Psalms 78

Psalms 78. THE Psalmist intimates in the beginning, ver. 1-4, that his object is to make a practical use, for the instruction and warn-ing of the present, of the events of the time of Moses. In pro-secution of this object, he represents, first, ver. 5-8, the destination of Israel: they should have been guided into the fear of God by the deeds and the commandments of God, and not fallen into the bad manners of their forefathers in the time of Moses. He shews next, that Israel had not proved faithful to this destination: so long as they continued under the guidance of Ephraim they forgot the deeds of God, and violated his commandments, ver. 9-11, and were in all respects like their forefathers, whose unbelief, hardness of heart, and perversity, in view of the glorious deeds of God, are described at length in ver. 12-10; they forgot unthankfully those glo-rious deeds of God by which he redeemed his people out of Egypt, (a copious description of which occurs in ver. 43-55); they provoked the Lord by their apostacy and rebellion, and brought down by this, his judgments upon them: he forsook his habitation in Shiloh, gave the ark of the covenant into the hands of the enemy, and his people to the sword, ver. 57-64. Now he has again taken compassion upon his people, and re-ceived then under his protection, but he has at the same time transferred the prerogative of Ephraim to Judah, in selecting Zion for the sanctuary, and David for the King, ver. 65-72. There is no formal arrangement throughout the Psalm, and there are no strophes, unless we are to confound paragraphs with strophes. In a Psalm of such length, and especially in one of such a decidedly historical character, the absence of a strict formal arrangement, exactly corresponds with what is the case in similar Psalms; and therefore there is no necessity for attempting, with Koester, to force one. It is, however, not ac-cidental that the whole number of verses in the Psalm Isaiah 72- 6 times 12, the signature of the people of the covenant,-and also that the description of the great deeds of the Lord in ver. 43-55, occupies 12 verses. The general object of the Psalm is to warn Israel, who had escaped the judgments of God, not to provoke a fresh judgmentby a fresh apostacy. The conclusion, however, ver. 65-72,indicates, that besides this general object, the Psalmist designed to warn the Israelites against a special sin to which they were peculiarly liable from the circumstances of the times. The dan-ger was, that of not being willing to acquiesce in the divine arrangement, by which the prerogative of Ephraim was trans-ferred to Judah, of regarding that as a usurpation which was in fact a divine judgment, and of rebelling against the sanctuary in Zion and the dominion of David and his tribe. The history renders it clear that this object was both an im-mediate and a very important one. The numerous, powerful, and haughty tribe of Ephraim, had been in possession of precedency during the whole period of the Judges.

The sanctuary in Shi-loh was in the heart of it. How very determined were its claims for precedency appeared from its objections to Gideon, Judges viii. 1, and its opposition to Jepthah, Judges 12:1.a It became hence a matter of great difficulty for this tribe to acquiesce in the new arrangement of things under David; and assuredly this would never have taken place, had not David been marked out in such a decided manner by God himself. For seven years David was king over Judah alone. The success of the rebellion of Absalom may assuredly be attributed, to a very great ex-tent, to the jealousy of Ephraim as its cause.b Similar conse-quences followed the insurrection of Sheba, who was supported by the whole of Israel, while the tribe of Judah remained faith-ful to its king, 2 Samuel 20:2, Under David and Solomon, how-ever, participation in that national glory, the foundation of which was laid by these powerful kings, counterbalanced the jealousy of Ephraim, and thus broke the energy of that tribe; just as during the splendid career of Napoleon, the republicans of France remained quiet. But, after Solomon’s death, it burst out into a violent flame; and the consequence of neglect-ing the warning of our Psalm, was the melancholy division which inflicted a death wound on the Israelitish nation. a Compare the important treatise of Verschuir, De AEmulatione Isr. mutua. b Compare Verschuir, p. 85: “It arose from the jealousy and envy of the tribes, who eagerly seized every occasion of attempting a revolution, and of rebelling, . . . . not so much for the purpose of placing the son on thefather’s throne, as with a view to take advantage of a state of confusion, for the purpose of finding out a way by which to tear the kingdom from Judah, and to free themselves from his yoke.” The method by which the Psalmist seeks the accomplish-ment of his object, is by directing attention to the events of the time of Moses. These were peculiarly well fitted, first, to bring the Israelites to a sense of their ingratitude, during the period of the Judges, and to fill them with righteous abhorrence of their former sins,-a state of mind which supplies the most powerful of all warnings against fresh transgressions. This tendency is particularly obvious in the second historical para-graph, ver. 42-55. And, second, to exhibit this apostasy by the example of their fathers, and at the same time to open their eyes to the divine judgments, the perception of which formed their only security against fresh transgressions. This tendency is particularly predominant in the first historical paragraph, ver. 12-40. In this paragraph the Psalmist holds up before the people the history, which had been written for the very pur-pose of promoting his present object, as a glass in which they might see their own face.

The assertion is altogether unfounded, that the historical por-tion of the Psalm is only of secondary importance, and that the author acts contrary to his plan in going so much into detail. The introduction announces, almost in plain terms, that the pe-culiar object of the Psalm is to seek the good of the present generation, by directing attention to the events of the time of Moses.

The assertion also is incorrect, that the author details the history of the Mosaic era and that of the Judges for warning. It is only the first of these periods that serves the author as a torch, (as it does to the author of the 95. Psalm): the history of the Judges is the subject to be illustrated. That the Psalm, which in the title is called “An Instruction of Asaph,” belonged to the age of David, and was therefore composed by the famous Asaph, cannot be considered as doubt-ful, if we take a correct view of its contents. The last matters of fact on which the author touches, are the kingdom of David, which by the fut. in ver. 72 is exhibited as still standing, and the settlement of the sanctuary on Zion. His object is to warn the people against a possible revolt from David and from the sanctuary in Zion; he cannot therefore have possibly composed the Psalm after this event had taken place.

He acts in the pro-secution of his object with such great tenderness,-not naming expressly even once the disruption which it is his purpose to pre-vent, and making no express mention whatever of any inclina-tion to this, which might exist at the time, but leaving his readers to make for themselves the practical application,-that it is ob-vious that he must have written at a time, when it was of im-portance not to irritate, for fear of increasing the dissatisfaction, by even supposing it to exist, and not to call forth the idea of the disruption, by naming it. The passion for bringing down the Psalms to the latest pos-sible date has been brought into exercise even in regard to this Psalm.

To deny that the Psalm belongs to the time of David, manifests utter ignorance of its contents. Most of the recent expositors agree in the assumption, that it was composed after the captivity. De Wette, Ewald, and Koester, consider it as the “product of religious hatred against the Samaritans,” pro-ceeding on the assumption, which is contrary to history, that the Samaritans were the continuation of the kingdom of the ten tribes: compare against this the Beitr. P. II. p. 3, et seq. llitzig assigns the Psalm to the age of Antiochus, because it warns against a revolt, in utter ignorance of the special object of the Psalm as dwelt upon in the concluding verses. The 69th verse shews that it must have been composed before the Chaldean destruction.

The Psalm is made use of in the book of Job: compare at ver. 64. It has been urged against the an-tiquity of the Psalm, that it rises very little above the style of prose.

But Venema has correctly observed: “the style is plain and easy, such as a narrative of events requires.” If the Psalm undoubtedly belongs to the age of David, it is evident that important results flow from it, bearing on the criti-cism of the Pentateuch. Those references to the Pentateuch, and that too as to the generally known and recognized book of national religion, by which all the Psalms of David’s time are pervaded, occur here, in unusual numbers, and in a peculiarly literal manner,-a circumstance sufficiently accounted for by the length and character of the Psalm. Should any one be still dis-posed to maintain, that the Pentateuch in David’s time did not exist in a complete state, and was not generally acknowledged, (which last presupposes its composition by Moses), he will find materials enough in this Psalm to show him that such an opi- nion is utterly untenable. The assertion has even been hazarded, that our Psalm is to be regarded as a product of “the national animosity” and arro-gance of the Jews. The remarks made by Lange in the pre-face to P. L of the Life of Jesus, p. 10, with so much propriety against a similar hypothesis, which had been advanced in refe-rence to the New Testament, apply with equal force to this as-sertion.

Men display very little knowledge of the Scriptures, when they attempt to discover in them the petty passions of ordinary life. Asaph, who was undoubtedly recognized by Jewish antiquity as a prophet among the psalmists, (2 Chronicles 29:30, Matthew 13:35), had indeed to say what was very un-pleasant to Ephraim; but in this he acted not as a Jewish parti-zan, (an idea quite out of place with him, who belonged not to the tribe of Judah but to the tribe of Levi), but as a servant of God. The position which he occupies was not one which he had assumed himself; he comes forward, as Jeremiah also did, as an interpreter of the deeds of God. That the accusation, which he brings against the Ephraimites, in the first instance, and also against the whole people, was a well founded one, is rendered sufficiently obvious by the division of the kingdom, and by the subsequent history of the ten tribes, who may be considered as represented here by Ephraim. The same vile spirit which, in that history, is conspicuous throughout,-Jero-boam was its representative,-was assuredly in existence during the period of the Judges, and, at the time when Ephraim was the ruling tribe, wrought consequences as disastrous to the whole nation, as it did at a later period to Israel. “We meet with this spirit in a very offensive manner on the two occasions above adverted to, in the history of the Judges.

