Barnes' Notes on the Bible · Psalms 第1章

註釋閱讀最佳化

分章註釋

Psalms 第 1 章

서론

Psalm 1 Introduction

開啟正文

詩篇導論

第一節 「詩篇全書的名稱」

希伯來文詩篇全書的總名稱是 תהלים Tehilliym,即「詩篇」,或更完整地作 תהלים ספר Sêpher Tehilliym,即「詩篇之書」。有時也用較短的名稱——תלים Tilliym。另有若干名稱適用於個別的詩篇,如 מזמורים mizmôriym 或 שׁירים shı̂yriym,意為「詩歌」;其單數形式則為 מזמור mizmôr 與 שׁיר shı̂yr,即「一首詩歌」。不過後面這些名稱並非加於整部選集,而是加於個別的詩篇。前一種名稱——מזמור mizmôr——見於 Psalm 3:1-8; Psalm 4:1-8; Psalm 5:1-12; Psalm 6:1-10; Psalm 8:1-9; Psalm 9; Psalm 12:1-8; Psalm 13:1-6; Psalm 15:1-5; Psalm 19:1-14; Psalm 20:1-9; Psalm 21:1-13; Psalm 22; Psalm 23:1-6;並見於另外三十九篇,最後一篇為 Psalm 143:1-12,一律譯作「一篇詩」。後一種名稱 שׁיר shı̂yr 出現於 Psalm 30:1-12; Psalm 45; Psalm 46:1-11;並見於另外二十七篇,最後一篇為 Psalm 134:1-3,一律譯作「歌」;只是它有時與 מזמור mizmôr(詩)一詞連用,譯作「歌與詩」,如 Psalm 48:1-14; Psalm 65:1-13; Psalm 66; Psalm 67:1-7; Psalm 68; Psalm 69; Psalm 75:1-10; Psalm 83; Psalm 87:1-7; Psalm 88;而在 Psalm 122:1-9; Psalm 123:1-4; Psalm 124:1-8,它則與「上行」一詞連用,作「上行之詩」。

תהלים Tehilliym 一詞源出自動詞 הלל hâlal,意即「讚美」,如「哈利路亞」一語即「你們要讚美耶和華」。這名稱之所以加於整部選集,是因為讚美比任何其他要素更足以表徵全書的特性,也是因為這部選集似乎本是為在公開頌讚或敬拜神的場合中使用而設計的。它們大概都曾這樣用於希伯來人的敬拜之中。

「詩篇」一詞之用於這部選集,我們得自希臘文譯本,即複數的 ψαλμοὶ psalmoi——單數作 psalmos(一篇詩),複數作 psalmoi(詩篇)。這詞源於 ψάλλω psallō,意為觸摸、撥動、彈撥——如撥動頭髮或鬍鬚;繼而指觸碰或撥動琴弦,使之「鳴響」,即以手指或撥子(πλῆκτρον plēktron——一種撥動里拉琴弦的器具,形如羽管)使之振動。Cic. N. D., 2. 59. 因此,這詞可指用於頌讚的樂器,繼而指一般頌讚的行動。名詞 ψαλμός psalmos——「詩篇」——本義為「一觸、一響」,如弓弦或絃樂器之聲;繼而指配以絃樂器的歌;再進而特指頌讚神的詩或歌。由此,動詞 ψάλλω psallō 在新約聖經中用以表示「頌讚」,見於以下各處:Romans 15:9,「……我要在外邦中稱讚你,歌頌你的名」;1 Corinthians 14:15,「我要用靈歌唱,也要用悟性歌唱」;Ephesians 5:19,「口唱心和地讚美主」;James 5:13,「有喜樂的呢,他就該歌頌」。

這動詞在新約別處未再出現。名詞 ψαλμός psalmos 在新約中以下列經文指一般所謂的「詩篇」:1 Corinthians 14:26,「各人或有詩歌」;Ephesians 5:19,「當用詩章……彼此對說」;Colossians 3:16,「用詩章、頌詞、靈歌彼此教導,互相勸戒」。在下列經文中,它則指作為頌讚詩歌集的詩篇全書:Luke 20:42,「詩篇上,大衛自己說」;Luke 24:44,「摩西的律法、先知的書,和詩篇上所記的,凡指著我的話都必須應驗」——參見該處的註釋;Acts 1:20,「詩篇上寫著說」;Acts 13:33,「正如詩篇第二篇上記著說」。這詞在新約別處未再出現。

第二節 「詩篇的作者」

如此收集成書的詩篇,絕非一位詩人或一個時代的產物。它們綿延於猶太歷史的一段長時期——肯定地從摩西時代直到從巴比倫被擄歸回之時,甚或更晚——並受各作者自身的特點、個人的與國族的歷史、以及寫作時代種種變遷的影響。然而其中有如此之多出自大衛之手,以致人們慣於稱之為「大衛的詩篇」,儘管選集中的詩篇可能只有略多於一半是他所寫。組成選集的一百五十篇詩,按希伯來文抄本的計數,通常歸於他名下的尚不足一半。據 DeWette 統計為 74 篇;Kennicott 為 66 篇;DeRossi 為 67 篇;Rosenmuller 與 Eichhorn 為 71 篇;Hengstenberg 為 80 篇。然而,很可能有一部分詩篇——標題未附作者之名,但此部分究竟多大,如今已無從確定——實出自大衛之手。即便如此,既有如此之多確知為他所寫,他又如此卓越地身為詩人,故當人們習慣地稱這卷書為「大衛的詩篇」時,這樣的說法是合宜的。

標題中被列為詩篇作者的,有以下諸人:

(1)有一篇——Ps. 90——歸於摩西。至於這是否當視為摩西的作品,參見該篇的註釋。選集中沒有別的詩篇歸於他,儘管五經中保存了不少他詩歌的樣本。這篇詩為何未與他的其他著作合編,或它如何被保存下來、直至在詩篇中取得固定的位置,如今已無法斷定。

(2)大衛作為選集中許多詩篇的作者,佔有顯著的地位;但如上文所述,批評學者對於應當歸於他名下的確實篇數,意見分歧。在希伯來文詩篇的題銘中,有六十八篇歸於他。這數字與上文所記 DeWette、Kennicott、DeRossi、Rosenmuller、Eichhorn、Hengstenberg 等人的意見之間的差異,源於諸抄本在這些題銘上的出入;不同批評學者對這些題銘所定的價值不同;有些詩篇雖在希伯來文中沒有標題,卻被認為如此確定出於大衛之手,以致宜於歸於他;還有些歸於他名下的詩篇,被不同作者認為屬於比他更晚的猶太歷史時期,因而將它們歸於大衛的標題乃是錯誤。有充分理由推測,如今一些沒有標題的詩篇中有大衛的作品,只是為何詩篇本身的標題沒有將它們歸於他,其故已不可知,如今也無從得知。由於這些事實,如今已不可能精確斷定有多少詩篇當歸於大衛;然而其數目無疑如此之大,以致他當被視為這部選集的主要作者。

(3)有十二篇——Psalm 50; Psalm 73; Psalm 74; Psalm 75:1-10; Psalm 76:1-12; Psalm 77; Psalm 78; Psalm 79:1-13; Psalm 80; Psalm 81; Psalm 82:1-8; Psalm 83——歸於亞薩。可以看出,這些詩篇在選集中佔據相連的位置(Psalm 63-83),惟 Psalm 1:1-6 除外。這樣編排的原因如今已不可知。DeWette(Einleitung, III. iii.)認為,除 Psalm 1:1-6 與 Psalm 73 之外,這些詩篇歸於亞薩名下並不恰當,因為在他看來,它們涉及猶太歷史較晚的時期:Psalm 74 與 Psalm 79:1-13 涉及聖殿與聖城被毀;Psalm 80 涉及被擄時期等。試參這些詩篇(Psalm 74; Psalm 79; Psalm 80)引言的註釋。

(4)有十一篇——Psalm 42:1-11; Psalm 44; Psalm 45; Psalm 46:1-11; Psalm 47:1-9; Psalm 48:1-14; Psalm 49; Psalm 84:1-12; Psalm 85:1-13; Psalm 87:1-7; Psalm 88——歸於「可拉後裔」名下作為作者,或是「為可拉後裔」而作。參見 Psalm 42:1-11 引言的註釋。這些詩篇究竟是「可拉後裔」所作,還是「為可拉後裔」——即為那受託管理聖殿音樂的樂師班——而作,並不能確定。然而顯然,若其意是「可拉後裔」所作,這標題便未提供關於各篇個別作者的任何資料。究竟出於他們中的哪一位,或是否出於不止一位,如此籠統的標題自然無從指明。DeWette 認為,這些詩篇大多屬被擄時期或更晚的時代。這些詩篇的特質並無十分獨特之處;就其本身而論,沒有什麼能使我們斷定它們出於標題所歸之人,而非出於大衛或亞薩。

(5)有兩篇——Psalm 88 與 Psalm 89——歸於一位稱為「以斯拉人」的人。其中一篇(Psalm 88)歸於「希幔(原文作以斯拉人)」,另一篇(Psalm 89)歸於「以斯拉人以探」。前者同時也算在「可拉後裔」的詩篇之中。然而以探與希幔大概是兩個不同的人,「以斯拉人」之名或因某種緣故各加於二人。在 1 Kings 4:31,他們與別人一同被提及,以其智慧著稱:「他(所羅門)的智慧勝過萬人,勝過以斯拉人以探,並瑪曷的兒子希幔、甲各、達大的智慧。」在 1 Chronicles 2:6,他們被稱為「謝拉的兒子」:「謝拉的兒子是心利、以探、希幔、甲各、大拉。」在 1 Chronicles 6:33,提到一位希幔是「哥轄人」之一:「哥轄的子孫中有歌唱的希幔,希幔是約珥的兒子。」同樣,在 1 Chronicles 15:17,他與以探一同被提及,以探在那裏被稱為古沙雅的兒子;在 1 Chronicles 15:19,他與亞薩、以探並列被提及:「這樣,派歌唱的希幔、亞薩、以探敲銅鈸,大發響聲。」在 1 Chronicles 25:1,希幔與耶杜頓一同被提及,他們的眾子「彈琴、鼓瑟、敲鈸、唱歌(原文作說預言)」。他在那裏與亞薩相提並論。試參 2 Chronicles 5:12; 2 Chronicles 29:13-14; 2 Chronicles 35:15。以探被提及兩次——1 Kings 4:31(如上,作智慧人),與 1 Chronicles 2:6(如上)。試參 Psalm 88 與 Psalm 89 引言的註釋。

(6)有兩篇——Psalm 72 與 Psalm 127:1-5——歸於所羅門,或標明「為所羅門」。參見這些詩篇標題的註釋(Psalm 72; Psalm 127)。這兩篇詩是他的作品,還是為他而作或指他而作,無法確切斷定。就 Psalm 72 而言,單從該篇的內容判斷,後一種看法似乎更為可能;但仍然沒有什麼因素絕對阻止我們承認這兩篇詩的作者就是他。

(7)有十五篇——Psalm 120-134——題為「上行之詩」。其中四篇歸於大衛,一篇歸於所羅門。其餘各篇作者之名未見記載。試參 Psalm 120:1-7 註釋的引言。這些詩篇被編在一起,是因為它們似乎曾在特定的場合使用,而非因詩篇本身有何特殊之處。

(8)在七十士譯本中,有幾篇詩被歸於耶利米、以西結、哈該與撒迦利亞。由於希伯來文標題中沒有與此對應的內容,這自然只能是出於揣測或傳統。

(9)選集中還有相當多的詩篇,作者之名未獲記載;因此,如今沒有途徑判斷其作者問題。這類詩篇有 s. 150。可以看出,這些詩篇零散分布於全書各處,不過大部分靠近書末。

關於各篇詩標題的來源與權威,見第四節。

第三節 「詩篇選集的形成與全書的編排」

猶太他勒目(Cod. Berachot, 1, 9)將詩篇集——即詩篇全書的彙編——歸於大衛。不必贅言,這不可能是正確的見解,因為許多詩篇毫無疑問晚於大衛的時代。大多數教父和許多近代批評學者把全書的彙集與編排歸於以斯拉,這如今被視為最有可能的見解;若然,整部選集必是約於基督降生前四五〇年形成的。然而,儘管這可視為全書以其現有形式完成之時的正確見解,詩篇本身卻顯示,在此之前已有較小的選集存在,最終的總集正是由這些小選集而成的。這些較小的選集由誰編成,如今已不可知;總集形成時對它們可能作過何種改動,也無從查考。

希伯來文本將全書分為五卷較小的書或選集,其特徵相當明顯,並在每卷末尾有所標示,以致極有可能這些曾是——可以這樣說——以不同書卷的形式「刊行」的,或者後面的各卷是對最初選集或書冊的增補。這種劃分也見於七十士譯本——這一事實證明它早在主前二〇〇年即已存在。這些部分顯然不是總集形成之時所作的「任意」劃分,而是由不同的人編成、各自獨立的選集。這種分組並非完全精確;就是說,在第一部分——「大衛的詩篇」(Psalm 1-41)——並未包括大衛全部的詩篇,也有少數幾篇在標題中並未歸於他;但就當時而言,它大概已足夠完整,以致就該選集編成的目的而論,可以適當地視之為「他」的詩篇集。

第一卷包括頭四十一篇詩,大概本是大衛詩篇的選集,儘管它絕未包括他所寫的全部,也可能未包括選集編成時尚存的所有篇章。這卷的「結尾」以「阿們!阿們!」一語標示(Psalm 41:13)。這一選集中的所有詩篇,除 Psalm 1:1-6; Psalm 2:1-12; Psalm 10; Psalm 33 之外,都明確歸於大衛,而且極有可能全部都出自他的手筆。在許多抄本、七十士譯本和拉丁武加大譯本中,第一篇與第二篇連為一篇(正如在總集的其他部分中,Psalm 42:1-11 與 Psalm 43:1-5,以及 Psalm 116 與 Psalm 117:1-2 也相連一樣)。這一選集可能編成得很早,儘管 DeWette 力圖證明它不可能早於被擄歸回之後,因為他認為 Psalm 14:1-7 與 Psalm 44 是在那事件之後寫成的。然而這並無證據。當然,如今已無法確定這一選集由誰編成。有人推測它早在希西家的時代即已編成,或是在他的指示下預備的,因為眾所周知他曾下令收集所羅門的箴言並加以謄錄(Proverbs 25:1),又如 2 Chronicles 29:30 記載,他「吩咐利未人用大衛……的詩詞頌讚耶和華」。(Kitto,《百科全書》)

總集中的第二卷包括 Psalm 42-72。這一選集由可拉後裔的詩篇(Psalm 42-49)、亞薩的一篇詩(Psalm 50)、大衛的十九篇、兩篇未具作者之名的詩,以及一篇題為「給所羅門」或「為所羅門」的詩(Psalm 72)組成。在這選集的末尾(Psalm 72:20)附有如下按語:「耶西的兒子大衛的祈禱完畢」;有人認為這是此前全部詩篇——作為一卷書或一個選集(Psalm 1-72)——的結束語。Carpzov,《導論》ii. 107。但這乃是一個不同的選集,或說是由不同的人先後編成的兩個選集,這一點從以下事實看來十分明顯:Psalm 53:1-6 與 Psalm 14:1-7 相同,僅有細微出入——出入主要在於前者以 אלהים 'Elohiym 作為神的名,取代了後者中的 יהוה Yahweh。很難設想一位彙編者會在同一選集中收錄僅有如此出入的同一篇詩。同樣,Psalm 70:1-5 只是 Psalm 40:13-17 的重複,僅有類似的更動。

有人或可「提議」,這兩個選集其後可能已被「合併」,並且在更總的選集編成之前,可能已構成為一。這樣,這一選集自然的「結尾」,正如第一選集一樣(Psalm 41:13),當是以「阿們!阿們!」一語作結(Psalm 72:19)。而對「整個」選集——即合併的兩卷——可能加上了這一句(Psalm 72:20):「耶西的兒子大衛的祈禱完畢」,意指「如今」,由合併的「兩」卷,已得著一套完整的大衛詩篇全集;或者說,「當時擬在該敬拜中使用的詩篇,已儘數編入」。這一想法並不排除以下的設想:當時實際上可能還有大衛的其他詩篇存世,或它們後來在「其他」選集中被引入對神的敬拜。

第三卷(Psalm 73-89)部分由亞薩的詩篇(Psalm 73-83)、部分由可拉後裔的詩篇(Psalm 84-89)組成,其中包括大衛的一篇(Psalm 86)。這一卷不含大衛的其他詩篇,只有 Psalm 86 除外;因此在第二卷末尾(Psalm 72:20)才有那樣的按語:「耶西的兒子大衛的祈禱完畢」。彙編者在那一卷的「結尾」處,顯然有意不在下一卷中收入大衛的任何詩篇;或許其用意是「不再」為公開敬拜的目的收集大衛的詩篇。也可能如 DeWette(Einleitung, p. 21)所推測,第三卷的彙編者把大衛詩篇至此為止的按語放在第二卷末尾,因他有意編成另一種性質的選集。這一選集何時編成,無從得知。從 Psalm 85:1-13 看來,它可能晚至從巴比倫被擄歸回之時才編成。那篇詩可能出於名為「可拉後裔」的那班人之手,也可能是為他們在聖所中使用而寫。這一選集與前兩卷一樣,以意味深長的「阿們!阿們!」結束(Psalm 89:52)。

第四卷(Psalm 90-106)全由匿名的詩篇組成,惟 Psalm 90(歸於摩西)與 Psalm 101:1-8; Psalm 103(歸於大衛)除外。這些詩篇幾乎沒有地方性的指涉或暗指,大部分幾乎可寫於任何國家、任何時代;其結構與暗指既不顯示作者,也不顯示促成其寫作的處境。除上述三處之外,其作者如今已無從查考;而且要充分理解並欣賞這些詩篇,也並不需要先解決這一問題。它們顯然是為公開敬拜而設計,大概本是有意如此使用的。這一卷以「阿們,哈利路亞」一語結束(Psalm 106:48)。

第五卷亦即末卷(Psalm 107-150),性質上是雜集,似乎意在收錄一切適合公開敬拜、卻未列入其他選集的零散詩篇。一部分(Psalm 108:1-13; Psalm 109; Psalm 110:1-7; Psalm 122:1-9; Psalm 124:1-8; Psalm 131:1-3; Psalm 133:1-3——末四篇屬於「上行之詩」;Psalm 138:1-8; Psalm 139; Psalm 140:1-13; Psalm 141:1-10; Psalm 142:1-7; Psalm 143:1-12; Psalm 144:1-15; Psalm 145)歸於大衛。一部分(Psalm 120-134)由「上行之詩」構成。其餘(Psalm 107; Psalm 111:1-10; Psalm 112:1-10; Psalm 113:1-9; Psalm 114:1-8; Psalm 115; Psalm 116; Psalm 117:1-2; Psalm 118; Psalm 119; Psalm 135; Psalm 136; Psalm 137:1-9; Psalm 146:1-10; Psalm 147; Psalm 148:1-14; Psalm 149:1-9; Psalm 150:1-6)為匿名。這最後的選集由誰編成、何時編成,無從得知。然而,或許可以不無道理地設想,它是由那位(以斯拉?)將既有各「卷」彙為一書的人所編;他發現有許多詩篇未被先前各卷的彙編者收入,於是把這一切都編為一卷,附加於總集中已分類編排的各卷之後。

第四節 「各篇詩的標題」

除了三十四篇之外,所有的詩篇在希伯來文中如今都有標題或題銘。不過有些人只算出二十五篇例外,因為按照他們的看法,出現於若干詩篇開頭的「哈利路亞」——「你們要讚美耶和華」——一語,當視為標題或題銘。然而無疑更正確的看法,是把那一語視為詩篇本文的一部分。他勒目稱這些例外中的每一篇為「孤兒詩篇」。

(a)這些標題的「作者」不詳,如今也無從查考。它們見於希伯來文本;但不可設想——至少就標題所載詩篇「作者」之名、或就其意在指明作者而論——它們是詩篇作者本人加於其前的。詩篇並非書信或史書之類,不能設想作者會在一首純粹的詩或頌歌之前署上自己的名字。因此,較可能的是:這些標題是在詩篇進入普遍使用之時,或由各卷的彙編者,或由全書的彙編者加上的,或為表明關於作者及寫作緣由的通行看法,或作為關乎該作者與宗旨的默示記錄。至於「由誰」加上的問題,如今已無從斷定。若能查明這一點,對判定它們的權威與價值必有極大助益;但如今對其價值的評估,必須循別的方法而定。

(b)這些標題具有極高的「古遠性」。它們見於希伯來文抄本這一事實即足證明,因為沒有任何希伯來文抄本——無論多古——是缺少它們的。它們也見於七十士譯本,雖有若干出入;因此可以確定,在該譯本譯成之前,它們即已存在。這一點也由以下事實得到印證:七十士譯本的譯者在若干實例中以希臘文字母抄錄希伯來文詞,並未嘗試翻譯;而在另一些實例中,他們所用的標題是希伯來文詞的譯文,表明這些必是從希伯來原文而來。然而,這些事實並不足以使我們假定標題是詩篇作者本人所加,也不必假定它們是在詩篇被彙集——無論是各卷的分集還是總集——之前加上的。

(c)這些標題的「用意」,或是指明詩篇的作者,或是指明寫作的緣由,或是指明詩篇所獻與的伶長——詩篇似乎交託給他,由他配上合宜的樂曲,即為詩篇的公共使用安排音樂;或是指明詩歌的體裁,或指明當用的樂器,或指明當唱的「調」。有些標題只指明作者,如許多歸於大衛名下的詩篇;有些則詳細描述寫作的緣由,如 Psalm 18; Psalm 30:1-12; Psalm 51; Psalm 52:1-9; Psalm 56:1-13 等。有些把這幾項合在一起——作者、緣由、詩體、當用的音樂等——如 Psalm 52:1-9; Psalm 53:1-6; Psalm 54:1-7; Psalm 55; Psalm 56:1-13。這些標題中最長最全的,是加於 Psalm 60:1-12 之前的那一個:其中載有獻與伶長的題記、作者之名、詩歌的體裁、詩篇的宗旨、當用的樂器,以及寫作該篇的歷史緣由。

(d)時隔如此久遠,如今要解釋這些標題中許多標題的「含義」極為困難,批評學者在這題目上的揣測也大相逕庭。這困難相當程度上源於我們對聖殿音樂及所用樂器的無知。這困難好比兩三千年後的人要解釋一本今日常見的書,其中含有樂「調」,並提及如今在公開敬拜神的場合中所用的樂器。要準確描述所用樂器的確切形制,使未來世代能以理解,或許很難,甚至不可能;而要令人滿意地解釋如今通行的許多「曲調」的「名稱」——如「Mear」「Martin's」「Russia」「Windham」「Lenox」——顯然也是不可能的。如上所述,這困難在七十士譯本譯成之時即已存在,因為在若干實例中,該譯本的譯者甚至未嘗試翻譯標題,而以對應希伯來文的希臘字母表出。一五三五年翻譯聖經的科弗代爾(Coverdale)深感此困難之大,以致除了作者之名以外,幾乎略去了所有的標題。在本註釋中,凡如今能給出令人滿意或多少可信的解釋之處,都將在個別詩篇的釋文中提出。

(e)關於這些標題的「權威」,向來意見分歧甚大。不少近代批評學者——特別是德國學者——視之為毫無權威,在討論詩篇的作者、以及其寫作時代與緣由時,全然不顧希伯來文本中存在這些標題。大多數古代學者則視之為真實,與詩篇本身具有同等權威。到了第四世紀末,摩普綏提亞的狄奧多若(Theodore of Mopsuestia)——古代釋經家中最有才幹、最審慎的一位——完全棄絕了它們。(Rosenmuller,《聖書詮釋史》Hist. Interp. Librorum Sacrorum,第三篇,頁 256。)Tholuck 與 Hengstenberg 則承認其權威。反對標題權威的「理由」大致如下:

(1)新約各書信末尾的「跋語」如今被視為沒有歷史價值;有人問:對於加於詩篇之前的「標題」,豈不也可以採取同樣的結論?

(2)古譯本——尤其是敘利亞文譯本與希臘文譯本——所載的標題出入極大,常竄改希伯來文本,有時在希伯來文本沒有標題之處加上標題。有人問:若這些標題曾被視為與詩篇本身同樣神聖,古譯者豈會如此擅改?(Kitto)——關於這一點,還有人補充說:「即使以斯拉曾經定了這些標題,後來諸譯本與抄本的種種出入,也使它們成了可疑。」(Eichhorn, "Einleitung," III, p. 490.)

