Bible Commentaries

Taking Heart in God, the All-Recompensing One

The same longing after Zion meets us sounding forth from this as from thepreceding Psalm. To remain his whole life long in the vicinity of the houseof God, is here his only prayer; and that, rescued from his enemies, heshall there offer sacrifices of thanksgiving, is his confident expectation. The היכל of God, the King, is at present only a אהל which,however, on account of Him who sits enthroned therein, may just as muchbe called היכל as the היכל which Ezekiel beheld inremembrance of the Mosaic tabernacle, אהל, Ezekiel 41:1. Cut offfrom the sanctuary, the poet is himself threatened on all sides by thedangers of war; but he is just as courageous in God as in Psalm 3:7, where thebattle is already going on: “I do not fear the myriads of people, who areencamped against me.” The situation, therefore, resembles that of Davidduring the time of Absolom. But this holds good only of the first half, Psalm 27:1. In the second half, Psalm 27:10 is not in favour of its being composed byDavid. In fact the two halves are very unlike one another. They form ahysteron-proteroninasmuch as the fides triumphansof the first partchanges into fides supplexin the second, and with the beginning of the δέησις in Psalm 27:7, the style becomes heavy and awkward, the strophicarrangement obscure, and even the boundaries of the lines of the versesuncertain; so that one is tempted to regard Psalm 27:7 as the appendage ofanother writer. The compiler, however, must have had the Psalm beforehim exactly as we now have it; for the grounds for his placing it to followPsalm 26:1-12 are to be found in both portions, cf. Psalm 27:7 with Psalm 26:11; Psalm 27:11 withPsalm 26:12.

In this first strophe is expressed the bold confidence of faith. It is a hexastich in the caesural schema. Let darkness break in upon him, the darkness of night, of trouble, and of spiritual conflict, yet Jahve is his Light, and if he is in Him, he is in the light and there shines upon him a sun, that sets not and knows no eclipse. This sublime, infinitely profound name for God, אורי, is found only in this passage; and there is only one other expression that can be compared with it. viz., בּא אורך in Isaiah 60:1; cf. φῶς ἐλήλυθα , John 12:46. ישׁעי does not stand beside אורי as an unfigurative, side by side with a figurative expression; for the statement that God is light, is not a metaphor. David calls Him his “salvation” in regard to everything that oppresses him, and the “stronghold (מעוז from עזז, with an unchangeable å) of his life” in regard to everything that exposes him to peril. In Jahve he conquers far and wide; in Him his life is hidden as it were behind a fortress built upon a rock (Psalm 31:3). When to the wicked who come upon him in a hostile way (קרב על differing from קרב אל), he attributes the intention of devouring his flesh, they are conceived of as wild beasts. To eat up any one's flesh signifies, even in Job 19:22, the same as to pursue any one by evil speaking (in Aramaic by slander, back-biting) to his destruction. In בּקרב (the Shebâ of the only faintly closed syllable is raised to a Chateph, as in ולשׁכני, Psalm 31:12, לשׁאול, and the like. The לי of איבי לּי may, as also in Psalm 25:2 (cf. Psalm 144:2), be regarded as giving intensity to the notion of special, personal enmity; but a mere repetition of the subject (the enemy) without the repetition of their hostile purpose would be tame in the parallel member of the verseלי is a variation of the preceding עלי, as in Lamentations 3:60. In the apodosis המּה כּשׁלוּ ונפלוּ, the overthrow of the enemy is regarded beforehand as an accomplished fact. The holy boldness and imperturbable repose are expressed in Psalm 27:3 in the very rhythm. The thesis or downward movement in Psalm 27:3 is spondaic: he does not allow himself to be disturbed; the thesis in Psalm 27:3 is iambic: he can be bold. The rendering of Hitzig (as of Rashi): “in this do I trust, viz., that Jahve is my light, etc.,” is erroneous. Such might be the interpretation, if בזאת אני בוטח closed Psalm 27:2; but it cannot refer back over Psalm 27:2 to Psalm 27:1; and why should the poet have expressed himself thus materially, instead of saying ביהוה? The fact of the case is this, בוטח signifies even by itself “of good courage,” e.g., Proverbs 11:15; and בזאת “in spite of this” (Coccejus: hoc non obstante), Leviticus 26:27, cf. Psalm 78:32, begins the apodosis, at the head of which we expect to find an adversative conjunction.

