The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms 9780567675217, 9780567675194, 9780567675200

Table of contents :
Cover
Title
Copyright
Contents
Acknowledgments
Abbreviations
Chapter 1. Introducing an Ethical Reading of the Thanksgiving Psalms
What Actually Happened and What Could Have Happened
An Outline
Chapter 2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms
Introducing Old Testament Narrative Ethics
The Place of the Psalter in Old Testament Narrative Ethics
The Storied Ethics of Psalm 30
Ethics and Ethos
Liturgy and World-Creating in the Thanksgiving Psalms
Conclusion
Chapter 3. Psalm 116
Translation
Structure and Genre
Interpretation
Verses 1–2
Verses 3–6
Verses 7–9
Summary of Verses 1–9
Verses 12–19
Summary of Verses 10–19
Conclusion: The Storied Ethics of Psalm 116
Chapter 4. Psalm 118
Translation
Structure, Setting(s), and Singer(s)
Structure
Setting(s)
Singer(s)
Interpretation
Verses 1–4
Verses 5–9
Verses 10–18
Verses 19–28
Verse 29
Conclusion: The Storied Ethics of Psalm 118
Chapter 5. Psalm 138
Translation
Genre, Singer(s), Date, and Structure
Genre
Singer(s) and Date
Structure
Interpretation
Verses 1–3
Verses 4–6
Verses 7–8
Conclusion: The Storied Ethics of Psalm 138
Conclusion
Bibliography
Index of References
Index of Authors

Citation preview

LIBRARY OF HEBREW BIBLE/ OLD TESTAMENT STUDIES

658 Formerly Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series

Editors Claudia V. Camp, Texas Christian University Andrew Mein, Westcott House, Cambridge

Founding Editors David J. A. Clines, Philip R. Davies and David M. Gunn

Editorial Board Alan Cooper, John Goldingay, Norman K. Gottwald, James E. Harding, John Jarick, Carol Meyers, Daniel L. Smith-Christopher, Francesca Stavrakopoulou, James W. Watts

THE STORIED ETHICS OF THE THANKSGIVING PSALMS

Joshua T. James

T&T CLARK Bloomsbury Publishing Plc 50 Bedford Square, London, WC1B 3DP, UK 1385 Broadway, New York, NY 10018, USA BLOOMSBURY, T&T CLARK and the T&T Clark logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published 2017 Paperback edition first published in 2019 Copyright © Joshua T. James, 2017 Joshua T. James has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Author of this work. For legal purposes the Acknowledgements on p. vii constitute an extension of this copyright page. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc does not have any control over, or responsibility for, any third-party websites referred to or in this book. All internet addresses given in this book were correct at the time of going to press. The author and publisher regret any inconvenience caused if addresses have changed or sites have ceased to exist, but can accept no responsibility for any such changes. No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by Bloomsbury or the author. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. ISBN: HB: 978-0-5676-7521-7 PB: 978-0-5676-8693-0 ePDF: 978-0-5676-7520-0 Series: Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies, volume 658 Typeset by Forthcoming Publications (www.forthpub.com) To find out more about our authors and books visit www.bloomsbury.com and sign up for our newsletters.

C on t en t s

Acknowledgments vii Abbreviations xi Chapter 1 Introducing an Ethical Reading of the Thanksgiving Psalms What Actually Happened and What Could Have Happened An Outline

1 5 8

Chapter 2 Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms 9 Introducing Old Testament Narrative Ethics 14 The Place of the Psalter in Old Testament Narrative Ethics 19 The Storied Ethics of Psalm 30 23 Ethics and Ethos 27 Liturgy and World-Creating in the Thanksgiving Psalms 30 Conclusion 36 Chapter 3 Psalm 116 39 Translation 40 Structure and Genre 42 Interpretation 49 Verses 1–2 49 Verses 3–6 54 Verses 7–9 61 Summary of Verses 1–9 65 Verses 12–19 69 Summary of Verses 10–19 73 Conclusion: The Storied Ethics of Psalm 116 74

vi Contents

Chapter 4 Psalm 118 78 Translation 78 Structure, Setting(s), and Singer(s) 82 Structure 82 Setting(s) 87 Singer(s) 92 Interpretation 94 Verses 1–4 94 Verses 5–9 99 Verses 10–18 103 Verses 19–28 109 Verse 29 115 Conclusion: The Storied Ethics of Psalm 118 115 Chapter 5 Psalm 138 119 Translation 120 Genre, Singer(s), Date, and Structure 121 Genre 121 Singer(s) and Date 123 Structure 127 Interpretation 129 Verses 1–3 129 Verses 4–6 133 Verses 7–8 138 Conclusion: The Storied Ethics of Psalm 138 141 Conclusion

144

Bibliography 147 Index of References 155 Index of Authors 159

A c k n owl ed g me nts

I first began working on the ethics of the Psalter as a doctoral student at Fuller Theological Seminary. Truth be told, I was initially drawn to the subject because it had been described as relatively uncharted territory in a few essays that I stumbled upon during my coursework. If a dissertation was supposed to make an original contribution to the field, I thought that perhaps the study of the ethics of the Psalter would provide me with an opportunity to do just that. (That probably sounds a bit less inspired than you and I might hope, but that is how this journey began.) In between the writing of my proposal in 2010 and the defense of my dissertation in late 2015, quite a bit has been said on this topic. I am happy to add my own voice to this growing catalogue of work by offering a slightly revised version of my Fuller dissertation. And I am thrilled that the platform for this publication is as part of the LHBOTS series. My sincere thanks are offered to editors, Andrew Mein and Claudia Camp, for their acceptance of this volume. I ended up at Fuller through an odd set of circumstances. Having completed all but one of the required courses in a different PhD program at a different seminary, I found myself writing emails late in the spring of 2008 to potential supervisors at other institutions. My academic home at the time was engaged in a theological battle that left many students uncertain of its (and their) future. At the recommendation of my professors, I began inquiring about other programs. One of the emails I sent that spring was to Professor John Goldingay. As he often does, he responded within minutes. I will always be grateful that he and the committee of the Center for Advanced Theological Studies (CATS) at Fuller made room for me. I can honestly say that the entire process of deciding to transfer, then moving across the country with my wife, and learning from the faculty at Fuller has changed my life. Not only did Professor Goldingay welcome us with open arms (and tickets to see Old Crow Medicine Show), he beautifully modeled scholarship at a high level and pastoral care and concern for his students. I am thankful for his example, and I am honored to be called one of his students.

viii Acknowledgments

I am also thankful for my secondary reader at Fuller, Dr. Erin Dufault-Hunter, and my external reader, Professor J. Clinton McCann Jr. Dr. Dufault-Hunter provided keen insight and much-needed encouragement at every stage of the (long) writing process. I am grateful for her investment in me, and I believe this study is better because of it. When I found out that Professor McCann served as an external reader, I was excited. The influence of his work is apparent throughout the pages that follow. Beyond his many contributions to Psalms scholarship, I have also come to appreciate his kindness, his encouragement, and his willingness to help. There are many other professors and teachers from various stages of my education who have contributed to my development as a student: Peter Enns, Doug Green, Al and Libbie Groves, Chris Hays, Les Hicks, Mignon Jacobs, Mike Kelly, Tremper Longman III, Jim McGahey, Stephen Nichols, and Fred Putnam. In their own distinct ways (and perhaps unbeknownst to them), they have inspired me to follow this path. I am extremely grateful for their honesty, their faithfulness, their excitement, and their commitment to both the academy and the Church. Throughout my time of writing and researching this work (both as a dissertation and in its present form), I have had the honor of serving as one of the pastors of a small, Cooperative Baptist Fellowship church in Salisbury, MD, called The Restoration Project. This community has allowed me ample time (and afforded me much grace) to complete this work. Most of the congregants will never read these words, but if they ever do, I hope they know how thankful I am for their support and encouragement. Every Sunday service, every community project, every afternoon appointment at Rise Up Coffee, every leadership meeting, every text or email (ok, that one is not completely true, but at least some of the texts and emails that I received) have provided welcomed breaks during the last few years that I have spent with the thanksgiving psalms. Thank you. Finally, to my family, I offer my heartfelt thanks. Mom, do you remember when you used to “help” me with my research papers in high school? I hope this makes up for my minimal effort back then. And Dad, I know that you think that anything that is said in 200 pages could really be said in 10. Well, humor me a bit here. To the rest of the family—especially, Jim, Erica, all the kids, my in-laws, and my grandparents—thank you. Your support has been much appreciated. I love you all.

Acknowledgments

ix

And to my crew—Kate, Abram, and Jude. I have spent more nights than I care to admit with my face in a book, and I have missed more conversations than I can count because my mind was drifting elsewhere (probably to the outline of a chapter in this book or to tightening up this argument or that). I am thankful that we are cultivating a home where we are supportive of each other’s passions, and I am grateful for your patience over the last few years. I hope that now that I’m done with this project, we can play more and I can write a little less (at least for a while!). Everything I do is dedicated to you three. Advent 2016

A b b rev i at i ons

AB AEL AOTC BBB BCOTWP BDB BETL BHS Bib BibInt BibInt BJSUCSD BN BThSt BZAW CBQ CC CQR DCLY ECC EPC FB FOTL GBS GKC HALOT HAT HThKAT HBS HSM

Anchor Bible American Essays in Liturgy Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries Bonner biblische Beiträge Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms Brown, F., S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford, 1907 Bibliothecha Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Edited by K. Elliger and W. Rudolph. Stuttgart, 1983 Biblica Biblical Interpretation Biblical Interpretation Series Biblical and Judaic Studies from the University of California, San Diego Biblische Notizen Biblisch theologische Studien Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Catholic Biblical Quarterly Continental Commentaries Church Quarterly Review Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Yearbook Eerdmans Critical Commentary Epworth Preacher’s Commentaries Forschung zur Bibel Forms of the Old Testament Literature Guides to Biblical Scholarship Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. Edited by E. Kautzsch. Translated by A. E. Cowley. 2d. ed. Oxford, 1910 Koehler, L., W. Baumgartner, and J. J. Stamm, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated and edited under the supervision of M. E. J. Richardson. 4 vols. Leiden, 1994–99 Handbuch zum Alten Testament Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Alten Testament Herders Biblische Studien Harvard Semitic Monographs

xii Abbreviations IBC IBHS

Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. B. K. Waltke and M. O’Connor. Winona Lake, IN, 1990 ICC International Critical Commentary Int Interpretation JBL Journal of Biblical Literature Jewish Bible Quarterly JBQ Joüon Joüon, P. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Translated and revised by T. Muraoka. 2 vols. Subsidia biblica 14/1-2. Rome, 1991 Journal of Religion JR JRE Journal of Religious Ethics Journal for the Study of the Old Testament JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series JSOTSup Journal of Theological Studies JTS The Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies LHBOTS LXX Septuagint Masoretic Text MT New American Standard Bible NASB NCB New Century Bible NCBC New Cambridge Bible Commentary NIB The New Interpreter’s Bible. Edited by Leander E. Keck. 12 vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 1994–2004 New International Commentary on the Old Testament NICOT New International Version NIV The New International Version Application Commentary NIVAC Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures: The New JPS Translation according to the NJPS Traditional Hebew Text New Revised Standard Version NRSV Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis OBO Old Testament Essays OTE Old Testament Studies OTS OtSt Oudtestamentische Studiën Paternoster Biblical Monographs PBM Revue biblique RB Restoration Quarterly ResQ Stuttgarter biblische Beiträge SBB Studies in Biblical Theology SBT Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series SBLDS Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament SJOT STI Studies in Theological Interpretation THOTC The Two Horizons Old Testament Commentary Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries TOTC Theological Studies TS Theologische Studiën ThSt VTSup Supplements to Vetus Testamentum Word Biblical Commentary WBC

Abbreviations WMANT ZAW ZNW

xiii

Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche

Chapter 1 I nt r od u c i n g a n E t h i cal R e adi ng of t h e T h a n k s g i vi n g P salms

In a 2010 essay, Andrew Mein identified ethics as an emerging interest in the field of Psalms studies. He writes, “Over the past twenty or thirty years, the ethics of the Psalms have been a relative backwater, but trends within both Psalms scholarship and biblical ethics have recently brought them closer to centre stage.”1 Prior to this shift, it was only the book’s more obvious ethical topics and texts that had occasioned any meaningful scholarly reflection. In fact, Gordon J. Wenham2 limits the scope of early work on the subject to sporadic analyses of the so-called entrance liturgies (Pss 15 and 24),3 the imprecatory psalms,4 and the ethical ideals of kingship, particularly those outlined in Psalm 72.5 While these texts have 1.  Andrew Mein, “Psalm 101 and the Ethics of Kingship,” in Ethical and Unethical in the Old Testament: God and Humans in Dialogue, ed. Katharine Dell, LHBOTS 528 (New York: T&T Clark International, 2010), 56–70 (56). 2.  See Gordon J. Wenham, “The Ethics of the Psalms,” in Interpreting the Psalms: Issues and Approaches, ed. David Firth and Philip S. Johnston (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2005), 175–94 (178). 3.  John T. Willis, “Ethics in a Cultic Setting,” in Essays in Old Testament Ethics, ed. James L. Crenshaw and John T. Willis (New York: Ktav, 1974), 145–69; R. E. Clements, “Worship and Ethics: A Re-examination of Psalm 15,” in Worship and the Hebrew Bible: Essays in Honour of John T. Willis, ed. M. Patrick Graham, Richard R, Marrs, and Steven L. McKenzie, JSOTSup 284 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999), 78–94. See also Eckart Otto, “Myth and Hebrew Ethics in the Psalms,” in Psalms and Mythology, ed. Dirk J. Human, LHBOTS 462 (New York: T&T Clark International, 2007), 26–37 (31–37). 4.  Erich Zenger, A God of Vengeance? Understanding the Psalms of Divine Wrath, trans. Linda M. Maloney (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996). 5.  Walter Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997), 611–14; Walter Houston, “The King’s Preferential Option for the Poor: Rhetoric, Ideology, and Ethics in Psalm 72,” BibInt 7 (1999): 341–67; David Jobling, “Deconstruction and the Political Agenda of Biblical Texts: A Jamesonian Reading

2

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

continued to garner interest in both Psalms studies and Old Testament ethics, interpreters have also begun to engage other important aspects of the book’s ethical instruction over the last ten years. These include the Psalter’s presentation of the ethical character of the righteous and the wicked,6 the usefulness of imitatio Dei as a model for an ethical reading of the book as a whole,7 the role and value of Torah8 and the advancement of social ethics in the Psalter,9 the ethical instruction that emerges when the book is viewed from a canonical perspective or from its final redacted form,10 the ethical effect(s) of reading, singing, and/or praying individual of Psalm 72,” Semeia 59 (1992): 95–127. See also Andrew Mein, “The King’s Justice? Early Modern Perspectives on the Ethics of Psalm 72,” in Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics, ed. Dirk J. Human, LHBOTS 572 (New York: T&T Clark International, 2012), 93–111. 6.  Jerome F. D. Creach, “The Righteous and the Wicked,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 529–41; J. Clinton McCann Jr., “ ‘The Way of the Righteous’ in the Psalms: Character Formation and Cultural Crisis,” in Character and Scripture: Moral Forma­ tion, Community, and Biblical Interpretation, ed. William P. Brown (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 135–49; Daniel C. Owens, Portraits of the Righteous in the Psalms: An Exploration of the Ethics of Book I (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2013); Wenham, “The Ethics of the Psalms,” 187–90; idem, Psalms as Torah: Reading Biblical Song Ethically, STI (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012), 139–66. See also Theodor Seidl, “Who Stands Behind the ‫ רשׁא‬in Psalm 50:16a? The Ethical Testimony of Psalm 50:16–22,” in Human, ed., Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics, 76–92. 7.  See, e.g., Wenham, “The Ethics of the Psalms,” 192–94; idem, Psalms as Torah, 158–65; Christopher J. H. Wright, Old Testament Ethics for the People of God (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2004), 41. Cf. Cyril S. Rodd, Glimpses of a Strange Land, OTS (London: T&T Clark International, 2001), 65–76. 8.  Kent Aaron Reynolds, Torah as Teacher: The Exemplary Torah Student in Psalm 119, VTSup 137 (Leiden: Brill, 2010). 9.  J. David Pleins, The Social Vision of the Hebrew Bible: A Theological Intro­ duction (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 419–51. See also Mein, “Psalm 101.” 10.  Phil J. Botha, “Psalm 34 and the Ethics of the Editors of the Psalter,” in Human, ed., Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics, 56–75; Walter Bruegge­ mann, “Bounded by Obedience and Praise: The Psalms as Canon,” JSOT 50 (1991): 63–92; Alphonso Groenewald, “The Ethical ‘Way’ of Psalm 16,” in The Composition of the Book of Psalms, ed. Erich Zenger, BETL 238 (Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters, 2010), 501–11, and, in the same volume, Dirk J. Human, “ ‘From Exile to Zion’: Ethical Perspectives from the Sîrē Hama‘alôt Psalm 127,” in Zenger, ed., The Composition of the Book of Psalms, 523–35; Michael LeFebvre, “Torah-Meditation and the Psalms: The Invitation of Psalm 1,” in Firth and Johnston, eds., Interpreting

1. Introducing an Ethical Reading of the Thanksgiving Psalms

3

psalms,11 the ecological interpretation of the Psalter,12 and other contextual approaches.13 Even a cursory glance at this burgeoning collection of secondary literature on the Psalter’s ethics confirms Mein’s assessment— this subject, which was once rightly characterized as a veritable “virgin scholarly territory,”14 is now “no longer quite the Cinderella of Hebrew Bible study that it once was.”15 Despite these ongoing advancements, however, certain aspects of the Psalter’s ethics have remained underdeveloped or completely overlooked. In the present work, I call attention to one such aspect—the ethical value of story and storytelling in Israel’s thanksgiving psalms. Not only does the focus of this study begin to examine the potentially important role of narrative in the Psalter, it also highlights the ethics of the Psalms, 213–25; James Luther Mays, “The Place of the Torah-Psalms in the Psalter,” JBL 106 (1987): 3–12; J. Clinton McCann Jr., A Theological Introduction to the Book of Psalms: The Psalms as Torah (Nashville: Abingdon, 1993). 11.  Karl Möller, “Reading, Singing and Praying the Law: An Exploration of the Performative, Self-Involving, Commissive Language of Psalm 101,” in Reading the Law: Studies in Honour of Gordon J. Wenham, ed. J. G. McConville and Karl Möller, LHBOTS 461 (New York: T&T Clark International, 2007), 111–37; Harry P. Nasuti, “The Sacramental Function of the Psalms in Contemporary Scholarship and Liturgical Practice,” in Psalms and Practice: Worship, Virtue, and Authority, ed. Stephen Breck Reid (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2001), 78–89; Gordon J. Wenham, “Prayer and Practice in the Psalms,” in Psalms and Prayers, ed. Bob Becking and Eric Peels, OtSt 55 (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 279–95; idem, Psalms as Torah, 41–76. 12.  Norman C. Habel, ed., The Earth Story in the Psalms and the Prophets, Earth Bible 4 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2001); David Rensberger, “Ecological Use of the Psalms,” in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms, ed. William P. Brown (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 608–20. 13.  See the following contributions to Human, ed., Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics: Liswanisu Kamuwanga, “Ethics and Justice in an African Society,” 128–41; Sampson S. Ndoga, “Psalms 133 as a Response to Xenophobic Attitudes in South Africa Today,” 156–65; Emmanuel O. Usue, “Ethical and Theological Parallels Between Biblical Psalms and the NKST Indigenous Christian Songs,” 142–55. 14.  Wenham, “The Ethics of the Psalms,” 178. See also idem, “Prayer and Practice in the Psalms,” 280; idem, Psalms as Torah, 5. 15.  John Barton, Understanding Old Testament Ethics: Approaches and Explora­ tions (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003), 45, used this line to describe the tendency of authors writing in the field of Old Testament ethics to highlight the absence of work on the subject throughout the majority of the twentieth century. Barton observed that this happened so often that scholars had collectively missed a substantial shift in the field: Old Testament ethics was no longer the Cinderella that it once was. A similar phenomenon is true for the study of the ethics of the Psalter.

4

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

a genre that has, for the most part, gone largely unnoticed.16 In brief, the argument presented here is that the storied retellings of the worshipper’s (and/or community’s) experience of divine deliverance in the thanksgiving psalms greatly contribute to the ethical framework or ethos of the ancient Israelite worshipping community. By weaving together terse narratives recounting the worshipper’s need, their subsequent call to Yahweh, and their eventual experience of rescue, the thanksgiving psalms affirm the community’s core theological beliefs by providing a unified image of Yahweh as one who is present and active, faithful and powerful, slow to anger and abounding in commitment. This theological presentation has a decided ethical edge. In particular, the stories that are retold in the thanksgiving psalms should shape the character of the worshipping community. They should become a people who also pray in response to their suffering and despair, believing that Yahweh will answer their petitions. They should learn, like the worshipper, to trust in Yahweh, to remain committed regardless of circumstance, to be shaped by gratitude and hope after hearing of Yahweh’s previous deliverances. And when Yahweh answers their petition, they should retell their story in public to the surrounding community and enact the proper cultic obligations as a response to Yahweh’s faithfulness. The worshipper sets this example in the thanksgiving psalms, and the audience is urged to follow in their footsteps. Admittedly, the potential outcomes listed above—prayer, belief, trust, gratitude, expectancy, hope, even the enactment of cultic obligations—are not typically identified as “ethical,” at least not in the way the term is currently used in the field of Old Testament ethics. Throughout this study, I argue that these spiritual and cultic concerns form an important part of the holistic ethical vision of the life that the Old Testament “reckons Israel should/could live or should/could have lived.”17 In order to demonstrate this thesis, I focus attention in the subsequent chapters on a close reading of three thanksgiving psalms: Psalms 116, 118, and 138. In their own distinct ways, each of these three psalms articulates the storied ethics of Israel’s thanksgivings, as the worshipper exemplifies the usefulness of story and storytelling in the process of ethical formation. When viewed in this light, the proposed ethical reading of these psalms helps to address 16.  Botha, “Psalm 34 and the Ethics of the Editors of the Psalter,” is one of the few studies that focuses its attention on the ethics of the thanksgiving psalms, though the larger goal of this work is to read Ps 34 diachronically and explore its theology and ethics in association with the proposed redactional development of the Psalter. 17.  John Goldingay, Old Testament Theology: Israel’s Life (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2009), 13.

1. Introducing an Ethical Reading of the Thanksgiving Psalms

5

the underlying interpretive questions guiding the present work: (1) how did the retelling of the worshipper’s experience of divine deliverance (their story) intend to shape or reshape and form or transform its audience ethically, if at all, and (2) what ethical model did the worshipper’s public testimony (their storytelling) set for the listening and, in some instances, participating worshipping community? To these three psalms, the witness of many other thanksgivings could easily be added. In fact, I propose that by approaching the genre from the “shared outlook” of narrative ethics, which I describe in more detail in Chapter 2, a valuable model might emerge for an ethical reading of the entire collection of Israel’s thanksgivings. The psalms in this genre have a story to tell, and while it is the case that the worshippers’ individual testimonies were probably offered as part of a prescribed thank offering to Yahweh, perhaps even functioning as the fulfillment of a personal vow made during their time of lament, it also seems as though these retellings were meant to instruct the larger worshipping community by teaching them who Yahweh is and who they should be (or who they should become) in response. As I hope to make clear, there are important differences between Psalms 116, 118, and 138, as there are, no doubt, between the other thanksgiving psalms as well, but there are also important unifiers that allow this study and the textual examples that are included here to be seen as paradigmatic for future work on the ethics of this genre. What Actually Happened and What Could Have Happened At the outset, I should admit two important qualifiers informing my work. First, it is not the purpose of this study to recreate what actually happened in Israel’s liturgical worship or as a result of reading, singing, or praying the thanksgiving psalms. To arrive at a conclusion on either of these socio-historical and socio-religious foci is well beyond the scope of the present work and quite possibly, any work. That being the case, I limit my ethical interpretation to the concerns that are raised in or by or through the text—that is, I highlight the presentation of the ethical life that Israel should/could live or should/could have lived according to the texts under investigation. At times, this ethical instruction is quite obvious. At other times, it is only implied. In either case, the value of these psalms and the genre as a whole proves to be worthy of sincere and sustained reflection for the ongoing conversation surrounding the Psalter’s ethics. Second, the claim that the thanksgiving psalms actually have ethical value does not assume that engaging them either as an individual reader or in corporate worship always worked to shape participants ethically.

6

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

This is an important disclaimer, for some ethicists have argued that good liturgy, by its very nature, will accomplish this end. For example, in their edited volume, The Blackwell Companion to Christian Ethics, Stanley Hauerwas and Samuel Wells write, The liturgy offers ethics a series of ordered practices that shape the character and assumptions of Christians, and suggests habits and models that inform every aspect of corporate life—meeting people, acknowledging fault and failure, celebrating, thanking, reading, speaking with authority, reflecting on wisdom, naming truth, registering need, bringing about reconciliation, sharing food, renewing purpose. That is the basic staple of corporate Christian life—not simply for clergy, or for those in religious orders, but for lay Christians, week in, week out. It is the most regular way in which most Christians remind themselves and others and are reminded that they are Christians. It is the most significant way in which Christianity takes flesh, evolving from a set of ideas and convictions to a set of practices and a way of life.18

To be fair, the authors are attempting to promote the idea that worship, especially the Eucharist, provides a valuable lens through which Christian ethics might be viewed. This claim is not controversial in and of itself. It has actually proven to be quite helpful as a pedagogical device. However, Hauerwas and Wells also intimate in this volume that good liturgy creates or forms good people, that liturgy works. Liturgical worship is therefore promoted as the chief resource God has given to form people. It “trains Christians to be saints,”19 they argue, and it yields results. This conclusion is problematic, not only in its implied “if…then…” rhetoric, but also in its presentation of liturgy (and ritual) as the primary mechanism of ethical shaping. Current research in narrative ethics, liturgical studies, ritual studies, memory studies, and various approaches in the social sciences confirm that the retelling of stories, especially when it occurs in a liturgical setting, can be formative, but examples proving the contrary also abound and must be taken into consideration. Throughout the Old Testament, for instance, the ancient Israelite worshipping community demonstrates itself to be profoundly unethical or unformed at times, and this despite its presumed participation in storied rituals. Such an observation should not be difficult to accept, for something strangely similar also occurs 18.  Stanley Hauerwas and Samuel Wells, eds., The Blackwell Companion to Christian Ethics, Blackwell Companions to Religion (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004), 7. 19.  Ibid., 26.

1. Introducing an Ethical Reading of the Thanksgiving Psalms

7

in modern-day communities of faith. In Christian worship, participants regularly sing songs, offer prayers, take part in responsive readings, and receive communion. All of these elements have ethical value. They identify a community. They intend to shape the participants’ character into conformity with a set of beliefs. They create a world for the participants to inhabit, and in so doing, they establish the framework or parameters, the ethos (as I argue below), in which ethical action takes place. But all of these elements of worship are only potentially transformative. Good liturgy does not necessarily create or form good people. The proposed liturgical use of the thanksgiving psalms is no different. The potential was certainly there for the worshipping community to be shaped into the sort of people that Yahweh desires, but this did not always take place. Throughout this study, I am intentionally sensitive to this fact. Therefore, any disclaimer that is made regarding a psalm’s potential for character-shaping is not indicative of a perceived lack in the psalm’s theological and ethical import. To the contrary, the thanksgiving psalms often assume an ethical function in the text itself. The didacticism of this genre is made particularly clear in the worshippers’ varied testimonies. These stories work to create a world for their audience, a world in which Yahweh reigns, where Yahweh is present and active, where Yahweh is invested in the lives of the worshipping community. Viewing story as an act of world-construction is not new, but as other readers have noticed, it has clear ethical implications. Through the act of storytelling, the worshipper invites their audience to re-imagine or re-envision the world around them and to learn how to live rightly within it. To use a term popularized by Walter Brueggemann, the wor­shipper’s storied testimony reorients readers and hearers toward a proper understanding of God, the world, and the self, and within the thanksgiving psalms, it does so primarily by completing the narrative that began with lament and culminates in thanks. As a result, the various stories of thanksgiving provide an important witness to Yahweh’s faithfulness, which occurs even in the midst of difficulty. As Brueggemann notes, liturgical storytelling is “an act of resymbolizing community experience.”20 It reappropriates the theology of Israel’s more basic, framing narratives (e.g., creation, patriarchs, exodus, wilderness wandering, conquest, judges, kingship, exile, return, the rebuilding of the temple and the city) and thus makes important connections between the past and the present. This allows the audience to trust that Yahweh will continue to work on their behalf, that Yahweh is still active in the 20.  Walter Brueggemann, Israel’s Praise: Doxology Against Idolatry and Ideology (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), x.

8

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

lives of the worshipping community. Its individual members should be different in light of this testimony. Their character should be shaped and formed. Their spirituality should be revived and reignited. They should be challenged to observe the proper cultic rituals, and to do so with the right motivation. They should imitate the worshipper. As we will see, all of this provides an important (though neglected) part of the framework in which ethical action takes place. But again, whether or not the good liturgy of the thanksgiving psalms created or formed good people is unknown. With this in mind, I write in terms of a psalm’s potential ethical function only because it is impossible to determine the result of a psalm’s intended goal in the lives of readers, singers, and pray-ers with any degree of certainty, not because the psalms themselves are devoid of ethical value. An Outline The outline of this study is as follows. I begin by providing some methodological reflections in Chapter 2. As I have already mentioned, my reading of Psalms 116, 118, and 138 is largely informed by narrative ethics. This approach is admittedly less methodological in nature than one may hope; it does not provide the reader with strict interpretive guidelines. It functions, instead, as a hermeneutical vantage point that calls attention to the role of narrative (and at times, liturgy and memory) in the process of character formation. As a result, a narrative ethical approach supplies the reader with important interpretive lenses through which to view the ethics of the thanksgiving psalms and their storied testimonies. To help further orient readers, I also include in Chapter 2 a brief survey of the use of narrative ethics in the field of Old Testament ethics and its virtual absence in studies on the ethics of the Psalter. Building on the interpretive possibilities outlined in Chapter 2, I turn to an ethical reading of Psalms 116, 118, and 138 in Chapters 3, 4, and 5 respectively. This constitutes the main body of the present work. Each chapter begins with a translation of the psalm under investigation and an analysis of any relevant introductory issues that may affect its interpretation. Having set the proper foundation, I then move on to my proposed ethical reading of the psalm. Here I address the ethical function of story and storytelling and its potential import in the process of character formation in the life of the ancient Israelite worshipping community. In the final chapter, I provide some concluding remarks on the ethics of Psalms 116, 118, and 138, and also on the ethics of the thanksgiving psalms as a whole. I then suggest some modest proposals for future work on the subject.

Chapter 2 S tory , E t h os , a n d C h a r a c t e r F or mat i on i n t h e T h a n k s g i v i ng P salms

In the preface to his edited volume, Character and Scripture, William P. Brown suggests that an ethical interpretation of the Bible is often based upon a “shared outlook” rather than “an established methodology.”1 To demonstrate this claim, he observes that what unites the various chapters in this volume is not the contributors’ commitment to a shared exegetical method, such as source-, form-, literary/rhetorical-, redaction-, or canonical-criticism; rather, it is a shared outlook, a shared hermeneutical awareness or interpretive commitment to a common thesis that can be applied regardless of method. This is how I am utilizing a narrative ethical approach in the present study, not as an established methodology, but as an outlook that enhances a close reading of the thanksgiving psalms. It should be noted that even with this relaxed methodological proposal, certain problems exist. Perhaps the most notable is the necessity of defining what is meant by a narrative ethical approach. Carol Newsom rightly observes that this designation “covers a wide range of interests, questions, and perspectives.”2 As a result, narrative ethics has proven to be somewhat ambiguous, evidenced by the fact that various scholars writing across disciplinary lines often define the approach according to their own idiosyncratic interpretive goals. To claim a narrative ethical approach as the shared outlook guiding this study, then, begs clarification. Simply stated, my appeal to narrative ethics in a reading of the thanksgiving psalms is based on the foundational belief informing most narrative ethicists and the biblical scholars who utilize their work: stories—authoritative, communally accepted stories—have the potential to shape the

1.  William P. Brown, ed., Character and Scripture: Moral Formation, Commu­ nity, and Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), xi. 2.  Carol A. Newsom, “Narrative Ethics, Character, and the Prose Tale of Job,” in Brown, ed., Character and Scripture, 121–34 (121).

10

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

character of their audience. Alasdair MacIntyre offers this programmatic statement in his landmark study, After Virtue: “[T]he chief means of moral education is the telling of stories.”3 He explains, It is through hearing stories about wicked step-mothers, lost children, good but misguided kings, wolves that suckle twin boys, youngest sons who receive no inheritance but must make their own way in the world and eldest sons who waste their inheritance on riotous living and go into exile to live with swine, that children learn or mislearn both what a child and what a parent is, what the cast of characters may be in the drama into which they have been born and what the ways of the world are. Deprive children of stories and you leave them unscripted, anxious stutterers in their actions as in their worlds. Hence there is no way to give us an understanding of any society, including our own, except through the stock of stories which constitute its initial dramatic resources.4

According to MacIntyre, a society’s stock of stories contributes to the formation of its identity and ethics. This collection works to develop a vision of all reality, a world its members are called to inhabit. To deprive children of these stories, and the foundation they provide, will “leave them unscripted, anxious stutterers in their actions as in their worlds.” As a result, MacIntyre argues that in order to answer the ethical question, “What am I to do?,” members of any given society must first answer the more fundamental question, “Of what story or stories do I find myself a part?”5 His contention is not merely that stories teach (and shape and form). That much is widely accepted. What MacIntyre proposes is that certain stories teach (and shape and form) and that they do so, ultimately, by providing their audience with a coherent vision of the world. In a number of his early writings, Stanley Hauerwas applies a similar logic to Christian ethics. He avers that the very nature of the discipline “is determined by the fact that Christian convictions take the form of a story, or better a set of stories that constitutes a tradition, which in turn creates and forms a community.”6 Collectively, these stories define the community’s identity and give its members a sense of meaning for their 3.  Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, 3rd ed. (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press), 121. 4.  Ibid., 216. 5.  Ibid. 6.  Stanley Hauerwas, The Peaceable Kingdom: A Primer in Christian Ethics (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1983), 24.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

11

lives.7 They provide a framework for understanding God, the world, and the self. And consequently, they challenge readers and hearers “to have one kind of character rather than another.”8 The community’s stories, it is believed, should work to reorient, reshape, and transform the audience into this kind of people. For example, Hauerwas argues that one of the goals of the determinative stories in the Christian tradition is to form the character of the community “appropriate to God’s character.”9 The biblical stories of God’s “covenant with Israel, the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, and the ongoing history of the church as the recapitulation of that life”10 are not merely historical records of the past. They demand a response. They demand participation. They “must be lived.”11 According to Hauerwas, then, the task of Christian ethics can be described as learning to tell the story of faith rightly for the sake of the community and, in a broader sense, for the sake of the entire world. As he goes on to note, this can only begin “when we can place our selves—locate our stories—within God’s story,”12 a process that depends upon the reality-making or world-creating claims of the narrative, the comprehensive vision of all reality that is to be gained from “God’s story.” Hauerwas concludes, “Christian ethics, therefore, is not first of all concerned with ‘Thou shalt’ or ‘Thou shalt not.’ Its first task is to help us rightly envision the world.”13 James M. Gustafson also provides an articulate (though contested14) summary of the ethical value of story in a series of lectures entitled, “Varieties of Moral Discourse.” He writes, Narratives function to sustain the particular moral identity of a religious (or secular) community by rehearsing its history and traditional meanings, as these are portrayed in Scripture and other sources. Narratives shape and sustain the ethos of the community. Through our participation in such a

7.  See Stanley Hauerwas (with David Burrell), “From System to Story: An Alternative Pattern for Rationality in Ethics,” in Why Narrative? Readings in Narrative Theology, ed. Stanley Hauerwas and L. Gregory Jones (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1997), 158–90 (177). 8.  Ibid., 167. 9.  Stanley Hauerwas, A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive Chris­ tian Social Ethic (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981), 91. 10.  Hauerwas, The Peaceable Kingdom, 29. 11.  Ibid., 44. 12.  Ibid., 27. 13.  Ibid., 27. 14.  It should be noted that one of Gustafson’s sparring partners was Hauerwas.

12

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms commu­nity, the narratives also function to give shape to our moral characters, which in turn deeply affect the way we interpret or construe the world and events and thus affect what we determine to be appropriate action as members of the community.15

Moral identity. Character. Ethos. Communal participation. Worldcreation. Many of the themes sounded here, themes that echo MacIntyre’s and Hauerwas’s explication of a narrative ethical approach, will become important for my reading of the thanksgiving psalms over the next three chapters. Indeed, it could be argued that this multi-faceted approach to the importance of story in ethical discourse should have a decided impact on how one views the concept of story throughout the biblical text. It causes us to ask, what might the retelling of a narrative do to a community of faith; how does a narrative shape the audience’s understanding of God, the world, and the self; what do these stories tell the audience of the past, and more importantly, how does their retelling affect the audience’s understanding of the present and the future; how are readers and hearers invited into the world that is created by these stories; how do they learn to tell the story rightly with their lives as a result; how might the narrative shape and sustain the audience’s identity and ethos and moral character? Within biblical studies, acceptance of the proposed link between story and ethics has often resulted in the application of a narrative ethical approach. In fact, various forms of this approach have greatly impacted how individual stories and the underlying, framing narrative(s) of the Old and New Testaments are commonly read. Stories, we are told, “mold people’s identities and their sense of the world and reality.”16 Stories “change how people think, feel and behave, and hence change the way the world actually is.”17 Stories “bind a community together, they also shape and preserve what is important for a community to remember and to pass on to the next generation.”18 “Stories form our values and moral

15.  James M. Gustafson, “Varieties of Moral Discourse: Prophetic, Narrative, Ethical, and Political,” in Seeking Understanding: The Stob Lectures, 1986–1998 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 43–76 (56). 16.  Bruce C. Birch and Larry L. Rasmussen, Bible and Ethics in the Christian Life, rev. and exp. ed. (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989), 106–7. 17.  N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 69. 18.  Phillip McMillon, “Psalm 78: Teaching the Next Generation,” ResQ 43 (2001): 219–28 (219).

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

13

sensibilities in more indirect and complex ways, teaching us how to see the world, what to fear, and what to hope for; stories offer us nuanced models of behavior both wise and foolish, courageous and cowardly, faithful and faithless.”19 All told, these claims argue that stories, and again, not just any stories, but those that have been placed within the authoritative canon of a community of faith, have the potential to shape the character of its audience by inviting readers and hearers into the world these stories create, or perhaps better, by appealing to its audience’s imagination to see the world that they already inhabit for what it truly is. Richard Bondi captures the character-shaping function of narrative when he concludes, The power of stories lies not only in their subtle conveyance of truth, but in their ability to touch our hearts, to provide us with reasons of the heart, acquaint us with lives of virtue, offer a focus for the affections and a sense of order and discipline for the passions, and give us the vision necessary to reinterpret our subjection to the accidents of history. Character and story come necessarily together, then, exactly in their use as a practical language of the well-lived life, as we try to take part in the shaping of our character so as to better embody the truth of a story of the good life.20

When viewed from this “shared outlook,” the ethical value of the thanksgiving psalms can be appropriately highlighted. Much like the “stock of stories” in MacIntyre’s view or the “set of stories” in Hauerwas’s, the Psalter’s collection of Israel’s storied testimonies in the thanksgiving psalms functions as an important resource for the formation of the identity, ethos, and moral character of the ancient worshipping community. Not only do these psalms, and the stories they retell, affirm the traditional understanding of Yahweh’s person and work as it is outlined in Israel’s foundational narratives, they also attest to Yahweh’s ongoing involvement in the lives of individuals and, at times, the entire community. Israel’s redemptive history is not relegated to the past. No, it is an ever-expanding record that includes Yahweh’s continued deliverance(s) voiced in the stories of the thanksgiving psalms. When viewed from the lens of narrative ethics, these stories work to create a narrative world for their audience and they invite them in to participate, or as Hauerwas would say, to place

19.  Richard B. Hays, The Moral Vision of the New Testament: A Contemporary Introduction to New Testament Ethics (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996), 73. 20.  Richard Bondi, “The Elements of Character,” JRE 12 (1984): 201–18 (205, emphasis mine).

14

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

themselves—locate their stories—within God’s story. As I hope to make clear, this should have significant effects for the worshipping community’s ethics. It should, among other things, encourage continued faith and trust, inform prayer and worship, and inspire expectancy and hope. Introducing Old Testament Narrative Ethics Awareness of the ethical value of narrative was slow in coming in the field of Old Testament ethics. As early as 1981, John Goldingay proposed narrative’s potential usefulness, claiming, “[A] story can form character at least as powerfully as a precept.”21 Surprisingly, very little attention was devoted to reading narrative ethically in the years that followed, despite the growing scholarly interest in Old Testament ethics in the 1990s.22 As the field developed, scholars chose to focus their attention, instead, on the diverse corpora of the law, the prophetic books, and Israelite wisdom literature. This practice was commonplace, ultimately eliciting a challenge from a number of interpreters. In his essay, “The Gap between Law and Ethics,” Gordon Wenham argues that the legal code provides only “a minimum standard of behaviour.”23 To equate law-keeping with ethical living, as many scholars seemed to be doing, was too restrictive; it left little room for the inclusion 21.  John Goldingay, Approaches to Old Testament Interpretation, 2nd ed. (Leicester: InterVarsity, 1990; repr. Toronto: Clements, 2002), 39. 22.  Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Toward Old Testament Ethics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983), 1, estimated that before 1983 only six monographs had been written on the subject, and of these works, the most recent contribution in the English language had appeared sixty years prior: W. A. Jarrel, Old Testament Ethics Vindicated: Being an Exposition of Old Testament Morals, a Compar­ ison of Old Testament Morals with the Morals of Heathen – so called – “Sacred Books,” Religions, Philosophers, and Infidel Writers, and a Vindication of Old Testament Morals against Infidelity (Greenville, TX: privately published, 1883); W. S. Bruce, The Ethics of the Old Testament, 2nd ed. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1909); Hinckley G. Mitchell, The Ethics of the Old Testament (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1912); J. M. Powis Smith, The Moral Life of the Hebrews (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1923); Johannes Hempel, Das Ethos des Alten Testaments, BZAW 67 (Berlin: Töpelmann, 1964); H. van Oyen, Ethik des Alten Testaments (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1967). For a brief summary of the history of scholarship in the field of Old Testament ethics, see Eckart Otto, “Hebrew Ethics in Old Testament Scholarship,” in Human, ed., Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics, 3–13. 23.  Wenham, “The Gap between Law and Ethics,” 18.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

15

of positive commands or exemplary practices in an assessment of Old Testament ethics. Wenham observes, “In most societies what the law enforces is not the same as what upright members of society feel is socially desirable, let alone ideal.”24 He illustrates the veracity of his thesis through a brief examination of three areas of Old Testament ethics: idolatry, homicide, and adultery. In each case, the law sets out the bare minimum of what is expected of the community: do not worship other gods, do not kill, and do not commit adultery. Obviously, these commands are not representative of the high ethical standards that an individual should strive to attain. Rather, as Eryl Davies notes, they refer only to “conduct required of every morally decent person.”25 There is a gap, then, between the law (which Wenham metaphorically depicts as the floor of a house) and the ethical ideal (its ceiling). The distance between these two is, in some cases, “as high as heaven itself.”26 Wenham summarizes, “The higher the ethical ideal, the greater the gap between law and ethics.”27 All of this led to Wenham’s conclusion that the study of Old Testament ethics needed to advance beyond an analysis of the legal code if it intended to elucidate Israel’s comprehensive vision of exemplary ethical behavior. And according to Wenham, Old Testament narrative provided a necessary piece of this vision. Wenham’s monograph, Story as Torah, added support for the important project of “reading Old Testament narrative ethically.” In this study, he investigates “the ethical norms and values embodied in the stories of the Old Testament.”28 The problem is, these norms and values are often unstated in the text. As a result, modern-day readers must attempt to uncover the ethical commitments of the implied author. Wenham writes, “In recounting the nation’s past its storytellers have a didactic purpose, but that certainly does not mean that they approved of all they described.”29 Readers must discern what is being commended to the audience within a given story. This is possible based on the use of certain criteria. These include the recurrence of the virtuous behavior being promoted in diverse contexts, its exhortation within the pentateuchal law code and/or the

24.  Ibid. 25.  Eryl W. Davies, “Ethics of the Hebrew Bible: The Problem of Methodology,” Semeia 66 (1994): 43–53 (45). 26.  Wenham, “The Gap Between Law and Ethics,” 26. 27.  Ibid., 28. 28.  Gordon J. Wenham, Story as Torah: Reading Old Testament Narrative Ethically (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2000), 5. 29.  Ibid., 151.

