Bible Commentaries
Psalms 17

Introduction

The situation here, also, is that of one who finds himself in great distress and danger, through hostile oppression. “We know that God heareth not sinners; but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth His will, him He heareth.” “Let every one that names the name of God, depart from iniquity.”

Therefore does the Psalmist first of all base his supplication to be heard on his righteousness; which is so far removed from hypocrisy, that it does not shun the most searching scrutiny of that Divine omniscience which penetrates into the most secret recesses of the heart. He declares his firm conviction, that this scrutiny will bring to light no contrariety between heart and mouth, but rather a perfect harmony between the two, Psalms 17:1-5. On the foundation thus laid, there then arises a more confident and urgent prayer, the reasonableness of which is made clear by a detailed and eloquent description of the ungodliness and wickedness of his enemies, loudly calling for the interference of Heaven; and the conclusion embodies an expression of joyful hope in the salvation of the Lord, Psalms 17:6-15.

The two parts of the Psalm, the first of which may be described as the porch, and the second as the proper building, present themselves to us as distinctly separate. The external dimensions of these parts are proportioned to their internal relation to each other. The introduction, which declares the Psalmist to be in possession of the indispensable condition of being heard, comprises five verses; the main burden of the Psalm is comprised in the number ten, which is the symbol of completeness. To this the formal arrangement appears to be confined. We might, however, conceive another division, analogous to that pointed out in Psalms 7, of strophes, which have an ascending number of verses; only that the one in which all the rest are enclosed, and into which they run out, instead of beginning, forms the conclusion: 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. Each of those strophes would really have pretty much its own proper ideas: Psalms 17:1 and Psalms 17:2, the prayer of the Psalmist about his right; Psalms 17:3-5, the grounding of this his right; Psalms 17:6-9, his prayer for deliverance from the wicked who oppressed him; Psalms 17:10-14, the grounding of this prayer, pointing to their disregard of all Divine and human rights, which called aloud for the interposition of God, and to their hitherto prosperous condition, which, as being contrary to God’s word and nature, could therefore not continue. Finally, in Psalms 17:15 we have the expression of hope and confidence in the salvation of the Lord. Still, this division cannot be held with the same confidence as the first: the last strophe especially, consisting of only one verse, renders it very doubtful.

If we assume a particular occasion for the Psalm, it must be one from the times of Saul; to those of Absalom we cannot assign it, because the Psalmist appears through the whole as a private individual who is oppressed. But the absence of all individual traits makes it probable, that the Psalmist does not speak in his own person, but in that of the righteous; and this supposition is confirmed by Psalms 17:11, where, precisely as in Psalms 16:10 of the preceding Psalm, the plurality concealed under the unity comes distinctly out. The individual character is discountenanced also by the introduction, Psalms 17:1-5, in which the didactic tendency—the purpose of directing the members of the Church to the fact, that righteousness is the indispensable, though also the sure foundation of the hearing of prayer, and the bestowment of salvation—can scarcely be overlooked.

This Psalm has many coincidences with Psalms 16, which are so important, that they give colour to the idea of both Psalms having been united by the author into one pair. (Venema remarks: “Such is the agreement between this Psalm and the preceding one, that I am almost disposed to reckon them as one Psalm.”) First, in both Psalms there is the same formal arrangement, mainly consisting in this, that the main substance is completed in the number ten, with the distinction, that in the former one, the introduction consists only of one verse, while in the latter it occupies five. Then, the situation in both Psalms is precisely the same, that of one who is brought into peril of life by the persecutions of wicked and ungodly enemies. Further, the conclusion of both Psalms remarkably agrees. And, finally, they present many striking coincidences in particular points. Comp. the following expressions: here in Psalms 17:7, “through Thy right hand,” with the same in Psalms 16:11; “Thou deliverer of them that put their trust in Thee,” here in Psalms 17:7, with “I put my trust in Thee,” in Psalms 16:1; “preserve me,” here in Psalms 17:8, with “preserve me,” in Psalms 16:1; and the plurality which discovers itself in Psalms 17:11, with the plural expression, “Thy pious ones,” in Psalms 16:10.

Taking into view these several points, they furnish us with the following result. David, intending to prepare a treasure of consolation and confidence for the sorely persecuted and oppressed from his own experience during the times of Saul, presented it in a whole, divided into two parts. Of the different subjects which come under consideration,—namely, confidence in the Lord, affording the sure hope of salvation; his own righteousness; and the unrighteousness of his enemies,—the first is handled in Psalms 16, and the second and third in the Psalm before us. The subject with which he exclusively occupies himself in Psalms 16, and which forms the proper theme of that Psalm, is referred to again here, for the purpose of bringing both Psalms into organic connection, and of assigning to Psalms 17 its proper, even a subordinate place. After the Psalmist had solemnly protested before God his righteousness, he calls on God as the “deliverer of those that trust in Him;” teaching, that when once a foundation of righteousness exists, there, certainly and fully, confidence attains to the prominent position assigned it in Psalms 16.

Besides this connection with Psalms 16, there is one also, though not so close, with Psalms 7, which is of importance, especially in so far as it shows how, in David’s case, general principles were evolved out of, and based on, the individual—how his own personal experience lies at the foundation even of those Psalms which he from the first indited, as it were, out of the soul of the Church—how he consoled others only with the consolation with which he himself had been comforted of God. As in Psalms 7 there was a porch of six, and a building of twelve verses, so we have here a porch of five, and a building of ten verses. In both Psalms also the ascent in the number of verses of which the strophes are composed, is alike, in so far as this may be recognised to have any place in our Psalm. The matter of the introduction, the protestation of innocence and righteousness, is in both Psalms the same. Common to both, also, is the “arise,” in Psalms 7:6, and here, in Psalms 17:13; and the expression, “trier of the hearts and reins art Thou, O righteous God,” in Psalms 7:10, agrees with the “proving of the heart,” etc., in Psalms 17:3 here; comp. also Psalms 11:4-5.

Finally, Psalms 17:1-5, in this Psalm, coincide with Psalms 18:20-27. Just as here the prayer for deliverance is grounded on righteousness, so there the deliverance obtained is derived from righteousness. This coincidence probably led the collector to place Psalms 18 immediately after ours,—a very fitting connection, since confidence in righteousness, as the ground of salvation, must grow when it is manifested as such in so glorious a manner by experience.