(3)有人辯稱,標題與詩篇的內容互相抵觸。例如,有人聲稱,有時標題所記作者之名是錯誤的,「正如論及被擄的詩篇卻標了大衛之名」,如 Psalm 14:1-7; Psalm 25; Psalm 51; Psalm 69。又有人說,Psalm 139 不可能是大衛的作品,因其中不無亞蘭語的成分。還有人說,詩篇寫作的緣由並非總是標得正確,如 Psalm 30:1-12。

然而當注意的是:這些作者有時假定某篇詩是指被擄時期說的,而其實按更早年代寫作的假定,也同樣可以解釋那篇詩;而且單憑詩篇的內證來反對題銘,並不總是穩妥。批評者把自己的解釋加於詩篇,再以之作為論證其來源的根據;然而往往——或許在一切情形中——若假定題銘正確,按公正的解經規則,不難依此假定把該篇詩解釋明白。

總的說來,在我看,這些題銘當視為默示記錄的一部分,具有默示的權威。它們見於希伯來文本——其淵源可追溯至我們對希伯來文本有任何認識的最早時期——並與該文本一併流傳至今——這一事實所提供的證據,似乎是我們如今無可推翻的:它們當視為文本的一部分,不應棄絕;除非如希伯來文本任何其他部分一樣,只有在能證明抄寫者的過失已使錯誤混入文本之時,方可棄絕。

第五節 「詩篇全書的總體特性」

詩篇大部分是抒情詩,即適合琴瑟的詩,為與器樂配合而用,是供「歌唱」而非「閱讀」的。這樣的詩在古人中很常見,在今人中亦然。阿那克里翁(Anacreon)、阿爾凱奧斯(Alcaeus)、斯特西科魯斯(Stesichorus)、薩福(Sappho)與賀拉斯(Horace)是古時著名的「抒情」詩人;今世代許多「歌」的作者——聖歌與俗歌——也當列入同一類。不過,「抒情詩」一語如今常指「直接表達詩人個人情感」的那類詩(韋氏 Webster)。

抒情詩大部分是深沉情感的表達,以情感或情懷為根基。與其說它是理智的果實,不如說是心的果實;與其說是想像力的創造,不如說是深沉個人情懷的傾訴。按其用意與性質,它涵蓋各樣的情感,或喜樂、或沉思、或沮喪、或得勝,隨作者的情感、或隨寫作的場合而定——因為這一切的傾訴都可以歌唱,或配以音樂,而音樂變化萬千的音調正適於表達這一切。因此,在共一百五十篇、由相當多不同的作者、在許多不同的場合寫成的詩篇中,我們看到各樣的情感:患難、痛苦、恐懼、盼望、喜樂、信靠、感恩、對神的敬虔、為罪的悔疚,以及蒙赦免的歡欣——心被感動,在配以琴瑟旋律或歌喉樂音的詞句中,為其情感尋得出口。這些情感以多種多樣的方式或形式表達,而音樂想必正是為配合這些不同的情感而設。因此,詩篇包含下列各類或各等級的作品:

(1)以頌讚神為主要並首要目的的頌讚詩:

(a)一般而言,神是作為自然與人類之神而受頌讚的:Psalm 8:1-9; Psalm 104; Psalm 145;

(b)作為自然之神、也作為希伯來民之神:Psalm 19:1-14; Psalm 29:1-11; Psalm 33; Psalm 65:1-13; Psalm 93:1-5; Psalm 135; Psalm 136; Psalm 147;

(c)特作希伯來民之神:Psalm 47:1-9; Psalm 66; Psalm 67:1-7; Psalm 75:1-10;

(d)作為他子民的幫助者與拯救者:Psalm 46:1-11; Psalm 48:1-14; Psalm 75:1-10; Psalm 76:1-12; Psalm 18; Psalm 30:1-12; Psalm 138:1-8。

(2)關乎希伯來國族的詩篇——關乎其歷史、神為它所作的介入、以及它與耶和華的關係:Psalm 78; Psalm 105; Psalm 106; Psalm 114:1-8。

(3)聖殿詩篇,或錫安之歌:Psalm 5:1-12; Psalm 15:1-5; Psalm 24:1-10; Psalm 87:1-7; Psalm 132。

(4)關於試煉、災禍、困苦的詩篇——無論是個人的還是國族的。這類詩為數甚多,如 Psalm 7; Psalm 22; Psalm 55; Psalm 56:1-13; Psalm 109; Psalm 44; Psalm 74; Psalm 79:1-13; Psalm 80; Psalm 137:1-9; Psalm 69; Psalm 77; Psalm 102; Psalm 10; Psalm 12:1-8; Psalm 14:1-7; Psalm 36:1-12;以及其他許多篇。

(5)宗教與道德的詩篇:Psalm 90; Psalm 139; Psalm 23:1-6; Psalm 91; Psalm 121:1-8; Psalm 127:1-5; Psalm 128:1-6; Psalm 42:1-11; Psalm 43:1-5; Psalm 101:1-8; Psalm 131:1-3; Psalm 1:1-6; Psalm 133:1-3; Psalm 119:

希伯來抒情詩有別於其他古民族的抒情詩、也有別於近代大部分抒情詩的獨特之處,在其「宗教性」。它是關乎宗教題材的抒情詩,或說為宗教所用的抒情詩:表達宗教的情感,並旨在喚起並培植這樣的情感。它意在使人心與情感升向神;使人的思想超越屬地之物;使人篤信神;使人在患難之時從神得著安慰;使人在經過憂傷患難、邁向更美家園的路途上得著鼓舞與慰藉。其中大部分最好的描述,莫過於借用聖經本身的一個說法——其真實不亞於其優美——即「夜間的歌曲」(Job 35:10);表明人在困苦憂傷之中仍可自心靈湧出的喜樂;表明在這世界的黑暗之中「確有」喜樂;說明宗教的能力與價值的歌;人在走向墳墓的路途中用以鼓舞自己並彼此鼓舞的歌;連罪人也能傾吐的歌——出於被軟化為痛悔、並因蒙赦免的確信而充滿感恩的心。

這樣豐富的詩歌竟在巴勒斯坦興起,而且竟限於那一地,實在極不尋常。這並非因為那片土地比別處更宜於抒情詩——就這方面而論,它無法與許多別的國家相比,尤不如希臘。也非因為他們歷史的事件特別啟發了這類作品的寫作——因為適於琴瑟或配樂的詩歌在別處所在多有,尤其在希臘。也非因為希伯來人比別的民族更富於詩意的想像——在這方面,他們並未超越希臘的天才;他們心智中的詩意想像,在亞拉伯與波斯同樣豐富。更非因為他們的語言特別有利於這類詩歌——因為在許多方面,它遠不及希臘語,也決不優於亞拉伯語與波斯語。

他們的詩歌取了這樣的方向;他們所有的盡屬宗教;他們的語言中竟沒有一種詩歌是為舞蹈、為節慶的娛樂、為酒神的狂歡、為輕浮虛華的場面而設計、而適用的;在希伯來人的全部抒情詩中,這方面竟沒有任何作品可以與希臘抒情詩的許多篇章並列——與賀拉斯(Horace)的許多作品、與彭斯(Burns)的許多作品並列,與巴勒斯坦以外各國的抒情詩並列——這一事實只能追溯到一個觀念,即新的宗教在那裏得勢;而對此最好的解釋是:這些詩歌的作者受了默示,要預備並傳諸後世那在一切時代都能表達真實敬虔情感、並可長久用於頌讚神的詩歌。人若不承認這些「甜美的歌者」受了聖靈的默示,就無法解釋這樣的詩歌何以僅見於巴勒斯坦,也無法領會其真正的性質。

關於希伯來詩歌的總體特性,參見約伯記註釋引言的第五節。關於「希伯來人抒情詩的起源與培植」,在此宜引 DeWette《詩篇註釋》(Commentar ueber die Psalmen)導論(Einleitung, II, pp. 6-12)中的以下論述。我轉錄自托里教授(Prof. John Torrey)刊於《聖經彙刊》(Biblical Repository)第三卷頁450-456的優雅譯文:

「我們若循詩篇的標題與通行的意見,就必須認為希伯來人的抒情詩——連同詩篇本身的大部分——乃是大衛與其同時代人的作品。大衛以前所見抒情作品的少數樣本,與他本身時代的豐饒相比,幾乎不足論列。在較早的歷史中,詩歌之聲不過偶爾可聞,如摩西在紅海之歌、底波拉之歌與哈拿之歌。在抒情詩方面嘗試如此之少之後,竟見一位如此圓熟多產的詩人驟然興起,還有若干人與他同行,我們不禁詫異。這樣迅速的進展,必須有某種充分的緣由、某種預備的步驟。如今,我們若放眼大衛時代之前不久的歷史,便見到一個似乎能解釋這難處的現象。

這就是撒母耳的先知學校。許多人——如 Herder、Eichhorn、Nachtigall 與 Rosenmuller——認為詩篇的寫作就是在這所學校裏受培植並臻於完善的。這一揣測看似有理,卻很難與歷史的事實相合。聖經並未暗示大衛在受膏之前與撒母耳有何關係;他不過牧放他父親的羊群。的確,撒母耳前去膏大衛之時,似乎並不認識大衛(1 Samuel 16:6 及以下)。然而大衛此時已是熟練的琴師,並以其技藝聞名(1 Samuel 16:18);可見他至少在琴藝上並非撒母耳的門生。但眾所周知,那時代的音樂與歌唱並不分離;因此我們必須認為大衛當時已是詩人,且以詩人的身分為人所知、所稱譽。誠然,其後某時我們見大衛在撒母耳的先知學校中,但那只是他逃避掃羅之時(1 Samuel 19:18 及以下)。

撒母耳在大衛受膏之前或許與他有過若干往來,雖然聖經在記載受膏之事時(1 Samuel 16)並未提及。但大衛可能因引起先知的注意,而未必正式作過他的門徒;又或許這少年人是自學而成的。天賦的才能,加上經常的練習,至少可以造就與人為的教學體系——如我們可以設想盛行於先知學校中的那種——同等的造詣。同時,若以為希伯來人的抒情詩是驟然興起、彷彿平地而生的,那也是錯誤的。大衛的同代人——那些以歌唱歡慶他戰勝歌利亞的婦女們——所操的一種詩歌,雖然粗獷未馴,就其種類而論卻是真正的抒情之作;她們的短詩已具有詩體平行式的形式,而一個原有優越心智的人,從這樣的起點自不難精進至最高的造詣——

掃羅殺死千千, 大衛殺死萬萬——

此外,我們還發現,在更早的時候——在摩西、底波拉與哈拿的例子之外——尤其是婦女中間,有奏樂跳舞的風俗,歌唱當然也不會除外。耶弗他的女兒拿著鼓跳舞出來迎接她父親(Judges 11:34);在示羅,女子們年年設宴舞蹈(Judges 21:21)。參孫是否算得一位樂師,或可存疑,因為他被叫出來在非利士人面前戲耍(Judges 16:25),這通常被理解為指跳舞而言,但並不排除歌唱與器樂的伴奏。然而,即使嚴格說來他不是樂師與歌者,我們仍在他身上遇見第一位「瑪沙爾」(Mashal)體詩人,正如同一時期我們還有約坦精妙的寓言。這些事實雖屬孤立,卻表明這個民族已達到相當高的教化程度,或至少具有相當的詩歌才能。

其實,單單底波拉之歌便足以證明,詩歌藝術當時已達到相當的進境,足以說明大衛詩歌的由來。一個時代產生一首絕妙的詩還是多首,與其說是文化狀態的結果,不如說是機緣之事。況且士師與撒母耳的時代構成希伯來人的英雄時代,一個特別有利於詩歌初創與漸進的時期。「這樣的時代,」Eichhorn 說,「在任何風土之下都是富於詩意的」;但我不能附和他再說下去:這時的詩歌與民族本身一樣,粗獷而英武,只在戰爭的號角中呼吸,除了勇武與勝利及其種種附隨之外,別無馳騁的園地。最初喚起希伯來詩人的緣由,大概與戰爭相連;但詩歌一旦萌生,便決不自限於如此狹窄的範圍,而要把別的對象也納入其圈中。在勝利的歡慶中,還有獻祭、舞蹈與別的禮儀相連,這些都容易使歌聲轉為較柔和的調子。就是戰歌也容許較溫柔的情感,底波拉之歌便富於動人情感的筆觸。人說他們向號角歌唱,我們斷不可拘泥理解;琴、笛與鼓的音樂,即使伴著戰歌,也是和緩的,這些樂器正適於最柔和的音調。可見我們並不必把大衛詩篇中甜美動人之詩的淵源,專歸於撒母耳的先知學校。

「可惜我們對撒母耳的先知學校所知太少,無法斷定它對詩歌的培植有過什麼影響。與此相關的經文是 1 Samuel 10:5; 1 Samuel 19:19-20。在前一處,無疑暗指先知的門徒中有音樂;他們的「受感說話」(התנבא hitenabē')被理解為歌唱之意,這並非全無根據,因為 נביא nâbîy' 一詞有時意指詩人(Exodus 15:20),而 נבא nâbaʼ 意為歌唱(1 Chronicles 25:1 及以下)。然而我們可以設想,這音樂不過用作先知傳講的輔助與伴奏。先知傳達信息——至少在較早的時代——大概伴有音樂,並伴有接近舞蹈的激烈動作與朗誦。2 Kings 3:15 及以下的記載值得注意:先知以利沙將要對約沙法的詢問宣佈耶和華的答覆;但在此之前,他叫人找一個彈琴的來;當那人彈琴之時,「耶和華的手就降在他身上」,他就說出他的答覆。

這裏的情形誠然不同:先知不是自己彈琴歌唱,而是任由他人演奏;但這仍表明音樂與先知職分的經常相連。上述經文也沒有明說先知的班眾自己「歌唱」。那裏所用的 התנבא hitenabē' 一詞,或許並不表示「歌唱」;因為掃羅和掃羅的使者一聽見音樂,便未經預備或練習而「受感說話」(התנבאוּ hitenabe'û)。他們的「說預言」或許不過是激烈的動作、舞蹈與手勢,這從掃羅赤身倒臥一事可以看出。至多,他們或許曾與先知的班眾同唱合唱之歌。這樣的合唱之歌或許在撒母耳的學校中唱過,但只用於敬虔與感發的目的;這學校正當的宗旨,是教導青年擔任先知的職分,即在神權政體之下,從主那裏向百姓提供謀略。

撒母耳是先知,而歷史並未保存他任何詩歌作品的遺篇。他豈不是最可能也在栽培門徒擔任先知之職麼?誠然,希伯來人並未在抒情詩與先知講論之間劃出精確的界線;但二者總有分別,尤其在傳達的方式上,因為抒情詩大概是歌唱的,而先知的信息只是誦讀的。這樣,假定撒母耳所從事的,是把門徒培養成作詩的或傳講的先知,那麼設想他們中間有些人因天才與愛好而傾向抒情詩,並在其中達於完善,豈不是再自然不過?然而這原在先知學校的計劃之外,純屬偶然。因此,把撒母耳的先知學校徑直視為培植歌唱與詩歌的機構,是不大正確的。

「還有別的機構,在促進抒情詩——尤其是宗教類抒情詩——的培植上,或許有比這先知學校更重要、更決定性的影響。我特別指那些音樂學校;據記載(1 Chronicles 15:16 及以下),它們是大衛為輔助公眾敬拜而設立的。然而,我對歷代志中這類記載及類似記載曾經作出的不利判斷,仍不能收回;我毋寧要予以確認。除了曾在彼處提出的理由(在此不便重複)之外,在我看來還有一個特別容易引起疑心的情況:歷代志所記在奉獻帳幕之時及類似場合所唱的詩篇與詩篇片段,很難出於大衛的手筆,毋寧屬於較晚、較不純正的聖殿詩風。所唱的那篇詩(1 Chronicles 16:8 及以下)由 Psalm 105 與 Psalm 96:1-13 組成;而這兩篇都是較晚風格的作品。歷代志若在此處給我們一篇真正的大衛之歌——如我們得自撒母耳記下第一章的那首哀歌——這一情況必能大大增加其記載的分量;但這些片段的插入,卻使全部連帶的記述都蒙上疑雲。還有 1 Chronicles 16:41 等處所引、關乎受派稱謝耶和華之利未人的那句話——「因他的慈愛永遠長存」——也顯露了較晚的聖殿詩風;我們在 Psalm 136 中便有一個實例,那句話在其中構成固定的疊句;此外,這話出現於其中的 Psalm 106; Psalm 107; Psalm 118,看來也屬於較晚的詩風。

「我們可以設想,像大衛這樣的宗師,在詩藝上不會沒有同伴與助手;事實上,大衛的幾位同時代人也在標題中被列為詩篇的作者:只是這些記載並不總是可靠的依據。所羅門按照歷史的見證,兼具豐富的抒情創作力與他獨具的格言體,在他的時代,抒情詩必已達到極高的完善境地。『所羅門作箴言三千句,詩歌一千零五首』(1 Kings 4:32)。然而奇特的是,除了兩篇頗不確定的之外,我們現有的選集中不見所羅門的詩篇;在所羅門之後的時期,我們也找不到一篇標有作者之名的詩篇,甚至沒有一篇能確切無疑地指涉那時代歷史中的任何特定事件;然而希西家與哈巴谷的抒情詩明明表明,在這段時期,抒情創作的培植絕未遭荒廢。

反之,我們有許多詩篇——按幾乎普遍公認的健全批判釋經的結果——必須置於被擄時期及被擄之後;而這些詩篇就語言之純正、就構思之崇高、優美與清新而論,均屬最高之列,絕不遜於大衛及其同時代人的作品,例如 Psalm 45; Psalm 74; Psalm 79:1-13; Psalm 107,以及上行之詩中的許多篇——若非全部的話。於是我們在此遇到一個奇特的現象:希伯來抒情詩在大衛的時代受栽培而臻於完善,多結果子之後,沉寂了將近五百年,然後在國族最不幸的時期驟然復甦,又經歷一個黃金時代,結出第二次收成——這是一個與事務常軌大不相合的現象。然而,只要我們假設詩篇選集中含有若干或屬匿名、或誤署其名的篇章,屬於從大衛到被擄之間的時期,這奇特性便消失了。的確,抒情創作極有可能與先知詩歌並行繁盛,許多先知本人也對我們現有的選集有所貢獻,並可從大衛與他人手中收回自己的作品。七十士譯本確實也把若干位先知列為詩篇的作者。」

第六節 「詩篇中的咒詛」

關於詩篇中的咒詛——即所謂的「咒詛詩」——已有許多論著;而且聖經中恐怕再沒有別的部分比這更使讀者困惑痛苦;恐怕再沒有別的東西,比這些詩篇有時似乎流露的復仇之靈、比作者似乎顯出的蓄意惡毒與不肯罷休之情,構成對「詩篇乃受默示之人作品」這一信仰更貌似有理的反對。大概迄今還沒有一種解釋能解開這樣困惑之人的心結,也沒有一種解釋能就「這樣的靈如何能與新約的誡命及真宗教的要求相調和」的問題,提供全然令人滿意的解答。企圖掩飾或隱藏這困難是無用的;可以承認,大多數已提出的解釋,都不過使困難原封未動。或許我們不可能除去這一切的困難,或把這題目陳述得使人無法提出無從回答的問題;誠然,在心理學、自然科學、道德學或神學中,又有哪一個題目不能提出人力尚不能回答的問題呢?關於一根草葉的生長,也可以提出任何化學家——任何人——都無法回答的問題。

關於詩篇中的咒詛,首先宜舉出這類詩篇的一些實例,使我們知道困難何在;然後再思考這困難究竟可以如何——若果有途徑——解決。

下面是屬於這類詩篇的經文中的一些例子。誠然並非可以把可選的全數列出,但它們都是恰當的標本;而且凡這類詩篇所涉及、而未見於這些例子的困難,再無別處可尋。

Psalm 5:10,「神啊,求你定他們的罪!願他們因自己的計謀跌倒;願你在他們許多的過犯中把他們逐出,因為他們背叛了你。」

Psalm 10:15,「願你打斷惡人的膀臂;至於壞人,願你追究他的惡,直到淨盡。」

Psalm 18:40-42,「你又使我的仇敵在我面前轉背逃跑,叫我能以剪除那恨我的人。他們呼求,卻無人拯救;就是呼求耶和華,他也不應允。我搗碎他們,如同風前的灰塵,倒出他們,如同街上的泥土。」

Psalm 28:4,「願你按著他們所做的,並他們所行的惡事待他們。願你照著他們手所做的待他們,將他們所應得的報應加給他們。」

Psalm 31:17,「耶和華啊,求你叫我不致羞愧,因為我曾呼籲你;求你使惡人羞愧,使他們在陰間緘默無聲。」

Psalm 35:3-8,「抽出槍來,擋住那追趕我的;求你對我的靈魂說:我是拯救你的。願那尋索我命的,蒙羞受辱!願那謀害我的,退後羞愧!願他們像風前的糠,有耶和華的使者趕逐他們。願他們的道路又暗又滑,有耶和華的使者追趕他們。因他們無故地為我暗設網羅,無故地挖坑,要害我的性命。願災禍忽然臨到他身上!願他暗設的網纏住自己!願他落在其中遭災禍!」

Psalm 40:14,「願那些尋找我、要滅我命的,一同抱愧蒙羞!願那些喜悅我受害的,退後受辱!」

Psalm 55:9,「主啊,求你吞滅他們,變亂他們的舌頭!因為我在城中見了強暴爭競的事。」

Psalm 55:15,「願死亡忽然臨到他們!願他們活活地(即活著的)下入陰間!因為他們的住處、他們的心中,都有邪惡。」

Psalm 58:6-10,「神啊,求你敲碎他們口中的牙;耶和華啊,求你敲掉少壯獅子的大牙!願他們消滅,如急流的水一般;他們瞅準射箭的時候,願箭頭彷彿砍斷。願他們像蝸牛消化過去,又像婦人墜落未見天日的胎。你們用荊棘燒火,鍋還未熱,他要用旋風把青的和燒著的一齊颳去。義人見仇敵遭報就歡喜,要在惡人的血中洗腳。」

Psalm 59:12-15,「他們口中的罪和嘴裏的言語,並咒罵虛謊的話,願他們在驕傲之中被纏住了。求你發怒,使他們消滅,以致歸於無有,叫他們知道神在雅各中間掌權,直到地極。到了晚上,任憑他們轉回;任憑他們叫號如狗,圍城繞行。他們必走來走去,尋找食物,若不得飽就終夜在外。」

Psalm 68:2,「他們被驅逐,如煙被風吹散;惡人見神之面而消滅,如蠟被火鎔化。」

Psalm 69:22-25,「願他們的筵席在他們面前變為網羅,在他們平安的時候變為機檻。願他們的眼睛昏矇,不得看見;願你使他們的腰常常戰抖。求你將你的惱恨倒在他們身上,叫你的烈怒追上他們。願他們的住處變為荒場;願他們的帳棚無人居住。」

Psalm 79:12,「主啊,願你將我們鄰邦所羞辱你的羞辱加七倍歸到他們身上。」

Psalm 83:9-17,「求你待他們,如待米甸,如在基順河待西西拉和耶賓一樣。他們在隱多珥滅亡,成了地上的糞土。求你叫他們的首領像俄立和西伊伯,叫他們的王子都像西巴和撒慕拿。……我的神啊,求你叫他們像旋風的塵土,像風前的碎秸。火怎樣焚燒樹林,火燄怎樣燒著山嶺,求你也照樣用狂風追趕他們,用暴雨恐嚇他們。願你使他們滿面羞恥,好叫他們尋求你——耶和華的名!願他們永遠羞愧驚惶!願他們慚愧滅亡!」

Psalm 109:6-15,「願你派一個惡人轄制他,派一個對頭站在他右邊!他受審判的時候,願他出來擔當罪名!願他的祈禱反成為罪!願他的年日短少!願別人得他的職分!願他的兒女為孤兒,他的妻子為寡婦!願他的兒女漂流討飯,從他們荒涼之處出來求食!願強暴的債主牢籠他一切所有的!願外人搶他勞碌得來的!願無人向他延綿施恩!願無人可憐他的孤兒!願他的後人斷絕,名字被塗抹,不傳於下代!願他祖宗的罪孽被耶和華記念!願他母親的罪過不被塗抹!願這些罪常在耶和華面前,使他的名號斷絕於世!」

Psalm 137:7-9,「耶路撒冷遭難的日子,以東人說:拆毀!拆毀!直拆到根基!耶和華啊,求你記念這仇!將要被滅的巴比倫城啊,報復你像你待我們的,那人便為有福!拿你的嬰孩摔在磐石上的,那人便為有福!」

以上是現正討論的這類詩篇的一些標本;數目固然還可增加,但這些例子已包括最難解釋的各篇,也涵蓋這類詩篇中一切的困難。再也舉不出比這些更顯復仇之氣的經文;再也沒有比這些更與新約之靈相悖的。因此,若能就這些經文提出令人滿意的解答,那麼把這一解答的原則應用到詩篇中一切類似的經文,便輕而易舉了。

於是問題來了:這困難究竟可以如何解決——若果有途徑;或可以提出什麼解釋。

關於這題目,可作以下的論述:

(1)無論存在什麼困難,都是聖經自己造成的。這記錄是聖經作者親自作出的。這一事實至少證明他們的坦誠,並證明他們自覺這記錄中「沒有」什麼不是根據事實、並非真正發生的事;也就是說,這些情感確實存在於他們心中。不能設想作者會放縱自己不願記錄、羞於示人的情感。事實上,他們用盡一切力所能及的方法使其顯明,並使這記錄傳之久遠。他們不僅記錄了——使其成為永久的形式——而且將其譜入詩歌,用於對神的公開敬拜,流傳於後世,引導遙遠時代之人的靈修。再者,聖經中若對這樣的靈有所譴責——這樣的靈若有任何不對——我們當記得,譴責正是出現在載有這些話語的同一本書裏;因為在此必須假定,就這些話語作為聖經的一部分、作為一種自稱的啟示所受的反對而論,聖經是一書;舊約與新約乃是神同一啟示的部分。聖經在作出這記錄時,至少當被容許視為一部坦誠的書——一部毫不企圖隱瞞作者心中實際經過之事的書。可以推想,作出這記錄必有某種理由,而這理由與啟示的宗旨並不牴觸;並且也假定這些事必能有一種解釋,與「聖經乃是出於神的啟示」這一主張相合。

(2)被指為錯謬、粗暴、復仇的成分之中,有多少可歸之於聖經寫成之時、這些人所處時代的風氣,或是一個值得探討的問題。提出這一點,並非假定道德與宗教的原則隨時代而改變,或因人的境遇而修改,或同一件事在一個時代或國家為道德上的對,在另一個時代或國家卻為道德上的錯。真理與聖潔、對與錯,並不改變,也不繫於人類的反覆無常或風俗習慣。然而,要確切知道話語「所指」為何、言辭表達的程度如何、所用語言要傳達的確切思想是什麼,我們就必須設身處地,明白用這語言之人的通行風俗與習慣。我們讀荷馬(Homer)、讀騎士遊俠的記錄、或努力了解任何民族早期的詩歌時,都在自覺或不自覺中運用著這些原則。盟約派或清教徒所用的言語,其表達的內心情感,或許與我們所用較溫和的言語所表達的並無不同;無學問的粗人所用的粗硬字眼,其表達的情感,與以文雅的聲調、上流社會的客套辭令傳達思想時所存的情感,或許並無二致。綢緞之下所藏的苦毒,未必少於獸皮之衣;宮殿之中,未必少於茅舍。遠古時代的人所常用的、在我們看來如此粗暴、如此懷恨、如此野蠻的言語,其真意或許並不多於我們所用、並且如今以為文明與基督教所要求的較溫和聲調。至少可以設想:後世的人在我們的文學與風俗記錄中,也會發現難以按他們的雅俗、文明與純正宗教之靈的觀念加以解釋之處,正如我們在蘇格蘭與英格蘭的盟約派與清教徒的語言中、或在大衛時代詩歌的詠歎中所見的一樣。在譴責他們之前,且讓我們先確實明白他們的意思,也確實明白我們自己的靈究竟在何處勝過他們。

(3)這些經文中有一部分無疑可視為預言性的;表達將要成就的事,而非表明詩篇作者盼望這些事臨到。在若干實例中,這些經文原可譯為將來時態而非命令語氣,而不違背希伯來文的文法規則或正確的解經原則。有幾處這類可以恰當應用於彌賽亞的經文,無疑正是這種性質;而且凡語言規律容許如此解釋之處,這些經文都當解為表達罪人所當受的、以及將要臨到他們的,而非表明作者有任何意願要其如此。

然而必須承認,這一考量決不能除去一切困難,實際上連減輕也不能。熟悉希伯來文的人斷不能斷言,這一解答可以套用於產生困難的每一實例;對於無法納入這條規則的案例,仍需另有解釋。在一本自稱受默示的書裏,這樣的經文即使只有一處,其反對的力量,實質上與有許多處是一樣的。根本的困難,在於使它與默示的主張本身相合。

還應當承認,這一解釋對最難的幾處經文而言是不能成立的。沒有人能證明它們全都只是對將來的預言;沒有人能證明這些經文所蘊含的一切,僅僅是表達罪所當得的、或當加於犯法者之身的。毫無疑問,在許多情形中,其中有情感的表達——或願望——或祈求;所用的言辭暗示:若所求的災禍臨到作者仇敵的身上,若刑罰加於惡人的身上,便會有快意——滿足——喜樂;其中含有禱告性質的話,求這些災禍臨到,求惡人被查出、被捉拿、受刑罰。按任何誠實的原則,我們解釋這些詩篇時不能不承認這一點;反對者有權追問:這樣的情感如何能辯護?如何能與基督教之靈相調和?如何能證明它與「詩篇乃聖靈所默示」的信仰相合?這是一個公允的問題,凡相信聖經默示的人,都當被要求回答。

(4)上述經文中的一部分,只是對他人情感的記錄——記錄他們在看見報應加於罪人身上時、甚至在以最野蠻兇殘的方式施行報復時所會感到的快意。在這種情形下,受默示的作者、或默示的聖靈所負責任的,只在記錄的公允,即他確切記述了那施行報復之人、或在旁觀看而引以為快之人所會懷有並表達的情感。人可以描述美洲野蠻人剝取頭皮、施以酷刑、凌遲殺害婦孺的行為,或食人族的行為,而無須為野蠻人這樣做時的任何情感負責;史家當然也無須為暴君壓制臣民時的一切或任何野蠻快意負責,無須為驅使人以報復追逐逃亡受害者的狂怒仇恨負責。受默示的作者記錄雅各眾子的殘暴(Genesis 34:25-29; Genesis 49:6-7),記錄大衛把拉巴的居民拉出來、「放在鋸下,或鐵耙下,或鐵斧下,或叫他經過磚窯」(2 Samuel 12:31),或記錄約押、亞希多弗、押沙龍、尼布甲尼撒、亞哈或耶洗別的行為時,不能要他們為這些人所表現的情感、所行的事負責,也不能公平地由此推論:他們在記錄時贊同所行的事。作者所能負責的,只在記錄的正確。

這類情形的一個實例見於 Psalm 137:8-9:「將要被滅的巴比倫城啊,報復你像你待我們的,那人便為有福。拿你的嬰孩摔在磐石上的,那人便為有福。」我們盡可以把這看作對那向巴比倫施行報復之人實際會有的情感——喜樂——滿足——的陳述,並無不可。其意可以是——而且從種種跡象看來也確實是——巴比倫如此驕橫狂傲,如此欺凌別的百姓,如此殘暴壓制,以致那勝過、降伏並毀滅她的人,在把當得的刑罰加於她身上時——即使按世人通常視為野蠻兇殘的方式——心中也會有自覺的滿足與快意。這裏沒有什麼必然暗示詩篇的作者贊同此事、或他自己會這樣行。即使假定這段話表明希伯來眾民對一個使他們長久深受其苦的仇敵遭毀滅的普遍情感,它仍可不過是對那情感如實的記錄;默示的聖靈所負責任的,只在對實際會存在的情感作出公允的記述。

