# comment

text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For there are no struggles in their death, but their strength is firm-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Firm" is the word used of the prosperous wicked amongst the exiles (<a href='B:330 34:20'>Eze 34:20</a>). But as Ezekiel points out, this was only a temporary illusion. Ultimately, death is indeed a fetter (s:w. "struggles"), broken only by God’s grace in Christ. The Psalmist is for a moment forgetting the Biblical picture of death, just as we can. He is thinking that a peaceful death means they were blessed; whereas by implication, he expects a difficult death.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They are free from the burdens of men, neither are they plagued like other men-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'><a href='B:50 26:7'>Deu 26:7</a> uses the word for "burdens" of the judgment of those who break covenant. And God is not unmindful of who breaks covenant with Him. David had earlier confidently stated that the "mischief" (s:w. "burdens") of men would return upon their own heads at death and judgment (<a href='B:230 7:16'>Psa 7:16</a>; <a href='B:230 140:9'>Psa 140:9</a>). But in <a href='B:230 73:5'>Psa 73:5</a> he momentarily doubts thIsa. Our understanding of basic truths can suddenly be eclipsed by moments of doubt, just as we see happening with the disciples on the lake during the storm. We could render "They have no share in the misery of mortals", as if the psalmist is thinking that they actually are not sharing in the results of the curse in Eden. But he is forgetting that all the same they die, and will be raised to judgment- they are not at all exempt from the curse on Adam. And he is forgetting some words in Job, which as one of the oldest Bible books he surely was aware of: “man is born for misery / burden” (Job 5:7). It's one thing to know God's word, quite another to feel and live it as felt reality.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Therefore pride is like a chain around their neck, violence covers them like a garment-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The conclusion therefore is that awareness of the reality of death leads to humility, and those who refuse to perceive Divine judgment in this life become proud and violent, believing they will not face judgment for their actions. Chains were worn around the neck by leaders and governors (we think of Joseph and Daniel being given one); so the implication is that such men were in leadership positions within Israel. Perhaps David has in view Saul and the Absalom-Ahithophel group.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Their eyes bulge with fat, their minds pass the limits of conceit-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This recalls the spirit of Job's complaints at the present prosperity of the wicked. "Conceit" is the word usually translated "image", with reference to idols. David perceives that idolatry is essentially a matter of the heart, and he sees materialism as idolatry- a conception absolutely relevant to our age. LXX "Their iniquity cometh forth from the heart: the imaginations of their mind overflow".</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They scoff and speak with malice; in arrogance, they threaten oppression-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The LXX appears to reference the crafty counsel of Ahithophel at the time of Absalom's rebellion: "They have taken counsel and spoken in wickedness: they have uttered unrighteousness loftily".</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They have set their mouth in the heavens, their tongue walks through the earth-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The idea may be that they speak as if they are God; it is playing God which is the basis for arrogance and price. But LXX has "Against the heavens".</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Therefore their people return to them, and they drink up waters of abundance-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"A metaphor for the enjoyment of pleasure". This was how they got people to turn after them, to follow them. David felt that by contrast he had few followers because he didn’t have any great hope of prosperity to offer anyone.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They say, How does God know? Is there knowledge in the Most High?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It's unlikely they actually said those words. But this is an example of where the unspoken implications of positions are stated for what they effectively are. To accept God exists, as these men apparently did, but to say that He has no awareness... is self contradictory. But this is what their attitudes effectively stated.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Behold, these are the wicked-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Psalmist has built up an image of wicked men having a great life and then dying in peace. This isn't actually the case, but it was and is the image which can be imagined as true.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Being always at ease, they increase in riches-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The wicked and indeed nobody is every "always at ease". This is the idealized image which the doubting psalmist had built up. It is the same false image offered by the media and subliminal advertising today. Job likewise frequently lamented that the wicked were "at ease" (Job 3:26; 12:6; 16:12; 20:20; 21:23); and Jeremiah too (Jer. 12:1). We simply conclude that the appearance of "ease" in the apparently cool life of the unbeliever is very strong. In our age it is pushed by visual images on social media, of relaxation by swimming pools, expensive meals etc. But one only has to think about it for a moment to see this is in fact all a false image. Behind those images is probably much grief and unhappiness, and this psalm will go on to put over it all the perspective of final death and eternal judgment. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Surely in vain I have cleansed my heart, and washed my hands in innocence-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Psalm begins with the conclusion- that "surely" God is good to His true Israel, those with clean hearts. But he got to that conclusion through having the thought that "surely"... something else. "Surely", he had once thought, the cleansing of hearts was all in vain. This is the dialectic which all men must go through- being convinced one way but coming to be convinced another way. 
