Psa 17:1-5 | KD | STEP | is placed after , because just like the latter (cf. ) it closes with the hope of a blessed and satisfying vision of God. In other respects also the two Psalms have many prominent features in common: as, for instance, the petition שׁמרני, ; ; the retrospect on nightly fellowship with God, ; ; the form of address in prayer אל, ; ; the verb תּמך, ; , etc. (vid., Symbolae p. 49), notwithstanding a great dissimilarity in their tone. For is the first of those which we call Psalms written in the indignant style, in the series of the Davidic Psalms. The language of the Psalms of David, which is in other instances so flowing and clear, becomes more harsh and, in accordance with the subject and mood, as it were, full of unresolved dissonances ( ; ; ; , cf. ) when describing the dissolute conduct of his enemies, and of the ungodly in general. The language is then more rough and unmanageable, and wanting in the clearness and transparency we find elsewhere. The tone of the language also becomes more dull and, as it were, a dull murmur. It rolls on like the rumble of distant thunder, by piling up the suffixes mo , āmo , ēmo , as in ; ; , , where David speaks of his enemies and describes them in a tone suggested by the indignation, which is working with his breast; or in ; ; ; ; , where, as in prophetic language, he announces to them of the judgment of God. The more vehement and less orderly flow of the language which we find here, is the result of the inward tumult of his feelings. There are so many parallels in the thought and expression of thought of this Psalm in other Davidic Psalms (among those we have already commented on we may instance more especially and , and also and ), that even Hitzig admits the לדוד. The author of the Psalm is persecuted, and others with him; foes, among whom one, their leader, stands prominently forward, plot against his life, and have encompassed him about in the most threatening manner, eager for his death. All this corresponds, line for line, with the situation of David in the wilderness of Maon (about three hours and three quarters S.S.E. of Hebron), as narrated in 1Sa 23:25., when Saul and his men were so close upon the heels of David and his men, that he only escaped capture by a most fortunate incident. The only name inscribed on this Psalm is תּפּלּה (a prayer), the most comprehensive name for the Psalms, and the oldest ( ); for שׁיר and מזמור were only given to them when they were sung in the liturgy and with musical accompaniment. As the title of a Psalm it is found five times ( , , , , ) in the Psalter, and besides that once, in Hab. Habakkuk’s תפלה is a hymn composed for music. But in the Psalter we do not find any indication of the Psalms thus inscribed being arranged for music. The strophe schema is 4. 7; 4. 4. 6. 7.

‏ Psalms 17:1-5

Flight of an innocent and Persecuted Man for Refuge in the Lord, Who Knoweth Them That Are His

Psa 17:1-15 is placed after Psa 16:1-11, because just like the latter (cf. Psa 11:7) it closes with the hope of a blessed and satisfying vision of God. In other respects also the two Psalms have many prominent features in common: as, for instance, the petition שׁמרני, Psa 16:1; Psa 17:8; the retrospect on nightly fellowship with God, Psa 16:7; Psa 17:3; the form of address in prayer אל, Psa 16:1; Psa 17:6; the verb תּמך, Psa 16:5; Psa 17:5, etc. (vid., Symbolae p. 49), notwithstanding a great dissimilarity in their tone. For Psa 16:1-11 is the first of those which we call Psalms written in the indignant style, in the series of the Davidic Psalms. The language of the Psalms of David, which is in other instances so flowing and clear, becomes more harsh and, in accordance with the subject and mood, as it were, full of unresolved dissonances (Psa 17:1; Psa 140:1; Psa 58:1; Psa 36:2, cf. Psa 10:2-11) when describing the dissolute conduct of his enemies, and of the ungodly in general. The language is then more rough and unmanageable, and wanting in the clearness and transparency we find elsewhere. The tone of the language also becomes more dull and, as it were, a dull murmur. It rolls on like the rumble of distant thunder, by piling up the suffixes mo , āmo , ēmo, as in Psa 17:10; Psa 35:16; Psa 64:6, Psa 64:9, where David speaks of his enemies and describes them in a tone suggested by the indignation, which is working with his breast; or in Psa 59:12-14; Psa 56:8; Psa 21:10-13; Psa 140:10; Psa 58:7, where, as in prophetic language, he announces to them of the judgment of God. The more vehement and less orderly flow of the language which we find here, is the result of the inward tumult of his feelings.

