The Hebrew Psalter

Are you interested in purchasing a copy? Please send me an e-mail!

This is a study of the formation of the ‘Book’ of Psalms that attempts to provide 
answers to two fundamental questions: “how?” and “why?”. The first relates to the diachronic growth of the collection (how are these processes to be reconstructed, and on what grounds?), while the second relates to questions of purpose (to what end are psalms being juxtaposed in a collection?). Proceeding from a review of the research on these intertwined issues (not least the ground-breaking work of Gerald H. Wilson), David Willgren argues that one fundamental 
aspect is still in need of consideration, namely to understand what is designated by the term ‘book’ in relation to the ‘Book’ of Psalms. What kind of collection does it imply? By conceptualizing the ‘Book’ of Psalms as an anthology, and by inquiring into its poetics by means of paratextuality, Willgren reframes the current discussion, and relates the formation process(es) to ancient material and scribal cultures. After a chapter on comparative ancient anthologies, he provides an overview of the ‘psalms’ scrolls from the Judean Desert, followed by an analysis of possible paratexts (prefaces, superscriptions, colophons, doxologies, etc.). Then, he searches for traces of collections of psalms in texts ranging from the Hebrew Bible up until the second 
century CE. Relating these observations to each other, Willgren provides a fresh reconstruction of the formation of the ‘Book’ of Psalms and concludes, in contrast to the canonical 
approach, that the ‘Book’ of Psalms does not primarily provide a literary context for individual psalms. Rather, it preserves a dynamic selection of psalms that is best seen not as a book of psalms, but as a canon of psalms.

In Ps 1,2 it is assumed that the readers understand the expression the Torah of Yahweh and so no interpretation is provided. The phrase acquires its meaning by means of referents external to the psalm (cf. Josh 1; 24). Psalm 1 displays anaphoric (to the Pentateuch and the Prophets) and cataphoric references (to the Psalter) and these two sets of references are connected to each other. The concept of the Torah of YHWH in its context establishes a fundamental moment in the metatextual function of Ps 1 with regard to the Psalter. The Psalter is connected to the authoritative Scriptures (Torah and Nebi’im) and understood as belonging itself to the Torah of YHWH.

This book contributes to the theory and practice of Biblical interpretation by engaging in an interpretation of Psalm 24 inspired by a particular understanding of Brevard Childs' "canonical approach": an understanding centred on the concept of "theological substance."

Sumpter shows how the literary, historical, and theological dimensions of Psalm 24 cohere into a single vision by reading the text according to the a dialectic between "witness" and "reality." An initial "synchronic" analysis of the psalm's poetic structure is then related to a "diachronic" reconstruction of the tradition history that lead to the final form. The question is then posed concerning the primary forces at work in this history of composition, a question which leads to reflection on the Trinity, first in se and then pro nobis. This latter dimension takes us back to the text, as its "Davidic" nature is further analysed in relation to the books of Samuel, the Psalter, and Isaiah. Finally, a contemporary actualization of the Psalm by Eberhard Jüngel is compared to its interpretation in Patristic exegesisin order to probe deeper into the mysterious subject matter of the text.

Main Idea


Psalm 95 invites the reader to worship God, as provident Creator, with joyfulness, confident faith, and thanksgiving, and warns them to avoid the past mistake of ignoring his providence for them as the Israelites had done before.

Outline


1. A call to worship the Creator-King…Psalm 95:1-5
2. A call to worship the Covenantal God…Psalm 95:6-7c
3. A warning not to ignore God's providence…Psalm 95:7d-11

After a brief review of past research and current attempts to formulate a theology of the Psalter, communication analytic considerations are presented that are based on Ps 3 (a Tephilla). It is remarked that in most psalms there is both: speech to God (prayer) speech about God (presupposing an audience). This “liturgical” phenomenon poses new questions regarding a (too) one-sided literary point of departure. On the basis of Ps 1 at the beginning of the book, the Torah aspect of the Psalter is considered. The conclusion also takes into account the connections with Ps 145 (a Tehilla) and the closing of the book.

