Introduction from the NIV Study Bible | Go to Psalms
The titles “Psalms” and “Psalter” come from the Septuagint (the pre-Christian Greek translation of the OT), where they originally referred to stringed instruments (such as harp, lyre and lute), then to songs sung with their accompaniment. The traditional Hebrew title is tehillim (meaning “praises”; see note on Ps 145 title), even though many of the psalms are tephillot (meaning “prayers”). In fact, one of the first collections included in the book was titled “the prayers of David son of Jesse” (72:20).
Collection, Arrangement, and Date
The Psalter is a collection of collections and represents the final stage in a process that spanned centuries. It was put into its final form by postexilic temple personnel, who completed it probably in the third century b.c. As such, it has often been called the prayer book of the ”second” (Zerubbabel’s and Herod’s) temple and was used in the synagogues as well. But it is more than a treasury of prayers and hymns for liturgical and private use on chosen occasions. Both the scope of its subject matter and the arrangement of the whole collection strongly suggest that this collection was viewed by its final editors as a book of instruction in the faith and in full-orbed godliness—thus a guide for the life of faith in accordance with the Law, the Prophets and the canonical wisdom literature (see chart, pp. 1048–1051). By the first century a.d. it was referred to as the “Book of Psalms” (Lk 20:42; Ac 1:20). At that time Psalms appears also to have been used as a title for the entire section of the Hebrew OT canon more commonly known as the “Writings” (see Lk 24:44 and note).
Many collections preceded this final compilation of the Psalms. In fact, the formation of psalters probably goes back to the early days of the first (Solomon’s) temple (or even to the time of David), when the temple liturgy began to take shape. Reference has already been made to “the prayers of David.” Additional collections expressly referred to in the present Psalter titles are: (1) the songs and/or psalms “of the Sons of Korah” (Ps 42–49; 84–85; 87–88), (2) the psalms and/or songs “of Asaph” (Ps 50; 73–83) and (3) the songs “of ascents” (Ps 120–134).
Other evidence points to further compilations. Ps 1–41 (Book I) make frequent use of the divine name Yahweh (“the Lord”), while Ps 42–72 (Book II) make frequent use of Elohim (“God”). The reason for the Elohim collection in distinction from the Yahweh collection remains a matter of speculation. Moreover, Ps 93–100 appear to be a traditional collection (see “The Lord reigns” in 93:1; 96:10; 97:1;99:1). Other apparent groupings include Ps 111–118 (a series of Hallelujah psalms; see introduction to Ps 113), Ps 138–145 (all of which include “of David” in their titles) and Ps 146–150 (with their frequent “Praise the Lord”; see NIV text note on 111:1). Whether the “Great Hallel” (Ps 120–136) was already a recognized unit is not known.
In its final edition, the Psalter contained 150 psalms. On this the Septuagint (the pre-Christian Greek translation of the OT) and Hebrew texts agree, though they arrive at this number differently. The Septuagint has an extra psalm at the end (but not numbered separately as Ps 151); it also unites Ps 9–10 (see NIV text note on Ps 9) and Ps 114–115 and divides Ps 116 and Ps 147 each into two psalms. Strangely, both the Septuagint and Hebrew texts number Ps 42–43 as two psalms whereas they were evidently originally one (see NIV text note on Ps 42).
In its final form the Psalter was divided into five Books (Ps 1–41; 42–72; 73–89; 90–106; 107–150), each of which was provided with a concluding doxology (see 41:13; 72:18–19; 89:52; 106:48; 150). The first two of these Books, as already noted, were probably preexilic. The division of the remaining psalms into three Books, thus attaining the number five, was possibly in imitation of the five books of Moses (otherwise known simply as the Law). At least one of these divisions (between Ps 106–107) seems arbitrary (see introduction to Ps 107). In spite of this five-book division, the Psalter was clearly thought of as a whole, with an introduction (Ps 1–2) and a conclusion (Ps 146–150). Notes throughout the Psalms give additional indications of conscious arrangement (see also chart, p. 1048–1051).
