This psalm appears to have been written after David’s elevation to the throne, and perhaps before he was acknowledged by the whole race of Israel (2 Sam. V. 5), Its design is to impress upon the public mind the true grounds of the transfer which had taken place, of the pre-eminence in Israel, from the tribe of Ephraim to that of Judah, as the execution of a divine purpose long before disclosed, and at the same time a just judgment on the sins committed by the people under the predominant influence of Ephraim, from the time of Joshua to that of EH. The internal character of the psalm determines its external form, which is simple, and admits of no minute division, beyond that afforded by the historical succession of events and the logical design of the composition, to prove that the Israelites under the ascendancy of Ephraim were similar in character to the elder generation which came out of Egypt.
1:’ Maschil. By Asaph. Listen, my people, to wy law; incline your ear to the sayings of my mouth. This is eminently a didactic psalm, because it teaches the true meaning of events in the history of Israel which might otherwise seem to be mere matters of curiosity. For the same reason it was necessary that it should be so designated in the title or inscription. See above, on Ps.xxxii.l,xlii.l,lii. l,&c. TheAsaph meant, as we have seen, is probably the contemporary and chief musician of David, but also an inspired psalmist. See above, on Ps. 1. 1. In this verse he invites attention, as if to something strange and unexpected. My people, fellow-members of the ancient church, not as individuals, however, but as an organised body. My law, my inspired instructions which, as such, have a binding authority and force.
2. / will open, in a parable, my mouth; I will utter riddles from an’ tiquity. By a parable we are here to understand an analogical illustration of divine truth. An exposition of the true design and meaning of the history of Israel was in this sense a mashal or parable. Riddles, enigmas, not the events themselves, but their latent import, which escaped a merely superficial observation. See above, on Ps. xlix. 5 (4). Of old, or from antiquity, i. e. belonging to the early period of our national existence. Utter^ literally pour forth, cause to flow or gush. See above, on Ps. six. 3 (2).
3. Which we have heard, and have known them, and our fathers recounted to us. Here, as often elsewhere, the knowledge of God’s ancient dealings with his people is ascribed to that national tradition, which they were not only suffered but required to cherish and perpetuate (Exod. xii. 14, Deut. vi. 20), but which was not at all exclusive of a written and authoritative record,
4. We will not hide (them) from their sons, to an after generation recounting the praises of Jehovah, and his strength, and his wonders which he did. The psalmist here recognises the obligation resting on the individual parent, but above all on the church as such, to continue the transmission of this knowledge to the latest generations.
5. And set up a testimony in Jacob, and a law established in Israel, which he commanded our fathers, to make them known unto their sons. The essential idea here conveyed still is, that the traditional transmission of God’s mighty deeds entered into the very end or purpose for which Israel existed as a nation.
6. In order that the after generation might know, sons be born, arise, and tell (if^ to their own sons. This prolonged reiteration of the same thing seems intended to preclude the thought or feeling, that the things about to be recounted were mere relics of antiquity, without interest or use to the contemporary race.
7. And might place in God their hope, and not forget the deeds of the Almighty, and his commandments might observe (or keep). The construction is continued from the verse preceding. The recollection thus enjoined was not a mere historical or speculative exercise, but designed to have a practical effect, to wit, that of securing obedience.
8. And might not be as their fathers, a generation stubborn and rebellious, a generation that did not prepare its heart, and whose spirit was not true to God. A still more specific purpose is here mentioned, to wit, that of warning by means of bad examples. The fathers here meant are the elder race that came out of Egypt. The description stubborn and rebellious is borrowed from Deut. xxi. 18. To prepare the heart is to dispose or devote it to God’s service. Compare 1 Sam. vii. 3, 2 Chron. xx. 33.
9. The sons of Ephraim, armed bowmen, turned (back) in the day of battle. The people, during the ascendancy of Ephraim, proved false to their great mission of subduing Canaan and destroying its inhabitants. This neglect is represented, in the history itself, as the source of all the national calamities that followed. As the bow among the ancients was one of the chief weapons of war, the description armed bowmen is equivalent to well anned soldiers, and is added to enhance the guilt and shame of those who thus betrayed their trust, in spite of every external advantage.
10. They kept not the covenant of God, and in his lata refused to walk. They violated the condition of their national vocation, and relumed to do the very thing for which they were brought out of Egypt.