In this regularly updated bibliography, literature on psalms and the Psalter from 1990 onwards is brought together; scientific sources as well as those which are more accessible are included (earlier literature in T. WITTSTRUCK: The Book of Psalms. An Annotated Bibliography. New York, NY – London 1994). The presentation is offered in thematic subdivisions so that a title may appear under more than one rubric. It comprises a combination of the bibliographies in my “Werkbuch Psalmen I–III” (Stuttgart 2001/2003/2010). The compilation has been updated and expanded and will be kept up to date – as far as I am able to do that. It is detailed, but not complete. Notes about errors that could be corrected, new editions that have appeared, as well as missing information or new entries (by the authors themselves or about publications via third parties) are gladly accepted (e-mail: [email protected]). The bibliography is made publicly available as a service to people who engage with psalms and the Psalter as well as with the history of interpretation and application of psalms. This digital version should enable users to search more easily for specific psalms, authors, titles, themes, year of publications, et cetera.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: to provide a sound exegesis of Psalm 44 and to discuss the implications of this exegesis for both biblical scholarship and for the Church. Of particular interest is the way in which the psalmists intentionally confuse the singular and the plural, suggesting that our modern categorization of the Psalms as either “individual” or “communal” is mistaken. Instead, readers ought to view the “singular” as the community’s expression of its singular, corporate identity, and the “plural” as the community’s expression of corporate solidarity. In other words, both the singular and the plural were corporate expressions. One of the implications of this for the Church is that Christians should view themselves not as individuals, but as a corporate entity with corporate solidarity.

The mention of todah in the title of Psalm 100 is generally interpreted as an indication of its nature as a song of confession or thanksgiving. However, in light of the use of todah to designate half-choirs in Nehemiah 12, it is tested here whether this term is introduced in the title of Psalm 100 as a musical instruction for antiphonal performance. This assumption is supported by the musical context of the psalm and by indications for antiphony. It is confirmed by the division of this psalm in two parallel parts (vv. 1-3 and 4-5), and by the coherent text emerging from the pairing of homolog segments from these two parts, which suggest that the two dialoging voices are edited separately.

The study will explain and describe the tense category of verbs in Biblical Hebrew, a category whose existence is not confirmed by all Biblical scholars, yet its presence cannot be underestimated. Taking into account that Biblical Hebrew had only two tenses: past and future, the process of translation of these tenses is an interpretation, because it is not possible to apprehend the original notion of the inspired writers and exhibit it in contemporary languages. The research will be conducted on the Book of Psalms taken from the Hebrew Old Testament with Interlinear Latin published in 1609 in Antwerp. It is one of the oldest Hebrew Bibles available, therefore its Hebrew text is allegedly the most reliable. The purpose of the research will be to compare tense categories of Hebrew verbs to the ways in which they were presented and “interpreted” in four most common English translations of the Psalter based on the original Biblical language. What is more the research will try to find a solution to the problem of understanding the Biblical language and text.

In this study, David Willgren attempts to provide answers to two fundamental questions in relation to the formation of the ‘Book’ of Psalms: “how?” and “why?”. The first relates to the diachronic growth of the collection (how are these processes to be reconstructed, and on what grounds?), while the second relates to questions of purpose (to what end are psalms being juxtaposed in a collection?).

By conceptualizing the ‘Book’ of Psalms as an anthology, and by inquiring into its poetics by means of paratextuality, David Willgren provides a fresh reconstruction of the formation of the ‘Book’ of Psalms and concludes, in contrast to the canonical approach, that it does not primarily provide a literary context for individual psalms. Rather, it preserves a dynamic selection of psalms that is best seen not as a book of psalms, but as a canon of psalms.

Psalm 109 contains an infamous imprecation, which roughly half of modern commentators identify as a quotation of an enemy curse. On the other hand, most who detect a quotation believe it to be aimed against the enemy anyway, in an act of poetic justice. This article assesses the debate and offers fresh grounds for a more recent proposal. The quotation includes not only curse, but an accusation, justifying the curse against David. David quotes his accuser's case, to protest that it is the fabrication of enemies who have suborned perjury. Finally, he prays that this plot against him would fail.

This book  proposes  a new (but older than it seems) way of approaching Hebrew poetry. At the base there are questions about how the ancient wrote, how they created beauty and modeled it, or whether they marked differences between prose and poetry. It goes on from the study of cultures such as Mesopotamia and Greek, contemporary to the Jews, and an affirmation of the Talmud, enigmatic by Westerners, "that is why they were called the ancient scribes / accountants (soferim), because they were the ones who counted (soferim) all the letters that are in the Torah "(Qid 30a).
Some authors have followed this way of study and have given clues and left shortcuts open, some, and closed, others. Much of the book is the study of thirty psalms, showing disconcerting, beautiful, simple, and at the same time, complex forms and structures, because we still do not know how they create them. Certainly, however, a change in logic is necessary to get closer to it, but those who approach it with wide-angle vision can conceal new senses in the same literality of the text.
This opens up new perspectives and ways of approaching the study of the book of Psalms, other biblical texts, and even the works from other cultures different from the Western contemporary.

