Psalms 89

Psa 89:5-8 At the close of the promises in Psa 89:4-5 the music is to become forte . And ויודוּ attaches itself to this jubilant Sela . In Psa 89:6-19 there follows a hymnic description of the exalted majesty of God, more especially of His omnipotence and faithfulness, because the value of the promise is measured by the character of the person who promises. The God of the promise is He who is praised by the heavens and the holy ones above.

His way of acting is פלא, of a transcendent, paradoxical, wondrous order, and as such the heavens praise it; it is praised (יודו, according to Ges. §137, 3) in the assembly of the holy ones, i. e. , of the spirits in the other world, the angels (as in Job 5:1; Job 15:15, cf. Deu 33:2), for He is peerlessly exalted above the heavens and the angels. שׁחק, poetic singular instead of שׁחקים (vid.

, supra on Psa 77:18), which is in itself already poetical; and ערך, not, as e. g. , in Isa 40:18, in the signification to co-ordinate, but in the medial sense: to rank with, be equal to. Concerning בּני אלים, vid. , on Psa 29:1. In the great council (concerning סוד, of both genders, perhaps like כּוס, vid. , on Psa 25:14) of the holy ones also, Jahve is terrible; He towers above all who are about Him (1Ki 22:19, cf.

Dan 7:10) in terrible majesty. רבּה might, according to Psa 62:3; Psa 78:15, be an adverb, but according to the order of the words it may more appropriately be regarded as an adjective; cf. Job 31:34, כּי אערץ המון רבּה, “when I feared the great multitude. ” In Psa 89:9 He is apostrophized with אלהי צבאות as being the One exalted above the heavens and the angels.

The question “Who is as Thou? ” takes its origin from Exo 15:11. חסין is not the construct form, but the principal form, like גּביר, ידיד, עויל ,יד, and is a Syriasm; for the verbal stem Syr. hṣan is native to the Aramaic, in which Syr. haṣı̄nā' = שׁדּי. In יהּ, what God is is reduced to the briefest possible expression (vid. , Psa 68:19). In the words, “Thy faithfulness compasseth Thee round about,” the primary thought of the poet again breaks through.

Such a God it is who has the faithfulness with which He fulfils all His promises, and the promises given to the house of David also, as His constant surrounding. His glory would only strike one with terror; but the faithfulness which encompasses Him softens the sunlike brilliancy of His glory, and awakens trust in so majestic a Ruler.

Psa 89:5-8 At the close of the promises in Psa 89:4-5 the music is to become forte . And ויודוּ attaches itself to this jubilant Sela . In Psa 89:6-19 there follows a hymnic description of the exalted majesty of God, more especially of His omnipotence and faithfulness, because the value of the promise is measured by the character of the person who promises. The God of the promise is He who is praised by the heavens and the holy ones above.

His way of acting is פלא, of a transcendent, paradoxical, wondrous order, and as such the heavens praise it; it is praised (יודו, according to Ges. §137, 3) in the assembly of the holy ones, i. e. , of the spirits in the other world, the angels (as in Job 5:1; Job 15:15, cf. Deu 33:2), for He is peerlessly exalted above the heavens and the angels. שׁחק, poetic singular instead of שׁחקים (vid.

, supra on Psa 77:18), which is in itself already poetical; and ערך, not, as e. g. , in Isa 40:18, in the signification to co-ordinate, but in the medial sense: to rank with, be equal to. Concerning בּני אלים, vid. , on Psa 29:1. In the great council (concerning סוד, of both genders, perhaps like כּוס, vid. , on Psa 25:14) of the holy ones also, Jahve is terrible; He towers above all who are about Him (1Ki 22:19, cf.

Dan 7:10) in terrible majesty. רבּה might, according to Psa 62:3; Psa 78:15, be an adverb, but according to the order of the words it may more appropriately be regarded as an adjective; cf. Job 31:34, כּי אערץ המון רבּה, “when I feared the great multitude. ” In Psa 89:9 He is apostrophized with אלהי צבאות as being the One exalted above the heavens and the angels.

The question “Who is as Thou? ” takes its origin from Exo 15:11. חסין is not the construct form, but the principal form, like גּביר, ידיד, עויל ,יד, and is a Syriasm; for the verbal stem Syr. hṣan is native to the Aramaic, in which Syr. haṣı̄nā' = שׁדּי. In יהּ, what God is is reduced to the briefest possible expression (vid. , Psa 68:19). In the words, “Thy faithfulness compasseth Thee round about,” the primary thought of the poet again breaks through.

Such a God it is who has the faithfulness with which He fulfils all His promises, and the promises given to the house of David also, as His constant surrounding. His glory would only strike one with terror; but the faithfulness which encompasses Him softens the sunlike brilliancy of His glory, and awakens trust in so majestic a Ruler.

Psa 89:5-8 At the close of the promises in Psa 89:4-5 the music is to become forte . And ויודוּ attaches itself to this jubilant Sela . In Psa 89:6-19 there follows a hymnic description of the exalted majesty of God, more especially of His omnipotence and faithfulness, because the value of the promise is measured by the character of the person who promises. The God of the promise is He who is praised by the heavens and the holy ones above.

His way of acting is פלא, of a transcendent, paradoxical, wondrous order, and as such the heavens praise it; it is praised (יודו, according to Ges. §137, 3) in the assembly of the holy ones, i. e. , of the spirits in the other world, the angels (as in Job 5:1; Job 15:15, cf. Deu 33:2), for He is peerlessly exalted above the heavens and the angels. שׁחק, poetic singular instead of שׁחקים (vid.

, supra on Psa 77:18), which is in itself already poetical; and ערך, not, as e. g. , in Isa 40:18, in the signification to co-ordinate, but in the medial sense: to rank with, be equal to. Concerning בּני אלים, vid. , on Psa 29:1. In the great council (concerning סוד, of both genders, perhaps like כּוס, vid. , on Psa 25:14) of the holy ones also, Jahve is terrible; He towers above all who are about Him (1Ki 22:19, cf.

Dan 7:10) in terrible majesty. רבּה might, according to Psa 62:3; Psa 78:15, be an adverb, but according to the order of the words it may more appropriately be regarded as an adjective; cf. Job 31:34, כּי אערץ המון רבּה, “when I feared the great multitude. ” In Psa 89:9 He is apostrophized with אלהי צבאות as being the One exalted above the heavens and the angels.

The question “Who is as Thou? ” takes its origin from Exo 15:11. חסין is not the construct form, but the principal form, like גּביר, ידיד, עויל ,יד, and is a Syriasm; for the verbal stem Syr. hṣan is native to the Aramaic, in which Syr. haṣı̄nā' = שׁדּי. In יהּ, what God is is reduced to the briefest possible expression (vid. , Psa 68:19). In the words, “Thy faithfulness compasseth Thee round about,” the primary thought of the poet again breaks through.

Such a God it is who has the faithfulness with which He fulfils all His promises, and the promises given to the house of David also, as His constant surrounding. His glory would only strike one with terror; but the faithfulness which encompasses Him softens the sunlike brilliancy of His glory, and awakens trust in so majestic a Ruler.

Psa 89:9-14 At the time of the poet the nation of the house of David was threatened with assault from violent foes; and this fact gives occasion for this picture of God’s power in the kingdom of nature. He who rules the raging of the sea, also rules the raging of the sea of the peoples, Psa 65:8. גּאוּת, a proud rising, here of the sea, like גּאוה in Psa 46:4.

Instead of בּשׂוע, Hitzig pleasantly enough reads בּשׁוא = בּשׁאו from שׁאה; but שׂוא is also possible so far as language is concerned, either as an infinitive = נשׂוא, Psa 28:2; Isa 1:14 (instead of שׂאת), or as an infinitival noun, like שׂיא, loftiness, Job 20:6, with a likewise rejected Nun . The formation of the clause favours our taking it as a verb: when its waves rise, Thou stillest them.

From the natural sea the poet comes to the sea of the peoples; and in the doings of God at the Red Sea a miraculous subjugation of both seas took place at one and the same time. It is clear from Psa 74:13-17; Isa 51:9, that Egypt is to be understood by Rahab in this passage as in Psa 87:4. The word signifies first of all impetuosity, violence, then a monster, like “the wild beast of the reed,” Psa 68:31, i.

e. , the leviathan or the dragon. דּכּאת is conjugated after the manner of the Lamed He verbs, as in Psa 44:20. כּחלל is to be understood as describing the event or issue (vid. , Psa 18:43): so that in its fall the proudly defiant kingdom is like one fatally smitten. Thereupon in Psa 89:12-15 again follows in the same co-ordination first the praise of God drawn from nature, then from history.

Jahve’s are the heavens and the earth. He is the Creator, and for that very reason the absolute owner, of both. The north and the right hand, i. e. , the south, represent the earth in its entire compass from one region of the heavens to the other. Tabor on this side of the Jordan represents the west (cf. Hos 5:1), and Hermon opposite the east of the Holy Land.

Both exult by reason of the name of God; by their fresh, cheerful look they give the impression of joy at the glorious revelation of the divine creative might manifest in themselves. In Psa 89:14 the praise again enters upon the province of history. “An arm with (עם) heroic strength,” says the poet, inasmuch as he distinguishes between the attribute inherent in God and the medium of its manifestation in history.

His throne has as its מכון, i. e. , its immovable foundation (Pro 16:12; Pro 25:5), righteousness of action and right, by which all action is regulated, and which is unceasingly realized by means of the action. And mercy and truth wait upon Him. קדּם פּני is not; to go before any one (הלּך לפני, Ps 85:14), but anticipatingly to present one’s self to any one, Psa 88:14; Psa 95:2; Mic 6:6.

Mercy and truth, these two genii of sacred history (Psa 43:3), stand before His face like waiting servants watching upon His nod.

Psa 89:9-14 At the time of the poet the nation of the house of David was threatened with assault from violent foes; and this fact gives occasion for this picture of God’s power in the kingdom of nature. He who rules the raging of the sea, also rules the raging of the sea of the peoples, Psa 65:8. גּאוּת, a proud rising, here of the sea, like גּאוה in Psa 46:4.

Instead of בּשׂוע, Hitzig pleasantly enough reads בּשׁוא = בּשׁאו from שׁאה; but שׂוא is also possible so far as language is concerned, either as an infinitive = נשׂוא, Psa 28:2; Isa 1:14 (instead of שׂאת), or as an infinitival noun, like שׂיא, loftiness, Job 20:6, with a likewise rejected Nun . The formation of the clause favours our taking it as a verb: when its waves rise, Thou stillest them.

From the natural sea the poet comes to the sea of the peoples; and in the doings of God at the Red Sea a miraculous subjugation of both seas took place at one and the same time. It is clear from Psa 74:13-17; Isa 51:9, that Egypt is to be understood by Rahab in this passage as in Psa 87:4. The word signifies first of all impetuosity, violence, then a monster, like “the wild beast of the reed,” Psa 68:31, i.

e. , the leviathan or the dragon. דּכּאת is conjugated after the manner of the Lamed He verbs, as in Psa 44:20. כּחלל is to be understood as describing the event or issue (vid. , Psa 18:43): so that in its fall the proudly defiant kingdom is like one fatally smitten. Thereupon in Psa 89:12-15 again follows in the same co-ordination first the praise of God drawn from nature, then from history.

Jahve’s are the heavens and the earth. He is the Creator, and for that very reason the absolute owner, of both. The north and the right hand, i. e. , the south, represent the earth in its entire compass from one region of the heavens to the other. Tabor on this side of the Jordan represents the west (cf. Hos 5:1), and Hermon opposite the east of the Holy Land.

Both exult by reason of the name of God; by their fresh, cheerful look they give the impression of joy at the glorious revelation of the divine creative might manifest in themselves. In Psa 89:14 the praise again enters upon the province of history. “An arm with (עם) heroic strength,” says the poet, inasmuch as he distinguishes between the attribute inherent in God and the medium of its manifestation in history.

His throne has as its מכון, i. e. , its immovable foundation (Pro 16:12; Pro 25:5), righteousness of action and right, by which all action is regulated, and which is unceasingly realized by means of the action. And mercy and truth wait upon Him. קדּם פּני is not; to go before any one (הלּך לפני, Ps 85:14), but anticipatingly to present one’s self to any one, Psa 88:14; Psa 95:2; Mic 6:6.

Mercy and truth, these two genii of sacred history (Psa 43:3), stand before His face like waiting servants watching upon His nod.

Psa 89:9-14 At the time of the poet the nation of the house of David was threatened with assault from violent foes; and this fact gives occasion for this picture of God’s power in the kingdom of nature. He who rules the raging of the sea, also rules the raging of the sea of the peoples, Psa 65:8. גּאוּת, a proud rising, here of the sea, like גּאוה in Psa 46:4.

Instead of בּשׂוע, Hitzig pleasantly enough reads בּשׁוא = בּשׁאו from שׁאה; but שׂוא is also possible so far as language is concerned, either as an infinitive = נשׂוא, Psa 28:2; Isa 1:14 (instead of שׂאת), or as an infinitival noun, like שׂיא, loftiness, Job 20:6, with a likewise rejected Nun . The formation of the clause favours our taking it as a verb: when its waves rise, Thou stillest them.

From the natural sea the poet comes to the sea of the peoples; and in the doings of God at the Red Sea a miraculous subjugation of both seas took place at one and the same time. It is clear from Psa 74:13-17; Isa 51:9, that Egypt is to be understood by Rahab in this passage as in Psa 87:4. The word signifies first of all impetuosity, violence, then a monster, like “the wild beast of the reed,” Psa 68:31, i.

e. , the leviathan or the dragon. דּכּאת is conjugated after the manner of the Lamed He verbs, as in Psa 44:20. כּחלל is to be understood as describing the event or issue (vid. , Psa 18:43): so that in its fall the proudly defiant kingdom is like one fatally smitten. Thereupon in Psa 89:12-15 again follows in the same co-ordination first the praise of God drawn from nature, then from history.

Jahve’s are the heavens and the earth. He is the Creator, and for that very reason the absolute owner, of both. The north and the right hand, i. e. , the south, represent the earth in its entire compass from one region of the heavens to the other. Tabor on this side of the Jordan represents the west (cf. Hos 5:1), and Hermon opposite the east of the Holy Land.

Both exult by reason of the name of God; by their fresh, cheerful look they give the impression of joy at the glorious revelation of the divine creative might manifest in themselves. In Psa 89:14 the praise again enters upon the province of history. “An arm with (עם) heroic strength,” says the poet, inasmuch as he distinguishes between the attribute inherent in God and the medium of its manifestation in history.

His throne has as its מכון, i. e. , its immovable foundation (Pro 16:12; Pro 25:5), righteousness of action and right, by which all action is regulated, and which is unceasingly realized by means of the action. And mercy and truth wait upon Him. קדּם פּני is not; to go before any one (הלּך לפני, Ps 85:14), but anticipatingly to present one’s self to any one, Psa 88:14; Psa 95:2; Mic 6:6.

Mercy and truth, these two genii of sacred history (Psa 43:3), stand before His face like waiting servants watching upon His nod.

Psa 89:9-14 At the time of the poet the nation of the house of David was threatened with assault from violent foes; and this fact gives occasion for this picture of God’s power in the kingdom of nature. He who rules the raging of the sea, also rules the raging of the sea of the peoples, Psa 65:8. גּאוּת, a proud rising, here of the sea, like גּאוה in Psa 46:4.

Instead of בּשׂוע, Hitzig pleasantly enough reads בּשׁוא = בּשׁאו from שׁאה; but שׂוא is also possible so far as language is concerned, either as an infinitive = נשׂוא, Psa 28:2; Isa 1:14 (instead of שׂאת), or as an infinitival noun, like שׂיא, loftiness, Job 20:6, with a likewise rejected Nun . The formation of the clause favours our taking it as a verb: when its waves rise, Thou stillest them.

From the natural sea the poet comes to the sea of the peoples; and in the doings of God at the Red Sea a miraculous subjugation of both seas took place at one and the same time. It is clear from Psa 74:13-17; Isa 51:9, that Egypt is to be understood by Rahab in this passage as in Psa 87:4. The word signifies first of all impetuosity, violence, then a monster, like “the wild beast of the reed,” Psa 68:31, i.

e. , the leviathan or the dragon. דּכּאת is conjugated after the manner of the Lamed He verbs, as in Psa 44:20. כּחלל is to be understood as describing the event or issue (vid. , Psa 18:43): so that in its fall the proudly defiant kingdom is like one fatally smitten. Thereupon in Psa 89:12-15 again follows in the same co-ordination first the praise of God drawn from nature, then from history.

Jahve’s are the heavens and the earth. He is the Creator, and for that very reason the absolute owner, of both. The north and the right hand, i. e. , the south, represent the earth in its entire compass from one region of the heavens to the other. Tabor on this side of the Jordan represents the west (cf. Hos 5:1), and Hermon opposite the east of the Holy Land.

Both exult by reason of the name of God; by their fresh, cheerful look they give the impression of joy at the glorious revelation of the divine creative might manifest in themselves. In Psa 89:14 the praise again enters upon the province of history. “An arm with (עם) heroic strength,” says the poet, inasmuch as he distinguishes between the attribute inherent in God and the medium of its manifestation in history.

His throne has as its מכון, i. e. , its immovable foundation (Pro 16:12; Pro 25:5), righteousness of action and right, by which all action is regulated, and which is unceasingly realized by means of the action. And mercy and truth wait upon Him. קדּם פּני is not; to go before any one (הלּך לפני, Ps 85:14), but anticipatingly to present one’s self to any one, Psa 88:14; Psa 95:2; Mic 6:6.

Mercy and truth, these two genii of sacred history (Psa 43:3), stand before His face like waiting servants watching upon His nod.

Psa 89:9-14 At the time of the poet the nation of the house of David was threatened with assault from violent foes; and this fact gives occasion for this picture of God’s power in the kingdom of nature. He who rules the raging of the sea, also rules the raging of the sea of the peoples, Psa 65:8. גּאוּת, a proud rising, here of the sea, like גּאוה in Psa 46:4.

Instead of בּשׂוע, Hitzig pleasantly enough reads בּשׁוא = בּשׁאו from שׁאה; but שׂוא is also possible so far as language is concerned, either as an infinitive = נשׂוא, Psa 28:2; Isa 1:14 (instead of שׂאת), or as an infinitival noun, like שׂיא, loftiness, Job 20:6, with a likewise rejected Nun . The formation of the clause favours our taking it as a verb: when its waves rise, Thou stillest them.

From the natural sea the poet comes to the sea of the peoples; and in the doings of God at the Red Sea a miraculous subjugation of both seas took place at one and the same time. It is clear from Psa 74:13-17; Isa 51:9, that Egypt is to be understood by Rahab in this passage as in Psa 87:4. The word signifies first of all impetuosity, violence, then a monster, like “the wild beast of the reed,” Psa 68:31, i.

e. , the leviathan or the dragon. דּכּאת is conjugated after the manner of the Lamed He verbs, as in Psa 44:20. כּחלל is to be understood as describing the event or issue (vid. , Psa 18:43): so that in its fall the proudly defiant kingdom is like one fatally smitten. Thereupon in Psa 89:12-15 again follows in the same co-ordination first the praise of God drawn from nature, then from history.

Jahve’s are the heavens and the earth. He is the Creator, and for that very reason the absolute owner, of both. The north and the right hand, i. e. , the south, represent the earth in its entire compass from one region of the heavens to the other. Tabor on this side of the Jordan represents the west (cf. Hos 5:1), and Hermon opposite the east of the Holy Land.

Both exult by reason of the name of God; by their fresh, cheerful look they give the impression of joy at the glorious revelation of the divine creative might manifest in themselves. In Psa 89:14 the praise again enters upon the province of history. “An arm with (עם) heroic strength,” says the poet, inasmuch as he distinguishes between the attribute inherent in God and the medium of its manifestation in history.

