introduction sets the general tone as praising God. The conclusion is a general benediction for “his people”, the worshippers. Both the introduction and the conclusion contain allusions to priestly ministry. As such, we can make two deductions about this psalm (without yet looking at the core message in verses 3-9). The first deduction is that this is probably a psalm for tabernacle ministry or temple worship in general. This might not seem obvious, but the connection to priestly ministry makes it very likely.
Look first in verse 2. “Worship the LORD in holy array”. Other translations say “Worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness”. In both cases, most scholars agree this is an indirect reference to the priestly robes, diadem, etc. that are described at length in Exodus 28. To rephase verse 2 according to this, it says, “worship the LORD wearing a priestly uniform”. Next, look at verse 11. “The LORD will bless his people with peace”. This echoes the priestly benediction in Numbers 6:26, which also contains a blessing of peace, and as such the “blessing of peace” is distinctly in reference to priestly ministry.
Having established that it’s part of priestly ministry, a natural consequence is that it would be part of the tabernacle ministry because the priestly ministry was so deeply tied to the tabernacle (or temple) as the center of worship. Although we do see priests occasionally traveling outside of Jerusalem, there can be no doubt that the overwhelming majority of priests lived near the temple and ministered at the temple.
Secondly, we can deduce that this psalm is for public worship. Again this may not be obvious, but since the conclusion of this psalm is essentially a priestly benediction, we should understand that the benediction is designed for pronouncing blessings over the people. It is typically expected that the people would be present to receive the blessing, rather than distant or abstract. Furthermore, the fact that this is a worship song for the tabernacle suggests that it would be public because that is where the majority of priestly worship would occur, in the public courtyard. It should be expected that non-priestly worshippers would go there and listen to the worship music. It’s not a certainty, but it feels likely given the context.
Since verse 2 expects that the person singing is “in holy array”, it is probable that the priests (or possibly Levites) would be singing, and the audience would be non-priestly worshippers at the tabernacle (or later, the temple).
Moving on, the most striking aspect of this psalm is the repetition. The introduction repeats the same phrase, “ascribe to the LORD” three times. The main body repeats the phrase “The voice of the LORD” seven times. Repetition in this case is both a poetic device, it’s part of what makes the song interesting, and it is also a backbone of sorts that holds the psalm together. Some of the language describing the voice of the LORD is clear and simple, and some of it is more difficult to understand. Verses 4 and 5 are both clear, describing the LORD’s voice as “powerful” and “majestic”. In verses 7-9 it gets more difficult to follow the exact meaning, even though the general sentiment is the same. It says that God’s voice “makes Lebanon skip like a calf” and “hews out flames of fire”.
It’s not clear exactly what this means, but we can work out two generalities. The first is that this entire passage, between verses 3-9, has a single point. All it’s trying to say is that God’s voice is powerful. Shattering cedars, cutting out fire, shaking the wilderness, and so on; these are all expressions of God’s power through his voice.
The second general theme here is that David is using the metaphor of a storm cloud and thunder to describe God’s voice. Note some of the language: “The God of glory thunders”, it is “over many waters”, “breaks the cedars”, “hews out flames of fire”. If you gather these phrases together then you will get a sense of a thunderstorm, lightning bolts striking trees and exploding, wind blowing like crazy and raining heavily.
This should sound familiar to some of you. Think back to the story of Job 37-38; it’s basically the same idea, with Elihu asserting that God speaks through lightning and thunder, that God’s voice is in the thunderstorm. In Job 38:1, God speaks to Job out of the “whirlwind”, again using stormy imagery to describe God’s voice.
It’s possible this imagery helps to explain verse 10, “The LORD sits as king over the flood”. “The flood” is possibly an allusion to the rain and flooding that comes with a storm. Since the earlier passage is connecting God’s voice to the lightning and thunder, it makes sense that they would also connect God’s presence to the arrival of a storm.
We should imagine stormy clouds, the wind blowing fiercely, rivers and streams overflowing with water, pouring rain and thundering lightning. It is a tempest, and the LORD is “king”. The thunder is his voice, the storm blows and roars at his command, trees are blown over or struck by lightning. Our conclusion? God is powerful and majestic, he deserves glory and strength (v. 1-2), and in the final benediction God uses his great power to grant strength and peace to his people (v. 11).
