Chú giải Kinh Thánh

This psalm does so particularly describe the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, by Nebuchadnezzar and the army of the Chaldeans, and can so ill be applied to any other event we meet with in the Jewish history, that interpreters incline to think that either it was penned by David, or Asaph in David's time, with a prophetical reference to that sad event (which yet is not so probable), or that it was penned by another Asaph, who lived at the time of the captivity, or by Jeremiah (for it is of a piece with his Lamentations,) or some other prophet, and, after the return out of captivity, was delivered to the sons of Asaph, who were called by his name, for the public service of the church. That was the most eminent family of the singers in Ezra's time. See Ezr 2:41,3:10, Ne 11:17,22,12:35,46. The deplorable case of the people of God at that time is here spread before the Lord, and left with him. The prophet, in the name of the church I. Puts in complaining pleas of the miseries they suffered, for the quickening of their desires in prayer, Ps 74:1-11. II. He puts in comfortable pleas for the encouraging of their faith in prayer, Ps 74:12-17. III. He concludes with divers petitions to God for deliverances, Ps 74:18-23. In singing it we must be affected with the former desolations of the church, for we are members of the same body, and may apply it to any present distresses or desolations of any part of the Christian church.

This psalm is entitled "Maschil of Asaph." On the word Maschil - meaning "didactic," or adapted "to give instruction" - see the notes at the title to Psalm 32:1-11. On the phrase "of Asaph," see the notes at the title to Psalm 73. It may mean either "for" Asaph, or ""of" Asaph; that is, it may either mean that it was composed "by" him, or that it was composed "for" him, to be used by him as the leader of music in public worship. The former is the most common, and the most probable opinion. The title, however, "may" mean that the psalm was dedicated or composed for one of the descendants of this Musician, among whom the office of their ancestor Asaph was hereditary. Thus understood, it might denote simply that the psalm belonged to that class of psalms which were composed for the one who, at the time, presided over the music.

If this is the meaning, there would be no impropriety in supposing that this psalm was composed near the time of the captivity, and had reference to the struction of the temple by the Chaldeans, to which the language seems "naturally" to refer. Yet the occasion on which it was composed is not certainly known, and cannot be ascertained from the psalm. All that is manifest is, that it was at a time when the land was invaded; when great ravages were committed; and when a work of desolation was perpetrated on the edifices upon Mount Zion, and particularly on the temple. The "language" could be applied either to the destruction of the temple in the time of the Babylonian invasion; or to the times of the Maccabees, and to the desolations brought upon the land Antiochus Epiphanes; or to some desolation before the temple was built. Rosenmuller, Venema, DeWette, some others, suppose that the reference is to the time of the Maccabees. The reason alleged for this opinion is founded on what is said in Psalm 74:4, Psalm 74:9, particularly Psalm 74:9, where it is asserted that "there is no more any prophet;" that is, no one to instruct the people, or to declare what the result or the issue will be.

It is alleged by them that at the time of the invasion by the Chaldeans there were prophets in the land, and particularly that Jeremiah was then living, who distinctly predicted what the result of it would be. But this is not a conclusive objection to the idea that the reference is to the destruction of the city and the temple by the Chaldees. The meaning of Psalm 74:9 may be that there was no divine teacher who could "save" the people, or who could "prevent" those desolations; the matter had gone so far that all divine interference and protection appeared to be withdrawn, and the nation seemed to be abandoned to its fate. Still there can now be no certainty as to the time or the occasion when the psalm was composed; though the most probable reference of the psalm is to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians.

The psalm consists essentially of two parts: a prayer; and the reasons why the prayer is urged, and should be answered.

I. The prayer, Psalm 74:1-3. It is a prayer that God would remember Mount Zion, now made desolate, or in ruins.

II. The reasons why the prayer is urged, Psalm 74:4-23.

(1) the desolations which had come upon the city and upon the edifices devoted to religion, Psalm 74:4-8.