Psalms 78:1-8

The Introduction is ver. 1-4. The Psalmist resolves to re-count the great deeds of the past, for the instruction and warning of the people of God, to transmit to posterity the in-heritance of their fathers, so urgently called for and needed at the present time.-Ver. 1. Receive my people my law, incline your ear to the words of my mouth. Ver. 2. I will open my mouth with a similitude; I will make known riddles from times of old. Ver. 3. Which we have heard, and know, and our fa-thers have told us. Ver. 4. We will not hold them back from their children, making known to the generation to come the praise of the Lord, and his wonders which he hath done.-תורה, in ver. 1, has never the sense of “doctrine,” but always the sense of “the law”; and this sense is suitable here. The Psalmist comes forward as one who has authority: the “Seer,” the“Prophet,” does not deliver well meant exhortations, which he submits to the judgment of his hearers, but laws, which leave no choice between obedience and destruction: compare Isaiah 1:10. “My people” indicates the love in which the effort of the Psalmist had originated. In reference to אביעה, in ver. 2, properly, “I will sputter out,” compare at Psalms 19:2; and onמשל and הידת at Psalms 49:4. The Psalmist does not desig-nate as similitudes and riddles, his remarks which follow, mere-ly as such, but the historical events which his remarks expound to the people. This is evident from the expression “from times of old,” and also from the 3d and 4th verses. These ap-pellations are founded on the fact that sacred history has, in every part of it, a concealed back ground of instruction, that it is a prophecy turned in the contrary direction, to which through-out the maxim is applicable, mutato nomine de to fabula narra-tur, and upon which are virtually written in legible characters thewords, READETH, LET HIM : comp. Gal.4:24, and particularly 1 Corinthians 10:6.

These appellations, moreover, call upon us to separate the kernel from the shell, and to press out the wine of instruction from the grapes of history. קדם, past time, is the common term applied to the Mosaic period, (compare Psalms 74:2; Psalms 77:5; Psalms 77:11), and is to be taken here in this sense, and not as denoting the whole of antiquity. In the quotation in Matthew 13:34; Matthew 13:35, the emphasis is laid on the first clause, “I will open my mouth in parables,” and the Evan-gelist gives this part of the quotation literally from the Psalm.

A prophet of the Old Testament, leaving the field of abstract thought, teaches in parables, which he clothes with flesh and blood, conveys instruction in the form of history, and thus stamps with his authority this method of instruction as one ad- quate to accomplish the end in view. In all this the Evangelist, with good reason, beholds a prophecy, that Christ, the true pro-phet, the best teacher, who must fully employ every adequate means of instruction, will avail himself also of this method. In the second clause Matthew allows himself greater liberty, and gives rather an application than a proper translation. In ver. 3 the Psalmist explains more precisely what it is that he means by “similitudes” and “riddles:” these are the universally known, the well accredited deeds of the Lord, which had been handed down from generation to generation. We are not, with most expositors, to connect this verse immediately with the 4th verse:-the similitude and the riddle are, when taken by them-selves, somewhat obscure, and require explanation. The last clause also, “which our fathers have told us,” serves as a pre-paration immediately for verse 4.

Exodus 10:2 ought to be compared: “that thou mayest tell in the ears of thy son and of thy son’s son what things I have wrought in Egypt,” also 2 Sam. 7:22 and Psalms 44:1. Though the knowlege of the deeds of the Mosaic times is drawn from tradition, this is not exclu-sive of scripture.

Even in the Pentateuch itself, oral tradition is mentioned (Deuteronomy 32:7), in reference to those very deeds of which it contains the full account; and in many passages we meet with pressing exhortations to be assiduous in continuing the stream of oral tradition. Scripture is the stay and correc-tive of oral tradition: it does not supplant, it supplements it. A single glance renders it evident, that the Psalmist himself drew his account directly from Scripture, and not from oral tradition. But the Scripture would have been to him a shut book, with which he would not have known how to commence any thing, had he not been surrounded from his early youth with the atmosphere of tradition. Ver. 4 intimates that it is the sacred duty of the church, at all times, not to keep up in a faithless manner the property of tradition entrusted to her care by her forefathers, but faithfully to deliver it over to posterity, and thus justifies the attempt of the Psalmist, who sets about the discharge of this duty in the following part of the Psalm. The Psalmist does not say “our children,” but “their child-ren,” although he meant the former.

His object is, to point out the duty of transmitting: what we have got from our fa-thers, we owe to our children, inasmuch as they did not hand it to us for our sakes only, but generally, for their children’s. תהלות properly praises, indicates the rich fulness of praise, which the Lord has acquired by his deeds. The “wonders” of the Lord form the centre point of the following representation.

The Psalmist does not merely recount these: he represents also the position which the people, on the other hand, took up, and points out the disastrous consequences which resulted from their false position. In the first paragraph we have the destination of Israel, the object which God has appointed him to fulfil: God has given him his law, containing a summary of his deeds and ordinances, in order that, by the transmission of it to posterity, they might be brought to a living trust in God and to obedience to his command-meats, and might be preserved from the bad habits and the re-bellious conduct of their fathers in the wilderness. This, there-fore, was the problem proposed to Israel in the time of the Judges. Ver. 5. He erected a testimony in Jacob, he laid down a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers to teach to their children. Ver. 6. In order that the generation to come might learn it, the sons who should still be born, and rise up and relate it to their children. Ver. 7. And place their trust in God, and not forget the deeds of the Lord and keep his com- mandments. Ver. 8. And might not be like their fathers, a re-bellious and refractory race, a generation which does not pre- pare its heart, and does not keep its spirit faithful to God.- The paragraph relates to those passages in the Pentateuch, in which the people are exhorted, faithfully to transmit the law to their posterity; for example Exodus 13:14, Deuteronomy 4:9; Deuteronomy 4:23; Deuteronomy 6:6, and following verses. By the testimony and the law in verse 5, are meant the whole contents of the Pentateuch, the direct commandments contained in it, and the deeds of the Lord. which are to be considered as indirect commandments: for all the deeds of God contain a kernel of instruction, of duty, and of warning; “I have done this for thee, what dost thou for me?” “be very thankful,” to day, hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as at Meribah, as at Massah in the wilderness, when your fathers tempted me, saw and felt my works,” &c. That we are to exclude neither these indirect, nor (with Steir) the direct commandments is evident, from the usus loquendi, (“testimony” and “law” must certainly denote the law usually so called), from those passages in the Pentateuch, in which the exhortation faithfully to transmit to posterity, refers at the same time to the deeds and to the commandments, and finally and incontrovertibly, from verses 7th, 10th, and 11th, where the deeds and the commandments are expressly mentioned as the contents of the law. The fathers are specially the Israelites of the Mosaic period. By the teaching or making known is meant not a mere external transmission, but one of such a kind as goes from heart to heart. The Berleb.: “And even to persevere in teaching, and to press it upon them with all earnestness."-In ver. 6, the object to be taught and learned is the law and testi-mony, which God erected in Jacob and laid down in Israel.

The generation to come is the Israelites existing in the time of the Judges. At יקמו (קום, is not to arise,�time�rise up; God has erected, in ver. 5, therefore they should rise up), the copula is designedly omitted, for the purpose of connecting closely together and blending into one “the know-ing” and “the rising up”: wherever, within the domain of religion, there is a true, a real knowledge, such as that spoken of in ver. 7, there, there is also preaching: whatever fills the heart flows out at the lips; whatever a man feels to be of vital importance, he endeavours to set it before his family.

The sub-ject in ver. 7 is “the following generation,” the sons who should be born, Israel during the period of the Judges, which appears as the second generation succeeding the Mosaic one, which is the first. We cannot make the sons and the grand-sons at the same time the subject. On the first clause the Berleb.: “The law which God erected in Israel, is a law full of love and truth. It requires nothing else, than that men know the blessings of God, that they be grateful to him for these, that they love him, that they depend upon him for his bounties, and that they surrender themselves to him without reserve.” The fundamental passage is Deuteronomy 31:11, “Thou shalt read this law before all Israel . . . . . in order that they may hear and learn, that they may fear the Lord your God, and observe carefully all the words of this law”: compare on the last clause, Deuteronomy 4:40; Deuteronomy 33:9.-In ver. 8th, the fathers are again the Israelites of the Mosaic time. The re-proaches which Moses uttered against his contemporaries are to be compared, Deuteronomy 9:6; Deuteronomy 9:7; Deuteronomy 31:27. The סורר, and מרה, are from Deuteronomy 21:18.

The man who had a stiff-necked and rebellious son, as there spoken of, may be considered as an em-blem of God, in relation to Israel: compare Deuteronomy 32:5. The phrase לבו הכין, cannot be interpreted by the נכון in ver. 37.

It does not mean, “to set right the heart,” but “to pre-pare the heart”: compare Sir. 2:17, “they who feared theLord, prepared their hearts,” ופןילבףןץףי, 18:22. This is clearfrom the want of “to the Lord,” here, and in Job 11:13, and from the construction with ל, in 2 Chronicles 20:33. In 1 Sam. vii. 3, the phrase signifies: to prepare the heart unto the Lord, so as to turn to him.

Psalms 78:5-8

In the first paragraph we have the destination of Israel, the object which God has appointed him to fulfil: God has given him his law, containing a summary of his deeds and ordinances, in order that, by the transmission of it to posterity, they might be brought to a living trust in God and to obedience to his commandments, and might be preserved from the bad habits and the rebellious conduct of their fathers in the wilderness. This, therefore, was the problem proposed to Israel in the time of the Judges. Ver. 5. He erected a testimony in Jacob, he laid down a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers to teach to their children. Ver. 6. In order that the generation to come might learn it, the sons who should still be born, and rise up and relate it to their children.