11. And forgot his deeds and his wonders which he shewed them. The second generation forgot the proofs of God’s presence and power, which, in the person of their fathers, they had seen when they came out of Egypt.
12. Before their fathers he did a wonder, in the land of Egypt, in the field of Zoan. “Wonder has here the same collective sense as in Ps. lxxvii. 12, 15 (11, 14). Zoan, called by the Greeks Tanis, was the ancient capital of Lower Egypt. See Num. xiii. 22. The field of Zoan yn^iS the country immediately adjacent to it.
18. He clave the sea, and let them pass, and made the waters stand as a heap. This last expression is derived from Exod. xv. 8. See above, on Ps. xxxiii. 7.
14. And led them by the cloud by day, and all (he night by light of fire. See Exod, xiii. 21, 22. The original expression, in the cloud, may denote something more than instrumental agency, to wit, the personal presence of the Divine Angel in the cloud itself.
15. He cleaves rocks in the wilderness, and gives them drink as a great deep. This last is a hyperbolical description of an abundant flow of water in the desert. Some account for it by supposing an allusion to the flood, from the account of which (Gen. vii. 11) some of the expressions are borrowed. The verse has reference to both miraculous supplies of this kind, one in the first, and one in the last year of the error in the wilderness. See Exod. xvii. 6, Num. xx. 8.
16. And brings out torrents from a rock, and brings down waters like the rivers. Ihis verse relates to the later miracle, recorded in the twentieth of Numbers.
17. And they continued still to sin against him, to rebel against the Highest in the desert. What ought to have been the effect of these divine interpositions, is clearly implied in this description of the actual effect. The very means which should have made them more obedient made them more rebellious. The last word in Hebrew means a desert, properly bo called, a dry land, and may here be used to suggest the idea, that they foolishly and wickedly provoked God in the very situation where they were most dependent on him for protection and supplies. The extent of this dependence is implied in the use of a divine name signifying sovereignty, supremacy.
18. And tempted God in their heart, to ask food for their soul. To tempt God is to require unnecessary proof of what should be believed without it. Instead of trusting in his bounty to supply them, they anxiously demanded what they looked upon as necessary for their sustenance. In their heart describes the first conception of the sin, as distinguished from its outward commission in the next verse. To ask, by asking, or rather, so as to ask. Such was their impious distrust of God, that they actually asked, &c. For their soul, for themselves; or, for their appetite, to gratify their inordinate desire of bodily indulgence; or, for their life, as absolutely necessary to preserve it.
19. And spake of God [and] said, Will the Almighty be able to set a table in the wilderness? This they not only said, but said it speaking of or against God. The unreasonableness of the doubt is aggravated by the use of a divine name which implies omnipotence. As if they had said, Can he do this who can do everything?
20. Lo, he smote the rock, and waters flow, and streams gush out; (but) can he also give bread or provide flesh for his people? The same thing is now proved by an appeal to what he had done. The question is reduced to an absurdity by introducing as a kind of preamble, what ought to have prevented its being asked at all. The doubters are described in these two verses as virtually reasoning thus: God is almighty; but is he able to supply our wants? He has given us water; but can he give us bread or meat?
21. Therefore Jehovah heard and was wroth, and fire was kindled in Jacob, and also anger came up in (or against) Israel. The first clause exemplifies a common Hebrew idiom, equivalent to saying, therefore when he heard he was angry. Heard, not the rumour or report of their offence, but the offence itself, which consisted externally in speaking against God. The second verb is a reflexive form of one that means to pass out or over, and properly denotes the act of letting one’s self out or giving vent to the emotions. Fire seems to be a figure for this same wrath, with or without allusion to material fire as a destroying agent. Compare Num. xi. 1. Came up, in the mind. See 2 Sam. xi. 20. Or there may be an allusion to the visible ascent of smoke and flame, as in Ps. xviii. 9 (8).
22. Because they believed not in God, and trusted not in his salvation. Compare the terms of the history in Exod. xiv. 13, Num. xiv. 11.
23. And he commanded the cloud above, and the doors of heaven he opened. The connection of the sentences is correctly although freely given in the common version, though he had commanded, &c. Above, literally//ow above, but see on Ps. 1. 4. The whole verse expresses the idea of a copious supply from heaven. In the last clause there seems to be a reference to the opening of the windows of heaven at the deluge. Compare Gen. vii. 11, and see above on ver. 15.
