圣经注释书

我们未被告知本篇作者是谁,也不知它在何时、因何事而作;我们确知它是因一件可悲的事而作——而且并非主要因作者本人之事(否则我们大可在 david 与其苦难的史实中找出许多机会),而是因神教会整体之事;因此我们若假设它为大卫所写,仍当归因于预言的灵,并须断定圣灵(无论他自己有何经历)所注目的乃是巴比伦之囚,或犹太教会在安提阿古手下所受的苦,更是基督教会初期的受苦状况(诗44:22经使徒应用于此,罗8:36),实际上也是其在地上一切日子的状况——因为教会命定的分,就是必须经过许多艰难才能进入神的国。我们若有什么福音诗指向基督徒的特权与安慰,为何不能有一首指向他们的试炼与熬炼呢?本诗正为因某种紧迫或威胁的公开灾祸而禁食自卑之日所设。其中教会受教:一、以感恩之心承认神为他们列祖所行的大事,归荣耀给神(诗44:1-8);二、陈列他们目前悲惨景况的记述(诗44:9-16);三、就此提出他们仍坚守正直、紧随神的抗议书(诗44:17-22);四、向施恩宝座呈递乞求救助解救的请愿(诗44:22-26)。我们唱这首诗时,当为神已往为他百姓所行的赞美他,或陈明我们自己的苦情,或同情教会中受苦的部分,无论遭遇何事都立定心志紧随神与本分,然后甘心等候结局。

本诗的标题"交与伶长，可拉后裔的训诲诗"，与 Psalm 42:1-11 前面的标题相同，只有轻微的语序变动。参见 Psalm 42:1-11 标题的注释。然而，这并不证明本诗出于同一位作者之手；也不证明它写于同一场合；也不证明两篇的主旨和内容彼此相似；只证明它们为同样的目的，同样呈交给那些受雇管理圣所音乐的可拉家族的后裔。诚然，本诗可能出于可拉家族的一位后裔、或某位负责音乐的人之手，但标题并没有使这一点成为确定。

没有任何方法可以确定其作者。它不属于诗篇书中归于大卫名下的大段（Psalm 1-41）；虽然毫无疑问，书的其他部分有许多诗篇是他写的，但如今已无法确定哪些是他的，除非某篇诗前附有他的名字；而他的名字既未附于本诗，这可视为一个证明：在编排这收集之书的人看来，它不是他的作品。他可能是那些未归于任何特定作者之诗篇中某些篇的作者，这是无可置疑的；但本诗中没有任何东西特别表明它是大卫的诗。因此，我们如今无法指望查明作者的名字。

本诗写作的场合也全然未知，猜测并无用处。诗中没有提到任何使我们能确定其写作年代的情况。然而，犹太人历史中有许多场合都适用于诗中的情感；但没有一个场合使本诗如此独特、唯独适用于它，以致能毫无疑义地把它归于那场合。其结果是，不同解经者把它的写作归于很不相同的场合。不少人把它归于安提阿古·伊皮法尼（Antiochus Epiphanes）的时代，归于他治下发生的逼迫。加尔文（Calvin）、维内玛（Venema）、达特（Dathe）和罗森米勒（Rosenmuller）持此见解。德维特（DeWette）认为它指被掳巴比伦之前的时期，或在约雅敬作王、尼布甲尼撒初次侵入这地的时候（2 Kings 24:1），或在约雅斤作王、这地再次被他侵入的时候（2 Kings 24:10）。图鲁克（Tholuck）认为它或指约雅斤的时期（2 Chronicles 36:9），或指西底家的时期（2 Chronicles 36:11），那时这地被巴比伦人侵入，被掳也开始了。亚历山大教授（Prof. Alexander）认为，诗中没有任何东西使人必须认为它指比大卫时代更晚的时期。

从诗篇本身所显明关于其写作场合的是：

（1）那是一个败挫与灾祸的时节，以色列的军队被击败，Psalm 44:9-10；

（2）他们的军队和民众被分散在列邦中，民众被"卖"给他们，Psalm 44:11-12；

（3）他们成了周围列国的羞辱和笑谈，Psalm 44:13-14；

（4）这败挫与羞辱临到他们，是在某个可称为"野狗之处"的地方，Psalm 44:19；以及

（5）这事发生于某个时候，那时诗作者以民众的名义说话，能说这不是因为盛行的拜偶像，也不是因为这民曾"向陌生的神伸手"，Psalm 44:17-18, Psalm 44:20。

