IMPRECATION AND RIGHTEOUSNESS IN
PSALM 35
by
Frederic
Clarke Putnam, M.Div.
Biblical Theological Seminary, 1978
A THESIS
Submitted
to the Faculty of
Biblical
Theological Seminary
in partial
fulfillment of the requirements
for
the degree of
MASTER OF SACRED
THEOLOGY
May, 1980
Digitized by Ted Hildebrandt and
proofed by Dr. Perry Phillips,
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
iv
INTRODUCTION 1
I.
CLASSIFICATION OF THE IMPRECATORY PSALMS 3
II.
SCHOOLS OF INTERPRETATION OF THE IMPRECATORY PSALMS 10
Introduction 10
Imprecation as Quotation 10
Imprecation as Prophecy 10
Imprecation as Moral Indignation 12
Imprecation as Cultural Phenomena 14
Imprecation as Philosophy 19
Imprecation as Zeal 20
Imprecation as Ethics of the Consummation 22
III.
A STUDY OF PSALM 35 27
The Basis for the Selection of a
Text 27
Introduction to Psalm 35 28
A Literal Translation of Psalm 35 30
Exegesis of Psalm 35 32
Strophe I: Verses 1-10 32
Strophe II: Verses 11-18 45
Strophe III: Verses
19-28 61
Evidences of Trial in Psalm 35 81
Conclusion 85
New Testament Considerations 86
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSION 90
APPENDIX 92
BIBLIOGRAPHY 105
LIST OF
TABLES
1.
Form-critical Analysis
1-A. Form-critical Analysis of
Psalms Identified
as Imprecatory 97
1-B. Form--critical Analysis of
Selected Psalms 101
2.
Legal Vocabulary in Psalm 35 103
3.
Interrelationship of the Parties in Psalm 35 104
Acknowledgments
Although the final responsibility rests upon the author,
without
the help and succour of many
people this thesis would not have been pos-
sible. The library staff of
Biblical Theological Seminary was most
patient with my long-term
borrowing of books for research; the staff of
Tenth Presbyterian Church has
graciously tolerated my constant presence
for study, writing and typing;
Richard C. Wolfe, J.D. deciphered and
transcribed the manuscript
(sic!) into typed form; my professors at Bi-
blical Seminary who have taught
me to desire the proper understanding of
the Word of God and the true
knowledge of its Author; my advisor, Mr.
Thomas V. Taylor, who allowed
me to go my own way in study and guided in
the most gracious way possible;
the other members of my advisory commit-
tee--Mr. James C. Pakala, who
helped with the format of footnotes and
bibliographical entries and
made many helpful suggestions concerning the
body and message of the thesis,
and Dr. Robert C. Newman, whose comments
and corrections were an
invaluable aid in eliminating errors in the text.
Special mention must also be
made of my family: my daughter, Kiersten,
copied and collated the final
copies and was understanding of my absence
and pre-occupation; my wife,
Emilie, has been my constant support, help
and encouragment in ways
innumerable for these many busy months. Above
all, my Lord, Jesus Christ, has
strengthened me and given me the perse-
verance necessary to bring this
work to completion. To Him be the praise!
iv
INTRODUCTION
Problem
This thesis seeks to answer the question: How can the
psalmist
curse his enemies and still
claim to be righteous? At times one verse
contains both a prayer for
their destruction and an assertion of his own
righteousness (or at least of
his innocence). On what basis does the
psalmist write these words?
This thesis, by the approach described
below, will arrive at a
suggested answer for these questions.
It does not attempt to answer the questions of Edwards,
or Vos.1 Neither is
the larger question of the presence of the impreca-
tory psalms in Scripture
addressed.2 The question of this thesis was
answered on the basis of one
particular text, and extrapolation of the
1B.B. Edwards, "The
Imprecations in the Scriptures," Bibliotheca
Sacra 1 (February 1844):
97-110. Edwards shows that the presence of im-
precations
does not negate the doctrine of divine inspiration. Joseph
Hammond,
"The Vindictive Psalms Vindicated," The Expositor, series 1, 3
(1876):
27-47, 101-118, 188-203, 402-471.
imprecations
are comminations (statements of belief), not curses, and
pose
not ethical problem for the Christian. J.G. Vos, "The Ethical
Problem
of the Imprecatory Psalms,"
(May
1942): 123-138. Vos discusses the ethical implications of the im-
precations
for Christians and their use by the Church.
2 There may be only a
fine semantic difference between the problem
of
the presence of the imprecatory psalms in Scripture and the question
of
the psalmist's profession of righteousness in the face of his curses.
In
both cases the presence of the curse raises the question. Therefore,
although
it is necessary to examine some of the proposed answers to the
question
of the presence of the imprecatory
psalms in order to recognize
"what
has gone before," this thesis will address the problem as it is
stated
in the paragraph above. A section dealing briefly with the
question
of the Christian's use of the imprecatory psalms (and of impre-
cations
in general) will be found in the section entitled "New Testament
Considerations,"
pp. 86-89, below.
1
2
proposed solution to every curse
in either the Psalter or all of the
Bible was not considered.
Approach
After a brief introduction to the genre of the individual
lament
and a statement of the problem
in terms of a suggested sub-genre (the
imprecatory lament) various
attempted solutions are discussed.1
Psalm 35 is the passage chosen for exegesis and the
results of
that exegesis were then
compared with certain New Testament considera-
tions because of the apparent
contradiction between them. The question
of the Christian use of these psalms
was considered briefly and these
conclusions were drawn together
to make application to and, hopefully,
give understanding to the
lIt will be noticed that
although many of the approaches examined
quote
from and allude to the psalms and even refer to them, this writer
did
not read one book or article approaching the question from an exege-
tical
base. The only exception to this is a paper: Thomas V. Taylor,
"A
Short Study in the Problem of Psalm 109." (
Press,
n.d.).
I. CLASSIFICATION OF THE IMPRECATORY
PSALMS
Form-critical
analysis of the psalms of lament
It is "by now a dictum of psalter studies that an
investigation
of literary patterns is basic
to programs in these studies."1 Thus does
J.W. Wevers begin his
"Study of the Form Criticism of Individual Complaint
Psalms" in which he
analyzes the general form-critical approach to the
individual psalms of lament. In
seeking to discover, therefore, whether
or not a class of psalms could
be called "imprecatory psalms," we shall
use this approach also,
especially since most of the psalms traditionally
called imprecatory are also
commonly called laments (by followers of
Gunkel as well as by others).2
Wevers has analyzed the individual complaint (lament)
psalm into
five components.3
These are: (1) the invocation of the divine name--both
Myhilox< or hvAhy; are used, the determining factor is direct
address;4
(2) the complaint--the reason
compelling the psalmist to approach God in
1J.H. Wevers, "A
Study of the Form Criticism of Traditional Com-
plaint
Psalms," Vetus Testamentum 6
(1956): 80.
2John H. Walton, Chronological Charts of the Old Testament,
(Grand
Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Company, 1978), p. 73. Cf. Ian Ross
McKenzie
Parsons, "Evil Speaking in the Psalms of Lament" (unpublished
Ph.D.
dissertation,
3Wevers, "A
Study," pp. 80f. The components are his but the
examples
are my own, selected intentionally as explained below.
4Psalms 35.1, 17, 22(twice),
23, 24; 55.1, 9; 58.6 (twice); 59.1, 5, 11;
69.1,
16, 29; 83.1(twice), 13; 109.1, 26; 137.7.
3
4
this way;1 (3) the
prayer--that which the psalmist wants the Lord to do
to his enemy, which may or may
not have motivations (reasons why the Lord
should answer his prayer) and
is in either the imperative or the jussive
mood;2 (4) either an
expression of certainty--the psalmist is now sure
that the Lord has heard his
cry--or a vow of that which the psalmist will
do in thanksgiving for God's
gracious intervention (these complete his
analysis, since both may be
present in the same psalm).3 It is worth
noting that the order of the
elements in several of the psalms approxi-
mates the order given by
Wevers.
Brueggeman's analysis differs only slightly:4
(1) the address,
which establishes the
covenantal context of the psalmist's relationship
with God and therefore his
"right to expect action from God;"5 (2) the
complaint or lament, which is
the psalmist's "expression of anguish or
betrayal by God or
others;"6 (3) the petition, in which the psalmist
"requests a solution"
from God to the problem; (4) motivations, which are
1Psalms 35.1a, 3a, 4, 7, 11, 12, 15-16, 17b-c;
55.3, 10-11; 58.2-5;
59.1-4, 6-7; 69.4, 7-9; 83.2-8;
109.2-5; 137.7b.
2Psalms
35.4-6, 8, 19, 25-26; 55.9a,15; 58.6-8; 59.11b-13a; 69.22-28;
83.9-16a,17; 109.6-15,19-20;
137.8-9.
3Psalms 35.9-10; 55.16b, 17b-18a, 23; 59.10;
69.32-36; 109.31.
4Walter Brueggemann, "From Hurt to Joy,
From Death to Life,"
Interpretation 28
(January 1974): 6-8. Both the form-critical analysis
and the examples are his,
although some examples could be added from the
psalms examined above.
5Psalms 4.1; 5.1; 12.1; 16.1; 17.1.
6Psalms 6.2; 13.3; 22.14-15; 38.5-6; 39.4ff;
41.11; 48.11.
5
reasons why God should answer
his prayer;1 (5) the last component of the
lament has three elements: the
"assurance of having been heard,"2 the
"singing of praise and
expressions of thanksgiving in the congregation
because the situation has been
transformed,"3 and the "paying of promised
vows."4 A brief
examination of the psalms considered by Wevers's ana-
lysis (e.g., Psalms 35, 55, 58,
59, 69, 83, 109, 137) shows that these
same elements are also present
in them.
R.E. Murphy, S.J. has outlined Claus Westermann's
approach to the
structure of the individual
lament psalms.5 This form-criticism by
Westermann yields seven parts
of the individual lament:
Address and introductory
cry
Complaint (of the form:
"my enemies...I/me...you")
Confidence motif
Plea ("Hear my
prayer/save me")
Reasons to induce God to
act
Vows to praise
Motif of certainty of
hearing (which blends into factual
praise in pleas that are
answered).6
From the comparison of these three examples with the
contents of
1Brueggemann "From
Hurt," pp. 6-8 lists seven basic motivations:
appeal
to God's reputation (Ps 13.14; 25.11; 57.5); appeal to past action
with
which He should now be consistent (Ps 22.4f; 143.5); the guilt of
the
speaker (Ps 25.11; 38.18); the innocence of the speaker (Ps 26.3-7;
35.7;
69.7); a promise of praise (Ps 6.5; 22.22); the helplessness of the
speaker
(Ps 25.16; 55.18; 69.17; 142.4,6); the trust of the speaker in
the
Lord (Ps 17.8f; 22.9f; 43.2; 57.1; 71.6).
2Psalms 13.5f; 17.15;
28.6; 69.33.
3Psalms 7.17; 16.9-11;
22.22-31; 35.27f.
4Psalms 26.12; 54.6f;
56.12f.
5Roland E. Murphy,
"A New Classification of Literary Forms in the
Psalms,"
Catholic Biblical Quarterly 21
(1959): 87.
6Ibid.
6
of the Psalter, many psalms are
to be classified as individual laments.
Mowinckel claims that many
psalms which use the "I-form" are to be under-
stood as communal laments in
which the king, as representative of the
nation, would pray for the
nation rather than as an individual praying
for his own needs.1
Gunkel and Soggin2 agree that there is no reason
other than compelling
contextual evidence3 to
read the "I-psalms" as
communal rather than
individual.
From these analyses and Gunkel's statement, it is clear
that
the psalms generally classified
as imprecatory may also be called indi-
vidual laments or complaint
psalms. This is demonstrated by a comparison
of the psalms most commonly
advanced as imprecatory with these patterns
adduced by form criticism.
Fifty-two psalms are commonly listed as either
imprecatory or
psalms which contain
imprecations.4 Eight of these are mentioned four
1Sigmund Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, 2 vols.,
trans.
D.R. Ap-Thomas (New York: Abingdon Press, 1962), 2:39.
2Hermann Gunkel, The Psalms: A Form-Critical Introduction,
trans.
T.M.
Horner (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967), p. 15; J. Alberto
Soggin,
Introduction to the Old Testament, in
Old Testament Library
(Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1976), p. 373.
3Gunkel, The Psalms, p. 33.
4The following statistics
reflect a comparison of lists of psalms
labelled
imprecatory either in part in whole. These lists are found in:
Hammond,"The
Vindictive Psalms," p. 238; Meredith G. Kline, The Structure
of Biblical Authority, 2nd ed. (
1975),
p. 161;
ment (Scottdale, Pa.: Herald
Press, 1971), p. 439; Chalmers Martin,
"Imprecations
in the Psalms," in Classical
Evangelical Essays on Old
Testament Interpretation, ed. Walter C. Kaiser (
House,
1976), pp. 113ff; Charles F. Kent and Frank K. Sanders, ed., The
Messages of the Bible, 12 vols. (
1904).
