Month: July 2024

July 31: Psalm 107:17-22

(Psalm 107 is being discussed over a series of daily notes; cf. the Introductory Notes)

Psalm 107:17-22

Verses 17-22 comprise the third stanza of the Psalm; the second stanza (vv. 10-16) was discussed in the previous note; for the first, vv. 4-9, see the Introduction.

Verse 17

“Foolish (one)s, from (the) path of their breaking (faith),
and from their crooked (way)s, are pressed (down).”

This third stanza deals with a different kind of oppression and affliction which human beings (and esp. God’s people) face. The initial word, MT <ylwa (vocalized <yl!w]a$, “stupid/foolish [one]s”), would seem to be somewhat at odds with the pattern of the initial couplets (vv. 4, 10) in the first two stanzas. There, the emphasis is on the misfortune and suffering experienced by the people, not on their sin/disobedience (as the cause of it). To be sure, such a connection is made in the second stanza (v. 11), but it is not the primary focus. For this reason, some commentators prefer to emend the text (the first character of the word) to <ylwj (<yl!oj, “weak/sick [one]s”). Dahood (III, p. 84f) accomplishes the same substitution, without emendation, by relating the verbal noun to a root lwa (a byform of lla), cognate with Akkadian ul¹lu (“to be weak”). The chiastic structure of the couplet does seem to support a reading of this kind:

    • “(The) weakened (one)s,
      • from (the) path of their breaking (faith), and
      • from their crooked (way)s,
    • are pressed (down) [i.e. by their sickness]”

The inner phrases, which are in synonymous parallelism, do explain the cause of the sickness that afflicts the people (cp. verse 11). The relationship of sin to sickness (as the cause of it) is a thematic motif that runs through a number of Psalms (e.g., 41:5[4]ff).

If the MT (and its vocalization) is correct, then the couplet establishes more clearly that it is the foolishness of the people which leads to their sin and unfaithfulness, and thus to their sickness (as punishment from YHWH). This emphasis is in keeping with certain Wisdom elements that can be found at points throughout the Psalm (see esp. the closing vv. 42-43). The noun lyw]a$ occurs frequently (19 out of 25 OT occurrences) in Proverbs, and twice again in Job 5:2-3; this would be the only occurrence in the Psalms (cf. also Isa 35:8; Jer 4:22; Hos 9:7).

As a side note, it is worth mentioning the alliterative wordplay in the second line of v. 17: WNu^t=y] <h#yt@n)ou&m@W, ûm¢±¦wœnœ¾êhem yi¾±anû.

Verse 18

“All that (they might) eat their soul abhors,
and they come near to touch (the) gates of death!”

It is a natural feature of sickness that people lose their appetite, to the point of finding food unappealing (even abhorrent). There are a number of poetic references to this motif (cf. Job 33:20). The failure to eat (lka) anything only brings the person closer to death—expressed here by the idea of coming so near as to touch (vb ug~n`) the “gates” of death (i.e., the realm of death, cf. Ps 9:14[13]; Job 38:17). The same root underlies one of the common nouns (ug~n#) for disease and pestilence (plague).

While this verse obviously applies to the general situation of a person (or group) suffering severe sickness (from disease/plague, etc), I think it quite possible that there is an allusion here to the famous episode of the Wilderness period, narrated in Numbers 11 (cf. Exod 16), particularly the climactic portion in vv. 31-34. The plague that strikes the Israelites (v. 33) takes place even as the people are in the process of the eating the meat sent by YHWH. The prior Psalm 106 (vv. 13-15) describes this same event, as part of the sin-judgment pattern of the Wilderness period. The translation of vp#n# here in the concrete sense of “throat” (cf. verse 9) would serve to enhance such an allusion—the food was literally stuck in their throat, and they became too sick even to swallow it.

The root uvp (noun uv^P#) is frequently used in the specific context of Israel’s violation of the covenant-bond with YHWH. The verb denotes the idea of “breaking” faith/trust with someone, as with regard to a binding agreement. It can also carry the more forceful connotation of rebellion, which would connect it (semantically) to the root hr*m* (v. 11; cf. 106:7, 33, 43).

Verse 19

“Then, (when) they cried out to YHWH,
in the (time of) distress for them,
he saved them from their tight spots.”

This tricolon (2+2+3) is identical to that of verse 13 (cf. the previous note), and essentially to v. 6 as well. See also the earlier note on Psalm 106:44.

Given the possible allusions to the Exile in the prior stanza (see also the overriding context of vv. 2-3), one could find the same theme present here as well. It would indeed be fitting to use the sickness-healing paradigm as a pattern for the historical exile-restoration sequence—note the references in Psalm 147:2-3; Isa 53:4; Jer 33:6-7; 2 Chron 36:16 (cf. Allen, p. 90).

Verse 20

“He sent forth His word, and healed them,
and brought them (out) alive from their pits!”

This concluding couplet expounds even more vividly the thought of v. 19 (compare the relation of verse 14 to v. 13 in the previous stanza). YHWH saved the people by “sending forth” (vb jl^v*) His word (rb*D*). Since YHWH is able to create and give life through His word (cf. the Creation account in Gen 1), He certainly is also able to heal (vb ap*R*) people through it, restoring them to life and health.

The second line essentially restates the third line of v. 19(c), drawing upon the imagery in v. 18b (viz., the realm of death):

    • “He saved them from their tight spots”
    • “He brought them (out) alive from their pits”

The verbs uv^y` (Hiphil, “save, keep safe, bring to safety”) and fl^m* (Piel) are clearly parallel. The precise meaning of the latter verb varies somewhat, though the basic denotation is “escape, get to safety”; the Piel stem here has a transitive meaning (i.e., “bring to safety”), thus being quite similar in meaning to uv^y` in the Hiphil. The cognate Akkadian bal¹‰u means “to live” (bullu‰u, “keep alive”), and I have chosen to emphasize this aspect of meaning (viz., “bring [out] alive”).

The plural form <t*otyj!v= (“their pits”) seems a bit peculiar, since the singular “Pit” (roB, etc) would more commonly be used as an expression for the ‘realm of Death’ (i.e., Sheol). However, the plural here is quite appropriate, as being parallel with “tight places” (hq*Wxm=, plur.) in v. 19c; the “pits” are the very “tight places” in which the sick people find themselves. Also, note the similar use of the plural in Lam 4:20, the only other occurrence of the noun tyj!v=. This noun has been alternately derived from the root hjv (“bow down”, i.e., go down, descend) and the root tj^v* (“destroy, corrupt, ruin”), the latter being more suitable for “pit” as an idiom for death and the grave.

Verse 21

“Let them give praise to YHWH (for) His devotion,
and His wondrous (deed)s to (the) sons of man!”

Each of the first four stanzas has a similar refrain, beginning with this same couplet, which echoes the opening call to worship (v. 1); see the note on verse 8 (and cf. verse 15).

Verse 22

“And let them sacrifice (with) sacrifices of praise,
and recount His (mighty) deeds with ringing cry!”

In the refrain of the first two stanzas, the second couplet of the refrain (vv. 9, 16) restates and summarizes the main theme of the stanza. Here, however, the couplet rather expands upon the initial refrain (v. 21), reinforcing the importance of God’s people praising Him for what He has done (viz., bringing deliverance and healing). The root jbz denotes the ritual slaughter of offerings; however, the more generalized (figurative) use of the language here, and also the need for poetic concision in rendering the line, prompts me to translate jbz more conventionally as “sacrifice”.

The worship setting (and musical nature) of the Psalms frequently leads to this special application of the idea of sacrifice—viz., sacrifice in the form of giving praise (through music and song) to YHWH (cf. 50:14, 23; 116:17; 141:2). And, along similar lines, there are other passages where the importance of the ritual offering is relativized or downplayed, in comparison with the orientation of a person’s inward intention and disposition (‘heart’)—cf. 40:7[6]ff; 50:8ff; 51:17[16]ff.

This praise includes the recounting (vb rp^s*) of all the mighty and wondrous deeds (v. 21 par) YHWH has done for His people. Psalms such as this, along with the prior Psalms 105 and 106 (and the historical summaries contained in them, cp. Ps 78), fulfill this very purpose, when the people sing or recite them.

References above (and throughout these notes) marked “Dahood, III” are to Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms III: 101-150, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 17A (1970).
Those marked “Allen” are to Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101-150, Revised edition, Word Biblical Commentary [WBC], Vol. 21 (Zondervan Academic: 2002).

July 30: Psalm 107:10-16

(Psalm 107 is being discussed over a series of daily notes; cf. the Introductory Notes)

Psalm 107:10-16

Verses 10-16 comprise the second stanza of the Psalm (the first, vv. 4-9, was discussed in the Introduction).

Verse 10

“(Those) sitting (in) darkness and death-shade,
being bound (by) oppression and iron(s),”

The thematic focus in the first stanza, on historical suffering of the Israelites (during the Wilderness period), is here shifted to the social imagery of people languishing in prison. The context is thus more general, being applicable to society at large (though the need for food and water [in stanza 1] is also of universal application). The pairing of “darkness” (Ev#j) and “shadow of death” (tw#m*l=x^), along with the motif of “sitting” (vb bv^y`) in the darkness, is traditional (cf. Job 3:5; 10:21; 28:3; 34:22; Isa 9:1; Amos 5:8). It suggests a condition of hopelessness and despair, in which a person (or people) suffers. The noun tw#m*l=x^, which itself can be used as vivid idiom for deep darkness/gloom (Job 10:22; 12:22; 24:17; Jer 2:6), occurs most famously in Psalm 23:4.