考察本诗之后也许会发现：与希伯来民族历史的任何其他时期相比，所有这些情形都与约西亚的时代、尤其他作王的末了（2 Kings 23:26-30; 2 Chronicles 35:20-27）、以及接下来那位王登基之初（2 Kings 23:31-37; 2 Kings 24:1）更为吻合。这是紧接被掳巴比伦之前临到这国之灾祸的开端；那是一个这样的时代：这民族因着敬虔之王努力所能成就的范围，已脱离盛行的拜偶像；然而也是那一系列灾祸开始的年代，最终导致全民族被迁往巴比伦。没有任何些微的内在证据表明本诗指马加比时代；大卫时代也没有任何易于应用于它的史实；但诗中一切情形都会在恰好先于被掳巴比伦的事件中、在始于约西亚之败亡与死亡的一连串国难中得到应验。

本诗是在民族的灾祸之中恳切呼吁神介入、为他们的保护和拯救兴起的呼吁。它由以下部分构成：

一、提及从古代传下来的传统中先前的民族福分——论到这民族处于危险之中时神为它施行介入、救它脱离仇敌，Psalm 44:1-8。这对过去的回顾显然是要作为论证或理由，用以期望并恳求神在当前民族黑暗与灾祸的时期施行介入。神曾在类似情形中介入，这一事实是可以提出的论证：祂理当再次如此行。

二、描述民族的光景，Psalm 44:9-16。那是民族灾祸的时节。神丢弃了这民族，不再与他们的军队同出。他们的军队败退、遭抢夺；民众被卖为奴，成了地上列国的羞辱和笑谈。

三、陈述说，无论这一切临到他们的原因何在，都不是因为民族背道、不是因拜偶像盛行、也不是因为他们忘记了神，Psalm 44:17-22。这里的观念是：这民族中有一种事奉神的普遍心愿；这当视为神的子民之为神的子民所受的灾难；他们所受的苦难是为真宗教的事业、或因为他们是神的子民而忍受的。这提供了呼吁的根据：求神为他们介入，或求神为他们和祂自己的事业伸冤。

四、恳切呼吁神救助、拯救他们，Psalm 44:23-26。

The psalmist recounts the mercies of God; shows to his people how God in ancient times gave them the victory over all their enemies, Psalm 44:1-8; points out their present miserable state, Psalm 44:9-16; asserts that they have not apostatized, and appeals to God for the truth of his assertion, Psalm 44:17-22; and calls upon the Lord for deliverance from their enemies, Psalm 44:23-26.

The title here is the same as that in Psalm 42:1-11 (note); which see. The Syriac says it was "A Psalm of the sons of Korah, which the people and Moses sung at Horeb." Such titles are fancies to which no credit should be attached. Like the preceding, it appears to belong to the time of the captivity.

INTRODUCTION TO Psalm 44

To the chief Musician for the sons of Korah, Maschil. It is not certain who was the writer of this psalm, nor when it was written, and to what time it belongs: some have thought it was composed by one of the Babylonish captivity, and that it gives an account of the church and people of God in those times; but what is said in Psalm 44:17 does not seem to agree with Daniel 9:5. It is most likely it was written by David, and to him the Targum ascribes it; though it does not respect his times; since what is said in Psalm 44:9 cannot agree with them; yet he being a prophet might, under a prophetic influence, speak of future times, and represent the church in them. Some are of opinion that he prophetically speaks of the times of the Maccabees and of Antiochus, when the church and people of God suffered much for the true religion, and abode steadfast in it; so Theodoret: but rather the whole may be applied to the times of the New Testament, since Psalm 44:22 is cited by the Apostle Paul, Romans 8:36, and is applied to his times, and as descriptive of the suffering state and condition of the church then; and which seems to be the guide and key for the opening of the whole psalm.

XLIV.