Ver. 7. And place their trust in God, and not forget the deeds of the Lord and keep his commandments. Ver. 8. And might not be like their fathers, a rebellious and refractory race, a generation which does not prepare its heart, and does not keep its spirit faithful to God. The paragraph relates to those passages in the Pentateuch, in which the people are exhorted, faithfully to transmit the law to their posterity; for example Exodus 13:14, Deuteronomy 4:9, Deuteronomy 4:23, Deuteronomy 6:6, and following verses. By the testimony and the law in Psalms 78:5, are meant the whole contents of the Pentateuch, the direct commandments contained in it, and the deeds of the Lord which are to be considered as indirect commandments: for all the deeds of God contain a kernel of instruction, of duty, and of warning; “I have done this for thee, what dost thou for me?” “be very thankful,” to day, hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as at Meribah, as at Massah in the wilderness, when your fathers tempted me, saw and felt my works,” &c. That we are to exclude neither these indirect, nor (with Steir) the direct commandments is evident, from the usus loquendi, (“testimony” and “law” must certainly denote the law usually so called), from those passages in the Pentateuch, in which the exhortation faithfully to transmit to posterity, refers at the same time to the deeds and to the commandments, and finally and incontrovertibly, from Psalms 78:7 th, (Psalms 78:10) 10th, and (Psalms 78:11) 11th, where the deeds and the commandments are expressly mentioned as the contents of the law. The fathers are specially the Israelites of the Mosaic period. By the teaching or making known is meant not a mere external transmission, but one of such a kind as goes from heart to heart. The Berleb.: “And even to persevere in teaching, and to press it upon them with all earnestness.” In Psalms 78:6, the object to be taught and learned is the law and testimony, which God erected in Jacob and laid down in Israel. The generation to come is the Israelites existing in the time of the Judges. At ιχξε (χεν is not to arise,—of future time—but to rise up; God has erected, in Psalms 78:5, therefore they should rise up), the copula is designedly omitted, for the purpose of connecting closely together and blending into one “the knowing” and “the rising up”: wherever, within the domain of religion, there is a true, a real knowledge, such as that spoken of in Psalms 78:7, there, there is also preaching: whatever fills the heart flows out at the lips; whatever a man feels to be of vital importance, he endeavours to set it before his family. The subject in Psalms 78:7 is “the following generation,” the sons who should be born, Israel during the period of the Judges, which appears as the second generation succeeding the Mosaic one, which is the first. We cannot make the sons and the grandsons at the same time the subject. On the first clause the Berleb.: “The law which God erected in Israel, is a law full of love and truth. It requires nothing else, than that men know the blessings of God, that they be grateful to him for these, that they love him, that they depend upon him for his bounties, and that they surrender themselves to him without reserve.” The fundamental passage is Deuteronomy 31:11, “Thou shalt read this law before all Israel. . . . . in order that they may hear and learn, that they may fear the Lord your God, and observe carefully all the words of this law”: compare on the last clause, Deuteronomy 4:40, Deuteronomy 33:9. In Psalms 78:8 th, the fathers are again the Israelites of the Mosaic time. The reproaches which Moses uttered against his contemporaries are to be compared, Deuteronomy 9:6-7, Deuteronomy 31:27. The ρεψψ, and ξψδ, are from Deuteronomy 21:18. The man who had a stiff-necked and rebellious son, as there spoken of, may be considered as an emblem of God, in relation to Israel: compare Deuteronomy 32:5. The phrase δφιομαε, cannot be interpreted by the πλεο in Psalms 78:37. It does not mean, “to set right the heart,” but “to prepare the heart”: compare Sir 2:17, “they who feared the Lord, prepared their hearts,” ἑτοιμάσουσι, Sir 18:23.

This is clear from the want of “to the Lord,” here, and in Job 11:13, and from the construction with μ, in 2 Chronicles 20:33. In 1 Samuel 7:3, the phrase signifies: to prepare the heart unto the Lord, so as to turn to him.

Psalms 78:9-11

In ver. 9-11, we are told how far the Israelites, during the pe-riod of the Judges, satisfied the positive destination pointed out for them according to ver. 5-7:-they acted contrary to the very design of their existence. They did the very opposite of whatthey ought to have clone,-they forsook, in a cowardly spirit, the duties assigned to them in war, they did not walk in the commandments of their God, and forgot shamefully his deeds and wonders. Ver. 9. The sons of Ephraim are (cowardly) bowmen, they turned back in the day of battle. Ver. 10. They did not keep the covenant of God, and would not walk in his law. Ver. 11. And they forgot his deeds and his wonders which he let them see.-In ver. 9 the first clause is to be supplemented from the second, which contains the ground of the comparison of the sons of Ephraim to bowmen: they are compared to bowmen, because they turned back in the day of battle, and therefore they could be nothing else than cowardly bowmen. Those who do not supply in this way, suppose that bowmen are used figu-ratively, to denote those who turn their backs in battle and fly, because the practice of these troops is, when attacked, to fly, and in their flight to shoot at the enemy. But this feigned flight does not suit here. Others, with greater probability, suppose that the bowmen are named, because, from their light armour, they were better adapted for real flight.

But of such an inclination on the part of the bowmen to fly, there are no traces whatever, and it is not even clear that they were light armed troops, although Jahn asserts that they were, Archהol. 2. 2. p. 424. The reason why they are named in this individualizing way, is undoubtedly because, among the Hebrews and the na-tions with whom they had to do, bowmen formed the main body of the army: comp.

Hosea 1:5, Psalms 76:3, Ezekiel 39:3. That the Ephraimites are merely compared to cowardly bowmen, and that it is only in a figurative sense that the Psalmist speaks of their flight in the day of battle, as indicating their apostacy in the day of their trial, appears from ver. 57th, where the Eph-raimites, who are here compared to the men, are compared to bows which will not do their work, from the connection with what goes before, according to which we are led to expect here a description of the way in which Israel fulfilled the destination appointed him by God, and with what follows, which, from this point forwards, speaks of the violation of the covenant by Israel. The sons of Ephraim do not stand here at all in opposition to the rest of Israel, but they represent the whole, as they formed, during the period of the Judges, the ruling tribe. This is evi-dent from the connection with ver. 5-8, where the Psalmist speaks of the whole of Israel during the period of the Judges,and from the 41, 42, 56, and following verses, where what is here said of Ephraim is said of the whole of Israel. It is clear as day that the conduct of Ephraim and of the whole of Israel, as here described, belongs to the period of the Judges; and we must say, that that man understands nothing whatever of the whole connection and tendency of the Psalm, who finds here the apostacy of the ten tribes. The whole Psalm ends with the government of David.

In. the 41st and following verses, the Psalmist speaks of the same apostacy of Ephraim or Israel. In the 59th and following verses, he is expressly spoken of as ex-isting in the time before the ark of the covenant was carried away by the Philistines; and this event, as well as the defeat, the rejection of Shiloh, and the bringing of the sanctuary to Judah, are represented as his punishment.

The verb נשק sig-nifies always “to be armed,” and not, as Gesenius assumes, “to stretch the bow, contrary to 2 Chronicles 17:17, and other pas-sages, and contrary to the sense of קש,נe. That קשת רומי sig-nifies “bowmen,” and nothing else, appears clear from Jeremiah 4:29. The armed of the bowmen, are “those of the bowmen who are armed,” or “those men who are both armed and bowmen.” The ך`פה in the sense of “to turn round,” is from Judges 20:39. The Berleb: “This representation is given to us for instruction and reflection, that we may not grow weak in faith, and fall away in the time of battle. This is commonly the case with those who rely too much upon themselves, and have not unre-servedly surrendered themselves to God. They fancy them-selves strong, so long as there are no enemies before them, and prepare to fight them in imagination. But as soon as real ene-mies come within sight, they fly before them and become un-faithful."-In ver. 10 we have the opposite of the duty assigned to Israel in ver. 7, “to keep the commandments of God;” and in ver. 11 the opposite of the “not forgetting the deeds of God.” The deeds and wonders of God are those done in Egypt, and during the sojourn in the wilderness. These had been seen by the fathers, as the representatives of the Israelites of all times.

This is clear from the expression: which he let them see. The opposition between what the Israelites were, and what they ought to have been, is drawn in ver. 9-11, keeping in view the point at the conclusion of the paragraph which de-scribes the destination of Israel, in ver. 8, viz. that they shouldnot be like their fathers, a rebellious race. The design of the Psalmist, is not merely to refer, in short terms, to the manner in which they acted in reference to this point, but to enter into detail, according to his purpose as expressed in the introduc-tion, to hold up the glass of the fathers to the sons, in order that they might see in it their own image. He hence depicts, at great length, the way in which the fathers acted: the theme of the whole paragraph is: “the fathers were a rebellious and re-fractory race, a race who did not prepare their hearts, and whose spirits did not continue faithful to God.” He next shows, in the 41st and following verses, that the Israelites, dur-ing the period of the Judges, were like their fathers.

Psalms 78:12-16

We are first told in ver. 12-16, with a view to placing the rebellious and refractory conduct of the fathers in its true light, what God did to the fathers, how he allured them to love and to good works.-Ver. 12. Before their fathers he did wonders, in the land of Egypt on the plain of Zoan. Ver. 13. He clave the sea and let them pass through, he placed the waters as an heap. Ver. 14. And he led them during the day by a cloud, and during the whole night, by the light of fire. Ver. 15. He clave the rocks in the wilderness, and let the waters flow down like a stream.-The wonders of God follow each other in historical or- der. There are first, in ver. 12, the wonders and the signs in Egypt. These are only briefly referred to, because the Psal-mist intends, at a subsequent part, and in another connection, (ver. 43-55), to take up the consideration of them at length. Ver. 12 cannot be connected with ver. 8-11, as many would do, in their excessive zeal for a strophe formation, of which there is not here one single trace. For it does not at all contain a general statement to be developed in what follows, but it forms part of a description of particulars, namely, the wonders in Egypt, which are succeeded in the following verse by others, the wonders during the sojourn in the wilderness. The clause “be-fore their fathers,” which refers back to the 8th verse, is to be considered as if printed in Italics.

Next to the land of Egypt, in opposition to the sea and the wilderness, we have the plain of Zoan, the country round the ancient royal city Tanis, pointed out as the theatre of the great deeds of God. The author has pointed out, in his treatise on “Egypt and the Books of Moses,“p. 41, that there is here expressly said, what is only alluded toin Numbers 13:22.