Vol. 5: The Messages of the Psalmists,
by John Edgar McFadyen,
p.
178; R.H. Pfeiffer, Introduction to the
Old Testament (
Harper
& Brothers, 1948), p. 638; Vos,"The Ethical Problem," p. 123;
"The
Imprecatory Psalms," Presbyterian
Quarterly Review 9 (April 1861):
7
times or more:1
Psalms 35, 55, 58, 59, 69, 83, 109 and 137. These psalms
(with the possible exception of
Psalm 137), because of their relatively
close adherence to the
form-critical analysis of the individual lament,
as well as the common element
of the severity of their imprecations, can
be considered a class of psalm
literature--the sub-genre of the impreca-
tory laments.
Both Martin and Mennenga say that we should speak only of
"the
imprecations in the
psalms"2 because they are so scattered in nature
(even throughout the entire
Bible), but in order to consider the question
of this thesis a particular
group of psalms is necessary (and easier) to
work with instead of a mass of
unconnected verses.3
The line of demarcation between these psalms and other
psalms
with some or most of these
elements, however, is the relative severity
of the imprecations contained
within these eight psalms.4 We will thus
consider them a sub-type of the
larger type of laments.
p.
575. Also: H. Osgood, "Dashing the Little Ones Against the Rock,"
Imprecatory
Psalms Viewed in Light of the Southern Rebellion,"
Bibliotheca Sacra 19 (January 1862): 165.
1Four times among these
ten authors who come from extremely
diverse
theological backgrounds.
2Martin,
"Imprecations," p. 113. Cf. Mennenga, "The Ethical
Problem
of the Imprecatory Psalms," Th.M. thesis (Westminster Theological
Seminary,
1959), p. 4.
3Table One shows the
consistent adherence of these psalms to this
form-critical
pattern.
4Admittedly a subjective
criterion, but there is a vast difference
between,
e.g., Psalm 5.10 and 35.1-8 or between Psalm 10.12-15 and
55.5,15.
This consideration and their common classification as impreca-
tory
psalms help to decide the members of this sub-genre.
8
Definition
of the imprecatory laments
What, then, is the definition of an imprecatory lament?
Wevers
tells us that there are three
types of complaint psalms: (1) the psalmist
finds himself falsely accused
and is thus protesting his innocence; (2)
the psalmist is seeking to
cause the curses or actions of his enemies to
fall upon their own heads; (3)
the psalmist is sick with an illness from
his enemies by means of magical
curses or from the Lord as punishment
for his sin.1
Westermann says that the basic attitudes of man to God
must be the determining factor
because they reflect the sitz im leben
of
the psalm.2 Oehler
says that these psalms relate to "the contradiction
existing between the moral
worth of an individual and his external cir-
cumstances."3
Park defines them as those psalms which "contain a wish
or even willingness that moral
agents be chastised or punished; and also
those which express gratitude
for the past afflictive event, or even
submission to it."4
These definitions, however, all erect boundaries
that are too broad to refer
only, or even principally, to our group of
psalms. On the basis of their
general form and of their content within
that general form, we define
them as laments (of the individual) which
contain within them
imprecations of extraordinary degree--the destruc-
tion or annihilation of the
enemies of the psalmist, as well as his own
1Wevers, "A
Study," p. 88.
2Murphy, "A New
Classification," p. 87.
3Gustave Friedrich
Oehler, Theology of the Old Testament,
rev.
ed.,
trans. George E. Day (
n.d.),
p. 558. This, however, could encompass all laments.
4Park, "The
Imprecatory Psalms," p. 165.
9
(possibly tacit) claim to a
right standing before God.1
The
problem of the imprecatory laments
The problem that becomes apparent upon even a casual
reading of
these psalms is the paradox
between the curses rained down on the enemies
by the psalmist and his constant
claim of righteousness, innocence, or
both.2 This is the
problem which this thesis addresses: How can the
psalmist curse his enemies and
still claim to be righteous? It is
obvious that the psalmist does
this--what is his basis for doing it?
In order to answer this
question Psalm 35 will be exegeted, which
exegesis constitutes the third
chapter of this thesis.
1This is a working
definition and is open to change and revision
if
that should prove necessary.
2Cf. Psalm 35,
imprecations: vv 4-6, 8, 19, 25-26; protestation of
innocence:
vv 7aa,
ba,
11-14, 27ab.
Psalm 55, imprecations: vv 9a, 15; pro-
testation
of innocence: vv 14, 20a, 22b. Psalm 58, imprecations: vv
protestation
of innocence: v 10a(?). Psalm 59, imprecations: vv 11b-13a;
protestation
of innocence: vv 3c,4aa. Psalm 69, imprecations: vv 22-28;
protestation
of innocence: v 4. Psalm 109, imprecations: vv 6-15,
19-20;
protestation of innocence: 2b, 3bb, 4aa, 4b.
II. SCHOOLS OF INTERPRETATION
OF THE
IMPRECATORY PSALMS
Introduction
There are as many different approaches to the problem of
the
presence of the imprecatory
psalms in the Bible as there are writers on
the subject. We will consider
seven basic varieties of approaches which
have been or are being
currently suggested by various writers.1
Imprecation
as quotation
Two older authors argue against this interpretation,
which says
that the imprecations in the
psalms are quotations by the psalmist of
the curses of his enemies
against him.2
69.27-28 is a "probable
quote because of verse twenty-six,"3 but this is
not necessary, and is only an
isolated case. It seems that McFadyen is
correct when he says that this
approach only serves to illustrate the
lengths gone to reach a desired
conclusion.4 At any rate, this view is
not held as a viable option
today.
Imprecation
as prophecy
A more common view of the imprecations is that they
consist of
lIt will be noted that
several names arise under different
theories.
Few men attempted to use only one theory to explain the pre-
sence
of the imprecations. Most depended upon several in various com-
binations,
perhaps realizing the truth of Eccl. 4.12b.
2Hammond, "The
Vindictive Psalms," p. 28; McFadyen, The
Messages,
5:
176.
3Hammond, ibid.
4McFadyen, The Messages, 5: 176.
10
11
prophecy, not petition. Thus
the moral problem disappears because the
psalmist only predicts the
result of his enemies' sins against him; he
does not seek it. All of the
Old Testament literary prophets do this
without hesitation and are not
questioned. If this is the case in these
psalms, the imprecations become
a moral force for good--a warning to sin-
ners to compel their
repentance. Thus Oehler says that in the impreca-
tory psalms "the judgment
of God is simply announced,"1 and
DeWitt that
David here acts as a
prophet--all men characterized by these sins must
and will be judged.2
Although he claims that there is "no reason for
the passion of the Psalmist
here," McFadyen states that the ambiguity of
the Hebrew imperfect tense
"allows them to be interpreted as predic-
tions,"3 and
Davies says that the "imperfect is used in several of the
passages, and they cannot be
made optatives without violence to the
text." Davies also says
that they are not "wishes or prayers that such
calamities should overtake
their enemies" (Cf. Psalm 137.8,9; Isaiah
13.16).4
There are several problems with this view. First, even if
they
are interpreted as predictions,
most of the imprecations are not expli-
cable in this way because they
consist of "actual 'proper' prayers
1Oehler, Theology, p. 558.
2John DeWitt, The Psalms: A New Translation with
Introductory
Essay and Notes (New York: Anson D.F.
Randolph, 1891), p. xvi. That
this
is an historic view of the Christian Church can be seen in that
Augustine
saw some of them as "prophecies or predictions of doom, not
prayer
or petition for that doom." Philip Schaff, gen. ed., Nicene and
Post-Nicene Fathers of
the Christian Church,
14 vols. (
tian
Literature Company, 1888), Vol. 3: Expositions
of the Book of
Psalms, by Augustine, p. 308.
3McFadyen, Messages, p. 176.
4W.W. Davies, "The
Imprecatory Psalms," The Old and New
Testa-
ment Student 14 (March 1892): 155.
12
addressed to God."
Therefore this explanation is “contrary to the lan-
guage of the psalms
themselves.”1
Second, even if certain passages are
rendered by the future, others,
in the imperative, remain.2 Driver says
that the jussive is used
"to express an entreaty or request. . . and in
particular blessings or
imprecations,"3 and Gesenius adds that the opta-
tive is (commonly) a combination
of the jussive with .4 For these
reasons this explanation is
rejected as inadequate. A more accurate
approach of this type is found
in Delitzsch's commentary on the Psalms.
He explains that condemnation
for eternity reflects the prophetic spirit5
which is (in the instance of
Psalm 109) the Old Testament type being
raised beyond David to New
Testament fulfillment in Judas Iscariot.6
Even if this were appropriate
at some points it does not do justice to
the nature of the imprecations,
because not every imprecation can be so
raised.
Imprecation
as moral indignation
This approach is a combination of two--the imprecations
as moral
indignation and as personal
desires for vindication. These both arise
from a certain perception of
human nature and so are grouped together.
1Vos, "The Ethical
Problem," p. 126.
2Edwards, "The
Imprecations," p. 100 (e.g., Ps. 5.10; 9.21; 17.13;
55.9;
59.13; 69.23 as listed in Mennega, "The Ethical Problem," p. 30).
3S.R. Driver, A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in
Hebrew, 2nd
ed.
(Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1881), p. 65.
4Kautzsch, E., ed., Gesenius's Hebrew Grammar, 2nd ed.,
trans.
A.E.
Cowley (Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1910), p. 321.
5Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, 3
vols.,
(New
York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1867), 1:75.
6Ibid., 3:177.
13
DeWitt expresses this viewpoint
well, if somewhat wryly by saying, "If
the critics of the imprecations
would have enemies like David, they might
not be so hard on him."1
Mickelsen calls the imprecations:
...poetic expressions of
individuals who were in-
censed at the tyranny of
evil, yet whose attitude
towards retribution is
so colored by their sense
of being wronged or of
the blasphemy committed
that they speak out in
language far removed from
the teaching that one
should leave judgment to
God, or from Jesus'
statements on the treatment
of enemies.2
C.S. Lewis's approach to the
imprecations falls into this category--he
saw that "the reaction of
the Psalmist to injury, though profoundly
natural, is profoundly
wrong,"3 and thought that they arise from a con-
fusion on the part of the
psalmist between his desire for justice and
desire for revenge.4
ponents tell us that the
inspiration of these verses is limited to their
having been recorded in
Scripture5--is also reflected in Lewis when he
tells us that we must not think
that "because it comes in the Bible, all
this vindictive hatred must
somehow be good and pious."6
As Vos points out, the major problem with this approach
is that
it teaches against the plenary
inspiration of Scripture--it acknowledges
1DeWitt, The Psalms, p. xi. Cf. W.O.E. Oesterley,
The Psalms
(London:
S.P.C.K., 1953), p. 461: "His physical suffering excuses (to
some
extent) the severity of these imprecations."
2A.
William
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1963), p. 643.
3C.S. Lewis, Reflections on the Psalms (
1958),
p. 26
4Ibid., p. 18.
5Hammond, "The
Vindictive Psalms," p. 38.
6Lewis, Reflections, p. 22.
14
inspired recording of words,
but not the inspiration of the thoughts and
emotions of the writers.1
This also makes the imprecations "totally the
product of human experience and
feeling, not of divine inspiration."2
Another variety of this
approach is that of Edwards, who says
that the emotions of
indignation, compassion for the injured, and a
growing desire for justice
arise in all men when they witness gross sin.3
These combine to cause men to
seek the good of society in the destruc-
tion of the sinner.4
That this principle is one implanted within us by
our Creator is obvious because
it is common to all men.5 Being implan-
ted, therefore, it is "as
valid as any emotion we may have."6
A criticism of Edwards's theory is that there is little
place
for the dynamic presence of
God. Neither is there any attempt to find a
resolution to this problem by
means of exegesis; he bases his argument
on experience which he then
universalizes.7 For these reasons this ap-
proach is inadequate.
Imprecation
as cultural phenomena
There are three aspects of this approach: the
imprecations as
magical curses, as examples of
sub-Christian morality, as Oriental hyper-
bole.
1Vos, "The Ethical
Problem," p. 128.
2Ibid., p. 129.
3Edwards, "The
Imprecations," pp. 103f.
4Ibid., pp. 105f. 5Ibid.,
p. 108.
6Ibid.
7That this
universalization is a weak prop for his argument can
be
seen in the reactions of men to any morally evil situation. Some men
are
not indignant, some men are indignant but powerless (either inter-
nally
or externally) to act, and some men fit his experience.