In spite of the singular used in Psalm 44:6; Psalm 44:15, we recognise, in this psalm, a hymn expressive not of individual but of national feeling; a feeling, too, which certainly could not have received such an expression before the exile, before the spell of the fascination of the Canaanitish idolatries had passed away. Nor can the psalm be assigned to the exile period itself, for it does not reflect the profound spiritual insight that characterises the literature which undoubtedly belongs to that time. Ewald places it during the months that disturbed the early years of the return from captivity. The majority of critics, however, prefer the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. It might well have been inspired by one of those reverses, which so often came upon the struggling community of Israel, in consequence of their scrupulous concern for the Sabbath day, which did not even allow them to defend themselves. (See Note, Psalm 44:13-14.) The parallelism is fine and well sustained.

Title.—See title, Psalms 42, 32

This Psalm is the appeal of the nation to God in a time of unmerited disaster and humiliation.

i. It begins by recalling the mighty deeds of God for His people in the days of old. It was God Himself who drove out the nations from Canaan, and planted Israel in their place. By His might and not by their own valour was the victory won (Psalm 44:1-3).

ii. From the past they have been wont to draw assurance for the present. To Him they still trust for victory and not to themselves, for He is their King and they are His loyal subjects (Psalm 44:4-8).

iii. But facts contradict faith. God has surrendered them to their enemies, and abandoned them to the scorn and derision of neighbouring nations (Psalm 44:9-16).

iv. And this suffering is undeserved. No faithlessness on their part accounts for it as a punishment. Nay, it is for His sake that they are being persecuted (Psalm 44:17-22).

v. The Psalm closes with an urgent appeal for speedy help (Psalm 44:23-26).

This Psalm is one of those which have most generally and most confidently been assigned to the Maccabaean period. It is argued that the general tone of the Psalm and the reference to the dispersion of the nation (Psalm 44:11) prove it to be post-exilic; that we know of no earlier time in the post-exilic period when the nation possessed an army (Psalm 44:9); that then, as never before, it could plead its fidelity to Jehovah. The persecution of Antiochus was preeminently a religious persecution, in which the Jews were slaughtered and sold into slavery by thousands for their faith’s sake. They were fighting not only for their lives but for their laws.

Those however who assign the Psalm to the Maccabaean period are not agreed as to the particular occasion to which it refers. The most plausible suggestion is that which connects it with the reverse sustained by Judas at Beth-Zachariah, which was followed by the surrender of Beth-zur, and the reduction of the defenders of the Temple to the greatest extremities (1Ma 6:28 ff.). It cannot refer to the early days of the persecution of Antiochus, for then the Jews had no army: nor to the defeat of Joseph and Azariah at Jamnia (1Ma 5:56 ff.), for that defeat was the result of self-willed disobedience, and arrogant self-assertion (1Ma 5:61): nor to disasters after the death of Judas (1 Maccabees 9), for the alliance which he had just contracted with Rome (1 Maccabees 8) was incompatible with that exclusive reliance upon Jehovah which the Psalmist so emphatically professes.

No doubt many of the features of the Psalm seem to reflect the circumstances of the Maccabaean period. But the closeness of the correspondence has been exaggerated. Could the Psalmist protest that the nation was faithful to its God, when the high-priest Jason had but recently introduced Greek customs into Jerusalem, and been followed by a multitude of willing apostates (1Ma 1:11 ff.)? Moreover, although an argument from silence is precarious, it would certainly be strange that a Psalm of the Maccabaean period should contain no reference to the desecration of the Temple, or to the attempt to destroy the national religion and enforce heathen customs.

The most convincing argument however against a Maccabaean date for this Psalm is to be derived from the history of the formation of the Psalter. The ‘Elohistic’ collection in which it is found was certainly anterior to the collections contained in Books iv and v (Introd. pp. lvi. ff.), and must on any hypothesis have been formed earlier than the Maccabaean age, while the subordinate collections which are incorporated in it carry us back to an earlier date still. Now while it is possible that a Maccabaean Psalmist might have “thrown himself into the spirit of the original collector and made his additions Elohistic to correspond to the earlier Psalms,” and might even have furnished the Psalm with a title which no longer had any meaning, it is, to say the least, extremely improbable[24]. The internal indications of a Maccabaean date must be overwhelming in order to justify such a bold hypothesis.

[24] See Robertson Smith, Old Test. in Jewish Church, ed. 2, pp. 207, 437. Sanday, Bampton Lectures, pp. 256, 270, draws out in detail the number of steps implied between the original composition of the Hebrew Psalm and the Greek Version of the Psalter, and shews that if, as many believe, the Greek Version of the Psalter is not later than b.c. 100, it is almost incredible that they can have been compressed into a space of seventy years.