This language is appropriate to David who considers he washed the blood of Uriah from his hands by repentance, and had his heart cleansed by God’s grace for the entire sin with Bathsheba (s:w. <a href='B:230 51:4'>Psa 51:4</a>; <a href='B:230 26:6'>Psa 26:6</a>). He would be suggesting that because he still suffered the consequence of the sin, all his cleansing from it was pointless grief. And yet this sense that "In vain I have cleansed my heart" could refer to how David in his youth had tried to cleanse his way according to God’s word (s:w. <a href='B:230 119:9'>Psa 119:9</a>); and now he momentarily considers he may have wasted his effort. Solomon uses the same word in saying that nobody can say "I have cleansed my heart" (<a href='B:240 20:9'>Pro 20:9</a>); as if disagreeing with his father David on this point. Solomon may be suggesting that all you can do is live an externally clean life, you can never cleanse your heart- and this refusal to allow the Holy Spirit to cleanse him inwardly is what led to his apostasy. For disregarding deep, core level spiritual mindedness and trusting in externalities... is a sure path to spiritual disaster. And Solomon took it.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>for all day long have I been plagued, and punished every morning-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Punished" is LXX "reproved". David may again be railing at how the consequences of his sin with Bathsheba continued, reproving him every morning. He struggled to accept Nathan's inspired words about this consequence. "Plagued" is used in the Bathsheba context (<a href='B:230 32:6'>Psa 32:6</a> s:w:).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>If I had said, I will speak thus; behold, I would have betrayed the generation of Your children-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "I should have broken covenant with the generation of thy children". He would no longer have been part of the promised seed if he chose to go the way of the wicked. He may mean that he would have been out of step with God's children throughout the generations; which suggests, as in :1, that he considers God's true Israel, His faithful children, as those who have clean hearts and accept His chastising hand. However we can legitimately interpret the Hebrew to the effect "If I had spoken out publically like this, I would have caused to stumble the generation / community of your children amongst whom I live". "Generation" can mean effectively 'community' as in Ps. 24:6 "This is the generation of those who seek Him". Asaph is now sharing with us his inner struggles- but after coming to the stated conclusion that he was so wrong. And he, the choirmaster of Israel, had these deep questions and struggles with him. It is common in our age to hear Christian leaders speaking of their struggles and doubts, and for this to be seen as somehow cool. The path of maturity is to not speak those doubts for fear of causing others to stumble. There is of course a fine line between this and hypocrisy. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>When I tried to understand this, it was too painful for me-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> "Painful" is s:w. "trouble" in :5. The wicked appear not to have pain or "troubles", but David struggled with the whole problem of evil and the apparent prosperity of the wicked, and this was a pain or trouble to him of itself. David was generally a very spiritual man, but we have here an insight into how even the most spiritually minded have their dark nights of the soul:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>until I entered God’s sanctuary, and considered their latter end-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This could not have been true for the exiles, who were unable to do thIsa. The Psalm originated with David, but was reapplied to the exiles and all who later would struggle with the problem of the apparent prosperity of the wicked. On entering "the sanctuary", he saw the plates around the altar which were all that was left of Korah’s rebellion (<a href='B:40 16:38'>Num 16:38</a>), those who were thrown down into the earth (:18). David perceived the wicked of his age as no better than the wicked within Israel during the wilderness journey.</p><p>Up until this point in the Psalm, the psalmist has been complaining that the wicked prosper and the righteous suffer; their righteousness is apparently pointless. But he now comes to a Kingdom perspective. At the last day, there will be judgment. And he recalls how rebels against God have at times had their judgment ahead of that last day. This changes everything for him.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Surely You set them in slippery places, You threw them down to destruction-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This continues the allusion to the fate of Korah and his supporters (:17). "Thrown down" or "fall" was to be the fate of the unjust princes of Israel (s:w. <a href='B:230 82:7'>Psa 82:7</a>) just as it had been the fate of Korah and the princes with him (<a href='B:40 16:2'>Num 16:2</a>). Asaph begins the psalm by saying that his feet had nearly slipped (:2). He is saying that he, the relatively righteous man, because of his bitterness and jealousy of the wicked, had almost had the same punishment as them. But he concludes by saying that he has come near to God (:28), another allusion to Korah and the princes who sought to inappropriately drawn near to God.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>How they were suddenly destroyed! They were completely swept away with terrors-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The lament is that the wicked seem to be so prosperous, and then David remembers that one day God will awake (:20). But it is ridiculous to think that God is now actually asleep. The judgment of the rebellious princes in Numbers 16 is seen as a pattern for all later rebels; and perhaps David has in view the rebels against him at the time of Absalom. The wages of sin is death (<a href='B:520 6:23'>Rom 6:23</a>)- not 'it will be death at the judgment', it is right now the response God makes to sin. Because God is without time, the judgment has effectively happened to them. We are come to "God the judge of all"- even now (<a href='B:650 12:23'>Heb 12:23</a>). And David perceived that. And yet mourned terribly when actually this happened, and Absalom was suddenly destroyed.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As a dream when one wakes up, so, Lord, when You awake, You will despise their fantasies-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "O Lord, in thy city thou wilt despise their image". David envisages judgment day being administered in Zion, when these men would be resurrected, judged, and die "the second death". To be despised by God is judgment enough. Their "fantasies", their self image (the Hebrew implies) will be revealed as vain.  GNB "They are like a dream that goes away in the morning; when you rouse yourself, O Lord, they disappear". "The morning" is the day when the Lord Jesus shall arise as the dawn (Mal. 4:2). All of human experience will then be revealed as a momentary dream, their "image" (AV) will change. We must realize that our current experience, of unfairness and injustice, is in fact not reality. It is a dream, a fantasy world. The reality is life with God and His eternal Kingdom. Ps. 39:6 has the same idea: "Surely every man walks like a shadow", like an image that is not the reality. "What I mean, my friends, is this: there is not much time left, and from now on married people should live as though they were not married; those who weep, as though they were not sad; those who laugh, as though they were not happy; those who buy, as though they did not own what they bought; those who deal in material goods, as though they were not fully occupied with them. For the fashion of this world passes away" (1 Cor. 7:29-31). The Greek word for "fashion" 'passing away' is the language of the theatre, 'the scenery', whereby scenes and stage props and background are changed to presents a totally different appearance. This world is just a stage at the theatre, with the props and scenery just passing away and not the actual reality that they represent. Paul has the same image in 1 Cor. 4:9 "we are made a spectacle [on a stage] to the world, both to angels and men".