16

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

prophetic and wisdom corpora, and perhaps above all else, the presentation of the imitation of God as a model for behavior.30 Regarding the latter, Wenham observes that the Old Testament authors did not condone mere obedience to the stated commands of God; rather, they “hoped that in some way man, made in the image of God, would in some measure imitate God, his creator, in maintaining creation and in loving his fellow man.”31 In sum, Wenham advances the view that Old Testament narrative is useful for ethical instruction, and beyond that, it is potentially transformative due to the positive example that it sets for its readers. Narrative goes beyond the minimum requirements that are often set out in the legal code and, consequently, should be set alongside of the legal code in an assessment of Old Testament ethics. John Barton argued similarly.32 He too claimed that restricting ethics to law “overlooks the many ways in which the Old Testament concentrates not on general principles but on specific cases.”33 For Barton, the characters of Old Testament narrative and the situations they find themselves in provide an example of this specificity. He writes, “[N]arrative is necessarily particular, concerned with connected chains of action and events which always befall particular people.”34 As a result, he stresses that interpreters must not reduce the importance of story to the extraction of “a simple moral, or ‘point.’ ”35 The story is indispensable. It must not be discarded. In a published lecture on the nature and aim of fiction, the noted short-story writer Flannery O’Connor decried the tendency to exchange a sound reading of a narrative for the identification of its key theme in the literary studies of the mid-twentieth century. In her typical, witty prose, she claimed,

30.  See Athena E. Gorospe, Narrative and Identity: An Ethical Reading of Exodus 4, BibInt 86 (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 4. 31.  Wenham, Story as Torah, 4. 32.  See John Barton, Ethics and the Old Testament, 2nd ed. (London: SCM, 2002), 19–36; idem, Understanding Old Testament Ethics, 1–11; idem, “Reading for Life: The Use of the Bible in Ethics,” in The Bible in Ethics: The Second Sheffield Colloquium, ed. J. W. Rogerson, P. R. Davies, and M. D. Carroll R., JSOTSup 207 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996), 66–76. 33.  Barton, Ethics and the Old Testament, 20. 34.  Ibid. 35.  Ibid.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

17

People have a habit of saying, “What is the theme of your story?” and they expect you to give them a statement: “The theme of my story is the economic pressure of the machine on the middle class”—or some such absurdity. And when they’ve got a statement like that, they go off happy and feel it is no longer necessary to read the story.36

For O’Connor, as well as for Barton, the entire story is to be celebrated in all of its fullness. Barton claims that this interpretive agenda safeguards a story’s particularity or specificity, which would, in turn, discourage the destructive practice of mining for some timeless truth to be extracted. Methodologically, Barton follows the model set forth in Martha Nussbaum’s influential work on Greek tragedy and classic literature.37 When biblical narrative is viewed from this lens, Barton proposes that it offers “profound accounts of fallible human characters caught in the interplay between other people, chance, luck, and fortune, and the perceived experience of divine intervention or providence.”38 There is an intimate relation between characterization and plot—a fact that Barton believes allowed the biblical authors to communicate moral truths in ways that were not available in other forms of literature. “Stories feed our moral life,” he writes, “by providing us with visions of how real human beings can live through various crises and trials and remain human, that is, recognizably continuous with ourselves as part of the human race.”39 In other words, individual narratives are invested with an “existential force,”40 which motivates the reader’s application of the ethical instruction that takes shape in the text. According to Barton, the same existential force is not present within the commands of the legal code. Admittedly, this is questionable. It is difficult to say how the law or other non-narrative genres might move people. Still, Barton’s point is well taken—whole narratives are invested with ethical value. They teach, instruct, and form, and they must not be discarded.41 36.  Flannery O’Connor, Mystery and Manners (New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux, 1969), 73. 37.  See Martha Nussbaum, Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Lit­ erature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990); idem, The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986). 38.  Barton, Ethics and the Old Testament, 35. 39.  Ibid., 31. 40.  Ibid., 32. 41.  See also John Barton, Ethics in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 25–32.

18

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

Bruce C. Birch,42 Waldemar Janzen,43 and Mary Mills44 have also contributed important monographs, articles, and essays on the relationship between narrative and ethics in the Old Testament. In fact, these works, along with Wenham’s and Barton’s introductory studies, helped to set the stage for a collective shift in the field of Old Testament ethics, as many scholars soon began reading narrative ethically.45 For the most part, these studies maintained a similar approach: they limit their focus to the narrative genre;46 they explore positive and/or negative examples of ethical behavior in the stories of the Old Testament (and, in some cases, they isolate a “point” that the narrative is making); most privilege the final form of the biblical text and employ a literary approach as the interpretive method of choice; the body of work that has been produced is largely descriptive, though some studies propose a normative application 42.  See Bruce C. Birch, “Old Testament Narrative and Moral Address,” in Canon, Theology, and Old Testament Interpretation, ed. Gene M. Tucker, David L. Petersen, and Robert R. Wilson (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 119–35; idem, Let Justice Roll Down: The Old Testament, Ethics, and Christian Life (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991); idem, “Moral Agency, Community, and the Character of God in the Hebrew Bible,” Semeia 66 (1994): 23–41. 43.  Waldemar Janzen, Old Testament Ethics: A Paradigmatic Approach (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994). 44.  Mary Mills, Biblical Morality: Moral Perspectives in Old Testament Narra­ tives, Heythrop Studies in Contemporary Philosophy, Religion, and Theology (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2001). 45.  See also Richard G. Bowman, “The Complexity of Character and the Ethics of Complexity: The Case of King David,” in Brown, ed., Character and Scripture, 73–97; M. Patrick Graham, “A Character Ethics Reading of 1 Chronicles 29:1–25,” in Brown, ed., Character and Scripture, 98–120; Newsom, “Narrative Ethics, Character, and the Prose Tale of Job”; Dennis T. Olson, “Between Humility and Authority: The Interplay of the Judge–Prophet Laws (Deuteronomy 16:18–17:13) and the Judge– Prophet Narratives of Moses,” in Character Ethics and the Old Testament: Moral Dimensions of Scripture, ed. M. Daniel Carroll R. and Jacqueline E. Lapsley (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007), 51–61; Robin Parry, Old Testament Story and Christian Ethics: The Rape of Dinah as a Case Study, PBM (Bletchley: Paternoster, 2004); David J. Reimer, “Stories of Forgiveness: Narrative Ethics and the Old Testament,” in Reflection and Refraction: Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld, VTSup 113 (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 359–78; Richard G. Smith, The Fate of Justice and Righteousness During David’s Reign: Narrative Ethics and Rereading the Court History According to 2 Samuel 8:15–20:26, LHBOTS 508 (New York: T&T Clark International, 2009). 46.  As a canonical critic, Birch is not as confined to narrative as a genre. Instead, he views the entire Old Testament within the framework of Israel’s story. See Birch, Let Justice Roll Down, 51–68.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

19

for a modern-day audience. All told, while the inclusion of narrative in Old Testament ethics has proven to be an important and necessary development, diversity in the application of a narrative approach remains limited. Very few Old Testament scholars, for example, have sought to apply a narrative approach to non-narrative texts, such as those included within the Psalter.47 And because of this omission, I contend that some very important themes have been missed. The Place of the Psalter in Old Testament Narrative Ethics In Old Testament Ethics for the People of God, Christopher J. H. Wright briefly introduces the ethical value of what he calls Israel’s “narrative-inworship.” He writes, Another way of recognizing the importance of worship in the formation of Israel’s ethical worldview is to recall that it was in the context of worship that the great stories of Israel’s past were recounted. These were the narratives that infinitely repeated and underscored the character of the Lord. These were the narratives that thereby entered into the consciousness of Israel as a powerful shaping and sustaining ethical force. We tend to focus more than we probably ought on the law of the Old Testament when, in the everyday experience of the people, it was more likely the regular experience of narrative-in-worship that oriented their ethical compass and provided both internal and community-validated values and sanctions.48

As I noted in the previous chapter, the Psalter had been relatively overlooked as an important source in the field of Old Testament ethics up until 2005. Wright, to his credit, is attempting to call attention to this gap in scholarship. In particular, he is addressing the need for scholars to engage the Psalter’s stories, which he believes may provide an entryway into a study of the book’s ethical instruction. Not only are these poetic stories powerful and potentially transformative because of their content (i.e., what they teach), Wright also argues that their ethical value is heightened when they are viewed from within a liturgical setting (i.e., how they are used). He reasons that if individual psalms were regularly repeated in ancient Israelite worship, whether at home, in the local cult, or at the temple, then the stories they include 47.  Notable exceptions include William P. Brown, Character in Crisis: A Fresh Approach to the Wisdom Literature of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996); Eric S. Christianson, “The Ethics of Narrative Wisdom: Qoheleth as Test Case,” in Brown, ed., Character and Scripture, 202–10. 48.  Wright, Old Testament Ethics, 377–78 (emphasis his).

20

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

of Israel’s past, of Yahweh’s faithfulness, of Israel’s moral successes and failures would have been viewed, ostensibly at least, as some of the community’s authoritative narratives. Consequently, the psalmists’ retellings of the past would have had the potential to enter the community’s consciousness, which would have thereby served to orient its ethical compass and provide an important witness to its internal and communityvalidated values and sanctions. In this proposal, Wright acknowledges a vital relationship between Israel’s worship, its stories, and the community’s ethical formation. Or stated another way, he acknowledges a vital relationship between the Psalter and narrative and ethics. Wright did not pursue his own suggestion in any great depth in this work and neither have many others. Two notable exceptions are, again, Wenham, who devotes a chapter in his monograph, Psalms as Torah,49 to what he calls, “narrative law in the Psalter,” and Phillip McMillon, who, in a lesser-known study, examines the ethical function of story in Psalm 78.50 Wenham’s main goal is to denounce the notion that the Psalter’s storied retellings are intended primarily to be historical records. He argues, instead, that their purpose “is to educate the user…in both theology and ethics,” which leads him to examine the ways the psalmists use “accounts of Israel’s past…to make ethical points.”51 Wenham pursues this interpretive end by identifying, first, which events are included in the psalmists’ compositions and, second, what lessons can be drawn from them.52 Wenham’s analysis is largely based on a literary/rhetorical approach to the text, and his conclusions are descriptive in nature. He draws attention to echoes of the pentateuchal narrative in the Psalter’s stories, which helps him to identify the emergence of two major theological themes, “the incorrigible sinfulness of Israel and the infinite compassion of God.”53 At times, the Psalter’s witness to Israel’s collective and individual failure(s) is so overwhelming that Wenham fears its presentation could potentially lead its audience to “utter despair.”54 However, the goal of these stories is to exhort the worshipping community to obey the law, and in so doing, avoid its ancestors’ past mistakes. Wenham contends, therefore, that the storied approach to ethical instruction in the Psalter is similar to the approach modeled by the Apostle Paul in his writing to the church at 49.  Wenham, Psalms as Torah, 119–37. 50.  McMillon, “Psalm 78.” 51.  Wenham, Psalms as Torah, 119. 52.  See ibid., 119–20. 53.  Ibid., 123. 54.  Ibid., 137.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

21

Corinth—the stories of the past are examples of what not to do. Referring to the stories of the Old Testament, Paul writes, “Now these things occurred as examples for us, so that we might not desire evil as they did” (1 Cor 10:6 NRSV). For Wenham, the psalms often have a similar focus. Beyond a moral appeal to avoid past mistakes, Wenham also observes that select psalms positively present the character of Yahweh as a source of hope and trust. This serves as an important and necessary juxtaposition to the failures of Israel’s past. For example, Israel is short-tempered; Yahweh is patient. Israel is obstinate; Yahweh is gracious. Israel is faithless; Yahweh is faithful. Throughout the psalmists’ various retellings, Yahweh embodies these and other characteristics—characteristics, which are reminiscent of Yahweh’s divine self-revelation in Exod 34:6: “Yahweh, Yahweh, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in commitment and faithfulness.” The Psalter’s theological presentation of Yahweh provides an impetus for ethical formation. The audience should reject the negative examples of its ancestors and seek to reflect the character of Yahweh. Once again, Wenham is highlighting the ethical model of imitatio Dei. But in addition, he also argues that the psalmists’ presentation of Yahweh’s faithfulness should inspire the audience’s faith. And it is faith, he suggests, “that underlies and integrates all the specific virtues that characterize the way of life of the righteous.”55 Theology and ethics must be held together. McMillon, on the other hand, limits his assessment of the ethical function of story in the Psalter to a reading of Psalm 78. Specifically, he investigates how the retelling of Israel’s past might instruct the ancient worshipping community, that is, how stories might be used to shape and form the character of its audience. He writes, How did Israel pass on the ethics of the community to the next generation? How did it promote right behavior? This psalm suggests that Israel used the story of its history with God as a basis for moral living. How one lives is determined largely by how one responds to what God has done… In this way, character development is directly related to the teaching of Israel’s relationship with God in its own history.56

For McMillon, it is not so much what Psalm 78 teaches, but how it teaches. His interest in a narrative approach, then, is largely methodological. Admittedly, McMillon’s essay is introductory in nature, but it is also highly suggestive. In fact, I will utilize some of his interpretive 55.  Ibid. 56.  McMillon, “Psalm 78,” 228.

22

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

proposals to guide my own ethical reading of the thanksgiving psalms, primarily his consideration of how psalms teach. As with Psalm 78, I argue that the thanksgiving psalms demonstrate that ethical instruction is communicated through storytelling. Beyond these two studies, very little has been said about the ethics of story in the Psalter and, as a result, very few have attempted to view the book’s instruction from a narrative approach. This is understandable in light of generic and literary considerations—the Psalter is not a narrative, at least not in any technical sense of the term. It is more commonly identified as a collection of Israel’s poems, praises, and prayers. But this attribution, while accurate, could work to diminish the fact that the Psalter also regularly includes stories and storied testimonies. Bernhard W. Anderson even notes that there is a “ ‘narrative’ mode”57 at work throughout the book. For Anderson, this mode is evidenced primarily in a specific genre, namely, the historical or narrative or storytelling psalms (Pss 78, 105, 106, 135, 136).58 Taken together, these five compositions recount “the shared history of the believing and worshipping community,”59 which includes a retelling of various episodes in Israel’s faith-story such as the creation narrative, the exodus event, Israel’s recurring disobedience and punishment in the wilderness wanderings, its eventual entrance into the promised land (and continued disobedience and punishment there), the establishment of the Davidic monarchy, the fall of northern Israel during the Assyrian conquest, and perhaps even the exile of Judah at the hands of the Babylonians. Expanding Marvin E. Tate’s description of Psalm 78, the longest of the narrative psalms, it could be argued that each of these “historical recitals” is “presented in the form of a story, told in poetry.”60 They are uniquely crafted compositions, intended to teach; they are meant to shape the audience’s character,

57.  Bernhard W. Anderson (with Steven Bishop), Out of the Depths: The Psalms Speak for Us Today, 3rd ed. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2000), 41. 58.  There is some debate on which psalms should be included in this group and which events are described. Hermann Gunkel, for instance, identifies Pss 78, 105, and 106 as “legends.” He argues further that this genre is characterized by the poems’ shared literary form—narrative. The narratives recounted in this genre vary, but they are “limited to Yhwh’s deeds toward Israel during the wilderness wandering from Egypt to the entry into Canaan.” See Hermann Gunkel (and Joachim Begrich), Intro­ duction to the Psalms: The Genres of the Religious Lyric of Israel, trans. James D. Nogalski (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1998), 247. 59.  Anderson (with Bishop), Out of the Depths, 41. 60.  Marvin E. Tate, Psalms 51–100, WBC 20 (Dallas: Word, 1990), 281 n. 2a.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

23

for, as Wright notes, “These were the narratives that infinitely repeated and underscored the character of the Lord. These were the narratives that thereby entered into the consciousness of Israel as a powerful shaping and sustaining ethical force.”61 Despite this, the didactic purpose of the narrative psalms has not featured prominently in the recent work on the Psalter’s ethics.62 Neither is it my focus here, though I am sure it would yield interesting results. The goal of the present study is to examine the ethics of another major contributor to the Psalter’s narrative mode, the thanksgiving psalms. Commentators often acknowledge the genre’s characteristic inclusion of story and storytelling. Gunkel even observes in his classic, form-critical introduction to the Psalter, “One of the most important elements never lacking from the thanksgiving song is the narrative of the fate of the one offering thanks.”63 Again, the latent didacticism of the narratives offered in this genre has been relatively untouched in the fields of Psalms studies and Old Testament ethics. This oversight is especially odd given the fact that the text’s dynamic retelling of the worshipper’s experience clearly contributes to the ethical instruction and potential character-shaping of the community, perhaps even more so than the narrative psalms, which seem content to retell the major stories of Israel’s redemptive history without making direct connections to the present as in the thanksgiving psalms. The Storied Ethics of Psalm 30 To cite one example, Psalm 30 recounts the following narrative, the first of two in the poem, “Yahweh my God, I called to you for help and you healed me. Yahweh, you brought me up from Sheol; You restored me to life from among the ones going down to the Pit.” (vv. 2–3 [MT 3–4])

61.  Wright, Old Testament Ethics, 377. 62.  Though his purpose is decidedly different, Walter Brueggemann, Abiding Astonishment: Psalms, Modernity, and the Making of History, Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991), includes some important observations on the ethical instruction of four of the narrative psalms (Pss 78, 105, 106, and 136). 63.  Gunkel (and Begrich), Introduction to the Psalms, 201.

24

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

Admittedly, the details surrounding this set of events are sparse. The audience is informed in v. 2 [3] that the worshipper called to Yahweh for help. The reason for their plea, however, is withheld. It can be inferred from the story’s brief description of rescue that the situation was dire, but we are not told why or how or to what extent. The record of Yahweh’s response is also terse and somewhat ambiguous. On the one hand, the Hebrew verb that is used here, ‫רפא‬, could refer to a physical healing, which would indicate an experience of sickness or injury of some kind. To support this reading, James Luther Mays calls attention to the verbal and thematic connections shared between Psalm 30 and similar petitions in Psalm 6 and Hezekiah’s request for healing in Isaiah 38. He concludes, “Verse 2 suggests that recovery from serious illness is the deliverance reported here.”64 While this reading is certainly plausible, other scholars note that the verb can also describe something more general, an emotional or spiritual healing for example. Based on what follows in the psalm (or better, what does not follow) some have argued that a non-physical healing may be intended. Goldingay summarizes this view: “[T]he psalm does not go on to refer to a physical ailment and thus leaves itself open to being used in connection with other forms of restoration, such as the verb can also denote.”65 In either case, the worshipper’s story recounts a radical reversal of fortunes, a resurrection of sorts that only Yahweh could accomplish. The opening line of the poem informs us that this experience has shaped the worshipper: they exalt Yahweh because of what has happened, namely, because Yahweh did not let the worshipper’s enemies have the final victory (v. 1b [2b]). This story has changed the worshipper’s perception of the world, resulting in an expression of praise. And the effects are not limited to the recipient of Yahweh’s deliverance. The worshipper moves on to exhort the audience to respond as well, to sing and give thanks in light of what they have just heard (v. 4 [5]). They are invited (albeit implicitly) to place themselves within the narrative, to pray in the midst of lament, to trust Yahweh for deliverance, to offer thanksgiving when Yahweh responds positively. In a sense, the worshipper encourages the audience to believe that Yahweh will be who Yahweh is supposed to be, who Yahweh has proven to be, and to shape their lives accordingly. Such character transformation should occur continually for the worshipper as well as for the worshipping community. It is not a one-time thing. DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner conclude, “The psalm calls 64.  James Luther Mays, Psalms, IBC (Louisville: John Knox, 1994), 140. 65.  Goldingay, Psalms 1–41, 426.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

25

the faithful not just to one isolated act of praise, but to a complete life of praise. The psalm enjoins us to lead a life that celebrates and bears joyful witness to the reversals and Easters that only Israel’s God can fashion.”66 The worshipper’s story invites a re-envisioning of the world and a reappropriation of a similar prayer when necessary, and it does so by telling a story—this is what happened to me, it could happen to you too. This interpretive conclusion, which promotes a communal engagement with, participation in, and application of the psalm, can be contrasted with Barton’s explication of Old Testament narrative as “specific and somehow ungeneralizable.”67 In one sense, Barton is right, even when applied to a non-narrative psalm. The testimony of the worshipper’s experience in Psalm 30 probably did refer to a concrete event, a rescue of a divine sort from an unidentified ailment. The thanksgiving that is offered in this psalm was most likely originally crafted because something actually happened to the worshipper. But the way the story is retold seems to highlight not the event’s specificity, but its generality.68 Westermann writes, “The psalmist does not intend to relate what happened to him, but to testify to what God has done for him.”69 The focus is not on the details of the event, but on Yahweh’s role in it. Simply put, Yahweh responded to the worshipper’s prayer. That is the point of testimony. It is not about the worshipper. It is not about the details of their circumstances or experiences. It is about Yahweh. None of this diminishes the ethical value of story in the psalm. In fact, some would argue that the story’s ambiguity actually enhances its usefulness. Some worshippers may have been in need of physical healing, while others needed an emotional or spiritual healing, and others still were hoping for a social or political restoration. The psalm’s lack of specificity makes any of these readings possible. Brueggemann observes that the author alone knows the precise details of the original situation; the surrounding community (both ancient and modern) does not. Thankfully, the situation “does not need to be spelled out… The psalm is useful to 66.  Nancy deClaissé-Walford, Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth Laneel Tanner, The Book of Psalms, NICOT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2014), 298. 67.  See Barton, Ethics and the Old Testament, 22. 68.  It is important to note that Barton’s comments were specifically directed at narrative as a genre. In his work, Reading the Old Testament: Method in Biblical Study, rev. ed. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996), 39, Barton notes that the psalms, when read as liturgical texts, “are essentially impersonal, stylized, multi-purpose texts, reusable on many similar or even regularly recurring occasions.” 69.  Claus Westermann, Praise and Lament in the Psalms, trans. Keith R. Crim and Richard N. Soulen (Atlanta: John Knox, 1981), 109.

26

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

us because we may bring our own specificity to the text.”70 By singing or praying or reciting Psalm 30, and others like it, the testimony of the unnamed “I” becomes the prayer of the larger worshipping community as a whole as well as the many individuals that are numbered within. The worshipper’s recollection of their experience functions as a catalyst toward true participation in prayer, testimony, and thanksgiving—the worshipper’s words become the words of those who need to claim them for themselves, even if their situation differs. Because Yahweh has answered this prayer, the worshipping community is led to believe that perhaps Yahweh will answer a different prayer for a different person in a different situation. Indeed, the psalm’s reuse and reappropriation is one of the main goals of the thanksgiving genre. Goldingay writes, We listen to people’s testimonies (or read their stories or memoirs) because of the way they may help us reflect on our own lives. The Psalms spell out ways they do that. What Yhwh has done for the worshiper is assumed not to be significant only for that one person. It illustrates something that can be true for others.71

Admittedly, the storied testimony of Psalm 30 is not prescribing an ethic to follow. It is not overly concerned with interpersonal relationships or law-keeping or social justice. It is used, instead, as an instrument for “moral formation.”72 It teaches its audience what type of person Yahweh is (in this case, Yahweh is presented as reliable, trustworthy, powerful, good, just, present, and responsive) and as a necessary consequence, it teaches the audience what type of people they should become. It also provides a moral example in the life of the worshipper for the audience to follow. And it creates a narrative world, one that may call the audience’s present lived reality into question. In other words, the worshipper’s story “creates a new vision of reality,”73 a new vision, which, as Hauerwas notes, requires a transformation of the self not only to see the world rightly but to live rightly within it.74 70.  Walter Brueggemann, The Message of the Psalms: A Theological Commen­ tary (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984), 126. 71.  Goldingay, Israel’s Life, 319. 72.  On narrative and moral formation, see Wayne A. Meeks, “The Ethics of the Fourth Evangelist,” in Exploring the Gospel of John: In Honor of D. Moody Smith, ed. R. Alan Culpepper and C. Clifton Black (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996), 317–27 (317 n. 13); idem, “Understanding Early Christian Ethics,” JBL 105 (1986): 3–11. 73.  McCann, A Theological Introduction, 21. 74.  See Hauerwas, A Peaceable Kingdom, 29–30.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

27

It is the contention of this study that this is not only true for the worshipper’s story in Psalm 30, but that this is how the thanksgiving psalms as a whole and the stories they recount work to teach (and potentially, shape and form) their audience. The outcomes listed above are quite different than those of other, more commonly pursued ethical texts in the Old Testament. This is because the thanksgiving psalms are concerned with the formation of the entire individual. No doubt, their instruction includes a concern for interpersonal relationships, law-keeping, and social justice, but to an even greater degree, it includes a concern for spirituality and worship. In fact, the thanksgiving psalms seem to concentrate on the latter. They are concerned with a life characterized by virtues such as faithfulness, decisiveness, compassion, discernment, visionary realism and an openness about failure and wrongdoing, along with the means of dealing with these; forms of worship, festivals, disciplines and rites that give expression to the way of life and the virtues, and encourage their cultivation; and forms of leadership that also encourage their cultivation.75

Within the field of Old Testament ethics, spirituality and worship are seemingly relegated to a second-tier concern. They may even be viewed as comprising a different, non-ethical focus that examines the individual’s religious commitments. As a result, spirituality and worship have not featured prominently in ethical studies, though the holistic presentation of ethics in the Psalter disagrees with this limited assessment. Spirituality and worship are presented throughout as important aspects in the comprehensive vision of the ethical life portrayed in the Old Testament. And, again, it is the contention of this study that these aspects are best illuminated in the thanksgiving psalms by a narrative ethical approach. Ethics and Ethos In his important work, The Ethos of the Cosmos, William P. Brown draws some of these lines of thought together, as he attempts to outline the formative function of the creation stories in the development of what he labels Israel’s underlying and guiding “ethos.”76 Specifically, he asks how the biblical retelling of the world’s and humanity’s beginning in Genesis, Deutero-Isaiah, Job, and Proverbs inspired its audience’s moral 75.  Goldingay, Israel’s Life, 14. 76.  William P. Brown, The Ethos of the Cosmos: The Genesis of Moral Formation in the Bible (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999).

28

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

imagination, that is, how these stories created a world for its readers and hearers and how this might have informed their vision of reality as well as their ethical actions. For Brown, the diverse creation narratives construct the “environment that makes possible and sustains moral living, establishing the direction and parameters of human conduct,” “the setting that is conducive for the formation of a community’s character,” and “the sustaining environment or context for an ethic to function and for a moral subject to perform.”77 This is what he refers to as “ethos.”78 It is, as he puts it, “a distinctly moral Weltanschauung.”79 It is a boundary or framework in which all proper ethical action must be measured and assessed. It is a world that is imagined but formative, a world that contributes to Israel’s self-identity over against the contrasting visions of the surrounding nations. The ethos that emerges from the creation narratives is necessarily ethical, for it demands change in its audience. It demands that they place themselves within God’s story. Brown treats these narratives as “the outgrowth of the ancients’ moral imagination, harnessed and directed for the purpose of shaping Israel’s character,”80 and he contends that this is accomplished, primarily, by the creation stories’ ability to reorient the audience’s perception of what is and what should be. Because these narratives are intimately tied to character and to formation, they are tied to ethics—even if they do not specifically aim to instruct the audience to obey divine commands or other such overtly ethical exhortations. The presentation of the creation narratives’ ethos is much broader in scope. It branches out to include other aspects of Israel’s ethical life, aspects that are commonly overlooked, aspects that if applied or recognized would allow ethical action to take place.81 77.  Ibid., 11. 78.  Brown acknowledges that the relationship between ethics and ethos is complex. The terms are often used interchangeably in ethical discourse. (See Jan G. van der Watt, “Ethics and Ethos in the Gospel According to John,” ZNW 97 [2006]: 147–76.) Appealing to ethicist Paul Lehmann for guidance, he claims that ethics is “concerned with that which holds human society together. It is, so to say, the ‘cement’ of human society.” (See Lehmann, Ethics in a Christian Context [New York: Harper & Row, 1963], 25.) 79.  Brown, The Ethos of the Cosmos, 3. 80.  Ibid., 23. 81.  A similar approach can be seen in Birger Gerhardsson, The Ethos of the Bible, trans. Stephen Westerholm (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1981; repr., Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2005). In this work, he highlights faith, love, living a life of sacrifice, fellowship/community, and worship as some of the dominant aspects of the ethos of the New Testament.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

29

Because the didactic focus of the thanksgiving psalms often moves beyond what is typically identified as ethical concerns in the field of Old Testament ethics, the use of the term “ethos” may help to structure the goal of the present study. To clarify, this does not mean that I am seeking to separate ethos from ethics. Rather, I am attempting to specify how the two are related in the comprehensive vision of the life Israel should/could live or should/could have lived. The ethos is the narrative world that is constructed to frame ethical action, without which it would be impossible to live rightly or even know how to live rightly. Following Brown’s description, the thanksgiving psalms contribute to the Old Testament’s broad ethical framework—they create or, at times, reinforce the environment that makes possible and sustains moral living, they provide the setting that is conducive for the formation of a community’s character, and they establish the sustaining environment or context for an ethic to function. In the genre’s emphasis on spirituality and worship, the thanksgiving psalms set clear parameters for the ancient worshipping community, namely, apart from the observance and practice of proper worship (internal as well as external), ethical action cannot take place. The genre, therefore, presents a holistic understanding of the ethical life that Israel was expected to live. It includes inward motivations and desires of the heart, the habitual actions and dispositions of the worshipping community, the spiritual aspects that accompany the outworking of Israel’s faith, and the proper requirements of worship. Again, it is not merely rote obedience to the divine command that is put forth as exemplary. The worshippers’ stories create their own distinctly moral Weltanschauung that seems to demand the audience’s entrance into the narrative and the application of its principles in diverse ways in their own unique context. As Hauerwas argues, the primary enterprise for Christian ethics is to help its followers see. He writes, “We can only act in a world we can envision, and we can envision the world rightly only as we are trained to see.”82 Brown echoes this claim, “One’s perception of the world has everything to do with how one engages the world and acts in it.”83 This is precisely how the thanksgiving psalms participate in the process of character formation. They provide their audience with a good and proper vision of the world. What we must do is to explicate the world that is being described in the thanksgiving psalms, to explicate, in other words, its moral framework, its sustaining environment and context, its ethos, 82.  Hauerwas, The Peaceable Kingdom, 29. 83.  Brown, The Ethos of the Cosmos, 18–19.

30

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

and all of the accompanying virtues, habits, and practices. When I refer to the ethos of the thanksgiving psalms, then, I am referring to the comprehensive vision of Israel’s ethical life. In the next section, I clarify how the thanksgiving psalms give voice to this underlying ethos. As I see it, it involves two key aspects: liturgy and world-creation. Liturgy and World-Creating in the Thanksgiving Psalms From the time of the groundbreaking research of Hermann Gunkel (which was advanced in the work of his student, Sigmund Mowinckel), the setting of the Psalter’s use has been indelibly linked with the Israelite cult. Brueggemann and Bellinger summarize the general consensus, “Ancient Israel’s cult—their organized worship primarily in the Jerusalem temple—provides the religious and social setting from which many of the psalms derive.” And again, “The language of the Psalms is liturgical language, reflecting actual worship practice. Leaders associated with the cultic establishment composed many of the texts for liturgical settings.”84 While the specific use of the psalms cannot be reconstructed with much specificity, even a generalized liturgical setting has implications for how the Psalter’s theology and ethics should be approached. For example, Brueggemann claimed in a previous work, “The outcome of [the psalms’] regular re-performance is a world that is unavailable except in the act of retelling.”85 He goes on to argue that this is what is achieved in worship. The world that is created here sometimes stands in tension with the world of the participants’ lived reality. It delegitimizes these other “worlds” and the claims they make. It offers its audience hope.86 Though Brueggemann does not highlight the world-creating character of the thanksgiving psalms, their stories of deliverance and rescue provide a counter-testimony of just this sort—the worshipper’s movement from lament to thanks demonstrates that Yahweh is active, that Yahweh hears when worshippers pray, that Yahweh responds and rescues. For those readers and hearers standing in the midst of their own lament, whether it is personal or communal, these claims are radical, particularly in the fact that they may conflict with the audience’s perception of reality. They may present them with a new vision. The proposed liturgical use and regular 84.  Walter Brueggemann and William H. Bellinger Jr., Psalms, NCBC (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 6. 85.  Walter Brueggemann, “The Psalms in Narrative Performance,” in Performing the Psalms, ed. Dave Bland and David Fleer (St. Louis: Chalice, 2005), 9–29 (16). 86.  See Brueggemann, Israel’s Praise, 1–28.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

31

retelling of these stories in Israelite worship, then, should work to reorient the community both to what has been, what is, and what might be. By rehearsing and, more importantly, by reappropriating these stories, the community “subverts…more familiar worlds that have no grid for radical obedience, no move to petition, and so no cause for thanks.”87 This seems to be what J. Clinton McCann Jr. is after when he concludes that liturgy is inevitably instructional. He writes, “Liturgy shapes minds and hearts; it moves and transforms; it creates a new vision of reality.”88 In Chapter 1, I noted that there is a gap between liturgy (and worship) and ethics. It is not always the case that good liturgy creates good people or that liturgy always works. Social-scientific research has demonstrated this, as has our experience in religious practices. It is also well attested in the Old Testament in instances where the ancient worshipping community is chided for performing their prescribed rituals but forsaking other obligations, weightier obligations. There is no one-to-one correspondence in the Old Testament between performance or enactment and ethics. To cite just one example, in Isaiah 58 there is a “hypocritical gap between the actual conduct of the community and the intention of the community expressed in worship.”89 Paul D. Hanson observes that the members of the community “engage in theological study, seek out divine oracles, engage in cultic rites, and fast. But according to the prophetic voice in this passage, it is all a sham, mere external motions, hypocritical acts that fail to meet the test of genuine religion.”90 The community’s worship is far from exemplary (or even acceptable) because their lives outside of the temple do not reflect the “fasting” that Yahweh truly desires. The practice of liturgy, in other words, does not necessarily correspond to living acceptable ethical lives, nor has it shaped its participants effectively, for even though they have obeyed the liturgical requirements—they have fasted and engaged in the proper ritual acts—they have also mistreated their neighbors. They have missed the weightier issues. Despite its ineffectiveness at times, however, it is the case that the liturgical use of the psalms can contribute to their overall ethical and potential shaping and forming function. As many scholars rightly acknowledge, the psalms’ intended use and re-use in worship place them in a different category than other types of religious literature. For 87.  Brueggemann, “The Psalms in Narrative Performance,” 16. 88.  McCann, A Theological Introduction, 21. 89.  Walter Brueggemann, Isaiah 40–66, Westminster Bible Companion (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998), 186 (emphasis original). 90.  Paul D. Hanson, Isaiah 40–66, IBC (Louisville: John Knox, 1995), 204.

32

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

example, in Harry P. Nasuti’s 2001 essay, “The Sacramental Function of the Psalms in Contemporary Scholarship and Liturgical Practice,” he postulates that the results of using individual psalms in liturgy are quite distinct from other texts. The Psalter has “a unique power that is not shared by the rest of Scripture, one rooted in their special ability to have a decisive effect on those who use them.”91 Psalms are not merely read, he argues, they are prayed, recited, sung, and/or performed. As a result, Nasuti argues that the person using a psalm is “shaped as a particular type of person, the person who…conforms to the words of the psalm.”92 In this reading, character-shaping does not occur because of the ethical content of an individual psalm, nor is it due to a process of self-analytical reflection; rather, Nasuti concludes that much like the singing of a hymn or the recitation of a creed or responsive reading in worship, the psalm (usually/possibly) becomes engrained in the mind of the participant. Once it takes root, it functions as an agent of change by slowly transforming the worship participant’s vision of the world to the vision that the psalm projects. Put simply, Nasuti claims that the repetitive and participatory aspects of liturgy work to shape the character of the worshipper. Wenham developed a similar thesis in his 2007 essay, “Prayer and Practice in the Psalms,” though he comes at the discussion from a different methodological foundation. He writes, “Anyone singing or praying the psalms will find him or herself being given a very strong ethical steer.”93 For Wenham, this ethical steer is due to the fact that the Psalter, when used as liturgy, places “powerful words into the worshipper’s mouth.”94 Because they are repeated, or sung, or prayed out loud in public acts of worship, he argues that the words of a psalm are “uniquely powerful.” They make “a stronger claim on the believer than either law, wisdom, or story, which are simply subject to passive reception.”95 Specifically, it is the verbalizing of the psalm that affords it this distinction because, as Wenham argues, “The reciter or singer is involved in giving very active assent to the standards of life implied in the Psalms.”96 Wenham cites the Lord’s Prayer as an example.

91.  Nasuti, “The Sacramental Function of the Psalms,” 78. 92.  Ibid., 82. 93.  Wenham, “Prayer and Practice in the Psalms,” 281. 94.  Ibid., 290. 95.  Wenham, Psalms as Torah, 57. 96.  Wenham, “Prayer and Practice in the Psalms,” 292.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

33

[W]hen we pray, “Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us,” we are committing ourselves to forgiving other people. I suggested that what worshipers say in prayer ought to have a profound effect on them because these words are addressed to God, who can evaluate their sincerity and worthiness. If we praise a certain type of behavior in our prayers, we are telling God that this is how we intend to behave. On the other hand, if in prayer we denounce certain acts and pray for God to punish them, we are in effect inviting God to judge us if we do the same.97

Building on the research of Speech-Act theory, Wenham believes that the latent ethical demands of the psalms are inescapable when they are vocalized. They are no longer merely words on a page; they become the ethical commitments of the singer. Before moving on, it is important to note that an awareness of the clear counterevidence to these proposals is missing from Nasuti’s and Wenham’s otherwise insightful essays. As I have already noted, liturgy or worship does not necessarily change the participant. And more to the point with Wenham’s analysis, the performative function of speech-acts do not always create change in the character of those reading or singing or praying the psalms. Both authors are right in stating that the Psalter possesses the unique potential to shape the audience’s character, but as the biblical record of Israel’s history makes clear, it did not always accomplish this end. Any proposal of what the liturgical use of a psalm does, therefore, cannot be reduced to an ex cathedra statement, for there are too many qualifiers and the results are too highly subjective. Still, worship and liturgy should be seen as potentially formative events, and the reading of the Psalter clearly plays an integral part in this process. The role of liturgy in character formation is echoed outside of biblical studies as well.98 For example, in his popular-level work, Desiring the Kingdom: Worship, Worldview, and Cultural Formation, James K. A. Smith describes humans as “liturgical animals” (homo liturgicus). “We are what we love,” he explains, “and our love is shaped, primed, and aimed by liturgical practices that take hold of our gut and aim our hearts to certain ends.”99 For Smith, the formative nature of liturgy is not specifically linked to religious worship—it involves cultural liturgies,

97.  Wenham, Psalms as Torah, 57. 98.  See, e.g., Paul Ramsey, “Liturgy and Ethics,” JRE 7 (1979): 139–71; Don E. Sailers, “Liturgy and Ethics: Some New Beginnings,” JRE 7 (1979): 173–89. 99.  James K. A. Smith, Desiring the Kingdom: Worship, Worldview, and Cultural Formation (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009), 40.

34

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

some of which are as mundane as going shopping. These regular routines and rituals shape us, and their enactment provides evidence of our deep-seated desires. No matter how secular they may be, the rituals that comprise our collective life are liturgical; they are “identity-forming and telos-laden.”100 As such, secular liturgies “often constitute a mis-formation of our desires.” The goal of Christian worship, for Smith at least, is to be “intentionally liturgical, formative and pedagogical in order to counter such mis-formation and misdirections… Christian worship functions as a counter-formation to the mis-formation of secular liturgies into which we are ‘thrown’ from an early age.”101 Nathan D. Mitchell reaches a similar conclusion: [T]he ritual logic of Christian public prayer and sacrament is primarily embodied and sensory, imagistic and experiential, rather than cognitive or intellectual. Like art, ritual can be imagined as a protest against extinction; an outcry against annihilation; a challenge to the dying of the light, the ending of the waltz.102

Even though Mitchell seems to overstate his case—certainly, the ritual logic of public prayer and sacrament is both “embodied and sensory, imagistic and experiential” and “cognitive and intellectual,” and not primarily the former rather than the latter—liturgy and ritual are rightly presented here as an important counter-witness. They reorient participants to a vision of the world as it should be and they provide an image of the participants’ place within it. They “are a vital means of negotiating a community’s identity, or guaranteeing its social cohesion; they enunciate, embody and enact a people’s most cherished meanings and values.”103 Within Psalms studies, much has been made of the Psalter’s worldcreating character. And indeed, it provides an important entryway into a discussion of how the thanksgiving psalms may have shaped its audience. A contemporary, non-religious example of the power of liturgy and ritual for character-shaping that is instructive for our purposes here is the structure of Alcoholics Anonymous, from its daily meetings to its Twelve Step program. In particular, it is important to note the formative role of story in the liturgy of AA’s meetings. Mitchell claims, “The ritual repetition of stories is the central, essential dynamic of AA, for this action

100.  Ibid., 88. 101.  Ibid. (emphasis original). 102.  Mitchell, Liturgy and the Social Sciences, 6. 103.  Ibid., 7–8.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

35

permits members to identify with one another; to share ‘experience, strength and hope’; and to embody AA’s primary purpose: to stay sober and to help other alcoholics achieve sobriety.”104 By structuring time for public retellings of struggles with alcohol addiction, the victories their members experience, and the ongoing battle for restoration, AA provides opportunities for the community to be shaped, to be encouraged and challenged, to see potential in themselves and in their situations. This happens primarily through the ritual of storytelling. Something similar, I argue, should happen through the liturgical use of the thanksgiving psalms. The point is this: liturgies, both secular and sacred, contribute in meaningful and potentially potent ways to the people we are and to the people we are becoming. They create a world for their audience to inhabit, a world that, in some instances, stands in contrast to the world where its audience currently believes it resides. As such, the effect of these liturgies on the character of the individual and community cannot be confined to a religious space in any strict sense. It is all encompassing. Liturgies move people away from thinking and believing to performing and doing. This demands a commitment to living rightly within the world constructed by our communally accepted liturgies. A given liturgy will not always accomplish this end, of course, but this is only because there are other competing claims, other liturgies, that are vying for our attention and our allegiance. When the thanksgiving psalms are set within the context of Israel’s liturgical worship, their world-creating properties and potential for transformation are heightened. By regularly being confronted with stories of Yahweh’s ongoing redemptive work—stories of deliverance and rescue, stories that encourage trust and commitment and hope—the community was challenged to live in light of these stories. One could even claim that the ritual repetition of stories is the central, essential dynamic of the thanksgiving psalms, and as Mitchell notes, this action permitted members “to identify with one another; to share ‘experience, strength and hope.’ ” The reading, singing, praying, or performing of these psalms presented its audience with an opportunity for their character to be shaped according to the narratives that were being retold. This potential reality must be accounted for in any treatment of the ethics of the thanksgiving psalms.

104.  Ibid., 45.

36

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

Conclusion In this study, I am utilizing a narrative ethical approach in an admittedly limited way, as an interpretive outlook that highlights the charactershaping potential of Israel’s authoritative, communally accepted stories in the thanksgiving psalms. When this genre is read from a narrative ethical lens of this sort, the didacticism of the worshippers’ stories can be clearly seen. It provides an outlook that informs what is happening in the text— what can be learned from the worshippers’ stories and how they may have shaped the ancient worshipping community. It is evident from the collection of stories that are retold in Israel’s thanksgiving psalms that Yahweh is willing (and able) to rescue those who pray, who believe and put their trust in Yahweh, who respond in thanks when their prayers are answered. These stories powerfully demonstrate Yahweh to be involved and invested, reliable and trustworthy, powerful and good. Narrative ethicists, most notably Stanley Hauerwas, have championed the view that theology is decidedly ethical. These stories, therefore, do not construct a theological image of who Yahweh is without also constructing a corresponding ethical image of who the worshipping community should be. Following the ethical principle of imitatio Dei, the character of Yahweh in the thanksgiving psalms is the theological foundation for its ethical instruction. It articulates a vision of the divine that the community is called to reflect in their ethics. And as a result, the theology of the thanksgiving psalms should inform the audience’s actions (cultic and otherwise), and it should shape their character. The worshipper also provides an example for the community to follow in the thanksgiving psalms—spiritually, cultically, ethically. This will become even clearer over the next three chapters. Admittedly, there is a significant amount of overlap in the presentation of the various worshippers in the thanksgiving psalms. This is largely due to the fact that their narratives can be summarized by the recurring scheme of need, rescue, and thanks.105 Something happens to the worshipper; the worshipper calls to Yahweh and Yahweh answers; the worshipper gives thanks. Still, the retelling of their individual stories of deliverance is didactic and instructive and potentially part of a transformative liturgy that reorients the community to follow Yahweh as the worshipper follows Yahweh. They too should pray in the midst of lament; they too should love and trust Yahweh; they too should give thanks; they too should participate in cultic rituals. 105.  See Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 151.

