Bible Commentary - Psalms 30

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.