</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For my soul was grieved, I was embittered in my heart-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>AV "Thus my heart was grieved" - for the tragedy of that rebellion, for the tragedy of men experiencing Divine condemnation. He didn’t gloat over the punishment of the wicked as he thinks about it at this point, although he does elsewhere. He grieved for it; it pricked his conscience, right within the depths of his being (AV "pricked in my reins").</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I was so senseless and ignorant; I was a brute beast before You-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The LXX sounds very much like an allusion to Job in his final realization and resolution of 'the problem of evil': "But I was vile and knew not: I became brutish before thee" (cp. <a href='B:220 40:4'>Job 40:4</a>). Envying the wicked is indeed being senseless and ignorant, and David uses these terms elsewhere about those who shall be condemned (<a href='B:230 49:10'>Psa 49:10</a>; <a href='B:230 92:6'>Psa 92:6</a>). The fact is, even those as spiritual as David can at times be totally unspiritual in their perspective, and like him need to take a grip and return to reality. We surely have all known thIsa.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Nevertheless, I am continually with You. You have held my right hand-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He is "with God", or "always close to You", because God holds his hand- not because of his righteousness nor closeness to God. For in :22 he has just lamented his unspirituality. We would expect "You are continually with me". But he realizes that the fact God had been with him meant that he had been with God. As noted on :22, David recognizes that he has temporarily lost perspective and spiritual focus during his time of envy at the wicked's prosperity. But he marvels that all through that weak period, be it minutes or months, God had remained with him and held his hand. This rules out for all time the attitude of separation from God’s people whilst they pass through the dark nights of the soul which afflict all of us. We are to reflect God’s continuance with us through it all.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You will guide me with Your word-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Your word" probably doesn't refer to the "Bible", because David would probably only have known the Pentateuch and Job. And he didn’t have the scrolls readily available to him for much of his life. Perhaps the prophetic word he had in view was the promise of restoration and kingship, the final flourishing of his kingdom. This was the same word which in essence the exiles were to be guided by as they too struggled with the problems of justice and evil. And the end point of that guidance was to be "glory"; perhaps a return to the sanctuary where the glory was visible, or the glory of the reestablished Davidic kingdom.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>And afterwards receive me in glory-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>In this life, David felt his prayers had been "received" (s:w. <a href='B:230 6:9'>Psa 6:9</a>). His experience of answered prayer was therefore a foretaste of his faith that God would finally receive or accept him (<a href='B:230 49:15'>Psa 49:15</a>; <a href='B:230 73:24'>Psa 73:24</a> s:w:). The desire to be received "to glory" may refer to David’s belief that he would again be able to enter the sanctuary and see God’s glory there, a desire he so often expresses in the exilic Psalms. "Afterwards" is the word used for "end" in :17. The psalmist foresees that the prosperous wicked will meet their "end" at the "end", the last day. At that day, at that "end" or "afterwards", he would be received to glory, taken from the sanctuary beyond the veil; whilst they would be cast down to an eternal grave. "Receive me" is literally 'to bring up' and can refer to resurrection, as it does clearly in Ps. 49:15: "God will redeem my soul from the power of Sheol, for He will receive me [s.w.]". Ps. 49 is in the same context, of the psalmist reflecting how the wicked will eternally perish at the same time as he is resurrected to eternal life. What is in view is resurrection and judgment at the last day, not going to heaven on death.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Whom do I have in heaven? There is no one on earth whom I desire besides You-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David felt forsaken by all at this time, so the origin of the Psalm (however it was later reused by the exiles) was at a time when he was largely forsaken by men; perhaps at the time of Absalom's putsch. For David, Yahweh was not one of a number of deities; he didn’t believe in Yahweh as well as idols. And this is a theme he develops in :27. He had no gods in Heaven apart from Yahweh, and "Earth has nothing I desire besides you". That is the place of maturity, but the psalmist arrived at it through a period of envy of others who apparently did have all the desirable things on earth. Again we see the path of prayer; he moves on from being envious to reflecting that he doesn't want all the things he was once envious of: "Earth has nothing I desire besides you". All he wanted was relationship with God. Despite his flesh and heart failing (:26), perhaps referring to moral and intellectual lapses, he now realizes that despite them, he has no desire nor passion for any other god nor for anything material on earth. He reaches the acme of spiritual maturity whilst still recognizing he would "fail" in some ways (:26). The psalmist comes to this profound position before God through the path of prayer; the early verses are a monologue, speaking with himself, but he comes to talk directly to God through that. His self talk becomes talk to God.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>My flesh and my heart fails-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Perhaps initially written in David’s health crisis after the sin with Bathsheba and whilst on the run from Absalom.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>There is a repeated Biblical theme that the believer's relationship with the Father too is essentially mutual. We are God’s portion / inheritance (<a href='B:50 4:20'>Deu 4:20</a>; <a href='B:50 9:29'>Deu 9:29</a>; <a href='B:560 1:18'>Eph 1:18</a>), and He is our inheritance (<a href='B:230 16:5-6'>Psa 16:5-6</a>; <a href='B:230 73:26'>Psa 73:26</a>; <a href='B:310 3:22-24'>Lam 3:22-24</a>; <a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a> RV); we inherit each other. David felt he was alienated from his rightful inheritance whilst on the run from both Saul and Absalom; and the exiles felt likewise.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For, behold, those who are far from You shall perish. You have destroyed all those who are unfaithful to You-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This helps the exiles understand that distance from God is not a geographical question of being far from the sanctuary, but such distance and closeness to God is rather a spiritual matter. "Unfaithful" suggests idolatry (s:w. <a href='B:230 106:39'>Psa 106:39</a>), and suggests that the wicked he had envied were in fact idolaters. If the initial context of the Psalm is Absalom's rebellion, then we can see another hint that they too were involved with idolatry.