Psalms
These Notes on tlie Book of Psalms complete my labours in endeavouring to explain and illustrate the sacred Scriptures. At my time of life, — with the partial failure of vision with which I have been afflicted for more than twelve years, — with the other cares and burdens resting on me, — and with the moral certainty that the infirmities of age, if I am spared, must soon come upon me, I could hope to accomplish no more; — and I shall attempt no more.
These Notes were commenced more than twelve years ago, and were undertaken in pursuance of a desire long cherished. Tor this work I had been making preparation for several years previous by the collection of such Commentaries on the Psalms as I could obtain, that might assist me in preparing something on this portion of the Sacred Volume that might at once be useful to others, and might make it my duty and privilege, in this the closing labour of my life, in this department, to contemplate the beauties of this book by a close study, — an employment than which none could be more appropriate for one who looks at the end of all his earthly labours as rapidly approaching.
The work has been prosecuted with such leisure as I could command, — the whole of it having been written, as all my other Commentaries have been, in the early hours of the morning, uniformly closing my daily task in this respect as the hour of nine was reached. By this arrangement I have secured the time which I have employed in preparing the Notes on the New Testament, on Job, on Isaiah, on Daniel, and now on the Psalms, without entrenching on what I felt might properly be required of me in my pastoral labours; and, at the same time, I haye secured to myself personally the inestimable benefit of commencing each day with the contemplation of a portion of the AVord of God.
In the long period which has elapsed since these Notes on the Psalms were commenced, I have been frequently compelled to interrupt my studies by the condition of my eyes; and, in more than one instance, the work has been wholly suspended for more than a year at a time, with little hope that it Avould be resumed again. Some apology, I trust, may be found in these facts for the manifold defects which I have too much reason to suppose will be observed by all who consult these volumes. I have performed my work as well as I could; but I have not accomplished my own cherished hopes in regard to it. It is not what I fondly trusted it might be; it is not what a work on the Psalms should be. Some of the reasons for the failure I have stated at length in the Introduction, § 8.
It is of more interest to me than it can be to the public to say that I cannot close these labours, continued through so many years of my life, without deep emotion. The very fact that any work of life is ended, however humble or unimportant it may be in itself, is fitted to suggest solemn reflections to a man's own miud. The nature of the work in which I have thus been engaged is such as to give great additional solemnity to these reflections. He undertakes a work of great responsibility, who engages in the task of endeavouring to explain the "Word of God, and who may thus give direction to the views, perhaps, of thousands, on subjects that may afi'ect their destiny for ever.
In looking, now, at a labour of this kind continued for nearly forty years, and entered on with no expectation of the results which have been reached, while I am grateful for the patronage extended to my efforts in this country and abroad, I cannot be insensible to the responsibility of having in that time sent forth to influence my fellow-men more than half a million of volumes of Commentary on the Scriptures in my native land, and perhaps more than this number in England, Scotland, and Ireland; and of having been permitted, to a limited extent at least, thus to speak in the Erench and "Welsh languages, in the languages of India, and in the language spoken by the millions of China.
"With such feelings of gratitude, and with, I trust, some proper sense of my responsibility, I now close this part of the labour of my life, and commend these volumes, as I have endeavoured to do those which have gone before them, to the blessing of God.
§ 1. The title to the Booh of Psalms. — The general title to the Book of Psalms in Hebrew is D'^^nri — Tehillim, Psalms, or more fuUj, Q^vrrn "iDp — Sejpher Tehillim, " Book of Psalms." Sometimes a shorter title is used — 'o'^br\—Tillim. Other terms are used as appropriate to particular psalms, as 'w^^l^i^l^—mizmorim, or D''"]^', shirim, songs; or in the singular, n?3T72, mizm'or, and l^li}, shir, a song. These latter titles, however, are not given to the entire collection, but to particular psalms. The former title — mizmor — is given to Ps. iii., iv., v., vi., viii., ix., xii., xiii., xv., xix., xx., xxi., xxii., xxiii., and to thirty-nine others, the last being Ps. cxliii., rendered uniformly a psalm. The latter title, shir, occurs in Ps. xxx., xlv., xlvi., and in twenty-seven other psalms, the last being Ps. cxxxiv., and is uniformly rendered song, though it is sometimes connected with the word mizmor, psalm, and rendered " A song and psalm," as in Ps^iMviii., Ixv., Ixvi., Ixvii., Ixviii., Ixxv., Ixxxiii., Ixxxvii., Ixxxviii.; and in Ps. cxxiii, cxxiii., cxxiv. it is connected with the word degrees: "A song of degrees."
The word Tehillim is derived from the Yerh—hin—halal, to praise, as in the word Hallelujah, Praise Jehovah. The name is given to the general collection, because praise, more than any one thing else, is the characteristic of the book, and because the collection seems to have been designed to be used in the public praise or worship of God. Probably they were all thus used in Hebrew worship.
The word Psalms, as applied to the collection, we have: derived from the Greek translation, the word ^aX/xbg, in the plural ^aXfioi—psalmos, and psalmoi. This word is derived from ypdWcj, psallo, to touch, to twitch, to pluck— as the hair or beard; and then, to touch or twitch a string, to twang, that is, to cause it to vibrate by touching or twitching it with the finger or with sl plectrum (TrXi'iKTpov) — an instrument for striking the strings of a lyre, as a quill. Cic. N. D., 2. 59. Hence the word is applied to instruments of music employed in praise, and then to acts of praise in general. The noun — \p-iXfi6(;,psalmos— psalm, means properly a touching, twang, as of a bowstring, or of stringed instruments; then a song, as accompanying stringed instruments; and then specifically a psalm or song of praise to God. Thus the* ^rQY]J — ^a\\u},2>scdlo — is used in the New Testament asdenotingpraise in the following places: — Rom. xv. 9, " I will confess — and sing unto Thy name;" 1 Cor. xiv. 15, " I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding;" Eph. v. 19, " Singing and mciMng melody in your heart to the Lord;" James v. 13, " Is any merry? let him sing psalms" The verb does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament. The noun — xpaSfiog, psalmos — is used in the New Testament in the following places as denoting psalms in general: — 1 Cor. xiv. 26, " Every one of you hath a psalm;" Eph. v. 19, " Speaking to yourselves in psalms,•" Col. iii. 16, " Admonishing one another in p)salms" In the following places it is applied in the New Testament to the Book of Psalms, considered as a collection of songs of praise; — Luke xx. 42, " David himself saitli in the Book of Psalms;" — Luke xxiv, 44, " All things must be fulfilled, w^hich were written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms^ concerning me:" see Notes on that passage; — Acts i. 20, "It is written in the Book of Psalms;" — Acts xiii, 33, "It is also written in the second psahn." The word does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament.
§ 2. The authors of the psalms. — The Psalms thus collected into a book are by no means the production of one poet or one age. They stretch through a long period of Jewish history, certainly from the time of Moses to the time of the return from the captivity of Babylon, and probablylater, and they are modified by all the varieties incident to the peculiarities of their respective authors; to individual and national history; to the times in which they were composed. So many of them, however, are the composition of David, that it is customary to speak of them as " The Psalms of David," though it is probable that not much more than half of the psalms in the collection ■were written by him. Of the one hundred and fifty comprising the collection, according to the enumeration in the Hebrew manuscripts, not quite one half are usually ascribed to him. According to Dc Wette, seventy-four; to Kennicott, sixty- six; to De Rossi, sixtyseven; to Rosenmiiller and Eichhorn, seventy-one; and to Hengstenberg, eighty. It is probable, however, that a portion of the psalms to which no name is prefixed in the title — but how great a portion it is impossible now to determine— is the production of David. Still, so many are known to have been composed by him, and he was so, eminent as a poet, as to justify the language which is so frequently employed when they are called familiarly " The Psalms of David."
The following persons are mentioned in the titles as authors of psalms:
(1.) One psalm (xc.) is ascribed to Moses. In regard to the question whether this is to be regarded as a composition of Moses, see Notes on the psalm. No other psalm in the collection is ascribed to him, though not a few specimens of his poetry are preserved in the Pentateuch. Why this was not incorporated with his other writings, or how it was preserved until it obtained a permanent place in the Book of Psalms, cannot now be determined.
(2.) David occupies a prominent position as the author of many of the psalms in the collection, but, as has been remarked above, critics are divided in opinion as to the exact number that should be ascribed to him. In the Hebrew inscriptions of the Psalms, sixty-eight are attributed to him. The difference between this number and that noted above in regard to the opinions of De Wette, Kennicott, De Rossi, Rosenm idler, Eichhorn, Hengstenberg, and others, arises from the variations in the manuscripts in respect to these inscriptions; the different value attached to these inscriptions by various critics; the fact that some psalms, though without a title in the Hebrew, are supposed to be so certainly the production of David as to make it proper to ascribe them to him; and the fe.ct that some of the psalms ascribed to him are supposed by different wi'iters to belong to a later period of the Jewish histoiy than his time, and that consequently the title by which they are attributed to David is an error. There is every reason to suppose that some of the psalms now without a title are the composition of David, though it is not known, and cannot now be known, why they are not ascribed to him in the titles of the X3salms themselves. In consequence of these facts, it is impossible now to determine with exact precision how many of the psalms are to be ascribed to David; though the number is undoubtedly so great that he is to be regarded as the principal author of the collection.