以上所指示的方法之一,或可完全除去所謂「咒詛詩」中一部分的困難。然而這些解答並不能套用於全部;若還有任何數目——無論多麼少——若還有一篇無法應用這些解答,就必須承認,實際的困難依然存在;因為詩篇當視為構成一本書;正如它們既受默示便含有的意思,它們只有一位作者——聖靈;而且,凡視聖經為受默示之書的人必須持守一項原則:一處經公正解釋的經文,足以確立任何教義的真理;同樣也必須承認:對一處經公正解釋的經文所作有根有據的反對,其影響默示問題的實效,正如有許多處這類經文一樣。因此,要除去這案例中真正的困難,還必須另尋解答。

(5)因此,關於這些經文中視為求報應或求刑罰惡人的禱告,還可提出第五點論述。真正的問題在於:這樣的禱告——這樣的咒詛——在任何情況下能否為正當;倘若能有,詩篇中的處境是否使它們成為合宜。

要對此有公正的認識,須作以下幾點論述。

(a)大衛是官長;是君王。他由神所立,是國家的行政與軍事元首。他的權柄不是僭取的權柄;他的行為也不僅是一個私人、一個個人受了冤屈之人的行為。作為君王——官長——他受命維持秩序;維護法律;施行公義;查出、控告並懲辦罪人。作為官長,他代表國家、法律的尊嚴、公義的權益。作為官長,一件行為的發生、一樁過犯的觸犯、一宗罪案在社會中的出現,關乎的不是他這個人——一個個體——而是那受命治理國家、護衛國家的人。無人能否認大衛對國家負有這一關係,維持與執行法律的責任至高無上地落在他身上。而且從種種跡象看來,這裏所說的也適用於詩篇中出現「咒詛」的每一案例。問題乃是:在受命制定並執行一國法律之人的職分與職能中,是否有什麼因素使這樣的咒詛成為正當。

(b)刑罰是正當的。法律附有刑罰並非不對;執行法律的刑罰並非不對;痛苦、剝奪官職、監禁、乃至喪失生命本身隨犯罪而來,並非不對。一切法律皆如此斷定;一切國家皆如此判斷。此處必須指出:這並非出於任意的事,也不是個人或一地情感的產物。它根植於我們的本性。它見於萬國。它施行於萬民。「在我們的本性中有一種東西——無論我們如何解釋——贊同在正當施行之時的刑罰,贊同為罪設定刑罰。」若這是錯的,那是錯在我們的本性中;是一個普遍的錯;是一個已進入一切法律制訂之中的錯——因為一切法律都有刑罰。沒有刑罰的法律必是一種嘲弄與兒戲。當人按照公正的法律判決被罰款、監禁、處死之時,我們表示贊同。我們覺得這是理所當然的,而且在這樣的情感中,我們並不覺得有錯。我們自覺,我們贊同定罪人為有罪的判決,並不比贊同開釋無辜者的判決更當受責。這情感的根基立於人性之中,因此它不可能是惡的。人這樣發覺自己贊同公正的法律判決時,沒有人覺得自己有可責之處;也沒有人覺得本性中的這一原則應當被抗拒或推翻,以致他若懷有相反的情感,倒成了更好的人。

(c)依據這一原則,每一個社會中都有查察並懲罰罪行的制度。有制訂出來界定罪行、指定其當得刑罰的法律;有為捉拿罪人、帶其受審而作的安排;有預期將有人受刑而建造的監獄。有專為審判罪犯而組織的法院;有法律對不同類別罪行所附的刑罰;有法律書籍中規定的逮捕、起訴、收押、提審並審判被控違法者的程序。有一類人以查出並逮捕犯法者為業;有一類人以審判他們為業;有一類人以對他們施刑為業。於是我們有偵探警察——以查出犯法者為業的人;我們有一隊警員、陪審員與法官;我們有警長、獄卒與行刑者。這些制度在我們這個世界是必需的。社會沒有它們便不能存在。沒有它們,沒有一個社群會安全。沒有它們,沒有人會覺得自己的生命、財產、家庭有保障。它們進入地上現存社會結構的本身;這些若被廢除,世界很快便要充滿混亂、流血與罪惡。

(d)這些都是合法、正當且可敬的職業。偵探官、警員、警長、陪審員、法官的職務,與農夫、鐵匠、學校教師、醫師、牧師的職務同樣合法。沒有人佔有比法院的法官——即使是刑事法庭的法官——更可敬的位置;沒有人比那以查出犯法者、起訴罪行或執行一國法律為日常職務的人,對國家作出更寶貴的服務。警員與法官可以懷著同樣自覺從事可敬工作的意識去履行職務,正如農夫或商人一樣;宣告被控犯罪之人被判定有罪的陪審團主席、宣判法律判決的法官、執行判決的人,夜間都可以像那白天在田間播種、收割莊稼、醫治病人或傳講福音的人一樣安然就寢。一天下來,前者可以同樣自覺對同胞沒有惡意、沒有復仇之願,正如後者一樣。各人胸中所有的,可以只是單純盡責的自覺願望。

(e)這樣的人——偵探官、警員、陪審員、法官、獄卒、行刑者——禱告,是合法且正當的。這樣的人禱告,與任何別的人同樣正當。他可以在內室中、在家中禱告;他可以在搜查被控犯罪之人、聽取對他的證詞、坐在審判席上審斷他、或執行法律刑罰之時,發出心中的默禱。他可以像別人一樣,求使自己「殷勤不可懶惰」;「心裏火熱」;在那職分上「服事主」。他可以求有恩典忠於所託、行事堅定、「在他受派的事上順利成功」。但這是什麼?就是願惡人——罪人——被繩之以法;願他們受刑罰;願他們按行為受當得的報應。這不是對個人的惡意;不是復仇的願望;不是放縱任何私情;不是與最廣泛的仁愛不相容的行為。執法的人正是從事把人繩之以法的工作;他們為什麼不可以為自己所從事的工作「禱告」求順利?凡愛公義之業、渴望社會安定與良善秩序的人,為什麼不可以求惡人的行徑被遏制——被逮捕——被監禁——受刑罰?既然人合法地從事這樣的事,為什麼不可以合法地求神的賜福,幫助他們去行?

還可進一步指出:這樣禱告的官長,其心情與從事不合法職業的人截然不同。從事製造並販賣酒類的人怎能「禱告」?他怎能求自己的工作順利?這樣禱告,就是求他的鄰舍、他的同胞——無論遠近——把財產耗費於無益於己之物;求他們虛擲光陰、毀壞健康、縮短壽命、毀滅靈魂;求他們褻瀆、粗鄙、可憎、如同禽獸;求他們成為社會的禍害、被引入罪惡、家園淪於救濟院、監獄或瘋人院;求他們的家庭陷於赤貧、一度安寧的家變為地獄;求年輕的、壯健的、滿懷希望的、俊美的、德行與敬虔之家的兒子——早早進入酒徒之墓;求妻子、母親、姊妹、女兒的心,因丈夫、父親、兄弟淪為酒徒而被碾碎。

這樣的禱告含有何等魔鬼般的惡毒!所以這樣的人並不求神賜福他們的工作。但官長可以禱告,也應當禱告。他可以求自己在履行職責、施行公義、起訴罪行、宣判法律的判決上順利成功。他的禱告,其實不過是願人人都得著公義的對待;願刑罰在應受之時得以執行;願自己成為神手中查察並懲罰罪惡的器皿。同時,這與復仇懷恨之靈可以相去甚遠,以致他自己可能是社會中最仁慈、最有人道精神的人;當他宣判法律的判決之時,他可能是法庭中唯一流淚的人。他宣判之時,眼淚可以急流而下,而那被判絞刑的冥頑惡徒可能全然無動於衷。華盛頓簽署處死才華出眾的安德烈的死刑令,並不表示他缺乏情感、心懷惡意,因為他是流著淚這樣行的。

同樣,以同樣的靈,人在國家受侵犯時、或在國中一部分起來反抗合法政府之時,可以起而保衛國家。被召保衛國家的士兵可以禱告;軍隊的統帥可以禱告——也應當禱告。但這樣的人的禱告可以是、也應當是在其職責的範圍之內,求他所從事之事順利成功。那將是求他國家的仇敵被擊敗並降伏。當他求他國家的仇敵如風前的糠被吹散、求他們的計謀變為愚拙、或求自己順利制伏他們時,這並不表明惡意、個人的恩怨、或復仇之靈。這是為義之業得勝而獻的禱告;他作為士兵的一切行動既都以擊潰國家的仇敵為歸趨;他既實際從事制伏他們的工作;他的一切計劃既都以這為念;他若不如此便不能成功——那麼,若這職分本身是正當的,他為其中的順利成功禱告便不可能是錯的;也就是說,求仇敵被交在他手中,求神使他能勝過他們、驅散他們、制伏他們。從這一觀點看,當自由、法律與公義的護衛者把 Psalm 149:1-9 的話應用於自己——「願他們口中稱讚神為高,手裏有兩刃的刀,為要報復列邦,刑罰萬民,要用鍊子捆他們的君王,用鐵鐐鎖他們的大臣,要在他們身上施行所記錄的審判」(Psalm 149:6-9)——其中便必無任何與最純正之仁愛相抵觸的情感。

(f)與此處所論相關,尚須補充的一點是:無法「證明」那些所謂「咒詛詩」中所含的惡意或復仇之靈,多於偵探官、警員、警長、陪審員、刑事律師、檢察官、法官、監獄長或行刑者每日履行職務時心中的惡意或復仇之靈——當他在內室、在家中、在晨間靈修之時,「禱告」求自己當日忠心而順利地履行公職:因為這一切職務上的成功,都將在禱告的範圍之內,也可能是對禱告的應允。偵探官若成功地查出竊賊或偽造者;官長若成功地把他繩之以法;陪審員若作出誠實的裁決判定他有罪;檢察官若成功地起訴他至定罪;法官若作出公正的判決;獄卒若把沉重的門閂鐵柵關在罪人身上——夜間他們回想自己的工作時,可以把白天合法職務上的成功,視為人生正當事業中真實的禱告蒙允,正如搖曳的金色莊稼是敬虔農夫的禱告蒙允,或滿載東方豐饒產物、英姿煥發駛入港口的船隻,當視為敬虔商人的禱告蒙允一樣;除非證明詩篇作者的言語所含的不能僅止於此,否則就不當假定咒詛詩流露復仇之靈,或與人心中最純正、最仁厚的情感相背。

(6)還有人提出另一種解答。其要點實質上是:這些話語「只是對詩人心靈中實際經過之事的記錄」,保存下來作為人性在部分成聖狀態下的例證。按這一解釋,我們並不必按任何公正的默示觀為那些情感辯護,也不必堅持這樣的情感不可能發生在受默示之人身上。詩篇的主要宗旨之一,是說明宗教在這世上善人心靈中的實際光景;這些人並非絕對完全,其最好的宗教情感也攙雜著許多不完全。按這一觀點,默示的聖靈對詩人的這些情感所負的責任,並不多於對大衛、亞伯拉罕、雅各或彼得的行為所負的責任。情感——行為——其本質如何便是如何;默示的聖靈所負責任的,只在對這些行為與情感作出正確的記錄或陳述:一個在歷史上、在字句上真實的記錄。以下幾點論述可進一步說明這一點。

(a)大衛並非完全人,這是公認的事實;詩篇的所有作者無疑也是如此。聖經從未聲稱他們完全;聖經如實記錄他們的過失;聖經立下一般性的原則:沒有人絕對免於罪:1 Kings 8:46; Ecclesiastes 7:20; James 3:2; 1 John 1:8; Job 9:20。聖經既處處宣告無人絕對完全,又承認大衛——例如——曾犯錯謬的行為,如烏利亞一案;那麼,基於同樣的理由也當承認:人——連最好的人——在思想上、在言語上、也在行為上,都可能犯罪。

(b)默示的正確概念,並不要求我們認為受默示之人絕對無罪。在受默示與個人性情完全之間,必有明顯可感的分別。默示按其真實性質保證記錄的真實,並不必然保證絕對的成聖。其實,默示與成聖並無必然的關聯;——至少按通行的信念可以設想,巴蘭曾就彌賽亞發出真實的預言,卻沒有人因此覺得必須堅持他是個好人以外的任何身分。李維(Livy)、吉本(Gibbon)、休謨(Hume)、羅伯遜(Robertson)都不是完全人,然而他們對自己宣稱記錄的事件,或許給出了正確的記述;我們也不會因為他們是忠實的史家,便論證他們因此是完全人,或他們從未做過、說過任何——若如其實發生的那樣記錄下來——與絕對完全品格的觀念不相容的事。因此,一項極重要的原則乃是:「默示保證記錄的正確,並不蘊含或保證個人的成聖;它若保證了記錄的正確,其責任的界限便已達到。」大衛在 Psalm 51 中就烏利亞一案的罪疚所作的真實記錄,當然不能證明他在那記錄所涉的事實上是對的、是無辜的;記錄若所記的是情感而非行為,其正確性也照樣不能為那樣的情感辯護或認可。

(c)在出於神的啟示中,為滿足世界的需要,必須有對宗教的真實描繪——描繪宗教與人心接觸時的實況,如其在人的生命中所實際例證並顯明的樣式,而不是如在無瑕天使的生命中可能有的樣式。聖經既處處假定人已墮落、有敗壞邪惡的傾向、有生來難以駕馭的情慾,而宗教的宗旨正是教導他如何節制並管轄它們——我們所需要的,便是宗教與這樣一顆心接觸時的例證。聖經若只描述一個完全之人的情感與行為,顯然就不適合於人,因為不合人的光景。人既不完全且有罪,一種給人留下「非有絕對完全即無真敬虔」印象的宗教描繪,便只會使人灰心喪志,因為它把人自覺無法達到的標準懸在他眼前,而他對自身不完全的自覺,必使他痛苦地得出結論:自己沒有真宗教。

因此,在聖經中,除了救主這獨一無二的實例,我們沒有一個完全聖徒生平的記錄。我們所見的敬虔描繪,是它必常呈現於人生命中的樣式:軟弱、掙扎、疑惑、與邪情私慾搏鬥;一種充滿爭戰、明暗交織、善惡相混、悲喜相間、振奮與沮喪相繼的生命;一種罪惡常常暴發、需要不斷努力去制服、而在許多看似相反的現象之中卻真正向完全不斷長進的生命——那完全非今世所能得著,惟有在天上才能成全。惟有這樣的記錄適合於人;惟有這樣的記錄才能真實地描繪並述說人在現今光景中的樣式。在另一個世界——在天上——蒙救贖之人的真實記錄,將是毫無不完全的宗教記錄——正如如今天使的一樣。

如今,我們在聖經中處處見到的是不完全之人的生平記錄:行為不完全、情感不完全、言語不完全。我們有亞伯拉罕、以撒、雅各、以利、大衛、希西家、摩西、亞倫、約西亞、雅各、約翰、彼得的傳記——都是不完全的善人;他們心中善惡兩種原則在掙扎;他們生命中惡的原則不斷暴發,且一時之間彷彿得勢。因此,才有聖經中那些令人痛苦卻誠實無偽的敬虔記錄。同樣,要看見並明白與人性相連的真敬虔究竟是什麼,或許正需要我們在詩篇中實際見到的這種例證:一個善人心靈經過之事的誠實記錄;不完全的人實際上常有的情感——即使他被正當地稱為神人也是如此。也許極少有人——非常少——即使在最高形態的敬虔影響之下,若誠實記錄自己心中時刻經過的一切——他們的願望、欲求、情緒、他們對仇敵、逼迫者與毀謗者的情感——不會發現詩篇的言語在這方面比他們在別處所能找到的任何言語,更能表達他們的情感;——而以下的設想豈是牽強或無據:連奧古斯丁(Augustine)、路德(Luther)、加爾文(Calvin)、諾克斯(Knox)、愛德華茲(Edwards)這樣的人,在非基督教之情感似乎在他們心中佔了上風之時,在受強烈試探要放縱情感、或實際放縱了情感之時,在可能因而懷疑懷有這樣情感的人豈能還有真宗教之時,或許曾從這一事實得著安慰:與他們全然相同的情感,也曾在那寫作詩篇的受默示者心中湧起,而他們在那裏誠實記錄了心靈中實際經過的一切,幾乎就是他們自身經歷的如實抄本?幾乎不必贅言:若這是對此事的正確看法,我們便不必試圖為這些情感的表達辯護——正如不必為大衛在烏利亞一事上的行為、或彼得否認他的主的行為辯護一樣。

(d)按這一觀點,這記錄中所用的話語,並不是提出來供我們效法的。這些話語既記錄為發生於善人的生命中,其發生本身並不證明它們是對的,或是我們當遵循的。救主生命中所發生的一切都是對的,其被記錄下來,是要我們在適合自身處境的範圍內加以效法。若上述論述正確,那麼這記錄的目的便不在於我們當效法那些流露這些情感之人的行為。善人心中實際存在過這樣的情感、他們的著述中含有這些「咒詛」,這一事實也不當歸咎於宗教,彷彿宗教傾向於產生它們,正如大衛的姦淫與殺人之行、彼得的褻瀆之語,都不當引來作例,說明宗教適於在人心中、生命中產生什麼。宗教不為這些事負責。責任在我們敗壞的本性。

(e)若這是對此事公正的看法,那麼「默示」所負責任的,只在「記錄」這些情感之存在一事上的正確:就是說,詩篇的作者確實「記錄」了自己心中經過的事。他們傾吐了內心的情感。他們陳述了自己真實懷有的情感;這些情感,只要人性不變,就可能在任何地方、任何時候,在不完全之人的心中湧起。他們記錄了別人實際懷有的情感;而在記錄時,他們只是把經過自己心中的事傾吐出來。他們不為此道歉;不停下來為此辯護;不說一句為其開脫的話——正如其他聖經作者記錄列祖、大衛與彼得生平中過犯之事時一樣。

以上種種途徑,大概足以應付詩篇中「咒詛」的一切困難。凡否認詩篇默示的人,應當能夠證明:這些並不是對困難的恰當解釋;或證明它們與任何公正的默示觀念不相合。

第七節 「詩篇全書的實用價值」

頗不尋常的是:在基督教時代較明亮的光之下,詩篇在敬虔人心目中的地位,實質上與在相對隱晦的希伯來體制之下並無二致;並且,儘管基督教的啟示帶來了一切額外的亮光,詩篇並未因此被取代。「基督徒」對詩篇的興趣,與古時的猶太人同樣熱切;而且,作為個人宗教經歷的表達,也作為敬拜的手冊,基督徒從整本聖經中選中詩篇,正如猶太人從他手中所有的書——舊約——中選中它們一樣。因此,它們在未來一切世代都必保持其價值;在宗教的亮光、經歷與知識上,世上也決不會有這樣的長進,以致詩篇在實際敬虔操練中的相對地位有所失落。

這一事實在多大程度上可視為詩篇作者乃受默示的證明——證明他們蒙賦予對真敬虔之原則與運行的認識,遠超其自身時代,足以與宗教教化最先進時代所將有的認識並駕齊驅;證明他們在寫作詩篇時,心中必有超出單純詩歌天才一切的影響——這是每一個善於思考的人必會遇到的問題。向懷疑詩篇默示的人提出以下問題,是公允的:他既認為詩篇的作者只是與其他天才之人同樣受禀賦的人,又承認他們生於世上真理觀念相對隱晦的時代,他如何能與這一事實相調和?一個希伯來詩人,在深湛的宗教經歷與知識上,竟把自己提到如此高的地步,以致在新的啟示臨到世界之後、在人類在宗教與人心之認識上的一切成就之後,仍能作一切未來世代的引導者,這是怎樣發生的?

詩篇的特殊價值來自:(a)它們適合於對神的敬拜;(b)它們是深湛宗教經歷的記錄。

(a)就其適合於對神的敬拜而論。其中許多詩篇在最初寫作之時便是為此設計的;就整卷書而論,彙編者似乎有意使其適合此用。不必設想這些聖歌涵蓋了希伯來抒情詩的全部,因為我們知道,舊約中所提到的有些書卷雖出於默示,卻已達成其目的而失傳;希伯來人抒情詩的一部分也可能如此。救主的許多話,雖然他所說的一切都是純粹的真理——是無別人曾說過的真理、是神的靈所賜的真理——卻因未被記錄而失傳(John 21:25);同樣,已寫下的真理也可能已達成其目的而消逝。然而,若果有這樣未曾流傳下來的作品,我們也沒有理由懷疑,它們與那些倖存並構成今日詩篇全書的作品,具有相同的總體特性。如今值得注意的是:希伯來人的詩歌如此適合於公開敬拜,遠逾其他一切詩歌;這民族的詩歌天才如此單純地朝宗教的方向發展。

在這方面,希伯來抒情詩自成一格,有別於任何其他民族的抒情詩。在希臘人中固然有獻與眾神的頌歌——為敬拜眾神之用而寫的頌歌;但這決非其抒情詩的總體特性。在波斯人、亞拉伯人、羅馬人、巴比倫人中,無疑也有這樣的頌歌;但這也不是他們抒情詩的主要特性。在早期蘇格蘭、法蘭西、西班牙、意大利與英格蘭的詩歌中,有這樣的頌歌;但這也決非那些民族早期抒情詩的唯一或主要的特性。他們的抒情作品中能用於敬拜真神的寥寥無幾;而能用於此的,就詩歌而論,也未必都屬最崇高之列。寫作詩篇與頌歌,是一門單獨的詩藝;這些語言的頌歌中雖有最高級抒情傑作的樣本,但仍必須承認:這類文獻的大部分,若其所關涉的是宗教以外的題目,便幾乎難以被視為「體面」之作。

但對希伯來人而言,這就是他們的全部。他們再沒有別的詩歌。他們沒有純粹的情詩或田園詩,足以與維吉爾(Virgil)的《牧歌》或彭斯(Burns)的許多詩作相比。他們宗教類的詩歌,也全屬上乘。沒有一篇可與大多數基督教宗派詩歌本中常見的許多篇章同列於那樣低的水準——很好、很敬虔、很傷感、據信很能激發敬虔的情感——但總是如此平淡、如此軟弱、如此沒有詩意,以致若收入一部純詩集,便連三流四流都難以入列,甚至能否有一席之地也成問題。如何解釋這一事實,要留給那拒絕把「默示」觀念應用於詩篇全書的人。

(b)詩篇全書是深湛宗教經歷的記錄。在一般敬虔人心目中,正是這一點賦予它首要的價值。它是初信者的引導;當信徒行過人生各樣的境遇、白髮臨頭、預示萬事將近終局的衰弱日漸沉重之時,它越發成為他的同伴、安慰者與參謀。一個敬虔的人,幾乎決不會置身於詩篇中找不著切合其境遇之言的境地;決不會發現希伯來的聖詩作者,竟未在宗教經歷的深處先行於他。因此,在病中、在喪親之時、在逼迫之下、在晚年、在臨終的床榻上,詩篇成為如此不變、如此珍貴的同伴;因此——不是出於便利,而是為供應人心中的需要,並作為其價值的標誌——詩篇與新約常被合訂為一冊。因此,為老年人、為病人、為視力因病或因年而衰退的人,詩篇與新約被印成大字、裝訂成便於持握的形式,使這些書卷所載的真理,在光明漸逝、生命漸消之時,仍可為那日漸成熟、將赴天家的聖徒所用。直到世界末了,詩篇在宗教經歷中的地位必與今日相同;直到世界末了,它們必如過往的世代一樣,把安慰賜給受擾的人,把平安賜給臨終的人。

第八節 「撰寫詩篇註釋所需的資格」

一個無可置疑的事實是:在詩篇的註釋書中,失敗的例子多於聖經任何其他書卷。迄今還沒有一部註釋滿足過基督教世界的需要;無論曾引起何等的期望,沒有一部能讓人讀來不感失望。這一事實必有其原因;而其原因大概正在於:撰寫詩篇註釋所需的資格極其特殊——這些資格極少集於一人之身。

以下就撰寫這樣一部註釋所需的資格略作論述,或可解釋已往失敗的原因;或許也能解釋,如今呈獻於公眾面前的這一部,為何也可能不過是既有失敗之作之外的又一添增。每一個撰寫詩篇註釋的人,到工作結束之時,大概都會對自己曾盼望——或曾預期——達成的事感到失望,並且完全與讀者同感:如此呈獻於世的,實在遠非聖經這一部分的註釋所當有的樣式。

撰寫詩篇註釋的獨特資格如下:

(1)希伯來文的知識,尤其是希伯來人詩律所影響之下的希伯來文知識。在一切語言中,都有特殊的詩律;是這些規律影響所用字詞的意義,並表達思想細微的層次。在大多數語言中,字詞有「詩的」與「散文的」意義;把一個字按散文用法所有的意義,應用於詩中的一段,可能全然表達不出詩人心中的意念。我們在閱讀自己熟悉的語言時,幾乎不知不覺便學會了準確分辨這一區別,即使無法解釋;我們讀一篇詩、一首頌歌、一支抒情曲,不致誤解其意。但當一個人著手閱讀以非母語寫成的詩集時,便另當別論。意大利人、法蘭西人或日耳曼人讀本國語言的詩歌時顯而易見的事,在英吉利人著手閱讀那詩歌時,卻成了艱難的功夫。

研讀一種死的語言,也是如此。不必贅言,關於希臘與拉丁的詩人,存在著一門獨特的文獻之學;能讀希羅多德(Herodotus)或李維(Livy)的人,不能就此假定自己對希臘文與拉丁文已有足夠全面的認識,足以明白那些語言中的詩歌。有多少意義常繫於節奏、繫於詩體的用字、或繫於詩歌特有的意象,以致人未掌握語言規則中這最艱難的部分之前,其古典教育便不算完成,他也不配領會一首詩的語言之意義、或賞識其思想與意象之美。希伯來人與別的民族一樣,曾有這樣的規則與慣例,這是無可疑問的,因為這些見於一切語言;希伯來詩歌本身,也有充分的證據表明它們曾存在於猶太人中。然而,如今是否還能充分恢復那些規則與慣例的知識,以致能把它們完美地應用於解釋聖典的詩體部分,或可存疑。許多關乎語言節奏的、許多關乎重音的、許多連於字詞特殊用法的,如今或已無從恢復。為表明這題目之難如何影響詩篇的解釋,也為說明希伯來詩歌的主題,可參 DeWette《導論》(Einleitung)vii. pp. 37-76 的論述。其優雅的譯文見《聖經彙刊》(Biblical Repository)第三卷,頁478-514。

(2)真敬虔是使人有資格作詩篇詮釋者所不可或缺的。其實,這對詮釋聖經的任何部分都是如此。聖經既是宗教的書,用於描述宗教的性質、能力與影響,那麼詮釋者顯然需要有正確的宗教情感,或對宗教有實際的認識。這原則與詮釋任何題材的書所需者,實質相同。在論繪畫、詩歌、雕塑、建築的著作中,必有一些內容,不及由對這些藝術有實際認識的人解釋得那樣好;要有詮釋這樣一部書的完整資格,欣賞書中論及這些藝術之言的能力,必須視為不可或缺。顯然,單有對字詞的知識——語文學——並非所需的全部;解釋地方性的暗指、法律、風俗、禮儀、地理或歷史指涉的能力,也不是所需的全部。在這一切之外,寫作者或作者的心中,還有他有意要表達的東西,那不是單靠語言或風俗的知識便足以解明的。要表明作者的意思,顯然必須能理解他——體會他有意要說的話;把藏在他心中的發掘出來;他想的是什麼——他感受的是什麼——他要表達的是什麼。因此,無論一部關於詩篇的著作,作為語文學著作、或作為說明詩篇作者身份及其寫作處境的著作,是多麼有價值,我們若未曾進入作者的心靈、未配有資格明白並體會他寫作時自身的情感,那就顯然還未觸及那主要的東西。