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A contemplation by Asaph-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This "Asaph" could be the Asaph of Hezekiah's time (<a href='B:290 36:3'>Isa 36:3</a>) who used the Psalms in the context of the events of the Assyrian invasion. The Asaph Psalms all have parts in them relevant to that context (Psalms 50, 73-83). Or the "Asaph" may have been the singers who were relatives of Asaph, prominent at the restoration (<a href='B:160 7:44'>Neh 7:44</a>; <a href='B:160 11:17'>Neh 11:17</a>; <a href='B:160 11:22'>Neh 11:22</a>). It could mean that the psalms were a part of a collection from the Asaphites, and the name "Asaph" was therefore simply used to identify the temple singers. And again, parts of the Asaph psalms also have relevance to the restoration. The fact the Asaph Psalms speak of elohim rather than Yahweh would support the idea that they were used in the exilic / restoration period. But Asaph was the "chief" of the Levites to whom David assigned the ministry of praise before the ark (<a href='B:130 16:4-5'>1Ch 16:4-5</a>). It seems he did compose his own Psalms, which were used by Hezekiah at his time (<a href='B:140 29:30'>2Ch 29:30</a>). So I would again suggest that all the Asaph Psalms were composed originally by David "for" [not necessarily "by"] Asaph, but were rewritten and edited for later occasions.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God, why have You rejected us forever?- </p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It was inappropriate to claim that God was going to reject His people forever (also in <a href='B:230 44:23'>Psa 44:23</a>). The prophets had made it abundantly plain that God would not reject forever. Israel had "the hope of Israel" as surely as the planets are in the sky. But these were the thoughts of the exiles, who thought that God had cast them off for ever (Lam. 5:20). :&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Why does Your anger smoulder against the sheep of Your pasture?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The answer was 'Because they sinned'. But as David struggled to accept the consequences of his sins, so did the exiles. It's only really necessary to ask these questions out loud, slowly, and in prayer before God... to get the answer. Human sin is the answer. But we all wriggle against it. It's as if they saw the fires of Jerusalem's burning (:7), representative of God's anger, as still smouldering against them. As if God was still angry with them, when second Isaiah is full of His continual pleading with the to accept His love and earnest desire to redeem them out of exile.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Remember Your congregation which You purchased of old, which You have redeemed to be the tribe of Your inheritance-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Second Isaiah continually reminds them that Yahweh had redeemed them from Babylon, He as the rich relative had paid the price and cleared their debt. They just had to quit Babylon and return to Zion. But as so many today, they lamented that they had no redemption- when the blood of God's Son is the ransom payment already paid. </p><p>This appeal to believe they were already "redeemed" is similar to how David asks for redemption (e.g. <a href='B:230 69:18'>Psa 69:18</a>) when in fact he has already been redeemed. God had already forgiven David, ransoming and redeeming him. But he was left to suffer the consequences of those sins, and because of that, in crisis he starts to wonder whether he has indeed been forgiven. And we can do the same so easily. The consequence of sin is death, and we can squirm against this when we or others face it... forgetting the wonder of the fact that we are indeed redeemed and ransomed from the power of the grave, although we must still take the consequences. The exiles likewise had to understand that they had been redeemed (s:w. <a href='B:230 74:2'>Psa 74:2</a>) but were suffering the consequence of sin. God was indeed their redeemer (<a href='B:290 41:14'>Isa 41:14</a>; <a href='B:290 43:1'>Isa 43:1</a> s:w:). At the very end of his life, David realized that he had in fact been redeemed (s:w. <a href='B:110 1:29'>1Ki 1:29</a>). He could give up his spirit to God in death, knowing that He was redeemed from the power of the grave (s:w. <a href='B:230 31:5'>Psa 31:5</a>; <a href='B:230 49:15'>Psa 49:15</a>). His sure hope in the resurrection of the body looked ahead to the attitude with which the Lord Jesus died.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Psalm however clearly applies to the exile, when Judah, the singular tribe, was sent into captivity; the ten tribe kingdom had already gone to Assyria.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Mount Zion, in which You have lived-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Relevant to the exiles, in that Yahweh was no longer living in Zion, the cherubim of glory had departed, as Ezekiel had seen in vision. "Lived" is shakan, from which developed the idea of the shekinah glory. But despite the psalmist's prayer, the shekinah never returned. Instead of pestering God for the restoration, Asaph needed surely to pay more attention to all the reasons why the exiles were precluding it happening. </p>


text:
<h2>Lift up Your feet on the perpetual ruins-</h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Jer. 25:9 had said that Zion was to be "perpetual desolations / ruins". Asaph needed to address the reason why that was the case. He is asking for God to undo an eternal punishment. But that is by grace alone, just as we ask for punishment of eternal death for sin to be undone in our case. But it is by grace alone, and we don't quite sense an awareness of that in Asaph at this point. Is. 61:4 promises a restoration of the perpetual / eternal desolations which were the judgment for Judah's sin in Jer. 25:9. This was by amazing grace alone. LXX "Lift up thine hands against their pride continually", which connects better with the second half of the verse.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See all the evil that the enemy has done in the sanctuary-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The evil done in the sanctuary had been done by God; this evil was ultimately from God, although the exiles struggled to believe that (<a href='B:290 45:5-7'>Isa 45:5-7</a>). Therefore He was obviously aware of it. It was their refusal to accept that God had been their enemy and had done the "evil" which led them to later feel He was somehow unaware of it. They however were forgetting the words of Ezekiel, who had reminded the exiles of the evil they had done in the sanctuary, worshipping the sun god there in the most holy place. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Your adversaries have roared in the midst of Your assembly. They have set up their standards as signs-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This speaks of the Babylonian military standards raised in the temple as glory to their idols, repeated by the Romans in AD70. Israel's enemies are likened to wild beasts roaring; and indeed "the beast" is Israel's neighbours, throughout scripture. But the psalmist appears to ignore the repeated prophetic declaration that this would happen because Judah worshipped idols within the sanctuary, as Ezekiel saw in vision. The psalmist sees only one side of the story- the suffering. The reason for it, and the hope of restoration predicated upon repentance, plays no part in his thinking at this point. And we see that attitude all around us, complaints at Divine judgment and the results of human sin, rather than seeing that suffering in wider spiritual and ethical context:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They behaved like men wielding axes, cutting through a thicket of trees-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The idea is that there was absolutely no reverence for the sanctity of the temple. And yet Judah had likewise paid no reverence to that, and so they received an appropriate judgment.