His throne has as its מכון, i. e. , its immovable foundation (Pro 16:12; Pro 25:5), righteousness of action and right, by which all action is regulated, and which is unceasingly realized by means of the action. And mercy and truth wait upon Him. קדּם פּני is not; to go before any one (הלּך לפני, Ps 85:14), but anticipatingly to present one’s self to any one, Psa 88:14; Psa 95:2; Mic 6:6.

Mercy and truth, these two genii of sacred history (Psa 43:3), stand before His face like waiting servants watching upon His nod.

Psa 89:9-14 At the time of the poet the nation of the house of David was threatened with assault from violent foes; and this fact gives occasion for this picture of God’s power in the kingdom of nature. He who rules the raging of the sea, also rules the raging of the sea of the peoples, Psa 65:8. גּאוּת, a proud rising, here of the sea, like גּאוה in Psa 46:4.

Instead of בּשׂוע, Hitzig pleasantly enough reads בּשׁוא = בּשׁאו from שׁאה; but שׂוא is also possible so far as language is concerned, either as an infinitive = נשׂוא, Psa 28:2; Isa 1:14 (instead of שׂאת), or as an infinitival noun, like שׂיא, loftiness, Job 20:6, with a likewise rejected Nun . The formation of the clause favours our taking it as a verb: when its waves rise, Thou stillest them.

From the natural sea the poet comes to the sea of the peoples; and in the doings of God at the Red Sea a miraculous subjugation of both seas took place at one and the same time. It is clear from Psa 74:13-17; Isa 51:9, that Egypt is to be understood by Rahab in this passage as in Psa 87:4. The word signifies first of all impetuosity, violence, then a monster, like “the wild beast of the reed,” Psa 68:31, i.

e. , the leviathan or the dragon. דּכּאת is conjugated after the manner of the Lamed He verbs, as in Psa 44:20. כּחלל is to be understood as describing the event or issue (vid. , Psa 18:43): so that in its fall the proudly defiant kingdom is like one fatally smitten. Thereupon in Psa 89:12-15 again follows in the same co-ordination first the praise of God drawn from nature, then from history.

Jahve’s are the heavens and the earth. He is the Creator, and for that very reason the absolute owner, of both. The north and the right hand, i. e. , the south, represent the earth in its entire compass from one region of the heavens to the other. Tabor on this side of the Jordan represents the west (cf. Hos 5:1), and Hermon opposite the east of the Holy Land.

Both exult by reason of the name of God; by their fresh, cheerful look they give the impression of joy at the glorious revelation of the divine creative might manifest in themselves. In Psa 89:14 the praise again enters upon the province of history. “An arm with (עם) heroic strength,” says the poet, inasmuch as he distinguishes between the attribute inherent in God and the medium of its manifestation in history.

His throne has as its מכון, i. e. , its immovable foundation (Pro 16:12; Pro 25:5), righteousness of action and right, by which all action is regulated, and which is unceasingly realized by means of the action. And mercy and truth wait upon Him. קדּם פּני is not; to go before any one (הלּך לפני, Ps 85:14), but anticipatingly to present one’s self to any one, Psa 88:14; Psa 95:2; Mic 6:6.

Mercy and truth, these two genii of sacred history (Psa 43:3), stand before His face like waiting servants watching upon His nod.

Psa 89:15-18 The poet has now described what kind of God He is upon whose promise the royal house in Israel depends. Blessed, then, is the people that walks in the light of His countenance. הלּך of a self-assured, stately walk. The words ידעי תּרוּעה are the statement of the ground of the blessing interwoven into the blessing itself: such a people has abundant cause and matter for exultation (cf.

Psa 84:5). תּרוּעה is the festive sound of joy of the mouth (Num 23:21), and of trumpets or sackbuts (Psa 27:6). This confirmation of the blessing is expanded in Psa 89:17-19. Jahve’s שׁם, i. e. , revelation or manifestation, becomes to them a ground and object of unceasing joy; by His צדקה, i. e. , the rigour with which He binds Himself to the relationship He has entered upon with His people and maintains it, they are exalted above abjectness and insecurity.

He is תּפארת עזּמו, the ornament of their strength, i. e. , their strength which really becomes an ornament to them. In Psa 89:18 the poet declares Israel to be this happy people. Pinsker’s conjecture, קרנם (following the Targum), destroys the transition to Psa 89:19, which is formed by Psa 89:18 . The plural reading of Kimchi and of older editions (e. g. , Bomberg's), קרנינוּ, is incompatible with the figure; but it is immaterial whether we read תּרים with the Chethîb (Targum, Jerome), or with the Kerî (lxx, Syriac) תּרוּם.

מגנּנוּ and מלכּנוּ in Psa 89:19 are parallel designations of the human king of Israel; מגן as in Ps 47:10, but not in Psa 84:10. For we are not compelled, with a total disregard of the limits to the possibilities of style (Ew. §310, a ), to render Psa 89:19 : and the Holy One of Israel, (as to Him, He) is our King (Hitzig), since we do not bring down the Psalm beyond the time of the kings.

Israel’s shield, Israel’s king, the poet says in the holy defiant confidence of faith, is Jahve’s, belongs to the Holy One of Israel, i. e. , he stands as His own possession under the protection of Jahve, the Holy One, who has taken Israel to Himself for a possession; it is therefore impossible that the Davidic throne should become a prey to any worldly power.

Psa 89:15-18 The poet has now described what kind of God He is upon whose promise the royal house in Israel depends. Blessed, then, is the people that walks in the light of His countenance. הלּך of a self-assured, stately walk. The words ידעי תּרוּעה are the statement of the ground of the blessing interwoven into the blessing itself: such a people has abundant cause and matter for exultation (cf.

Psa 84:5). תּרוּעה is the festive sound of joy of the mouth (Num 23:21), and of trumpets or sackbuts (Psa 27:6). This confirmation of the blessing is expanded in Psa 89:17-19. Jahve’s שׁם, i. e. , revelation or manifestation, becomes to them a ground and object of unceasing joy; by His צדקה, i. e. , the rigour with which He binds Himself to the relationship He has entered upon with His people and maintains it, they are exalted above abjectness and insecurity.

He is תּפארת עזּמו, the ornament of their strength, i. e. , their strength which really becomes an ornament to them. In Psa 89:18 the poet declares Israel to be this happy people. Pinsker’s conjecture, קרנם (following the Targum), destroys the transition to Psa 89:19, which is formed by Psa 89:18 . The plural reading of Kimchi and of older editions (e. g. , Bomberg's), קרנינוּ, is incompatible with the figure; but it is immaterial whether we read תּרים with the Chethîb (Targum, Jerome), or with the Kerî (lxx, Syriac) תּרוּם.

מגנּנוּ and מלכּנוּ in Psa 89:19 are parallel designations of the human king of Israel; מגן as in Ps 47:10, but not in Psa 84:10. For we are not compelled, with a total disregard of the limits to the possibilities of style (Ew. §310, a ), to render Psa 89:19 : and the Holy One of Israel, (as to Him, He) is our King (Hitzig), since we do not bring down the Psalm beyond the time of the kings.

Israel’s shield, Israel’s king, the poet says in the holy defiant confidence of faith, is Jahve’s, belongs to the Holy One of Israel, i. e. , he stands as His own possession under the protection of Jahve, the Holy One, who has taken Israel to Himself for a possession; it is therefore impossible that the Davidic throne should become a prey to any worldly power.

Psa 89:15-18 The poet has now described what kind of God He is upon whose promise the royal house in Israel depends. Blessed, then, is the people that walks in the light of His countenance. הלּך of a self-assured, stately walk. The words ידעי תּרוּעה are the statement of the ground of the blessing interwoven into the blessing itself: such a people has abundant cause and matter for exultation (cf.

Psa 84:5). תּרוּעה is the festive sound of joy of the mouth (Num 23:21), and of trumpets or sackbuts (Psa 27:6). This confirmation of the blessing is expanded in Psa 89:17-19. Jahve’s שׁם, i. e. , revelation or manifestation, becomes to them a ground and object of unceasing joy; by His צדקה, i. e. , the rigour with which He binds Himself to the relationship He has entered upon with His people and maintains it, they are exalted above abjectness and insecurity.

He is תּפארת עזּמו, the ornament of their strength, i. e. , their strength which really becomes an ornament to them. In Psa 89:18 the poet declares Israel to be this happy people. Pinsker’s conjecture, קרנם (following the Targum), destroys the transition to Psa 89:19, which is formed by Psa 89:18 . The plural reading of Kimchi and of older editions (e. g. , Bomberg's), קרנינוּ, is incompatible with the figure; but it is immaterial whether we read תּרים with the Chethîb (Targum, Jerome), or with the Kerî (lxx, Syriac) תּרוּם.

מגנּנוּ and מלכּנוּ in Psa 89:19 are parallel designations of the human king of Israel; מגן as in Ps 47:10, but not in Psa 84:10. For we are not compelled, with a total disregard of the limits to the possibilities of style (Ew. §310, a ), to render Psa 89:19 : and the Holy One of Israel, (as to Him, He) is our King (Hitzig), since we do not bring down the Psalm beyond the time of the kings.

Israel’s shield, Israel’s king, the poet says in the holy defiant confidence of faith, is Jahve’s, belongs to the Holy One of Israel, i. e. , he stands as His own possession under the protection of Jahve, the Holy One, who has taken Israel to Himself for a possession; it is therefore impossible that the Davidic throne should become a prey to any worldly power.

Psa 89:15-18 The poet has now described what kind of God He is upon whose promise the royal house in Israel depends. Blessed, then, is the people that walks in the light of His countenance. הלּך of a self-assured, stately walk. The words ידעי תּרוּעה are the statement of the ground of the blessing interwoven into the blessing itself: such a people has abundant cause and matter for exultation (cf.

Psa 84:5). תּרוּעה is the festive sound of joy of the mouth (Num 23:21), and of trumpets or sackbuts (Psa 27:6). This confirmation of the blessing is expanded in Psa 89:17-19. Jahve’s שׁם, i. e. , revelation or manifestation, becomes to them a ground and object of unceasing joy; by His צדקה, i. e. , the rigour with which He binds Himself to the relationship He has entered upon with His people and maintains it, they are exalted above abjectness and insecurity.

He is תּפארת עזּמו, the ornament of their strength, i. e. , their strength which really becomes an ornament to them. In Psa 89:18 the poet declares Israel to be this happy people. Pinsker’s conjecture, קרנם (following the Targum), destroys the transition to Psa 89:19, which is formed by Psa 89:18 . The plural reading of Kimchi and of older editions (e. g. , Bomberg's), קרנינוּ, is incompatible with the figure; but it is immaterial whether we read תּרים with the Chethîb (Targum, Jerome), or with the Kerî (lxx, Syriac) תּרוּם.

מגנּנוּ and מלכּנוּ in Psa 89:19 are parallel designations of the human king of Israel; מגן as in Ps 47:10, but not in Psa 84:10. For we are not compelled, with a total disregard of the limits to the possibilities of style (Ew. §310, a ), to render Psa 89:19 : and the Holy One of Israel, (as to Him, He) is our King (Hitzig), since we do not bring down the Psalm beyond the time of the kings.

Israel’s shield, Israel’s king, the poet says in the holy defiant confidence of faith, is Jahve’s, belongs to the Holy One of Israel, i. e. , he stands as His own possession under the protection of Jahve, the Holy One, who has taken Israel to Himself for a possession; it is therefore impossible that the Davidic throne should become a prey to any worldly power.

Psa 89:19-22 Having thus again come to refer to the king of Israel, the poet now still further unfolds the promise given to the house of David. The present circumstances are a contradiction to it. The prayer to Jahve, for which the way is thus prepared, is for the removal of this contradiction. A long line, extending beyond the measure of the preceding lines, introduces the promises given to David.

With אז the respective period of the past is distinctly defined. The intimate friend of Jahve (חסיד) is Nathan (1Ch 17:15) or David, according as we translate בחזון “in a vision” or “by means of a vision. ” But side by side with the לחסידך we also find the preferable reading לחסידיך, which is followed in the renderings of the lxx, Syriac, Vulgate, Targum, Aquila, Symmachus, and the Quarta, and is adopted by Rashi, Aben-Ezra, and others, and taken up by Heidenheim and Baer.

The plural refers to Samuel and Nathan, for the statement brings together what was revealed to these two prophets concerning David. עזר is assistance as a gift, and that, as the designation of the person succoured by it (שׁוּה על as in Psa 21:6) with גּבּור shows, aid in battle. בּחוּר (from בּחר = בּגר in the Mishna: to ripen, to be manly or of marriageable age, distinct from בּחיר in Psa 89:4) is a young man, adolescens : while yet a young man David was raised out of his humble lowly condition (Psa 78:71) high above the people.

When he received the promise (2 Sam. 7) he had been anointed and had attained to the lordship over all Israel. Hence the preterites in Psa 89:20-21, which are followed by promissory futures from Psa 89:22 onwards. תּכּון is fut. Niph . , to be established, to prove one’s self to be firm, unchangeable (Psa 78:37), a stronger expression than תּהיה, 1Sa 18:12, 1Sa 18:14; 2Sa 3:10.

The Hiph . השּׁיא, derived from נשׁא = נשׁה, to credit (vid. , on Isa 24:2; Gesenius, Hengstenberg), does not give any suitable sense; it therefore signifies here as elsewhere, “to impose upon, surprise,” with בּ, as in Psa 55:16 with על. Psa 89:23 is the echo of 2Sa 7:10.

Psa 89:19-22 Having thus again come to refer to the king of Israel, the poet now still further unfolds the promise given to the house of David. The present circumstances are a contradiction to it. The prayer to Jahve, for which the way is thus prepared, is for the removal of this contradiction. A long line, extending beyond the measure of the preceding lines, introduces the promises given to David.

With אז the respective period of the past is distinctly defined. The intimate friend of Jahve (חסיד) is Nathan (1Ch 17:15) or David, according as we translate בחזון “in a vision” or “by means of a vision. ” But side by side with the לחסידך we also find the preferable reading לחסידיך, which is followed in the renderings of the lxx, Syriac, Vulgate, Targum, Aquila, Symmachus, and the Quarta, and is adopted by Rashi, Aben-Ezra, and others, and taken up by Heidenheim and Baer.

The plural refers to Samuel and Nathan, for the statement brings together what was revealed to these two prophets concerning David. עזר is assistance as a gift, and that, as the designation of the person succoured by it (שׁוּה על as in Psa 21:6) with גּבּור shows, aid in battle. בּחוּר (from בּחר = בּגר in the Mishna: to ripen, to be manly or of marriageable age, distinct from בּחיר in Psa 89:4) is a young man, adolescens : while yet a young man David was raised out of his humble lowly condition (Psa 78:71) high above the people.

When he received the promise (2 Sam. 7) he had been anointed and had attained to the lordship over all Israel. Hence the preterites in Psa 89:20-21, which are followed by promissory futures from Psa 89:22 onwards. תּכּון is fut. Niph . , to be established, to prove one’s self to be firm, unchangeable (Psa 78:37), a stronger expression than תּהיה, 1Sa 18:12, 1Sa 18:14; 2Sa 3:10.

The Hiph . השּׁיא, derived from נשׁא = נשׁה, to credit (vid. , on Isa 24:2; Gesenius, Hengstenberg), does not give any suitable sense; it therefore signifies here as elsewhere, “to impose upon, surprise,” with בּ, as in Psa 55:16 with על. Psa 89:23 is the echo of 2Sa 7:10.

Psa 89:19-22 Having thus again come to refer to the king of Israel, the poet now still further unfolds the promise given to the house of David. The present circumstances are a contradiction to it. The prayer to Jahve, for which the way is thus prepared, is for the removal of this contradiction. A long line, extending beyond the measure of the preceding lines, introduces the promises given to David.

With אז the respective period of the past is distinctly defined. The intimate friend of Jahve (חסיד) is Nathan (1Ch 17:15) or David, according as we translate בחזון “in a vision” or “by means of a vision. ” But side by side with the לחסידך we also find the preferable reading לחסידיך, which is followed in the renderings of the lxx, Syriac, Vulgate, Targum, Aquila, Symmachus, and the Quarta, and is adopted by Rashi, Aben-Ezra, and others, and taken up by Heidenheim and Baer.

The plural refers to Samuel and Nathan, for the statement brings together what was revealed to these two prophets concerning David. עזר is assistance as a gift, and that, as the designation of the person succoured by it (שׁוּה על as in Psa 21:6) with גּבּור shows, aid in battle. בּחוּר (from בּחר = בּגר in the Mishna: to ripen, to be manly or of marriageable age, distinct from בּחיר in Psa 89:4) is a young man, adolescens : while yet a young man David was raised out of his humble lowly condition (Psa 78:71) high above the people.

When he received the promise (2 Sam. 7) he had been anointed and had attained to the lordship over all Israel. Hence the preterites in Psa 89:20-21, which are followed by promissory futures from Psa 89:22 onwards. תּכּון is fut. Niph . , to be established, to prove one’s self to be firm, unchangeable (Psa 78:37), a stronger expression than תּהיה, 1Sa 18:12, 1Sa 18:14; 2Sa 3:10.

The Hiph . השּׁיא, derived from נשׁא = נשׁה, to credit (vid. , on Isa 24:2; Gesenius, Hengstenberg), does not give any suitable sense; it therefore signifies here as elsewhere, “to impose upon, surprise,” with בּ, as in Psa 55:16 with על. Psa 89:23 is the echo of 2Sa 7:10.

Psa 89:19-22 Having thus again come to refer to the king of Israel, the poet now still further unfolds the promise given to the house of David. The present circumstances are a contradiction to it. The prayer to Jahve, for which the way is thus prepared, is for the removal of this contradiction. A long line, extending beyond the measure of the preceding lines, introduces the promises given to David.

With אז the respective period of the past is distinctly defined. The intimate friend of Jahve (חסיד) is Nathan (1Ch 17:15) or David, according as we translate בחזון “in a vision” or “by means of a vision. ” But side by side with the לחסידך we also find the preferable reading לחסידיך, which is followed in the renderings of the lxx, Syriac, Vulgate, Targum, Aquila, Symmachus, and the Quarta, and is adopted by Rashi, Aben-Ezra, and others, and taken up by Heidenheim and Baer.

The plural refers to Samuel and Nathan, for the statement brings together what was revealed to these two prophets concerning David. עזר is assistance as a gift, and that, as the designation of the person succoured by it (שׁוּה על as in Psa 21:6) with גּבּור shows, aid in battle. בּחוּר (from בּחר = בּגר in the Mishna: to ripen, to be manly or of marriageable age, distinct from בּחיר in Psa 89:4) is a young man, adolescens : while yet a young man David was raised out of his humble lowly condition (Psa 78:71) high above the people.

When he received the promise (2 Sam. 7) he had been anointed and had attained to the lordship over all Israel. Hence the preterites in Psa 89:20-21, which are followed by promissory futures from Psa 89:22 onwards. תּכּון is fut. Niph . , to be established, to prove one’s self to be firm, unchangeable (Psa 78:37), a stronger expression than תּהיה, 1Sa 18:12, 1Sa 18:14; 2Sa 3:10.

The Hiph . השּׁיא, derived from נשׁא = נשׁה, to credit (vid. , on Isa 24:2; Gesenius, Hengstenberg), does not give any suitable sense; it therefore signifies here as elsewhere, “to impose upon, surprise,” with בּ, as in Psa 55:16 with על. Psa 89:23 is the echo of 2Sa 7:10.

Psa 89:23-29 What is promised in Psa 89:26 is a world-wide dominion, not merely dominion within the compass promised in the primeval times (Gen 15:18; 2Ch 9:26), in which case it ought to have been said ובנהר (of the Euphrates). Nor does the promise, however, sound so definite and boundless here as in Psa 72:8, but it is indefinite and universal, without any need for our asking what rivers are intended by נהרות.