This psalm is about God’s power. It begins with a call to worship, a call to declare the glory of God. In the middle is the “evidence”. It’s the description of God’s power and glory, manifested through a storm which is symbolic of God’s voice.
Its conclusion is a final declaration of God’s authority, and then a blessing for God’s people. God is great, and he will make his people great too. God is mighty and he will bless his people.
Tuesday, May 19, 2020
Bible Commentary - Psalms 28
Psalm 28 is another prayer psalm. Verse 1 tells us the topic will be David’s pleas for deliverance.
A typical prayer psalm has three components: a problem statement (the subject of the petition), the petition itself, and praise and thanksgiving in anticipation of God’s response. This psalm contains approximately two out of three sections. It has a petition for relief in verses 1-5, and it has praise and thanksgiving in verses 6-9. What is absent is the “problem statement”, where David would lay out the crisis that he is facing to precipitate this prayer. I can’t really offer much of an explanation or rationale why David would exclude the problem statement from this prayer, unfortunately.
Moving on, the prayer itself is composed of two parts. In the first part, David asks God to protect and deliver him (v. 1-3), and in the second part he asks God to punish the wicked (v. 4-5). In a lot of ways this follows the typical “bless the righteous, punish the wicked” doctrine of divine justice. In fact, verse 3 alone lays that out clearly when David asks God to not punish him in the same way that God punishes the wicked. “Do not punish me in the same way that you punish evil men,” he says, “because I’m not like those guys.”
Unlike the previous two psalms, David does not use the temple of God as a symbol of his innocence, though in verse 2 he does use it as a description of his prayers (giving us an early tradition of orienting prayer in the direction of a holy place, in this instance the temple in Jerusalem). Interestingly, David does not make any particular claim of innocence or personal integrity; he implies it by contrasting himself with the wicked, but he does not directly state it. Instead, David simply asks God to answer his prayer, as if asking for help was reason enough for God to give it.
The wicked in this case are defined by their deeds, “those who work iniquity” (v. 3), and “the evil of their practices” (v. 4). The only evil deed specifically described is dishonesty, speaking peace to a neighbor while planning evil (v. 3). There is also an oblique reference to how the wicked “do not regard the works of the LORD”, but the exact nature of this offense is not clear to me, other than perhaps a vague reference to pride or insolence.
The thanksgiving section begins personal, and then gradually expands. David first praises God “because he has heard the voice of my supplication” and he protected David. In verse 8, David expands the scope and praises God for protecting the people and also “his anointed” (most likely referring to the king). In verse 9, David concludes by praying one last time for the people Israel, that God would save, bless and shepherd them forever.
Besides that, the thanksgiving section doesn’t even really connect much with the petition. There are no common threads that unite them together, so these really could be in completely different psalms and it would make no difference to my reading. In fact, I would challenge my readers to pretend there is a completely different psalm beginning at verse 6, and after reading verses 6-9 tell me if it sounds incomplete or different from any of the other thanksgiving psalms. Same thing with verses 1-5, which form a relatively complete thought.
I wish I could say more, but this psalm is so generic I really can’t find anything else to remark upon.
A typical prayer psalm has three components: a problem statement (the subject of the petition), the petition itself, and praise and thanksgiving in anticipation of God’s response. This psalm contains approximately two out of three sections. It has a petition for relief in verses 1-5, and it has praise and thanksgiving in verses 6-9. What is absent is the “problem statement”, where David would lay out the crisis that he is facing to precipitate this prayer. I can’t really offer much of an explanation or rationale why David would exclude the problem statement from this prayer, unfortunately.
Moving on, the prayer itself is composed of two parts. In the first part, David asks God to protect and deliver him (v. 1-3), and in the second part he asks God to punish the wicked (v. 4-5). In a lot of ways this follows the typical “bless the righteous, punish the wicked” doctrine of divine justice. In fact, verse 3 alone lays that out clearly when David asks God to not punish him in the same way that God punishes the wicked. “Do not punish me in the same way that you punish evil men,” he says, “because I’m not like those guys.”