A less obvious pairing, in the second line, is “oppression” (yn]u() and “iron” (lz#r=B^). It indicates two different, but related, aspects of being “bound” (vb rs^a*)—that is, in prison, or other forms of bondage. The noun yn]a(, which occurs with some frequency in the Psalms (also in Job and Lamentations), denotes a condition of being forced/pressed down, by someone with the strength and/or authority to do so. The term “iron” here, of course, refers to the chains or shackles with which a prisoner is bound (cf. 105:18); secondarily, it could refer to an iron bar that bolts the prison door (see verse 16, below).

Verse 11

“because they defied (the) words of (the) Mighty (One),
and (the) counsel of (the) Most High despised,”

The people suffering in prison/bondage are said to be there because of their defiance and rejection of God’s instruction. While this certainly could be an allusion to the Exile (cp. verses 2-3; cf. Allen, p. 89, who cites the bondage-references in Isa 42:7; 49:9), or other periods in Israelite history, for that matter (see the earlier notes on Ps 106:39-42 & 43-46), it could also be interpreted more generally. That is to say, by rejecting God’s “words” and “counsel” —specifically, the precepts and regulations of the Torah—a person may well end up in prison (or otherwise, in some form of real bondage). The verbs hr*m* (“defy, resist, rebel [against]”) and Ja^n` (“despise, abhor, spurn”) are both frequently used in the historical context of Israelite unfaithfulness to the covenant. For examples of Ja^n`, see Num 14:11, 23; 16:30; Deut 31:20; 32:19; Isa 1:4. The verb hr*m* is even more frequent; see the important occurrences in the previous Psalm 106 (vv. 7, 33, 43), cf. also 78:8, 17, 40, 56, and cp. 105:28.

Verse 12

“and (so) He bent (down) their heart with hard labor—
they stumbled, and there was no (one) helping!—”

The imagery of bondage in prison (v. 10) is here joined to that of hard labor (lm*u*)—a common condition of many slave-laborers, and which certainly can be seen as a form of punishment. In this case, the punishment comes from YHWH (see on v. 11 above). The verb un^K* (“bend [down]”, Hiphil, “make/cause to bend down”) seems to echo the usage in Psalm 106:42 (note); here it relates, generally, to the condition of being forced/pressed down (yn]u(, cf. verse 10). The state of bondage weighs down on both the body and the heart (i.e., mind, spirit). The motif of there being “no one helping” (i.e., no one able to help) occurs on occasion in the Psalms (Ps 22:12[11]; 72:12); the implication is that only YHWH is able to give help to the people.

Verse 13

“when they cried out to YHWH,
in the (time of) distress for them,
He saved them from their tight spots.”

Grammatically, verses 10-13 form a single sentence, which could be phrased (in translation) several different ways (cp. Dahood, III, p. 78). Even though the people were in bondage as a result of their own faithless and disobedience, still, when they cried out to YHWH, God answered them and saved them from their distress. This echoes the thought in Ps 106:43-46 (note), and could apply to various points in Israelite/Judean history—including the context of the Exile. Essentially the same wording was used earlier in verse 6 (cf. the note in the Introduction), which provides a key point of connection between the two stanzas. As I mentioned, the noun hq*Wxm= basically means “tight/narrow place”, which is an apt description of a state of bondage, or (more literally), a prison cell. In English idiom, we might say a “tight spot”.

I have parsed the verse, like the earlier v. 6, as a 2+2+3 tricolon.

Verse 14

“He brought them out from darkness and death-shade,
and He tore off (all) their (prison) bonds!”

The act of deliverance (v. 13) is expressed here by a return to the initial language of verse 10 (see above). The image of YHWH “tearing off” (vb qt^n`) their prison-bonds is appropriately vivid and climactic. Since the same verb, in the sense of “tear/pull out”, can be used in the negative context of the Exile (cf. Isa 33:20; Jer 10:20), there may be an allusion to that context here (cf. above). If so, then the reference would be to YHWH essentially reversing the captivity, and pulling the people back out, to freedom. The verb is used, in a very different context (viz., the rebelliousness of the nations) in Psalm 2:3.

Verse 15

“Let them give praise to YHWH (for) His devotion,
and His wondrous (deed)s to (the) sons of man!”

Each of the first four stanzas has a similar refrain, beginning with this same couplet, which echoes the opening call to worship (v. 1); see the note on verse 8.

Verse 16

“For He breaks down (the) doors of bronze,
and (the) bars of iron hacks apart!”

The second couplet of the refrain (cf. verse 9) repeats and summarizes the main theme(s) of the stanza. Here, in particular, the climactic imagery of verse 14 (cf. above) is expressed even more vigorously. Even prison doors made of bronze (and bolted with iron bars) are broken apart by YHWH, in order to set His people free (cp. the similar couplet in Isa 45:2b). The verb rb^v* (“break [apart]”) is quite common, while the parallel ud^G` (“cut/hack [down]”) is less frequent. The name /oud=G] (Gid±ôn, Gideon, “Hacker”) is derived from the root udg.

References above (and throughout these notes) marked “Dahood, III” are to Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms III: 101-150, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 17A (1970).
Those marked “Allen” are to Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101-150, Revised edition, Word Biblical Commentary [WBC], Vol. 21 (Zondervan Academic: 2002).

Sunday Psalm Studies: Psalm 107 (vv. 1-9)

Psalm 107

Dead Sea MSS: 4QPsf (vv. 2-5, 8-16, 18-19, 22-30, 35-42)

This lengthy Psalm, like the prior Psalms 105 (discussed in the prior studies) and 106 (cf. the study and notes), features a hymnic summary of Israelite history, in verse form and with a didactic (teaching) purpose. In particular, the stanzas of vv. 4-9 and 17-22 resemble the two main stanzas of Ps 106 (vv. 13-23, 24-38) with their presentation of the Wilderness period. However, while Psalm 106 focuses on the breaking of the covenant by the people during the Wilderness period, the focus in Ps 107 is on the covenant loyalty (ds#j#) of YHWH, and the ways in which He rescued and delivered His people.

Also in common with Ps 106 is the application of this history to the present time—that is, when the Psalm was composed and (first) recited. The historical theme of sin-judgment in Ps 106, as represented (primarily) by the Wilderness generation, is applied to exilic setting of the Psalm (v. 47); through the confession of sin (v. 6) and prayer for deliverance (vv. 4-5, 47), the Psalmist, along with the people as a whole, is looking toward the restoration of Israel from exile. In Psalm 107, by contrast, the moments of deliverance in Israel’s history prefigure the return from the Exile, with a post-exilic date for the Psalm (or, at least, for vv. 2-3 and 23-41) being indicated. It is, however, possible that portions of the Psalm are of an earlier date. W. Beyerlin, in his study (Werden und Wesen in 107. Psalms, BZAW 153, 1979), posits an early form of the Psalm that was comprised of the first three stanzas (vv. 4-22) and the introductory v. 1. The final two stanzas (vv. 23-32 and 33-43) could have begun as separate poems, containing a number of Wisdom elements, that were subsequently included in the Psalm. Verses 2-3, which unquestionably reference a return from exile (and thus a post-exilic date), might well have been added (along with vv. 33-43, or parts of that stanza) at a later stage.

The structure of the Psalm is quite straightforward: an introductory call to worship (vv. 1-3) is followed by a hymn in five stanzas. The first four of these stanzas end with a common refrain (vv. 8-9, 15-16, 21-22, 31-32); each refrain is comprised of two couplets, the first of which is identical: “Let them give praise to YHWH (for) His ds#j#, and His wondrous (deed)s to (the) sons of man!”.

The meter of the Psalm is somewhat irregular. A standard 3-beat (3+3) couplet format tends to be used, but there are numerous exceptions, which will be noted.

Much of Psalm 107 is preserved in the Qumran manuscript 4QPsf. Though the manuscript is fragmentary, it contains at least portions of 32 of the Psalm’s 42 verses. There are a few significant variant readings, which will be noted.

Introduction: Verses 1-3

Verse 1

“Give praise to YHWH, for (He is) good,
for His devotion (lasts) to (the) distant (future)!”

The same couplet opens Psalm 106 (see the previous study), as a call to worship for the people. The verb hd*y` denotes a public declaration (or confession) of praise (and thanksgiving). The noun ds#j# (“goodness, kindness”) is used frequently in the Psalms, and almost always in the context of the covenant between YHWH and His people; in such a context, it connotes “faithfulness, loyalty, devotion”. Here, as often, I render it “devotion”. The good(ness) (adj. bwf) of YHWH, in line 1, must be understood in this light—viz., of His loyalty to the covenant bond.

Verse 2

“(So) let them say, (the) redeemed (one)s of YHWH—
whom He redeemed from (the) hand of (the) foe,”

It is not entirely clear whether the first line of this couplet refers back to verse 1, or ahead to vv. 2b-3; that is, whether the “redeemed (one)s of YHWH” are called to give praise/thanks (according to the words of v. 1), or to declare that YHWH has redeemed them (and brought them out of exile). In the former case, the relative particle rv#a& must be combined (in English translation) with the plural object suffix <– (“them”) on the verb <a*l*G+ (“He redeemed them”), and rendered as “whom He redeemed”. This is the approach taken by most commentators (e.g., Allen, p. 81; Hossfeld-Zenger, p. 97), and I have adopted it above. The other possibility is that rv#a& introduces what is to be said; i.e., “let them say that He redeemed them…”. Beyerlin and Dahood (III, p. 81) favor this approach.