It is however easier to arrive at the negative conclusion that the Maccabaean date is untenable than to suggest a satisfactory alternative. Delitzsch connects this Psalm with Psalms 60, and accepting the title of that Psalm as trustworthy, supposes that the occasion of both Psalms was an Edomite raid upon Judah while David was occupied with his campaign against the Ammonites and Syrians. There is certainly a remarkable affinity between this Psalm and Psalms 60; and in David’s reign the people could boast of their faithfulness to Jehovah in marked contrast to the repeated apostasies of the age of the Judges. Lagarde points to the close resemblance between Psalm 44:16 and Isaiah 37:6; Isaiah 37:23-24, and assigns the Psalm to the time of Sennacherib’s invasion. Robertson Smith (O.T. J. C., ed. 2, p. 207) refers it, along with Psalms 74, 79, 80, to the rebellion of the Jews under Artaxerxes Ochus (circa 350 b.c.), which was put down with great severity.

It is impossible to decide with certainty; but the Psalm produces a strong impression that it belongs to the time when Israel had still an independent existence as a nation, and was accustomed to make war upon its enemies. If so, it must be assigned to the period of the Monarchy, for at no time after the exile, so far as we know, down to the Maccabaean period, was Israel in a position to make war. The exile is not necessarily presumed by Psalm 44:11. All that the verse need mean is that prisoners had been taken and sold for slaves, as was the case in the eighth century (Amos 1:6; Amos 1:9), and doubtless in earlier times.

The Psalm stands alone in its confident assertions of national fidelity to Jehovah, which may be contrasted with the confessions of national guilt in Isaiah 63, 64, and Lamentations 3. But it must be noticed carefully that it is not an absolute but a relative assertion of innocence. It resembles that of Job. He made no claim of absolute sinlessness, but protested that he was conscious of no exceptional sin which would account for his exceptional afflictions on the current theory of retribution; and the Psalmist is conscious of no national apostasy which would account for Jehovah’s desertion of His people as a justly merited punishment.

The parallels with Psalms 60 should be carefully studied. The situation is similar: in both Psalms the thought of God, not man, as the deliverer is prominent: and there are several parallels of language. Comp. Psalm 44:9; Psalm 44:23 with Psalm 60:1; Psalm 60:10; Psalm 44:5 with Psalm 60:12; Psalm 64:3 with Psalm 60:5. Several links of connexion with Psalms 42, 43 will also be found in the notes.

On the title, which should be rendered with R.V., For the Chief Musician; (a Psalm) of the sons of Korah. Maschil, see Introd. pp. xix, xxi, xxxiii; and p. 223.

Ps 44:1-26.

在大卫作王时期一次极严重的民族危难中，诗人述说神往日施恩的作为，以及他们所学会对祂的倚靠。在生动描绘了他们的灾祸之后，他谦卑地就神似乎忘却他们一事陈情辩驳，提醒神他们的忠信，并为深重的苦难哀伤。

1-3. 这段时期即定居迦南之时

（Jos 24:12； Jud 6:3）。

曾告诉——或作"述说"（参

Ex 10:2）。

我们亲耳听见了——即这是凭传统流传下来的。

我们的列祖也给我们述说过——指我们的先祖。他们将其一代又一代地传递下来。译作“述说”的这个词，本义是镌刻，或刻记于石上；由此引申为书写；进而意为数算、计算、复述、讲述、宣告。这个词适用于任何使人知晓此事的方式——或借雕刻上的象形文字，或借书写，或借口述传统，尽管这里所指的很可能是最后这种方式。试参 Exodus 10:2；Exodus 12:26-27。

在我们列祖的日子，你所行的事——你所为他们成就的大工；或者说，你如何为他们出面干预。这里所指的，是神拯救他们脱离埃及的奴役、领他们进入迦南地时，为他们成就的事。

在古时——在远古的时代；在我们历史的开端。这里的思想是：我们可以恰当地诉诸过去——诉诸神在往昔世代所行的——作为求祂在类似境况中如今也施行干预的论据，因为，

（a）祂先前的介入显明了祂拯救的大能；

（b）那是祂品格的如此彰显，以致我们可以诉诸它，作为求祂再次介入的理由。