Читать книгу Trusting YHWH - Lorne E. Weaver - Страница 10

Throughout this book we will be treating Psalms 90, 91 and 92 as a specific literary unit in the Psalms. There is much evidence to support its supposition. We focus first on Psalm 91 where only here in the Psalter, the poet employs four different names for God, each of which is intended to emphasize the total sovereignty and power and incomparability of the Hebrew God.

The one who dwells in the secret shelter of the Most High (עליון), and passes the night in the shadow of Shaddai (שדי) speaks: ‘I will say of the LORD (יהוה), my refuge and my bulwark; my God Elohay (אלהי) in whom I put my trust’ (91:1,2, LW). Here עליון (Elyon) is God Most High.18 עליו (Elyon Most High) also occurs in certain other psalms identified with Zion and is often times used with the prefix אל (El)

In Psalm 78:56, it is the continued sin of the people that is met by divine anger, but it is anger tempered with compassion. For they tested the Most High God, and were in utter rebellion. They did not observe the divine decrees, but turned away and were faithless like their ancestors. Again it is used in its plural form אלהים (Elohim, gods) in Psalm 57:3. I cry to God Most High, to God (אלהים) who fulfills [his] purpose for me. God will send from heaven and save me; God will put to shame those who trample me under foot. God will send forth [his] constant love and faithfulness (LW). God as the exalted ruler of the universe vindicates the innocent and confronts the faithless.

In Psalm 113, we read how the personal, intimate יהוה is high above all nations, and his glory above the heavens. Who is like יהוה our God, who is seated on high, who looks far down on the heavens and the earth? אלהי ( Elohay, my God), which only occurs in three other places in the book of Psalms, is the singular, feminine form of אלהים , the plural (Elohim, gods). Both אלהים (Elohim) and אלהי (Elohay) are derivations of the broader prefix אל (El) the chief god in the Canaanite pantheon.

With the conjunctive יהוה עליון, YHWH and Elyon are also used in apposition in several other psalms.

I will give thanks to יהוה with my whole heart; . . .I will sing praises to your name, O עליון (Ps 9:2); For יהוה thundered in the heavens, and עליון (elyon) raised [his] voice (18:13); For the king trusts in יהוה and through the constant love of עליון (elyon) he shall not be moved (21:7, NRSV). This close association between the two names is found throughout the Hebrew Bible and is particularly noteworthy in the Psalms. Elyon (עליון) connects Psalm 92 to Psalm 91. It is good to give thanks to יהוה and to sing praises to your name, O עליון (elyon). cf. 92:1, 4, 5, 8, 9, and 15. Psalm 92 is a thanksgiving hymn for the just order. It speaks to the deliverance by יהוה of Israel out of the hands of her enemies and oppressors. It is a resounding hymn which builds on the majestic confidence and trust of Psalm 91.

In Psalm 91:4 a distinctly unique metaphor for refuge is employed. יהוה will cover you with [his] pinions, and under [his] wings you will find refuge. The Hebrew noun סֹחֵרָה (sokherah), which occurs only here in the Hebrew Bible, refers to a surrounding enclosure, a rampart, or an enveloping and rounded shield. This metaphor is intended to evoke the powerful image of יהוה encompassing the poet with complete protection against all assaults. Included in this imagery is the understanding of the life of faith and trust as one that is embattled, requiring the unfailing assistance and continuously abiding protection of the presence of יהוה throughout one’s life. Assurance of the presence of יהוה is appealed to by the poets over and over again and is a constant theme in the life of faith for the ancient people of God.

Psalm 91 uses two names for the deity which are typically associated with pre-Mosaic religion: עליון (Elyon, Most High) and שדי (Shaddai, the God of Heaven) which are both names of great antiquity.19 Shaddai is usually translated the Almighty in the LXX. יהוה is referred to in the prophet Hosea as “the living God.” Moses is told in Exodus 6:2–8 that שדי (Shaddai, Almighty) is the name by which the patriarchs knew God. The most likely meaning of this divine appellative is god of the fields, or mountain, but the name יהוה was possibly unknown to them. What we have in the name אל שדי (el shaddai) is an ancient divine appellative with roots deep in the Semitic past. The derivation and meaning of אל שדי (el shaddai) is mostly translated (Almighty) in the Septuagint—whose interpreters themselves were unfamiliar with the original meaning of the name.

Another feature of the LXX (Septuagint) 20 is the reference to the God of Israel, translated the Lord of all the earth. In Psalm 97:5 it states: The mountains melt like wax before יהוה before the Lord of all the earth; and 98:4: All the ends of the earth have seen the victory of our God. Make a joyful noise to יהוה, all the earth. In a non-biblical reference, it is used of the Greek god, Zeus and the Egyptian god, Osiris, specifically by Plutarch (cf. Isis and Osiris 355e).

The origin of the sacred name, יהוה, goes something like this. In its classical form the traditional Kenite hypothesis postulates the view that the Israelites became acquainted with the worship of יהוה through Moses. Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law in one account was, according to an old tradition, a Midianite priest (Ex 2:16; 3:1; 18:1) who worshiped יהוה (e.g. Ex 18:10–12). In two other accounts Hobab is referred to also as Moses’ father-in-law (in Judg 1:16; 4:11; Num 10:29) and belonged to the Kenites (Judg 1:16; 4:11) a branch of the Midianites. By way of Hobab and Moses, then, the Kenites were the mediators of the cult of יהוה.