Unlike the previous two psalms, David does not use the temple of God as a symbol of his innocence, though in verse 2 he does use it as a description of his prayers (giving us an early tradition of orienting prayer in the direction of a holy place, in this instance the temple in Jerusalem). Interestingly, David does not make any particular claim of innocence or personal integrity; he implies it by contrasting himself with the wicked, but he does not directly state it. Instead, David simply asks God to answer his prayer, as if asking for help was reason enough for God to give it.
The wicked in this case are defined by their deeds, “those who work iniquity” (v. 3), and “the evil of their practices” (v. 4). The only evil deed specifically described is dishonesty, speaking peace to a neighbor while planning evil (v. 3). There is also an oblique reference to how the wicked “do not regard the works of the LORD”, but the exact nature of this offense is not clear to me, other than perhaps a vague reference to pride or insolence.
The thanksgiving section begins personal, and then gradually expands. David first praises God “because he has heard the voice of my supplication” and he protected David. In verse 8, David expands the scope and praises God for protecting the people and also “his anointed” (most likely referring to the king). In verse 9, David concludes by praying one last time for the people Israel, that God would save, bless and shepherd them forever.
Besides that, the thanksgiving section doesn’t even really connect much with the petition. There are no common threads that unite them together, so these really could be in completely different psalms and it would make no difference to my reading. In fact, I would challenge my readers to pretend there is a completely different psalm beginning at verse 6, and after reading verses 6-9 tell me if it sounds incomplete or different from any of the other thanksgiving psalms. Same thing with verses 1-5, which form a relatively complete thought.
I wish I could say more, but this psalm is so generic I really can’t find anything else to remark upon.
Sunday, May 17, 2020
Bible Commentary - Psalms 27
Psalm 27 continues some of the patterns of Psalm 26. It is ostensibly another prayer psalm, after a fashion; it doesn’t have a clear “problem statement”, though David does mention a nebulous collection of enemies gathering to destroy him. In addition, verse 1 establishes a tone of prayer or intercession. The emphasis in that verse is upon God’s protection against David’s enemies or fears. This first verse reminds me of the opening to Psalm 18, where in Ps 18:2 David applies many epithets to God, describing him as a “rock”, “fortress”, “stronghold” and so on. In this case the opening has a similar tone, with David describing God as his “light”, “salvation” and “defense of my life”. After the opening these two psalms diverge however, and I will argue that Psalm 27 is much more a devotional psalm than a prayer psalm.
The similarity I perceive between this psalm and Psalm 26 is how in both cases the temple is a source of deliverance for David. In Psalm 26 it was David “going about the altar” washing his hands in innocence, while in this chapter it is dwelling in the temple itself that becomes David’s “secret place” where he will be “concealed” from “the day of trouble” (v. 5). In the first case, David’s activity around the temple is a reflection of his innocence and inner purity. In the second case, rather than being symbolic of David’s personal character, the temple is reimagined as a fortress or shelter in the midst of the storms of life. We can imagine David just hiding out in the temple while enemies swirl around him.
Yet, this is clearly metaphorical language. It’s not that David expected the temple to be some kind of fortress, impervious to attack, but that by dwelling in the presence of God that God would become his protector wherever he went, and the temple is what signifies God’s presence. David’s son, king Solomon, ordered Joab’s death when Joab fled into the temple and took hold of the horns of the altar there (1 Kings 2:28-29). This shows that it is not the physical temple that protects people from death, but rather based on our spiritual or emotional relationship to the God who lives there.
The temple becomes our shelter when, like David, we make it our home. It is the years of living in the presence of God that keeps us safely with him during the day of trouble. It is the time that David spent “going about the altar” that makes it his “secret place” and his “rock”. The one who flees to the temple only in the day of trouble will find that the shelter he is claiming does not recognize him, and perhaps does not accept him. It certainly didn’t accept Joab, anyway.
It is impossible for us to separate the devotion to God in verse 4 from the protection of God in verse 5. In fact, I would say one of the most striking aspects of Psalm 27 is the blending of devotion and dedication to God, with descriptions of David’s many enemies and conflict. They are interwoven repeatedly: verse 1 speaks of devotion, verses 2-3 speak of conflict, verse 4 speaks of devotion, verses 5-6 speak of conflict again, verses 7-11 speak of devotion again (mostly), verses 12-13 are conflict again, and verse 14 is largely devotion.