24. And rained upon them manna to eat, and corn of heaven gave to them. The expression rained is borrowed from the history, Exod. xvi. 4. The addition of the words to eat may have reference to the primary import of the word (]D) manna as an interrogative or indefinite pronoun, meaning what or somewhat, so that the words here might also bear the sense of something to eat. See Exod. xvi. 15, 31. It is called corii of heaven as a miraculous substitute for bread, and also in allusion to its granular form and appearance, Exod. xvi. 31.
25. Bread, of the mighty (ones) did (each) man eat; victual he sent them to the full. The first Hebrew word, as appears from the preceding verse,; s used in its specific sense of bread, and not in the generic one of food, which is otherwise expressed in ver. 20. Some explain bread of the mighty to mean delicate or costly bread, like that used by the rich and noble. But io these the epithet is nowhere else applied, as a similar one is to the angels in Ps. ciii. 20, a circumstance which favours the old explanation given in the Targum and the Septuagint, according to which manna is called angels’ bread, not as being their food, but as coming from the place where they reside. Man is not used generically in antithesis to angels, which would have required another Hebrew word (OlX), but distributively in the sense of every one, as it is in the history of this very miracle, Exod. xvi. 16. The idea then is that enough was sent for all without exception. The word ti-anslated victual denotes specially provision for a march or journey. See Exod. xii. 39. To the full,’or to satiety, enough and more than enough to satisfy the appetite of every individual; another expression borrowed from the history. See Exod. xvi. 3.
26. He rouses an east-wind in the heavens, and guides hy his power a south-wind. The first verb is a causative of that used in Num. xi. 31, which strictly means to strike a tent or break up an encampment, and then to set out upon a march or journey, but is there applied to the sudden rise of a particular wind. The east and south are here named as the points from which the strongest winds were known to blow in that part of the world. The history itself contains no such specification. Guides, directs it in the course required for this purpose.
27. And he rained upon them, like dust, flesh, and like the sand of seas, winged fowl (or birds of wing). Here, as in the miracle of water, two miraculous supplies of flesh are brought together. See Exod. xvi. 13, Num. xi. 31, 32. To these two is transferred the figure of rain, which, in the history, is applied only to the manna.
28. Ayid let it fall in the midst of his camp, round about his dwellings. The pronoun his refers to Israel as a body, and may be rendered clearer by the use of the plural their. Several of the terms here used are borrowed from the Mosaic narrative. See Exod. xvi. 13, Num. xi, 31.
29. And they ate and were sated exceedingly, and (thus) their desire he brings to them. The first clause is an amplification of the phrase to the full in ver. 25 above. Compare the history in Num. xi. 18-20. Their desire, i. e. the object of it, that which they had longed for.
30. They were not (yet) estranged from their desire; still (w&s) their food in their mouth. This is merely the protasis or conditional clause of- the sentence completed in the next verse. The first clause does not mean that the food had not begun to pall upon their appetite, but, as the other clause explains it, that it was still in their possession, in their very mouths, when God smote them. Compare Num. xi. 33.
31. And the wrath of God came up among them (or against them), ani slew among their fat ones, and the chosen (youths) of Israel brought low. The form of expression in the first clause is the same as in ver. 21 above. Among their fat ones, i.e. killed some or many of them. The parallel term, according to its etymology, means picked or chosen men, but its usage is applied to young men in their full strength and the flower of their age, and therefore fit for military service. Thus the youngest and strongest are described as unable to resist the exhibition of God’s wrath against his people.
32. For all this they sinned still, and believed not for his wonders. Notwithstanding all these favours and extraordinary interpositions, the generation that came out of Egypt still persisted in their evil courses. The last clause does not charge them with denying the reality of the wonders which they witnessed, but with refusing to trust God on the strength of them. This appears from the history itself, Num. xiv. 11, to which there is obvious allusion.
33. And (therefore) he wasted in vanity their days and their years in terror. As the preceding verse relates to the refusal of the people to go up against the Canaanites in the first year of the exodus, so this relates to the forty years of eiTor in the wilderness, by which that refusal was at once indulged and punished. The fruitless monotony of their existence during this long period, and their constant apprehension of some outbreak of divine wrath, are expressed here by the words translated vanity and terror. The meaning of the verb is that he suffered or caused their years to be thus unprofitably and miserably spent. Compare Ps. lxxiii. 19.