Authorship and Titles (or Superscriptions)
Of the 150 psalms, only 34 lack superscriptions of any kind (only 17 in the Septuagint, the pre-Christian Greek translation of the OT). These so-called “orphan” psalms are found mainly in Books III–V, where they tend to occur in clusters: Ps 91; 93–97; 99; 104–107;111–119; 135–137; 146–150. (In Books I–II, only Ps 1–2; 10; 33; 43; 71 lack titles, and Ps 10 and 43 are actually continuations of the preceding psalms.)
The contents of the superscriptions vary but fall into a few broad categories: (1) author, (2) name of collection, (3) type of psalm, (4) musical notations, (5) liturgical notations and (6) brief indications of occasion for composition. For details see notes on the titles of the various psalms.
Students of the Psalms are not agreed on the antiquity and reliability of these superscriptions. That many of them are at least preexilic appears evident from the fact that the Septuagint translators were sometimes unclear as to their meaning. Furthermore, the practice of attaching titles, including the name of the author, is ancient. On the other hand, comparison between the Septuagint and the Hebrew texts shows that the content of some titles was still subject to change well into the postexilic period. Most discussion centers on categories 1 and 6 above.
As for the superscriptions regarding occasion of composition, many of these brief notations of events read as if they had been taken from 1,2 Samuel. Moreover, they are sometimes not easily correlated with the content of the psalms they head. The suspicion therefore arises that they are later attempts to fit the psalms into the real-life events of history. But then why the limited number of such notations, and why the apparent mismatches? The arguments cut both ways.
Regarding authorship, opinions are even more divided. The notations themselves are ambiguous since the Hebrew phraseology used, meaning in general “belonging to,” can also be taken in the sense of “concerning” or “for the use of” or “dedicated to.” The name may refer to the title of a collection of psalms that had been gathered under a certain name (as “Of Asaph” or “Of the Sons of Korah”). To complicate matters, there is evidence within the Psalter that at least some of the psalms were subjected to editorial revision in the course of their transmission. As for Davidic authorship, there can be little doubt that the Psalter contains psalms composed by that noted singer and musician and that there was at one time a “Davidic” psalter. This, however, may have also included psalms written concerning David, or concerning one of the later Davidic kings, or even psalms written in the manner of those he authored. It is also true that the tradition as to which psalms are “Davidic” remains somewhat indefinite, and some “Davidic” psalms seem clearly to reflect later situations (see, e.g., Ps 30 title—but see also note there; and see introduction to Ps 69 and note on Ps 122 title). Moreover, “David” is sometimes used elsewhere as a collective for the kings of his dynasty, and this could also be true in the psalm titles.
The word Selah is found in 39 psalms, all but two of which (Ps 140; 143, both “Davidic”) are in Books I–III. It is also found in Hab 3, a psalm-like poem. Suggestions as to its meaning abound, but honesty must confess ignorance. Most likely, it is a liturgical notation. The common suggestions that it calls for a brief musical interlude or for a brief liturgical response by the congregation are plausible but unproven (the former may be supported by the Septuagint rendering). In some instances its present placement in the Hebrew text is highly questionable.
Hebrew superscriptions to the Psalms acquaint us with an ancient system of classification: (1)mizmor (“psalm”); (2) shiggaion (see note on Ps 7 title); (3) miktam (see note on Ps 16 title); (4)shir (“song”); (5) masvkil (see note on Ps 32 title); (6) tephillah (“prayer”); (7)tehillah (“praise”); (8) lehazkir (“for being remembered”—i.e., before God, a petition); (9) letodah (“for praising” or “for giving thanks”); (10) lelammed (“for teaching”); and (11) shir yedidot (“song of loves”—i.e., a wedding song). The meaning of many of these terms, however, is uncertain. In addition, some titles contain two of these (especially mizmor and shir), indicating that the types are diversely based and overlapping.
