Psalms 144:1
Taking Courage in God before a Decisive Combat
Praised be Jahve who teacheth me to fight and conquer (Psa 144:1, Psa 144:2), me the feeble mortal, who am strong only in Him, Psa 144:3-4. May Jahve then be pleased to grant a victory this time also over the boastful, lying enemies, Psa 144:5-8; so will I sing new songs of thanksgiving unto Him, the bestower of victory, Psa 144:9-10. May He be pleased to deliver me out of the hand of the barbarians who envy us our prosperity, which is the result of our having Jahve as our God, Psa 144:11-15. A glance at this course of the thought commends the additional inscription of the lxx (according to Origen only “in a few copies”), πρὸς τὸν Γολιάδ, and the Targumist’s reference of the “evil sword” in Psa 144:10 to the sword of Goliath (after the example of the Midrash). Read 1Sa 17:47. The Psalm has grown out of this utterance of David. In one of the old histories, just as several of these lie at the foundation of our Books of Samuel as sources of information that are still recognisable, it was intended to express the feelings with which David entered upon the single-handed combat with Goliath and decided the victory of Israel over the Philistines. At that time he had already been anointed by Samuel, as both the narratives which have been worked up together in the First Book of Samuel assume: see 1Sa 16:13; 1Sa 10:1. And this victory was for him a gigantic stride to the throne. If אשׁר in Psa 144:12 is taken as eo quod, so that envy is brought under consideration as a motive for the causeless (שׁוא), lyingly treacherous rising (ימין שׁקר) of the neighbouring peoples, then the passage Psa 144:12-15 can at any rate be comprehended as a part of the form of the whole. But only thus, and not otherwise; for אשׁר cannot be intended as a statement of the aim or purpose: in order that they may be...(Jerome, De Wette, Hengstenberg, and others), since nothing but illustrative substantival clauses follow; nor do these clauses admit of an optative sense: We, whose sons, may they be...(Maurer); and אשׁר never has an assuring sense (Vaihinger). It is also evident that we cannot, with Saadia, go back to Psa 144:9 for the interpretation of the אשׁר (Arab. asbh 'lâ mâ). But that junction by means of eo quod is hazardous, since envy or ill-will (קנאה) is not previously mentioned, and וימינם ימין שׁקר expresses a fact, and not an action. If it is further considered that nothing is wanting in the way of finish to the Psalm if it closes with Psa 144:11, it becomes all the more doubtful whether Psa 144:12-15 belonged originally to the Psalm. And yet we cannot discover any Psalm in its immediate neighbourhood to which this piece might be attached. It might the most readily, as Hitzig correctly judges, be inserted between Psa 147:13 and Psa 147:14 of Ps 147. But the rhythm and style differ from this Psalm, and we must therefore rest satisfied with the fact that a fragment of another Psalm is here added to Psa 144:1-15, which of necessity may be accounted as an integral part of it; but in spite of the fact that the whole Psalm is built up on a gigantic scale, this was not its original corner-stone, just as one does not indeed look for anything further after the refrain, together with the mention of David in Psa 144:10., cf. Ps 18:51.
Copyright information for
KD