The פלא, stands collectively as at Psalms 57:12.–In verse 13, there is the passage through the Red Sea. “As a heap”, is from Exodus 15:8, to which passage allusion is else-where made: compare at Psalms 33:7. The Psalmist reservesthe נוזלים, in that passage, for ver. 16.�In ver. 15 and 16, the sending of the waters at Rephidim in Exodus 17:6, and at Kadesh in Numbers 20., are joined together. That we must not, through excessive historical caution, (as in what follows, deeds are re-ferred to which happened before the second of these events), re-fer the allusion merely to the first, is evident from the plural,צרים, and from the undoubted quotation of the first half of the 16th verse, from Numbers 20:8. The agreement is verbal, with this exception, that instead of the prosaic word מים, which is there used, we have here נוזלים: compare at ver. 13. Ver. 15th refers to both occasions, and verse 16, to the second as thegreater. This is evident from the סלע, which, in the Pentateuch,is used only of the second occasion, because it was only then that water came from the rock.

In Ex. the word צור is always used: compare the Beitr. III. p. 379.

This, as the general term, (compare on צור, properly not a rock, but a stone, at Psalms 18:2), might be used in the plural, and applied to both occasions. He “clave,” refers back, in the first instance, to, “he clave,” in ver. 13th, but, at the same time, in connection with this first cleaving in grace, it directs attention to its opposition, that cleaving in wrath, in the days of old, of which we read in Gen. vii. 11, “all the fountains of the great deep were broken up”: compare similar allusions to the history of the deluge in Psalms 29:10; Psalms 32:6. It is only from the allusion to this passage, that we can explain how the great flood should send forth water, (as if it had something to do on the occasion), which at a former time, at the deluge, sent forth its waters for the destruction of the sinful world. We require only to see this allusion, to aban-don the idea that רבה, contrary to the accusative, may be con-sidered as an adverb: richly. The plural תהומות denotes the flood in an absolute sense, the mundane sea, and is used in the same way as Behemoth, Chokmoth, Psalms 73:22. As in reality there is only one flood meant, the adjective stands in the singular number: compare Ewald, § 569. Berleb: “should they not now have drunk with the mouth of faith, and praised the great work of God.”

Psalms 78:17-20

There follows in ver. 17-20, the rebellious and refractory conduct, with which Israel requited God.-Ver. 17. But theywent on still to sin against him, and rebelled against the Most High in the wilderness. Ver. 18. And they tempted God in their heart, to ask meat for their souls. Ver. 19. And they spoke against God, they said: will God be able to provide a table in the wilderness? Ver. 20. Behold he has struck the rock, so that waters gushed out, and the streams overflowed, will he be able also to give bread, or will he prepare flesh for his people? -“They went on,” in ver. 17, refers in reality to Exodus 17:2, where an account is given of the sinful and refractory conduct of the Israelites, previous to the first sending of water, when they said, " Is the Lord in the midst of us or not?” (Ven. sicut jam antea potus causa, ita et deinceps mox propter cibum), and also to Exodus 9:34, where the very same expression is used of Pharaoh, the personification of obstinacy and rebellion. The expression, “they rebelled against the Lord in the wilderness,” (properly “in a dry land,” with reference to what is before re-corded as to God sending them a supply of water), refers to the fundamental passage, Deuteronomy 9:7 : compare ver. 24, 31:27. The המרה here, and in ver. 40, occurs frequently in the Pentateuch. The construction with the accusative, which oc-curs also there occasionally, Deuteronomy 1:26; Deuteronomy 1:43; Deuteronomy 9:23, is to be ex-plained from a modification of the sense:-with the preposition it is, “to act rebelliously towards,” with the accusative “to treat."-The tempting of God in ver. 18, consists in this, that they unbelievingly and insolently demanded, instead of expect-ing in the exercise of faith, and supplicating. They wished to put God to the proof, with a view to renounce him altogether, in case he should not give them what they wanted, whereas they ought to have been firmly convinced, long before, that he was both able and willing to give, and that he would give in due time: compare Exodus 17:7, Deuteronomy 6:6, where the tempting of God by Israel is said to consist in their saying, “Is the Lord in the midst of us or not?” that is, “we shall now see and try, it will be shewn whether he is so.” God has a right to try man, because man is a being of ambiguous and uncertain character: but man cannot try God without being guilty of great offence, and injurious conduct; God says, that we try him when we doubt whether he is God or not. “In their hearts,” points to the evil fountain of the heart, from which the words of the mouth proceed, (compare Matthew 12:35), and serves also to aggravate the offence. Man is always disposed to separate the mouth from theheart, and to claim immunity for the latter: compare Math. 12:37.

The emphasis lies on “they demanded,” not on “for their soul.” The נפש denotes the animal, the food-craving soul, (comp. Romans 11:6, Deuteronomy 12:20), and not the desire for what is necessary.

The sin lay not in what in they desired, but in the way and manner in which they desired it. What follows, shews that the Psalmist connects together a double demand and temptation, the one recorded in Exodus 16. and the other in Numbers 11. The first one was followed by the sending of manna, and preceded the first giving of water; but the Psalmist, with poe-tical freedom, has wrought together into one figure, the two oc-casions on which bread was given, as he formerly did with the water. It was enough, that the more aggravated temptation, and the more remarkable sending of food, happened later.-The 19th verse contains in substance exactly what the Israelites really said, and the 20th verse gives rather what they would have said had they spoken honestly and sincerely, with a view to exhibit clearly the unjustifiable nature of their conduct. It is characteristic of unbelief, to remain wilfully in ignorance of what God has previously done to exhibit his godhead; and it therefore acts towards him as if he had revealed himself for the first time. But when this cloak is removed, it stands in its en-tire nakedness. The להם, is not food, but bread, compare Exodus 16:3; Exodus 16:12; the manna was given them as bread, ver. 25, the quails as flesh, ver. 27.

Psalms 78:21-40

In ver. 21-31, we are told how God acted towards the re-bellious and refractory generation: his wrath burned against it; he gave them what they desired, bread and flesh, and in this way made them ashamed of their unbelieving wicked doubts, and thus manifested his real godhead, but after this happen-ed, there followed severe punishment. Ver. 21. Therefore,when the Lord heard it he was angry, and a fire was kindled against Jacob, and wrath rose up against Israel. Ver. 22. Be-cause they believed not in God, and trusted not in his salvation. Ver. 23. And he commanded the clouds above, and opened the doors of heaven. Ver. 24. And rained upon them manna to eat, and gave them the corn of heaven. Ver. 25. Every one ate the food of the strong, he sent them provisions to the full. Ver. 26. He caused the east wind in heaven to blow, and brought for- ward by his power the south wind. Ver. 27. And rained upon them flesh as dust, and feathered fowl as the sand of the sea. Ver. 28. And let them fall in the midst of the camp round about their habitations. Ver. 29. And they ate and were fully satis-fied, and he gratified their appetite. Ver. 30. They were yet in-dulging their appetite, the food was still in their mouth. Ver. 31. Then the wrath of God rose up against them, and he slew the fat ones among them, and struck down the young of Israel. -“The Lord heard and was angry,” in ver. 21, signifies “when the Lord heard, he was angry:” comp. Numbers 11:1. The fire is not a literal fire, as many imagine from an unseasonable com-parison of Numbers 11., where there is a narrative of an event which has no connection whatever with the passage before us, but the fire of divine wrath: comp. at Psalms 18:7. This is most manifest from the repetition in ver. 31, where it is only divine wrath that is spoken of, (it is also named here in the way of ex-planation in the third clause), and where its manifestations are likewise described as in Numbers 11. The germ of this figurative re-presentation occurs in Numbers 11.: compare ver. 10, “and the anger of the Lord was kindled greatly,” and ver. 33, “the an-ger of the Lord burned against his people.” The נשק is not, as Hהvernick on Ez. p. 615, supposes, “to prepare,” but “to kindle;” were it not so, why, should the verb be always used in connection with fire? The עלה is used of ascending wrath in 2 Samuel 11:20.

On ver. 22 compare James 1:6; James 1:7, “let him pray in faith, nothing doubting Jet not such a man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.” But when, as in the present instance, a man receives any thing for the gra-tification of those desires by which he has tempted God, he re-ceives it in wrath, which could not happen to faith in the divine mercy. On “they believed not,” compare Numbers 14:11; on “in his salvation,” Exodus 14:13; Exodus 15:2.

There is a reference in “he opened the doors of heaven” to “the windows of heaven were opened,” in the history of the deluge, Genesis 7:17, in the same way as in ver. 15. On ver. 24, compare Exodus 16:4, “be-hold I rain bread from heaven for you.” On “corn from heaven,” Berleb.: “instead of the fruit, from which, in ordinary cases, men are accustomed to prepare meal and bread.” On the manna, see the author’s treatise on Balaam. Exodus 16:6 renders it evident that by איש is meant “every man.” The term “to satisfaction”, in the second clause, which in like manner refers to the rich supply of provisions, corresponds to it. By “the strong ones,” many, after the example of the Septuagint, theChaldee, and the Book of Wisdom 16:20, (for it is beyond adoubt that the expression ἀדדוכשם פסןצחם ἐרשליףבע פןם כבןם ףןץ re-fers to the passage before us), understand “angels,” and others “men of rank,”-“bread of the nobles,” “rare, costly food:” compare Judges 5:25, “in a lordly dish.” Against this latter idea, it is urged, that the passages which have been adduced for the purpose of shewing that אביר, strong, is also used of princes and nobles, are not satisfactory. In Job 24:22; Job 34:20, Psalms 68:30, the sense of “strong” is demanded by the connection, In 1 Samuel 21:7, Doeg is called “the strong (one) of the herdmen,” not at all as being the principal one among them. Decisive evidence as to the contrary of this is furnished by ch. 22:9, where he holds a military office, in all probabili-ty, however, as the commander of the troops who were entrust-ed with the care of the royal cattle:-the strong guardian or patron of the herdmen.

On the other hand, the entirely analo-gical expression in Psalms 103:20, “the powerful heroes,” shews that אבירים is a very suitable term for referring to angels. We are not, however, to adopt the idea of “meat serving for the nourishment of angels,"-such a strange representation as this lies without the field of Scripture; the Psalmist, moreover, gives nothing new in reference to the history of the times of old; he merely clothes in a poetical dress the account given by Moses, -but of “meat from the region of the angels,” corresponding to the bread or the corn of heaven in the Pentateuch, and in verse 24.