(2) the fact that there was among the people, in those times of calamity, no prophet - no messenger of God - no one to show them how long this would continue, or to give them assurance that these desolations would cease, Psalm 74:9-11.

(3) a reference to what God had done for his people in former times when he interposed to save them from their enemies, Psalm 74:12-15.

(4) the fact that God rules over the earth, and has control of all things; that day and night, light and darkness, summer and winter, are all under him, and are directed and controlled by him, Psalm 74:16-17.

(5) a prayer that God would not forget his own cause; that he would remember that these reproaches were reproaches of his own name; that he would call to mind his own solemn covenant; and that he would pity and relieve the people that loved him, now poor and oppressed - the people that desired to serve and praise him, Psalm 74:18-23.

The psalmtst complains of the desolations of the sanctuary, and pleads with God, Psalm 74:1-3; shows the insolence and wickedness of their enemies Psalm 74:4-8; prays to God to act for them as he had done for their fathers, whom, by his miraculous power, he had saved, Psalm 74:9-17; begs God to arise, and vindicate his own honor against his enemies, and the enemies of his people, Psalm 74:18-23.

The title is, Maschil of Asaph, or, "A Psalm of Asaph, to give instruction." That this Psalm was written at a time when the temple was ruined, Jerusalem burnt, and the prophets scattered or destroyed, is evident. But it is not so clear whether the desolations here refer to the days of Nebuchadnezzar, or to the desolation that took place under the Romans about the seventieth year of the Christian era. Calmet inclines to the former opinion; and supposes the Psalm to be a lamentation over the temple destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar.

INTRODUCTION TO Psalm 74

Maschil of Asaph. Some think that Asaph, the penman of this psalm, was not the same that lived in the times of David, but some other of the same name, a descendant of his (k), that lived after the Babylonish captivity, since the psalm treats of things that were done at the time the Jews were carried captive into Babylon, or after; but this hinders not that it might be the same man; for why might he not, under a spirit of prophecy, speak of the sufferings of the church in later ages, as well as David and others testify before hand of the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow? The psalm is called "Maschil", because it gives knowledge of, and causes to understand what afflictions should befall the church and people of God in later times. The Targum is,

"a good understanding by the hands of Asaph.''

Some think the occasion of the psalm was the Babylonish captivity, as before observed, when indeed the city and temple were burnt; but then there were prophets, as Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and after them Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi; which is here denied, Psalm 74:9, others think it refers to the times of Antiochus Epiphanes; but though prophecy indeed had then ceased, and the temple was profaned, yet not burnt. The Jews apply it to their present captivity, and to the profanation of the temple, by Titus (l), and to the destruction both of the city and temple by him; so Theodoret: the title of it in the Syriac version is,

"when David saw the angel slaying the people, and he wept and said, on me and my seed, and not on these innocent sheep; and again a prediction of the siege of the city of the Jews, forty years after the ascension, by Vespasian the old man, and Titus his son, who killed multitudes of the Jews, and destroyed Jerusalem; and hence the Jews have been wandering to this day.''

But then it is not easy to account for it why a psalm of lamentation should be composed for the destruction of that people, which so righteously came upon them for their sins, and particularly for their contempt and rejection of the Messiah. It therefore seems better, with Calvin and Cocceius, to suppose that this psalm refers to the various afflictions, which at different times should come upon the church and people of God; and perhaps the superstition, wickedness, and cruelty of the Romish antichrist, may be hinted at.

LXXIV.

Two periods only in the history of the Jews offer possible place for the composition of this psalm—that immediately after the Chaldæan invasion, and that of the persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes (B.C 167). Against the former of these is the statement in Psalm 74:9 (see Note), which could not have been spoken while Jeremiah was alive. Hence, with a certainty allowed by no other of the psalms, this, with Psalms 79, can be referred to the year before the patriotic rise of the Asmoneans. Indeed, as Delitzsch remarks, their contents coincide with the prayer of Judas Maccabæus preserved in 2 Maccabees 8:1-4. The only argument of any weight against this conclusion is the expression in Psalm 74:3, “ruins,” which appears at first sight too strong a term for the mischief wrought by the Syrians at the command of Antiochus. But we must allow at such a crisis a little licence to patriotism and poetry; and, unless the words must be limited to the sanctuary (which is not absolutely necessary: see Note), the picture given in the Book of Maccabees of the state of the Holy City, is such as to bear out the psalm. The poetical form is irregular.