נתן יד בּ, like שׁלח (in Isa 11:14, of a giving and taking possession. With אף־אני (with retreated tone, as in Psa 119:63, Psa 119:125) God tells with what He will answer David’s filial love. Him who is the latest-born among the sons of Jesse, God makes the first-born (בּכור from בּכר, to be early, opp . לקשׁ, to be late, vid. , Job 2:1-13 :21), and therefore the most favoured of the “sons of the Most High,” Psa 82:6.

And as, according to Deu 28:1, Israel is to be high (עליון) above all nations of the earth, so David, Israel’s king, in whom Israel’s national glory realizes itself, is made as the high one (עליון) with respect to the kings, i. e. , above the kings, of the earth. In the person of David his seed is included; and it is that position of honour which, after having been only prelusively realized in David and Solomon, must go on being fulfilled in his seed exactly as the promise runs.

The covenant with David is, according to Psa 89:29, one that shall stand for ever. David is therefore, as Psa 89:30 affirms, eternal in his seed; God will make David’s seed and throne לעד, into eternal, i. e. , into such as will abide for ever, like the days of heaven, everlasting. This description of eternal duration is, as also in Sir. 45:15, Bar. 1:11, Taken from Deu 11:21; the whole of Psa 89:30 is a poetic reproduction of 2Sa 7:16.

Psa 89:23-29 What is promised in Psa 89:26 is a world-wide dominion, not merely dominion within the compass promised in the primeval times (Gen 15:18; 2Ch 9:26), in which case it ought to have been said ובנהר (of the Euphrates). Nor does the promise, however, sound so definite and boundless here as in Psa 72:8, but it is indefinite and universal, without any need for our asking what rivers are intended by נהרות.

נתן יד בּ, like שׁלח (in Isa 11:14, of a giving and taking possession. With אף־אני (with retreated tone, as in Psa 119:63, Psa 119:125) God tells with what He will answer David’s filial love. Him who is the latest-born among the sons of Jesse, God makes the first-born (בּכור from בּכר, to be early, opp . לקשׁ, to be late, vid. , Job 2:1-13 :21), and therefore the most favoured of the “sons of the Most High,” Psa 82:6.

And as, according to Deu 28:1, Israel is to be high (עליון) above all nations of the earth, so David, Israel’s king, in whom Israel’s national glory realizes itself, is made as the high one (עליון) with respect to the kings, i. e. , above the kings, of the earth. In the person of David his seed is included; and it is that position of honour which, after having been only prelusively realized in David and Solomon, must go on being fulfilled in his seed exactly as the promise runs.

The covenant with David is, according to Psa 89:29, one that shall stand for ever. David is therefore, as Psa 89:30 affirms, eternal in his seed; God will make David’s seed and throne לעד, into eternal, i. e. , into such as will abide for ever, like the days of heaven, everlasting. This description of eternal duration is, as also in Sir. 45:15, Bar. 1:11, Taken from Deu 11:21; the whole of Psa 89:30 is a poetic reproduction of 2Sa 7:16.

Psa 89:23-29 What is promised in Psa 89:26 is a world-wide dominion, not merely dominion within the compass promised in the primeval times (Gen 15:18; 2Ch 9:26), in which case it ought to have been said ובנהר (of the Euphrates). Nor does the promise, however, sound so definite and boundless here as in Psa 72:8, but it is indefinite and universal, without any need for our asking what rivers are intended by נהרות.

נתן יד בּ, like שׁלח (in Isa 11:14, of a giving and taking possession. With אף־אני (with retreated tone, as in Psa 119:63, Psa 119:125) God tells with what He will answer David’s filial love. Him who is the latest-born among the sons of Jesse, God makes the first-born (בּכור from בּכר, to be early, opp . לקשׁ, to be late, vid. , Job 2:1-13 :21), and therefore the most favoured of the “sons of the Most High,” Psa 82:6.

And as, according to Deu 28:1, Israel is to be high (עליון) above all nations of the earth, so David, Israel’s king, in whom Israel’s national glory realizes itself, is made as the high one (עליון) with respect to the kings, i. e. , above the kings, of the earth. In the person of David his seed is included; and it is that position of honour which, after having been only prelusively realized in David and Solomon, must go on being fulfilled in his seed exactly as the promise runs.

The covenant with David is, according to Psa 89:29, one that shall stand for ever. David is therefore, as Psa 89:30 affirms, eternal in his seed; God will make David’s seed and throne לעד, into eternal, i. e. , into such as will abide for ever, like the days of heaven, everlasting. This description of eternal duration is, as also in Sir. 45:15, Bar. 1:11, Taken from Deu 11:21; the whole of Psa 89:30 is a poetic reproduction of 2Sa 7:16.

Psa 89:23-29 What is promised in Psa 89:26 is a world-wide dominion, not merely dominion within the compass promised in the primeval times (Gen 15:18; 2Ch 9:26), in which case it ought to have been said ובנהר (of the Euphrates). Nor does the promise, however, sound so definite and boundless here as in Psa 72:8, but it is indefinite and universal, without any need for our asking what rivers are intended by נהרות.

נתן יד בּ, like שׁלח (in Isa 11:14, of a giving and taking possession. With אף־אני (with retreated tone, as in Psa 119:63, Psa 119:125) God tells with what He will answer David’s filial love. Him who is the latest-born among the sons of Jesse, God makes the first-born (בּכור from בּכר, to be early, opp . לקשׁ, to be late, vid. , Job 2:1-13 :21), and therefore the most favoured of the “sons of the Most High,” Psa 82:6.

And as, according to Deu 28:1, Israel is to be high (עליון) above all nations of the earth, so David, Israel’s king, in whom Israel’s national glory realizes itself, is made as the high one (עליון) with respect to the kings, i. e. , above the kings, of the earth. In the person of David his seed is included; and it is that position of honour which, after having been only prelusively realized in David and Solomon, must go on being fulfilled in his seed exactly as the promise runs.

The covenant with David is, according to Psa 89:29, one that shall stand for ever. David is therefore, as Psa 89:30 affirms, eternal in his seed; God will make David’s seed and throne לעד, into eternal, i. e. , into such as will abide for ever, like the days of heaven, everlasting. This description of eternal duration is, as also in Sir. 45:15, Bar. 1:11, Taken from Deu 11:21; the whole of Psa 89:30 is a poetic reproduction of 2Sa 7:16.

Psa 89:23-29 What is promised in Psa 89:26 is a world-wide dominion, not merely dominion within the compass promised in the primeval times (Gen 15:18; 2Ch 9:26), in which case it ought to have been said ובנהר (of the Euphrates). Nor does the promise, however, sound so definite and boundless here as in Psa 72:8, but it is indefinite and universal, without any need for our asking what rivers are intended by נהרות.

נתן יד בּ, like שׁלח (in Isa 11:14, of a giving and taking possession. With אף־אני (with retreated tone, as in Psa 119:63, Psa 119:125) God tells with what He will answer David’s filial love. Him who is the latest-born among the sons of Jesse, God makes the first-born (בּכור from בּכר, to be early, opp . לקשׁ, to be late, vid. , Job 2:1-13 :21), and therefore the most favoured of the “sons of the Most High,” Psa 82:6.

And as, according to Deu 28:1, Israel is to be high (עליון) above all nations of the earth, so David, Israel’s king, in whom Israel’s national glory realizes itself, is made as the high one (עליון) with respect to the kings, i. e. , above the kings, of the earth. In the person of David his seed is included; and it is that position of honour which, after having been only prelusively realized in David and Solomon, must go on being fulfilled in his seed exactly as the promise runs.

The covenant with David is, according to Psa 89:29, one that shall stand for ever. David is therefore, as Psa 89:30 affirms, eternal in his seed; God will make David’s seed and throne לעד, into eternal, i. e. , into such as will abide for ever, like the days of heaven, everlasting. This description of eternal duration is, as also in Sir. 45:15, Bar. 1:11, Taken from Deu 11:21; the whole of Psa 89:30 is a poetic reproduction of 2Sa 7:16.

Psa 89:23-29 What is promised in Psa 89:26 is a world-wide dominion, not merely dominion within the compass promised in the primeval times (Gen 15:18; 2Ch 9:26), in which case it ought to have been said ובנהר (of the Euphrates). Nor does the promise, however, sound so definite and boundless here as in Psa 72:8, but it is indefinite and universal, without any need for our asking what rivers are intended by נהרות.

נתן יד בּ, like שׁלח (in Isa 11:14, of a giving and taking possession. With אף־אני (with retreated tone, as in Psa 119:63, Psa 119:125) God tells with what He will answer David’s filial love. Him who is the latest-born among the sons of Jesse, God makes the first-born (בּכור from בּכר, to be early, opp . לקשׁ, to be late, vid. , Job 2:1-13 :21), and therefore the most favoured of the “sons of the Most High,” Psa 82:6.

And as, according to Deu 28:1, Israel is to be high (עליון) above all nations of the earth, so David, Israel’s king, in whom Israel’s national glory realizes itself, is made as the high one (עליון) with respect to the kings, i. e. , above the kings, of the earth. In the person of David his seed is included; and it is that position of honour which, after having been only prelusively realized in David and Solomon, must go on being fulfilled in his seed exactly as the promise runs.

The covenant with David is, according to Psa 89:29, one that shall stand for ever. David is therefore, as Psa 89:30 affirms, eternal in his seed; God will make David’s seed and throne לעד, into eternal, i. e. , into such as will abide for ever, like the days of heaven, everlasting. This description of eternal duration is, as also in Sir. 45:15, Bar. 1:11, Taken from Deu 11:21; the whole of Psa 89:30 is a poetic reproduction of 2Sa 7:16.

Psa 89:23-29 What is promised in Psa 89:26 is a world-wide dominion, not merely dominion within the compass promised in the primeval times (Gen 15:18; 2Ch 9:26), in which case it ought to have been said ובנהר (of the Euphrates). Nor does the promise, however, sound so definite and boundless here as in Psa 72:8, but it is indefinite and universal, without any need for our asking what rivers are intended by נהרות.

נתן יד בּ, like שׁלח (in Isa 11:14, of a giving and taking possession. With אף־אני (with retreated tone, as in Psa 119:63, Psa 119:125) God tells with what He will answer David’s filial love. Him who is the latest-born among the sons of Jesse, God makes the first-born (בּכור from בּכר, to be early, opp . לקשׁ, to be late, vid. , Job 2:1-13 :21), and therefore the most favoured of the “sons of the Most High,” Psa 82:6.

And as, according to Deu 28:1, Israel is to be high (עליון) above all nations of the earth, so David, Israel’s king, in whom Israel’s national glory realizes itself, is made as the high one (עליון) with respect to the kings, i. e. , above the kings, of the earth. In the person of David his seed is included; and it is that position of honour which, after having been only prelusively realized in David and Solomon, must go on being fulfilled in his seed exactly as the promise runs.

The covenant with David is, according to Psa 89:29, one that shall stand for ever. David is therefore, as Psa 89:30 affirms, eternal in his seed; God will make David’s seed and throne לעד, into eternal, i. e. , into such as will abide for ever, like the days of heaven, everlasting. This description of eternal duration is, as also in Sir. 45:15, Bar. 1:11, Taken from Deu 11:21; the whole of Psa 89:30 is a poetic reproduction of 2Sa 7:16.

Psa 89:30-37 Now follows the paraphrase of 2Sa 7:14, that the faithlessness of David’s line in relation to the covenant shall not interfere with (annul) the faithfulness of God - a thought with which one might very naturally console one’s self in the reign of Rehoboam. Because God has placed the house of David in a filial relationship to Himself, He will chastise the apostate members as a father chastises his son; cf.

Pro 23:13. In 1Ch 17:13 the chronicler omits the words of 2Sa 7:14 which there provide against perverted action (העוות) on the part of the seed of David; our Psalm proves their originality. But even if, as history shows, this means of chastisement should be ineffectual in the case of individuals, the house of David as such will nevertheless remain ever in a state of favour with Him.

In Psa 89:34 חסדּי לא־אפיר מעמּו corresponds to וחסדּי־לא־יסוּר ממּנּוּ in 2Sa 7:15 (lxx, Targum): the fut . Hiph . of פרר is otherwise always אפר; the conjecture אסיר is therefore natural, yet even the lxx translators (ου ̓ μὴ διασκεδάσω) had אפיר before them. שׁקּר בּ as in Psa 44:18. The covenant with David is sacred with God: He will not profane it (חלּל, to loose the bonds of sanctity).

He will fulfil what has gone forth from His lips, i. e. , His vow, according to Deu 23:24 [23], cf. Num 30:3 [2]. One thing hath He sworn to David; not: once = once for all (lxx), for what is introduced by Psa 89:36 (cf. Psa 27:4) and follows in Psa 89:37, Psa 89:38, is in reality one thing (as in Psa 62:12, two). He hath sworn it per sanctitatem suam . Thus, and not in sanctuario meo , בּקדשׁי in this passage and Amo 4:2 (cf.

on Psa 60:8) is to be rendered, for elsewhere the expression is בּי, Gen 22:16; Isa 45:23, or בּנפשׁו, Amo 6:8; Jer 51:14, or בּשׁמי, Jer 44:26, or בּימינו, Isa 62:8. It is true we do not read any set form of oath in 2 Sam. 7, 1 Chr. 17, but just as Isaiah, Isa 54:9, takes the divine promise in Gen 8:21 as an oath, so the promise so earnestly and most solemnly pledged to David may be accounted by Psalm-poesy (here and in Psa 132:11), which reproduces the historical matter of fact, as a promise attested with an oath.

With אם in Psa 89:36 God asserts that He will not disappoint David in reference to this one thing, viz. , the perpetuity of his throne. This shall stand for ever as the sun and moon; for these, though they may one day undergo a change (Psa 102:27), shall nevertheless never be destroyed. In the presence of 2Sa 7:16 it looks as if Psa 89:38 ought to be rendered: and as the witness in the clouds shall it (David’s throne) be faithful (perpetual).

By the witness in the clouds one would then have to understand the rainbow as the celestial memorial and sign of an everlasting covenant. Thus Luther, Geier, Schmid, and others. But neither this rendering, nor the more natural one, “and as the perpetual, faithful witness in the clouds,” is admissible in connection with the absence of the כּ of comparison. Accordingly Hengstenberg, following the example of Jewish expositors, renders: “and the witness in the clouds is perpetual,” viz.

, the moon, so that the continuance of the Davidic line would be associated with the moon, just as the continuance of the condemned earth is with the rainbow. But in what sense would the moon have the name, without example elsewhere, of witness? Just as the Book of Job was the key to the conclusion of Ps 88, so it is the key to this ambiguous verse of the Psalm before us.

It has to be explained according to Job 16:19, where Job says: “Behold in heaven is my witness, and my surety in the heights. ” Jahve, the אל נאמן (Deu 7:9), seals His sworn promise with the words, “and the witness in the sky (ethereal heights) is faithful” (cf. concerning this Waw in connection with asseverations, Ew. §340, c ). Hengstenberg’s objection, that Jahve cannot be called His own witness, is disposed of by the fact that עד frequently signifies the person who testifies anything concerning himself; in this sense, in fact, the whole Tôra is called עדוּת ה (the testimony of Jahve).

Psa 89:30-37 Now follows the paraphrase of 2Sa 7:14, that the faithlessness of David’s line in relation to the covenant shall not interfere with (annul) the faithfulness of God - a thought with which one might very naturally console one’s self in the reign of Rehoboam. Because God has placed the house of David in a filial relationship to Himself, He will chastise the apostate members as a father chastises his son; cf.

Pro 23:13. In 1Ch 17:13 the chronicler omits the words of 2Sa 7:14 which there provide against perverted action (העוות) on the part of the seed of David; our Psalm proves their originality. But even if, as history shows, this means of chastisement should be ineffectual in the case of individuals, the house of David as such will nevertheless remain ever in a state of favour with Him.

In Psa 89:34 חסדּי לא־אפיר מעמּו corresponds to וחסדּי־לא־יסוּר ממּנּוּ in 2Sa 7:15 (lxx, Targum): the fut . Hiph . of פרר is otherwise always אפר; the conjecture אסיר is therefore natural, yet even the lxx translators (ου ̓ μὴ διασκεδάσω) had אפיר before them. שׁקּר בּ as in Psa 44:18. The covenant with David is sacred with God: He will not profane it (חלּל, to loose the bonds of sanctity).

He will fulfil what has gone forth from His lips, i. e. , His vow, according to Deu 23:24 [23], cf. Num 30:3 [2]. One thing hath He sworn to David; not: once = once for all (lxx), for what is introduced by Psa 89:36 (cf. Psa 27:4) and follows in Psa 89:37, Psa 89:38, is in reality one thing (as in Psa 62:12, two). He hath sworn it per sanctitatem suam . Thus, and not in sanctuario meo , בּקדשׁי in this passage and Amo 4:2 (cf.

on Psa 60:8) is to be rendered, for elsewhere the expression is בּי, Gen 22:16; Isa 45:23, or בּנפשׁו, Amo 6:8; Jer 51:14, or בּשׁמי, Jer 44:26, or בּימינו, Isa 62:8. It is true we do not read any set form of oath in 2 Sam. 7, 1 Chr. 17, but just as Isaiah, Isa 54:9, takes the divine promise in Gen 8:21 as an oath, so the promise so earnestly and most solemnly pledged to David may be accounted by Psalm-poesy (here and in Psa 132:11), which reproduces the historical matter of fact, as a promise attested with an oath.

With אם in Psa 89:36 God asserts that He will not disappoint David in reference to this one thing, viz. , the perpetuity of his throne. This shall stand for ever as the sun and moon; for these, though they may one day undergo a change (Psa 102:27), shall nevertheless never be destroyed. In the presence of 2Sa 7:16 it looks as if Psa 89:38 ought to be rendered: and as the witness in the clouds shall it (David’s throne) be faithful (perpetual).

By the witness in the clouds one would then have to understand the rainbow as the celestial memorial and sign of an everlasting covenant. Thus Luther, Geier, Schmid, and others. But neither this rendering, nor the more natural one, “and as the perpetual, faithful witness in the clouds,” is admissible in connection with the absence of the כּ of comparison. Accordingly Hengstenberg, following the example of Jewish expositors, renders: “and the witness in the clouds is perpetual,” viz.

, the moon, so that the continuance of the Davidic line would be associated with the moon, just as the continuance of the condemned earth is with the rainbow. But in what sense would the moon have the name, without example elsewhere, of witness? Just as the Book of Job was the key to the conclusion of Ps 88, so it is the key to this ambiguous verse of the Psalm before us.

It has to be explained according to Job 16:19, where Job says: “Behold in heaven is my witness, and my surety in the heights. ” Jahve, the אל נאמן (Deu 7:9), seals His sworn promise with the words, “and the witness in the sky (ethereal heights) is faithful” (cf. concerning this Waw in connection with asseverations, Ew. §340, c ). Hengstenberg’s objection, that Jahve cannot be called His own witness, is disposed of by the fact that עד frequently signifies the person who testifies anything concerning himself; in this sense, in fact, the whole Tôra is called עדוּת ה (the testimony of Jahve).

Psa 89:30-37 Now follows the paraphrase of 2Sa 7:14, that the faithlessness of David’s line in relation to the covenant shall not interfere with (annul) the faithfulness of God - a thought with which one might very naturally console one’s self in the reign of Rehoboam. Because God has placed the house of David in a filial relationship to Himself, He will chastise the apostate members as a father chastises his son; cf.

Pro 23:13. In 1Ch 17:13 the chronicler omits the words of 2Sa 7:14 which there provide against perverted action (העוות) on the part of the seed of David; our Psalm proves their originality. But even if, as history shows, this means of chastisement should be ineffectual in the case of individuals, the house of David as such will nevertheless remain ever in a state of favour with Him.

