maintained. The holiness of God is insisted on with much reiteration,
but it is conceived of as a physical rather than a moral attribute.
It is really only a conception of the unapproachability of God unless
certain purely ritual and physical conditions are observed. For the
enforcement of this idea the old custom of sacrifice was elaborated
and strictly defined, but strangely enough, without explicit teaching
as to its meaning. This is peculiar, and it seems to have remained
largely unnoticed, for many Biblical expositors have adopted without
inquiry the idea that the sacrifices were substitutionary, piacular,
and typical of the sacrifice of Christ. The piacular meaning suggests
itself at so many points that it is startling to find that it cannot be
borne out by careful examination. The sacrifices are in most instances
only efficacious for the forgiveness of unintentional sins, or for
the atonement of ritualistic mistakes made in ignorance or through
inadvertence. The ceremony of laying the hands of the offerer on the
head of the intended victim, suggests that a symbolical transference of
guilt is taking place, and yet only in one case is this accompanied by
a confession of sins, and there the victim is not slain, but led away
for Azazel. The sin-offering involved the death of the animal, but an
animal was not absolutely necessary for the purpose, and flour might
be substituted; and even where we have the slain animal, the idea that
the animal has taken the place of the sinner seems to be excluded by
the fact that its flesh is regarded as "most holy." The offerings are
said to make atonement, but we are not told how this is affected unless
in the passage that states that "it is the blood that maketh atonement,
by reason of the life." The word translated "atonement" means simply "a
covering," and of course may mean that the blood, which is symbolical
of the offered life, either covers the eyes of God from beholding the
sin, or covers the sinner. We are left then, either with the deduction
that the exact significance of the sacrifices was not mentioned because
everyone knew what it was, or that it has not been told because it
was too mysterious, or that there was no definite meaning attached to
them. Originally sacrifice did not bear a piacular significance, but it
would be unsafe to argue from this that no substitutionary value was
attached to the Levitical sacrifices by these priestly lawyers; indeed
the only safe conclusion seems to be that the priests adopted these
sacrifices, which were time-honoured, as the proper ritual for the
approach to God, without any definite inquiry as to their meaning. But
taking the Levitical system as a whole there seems to underlie it the
theory of symbolical, although not piacular substitution. God owns man
entirely, and that by right: his time, possessions, flocks, and lands;
and demands from him the completest recognition of this ownership. Now
in practice, this absolute demand can only be recognised by substitute
and proxy; and so we have the recognition of God's claims by the
observance of one holy day in seven, by the ransom of the first-born,
by the sabbatical and jubilee years, by the tithes, and especially by
the sacrifices. His dwelling in the land is symbolised by the respect
paid to one symbolical holy place; and the continual service He demands
is represented by the daily service carried on by the Levitical caste.
But even if this be the intention of the system, it is nowhere so
defined, and therefore it is not surprising to find that people soon
forgot the symbolical meaning, and treated the symbol as a thing
sufficient in itself; with the result, that the service of God came to
be restricted to a performance of rites that had lost all significance.
One explanation would soon silence any criticism of this scheme
that might arise, namely, that God had so ordained that men should
worship Him. But deeper still there lay a radical misconception of
the very nature of God and of the service He seeks. God was conceived
as inimical not so much to man's sin, as to man himself; and this
danger was averted by the use of protective rites which needed to be
performed with scrupulous care, lest a mistake might bring down on the
worshipper immediate and awful destruction, quite irrespective of his
moral condition. Doubtless the nation might be impressed by these means
with the awful aloofness of God, and there must often have accompanied
this some notion of the ethical character that was expressed in this
separateness; but the means taken for satisfying this character and
demand in the nature of God could never have had any other result than
it did, namely, the conception that attention to details of ritual
could be a substitute for the much more difficult service of repentance
and righteousness. It is possible that we may be under-estimating the
real motive of the Priests' work and its actual success in preserving
religion under these forms; but the radical evil is clearly exposed
when we come to the time of another calamity, that which befel the
nation under Antiochus Epiphanes, when no other method of averting the
anger of God seems to have been thought of, except that of increasing
the rigour of this ritual law and fencing it round with still further
restrictions, until it became a burden too heavy to be borne.
