Psalm 46 is another psalm of Korah, and it shares superficial structural similarity to Psalms 42 and 43. The similarity I am referring to is the verse-and-chorus pattern where a particular chorus is repeated several times. In the case of Psalms 42 and 43, they have three choruses (when combined together). In this psalm, there are only 2 (in verses 7 and 11).
Besides that, I also want to point out how nearly every song of the sons of Korah has musical guidance “for the choir director” or “the director of music”. In my opinion, this reinforces the evidence that these songs were liturgical and either originally written for temple worship, or repurposed in antiquity for temple worship (depending on whether we view the header notes as original or a later addition). In any case, it’s clear that at some point it became liturgical and that is the form in which we receive it, as well as the likely reason it is part of the book of Psalms.
For the purposes of analyzing this psalm, I suggest dividing it into three pieces based on the three occurrences of the word “selah”, at the end of verses 3, 7 and 11. It nearly aligns with the verse-and-chorus pattern I mentioned above.
The reason why “selah” is a good point to divide the psalm is because, although the exact meaning is unclear, “selah” is commonly used in the psalms as a stop word to indicate a moment of reflection or thoughtfulness, and in many cases denotes the end of a logical progression leading up to that point. This makes it a good marker for dividing psalms, especially considering the original source material lacks punctuation and spacing that we would normally use for similar purposes.
With that said, my assessment is that all three sections of this psalm contain fairly similar themes and patterns. The overall theme of this psalm is that God is in control, and no amount of churning or turbulence in “the nations” can disturb the works or plans of God.
Verse 1 sets out the general message: “God is our refuge and strength… in trouble”. The rest of the psalm expands on what kind of “trouble” the sons of Korah are thinking about, and for the most part it is “the nations” they are concerned about.
Verses 2-3 paint a picture of natural turmoil and disaster, with mountains “falling” and “quaking”, and waters “roaring”. I don’t personally take this at face value, however, mainly because of the following sections. In particular, look at the language of verse 6. In verse 3, it is the waters roaring; in verse 6, it is “the nations” roaring. It also says that when God raises his voice, “the earth melted”. In verse 11, the psalm directly equates the nations with “the earth”, when he says “I will be exalted in the nations, I will be exalted in the earth”.
In my opinion, this psalm is a classic example of Hebrew poetry where it is not words that are rhymed, but thoughts and ideas. All three sections present a parallel concept: the earth (and the nations that constitute the earth) are in turmoil, roaring and foaming and boiling with wrath and warfare, and God is a constant rock through it all, the “stronghold” that Israel can cling to. As verse 5 puts it, “God is in the midst of her, she will not be moved”.
This parallel construction means that the turmoil of nature in verses 1-3 is probably a literary allusion for the turmoil of peoples and nations that we see in the rest of the psalm, especially because similar language is used to describe all of them. The consistency of the repeated chorus seems to drive home the consistency and reliability of God’s support for them, as their trustworthy foundation and helper. I’m reminded of “ebenezer”, the “rock of help” in 1 Samuel 7:12, when God delivered Israel from the oppression of the Philistines. This is a perfect example of the “turmoil” of the nations threatening Israel, and God being a “rock” for them by saving them in battle from their enemies. The language of Samuel, calling God a “rock of help” is very similar to the language of this psalm, and while I don’t believe there is a direct literary connection between that story and this psalm, I believe they share similar language because of a common cultural tradition and because they have similar expectations for how God would interact with Israel.
We especially see God’s activity in verses 8-9, where he brings “desolation” and causes warfare to cease. This focus on ending warfare and bringing peace to the earth emphasizes once again how “the nations” are the primary concern of the psalmist, and the anxiety and fears of the psalmist revolve around hostility of Israel’s neighbors. The history of warfare present in the books of Samuel and Kings give us vivid demonstrations of why the psalmist’s concern was so frequently justified, with many hostile nations repeatedly invading both Israel and Judah and killing many.
This psalm does not have a direct petition, so it reads more like a psalm of praise than anything else. Underlying the text is a general sentiment of encouraging the readers to trust in God. In that sense, I once again find similarity to Psalms 42 and 43, which continuously refrained “put your hope in God”. In this case, the refrain is “God is our stronghold”, which implies that we should trust in him.
The last point I want to address is verse 4, which says, “There is a river whose streams make glad the city of our God”. In the midst of everything else I’ve discussed, which can be analyzed pretty clearly, this verse is a bit of an anomaly. More to the point, I simply have no idea which river is being discussed here. “The city of God” is probably Jerusalem or Zion, but there isn’t any major river going through or near Jerusalem. Usually when the bible talks about “the river” without explanation, it is referring to the Jordan river (much less frequently, it could also mean the Euphrates river or the Nile river, which are both much more distant). The Jordan river does not go to Jerusalem however, so I don’t know why it would be mentioned in connection with “the city of our God”.
Overall, my best guess at interpreting v. 4 is to say that the river is also symbolic rather than literal, and that it is symbolic of water and life, such as the water flowing out of the two rocks that Moses struck with his staff when Israel was wandering in the desert of Sinai. It’s possible that by the time this psalm was composed, more symbolic and allusive interpretations were emerging to describe the incident of Moses and the rock. It’s also possible that the river is simply a metaphor for bubbly, flowing water, and in the midst of a desert, that’s enough to make anyone joyful.
These explanations are not entirely satisfactory to me, but I don’t know much more than that. Please comment if you have suggestions about what “the river” could refer to!
No comments:
Post a Comment