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.
Sunday, May 31, 2020
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.
Friday, October 11, 2019
Bible Commentary - Psalms 25
Psalm 25 is clearly a prayer psalm, but it does not follow the pattern of the prayer psalms that I have previously described. In some important ways, Psalm 25 deviates from previous visions of God’s role as the great justice, and perhaps more closely follows the line of post-exilic Jewish thought. Allow me to explain these points in turn.
A typical prayer psalm that we have analyzed so far has three parts: a problem statement, a petition for relief, and thanksgiving in anticipation of God’s response. One strong example of this format, out of several I could offer, is Psalm 18. Psalm 25 differs in that it does not offer a clear problem statement, i.e. the situation that compels David to seek the LORD’s deliverance. He briefly mentions his enemies’ “violent hatred” (v. 19), but structurally it is not in the right place to justify David’s petition as per the usual format. Secondly, the prayer in Psalm 25 does not contain thanksgiving in anticipation of God’s deliverance.
Besides these structural differences, the psalm also modifies its depiction of God and even more starkly, it’s depiction of the petitioner and his relationship with God. In many other places, God is depicted as the great judge who blesses the righteous and punishes the wicked. We see this moral framework in such places as Job and Deuteronomy, but also in Psalms 1, 5, 7, 9, and many others. In this framework, David typically places himself in the righteous category, his enemies in the wicked category, and then implores God to fulfill his role as the judge by delivering David (the righteous) and punishing or destroying his enemies (the wicked).
I really want to focus on Psalm 7 as a contrast. In Psalm 7:3-5, David specifically calls down a curse on himself and says that if he has done any wicked thing, then “let the enemy pursue my soul and overtake it”. In other words, if he has done anything wrong then it is right that God should destroy his life as fair punishment.
Psalm 25 could not be more different. In this case, even though David includes occasional references to his “enemies” as a source of distress, and he also petitions the LORD for deliverance, instead of focusing on the wickedness of his enemies he focuses on his own sins and wickedness and pleads the LORD for mercy and forgiveness. For examples, see v. 7, 11, 18. In a sense, verse 8 is the same thing where David is acknowledging that God leads “sinners”, such as himself.
David is not making a single claim anywhere that he is innocent, like what we found in Psalm 7. Perhaps David believes that his guilt is the reason why he is now suffering. Instead, David acknowledges his sins and asks for forgiveness. Furthermore, David argues that God should heal and restore him not because he is righteous, but because he places his faith in God. We see this theme throughout the psalm, in various forms, such as verses 1-3, 5, 10, 12, 14-15, 20-21. “My eyes are continually toward the LORD” (v. 15).
David is basically saying that he is not innocent; he has done things that are wrong and evil in God’s sight. However, he looks to God for healing and deliverance, and continues to hope that God will forgive him and restore him. I will also add in, verses 4-5 show that David wants to be taught God’s ways and God’s truth, so it’s not just that he wants to continue doing evil while God continues to forgive him (this is a common criticism by non-believers who see forgiveness as a mechanism to defer the punishment of sin while continuing the practice of sin). It shows that David wishes to break the cycle of sin and punishment, but he knows that only God has the power to do either: to lead David out of sin, and to forestall the punishment that David rightly deserves for previous sins.
Lastly, this psalm seems to have more in common with post-exilic Jewish thought than pre-exilic, for the simple reason that it focuses so much on Israelite guilt and forgiveness, themes that were greatly amplified after Israel’s national punishment in the Babylonian exile. For instance, consider the prayer of the Levites in Nehemiah 9, or the prayer of Ezra in Ezra 9. Not to say that there was no acknowledgement of guilt in pre-exilic Israel (such as the many rebellions and idolatries in the books of Numbers and Judges), but thematically it became more important and more frequent in post-exilic discourse for obvious reasons.
To me this prayer is significant because it shows that we can have faith in God, and yet have sin in our lives. Like David, we seek forgiveness for the things we have done wrong, we desire instruction from God to teach us how to be righteous, and we seek deliverance from our enemies and troubles, even if they are the punishment that we deserve. The key is in verse 12, to fear the LORD, and from that fear come the blessings of verses 13-15.