The root laG relates to the socio-cultural circumstance, whereby a qualified representative is able to “redeem” (through payment) a kin-relative out of debt or bondage, etc. The verb came to be used in the more general sense of rescuing a person out of danger, etc; in this sense, it is frequently used of YHWH, in the context of saving His people (or the righteous) from danger and distress. The same wording was used in 106:10 (cf. the earlier note). Given the apparent reference to the restoration/return of Israel (from Exile) in v. 3, the idea of being rescued “from the hand” of the oppressing foe echoes the use of the same idiom in 106:41-42 (note).

Verse 3

“and (who)m He gathered from (all the) lands,
from (the) place of (the sun’s) rising and setting,
from (the) distant (north) and (the southern) sea!”

Here, the more general idea of Israel’s redemption (v. 2) is described specifically in terms of the people being gathered (vb Jb^q*) from all the surrounding lands—viz., the nations into which the exiled people were ‘dispersed’ (scattered), cf. 106:41-42. This great act of deliverance by YHWH answers the Psalmist’s prayer of 106:47 (note, cf. also vv. 4-5). The people are gathered from all four directions. First, in line 2, is east and west—lit., the “place of the rising” (jr*z+m!) of the sun,  and the “place of (its) coming/going down” (br*u&m^) or setting (i.e., sunset). Then, in line 3, there is the “distant/hidden” (/opx*) north, and the south, the latter indicated here as the direction of the “sea” (i.e., seaward). Usually, the “sea” (<y`) refers to the west (i.e., the Mediterranean), but the parallelism here dictates that the direction is south. For this reason, many commentators would emend the text to read the noun /ym!y` (“south”). Dahood (III, p. 81) suggests that the “sea” here is the “south sea”, or the gulf of Aqabah, and this is as good an explanation as any. It may well be that the line also echoes the wording of Isa 49:12 (Allen, p. 83).

Metrically, this verse is a 2-beat (2+2+2) tricolon.

First Stanza: Verses 4-9

This is the first of two stanzas dealing with the period of Israel’s ‘wandering in the wilderness’ (i.e., the Wilderness period); this period was also the focus of the historical summary in Psalm 106 (the two main stanzas).

Verse 4

“They wandered in the outback,
treading in a desolate (land)—
a city (for) a dwelling they did not find.”

The meter of this initial verse is slightly irregular. I follow Dahood (III, p. 82) in parsing/dividing it as a 2+2+3 tricolon, which is much aided by vocalizing ird as an infinitive (Er)D*, “treading”) rather than the simple noun Er#D# (“way/path”, that one treads) of the MT. It is also possible to retain the MT vocalization, and to divide the verse as a couplet (cf. Allen, p. 81):

“They wandered in the outback, in a desolate (land)—
(the) way to a city dwelling they did not find.”

The verse, of course, refers (in a summary fashion) to the wanderings (vb. hu*T*) of Israel during the Wilderness period, as narrated in the books of Exodus and Numbers.

Verse 5

“(Being) hungry, (yes, and) also thirsty,
their soul itself became weak in them.”

The lack of reliable food and water was a frequent problem during the Israelites’ journeying throughout the desolate regions of the Sinai peninsula. The theme was vividly portrayed in several key narrative episodes within the tradition—most notably, in Exodus 16-17 (cf. Numbers 11), and Numbers 20. These episodes were representative of the people’s lack of trust and ‘rebelliousness’, and were naturally utilized to illustrate the sin-judgment pattern, during the Wilderness period, in the stanzas of Psalm 106 (cf. the notes on vv. 13-15 and 32-33). It is important to keep in mind that the lack of trust by the people was in response to genuine physical need (i.e., food and water, to satisfy hunger and thirst). Without sufficient food and water, the soul of the people would become weak and feeble (vb [f^u* II). The focus here in Psalm 107 is not on the people’s faithlessness, but on the need—the mortal danger (due to hunger and thirst), from which YHWH saves them (v. 6).

Verse 6

“And (when) they cried out to YHWH,
in the time of distress for them,
He snatched them from their tight (place)s,”

The situational motif of the people “crying out” (vb qu^x*, cp. qu^z`), in the midst of their distress (rx^), features prominently in the traditional narratives (Exod 14:10; Num 11:2; 20:16; Judg 3:9; 4:3; 10:12, etc); in Psalm 106:44, the root /nr (“ring out”, with a cry/shout) is used. YHWH repeatedly rescued His people out of their distress, all the various “things pressing” on them; the noun hq*Wxm= denotes a tight/narrow place (in English idiom, we might say “a tight spot”. The verb lx^n`, meaning “snatch (out of trouble/danger)”, occurs with great frequency in the Psalms.

As with v. 4 (see above), I parse this verse as a 2+2+3 tricolon; it could also be rendered as a 4+3 couplet.

Verse 7

“and made them tread on a straight path trodden,
to go (to) a city (that would be) a dwelling-place.”

Throughout the Wilderness period, in their years of wandering, the people could not find a city that would be a “dwelling place” for them (v. 4). But at the end of this period, when their wandering came to an end, the people finally did find such cities to dwell in—viz., in the land of Canaan, the Promised Land. YHWH’s guidance of his people toward this land is described, in summary fashion, here in line 1. He “made them to tread” (vb Er^D*, Hiphil) on the path that they would tread (noun Er#D#). It was a “straight” (rv*y`) path, reliable and secure under YHWH’s guidance. Moreover, both the noun Er#D# and the adjective rv*y` are traditional terms used in relation to the Torah regulations—that is, the Instruction provided by YHWH, i.e., guidance in the ethical-religious sense. Throughout, this expresses YHWH’s covenant loyalty (ds#j#) toward Israel (see above). The protection provided by YHWH, and the guidance, are key aspects of the covenant bond.

The root bvy denotes sitting, and so the locative noun bv*om literally means “sitting-place, place for sitting”. However, it can also be used in the broader sense of “settle (down)”, i.e., “dwell” (in a place). Here (as in v. 4) the meaning of dwelling (i.e., a place to settle down) is prominent; yet there may be an intended contrast between the Israelites’ walking (marching, treading) and the idea of eventually sitting (that is, being at rest).

Verse 8

“Let them give praise to YHWH (for) His devotion,
and His wondrous (deed)s to (the) sons of man!”

The refrain in each of the first four stanzas begins with this same couplet, which echoes the opening call to worship (v. 1, see above). YHWH is repeatedly praised for His ds#j#, his loyalty and devotion. This devotion is manifested by “wondrous deeds” (plural verbal noun, vb al*P*) done on behalf of (“[un]to, for”) human beings (“sons of man”). In particular, this refers to the mighty deeds done on behalf of Israel, reflecting YHWH’s faithful devotion to special covenant bond He made with them. However, as the Psalm progresses, as the Wisdom elements (esp. in stanzas 2, 4 and 5) are introduced, it becomes clear that the loving care and faithfulness shown by YHWH is directed at all humankind, and not the people of Israel alone.

Verse 9

“For He satisfies (the) throbbing throat,
and (the) hungry soul He fills with good.”

The second couplet of the refrain is different in each stanza, and serves to summarize the theme and content of the stanza. Here, the emphasis on YHWH filling the human need (for sustenance, food and drink) for the Wilderness generation of Israel (vv. 5-6) is made to apply to the providential care He has for His people (and all humanity) more generally.

There is a bit of dual-meaning wordplay, involving the noun vp#n# that is impossible to capture in English. Typically, vp#n# is translated “soul”, but it can also carry the more concrete meaning “throat”; a rendering such as “appetite” or “longing” might capture the semantic range. By satisfying the throat (with food and drink), the soul is also satisfied, being filled with good (bof, cf. verse 1) from God, just as a lack of food and drink makes the soul (i.e., one’s life and vitality) weak and feeble, to the point of expiring (v. 5). YHWH’s care for our physical needs reflects His devotion toward our very soul (in the deeper, spiritual sense).

The thirst of the throat in line 1 is expressed by the rare verb qq^v* (II), which would seem to be related to the noun qov (“leg, thigh”), and thus would have the basic (denominative) meaning of “run, rush” (or “leap”), cf. Isa 29:8; 33:4; Nah 2:5. In the context of a person’s throat, the meaning “pulsate, throb” would seem to be appropriate (cf. the discussion by Dahood, III, p. 83). The verb may also be related to a separate verbal root (qwv), meaning “long (for), desire, crave” (cf. Arabic š¹qa[w] I/II), from which the noun hq*WvT= is derived. Cf. HALOT, pp. 1448, 1647.

*          *          *          *          *          *          *

The remaining stanzas of Psalm 107 will be discussed over a series of daily notes, beginning with the next note (on stanza 2, vv. 10-16).

References above marked “Dahood, III” are to Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms III: 101-150, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 17A (1970).
Those marked “Allen” are to Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101-150, Revised edition, Word Biblical Commentary [WBC], Vol. 21 (Zondervan Academic: 2002).
Those marked “Hossfeld-Zenger” are to Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150, translated by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia Commentary Series (Fortress Press: 2011).
Those marked “HALOT” are to The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, by Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner (Brill: 1994-2000).