The superscription, “A prayer of David,” can have had no other than David for its author, as appears from the remarks already made, though it is not to be understood to designate him as the one to whose circumstances the prayer refers. The superscription in Habakkuk 1, “A prayer of Habakkuk,” formed on the model of this, is quite analogous. For, in the whole chapter, the Church, and not the prophet, is the speaker.

Verse 1

Ver. 1. Hear righteousness, O Lord; attend to my cry, give ear to my prayer, from lips without deceit. The prayer is here still only as means to an end; only serves the purpose of introducing the Psalmist’s protestation of righteousness: the proper commencement of the prayer is at Psalms 17:6. The Psalmist begs that the Lord would hear righteousness. Instead of the righteous, he puts righteousness, with the view of giving emphasis to the fact, that he sought nothing from the holy and righteous God, with whom there is no respect of persons, as a matter of party preference or favouritism; that he laid claim to His help and salvation only in so far as righteousness appeared to be personified in him. He is inwardly penetrated by the conviction, that the sine ira et studio, quorum causas procul habeo, of which men do but falsely boast, holds true of God in the fullest sense, and he wishes to communicate this conviction to others. It has often been found a stone of stumbling, that the Psalmist seems here to make his reception of the Divine help depend on a condition, which lies beyond the reach of sinful men. Several expositors have been induced thereby, either to refer the Psalm exclusively to Christ, or at least, to maintain that it has its full truth only in Christ. So Amyrald remarks: “In the exposition of this Psalm, and of some others, the left eye must be so fixed on David, that the right may be kept intent on Christ.” Luther says: “The Hebrew text says simply, ‘Lord, hear righteousness,’ without attaching the word my to it. We shall here pass by the error of the Jews, who feign, that David, in consequence of the sin here committed of boasting of his own righteousness, afterwards fell into adultery; and we only bear in mind, that some of ourselves also have taken such offence at this word, as to have ascribed all that is said here to Christ.” Others seek to avoid the difficulty by substituting the righteousness of the cause for that of the person. So Luther: “He says, Though I who beg do indeed possess no righteousness as to my person, yet is the cause in itself worthy, because it concerns Thy word and the faith; it is truly righteousness, and worthy that Thou shouldst, not leave it to be overthrown;” and Venema, who gives a somewhat different delineation of the idea: “Righteous is my cause, which I bring before Thee, O God; and I have neither in thought, in word, nor deed, been guilty of any such things as they lay to my charge, and on account of which I am persecuted.” To the like effect, also, J. H. Michaelis, De Wette and others. But it is to be objected, that neither here nor in the succeeding verses is a trace to be found of any special reference to a particular cause: righteousness and integrity in general the Psalmist ascribes to himself, protests that his heart is pure and upright, and that he has constantly adhered to the ways of God. To the righteousness of his cause, the parallel section in Psalms 18:21 ss., cannot possibly be referred. And, finally, even the righteousness of the cause is not of itself sufficient to constitute a foundation for the hope of deliverance, it is possible for the wicked also to have a righteous cause, without having on that score any claim to the Divine help. The righteousness of the cause can only be of importance, in so far as it arises out of the righteousness of the person; and hence the Psalmist, even if he did in the first instance assert the righteousness merely of his cause, would still, at the same time, have laid claim to righteousness of person. The legitimate removal of the difficulty presents itself as soon as we define more accurately the idea of the personal righteousness, which the Psalmist ascribes to himself: it is not perfect holiness—how far David was from laying claim to that, appears from such expressions as Psalms 143:2, “Enter not into judgment with Thy servant, for in Thy sight shall no flesh living be justified,” Psalms 19:13,—it is upright moral effort. If the main bent of the mind is towards the fulfilment of the Divine law, God graciously pardons many weaknesses; and such a man is termed righteous. Righteousness in this sense is as certainly a distinctive feature of the elect, an indispensable condition of Divine help, as that true religion has a thoroughly ethical character, and addresses to those who dream of being able to put God off with idle feelings, the solemn admonition, “Be ye holy, for I am holy.” It is not less required in the New Testament, than it was in the Old. John, indeed, says in his First Ep. 1 John 1:8, “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us;” but he says also, ch. 1 John 3:6, “Whosoever abideth in Him, sinneth not (leads no life of sin—sin being used there in the narrower sense, just as righteousness here); whosoever sinneth, hath not seen Him, neither known Him;” and in 1 John 3:9, “Whosoever is born of God, doth not commit sin; for His seed remaineth in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.” That here the term, “righteousness,” can only refer to the general tenor of the life, may be inferred even from the contrast in Psalms 17:1 and Psalms 17:3, with hypocrisy. To draw a more exact line of demarcation between the righteousness of endeavour and absolute sinlessness, could the less occur to the Psalmist’s mind, as the deep consciousness of human guilt, which was peculiar to the Old Testament, did not permit such an idea as the latter to present itself either to him or to his readers. As he here brings into view the one side, righteousness, because he was now concerned with it alone, so elsewhere he lays stress on the other side, without ever dreaming that the one excluded the other. There are times also when the prayer, “Hear righteousness, O God,” is for us also the only suitable one; and again other times, when the juste judex ultionis, donum fac remissionis ante diem ultionis, rushes with power from the heart. Besides, what the Berleb. Bible says is quite correct, “The soul is never in a state to desire that its righteousness may be heard, unless it have already lost all its own righteousness.” The righteousness which the Psalmist here urges, always and only shoots forth from the soil of pardon of sin, which presupposes the renouncement of all one’s own righteousness. Righteousness of life is the fruit of righteousness of faith, according to the Old Testament plan, as most clearly laid down in Psalms 51; and also according to that of the New Testament. Still, we must not here, against the plain letter, put the righteousness of faith in the room of righteousness of life. The question here is not one about justification, but one about help against enemies, and deliverance from distress, which can only be claimed on the ground of an already existing righteousness of life.