15
Imprecation
as magical curse. Both Gunkel and Mowinckel claimed
that the imprecations in the
psalms developed out of the pagan curses and
magical formulae of the
countries around them.1 C.F. Kent says that the
imprecatory psalms are a
survival of the ancient belief that a curse had
a certain potency in itself,2
and Oesterly tries to have it both ways by
saying that imprecations show
the religious superstition of the day, but
that Psalm 109 is an example of
a magical, and not religious, curse and
is therefore full of
"exaggerated vindictiveness."3 The curses are an
attempt by the psalmist to
"boomerang" the effect of something (the curse
of his enemies) instigated
against him, thereby changing their thrust from
vengeance to escape and
preservation.4
As Robinson notes, however, the word "cursed" (rUrxA) does not
occur in the Psalter, and
Pfeiffer says that there is "no reason" to
assume sorcerers using spells
to attack the psalmist.5 When this theory
is compared with the warnings
of Deuteronomy 18.9-13 and the time of
the composition of most of the
imprecatory psalms (the early monarchy,
when true religion was
strongest in
tent with the Scriptural
evidence is necessary. When it is seen that
1Mennega, "The
Ethical Problem," pp. 9, 11.
2Charles Foster Kent, The Student's Old Testament, 6 vols.
(New
Prayers of the Old
Testament,
p. 238.
3Oesterly, The Psalms, p. 460, cf. p. 457.
4Theodore H. Robinson, The Poetry of the Old Testament (
Gerald
Duckworth, 1969), pp. 139ff. Cf. also J.
Life and Culture, 2 vols. (London:
Oxford University Press, 1926),
pp.
449ff for an excellent discussion of "curse" in the ancient Near
East.
5Robinson, The Poetry, pp. 139ff; Pfeiffer, Introduction, p. 639.
16
they are outpourings of the
hearts of men to the true God, this explana-
tion totally loses its
force--they knew that He was not one who could be
coerced by formula or
incantation.
Imprecation as
sub-Christian morality. The second of these cul-
tural explanations sees the
imprecations as pre-Christian and therefore
"sub-standard"
morally. Oesterly says that Psalm 35, for example, shows
an underdeveloped view of
God--a low religious standard, although he
notes that the psalmist calls
on God rather than on his army or friends
for vengeance.3 The
main thrust of this approach is true--that the Old
Testament is of a different
time, far removed "temporally and spiritually
from the sphere of the New
Testament."4 This is underscored by the
statement that "these
imprecations. . . cannot be satisfactorily inter-
preted without grasping the
idea that revelation has been gradual and
progressive...and therefore. . .
the standard of morality has been gradually
but constantly advanced.”5 Being part of the Old Testament, they
"should
be interpreted in accordance with this part of the Bible." The Old
Testament law ordered
retribution, so they should not surprise us.6
The most ardent proponent of
this type of approach, Rudolf
Kittel, says that these psalms
are inferior things belonging to the
1R.H. Pfeiffer, Introduction, p. 639.
2Lehman, Old Testament, 1:440.
3Oesterly, The Psalms, p. 218.
4DeWitt, The Psalms, p. x.
5Davies, "The
Imprecatory Psalms," p. 158.
6Lehman, Old Testament, p. 439.
17
past--to a primitive stage in
the evolution of religious knowledge.1 It
is an offense against the
Bible, he says, when their expressions are con-
doned,2 and “it is
wrong to expect Christian religious and moral perfec-
tions from Israelites.”3
As Edwards says, however, we cannot destroy the unity of
the two
testaments because God is the
author of them both. The imprecations
cannot, therefore, be
reflections of mere pre-Christian morality now
abrogated by the teachings of
the New Testament.4 We also must recognize
that the psalmists cannot be
excused because they were not Christians.5
This view is a direct
reflection of the evolutionary theory of the growth
of the Israelite religion as
outlined by Julius Wellhausen: Judaism
underwent religious evolution;
her sacred writings underwent the same
evolution; the imprecatory
psalms are one example of this evolution in
the area of morality. This
view, like the last, is insufficient because
of its theological base and
lack of exegetical evidence.6
Imprecation as
Oriental hyperbole. The third cultural explana-
1Rudolf Kittel, The Scientific Study of the Old Testament,
trans.
J.D. Hughes (New York: Putnam's Sons, 1910), p. 143.
2Ibid., p. 195.
3Ibid., p. 285.
4Edwards, "The
Imprecations," p. 101.
5Lewis, Reflections, p. 26 (cf.
Lev. 19.17-18; Ex. 23.4-5;
Pr.
24.17).
6Although some say that
the standard of morality is higher in the
New
Testament than in the Old, it is not true that the absolute stan-
dards
of morality change. God is the Law-giver and He does not change.
His
Law, therefore, although revealed in different ways at different
times,
is absolute and non-evolutionary in either form or substance.
18
tion says that the imprecations
are the product of the "intense hyber-
bolic nature of the
Semites."1 Because “feeling of any kind was scarcely
thought of as genuine unless it
was expressed exaggeratedly,”2 and since
this feeling was being
expressed poetically,3 it is only natural to find
such shocking expressions as
these in the Old Testament. This approach
says, in essence, that the
imprecations are not as bad as they sound,
but they are writings of men
who would get tired and then "explode from
exasperated exhaustion."4
This puts the psalmist on a level slightly lower than any
person
who is grumpy or edgy from too
little sleep. It also overlooks the
literary nature of these
compositions which were written, not in the
heat of anger of the moment,
but after careful thought and reflection.5
It is also a rewording of the
position of imprecation as moral indigna-
tion and is therefore subject
to some of the same criticisms.
1R.K. Gottwald, A Light to the Nations (
Bros.,
1959), p. 513. Cf. also "The Imprecatory Psalms," Presbyterian
Quarterly Review 9 (April 1861): 586.
2DeWitt, The Psalms, p. xi.
3J. Barton Payne, Theology of the Older Testament (
Zondervan
Publishing Company, 1962), p. 202.
4Gottwald, A Light, p. 513.
5That these psalms were
probably not written at the time of the
events
which they describe can be seen from the inscriptions of Psalms
56-60
(for example). It is doubtful that David would have been able to
feign
the madness described in 1 Samuel 21.13-15 and write Psalm 56 at
the
same time (cf Ps 56.1). It is possible that he wrote Psalm 57 while
hiding
in the cave from Saul (cf Ps 57.1). David did not stay at his
house
when he learned of the plot to murder him (cf Ps 58.1). Psalm 60
was
probably not written during the campaign against the Arameans. This
is
not meant to suggest when these psalms were
written, but only to de-
monstrate
that it is not possible to assign their composition to the time
of
the events which they (albeit poetically) describe.
19
Imprecation
as philosophy
This approach to the imprecations attempts to explain the
ethical
problem by saying that the
imprecations are not directed toward any real
person. There are two varieties
of this approach.
The first variety is that of most of the Church Fathers,
who saw
the enemies against whom the
imprecations were written as either the
enemies of the psalmist or our
own spiritual enemies.1 We are to under-
stand them as personifications
of demonic powers, lusts, or temptations
which would ensnare us or
conquer us to pull us from God. The psalmist
is not morally questionable
because every Christian is to hate sin and
pray for its destruction. In
Psalm 109.6 there is a clear demarcation
between the human and the
demonic, and when Psalm 109.8-9 is coupled with
Acts 1.20 a personal being
(Judas Iscariot) is clearly in view.2
The second variety of this approach is that which says
that
these psalms represent a
philosophical wrestling with the problem of evil
in the world (Cf. the book of
Job). Because they saw suffering and mis-
fortune as visible signs of the
wrath of God, the psalmists knew that the
righteous should prosper and
the wicked perish.3 Whereas Psalm 1
describes the "traditional
view,"4 the imprecations are the philosophical
quests for the reason for the
apparent contradiction.5 This view falls
1Hammond, "The
Vindictive Psalms," p. 35.
2Vos, "The Ethical
Problem," p. 127.
3W.O.E. Oesterly, A Fresh Approach to the Psalms (
Nicholson
and Watson, Ltd., 1937), p. 239.
4Ibid.
5Hammond, "The
Vindictive Psalms," p. 186; Oesterly, A
Fresh Ap-
proach, p. 241.
20
short of the needed explanation
for the same reasons as the view of the
Fathers. These psalms do not
seem to be the philosophical discussion of
an abstract topic. They are the
agonized cries of men living in these
circumstances with enemies and
haters seeking to slander their reputa-.
tion and destroy their honor or
even their lives.
We sense the close relationship between this approach and
the
next when we consider that the
next step in this philosophical process
would probably be for the
psalmist to call upon God to exercise His rule
and judgment to destroy the
wicked exactly as is happening here in the
imprecatory psalms. The reason
that this approach is separated from the
following is that the following
sees the enemies as personal agents
whereas this approach does not.
Imprecation
as zeal
The righteousness of God was an axiomatic truth which the
psalm-
ists took for granted.1
The imprecatory psalms are to be seen as ex-
pressions of longing of Old
Testament saints for the vindication of God's
righteousness.2 The
demand for retribution was, therefore, a means of
ensuring the truth of their
world view--that God "indeed worked in the
trials of men to punish the
wicked and restore the righteous."3 The
psalmists demanded retribution
in the present4 because they had no doc-
trine of a future life and
consequently no concept of the final judgment.
1Oesterly, A Fresh Approach, p. 223.
2Martin, "Imprecations,"
p. 121.
3Walter Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament, vol. 1,
trans.
J.A.
Baker (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1961), p. 180.
4 R. K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament (
William
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1969), p. 1000.
21
This is seen in
rewards and punishments--the
highest (most severe) penalty being death.1
The convergence of these
factors--the righteousness of God, the impossi-
bility of an ultimate judgment
after death, the failure of events to
"harmonize with the
postulate of the doctrine of retribution" (i.e., that
God would punish the wicked and
prosper the righteous)2--leads to the
conclusion that the Jews were
"bound to pray for those specific temporal
punishments which were the
sanctions of the Old Testament law."3
Every Jew saw this as a moral obligation because if the wicked
were to defeat God's people,
God Himself is defeated.4 The psalmists are
seeking the honor of God's
kingdom5 and the vindication of His name in
the sight of the peoples and
the nations. The imprecations are the cries
of the psalmists for God to
vindicate His nature and name, which vindi-
cation "may involve as a
corollary the vindication of the individual
himself."6
This approach has much that is commendable--among other
things it
recognizes the enemies as
personal agents, it deals directly with the
moral problem and works it out
to a straightforward solution. Yet, if it
is correct, does it not make
the psalms containing imprecations--or at
1Hammond, "The
Vindictive Psalms," pp. 112ff. (Contrast this with
the
promise of "length of days" as reward for obedience and righteous-
ness.
E.g., Dt. 30.20; Ps. 21.4; Pr. 3.2). Cf. also Lehman, Old Tes-
tament, p. 439.
2Oehler, Theology, p. 556.
3Hammond, "The
Vindictive Psalms," p. 198.
4McFadyen, The Messages, p. 178.
5Delitzsch, Commentary, 1:418.
6Payne, Theology, p. 202.
22
least the imprecations themselves--inapplicable
for the Christian?
Having the doctrine of final
judgment, of ultimate retribution or reward,
as well as the example and
teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ, can we
any longer consider them to be “useful
for teaching, rebuking, correcting
and training in righteousness:”
(2 Timothy 3.16b)? Does this not ulti-
mately yield to the approach
which says that the imprecations are the
result of a sub-Christian
morality--that we, with the more refined
teachings of the New Testament,
can ignore these verses as inapplicable
to us today? For these reasons
this view is deficient in its explanation
of the imprecations in the
psalms.
Imprecation
as ethics of the consummation
Within this final and major approach are included three
views of
the imprecatory psalms which,
considered as aspects of one approach, are
complementary rather than
contradictory or conflicting.
Imprecation as
identification. The first of these is closely
related to the last view
examined (imprecation as zeal). David, being
conscious of his identity as
the chosen (anointed) of God, saw that sin
perpetrated against him was
done against Christ as well.1 Because he
thought of himself as being
"in Christ," David cried out for vengeance as
the souls in Revelation cry out
for vengeance.2 David, seeing himself as
representing Christ, counted
his enemies as God's enemies;3 thus the
1Delitzsch, Commentary, 3:177.
2Cornelius Van Til,
"Christian Theistic Ethics," (Class syllabus,
loves
and hate what Christ hates."
