## Studies in the Book of Psalms

### Being a Critical and Expository Commentary,

### with Doctrinal and Practical Remarks on the Entire Psalter

### by William S. Plumer

Introduction

Psalm 1

Psalm 2

Psalm 3

Psalm 4

Psalm 5

Psalm 6

Psalm 7

Psalm 8

Psalm 9

Psalm 10

Psalm 11

Psalm 12

Psalm 13

Psalm 14

Psalm 15

Psalm 16

Psalm 17

Psalm 18

Psalm 19

Psalm 20

Psalm 21

Psalm 22

Psalm 23

Psalm 24

Psalm 25

Psalm 26

Psalm 27

Psalm 28

Psalm 29

Psalm 30

Psalm 31

Psalm 32

Psalm 33

Psalm 34

Psalm 35

Psalm 36

Psalm 37

Psalm 38

Psalm 39

Psalm 40

Psalm 41

Psalm 42

Psalm 43

Psalm 44

Psalm 45

Psalm 46

Psalm 47

Psalm 48

Psalm 49

Psalm 50

Psalm 51

Psalm 52

Psalm 53

Psalm 54

Psalm 55

Psalm 56

Psalm 57

Psalm 58

Psalm 59

Psalm 60

Psalm 61

Psalm 62

Psalm 63

Psalm 64

Psalm 65

Psalm 66

Psalm 67

Psalm 68

Psalm 69

Psalm 70

Psalm 71

Psalm 72

Psalm 73

Psalm 74

Psalm 75

Psalm 76

Psalm 77

Psalm 78

Psalm 79

Psalm 80

Psalm 81

Psalm 82

Psalm 83

Psalm 84

Psalm 85

Psalm 86

Psalm 87

Psalm 88

Psalm 89

Psalm 90

Psalm 91

Psalm 92

Psalm 93

Psalm 94

Psalm 95

Psalm 96

Psalm 97

Psalm 98

Psalm 99

Psalm 100

Psalm 101

Psalm 102

Psalm 103

Psalm 104

Psalm 105

Psalm 106

Psalm 107

Psalm 108

Psalm 109

Psalm 110

Psalm 111

Psalm 112

Psalm 113

Psalm 114

Psalm 115

Psalm 116

Psalm 117

Psalm 118

Psalm 119

Psalm 120

Psalm 121

Psalm 122

Psalm 123

Psalm 124

Psalm 125

Psalm 126

Psalm 127

Psalm 128

Psalm 129

Psalm 130

Psalm 131

Psalm 132

Psalm 133

Psalm 134

Psalm 135

Psalm 136

Psalm 137

Psalm 138

Psalm 139

Psalm 140

Psalm 141

Psalm 142

Psalm 143

Psalm 144

Psalm 145

Psalm 146

Psalm 147

Psalm 148

Psalm 149

Psalm 150

### INTRODUCTION

1. THE WONDERFUL CHARACTER OF THE PSALMS

THE Psalms are wonderful. They have been read, repeated, chanted, sung, studied, wept over, rejoiced in, expounded, loved and praised by God's people for thousands of years. The most ancient of these productions is now three thousand three hundred and twenty-six years old. The least ancient of them is two thousand four hundred and fifty-three years old. The difference in date between the most ancient and the most modern of them is eight hundred and seventy-three years. They were all written in Asia, so that we in this Western World can have no national pride respecting them. Yet pious people here and all over the earth have found and can find no compositions more suitable for delineating their devout emotions, and for expressing their pious sensibilities than those of inspired Psalmists. If to any man these songs are unsavory, the reason is found in the blindness and depravity of the human heart. Hengstenberg: "The Psalms are expressions of holy feeling, which can be understood by those only, who have become alive to such feeling."

Horne: "Composed upon particular occasions, yet designed for general use; delivered out as services for Israelites under the law, yet no less adapted to the circumstances of Christians under the Gospel, the Psalms present religion to us in the most engaging dress; communicating truths which philosophy could never investigate, in a style which poetry can never equal, while history is made the vehicle of prophecy, and creation lends all its charms to paint the glories of redemption. Calculated alike to profit and to please, they inform the understanding, elevate the affections, and entertain the imagination. Indited under the influence of Him to whom all hearts are known, and all events foreknown, they suit mankind in all situations, grateful as the manna which descended from above, and conformed itself to every palate. The fairest productions of human wit, after a few perusals, like gathered flowers, wither in our hands, and lose their fragrancy; but these unfading plants of paradise become, as we are accustomed to them, still more and more beautiful; their bloom appears to be daily heightened; fresh odors are emitted, and new sweets extracted from them. He who hath once tasted their excellences will desire to taste them yet again; and he who tastes them oftenest will relish them best."

Other things being equal, he who has the most heavenly mind, will be the most successful student of the Psalms. Carnal tempers are ill suited to spiritual truths. The blind cannot see afar off. No natural acuteness, no learning, no amount of examination will answer the purpose unless we are taught from heaven and thus made docile. The best qualification for studying any portion of God's word is the influence of the Holy Spirit abiding in us, warming our cold hearts, giving us humbleness of mind, and right affections. Augustine: "Form thy spirit by the affection of the Psalm … If the Psalm breathes the spirit of prayer, do you pray; if it is filled with groanings, groan also thyself; if it is gladsome, do thou rejoice also; if it encourages hope, then hope thou in God; if it calls to godly fear, then tremble thou before the divine majesty; for all things herein contained are mirrors to reflect our own real characters … Let the heart do what the words signify."

Cassian: "That we may enjoy this treasure, it is necessary that we say the Psalms with the same spirit with which they were composed, and accommodate them unto ourselves in the same manner as if every one of us had composed them, or as if the Psalmist had directed them purposely for our uses; not satisfying ourselves that they had their whole completion in or by the Prophet, but discerning every one of us our own parts still to be performed and acted over in the Psalmist's words, by exciting in ourselves the same affections which we discern to have been in David, or in others at that time, loving when he loves, fearing when he fears, hoping when he hopes, praising God when he praises, weeping for our own or others' sins when he weeps, begging what we want with the like spirit wherein his petitions are framed, loving our enemies when he shows love to his, praying for ours when he prays for his, having zeal for the glory of God when the Psalmist professes it, humbling ourselves when he is humbled, lifting up our spirit to heaven when he lifts up his, giving thanks for God's mercies when he doth, delighting and rejoicing in the beauty of the Messias, and of the Church his spouse, when he is delighted and rejoiceth; when he relates the wonderful works of God in the creation of the world, bringing his people out of Egypt, etc., admiring and glorifying God as he stands amazed and glorifies him; and when he mentions the punishments inflicted on rebellious sinners, and rewards and favors bestowed on the obedient, we likewise are to tremble when he trembles, and exult when he exults, and walk in the court of heaven, the sanctuary, as he walks, and wish to dwell in it as he wishes. Finally, where he as a master teaches, exhorts, reprehends, and directs the just man, each of us must suppose him speaking to him, and answer him in such due manner as the instruction of such a master exacts." That we may in some measure perform this vital substantial part of our task, "Let us at the beginning of the Psalm, beg of God that light and affection, and gust and savor, with which David was affected when he made it, and that with the affection and desire of obtaining what he felt." As well might men hope that improvements in agriculture would render unnecessary the rain of heaven, as that any advancement in Biblical science would make us independent of the grace and Spirit of God, imparting to us right tempers and right views.

2. TESTIMONY OF COMMENTATORS

Many, who have written on the Psalms, have left their testimony to the pleasantness of their labors. They seem to have been walking through the green pastures and by the still waters. Thus Calvin: "If the reading of these COMMENTARIES confer as much benefit on the church of God as I myself have reaped advantage from the composition of them, I shall have no reason to regret that I have undertaken this work."

Horne: "And now, could the author flatter himself, that any one would take half the pleasure in reading the following exposition, which he hath taken in writing it, he would not fear the loss of his labor. The employment detached him from the bustle and hurry of life, the din of politics, and the noise of folly; vanity and vexation flew away for a season, care and disquietude came not near his dwelling. He arose fresh as the morning to his task; the silence of the night invited him to pursue it: and he can truly say, that food and rest were not preferred before it. Every Psalm improved infinitely on his acquaintance with it; and no one gave him uneasiness but the last; for then he grieved that his work was done. Happier hours than those which have been spent on these Songs of Sion, he never expects to see in this world. Very pleasantly did they pass, and moved swiftly along: for when thus engaged, he counted no time. They are gone, but have left a relish and a fragrance upon the mind, and the remembrance of them is sweet." Chalmers quotes this experience of Horne as "an actual specimen of heaven upon earth, as enjoyed for a season of devotional contemplation on the word of God."