This is the idea adopted in the Chaldee: “food which came from the habitation of the angels.” The most com-plete collection of the translations which have been given of this passage, is to be found in Jac. Ode, de Angelis, p. 799, et seq., though he does not himself consider that this passage re-fers to angels. “He sent them provisions” refers to Exodus 12:39, “they had provided no provisions.” The לשבע is from Exodus 16:3.-The murmuring Israelites had desired not only bread, but flesh, according to ver. 20. The 26 and following verses describe how this was given to them. “He caused the east wind to blow in heaven,” rests on Numbers 11:31, “and there went forth a wind from the Lord”; from which passage it is clear that “the heaven” is introduced as the habitation of God, corresponding to “from the Lord”, and being parallel to “by his power.” In the fundamental passage it is only the wind in general that is spoken of; we have here the east wind and thesouth wind. The Berleb.: “Both of these are winds which bytheir strength carry along with them every thing that comes intheir way; and were therefore employed to collect and carryforward the fowls.” It is self-evident that the Psalmist doesnot understand the two winds as blowing together, but in suc-cession. On ver. 27 compare Exodus 16:3, Numbers 11:31; Numbers 11:32. Theימטר assimilates the quails to the manna. On “he let fall inthe midst of his camp,” in ver. 28, (the suffix is to be referred toIsrael), compare Exodus 16:13, “they covered the camp.” Onסכיב, Numbers 11:31.-The expression, “they were fully satisfied"in ver. 27, shows that their wish was gratified not only complete-ly, but to excess: compare Num. 9:18-20.

The תאוה, lust,is from Numbers 11:4. In preference to, “he gave them whatthey wanted,” we may, on account of what follows, translate, “hebrought to them (Job 42:11, 1 Kings 9:9,) the object of theirlust,” or “the thing for which they lusted."-On ver. 30 com-pare Numbers 11:33, “the flesh was still between their teeth, ithad not yet been finished,” יכרת לא.

Corresponding to this last expression we have, “they were not parted from their lust,”- זור is “to turn back,” “to be removed,” “to be estranged from.” Hence, and also in accordance with the pa-rallelism, תאוה cannot here mean “lust,” (several: still they did not go against their passion), but only “the object of lust.” This translation also is the only one that corresponds to the history. The depopulating sickness originated even with the loathing and the surfeiting. Even while their wish was being gratified, their punishment was preparing: compare Numbers 11:20 with ver 33. The otherwise strange expression זרו has been in-troduced from the allusion to Numbers 11:20, “and it was loath-some,” לזרא, properly, “for estrangement”,�were not separated, but inwardly they were all the more so. On ver. 31, compare Numbers 11:33, “and the wrath of Jehovah burned against the people, and the Lord smote the people with a very great plague.” Among those who were struck down “the fat ones,” (compare Isaiah 10:16, Judges iii. 29, Psalms 105:15), and “the young,” are singled out and brought prominently forward, as the healthiest and the strong-est, who, in spite of their health and strength, were unable to resist the power of the depopulating disease which God sent among the people. The הרג with ב, is “to strangle among.” But the Israelites, in the days of old, fully manifested them-selves to be a rebellious and a refractory generation, in that they were not, even by those severe visitations, brought to a right state of mind, but continued still to persevere in sinning against God.

They were therefore visited with an annihilating divine judgment. They turned to God when this lay immediate-ly upon them, but their repentance never was any thing else than superficial.

It was thus that they acted towards their God, who was full of compassion and love. Truly, therefore, Israel, in the days of old, was a refractory and a rebellious generation:–this it was the immediate design of the Psalmist to shew.-Ver. 32. With all this they sinned yet more, and believed not for his wondrous works. Ver. 33. Therefore he caused their days to be consumed in vanity, and their years in terror. Ver. 34. When he slew them, they inquired after him and returned and sought God. Ver. 35. And remembered that God was their rock, and God the Most High their Redeemer. Ver. 30. And they dissem-bled to him with their mouth, and they lied to him with their tongue. Ver. 37. And their heart was not firm with him, and they were not steadfast in his covenant. Ver. 38. And he is compassionate, forgives their iniquities, and destroys them not, and often turns away his wrath and awakens not all his zeal. Ver. 39. And he remembered that they were flesh, a breath which passes away without returning. Ver. 40. How often did they rebel in the wilderness, and vex him in the desert?-It is evi-dent from Numbers 14:11, and also from the following verse, that “they sinned yet more,” in ver. 32, refers to the conduct of the Israelites after the return of the spies. The correct trans-lation of the following clause is not, “they believed in his won-derful works,” but “they believed (God, comp. ver. 22) through his wonderful works.” This is evident from the fundamental passage, Numbers 14:11, “And the Lord said to Moses, how long will this people provoke me, and how long will it be ere they believe me for all the signs which I have shewed among them?” -Ver. 33 refers to the condition into which the Israelites were brought in consequence of the divine judgments subsequent to the sending out of the spies.

The vanity denotes the useless character of their existence, and the entire state of helplessness into which they were brought. The terror refers to the extra-ordinary tokens of divine wrath which broke in upon them, and by which they were hurried off the earth: compare, “when he slew them,” in the following verse and in Psalms 73:19.-Theexpression, “when he slew them,” in ver. 34, refers to the.- judgments from the sending out of the spies till the death of Moses, beyond which it is not possible to go, throughout this description, without destroying the entire organism of the Psalm.

On ver. 36, Berleb.: “What a large book might be written on the similarity, in this respect, of the people in our own day! The seats of repentance might speak here!”–In re-ference to נכון, in ver. 7, compare at Psalms 51:10. In ver. 38- and 39, with a view to place the conduct of Israel in a correct light, prominence is given to the truth, that they acted in this way towards their God, who was full of compassion and love. Ver. 38 is thrown into a very general form, but the general af-firmations are made with a special application, as the inserted preter. הרבה shews, to case en hand: and he is, according to the proof afforded by his conduct at this time, compassionate, &c. Allusion is made to the fundamental passage Exodus 34:6; Exodus 34:7;–instead of כפר there stands there נשא, and instead of השהית as in Deuteronomy 4:31, there is there נקה. Berleb.: “He destroy- ed them not altogether and suddenly; he did not direct against them any judgments which would have destroyed them utterly, so as to requite them in his wrath all at once, as he had often threatened to Moses that he would do,” Exodus 32:10, Numbers 14:12; Numbers 16:21.

On ver 39, compare “er kennt das arm Gemilchte, Gott Weiss wir Sind nun Staub,” &c. in the poem, Nun lob, meine Seele, den Herrn. The suffering and the brevity of this life, form a reason why God does not act altogether strictly with us: compare Psalms 103:14-16.

On the second clause, compare the dependant passage in Job 10:24, “Ere I go without return (to the upper world), to the land of darkness and of the shadow of death.”

Psalms 78:32-40

But the Israelites, in the days of old, fully manifested themselves to be a rebellious and a refractory generation, in that they were not, even by those severe visitations, brought to a right state of mind, but continued still to persevere in sinning against God. They were therefore visited with an annihilating divine judgment. They turned to God when this lay immediately upon them, but their repentance never was any thing else than superficial. It was thus that they acted towards their God, who was full of compassion and love. Truly, therefore, Israel, in the days of old, was a refractory and a rebellious generation:—this it was the immediate design of the Psalmist to show. Ver. 32. With all this they sinned yet more, and believed not for his wondrous works. Ver. 33. Therefore he caused their days to be consumed in vanity, and their years in terror. Ver. 34. When he slew them, they inquired after him and returned and sought God.

Ver. 35. And remembered that God was their rock, and God the Most High their Redeemer. Ver. 30. And they dissembled to him with their mouth, and they lied to him with their tongue. Ver. 37. And their heart was not firm with him, and they were not steadfast in his covenant.

Ver. 38. And he is compassionate, forgives their iniquities, and destroys them not, and often turns away his wrath and awakens not all his zeal. Ver. 39. And he remembered that they were flesh, a breath which passes away without returning. Ver. 40. How often did they rebel in the wilderness, and vex him in the desert?It is evident from Numbers 14:11, and also from the following verse, that “they sinned yet more,” in Psalms 78:32, refers to the conduct of the Israelites after the return of the spies.

The correct translation of the following clause is not, “they believed in his wonderful works,” but “they believed (God, comp. Psalms 78:22) through his wonderful works.” This is evident from the fundamental passage, Numbers 14:11, “And the Lord said to Moses, how long will this people provoke me, and how long will it be ere they believe me for all the signs which I have showed among them?” Psalms 78:33 refers to the condition into which the Israelites were brought in consequence of the divine judgments subsequent to the sending out of the spies. The vanity denotes the useless character of their existence, and the entire state of godlessness into which they fell. The terror refers to the extraordinary tokens of divine wrath which broke in upon them, and by which they were hurried off the earth: compare, “when he slew them,” in the following verse and in Psalms 73:19. The expression, “when he slew them,” in Psalms 78:34, refers to the judgments from the sending out of the spies till the death of Moses, beyond which it is not possible to go, throughout this description, without destroying the entire organism of the Psalm. On Psalms 78:36, Berleb.: “What a large book might be written on the similarity, in this respect, of the people in our own day! The seats of repentance might speak here!” In reference to πλεο, in Psalms 78:7, compare at Psalms 51:10. In Psalms 78:38 and Psalms 78:39, with a view to place the conduct of Israel in a correct light, prominence is given to the truth, that they acted in this way towards their God, who was full of compassion and love. Psalms 78:38 is thrown into a very general form, but the general affirmations are made with a special application, as the inserted preter. δψαδ shows, to case en hand: and he is, according to the proof afforded by his conduct at this time, compassionate, &c. Allusion is made to the fundamental passage Exodus 34:6-7;—instead of λτψ there stands there πωΰ, and instead of δωηιϊ as in Deuteronomy 4:31, there is there πχη. Berleb.: “He destroyed them not altogether and suddenly; he did not direct against them any judgments which would have destroyed them utterly, so as to requite them in his wrath all at once, as he had often threatened to Moses that he would do,” Exodus 32:10, Numbers 14:12, Numbers 16:21. On Psalms 78:39, compare “er kennt das arm Gemδchte, Gott weiss wir sind nun taub,” &c. in the poem, Nun lob, meine Seele, den Herrn.