2. Story, Ethos, and Character Formation in the Thanksgiving Psalms

37

The teaching of the thanksgiving psalms does not focus on those typically defined ethical categories, such as interpersonal relationships, law-keeping, and social justice, but rather, the spiritual and cultic components of Israel’s underlying ethos—the components that frame the sustaining context for ethical action. This contributes greatly to the vision of the life Israel was meant to live. Therefore, my exploration of the storied ethics of the thanksgiving psalms seeks to give voice to a more holistic understanding of the life Israel should/could live or should/could have lived. In so doing, I am consciously extending the boundaries that have come to define Old Testament ethics by including the ethos of thanksgiving as a vibrant and necessary part of the Psalter’s ethical instruction. Indeed, the Old Testament itself seems to eschew a conception of ethics as outward or external obedience alone; it must also include a catalogue of spiritual components and cultic requirements. Taken together, these aspects help to structure the sustaining context or framework, the ethos, of Israel’s ethical life. Through the retelling of the worshipper’s story, the worshipping community is instructed on who Yahweh is and who they should be as a result, what type of character they should have, how they should pray, how they should respond to Yahweh, how they should worship. Truly, these stories encompass many diverse aspects of the life Israel was expected to live. Wright and other scholars argue that the regular rehearsal of Israel’s narrative-in-worship played an important role in the development of Israel’s ethical worldview. The fact that the worshippers’ stories of divine deliverance were (presumably) used in liturgical worship would have allowed them to enter into Israel’s consciousness “as a powerful shaping and sustaining ethical force.”106 Admittedly, it is impossible to know if the thanksgiving psalms were actually used in this way in Israelite worship or if they ever accomplished this shaping function, but the psalms are worded as if they could and should be used in this way. Employing a narrative approach helps to bring this to the fore. Gustafson writes, “Narratives function to sustain the particular moral identity of a religious (or secular) community by rehearsing its history and traditional meanings, as these are portrayed in Scripture and other sources.”107 The stories included in Israel’s thanksgivings may have become part of this rehearsal, and as such, their repetition and reappropriation should have helped to solidify the moral identity of the community in ever-changing

106.  Wright, Old Testament Ethics, 377. 107.  Gustafson, “Varieties of Moral Discourse,” 56.

38

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

contexts. This is so, due to the fact that the words of the unnamed “I” in these psalms become the words of the speaker (or reader or singer). Regardless of circumstance, the liturgical use of the psalms allows the audience to participate in the narrative that is being sung. The narrative approach that is espoused here is not a methodology to be applied. It is an interpretive outlook that I believe provides an important ethical perspective for an interpretation of the thanksgiving psalms. It calls attention to story and ethos, spirituality and cult, liturgy and worldcreation, and the relation of these aspects to character formation. In this study, I will apply this outlook to a close reading of three psalms: Psalms 116, 118, and 138. Each of these psalms highlights important (but often neglected) aspects of Israel’s ethical worldview and therefore deserves careful consideration.

Chapter 3 P s a l m 116

The didactic function of Psalm 116 is made clear to the reader at the outset of the poem. Yes, the worshipper retells their experience in public worship in order to give thanks to Yahweh and thus fulfill their covenantal and cultic obligation. The importance of vow-keeping is not to be underestimated and neither are the relational aspects with the divine that are involved in a thank offering. But with their storytelling, the worshipper also provides an example that their audience should follow. They too should enact the prescribed requirements when prayers have been answered, and they should embody the same spiritual characteristics as the worshipper. Both are vital components of telling God’s story rightly with one’s ethical life. In order to elucidate the psalm’s didacticism toward these ends, I begin this chapter with a translation of Psalm 116 and a brief discussion on its structure and genre. These introductory matters establish the necessary groundwork for my proposed ethical interpretation of the psalm, which comprises the main body of the chapter. Here, I highlight the worshipper’s presentation of the sustaining context or ethos that informs their storytelling. Put another way, I highlight the world that is created or envisioned or imagined as a result of the worshipper’s story. This, it should be noted, is what serves as the psalm’s proposed framework for right living, for it is only in this framework that ethical action can take place. The chapter then concludes with a summary of the teaching of Psalm 116—how the worshipper’s story and storytelling should inform the audience, how its character should be shaped (or reshaped) in light of this retelling.

40

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

Translation (1) I love1 because Yahweh2 has heard3 my voice, my pleading, (2) because he has inclined his ear to me; yes, through my days,4 I will proclaim. (3) The cords of death encompassed me and the restraints of Sheol found me; I found sorrow and agony. (4) Then I called in the name of Yahweh, “Yahweh, deliver my life.” (5) Gracious is Yahweh and righteous; yes, our God is one who does mercy. (6) Yahweh protects the simple: I became low and he saved me. (7) Return, my life, to your5 resting place, because Yahweh has treated you well. 1. The verb ‫ אהבתי‬is in the absolute form. (See also ‫ אקרא‬in v. 2a and ‫האמנתי‬ in v. 10a.) 2. BHS suggests moving Yahweh so it can function as the direct object of the verb (“I love Yahweh because…”). This is not necessary, and thus not reflected in the proposed translation. For more discussion on the perceived textual difficulty see the “Interpretation” of v. 1 below. 3.  The verbs in vv. 1–2 alternate from qaṭal to yiqṭol. In v. 1a, the yiqṭol has a past referent: Yahweh has heard (‫)כי־ישׁמע יהוה‬. 4.  This is the only use of ‫יָמי‬ ַ ‫ּוב‬ ְ in the MT. Because of the infrequency of this word (and following the Syriac tradition), it is commonly emended to ‫“( ביום‬on the day”). 5.  The suffixes appearing in v. 7 (‫למנוחיכי‬, ‫)עליכי‬, and again in vv. 12 (‫)תגמולוהי‬ and 19 (‫)בתוככי‬, are typically identified as Aramaisms. (For an explanation of the suffixes used in vv. 7 and 12, see GKC §91l and Joüon §94i; for the suffix in v. 19, see GKC §91e and Joüon §94h.) This, and other evidence, such as the psalm’s use of the preposition ‫ ל‬to introduce the object of the verb in v. 16 (‫)פתחת למוסרי‬, has led many interpreters to propose a post-exilic date for the psalm. See, e.g., L. C. Allen, Psalms 101–150, rev. ed., WBC 21 (Waco, TX: Word, 2002), 153; Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 339; on the grammar, see GKC §117n. In contrast, Gary A. Rendsburg, Linguistic Evidence for the Northern Origin of Selected Psalms, SBLMS 43 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990), 83–86, postulates that the psalm was most likely written in a northern dialect (Israelian Hebrew), which also serves as an indication of the psalm’s provenance. The psalm, he argues, is pre-exilic. Mitchell Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, AB 17a (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1970), 145, also proposes an early date, “Critics tend to assign this poem to the post-Exilic period, but the dense syntax of several verses (1, 8, 12), frequent enjambment (vss. 1, 9, 12, 14, 15, 18), the use of yqtl verbs to describe completed

3. Psalm 116

41

(8) Yes, you have torn my life from death, my eyes from tears, my feet from stumbling. (9) I will walk before Yahweh in the lands of the living. (10) I trusted, because6 I said, “I am suffering7 greatly.” (11) I said in my fear, “Every person is a liar.” (12) How8 can I give back to Yahweh all his9 good deeds to me? (13) I will lift up a cup of salvation, and I will call in the name of Yahweh. (14) I will complete my vows to Yahweh, right in front of all of his people. (15) Too precious10 in the eyes of Yahweh is the death of those who are committed to him. (16) Oh Yahweh, because I am your servant, I am your servant, son of your female servant, you loosed my fetters. (17) To you I will sacrifice a thanksgiving offering, and I will call in the name of Yahweh. past action (vss. 1, 3, 4, 6), rare forms such as energic –nā in vss. 14, 18, doubleduty particles in vss. 10, 17, bespeak a much earlier period of composition. The Qumran poems, for example, show scant familiarity with these poetic devices.” 6.  LXX translates ‫ כי‬as διό (“therefore”). Allen, Psalms 101–150, 152, suggests that this reading may be a corruption of διότι, which means “because.” As he points out, this corruption occurs in LXX MSS occasionally. Neither term, however, is well attested in the Greek Psalter: διότι never occurs; διό occurs only here. The reading proposed here, therefore, follows the use of ‫ כי‬in v. 1 (causal) because of the syntactic parallelism between the two verses. 7.  LXX (ἐταπεινώθην) reads ‫יתי‬ ִ ִ‫ ָענ‬as a pual (‫יתי‬ ִ ֵ‫)עּנ‬, ֻ meaning, “I become degraded, humiliated.” 8.  Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 149, “When used adverbially as an interrogative, mah especially expresses what is regarded as an impossibility, obviously true of the present context.” 9.  According to Allen, Psalms 101–150, 152, the suffix is “purely Aramaic in form.” 10.  The translation of ‫ יקר‬is notoriously difficult. For interpretive options, see J. A. Emerton, “How Does the Lord Regard the Death of His Saints in Psalm cxvi. 15?,” JTS 34 (1983): 146–53; Aron Pinker, “Psalm 116, 15 – Death of the Saints?” ZAW 121 (2009): 529–39.

42

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms (18) I will make complete my vows to Yahweh, right in front of all of his people, (19) In the courts of Yahweh’s house, in the midst of Jerusalem. Praise Yah.

Structure and Genre Commentators have long observed that Psalm 116’s movement, at least as it is found in the MT, is haphazard.11 As a result, the identification of the psalm’s intended structure is often viewed as a problem to be solved.12 This state of affairs has inspired many different suggestions. Out of this disparate collection, however, three distinct approaches have come to dominate the scholarly landscape.13 On one extreme, there are those who characterize the psalm as a disconnected text. They “disallow any logical line of thought or structure in the psalm.”14 Hermann Gunkel provides a summary of this approach, arguing that the order of the psalm is virtually indecipherable. He reaches this conclusion based primarily on the observation that the psalm does not follow the expected form-critical pattern of an individual thanksgiving. It should be noted that the formal characteristics commonly attributed to an individual thanksgiving were based on Gunkel’s own critical analysis of the genre. Psalm 116’s deviation from this pattern, then, might be more of a commentary on the inadequacies of Gunkel’s interpretive model than on the oddities of Psalm 116’s structure. Be that as it may, Gunkel claims that the final form of the psalm includes different formal elements with no identifiable logic in its progression.15 11.  See Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, and Lamentations, FOTL 15 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 291. 12.  See Allen, Psalms 101–150, 153. 13.  Other approaches have been suggested as well, but they are in the minority. See, e.g., Charles Augustus Briggs and Emilie Grace Briggs, The Book of Psalms II: 51–150, ICC (New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1907), 397–401; Richard J. Clifford, Psalms 73–150, AOTC (Nashville: Abingdon, 2003), 199; Derek Kidner, Psalms 73–150: An Introduction and Commentary, TOTC 16 (Downers Grove, IL: Inter­ Varsity, 2008), 442–46. 14.  See W. S. Prinsloo, “Psalm 116: Disconnected Text or Symmetrical Whole?” Bib 74 (1993): 71–82. 15.  Hermann Gunkel, Die Psalmen (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1926), 500, “Der Psalm enthält die verschiedenartigsten Bestandteile…scheinbar ohne jede Ordnung.”

3. Psalm 116

43

Hans-Joachim Kraus, who also approaches the psalm from a formcritical perspective, reaches a similar conclusion. He writes, “Varying components seem to follow one another without any apparent order: lament, petition, trust, and thanksgiving.”16 He suggests further that some components are “fragmentlike,” while others are more dominant. The latter thus provide a clue to the psalm’s genre and function. He explains, “The fact that the psalmsinger has experienced Yahweh’s help and is appearing before him to give thanks is clearly evident in vv. 1, 2, 12–14, and 17–19… Accordingly, Psalm 116 belongs to the category of thanksgiving songs of an individual.”17 Genre identification notwithstanding, Kraus avers that the poem’s structure is, at best, difficult to follow. A few contemporary readers have also followed this interpretive trajectory. Erhard S. Gerstenberger, another form-critic, admits difficulty in establishing the psalm’s “logical, poetic, and theological order.” As a result, he argues that the psalm should be read “as a liturgical piece serving certain functions in worship.”18 This proposed setting helps to bring some clarity to the psalm’s structure, but only minimally. In fact, Gerstenberger concludes that attempts to resolve the psalm’s structural difficulties will ultimately prove unsuccessful because, whatever approach is attempted, enigmas inevitably remain. The best one can do is to provide an outline of the psalm in which the reader demarcates its distinct formal elements and evaluates its structure on this basis. Gerstenberger’s proposal of Psalm 116’s structure, therefore, reads as a disjointed collection of forms, some of which seem out of place when compared to the standard (and hence assumed) form-critical expectations of an individual thanksgiving psalm. He orders the poem thus: I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII.

Declaration of being heard (1–2) Account of trouble and salvation (3–4) Responses of community (5–7) Thanks and vow of the saved one (8–9) Account of trouble and salvation (10–11) Vow and fulfillment (12–15) Account of salvation (16) Vow and fulfillment (17–19)

16.  Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalms 60–150, trans. Hilton C. Oswald, CC (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 385. 17.  Ibid., 386. 18.  Gerstenberger, Psalm, Part 2, 291.

44

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

In contrast to the form-critical school, which has generally characterized the psalm’s structure as disconnected, other readers have located a discernible pattern in the outline of the psalm. Th. Booij writes, “Psalm 116, in spite of allegations to the contrary, has a clearly arranged line of thought.”19 Booij’s overly positive conclusion should quickly be tempered, however, by the fact that scholars have failed to identify the psalm’s alleged arrangement with any sense of unanimity. Opinions are actually quite diverse. Thankfully, some recurring patterns have emerged. The first, which is known as the traditional approach, divides the poem into two halves: vv. 1–9 and vv. 10–19. Dividing the poem at this point has significant precursors in the Greek and Latin textual traditions, though neither of these traditions viewed the poem as two (roughly equal) halves in a single unified work; rather, they divided the composition into two separate poems. In the LXX, for example, the MT of Psalm 116 is broken up into Psalm 114 (which consists of vv. 1–9) and Psalm 115 (vv. 10–19). C. A. and E. G. Briggs postulate that the textual break was made for liturgical purposes. They make this suggestion on the basis of another observation—“the two parts have so many features in common that they must be regarded as parts of the same original.”20 Whether or not this was the logic informing the decision of the psalm’s early translators, many modern readers agree that there is at least some literary or thematic correspondence between the two halves, but they choose to read them together as a unified composition. Goldingay summarizes, Verses 1–9 would indeed work on their own, though vv. 10–19 hardly do so. But the splitting does point us toward the psalm’s structure: vv. 1–9 and vv. 10–19 are broadly parallel, each beginning the same way, the first focusing on Yhwh’s action, the second more on the worshipper’s response.21

Michael L. Barré justifies the traditional approach’s suggested structural break between vv. 9 and 10 on the grounds of a perceived symmetry in the word count of the two proposed sections.22 He writes, “Counting up the words in Psalm 116 (i.e., the unaltered MT), we note that vv. 1–9

19.  Th. Booij, “Psalm 116, 10–11: The Account of an Inner Crisis,” Bib 76 (1995): 388–95 (393). 20.  Briggs and Briggs, The Book of Psalms II: 51–150, 398. 21.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 338–39. 22.  Michael L. Barré, “Psalm 116: Its Structure and Its Enigmas,” JBL 109 (1990): 61–79 (63).

3. Psalm 116

45

contain 63 words, while vv. 10–19 contain 64 words.”23 He then goes on to note a similar proportion in the number of words included in the subsections of the poem’s major divisions, which he identifies as vv. 1–4 (29 words) and vv. 5–9 (34) in the first section and vv. 10–14 (30) and vv. 15–19 (34) in the second. As he continues, Barré also suggests another subdivision, though this time it is based on the poem’s “shift in thought” (vv. 1–2, 3–4, 5–6, 7–9; vv. 10–11, 12–14, 15–16, 17–19).24 While the numerical basis for Barré’s proposal is tenuous at best, the psalm’s syntax and content seem to affirm the conclusions of the traditional approach, particularly its identification of a major break between vv. 9 and 10. The most significant piece of evidence, which virtually every proponent of this approach cites, is the parallelism between v. 1 and v. 10. Barré summarizes the argument, At the beginning of each stands a qtl verb in the 1st person sg. followed by ky + yqtl verb: hbty ky yšm (v. 1) and hmnty ky dbr (v. 10). In each case Yahweh is the implied object of these qtl verbs: “I love (Yahweh) because…” and “I put my trust (in Yahweh) because…” The yqtl verb that follows ky in each case reflects the protagonist in that section of the psalm: in v. 1 the subject of the verb is Yahweh, whose saving actions with regard to the poet are the main concern of this section; in v. 10, it is the psalmist, whose response to Yahweh’s salvation is the burden of Part II.25

In this reading, the mirrored syntax in each section’s opening verse is believed to signal the presence of an intended structural device. In fact, many modern interpreters conclude that the similarities between these two verses alone provide enough evidence to support a reading of the psalm as a compilation of two complementary halves. Within the traditional approach, the identification of subdivisions in the psalm’s two major sections remains a source of contention. Klaus Seybold proposes a reading similar to Barré’s, in which he acknowledges breaks between vv. 1–4 and vv. 5–9; vv. 10–13 and vv. 14–19.26 The only difference between the two is Seybold’s decision to separate the second section between v. 13 and v. 14, not v. 14 and v. 15. In contrast, Goldingay’s proposal, which is structured according to the events depicted in the psalm and their timing, is quite different. He divides the poem in this way: 23.  Ibid., 63–64. 24.  Ibid., 66. 25.  Ibid., 66–67. 26.  Klaus Seybold, Die Psalmen, HAT 15 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996), 454–56.

46

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms I.

Yahweh’s Action (1–9) 1–2 The psalmist’s testimony to Yahweh’s responsiveness 3–6 The psalmist’s story of predicament, prayer, and deliverance 7–9 The psalmist’s confidence about the future

II. The Worshipper’s Response (10–19) 10–11 The psalmist’s renewed recollection 12–19b Public testimony 19c Hallelujah

The first section, he argues, centers on the worshipper’s lived experience. This includes a thematic (and temporal) movement from lament (past) to deliverance (present) to a proclamation of trust (future). At the hinge of the psalm, v. 10, the composition returns to a description of the worshipper’s plight (past), which sets up the announcement of deliverance and the cultic performance of sacrifice in vv. 12–19b. The psalm, in other words, retells the same story twice and in both retellings, there is movement from the past to the present and ultimately, to the future.27 Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger suggest a minor deviation from the traditional approach, but they deserve mention here as well. They maintain a twofold division of the poem, but they do not identify v. 10 as the introduction to the second half. They suggest, instead, that vv. 10–11 together serve a transitional function.28 These verses “formulate a conclusion to the first section, oriented to retrospect and reflection (vv. 1–9) and lay the foundation for the second section, which aims at the practice of thanksgiving (vv. 12–19).”29 In other words, vv. 10–11 signal 27.  Cf. Booij, “Psalm 116, 10–11,” 393, “The arrangement…is not determined by the events mentioned in the text, but by an inner movement leading from intense gratitude (vv. 1–2. 5–6. 7b. 8), calm (v. 7) and joy of life (v. 9) to the intention to requite YHWH for his goodness (vv. 12ff.). Behind this movement, pushing it ahead, is the memory of distress and release; it comes up several times and in different ways. First the speaker tells in somewhat traditional terms his anxieties, grief (vv. 3. 8), and helplessness (v. 6b), and the deliverance as an expression of YHWH’s merciful inclination (vv. 5–7); then he describes his bewilderment (vv. 10–11); finally, he ponders upon the connection between the deliverance and his devotion to YHWH (vv. 15–16).” 28.  See also Bernd Janowski, “Dankbarkeit: Ein anthropologischer Grundbegriff im Spiegel der toda-Psalmen,” in Ritual und Poesie: Formen und Orte religiöser Dichtung im Alten Orient, im Judentum und im Christentum, HBS 36 (Freiburg: Herder, 2003), 91–136 (99–100); Hubert Tita, Gelübde als Bekenntnis: Eine Studie zu den Gelübden im Alten Testament, OBO 181 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001), 109–26. 29.  Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101–150, trans. Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2011), 215. See also deClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, The Book of Psalms, 859–62.

3. Psalm 116

47

a thematic shift from the expression of thanksgiving in the psalm to its ritual performance. Read in this way, the second section of the poem is not another retelling of the worshipper’s experience; rather, v. 1 together with v. 10 forms an inclusio around the psalm’s only retelling of this story. The psalm then moves from the worshipper’s storied retelling of divine deliverance to the preparations or perhaps liturgy for a proper cultic response in the second section. Following Bernd Janowski, Hossfeld and Zenger also maintain the presence of a conceptual shift in space and time throughout the psalm as a whole. First, they observe that Psalm 116 journeys from Sheol (v. 3) to the land of the living (v. 9) to the courts of Yahweh’s house, the temple (v. 19). Janowski describes this as the poem’s “religious topography,” the movement through which is indicative of the worshipper’s dramatic journey from disaster to salvation.30 As important as this is conceptually, it is secondary to the psalm’s use of time as a structuring device.31 Hossfeld and Zenger write, “The confession in v. 1, the self-exhortation in v. 7, and the confession in v. 10 all take place in the present. The whole second section (vv. 12–19) occurs in the immediate future.”32 Due to this “layering of time,”33 they suggest that the psalm should be read as a proclamation of where the worshipper has been, where they are now, and where they are going. The psalm, therefore, is not referring merely to an individual experience of divine deliverance in the past. It is paradigmatic. It refers to Yahweh’s ongoing involvement—Yahweh’s repeated rescues, if you will. Read in this way, the structure of the poem is ordered thus: I.

Expression of Thanksgiving 1–2 Declaration of love as confession of trust and statement of thanks 3–6 Narrative of rescues with reminiscence of the formula of grace 7–9 Self-exhortation with retrospect and explanation of confidence 10–11 Confession of trust and retrospect

II. Performance of Thanksgiving 12 Initial question about the concrete performance of thanksgiving 13–14 Cup ritual and fulfillment of vow 15–16 Confession of trust with reflection 17–19 Thanksgiving sacrifice and fulfillment of vow Hallelujah

30.  Janowski, “Dankbarkeit,” 106–7. 31.  See ibid., 108. 32.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 216. 33.  Ibid., 216.

48

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

The logic of Hossfeld and Zenger’s restructuring is attractive. Not only does it allow interpreters to make use of the shared syntax and content of v. 1 and v. 10, it also confines the psalmist’s storytelling to the first section and the (intended) cultic performance to the second section. Ultimately, however, this reading goes against the grain of the early traditions, which is not enough on its own to rule it out of course, but its idiosyncrasy should at least caution interpreters. Finally, there is another approach advocated by those who perceive an identifiable structure in Psalm 116: the psalm divides into three sections. Leslie C. Allen and James Luther Mays are notable exponents of this view. Both label the psalm’s individual strophes as vv. 1–7, vv. 8–14, and vv. 15–19 with a hallelujah rubric appended as the psalm’s conclusion. Allen bases his proposal on the appearance of recurring motifs, such as death (vv. 3, 8, 15) and lament (vv. 3, 10–11, 16), and recurring phrases, most notably, the psalmist’s appeal to the “name of Yahweh” in each of the psalm’s three strophes (vv. 4, 13, 17). He also highlights the use of repeated verbal roots (e.g., ‫ גמל‬and ‫ שׁוב‬in v. 7 and v. 12) and structural parallels that occur in at least two of the three sections.34 Mays buttresses this proposal by suggesting the presence of what he terms “performance statements” at the end of each section (vv. 7, 13–14, 17–18).35 Other correspondences are noted as well, but they are not as regular (or as convincing). On the basis of these observations, Allen outlines the structure of the poem as follows: I. II. III.

Responding to divine faithfulness in saving from deadly crisis (vv. 1–7) Responding to divine rescue from deadly crisis (vv. 8–14) Responding to divine faithfulness in defeating death (vv. 15–19) Closing Rubric

Some modern commentators, including Brueggemann and Bellinger,36 Grogan,37 and McCann,38 have championed a threefold approach as well, largely following the work of Allen and Mays.39 While I admire the 34.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 153–54. 35.  Mays, Psalms, 369. 36.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 499–500. 37.  Geoffrey W. Grogan, Psalms, THOTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 191–92. 38.  J. Clinton McCann Jr., “Psalms,” NIB 4:1147–48. 39.  P. Auffret, “Essai sur la Structure Littéraire du Psaume 116,” BN 23 (1984): 32–47, also advocated for a threefold approach to the structure of Ps 116, though, in a more recent contribution, he emphasized the chiastic structure of the psalm (even noting the possibility of reading the poem as two deeply interconnected

3. Psalm 116

49

sen­sitivity to literary concerns demonstrated in this approach, I do not find the poetic divisions and the proposed rationale standing behind them overly convincing. For example, if the psalm is divided into two sections and not three (as in the traditional approach), the recurring motifs, phrases, and verbal roots cited by Allen and Mays still hold interpretive value. More importantly, the division of the poem into three sections seems to run roughshod over the narrative of the psalm, which is to the detriment of the reader. In this chapter, I read the psalm according to the traditional approach. The subdivisions that are proposed here are based on the narrative structure of the worshipper’s testimonies. This decision respects both the final form of the MT and the point of division suggested by some of the psalm’s early interpreters. Syntactic and linguistic arguments can also be made to substantiate this decision, most notably, the similarities between v. 1 and v. 10. Interpretation Verses 1–2 The poem’s opening colon presents interpreters with immediate problems. Arnold B. Ehrlich overstates the case by claiming that the psalm holds one of the most difficult interpretive issues in the Psalter.40 The first oddity is the worshipper’s powerful, but uncharacteristic, declaration of commitment: “I love.” I have opted to follow the standard translation of the verb, reflected in most English translations, “love,” though the semantic domain of ‫ אהב‬also includes a sense of commitment or dedication. These attributes should not be viewed as mutually exclusive. In fact, commitment and dedication, and even “passion” as Samuel Terrien describes the term,41 should be included in a robust understanding of love. Admittedly, such descriptions are often (heavily) veiled under more romantic or emotional overtones in our contemporary context. This is unfortunate, for the worshipper is not communicating mere sentimentality

parts, vv. 1–9, 10–19) over against a strict threefold division. See P. Auffret, “ ‘Je Marcherai à la Face de YHWH’: Ètude Structurelle du Psaume 116,” OTE 10 (1997): 161–77. See also Jean-Luc Vesco, Le Psautier de David: Traduit et Commenté II (Paris: Cerf, 2006), 1091–92. 40.  Arnold B. Ehrlich, Die Psalmen: Neu Uebersetz und Erklaert (Berlin: Poppelauer, 1905), 291. 41.  See Samuel Terrien, The Psalms: Strophic Structure and Theological Commen­ tary, ECC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 777.

50

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

in the opening line of the poem; rather, the worshipper is declaring an unrelenting resolve to follow Yahweh, an absolute, unwavering devotion. Yahweh has heard and answered the worshipper’s prayer, and this has a decided effect on their disposition.42 Because Yahweh has proven to be faithful, the worshipper renews their commitment. It is as if they are saying, “I will not doubt. I will not waver. I will remain committed. I will love.” Beyond the meaning of its content, the second difficulty at the outset of the poem is the opening line’s structure. As Gerstenberger notes, “How can a psalm, and an individual thanksgiving at that, open up with a declaration of love?”43 Viewed from a form-critical perspective, this is an issue that arises, again, primarily due to the seemingly unpredictable structure of the poem. Such a declaration does not fit with the anticipated form of an individual thanksgiving. More significantly, however, the oddity of this statement concerns the verb’s lack of an explicit object in the final form of the MT. Instead of identifying who or what the worshipper loves, the composition moves to a justification of the claim: “I love (‫)אהבתי‬ because Yahweh has heard my voice, my pleading.” A wooden reading of the MT such as this one is commendable for a number of reasons, but as Robert Alter observes, a sentiment of this sort is uncharacteristic in the Psalter.44 Early interpreters acknowledged this as well. The critical apparatus in BHS suggests moving ‫ יהוה‬out of its current position, as the stated subject of the ‫ כי‬clause, to the beginning of the line in order to specify the object of the worshipper’s love. Most modern English translations follow this suggestion for the sake of clarity and perhaps also in an attempt to align the syntax with other, similar texts, such as Ps 18:1 [MT 2] (‫ )ארחמך יהוה חזקי‬and Ps 31:23 [24] (‫)אהבו את־יהוה‬.45 Either way, the structure is often altered. Mitchell Dahood also concludes that something must be done about the line’s arrangement, though, as is common throughout his work on the Psalter, he appeals to Northwest Semitic philology in an attempt “to elicit sense from the poet’s crowded syntax.”46 Specifically, Dahood’s comparative work on the psalm led him to propose repointing the initial 42.  See Seybold, Die Psalmen, 454. 43.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 292. 44.  See Robert Alter, The Book of Psalms: A Translation with Commentary (New York: Norton, 2007), 411. 45.  See Allen, Psalms 101–50, 154, “For the sentiment of love for God in v 1 compare Pss 18:2 (1); 31:24 (23), Exod 20:6 and related passages, and Deuteronomic passages such as Deut 6:5.” 46.  Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 145.

3. Psalm 116

51

verb so that it would read as a substantive, either an accusative of cause with a first person (‫)א ֲה ָב ִתי‬ ַ or third person suffix (‫)א ֲה ָבתֹו‬. ַ When read in this way, the line can either be translated, “Out of love for me Yahweh did hear my plea for his mercy” or “In his love, Yahweh did hear my plea for his mercy” (cf. Isa 63:9; Jer 31:3).47 In both readings, the reconstructed noun functions adverbially, announcing the basis for Yahweh’s hearing and, consequently, Yahweh’s answering the worshipper’s prayer, rather than providing a description of the worshipper’s reconstituted disposition in light of their experience of divine rescue. Within Psalms scholarship, Dahood’s proposal has been met with a good deal of skepticism. Kraus responded that the MT’s form, ‫אהבתי‬, “is well documented…in the old translations,” and as such, should be kept.48 Additionally, he viewed the hypothesized textual emendations, such as those offered by Dahood, as highly speculative; he reached a similar conclusion regarding the proposed interpolation of the line (e.g., ‫אהבתי‬ ‫ )בית יהוה‬offered by other scholars (e.g., Schmidt). Despite these textual concerns, however, Kraus reached the same interpretive conclusion as Dahood: the placement of ‫ יהוה‬in the MT needs to be adjusted if the line is to make good sense. He reverted to a more conventional approach in his translation, rendering the line: “I love Yahweh, for he ‘has heard’ my loud pleading.”49 This restructuring is ultimately unnecessary, even if the alternative reading is deemed to be uncharacteristic in the Psalter. As A. A. Anderson has rightly noted, the MT is not impossible.50 Hossfeld and Zenger claim that the verb’s lack of an object in the first clause corresponds with the absolute use of ‫ אקרא‬in v. 2b and ‫ האמנתי‬in v. 10a.51 Goldingay even suggests that its omission was purposeful and theologically significant. By maintaining the MT’s reading, he is able to conclude, “[T]here is no point in the Bible when someone says that they dedicate themselves to or love God.”52 From this, Goldingay draws an important challenge for a modern audience: the Bible’s reticence to declare one’s love for Yahweh stands in 47.  In this translation, the function of ‫ כי‬is deemed to be emphatic: “did hear.” 48.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 385. 49.  Ibid., 384. See Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalmen II, BKAT 15/2 (Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1960), 792, “Ich liebe Jahwe, denn er ‘hat gehört’ mein lautes Flehen.” 50.  A. A. Anderson, Psalms 73–150, NCB (London: Oliphants, 1972), 791. 51.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 214. Cf. Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 292, “The verb hb, ‘to love,’ used without a direct object, i.e., in an absolute state, does not make sense.” 52.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 339.

52

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

stark contrast to “the ease with which modern Christians profess their love for God.”53 Perhaps, then, there is something to be learned from a wooden reading of this potentially troublesome line. Whether or not the line is rearranged syntactically, most commentators identify the implicit object of the verb as Yahweh. They argue that the intimation made by the fact that the referent is not explicitly stated is that the worshipper’s (and presumably, the worshipping community’s) allegiance to Yahweh can be taken for granted, that it does not need to be stated outright. They argue further that this is especially so when the worshipper’s confession is placed within a liturgical context. The object of the worshipper’s love should be rather obvious. The thing to note in Ps 116:1, then, is the rationale or grounds for the worshipper’s response—not who they love, but why they love. In Israel’s thanksgiving psalms, this is characteristically explained through a terse retelling of one’s lived experience. The love and commitment that the story elicits is due to Yahweh’s redemptive work, to Yahweh’s deliverance, to Yahweh’s involvement. And indeed, that is the point of this poem’s introduction. More generally, that is the point of the entire psalm, not merely the who (that is assumed) but the why —“I love (Yahweh) because…” The thanksgiving psalm has a story to tell. The emphasis in vv. 1–2 is placed on Yahweh’s actions, that is, what Yahweh has done to elicit the worshipper’s thanks. In response, the worshipper tells the story of Yahweh’s mighty deeds. This is in keeping with the overall theme of the genre. “Thanksgiving or testimony is a matter of extolling Yhwh before people because of what Yhwh has done. Its nature is to put more emphasis on the facts of what has happened than on the worshipper’s feelings of gratitude.”54 This observation is certainly substantiated in Psalm 116, for the experience of divine rescue is depicted as the basis for the worshipper’s love and, in v. 2, their proclamation. Yahweh is the impetus for both of these responses. The chiastic structure of vv. 1–2 makes this clear. At the center of these lines stands Yahweh, specifically, the announcement of what Yahweh did on behalf of the worshipper: a I love b because Yahweh has heard my voice, my pleading bʹ because he has inclined his ear to me aʹ yes, through my days, I will proclaim

53.  Ibid. 54.  Goldingay, Psalms 1–41, 55.

3. Psalm 116

53

The form of the verbs in these verses are also mirrored: in lines a and aʹ, the verbs are both yiqṭols in the absolute state; in lines b and bʹ, they are qaṭals set within a ‫ כי‬clause. Structurally, Yahweh’s past actions are the hinge. While this interpretation represents the conventional approach to understanding the worshipper’s story in Psalms scholarship—the object of the worshipper’s love and commitment is Yahweh and the focus of their initial retelling is Yahweh’s great deeds—there may be more to consider. There may be a didactic element at work in the psalm’s opening lines as well. In particular, the audience is subtly instructed in these two verses in the ways of Israel’s ethos, and the intent, if one can be claimed, is that reorientation might take place. When the audience hears of Yahweh’s involvement, it is simultaneously encouraged to love and proclaim along with the worshipper. The audience is also encouraged, albeit implicitly, to make the worshipper’s story their own by believing that deliverance is also available to them, that Yahweh is willing to intervene on their behalf. As a result, the audience should be inspired from the very outset of the psalm to follow the worshipper’s lead in thanksgiving, perhaps even in the midst of their own personal lament when Yahweh is not yet responding and their faith may be fading. The book of Jonah seems to offer an example of this. In Jonah 2, the prophet sings an individual thanksgiving (a portion of which is this individual thanksgiving, in fact) while he is in the stomach (or intestines or entrails) of the great fish (see Jon 2:1–10). Jonah had been rescued from the sea, but he is far from deliverance. Still, he sings of Yahweh’s faithfulness, as if his deliverance were a completed action. The implicit anticipation of the worshipper in Psalm 116 is that the worshipping community would follow their example. The community should imitate the worshipper’s faithful, even hopeful, response. It is as if the worshipper is saying, “Because of all that has happened, I love. I am committed. I dedicate myself. And I will proclaim. I will tell this story. And you should too.” From an ethical or character-shaping perspective, this is foundational. Like the worshipper, the audience should be characterized by their love and proclamation, their commitment and their storytelling. They should emulate the worshipper in faith and in practice. Finally, the absolute form of the verb in Ps 116:1 also leaves open the possibility of another reading, not “I love Yahweh because…” but “I love because…” Read in this way, the opening line becomes a declaration of why or how or on what basis one loves anyone or anything at all. Allen writes, Yahweh’s “divine act of love is what prompts [the psalmist’s] own love of v 1, in the spirit of 1 John 4:19, ‘We love because he first

54

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

loved us.’ ”55 Allen’s apt comparison between this foundational New Testament text and Psalm 116 demonstrates the interpretive open-endedness of the poem. Yahweh’s deliverance has impacted the worshipper so greatly that they stake their love and trust on it. Without Yahweh’s faithful intervention, love and trust (of any kind) would not be possible. To be sure, this is an extreme reading of the MT, but it is one that takes seriously the verb’s lack of a stated object. This reading also makes sense in the framework of the ancient Israelite worshipping community and their ethical commitments. As we have seen, ethics and spirituality are related—how one treated Yahweh (including how or if she or he obeyed the prescribed cultic requirements) impacts interpersonal relationships and vice versa. To love Yahweh was to love one’s neighbor. And to love one’s neighbor was to love Yahweh. It was impossible to do one without the other. It is not too far a leap, then, to posit the view that in light of Yahweh’s rescue, the worshipper was now able and willing to love and trust anyone or anything at all, and in so doing, they were able to demonstrate a deep love for Yahweh. Verses 3–6 Storytelling is a characteristic element in Israel’s thanksgiving psalms, one that Gunkel claims is “never lacking.”56 After briefly introducing the story’s climactic ending in vv. 1–2, the psalm moves to a retelling of the situation that occasioned the worshipper’s prayer to Yahweh, the content of this prayer, and Yahweh’s response. As most commentators note, the narrative neither specifies the exact nature of the worshipper’s predicament nor does it include much detail of their deliverance. Instead, “The affliction that was the occasion of prayers for God’s help” in Psalm 116 “is characterized.”57 The presumed liturgical function of Israel’s thanksgivings is an important factor in understanding the benefits of the story’s ambiguity. The lack of detail heightens its potential corporate applicability. The worshipper’s words easily become the words of the worshipping community, regardless of time, place, or circumstance. The cords of death mentioned in v. 3a, for instance, encompass the worshipper and their audience, so to speak; the restraints of Sheol (v. 3b) bind them both, albeit in different ways and to different degrees. The psalm’s singers, readers, and pray-ers 55.  Allen, Psalms 101–50, 154. 56.  Gunkel (and Begrich), Introduction to the Psalms, 201. See also Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 387. 57.  Mays, Psalms, 369.

3. Psalm 116

55

are potentially facing various forms of sorrow and agony, and following the worshipper’s lead, they are challenged to cry out in prayer, petitioning Yahweh for divine intervention and rescue. The story retold in Psalm 116, then, is a shared story, one in which its audience is able to participate.58 Even with this in mind, most commentators contend that Psalm 116 was originally written in response to a specific situation. Alter proposes that the reference to the cords of death “may be an indication that the speaker has recovered from a near fatal illness.” This may be true, but as Alter goes on to note, a similar formulation in Ps 18:5 “refers to danger in battle.”59 Thankfully, the psalm’s interpretation is not contingent upon the accuracy of its socio-historical reconstruction. The psalm should be viewed, more fundamentally, as a template, as an invitation into an ongoing narrative in which the members of the worshipping community function as participants. The audience contributes to the meaning of the psalm, therefore, by using its intense imagery to describe their own situation. This demands a broad view of the psalm and the story it retells. The operative question is not what did the poem originally refer to, but what sort of situation does it characterize? In Psalm 116, the worshipper’s affliction is described as one of great danger. Kraus writes, “The sufferer…was destined for the ‘realm of death.’ ‫ שׁאול‬was casting its ‘bands of despair’ into his life and placed the psalmist in bitter distress and despair.”60 Goldingay pushes the imagery further, claiming, “It is as if Death were a hunter throwing ropes over his prey in order to capture it. The second colon restates the point. Sheol had gone looking for this prey, found it, and put it under confinement.”61 For both authors, death and Sheol are equated.62 Both are used as symbolic descriptions of the drastic nature of the worshipper’s situation: for all intents and purposes, they were dead, and they were being held in the violence of the underworld.63 Brueggemann and Bellinger suggest that this exaggerated poetic imagery is typical of Israel’s lament and thanksgiving psalms.64 The worshipper is not dead, but at the time of their lament, they believed that 58.  This is also true for the use of the psalm in a non-liturgical setting. In a private setting, for example, the psalm’s use is enhanced by the lack of detail, which allows for individual participation in its narrative. 59.  Alter, Psalms, 411. 60.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 387. 61.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 340. 62.  See Mays, Psalms, 369. 63.  See Seybold, Die Psalmen, 454. 64.  See Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 500.

56

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

they might as well have been. Neither were they actually residing in the realm of the dead, which is variously identified in the Old Testament as Sheol or the Pit, but their situation was representative of such an experience. The use of these descriptions would bring certain images to mind for an ancient audience; they would have been clear at the time. Death is obvious, regardless of culture. It is final. It is definitive. It brings life to its conclusion. Sheol is less obvious for modern readers. In its context, it may have connoted a prison or holding place for the dead, a “nonphysical equivalent to the grave or the tomb. It is not a place of punishment… but just a place where people exist rather than really live, as bodies do in their graves.”65 It offered no release.66 To equate one’s situation with these concepts, then, was to equate one’s situation with life’s ultimate end—an end that disallowed Yahweh’s interaction. Mays explains, death and Sheol are emblematic of “a condition and place that is beyond any possible relation to God.”67 Whatever the worshipper faced, it was grave and they knew it. The perception of the worshipper’s life as death and their assumed residence in the underworld does introduce an obvious tension: if the inhabitants of Sheol cannot be reached by Yahweh’s love or commitment, as Mays concludes, how will Yahweh rescue one from its grip? And if this divide did exist between Yahweh and the dead in the minds of an ancient audience, what would be the point of petitioning Yahweh to act? Brueggemann and Bellinger suggest an answer. Sheol, they observe, is often portrayed as an image of “the power of death that invades life and diminishes it.”68 McCann provides a similar reading, claiming that Sheol can be “viewed as a sort of power that invades life and from which God can rescue (Pss 30:3; 49:15; 56:13; 86:13; see also Ps 139:8).”69 It is not only an image of what happens after death—separation, captivity, a place of non-physical and perpetual existence—it can also refer to one’s quality of life in the here and now. A life that is being invaded by death and Sheol is a life not to the full. It is a life that is being overtaken by threats and uncertainty; it is a life that is not reaping the benefits of the covenant. This image is powerful and, in many ways, an accurate description of the worshipper’s lived reality. It is not merely hyperbolic, especially when it occurs in the midst of lament. There is an impending finality surrounding 65.  Goldingay, Psalms 1–41, 599. 66.  See Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 500. 67.  Mays, Psalms, 370. 68.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 500. 69.  McCann, NIB 4:1148.

3. Psalm 116

57

the worshipper’s situation, and the images of death and Sheol are fitting. Yet, despite the gravity of the worshipper’s situation, it does not mean that they are beyond hope. The psalm recounts the worshipper’s prayer of desperation, “I called out ‫( ”בשׁם־יהוה‬v. 4a). The phrase ‫ בשׁם־יהוה‬will occur two more times in this composition (vv. 13, 17). Allen writes, “[T]he formula of calling on Yahweh’s name can stand for both prayer and praise (vv. 13, 17) that employed the divine name.”70 Here, it functions as an invocation of Yahweh in prayer. It is a calling in the divine name. It is a petition for deliverance and rescue based on the character of Yahweh. The worshipper is “proclaiming who Yhwh is, and therefore urging Yhwh to act in light of the revelation expressed by the name: ‘Yhwh, in your own name, because of who you have revealed yourself to be, save me.’ ”71 Any help that is to be received is dependent upon Yahweh. The worshipper knows this and prays accordingly. Something similar is evidenced in many of the recorded examples of Old Testament prayer where, in the midst of difficulty, suffering, and/or oppression, a suppliant urges Yahweh to act in accordance with Yahweh’s character, to be who Yahweh has proven to be at various points in Israel’s past, to be consistent with Israel’s presentation of Yahweh in their theological and scriptural tradition(s). In Exodus 32, for instance, Moses intercedes on behalf of Israel on the basis of Yahweh’s character. In the narrative, Yahweh is provoked to anger because of Israel’s disobedience. As a result, Yahweh reveals a plan to destroy the people to Moses. Moses counters, arguing that if such a plan were accomplished, Yahweh would be violating the covenant made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Further, Yahweh would be seen as a petulant tyrant to the surrounding nations. This is unacceptable, so Moses petitions Yahweh to abort the plan and act in accordance with the dominant features of Yahweh’s own character instead: Yahweh is “a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in commitment and faithfulness” (Exod 34:6). In the end, Yahweh relents. In another narrative, Jonah is so convinced that Yahweh will be faithful to the divine self-revelation that he disobeys the call to prophesy against the Ninevites. Jonah later explains the reasoning behind his attempted escape: it is Yahweh’s character. “That is why I fled to Tarshish at the beginning; for I knew that you are a gracious and merciful God, slow to

70.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 155. 71.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 341.