Dependency on the historical role of Moses, moreover, is problematic. It seems more prudent not to put too much weight on the figure of Moses—to say nothing of the discrepancy that is found in scripture regarding the actual identities of Jethro and Hobab who are each cited as Moses’s father-in-law (perhaps Moses had two fathers-in-law?). It is only in a much later tradition that Moses came to be regarded as the legendary ancestor of the Levitical priests and a symbol of the “יהוה alone movement.” That יהוה is known as the God of deliverance and grace is attested in the Exodus 18 strata; Moses said to Hobab . . . We are setting out for the place of which יהוה said, ‘I will give it to you’; come with us, and we will treat you well; for יהוה has promised good to Israel. (cf. Num.10:29).

A major flaw in the classical Kenite hypothesis, however, is its disregard for the Canaanite origins of Israel (ca. early to mid thirteenth-century BCE) near the end of the Late Bronze Age. The view that under the influence of Moses, the Israelites then became Yahwists during their journey through the desert, and brought their newly acquired religion to the Palestinian soil, neglects the fact that the majority of Israelites were already firmly rooted and established in Palestine. It is most likely, and it is accurate, I think, to say that Moses first learned the name יהוה in the low desert area separating Canaan and Egypt. This is roughly the geographical location of the Exodus 3 tradition—the Name of the Hebrew God is given to Moses, the Tetragrammaton, YHWH, יהוה Numerous biblical references specifically associate the God of Israel, יהוה, with one or more of the southeastern desert regions of Sinai, Paran, Seir/Edom, Midian, Cushan, and Teman (Dt. 33:2; Jud. 5:4, 5; Hab. 3:3; Ps 68:8,17). The appellative, elyon, Most High, is the name that Moses used for the divine in one of his last speeches. When the Most High apportioned the nations, when he divided humankind, [he] fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the Israelites; the portion of יהוה was [his] own people, Jacob his allotted share (Dt. 32:8 NRSV).21 Elyon (עליון) is a richly textured term connoting the idea of the Most High or Highest God.

By openly proclaiming that God is known as (עליון) Elyon, (שדי) Shaddai, (יהוה) Yhwh, and (אלהי) Elohay, the poet of Psalm 91 appropriates this combination of divine names which seems intended to evoke supreme confidence in and a deep inner consciousness of the Holy.22 This aggregate of appellatives connotes the power of the Creator-God as well as the enduring love of the Deliverer God in whom Israel lives and moves by virtue of the eternal covenant. Both transcendence and immanence are attributed to the Hebrew God יהוה, and this God יהוה is the personal and incomparable deity. The use of the sacred name יהוה in Psalm 91 then, in this line of thought, is intended to gather up into completion all the meanings of the other three names. It was then fused with the older deity, El or Elohim, and is associated with the land of Canaan.23

This is Moses’ greatest contribution to Israelite religion and the psalmists make conscious decisions to employ the Name numerously. יהוה is by far the most prevalent designation of the deity in the Psalms. The covenantal Name יהוה—which occurs nearly 700 times throughout the Psalter–along with the abbreviated יה (yah)–is, by far, the most conspicuous. The Psalter is predominately a Yahwist Book! The only exception to its prominence throughout the book is found in the common usage of אלהים (elohim) in what is now usually referred to as the Elohistic Psalter (Pss 42–83). We will consider this phenomenon in another chapter.

The richness of ancient Israel’s religious experience and practice is reflected in the interface between יהוה and the people of God. It is יהוה who revealed to Israel (Moses) the holy and ineffable Name (Ex 3). For Israel to be given the name יהוה was an extraordinary thing.24 It is a basis for confidence therefore that the giving of the divine Name is rooted in the character of God. In most current English Bible versions (NRSV, REB, Grail, and JPS), יהוה is rendered LORD, in four capital letters; it is thus distinguished from “Lord”, or Adonai, meaning sovereign. יהוה was mistakenly transliterated Jehovah in the 19th century. YHWH, the tetragrammaton or the four Hebrew consonants יהוה, is identified with the I am who I am, or, I will be who I will be in the pentateuchal narrative. Most scholarship today understands יהוה to be a pun which plays on the Hebrew verb, to be.25

This is the name of the personal, intimate God and it is this name that was communicated directly to Moses—according to the Exodus 3 narrative tradition. It is frequently insufficiently recognized that, at the beginning of Iron Age I, the role of the god El—king of the pantheon of the Canaanite gods—had become largely nominal. By the end of Iron Age I, the cult of El had survived only in some border zones of the Near East. In most regions, including Palestine, El’s career as a living god (i.e. as a cultic reality and an object of actual devotion) had ended.

The name survived in such expressions as ‘the council of El’ and ‘sons of El’, but this was survival in name only. This fact explains why there are no traces of polemic against El in the Hebrew Bible. The name was increasingly used either as a generic noun meaning ‘god’ or, more specifically, as a designation of the personal god. In both cases, יהוה could be called El. Along with the name, יהוה inherited various traits of El. One of them is divine eternity. Ugaritic texts refer to El as the “father of years” while יהוה is called “Ancient of Days” (Dan 7). Power and compassion are commonly attributed traits of both El and יהוה.

Other references where עליון (elyon) occurs on its own are: And I say, ‘It is my grief that the right hand of the Most High (elyon) has changed’ (77:10); and, I say, ‘You are all gods, children of the Most High, עליון (elyon) all of you; nevertheless, you shall all die like any mortal-fall like any prince (82:6, LW); And of Zion it shall be said, ‘This one and that one were born in it’; for the Most High עליון (elyon) himself will establish it (87:5, LW) and 92:1. Of these examples, עליון (elyon), as a term for the God of Israel, must have been interpreted early on as an allusion to Zion. The latter redactors and editors of the Psalter gave expression to this allusion in its final shaping. The God of the psalmists is an active God who intervenes for the benefit of, and on behalf of, [his] worshipers.