3”The Imprecatory Psalms,”
pp. 577ff. This conclusion is based
on
the following points: (1) mingling of piety with maledictions, (2)
the
psalmist usually refers to the wicked in general, not as personal
enemies
(e.g., the honor of God and the good of men is sought, not personal
23
imprecatory psalms express the “awful
conditions and deserved rewards of
the incorrigible enemies of
Christ and His Kingdom.”1 The psalmist may
be seen, therefore, as a type
of Christ, "imprecating the impenitent
from among his enemies."2
Imprecation as
representation. This identity carries over into
a larger sphere when David is
seen, not only as a private person, but,
because he is the king of the
earthly visible aspect of the Kingdom of
God, as the representative of
God's people.3 The psalmist identifies his
enemies with the enemies of
God. As such he identifies the course of
bolic of the great unending
conflict.4 This is an important step be-
cause the psalmist can now call
on God to do that which He has promised
to do concerning sin.5
That this is true can be seen by the many impre-
cations which can also be found
as statements of fact in other psalms.6
revenge),
(3) David had authority and power over his enemies (Cf. 1 Sa.
24.1-7;
26.6-12)--he was king, (4) several of these psalms are Messianic,
thus
David is speaking about Christ, (5) cf. the imprecations of Jeremiah
(18.21ff)
and Paul (2 Ti., 4.14).
1A. C. Douglass,
"The Ethics of the Psalms," in The
Psalms in Wor-
ship, ed. John McNaugher (
Publication,
1907), p. 283.
2Moira Dearnley,
"Expressions That Seem Contrary to Christ,"
Theology 73 (April 1970): 164.
As Davies, "The Imprecatory Psalms," p.
156,
"These prayers for judgment upon enemies are in entire harmony with
Ps.
2.9."
3Martin,
"Imprecations," p. 124.
4Lehman, Old Testament, p. 439.
5Howard Osgood,
"Dashing the Little Ones," p. 37. He notes that
this
is not inconsistent with God's character because of such references
as
Isaiah 11.4; Matthew 24.41; Galatians 5.12; Hebrews 10.28ff.
6Martin, “Imprecations,” p.
189. (Cf. Ps. 35.5 with Ps. 1.4;
Ps. 58.6 with Ps. 3.7; Ps. 35.8 with Ps. 9.15p Ps. 35.26 with Ps. 6.10). Cf.
also Mennega, "The Ethical Problem," pp. 64ff, 70ff, 75ff.
24
The people pray, in times of
trouble, that God will accomplish His vows
of protection. Thus, the
psalmist is not initiating a curse, but merely
praying for the fulfillment of
a promise.1 The imprecations are "govern-
mental psalms; staid, regular,
reverential invocations upon the Monarch
to wield his own scepter."2
Thus we see that identification with Christ can lead to
impreca-
tion as can the identification
of one's enemies with the enemies of God.
Ultimately, however, this
explanation is victim to the same criticism as
the approach above entitled
"imprecation as zeal." There is posited a
gap between the testaments
which is unable to be bridged.
Imprecation as
Kingdom ethics. After examining this view we will
see why the two aspects of
imprecation as identification are to be con-
sidered parts of this final approach.
Intrusion ethics are the "anticipation in the
present age of the
ultimate realities of the
consummation in the age to come."3 This is to
say that at various times it
has been not only proper, but morally neces-
sary to use a "pattern of
conduct which conforms to the ethics of the
consummation." We are
confronted with such an occasion in the impreca-
tory psalms.4
Kline's view seems to flow directly from the theistic
ethics of
1Mennega, "The
Ethical Problem," pp. 63, 66.
2James A. Reed, "The
Imprecatory Psalms," in The Psalms
in Wor-
ship, ed. John McNaugher (
Publication,
1907), p. 319.
3Kline, The Structure, p. 160.
4Ibid., pp. 162ff. Some
other examples of "intrusion ethics"
listed
by Kline are: the annihilation of the Canaanites, Rahab's lie,
the
Hebrew midwives (Ex. 1), and Samuel's deception of Saul.
25
Cornelius Van Til, so a brief
presentation of his thought concerning the
biblical summum bonum is appropriate here.
(1) The ethical ideal is an
absolute.
(2) The
(3) Destroying the works of the evil
one is an important
part of attaining the summum bonum
(
(4) Because the evil one's works
continue until the consum-
mation, the ideal or absolute summum
bonum will never
be reached on
earth.1
The important portion of this
analysis is (3) Part of the ethical
ideal of man is destroying the
works of the evil one, which is the nega-
tive but unavoidable task of
every Christian.2 Seen in this light, even
the Lord's Prayer seeks the
destruction of the wicked when we pray "Thy
kingdom come" because His
kingdom cannot come without the destruction of
the works and systems of the
more strongly that because we
desire the advance of the
can desire the destruction of
those who oppose it.4 The psalmists, thus,
pray for that which they know
will be true at the consummation.
This view has the force of its several parts because it
is pre-
cisely the identification of
his enemies with the enemies of God and His
kingdom that allows the
psalmist to pray as he does in this consummatory
manner. These psalms become the
product of a special revelation to their
authors who thereby knew that
it was proper for them to pray as it may
not be proper for us as
Christians to pray.
1Van Til,
"Ethics," pp. 73ff.
2Ibid., p. 82. We begin
by destroying evil within ourselves
(i.e.,
sanctification), then within the theocracy, then within the
world;
p. 86.
3Vos, "The Ethical
Problem," p. 138.
4Delitzsch, Commentary, 1:74.
26
Therein lies the major problem with this approach to the
impreca-
tions: Can something be wrong
and yet right? Do ethical standards given
as absolutes change because
revelation progresses? How are we to tell
what is intrusion ethics and
what is not? Is there any authority for
this interpretation or is it a
pattern to be fitted to whatever we can-
not explain? It seems that
these questions show up the inadequacies of
this view.
Having examined these basic approaches to the ethical
problem of
the imprecatory psalms, we turn
to the burden of this thesis which is
inextricably bound up with this
whole question. The means by which
righteousness and imprecation
are compatible are at the same time the
means by which the ethical
problem of the psalms is answered. Rather
than base our discussion on
purely (or mainly) philosophical and theolo-
gical considerations, we will
examine the texts of a psalm in which the
crux of this problem is most
clearly seen. In order to do this we will
briefly examine the Psalter
form-critically in order to select those
psalms which are in the sub-genre
with which we are concerned and then
exegete particular passages as
appropriate.
III. A STUDY OF
PSALM 35
The Basis For The
Selection of a Text
The
Reason for Selecting a Text
In order to approach this "problem of the
imprecatory laments"
exegetically, it is necessary
to select a particular passage on which to
center the study. Psalm 35 has
been selected for three reasons: (1) it
is an imprecatory lament, (2)
it is a crux passage for this question,
(3) it is the clearest example
of the proposed solution.
Psalm
35: An Imprecatory Lament
That Psalm 35 is an example of the sub-genre of the
imprecatory
lament is seen from a brief
form-critical analysis of its components.
Psalm 35 contains every element
of a lament as advanced by various men
except the certainty of hearing
(which may be present implicitly).
The vocative is
used by the psalmist in verses 1, 22, and 24 with
hvAhy;, in
verses 17, 22, 23 with ynadoxE and in
verses 23 and 24 with
Myhilox<;. The complaint is developed elaborately (vv.
lab-b, 3ab, 4ab, 4bb,
7, 11-12, 15-16, 17bb, 19, 21, 25-26) as is the prayer (vv. 4-6, 8, 19, 25-26).
The confidence motif (vv. 9-10), vow
to praise (v. 18), paying of pro-
mised
vows
(vv. 17-18; cf. Ps. 22.20-22) and singing
of praise in the
congregation (vv. 27-28) are
also present. The special distinguishing
feature of the imprecatory
laments--the protestation of innocence--is in
Psalm 35 also (vv. 7aa, ba, 11-14,
27ab). On the basis of these
particulars
this Psalm is an imprecatory
lament. That the imprecations are unusually
severe can be seen by a brief
reading of verses 4-6, 19, 24b-26.
27
28
Psalm
35: A Crux Passage
Psalm 35 is a crux passage for this question for several
reasons.
It is an imprecatory lament. It
contains fearful imprecations (e.g., the
opposition of the angel of the
Lord, destruction, shame, humiliation and
dishonor). His own innocence
and righteousness are consistently main-
tained by the psalmist (vv.
7,19,27a). For these Psalm 35 has been cho-
sen for exegesis to answer the
burden of this thesis.
Psalm
35: Clear to Unclear
A generally accepted principle of hermeneutics is that
our under-
standing of the clear passages
of Scripture is to be the basis on which
we interpret the unclear
passages. As will be shown below, Psalm 35 is a
clear passage with regard to
this question. On the basis of our under-
standing of its truths we can
interpret some other Scriptures related to
the problem of the imprecatory
laments.
For These three reasons Psalm 35 has been selected as the
text
for exegesis after
consideration of some introductory matters and will be
the basis of the proposed
solution to the question of this thesis.
Introduction
to Psalm 35
Authorship
of Psalm 35
In order to understand the psalm, it is helpful to be
able to
identify the author of the
psalm. Psalm 35 is one of 122 psalms with
titles indicating authorship
(Ps. 35.1—dvidAl;. The
answer to the ques-
tion of authorship depends
therefore on the view taken regarding the
psalm titles. This writer
accepts the titles of the psalms as part of
the original text,1
and therefore inspired. The author of Psalm 35 is
1 This is discussed briefly in an Appendix at
the end of this thesis.
29
David, and it is within the
range and experience of his life that we may
try to discover its setting.
Setting
of Psalm 35
It is often alleged, by those who accept Davidic
authorship of
this psalm, that David was
referring to 1 Samuel 24.15-16 when he wrote
Psalm 35.1 This is
based on the similarity of language between the two
passages.2 The
content of the psalm is also said to suit David's experi-
ence at the time. Doeg and
others of Saul's servants were certainly men
of low enough moral character
to slander David for their own advancement.3
The contents of Psalm 35 could
also reflect David's situation in
2 Samuel 16ff--the revolt of
Absalom his son. Ahithophel, David's chief
advisor (2 Sam. 15.12) joined
the revolt, as did many men of the nation
(2 Sam. 15.10-13). David was
betrayed by those whom he had befriended.
Since there is no clear statement in either the title4
or the
body of the psalm, the
assignment of a specific historical context to it
is not possible. It was
definitely written by David at or about one of
several periods of persecution
which he endured. Probably it was written
during Saul's persecution of
David, but we cannot be dogmatic. Although
we will mention David as the
author, therefore, reference to either a
particular historical situation
or person(s) will not be made.
1J.J. Stewart Perowne, The Book of Psalms (
van
Publishing Company, 1976), p. 301; Joseph Addison Alexander, The
Psalms Translated and
Explained
(Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977),
p.
149; Delitzsch, Commentary, 1:416.
2Cf. FpawA with the Lord as
subject (1 Sam. 24.16; Ps. 35.24),
with
the lord as subject (2 Sam. 24.16; Ps. 35.1), ybiyri used of David
(1
Sam. 24.16; Ps. 35.23).
3Cf. 1 Sam. 21.7-22.19.
4As there is in, e.g.,
Pss. 51, 52, 54, 56, 57.
A Literal
Translation of Psalm 35
1
Belonging to David, as author:
Contend,
O Lord, with my contenders;
Fight with my fighters.
2
Seize a shield and a large shield
And standup in my help.
3
And draw out a spear
And stop up (the way) against my pursuers;
Say to my soul, "Your salvation am
I."
4
Let them be ashamed and humiliated--the
ones seeking my soul;
Let them move away behind and be
abashed--those desiring my hurt.
5
Let them be as chaff before the wind,
And the angel of the Lord thrusting (them);
6
Let their path be dark and slippery,
And
the angel of the Lord pursuing them.
7
For without cause they hid for me (in) a
pit their net;
Without cause they dug for my soul.
8
Let destruction come upon him unawares;
And his net which he hid, let it capture
him:
With destruction let him fall into it.
9
And my soul will rejoice in the Lord,
And it will exult in His salvation:
10
All my bones shall say, "Lord, who is like You,
Who delivers the afflicted from the one who
is stronger than him,
And the afflicted and the needy from him
who tears him away?"
11
Malicious witnesses shall rise;
That which I do not know they ask me.
12
They repay me evil after good;
Desolation (is) for my soul.
13
And I? In their sickness my clothing (was) sackcloth;
I bowed down my soul with fasting;
And my prayer--it returned unto my bosom.
14
Like a neighbor, like a brother to me I went about;
As a mourner for a mother--dressed in
black I was bowed down.
15
But at my Stumbling they rejoiced and gathered themselves together;
Smiters gathered themselves together
against me and I did not know;
They tore and were not silent
16
With godless mockers (for) a cake; gnashing against me their teeth.
17
Lord! How long will You watch?
Cause my soul to turn back from their
ravages;
From lions my only one.
18
I will praise You in a great congregation;
With a mighty people I will praise You.
30
19
Do not let my false haters rejoice at me;
My haters without cause--do not let them
wink an eye
20
Because they do not speak peace
And against restful ones of a land words
of deceit they conspire.