A typical prayer psalm that we have analyzed so far has three parts: a problem statement, a petition for relief, and thanksgiving in anticipation of God’s response. One strong example of this format, out of several I could offer, is Psalm 18. Psalm 25 differs in that it does not offer a clear problem statement, i.e. the situation that compels David to seek the LORD’s deliverance. He briefly mentions his enemies’ “violent hatred” (v. 19), but structurally it is not in the right place to justify David’s petition as per the usual format. Secondly, the prayer in Psalm 25 does not contain thanksgiving in anticipation of God’s deliverance.
Besides these structural differences, the psalm also modifies its depiction of God and even more starkly, it’s depiction of the petitioner and his relationship with God. In many other places, God is depicted as the great judge who blesses the righteous and punishes the wicked. We see this moral framework in such places as Job and Deuteronomy, but also in Psalms 1, 5, 7, 9, and many others. In this framework, David typically places himself in the righteous category, his enemies in the wicked category, and then implores God to fulfill his role as the judge by delivering David (the righteous) and punishing or destroying his enemies (the wicked).
I really want to focus on Psalm 7 as a contrast. In Psalm 7:3-5, David specifically calls down a curse on himself and says that if he has done any wicked thing, then “let the enemy pursue my soul and overtake it”. In other words, if he has done anything wrong then it is right that God should destroy his life as fair punishment.
Psalm 25 could not be more different. In this case, even though David includes occasional references to his “enemies” as a source of distress, and he also petitions the LORD for deliverance, instead of focusing on the wickedness of his enemies he focuses on his own sins and wickedness and pleads the LORD for mercy and forgiveness. For examples, see v. 7, 11, 18. In a sense, verse 8 is the same thing where David is acknowledging that God leads “sinners”, such as himself.
David is not making a single claim anywhere that he is innocent, like what we found in Psalm 7. Perhaps David believes that his guilt is the reason why he is now suffering. Instead, David acknowledges his sins and asks for forgiveness. Furthermore, David argues that God should heal and restore him not because he is righteous, but because he places his faith in God. We see this theme throughout the psalm, in various forms, such as verses 1-3, 5, 10, 12, 14-15, 20-21. “My eyes are continually toward the LORD” (v. 15).
David is basically saying that he is not innocent; he has done things that are wrong and evil in God’s sight. However, he looks to God for healing and deliverance, and continues to hope that God will forgive him and restore him. I will also add in, verses 4-5 show that David wants to be taught God’s ways and God’s truth, so it’s not just that he wants to continue doing evil while God continues to forgive him (this is a common criticism by non-believers who see forgiveness as a mechanism to defer the punishment of sin while continuing the practice of sin). It shows that David wishes to break the cycle of sin and punishment, but he knows that only God has the power to do either: to lead David out of sin, and to forestall the punishment that David rightly deserves for previous sins.
Lastly, this psalm seems to have more in common with post-exilic Jewish thought than pre-exilic, for the simple reason that it focuses so much on Israelite guilt and forgiveness, themes that were greatly amplified after Israel’s national punishment in the Babylonian exile. For instance, consider the prayer of the Levites in Nehemiah 9, or the prayer of Ezra in Ezra 9. Not to say that there was no acknowledgement of guilt in pre-exilic Israel (such as the many rebellions and idolatries in the books of Numbers and Judges), but thematically it became more important and more frequent in post-exilic discourse for obvious reasons.
To me this prayer is significant because it shows that we can have faith in God, and yet have sin in our lives. Like David, we seek forgiveness for the things we have done wrong, we desire instruction from God to teach us how to be righteous, and we seek deliverance from our enemies and troubles, even if they are the punishment that we deserve. The key is in verse 12, to fear the LORD, and from that fear come the blessings of verses 13-15.
Tuesday, May 21, 2019
Bible Commentary - Psalms 24
This psalm defies my standard interpretations. I feel like I’ve been saying that a lot recently. In my introduction, I mentioned that the psalms are very diverse or heterogeneous. Every time I am challenged to generalize a particular psalm, that is another data point showing the extensive variety of themes and structures in the book of Psalms.
