Psalms 120

Psalms 120:1-7

Psalms 1201. (Psalms 120:1) A Song of the Ascents. To Jehovah, in my distress, I called, and he answered me. This is the first of fifteen psalms (cxx.— cxxxiv.), all bearing the inscription, song of ascents or upgoings, i. e. sung during the periodical journeys or pilgrimages to Jerusalem at the times of the great yearly festivals. On these occasions the people are said, even in historical prose, to go up to Jerusalem, in reference both to its physical and moral elevation. See Exodus 34:24, 1 Kings 12:27-28. The Hebrew verb employed in such connections is the root of the noun Ascents in these inscriptions.

This explanation of the title is much more satisfactory than any other which has been proposed. A rabbinical tradition represents these psalms as having been sung by the people, as they ascended the fifteen steps, seven on one side and eight on the other, repeatedly mentioned by Ezekiel (Ezekiel 40:6; Ezekiel 40:22; Ezekiel 40:26; Ezekiel 40:31; Ezekiel 40:34; Ezekiel 40:37).

But apart from the intrinsic improbability of this tradition, some psalms in the series were evidently not meant to be sung at the temple. No less improbable than this very ancient explanation is the modern one, that the inscription has reference to a peculiarity of structure, the repetition of a phrase or clause of one sentence in the next with an addition, forming a kind of climax or progression in the terms as well as the ideas. But even admitting that this peculiarity of form might be described by the Hebrew word in question, this word could not have been prefixed to each of the fifteen psalms, when the examples of the fact alleged are confined almost exclusively to one or two of them. Much nearer to the truth is the opinion, that these psalms were intended to be sung during the return from Babylon, which is called an ascent by Ezra (Ezra 2:9). But this can only be maintained by arbitrarily denying the genuineness of the titles, which ascribe four of the psalms (Psalms 122, 124, 131, 133.) to David, and one (Psalms 127.) to Solomon. The position assigned to these, and the difference of tone between them and the rest, are ingeniously accounted for by Hengstenberg’s hypothesis, that these five ancient psalms, sung by the people, as they went up to Jerusalem before the captivity, were made the basis of a whole series or system, designed for the same use by an inspired writer after the Restoration, who not only added ten psalms of his own, as appears from the identity of tone and diction, but joined them to the old ones in a studied and artificial manner, entirely inconsistent with the supposition of fortuitous or random combination.

The one psalm by Solomon stands in the centre of the series or system and divides it into two equal parts, in each of which we find two psalms of David and five anonymous or new ones, the former being separated and surrounded by the latter, an additional and strong proof of intended adaptation to the times when the later psalms were written, to which Hengstenberg still further adds the number and distribution of the divine names in the whole series and its subdivisions. The psalm immediately before is anonymous, but its tone and diction mark it as belonging to the period of the Restoration.

It begins with an acknowledgment of that great mercy, Psalms 120:1, followed by a prayer for deliverance from treacherous and spiteful enemies, Psalms 120:2, and a confident anticipation of their punishment, Psalms 120:3-4, but closes with a further lamentation and complaint of present sufferings, Psalms 120:5-7. In this, as in all the other psalms of the series, the ideal speaker is Israel or Judah, considered as the church or chosen people. This first verse, although general in its terms, is perfectly appropriate to the Captivity, as the distress out of which the sufferer cried to God, and to the Restoration, as the answer to his prayer. In my distress, literally in distress to me, an expression like that in Psalms 18:6. The augmented form of the Hebrew noun is like that in Psalms 3:2.

2. (Psalms 120:2) O Jehovah, free my soul from lip of falsehood, from tongue of fraud. The soul is particularly mentioned as usual when the life or the existence is in danger. The last two nouns in Hebrew are not in construction but in apposition, a tongue (which is) fraud, equivalent in meaning to the same English words in an inverted order, fraud-tongues. See a somewhat similar combination, Psalms 45:4; Psalms 60:4. The terms of the description are too strong to be applied to mere delusive promises, and necessarily suggest the idea of calumnious falsehood, as in Psalms 31:18; Psalms 119:69; Psalms 119:78. The reality answering to this description in the case of the restored Jews is the spiteful misrepresentation, by which the Samaritans retarded the rebuilding of the temple, as recorded in the fourth chapter of Ezra.