Such a régime utterly failed to understand the teaching of Jesus and
could only regard His religion as impious and lacking in all that was
essential, reverential, or good, and it was "the Law" which put Jesus
to death. It is much to be deplored that the Sacrifice of Christ has
in turn been explained to the conscience touched to penitence and
tenderness by the story of the Cross, rather by the analogy of the Old
Testament sacrifices than by its complete superiority to them as based
upon a different and ethical order; for the rags and tatters of the
Levitical system still impede the religious life; allowing men to think
that God is content with substitutes, can be placated with blood, and
is more concerned with abstract regulations than with moral change.
And so there still hang about religion the same inconsistencies, the
same slaughter of the prophets, the same blindness to the eternal
demands of personal and social righteousness. The motive of the work
of the Priests may have been to enforce the prophetic repentance, but
to gain this end they compromised with unspiritual ritual, and on that
compromise Christ was, and is still crucified.
THE RELIGION OF THE PSALMISTS
Titles of the Psalms, descriptive of their contents:--
(1) Song, Heb. _Shirah._ A lyrical poem for singing. Probably the
earliest title, which in some instances may have belonged to the
original composition.
(2) _Michtam_, perhaps, "a golden piece." The title indicates their
artistic form and choice contents. They were probably all taken from
a previous collection.
(3) _Maschil_, a meditative poem, from a collection made perhaps in
the late Persian period.
(4) Psalm, Heb. _Mizmor_. The name given to a collection used for
public worship, probably in the early Greek period.
(5) _Shiggaion_, (Ps. vii.; also in plural, Hab. iii. 1.) Some take
this to mean a wild, passionate composition, but this Psalm hardly
bears that character. Perhaps we may expect a textual corruption from
_Neginah_: a song accompanied with musical instruments.
(6) A song of Ascents: used in the processions to the Temple.
(7) A prayer.
On the question of the Davidic authorship of the Psalms, the
following passages should be examined; they would appear to be in
hopeless disagreement with the life of David as depicted in the
historical books. Ps. v. 8-10; vi. 7, f.; xii. 1-4; xvii. 9-14;
xxii.; xxvii. 10, 12; xxxv. 11-21; xli. 5-9; liv. 2-6; lxii. 3, f.
The Psalms which are ascribed to some definite occasion in David's
life are not on the whole any more suitable to the situation,
although there is generally some single phrase which probably gave
rise to this identification.
The great commentator Ewald, on literary grounds ascribed the
following Psalms to David because of their originality and dignified
spirit: Ps. iii.; iv.; vii.; viii.; xi.; xv.; xviii.; xix. 1-6; xxiv.
1-6; xxiv. 7-10; xxix.; xxxii.; lx. 6-9; lxviii. 13-18; ci.; cxliv.
12-14.
Briggs would not go so far as to indicate Davidic Psalms, but would
put as far back as the Early Monarchy, Ps. vii., xiii., xviii.,
xxiii., xxiv. b, lx. a, and cx.
Lecture IX
THE RELIGION OF THE PSALMISTS
The principles of Biblical criticism have often been traced to a
vigorous application of the theory of evolution to the growth of
religious ideas. Such an application, if without the support of facts,
would discredit all critical results; but as a matter of fact, the
critical readjustment of the Old Testament does not give a perfect
progression in religious development. Indeed, it leaves us with a
perplexing story of decline from high attainment. The Law follows
the Prophets, and no theory can recognise the Law as an advance upon
prophetic teaching. The national rejection of the Prophets is the
central tragedy of Hebrew history and prepares us for the national
rejection of Jesus. Yet between the Prophets and the religion of
the Gospels we are able to trace an almost continuous link in the
religion of the Psalmists. This connection is somewhat obscured by
the early date assigned to the Psalms by uncritical tradition, by
the heterogeneous character of the collection, and by its continual
redaction in the interest of the purpose to which they were adapted.