58

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

anger and abounding in commitment, and ready to relent from punishing” (Jon 4:2). Jonah did not want Yahweh to embody any of these virtues, and he knew full well that Yahweh would if given the opportunity. Jonah wanted swift and definitive punishment for Israel’s enemies, the Assyrians, and this did not fit with what he knew of Yahweh. The record of the worshipper’s prayer in Psalm 116 demonstrates a similar theology. In fact, the entire petition is dependent on the pray-er’s foundational belief in these attributes of Yahweh’s character, some of which will be more fully developed in vv. 5–6. Before they are articulated, however, the worshipper’s prayer is rehearsed in condensed form. According to Gerstenberger, brevity “is a proven means of re-creating the time of anguish.”72 And indeed, the prayer recorded in Psalm 116 is so concise that it leaves no room for anything other than anguish. There is no flowery language or in-depth petitioning. The worshipper simply cries out, “Yahweh, deliver my life” (v. 4b). Terse though it may be, the wording of this prayer subtly picks up on some of the themes that have portrayed the worshipper’s experience thus far. The situation is one of life and death. Goldingay contends that the use of the verb ‫ מלט‬also demonstrates the literary artistry of the poem. It is “an apposite verb in light of v. 3a–b, as it suggests providing a way of escape,”73 ostensibly, from death’s cords and Sheol’s restraints. In this way, the prayer is fitting for the situation. Again, it is the belief that Yahweh will act in a manner consistent with Yahweh’s character that undergirds the worshipper’s simple yet weighty request. Because the worshipper knows who Yahweh is, because they have heard, seen, and maybe even experienced what Yahweh has done in the past, and because they believe that Yahweh is capable of doing these things again, they pray for rescue. As we will soon see, this theological commitment to Yahweh’s power, faithfulness, and justice is affirmed through the eventual experience of rescue. Verse 5 describes Yahweh’s character in familiar terms: Gracious is Yahweh and righteous; yes, our God is one who does mercy.

Clifford argues, “Faith confessions like that…are relatively rare in the Bible, which generally prefers to narrate God’s acts rather than attributes.”74 This position is somewhat overstated. A confession based 72.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 292. 73.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 341. 74.  Clifford, Psalms 73–150, 199.

3. Psalm 116

59

on the divine self-revelation of Exodus 34 recurs at various points in the Old Testament (see, e.g., Pss 103:8; 111:4; 112:4; Jon 4:2; Neh 9:17). Clifford’s conclusion, therefore, is correct only as it pertains to the thanksgiving psalms. This genre differs from Israel’s praise psalms in its narration of the worshipper’s (or Israel’s) lived experiences, that is, in its storytelling. Indeed, Psalm 116 will turn in this direction soon enough, but first, the psalm invites some obvious connections with Yahweh’s divine self-revelation. “The psalm thus celebrates YHWH as ‘gracious,’ ‘righteous,’ and ‘merciful,’ powerful adjectives for YHWH in the faith tradition of ancient Israel. The narrative of salvation demonstrates these characteristics.”75 The confession is broadened beyond its conventional use by elaborating on these descriptors, depicting how they functioned in the lived experience of the worshipping community. Truly, “God protects the vulnerable (‘the simple,’ v. 6).”76 The worshipper self-identifies as one of the ‫פתאים‬. Kidner seems to associate the term with a lack of understanding. He notes, “The simple is a revealing description to use, for in the Old Testament it has no trace of merit. ‘The silly’ would hardly be too strong a term for these gullible, feckless people who roam the pages of Proverbs drifting into trouble.”77 Seybold arrives at a similar conclusion, though his interpretation of the term is strengthened with an appeal to the classroom. He argues that ‫ פתאים‬is a wisdom term for young students, who make careless or inexperienced mistakes.78 Yahweh functions as the protector or defender of these students. Such an understanding may have informed the psalmist, but the intention of ‫ פתאים‬in Psalm 116 is far from settled. Allen agrees that the term relates to knowledge, or more accurately, a lack thereof, but he includes a degree of divine dependency in the term’s meaning as well. He explains, it is “a wisdom expression for those who do not have answers to life’s problems and need to turn to God for them.”79 Hossfeld and Zenger offer a completely different reading—they argue that the term is indicative of the worshipper’s awareness of their own sinfulness.80 And when read along with the confession, “I am suffering greatly” (or “I became low”) in v. 10b, the psalm may indicate poverty

75.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 500. 76.  See Clifford, Psalms 73–150, 200. 77.  Kidner, Psalms 73–150, 443–44 (emphasis his). 78.  See Seybold, Die Psalmen, 455, “‫ פתאים‬ist ein weisheitlicher Begriff für den jungen Schüler und Anfänger, der unerfahren und leichtsinnig Fehler begeht.” 79.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 155. 80.  See Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 217.

60

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

as part of the worshipper’s self-understanding. Then again, Hossfeld and Zenger also suggest that the term could demonstrate a dependence “on the protection and saving justice of Yhwh.” The worshipper is helpless without Yahweh’s intervention. Either way, Hossfeld and Zenger conclude that the term is indicative of a theology of humility, perhaps even a theology of the poor. Both of these connotations—the worshipper as sinful and the worshipper as helpless apart from Yahweh—“should be kept in mind.”81 The psalm’s retelling clarifies the import of the worshipper’s self-identification: it is only when the worshipper “became low” (‫ )דלותי‬that Yahweh acted. Yahweh, therefore, is presented as one who is “[m]otivated by compassion, impelled by grace,” and as a result, “sets things right for ‘the simple’—that is, the powerless—and those ‘brought low.’ ”82 By implication, the worshipper admonishes the audience to relinquish control, to humble themselves whether through the self-awareness and confession of sin or through a renewed dependence upon Yahweh. The psalm also teaches that the experience of divine rescue is an event that the entire community can participate in and hope for. This is very subtly suggested by the worshipper’s description of Yahweh as “our God” in v. 5b. Everyone is invited to see the worshipper’s story as their own— it is a story of lament and petition and, ultimately, deliverance. Through Yahweh, a similar outcome is available to all. Yahweh’s acknowledgment of the worshipper’s prayer is indeed the climax of the story. The worshipper was once dead, residing in Sheol no less, but Yahweh heard their prayer and responded with power, even beyond the grave. The summary of the worshipper’s “resurrection” is confined to one colon: “he saved me” (v. 6b). Again, it is unclear what the worshipper was saved from specifically, but the gravity of the situation is stressed. The point of the story in the thanksgiving psalm is not merely to announce that the event happened. As a corporate and public testimony, it is partly that of course. Yahweh has intervened and should be celebrated within the worshipping community. But beyond this, it seems as though the worshipper is motivated by a didactic goal as well—to let the audience know that rescue is available for them and to encourage them to live in light of this fact. Hossfeld and Zenger conclude, “The brief statement about Yhwh’s help in v. 6b summarizes all Yhwh’s rescues in the past

81.  Ibid. 82.  McCann, NIB 4:1148.

3. Psalm 116

61

and present.”83 It is a repeatable story that should inspire the worshipping community to believe, to trust, and to hope in Yahweh’s unwavering faithfulness. The worshipper’s story, then, invites the audience into this ethos, this sustaining context, in which ethical action takes place. The worshipper presents a world where Yahweh is invested and active, a world where prayers are answered and deliverance can be experienced. As such, their story provides the audience with a proper vision of God, the world, and the self. It is didactic and instructive. And the worshipper’s testimony is exemplary and worthy of emulation. As we will soon see, this has obvious and important ethical consequences. Verses 7–9 The poem then shifts perspectives from the past to the present, as it begins to draw conclusions “from the account of rescues.”84 The worshipper’s experience has shaped and transformed them, resulting in a “new attitude to life that deliverance made possible.”85 This shift is exhibited, textually, in the worshipper’s self-exhortation in v. 7a: “Return, my life, to your resting place” (cf. Pss 46:5 [6]; 103:1). The vocative address to “my life” (‫ )נפשׁי‬picks up, once again, on the theme of life and death. Because Yahweh has “treated [the worshipper] well” (‫( )גמל‬v. 7b), they are no longer in the clutches of death and Sheol. Their life has been restored. Lament has given way to thanksgiving. In his seminal article, “The Psalms and the Life of Faith: A Suggested Typology of Function,”86 Brueggemann highlights the Psalter’s seemingly haphazard organization of individual psalms and groups them, not simply according to genre, but according to content. He proposes three categories: psalms of orientation, psalms of disorientation, and psalms of reorientation. The climactic movement envisioned in Brueggemann’s thematic grouping is embodied in Ps 116:7. Here, the worshipper calls for a return, or, to use Brueggemann’s language, a reorientation. Trouble disrupted the worshipper’s life, and if we take the psalm’s poetic imagery seriously, it did so in a significant way. In fact, to conclude that they were disoriented during their time of lament is an understatement. The worshipper was on the brink of death, but Yahweh’s miraculous and timely response allowed reorientation to occur. It allowed the worshipper to settle back 83.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 217. 84.  Ibid. 85.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 341. 86.  Walter Brueggemann, “Psalms and the Life of Faith: A Suggested Typology of Function,” JSOT 17 (1980): 3–32.

62

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

into “a place of rest.” Ostensibly, one does not return to the same place where she or he resided before. The experience has brought a certain, undeniable depth to the worshipper’s beliefs, which now informs their individual practice and the way they instruct the worshipping community through their story. Goldingay refers to this transformative process as the “dynamic cycle of praise and prayer.”87 He writes, For each journey round [the cycle] it takes [the believer] through a new experience of calling on God in need, of wrestling to keep faith in God despite affliction, of self-examination which will issue in confession or the cry of innocence, of experiencing God turning, answering, and acting, and of joyful confession that Yahweh is after all the one who hears and saves. A man who has been through that experience is not the same man at the end as he was at the beginning. He may use the same words of descriptive praise to acknowledge what God always is and how he characteristically acts, but he puts new meaning into them.88

The self-exhortation in v. 7a gives voice to this reality: yes, return to the place of your rest, but do so in light of what just happened. The call to the worshipping community is similar: hear this story, and be changed by it; learn from the worshipper’s example; trust in Yahweh’s faithful response. Allen writes, “Dire circumstances forced [the worshipper] to admit human infidelity and turn to the only one who was reliable… His faith has been vindicated, and implicitly he encourages others to hold onto their faith, come wind, come weather.”89 In addition to the worshipper’s emotional, spiritual, and/or mental journey, the psalm’s use of ‫ מנוח‬is indicative of a spatial movement as well—from death to a place of rest, from Sheol to the place where Yahweh dwells.90 Working from this spatio-temporal framework, it is appropriate to read the line in conjunction with the worshipper’s stated resolve to “walk before Yahweh in the lands of the living” in v. 9.91 No longer do they inhabit the underworld. No longer are they surrounded by the dead. They have found true rest in a new place. They are walking

87. John Goldingay, “The Dynamic Cycle of Praise and Prayer in the Psalms,” JSOT 20 (1981): 85–90. 88. Ibid., 87. 89. Allen, Psalms 101–150, 155. 90. See Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 217–18; Tita, Gelübde als Bekenntnis, 114. 91. See Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 218.

3. Psalm 116

63

(and not stumbling92) in the lands of the living, “in the community that makes possible full living,” which is now available because Yahweh “has delivered from death, tears, and stumbling.”93 Kraus summarizes the worshipper’s restoration and the measured effect it should have taken on their life: “ ‘Life in the presence of God’ is life in the fullest sense of the word—life that knows it is God’s gift and that it is always hidden in God.”94 There is also a possible association in this line between ‫ מנוח‬and the “ultimate place of rest,” which, in the ancient Israelites’ mind, referred to the temple.95 Hossfeld and Zenger propose that if this reading is adopted, it would suggest the worshipper’s performance of thanksgiving in a cultic setting, “before all [Yahweh’s] people” (vv. 14, 18), “in the courts of Yahweh’s house, in the midst of Jerusalem” (v. 19).96 Mays agrees, claiming, “This rare exhortation of the self to return to its rest is probably a rhetorical statement of an intention to visit the temple as the sphere where God’s presence provides relief and security.”97 Thematically, this association works quite nicely, and it provides an interesting tie between the first and second section of the psalm, but it is speculative, and as a result, it should be held loosely. Somewhat surprisingly, the intended audience of the psalm shifts at v. 8 in the MT, as the psalm moves from a third-person account of Yahweh’s deliverance (vv. 3–6) and its effects (vv. 1–2, 7, 9) to a direct address of Yahweh. This has presented some difficulty for those following a traditional approach to the psalm’s structure, causing them to ask, why here, why now?98 The ancient versions (LXX, Syr.U) attempted to rectify the odd juxtaposition by rendering the verb as a third person singular, which would make the line’s perspective consistent with what precedes it. Dahood suggested a different (though, in light of his larger project, expected) way forward. He proposed repointing the verb to read as a pual second person feminine singular (see Ps 56:14). This move allowed him to translate Ps 116:7–8 as follows:

92.  See McCann, NIB 4:1148. 93.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 500. 94.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 387. 95.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 218. 96.  Ibid. 97.  Mays, Psalms, 369. 98.  Those who read the psalm according to a threefold structure begin the psalm’s second section here. Therefore, they view v. 8 as an introduction to a new section, which begins with this rehearsal of the suppliant’s deliverance.

64

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms Return, my soul, to your rest, for Yahweh has treated you kindly. For you, my soul, have been rescued from Death, you, mine eye, from Tears, you, my foot, from Banishment.99

The ingenuity of both suggestions is appreciated, but as Allen rightly notes, the MT should be preferred as the harder reading.100 In order to understand Ps 116:8–9, one should consider Ps 56:13 [14], an important comparative text both in terms of its content and form. Indeed, as Seybold notes, the two texts are almost identical.101 Without making any comments on the direction of literary dependence, an intertextual reading helps to ease the interpretive tension arising from the change in perspective by helping its audience focus on the heart of the passage. Psalm 56:13 [14]

Psalm 116:8–9

‫כי הצלת נפשׁי ממות‬

‫כי חלצת נפשׁי ממות‬ ‫את־עיני מן־דמעה‬ ‫את־רגלי מדחי׃‬ ‫אתהלך לפני יהוה‬ ‫בארצות החיים׃‬

‫הלא רגלי מדחי‬ ‫להתהלך לפני אלהים‬ ‫באור החיים׃‬ For you saved my life from death, my feet from stumbling, so that I might walk before God in the light of the living.

Yes, you have torn my life from death, my eyes from weeping my feet from stumbling. I will walk before Yahweh in the lands of the living.

Even on a first reading, there are a number of similarities that emerge between these two texts, most notably, the description of the worshipper’s deliverance. These correspondences should be viewed from the vantage point of the two psalms’ broader literary contexts. Psalm 56 is a lament psalm. Its conclusion (vv. 12–13 [13–14]) represents the worshipper’s intention to give thanks after Yahweh answers her or his request. Deliverance has not been experienced; at this point, it is only hoped for. In contrast, the worshipper is declaring what Yahweh has already done in Psalm 116. They are on the other side of lament; Yahweh has answered their petition and now they intend to perform their vows. The emphasis 99.  Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 144. 100.  See Allen, Psalms 101–150, 152 n. 8.a. 101.  See Seybold, Die Psalmen, 455.

3. Psalm 116

65

in both texts is on divine deliverance, but it focuses either on deliverance that has been experienced or deliverance that is yet to be experienced. Accordingly, the psalms refer to Yahweh’s rescue in different but related terms: life has been (or will be, in the case of Ps 56) climactically and definitively restored; the worshipper adds in Psalm 116 that weeping has subsided; and loose footing, which could easily result in falling to one’s death, has been (or will be in Ps 56) secured. In both cases, the focus is on Yahweh. Syntactically, Gerstenberger suggests that the introductory ‫ כי‬in Ps 116:8 is emphatic, “not motivational”; it is “the exclamation of the suppliant.”102 Similarly, Hossfeld and Zenger conclude that it should be read as an affirmative, Yes, you have delivered my life from death, my eye from tears, my foot from stumbling.

Yahweh’s divine intervention is worth celebrating. This has been the case throughout the entire composition. The worshipper exhorts the audience to celebrate a miraculous resurrection from the dead. Such a celebration was warranted, for the worshipper believed that a similar experience was available to the audience as well. Summary of Verses 1–9 And with this, the first section of the poem comes to end. Up to this point, there has been an overwhelming emphasis on Yahweh—Yahweh’s character, Yahweh’s faithfulness, Yahweh’s rescue. As such, the worshipper’s retelling is in keeping with a typical thanksgiving psalm, though perhaps not formally. Thematically, the genre is concerned with recounting Yahweh’s great deeds in prayer, in worship, in public, in community, and that is what we find here according to the text. There has also been a subtle but very present didactic thread running throughout the worshipper’s story. As odd or uncharacteristic as it may be, the worshipper’s initial declaration of love (or commitment) frames the entire section. Because of what Yahweh has done, the worshipper is forever changed, and as a result, they have (re)committed themselves to Yahweh. This experience also opens up the possibility for the worshipper to love others. Indeed, loving Yahweh is predicated upon loving one’s neighbor and vice versa. As we will soon see, the worshipper’s stated commitment is not necessarily indicative of a movement from skepticism 102.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 293. See also Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 387, who terms this use “affirmative.”

66

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

to trust or from doubt to faith or worse yet, from hatred to love. It seems, instead, that the worshipper’s theology, which includes an ethos of love and trust and commitment, was affirmed in the painful process of waiting for Yahweh to deliver. The experience was transformational; it affected their ethical life. And more than that, the worshipper urges, albeit implicitly, the surrounding community to participate in this story along with them and to be shaped by it. This retelling is not confined to a select individual’s experience. It is available to others, and as such, it is an invitation to live a life of commitment and love despite circumstances, knowing that Yahweh is able to restore, redeem, and reconcile. Verses 10–11 “Having voiced the bliss of a new life the psalm might come to an end, it seems; indeed, LXX tradition starts a new text,”103 but in the MT, the psalm continues, or more accurately, the psalm returns to the beginning, to the situation of the worshipper’s lament and their story of divine rescue.104 According to the traditional approach, this return introduces the second major section of the poem. As I have already noted, one of the contributing factors leading many to accept this reading is the structural, syntactic, and thematic correspondence between each of the proposed sections’ introductory verses (vv. 1, 10).105 Both of these lines move from a qaṭal verb form followed by a ‫ כי‬clause to a yiqṭol verb form; the initial verbs in v. 1 (‫ )אהבתי‬and v. 10 (‫ )האמנתי‬are in the absolute state, an odd feature, which has caused some consternation among interpreters, but unites the sections nonetheless; and the function of ‫ כי‬is ambiguous in both lines—for example, in v. 10, opinions oscillate between causal, temporal, concessive, and asseverative uses.106 If we extend our examination into the next verse (v. 11), a shared content provides yet another point of contact with the poem’s introduction. In both strophes (vv. 1–2, 10–11), the worshipper retells their story in condensed form.107 The second narrative is as follows: 103.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 293. 104.  Cf. Seybold, Die Psalmen, 455. 105.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 218, understand the correspondences between v. 1 and v. 10 not as an indication of a new section, but as the establishment of a frame around vv. 3–6, 7–9. As such, vv. 10–11 bring the first section to a close, and collectively, provide a transition to the suppliant’s performance of thanksgiving in vv. 12–19. 106.  See Barré, “Psalm 116,” 74. 107.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 387, sees more of a correspondence here with vv. 3–6. See also Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 293.

3. Psalm 116

67

I trusted, because I said, “I am suffering greatly.” I said in my fear, “Every person is a liar.”

In contrast to vv. 1–2, there is no resolution in this version of the story, at least not yet. But the worshipper does provide some new information, most notably, their disposition during the time of trial. Exactly what is intended in this recollection is somewhat complex. Barré writes, “Although they present no textual or lexical difficulties, vv. 10–11 have proved very difficult to translate.”108 Indeed, these verses demand close attention, beginning with the interpretation of the initial verb, ‫אמן‬. Hossfeld and Zenger highlight the two dominant interpretive options: “The verb can be interpreted as an indication of trust (‘fides qua’) or as an ‘I believe’ statement followed by an objective clause.”109 In their commentary, they argue for the former on the basis of the apparent parallelism with v. 1 (which also helps them settle on an interpretation of ‫)כי‬. Goldingay agrees with the suggested reading of ‫ אמן‬as “trust,” adding a potential intertextual echo from Ps 27:13 for support. In Psalm 27, the same verb is used to connote the worshipper’s trust and confidence in Yahweh’s goodness. What makes this echo interesting is the inclusion of the phrase, “in the land of the living” (‫)בארץ חיים‬, which also appears in Psalm 116, seemingly justifying an interpretive appeal to the use of the verb in this context.110 “[T]he confidence expressed in [Ps 116:9] was the confidence the worshipper affirmed when going through the ordeal the psalm refers back to.”111 The object of the worshipper’s trust in v. 10 is not explicitly stated, but the implication of the passage is clear, much clearer, in fact, than the absolute construction in v. 1. The worshipper trusted in Yahweh during the time of their lament and, one could argue, the worshipper is trusting in Yahweh still as a result. As the succeeding lines will make clear, there was nowhere else to turn. The worshipper was powerless over their circumstances (v. 10b), and every human was certain to disappoint (v. 11b). Yahweh was the only option left. 108.  Barré, “Psalm 116,” 74. 109.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 218. 110.  There is a slight difference in the number in these two renderings, but this does not diminish the comparison’s usefulness. In Ps 27, the phrase is “in the land of the living” versus “in the lands of the living” in Ps 116. Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 343, is one of the few commentators to make a note about this. He argues that the plural in Ps 116 underlines “the fullness of life that Yhwh gives in this life.” 111.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 344.

68

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

This is an important point for the audience to hear. As Brueggemann and Bellinger put it, “[V]erse 10 makes it clear that the raw honesty of prayer in the midst of trouble is included in the sphere of faith.”112 In fact, if one reads v. 10 as a parallel of v. 1, the worshipper’s confession serves as the basis for their trust in Yahweh: “I trusted (Yahweh) because I said…” Admittedly, this nuance is different than Hossfeld and Zenger’s proposal of the concessive use of ‫כי‬, which would imply that the worshipper trusted “even though” they were suffering greatly (v. 10b). That is, the worshipper trusted despite their circumstances. By characterizing the intended use of the conjunction as causal, the line makes a different claim, a stronger claim. The worshipper trusted, not in spite of their weakness, but because of it. Trusting in Yahweh was the only possible recourse left. Their circumstances had essentially forced this to happen. Some commentators have noted that ‫ דבר‬is used infrequently as an introduction to direct speech.113 As a result, their rendering of v. 10b does not view the line as the content of the worshipper’s speech. This seems to be an overreaction, for when the verb is read along with the similar construction, ‫אני אמרתי‬, in v. 11a, this function seems probable. Thus, v. 10 is best translated, I trusted because I said, “I am suffering greatly.”

The admission of suffering does not refer to personal hurt or potential danger. It is a commentary, again, on the worshipper’s lack of options. They could not trust in themselves or overcome whatever obstacles they were facing by sheer determination and self-motivation. Only Yahweh provided a way out. The worshipper makes a related claim in v. 11b, “Every person is a liar.” This is not a statement concerning the truth-telling capabilities of those surrounding them, though that may be part of the problem. People are often untrustworthy. People are also often slanderous, accusatory, and deceitful.114 Their speech is not always helpful. In fact, it can be unsupportive and potentially destructive.115 But even more to the point, Allen argues that the term, ‫כזב‬, “means the failure to fulfill expectations: it 112.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 501. See also Kidner, Psalms 73–150, 445, “So the author makes a point which his fellow psalmists often illustrate: that to feel crushed (10) or disillusioned (11), and to say so, even in the wild tones of panic… is no proof that faith is dead; it may even vouch for its survival, as pain betokens life.” 113.  See Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 343. 114.  See Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 388. 115.  See Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 501.

3. Psalm 116

69

indicates the opposite of what Yahweh does.”116 The confession, therefore, “should not be viewed so much as evidence that the psalmist has been the victim of deceit but that he or she did not place hope in human help.”117 In both of the worshipper’s statements—“I am suffering greatly” and “Every person is a liar”—they acknowledge the object of their trust as Yahweh (and, if Ps 27 is echoed here, Yahweh’s goodness), for that is the only reliable source available. The nuance that is added here informs our understanding of the first section of the poem. Up to this point, we have not received any information on the worshipper’s demeanor in the midst of suffering, only the gravity of the situation. As the second section begins, however, we learn that the worshipper trusted the entire time, not only in spite of their situation and the lack of support they received, but in a sense, because of it. Verses 12–19 “The rest of the psalm is back to the thanksgiving agenda.”118 In this, the psalm’s final section, the poem moves from testimony and storytelling (and the latent didacticism that accompanies these features) to performance. This development is framed by the orienting question posed by the worshipper in v. 12, How can I give back to Yahweh all his good deeds to me?

What, in other words, is the appropriate thank offering given in response for the experience of divine deliverance?119 McCann and Goldingay point out the thematic resonances shared between this inquiry and the worshipper’s self-exhortation in v. 7. The same verbal root (‫ )שׁוב‬is used in both verses: in v. 7, the worshipper commands their life to “return” to its place of rest; in v. 12, there is an expressed desire to “return” an appropriate offering to Yahweh. Another verbal root from v. 7 (‫ )גמל‬also reappears here, only this time, it is in the form of a substantive and it is used to emphasize Yahweh’s role in the experience of deliverance—Yahweh has acted decisively, and as the content clarifies, Yahweh has acted on behalf of the suppliant.120 116.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 155. See also Martin A. Klopfenstein, Die Lüge nach dem Alten Testament: Ihr Begriff, ihre Bedeutung und ihre Beurteilung (Zurich: Gotthelf-Verlag, 1964), 198–200. 117.  McCann, NIB 4:1148. 118.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 294. 119.  See Tita, Gelübde als Bekenntnis, 120. 120.  See McCann, NIB 4:1148; Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 344.

70

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

In one sense, the question posed by the worshipper is rhetorical. Alter notes, “There is no adequate return that [anyone] can offer God.”121 Yahweh is not in need of anything, and the gift of deliverance is so great that no gift in return would suffice. If the question is pursued from the vantage point of the psalm’s liturgical context, however, the question is not rhetorical. The worshipper “can participate in the ritual of thanksgiving, which is spelled out in the next two verses.”122 Because their life has been changed, they offer what they can. In particular, they make good on the vow that was (apparently) voiced during the time of their lament, and they do so in public, in the presence of the worshipping community, by fulfilling a cultic obligation. The psalmist writes, I will lift up the cup of salvation and I will call out in the name of Yahweh. I will complete my vows to Yahweh, right in front of all his people.

The time for talking is over. The worshipper’s public proclamation, which began in v. 3, is now accompanied by a different sort of cultic activity— a performance or enactment. These two modes go together. Goldingay writes, “A verbal declaration of gratefulness without an expression of it that costs something would not be very impressive, but a concrete expression of gratefulness unaccompanied by interpretation would not give clear enough glory to Yhwh.”123 Both expressions are included in thanksgiving, and the psalm gives appropriate attention to both public testimony and cultic performance. McCann writes, “It is apparently customary to accompany public expressions of gratitude with sacrifices, and the ‘cup of salvation’ seems originally to have been some form of sacrificial offering.”124 This cup should be distinguished from another cup that appears in the Old Testament, the cup of Yahweh’s wrath, the foaming cup of judgment that must be drunk to the dregs, the cup that, according to some commentators, everyone deserves (cf. Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Lam 4:21, 32, 33).125 With this conceptual juxtaposition in mind, Kidner sees a hint of the Christian gospel in Psalm 116, for the worshipper has received deliverance for free: it is a gift; it is an experience of grace. As such, the 121.  Alter, Psalms, 412. 122.  Ibid. 123.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 345. 124.  McCann, NIB 4:1148. 125.  See Kidner, Psalms 73–150, 445.

3. Psalm 116

71

cup motif in this psalm is clearly positive. It is linked with Yahweh’s goodness, which the worshipper has received beyond measure in “the superabundant fullness of blessing and life in God’s presence” (cf. Pss 16:5; 23:5).126 As the author of Psalm 23 puts it, the cup of salvation is running over. Not much is known about the process of the drink offering. Gerstenberger claims, “[T]he saved one has to raise and empty a ‘cup of salvation.’ ”127 In Psalm 116, we are only informed of the worshipper’s raising of the cup, but it makes plausible sense that its contents should be dedicated to Yahweh as a sacrificial act of thanksgiving. And it follows other biblical examples of the practice (see, e.g., Gen 35:14; Exod 25:29; Num 28:7; Lev 23:27). According to Alter, the libation “is poured out on the altar.”128 Again, this is consistent with other presentations of a drink offering in the Old Testament (and the specifications of the altar and cultic furniture included in the law code), but it is impossible to know with certainty if this act took place. It is not overly important, for, as Seybold claims, the libation is not the point anyway.129 The psalm’s presentation of the worshipper’s offering indicates that it was not just a sign act. It was also accompanied by a prayer, specifically, a calling out “in the name of Yahweh.” This is the same phrase that was used earlier in the psalm to refer to the suppliant’s petition in the midst of lament (v. 4). In the previous context it functioned as an invocation to Yahweh to act in a manner consistent with Yahweh’s character, to be who Yahweh was supposed to be. Here, the worshipper’s calling in the name of Yahweh refers to the praises that are voiced before the community in thanksgiving. Yahweh has delivered and is worthy of praise. The community needs to be reminded of this. Both aspects—the pouring out of the drink offering and the testimony to Yahweh’s goodness—comprise the thanksgiving ritual, and when they are offered, the worshipper has fulfilled their vows to Yahweh (v. 14).130

126.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 218. 127.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 294. 128.  Alter, Psalms, 412. 129.  Seybold, Die Psalmen, 456. 130.  On the individual thanksgiving psalms as vow-fulfillment, see Julia M. O’Brien, “Because God Has Heard My Voice: The Individual Thanksgiving Psalms and Vow-Fulfillment,” in The Listening Heart: Essays in Wisdom and the Psalms in Honor of Roland E. Murphy, O. Carm., ed. K. Hoglund et al., JSOTSup 58 (Sheffield: JSOT, 1987), 281–98; Tita, Gelübde als Bekenntnis.

72

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

Barré describes v. 15 as “one of the strangest passages in the Psalter, which has taxed the ingenuity of exegetes for centuries.”131 The line contains some linguistic and syntactic difficulties, but for the most part, it is quite readable. It is the content that is odd and seemingly out of place. On a first reading, the line seems to suggest that Yahweh delights in the death of those who are committed to him. Allen rightly claims that the line should be read as “the opposite of a pagan adage, ‘Whom the gods love die young.’ ”132 Clearly, the intent in the psalm is not to indicate that Yahweh desires or takes pleasure in the death of anyone (cf. Ezek 18:32), let alone Yahweh’s own people. That message does not fit the context. Some argue, therefore, that the intended sense must be that the death of the saints is precious or costly, in fact, too precious or too costly.133 Goldingay explains, v. 15 “involves a hypallage, an interchange in the application of words. Prosaically put, the life of the people committed to him is valuable to Yhwh; or the people in danger of death who are committed to him are valuable to him.”134 Others attempt to sidestep the issue by contending that ‫ יקר‬is best read as an Aramaic root meaning “grievous,” indicating that the death of these exemplary Israelites is painful for Yahweh. However the term is dealt with, the conclusion should be clear: Yahweh has intervened on behalf of the worshipper. Psalm 116 is not a story of martyrdom. Even if the linguistic/syntactic issues are pacified, another issue quickly emerges. Experience presents a counter-argument against this summary. Not every prayer is answered. Not every suppliant is rescued, though the story of those unfortunate individuals is not brought to bear in this psalm. The cords of death have been shed. The restraints of Sheol have been loosed. The worshipper now walks in the presence of Yahweh, in the fullness of life. In v. 16, it is proposed that their deliverance is due to the covenantal relationship between the worshipper and Yahweh—“because I am your servant… I am your servant, the son of your female slave, you have loosed my bonds” (vv. 15b–16). Hossfeld and Zenger propose a connection with Psalm 86, in which the worshipper also self-identifies as a devoted person (‫)חסיד‬, as Yahweh’s servant (‫)עבדך‬, the son of [Yahweh’s] maid (‫( )בן־אמתך‬Ps 86:1–2, 16). Because Psalm 86 is set within the conceptual frame of poverty (whether it is spiritual or material, we are not told), the echoes of self-identification confirm for Hossfeld and Zenger, the presence of a theology of the poor that runs throughout Psalm 116. 131.  Barré, “Psalm 116,” 61. 132.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 155. 133.  See Clifford, Psalms 73–150, 201. 134.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 346.

3. Psalm 116

73

Goldingay suggests a different way forward: the relationship between servant and master in the ancient Near East. “Being a servant implies having the attention and protection of one’s master.”135 The fact that the worshipper also identifies as the son of a family slave furthers the image. Servanthood is not the result of their situation. It is who they are. It is, in the imagery of the psalm, the only thing they have known. They have lived a life of servitude, and this contributed to the worshipper’s rescue. Hossfeld and Zenger argue that this status is indicative of the worshipper’s low estate, but this may be due more to their ongoing consideration of an underlying theology of the poor that is informing the psalmist’s work. More importantly, the self-identification of servanthood indicates the rationale motivating the master’s investment (see, e.g., Gen 24). Verses 17–19 bring the psalm to a close. The worshipper introduces their thanksgiving offering a final time, specifying its function as a ‫תודה‬ and clarifying the location of the offering. It picks up on many of the themes announced in vv. 13–14: the suppliant will call out in the name of Yahweh (v. 17b); they will fulfill their vows to Yahweh (v. 18a) before all his people (v. 18b) “in the courts of Yahweh’s house, in the midst of Jerusalem” (v. 19a–b). In light of all of this, “Praise Yah.” Summary of Verses 10–19 The worshipper begins this section with an admission of their demeanor and disposition in the midst of suffering. Simply put, they trusted Yahweh. Indeed, they claim that there were no other options. Their dire circumstances pushed them toward this end. They trusted because they suffered, because everyone is a liar. In the opening verses of this section, this is commended to the audience as a better way to live. On the other side of lament, Yahweh has proven to be trustworthy. Yahweh hears and answers prayers. Yahweh delivers. Yahweh will not let you down. Yahweh should be trusted regardless of circumstances, and this story provides further evidence. Verses 12–19b also serve as an important witness to the act of giving thanks corporately, in public, in the liturgical worship of ancient Israel. This is also instructional. It teaches the community how to respond to Yahweh’s goodness. But underneath the proper enactment of the ritual, which, again, would have been quite important for an ancient audience’s ethical life, stands another core tenet of Israel’s ethos: gratitude. The worshipper models this throughout the psalm, providing evidence 135.  Ibid.

74

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

of its internal (love and trust) and external (sacrifice, proclamation, vow-fulfillment) manifestations. The surrounding community is therefore encouraged to participate in this gratitude as well, by expressing thanksgiving for the worshipper’s deliverance and perhaps by anticipating a moment when their own thanksgiving must be raised, when Yahweh brings deliverance to them. In this way, the psalm might work to shape the character of the audience, helping them to live in hope and expectation of Yahweh’s involvement. Conclusion: The Storied Ethics of Psalm 116 A careful reading of Psalm 116 reveals that the poem should challenge its audience in many ways. Perhaps the most significant is in its explication of several important aspects of the ethos of the ancient Israelite worshipping community: prayer, sacrifice, thanksgiving, love/commitment, trust, hopefulness, expectancy, and gratitude. These aspects of Israelite cultic expectation and spirituality are emblematic of the life Israel should/could live or should/could have lived. And together they form at least part of what Brown would identify as the sustaining environment or context in which Israel’s ethic functions. Indeed, the psalm seems to proceed on the assumption that without careful attention to these spiritual and cultic aspects, the worshipping community would be unsuccessful in living a completely ethical life. The psalm’s teaching, then, contributes greatly to the ongoing discussion in current Psalms studies and Old Testament ethics, for, when it is viewed through the lens of narrative ethics, the story the worshipper retells gives voice to the larger narrative in which the individual members of the worshipping community find themselves. In order to deduce what they should do or how they should live, they must first attend to the story in which they find themselves. The worshipper aids in this reflective process by creating a world in Psalm 116 in which certain character traits of Yahweh are affirmed. Yahweh is active and responsive, faithful and trustworthy. Theological claims such as these provide the basis for ethical conclusions because “for Israel, ethical behaviour was defined by the identity of this God, their God, Yahweh, ‘the Lord our God,’ the Holy One of Israel.”136 As we have seen throughout this study, there is a tie not only between story and ethics, but between theology and ethics. The audience’s understanding of the person and work of Yahweh is (re)formed by the worshipper’s story, and as a result, its character should be (re)shaped by it as well. To use 136.  Wright, Old Testament Ethics, 25.

3. Psalm 116

75

Hauerwas’s words, the audience is initiated into a truthful narrative through the retelling of the worshipper’s experience and they must learn to live rightly within it. Brueggemann and Bellinger write, “The story is about the God who comes to deliver, and the psalm seeks to involve the congregation in the narrative and thereby facilitate an encounter for the community with this God and express gratitude in word and deed.”137 This occurs through the introduction of a few key themes. The worshipper opens the first section of the poem with a simple, if oddly placed, confession, “I love.” Clifford suggests that the placement of this confession is indicative of the poem’s didactic focus.138 Indeed, the introductory line does not function merely as a confession of the worshipper’s emotional or psychological response to Yahweh’s goodness; it is not just about the experience of rescue. Rather, the worshipper’s resolve to love is suggestive of a commitment to live in obedience, to live in light of Yahweh’s rescue, to worship and give thanks, both now and always. Clifford concludes, “The psalm holds in exquisite balance devotion that is expressed both in the obedience of daily life and the rituals of the sanctuary.”139 This is perhaps where studies on the ethics of the Psalms have fallen short in the past. They tend to focus more on issues of obedience than on the rituals of the sanctuary. A holistic vision of ethics, however, must include both. Following the worshipper’s example in the psalm, the community is (implicitly) encouraged to devote themselves to love, to commit themselves to act in faithfulness, to obey and to worship. Their story is, in a very real sense, the audience’s story as well. Likewise, the worshipper’s response to Yahweh’s goodness should become the community’s response too. Read in this way, the psalm sounds a call to imitation. The worshipper provides an example the audience should follow: an example of prayer in the midst of lament, of trust in the midst of doubt, of thankfulness in response to divine deliverance. In the field of Old Testament ethics, imitation has served as a viable ethical principle, but it is typically focused on Israel imitating or reflecting Yahweh’s character. Here, the worshipper subtly presents their own life as an example worthy of emulation. The worshipper’s initial commitment to love in v. 1 is syntactically and thematically tied to their commitment to trust in v. 10. According to the traditional approach, these verses divide the poem into two roughly equal halves. Thus, love and trust provide the major themes of the entire 137.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 501. 138.  See Clifford, Psalms 73–150, 202. 139.  Ibid.

76

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

composition. Without love and trust, there is not much that can be done. Prayer, sacrifice, cultic activity, even interpersonal relationships are all motivated by this commitment to love and trust Yahweh. Any offering that is not motivated by or enacted in light of these foundational tenets would be hollow and worthless. The psalm, therefore, confronts the worshipping community’s character by challenging its members to exhibit love and trust and to be shaped continually by these virtues. To do so would also allow them to begin to expect or anticipate Yahweh’s goodness in their lives and in the lives of those around them. The worshipper’s story confirms this possibility, and it serves to reorient the worshipping community toward becoming a people of hope. A people of hope continue to pray in the midst of lament. A people of hope believe that Yahweh will hear their prayer and respond. A people of hope cling to Yahweh’s promises, to Yahweh’s justice, to Yahweh’s unending and unfailing commitment. The presentation of the worshipper’s story sets this example. It allows the audience to see what happens when a suppliant appeals to Yahweh while entangled in the cords of death. As a result of this testimony, the audience should begin to expect to experience a similar intervention, in whatever they may be facing—pain, sickness, brokenness, oppression, threat. Finally, Rodd writes, “Joyous gratitude shines out in this psalm.”140 As we have seen, the worshipper encourages communal participation in the rites of thanksgiving by inviting the surrounding worshipping community to participate. But more than eliciting the proper cultic response, the worshipper commends gratitude as the defining outlook of the community. Because the worshipper’s story is also the community’s, it should celebrate when the worshipper celebrates, knowing that at some point it will also experience Yahweh’s acts of commitment. Gratitude is not just a response to deeds done in the past, it is an outlook that frames the hope for divine activity in the future as well. Psalm 116 is deeply rooted in the ethos of the ancient Israelite worshipping community. It depends upon it. It instructs its audience in it. It invites them to believe that living in light of it is not only necessary, it is actually a better way forward. Following Brown, the ethos of Psalm 116 provides the context or framework or parameters in which ethics occurs. The psalm, then, reorients the audience toward a right view of the world and it shapes their character toward becoming a people of love and trust, hope and expectancy, and gratitude. And this is primarily achieved through the retelling of the worshipper’s story. This is a highly didactic act that not 140.  Cyril S. Rodd, Psalms 73–150, EPC (London: Epworth, 1964), 81.

3. Psalm 116

77

only gives Yahweh thanks, but the worshipper’s story also instructs the audience on how to live rightly. Admittedly, this is not overt. The psalm does not contain a list of dos and don’ts. Rather, it retells the story of an individual who has been rescued, who has petitioned Yahweh to act and Yahweh did. This story provides an example. It provides a paradigm. And it subtly invites the audience to participate in this narrative—to love as the worshipper loves, to trust as the worshipper trusts, and to hope as the worshipper hopes.

Chapter 4 P s a l m 118

There are significant overlaps in the ethical instruction of Psalm 116 and Psalm 118. In some ways, this is to be expected due to the shared form and content of the thanksgiving psalms as a genre. However, Psalm 118 does provide an added dimension that sets its storytelling apart—the role of memory or remembering. This is evidenced primarily in the psalm’s use of intertextual allusions, which I will argue serve as the basis for the worshipper’s theological understanding and thus frames their retelling. Put simply, what the worshipper experienced is portrayed as similar to the events of Israel’s past. Yahweh’s goodness and acts of commitment, therefore, are not confined to the past. They are invading the present. This understanding has a decided impact on the psalm’s ethical instruction. Not only does it depict Yahweh’s great and mighty deeds as ongoing, the very act of remembering the past is presented as an integral part of the psalm’s comprehensive ethical vision. Similar to the previous chapter, I begin our discussion of the storied ethics of Psalm 118 with a translation of the psalm, followed by an assessment of any troublesome structural, linguistic, or generic issues. Once these introductory matters have been dealt with adequately, an ethical interpretation of the psalm is presented. This interpretation comprises the main body of the chapter. I then conclude the chapter with a brief summary of the storied ethics of Psalm 118. Translation (1) Give thanks to Yahweh because he is good, because his commitment1 lasts forever.

1.  ‫ חסד‬is traditionally translated “steadfast love,” but the term more characteristically conveys the idea of acts of commitment or faithfulness. It is a term that denotes an activity rather than an emotional bond.

4. Psalm 118

79

(2) Let Israel2 indeed3 say,4 “His commitment lasts forever.” (3) Let the house of Aaron indeed say, “His commitment lasts forever.” (4) Let those who fear Yahweh indeed say, “His commitment lasts forever.” (5) From the narrow straits,5 I called, “Yah.”6 Yah answered me with a wide-open space. (6) Yahweh is for me, I will not be afraid; what can a human being do to me? (7) Yahweh is for me as my great helper,7 and I will look8 (in triumph)9 on those who are against me. (8) It is better to take refuge in Yahweh than to trust in human beings; (9) it is better to take refuge in Yahweh than to trust in princes.

2.  LXX identifies the subject as the “house of Israel” (οἶκος Ισραηλ) as in Ps 115:9 [LXX 113:17], 12 [LXX 113:20], and 135:19 [LXX 134:19]. 3.  “Indeed” reflects the emphatic use of the particle ‫נא‬. 4.  In contrast to its use in v. 1, ‫ כי‬introduces direct speech in vv. 2a, 3a, and 4a. I have chosen not to translate it. 5.  Lit.: “out of narrowness” (which is to be contrasted spatially with “wideness” in v. 5b) 6.  Some suggest that “Yah” is a shortened form of the Tetragrammaton, commonly used in poetic texts. See deClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, Psalms, 865 n. 6. Allen, Psalms 101–150, 162 n. 5.b, argues that its use here “was inspired by the formula used in Exod 15:2 at v 14.” 7.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 162 n. 7.a, Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 352 n. 3, and Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 229 n. h, classify the ‫ ב‬in ‫ בעזרי‬as a beth essentiae. Allen and Goldingay note that this use indicates that Yahweh is the worshipper’s helper. In contrast, Hossfeld and Zenger conclude that Yahweh is merely among helpers. On the use of the beth essentiae, see IBHS 11.2.5e; Joüon §133c; cf. GKC §119i. Regarding the use of the plural (helpers), it is probably best to read it as an intensive plural, “my ‘great’ helper.” See Joüon §136f; Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 157. 8.  Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 157, notes a play on words between ‫( ירא‬v. 6a) and ‫( ראה‬v. 7b). 9.  The positive result, “in triumph,” is not indicated by the verb, but by the context.

80

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms (10) All nations surrounded me, in the name of Yahweh I indeed10 fended them off.11 (11) They surrounded me, yes, surrounded me, in the name of Yahweh I indeed fended them off. (12) They surrounded me like bees,12 they were extinguished13 like a fire of thorns, in the name of Yahweh I indeed fended them off. (13) You14 pushed me, pushed me so hard that I fell, but Yahweh helped me. (14) Yah became my strength and (my) protection,15 and he became salvation for me.