Analysis of content has given rise to a different classification that has proven useful for study of the Psalms. The main types that can be identified are: (1) prayers of the individual (e.g., Ps 3–7); (2) praise from the individual for God’s saving help (e.g., Ps 30; 34); (3) prayers of the community (e.g., Ps 12; 44; 79); (4) praise from the community for God’s saving help (e.g., Ps 66; 75); (5) confessions of confidence in the Lord (e.g., Ps 11; 16; 52); (6) hymns in praise of God’s majesty and virtues (e.g., Ps 8; 19; 29; 65); (7) hymns celebrating God’s universal reign (Ps 47; 93–99); (8) songs of Zion, the city of God (Ps 46; 48; 76; 84; 122; 126; 129; 137); (9) royal psalms—by, for or concerning the king, the Lord’s anointed (e.g., Ps 2; 18; 20; 45; 72; 89; 110); (10) pilgrimage songs (Ps 120–134); (11) liturgical songs (e.g., Ps 15; 24; 68); (12) didactic (instructional) songs (e.g., Ps 1; 34; 37; 73; 112; 119; 128; 133).
This classification also involves some overlapping. For example, “prayers of the individual” may include prayers of the king (in his special capacity as king) or even prayers of the community speaking in the collective first person singular. Nevertheless, it is helpful to study a psalm in conjunction with others of the same type. Attempts to fix specific liturgical settings for each type have not been very convincing. For those psalms about which something can be said in this regard see introductions to the individual psalms.
Of all these psalm types, the prayers (both of the individual and of the community) are the most complex. Several speech functions are combined to form these appeals to God: (1) address to God: “O Lord,” “my God,” “my deliverer”; (2) initial appeal: “Arise,” “Answer me,” “Help,” “Save me”; (3) description of distress: “Many are rising against me,” “The wicked attack,” “I am in distress”; (4) complaint against God: “Why have you forsaken me?” “How long will you hide your face from me?”; (5) petition: “Be not far from me,” “Vindicate me”; (6) motivation for God to hear: “for I take refuge in you,” “for your name’s sake”; (7) accusation against the adversary: “There is no truth in their mouths,” “Ruthless men seek my life” (“the wicked” are often quoted); (8) call for judicial redress: “Let them be put to shame,” “Call him to account for his wickedness”; (9) claims of innocence: “I have walked in my integrity,” “They hate me without cause”; (10) confessions of sin: “I have sinned against you,” “I confess my iniquity”; (11) professions of trust: “You are a shield about me,” “You will answer me”; (12) vows to praise for deliverance: “I will sing your might,” “My lips will praise you”; (13) calls to praise: “Magnify the Lord with me,” “Sing praise to the Lord”; (14) motivations for praise: “for you have delivered me,” “for the Lord hears the needy.”
Though not all these appear in every prayer, they all belong to the conventions of prayer in the Psalter, with petition itself being but one (usually brief) element among the rest. On the whole they reflect the then-current conventions of a court trial, the psalmists presenting their cases before the heavenly King/Judge. When beset by wicked adversaries, the petitioners appeal to God for a hearing, describe their situation, plead their innocence (“righteousness”), lodge their accusations against their adversaries, and appeal for deliverance and judicial redress. When suffering at the hands of God (when God is their adversary), they confess their guilt and plead for mercy. Attention to these various speech functions and their role in the psalmists’ judicial appeals to the heavenly Judge will significantly aid the reader’s understanding of these psalms.
It should be noted that reference to ”penitential” and ”imprecatory” psalms as distinct psalm ”types” has no basis in the Psalter collection itself. The former (“penitential”) refers to an early Christian selection of seven psalms (6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143) for liturgical expressions of penitence; the latter (”imprecatory”) is based on a misconstrual of one of the speech functions found in the prayers. What are actually appeals to the heavenly Judge for judicial redress (function 8 noted above) are taken to be curses (“imprecation” means ”curse”) pronounced by the psalmists on their adversaries. See note on 5:10.