In adopting this collection of religious poems for the purpose of
public praise, it is more than likely that additions were made, in
order that they might more fitly express the need of the time, while
reverence for the writings, by the time at least, of the final edition
of the work, operated to preserve the original; as may be seen, for
instance, in the addition made to the fifty-first Psalm (ver. 18,
19), which in its original form condemns the very worship in which
it was used. Moreover the collection is as much a prayer-book as a
hymn-book, for many of the Psalms are really prayers, and five of them
are actually so entitled. The book was certainly used in the Temple
services, but on the whole it must have seemed more fitted for the
non-sacrificial and non-ceremonial worship of the synagogue, or for the
private devotions of pious men and women. However and wherever used, it
must have nourished a deep personal religion and kept alive hopes to
which Christianity afterwards appealed.
No other single book of the Old Testament has had such an influence on
Christian piety and worship. From ancient times to the present day the
Psalms have been chanted, and in Churches of widely differing ritual
they have been considered the only fit vehicle for Christian praise.
Nothing more clearly demonstrates their proximity to the Christian
view of things, although the modern spirit in Christendom is finding
it increasingly difficult to express itself in the language of all the
Psalms, on account of their imprecatory wishes. Perhaps still more, the
predominant tone of the book, which is one of crying for deliverance
from overwhelming enemies and oppression, hardly suits the safety of
our times, or meets the demand for a joyful religious spirit. Many
of the Psalms become real only in times of severe spiritual trial,
and where there exists a deep sense of contrition; still better do
they express the emotions which arise in times of national calamity
or religious persecution; and most of all when men are constrained
to take arms in the cause of religion and righteousness. They have
never sounded so fitting as on the lips of the Reformers, Cromwell's
Ironsides, or the Scottish Covenanters. And yet their great breadth
of appeal, their touching of every possible note in religious
experience--penitence and joy, questioning and trust, longing and
satisfaction, defeat and victory,--their majestic literary form,
and their poetic inspiration will preserve them for ever as sublime
utterances of universal religion. But our work is not to appraise their
eternal value, but to estimate their significance, influence, and
position in the development of Old Testament religion; and to do this
we must endeavour to trace the origin and compilation of the Psalter.
The criticism of the Psalter is faced by a peculiarly difficult and
complex problem, arising from the lack of historic connection, the
possible obliteration by editorial redaction, and the difficulty of
interpreting with certainty even those data which the text presents,
and it has by no means yet reached settled conclusions; only general
and tentative results can be noted here. That, however, the book is
the result of a gradual process, may be seen from the presence of
doublets (liii. = xiv.; lxx. = xl. 13-17; cviii. = lvii. 7-11 + lx.
5-12), and from the subscription at the end of Book II., which displays
ignorance of the fact that further Psalms, ascribed to David follow.
It will be more convenient to start from the final position and work
backward; and that final position is undoubtedly this, that the Book
of Psalms as it stands in our Bible is the hymn-book of the restored
Second Temple. It is a book prepared for musical accompaniment; this
may be seen from the titles still preserved at the head of many of
the Psalms. These titles are of three kinds: they describe the nature
of the poetic composition; they give the names of the authors and
sometimes the circumstances in which they were composed; and the third
kind are most probably to be explained as instructions for musical
setting. These last-named titles are in most cases very obscure; the
Revised Version has simply transliterated the Hebrew words. On the
assumption that these are musical terms, we have three classes of them
in the Psalms. One class apparently gives directions for the tune to
which the Psalm is to be sung, and this tune is named, like some modern
hymn tunes, after the words with which the tune had been originally
or customarily associated; these appear to have been popular songs,
not necessarily of an entirely religious character (Ps. lvi., R.V.
title: "set to Jonath elem rehokim"; mar. translates: "The silent dove
of them that are afar off"; Ps. lvii., lviii.: "set to Al tashheth,"
which means: "Do not destroy." In the Septuagint the setting of Ps.
lxx. has been altered to: "Save me, O Lord"). Other titles seem to
direct the voice to be used in singing, as either falsetto or bass (Ps.
xlvi., "set to Alamoth"; probably maiden-like voices, and as women
took no part in the service of the choirs, this must refer either to
tenor, or male falsetto; Ps. vi., xii., "set to the Sheminith." R.V.
