1. To the Chief Musician. On (or according to) the Gittith. By Asaph. For the probable meaning of the Gittith, see above on Ps. viii. 1. In the absence of any proof to the contrary, the Asaph of this title must be assumed to be the contemporary of David. See above, on Ps. 1. 1. The psalm before us was probably intended to be sung at the Passover, as it consists of an exhortation to praise God for the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, ver. 2-8 (1-7), a complaint of their ingratitude, ver. 9-13 (8-12), and a glowing picture of the happy effects to be expected from obedience and fidelity, ver. 14-18 (13-17).
2 (1). Sing aloud unto God our strength, make a joyful noise unto the God of Jacob I The first verb is properly a causative meaning make or let rejoice. See above, on Ps. kv. 9 (8), and compare Deut. xxxii. 43, in which place, and in this, it is commonly supposed to be intransitive. The parallel verb is a generic term, applied both to shouting and the sound of a trumpet. See above, on Ps. xli. 12 (11), xlvii. 2 (1). God our strength, our strong protector and deliverer, in which character he specially revealed himself in the deliverance of Israel from Egypt, the main theme or subject of this psalm, and thereby proved himself to be indeed the covenant or tutelary God of Jacob.
8 (2). Raise the song, and beat the drum, the sweet harp with the lute (or lyre). Beat, literally give, i. e. give forth its sound, or sound it. See above, on Ps. xlvi. 7 (6), lxviii. 34 (33), lxxvii. 18 (17). This is to be understood as a mutual exhortation of the musicians to each other during the actual performance.
4 (3). blow, in the month, the trumpet, at the full moon, on the day of our feast. The month, by way of eminence, was the first month, in which the passover was celebrated (Exod. xii. 1,2). Here, as in the Hebrew of Lev. xxiii. 5, the month is first named, then the particular part of it. That this last was no unessential circumstance, appears from the fact, that when an extraordinary passover was kept, it was on the same day of another month (Nima. ix. 9-14), and that when Jeroboam changed the feast of tabernacles, he transferred it to the same day of the eighth month (1 Kings xii. 32). The time thus selected for religious observance seems to have been that of the fall moon. Compare the original and marginal translation of Prov. vii. 20. The day of our festival or feast, *”. e. the great day of the Passover. Our feast, if emphatic, is intended to describe it as a distinctive national solemnity. The continued use of instrumental music at this festival appears from 2 Chron. xxx. 21.
5. (4)i For a law to Israel (is) this, a right (belonging) to the God of Jacob. The observance of this festival was not a mere matter of usage or conventional arrangement, but binding on the people and due to Jehovah as their God. The personal pronoun (it) at the end of the first clause is emphatic, and may be better expressed in English by a demonstrative. A right, jus, that to which he is rightfully entitled.
6 (5). (As) a testimony in Joseph he set it, in his coming out over the land of Egypt. A speech I knew not I am hearing. Besides the constant use of testimony in the sense of law, Ps. xix. 8 (7), lx. 1, lxxviii. 6, lxxx. 1, the word is appropriate, in its strict sense, to the Passover, as a perpetual memento or memorial of the exodus from Egypt. Joseph is here put for Israel, on account of his pre-eminence during the residence in Egypt (Gen. xlix. 26, Exod. i. 8). He set it, i. e. God instituted or ordained the festival. In his coming, at the time, or in the very act, of his departure. Over the land of Egypt includes the usual expression, from or out of it (Exod. xxxiv. 18), but suggests the additional ideas of publicity and triumph. Israel, at the exodus, passed over a considerable tract of the Egyptian territory, and at the same time, as it were, over the heads of the humbled and terrified Egyptians. Compare Exod. xiv. 8, Num. xxxiii. 3. Speech, literally lip, a common idiomatic expression for dialect or language. According to the version of this last clause above given, it refers to the words of God that follow, and describes the people as having then heard what they never heard before. Some interpreters, however, understand it as describing the condition of the people while in Egypt, by one of its most marked and painful circumstances, namely, that they there resided in the midst of a foreign and by implication heathen race. This agi-ees better with the figurative usage of Up elsewhere, and is strongly favoured by the analogy of Deut. xxviii. 49, Jer, v. 15, Ps, cxiv. 1. Compare my note on Isa. xxxiii. 19. Thus understood, the clause may be translated, (where) I heard a tongue I did not understand. The future form of the first verb has reference to the actual’time of the events, into which the speaker here transports himself.
7 (6). / removed from the burden his shoulder; his hands from the basket escape. The first verb strictly means I caused (or suffered) to depart. The idea is borrowed from Exod. vi. 6, 7. The specific reference is no doubt to the carrying of bricks and monar, and the pot or basket of the next clause is the vessel used for that purpose, the form of which has been found delineated in a burial-vault at Thebes. Escape, literally pass away.
8 (7). In distress thou hast called and I have delivered thee; I will (yet) answer thee in the secret place of thunder; 1 will try thee at the waters of Strife. The secret or hiding place of thunder is the dark cloud charged with tempest which overhung mount Sinai at the giving of the law (Exod. XX. 18). This is here anticipated or predicted, as well as the murmuring of the people at Meribah (Exod. xvii.. Num. xx.) as a signal instance of their unbelief and disobedience. Thus understood, the verse continues the words of God himself, at the crisis of the exodus. According to the other exegetical hypothesis already mentioned, there is here a sudden change of speaker, and the future verbs in this verse are to be explained as historical presents.