34. // he slew them, then they sought him, and returned and inquired early after God. Whenever, during this long interval, he punished them with more than usual severity, a temporary and apparent reformation was the immediate consequence. The verb in the last clause denotes eager and importunate solicitation. See above, on Ps. xliii. 2 (1).
35. And remembered that God (was) their Enck, and the Mighty, the Most High, their Redeemer. It was only at these times of peculiar suffering that the people, as a body, called to mind their national relation to Jehovah, as their founder, their protector, and their refuge. See above, on Ps. xviii. 3 (2), and compare Deut. xxxii. 4, 15, 18, 31.
36. And (yet) they deceived him with their mouth, and with their tongue they lie to him. Even these apparent reformations only led to hypocritical professions. The verb in the first clause does not describe the effect but the intention. It may therefore be_translated flattered, although this is not the strict sense of the Hebrew word.
37. And their heart was not fi,xed (or constant) with him, and they were not true to (or faithful in) his covenant. Their obedience was capricious and imperfect, and proceeded from no settled principle or genuine devotion to his service. They were false to the very end for which they existed as a nation. For the meaning of a fixed or settled heart, see above, on Ps. h. 12 (10), and compare Ps. lvii. 8 (7).
38. And he, the Merciful, forgives iniquity, and does not (utterly) destroy; and he often withdrew his anger, and would not arouse all his wrath. The first clause relates rather to God’s attributes, or to his method of proceeding in the general, than to his proceeding in this particular case, which is not brought forward till the last clause. There is obvious allusion to the description of God’s mercy in Ex. xxxiv. 6, 7. Forgives is a very inadequate translation of the Hebrew word, which necessarily suggests the idea of expiation as the ground of pardon. Often withdrew, literally multiplied to withdraw his wrath, or cause it to return without accomplishing its object.
39. And he remembered that they (were but) flesh, a breath departing and returning not. Here, as elsewhere, the frailty and infirmity of man is assigned as a ground of the divine forbearance. Compare Ps. ciii. 14-16. Flesh, a common scriptural expression for humanity or human nature, as distinguished from superior beings, and especially from God. See above, on Ps. lvi. 5 (4), and compare Gen. vi. 3, Isa. xxxi. 3. The idea of fragility and brief duration is expressed still more strongly by the exquisite figure in the last clause. The melancholy thought with which it closes is rendered still more emphatic in Hebrew by the position of the verb and the irregular construction of the sentence, a breath going and it shall not return.
40. How oft do they resist him in the wilderness (and) grieve him in the desert! Many particular occurrences are summed up in this pregnant exclamation. The future form of the verbs seems to have reference to the ideal situation of the writer, looking forward in imagination to the error as still futm-e, and saying as Moses might have said, if gifted with prophetic foresight of the sins of Israel, Notwitstanding all these favours and these high professions, how oft will they resist his authority and rouse his wrath!
41. And they turned and tempted God, and (on) the Holy One of Israel set a mark. Having described the conduct of the first generation in the wilderness, the Psalmist now proceeds to shew that the younger generation, after the death of Joshua (Josh. xxiv. 31), were like their fathers (ver. 57 below). The first verb may either have the independent meaning turned away, or turned, hack from his service, or qualify the next verb by denoting repetition of the action; and they tempted again, or still tempted. They tempted God by doubting his supremacy, and practically challenging him to the proof of it. See above, on ver. 19. The last woi-d in Hebrew is of doubtful meaning. Some explain it, by a Syriac analogy, and on the authority of the ancient versions, to mean provoked or grieved. In the only other place where the Hebrew word occurs (Ezek. ix. 4) it mea,ns to set a mark upon a person, which some apply here, in the figurative sense of stigmatising or insulting. A cognate verb is used by Moses (Num. xxxiv. 7, 8) to denote the act of laying off” or marking out a boundary, which is probably the origin of the common version, limited, i.e. prescribed bounds to the power of Jehovah in their unbelief. Holy One of Israel, see above, on Ps. lxxi. 22)
42. They remembered not his hand, the day that he redeemed them from distress (or from the enemy). The psalmist still confounds or identifies the several generations as one aggregate or national person. The younger race remembered not the miraculous favours experienced by their predecessors. His hand, the exertion of his power, a favourite Mosaic figure. See particularly Exod. vii. 5, xiii, 9, Deut. vii. 8. The last clause admits of two constructions. The day may be in apposition with his hand, and a collateral object to the verb, as in the common version; or it may be an adverbial expression qualifying what precedes. “ They remembered not how his power was exerted in the day that he redeemed them from the enemy.” The essential meaning is the same in either case.