10.  “Indeed” reflects an asseverative use of the conjunction ‫כי‬. This is rare. See Joüon §164b. 11.  The meaning of the verb ‫מול‬, which also occurs in v. 11b and v. 12c, is uncertain (see, e.g., LXX’s translation, ἠμυνάμην). Some modern interpreters read the verb as an allusion to circumcision, choosing to translate the phrase quite literally, “indeed, I cut off their foreskin” (e.g., Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 154, 157), while others have read the term more broadly so as to include other forms of cutting or destruction (e.g., Alter, Psalms, 416; Hans Bauer and Pontus Leander, Historische Grammatik der Hebraïschen Sprache des Alten Testaments [Hildesheim: Olms, 1962], 403; Eaton, Kingship and the Psalms, 155; Artur Weiser, The Psalms, OTL [Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1962], 722). HALOT suggests reading a different root, meaning to “fend off, repel.” A number of scholars have followed this trajectory as well (e.g., Allen, Psalms 101–150, 160–61; Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 228; Kraus, Psalms, 2:394–95; Mays, Psalms, 374). For a full discussion, see Joel M. LeMon, “Cutting the Enemy to Pieces: Ps 118, 10–12 and the Iconography of Disarticulation,” ZAW 126 (2014): 59–75. 12.  LXX adds κηρίον, which corresponds to the Hebrew term, ‫( יער‬see 1 Sam 14:27). Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 229 n. k, argue that the LXX’s addition makes the parallelism between vv. 12a and 12b explicit: “they surrounded me like bees surround the honeycomb, they burned like fire among thorns.” 13.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 229 n. k, “‫ דעכו‬is Pual and signals the ‘extinguishing’ of the fire in the brambles, which flares up quickly and dies just as quickly.” 14.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 162 n. 13b, claims that the MT, which is followed in the above translation, is “hardly possible.” He writes, “It cannot refer to Yahweh, who essentially is not addressed in the second person until v 21.” Allen follows the translations (e.g., LXX, Syr.) and suggests a first person singular passive, “I was pushed.” While it is unclear who is pushing (either Yahweh or the worshipper’s enemies), a straightforward reading of the MT is not impossible, and, actually, should be preferred. 15.  According to Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 230 n. m, the psalm’s reference to Exod 15 suggests reading the line, “my strength and my song.” In contrast, Allen, Psalms 101–150, 162 n. 14.a, argues that the term, ‫זמרת‬, is related to Ugaritic, ḏmr,

4. Psalm 118

81

(15) The sound of resounding and salvation in the tents of the righteous: Yahweh’s right hand acts powerfully, (16) Yahweh’s right hand uplifts,16 Yahweh’s right hand acts powerfully. (17) I did not die; I lived. And I will recount the deeds of Yah. (18) Yah really17 chastised me, but he did not give me over to death. (19) [Worshipper:] “Open the gates of righteousness for me, when I come in them, I will give Yah thanks.” (20) [Officiant:] “This is the gate that belongs to Yahweh; the faithful, they may come through it.” (21) [Worshipper:] “I give you thanks because you answered me, and you became salvation for me.” (22) [Community:] “The stone the builders rejected, it has become a cornerstone.18 (23) This has come from Yahweh; it is marvelous in our eyes. (24) This is the day Yahweh has acted;19 let us rejoice and be glad in it.20 (25) Please, Yahweh, please save; please, Yahweh, please give success. (26) Blessed is the one who enters in Yahweh’s name; we bless you from Yahweh’s house. which is more suggestive of strength or protection (see RS 24.252, rev. line 9). On the translation of ‫זמרת‬, see Michael L. Barré, “ ‘My Strength and My Song’ in Exodus 15:2,” CBQ 54 (1992): 623–37. 16.  This is an odd form. BDB and HALOT read ‫ רוממה‬as a polel participle without the preformative ‫מ‬. Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 353 n. 10, believes that this reading is implausible. He writes, “More likely it is a reduplicated form of a qal participle.” Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 230 n. n, follow BDB and HALOT, reading ‫ רוממה‬as a polel participle, but, like Goldingay, their translation is active: “The right hand of YHWH, it exalts.” 17.  See GKC §113p; Joüon §123i. 18.  On the translation of ‫ראשׁ פנה‬, see Michael Cahill, “Not a Cornerstone!,” RB 106 (1999): 345–57. 19.  See Adele Berlin, “Critical Notes: Psalm 118:24,” JBL 96 (1977): 567–68; J. Becker, “Zur Deutung von Ps 118, 24,” BN 94 (1998): 44–51. 20.  The pronominal suffix refers to Yahweh’s deeds (not Yahweh’s person), leading Berlin, “Critical Notes,” 568, to conclude, “[T]he cause for rejoicing is God only in an indirect way; the rest of the psalm emphasizes God’s act of deliverance. It therefore seems preferable to translate ‘let us exult and rejoice in it (i.e. what God has done).”

82

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms (27) Yahweh is God, and he has shone light on us; bind the festal offering21 with cords,22 up to the horns of the altar. (28) [Worshipper:] “You are my God and I will give you thanks; my God and I will lift you high.” (29) Give thanks to Yahweh because he is good, because his commitment lasts forever.

Structure, Setting(s), and Singer(s) Structure In contrast to the many structural issues facing readers of Psalm 116, the majority of scholars claim that Psalm 118 is “clearly divided”23 into three major sections.24 Martin Mark even characterizes it as having a brilliant poetical-grammatical structure.25 The composition begins (and ends) with a call to communal praise (vv. 1–4, 29). The repeated

21.  In this context, ‫ חג‬probably refers to a festal offering rather than a festal procession or festal dance (see, e.g., Exod 23:18). If it referred to the latter, the verb, ‫אסרו‬, would be functioning in a strange way. The line, therefore, suggests tying up a sacrifice prior to its slaughter. The practice of tying an animal to the altar is not attested elsewhere. Therefore, Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 364, suggests that the expression implies an ellipse: “tie the festal offering with cords [until it comes] up to the horns of the altar.” 22.  ‫ עבות‬is also ambiguous. The root can mean “branch, twig,” or “cord, tie, rope.” Some interpreters suggest the use of the former as a reference to the use of lulab branches at the Feast of Tabernacles. For example, m. Sukkah 4:5, “What was the rite of the willow branch? There was a place below Jerusalem called Motsa. They went down there and collected young willow branches, and they came and set them right along the sides of the Altar with their tops bent over the top of the Altar. They then sounded a prolonged blast, a quavering note, and a prolonged blast. Each day they walked in procession once around the Altar” (cited in deClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, Psalms, 869). I have elected to translate the term as “cord,” due to the influence of the verb and because it seems to involve “the fewest difficulties” (see Kidner, Psalms 73–150, 451). 23.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 233. 24.  Cf. Seybold, Die Psalmen, 459, “Ps 118 ist ein liturgischer Text mit lockerem Gefüge”; Terrien, The Psalms, 783, “The psalm appears to be a conglomeration of independent fragments, some hymns, and other complaints or laments.” 25.  Martin Mark, Meine Stärke une mein Schutz ist der Herr: Poetologischetheologische Studie zu Psalm 118, FB 92 (Würzburg: Echter, 1999), 487.

4. Psalm 118

83

confessional statements that are articulated here provide a hermeneutical framework for a reading of the entire poem, an inclusio of sorts that serves as a guide for understanding the worshipper’s narrative in the following section (vv. 5–18). In this, the main body of the poem, the worshipper retells their experience of divine deliverance. And as we will see, this testimony works to affirm the depiction of Yahweh’s character that is presented in the opening and closing liturgy: Yahweh is good and Yahweh’s ‫ חסד‬lasts forever (vv. 1b, 2b, 3b, 4b, 29b). The poem’s third section is a liturgical dialogue (either real or imagined), outlining what appears to be a ritual procession of thanksgiving in ancient Israel (vv. 19–28). The surrounding community is called to respond at this time by taking an active role in the thank offering. In so doing, they affirm Yahweh’s presence in the life of the individual worshipper and, more interestingly, they plead for Yahweh’s involvement in their lives as well (see v. 25). These three sections—call, story, and liturgy—make up Psalm 118. To be sure, variations on this thematic progression have been suggested, but for the most part, any proposed divergences are relatively minor.26 If there has been a source of contention, it usually concerns the delineation of the narratives that make up the poem’s second major section. For example, in H. Schmidt’s reading of the psalm, he identifies three separate stories in vv. 5–19, each of which he believes is the rehearsal of an individual representative of a different group: those who are falsely accused (vv. 5–7), travelers (vv. 10–14), and the sick (vv. 17–19).27 Schmidt’s reading is based on a presumed structural or thematic correspondence between Psalm 118 and Psalm 107, a communal thanksgiving that is broken up into four separate vignettes detailing the circumstances that led to an individual’s or group’s experience of deliverance. Schmidt believed that something similar is happening in Psalm 118. Allen reaches the conclusion that Schmidt’s intertextual proposal is purely eisegetical; it is a reading-in that has no real roots in the text itself.28 Most commentators have followed suit, not so much in articulating a specific rebuttal to this study, but in their offering of a different proposal 26.  Notable exceptions include, Seybold, Die Psalmen, 459–61, who divides the poem into four sections (vv. 1, 2–4, 5–28, 29), and P. Auffret, Merveilles à Nos Yeux: Ètude Structurelle de Vingt Psaumes dont celui de 1Ch 16,8–36, BZAW 235 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1995), 162–81, who also identifies four sections (vv. 1–9, 10–19, 20–26, 27–29). Allen, Psalms 101–150, 164, identifies five sections (vv. 1–4, 5–13, 14–19, 20–28, 29). 27.  H. Schmidt, “Erklärung des 118. Psalms,” ZAW 40 (1922): 1–14. 28.  See Allen, Psalms 101–150, 163–64.

84

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

al­together.29 Typically, they identify two retellings in the psalm, both of which recount the same experience of the unnamed “I.” Working from this premise, Brueggemann and Bellinger,30 Clifford,31 Goldingay,32 Kidner,33 Mays,34 McCann,35 and Vesco36 classify vv. 5–7 as the first retelling of the worshipper’s experience of rescue and vv. 8–9 as a liturgical response. The proposed response, they argue, provides resolution for the first narrative and a natural break in the poem’s structure. Verse 10 then begins the second retelling of the same experience.37 This is a longer account that details the worshipper’s rescue with more intentionality. For example, in the first narrative, the worshipper’s experience is cloaked in ambiguity: they were in “narrow straits” but Yahweh answered by setting them in wide-open space (v. 5). It is difficult to say what this rescue entailed from the witness of the text. The second narrative is no less elusive even though the imagery is more developed. Here, the worshipper is surrounded by all nations (vv. 10a, 11a); their enemies are like bees (v. 12a). The psalm even suggests in the second narrative that Yahweh is involved, to some degree, in the plight of the worshipper. It could be read that Yahweh is the executor of judgment (vv. 13a, 18a). Thankfully, when the worshipper was close to death, Yahweh responded with deliverance— finally, climactically, definitively (vv. 15–18). Like the first narrative, the second also concludes with liturgical elements—in this case, a dialogue between the worshipper, minister/priest, and congregation, which makes up the poem’s third section. Allen offers a different structural proposal. He identifies the limits of the first narrative as vv. 5–13, and the second as vv. 14–19. These parameters are based largely on the perceived thematic and linguistic correspondences between the two sections. Allen summarizes, 29.  Seybold, Die Psalmen, 459, is one notable exception. He categorizes vv. 5–28 as a series of loosely connected testimonies made by individual speakers. 30.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 507. 31.  Clifford, Psalms 73–150, 206. 32.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 356–58. 33.  Kidner, Psalms 73–150, 448. 34.  Mays, Psalms, 374–75. 35.  McCann, NIB 4:1154. 36.  Jean-Luc Vesco, Le Psautier de David: Traduit et Commenté II (Paris: Cerf, 2006), 1104. 37.  See Alter, Psalms, 416; Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 507; Clifford, Psalms 73–150, 206; Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 303–4; Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 358; Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 397; Mays, Psalms, 374; McCann, NIB 4:1154; Vesco, Le Psautier de David: II, 1104.

4. Psalm 118

85

The main, individual part of the psalm vv 5–19, is bound together by a sixfold use of ‫יה‬, “Yah,” in vv 5, 14, and (climactically) vv 17–19; significant too is ‫לי‬, “to me,” in vv 6–7, 14, 19 (and also 21). It divides into two strophes: vv 5–13 have the root ‫עזר‬, “help,” as their framing marker in vv 7, 13, while vv 14–19 have the root ‫צדק‬, “righteous(ness),” in vv 15, 19, with the wordplay ‫עזרני‬/‫עזי‬, “he helped me”/“my strength,” acting as an interstrophic hinge in vv 13–14.38

Mark39 and Hossfeld and Zenger40 suggest a similar division of the worshipper’s storied testimonies, arguing that vv. 5–12 comprise the first narrative and vv. 13–18 the second. Hossfeld and Zenger also observe that the psalm’s double narrative is told from two complementary perspectives. In the first narrative, the worshipper describes their deliverance from an external perspective, highlighting the role of their enemies, while the second narrative presents the event from an internal perspective, which focuses on the divine cause behind the external pressures facing the worshipper. “Both sections,” they argue, “are interwoven by means of the theme of ‘Yhwh as helpful rescuer,’ ” based on the presence of the keyword, ‫עזר‬, in v. 7 and v. 13.41 There is much to commend in this view, specifically, the attention to the literary artistry of the poem and the proposed correspondences between the two narratives. However, the content seems to suggest a break at v. 10. In the second narrative, the worshipper expands on the events of vv. 5–7, further developing the nature of their confinement, their eventual rescue, and Yahweh’s role in both. The identification of the beginning point of the psalm’s third section has probably occasioned the most significant discussion among scholars. A perceived shift in tone in v. 19, from narrative to liturgy (or from storytelling to what appears to be a processional ritual), has led a large swath of commentators, including Brueggemann and Bellinger,42 Clifford,43 Dahood,44 deClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner,45 Gerstenberger,46

38.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 164–65. 39.  Mark, Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 164–65. 40.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 233–34. 41.  Ibid., 233. 42.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 506–7. 43.  Clifford, Psalms 73–150, 204. 44.  Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 155–56. 45.  DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, The Book of Psalms, 865, 868. 46.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 300.

86

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

Hossfeld and Zenger,47 Mark,48 Mays,49 and McCann50 to place the outer limits of the poem’s second major section at the conclusion of v. 18. According to their reading, the worshipper’s request for access into the “faithful gates” in v. 19 is believed to begin a formalized entrance ritual. Other readers, however, include v. 19 as part of the worshipper’s narrative. Goldingay, for instance, argues that since v. 19 extrapolates on v. 17b, it should be included in the preceding text unit (vv. 10–19). Because of what Yahweh has done, the worshipper commits to proclaiming Yahweh’s deeds in public, to the worshipping community (v. 17b), and v. 19, he posits, provides the fulfillment of that commitment. Crüsemann and Allen also include v. 19 with what precedes it.51 Both aver that the next major section of the poem, “the liturgy of thanksgiving,” begins with the gatekeeper’s pointed response to the worshipper’s request for admission into the temple court in v. 20. Admission must be granted before the liturgy begins. Some interpreters in the form-critical school disagree with Crüsemann’s and Allen’s assessment, though they seem to view the liturgical interchange from a similar perspective. Historically, form-critics have been quite interested in socio-historical and socio-religious reconstructions, and indeed, Gunkel, Weiser, and Kraus have each articulated their own version of what a reconstruction of this psalm might entail. They believed that the worshipper’s request was a real plea for admission. It was not staged or imagined. Neither was it constructed solely for didactic purposes. In fact, they understand the worshipper’s anticipated entrance into the temple as one of the main points of the poem. Israel’s thanksgiving, from its storytelling to its sacrifice, was ritualistic, and the liturgy included in this section, they argue, gives voice to the high importance of these cultic routines. The difference between Crüsemann’s and Allen’s reading and that of the early form-critics’ is that Gunkel, Weiser, and Kraus suggest keeping the entire dialogue together—the worshipper’s request (v. 19) and the gatekeepers’ response (vv. 20–21). And they conclude that this text unit belongs with the preceding story, resulting in a proposed division of the poem as follows: vv. 1–4, 5–21, 22–29.52 47.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 233–34. 48.  Mark, Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 220. 49.  Mays, Psalms, 374–75. 50.  McCann, NIB 4:1153–55. 51.  See, e.g., Frank Crüsemann, Studien zur Formgeschichte von Hymnus und Danklied in Israel, WMANT 32 (Neukirchener-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1969), 217–21; Allen, Psalms 101–150, 164–65. 52.  See Gunkel, Die Psalmen, 507; Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 398–99; Weiser, Psalms, 728.

4. Psalm 118

87

In this study, I too divide the psalm into three major sections: a communal call to confession, which brackets the entire composition (vv. 1–4, 29); the worshipper’s narrative retelling (vv. 5–18), which I break down further into two stories that recount the same event (vv. 5–9, 10–18); and a liturgy of thanksgiving (vv. 19–28), beginning with the worshipper’s request for entry. This seems to provide the most natural understanding of the worshipper’s storied testimonies—they are two stories that retell the same event. The breaks proposed here, which view the worshipper’s stories as appended with cultic elements, are well attested, though, as we have already seen, they are not unanimously agreed upon. Setting(s) A more pressing interpretive issue concerns the identification of the setting(s) and the singer(s) of the psalm. With regard to the former, a presumed liturgical function for Psalm 118 has led some commentators to attempt a reconstruction of its use in ancient Israelite worship. Gunkel provides a noteworthy example.53 His reading of Psalm 118 was structured, first and foremost, around the belief that the psalm was used as a liturgical agenda in Israel’s thanksgiving. As a result, he envisioned a specific setting for the psalm’s cultic use. Gunkel claimed that the worshipper’s experience of deliverance probably entailed some sort of physical healing, which led him to emphasize the psalm’s private use. It was not a story celebrating the military victory of a king, despite the composition’s grandiose images that suggest otherwise. Rather, for Gunkel, the worshipper’s personal deliverance gave rise to a felt need (and perhaps, a cultic expectation) to offer thanks to Yahweh in public, in the hearing of the worshipping community, presumably, in the temple. Gunkel recreated the scene with some specificity.54 In particular, Gunkel imagined a procession by the worshipper, who was bringing an animal sacrifice to the temple. The larger worshipping community (or “friends”) surrounded the worshipper and the sacrifice as they approached. Everyone was wearing festival clothing and yelling loudly in celebration. When this company arrived, the gates are found locked, prohibiting their entrance. This is part of the custom, Gunkel notes, which illustrates that the officiants will only open the gates in specific circumstances. Only “righteousness” grants one the right to enter. 53.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 231, claim that his is “the most influential interpretation of the psalm in the history of scholarship.” 54.  See Gunkel, Die Psalmen, 507.

88

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

Gunkel believed that this sets up the worshipper’s interchange with the gatekeeper in vv. 19–21 and, following their entrance into the temple courts, the liturgical dialogue in vv. 22–29. To be fair, Gunkel notes an admitted tension between the private and public use of the psalm. Psalm 118 is the thanksgiving song of an indi­ vidual, but he believed that it was also clearly used (at some point) in public worship. Because the worshipper was healed, a retelling of the experience would occur formally in worship as an act of thanks. What began as a personal use of the psalm, then, would have (most likely) culminated in its public use in worship. It was the response of an individual, but it was voiced in public. Kraus notes a similar tension as well: “[T]he designation ‘private’ is extremely problematical, for the insertion of the individual song into the liturgy of thanksgiving of the festival assembly surely shows precisely that the psalmist does not cultivate a ‘private piety’ but knows that his personal experience finds its place in the great assembly.”55 Gunkel’s attempted reconstruction characterizes one of the goals of a classic form-critical approach. This approach, as we have already seen, has enjoyed many followers. Mowinckel, for example, attempted to further Gunkel’s proposal by identifying a specific historical setting for the origin and/or use of the psalm. He argued that this psalm, as well as many others, was used during the cultic (re)enthronement of Yahweh as King.56 Because this event is not explicitly mentioned in the Old Testament, Mowinckel hypothesized the Harvest Festival or the Feast of Tabernacles as its most likely setting. Indeed, a festal association with Psalm 118 has historic roots. Mowinckel writes, There is absolutely no reason to reject the tradition in Mishna Sukka IV.5 that Ps. 118 belonged to the feast of Tabernacles. It is a procession psalm and alludes to “the day” of the feast (v. 24), to the procession up to and around the altar, and to the green branches with which the altar was covered “up to its horns,” or, as read in Sukka IV.5, “so that their tops bent the altar.” The psalm alludes also to the Hosanna-cry of the procession, and to the light of the torches in the torch dance on the first night of the feast, giving the rites a symbolic interpretation: “Yahweh is our God who brought us light” (v. 27).57

55.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 395. 56.  See Sigmund Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, trans. D. R. Ap-Thomas, 2 vols., The Biblical Resource Guide (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 1:5–6, 120, 123, 171, 180–81. 57.  Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 1:120.

4. Psalm 118

89

Another form-critic, Artur Weiser, largely agreed with Mowinckel’s proposal, though he emphasized that the psalm does not clarify its original intention or use. Interestingly, Weiser claimed that the psalm’s ambiguity actually works in favor of Mowinckel’s designation. He writes, “The absence of any concrete allusions and the general character of the liturgy…point to the autumn festival of Yahweh, as does the Jewish tradition relating the psalm of the Feast of Tabernacles.”58 A variety of interpreters, including Anderson,59 Croft,60 Eaton,61 and Johnson62 have reached similar conclusions. Gerstenberger also betrays an admittedly nuanced allegiance to Gunkel’s interpretive method. He posits a more generic cultic setting for the psalm, claiming, “The offertory proper was combined with days of feasting in the circle of friends, family, and co-religionists. The saved one would invite a ‘large congregation’ and pay for eating and drinking.”63 Dahood questioned the validity of this emerging consensus view, and more importantly, the validity of the method upon which it was based, contending that such a reading was too speculative. As an alternative, he proposed a more literal interpretation of the psalm: “Some critics claim that this psalm is best understood as part of the annual liturgy in which the Davidic king was prominent, but this reconstruction must symbolically interpret the psalmist’s references to an encounter with death, which seem to be literal.”64 Dahood agreed that the psalm was used in ancient Israelite liturgy, but it was used to aid in the celebration of an actual military victory because that is what the psalm describes. The psalm was not created or used in a symbolic re-enthronement service. It was used whenever a king, a real king, needed to give thanks for a victory, a real victory. Some time later, Allen voiced his agreement with this reading, claiming that a straightforward understanding of the psalm’s setting is “probably correct.”65 Allen does go on to postulate, along with many in the form-critical school, that Israelite military victories would most likely 58.  Weiser, Psalms, 724–25. 59.  Anderson, Psalms 73–150, 797. 60.  Steven J. L. Croft, The Identity of the Individual in the Psalms, JSOTSup 82 (Sheffield: JSOT, 1987), 81–88. 61.  John Eaton, Kingship in the Psalms, SBT 32 (Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1976), 130. 62.  Aubry R. Johnson, Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1955), 114–18. 63.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 308. 64.  Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 155. 65.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 164.

90

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

have been celebrated at the Autumn Festival, after the campaigns of the spring and summer had ended. The proposed timeline of the psalm’s use, therefore, is similar, but the occasion that underlies it in Allen’s reading is different than that of the form-critical school—it was used to celebrate a real victory. Other socio-historical and socio-religious reconstructions appear throughout the pages of the secondary literature. Hossfeld and Zenger provide a catalogue of the psalm’s proposed origin or intended Sitz im Leben in order to demonstrate the breadth of scholarly opinion. They write, Scholars offer a broad selection here: the first Feast of Booths in 536 B.C.E., after the end of the exile (cf. Ezra 3:1–4); the laying of the cornerstone of the Second Temple in 520 B.C.E. (cf. Ezra 3:8–13 and liturgical formula of Psalm 118 quoted in 3:11); the reconsecration of the Second Temple in 515 B.C.E. (cf. Ezra 6:15–18); the Feast of Booths after the completion of the walls of Jerusalem under Nehemiah in 444 B.C.E. (cf. Nehemiah 8); the Maccabean consecration of the Temple by Judas Maccabeus in 164 B.C.E. (cf. 1 Macc 4:36–61; 2 Macc 10:1–8); the defeat of Nicanor in 161 B.C.E. (cf. 1 Macc 7:48–49); Simon’s solemn entry into the citadel of Jerusalem in 142 B.C.E. (cf. 1 Macc 13:51). Other authors reject application to such “historical” points of origin, but emphasize the psalm’s liturgical use, either by the Feast of Booths, the New Year’s festival, or the Yhwh-is-king festival, or the liturgy for bringing a vowed sacrifice, when individuals recited their narratives of rescue.66

To this list, we can add more. W. Robinson promotes an oddly specific cultic ritual as the psalm’s intended setting—a circumcision festival for proselytes.67 More recently, Fred Blumenthal has claimed that the psalm functions as “A Ceremony for the Bringing of the Korban Todah.”68 In fact, he suggests that the entire psalm acts as a script for the occasion. Chapter 118 appears to be a description of the ceremony connected with the bringing of [an animal sacrifice to the Temple]. It is safe to assume that on holidays, when many out-of-towners came to Jerusalem, a number of them wanted to carry out this obligation and that a special time was set aside to receive them. The author of this chapter has poetically described the following ceremony.69 66.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 232. 67.  W. Robinson, “Psalm 118: A Liturgy for Admission of a Proselyte,” CQR 144 (1947): 179–83. 68.  Fred Blumenthal, “Psalm 118,” JBQ 39 (2011): 115–17. 69.  Ibid., 115.

4. Psalm 118

91

In both studies (but very clearly in Blumenthal’s), the authors’ proposed reading is an exercise in re-envisioning the setting (e.g., under what circumstances and at what moment in the process the lines of the poem were read) and the liturgical roles of the participants (e.g., who read what). In response to this dubious interpretive enterprise, Reuven Hammer drafted a thoughtful and convicting analysis, one that guides my own reading of Psalm 118. He writes, “Although these texts may have been composed for a specific historical occasion, it is virtually impossible to determine with certainty the specific historical venue for any psalm, and the range of identifications renders these attempts somewhat ludicrous.”70 Indeed, if Hossfeld and Zenger’s selective summary, which includes proposals spanning at least four centuries, is any indication, Hammer is quite right. The attempts are ludicrous. Mays offers a simple alternative. He does not attempt to recreate the psalm’s original intention, nor does he attempt to recreate a hypothetical socio-religious setting that would accommodate the psalm’s continued use in the ancient Israelite worshipping community. Rather, he highlights the general liturgical function of the psalm, observing that it was obviously composed for a service of thanksgiving—when and where and why such a ritual occurred, we are not told. The celebrant is unknown and the occasion is too general to formulate an opinion concerning an intended setting. All of this leads Mays to conclude, “The psalm was not composed to answer historical questions; instead, it is wholly concentrated on portraying what happened to the celebrant as the work of the Lord.”71 To focus on what may or may not underlie this offering, therefore, is to misread the psalm; it is an empty interpretive effort that actually moves us away from the psalm’s spirit and purpose. In this chapter, I approach the psalm in a similar way. I acknowledge that it is undoubtedly a liturgical poem, but its intended use in ancient Israelite worship is unknown and irrecoverable. As Goldingay notes, “[W]e would be unwise to try to infer a liturgy that was actually taking place as the psalm unfolded, though no doubt the psalm reflects liturgical events.”72 It is best to approach the psalm on literary grounds, then, allowing it to speak to the goodness and commitment of Yahweh in the life of the worshipper and by implication, the worshipping community.73 70.  Reuven Hammer, “Two Liturgical Psalms: Salvation and Thanksgiving,” Judaism 40 (1991): 484–97 (484). 71.  Mays, Psalms, 376. 72.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 355. 73.  The lack of a specific socio-historical and socio-religious setting is probably what led Luther to describe the psalm as “my own beloved Psalm” (Jaroslav Pelikan,

92

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

Singer(s) Closely related to the interpretive issues surrounding the setting of Psalm 118 is the ambiguous identity of the singer(s). Again, because the psalm is believed to reflect liturgical events, many interpreters have attempted to isolate and identify its singers. On this, Mark observes that the history of interpretation on Psalm 118 offers readers “an overflowing amount of completely different suggestions.”74 Schmidt’s intertextual reading, for instance, led him to identify three individual speakers in the psalm’s narrative retellings alone, not to mention the additional voice(s) of any other liturgical/cultic participants potentially included in the poem. Though Schmidt’s proposal is a minority view,75 the identification of multiple voices in the psalm is not. In addition to the lead storyteller (i.e., the unnamed “I” in vv. 5–18), the list of other participants in the psalm’s liturgy includes: a leader or officiant of the liturgy (e.g., liturgist, worship leader, minister), the worshipping community (“Israel”; cf. v. 2a), a priest or priests (v. 3a), and “those who fear Yahweh” (v. 4a). Some combination of these participants is believed to appear throughout the poem, especially in the liturgical dialogue of vv. 22–29. The identity of the lead storyteller has posed the most difficulty.76 The language and imagery of the psalm, especially in vv. 10–12, suggest an identification of this individual as Israel’s king. Dahood writes, “Verses 5–18 contain the king’s description of the battle in which through divine intervention he escaped sure death.”77 Allen agrees. He surmises that the “central character of the psalm,” the king, emerges in v. 5. This figure “bears witness before the congregation to Yahweh’s liberating help in answer to prayer in a time of military crisis.”78

ed., Luther’s Works, Volume 14: Selected Psalms III [St. Louis: Concordia, 1958], 45). In describing Luther’s personal application of Ps 118, Ronald M. Hals, “Psalm 118,” Int 37 (1983): 277–83, suggests that this, though largely uninformed, is a perfectly valid reading of the psalm: “Luther’s way of seeing himself and his fellow Christians as those whose plight is described in verses 10–13 is ideally suited to the accomplishment of the psalm’s intent. The employing of all this stylized language, perhaps originally rooted in the experience of a king, aims at the goal of democratization, that is, that the individual worshipers may find their own experience incorporated in and transcended by the imagery of the text” (278). 74.  Mark, Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 294. 75.  Seybold, Die Psalmen, 459–60, suggests a similar reading. 76.  See Vesco, Le Psautier de David: II, 1105. 77.  Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 155. 78.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 166.

4. Psalm 118

93

C. A. and E. G. Briggs seek to temper the royal association in the psalm, claiming instead that the psalm-singer is a representative leader, a processional or worship leader perhaps, who retells a story of deliverance. The story is not the leader’s personal experience; the leader is merely retelling the experience of the community. They conclude, The solo proclaims the deliverance of the people by Yah from great straits, and their confidence in Him who has helped them to triumph over their enemies (v. 5–7). The leader recalls the multitude of enemies, and the chorus responds in a vow to exterminate them (v. 10–12). The leader bids them hearken to the shouts of victory; the chorus responds that it is due to the right hand of Yahweh (v. 15–16).79

Because the psalm’s language is so ambiguous, many scholars shirk a specific identification for the worshipper. McCann simply notes, “[C]ertainty is elusive.”80 This is not just due to the difficulty of historical reconstruction. The text itself is ambiguous. Mays writes, “Who the person was who ‘comes in the name of the Lord’ and from what particular crisis he had escaped is left open and indefinite, as is usually the case with individual prayers for help and songs of thanksgiving.”81 Brueggemann and Bellinger also avoid identifying the singer. They write, “In verses 5–18, the voice of a person within the congregation narrates a demonstration of Yhwh’s steadfast love… The identities of the petitioner and crisis remain open.”82 As I argued previously, the ambiguity of the singer, both in this psalm and any other thanksgiving psalm, makes its corporate use more amenable. The story of the unnamed “I” can become the story of the worshipping community. It is not the representative leader’s or the king’s story alone, it is the audience’s as well. In some ways, the audience was in straits and then placed into wide-open space, and not just corporately or by an imaginary act of solidarity, but as individuals, in their own lives and experiences. Gerstenberger gives voice to this: “The ‘I’ stands for the saved one, and for each individual member of the community, hardly for the worshipping group as a whole.”83

79.  Briggs and Briggs, The Book of Psalms II: 51–150, 403. 80.  McCann, NIB 4:1153. 81.  Mays, Psalms, 375. 82.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 508. 83.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 307.

94

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

While it is often the case that individuals (both ancient and modern) are able to identify with the psalmist’s narrative of deliverance, it is also the case that this narrative alludes more broadly to Israel’s past. Deliverance had been the experience and story of corporate Israel, and according to Hossfeld and Zenger, it has roots in the psalm’s not-sosubtle intertextual echoes. They write, [T]he psalm builds up a powerful time-space: on the one hand, it recalls the “canonical” history of Israel’s origins, and, on the other hand, it evokes the great promises according to which Israel and the nations will together celebrate and worship YHWH as the only God. The psalm transfers the experience of rescue narrated by the speaking “I” and interprets it as an element that supports this time-space. The rescue of this “I” that the psalm sings of is the individual and collective actualization of the universal history of salvation, in which Israel and the nations are to experience and learn what the psalm summarizes in its framing verses: “Give thanks/praise Yhwh, for he is good, for his love is/endures forever” (Ps 118:1, 29).84

I will say more about the use of intertextual echoes in Psalm 118 and their relation to the psalm’s ethical instruction in the interpretation below. For now, suffice it to say that the worshipper viewed their deliverance as an affirmation of Yahweh’s character. The same God who delivered Israel from Egypt delivers now and, by implication, will deliver again. Interpretation Verses 1–4 Psalm 118 begins with a hymnic exhortation to the worshipping community. It is an imperative that calls those in attendance (or those reading, singing, or praying the psalm) to confess or give thanks, ‫הודו‬, to Yahweh. The use of this verb as part of an opening formula also occurs in Pss 106:1, 107:1, and 136:1. Its prominent placement in the present psalm sets the tone for a reading of the entire composition and suggests its generic categorization. Psalm 118 is a thanksgiving or testimony psalm; it is a public declaration of who Yahweh is and what Yahweh has done. The fivefold use of the verb, the most in any psalm, confirms an overwhelming emphasis on confessing Yahweh. As Vesco notes, it is a thanksgiving psalm par excellence.85

84.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 233. 85.  Vesco, Le Psautier de David: II, 1104.

4. Psalm 118

95

Hossfeld and Zenger argue that the psalm’s “compositional associa­ tion”86 with Psalm 116 also forms a clue as to its intended use.87 They claim that Psalm 116 (esp. vv. 17–19) announces and describes a tôdâsacrifice. While Psalm 118 does not specify the worshipper’s sacrificial offering, the hiphil form of the verb, ‫ידה‬, which occurs both here in v. 1 and throughout the poem’s liturgical section (vv. 19, 21, 28), “alludes to such a sacrifice.”88 This is impossible to know, but the purpose of the psalm remains clear. The worshipper intends to give thanks, to confess Yahweh to the worshipping community, and to invite those in attendance to join in. The rationale behind the worshipper’s initial exhortation to the surrounding community is stated in two clauses: they should give thanks “because [Yahweh] is good, because [Yahweh’s] ‫חסד‬,” a term variously translated as covenant or steadfast love or commitment,89 “lasts forever.”90 Read as a whole, this confessional statement undergirds the logic (as well as the theology, ethics, and ethos) of the poem. The worshipper is confessing, in a sense, “Because Yahweh has answered my lament, I will give thanks, and because my story provides a witness to Yahweh’s ability and willingness to rescue, you should give thanks too.” The purpose of the psalm’s introductory liturgy, however, is not merely to elicit a verbal or cultic response. It is meant to engage the audience, to reorient its readers and hearers theologically and ethically, to shape and transform their character by heightening their sense of anticipation and expectation, their belief and trust. This is so because Yahweh’s goodness and commitment are not restricted to the events narrated here; no, these divine characteristics are evidenced regularly and are available to others. Understanding this divine potential is revolutionary for one’s worship, and also, one’s prayers. Readers often attribute the role of a priest,91 precentor,92 leader,93 or singer94 to the speaker in v. 1. The opening voice of the psalm, therefore, 86.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 237. 87.  On the connection between Ps 116 (and Ps 117) and Ps 118:1–4, 29, see Mark, Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 141–50. 88.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 237. 89.  On the meaning of ‫חסד‬, see K. D. Sakenfeld, The Meaning of Hesed in the Hebrew Bible: A New Inquiry, HSM 17 (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1978). 90.  Cf. Seybold, Die Psalmen, 457, 459. 91.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 165; Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 506. 92.  Weiser, Psalms, 725. 93.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 356. 94.  Clifford, Psalms 73–150, 205.

96

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

is identified (albeit in different ways) as the one facilitating the entire thanksgiving offering. Allen proposes that it was a priest who led the psalm’s communal liturgy as a way of introducing the individual storyteller or worshipper in v. 5. Others are more generic in their proposals, but still maintain that the initial voice in the psalm is separate from the one raised in the main body of the poem, vv. 5–18. Mark and Hossfeld and Zenger represent a minority position. Mark argues that the liturgy is not real; it is fictitious.95 Hossfeld and Zenger reach a similar conclusion, though they clarify the purpose of this fictive activity, claiming that the psalm “adopts cultic elements in order to shape a liturgical cantata with an instructional purpose.”96 The liturgy, therefore, is a heuristic device meant to instruct the audience. Because it is not a description of a real cultic event, a reconstructed priest or worship leader is not necessary. On this basis, they conclude that it is the worshipper (the storyteller, the one offering thanks, the one praying the psalm), who exhorts the audience to join in the celebration in v. 1. This reading has some merit, most notably, its ability to circumvent the difficult (if not impossible) task of reconstruction, though I would add that the authors’ conclusion is just as tenuous, historically speaking. We simply do not know how the psalm was used in worship. Hossfeld and Zenger’s proposal that because the psalm is liturgical, it is also didactic, does not necessitate the view that it was, as a result, fictional. As I have pointed out throughout this study, liturgy, by its very nature, is instructional. The psalm’s proposed didactic function has no bearing on whether or not it was used in an actual thanksgiving procession. The psalm’s intended audience is also ambiguous. According to Gerstenberger, the lack of an explicit referent in v. 1 indicates that the entire congregation is in view. He reaches this conclusion on the basis of the formulaic use of the communal call, specifically, the opening verb, which he observes “in various psalms and even some narrative contexts (cf. 30:5 [RSV 4]; 33:2; 97:12; 100:4; 105:1; 106:1; 107:1; 136:1–3, 26; 1 Kgs 8:33, 35 [perfect mode]; Isa 12:4; Jer 33:11; 2 Chron 20:21).”97 He writes, The frequency of use in late Hebrew Scripture is significant. We are really dealing with a standard liturgical formula of the early Jewish community worship. There is no need to make explicit reference to that worshiping

95.  See Mark, Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 296. 96.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 232. 97.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 300.

4. Psalm 118

97

community. The people that are addressed are simply that particular group to whom belong the Scriptures, the only source of knowledge about the great deeds of Yahweh.98

Something similar could be said about the entire confessional statement in Ps 118:1 (and in 118:29)—‫הודו ליהוה כי־טוב כי לעולם חסדו‬. The statement recurs in various forms throughout the Old Testament. It is repeated verbatim in Pss 106:1, 107:1, 136:1, and 1 Chron 16:34, and it is found in a slightly altered form in Ps 110:4–5, Jer 33:11, Ezra 3:11, 2 Chron 5:13, and 7:3, 6. “All this evidence suggests widespread use of the Summons to Praise in the plural form directed toward a worshiping community.”99 The audience, then, is whoever comprises the community at that time. While I affirm this view, it does seem to deconstruct over the next three verses, as the psalmist specifically invites three groups of people to participate in the liturgy: Let Israel indeed say, “His commitment lasts forever.” Let the house of Aaron indeed say, “His commitment lasts forever.” Let those who fear Yahweh indeed say, “His commitment lasts forever.”

For those who are guided in their interpretation by an attempt to recreate a specific liturgical setting, the groups of people mentioned here are taken to be members of the congregation who would have been present when the psalm was used in worship. As a result, they believe that these three groups were each exhorted to respond in turn. Kraus writes, “Psalm 118 begins with a liturgy for a festival of thanksgiving (vv. 1–4) which we must imagine sung by various groups,”100 ostensibly, those mentioned by name in the psalm. Weiser also supports this reading: The different groups of those who take part in the offering of thanksgiving are called upon in turn to join in singing the refrain attached to the testimony: first of all “Israel,” the people of the covenant, then the “house of Aaron,” that is, the priesthood, and finally “those who fear God,” that is, the proselytes of non-Israelite origin.101

98.  Ibid. 99.  Ibid., 301. 100.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 396. 101.  Weiser, Psalms, 725.

98

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

The proposed identity and liturgical role of each group in Kraus’s and Weiser’s reconstruction betrays their dependence upon a hypothesized setting. In their mind, a festival would have provided the perfect opportunity for these diverse subsections of the worshipping community to be in attendance and to participate in a thanksgiving procession. Upon closer examination, however, the psalmist’s naming of these three groups actually reinforces Gerstenberger’s universal point. The psalm, and perhaps more importantly, the stories it recounts, are meant for the entire worshipping community—for Israel and Israel’s priestly tribe (i.e., the house of Aaron) and anyone who fears Yahweh. Some have suggested that the last group mentioned refers either to surrounding non-Israelite communities102 or proselytes. Either identification would indicate a more expansive understanding of “Israel.” It is not only national Israel that is asked to participate; anyone on the border or anyone who has converted should join in giving thanks as well. Thankfully, specificity for the Yahweh-fearers is not necessary for this reading. In fact, it is probably best to understand the identity of this final group as a collective term,103 especially when the designation is viewed in light of the parallel exhortation to Israel, the house of Aaron, and those who fear Yahweh in Ps 115:9–11. In this context, the psalm goes on to characterize those who fear Yahweh as a group that is highly inclusive (v. 13). It is not just those in close geographical proximity or those who have been proselytized, it is anyone who fears Yahweh. With this in mind, we do well to follow Gerstenberger, “[W]e cannot be sure of the ‘factions’ and liturgical groupings within the community,”104 and even more importantly, discovering their specific identity is not the point. Each of these three groups is invited to raise their voice in affirmation of Yahweh’s character, which is specified in the refrain, “his commitment lasts forever.” When all is said and done, the point of the psalm’s liturgical introduction is that the worshipper’s testimony would become everyone’s testimony, that the worshipper’s story would become everyone’s story. As such, the entire audience is urged to become a thankful people in response to the worshipper’s experience, a people who testify to Yahweh’s commitment, a people who trust that divine goodness will be demonstrated in their lives as well. The worshipper’s experience of deliverance is viewed as (at least) a possibility for those hearing, singing, or praying the psalm, and this should shape them into a certain type of person. What type of person this is, exactly, will be explicated further throughout the poem. 102.  See Seybold, Die Psalmen, 459. 103.  See Mark, Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 493. 104.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 302.

4. Psalm 118

99

Verses 5–9 The worshipper’s introductory claim that Yahweh is both committed and good is affirmed and expanded in the next section of the poem, particularly, vv. 5–7. In this, the first of two retellings of the worshipper’s experience of divine rescue, the story is concise, but it is also artistic and, as Kraus suggests, “very graphic” in its presentation.105 Its literary artistry is evident at the outset, in v. 5, as the worshipper begins the story by way of a chiasm that juxtaposes two word-pairs, one spatial (narrow straits/ wide-open space) and one sequential (call/answer): From the narrow straits, I called, “Yah.” Yah answered me with wide-open space.

The word used to describe the worshipper’s situation in v. 5a, ‫המצר‬, indicates that the predicament involved, quite literally, a lack of space: the worshipper was constrained. Admittedly, this is an odd use of the Hebrew root. It occurs only three times in the MT including its use here (Ps 116:3; Lam 1:3). Goldingay notes, “Words from the root ṣārar are used to denote ‘distress’ more generally, but etymologically the word points to restriction or straits, and the parallelism suggests this meaning here.”106 Allen attempts to specify the cause of confinement.107 Due to the language used in vv. 10–18 (which I will discuss below), he argues that the lack of space is probably the result of a military crisis or another impending threat. Vesco reaches a similar conclusion based on the encirclement of the worshipper by hostile nations (see vv. 10–12).108 To be sure, the worshipper’s confinement could have been due to foreign military pressure, but the language used here could also denote a figurative confinement such as the affects of a physical ailment, the worshipper’s weak emotional state, or some other potentially oppressive situation. In the midst of lament, the worshipper was “unable to move.” We are not told why. What we do know is that this adverse set of circumstances occasioned the worshipper’s prayer: “From the narrow straits, I called, ‘Yah.’ ” The syntax of v. 5a is suggestive. The psalm does not say the worshipper “called to Yah,” as one might expect. Instead, the verb used here is transitive, meaning the divine name, “Yah,” functions as the content of the worshipper’s call. Despite its odd syntax, the line demonstrates something about the nature of prayer: it is intended to be dialogical. 105.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 397. 106.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 357. 107.  See Allen, Psalms 101–150, 166. 108.  Vesco, Le Psautier de David: II, 1106.