The Psalter is from first to last poetry, even though it contains many prayers and not all OT prayers were poetic (see 1Ki 8:23–53; Ezr 9:6–15; Ne 9:5–37; Da 9:4–19)—nor, for that matter, was all praise poetic (see 1Ki 8:15–21). The Psalms are impassioned, vivid and concrete; they are rich in images, in simile and metaphor. Assonance, alliteration and wordplays abound in the Hebrew text. Effective use of repetition and the piling up of synonyms and complements to fill out the picture are characteristic. Key words frequently highlight major themes in prayer or song. Enclosure (repetition of a significant word or phrase at the end that occurs at the beginning) frequently wraps up a composition or a unit within it. The notes on the structure of the individual psalms often call attention to literary frames within which the psalm has been set.
Hebrew poetry lacks rhyme and regular meter. Its most distinctive and pervasive feature is parallelism. Most poetic lines are composed of two (sometimes three) balanced segments (the balance is often loose, with the second segment commonly somewhat shorter than the first). The second segment either echoes (synonymous parallelism), contrasts (antithetic parallelism) or syntactically completes (synthetic parallelism) the first. These three types are generalizations and are not wholly adequate to describe the rich variety that the creativity of the poets has achieved within the basic two-segment line structure. When the second or third segment of a poetic line repeats, echoes or overlaps the content of the preceding segment, it usually intensifies or more sharply focuses the thought or its expression. They can serve, however, as rough distinctions that will assist the reader. In the NIV the second and third segments of a line are slightly indented relative to the first.
Determining where the Hebrew poetic lines or line segments begin or end (scanning) is sometimes an uncertain matter. Even the Septuagint (the pre-Christian Greek translation of the OT) at times scans the lines differently from the way the Hebrew texts now available to us do. It is therefore not surprising that modern translations occasionally differ.
A related problem is the extremely concise, often elliptical writing style of the Hebrew poets. The syntactical connection of words must at times be inferred simply from context. Where more than one possibility presents itself, translators are confronted with ambiguity. They are not always sure with which line segment a border word or phrase is to be read.
The stanza structure of Hebrew poetry is also a matter of dispute. Occasionally, recurring refrains mark off stanzas, as in Ps 42–43;57. In Ps 110 two balanced stanzas are divided by their introductory oracles (see also introduction to Ps 132), while Ps 119 devotes eight lines to each letter of the Hebrew alphabet. For the most part, however, no such obvious indicators are present. The NIV has used spaces to mark off poetic paragraphs (called “stanzas” in the notes). Usually this could be done with some confidence, and the reader is advised to be guided by them. But there are a few places where these divisions are questionable—and are challenged in the notes.
Close study of the Psalms discloses that the authors often composed with an overall design in mind. This is true of the alphabetic acrostics, in which the poet devoted to each letter of the Hebrew alphabet one line segment (as in Ps 111–112), or a single line (as inPs 25; 34; 145), or two lines (as in Ps 37), or eight lines (as in Ps 119). In addition Ps 33; 38; 103 each have 22 lines, no doubt because of the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet (see Introduction to Lamentations: Literary Features). The oft-voiced notion that this device was used as a memory aid seems culturally prejudiced and quite unwarranted. Actually people of that time were able to memorize far more readily than most people today. It is much more likely that the alphabet—which was relatively recently invented as a simple system of symbols capable of representing in writing the rich and complex patterns of human speech and therefore of inscribing all that can be put into words (one of the greatest intellectual achievements of all time)—commended itself as a framework on which to hang significant phrases.
Other forms were also used. Ps 44 is a prayer fashioned after the design of a ziggurat (a Babylonian stepped pyramid; see note on Ge 11:4). A sense of symmetry is pervasive. There are psalms that devote the same number of lines to each stanza (as Ps 12; 41), or do so with variation only in the introductory or concluding stanza (as Ps 38; 83; 94). Others match the opening and closing stanzas and balance those between (as Ps 33; 86). A particularly interesting device is to place a key thematic line at the very center, sometimes constructing the whole or part of the poem around that center (see note on 6:6). Still other design features are pointed out in the notes. The authors of the psalms crafted their compositions very carefully. They were heirs of an ancient art (in many details showing that they had inherited a poetic tradition that goes back hundreds of years), and they developed it to a state of high sophistication. Their works are best appreciated when carefully studied and pondered.