There are various interpretations of ינחני במגעלי־צדק (Ps. 23.3b). Does it profess confidence in YHWH’s guidance of his people to live morally, his righteous treatment of them, his ensuring their prosperity, or some combination of these? This article contributes to the discussion by drawing upon the literary context of the Psalter for assistance in several ways. First, with the Psalter providing a ‘grammar of faith’ for its readers, seven verses containing collocations similar to Ps. 23.3b receive consideration to discern what sense they typically convey (Pss. 1.6; 5.9; 25.9; 27.11; 107.7; 119.35; 139.24). Second, we explore how the frame of Book I and Pss. 15–24, a smaller collection within Book I, illuminate how one might read Ps. 23.3 within these contexts. Thus, the Psalter as a collocative and structural context is brought to bear on the interpretation of Ps. 23.3b.

The present contribution aims at highlighting the different ways of portraying the king and the priest in the Book of Psalms, paying special attention to the possible parallels in Ancient Near East literature. By way of example, three Psalms (Ps 2; 72; 110) are analysed in order to identify the different attributes of the king and the priets and the merging of these two key figures in post-exilic Ps 110. Ultimately, the three Psalms show clear parallels with ANE literature and Königsideologie; nevertheless, the idea of the subordination of the king to the Law and to the one God mark a striking difference between the above-mentioned Psalms and ANE parallels. In other words, the Psalms use a common stock of images and words in a quite different way, in order to express a different view on the function and missione of the king and the priest.

The gap between the New Testament and the Imprecatory Psalms is less than we think. When faced with prayers against enemies in the Psalms, we are too quick to assume that these Old Testament authors were ignorant of some basic New Testament ethics. They are self-righteous, thinking they have earned God’s favor. They don’t know that the wicked can repent and be forgiven. They believe in vengeance and hating their enemies. We assume wrongly. These prayers are far more aware than many modern churchgoers of how deeply our own sin runs, so that even when persecuted, we are not automatically entitled to divine help. Even when we are truly entitled to justice against unrighteous attackers, if God rescues us, that is unmerited grace. Further, the psalms are fully aware that their enemies can repent, and they show mercy to them. The Book of Psalms teaches its readers—individuals and the whole people of God—to desire the repentance, forgiveness and divine blessing of all nations, even the people’s most vicious enemies.

Le Ps 51 doit son charme à l’emploi d’un vocabulaire très « physique » qui a, d’une façon ou de l’autre, été toujours lié à la sensualité dont est tissé le récit de la faute de David. Mais on a du mal à placer cette demande de pardon dans l’histoire racontée dans 2S 11-12. Le psaume parle d’un châtiment déjà subi, 2S nous dit que David arrêta ses supplications et son jeûne lorsqu’il apprit la mort de l’enfant né de Bethsabée. Il est toutefois légitime de se demander pourquoi on a voulu voir dans ce psaume pénitentiel, à l’allure liturgique, que les versets finaux placent à une époque où il fallait « rebâtir les murs de Jérusalem », la prière du fondateur de la dynastie, coupable d’adultère avec celle qui sera la mère de son successeur. D’ailleurs, si la fin est postérieure au titre, pourquoi a-t-on créé un anachronisme évident ? Quelle cohérence a-t-on trouvée à un moment de l’histoire des réécritures du texte entre ces trois « situations » : a) la prière de David, b) la prière d’un homme dont les os sont « broyés », c) la prière pour la reprise des sacrifices à Sion et la reconstruction de la Ville sainte ? Le mot רוח « esprit » a certainement joué un rôle dans cette histoire.

Psalm 51 owes its charm to the use of a very “physical” vocabulary which, in one way or another, has always been linked to the sensuality of David’s fault. But how to place this request for forgiveness in the story told in 2 Samuel 12? The Psalm speaks of a punishment already suffered, 2 Samuel tells us that David stopped his supplications and fasting, when he learned of the death of the child born to Bathsheba. However, it is legitimate to ask why someone wanted to see in this penitential poem, liturgical in shape, that the final verses place at a time when it was necessary to “rebuild the walls of Jerusalem,” the prayer of the founder of the dynasty, guilty of adultery and father of Salomon, the second son of Bathsheba. Why to create such an obvious anachronism? What coherence was felt at a moment in the history of its redaction between these three “situations”: a) David’s prayer, b) the prayer of a man whose bones are “crushed,” c) the prayer for the resumption of sacrifices in Zion and for the Holy City? The word רוח “spirit” has certainly played a role in this story.