43. (He) who set in Er/ypt his signs and his wonders in the field of Zoan. The miraculous interpositions at the exodus were signs of God’s presence and immediate agency. To set these was to hold them up to view. See above, on Ps. lxxiv. 4. The description of Egypt in the last clause is repeated from ver. 12 above.
44. And turned to blood their rivers, and their streams they cannot drink. The general statement of the preceding verse is rendered more specific by the mention of several of the plagues in detail, beginning with the first. See Exod. vii. 18-20. The word translated rivers is the plural of one commonly applied to the Nile, and supposed to be of Egyptian origin. It may here be understood as denoting either the natural branches of the Nile, or the artificial channels by which its waters are employed in the irrigation of the country. In the last clause, by a very common trope, the writer speaks as he might have spoken at the time of the event.
45. He sends among them (or against them) flies and they devour them, and frogs and they destroy them. Two of the other plagues are here added, from the narrative in Exod. viii. The first noun in Hebrew was explained by the ancient writers as denoting a mixture of noxious animals; but the best interpreters are now agreed that it means the Egyptian dog-fly, which Philo represents as feeding upon flesh and blood.
46. And he gave (up) to the caterpillar their produce, and their labour to the locust. Both the animal names in this verse are really designations of the locust, one meaning the devourer, and the other denoting the vast numbers of that insect. Their labour, i. e. its effect or fruit. Compare the narrative in Exod. x. 12-19.
47. He kills with hail their vine and their sycamores with frost. The destruction of the vines is not mentioned in the history (Exod. ix. 23-32), though it is in Ps. cv. 33. It has even been denied that the culture of the vine was known in ancient Egypt; but the fact has been fully established by modern investigation and discovery. The last word of the sentence occurs nowhere else. Some of the moderns explain it, from an Arabic analogy, to mean an ant; but the parallelism favours the usual interpretation which is derived from the ancient versions.
48. And delivered their cattle to the hail and their herds to the flames. The Hebrew verb strictly means shut up, and occurs, elsewhere in the combination to shut tip in the hand, i. e. abandon to the power, of another. See above, on Ps. xxxi. 9 (8), and compare 1 Sam. xxiii. 11. Here, as in Deut. xxxii. 30, the verb is used absolutely in the sense of the whole phrase. The word translated flames occurs above in Ps. lxxvi. 4 (3), and is here a poetical description of the lightning. The common version (hot thunderbolts) is striking and poetical, but perhaps too strong. This verse does not relate to a distinct plague, but to the effects of the hail-storm upon animals, as its effect upon plants was described in the preceding verse.
49. He sends upon them the heat of his anger, wrath and indignation and anguish, a mission of angels of evil. Before mentioning the last and greatest plague of all, he accumulates expressions to describe it as the effect of the divine displeasure. The slaughter of the first-born is ascribed in the history itself to a destroyer or destroying angel (Exod. xii. 23, Heb. xi. 28), which may be a collective as it seems to be in 1 Sam. xiii. 17, or denote the commander of a destroying host (Josh. v. 15), here called a mission or commission of angels. The destroying angel reappears in the history of David (2 Sam. xxiv. 16) and of Hezekiah (2 Kings xix. 35). The original construction in the case before us is peculiar, angels of evil (ones). This cannot mean evil angels, in the sense of fallen spirits, who are not described in the Old Testament as the executioners of God’s decrees. The best explanation is perhaps to take the plural evils in an abstract sense, angels of evil, not moral but physical, i. e. authors of suffering or destruction.