In Psa 89:34 חסדּי לא־אפיר מעמּו corresponds to וחסדּי־לא־יסוּר ממּנּוּ in 2Sa 7:15 (lxx, Targum): the fut . Hiph . of פרר is otherwise always אפר; the conjecture אסיר is therefore natural, yet even the lxx translators (ου ̓ μὴ διασκεδάσω) had אפיר before them. שׁקּר בּ as in Psa 44:18. The covenant with David is sacred with God: He will not profane it (חלּל, to loose the bonds of sanctity).

He will fulfil what has gone forth from His lips, i. e. , His vow, according to Deu 23:24 [23], cf. Num 30:3 [2]. One thing hath He sworn to David; not: once = once for all (lxx), for what is introduced by Psa 89:36 (cf. Psa 27:4) and follows in Psa 89:37, Psa 89:38, is in reality one thing (as in Psa 62:12, two). He hath sworn it per sanctitatem suam . Thus, and not in sanctuario meo , בּקדשׁי in this passage and Amo 4:2 (cf.

on Psa 60:8) is to be rendered, for elsewhere the expression is בּי, Gen 22:16; Isa 45:23, or בּנפשׁו, Amo 6:8; Jer 51:14, or בּשׁמי, Jer 44:26, or בּימינו, Isa 62:8. It is true we do not read any set form of oath in 2 Sam. 7, 1 Chr. 17, but just as Isaiah, Isa 54:9, takes the divine promise in Gen 8:21 as an oath, so the promise so earnestly and most solemnly pledged to David may be accounted by Psalm-poesy (here and in Psa 132:11), which reproduces the historical matter of fact, as a promise attested with an oath.

With אם in Psa 89:36 God asserts that He will not disappoint David in reference to this one thing, viz. , the perpetuity of his throne. This shall stand for ever as the sun and moon; for these, though they may one day undergo a change (Psa 102:27), shall nevertheless never be destroyed. In the presence of 2Sa 7:16 it looks as if Psa 89:38 ought to be rendered: and as the witness in the clouds shall it (David’s throne) be faithful (perpetual).

By the witness in the clouds one would then have to understand the rainbow as the celestial memorial and sign of an everlasting covenant. Thus Luther, Geier, Schmid, and others. But neither this rendering, nor the more natural one, “and as the perpetual, faithful witness in the clouds,” is admissible in connection with the absence of the כּ of comparison. Accordingly Hengstenberg, following the example of Jewish expositors, renders: “and the witness in the clouds is perpetual,” viz.

, the moon, so that the continuance of the Davidic line would be associated with the moon, just as the continuance of the condemned earth is with the rainbow. But in what sense would the moon have the name, without example elsewhere, of witness? Just as the Book of Job was the key to the conclusion of Ps 88, so it is the key to this ambiguous verse of the Psalm before us.

It has to be explained according to Job 16:19, where Job says: “Behold in heaven is my witness, and my surety in the heights. ” Jahve, the אל נאמן (Deu 7:9), seals His sworn promise with the words, “and the witness in the sky (ethereal heights) is faithful” (cf. concerning this Waw in connection with asseverations, Ew. §340, c ). Hengstenberg’s objection, that Jahve cannot be called His own witness, is disposed of by the fact that עד frequently signifies the person who testifies anything concerning himself; in this sense, in fact, the whole Tôra is called עדוּת ה (the testimony of Jahve).

Psa 89:30-37 Now follows the paraphrase of 2Sa 7:14, that the faithlessness of David’s line in relation to the covenant shall not interfere with (annul) the faithfulness of God - a thought with which one might very naturally console one’s self in the reign of Rehoboam. Because God has placed the house of David in a filial relationship to Himself, He will chastise the apostate members as a father chastises his son; cf.

Pro 23:13. In 1Ch 17:13 the chronicler omits the words of 2Sa 7:14 which there provide against perverted action (העוות) on the part of the seed of David; our Psalm proves their originality. But even if, as history shows, this means of chastisement should be ineffectual in the case of individuals, the house of David as such will nevertheless remain ever in a state of favour with Him.

In Psa 89:34 חסדּי לא־אפיר מעמּו corresponds to וחסדּי־לא־יסוּר ממּנּוּ in 2Sa 7:15 (lxx, Targum): the fut . Hiph . of פרר is otherwise always אפר; the conjecture אסיר is therefore natural, yet even the lxx translators (ου ̓ μὴ διασκεδάσω) had אפיר before them. שׁקּר בּ as in Psa 44:18. The covenant with David is sacred with God: He will not profane it (חלּל, to loose the bonds of sanctity).

He will fulfil what has gone forth from His lips, i. e. , His vow, according to Deu 23:24 [23], cf. Num 30:3 [2]. One thing hath He sworn to David; not: once = once for all (lxx), for what is introduced by Psa 89:36 (cf. Psa 27:4) and follows in Psa 89:37, Psa 89:38, is in reality one thing (as in Psa 62:12, two). He hath sworn it per sanctitatem suam . Thus, and not in sanctuario meo , בּקדשׁי in this passage and Amo 4:2 (cf.

on Psa 60:8) is to be rendered, for elsewhere the expression is בּי, Gen 22:16; Isa 45:23, or בּנפשׁו, Amo 6:8; Jer 51:14, or בּשׁמי, Jer 44:26, or בּימינו, Isa 62:8. It is true we do not read any set form of oath in 2 Sam. 7, 1 Chr. 17, but just as Isaiah, Isa 54:9, takes the divine promise in Gen 8:21 as an oath, so the promise so earnestly and most solemnly pledged to David may be accounted by Psalm-poesy (here and in Psa 132:11), which reproduces the historical matter of fact, as a promise attested with an oath.

With אם in Psa 89:36 God asserts that He will not disappoint David in reference to this one thing, viz. , the perpetuity of his throne. This shall stand for ever as the sun and moon; for these, though they may one day undergo a change (Psa 102:27), shall nevertheless never be destroyed. In the presence of 2Sa 7:16 it looks as if Psa 89:38 ought to be rendered: and as the witness in the clouds shall it (David’s throne) be faithful (perpetual).

By the witness in the clouds one would then have to understand the rainbow as the celestial memorial and sign of an everlasting covenant. Thus Luther, Geier, Schmid, and others. But neither this rendering, nor the more natural one, “and as the perpetual, faithful witness in the clouds,” is admissible in connection with the absence of the כּ of comparison. Accordingly Hengstenberg, following the example of Jewish expositors, renders: “and the witness in the clouds is perpetual,” viz.

, the moon, so that the continuance of the Davidic line would be associated with the moon, just as the continuance of the condemned earth is with the rainbow. But in what sense would the moon have the name, without example elsewhere, of witness? Just as the Book of Job was the key to the conclusion of Ps 88, so it is the key to this ambiguous verse of the Psalm before us.

It has to be explained according to Job 16:19, where Job says: “Behold in heaven is my witness, and my surety in the heights. ” Jahve, the אל נאמן (Deu 7:9), seals His sworn promise with the words, “and the witness in the sky (ethereal heights) is faithful” (cf. concerning this Waw in connection with asseverations, Ew. §340, c ). Hengstenberg’s objection, that Jahve cannot be called His own witness, is disposed of by the fact that עד frequently signifies the person who testifies anything concerning himself; in this sense, in fact, the whole Tôra is called עדוּת ה (the testimony of Jahve).

Psa 89:30-37 Now follows the paraphrase of 2Sa 7:14, that the faithlessness of David’s line in relation to the covenant shall not interfere with (annul) the faithfulness of God - a thought with which one might very naturally console one’s self in the reign of Rehoboam. Because God has placed the house of David in a filial relationship to Himself, He will chastise the apostate members as a father chastises his son; cf.

Pro 23:13. In 1Ch 17:13 the chronicler omits the words of 2Sa 7:14 which there provide against perverted action (העוות) on the part of the seed of David; our Psalm proves their originality. But even if, as history shows, this means of chastisement should be ineffectual in the case of individuals, the house of David as such will nevertheless remain ever in a state of favour with Him.

In Psa 89:34 חסדּי לא־אפיר מעמּו corresponds to וחסדּי־לא־יסוּר ממּנּוּ in 2Sa 7:15 (lxx, Targum): the fut . Hiph . of פרר is otherwise always אפר; the conjecture אסיר is therefore natural, yet even the lxx translators (ου ̓ μὴ διασκεδάσω) had אפיר before them. שׁקּר בּ as in Psa 44:18. The covenant with David is sacred with God: He will not profane it (חלּל, to loose the bonds of sanctity).

He will fulfil what has gone forth from His lips, i. e. , His vow, according to Deu 23:24 [23], cf. Num 30:3 [2]. One thing hath He sworn to David; not: once = once for all (lxx), for what is introduced by Psa 89:36 (cf. Psa 27:4) and follows in Psa 89:37, Psa 89:38, is in reality one thing (as in Psa 62:12, two). He hath sworn it per sanctitatem suam . Thus, and not in sanctuario meo , בּקדשׁי in this passage and Amo 4:2 (cf.

on Psa 60:8) is to be rendered, for elsewhere the expression is בּי, Gen 22:16; Isa 45:23, or בּנפשׁו, Amo 6:8; Jer 51:14, or בּשׁמי, Jer 44:26, or בּימינו, Isa 62:8. It is true we do not read any set form of oath in 2 Sam. 7, 1 Chr. 17, but just as Isaiah, Isa 54:9, takes the divine promise in Gen 8:21 as an oath, so the promise so earnestly and most solemnly pledged to David may be accounted by Psalm-poesy (here and in Psa 132:11), which reproduces the historical matter of fact, as a promise attested with an oath.

With אם in Psa 89:36 God asserts that He will not disappoint David in reference to this one thing, viz. , the perpetuity of his throne. This shall stand for ever as the sun and moon; for these, though they may one day undergo a change (Psa 102:27), shall nevertheless never be destroyed. In the presence of 2Sa 7:16 it looks as if Psa 89:38 ought to be rendered: and as the witness in the clouds shall it (David’s throne) be faithful (perpetual).

By the witness in the clouds one would then have to understand the rainbow as the celestial memorial and sign of an everlasting covenant. Thus Luther, Geier, Schmid, and others. But neither this rendering, nor the more natural one, “and as the perpetual, faithful witness in the clouds,” is admissible in connection with the absence of the כּ of comparison. Accordingly Hengstenberg, following the example of Jewish expositors, renders: “and the witness in the clouds is perpetual,” viz.

, the moon, so that the continuance of the Davidic line would be associated with the moon, just as the continuance of the condemned earth is with the rainbow. But in what sense would the moon have the name, without example elsewhere, of witness? Just as the Book of Job was the key to the conclusion of Ps 88, so it is the key to this ambiguous verse of the Psalm before us.

It has to be explained according to Job 16:19, where Job says: “Behold in heaven is my witness, and my surety in the heights. ” Jahve, the אל נאמן (Deu 7:9), seals His sworn promise with the words, “and the witness in the sky (ethereal heights) is faithful” (cf. concerning this Waw in connection with asseverations, Ew. §340, c ). Hengstenberg’s objection, that Jahve cannot be called His own witness, is disposed of by the fact that עד frequently signifies the person who testifies anything concerning himself; in this sense, in fact, the whole Tôra is called עדוּת ה (the testimony of Jahve).

Psa 89:30-37 Now follows the paraphrase of 2Sa 7:14, that the faithlessness of David’s line in relation to the covenant shall not interfere with (annul) the faithfulness of God - a thought with which one might very naturally console one’s self in the reign of Rehoboam. Because God has placed the house of David in a filial relationship to Himself, He will chastise the apostate members as a father chastises his son; cf.

Pro 23:13. In 1Ch 17:13 the chronicler omits the words of 2Sa 7:14 which there provide against perverted action (העוות) on the part of the seed of David; our Psalm proves their originality. But even if, as history shows, this means of chastisement should be ineffectual in the case of individuals, the house of David as such will nevertheless remain ever in a state of favour with Him.

In Psa 89:34 חסדּי לא־אפיר מעמּו corresponds to וחסדּי־לא־יסוּר ממּנּוּ in 2Sa 7:15 (lxx, Targum): the fut . Hiph . of פרר is otherwise always אפר; the conjecture אסיר is therefore natural, yet even the lxx translators (ου ̓ μὴ διασκεδάσω) had אפיר before them. שׁקּר בּ as in Psa 44:18. The covenant with David is sacred with God: He will not profane it (חלּל, to loose the bonds of sanctity).

He will fulfil what has gone forth from His lips, i. e. , His vow, according to Deu 23:24 [23], cf. Num 30:3 [2]. One thing hath He sworn to David; not: once = once for all (lxx), for what is introduced by Psa 89:36 (cf. Psa 27:4) and follows in Psa 89:37, Psa 89:38, is in reality one thing (as in Psa 62:12, two). He hath sworn it per sanctitatem suam . Thus, and not in sanctuario meo , בּקדשׁי in this passage and Amo 4:2 (cf.

on Psa 60:8) is to be rendered, for elsewhere the expression is בּי, Gen 22:16; Isa 45:23, or בּנפשׁו, Amo 6:8; Jer 51:14, or בּשׁמי, Jer 44:26, or בּימינו, Isa 62:8. It is true we do not read any set form of oath in 2 Sam. 7, 1 Chr. 17, but just as Isaiah, Isa 54:9, takes the divine promise in Gen 8:21 as an oath, so the promise so earnestly and most solemnly pledged to David may be accounted by Psalm-poesy (here and in Psa 132:11), which reproduces the historical matter of fact, as a promise attested with an oath.

With אם in Psa 89:36 God asserts that He will not disappoint David in reference to this one thing, viz. , the perpetuity of his throne. This shall stand for ever as the sun and moon; for these, though they may one day undergo a change (Psa 102:27), shall nevertheless never be destroyed. In the presence of 2Sa 7:16 it looks as if Psa 89:38 ought to be rendered: and as the witness in the clouds shall it (David’s throne) be faithful (perpetual).

By the witness in the clouds one would then have to understand the rainbow as the celestial memorial and sign of an everlasting covenant. Thus Luther, Geier, Schmid, and others. But neither this rendering, nor the more natural one, “and as the perpetual, faithful witness in the clouds,” is admissible in connection with the absence of the כּ of comparison. Accordingly Hengstenberg, following the example of Jewish expositors, renders: “and the witness in the clouds is perpetual,” viz.

, the moon, so that the continuance of the Davidic line would be associated with the moon, just as the continuance of the condemned earth is with the rainbow. But in what sense would the moon have the name, without example elsewhere, of witness? Just as the Book of Job was the key to the conclusion of Ps 88, so it is the key to this ambiguous verse of the Psalm before us.

It has to be explained according to Job 16:19, where Job says: “Behold in heaven is my witness, and my surety in the heights. ” Jahve, the אל נאמן (Deu 7:9), seals His sworn promise with the words, “and the witness in the sky (ethereal heights) is faithful” (cf. concerning this Waw in connection with asseverations, Ew. §340, c ). Hengstenberg’s objection, that Jahve cannot be called His own witness, is disposed of by the fact that עד frequently signifies the person who testifies anything concerning himself; in this sense, in fact, the whole Tôra is called עדוּת ה (the testimony of Jahve).

Psa 89:30-37 Now follows the paraphrase of 2Sa 7:14, that the faithlessness of David’s line in relation to the covenant shall not interfere with (annul) the faithfulness of God - a thought with which one might very naturally console one’s self in the reign of Rehoboam. Because God has placed the house of David in a filial relationship to Himself, He will chastise the apostate members as a father chastises his son; cf.

Pro 23:13. In 1Ch 17:13 the chronicler omits the words of 2Sa 7:14 which there provide against perverted action (העוות) on the part of the seed of David; our Psalm proves their originality. But even if, as history shows, this means of chastisement should be ineffectual in the case of individuals, the house of David as such will nevertheless remain ever in a state of favour with Him.

In Psa 89:34 חסדּי לא־אפיר מעמּו corresponds to וחסדּי־לא־יסוּר ממּנּוּ in 2Sa 7:15 (lxx, Targum): the fut . Hiph . of פרר is otherwise always אפר; the conjecture אסיר is therefore natural, yet even the lxx translators (ου ̓ μὴ διασκεδάσω) had אפיר before them. שׁקּר בּ as in Psa 44:18. The covenant with David is sacred with God: He will not profane it (חלּל, to loose the bonds of sanctity).

He will fulfil what has gone forth from His lips, i. e. , His vow, according to Deu 23:24 [23], cf. Num 30:3 [2]. One thing hath He sworn to David; not: once = once for all (lxx), for what is introduced by Psa 89:36 (cf. Psa 27:4) and follows in Psa 89:37, Psa 89:38, is in reality one thing (as in Psa 62:12, two). He hath sworn it per sanctitatem suam . Thus, and not in sanctuario meo , בּקדשׁי in this passage and Amo 4:2 (cf.

on Psa 60:8) is to be rendered, for elsewhere the expression is בּי, Gen 22:16; Isa 45:23, or בּנפשׁו, Amo 6:8; Jer 51:14, or בּשׁמי, Jer 44:26, or בּימינו, Isa 62:8. It is true we do not read any set form of oath in 2 Sam. 7, 1 Chr. 17, but just as Isaiah, Isa 54:9, takes the divine promise in Gen 8:21 as an oath, so the promise so earnestly and most solemnly pledged to David may be accounted by Psalm-poesy (here and in Psa 132:11), which reproduces the historical matter of fact, as a promise attested with an oath.

With אם in Psa 89:36 God asserts that He will not disappoint David in reference to this one thing, viz. , the perpetuity of his throne. This shall stand for ever as the sun and moon; for these, though they may one day undergo a change (Psa 102:27), shall nevertheless never be destroyed. In the presence of 2Sa 7:16 it looks as if Psa 89:38 ought to be rendered: and as the witness in the clouds shall it (David’s throne) be faithful (perpetual).

By the witness in the clouds one would then have to understand the rainbow as the celestial memorial and sign of an everlasting covenant. Thus Luther, Geier, Schmid, and others. But neither this rendering, nor the more natural one, “and as the perpetual, faithful witness in the clouds,” is admissible in connection with the absence of the כּ of comparison. Accordingly Hengstenberg, following the example of Jewish expositors, renders: “and the witness in the clouds is perpetual,” viz.

, the moon, so that the continuance of the Davidic line would be associated with the moon, just as the continuance of the condemned earth is with the rainbow. But in what sense would the moon have the name, without example elsewhere, of witness? Just as the Book of Job was the key to the conclusion of Ps 88, so it is the key to this ambiguous verse of the Psalm before us.

It has to be explained according to Job 16:19, where Job says: “Behold in heaven is my witness, and my surety in the heights. ” Jahve, the אל נאמן (Deu 7:9), seals His sworn promise with the words, “and the witness in the sky (ethereal heights) is faithful” (cf. concerning this Waw in connection with asseverations, Ew. §340, c ). Hengstenberg’s objection, that Jahve cannot be called His own witness, is disposed of by the fact that עד frequently signifies the person who testifies anything concerning himself; in this sense, in fact, the whole Tôra is called עדוּת ה (the testimony of Jahve).

Psa 89:30-37 Now follows the paraphrase of 2Sa 7:14, that the faithlessness of David’s line in relation to the covenant shall not interfere with (annul) the faithfulness of God - a thought with which one might very naturally console one’s self in the reign of Rehoboam. Because God has placed the house of David in a filial relationship to Himself, He will chastise the apostate members as a father chastises his son; cf.

Pro 23:13. In 1Ch 17:13 the chronicler omits the words of 2Sa 7:14 which there provide against perverted action (העוות) on the part of the seed of David; our Psalm proves their originality. But even if, as history shows, this means of chastisement should be ineffectual in the case of individuals, the house of David as such will nevertheless remain ever in a state of favour with Him.