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Now they break all its carved work down with hatchet and hammers-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "stonecutters". There was a wilful and intentional destruction of the temple. The "carved work" is that of the cherubim and palm trees (s:w. <a href='B:110 6:29'>1Ki 6:29</a>), broken down because it was overlaid with gold (<a href='B:110 6:22'>1Ki 6:22</a>; <a href='B:110 6:32'>1Ki 6:32</a>; <a href='B:110 6:35'>1Ki 6:35</a>):&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; But it was the men of Judah who had "despised My holy things... defiled My sanctuary" (Ez. 22:8,26; 23:39; 44:7). Because they had done this, God in turn said that "I will profane My sanctuary" (Ez. 24:21). </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They have burned Your sanctuary to the ground, they have profaned the dwelling place of Your Name-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This burning of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar is recorded in <a href='B:120 25:9'>2Ki 25:9</a>; <a href='B:140 36:19'>2Ch 36:19</a>. The psalmist complains that "they" had done this, whereas the more spiritual perspective was that God had done these things (<a href='B:310 2:6'>Lam 2:6</a>; <a href='B:310 4:1'>Lam 4:1</a>) as judgment for Judah's sins. All that is said is true, but lacks humility and spiritual perspective.</p><p>God's Name was to be in a house of people, for a Name / personality / characteristics cannot dwell in a house of stone and cedar and gold. It was this misunderstanding that led the Jews to lament how the destruction of the temple had actually destroyed the dwelling place of God's Name: "They have burned Your sanctuary to the ground, they have profaned the dwelling place of Your Name" (Ps. 74:7). The truth was that God's Name dwelt in the hearts and personalities of His true people. And it was God who destroyed the physical temple to try to get them to realize this (Lam. 2:6,7). The word for "profaned" is used of how in judgment for Judah's sins, God would profane or "stain" the pride of His glory (Is. 23:9). "Therefore have I profaned the princes of the sanctuary" (Is. 43:28; Lam. 2:2). It was Judah who had profaned / defiled God's land and Name (Jer. 16:18; 34:16 s.w.). Even in exile, they had profaned His Name by their idolatry in Babylon (Ez. 36:20-22). And the exiles who returned are accused likewise, with the same Hebrew word, of profaning God's Name (Mal. 1:12; 2:10,11).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They said in their heart, We will crush them completely. They have burned up all the places in the land where God was worshiped-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But Yahweh was to be worshipped in Zion. It was the "high places" built ostensibly to worship Him, which had become the places of idolatry for which God’s anger came upon His people This is quite overlooked by the writer. But LXX has "They have said in their heart, even all their kindred together, Come, let us abolish the feasts of the Lord from the earth". Again we notice the huge importance the Bible attaches to self talk.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>We see no miraculous signs. There is no longer any prophet, neither is there among us anyone who knows how long-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Again this was not quite the case. There was a ministry of the true prophets throughout the siege and destruction of Jerusalem, and Ezekiel and others continued the witness afterwards. But this is overlooked in the desire of the author to focus upon the negative and pain as dismal a picture as possible. There were "signs"; for Jeremiah and Ezekiel were men of sign to the Jews. LXX "and God will not know us any more" was a complete denial of the prophetic pleas to know God in repentance, and the clear hope of restoration offered.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>How long, God, shall the adversary reproach? Shall the enemy blaspheme Your name forever?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The answer to that question is provided in the prophets. It would be until Judah repented. And yet the psalmist overlooks that dimension completely. Just as we can so easily:&nbsp;  It was Judah who were profaning Yahweh's Name in exile (Ez. 36:20-22). And the exiles who returned are accused likewise, with the same Hebrew word, of profaning God's Name (Mal. 1:12; 2:10,11). The psalmist sees only the evil in the world and not in God's people.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Why do You draw back Your hand, even Your right hand? Take it out of Your pocket and consume them!<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Again as on :10, the answer was that God’s hand would again be seen active for His people once they repented. But typical of the secular view, the psalmist expects immediate action from God right now, regardless of any spiritual dimension to the basis of His operations with men. And second Isaiah is full of appeals to realize that God's "arm" and hand were outstretched to save His people out of Babylon and restore Zion and the Kingdom.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yet God is my King of old, working salvation in the midst of the earth-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The midst of the land was Zion, and there He had done great miracles at the time of Hezekiah- which the psalmist believes can be repeated. The tone of the Psalm changes now. The Psalmist has not made a good case in the preceding verses, as noted above. He is simply demanding immediate release from the exile. Although he is spiritually deficient in failing to factor in Israel's sin and the need for repentance, he all the same has a strong personal faith. Whether or not God comes through for His people on a larger scale, "God is my king". And here we have an example for us all. Our struggle with the problem of evil must not be allowed to take away God’s salvation history; His apparent failure to save whom and when and how we think He should must never take away from our personal faith in Him.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>We also learn here that a man like this psalmist who may be deficient in attitude and understanding (as witnessed in the notes above on :2-11) may still have genuine faith before God. Although the visible kingship had been ended, the psalmist still believes that God is Israel's King. Despite all his defective reasoning up until this point in the psalm, he now rallies himself by reflecting upon God's historical salvation of His people, and the way the natural creation is evidence enough of His ongoing work for His people.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You divided the sea by Your strength. You broke the heads of the sea monsters in the waters-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A clear allusion to God’s division of the Red Sea and destruction of the "monsters" of Egypt. The chariots of Pharaoh are likened to sea monsters.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You broke the heads of Leviathan in pieces. You gave him as food to people and desert creatures-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Again the power of Egypt is likened to a mythical creature. People of the time found the sea mysterious, and believed in a vast sea dragon lurking there which was invincible, rather like folks tend to believe in a supernatural devil figure. The simple point was that God has and can destroy such entities at ease, to the point that effectively God’s people need not believe in them. LXX "Thou didst give him for meat to the Ethiopian nations" perhaps imagines the local peoples picking up the spoil of the Egyptian chariots after the Red Sea drowned them all.