The majority of expositors consider the second petition as terminated with the words, “attend to my cry,” and the words, “with lips without deceit,” as belonging solely to the third. According to them, the ground is twofold on which the Psalmist rests his prayer; first, the righteousness of his cause (or of his person),—then his faith, which impelled him to seek help from God, and which God ought not to put to shame. They maintain that the first requisite could have existed without the latter. “It often happens,” remarks Calvin, “that even profane men justly boast of having a good cause; yet, because they do not consider that God governs the world, they shut themselves up in their own consciences; and bear injuries more stubbornly and stedfastly, because they seek no consolation from faith in God, and supplication to Him.” The Psalmist must then, it is thought, in the last clause, have united both elements together. But it is decisive against this view, that according to the whole tenor of the first part, it is impossible for any other element than righteousness to be brought out independently; the unity thereof would be broken, if we deny the reference of the petition, “attend to my cry,” to that which follows. The crying, like the prayer, is in place here, only in so far as it proceeds from lips without deceit. That these words belong to both the last petitions, is indicated also by the accentuation, which is opposed to the too close and exclusive connection with the third. Every one has lips of deceit who comes before God praying for, and claiming salvation, without being a righteous person. For, as it is certain that salvation is bestowed only on the ground of righteousness, that God only hears the righteous, so every prayer involves a declaration of righteousness, whether uttered in words or not. Whosoever prays without being a righteous person, is a hypocrite of the worst kind; not content with deceiving men thereby, he would also impose on the all-seeing God, imagining, in the blindness of his folly, that God looks only on his countenance, and not on his heart.

Verse 2

Ver. 2. Let my right go forth from Thee, let Thine eyes behold uprightness. The Fut. of the verb may be regarded as expressive either of the wish or of the hope. Both are much alike as to the sense. The emphasis, in any case, is upon the משפטי , and on the מישרים . Only on the ground of his right and his integrity, does he either expect or desire God’s help. The word, “my right” (Luther, falsely, “Speak Thou in my cause”), stands opposed to partial favouritism: it is not this the Psalmist desires, but only the salvation which God, the righteous One, has promised to righteousness; and because he desires only this, only what God must necessarily grant, and cannot refuse, without denying His own nature, and the expression thereof in His word, the prayer cannot possibly remain unheard, just as little as it could have been heard if it had not sprung from such a root, if the Divine help had been claimed as a reward of merely saying, Lord, Lord. In the second clause, the uprightness is that which is to be beheld, as, in Psalms 17:1, the righteousness is that which is to be heard. Because, with a righteous judge, to recognise and to deliver uprightness are one and the same thing, it is said of God, in the language of emotion, that He does not see uprightness, when He allows it to be overthrown. We must reject the exposition of Hitzig and De Wette, who, taking מישרים adverbially, render, “Thine eyes behold rightly.” The word signifies, not correctness, but integrity, honesty; it is never used adverbially, not even in Psalms 58:1. The idea is foreign to the context; this is not the place to say that God is upright, but that the Psalmist is upright; uprightness is on the same footing as righteousness, as the lips without deceit, the right. The words, “His countenance beholds the upright” in Psalms 11:7, are parallel. Luther remarks: “So that we see, how everywhere zeal and hatred break forth against hypocrisy, which the saints avoid with as great a horror in themselves, as they bring accusations against it.”

Verse 3

Ver. 3. The Psalmist had grounded his prayer for help, in the preceding context, on his righteousness. This indispensable condition of salvation actually existed in him; he did not merely feign righteousness before the eyes of short-sighted men; and therefore (woe to him who cannot do the same) he appeals to the judgment of the all-seeing God, who knows the purity of his heart, whose inmost recesses are open before Him. Luther: “He had prayed that the Lord would regard his righteousness; now he declares what sort of confidence he had to rest on, in begging this.” Thou provest my heart, Thou examinest it by night; Thou purgest me, Thou findest not; my thought oversteps not my mouth. The Preterites of the verb mark the past reaching into the present. The Psalmist appeals to the result of trials already held: God is constantly putting men to the proof; and there is no reason for rendering, with some, “when Thou provest, etc., Thou findest not;” or, with others, to put a demand in the place of a simple declaration. The night is named as the time when good and evil thoughts in the soul of man spring up in greatest force, because he is then free from outward business and influences; and having nothing to scatter them, and not being restrained by any regard to, or fear of others, they come forth with the greatest force. That the Psalm was an evening song, is rendered probable by this allusion alone; comp. on Psalms 17:15. In the words, “Thou purgest or purifiest me,” there is an allusion to the purifying of gold and silver. Pure gold and silver is what stands the test, and is found free from dross. Dereser expounds falsely: “Thou purgest and purifiest me through tribulations from defects.” There is nothing here of a purifying through tribulation, though it is often referred to elsewhere. God’s proving is only represented under the image of purifying, so far as in both alike a sure result is obtained in regard to the purity or impurity of the object; comp. Proverbs 17:3. Thou findest not—namely, anything that would show the affirmation I made of my righteousness to be untrue, or prove me to be a hypocrite; one who presents a fair exterior, but within is full of ravening and unrighteousness. It is obvious, that the purity and righteousness of heart, which the Psalmist here lays claim to, is not opposed to the testimony, that the righteous falls seven times a day. This is clear, especially from the last words, which show that the Psalmist only asserts his freedom from hypocrisy, and not from frailty. We take זמתי as inf. from זמם . The fem. form of the inf. in ות , according to this form of verbs in עע , occurs in Psalms 77:9; Ezekiel 36:3. It is to be explained from the affinity between verbs עע and לה . The זמותי is accus., the פי nominative. That the common sequence of the words is departed from, the object preceding the subject, arises from the fact, that it was not the mouth, but the thought, the state of feeling, which was the object of the Divine search; comp. the words, “Thou provest my heart.” From the proving of his internal disposition, the result is derived, that the Psalmist’s mouth had not gone beyond it, in that, coming before God, he gave himself out as a righteous person. Luther, though he errs in his translation, yet explains quite correctly in his comment.: “The mouth overpasses the thoughts when it utters more, and otherwise, than the heart thinks, so that the mouth and heart do not correspond with each other.” We must reject the other expositions. Gesenius takes זמתי as the plural of זַ?מּ?ֹ?תַ?י , which must be of like import with זִ?מּ?ָ?ה , and explains, “my thoughts overstep not my mouth.” But we conceive that this contains three philological difficulties—זַ?מּ?ָ?ה never occurs elsewhere, the singular suffix in זמתי would stand in the room of the plural זַ?מּ?ֹ?תַ?י , the verb in the sing. masc. would be joined to a noun in the plural fem.—and the meaning, purchased at so dear a rate, is after all not suitable. The question is not, whether the Psalmist thinks otherwise than he speaks, but whether he speaks otherwise than he thinks,—nor whether his feeling agrees with his words, but whether his words agree with his feeling—comp. the expression, “not with deceitful lips,” in Psalms 17:1. He appears before God asserting his righteousness; and the proving of his heart shows that his mouth had spoken the truth. Others take זמתי as the first person Preterite. So Luther: “I have purposed to myself, that my mouth shall not transgress.” But this exposition is contrary to the accents, according to which the word has the tone upon the last syllable; and the sense, besides, is a quite unsuitable one; “the transgressing of the mouth,” is out of place here. Ewald, De Wette, and Koester, connect זמתי with what precedes: “Thou dost not find me meditating evil, my mouth transgresses not.” But the external authority of the accents, the Masorah, and the old translations, are all against it: the expression, “my meditation,” for, “that I meditate evil,” is hard. עבר cannot, without some further explanation, signify “to transgress,” and the proving of the heart has nothing to do with the transgressions of the mouth. According to the connection, the only thing here in question is, whether the utterances of the mouth are confirmed by the condition of the heart. That the heart, with its thoughts and inclinations, should here be represented as the proper seat of righteousness, and that the hope of salvation should be considered well-grounded only where the heart did not need to shun the sharpest Divine search, is characteristic as to the moral platform of the Old Testament, which, even in its original legal enjoinments, did not limit its claims to word and deed, but extended them to the whole sphere of thoughts and inclinations.