In Psa 89:34 חסדּי לא־אפיר מעמּו corresponds to וחסדּי־לא־יסוּר ממּנּוּ in 2Sa 7:15 (lxx, Targum): the fut . Hiph . of פרר is otherwise always אפר; the conjecture אסיר is therefore natural, yet even the lxx translators (ου ̓ μὴ διασκεδάσω) had אפיר before them. שׁקּר בּ as in Psa 44:18. The covenant with David is sacred with God: He will not profane it (חלּל, to loose the bonds of sanctity).

He will fulfil what has gone forth from His lips, i. e. , His vow, according to Deu 23:24 [23], cf. Num 30:3 [2]. One thing hath He sworn to David; not: once = once for all (lxx), for what is introduced by Psa 89:36 (cf. Psa 27:4) and follows in Psa 89:37, Psa 89:38, is in reality one thing (as in Psa 62:12, two). He hath sworn it per sanctitatem suam . Thus, and not in sanctuario meo , בּקדשׁי in this passage and Amo 4:2 (cf.

on Psa 60:8) is to be rendered, for elsewhere the expression is בּי, Gen 22:16; Isa 45:23, or בּנפשׁו, Amo 6:8; Jer 51:14, or בּשׁמי, Jer 44:26, or בּימינו, Isa 62:8. It is true we do not read any set form of oath in 2 Sam. 7, 1 Chr. 17, but just as Isaiah, Isa 54:9, takes the divine promise in Gen 8:21 as an oath, so the promise so earnestly and most solemnly pledged to David may be accounted by Psalm-poesy (here and in Psa 132:11), which reproduces the historical matter of fact, as a promise attested with an oath.

With אם in Psa 89:36 God asserts that He will not disappoint David in reference to this one thing, viz. , the perpetuity of his throne. This shall stand for ever as the sun and moon; for these, though they may one day undergo a change (Psa 102:27), shall nevertheless never be destroyed. In the presence of 2Sa 7:16 it looks as if Psa 89:38 ought to be rendered: and as the witness in the clouds shall it (David’s throne) be faithful (perpetual).

By the witness in the clouds one would then have to understand the rainbow as the celestial memorial and sign of an everlasting covenant. Thus Luther, Geier, Schmid, and others. But neither this rendering, nor the more natural one, “and as the perpetual, faithful witness in the clouds,” is admissible in connection with the absence of the כּ of comparison. Accordingly Hengstenberg, following the example of Jewish expositors, renders: “and the witness in the clouds is perpetual,” viz.

, the moon, so that the continuance of the Davidic line would be associated with the moon, just as the continuance of the condemned earth is with the rainbow. But in what sense would the moon have the name, without example elsewhere, of witness? Just as the Book of Job was the key to the conclusion of Ps 88, so it is the key to this ambiguous verse of the Psalm before us.

It has to be explained according to Job 16:19, where Job says: “Behold in heaven is my witness, and my surety in the heights. ” Jahve, the אל נאמן (Deu 7:9), seals His sworn promise with the words, “and the witness in the sky (ethereal heights) is faithful” (cf. concerning this Waw in connection with asseverations, Ew. §340, c ). Hengstenberg’s objection, that Jahve cannot be called His own witness, is disposed of by the fact that עד frequently signifies the person who testifies anything concerning himself; in this sense, in fact, the whole Tôra is called עדוּת ה (the testimony of Jahve).

Psa 89:38-45 Now after the poet has turned his thoughts towards the beginnings of the house of David which were so rich in promise, in order that he might find comfort under the sorrowful present, the contrast of the two periods is become all the more sensible to him. With ואתּה in Psa 89:39 (And Thou - the same who hast promised and affirmed this with an oath) his Psalm takes a new turn, for which reason it might even have been ועתּה.

זנח is used just as absolutely here as in Psa 44:24; Psa 74:1; Psa 77:8, so that it does not require any object to be supplied out of Psa 89:39 . נארתּה in Psa 89:40 the lxx renders kate'strepsas; it is better rendered in Lam 2:7 ἀπετίναξε; for נאר is synonymous with נער, to shake off, push away, cf. Arabic el - menâ‛ir , the thrusters (with the lance). עבדּך is a vocational name of the king as such.

His crown is sacred as being the insignia of a God-bestowed office. God has therefore made the sacred thing vile by casting it to the ground (חלּל לארץ, as in Psa 74:17, to cast profaningly to the ground). The primary passage to Psa 89:41-42, is Psa 80:13. “His hedges” are all the boundary and protecting fences which the land of the king has; and מבצריו “the fortresses” of his land (in both instances without כל, because matters have not yet come to such a pass).

In שׁסּהוּ the notions of the king and of the land blend together. עברי־דרך are the hordes of the peoples passing through the land. שׁכניו are the neighbouring peoples that are otherwise liable to pay tribute to the house of David, who sought to take every possible advantage of that weakening of the Davidic kingdom. In Psa 89:44 we are neither to translate “rock of his sword” (Hengstenberg), nor “O rock” (Olshausen).

צוּר does not merely signify rupes , but also from another root (צוּר, Arab. ṣâr , originally of the grating or shrill noise produced by pressing and squeezing, then more particularly to cut or cut off with pressure, with a sharply set knife or the like) a knife or a blade (cf. English knife, and German kneifen , to nip): God has decreed it that the edge or blade of the sword of the king has been turned back by the enemy, that he has not been able to maintain his ground in battle (הקמתו with ē instead of ı̂ , as also when the tone is not moved forward, Mic 5:4).

In Psa 89:45 the Mem of מטהרו, after the analogy of Eze 16:41; Eze 34:10, and other passages, is a preposition: cessare fecisti eum a splendore suo . A noun מטּהר = מטהר with Dag. dirimens, like מקדּשׁ Exo 15:17, מנּזר Nah 3:17 (Abulwalîd, Aben-Ezra, Parchon, Kimchi, and others), in itself improbable in the signification required here, is not found either in post-biblical or in biblical Hebrew.

טהר, like צהר, signifies first of all not purity, but brilliancy. Still the form טהר does not lie at the basis of it in this instance; for the reading found here just happens not to be טהרו, but מטּהרו; and the reading adopted by Norzi, Heidenheim, and Baer, as also by Nissel and others, so far as form is concerned is not distinct from it, viz. , מטּהרו ( miṭtŏharo ), the character of the Shebâ being determined by the analogy of the å following (cf.

בּסּערה, 2Ki 2:1), which presupposes the principal form טהר (Böttcher, §386, cf. supra , 2:31, note). The personal tenor of Psa 89:46 requires that it should be referred to the then reigning Davidic king, but not as dying before his time (Olshausen), but as becoming prematurely old by reason of the sorrowful experiences of his reign. The larger half of the kingdom has been wrested from him; Egypt and the neighbouring nations also threaten the half that remains to him; and instead of the kingly robe, shame completely covers him.

Psa 89:38-45 Now after the poet has turned his thoughts towards the beginnings of the house of David which were so rich in promise, in order that he might find comfort under the sorrowful present, the contrast of the two periods is become all the more sensible to him. With ואתּה in Psa 89:39 (And Thou - the same who hast promised and affirmed this with an oath) his Psalm takes a new turn, for which reason it might even have been ועתּה.

זנח is used just as absolutely here as in Psa 44:24; Psa 74:1; Psa 77:8, so that it does not require any object to be supplied out of Psa 89:39 . נארתּה in Psa 89:40 the lxx renders kate'strepsas; it is better rendered in Lam 2:7 ἀπετίναξε; for נאר is synonymous with נער, to shake off, push away, cf. Arabic el - menâ‛ir , the thrusters (with the lance). עבדּך is a vocational name of the king as such.

His crown is sacred as being the insignia of a God-bestowed office. God has therefore made the sacred thing vile by casting it to the ground (חלּל לארץ, as in Psa 74:17, to cast profaningly to the ground). The primary passage to Psa 89:41-42, is Psa 80:13. “His hedges” are all the boundary and protecting fences which the land of the king has; and מבצריו “the fortresses” of his land (in both instances without כל, because matters have not yet come to such a pass).

In שׁסּהוּ the notions of the king and of the land blend together. עברי־דרך are the hordes of the peoples passing through the land. שׁכניו are the neighbouring peoples that are otherwise liable to pay tribute to the house of David, who sought to take every possible advantage of that weakening of the Davidic kingdom. In Psa 89:44 we are neither to translate “rock of his sword” (Hengstenberg), nor “O rock” (Olshausen).

צוּר does not merely signify rupes , but also from another root (צוּר, Arab. ṣâr , originally of the grating or shrill noise produced by pressing and squeezing, then more particularly to cut or cut off with pressure, with a sharply set knife or the like) a knife or a blade (cf. English knife, and German kneifen , to nip): God has decreed it that the edge or blade of the sword of the king has been turned back by the enemy, that he has not been able to maintain his ground in battle (הקמתו with ē instead of ı̂ , as also when the tone is not moved forward, Mic 5:4).

In Psa 89:45 the Mem of מטהרו, after the analogy of Eze 16:41; Eze 34:10, and other passages, is a preposition: cessare fecisti eum a splendore suo . A noun מטּהר = מטהר with Dag. dirimens, like מקדּשׁ Exo 15:17, מנּזר Nah 3:17 (Abulwalîd, Aben-Ezra, Parchon, Kimchi, and others), in itself improbable in the signification required here, is not found either in post-biblical or in biblical Hebrew.

טהר, like צהר, signifies first of all not purity, but brilliancy. Still the form טהר does not lie at the basis of it in this instance; for the reading found here just happens not to be טהרו, but מטּהרו; and the reading adopted by Norzi, Heidenheim, and Baer, as also by Nissel and others, so far as form is concerned is not distinct from it, viz. , מטּהרו ( miṭtŏharo ), the character of the Shebâ being determined by the analogy of the å following (cf.

בּסּערה, 2Ki 2:1), which presupposes the principal form טהר (Böttcher, §386, cf. supra , 2:31, note). The personal tenor of Psa 89:46 requires that it should be referred to the then reigning Davidic king, but not as dying before his time (Olshausen), but as becoming prematurely old by reason of the sorrowful experiences of his reign. The larger half of the kingdom has been wrested from him; Egypt and the neighbouring nations also threaten the half that remains to him; and instead of the kingly robe, shame completely covers him.

Psa 89:38-45 Now after the poet has turned his thoughts towards the beginnings of the house of David which were so rich in promise, in order that he might find comfort under the sorrowful present, the contrast of the two periods is become all the more sensible to him. With ואתּה in Psa 89:39 (And Thou - the same who hast promised and affirmed this with an oath) his Psalm takes a new turn, for which reason it might even have been ועתּה.

זנח is used just as absolutely here as in Psa 44:24; Psa 74:1; Psa 77:8, so that it does not require any object to be supplied out of Psa 89:39 . נארתּה in Psa 89:40 the lxx renders kate'strepsas; it is better rendered in Lam 2:7 ἀπετίναξε; for נאר is synonymous with נער, to shake off, push away, cf. Arabic el - menâ‛ir , the thrusters (with the lance). עבדּך is a vocational name of the king as such.

His crown is sacred as being the insignia of a God-bestowed office. God has therefore made the sacred thing vile by casting it to the ground (חלּל לארץ, as in Psa 74:17, to cast profaningly to the ground). The primary passage to Psa 89:41-42, is Psa 80:13. “His hedges” are all the boundary and protecting fences which the land of the king has; and מבצריו “the fortresses” of his land (in both instances without כל, because matters have not yet come to such a pass).

In שׁסּהוּ the notions of the king and of the land blend together. עברי־דרך are the hordes of the peoples passing through the land. שׁכניו are the neighbouring peoples that are otherwise liable to pay tribute to the house of David, who sought to take every possible advantage of that weakening of the Davidic kingdom. In Psa 89:44 we are neither to translate “rock of his sword” (Hengstenberg), nor “O rock” (Olshausen).

צוּר does not merely signify rupes , but also from another root (צוּר, Arab. ṣâr , originally of the grating or shrill noise produced by pressing and squeezing, then more particularly to cut or cut off with pressure, with a sharply set knife or the like) a knife or a blade (cf. English knife, and German kneifen , to nip): God has decreed it that the edge or blade of the sword of the king has been turned back by the enemy, that he has not been able to maintain his ground in battle (הקמתו with ē instead of ı̂ , as also when the tone is not moved forward, Mic 5:4).

In Psa 89:45 the Mem of מטהרו, after the analogy of Eze 16:41; Eze 34:10, and other passages, is a preposition: cessare fecisti eum a splendore suo . A noun מטּהר = מטהר with Dag. dirimens, like מקדּשׁ Exo 15:17, מנּזר Nah 3:17 (Abulwalîd, Aben-Ezra, Parchon, Kimchi, and others), in itself improbable in the signification required here, is not found either in post-biblical or in biblical Hebrew.

טהר, like צהר, signifies first of all not purity, but brilliancy. Still the form טהר does not lie at the basis of it in this instance; for the reading found here just happens not to be טהרו, but מטּהרו; and the reading adopted by Norzi, Heidenheim, and Baer, as also by Nissel and others, so far as form is concerned is not distinct from it, viz. , מטּהרו ( miṭtŏharo ), the character of the Shebâ being determined by the analogy of the å following (cf.

בּסּערה, 2Ki 2:1), which presupposes the principal form טהר (Böttcher, §386, cf. supra , 2:31, note). The personal tenor of Psa 89:46 requires that it should be referred to the then reigning Davidic king, but not as dying before his time (Olshausen), but as becoming prematurely old by reason of the sorrowful experiences of his reign. The larger half of the kingdom has been wrested from him; Egypt and the neighbouring nations also threaten the half that remains to him; and instead of the kingly robe, shame completely covers him.

Psa 89:38-45 Now after the poet has turned his thoughts towards the beginnings of the house of David which were so rich in promise, in order that he might find comfort under the sorrowful present, the contrast of the two periods is become all the more sensible to him. With ואתּה in Psa 89:39 (And Thou - the same who hast promised and affirmed this with an oath) his Psalm takes a new turn, for which reason it might even have been ועתּה.

זנח is used just as absolutely here as in Psa 44:24; Psa 74:1; Psa 77:8, so that it does not require any object to be supplied out of Psa 89:39 . נארתּה in Psa 89:40 the lxx renders kate'strepsas; it is better rendered in Lam 2:7 ἀπετίναξε; for נאר is synonymous with נער, to shake off, push away, cf. Arabic el - menâ‛ir , the thrusters (with the lance). עבדּך is a vocational name of the king as such.

His crown is sacred as being the insignia of a God-bestowed office. God has therefore made the sacred thing vile by casting it to the ground (חלּל לארץ, as in Psa 74:17, to cast profaningly to the ground). The primary passage to Psa 89:41-42, is Psa 80:13. “His hedges” are all the boundary and protecting fences which the land of the king has; and מבצריו “the fortresses” of his land (in both instances without כל, because matters have not yet come to such a pass).

In שׁסּהוּ the notions of the king and of the land blend together. עברי־דרך are the hordes of the peoples passing through the land. שׁכניו are the neighbouring peoples that are otherwise liable to pay tribute to the house of David, who sought to take every possible advantage of that weakening of the Davidic kingdom. In Psa 89:44 we are neither to translate “rock of his sword” (Hengstenberg), nor “O rock” (Olshausen).

צוּר does not merely signify rupes , but also from another root (צוּר, Arab. ṣâr , originally of the grating or shrill noise produced by pressing and squeezing, then more particularly to cut or cut off with pressure, with a sharply set knife or the like) a knife or a blade (cf. English knife, and German kneifen , to nip): God has decreed it that the edge or blade of the sword of the king has been turned back by the enemy, that he has not been able to maintain his ground in battle (הקמתו with ē instead of ı̂ , as also when the tone is not moved forward, Mic 5:4).

In Psa 89:45 the Mem of מטהרו, after the analogy of Eze 16:41; Eze 34:10, and other passages, is a preposition: cessare fecisti eum a splendore suo . A noun מטּהר = מטהר with Dag. dirimens, like מקדּשׁ Exo 15:17, מנּזר Nah 3:17 (Abulwalîd, Aben-Ezra, Parchon, Kimchi, and others), in itself improbable in the signification required here, is not found either in post-biblical or in biblical Hebrew.

טהר, like צהר, signifies first of all not purity, but brilliancy. Still the form טהר does not lie at the basis of it in this instance; for the reading found here just happens not to be טהרו, but מטּהרו; and the reading adopted by Norzi, Heidenheim, and Baer, as also by Nissel and others, so far as form is concerned is not distinct from it, viz. , מטּהרו ( miṭtŏharo ), the character of the Shebâ being determined by the analogy of the å following (cf.

בּסּערה, 2Ki 2:1), which presupposes the principal form טהר (Böttcher, §386, cf. supra , 2:31, note). The personal tenor of Psa 89:46 requires that it should be referred to the then reigning Davidic king, but not as dying before his time (Olshausen), but as becoming prematurely old by reason of the sorrowful experiences of his reign. The larger half of the kingdom has been wrested from him; Egypt and the neighbouring nations also threaten the half that remains to him; and instead of the kingly robe, shame completely covers him.

Psa 89:38-45 Now after the poet has turned his thoughts towards the beginnings of the house of David which were so rich in promise, in order that he might find comfort under the sorrowful present, the contrast of the two periods is become all the more sensible to him. With ואתּה in Psa 89:39 (And Thou - the same who hast promised and affirmed this with an oath) his Psalm takes a new turn, for which reason it might even have been ועתּה.

זנח is used just as absolutely here as in Psa 44:24; Psa 74:1; Psa 77:8, so that it does not require any object to be supplied out of Psa 89:39 . נארתּה in Psa 89:40 the lxx renders kate'strepsas; it is better rendered in Lam 2:7 ἀπετίναξε; for נאר is synonymous with נער, to shake off, push away, cf. Arabic el - menâ‛ir , the thrusters (with the lance). עבדּך is a vocational name of the king as such.

His crown is sacred as being the insignia of a God-bestowed office. God has therefore made the sacred thing vile by casting it to the ground (חלּל לארץ, as in Psa 74:17, to cast profaningly to the ground). The primary passage to Psa 89:41-42, is Psa 80:13. “His hedges” are all the boundary and protecting fences which the land of the king has; and מבצריו “the fortresses” of his land (in both instances without כל, because matters have not yet come to such a pass).

In שׁסּהוּ the notions of the king and of the land blend together. עברי־דרך are the hordes of the peoples passing through the land. שׁכניו are the neighbouring peoples that are otherwise liable to pay tribute to the house of David, who sought to take every possible advantage of that weakening of the Davidic kingdom. In Psa 89:44 we are neither to translate “rock of his sword” (Hengstenberg), nor “O rock” (Olshausen).

צוּר does not merely signify rupes , but also from another root (צוּר, Arab. ṣâr , originally of the grating or shrill noise produced by pressing and squeezing, then more particularly to cut or cut off with pressure, with a sharply set knife or the like) a knife or a blade (cf. English knife, and German kneifen , to nip): God has decreed it that the edge or blade of the sword of the king has been turned back by the enemy, that he has not been able to maintain his ground in battle (הקמתו with ē instead of ı̂ , as also when the tone is not moved forward, Mic 5:4).

In Psa 89:45 the Mem of מטהרו, after the analogy of Eze 16:41; Eze 34:10, and other passages, is a preposition: cessare fecisti eum a splendore suo . A noun מטּהר = מטהר with Dag. dirimens, like מקדּשׁ Exo 15:17, מנּזר Nah 3:17 (Abulwalîd, Aben-Ezra, Parchon, Kimchi, and others), in itself improbable in the signification required here, is not found either in post-biblical or in biblical Hebrew.

טהר, like צהר, signifies first of all not purity, but brilliancy. Still the form טהר does not lie at the basis of it in this instance; for the reading found here just happens not to be טהרו, but מטּהרו; and the reading adopted by Norzi, Heidenheim, and Baer, as also by Nissel and others, so far as form is concerned is not distinct from it, viz. , מטּהרו ( miṭtŏharo ), the character of the Shebâ being determined by the analogy of the å following (cf.