The joy of the worshiping psalmist at the intervention of יהוה is not a quiet feeling of happiness which he keeps to himself; rather the words of worship that are employed are usually associated with the praise of God in hymns or with the festive joy of the celebrations in the temple. The divine epithets speak of praise and majesty, honor and power. All these are compressed into the first two verses of Psalm 91. The names of יהוה that occur in the Psalms are derived in all likelihood from the cultic tradition of the old Jebusite city–Jerusalem. Evidence also exists which seems to suggest how very early on, יהוה was venerated as אל עליון (El Elyon) at Shiloh in the pre-monarchical period. This is a sacred name of great antiquity and Israel believed that only Yahweh is El Elyon (“God Most High” cf. Gen 14:22).

“The psalmists, too, use the epithet ‘Elyon’ to refer to Yahweh, and their use has no mythological overtones. Whatever they may say about Elyon is completely adapted to the bounds of revelation from Sinai: ‘For you, O Lord, are the Most High [Elyon] over all the earth; you are exalted far above all gods’ (97:9). [He] is Yahweh Elyon, and there is no other Elyon than Yahweh! Therefore, the psalmist prays, ‘Let them know that you, whose name is the LORD–that you alone are the Most High [Elyon]over all the earth’ (83:18).”26

Though יהוה was known and worshiped among the Israelites before 1000 BCE, [he] did not become the patron, national god until the monarchic era. Due to the religious politics of Saul, יהוה only became the patron deity of the Israelite state following its origination in the south–primarily the tribe of Judah. As David and Solomon inherited and enlarged Saul’s Kingdom, they acknowledged the rightful position of יהוה as Israel’s national God. David brought the Ark of יהוה from Benjamin to Jerusalem (2 Sam 6). Solomon sought the blessing of יהוה at the sanctuary of Gibeon, the national temple of the Saulide state (1 Kgs 3:4). Evidence of the predominant role of יהוה in the official cult during the Monarchic Era are the theophoric personal names, the biblical names, and the epigraphical ones.

. . . there is not a single derivation of the word ‘Yahweh’ from a native Hebrew root; they are all from foreign roots, most of them Arabic, indicating quite clearly that Yahweh was a foreign god, most probably originating in Arabia. [He] was anything but a native Hebrew god, and on that particular point practically all scholars are agreed. They agree, too, that [he] originated in the south. They differ only as to whether [he] was of Arabic or Kenite origin. 27

The divine name, יהוה is by far the most common theophoric element. The practical henotheism of יהוה should not be taken for a strict monotheism. Far from it! Not only did the Israelite’s continue to recognize the existence of other deities besides יהוה, for a very long time, they also knew more than one הוה ! Though at the mythological level there is only one, the cultic reality reflected a plurality of יהוה gods. Non-biblical evidence mentions a “יהוה from Samaria” and a “יהוה of Teman”; it is possible that the two names designate one god, the official god of the northern Kingdom (“Samaria”, after its capital). Yet the recognition of a northern יהוה is mirrored by the worship of a “יהוה of Hebron” and a “יהוה of Zion” (2 Sam 15:7) all of which should be understood as references to local forms of יהוה worship centered in regional shrines dating back to the earliest days before the monarchy and reminiscent of the days of the tribal confederation. In the Hebrew Bible, the name יהוה is written in two different ways when standing by itself, יה (yah) and יהוה and, in three different ways, when used in personal names, יה, יהו, and יהו, but never as יהוה. Outside the Hebrew Bible, it is found in only two other places as יהוה—on the Moabite Stone and the ostraca from Lachish.28

Indicators all point to there being an early epithet of על (el) who, as the dominant god in the surrounding Semitic cultures, undoubtedly posed challenges to ancient Israel when the newly arrived Hebrews gained entrance into Canaan in the fourteenth-century BCE. The name elyon connects our three Psalms, 90, 91, and 92. There is also evidence to suggest that the inhabitants of the old Jebusite city (pre-Israelite Jerusalem) already entertained religious and cultic conceptions of the Highest God or el Elyon. Consequently, a qualitative distinction was formidably drawn between the worshiping practices in Israel and that of her surrounding neighbors.

This distinction is critical to any right understanding of the Hebrew conception of the incomparability of יהוה when contrasted to other gods. The religious situation in early Israel, therefore, was extremely complicated. For much of the period of old Israel, it faced a daunting reality that was not merely one of a rampant polytheism, but also of poly-yahwism. The Deuteronomic emphasis, of course, is on the unity of יהוה amid these complexities and ought to be so understood against this background. Israel’s journey to monotheism was a long, complicated and arduous one and was never arrived at easily.