(3)由於上述原因,詩篇的詮釋不當止於僅有敬虔。「還要有深湛的宗教經歷。」要認識敬虔在其最高形態的狂喜之中、也在灰心、黑暗與憂傷的最深之處的樣式。世上再沒有一本書像詩篇這樣,有如此多樣的敬虔表達、如此多元形式的宗教經歷。詩篇既是為世界的各時代而寫,為各等階層與境遇之人而寫,為喜樂與憂傷之時、為童年、青年、中年、老年而寫,為無學問的與有學問的而寫,為患病與健康之時而寫,為個人、社交、家庭與公眾生活而寫,為官長與平民而寫,為戰爭與和平而寫,為商業之務與慈善之工而寫,為活人與臨終之人而寫,也為哀哭之人而寫——它們便是要構成一部在這一切形式與關係中說明宗教的「手冊」;要成為一本書,使任何人、在人生存在的一切變化境遇中,都能確信在其中尋得適合自己的東西。若果如此,那麼顯然,要有一部好的詩篇註釋——要使詮釋者能進入他所詮釋之工的真正心靈——所需要的,便不是尋常等閒的敬虔;所需要的豐富而多元的宗教經歷,是極少數世人才能得著的。單單看詩篇註釋者的這一項資格,我們便可以不再驚訝,為何迄今從未有過一部全然無可指摘的詩篇註釋。

(4)詩的鑑賞力是詩篇註釋者的重要條件。詩篇是詩,而且是至為精緻細膩的詩。詩篇之美,以及它們切合人需要之處,大部分正繫於它們是詩這一事實。這也是一個原因,使神的靈在感動撰寫詩篇之人時,定意其中的情感當以詩、而非散文來表達,故此選用了這一媒介。在人類心智原有的禀賦之中,有一種把「詩」看為幸福的手段之一、看為適於把真理銘刻於心、適於激發心靈作出偉大努力、旨在使心中充滿安靜、和平、純潔、愛國與敬虔情感的禀賦。這種禀賦在不同的人身上(無論是創作詩的能力,還是欣賞詩的能力)程度迥異,但它總是人的禀賦;它既是人的禀賦,宗教便利用它來促成自己的目的。有人幾乎惟有冷靜的論證、嚴密的邏輯、嚴格的證明才能被推動;有人惟有受雄辯崇高的呼籲激發;有人最易受勸勉之聲的影響;有人惟有藉忿怒的警告,才能從危險的沉睡中被喚醒;有人心中純潔、喜樂、神聖的情感,最易由詩歌激起。以「歌唱」本身而論,喚醒人心中許多最純潔、最虔奉的敬虔情感,正是它的職分;而詩篇,正是聖典中被設計並期待以恒久安排成就這一目的的部分。

由此可見,人若自己不具有那欣賞詩歌之美的禀賦,不能在這一方面,一面進入聖經作者的情感,一面進入那受造而為詩所動之人的心中,他就不能完全具備作詩篇註釋者的資格。詩篇註釋「失敗」的原因之一,正可溯源於此。單純的語文學者;一個除非有精確的證明便不認任何東西有價值的人;一個散文氣質的人,儘管可有崇高純潔的敬虔,卻仍可能缺少一項重要的資格,使他難以進入詩篇的真正心靈,難以應付那些在聖經這一部分中尋求建立與安慰之人的需要。

(5)認識人心——認識人性——是作好的詩篇註釋者不可或缺的條件。詩篇比聖經任何別的書卷,更多記載人心的運行。其實,它們大部分正是關乎內心。它們不像羅馬書那樣,訴諸理智較高的能力;也不像以賽亞的異象、或約翰在拔摩島的異象那樣,向想像力發出這樣的呼籲。在詩篇中,心正是神的靈與人靈魂之間卓越的交通媒介。聖經的一切部分中,說明人心最多的,是詩篇。人心中所有的一切,都在其中以這樣或那樣的方式、在幾乎無窮無盡的境遇中得到了說明。喜樂、憂傷、悔疚、感恩、頌讚、灰心、悲傷;愛——對神的愛——對人的愛;患病之時與康復之時所經歷的感受;因他人的忘恩而生的痛苦、心靈的苦楚;對神忿怒的畏懼;對死亡的驚恐;宗教在死亡前景之前所賜的平安;禱告的喜樂;懇切祈求蒙允而進入心靈的光;因敬虔默想神的性情與他的律法而生的安寧;長久黑暗之後照徹心靈的光;被記起的罪疚所生的效果(如 Psalm 51);神似乎離棄我們之時的絕望之感;遭受傷害之後心中湧起的情感——這些不過是詩篇在作者個人經歷中所說明的許多題目中的少數幾項;顯然,人若自己不認識人心的運行,就沒有資格註釋這些題目。

能解釋所用的字詞;能陳述詩篇的來源與作者、以及寫作的緣由;能考究文本的真實與準確,判斷各異文的價值;能明白並解釋詩篇中所用的平行體、節奏與重音;能領會並欣賞詩篇的詩藝;或能把猶太拉比與基督教教父的著述彙集起來,或把德國在理性主義聖經觀之下產生的作品、甚至德意志心智在其最佳運行、在真宗教影響之下所產生的作品移植過來——這一切並非撰寫一部詩篇註釋的全部或主要要求,不足以滿足我國人士的需要,也不是最能造福廣大青年、病者、喪親者、受試探者、年老者與灰心者的詩篇詮釋方式。人若不能以這樣多樣的方式,在詩篇所說明的人心運行上與詩篇的作者們同情共感,就不是完全有資格撰寫這卷書註釋的人。為某些目的,他或許確能寫出一部有價值的書,卻不是在詩篇所要成就的真正目的上——在人生一切變化的境遇中、在人心一切繁複的運行中,作各等階層與境遇之信徒的引導與安慰——有價值的書。

(6)還可補充:詩篇全書大體上如此明白、如此易於為大多數讀者理解、如此善於表達內心的情感與情緒,以致反而增加了撰寫註釋的困難。詩篇如此豐富;如此滿有意義;如此切合信徒的需要;如此應付神子民各樣的經歷,又如此充滿敬虔的例證;如此觸動靈魂深處情感的泉源,以致就這大多數方面而論,「註釋」作為附加的光源,與那要在太陽旁增其光輝的燭光相比,實無多大分別。人在平日誦讀詩篇、把它當作靈修之書時,在深湛經歷性敬虔的題目上所尋得的,遠超過他通常在註釋中所能尋得的,以致他帶著深切的失望,擱下解釋的嘗試,回到詩篇本身,覺得它比註釋者所能增添的任何東西,更善於表達他的情感、應付他的需要、在試煉中賜他安慰。他迎接詩篇本身,作他的安慰者與引導者;在如今以如此廉價發售的小冊、或附於袖珍新約之後的小書中,聖經的普通讀者所尋得切合其需要的,多於他在 Venema 的長篇註釋中、在《聖經批評家》(Critici Sacri)的一切彙編中、在 Poole 的《概要》(Synopsis)中、在 Grotius 的《評註》(Annotations)中、或在 DeWette——儘管 DeWette 的著作何等優雅——或 Tholuck、或 Hengstenberg 的學術詮釋中所能尋得的。

當寫作詩篇註釋的這些困難被考慮到——當一個坐下來寫作的人,思考這項工作所需的資格——當在這些念頭的影響之下(這些念頭不斷增大,並且當他像我一樣,斷斷續續勞作了十二年之久,預備聖經這一部分的註釋時,越發沉重地壓在他身上),無論他在這事業開始之時,曾有怎樣熱切的願望或成功的把握,他都必不再詫異,為何別人迄今預備詩篇註釋的努力盡歸失敗;而且,倘若他的壽數得以延長、得見自己勞作的成果,他發現世人把他長久勞苦、並曾盼望或可在某種程度上配得上他所詮釋之書卷的這部作品,不過視為那長長一串撰寫詩篇合宜詮釋的不成功嘗試中的又一個,也不足為奇。

第一篇詩沒有加於其前的標題,Psalm 10; Psalm 116; Psalm 117:1-2 以及其他許多篇也是如此。如今要探究這一省略的原因,已是徒然。關於詩篇標題的來源與權威,見引言第四節。有人推想,這篇詩之所以未附標題,是因為全書之前已冠以總標題——「大衛的詩篇」——而那已足以指明這一系列中第一篇的作者。但這只是揣測,而且這一理由若能成立,就不僅當省略第一篇詩的標題,也同樣當省略凡在那一總標題之下的任何別篇的標題。在有些抄本(DeRossi 的兩部)中,這篇詩未編號碼;在另一些抄本(Kennicott 的四部、DeRossi 的三部)中,它與第二篇相連,兩篇被算作一篇。

然而,它顯然是與第二篇各自獨立的作品。它有自身的完整性,正如第二篇也有其一樣;全書之中,幾乎再沒有哪兩篇詩,不能像這兩篇一樣被恰當地合併。如今已無法查明這篇詩的作者,儘管通行的看法——它出於大衛之手——大概是正確的。但它寫於什麼場合,如今同樣無法查明。其中沒有歷史的暗指,可使我們據以確定寫作的場合,正如其中沒有任何內容能確定其作者。所用的字詞屬最一般的性質,其中的情感適用於一切時代、一切地方。它處處顯得是詩篇全書的總引論,顯得是要以寥寥數語表達整部選集的要旨,或陳明貫穿全書的大原則——義人的生命必伴隨興盛與福樂,惡人的生命終必隨以憂傷與毀滅。這是猶太神權政體的偉大原則;其重要性足以在一卷旨在充分說明真宗教之性質與價值的書的開端,清楚地加以陳明。試參 Deuteronomy 27-28。

這篇詩旨在描繪義人的福樂或幸福。這是「按字面與寓意、正面與反面、直接與對比,兼就其品格與其今世來世的境遇」而作的描繪。——亞歷山大教授(Prof. Alexander)。然而,它並不像亞歷山大教授所設想的,是一幅「真幸福之人的畫像」;它是對義人之福樂的描繪,與不義之人的境遇相對照。義人誠然興盛而蒙福;表明這一點也是本篇的用意之一。但詩人眼中所看的,不是幸福的人本身,而是義人,以及為義的福樂。

這篇詩恰當地由兩部分構成——義人的福樂,與惡人或不虔之人非福的境遇,或用德文詞語說,其 "ungluck"(DeWette)。

一、義人的福樂(Psalm 1:1-3)。這又分為兩小段:

(1)他的品格(Psalm 1:1-2)。這又以兩種方式描述——反面與正面。

(a)反面:他不從惡人的計謀,不站罪人的道路,不坐褻慢人的座位(Psalm 1:1)。

(b)正面:他喜愛耶和華的律法,以晝夜思想他的真理為樂(Psalm 1:2)。

(2)他的興盛,作為行義的結果(Psalm 1:3)。他的境況被比作栽於水源充足之處的樹,葉子常青,果子從不間斷;他凡所作的,盡都順利。

二、不義之人的境遇,或不義之人與義人之間的強烈對比(Psalm 1:4-6)。他們的境遇與結局以三種方式表達:

(1)他們如同糠粃,被風吹散(Psalm 1:4)。

(2)當審判的時候,他們必站立不住,在義人的會中也無位置(Psalm 1:5)。

(3)他們必不蒙神認可,必要滅亡(Psalm 1:6)。

英文原文

Introduction to the Psalm

Section 1. "The Title to the Book of Psalm."

The general title to the Book of Psalms in Hebrew is תהלים Tehilliym, Psalms, or more fully, תהלים ספר Sêpher Tehilliym, "Book of Psalms?" Sometimes a shorter title is used - תלים Tilliym. Other terms are used as appropriate to particular psalms, as מזמורים mizmôriym, or שׁירים shı̂yriym, songs; or in the singular, מזמור mizmôr, and שׁיר shı̂yr, a song. These latter titles, however, are not given to the entire collection, but to particular psalms. The former title - מזמור mizmôr - is given to Psalm 3:1-8; Psalm 4:1-8; Psalm 5:1-12; Psalm 6:1-10; Psalm 8:1-9; Psalm 9; Psalm 12:1-8; Psalm 13:1-6; Psalm 15:1-5; Psalm 19:1-14; Psalm 20:1-9; Psalm 21:1-13; Psalm 22; Psalm 23:1-6; and to 39 others, the last being Psalm 143:1-12, rendered uniformly "a psalm." The latter title, שׁיר shı̂yr, occurs in Psalm 30:1-12; Psalm 45; Psalm 46:1-11; and in 27 other psalms, the last being Psalm 134:1-3, and is uniformly rendered "song," though it is sometimes connected with the word מזמור mizmôr, psalm, and rendered "A song and psalm," as in Psalm 48:1-14; Psalm 65:1-13; Psalm 66; Psalm 67:1-7; Psalm 68; Psalm 69; Psalm 75:1-10; Psalm 83; Psalm 87:1-7; Psalm 88; and in Psalm 122:1-9; Psalm 123:1-4; Psalm 124:1-8 it is connected with the word degrees: "A song of degrees."

The word תהלים Tehilliym is derived from the verb - הלל hâlal, to praise, as in the word "Hallelujah, Praise Jehovah." The name is given to the general collection, because praise, more than anything else, is the characteristic of the book, and because the collection seems to have been designed to be used in the public praise or worship of God. They were all probably thus used in Hebrew worship.

The word "Psalms," as applied to the collection, we have derived from the Greek translation, the word ψαλμοὶ psalmoi, in the plural - "psalmos" (a psalm) and "psalmoi" (psalms). This word is derived from ψάλλω psallō, to touch, to twitch, to pluck - as the hair or beard; and then, to touch or twitch a string, "to twang," that is, to cause it to vibrate by touching or twitching it with the finger or with a "plectrum" (πλῆκτρον plēktron) - an instrument for striking the strings of a lyre, as a quill. Cic. N. D., 2. 59. Hence, the word is applied to instruments of music employed in praise, and then to acts of praise in general. The noun - ψαλμός psalmos, - "psalm," means properly "a touching, twang," as of a bowstring, or of stringed instruments; then a song, as accompanying stringed instruments; and then specifically a psalm or song of praise to God. Thus, the verb - ψάλλω psallō, - is used in the New Testament as denoting "praise" in the following places: Romans 15:9, "I will confess ... and "sing" unto Thy name;" 1 Corinthians 14:15, "I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding;" Ephesians 5:19, "Singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;" James 5:13, "Is any merry? let him sing psalms."

The verb does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament. The "noun" - ψαλμός psalmos, - is used in the New Testament in the following places as denoting psalms in general: 1 Corinthians 14:26, "Every one of you hath a psalm;" Ephesians 5:19, "Speaking to yourselves in psalms;" Colossians 3:16, "Admonishing one another in psalms." In the following places it is applied in the New Testament to the Book of Psalms, considered as a collection of songs of praise; - Luke 20:42, "David himself saith in the Book of Psalms;" - Luke 24:44, "All things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me:" see the notes on that passage; - Acts 1:20, "It is written in the Book of Psalms;" - Acts 13:33, "It is also written in the second psalm." The word does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament.

Section 2. "The Authors of the Psalm."

The Psalms thus collected into a book are by no means the production of one poet or one age. They stretch through a long period of Jewish history, certainly from the time of Moses to the time of the return from the captivity of Babylon, and probably later, and they are modified by all the varieties incident to the peculiarities of their respective authors; to individual and national history; to the times in which they were composed. So many of them, however, are the composition of David, that it is customary to speak of them as "The Psalms of David," though it is probable that not much more than half of the psalms in the collection were written by him. Of the 150 psalms comprising the collection, according to the enumeration in the Hebrew manuscripts, not quite one half are usually ascribed to him. According to DeWette, 74; to Kennicott, 66; to DeRossi, 67; to Rosenmuller and Eichhorn, 71; and to Hengstenberg, 80. It is probable, however, that a portion of the psalms to which no name is prefixed in the title - but how great a portion it is impossible now to determine - is the production of David. Still, so many are known to have been composed by him, and he was so eminent as a poet, as to justify the language which is so frequently employed when they are called familiarly "The Psalms of David."

The following persons are mentioned in the titles as authors of psalms:

(1) One psalm Ps. 90 is ascribed to Moses. In regard to the question whether this is to be regarded as a composition of Moses, see the notes on the psalm. No other psalm in the collection is ascribed to him, though not a few specimens of his poetry are preserved in the Pentateuch. Why this was not incorporated with his other writings, or how it was preserved until it obtained a permanent place in the Book of Psalms, cannot now be determined.

(2) David occupies a prominent position as the author of many of the psalms in the collection, but, as has been remarked above, critics are divided in opinion as to the exact number that should be ascribed to him. In the Hebrew inscriptions of the Psalms, 68 are attributed to him. The difference between this number and that noted above in regard to the opinions of DeWette, Kennicott, DeRossi, Rosenmuller, Eichhorn, Hengstenberg, and others, arises from the variations in the manuscripts in respect to these inscriptions; the different value attached to these inscriptions by various critics; the fact that some psalms, though without a title in the Hebrew, are supposed to be so certainly the production of David as to make it proper to ascribe them to him; and the fact that some of the psalms ascribed to him are supposed by different writers to belong to a later period of the Jewish history than his time, and that, consequently, the title by which they are attributed to David is an error. There is every reason to suppose that some of the psalms now without a title are the composition of David, though it is not known, and cannot now be known, why they are not ascribed to him in the titles of the psalms themselves. In consequence of these facts, it is impossible now to determine with exact precision how many of the psalms are to be ascribed to David; though the number is undoubtedly so great that he is to be regarded as the principal author of the collection.

(3) Twelve of the psalms, Psalm 50; Psalm 73; Psalm 74; Psalm 75:1-10; Psalm 76:1-12; Psalm 77; Psalm 78; Psalm 79:1-13; Psalm 80; Psalm 81; Psalm 82:1-8; Psalm 83; are ascribed to Asaph. These, it will be seen, occupy a place together in the collection Psalm 63-83, with the exception of Psalm 1:1-6. The reason for this arrangement cannot now be known. DeWette (Einleitung, III. iii.) supposes that, with the exception of Psalm 1:1-6. and Psalm 73, these are improperly ascribed to Asaph, as, in his view, they pertain to later times of the Jewish history, Psalm 74; Psalm 79:1-13 to the destruction of the temple and the city; Psalm 80 to the Exile, etc. Compare the notes on the introduction to those psalms (Psalm 74; Psalm 79; Psalm 80).

(4) Eleven of the psalms, Psalm 42:1-11; Psalm 44; Psalm 45; Psalm 46:1-11; Psalm 47:1-9; Psalm 48:1-14; Psalm 49; Psalm 84:1-12; Psalm 85:1-13; Psalm 87:1-7; Psalm 88; are ascribed to "the sons of Korah," as the authors, or are "for the sons of Korah." See the notes to the introduction of Psalm 42:1-11. It is not certain whether these were composed by "the sons of Korah," or were composed for "the sons of Korah;" that is, for the company of musicians to whom the direction of the music in the temple was confided. It is obvious, however, that if the meaning is that they were composed by "the sons of Korah," this furnishes no information as to the individual authorship of the psalms. By which one of them they were composed, or whether by more than one, of course is not indicated by a title so general. DeWette supposes that most of these psalms pertain to the times of the Exile, or to a later period. There is nothing very unique in the character of these psalms; nothing which in themselves could lead us to conclude that they were composed by those to whom they are ascribed, rather than by David or Asaph.

(5) Two psalms, Psalm 88; Psalm 89 are ascribed to a person called "The Ezrahite." One of these, Psalm 88, is ascribed to" the Ezrahite," and the other, Psalm 89, to Ethan the Ezrahite." The former of these is also reckoned among those which pertain to the "sons of Korah." Ethan and Heman were probably, however, different persons, to each of whom the name "Ezrahite" might for some reason be applied. In 1 Kings 4:31, they are mentioned among others as remarkable for their wisdom: "For he, Solomon, was wiser than all men; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Chalcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol." In 1 Chronicles 2:6, they are mentioned as "sons of Zerah:" "Zimri, and Ethan, and Heman, and Calcol, and Dara." In 1 Chronicles 6:33, a Heman is mentioned as one of the "sons of the Kohathites:" "Heman, a singer, the son of Joel." So, in 1 Chronicles 15:17, he is mentioned in connection with Ethan, who is there said to be the son of Kushaiah; and in 1 Chronicles 15:19, he is mentioned as associated with Asaph and Ethan: "So the singers, Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, were appointed to sound with cymbals of brass." In 1 Chronicles 25:1, Helman is mentioned with Jeduthun, as one of those whose sons "should prophesy with harps, with psalteries, and with cymbals." He is there referred to as associated with Asaph. Compare 2 Chronicles 5:12; 2 Chronicles 29:13-14; 2 Chronicles 35:15. Ethan is twice mentioned - 1 Kings 4:31 as above, as a wise man, and 1 Chronicles 2:6, as above. Compare the notes on the introduction to Psalm 88; Psalm 89.

(6) Two of the psalms, Psalm 72 and Psalm 127:1-5, are ascribed to Solomon, or are "for Solomon." See the notes on the titles to those psalms (Psalm 72; Psalm 127). It cannot be positively determined whether those psalms are his composition, or whether they were composed with reference to him or for him. The latter would seem to be the more probable opinion in regard to Psalm 72, so far as can be determined from the contents of the psalm; but still there is nothing which absolutely prevents us from ascribing the two to him as the author.

(7) Fifteen of the psalms, Psalm 120-134, are entitled "Songs of Degrees." Of these, four are ascribed to David and one to Solomon. The names of the authors of the others are not mentioned. Compare the introduction to the notes on Psalm 120:1-7. They are grouped together because they appear to have been used on certain special occasions, rather than from anything special in the psalms themselves.

(8) Some of the psalms are ascribed in the Septuagint translation to Jeremiah, to Ezekiel, to Haggai, and to Zechariah. As there is nothing corresponding to this in the Hebrew titles, this must have been, of course, mere conjecture or tradition.

(9) There remains a pretty large number of the collection the names of whose authors are not mentioned; and, of course, there are now no means of determining the question in regard to the authorship. Such are s. 150. These, it will be seen, are irregularly scattered through the book, though they are, for the most part, near its close.

In regard to the origin and authority of the titles to the several psalms, see section 4.

Section 3. "The Formation of the Collection and Arrangement of the Book of Psalm."

The Jewish Talmud (Cod. Berachot, 1, 9) ascribes the formation of the Psalter, or the assembling of the Book of Psalms, to David. It is unnecessary to remark that this cannot be a correct opinion, since many of the psalms are indubitably of a later date than the time of David. Most of the Christian fathers, and many critics of modern times, ascribe the collection and arrangement of the Book to Ezra, and this is now regarded as the most probable opinion; and if so the whole collection must have been formed about 450 years before Christ. But though this may be regarded as the correct opinion in regard to the completion of the whole as it now stands, yet there is evidence in the psalms themselves of the existence of smaller collections made before from which the general one was ultimately formed. By whom those smaller collections were made is not now known, nor can it be ascertained what changes may have been made in them when the general collection was formed.

The Book is divided in the Hebrew text into five minor books or collections, sufficiently marked in their character, and so indicated at the close of each as to make it every way probable that these may have been "published," so to speak, in the form of different books, or that the later were additions to the first collection or volume. This division is found also in the Septuagint version - a fact which proves that it existed as early as the year 200 b.c. These portions bear marks of being not "arbitrary" divisions made at the time when the general collection was formed, but distinct and independent collections by different persons. The grouping is not precisely accurate, that is, in the first part, the "Psalms of David" Psalm 1-41, not all the psalms of David are included; and there are a few that are not ascribed to him in the title; but still it was so complete at the time, probably, as to make it proper to regard it as a collection of "his" psalms in respect to the purpose for which that collection was made.

The first book embraces the first 41 psalms, and was, probably, a collection of David's psalms as such, although it does not embrace by any means all that he wrote, probably not all that were extant at the time when the collection was made. The "close" of this "book" is indicated by the words "Amen, and Amen," Psalm 41:13. All the psalms in this collection, except Psalm 1:1-6; Psalm 2:1-12; Psalm 10; Psalm 33; are expressly ascribed to David, and it is every way probable that all were composed by him. In many manuscripts, in the Septuagint, and in the Latin Vulgate, the first psalm is united with the second (as are, also, in other parts of the general collection, Psalm 42:1-11 and Psalm 43:1-5; and Psalm 116 and Psalm 117:1-2). It is probable that this collection was early made, though DeWette has endeavored to show that it could not have been until after the exile, since he supposes that Psalm 14:1-7 and Psalm 44 were composed after that event. Of this, however, there is no evidence. Of course it is impossible to determine by whom this collection was made. It has been supposed by some that it was as early as the time of Hezekiah, and that it was prepared under his direction, as he is known to have ordered a collection of the proverbs of Solomon to be made and written out Proverbs 25:1; and as 2 Chronicles 29:30 he "commanded the Levites to sing praise unto the Lord with the words of David." (Kitto, Encyclopedia)

The second book in the general collection comprises Psalm 42-72. This collection is made up of the psalms of "the sons of Korah," Psalm 42-49; of one of the psalms of Asaph, Psalm 50; of 19 psalms of David; of two whose authors are not named; and of one inscribed "to Solomon," or "for Solomon," Psalm 72. At the end of this collection Psalm 72:20 the following notice is given: "The prayers of David, the son of Jesse, are ended;" and some have supposed that this was the close of the entire psalms preceding it, as one book or collection, Psalm 1-72. Carpzov, Introduction ii. 107. But that this was a different collection, or that there were two collections made by different persons, seems evident from the fact that Psalm 53:1-6 is the same as Psalm 14:1-7; with only slight variations - the variations consisting mainly in the fact that the word אלהים 'Elohiym is used as the name of God in the latter, in the place of יהוה Yahweh in the former. It cannot be supposed that a collector would have used the same psalm with such a variation in the same collection. So also Psalm 70:1-5 is only a repetition of Psalm 40:13-17, with only a similar change.

It may be "suggested" that these two collections may have been subsequently "united," and may have constituted as one before the more general collection was made. Thus, the natural "close" of this collection, as of the first collection Psalm 41:13, would be with the words "Amen, and Amen," Psalm 72:19. To the "entire" collection - the two combined - these words may have been added Psalm 72:20, "The prayers of David, the son of Jesse, are ended," meaning that "now" an entire and complete collection of the Psalms of David had been made in the "two" combined; or, that "as many had been combined for public worship as were then intended to be used in that service." This idea would not prevent the supposition that there may have been at that time, in fact, other psalms of David in existence; or that they might have been subsequently introduced into the worship of God in "other" collections.

The third book Psalm 73-89 consists in part Psalm 73-83 of psalms of Asaph, and in part Psalm 84-89 of the psalms of the sons of Korah, including one of David Psalm 86. The book contains none of the psalms of David, with the exception of Psalm 86; and therefore the notice is given at the end of the second book Psalm 72:20, that "the prayers of David, the son of Jesse, are ended." It was evidently the design of the author of the compilation at the "close" of that book not to admit in the following book any of the psalms of David; perhaps it was the intention "not" to collect anymore of the psalms of David for the purpose of public worship. Possibly, as DeWette (Einleitung, p. 21) suggests, the author of the collection in the third book put the notice at the end of the second book that David's psalms ended there, it being his intention to make a collection of another kind. when this collection was made is unknown. From Psalm 85:1-13 it would seem probable that it was made as late as the return from the captivity at Babylon. That psalm may have been written by one of the company called "the sons of Korah;" or it may have been composed for their use in the sanctuary. This collection closes, like the two former, with the expressive "Amen, and Amen," Psalm 89:52,

The fourth collection Psalm 90-106 is made up wholly of anonymous psalms, with the exception of Psalm 90, which is ascribed to Moses, and Psalm 101:1-8; Psalm 103; which are ascribed to David. They are psalms which have almost no local references or allusions, which might, for the most part, have been composed in any country or at any period of the world; and which, in their structure and allusions, give no indication of their authors or of the circumstances which led to their composition. Their authorship, except in the three instances above mentioned, cannot now be ascertained; nor is it necessary to determine that question in order fully to understand and appreciate them. They were manifestly designed for public worship, and probably written with the intention of being so used. This book closes Psalm 106:48 with the expression "Amen, Hallelujah."