Verse 4

Ver. 4. As for the doing of man: by the word of Thy lips I observe the ways of the transgressor. The Psalmist protests that he has constantly kept far away from the paths of transgressors, while pointing at the same time to that which the treading of these paths at once suggested, namely, the common corrupt bent of the hearts of men, and to the word of God, which he carefully followed, as a guide. ל is not rarely used, especially at the beginning of sentences, in the signification of, “in reference to,” “in respect of,” “as regards;” see Gesell. Thes. p. 732. פעלות stands in its common meaning, doing, manner of acting: 2 Chronicles 15:7; Jeremiah 31:16; Psalms 28:5. The doing of man is the course of action that is natural to man, in whom the imagination of the heart is only evil from his youth, and that continually ( Genesis 6:5, Genesis 8:21), who has been born in guilt, and conceived by his mother in iniquity ( Psalms 51:5). It is one of the strongest testimonies for the natural corruption of man, that a corrupt line of action, a walking in the ways of the transgressor, is here spoken of simply as the doing of man. There is a parallel passage in 1 Samuel 24:9, where David says to Saul, “Wherefore hearest thou men’s words?” and in Hosea 6:7, “And they as men transgress the covenant” (Manger: more humano levitatis; Hitzig’s interpretation, “like Adam,” deserves rejection simply on the ground that Adam did not transgress the covenant); also in Job 31:33, where hypocrisy is described without further explanation as natural to man, “If I covered my transgressions as man, hiding mine iniquity in my bosom;” and in Job 23:12, where the law of man, the course of life which his natural inclination leads him to take, is described as directly opposed to the law of God, “More than my law I have respected the words of His mouth.” We should, then, entirely mistake if, by the doing of man, we were to understand merely the power of evil example, which would also be opposed to the parallel passages now adduced, and likewise against the quite analogous declaration in Psalms 18:23, “And I kept myself from mine iniquity.” The Psalmist does not place himself in contrast to men, but comprehends himself amongst them. That evil-doing is the doing of man, renders it exceedingly difficult to keep far from the paths of the transgressor, which one has not first to be at pains to discover, but into which one is apt to slip quite naturally and imperceptibly. Whosoever would shun them, must not follow his natural disposition, but must deny it. Many expound, “in the doing of men;” but this signification of the ל is doubtful (comp. Gesen. Thes. p. 733), and the sense is rendered tame by such an exposition, as the Psalmist would then except himself from the number of men. The expression, “in the word of Thy lips,” points to the authority which the Psalmist followed in shunning the ways of the violent, to which natural inclination drew him, or to that from which he received an impulse in the better direction. ב denotes the relation of effect to cause: “in the word”=“at the word.” בדבר , is used precisely in the same way in Numbers 31:16, “These taught the children of Israel, at the word of Balaam, unfaithfulness to the Lord,”—the word of Balaam is the cause, in which the effect abides, that from which the impulse proceeds, the authority-- 1 Chronicles 21:19, “at the word of Gad;” comp. במצות דוד “at the command of David,” on the ground of his command, in 2 Chronicles 29:25. The word of God is the only light on the otherwise dark way of man; from it alone can the good impulse proceed, through which we keep ourselves unspotted from the world within and without us—withstand the corrupt inclinations of nature, and the spirit of the world—swim against the stream which, with gigantic and resistless force, carries everything along with it. The contrast here implied between men’s natural inclination and the word of God, lies also at the basis of the Decalogue. To it is due the negative form which predominates in the ten commandments. Everywhere we are forced to add in thought: “whereto thy corrupt heart is prone,” just as in a command in the positive form the word, “remember,” points to the tendency toward forgetfulness.

אני is used emphatically in opposition to the enemies, the wicked, who, according to Psalms 17:11, direct their eyes to turn aside in the land. שמר , “to observe,” in connection with the way, commonly with the design of keeping it, comp. Psalms 21; Job 23:11; only here with the design of shunning it. The Psalmist opposes his own observation of the way of the transgressor, which was under the guidance of the word of God, to the foolish eagerness with which the world blindly enters them. There is probably a witty allusion to this current mode of expression, “I have, observing the ways of God, in order to keep myself in them, at the same time observed the ways of the transgressor, in order to shun them”—a reference which becomes still more plain, as soon as we set in thought a dash after שמרתי . The verb פרץ , “to break through,” is used in Hosea 4:2, of the breaking through of all the limits of good and right; and derived from it, the term פריץ signifies the transgressor. Luther’s translation, “I keep myself in the word of Thy lips from the work of man on the path of the murderer,” gives, on the whole, the true sense, only that for transgressor, the far too special and gross name of murderer is substituted.

Verse 5

Ver. 5. My steps hold fast by Thy paths, my feet slide not. The paths of God, which the Psalmist held fast by, are contrasted with the ways of the transgressor, which he shunned. The verse contains still, like the preceding one, a protestation of the Psalmist’s righteousness, and forms a suitable conclusion to the whole section, Psalms 17:1-5, which is entirely taken up therewith. Exactly parallel is Job 23:11, “My foot holdeth fast, אחזה , His step; His way have I kept and not declined.” “To the protestation of his innocence,” remarks De Wette, “the Psalmist now adds a prayer for the maintenance thereof, that moral power might be given him.” But the sense which this exposition affords, is so unsuitable to the context, that any other might be held equally valid; we should then have an isolated thought, a genuine ejaculation before us. The Psalm has nothing at all to do with a prayer for moral support. The object of prayer in it is merely salvation from enemies, grounded upon his own righteousness already existing, and the wickedness of his enemies. Then, the exposition is also objectionable in a philological point of view. The force of the inf. absol., bringing out the simple action, is always more carefully defined. by the context. But this points here decidedly to the Preterite, that goes before, and follows in the parallelism. תמךְ? , “to seize, take hold,” never signifies, with ב , “to, maintain,” but always to take hold of, to hold to, to keep fast by; comp. Psalms 63:8, where the idea of holding fast is required by the parallelism, “My soul cleaveth to Thee, Thy right hand holdeth me fast:” Psalms 41:12; Exodus 17:12; Isaiah 42:1.