The question of the origin and age of biblical monotheism has again been vigorously discussed in recent times [c. 1994]. Whereas earlier scholars generally saw the exclusiveness of Israel’s worship of Yahweh as an old legacy of the early period, which in the crises of the settlement and formation of the state was gradually developed into the express requirement of monolatry (sole worship) in the face of the threat of ‘Canaanite’ infiltration, and finally, during the exile, into theoretical monotheism (the assertion of a sole God and the denial of all others), in more recent scholarship the exact opposite has been maintained, that throughout its pre-exilic phase the religion of Israel had been a ‘polytheistic religion which was no different from the religions of the surrounding world’. The propagation of the sole worship of Yahweh is said to have begun only at a late stage, at the earliest with Elijah in the ninth century, but really only with Hosea in the eighth century, and to have been the concern of only small opposition groups (the ‘Yahweh alone movement’). According to this view, this movement was only able to influence society for a short period under Josiah, but then finally helped monotheism to victory in the exilic and early post-exilic period.29

The Hebrew text—which the LXX translated into Greek—differed from the MT (Masoretic Text) to some extent. The condition of that earlier text was quite variable and in some cases was doubtless superior to our present Hebrew text. But in other instances it was clearly inferior. Our conclusion here is that the LXX, while certainly indispensable to the study of the Psalms, must be handled with care. Diligence therefore must be exercised in weighing its evidences and appropriating its conclusions to our reading and interpretation of the text. 30

The MT (Masoretic Text) is the earliest Hebrew text available to us and dates from the ninth-century CE. In the MT the term שדי (Shaddai, Almighty) also appears only twice in the Psalter (91:1 and 68:14) but over thirty times, for instance, in the book of Job. Biblical references to שדי (Shaddai) in their present form, are most likely of post-exilic origin. In the LXX Shaddai has been rendered variously, but the predominant rendition was Almighty and it issued forth in the eastern Christian church, eventually, by the Greek title pantokrator or Lord of all worlds.

Pantokrator-as a Greek title of the divine and cosmic Lordship of Christ first appeared in the Eastern church in the 4th -5th centuries CE. That Jesus was the Christ of God and the one promised in the Old Testament was the central conviction with which Christianity had arisen out of Judaism. The conviction had been worked out in early Jewish -Christian debates, but Byzantine theology expanded the case for this identification of the Christ . . . It was the theme and purpose of Christian writings against Judaism to show ‘from the Scriptures and from the truth itself [that various passages of the Old Testament] speak about the incarnate economy of the Son of God.’ These passages had been fulfilled before the eyes of the entire cosmos, proving [to those who believed in his name] that Jesus was the promised one.31

In the early apostolic church, the confession (ἐστιν πάντων κύριος)—(“he is Lord of all”) in Acts 10:36, conveys the core conviction of the lordship of the risen Christ through this parenthetical remark by Luke. It is obvious that the early Christian writers utilized the LXX. Luke was certainly familiar with it. The theological significance to the speech by Peter is that the risen Jesus is become Christ, and, by Christians, is subsequently to be proclaimed as the Lord of all worlds. The gospel of the risen Christ—from the beginning of the Christian tradition–was understood, by implication, to have cosmic significance.

There has been considerable debate about the appearances of the name יהוה in the Pentateuch, primarily because of various theories asserting that the name יהוה was unknown in antiquity. The idea that the name יהוה was revealed here only raises the question of how God was known earlier. God is not a name but rather a concept. אל שדי (el shaddai) is used only a few times in Genesis. Israel would not have had a nameless deity–especially since Genesis says that from the very beginning people were making proclamation of, and erecting altars in the name of יהוה (Gen 4:26; 12:8). It is possible that they did not always need a name if they were convinced that there was only יהוה and there were no other gods.

Probably what Moses was anticipating was the Israelites’ needing assurance that he came to them with a message from their God and that some sign would serve as verification of the fact that the presence of יהוה was indeed with them. They would have known the Name and they would have known the ways in which יהוה had been manifested. It would have done no good for Moses to come to the people with a new name for God for that would be like introducing them to a new god. It would in no way authenticate to them Moses’s call, only confuse; after all, they would not be expecting a new name since they had been praying to their God all along. They would want to be assured that their God actually had sent Moses to lead them.

To satisfy the Israelites Moses would had to have been familiar with the name יהוה—if nothing more than to convey to them the reality of the divine presence among them; that this indeed was the self-revealing God who had appeared to him in the Exodus 3 theophany. They would also have wanted to know if יהוה had sent Moses and how this was going to work in their deliverance—for they had been crying out to their God for rescue for a very long time. As it turned out the Israelites had less problem with this than Moses anticipated. Indeed, they were delighted when he came. It is likely that much of this concern was Moses’s own need for assurance that this was the God of their ancestors. The promised deliverance was now to take place. Israel’s long communion and worship of יהוה as the covenanted and covenantal people begins at Sinai. This marks the beginning of the Sinai theology tradition which can be traced with clarion accuracy through the Asaphite psalms (50, 73–83) which are songs originating in the north (Israel or Ephraim).32

In the Hebrew Bible, the Name (Heb. hashem), is used in place of יהוה in reverence of the holy Name. This reverence for יהוה is still maintained in various expressions of modern day Judaism. There is a reluctance to appropriate its usage aloud—this in sobering contrast to much of contemporary Christianity’s casual references to the holy One. The only appropriate stance is to tread carefully with awe and worship in the presence of the Holy.33 The acknowledgment of the activity and attributes of יהוה, particularly immanence and transcendence, frequently come to expression through the various images used to describe God’s actions in the Psalms. The more frequent Hebraic images express a knowledge of the nearness and awareness of the presence and help and deliverance of יהוה. It is the presence of יהוה that is, for ancient Israel, the primary locus of divine activity.

A deep trust and confidence in יהוה emerges out of each of these texts. This trust is rooted in ancient Israel’s common life and work and, most of all, worship. Our three psalms represent some of the highest expressions of trust in the Psalter. In this respect Psalm 91 marks the zenith of the book of Psalms. The entire book is the subject of a people’s growth in faith and trust in יהוה their God. יהוה is the sacred name of the God of Israel, both in the northern kingdom and in Judah. Before ca. 1200 BCE, the name is not found in any semitic texts. יהוה was never known at Ugarit according to the findings. But it is in the Psalms where we may eavesdrop on the way God’s ancient people conversed in the presence of the sacred Name. Nowhere is the transaction of the divine-human drama expressed more convincingly than in ancient Israel’s ongoing dialogue with יהוה, the God of history. The results of this dialog bear the hallmarks of the book of Praises.