(3.) Twelve of the psalms, Ps. 1., Ixxiii., Ixxiv., Ixxv., Ixxvi., Ixxvii,, Ixxviii., Ixxix., Ixxx., Ixxxi., Ixxxii., Ixxxiii., are ascribed to Asaph. These, it will be seen, occupy a place together in the collection, (Ps.lxiii. — Ixxxiii.,) with the exception of Ps. 1. The reason for this arrangement cannot now be known. De Wette (Einleitung, III. iii.) supposes that, with the exception of Ps. 1. and Ixxiii., these are improperly ascribed to Asaph, as, in his view, they pertain to later times of the Jewish history, Ps. Ixxiv. and Ixxix. to the destruction of the temple and the city; Ps. Ixxx. to the Exile, etc. Comp. the Notes on the introduction to those psalms.
tlie authors, or are "for tlie sons of Korali." See Notes to tlie introduction of Ps. xlii. It is not certain whether these were composed by " the sons of Korah," or were composed for " the sons of Korah;" that is, for the company of musicians to whom the direction of the music in the temple was confided. It is obvious, however, that if the meaning is that they were composed hy " the sons of Korah," this furnishes no information as to the individual authorship of the psalms. By which one of them they were composed, or whether by more than one, of course is not indicated by a title so general. De Wette supposes that most of these psalms pertain to the times of the Exile, or to a later period. There is nothing very peculiar in the character of these psalms; nothing which in themselves could lead us to conclude that they were composed by those to whom they are ascribed, rather than by David or Asaph.
(5.) Two psalms, Ixxxviii., Ixxxix., are ascribed to a person called *' The Ezrahite." One of these, Ps. Ixxxviii., is ascribed to " Heman the Ezrahite," and the other, Ps. Ixxxix., to Mhan the Ezrahite." The former of these is also reckoned among those which pertain to the " sons of Korah." Ethan and Heman were probably, however, difi'erent persons, to each of whom the name Ezrahite might for some reason be applied. In 1 Kings iv. 31, they are mentioned among others as remarkable for their wisdom: " For he [Solomon] was wiser than all men; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Chalcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol." In 1 Chron. ii. 6, they are mentioned as " sons of Zerali:" " Zimri, and Ethan, and Heman, and Calcol, and Dara." In 1 Chron. vi. 33, a Heman is mentioned as one of the " sons of the Kohathites:" " Heman, a singer, the son of Joel." So, in 1 Chron. xv. 17, he is mentioned in connexion with Ethan, who is there said to be the son of Kushaiah; and in 1 Chron. XV. 19, he is mentioned as associated with Asaph and ijthan: " So the singers, Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, were appointed to sound with cymbals of brass." In 1 Chron. xxv. 1, Heman is mentioned with Jeduthun, as one of those whose sons " should prophesy with hai-ps, with psalteries, and with cymbals." He is there referred to as associated with Asaph. Comp. 2 Chron. v. 12; xxix. 13, 14; XXXV. 15. Ethan is twice mentioned — 1 Kings iv. 31 as above, as a wise man, and 1 Chron. ii. 6, as above. Compare Notes on the introduction to Ps. Ixxxviii., Ixxxix.
(6.) Two of the psalms, Ps. Ixxii. and Ps. cxxvii., are ascribed to Solomon, or are "for Solomon." See the Notes on the titles to those psalms. It cannot be positively determined whether those psalms are his composition, or whether they were composed with reference to him or "/or " him. The latter would seem to be the more probable opinion in regard to Ps. Ixxii., so far as can be determined from the contents of tlie psalm; but still there is nothing which absolutely prevents us from ascribing the two to him as the author.
(7.) Fifteen of the psalms, Ps. cxx. — cxxxiv., are entitled " Songs of Degrees." Of these, four are ascribed to David and one to Solomon. The names of the authors of the others are not mentioned. Comp. the introduction to the Notes on Ps. cxx. They are grouped together because they appear to have been used on certain special occasions, rather than from anything peculiar in the psalms themselves.
(8.) Some of the psalms are ascribed in the Septuagint translation to Jeremiah, to Ezekiel, to Haggai, and to Zechariah. As there is nothing corresponding to this in the Hebrew titles, this must have been, of course, mere conjecture or tradition.
In regard to the origin and authority of the titles to the several psalms, see § 4.
§ 3. The formation of the collection and arrangement of the BooJc of Psalms. — The Jewish Talmud (Cod. Berachot, 1, 9) ascribes the formation of the Psalter, or the assembling of the Book of Psalms, to David. It is unnecessary to remark that this cannot be a correct opinion, as many of the psalms are indubitably of a later date than the time of David. Most of the Christian fathers, and many critics of modern times, ascribe the collection and arrangement of the book to Ezra, and this is now regarded as the most probable opinion; and if so the collection must have been formed about 450 years before Christ. But though this may be regarded as the correct opinion in regard to the completion of the whole as it now stands, yet there is evidence in the psalms themselves of the existence of smaller collections made before from which the general one was ultimately formed. By whom those smaller collections were made is not now known, nor can it be ascertained what changes may have been made in them when the general collection was formed.
The book is divided in the Hebrew into five minor books or collections, sufficiently marked in their character, and so indicated at the close of each as to make it every way probable that these may have been published, so to speak, in the form of different books, or that the later were additions to the first collection or volume. This division is found also in the Septuagint version — a fact which proves that it existed as early as the year 200 before Christ. These portions bear marks of being not arhitjxiry divisions made at the time when the general collection was formed, but distinct and independent collections by different persons. The grouping is not precisely accurate, that is, in the first part, the " Psalms of David " (Ps. i.— xli.), not all the psalms of David are included; and there are a few that are not ascribed to him in the title; but still it was so complete at the time, probably, as to make it proper to regard it as a -collection of his psalms in respect to the purpose for which that collection was made.
The first book embraces the first forty-one psalms, and was, probably, a collection of David's psalms as such, although it does not embrace by any means all that he wrote, probably not all that were extant at the time when the collection was made. The close of this " book " is indicated by the words " Amen, and Amen," Ps. xli. 13. All the psalms in this collection, except Ps. i., ii., x., and xxxiii., are expressly ascribed to David, and it is every way probable that all were composed by him. In many manuscripts, in the Septuagint, and in the Latin Vulgate, the first psalm is united with the second (as are, also, in other parts of the general collection, Ps. xlii. and Ps. xliii., and Ps. cxvi. and cxvii.). It is probable that this collection was early made, though De Wette has endeavoured to show that it could not have been until after the Exile, as he supposes that Ps. xiv. and xliv. were composed after that event. Of this, however, there is no evidence. Of course it is impossible to determine by whom this collection was made. It has been supposed by some that it was as early as the time of Hezekiah, and that it was prepared under his direction, as he is known to have ordered a collection of the proverbs of Solomon to be made and written out (Prov. xxv. 1); and as (2 Chron. xxix. 30) he " commanded the Levites to sing praise unto the Lord with the words of David." (Kitto, Ency.)
The second book in the general collection comprises Ps. xlii. — Ixxii. This collection is made up of the psalms of " the sons of Korah," Ps. xlii. — xlix.; of one of the psalms of Asaph, Ps. 1.; of nineteen psalms of David; of two whose authors are not named; and of one inscribed " to Solomon," or "for Solomon," Ps. Ixxii. At the end of this collection (Ps. Ixxii. 20) the following notice is given: " The prayers of David, the son of Jesse, are ended;" and some have supposed that this was the close of the entire psalms preceding it, as one book or collection, Ps. i. — Ixxii. Cai-pzov. Introd. ii. 107. But that this was a different collection, or that there were two collections made by different persons, seems evident from the fact that Ps. liii.
is the same as Ps. xlv., with only slight variations — the variations consisting mainly in the fact that the word Elohim is nsed as the name of God in the latter, in the place of Jehovah in the former. It cannot be supposed that a collector would have used the same psalm with such a variation in the same collection. So also Ps. Ixx. is but a repetition of Ps. xl. 13 — 17, with only a similar change.
It may be suggested that these two collections may have been subsequently united, and may have constituted one before the more general collection was made. Thus, the natural close of this collection, as of the first collection (Ps. xli. 13), would be with the words " Amen, and Amen," Ps. Ixxii. 19. To the entire collection — the two combined — these words may have been added (Ps. Ixxii. 20), "The prayers of David, the son of Jesse, are ended," meaning that now an entire and complete collection of the Psalms of David had been made in the two combined; or, that as many had been combined for public tvorship as were then intended to be used in that service. This idea would not prevent the supposition that there may have been at that time, in fact, other psalms of David in existence; or that they might have been subsequently introduced into the worship of God in other collections.
The third book (Ps. Ixxiii. — Ixxxix.) consists in part (Ps. Ixxiii. — Ixxxiii.) of psalms of Asaph, and in part (Ps. Ixxxiv. — Ixxxix.) of the psalms of the sons of Korah, including one of David (Ps. Ixxxvi.). The book contains none of the psalms of David, with the exception of Ps. Ixxxvi,, and therefore the notice is given at the end of the second book (Ps. Ixxii. 20), that " the prayers of David, the son of Jesse, are ended." It was evidently the design of the author of the compilation at the close of that book not to admit in the following book anij of the psalms of David; perhaps it was the intention not to collect any more of the psalms of David for the purpose of public worship. Possibly, as De Wette (Einleitung, p. 21) suggests, the author of the collection in the third book put the notice at the end of the second book that David's psalms ended there, it being his intention to make a collection of another kind. When this collection was made is unknown. From Ps. Ixxxv. it would seem probable that it was made as late as the return from the captivity at Babylon. That psalm may have been written by one of the company called *' the sons of Korah;" or it may have been composed for their use in the sanctuary. This collection closes, like the two former, with the expressive " Amen, and Amen," Ps. Ixxxix. 52.