“Who Is This Son of Man…?”: Johannine Sayings (Jn 12:23; 13:31)

John 12:23 & 13:31

This study deals with the final (climactic) “son of man” sayings by Jesus in the Gospel of John. These sayings are parallel, and closely related:

“The hour has come that the son of man should be given honor”
e)lh/luqen h( w%ra i%na docasqh=| o( ui(o\$ tou= a)nqrw/pou
(12:23)
“Now is the son of man given honor…”
nu=n e)doca/sqh o( ui(o\$ tou= a)nqrw/pou
(13:31)

Let us consider the literary context of the first saying. It occurs in the final Discourse of the first division of the Gospel (chapters 2-12), covering the period of Jesus’ public ministry. This Discourse (12:20-36) is based on the preceding narrative of vv. 1-19, and the historical traditions contained therein. In this regard, the chap. 12 Discourse resembles those of chaps. 5 and 6, each of which is prefaced by an extensive historical tradition, resembling episodes found in the Synoptic Gospels. In this instance, the traditions contained in vv. 1-8ff and 12-15ff have parallels in Mark 14:1-9 par and 11:1-10 par, respectively. The main difference is that, in the Synoptics, these two episodes occur at the beginning of the second half of the Gospel (the Jerusalem Period), while in John they occur at the end of the first half (the Public Ministry Period).

The main components of the narrative (in vv. 1-19) which relate to the Discourse are: (i) the Passover setting (v. 1), (ii) the allusions to Jesus’ upcoming death (vv. 7, 9-10), and (iii) the crowds that went out to meet Jesus (vv. 12ff, 17-19). The first and third of these, in particular, inform the narrative introduction to the Discourse (vv. 20-22). The “Greeks” refer to Greek-speaking Jews from the Hellenistic (Greco-Roman) nations and territories who were in Jerusalem for the celebration of Passover.

Or, alternatively, the reference may be to ethnic non-Jews (Gentiles) who have adopted a Jewish religious identity (i.e., proselytes or ‘godfearers’). The use of the same term e%llhn (plur. “Greeks”) in 7:35 would tend to favor this interpretation, which is also preferred by the majority of commentators (cf., Brown, p. 466; von Wahlde, p. 544). In either case, the principal symbolic allusion is to the advent of the early Christian mission into the Jewish Diaspora and the Greco-Roman world.

Like the people who came out to meet Jesus upon his entry, these foreign Jews (or proselytes) also desire to meet him. This is expressed in Johannine theological terminology, using the idiom of seeing Jesus: “We wish to see [i)dei=n] Yeshua” (v. 21). It also involves some typical Johannine wordplay—specifically the dual-meaning of the sight-motif, discussed in the previous study (on 9:35). On the surface, the group’s request refers to ordinary physical sight, lit. to see Jesus with their eyes; however, at the deeper (theological) level of the Discourses, “seeing” refers to trust in Jesus as the Son of God. The interest expressed by these Greek-speaking (Hellenistic) Jews thus alludes to such foreign Jews (and Greeks) as might come to trust in Jesus—anticipating the early Christian mission into the surrounding nations (cp. the symbolism of the cosmopolitan festal setting in Acts 2).

Every Johannine Discourse begins with a principal saying by Jesus; in this case, it is the “son of man” saying in verse 23:

“The hour has come that the son of man should be given honor.”
e)lh/luqen h( w%ra i%na docasqh=| o( ui(o\$ tou= a)nqrw/pou

In the Discourses, the principal saying is followed by a sequence, with some variation (including repetition of the pattern), consisting of: (1) a response by Jesus’ hearers, demonstrating a lack of understanding; and (2) an exposition by Jesus, in which he explains further the true meaning of his words. The chapter 12 Discourse, like the more expansive chap. 6 (Bread of Life) Discourse, may be divided into three discourse-units:

    • Unit 1 (vv. 23-26):
      • Saying by Jesus (v. 23)
      • Exposition (v. 24-26)
    • Unit 2 (vv. 27-30)
      • Saying by Jesus (vv. 27-28)
      • Response (v. 29)
      • Exposition (v. 30)
    • Unit 3 (vv. 31-36a)

Each unit builds upon the one prior, further elucidating it. The chief exposition of the initial saying (v. 23) is in verse 24, clearly relating the “son of man” saying to the impending death of Jesus:

“Amen, amen, I say to you (that), if the kernel of the grain should not, (hav)ing fallen into the earth, die off, (then) it remains alone; but if it should die off, (then) it bears much fruit.”

The implication is that the death of Jesus will have a life-producing, fructifying effect, as he becomes the source of new life, just like the seed-kernel of grain that is put into the ground (death/burial motif). This natural agricultural image is fully in keeping with the known parables and illustrations of Jesus. However, it is noteworthy that, elsewhere in the Gospel of John, the fruit-bearing motif is applied to the ministry activity of Jesus’ disciples (believers)—see the context of 4:36, and throughout the Vine-illustration of chap. 15 (vv. 2, 4-5, 8, 16). The same application is made here, with the sayings on discipleship that follow in vv. 25-26. The use of the Johannine key-verb me/nw (“remain, abide”), in v. 24, is significant in this regard. The seed that does not ‘die off’, by going into the ground, remains [me/nei] alone. Normally, in the Johannine writings, this verb is used of the union of believers with the Son (Jesus); here, however, the opposite is indicated—the seed is not united, but remains separated (cp. the verb in 9:41). One should compare the agricultural imagery in the Vine-illustration, where the verb me/nw occurs 11 times. The contrast is between the branch/tendril that is united with (“remains in”) the vine-stock (of the Son), and the one that is not (i.e., “does not remain”).

The implication is that the believer who “remains” in the Son (Jesus) receives and participates in the life-giving power of the Son’s death. The discipleship sayings in vv. 25-26 are traditional, but, in context, they must be understood in light of this Johannine theology. The saying of v. 26, in particular, has been shaped in the Johannine theological idiom. When it comes to the true disciple (that is, the true believer), the one who would serve Jesus and follow him (26a), the promise is given that:

“…where I am [ei)mi e)gw/], there also my servant shall be [e&stai]”

This use of the verb of being, with echoes of Johannine essential predication (esp. the “I am” statements by Jesus), suggests the theme of the believer’s union with the Son of God (and, through the Son, with God the Father). The “where…there” (o%pou…e)kei=) framework (“where I am…there also…”) is used by Jesus a number of times in the Last Discourse (cf. 13:33, 36; 14:3-4; 17:24). The final statement in v. 26 brings the discipleship sayings back in alignment with the “son of man” saying in v. 23:

“if any(one) would serve me, the Father will honor [timh/sei] him”

Just as the Son is honored by the Father, so the one who trusts in the Son (and follows him) will also be honored. The verbs used may be different (doca/zw vs. tima/w), but the thought and meaning is very close.

In light of this initial exposition, how shall we understand the use of the expression “the son of man” (o( ui(o\$ tou= a)nqrw/pou) in v. 23? Like the Passion-predictions in the Synoptic Gospels, the expression is specifically used in the context of Jesus’ impending death. As we discussed, two aspects of the expression’s meaning are relevant in connection with Jesus’ Passion: (i) the expression as a self-reference by Jesus, and (ii) the poetic tradition whereby the expression tends to signify the weakness and limitation (including the mortality) of the human condition. Jesus is specifically identifying himself with the human condition, in this regard.

The Johannine use of the expression, however, as we have seen, is somewhat different, even when used in the context of Jesus’ death. The theological matrix involves the descent/ascent motif, utilizing the verbs katabai/nw (“step down”) and a)nabai/nw (“step up”)—cf. 1:51; 3:13; 6:62. The Son “steps down” from heaven, having been sent to earth by the Father; this entails the incarnation of the Son (1:14), in the person of Jesus. Having completed his mission (culminating in his sacrificial death), the Son then “steps (back) up” to heaven. This latter aspect is also expressed by the verb u(yo/w (“lift up high”)—3:14; 8:28. Within this theological framework, the use of the expression “the Son of man” signifies the incarnate Son, at the junction-point (viz., his earthly mission/ministry) between descent and ascent (cf. the visionary scene in 1:51). The Son possesses the life-giving power, given to him by the Father (cf. the context of 5:27), and this power is given by the Son to those who believe (6:27, 53); it is, in particular, the Son’s death which makes this life available to believers, communicated through the Spirit (cf. 19:30).

When we turn to the second Discourse-unit (vv. 27-30), we find a clearer foreshadowing of the Son’s impending Passion (suffering and death). The temporal particle (nu=n, “now”), which begins the saying in vv. 27-28, refers back to “the hour” in v. 23—viz., the time of Jesus’ Passion is now (it is “this hour”). The wording in the saying is similar to that spoken by Jesus in the garden scene of the Synoptic Passion narrative (Mark 14:34-36, 41 par); there is no comparable scene in the Johannine narrative, but a reference to it may have been ‘transferred’ here by the Gospel writer. From a Johannine theological standpoint, the saying makes clear that this moment of suffering/death is the reason for the Son having come into the world (“…through this [i.e. for this purpose] I came unto this hour”).