Verse 6

Ver. 6. The prayer of the Psalmist, which had only been indicated before, comes out in full force now, that the right foundation has been laid in his righteousness. It receives afterwards a second foundation, that of the wickedness of the enemies, which constitutes a call to God for vengeance. I call upon Thee, for Thou God Nearest me: incline Thine ear to me, hear my speech. The מענני is either, “Thou wilt hear me,” or, “Thou art accustomed to hear me.” The latter view is supported by the corresponding words in the next verse, “Thou deliverer of those,” etc. Luther “It comprehends both in itself, the past as well as the future. The meaning of it appears to be this,

I have confidence, that my words shall not be in vain, since I know how, according to Thy grace, Thou art wont to hear me. Thus the compassion of God is celebrated, which consists in His hearing when we cry. This moves us, and is the cause why we can presume to call.” According to the exposition, “Thou wilt hear me,” the Psalmist would refer to his righteousness, as set forth in the preceding context. To this, at all events, points the אני , “I,” the righteous person.

Verse 7

Ver. 7. Single out Thy loving-kindness, Thou deliverer of the confiding from the revolters, by Thy right hand. Upon הפלה to single out, separate, not, “to make wonderful,” comp. on Psalms 4:3. The tokens of favour which the Psalmist desires, must be distinguished from the common ones. This indicates the greatness of the danger. De Wette thinks, that this almost presumptuous-looking prayer, like the similar one following, should be ascribed to the spirit of Hebraism, which was not yet penetrated by the resignation of Christianity. But if this prayer be presumptuous, so also is the prayer of the Canaanitish woman, who also supplicated: “Single out Thy mercies, have compassion on me, O Lord, for my daughter is tormented;” and yet the Lord does not appear to have regarded it so, otherwise He would not have replied to her: “O woman, great is thy faith; be it done to thee as thou wilt.” If the Stoic resignation of De Wette were Christian, then Christ’s wonder-working activity would be unchristian, and the prayer also for our daily bread, in the Lord’s Prayer, must be erased. Were a doctrine so unhuman Christian, then the Old Testament, which places the whole of human existence in a relation to God, would stand higher than the New. The words, “Thou deliverer of those,” etc., contain the ground of the Psalmist’s hope of being heard. Calvin: “As often as we draw near to God, we ought first to bear in mind that we are not to be afraid of God’s being ready to help us, because He is not in vain called the deliverer of those who put their trust in Him.” The חֹ?סֶ?ה is used in Proverbs 14:32 absolutely, as here, without any designation of what the confidence is placed on. In the case of those who revolt or rise, the object of resistance must be the same as in the case of those who confide, the less so, as, in the latter case, the person on whom the confidence is placed is not named. The former, therefore, could only be revolters against God. Luther: “By this he seeks to bring his enemies into great hatred, as persons whose madness swelled against God.” בימינך is to be coupled with מושיע , “Thou who deliverest by Thy right hand;” it points to the plenitude of power with which God is provided for the defence of His people. That we must not expound: “from those who rebel against Thy right hand,” as Luther, or: “who confide in Thy right hand, from those who set themselves against it,” appears by a comparison with Psalms 16:11, and Psalms 17:14 here, and by what was already remarked by Venema: “The pious are more properly said to be preserved by the right hand of God, than enemies attacking the pious, to rise up against it.” Luther: “See how quickly emotion makes an excellent orator. He recommends to God his cause in the most favourable light, he seeks to put himself on good terms with Him, he makes complaint against his adversaries, he tries to have these made hateful, and this he does in very few and choice words. But he does so, not as if they were necessary in order to prevail on God, but for the sake of faith. For the more vigorous and fervent our faith is, the more always does God work through it.”

Verse 8

Ver. 8. Keep me as the apple of the eye, in the shadow of Thy wings hide me. That reference is made in the first clause to Deuteronomy 32:10, “He kept him (Israel) as the apple of His eye,” is the more probable, as there the similitude of the eagle caring for her young ones immediately follows. On אישון , not “little man,” but “the male,” “the masculine,” see my work, Balaam, p. 98. בת עין , prop. “the daughter of the eye.” Son and daughter, in the Semitic dialects, are applied to what belongs to another thing, or is dependent on it; for example, arrows are named, in Lamentations 3:13, “sons of the quiver.” Luther: “In this verse he employs many words to say one and the same thing; since he magnifies the danger, and, by expressing his great anxiety strongly, gives us, as it were, to understand that he cannot be made secure enough against the snares of the wicked. Therefore in these words there is embodied the emotion of a person oppressed with fear, and who flees from a very great danger; such as we observe in little children, who run to the lap of their parents, and hang around their neck, when they are alarmed at danger.” The figure in the second member is found enlarged in Matthew 23:37, probably in allusion to this passage.

Verse 9

Ver. 9. From the wicked, who disturb me, mine enemies, who against the soul compass me about. Many interpreters take שדד in the Arabic sense of seizing hold; but the Hebrew one is quite suitable, if it only be remembered that the Psalmist represents himself under the image of a city destroyed by enemies, or of a land laid waste. שׁ?ָ?דוּ?ד is also used in Judges 5:27, of a slain man. בנפש , prop. “in soul,” in matters of life, so that it is equivalent to life. Many expound it, after the example of Abenezra, by, “in desire.” But in doing so, they overlook the relation in which the words, “deliver my soul,” stand to the בנחפש here. They think to destroy my soul,” in Psalms 40:14, is parallel.