mar., "the eighth." This is probably the octave or bass voice). Two
references are to be found to the instrumental accompaniment to be
used, as either stringed or wind instruments (Ps. iv., vi., etc.,
"on stringed instruments"; Ps. v., "with the Nehiloth," mar., "wind
instruments"). The much discussed meaning of _Selah_ is most probably
to be sought in a musical direction. The word means: "lift up." The
Septuagint translates, "interlude," but many other versions (Version
of Aquila, Syriac Peshitto, Jerome and the Targum) translate, "for
ever." This duplicate translation suggests the very possible clue
that at the places where _Selah_ appears, the Psalm might be ended,
if desired, and the "for ever," or the doxology, which was usually
sung at the end of the Psalm and which is found at the end of each
book, could be taken there. As completed, the Psalter is therefore a
book with directions for a fully organised and choral worship, and
we have to seek for a time when such a worship was in existence. The
difficulty is that these musical directions are somewhat rare and
are not found in the later books, but only in connection with those
Psalms entitled, "for the Director." As the instruments mentioned are
only of the simplest kind and not of the varied character used in the
ornate worship of the Temple (cxlix. 3; cl. 3-5), and as by the time
the Greek translation was made (150 B.C.), their significance was
forgotten, we have to put the final edition long after the founding of
synagogue worship, in which the Director's Psalm Book was first used,
and at some period when there had been a complete change in musical
practice. This demands a time when Hellenistic culture had moulded even
the Temple worship. (The Jews were under Greek influence and rule from
B.C. 333 to B.C. 63.) The time from which a full choral service was in
use in the Temple is to be carried back, according to the Chronicler,
to the time of Solomon and David, but a comparison with the earlier
history contained in the Books of the Kings does not confirm this.
The Chronicler, who from his interest in these matters seems to have
been a member of one of the Levite choirs, really gives us the customs
current in his times, and infers that they went back unchanged to the
time of the building of the first Temple and to the preparatory work
of David. These considerations, together with the admitted lateness of
many of the Psalms, some of them undoubtedly belonging to the times of
the Maccabæan wars, bring us down to that late age and perhaps more
precisely to the time of the rededicated Temple (165 B.C.), and demand
that the final edition of the Psalter is to be placed somewhere about
150 B.C.
We might expect to find traces of the growth of the Psalter in the
division into five books (at xli., lxxii., cvi., cl., see R. V.),
but there seems no real division necessary between Books IV. and V.
and the five-fold division may be due to the desire to imitate the
divisions of the Law; the other divisions however contain more hopeful
suggestions. The first book, for instance, is almost entirely ascribed
to David (Ps. i. is an introduction to the whole book, composed for
the final edition, and Ps. ii. may have been also placed in front as
part of the introduction. Ps. xxxiii., which is very late, may have
been added as a kind of doxology to Ps. xxxii. The rest are ascribed
to David). The second book is largely Davidic and it concludes with
the statement: "the prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended."
In spite of this notice Psalms are found ascribed to David in the
books that follow, so that the remark must have been found appended
to a collection that the final editor took over; it cannot be due to
his own hand. Further evidence of compilation is to be found in the
strange occurrence of the different names for God: Elohim and Jehovah.
In the first book the name of Jehovah preponderates. In Book II.
the name Elohim is found most frequently. Then in Book III. Psalms
lxxiii.-lxxxiii. use Elohim only, and lxxxiv.-lxxxix. Jehovah mainly;
and in practically the whole of Books IV. and V. Jehovah is almost
solely used, The reason for this phenomenon must be sought in editorial
redaction, for in the duplicate Psalms, xiv. and liii., xl. 13-17 and
lxx., Jehovah is found in the first recension and Elohim in the second.