3. (Psalms 120:3) What will he give to thee, and what will he add to thee, thou tongue of fraud? Having complained to God of the false tongue, the ideal speaker turns to it as actually present, and addresses it directly, speaking of God in the third person. The meaning of the question is, what recompence can you expect from an infinitely righteous God for these malignant calumnies? The peculiar form of the interrogation is derived from that of an ancient oath, The Lord do so to me and more also, literally and so add, i.e. further do, or in addition to the thing in question. See 1 Samuel 3:17; 1 Samuel 14:44. As explained by this allusion, the words have a new force. What good or evil may be imprecated on thee, as the consequence of these malicious falsehoods.

4. (Psalms 120:4) Arrows of a warrior sharpened, (together) with coals of juniper. The general idea of severe and painful punishment is here expressed by the obvious and intelligible figures of keen arrows and hot coals. The arrows of a mighty man, warrior, or hero, are those used in battle, perhaps with an allusion to the fact, that one of the races mentioned in the next verse excelled in archery. See Isaiah 21:17. The word which the rabbinical tradition explains to mean the juniper, is by modern lexicographers identified with the Arabic name of a species of broom-plant, which is thought, on account of its inflammatory quality, to make the best charcoal. See Robinon’s Palestine, vol. i. p. 299. With the figures of the verse before us compare Psalms 7:13; Psalms 18:12-13; Psalms 140:10.

5. (Psalms 120:5) Alas for me, that I sojourn (with) Meshech, (and) dwell near the tents of Kedar! The first verb seems elsewhere, in the same construction, to denote the act of dwelling with one, Psalms 5:4. The Hebrew preposition in the last clause properly means with, and denotes association and proximity. The English Bible, by twice employing our preposition in, obscures the meaning of both clauses, which is not that the people were in the power or even in the midst of the enemies here mentioned, but compelled to reside near them and to suffer from their neighbourhood. Meshech is the name given in Genesis 10:2 to the Moschi, a barbarous people inhabiting the mountains between Colchis, Armenia, and Iberia. Kedar was one of the sons of Ishmael (Genesis 25:13), whose name is sometimes used to designate an Arabian tribe (Isaiah 21:16; Isaiah 42:11), and in later Hebrew the Arabians generally.

As these races, dwelling far off, in the north and south, were never in immediate or continued contact with the Israelites, they are pro bably named as types and representatives of warlike barbarism, just as the names Goths, Vandals, Huns, Turks, Tartars, Cossacks, have at different times been used proverbially in English, to describe those supposed to exhibit the same character, however unconnected or remote in genealogy and local habitation. A slight approach to the same usage was produced among ourselves by the revolutionary war, in reference to the national names, British and Hessian. In the case before us, it is evident from Psalms 120:6, that Meshech and Kedar are mere types and representatives of those who hate peace and delight in war. Compare Ezekiel 38:2, where Meshech appears as a chief leader under Gog, the great prophetic representative of heathendom.

6. (Psalms 120:6) My soul has dwelt too long for her with (one) hating peace. The substitution of my soul for I implies the intimate conviction and the painful sense of what is here asserted. Too long, literally much or too much. As to this peculiar idiom, see above, on Psalms 65:9. For her, may bean idiomatic pleonasm, adding nothing to the meaning of the verb, with which it must be read in close connection; or it may have the meaning which the corresponding phrase would naturally seem to have in English, for her good or for her interest. See above, on Psalms 58:7. Hating peace is clearly a collective or aggregate expression, comprehending all denoted by the Meshech and Kedar of the preceding verse, as an ideal individual.

7. (Psalms 120:7) I am peace, and when I speak, they (go) to war. The first phrase resembles I am prayer in Psalms 109:4, and seems to mean, I am all peace, nothing but peace, peace itself, i. e. entirely peaceful or pacific. Speak may be an ellipsis for speak peace, a phrase repeatedly occurring in the Psalms. See above, Psalms 35:20; Psalms 85:8, and below, Psalms 122:8. The sense will then be, whenever I desire or propose peace. If the verb be absolutely understood, the sense is that every word he utters is made an occasion of attack or conflict. The double for, in the common version of this sentence, is as incorrect as the double in of Psa 120:5, and more enfeebling to the sense. I am not only for peace, but am peace itself. They are not only for war, but arise, proceed, or address themselves to it.