The fourth collection (Ps. xc. — cvi.) is made up wholly of anonymous psalms, with the exception of Ps. xc, which is ascribed to Moses, and Ps. ci. and ciii., which are ascribed to David. They are psalms which have almost no local references or allusions, which miglit, for tlie most part, Lave been composed in any country or at any period of the world; and whicli, in their structure and allusions, give no indication of their authors or of the circumstances which led to their composition. Their authorship, except in the three instances above mentioned, cannot noAV be ascertained; nor is it necessary to determine that question in order fully to understand and appreciate them. They were manifestly designed for public worship, and probably Avi-itten with the intention of being so used. This book closes (Ps. cvi. 48) with the expression " Amen, Hallelujah."
The fifth and last book (Ps. cvii. — cL), is miscellaneous in its character, and seems to have been intended to be a collection of all the scattered psalms which would be proper for public worship, which had not found a place in the other collections. Part (Psalms cviii., cix., ex., cxxii., cxxiv., cxxxi., cxxxiii,, the four last being among the " Songs of Degrees," cxxxviii., cxxxix,, cxl., cxli., cxlii., cxliii., cxliv., cxlv.,) are ascribed to David. Part (Psalms cxx. — cxxxiv.) consist of the " Songs of Degrees." The rest (Psalms cvii., cxi,, cxii., cxiii., cxiv., cxv., cxvi., cxvii., cxviii., cxix., cxxxv., cxxxvi., cxxxvii., cxlvi., cxlvii., cxlviii., cxlix., cl.) are anonymous. By whom, and when this last collection was made is unknown. It may without improbability, however, be supposed that it v>^as made by the person — Ezra, perhaps — who undertook to collect into one the entire '•' books" already existing, and who found many psalms that had not been included by the collectors of the previous books, and who, therefore, grouped all these together in a single book, to be added in the general collection to those which had been already classified and arranged.
§ 4. The titles to tlie several psalms. — All the psalms, except thirtyfour, have now in the Hebrew titles or superscriptions. Some, however, reckon but twenty-five exceptions, as, according to their view, the phrase. Hallelujah, " Praise ye the Lord," occurring at the commencement of several of the psalms, is regarded by them as a title or superscription. The more correct supposition, however, undoubtedly is to regard that phrase as a part of the psalm. To each one of these exceptions the Talmud gives the name of Orphan Psalms.
(a) The authorshi]) of these titles is imknown, and cannot now be ascertained. They are found in the Hebrew; but it is not to be supposed that, so far as the name of the author of the psalm is concerned, or so far as they are intended to indicate the author, they were prefixed to the psalm by the authors themselves. The Psalms are not of the nature of epistles or histories, and it cannot be supposed that the author would prefix his name to a mere poem or hymn. The probability, therefore, is, that they were prefixed to the psalms as they came into common use, or by the collectors of the several books, or the collector of the entire book, either as indicating what was the common opinion on the subject of the authorship, and the occasion on which they were composed, or as an inspired record in regard to that authorship and design. The question by whom they were prefixed is, however, a point which cannot now be determined. If it were possible to ascertain that, it would do much to determine their authority and worth, but the estimate of their value must now be settled by some other method than this.
ih) These titles are of great antiquity. The fact that they are found in the Hebrew manuscripts proves this, for there are no Hebrew manuscripts, however ancient, without them. They are found, with some variations, in the Septuagint; and it is thus certain that they existed before that translation was made. This point is also confirmed by the fact that the translators of the Septuagint have, in some instances, copied the Hebrew words in Greek letters, without attempting to translate them; and that, in other instances, the titles which they use are translations of the Hebrew words, and show that they must have been made from a Hebrew original. These facts, however, would not make it necessary to suppose that they had been prefixed by the wi-iters themselves, nor would it be necessary to suppose that they were prefixed before the time when the psalms were collected, — either the separate books, or the general collection.
(c) The design of these titles is either to designate the author of the psalm, or the occasion on which it was composed, or the chief singer to whom it was dedicated, and to whom it seems to have been committed to set it to appropriate music — that is, to arrange the music for a XDublic use of the psalm; or the style of the poetry; or the instrument which was to be used; or the tune which was to be sung. Some of the titles simply designate the author, as in many of those ascribed to David; some describe at length the occasion on which they Avere written, as Ps. xviii., xxx., li., lii., Ivi., etc. etc. Some combine several of these things together, the author, the occasion, the style of the poetry, the music to be used, etc., as Ps. lii., liii., liv., Iv., Ivi. The longest and fullest of these titles is that prefixed to Ps. Ix., where we have the dedication to the chief musician, the name of the author, the style of the poetry, the design of the psalm, the instrumentp of music to be employed, and the historical occasion on which the psalm was composed.
{d) It is very difficult at this distance of time to explain the meaning of many of these titles, and critics have diff'ered veiy materially in their conjectures on this subject. The difficulty arises in a considerable degree from our ignorance in regard to the Templemusic, and to the instruments which were employed. The difficulty is the same which would exist two or three thousand years from the present time in explaining a book, now familiar, containing " tunes" of music, and a reference to the instruments of music which are now employed in the pubHc service of God. It might be difficult, if not impossible, so to describe the exact instrument of music used as to be intelligible to a future age; and it would be obviously impossible to explain satisfactorily the names of many of the tunes which are now in common use — as " Mear," " St. Martin's," " Russia,' " Windham," " Lenox." The difficulty, as has been remarked above, was felt even at the time when the Septuagint version was made, as in several instances the authors of that version have not attempted even to translate the title, but have expressed it in Greek letters answering to the Hebrew. Coverdale, who translated the Bible in 1535, felt the difficulty to be so great that he has omitted nearly all the titles except the names of the authors. In these Notes, as far as an explanation can now be given that is satisfactory or probable, it will be offered in the exposition of the particular psalms.
(e) There has been a wide difference of opinion respecting the authority of these titles. Not a few modern critics, esj)ecially German critics, regard them as of no authority, and argue in respect to the authorship of the psalms, and the time and occasion on which they were composed, as if no such titles were found in the Hebrew. By most of the ancient critics they were considered as genuine, and as having equal authority with the psalms themselves. They were wholly rejected at the close of the fourth century by Theodore of Mopsuestia, one of the ablest and most judicious of the ancient interpreters. Rosenmiiller, Hist. Interp. Librorum Sacrorum, P. III., p. 256. Tholuck and Hengstenberg admit their authority. The objections to the authority of the title are such as these: — (1.) That the subsc)'i]itions at the close of the epistles in the New Testament are now regarded as of no historical value, and it is asked why may not the same conclusion be adopted in regard to the iitle^ prefixed to the psalms? (2.) That the ancient versions, the Syriac and the Greek especially, exhibit them with great variations, often altering the Hebrew, and sometimes giving a heading where the Hebrew has none. It is asked whether these ancient translators would have taken such liberties if the titles had been considered" sacred like the psalms themselves? (Kitto). — It is added on this point, that " if ever Ezra settled them, the variations in versions and manuscripts have tended since to make them doubtful." Eichhorn, Einleitung, III., p. 490. (3.) It is argued that the titles are at variance with tho contents of the psalms. Thus, it is alleged that sometimes the name of the author is incorrectly given, " as when David is named over the psalms referring to the captivity," as in Ps. xTv., xxv., li., Ixix. It is also alleged that Ps. cxxxix. cannot be David's, as it is not fi-ee from Chaldaisms. It is also said that the occasion on which a psalm was composed is not always correctly specified, as in
It is to be observed, however, that these writers sometimes assume that a psalm refers to the time of the exile when it would be possible to explain it on the supposition that it was composed at an earlier date; and that it is not always safe to argue from the internal evidence of a psalm against the inscription. A critic affixes his own interpretation to a psalm, and then adopts that as a basis of argument in regard to its origin; whereas often, possibly in all cases, if the inscription were assumed to be correct, it would not be difficult to explain the psalm, by fair rules of interpretation, in accordance with that supposition.
On the whole, it seems to me that these inscriptions are to be regarded as a part of the inspired record, and as having the authority of inspiration. The fact that they are found in the Hebrew, — that they can be traced back to the earliest periods when we have any knowledge of the Hebrew text, — that they have come do\vn to us with that text, — furnishes proof which it seems we cannot now set aside; that they are to be regarded as a part of the text, and that they should not be rejected, except as any other portion of the Hebrew text should be rejected, i. e., only when it can be demonstrated that an error has crept into the text by the fault of transcribers.
§ 5. The general character of the Booh of Psalms. — The Psalms are mostly lyrical poetry, that is, poetry adapted to the harp or lyre; to be used in connexion with instrumental music; to be sung, not read. Such poetry was common among the ancients, as it is among the moderns. Anacreon, Alcseus, Stesichorus, Sappho, and Horace vrere eminent among the ancients as lyric poets; and the numerous writers of songs, sacred and secular, among the moderns, are to be ranked in the same class. The phrase ly7'ic poetry now, however, is frequently applied to that species of poetry which " directly expresses the individual emotions of the poet" (Webster, Die).
Lyric poetry is, for the most part, an expression of deep feeling, and has its foundation in feeling or emotion. It is not so much the fruit of the understanding as of the heart; not so much the creation of the imagination as the utterance of deep personal emotion. It embraces in its design and nature all kinds of feeling, and may be joyous, pensive, desponding, triumphant, according to the feelings of tlie author, or to tlie occasion; for all these utterances may be sung, ■ or may be set to music, the varying tones of music being adapted to express them aTl. Hence, in the Psalms, one hundred and fifty in number, and composed by a considerable variety of individuals, and on many different occasions, we have the varied feelings of trouble, anguish, fear, hope, joy, trust, thankfulness, devotion to God, penitence for sin, and the exultation of forgiveness, — the heart moved, and finding vent for its feelings in words adapted to the melody of the lyi'e, or the musical tones of the voice. These feelings are expressed in a great variety of modes or forms, and the music was intended, doubtless, to be in accordance with these varied feelings. The Psalms, therefore, comprise compositions of the following classes or orders: —
(1.) Hymns in which the praise of God is the principal and leading object, as («) in general, God is praised as the God of nature and of men, Ps. viii., civ., cxlv.; (6) as the God of nature and of the Hebrew j)eople, Ps. xix., xxix., xxxiii., Ixv., xciii., cxxxv., cxxxvi,, cxlvii.; (c) as peculiarly the God of the Hebrew people, Ps. xlvii., Ixvi., Ixvii., Ixxv.; (cZ) as the helper and deliverer of his people, Ps. xlvi., xlviii., Ixxv., Ixx^d., xviii., xxx., cxxxviii.