The suffering and the brevity of this life, form a reason why God does not act altogether strictly with us: compare Psalms 103:14-16. On the second clause, compare the dependant passage in Job 10:24, “Ere I go without return (to the upper world), to the land of darkness and of the shadow of death.”

Psalms 78:41-55

The Psalmist, in considering the conduct of the Israelites during the period of the Judges, with a view to the exhortation, “be ye not like your fathers,” having exhibited a picture of this rebellious and refractory race, now proceeds, in prosecution of his object, to shew the similarity of the Israelites during the period of the Judges. After a short notice, in ver. 41 and 42, there follows, in ver. 43-45, with a view to exhibit their guilt in its true light, a representation of the grace and the mercies by which God had laid them under obligations, no less than he had their fathers at an earlier period.-Ver. 41. And they tempted God anew, and dishonoured the Holy One of Israel.Ver. 42, They did not remember his hand, on the day when he redeemed them from the enemy. Ver. 43. Who laid down his signs in Egypt, and his wonders in the plain of Zoan. Ver. 44. He turned their rivers into blood, and they drank not their water. Ver. 45. He sent against them vermin, which devoured them, and frogs which destroyed them. Ver. 46. He gave to the cater-pillar their increase, and their labour to the locust. Ver. 47. He destroyed their vines by hail, and their sycamore trees by frost. Ver. 48. He gave up their cattle to the hail, and their flocks to the flames. Ver. 49. He sent against them the fierceness of his wrath, anger and indignation and trouble, a host of afflic- tion-angels. Ver. 50. He made a way for his wrath, he spared not their soul from death, and gave their life over to the pesti- lence. Ver. 51. And slew all the first born in Egypt, the chief of their strength in the tents of Ham. Ver. 52. Then he caused his people to go forth like sheep, and led them like a flock in the wilderness. Ver. 53. And he led them on sqfely, and they feared not, but the sea covered their enemies. Ver. 54. And he brought them to his holy boundary, the mountain which his right hand had procured. Ver. 55. And he drove out before them the hea-then, and caused them to fall to them as an inheritance, and the tribes of Israel dwelt in their tents.-That, in the 41st verse, Israel, during the period of the Judges, is the subject, is evident from the expression standing in opposition, in the 40th verse, “in the wilderness,” from the circumstance, that in the enume-ration of the wonderful deeds of God, the introduction to the land of Canaan is mentioned, and finally, from the 57th verse, where those here referred to are distinguished from the fathers in the wilderness. The temptation followed here, according to-ver. 56, where the subject is resumed, in consequence of their apostacy to idol worship, by which they put God to the proof, whether he would indeed demonstrate his true godhead. There is no necessity whatever for endeavouring to seek the uncertain aid of the cognate dialects in interpreting התוה. It occurs in Ezekiel 9:4, undoubtedly in the sense of, “to set a mark upon”: and in like manner, in the Pib. in 1 Samuel 21:14, Num. 34:7, 8, The mark, according to the connection, is one of disgrace, just as the Latin word notare, is used in the sense of dishonour, to disgrace. This sense accords well with the ap-pellation given to God, “The Holy One of Israel:” compare at Ps. 71:22. To cast reproach upon such a God, the Holyand the Glorious One, is the height of iniquity.-On “his hand.” in verse 42, i. e. “how his hand manifested itself at that time,” comp.

Exodus 7:5; Exodus 13:9. On “the enemy,” Deuteronomy 7:8.

In refe-rence to the paragraph, ver. 43-45, which the 42nd verse in-troduces, Venema remarks: “The design of this paragraph is, in the way of parenthesis, to exhibit in the most aggra-vated form the crime of tempting God, as conjoined with that of extreme ingratitude."-Ver. 43 is connected with verse 12. The signs, and the wonderful deeds of God, which were there shortly referred to, as exhibiting the depravi-ty of the fathers, are here depicted at length, in illustration of the depravity of the sons, for whose sakes, as well as their fathers’, these were brought to pass, and who were, equally with them, laid under the deepest obligations. The fundamental passage, to which also Psalms 105:27 refers, is Ex. 10:1, 2, “I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might lay down these my signs before him, and that thou mayest tell to thy son, and to thy grandson, what I have done in Egypt, and my signs which I have laid down before them."-The enumeration of the wonders and signs begins with the first, and ends with the last; in the middle, however, the Psalmist speaks with considerable latitude.-In ver. 44, the first of the wonders wrought, or the first plague, was the turning of the water into blood. The יארים is from Exodus 7:19, (compare Egypt. p. 119), and denotes here in a wider sense, the arms and the canals of the Nile, the latter of which are called, in that passage, streams. The second clause refers to Exodus 7:18; Exodus 7:20.-The gnats are al-together omitted; the third and the fourth plague are inverted in ver. 45. On Arob, properly mixture, dirt, then flies, com-pare Eg. p. 114.

The expression, “and they consumed them”, is not at all againt this sense. Philo, in describing the dog-flies of Egypt, says: “They rest not until they have satisfied them-selves with blood and flesh,” Schהfer in Mich.

Suppl. “it gorges itself with blood, and makes bloody boils, severe pains.” The השהית, is from Exodus 8:20, where it is used of the vermin, here mixed up in one pair with the frogs.-On הסיל, in ver. 26,originally an appellative of the locust, 1 Kings 37, and after-wards poetically a name given to them, (הסל is used in Deuteronomy 28:38, of “the feeding of the locusts”), compare Chris. III. p. 157.-The vine is particularly mentioned in the Mosaic record, as it is here in the 47th verse, and in Psalms 105:33, in connectionwith the devastation produced by hail. The “blunder against history” recoils upon the head of the critic, who brings such an accusation against the Psalmist. Compare the proof that in Egypt the vine was cultivated, and wine made from the earliest times, Egypt. p. 12.-In ver. 47, the destruction in the vegetable world is described, and after that, in ver. 48, the ruin that fell upon the cattle, and thus by gradual ascent, man himself is reached, vet 49-51. The second clause refers to the fire among the hail, which is expressly mentioned in Exodus 9:23; Exodus 9:24 : compare also Psalms 105:32, Wis. 16:16. The רשף, means always flame, never lightning: although in this passage, it is certainly the fire of heaven, or lightning, that is meant.

This observation also sets aside the miserable conjecture, דבר, pestilence, for ברד.�Ver. 49-51, refer singly and alone to the last and the severest plague, the death of the first born in Egypt, as is seen from the manifest reference to it in ver. 49. The three days’ darkness, as well as the gnats and the destruction of the cattle, are passed over wholly in silence. In the first half of ver. 49th, the accumulation of terms, signifying divine wrath, is designed to set forth the dreadful nature of this last judgment, which is mentioned for the first time in plain language, at the end of the whole description in verse 57. In the second clause, רעים is to be taken in the sense of mala, as for example, atPro_12:12, the genitive in the object.: compare מוה מלאכי, in Proverbs 16:14. The fundamental passage is Exodus 12:13; Exodus 12:23, according to which, the death of the first born in Egypt is said to have been accomplished by the destroyer, המשהית:pare Hebrews 11:28. It is doubtful whether the משהית is used in Exod., collectively, for an army of destroying angels, as in Lamentations 13:17, or denotes merely the angel of the Lord appointed to execute vengeance, a sense which is favoured by 2 Samuel 24:16. In this latter case, the Psalmist must be supposed to point expressly, only to the retinue by which the “Captain of the Lord’s host,” as the Angel of the Lord is called in Joshua 5:15, would, as a matter of course, on such an occasion be attended: -the commander goes forth to battle, only at the head of his army. The translation, “an host of evil angels,” might, if necessary, be justified grammatically,–angels who belong to the class of evil angels. But the reference to the passage above quoted in Exod., where no mention whatever is made of evil angels, and where the destroyer appears as in intimate com-mullion with God,-the analogy of the judgment of God upon the Assyrians, which was effected by the Angel of the Lord, 2 Kings 19:34, and the whole doctrine of Scripture, on the subject of angels, are altogether against it:-Jac. Ode, de Angelis, p. 741, et seq., skews that God sends good angels to punish wicked men, and employs bad angels to chastise good men. The idea, however, that “bad” stands instead of “evil bringing,” is undoubtedly contrary to the language. It is better to translate: angels of the wicked, i. e. sent to punish them.-In ver. 50, the דבר re-quires attention. In the account, as given in Exod, there is nothing expressly said, as to the death of the first born being occasioned by pestilence. Still, chapter 9:15, and the natural analogies, lead to this: compare Egypt, p. 126, et seq.-In the 51st verse, “the beginning of their strength”, a poetical expres-sion for “the first born”, is taken from Jacob’s blessing, Genesis 49:3; as it is also in Deuteronomy 49:3. Egypt is called the land of Ham, in reference to Genesis 10:6, according to which, the Egyptians descended from Ham.-In ver. 52, “he made his people to go forth,” is from Exodus 12:37 : compare 15:22. The wilderness began on this side the Red Sea, Exodus 14:3, so that the guidance of the Israelites through it, which in ver. 53 is brought prominently forward, as the point from which their being guided like a flock is viewed, forms a portion of their guidance through the wilderness.–In “they were not afraid”, it is not the faith of the Israelites, according to the connection, that is praised, but the grace of God, which removed from them all cause of fear. The second clause renders it evident, that the Psalmist’s thoughts are chiefly dwelling upon the pas-sage through the Red Sea: compare Exodus 15:19, where the safety of the Israelites, and the destruction of the enemies, are both connected together.-In ver. 54, Mount Zion is named next after the holy land, as the centre of it, and as representing it. Although this mountain was not brought under the power of the Israelites till the time of David, it is viewed, as if from the beginning it had formed part of the land. It had already been hallowed, by a transaction which occurred in patriarchaltimes, Genesis 22. (compare the Beitr. p. 195), and in the dim obscurity of prophecy, it had been pointed out, as the spiritual centre in future times of the land, Exodus 15:13; Exodus 15:17.