בּסּערה, 2Ki 2:1), which presupposes the principal form טהר (Böttcher, §386, cf. supra , 2:31, note). The personal tenor of Psa 89:46 requires that it should be referred to the then reigning Davidic king, but not as dying before his time (Olshausen), but as becoming prematurely old by reason of the sorrowful experiences of his reign. The larger half of the kingdom has been wrested from him; Egypt and the neighbouring nations also threaten the half that remains to him; and instead of the kingly robe, shame completely covers him.

Psa 89:38-45 Now after the poet has turned his thoughts towards the beginnings of the house of David which were so rich in promise, in order that he might find comfort under the sorrowful present, the contrast of the two periods is become all the more sensible to him. With ואתּה in Psa 89:39 (And Thou - the same who hast promised and affirmed this with an oath) his Psalm takes a new turn, for which reason it might even have been ועתּה.

זנח is used just as absolutely here as in Psa 44:24; Psa 74:1; Psa 77:8, so that it does not require any object to be supplied out of Psa 89:39 . נארתּה in Psa 89:40 the lxx renders kate'strepsas; it is better rendered in Lam 2:7 ἀπετίναξε; for נאר is synonymous with נער, to shake off, push away, cf. Arabic el - menâ‛ir , the thrusters (with the lance). עבדּך is a vocational name of the king as such.

His crown is sacred as being the insignia of a God-bestowed office. God has therefore made the sacred thing vile by casting it to the ground (חלּל לארץ, as in Psa 74:17, to cast profaningly to the ground). The primary passage to Psa 89:41-42, is Psa 80:13. “His hedges” are all the boundary and protecting fences which the land of the king has; and מבצריו “the fortresses” of his land (in both instances without כל, because matters have not yet come to such a pass).

In שׁסּהוּ the notions of the king and of the land blend together. עברי־דרך are the hordes of the peoples passing through the land. שׁכניו are the neighbouring peoples that are otherwise liable to pay tribute to the house of David, who sought to take every possible advantage of that weakening of the Davidic kingdom. In Psa 89:44 we are neither to translate “rock of his sword” (Hengstenberg), nor “O rock” (Olshausen).

צוּר does not merely signify rupes , but also from another root (צוּר, Arab. ṣâr , originally of the grating or shrill noise produced by pressing and squeezing, then more particularly to cut or cut off with pressure, with a sharply set knife or the like) a knife or a blade (cf. English knife, and German kneifen , to nip): God has decreed it that the edge or blade of the sword of the king has been turned back by the enemy, that he has not been able to maintain his ground in battle (הקמתו with ē instead of ı̂ , as also when the tone is not moved forward, Mic 5:4).

In Psa 89:45 the Mem of מטהרו, after the analogy of Eze 16:41; Eze 34:10, and other passages, is a preposition: cessare fecisti eum a splendore suo . A noun מטּהר = מטהר with Dag. dirimens, like מקדּשׁ Exo 15:17, מנּזר Nah 3:17 (Abulwalîd, Aben-Ezra, Parchon, Kimchi, and others), in itself improbable in the signification required here, is not found either in post-biblical or in biblical Hebrew.

טהר, like צהר, signifies first of all not purity, but brilliancy. Still the form טהר does not lie at the basis of it in this instance; for the reading found here just happens not to be טהרו, but מטּהרו; and the reading adopted by Norzi, Heidenheim, and Baer, as also by Nissel and others, so far as form is concerned is not distinct from it, viz. , מטּהרו ( miṭtŏharo ), the character of the Shebâ being determined by the analogy of the å following (cf.

בּסּערה, 2Ki 2:1), which presupposes the principal form טהר (Böttcher, §386, cf. supra , 2:31, note). The personal tenor of Psa 89:46 requires that it should be referred to the then reigning Davidic king, but not as dying before his time (Olshausen), but as becoming prematurely old by reason of the sorrowful experiences of his reign. The larger half of the kingdom has been wrested from him; Egypt and the neighbouring nations also threaten the half that remains to him; and instead of the kingly robe, shame completely covers him.

Psa 89:38-45 Now after the poet has turned his thoughts towards the beginnings of the house of David which were so rich in promise, in order that he might find comfort under the sorrowful present, the contrast of the two periods is become all the more sensible to him. With ואתּה in Psa 89:39 (And Thou - the same who hast promised and affirmed this with an oath) his Psalm takes a new turn, for which reason it might even have been ועתּה.

זנח is used just as absolutely here as in Psa 44:24; Psa 74:1; Psa 77:8, so that it does not require any object to be supplied out of Psa 89:39 . נארתּה in Psa 89:40 the lxx renders kate'strepsas; it is better rendered in Lam 2:7 ἀπετίναξε; for נאר is synonymous with נער, to shake off, push away, cf. Arabic el - menâ‛ir , the thrusters (with the lance). עבדּך is a vocational name of the king as such.

His crown is sacred as being the insignia of a God-bestowed office. God has therefore made the sacred thing vile by casting it to the ground (חלּל לארץ, as in Psa 74:17, to cast profaningly to the ground). The primary passage to Psa 89:41-42, is Psa 80:13. “His hedges” are all the boundary and protecting fences which the land of the king has; and מבצריו “the fortresses” of his land (in both instances without כל, because matters have not yet come to such a pass).

In שׁסּהוּ the notions of the king and of the land blend together. עברי־דרך are the hordes of the peoples passing through the land. שׁכניו are the neighbouring peoples that are otherwise liable to pay tribute to the house of David, who sought to take every possible advantage of that weakening of the Davidic kingdom. In Psa 89:44 we are neither to translate “rock of his sword” (Hengstenberg), nor “O rock” (Olshausen).

צוּר does not merely signify rupes , but also from another root (צוּר, Arab. ṣâr , originally of the grating or shrill noise produced by pressing and squeezing, then more particularly to cut or cut off with pressure, with a sharply set knife or the like) a knife or a blade (cf. English knife, and German kneifen , to nip): God has decreed it that the edge or blade of the sword of the king has been turned back by the enemy, that he has not been able to maintain his ground in battle (הקמתו with ē instead of ı̂ , as also when the tone is not moved forward, Mic 5:4).

In Psa 89:45 the Mem of מטהרו, after the analogy of Eze 16:41; Eze 34:10, and other passages, is a preposition: cessare fecisti eum a splendore suo . A noun מטּהר = מטהר with Dag. dirimens, like מקדּשׁ Exo 15:17, מנּזר Nah 3:17 (Abulwalîd, Aben-Ezra, Parchon, Kimchi, and others), in itself improbable in the signification required here, is not found either in post-biblical or in biblical Hebrew.

טהר, like צהר, signifies first of all not purity, but brilliancy. Still the form טהר does not lie at the basis of it in this instance; for the reading found here just happens not to be טהרו, but מטּהרו; and the reading adopted by Norzi, Heidenheim, and Baer, as also by Nissel and others, so far as form is concerned is not distinct from it, viz. , מטּהרו ( miṭtŏharo ), the character of the Shebâ being determined by the analogy of the å following (cf.

בּסּערה, 2Ki 2:1), which presupposes the principal form טהר (Böttcher, §386, cf. supra , 2:31, note). The personal tenor of Psa 89:46 requires that it should be referred to the then reigning Davidic king, but not as dying before his time (Olshausen), but as becoming prematurely old by reason of the sorrowful experiences of his reign. The larger half of the kingdom has been wrested from him; Egypt and the neighbouring nations also threaten the half that remains to him; and instead of the kingly robe, shame completely covers him.

Psa 89:38-45 Now after the poet has turned his thoughts towards the beginnings of the house of David which were so rich in promise, in order that he might find comfort under the sorrowful present, the contrast of the two periods is become all the more sensible to him. With ואתּה in Psa 89:39 (And Thou - the same who hast promised and affirmed this with an oath) his Psalm takes a new turn, for which reason it might even have been ועתּה.

זנח is used just as absolutely here as in Psa 44:24; Psa 74:1; Psa 77:8, so that it does not require any object to be supplied out of Psa 89:39 . נארתּה in Psa 89:40 the lxx renders kate'strepsas; it is better rendered in Lam 2:7 ἀπετίναξε; for נאר is synonymous with נער, to shake off, push away, cf. Arabic el - menâ‛ir , the thrusters (with the lance). עבדּך is a vocational name of the king as such.

His crown is sacred as being the insignia of a God-bestowed office. God has therefore made the sacred thing vile by casting it to the ground (חלּל לארץ, as in Psa 74:17, to cast profaningly to the ground). The primary passage to Psa 89:41-42, is Psa 80:13. “His hedges” are all the boundary and protecting fences which the land of the king has; and מבצריו “the fortresses” of his land (in both instances without כל, because matters have not yet come to such a pass).

In שׁסּהוּ the notions of the king and of the land blend together. עברי־דרך are the hordes of the peoples passing through the land. שׁכניו are the neighbouring peoples that are otherwise liable to pay tribute to the house of David, who sought to take every possible advantage of that weakening of the Davidic kingdom. In Psa 89:44 we are neither to translate “rock of his sword” (Hengstenberg), nor “O rock” (Olshausen).

צוּר does not merely signify rupes , but also from another root (צוּר, Arab. ṣâr , originally of the grating or shrill noise produced by pressing and squeezing, then more particularly to cut or cut off with pressure, with a sharply set knife or the like) a knife or a blade (cf. English knife, and German kneifen , to nip): God has decreed it that the edge or blade of the sword of the king has been turned back by the enemy, that he has not been able to maintain his ground in battle (הקמתו with ē instead of ı̂ , as also when the tone is not moved forward, Mic 5:4).

In Psa 89:45 the Mem of מטהרו, after the analogy of Eze 16:41; Eze 34:10, and other passages, is a preposition: cessare fecisti eum a splendore suo . A noun מטּהר = מטהר with Dag. dirimens, like מקדּשׁ Exo 15:17, מנּזר Nah 3:17 (Abulwalîd, Aben-Ezra, Parchon, Kimchi, and others), in itself improbable in the signification required here, is not found either in post-biblical or in biblical Hebrew.

טהר, like צהר, signifies first of all not purity, but brilliancy. Still the form טהר does not lie at the basis of it in this instance; for the reading found here just happens not to be טהרו, but מטּהרו; and the reading adopted by Norzi, Heidenheim, and Baer, as also by Nissel and others, so far as form is concerned is not distinct from it, viz. , מטּהרו ( miṭtŏharo ), the character of the Shebâ being determined by the analogy of the å following (cf.

בּסּערה, 2Ki 2:1), which presupposes the principal form טהר (Böttcher, §386, cf. supra , 2:31, note). The personal tenor of Psa 89:46 requires that it should be referred to the then reigning Davidic king, but not as dying before his time (Olshausen), but as becoming prematurely old by reason of the sorrowful experiences of his reign. The larger half of the kingdom has been wrested from him; Egypt and the neighbouring nations also threaten the half that remains to him; and instead of the kingly robe, shame completely covers him.

Psa 89:46-51 After this statement of the present condition of things the psalmist begins to pray for the removal of all that is thus contradictory to the promise. The plaintive question, Psa 89:47, with the exception of one word, is verbatim the same as Psa 79:5. The wrath to which quousque refers, makes itself to be felt, as the intensifying (vid. , Psa 13:2) לנצח implies, in the intensity and duration of everlasting wrath.

חלד is this temporal life which glides past secretly and unnoticed (Psa 17:14); and זכר־אני is not equivalent to זכרני (instead of which by way of emphasis only זכרני אני can be said), but אני מה־חלד stands for מה־חלד אני - according to the sense equivalent to אני מה־חדל, Psa 39:5, cf. Psa 39:6. The conjecture of Houbigant and modern expositors, זכר אדני (cf.

Psa 89:51), is not needed, since the inverted position of the words is just the same as in Psa 39:5. In Psa 89:48 it is not pointed על־מה שׁוא, “wherefore (Job 10:2; Job 13:14) hast Thou in vain (Psa 127:1) created? ” (Hengstenberg), but על־מה־שּׁוא, on account of or for what a nothing (מה־שׁוא belonging together as adjective and substantive, as in Psa 30:10; Job 26:14) hast Thou created all the children of men?

(De Wette, Hupfeld, and Hitzig). על, of the ground of a matter and direct motive, which is better suited to the question in Psa 89:49 than the other way of taking it: the life of all men passes on into death and Hades; why then might not God, within this brief space of time, this handbreadth, manifest Himself to His creatures as the merciful and kind, and not as the always angry God?

The music strikes in here, and how can it do so otherwise than in elegiac mesto ? If God’s justice tarries and fails in this present world, then the Old Testament faith becomes sorely tempted and tried, because it is not able to find consolation in the life beyond. Thus it is with the faith of the poet in the present juncture of affairs, the outward appearance of which is in such perplexing contradiction to the loving-kindness sworn to David and also hitherto vouchsafed.

חסדים has not the sense in this passage of the promises of favour, as in 2Ch 6:42, but proofs of favour; הראשׁנים glances back at the long period of the reigns of David and of Solomon. The Asaph Ps 77 and the Tephilla Isa. 63 contain similar complaints, just as in connection with Psa 89:51 one is reminded of the Asaph Psa 79:2, Psa 79:10, and in connection with Psa 89:52 of Psa 79:12.

The phrase נשׂא בחיקו is used in other instances of loving nurture, Num 11:12; Isa 40:11. In this passage it must have a sense akin to חרפּת עבדיך. It is impossible on syntactic grounds to regard כּל־רבּים עמּים as still dependent upon חרפּת (Ewald) or, as Hupfeld is fond of calling it, as a “post-liminiar” genitive. Can it be that the כל is perhaps a mutilation of כּלמּת, after Eze 36:15, as Böttcher suggests?

We do not need this conjecture. For (1) to carry any one in one’s bosom, if he is an enemy, may signify: to be obliged to cherish him with the vexation proceeding from him (Jer 15:15), without being able to get rid of him; (2) there is no doubt that רבּים can, after the manner of numerals, be placed before the substantive to which it belongs, Eze 32:10, Pro 31:29; 1Ch 28:5; Neh 9:28; cf.

the other position, e. g. , Jer 16:16; (3) consequently כּל־רבּים עמּים may signify the “totality of many peoples” just as well as כּל גּוים רבּים in Eze 31:6. The poet complains as a member of the nation, as a citizen of the empire, that he is obliged to foster many nations in his bosom, inasmuch as the land of Israel was overwhelmed by the Egyptians and their allies, the Libyans, Troglodytes, and Ethiopians.

The אשׁר which follows in Psa 89:52 cannot now be referred back over Psa 89:51 to חרפּת ( quâ calumniâ ), and yet the relative sense, not the confirmatory (because, quoniam ), is at issue. We therefore refer it to עמים, and take אויביך as an apposition, as in Psa 139:20 : who reproach Thee, (as) Thine enemies, Jahve, who reproach the footsteps (עקּבות as in Psa 77:20 with Dag.

dirimens , which gives it an emotional turn) of Thine anointed, i. e. , they follow him everywhere, wheresoever he may go, and whatsoever he may do. With these significant words, עקּבות משׁיחך, the Third Book of the Psalms dies away.

Psa 89:46-51 After this statement of the present condition of things the psalmist begins to pray for the removal of all that is thus contradictory to the promise. The plaintive question, Psa 89:47, with the exception of one word, is verbatim the same as Psa 79:5. The wrath to which quousque refers, makes itself to be felt, as the intensifying (vid. , Psa 13:2) לנצח implies, in the intensity and duration of everlasting wrath.

חלד is this temporal life which glides past secretly and unnoticed (Psa 17:14); and זכר־אני is not equivalent to זכרני (instead of which by way of emphasis only זכרני אני can be said), but אני מה־חלד stands for מה־חלד אני - according to the sense equivalent to אני מה־חדל, Psa 39:5, cf. Psa 39:6. The conjecture of Houbigant and modern expositors, זכר אדני (cf.

Psa 89:51), is not needed, since the inverted position of the words is just the same as in Psa 39:5. In Psa 89:48 it is not pointed על־מה שׁוא, “wherefore (Job 10:2; Job 13:14) hast Thou in vain (Psa 127:1) created? ” (Hengstenberg), but על־מה־שּׁוא, on account of or for what a nothing (מה־שׁוא belonging together as adjective and substantive, as in Psa 30:10; Job 26:14) hast Thou created all the children of men?

(De Wette, Hupfeld, and Hitzig). על, of the ground of a matter and direct motive, which is better suited to the question in Psa 89:49 than the other way of taking it: the life of all men passes on into death and Hades; why then might not God, within this brief space of time, this handbreadth, manifest Himself to His creatures as the merciful and kind, and not as the always angry God?

The music strikes in here, and how can it do so otherwise than in elegiac mesto ? If God’s justice tarries and fails in this present world, then the Old Testament faith becomes sorely tempted and tried, because it is not able to find consolation in the life beyond. Thus it is with the faith of the poet in the present juncture of affairs, the outward appearance of which is in such perplexing contradiction to the loving-kindness sworn to David and also hitherto vouchsafed.

חסדים has not the sense in this passage of the promises of favour, as in 2Ch 6:42, but proofs of favour; הראשׁנים glances back at the long period of the reigns of David and of Solomon. The Asaph Ps 77 and the Tephilla Isa. 63 contain similar complaints, just as in connection with Psa 89:51 one is reminded of the Asaph Psa 79:2, Psa 79:10, and in connection with Psa 89:52 of Psa 79:12.

The phrase נשׂא בחיקו is used in other instances of loving nurture, Num 11:12; Isa 40:11. In this passage it must have a sense akin to חרפּת עבדיך. It is impossible on syntactic grounds to regard כּל־רבּים עמּים as still dependent upon חרפּת (Ewald) or, as Hupfeld is fond of calling it, as a “post-liminiar” genitive. Can it be that the כל is perhaps a mutilation of כּלמּת, after Eze 36:15, as Böttcher suggests?

We do not need this conjecture. For (1) to carry any one in one’s bosom, if he is an enemy, may signify: to be obliged to cherish him with the vexation proceeding from him (Jer 15:15), without being able to get rid of him; (2) there is no doubt that רבּים can, after the manner of numerals, be placed before the substantive to which it belongs, Eze 32:10, Pro 31:29; 1Ch 28:5; Neh 9:28; cf.

the other position, e. g. , Jer 16:16; (3) consequently כּל־רבּים עמּים may signify the “totality of many peoples” just as well as כּל גּוים רבּים in Eze 31:6. The poet complains as a member of the nation, as a citizen of the empire, that he is obliged to foster many nations in his bosom, inasmuch as the land of Israel was overwhelmed by the Egyptians and their allies, the Libyans, Troglodytes, and Ethiopians.

The אשׁר which follows in Psa 89:52 cannot now be referred back over Psa 89:51 to חרפּת ( quâ calumniâ ), and yet the relative sense, not the confirmatory (because, quoniam ), is at issue. We therefore refer it to עמים, and take אויביך as an apposition, as in Psa 139:20 : who reproach Thee, (as) Thine enemies, Jahve, who reproach the footsteps (עקּבות as in Psa 77:20 with Dag.

dirimens , which gives it an emotional turn) of Thine anointed, i. e. , they follow him everywhere, wheresoever he may go, and whatsoever he may do. With these significant words, עקּבות משׁיחך, the Third Book of the Psalms dies away.

Psa 89:46-51 After this statement of the present condition of things the psalmist begins to pray for the removal of all that is thus contradictory to the promise. The plaintive question, Psa 89:47, with the exception of one word, is verbatim the same as Psa 79:5. The wrath to which quousque refers, makes itself to be felt, as the intensifying (vid. , Psa 13:2) לנצח implies, in the intensity and duration of everlasting wrath.

חלד is this temporal life which glides past secretly and unnoticed (Psa 17:14); and זכר־אני is not equivalent to זכרני (instead of which by way of emphasis only זכרני אני can be said), but אני מה־חלד stands for מה־חלד אני - according to the sense equivalent to אני מה־חדל, Psa 39:5, cf. Psa 39:6. The conjecture of Houbigant and modern expositors, זכר אדני (cf.