(2.) Psalms pertaining to the Hebrew nation; to its history; to the Divine interposition in its behalf; and to its relation to Jehovah. Ps. Ixxviii., cv., cvi., cxiv.
The i^eculiaritij of the Hebrew lyrical poetry as distinguished from the lyrical jDoetry of other ancient people, and from most of the lyrical poetry in modern times, is its religion. It is lyrical poetry on subjects pertaining to religion, or to be employed in religion: as expressing religious feeling, and as designed to awaken and foster such feeling. It is intended to raise the heart and the affections towards God; to lift wp the thoughts of men from the earth; to inspire confidence in God; to produce consolation as derived from God in times of trouble; to cheer and comfort man in his pilgrimage along a path of sorrow and trouble to a better abode. Much of it can be best characterised by an expression derived from the Bible itself — an expression no less remarkable for its beauty than its truthfulness — as *' Songs in the NIGHT " (Job XXXV. 10); songs indicating the joy that may spring up in the soul of man in times of distress and sorrow; songs that show that there is joy in the darkness of this world; songs which illustrate the power and the value of religion; songs with which men cheer themselves and each other in their journey towards the grave; songs which even the guilty may pour forth from hearts softened into penitence, and filled with thankfulness in the assurance of pardon.
It is most remarkable that this rich poetry should have sprung up in Palestine, and that it should have been confined to that land. It was not that the land was better adapted to lyric poetry than other lands — for in this respect it could not compare favourably with many other countries, and particularly with Greece. It was not that the events of their history had been such as peculiarly to suggest this kind of composition — for poetry adapted to the lyre or to music abounded elsewhere, and especially in Greece. It was not that the Hebrews had a more poetic imagination than other people — for theirs did not, in this respect, surpass the Greek genius, and whatever there was of poetic imagination in the character of their minds was found with equal richness in Arabia and Persia. Nor was it that theii* language was peculiarly favourable for this kind of poetry — for in very many respects it was far inferior in this point to the Greek, and had no superiority certainly over the Arabian and Persian.
The fact that their poetry took this turn; the fact that all which they had was religious; the fact that there was literally no poetry in their language that was designed and adapted to the dance, to festive amusements, to Bacchanalian orgies, to scenes of gaiety, frivolity, and vanity; the fact that in all the lyric poetry of the Hebrews there is literally nothing in this respect that can be placed by the side of much in the Greek lyric poetiy — much in Horace — much in Burns; by the side of the lyric poetry of all lands except Palestine, can be traced only to the idea that the new religion prevailed there, and can be best explained on the supposition that the authors of that poetry were insjpired to prepare and transmit to future times that which, in all ages, would express the feelings of true devotion, and which might be permanently employed in the praises of God. He wiU fail to explain the fact that such poetry is found in Palestine alone, and wiU fail to appreciate its true nature, who does not admit that these " sweet singers" were inspired by the Holy Ghost.
On the general character of Hebrew poetry, see Introduction to the Notes on the Book of Job, sect. v. On "the origin and culture of lyric poetry among the Hebrews," it may be proper to introduce here the following remarks from De Wette's " Commentar ueber die Psalmen," Einleitung, II., pp. 6-12. I copy from the elegant translation of the introduction of De Wctte, by Prof. J. Torrey, in the Biblical Repository, Vol. lU., pp. 450-456:—
"If we follow the titles of the Psalms and the common opinion, we must suppose the lyric poetry of the Hebrews, as well as the largest portion of the Psalms themselves, a production of David and his contemporaries. The few specimens of lyric composition which we find before David scarcely enter into consideration, compared with the fertility of his own period. In the earlier history it is but occasionally that the voice of poetry is heard, as in the songs of Moses at the Red Sea, of Deborah, and of Hannah. We are surprised, after so few attempts in lyric poetry, to see so accomplished and fruitful a poet rise up all at once, with several others in his company. So rapid a progress supposes some adequate occasion, some preparatory steps. Now, if we cast our eye over the history of the times immediately preceding the age of David, we are presented with a phenomenon which seems to explain the difficulty. It is Samuel's school of the prophets. Many, as Herder, Eichhorn, Nachtigall, and Rosenmiiller, suppose that the composition of psalms was cultivated and brought to perfection in this seminary. Specious as this conjecture appeal's^ it is hardly reconcilable with the facts of the history. It is not intimated that David, before his unction, had any connexion with Samuel. The former tends his father's flock. Indeed Samuel appears to have had no acquaintance with David when he comes to anoint him, 1 Sam. xvi. 6, seq. Yet David is already a skilful minstrel, and famed for his art, ib. ver. 18; he was not, therefore, a discii^le of Samuel, at least in minstrelsy. But it is well known that music and song at this period were not separated; we must therefore suppose that David was already a poet, and, as such, known and celebrated. Some time afterwards, it is true, we find David in Samuel's school of the prophets, but it is only on the occasion of his flight from Saul, 1 Sam. xix. 18, seq. It may be possible that Samuel had some acquaintance with David prior to bis unction, though no mention is made of it in the account of that transaction, 1 Sam. xvi. But he might have been an object of attention to the projjhet without being properly his disciple; or perhaps the youth was his own instructor. Natural capacity, in connexion with frequent practice, might produce the same degree of talent, to say the least, as an artificial system of instruction, like that which we may suppose to have prevailed in the prophetic school. At the same time, it would be an error to imagine that lyric poetry arose amongst the Hebrews all at once, as if it sprung out of the ground. David's contemporaries, the women who celebrated with song and joy his victory over Goliath, praetised a species of poetry which, though rude and uncultivated, was truly lyric in its kind; their short poem,
Saul smote his thousands. But David his ten thousands,
has already the form of the poetic parallelism, and an original and superior mind might easily advance from such a beginning to the highest degree of excellence. We find also, still earlier, in addition to the examples of Moses, Deborah, and Hannah, the practice, particularly among the women, of music and the dance, from which song certainly was not excluded. Jephthah's daughter comes out to meet her father with timbrels and dances. Judges xi. 3i. At Shiloh the maidens held a yearly feast with dances. Judges xxi. 21.
It may bo questioned whether Samson was not a minstrel, for he is called out to play before the Philistines, Judges xvi. 25, which is commonly understood to refer to the dance, but excludes not the accompaniments of song and instrumental music. But even if he was not, strictly speaking, a musician and singer, yet we meet in him with the first Mashal poet, as we have also from the same period the masterly apologue of Jotham. Such facts, though insulated, pre-suppose among a people a considerably high degree of cultivation, or at least of poetical capacity. Indeed, the song of Deborah alone proves that the poetic art was already arrived at a stage of improvement sufficient to account for the origin of the Davidian poetry. Whether a period produces one admirable poem or more is a matter of chance rather than the result of the state of culture. Besides, the times of the Judges and of Samuel constituted the heroic age of the Hebrews, a period peculiarly favourable to the first beginnings and gradual improvement of poetry. ' Such times,' says Eichhoi-n, ' are poetical under every climate;' but I cannot add with him, ' that poetry, in this case, is like the nation, wild and heroic, breathes only in the warlike trump, and knows no field for pi'actice but that of valour and victory with their attendant train.' The occasions which first called forth the Hebrew poets were, probably enough, connected with war; but when poetry has once sprung into life, she confines herself to no such narrow limits, and draws still other objects within her circle. With feasts of victory, sacrifices, dances, and other rites were united, which might easily have tempered the song to a tone of somewhat softer character. Even warlike songs admit of the gentler emotions, and the song of Deborah is rich in touches of amiable feeling. When it is said they sung to the trumpet, we are certainly not to understand it in the literal sense; the music of the harp, of the flute, and of the timbrel, was the accompaniment even of the songs of war, and these instruments ai-e adapted to the softest tones. We are not then obliged to trace the origin of the sweet and amiable poetry of David's psalms exclusively to Samuel's school of the prophets.
" Unfortunately we know far too little about the prophetic school of Samuel to determine what influence it had on the cultivation of poetry. The passages relating to it are 1 Sam. x. 5 and xix. 19, 20. In the first of these it is undoubtedly implied that the disciples of the prophets had music among them, and their * prophesying ' (NB^Dn) has been understood, not without grounds, in the sense of song; for the word K'^lDj sometimes signifies poet, Ex. XV. 20, and h{Zi3, to sing, 1 Chr. xxv. 1, seq. We may suppose, however, that this music was emploj'ed simply as a support and accompaniment of the prophetic delivery. The prophets probably delivered their messages, in the earlier times at least, in connexion with music and a vehement action and declamation approaching to a dance. The passage in 2 Kings iii. 15, seq. is remarkable. The prophet Elisha is about to pronounce the answer of the Lord to certain inquiries of Jehoshaphat; but before he does it, he asks for a minstrel; and as the latter strikes the harp, 'the hand of Jehovah comes upon him,' and he utters his reply. The case here, it is true, is different; the prophet does not play and sing himself, but submits to the performance of another; still it shows the constant connexion of music with the prophetic office. Neither is it distinctly asserted in the passages above that the company of the prophets sung themselves. The word N^jrin, which is there employed, may not perhaps signify to sing, for Saul and SauVs messengers prophecy — ^K32n7T — as soon as they hear the music, without preparation or practice. Their prophesying was perhaps nothing more than a vehement action, dancing, and gesticulation, as we see from the circumstance of Saul's falling down naked. At farthest, they might have joined in the choral song with the company of prophets. Such choral chants were perhaps sung in the school of Samuel, but only for the purposes of devotion and inspiration; and the proper design of this school was to educate youth for the prophetic office, that is, to give counsel from the Lord to a people under a theocratic government. Samuel was a prophet, and history has preserved no remains of any poetical works of his. Is it not most probable that he was aiming to educate his disciples likewise for the prophetic office? Now, it is true that the Hebrews drew no accurate line of distinction between lyric poetry and prophetic eloquence; yet these two always diffi?r, particularly in the mode of delivery; for the lyric poem was probably sung, while the prophetic message was only recited. Supposing, then, Samuel was employed in forming his disciples to be prophetic poets or speakers, what is more natural than to imagine that some of them might feel drawn by genius and inclination to lyric poetry, and succeed in perfecting themselves in this? Yet it lay out, of the plan of the prophetic school, and was a thing quite accidental. It is hardly correct, therefore, to consider the prophetic school of Samuel simply as an institution for the cultivation of singing and poetry.