The verse before us is founded on this last passage. These fundamental passages, especially the concluding clause of the second, “tothe sanctuary, O Lord, which thy hands have prepared,” exclude a reference, which. several expositors have sought to find to the land of Canaan, in connection with Deuteronomy 3:25, where it is called “this goodly mountain.” Ewald’s idea that Shiloh is referred to, is set aside by the considerations, that it would have been utterly inconsistent with the object which the Psalmist had in view, to have given prominence to Shiloh, and that the Mount Zion, which the Lord loves, appears as the definite seat of the sanctuary, (compare Psalms 74:2; Psalms 68:16), and finally, from the circumstance, that the ruins of Shiloh are situated upon a little hill, which is overshadowed by the mountains in its neighbourhood, Robinson, III. 1, p. 303.-That in ver, 55, we must interpret, “he caused them, (i. e. their territory), to fallas an inheritance,” (the הבל is properly the measuring-line, and not unfrequently, the portion of land measured, compare at Psalms 16:6), is evident from the fundamental passage, Num. 34:2, “this is the land which has fallen to you as an inhe-ritance,” בנהלה, and from the parallel passage, Psalms 105:11.

Psalms 78:56-72

In ver. 56-64, the representation of the rebelliousness of the Israelites is continued during the period of the Judges, and at-tention is directed to the divine judgments which overtook them, as they had overtaken their fathers in a former age, after they failed in fulfilling the appointment which had been made to them, not to insult God as their fathers had done. Ver. 56. And they tempted and grieved God the Most High, and did not observe his testimonies. Ver. 57. And turned back and were faithless, they changed like a deceitful bow. Ver. 58. And en-raged him by their high places, and provoked him by their idols. Ver. 59. When God heard, he was angry, and cast Israel far off. Ver. 60. And forsook the habitation of Shiloh, the tabernacle which he erected among men. Ver. 61. And gave up his strength to captivity, and his glory into the hand of the enemy. Ver. 62. And gave over his people to the sword, and was wroth against his inheritance. Ver. 63. The fire consumed their young men, and their maidens were not celebrated. Ver. 64. Their priests fell by the sword, and their widows did not weep.-On ver. 56-58, compare Judges 2:7, and following verses.a Ver. 56 refers to a Venema: “The prophet having brought to a close this parenthetical re- view of the judgments of God, upon the enemies, and of the benefits conferred on Israel, resumes the thread of his discourse, and enlarges at considerable Deuteronomy 6:16; Deuteronomy 6:17 : “Ye shall not tempt the Lord your God, as ye tempted him at Massah: they observed not the command-ments of the Lord and his testimonies.”-“As their fathers,” in ver. 57, points back to ver. 8. “They changed,” in contrast to what they should have been and had been, indicates an inci-pient change of conduct for the better: compare Judges 2:7.–A deceitful bow, is one which disappoints the trust placed in it, just as streams which, in summer, when they are most needed, become dry, are said to be deceitful and faithless, Isaiah 58:11, Job 6:15. The Israelites, instead of being compared to cow-ardly soldiers, as they are in ver. 9, are here compared to use-less weapons. Hosea 7:16, “they are like a deceitful bow,” depends on our passage. The הכעיס, in ver. 58, is from Deuteronomy 32:21, and the הקניא from Deuteronomy 32:16; Deuteronomy 32:21 : comp. Exodus 20:5.-Ver. 59 is intentionally the same as ver. 21:–they were faithless like their fathers, and therefore there is repeated upon them the punishment of their fathers. Israel is here the whole nation, as at ver. 55. It is against them, and not against the ten tribes only, that the charge of apostacy is brought, ver. 56 -58, it was upon them that the punishments described in the following verses fell, from the forsaking of the sanctuary in Shiloh onward, which involved them in all that followed, and from which all Israel, and not Ephraim only, had to suffer. On ver. 60 Calvin: “It is a most impressive expression, that God should have been offended by the constant transgressions of his people, so as to be constrained to forsake the only place which he had selected upon earth.” The holy tabernacle was at Shiloh, during the whole period of the Judges: compare the Beitr. p. 52, et seq. That God did forsake his sanctuary in that place, so that it became like a dead carcass without a soul, was visibly demonstrated to all men, by the catastrophe described in the following verses, and more especially when the ark of the covenant actually came into the hands of the Philis-tines. The men of those days were informed, by facts which took place before their eyes, that God would never again dwell in Shiloh:-the ark of the covenant was not brought back to that length, upon the statement which had been briefly made in ver. 41, as to the temptation and rebellion of the people.” On this, we would observe, that the word, “parenthetical”, must be either removed, or at least, explained and modified. Compare the introduction.place, and the holy tabernacle was removed from it, first to Nob, 1 Samuel 21:2, and subsequently, after the destruction of that city by Saul, to Gibeon, 1 Kings 3:4. Jeremiah repre-sents this catastrophe, as a declaration made by God in deeds, that he would not again dwell at Shiloh. In chap. 7:12, after warning the people not to substitute a blind confidence in the temple, in room of true repentance, he says: “Go to my place at Shiloh, where I caused my name to dwell, at the beginning, and see what I have done to it, on account of the wickedness of my people Israel:” compare ver. 14, 26:6, passages which do not at all refer to a destruction of the place by enemies, of which the history knows nothing, but to a desolation of it, fol-lowing in consequence of the removal of the sanctuary, which in reality proceeded not from man, but from God. The mat-ter, however, did not end with this removal. The sanctuary was, and continued to be a corpse, until it rose in a glorified form on Zion: compare ver. 68 and 69, according to which the true sanctuary passed directly from Shiloh to Jerusalem, Beitr.

III. 48. שכן signifies in Pih. to make, or to cause to dwell, (compare Deuteronomy 12:11, and other passages), and never to dwell. Luther falsely: when he dwelt among men. “To cause to dwell” is applied to the sanctuary in Joshua 18:1, “And the whole congregation of the children of Israel assembled toge-ther at Shiloh, and they made to dwell there (the Hiph. instead of the Pih.) the tabernacle of meeting:” compare ch. 22:19.

The erection of the holy tabernacle was only in a lower sense, that is, as far as its boards, &c. are concerned, the work of men, who even here wrought under the direction of God. As far as regards its substance, the sanctuary was singly and alone, the work of God, who, in fulfilment of his promise, “I will dwell in the midst of you,” Exodus 25:8, breathed into the body the living soul, and caused his name to dwell there, Deuteronomy 12:11. The church is, in, spite of all builders and carpenters, always built only by the Lord. It is only in consequence of not adopting this spiritual sense, that some expositors have felt them-selves obliged to have recourse to the violent assumption of a double ellipsis:-the tabernacle (where) he caused (his name) to dwell among men. Compare Ezekiel 11. where the substance of the tabernacle, the Shechinah, went back into heaven. The words call down a woe upon the wickedness of the people,by which they rendered themselves unworthy, and robbed themselves, of such a glorious privilege.-In ver. 61, the ark of the covenant is called the strength of God, (עז has only this sense), because it was the pledge of the manifestation of divine power on behalf of Israel, and, as it were, its seat and foun-tain, so that, in consequence of the loss of it, they were given up as a helpless prey to their enemies: compare Psalms 132:8, 1 Samuel 4:3, and the Beitr.

III.-p. 54.. In like manner, the ark of the covenant is called the ornament of God, as the place of manifestation of his glory.

As such, the ark of the covenant is call-ed also the honour or the glory of Israel, 1 Samuel 4:21, to whom Luther, after the example of the Septuagint and the Vulgate, falsely refers the suffix in this passage.-Ver. 62 refers more particularly to the great slaughter by the Philistines, in which thirty thousand Israelites perished, 1 Samuel 4:10.-In ver. 63, the fire is the fire of battle: compare Numbers 21:28. Instead of, they were celebrated or praised, Luther has: they must re-main unmarried. The praises of the bride used to be cele-brated on the day of her marriage. Now, that the young then are slain, the voices of the bridegroom and of the bride are alike hushed in silence.-The first clause of verse 64 refers to the death of the sons of Eli, 1 Samuel 4:11; 1 Samuel 4:17. The weeping is the solemn mourning: compare Genesis 23:2. This presup-poses the presence of the dead body, and takes place at the in-terment. Compare Jeremiah 22:18, where it is said of Jehoiakim: “They shall not lament for him, saying, Ah, my brother, Ah, Lord, he shall be buried with the burial of an ass.” It is clear as day, that our passage is the original one, and that Job 27:15, “where his widows weep not,” occurs word for word, is the copy. The singular affix, as there used, where it is the ungodly that is spoken of, has a strange appearance as applied to an ideal person; and this strange appearance is assuredly of itself sufficient to indicate the original. Now the Lord has again received his people into favour, but, in the exercise of his sovereign authority, he has at the same time made a change in regard to internal arrangements; and woe to the man who will not acquiesce in these appointments! Ver. 65-72.-Ver. 65. Then the Lord awaked like one sleep-ing, like a warrior rejoicing with wine. Ver. 66. And he struck back his enemies, he gave them an eternal reproach. Ver. 67.But he rejected the tents of Joseph, and selected not the tribe of Ephraim. Ver. 68. And selected the tribe of Judah, the Mount Zion which he loved. Ver. 69. And built like high mountains his sanctuary, like the earth which he has founded for ever. Ver. 70. And he selected David his servant, and took him from the flocks of sheep. Ver. 71. He brought him from the suckling sheep, that he might feed Jacob his people, and Israel his inheri- tance. Ver. 72. And he fed them with upright heart, and guided them, with skilful hands. In the song of Moses, it is said to be the way of God, that he first punishes the sins of his people, and then delivers them out of the oppressive power of the in-struments of his punishment. The Psalmist announces, in ver. 65 and 66, that God, on this occasion also, adopted this me-thod. These verses refer to the prosperous events which hap-pened under Samuel, Saul, and David, the commencement of which is related in. 1 Samuel 5.