There are so many parallels in the thought and expression of thought of this Psalm in other Davidic Psalms (among those we have already commented on we may instance more especially Psa 7:1 and Psa 11:1, and also Psa 4:1 and Psa 10:1), that even Hitzig admits the לדוד. The author of the Psalm is persecuted, and others with him; foes, among whom one, their leader, stands prominently forward, plot against his life, and have encompassed him about in the most threatening manner, eager for his death. All this corresponds, line for line, with the situation of David in the wilderness of Maon (about three hours and three quarters S.S.E. of Hebron), as narrated in 1Sa 23:25., when Saul and his men were so close upon the heels of David and his men, that he only escaped capture by a most fortunate incident.

The only name inscribed on this Psalm is תּפּלּה (a prayer), the most comprehensive name for the Psalms, and the oldest (Psa 72:20); for שׁיר and מזמור were only given to them when they were sung in the liturgy and with musical accompaniment. As the title of a Psalm it is found five times (Psa 17:1, Psa 86:1, Psa 90:1, Psa 92:1, Psa 142:1) in the Psalter, and besides that once, in Hab. Habakkuk’s תפלה is a hymn composed for music. But in the Psalter we do not find any indication of the Psalms thus inscribed being arranged for music. The strophe schema is 4. 7; 4. 4. 6. 7. Psa 17:1-2 צדק is the accusative of the object: the righteousness, intended by the suppliant, is his own (Psa 17:15). He knows that he is not merely righteous in his relation to man, but also in his relation to God. In all such assertions of pious self-consciousness, that which is intended is a righteousness of life which has its ground in the righteousness of faith. True, Hupfeld is of opinion, that under the Old Testament nothing was known either of righteousness which is by faith or of a righteousness belonging to another and imputed. But if this were true, then Paul was in gross error and Christianity is built upon the sand. But the truth, that faith is the ultimate ground of righteousness, is expressed in Gen 15:6, and at other turning-points in the course of the history of redemption; and the truth, that the righteousness which avails before God is a gift of grace is, for instance, a thought distinctly marked out in the expression of Jeremiah צדקנוּ ה, “the Lord our righteousness.” The Old Testament conception, it is true, looks more to the phenomena than to the root of the matter (ist mehr phänomenell als wurzelhaft), is (so to speak) more Jacobic than Pauline; but the righteousness of life of the Old Testament and that of the New have one and the same basis, viz., in the grace of God, the Redeemer, towards sinful man, who in himself is altogether wanting in righteousness before God (Psa 143:2). Thus there is no self-righteousness, in David’s praying that the righteousness, which in him is persecuted and cries for help, may be heard. For, on the one hand, in his personal relation to Saul, he knows himself to be free from any ungrateful thoughts of usurpation, and on the other, in his personal relation to God free from מרמה, i.e., self-delusion and hypocrisy. The shrill cry for help, רנּה, which he raises, is such as may be heard and answered, because they are not lips of deceit with which he prays. The actual fact is manifest לפני יהוה, therefore may his right go forth מלּפניו, - just what does happen, by its being publicly proclaimed and openly maintained - from Him, for His eyes, the eyes of Him who knoweth the hearts (Psa 11:4), behold מישׁרים (as in Psa 58:2; Psa 75:3 = בּמישׁרים, Psa 9:9, and many other passages), in uprightness, i.e., in accordance with the facts of the case and without partiality. מישׁרים might also be an accusative of the object (cf. 1Ch 29:17), but the usage of the language much more strongly favours the adverbial rendering, which is made still more natural by the confirmatory relation in which Psa 17:2 stands to Psa 17:2. Psa 17:3-5