This is different from a typical prayer psalm. Rather than focusing on petition (asking God for help), the central effect is to focus our attention on devotion to God as the solution for conflict. In fact, it’s difficult to isolate a specific petition in this psalm. This psalm has several uses of the imperative to ask God for things, but David is not really asking for deliverance from his problems. He asks for God to “hear… when I cry” (v. 7), to “not hide your face” and several related claims(v. 9), and to “teach me your ways” (v. 11). The first one is vaguely intercessional, but the other two prayers are pretty clearly devotional, i.e. “do not hide your face” and “teach me your ways” are focused on strengthening David’s relationship with God, rather than improving his physical circumstances.
The emotional center of Psalm 27 is in verses 4 and 8. However, in this devotional psalm David nonetheless spends a lot of time talking about his enemies and conflict. Rather than focusing on the danger, he focuses much more on his victories and security over his enemies. The driving power behind those victories is his devotion to God. The overall effect is this: through our devotion to God, we can be victorious over our enemies and adverse circumstances. David acknowledges his struggles, but remains focused on God and does not even feel the need (at present) to plead for deliverance. Instead he makes a basic assumption that he will find victory in the shelter of God’s presence, and seemingly finds no need to ask for help so long as God is with him. While there are a handful of prayers, I would argue that they do not express the thematic center of this psalm which, as I previously described, is devotion to God.
Lastly, this psalm ends with yet another twist. David’s conclusion is that we should “wait for the LORD”. He feels it so strongly that he says it twice. This is a passive behavior, but it also expresses an underlying faith that God is bringing the solution to your life’s problems. It’s difficult to tie this to the devotional themes of the psalm. Perhaps this confidence in God is the result of David’s life of devotion. It is also the response to the enemies and conflict that he faces. Rather than taking an active stance to defeat his enemies, David simply believes that the power of God will arrive to defeat his enemies and to bring him victory.
If I may try to summarize, my interpretation of this psalm is that so long as David focuses on his devotion to God and seeks God first, he believes that God will deliver him from his enemies and bring him victory in battle. Devotion to God is the center of his life, and even with minimal intercession, he believes that by staying in God’s presence God will grant him deliverance almost directly as a consequence of that. After a life of devotion, the only thing you need to do to have victory is to “wait for the LORD” to bring it.
The similarity I perceive between this psalm and Psalm 26 is how in both cases the temple is a source of deliverance for David. In Psalm 26 it was David “going about the altar” washing his hands in innocence, while in this chapter it is dwelling in the temple itself that becomes David’s “secret place” where he will be “concealed” from “the day of trouble” (v. 5). In the first case, David’s activity around the temple is a reflection of his innocence and inner purity. In the second case, rather than being symbolic of David’s personal character, the temple is reimagined as a fortress or shelter in the midst of the storms of life. We can imagine David just hiding out in the temple while enemies swirl around him.
Yet, this is clearly metaphorical language. It’s not that David expected the temple to be some kind of fortress, impervious to attack, but that by dwelling in the presence of God that God would become his protector wherever he went, and the temple is what signifies God’s presence. David’s son, king Solomon, ordered Joab’s death when Joab fled into the temple and took hold of the horns of the altar there (1 Kings 2:28-29). This shows that it is not the physical temple that protects people from death, but rather based on our spiritual or emotional relationship to the God who lives there.
The temple becomes our shelter when, like David, we make it our home. It is the years of living in the presence of God that keeps us safely with him during the day of trouble. It is the time that David spent “going about the altar” that makes it his “secret place” and his “rock”. The one who flees to the temple only in the day of trouble will find that the shelter he is claiming does not recognize him, and perhaps does not accept him. It certainly didn’t accept Joab, anyway.
It is impossible for us to separate the devotion to God in verse 4 from the protection of God in verse 5. In fact, I would say one of the most striking aspects of Psalm 27 is the blending of devotion and dedication to God, with descriptions of David’s many enemies and conflict. They are interwoven repeatedly: verse 1 speaks of devotion, verses 2-3 speak of conflict, verse 4 speaks of devotion, verses 5-6 speak of conflict again, verses 7-11 speak of devotion again (mostly), verses 12-13 are conflict again, and verse 14 is largely devotion.