50. He levels a path for his anger; and he did not withhold from death their soul, and their life to the plague gave up. For the meaning of the first verb, see above, on Ps. lviii. 3 (2). The meaning of the figure seems to be, that he removes all hindrance to his anger and allows it free scope. Not content with having smitten their possessions and their persons, he now extends his stroke to their lives. The word translated life more usually means an animal or animals collectively. See above, on Ps. lxviii. 11, 31 (10, 30), lxxiv. 19. If we retain this meaning here, the verse may be referred to the death of the Egyptian cattle by the murrain (Exod. ix. 1-7). But the parallelism and the context rather favour the translation life, and the reference of the passage to the death of the first-born, which was probably occasioned by a pestilence (Exod. ix. 15) and is expressly mentioned in the next verse.
51. And smote all the first-horn in Egypt, the first-fruits of strength in the tents of Ham. Compare the narrative in Exod. xii. 29, 30. The poetical description of the first-born in the last clause is derived from Gen. xlix. 3 (compare Deut. xxi. 17), and that of Eg^-pt from Gen. x. 6.
52. And brought out, like sheep, his people, and led them, like a flock in the wilderness. For the precise meaning of the first verb, see above, on ver. 26, and compare Exod. xii. 37, xv. 22. The guidance in the wilderness includes that on both sides of the Red Sea, as appears from Exod. xii. 37.
53. And guided them in safety, and they did not fear, and their enemies the sea covered. They did not fear, because he removed all ground of apprehension. This was especially the case at the passage of the Red Sea, Exod. XV. 19, to which there is clearly a particular allusion.
54. And brought them to his holy border, this mountain (which) his right hand lion. The bound or border of his holiness, the frontier of the land which he had set apart as holy. This mountain may, agreeably to Hebrew usage, mean this hilly country, as it does in Deut. iii. 25. But there is no doubt a particular reference to mount Zion, in the wide sense, as the central point of the theocracy, designated as such long before the conquest of Canaan. See Gen. xxii. 14, and compare Exod. xv. 13, 17. His right hand, the exertion of his strength. Won, purchased, not in the restricted modern sense of buying, but in the old and wide sense of acquiring.
55. And drove out before them nations, and assigned them by measure (as) a heritage, and caused to dwell in their tents the tribes of Israel. Before them, literally from their face or presence. Nations, whole nations, not mere armies, much less individuals. Assigned them, literally made them fall, by lot or otherwise, a common expression for the distribution and allotment of the land. See Num. xxxiv. 2. The pronoun (them) refers to the nations, put for their possessions, and especially their territory. The word translated measure means primarily a measuring line, but then the portion of land measured. Hence we may also read, assigned them as (or for) a hereditary portion. In the last clause, their tents means of course those of the Canaanites, not of the Israelites themselves, which would make the clause unmeaning.
56. And they tempted and resisted God, Most High, and his testimonies did not keep. Having brought down the narrative of God’s dealings with the older race to the conquest of Canaan, the Psalmist now resumes his charge (against the following generations) of being no better than their fathers. To tempt God and resist him, or rebel against him, has the same sense as in ver. 18, 40. The divine title ]v?)!l suggests that their rebellion was against the highest and the most legitimate of all authority. His testimonies against sin, contained in his commandments; hence the use of the verb keep. The form of expression, in both clauses of this verse, is borrowed from Deut. vi. 16, 17.
67. And revolted, and dealt falsely like their fathers; they were turned like a deceitful bow. He here resumes the thread dropped at ver. 8, for the purpose of relating what their fathers did and were, i. e. the older generation who came out of Egypt. Having shewn this at great length, he now reiterates the charge that their descendants, after the days of Joshua, were no better, and proceeds to prove it. The first clause describes them both as rebels and traitors. 2’hey were turned, i. e. as some suppose, turned aside, swerved or twisted in the archer’s hand, so as to give a wrong direction to the arrow. Others understand it to mean, they were converted (or became) like a deceitful bow, i. e. one which deceives the expectation, and fails to accomplish the design for which it is employed. By a similar trope, falsehood or lying is ascribed to waters which are not perennial, but fail precisely when most needed. See Isa. lviii. 11, Job vi. 15. The figure of a deceitful bow is borrowed from this passage by Hosea (vii. 16).
68. And made him angry with their heights, and with their idols made him jealous. Here, for the first time, idolatry is mentioned as the great national sin of Israel after the death of Joshua and the contemporary elders. This sin is intimately connected with the one described in ver. 9, since the failure to exterminate the Canaanites and gain complete possession of the country, with its necessary consequence, the continued residence of gross idolaters in the midst of Israel, could not fail to expose the chosen people to perpetual temptation, and afford occasion to their worst defections. In the last clause, graven images are put for the whole class of idols or created gods, of whom the true God must be jealous as his rivals, as well as indignant at the heights or high places, the hill-tops where these false gods were most usually worshipped. The whole form of expression is Mosaic. See Deut. xxxii. 16, 21, and compare Exod. xx. 5.