Morison speaks of his labors in this department as "a delightful task," and says, "Should the benefit of perusing this exposition be equal to that which has attended the writing of it, it will not be consulted in vain. Truly it has proved a source of spiritual excitement to the author, for which he hopes ever to be grateful to the God of his life. It has tended to endear the retirements of the closet, and to discover beauties in the word of God, which never fell with equal interest upon his mind."

Hengstenberg: "However this work may be received, the author has found an ample recompense in itself, and hopes that he shall be able to look back upon it with pleasure, even in eternity."

During a Christian and ministerial life, neither short, uneventful, nor free from dark days and sharp sorrows, the author has freely mingled with the suffering people of God of various names and conditions, and has never been able to secure to himself, or administer to others full support and abounding consolation without a resort to the Psalms. Here was always something well suited to every stage of religious experience and to every kind and degree of affliction. He has therefore preached much on texts chosen from this part of Scripture. This has been specially true of his weekly lecture, which he has maintained wherever he has exercised his ministry. And although this work has been prepared in the midst of other and pressing duties, yet he has often been refreshed by writing or revising even a paragraph. "Thy statutes have been my songs in the house of my pilgrimage." "Thy testimonies have I taken as an heritage forever; for they are the rejoicing of my heart."

3. THE PSALMS EXCELLENT

The testimonies in favor of the Book of Psalms are numerous and striking. Athanasius calls it "an epitome of the whole Scriptures." Basil says it is "the common treasure of all good precepts … the voice of the church … a compendium of all theology." Ambrose: "The law instructs, history informs, prophecy predicts, correction censures, and morals exhort. In the Book of Psalms you find the fruit of all these, as well as a remedy for the salvation of the soul. The Psalter deserves to be called, the praise of God, the glory of man, the voice of the church, and the most beneficial confession of faith." Augustine: "What is there that may not be learned in the Psalms?" Luther: "The Psalter is a little Bible, and the summary of the Old Testament. One verse of the Psalms is sufficient for the meditation of a day; and he, who at the end of the day finds himself fully possessed of its sense and spirit, may consider his time well spent." Cassiodorus: "The Book of Psalms is splendid, illuminated with brightness, solacing the wounded heart, like the honey-comb refreshing the inner man, speaking the language of hidden virtues, inclining the proud to humility, making kings poor in spirit, yet gently nourishing and animating the timid and the feeble." Gerhard: "The Psalter is a theatre, where God allows us to behold both himself and his works; a most pleasant green field, a vast garden, where we see all manner of flowers; a paradise, having the most delicious flowers and fruits: a great sea in which are hid costly pearls; a heavenly school, where we have God for our teacher; a compend of all Scripture; a mirror of divine grace, reflecting the lovely face of our heavenly Father; and the anatomy of our souls." Melancthon says the Book of Psalms is "the most elegant work extant in the world." Calvin: "I have been accustomed to call this book, I think not inappropriately, 'an anatomy of the soul;' for there is not an emotion of which any one can be conscious that is not here represented as in a mirror. Or rather, the Holy Spirit has here drawn to the life all the griefs, sorrows, fears, doubts, hopes, cares, perplexities, in short, all the distracting emotions with which the minds of men are wont to be agitated.… There is no other book in which are recorded so many deliverances, nor one in which the evidences and experiences of the fatherly providence and solicitude, which God exercises towards us, are celebrated with such splendor of diction, and yet with the strictest adherence to truth." Rivet, borrowing from one of the early Fathers, compares this book to Paradise, where grow all manner of fruits, and says that his object in his exposition is to show the beauty, and gather the fruit of this pleasant garden and place it before his readers. Hooker adopts and amplifies the language of Augustine on the subject. On his death-bed the learned Salmasius said, "O I have lost a world of time. If one year more were added to my life, it should be spent in reading David's Psalms and Paul's epistles." John Brent says, "You may rightly and fitly call the Psalter an epitome of the sacred books." Of these sacred songs John Milton says, "Not in their divine argument alone, but in the very critical art of composition, they may be easily made appear over all the kinds of lyric poesy to be incomparable." Sir Daniel K. Sandford: "In lyric flow and fire, in crushing force and majesty, that seems still to echo the awful sounds once heard beneath the thunder-clouds of Sinai, the poetry of the ancient Scriptures is the most superb that ever burned within the breast of man." Why should not such a book be studied from age to age? I marvel not that Jerome in his letter to Laeta respecting the education of her grand-daughter, said, "Let her learn the Psalms." I am not surprised, when a pious, infirm friend, nearly eighty years old, writes to me saying, "I constantly read the Psalms, and often commit them to memory." Could a child of God on the verge of the grave have a more heavenly employment? Well does David Dickson speak of "this sweet-smelling bundle of Psalms." Dodd: "The Psalms are fitted to all persons and ages, to all manner of employments, and to all conditions and circumstances of life: but they have still one further excellence, that they contain a variety of striking prophecies concerning Christ and his church." Clarke: "I know nothing like the Book of Psalms: it contains all the lengths, breadths, depths, and heights of the Patriarchal, Mosaic, and Christian Dispensations. It is the most useful book in the Bible, and is every way worthy of the wisdom of God." Tholuck: "Piety, Jewish or Christian, if genuine, and not formal, has derived more nourishment from the Psalms than from any other source."

He cites beautiful testimonies to the same effect from the great statesman, Moser, from the classical Herder, and from the historian, John Mueller.

Mueller: "The Psalms teach one to prize a much tried life … David yields me every day the most delightful hour. There is nothing Greek, nothing Roman, nothing in the West, nor in the land towards midnight, to equal David, whom the God of Israel chose to praise him higher than the gods of the nations. The utterance of his mind sinks deep into the heart, and never in my life, never have I thus seen God."

Herder: "The use of the Psalms became the blessing of humanity, not only on account of their contents, but also on account of their form … For two thousand years have the Psalms frequently and differently been translated, and still there are many new formations of their much embracing and rich manner possible … The Psalter is the hymn-book for all times."

Moser: "How much comfort, light, and strength have the Psalms imparted to my fainting soul. I often not only missed the way, but lost the very trace of it. I say me down as if I had become petrified. One word from the Psalms was a sunbeam to me; like a lark I settled on the pinions of that eagle; carried by her, I scaled the rock, and beheld from that eminence the world, with its cares and mine, stretched out beneath me; I acquired to think, infer, mourn, pray, wait, hope, and speak in the spirit of David. I thank thee, O Lord, that thou hast humbled me. I acquired to know and understand the rights of God—his purposes of love and faithfulness to every man, but especially to myself—his mighty wisdom towards us his creatures in our present state of probation, as well as the blessedness, benefit, and necessity of sufferings for our cleansing, purification, and perfection. I learned to esteem myself happy in being permitted to endure suffering. I attained to a better knowledge of the wisdom and love of God, the truth of his word and assurance, the unalterable faithfulness of his promises, the riches of his mercy and long-suffering; of my own dependence, insufficiency, nothingness, and inability without him, of the wickedness and deceit of my heart, of the world, of men, and of the profound wisdom of God in the blending of evil with good. I became less in my own sight, more suffering and affectionate, more sparing and forgiving, more severe with myself, more lenient to others. I learned to trust God in all my ways and to renounce the claims of fame, honor, and comfort. It was nourishment to my soul to be enabled to say: 'Lord, let me possess but Thee.' I asked for no more aid in temporal concerns than his wisdom might find good for the best of my soul. I learned to become more contented in my desires, more moderate in my enjoyments. I was enabled with tears to express my gratitude for mercies, which formerly I counted not as blessings, but as my right and due. If my soul would keep holy-day, the Psalms became my temple and my altar. Next to the writings of the New Testament, they are now to me my dearest and most precious book—the golden mirror, the cyclopaedia of the most blessed and fruitful knowledge and experience of my life; to thoroughly understand them will be the occupation of eternity, and our second life will form their commentary."