The Elohistic character of lxxiii.-lxxxiii. may be due to the original
compiler since they are all ascribed to Asaph and otherwise bear marks
of common production. The Elohistic redaction may have been made in
a period when the name Jehovah sounded tribal and almost heathenish;
but a similar test leads to the conclusion that the first collection
enjoyed by this time a liturgical familiarity, which did not permit
of alteration. The reversion to the name of Jehovah in Books IV. and
V. might be explained by the fact that in later times the name was
written but never pronounced. On the line of these suggestions we
should expect to find that Book I. contained the earliest Psalms and
Books IV. and V. the latest; this is roughly correct, if we allow for
the possibility of minor insertions being made for various purposes in
the last edition. In Book V. there is a group of Psalms (civ.-cvi.,
cxi.-cxiii., cxv.-cxvii., cxxxv., cxlvi.-cl.), which are distinguished
by either commencing or ending with "Hallelujah," and are known as
the "Hallels." From their contents, it may be observed that they are
suitable for use at the Great Festivals, and it is known that they
were, and are still so used by the Jews. They imply a highly organised
musical service (Ps. cl.), they require a time when the festivals were
regularly observed and when the worship of the Temple could be carried
on without fear. Such conditions are to be found together only after
the Exile, and then only during the period of Greek rule; and to this
late period the composition of these Psalms is to be referred. An
even later date is demanded for some Psalms that are said to reflect
the rebellion against the Hellenizing movement enforced by Antiochus
Epiphanes, in which the Maccabees played such a heroic part. This date
is confirmed by the references to: the "assembly of the saints" (Ps.
cxlix. 1, Heb. _hasidim_, the purist party formed in that time); the
cruel persecution for religious opinions (Ps. xliv. 17-22; lxxix.
2; lxxxiii. 3, 4); the defiling of the Temple, the burning of the
synagogues, and the silence of the Prophetic voice (Ps. lxxiv. 7-9;
lxxix. 1). Other Maccabæan Psalms are said to be: cx., where there is a
reference to some priest who is not in the legitimate succession, which
entirely describes the Priest-Kings of the Maccabæan dynasty (other
scholars would put this Psalm very early; on the other hand there are
alleged traces of an acrostic that would spell Simon, the first of the
Maccabæan Priest-Kings); cxv. cxviii., which celebrate successful wars
in which the leaders have been the house of Aaron, to which house the
Maccabees of course belonged. This is the latest date that is demanded
for any of the Psalms, and in the present condition of criticism we
can only say that between this and some earlier period the book is to
be placed. It must now be our task to discover the earliest date that
any of the Psalms demand. We have seen that Book I. seems to be the
earliest collection, and tradition assumes that this was the work of
David and was the Psalm Book used in the First Temple. To discuss this
point it is necessary to enquire into the reliability of the titles
that ascribe the Psalms to definite authors. These titles give: one
each to Moses, Ethan, and Heman; two to Solomon; eleven to the Sons
of Korah; twelve to Asaph; and seventy-three to David (it is doubtful
whether Jeduthun is a person; if so he is probably the same as Ethan:
Ps. xxxix., lxii., lxxvii., titles; cp. 1 Chron. vi. 44 with 1 Chron.
ix. 16). Now it should be noticed that none of the authors are later
than Solomon (Ethan, 1 Kings iv. 31, 1 Chron. vi. 44; Heman, 1 Kings
iv. 31, 1 Chron. vi. 33, xv. 17, 19, xxv. 5; Asaph, 1 Chron. vi. 39,
xxv. 1f, Neh. xii. 46; in Ezra ii. 41, Neh. vii. 44, Asaph seems to
mean a guild of singers rather than an individual). If any of the
Psalms ascribed to authors might be expected to yield confirmation by
internal evidence, it would be Ps. xc.; but there is nothing in its
language or thought that points to extreme antiquity. There is also
nothing in the Psalms themselves that confirms the authorship of the
contemporaries of Solomon, Ethan and Heman. The title of Ps. cxxvii.,
"of Solomon," is missing in the Septuagint and is evidently a late
gloss, and the title of Ps. lxxii. is translated in the Septuagint: "a
psalm _for_ Solomon," which certainly describes the contents better.
The Psalms ascribed to the Sons of Korah (xlii.-xlix., lxxxiv., lxxxv.,
lxxxvii., lxxxviii.; 2 Chron. xx. 19, 1 Chron. xxvi. 19; but 1 Chron.
vi. 33-38 shows that Kohathite and Korahite are the same), have common
features, as have also the Psalms ascribed to Asaph, which imply that
they are at least guild collections; but their exalted conception of
God, their consciousness of national righteousness, the reference to
synagogue worship and the cessation of prophecy (lxxiv. 8f) point to a
time subsequent to Ezra.