Another point of contact with the saying in v. 23 is the use of the verb doca/zw, as Jesus asks: “Father, give honor (to) [do/cason] your name”. The implication is that, by honoring the Son, the Father gives honor to His own name. There is a distinctive name-theology in the Gospel of John, and it relates to the Johannine Christology—that is, Jesus’ identity as the Son of God, sent by God the Father (as His representative). The Son came to earth in the Father’s name (5:43; cf. 12:13), acts in the Father’s name (10:25), and, through his mission, makes the Father’s name known to people (believers) in the world (17:6, 11-12, 26). Thus, when the Son’s mission is complete, and the Father honors him, He gives honor to His own name as well. In verse 28b, the Father responds to Jesus’ request: “I (have) honored (it), and I will honor (it) again!” The verb in the aorist (past) tense is best understood, in a comprehensive sense, as the effect of the Son’s public ministry, prior to his death (cf. 1:14; 2:11; 8:50, 54). This may be represented, specifically, by the Lazarus episode, which both manifested the do/ca of God (11:4, 40), and also foreshadowed Jesus’ own death and resurrection.

The response/exposition portion of this Discourse-unit is rather brief. The people hear the voice of God the Father speaking (v. 28b), but mistake it for the sound of thunder (v. 29), alluding to the theophany at Sinai (Exod 19:19ff). This is typical of the audience’s response, in the Discourses, as reflecting misunderstanding (and/or a lack of understanding). In some ways, this particular response is the ultimate example of their misunderstanding: they did not realize that it was God speaking. The same unawareness can be applied to Jesus’ identity—viz., they did not understand that he is the Son of God, speaking the words of God, and with the authority of God. Those who mistook the voice for that of an angel (Messenger) similarly have misunderstood the situation.

Jesus’ exposition (v. 30) is extremely brief, and functions primarily as a point of transition into the next Discourse-unit (with the saying in vv. 31-32). It expresses the fundamental idea that the manifestation of God (the Father) in the person of Jesus (the Son) is for the benefit of those who will trust in him; the thought is stated more clearly in 11:42, where Jesus’ audible prayer to the Father is “…for the throng standing round about, (so) that they might trust that you [i.e. the Father] (have) sent me forth”.

In the next part of this study, we will examine the final (third) Discourse-unit (vv. 31-36), and will also consider the “son of man” saying in v. 23 in light of the saying in 13:31.

References above marked “Brown” are to Raymond E. Brown, S.S., The Gospel According to John I-XII, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 29 (1966).
Those marked “von Wahlde” are to Urban C. von Wahlde, The Gospel and Letters of John. Volume 2: Commentary on the Gospel of John, Eerdmans Critical Commentary (2010).

July 26: Psalm 106:47-48

(Psalm 106 is being discussed over a series of daily notes; cf. the Introductory Notes)

Psalm 106:47-48

Verse 47 marks the conclusion of the Psalm, with v. 48 being a doxology (parallel to the opening v. 1). The historical summary, which comprises the body of the Psalm (vv. 6-46), having been concluded (with vv. 43-46, see the previous note), the Psalmist returns to the present moment. The wording of verse 47 indicates an Exilic setting—though a post-Exilic date is possible for the Psalm as a whole, as it has come down to us. Certainly, throughout the post-Exilic period, the prayer in verse 47 would have remained entirely relevant and heartfelt for many Israelites and Jews.

It is worth noting that verses 47-48 (or their equivalent) are cited in 1 Chronicles 16:35-36, which could indicate that the Psalm was known (and in use) at least by the time of the Chronicler. On the other hand, the verses may simply be regarded as traditional, a liturgical form that might have been utilized in any number of compositions. As such, the content of the verses could have been in existence long before the Psalm was even composed.

Verse 47

“Save us, YHWH, our Mighty (One),
and gather us from the nations—
to give thanks to (the) name of your holiness,
to sing out ourselves with your praise!”

This prayer matches that of verse 4f (cf. the introduction), the main difference being that the Psalmist there spoke in the first person singular, while here it is entirely in the first person plural:

    • “Remember me, YHWH…attend to me with your saving (power)” (v. 4)
    • “Save us, YHWH…and gather us from the nations” (v. 47)

However, even in that earlier section, the Psalmist clearly is identifying his experience of salvation with that of the people as a whole: “with (the) favor (to) your people” —i.e., when you show favor to your people (cf. also the thought expressed in v. 5). The Psalmist includes himself as being among those righteous/faithful ones (v. 3) who, through their loyalty to the covenant, and their prayers and praise to YHWH, will see ushered in the restoration of Israel from exile. The Exile was certainly in view in the final strophe (vv. 43-46) of the historical summary (see esp. verse 46). Now the faithful/loyal ones among God’s people are praying (and hoping, with expectation) that YHWH will soon lead His people back to the Promised Land, gathering them “from the nations” (line 2).

The purpose of the restoration is expressed by the pair of infinitive-clauses in lines 3-4, echoing the earlier sentiment in vv. 1-2, the call to praise. The first verb is hd*y`, which was also used in verse 1 (see the note in the Introduction), denoting a (public) confession of thanks/praise to YHWH. The second verb is the rarer jb^v* (I), meaning “sing/cry out (with praise)”; it occurs primarily in the Psalms (63:4; 117:1; 145:4; 147:12), overlapping in meaning with other praise-verbs (such as /n~r*). Here the verb is in the reflexive Hitpael stem, presumably emphasizing that the very people singing the Psalm are the ones who will be praising YHWH when He brings restoration to Israel. Giving praise to YHWH by worshiping and extolling His name is a point of emphasis found frequently in the Psalms (see, most recently, in 105:1, 3); the role of YHWH’s name in His acts of salvation, on behalf of His people throughout their history, is mentioned in verse 8 (cf. the earlier note). On the significance of names and naming in the ancient Near East, see the introduction to my earlier series “And You Shall Call His Name…”; cf. also the theological importance of the name-motif in the Prayer of Solomon (1 Kings 8), as discussed in my notes on that passage.

Verse 48

“Bless YHWH, (the) Mighty (One) of Yisrael,
from the distant (past) even unto the distant (future)!
And let all the people say, ‘Firmly (so)!’
Praise YH(WH)!”

As noted above, this concluding verse matches the opening of the Psalm (v. 1), calling upon all the people to bless and praise YHWH. The call/response format indicates a definite liturgical setting within the corporate (community) worship. In light of the important thematic focus on covenant loyalty throughout the Psalm (as also in Ps 105), there is an additional significance here to the traditional confession of YHWH as the “God [Mighty One] of Israel”, with the implication that Israel is the people of God, bound to Him by the covenant (binding agreement).

The root /ma (“be firm, fixed”) also often carries a connotation related to the covenant—viz., to be firm or sure in faith, loyal to the covenant bond. Note, for example, the use of the verb /m^a* in verse 12, to express the lack of faith and loyalty among the Wilderness generation; they trusted in YHWH’s word, but only after witnessing the mighty event at the Reed Sea, and then (thereafter) quickly forgot about the covenant again (v. 13). I rendered the first line of verse 12 as: “Then [i.e., only then did] they set (their heart) firmly on His words”. Thus, the use of the related adverb /m@a* (°¹m¢n) here in v. 48 should be given its full weight in translation, rather than simply transliterated as the exclamation Amen! In the liturgical setting implied here, the people are giving consensual confirmation of the cantor’s words in the first two lines. I have rendered their response as “Firmly (so)!” —i.e., may it truly be so.

The Psalm ends as it began, with a call for people to praise YHWH, with the traditional exclamation Hy`-Wll=h^ (Hal®lû-Y¹h), “Praise YH(WH)!”

July 25: Psalm 106:43-46

(Psalm 106 is being discussed over a series of daily notes; cf. the Introductory Notes)

Psalm 106:43-46

Verses 43-46 represent the second of two strophe-units (see the previous note on vv. 39-42) that comprise the concluding section of vv. 39-46. The two strophes are complementary, each dealing with the theme of Israel’s time under foreign domination—a significant period of Israelite history that culminates with the Exile (cf. verse 47). Verses 39-42 describe Israel coming under foreign domination (parallel to the time under Egyptian dominion, vv. 7-8ff), while vv. 43-46 deal with YHWH’s covenant loyalty and devotion to His people during this period of foreign rule, even in spite of the people’s repeated lack of trust. God’s loyalty is distinctly contrasted with the people’s lack of loyalty to the covenant bond.

Verse 43

“(At) many steps, He snatched them (away),
but they were defiant in their (own) purpose,
and sank deep(er) in their crookedness.”

The initial lines summarize a dynamic that characterized much of Israel’s history in the land of Canaan. It may refer, specifically, to the episodes of foreign domination and oppression narrated in the book of Judges. In the previous note, I had mentioned this with regard to vv. 40-41 (cf. Judges 2:14). The expression “(at) many steps” (i.e., many times, at many points) indicates the frequentive occurrence of YHWH’s saving acts on behalf of His people. The verb lx^n` is used quite often in this context, meaning “snatch up/away”, i.e., out of danger; in light of vv. 41-42, it means, specifically, snatch out of the hand of the oppressing nation.

As in the earlier episodes of Israel’s history (beginning at v. 7 in the historical summary), the people continued to be unfaithful, in spite of the might deeds performed by YHWH on their behalf. The final two lines (v. 43 is an irregular 3+3+2 tricolon) describe this aspect of the history; note the parallelism:

    • “they were defiant [vb hr*m*] in their plan/purpose [hx*u@]”
    • “they sank deep(er) [vb Ek^m*] in their crookedness [/w)u*]”

Formally, the lines are synonymous, but the parallelism is also synthetic—that is, the second line builds upon the first, indicating a certain progress. As the people continued to be defiant in their own purpose (and thus rebelling against God’s purpose), the proceeded to sink down (deeper) into their own twisted and distorted attitudes and conduct.