In his Cours de Literature the celebrated Lamartine, probably regarding the last four Psalms (the Hallelujah Hymns) as one whole (as Hengstenberg also does) thus speaks: "The last Psalm ends with a chorus to the praise of God, in which the poet calls on all people, all instruments of sacred music, all the elements, and all the stars to join. Sublime finale of that opera of sixty years sung by the shepherd, the hero, the king, and the old man! In this closing Psalm we see the almost inarticulate enthusiasm of the lyric poet; so rapidly do the words press to his lips, floating upwards towards God their source, like the smoke of a great fire of the soul wafted by the tempest! Here we see David, or rather the human heart itself with all its God-given notes of grief, joy, tears, and adoration—poetry sanctified to its highest expression; a vase of perfume broken on the step of the temple, and shedding abroad its odors from the heart of David to the heart of all humanity! Hebrew, Christian, or even Mohammedan, every religion, every complaint, every prayer has taken from this vase, shed on the heights of Jerusalem, wherewith to give forth their accents. The little shepherd has become the master of the sacred choir of the Universe. There is not a worship on earth which prays not with his words, or sings not with his voice. A chord of his harp is to be found in all choirs, resounding everywhere and forever in unison with the echoes of Horeb and Engedi! David is the psalmist of eternity; what a destiny—what a power hath poetry when inspired by God! As for myself, when my spirit is excited, or devotional, or sad, and seeks for an echo to its enthusiasm, its devotion, or its melancholy, I do not open Pindar, or Horace, or Hafiz, those purely Academic poets; neither do I find within myself murmurings to express my emotion. I open the Book of Psalms, and there I find words which seem to issue from the soul of the ages, and which penetrate even to the heart of all generations. Happy the bard who has thus become the eternal hymn, the personified prayer and complaint of all humanity! If we look back to that remote age when such songs resounded over the world; if we consider that, while the lyric poetry of all the most cultivated nations only sang of wine, love, blood, and the victories of coursers at the games of Elidus, we are seized with profound astonishment, at the mystic accents of the shepherd-prophet who speaks to God the Creator as one friend to another, who understands and praises his great works, admires his justice, implores his mercy, and becomes, as it were, an anticipative echo of the evangelic poetry, speaking the soft words of Christ before his coming. Prophet or not, as he may be considered by Christian or skeptic, none can deny in the poet-king an inspiration granted to no other man. Read Greek or Latin poetry after a Psalm, and see how pale it looks."

4. PECULIARITIES OF THE PSALTER

The Book of Psalms is very peculiar. It differs from all other parts of God's word. It contains one hundred and fifty distinct compositions. Of these, some consist of a very few short sentences. Others are quite extended. One has a hundred and seventy-six verses. In the Hebrew the Psalter contains two thousand five hundred and seventeen verses. The middle verse is in Psalms 78:36. Of these compositions, sometimes seventy-four, sometimes seventy-three, and commonly seventy-two are ascribed to David, "The man raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet Psalmist of Israel." There never arose another Psalmist like him. Jerome: "Simonides, Pindar, and Alceus, among the Greeks; Horace, Catullus, and Serenus, among the Latins, were famous for their poetic writings; but in his lyrics David personates Christ, and with his ten-stringed psaltery celebrates his rising from the dead." Augustine: "David was a man eminently skilled in songs, being one who loved musical harmony, not to produce a carnal delight, but with the will of faith." The son of Sirach says of David: "In all his works he praised the Holy One most high with words of glory; with his whole heart he sung songs, and loved him that made him. He set singers also before the altar, that by their voices they might make sweet melody and daily sing praises in their songs. He beautified their feasts, and set in order the solemn times unto the end, that they might praise his holy name, and that the temple might sound from morning." Ecclus. 47:8–10.

Several of the Fathers and some more modern writers make David the sole author of the Book of Psalms, but this is unquestionably a mistake.

Twelve of the Psalms are ascribed to Asaph, who seems to have been a man of exquisite sensibilities, much tempted, but remarkably delivered. He was cotemporary with David, and wrote his first Psalm about one thousand and twenty years before Christ. He is mentioned as a composer of Psalms in 2 Chron. 29:30, where he is also called a Seer. Two of the Psalms are ascribed to Solomon, the son of David, a great preacher, and the wisest of mere men. 1 Kings 4:29–34. Only one Psalm is believed to have been written by Moses, (and Kennicott denies even that to him, though on insufficient grounds,) Moses, the man that spoke to God in the mountain till his face had an intolerable brightness. Although Angus claims that Ps. 88 is of the greatest antiquity, being written, he thinks, B. C. 1531, yet in this he is pretty certainly mistaken; and we may safely say that the 90th Psalm is the most ancient of all these songs. Scott dates it 1460, and Angus 1489 years B. C.

One Psalm is ascribed to Heman the Ezrahite, and one to Ethan the Ezrahite. Of these men we know that they were the sons of Mahol, that they had two eminent brothers, Chalcol and Darda, that they were cotemporary with Solomon, and that they were wise men, though surpassed by their monarch. Some think Ethan and Jeduthun the same; but that is doubtful. Some think Psalms 88 and 89 were written by persons living before the time of David. But this cannot be proven. Compare 1 Kings 4:31; 1 Chron. 15:17, 19; 25:1; 2 Chron. 35:15. That the Ethan and Heman mentioned in 1 Chron. 2:6 cannot be the authors of Psalms 88 and 89 is evident from the contents of Psalm 89 which records things said and done long after their day. Of the remaining sixty-one Psalms the authorship is either wholly unknown or somewhat uncertain. Of these, eleven are ascribed to the sons of Korah as authors, or are addressed to them as musical performers; but learned men are not agreed on this point. It is almost certain that David wrote some of those ascribed to the sons of Korah. It would not profit the reader here to inquire at length into this matter, which will probably in several cases never be fully settled. To us the sense of the Psalm, if clearly ascertained, is the same, whoever may have been the writer. It is certain that David was the author of several to which his name is not prefixed. Thus the second Psalm is not on its face ascribed to David, yet in Acts 4:25 we learn from infallible authority that it was composed by him. In substance the same may be said respecting the 95th Psalm, which in Hebrews 4:7 is expressly ascribed to David, though there is no statement to that effect in the Psalter. It is said in Psalms 72:20: "The prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended." Whatever else that phrase may mean, it cannot teach that no portion of the Psalms subsequent to the 72d in our arrangement was written by David.

5. THE PSALMS INSPIRED

The real author of the Psalms is the Holy Spirit. In other words, the penmen of these compositions were inspired of God. So Chrysostom: "How does it concern me whether David was the author of all the Psalms, or whether some of them were written by others since it is certainly known that they were all written by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit?" Williams: "The divine authority of the Book of Psalms has, we believe, never been controverted by those who admit the inspiration of any part of the Old Testament." David expressly claims inspiration for him self: "The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his word was in my tongue. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me." 2 Samuel 23:2, 3. This clearly claims inspiration. David was certainly inspired. On the day of Pentecost, Peter did but declare the judgment of the Church and the mind of God, when he said, "This Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake," etc. Acts 1:16. And in Acts 13:29–37, Paul speaks of the Psalms in a way that he surely would not do if he did not regard them as the word of God. Our Saviour himself teaches that in the hundred and tenth Psalm David spoke "by the Holy Ghost," and that "David in spirit called him Lord." Matthew 22:43, and Mark 12:36. In his last interview with his disciples, just before his ascension, our Lord puts Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms on the same level, as containing unfailing truths. Luke 24:44. Indeed, Christ and his apostles always treated the Psalms as the infallible word of God. Hebrews 3:7. They are quoted or referred to scores of times in the New Testament as of the highest authority in religion, as may be seen from the following

TABLE OF VERSES OF THE PSALMS

QUOTED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

Some of the Jews deny to David the title of prophet; but in Acts 2:30 Peter expressly calls him a prophet. In whatever sense the word prophet may be taken, it surely belongs to David. He was a great teacher. He predicted many great events. No man can consistently deny inspiration to the Psalms without denying it to all the Scriptures. If the Psalms are inspired it is easy to understand why they should be so powerful in their influence over the minds and hearts of men. They are a fire and a hammer. They are life and spirit.

6. DIFFICULTY OF UNDERSTANDING THE PSALMS

If any ask, why should a divinely inspired and devotional book be so hard to be understood, and lead to so considerable diversity of interpretation? the answer has been given a thousand times: The human mind is very weak, and liable to many prejudices and to much darkness; and the things of God are very excellent and glorious. The fact that the book is highly devotional and experimental takes nothing from the difficulty; for the near we are to the throne, the more dazzling is its effulgence found to be; and the more deeply truth enters into our spirits, the less able do we feel ourselves to tell its relations and describe its beauties. The Psalms were written a long time ago, in an age and country very diverse from our own, and in a language so peculiar as to have now no parallel. In his preface to the book of Psalms with notes, the learned Creswell thus accounts for much of the difficulty: "The Hebrew is not only a dead language, but the oldest of all dead languages; it is, moreover, the language of a people that lived under institutions and in a climate very different from those of our own country, so that the idioms with which it abounds cannot but be strange to our habits of thinking, and our modes of speech; nor have we any book but the Bible itself to consult for an illustration of these phraseological peculiarities The pancity of the words also contained in that ancient tongue is such, that the same Hebrew term very often bears a great variety of significations, the connection of which with each other cannot always be satisfactorily ascertained: and, again, there are words, each of which is found but once in the whole volume of Scripture, so that their meanings can only be conjectured, either from their affinity to other words, or from the purport of the passage where they occur.