100

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

The worshipper speaks the divine name expecting a response, expecting Yahweh to show up and deliver. It also demonstrates the personal nature of prayer. It is so personal, in fact, that the suppliant can simply call out and demand a divine audience. Goldingay writes, “It might seem peremptory, like a master’s calling of a servant, but evidently it is all right.”109 The worshipper is not chastised for a lack of respect. Yahweh answers. The preposition in v. 5b invites multiple readings. It could be read, for instance, that Yahweh answered “in the wide-open space” (‫)במרחב‬. Read in this way, the contrast between v. 5a and v. 5b would be the location of the suppliant, who is confined, and Yahweh, who is not. This is grammatically possible, but if this were the case, it probably would not have evoked the sort of praise the worshipper offers in the following verses. A better reading identifies not where Yahweh responded but how Yahweh responded, namely, “with wide-open space.” Yahweh’s answer to the worshipper’s prayer included action. The worshipper was moved out of a place of confinement or narrowness to open space. Some English translations clarify this by adding an explanatory phrase, “Yahweh answered and set me in wide-open space” (e.g., NRSV, NASB). Such an addition, however, is not necessary if the preposition is treated as an indication of means. The movement in the psalm also need not be taken literally. The receipt of this gift could indicate a state of relief. Hossfeld and Zenger describe Yahweh’s answer as a “concrete bringing-out from the situation experienced as crushing, oppression, and fear into a condition of freedom (‘free space’), expansion of life (‘living space’), and security (‘protected space’).”110 This seems to be the interpretive force of the contrast between confinement and spaciousness. The worshipper was delivered, to be sure, but it need not be construed as a literal movement from one place to another. Israel’s thanksgiving psalms often provide these sorts of best-case scenarios. The worshipper calls and Yahweh answers. But readers know that life does not always work like that. Yahweh does not always deliver in this way or sometimes at all. One lesson to be gleaned from the psalm is the sense of expectancy that is built because of the worshipper’s experience. The prayer that they offer is neither tame nor reverent. It is just one word, “Yah,” which functions as a call to action. It is a summoning of Yahweh to be who Yahweh is supposed to be (or who Yahweh has been or could 109.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 357. 110.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 238.

4. Psalm 118

101

be). And, somewhat surprisingly, it works. For the audience, this should affect their view of prayer. It should also affect their view of Yahweh. Ultimately, it should invest them with hope. According to the psalm, the experience of deliverance affected the worshipper’s outlook, not only momentarily, not just in the offering of thanks, but moving forward as well. Yahweh has proven to be committed; Yahweh is “for” the worshipper. And as a result, there is nothing to fear, not even the unknown forces that once exerted power: Yahweh is for me, I will not be afraid; what can a human being do to me? Yahweh is for me as one of my helpers, and I will look (in triumph) on those who are against me.

Mays argues that this truth—Yahweh is for me—is the most wonderful truth a person can know. It shapes who they are. It shapes what they believe. It shapes how they live. In light of this knowledge, they are able to operate out of faith instead of fear.111 Such a revelation informs the worshipper’s disposition and it should inform the audience’s as well. Brueggemann and Bellinger write, “The experience brought the realization that God as refuge is far more powerful than any crisis and far more powerful than any human, even any human ruler. Fear can be a powerful reality, but refuge in God can bring hope, even in the face of such trauma.”112 What the worshipper believes, therefore, affects their actions as well as their character. Their theology informs their ethics. And their testimony, their story, should affect their audience in a similar way. Narrative ethicists would add that theological commitments, such as the ones held by the worshipper in Psalm 118, are embedded within an overarching story. Indeed, the worshipper’s experience makes sense only when it is set within the broader matrix of Israel’s stories concerning the person and work of Yahweh. Who Yahweh is believed to be is based on the traditions of Israel’s past, and in this psalm, Israel’s traditions are finding affirmation in real life experiences. We are not able to say whether Yahweh’s goodness and commitment is a new revelation to the worshipper. One would assume it is not. But we are able to say, on the basis of this psalm, that the worshipper’s personal story is informing their ethics, specifically, in the construction of their ethos, their sustaining environment or context in which ethical action takes place. Because of what has happened, the worshipper now knows (or is reaffirmed in the 111.  See Mays, Psalms, 376. 112.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 508.

102

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

belief) that Yahweh is for them, and as a result, they have no reason to be afraid. They can expect Yahweh to protect, to provide, to sustain, to deliver. And by extension, so can the worshipping community. The testimony of the worshipper (and the world that their words create) works to affirm the framing narratives of Israel’s faith. It invests the past with meaning and helps to structure the community’s present and future. It provides another vision of Yahweh as one who is invested in the life of the community, as one who answers prayer, as one who delivers. There is a challenge, then, to live a life of radical commitment and trust, to believe that what Yahweh does for one member of the community is also possible for another member. In vv. 8–9, the psalm shifts to the community’s intended response. These verses have a liturgical function, suggested by the poem’s changed tone. Prior to this, the psalm’s story has been written as a first-person testimony. These lines, however, take the form of a “better than” saying typically found in Old Testament wisdom literature (see especially Proverbs and Ecclesiastes).113 It is better to take refuge in Yahweh than to trust in human beings; it is better to take refuge in Yahweh than to trust in princes.

The didacticism of this saying concerns the source of one’s trust. Knowing what the audience now knows, that is, knowing the worshipper’s story of divine deliverance, hearers should deduce that it is better to “take refuge in Yahweh” than to trust in human beings, even powerful ones such as princes or leaders (‫)נדיבים‬. In one sense, these lines follow nicely after vv. 5–7. They complete the narrative. Yahweh has proven to be faithful, and this is how one should live in response. In another sense, they are notably ambiguous. Who are these human leaders that may have earned the people’s trust? What sort of leadership position did they have? Why was their potential involvement attractive? What was the situation underlying the worshipper’s constraint? We are not told. In the psalm, this message is conveyed: leaders will surely disappoint; Yahweh will not. The worshipper’s first narrative retelling in Psalm 118 provides a witness to possibility. It is an individual’s story offered to Yahweh in thanks, but it is also offered for the benefit of the community. It instructs its audience to follow the example set by the worshipper—to pray in the 113.  According to Seybold, Die Psalmen, 460, vv. 8–9 form a “weisheitliche ‫טוב‬-Sprüche.”

4. Psalm 118

103

midst of lament (sometimes even irreverently), to trust that Yahweh will respond, and not only that, but to trust that Yahweh will respond with “wide-open spaces.” Mays is correct, the reality that Yahweh is for me, or for you, or for us, is the most wonderful truth a person can know. Indeed, this theological tenet should inform the ongoing attitude—the spirituality, the worship, on a broader level, the sustaining context and ethos—of the entire worshipping community. They should be different in light of the worshipper’s witness, and their affirmation of Yahweh’s goodness and commitment should transcend liturgical participation and move to form (or transform) their character. Verses 10–18 In the next section, the worshipper retells their story again, this time in more detail. Brueggemann and Bellinger claim that an emphasis is placed in this version on the trouble and woe the worshipper faced.114 This is evidenced, first, by the repetitive use of the verb ‫ סבב‬in vv. 10a, 11a (×2), and 12a: All nations surrounded me, in the name of Yahweh, I indeed fended them off. They surrounded me, yes, surrounded me, in the name of Yahweh, I indeed fended them off. They surrounded me like bees, they were extinguished like a fire of thorns, in the name of Yahweh, I indeed fended them off.

McCann observes that in each line the distress is intensified. The progression culminates in v. 12 with the nations being described by way of two similes: they are like bees (‫)דבורים‬, and they are like a fire among thorns (‫)אשׁ קוצים‬. Still, “God’s help remains constant amid the growing threat.”115 Even though the worshipper was surrounded, a theme that may recall the narrow straits of v. 5, it was possible for them to fend off the unwanted advances of their enemies in the name of Yahweh. Seybold observes that each verse points to a situation of need and names the means by which the worshipper was able to stand up against the oppressor.116 Safety was not achieved through the use of the worshipper’s own strength. It was achieved by the simple act of calling on the name of Yahweh, the same name that was summoned in the first narrative, the same name 114.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 508. 115.  McCann, NIB 4:1154. 116.  Seybold, Die Psalmen, 460.

104

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

that responded to their desperate prayer with wide-open space. Indeed, “Without Yahweh’s aid all would have been lost.”117 Hossfeld and Zenger write, “The utterly unexpected outcome, in which the ‘hopelessly’ inferior ‘I’ did not fall victim to the superior power, but on the contrary was able to successfully fend off the attack, is linguistically underscored by the three repetitions of the deictic ‫כי‬, ‘indeed, yes.’ ”118 This is reflected in the translation of the line, “in the name of Yahweh, I indeed fended them off ” (‫)בשׁם יהוה כי אמילם‬. The intended sense of the verb, ‫מול‬, has caused some confusion. It is typically used in the Old Testament for circumcision, an allusion that McCann finds interesting given the role of the nations (i.e., the uncircumcised) in this potentially disastrous scenario.119 Dahood was not content to leave this suggested meaning lying under the surface. Instead, he reads the verb in the full interpretive light of 1 Sam 18:25–27, a passage that describes the practice of circumcising one’s fallen enemies. This has resulted in a very literal translation, representative of what Dahood deemed to be the “obvious meaning” of the verb: “indeed, I cut off their foreskins.”120 He postulated further that the psalmist must have had the Philistines in mind when composing the poem—they were the uncircumcised foes constricting the worshipper’s space. Other readers have maintained a related sense in their treatment of the verb, reflected in the proposed translation, “to cut off,” while others have interpreted the verb more broadly, as an indication of destruction.121 On the latter, Mark claims that the verb functions as an antonym of ‫סבב‬, and is used to imply a swift and wholesale defeat of those who surrounded the worshipper. He appeals to the destruction of “alle Völker” in Esther 9 and the defeat of Goliath in 1 Samuel 17 as possible literary parallels.122 Another option is to identify a different verbal root altogether in vv. 10–12, one that, according to HALOT, means to “fend off” or “repel.” This is probably the safest option, but as Gerstenberger concludes, “The meaning of the verb…is guesswork.”123

117.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 166. 118.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 238. 119.  See McCann, NIB 4:1154. 120.  See Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 154, 157. 121.  See, e.g., Alter, Psalms, 416; Eaton, Kingship and the Psalms, 176; Weiser, Psalms, 722. 122.  Mark, Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 438. 123.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 303.

4. Psalm 118

105

The use of the second person (“you”) in v. 13 presents more substantial interpretive issues. Seybold rightly observes that this form is “difficult to understand.”124 The solution proposed by the LXX and Vulgate is to emend the text to a first person passive form of the verb for the sake of consistency, “I was pushed down.” While this alleviates one difficulty, it does not escape the implication of Yahweh’s potential involvement, an involvement that Hossfeld and Zenger make explicit. They do not follow the emendation proposed by the Greek and Latin tradition, but they do read the first colon as a description of Yahweh’s role as the worshipper’s enemy (for lack of a better word). “You,” that is, Yahweh, “pushed me, pushed me so hard that I fell” (v. 13a). Theologically, this is possible. Gerstenberger notes, “According to some complaint songs it is God himself who inflicts suffering and pain, defeat and grace.”125 Verse 18 even seems to corroborate such a reading, though it depends on a particular understanding of Yahweh’s “punishment,” “discipline,” or “chastisement” (‫)יסר‬. DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner also conclude that the agent behind the worshipper’s fallen state in v. 13a is Yahweh, though they reach this conclusion on different grounds. They claim that the worshipper is responding to a dominant worldview that identified God as the mover of the created order: “If an event, a passion, an emotion occurs within humanity, then, if God is the only God, then God must cause such an occurrence.”126 This may be, but the emphasis in the psalm’s line is not on the pushing, but on the helping. What makes the association between “you” and “Yahweh” unlikely in Ps 118:13 is the psalm’s reversion to a description of Yahweh in the third person in the following colon: “You pushed me…but Yahweh helped me” (v. 13b). Hossfeld and Zenger note the oddity of the line, but they conclude that the theological possibility of Yahweh being both enemy and helper trumps the syntactical difficulties presented by the juxtaposition of the second and third person subjects. Their reasoning is as follows: because Yahweh can (and often does) play the role of enemy and helper, it is likely that Yahweh is playing both roles in the worshipper’s life in the present context. In contrast, Goldingay believes that it is much more likely that the worshipper is addressing their enemy (the nations) as if they were present, “perhaps as if captured and paraded

124.  Seybold, Die Psalmen, 460. 125.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 304. 126.  DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, The Book of Psalms, 868.

106

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

before Israel” (see, e.g., 1 Sam 15).127 In this reading, it is the enemy, not Yahweh, who pushed the worshipper down.128 Verses 14–18 “excitedly goes over the ground of avowal and report already traversed” in the worshipper’s stories.129 The psalmist uses familiar language from the song of victory in Exodus 15 in order to aid the process. Verse 14 begins the section with a quotation of Exod 15:2a, and with it, a call to the “community’s historical memory.”130 Yah became my strength and (my) protection, and he became salvation for me.

A large portion of the psalm is bracketed by this memory, demonstrated by the fact that the line appears again at the conclusion of the liturgical dialogue in Ps 118:28. Hossfeld and Zenger conclude, “It is thus clear that the whole song in Exod 15:1–18 is the hermeneutical horizon within which Psalm 118 is to be understood.”131 Indeed, as Mark notes, the interpretive contexts of both texts are bound together, for they both exemplify how Yahweh rescues his own people from a seemingly hopeless situation.132 In Exodus, Yahweh rescues Israel from Egyptian servitude. In the psalm, Yahweh rescues the worshipper from the nations, whether they are real or imagined. The intertextual allusion to Exodus helps to focus the worshipper’s praise in Psalm 118 as well as the worshipper’s instruction: just as Yahweh delivered in the past, Yahweh delivered me, here, now, from my enemies. The past, in other words, is invading the present. As a result, the exodus becomes a paradigm for the worshipper’s experience. Their deliverance is viewed through the lens of the “Exodusmotiv,”133 and they tell their story in such a way that the audience is encouraged to view their experiences through this lens as well.134 Israel’s tradition is filled with examples of Yahweh’s faithfulness and rescue in the past. And collectively, these accounts each inspire the belief that Yahweh will exemplify similar characteristics again for a different 127.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 359. 128.  See also Rodd, Psalms 73–150, 84. 129.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 166. 130.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 508. 131.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 239. 132.  See Mark, Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 459. 133.  Ibid., 494. 134.  Mark dates Ps 118 fairly late, and as a result, he identifies a number of intertextual allusions in this composition. See the charts in Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 239, 269.

4. Psalm 118

107

people, in a different context, at a different time. Martin Luther summarized, “For God does these wonders which are prefigured in the Red Sea to anyone.”135 Stated another way, the God of the exodus “continues to effect a series of new exoduses” in the minds of the ancient Israelite worshipping community.136 This does not mean, of course, that the exodus is devoid of historical importance as an event in its own right. Nor does it mean that the exodus event is a type, merely awaiting future fulfillment(s). Neither the psalmists (in particular) nor Israel (in general) anticipated another exodus event. But the tradition did serve as the basis for Israel’s hope. When it seems as though Yahweh had abandoned Israel or that Yahweh’s purpose for this people had come to an end, the psalmists look back to God’s mighty deeds of old and claim them as the pattern of what will happen in the future as well… Again and again, it is God’s powerful rescue of his people in the Exodus that provides the template: the sign of what his power can do, and the pledge that it will happen again when Israel needs it.137

The power and faithfulness of Yahweh that was demonstrated in this pivotal moment in Israel’s redemptive history allowed the worshipping community to expect Yahweh’s deliverance in smaller sufferings as well. And this is what we find in Psalm 118. Hossfeld and Zenger and Vesco suggest that the phrase, “in the tents of the righteous” (‫)באהלי צדיקים‬, forms another possible intertextual allusion, this time to the Israelites’ camp during their wilderness wandering.138 Read on its own, this claim is debatable, but in view of the psalmist’s use of Exodus 15 in the surrounding context, it is not out of the realm of possibility. In fact, it would have been quite plausible for an ancient audience that the literary and thematic echoes of this event would have “leaped the gap,” to use Richard Hays’s helpful image.139 135.  Cited in Brian Brock, Singing the Ethos of God: On the Place of Christian Ethics in Scripture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 176. 136.  For this phrase, see J. Clinton McCann Jr., Judges, IBC (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2011), 63. 137.  N. T. Wright, The Case for the Psalms: Why They Are Essential (New York: HarperOne, 2013), 59–60. 138.  See Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 240; Vesco, Le Psautier de David: II, 1107. 139.  See Hays, The Moral Vision of the New Testament, 298–304; Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 33.

108

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

The appeal to Yahweh’s right hand in v. 16 is more straightforward. It is an undeniable echo, for it uses “the language of the Exodus tradition.”140 Hossfeld and Zenger recognize that the meaning of this image is different in the present context. In Exodus, it conveys Yahweh’s power, evidenced, most notably, in the violent deliverance of Israel from Egyptian servitude (see Exod 15:6, 12), whereas in the psalm, it emphasizes “Yhwh’s saving power.”141 The worshipper clarifies the redemptive force of the divine arm as the poem continues, I did not die; I lived. And I will recount the deeds of Yah. Yah really chastised me, but he did not give me over to death.

The change of paths envisioned here makes explicit what has been underneath the surface the entire time: Yahweh’s deliverance was a deliverance from death to life. This is an accurate and moving summary of the events preceding this moment. The worshipper is claiming, “I was in narrow straits, but I lived; I was surrounded by all nations, but I lived; they were like bees, like a fire among thorns, but I lived; Yahweh did not give me over to death, I lived.” This is the story the worshipper recounts (‫)ספר‬. And this is the story they invite their audience into. Again, the past is invading the present. The great tradition of Yahweh’s past actions provides a framework for understanding Yahweh’s present deliverance. The message to the audience is clear: Yahweh continues to work on our behalf. Trust in Yahweh. Verse 18 admits, “Yah really chastised me” (‫)יסר יסרני יה‬. This line explicitly indicates Yahweh’s involvement in the ordeal, but it does not clarify what this chastisement entailed. The use of this verb does not denote retributive punishment, as if the worshipper was being disciplined for wrongdoing. Neither does the psalm itself make any indication that the worshipper’s narrow straits were due to their sinfulness. Instead, the verb refers to an action that is designed to teach. The experience of chastisement was intended to be instructive. “Yah put the [worshipper] under severe pressures to drive him to learn the lessons the psalm referred to,”142 lessons about Yahweh’s character, such as: Yahweh is good; Yahweh is committed; Yahweh hears and responds; Yahweh helps and

140.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 508. 141.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 240. 142.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 360.

4. Psalm 118

109

rescues. And now, through storytelling, the worshipper intends to teach the worshipping community these same lessons, “to invite the congregation to enter the narrative and encounter again the God who comes to deliver and so renew the confession: ‘The Lord is my strength and my might; he has become my salvation’ (v. 14).”143 Verses 19–28 McCann writes, “Verses 19–28 have several features of a public worship service, including indications of alternating voices and a liturgical procession.”144 The worshipper begins with a request of admission into the temple court (or perhaps, into the city gates, depending on how one understands the phrase, “the gates of righteousness” or “the faithful gates”145). As the poem makes clear, this request is made so that the worshipper can confess Yahweh’s goodness and commitment formally, in the presence of the worshipping community. This rite may have involved a tôdâ-sacrifice, but the text does not specify. The historicity of such a procession is also in question. Gerstenberger, for instance, notes that it may have been imaginary or symbolic. He appeals to a modern ecclesiastical parallel in order to substantiate the point, “[O]ur congregations today as a rule do not move from their seats when singing an introit or advent songs of the coming of the Lord.”146 Even so, he concludes that originally it would have been customary to “call on the doors of the temple to open.”147 The content of Psalm 118 makes it comparable to other entrance liturgies, such as Psalms 15 and 24. Kidner writes of vv. 19–20, “These two verses are a pair: a challenge and counter-challenge like those of Psalm 24.”148 Whatever the relationship is between these psalms,149 Psalm 118 constructs a liturgical ritual involving different voices. Hossfeld and Zenger write,

143.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 508. 144.  McCann, NIB 4:1154. 145.  See, e.g., David Hamidović, “ ‘Les portes de justice’ et ‘la porte de YHWH’ dans le Psaume 118, 19–20,” Bib 81 (2000): 542–50. 146.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 305. 147.  Ibid. 148.  Kidner, Psalm 73–150, 449. 149.  See, e.g., Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 241; Walter Beyerlin, Weisheitlich-kultische Heilsordnung: Studien zum 15. Psalm, BThSt 9 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1985); Thomas Podella, “Transformationen kultischer Darstellungen: Toraliturgien in Ps 15 und 24,” SJOT 13 (1999): 95–130.

110

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms The (imagined) scenario in vv. 19–21 takes place in three steps: First the “I” who told of his rescue in vv. 5–18, asks in v. 19 that “the gates of righteousness” be opened to him…, so that he can bring the tôdâ-sacrifice for his rescue. Another voice (Temple personnel: priest?)…answers with a solemn declaration that only the “righteous,” that is, those shown by Yhwh (through their being saved) to be righteous, those who worship him alone (cf. v. 28) may enter. To this the “I” answers in v. 21 with the announcement of his sacrifice, grounded in a repetition of vv. 5b and 14b, in the typical style of thanksgiving psalms.150

The officiant’s response in v. 20 addresses the worshipper’s initial request “point by point.”151 The gate in question is identified as “the gate belonging to Yahweh” (‫)השׁער ליהוה‬. Goldingay avers that this designation does not indicate a gate leading to Yahweh (cf. Allen,152 Hossfeld and Zenger,153 Seybold,154 NJPS), for this would assume that Yahweh is located “inside not outside, whereas the [worshipper] knows that Yhwh has been present outside, acting to deliver.”155 Therefore, the phrase is more accurately rendered, a gate belonging to Yahweh,156 where only the faithful (‫ )צדיקים‬may enter. Allen contends that the designation, “the faithful,” does not qualify potential worship participants morally or ethically. He writes, “[T]he victory attests the covenant status and consequent right to enter the court of the temple that is associated with the maintenance of the covenant relationship.”157 The morality of the worshipper, then, can be assumed in light of the outcome. Because the worshipper has been delivered, they must be part of the covenant family. Clifford reads the line differently. He writes, “One must be righteous, that is, have a record of obeying the commands of the Lord.”158 I am not certain that these two views are mutually exclusive. In fact, they seem to be saying the same thing. There is a moral component in the psalm. Whether it is assumed or stated, the worshippers must exhibit faithfulness to enter.

150.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 241. 151.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 167. 152.  Ibid., 162 n.20.a. 153.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 230 n. o. 154.  Seybold, Die Psalmen, 458, 460. 155.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 361. 156.  Mark, Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 496, notes a potential association with “Heaven’s Gate” in Bethel in Gen 28:17. 157.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 167. 158.  Clifford, Psalms 73–150, 207.

4. Psalm 118

111

The voice of the community responds in vv. 22–27. In vv. 22–24, their response represents a “theological interpretation of the event of rescue narrated in vv. 5–18.”159 They begin by constructing the literary image of building a house: “The stone the builders rejected, it has become a cornerstone” (v. 22). This line may have been a well-known proverb. To understand it demands some knowledge of ancient building practices, where builders would test stones to determine their best use. In the psalm, “A stone thrown away by the builder is taken by Yhwh, as the master builder, and is even placed as a very important stone in his building—to the surprise and astonishment of those who have seen or see the whole thing.”160 Scholars debate the use of the ‫ ראשׁ פנה‬as an architectural term. It may have functioned as a cornerstone, headstone, top stone, or coping stone, among other options.161 This seems to miss the point. The image is used to demonstrate the unlikely or unexpected rescue of the worshipper from death to life. Mays concludes, “The deliverance of the celebrant was as much a surprise as finding that a stone cast aside by builders as useless turned out to fit exactly as the cornerstone, the most important component of the building.”162 The use of this image evokes another issue, namely, why was the worshipper rejected in the first place? This may be an overreading of the community’s proverb, but it adds a new layer to the plight of the worshipper. Throughout their story, there has been no talk of communal (or divine) rejection. For those who identify the worshipper as Israel’s king, they conclude that the community is here intimating a discernment of “divine providence in the unlikely royal reversal,” which culminated in their military victory.163 The rejection the king faced was on a national scale, brought about by the hands of their enemies. Others, following the suffering servant motif in Isaiah 52–53, have identified the rejection as messianic: the maligned member of the community turns out to be the “chosen ‘lamb of God.’ ”164 This sort of reading certainly influenced the early Christian community and their application of the text to Jesus (Mark 12:10–11; Acts 4:11; Eph 2:20–21; 1 Pet 2:4–8). Another option, however, is to view this rejection as a metaphor for the worshipper’s suffering and eventual acceptance as a form of rehabilitation. The 159.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 241. 160.  Ibid. (emphasis original). 161.  On the interpretive options, see Cahill, “Not a Cornerstone!” 162.  Mays, Psalms, 377. 163.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 167. 164.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 306.

112

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

worshipper may have been marginalized or held in contempt, perhaps even by the community itself, but with Yahweh’s rescue, restoration has now become a reality. In vv. 23–24, the community continues to describe the worshipper’s experience: rescue has come from Yahweh (v. 23a); it is viewed as marvelous in their eyes (v. 23b); it is cause for rejoicing and gladness (v. 24b). The verbal root in ‫פלא( נפלאת‬, “marvelous”) occurs in Exod 15:11, thus inviting another link to Yahweh’s past actions. “The deliverance the leader has confessed can only be seen as something extraordinary, supernatural, wonderful, in continuity with the Red Sea deliverance celebrated in the Song of Moses.”165 In this echo to the past, the congregation subtly acknowledges their historical memory and affirms, along with the worshipper, Yahweh’s ongoing redemptive work. The deliverance experienced here is an exodus of sorts, and as a result, it functions paradigmatically as a “marvelous act of hope.”166 This is cause for celebration. Kraus summarizes a large swath of scholarly thinking, when he writes, “Verse 24 celebrates a festival day under the banner of jubilation and joyful shouting.”167 According to this reading, it is the day, not Yahweh or Yahweh’s work, that is to be celebrated. Adele Berlin has called this view into question in her insightful re-reading of v. 24. She writes, “[I]t is not a day, even a special day, that is the subject of this psalm: it is God’s actions.”168 Thus, the line is best read, This is the day Yahweh has acted; let us rejoice and be glad in it (i.e., what Yahweh has done).

The community is celebrating the fact that Yahweh has acted, that Yahweh has rescued, both in the past (in the exodus) and now (in the life of the worshipper). This certainly fits the overall message of thanksgiving. It is about Yahweh and Yahweh’s work. The line also invites communal participation—Yahweh’s work in the life of the worshipper should be celebrated. Again, the implication may be that another day is coming when Yahweh will act on behalf of others in the community. The story that is retold here becomes their story too. This is made clear in what follows.

165.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 362. 166.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 509. 167.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 400. 168.  Berlin, “Psalm 118:24,” 567.

4. Psalm 118

113

Verse 25 shifts to a communal petition. It is surprising, but it holds an important structural function in this third and final section of the poem. In fact, Hossfeld and Zenger claim that it is at the center of the concentric composition in vv. 19–28 (vv. 18–21 [A], 22–23 [B], 24 [C], 25 [D], 26 [C], 27a [B], 27b–28 [A]).169 It is the hinge of the third section— communal involvement, communal participation, communal blessing. The centrality of this line suggests that only in light of what has happened, in light of what they now know, the community can request deliverance: Please, Yahweh, please save; please, Yahweh, please give success.

This may be odd for a thanksgiving, but perhaps the community’s moment of suffering has not passed. Perhaps other individuals in their midst need their own wide-open space. Perhaps it is simply a request born out of the realization that Yahweh is continually needed. Mark suggests that v. 25 is an eschatological petition to Yahweh for a final or definitive success in the future.170 Mark seems to overplay the eschatological significance of the psalm, but he is right to view the petition as the community’s request for future deliverance(s). The verbs used in v. 25 do not specify an object. The worshipper simply cries out: “save, give success.” Such interpretive ambiguity allows for various proposals, which, as we have seen throughout this study, is one of the points of Israel’s thanksgivings. “The import of verses 26–27 is obscure.”171 Most likely, the blessing offered here signals a return back to the situation of the worshipper, who has provided the community with a tangible example of divine power. Their retelling should inspire continued trust in Yahweh, and as a result, the worshipper is blessed for the role they now play in the community. Goldingay avers that the blessing is also demonstrative of a dissemination of power. The blessing issues from Yhwh’s house, not from the priestly office.172 Many are involved. The corporate participation in the psalm’s liturgy commends its applicability (and formative value) as well.

169.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 242. See also Mark, Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 260–69. 170.  Mark, Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr, 268. 171.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 509. 172.  See Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 363.

114

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

The congregation concludes its participation in the liturgy with a confession of faith: “Yahweh is God” (v. 27a). This claim is fundamental. It serves to identify a people and provide a basis for their theology and ethics. The community explicates the nature of Yahweh by adding, “he has shone light on us.” Most commentators call attention to the line’s potential fulfillment of the Aaronic blessing (Num 6:24–26). Because of Yahweh’s deliverance, the worshipper has experienced light, not darkness, life, not death. What is interesting to note in this line is the community’s use of the plural pronoun, “he has shown light on us.” Once again, the intimation is made clear—the worshipper’s story becomes, in some meaningful way, the community’s story. They benefit, on the one hand, from the experience of deliverance that restores one of their own to the community, but they also participate in the experience, and if not now by receiving deliverance in a literal sense, then certainly in the future. “Thus v. 27 seems to express the people’s confidence in God’s illuminating presence in the midst of their current need.”173 This elicits a cultic response in the next line. [B]ind the festal offering with cords, up to the horns of the altar.

Allen notes that this line “is an exegetical crux because of the ambiguity of two of the nouns and the uncertain meaning of the verb.”174 It could be read: “bind the festal sacrifice with cords” or “bind the festival dance with branches.” Commentators have not reached a consensus view with regard to the line’s meaning, though it is at least clear that the community engages in a cultic act of celebration and thanksgiving in response to the worshipper’s story. Brueggemann and Bellinger provide a way forward. They focus less on the specific meaning of the line in their interpretation and more on its import. They thus conclude, “[P]erhaps the reference is to the one who was delivered and that person’s testimony of thanksgiving has brought renewed hope for the congregation, which celebrates now, even in the midst of a continuing time of trouble and petition.”175 The poem’s liturgical section concludes with the worshipper’s response, which, according to Hossfeld and Zenger, appeals to both Exod 15:2b and Isa 25:1 in order to bring the thanksgiving ritual to its completion: You are my God and I will give you thanks; my God and I will lift you high. 173.  McCann, NIB 4:1155. 174.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 163 n.27.a. 175.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 509.

4. Psalm 118

115

Verse 29 The psalm ends with a restatement of the hymnic exhortation that was offered as an introit in v. 1. Or, as Seybold claims, it is an antiphone with which the psalm arcs back to the beginning.176 The line, then, offers a fitting conclusion to the poem. In light of all that has been heard (and said), Give thanks to Yahweh because he is good, because his commitment lasts forever.

Conclusion: The Storied Ethics of Psalm 118 The worshipper creates a world for their audience in Psalm 118 through the narrative retelling of their experience of lament, petition, and divine rescue. As such, the psalm’s story provides a witness to several important elements of the ethos of the ancient worshipping community. Because of Yahweh’s decisive and timely response to the worshipper’s prayer, their commitment is renewed. They have learned firsthand that Yahweh is for them, so they place their trust in Yahweh over against other leaders. Yahweh has proven to be a helper. Yahweh has empowered the worshipper to fend off numerous, surrounding enemies. Yahweh has become their strength and protection. In the psalm, this results in the worshipper’s individual thanksgiving, a thank offering made in public worship, but it also results, somewhat expectedly, in the worshipper’s invitation for others to join in. In light of their experience, the worshipper encourages fellow worship participants to renew their commitment as well, to place their trust in Yahweh, to believe that Yahweh can become a helper for them too. The community accepts this invitation in its (purported) liturgical response at the conclusion of the poem. The impact of the worshipper’s experience, therefore, is not limited to the worshipper alone. It is didactic. It is exemplary. It is potentially transformative and charactershaping for its audience. Commitment to Yahweh becomes a reasonable response in light of Yahweh’s goodness and faithfulness. In fact, the stories of Israel’s past are affirmed and reappropriated in this testimony, and the community is called to live and worship accordingly. In a very real sense, the retelling of the worshipper’s experience helps to set the context for ethical action.

176.  Seybold, Die Psalmen, 461.

116

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

This recollection also provides an example of prayer voiced in the midst of lament. Brock notes that a plea of this sort—in all of its desperation—is the root activity of faith.177 Indeed, the worshipper’s (very) terse, one-word prayer gives voice to their faith. In addition, it brings awareness to the dialogical and personal nature of prayer. Yahweh is called upon, summoned even, and expected to respond in accordance with the presentation of Yahweh’s character in Israel’s traditions. As such, the worshipper’s prayer indicates their reliance on the theological commitment that Yahweh can and will act. As a result, it is informed and shaped by a sense of expectancy and hopefulness. As we have already seen, this sort of disposition is an important aspect of the ethos of thanksgiving. It is part of the sustaining context that the worshipper creates for the ethical life of the community. It guides their worship and their spirituality. As with Psalm 116, the retelling of the worshipper’s story also provides the community with an example of gratitude. The worshipper’s life has been shaped by their experience, by Yahweh’s response and rescue, so they give thanks formally in the setting of public worship. But this response is not merely cultic. The worshipper claims that the experience will (hopefully) continue to shape them into a grateful people in the future, both inside and outside of the cult. The effect, then, is not momentary. It is ongoing. It is life-changing. Consequently, the worshipper’s presentation of this narrative has the ability to reorient the lives of the community as well, perhaps even without having to go through the same ordeal. They are encouraged to enter into the narrative, to make the worshipper’s story their own, to set their life within this story, and in so doing, become a people characterized by their commitment, trust, hope, and gratitude. With this in mind, it is fair to summarize the resulting ethos of Psalm 118, more generally, as an ethos of possibility. This is also true of Psalm 116, but this aspect is heightened in Psalm 118 due to the worshipper’s inclusion of significant intertextual allusions to Israel’s past. The God of the exodus still redeems, still rescues, still guides, still protects. In fact, the worshipper believes that Yahweh has exemplified these characteristics in this recent situation. As a result of this association between past and present, the audience is challenged to believe that something similar is possible for them too. The God of the exodus becomes the God of the exoduses, and the worshipper’s rescue affirms this possibility. The community’s prayers, therefore, should be laced with expectancy and hope because the significance of past events is not confined to the past. The past, rather, is a template for Yahweh’s ongoing redemptive work. 177.  Brock, Singing the Ethos of God, 178.

4. Psalm 118

117

Israel’s collective memory shapes its identity and ethic (or more generally, its ethos). Summarizing one of Nietzsche’s arguments in his work, Genealogy of Morals, Jan Assman concludes, “Man needs a memory in order to live in community.”178 And indeed, for ancient Israel, their memory was determinative both for who the community believed Yahweh is (and will be) and who they aspired to become—in character and in deed, in disposition and in habit. This is particularly so because Israel’s past was constantly rehearsed and reappropriated. Scholars have argued that how (and where and why and the extent to which) such communal remembering takes place demonstrates something profoundly important—what a community believes about its past informs and shapes its members in the present. Markus Witte writes, The way in which society reflects on its past, the way in which it shapes the inner space of its memory, the way in which it constructs its own history in creative act, and the way it makes it enriching for its present, all reveal essential characteristics of a society’s cultural profile, of the structure of meaning that determines it, and of its identity.179

To use MacIntyre’s words, this communal memory or remembrance functions as the story into which a society must place itself if it is to know how it must act. And they must do so continually. In Psalm 118, the worshipper’s appeal to the exodus (and potentially other events and contexts) is a reflection on the past, and the association between these events and the worshipper’s present experience testifies to the past’s ongoing relevance. It continues to shape and form the community’s theology and ethics. But the psalm not only depends on Israel’s collective memory, it actually participates in it. The retelling of the worshipper’s experience has become a memory itself—a memory of answered prayer, a memory of divine rescue—and its proposed use and re-use in Israel’s worship provides further evidence for the ethical instruction and character-shaping function of memory and remembering. In the same way that the exodus provided a template for Yahweh’s ongoing redemptive activity, the record of the worshipper’s experience does as well. Toni Craven writes, “In the Psalms…there is not a single prayer… 178.  Jan Assmann, Religion and Cultural Memory: Ten Studies, trans. Rodney Livingstone (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2006), 53. 179.  Markus Witte, “From Exodus to David – History and Historiography in Psalm 78,” in History and Identity: How Israel’s Later Authors Viewed Its Earlier History, ed. Núria Calduch-Benages and Jan Liesen, DCLY 2006 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2006), 21–42 (21).

118

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

that doesn’t depend upon something remembered about self, community, or God.”180 The audience, therefore, is guided by what scholars refer to as an ethos of memory or an ethos of remembering, and again, this is part, a significant part no less, of Israel’s sustaining environment and context, which allows them to live an ethical life. The past must not be forgotten. The Old Testament attests to this over and over. Without these testimonies, the worshipping community’s identity would be confined to the past, and along with it, the relevance of its God. The worshipper’s retelling in Psalm 118 allows the audience to view Yahweh in the present and perhaps more importantly, it allows them to identify Yahweh’s redemptive work as ongoing. Regardless of circumstance, they are one prayer away from divine intervention, from deliverance and rescue. This is the sort of character that is potentially shaped by the worshipper’s story—a believing, committed, prayerful, and hopeful follower of Yahweh. And it is within the framework established by this story that Israel’s ethic finds its true expression.

180.  Toni Craven, “Remembering the Past in the Psalms,” in Performing Memory in Biblical Narrative and Beyond, ed. Athalya Brenner and Frank H. Polak, Bible in Modern World 25, Amsterdam Studies in Bible and Religion 3 (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2009), 24–34 (24).

Chapter 5 P s a l m 138

As the Psalter comes to a close, Psalm 138 introduces a final group of Davidic psalms (Pss 138–145).1 Because this group is set immediately before the book’s grand doxological conclusion in Psalms 146–150, Brueggemann and Bellinger postulate that its head psalm, Psalm 138, “provides something of a summary of the thanksgiving in the book of Psalms.”2 Consequently, they argue that the poem has a vested hermeneutical interest: “The composition asks the community of hearers/readers to remember and experience again the steadfast love and trustworthiness of YHWH as seen in the book of Psalms.”3 Psalm 138, in other words, functions as something of a summary statement on the genre of thanksgiving in the Psalter. Mays posits a similar conclusion. He writes, “The psalm is…a sound guide to the meaning and practice of thanksgiving by the redeemed.”4 Both of these commentaries seem to suggest that the canonical placement of the psalm invites sustained reflection on the ethical instruction and underlying ethos of Psalm 138, but also the ethical instruction and underlying ethos of Israel’s thanksgivings as a whole. Following this logic, an examination of Psalm 138 provides an appropriate conclusion to the present study. It serves as a capstone to our brief analysis of the didactic function and ethical value of story and storytelling in the thanksgiving psalms.

1.  See Klaus Seybold, Studien zu Sprache und Stil der Psalmen, BZAW 415 (Berlin: de Gruyter 2010), 221–43. On the role of David in Psalms 138–145, see Harm van Grol, “David and His Chasidim: Place and Function of Psalms 138–145,” in Zenger, ed., The Composition of the Book of Psalms, 309–37. 2.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 578. 3.  Ibid. 4.  Mays, Psalms, 425.

120

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

In keeping with the outline that has structured the preceding chapters, I begin with a translation of Psalm 138, followed by a discussion of any introductory issues that may impact its interpretation. I then turn to my proposed ethical interpretation of the psalm. And I conclude the chapter with a few summative remarks on the storied ethics of Psalm 138. Translation (1) For David. I will give you thanks5 with all my heart,6 before the gods,7 I will make music for you. (2) I will bow down to your holy temple, and give your name thanks for your commitment and for your faithfulness because you have exalted above everything your name, your word.8 (3) On the day I called, you answered me. You awakened9 strength in me, in my spirit. (4) All the kings of the earth will give you thanks, Yahweh, because they have heard the words of your mouth. 5.  Some Hebrew manuscripts (e.g., 11QPsa) and ancient versions (e.g., LXX, Syr., Tg.) add ‫ יהוה‬to clarify the recipient of the worshipper’s thank offering (cf. Ps 9:1 [2]). Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 526–27 n. a, suggest that the omission was probably intentional and contributed toward a sense of “preparatory suspense” for the first mention of Yhwh in v. 4. 6.  LXX adds, ὅτι ἤκουσας τὰ ῥήματα τοῦ στόματός μου (“because you heard the words of my mouth”). Allen, Psalms 101–150, 311 n. 1.b, postulates, “Most probably it was originally a marginal correction of the Greek of v 4b, dispensing with the extra πάντα, ‘all’; it was wrongly attached to v 1 because of the similarity of the verbs of thanksgiving in vv 1a, 4a, and the 3 pl. verb and 2 sg. suf. were adapted to suit the new context.” 7.  LXX translates ‫ אלהים‬as ἀγγέλων. 8.  The MT is difficult. Literally, it reads, “you have made your word great above all your name.” Some choose to reread ‫“( שׁמך‬your name”) as ‫“( שׁמיך‬your heaven”), rendering the line, “you have made your word great above all your heavens.” Others read ‫ כל‬as an absolute (instead of the MT’s construct) and insert ‫ ו‬before the final noun, “you have made your word and your name great above everything.” 9.  The meaning of the verb, ‫רהב‬, is disputed. HALOT includes the following options: “to drive on, to storm”; “to make bold, give confidence, fill with pride”; “to frighten, scare, alarm.” The Greek and Latin traditions preferred to emend the text to read ‫רבה‬, which connotes the meaning, “to increase.” Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 527 n. d, note that the lectio difficilior is to be preferred.

5. Psalm 138

121

(5) And they will sing of Yahweh’s ways: “Yes,10 Yahweh’s glory is great. (6) Yes, Yahweh is on high, but he sees the lowly; and the lofty,11 he acknowledges from afar.” (7) Though I walk in the midst of trouble, you give me life; on account of my enemies’ wrath, you stretch out your hand, you deliver me (with)12 your right hand. (8) Yahweh will bring it to an end13 on my behalf. Yahweh, your commitment lasts forever. Do not let go of14 the works of your hands.

Genre, Singer(s), Date, and Structure Genre Most commentators argue that the content of Psalm 138 provides clear signs of its genre. Perhaps the most notable is the psalm’s introductory declaration to give thanks in v. 1.15 Gerstenberger summarizes the 10.  In distinction from the use of ‫ כי‬in v. 4b (as introducing a motive clause), the conjunction in vv. 5b–6b “introduces a hymnic shout” (Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 398). 11.  Alter, Psalms, 477, “The Hebrew syntax also allows a different construction, ‘the Lofty [One] from a distance knows,’ but that adjective (gavoah) is not generally used as an epithet for God, and the pairing of antithetical objects to the verb in each half of the line is much more in keeping with biblical poetic practice.” 12.  The MT does not include a preposition. 13.  The meaning assigned to the verbal root has caused some confusion. Some commentators, e.g., Allen, Psalms 101–150, 312 n. 8.a, are unsatisfied with the traditional reading: “A transitive force has traditionally been assigned to ‫גמר‬, ‘come to an end,’ here and in Ps 57:3, and most modern versions follow suit; in both cases the difficult ellipse of an obj. ‘what he has begun, his purpose’ has then to be assumed.” For Allen, the lack of a specific object is unsatisfying, so he follows the early translations (LXX, Tg.) and the perceived use of the Ugaritic stem gmr in translating the verb, “to act as an avenger.” (See also Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 281–82; idem, “The Root GMR in the Psalms,” TS 14 [1953]: 595–97.) HALOT also acknowledges the validity of this sense, but suggests that the verb root, in this context, refers more broadly to Yahweh’s activity on behalf of the worshipper. The conclusion that Yahweh will bring the worshipper’s time of trouble (v. 7a) to an end, therefore, is perfectly legitimate. 14.  Alter, Psalms, 478, “The verb hirpah means to relax the muscles of the hand so that what it holds is dropped or released.” 15.  See, e.g., Allen, Psalms 101–150, 312; Alter, Psalms, 476; Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 577; deClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, The Book of Psalms, 958; Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 506; Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 616; Mays, Psalms, 424; McCann, NIB 4:1231.