James Muilenburg’s observation made a half century ago, still remains an accurate assessment of ancient Israel’s uniqueness: The way of Israel is historical. It is historical to a maximum degree because its history belongs to God. History is God’s gift to Israel and to the world.34 That יהוה will one day come to be recognized by all as the God of all the earth is attested in Psalm 83:18–Let them know that you alone, whose name is יהוה, are עליון (elyon) over all the earth.

. . . it is important to note the close association between the idea of Yahweh’s incomparability and the idea that not only Israel, but also the heathen had to acknowledge Yahweh as God . . . it cannot be denied that, at least to a certain extent, the concept shows trends of universalism . . . in connection with the idea of [His] incomparability it means that other peoples will recognize not only this, but also [His] uniqueness. Should universalism be seen as one of the requirements for pure monotheism, then this confession undoubtedly met this requirement, for right from the beginning it transcended national limitation in showing a universalistic trend.35

The identity and the universality of Israel’s God is firmly rooted in the prophets, particularly Isaiah: Only in יהוה it shall be said of me, are righteousness and strength; all who were incensed against him shall come to him and be ashamed. In יהוה all the offspring of Israel shall triumph and glory (Is 45:24, NRSV). The broad parameter of the use of the divine names is illustrated abundantly throughout the book of Praises. Israel’s very existence bears witness to the promises of the covenant which she entered into with יהוה. Israel’s conversation with יהוה is Israel’s gift to us. Here we witness the mighty deeds of יהוה, Israel’s words to God, and God’s words to Israel. This is, theologically speaking, a new horizon in Israel’s faith development. When meditating on the Psalter we too may step into the historic stream -this remarkable legacy of trusting יהוה in faith—whether in times of lamentation and desolation or times of celebration and praise. The unique and primary locus of these hymns of praise in the Hebrew Bible is found in the Psalter.

In the LXX the word psalm is derived from the Greek (ψαλμοῖς, psalmois) which in turn translates the Hebrew מזמור (mizmor, root meaning to pluck) and is the most common title. It is used in the superscriptions of 57 psalms.36 מזמור (mizmor) refers to a song accompanied by a stringed instrument.

The term Psalter is derived from the Latin, psalterium, or stringed instrument. Many of the psalms that have come down to us clearly denote musical accompaniment (lyre and harp, zither, trumpets, tambourines and drums) in a particular liturgical setting—but reaching anything like exact dates when these titles were first appropriated is only ill-advised speculation.

. . . there is the attempt to place various psalms on a continuum according to their theological perspective. The interpretation of the Old Testament has been plagued by this necessity to argue from the development of religious thought to history and from historical context to the date of the literature. For this reason, all judgments about the relative dates of biblical texts are hazardous. Naturally, this approach assumes that religious ideas progressed ever more in ancient Israel, and the purest teachings necessarily came later than others less refined. Of course, we know that societies do not evolve in this fashion and pockets of a culture invariably preserve older values.37

The LXX remains an immensely important translation and has served as an invaluable resource to all subsequent studies of the Hebrew Scriptures for more than two millennia. Since the LXX is a translation, scholars speculate as to what degree it accurately reflects the Hebrew text of the third-century BCE. On closer examination of both the LXX and the ninth-century CE Masoretic Text (MT) there do occur, understandably, some variations. Were these due to errors in translation, transcription, or are the LXX and MT based on two different Hebrew manuscripts? The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls has certainly helped shed light on some of these questions.

The inhabitants of Judea and Israel in the time of the monarchy were constantly tempted to forsake יהוה and to engage in the ancient cults of the neighboring nature deities. Israel’s God, by any name, is holy and awe-filled. But it was the constant allurement of the prolific nature deities of Canaan that remained a continuing enticement to Israel to abandon the worship of “יהוה alone.” The influence of Canaanite religion played a significant role in these developments. Our knowledge of the religions of Canaan has been much advanced by archaeological discoveries of documents and potsherds, especially from Ugarit (Ras Shamra) which date from the middle of the second millennium, ca.1420 BCE.

These Bronze Age religions had a powerful impact on the Iron Age Israelites, particularly during the time of the divided kingdom and they gained entry into Israel’s life especially under the program and policies of Jeroboam I, the first king of the northern kingdom (Israel). But it was later, under Ahaz and his Sidonian princess wife Jezebel, that a particularly noxious and virulent strain of Canaanite religion was introduced in the north and was practiced openly.38 This threatened the very future of Yahwism in both North and South. The early prophets of the north, Elijah and Elisha in the ninth century BCE, continually castigated the northern kings for their polytheism. The eighth-century BCE prophets railed against these cultural accretions, particularly Amos and Hosea in the north, beginning in the mid-eighth century. Somewhat later in the century, in the south, Micah–and still later on, Jeremiah in the late seventh and early sixth-centuries BCE continued to warn the southern kingdom of Judah of impending disaster.

The contrast and movement from polytheism and henotheism to monotheism run like a continuous thread through ancient Israel’s history.39 Israel never arrived at a pure monotheism easily. There is no evidence for this transition from henotheism to monotheism having occurred abruptly. Rather, it appears to have been a lengthy process that continued through much of pre-exilic Israel’s life.