"The following are amongst the many grammatical Hebraisms which we meet with in the Book of Psalms. The future and past tenses are put almost indiscriminately, the one for the other, and the former of them is used occasionally to designate not that which will happen, but that which is accustomed to happen. The infinitive is put for every other mood, and also for nouns even in the accusative case. The future tense is sometimes expressed by a verb in the imperative mood. Two substantives are put instead of a substantive and an adjective; a substantive is frequently used adverbially; and the same substantive repeated denotes multitude. When the negative particle occurs in the first member of a sentence, it is sometimes to be understood, and must be supplied, in the following members. Hebrew sentences are also in other respects very often elliptical, broken and imperfect; and in the same sentence there is in many instances a change of person in the speaker, without any express intimation of it.

"From the peculiarities above mentioned, and especially from the different ways in which an ellipse may be supplied, it is plain that the text of Scripture must needs admit of a considerable latitude of interpretation; so that although none of its important doctrines, whether they relate to faith or morals, are thereby left doubtful, yet does it contain passages the exact meanings of which are more or less uncertain. The candid and pious reader, however, will with Augustine gladly acknowledge that all which he fully comprehends in the sacred volume is most excellent; whilst he looks with feelings of veneration upon that smaller portion of it which he less perfectly understands, but which the diligence and erudition of future times may, through divine aid, be enabled to elucidate."

This is the proper place to remark on those forms of expression in the Psalms, which taken according to the sound are imprecations of evil upon enemies. Respecting these the following remarks are offered to show that the inconsistency of such passages with the existence of genuine benevolence is merely apparent. True piety is ever the same. It teaches us to do good for evil, to bless and curse not. The Psalms themselves show that the law of love was understood by David as we now understand it. See Psalms 7:4. True religion requires men, always did require men to supplicate blessings, such as repentance, forgiveness and salvation on our earthly foes.

To explain these imprecatory forms of speech some say that they are not expressive of the feelings of the writers as private persons, but that they are inspired by the Holy Ghost to say these things in the name of God, or of Christ. But God swears that he has no pleasure in the death of sinners; Christ when dying prayed for his murderers; and the Divine Spirit is the author of all holy love in man's heart. The representative of the Holy One must be like him.

Nor does it aid the matter to say that all these persons, against whom imprecations are uttered, are incorrigible foes of God and good men; for first, it cannot be shown that in all cases they were so; and, secondly, Jesus Christ wept over the city, which he knew to be hopelessly doomed to destruction. We must be like Christ. If a man is known to be incorrigibly wicked, we may not pray for him; but we may not ask God to hasten his perdition.

Others say that such imprecations are simple expressions of a strong sense of the justice of God in sending calamities and curses on the wicked. No doubt every sin deserves God's terrible and eternal displeasure, and all ought to say so. But personal ill-desert is not confined to those, who shall be lost. The righteous are not saved because they have not sinned, nor because they have sinned less than others, nor because they do not deserve perdition. Their salvation is wholly gratuitous. Every regenerate man has a strong sense of the justice of his own destruction, if God should finally cast him off. Yet no good man uses any form of imprecatory words, respecting himself. And he has no right to use such phrases merely to convey the idea that the thing is just. For there are other modes, well known to pious men, of doing the same thing. It would be just in God to damn the world, but in saying that, we may not seem to ask him to do it. On the contrary we should pray for all, who are in the land of the living, and have not sinned unto death, even while we confess that no man deserves anything but wrath. It should never be forgotten, however, that all such passages are based upon the fact that the punishment of the wicked will be perfectly just.

Many say that the verbs in the clauses under consideration might and should be rendered in the future.

Horne: "The offence taken at the supposed uncharitable and vindictive spirit of the imprecations, which occur in some of the Psalms, ceases immediately if we change the imperative for the future, and read, not 'let them be confounded,' etc., but, 'they shall be confounded,' etc., of which the Hebrew is equally capable. Such passages will then have no more difficulty in them than the other frequent predictions of divine vengeance in the writings of the prophets, or denunciations of it in the gospels intended to warn, to alarm, and to lead sinners to repentance, that they may fly from the wrath to come. This is Dr. Hammond's observation; who very properly remarks, at the same time, that in many places of this sort, as particularly in Ps. 109, (and the same may be said of Ps. 69,) it is reasonable to resolve, that Christ himself speaketh in the prophet; as being the person there principally concerned, and the completion most signal in many circumstances there mentioned; the succession especially of Matthias to the apostleship of Judas. It is true, that in the citation made by St. Peter from Ps. 109, in Acts 1:20, as also in that made by St. Paul from Ps. 69, in Romans 11:9, the imperative form is preserved: 'Let his habitation be void,' etc. 'Let their table be made a snare,' etc. But it may be considered, that the apostles generally cited from the Greek of the LXX. version; and took it as they found it, making no alteration, when the passage, as it there stood, was sufficient to prove the main point which it was adduced to prove. If the imprecatory form be still contended for, all that can be meant by it, whether uttered by the prophet, by Messiah, or by ourselves, must be a solemn ratification of the just judgments of the Almighty against his impenitent enemies, like what we find ascribed to the blessed spirits in heaven, when such judgments were executed: Revelation 11:17, 18; 16:5, 6, 7: See Merrick's Annotations on Ps. 109, and Witsii Miscellan. Sacr. lib. i., cap. 18, sect. 24. But, by the future rendering the verbs, every possible objection is precluded at once."

Scott: "The future tense is often used for the imperative, or the optative mood, in the Hebrew, which has not that precision, as to tenses and moods, which prevails in many other languages. But where the literal rendering contains simply a prediction, and changing the future for the imperative, or optative, implies an imprecation, or a wish, the literal version is frequently preferable … We must by no means desire and pray for the destruction of our enemies, but we may predict the ruin of God's enemies, who will fall by their own counsels, and in the multitude of their iniquities." If these seeming imprecations are mere predictions, the matter is relieved of all serious difficulty. This view is well supported by authority.

But the use of the future tense instead of the optative mood does not in all cases satisfy Scott, for he says, "Yet it cannot be denied that the form of imprecation is often used, implying that the impenitent enemies of God and Christ will perish, with the approbation of all holy creatures; and that the very prayers of believers for themselves and the Church will be answered in the destruction of their enemies." Others have expressed similar views.

Therefore some adopt and enlarge on the idea that "we may predict the ruin of God's enemies." Surely we may do that. We must do it in all fidelity and tenderness. The view then is that the form of expression in our English Bible in many places is an ordinary method of prophetically announcing both curses and blessings. An examination of many passages in the Psalms and in the prophets would confirm this view.

Either this or the next preceding mode of explaining the difficulty will to most candid persons be satisfactory. The latter is perhaps to be preferred.

Some, however, unite both, and so cover the whole ground. Cobbin: "Such passages admit of translation in the future, and are rather predictions than imprecations." Morison also says that Psalms 5:10, "and all similar passages in the Psalms, will bear to be translated in the future tense. For the want of observing this circumstance, many have been stumbled at the apparent want of benevolence on the part of David. These words are a distinct but awful prophecy of the judgments which await the enemies of Christ and his Church."

The sense of the Christian world so far coincides with the idea that these seeming imprecations were mere predictions, that, with very limited exceptions, persons professing the Christian name have never been led to use similar forms of expression in their devotions. Those who form the exception have commonly been men heated with the intense malignity of partizans in political or theological controversy.

It should also be stated that such is the pious, benevolent spirit of the Psalms, that any one using these forms of speech to express real imprecations, would shock a Christian community. Alexander: "Such expressions in the Psalms have never really excited or encouraged a spirit of revenge in any reader, and are no more fitted to have that effect than the act of a judge who condemns a criminal to death or of the officer who executes the sentence." God will surely, by his very nature, be led to destroy the incorrigibly wicked. Nothing is more certain. Such truth should be proclaimed. The belief of it is eminently salutary.