122

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

general consensus by acknowledging that the opening verb “is a fitting introduction to an individual thanksgiving psalm.”16 Other characteristic elements also contribute to this classification, including the worshipper’s story of divine deliverance and their consequent invitation to the audience to join in with a thanksgiving of its own. As we have seen throughout this study, these elements characterize Israel’s thanksgivings, and as a result, the classification of Psalm 138 has not occasioned much debate. Hossfeld and Zenger provide an exception. They claim, “The traditional genre designation ‘individual song of thanksgiving’ does not apply to the individual form of this psalm.”17 While they acknowledge that certain formal elements of thanksgiving are present, they also observe that the account of rescue in this psalm is “thin and rather general.”18 It is not, at least in their mind, a typical retelling when compared to other stories in the genre. This may be true, but in response, it is also often the case that the stories offered in the thanksgiving psalms are terse and ambiguous. It could even be stated that this characteristic is the point, for as we have seen throughout the present study, a story’s lack of specificity encourages audience involvement and participation. When it is sung or recited or prayed, the worshipper’s story becomes the community’s story precisely because the form and/or content of the story itself does not rule out potential reappropriations due to its specificity. Instead, participants can effectively (and at times, quite easily) take the place of the unnamed “I.” Such an interpretive opportunity is certainly true of Psalm 138, which claims, “On the day I called, you answered me. You awakened strength in me, in my spirit” (v. 3). A weightier discrepancy working against the genre identification of Psalm 138 as an individual thanksgiving is the confession of trust in vv. 7–8. Hossfeld and Zenger suggest that this formal element would be much more comfortably placed in a lament psalm. As a result, they conclude, “[O]ne could call this psalm a prayer of thanksgiving and confession.”19 The psalm’s genre, in other words, is mixed. As we will see, this classification is unnecessarily specific. While Hossfeld and Zenger are correct to acknowledge the oddity of this particular confession of trust, which culminates in a petition to Yahweh, the inclusion of the formal element itself should not be limited only to lament psalms. The thanksgiving psalms often encourage trust, even in adverse situations. The worshipper is simply giving voice to this reality in Psalm 138. 16.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 397. 17.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 528. 18.  Ibid. 19.  Ibid.

5. Psalm 138

123

Gerstenberger appeals to modern analogies in order to explain the relationship between thanks and trust. He writes, “Any type of anniversary in our culture provokes thanksgivings for times past and wishes for a continued blessed time and experience. The same is true in Israelite thanksgiving. In our case, new troubles and anxieties are realistically expected (v. 7).”20 With the addition of the worshipper’s resolve to trust, Gerstenberger argues that the psalm approaches life with realistic expectations. Conflict and difficulty, even if they are held at bay momentarily, will certainly return. Thanksgiving is temporary, and at some point, it must give way to petition.21 Admittedly, Gerstenberger’s rationale is highly speculative, perhaps even bordering on anachronistic, but his interpretive conclusion aligns with one of the themes of thanksgiving throughout the Psalter. The experience of divine deliverance shapes the character of the worshipper. Because Yahweh has rescued in the past, the worshipper believes that Yahweh will rescue again. And this provides the grounds for thanksgiving. An affirmation of trust, though it might not be regularly appended to a thanksgiving psalm, certainly fits thematically with the rest of the genre. What has happened to the worshipper reorients them toward hope, and their life—their worship, their obedience, their commitment, and their petition—should provide evidence of this. Despite all odds, the worshipper is characterized by trust and this trust, as it is expressed in Psalm 138, has led to an expectation to give thanks again and again. Singer(s) and Date With the genre identification of Psalm 138 largely settled, a more vibrant scholarly debate has surrounded the proposed identity of the individual who is offering thanks. This is largely due to the worshipper’s address to “all the kings of the earth” in v. 4. For many readers, the invocation to world leaders and rulers to give thanks and sing to Yahweh indicates that the speaker must be in a similarly influential position, perhaps functioning as a king or governor. Dahood is one of the most ardent advocates of the speaker’s royal identification.22 Unsurprisingly, he bases his argument on epigraphic discoveries of the early twentieth century, which he believes clearly reveal that the poem is a “royal psalm of thanksgiving.” He claims that the “words, parallelisms, and poetic devices” of Psalm 138 “find their closest counterparts in the Ugaritic 20.  Gerstenberger, Psalms 2, 399. 21.  See Goldingay, Psalms 1–41, 67–69. 22.  See also Mowinckel, Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 2:29, 32; Eaton, Kingship and the Psalms, 63; Croft, Identity of the Individual, 38, 131.

124

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

tablets and in some tenth-century psalms, so a date in the Davidic period seems reasonable.”23 If it is reasonable to date the psalm in the period of the Israelite monarchy, Dahood suggests it is also reasonable to assume the psalm’s intended use by an Israelite king. In contrast, Seybold concludes that it is unlikely that the singer was the king.24 He prefers a much more general term to identify (or better, characterize) the singer—“the pray-er” (“Der Beter”). Much earlier, Kraus also rejected the conviction “that Psalm 138 must have been sung by a king,” labeling the view a “mistaken” interpretation.25 He provides three arguments to substantiate this position. In order to frame our discussion, I will take each in turn. The first concerns the setting of the psalm, which, according to v. 2, is outside the temple, perhaps in the temple forecourt. An external setting is problematic for the proposed royal use of the psalm because a king would have most likely offered thanks inside the temple. Kraus writes, “A king does not worship before the gates of the temple (v. 2).”26 Advocates of a royal reading of Psalm 138 have attempted to address this difficulty, though not satisfactorily. Dahood surmised that the worshipper’s location indicates that the king “must have been absent from Jerusalem on a military expedition.”27 This would explain why the king intended to bow down toward the temple and not in the temple—he was not there. He was off fighting battles. Eaton formulated a slightly better argument, claiming that thanksgiving songs were sometimes offered near the great altar, which was located outside the temple. The direction of the offering in v. 2, therefore, would not necessarily preclude kingly participation.28 Goldingay proposes a different solution altogether, though he is not motivated by the identification of a royal singer in Psalm 138. He argues that the worshipper’s thank offering probably took place inside the earthly temple. The directional specification refers, instead, to Yahweh’s heavenly temple, which is where the divine court (including the gods in v. 1b) is seated.29 Each of these proposals is somewhat speculative. And while the certainty that pervades Kraus’s conclusion is clearly overstated, v. 2 does raise important interpretive obstacles for the identification of a royal singer. 23.  Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 276. 24.  Seybold, Die Psalmen, 512, “Daß er selbst König war, ist unwahrscheinlich.” 25.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 506. 26.  Ibid. 27.  Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 277. 28.  Eaton, Kingship and the Psalms, 63. 29.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 617.

5. Psalm 138

125

Kraus’s second argument is based on the consideration “that in the Psalter words that really could be spoken only by a king were positively taken up by members of the community.”30 This argument is based on the purported use of the psalm. Even if it was originally composed by a king or intended for kingly use, the psalm would probably go through what Allen calls “a democratizing process whereby members of the community took over expressions properly and originally spoken by a king.”31 On this reading, the psalm is not just for kings. It has universal validity and universal application. Indeed, as we have seen throughout this study, the widespread use of a psalm is characteristic of Israel’s thanksgivings. The worshipper’s story of deliverance may have been originally based on a specific event, but its import is not limited to that event. The worshipper’s story becomes the entire community’s story because “Yahweh’s salvation is for the whole world.”32 And Psalm 138 is no exception. Kraus’s third argument against a royal identification of the singer focuses on the date of the psalm. In contrast to Dahood, Kraus claims that the psalm is “relatively late, probably postexilic”33 due to the assumed influence of Deutero-Isaiah on this composition. If the psalm was composed during this period, its intended use by a king would be practically impossible, for the monarchy had already been disrupted. The majority of modern commentators agree with Kraus’s postulation of a postexilic date. Mays writes, “[T]he psalm can be understood as a general song of praise by the restored community in the postexilic period, written under the influence of the prophets whose words are gathered in Isaiah 48–66.”34 McCann agrees, but he appeals to a canonical interpretation to support this view. The message of Psalm 138, he claims, “is in keeping with the apparent purposes of Books IV–V to address the crisis of exile and its aftermath.”35 Hossfeld and Zenger also cite the psalm’s canonical setting in order to defend a late date: “The opening Psalm 138 leads us into the world of the fifth Davidic Psalter: it is shaped by the situation of the exile.”36

30.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 506. 31.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 313. 32.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 508. 33.  Ibid., 506. 34.  Mays, Psalms, 424. 35.  McCann, NIB 4:1231. 36.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 533. See also Seybold, Die Psalmen, 512.

126

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

Despite its (seemingly) widespread acceptance, a postexilic date cannot be held with certainty. Seybold favors a late date for many of the same reasons listed above, but he acknowledges that the concrete circumstances surrounding the psalm are difficult to reconstruct.37 Goldingay appears even less certain. He observes that the psalm’s “only pointer to a date” is its placement among other postexilic psalms, which, he claims, is tenuous at best. In addition, the proposed influence of Isaiah 40–66 is difficult to prove, especially when it is realized that many psalms include language and themes similar to Psalm 138.38 Brueggemann and Bellinger note another textual issue that might pose a problem for a late date: the speaker’s deliverance in v. 3 could be viewed as an allusion to “the aftermath of exile,” but the worshipper is back in “the midst of trouble” (v. 7) by the end of the poem.39 This is an odd transition for a postexilic thanksgiving psalm, but it is not something that is unable to be overcome. Trouble still arose during the postexilic period, even if it was not on a national scale. The oscillation between deliverance and potential danger in the psalm could also reflect a theological and ethical purpose. McCann summarizes it in this way: “[W]e shall always find ourselves simultaneously professing God’s deliverance (v. 3) and praying for God’s deliverance (v. 8c)—‘thine is the kingdom’ and ‘thy kingdom come.’ ”40 All of this leads to a sense of uncertainty regarding the identity of the singer and the date of the psalm. In this chapter, I understand the voice of Psalm 138 as “the song of a person who speaks in identity with the community or is the personified community.”41 I do not assume, based on v. 4, that the worshipper must have been a king or governor or some other representative leader. And even if the psalm was originally intended for royal use, Mowinckel rightly notes that “the boundary line between private and public occasions of distress, and between public (royal) psalms of thanksgiving and private ones, is rather fluid.”42 Little would be gained by limiting the psalm’s voice to Israelite royalty. Other singers, royal and otherwise, have been invited in to participate in this offering and they have responded with raised voices throughout the psalm’s history of interpretation. In this sense, the psalm has proven to be communal; it is not just for kings. 37.  See Seybold, Die Psalmen, 512. 38.  See Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 616. 39.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 577. 40.  McCann, NIB 4:1233. 41.  Mays, Psalms, 424. 42.  Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 2:36.

5. Psalm 138

127

Regarding the date of the psalm, I follow most modern commentators by placing the composition (tentatively) in the postexilic period, though the issues cited above should be duly considered. Thankfully, the dating of the psalm does not significantly alter its ethical import, and that is what I intend to assess in this chapter. Structure Before moving on to my interpretation of the psalm, it is important to comment briefly on its structure. Hossfeld and Zenger simplify the issue: “The division of the psalm into three sections or strophes is universally acknowledged.”43 To be fair, the perceived scholarly unanimity that is presented in this statement is somewhat exaggerated,44 though the sections of the psalm are often identified as vv. 1–3, 4–6, 7–8.45 In this reading, the first section (vv. 1–3) begins with an articulation of the worshipper’s intent to give thanks, which is followed by an expanded theological rationale for their announced offering and the actual “substance of thanksgiving,”46 the retelling of the worshipper’s experience of deliverance. The second section (vv. 4–6) is a “hymn summoning kings to join in praising Yahweh’s greatness.”47 The anticipated response of these kings should accompany the thanks offered in the presence of “the gods” in the first section. “Yhwh’s honor is to be acknowledged on earth as it is in heaven.”48 The third section (vv. 7–8) is the affirmation of the worshipper’s trust, apparently voiced in the midst of ongoing trouble. This affirmation doubles (albeit implicitly) as an invitation to the community to

43.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 527. 44.  Grogan, Psalms, 216, divides the psalm at vv. 1–3, 4–5, 6–8, perhaps following the division in some modern English translations (see NIV). Pierre Auffret, “Tu Me Feras Vivre – Étude Structurelle du Psaume 138,” OTE 18 (2005): 472–81, also offers a differing perspective. He identifies two major sections: vv. 1–6 and vv. 7–8. See also Pierre Auffret, “L’Étude Structurelle des Psaumes Réponses et Compléments II (Pss. 61, 77, 82, 100, 138, 147),” Science et Espirit 49 (1997): 39–61 (53–58). 45.  See Allen, Psalms 101–150, 314; Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 577; deClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, The Book of Psalms, 958; Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 616–21; Gunkel, Die Psalmen, 583–84; Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 527; Kidner, Psalms 73–150, 497–500; Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 506–8; Mays, Psalms, 424; McCann, NIB 4:1231–32; Seybold, Die Psalmen, 512–13. 46.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 578. 47.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 312. 48.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 618.

128

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

“trust that YHWH will bring hope out of crisis and thereby make thanksgiving and faith possible.”49 The didacticism of the psalm is highlighted in this final section. DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner follow this proposed structural division, but they argue that the poem is not divided by formal markers—the parts of an individual thanksgiving (e.g., introduction, narrative, conclusion)—“but rather the groups referred to by the psalmist in the verses of the hymn.”50 Verses 1–3 focus on “the gods,” vv. 4–6 on “the kings of the earth,” and vv. 7–8 on “enemies.” They claim that these referents provide natural breaks in the flow of the poem. Allen observes that there are also literary and thematic hooks that confirm this division. He writes, The central strophe is bound together as a unit by the fourfold mention of the divine name, held back until now and savored with pride, and the threefold occurrence of ‫כי‬, “when, that, for.” Around it cluster the other two strophes, linked by the motif of deliverance from distress (vv 3, 7). ‫חסדך‬, “your loyal love,” functions as a framing and parallel element (vv 2, 8), while the repetition of ‫שׁמך‬, “your name,” in v 2 corresponds to that of ‫יד(י)ך‬, “your hand(s),” in vv 7–8.51

Thus, the psalm is presented as a tightly knit unit. It could even be argued that the psalm reflects a chiastic structure, which would place an emphasis on the central section (vv. 4–6). Weber highlights this feature, claiming that the universal scope of the second stanza is purposefully placed at the center of the poem.52 The psalm looks forward to the day when all kings will give thanks to Yahweh. The worshipper’s story contributes to (and longs for) the fulfillment of this reality. In the exposition of the psalm that follows, I employ this structural division (vv. 1–3, 4–6, 7–8) and hope to make use of the diverse models that affirm these poetic breaks.

49.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 579. 50.  DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, The Book of Psalms, 958. 51.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 314. 52.  See Beat Weber, Werkbuch Psalmen: Die Psalmen 73 bis 150 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2003), 339 (cited in Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Die Psalmen 3: 101–150, HThKAT [Freiburg: Herder, 2008], 832).

5. Psalm 138

129

Interpretation Verses 1–3 In the poem’s introductory section, the worshipper describes the process of thanksgiving by the use of three verbs: “I will give you thanks” (‫)אודך‬ in v. 1a, which also occurs as a cohortative in v. 2b, “I will make music for you” (‫ )אזמרך‬in v. 1b, and “I will bow down” (‫ )אשׁתחוה‬in v. 2a. Brueggemann and Bellinger observe that these three verbs are characteristically found in Israel’s thanksgivings, and when taken together, they provide a summary of the cultic activity involved.53 They also demonstrate the worshipper’s whole-body response to Yahweh’s intervention. First, the internal aspects of thanks are acknowledged. The worshipper involves their whole heart in the process (v. 1a). This qualifier echoes well-known, Deuteronomic rhetoric (see, e.g., Deut 6:5).54 Its closest parallel in the Psalter is Ps 9:2a, which states, “I will give thanks to Yahweh with all my heart” (‫)אודה יהוה בכל־לבי‬. In both of these texts, the heart symbolizes “intelligence and intention”55 and “the conscious devotion of the will.”56 To engage these faculties certainly moves the participant (and readers) beyond mere cultic obligation. Thanksgiving is portrayed, instead, as an act involving the entire person, both internal and external, mind and body. As such, the worshipper’s stated intention in the opening verse of Psalm 138 recalls the requirements for worship that are outlined in the so-called entrance liturgies of Psalms 15 and 24. Both of these psalms stress a holistic approach to worship—only those who have clean hands and pure hearts are able to participate. It is clear that in Psalm 138, the worshipper desires to offer a public testimony, to tell the story of their experience to the community, but this external act is matched by the worshipper’s internal motivation and resolve. They are not merely going through the motions. Second, the description of the worshipper’s offering includes musicmaking (v. 1b). This probably occurs with the raising of the worshipper’s voice, though Seybold suggests the process may have also involved instrumentation of some sort.57 Regardless of the details, the worshipper’s musical act would accompany the offering of their storied testimony in this cultic ritual. Mays claims that their song may have been offered in

53.  See Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 578. 54.  See Mays, Psalms, 424. 55.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 578. 56.  Allen, Psalms 101–150, 314. 57.  Seybold, Die Psalmen, 512.

130

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

lieu of an animal sacrifice.58 Crüsemann reached a similar conclusion, viewing the cultic use of the song as a spiritualized sacrifice.59 It is impossible to reconstruct the details surrounding the event. Most commentators, therefore, choose to focus their attention not on the worshipper’s musical contribution but on its setting, which is said to be “before the gods” (v. 1b). As Grogan notes, ‫ אלהים‬has been “variously understood.”60 The LXX tradition translates the term, ἀγγέλων. The Targum offers, “judges.” Rashi reads the term as a reference to the Sanhedrin.61 Some modern translators prefer to interpret ‫ אלהים‬as an appellation of Yahweh, thus rendering the line, “In front, God, will I sing to you.”62 And others still, suggest something a bit more innocuous, “the mighty” (JPS). The most likely interpretation, however, recognizes the polemical tone that is present in the line. To sing to Yahweh in the presence of other gods would give prominence to Yahweh’s sovereignty. It is a way of diminishing rival gods. This is made especially clear when one associates the gods in v. 1b with the deities of the “heathen kings” in v. 4.63 When these gods are included in the worshipper’s audience, in the congregation that will hear their thanks and song and testimony, the message is clearly conveyed that they are not now nor will they ever be Yahweh. These gods are not worthy of thanks, for they did not contribute to the worshipper’s experience of rescue, and they are not worthy of songs because they are imposters. The polemical thrust that heightens Yahweh over any competitor is what fuels the worshipper’s confession. To dwell on the relation between the poetic line and Israel’s commitment to monotheism severely misses the point. Third, the worshipper bows down in adoration (v. 2a). As we have already seen, the direction of this act of prostration has caused some confusion. Why is the worshipper bowing down toward the temple rather than bowing down in the temple? Picking up on our previous discussion, it is best to conclude that this is probably the case because the worshipper is located outside of the temple, even on foreign soil.64 In some expositions, the pursuit of this interpretive issue (and its related

58.  Mays, Psalms, 424. 59.  Crüsemann, Studien zur Formgeschichte, 249–51. 60.  Grogan, Psalms, 216. 61.  See Alter, Psalms, 476. 62.  See Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 397. 63.  Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 276. 64.  See Seybold, Die Psalmen, 512.

5. Psalm 138

131

socio-historical and socio-religious reconstructions) has supplanted the theological and ethical import of the line. This is unfortunate, for it is necessary to recover these emphases rather than speculating on the proposed setting. Bowing down is an act of submission, an act of humility. The worshipper, therefore, enacts thankfulness by positioning their body in an appropriate manner. The internal gratitude that consumes the worshipper’s entire being is matched physically by this act of humility. Kidner writes, “There is a fine blend of boldness and humility from the outset: boldness to confess the Lord before the gods, humility to bow down before him.”65 The worshipper is setting an example for the audience in both of these character traits. In v. 2b, the worshipper again declares their intention to give thanks, though this time, the verb appears in the cohortative form. Goldingay argues that the two different uses of ‫ ידה‬indicate a heightening, with the use of the cohortative in v. 2b denoting a “higher degree of commitment.”66 Whether or not this interpretive effect is achieved by the subtle change in verb form, the line’s inclusion of the object of the worshipper’s thanks (Yahweh’s name) and rationale (Yahweh’s commitment and faithfulness) does serve to further its exegetical value beyond that of v. 1a. McCann writes, “The psalmist is able to present his or her whole life to God, because the psalmist trusts that it is God’s character to manifest ‘steadfast love’ and ‘faithfulness.’ ”67 This characterization, which, again, recalls Yahweh’s self-revelation in Exod 34:6–7, is common throughout the Psalter (see, e.g., Pss 40:11–12; 57:2; 85:10–13; 115:1–2), and it often serves as the basis for potential character formation. The divine activity experienced in the past informs the worshipper’s outlook for the future. These examples inspire renewed trust, expectancy, and hope, and as such, it adds depth to the worshipper’s worship and prayer. Yahweh’s response, in other words, has provided the context or ethos that guides future ethical action. It has created a true and lasting vision of the world that the worshipper and the surrounding community inhabit. Verse 2c develops the description of Yahweh’s commitment and faith­fulness further, though the Hebrew is admittedly quite difficult. A straightforward reading of the MT seems to pit “word” and “name” against each other: “for you have made your word greater than your

65.  Kidner, Psalms 73–150, 498. 66.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 617. 67.  McCann, NIB 4:1232.

132

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

name.” This makes for an odd reading. Hossfeld and Zenger argue that the difficulty “should not be alleviated through conjecture,”68 but their proposal seems to miss the theological import of the line. It is not that Yahweh’s word is greater than Yahweh’s name; it is, rather, that Yahweh’s name and word have both been exalted in the act of rescue. Indeed, the one embodies the other. Commentators suggest that Yahweh’s name refers more broadly to the character that has been revealed in the name.69 Kraus adds, “The ‫שׁם‬ announces the secret presence of Yahweh. Where the ‫ שׁם‬is, there Yahweh himself is with his benevolent attention.”70 Yahweh’s name, then, encompasses who Yahweh is, and, in a sense, what Yahweh does. The meaning of the term, ‫אמרה‬, has elicited much more discussion. Its suggested interpretations range from a salvation oracle,71 a saying (meaning the actual activity of voicing a word rather than the product that is voiced),72 Yahweh’s promise (and fulfillment),73 and the law,74 just to name a few. The context invites the association of the term with Yahweh’s divine rescue, which would suggest some sort of salvific undertone characterizing the word. Again, it is the person and work of Yahweh that is displayed in this rescue and, as a result, is the occasion for thanksgiving. DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner summarize the introduction in this way: “The psalmist gives thanks to, makes music to, and bows down toward God because of God’s name, covenant commitment, and firm reliability.”75 The worshipper enlists the entire body in this effort. The thanks that is offered here is internal as well as external. It is bold as well as humble. It is genuine and loud and celebrative. As such, the worshipper’s stated intention is didactic in nature. It instructs the audience how to give thanks and, ostensibly, how to live in such a way that the spiritual and cultic aspects announced here are reflected in daily life. It provides them with an example to imitate.

68.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 529. 69.  See, e.g., Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 618; Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 529; Seybold, Die Psalmen, 512. 70.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 507. 71.  Ibid. 72.  DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, The Book of Psalms, 960. 73.  Allen, Psalm 101–150, 310; Goldingay, Psalms, 3:618; McCann, NIB 4:1232. 74.  Egbert Ballhorn, Zum Telos des Psalters: Der Testzusammenhang des Vierten und Fünften Psalmenbuches (Ps 90–150), BBB 138 (Berlin: Philo, 2004), 269. 75.  DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner, The Book of Psalms, 959–60.

5. Psalm 138

133

As expected, the worshipper’s thanksgiving offering also includes the retelling of their experience, their story (v. 3). And as expected, it does not focus on the details. Goldingay writes, “At last we get some concrete account of what Yahweh did, though it is still not very specific.”76 The worshipper simply recounts, “On the day I called, you answered me.” There are two distinct interpretations of the initial prepositional phrase, ‫ביום‬. On the one hand, it can mean “on the day,” which signals the timing of Yahweh’s response—on the very day the worshipper petitioned for help, Yahweh answered. Read in this way, the petition/response formula speaks not only to the dialogical nature of prayer, but in this case at least, its immediate results as well. On the other hand, the phrase could also be rendered, “whenever.” This reading certainly changes the dynamic of the worshipper’s thanksgiving. It is no longer based on a specific event; thanksgiving is based on Yahweh’s recurring and ongoing answer to prayer, which occurs “whenever the worshipper calls.” The former reading seems to fit the context better, so I have chosen to adopt it here. The next line reveals that Yahweh’s response involved an awakening of the worshipper’s strength. We are not told what this entailed, nor are we told why added strength was needed. Brueggemann and Bellinger simply state, the life of the speaker was “emboldened or exalted with strength or refuge.”77 It could be argued that this was the result of answered prayer. After benefiting from Yahweh’s deliverance (whatever that may have been), the worshipper became courageous—in prayer, in worship, in obedience, in life. Or it may be that this divine strength was added in the midst of the worshipper’s situation, that is, it arrived in order to sustain them or even bring about their deliverance from danger or difficulty. Whatever the case may be, it appears that the worshipper has been changed by this experience; its effects were not momentary or fleeting. As we will soon see, the worshipper undertakes “to live a life of trust in the midst of the dangers of history.”78 Verses 4–6 The second section of the psalm introduces a significant shift in tone and content. Most notably, the worshipper here identifies the “you” that had been featured as the recipient of the thanksgiving offering in vv. 1–3 as Yahweh. This divine naming, which was already clearly implied in the preceding section, occurs four times in three verses. Hossfeld and 76.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 618. 77.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 578. 78.  Mays, Psalms, 425.

134

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

Zenger suggest that the specification became necessary at this point in the poem due to the universal scope of vv. 4–6.79 The worshipper envisions Yahweh’s words reaching all the kings of the earth, an act that would (or should) result in their giving thanks, though not to their gods (see v. 1b), but to Yahweh. Allen writes, So overwhelming is the psalmist’s sense of wonder and indebtedness that he transfers his thanksgiving theme to a broader canvas. He is painfully aware of the inadequacy of his little contribution of praise to so great a God. Surely nothing but the concerted thanksgiving of the monarchs of the earth could approach the praiseworthiness of this unique God (cf. v 1) whose habit it is both to promise and to perform, manifesting transcendent power.80

The progression from the worshipper’s thanksgiving to that of the surrounding community (and beyond) is representative of the didactic nature of the thanksgiving genre. The worshipper’s storied testimony is an example to be followed. Indeed, “[O]ne person’s confession comes also to be expressed by others who hear what Yahweh has done for that person.”81 The psalm does not clarify how these kings will hear Yahweh’s words, nor does it specify what words comprised this message. This inquiry may rest on an overly literalistic interpretation of the psalm, but some scholars have pursued it nonetheless. Hossfeld and Zenger, for example, propose that the content focused either on the prophets’ prediction of Israel’s fate or, as the exaltation of Yahweh’s word in v. 2b suggests, the torah.82 Following Buysch, they conclude that a torah connection is most plausible.83 They note that the qualifier, “your mouth” (‫)פיך‬, occurs seven times in the Psalter, but only four times with reference to Yahweh. Other than its present use in Psalm 138, the other three occurrences are found in Psalm 119 (vv. 13, 72, 88), each time describing the torah (or some derivative thereof). The intonation of the psalm, then, is that hearing the torah will elicit the praise of foreign kings. Despite the psalm’s literary connection with Psalm 119, Dahood proposes that the kings will be moved to action, not due to a presentation of the torah (whatever that might entail), but due to their hearing of the 79.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 529. 80.  Allen, Psalm 101–150, 315. 81.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 618–19. 82.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 529. 83.  See Christopher Buysch, Der letze Davidpsalter: Interpretation, Komposi­ tion und Funktion der Psalmengruppe Ps 138–145, SBB 63 (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2010), 32.

5. Psalm 138

135

retelling of Yahweh’s redemptive activity in the worshipper’s story.84 Read in this light, the words spoken to the kings are roughly synonymous with Yahweh’s initial response to the worshipper’s plea (vv. 2c–d) and the terse narrative of its fulfillment (v. 3). Therefore, the worshipper’s storied retelling is what will provide the impetus for the kings’ thanksgiving. As such, story and ethics are united. The kings will be moved to action, to transformation, due to the worshipper’s story. Alter suggests that the universal scope of vv. 4–6 is “in keeping with a reiterated theme of Deutero-Isaiah.”85 The kings’ thank offering in the psalm envisions their future alignment with Yahweh, which is a key theme in the later chapters of Isaiah (see, e.g., Isa 49:7, 23; 52:5; 60:10). It should be noted that this is also a key theme in the Psalter. In Psalm 2, for example, kings are admonished to serve Yahweh with trembling (v. 11). In so doing, they will avoid Yahweh’s anger (v. 12). In Psalm 72, the suppliant petitions Yahweh to make all kings bow down before the Davidic king, Yahweh’s representative (v. 11). It is difficult to deduce the worshipper’s expectations surrounding the hoped-for result in Psalm 138—if the kings’ submission to Yahweh’s sovereignty will, in fact, happen or if it is something that should happen. Either way, a sense of anticipation seems to inform the worshipper’s testimony here, and it provides a much more likely foundation for the universal scope of the poem than Grogan’s hypothesis, in which he identifies the cause of the spread of Yahweh’s redemptive activity among foreign kings as David’s expansive reign. He claims that the message came to these kings because David was “an international figure, an emperor ruling subject peoples.”86 Such a reading places undue stress on a hypothetical historical reconstruction. Not only should the kings give thanks, but according to v. 5a, they should also sing of Yahweh’s ways. This line indicates “that the kind of praise that is signified by the kings’ confession requires music for its affective significance. Mere words are not enough, as is the case for the person for whom Yhwh has directly acted (v. 1).”87 Again, the worshipper has provided an example of gratitude that is to be emulated by others, this time, on an international scale.

84.  See Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 278. 85.  Alter, Psalms, 477. See also Allen, Psalm 101–150, 314–15; Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 506–8; Mays, Psalms, 424. 86.  Grogan, Psalms, 216. 87.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 619.

136

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

The juxtaposition of the singing described in Psalm 138 and that of its canonical predecessor, Psalm 137, is worth mentioning. In Psalm 137, Israel was unable to sing “Yahweh’s song” (‫ )שׁיר־יהוה‬while in a foreign land, but in Psalm 138, foreign kings are instructed (and perhaps, expected) to sing.88 As Seybold observes, a new hymn “breaks the silence.”89 Quite a change has taken place in the span of one psalm. This might speak to the postexilic context of Psalm 138—the aftermath of exile, as Brueggemann and Bellinger call it—but the point should not (and need not) be pressed too hard. Instead, the importance should be placed on the psalm’s anticipated goal—universal acknowledgment of Yahweh. The phrasing of Ps 138:5a is odd,90 and as a result, there is some interpretive ambiguity surrounding the prepositional phrase, ‫בדרכי יהוה‬. Commentators observe that the phrase could denote the content or theme of the kings’ song (what they will sing about Yahweh’s ways) or its location (where they will sing91). Hossfeld and Zenger prefer the latter because they claim that the content of singing is typically indicated by “the particle ‫ ְל‬or the accusative.”92 Attributing a locative sense to this line, however, is not immune from its own set of difficulties. Even Hossfeld and Zenger are forced to reduce the interpretive import of the phrase to metaphor, arguing that it “recalls the Deuteronomic–Deuteronomistic metaphor of the way.”93 Their reading, then, does not truly reflect the location of the kings’ song. A more straightforward reading views Yahweh’s ways as the content or theme of the royal song, that is, they will sing about Yahweh’s ways. As such, v. 5a develops the thought of the poem by now identifying Yahweh’s actions and character as praiseworthy, in addition to Yahweh’s words (v. 4b). Because Yahweh has heard the worshipper’s petition and responded swiftly in both word and deed, celebration should ensue. Verses 5b–6 elaborate further on the description of Yahweh’s ways: Yahweh’s glory is great; Yahweh is on high, but sees the lowly; Yahweh acknowledges the lofty (or the proud) from afar. It is probably best to view these three lines as the content of the kings’ song.94 They sing: 88.  See Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 579. 89.  Seybold, Die Psalmen, 512. 90.  Dahood, Psalms III: 101–150, 278, notes that the construction ‫ וישׁירו‬followed by ‫ ב‬is a hapax legomenon. 91.  See, e.g., Michael D. Goulder, The Psalms of the Return (Book V, Psalms 107–150): Studies in the Psalter, IV, JSOTSup 258 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1998), 233–34. 92.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 530. 93.  Ibid. 94.  Ibid. See also Seybold, Die Psalmen, 512.

5. Psalm 138

137

“Yes, Yahweh’s glory is great. Yes, Yahweh is on high, but he sees the lowly; and the lofty, he acknowledges from afar.”

Several points deserve our attention. First, Yahweh’s glory is highlighted (v. 5b). The line echoes Isa 40:5, which anticipates a day when the glory of Yahweh (‫ )כבוד יהוה‬will be revealed and all will see it “for the mouth of Yahweh (‫ )פי יהוה‬has spoken.” The kings’ public confession of Yahweh’s glory depicted here envisions the fulfillment of this day. Second, Yahweh is described through the use of transcendent language: Yahweh is on high; Yahweh acknowledges from afar (v. 6). Thankfully, this spatio-temporal reality does not impede Yahweh’s involvement. Yahweh still sees the lowly, and Yahweh still acknowledges the lofty, though, as we will see, the context indicates that the latter is not a favorable action. Hossfeld and Zenger claim that the parallelism of v. 6a between Yahweh and the ‫ שׁפל‬is not meant to contrast the exalted nature of the divine and the inherent lowliness of people on an ontological level. Rather, it highlights Yahweh’s “specific interest in the lowly/poor.”95 Their lives are not overlooked, despite Yahweh’s position. On the surface, such a theological conclusion should have inspired the ancient worshipping community. And they should have lived (and prayed and worshipped) differently because of it. Goldingay adds, third, that the divine accommodation envisioned here represents an ideal for kingship—the king should not be so far removed that he is unable (or unwilling) to engage the neediness of even the lowliest citizen.96 The worshipper’s story provides an example of this from a divine perspective. And, as is often the case in Israel’s thanksgiving, it is not confined to the past; it is paradigmatic. The divine accommodation in v. 6a defines Yahweh’s character. Similar expressions should be anticipated in the present and future, and as such, the worshipper’s story draws people in. Kraus writes, “The miracle of the condescension of ‘God Most High’ to the lowly, when it is beheld in one single case as an example, draws all the mighty as witnesses to join in the praise and thanksgiving.”97 The import is not merely to join in a chorus of praise, however. It also, and perhaps more importantly, elicits change. The call is to be the type of person that Yahweh sees, to be lowly and broken and humble. Brueggemann and Bellinger write, “YHWH, who is above

95.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 530. 96.  See Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 620. 97.  Kraus, Psalms 60–150, 508.

138

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

all, comes down to those who are lowly and troubled and raises them up to new life—in contrast to the arrogant (v. 6), who will not publicly claim their pain and seek divine help.”98 Fourth, Seybold calls attention to the character of the referents in v. 6: Yahweh is merciful to the lowly, but sees through the powerful.99 Apart from the worshipper’s anticipation of the universal acknowledgment (and confession) of Yahweh, therefore, v. 6b exhorts readers (albeit implicitly) to avoid arrogance or pride and, instead, model humility. Certainly, this is a virtue that should be highlighted in a discussion of Israel’s ethos. Consistently throughout the thanksgiving psalms, the worshipper commends humility to the audience, at times even suggesting that this is a foundational characteristic for ethical action. Indeed, Yahweh responds when the suppliant exemplifies true humility. This is the world that the worshipper creates, a world that, as Brueggemann notes, may be in contrast to the political world outside of the temple, but a true vision of the world no less. The model presented here, then, is worthy of consideration. Verses 7–8 The worshipper’s thank offering returns in v. 7 to direct address, petitioning Yahweh to deliver yet again. The resolution that was depicted in vv. 1–3 has apparently passed, but the worshipper still walks “in the midst of trouble” (v. 7a).100 It may be that the difficulty never ended or that it was a “continued situation of distress.”101 The petition might also speak to the cyclical reality of life and its incessant movement from times of orientation to disorientation to reorientation. Still, as we noted at the outset, this is an odd shift for a thanksgiving psalm. The type of narrative that is retold and celebrated throughout the genre characteristically concludes with healing, deliverance, and rescue, not enemies, impending danger, and trouble, even if it is imagined or anticipated. Psalm 138 is unique in making this turn, though, as I suggested previously, the inclusion of an affirmation of trust and petition in vv. 7–8 may be indicating a higher truth. Thanksgiving eventually gives way to 98.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 579. 99.  See Seybold, Die Psalmen, 512–13. 100.  Goldingay, Psalms 90–150, 620–21, reads vv. 7–8 as an affirmation of trust that when trouble arises (as it certainly will), Yahweh will deliver. “This is what the psalm expects for the future,” not what the worshipper presently endures. (See also, Allen, Psalms 101–150, 315.) I have elected to read this section differently, with suffering as an ongoing issue, based on the psalm’s concluding petition: “Do not forsake the work of your hands” (v. 8c). 101.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 530.

5. Psalm 138

139

lament; resolution gives way to conflict; rescue gives way to suffering. The worshipper believes that Yahweh is present and willing to rescue again and again regardless of circumstance. “Trouble never disappears, but neither does YHWH.”102 The concluding section of the psalm affirms these two realities. The relentless presence of Yahweh can be recognized here because of the worshipper’s previous experience of rescue. This story has shaped the worshipper’s outlook and, hopefully, that of the surrounding worshipping community and even its royal audience abroad. Because of what Yahweh has done, Yahweh is described as the giver of life, the one who delivers people from enemies with an outstretched right hand. The worshipper is confident that Yahweh will work on their behalf to bring this time of trouble to an end as well (v. 8a). Indeed, they believe that Yahweh will not give up until this becomes a reality.103 Once again, theology is informing ethical instruction. Confidence in Yahweh’s person and work provides the sustaining context in which the worshipper’s ethical life takes root. It allows the worshipper to trust, to pray with expectancy, to hope. Ultimately, Mays concludes that this theological understanding allows the worshipper to “to live a life of trust in the midst of the dangers of history…knowing that what the Lord has begun in them he will surely bring to completion.”104 Put another way, it allows the worshipper to live God’s story rightly. The character-shaping process is not just an inference to be drawn from the psalm. It is also evidenced in the worshipper’s description of Yahweh’s gift of life. It is ongoing; it is “both a present reality and yet something that awaits fulfillment.”105 In theological terms, this gift is both already and not-yet. It is experienced, but it is not final. And in a similar way, the deliverance the worshipper will receive is also ongoing. Indeed, it must be, for trouble is persistent. As Brueggemann and Bellinger note, it never disappears. “The divine right hand of deliverance,” therefore, “continues to reach out to those in crisis and anxiety.”106 The psalm, both in its presentation of the worshipper’s story in the poem’s introduction and in this, its concluding petition, commends the belief that Yahweh will respond, while also depicting this expected divine activity as an ongoing need for the worshipping community. Yahweh brings trouble to an end, 102.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 579. 103.  See Seybold, Die Psalmen, 513. 104.  Mays, Psalms, 425. 105.  McCann, NIB 4:1232. 106.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 579.

140

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

but now, it is only momentarily. This grace should elicit thanksgiving when it is experienced and prayer when trouble arises. The dynamic nature of thanks and lament in the psalm seems to reflect the nature of trust. It defies circumstance, and it allows worshippers to remain centered in the midst of disaster or celebration. As I have argued throughout, this is part of Israel’s ethos, a foundational part, in fact, without which it would be impossible to live rightly. The psalm expresses the worshipper’s trust by way of a liturgical formula: “Yahweh, your commitment lasts forever” (v. 8b). This line recalls, among other things, the refrain of Psalm 136, which praises the demonstration of Yahweh’s commitment in Israel’s past. In Psalm 138, however, it is the worshipper’s experience both in the past and in the future that is cited as the pertinent evidence of this theological tenet.107 As with Psalm 118, there is a link between Yahweh’s great and mighty deeds in Israel’s redemptive history and the deliverance of the worshipper. This association reinforces the universal application of Israel’s past and the worshipper’s experience. It is available to others. The psalm teaches that “our salvation is not first of all and only for our sake but it is also and foremost the revelation of the coming kingdom of God.”108 It is for the kings in far off lands. It is for the enemies that will ultimately confess Yahweh is Lord. It is for the members of the worshipping community. And it is for the worshipper in future situations.109 The worshipper then closes the psalm with a petition, “Do not let go of the works of your hands” (v. 8c).110 Alter suggests that the metaphor intimated here, that the worshipper is Yahweh’s handiwork, implicitly depicts Yahweh as a potter, “who is implored not to loose his hand and allow what he has made to fall and shatter.”111 If this interpretation is followed, the function of Yahweh’s hands has shifted from a potentially destructive force enlisted as the agent of punishment against the worshipper’s enemies in vv. 7b–c to now shaping and molding and creating in v. 8c. Once again, this petition can only be made on the basis of the worshipper’s underlying ethos: Yahweh is committed and faithful; Yahweh is present and responsive; Yahweh is transcendent and immanent; Yahweh

107.  Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 3, 531. 108.  Mays, Psalms, 425. 109.  See Seybold, Die Psalmen, 513. 110.  Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, 399, notes the occurrence of “similar peti­ tions for protection and blessing in noncompliant psalms” in Pss 90:13–17, 104:35, and 139:19–24. 111.  Alter, Psalms, 478.

5. Psalm 138

141

gives life; Yahweh rescues; Yahweh will bring trouble to an end. These theological commitments, which have been evidenced in the psalm’s story of divine deliverance, inform the worshipper’s prayer, their worship, their cultic obligations, and they affirm the worshipper’s trust going forward. Collectively, there are many witnesses to the fact that Yahweh continues to work in the lives of this community, and as such, the community should strive to live in light of it. Conclusion: The Storied Ethics of Psalm 138 Many of the same ethical themes that we have already seen in Psalms 116 and 118 recur in this psalm. Again, this is largely due to a shared narrative structure in the thanksgiving psalms as a whole: the worshipper calls to Yahweh, Yahweh answers, the worshipper gives thanks. Psalm 138 clarifies, as do the preceding psalms, that this experience of rescue has shaped the worshipper. Trust has been earned and it is now placed in Yahweh despite adverse (and ongoing) circumstances. This is so because Yahweh has acted in the past, because Yahweh has proven to be the person that the worshipper (and the worshipping community) expected Yahweh to be. Specifically, the worshipper in Psalm 138 affirms the community’s guiding theological claim(s) in their celebration of Yahweh’s ‫( חסד‬which, according to v. 8, lasts forever) and Yahweh’s ‫אמת‬. The psalm even seems to suggest that it is a commitment to this underlying theology that works to create the sustaining environment and context in which ethical action can take place. The framework that it provides, or the world that it creates, is one in which Yahweh answers (v. 3a), Yahweh awakens strength (v. 3b), Yahweh sees the lowly (v. 6a) and acknowledges the lofty (v. 6b), Yahweh gives life (v. 7a), Yahweh delivers (v. 7c), Yahweh puts suffering to an end (v. 8a). Brueggemann and Bellinger conclude, “In a sense, Psalm 138 is a simple summary of Israel’s faith, but it is still powerful, because it reflects faith in a world of chaos knocking at the door.”112 This world of chaos is confronted head on with the worshipper’s (re)affirmation of Yahweh’s sovereignty. The vision of the world that is presented in this psalm, therefore, subverts what appears to be. Chaos is knocking at the door, but Yahweh has demonstrated deep commitment throughout the worshipper’s ordeal. This implies that Yahweh’s acts of commitment are ongoing, everlasting, and, ultimately, available. As we have seen in Psalms 116 and 118, the worshipper’s story should inspire faith and trust in Yahweh’s commitment. It should inform the future prayers of the worshipping 112.  Brueggemann and Bellinger, Psalms, 579.

142

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

community. Yahweh’s involvement in the life of this individual should become a paradigm for what might be, and as such, it should lead to an expectation of similar redemptive activity in diverse situations. Their story should lead to hope. The universal scope of Psalm 138 sets it apart from Psalms 116 and 118. The example of the worshipper and the power of their testimony is not confined by nationalistic boundaries. Their story provides a different (and better) vision of the world even for foreign kings who worship rival gods. According to the psalm, this vision is compelling and good, and it will ultimately elicit a thank offering from its distant, regal audience. When this occurs, kings declare that Yahweh’s glory is great, that Yahweh is concerned for the lowly and acknowledges the lofty. The implication is that the kings should surrender their status and live, instead, as those humbled before Yahweh. There is much to be learned from Psalm 138. Its claims are deeply theological and as a result, deeply ethical. The psalm instructs readers and hearers to trust in Yahweh regardless of circumstances, to expect Yahweh to work, to commit themselves to enacting the proper cultic requirements with all their heart, with boldness and humility, and to tell the story, Yahweh’s story, rightly with their lives. The psalm also suggests that such a testimony will yield great results. It will melt the hearts even of foreign kings. It will shape and form its audience so that prayers will be offered with the expectation of Yahweh’s response. The conclusion of the psalm also provides a realistic vision of the world. It is not simply a narrative that recounts need–rescue–thanks. In the worshipper’s return to need, to the announcement of their concluding petition, Psalm 138 broadens its scope. Indeed, if the Psalter works to subvert one’s vision of the world through worship, as Brueggemann suggests, the subversion cast in this psalm is that the story does not always end with thanks. It might end with petition, with pleading. But thankfully, Yahweh’s ‫ חסד‬lasts forever, and as such, Yahweh will work to put suffering to an end. As Wenham states, the Psalter puts very powerful words on readers’, singers’, and pray-ers’ lips.113 Psalm 138, in its imaginative construction of what has been, what is, and what will be, certainly invites its audience into a dangerously subversive world. It requires imagination to anticipate the expansive reign of Yahweh and to live under it when foreign powers threaten to overtake you. It requires boldness to accept the sovereignty of Yahweh in the midst of yet another trial. If Brueggemann and Bellinger 113.  See Wenham, “Prayer and Practice in the Psalms,” 290.