Title.—See titles, Psalms 32, 1.

This Psalm and Psalms 79 are closely connected in thought and language[37], and reflect the same historical situation. If they are not from the same pen, they must at least belong to the same period, and must be considered together.

[37] Comp. Psalm 74:1; Psalm 74:9-10 with Psalm 79:5, how long, for ever: Psalm 74:3; Psalm 74:7 with Psalm 79:1, the desecration of the sanctuary: Psalm 74:1 with Psalm 79:5, God’s wrath: Psalm 74:1 with Psalm 79:13, sheep, of thy pasture: Psalm 74:2 with Psalm 79:1, thine inheritance: Psalm 74:10; Psalm 74:18; Psalm 74:22-23 with Psalm 79:4; Psalm 79:12, the reproaches of the enemy: Psalm 74:7; Psalm 74:10; Psalm 74:18; Psalm 74:21 with Psalm 79:6; Psalm 79:9, God’s name.

The circumstances under which they were written stand out clearly. The holy land has been overrun by heathen enemies; the Temple has been desecrated and burnt to the ground; Jerusalem is in ruins; numbers of Israelites have been slaughtered, and their bodies left unburied; Israel is the scorn of neighbouring nations; the outward ordinances of religion are suspended; Jehovah seems permanently to have cast off His people, and its fortunes seem destined to know no recovery; no one can foresee the end of its humiliation.

It has generally been thought that there are two periods, and only two, to which this description can apply:—the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans in b.c. 586, and the oppression of the Jews by Antiochus Epiphanes in b.c. 170–165. Almost all commentators who admit the existence of Maccabaean Psalms in the Psalter at all agree in referring these Psalms to the latter occasion, and we may consider it first. Antiochus IV, surnamed Epiphanes, became king of Syria in b.c. 175. After his second expedition to Egypt, b.c. 170, he invaded Jerusalem, plundered the Temple of its treasures, and massacred thousands of the people. “All the house of Jacob was covered with confusion” (1Ma 1:20-28). Two years later, after his fourth Egyptian campaign, Antiochus sent a force under his general Apollonius to occupy Jerusalem. He seized the city by treachery, plundered it and set it on fire, massacred many of the people, sold many women and children as slaves, and fortifying the city of David, established a Syrian garrison there (1Ma 1:29 ff.). Antiochus next resolved to stamp out the Jewish religion. He promulgated an edict prohibiting the practice of all its distinctive ceremonies upon pain of death, and ordering the Jews to take part in heathen rites. The Temple was desecrated; an idol altar set up on the altar, and sacrifices offered upon it to Zeus Olympios; all the copies of the Law that could be found were destroyed or defaced, and their possession was made a capital offence. Many Israelites turned apostate, but many preferred death to the abnegation of their religion. The resistance inaugurated by Mattathias at Modin was crowned with success. Under the heroic leadership of his son Judas the Jews recovered their liberty, and in b.c. 165 the Temple was cleansed and re-dedicated with great rejoicings (1Ma 4:36 ff.).

