1. To the Chief Musician. A Psalm by David. This psalm, though intended, like all the rest, for permanent and public use, exhibits very strong marks of the personal experience of the author. He first states a general rule of the divine dispensations, namely, that the merciful shall obtain mercy, ver. 2–4 (1–3). He then claims the benefit of this law in his own case, which is described as one of great suffering from sickness and the spite of wicked enemies, ver. 5–10 (4–9). He concludes with an earnest prayer to God for succor, and expresses a strong confidence that he shall receive it, ver. 11–14 (10–13).
The juxtaposition of this psalm with that before it is not fortuitous, but founded on their common resemblance to the thirty-fifth, and on their mutual resemblance as generic descriptions of the sufferings of the righteous, with specific reference to those of the Messiah, as the head and representative of the whole class. In this, as in the fortieth psalm, the exclusive reference to Christ is forbidden, by its obvious adaptation to a whole class, and by the explicit confession of sin in ver. 6 (5).
2 (1). Happy (the man) acting wisely towards the poor (man); in the day of evil Jehovah will deliver him. The form of expression at the beginning is the same as in Ps. 1:1, 40:5 (4). As the first verb sometimes has the sense of attending or attentively considering, some understand it to mean here considering (or attending to) the poor. But its proper import of acting prudently (or wisely) is entirely appropriate, and therefore entitled to the preference. See above, on Ps. 2:10, 14:2. What is meant by acting wisely towards the poor, may be gathered from the parallel passage, Ps. 35:13, 14. The principle assumed is that expressed by our Saviour in Mat. 5:7. See above, on Ps. 37:28. The poor, in the wide sense of the English word, corresponding very nearly to that of the Hebrew דַּל, which means poor in flesh (Gen. 41:19), and poor in strength (2 Sam. 3:1), as well as poor in point of property and social standing (Exod. 23:3). It here includes all forms of want and suffering, and might be translated wretched. This is not a mere reflection on the unkindness of his own acquaintances, but an indirect assertion of his own benevolence. “Happy the man acting wisely towards the poor—as I have done. In the day of evil, of his own misfortune, when his own turn comes to suffer, the Lord will deliver him—as I desire and expect to be delivered.”
3 (2.) Jehovah will keep him and save him alive; he shall be prospered in the land; and do not thou give him up to the will of his enemies. What he has done for others the Lord will do for him. Save him alive: the same verb occurs above in Ps. 22:30 (29). Prospered: the Hebrew verb (יאשר) originally means led straight, or in a straight path. See above, on Ps. 23:3. But here it has the same sense as in Prov. 3:18. The marginal reading in the Hebrew Bible (ואשר) only differs from the text by introducing the conjunction and. In the land, i.e. the land of promise. See above, on Ps. 25:13, 37:3, 9, 11, 22, 29, 34. These are generally propositions, but are evidently meant to be applied specifically to himself. His solicitude respecting the event is betrayed by his sudden transition from prediction to petition. Give him up to the will, literally into the soul, here put for the desire or appetite. See above, on Ps. 27:12, and compare Ps. 17:9.
4 (3.) Jehovah will support him on the couch of languor; all his bed hast thou turned in his sickness. The images are borrowed from the usages of real life. The first is that of holding a sufferer up, sustaining him, in pain and weakness; the other that of changing, making, or adjusting his bed. The parallelism favors this interpretation of the second clause much, more than that which makes it mean “thou has converted all his sickness into health.” The words translated couch and languor are unusual equivalents to bed and sickness in the other clause.