"There were other institutions which may have had an influence still more important and decided than this school of the prophets in promoting the culture of lyric poetry, especially of the religious kind. I refer particularly to those musical schools which, according to the account, 1 Chron. xv. 16, seq., were founded by David in aid of the public worship. Yet I cannot retract the unfavourable opinion I once pronounced * upon these and similar narratives in the Chronicles; I must rather confirm it. Besides the reasons there alleged, which I may not repeat, it seems to me to be a circumstance particularly calculated to excite suspicion, that the psalms and fragments of psalms represented by the Chronicles to have been sung at the dedication of the tabernacle and on similar occasions can hardly have been penned by David, but belong rather to the later and less pure style of the temple poetry. The psalm which is sung, 1 Chron. xvi. 8, seq., is composed of Ps. cv. and xcvi.; but both are productions of a later style. If the Chronicles had presented us on this occasion with a genuine song of David, such as the elegy for which we are indebted to 2 Sam. i., this circumstance would havo contributed not a little to add Aveight to its authority, but the insertion of these fragments throws suspicion over the whole of the accompanying narrative. The phrase also, quoted 1 Chron xvi. 41, and elsewhere, respecting the Levites who were appointed to give thanks to the
Lord, ' because his mercy enduretb for ever/ betrays the later poetry of the temple, an example of which we have in Ps. exxxvi, where this phrase forms a regular refrain; also Psalms cvi., cvii., and cxviii., in which this phrase occurs, appear to belong to a later style of poetry.
" We may imagine that a master like David would not be without companions and assistants in the poetic art; and, in fact, several of David's contemporaries are named in the titles as composers of psalms: but these notices are not always good authority. Solomon, according to the testimony of history, united in himself such richness of lyric invention with the sententious style peculiar to him, that in his time lyric poetry must have attained to a very high degree of perfection. ' Solomon spake three thousand proverbs, and his songs were a thousand and five,' 1 Kings iv. 32. It is singular, however, that with the exception of two which are quite uncertain, no psalms of Solomon are preserved in our present collection; nor do we find any psalm with the author's name belonging to the period after Solomon, not even one which admits of being referred with certainty and of necessity to any particular event in the history of those times; and yet such lyric poems as those of Hezekiah and of Habakkuk clearly evince, that during this period the culture of lyric composition had by no means fallen into neglect. On the contrary, we have many psalms which, according to the results of a sound critical exegesis almost universally acknowledged, must be placed in the times of the captivity, and after the captivity; and these psalms rank, for purity of language, and for sublimity, beauty, and freshness of conception, in the highest class, and are, in no respect, inferior to the poems of David and his contemporaries, e. g., Ps. xlv., Ixxiv, Ixxix,, cvii., and many, if not al), of the Psalms of Degrees. We are here presented, then, with a singular phenomenon. The lyric poetry of the Hebrews, which was cultivated and brought to perfection in the times of David, after producing abundance of fruit, sank into a repose of nearly five hundred years, and then all at once, in the most calamitous period of the state, arose again, survived another golden age, and yielded a second harvest — a phenomenon hardly corresponding with the common course of events. The singularity, however, disappeai-s as soon as we suppose that the collection of Psalms contains several pieces, either anonymous or incorrectly named, which belong to the period extending from David to the captivity. Indeed, it is in the highest degree probable that lyric composition flourished side by side with the prophetic poetry, and that many of the prophets themselves contributed to our present collection, and might reclaim their own productions from David and others. Some of the prophets, too, are actually named by the Septuagint as authors of psalms."
§ 6. The imprecations in the Psalms. — Mucli has been wi'itten on the subject of the imprecations in the Psalms, or, as they are called, " The imprecatory psalms;" and perhaps there is no part of the Bible that gives more perplexity and pain to its readers than this; perhaps nothing that constitutes a more plausible objection to the belief that the psalms are the productions of inspired men than the spirit of revenge which they sometimes seem to breathe, and the spirit of cherished malice and implacableness which the writers seem to manifest. There has been probably no explanation offered which has relieved the minds of those who are thus perplexed, or which has furnished a solution wholly satisfactory on the question how this spirit can be reconciled with the precepts of the New Testament and Avith the requirements of true religion. It is useless to attempt to disguise or to conceal the difficulty, and it may be admitted that most of the explanations which have been suggested leave the difficulty just where it was. Perhaps it is not possible for us to remove all such difficulty, or so to present the subject that questions may not be asked which it would be impossible to answer; and, indeed, what subject is there in mental philosophy, in natural science, in morals, or in theology, on which questions may not be asked which the human powers are not yet competent to answer? In regard to the growth of a blade of grass, questions may be asked which no chemist — no man — can answer.
In reference to the imprecations in the Psalms, it will be proper, first, to refer to some specimens of such psalms, that we may know where the difficulty lies; and then to consider in what way, if any, this difficulty may be solved.
The following are among the passages which would be referred to as belonging to that class of psalms. They are not, indeed, all that could be selected, but they are fair specimens, and there are no others that would involve any difficulty which are not found in these.
Ps. v. 10: "Destroy thou them, 0 God; let them fall by their own counsels; cast them out in the multitude of their transgressions; for they have rebelled against thee."
Ps. X. 15: " Break thou the arm of the wicked and the evil man: seek out his wickedness till thou find none."
Ps. xviii. 40 — 42: " Thou hast also given me the necks of mine enemies; that I might destroy them that hate me. They cried, hut there was none to save them: even unto the Lord, hut he answered them not. Then did I beat them small as the dust before the wind: I did cast them out as the dirt in the streets."
Ps. xxviii. 4: *' Give them according to their deeds, and according to the wickedness of their endeavours: give them after the work of their hands; render to them their desert."
Ps. xxxi. 17: " Let me not be ashamed, O Lord; for I have called upon thee: let the wicked be ashamed, and let them be silent in the grave."
Ps. XXXV. 3 — 8: " Draw out also the spear, and stop the way against them that persecute me: say unto my soul, I am thy salvation. Let them be confounded and put to shame that seek after ray soul: let them be turned back and brought to confusion that devise my hurt. Let them be as chaff before the wind: and let the angel of the Lord chase them. Let their way be dark and slippery: and let the angel of the Lord persecute them. For without cause have they hid for me their net in a pit, which without cause they have digged for my soul. Let destruction come upon him at unawares; and lot his net that he hath hid catch himself: into that very destruction let him fall,"
Ps. xl. 14: " Let them be ashamed and confounded together that seek after my soul to destroy it; let them be driven backward and put to shame that wish me evil."
Ps. Iv. 9: " Destroy, 0 Lord, and divide their tongues: for I have seen violence and strife in the city." 15: " Let death seize upon them, and let them go down quick [^alive, living'] into hell: for wickedness is in their dwellings, and among them."
Ps. Iviii. 6 — 10: " Break their teeth, 0 God, in their mouth: break out the great teeth of the young lions, O Lord. Let them melt aw^ay as waters which run continually: when he bendeth his bow to shoot his arrows, let them be as cut in pieces. As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun. Before your pots can feel the thorns, he sliall take them away as with a whirlwind, both living, and in his wrath. The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked."
Ps. lix. 12 — 15: " For the sin of their mouth and the w^ords of their lips let them even be taken in their pride: and for cursing and lying which they speak. Consume them in wrath, consume them, that they may not be: and let them know that God ruleth in Jacob unto the ends of the earth. And at evening let them return; and let them make a noise like a dog, and go round about the city. Let them wander up and down for meat, and grudge if they be not satisfied."
Ps. Ixvili. 2: "As smoke is driven away, so drive them away: as wax melteth before the fire, so let the wicked perish at the presence of God."
Ps. Ixix. 22 — 25: " Let their table become a snare before them: and that Avhich should have been for their welfare, let it become a trap. Let their eyes be darkened, that they see not; and make their loins continually to shake. Pour out thine indignation upon them, and let thy wrathful anger take hold of thera. Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents."
Ps. Ixxix. 12: " And render unto our neighbours sevenfold into their bosom their reproach, wherewith they have reproached thee, O Lord."
Ps. Ixxxiii. 9 — 17: " Do unto them as unto the Midianites; as to Sisera, as to Jabin, at the brook of Kison: which perished at Endor: they became as dung for the earth. Make their nobles like Oreb, and like Zeeb; yea, ail their princes as Zebah, and as Zalmunna.... O my God, make them like a wheel; as the stubble before the wind. As the fire burneth a \vood, and as the flame setteth the mountains on fire; so persecute them with thy tempest, and make them afraid with thy storm. Fill their faces with shame; that they may seek thy name, O Lord. Let them be confounded and troubled for ever; yea, let them be put to shame, and perish."