In many respects these Psalms appear remarkably to reflect the circumstances of this period; they illustrate and are illustrated by the narrative in 1 and 2 Maccabees in a number of details; and in particular the complaints put into the mouth of Mattathias (1Ma 2:6 ff.) and Judas (2Ma 8:2 ff) present many points of resemblance. The special arguments urged in favour of the Maccabaean date are (1) that the absence of prophets spoken of in Psalm 74:9 was a marked characteristic of the Maccabaean times (1Ma 4:46; 1Ma 9:27; 1Ma 14:41), whereas Jeremiah and Ezekiel survived the destruction of Jerusalem for many years, and the former had predicted the duration of the captivity: (2) that the existence of synagogues (Psalm 74:8) points to a late period of Jewish history: (3) that the language of the Psalms implies that Israel was suffering a religious persecution (Psalm 74:10; Psalm 74:18; Psalm 74:22): (4) that the ‘signs’ of the heathen in the Temple and the absence of Israel’s ‘signs’ (Psalm 74:4; Psalm 74:9) clearly refer to the introduction of idolatrous emblems and the attempt to destroy the Jewish religion.

Upon these grounds these Psalms have very generally been assigned to the period between b.c. 170 and b.c. 165, or more particularly between the desecration of the Temple in b.c. 168 and its re-dedication in b.c. 165. At first sight the arguments appear to be convincing. But it has already been pointed out in the introduction to Psalms 44 that the history of the growth of the Psalter makes the presence of Maccabaean Psalms in the Elohistic collection highly improbable. In view of this improbability it is necessary further to examine the arguments alleged in proof of the Maccabaean date. Now (1) though Jeremiah and Ezekiel lived for several years after the destruction of Jerusalem, the complaint of Psalm 74:9 is intelligible, if the Psalm was written, as it may well have been, after their death. It finds at least a partial parallel in Lamentations 2:9. Further, though the question ‘How long’ may seem strange in the face of Jeremiah’s prediction of the duration of the Captivity, it could still be asked even after the first Return (Zechariah 1:12). (2) It will be shewn in the notes on Psalm 74:8 that the LXX, the oldest authority for the text and interpretation of the passage, finds no allusion in it to synagogues, but understands it of the solemn feasts, the suspension of which is deplored in Lamentations as one of the great calamities of the Exile. (3) Every war against Israel was in a sense a religious war, and the language is no more than might have been used with reference to any occasion when the humiliation of Israel gave the heathen opportunity to speak contemptuously of Israel’s God. (4) The ‘signs’ of the enemy may equally well mean the military ensigns of the Chaldeans, and the absence of Israel’s ‘signs’ may refer to the suspension of festivals and other outward ordinances of religion.

Thus the special arguments for the Maccabaean date break down upon examination. But further, there are allusions which fit the earlier date better than the later, and there are some marked features of the Maccabaean period which are conspicuously absent.

(1) The description of the burning and destruction of the Temple and the demolition of the city agrees with the account of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans (2 Kings 25:9-10), whereas in the Syrian troubles only the gates of the Temple were burnt and some of the subordinate buildings destroyed (1Ma 4:38), and though the city had suffered, it does not seem to have been laid in ruins.

(2) The prolonged desolation of the city and humiliation of Israel point decidedly to the earlier occasion. The interval from the outrage of Antiochus to the re-dedication of the Temple was only three years, and even from his first invasion of Jerusalem only five years, a short period, surely, to account for the strong expressions in Psalms 74.

(3) The mockery of the neighbouring peoples was a conspicuous feature at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem (Psalms 137; Ezekiel 25). (4) The parallels with Jeremiah, Lamentations, and Ezekiel are at least as striking as those with 1 Maccabees[38].

[38] Comp. Psalm 74:4 with Lamentations 2:6-7; Psalm 74:7 with Lamentations 2:2; Psalm 74:9 with Lamentations 2:6; Lamentations 2:9; Psalm 79:6-7 with Jeremiah 10:25; Psalm 74:1; Psalm 79:13 with Jeremiah 23:1; and further references in the notes.

Arguments from silence are no doubt precarious, but it must be noted that these Psalms contain no reference to some prominent features of the Maccabaean times. There is no allusion to the intrigues which had disgraced the hierarchy, or to the religious divisions of the time and the apostasy of many of the people, or to the deliberate attempt of Antiochus to enforce idolatry and destroy the Jewish religion.