This is different from a typical prayer psalm. Rather than focusing on petition (asking God for help), the central effect is to focus our attention on devotion to God as the solution for conflict. In fact, it’s difficult to isolate a specific petition in this psalm. This psalm has several uses of the imperative to ask God for things, but David is not really asking for deliverance from his problems. He asks for God to “hear… when I cry” (v. 7), to “not hide your face” and several related claims(v. 9), and to “teach me your ways” (v. 11). The first one is vaguely intercessional, but the other two prayers are pretty clearly devotional, i.e. “do not hide your face” and “teach me your ways” are focused on strengthening David’s relationship with God, rather than improving his physical circumstances.
The emotional center of Psalm 27 is in verses 4 and 8. However, in this devotional psalm David nonetheless spends a lot of time talking about his enemies and conflict. Rather than focusing on the danger, he focuses much more on his victories and security over his enemies. The driving power behind those victories is his devotion to God. The overall effect is this: through our devotion to God, we can be victorious over our enemies and adverse circumstances. David acknowledges his struggles, but remains focused on God and does not even feel the need (at present) to plead for deliverance. Instead he makes a basic assumption that he will find victory in the shelter of God’s presence, and seemingly finds no need to ask for help so long as God is with him. While there are a handful of prayers, I would argue that they do not express the thematic center of this psalm which, as I previously described, is devotion to God.
Lastly, this psalm ends with yet another twist. David’s conclusion is that we should “wait for the LORD”. He feels it so strongly that he says it twice. This is a passive behavior, but it also expresses an underlying faith that God is bringing the solution to your life’s problems. It’s difficult to tie this to the devotional themes of the psalm. Perhaps this confidence in God is the result of David’s life of devotion. It is also the response to the enemies and conflict that he faces. Rather than taking an active stance to defeat his enemies, David simply believes that the power of God will arrive to defeat his enemies and to bring him victory.
If I may try to summarize, my interpretation of this psalm is that so long as David focuses on his devotion to God and seeks God first, he believes that God will deliver him from his enemies and bring him victory in battle. Devotion to God is the center of his life, and even with minimal intercession, he believes that by staying in God’s presence God will grant him deliverance almost directly as a consequence of that. After a life of devotion, the only thing you need to do to have victory is to “wait for the LORD” to bring it.
Sunday, May 10, 2020
Bible Commentary - Psalms 26
I have said this over and over, but we can usually identify the central theme or purpose of each psalm by studying the first verse. I am going to continue saying it because it continues being true, and it’s true for this psalm as well. The first verse really tells us a lot about the purpose of this psalm. It tells us that this is a prayer psalm, with David asking for deliverance from his enemies because of his “integrity” and persistent trust in God.
We can easily identify parallels and differences with Psalm 25, which we just read. The biggest similarity is David’s insistence that he trusts God, places his life in God’s hands, and has consistently sought to follow the LORD. We see that in Psalm 25:1, 20, and in this psalm we see it really throughout the whole psalm but it is clearly expressed in verses 1 and 11.
The differences are more substantial. One key difference is that in Psalm 25, David expresses a clear sense of his own guilt and need for God’s mercy. He appeals several times for forgiveness, that God would “pardon his iniquity” (Psalm 25:11). In this psalm, David insists repeatedly on his own innocence and separation from wicked men (verses 1-7). David asks to avoid the fate of evil men (v. 9), but his appeal is not to God’s mercy but rather to justice and his own innocence.
The result of this is that we can reverse many of the claims that I made about Psalm 25. I said that Psalm 25 focused on God’s mercy as the center of David’s prayer. At its heart, David’s prayer was that he has sinned in the past, but through God’s mercy David’s sins could be forgiven and could God nevertheless deliver him from his many enemies and troubles. I mentioned that this kind of structure, while it possesses some clear pre-exilic examples, is more common in the post-exilic period when the national consciousness of Israel was much more focused on their guilt in their conduct towards the LORD.
Psalm 26, in contrast, does not have any particular appeal to mercy. Instead, as I already mentioned, David insists on his own innocence and correspondingly appeals instead to justice. David should not suffer the fate of the wicked because he has not shared the deeds or the “assembly of evildoers” (v. 5). David acknowledges God’s punishment for those who do evil, and he doesn’t seem to have any problem with it because he does not foresee that as his own just result.