There is only one thing, that he desires, although he also has besides fullsatisfaction in Jahve in the midst of strangers and in trouble. The future isused side by side with the perfect in Psalm 27:4 , in order to express an ardentlonging which extends out of the past into the future, and therefore runsthrough his whole life. The one thing sought is unfolded in שׁבתּי וגו. A life-long dwelling in the house of Jahve, that is to say intimatespiritual intercourse with the God, who has His dwelling (בית), Hispalace (היכל) in the holy tent, is the one desire of David's heart, inorder that he may behold and feast upon (חזה בּ of a clinging,lingering, chained gaze, and consequently a more significant form ofexpression than חזה with an accusative, Psalm 63:3) נעם ה (Psalm 90:17), the pleasantness (or gracefulness) of Jahve, i.e., Hisrevelation, full of grace, which is there visible to the eye of the spirit. The interpretation which regards amaenitasas being equivalent to amaenus cultustakes hold of the idea from the wrong side. The assertion that בּקּר בּ is intended as a synonym of חזה בּ, of a pleased andlingering contemplation (Hupf., Hitz.), is contrary to the meaning of theverb, which signifies “to examine (with ל to seek or spie about afteranything, Leviticus 13:36), to reflect on, or consider;” even the post-biblicalsignification to visit, more especially the sick (whence בּקּוּר הלים),comes from the primary meaning investigareAn appropriate sense maybe obtained in the present instance by regarding it as a denominative fromבּקשׁ and rendering it as Dunash and Rashi have done, “and to appearearly in His temple;” but it is unnecessary to depart from the general usageof the language. Hengstenberg rightly retains the signification “to meditate on.” בּהיכלו is a designation of the place consecrated to devotion, and לבקּר is meant to refer to contemplative meditation that loses itself in God who is there manifest. In Psalm 27:5 David bases the justification of his desire upon that which the sanctuary of God is to him; the futures affirm what Jahve will provide for him in His sanctuary. It is a refuge in which he may hide himself, where Jahve takes good care of him who takes refuge therein from the storms of trouble that rage outside: there he is far removed from all dangers, he is lifted high above them and his feet are upon rocky ground. The Chethîb may be read בּסכּה, as in Psalm 31:21 and with Ewald §257, d; but, in this passage, with אהל alternates סך, which takes the place of סכּה in the poetic style (Psalm 76:3; Lamentations 2:6), though it does not do so by itself, but always with a suffix.

(Note: Just in like manner they say in poetic style צידהּ, Psalm 132:15; פּנּהּ, Proverbs 7:8; מדּה, Job 11:9; גּלּהּ, Zechariah 4:2; and perhaps even נצּהּ, Genesis 40:10; for צידתהּ, פּנּתהּ, מדּתהּ, גּלּתהּ, and נצּתהּ; as, in general, shorter forms are sometimes found in the inflexion, which do not occur in the corresponding principal form, e.g., צוּרם, Psalm 49:15, for צוּרתם; מגוּרם, Psalm 55:16, for מגוּרתם; בּערמם, Job 5:13, for בּערמתם; בּתבוּנם, Hosea 13:2, for בּתבוּנתם; פּחם; Nehemiah 5:14, for פּחתם; cf. Hitzig on Hosea 13:2, and Böttcher's Neue Aehrenlese, No. 693.)

With ועתּה the poet predicts inferentially (cf. Psalm 2:10) thefulfilment of what he fervently desires, the guarantee of which lies in hisvery longing itself. זבחי תּרוּעה do not meansacrifices in connection with which the trumpets are blown by the priests;for this was only the case in connection with the sacrifices of the wholecongregation (Numbers 10:10), not with those of individuals. תּרוּעה is a synonym of תּודה, Psalm 26:7; and זבחי תּרוּעה is a stronger form of expression for זבחי תודה (Psalm 107:22), i.e., (cf. זבחי צדק, Psalm 4:6; 51:21) sacrifices of jubilant thanksgiving: he will offer sacrifices in which his gratitude plays a prominent part, and will sing songs of thanksgiving, accompanied by the playing of stringed instruments, to his Deliverer, who has again and so gloriously verified His promises.

Vows of thanksgiving on the assumption of the answering of the prayerand the fulfilment of the thing supplicated, are very common at the closeof Psalms. But in this Psalm the prayer is only just beginning at this stage. The transition is brought about by the preceding conception of the dangerthat threatens him from the side of his foes who are round about him. Thereality, which, in the first part, is overcome and surmounted by his faith,makes itself consciously felt here. It is not to be rendered, as has beendone by the Vulgate, Exaudi Domine vocem qua clamavi(rather, clamo) ad te(the introit of the Dominica exspectationisin the interval of preparationbetween Ascension and Pentecost). שׁמע has Dechîandaccordingly קולי אקרא, voce mea(as in Psalm 3:5) clamoisan adverbial clause equivalent to voce mea clamante meIn Psalm 27:8 לך cannot possibly be so rendered that ל is treated as Lamed auctoris(Dathe,Olshausen): Thine, saith my heart, is (the utterance:) seek ye may face. The declaration is opposed to this sense, thus artificially put upon it. לך אמר are undoubtedly to be construed together; andwhat the heart says to Jahve is not: Seek ye my face, but by reason ofthis, and as its echo (Calvin: velut Deo succinens): I will therefore seekThy face. Just as in Job 42:3, a personal inference is drawn from a directlyquoted saying of God. In the periodic style it would be necessary totranspose בּקּשׁוּ פּני thus: since Thou hast permittedand exhorted us, or in accordance with Thy persuasive invitation, that weshould seek Thy face, I do seek Thy face (Hupfeld). There is noretrospective reference to any particular passage in the Tôra, such as Deuteronomy 4:29. The prayer is not based upon any single passage of Scripture, butupon God's commands and promises in general.