David refers to the divine testing and illumination of the inward parts, which he has experienced in himself, in support of his sincerity. The preterites in Psa 17:3 express the divine acts that preceded the result בּל־תּמצא, viz., the testing He has instituted, which is referred to in צרפתּני and also בּחנתּ as a trying of gold by fire, and in פּקד as an investigation (Job 7:18). The result of the close scrutiny to which God has subjected him in the night, when the bottom of a man’s heart is at once made manifest, whether it be in his thoughts when awake or in the dream and fancies of the sleeper, was and is this, that He does not find, viz., anything whatever to punish in him, anything that is separated as dross from the gold. To the mind of the New Testament believer with his deep, and as it were microscopically penetrating, insight into the depth of sin, such a confession concerning himself would be more difficult than to the mind of an Old Testament saint. For a separation and disunion of flesh and spirit, which was unknown in the same degree to the Old Testament, has been accomplished in the New Testament consciousness by the facts and operations of redemption revealed in the New Testament; although at the same time it must be remembered that in such confessions the Old Testament consciousness does not claim to be clear from sins, but only from a conscious love of sin, and from a self-love that is hostile to God.

With זמּותי David begins his confession of how Jahve found him to be, instead of finding anything punishable in him. This word is either an infinitive like חנּות (Psa 77:10) with the regular ultima accentuation, formed after the manner of the הל verbs, - in accordance with which Hitzig renders it: my thinking does not overstep my mouth, - or even 1 pers. praet., which is properly Milel, but does also occur as Milra, e.g., Deu 32:41; Isa 44:16 (vid., on Job 19:17), - according to which Böttcher translates: should I think anything evil, it dare not pass beyond my mouth, - or (since זמם may denote the determination that precedes the act, e.g., Jer 4:28; Lam 2:17): I have determined my mouth shall not transgress. This last rendering is opposed by the fact, that עבר by itself in the ethical signification “to transgress” (cf. post-biblical עברה παράβασις) is not the usage of the biblical Hebrew, and that when יעבר־פּי stand close together, פי is presumptively the object. We therefore give the preference to Böttcher’s explanation, which renders זמותי as a hypothetical perfect and is favoured by Pro 30:32 (which is to be translated: and if thou thinkest evil, (lay) thy hand on thy mouth!). Nevertheless בל יעבר־פי is not the expression of a fact, but of a purpose, as the combination of בל with the future requires it to be taken. The psalmist is able to testify of himself that he so keeps evil thoughts in subjection within him, even when they may arise, that they do not pass beyond his mouth, much less that he should put them into action. But perhaps the psalmist wrote פּיך originally, “my reflecting does not go beyond Thy commandment” (according to Num 22:18; 1Sa 15:24; Pro 8:29), - a meaning better suited, as a result of the search, to the nightly investigation. The ל of לפעלּות fo ל need not be the ל of reference (as to); it is that of the state or condition, as in Psa 32:6; Psa 69:22. אדם, as perhaps also in Job 31:33; Hos 6:7 (if אדם is not there the name of the first man), means, men as they are by nature and habit. בּדבר שׂפתיך does not admit of being connected with לפעלּות: at the doings of the world contrary to Thy revealed will (Hofmann and others); for פּעל בּ cannot mean: to act contrary to any one, but only: to work upon any one, Job 35:6. These words must therefore be regarded as a closer definition, placed first, of the שׁמרתּי which follows: in connection with the doings of men, by virtue of the divine commandment, he has taken care of the paths of the oppressor, viz., not to go in them; 1Sa 25:21 is an instance in support of this rendering, where שׁמרתי, as in Job 2:6, means: I have kept (Nabal’s possession), not seizing upon it myself. Jerome correctly translates vias latronis; for פּריץ signifies one who breaks in, i.e., one who does damage intentionally and by violence. The confession concerning himself is still continued in Psa 17:5, for the inf. absol. תּמך, if taken as imperative would express a prayer for constancy, that is alien to the circumstances described. The perfect after בּל is also against such a rendering. It must therefore be taken as inf. historicus, and explained according to Job 23:11, cf. Psa 41:13. The noun following the inf. absol., which is usually the object, is the subject in this instance, as, e.g., in Job 40:2; Pro 17:12; Ecc 4:2, and frequently. It is אשׁוּרי, and not אשּׁוּרי, אשׁור (a step) never having the שׁ dageshed, except in Psa 17:11 and Job 31:7.