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You opened up spring and stream. You dried up mighty rivers-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Alluding to the provision of living water in the wilderness. The same language is used of how God could dry up the rivers around Babylon to destroy her. He did this, through the Medes, but most of Judah preferred to remain in Babylon rather than obey the commands to flee out of her at that point.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The day is Yours, the night is also Yours; You have prepared the light and the sun-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This could continue the allusion to God’s care for Israel in the wilderness in :15, this time referring to the provision of light by night and protection from the sun in the day time. Or it could be that the Psalmist, struggling with God’s apparent injustice and lack of activity, reflects that of course God is active; for the passing of day and night is evidence enough of that. So often in the Psalms and second Isaiah, God's people look to the natural creation as a reminder that despite their struggle to accept God's hand, and despite all the willful misunderstandings of :2-11, God is obviously still active. And His power is unlimited, even if we consider He ought to use it more visibly for us. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have set all the boundaries of the earth. You have made summer and winter-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As discussed on :16, any illusion that God is somehow inactive is ended by considering the passage of the seasons, all designed and activated by Him. Judah in exile were at the very boundaries of the eretz / land / earth promised to Abraham, and God had decreed that too.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Remember this, that the enemy has mocked You, Yahweh. Foolish people have blasphemed Your name-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Again it is inappropriate to suggest that God has as it were forgotten anything. A more mature perspective would have known that finally "God is not mocked" (<a href='B:550 6:7'>Gal 6:7</a>). But as noted on :12, a man like this psalmist who may be deficient in attitude and understanding (as witnessed in the notes above on :2-11) may still have genuine faith before God:&nbsp; LXX adds "Remember this thy creation"; time and again, a doubting and depressed psalmist comes back to the theme of creation, that God has created me, Israel, the world... and the creator will redeem. This is continually the argument God deploys to the exiles when reasoning with them throughout second Isaiah. It was Judah who were profaning Yahweh's Name in exile (Ez. 36:20-22). And the exiles who returned are accused likewise, with the same Hebrew word, of profaning God's Name (Mal. 1:12; 2:10,11). The psalmist sees only the evil in the world and not in God's people. He goes on :19 to suggest that Judah are an innocent dove; but they were far from this.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Don’t deliver the soul of Your dove to wild beasts, don’t forget the life of Your poor forever-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Again, Israel's neighbouring enemies are the "wild beasts" of scripture. This imagery is consistent. The argument could be seen as manipulative; for God had taught in His own law that the poor should be cared for and redeemed, yet He appears not to redeem His own "poor". Judah in exile were major sinners, as Ezekiel makes clear. But the psalmist likes to compare them to innocent dove. See on :18.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Honour Your covenant, for haunts of violence fill the dark places of the land-</p><h2> This fails to appreciate the clear teaching of Hosea, Jeremiah and Ezekiel to the exiles; that they had broken the old covenant, and their only hope was to repent and accept the new covenant which was offered. But this wonderful "hope of Israel" fell on deaf ears, because they were so obsessed with a return to how things had been, under the same covenant which was now broken.</h2>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Don’t let the oppressed return ashamed; let the poor and needy praise Your name-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David had felt "oppressed" whilst in exile from Saul (s:w. <a href='B:230 9:9'>Psa 9:9</a>; <a href='B:230 10:18'>Psa 10:18</a>), and his Psalms show him to have been the "poor and needy" who was ever praising Yahweh's Name (s:w. <a href='B:230 40:17'>Psa 40:17</a>; <a href='B:230 70:5'>Psa 70:5</a>). David is set up as the programmatic example for the exiles. But they had to follow his path of humility and repentance.  Despite the psalmist rallying himself a bit spiritually, he still has wrong attitudes. Second Isaiah is appealing for the exiles to praise God's Name; it was not the case that God wasn't allowing them to worship Him. Possibly the psalmist wrongly imagines that the poor and needy could only praise Yahweh's Name at a restored temple in Zion. But they could do so in any context.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Arise, God! Plead Your own cause. Remember how the foolish man mocks You all day-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The psalmist imagines God as in court, saying nothing and being judged by those who mocked Him. But this again reflects a lack of faith and understanding that God is the ultimate judge, and that finally "God is not mocked" (<a href='B:550 6:7'>Gal 6:7</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For the Chief Musician. To the tune of Do Not Destroy. A Psalm by Asaph. A song-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This "Asaph" could be the Asaph of Hezekiah's time (<a href='B:290 36:3'>Isa 36:3</a>) who used the Psalms in the context of the events of the Assyrian invasion. The Asaph Psalms all have parts in them relevant to that context (Psalms 50, 73-83). Or the "Asaph" may have been the singers who were relatives of Asaph, prominent at the restoration (<a href='B:160 7:44'>Neh 7:44</a>; <a href='B:160 11:17'>Neh 11:17</a>; <a href='B:160 11:22'>Neh 11:22</a>). It could mean that the psalms were a part of a collection from the Asaphites, and the name "Asaph" was therefore simply used to identify the temple singers. And again, parts of the Asaph psalms also have relevance to the restoration. The fact the Asaph Psalms speak of elohim rather than Yahweh would support the idea that they were used in the exilic / restoration period. But Asaph was the "chief" of the Levites to whom David assigned the ministry of praise before the ark (<a href='B:130 16:4-5'>1Ch 16:4-5</a>). It seems he did compose his own Psalms, which were used by Hezekiah at his time (<a href='B:140 29:30'>2Ch 29:30</a>). So I would again suggest that all the Asaph Psalms were composed originally by David "for" [not necessarily "by"] Asaph, but were rewritten and edited for later occasions.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>We give thanks to You, God. We give thanks, for Your Name is near. Men tell about Your wondrous works-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The coming near of God's Name is used in prophecy of the destruction of the Assyrians: "The name of Yahweh comes from far away, burning with His anger" (Is. 30:27). The Asaph psalms look back to incidents like the Red Sea and the destruction of the Assyrians to remind the exiles that God is not incapable of judgment. It's just a question of when He chooses to articulate it.