The requests are now poured forth with all the greater freedom andimportunity, that God may be willing to be entreated and invoked. TheHiph. הטּה signifies in this passage standing by itself (cf. Job 24:4): to push aside. The clause עזרתי היית doesnot say: be Thou my help (which is impossible on syntactical grounds),nor is it to be taken relatively: Thou who wast my help (for which there isno ground in what precedes); but on the contrary the praet. gives theground of the request that follows “Thou art my help (lit., Thou hasbecome, or hast ever been) - cast me, then, not away,” and it is, moreover,accented accordingly. Psalm 27:10, as we have already observed, does not soundas though it came from the lips of David, of whom it is only said duringthe time of his persecution by Saul, that at that time he was obliged to partfrom his parents, 1 Samuel 22:3. The words certainly might be David's, if Psalm 27:10 would admit of being taken hypothetically, as is done by Ewald, §362,b: should my father and my mother forsake me, yet Jahve will etc. But theentreaty “forsake me not” is naturally followed by the reason: for myfather and my mother have forsaken me; and just as naturally does theconsolation: but Jahve will take me up, prepare the way for the entreatieswhich begin anew in Psalm 27:11. Whereas, if כי is taken hypothetically,Psalm 27:11 stands disconnectedly in the midst of the surrounding requests. Onיאספני cf. Joshua 20:4.

He is now wandering about like a hunted deer; but God is able to guide himso that he may escape all dangers. And this is what he prays for. As in Psalm 143:10, מישׁור is used in an ethical sense; and differs in thisrespect from its use in Psalm 26:12. On שׁררים, see the primary passage Psalm 5:9,of which this is an echo. Wily spies dodge his every step and would gladlysee what they have invented against him and wished for him, realised. Should he enter the way of sin leading to destruction, it would tend to the dishonour of God, just as on the contrary it is a matter of honour with God not to let His servant fall. Hence he prays to be led in the way of God, for a oneness of his own will with the divine renders a man inaccessible to evil. נפשׁ, Psalm 27:12, is used, as in Psalm 17:9, and in the similar passage, which is genuinely Davidic, Psalm 41:3, in the signification passion or strong desire; because the soul, in its natural state, is selfishness and inordinate desire. יפח is a collateral form of יפיח; they are both adjectives formed from the future of the verb פּוּח (like ירב, יריב): accustomed to breathe out (exhale), i.e., either to express, or to snort, breathe forth (cf. πνεῖν , or ἐμπνεῖν φόνον and θόνοῦ, θυμον , and the like, Acts 9:1). In both Hitzig sees participles of יפח (Jeremiah 4:31); but Psalm 10:5 and Habakkuk 2:3 lead back to פּוּח (פּיח); and Hupfeld rightly recognises such nouns formed from futures to be, according to their original source, circumlocutions of the participle after the manner of an elliptical relative clause (the (ṣifat) of the Arabic syntax), and explains יפיח כּזבים, together with יפח חמס, from the verbal construction which still continues in force.

Self-encouragement to firmer confidence of faith. Joined to Psalm 27:12 (Aben-Ezra, Kimchi), Psalm 27:13 trails badly after it. We must, with Geier, Dachselt,and others, suppose that the apodosis is wanting to the protasis with itsלוּלא pointed with three points above,

(Note: The ו has not any point above it, because it might be easily mistaken for a Cholem, vid., Baer's Psalterium p. 130.)

and fourbelow, according to the Masora (cf. B. Berachoth 4a), but a wordwhich is indispensably necessary, and is even attested by the lxx(å) and the Targum (although not by any other of theancient versions); cf. the protasis with לוּ, which has noapodosis, in Genesis 50:15, and the apodoses with כּי after לוּלי in Genesis 31:42; Genesis 43:10; 1 Sam. 35:34; 2 Samuel 2:27 (also Numbers 22:33, where אוּלי = אם לא = לוּלי),which are likewise to be explained per aposiopesinThe perfect afterלוּלא (לוּלי) has sometimes the sense of aplusquamperfectum (as in Genesis 43:10, nisi cunctati essemus), and sometimes the sense of an imperfect, as in the present passage (cf. Deuteronomy 32:29 , si saperent). The poet does not speak of a faith that he once had, a past faith, but, in regard to the danger that is even now abiding and present, of the faith he now has, a present faith. The apodosis ought to run something like this (Psalm 119:92; Psalm 94:17): did I not believe, were not confidence preserved to me … then (אז( ne or כּי אז)I should perish; or: then I had suddenly perished. But he has such faith, and he accordingly in Psalm 27:14 encourages himself to go on cheerfully waiting and hoping; he speaks to himself, it is, as it were, the believing half of his soul addressing the despondent and weaker half. Instead of ואמץ (Deuteronomy 31:7) the expression is, as in Ps 31:25, ויאמץ לבּך, let thy heart be strong, let it give proof of strength. The rendering “May He (Jahve) strengthen thy heart” would require יאמּץ; but האמיץ, as e.g., הרחיב; Psalm 25:17, belongs to the transitive denominatives applying to the mind or spirit, in which the Hebrew is by no means poor, and in which the Arabic is especially rich.