5 (4). I have said, Jehovah, have mercy upon me; heal my soul, for I have sinned against thee. The pronoun at the beginning is emphatic. He is here applying to himself the doctrine which he had before laid down in general terms. “Knowing this to be the rule of the divine administration, I myself have claimed the benefit of it; I myself have said,” &c. There is no need of diluting the past tense into a present. The use of the preterite implies that it is not an act yet to be performed, but one that has been done already. The same emphasis, though not required by the form of the original, may be supposed to rest upon the me and the my. The prayer for the healing of his soul may be considered as including that for the removal of his bodily disease, which seems to be referred to in this psalm as a mere consequence of inward agony. And this is itself referred to sin as its occasion in the last clause of the verse. The intimate connection between sin and suffering is continually recognized by David. See above, Ps. 31:11 (10), 32:5, 38:4, 5, 19 (3, 4, 18), 40:13 (12). Against thee, literally to thee, as to thee. The idea of direct opposition is suggested by the context. See above, on Ps. 30:2 (1), 35:19, 24, 38:17 (16).
6 (5.) My enemies will say evil to (or as to) me: when shall he die and his name perish? The word translated evil is constantly applied to moral evil, and here means spite or malice. The ambiguous phrase to me seems to include the two ideas of speaking of him and in his hearing, or as we say in familiar English, talking at him. See above, on Ps. 3:3 (2), 11:1. The question in the second clause implies impatience. With the last phrase compare Ps. 9:7 (6).
7 (6.) And if he come to see me, falsehood he will speak; (in) his heart he is gathering mischief; he will go out, to the street (or out of doors) he will speak (or tell it). The subject of the sentence is his enemy viewed as an ideal person. Compare the alternation of the singular and plural forms in ver. 6 (5) and 12 (11). If he come, literally has come, at any former time; or still better, if he has come now, if he is now here, the scene being then described as actually present to the writer’s senses, which adds greatly to its graphic vividness and beauty. To see, not merely to see me, in the usual sense of visiting, which is rather an English than a Hebrew idiom, but to see for himself, to observe, to play the spy, to watch the progress of the malady, and judge how soon a fatal termination may be looked for. Falsehood, vanity, in the strong scriptural sense of emptiness, hypocrisy, false professions (in this case) of sympathy and friendly interest. He will speak: I am sure that he will do so; I know him too well to doubt it for a moment. The idea thus suggested by the future is entirely lost by exchanging it for the present, which it really includes, but something in addition. The construction, his heart gathereth, is at variance with the Masoretic accents, and does not yield so good a sense as that which makes his heart an adverbial phrase, a Hebrew idiom of perpetual occurrence. In our idiom it will then mean in (or as to) his heart, as opposed to the outward appearance of benevolence and friendship. The second future (יקבץ) may be either construed like the first, he (certainly) will gather, (I know that) he will gather; or understood to signify an action which has been begun but is not finished, he is gathering. To gather mischief is, in this connection, to collect materials for calumnious reports. He will go out, he will speak, or as we should say in English, when he goes out he will speak. The Hebrew verb itself (יצא) means to go out. The additional phrase means strictly to the street, or to the outside of the house. It might be grammatically construed with the verb before it, he will go out to the street. But the accents connect it with the verb that follows, to the street he will tell (it), or to the outside, i.e. to those without, who are perhaps to be conceived of, as impatiently awaiting his report.
8 (7). Together against me they will whisper all (those) hating me; against me they will meditate—injury to me. The collocation in the first clause is like that in Ps. 40:15–17, (14–16), the action being first described, and then the actors. The future has the same force as in the first clause of ver. 6, 7 (5, 6). They will certainly persist in doing as they now do. The substitution of the present in translation conveys only half of this idea. The last word in Hebrew (לִי) is omitted in most versions, though expressed in the margin of the English Bible. It defines the evil meditated, not as evil in the abstract or in general, but as evil to the sufferer, i.e. injury, which is the usual meaning of the Hebrew word (רָעָה), a modified form of (רַע), the one used in ver. 6 (5) to denote moral evil. The last words are a kind of after-thought.—Against me they will meditate or plot, is a complete proposition in itself, which is then made more explicit by mentioning the object of their plots, namely, evil (or injury) to me. This form of the sentence may have been adopted to render the resemblance in the structure of the clauses more complete.