The fifth and last book Psalm 107-150, is miscellaneous in its character, and seems to have been intended to be a collection of all the scattered psalms which would be proper for public worship, which had not found a place in the other collections. Part (Psalm 108:1-13; Psalm 109; Psalm 110:1-7; Psalm 122:1-9; Psalm 124:1-8; Psalm 131:1-3; Psalm 133:1-3; the four last being among the "Songs of Degrees," Psalm 138:1-8; Psalm 139; Psalm 140:1-13; Psalm 141:1-10; Psalm 142:1-7; Psalm 143:1-12; Psalm 144:1-15; Psalm 145) are ascribed to David. Part Psalm 120-134 consist of the "Songs of Degrees." The rest Psalm 107; Psalm 111:1-10; Psalm 112:1-10; Psalm 113:1-9; Psalm 114:1-8; Psalm 115; Psalm 116; Psalm 117:1-2; Psalm 118; Psalm 119; Psalm 135; Psalm 136; Psalm 137:1-9; Psalm 146:1-10; Psalm 147; Psalm 148:1-14; Psalm 149:1-9; Psalm 150:1-6 are anonymous. By whom, and when this last collection was made is unknown. It may without improbability, however, be supposed perhaps that it was made by the person (Ezra?) who undertook to collect into one the entire "books" already existing, and who found many psalms that had not been included by the collectors of the previous books, and who, therefore, grouped all these together in a single book, to be added in the general collection to those which had been already classified and arranged.

Section 4. "The Titles to the Several Psalm."

All the psalms, except Psalm 34, now have in the Hebrew titles or superscriptions. Some, however, reckon only 25 exceptions, as, according to their view, the phrase, "Hallelujah,"" Praise ye the Lord," occurring at the commencement of several of the psalms, is regarded by them as a title or superscription. The more correct supposition, however, undoubtedly is to regard that phrase as a part of the psalm. To each one of these exceptions the Talmud gives the name of "Orphan Psalms."

(a) The "authorship" of these titles is unknown, and cannot now be ascertained. They are found in the Hebrew; but it is not to be supposed that, so far as the "name" of the author of the psalm is concerned, or so far as they are intended to indicate the author, they were prefixed to the psalm by the authors themselves. The Psalms are not of the nature of epistles or histories, and it cannot be supposed that the author would prefix his name to a mere poem or hymn. The probability, therefore, is, that they were prefixed to the psalms as they came into common use, or by the collectors of the several books, or the collector of the entire book, either as indicating what was the common opinion on the subject of the authorship, and the occasion on which they were composed, or as an inspired record in regard to that authorship and design. The question "by whom" they were prefixed is, however, a point which cannot now be determined. If it were possible to ascertain that, it would do much to determine their authority and worth, but the estimate of their value must now be settled by some other method than this.

(b) These titles are of great "antiquity." The fact that they are found in the Hebrew manuscripts proves this, for there are no Hebrew manuscripts, however ancient, without them. They are found, with some variations, in the Septuagint; and it is thus certain that they existed before that translation was made. This point is also confirmed by the fact that the translators of the Septuagint have, in some instances, copied the Hebrew words in Greek letters, without attempting to translate them; and that, in other instances, the titles which they use are translations of the Hebrew words, and show that they must have been made from a Hebrew original. These facts, however, would not make it necessary to suppose that they had been prefixed by the writers themselves, nor would it be "necessary" to suppose that they were prefixed before the time when the psalms were collected - either the separate books, or the general collection.

(c) The "design" of these titles is either to designate the author of the psalm, or the occasion on which it was composed, or the chief singer to whom it was dedicated, and to whom it seems to have been committed to set it to appropriate music - that is, to arrange the music for a public use of the psalm; or the style of the poetry; or the instrument which was to be used; or the "tune" which was to be sung. Some of the titles simply designate the author, as in many of those ascribed to David; some describe at length the occasion on which they were written, as Psalm 18; Psalm 30:1-12; Psalm 51; Psalm 52:1-9; Psalm 56:1-13; etc. Some combine several of these things together, the author, the occasion, the style of the poetry, the music to be used, etc., as Psalm 52:1-9; Psalm 53:1-6; Psalm 54:1-7; Psalm 55; Psalm 56:1-13. The longest and fullest of these titles is that prefixed to Psalm 60:1-12; where we have the dedication to the chief musician, the name of the author, the style of the poetry, the design of the psalm, the instrument of music to be employed, and the historical occasion on which the psalm was composed.

(d) It is very difficult at this distance of time to explain the "meaning" of many of these titles, and critics have differed very materially in their conjectures on this subject. The difficulty arises in a considerable degree from our ignorance in regard to the temple-music, and to the instruments which were employed. The difficulty is the same which would exist two or three thousand years from the present time in explaining a book, now familiar, containing "tunes" of music, and a reference to the instruments of music which are now employed in the public service of God. It might be difficult, if not impossible, so to describe the exact instrument of music used as to be intelligible to a future age; and it would be obviously impossible to explain satisfactorily the "names" of many of the "tunes" which are now in common use - as "Mear," "Martin's," "Russia, "Windham," "Lenox." The difficulty, as has been remarked above, was felt even at the time when the Septuagint version was made, as in several instances the authors of that version have not attempted even to translate the title, but have expressed it in Greek letters answering to the Hebrew. Coverdale, who translated the Bible in 1535, felt the difficulty to be so great that he has omitted nearly all the titles except the names of the authors. In these notes, as far as an explanation can now be given that is satisfactory or probable, it will be offered in the exposition of the particular psalms.

(e) There has been a wide difference of opinion respecting the "authority" of these titles. Not a few modern critics, especially German critics, regard them as of no authority, and argue in respect to the authorship of the psalms, and the time and occasion on which they were composed, as if no such titles were found in the Hebrew. By most of the ancient critics they were considered as genuine, and as having equal authority with the psalms themselves. They were wholly rejected at the close of the fourth century by Theodore of Mopsuestia, one of the ablest and most judicious of the ancient interpreters. Rosenmuller, Hist. Interp. Librorum Sacrorum, P. III, p. 256. Tholuck and Hengstenberg admit their authority. The "objections" to the authority of the title are such as these:

(1) That the "subscriptions" at the close of the epistles in the New Testament are now regarded as of no historical value, and it is asked why may not the same conclusion be adopted in regard to the titles "prefixed" to the psalms?

(2) that the ancient versions, the Syriac and the Greek especially, exhibit them with great variations, often altering the Hebrew, and sometimes giving a heading where the Hebrew has none. It is asked whether these ancient translators would have taken such liberties if the titles had been considered sacred like the psalms themselves? (Kitto). - It is added on this point, that "if ever Ezra settled them, the variations in versions and manuscripts have tended since to make them doubtful." Eichhorn, "Einleitung," III, p. 490.

(3) It is argued that the titles are at variance with the contents of the psalms. Thus, it is alleged that sometimes the name of the author is incorrectly given, "as when David is named over the psalms referring to the captivity," as in Psalm 14:1-7; Psalm 25; Psalm 51; Psalm 69. It is also alleged that Psalm 139 cannot be David's, since it is not free from Aramaisms. It is also said that the occasion on which a psalm was composed is not always correctly specified, as in Psalm 30:1-12.

It is to be observed, however, that these writers sometimes assume that a psalm refers to the time of the exile when it would be possible to explain it on the supposition that it was composed at an earlier date; and that it is not always safe to argue from the internal evidence of a psalm against the inscription. A critic affixes his own interpretation to a psalm, and then adopts that as a basis of argument in regard to its origin; whereas often, possibly in all cases, if the inscription were assumed to be correct, it would not be difficult to explain the psalm, by fair rules of interpretation, in accordance with that supposition.

On the whole, it seems to me that these inscriptions are to be regarded as a part of the inspired record, and as having the authority of inspiration. The fact that they are found in the Hebrew - that they can be traced back to the earliest periods when we have any knowledge of the Hebrew text - that they have come down to us with that text - furnishes proof which it seems we cannot now set aside; that they are to be regarded as a part of the text, and that they should not be rejected, except as any other portion of the Hebrew text should be rejected, i. e., only when it can be demonstrated that an error has crept into the text by the fault of transcribers.

Section 5. "The General Character of the Book of Psalm."

The Psalms are mostly lyrical poetry, that is, poetry adapted to the harp or lyre; to be used in connection with instrumental music; to be "sung," not "read." Such poetry was common among the ancients, as it is among the moderns. Anacreon, Alcaeus, Stesichous, Sappho, and Horace were eminent among the ancients as "lyric" poets; and the numerous writers of "songs," sacred and secular, among the moderns, are to be ranked in the same class. The phrase "lyric poetry" now, however, is frequently applied to that species of poetry which "directly expresses the individual emotions of the poet" (Webster).

Lyric poetry is, for the most part, an expression of deep feeling, and has its foundation in feeling or emotion. It is not so much the fruit of the understanding as of the heart; not so much the creation of the imagination as the utterance of deep personal emotion. It embraces in its design and nature all kinds of feeling, and may be joyous, pensive, desponding, triumphant, according to the feelings of the author, or to the occasion, for all these utterances may be sung, or may be set to music, the varying tones of music being adapted to express them all. Hence, in the Psalms, 150 in number, and composed by a considerable variety of individuals, and on many different occasions, we have the varied feelings of trouble, anguish, fear, hope, joy, trust, thankfulness, devotion to God, penitence for sin, and the exultation of forgiveness - the heart moved, and finding vent for its feelings in words adapted to the melody of the lyre, or the musical tones of the voice. These feelings are expressed in a great variety of modes or forms, and the music was intended, doubtless, to be in accordance with these varied feelings. The Psalms, therefore, comprise compositions of the following classes or orders:

(1) Hymns in which the praise of God is the principal and leading object, as

(a) in general, God is praised as the God of nature and of men, Psalm 8:1-9; Psalm 104; Psalm 145;

(b) as the God of nature and of the Hebrew people, Psalm 19:1-14; Psalm 29:1-11; Psalm 33; Psalm 65:1-13; Psalm 93:1-5; Psalm 135; Psalm 136; Psalm 147;

(c) as uniquely the God of the Hebrew people, Psalm 47:1-9; Psalm 66; Psalm 67:1-7; Psalm 75:1-10;

(d) as the helper and deliverer of his people, Psalm 46:1-11; Psalm 48:1-14; Psalm 75:1-10; Psalm 76:1-12; Psalm 18; Psalm 30:1-12; Psalm 138:1-8.

(2) Psalms pertaining to the Hebrew nation; to its history; to the Divine interposition in its behalf; and to its relation to Yahweh. Ps. Ps. 78; Psalm 105; Psalm 106; Psalm 114:1-8.

(3) temple psalms, or songs of Zion. Psalm 5:1-12; Psalm 15:1-5; Psalm 24:1-10; Psalm 87:1-7; Psalm 132.

(4) Psalms in relation to trial, calamity, distress, whether of individuals or of the nation. These abound, as Psalm 7; Psalm 22; Psalm 55; Psalm 56:1-13; Psalm 109; Psalm 44; Psalm 74; Psalm 79:1-13; Psalm 80; Psalm 137:1-9; Psalm 69; Psalm 77; Psalm 102; Psalm 10; Psalm 12:1-8; Psalm 14:1-7; Psalm 36:1-12; and many others.

(5) Religious and moral psalms, Psalm 90; Psalm 139; Psalm 23:1-6; Psalm 91; Psalm 121:1-8; Psalm 127:1-5; Psalm 128:1-6; Psalm 42:1-11; Psalm 43:1-5; Psalm 101:1-8; Psalm 131:1-3; Psalm 1:1-6; Psalm 133:1-3; Psalm 119:p>The uniqueness of the Hebrew lyrical poetry as distinguished from the lyrical poetry of other ancient people, and from most of the lyrical poetry in modern times, is its "religion." It is lyrical poetry on subjects pertaining to religion, or to be employed in religion: as expressing religious feeling, and as designed to awaken and foster such feeling. It is intended to raise the heart and the affections toward God; to lift up the thoughts of men from the earth; to inspire confidence in God; to produce consolation as derived from God in times of trouble; to cheer and comfort man in his pilgrimage along a path of sorrow and trouble to a better abode. Much of it can be best characterized by an expression derived from the Bible itself - an expression no less remarkable for its beauty than its truthfulness - as "songs in the night" Job 35:10; songs indicating the joy that may spring up in the soul of man in times of distress and sorrow; songs that show that there "is" joy in the darkness of this world; songs which illustrate the power and the value of religion; songs with which men cheer themselves and each other in their journey toward the grave; songs which even the guilty may pour forth from hearts softened into penitence, and filled with thankfulness in the assurance of pardon.

It is most remarkable that this rich poetry should have sprung up in Palestine, and that it should have been confined to that land. It was not that the land was better adapted to lyric poetry than other lands - for in this respect it could not compare favorably with many other countries, and particularly with Greece. It was not that the events of their history had been such as peculiarly to suggest this kind of composition - for poetry adapted to the lyre or to music abounded elsewhere, and especially in Greece. It was not that the Hebrews had a more poetic imagination than other people - for theirs did not, in this respect, surpass the Greek genius, and whatever there was of poetic imagination in the character of their minds was found with equal richness in Arabia and Persia. Nor was it that their language was especiallly favorable for this kind of poetry - for in very many respects it was far inferior in this point to the Greek, and had no superiority certainly over the Arabian and Persian.

The fact that their poetry took this turn; the fact that all which they had was religious; the fact that there was literally no poetry in their language that was designed and adapted to the dance, to festive amusements, to Bacchanalian orgies, to scenes of gaiety, frivolity, and vanity; the fact that in all the lyric poetry of the Hebrews there is literally nothing in this respect that can be placed by the side of much in the Greek lyric poetry - much in Horace - much in Burns; by the side of the lyric poetry of all lands except Palestine, can be traced only to the idea that the new religion prevailed there, and can be best explained on the supposition that the authors of that poetry were inspired to prepare and transmit to future times that which, in all ages, would express the feelings of true devotion, and which might be permanently employed in the praises of God. He will fail to explain the fact that such poetry is found in Palestine alone, and will fail to appreciate its true nature, who does not admit that these "sweet singers" were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

On the general character of Hebrew poetry, see the introduction to the notes on the Book of Job, Section 5. On "the origin and culture of lyric poetry among the Hebrews," it may be proper to introduce here the following remarks from DeWette's "Commentar ueber die Psalmen," Einleitung, II, pp. 6-12. I copy from the elegant translation of the introduction of DeWette, by Prof. John Torrey, in the Biblical Repository, Vol. III, pp. 450-456:

"If we follow the titles of the Psalms and the common opinion, we must suppose the lyric poetry of the Hebrews, as well as the largest portion of the Psalms themselves, a production of David and his contemporaries. The few specimens of lyric composition which we find before David scarcely enter into consideration, compared with the fertility of his own period. In the earlier history it is but occasionally that the voice of poetry is heard, as in the songs of Moses at the Red Sea, of Deborah, and of Hannah. We are surprised, after so few attempts in lyric poetry, to see so accomplished and fruitful a poet rise up all at once, with several others in his company. So rapid a progress supposes some adequate occasion, some preparatory steps. Now, if we cast our eye over the history of the times immediately preceding the age of David, we are presented with a phenomenon which seems to explain the difficulty.

It is Samuel's school of the prophets. Many, as Herder, Eichhorn, Nachtigall, and Rosenmuller, suppose that the composition of psalms was cultivated and brought to perfection in this seminary. Specious as this conjecture appears, it is hardly reconcilable with the facts of the history. It is not intimated that David, before his unction, had any connection with Samuel. The former tends his father's flock. Indeed Samuel appears to have had no acquaintance with David when he comes to anoint him, 1 Samuel 16:6 ff. Yet, David is already a skillful minstrel, and famed for his art, 1 Samuel 16:18; he was not, therefore, a disciple of Samuel, at least in minstrelsy. But it is well known that music and song at this period were not separated; we must therefore suppose that David was already a poet, and, as such, known and celebrated. Some time afterward, it is true, we find David in Samuel's school of the prophets, but it is only on the occasion of his flight from Saul, 1 Samuel 19:18 ff.

It may be possible that Samuel had some acquaintance with David prior to his unction, though no mention is made of it in the account of that transaction, 1 Samuel 16. But he might have been an object of attention to the prophet without being properly his disciple; or perhaps the youth was his own instructor. Natural capacity, in connection with frequent practice, might produce the same degree of talent, to say the least, as an artificial system of instruction, like that which we may suppose to have prevailed in the prophetic school. At the same time, it would be an error to imagine that lyric poetry arose among the Hebrews all at once, as if it sprung out of the ground. David's contemporaries, the women who celebrated with song and joy his victory over Goliath, practiced a species of poetry which, though rude and uncultivated, was truly lyric in its kind; their short poem, has already the form of the poetic parallelism, and an original and superior mind might easily advance from such a beginning to the highest degree of excellence.

Saul smote his thousands,

But David his ten thousands,

We find also, still earlier, in addition to the examples of Moses, Deborah, and Hannah, the practice, particularly among the women, of music and the dance, from which song certainly was not excluded. Jephthah's daughter comes out to meet her father with timbrels and dances, Judges 11:34. At Shiloh the maidens held a yearly feast with dances, Judges 21:21. It may be questioned whether Samson was not a minstrel, for he is called out to play before the Philistines, Judges 16:25, which is commonly understood to refer to the dance, but excludes not the accompaniments of song and instrumental music. But even if he was not, strictly speaking, a musician and singer, yet we meet in him with the first "Mashal" poet, as we have also from the same period the masterly apologue of Jotham. Such facts, though insulated, presuppose among a people a considerably high degree of cultivation, or at least of poetical capacity.

Indeed, the song of Deborah alone proves that the poetic art was already arrived at a stage of improvement sufficient to account for the origin of the Davidian poetry. Whether a period produces one admirable poem or more is a matter of chance rather than the result of the state of culture. Besides, the times of the judges and of Samuel constituted the heroic age of the Hebrews, a period peculiarly favorable to the first beginnings and gradual improvement of poetry. 'Such times,' says Eichhorn, 'are poetical under every climate;' but I cannot add with him, 'that poetry, in this case, is like the nation, wild and heroic, breathes only in the warlike trump, and knows no field for practice but that of valor and victory with their attendant train.' The occasions which first called forth the Hebrew poets were, probably enough, connected with war; but when poetry has once sprung into life, she confines herself to no such narrow limits, and draws still other objects within her circle. With feasts of victory, sacrifices, dances, and other rites were united, which might easily have tempered the song to a tone of somewhat softer character. Even warlike songs admit of the gentler emotions, and the song of Deborah is rich in touches of amiable feeling. When it is said they sung to the trumpet, we are certainly not to understand it in the literal sense; the music of the harp, of the flute, and of the timbrel, was the accompaniment even of the songs of war, and these instruments are adapted to the softest tones. We are not then obliged to trace the origin of the sweet and amiable poetry of David's psalms exclusively to Samuel's school of the prophets.

"Unfortunately we know far too little about the prophetic school of Samuel to determine what influence it had on the cultivation of poetry. The passages relating to it are 1 Samuel 10:5; 1 Samuel 19:19-20. In the first of these it is undoubtedly implied that the disciples of the prophets had music among them. and their 'prophesying' (התנבא hitenabē') has been understood, not without grounds, in the sense of song, for the word נביא nâbı̂y' sometimes signifies poet, Exodus 15:20, and נבא nibâ', to sing, 1 Chronicles 25:1 ff. We may suppose, however, that this music was employed simply as a support and accompaniment of the prophetic delivery. The prophets probably delivered their messages, in the earlier times at least, in connection with music and a vehement action and declamation approaching to a dance. The passage in 2 Kings 3:15 ff. is remarkable. The prophet Elisha is about to pronounce the answer of the Lord to certain inquiries of Jehoshaphat; but before he does it, he asks for a minstrel; and as the latter strikes the harp, 'the hand of Yahweh comes upon him,' and he utters his reply.

The case here, it is true, is different; the prophet does not play and sing himself, but submits to the performance of another; still it shows the constant connection of music with the prophetic office. Neither is it distinctly asserted in the passages above that the company of the prophets "sung" themselves. The word התנבא hitenabē', which is there employed, may not perhaps signify "to sing," for Saul and Saul's messengers prophecy - התנבאוּ hitenabe'û - as soon as they hear the music, without preparation or practice. Their prophesying was perhaps nothing more than a vehement action, dancing, and gesticulation, as we see from the circumstance of Saul's falling down naked. At the farthest, they might have joined in the choral song with the company of prophets. Such choral chants were perhaps sung in the school of Samuel, but only for the purposes of devotion and inspiration; and the proper design of this school was to educate youth for the prophetic office, that is, to give counsel from the Lord to a people under a theocratic government.

Samuel was a prophet, and history has preserved no remains of any poetical works of his. Is it not most probable that he was aiming to educate his disciples likewise for the prophetic office? Now, it is true that the Hebrews drew no accurate line of distinction between lyric poetry and prophetic eloquence; yet these two always differ, particularly in the mode of delivery, for the lyric poem was probably sung, while the prophetic message was only recited. Supposing, then, Samuel was employed in forming his disciples to be prophetic poets or speakers, what is more natural than to imagine that some of them might feel drawn by genius and inclination to lyric poetry, and succeed in perfecting themselves in this? Yet it lay out of the plan of the prophetic school, and was a thing quite accidental. It is hardly correct, therefore, to consider the prophetic school of Samuel simply as an institution for the cultivation of singing and poetry.

"There were other institutions which may have had an influence still more important and decided than this school of the prophets in promoting the culture of lyric poetry, especially of the religious kind. I refer particularly to those musical schools which, according to the account, 1 Chronicles 15:16 ff. were founded by David in aid of the public worship. Yet I cannot retract the unfavorable opinion I once pronounced upon these and similar narratives in the Chronicles; I must rather confirm it. Besides the reasons there alleged, which I may not repeat, it seems to me to be a circumstance particularly calculated to excite suspicion, that the psalms and fragments of psalms represented by the Chronicles to have been sung at the dedication of the tabernacle and on similar occasions can hardly have been penned by David, but belong rather to the later and less pure style of the temple poetry. The psalm which is sung, 1 Chronicles 16:8 ff, is composed Psalm 105 and Psalm 96:1-13; but both are productions of a later style. If the Chronicles had presented us on this occasion with a genuine song of David, such as the elegy for which we are indebted to 2 Samuel 1; this circumstance would have contributed not a little to add weight to its authority, but the insertion of these fragments throws suspicion over the whole of the accompanying narrative. The phrase also, quoted 1 Chronicles 16:41, and elsewhere, respecting the Levites who were appointed to give thanks to the Lord, 'because his mercy endureth forever,' betrays the later poetry of the temple, an example of which we have in Psalm 136, where this phrase forms a regular refrain; also Psalm 106; Psalm 107; Psalm 118; in which this phrase occurs appear to belong to a later style of poetry.

"We may imagine that a master like David would not be without companions and assistants in the poetic art; and, in fact, several of David's contemporaries are named in the titles as composers of psalms: but these notices are not always good authority. Solomon, according to the testimony of history, united in himself such richness of lyric invention with the sententious style unique to him, that in his time lyric poetry must have attained to a very high degree of perfection. 'Solomon spoke three thousand proverbs, and his songs were a thousand and five,' 1 Kings 4:32. It is singular, however, that with the exception of two which are quite uncertain, no psalms of Solomon are preserved in our present collection; nor do we find any psalm with the author's name belonging to the period after Solomon, not even one which admits of being referred with certainty and of necessity to any particular event in the history of those times; and yet such lyric poems as those of Hezekiah and of Habakkuk clearly evince, that during this period the culture of lyric composition had by no means fallen into neglect.

On the contrary, we have many psalms which, according to the results of a sound critical exegesis almost universally acknowledged, must be placed in the times of the captivity, and after the captivity; and these psalms rank, for purity of language, and for sublimity, beauty, and freshness of conception, in the highest class, and are, in no respect, inferior to the poems of David and his contemporaries, for example, Psalm 45; Psalm 74; Psalm 79:1-13; Psalm 107; and many, if not all, of the Psalms of Degrees. We are here presented, then, with a singular phenomenon. The lyric poetry of the Hebrews, which was cultivated and brought to perfection in the times of David, after producing abundance of fruit, sank into a repose of nearly 500 years, and then all at once, in the most calamitous period of the state, arose again, survived another golden age, and yielded a second harvest - a phenomenon hardly corresponding with the common course of events. The singularity, however, disappears as soon as we suppose that the collection of Psalms contains several pieces, either anonymous or incorrectly named, which belong to the period extending from David to the captivity. Indeed, it is in the highest degree probable that lyric composition flourished side by side with the prophetic poetry, and that many of the prophets themselves contributed to our present collection, and might reclaim their own productions from David and others. Some of the prophets, too, are actually named by the Septuagint as authors of psalms."

Section 6. "The Imprecations in the Psalm."

Much has been written on the subject of the imprecations in the Psalms, or, as they are called, "The imprecatory psalms;" and perhaps there is no part of the Bible that gives more perplexity and pain to its readers than this; perhaps nothing that constitutes a more plausible objection to the belief that the psalms are the productions of inspired men than the spirit of revenge which they sometimes seem to breathe, and the spirit of cherished malice and implacableness which the writers seem to manifest. There has been probably no explanation offered which has relieved the minds of those who are thus perplexed, or which has furnished a solution wholly satisfactory on the question how this spirit can be reconciled with the precepts of the New Testament and with the requirements of true religion. It is useless to attempt to disguise or to conceal the difficulty, and it may be admitted that most of the explanations which have been suggested leave the difficulty just where it was. Perhaps it is not possible for us to remove all such difficulty, or so to present the subject that questions may not be asked which it would be impossible to answer, and, indeed, what subject is there in mental philosophy, in natural science, in morals, or in theology, on which questions may not be asked which the human powers are not yet competent to answer? In regard to the growth of a blade of grass, questions may be asked which no chemist - no person - can answer.

With reference to the imprecations in the Psalms, it will be proper, first, to refer to some specimens of such psalms, that we may know where the difficulty lies; and then to consider in what way, if any, this difficulty may be solved.

The following are among the passages which would be referred to as belonging to that class of psalms. They are not, indeed, all that could be selected, but they are fair specimens, and there are no others that would involve any difficulty which are not found in these.

Psalm 5:10, "destroy thou them, O God; let them fall by their own counsels; cast them out in the multitude of their transgressions, for they have rebelled against thee."

Psalm 10:15, "break thou the arm of the wicked and the evil man: seek out his wickedness until thou find none."

Psalm 18:40-42, "thou hast also given me the necks of mine enemies; that might destroy them that hate me. They cried, but there was none to save them: even unto the Lord, but he answered them not. Then did I beat them small as the dust before the wind: I did cast them out as the dirt in streets."

Psalm 28:4, "give them according to their deeds, and according to the wickedness of their endeavors: give them after the work of their hands; render to them their desert."

Psalm 31:17, "let me not be ashamed, O Lord, for I have called upon thee: let the wicked be ashamed, and let them be silent in the grave."

Psalm 35:3-8, "draw out also the spear, and stop the way against them that persecute me: say unto my soul, I am thy salvation. Let them be founded and put to shame that seek after my soul: let them be turned back and brought to confusion that devise my hurt. Let them be as chaff before the wind: and let the angel of the Lord chase them. Let their way be dark and slippery: and let the angel of the Lord persecute them. For without cause have they hid for me their net in a pit, which without cause they have digged for my soul. Let destruction come upon him at unawares; and let his net that he hath hid catch himself: into that very destruction let him fall."

Psalm 40:14, "let them be ashamed and confounded together that seek after my soul to destroy it; let them be driven backward and put to shame that wish me evil."

Psalm 55:9, "destroy, O Lord, and divide their tongues: for I have seen violence and strife in the city."

Psalm 55:15, "let death seize upon them, and let them go down quick (alive, living) into hell: for wickedness is in their dwellings, and among them."

Psalm 58:6-10, "break their teeth, O God, in their mouth: break out the great teeth of the young lions, O Lord. Let them melt away as waters which run continually: when he bendeth his bow to shoot his arrows, let them be as cut in pieces. As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun. Before your pots can feel the thorns, he shall take them away as with a whirlwind, both living, and in his wrath. The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked."

Psalm 59:12-15, "for the sin of their mouth and the words of their lips let them even be taken in their pride: and for cursing and lying which they speak. Consume them in wrath, consume them, that they may not be: and let them know that God ruleth in Jacob unto the ends of the earth. And at evening let them return; and let them make a noise like a dog, and go round about the city. Let them wander up and down for meat, and grudge if they be not satisfied."

Psalm 68:2, "as smoke is driven away, so drive them away: as wax melteth before the fire, so let the wicked perish at the presence of God."

Psalm 69:22-25, "let their table become a snare before them: and that which should have been for their welfare, let it become a trap. Let their eyes be darkened, that they see not; and make their loins continually to shake. Pour out thine indignation upon them, and let thy wrathful anger take hold of them. Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents."