9 (8). Hear, my people, and I will testify against thee, Israel, if thou wilt hearken to me. There is a strong resemblance between this verse and Ps. 1. 7. The conditional particle (if) in the last clause is by some taken optatively, Oh that thou wouldst hearken, or, as we might say in English, if thou wouldst but hearken. As examples of this usage, Ps. xcv. 7, cxxxix. 19, Prov. xxiv, 11, are cited. Other interpreters deny its existence and regard this as an instance of aposiopesis, if thou wilt hearken to me (thou shalt do well), like those in Exod. xxxii. 32, Luke xix. 42. See above, on Ps. xxvii. 13. A simpler and more natural construction than either is to make this the condition of the statement in the first clause. “ I will speak, if thou wilt hear me.”
10 (9). There shall not be in thee a strange god, and thou shalt not worship a foreign god. The divine name here used is the one denoting power. “ Thou shalt acknowledge no Almighty but the true one.” The prohibitory futures have a stronger sense than that expressed in some translations, let there be no strange god in thee, i.e. in the midst of thee, among you. A strange god, a god who is an alien to Jehovah and to Israel. Worship, literally bow down or prostrate thyself.- A foreign god, a god of strangeness, or belonging to foreign parts, in other words, a heathen deity. See above, on Ps. xviii. 45, 46 (44, 45). The specific reason here implied is that expressed in Deut. xxxii. 12. The general principle is the same that is propounded in the first commandment (Exod. xx. 3, Deut. v. 7).
11 (10). / am Jehovah, thy God, who brought thee up out of the land of Egypt; open thy mouth wide, and I will fill it. The reason of the precept in the foregoing verse is now explicitly declared. The (one) making thee ascend, or causing thee to come up. Open thy mouth wide, literally widen it. The supply of food is here put for that of all necessities. The reason here suggested for adhering to Jehovah is, that He not only had delivered them from Egypt, but was abundantly able to provide for them in Canaan and the wilderness.
12 (11). And my “people did not hearken to my voice, and Israel did not consent unto me. God having once been introduced as speaking, the description of the subsequent events is still ascribed to him. The phrase my people is designed to aggravate the guilt of their rebellion. My voice has special reference to the warning in ver. 7-11 (6-10), supposed to be uttered at the exodus from Egypt. Some interpreters, however, make the whole verse a general description. Consent unto me, acquiesce in my requirements, and agree to do my will. The form of expression is like that in Deut. xiii. 9 (8).
13 (12). And I gave them tip to the corruption of their own heart; they go on in their own counsels. The first verb strictly means / sent themjorth, i. e. to walk in the corruption of their own heart. The word translated corruption occurs elsewhere only in Deut. xxix. 18, and in Jeremiah’s imitations of it (Jer. iii. 17, vii. 24, ix. 13, xi. 8). According to a Syriac analogy, and the most probable Hebrew etymology, it properly means hardness, corresponding to the ‘Trw^ueig of the New Testament (Mark vii. 5, Rom. xi. 25, Eph. iv. 18). In their own counsels, in the execution of their own evil purposes and unwise plans. The verb in the last clause may be read as a concession or permission, by referring the words to an anterior point of time. “I gave them up, &c., (saying) let them go on in their own counsels.” As to the fearful kind of retribution here denounced, see Prov. i. 30, 31, Rom. i. 24, 2 Thess. ii. 10, 11.
14 (13). If my people would (but) hearken to me (and) Israel in my ways would walk. The conditional particle at the beginning, although not the same with that in ver. 9 (8), is construed in the same way, but with a stronger optative meaning. To listen to God’s teaching and commands implies a docile and obedient spirit. To walk in his ways is to act as he approves and has required.
15 (14). Soon would I bow down their enemies, and on their foes bring lack my hand. The first Hebrew phrase strictly means like a little, but is used like the English yet a little, i.e. in a little while. See above, on Ps. ii. 12, and compare Ps, lxxiii. 2. To draw back the hand, in Ps. lxxiv. 11, means to withdraw or withhold it from action; but in this connection it conveys the opposite idea of bringing it again into action, with specific reference, as some suppose, to its use in former exigencies, ver. 8 (7). The phrase itself denotes mere action; the idea of hostile or destructive action is suggested by the context. See my note on Isa. i. 25.
16 (15). The haters of Jehovah should lie to him, and their time should be for ever. The first phrase is intended to suggest the consolatory thought that the foes of God’s people are the foes of God himself. There is no need, therefore, of referring him to Israel or my people, as in Deut. xxxiii. 29, from which the clause is borrowed. The plurals before and after render this less natural, and as the interests of God and his people are identical, the meaning is the same in either case. To lie is here to yield a feigned obedience to a conqueror or superior enemy. See above, on Ps. xviii. 45 (44), lxvi. 3. Their time, i. e. the continued existence of Israel as the chosen people. Compare 2 Sam. vii. 24.
17 (16). And he would feed him with the fat of wheat, and from the rock with honey sate him. The first verb is a causative, and means would let (or make) him eat. The fat of wheat, its richest part or finest quality, another transfer of animal attributes to vegetable objects. See above, on Ps. lxxx. 16 (15). Honey from the rock, some suppose to mean wild honey; others, with more probability, honey supplied by miracle, like the water from the rock in the desert. All these strong expressions are borrowed from Deut. xxxii. 13, 14, and are imitated likewise in Ps. cxlvii. 14, Isa. xxxiv, 16. Wheat and honey, by a natm-al and primitive association, are here put for the necessaries and the luxuries of human sustenance, and these again for the highest enjoyment and prosperity. The English version refers these four verses all to past time, had hearkened, had walked, should have subdued, should have submitted, should have endured, should have fed, should have satisfied. This is in fact the true construction of the similar passage in Isa. xlviii. 18; but there the conditional or optative particle is construed with the preterite, and not with the future tense as here, which makes an essential difference of syntax. See Nordheimer’s Hebrew Grammar, § 1078.