Verse 10

Ver. 10. Their fat they close up, with their mouth they speak proudly. How the expression, “their fat they close up,” is to be understood—that it is equivalent to “they have closed it upon one another, wholly covered themselves in fat,” appears from Judges 3:22, “the fat closed upon the blade.” The fat here, however, is not corporeal, but spiritual; it denotes the spiritual deadness, and hardening, by which their whole mind was overlaid. In this sense fat is very often used. So, first, in the ground-passage, Deuteronomy 32:15, “But Jeshurun waxed fat and kicked; thou didst wax fat, thou didst grow thick, thou art covered;” where many quite erroneously think of an external condition, a state of prosperity granted by God,—a view which leaves the sudden address and the threefold repetition altogether unexplained. The reference is rather to becoming fat internally, which so easily results from prosperity, and from the undisturbed enjoyment of the Divine gifts. Then Job 15:27, “Because he covered his face with his fatness, and made collops of fat upon his flanks;” where the fat, from the connection, can only be understood morally—for the verse contains the ground of a proud revolt against God—q. d. he resembles such an one spiritually who covers his bodily face, etc., he is spiritually as devoid of feeling, as that person is corporeally; comp. Psalms 119:70, where the abbreviated comparison comes out in a complete form, “Their heart is as fat as grease.” Finally, Psalms 73:7, “Their eyes stand out with fatness.” Modern expositors, for the most part, suppose that the חלב , from the contrast with the mouth, must necessarily mean the heart. Rosenmüller, departing from the Hebrew signification of that word, attributes to it, from the Arabic, the import of heart. Others leave to it its common and alone certain signification, but maintain that the words, “your fat is, etc.,” are equivalent to “your fat, unfeeling heart:” So Ewald: “While from hardness they have closed their unfeeling heart against compassion, their haughty mouth opens itself so much the wider for reproach.” But there is no ground for such an interpretation, as, according to our view also, full justice is done to the contrast with the mouth; the closing in of the fat, the covering itself in fat, indirectly describes a state of heart and mind, carnal-mindedness. And, on the other hand, we can appeal to the parallel passages, which everywhere speak, not of unfeeling hardness toward brethren, but of carnalmindedness in general; also to the fact, that the expression, “to close the heart,” as a description of unfeeling hardness, is found nowhere else in the Old Testament; and, finally, to the consideration that the enclosing of the heart in this connection is too tame. פימו , like אשרנו in Psalms 17:11, and חרבך in Psalms 17:13, the accusative, “after their mouth,” “with their mouth.” The predilection for this sort of accus. is one of the peculiarities of our Psalm.

Verse 11

Ver. 11. After our steps they compass me about now; they direct their eyes, to turn aside in the land. אשרנו , “after our steps,” “whithersoever we turn ourselves:” everywhere our enemies pursue us, and cut off from us all escape, take from us every hope of deliverance. To take the word, with some, as nom. absol., does not accord with the predilection just noticed, which the Psalmist shows for this sort of accusative. For the more difficult reading of the text, סבבוני , explicable on the ground that the speaker is the righteous person, so that he can speak in the sing. of himself, not less than in the plural (comp. the sing. in reference to enemies in Psalms 17:12), the Masorites have put סְ?בָ?בוּ?נוּ? , “they have compassed us about,” corresponding to the suffix in אשרנו . The Psalmist has, without doubt, intentionally conjoined thus closely the sing. and the plural, on purpose to show that behind the ideal unity there was concealed a multiplicity. The now points to the fact, that the greatest danger had arrived, and consequently, also, the time for God to help. לנטות בארץ is commonly explained, “in order to cast down to the earth, or in the land.” This mode of explanation does not allow us to supply, with De Wette, “ me or us;” but we must consider, as the object thrown down, whatever is high or stands erect. Calvin: “The godless, as if they must fall, when the world stands, would fain see the whole human race destroyed; and hence they apply themselves with vigour to throw everything to the ground.” But it is against this exposition, that though נטה may properly enough be taken in the sense of “to bend or bow,” comp. Psalms 62:3, “a bowing wall,” yet, in the present connection, that is too tame; not so, however, “to beat down,” “to throw to the ground.” The right exposition is seen on a comparison with Psalms 17:5. Whilst the righteous directs his eye to the object of holding fast the ways of the Lord, they are equally zealous and bent on turning aside from God’s ways, and hence are as much the objects of God’s punishing, as the others of His saving, energy. נטה is constantly employed to designate the turning aside from God, from His ways and His laws; to set up which as the task of life, and to sin boldly and with a high hand, is a mark of the most thorough abandonment. Comp., for example, Job 31:7, “If my foot hath turned out of the way;” 1 Kings 11:9, “And the Lord was angry with Solomon, because his heart was turned from the Lord God of Israel.” Psalms 119:51, Psalms 119:157. נטה , “to turn aside,” as here, is used absolutely for, “to turn out of the way,” in Jeremiah 14:8. On באאץ , not, “upon earth,” but, “in the land,” “in the land of the Lord,” compare Psalms 16:3.

Verse 12

Ver. 12. He is like a lion greedy to tear in pieces, and a young lion, lying in covert. Luther: “But the pride and haughtiness of Moab is greater than his strength. He undertakes more than lie can execute.” The sing. suffix is here also to be explained from the circumstance, that the whole host of wicked ones is represented in one person.

Verse 13

Ver. 13. Arise, O Lord, surprise his face, cast him down, deliver my soul from the wicked through Thy sword. The “face” is named, because it threatened destruction to the Psalmist; comp. the מפני in Psalms 17:3. קדם , “to anticipate,” then, “to surprise,” is used, as here, in Psalms 95:2, with פנים . חרבך , “as to Thy sword,” through Thy sword. Several Jewish expositors interpret, “from the ungodly, who is Thy sword;” in the following verse also, where Luther adopts the same view, they render, “from the men, who are Thy hand;” overlooking, however, the Psalmist’s marked predilection for the accusative, and besides, disregarding the connection, which does not permit such a mode of considering enemies as that found in Isaiah 10:5, where Assyria is called the rod of Divine wrath. This trait would have broken the strength of the Psalmist’s prayer, which is founded on his own righteousness and the enemies’ wickedness.