Ps. cix. 6 — 15: " Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand. When he shall be judged, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin. Let his days be few; and let another take his office. Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow. Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places. Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labour. Let there be none to extend mercy unto him: neither let there be any to favour his fatherless children. Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out. Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered with the Lord; and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out. Let them be before the Lord continually, that he may cut off the memory of them from the earth."
Ps. cxxxvii. 7 — 9: " Remember, O Lord, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof. O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."
These are specimens of tlie class of psalms now under consideration, and tliougli the number might be somewhat increased, yet these examples embrace those which are most difficult to be explained, and involve all the difficulties to be found in this class of the psalms. None could be adduced which seem to breathe a more vindictive sj^irit than these do; none seem to be more opposed to the spirit of the New Testament. If, therefore, a solution can be suggested that would be satisfactory in regard to these passages, it would be easy to ap^^ly the principles of such a solution to all the similar passages in the Psalms.
The inquiry then occurs in what way, if in any way, the difficulty is to be solved, or what explanations can be suggested.
On this subject the following remarks may be made: — (1.) Whatever difficulty there exists, is created by the Bible itself. The record is one which the sacred writers have themselves made. This fact is proof at least of candour, and of a consciousness on their part that there was nothing in this record which was not founded in truth, which did not really occur; that is, that these feehngs actually existed in their minds. It cannot be pretended that the writers indulged in feelings which they were unwilling to record; which they were ashamed to make known. In fact, they took all the methods in their power to make them known, and to have the record perj)etuated. They not only recorded them — put them in a permanent form — but they embodied them in poetry, which was to be employed in the public worship of God; which was to go down to future ages, to direct the devotions of the people of far-distant times. Moreover, if there is any condemnation of this spirit in the Bible — if there was anything wrong in this spirit — we are to remember that the condemnation is found in tlio very book where tliese expressions occur — for it is to be assumed liere tliat, so far as the objection lies against these expressions as a part of the Bible — as a part of a pretended revelation — the Bible is one hook; the Old Testament and the New are parts of the same revelation from God. The Bible, thus in making the record, should be allowed at least to be a book of candour — a book in which there is no attempt to conceal what was actuallypassing in the minds of the wi'iters. There was, it may be presumed, some reason for making the record which was regarded as not inconsistent with the purpose of a revelation; and it was assumed also that these things would be susceptible of an explanation, which would be consistent with the claim that the Bible was a revelation from God.
(2.) It may be a fair subject of inquiry how much of what is charged as wrong, harsh, and vindictive, maybe referred to the spirit of the age in which the Bible was composed, and in which these men lived. This remark is not made on the supposition that the principles of morals and religion change from one age to another; or that they are modified by the circumstances of men; or that the same thing is morally right in one age or country, and morally wrong in another. Truth and holiness, right and wrong, do not change, nor are they dependent on the caprices or the customs of mankind. Still, in order to know exactly what was meant; how much words express; what was the precise idea intended to be conveyed by language that was used, — it is necessary for us to place ourselves in the circumstances, and to understand the prevailing customs and habits of the people who used the language. "We constantly apply these principles, insensibly it may be, when we read Homer, or when we read the records of knight-errantry, or when we endeavour to understand the poeti-y of any people in the earlier periods of history. The language which a Covenanter or a Puritan used maij possibly have expressed no other internal emotion than would be expressed by the milder language which we should use; the rough words which the uneducated and the vulgar use may express no different feelings than would be found to exist when the thoughts are conveyed in the smooth tones, and the courtly phrases of those in the higher walks of life. There may be as much bitter feeling beneath silk and satin as beneath a dress made of the skins of wild beasts; in the palace as in the wigwam. It may be possible that those who lived in the earlier ages of the world really meant no more by the language which they often used, and which seems to us to be so harsh, so revengeful, and so savage, than we do in the milder tones which we employ, and which we now suppose to be demanded by civilization and Christianity. It is, at least, a supposable case that the people of future times may have had conveyed to them as much in the records of our literature, and of oiir customs, wliich tliey will find it difficult to explain consistently witli their notions of refinement, civilization, and the spirit of pure religion, as ive recognise in the language of the Covenanters -and the Puritans of Scotland and England, or in the poetic effusions of the days of David. Let us be sure that we understand precisely what they meant, and exactly how our own spirit is better than theirs, before we condemn them.
(3.) Part of these passages may undoubtedly be regarded as prophetic; expressing what would he, rather than indicating any ivish on the part of the author of the psalms that such things should be. In some instances, the passages might have been rendered in the future instead of the imperative mood, with no violation of the laws of the Hebrew language, or the proper principles of interpretation. Several of the passages of this kind which may properly be applied to the Messiah, are undoubtedly of this nature, and those passages are to be interpreted, when the laws of language will admit of such an interpretation, as expressive of what sinners deserve, and of what ivill come ux)on them, and not as indicating any desire on the part of the author that it should be so.
It must be admitted, however, that this consideration does by no means remove all the difficulty, nor does it in fact even diminish it. It cannot be affirmed by any one acquainted with the Hebrew language that this solution could be applied to all the cases in reference to which the difficulty exists, and there is still an explanation needed to meet the cases which cannot be brought under this rule. In a book claiming to be inspired the objection is, in effect, as great if there is only one such passage as if there are many. The essential difficulty is to explain it consistently with the claim to inspiration at all.
It should be conceded, further, that this explanation is one which cannot be admitted in regard to the most difficult of the passages. No man can show that they are all mere predictions of the future; no one can prove that all that is imphed in these passages is a mere expression of what sin deserves, or what ought to be inflicted on transgressors. Beyond all question there is, in many cases, an expression of feeling — or desire — or ivish; there is language used which implies that there would be gratification — satisfaction — pleasure — if the calamity invoked should come upon the enemies of the writer, or if the punishment should be inflicted on the wicked; there is what is of the nature of prayer, that these calamities might come, and that the wicked might be detected, arrested, punished. We cannot on any honest principles interpret these psalms without admitting this; and the objector has a right to ask hoiv this feeling can be vindicated; how it can be reconciled with the spirit of Christianity; how it can be shown to be consistent -svith tlie belief that the psalms were inspired by the Holy Ghost. This is a fair question to ask, and it is one which a believer in the inspiration of the Bible should be held to answer.
(4.) Some of the expressions referred to are a mere record of the feelings of others; of the gratification which they would feel in seeing vengeance inflicted on the guilty, even when revenge should be taken in the most barbarous and savage manner. In such a case all that the inspired writer, or the Spirit of inspiration, is responsible for, is the fairness of the record; or that he has given an exact statement of the feelings which would be cherished and expressed by those who should inflict the vengeance, or who should experience gratification in seeing it. A man may describe the acts of the American savage, scalping, torturing, murdering by slow degrees women and children, or the acts of cannibals, without being responsible for any of the feeUngs of the savages in doing this; and the wi-iter of history cannot assuredly be responsible for all or any of the feelings of barbarous delight which a tyrant may have in oppressing his subjects, or for the fury and hatred which leads men to pursue with vengeance their flying victims. The inspired writers who made a record of the cruelty of the sons of Jacob (Gen. xxxiv. 25 — 29, xlix. 6, 7), or of the act of David in bringing forth the people of Rabbah, and " putting them under saws, and under harrows of iron, and under axes of iron, and making them pass through the brick-kiln" (2 Sam. xii. 31), or the acts of Joab, Ahithophel, Absalom, Nebuchadnezzar, Ahab or Jezebel, cannot be held to be answerable for the feelings which they manifested, or the deeds which they performed, nor is it fair to infer that in making the record they approved of what was done. All that the writers can be held to be responsible for is the correctness of the record.
An instance of this kind occurs in Ps. cxxxvii. 8, 9, " O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Kappij shall he he that talceth and dasheth thy little ones against the stones." There is nothing to prevent our regarding this as a statement of the actual feelings — the pleasure — the satisfaction — which they would actually feel who should wreak vengeance on Babylon. The idea may be, and from anything that appears actually is, that such had been the pride and arrogance of Babylon, such the wi'ongs which she had done to other people; such her acts of cruelty and oppression, — that they who should overcome, subdue, and destroy her, would have conscious satisfaction and pleasure in bringing deserved punishment on her, even in those forms which men usually regard as savage and barbarous. In this there is nothing which necessarily implies that the author of the psalms would approve of it, or that he would have done it himself. If the case is supposed even to indicate tlie common feelings of the Hebrew people, in view of the destruction of an enemy under which the nation had suffered so much and so long, still it may be a mere record of that feeling as a matter of fact, and the Spirit of inspiration is responsible only for a fair account of the feelings which would actually exist.
In one of the methods which have thus been indicated the difficulties in regard to a portion of what are called the imprecatory iJsalms may be removed altogether. These are solutions, however, which cannot be applied to all of them; and if there is any number, however small, — if there is a single one remaining, — to which these solutions cannot be applied, it must be admitted that the actual difficulty still remains; for the Psalms are to be regarded as forming one book; they have, as is fairly implied in the idea that they are inspired, one author — the Holy Spirit; and as it is a principle which must be held by all who regard the Bible as an inspired book, that one text of Scripture fairly interpreted is sufficient to establish the truth of any doctrine, so it must be admitted that a well-founded objection to a single text, fairly interpreted, as really affects the question of inspiration as though there were many passages of that character. Some other solution, therefore, must be found in order to remove the real difficulty in the case.
(5.) A fifth remark, therefore, in regard to the prayers in these passages considered as invocations of vengeance or of punishment on the wicked may be suggested. The real question is, whether under any circumstance such prayers — such imprecations— can be right; and whether, if ever right, the circumstances in the Psalms were such as to make them proper.