Dahood (III, p. 75) suggests that MT Wrm=y~ should be vocalized as Wrm*y@, a form of the verb rr^m* (“strengthen, harden”), rather than hr*m* (“defy, rebel [against]”). This certainly would fit the context; however, I see no reason to disregard the thematic continuation involving the verb hr*m* (vv. 7, 33; cf. 105:28), as a keyword (drawn from the Tradition) for the people’s faithlessness and disobedience. The rare verb Ek^m* (elsewhere only in Job 24:24 and Eccles 10:18) means “be(come) low”, either in the positional sense of bend/sink down, or figuratively as “become weak”.

The noun hx*u@ (“plan, purpose, counsel”) was used earlier in verses 13; as for the noun /w)u* (“crookedness”), the related verb hw`u* was used in verse 6.

Verse 44

“Indeed, He looked on the distress for them,
(each time) in His hearing their cry ring out.”

In each of the “many times” (v. 43) that the people cried out (/nr) for help under foreign oppression, YHWH would hear and see—that is, would pay attention and have regard for their suffering. Again, this certainly fits the narrative pattern in the book of Judges (3:9, 15, et al), where the verb qu^z` (for the people’s “crying out”) is used. However, it also is appropriate the context of the Psalm itself, which would seem to have an exilic setting (see verse 47, to be discussed in the next note). The noun hN`r! (a ringing cry) occurs with some frequency in the Psalms, either as a cry/shout of praise, or as a cry/plea for help (17:1; 61:2[1]; 88:3[2], etc).

Verse 45

“Then He remembered for them His binding agreement,
and sighed, according to (the) abundance of His devotion.”

YHWH has compassion for the people in their suffering, and acts with mercy, based on His loyalty to the binding agreement (covenant, tyr!B=) that He had made with them. This is one of many instances in the Scriptures where the verb <j^n` is difficult to translate, due to its wide (and highly contextual) range of meaning. I have decided to render it according to what I take to be its fundamental meaning, “sigh, breathe (deeply)”. This vigorous, concrete denotation carries with it a range of connotative meaning. The ‘sighing’ is an indication of compassion and pity for the suffering of the people; it may also connote a certain regret, implying that YHWH here will mitigate (or even reverse) their punishment.

Within this dynamic (and the theological issues it raises), it is important to preserve the central importance of the covenant. Ultimately, it is YHWH’s loyalty to the covenant bond that prompts Him to act. The verb rk^z` (“have in mind, remember”) is often used in this traditional context (cf. 105:8, 42). Even if the people do not keep the covenant in mind (v. 6; cp. 105:5), YHWH will remember it (and be loyal to it). Also, as I have often discussed, the noun ds#j# (“goodness, kindness”) is frequently used in the context of the covenant (with the connotation “faithfulness, loyalty, devotion”), and nearly always so in the Psalms (cf. here in vv. 1, 7). The singular of the MT kethib (wdsj) is to be preferred over the plural (wyd*s*j&) of the qere.

Verse 46

“And (so) He gave them to acts of compassion
before (the) face of all (those) taking them captive.”

This final couplet clearly is more suitable to the setting of the Exile, rather than the context of the Judges narratives, etc (see above). There may be an allusion to the reference in 1 Kings 8:50, at the conclusion of the Prayer of Solomon (for the dedication of the Temple, cf. my earlier note). The syntax of the first line is a bit awkward, but the meaning seems to be that YHWH allowed His people to be treated with a certain degree of mercy and compassion by their foreign overlords; compare verses 14-22 in the prior Psalm 105 (cf. the earlier study). Dahood (III, p. 76) makes the interesting suggestion that there is a double accusative at work, with the prefixed l= (on <ym!j&r^l=) as an emphatic particle (with an intensive plural); the line would then read: “And He gave (to) them great compassion”.

The shift in context—from the period of the Judges to the time of the Exile—allows the Psalmist quickly to complete the historical summary, transitioning to the present time. It is the present moment, viz., the time of the composition and reciting of the Psalm itself, that is in view in the final verses (47-48). These will be discussed in the next (and final) note on Psalm 106.

References above (and throughout these notes) marked “Dahood, III” are to Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms III: 101-150, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 17A (1970).
Those marked “Allen” are to Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101-150, Revised edition, Word Biblical Commentary [WBC], Vol. 21 (Zondervan Academic: 2002).

July 24: Psalm 106:39-42

(Psalm 106 is being discussed over a series of daily notes; cf. the Introductory Notes)

Psalm 106:39-42

The strophe units of vv. 39-42 and 43-46 essentially match the earlier pair of vv. 6-8 & 9-12; these pairs of strophe-units bracket and frame the two main stanzas (vv. 13-23, 24-38). Verses 6-12 describe the covenant loyalty shown by YHWH to His people, while they were in ‘exile’ in Egypt, leading them out of their captivity (i.e., the Exodus), in spite of the people’s lack of trust (v. 7). There is a similar, but inverse pattern, here in vv. 39-46:

    • The people are in ‘exile’ in Egypt (v. 7)
      • In spite of their lack of trust…
        • YHWH demonstrates His devotion (vv. 8ff)
          • He leads them out of bondage (vv. 9-12)
            • [Violation of the covenant] (v. 39)
          • YHWH sends the people into bondage (vv. 40-42)
        • He still shows His care and devotion… (vv. 43-45)
      • …in spite of their repeated lack of trust
    • while the people remain in Exile (v. 46)
Verse 39

“So they came to be unclean by their doings,
and acted like prostitutes by their dealings.”

This initial couplet summarizes again the Israelite people’s violation of the covenant, especially their faithless conduct during their time in the land of Canaan (see the previous note on vv. 34-38), describing it in traditional language: (1) becoming “unclean” (vb am@f*), and (2) acting like ‘prostitutes’ (vb hn`z`). The root amf occurs throughout the Torah regulations, and reflects, in a ritual and ceremonial way, the holiness and purity that is required of God’s people. That some of the Canaanite cultural and religious practices, which Israel adopted, involved immoral or wicked conduct, is indicated by the Baal-Peor episode (vv. 28ff) and by the reference to child sacrifice in vv. 37-38.

Israelite unfaithfulness to the covenant was frequently described or referenced using sexual images or terminology. Adultery or marital infidelity was one way of describing it; another was the idiom of prostitution. This idiom could be employed from either side—that is, of Israel as person seeking out the prostitute, or as the prostitute herself. The root hnz is typically used to express this; while the verb hn`z` refers specifically to the act of prostitution, it can be used in a broader sense, for different kinds of illicit sexual intercourse, or even of sexual immorality generally. For the use of this idiom, cf. Exod 34:15-16; Lev 17:7; 20:5-6; Num 25:1; Deut 31:16; Judg 2:17; 8:27. The only other occurrence of the verb in the Psalms is at 73:27.

Verse 40

“And the anger of YHWH burned on His people,
and He came to abhor His (own) inheritance!”

Also traditional is the description of YHWH being provoked by the people’s unfaithfulness, so that his anger burns against them. The verb hr*j* is used frequently in this context—e.g., Exod 32:10-11; Num 11:1, 10, 33; 12:9; 25:3; 32:10, 13; Deut 6:15; 7:4; 11:17; 31:17. By rendering [a^ in the more concrete sense of “nose, nostril(s)”, the first line would read: “And the nostril(s) of YHWH burned on/against His people”. This colorful language suggests the depiction of YHWH as an angry, snorting bull.

The motif of Israel as the “inheritance” (or inherited portion, hl*j&n~) of YHWH is traditional, and occurs many times in the Scriptures; it was used earlier in verse 5 (cf. the introduction).

Verses 41-42

“Then He gave them in(to the) hand of (the) nations—
and (those) hating them became rulers over them,
and (those) hostile to them put the squeeze on them,
so (that) they were bent (down) under their hand.”

Verses 40-41 together may be taken as a summary reference akin to Judges 2:14, and to the various periods of foreign domination or oppression narrated in the book of Judges (cf. verse 43, to be discussed in the next note). However, while these historical episodes may be the starting point, verses 41-42 here put forward a dynamic that is at work through much of Israelite (and Judean) history, culminating the Exile (see the context of v. 47).

There is a chiastic, parallelistic structure to verses 41-42 which requires that they be treated together; note:

    • YHWH gave them into the hand [dy`] of the nations,
      • those hating [an@c)] them ruled over them
      • those hostile [by@a)] to them squeezed them
    • so they were bent down under their hand [dy`]

The description of Israel’s adversaries with the parallel verbal nouns (participles), “(those) hating” and “(those) being hostile”, is traditional, and occurred earlier in verse 10.

The four lines narrate a progression of misfortune for the people: (i) YHWH gives them into the hands [i.e. control] of the nations, (ii) the nations rule over them, (iii) and squeeze [vb Jj^l*, i.e. oppress] them, so that (iv) they are bent down [vb un~K*]—put into a humiliating position of submission and bondage—under the nations’ rule. As Allen (p. 73) notes, there is a bit of wordplay here between the verb un~K* (k¹na±) and the proper name /u^n`K= (k®n¹±an, i.e. Canaan) in v. 38. This may be a poetic way of implying that the people’s punishment fits their crime (viz., following Canaanite religious practices).

References above (and throughout these notes) marked “Allen” are to Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101-150, Revised edition, Word Biblical Commentary [WBC], Vol. 21 (Zondervan Academic: 2002).