69. God heard and was indignant, and rejected Israel exceedingly. The same sin is followed by the same retribution as in ver. 21. Abhorred is an inadequate translation of the last verb, which denotes not merely an internal feeling, but the outward exhibition of it. It means not merely to abhor, but to reject with abhorrence. See above, on Ps. xv. 4. The addition of the intensive adverb, very or exceedingly, serves at the same time to enhance and to restrict the meaning of the verb which it qualifies. He abhorred them, not a little but exceedingly, and as a token of his doing so, rejected them exceedingly, yet not utterly or altogether. As there is nothing to restrict the application of this statement, we must understand it in its widest sense, as meaning that the whole people was regarded with displeasure, and punished on account of its transgressions during the ascendancy of Ephraim.
60. And forsook the dwelling-place of Shilo, the tent (which) he caused to dwell among men. The punishment of Ephraim, not as the sole offender, but as the unfaithful leader of the chosen people, consisted in the transfer of the sanctuary, and the manifested presence of God in it, to the tribe which was intended from the first to have that honour (Gen. xlix. 10), but whose rights had been held in abeyance during the experimental chieftainship of Ephraim. The ark, after it was taken by the Philistines (1 Sam. iv. 17), never returned to Shiloh, but was deposited successively at Nob (1 Sam. xxi. 2) and at Gibeon (1 Kings iii. 4), until David pitched a tabernacle for it on mount Zion (2 Chron. xv. 1). See above, on Ps. xxiv. 1. Caused to dwell is an expression used in the very same connection in the history. See Josh, xviii. 1, and compare Deut, xii. 11, where the sanctuary is described as the place in which God caused his name to dwell. Among men implies that this was his only earthly residence, and hints at the true meaning of the sanctuary, as propounded in the law (Exod. xxv. 8).
61. And gave up to captivity his strength, and his beauty into the foeman’s hand. This is a still more distinct allusion to the capture of the ark by the Philistines (1 Sam. iv. 17). The pronouns admit of two constructions, as they may be referred either to God or Israel. In the former case, the ark is called his strength, because it was the symbol of his saving presence and a pledge for the exertion of his power to protect and save his people. It is called his beauty or honour, as it marked the place where God was pleased to manifest his glory. At the same time it was Israel’s strength, because it was considered as ensuring the divine protection (1 Sam. iv. 3), and his glory, because the possession of this symbol was his highest honour (1 Sam. iv. 21). Both these senses are so perfectly appropriate, that it is not easy to choose either, to the entire exclusion of the other.
62. And abandoned to the sword his people, and at his heritage was wroth. For the meaning of the first verb, see above on ver. 48, and for that of the second, on ver. 21. To the sword, to defeat and destruction in war, with particular reference to 1 Sam. iv. 10. The severity of these judgments is enhanced by their having been inflicted on his people and his heritage.
63. His youths (or chosen ones) the fire devoured, and his maidens were not praised. This may either mean that they attracted no attention on account of public troubles, or that they were not praised in nuptial songs, implying what is expressed in the text of the English Bible, to wit, that they were not given to marriage. The fire may be a figure for destructive war, as in Num. xxi. 28. The pronoun (his) refers to Israel as a whole or an ideal person.
64. His priests by the sword fell, and his widows weep not. The priests are particularly mentioned because, at the time specially referred to, the chief magistracy was vested in a sacerdotal family, and because Hophni and Phinehas, the sons of Eli, were among the first victims of the great calamity in question. See 1 Sam. iv. 11, 17. In the last clause there seems to be allusion to the death of Phinehas’s wife, whose sorrow for her husband and herself was lost in sorrow for the departing glory of Israel (1 Sam. iv. 21). In a wider sense, the words may represent the whole class of Israelitish widows as not weeping for their husbands, either because they were engrossed by their own perils and personal sufferings, or, as some interpreters suppose, because the bodies of the slain were absent, and there could not therefore be a formal mourning in accordance with the oriental usage. The last words of this verse are copied in Job xxvii. 15.