The arrival of a belief in the form of a distinct monotheism as central to ancient Israel’s life, is thus postulated as having arrived in the post-exilic years. Psalm 82 is frequently cited as marking the moment that Israel adopted a thorough-going monotheism.

A comparison between Psalm 91:1, 2 and Psalm 18:1–3 and its hymnic praise to יהוה by heaping metaphor upon metaphor underscores the centrality of the “יהוה alone movement” as it may be tracked throughout the Psalter. It may be said that metaphorical monotheism characterizes much of the these psalms. But the worship of יהוה did not mean that Israel was immediately transformed into a monotheistic culture. This process would take centuries. The form and fact of henotheism weaves a pattern throughout Israel’s history and is the subject of the constant judgment of יהוה on the people of God. Israel’s God, יהוה, is a jealous God. Much of this language may be found throughout the Psalter.

Many scholars understand monotheism as a solely post-exilic phenomenon which began to flourish during the “Babylonian Captivity.” In exile, Israel–or Judah—was forced to come to terms with her recent debasement and central to this core belief was the recognition that יהוה was the One God of All, having chosen Israel’s’ oppressors as instruments of correction to call the people back to the true meaning of their life as the people of God. This radical movement took root during the seventy years the people were in exile. It was to be the harbinger of new life that infused the exiled community, upon their return, to begin to understand the universal meaning of their election by יהוה in dramatically new and fundamentally altered ways. The prophetic words uttered by Amos and Hosea in the eighth-century BCE, and the message of Jeremiah in the seventh and sixth centuries, and of the later prophets, Habakkuk and Zechariah, had not been heeded. Their words now came back to haunt the defeated people. They purposed to reconstruct their lives under יהוה and the end result was the miracle of Judaism whereby the Jews became the people of the book, or Torah meaning the way of instruction (cf. Psalm 119).

Some of the post-exilic psalms reflect this fundamental shift in understanding (96, 97, 103, 107, 113, 115, 123, 138, etc.). יהוה as sheltering presence and protecting refuge serve as core monotheistic metaphors. These are stirring descriptions. Psalm 18, an early psalm considered by many scholars as most likely a Davidic poem, is well known for its exceedingly rich metaphorical flourishes in the opening verses: I love you, O יהוה, my strength. יהוה is my rock, my fortress, and my deliverer, my God, the Rock in whom I take refuge, my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold (18:1–2, NRSV).

But it is only in Psalm 91 that we find this compact formula consisting of four divine appellatives—in just two verses. In Psalm 90 the poet quickly picks up on the image of refuge proclaiming יהוה as מחסי (machasa, to hide or shelter); it is the principal word for refuge, which occurs twice in Psalm 91 (vss 2, 9). Psalm 115 is considered a communal song of trust to be sung and celebrated by the whole people. The alternating pronouns suggest antiphonal responses throughout the recitation or singing of the prayer. All praise is attributed to the Name, יהוה. The poet is attuned to the complaints on the part of the people. Their situation is understood to be a challenge to the glory and honor of יהוה. The poet reinforces the power and demonstration of the glory of the Name יהוה in the face of the taunts of the surrounding nations. The entire poem is a call to monotheistic Yahwism. As a response to such charges, the poet declares the vitality and power of the God of Israel, יהוה. The idols of the nations are reduced to the futility of their makers while the people of Israel are encouraged to trust in יהוה alone and express their confidence in God’s rescue and deliverance of them.

At the very outset of Psalm 115, glory to the Name of יהוה is expressed and the situation of the people in the face of their enemy Egypt is taken to be a challenge to the glory and honor of יהוה. The poem’s representative voice declares the awesome power and strength of Israel’s God over and against all other gods. The stress is on the transcendence of God. For our God is in the heavens; whatever God wills, God does. The word of finality is expressed in the final strophe: Praise YHWH! This psalm, a liturgical communal prayer of the people in Jewish tradition, is one of the Egyptian Hallel (“praise”) psalms (113–118)—sung before (Pss 113–114) and after (Pss (115–118) the Passover meal in praise of the deliverance out of Egypt by the hand of יהוה.

Psalm 115

Not to us, O יהוה, not to us,

but to your Name give the glory

for the sake of your constancy and your truth,

lest the heathen say: “Where is their God?”

For our God is in the heavens;

whatever God wills, God does.

The idols of the heathen are silver and gold,

the work of their hands.

They have mouths but they cannot speak;

they have eyes but they cannot see;

they have ears but they cannot hear;

they have nostrils but they cannot smell.

With their hands they cannot feel;

with their feet they cannot walk.

No sound comes from their throats.

Their makers will become like themselves

and so will all who put their trust in them.

O Israel’s family, trust in יהוה;

יהוה is your help and your shield.

Aaron’s family, trust in יהוה;

יהוה is your help and your shield.

You who fear יהוה trust in יהוה;

יהוה is your help and your shield.

יהוה remembers and will bless us;

will bless the family of Israel,

will bless the family of Aaron.

יהוה will bless those who fear him,

the little no less than the great;

The heavens belong to יהוה

but God has given the earth into our keeping.

Those who go down to the grave shall not praise יהוה,

nor the dead who, in silence, know only oblivion.

But we will bless יהוה

both now and forevermore.

Praise יהוה!

This psalm functions as a potent discourse on the close relationship that exists between the family of Israel and her God, יהוה. As has already been noted, the Psalter is first and foremost an account of the relationship between יהוה and Israel—God’s word to God’s people and their words as a response to יהוה. There is a continuing conversation between יהוה and the covenantal people throughout the Psalter. This is the hallmark of its many themes and features. It is little wonder then that the rabbis call the Psalter sepher tehillim, formed from the same root as the word הללויה (hallelujah), thus the title The Book of Praises.