 

July 23: Psalm 106:34-38

(Psalm 106 is being discussed over a series of daily notes; cf. the Introductory Notes)

Psalm 106:34-38

Verses 34-38 represent the concluding strophe to this stanza (vv. 24-38), holding a position comparable to the Golden Calf episode (vv. 19-23) in the prior stanza. Like that earlier episode, the emphasis is on the people’s violation of the covenant bond with YHWH by worshiping other deities (and/or images [idols] of deity). From this broad thematic standpoint, the Golden Calf episode foreshadows the more pervasive influence of Canaanite religious culture, once the people have entered and settled in the Land. This theme was already developed in the second strophe unit of this stanza (cf. the prior note on vv. 28-31), dealing with the episode of Baal-Peor.

Verse 34-35

“They did not exterminate the peoples,
(which is) what YHWH told to them (to do),
but became mixed up with the nations,
and learned (to follow) their doings.”

The Wilderness period having effectively concluded with the death of Moses (Deut 34), alluded to in the prior short strophe (vv. 32-33, cf. Num 20:2-13ff, discussed in the previous note), the focus now shifts to its culmination—Israel’s entry into the land of Canaan (the land promised in the covenant). The death of Moses corresponds with the death of the Wilderness generation, all those who were unfaithful and rebelled during that period. The possibility existed for the descendants of that generation to start afresh in the Promised Land, faithful and loyal to the covenant with YHWH.

The danger posed by the Canaanite peoples, who were already living in the Land, is a key component of the Tradition. The narrative, anticipating the subsequent failures of the people, gives great prominence to the idea that the Israelites will be influenced by the culture of the Canaanites, to the point of abandoning the covenant and their exclusive worship of YHWH. For this reason, according to the Tradition, the command was given (by YHWH) for the Israelites to exterminate the other Canaanite peoples. The main passage expressing this is Deuteronomy 7 (esp. verses 2, 16, 22-24); cf. also 12:30; 20:16-18. Naturally, it also features in the conquest narratives of Joshua (e.g., 9:24; 11:14ff; 24:8).

It hardly need be said that this aspect of the historical tradition is quite disturbing and repellent to readers today—especially devout Christian readers—who find it most difficult to reconcile that God would order the Israelites to commit wide-scale genocide in the land of Canaan. There have been various attempts to justify or explain it, in a way that could be deemed acceptable for us today, but these efforts have been far from successful or convincing. The entire issue remains troubling and difficult to resolve, and cannot be addressed in any meaningful way here. However, I do expect to touch upon the subject in an upcoming article in the series The People of God, under the theme of “Israel and the Nations”.

The verb dm^v* (“destroy”), in the sense of exterminate, was used earlier in verse 23. The failure of Israel to completely eliminate the Canaanite peoples of the land (line 2) is a key theme in Judges 1-3, being anticipated (within the Tradition) by the Torah passages, such as those in Deuteronomy noted above (cf. also Num 33:52ff). The persistent negative influence of these peoples, and the danger it presents for Israel, is stated unequivocally, on a number of occasions (e.g., Num 33:55; Josh 23:13; Judg 2:3). The second couplet (verse 35) here describes this dynamic.

The verb br^u* is best identified with bru II (HALOT, p. 877), meaning “participate, become involved (with)”, i.e., “get mixed up”  with. Dahood (III, p. 74) makes a strong argument for identifying it with the Ugaritic ±rb, “enter”, in the sense of entering into an agreement with someone, etc; specifically it could connote here the Israelites entering into marriage alliances with the Canaanites. Certainly, intermarriage is part of the dynamic being described (cf. Deut 7:3ff), but I am not inclined to interpret v. 35 here so narrowly. The more general idea of becoming “mixed up” with the Canaanites, so as to be influenced by their cultural and religious practices, seems preferable (cf. Exod 34:12). The people learned (vb dm^l*) from the Canaanites, following their example, to do the things they do (“their doings”); cf. Deut 18:9.

Verse 36

“Indeed, they served their fashioned (image)s,
and (these) became for them as a snare.”

The main danger of the Canaanite cultural influence for Israel was religious—viz., the people would come to adopt Canaanite religious beliefs and practices. This could mean replacing the prescribed worship of YHWH with the worship of other deities, or it could refer to various kinds and modes of syncretism—the blending together of Israelite (Yahwist) and Canaanite elements. The focus here is on the Canaanite images of deity, using the noun bx*u*, denoting an image that is fashioned (by hand), which occurs also in verse 38 (cf. below). This hearkens back to the Golden Calf episode, in the parallel strophe of vv. 19-23 (cf. the earlier note).

As I mentioned previously, in the ancient Near Eastern religious context, as expressed by the religious principles involved in the covenant with YHWH, the veneration of images of deity, even if they were meant to depict YHWH, was tantamount to worshiping other deities. Such image-worship represented a fundamental violation of the covenant, as is clear from the first of the Ten Words (Exod 20:3, 4-5ff). Throughout the Torah, there are repeated injunctions for Israel to destroy the sacred images, pillars, etc, of the Canaanites—cf. Exod 23:24ff; 34:13; Deut 7:5, etc. Similarly, the people are prohibited from fashioning such sacred objects themselves (Lev 26:1, etc).

These Canaanite religious practices would become a “snare” (vq@om) that would entrap the Israelites; cf. the specific use of this term and motif in Exod 23:33; 34:12; Deut 7:16; Josh 23:13; Judg 2:3; 8:27.

Verse 37

“They even slaughtered their (own) sons
and their (own) daughters to the šedîm—”

The people of Israel even engaged in rituals of human (child) sacrifice. This was naturally seen as the most egregious and abhorrent form of aberrant religious practice. However rarely it may have been practiced—either by the Canaanites or by Israel—it represents the pinnacle of religious wickedness, and an abject departure from the true and honorable worship of YHWH. While there are various allusions to child sacrifice in the Scriptures, the only mention of Israelites/Judeans actually making such offerings come from late in the history—2 Kings 16:3; 17:17; 21:16; Jer 19:4-5ff; 32:35; Ezek 16:20ff; 20:26ff, etc. The implication is that this extreme wickedness and idolatry played a major role in ushering in the judgment of the Exile (cf. verse 47).

The verb jb^z` refers to ritual slaughter, viz., of sacrificial offerings. The noun dv@ (plur. <yd!v@) designates a local spirit-deity, which might either be benevolent or malevolent; cf. the cognate Akkadian term š¢du(m). It occurs only here and in Deut 32:17, from which the reference in v. 37 may well be derived. In the Song of Moses, it serves as a blanket poetic term for the deities, other than YHWH, who were actively worshiped in the land of Canaan. Its use in an Israelite context is decidedly pejorative, meant as a stark contrast with the true worship of YHWH. The term dv@ generally corresponds with Greek daimw/n, but to translate it flatly as “demon” is somewhat misleading; I have preferred to leave it transliterated above.

Verse 38

“yes, they poured out clean blood,
blood of (their) sons and daughters,
whom they slaughtered to Kena‘an’s images,
and (so) defiled the land with th(eir) blood!”

The final two couplets build dramatically upon v. 37, expanding the climactic theme of child sacrifice—as the most extreme form of aberrant and wicked religious practice. The blood of the sacrificed children is “clean” (yq!n`), that is, clear of guilt, or innocent; they did nothing to deserve being put to death. On this motif, in connection with child sacrifice, cf. Jer 19:4-5. The parallel between the wording in line 3 and that of v. 37 makes clear that the “fashioned images” (bx*u*, plur.) are images of deities other than YHWH. They are called the “images of Canaan”, in that they represent the deities worshiped by the Canaanite peoples. The entire land was defiled/polluted (vb [n~j*) by the blood of these sacrifices; again, the implication is that such egregious behavior, having far violated the covenant with YHWH, led to the exile of Israel/Judah from the Promised Land.

References above (and throughout these notes) marked “Dahood, III” are to Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms III: 101-150, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 17A (1970).
Those marked “HALOT” are to The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, by Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner (Brill: 1994-2000).

Notes on Prayer: Thy Kingdom Come (Matthew 13:24ff)

“May your Kingdom come!”
e)lqe/tw h( basilei/a sou

As we further examine the theme of the coming of the Kingdom in the Gospel of Matthew, it is worth noting that the Gospel writer has largely followed the inherited traditions—that is, the Kingdom-references in the Synoptic (Markan) Tradition and those (shared by Luke) in the “Q” Tradition. If we consider the distinctive Matthean contributions, they largely fall along the lines of the Kingdom references in the Sermon on the Mount (previously discussed). Two aspects, in particular, are emphasized: (1) the eschatological orientation of the Kingdom, with its associated judgment theme, and (2) the faithful disciples of Jesus identified as those who belong to the Kingdom, in contrast to others (who might be thought to belong). These two themes are actually quite closely related, and they tend to coalesce around the end-time Judgment, which is a point of emphasis that is somewhat more prominent in the Gospel in Matthew, than in the other Synoptics.