Psalm 79:12, "and render unto our neighbors sevenfold into their bosom their reproach, wherewith they have reproached thee, O Lord."

Psalm 83:9-17, "do unto them as unto the Midianites; as to Sisera, as to Jabin, at the brook of Kison: which perished at Endor: they became as dung for the earth. Make their nobles like Oreb, and like Zeeb; yea, all their princes as Zebah, and as Zalmunna ...O my God, make them like a wheel; as the stubble before the wind. As the fire burneth a wood, and as the flame setteth the mountains on fire; so persecute them with thy tempest, and make them afraid with thy storm. Fill their faces with shame; that they may seek thy name, O Lord. Let them be confounded and troubled for ever; yea, let them be put to shame, and perish."

Psalm 109:6-15, "set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand. When he shall be judged, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin. Let his days be few; and let another take his office. Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow. Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places. Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labor. Let there be none to extend mercy unto him: neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children. Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out. Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered with the Lord; and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out. Let them be before the Lord continually, that he may cut off the memory of them from the earth."

Psalm 137:7-9, "remember, O Lord, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof. O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

These are specimens of the class of psalms now under consideration, and though the number might be somewhat increased, yet these examples embrace those which are most difficult to be explained, and involve all the difficulties to be found in this class of the psalms. None could be adduced which seem to breathe a more vindictive spirit than these do; none seem to be more opposed to the spirit of the New Testament. If, therefore, a solution can be suggested that would be satisfactory in regard to these passages, it would be easy to apply the principles of such a solution to all the similar passages in the Psalms.

The inquiry then occurs in what way, if in any way, the difficulty is to be solved, or what explanations can be suggested.

On this subject the following remarks may be made:

(1) Whatever difficulty there exists is created by the Bible itself. The record is one which the sacred writers have themselves made. This fact is proof at least of candor, and of a consciousness on their part that there was "nothing" in this record which was not founded in truth, which did not really occur; that is, that these feelings actually existed in their minds. It cannot be pretended that the writers indulged in feelings which they were unwilling to record; which they were ashamed to make known. In fact, they took all the methods in their power to make them known, and to have the record perpetuated. They not only recorded them - put them in a permanent form - but they embodied them in poetry, which was to be employed in the public worship of God; which was to go down to future ages, to direct the devotions of the people of far-distant times. Moreover, if there is any condemnation of this spirit in the Bible - if there was anything wrong in this spirit - we are to remember that the condemnation is found in the very book where these expressions occur - for it is to be assumed here that, so far as the objection lies against these expressions as a part of the Bible - as a part of a pretended revelation - "the Bible is one book;" the Old Testament and the New are parts of the same revelation from God. The Bible, thus in making the record, should be allowed at least to be a book of candor - a book in which there is no attempt to conceal what was actually passing in the minds of the writers. There was, it may be presumed some reason for making the record which was regarded as not inconsistent with the purpose of a revelation; and it was assumed also that these things would be susceptible of an explanation, which would be consistent with the claim that the Bible was a revelation from God.

(2) It may be a fair subject of inquiry how much of what is charged as wrong, harsh, and vindictive, may be referred to the spirit of the age in which the Bible was composed, and in which these men lived. This remark is not made on the supposition that the principles of morals and religion change from one age to another; or that they are modified by the circumstances of men; or that the same thing is morally right in one age or country, and morally wrong in another. Truth and holiness, right and wrong, do not change, nor are they dependent on the caprices or the customs of mankind. Still, in order to know exactly what was "meant;" how much words express; what was the precise idea intended to be conveyed by language that was used - it is necessary for us to place ourselves in the circumstances, and to understand the prevailing customs and habits of the people who used the language. We constantly apply these principles, insensibly it may be, when we read Homer, or when we read the records of knight-errantry, or when we endeavor to understand the poetry of any people in the earlier periods of history.

The language which a covenanter or a Puritan used may possibly have expressed no other internal emotion than would be expressed by the milder language which we should use; the rough words which the uneducated and the common use may express no different feelings than would be found to exist when the thoughts are conveyed in the smooth tones, and the courtly phrases of those in the higher walks of life. There may be as much bitter feeling beneath silk and satin as beneath a dress made of the skins of wild beasts; in the palace as in the wigwam. It may be possible that those who lived in the earlier ages of the world really meant no more by the language which they often used, and which seems to us to be so harsh, so revengeful, and so savage, that we do in the milder tones which we employ, and which we now suppose to be demanded by civilization and Christianity. It is, at least, a supposable case that the people of future times may have had conveyed to them as much in the records of our literature, and of our customs, which they will find it difficult to explain consistently with their notions of refinement, civilization, and the spirit of pure religion, as we recognize in the language of the covenanters and the Puritans of Scotland and England, or in the poetic effusions of the days of David. Let us be sure that we understand precisely what they meant, and exactly how our own spirit is better than theirs, before we condemn them.

(3) Part of these passages may undoubtedly be regarded as prophetic; expressing what would be, rather than indicating any wish on the part of the author of the psalms that such things should be. In some instances, the passages might have been rendered in the future instead of the imperative mood, with no violation of the laws of the Hebrew language, or the proper principles of interpretation. Several of the passages of this kind which may properly be applied to the Messiah, are undoubtedly of this nature, and those passages are to be interpreted, when the laws of language will admit of such an interpretation, as expressive of what sinners deserve, and of what will come upon them, and not as indicating any desire on the part of the author that it should be so.

It must be admitted, however, that this consideration does by no means remove all the difficulty, nor does it in fact even diminish it. It cannot be affirmed by anyone acquainted with the Hebrew language that this solution could be applied to will the cases in reference to which the difficulty exists, and there is still an explanation needed to meet the cases which cannot be brought under this rule. In a book claiming to be inspired, the objection is, in effect, as great if there is only one such passage as if there are many. The essential difficulty is to explain it consistently with the claim to inspiration at all.

It should be conceded, further, that this explanation is one which cannot be admitted in regard to the most difficult of the passages. No man can show that they are all mere predictions of the future; no one can prove that all that is implied in these passages is a mere expression of what sin deserves, or what ought to be inflicted on transgressors. Beyond all question there is, in many cases, an expression of feeling - or desire - or wish; there is language used which implies that there would be gratification - satisfaction - pleasure - if the calamity invoked should come upon the enemies of the writer, or if the punishment should be inflicted on the wicked; there is what is of the nature of prayer, that these calamities might come, and that the wicked might be detected, arrested, punished. We cannot on any honest principles interpret these psalms without admitting this; and the objector has a right to ask how this feeling can be vindicated; how it can be reconciled with the spirit of Christianity; how it can be shown to be consistent with the belief that the psalms were inspired by the Holy Spirit. This is a fair question to ask, and it is one which a believer in the inspiration of the Bible should be held to answer.

(4) Some of the expressions referred to are a mere record of the feelings of others; of the gratification which they would feel in seeing vengeance inflicted on the guilty, even when revenge should be taken in the most barbarous and savage manner. In such a case all that the inspired writer, or the Spirit of inspiration, is responsible for, is the fairness of the record, or that he has given an exact statement of the feelings which would be cherished and expressed by those who should inflict the vengeance, or who should experience gratification in seeing it. A person may describe the acts of the American savage, scalping, torturing, murdering by slow degrees women and children, or the acts of cannibals, without being responsible for any of the feelings of the savages in doing this; and the writer of history cannot assuredly be responsible for all or any of the feelings of barbarous delight which a tyrant may have in oppressing his subjects, or for the fury and hatred which leads men to pursue with vengeance their flying victims. The inspired writers who made a record of the cruelty of the sons of Jacob Genesis 34:25-29; Genesis 49:6-7, or of the act of David in bringing forth the people of Rabbah, and "putting them under saws, and under harrows of iron, and under axes of iron. and making them pass through the brick-kiln" 2 Samuel 12:31, or the acts of Joab, Ahithophel, Absalom, Nebuchadnezzar, Ahab or Jezebel, cannot be held to be answerable for the feelings which they manifested, or the deeds which they performed, nor is it fair to infer that in making the record they approved of what was done. All that the writers can be held to be responsible for is the correctness of the record.

An instance of this kind occurs in Psalm 137:8-9, "O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. "Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones." There is nothing to prevent our regarding this as a statement of the actual feelings - the pleasure - the satisfaction - which they would actually feel who should wreak vengeance upon Babylon. The idea may be, and from anything that appears actually is, that such had been the pride and arrogance of Babylon, such the wrongs which she had done to other people; such her acts of cruelty and oppression - that they who should overcome, subdue, and destroy her, would have conscious satisfaction and pleasure in bringing deserved punishment on her, even in those forms which men usually regard as savage and barbarous. In this there is nothing which necessarily implies that the author of the psalms would approve of it, or that he would have done it himself. If the case is supposed even to indicate the common feelings of the Hebrew people, in view of the destruction of an enemy under which the nation had suffered so much and so long, still it may be a mere record of that feeling as a matter of fact, and the Spirit of inspiration is responsible only for a fair account of the feelings which would actually exist.

In one of the methods which have thus been indicated the difficulties in regard to a portion of what are called the "imprecatory psalms" may be removed altogether. These are solutions, however, which cannot be applied to all of them; and if there is any number, however small - if there is a single one remaining - to which these solutions cannot be applied, it must be admitted that the actual difficulty still remains, for the Psalms are to be regarded as forming one book; they have, as is fairly implied in the idea that they are inspired, one author - the Holy Spirit; and as it is a principle which must be held by all who regard the Bible as an inspired book, that one text of Scripture fairly interpreted is sufficient to establish the truth of any doctrine, so it must be admitted that a well-founded objection to a single text, fairly interpreted, as really affects the question of inspiration as though there were many passages of that character. Some other solution, therefore, must be found in order to remove the real difficulty in the case.

(5) A fifth remark, therefore, in regard to the prayers in these passages considered as invocations of vengeance or of punishment on the wicked may be suggested. The real question is, whether under any circumstance such prayers - such imprecations - can be right; and whether, if ever right, the circumstances in the Psalms were such as to make them proper.

To obtain a just view of this, several remarks are to be made.

(a) David was a magistrate; a king. He was, by the appointment of God, the civil and military ruler of the nation. His authority was not an usurped authority; nor were his acts those merely of a private man, a man individually wronged. As a king - a magistrate - he was appointed to preserve order; to maintain law; to dispense justice; to detect, arraign, and punish the guilty. As a magistrate, he represented the state; the majesty of the law; the interests of justice. As, a magistrate, an act done - an offence committed - a crime in the community, did not respect him as a man - an individual - but as appointed to administer the government and to defend the state. No one can deny that David sustained this relation to the state, and that the duty of maintaining and administering law rested supremely with him. From anything that appears, also, the remark here made is applicable to each of the cases where "imprecations" are found in the Psalms. The question, then, is, whether there is anything in the office and functions of one appointed to make and execute the laws of a land which would render such imprecations justifiable.

(b) Punishment is right. It is not wrong that a penalty should be affixed to law; it is not wrong that the penalty of a law should be inflicted; it is not wrong that pain, privation of office, imprisonment, and the loss of life itself, should follow the commission of crime. So all laws determine; so all nations have judged. It is material here to remark that this is not an arbitrary thing; that it is not a matter of individual or local feeling. It is laid in our very nature. It is found in all nations. It is acted on among all people. "There is something in our very nature, account for it as we may, which approves of punishment when properly inflicted; which approves of the appointment of a penalty for crime." If this is wrong, it is a wrong in our very nature; it is a universal wrong; it is a wrong which has gone into the enactment of all laws - for all law has a penalty. A law without a penalty would be a mockery and a farce. When a man, in accordance with a just sentence of law, is fined, imprisoned, executed, we approve of it. We feel that it is what ought to be done, and in this feeling we are conscious of no wrong. We are conscious that we are not to be blamed for approving the sentence which condemns the guilty anymore than we are for approving the sentence which acquits the innocent. The foundation of this feeling is laid in the very nature of man, and, therefore, it cannot be evil. No man feels that he is blameworthy when he thus finds himself approving of a just sentence of law; no man feels that this principle of his nature ought to be resisted or reversed, so that he would be a better man if he were conscious of the opposite feeling.

(c) In accordance with this principle, there are arrangements in every community for detecting and punishing crime. There are laws made which define crime, and designate its just penalty; there are arrangements made for arresting the guilty, and bringing them to trial; there are prisons built in anticipation that there will be men to be punished. There are courts organized for the express purpose of trying offenders; there are penalties affixed by law to different classes of crimes; there are processes prescribed in the law books for arresting. indicting, committing, arraigning, and judging those charged with a violation of law. There is a class of men whose business it is to detect and arrest offenders; there is a class whose business it is to try them; there is a class whose business it is to inflict punishment on them. Hence, we have a detective police - men whose calling it is to find out offenders; we have an array of constables, jurymen, and judges; we have sheriffs, keepers of prisons, and executioners. These arrangements are necessary in our world. Society could not do without them. No community would be safe without them. No man would feel that his life, his property, his family were secure without them. They enter into the very structure of society as it exists on earth; and if these were abolished, the world would soon be filled with anarchy, bloodshed, and crime.

(d) These are lawful, proper, and honorable employments. The business of a detective officer, of a constable, of a sheriff, of a juryman, of a judge, is as lawful as that of a farmer, a blacksmith, a school-teacher, a physician, a clergyman. No man occupies a more honorable position than the judge of a court, though it be a criminal court; no man is rendering more valuable service to his country than he whose daily business it is to detect offenders, to prosecute for crime, or to administer the laws of a nation. The constable and the judge may go to their work with as conscious a feeling that they are engaged in an honorable work as the farmer or the merchant; and the foreman of a jury who declares that a man arraigned for crime has been found guilty, and the judge who pronounces the sentence of the law, and the man who executes the sentence, may each one lie down on his bed at night as calmly as the man who during the day has been engaged in sowing seed in his field, or gathering in his harvest, or administering medicine to the sick, or preaching the Gospel. Through all that day the one may be as conscious that he has had no malice toward his fellow-men, no desire of revenge, as the other. In the bosom of each one there may have been only the consciousness of a simple desire to do his duty.

(e) It is lawful and proper for such a man - a detective officer, a constable, a juryman, a judge, a keeper of a prison, a hangman - to pray. It is as proper for such a man to pray as any other man. He may pray in his closet and in his family; he may breathe forth a mental prayer when searching for a man charged with an offence, or when hearing a testimony against him, or when sitting in judgment on him, or when inflicting the penalty of the law. He may pray, as other men do, that he may be "diligent in business;" that he may be "fervent in spirit;" that he may "serve the Lord" in that calling. He may pray that he may have grace to be faithful to his trust; firm in his conduct; "successful in what he is appointed to do." But what is this? It is that the wicked - the guilty - may be brought to punishment; that they may be punished; that they may receive the due reward for their deeds. It is not malice against an individual; it is not a desire of revenge; it is not the indulgence of any private feeling; it is not conduct inconsistent with the widest benevolence. The officers of justice are engaged in the very work of bringing men to punishment; and why may they not "pray" for success in the work in which they are engaged? Why may not any man who loves the cause of justice, and who desires the security and good order of a community, pray that the wicked may be checked in their career - arrested - confined - punished? Since men lawfully engage in doing the thing, why may they not lawfully pray for the Divine blessing to aid them in doing it?

It is further to be remarked that a magistrate offering such a prayer would have a very different feeling from one who was engaged in an unlawful employment. How can a man engaged in the manufacture and sale of intoxicating drinks "pray"? How can he ask for success in his work? To do this would be to pray that his neighbor, his fellow-men, near or far off, might spend their property for that which would not profit them; might waste their time, ruin their health, cut short their lives, and destroy their souls; that they might be profane, gross, offensive, beastly; that they might be a pest in the community, be led into crime, and find their home in an almshouse, a penitentiary, or an insane asylum; that their families might be beggared, and that a once peaceful home might become a hell; and that the young, the vigorous, the hopeful, the beautiful, the sons of the virtuous and the pious - might go down early to the drunkard's grave; that the hearts of wives, mothers, sisters, and daughters might be crushed and broken, because a husband, a father, a brother, had been made a drunkard.

But what fiendish malignity would there be in such a prayer as this! Hence, such men do not ask the Divine blessing on their work. But a magistrate may pray, and should pray. He may pray that he may be successful in discharging the duties of his office; in administering justice; in prosecuting for crime; and in pronouncing the sentence of the law. His prayer, in fact, is simply that justice may be done to all; that punishment may be inflicted when it is deserved; and that he may be made an instrument in the hands of God in detecting and punishing crime. At the same time this may be so far from being a vindictive and revengeful spirit, that he himself may be among the most kind and humane men in a community, and when he pronounces the sentence of the law, he may be the only one in the court room that shall weep. Tears may flow fast from his eyes as he pronounces the sentence of the law, while the hardened wretch sentenced to the gallows may be wholly unmoved. It indicated no lack of feeling and no malevolent spirit when Washington signed the death-warrant of the accomplished Andre, for he did it with tears.

In the same way, and with the same spirit, a man may go forth to the defense of his country when invaded, or when one portion of it has risen up in rebellion against a lawful government. A soldier called forth to defend his country may pray; the commander of an army may pray - should pray. But the prayer of such an one may be, and should be, in the line of his duty, for success in that which he has undertaken. It will be a prayer that the enemies of his country may be overcome and subdued. It indicates no malice, no personal feeling, no spirit of revenge, when he prays that the enemies of his country may be scattered as chaff before the wind; or that their counsels may be turned to foolishness; or that he may be successful in subduing them. It is a prayer for the triumph of a righteous cause; and as all his acts as a soldier tend to the destruction of the enemies of his country; as he is actually engaged in endeavoring to subdue them; as all his plans contemplate that; as he cannot be successful without that - if the employment itself is right, it cannot be wrong that he should pray for success in it; that is, that his enemies may be delivered into his hands, and that God would enable him to overcome, to scatter, to subdue them. In this view of the matter there is necessarily no feeling inconsistent with the purest benevolence when the defenders of liberty and law and right apply to themselves the language of Psalm 149:1-9 : "Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword in their hand; to execute vengeance upon the pagan, and punishments upon the people; to bind their kings with chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron; to execute upon them the judgment written," Psalm 149:6-9.

(f) It only remains to be added, as bearing on the point here suggested, that it cannot be "demonstrated" that there is in the psalms that are called "imprecatory psalms" anymore of malice, or of a spirit of revenge, than there is in the heart of a detective officer, a constable, a sheriff, a juryman, a crown lawyer, a prosecuting attorney, a judge, the keeper of a penitentiary, or an executioner, when he goes to the daily discharge of the duties of his office, and when, in his closet, or in his family, in his morning devotions, he "prays" that he may be faithful and successful in the discharge of his official duties through the day: for success in any of these duties will be in the line of prayer, and may be in answer to prayer. If the detective officer is successful in ferreting out a burglar or a counterfeiter; if a magistrate is successful in bringing him to justice; if a juryman pronounces an honest verdict finding him guilty; if an attorney is successful in prosecuting the guilty to conviction; if a judge delivers a just sentence; and if the keeper of a prison closes the massive bars and bolts on the guilty - at night, when they reflect on their work, they may regard their success in the lawful duties of the day as being as real an answer to prayer in the proper business of human life as the waving golden harvest is an answer to the prayers of the pious farmer, or the ship laden with the rich productions of the east, as she glides gallantly into port, should be regarded as an answer to the prayers of the pious merchant; and until it is proved that this may not have been all that was implied in the language of the psalmist, it should not be assumed that the imprecatory psalms breathe a vindictive spirit, or are contrary to the purest and most benevolent feelings of the human heart.

(6) There is still another solution of the difficulty which has been suggested. It is, substantially, that these expressions "are a mere record of what actually occurred in the mind of the psalmist," and are preserved to us as an illustration of human nature when partially sanctified. According to this explanation we are not required by any just view of inspiration to vindicate those feelings, or to maintain that such feelings could not occur in the case of an inspired man. One of the main objects of the Psalms is to illustrate religion as it actually exists in the minds of good men in this world; men who are not absolutely perfect, but whose best religious emotions are mingled with many imperfections. According to this view the Spirit of inspiration is no more responsible for these feelings on the part of the psalmist than it is for the acts of David, Abraham, Jacob, or Peter. The feelings - the acts - are what they are; the Spirit of inspiration is responsible for a correct record or statement in regard to these acts and feelings: a record that shall be historically and exactly true. A few remarks may explain this further.

(a) It is, then, an admitted fact that David was not a perfect man; and the same was undoubtedly true of all the writers of the Psalms. The Bible never claims that they were perfect; it makes a fair record of their faults; it lays down the general principle that none are absolutely free from sin: 1 Kings 8:46; Ecclesiastes 7:20; James 3:2; 1 John 1:8; Job 9:20. As it is everywhere declared in the Bible that no one is absolutely perfect, and as it is admitted that David, for example, was guilty of wrong acts, as in the case of Uriah - so, for the same reason, it is to be admitted that men, even the best of men, are liable to sin in thoughts and in words as well as in deeds.

(b) The proper notion of inspiration does not require us to hold that the men who were inspired were absolutely sinless. There is and must be a manifest and palpable difference between being inspired, and being personally perfect. Inspiration, in its true nature, secures a truthful record; it does not necessarily secure absolute sanctification. Indeed, inspiration has no necessary connection with sanctification; - as it is conceivable, certainly, in accordance with the common belief, that Balaam uttered true prophecies respecting the Messiah, yet no one from that fact feels bound to maintain that he was otherwise than a bad man. Livy, Gibbon, Hume, Robertson, were not perfect men, and yet it may be true that they have given a correct account of the events which they profess to record; nor do we argue that because they were faithful historians that therefore, they were perfect men, or that they never did or said anything, which, if it were recorded exactly as it occurred, would not be inconsistent with the idea of absolute perfection of character. It is, therefore, a very important principle "that inspiration secures a correct record, not that it implies or secures personal sanctification; and that if it does secure a correct record the limit of responsibility in regard to it is reached." Assuredly, the fact that David in Psalm 51 has made a true record in regard to his guiltiness in the case of Uriah, does not prove that he was right or innocent in the fact which is the subject of that record; nor if a record is a record of feelings instead of deeds does its correctness anymore justify or sanction such feelings.

(c) It was important and necessary in a revelation from God, in order to meet the wants of the world, that there should be a true representation of religion as it comes in contact with the human heart; as it is in fact illustrated and manifested in the life of man, not as it might be in the life of a spotless angel. Assuming, as the Bible does everywhere, that man is depraved; that he has corrupt and evil propensities; that he has passions which by nature are uncontrollable, and that it is the design of religion to teach him how to control and govern them - what we want is an illustration of religion as it comes in contact with such a heart. If the Bible had described only the feelings and conduct of a perfect being, it would be obviously unfit for man, for it would not be adapted to his condition. As man is imperfect and sinful, a representation of religion which would leave the impression that there is no true piety except where there is absolute perfection, would be adapted only to discourage and dishearten, for it would hold up that before his mind which he would feel to be unattainable, and his own consciousness of imperfection would lead him to the painful conclusion that he had no true religion.

Hence, in the Bible, except in the solitary instance of the Savior, we have no record of the life of a perfect saint. We have a description of piety as it must always be found in the life of man: as feeble, and struggling, and doubting, and contending with evil passions; as a life of conflict, of mingled light and darkness, good and evil, happiness and sadness, cheerfulness and despondency; as a life where evil often breaks out, where there is a constant effort required to subdue it, and where there is, amidst much that seems to be otherwise, yet truly a constant progress in the soul toward perfection - a perfection not to be obtained in this life, but which is to be consummated in heaven alone. Such a record only is fitted for man; such a record only would properly represent and describe man in his present condition. In another world - in heaven - a true record of man redeemed would be a record of religion without imperfection - as it would now be of the angels.

As it is, we have now in the Bible everywhere recorded the lives of imperfect men: imperfect in their conduct; imperfect in their feelings; imperfect in their words. We have the biographies of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, of Eli, David, Hezekiah, Moses, Aaron, Josiah, James, John, Peter - all imperfect but good men; men in whose bosoms there were the strugglings between good and evil principles; in whose lives the evil principle was constantly breaking out, and over whom for the time it seemed to triumph. Hence, the painful but honest records which we have of piety in the Bible. In like manner, in order to see and understand what true piety is, as it is found in connection with human nature, it might be important that there should be such an illustration of it as we actually find in the Psalms: the honest record of what passed through the mind of a good man; of what imperfect man actually feels often, even when it is proper to characterize him as a man of God. Probably there have been few men, very few, even under the influence of the highest forms of piety, who, if they had made an honest record of what was passing in their minds at all times - of their wishes, desires, emotions; of their feelings toward their enemies, persecutors, and slanderers - would not have found that the language of the Psalms would better express their feelings in this respect than any language which they could find elsewhere; - and is it a forced or an unauthorized thought that even such men as Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Knox, and Edwards, at times when unChristian feelings seemed to have got the ascendancy in their hearts; when they were strongly tempted to give way to passion, or actually gave way to it; when they might have been led to doubt whether men with such feelings could have any true religion - may have found consolation in the fact that feelings precisely like theirs sprang up in the hearts of the inspired men who composed the Psalms, and who there made an honest record of what was actually passing in the soul, almost an actual transcript of what they themselves experienced? It need be hardly remarked that if this is a true view of the matter, we are not bound to attempt to vindicate these expressions of passion - anymore than we are the conduct of David in the matter of Uriah, or of Peter in denying his Lord.

(d) According to this view, the expressions which are used in this record are not presented for our imitation. The mere fact that they are recorded as having occurred in the lives of good men is no evidence that they are right, or are to be followed by us. "All" that occurred in the life of the Redeemer was right, and was recorded that, so far as it might be applicable to us in our circumstances, we might imitate it. If the above remarks are correct, then the record was made for other purposes than that we should imitate the conduct of those who gave expression to these feelings. Nor should the fact that such feelings actually existed in the minds of good men, or that these "imprecations" are found in their writings, be charged on religion, as if it tended to produce them, anymore than the act of adultery and murder on the part of David, or the profaneness of Peter, should be referred to as an illustration of what religion is adapted to produce in the hearts and lives of men. Religion is not responsible for these things. The responsibility is in our corrupt nature.

(e) If such is a just view of the matter, then all that "inspiration" is responsible for is, the correctness of the "record" in regard to the existence of these feelings: that is, the authors of the Psalms actually "recorded" what was passing in their own minds. They gave vent to their internal emotions. They state real feelings which they themselves had; feelings which, while human nature remains the same, may spring up in the mind of imperfect man, anywhere, and at any time. They record what other men actually feel; and in making the record, they simply give utterance to what passed through their own hearts. They do not apologize for it; they do not pause to vindicate it; they offer no word in extenuation of it - anymore than other sacred writers did when they recorded the facts about the errors in the lives of the patriarchs, of David, and of Peter.

In some of these ways it is probable that all the difficulties in regard to the "imprecations" in the Psalms may be met. They who deny the inspiration of the Psalms should be able to show that these are not proper explanations of the difficulty; or that they are not consistent with any just notions of inspiration.

Section 7. "The Practical Value of the Book of Psalm."

It is not a little remarkable that the Psalms, in the estimation of religious persons, hold substantially the same place under the clearer light of the Christian dispensation which they did under the comparatively obscure Hebrew economy, and that with all the additional light which has been imparted under the Christian revelation, the Psalms have not been superseded. The "Christian" looks to the Psalms with an interest as intense as did the ancient Jew; and, as expressive of personal religious experience, as well as for the purpose of a manual for worship, the Psalms are selected by the Christian, from the whole Bible, as they were by the Jew from the books in his possession - the Old Testament. As such, they will retain their value in all times to come, nor will there ever be in our world such an advance in religious light, experience, and knowledge, that they will lose their relative place as connected with the exercises of practical piety.

How far this fact is to be regarded as a proof that the authors of the Psalms were inspired; that there was communicated to them a knowledge of the principles and workings of true piety, so in advance of their own age as to be on a level with what will be possessed in the most advanced periods of religious culture; that there must have been an influence on their minds, in composing the Psalms, beyond anything derived from mere poetic genius, is a question which must occur to all reflecting minds. It is a fair question to propose to one who doubts the inspiration of the Psalms, how he will account for this fact, consistently with his idea that the authors of the Psalms were men endowed only as other men of genius are, and with the acknowledged fact that they lived in an age when the views of truth in the world were comparatively obscure. How did it happen that a Hebrew bard, in the matter of deep religious experience and knowledge, placed himself so high as to be a guide to mankind in all coming times, after a new revelation should have been introduced to the world, and after all the attainments which men would have made in the knowledge of religion and of the human heart?