Taking this psalm by its first verse, it would seem that this is a psalm of praise. “The earth is the LORD’s, and all that is within it”. However, in this case it defies standard convention because almost the entirety of the rest of this psalm is not really a praise psalm.
Instead, it splits into three parts. The first part is the introduction in verses 1-2. The second part in verses 3-6 is a description of the righteous. This is reminiscent of Psalm 15 which started with a very similar question: “Who may dwell on your holy hill?” (Psalm 15:1). In this case, verse 3 asks “Who may stand in his holy place?” Both Psalm 15 and verses 3-6 here answer the question by describing the characteristics of the righteous person.
The third part in verses 7-10 breaks off in a completely different direction, prophesying the entrance of God into … somewhere. That the gates and “ancient doors” should be opened up that God may enter. It doesn’t say where, but we can reasonably guess it’s referring to either the temple or Jerusalem. My inclination is to say it’s the temple, since that was the subject of verse 3, but it’s not a sure thing.
There are many questions for which I can offer few answers. The first question is why these three pieces are tied together in the same psalm? The second question is why verses 7-10 use a repeating structure with a recurring phrase “king of glory”. The third question is to look for meaningful differences between verses 3-6 and Psalm 15. I will try to address these questions as best as I can, in order.
First, why are these three parts in the same psalm? To be honest, I have no idea. In situations like this I typically look to other commentaries to enlighten my confusion, but Rashi says nothing and the NIV commentary does not offer much insight into the particular structure of this psalm or why these ideas are combined in this way. One thing I noticed while reading the NIV commentary is that both the second and third section contain the idea of “entering”. The second part describes the righteous people who can ascend the hill of God and enter the temple. The third part is a triumphant announcement of God’s entry into the city (or temple). That is one possible connection. I don’t see how either part is associated with God’s lordship over the world in verses 1-2, however.
The NIV commentary also mentioned that this psalm was plausibly composed when David returned the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem, or as a commemoration of that event (see 2 Samuel 6). This is a bit speculative because the psalm does not itself mention the ark, only “the king of glory”. The triumphal entry in this psalm certainly reminds us of David and the ark, though.
For the second question, I would guess this is as least partly musical; remember that this was originally a song. In addition, the repeated phrase “king of glory” highlights the celebratory nature of the psalm. God is the “king of glory” because he is exalted, honored, praised, etc. I think it’s mostly musical though, because these are like choruses that would be repeated over and over. In modern music, Handel’s Messiah has a beautiful chorus based on this psalm, which sounds very much like how I imagine this psalm was originally intended.
For the third question, verses 3-6 and Psalm 15 are both mostly similar. One minor difference is that Psalm 15 places a strong emphasis on honesty and integrity in both our words and our business dealings. Verses 3-6, in contrast, mentioned integrity at the end of verse 4 (“and has not sworn deceitfully”), but it is much less of a focus. Instead, verses 3-6 seem to pay the most attention to the concept of purity.
“Clean hands and a pure heart” use the language of purity and cleanliness, but the meaning is relatively similar to Psalm 15. “Clean hands” means that one has not committed any crimes, that one’s hands are “innocent” in some sense. “A pure heart” means that one’s thoughts and intentions are good, pure and innocent.
The phrase taken as a whole means that a righteous person should be innocent in both thought and deed. Psalm 15, in contrast, says that a righteous person should have integrity in what they say and what they do. In conclusion, these are two subtly different ways of saying what amounts to roughly the same thing. As a righteous person, one is expected to be honest, pure and innocent in both thought, word and action. It’s not enough to be honest in your dealings if you lie and slander, and it’s not enough to be honest in your words if your thoughts and intentions (your “heart”) are bad. You must have honest and good intentions, honest and good words, and honest and righteous deeds.
Finally, I want my readers to think about the placement of this psalm after Psalms 22 and 23. If we look at them broadly, Psalm 22 is a desperate cry for help, which ends in praise but begins in despair. Psalm 23 is a very quiet psalm, confident in God’s salvation. Psalm 24 is much more boisterous, with a joyful declaration of God’s imminent entry into Jerusalem and/or the temple.