9 (8). A word of Belial is poured into him, and he who lies (there) shall arise no more. These are the words of his malignant visitors, either uttered in his presence, or to their companions after leaving him. The literal translation of the first clause is given, to shew its obscurity, and enable the reader to understand the different explanations of it which have been proposed. Some give word its not unfrequent idiomatic sense of thing, affair (1 Sam. 10:2, 2 Sam. 11:18, 19, Ps. 105:27), and Belial that of ruin or destruction, which they suppose it to have in Nah. 1:11, and Ps. 18:5 (4) above. But there, as elsewhere, it is better to retain its primary meaning, good for nothing, worthless, or as an abstract, worthlessness, a strong though negative expression for depravity. The whole phrase will then mean a wicked matter, a depraved affair. By this again some understand the disease with which he was afflicted, and which is then described as the result of his own wickedness; others the plan or plot devised by the speakers for the ruin of the sufferer. But this would hardly be described by themselves as a depraved affair. None of these explanations seem so natural or so exact, as that which gives to both words their customary meaning, and understands by a word of Belial a disgraceful charge or infamous reproach, which is then represented as the cause of his distress and his approaching death. The next phrase may either mean poured into his mind or soul, as a moral poison, producing agony and death; or poured upon him, so as to submerge or overwhelm him. In Job 41:15, 16 (23, 24), the same participle (יָצוּק) seems to be thrice used in the sense of poured out, melted, soldered, firmly fastened. So here the English Bible renders it cleaveth fast unto him, and the same meaning is assumed by some who understand by the preceding words a wicked plot or a destructive visitation, which is then described as cleaving fast to him so that he cannot shake it off or otherwise escape from it. The common version of the next words, now that he lieth, is extremely forced. The only natural construction of the relative is that which refers it to the sufferer himself. He who has lain down shall not add to rise, the common Hebrew method of expressing a continued or repeated action. See above, on Ps. 10:18. The expression becomes still more graphic if we understand it to mean he who is lying (here before you), or he who lies there, i.e. in yonder house or chamber.
10 (9). Even the man of my peace—whom I confided in—eating my bread—has lifted against me the heel. The first word properly means also. Not only foes, but also friends; not only strangers, but likewise they of my own household. The man of my peace, or my man of peace, is a strong idiomatic expression for the man with whom I was at peace. As to the construction, see above, on Ps. 2:6. Eating my bread, not merely as a guest, but as a dependent. Such must have been the current usage of the phrase in David’s time. See 2 Sam. 9:11, 13, 19:29 (28), and compare 1 Kings 18:19. Lifted, literally magnified or made great. See above, on Ps. 35:26, 38:17 (16). The act described seems to be one of contemptuous violence, but probably with an implicit allusion to supplanting as an act of treachery. Our Lord applies this verse expressly to himself and Judas (John 13:18), which shews that he was really included in the class to which the psalm relates. It is remarkable, however, that he only quotes the second of the three descriptive phrases, eating my bread, enjoying my society and subsisting on my bounty, while he omits the other two, because these would have represented Judas as his friend, and one in whom he trusted. But he knew from the beginning who it was that should betray him (John 6:64). This accurate distinction seems to confirm the assumption that the psalm has a generic meaning, and is only applicable to our Saviour as the most illustrious representative of the class which it describes. The allusion to Judas would be still more striking if, as some suppose, the phrase man of my peace had reference to the customary use of the word peace in salutation. He who was wont to wish me peace or to say. Peace be with thee. Compare Mat. 26:49. But this, although ingenious, is by no means an obvious or natural interpretation.