The special value of the Psalms arises: (a) from the fact that they are adapted to the worship of God; (b) from the fact that they are records of deep religious experience.

(a) As adapted to the worship of God. For this many of them were originally designed in their very composition; to this the entire book seems to have been intentionally adapted by those who made the collection. It is not necessary to suppose that these sacred songs comprise the whole of the Hebrew lyrical poetry, for as we know that some of the books mentioned in the Old Testament, though inspired, accomplished their purpose and have been lost, so it may have been in regard to a portion of the lyrical poetry of the Hebrews. Many of the words of the Savior, though all that he spoke was pure truth - truth such as no other man ever spoke - truth such as the Spirit of God imparts - were lost from not having been recorded John 21:25, and in like manner it may have been that truths which were written may have accomplished their purpose, and have passed away. But, if there were such productions which have not come down to us, we have no reason to doubt that they were of the same general character as those which have survived, and which now constitute the Book of Psalms. Now, it is remarkable that the poetry of the Hebrews is so adapted to public worship above all other poetry, and that the poetic genius of the nation took so exclusively a religious turn.

In this respect the Hebrew lyric poetry stands by itself, and is unlike that of every other nation. Among the Greeks there are, indeed, hymns to the gods - hymns designed to be used in the worship of the gods; but this is by no means the general character of their lyric poetry. Among the Persians, the Arabs, the Romans, the Babylonians, there were doubtless such hymns; but this is not the prevailing character of their lyric poetry. In the early Scotch, French, Spanish, Italian, and English poetry there are such hymns, but this is by no means the exclusive or the predominant character of the early lyric poetry of those nations. Few of all their lyric compositions can be used in the worship of the true God; nor is that which can be thus used always of the most exalted character as poetry. The composition of psalms and hymns is a separate poetic art; and though there are specimens, in the hymns in these languages, of the highest kind of lyric excellence, yet it is to be admitted that a large portion of that species of literature would scarcely be regarded as even "respectable," if it related to other subjects than religion.

Of the Hebrews, however, this is their all. They have no other poetry whatever. They have none merely amatory or pastoral which will compare with the Bucolics of Virgil, or with much of the poetry of Burns. Their poetry of the religious kind, also, is all of a high order. There is none that can be placed on the same low level with much that is found in the hymn books of most denominations of Christians - very good; very pious; very sentimental; very much adapted, as is supposed, to excite the feelings of devotion - but withal so flat, so weak, so unpoetic, that it would not, in a volume of mere poetry, be admitted to a third or fourth rank, if, indeed, it would find a place at all. It is for him who rejects the idea of "inspiration," as applied to the Book of Psalms, to account for this fact.

(b) The Book of Psalms is a record of deep religious experience. It is this which, in the estimation of religious persons in general, gives it its chief value. It is the guide of young believers; and it becomes more and more the companion, the comforter, and the counselor, as the believer moves along through the varied scenes of life, and as grey hairs come upon him, and as the infirmities, which pre-intimate the approaching close of all things, press him down. A religious man is rarely, if ever, placed in circumstances where he will not find something in the Psalms appropriate to his circumstances; where he will not find that the Hebrew sacred bard has not gone before him in the depths of religious experience. Hence, in sickness, in bereavement, in persecution, in old age, on the bed of death, the Book of Psalms becomes so invariable and so valuable a companion; and hence, not as a matter of convenience, but as supplying a want in the minds of men, and as significant of their value, the Psalms and the New Testament are so often bound together in a single volume. Hence, also, for the aged, for the sick, for those whose powers of vision fail by disease or by years, the Psalms and the New Testament are printed in large type, and bound in convenient forms, that the truths contained in these volumes may be still accessible to the saint ripening for heaven, as the light fails, and as life ebbs away. To the end of the world the Psalms in religious experience will occupy the same place which they now occupy; to the end of the world they will impart comfort to the troubled, and peace to the dying, as they have done in the ages that are past.

Section 8. "The Qualifications for Preparing a Commentary on the Psalm."

It is an undoubted fact that there have been more failures in the Commentaries on the Book of Psalms than on any other of the books of the Bible. As yet there has been no commentary that has met the wants of the Christian world; there are none, whatever anticipations may have been raised, which can be read without feelings of disappointment. For this fact there must be a cause; and that cause is probably to be found in the very peculiar qualifications needed to produce a commentary on the Psalms: - qualifications which are rarely to be found united in the same person.

A few remarks on the qualifications necessary for preparing such a commentary may explain the cause of the failures which have occurred; and may, perhaps, also explain the reason why the one now submitted to the public may be found to be an addition to the failures already existing. Every man who prepares a commentary on the Psalms will probably, at the close of his work, be sensible of a feeling of disappointment in what he had hoped, perhaps what he had expected to do, and will share fully in the feelings of his readers that what is thus submitted to the world is very far from being what a commentary on this portion of the sacred Scriptures ought to be.

The unique qualifications for preparing a commentary on the Psalms are such as the following:

(1) A knowledge of the Hebrew language, particularly as it is affected by the laws of poetry which prevailed among the Hebrews. In all languages there are special rules of poetry; rules by which the sense of the words used is affected. and by which special shades of thought are expressed. In most languages, words have a "poetic" and a "prosaic" sense; and the application of the meaning of a word as used in prose to a passage in poetry might by no means express the idea which was in the mind of the poet. We learn almost insensibly, in reading a language familiar to us, to make this distinction accurately, even when we could not explain it; and we read a psalm, a hymn, a lyric song, without mistaking the meaning. But it is another thing when one undertakes to read a book of poetry in a language different from his native tongue. What is obvious to an Italian, a Frenchman, or a German, in reading poetry in his native language, becomes a matter of difficult acquisition when an Englishman attempts to read the poem.

The same thing is true in studying a dead language. It need not be said that there is a unique literature with respect to the Greek and Latin poets; and he who can read Herodotus or Livy cannot assume that he has such a full knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages as to qualify him to understand the poetry in those languages. So much depends often on rhythm, on the poetic forms of words, or on the images special to poetry, that a classical education is not complete, nor is the student qualified to apprehend the meaning of the language of a poem, or to appreciate the beauties of its thought and imagery until he has mastered this most difficult part of the rules of language. That the Hebrews, like other people, had such rules and usages, there can be no doubt, for they are to be found in all languages, and there is abundant evidence in the Hebrew poetry itself that they existed among the Jewish people. Yet, it may be doubted whether it is possible now so fully to recover the knowledge of those rules and usages as to apply them perfectly in the explanation of the poetic portions of the sacred writings. Much pertaining to the rhythm of the language, much relating to the accents, much connected with the peculiar use of words, it may be impossible now to recover. To show the difficulty of this subject in its bearing on the interpretation of the Psalms, as well as to illustrate the subject of Hebrew poetry, I may refer to the remarks of DeWette, Einleitung, vii. pp. 37-76. An elegant translation of this may be found in the Biblical Repository, vol. iii.; pp. 478-514.

(2) True piety is essential to qualify one to be an interpreter of the Psalms. This is true, in fact, in regard to the interpretation of any portion of the sacred volume. Since the Bible is a book of religion, employed in describing the nature, the power, and the influence of religion, it is obvious that correct religious feeling, or a practical acquaintance with religion, is necessary in an interpreter. The principle is substantially the same which is required in the interpretation of books on any subject. In a treatise on painting, poetry, sculpture, architecture, there will be things which could not be so well explained as by one who had a practical knowledge of these arts; and in order to the possession of a complete qualification for the interpretation of such a book, an ability to appreciate what is said on those arts must be regarded as indispensable. It is obvious that the mere knowledge of words - of philology - would not be all that would be demanded; nor would any power of explaining local allusions, laws, customs, manners, or geographical or historical references, be all that would be required. Beyond all this, there was in the mind of the writer or author that which he intended to express, and which no mere knowledge of language or of customs would be sufficient to explain. To show what the writer meant it would be obviously necessary to be able to understand him - to appreciate what he intended to say; to bring out what was in his mind; what he thought of - what he felt - what he designed to express. Hence, however valuable a work may be on the Psalms as a philological work, or as illustrating the authorship of a psalm, and the circumstances of the author in its composition, it is plain that we have not reached the main thing unless we have entered into the spirit of the author, and are qualified to understand and appreciate his own feelings in the composition.

(3) For the reason above stated, there should be in an exposition of the Psalms more than the mere possession of piety. "There should be deep religious experience." There should be an acquaintance with piety in its highest forms of rapture, and in the lowest depths of despondency, darkness, and sorrow. There is no book in the world in which there are such varied expressions of piety, in which there are such diversified forms of religious experience, as in the Book of Psalms. As the Psalms were designed for every age of the world, for persons found in every rank and condition of life, for seasons of joy and of sorrow, for childhood, youth, middle age, old age, for the ignorant and the learned, for times of sickness and of health, for private, social, domestic, and public life, for magistrates and private citizens, for war and peace, for acts of business and acts of charity, for the living and for the dying, and for those that mourn - so they were designed to form a "manual" that would illustrate religion in all these forms and relations; to be a book in which anyone, in all the varied conditions of human existence, might be sure that he would find something that would be applicable to himself. If this is so, then it is clear that in order to a good commentary on the Psalms - in order that the expositor may be able to enter into the real spirit of the work which he undertakes to explain - piety of no common order is demanded; a rich and varied religious experience is required that falls to the lot of very few of mankind. Looking simply at this qualification of a commentator on the Psalms, we may cease to be surprised that no such commentary has ever appeared as to leave nothing yet to be desired.

(4) Poetic taste is an important requisite in a commentator on the Psalms. The Psalms are poetry, and poetry of the most delicate kind. Much of the beauty of the Psalms, and much of their adaptedness to the wants of man, depends on the fact that they are poetry. This was a reason why the Spirit of God, in breathing his influence on the men who composed the Psalms, preferred that the sentiments found in them should be expressed in poetry rather that in prose, and hence, this medium was selected. Among the original endowments of the human mind, that which contemplates "poetry" as among the means of happiness; as adapted to impress truth on the mind; as fitted to arouse the soul to great efforts; as designed to fill the mind with calm, peaceful, pure, patriotic, pious emotions, is one. Possessed by men, indeed (either in the power of producing poetry or of appreciating it) in very different degrees, yet it is an endowment of man; and, being such, religion makes use of it to promote its own ends. There are those who will be moved by little besides calm argument, stern logic, severe demonstration; there are those who will be aroused only by the lofty appeals of eloquence; there are those who will be most influenced by the voice of persuasion; there are those who will be awakened from dangerous slumbers only by the denunciations of wrath; there are those in whose minds pure and joyful and holy emotions will be best excited by poetry. It is the province of "song," as such, to awaken many of the most pure and devoted feelings of piety in the human soul; and the Book of Psalms is the portion of the sacred volume by which it is designed and expected that this object will be accomplished as a permanent arrangement.

It is clear, therefore, that he cannot be completely qualified to be a commentator on the Psalms who has not himself such endowments as to appreciate the beauties of poetry; who cannot, in this respect, enter into the feelings of the sacred writer on the one hand, and into the hearts of those who are so made as to be affected by poetry on the other. One of the causes of the "failure" to produce a good commentary on the Psalms may be traced to this source. A mere philologist; a man who regards nothing as valuable but exact demonstration; a man of prosaic temperament, though he may have piety that is exalted and pure, may lack still an important qualification for entering into the true spirit of the Psalms, and for meeting the needs of those who seek for edification and comfort in this portion of the Bible.

(5) A knowledge of the human heart - of human nature - is an indispensable condition for a good commentator on the Psalms. The Psalms comprise, more than any other book in the Bible, a record of the workings of the heart. Indeed, they pertain mostly to the heart. They are not addressed, as the epistle to the Romans is, to the loftier powers of the understanding, nor do they make such appeals to the imagination as the visions of Isaiah, or the visions of John in Patmos. It is the heart which, in the Psalms, is eminently the medium of communication between the Divine Spirit and the soul. Of all parts of the Bible there is most to illustrate the human heart in the Psalms. All that there is in the heart of man is there in one way or another illustrated, and in an almost endless variety of circumstances. Joy, sorrow, penitence, gratitude, praise, despondency, sadness; love - love to God - love to man; - the feelings experienced in sickness, and on a recovery from sickness; - the anguish, the bitterness of soul, arising from the ingratitude of others; terror at the wrath of God; the dread of death; the peace which religion gives in the prospect of death; the joy of prayer; the light which comes into the soul in answer to earnest supplication; the calmness which springs from devout meditation on the character of God and his law; the light which beams upon the soul after long darkness; the effects of remembered guilt (as in Psalm 51); the feeling of despair when God seems to have forsaken us; the feelings which spring up in the heart on the reception of injuries; these are a few among the many topics which are found illustrated in the Psalms in the personal experience of the writers, and it is obvious that no one is qualified to comment on these subjects unless he has himself a knowledge of the workings of the human heart.

To be able to explain the words used; to state the origin and authorship of the Psalms, and the occasion on which they were composed; to investigate the genuineness and accuracy of the text, and to determine the value of the varied readings; to understand and explain the parallelisms, the rhythm, and the accents employed in the Psalms; to comprehend and appreciate the poetry of the Psalms; or to gather together what Jewish rabbis and the Christian fathers have written, or to transplant from Germany what has been produced under Rationalistic views of the Bible, or even what the German mind in its best workings and under the influence of true religion has produced, is not all or mainly what is demanded in a commentary on the Psalms that will meet the wants of those in our own land, or that will illustrate the Psalms in the manner that will be of most value to the great masses of the young, the sick, the bereaved, the tempted, the aged, and the desponding. A man who cannot in this varied manner enter into sympathy with the writers of the Psalms in the workings of the human heart as there illustrated, is not a man who is fully qualified to prepare a commentary on this Book. For some purposes he may, indeed, make a book that will be valuable, but not a book that will be valuable in relation to the real purpose designed to be accomplished by the Psalms - to be a guide and a comfort to believers of every station and condition, in all the varied circumstances of human life, and in all the varied and complicated workings of the human heart.

(6) It may be added that the Book of Psalms, in the main, is so plain, so easy to be understood by the great mass of readers; so expressive of the internal feelings and emotions, as to increase the difficulty in the preparation of a commentary. The Psalms are so rich; so full of meaning; so adapted to the wants of believers; they so meet the varied experiences of the people of God, and are so replete with the illustrations of piety; they so touch the deepest fountains of emotion in the soul, that, so far as most of these points are concerned, a "commentary," considered as an additional source of light, does not differ materially from a candle considered as affording additional splendor to the sun. What a man finds in the ordinary perusal of the Psalms as a book of devotion, on the subject of deep experimental piety, is so much in advance of what he will usually find in the commentary, that he turns from the attempt to explain them with a feeling of deep disappointment, and comes back to the book itself as better expressing his emotions, meeting his necessities, and imparting consolation in trial, than anything which the commentator can add. He welcomes the Book of Psalms itself as a comforter and a guide; and in the little volume sold now at so cheap a rate, or appended to his pocket Testament, the common reader of the Bible finds more that is suited to his need than he would in the voluminous commentary of Venema; in all the collections in the Critici Sacri; in the Synopsis of Poole; in the Annotations of Grotius; or in the learned expositions of DeWette - elegant as the work of DeWette is - or of Tholuck, or Hengstenberg.

When these difficulties in composing a commentary on the Psalms are considered - when a man who sits down to write one reflects on the qualifications necessary for the task - and when under the influence of these thoughts, constantly increasing in magnitude, and pressing upon him more and more as he labors for a dozen years, though at intervals, as I have done, in preparing a commentary on this portion of Scripture - whatever ardor of desire or confidence of success he may have had at the commencement of his enterprise, he will cease to wonder, as he progresses in his work, that the efforts of others to prepare a commentary heretofore have been a failure, and he will not be surprised, should his life be lengthened out to see the result of his own labors, if he finds that the world regards that at which he has toiled so long, and which he hoped might be, in some measure, worthy of the volume he has undertaken to explain, as but adding another to the long list of unsuccessful attempts to prepare a proper exposition of the Book of Psalms.

The first psalm has no title prefixed to it, which is the case, also, with many others, Psalm 10; Psalm 116; Psalm 117:1-2, and others. It is now in vain to attempt to search for the cause of this omission. On the origin and authority of the titles prefixed to the Psalms, see the introduction, Section 4. Some have supposed that the reason why no title was affixed to this psalm was that the general title, "The Psalms of David," was prefixed to the whole book, and that that was a sufficient indication of the author of this the first in the series. But this is mere conjecture, and this reason would no more make proper the omission of the title to the first psalm than of any other that came under that general title. In some manuscripts (2 codices of Rossi) this psalm is not numbered; in some others (4 codices of Kennicott, and 3 codices of Rossi) it is united with the second psalm, and the two are reckoned as one.

It is, however, manifestly a distinct composition from the second psalm. It has a unity of its own, as the second has also; and there are almost no two psalms in the whole collection which might not be united with as much propriety as these. It is impossible now to ascertain the authorship of the psalm, though the common opinion is probably the correct one, that it was composed by David. But on what occasion it was written it is now equally impossible to discover. There are no historical allusions in it which would enable us to determine the occasion on which it was written, as there is nothing in it which certainly determines its authorship. The terms employed are of the most general character, and the sentiments are applicable to all times and all lands. It has all the marks of being a general introduction to the Book of Psalms, and of having been designed to express in a few sentences the substance of the entire collection, or to state the great principle which would be found to run through the whole of it - that a righteous life will be attended with prosperity and happiness, and that the life of the wicked will be followed by sorrow and ruin. This was the great principle of the Jewish theocracy; and was of sufficient importance to be stated clearly in the commencement of a book that was designed to illustrate so fully the nature and the value of true religion. Compare Deuteronomy 27-28.

The psalm is designed to describe the blessedness or the happiness of the righteous man. This is done "literally and figuratively, positively and negatively, directly and by contrast, with respect both to his character and his condition here and hereafter." - Prof. Alexander. It is not, however, as Prof. Alexander supposes, a "picture of the truly happy man;" it is a description of the blessedness of the righteous man, in contrast with the condition of the unrighteous. The righteous man is indeed prosperous and happy; and it is one design of the psalm to show this. But it is not the happy man, as such, that is in the eye of the psalmist; it is the righteous man, and the blessedness of being righteous.

The psalm is properly made up of two parts - the blessedness of the righteous man, and the unblessedness, or, the German word, "ungluck" (DeWette), of the wicked or ungodly man.

I. The blessedness of the righteous man, Psalm 1:1-3. This consists also of two minor parts:

(1) His character Psalm 1:1-2, and this is described also in two forms - negatively and positively.

(a) Negatively. He does not walk in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stand in the way of sinners, nor sit in the seat of the scornful, Psalm 1:1.

(b) Positively. He delights in the law of the Lord, and he has pleasure in meditating continually on his truth, Psalm 1:2.

(2) his prosperity, as the result of being righteous, Psalm 1:3. His condition is compared with that of a tree planted in a well-watered place, whose leaves are always green, and whose fruit never fails; so whatever he does shall prosper.

II. The condition of the unrighteous, or the strong contrast between the unrighteous and the righteous, Psalm 1:4-6. Their condition and destiny are expressed in three forms:

(1) They are like chaff which the wind drives away, Psalm 1:4.

(2) They shall not be acquitted in the judgment, nor have a place among the righteous, Psalm 1:5.

(3) They shall not be approved by God, but shall perish, Psalm 1:6.

1

Psalm 1:1

開啟正文

「這人便為有福」——即:他的處境是快樂的、可羨慕的。這裏所用的字——אשׁר 'esher——本義是「福樂」或「有福」。不過它只以複數形式並在構造狀態中出現,帶有感嘆詞的性質和力量——「哦,這人的福樂啊!」或「哦,有福的人啊!」Deuteronomy 33:29:「以色列阿,你是有福的!」1 Kings 10:8:「你的臣子、你的僕人常侍立在你面前聽你智慧的話是有福的!」Job 5:17:「神所懲治的人是有福的!」Psalm 2:12:「凡投靠他的,都是有福的!」另見 Psalm 32:1-2; Psalm 33:12; Psalm 34:8; Psalm 40:4; Psalm 41:1; Psalm 65:4; Psalm 84:4-5, Psalm 84:12 等處,該字在那些地方譯作「有福」。這字屬最概括性的字眼,就其本身而言,涵蓋一切被視為構成真正幸福的東西。這裏所指的福的特定性質,正如本詩後文所解釋的,在於以下事實:他避免與惡人為伴;他以耶和華的律法為樂;他在今世亨通;他至終不致滅亡。這裏的「人」字也屬最概括性的字眼,旨在包括一切時代、一切境況中具有這裏所述品格的所有人。這稱謂既適用於窮人,也適用於富人;既適用於卑微者,也適用於尊貴者;既適用於僕人,也適用於主人;老年人、中年人和青年人都同樣適用。凡具有這裏所描述之品格的人,都落在「有福的人」——那處境快樂可羨慕的人——這概括描述之內。

「不從」——他的品格乃是:他不照所指定的方式而行。Alexander 教授將此譯作「未曾行過的人」。但這話所包含的更多;它所指的不僅是過去。這是那人恆常不變的特徵——他不這樣行;這不僅在過去是真實的,在現今是真實的,在將來也必是真實的。這正是那人的分別標記。「行」字在聖經中常用以指生活方式或行事為人——因為生命被描繪為一場旅程,人被描繪為旅客。Psalm 15:2:「行為正直。」試參 1 Kings 9:4; Deuteronomy 19:9; Deuteronomy 28:9; Psalm 81:12-13; Isaiah 33:15。

「計謀」——按照這類人的方式、原則、計劃。他不從他們領受當如何生活的指教,而是從耶和華的律法領受(Psalm 1:2)。這包括這樣一些事:他不聽從罪人的建議(2 Samuel 16:20; 1 Kings 1:12);他不執行罪人的目的或計劃(Isaiah 19:3);他不按照他們的觀點和提議安排自己的生活。在他生活的計劃和目的上,他獨立於他們,並向別的源頭尋求引導他的準則。

「惡人的」——即惡人。這裏所用的字是概括性的,會涵蓋各種類別、各種程度的不義者。它不如隨後的字眼那麼具體,就其本身而言,也不表示如以下字眼那樣明確或那樣嚴重的敗壞。這裏的大意是:這裏所指的人,並非惡人的同伴。

「不站」——這表明更多的深思熟慮;一種更固定、更堅決的品格。

「道路」——他們所在的路徑,或他們通常所走的地方。他站在那裏,彷彿是在等候他們,或彷彿他想與他們結伴。他不在自己固定而正當的職分中前行,反而駐足在罪人通常經過的路上,在那裏徘徊流連。如此,他表明想與他們同在的意願。事實上,這常由以下的人所例證:他們彷彿無事可做,置身於惡人慣常經過的地方,或置身於大城市街角可以遇見他們之處。

「罪人的」——חטאים chaṭṭâ'iym。這字按字面指射不中目標的人;繼而指偏離本分或正道的人。它常用以指任何種類、任何程度的罪。它比前一個譯作「惡人」的字更具體,指那些偏離本分之路的人;在人生的大目標上失敗的人;違犯明確而已知之義務的人。

「不坐」——這比前述任何字眼都暗示更深的深思熟慮和更堅決的品格。這裏所指的人,不是偶然、無意地與他們同行,也不是站在他們慣常所在之處而置身於他們的路徑上;而是藉著與他們同坐一席,成為他們中的一員;如此刻意地與他們結交。他在惡人中有了固定的居所;他永久成為他們中的一員。

「座位」——褻慢人通常所坐的座位;這類人交談共坐之處——如在舞廳,或在「俱樂部」,即惡人聚會之處,或不信者和譏誚者慣常聚集的地方。

「褻慢人的」——לצים lētsiym。這字本義指嘲弄、譏誚、哂笑的人;以輕蔑和嘲弄對待德性與宗教的人。Proverbs 1:22; Proverbs 3:34; Proverbs 9:7-8; Proverbs 13:1; Proverbs 15:12,「et saepe」(比比皆是)。它比前述任何字眼都表明更高、更頑固程度的邪惡,指敗壞品格的頂點、邪惡的最後階段——那時神和聖潔的事物受輕蔑與嘲弄的對待。只要一個人還肯以某種程度的尊重對待德性與宗教,他就還有希望;當他在自己的品格中達到這一步——視德性與敬虔只配作譏笑和嘲弄的對象——希望就微乎其微,或全然無望了。這樣,我們在本節的名詞和動詞中便看到一個優美的雙重遞進或層進,表明品格的接續階段。首先是與惡人偶然同行,或意外落入他們的同伴之中;其次是對他們的交往更刻意的傾向,表現為自願置身於他們慣常聚集的地方、站立等候他們;最後是與他們結交的深思熟慮而定意的目的——藉著經常坐在他們中間,永久成為他們的一員。

他們所結交的人也是如此。首先是泛泛的不虔者;其次是那些在敗壞中已深到無視已知本分、違犯已知義務的人;最後是那些在不信中定型的人——他們公開嘲弄德性,譏笑宗教的要求。不必多說,在這兩方面,這都是對世上實際發生之事的準確描述。那偶然、無意與惡人同行、聽從他們計謀的人,很快就會學會置身於他們的路上、等候他們、渴想他們的交往,至終很可能與公開的譏誚者認同為一;那放縱於某種形式的敗壞、或以任何方式忽略宗教的人,除非受約束並歸正,也很可能逐一經歷各級的邪惡,直到成為譏誚一切宗教的頑固嘲弄者。本節的要義是:真正有福的人,這一切事都不作。他的結交與喜好在別處,如下節所述。

英文原文

Blessed is the man - That is, his condition is a happy or a desirable one. The word used here, אשׁר 'esher means properly, "happiness" or "blessedness." It is found, however, only in the plural form and in the construct state, and takes the nature and force of an interjection - " O the happiness of the man!" or "O happy man!" Deuteronomy 33:29 : "happy art thou, O Israel!" 1 Kings 10:8 : "happy are thy men, happy are these thy servants!" Job 5:17 : "happy is the man whom God correcteth!" Psalm 2:12 : "blessed are all they that put their trust in him!" See also Psalm 32:1-2; Psalm 33:12; Psalm 34:8; Psalm 40:4; Psalm 41:1; Psalm 65:4; Psalm 84:4-5, Psalm 84:12, et al., where it is rendered "blessed." The word is of the most general character, and, in itself, would embrace all that is supposed to constitute real happiness. The particular kind of blessedness referred to here, as explained in the subsequent part of the psalm, consists in the fact that he avoids the companionship of the wicked; that he has pleasure in the law of the Lord; that he will be prospered in this world; and that he will not perish at lasts. The word "man" here, also, is of the most general character, and is designed to include all people, of all times and of all conditions, who possess the character referred to. The term is applicable to the poor as well as to the rich; to the low as well as to the exalted; to the servant as well as to the master; alike to the aged, the middle-aged, and the young. All who have the character here described come under the general description of the happy man - the man whose condition is a happy and a desirable one.

That walketh not - Whose character is that he does not walk in the manner specified. Prof. Alexander renders this, "Who has not walked." But it implies more than this; it refers to more than the past. It is the characteristic of the man, always and habitually, that he does not thus walk; it has not only been true in the past, but it is true in the present, and will be true in the future. It is that which distinguishes the man. The word "walk" is often used in the Scriptures to denote a way of life or conduct - since life is represented as a journey, and man as a traveler. Psalm 15:2 : "who walketh uprightly." Compare 1 Kings 9:4; Deuteronomy 19:9; Deuteronomy 28:9; Psalm 81:12-13; Isaiah 33:15.

In the counsel - After the manner, the principles, the plans of this class of men. He does not take counsel of them as to the way in which he should live, but from the law of the Lord, Psalm 1:2. This would include such things as these: he does not follow the advice of sinners, 2 Samuel 16:20; 1 Kings 1:12; he does not execute the purposes or plans of sinners, Isaiah 19:3; he does not frame his life according to their views and suggestions. In his plans and purposes of life he is independent of them, and looks to some other source for the rules to guide him.