Let us then not be surprised at these difficulties in ascertaining the sense of the Psalmists; in doubtful cases let us propose our views with unfeigned modesty; let us make reasonable allowance for human infirmity; and especially let us implore the guidance of the Holy Spirit. He is that unction which teacheth us all things. No wit, nor learning, nor study can ever render his teachings unnecessary. Let us thank God that so much is clear and intelligible. Let us also often cry, "Teach me thy statutes;" "Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law." God is himself the great Teacher.

7. VARIOUS VERSIONS. THE ENGLISH GOOD

Various translations of the Psalms are before the public. Many of them have much merit and preserve much of the heavenly savor of the original. All of them may occasionally afford a good hint. Of those made into English none can compare with the authorized version. Many devout persons have by long use become attached to the translation found in the prayer-book of the church of England. This version bears date from A. D. 1539. Their preference for this shows how precious God's word is in any translation, which is much used; but no competent scholar would agree that our authorized version has any successful rival. That just referred to is far more a translation of the Septuagint than of the Hebrew text. The Commentator Scott, who well deserves the epithet Judicious, says, "The Prayer-book translation is in no respect comparable to the Bible translation." Nearly all the translations now claiming public attention may be profitably consulted. The older English versions from quaintness, if not from elegance, do often give the sense in a very striking way. The Polyglot Bibles may with great advantage be consulted by those whose scholarship is sufficient. The author thinks proper here to record his high estimate of the value of the English Bible now in common use. It seems to him that his brethren, who seek to bring it into disrepute, might be much better employed. He gives it as his deliberate judgment that he has never seen even one chapter done into English so well anywhere else. The learning of the men, who made it, was vast, sound, and unquestionable. In this respect their little fingers were thicker than the loins of the men, who decry their labors. The common people ought to be told that they have God's word in a better translation than that of the Septuagint, which was freely quoted by Christ and his apostles. Nothing is inspired but the original; yet those learned and modest men, who have suggested improvements in the rendering of any text, should receive all due honor, and not be looked upon with suspicion. The old mode of paraphrasing Scripture had more serious objections to it than that of suggesting a new rendering.

For these reasons no new translation is presented in this work. One absolutely new, and paying any decent regard to the Hebrew text, is quite impossible, although it may be fairly original with its author. Yet the various translations, where they can cast any light on the text, or where candor requires the statement of views opposed to the sense conveyed by the common version, are freely given.

8. HOW FAR ARE THE PSALMS MESSIANIC?

The weightiest matter in controversy respecting the interpretation of the Psalms regards their application to Christ. How far are they Messianic? Has any portion of them a primary application to David or Solomon, and a secondary reference to Christ? Were these kings types of the Saviour? if so, how far may we go in regarding them as typical? In this matter there may have been rashness and folly on both sides. An unbridled fancy may find supposed analogies, where none were intended to be suggested. And a cold critical turn of mind may reject the most striking types. To say that nothing in the Old Testament is a type of Christ unless in the New Testament it is expressly declared to be so is as contrary to reason as to say that no prophecy of the Old Testament relates to Christ unless it is quoted as such in the New. The entire old dispensation was full of figures. So Paul teaches in Hebrews 10:1. On the other hand fanciful men will pervert anything. In explaining God's word we must exercise sobriety. The Scripture calls on men to use common sense. Lacking this, they will err whatever may be the rules of interpretation adopted by them. They must prove all things.

It has often been said that Cocceius carried the typical interpretation to an extreme, finding Christ everywhere. Both Christ and his apostles taught that the Old Testament was very full of Messiah and his kingdom. See Luke 24:44 and Acts 3:24. These passages are supported by Luke 24:27; 2 Timothy 3:15, and many others. If therefore Cocceius did find Christ "in all the prophets," inspired men did the same thousands of years ago. He may have erred in some of his views, but some examination of his work on the Psalms satisfies me that he is a far safer and sounder guide than any of his traducers. This great man wrote at a time when the world was far gone astray, and his attempt to recall mankind to the simple truths of Scripture provoked violent opposition, which covered his name with unmerited reproach. He laid down no rule of interpreting the Psalms more comprehensive than that of Horsley: "There is not a page of this Book of Psalms, in which the pious reader will not find his Saviour, if he read with a view of finding him." Henry: "In the Book of Psalms there is so much of CHRIST and his gospel, as well as of GOD and his law, that it has been called the abstract or summary of both Testaments … David was a type of Christ, who descended from him, not from Moses, because he came to take away sacrifice (the family of Moses was soon lost and extinct) but to establish and perpetuate joy and praise: for of the family of David in Christ there shall be no end."

The great key to the interpretation of the Psalms respecting David and Solomon is found in 2 Samuel 7 where God gives a clear promise that the seed of David should reign for ever. In no sense can that promise be made good except in Christ Jesus. Bishop Chandler very justly remarks that the Jews "must have understood David, their prince, to have been a figure of Messiah. They would not otherwise have made his Psalms a part of their daily worship, nor would David have delivered them to the church to be so employed, were it not to instruct and support them in the belief of this fundamental article. Was the Messias not concerned in the Psalms, it were absurd to celebrate twice a day, in their public devotions, the events of one man's life, who was deceased so long ago as to have no relation now to the Jews, and the circumstances of their affairs; or to transcribe whole passages from them into their prayers for the coming of Messiah."

Bellarmine says, that in some of the Psalms the coming, the kingdom, the miracles, the sufferings, the resurrection, the ascension of Christ are so manifestly foretold, that one rather seems to be reading an evangelist than a prophet. Gill says, that "the subject-matter of the Psalms is exceeding great and excellent; many of the Psalms respect the person, offices and grace of Christ; his sufferings and death, resurrection, ascension, and session at the right hand of God; and so are exceeding suitable to the gospel dispensation." Dr. J. A. Alexander: "The chain of Messianic promises, which for ages had been broken, or concealed beneath the prophetic ritual, was now renewed by the addition of a new link in the great Messianic promise made to David (2 Sam. 7) of perpetual succession in his family."

In discussing the question "whether all the Psalms should be applied to Christ or not," Scott says, "No doubt every pious mind will allow that each of them immediately points to him in his person, character, and offices; or may be so applied as to lead the believer's thoughts to Him who is the centre of all acceptable religion."

Leighton: "There are many things in the Psalms and other parts of the Old Testament applied by the apostles to Christ, which, but for their authority, perhaps no one would have considered as referring to him."

We might therefore agree with Morison, that we "perceive no infallible guide but in the comments and appropriations of Christ and his apostles;" and yet with consistency we might with him say, "That many of the Psalms have a double sense attached to them cannot be fairly disputed." And there is much truth in the remark of Dr. Allix, that "although the sense of near fifty Psalms be fixed and settled by divine authors, yet Christ and his apostles did not undertake to quote all the Psalms they could quote, but only to give a key to their hearers, by which they might apply to the same subjects the Psalms of the same composure and expression."

Nothing heretofore said was designed to oppose the rule of interpretation laid down by Melancthon, that we must always seek the grammatical sense of Scripture; nor that laid down by Hooker: "I hold it for a most infallible rule in expositions of sacred Scripture, that where a literal construction will stand, the farthest from the letter is commonly the worst." Let us then in all cases admit the literal or primary sense of Scripture. But this should not hinder us from also admitting in many cases the spiritual or secondary sense. A thing spoken of David may be literally true of him. Thus we have the primary sense. But David was a type of Christ, and what he says primarily of himself may have a secondary fulfilment in Christ, and so we get the spiritual sense. Without admitting thus much, how is it possible ever to apply the doctrine of types in persons to the antitype? When we have a figure, the first thing is to discover the foundation and sense of the figure; the next is to apply it to the matter in hand.

This is not giving unbridled license to the vagaries of men of no judgment. Vitringa was right when he condemned what has often passed under the name of spiritualizing: "I do not deny that many men of uninstructed faculties and of shallow judgment have, in almost every age of the Church, commended to persons like themselves, under the name of allegorical interpretations of Scripture, certain weak and stupid fancies, in which there is neither unction, judgment, nor spiritual discernment: and have sought for those mysteries of theirs which spring from a most frigid invention, either in improper places, or promiscuously in every place, without any discrimination of circumstances, without any foundation in allegory, or in verisimilitude of language: so that I do not wonder that it has occurred to many sensible persons to doubt, whether it would not be better to abandon this study altogether, to the skilful use of which experience teaches us the abilities of but very few are adequate, than to expose Holy Scripture to the senseless experiments of the unskilful, so as to cause great injury to itself, and to excite the applause of the profane." The truth is that nothing is of more importance to the interpreter of Scripture than good common sense. A foolish or fanciful man will misapply the best rules of exposition. In vain do we expect wisdom from those who lack sobriety.