Verse 14

Ver. 14. From the men through Thy hand, O Lord, from the men of continuance, whose portion in life, and whose body Thou fittest with Thy treasures; they have sons in plenty, and leave their affluence to their children. The Psalmist believes that he can the more confidently present the prayer uttered in the preceding context, and hope with the greater certainty for its fulfilment, since it does not consist with God’s nature and word, that those who, in alienation from God, despise Him, and lift themselves proudly up against Him, should be richly endowed by Him with goods, and become partakers of the blessing which is promised to the righteous. This contrast between the reality and the idea, must God, as certainly as He is God, remove by His judgment; He must abolish the abnormity which is so fitted to strengthen the wicked in his wickedness, and to cause the pious to fail in his piety, and which can only be regarded as a temporary and passing state of things. Preparation is made for the contrast which is here unfolded between the reality and the idea, by קומה , “stand up, arise,” in the preceding verse, which presupposes the existence of such a contrast. The length of the verse shows, that the theme is one in which the Psalmist is peculiarly interested. The repetition of ממתים is emphatical, as was justly remarked by Calvin. מחלד is in the main correctly expounded by Calvin, “Qui sunt a seculo.” By the preposition, says he, David expresses, that they had not raised themselves as of yesterday, but that their prosperity had already continued for a long series of years, which, however, ought to have vanished in a moment. So also Venema, according to whom the מתים מחלד are, “florente et durante in fortuna constituti.” That the primary signification of חלד is that of continuance, appears from the Arabic. Dscheuhari in Scheid. in cant. Hisk. p. 51, says: “חלד denotat existentiae continuationem; de homine dicitur חלד quando persistit et viget.” From this primary signification, which here obtains, flow in Heb. the two derived ones of life and the world. Life is named continuance, as what usually belongs to existence; comp. Job 11:17; Psalms 89:47, Psalms 39:5, in which two latter passages allusion is made to the primary import; in the last: חלדי , my life, which has its name from continuance, is as nothing before Thee.

The world bears the name of continuance, as the general, abiding, while individual parts are transitory. In Arabic, “chytropodes, rupes et saxa dicuntur חולד quia semper manent, deleantur licet domuum, etc. vestigia,” Dscheuh. by Scheid. So in Psalms 49:1, חלד is used of the world. Hezekiah alludes to the ישבי חלד there, the inhabitants of continuance, when in Isaiah 38:11, he calls the dwellers in Sheol ישׁ?ְ?בֵ?י חֶ?דֶ?ל , “inhabitants of ceasing;” an allusion which presupposes that חלד , even when used of the world, retains its common signification. Parallel to the expression here, “of continuance,” is that in Psalms 10:5, “His ways are strong at all times.”

Most modern expositors, after the example of Luther, render, “of the people of this world,” i.e., De Wette remarks, whose whole striving terminates with this temporal, finite world, and does not pass over into eternity; חלד marks the temporal, perishing, sensible, as opposed to what is eternal, above sense. But a false meaning is forced by this exposition upon the word. It signifies neither, as Gesenius maintains, vita eaque cito praeterlabens, fluxa et caduca—for in Psalms 89:47, Psalms 39:5, the idea of fleetness and transitoriness, which is not suitable in Job 11:17, is not contained in the word itself, but in the connection—nor hic mundus, cujus res fluxae et caducae sunt. In order to obtain this signification, we must violently tear the Heb. חלד from the Arabic. Further, a contrast between the temporal and the eternal, so sharply expressed, and so briefly indicated, cannot be expected in the Psalms. It will not do to compare the οἱ? υἱ?οὶ? τοῦ? αἰ?ῶ?νος τού?του , of the New Testament, as the contrast here rests upon a clear recognition of a future state of being. In such a contrast, also, we should have expected the article. Finally, what follows the words, “whose part in life,” cannot possibly be understood otherwise than of the prosperous condition of the ungodly. According to this, however, the beginning of the verse must refer, not to the disposition, but to the course of the wicked. The verse is miserably torn asunder if this reference is overlooked.

חלקם בחיים is sometimes rendered, “who have their firm and secure portion of life;” but better, “whose part is in life,” so that life is the sphere in which they obtain their part, their lot: comp. חלק in this signification for ex. in Job 20:29, “This is the portion of the wicked man from God,” Job 27:13; Job 31:2-3, “For what is the portion of God from above? and what is the inheritance of the Almighty from on high? Is not misfortune to the wicked, and misery to the evil-doers?” which last passage especially serves to throw light on the one before us, whose complaint it answers. Life stands here in an emphatic sense for prosperous life, because a disastrous one is rather to be accounted a death: their part is that they live and prosper. Calvin: “I understand these words to mean, that they are free from all discomfort, and riot in joy, and therefore are quite exempt from the general lot, as inversely is said of the miserable man, that his part is in death.” Expositors generally interpret it, “who are of an earthly disposition.” “Inheritance,” according to De Wette, “is equivalent to the ‘highest good or aim; life is opposed to eternity after death.” But as both the preceding and the subsequent context refers to the lot of the wicked, this word cannot possibly denote their disposition; and that חיים by itself can denote the earthly life as opposed to the eternal, is destitute of all proof. Such a contrast of necessity requires a more pointed description.—צפונך , for which the Masorites, without any necessity, would substitute צפונך , the part. pas.; properly, “thy concealed.” Calvin: “The concealed goods of God here mean rare and peculiar dainties, since God often endows the wicked, not merely with all the common comforts of life, but also with thoroughly special ones. It is a strong temptation, when a man measures God’s favour by earthly prosperity. But we must remember, that in his complaint, the pious man seeks alleviation; he does not murmur against God, so that we may also learn to direct our sighs toward heaven” The state of things in which the wicked, who lie under the Divine anger, are replenished by Him with goods and gifts, considered as a permanent one, would be the perverse world; but on that very account it cannot possibly be a permanent state.—ישבעו בנים is rendered by Luther: Who have children the fulness; and he remarks: “This refers not merely to the great number of children, but rather to their state and condition;” quite correctly, since it is only strong and healthful children that can be considered as a token of prosperity. But according to the current exposition, בנים is to be taken as the nominative, not as the accus., “full are their children.” De Wette “They hunger not, like the children of the poor, who cry for bread.” The first construction is the only right one. It is supported by the want of the suffix, and the analogy of the words, “I shall be satisfied with Thy likeness.” It is further supported by the parallel passages, in which a blooming host of children is spoken of as a reward for the fear of God; comp. Psalms 127 “Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord; the fruit of the womb is His reward;” Psalms 128:3-4, “Thy wife shall be as a fruitful vine by, the sides of thy house,” etc. “Behold, thus shall the man be blessed that feareth the Lord.” Or complaint is made, that this blessing, which properly belongs only to the righteous, is lavished on the ungodly; comp. Job 21:11, “They send forth their little ones like a flock, and their children dance,” magna foecunditate emittunt (Michaelis), in contrast to the pious Job, who lost all his children.

The expression, “they leave their superfluity to their children,” can only refer to the outward appearance. For God is called upon to interpose against the parents themselves, and bring on; their ruin. They will not be able to leave their overflowing abundance to their children, notwithstanding the seemingly well-grounded prosperity of their house, notwithstanding their confident thoughts, and the actual state of affairs, which decidedly favours them; for God has threatened the ungodly in His word, that He will punish their sins in themselves and in their children, even to the third and the fourth generation. Those words give a fearful emphasis to the prayer of the Psalmist: “Arise, O Lord.”