In all of these ways, Psalm 26 is much more similar to the theology of Job, Deuteronomy and elsewhere that hold God to be a great judge who punishes the wicked and blesses the righteous. This psalm places a tremendous importance on contrasting David’s behavior and habits from the “deceitful men”. In several verses, David describes his thoughts and activity as being centered around the temple. I believe this is a deliberate contrast, with David presented innocently, perhaps even naively, walking around the temple singing and praising God, while outside there are bands of “evildoers” and “wicked men” who are sitting and plotting together to commit some horrible crime or other. In this way David presents a clear contrast between himself and the wicked, which is the conventional moral framework in much of the OT. In my opinion this contrast is the central theme of this psalm.
Psalm 26, like Psalm 25, does not follow the standard formula for a prayer psalm in that it also lacks a “problem statement”; it has a brief statement of thanksgiving in verse 12, but otherwise the thanksgiving section is also absent.
I’m not sure what else to say about this chapter. The temple shows up as a important part of how David envisions righteousness, but I don’t otherwise see this psalm having particularly strong connections to other parts of the bible. David is praying for help from some unidentified crisis and he thinks God should judge between him and wicked men. Besides that, I don’t think I really have anything else to add.
We can easily identify parallels and differences with Psalm 25, which we just read. The biggest similarity is David’s insistence that he trusts God, places his life in God’s hands, and has consistently sought to follow the LORD. We see that in Psalm 25:1, 20, and in this psalm we see it really throughout the whole psalm but it is clearly expressed in verses 1 and 11.
The differences are more substantial. One key difference is that in Psalm 25, David expresses a clear sense of his own guilt and need for God’s mercy. He appeals several times for forgiveness, that God would “pardon his iniquity” (Psalm 25:11). In this psalm, David insists repeatedly on his own innocence and separation from wicked men (verses 1-7). David asks to avoid the fate of evil men (v. 9), but his appeal is not to God’s mercy but rather to justice and his own innocence.
The result of this is that we can reverse many of the claims that I made about Psalm 25. I said that Psalm 25 focused on God’s mercy as the center of David’s prayer. At its heart, David’s prayer was that he has sinned in the past, but through God’s mercy David’s sins could be forgiven and could God nevertheless deliver him from his many enemies and troubles. I mentioned that this kind of structure, while it possesses some clear pre-exilic examples, is more common in the post-exilic period when the national consciousness of Israel was much more focused on their guilt in their conduct towards the LORD.
Psalm 26, in contrast, does not have any particular appeal to mercy. Instead, as I already mentioned, David insists on his own innocence and correspondingly appeals instead to justice. David should not suffer the fate of the wicked because he has not shared the deeds or the “assembly of evildoers” (v. 5). David acknowledges God’s punishment for those who do evil, and he doesn’t seem to have any problem with it because he does not foresee that as his own just result.
In all of these ways, Psalm 26 is much more similar to the theology of Job, Deuteronomy and elsewhere that hold God to be a great judge who punishes the wicked and blesses the righteous. This psalm places a tremendous importance on contrasting David’s behavior and habits from the “deceitful men”. In several verses, David describes his thoughts and activity as being centered around the temple. I believe this is a deliberate contrast, with David presented innocently, perhaps even naively, walking around the temple singing and praising God, while outside there are bands of “evildoers” and “wicked men” who are sitting and plotting together to commit some horrible crime or other. In this way David presents a clear contrast between himself and the wicked, which is the conventional moral framework in much of the OT. In my opinion this contrast is the central theme of this psalm.
Psalm 26, like Psalm 25, does not follow the standard formula for a prayer psalm in that it also lacks a “problem statement”; it has a brief statement of thanksgiving in verse 12, but otherwise the thanksgiving section is also absent.
I’m not sure what else to say about this chapter. The temple shows up as a important part of how David envisions righteousness, but I don’t otherwise see this psalm having particularly strong connections to other parts of the bible. David is praying for help from some unidentified crisis and he thinks God should judge between him and wicked men. Besides that, I don’t think I really have anything else to add.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)