The Psalter is for the most part a book of prayer and praise. In it faith speaks to God in prayer and of God in praise. But there are also psalms that are explicitly didactic (instructional) in form and purpose (teaching the way of godliness). As noted above (Collection, Arrangement and Date), the manner in which the whole collection has been arranged suggests that one of its main purposes was instruction in the life of faith, a faith formed and nurtured by the Law, the Prophets and the canonical wisdom literature. Accordingly, the Psalter is theologically rich. Its theology is, however, not abstract or systematic but doxological, confessional and practical. So a summation of that “theology” impoverishes it by translating it into an objective mode.
Furthermore, any summation faces a still greater problem. The Psalter is a large collection of independent pieces of many kinds, serving different purposes and composed over the course of many centuries. Not only must a brief summary of its “theology” be selective and incomplete; it will also of necessity be somewhat artificial. It will suggest that each psalm reflects or at least presupposes the “theology” outlined, that there is no “theological” tension or progression within the Psalter. Manifestly this is not so.
Still, the final editors of the Psalter were obviously not eclectic in their selection. They knew that many voices from many times spoke here, but none that in their judgment was incompatible with the Law and the Prophets. No doubt they also assumed that each psalm was to be understood in the light of the collection as a whole. That assumption we may share. Hence something, after all, can be said concerning seven major theological themes that, while admittedly a bit artificial, need not seriously distort and can be helpful to the student of the Psalms.
Theology: Major Themes
- At the core of the theology of the Psalter is the conviction that the gravitational center of life (of right human understanding, trust, hope, service, morality, adoration), but also of history and of the whole creation (heaven and earth), is God (Yahweh, “the Lord”; see Dt 6:4 and note). He is the Great King over all, the One to whom all things are subject. He created all things and preserves them; they are the robe of glory with which he has clothed himself. Because he ordered them, they have a well-defined and “true” identity (no chaos there). Because he maintains them, they are sustained and kept secure from disruption, confusion or annihilation. Because he alone is the sovereign God, they are governed by one hand and held in the service of one divine purpose. Under God creation is a cosmos—an orderly and systematic whole. What we distinguish as “nature” and history had for the psalmists one Lord, under whose rule all things worked together. Through the creation the Great King’s majestic glory is displayed. He is good (wise, righteous, faithful, amazingly benevolent and merciful—evoking trust), and he is great (his knowledge, thoughts and works are beyond human comprehension—evoking reverent awe). By his good and lordly rule he is shown to be the Holy One.
- As the Great King by right of creation and enduring absolute sovereignty, he ultimately will not tolerate any worldly power that opposes or denies or ignores him. He will come to rule the nations so that all will be compelled to acknowledge him. This expectation is no doubt the root and broadest scope of the psalmists’ long view of the future. Because the Lord is the Great King beyond all challenge, his righteous and peaceable kingdom will come, overwhelming all opposition and purging the creation of all rebellion against his rule—such will be the ultimate outcome of history.
- As the Great King on whom all creatures depend, he opposes the “proud,” those who rely on their own resources (and/or the gods they have contrived) to work out their own destiny.These are the ones who ruthlessly wield whatever power they possess to attain worldly wealth, status and security; who are a law to themselves and exploit others as they will. In the Psalter, this kind of “pride” is the root of all evil. Those who embrace it, though they may seem to prosper, will be brought down to death, their final end. The “humble,” the “poor and needy,” those who acknowledge their dependence on the Lord in all things—these are the ones in whom God delights. Hence the “fear of the Lord”—i.e., humble trust in and obedience to the Lord—is the “beginning” of all wisdom (111:10). Ultimately, those who embrace it will inherit the earth. Not even death can hinder their seeing the face of God.