Verse 15

Ver. 15. The prayer uttered in the preceding verses contains even within itself the germ of hope and confidence, in consequence of the foundation on which it stands, and of the opposition between the contrast, in the reality, considered as permanent, and God’s word and nature. That germ comes here into development. “The Psalmist raises himself on the wings of faith to a serene repose, in which he sees everything in order. He mocks the proud boasting of the enemy; and although, as it seemed, quite cast off by God, he still promises himself the enjoyment ere long of his confiding look.” I shall behold Thy face in righteousness, satisfy myself when I awake with Thy form. אני with emphasis, “ I,” very different from my enemies, for whom the Lord is preparing destruction. Righteousness is here, according to the common view, named as the ground upon which the Psalmist rests his hope of seeing the face of God. As matters then stood, his righteousness appeared to be of no avail; God seemed to make nothing of it. But as certain as that God is righteous, such a state of things cannot last, the Psalmist’s righteousness must still bear its proper fruit. We may also expound, “as a righteous or justified person;” and it is in favour of this latter exposition, that according to the former, we should have expected the suffix. Now the Psalmist was represented by his position and experiences as an unrighteous person. But he trusts the righteous God will represent him as the person he really is, will justify him by facts; so that righteousness is here considered as the gift of God. The words, I shall behold Thy face, refer to Psalms 17:2, where the Psalmist wishes that his right might come forth from God’s presence, that His eyes might behold uprightness. This wish he sees here fulfilled. For, to behold God’s face, presupposes that God’s face is turned towards him, that God’s eye looks on him and his uprightness. Just as it is said of God, that He hides His countenance, when He withdraws His favour and help, so is He said to turn towards us, His countenance, when He shows Himself gracious,—comp. Psalms 11:7, “His countenance beholds the upright.” To see God, or God’s face, therefore, is nothing else than to enjoy the Divine favour, to experience the friendship of God, to be assured of His love, and through it to obtain deliverance from the hands of our enemies. So unquestionably is the seeing of God used in the prayer of Hezekiah, Isaiah 38:11, “I said, I shall not see the Lord in the land of the living.” Precisely similar also is Psalms 16:11, where the Psalmist expects fulness of joy in the presence of the Lord; so that the Lord sees him, and he the Lord. The expression, “when I awake”—inasmuch as the figurative view, already adopted by Calvin, according to which a person freed from suffering is represented as one awaking, and the rendering, “as often as I awake,” every morning, are arbitrary—obliges us to suppose, that our Psalm contains an evening prayer of the Psalmist, or was designed by him to be an evening prayer for the faithful. In the stillness of night, the righteous man on his bed complains to the Lord of his distress, and receives from Him inward consolation and the assurance of His help. Calmed, he now sleeps, certain that on his awaking the Lord will grant him the promised aid. That the custom of prayer at even, springing from the very nature of the case, was then also prevalent with the pious, is evident from Psalms 3:5, Psalms 4:8,—passages which are plainly opposed to every explanation of the expression, “when I awake,” other than the one just given; the existence also of the custom of morning prayer distinctly appears from Psalms 5:3.—תמונה always signifies form. The Psalmist refers here to Numbers 12:8, where God, to indicate the confidential relation of Moses to Him, says, “With him I speak mouth to mouth, and face to face, not in dark speeches, and the form of the Lord he beholds.” A like confidential relation to the Lord is here meant, a like visible (namely, by the eye of faith) and felt nearness to Him; the form in opposition to image and shadow; the Psalmist means God to take, as it were, flesh and blood, to meet him in the most concrete, living manner. The Psalmist consoles himself justly therewith, regarding what happened to Moses as a real prophecy for all righteous persons. This hope of the righteous, of satisfying themselves with the form of the Lord, grows out of the same feeling of need, which was met by the appearances of God under a corporeal veil in the time of the fathers, and which had its highest satisfaction in the incarnation of the Word. There is so strong a craving in the human heart for a near, human God, that, anticipating the incarnation of God, it figuratively attributes corporeity to Him, lends to Him form, that it might be able to love Him very intimately, and to derive full comfort from Him. The received exposition of this Psalm we cannot set forth better than in the words of Luther, with whose translation ours agrees, only that he improperly connects תמונתך with בהקיץ : “when I awake after Thine image.” “He sets these words over against what he had said of the ungodly. These strive only after earthly things, are full of children, and place their portion in this life: to me, however, this life is contemptible; I hasten toward the future, where I shall behold, not in riches, but in righteousness, not these earthly things, but Thy face itself. I shall also not be satisfied with children of flesh, but when I shall awake in Thine image.” In recent times this exposition has gained much currency by having been espoused even by De Wette. Many thought, that a reference to a blessed immortality must surely be well grounded, which was admitted even by so great a sceptic. Already, however, did Calvin designate this exposition as one not supported by the text, as subtle. It has nothing, indeed, on its side. The supposition, that a striving after the eternal, after eternal blessedness, is here spoken of, and that this appears from the contrast to the striving of the ungodly after temporal goods, mentioned in the preceding verse, rests simply and exclusively upon a false exposition of that verse. How it can be maintained, that the seeing of the Lord’s face, and being satisfied with His form, must necessarily be understood of the seeing of God in the life to come, one cannot easily see. There cannot be a corporeal vision even in that life; even on that view, the satisfaction with the form of God must be figuratively understood. The seeing of God in the present, and the seeing of Him in the future life, are different only in degree, not in kind. This is most manifest from the declaration of our Lord, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God;” the promise in which, as in all others, is to be referred not less to this life, than to the future one. But what thoroughly refutes this exposition, is the circumstance that, according to it, not merely would there be expressed here a knowledge of eternal life more clear and confident than we could expect to find in a Psalm of David, but especially that the Psalmist would be declaring his entire resignation in regard to earthly things, wholly abandoning them to the wicked, and would express hope only in regard to what is heavenly. The rest of the Psalm stands in direct opposition to this rationalistic, rather than Christian sort of resignation; for a strong and healthy faith in regard to a future recompense, always rests on the foundation of a present retribution. Besides, in Psalms 17:13, we find the Psalmist calling upon the Lord to deliver his soul from the ungodly by His sword, and in Psalms 17:14, making complaint of the temporal prosperity of the wicked.