This book contributes to the theory and practice of Biblical interpretation by engaging in an interpretation of Psalm 24 inspired by a particular understanding of Brevard Childs' "canonical approach": an understanding centred on the concept of "theological substance." Sumpter shows how the literary, historical, and theological dimensions of Psalm 24 cohere into a single vision by reading the text according to the a dialectic between "witness" and "reality." An initial "synchronic" analysis of the psalm's poetic structure is then related to a "diachronic" reconstruction of the tradition history that lead to the final form. The question is then posed concerning the primary forces at work in this history of composition, a question which leads to reflection on the Trinity, first in se and then pro nobis. This latter dimension takes us back to the text, as its "Davidic" nature is further analysed in relation to the books of Samuel, the Psalter, and Isaiah. Finally, a contemporary actualization of the Psalm by Eberhard Jüngel is compared to its interpretation in Patristic exegesis in order to probe deeper into the mysterious subject matter of the text.

Zusammenfassung

Es ist eine vertretene Ansicht, dass Ps 1 entweder allein oder in Kombination mit Ps 2 die Funktion eines Vorwortes zum »Buch« der Psalmen erfüllt. Obwohl diese Sicht von der frühchristlichen Rezeption unterstützt wird, hängt viel davon ab, wie man תורת יהוה in Ps 1 versteht, und wie man die Beziehung zwischen den ersten beiden Psalmen und dem Konzept des »Buches« der Psalmen versteht. Dieser Artikel besieht diese Frage neu und benennt einige Gründe gegen diese These. Zuerst wird תורת יהוה analysiert. Dabei wird argumentiert, dass sich der Ausdruck nicht auf eine Sammlung von Psalmen bezieht, sondern auf eine Tora, die mit Moses verwandt ist. Zum zweiten wird der Pescher des Psalms in Qumran besehen, 4Q174, und ein paratextuelle Verständnis von Ps 1 dort ebenso bestritten wie eine verknüpfende Lesung von Ps 1–2. Abschließend wird eine Textvariante in Apostelgeschichte 13:33 analysiert, die einen interessanten Einblick in die Interpretation von Ps 1 im 4. Jahrhundert bietet. Zusammengefasst stellen die Beobachtungen den fest etablierten Konsens in Frage, nach dem Ps 1–2 als Vorwort zum Buch platziert wurde.

Abstract

It is a long-held view that Ps 1, either alone or combined with Ps 2, performs the function of a preface to the »Book« of Psalms. Although supported by early Christian reception, much depends on how to understand תורת יהוה in Ps 1, as well as how to understand the relation between the first two psalms and the concept of the »Book« of Psalms. This article aims to look at the issue anew and provide some reasons why Pss 1–2 should not be considered as a preface to the »Book« of Psalms. First, an analysis of תורת יהוה in Ps 1:2 is provided, and it is argued that the expression does not refer to any collection of psalms but to a torah related to Moses. Secondly, the first attestation of the psalm in Qumran is revisited, namely the pesher designated as 4Q174, and it is argued that it does not show any trace of a paratextual understanding of Ps 1, nor that it provides the earliest attestation of a combined reading of Pss 1–2. Finally, a textual variant in Acts 13:33 is analyzed, as it provides an interesting window into the way Ps 1 came to be interpreted in the fourth century CE. Taken together, the observations challenge the well-established consensus that Pss 1–2 have been intentionally placed as a preface to the book.