5. Psalm 138

143

and Mays are correct in seeing this psalm as a summation of the thanksgiving genre, the articulation of thanks demands a constant reorientation to the true vision of the world, to trust in the midst of lament, to pray expecting a divine response, to give thanks regardless of circumstance knowing that Yahweh can and hopefully will deliver, to “live faithfully to the story of God”114 despite the cost. Indeed, this is what the worshipper is inviting the audience into and the acceptance of this invitation demands character transformation.

114.  Hauerwas, A Peaceable Kingdom, 29–30.

C on cl u s i on

Despite the rapid growth in the number of studies dedicated to the ethics of the Psalter in recent years, the thanksgiving psalms have yet to occasion much reflection. One possible reason for this omission is the relative newness of scholarly interest in the field of Old Testament ethics, which began to take off in the early 1990s, and the ethics of the Psalter, which has only really started to gain traction in the last ten years. There is still much work to be done in both fields of study and the continued ethical assessment of the thanksgiving psalms should be included on this list. Perhaps a more significant reason for the thanksgiving psalms’ lack of attention is the genre’s overwhelming concern for the worshipping community’s proper enactment of its cultic practices and the development of its spirituality. Even though the Old Testament regularly identifies both of these traits as important aspects of the life that Israel should/ could live or should/could have lived, the majority of studies in Old Testament ethics and the ethics of the Psalter seem to separate cultic and spiritual concerns from the “real work” of ethical analysis—interpersonal relationships, law-keeping, social justice—perhaps even relegating them to subsidiary or second-tier concerns. In this study, I have suggested that a comprehensive view of Israel’s ethical life must include the cultic—it must include prayer, sacrifice, thanksgiving, storytelling, participation in liturgical enactments, vow-keeping and vow-fulfillment—and it must also involve the internal motivations, desires, and dispositions that inform these acts. In addition, a comprehensive view of Israel’s ethical life must also include a discussion on relevant spiritual traits such as love/ commitment, trust, expectancy, hope, and gratitude, which should remain constant regardless of circumstances. Indeed, both of these important aspects of Israel’s ethical life work together to provide the framework, the sustaining context, the ethos, in which ethical actions can take place. Without proper worship (which is internal as well as external, spiritual as well as cultic), the witness of the Old Testament identifies the ethics of interpersonal relationships, law-keeping, and social justice as inadequate on their own. As a result, I have sought to apply the term “ethos” as an all-encompassing description



Conclusion

145

of the instruction of the thanksgiving psalms. These psalms do not focus on a list of dos and don’ts. Rather, they create a world for their audience to inhabit; they help their audience to see the world rightly through the introduction of a new and true vision of God, the world, and the self that is offered in the worshipper’s story. As Hauerwas suggests, the acceptance of this vision demands change from its audience. The thanksgiving psalms, then, are fully engaged in shaping the character of their audience. Or at least they should be. I have also suggested throughout that a close reading of the thanksgiving genre is aided by the application of a narrative ethical approach. Admittedly, a narrative approach is not so much a methodology as it is a hermeneutical awareness that is guided by the fact that stories— authoritative, communally accepted stories—possess character-shaping potential. The worshipper’s storied testimonies in Psalms 116, 118, and 138, for example, clearly demonstrate the didactic nature of storytelling. These diverse stories are not merely offered to Yahweh for the purpose of thanksgiving, nor are they recorded solely as a historical witness. No, they also instruct their audience by inviting them into the narrative world that their various testimonies construct. And they invite the audience in as participants, asking them to place themselves within God’s story and to learn to tell that story rightly with their lives. Using Gustafson’s description of the ethical function of story, the worshippers’ contribution to the community’s “stock of stories” or “set of stories” in the thanksgiving psalms should work “to sustain the particular moral identity of a religious (or secular) community by rehearsing its history and traditional meanings”; they should “shape and sustain the ethos of the community”; and through the community’s participation in worship and through its regular rehearsal (and reappropriation) of these narratives of need–rescue–thanks, they should “function to give shape to [their] moral characters, which in turn deeply affect the way [they] interpret or construe the world and events and thus affect what [they] determine to be appropriate action as members of the community.”1 To answer the question that was stated at the outset of this study, this is how the retelling of the worshipper’s experience of divine deliverance (their story) intended to shape or reshape and form or transform its audience ethically. Christopher J. H. Wright suggested this as a possible entryway into the study of the Psalter’s ethics, to assess the role of narrative-inworship, and I have attempted to utilize the findings of narrative ethics to aid in this research. 1.  Gustafson, “Varieties of Moral Discourse,” 56.

146

The Storied Ethics of the Thanksgiving Psalms

The second question that framed this study concerned the ethical model that the worshipper’s public testimony (their storytelling) set for the worshipping community. Psalms 116, 118, and 138 have each consistently presented the worshipper as worthy of emulation. When Yahweh answers prayer, give thanks, tell your story in public to the worshipping community with boldness and humility. Beyond this cultic practice, the worshipper is also presented as worthy of emulation prior to their deliverance—in the midst of lament, petition Yahweh to rescue and trust that Yahweh will respond. And after deliverance, the call is to continue to be shaped by the experience, to let it provide a source of reorientation to help weather the storms that are certain to come again. The worshipper, in a sense, provides an image of the ideal Israelite for the audience to consider. They are challenged “to have [this] kind of character rather than another,”2 for the worshipper has had their character formed “appropriate to God’s character.”3 In sum, the thanksgiving psalms represent an important voice in the ongoing story of the ancient Israelite worshipping community. The storied testimonies offered here affirm the framing narratives of Yahweh’s work in Israel’s redemptive history, the narratives that retell Yahweh’s mighty deeds in the events of creation, patriarchs, exodus, wilderness wandering, conquest, judges, kingship, exile, and return. The thanksgivings attest to the fact that Yahweh is involved and that Yahweh responds. Truly, Yahweh’s ‫ חסד‬lasts forever, and this is worth celebrating. For the worshippers, though, this is more than the grounds for thanks; it is the theological basis for their very life. They attempt to live in light of it. And they consistently call the community to live in light of it as well.

2.  Hauerwas (with Burrell), “From System to Story,” 167. 3.  Hauerwas, A Community of Character, 91.

B i b l i og r a p h y

Allen, Leslie C. Psalms 101–150. Rev. ed. WBC 21. Waco, TX: Word, 2002. Alter, Robert. The Book of Psalms: A Translation with Commentary. New York: Norton, 2007. Anderson, A. A. Psalms 73–150. NCBC. London: Oliphants, 1972. Anderson, Bernhard W., with Steven Bishop. Out of the Depths: The Psalms Speak for Us Today. 3rd ed. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2000. Assmann, Jan. Religion and Cultural Memory: Ten Studies. Translated by Rodney Livingstone. Cultural Memory in the Present. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2006. Auffret, P. “Essai sur la structure littéraire du psaume 116.” BN 23 (1984): 32–47. ———. “ ‘Je marcherai à la face de YHWH: Ètude structurelle du Psaume 116.” OTE 1 (1997): 161–77. ———. “L’Étude Structurelle des Psaumes Réponses et Compléments II (Pss. 61, 77, 82, 100, 138, 147).” Science et Espirit 49 (1997): 39–61. ———. Merveilles à Nos Yeux: Ètude Structurelle de Vingt Psaumes dont celui de 1Ch 16,8–36. BZAW 235. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1995. ———. “Tu Me Feras Vivre – Étude Structurelle du Psaume 138.” OTE 18 (2005): 472–81. Ballhorn, Egbert. Zum Telos des Psalters: Der Testzusammenhang des Vierten und Fünften Psalmenbuches (Ps 90–150). BBB 138. Berlin: Philo, 2004. Barré, Michael L. “ ‘My Strength and My Song’ in Exodus 15:2.” CBQ 54 (1992): 623–37. ———. “Psalm 116: Its Structure and Its Enigmas.” JBL 109 (1990): 61–79. Barton, John. Ethics and the Old Testament. 2nd ed. London: SCM, 2002. ———. Ethics in Ancient Israel. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. ———. “Reading for Life: The Use of the Bible in Ethics.” Pages 66–76 in The Bible in Ethics: The Second Sheffield Colloquium. Edited by J. W. Rogerson, P. R. Davies, and M. D. Carroll R. JSOTSup 207. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996. ———. Reading the Old Testament: Method in Biblical Study. Rev. ed. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996. ———. Understanding Old Testament Ethics: Approaches and Explorations. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003. Bauer, Hans, and Pontus Leander. Historische Grammatik der Hebraïschen Sprache des Alten Testaments. Hildesheim: Olms, 1962. Becker, J. “Zur Deutung von Ps 118, 24.” BN 94 (1998): 44–51. Berlin, Adele. “Critical Notes: Psalm 118:24.” JBL (1977): 567–68. Beyerlin, Walter. Weisheitlich-kultische Heilsordnung: Studien zum 15. Psalm. BThSt 9. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1985.

148 Bibliography Birch, Bruce C. Let Justice Roll Down: The Old Testament, Ethics, and Christian Life. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991. ———. “Moral Agency, Community, and the Character of God in the Hebrew Bible.” Semeia 66 (1995): 23–41. ———. “Old Testament Narrative and Moral Address.” Pages 119–35 in Canon, Theology, and Old Testament Interpretation. Edited by Gene M. Tucker, David L. Petersen, and Robert R. Wilson. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988. Birch, Bruce C., and Larry L. Rasmussen. Bible and Ethics in the Christian Life. Rev. and exp. ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1989. Blumenthal, Fred. “Psalm 118.” JBQ 39 (2011): 115–17. Bondi, Richard. “The Elements of Character.” JRE 12 (1984): 201–18. Booij, Th. “Psalm 116, 10–11: The Account of an Inner Crisis.” Bib 76 (1995): 388–95. Botha, Phil J. “Psalm 34 and the Ethics of the Editors of the Psalter.” Pages 56–75 in Human, ed., Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics. Bowman, Richard G. “The Complexity of Character and the Ethics of Complexity: The Case of King David.” Pages 73–97 in Brown, ed., Character and Scripture. Briggs, Charles A., and Emilie Grace Briggs. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Psalms, vol. 2. ICC. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1907. Brock, Brian. Singing the Ethos of God: On the Place of Christian Ethics in Scripture. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007. Brown, William P., ed. Character and Scripture: Moral Formation, Community, and Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. ———. Character in Crisis: A Fresh Approach to the Wisdom Literature of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996. ———. The Ethos of the Cosmos: The Genesis of Moral Formation in the Bible. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999. Bruce, W. S. The Ethics of the Old Testament. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1909. Brueggemann, Walter. Abiding Astonishment: Psalms, Modernity, and the Making of History. Literary Currents in Biblical Interpretation. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991. ———. “Bounded by Obedience and Praise: The Psalms as Canon.” JSOT 50 (1991): 63–92. ———. Isaiah 40–66. Westminster Bible Companion. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998. ———. Israel’s Praise: Doxology Against Idolatry and Ideology. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988. ———. “Psalms and the Life of Faith: A Suggested Typology of Function.” JSOT 17 (1980): 3–32. ———. The Message of the Psalms: A Theological Commentary. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984. ———. “The Psalms in Narrative Performance.” Pages 9–29 in Performing the Psalms. Edited by Dave Bland and David Fleer. St. Louis: Chalice, 2005. ———. Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dispute, Advocacy. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997. Brueggemann, Walter, and William H. Bellinger Jr. Psalms. NCBC. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Buysch, Christopher. Der letze Davidpsalter: Interpretation, Komposition und Funktion der Psalmengruppe Ps 138–145. SBB 63. Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2010.

Bibliography

149

Cahill, Michael. “Not a Cornerstone!” RB 106 (1999): 345–57. Christianson, Eric S. “The Ethics of Narrative Wisdom: Qoheleth as Test Case.” Pages 202–10 in Brown, ed., Character and Scripture. Clements, R. E. “Worship and Ethics: A Re-examination of Psalm 15.” Pages 78–94 in Worship and the Hebrew Bible: Essays in Honor of John T. Willis. JSOTSup 284. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999. Clifford, Richard J. Psalms 73–150. AOTC. Nashville: Abingdon, 2004. Craven, Toni. “Remembering the Past in the Psalms.” Pages 24–34 in Performing Memory in Biblical Narrative and Beyond. Edited by Athalya Brenner and Frank H. Polak. Bible in Modern World 25. Amsterdam Studies in Bible and Religion 3. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2009. Creach, Jerome F. D. “The Righteous and the Wicked.” Pages 529–41 in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms. Edited by William P. Brown. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Crenshaw, James L., and John T. Willis, eds. Essays in Old Testament Ethics. New York: Ktav, 1974. Croft, Steven J. L. The Identity of the Individual in the Psalms. JSOTSup 82. Sheffield: JSOT, 1987. Crüsemann, Frank. Studien zur Formgeschichte von Hymnus und Danklied in Israel. WMANT 32. Neukirchener-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1969. Dahood, Mitchell. Psalms III: 101–150. AB 17a. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1970. ———. “The Root GMR in the Psalms.” TS 14 (1953): 595–97. Davies, Eryl W. “Ethics of the Hebrew Bible: The Problem of Methodology.” Semeia 66 (1995): 43–53. ———. “Walking in God’s Ways: The Concept of Imitatio Dei in the Old Testament.” Pages 99–115 in In Search of True Wisdom. JSOTSup 300. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999. DeClaissé-Walford, Nancy, Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth Laneel Tanner. The Book of Psalms. NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2014. Eaton, John H. Kingship in the Psalms. SBT 32. Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1976. Ehrlich, Arnold B. Die Psalmen: Neu Uebersetz und Erklaert. Berlin: Poppelauer, 1905. Emerton, J. A. “How Does the Lord Regard the Death of His Saints in Psalm cxvi. 15?” JTS 34 (1983): 146–53. Gerhardsson, Birger. The Ethos of the Bible. Translated by Stephen Westerholm. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1981. Repr., Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2005. Gerstenberger, Erhard S. Psalms, Part 2, and Lamentations. FOTL 15. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001. Goldingay, John. Approaches to Old Testament Interpretation. Rev. ed. Toronto: Clements, 2002. ———. Old Testament Theology: Israel’s Life. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2009. ———. Psalms 1–41. BCOTWP. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006. ———. Psalms 90–150. BCOTWP. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009. ———. “The Dynamic Cycle of Praise and Prayer in the Psalms.” JSOT 20 (1981): 85–90. Gorospe, Athena E. Narrative and Identity: An Ethical Reading of Exodus 4. BibInt 86. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Goulder, Michael D. The Psalms of the Return (Book V, Psalms 107–150): Studies in the Psalter, IV. JSOTSup 258. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1998.

150 Bibliography Graham, M. Patrick. “A Character Ethics Reading of 1 Chronicles 29:1–25.” Pages 98–120 in Brown, ed., Character and Scripture. Groenewald, Alphonso. “The Ethical ‘Way’ of Psalm 16.” Pages 501–11 in Zenger, ed., The Composition of the Book of Psalms. Grogan, Geoffrey W. Psalms. THOTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008. Grol, Harm van. “David and His Chasidim: Place and Function of Psalms 138–145.” Pages 309–37 in Zenger, ed., The Composition of the Book of Psalms. Gunkel, Hermann. Die Psalmen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1968. Gunkel, Hermann, and Joachim Begrich. Introduction to Psalms: The Genres of the Religious Lyric of Israel. Mercer Library of Biblical Studies. Translated by James D. Nogalski. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1998. Gustafson, James M. “Varieties of Moral Discourse: Prophetic, Narrative, Ethical, and Political.” Pages 43–76 in Seeking Understanding: The Stob Lectures, 1986–1998. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001. Habel, Norman C., ed. The Earth Story in the Psalms and the Prophets. Earth Bible 4. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2001. Hals, Ronald M. “Psalm 118.” Int 37 (1983): 277–83. Hamidović, David. “ ‘Les portes de justice’ et ‘la porte de YHWH’ dans le Psaume 118, 19–20.” Bib 81 (2000): 542–50. Hammer, Reuven. “Two Liturgical Psalms: Salvation and Thanksgiving.” Judaism 40 (1991): 484–97. Hanson, Paul D. Isaiah 40–66. IBC. Louisville: John Knox, 1995. Hauerwas, Stanley. A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive Social Ethic. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1981. ———. The Peaceable Kingdom: A Primer in Christian Ethics. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1983. Hauerwas, Stanley, with David Burrell. “From System to Story: An Alternative Pattern for Rationality in Ethics.” Pages 158–90 in Why Narrative? Readings in Narrative Theology. Edited by Stanley Hauerwas and L. Gregory Jones. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1997. Hauerwas, Stanley, and Samuel Wells, eds. The Blackwell Companion to Christian Ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004. Hays, Richard B. Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989. ———. The Moral Vision of the New Testament: A Contemporary Introduction to New Testament Ethics. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996. Hempel, Johannes. Das Ethos des Alten Testaments. BZAW 67. Berlin: Töpelmann, 1964. Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar, and Erich Zenger. Die Psalmen 3: 101–150. HThKAT. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2008. Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar, and Erich Zenger. Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101–150. Translated by Linda M. Maloney. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2011. Houston, Walter. “The King’s Preferential Option for the Poor: Rhetoric, Ideology, and Ethics in Psalm 72.” BibInt 7 (1999): 341–67. Human, Dirk Johannes. “ ‘From Exile to Zion’: Ethical Perspectives from the Sîrē Hama‘alôt Psalm 127.” Pages 523–35 in Zenger, ed., The Composition of the Book of Psalms. ———, ed. Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics. LHBOTS 572. New York: T&T Clark International, 2012.

Bibliography

151

Janowski, Bernd. “Dankbarkeit: Ein anthropologischer Grundbegriff im Spiegel der toda-Psalmen.” Pages 91–136 in Ritual und Poesie: Formen und Orte religiöser Dichtung im Alten Orient, im Judentum und im Christentum. HBS 36. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2003. Janzen, Waldemar. Old Testament Ethics: A Paradigmatic Approach. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994. Jarrel, W. A. Old Testament Ethics Vindicated: Being an Exposition of Old Testament Morals, a Comparison of Old Testament Morals with the Morals of Heathen – so called – “Sacred Books,” Religions, Philosophers, and Infidel Writers, and a Vindication of Old Testament Morals against Infidelity. Greenville, TX: privately published, 1883. Jobling, David. “Deconstruction and the Political Agenda of Biblical Texts: A Jamesonian Reading of Psalm 72.” Semeia 59 (1992): 95–127. Johnson, Aubrey R. Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1955. Kaiser, Walter C. Toward Old Testament Ethics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983. Kamuwanga, Liswanisu. “Ethics and Justice in an African Society,” Pages 128–41 in Human, ed., Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics. Kidner, Derek. Psalms 73–150. TOTC. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1975. Klopfenstein, Martin A. Die Lüge nach dem Alten Testament: Ihr Begriff, ihre Bedeutung und ihre Beurteilung. Zürich: Gotthelf-Verlag, 1964. Kraus, Hans-Joachim. Psalmen II. BKAT 15/2. Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1960. ———. Psalms 60–150. Translated by Hilton C. Oswald. CC. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993. LeFebvre, Michael. “Torah-Meditation and the Psalms: The Invitation of Psalm 1.” Pages 213–25 in Interpreting the Psalms: Issues and Approaches. Edited by David Firth and Philip S. Johnston. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2005. Lehmann, Paul. Ethics in a Christian Context. New York: Harper & Row, 1963. LeMon, Joel M. “Cutting the Enemy to Pieces: Ps 118, 10–12 and the Iconography of Disarticulation.” ZAW 126 (2014): 59–75. MacIntyre, Alasdair. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. 3rd ed. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2007. Mark, Martin. Meine Stärke und mein Schutz ist der Herr: Poetologisch-theologische Studie zu Psalm 118. FB 92. Würzburg: Echter, 1999. Mays, James L. “The Place of the Torah-Psalms in the Psalter.” JBL 106 (1987): 3–12. ———. Psalms. IBC. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994. McCann, J. Clinton, Jr. Judges. IBC. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2011. ———. “Psalms.” Pages 639–1280 in 1 & 2 Maccabees, Introduction to Hebrew Poetry, Job, Psalms. Vol. 4 of The New Interpreter’s Bible. Edited by Leander E. Keck. Nashville: Abingdon, 1996. ———. A Theological Introduction to the Book of Psalms: The Psalms as Torah. Nashville: Abingdon, 1993. ———. “ ‘The Way of the Righteous’ in the Psalms: Character Formation and Cultural Crisis.” Pages 135–49 in Brown, ed., Character and Scripture. McMillon, Phillip. “Psalm 78: Teaching the Next Generation.” ResQ 43 (2001): 219–28. Meeks, Wayne A. “The Ethics of the Fourth Evangelist.” Pages 317–26 in Exploring the Gospel of John: In Honor of D. Moody Smith. Edited by R. Alan Culpepper and C. Clifton Black. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996. ———. “Understanding Early Christian Ethics.” JBL 105 (1986): 3–11.

152 Bibliography Mein, Andrew. “The King’s Justice? Early Modern Perspectives on the Ethics of Psalm 72.” Pages 93–111 in Human, ed., Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics. ———. “Psalm 101 and the Ethics of Kingship.” Pages 56–70 in Ethical and Unethical in the Old Testament: God and Humans in Dialogue. Edited by Katharine Dell. LHBOTS 528. New York: T&T Clark International, 2010. Mills, Mary E. Biblical Morality: Moral Perspectives in Old Testament Narratives. Heythrop Studies in Contemporary Philosophy, Religion, and Theology. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2001. Mitchell, Hinckley G. The Ethics of the Old Testament. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1912. Mitchell, Nathan D. Liturgy and the Social Sciences. AEL. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1999. Möller, Karl. “Reading, Singing and Praying the Law: An Exploration of the Performative, Self-Involving, Commissive Language of Psalm 101.” Pages 111–37 in Reading the Law: Studies in Honour of Gordon J. Wenham. LHBOTS 461. New York: T&T Clark International, 2007. Mowinckel, Sigmund. The Psalms in Israel’s Worship. Translated by D. R. Ap-Thomas. 2 vols. The Biblical Resource Series. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004. Nasuti, Harry P. “The Sacramental Function of the Psalms in Contemporary Scholarship and Liturgical Practice.” Pages 78–89 in Psalms and Practice: Worship, Virtue, and Authority. Edited by Stephen Breck Reid. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2001. Ndoga, Sampson S. “Psalms 133 as a Response to Xenophobic Attitudes in South Africa Today.” Pages 156–65 in Human, ed., Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics. Newsom, Carol A. “Narrative Ethics, Character, and the Prose Tale of Job.” Pages 121–34 in Brown, ed., Character and Scripture. Nussbaum, Martha C. The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. ———. Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990. O’Brien, Julia M. “Because God has Heard My Voice: The Individual Thanksgiving Psalms and Vow-Fulfillment.” Pages 281–98 in The Listening Heart: Essays in Wisdom and the Psalms in Honor of Roland E. Murphy, O. Carm. Edited by K. Hoglund et al. JSOTSup 58. Sheffield: JSOT, 1987. O’Connor, Flannery. Mystery and Manners. New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux, 1969. Olson, Dennis T. “Between Humility and Authority: The Interplay of the Judge–Prophet Laws (Deuteronomy 16:18–17:13) and the Judge–Prophet Narratives of Moses.” Pages 51–61 in Character Ethics and the Old Testament: Moral Dimensions of Scripture. Edited by M. Daniel Carroll R. and Jacqueline E. Lapsley. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007. Otto, Eckart. “Hebrew Ethics in Old Testament Scholarship.” Pages 3–13 in Human, ed., Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics. ———. “Myth and Hebrew Ethics in the Psalms.” Pages 26–37 in Psalms and Mythology. Edited by D. J. Human. LHBOTS 462. New York: T&T Clark International, 2007. Owens, Daniel C. Portraits of the Righteous in the Psalms: An Exploration of the Ethics of Book I. Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2013. Oyen, H. van. Ethik des Alten Testaments. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1967. Parry, Robin. Old Testament Story and Christian Ethics: The Rape of Dinah as a Case Study. PBM. Bletchley: Paternoster, 2004.

Bibliography

153

Pelikan, Jaroslav, ed. Luther’s Works, Volume 14: Selected Psalms III. St. Louis: Concordia, 1958. Pinker, Aron. “Psalm 116, 15 – Death of the Saints?” ZAW 121 (2009): 529–39. Pleins, J. David. The Social Visions of the Hebrew Bible: A Theological Introduction. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001. Podella, Thomas. “Transformationen kultischer Darstellungen: Toraliturgien in Ps 15 und 24.” SJOT 13 (1999): 95–130. Prinsloo, W. S. “Psalm 116: Disconnected Text or Symmetrical Whole?” Bib 74 (1993): 71–82. Ramsey, Paul. “Liturgy and Ethics.” JRE 7 (1979): 139–71. Reimer, David J. “Stories of Forgiveness: Narrative Ethics and the Old Testament.” Pages 359–78 in Reflection and Refraction: Studies in Biblical Historiography in Honour of A. Graeme Auld. Edited by Robert Rezetko, Timothy H. Lim, and W. Brian Aucker. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Rendsburg, Gary A. Linguistic Evidence for the Northern Origin of Selected Psalms. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990. Rensberger, David. “Ecological Use of the Psalms.” Pages 608–20 in The Oxford Handbook of the Psalms. Edited by William P. Brown. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Reynolds, Kent Aaron. Torah as Teacher: The Exemplary Torah Student in Psalm 119. VTSup 137. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Robinson, W. “Psalm 118: A Liturgy for Admission of a Proselyte.” CQR 144 (1947): 179–83. Rodd, Cyril S. Glimpses of a Strange Land: Studies in Old Testament Ethics. OTS. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 2001. ———. Psalms 73–150. EPC. London: Epworth, 1964. Sailers, Don E. “Liturgy and Ethics: Some New Beginnings.” JRE 7 (1979): 173–89. Sakenfeld, K. D. The Meaning of Hesed in the Hebrew Bible: A New Inquiry. HSM 17. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1978. Schmidt, H. “Erklärung des 118. Psalms.” ZAW 40 (1922): 1–14. Seidl, Theodor. “Who Stands Behind the ‫ רשׁא‬in Psalm 50:16a? The Ethical Testimony of Psalm 50:16–22.” Pages 76–92 in Human, ed., Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics. Seybold, Klaus. Die Psalmen. HAT 15. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996. ———. Studien zu Sprache und Stil der Psalmen. BZAW 415. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2010. Smith, J. M. Powis. The Moral Life of the Hebrews. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1923. Smith, James K. A. Desiring the Kingdom: Worship, Worldview, and Cultural Formation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009. Smith, Richard G. The Fate of Justice and Righteousness During David’s Reign: Narrative Ethics and Rereading the Court History According to 2 Samuel 8:15–20:26. LHBOTS 508. New York: T&T Clark International, 2009. Tate, Marvin E. Psalms 51–100. WBC 20. Waco, TX: Word, 1990. Terrien, Samuel. The Psalms: Strophic Structure and Theological Commentary. ECC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003. Tita, Hubert. Gelübde als Bekenntnis: Eine Studie zu den Gelübden im Alten Testament. OBO 181. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001.

154 Bibliography Usue, Emmanuel O. “Ethical and Theological Parallels Between Biblical Psalms and the NKST Indigenous Christian Songs.” Pages 142–55 in Human, ed., Psalmody and Poetry in Old Testament Ethics. Vesco, Jean-Luc. Le Psautier de David: Traduit et Commenté II. Paris: Cerf, 2006. Watt, Jan G. van der. “Ethics and Ethos in the Gospel According to John.” ZNW 97 (2006): 147–76. Weber, Beat. Werkbuch Psalmen: Die Psalmen 73 bis 150. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2003. Wenham, Gordon J. “The Ethics of the Psalms.” Pages 175–94 in Interpreting the Psalms: Issues and Approaches. Edited by David Firth and Philip S. Johnston. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2005. ———. “Prayer and Practice in the Psalms.” Pages 279–95 in Psalms and Prayers: Papers Read at the Joint Meeting of the Society of Old Testament Study and Het Oudtestamentisch Werkgezelschap in Nederland en België, Apeldoorn August 2006. Edited by Bob Becking and Eric Peels. OtSt 55. Leiden: Brill, 2007. ———. Psalms as Torah: Reading Biblical Song Ethically. STI. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012. ———. Story as Torah: Reading the Old Testament Narrative Ethically. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2000. Weiser, Artur. The Psalms: A Commentary. OTL. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962. Westermann, Claus. Praise and Lament in the Psalms. Translated by Keith R. Crim and Richard N. Soulen. Atlanta: John Knox, 1981. Willis, John T. “Ethics in a Cultic Setting.” Pages 145–69 in Essays in Old Testament Ethics. Edited by James L. Crenshaw and John T. Willis. New York: Ktav, 1974. Witte, Markus. “From Exodus to David: History and Historiography in Psalm 78.” Pages 21–42 in History and Identity: How Israel’s Later Authors Viewed Its Earlier History. Edited by Núria Calduch-Benages and Jan Liesen. DCLY 2006. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2006. Wright, Christopher J. H. Old Testament Ethics for the People of God. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2004. Wright, N. T. The Case for the Psalms: Why They Are Essential. New York: HarperOne, 2013. ———. The New Testament and the People of God. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992. Zenger, Erich A God of Vengeance? Understanding the Psalms of Divine Wrath. Translated by Linda M. Maloney. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996. ———, ed. The Composition of the Book of Psalms. BETL 238. Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters, 2010.

I n d ex of R ef er e nce s

Hebrew Bible/ Old Testament Genesis 28:17 110 35:14 71 Exodus 15

1 Kings 8:33 96 8:35 96 1 Chronicles 16:34 97

80, 106, 107 15:1–18 106 15:2 79, 106, 114 15:6 108 15:11 112 15:12 108 20:6 50 23:18 82 25:29 71 32 57 34 59 34:6–7 131 34:6 21, 57

2 Chronicles 5:13 97 7:3 97 7:6 97 20:21 96

Leviticus 23:27 71

Esther 9 104

Numbers 6:24–26 114 28:7 71

Psalms 2 135 2:11 135 2:12 135 6 24 9:1 120 9:2 129 9:2 mt 120 11:10–19 49 15 1, 109, 129 16:5 71 18:1 50 18:2 mt 50

Deuteronomy 6:5 50, 129 1 Samuel 14:27 80 15 106 17 104 18:25–27 104

Ezra 3:1–4 90 3:8–13 90 3:11 90, 97 6:15–18 90 Nehemiah 8 90 9:17 59

18:5 55 23 71 23:5 71 24 1, 109, 129 27 67, 69 30 23–27 30:1 24 30:2 24 30:2 mt 24 30:2–3 23 30:3 56 30:3 mt 24 30:3–4 mt 23 30:4 24 30:4 RSV 96 30:5 96 30:5 mt 24 31:23 50 31:24 mt 50 33:2 96 34 4 40:11–12 131 46:5 61 46:6 mt 61 49:15 56 64, 65 56 56:12–13 64 56:13–14 mt 64 56:13 56, 64 56:14 63 56:14 mt 64 57:2 131 57:3 121 1, 135 72 72:11 135 75:8 70 78 20–23 85:10–13 131 86 72

156 Psalms (cont.) 86:1–2 72 86:13 56 86:16 72 90:13–17 140 97:12 96 100:4 96 103:1 61 103:8 59 104:35 140 105 22, 23 105:1 96 106 22, 23 106:1 94, 96, 97 107 83 107:1 94, 96, 97 110:4–5 97 111:4 59 112:4 59 113:17 lxx 79 113:20 lxx 79 114 44 115 44 115:1–2 131 115:9–11 98 115:9 79 115:12 79 115:13 98 116 4, 5, 8, 38, 39, 42, 44, 48, 52–55, 58, 59, 64, 65, 67, 71, 72, 74, 76, 78, 82, 95, 116, 141, 142, 145, 146 116:1–9 44, 46, 49, 65 116:1–7 40, 48 116:1–4 45 116:1–2 40, 43, 45–47, 49, 52, 54, 63, 66, 67 116:1 40, 41, 43, 45, 47–50,

Index of References 52, 53, 66–68, 75 116:2 40, 43, 51, 52 46, 47, 54, 116:3–6 63, 66 116:3–4 43, 45 116:3 41, 46–48, 54, 58, 70, 99 41, 48, 57, 116:4 58, 71 116:5–9 45 116:5–7 43, 46 116:5–6 45, 46, 58 116:5 60 116:6 41, 46, 59, 60 116:7–9 45–47, 61, 66 116:7–8 63 116:7 40, 46–48, 61–63, 69 116:8–17 41 116:8–14 48 116:8–9 43, 64 116:8 40, 46, 48, 63, 65 116:9 40, 44–47, 63, 67 116:10–19 44–46, 73 116:10–14 45 116:10–13 45 116:10–11 43, 45–48, 66, 67 116:10 40, 41, 44–49, 51, 66–68, 75 116:11 66–68 116:12–19 46, 47, 66, 69, 73 116:12–15 43 116:12–14 43, 45 116:12 40, 46–48, 69 116:13–14 47, 48 116:13 45, 48, 57 116:14–19 45

116:14

40, 41, 45, 63, 71 116:15–19 45, 48 116:15–16 45–47, 72 40, 45, 48, 116:15 72 116:16 40, 43, 48, 72 116:17–19 43, 45, 47, 73, 95 116:17–18 48 116:17 41, 48, 57, 73 116:18 40, 41, 63, 73 40, 46, 47, 116:19 63, 73 117 95 118 4, 5, 8, 38, 78, 82, 83, 87, 88, 90–92, 94, 95, 97, 101, 102, 106, 107, 109, 115–18, 141, 142, 145, 146 118:1–9 83 118:1–4 82, 83, 86, 87, 94, 95, 97 79, 83, 118:1 94–97, 115 118:2–9 79 118:2–4 83 118:2 79, 83, 92 118:3 79, 83, 92 118:4 79, 83, 92 118:5–28 83, 84 118:5–21 86 118:5–19 83, 85 118:5–18 83, 87, 92, 93, 96, 110, 111 118:5–13 83–85 118:5–12 85 87, 99 118:5–9

118:5–7

83–85, 93, 99, 102 118:5 79, 84, 85, 92, 96, 99, 100, 103, 110 118:6–7 85 118:6 79 118:7 79, 85 118:8–9 84, 102 118:10–19 83, 86 118:10–18 87, 99, 103 118:10–14 80, 83 118:10–13 92 118:10–12 92, 93, 99, 104 84, 85, 103 118:10 118:11 80, 84, 103 118:12 80, 84, 103 118:13–18 85 118:13–14 85 118:13 84, 85, 105 118:14–19 83–85 118:14–18 106 118:14 79, 85, 106, 109, 110 118:15–26 81 118:15–18 84 118:15–16 93 118:15 85 118:16 108 118:17–19 83, 85 118:17 86 118:18–21 113 118:18 84, 105, 108 118:19–28 83, 87, 109, 113 118:19–21 88, 110 118:19–20 109 118:19 85, 86, 95, 110 118:20–28 83 118:20–26 83 118:20–21 86 118:20 86, 110 118:21 80, 85, 95, 110

157

Index of References 118:22–29 86, 88, 92 118:22–27 111 118:22–24 111 118:22–23 113 118:22 111 118:23–24 112 118:23 112 118:24 88, 112, 113 118:25 83, 113 118:26–27 113 118:26 113 118:27–29 82 118:27–28 113 118:27 88, 113, 114 118:28 95, 106, 110 118:29 82, 83, 87, 94, 95, 97, 115 119 134 119:13 134 119:72 134 119:88 134 134:19 lxx 79 135 22 135:19 79 136 22, 23 136:1–3 96 136:1 94, 97 136:26 96 137 136 138–145 119 138 4, 5, 8, 38, 119–26, 129, 134– 36, 138, 140–42, 145, 146 138:1–6 127 138:1–4 120 138:1–3 127–29, 133, 138 138:1 120, 121, 124, 129– 31, 135

124, 128– 31, 134, 135 138:3 122, 126, 128, 133, 135, 141 127, 128, 138:4–6 133–35 138:4–5 127 138:4 120, 121, 123, 126, 130, 136 138:5–8 121 138:5–6 121, 136 138:5 135–37 138:6–8 127 138:6 137, 138, 141 138:7–8 122, 127, 128, 138 121, 123, 138:7 126, 128, 138, 140, 141 138:8 126, 128, 138–41 139:8 56 139:19–24 140 146–150 119 138:2

Isaiah 12:4 96 25:1 114 38 24 40–66 126 40:5 137 49:7 135 49:23 135 51:17 70 51:22 70 52–53 111 52:5 135 58 31 60:10 135 63:9 51

158

Index of References

Jeremiah 31:3 51 33:11 96, 97

New Testament Mark 12:10–11 111

Lamentations 1:3 99 4:21 70 4:32 70 4:33 70

Acts 4:11 111 1 Corinthians 10:6 21

Ezekiel 18:32 72

Ephesians 2:20–21 111

Jonah 2 53 2:1–10 53 4:2 58, 59

1 Peter 2:4–8 111 1 John 4:19 53

1 Maccabees 4:36–61 90 7:48–49 90 13:51 90 2 Maccabees 10:1–8 90 Mishnah Sukkah 4:5

82, 88

Ugaritic Texts RS 24.252, rev. line 9 81

I n d ex of A ut hor s

Allen, L. C. 40–42, 48, 50, 54, 57, 59, 62, 64, 69, 72, 79, 83, 85, 86, 89, 92, 95, 99, 104, 106, 110, 111, 114, 120, 121, 125, 127–29, 132, 134, 135, 138 Alter, R. 50, 55, 70, 71, 80, 84, 104, 121, 130, 135, 140 Anderson, A. A. 51, 89 Anderson, B. W. 22 Assmann, J. 117 Auffret, P. 48, 49, 83, 127 Ballhorn, E. 132 Barré, M. L. 44, 45, 66, 67, 72, 81 Barton, J. 3, 16, 17, 25 Bauer, H. 80 Becker, J. 81 Begrich, J. 22, 23, 54 Bellinger, W. H. 30, 36, 48, 55, 56, 59, 63, 68, 75, 84, 85, 93, 95, 101, 103, 106, 108, 109, 112–14, 119, 121, 126–29, 133, 136, 138, 139, 141 Berlin, A. 81, 112 Beyerlin, W. 109 Birch, B. C. 12, 18 Bishop, S. 22 Blumenthal, F. 90 Bondi, R. 13 Booij, Th. 44, 46 Botha, P. J. 2, 4 Bowman, R. G. 18 Briggs, C. A. 42, 44, 93 Briggs, E. G. 42, 44, 93 Brock, B. 107, 116 Brown, W. P. 9, 19, 27–29 Bruce, W. S. 14 Brueggemann, W. 7, 23, 26, 30, 31, 36, 48, 55, 56, 59, 61, 63, 68, 75, 84, 85, 93, 95, 101, 103, 106, 108, 109, 112–14, 119, 121, 126–29, 133, 136, 138, 139, 141 Burrell, D. 11, 146 Buysch, C. 134

Cahill, M. 81, 111 Christianson, E. S. 19 Clements, R. E. 1 Clifford, R. J. 42, 58, 59, 72, 75, 84, 85, 95, 110 Craven, T. 118 Creach, J. F. D. 2 Croft, S. J. L. 89, 123 Crüsemann, F. 86, 130 Dahood, M. 40, 41, 50, 64, 79, 80, 85, 89, 92, 104, 121, 124, 130, 135, 136 Davies, E. W. 15 DeClaissé-Walford, N. 25, 46, 79, 82, 85, 105, 121, 127, 128, 132 Eaton, J. H. 80, 89, 104, 123, 124 Ehrlich, A. B. 49 Emerton, J. A. 41 Gerhardsson, B. 28 Gerstenberger, E. S. 42, 43, 50, 51, 58, 65, 66, 69, 71, 84, 85, 89, 93, 96–98, 104, 105, 109, 111, 121–23, 130, 140 Goldingay, J. 4, 14, 24, 26, 27, 40, 44, 51, 52, 55–58, 61, 62, 67–70, 72, 73, 79, 81, 82, 84, 91, 95, 99, 100, 106, 108, 110, 112, 113, 121, 123, 124, 126, 127, 131–35, 137, 138 Gorospe, A. E. 16 Goulder, M. D. 136 Graham, M. P. 18 Groenewald, A. 2 Grogan, G. W. 48, 127, 130, 135 Grol, H. van 119 Gunkel, H. 22, 23, 42, 54, 86, 87, 127 Gustafson, J. M. 12, 37, 145 Habel, N. 3 Hals, R. M. 92 Hamidovič, D. 109 Hammer, R. 91

160

Index of Authors

Hanson, P. D. 31 Hauerwas, S. 6, 10, 11, 26, 29, 143, 146 Hays, R. B. 13, 107 Hempel, J. 14 Hossfeld, F.-L. 46, 47, 51, 59–63, 66, 67, 71, 79–82, 85–87, 90, 94–96, 100, 104, 106–11, 113, 120, 122, 125, 127, 128, 132, 134, 136–38, 140 Houston, W. 1 Human, D. J. 2, 3 Jacobson, R. 25, 46, 79, 82, 85, 121, 127, 128, 132 Janowski, B. 46, 47 Janzen, W. 18 Jarrel, W. A. 14 Jobling, D. 1, 2 Johnson, A. R. 89

Nasuti, H. P. 3, 32 Ndoga, S. S. 3 Newsom, C. A. 9, 18 Nussbaum, M. C. 17 O’Brien, J. M. 71 O’Connor, F. 17 Olson, D. T. 18 Otto, E. 1, 14 Owens, D. C. 2 Oyen, H. van 14 Parry, R. 18 Pelikan, J. 92 Pinker, A. 41 Pleins, J. D. 2 Podella, T. 109 Prinsloo, W. S. 42

Kaiser, W. C. 14 Kamuwanga, L. 3 Kidner, D. 42, 59, 68, 70, 82, 84, 109, 127, 131 Klopfenstein, M. A. 69 Kraus, H.-J. 43, 51, 54, 55, 63, 65, 66, 68, 84, 86, 88, 97, 99, 112, 121, 124, 125, 127, 135, 137

Ramsey, P. 33 Rasmussen, L. L. 12 Reimer, D. J. 18 Rendsburg, G. A. 40 Rensberger, D. 3 Reynolds, K. A. 2 Robinson, W. 90 Rodd, C. S. 2, 76, 106

LeFebvre, M. 2, 3 LeMon, J. M. 80 Leander, P. 80 Lehmann, P. 28

Sailers, D. E. 33 Sakenfeld, K. D. 95 Schmidt, H. 83 Seidl, T. 2 Seybold, K. 45, 50, 55, 59, 64, 66, 71, 82–84, 92, 95, 98, 102, 103, 105, 110, 115, 119, 124–27, 129, 130, 132, 136, 138–40 Smith, J. K. A. 33, 34 Smith, J. M. P. 14 Smith, R. G. 18

MacIntyre, A. 10 Mark, M. 82, 85, 86, 92, 95, 96, 98, 104, 106, 110, 113 Mays, J. L. 3, 24, 48, 54–56, 63, 80, 84, 86, 91, 93, 101, 111, 119, 121, 125–27, 129, 130, 133, 135, 139, 140 McCann, J. C. Jr. 2, 3, 26, 31, 48, 56, 60, 63, 69, 70, 84, 86, 93, 103, 104, 107, 109, 114, 121, 125–27, 131, 132, 139 McMillon, P. 12, 20, 21 Meeks, W. A. 26 Mein, A. 1, 2 Mills, M. E. 18 Mitchell, H. G. 14 Mitchell, N. D. 34, 35 Möller, K. 3 Mowinckel, S. 88, 123, 126

Tanner, B. L. 25, 46, 79, 82, 85, 105, 121, 127, 128, 132 Tate, M. E. 22 Terrien, S. 49, 82 Tita, H. 46, 62, 69, 71 Usue, E. O. 3 Vesco, J.-L. 49, 84, 92, 94, 99, 107



Index of Authors

Watt, J. G. van der 28 Weber, B. 128 Weiser, A. 80, 86, 89, 95, 97, 104 Wells, S. 6 Wenham, G. J. 1–3, 14–16, 20, 21, 32, 33, 142 Westermann, C. 25 Willis, J. T. 1

161

Witte, M. 117 Wright, C. J. H. 2, 19, 23, 37, 74 Wright, N. T. 12, 107 Zenger, E. 1, 46, 47, 51, 59–63, 66, 67, 71, 79–82, 85–87, 90, 94–96, 100, 104, 106–11, 113, 120, 122, 125, 127, 128, 132, 134, 136–38, 140