Of the ungodly - The wicked. The word used here is general, and would embrace all kinds and degrees of the unrighteous. It is not so specific, and would, in itself, not indicate as definite, or as aggravated depravity, as the terms which follow. The general sentiment here is, that the man referred to is not the companion of wicked men.

Nor standeth - This indicates more deliberation; a character more fixed and decided.

In the way - The path where they are found, or where they usually go. His standing there would be as if he waited for them, or as if he desired to be associated with them. Instead of passing along in his own regular and proper employment, he stations himself in the path where sinners usually go, and lingers and loiters there. Thus, he indicates a desire to be with them. This is often, in fact, illustrated by men who place themselves, as if they had nothing to do, in the usual situation where the wicked pass along, or where they may be met with at the corners of the streets in a great city.

Of sinners - חטאים chaṭṭâ'iym. This word means literally, those who miss the mark; then, those who err from the path of duty or rectitude. It is often used to denote any kind or degree of sin. It is more specific than the former word rendered "ungodly," as denoting those who depart from the path of duty; who fail in regard to the great end of life; who violate positive and known obligations.

Nor sitteth - This implies still greater deliberation and determination of character than either of the other words employed. The man referred to here does not casually and accidentally walk along with them, nor put himself in their way by standing where they are ordinarily to be found; but he has become one of them by occupying a seat with them; thus deliberately associating with them. He has an established residence among the wicked; he is permanently one of their number.

In the seat - The seat which the scornful usually occupy; the place where such men converse and sit together - as in a ball-room, or in a "club," where wicked men hold their meetings, or where infidels and scoffers are accustomed to assemble.

Of the scornful - לצים lētsiym. This word properly means those who mock, deride, scoff; those who treat virtue and religion with contempt and scorn. Proverbs 1:22; Proverbs 3:34; Proverbs 9:7-8; Proverbs 13:1; Proverbs 15:12, et saepe. It denotes a higher and more determined grade of wickedness than either of the other words employed, and refers to the consummation of a depraved character, the last stage of wickedness, when God and sacred things are treated with contempt and derision. There is hope of a man as long as he will treat virtue and religion with some degree of respect; there is little or none when he has reached the point in his own character in which virtue and piety are regarded only as fit subjects for ridicule and scorn. We have here, then, a beautiful double gradation or climax, in the nouns and verbs of this verse, indicating successive stages of character. There is, first, casual walking with the wicked, or accidentally falling into their company; there is then a more deliberate inclination for their society, indicated by a voluntary putting of oneself in places where they usually congregate, and standing to wait for them; and then there is a deliberate and settled purpose of associating with them, or of becoming permanently one of them, by regularly sitting among them.

So also it is in regard to the persons with whom they associate. They are, first, irreligious men in general; then, those who have so far advanced in depravity as to disregard known duty, and to violate known obligations; and then, those who become confirmed in infidelity, and who openly mock at virtue, and scoff at the claims of religion. It is unnecessary to say that, in both these respects, this is an accurate description of what actually occurs in the world. He who casually and accidentally walks with the wicked, listening to their counsel, will soon learn to place himself in their way, and to wait for them, desiring their society, and will ultimately be likely to be feared identified with open scoffers; and he who indulges in one form of depravity, or in the neglect of religion in any way, will, unless restrained and converted, be likely to run through every grade of wickedness, until he becomes a confirmed scoffer at all religion. The sentiment in this verse is, that the man who is truly blessed is a man who does none of these things. His associations and preferences are found elsewhere, as is stated in the next verse.

2

Psalm 1:2

開啟正文

「惟喜愛」——他的喜樂;他的快樂。他不是在惡人的交往和惡人的活動中尋找自己的幸福,而是在神的真理中尋找它。神的律法或真理於他並非可厭之物;他如此喜愛它,以致渴望越發認識它,並使其真理越發深刻地銘刻在他心中。

「耶和華的律法」——Yahweh 的律法——譯本中的小型大寫字母,在此處與別處一樣,表明原文的用詞是 Yahweh。在聖經中,「律法」一詞有多種頗不相同的含義。希伯來文 תורה tôrâh 一詞,本義是教訓、訓誨;繼而指命令、吩咐、律法(即該詞通常的意義)。它特別應用於摩西五經,即摩西的律法(試比較 Luke 24:44 的註釋),因為其中包含神最初寫成並記錄下來的律法;後來這詞在較廣的意義上,被用來指舊約的全部書卷,視之為律法的解釋與應用。在此處,這詞無疑是指神旨意的成文啟示,即當時已經顯明的部分。然而,按同樣的原則,這裏所作的宣告也適用於神聖啟示的任何部分;因此,這裏的意思是:一個真正敬虔的人,在神所啟示的真理中找到他最高的喜樂。這常被引述為真敬虔的特徵。試比較 Psalm 19:10;Psalm 119:97、Psalm 119:99。

「在他的律法上」——在他的律法或真理上。「思想」——這裏所用的字 הגה hâgâh,本義是發怨言、低聲咕噥;繼而指說話;再指以低沉、如怨訴的聲音發出言語,正如人在深沉默想時所常作的;因此在通常的意義上,指默想某事、思想某事。如 Joshua 1:8:「你要晝夜思想它(這律法)。」Psalm 77:12:「我也要思想你的一切作為。」Proverbs 15:28:「義人的心思量如何回答。」這裏的意思是:他思想它;他努力明白它的意義;他以反思它為樂。這不是他撇在一旁的題目,也不是他漠不關心的事;他把它持守在心中,並以這樣行為滿足。

「晝夜」——即不斷地——因為晝夜構成全部的時間。其意義是:

(a) 他習慣性地這樣行,或他有意養成默想神聖真理的習慣,藉着操練自己的心,使他能以這樣行;

(b) 他抽出時間這樣行——特意分別出每天合宜的時段,好叫自己從世務的掛慮中抽離,藉着思想神聖的真理而使心靈甦醒,或得以越發認識神,並認識自己對祂的本分,又使關乎永恆實事的真理更直接地作用於自己的靈魂;

(c) 他在事務的間隙這樣行,在白天可能有的閒暇時刻這樣行——因而有一個永不枯竭的思想題材,他的心思隨時自然地回到其中,並在生活的掛慮與勞苦中,在其中得着舒弛與安慰;

(d) 他在夜間清醒的時刻這樣行,當他患病、在牀上輾轉反側,或因任何其他緣故「眼睛不能合眼」的時候。Psalm 63:5-6:「我在牀上記念你,在夜更的時候思想你。」Psalm 119:54:「我在世寄居,素來以你的律例為詩歌。」試比較 Psalm 119:23、Psalm 119:43;Psalm 143:5。詩人心中所想到的,大概就是 Joshua 1:8 所載的吩咐。

英文原文

But his delight - His pleasure; his happiness. Instead of finding his happiness in the society and the occupations of the wicked, he finds it in the truth of God. The law or truth of God is not distasteful to him, but he so delights in it as to desire to become more and more acquainted with it, and to have its truths impressed more and more on his heart.

In the law of the Lord - The law of Yahweh - the small capitals in the translation indicating here as elsewhere that the original word is Yahweh. The word law in the Scriptures is used in a considerable variety of significations. The Hebrew word תורה tôrâh, properly means instruction, precept; and then, an injunction, command, law, in the usual sense of the word. It was applied particularly to the Pentateuch, or law of Moses (compare the notes at Luke 24:44), as containing the first written and recorded laws of God; and then the word came, in a more general sense, to be applied to all the books of the Old Testament, as being an exposition and application of the law. Here the word undoubtedly refers to the written revelation of the will of God as far as it was then made known. On the same principle, however, the declaration here made would apply to any part of a divine revelation; and hence, the sentiment is, that a truly pious man finds his highest delight in the revealed truths of God. This is often referred to as characteristic of true piety. Compare Psalm 19:10; Psalm 119:97, Psalm 119:99.

And in his law - On his law, or his truth. "He doth meditate." The word used here, הגה hâgâh, means properly to complain, to mutter; then, to speak; then, to utter in a low complaining voice, as is often done by a person in deep meditation; hence, in the usual sense, to meditate on anything; to think of it. So Joshua 1:8 : "Thou shalt meditate therein (the law) day and night." Psalm 77:12 : "I meditate on all thy work." Proverbs 15:28 : "the heart of the righteous meditateth what to answer." The meaning here is, he thinks of it; he endeavors to understand its meaning; he has pleasure in reflecting on it. It is not a subject which he puts away from him, or in respect to which he is indifferent, but he keeps it before his mind, and has satisfaction in doing it.

Day and night - That is, continually - as day and night constitute the whole of time. The meaning is:

(a) he does this habitually, or he intentionally forms the habit of meditating on divine truth, by disciplining his mind in order that he may do it;

(b) he takes time to do it - designedly setting apart suitable portions of each day, that, withdrawn from the cares of life, he may refresh his spirit by contemplating divine truth, or may become better acquainted with God, and with his duty to him, and may bring to bear upon his own soul more directly the truths pertaining to eternal realities;

(c) he does this in the intervals of business, the moments of leisure which he may have during the day - having thus an unfailing subject of reflection to which his mind readily reverts, and in which, amid the cares and toils of life, he finds relaxation and comfort; and

(d) he does it in the wakeful hours of night, when sick and tossed upon his bed, or when, for any other reason, his "eyes are held waking." Psalm 63:5-6 : "my soul shall be upon my bed, and meditate on thee in the night-watches." Psalm 119:54 : "Thy statutes have been my songs in the house of my pilgrimage." Compare Psalm 119:23, Psalm 119:43; Psalm 143:5. It is probable that the psalmist had the injunction in his mind which is contained in Joshua 1:8.

3

Psalm 1:3

開啟正文

「他要像一棵樹」——隨後是對這樣避開罪人之路、又喜愛神律法之人的幸福或順利的描述。這以一幅極美的圖畫呈現——一棵栽在根能得到豐沛水源之處的樹。

「栽在溪水旁」——這不是一棵自發生長的樹,而是一棵栽種在好地方、又受到細心栽培的樹。「溪水」一詞在此並未完全表達原文的意思。希伯來文 פלג peleg(出自 פלג pâlag,意為裂開、分開、劃分)本義是「分流」;繼而指水道、運河、溝渠、分支的水路、小溪。這裏所暗指的,是東方人灌溉田地的方法:開鑿人工小水道,把水從較大的河流或湖泊引來。這樣,水便被輸送到四面八方。古時埃及全地就是以這種方式灌溉的;埃及那異常的肥沃也正是這樣得來的。本節的一個例證,可從莫德雷爾(Maundrell)關於大馬士革近郊園圃與果園澆灌方法的記述中取得。「園圃裏密密地種滿了各樣果樹,靠巴拉達河(Barady)的水保持新鮮青翠……這河一出上述山間的裂口進入平原,便立即分為三股;其中居中最大的一股直流入大馬士革,分配給城裏一切的蓄水池與泉源。其餘兩股——據我看是人工作成的——則一右一左,沿着園圃的邊緣繞流,沿途以小水道引入園中,就這樣散布到整片廣大的樹林,以致沒有一個園子不是有一道清澈活潑的溪流穿過其中。」《遊記》(Trav.),頁 122。

在 Ezekiel 31:3-4 中,也有一處對以這方式栽培之樹的生動暗指:「看哪,亞述王曾如利巴嫩中的香柏樹,枝條榮美,影密如林,極其高大,樹尖插入雲中。眾水使它生長;深水使它長大。所栽之地有江河圍流,汊出的水道延到田野諸樹。」Ecclesiastes 2:4 也是這樣:「挖造水池,用以澆灌嫩小的樹木。」在我們面前的這段經文裏,並沒有指明特定的樹種;但在東方,這些人工水道兩岸成排的柳樹、橙樹等,為本節提供了豐富的例證。這圖畫是一棵得着豐沛澆灌、茂盛繁榮的樹。

「按時候結果子」——它的果子不會因養分不足而落下。這裏的觀念,是一棵在一年適當時節滿結果子的樹。參 Psalm 92:14。這圖畫十分優美。這果子不是不合時宜的。它不會成熟得太早而墜落,也不會未熟而先落;並且收成豐盛。

「葉子也不枯乾」——不因乾旱炎熱而枯乾。參 Job 8:16 的註釋;Job 15:32 的註釋。它是青翠繁茂的——這是蒙福而順利之人的一幅鮮明圖畫。

「凡他所做的盡都順利」——這是剛才以比喻或詩體形式所說之話的字面陳述。它包含一個普遍的真理,或有關敬虔生活之自然與正當效果的斷言,與 1 Timothy 4:8 的話相似:「操練身體,益處還少;惟獨敬虔,凡事都有益處,因有今生和來生的應許。」聖經中常有這種關於敬虔生活之效果的觀念,並由事物慣常的進程所證實。人若想要持久的順利與幸福,只有在德行與宗教的路上才能尋得。這裏的「凡」字應按一般的意義理解;正確的解經原則並不要求我們把它解釋為絕對無例外地真。可以想像,一個義人——一個深深而真誠敬畏神的人——有時也可能制定不智的計劃;可以想像,他可能失去財富,或在商業困難的時期、在戰爭、饑荒、瘟疫之年,捲入臨到一國之民的災禍之中;可以想像,他可能因他人的欺詐與不誠實而受損;但作為一個普遍而極重要的真理,敬虔的生活終必帶來順利,並不斷賜下幸福。詩篇的主旨,正是要闡明這偉大而重要的真理。

英文原文

And he shall be like a tree - A description of the happiness or prosperity of the man who thus avoids the way of sinners, and who delights in the law of God, now follows. This is presented in the form of a very beautiful image - a tree planted where its roots would have abundance of water.

Planted by the rivers of water - It is not a tree that springs up spontaneously, but one that is set out in a favorable place, and that is cultivated with care. The word "rivers" does not here quite express the sense of the original. The Hebrew word פלג peleg, from פלג pâlag, to cleave, to split, to divide), properly means divisions; and then, channels, canals, trenches, branching-cuts, brooks. The allusion is to the Oriental method of irrigating their lands by making artificial rivulets to convey the water from a larger stream, or from a lake. In this way, the water was distributed in all directions. The whole land of Egypt was anciently sluiced in this manner, and it was in this way that its extraordinary fertility was secured. An illustration of the passage may be derived from the account by Maundrell of the method of watering the gardens and orchards in the vicinity of Damascus. "The gardens are thick set with fruit trees of all kinds, kept fresh and verdant by the waters of the Barady .... This river, as soon as it issues out of the cleft of the mountain before mentioned, into the plain, is immediately divided into three streams, of which the middlemost and largest runs directly to Damascus, and is distributed to all the cisterns and fountains of the ciy. The other two, which I take to be the work of art, are drawn round, the one to the right, and the other to the left, on the borders of the gardens, into which they are let out, as they pass, by little rivulets, and so dispersed over all the vast wood, insomuch that there is not a garden but has a fine, quick stream running through it." Trav., p. 122.

A striking allusion to trees cultivated in this manner occurs in Ezekiel 31:3-4 : "Behold, the Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon, with fair branches, and with a shadowing shroud, and of a high stature, and his top was among the thick boughs. The waters made him great, the deep set him up on high, with his rivers running round about his plants, and sent out his little rivers unto all the trees of the field." So Ecclesiastes 2:4 : "I made me pools of water, to water therewith the wood that bringeth forth trees." No particular kind of tree is referred to in the passage before us, but there are abundant illustrations of the passage in the rows of willow, oranges, etc., that stand on the banks of these artificial streams in the East. The image is that of a tree abundantly watered, and that was flourishing.

That bringeth forth his fruit in his season - Whose fruit does not fall by the lack of nutriment. The idea is that of a tree which, at the proper season of the year, is loaded with fruit. Compare Psalm 92:14. The image is one of great beauty. The fruit is not untimely. It does not ripen and fall too soon, or fall before it is mature; and the crop is abundant.

His leaf also shall not wither - By drought and heat. Compare Job 8:16, note; Job 15:32, note. It is green and flourishing - a striking image of a happy and a prosperous man.

And whatsoever he doeth shall prosper - This is a literal statement of what had just been put in a figurative or poetic form. It contains a general truth, or contains an affirmation as to the natural and proper effect of religion, or of a life of piety, and is similar to that which occurs in 1 Timothy 4:8 : "Godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come." This idea of the effect of a life of piety is one that is common in the Scriptures, and is sustained by the regular course of events. If a man desires permanent prosperity and happiness, it is to be found only in the ways of virtue and religion. The word "whatsoever" here is to be taken in a general sense, and the proper laws of interpretation do not require that we should explain it as universally true. It is conceivable that a righteous man - a man profoundly and sincerely fearing God - may sometimes form plans that will not be wise; it is conceivable that he may lose his wealth, or that he may be involved in the calamities that come upon a people in times of commercial distress, in seasons of war, of famine, and pestilence; it is conceivable that he may be made to suffer loss by the fraud and dishonesty of other men; but still as a general and as a most important truth, a life of piety will be followed by prosperity, and will constantly impart happiness. It is this great and important truth which it is the main design of the Book of Psalms to illustrate.

4

Psalm 1:4

開啟正文

「惡人並不是這樣」——字面是「惡人並非如此」。關於「惡人」一詞,見 Psalm 1:1 的註釋。「惡人並不是這樣」這話,是一個概括性的陳述,同樣適用於他們的品格與結局;不過詩篇作者的心思立時特別注重的,是他們結局的不同,而沒有特別說明他們的品格。然而,惡人確實隨從惡人的計謀、站在罪人的道路上、坐褻慢人的座位,正如義人不這樣行一樣真實;他們不喜愛耶和華的律法,正如義人喜愛一樣真實;惡人不像栽在溪水旁的樹,正如義人像那樣的樹一樣真實。因此,這段經文可用來顯明惡人的品格;這樣應用時,先前對義人為否定的事,對惡人便成為肯定;先前為肯定的,便成為否定。所以:

(a)惡人確實隨從惡人的計謀,確實站在罪人的道路上,確實坐褻慢人的座位;

(b)他們不喜愛耶和華的律法,也不思想祂的話;

(c)他們不像栽在水旁的樹——那青翠、美好、結果子的樹。

無論在品格上還是在結局上,惡人都與義人不同。本節後半顯明:作者心中雖有這普遍的真理,但他當時所注視的特別是他的光景——他的結局——那是無法與青翠結果的樹相比的,反而叫人想起另一幅全然不同的圖畫。

「乃像糠秕被風吹散」——即麥子揚場之時。在東方各國,這工作通常在空曠的田野進行,多在高處、風力強勁之地。那時的操作,正如我們今日在得不到簸箕或風車之時所行的一樣:用杴揚起打好的穀粒,風把糠秕吹散,穀粒便落在地上。見 Matthew 3:12 的註釋。

這很自然、很恰當地成了惡人結局的例證。與義人相比,他們如同被風吹散的無用糠秕。聖經中常見這圖畫。見 Job 21:18 的註釋;Isaiah 17:13 的註釋。並參 Psalm 35:5;Isaiah 29:5;Isaiah 41:15;Daniel 2:35;Hosea 13:3。這裏的意思是:惡人在任何方面都不像詩篇 1:3 所說那青翠結果的樹。他們在任何意義上都不像樹。他們甚至不像枯萎的樹、不結果的樹、死樹,因為這些都還會叫人想到某種穩固或恆久。他們像被風吹散的乾燥無用的糠秕,對農夫毫無價值——一種他只求完全與穀粒分開、從眼前除去的東西。因此,這裏所暗示的,乃是本質上的無價值。惡人將被驅散,原因之一正在於此:他們在神的宇宙中是無用的——對人受造的一切目的都是無用的。同時,這糠秕與農夫所要收藏的有用穀粒之間,也可能含着一層對比。

英文原文

The ungodly are not so - literally, "Not thus the wicked." For the word ungodly, see the notes at Psalm 1:1. The statement that the "wicked are not so," is a general statement applicable alike to their character and destiny, though the mind of the author of the psalm is fixed immediately and particularly on the difference in their destiny, without specifying anything particularly respecting their character. It is as true, however, that the ungodly do walk in the counsel of the wicked, and stand in the way of sinners, and sit in the seat of the scornful, as it is that the righteous do not; as true that they do not delight in the law of the Lord, as it is that the righteous do; as true that the wicked are not like a tree planted by the channels of water, as it is that the righteous are. This passage, therefore, may be employed to show what is the character of the ungodly, and in so applying it, what was before negative in regard to the righteous, becomes positive in regard to the wicked; what was positive, becomes negative. Thus it is true:

(a) that the wicked do walk in the counsel of the ungodly; do stand in the way of sinners; do sit in the seat of the scornful;

(b) that they do not delight in the law of the Lord, or meditate on his word; and

(c) that they are not like a tree planted by the waters, that is green and beautiful and fruitful.

Both in character and in destiny the ungodly differ from the righteous. The subsequent part of the verse shows that, while the general truth was in the mind of the writer, the particular thing on which his attention was fixed was, his condition in life - his destiny - as that which could not be compared with a green and fruitful tree, but which suggested quite another image.

But are like the chaff which the wind driveth away - When the wheat was winnowed. This, in Oriental countries, was commonly performed in the open field, and usually on an eminence, and where there was a strong wind. The operation was performed, as it is now in our country, when a fan or fanning-mill cannot he procured, by throwing up the grain as it is threshed with a shovel, and the wind scatters the chaff, while the grain falls to the ground. See the notes at Matthew 3:12.

This very naturally and appropriately furnished an illustration of the destiny of the wicked. Compared with the righteous, they were like the worthless chaff driven away by the wind. The image is often found in the Scriptures. See Job 21:18, note; Isaiah 17:13, note. Compare also Psalm 35:5; Isaiah 29:5; Isaiah 41:15; Daniel 2:35; Hosea 13:3. The idea here is, that the wicked are in no respect like the green and fruitful tree referred to in Psalm 1:3. They are not like a tree in any respect. They are not even like a decaying tree, a barren tree, a dead tree, for either of these would suggest some idea of stability or permanency. They are like dry and worthless chaff driven off by the wind, as of no value to the farmer - a substance which he is anxious only to separate wholly from his grain, and to get out of his way. The idea thus suggested, therefore, is that of intrinsic worthlessness. It will be among other things, on this account that the wicked will be driven away - that they are worthless in the universe of God - worthless to all the purposes for which man was made. At the same time, however, there may be an implied contrast between that chaff and the useful grain which it is the object of the farmer to secure.

5

Psalm 1:5

開啟正文

「因此」——因為他們正是這樣無價值。

「惡人」——參 Psalm 1:1 的註釋。泛指惡人,任何種類、任何程度的惡人。

「必站立不住」——比較 Psalm 1:1 的註釋。意思是:他們必不列於蒙審判者宣判無罪、又得他嘉許的人之中。這說法似乎出自受審或聆判時站起來的舉動。

「當審判的時候」——亞蘭文意譯本將此譯作「在大日子」,把它理解為審判之日。七十士譯本與武加大譯本譯作「惡人在審判中必不起來」(ἀναστήσονται anastēsontai;resurgent)。大多數猶太解經家跟隨亞蘭文意譯本,認為這是指末後的審判(Rosenmuller, in loc.)。然而,這裏所陳述的真理似乎比這更為普遍,儘管那也大概包括在內。意思是:他們必不能有分於義人的分;在一切品格受判定、神對人品格的評價得顯明的地方和時候,都必顯出他們經不起試驗、擔不起結果,不能與義人同列。在這一切情況中,他們真實的品格都會顯露出來,他們必被看待如被風吹散的糠秕。這在今世品格受判定的各樣試煉境況中是真實的,在末後審判——那時將宣布決定人類最終結局的判決——也是真實的。

「罪人」——參 Psalm 1:1 的註釋。

「在義人的會中」——即被算為或被視為屬於義人。意思是:在義人以義人身分聚集的一切地方,他們都無分;在義人聚集敬拜神的地方;在他們以神朋友的身分相會之處;在他們一同有分於他恩寵之處;在末後的日子他們被招聚在一起領受賞賜之時;以及他們在天上一同聚集之時。罪人在神子民的諸會中沒有位置。

英文原文

Therefore - Because they are thus worthless.

The ungodly - See the notes at Psalm 1:1. The wicked in general; the wicked of any kind or degree.

Shall not stand - Compare the notes at Psalm 1:1. The idea is, that they will not be found among those who are acquitted by the Judge, and approved by him. The idea seems to be derived from the act of standing up to be tried, or to receive a sentence.

In the judgment - The Aramaic Paraphrase renders this, "in the great day" - understanding it of the day of judgment. The Septuagint and Vulgate render it, "the wicked shall not rise - ἀναστήσονται anastēsontai - resurgent - in judgment." Most of the Jewish interpreters, following the Aramaic Paraphrase, understand this as referring to the last judgment. Rosenmuller, in loc. The truth stated, however, seems to be more general than that, though that is probably included. The meaning is, that they would not share the lot of the righteous: in all places, and at all times, where character is determined, and where the divine estimate of human character is manifested, it would be found that they could not stand the trial, or abide the result, so as to have a place with the righteous. Their true character would in all such cases be shown, and they would be treated like the chaff that is driven away. This would be true alike in those situations of trial in the present life when character is determined, and at the last judgment, when the sentence will be pronounced which will determine the final doom of mankind.

Nor sinners - See the notes at Psalm 1:1.

In the congregation of the righteous - Be reckoned or regarded as belonging to the righteous. That is, in all the places where the righteous, as such, are assembled, they will have no place: where they assemble to worship God; where they meet as his friends; where they unitedly participate in his favor; when, in the last day, they shall be gathered together to receive their reward, and when they shall be assembled together in heaven. The sinner has no place in the congregations of the people of God.

6

Psalm 1:6

開啟正文

因為耶和華知道義人的道路——這是惡人在審判中必不能與義人一同站立的理由。理由乃是:耶和華這位大審判官,完全認識那些作他朋友之人的品格,並能將他們與其他一切人分別出來,無論別人對那品格作何等的偽裝。惟有神所認可、所愛、視為朋友的,才能在那大判決作出的日子站立得住。沒有人能單憑敬虔的偽裝欺哄他;沒有人能靠權力強行達到他的恩寵、或義人的賞賜;沒有人能憑等級與地位要求這一切。品格若不能忍受無所不見之神的察驗,就無人能蒙神悅納、得天上的賞賜。參閱 2 Timothy 2:19 的註釋。人判斷品格時或會受騙,神卻不然。說「耶和華知道義人的道路」時,「道路」一詞看來是用以指一生的全部——生活的方式(見 Psalm 1:1 的註釋),進而指整個品格。或許這裏還包含這樣的意思:耶和華知道他們生活方式的結局——其所致的歸宿——因此他能公正地審判義人,並將他們安置在未來世界中那與他們的行動趨向相稱的地位,即天堂。

惡人的道路卻必滅亡——惡人所生活的方式或道路必趨於毀滅;他們的計謀、目的與指望,都必歸於無有。他們的行徑事實上通向滅亡。在信仰的事上,他們的計謀無一亨通;他們的盼望無一實現。在這一點上,正如在其他一切方面一樣,他們在今世和來世都與義人形成強烈的對比。

英文原文

For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous - This is given as a reason why the wicked would not stand in the judgment with the righteous. The reason is, that the Lord, the great Judge, fully understands the character of those who are his friends, and can discriminate between them and all others, whatever pretences others may make to that character. Only those whom God approves, and loves, as his friends, will be able to stand in the day when the great decision shall be made. No one can impose on him by any mere pretensions to piety; no one can force his way to his favor, or to the rewards of the just, by power; no one can claim this in virtue of rank and station. No one can be admitted to the favor of God, and to the rewards of heaven, whose character is not such that it will bear the scrutiny of the Omniscient eve. Compare the notes at 2 Timothy 2:19. Man may be deceived in judging character, but God is not. When it is said that "the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous," the word "way" seems to be used to denote the whole of life - the manner of living (Notes, Psalm 1:1), and hence, the whole character. Perhaps there is included also the idea that the Lord knows the result of their manner of life - the issue to which it leads - and that, therefore, he can properly judge the righteous and assign them to that place in the future world, to wit, heaven, to which their actions tend.

But the way of the ungodly shall perish - The way or manner in which the ungodly live shall tend to ruin; their plans, and purposes, and hopes, shall come to nought. Their course, in fact, tends to destruction. None of their plans shall prosper in regard to religion: none of their hopes shall be fulfilled. In this, as in all other respects, they stand in strong contrast with the righteous, alike in this world and the world to come.