Psa 89:51), is not needed, since the inverted position of the words is just the same as in Psa 39:5. In Psa 89:48 it is not pointed על־מה שׁוא, “wherefore (Job 10:2; Job 13:14) hast Thou in vain (Psa 127:1) created? ” (Hengstenberg), but על־מה־שּׁוא, on account of or for what a nothing (מה־שׁוא belonging together as adjective and substantive, as in Psa 30:10; Job 26:14) hast Thou created all the children of men?

(De Wette, Hupfeld, and Hitzig). על, of the ground of a matter and direct motive, which is better suited to the question in Psa 89:49 than the other way of taking it: the life of all men passes on into death and Hades; why then might not God, within this brief space of time, this handbreadth, manifest Himself to His creatures as the merciful and kind, and not as the always angry God?

The music strikes in here, and how can it do so otherwise than in elegiac mesto ? If God’s justice tarries and fails in this present world, then the Old Testament faith becomes sorely tempted and tried, because it is not able to find consolation in the life beyond. Thus it is with the faith of the poet in the present juncture of affairs, the outward appearance of which is in such perplexing contradiction to the loving-kindness sworn to David and also hitherto vouchsafed.

חסדים has not the sense in this passage of the promises of favour, as in 2Ch 6:42, but proofs of favour; הראשׁנים glances back at the long period of the reigns of David and of Solomon. The Asaph Ps 77 and the Tephilla Isa. 63 contain similar complaints, just as in connection with Psa 89:51 one is reminded of the Asaph Psa 79:2, Psa 79:10, and in connection with Psa 89:52 of Psa 79:12.

The phrase נשׂא בחיקו is used in other instances of loving nurture, Num 11:12; Isa 40:11. In this passage it must have a sense akin to חרפּת עבדיך. It is impossible on syntactic grounds to regard כּל־רבּים עמּים as still dependent upon חרפּת (Ewald) or, as Hupfeld is fond of calling it, as a “post-liminiar” genitive. Can it be that the כל is perhaps a mutilation of כּלמּת, after Eze 36:15, as Böttcher suggests?

We do not need this conjecture. For (1) to carry any one in one’s bosom, if he is an enemy, may signify: to be obliged to cherish him with the vexation proceeding from him (Jer 15:15), without being able to get rid of him; (2) there is no doubt that רבּים can, after the manner of numerals, be placed before the substantive to which it belongs, Eze 32:10, Pro 31:29; 1Ch 28:5; Neh 9:28; cf.

the other position, e. g. , Jer 16:16; (3) consequently כּל־רבּים עמּים may signify the “totality of many peoples” just as well as כּל גּוים רבּים in Eze 31:6. The poet complains as a member of the nation, as a citizen of the empire, that he is obliged to foster many nations in his bosom, inasmuch as the land of Israel was overwhelmed by the Egyptians and their allies, the Libyans, Troglodytes, and Ethiopians.

The אשׁר which follows in Psa 89:52 cannot now be referred back over Psa 89:51 to חרפּת ( quâ calumniâ ), and yet the relative sense, not the confirmatory (because, quoniam ), is at issue. We therefore refer it to עמים, and take אויביך as an apposition, as in Psa 139:20 : who reproach Thee, (as) Thine enemies, Jahve, who reproach the footsteps (עקּבות as in Psa 77:20 with Dag.

dirimens , which gives it an emotional turn) of Thine anointed, i. e. , they follow him everywhere, wheresoever he may go, and whatsoever he may do. With these significant words, עקּבות משׁיחך, the Third Book of the Psalms dies away.

Psa 89:46-51 After this statement of the present condition of things the psalmist begins to pray for the removal of all that is thus contradictory to the promise. The plaintive question, Psa 89:47, with the exception of one word, is verbatim the same as Psa 79:5. The wrath to which quousque refers, makes itself to be felt, as the intensifying (vid. , Psa 13:2) לנצח implies, in the intensity and duration of everlasting wrath.

חלד is this temporal life which glides past secretly and unnoticed (Psa 17:14); and זכר־אני is not equivalent to זכרני (instead of which by way of emphasis only זכרני אני can be said), but אני מה־חלד stands for מה־חלד אני - according to the sense equivalent to אני מה־חדל, Psa 39:5, cf. Psa 39:6. The conjecture of Houbigant and modern expositors, זכר אדני (cf.

Psa 89:51), is not needed, since the inverted position of the words is just the same as in Psa 39:5. In Psa 89:48 it is not pointed על־מה שׁוא, “wherefore (Job 10:2; Job 13:14) hast Thou in vain (Psa 127:1) created? ” (Hengstenberg), but על־מה־שּׁוא, on account of or for what a nothing (מה־שׁוא belonging together as adjective and substantive, as in Psa 30:10; Job 26:14) hast Thou created all the children of men?

(De Wette, Hupfeld, and Hitzig). על, of the ground of a matter and direct motive, which is better suited to the question in Psa 89:49 than the other way of taking it: the life of all men passes on into death and Hades; why then might not God, within this brief space of time, this handbreadth, manifest Himself to His creatures as the merciful and kind, and not as the always angry God?

The music strikes in here, and how can it do so otherwise than in elegiac mesto ? If God’s justice tarries and fails in this present world, then the Old Testament faith becomes sorely tempted and tried, because it is not able to find consolation in the life beyond. Thus it is with the faith of the poet in the present juncture of affairs, the outward appearance of which is in such perplexing contradiction to the loving-kindness sworn to David and also hitherto vouchsafed.

חסדים has not the sense in this passage of the promises of favour, as in 2Ch 6:42, but proofs of favour; הראשׁנים glances back at the long period of the reigns of David and of Solomon. The Asaph Ps 77 and the Tephilla Isa. 63 contain similar complaints, just as in connection with Psa 89:51 one is reminded of the Asaph Psa 79:2, Psa 79:10, and in connection with Psa 89:52 of Psa 79:12.

The phrase נשׂא בחיקו is used in other instances of loving nurture, Num 11:12; Isa 40:11. In this passage it must have a sense akin to חרפּת עבדיך. It is impossible on syntactic grounds to regard כּל־רבּים עמּים as still dependent upon חרפּת (Ewald) or, as Hupfeld is fond of calling it, as a “post-liminiar” genitive. Can it be that the כל is perhaps a mutilation of כּלמּת, after Eze 36:15, as Böttcher suggests?

We do not need this conjecture. For (1) to carry any one in one’s bosom, if he is an enemy, may signify: to be obliged to cherish him with the vexation proceeding from him (Jer 15:15), without being able to get rid of him; (2) there is no doubt that רבּים can, after the manner of numerals, be placed before the substantive to which it belongs, Eze 32:10, Pro 31:29; 1Ch 28:5; Neh 9:28; cf.

the other position, e. g. , Jer 16:16; (3) consequently כּל־רבּים עמּים may signify the “totality of many peoples” just as well as כּל גּוים רבּים in Eze 31:6. The poet complains as a member of the nation, as a citizen of the empire, that he is obliged to foster many nations in his bosom, inasmuch as the land of Israel was overwhelmed by the Egyptians and their allies, the Libyans, Troglodytes, and Ethiopians.

The אשׁר which follows in Psa 89:52 cannot now be referred back over Psa 89:51 to חרפּת ( quâ calumniâ ), and yet the relative sense, not the confirmatory (because, quoniam ), is at issue. We therefore refer it to עמים, and take אויביך as an apposition, as in Psa 139:20 : who reproach Thee, (as) Thine enemies, Jahve, who reproach the footsteps (עקּבות as in Psa 77:20 with Dag.

dirimens , which gives it an emotional turn) of Thine anointed, i. e. , they follow him everywhere, wheresoever he may go, and whatsoever he may do. With these significant words, עקּבות משׁיחך, the Third Book of the Psalms dies away.

Psa 89:46-51 After this statement of the present condition of things the psalmist begins to pray for the removal of all that is thus contradictory to the promise. The plaintive question, Psa 89:47, with the exception of one word, is verbatim the same as Psa 79:5. The wrath to which quousque refers, makes itself to be felt, as the intensifying (vid. , Psa 13:2) לנצח implies, in the intensity and duration of everlasting wrath.

חלד is this temporal life which glides past secretly and unnoticed (Psa 17:14); and זכר־אני is not equivalent to זכרני (instead of which by way of emphasis only זכרני אני can be said), but אני מה־חלד stands for מה־חלד אני - according to the sense equivalent to אני מה־חדל, Psa 39:5, cf. Psa 39:6. The conjecture of Houbigant and modern expositors, זכר אדני (cf.

Psa 89:51), is not needed, since the inverted position of the words is just the same as in Psa 39:5. In Psa 89:48 it is not pointed על־מה שׁוא, “wherefore (Job 10:2; Job 13:14) hast Thou in vain (Psa 127:1) created? ” (Hengstenberg), but על־מה־שּׁוא, on account of or for what a nothing (מה־שׁוא belonging together as adjective and substantive, as in Psa 30:10; Job 26:14) hast Thou created all the children of men?

(De Wette, Hupfeld, and Hitzig). על, of the ground of a matter and direct motive, which is better suited to the question in Psa 89:49 than the other way of taking it: the life of all men passes on into death and Hades; why then might not God, within this brief space of time, this handbreadth, manifest Himself to His creatures as the merciful and kind, and not as the always angry God?

The music strikes in here, and how can it do so otherwise than in elegiac mesto ? If God’s justice tarries and fails in this present world, then the Old Testament faith becomes sorely tempted and tried, because it is not able to find consolation in the life beyond. Thus it is with the faith of the poet in the present juncture of affairs, the outward appearance of which is in such perplexing contradiction to the loving-kindness sworn to David and also hitherto vouchsafed.

חסדים has not the sense in this passage of the promises of favour, as in 2Ch 6:42, but proofs of favour; הראשׁנים glances back at the long period of the reigns of David and of Solomon. The Asaph Ps 77 and the Tephilla Isa. 63 contain similar complaints, just as in connection with Psa 89:51 one is reminded of the Asaph Psa 79:2, Psa 79:10, and in connection with Psa 89:52 of Psa 79:12.

The phrase נשׂא בחיקו is used in other instances of loving nurture, Num 11:12; Isa 40:11. In this passage it must have a sense akin to חרפּת עבדיך. It is impossible on syntactic grounds to regard כּל־רבּים עמּים as still dependent upon חרפּת (Ewald) or, as Hupfeld is fond of calling it, as a “post-liminiar” genitive. Can it be that the כל is perhaps a mutilation of כּלמּת, after Eze 36:15, as Böttcher suggests?

We do not need this conjecture. For (1) to carry any one in one’s bosom, if he is an enemy, may signify: to be obliged to cherish him with the vexation proceeding from him (Jer 15:15), without being able to get rid of him; (2) there is no doubt that רבּים can, after the manner of numerals, be placed before the substantive to which it belongs, Eze 32:10, Pro 31:29; 1Ch 28:5; Neh 9:28; cf.

the other position, e. g. , Jer 16:16; (3) consequently כּל־רבּים עמּים may signify the “totality of many peoples” just as well as כּל גּוים רבּים in Eze 31:6. The poet complains as a member of the nation, as a citizen of the empire, that he is obliged to foster many nations in his bosom, inasmuch as the land of Israel was overwhelmed by the Egyptians and their allies, the Libyans, Troglodytes, and Ethiopians.

The אשׁר which follows in Psa 89:52 cannot now be referred back over Psa 89:51 to חרפּת ( quâ calumniâ ), and yet the relative sense, not the confirmatory (because, quoniam ), is at issue. We therefore refer it to עמים, and take אויביך as an apposition, as in Psa 139:20 : who reproach Thee, (as) Thine enemies, Jahve, who reproach the footsteps (עקּבות as in Psa 77:20 with Dag.

dirimens , which gives it an emotional turn) of Thine anointed, i. e. , they follow him everywhere, wheresoever he may go, and whatsoever he may do. With these significant words, עקּבות משׁיחך, the Third Book of the Psalms dies away.

Psa 89:46-51 After this statement of the present condition of things the psalmist begins to pray for the removal of all that is thus contradictory to the promise. The plaintive question, Psa 89:47, with the exception of one word, is verbatim the same as Psa 79:5. The wrath to which quousque refers, makes itself to be felt, as the intensifying (vid. , Psa 13:2) לנצח implies, in the intensity and duration of everlasting wrath.

חלד is this temporal life which glides past secretly and unnoticed (Psa 17:14); and זכר־אני is not equivalent to זכרני (instead of which by way of emphasis only זכרני אני can be said), but אני מה־חלד stands for מה־חלד אני - according to the sense equivalent to אני מה־חדל, Psa 39:5, cf. Psa 39:6. The conjecture of Houbigant and modern expositors, זכר אדני (cf.

Psa 89:51), is not needed, since the inverted position of the words is just the same as in Psa 39:5. In Psa 89:48 it is not pointed על־מה שׁוא, “wherefore (Job 10:2; Job 13:14) hast Thou in vain (Psa 127:1) created? ” (Hengstenberg), but על־מה־שּׁוא, on account of or for what a nothing (מה־שׁוא belonging together as adjective and substantive, as in Psa 30:10; Job 26:14) hast Thou created all the children of men?

(De Wette, Hupfeld, and Hitzig). על, of the ground of a matter and direct motive, which is better suited to the question in Psa 89:49 than the other way of taking it: the life of all men passes on into death and Hades; why then might not God, within this brief space of time, this handbreadth, manifest Himself to His creatures as the merciful and kind, and not as the always angry God?

The music strikes in here, and how can it do so otherwise than in elegiac mesto ? If God’s justice tarries and fails in this present world, then the Old Testament faith becomes sorely tempted and tried, because it is not able to find consolation in the life beyond. Thus it is with the faith of the poet in the present juncture of affairs, the outward appearance of which is in such perplexing contradiction to the loving-kindness sworn to David and also hitherto vouchsafed.

חסדים has not the sense in this passage of the promises of favour, as in 2Ch 6:42, but proofs of favour; הראשׁנים glances back at the long period of the reigns of David and of Solomon. The Asaph Ps 77 and the Tephilla Isa. 63 contain similar complaints, just as in connection with Psa 89:51 one is reminded of the Asaph Psa 79:2, Psa 79:10, and in connection with Psa 89:52 of Psa 79:12.

The phrase נשׂא בחיקו is used in other instances of loving nurture, Num 11:12; Isa 40:11. In this passage it must have a sense akin to חרפּת עבדיך. It is impossible on syntactic grounds to regard כּל־רבּים עמּים as still dependent upon חרפּת (Ewald) or, as Hupfeld is fond of calling it, as a “post-liminiar” genitive. Can it be that the כל is perhaps a mutilation of כּלמּת, after Eze 36:15, as Böttcher suggests?

We do not need this conjecture. For (1) to carry any one in one’s bosom, if he is an enemy, may signify: to be obliged to cherish him with the vexation proceeding from him (Jer 15:15), without being able to get rid of him; (2) there is no doubt that רבּים can, after the manner of numerals, be placed before the substantive to which it belongs, Eze 32:10, Pro 31:29; 1Ch 28:5; Neh 9:28; cf.

the other position, e. g. , Jer 16:16; (3) consequently כּל־רבּים עמּים may signify the “totality of many peoples” just as well as כּל גּוים רבּים in Eze 31:6. The poet complains as a member of the nation, as a citizen of the empire, that he is obliged to foster many nations in his bosom, inasmuch as the land of Israel was overwhelmed by the Egyptians and their allies, the Libyans, Troglodytes, and Ethiopians.

The אשׁר which follows in Psa 89:52 cannot now be referred back over Psa 89:51 to חרפּת ( quâ calumniâ ), and yet the relative sense, not the confirmatory (because, quoniam ), is at issue. We therefore refer it to עמים, and take אויביך as an apposition, as in Psa 139:20 : who reproach Thee, (as) Thine enemies, Jahve, who reproach the footsteps (עקּבות as in Psa 77:20 with Dag.

dirimens , which gives it an emotional turn) of Thine anointed, i. e. , they follow him everywhere, wheresoever he may go, and whatsoever he may do. With these significant words, עקּבות משׁיחך, the Third Book of the Psalms dies away.

Psa 89:52 (Hebrew_Bible_89:53) The closing doxology of the Third Book.

The Fourth Book of the Psalms, corresponding to the ספר במדבר of the Pentateuch, begins with a Prayer of Moses the man of God , which comes out of the midst of the dying off of the older generation during the march through the wilderness. To the name, which could not be allowed to remain so bald, because next to Abraham he is the greatest man known to the Old Testament history of redemption, is added the title of honour אישׁ האלהים (as in Deu 33:1; Jos 14:6), an ancient name of the prophets which expresses the close relationship of fellowship with God, just as “servant of Jahve” expresses the relationship of service, in accordance with the special office and in relation to the history of redemption, into which Jahve has taken the man and into which he himself has entered.

There is scarcely any written memorial of antiquity which so brilliantly justifies the testimony of tradition concerning its origin as does this Psalm, which may have been preserved in some one or other of the older works, perhaps the “Book of Jashar” (Jos 10:13; 2Sa 1:18), until the time of the final redaction of the Psalter. Not alone with respect to its contents, but also with reference to the form of its language, it is perfectly suitable to Moses.

Even Hitzig can bring nothing of importance against this view, for the objection that the author in v. 1 glances back upon past generations, whilst Israel was only born in the time of Moses, is removed by the consideration that the existence of Israel reaches back into the patriarchal times; and there is as little truth in the assertion that the Piel שׂבּענוּ in Psa 90:14 instead of the Hiphil brings the Psalm down into very late times, as in the idea that the Hiph .

והאבדתּ in Psa 143:12 instead of the Piel carries this Psa 143:1-12 back into very early times. These trifling points dwindle down to nothing in comparison with the fact that Psalms 90 bears within itself distinct traces of the same origin as the song האזינו (Deut. 32), the blessing of Moses (Deut. 33), the discourses in Deuteronomy, and in general the directly Mosaic portions of the Pentateuch.

The Book of the Covenant, together with the Decalogue (Exo 19:1) and Deuteronomy (with the exception of its supplement), are regarded by us, on very good grounds, as the largest originally Mosaic constituent parts of the Pentateuch. The Book of Deuteronomy is תּורת משׁה in a pre-eminent sense.

Psa 90:1-4 The poet begins with the confession that the Lord has proved Himself to His own, in all periods of human history, as that which He was before the world was and will be for evermore. God is designedly appealed to by the name אדני, which frequently occurs in the mouth of Moses in the middle books of the Pentateuch, and also in the Song at the Sea, Exo 15:17 and in Deu 3:24.

He is so named here as the Lord ruling over human history with an exaltation ever the same. Human history runs on in דּר ודר, so that one period (περίοδος) with the men living contemporaneous with it goes and another comes; the expression is deuteronomic (Deu 32:7). Such a course of generations lies behind the poet; and in them all the Lord has been מעון to His church, out of the heart of which the poet discourses.

This expression too is Deuteronomic (Deu 33:27). מעון signifies a habitation, dwelling-place (vid. , on Psa 26:8), more especially God’s heavenly and earthly dwelling-place, then the dwelling-place which God Himself is to His saints, inasmuch as He takes up to Himself, conceals and protects, those who flee to Him from the wicked one and from evil, and turn in to Him (Psa 71:3; Psa 91:9).

In order to express fuisti היית was indispensable; but just as fuisti comes from fuo , φύω, היה (הוה) signifies not a closed, shut up being, but a being that discloses itself, consequently it is fuisti in the sense of te exhibuisti . This historical self-manifestation of god is based upon the fact that He is אל, i. e. , might absolutely, or the absolutely Mighty One; and He was this, as Psa 90:2 says, even before the beginning of the history of the present world, and will be in the distant ages of the future as of the past.