The psalmists’ hope for the future—the future of God and his kingdom and the future of the godly—was firm, though somewhat generalized. None of the psalmists gives expression to a two-age vision of the future (the present evil age giving way to a new age of righteousness and peace on the other side of a great eschatological divide). Such a view began to appear in the intertestamental literature—a view that had been foreshadowed by Daniel (see especially 12:2–3) and by Isaiah (see65:17–25; 66:22–24)—and it later received full expression in the teaching of Jesus and the apostles. But this revelation was only a fuller development consistent with the hopes the psalmists lived by.
- Because God is the Great King, he is the ultimate Executor of justice among humans (to avenge oneself is an act of the “proud”). God is the court of appeal when persons are threatened or wronged—especially when no earthly court that he has established has jurisdiction (as in the case of international conflicts) or is able to judge (as when one is wronged by public slander) or is willing to act (out of fear or corruption). He is the mighty and faithful Defender of the defenseless and the wronged. He knows every deed and the secrets of every heart. There is no escaping his scrutiny. No false testimony will mislead him in judgment. And he hears the pleas brought to him. As the good and faithful Judge, he delivers those who are oppressed or wrongfully attacked and redresses the wrongs committed against them (see note on 5:10). This is the unwavering conviction that accounts for the psalmists’ impatient complaints when they boldly, yet as “poor and needy,” cry to him, “Why, O Lord, (have you not yet delivered me)?” “How long, O Lord (before you act)?”
- As the Great King over all the earth, the Lord has chosen Israel to be his servant people, his “inheritance” among the nations.He has delivered them by mighty acts out of the hands of the world powers, he has given them a land of their own (territory that he took from other nations to be his own “inheritance” in the earth), and he has united them with himself in covenant as the initial embodiment of his redeemed kingdom. Thus both their destiny and his honor came to be bound up with this relationship. To them he also gave his word of revelation, which testified of him, made specific his promises and proclaimed his will. By God’s covenant, Israel was to live among the nations, loyal only to her heavenly King. She was to trust solely in his protection, hope in his promises, live in accordance with his will and worship him exclusively. She was to sing his praises to the whole world—which in a special sense revealed Israel’s anticipatory role in the evangelization of the nations.
- As the Great King, Israel’s covenant Lord, God chose David to be his royal representative on earth. In this capacity, David was the Lord’s “servant”—i.e., a member of the Great King’s administration. The Lord himself anointed him and adopted him as his royal “son” to rule in his name. Through him God made his people secure in the promised land and subdued all the powers that threatened them. What is more, he covenanted to preserve the Davidic dynasty. Henceforth the kingdom of God on earth, while not dependent on the house of David, was linked to it by God’s decision and commitment. In its continuity and strength lay Israel’s security and hope as she faced a hostile world. And since the Davidic kings were God’s royal representatives in the earth, in concept seated at God’s right hand (110:1), the scope of their rule was potentially worldwide (see Ps 2).
The Lord’s anointed, however, was more than a warrior king. He was to be endowed by God to govern his people with godlike righteousness: to deliver the oppressed, defend the defenseless, suppress the wicked, and thus bless the nation with internal peace and prosperity. He was also an intercessor with God in behalf of the nation, the builder and maintainer of the temple (as God’s earthly palace and the nation’s house of prayer) and the foremost voice calling the nation to worship the Lord. It is perhaps with a view to these last duties that he is declared to be not only king, but also “priest” (see Ps 110 and notes).
- As the Great King, Israel’s covenant Lord, God (who had chosen David and his dynasty to be his royal representatives) also chose Jerusalem (the City of David) as his own royal city, the earthly seat of his throne. Thus Jerusalem (Zion) became the earthly capital (and symbol) of the kingdom of God. There in his palace (the temple) he sat enthroned among his people.There his people could meet with him to bring their prayers and praise, and to see his power and glory. From there he brought salvation, dispensed blessings and judged the nations. And with him as the city’s great Defender, Jerusalem was the secure citadel of the kingdom of God, the hope and joy of God’s people.