The Kingdom Parables of Matthew 13

Especially notable are the larger number of Kingdom parables that occur in the Matthean Gospel. As an example, we can compare the additional parables, in chapter 13, which are not found in the corresponding (Synoptic) material of Mark 4:1-34: (i) the ‘Weeds’, with its explanation (vv. 24-30, 36-43); (ii) the Hidden Treasure (v. 44); (iii) the Pearl (vv. 45-46); (iv) the Net (vv. 47-50); and (v) the closing illustration in vv. 51-52. At the same time, the two Markan parables of 4:21-29 are not included here in Matthew. The parables of the ‘Weeds’ (properly darnel plants) and the Net clearly contain an eschatological judgment reference. In the latter parable, the Kingdom (of the heavens) is specifically identified with the drag-net (sagh/nh) itself, but also, more comprehensively, as the entire process of fishing that involves the net (comparable to the harvest phase in the agricultural illustrations). In the weeds/darnel parable, the Kingdom would seem to represented by the entire dynamic at work in the illustration—the field, sower, seed, growth, and harvest. The focus of the illustration is summarized by Jesus as follows:

“The kingdom of the heavens is like:
a man (hav)ing scattered good seed in his field” (v. 24)

The main point of the parable, much like that of the net-parable, is that good and bad come to be found in the same Kingdom-field.

According to the explanation provided by Jesus in the earlier sower-parable, the “seed” is the word (i.e., message) of the Kingdom—thus being identified with the preaching ministry of Jesus and his disciples (4:17, 23; 9:35; 10:7). By contrast, in the weeds-parable, the seed is explained as the people who respond (with trust) to the message, referenced as “the sons [ui(oi/] of the kingdom” (v. 38). This alludes to the motif of inheriting the Kingdom, as implied by the earlier references in the Sermon on the Mount, where the specific idiom of entering the Kingdom is used (5:20; 7:21), or, otherwise, the idea of belonging to the Kingdom (5:3, 10, cf. vv. 19-20). The “sons” are the heirs to the Kingdom, but they do not inherit it immediately; rather, they are first “sown” into the field of the world (v. 38). During this same period of growth (at night, v. 25), the “evil one” sows his own seed, which sprouts up to resemble the grain; however, it is not wheat at all, but an entirely different plant (darnel stalks, ziza/nia).

If we apply this illustration to the context of Jesus’ ministry (“the son of man”, v. 37), the implication is that there are people who resemble Jesus’ disciples—and who might claim to be his disciples, and even to act like them in some respects—but they are not his disciples at all, but rather are false disciples/believers. This is a theme that pervades the Sermon on the Mount, being brought to a focus toward the conclusion (cf. 7:13-23). The designation of the false disciples as false prophets (7:15ff) marks the eschatological context of this teaching, since the presence and activity of false prophets (and also false Messiahs [Christs]) is a traditional characteristic of the end-time period of distress (qli/yi$)—cf. Mark 13:6, 21-22 (par Matt 24:5, 11, 23-26). Other examples can be cited from elsewhere in the New Testament, perhaps most notably in 1 John, where the opponents are called both antichrists (2:18; 4:3 [2 Jn 7], “against the Anointed [Christ]”, but also with the nuance of “false Christ”) and false prophets (4:1); note the imminent eschatological orientation of these passages (2:18, 28ff).

During this end-time period, the two—true and false believers—are allowed to grow up together. Only at the very end, at the moment of judgment, will they be separated, just as, in the Net-parable, the good fish are separated from the rotten ones (v. 48). The same scenario is vividly portrayed in the visionary “sheep and goats” Judgment scene (25:31-46)—a Matthean ‘addition’ to the Eschatological Discourse, which brings the Discourse to a close. Though the two may resemble each other superficially, there are clear and obvious signs that distinguish the true/faithful disciple (believer) from the false. Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount establishes many core characteristics of the true disciple, whereby one can recognize the false disciple, by contrast (7:15-23).

The characteristics of the true disciple are also indicated by Jesus in the remaining Matthean Kingdom-parables of chapter 13 (vv. 44-46, 51-52). The illustration of the treasure hidden in the field, and of the pearl, suggest the complete and whole-hearted devotion to the Kingdom that is required by the true disciple. Again, this is a central aspect of Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount. It is perhaps best summed up by the wording in 6:33:

“you must seek first the kingdom [of God] and its right(eous)ness…”

This “rightness” (dikaiosu/nh, cf. 5:6, 10, 20; 6:1) is defined as “doing the will of the Father who is in heaven” (7:21, cf. 6:10). In the context of the Sermon, this further means following the teaching and example of Jesus, who proclaims and expounds the right(eous) will of God for his followers. The disciple (“learner”) is literally one who is taught (“made to learn”), i.e., trained, in the Kingdom (13:51-52).

In the next study, we will explore briefly several other Kingdom parables and illustrations that are unique to the Matthean Gospel.

 

July 22: Psalm 106:32-33

(Psalm 106 is being discussed over a series of daily notes; cf. the Introductory Notes)

Psalm 106:32-33

The two couplets of this short strophe serve as an excursus, of sorts, within the stanza (vv. 24-38). Its inclusion is curious, beyond the fact that it disrupts the natural three-part division of the stanza—vv. 24-27, 28-31, 34-38; cp. with vv. 13-15, 16-18, 19-23. One may ask why the Psalmist felt the need to include Moses, singling him out along with the people as a whole, but then fails to make any mention of Aaron. Particularly in light of the (implicit) emphasis on the priesthood in vv. 30-31 (see the previous note), the omission of Aaron’s role in the Meribah episode would seem to be significant. However, one can only guess at the precise reason, other than that there would seem to be a certain priestly bias throughout the Psalm. For example, Aaron’s role in the Golden Calf episode (vv. 19-23) is similarly omitted, as is the Levite Korah’s role in the rebellion (Num 16:1ff) described in vv. 16-18. Note also the way that Aaron is singled out as the “holy one of YHWH” in v. 16, and the emphasis given to Phinehas (Aaron’s grandson) in vv. 30-31. Cf. Hossfeld-Zenger, p. 91.

As for the episode itself, it is narrated in Numbers 20:2-13, with a further reference in vv. 24ff. The name of the site, (the waters of) hbyr!m= (“fighting, quarreling”), is explained by its etymological connected with the verb byr!, and the fighting/quarreling that went on there (vv. 3ff). The tradition is also mentioned in Num 27:14 and Psalm 95:8.

In terms of the historical summary of the Psalm, this strophe marks the conclusion of the Wilderness period; thus, it is fitting that Moses‘ failure to enter the Promised Land would be alluded to here, since his death (outside the borders of the Land) marks the end of the Torah narrative of the people’s journeying (Deut 34). It is after Moses’ death that the people finally enter the land, which becomes the setting for the concluding strophe of this stanza (vv. 34-38, to be discussed in the next daily note).

Verse 32

“They also angered (Him) at (the) Waters of Quarreling,
and, in passing from them, evil came to Moshe (as well)!”

The point of this short strophe, as noted above, is that the unfaithfulness of the people had the unfortunate result of bringing YHWH’s judgment upon Moses as well. This is indicated here, by way of a very brief summary of events described in Numbers 20:2-13. The dissatisfaction of the people (cf. the earlier strophes of vv. 13-15 and 24-27) led to open quarreling (vb byr!) with Moses and Aaron (cp. the episode summarized in vv. 16-18). As a result, Moses and Aaron responded in a way (v. 10) that dishonored YHWH (v. 12). On the Psalmist’s exclusion of Aaron from this episode, see above.

The expression rWbu&B^ in the second line is often translated flatly in the abstract sense of “on account of”. While this gets the point across, I prefer to preserve the verbal aspect of rWbu*, referring to the “passing over [rbu]” from one place (or person) to another. The evil (ur) of the people came over to Moses, infecting him as well; here, the denominative verb uu^r* (“be evil”), functions impersonally (“it/there was evil”), which I have rendered more vigorously as “evil came”. One may also say that the evil of judgment came over from the people to Moses (and Aaron), so that they shared the people’s fate of dying without entering the Promised Land (Num 20:12).

Verse 33

“For defiantly they provoked his spirit,
and (so) he spoke rashly with his lips.”

The relationship between the people’s faithlessness and that of Moses is brought into closer focus here in the second couplet. It offers a psychological cause-and-effect explanation that otherwise has to be inferred within the traditional account (in Numbers 20). The verb hr*m* (“defy, rebel [against]”) was used earlier in the Psalm, in verse 7, in a summary reference to the rebellious conduct of the people during the Wilderness period. I have translated the verb here as “provoke defiantly”, since this captures the effect of the people’s defiance (or rebellion) upon the “spirit” of Moses. We can see how this evil “passed over” (cf. on v. 32 above) from the people to Moses by the way that the verb hr*m* is used in the Numbers 20 narrative. First, the provocation is indicated by the words Moses uses (together with Aaron) prior to striking the rock: “Hear, now, (you) the (one)s defying [<yr!m)]…!” (v. 10). Then, later in the chapter (v. 24), the punishment extending to Moses and Aaron—viz., that they will die without entering the Promised Land—is explained by YHWH as follows: “you shall not come into the land…over (the way) that you defied [<t#yr!m=] my mouth [i.e. word] at (the) Waters of Quarrelling!”. In other words, having been provoked by the rebelling people, Moses and Aaron became rebellious (against YHWH) themselves.

The rare verb af*B*, which occurs only three times elsewhere in the Scriptures (Lev 5:4 [twice]; Prov 12:18 [the byform hf*B*]), would seem to mean “speak carelessly”; here the translation “speak rashly” is perhaps more appropriate to the context. It was principally through the words he spoke (Num 20:10) that Moses ‘rebelled’ against YHWH, in this instance, and sinned.

References above marked “Hossfeld-Zenger” are to Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150, translated by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia Commentary Series (Fortress Press: 2011).