The foundation of this world’s history is the creation. The combination ארץ ותבל shows that this is intended to be taken as the object. ותּחולל (with Metheg beside the e4 of the final syllable, which is deprived of its accent, vid. , on Psa 18:20) is the language of address (Rashi): that which is created is in a certain sense born from God (ילּד), and He brings it forth out of Himself; and this is here expressed by חולל (as in Deu 32:18, cf.

Isa 51:2), creation being compared to travail which takes place amidst pains ( Psychology , S. 114; tr. p. 137). If, after the example of the lxx and Targum, one reads as passive ותּחולל (Böttcher, Olshausen, Hitzig) from the Pulal חולל, Pro 8:24, - and this commends itself, since the pre-existence of God can be better dated back beyond facts than beyond the acts of God Himself, - then the conception remains essentially the same, since the Eternal and Absolute One is still to be thought of as מחולל.

The fact that the mountains are mentioned first of all, harmonizes with Deu 33:15. The modus consecutivus is intended to say: before the mountains were brought forth and Thou wast in labour therewith.... The forming of the mountains consequently coincides with the creation of the earth, which is here as a body or mass called ארץ, and as a continent with the relief of mountains and lowlands is called תבל (cf.

תבל ארץ, Pro 8:31; Job 37:12). To the double clause with טרם seq. praet. (cf. on the other hand seq. fut . Deu 31:21) is appended וּמעולם as a second definition of time: before the creation of the world, and from eternity to eternity. The Lord was God before the world was - that is the first assertion of Psa 90:2; His divine existence reaches out of the unlimited past into the unlimited future - this is the second.

אל is not vocative, which it sometimes, though rarely, is in the Psalms; it is a predicate, as e. g. , in Deu 3:24. This is also to be seen from Psa 90:3, Psa 90:4, when Psa 90:3 now more definitely affirms the omnipotence of God, and Psa 90:4 the supra-temporality of God or the omnipresence of God in time. The lxx misses the meaning when it brings over אל from Psa 90:2, and reads אל־תּשׁב.

The shorter future form תּשׁב for תּשׁיב stands poetically instead of the longer, as e. g. , in Psa 11:6; Psa 26:9; cf. the same thing in the inf. constr. in Deu 26:12, and both instances together in Deu 32:8. The poet intentionally calls the generation that is dying away אנושׁ, which denotes man from the side of his frailty or perishableness; and the new generation בּני־אדם, with which is combined the idea of entrance upon life.

It is clear that השׁיב עד־דּכּא is intended to be understood according to Gen 3:19; but it is a question whether דּכּא is conceived of as an adjective (with mutable aa ), as in Psa 34:19, Isa 57:15 : Thou puttest men back into the condition of crushed ones (cf. on the construction Num 24:24), or whether as a neutral feminine from דּך (= דּכּה): Thou changest them into that which is crushed = dust, or whether as an abstract substantive like דּכּה, or according to another reading (cf.

Psa 127:2) דּכּא, in Deu 23:2 : to crushing. This last is the simplest way of taking it, but it comes to one and the same thing with the second, since דּכּא signifies crushing in the neuter sense. A fut. consec . follows. The fact that God causes one generation to die off has as its consequence that He calls another into being (cf. the Arabic epithet of God el - mu‛ı̂d = המשׁיב, the Resuscitator).

Hofmann and Hitzig take תּשׁב as imperfect on account of the following ותּאמר: Thou didst decree mortality for men; but the fut. consec. frequently only expresses the sequence of the thoughts or the connection of the matter, e. g. , after a future that refers to that which is constantly taking place, Job 14:10. God causes men to die without letting them die out; for - so it continues in Psa 90:4 - a thousand years is to Him a very short period, not to be at all taken into account.

What now is the connection between that which confirms and that which is confirmed here? It is not so much Psa 90:3 that is confirmed as Psa 90:2, to which the former serves for explanation, viz. , this, that God as the Almighty (אל), in the midst of this change of generations, which is His work, remains Himself eternally the same. This ever the same, absolute existence has its ground herein, that time, although God fills it up with His working, is no limitation to Him.

A thousand years, which would make any man who might live through them weary of life, are to Him like a vanishing point. The proposition, as 2Pe 3:8 shows, is also true when reversed: “One day is with the Lord as a thousand years. ” He is however exalted above all time, inasmuch as the longest period appears to Him very short, and in the shortest period the greatest work can be executed by Him.

The standpoint of the first comparison, “as yesterday,” is taken towards the end of the thousand of years. A whole millennium appears to God, when He glances over it, just as the yesterday does to us when (כּי) it is passing by (יעבר), and we, standing on the border of the opening day, look back upon the day that is gone. The second comparison is an advance upon the first, and an advance also in form, from the fact that the Caph similitudinis is wanting: a thousand years are to God a watch in the night.

אשׁמוּרה is a night-watch, of which the Israelites reckoned three, viz. , the first, the middle, and the morning watch (vid. , Winer’s Realwörterbuch s. v. Nachtwache ). It is certainly not without design that the poet says אשׁמוּרה בלּילה instead of אשׁמרת הלּילה. The night-time is the time for sleep; a watch in the night is one that is slept away, or at any rate passed in a sort of half-sleep.

A day that is past, as we stand on the end of it, still produces upon us the impression of a course of time by reason of the events which we can recall; but a night passed in sleep, and now even a fragment of the night, is devoid of all trace to us, and is therefore as it were timeless. Thus is it to God with a thousand years: they do not last long to Him; they do not affect Him; at the close of them, as at the beginning, He is the Absolute One (אל).

Time is as nothing to Him, the Eternal One. The changes of time are to Him no barrier restraining the realization of His counsel - a truth which has a terrible and a consolatory side. The poet dwells upon the fear which it produces.

Psa 90:1-4 The poet begins with the confession that the Lord has proved Himself to His own, in all periods of human history, as that which He was before the world was and will be for evermore. God is designedly appealed to by the name אדני, which frequently occurs in the mouth of Moses in the middle books of the Pentateuch, and also in the Song at the Sea, Exo 15:17 and in Deu 3:24.

He is so named here as the Lord ruling over human history with an exaltation ever the same. Human history runs on in דּר ודר, so that one period (περίοδος) with the men living contemporaneous with it goes and another comes; the expression is deuteronomic (Deu 32:7). Such a course of generations lies behind the poet; and in them all the Lord has been מעון to His church, out of the heart of which the poet discourses.

This expression too is Deuteronomic (Deu 33:27). מעון signifies a habitation, dwelling-place (vid. , on Psa 26:8), more especially God’s heavenly and earthly dwelling-place, then the dwelling-place which God Himself is to His saints, inasmuch as He takes up to Himself, conceals and protects, those who flee to Him from the wicked one and from evil, and turn in to Him (Psa 71:3; Psa 91:9).

In order to express fuisti היית was indispensable; but just as fuisti comes from fuo , φύω, היה (הוה) signifies not a closed, shut up being, but a being that discloses itself, consequently it is fuisti in the sense of te exhibuisti . This historical self-manifestation of god is based upon the fact that He is אל, i. e. , might absolutely, or the absolutely Mighty One; and He was this, as Psa 90:2 says, even before the beginning of the history of the present world, and will be in the distant ages of the future as of the past.

The foundation of this world’s history is the creation. The combination ארץ ותבל shows that this is intended to be taken as the object. ותּחולל (with Metheg beside the e4 of the final syllable, which is deprived of its accent, vid. , on Psa 18:20) is the language of address (Rashi): that which is created is in a certain sense born from God (ילּד), and He brings it forth out of Himself; and this is here expressed by חולל (as in Deu 32:18, cf.

Isa 51:2), creation being compared to travail which takes place amidst pains ( Psychology , S. 114; tr. p. 137). If, after the example of the lxx and Targum, one reads as passive ותּחולל (Böttcher, Olshausen, Hitzig) from the Pulal חולל, Pro 8:24, - and this commends itself, since the pre-existence of God can be better dated back beyond facts than beyond the acts of God Himself, - then the conception remains essentially the same, since the Eternal and Absolute One is still to be thought of as מחולל.

The fact that the mountains are mentioned first of all, harmonizes with Deu 33:15. The modus consecutivus is intended to say: before the mountains were brought forth and Thou wast in labour therewith.... The forming of the mountains consequently coincides with the creation of the earth, which is here as a body or mass called ארץ, and as a continent with the relief of mountains and lowlands is called תבל (cf.

תבל ארץ, Pro 8:31; Job 37:12). To the double clause with טרם seq. praet. (cf. on the other hand seq. fut . Deu 31:21) is appended וּמעולם as a second definition of time: before the creation of the world, and from eternity to eternity. The Lord was God before the world was - that is the first assertion of Psa 90:2; His divine existence reaches out of the unlimited past into the unlimited future - this is the second.

אל is not vocative, which it sometimes, though rarely, is in the Psalms; it is a predicate, as e. g. , in Deu 3:24. This is also to be seen from Psa 90:3, Psa 90:4, when Psa 90:3 now more definitely affirms the omnipotence of God, and Psa 90:4 the supra-temporality of God or the omnipresence of God in time. The lxx misses the meaning when it brings over אל from Psa 90:2, and reads אל־תּשׁב.

The shorter future form תּשׁב for תּשׁיב stands poetically instead of the longer, as e. g. , in Psa 11:6; Psa 26:9; cf. the same thing in the inf. constr. in Deu 26:12, and both instances together in Deu 32:8. The poet intentionally calls the generation that is dying away אנושׁ, which denotes man from the side of his frailty or perishableness; and the new generation בּני־אדם, with which is combined the idea of entrance upon life.

It is clear that השׁיב עד־דּכּא is intended to be understood according to Gen 3:19; but it is a question whether דּכּא is conceived of as an adjective (with mutable aa ), as in Psa 34:19, Isa 57:15 : Thou puttest men back into the condition of crushed ones (cf. on the construction Num 24:24), or whether as a neutral feminine from דּך (= דּכּה): Thou changest them into that which is crushed = dust, or whether as an abstract substantive like דּכּה, or according to another reading (cf.

Psa 127:2) דּכּא, in Deu 23:2 : to crushing. This last is the simplest way of taking it, but it comes to one and the same thing with the second, since דּכּא signifies crushing in the neuter sense. A fut. consec . follows. The fact that God causes one generation to die off has as its consequence that He calls another into being (cf. the Arabic epithet of God el - mu‛ı̂d = המשׁיב, the Resuscitator).

Hofmann and Hitzig take תּשׁב as imperfect on account of the following ותּאמר: Thou didst decree mortality for men; but the fut. consec. frequently only expresses the sequence of the thoughts or the connection of the matter, e. g. , after a future that refers to that which is constantly taking place, Job 14:10. God causes men to die without letting them die out; for - so it continues in Psa 90:4 - a thousand years is to Him a very short period, not to be at all taken into account.

What now is the connection between that which confirms and that which is confirmed here? It is not so much Psa 90:3 that is confirmed as Psa 90:2, to which the former serves for explanation, viz. , this, that God as the Almighty (אל), in the midst of this change of generations, which is His work, remains Himself eternally the same. This ever the same, absolute existence has its ground herein, that time, although God fills it up with His working, is no limitation to Him.

A thousand years, which would make any man who might live through them weary of life, are to Him like a vanishing point. The proposition, as 2Pe 3:8 shows, is also true when reversed: “One day is with the Lord as a thousand years. ” He is however exalted above all time, inasmuch as the longest period appears to Him very short, and in the shortest period the greatest work can be executed by Him.

The standpoint of the first comparison, “as yesterday,” is taken towards the end of the thousand of years. A whole millennium appears to God, when He glances over it, just as the yesterday does to us when (כּי) it is passing by (יעבר), and we, standing on the border of the opening day, look back upon the day that is gone. The second comparison is an advance upon the first, and an advance also in form, from the fact that the Caph similitudinis is wanting: a thousand years are to God a watch in the night.

אשׁמוּרה is a night-watch, of which the Israelites reckoned three, viz. , the first, the middle, and the morning watch (vid. , Winer’s Realwörterbuch s. v. Nachtwache ). It is certainly not without design that the poet says אשׁמוּרה בלּילה instead of אשׁמרת הלּילה. The night-time is the time for sleep; a watch in the night is one that is slept away, or at any rate passed in a sort of half-sleep.

A day that is past, as we stand on the end of it, still produces upon us the impression of a course of time by reason of the events which we can recall; but a night passed in sleep, and now even a fragment of the night, is devoid of all trace to us, and is therefore as it were timeless. Thus is it to God with a thousand years: they do not last long to Him; they do not affect Him; at the close of them, as at the beginning, He is the Absolute One (אל).

Time is as nothing to Him, the Eternal One. The changes of time are to Him no barrier restraining the realization of His counsel - a truth which has a terrible and a consolatory side. The poet dwells upon the fear which it produces.

Psa 90:1-4 The poet begins with the confession that the Lord has proved Himself to His own, in all periods of human history, as that which He was before the world was and will be for evermore. God is designedly appealed to by the name אדני, which frequently occurs in the mouth of Moses in the middle books of the Pentateuch, and also in the Song at the Sea, Exo 15:17 and in Deu 3:24.

He is so named here as the Lord ruling over human history with an exaltation ever the same. Human history runs on in דּר ודר, so that one period (περίοδος) with the men living contemporaneous with it goes and another comes; the expression is deuteronomic (Deu 32:7). Such a course of generations lies behind the poet; and in them all the Lord has been מעון to His church, out of the heart of which the poet discourses.

This expression too is Deuteronomic (Deu 33:27). מעון signifies a habitation, dwelling-place (vid. , on Psa 26:8), more especially God’s heavenly and earthly dwelling-place, then the dwelling-place which God Himself is to His saints, inasmuch as He takes up to Himself, conceals and protects, those who flee to Him from the wicked one and from evil, and turn in to Him (Psa 71:3; Psa 91:9).

In order to express fuisti היית was indispensable; but just as fuisti comes from fuo , φύω, היה (הוה) signifies not a closed, shut up being, but a being that discloses itself, consequently it is fuisti in the sense of te exhibuisti . This historical self-manifestation of god is based upon the fact that He is אל, i. e. , might absolutely, or the absolutely Mighty One; and He was this, as Psa 90:2 says, even before the beginning of the history of the present world, and will be in the distant ages of the future as of the past.

The foundation of this world’s history is the creation. The combination ארץ ותבל shows that this is intended to be taken as the object. ותּחולל (with Metheg beside the e4 of the final syllable, which is deprived of its accent, vid. , on Psa 18:20) is the language of address (Rashi): that which is created is in a certain sense born from God (ילּד), and He brings it forth out of Himself; and this is here expressed by חולל (as in Deu 32:18, cf.

Isa 51:2), creation being compared to travail which takes place amidst pains ( Psychology , S. 114; tr. p. 137). If, after the example of the lxx and Targum, one reads as passive ותּחולל (Böttcher, Olshausen, Hitzig) from the Pulal חולל, Pro 8:24, - and this commends itself, since the pre-existence of God can be better dated back beyond facts than beyond the acts of God Himself, - then the conception remains essentially the same, since the Eternal and Absolute One is still to be thought of as מחולל.

The fact that the mountains are mentioned first of all, harmonizes with Deu 33:15. The modus consecutivus is intended to say: before the mountains were brought forth and Thou wast in labour therewith.... The forming of the mountains consequently coincides with the creation of the earth, which is here as a body or mass called ארץ, and as a continent with the relief of mountains and lowlands is called תבל (cf.

תבל ארץ, Pro 8:31; Job 37:12). To the double clause with טרם seq. praet. (cf. on the other hand seq. fut . Deu 31:21) is appended וּמעולם as a second definition of time: before the creation of the world, and from eternity to eternity. The Lord was God before the world was - that is the first assertion of Psa 90:2; His divine existence reaches out of the unlimited past into the unlimited future - this is the second.

אל is not vocative, which it sometimes, though rarely, is in the Psalms; it is a predicate, as e. g. , in Deu 3:24. This is also to be seen from Psa 90:3, Psa 90:4, when Psa 90:3 now more definitely affirms the omnipotence of God, and Psa 90:4 the supra-temporality of God or the omnipresence of God in time. The lxx misses the meaning when it brings over אל from Psa 90:2, and reads אל־תּשׁב.

The shorter future form תּשׁב for תּשׁיב stands poetically instead of the longer, as e. g. , in Psa 11:6; Psa 26:9; cf. the same thing in the inf. constr. in Deu 26:12, and both instances together in Deu 32:8. The poet intentionally calls the generation that is dying away אנושׁ, which denotes man from the side of his frailty or perishableness; and the new generation בּני־אדם, with which is combined the idea of entrance upon life.

It is clear that השׁיב עד־דּכּא is intended to be understood according to Gen 3:19; but it is a question whether דּכּא is conceived of as an adjective (with mutable aa ), as in Psa 34:19, Isa 57:15 : Thou puttest men back into the condition of crushed ones (cf. on the construction Num 24:24), or whether as a neutral feminine from דּך (= דּכּה): Thou changest them into that which is crushed = dust, or whether as an abstract substantive like דּכּה, or according to another reading (cf.

Psa 127:2) דּכּא, in Deu 23:2 : to crushing. This last is the simplest way of taking it, but it comes to one and the same thing with the second, since דּכּא signifies crushing in the neuter sense. A fut. consec . follows. The fact that God causes one generation to die off has as its consequence that He calls another into being (cf. the Arabic epithet of God el - mu‛ı̂d = המשׁיב, the Resuscitator).

Hofmann and Hitzig take תּשׁב as imperfect on account of the following ותּאמר: Thou didst decree mortality for men; but the fut. consec. frequently only expresses the sequence of the thoughts or the connection of the matter, e. g. , after a future that refers to that which is constantly taking place, Job 14:10. God causes men to die without letting them die out; for - so it continues in Psa 90:4 - a thousand years is to Him a very short period, not to be at all taken into account.

What now is the connection between that which confirms and that which is confirmed here? It is not so much Psa 90:3 that is confirmed as Psa 90:2, to which the former serves for explanation, viz. , this, that God as the Almighty (אל), in the midst of this change of generations, which is His work, remains Himself eternally the same. This ever the same, absolute existence has its ground herein, that time, although God fills it up with His working, is no limitation to Him.

A thousand years, which would make any man who might live through them weary of life, are to Him like a vanishing point. The proposition, as 2Pe 3:8 shows, is also true when reversed: “One day is with the Lord as a thousand years. ” He is however exalted above all time, inasmuch as the longest period appears to Him very short, and in the shortest period the greatest work can be executed by Him.

The standpoint of the first comparison, “as yesterday,” is taken towards the end of the thousand of years. A whole millennium appears to God, when He glances over it, just as the yesterday does to us when (כּי) it is passing by (יעבר), and we, standing on the border of the opening day, look back upon the day that is gone. The second comparison is an advance upon the first, and an advance also in form, from the fact that the Caph similitudinis is wanting: a thousand years are to God a watch in the night.

אשׁמוּרה is a night-watch, of which the Israelites reckoned three, viz. , the first, the middle, and the morning watch (vid. , Winer’s Realwörterbuch s. v. Nachtwache ). It is certainly not without design that the poet says אשׁמוּרה בלּילה instead of אשׁמרת הלּילה. The night-time is the time for sleep; a watch in the night is one that is slept away, or at any rate passed in a sort of half-sleep.

A day that is past, as we stand on the end of it, still produces upon us the impression of a course of time by reason of the events which we can recall; but a night passed in sleep, and now even a fragment of the night, is devoid of all trace to us, and is therefore as it were timeless. Thus is it to God with a thousand years: they do not last long to Him; they do not affect Him; at the close of them, as at the beginning, He is the Absolute One (אל).

Time is as nothing to Him, the Eternal One. The changes of time are to Him no barrier restraining the realization of His counsel - a truth which has a terrible and a consolatory side. The poet dwells upon the fear which it produces.