11 (10). And thou, Jehovah, have mercy upon me, and cause me to arise, and I will repay them. The connection between this verse and the one before it can be fully expressed in English only by a but at the beginning of the sentence. The pronoun is emphatic, thou, on thy part, as distinguished from these spiteful enemies. He here resumes the prayer begun in ver. 5 (4), and interrupted by the description of the malice of his enemies. Make me to rise, help me up from this bed of weakness and suffering, with obvious allusion to their having said that he would never rise again, ver. 9 (8). “O Lord, do what they pronounce impossible.” The last words of this verse seem at first sight inconsistent with the Christian doctrine of forgiveness, as laid down in Mat. 5:39, 40, Rom. 12:19. (Compare 1 Pet. 2:23.) But as this is also an Old Testament doctrine (see Prov. 20:22), as David himself recognised the principle, Ps. 7:5 (4), and acted on it, as appears from 2 Sam. 19:24 (23), the disagreement can be only an apparent one. It may be partially removed by observing that the speaker here is neither Christ nor David in his proper person, but an ideal character, representing the whole class of righteous sufferers, so that what is here said really amounts to little more than a prediction that the malignant persecutors of this class shall be requited. In the next place, let it be observed that it is not said how he will repay them, whether by punishment or by heaping coals of fire upon their heads, according to Solomon’s and Paul’s directions. (Prov. 25:21, 22, Rom. 12:20, 21.) Lastly, the rule laid down by Christ himself admits of righteous retribution, not only on the part of magistrates and rulers, but of private persons, where the means employed are lawful in themselves, and where their use is prompted, not by selfish pride or a revengeful malice, but by a desire to prevent a greater evil, to assert God’s honor, and even to benefit the offender himself.
12 (11). By this have I known that thou hast delighted in me, because my enemy is not to triumph over me. This implies a previous divine assurance that his enemy should not so triumph. For a similar intimation, see above, Ps. 20:7 (6). The certainty thus afforded is expressed by the past tenses of the two first verbs. “Since thou hast assured me that my enemy is not to triumph over me, I know already that thou hast even heretofore regarded me with favor.” The original expression is a very strong one, and denotes not only preference but warm and tender affection. See Gen. 34:19, where it first occurs. The last verb means properly to shout or make a noise as a sign of exultation, more especially in war. See 1 Sam. 17:20.
13 (12). And as for me—in my integrity thou hast held me, and hast made me stand before thy face forever. The first phrase literally means and I, as if agreeing with some verb suppressed, or as if the construction had been suddenly changed from I have been held to thou hast held me. The integrity here claimed is not absolute or sinless perfection, as appears from the confession in ver. 5 (4), but freedom from essential or fatal defect. See above, on Ps. 18:21–25 (20–24). In my integrity, not simply on account of it, which is rather implied than expressed, but in the possession and exercise of it. Thou hast held may either mean held fast or held up, but the first seems to be the essential meaning of the verb, and really involves or at least suggests the other. “Thou hast so held me fast as to hold me up. By retaining thy hold upon me thou hast sustained me.” Setting before the face seems here to mean making one the object of attention. keeping constantly in view. The reciprocal act of man towards God is spoken of in Ps. 16:8. As man sets God before him as an object of trust, so God sets man before him as an object of protection. That this is not to be a transient but a permanent relation, is implied in the future form of the verb, and expressed in the adverbial phrase for ever.
14 (13). Blessed (be) Jehovah, the God of Israel, from everlasting and to everlasting. Amen and Amen. In such connections, blessed is nearly synonymous with praised or glorified. In the sense of happy, the Hebrew word can only be applied to creatures. From the perpetuity (already past). and even to the perpetuity (to come), is a paradoxical but strong expression for unlimited duration. Amen is a Hebrew verbal adjective meaning firm, sure, certain, true. It is used as an expression of assent, just as we use right, good, and true itself, for the same purpose. It was uttered by the people as an audible response, not only in the time of Moses (Num. 5:22, Deut. 27:15–26), and of David (1 Chron. 16:36), but after the return from exile (Neh. 5:13, 8:6), and under the New Testament (1 Cor. 14:16). Its repetition here and elsewhere simply makes it more emphatic and expressive of a stronger and more cordial acquiescence. The doxology before us marks the close of the first of the five books into which the Psalter is divided. See below, on Ps. 72:19, 89:53 (52), 106:48.
Alexander, J. A. (1864). The Psalms Translated and Explained (pp. 183–188). Andrew Elliot; James Thin. (Public Domain)
Comments