To obtain a just view of this, several remarks are to be made.
(a) David was a magistrate; a king. He was, by the appointment of God, the civil and military ruler of the nation. His authority was not an usurped authority; nor were his acts those merely of a private man, a man individually wronged. As a king — a magistrate — he was appointed to preserve order; to maintain law; to dispense justice; to detect, arraign, and i^unish the guilty. As a magistrate, he represented the state; the majesty of the law; the interests of justice. As a magistrate, an act done — an offence committed — a crime in the community, did not respect him as a man — an individual — but as appointed to administer the government and to defend the state. No one can deny that David sustained this relation to the state, and that the duty of maintaining and administering law rested supremely with him. From anything that appears, also, the remark here made is applicable to each of the cases where " imprecations " are found in the Psalms. The question, then, is, whether there is anything in the office and functions of one appointed to make and execute tlie laws of a land which would render such imprecations justifiable.
(h) Punishment is right. It is not wrong that a i^enalty should be affixed to law; it is not wrong that the penalty of a law should be inflicted; it is not wrong that pain, piivation of office, imprisonment, and the loss of life itself, should follow the commission of crime. So all laws determine; so all nations have judged. It is material here to remark that this is not an arbitrary thing; that it is not a matter of individual or local feeling. It is laid in our very nature. It is found in all nations. It is acted on among all people. There is something in our very nature, account for it as we may, which approves of punishment when properly inflicted; which approves of the appointment of a penalty for crime. If this is wrong, it is a wrong in our very nature; it is a universal wrong; it is a wrong which has gone into the enactment of all laws — for all law has a penalty. A law without a penalty would be a mockery and a farce. When a man, in accordance with a just sentence of law, is fined, imprisoned, executed, we approve of it. We feel that it is what ought to be done, and in this feeling we are conscious of no wrong. We are conscious that we are not to be blamed for approving the sentence which condemns the guilty any more than we are for approving the sentence which acquits the innocent. The foundation of this feeUng is laid in the very nature of man, and, therefore, it cannot be evil. No man feels that he is blameworthy when he thus finds himself approving of a just sentence of law; no man feels that this principle of his nature ought to be resisted or reversed, so that he would be a better man if he were conscious of the opposite feeling.
(c) In accordance with this principle, there are arrangements in every community for detecting and punishing crime. There are laws made which define crime, and designate its just penalty; there are arrangements made for arresting the guilty, and bringing them to trial; there are prisons built in anticipation that there will be men to be punished. There are courts organized for the express purpose of trying offenders; there are penalties affixed by law to different classes of crimes; there are processes prescribed in the law books for arresting, indicting, committing, arraigning, and judging those charged with a violation of law. There is a class of men whose business it is to detect and arrest offenders; there is a class whose business it is to try them; there is a class whose business it is to inflict punishment on them. Hence we have a detective police — men whose calling it is to find out offenders; we have an array of constables, jurymen, and judges; we have sheriffs, keepers of prisons, and executioners. These arrangements are necessary in our world. Society could not do without them. No community would be safe without them. No man would feel that his life, his property, his family were secure without them. They enter into the very structure of society as it exists on earth; and if these were abolished, the world would soon be filled with anarchy, bloodshed, and crime.
(d) These are lawful, proper, and honourable employments. The business of a detective officer, of a constable, of a sheriff, of a juryman, of a judge, is as lawful as that of a farmer, a blact smith, a school-teacher, a physician, a clergyman. 'No man occupies a more honourable position than the judge of a court, though it be a criminal court; no man is rendering more valuable sei-vice to his country than he whose daily business it is to detect offenders, to prosecute for crime, or to administer the laws of a nation. The constable and the judge may go to their work with as conscious a feeling that they are engaged in an honourable work as the farmer or the merchant; and the foreman of a jury who declares that a man arraigned for crime has been found '" guilty," and the judge who pronounces the sentence of the law, and the man who executes the sentence, may each one lie down on his bed at night as calmly as the man who during the day has been engaged in sowing seed in his field, or gathering in his harvest, or administering medicine to the sick, or preaching the Gospel. Through all that day the one may be as conscious that he has had no malice towards his fellow-men, no desire of revenge, as the other. In the bosom of each one there may have been only the consciousness of a simple desire to do his duty.
(e) It is lawful and proper for such a man to pray; — a detective officer, a constable, a juryman, a judge, a keeper of a prison, a hang' man. It is as proper for such a man to pray as any other man. He may pray in his closet and in his family; he may breathe forth a mental prayer when searching for a man charged with an offence, or when bearing a testimony against him, or when sitting in judgment on him, or when inflicting the penalty of the law. He may pray, as other men do, that he may be "diligent in business;" that he may be " fervent in spirit;" that he may " serve the Lord " in that calling. He may pray that he may have grace to be faithful to his trust; firm in his conduct; successful in ivhat he is a'ppointed to do. But what is this? It is that the wicked — the guilty — maij be brought to punishment; that they ma?/ be punished; that they may receive the due reward for their deeds. It is not malice against an individual; it is not a desire of revenge; it is not the indulgence of any private feeling; it is not conduct inconsistent with the widest benevolence. The officers of justice are engaged in the very work of bringing men to punishment; and why may they not pray for success in the work in which they are engaged? Why may not any man who loves the cause of justice, and who desires the security and good order of a community, pray tliat the wicked may be checked in tlieir career— arrested — confined — punished? Since men kivvfuUy engage in doing the thing, Avhy may they not lawfully pray for the Divine blessing to aid them in doing it?
It is further to be remarked that a magistrate offering such a prayer would have a very different feeling from one.who was engaged in an unlawful employment. How can a man engaged in the manufacture and sale of intoxicating drinks pra?/? How can he ask for success in his work? To do this would be to pray that his neighbour, his fellow-men, near or far off, might spend their property for that which would not profit them; might waste their time, ruin their health, cut short their lives, and destroy their souls; that they might be profane, gross, offensive, beastly; that they might be a pest in the community, be led into crime, and find their home in an almshouse, a penitentiary, or an insane asylum; that their families might be beggared, and that a once peaceful home might become a hell; and that the young, the vigorous, the hopeful, the beautiful, the sons of the virtuous and the pious — might go down early to the drunkard's grave; that the hearts of wives, mothers, sisters, and daughters might be crushed and broken, because a husband, a father, a brother, had been made a drunkard. But what fiendish malignity would there be in such a prayer as this! Hence such men do not ask the Divine blessing on their work. But a magistrate may pray, and should pray. He may pray that he may be successful in discharging the duties of his office; in administering justice; in prosecuting for crime; and in pronouncing the sentence of the law. His prayer, in fact, is simply that justice may be done to all; that punishment may be inflicted when it is deserved; and that he may be made an instrument in the hands of God in detecting and punishing crime. At the same time this may be so far from being a vindictive and revengeful spirit, that he himself may be among the most kind and humane men in a community, and when he pronounces the sentence of the law, he may be the only one in the court room that shall weep. Tears may flow fast from his eyes as he pronounces the sentence of the law, while the hardened wretch sentenced to the gallows may be wholly unmoved. It indicated no want of feeling and no malevolent spirit when Washington signed the death-warrant of the accomplished Andre, for he did it with tears.
In the same way, and with the same spirit, a man may go forth to the defence of his country when invaded, or when one portion of it has risen up in rebellion against a lawful government. A soldier called forth to defend his country may pray; the commander of an army may pray — should pray. But the prayer of such an one may be, and should be, in the line of his duty; for success in that which lie has undertaken. It will be a prayer that the enemies of his country may be overcome and subdued. It indicates no malice, no personal feeling, no spirit of revenge, when he prays that the enemies of his country may be scattered as chaff before the wind; or that their counsels may be turned to foolishness; or that he may be successful in subduing them. It is a prayer for the triumph of a righteous cause; and as all his acts as a soldier tend to the destruction of the enemies of his country; as he is actually engaged in endeavouring to subdue them; as all his plans contemplate that; as he cannot be successful without that, — if the employment itself is right, it cannot be wrong that he should pray for success in it; that is, that his enemies may be delivered into his hands, and that God would enable him to overcome, to scatter, to subdue them. In this view of the matter there is necessarily no feeling inconsistent with the purest benevolence when the defenders of liberty and law and right apply to themselves the language of Psalm cxlix.: — " Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword in their hand; to execute vengeance upon the heathen, and punishments upon the people; to bind their kings with chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron; to execute upon them the judgment written," vers. 6-9,
(/) It only remains to be added, as bearing on tue point here suggested, that it cannot be demonstrated that there is in the i)salms that are called " Imprecatory Psalms " any more of malice, or of a spirit of revenge, than there is in the heart of a detective officer, a constable, a sheriff,' a juryman, a crown lawyer, a prosecuting attorney, a judge, the keeper of a penitentiary, or an executioner, when he goes to the daily discharge of the duties of his office, and when, in bis closet, or in his family, in his morning devotions, he 'praijs that he may be faithful and successful in the discharge of his offxcial duties through the day: — for success in any of these duties will be in the line of prayer, and may be in answer to prayer. If the detective officer is successful in ferreting out a burglar or a counterfeiter; if a magistrate is successful in bringing him to justice; if a juryman pronounces an honest verdict finding him guilty; if an attorney is successful in prosecuting the guilty to conviction; if a judge delivers a just sentence; and if the keeper of a prison closes the massive bars and bolts on the guilty, — at night, when they reflect on their work, they may regard their success in the lawful duties of the day as being as real an answer to prayer in the proper business of human life as the waving golden harvest is an answer to the prayers of the pious farmer, or the ship laden with the rich productions of the East, as she glides gallantly into port, should be regarded as an answer to the prayers of the pious merchant; — and until it is proved that this may not have been all that was implied in the language of the psalmist, it should not be assumed that the imprecatory psalms breathe a vindictive spirit, or are contrary to the purest and most benevolent feeliugs of the human heart.