The Hebrew title of the book of Psalms is tehillim, ‘Praises.’ Although the hymns or songs of praise are outnumbered in the Psalter by the prayers of lament or complaint, the title ‘Praises’ is appropriate. Even the prayers of lament or complaint move toward praise. So does the Psalter as a whole. Whereas prayers of lament or complaint dominate Books I-III, hymns or songs of praise are dominate in Books IV-V. Thus praise becomes the goal of the Psalter in the same way that praise is the goal of human life. Praise is fundamental.40

Although the songs of praise and thanksgiving are outnumbered, dominantly so, by the prayers and songs of lament-complaint, the title book of Praises is still appropriate. For these and other reasons the Psalter is sometimes referred to as the Hymnbook of the Second Temple.41 This would be appropriate if the book of Psalms was viewed primarily as a post-exilic book, which was commonly held a century ago. But this, too, is inaccurate and misleading as we now understand that not a few psalms likely predate by at least one hundred years the first temple’s Iron Age construction in the mid-tenth-century BCE.

It is important to remember that these early psalms would have begun their life in the worship of יהוה following the event of the exodus; in their journey through the wilderness, shrines and altars were erected in order for the people of יהוה to continue their sacrificial rites and ceremonies. These psalms would travel far and wide before coming to rest in the liturgy of the temple beginning in the tenth century BCE. It is fair to say that ancient Israel’s psalms became, over time, the voice of the people of יהוה communing with their God. This is substantiated by the repeated pleas that the presence of their God would remain and abide with them forever.

18. Kraus, Theology of the Psalms, “The divine name Elyon suggests the idea of ‘ascend’ and connotes ‘the Highest’. The name indicates the exalted status and power of God (e.g. Pss 47:2, 6–7; 82:6; 83:19; 91:1, 9; 97:9). It is an epithet of kingship.” 461.

cf. Mettinger, In Search of God: The Meaning and Message of the Everlasting Names. “The biblical names of God are symbols. On the pump-organ of human language, these symbols perform the music that speaks about God. The symbols are not a direct reproduction of the original tones, but are a downward transposition with a supposedly analogical relationship to them. The symbols are names that speak of the Ineffable through categories deriving from the world of human experience.” 201

19. A. A. Anderson, Psalms, New Century Bible Commentary, vol. II. “Shaddai possesses not only a protective character but also a fearsome aspect. It is very likely an early Canaanite divine epithet usually rendered ‘the one of the mountains;’” 656.

20. Note: The Septuagint, or LXX, (the term Septuagint meaning seventy) is the first Greek translation of the text of the Hebrew Bible. Tradition says it was the product of seventy-two Jewish scholars convened sometime in the third century BCE in Alexandria. According to an ancient document, the Letter of Aristeas, legend states how seventy-two Jewish scholars were commissioned during the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus of Egypt to carry out the task of translating the Hebrew Bible into Greek. Widely used among Hellenistic Jews, this Greek version of the Hebrew Bible was called forth as many Jews who were dispersed throughout the far-flung Roman world were beginning to lose contact with their Hebrew roots and language. One of the fascinating results of translating the Hebrew Bible into Greek is that it gave non-Jews a window into viewing Judaism and its ancient traditions. The LXX had an enormous influence on the early church, most particularly among the first century CE writers of what would become the Christian scriptures. The LXX WAS the “Old Testament” for the early church.

21. Wallace, The Narrative Effect of Book IV of the Hebrew Psalter. “The faithful in Ps 91 will also find protection of Yahweh’s ‘pinions’ (v. 4). This word is also used in Dt. 32:11. When the divine does speak in Ps. 91, in the oracle, Yahweh states in 14b that ‘I will protect those who know my name.’ The phrase is conspicuous when read with Dt. 32:3 ‘I will call on the name of Yhwh’.” 23.

Note: There are various similarities between the Song of Moses (Deut 32) and Psalm 91. cf. Andre Caquot, “Le Psaume XCI” Semitica 8 (21–37).

22. Ps 91:1, 2. יהוה (Yahweh) occurs in the Psalms close to 700 times, of which the abbreviated form yah occurs 43 times; elohim, 365 times; El, 79 times; Adonai, 54 times; Elyon, 22 times; Elohay, 4 times; and Shaddai, twice, in Ps 68 and Ps 91.

23. Note: The fact that there remains a very close linkage between our psalms (Pss 90, 91, 92) and the seventh-sixth century BCE deuteronomistic historians—editors, tells us even more about the very long process of time that passed in bringing the Psalter to its present form, approximately in the second century CE. cf. M. Segal, “El, Elohim, and YHWH in the Bible,” in Jewish Quarterly Review 46 (89–115).

24. Vriezen, The Religion of Ancient Israel. It is an extraordinary thing because it is also a “clear case of a personal relationship with the Most High God, with Israel’s only God in person. [He] is directly accessible. Not only kings (like David, in 1 Sam. 30:6) may call upon [him], but all who are in distress (Pss. 25, 35, 69, 71, 84, 86, 143, passim); . . . In other words, there is in Israel an absolute immediacy about the relationship between God [himself], in the highest sense of that term, and the individual human being.” 27.