65. Then awoke, as a sleeper, the Lord, as a hero rejoicing from wine. His apparent connivance or indifference to what was passing was abruptly exchanged for new and terrible activity. The Lord, the sole and rightful sovereign, both of men in general and of Israel in particular. A hero, mighty man, or warrior. See above on Ps. xiv. 8. From wine is not to be construed with awoke or awakes understood, but with rejoicing, exhilarated, cheered by wine.
66. And he struck his foes hack (and) disgrace cf eternity gave them. The idea of driving his assailants back, repelling or repulsing them, is worthier in itself, and better suited to the context than the one expressed in the English Bible. Perpetual dishonour was in fact the doom of the Philistines from the time of the events in question. The successes particularly meant are those of Saul and David. Gave them, or to them, as their portion.
67. And rejected the tent of Joseph, and the tribe of Ephraim did not choose. This is the completion and specification of the statement in ver. 60. Even after the punishment of Israel, as a whole, had ceased, Ephraim, though still a member of the chosen people, was deprived of the ascendancy, of which he had proved himself unworthy, and by means of which he had betrayed the whole race into grievous sin. The tent or house of Joseph (the progenitor of Ephraim) is particularly mentioned, because the honour taken from that family was the honour of God’s dwelling in the midst of them. The last clause might be rendered, and the tribe of Ephraim no (longer) chose. But the original contains a simple negative without qualification; and according to the scriptural account, Ephraim never was the chosen tribe, but only allowed to act as such, for a particular purpose, just as the experimental reign of Saul afterwards preceded the commencement of the true theocratical monarchy in David.
68. And chose the tribe of Judah, the Mount Zion which he loved. He now assigned the visible pre-eminence to Judah, who had long enjoyed it in the divine purpose (Gen. xlix. 10). Zion is mentioned as the capital of Judah, the place of the sanctuary, and the seat of the theocratic monarchy. The name, as usual in this book, does not signify the single eminence so called, but the entire height on which Jerusalem was built.
69. And built like high (places) his sanctuary, like the earth (which) he founded for ever. Some give the adjective in the first clause the abstract sense of heights, which it never has in usage. Others supply heavens, but the construction most agreeable to usage is that which snpphes hills or mountains. The sanctuary is then described as being, not externally but spiritually, lofty as mountains and enduring as the earth.
70. And chose David (as) his servant, and took him from the sheep folds. Having spoken of the tribe and the particular locality preferred to Ephraim and Shiloh, he now brings into view the personal instrument or agent, by whom it pleased God that the theocratic kingdom should be founded. He did not choose David because he was his servant, i. e. a good man, but to be his servant, in the same pregnant and emphatic sense in which the title is applied to him in Ps. xviii. 1. The sovereignty of the choice is indicated by the humble occupation and condition from which he was promoted.
71. From behind the suckling (ewes) he brought him, to feed Jacob his people and Israel his heritage. From behind them, t. e. from following and watching them vi’iih. tender care, one of the chief duties of a shepherd. The next word in Hebrew is a participle, and means nursing, giving suck. The sense is incorrectly given in the common version of this place, and ambiguously in that of Isa. xl. 11. To feed expresses only one part of the meaning of the Hebrew verb, which signifies to do the work or exercise the office of a shepherd. See above, on Ps. xlix. 14 (13). The contrast presented is, that he who had spent his youth in tending sheep was now to be the shepherd of a nation, nay, of the chosen people, of the church, the heritage of God himself. To this passage, and those portions of the history on which it is founded (2 Sam. vii. 8, 1 Chron. xi. 2), may be traced the constant use of pastoral images, in the later Scriptures, to express the relation which subsists between the Church and Christ, as its Chief Shepherd, and his faithful ministers as his representatives and deputies.
72. And he has fed them after his integrity of he^rt, and in the skill (or prudence) of his hands will lead them (still). This is no sudden interruption of the psalm, but the conclusion to which all was tending from the first. At the same time it implies that when the psalm was written, David was still reigning and expected to reign longer. Besides the divine attestation here afforded to his theocratical fidelity, the verse may be regarded as a beautiful tribute to the good and great King from his chief musician and fellow-seer. To lead, in the last clause, is to lead or tend a flock, and, with the parallel term feed, makes up the full description of a shepherd.