Résumé

C’est un point de vue défendu depuis longtemps que le Psaume 1, seul ou associé au Ps 2, tient la fonction de préface du »livre« des Psaumes. Bien que supportée par la réception chrétienne ancienne, cette vue dépend beaucoup de l’interprétation de l’expression יהוה תורת dans le Ps 1, ainsi que la manière dont on comprend la relation entre les deux premiers Psaumes et le concept de »livre« pour les Psaumes. Cet article vise à reprendre cette problématique et de fournir quelques arguments pour ne pas considérer les Psaumes 1–2 comme une préface du livre des Psaumes. Premièrement, l’analyse de l’expression יהוה תורת en Ps 1,2 montre que cette expression ne renvoie à aucune collection de Psaumes mais à une loi associée à Moïse. Deuxièmement, la première attestation du Psaume à Qumran, à savoir le pesher 4Q174 ne présente aucune trace d’une compréhension para-textuelle du Ps 1, ni n’atteste de la plus ancienne attestation d’une lecture combinée des Psaumes 1–2. Finalement, une variante textuelle en Actes 13,33 offre une fenêtre intéressante sur la manière dont le Ps 1 fût interprété au cours du IVe siècle de notre ère. Ensemble ces observations remettent en question le consensus bien établi selon lequel les Ps 1–2 auraient été placés intentionnellement en préface du livre.

The seminal question at the forefront of Masoretic (MT)-150 Psalter research is a question of the literary arrangement of the 150 psalms. An overarching compositional logic of the MT-150, if any, is in the sequence design of the psalms. Unfortunately, macrostructural studies of the entire Psalter are few, with no major consensus to understanding its structuring techniques, shape and logic. From my consolidation of at least 30 different tacit and formal macrostructuring techniques that can be detected in the MT-150, important macrostructuring techniques include the use of superscriptions; the programmatic nature of Pss 1–2; placement of acrostic/alphabetical compositions; numerical devices and the five Davidic Collections. A previously unknown scribal technique that places certain lexemes sequentially and exhaustively across the Psalter to express a message is also uncovered. Based on these organizational principles, the Psalter can be read palindromically, linearly, intertextually and even numerically. The MT-150 is structured into three major Sections (Books I, II–III, IV–V), each further divided into four Groups, and characterized by four recurring Central Motifs: (a) YHWH’s kingship; (b) Davidic kingship; (c) Zion-temple and (d) Supplication of a Davidic figure. The logic of the MT-150 is a reception of the Davidic covenant. Book I traces the establishments of both the Davidic kingship and Zion. Books II–III, however, depict their fall and brokenness. Books IV–V highlight the reestablishments of an ideal Davidic kingship and ideal Zion. As a whole, the MT-150 has a messianic thrust with an exhortation for its readers to persevere in prayer and hope in view of YHWH’s covenantal promises. Striking correspondences between techniques, form, content and logic help to validate the proposed design of the MT-150. This thesis will contribute significantly to the understanding of the arrangement of the Hebrew Psalter.

Recent years have witnessed renewed interest in understanding Scripture as divine communication, a move which reconnects the academy with ecclesiological concerns. Those involved in theological hermeneutics have drawn upon advances in a wide range of disciplines in order to develop and defend their methodologies. From the fields of communication theory and pragmatics, speech act theory has been proffered by some as providing insightful analysis of the anatomy of communication and, in particular, authorial intention. Nicholas Wolterstorff's, Divine Discourse: Philosophical Reflections on the Claim that God Speaks is representative of such works. Drawing heavily upon speech act theory, Wolterstorff defends a model of interpretation that prioritises authorial intention. Furthermore, Wolterstorff's conviction that Scripture is both human and divine discourse leads him to a two-stage hermeneutic. This paper will offer an explanation and critique of Wolterstorff's move from the first to the second hermeneutic in his interpretation of Psalm 137. It will conclude that while Wolterstorff's method does account for the divine intention in part, it ultimately suffers from both a limited connection to speech act theory and a failure to appreciate the nature of communication at higher (especially generic) levels. In addressing these methodological deficiencies, the paper will present Psalm 137 as an authoritative canonical text by clarifying how it continues to function as divine discourse. TYNDALE BULLETIN 60.1 (2009) 2

Synchron gelangt Ps 44 von der Bitte (v. 5b), die durch Vertrauen und Gewissheit – resultierend aus Erinnerung – fundiert ist (v. 2–4.6–8), zu Forderungen an Gott (v. 24–27), die aus der Klage und Anklage/Unschuldsbekundung resultieren (v. 10–17.18–23). Diachron betrachtet wird ein Text aus der Tradition (v. 2–9) mit der konträren Gegenwartserfahrung konfrontiert (v. 10–27). Die Tradition wird nicht verworfen, sondern sie dient als Kontrastfolie, auf der Gott im anklagenden Ton zum Handeln aufgefordert wird. Die Tradition wird dadurch aktualisiert und zugleich können Klage und Protest nur auf der Grundlage der Tradition festen Boden finden.