God’s goodwill and faithfulness toward his people were most strikingly symbolized by his pledged presence among them at his temple in Jerusalem, the “city of the Great King” (48:2). But no manifestation of his benevolence was greater than his readiness to forgive the sins of those who humbly confessed them and whose hearts showed him that their repentance was genuine and that their professions of loyalty to him had integrity. As they anguished over their own sinfulness, the psalmists remembered the ancient testimony of their covenant Lord: I am Yahweh (“the Lord”), “the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin” (Ex 34:6–7). Only so did they dare to submit to him as his people, to “fear” him (see 130:3–4).
Theology: Summary, Messianic Import, and Conclusion
Unquestionably the supreme kingship of Yahweh (in which he displays his transcendent greatness and goodness) is the most basic metaphor and most pervasive theological concept in the Psalter—as in the OT generally. It provides the fundamental perspective in which people are to view themselves, the whole creation, events in “nature” and history, and the future. All creation is Yahweh’s one kingdom. To be a creature in the world is to be a part of his kingdom and under his rule. To be a human being in the world is to be dependent on and responsible to him. To proudly deny that fact is the root of all wickedness—the wickedness that now pervades the world.
God’s election of Israel and subsequently of David and Zion, together with the giving of his word, represent the renewed inbreaking of God’s righteous kingdom into this world of rebellion and evil. It initiates the great divide between the righteous nation and the wicked nations, and on a deeper level between the righteous and the wicked, a more significant distinction that cuts even through Israel. In the end this divine enterprise will triumph. Human pride will be humbled, and wrongs will be redressed. The humble will be given the whole earth to possess, and the righteous and peaceable kingdom of God will come to full realization. These theological themes, of course, have profound religious and moral implications. Of these, too, the psalmists spoke.
One question that ought yet to be addressed is: Do the Psalms speak of the Christ? Yes, in a variety of ways—but not as the prophets do. The Psalter was never numbered among the “prophetic” books. On the other hand, when the Psalter was being given its final form, what the psalms said about the Lord and his ways with his people, about the Lord and his ways with the nations, about the Lord and his ways with the righteous and the wicked, and what the psalmists said about the Lord’s anointed, his temple and his holy city—all this was understood in light of the prophetic literature (both Former and Latter Prophets). Relative to these matters, the Psalter and the Prophets were mutually reinforcing and interpretive.
When the Psalms speak of the king on David’s throne, they speak of the king who is being crowned (as in Ps 2; 72; 110—though some think 110 is an exception) or is reigning (as in Ps 45) at the time. They proclaim his status as the Lord’s anointed and declare what the Lord will accomplish through him and his dynasty. Thus they also speak of the sons of David to come—and in the exile and the postexilic era, when there was no reigning king, they spoke to Israel only of the great Son of David whom the prophets had announced as the one in whom God’s covenant with David would yet be fulfilled. So the NT quotes these psalms as testimonies to Christ, which in their unique way they are. In him they are truly fulfilled.
When in the Psalms righteous sufferers—who are “righteous” because they are innocent, not having provoked or wronged their adversaries, and because they are among the “humble” who trust in the Lord—cry out to God in their distress (as in Ps 22; 69), they give voice to the sufferings of God’s servants in a hostile and evil world.
These cries became the prayers of God’s oppressed “saints,” and as such they were taken up into Israel’s book of prayers. When Christ came in the flesh, he identified himself with God’s “humble” people in the world. He became for them God’s righteous servant par excellence, and he shared their sufferings at the hands of the wicked. Thus these prayers became his prayers also—uniquely his prayers. In him the suffering and deliverance of which these prayers speak are fulfilled (though they continue to be the prayers also of those who take up their cross and follow him).
Similarly, in speaking of God’s covenant people, of the city of God, and of the temple in which God dwells, the Psalms ultimately speak of Christ’s church. The Psalter is not only the prayer book of the second temple; it is also the enduring prayer book of the people of God. Now, however, it must be used in the light of the new era of redemption that dawned with the first coming of the Messiah and that will be consummated at his second coming.
© Zondervan. From the Zondervan NIV Study Bible. Used with Permission.