The Asaph psalms are encouragement to the exiles to realize that God is in fact "near".  Literally, 'next to', 'neighbour / relative to'. This is how close God feels to the broken hearted and crushed; and conversely, how far He is from the self satisfied and self congratulatory, 'the strong' in secular terms. It is this feature of Yahweh which makes Him unique; no other God has this characteristic of 'nearness' (s:w. <a href='B:50 4:7'>Deu 4:7</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You are not alone, I am not alone; “For I am with you”. God is with us for us in His Son. Of course, we must draw near to Him (<a href='B:230 73:28'>Psa 73:28</a>); and yet He is already near, not far from every one of us (<a href='B:510 17:27'>Act 17:27</a>). David often speaks of drawing near to God, and yet he invites God to draw near to him (<a href='B:230 69:18'>Psa 69:18</a>). Yet David also recognizes that God “is” near already (<a href='B:230 75:1'>Psa 75:1</a>). I take all this to mean that like us, David recognized that God “is” near, and yet wished God to make His presence real to him. Truly can we pray David’s prayers. So often, prayer is described as coming near to God (<a href='B:230 119:169'>Psa 119:169</a> etc:)- and yet God “is” near already. Prayer, therefore, is a way of making us realize the presence of the God who is always present. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>When I choose the appointed time, I will judge blamelessly-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I suggest later in this Psalm that the initial application was to the Assyrian encirclement of Jerusalem at the time of Hezekiah. "The appointed time" is a phrase used about the feasts, and there is reason to believe that God delivered Jerusalem at Passover time. This was the "set time to favour Zion" (<a href='B:230 102:13'>Psa 102:13</a> s:w:). Hence LXX "When I shall take a set time, I will judge righteously". GNB ""I have set a time for judgment," says God, "and I will judge with fairness"". From here to :5 would be the statement of God about the current crisis in His land. The blameless nature of God's judgment must be an abiding comfort to all His people; for we all struggle with the fact that both we and others are judged wrongly in this life. Many people can hardly get up in the morning and live another day because they are so burdened by the pain of being wrongly judged. For the believer, there is the comfort that the ultimate, only real Judge will judge with ultimate fairness. And indeed He judges like that now.
Whatever their original historical background, the Asaph psalms were used at the time of the exile to help resolve the conflict between faith and expectation of how God should work in the here and now. The temple was destroyed, and the restoration didn't happen as was potentially possible. The faithful therefore looked back to how God had come through for His people historically, for example, at the time of the Assyrian invasion. The focus was on praise for how God had been, and how He is as God, and therefore looking forward to His ultimate salvation and judgment. Even if He was not coming through for His people as they expected in the here and now. Hence the simple power of the words "I will judge", and the comfort in :7 that in a sense, He is judging right now. It's just that the visible articulation of that judgment is yet future.
</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The earth and all its inhabitants quake. I firmly uphold its pillars. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Inhabitants" of the earth / land quaking or "melting away" is the very phrase used about the inhabitants of Canaan melting away after the miracle at the Red Sea and its associated earthquakes (s:w. <a href='B:20 15:15'>Exo 15:15</a>; <a href='B:60 2:9'>Jos 2:9</a>; <a href='B:60 2:24'>Jos 2:24</a>). The implication that God was going to dramatically deliver His people, and then subdue the entire eretz promised to Abraham under them. Despite this quaking, the pillars of the land, as it were, would be held firm by God. His people would be preserved. But this great possibility and potential was not used by those who entered Canaan, nor was it used in Hezekiah's time; for instead of exalting Israel's God in the entire eretz, Hezekiah instead went the way of the surrounding nations:&nbsp;</p.<P>
Or we can read this as meaning that the "earth" as in the land quaked or LXX "is dissolved, and all that dwell in it", in the sense that the Assyrians had overrun all of Judah apart from Jerusalem. It seemed that the whole land had dissolved or was quaking, and all the people feared. But God is saying that beneath the land are pillars, which He upholds. Just as all may appear to dissolve in our lives, in our worlds, rocked by an earthquake... but beneath us are pillars upheld by God.
</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I said to the arrogant, Don’t boast!; I said to the wicked, Don’t lift up the horn-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This would refer to the proud, boastful words of Rabshakeh outside the walls of Jerusalem. He "lifted up his eyes" against God (Is. 37:23) The implication would be that God had tried to stop even an unbelieving Gentile from boasting; and He only judged him because he refused to desist. In the context of the Asaph psalms, the wicked had lifted up their horn / power over Israel. Their horn would finally be cut off (:10). But for now, their horn was dominant. But the view of faith is that they are dominant in disobedience to God, and therefore must finally fall. And the way God historically judged the Assyrians is a guarantee of that. It is God who "lifts up" (:7) at His right time; "exaltation" ['lifting up'] comes only from Him (:6). But these powers had lifted themselves up (:4,5). Here we see clearly the folly of absolutely any self exaltation. Be it on social media, by implication or by specific claims about ourselves. Even in the times when it seems others are lifted up above ourselves, we are to see behind the scenes- that God is lifting up and putting down right now, but will reveal this in His own "appointed time" (:7). We chafe at the way we are 'down' and others are 'up'. But that is only for now. At God's right time (:2), we will be put "up" eternally and the wicked put 'down' for ever. Judgment "day", "the time of His judgments", means just that; the time for judgment being articulated is yet to come, but there will be that specific day or time.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Don’t lift up your horn on high, don’t speak with a stiff neck-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is addressed to the entity which has "horns" which Yahweh would break (:10). The Assyrian enemy of Judah is depicted as a beast with horns, and this symbology continues throughout the Bible. The beast is the latter day Assyrian. The proud speaker would likely refer to Rabshakeh speaking loudly and proudly about the failure of Israel's God to save from the Assyrians. This rebuke of the Assyrian was uttered on God’s behalf by the faithful remnant within Jerusalem at that time.