Martin Bucer: "It would be worth a great deal to the Church, if, forsaking allegories, and other frivolous devices, which are not only empty, but derogate very much from the majesty of the doctrine of Christ, we would all simply and soberly prosecute that which our Lord intends to say to us."

Nor can we rightly apply to Christ the penitential Psalms, or represent him as asking forgiveness. In himself he was holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, perfectly innocent, having nothing to repent of. And if sin imputed to him was to him forgiven, then it was not atoned for by him. Indeed, forgiveness is non-imputation. Nor can we ever apply to Christ those parts of the Psalter which plead for the subduing of corruptions. He had no corruptions to subdue. Yet the remark of Hilary is of great weight: "The key of the Psalms is the faith of Christ."

9. NAME OF THE PSALTER

The name of this collection of songs in the Hebrew is Book of Praises, or Praise-songs. This is given because praise is a striking characteristic of these compositions. In them God is greatly exalted and extolled both for what he is and for what he does. According to all the teachings of this book, the Lord is a great God and King, greatly to be feared and greatly to be praised. Let men study the Book of Praises. From the Greek Testament we get the titles, PSALMS, and BOOK OF PSALMS. These names are chosen by inspiration. The word Psalm denotes a composition intended to be sung in connection with an instrument of music. The first men among the Levites were those who led the singing. They did not, like the rest of their tribe, fulfil their course and then retire to the villages and rural districts of Judea, but they made the holy city their home. 1 Chron. 9:33, 34. This work of praise was a great matter among the ancient people of God. The instruments used were chiefly psalteries, and harps, and cymbals, 1 Chron. 15:16–22; also trumpets, 1 Chron. 16:4–6. In 1 Chron. 16:42, we read of "musical instruments of God." Those who led this part of public worship were divided into twenty-four classes or choirs. 1 Chron. 25. Perhaps devotional music was never carried to greater perfection, nor shall be in this world, than when the thousands of trained Levites united in singing the Psalms. The music used is entirely lost, though Rabbi Benjamin says that in his time there were at Bagdad some Jews who knew how to sing the songs as the singers did when the temple was standing. There doubtless were men who so pretended, but they could hardly have retained this knowledge to so late a period.

10. INSCRIPTIONS

The titles of the several Psalms (Hengstenberg calls them superscriptions; others, inscriptions) are as old as the Psalms themselves, being always found in the Hebrew. They were doubtless put there by divine authority. Tholuck: "The titles of the Psalms did not originate with the compilers, but with those who first wrote them down, or in the authors themselves." God, who would have all things done decently and in order, deigned to give minute directions for arranging the temple service, and especially respecting the public praise offered to his heavenly majesty. See 2 Chron. 29:25. He who did these things, also directed these inscriptions to be put to the Psalms, not always to give us the doctrine or matter therein contained, but to set up a memorial respecting events through which the writer had passed, or to give some general idea of the theme, or to address the piece to certain performers. The import of some of these titles may not be intelligible to us, though they may have been very clear when given. Many of them greatly aid us in giving a lively view of the state of things, in which the writer uttered his song. Where remark is called for in explanation of given titles it will be offered at the proper place. It is surprising that Fry should have ventured to say, "These titles are destitute of authority, as the careful reader of the Psalms will soon remark; they are to be regarded merely as marginal glosses of the Jews, but poor guides to the interpretation of Scripture." Even Morison says, "The authority of the several inscriptions is, to say the least, somewhat doubtful." And the aunotator of Calvin quotes Fry's remark with approbation. But Alexander has well observed that "in all Hebrew manuscripts they bear the same relation to the body of the Psalm, that the inscriptions in the prophets or in Paul's epistles bear to the substance of the composition." This shows the great rashness of those, who boldly set aside the Hebrew heading. Jerome: "The titles of the Psalms are the keys, opening the door to a right understanding of them." Bossuet: "There can be no reason for expunging them, since they are found in the text and all the versions, and have been thought worthy of explanation by Jewish as well as Christian commentators. It is true, there are many who take these titles in different senses; but I cannot find one ancient interpreter who doubts of their authority."

11. THE PSALMS ARE ONE BOOK

The very first remark of Hilary in his Prologue to the Psalms is that "the Book of Psalms is one, not five." He here refers to the fact that some of the Jews divided the Psalms into five books, corresponding to the five books of Moses. It is not necessary here to dwell on this matter. It is sufficient to inform the reader that such a division was a mere human invention, deriving no authority from God, and not even founded on the nature of the contents of these wondrous songs. In Luke 20:42 and in Acts 1:20, we read of "The Book of Psalms," but nowhere do we read of "The Books of Psalms," nor of the first, second, third, fourth, or fifth Book of Psalms.

12. PAIRS OF PSALMS

Some have asserted that in several instances the Psalms were in pairs. It may be so, but there is no proof of it contained in the text of Scripture. Nor would the reader be profited by a long inquiry into this matter. All truth is related, and is harmonious. In this sense, almost any one Psalm may well be put as the mate of more than one other Psalm. At least, there seems to be no reason from the contents of any two psalms, why a close affinity should be discovered between them, and not between either of them, and some other portions of these divine songs. The classification here spoken of is harmless, and if any think it is based in the nature of these compositions, such an opinion should give no offence. Alexander thinks that "we may trace not only pairs but trilogies and even more extensive systems of connected Psalms, each independent of the rest, and yet together forming beautiful and striking combinations." Any remark from such a source is entitled to respect.

13. ALPHABETICAL PSALMS

A peculiarity of several Psalms is that they are alphabetical. That is "the successive sentences or paragraphs begin with the letters of the Hebrew alphabet in their order." Without extraordinary ingenuity this could not be made to appear in any translation. Thus it would not be easy to make the first eight verses of the 119th Psalm begin with the first letter of our alphabet, and the second eight verses begin with the second letter of our alphabet, and so on. Nor is it necessary that we should make such an attempt. The sense of Scripture is of infinite weight. But it is of no importance to us whether our translation should in this respect copy the original. The mind of the Spirit is what we should seek. The version which gives that is what we need.

14. HEBREW POETRY

The reader need hardly be told that the Psalms are highly poetical, and that our knowledge of Hebrew Poetry is very limited. On all subjects of sacred criticism our utterances should be modest; but in relation to the poetical portions of God's word we should be doubly careful to say nothing rashly. At the same time we may very properly consult all sober writers on such subjects, and get the best lights within our reach. Nor can we judge of Hebrew odes by canons applicable to modern languages. "The poetry of the Psalms is formed, not like that of modern languages, by the response of answering syllables, but of answering thoughts."

15. SELAH

The word, Selah, is found nowhere in Scripture but in thirty-nine of the Psalms and in the 3d chapter of Habakkuk—in the Psalms seventy-four times and in Habakkuk thrice. Our translators have left it as they found it. Bishop Jebb has devoted great attention to this word, and has reached the following safe conclusions, viz: that the word is an integral part of the sacred text; that it does not mean "amen," forever," "mark this well," or "nota bene;" that it never occurs in the alphabetical Psalms, nor in the Songs of degrees, nor in any Psalm composed after the Captivity; that the prayer of Habakkuk was composed at a time when the Temple service had been restored to great grandeur; that nothing can be confidently spoken respecting the etymological meaning of this word; that the Septuagint renders the word invariably by Diapsalma, which marks a division of some kind; and that the word is put as a musical notation. Many will doubt whether this writer has fairly maintained another view which had been formerly given by Burkius in his Gnomon Psalmorum, that Selah is a mark of division, discriminating one moral portion of a Psalm from another. Without discussing at length this theory, which has been presented with some plausi bility, it may be said that it does not seem to suit every case. The only ground ye! taken, and successfully maintained is that Selah is a simple direction to the musicians, the precise force of which is not known to us. The word is not found "in the later editions of the Vulgate, nor in the Syriac, nor in the Arabic translations," nor does the church of England use it in her Psalter. Yet it is very properly retained in our authorized version of the Scriptures. And if any should feel disposed to pronounce it let none be offended. It is undoubtedly a part of the holy writings given to us. Patrick: "And here I must note once for all, that it cannot be certainly known what is meant by the word SELAH, which we meet withal thrice in this (the 3d) short Psalm. The most probable opinion is that it was a note in musick … That musick being now lost, some interpreters have wholly omitted this word, Selah, as I shall also do." Calvin: "As the word Selal, from which Selah is derived, signifies to lift up, we incline to the opinion of those who think it denotes the lifting up of the voice in harmony in the exercise of singing." Venema thinks it calls for an elevation of the voice in singing the Psalm. Alting thinks it calls for a repetition of the words immediately preceding. The Chaldee renders it forever. It should be stated however that it is designed to fix the minds of the godly on the matter, which has just been spoken of in any given case, as well as to regulate the singing in such a manner as to make the music correspond to the words and the sentiment. Alexander also says, that Selah is "properly a musical term, but generally indicates a pause in the sense as well as the performance." A writer in the Bibliotheca Sacra says:

"Rabbi Kimchi regards it as a sign to elevate the voice. The authors of the Septuagint translation appear to have regarded it as a musical or rythmical note. Herder regarded it as indicating a change of note; Mathewson as a musical note, equivalent, perhaps, to the word repeat. According to Luther and others, it means silence! Gesenius explains it to mean, "Let the instruments play and the singers stop." Wocher regards it as equivalent to sursum corda—up, my soul! Sommer, after examining all the seventy-four passages in which the word occurs, recognizes in every case "an actual appeal or summons to Jehovah." They are calls for aid and prayers to be heard, expressed either with entire directness, or if not in the imperative, "Hear, Jehovah!" or Awake, Jehovah! and the like still earnest addresses to God that he would remember and hear, etc. The word itself he regards as indicating a blast of the trumpets by the priests. Selah, itself, he thinks an abridged expression, used for Higgaion Selah—Higgaion indicating the sound of the stringed instruments, and Selah a vigorous blast of trumpets."

16. THE WORDS RENDERED MAN

In the Psalter there are three Hebrew words rendered man, Adam, Ish and Enosh. The first and third of these occur in our Hebrew Bible more than five hundred times each, and the second more than fifteen hundred times. Each of these words is found in the Law, the Prophets, and the poetic books of Scripture. They are in the Pentateuch and in books written after the captivity. Adam is first found in Genesis 1:26, 27. In the 2d chapter of Genesis it occurs twelve times, where it is sometimes rendered man, and sometimes given as the proper name of the first man.

Ish is first found in Genesis 2:23, 24, where it is rendered man. Enosh is first found in the plural at the close of Genesis 6:4, and is rendered men of renown. By far the most common rendering of each of these words is man, or, in the plural, men. Indeed the first (Adam) is never otherwise translated except in seven cases (Numbers 31:28, 30, 35, 40, 46; Proverbs 6:12; Jonah 4:11,) where it is rendered person or persons. The second (Ish) is also rendered simply man; very often to conform to English idiom. every man, every one, any man; sometimes one, any with a negative none, no man; sometimes that man, he or him; frequently one followed by the word another, sometimes person, or, in the plural, persons; sometimes, another, each, a certain, meaning man; a few times one followed by the word other; once or twice each one, one man, every, either, the good-man, champion (literally middle-man) fellow, people, applied to the male head of a family, often husband; once eloquent (literally man of words); a very few times whoso, whosoever; sometimes Canaanite, Egyptian, for man of Canaan, man of Egypt, reprover for man reproving, stranger, for man strange. It is but once rendered male, and then in application to brutes.

Enosh is but about thirty times rendered otherwise than man, or, in the plural, men, and then by such words as they or them, certain, divers, some, persons, fellows, counsellors for men of counsel, archers for men of bows, etc. These statements are made in view of a discussion of some importance respecting the import of these words. Some claim that at least at times each of these words is emphatic, and especially when preceded by the Hebrew word rendered son, or sons. Thus it is contended that in Psalms 49:2, where for sons of Adam our translators give the word low, and in Psalms 62:9, where they render the same words men of low degree, the original is emphatic; and yet in Psalms 49:12, 20 we read of man being in honor and of man that is in honor, and yet the word Adam is used in both these verses. It is also said to have the same meaning in Proverbs 8:4, where it is rendered literally sons of man, Adam. In Isaiah 2:9 the common version renders Adam, mean man. In like manner some contend that our translators render sons of Ish in Psalms 4:2, sons of men, meaning great men; and certainly in Psalms 49:2 they render sons of Ish by the word high, and in Psalms 62:9 by men of high degree, and in Proverbs 8:4 the plural of Ish by simply men; but in Isaiah 2:9 the singular Ish by great man. The words sons of Enosh are never found in the Hebrew Bible, but son of Enosh occurs once, Psalms 144:3. Yet it is contended that the word Enosh is itself sometimes emphatic as in Psalms 8:4; 9:19, 20, and in some other places. Indeed in Job 4:17 it is rendered mortal man.

Patrick: "The son of man [Ben Adam] and the sons of men [Bene Ish] are phrases which often occur; which I have good ground to think belong in the Scripture language to Princes; and sometimes the greatest of Princes. So I have expounded that known place, Psalms 80:17: The man [Ish] of thy right hand, the son of man [Ben Adam] whom thou madest strong for thyself; and Psalms 4:2: O ye sons of men [Bene Ish], i. e., rulers of people; and Psalms 8:4: What is man [Enosh] that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man [Ben Adam] (i. e., the greatest of men), that thou visitest him? Psalms 146:3: Put not your confidence in princes, nor in the son of man [Ben Adam] (how great a prince, that is, soever he may be, though of never such dignity and power), in whom there is no help.

"And thus the counsellors of Saul are called the sons of men [Adam]. And so I understand these words in Isaiah 51:12: Who art thou that thou shouldest be afraid of a man [Enosh] that shall die, and of the SON OF MAN [Ben Adam] (that is, a prince) who shall be as grass?" Having made some other statements, he adds: "As for Ben Enosh, which we also render son of man, (Psalms 144:3,) it hath another signification; importing the wretchedness of any man's condition."

It is best here once for all to examine this theory of interpreting these terms. In Psalms 4:2, we have sons of men [Bene Ish]. Some think this means strong and powerful men, or nobles, or persons of rank. Edwards renders it, Ye great ones. Calvin regards the title here given as "an ironical concession of what they claimed to themselves, by which he ridicules their presumption in esteeming themselves to be noble and wise, whereas it was only blind rage which impelled them to wicked enterprises." Hengstenberg asserts that the expression rendered sons of men is in many places unquestionably used in an emphatic sense." In proof he cites Psalms 49:2; 62:9; Proverbs 8:4. Let us look a little at Psalms 8:4: What is man [Enosh], that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man [Ben Adam], that thou visitest him? Piscator and Edwards render Enosh a mortal. Calvin: "The Hebrew word, which we have rendered man, expresses the frailty of man, rather than any strength or power which he possesses." For man Venema reads miserable man; and Henry paraphrases it sinful, weak, miserable man. The words son of man [Ben Adam] are commented on in like manner. Ainsworth says, "As men are called Enosh for their doleful estate by sin, so are they called Adam, and sons of Adam, that is, earthy, to put them in mind of their original and end, who were made of Adamah, the earth, even of the dust, and to dust shall return again." Patrick regards the phrase son of man in this verse as equivalent to "the greatest of men." Anderson quotes Pye Smith as reading the words thus: "What is man, that thou art mindful of him? Even the [noblest] son of man, that thou visitest him?" and as saying, "Our language has no single terms to mark the distinction expressed" by these two words; and adding, "I have endeavored to approach the idea by one insertion of an epithet."

Patrick thinks that his theory gives us the key to the right understanding of the phrase, the son of man, so often found in the New Testament. But that title is sufficiently explained by simply saying that it declares the entire humanity of our Lord. No further meaning is required, or has been commonly accepted.

It may seem almost presumption to express a doubt whether this theory is correct. Yet candor and truth are always worth more than they cost. The author has studied the matter with some care, and is not satisfied that any Psalmist ever used either of the words, Adam, Ish, or Enosh, in an emphatic sense, or as conveying the ideas contended for, or that the primary meaning of the words is ever to be insisted on in any part of these sacred songs.

Besides the views already presented at the beginning of this section, it is proper to say that the words and phrases under consideration occur with great frequency, and if ever used emphatically, and in the senses contended for, it is very rarely indeed; and there is nothing requiring us so to regard them anywhere. As the words Adam, Ish, and Enosh occur so often, no collection of instances is here presented for comparison. Such a labor would be tedious. It is also quite unnecessary. But let any one compare the texts where the expression son of man [Adam] is found. See Numbers 23:19; Job 25:6; 35:8; Psalms 80:17; 146:3; Ecclesiastes 1:13; Jeremiah 49:18; 50:40; 51:43; scores of times in Ezekiel, as an appellation of that prophet; and Daniel 8:17.