Psalm 23 ends with “I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever” (Psalm 23:6), and Psalm 24 begins by asking “Who may ascend the hill of the LORD?” From this point of view, Psalm 24 continues from the exact place Psalm 23 left off. Furthermore, if we look at these three psalms together, Psalm 22 is like the beginning of a prayer psalm with its “problem statement”, and Psalms 23 and 24 feel like the declaration of God’s help and the resulting praise and thanksgiving.
I would try to take this further but the connection is not that strong. I would describe this as a “general sense” that the psalms may be tied together in this way, but it’s not conclusive and I could potentially be over-interpreting the situation. I will leave further analysis as an exercise for my readers, because it exceeds my capabilities.
Taking this psalm by its first verse, it would seem that this is a psalm of praise. “The earth is the LORD’s, and all that is within it”. However, in this case it defies standard convention because almost the entirety of the rest of this psalm is not really a praise psalm.
Instead, it splits into three parts. The first part is the introduction in verses 1-2. The second part in verses 3-6 is a description of the righteous. This is reminiscent of Psalm 15 which started with a very similar question: “Who may dwell on your holy hill?” (Psalm 15:1). In this case, verse 3 asks “Who may stand in his holy place?” Both Psalm 15 and verses 3-6 here answer the question by describing the characteristics of the righteous person.
The third part in verses 7-10 breaks off in a completely different direction, prophesying the entrance of God into … somewhere. That the gates and “ancient doors” should be opened up that God may enter. It doesn’t say where, but we can reasonably guess it’s referring to either the temple or Jerusalem. My inclination is to say it’s the temple, since that was the subject of verse 3, but it’s not a sure thing.
There are many questions for which I can offer few answers. The first question is why these three pieces are tied together in the same psalm? The second question is why verses 7-10 use a repeating structure with a recurring phrase “king of glory”. The third question is to look for meaningful differences between verses 3-6 and Psalm 15. I will try to address these questions as best as I can, in order.
First, why are these three parts in the same psalm? To be honest, I have no idea. In situations like this I typically look to other commentaries to enlighten my confusion, but Rashi says nothing and the NIV commentary does not offer much insight into the particular structure of this psalm or why these ideas are combined in this way. One thing I noticed while reading the NIV commentary is that both the second and third section contain the idea of “entering”. The second part describes the righteous people who can ascend the hill of God and enter the temple. The third part is a triumphant announcement of God’s entry into the city (or temple). That is one possible connection. I don’t see how either part is associated with God’s lordship over the world in verses 1-2, however.
The NIV commentary also mentioned that this psalm was plausibly composed when David returned the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem, or as a commemoration of that event (see 2 Samuel 6). This is a bit speculative because the psalm does not itself mention the ark, only “the king of glory”. The triumphal entry in this psalm certainly reminds us of David and the ark, though.
For the second question, I would guess this is as least partly musical; remember that this was originally a song. In addition, the repeated phrase “king of glory” highlights the celebratory nature of the psalm. God is the “king of glory” because he is exalted, honored, praised, etc. I think it’s mostly musical though, because these are like choruses that would be repeated over and over. In modern music, Handel’s Messiah has a beautiful chorus based on this psalm, which sounds very much like how I imagine this psalm was originally intended.
For the third question, verses 3-6 and Psalm 15 are both mostly similar. One minor difference is that Psalm 15 places a strong emphasis on honesty and integrity in both our words and our business dealings. Verses 3-6, in contrast, mentioned integrity at the end of verse 4 (“and has not sworn deceitfully”), but it is much less of a focus. Instead, verses 3-6 seem to pay the most attention to the concept of purity.
“Clean hands and a pure heart” use the language of purity and cleanliness, but the meaning is relatively similar to Psalm 15. “Clean hands” means that one has not committed any crimes, that one’s hands are “innocent” in some sense. “A pure heart” means that one’s thoughts and intentions are good, pure and innocent.