21
And they made their mouths large against me:
They said, "Aha! Aha! Our eyes have
seen!"
22
You have seen it, Lord, do not be dumb;
Lord, do not be far from me.
23
Rouse Yourself and awake for my judgment;
My God and my Lord (Master) for my
lawsuit.
24
Judge me according to Your righteousness, O Lord my God,
And do not let them rejoice at me.
25
Do not let them say in their hearts, "Aha! Our soul!"
Do not let them say, "We have
swallowed him up!"
26
Let them be ashamed and abashed altogether--the ones seeking my evil;
Let them be clothed (with) shame and
ignominy--the ones who are making
themselves great against me.
27
Let them give a ringing cry and rejoice--who delight (in) my
righteousness;
And let them say continually, "The
Lord be exalted (Who) delights (in)
the peace of His servant."
28
And my tongue shall meditate aloud on Thy righteousness;
All the day it shall praise You.
Exegesis of
Psalm 35
Strophe
I: Verses 1 - 10
Verses 1-3
1 Belonging
to David, as author:
Contend, O Lord, with my contenders;
Fight with my fighters.
2 Seize a
shield and a large shield
And stand up in my help.
3 And draw
out a spear
And stop up (the way) against my pursuers;
Say to my soul, "Your salvation am
I."
In verse one of Psalm 35, David calls upon the Lord to
strive or
contend with his contenders.1
The verb byri is
commonly used of a court
process,2 and here
the Lord is summoned as David's vindicator in court.
byri
is
used as a noun for a lawsuit or court contention3 and as a verb
of the contention or conducting
of a legal case.4 Since this is the first
word of the psalm it is a clue
to the character and theme of the psalm
as a whole. David is going to
set forth his lament (and its imprecations)
under the poetic imagery of a
court of law. MHal;, is qal in a verb which
is usually niphal, perhaps to
express the simplicity of the psalmist's
basic request. In both clauses
the meaning is not affected if we take txe
1Wevers, "A
Study," p. 87, suggests that the invocation of the
divine
name guarantees the effectiveness of the prayer (Cf. vv. 9,10, but
particularly
1,22,24).
2C.A. and E.G. Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on
the Book of Psalms, in International
Critical Commentary (
tation
that this is a decision by force of arms is based on the military
terminology
in vv. 1-3. It does not, however, seem to take the context
of
the entire psalm into account.
3Cf. Ex. 23.2, 3, 6; 2
Sam. 15.2, 4; Ho. 4.1; Mi. 6.2.
4Cf. Is. 3.13; 57.16; Ps.
103.9; Am. 7.4.
32
33
as either the sign of the
accusative1 or the preposition.2 The sense of
the verse is an application of
the lex talionis (repayment in accord
with
their sins). David uses byri in parallel with MHalA
and
the picture of
the warrior-hero to emphasize
the ferocity of the struggle, not to change
the image of the psalm.3
The weaponry of the Lord as heroic warrior4 is
described as only
David, the great warrior-king
of
Lord first to defend him. Both
the NgemA (a small shield for the
cavalry)
and hn.Aci (a large shield for the infantry) were
primarily defensive wea-
pons.5 Since they
both were shields used by different branches of the
military, it is obvious that
David is not picturing an ordinary warrior.
He is using this hyperbole to
emphasize his need for total protection.
Having armed himself, the Lord
is to stand up for David's help.
This use of the beth essentiae6 is referring
to the Lord's appearance
1Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:419. The Septuagint (LXX), by
not trans-
lating
it, seems to understand this as the sign of the accusative.
2Perowne, Psalms, p. 307; Cf. Francis Brown,
Samuel Rolles Driver,
and
Charles Augustus Briggs, eds., A Hebrew
and English Lexicon of the Old
Testament, s.v. “txe.” It is "often
with verbs of fighting, striving, con-
tending"
as a preposition (Gn. 14.2, 8; Nu. 20.13; Is. 45.9a; Pr. 23.11).
This
resolves the alleged "conflicting metaphors" advanced to
deny
the identification of this psalm as a lawsuit. Cf. Herbert Leupold,
An Exposition of the
Psalms
(Columbus: Wartburg Press, 1959), p. 285;
A.F.
Kirkpatrick, The Book of Psalms, 3
vols., The Cambridge Bible for
Schools
and Colleges (Cambridge: The University Press, 1903), p. 176; J.W.
McKay
and J.W. Rogerson, Psalms 1-50, The
the
New English Bible (New York: Cambridge Press, 1977), pp. 160f.
4Cf. Ex. 15.3; Dt. 32.41;
Ps. 24.9.
5John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of Psalms, 5
vols., trans.
J.
Andersen (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1963),
1:576n.
Cf. 1:64 for offensive qualities of hnA..ci.
6Delitzsch, Psalms, 1;420.
34
"in the capacity" of
my help.1 The Lord is thus more than David's
helper; He is David's help.
Having described the strength and surety of his defenses,
David
now calls for primarily
offensive weapons. The Lord is to draw his spear
and close up the path of
pursuit against his pursuers. Since rUgs;
is
qal imperative of RgasA ("close, shut up") we supply the word
"path" or
"way" as its object2
and txraq;li is used as preposition
("toward,
against").3 This
interpretation is supported by the LXX which reads
su<gkleison e]c e]nanti<aj . . . Su<gkleison, aorist imperative of suglkei<w,
means "to close up, hem
in, surround or imprison." The passages where it
has this meaning are battle
contexts in the Old Testament, so we see that
David employs vocabulary that
matches the seriousness of his situation.
The pursuit is to be stopped.
David is defended against injury by the
shields of the Lord, but
defense alone is not enough.
The second half of verse three is a plea for assurance.
David
again uses the imperative to
explain that which he desires from the Lord,
only this is a personal request
following the military images in the
beginning. The Lord has already
been called David's help; now he wants
reassurance that He is his
salvation as well.4 This is simply a guaran-
tee that help will be
effectual.
1Kautzsch, Grammar, p. 379.
2This is a simple ellipse
of the object of the imperative. Cf.
Perowne, Psalms,
p. 307.
3Cf.
2 Sa. 10.9,10,17; Nu. 21.23; Jg. 7.24; 20.31.
4rwayA need not imply
spiritual salvation, although the assurance
of one may be assign of the other (i.e.,
having confidence in the Lord
that
He will indeed deliver one from danger may be a sign of true faith
in
the heart of an individual).
35
Verses
4-8
4 Let them
be ashamed and humiliated--the ones seeking my soul;
Let them move away behind and be
abashed--those desiring my hurt.
5 Let them
be as chaff before the wind,
And the angel of the Lord thrusting (them);
6 Let,
their path be dark and slippery,
And the angel of the Lord pursuing them.
7 For
without cause they hid for me (in) a pit their net;
Without cause they dug for my soul.
8 Let destruction
come upon him unawares;
And his net which he hid, let it capture him:
With destruction let him
fall into it.
In these verses David calls for judgment upon his enemies
in the
form of the lex talionis and protests his own
innocence. Although he has
asked for action on the Lord's
part, verse four is the first indication
of the effect that he wants the
Lord's intervention to have on his ene-
mies. They are to be ashamed (Uwboye), humiliated (Uml;KAyi),
turned back
(tHaxa
Ugsoyi)
and abashed (yrip;H;ya). This
upheaval is the first of a
series of imprecations in this
psalm.1 wOB has the concept, not of the
emotion of shames, but more of
the fact of shame. Shame is the overthrow
of one's position, place, pride
or plans so that all of one's former ad-
vantages are annulled. He prays
this prayer, according to Seebass, "not
out of revenge. . ." but
that the falsehood with which his enemies view his
relationship to God may be
manifest in their own lives and that their
lives may be bereft of that
relationship.2 He again asks that they be
repaid in kind for their
treatment of him. In spite of the seriousness
of these desires they are less
severe than the desires of his enemies to
slander and confuse him. His
enemies are seeking his soul (ywip;na) and
this verse, as a synthetic
parallelism, goes on to explain that the
1Cf. vv. 5-6,8,19-21, 24b-26.
2Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, revised ed., s.v.
"wOB," by Horst Seebass
(Hereafter TDOT).
36
seeking for his soul entailed
at least the thinking of evil thoughts
about him. His prayer for their
defeat, therefore, is a prayer for phy-
sical (rgos;, v. 3) and mental (v. 4) defeat. He is still
remaining with-
in the bounds of the lex talionis.
In verse five David's imprecation turns to the essence of
his
enemies' being—their dObKA. Although dObKA does
not appear in this
verse, the concept of a man's
glory, honor or weight (all possible trans-
lations of dObKA) being removed so that he becomes light is a
familiar
one (Cf. Ps. 1.4).1
Their dismay and defeat outlined in verse four is
intensified in verse five.
Now, for the second time, the phrase hvAhy; j`xal;ma appears. Who is
this person, mentioned twice in
this psalm? j`xal;ma shares
with the Greek
a@ggeloj (used
here in the LXX) the primary meaning of messenger,2 which
is extended when referring to
the super-human messengers of God--the an-
gels--3 and even to
the special angel known as "the
angel of the Lord."4
1Although I disagree with
Pedersen's view of the imprecation as
magic
formulae, his point that the curse "eats away at the dObKA
the
soul
of one who was honored" is valid.
come
like chaff is to have no weight or metaphorically, no honor or glory
of
one's own. Cf. Ps. 1 where the wicked, as chaff, have no place in
the
judgment.
2Cf. Gn. 32.4; Dt. 2.26;
Jg. 6.35; Is. 14.32.
3Cf. Gn. 19.1,15; 32.2; 2
Sa. 14.17,20; Ps. 91.11; 103.20.
4Since this phrase is
used to refer to what are commonly regarded
as
pre-incarnate appearances of our Lord Jesus, it is important to under-
stand
the meaning of the phrase in these verses. Briggs, Commentary, p.
303,
sees this as an angel of the Lord and specifically states that this
is
"not the theophanic angel of the ancient tradition. . . but the angel
whom
Yahweh had given charge over
that
no particular angel is in view, but Delitzsch, Commentary, 1:421,
says
that this is the angel "who took off Pharaoh's chariot wheels so
that
they drove them heavily." The evidence of Scripture favors under-
standing
this as an angel of the Lord because we do not see the angel of
the
Lord elsewhere being the agent of personal revenge. For these reasons
this
angel is any one of his host whom God might choose.
37
Although some think the figure
of hH,Do inappropriate and feel
that verses 5b and 6b should be
transposed to better suit the meaning,1
this is not necessary for a
clear and proper understanding of the text.2
As the wind pushes chaff, so
they are to be pushed and thrust by the
angel of the Lord. (Although we
will continue to refer to the angel of the
Lord, this is the angel
referred to in this psalm; the term is not being
used in its technical sense.)
Verse six intensifies the horror of their plight, both by
grammar
and language. As Calvin notes,
David expresses
. . . his prayer of
verse five more clearly in verse
six, praying that the
angel of the Lord would drive
them through dark and
slippery places, so that reason
and understanding might
fail them, and that they not
know whither to go, nor
what to become, nor have
even time given them to draw their breath.3
David intensiies his prayer of
verse five as well--thrusting or pushing
is a single acition, but
pursuit (JdarA) is a
continual action which has
an end in view beyond itself.4
David thus emphasizes by the use of JdarA
and the intensive form tOqla q;laHE (for tOqlAHE)5 the precarious nature of
their position, which is his
desire for them. Not only are they to be
pursued along a slippery path
but the way is to be in darkness as well.
David again uses a noun to
emphasize the concrete nature of the disaster
1Briggs, Commentary, pp. 303f; Delitzsch, Psalms, p. 421;
Kirkpatrick,
Psalms, p. 178.
2Even a translation so
free with the text as the New
English
Bible does not change the
order of this text.
3Calvin, Commentary, 1:578.
4I.e., the pursuit is the
emphasized part of the action, but the
end
of the chase, the final battle or stand-off, is also in view.
5Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:421.
38
which he desires for them.1
This is the darkness of the ninth plague of
which is used here perhaps
symbolically of confusion--lack of guidance or
direction. David has called
upon the Lord to judge his enemies with in-
creasing severity in these
verses and now turns to plead his own cause
before the Lord--asserting his
innocence and the causeless antagonism
of his foes.
Verses 7 - 8 contain the first lament section of this
psalm.2
Twice in verse seven David
claims that everything done to him was Mn.AHi,
or without cause or reason. He
had done nothing to deserve their actions
toward him either in his
actions or his words. They were acting out of
self-motivated spite and
malice, not legal retaliation for wrongs done
(Contrast this with David's own
prayer of verse one.). yKi at the
beginning of this verse tells
us that it contains the reason for his im-
precations; this is the first
set of accusations as he bears testimony
against his foes.