Let him go further and compare the cases where the words sons of men [Adam] are found: Psalms 31:19; 33:13; 57:4; 58:1; 145:12; Proverbs 8:31; Ecclesiastes 1:13; 2:3, 8; 3:10, 18, 19; 8:11; 9:3, 12; Isaiah 52:14; Jeremiah 32:19; Daniel 10:16; Micah 5:7; Joel 1:12.

The phrase sons of man [Adam] occurs in Psalms 49:2; Proverbs 8:4. Besides those previously cited, these are the only cases where either of these phrases occurs in all the Hebrew Scriptures.

The expression son of man [Ish] is never found. That of sons of man [Ish] is found but once, Psalms 62:9, where our version reads men of high degree. That of sons of men is in but two places, in Psalms 4:2 where it is rendered literally, and in Psalms 49:2 high. It is evident that any theory built on so small an induction as this must have a very slender foundation, unless there is something in the context or connection defining the word, or making it necessary to give it such a translation.

We never find the expression sons of man or sons of men, where Enosh is used. And we but once find son of man [Enosh] in Psalms 144:3. It can hardly be esteemed wise to build any doctrine of language on this one expression.

That these three Hebrew words are used so as to make it impossible to tell from any fair literal translation what the original word is in all ordinary cases may easily be made to appear by looking over the English concordance for the words man and men, trying to form an opinion of what the original is, and then turning to the Hebrew. Where memory gives no clue, it will be found to be mere guess-work. Let any one try his powers on these verses where man occurs, Psalms 1:1; 32:2; 39:11; 55:13; 104:15; 112:1; and on these where men occurs, Jude 20:17; Psalms 17:4; 76:5; 1 Samuel 25:13; Psalms 66:12; 82:7. He will often find it impossible to tell what the original is.

It is not at all here asserted that there is any impropriety in adverting at any time to the primary meaning of these or any other words of Scripture, if thereby the sense of any passage receives force. But it is simply denied that we have satisfactory evidence that these Hebrew words rendered man have an emphatic sense in the Psalms.

At the same time there is no impropriety in rendering two of these "men of low degree and men of high degree," because that phrase in English is equivalent to this, "men by whatever name called," or "men of all conditions."

17. AUTHORS CONSULTED

It is not necessary here to give an extended list of authors consulted in preparing this work. Except in a very few instances due credit is formally given. Any exception to this remark is unintentional, or is found in those places where many writers without giving credit to each other say the same thing. In all branches of study there are things, which have become the common property of mankind. To quote would be mere pedantry, unless the very words of an author are copied. For instance, many things are said by every commentator on the first Psalm, because they obviously belong to the matter in hand, and not because they have been said by others at previous times.

Nearly a century ago Dodd stated that "the number of commentaries on the Book of Psalms was almost endless; above six hundred are enumerated, exclusive of those which have been written on the whole body of the Scriptures, and on particular Psalms." Since that time the number has been much increased.

18. OBJECT OF THIS WORK

The great object of this work is the glory of God in the edification of his church. If it shall fail of practical usefulness and religious profit, it will gain no important end. The author has endeavored to embody all the most valuable suggestions of others together with his own reflections on this inspired book. And he begs his readers to remember that as it is in vain to light a candle to examine the sun-dial, so human wit will make no good progress in learning this or any other portion of God's word except as the Sun of Righteousness by his Holy Spirit shines upon the sacred page. All attempts to understand the spiritual import of God's word without divine teaching must ever prove failures. This fact and the reasons of it are clearly given in Scripture. Let every one, therefore, seek help from God in earnest fervent prayer. John Newton: "A few minutes of the Spirit's teaching will furnish us with more real useful knowledge, than toiling through whole folios of commentators and expositors,—they are useful in their places, and are not to be undervalued by those, who can perhaps in general do better without them; but it will be our wisdom to deal less with the streams, and be more close in applying to the fountainhead. The Scripture itself, and the Spirit of God are the best and the only sufficient expositors of Scripture … It is absurd to read or study the Scripture with any other view than to receive its doctrines, submit to its reproofs, and obey its precepts that we may be made wise unto salvation. All disquisitions and criticisms that stop short of this, that do not amend the heart as well as furnish the head, are empty and dangerous, at least to ourselves of whatever use they may be to others. An experience of this caused a learned critic and eminent commentator (Grotius) to confess towards the close of his life, 'Alas! I have wasted my life in much labor to no purpose.' " Luther: "We must not simply read or sing the Psalms, as if they did not concern us; but we must read and sing them for this purpose, that we may be improved by them, may have our faith strengthened, and our hearts comforted amid all sorts of necessities. For the Psalter is nothing else than a school and exercise for our heart and mind, to the end, that we may have our thoughts and inclinations turned into the same channel. So that he reads the Psalter without spirit, who reads it without faith and understanding."

19. IGNORANCE OF SOME LANGUAGES QUOTED

As the author is not acquainted with Ethiopic, Syriac and Arabic, and yet freely quotes them, he would state that he relies upon the Latin translation of those versions, found in Walton's Polyglot. In many cases too he finds those versions given in Latin or English by other commentators. So that he hopes the quotations will be found sufficiently accurate.

20. WHY THIS WORK WAS UNDERTAKEN

If any ask why this work was undertaken the answer is, 1. The word of God is not bound. It is open to all. 2. The author had a mind to it. He has never felt more disposed to any work. He has always found it best to pursue that kind of literary labor, for which he had a strong inclination. 3. He saw no way in which he could more fitly spend a portion of the afternoon of his life than in the special study of this incomparable collection of sacred poems. 4. Others, who had devoted considerable time to the Psalms, uniformly testified that they were thereby great gainers. The author felt his own poverty and wished to be enriched. Archibald Symson in his preface to his work on the seven penitential Psalms says he undertook it; "Because this ocean is not dryed up, and hee that commeth last may as well fill his bucket as hee that came first." Musculus on a like occasion said: "If the treasure of the holy Scriptures be such that it can be drawn so dry by the diligent searches of pious and learned men, as that nothing shall remain to exercise the studies of them that succeed them; if there be at any time such an effusion of God's Holy Spirit, that after that time it is in vain to labor in finding out its mind, in the holy Scriptures; if there have been in the church, after the prophets, Christ, and his Apostles, men of such perfect accomplishments, that to them was imparted such a universal fullness of divine knowledge, as to make their writings absolutely complete; so that we need do nothing, but night and day study them alone: then truly I refuse not the censure of folly, nay of madness, for attempting anything now in the holy Scriptures, after such absolute writers. But if that most rich fountain of the divine oracles be altogether inexhaustible; and no age can be assigned to which alone the grace of the Holy Spirit was confined; and there were never any doctors at any time in the church, after Christ, the apostles and prophets, of such esteem, that nothing is wanting in their writings, nothing can be rightly added to them; nothing is in them which can be rightly taken away, or changed for the better: then I do not see why we may not profitably travel in the same way that others have done; with hopes of adding more light to that which they have left us." 5. Many of the most valuable works on the Psalms are in Latin, or are very scarce and high-priced. The endeavor here is to aid the reader with the best suggestions of writers inaccessible to most, as well as to make original remarks, critical, explanatory, doctrinal and practical. 6. Several learned and judicious persons, who heard of the contemplated design and have examined parts of it after it was commenced, greatly encouraged the author to go on with his undertaking.

21. NAMES OF THE MOST HIGH

It will be satisfactory to the plain reader and will save time here to note that the names of the Almighty occurring in the Psalter are significant, and are briefly explained in this work:

On Jehovah LORD, see on Psalms 1:2.

On Adonai Lord, see on Psalms 2:4.

On Elohim God, see on Psalms 3:2.

On El God, see on Psalms 5:4.

On Gel-yohn Most High, see on Psalms 7:17.

On Eloah God, see on Psalms 18:31.

On Jah LORD,

} See introduction to Psalm 68.

On Shaddai The Almighty,

22. PUNCTUATION

In punctuation the usual rules are observed, except where a single sentence or phrase is cited in the various renderings of a clause or of a verse, and the author's name is immediately prefixed. In that case the quotation marks are not given; but then the words cited do not go beyond one sentence or verse. In all other cases, the credit is given in the usual way.