The phrase taken as a whole means that a righteous person should be innocent in both thought and deed. Psalm 15, in contrast, says that a righteous person should have integrity in what they say and what they do. In conclusion, these are two subtly different ways of saying what amounts to roughly the same thing. As a righteous person, one is expected to be honest, pure and innocent in both thought, word and action. It’s not enough to be honest in your dealings if you lie and slander, and it’s not enough to be honest in your words if your thoughts and intentions (your “heart”) are bad. You must have honest and good intentions, honest and good words, and honest and righteous deeds.
Finally, I want my readers to think about the placement of this psalm after Psalms 22 and 23. If we look at them broadly, Psalm 22 is a desperate cry for help, which ends in praise but begins in despair. Psalm 23 is a very quiet psalm, confident in God’s salvation. Psalm 24 is much more boisterous, with a joyful declaration of God’s imminent entry into Jerusalem and/or the temple.
Psalm 23 ends with “I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever” (Psalm 23:6), and Psalm 24 begins by asking “Who may ascend the hill of the LORD?” From this point of view, Psalm 24 continues from the exact place Psalm 23 left off. Furthermore, if we look at these three psalms together, Psalm 22 is like the beginning of a prayer psalm with its “problem statement”, and Psalms 23 and 24 feel like the declaration of God’s help and the resulting praise and thanksgiving.
I would try to take this further but the connection is not that strong. I would describe this as a “general sense” that the psalms may be tied together in this way, but it’s not conclusive and I could potentially be over-interpreting the situation. I will leave further analysis as an exercise for my readers, because it exceeds my capabilities.
Tuesday, May 14, 2019
Bible Commentary - Psalms 23
Psalm 23 is so popular and so widely quoted it’s almost difficult to look at it objectively. Phrases like “the LORD is my shepherd” are so commonly repeated it’s hard to even think about separately from how it’s used by popular culture. Nevertheless, I will do my best.
Psalm 23 is quite distinct from the psalms we have read so far. It is a gentle, pastoral psalm with a lot of soothing imagery. David, who historically was a shepherd in his youth, envisages God as a shepherd and himself as the sheep. Verses 2, 3 and 4 all contain various allusions to David as a sheep. In verse 2, David is lying down in green pastures and led besides water. In verse 3 David is guided by God, and in verse 4 David is comforted by the rod and staff, which are common shepherd tools.
First of all, David’s role as a sheep emphasizes his own passivity and God’s activity. In verses 2-3 David is the recipient of God’s leadership, which is highlighted by the repetition of the word “he”. “He makes me,” “he leads me”, “he restores me”, “he guides me”.
Verses 4-5 continue this in a more direct way, using the second person pronoun “you”. “You are with me”, “your rod and staff comfort me”, “you prepare”, “you anointed”. It changes to second person which makes the activity much more personal and less abstract: David is speaking directly to God now, and not talking about God to someone else. Nevertheless, the overall tone is similar because it continues to emphasize God’s protective influence surrounding David.
There are four uses of the word “I” in this psalm; first in verse 1, then twice in verse 4, and then once in verse 6. He says, “I shall not want”, “I walk through the valley,” “I shall not fear”, “I will dwell in the house of the LORD”. The only one of these that really constitutes an action is the second one, when David “walks through the valley of the shadow of death”.
The only thing that David needs to do is walk; he walks through the valley of the shadow, and God is the one who guides him, leads him, comforts him, restores him, and anoints him. Most of the activity is God’s, and as long as David continues to walk, God will lead him and bring him through the darkness.
Psalm 23 draws a stark contrast with Psalm 22, which immediately precedes it. In Psalm 22, we see evidence of David’s anxiety and doubts of God’s saving power. Psalm 22 also expresses David’s hope and confidence in God, giving it an emotionally mixed character that is typical of “the waiting”, the moments between when a prayer is offered and when it is answered, when his faith is tried and tested.
In Psalm 23, there are no hints of this anxiety. Instead, the psalm is characterized by confident declarations of God’s faithfulness and his protective nature. Once again the first verse of the psalm typifies its whole message: God is my shepherd. David can trust that God, his shepherd, will guide him, lead him, protect him and feed him. The shepherd protects and cares for the sheep, almost like a parent would protect and care for a young child. Even though verse 4 has David walking through the “valley of the shadow of death”, rather than being a source of anxiety this is yet another opportunity for David to announce his trust in God: “I fear no evil, for you are with me”. Notice once again the simple, declarative sentences that leave no room for doubts or questions.