He tells the Lord that they had hidden3 a pit
of their net (or
with their
net or for their net), and were
seeking after his soul (or
life). There is no need to
transpose tHawa to the
following line4 because
the net could be hidden within
the pit, or used with it in some way to
1See j`tefAwuy;, v. 3b, above.
2Verses 1-3 are an
implicit lament (see ybayriy;, etc., as repre-
senting
his foes and their antagonism), but these verses are true laments.
3For the ability of the
Hebrew perfect to be represented by
English
perfect or pluperfect see Kautzsch, Grammar,
p. 125n.
4Contra: Briggs, Commentary, p. 304; Delitzsch, Psalms,
1.422;
Kirkpatrick,
Psalms, p. 178; Perowne, Psalms, p. 308 (As Perowne notes,
the
versions support the Masoretic Text).
39
snare or entrap him; it could
even be a net-pit, as Leupold suggests.1
Verse 7b is parallel with 7a in
that it explains the trap as one which
will aid the search for David's
soul. rpaHAcan have the meaning
"to
search for" and is used
this way in terms of military spies searching out
the land,2 as well
as of an eagle's search for food.3 His foes are
searching for his soul (ywip;nal;) and using every means possible (Cf. the
pit and the net) to find and
trap him. This again, as in verses 1-3,
indicates the danger in which
David portrays himself and is not neces-
sarily a literal picture. Verse
seven, therefore, describes the means by
which the enemis hope to
accomplish their evil ends, the gratuitous
nature of their hate, and
David's own claim of righteousness.
Verse eight concludes the first set of imprecations with
the wish
for destruction and one-for-one
recompense for their traps for David.
That hxAUw is a stronger word than "confusion"4
can be seen from some of
its other uses in the Old
Testament. Isaiah 47.11 seems to be related to
this verse5 and uses
three words in a synthetic parallelism that builds
throughout the verse from hfArA (evil, calamity) and hvAho (ruin, disaster)
to hxAUw, showing the suddenness and terrible nature of
the destruction
which was to be wreaked upon
with several words paralleling hxAUw. Speaking of the great day of the
Lord, Zephaniah calls it a day
of hbAb;f, (wrath, fury), of hrAcA (distress,
travail) and hqAUcm; (straits, stress), of hxAUw (used here) and hxAUwm;
1Leupold, An Exposition, p. 291. His next
statement, that tHawa
is
to be understood as the object of rpaHA in line 7b is not
necessary.
2Cf. Dt. 1.22; Jos.
2.2,3. 3Cf. Jb. 39.29.
4Calvin, Commentary, 1:580.
5Briggs, Commentary, p. 304 calls this a
"condensation."
40
(destruction, desolation). To
say that hxAvw means
only "confusion" is
euphemism.1 David is
praying for the death of his enemies.2 This desire,
without the New Testament
knowledge of the after-life, is the ultimate
judgment upon any man. David
asks that this destruction come upon his
enemies without their knowledge
(fdAye-xlo is an adverbial phrase,
with an
ellipsis of rw,xE).3
David then asks for the just recompense of his enemies'
sins--
that which they were trying to
do to him should be done to them. The
net which they had concealed in
verse seven will capture them. Here is
another word reminiscent of
David's warfaring background. dkalA is used
of something captured in war
(often a town or city).4 It is used five
times of entrapping men.5
This helps to see the weight of the word; this
is a violent capture which
David seeks, not a slight discomfiture.
The last phrase of this verse again voices the same
desire, but
from a different point of view.
In verse 8a was destruction coming upon
David's foes. Here they are to
fall into it--they are the active agents
instead of the destruction.
There is some question regarding the cor-
rectness of this text. Kittel
suggests that hxUw should
read rHAOw.Ba.6
giving the enemies something
into which to fall and using both images of
1For further examples,
cf. Is. 10.3; Pr. 1.27; 3.25.
2hxAOw
is also
used to describe the resultant waste or ruins from
such
destruction in Job 30.3,14; 38.27. This is the judgment for which
David
prays.
3Perowne, Psalms, p. 308.
4Cf. Dt. 2.35; 3.4; Jos.
11.12,17; Jg. 1.8,12,18; 7.24.
5Jer. 5.26; 18.22; Ps.
35.8; Jb. 5.13.
6Rudolf Kittel, ed., Biblia Hebraica, 3rd ed. (
Wurtemburgische
Bibelanstalt, 1937), p. 1003n.
41
verse seven. What did David
mean in this phrase?
Delitzsch sees this as an example of the basic meaning of
hxAOw
as the loud noise or rumbling
with which the wicked will fall into his
pit.1 Some say this
is another instance of the recurring error of these
verses2 (This conclusion
is hardly necessary, however.). The desire to
reorganize the text should be
restrained unless there is no possible
interpretation of the passage
which makes sense. In this phrase there is
such an interpretation. If we
understand the net to be somehow used in
conjunction with the pit, the
verse could be translated:
Let destruction come upon him unawares;3
And his net which he hid, let it capture him:
With destruction let him
fall into it.
David's foe is captured by
falling into his net to his own destruction.
David's desire is the
destruction or incapacitation of his foes.
The translation given above raises another question about
verse
eight: Why is there a change
from the plural (enemies) of the first seven
verses to the singular of verse
eight? This may be understood as either
a collective treatment of the
group4 or the individualization of each of
his foes5 without
affecting the meaning of the text, but, in keeping with
the plurals in the rest of the
psalm, it is probably a collective plural.
As he began verse one with the lex talionis, so David ends verse eight.
1Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:422.
2Briggs, Commentary, p. 304; Kirkpatrick, Psalms, p. 178; Perowne,
Psalms, p. 308. The alleged
error is the mis-positioning of tH,w,.
3Kautzsch, Grammar, p. 490.
4Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:422.
5Kirkpatrick, Psalms, p. 178.
42
Verses 9-10
9 And my soul will
rejoice in the Lord,
And it will
exult in His salvation:
10 All my bones shall say, "Lord, who is like You,
Who delivers
the afflicted from the one who is stronger
than
him,
And the
afflicted and the needy from him who tears him away?"
Until verse nine there is little of positive note in this
psalm.
With the exception of verse 3b
David has been accusing his adversaries,
pleading his own innocence and
calling for the execution of righteousness.
In verse nine, however, the
mood of the psalm lifts and we find David
rejoicing in the Person of
God--in both Who He is and what He does. What
caused this dramatic change in
David's outlook and language?
One theory seeks to explain this phenomenon by
naturalistic means
by saying that the imprecations
are actually part of a cursing ritual in
the temple which, after the petitioner
had made his desire for vengeance
known to the priest, was
followed by a sign or statement that guaranteed
the petitioner his desire.1
Thus reassured, he could rejoice and praise
the Lord for answering his
prayer(s).
There is, however, another explanation which is in accord
with
the Scriptural evidence. David
has nowhere expressed doubt concerning
the Lord's ability to answer
his prayers, and this outburst of praise in
verses 9 and 10 is the
expression of his confidence in the Lord. What is
implicit in verses 1 - 8 is
explicit in verses 9 and 10. The Lord will
hear him; He will answer his
prayers.
In verse 9a David says that his soul will rejoice in the
Lord and
in 10a that all of his bones
will confess the awesome majesty and might
1 Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 2 vols., trans.
D.M.G.
Stalker
(New York: Harper and Row, 1962), 1:401f, Cf. discussion on
verses 27-28, below.
43
of the Lord. His entire body
and soul are united in praising his God.1
The object of his soul's
rejoicing is the Lord. His soul will rejoice
hv;hyBa, and
by this phrase David says that he is not only praising the
Lord, but he is realizing the
content and cause of his joy as the Lord's
Person. His soul not only rejoices
in the Lord as Lord; it also rejoices
in Him as his Saviour or
Rescuer. The Lord is the one who will accom-
plish the deliverance and
rescue of David. He tells us not only His name
but His role or mission as
well. David makes clear that he has entrusted
the situation to the Lord and
expects Him to care for him regardless of
the eventual outcome.
Every bone is continually asking the rhetorical question,
“Lord,
who is like You?"2
He gives no answer since he knows that none is needed,
for there is no one like the
Lord. This question echoes that of Moses in
Exodus 15.11 which is answered
earlier in that book as well as through-
out the Old Testament.3
The action of this divine Deliverer in verse 10b
is a continual action as
indicated by the participle (lycima) which
empha-
sizes the continual aspect of
the action without specifically tying it to
one time-place event. It is
clear from the context of the psalm and the
wording of this verse that
David considers himself one of the afflicted,
one of the needy who will be
rescued by the Lord. This is perhaps a fur-
ther implicit claim to
innocence on David's part--he is afflicted, not an
1Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole
Bible, 6
vols.
(
p.
361. wp,n,
here is to be understood as "soul" not "life." It is used
in
synthetic parallelism with Mc,f, as metonomy for the
entirety of David's
person.
2The imperfect emphasizes
the continual, ongoing nature of this
proclamation.
3Cf.
Ex. 8.10; 9.14; Dt. 33.26; Is. 46.9; Jer. 10.6,7; Ps. 86.8.
44
afflictor; he is needy, not one
of those who have everything in their own
strength. David's neediness
arises out of his trust in the Lord. He was
not needy in the sense of
monetary poverty, but he was needy in his depen-
dence upon the Lord as his
defender instead of depending upon his own
strength or friends to deliver
him. The fact that the Lord accomplishes
this deliverance shows that He
is unique--that there is no other god who
will act on behalf of those who
cannot repay him in some way. He rescues
the poor and oppressed from
those who would tear away from them the last
of their belongings.
David concludes the first strophe of this psalm with
praise to
the Lord, proclaiming his
confidence in both the Lord's answer to his
prayer and the reason for that
confidence. David has proclaimed his own
innocence and endangered state
since verse seven. Since the Lord deli-
vers the afflicted and needy
from the strong who would plunder them com-
pletely, and David considers
that to be his situation, David is confident
that he will be delivered. The
consideration of God's attributes and His
actions together strengthens
David in his time of need.
45
Strophe
II: Verses 11 - 18
In this section of the psalm David strengthens his
argument that
the actions of his enemies are
truly Mn.AHi (v. 7). He does this by
con-
trasting their unrighteousness
(vv. 11-12, 15-16) with his concern for
them and his conduct toward
them (vv. 13-14). There is no imprecation in
this strophe because the
emphasis has been changed from that of the first
strophe. In the first David made his initial plea for
aid as well as his
initial lament. He was not
emphasizing his own position, but was
sketching the entire scope of
his situation, both his predicament and
the hoped-for deliverance. In
the second strophe, however, David empha-
sizes his righteousness and the
forensic climate in order that his prayer
will be seen as more reasonable
than it might at first appear.
Verses 11-12
11 Malicious witnesses shall rise;
That which I
do not know they ask me.
12 They repay me evil after good;
Desolation (is) for my soul.
With NUmUqy;,1
David uses the imperfect to describe a condition
that was both present and had
already existed for a period of time.2 He
emphasizes the desperateness of
his circumstances and the determination
of his foes. MUq is the
same verb as was used in verse 2b in his call
to the Lord to arise for his
help.
Who are the rq,w,
ydeyfe?
They are witnesses of some kind because
dyfe
is
a word commonly used for "witness" in a court of law.3
This is
1The peragogic nun, commonly used for emphasis, is
probably used
here
to avoid an hiatus before the f. Kautzsch, Grammar, p. 128.
2Calvin, Commentary, 1:583; Delitzsch, Psalms, p. 423.
3dyfe
used of
witness giving testimony in a court of law in
Nu. 5.13; Jos. 24.22; 1 Sa 12.5 (cf. rq,w, dyfe in Ex. 23.1; Dt. 19.16ff.).
46
the second occurrence of
specifically legal terminology in Psalm 35 (Cf.
on byri, v. 1, above). Are these persons who rise up
witnesses of vio-
lencel or are they
violent (i.e., malicious) witnesses?2 The question
asks whether the construct noun
is modified by the following word or not.
When we consider other places
where this phrase is used, it seems clear
that these witnesses are
"false" or "malicious" witnesses (i.e., their
violence is in their hearts).
In Exodus 23.1 Moses forbids the Israelites
to be partners with a wicked
man (fwArA-Mfi) and thereby become smAHA dfe.
Deuteronomy 19.16ff. points out
the difference between these men and
those who are usually called
false witnesses. If the smAHA dyfe is
found to
be rq,w,-dfe, having accused his brother, he is to be
killed in order to
purge the evil from the midst
of the people. smAHA-ydefE thus emphasizes
the intent and motivation,
whereas rq,w, dfe3
emphasizes the nature of the
testimony being offered.4
Therefore David's foes were either accusing him directly
or were
paying others to accuse him
falsely. They were probably doing the
accusing themselves because it
would be difficult to ascribe true malice
to mercenaries, whereas from
what he has said so far in this psalm his
foes were working and
conspiring against him.5 That they were malicious
1Briggs, Commentary, p. 305; Calvin, Commentary, 1:582n, quoting
Horsley;
Leupold, An Exposition, p. 288.