(0.) There is still another solution of the difficulty which has been suggested. It is, substantially, that these expressions are a mere record of ivhat actually occurred in the mind of the psalmist, and are preserved to us as an illustration of human nature when partially sanctified. According to this explanation we are not required by any just view of inspiration to vindicate those feelings, or to maintain that such feelings could not occur in the case of an inspired man. One of the main objects of the Psalms is to illustrate religion as it actually exists in the minds of good men in this world; men who are not absolutely perfect, but whose best religious emotions are mingled with many imperfections. According to this view the Spirit of inspiration is no more responsible for these feelings on the part of the psalmist than it is for the acts of David, Abraham, Jacob, or Peter. The feelings — the acts — are what they are; the Spirit of inspiration is responsible for a correct record or statement in regard to these acts and feelings: — a record that shall be historically and exactly true. A few remarks may explain this further.
(a) It is, then, an admitted fact that David was not a perfect man; and the same was undoubtedly true of all the writers of the Psalms. The Bible never claims that they were perfect; it makes a fair record of their faults; it lays down the general j^rinciple that none are absolutely free from sin: 1 Kings viii. 46; Eccles. vii. 20; James iii. 2; 1 John i. 8; Job ix. 20. As it is everywhere declared in the Bible that no one is absolutely perfect, and as it is admitted that David, for example, was guilty of wrong acts, as in the case of Uriah, — so, for the same reason, it is to be admitted that men, even the best of men, are liable to sin in thoughts and in words as well as in deeds.
(h) The proper notion of inspiration does not require us to hold that the men who were inspired were absolutely sinless. There is and must be a manifest and palpable difference between being ins2)ired, and being personally perfect. Ins^^iration, in its true nature, secures a truthful record; it does not necessarily secure absolute sanctification. Indeed, inspiration has no necessary connexion with sanctification; — as it is conceivable, certainly, in accordance with the common belief, that Balaam uttered true prophecies respecting the Messiah, yet no one from that fact feels bound to maintain that he was otherwise than a bad man. Livy, Gibbon, Hume, Robertson, were not perfect men, and yet it may be true that they have given a correct account of the events which they profess to record; nor do we argue that because they were faithful historians that, therefore.
tliey were perfect men, or that they never did or said anything, which, if it were recorded exactly as it occurred, would not be inconsistent v/itli the idea of absolute perfection of character. It is, therefore, a very important principle that inspiration secures a correct record, not that it implies or secures iiersonal sanctification; and that if it does secure a correct record the limit of responsibility in regard to it is reached. Assuredly the fact that David in Psalm li. has made a true record in regard to his guiltiness in the case of Uriah, does not prove that he was right or innocent in the fact which is the subject of that record; nor if a record is a record of feelings instead of deeds does its correctness any more justify or sanction such feelings.
(c) It was important and necessary in a revelation from God, in order to meet the wants of the world, that there should be a true representation of religion as it comes in contact with the huma,n heart; as it is in fact illustrated and manifested in the life of man, not as it might be in the life of a spotless angel. Assuming, as the Bible does everywhere, that man is depraved; that he has corrupt and evil propensities; that he has passions which by nature are uncontrollable, and that it is the design of religion to teach him how to control and govern them, — what we want is an illustration of religion as it comes in contact with such a heart. If the Bible had described only the feelings and conduct of £i perfect being, it w^ouldbe obviously unfit for man, for it would not be adapted to his condition. As man is imperfect and sinful, a representation of religion which would leave the impression that there is no true piety excei)t where thei e is absolute perfection, would be adapted only to discourage and dishearten, for it would hold up that before his mind which he would feel to be unattainable, and his own consciousness of imperfection would lead him to the painful conclusion that he had no true religion. Hence in the Bible, except in the solitary instance of the Saviour, we have no record of the life of a perfect saint. We have a description of piety as it must always be found in the life of man: — as feeble, and struggling, and doubting, and contending with evil passions; as a life of conflict, of mingled light and darkness, good and evil, happiness and sadness, cheerfulness and despondency; as a life where evil often breaks out, where there is a constant effort required to subdue it, and where there is, amidst much that seems to be otherwise, yet truly a constant progress in the soul towards perfection — a perfection not to be obtained in this life, but which is to be consummated in heaven alone. Such a record only is fitted for man; such a record only would properly represent and describe man in his present condition. In another world — in heaven — a true record of man redeemed would be a record of religion without imperfection — as it w^ould now be of the angels. As it is,, we have now in the Bible everywhere recorded the lives of imperfect men: — imperfect in their conduct; imperfect in their feelings; imperfect in their words. We have the biographies of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, of Eli, David, Hezekiah, Moses, Aaron, Josiah, James, John, Peter, — all imperfect but good men; men in whose bosoms there were the strugglings between good and evil principles; in Avhose lives the evil principle was constantly breaking out, and over whom for the time it seemed to triumph. Hence the painful but honest records which we have of piety in the Bible. In like manner, in order to see and understand what true piety is as it is found in connexion with human nature, it might be important that there should be such an illustration of it as we actually find in the Psalms: the honest record of what passed through the mind of a good man; of what imperfect man actually feels often, even when it is proper to characterise him as a man of God. Probably there have been few men, very few, even under the influence of the highest forms of piety, who, if they had made an honest record of what was passing in their minds at all times — of their wishes, desires, emotions; of their feelings towards their enemies, persecutors, and slanderers — would not have found that the language of the Psalms would better express their feelings in this respect than any language which they could find elsewhere; — and is it a forced or an unauthorized thought that even such men as Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Knox, and Edwards, at times when unchristian feelings seemed to have got the ascendancy in their hearts; when they were strongly tempted to give way to passion, or actually gave way to it; when they might have been led to doubt whether men. with such feelings could have any true religion — may have found consolation in the fact that feelings precisely like theirs sprang up in the hearts of the inspired men who composed the Psalms, and who there made an honest record of what was actually passing in the soul, almost an actual transcript of v/hat they themselves experienced? It need be hardly remarked that if this is a true view of the matter, we are not bound to attempt to vindicate these expressions of passion — any more than we are the conduct of David in the matter of Uriah, or of Peter in denying his Lord. {(l) According to this view, the expressions which are used in this record are not presented for our imitation. The mere fact that they are recorded as having occurred in the lives of good men is no evidence that they are right, or are to be followed by us. All that occurred in the life of the Redeemer was right, and was recorded that, so far as it might be applicable to us in our circumstances, we might imitate it. If the above remarks are correct, then the record was made for far other purposes than that we should imitate the conduct of those who gave expression to these feelings. Nor should tlie fact that such feelings actually existed in the minds of good men, or tbat these " imprecations " are found in tlieir writings, be charged on religion, as if it tended to produce them, any more than the act of adultery and murder on the part of David, or the profaneness of Peter, should be referred to as an illustration of what religion is adapted to produce in the hearts and lives of men. Religion is not responsible for these things. The res^Donsibility is in our corrupt nature.
(e) If such is a just view of the matter, then all that inspiration is responsible for is, the correctness of the record in regard to the existence of these feelings: — that is, the authors of the Psalms actually recorded what was passing in their own minds. They gave vent to their internal emotions. They state real feelings which they themselves had; feelings which, while human nature remains the same, may spring up in the mind of imperfect man, anywhere, and at any time. They record what other men actually feel; and in making the record, they simply give utterance to what passed through their ovnn hearts. They do not apologize for it; they do not pause to vindicate it; they offei* no word in extenuation of it — any more than other sacred writers did when they recorded the facts about the errors in the lives of the patriarchs, of David, and of Peter.
In some of these ways it is probable that all the difficulties in regard to the " imprecations " in the Psalms may be met. They who deny the inspiration of the Psalms should be able to show that these are not proper explanations of the difficulty; or that they are not consistent with any just notions of inspiration.
§ 7. The practical value of the Booh of Psalms. — It is not a little remarkable that the Psalms, in the estimation of religious persons, hold substantially the same place under the clearer light of the Christian dispensation which they did under the comparatively obscure Hebrew economy, and that with all the additional light which has been imparted under the Christian revelation, the Psalms have not been superseded. The Christian looks to the Psalms with an interest as intense as did the ancient Jew; and, as expressive of personal religious experience, as well as for the purpose of a manual for worship, the Psalms are selected by the Christian, from the whole Bible, as they were by the Jew from the books in his possession — the Old Testament. As such, they will retain their value in all times to come, nor will there ever be in our world such an advance in religious light, experience, and knowledge, that they will lose their relative place as connected with the exercises of practical piety. How far this fact is to be regarded as aproof that the authors of the Psalms were inspired; that there was communicated to them a knowledge of the principles and workings of true piety, so in advance of their own age as to be on a level witli what will be possessed in the most advanced periods of religious culture; that there must have been an influence on their minds, in composing the Psalms, beyond anything derived from mere poetic genius, is a question which must occur to all reflecting minds. It is a fair question to propose to one who doubts the inspiration of the Psalms, how he will account for this fact, consistently with his idea that the authors of the Psalms were men endowed only as other men of genius are, and with the acknowledged fact that they lived in an age when the views of truth in the world were comparatively obscure. How did it happen that a Hebrew bard, in the matter of deep religious experience and knowledge, placed himself so high as to be a guide to mankind in all coming times, after a new revelation should have been introduced to the world, and after all the attainuients which men would have made in the knowledge of religion and of the human heart?
The special value of the Psalms arises (a) from the fact that they are adapted to the worship of God; (6) from the fact that they are records of deep religious experience.