I’m not sure why these two psalms are put next to each other, but after the fears and doubts of the previous chapter, this psalm clearly has a calming influence, reminding us of God’s faithfulness and protection in all circumstances. David’s final thought is that he will dwell in the house of the LORD forever. In David’s own life, he started out in the Judean wilderness as a shepherd himself, and ended his life as the king in Jerusalem. In some ways the Psalm itself mimicks this progression, as David describes himself as a sheep wandering through green pastures and lakes, and ends by placing himself in the temple, which was located in Jerusalem. In spite of the pastoral origin, David chooses his forever home, the place he would spend the rest of his life, to be the house of the LORD where he could dwell in the presence of God always.
Psalm 23 is quite distinct from the psalms we have read so far. It is a gentle, pastoral psalm with a lot of soothing imagery. David, who historically was a shepherd in his youth, envisages God as a shepherd and himself as the sheep. Verses 2, 3 and 4 all contain various allusions to David as a sheep. In verse 2, David is lying down in green pastures and led besides water. In verse 3 David is guided by God, and in verse 4 David is comforted by the rod and staff, which are common shepherd tools.
First of all, David’s role as a sheep emphasizes his own passivity and God’s activity. In verses 2-3 David is the recipient of God’s leadership, which is highlighted by the repetition of the word “he”. “He makes me,” “he leads me”, “he restores me”, “he guides me”.
Verses 4-5 continue this in a more direct way, using the second person pronoun “you”. “You are with me”, “your rod and staff comfort me”, “you prepare”, “you anointed”. It changes to second person which makes the activity much more personal and less abstract: David is speaking directly to God now, and not talking about God to someone else. Nevertheless, the overall tone is similar because it continues to emphasize God’s protective influence surrounding David.
There are four uses of the word “I” in this psalm; first in verse 1, then twice in verse 4, and then once in verse 6. He says, “I shall not want”, “I walk through the valley,” “I shall not fear”, “I will dwell in the house of the LORD”. The only one of these that really constitutes an action is the second one, when David “walks through the valley of the shadow of death”.
The only thing that David needs to do is walk; he walks through the valley of the shadow, and God is the one who guides him, leads him, comforts him, restores him, and anoints him. Most of the activity is God’s, and as long as David continues to walk, God will lead him and bring him through the darkness.
Psalm 23 draws a stark contrast with Psalm 22, which immediately precedes it. In Psalm 22, we see evidence of David’s anxiety and doubts of God’s saving power. Psalm 22 also expresses David’s hope and confidence in God, giving it an emotionally mixed character that is typical of “the waiting”, the moments between when a prayer is offered and when it is answered, when his faith is tried and tested.
In Psalm 23, there are no hints of this anxiety. Instead, the psalm is characterized by confident declarations of God’s faithfulness and his protective nature. Once again the first verse of the psalm typifies its whole message: God is my shepherd. David can trust that God, his shepherd, will guide him, lead him, protect him and feed him. The shepherd protects and cares for the sheep, almost like a parent would protect and care for a young child. Even though verse 4 has David walking through the “valley of the shadow of death”, rather than being a source of anxiety this is yet another opportunity for David to announce his trust in God: “I fear no evil, for you are with me”. Notice once again the simple, declarative sentences that leave no room for doubts or questions.
I’m not sure why these two psalms are put next to each other, but after the fears and doubts of the previous chapter, this psalm clearly has a calming influence, reminding us of God’s faithfulness and protection in all circumstances. David’s final thought is that he will dwell in the house of the LORD forever. In David’s own life, he started out in the Judean wilderness as a shepherd himself, and ended his life as the king in Jerusalem. In some ways the Psalm itself mimicks this progression, as David describes himself as a sheep wandering through green pastures and lakes, and ends by placing himself in the temple, which was located in Jerusalem. In spite of the pastoral origin, David chooses his forever home, the place he would spend the rest of his life, to be the house of the LORD where he could dwell in the presence of God always.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)