The מתרונן is not to be derived from the imaginary root, רען, to overpower, Hiph. to be over-powered, which would furnish an incongruous (for a man recover-ing from intoxication does not rejoice) and an ignoble figure, such as is never employed in Scripture, but from the very com-mon root רנן, to rejoice, to shout for joy:�rejoicing with wine, one who has increased by wine the strength and cou-rage which always belong to him: compare Psalms 104:16. It has been erroneously said, that this does not suit with the “awak-ing.” There might be some force in this objection, were the expression, instead of “like one sleeping,” “from his sleep,” which, in Judges 16:14; Judges 16:20, is used of Samson. “To awake,” however, is used in a figurative sense, and denotes the return from repose to action.–On ver. 66 Luther, instead of “back,” has, “on the back parts,” with reference to 1 Samuel 5:9.

But אהור, in such connections, always signifies “back,” although sometimes it has the sense of “behind,” and, at the most, there is an allusion to that circumstance and double sense. The eternal shame is in accordance with the history. The Philistines went downward step by step, till they disappeared from the scene altogether. The expression, “and he rejected,” refers back to ver. 59; the rejection of all Israel had come to an end, but the rejection of the house of Joseph, and specially of the tribe of Ephraim, who held the sceptre of that house, still re-mained. This rejection is limited by the connection. It didnot relate to their forming part of the Lord’s people.

This privilege Ephraim at that time retained in all its integrity: and even at a later period, when he had actually apostatized, it was not wholly withdrawn; as the sending of the prophets from time to time made manifest. It relates singly and alone to the pre-cedency, which was transferred to Judah.

Ephraim irrevocably lost this. In ver. 48, the Psalmist says in general, that the Lord had selected Judah and Mount Zion; and Zion comes into notice as invested with a twofold excellence;–it is the seat of the sanctuary and of the Israelitish monarchy. And in ver. 69- 72, both of the prerogatives, imparted to Judah and Zion, are men tioned separately; the sanctuary in ver. 69, and the monarchy in ver. 70-72.-The first clause of ver. 69 refers to the glory and, spiritual excellence of the sanctuary on Zion; and the second to its unchangeableness, in opposition to Shiloh, from which it wasremoved:-it is high as the mountains, firm as the earth, and therefore it presents an impenetrable bulwark against every at- tempt which might be made to remove it. רמים, high, not heights, is a poetical expression for high mountains. To the eye of faith, the sanctuary in Zion, which at that time present-ed externally an insignificant appearance, seemed to rise like a mighty giant to heaven. Against the translation, “like heaven’s height,” we may urge, that רם is the common term applied to a mountain, (comp. for example, the רמה, in so many of the proper names of high-lying places), while it is never applied to heaven, and that the sanctuary on Zion is never compared to heaven, but frequently to high hills,-comp. Psalms 68:15; Psalms 68:16, and the passages quoted there.

On the second clause, comp. Psalms 68:16, “the Lord shall dwell there for ever,” and Psalms 132:14, “this is my rest for ever.” The Psalmist has no anti-cipation of an impending destruction of the temple, foretold as it was by the oldest of the prophets. Still, this is not absolutely excluded by the expression, “for ever.” For even the eternity of the earth is not absolute, according to the doctrine of the Old Testament: comp. Ps. eii. 27.-The call of David from the con-dition of a shepherd, ver. 70, 71, indicates “the pious and pru-dent shepherd-concern of the chosen king.” (Steir): Who is the man that would rebel against such a king, graciously granted by God, instead of rendering him thanks! “It is for this reason also, that mention is made of the suckling sheep, because, in at tending to these, the faithfulness of the shepherd is most con- spicuously seen:” comp. Isaiah 40:11, and for the whole, 2 Sam. vii. 8, “I have taken thee from the sheep-cote, from following the sheep, to feed my people Israel,” 1 Chronicles 11:2. The רעה with ב, is “to tend,” or, “to perform the duties of a shepherd among the sheep."-Stier: “ Serve therefore this king whom God has given you with faithfulness, come together under his shepherd’s rod to the sanctuary of Zion, and do not revolt like your fathers:"-this is the concluding fundamental tone of the whole Psalm. END OF VOL. II. J. THOMSON, PRINTER, MILNE SQUARE.

Psalms 78:65-72

Now the Lord has again received his people into favour, but, in the exercise of his sovereign authority, he has at the same time made a change in regard to internal arrangements; and woe to the man who will not acquiesce in these appointments! Psalms 78:65-72. Ver. 65. Then the Lord awaked like one sleeping, like a warrior rejoicing with wine. Ver. 66. And he struck back his enemies, he gave them an eternal reproach. Ver. 67. But he rejected the tents of Joseph, and selected not the tribe of Ephraim.

Ver. 68. And selected the tribe of Judah, the Mount Zion which he loved. Ver. 69. And built like high mountains his sanctuary, like the earth which he has founded for ever. Ver. 70. And he selected David his servant, and took him from the flocks of sheep.

Ver. 71. He brought him from the suckling sheep, that he might feed Jacob his people, and Israel his inheritance. Ver. 72. And he fed them with upright heart, and guided them, with skilful hands. In the song of Moses, it is said to be the way of God, that he first punishes the sins of his people, and then delivers them out of the oppressive power of the instruments of his punishment. The Psalmist announces, in Psalms 78:65 and Psalms 78:66, that God, on this occasion also, adopted this method.

These verses refer to the prosperous events which happened under Samuel, Saul, and David, the commencement of which is related in. 1 Samuel 5. The ξϊψεπο is not to be derived from the imaginary root, ψςο, to overpower, Hiph. to be overpowered, which would furnish an incongruous (for a man recovering from intoxication does not rejoice) and an ignoble figure, such as is never employed in Scripture, but from the very common root ψπο, to rejoice, to shout for joy:—a warrior rejoicing with wine, one who has increased by wine the strength and courage which always belong to him: compare Psalms 104:16. It has been erroneously said, that this does not suit with the “awaking.” There might be some force in this objection, were the expression, instead of “like one sleeping,” “from his sleep,” which, in Judges 16:14, Judges 16:20, is used of Samson. “To awake,” however, is used in a figurative sense, and denotes the return from repose to action. On Psalms 78:66 Luther, instead of “back,” has, “on the back parts,” with reference to 1 Samuel 5:9. But ΰηεψ, in such connections, always signifies “back,” although sometimes it has the sense of “behind,” and, at the most, there is an allusion to that circumstance and double sense. The eternal shame is in accordance with the history. The Philistines went downward step by step, till they disappeared from the scene altogether. The expression, “and he rejected,” refers back to Psalms 78:59; the rejection of all Israel had come to an end, but the rejection of the house of Joseph, and specially of the tribe of Ephraim, who held the sceptre of that house, still remained. This rejection is limited by the connection.

It did not relate to their forming part of the Lord’s people. This privilege Ephraim at that time retained in all its integrity: and even at a later period, when he had actually apostatized, it was not wholly withdrawn; as the sending of the prophets from time to time made manifest. It relates singly and alone to the precedency, which was transferred to Judah. Ephraim irrevocably lost this. In Psalms 78:48, the Psalmist says in general, that the Lord had selected Judah and Mount Zion; and Zion comes into notice as invested with a twofold excellence;—it is the seat of the sanctuary and of the Israelitish monarchy. And in Psalms 78:69-72, both of the prerogatives, imparted to Judah and Zion, are mentioned separately; the sanctuary in Psalms 78:69, and the monarchy in Psalms 78:70-72. The first clause of Psa 78:69 refers to the loftiness and, spiritual heigth of the sanctuary on Zion; and the second to its unchangeableness, in opposition to Shiloh, from which it was removed:—it is high as the mountains, firm as the earth, and therefore it presents an impenetrable bulwark against every attempt which might be made to remove it. ψξιν, high, not heights, is a poetical expression for high mountains. To the eye of faith, the sanctuary in Zion, which at that time presented externally an insignificant appearance, seemed to rise like a mighty giant to heaven. Against the translation, “like heaven’s height,” we may urge, that ψν is the common term applied to a mountain, (comp. for example, the ψξδ, in so many of the proper names of high-lying places), while it is never applied to heaven, and that the sanctuary on Zion is never compared to heaven, but frequently to high hills,—comp. Psalms 68:15-16, and the passages quoted there. On the second clause, comp. Psalms 68:16, “the Lord shall dwell there for ever,” and Psalms 132:14, “this is my rest for ever.” The Psalmist has no anticipation of an impending destruction of the temple, foretold as it was by the oldest of the prophets.

Still, this is not absolutely excluded by the expression, “for ever.” For even the eternity of the earth is not absolute, according to the doctrine of the Old Testament: comp. Psalms 102:27. The call of David from the condition of a shepherd, Psalms 78:70-71, indicates “the pious and prudent shepherd-concern of the chosen king.” (Steir): Who is the man that would rebel against such a king, graciously granted by God, instead of rendering him thanks! “It is for this reason also, that mention is made of the suckling sheep, because, in attending to these, the faithfulness of the shepherd is most conspicuously seen:” comp. Isaiah 40:11, and for the whole, 2 Samuel 7:8, “I have taken thee from the sheep-cote, from following the sheep, to feed my people Israel,” 1 Chronicles 11:2. The ψςδ with α, is “to tend,” or, “to perform the duties of a shepherd among the sheep.” Stier: “Serve therefore this king whom God has given you with faithfulness, come together under his shepherd’s rod to the sanctuary of Zion, and do not revolt like your fathers:”—this is the concluding fundamental tone of the whole Psalm.