25. Freedman, “The Real Formal Full Name of the God of Israel” In Sacred History, Sacred Literature, “If the Tetragrammaton, YHWH, is a verb in the earliest biblical tradition, then it has a pronominal subject that is expressed, and behind it a subject-noun. From the passages of Exod 3:6; 6:2–3, and 34:6 -7, it seems clear that Yahweh was originally a verb for which the subject was El” 119. cf. Albertz, Israelite Religion. “Attempts have been made time and time again to learn something about the nature of Yahweh from the explanation of [his] name. The divine name appears in different forms, in the Old Testament mostly in the long form (tetragrammaton) YHWH; because of the reluctance to utter the divine name which began in the Hellenistic period, its pronunciation is not completely certain. When the Massoretes laid down the pronunciation of the Hebrew consonantal text in the early Middle Ages, they vocalized the tetragrammaton by the words which were read in its place, ‘adonay (‘Lord’) or ‘elohim (God); this gave rise to the false reading ‘Jehovah’ which was popularized by the nineteenth century.” 49, 50.

26. VanGemeren, Psalm 131:2, 153.

27. Meek, Hebrew Origins. 109–110. cf. Albertz, A History of Israelite Religion, “So the god Yahweh is older than Israel; [ he] was a southern Palestinian god before [ he] became the god of liberation for the Moses group. It was important here that [ he] was a god who came from outside, an alien god who had not yet been incorporated into the structure of the Egyptian pantheon and was thus in a position to break up this religious system which gave political stability to society.” 52.

28. Wurthwein, The Text of the Old Testament: An Introduction to the Biblia Hebraica. 122–124. Note: The inscribed Bowl from Lachish was discovered in 1935 and a date has been proposed to the second quarter of the fourteenth century BCE. The inscription consists of eleven signs or letters. Seven of these are well preserved. Most scholars agree that the identity of the first five signs are the Hebrew letters b, s, l, s, t (i.e. a form of the number “three” with the prepositional prefix, b). The sixth symbol is probably a division mark and the seventh, the beginning of another word, is now illegible. The Moab Stele was discovered in 1868 by a missionary, F. A. Klein, in Dhibon, Jordan. It is a victory inscription on black basalt consisting of thirty-four lines in Phoenician-Old Hebrew script with twenty-seven lines preserved entirely. They celebrate the victory of Mesha, King of Moab, over Israel after a period of Moabite submission (cf. 2 Kgs 3: 4—27) and are a record of a program of city building. The stele is of great importance as it is the sole historical monument of the Moabite kingdom and a record of historical relations between Moab and Israel, which are glossed over or omitted from the “Old Testament.” It dates from the ninth century BCE.

29. Albertz, A History of Israelite Religion, 61. cf. For an excellent discussion of the long process toward monotheism in ancient Israel, please see James A. Sanders, The Monotheizing Process: Its Origins and Development, 2014.

30. Note: The findings of the psalms scroll at Qumran have reinvigorated and renewed confidence in the reliability and accuracy of the Hebrew of the ninth century CE Masoretic text (MT). This is one of the greatest contributions of the Dead Sea Scrolls for research and study of the Psalter.

31. Pelikan, The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600–1700) In The Christian Tradition, Vol. 3. 208.

32. cf. Cook, The Social Roots of Biblical Yahwism, Society of Biblical Literature. 2004.

Note: Cook cites often the connection that exists between the Psalms of Asaph (50, 73–83) and the Sinai theology tradition which is the monotheistic Yahwist belief and which becomes the subsequent confession of ancient Israel.

33. cf. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy, 44.

34. Muilenburg, Psalm 4:7, 44.

cf. Rendtorff, Canon and Theology, “. . . the historical experiences of Israel are reflected in the Psalms in various ways. The personal religion that finds its expression here is rooted in God’s action in the past; but it directs itself ever and again to the yet imminent future deeds of God.” 64.

35. Labuschagne, The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament, 146.

36. Note: The superscriptions or titles are headings that appear at the beginning of 116 psalms (the opening verse or verses in Hebrew). They provide ancient, though not original, information in a variety of forms: authorial attribution, historical setting, instrumental accompaniment, poem-prayer types, etc. The remaining psalms which have no titles are sometimes referred to as “orphans.” The psalm titles are late editorial additions to the collections and may most certainly be dated in the late postexilic era.

37. Crenshaw, A Whirlpool of Torment, 95.

38. Admittedly what we know of the monarchy in the northern kingdom of Israel—at least what is in the Bible— is filtered through the 7th century BCE Deuteronomist historians who view Israel’s monarchy through the prism of the southern kingdom perspective. This royal propaganda considered all the kings of northern Israel bad—in their view.

39. Polytheism is the devotion to and worship of a plurality of gods; Henotheism is the worship of one God per tribe or nation among other gods; Monotheism is the worship of the One and Only God of All. Monolatry is a synonym of henotheism.

40. Craigie, Psalms 1–50, vol. 1 Word Biblical Commentary, 53. cf. Curtis, Psalms in Epworth Commentaries “The Hebrew name sepher tehillim means ‘Book of Praises’ and the title is most appropriate. Many psalms are hymns of praise to God, while others praise [him] indirectly, e.g. by praising Zion where [his] presence was believed to dwell.” xxi.

41. Kraus, Psalms 1–59, vol. 1. A Continental Commentary, 11. Kraus prefers the designation, “the Hymnal of the Jewish Community,” as, in his view, “the title Sepher Tehillim is not at all suitable to serve as a general title that is exhaustive and at all adequate for the contents of the 150 psalms.” 5. Note: However, even the prayers of lament or complaint, by their structure and occurrences throughout, demonstrate the inexorable movement toward praise.