2Delitzsch, Psalms, p. 423; Henry, Commentary, 3:362; Kirkpatrick,
Psalms, p. 179; Perowne, Psalms, p. 303.
3See commentary on verse
20, below.
4Dt. 19.16ff is one of
several dealing with the nature of testi-
mony
given in a court of law. It closes with a recapitulation of the
lex talionis.
5The LXX refers to them
as ma<rturej a@dikoi. This emphasizes their
personal
nature rather than the nature of their testimony.
47
witnesses would only lead us to
suspect that their testimony would be
false--a conclusion borne out
by Deuteronomy 19.16ff.
These malicious witnesses were not only rising up but
were also
seeking information which David
did not--could not--have. Since he was
innocent, he had no way of
answering their charges or their questions.
Yet they continued to press him
for an explanation of the actions which
they were (albeit falsely)
ascribing to him. By xlo with the
perfect David
categorically denies any
knowledge of the accusations1 and confesses his
ignorance before he tells us
what they were doing. lxawA here
simply de-
scribes their actions. David
says that they are inquiring of him with no
modifiers concerning the nature
of their inquiry--he has described the
nature of their attitude toward
him in the first half of the verse.
The imperfect of MlawA as of NUmUqy; in verse eleven, describes a
present state as well as a
continual action in the past. Although more
familiar as "complete,
whole, healthy" MlawA, here
in piel, has the sense
of "repaying
something." David's cry is that he did good (hbAOF) but that
his foes repaid him--not in
kind--but with evil (hfArA).2
The good David
had done for his enemies was
physical good; bounty, good things, pros-
perity are all implied by hbAOF. Their response to this was anything but
equally gracious. Instead, they
had been and still were causing David
injury (not necessarily
physically) and doing wrong to him. All of this
is contained in the direct
contrast between hfArA and hbOF.
1A denial emphasized by
the accents. The merekha, as the major
conjunctive
accent for the books tmx, binds rw,xE with yTifd;dayA
xlo and the
rebhia mugras separates this phrase
from yniUlxaw;yi.
2This use of MlawA
is also
seen Gn. 44.4 and Ps. 38.21. The
general
thought expressed here can be seen in Ps. 109.5 where ylAfa
MyWi is
used,
rather than Ml.ewi. This action is condemned in Jer. 18.20.
48
Describing his own state, David then says that all that
is left
to him in this life is
bereavement. Used only thrice in the Hebrew Bible,
lOkw;
signifies
a deep personal loss. In Isaiah 47.8, 9 lOkw;
is
twice
used in conjunction with Nmol;xa (widowhood) as part of a judgment being
prophesied against
upon her suddenly and in one day,
a prophecy realized in her destruction
in 539 B.C.1 The
verb to which this noun is related (lkawA) means
to be
bereaved, and from several occurrences
we can understand David's meaning.
come upon him if Benjamin does
not return from
I am bereaved."). This is
the loss of only some of his children (two of
twelve) but they were his sons
by his favorite wife. In 1 Samuel 15.33
Samuel uses lkowA when he described the state of Agag's mother
immediately
before killing him. There are
other uses of lkowA as
wel1,2 but the most
explicit example is Deuteronomy
32.25 where the Lord, warning
through Moses of their fate if
they choose to disobey and go their own
way, says that the young man,
the virgin, the nursing infant and the man
with gray hair will all be
killed by the sword and terror. "The sword
shall bereave" (br,H,-lK,waT;) and the result of that
bereavement will be
the death of some from every
portion of society. David is expressing his
intense isolation and sorrow.
No one is left to whom he can turn.3
1J. Barton Payne, Encyclopedia
of Biblical Prophecy (
Harper
and Row, 1973), p. 301; Jack Finegan,
Light From the Ancient Past,
2
vols. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974), 1:229f.
2Cf. Ex. 23.26; 2 Ki.
2.19, 21; Ezk. 14.15; 36.14.
3Understanding wp,n,, as metonymy for the
person, not just the non-
material
part of David's being. Briggs, Commentary,
p. 304.
49
In these two verses David further describes his situation
both
positively (that which his
enemies do to him) and negatively (his lack of
aid or comfort). He is laying
the foundation for verses 13 and 14, where
he describes clearly the fact
of his own righteous and irreproachable
behaviour, especially in the
light of his enemies' conduct toward him.
Verses 13-14
13 And I? In their sickness my clothing (was) sackcloth;
I bowed down
my soul with fasting;
And my prayer--it
returned unto my bosom.
14 Like a neighbor, like a brother to me I went about;
As a mourner for a mother--dressed in black I was bowed down.
By beginning the verse with the copula and pronoun David
empha-
sizes his personal conduct1
as the subject of these verses and contrasts
himself with his detractors.2
The waw may be rendered
"and" in spite of
the contrast in content between
this verse and the preceding. It is as
if he does not know how to
express himself. He says, "And I in their
weakness. . ." and goes
from their state to his own actions as if overcome
by emotion because of the
anomaly between his behavior and theirs. The
degree of their sickness is not
plainly stated. hlAHA can be
weakness, as
used to describe Samson after
his hair had been cut,3 or sickness that is
near death (e.g., Hezekiah's
condition).4 The severity of David's
response--dressing in sackcloth
and ashes and interceding for them--indi-
cates that they may have been
seriously ill, even near death. If this is
David's meaning, which it seems
to be, he emphasizes the efficacy of his
prayers for them, because their
lives were spared5 due at least in part
1Briggs, Commentary, p. 305. 2Delitzsch,
Psalms, 1:423.
3Judges 16.7,11,17. 42 Kings 20.10; Isaiah 38.1.
5That these are the same
persons is shown by the pronominal
suffixes.
50
to his prayers; their healing
may be seen as a sign of his righteousness.
David does not merely express his sympathy for their
situation,
however. He changed his
lifestyle to bring it into conformity with the
demands of the moment. His
clothing was made of sackcloth, he fasted, he
prayed most earnestly, he acted
as one who mourned after his own neighbor
or brother. By describing this
behavior David asserts not only his out-
ward, visible innocence and the
innocence of his motivations, but his
positive and visible acts of
mercy as well. He realized that the action
was proof of his heart.
Sackcloth was a sign of repentance or sorrow,1
showing his iden-
tification with them in their
distress.2 He afflicted his soul by
fasting,3 which is a
sign of either mourning4 or of dedication to the
occasion at hand.5
David fasts in order that he might better pray for
his foes in their illness. What
is more precious to a man than his sto-
mach?6 What better
way to demonstrate his sincerity toward them?
David advances as another sign of his sincerity and
righteousness
bUwTA
yqiyHe-lf ytilA.pit;U--a clause that has caused much discussion and
has
produced two main points of
view. The first of these suggests that David
is to be pictured with his chin
sunk upon his breast as he prays, and the
1McKay, Psalms 1-50, p. 162.
2Cf. Job 2.12 where Job's
three friends tore their robes as a
sign
of their sorrow and desire to identify with him in his distress.
3ywip;na is, therefore, his
entire being, since the non-material
part
of his person would not be affected by fasting.
41 Sam. 31.13; 2 Sam.
1.12.
5Cf. Lv. 16.29, 31; 23.27
(wp,n,
+ hnAfA
which does not use MOc,
which
is not commonly used until 1 Sam.
(Cf. Jg, 20.26).
6Rom. 16.18; Php. 3.19; Eph. 5.29a.
51
clause illustrates David's
physical posture.1 The second
suggestion
emphasizes the concept of
return (bUw) into David's bosom, saying
either
that David's prayer will be
without effect on them and will be turned
to his benefit2 or
that he is so honest that he could pray that prayer
for himself.3
The LXX and David's use of these two verses to emphasize
his
righteous behaviour together
point to Perowne's suggestion as the proper
interpretation of this clause.
David's motives, thoughts, intents of his
heart all work together to
produce a prayer so honest and righteous that
he would that others had prayed
it for him.
The figurative use of j`lahA in the
hithpael to suggest "living"
or "manner of living"
emphasizes David's exemplary conduct4 while they
were sick and miserable. David
tells the Lord that he had behaved toward
them as he would have toward
his own brother or his own friend in similar
circumstances. The athnah
here is for a dramatic pause--the ascending
nature of the relationships
cited5 (from friend to brother to mother)
shows the depth of his emotions
toward his foes. How far need a man go
to assert his innocence? David
claims that he would be no more solici-
tous of his own mother than he
was of these, his persecutors. His
mourning at their sorry state
was like the mourning of one who had lost
1Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:424; Calvin, Commentary, 1:585 also allows
this
interpretation.
2Cf. LXX (a]postrafh<tw). Alexander, Psalms, pp. 151f; Kirkpatrick,
Psalms, p. 180.
3Perowne, Psalms, p. 304. 4Cf.
j`lahA
Psalm 1.1.
5Alexander, Psalms, p. 152.
52
his mother.1 He
wants no doubt concerning his sincerity of motives and
actions.
Again stressing the continual nature of his actions2
by using the
qal participle, David says that
he was bowed down because he was in
mourning, or in other words,
dressed darkly. He went about softly,
quietly, as one troubled by
pain or sorrow.3 David has illustrated his
two-fold use of Mn.A.Hi in verse seven in these two verses and now
turns to
contrast the conduct of his
enemies in his misfortune with his conduct in
their misfortune.
Verses 15-16
15 But at my stumbling they rejoiced and gathered
themselves
together;
Smiters
gathered themselves together against me and I did
not know;
They tore and
were not silent.
16 With godless mockers (for) a cake; gnashing against me
with
their teeth.
How do David's enemies respond to his calamities? In
these two
verses he shows that their
attitudes are none other than those which
their actions and attitudes
discussed earlier in the psalm would lead one
to expect. They rejoice in his
misfortune, they are continually gather-
ing together against him (even
those whom he does not know), and they
refuse to give him any peace in
which to collect his thoughts or muster
1lbexa as the construct state
with an objective genitive (cf. Gn.
27.41;
Dt. 34:8); Delitzsch, Psalms, 1.425;
Kautzsch, Grammar, p. 271.
2David emphasizes his
righteousness by describing the continual
oppression
of his foes (cf. the imperfect tense in vv. 11,12) and his
own
consistent and continual goodness.
3Delitzsch, Psalms, p. 425.
53
his defense. He is without rest
and weary which may contritute to the
images that he uses in these
verses.
David's description shifts to a different scene. He is
now the
one in distress, the one “in flac,.”1
He uses stumbling or limping as a
symbol for distress and
trouble. Bildad, in Job 18.12 uses this image
to describe the ever-present
danger of disaster being prepared to take
advantage of any slipping (flacA) of a man's foot. So it is with David.
His foes rejoice when he slips
or has a problem or trial. They gather
together in their joy and laugh
and taunt David.2 Having done this they
again gather together. This
time perhaps a different group of people is
involved--the smitten ones of
low social estate,3 the disreputable and
base persons of society.4
These smitten ones are those who, because of
their low social standing, were
unknown to David5 (thus ytif;dayA-xlo). He
did not know them, yet they too
were gathering together, not to rejoice
over his calamities, but
because they were against David's person (ylafA).
Perhaps these were more active
in seeking trouble for him. Not content
to merely sit and watch, they
had gathered behind his back and would soon
move openly against him.
At the end of verse fifteen David further describes their
actions
against him. Their attack was
so constant that it seemed to him that
they were never quiet. These
men, like wild beasts tearing their prey
(fraqA; cf.
Hosea 13.8), were continually bringing false and unjust
1Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:425.
2The combination of galgal and ‘ole weyored with UHm;WA and UpsAxIn,v;,
respectively,
emphasizes the combination of these two verbal concepts.
3Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:425f. 4Calvin,
Commentary, 1:587.
5Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:426.
54
accusations against David.
These tearings are a vivid picture of the
false charges which David was
forced to face. Not only were they tearing
at him, they were not ceasing
from their antagonism (UmDA-xlo).
David was
being overwhelmed by their
hatred and feels that he has no oppurtunity
to attempt an answer to their
attacks.
Verse sixteen gives no sign of hope for his situation.
The pro-
fane godless ones are among his
opponents and they are the type of per-
sons who mock someone else for
a piece of cake.1 These men
therefore
have no moral standards which
would cause them to hold back or cease
their mockery. They are an
excellent example of the description "whose
god is their belly." They
are men from whom David can hope for no mercy.