On the whole, then, the view which seems most in accordance with the evidence is that these Psalms were written some fifteen or twenty years after the destruction of Jerusalem, about the same time as the Lamentations. The author might have been an eye-witness of the destruction of the Temple, which he describes so graphically, while at the same time the exile had lasted long enough to make it seem as though, in spite of Jeremiah’s predictions of restoration, God had permanently rejected His people. This hypothesis we may at any rate take as the basis of our study, referring to the Book of Maccabees only for illustration.[39]

[39] On the question of Maccabaean Psalms generally, see Introd. p. xliv ff.

It has been suggested that these Psalms, though originally written with reference to the destruction of Jerusalem, were re-touched to adapt them to the circumstances of the later struggle. The possibility may be borne in mind, but the conjecture does not admit of proof. Naturally the Psalms would have been favourites at that time, and this may account for many of the coincidences of thought and expression.

It may indeed be the case that it has been too hastily assumed by the majority of commentators that these Psalms must refer to one or other of the periods above mentioned. Ewald would connect them, together with 44, 60, 80, 85, with disasters which befel the restored community in the earlier part of the fifth century b.c., to which reference is made in Nehemiah 1:3. But it must be noted that Nehemiah’s concern is for the city only: there is no mention of any desecration of the Temple.

Robertson Smith (Old Test. in Jewish Ch., ed. 2, p. 438) prefers Ewald’s earlier view, and connects them with the rebellion of the Jews under Artaxerxes Ochus (circa b.c. 350), which was put down with great severity. Our knowledge of the history of that period is, however, extremely scanty, and the hypothesis lacks evidence.

Psalms 74 may be divided into three stanzas, thus:

i. The Psalmist expostulates with God for abandoning His people, and entreats Him to come to their help, enforcing his appeal by a vivid description of the havoc which the enemy had wrought in the sanctuary, and the despair which is seizing upon Israel (Psalm 74:1-9).

ii. He renews his expostulation, bidding God remember that His honour is at stake, and recalling, at once by way of pleading with God and for his own consolation, the sovereignty of Israel’s King in history and in nature (Psalm 74:10-17).

iii. Repeating the arguments he has already used, he once more urgently entreats God not to abandon His people to the mercy of their foes, or any longer to endure the insults which are heaped upon Him daily (Psalm 74:18-23).

On Maschil see Introd. p. xix.

Ps 74:1-23.

If the historical allusions of

Ps 74:6-8,

&c., be referred, as is probable, to the period of the captivity, the author was probably a descendant and namesake of Asaph, David's contemporary and singer (compare

2Ch 35:15; Ezr 2:41).

He complains of God's desertion of His Church, and appeals for aid, encouraging himself by recounting some of God's mighty deeds, and urges his prayer on the ground of God's covenant relation to His people, and the wickedness of His and their common enemy.

1. cast . . . off--with abhorrence (compare

Ps 43:2; 44:9).

There is no disavowal of guilt implied. The figure of fire to denote God's anger is often used; and here, and in

De 29:20,

by the word "smoke," suggests its continuance.

sheep . . . pasture--(Compare

Ps 80:1; 95:7).

O God, why hast thou cast us off for ever? - Thou seemest to have cast us off forever, or finally. Compare Psalm 44:9, note; Psalm 13:1, note. "Why doth thine anger smoke." See Deuteronomy 29:20. The presence of smoke indicates fire, and the language here is such as often occurs in the Scriptures, when anger or wrath is compared with fire. See Deuteronomy 32:22; Jeremiah 15:14.

Against the sheep of thy pasture - Thy people, represented as a flock. See Psalm 79:13; Psalm 95:7. This increases the tenderness of the appeal. The wrath of God seemed to be enkindled against his own people, helpless and defenseless, who needed his care, and who might naturally look for it - as a flock needs the care of a shepherd, and as the care of the shepherd might be expected. He seemed to be angry with his people, and to have cast them off, when they had every reason to anticipate his protection.