Their mocking, however, did not cease with mere words,
but
increased in intensity until
they were gnashing their teeth at David
(Omyne.wi
ylafA qroHA).2 This expression is used in the Old Testament
to de-
scribe the intensity of one
person's hatred toward another.3 David uses
this infinitive absolute as one
of attendant circumstance, paralleling
and defining more closely UfrqA of verse fifteen, above.4 His enemies
are acting exactly in accord
with their character. As wild beasts tear
at their prey with their teeth,
so do they show their desire to do so by
1Alexander, Psalms, p. 152; Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:426; Leupold,
An Exposition, p. 288. These are men
who mock their master's enemies
in
return for his favor. That gOfmA a "cake" can
be demonstrated from
1
Kings 17.12. The LXX reveals the idiomatic nature of this expression
by
translating 1 Kings 17.12 with e]gkrufi<aj (a loaf baked in ashes,
or a
cake),
whereas here they use mukth<rismoj (mockery, scorn).
2Briggs, Commentary, p. 307.
3Cf. Ps. 37.12; 112.10;
Lam. 2.16.
4Kautzsch, Grammar,
p. 341.
55
gnashing their teeth at him.
That he feels the personal force of their
hatred is seen both by the use
of lfa ( stronger word meaning
"against"
than B;) and by its position in this phrase. lfa's two
original meanings
were "upon" (e]pi<) and "over" (u[pe<r) and the derived meaning
"against"
carries the picture of a
warrior or an agressor standing in or struggling
to attain a position of
superiority over his opponent.1 David, thinking
of the wild beast standing over
its prey ready to devour it, or of the
soldier, standing over his
fallen foe ready to dispatch him, pictures in
carefully chosen language the
desperation of his plight. He writes, in
a word-for-word translation,
"to gnash against me his (their) teeth."
By putting himself in the
middle of this construction rather than saying
ylafA
Mh,yn.ewi qroHA he emphasizes again his hopeless state.
In these two verses David has illustrated the implacable
hatred
of his enemies and the
hopelessness of his own situation. His flow of
thought throughout this passage
(vv. 11-16) has been to show his own
righteous conduct and attitudes
in the light of his opponents' sinfulness.
The structure of these six
verses further illustrates this by his careful
use of a chiastic pattern
whereby his righteous deeds are centered
between two sections recording
their sins. The progression is not so
much logical as didactic--David
is teaching by structure. These verses
could be diagrammed:
A 11
Their false accusations
B 12
Their shameful conduct
C 13 ("But I. . .") David's righteous conduct
C 14 David's righteous conduct, personalized
B 15a-b
("But at. . .") Their shameful conduct
A 15b-16
Their False Accusations
This device heightens the
contrast between David and his enemies. He also
1Kautzsch, Grammar,
p. 383.
56
contrasts the two lifestyles by
putting in expressions and words that are
antithetical to each other
(e.g., at their sickness he was solicitous of
God for their health, but as
soon as he slipped they were attacking and
deriding him; he fasted but
they feasted on payment received for mocking
him; he acted toward them as if
they were his own kin, but they mocked
him without knowing him; the
honesty and fervency of his prayer contras-
ted with their lack of any
thought of God). From this bleak outlook on
events, David again (Cf. vv.
4-8) turns to the Lord with a petition and
ends the strophe with a promise
of praise to the Lord for the deliverance
that will come.
Verses 17-18
17 Lord! How long will You watch?
Cause my soul
to turn back from their ravages;
From lions my
only one.
18 I will praise You in a great congregation;
With a mighty people I will praise you.
David begins with the vocative, calling upon the Lord.
This is
the first time that he has
called God ynAdoxE in this
psalm and he repeats
it later in verses 22b and 23b.
NOdxE (ynAdoxE) emphasizes the superior
position of the one addressed.
Sarah called Abraham her lord (Gn. 18.12).
Eissfeldt's suggestion that the
yodh be understood as a pronominal
affor-
mative and that the qames shows a plural of majesty,
resulting in the
meaning "Lord of all"
for ynAdoxE, is true in essence.1
David, recognizing
his helpless position, calls on
the One Who is superior to every circum-
stance and able to help. His
question is a cry of anguish: "How long will
you watch?" hmAKa is a combination of the preposition K; with hmA, the
interrogative. Literally
meaning "the like of what?" the resultant
1TDOT,
revised ed., s.v. "NOdxE ynAdoxE,"
by Otto Eissfeldt, p. 69.
57
meanings "how much?"
"how many?"1 become "how long?" when joined to
the
infinitive verb. Since the
imperfect implies unfinished or incomplete
action, David is asking the
Lord, "How long are You going to keep standing
by, looking on?" We do not
interpret this, however, as a cry of frustra-
tion but as a desire for the
justice of God.2 David's meaning was not
simply to ask about the length
of time during which the Lord would
observe, but to ask how long
would the Lord wait before intervening on
his behalf, as the rest of
verse seventeen shows.
He changes the nature of his prayer (from vv. 4-8) in
language
although its subject is still
the same. Here is no recrimination, no
protestation of innocence. He
is concerned for his life and asks the
Lord to cause his soul to
return (i.e., be rescued). He is not speaking
only of his soul, however (Cf.
on v. 4, above), for his soul here is syn-
doche for his entire person.
David's request for rescue is not aimless
because he refers back to verse
eight where he asked that devastations
come upon them because of their
sin. He now asks for deliverance from
the destruction that they have
planned for him.
The ywip;na that
David wants delivered from them is his soul, as
the synthetic parallelism
indicates. He refers back to verses 15 and 16,
picking up the image of the
wild beasts. These enemies of his were like
young lions (MyriypiK;)--strong, bold, eager to kill, with no
respect for
man. David describes his soul
as his precious one because he recognizes
its importance. He has nothing
else to lose--if he loses it everything
else is gone--so he calls it
"precious." It is not precious to his adver-
saries, but it is important to
him. Having unburdened his soul with this
cry for help, David turns to
vow his praise in the midst of the nation.
1BDB,
s.v. "hm." 2Cf.
Rev. 6.10.
58
Verse eighteen is a reprise and expansion of verses 9 and
10. In
those verses the whole person
of David, represented by his soul and bones,
was rejoicing and exulting in
the Person and salvation of the Lord.
Here nothing is mentioned as
the cause for thanksgiving; he simply states
his intention to thank and
praise the Lord publicly (MUcfA MfaB;
brA lhAqAB;).
The imperfect verbs reveal his
intention and the nouns the circumstances
under which he will perform it.
If j~d;Ox be
understood as the imperfect of hdAyA, it is
a predic-
tion of what David will do
after his rescue. It would then emphasize
David's faith that the Lord
will deliver him and bring him through his
trials safely. If, on the other
hand, it be seen as cohortative, David
is lay stress on his personal determination underlying his action.1
The
answer to this question is
found in the form j~l,l;haxE because
the dagesh
is gone from the first l, as it is in the cohortative.2 Since
these two
verbs are parallel in usage it
is reasonable to assume that their forms
are parallel as wel1.3
David is stating his determination to praise the
Lord. His ability to state this
comes from his certainty that the Lord
will not stand by as a
spectator looking on, but will involve Himself on
David's side and intervene
effectually on his behalf.
His confession (hdAyA) will
center on the Person of the Lord. He
will be confessing the great
deeds of the Lord on his behalf and will
praise Him (llahA) for them. He again positions the words to
emphasize
1Kautzsch, Grammar, p. 319. LXX, reading e]comologh<somai, does
not
help here, because the Greek future can be either, though it tends to
parallel
the Hebrew imperfect of intent.
2BDB, s.v. "
3Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:427. He states that j~d;Ox
is
cohortative
without
giving any reasons. Perhaps his thinking is reflected in this
discussion.
59
his point--the first word in
the verse (j~d;Ox) and
the last (j~l,l;haxE)
show that his actions are his
main concern, not the location.
That David expected to be in the company of the Lord's
people
again cannot be doubted. Verses
11 and 12, 15 and 16 picture him sur-
rounded by his enemies, but he
draws a sharp contrast with that situation
in verse eighteen. He will be
in the great congregation (brA lhAqA),
presumably people who will
either serve as witnesses to his confession
of praise or who will join him
in praise, or both. lhAqA
usually refers
to a group gathered together1
for a specific purpose.2 David, aware of
the significance of his
anointment by Samuel,3 anticipated the day when
he would be able to convocate
the people of
thanksgiving and praise to the
Lord for his deliverance out of the hands
of his enemies. MUcfA does not only mean "mighty" in the
sense of
"powerful," because,
as Delitzsch says, it "always refers, according to
the context, to strength of
numbers or to strength of power."4 Since it
is parallel with brA it is a picture of a numberless multitude.5
In this strophe David again asserts his innocence. He
does not
use Mn.AHi as in verse seven, for his aim is different
from the first
strophe. There he is content to
protest his innocence, but here he uses
his good works as proofs of his
righteousness. As was his intent, this
1See LXX e]kklhsi<a
pollh<--the
"great called-out group" which was
called
out for a purpose:
2E.g., for war (Nu. 22.4;
Jg. 21.5,8), for religious ceremonies
(Dt.
5.19; Jos. 2.16; Jer. 44.15). It can also refer to general gather-
ings (Gn. 35.11; Nu. 27.4; Pr. 21.16).
31
Sam. 16.13.
4Delitzsch, Psalms, 1:427; Calvin, Commentary, 1:590f.
5BDB, s.v. "MUcfA." In every occurrence of MUcfA, with this
meaning,
it is parallel with brA.
60
intensifies the picture of his
innocence and righteousness against his
enemies' sinfulness. He is thus
increasingly confident in the Lord's
deliverance of him and
anticipates the ceremony of praise at his vindi-
cation. David now returns, in
the final strophe, to the ungodliness of
of his enemies and assertions
of his own righteousness, but the tone of
these verses is more sedate and
controlled than in the beginning of the
psalm. Even his prayers change
somewhat in emphasis as he calls for the
Lord's condemnation and
judgment upon his enemies.
61
Strophe
III: Verses 19 - 28
Verses 19-21
19 Do not let my false haters rejoice at me;
My haters
without cause--do not let them wink an eye
20 Because they do not speak peace
And against
restful ones of a land words of deceit they
conspire.
21 And they made their mouths large against me:
They said, "Aha! Aha! Our eyes have seen!"
lfa with
the jussive, often used for negative wishes or impreca-
tions,1 here
expresses David's strong desire that his enemies not be
allowed to rejoice over him.
Widespread debate on the meaning of byexo
has not brought agreement on
its meaning--if anything, it has splintered
what agreement there may have
been.2 Ringgren says in summarizing
Widengren's thought:
On the basis of his comparisons of
the Old Testament
psalms with the Akkadian psalms of
lament, Widengren
emphasizes that the same expressions
can be used dif-
ferently in different contexts, and
that stereotyped
phrases by no means justify a
uniform explanation of
the enemies; rather, in each
individual case, one
must make his investigation on the
basis of other
criteria in order to determine those
to whom the ex-
pressions refer.3
David here refers to his
personal enemies and says that they are his ene-
mies rq,w,, usually translated "wrongfully."4
rq,w,
is
used elsewhere in
1Kautzsch, Grammar, pp. 321f.
2TDOT, revised ed., s.v. " byx," by Helmer
Ringgren.
3Ibid., p. 218.
4Calvin, Commentary, 1:592; Kirkpatrick, Psalms,
p. 181. John T.
Willis,
ed., The Living Word Commentary on the
Old Testament (
Sweet
Publishing Company, 1980). Vol. 10: Psalms,
by Arthur L. Ash and
on rq,w,, p. 46, above.
62
the Old Testament to refer to
witnesses in a court situation who are
giving false testimony in order
to cause a false judgment against the
accused.1 Its
primary meaning is deception or falsehood and by using it
in parallel with Mn.AHi (cf. v. 7, above), he is emphasizing his
claim of
verse eleven. His enemies
pretend to have a reason for hating him. This
excuse is a falsehood, a lie,
and reveals both their hatred of him and
the lack of any restraint upon
their behaviour. Any testimony they may
give against him is not likely
to be trustworthy.
His enemies are not only ybay;xo,
however. byaxA is a
passive verb
usually meaning "be
hostile to,"2 but they go beyond being his enemies
and actively hate him (yxan;W), seeking ways to effectively employ (or
deploy) that hatred against
him. They hated him gratuitously (Mn.AHi), for
no reason (Cf. v. 7, above).
The force of lxa
carries over to the second half of the verse.
The verb may be read as if it
were Ucr;q;yi-lfa and
the same urgency given
to its interpretation as we saw
above. CraqA refers to the
compression of
something; it can be rendered
"to pinch," or "to nip." When referring to
the eyes it means to compress
the eyelids or "wink" and always bears a
negative connotation.3
David asks the Lord to prevent their joy at his
misfortune and their evil
plans.
As in verse seven, so in verse twenty. David is careful
to give