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For neither from the east, nor from the west, nor yet from the south, comes exaltation-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The implication therefore is that exaltation to safety and deliverance comes from the "north", literally "the hidden place", put here for "God". Another take is that the Psalm may have been written or applied to the time when Jerusalem was surrounded by the Assyrian armies. They had approached from the north. There was no good looking for help to come from the other points of the compass. All the nations to whom Judah had looked for help would not deliver her. "Exaltation" is used by David in <a href='B:230 18:48'>Psa 18:48</a> to mean deliverance from enemies. The fact is that as Isaiah had pointed out, Judah had sought help from all points of the compass [especially Egypt in the South] against the Assyrian threat. This is very much the spirit of Ps. 121:1,2 " I will lift up my eyes to the hills. Where does my help come from? My help comes from Yahweh, who made heaven and earth". "Exaltation" is 'lifting up', a major theme of the Psalm. See on :4.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But God is the judge. He puts down one, and lifts up another-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This thought was with the faithful when surrounded by the Assyrians: "Yahweh is our judge. He will save us" (Is. 33:22). As discussed on :2, the Asaph psalms are in the context of Judah in exile struggling to understand how God appeared silent and not to be judging in the earth. The comfort is that God is in fact judging right now, but the visible articulation of that judgment is yet future. This is the ultimate answer to our struggles over why God is apparently silent and disengaged with our dramas and sufferings of injustice. God right now puts down one and lifts up another– all of which He will also due at the last day (<a href='B:490 14:10'>Luk 14:10</a> alludes here). The essence of judgment is ongoing now; “we make the answer now”. God’s present judgment is often paralleled with His future judgment. Thus “The Lord shall judge the people... God judges [now] the righteous, and God is angry with the wicked every day... he will whet his sword; he has [right now]bent his bow, and made it ready." (<a href='B:230 7:8'>Psa 7:8</a>; <a href='B:230 7:11-13'>Psa 7:11-13</a>). We are come now “to God the judge of all” (<a href='B:650 12:23'>Heb 12:23</a>); God is now enthroned as judge (<a href='B:230 93:2'>Psa 93:2</a>; <a href='B:470 5:34'>Mat 5:34</a> “the heaven is God’s throne”). We are now inescapably in God’s presence (<a href='B:230 139:2'>Psa 139:2</a>); and ‘God’s presence’ is a phrase used about the final judgment in <a href='B:600 1:9'>2Th 1:9</a>; <a href='B:720 1:24'>Jud 1:24</a>; <a href='B:730 14:10'>Rev 14:10</a>.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For in the hand of Yahweh there is a cup, full of foaming wine mixed with spices. He pours it out; indeed the wicked of the earth drink and drink it to its very dregs-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This may have originated in David’s thoughts about Saul, then reapplied to David’s need for salvation from Absalom and Ahithophel, but, it becomes the intended appeal of the exiles for deliverance from Babylon, then Haman, and indeed from all their captors. "The wicked of the earth" is the term used for the Babylonians in <a href='B:330 7:21'>Eze 7:21</a>. The imagery of Babylon being given a cup of wine to drink as judgment is developed in the later prophets.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Taking the cup of wine is a double symbol: of blessing (<a href='B:530 10:16'>1Co 10:16</a>; <a href='B:530 11:25'>1Co 11:25</a>), and of condemnation (<a href='B:230 60:3'>Psa 60:3</a>; <a href='B:230 75:8'>Psa 75:8</a>; <a href='B:290 51:17'>Isa 51:17</a>; <a href='B:300 25:15'>Jer 25:15</a>; <a href='B:730 14:10'>Rev 14:10</a>; <a href='B:730 16:19'>Rev 16:19</a>). Why this use of a double symbol? Surely the Lord designed this sacrament in order to highlight the two ways which are placed before us by taking that cup: it is either to our blessing, or to our condemnation. Each breaking of bread is a further stage along one of those two roads. At the last day, the Messianic banquet will feature fine wines: "In this mountain Yahweh of Armies will make to all peoples a feast of fat things, a feast of choice wines, of fat things full of marrow, of well refined choice wines" (Is. 25:6); but at the same time, the rejected will be made to drink the wine of God's wrath (Rev. 14:10). As we hold the memorial cup of wine in our hands, we make the answer now.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But I will declare this forever: I will sing praises to the God of Jacob-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Eternal praise to the God who saved spiritually weak Jacob is how David perceived eternity. "Declaring" or showing forth praise of God’s ways is what David did in this life (<a href='B:230 71:17-18'>Psa 71:17-18</a>; <a href='B:230 92:2'>Psa 92:2</a>; <a href='B:230 92:15'>Psa 92:15</a> and often). But he imagines himself doing so "forever" (<a href='B:230 75:9'>Psa 75:9</a>). This is an example of how we can live the eternal life now, acting now as we shall eternally do in the Kingdom. It is in this sense that the Lord Jesus in John's gospel offers eternal life right now; even though we shall die and only enter eternity at the resurrection of the body.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For the Chief Musician. On stringed instruments. A Psalm by Asaph. A song-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This "Asaph" could be the Asaph of Hezekiah's time (<a href='B:290 36:3'>Isa 36:3</a>) who used the Psalms in the context of the events of the Assyrian invasion. The Asaph Psalms all have parts in them relevant to that context (Psalms 50, 73-83). Or the "Asaph" may have been the singers who were relatives of Asaph, prominent at the restoration (<a href='B:160 7:44'>Neh 7:44</a>; <a href='B:160 11:17'>Neh 11:17</a>; <a href='B:160 11:22'>Neh 11:22</a>). It could mean that the psalms were a part of a collection from the Asaphites, and the name "Asaph" was therefore simply used to identify the temple singers. And again, parts of the Asaph psalms also have relevance to the restoration. The fact the Asaph Psalms speak of elohim rather than Yahweh would support the idea that they were used in the exilic / restoration period. But Asaph was the "chief" of the Levites to whom David assigned the ministry of praise before the ark (<a href='B:130 16:4-5'>1Ch 16:4-5</a>). It seems he did compose his own Psalms, which were used by Hezekiah at his time (<a href='B:140 29:30'>2Ch 29:30</a>). So I would again suggest that all the Asaph Psalms were composed originally by David "for" [not necessarily "by"] Asaph, but were rewritten and edited for later occasions.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Note how the restoration Psalm <a href='B:230 76:1-5'>Psa 76:1-5</a> speaks in the prophetic perfect of a great battle at Jerusalem which Yahweh would win. Perhaps this speaks of the same battle spoken of in Ezekiel 38, which could have come true in God’s prophetic program, had the people rebuilt the city as they should have done.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>In Judah God is known, His name is great in Israel-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is one of the many passages where God emphasizes the essential unity of Israel and Judah through the device of parallelism. Here Judah and Israel are paralleled, and therefore making His Name great is paralleled with knowing Him. To know God is to have a relationship with Him which issues in glorifying His Name. The idea may be that God’s Name is being made great, i:e. praised, because God has made Himself known by a great deliverance of Judah- probably referring to the destruction of the Assyrian invaders in Hezekiah's time. I have noted throughout the Psalms that there is sometimes a pairing of Psalms, and Psalms 75 is clearly in the same context.  LXX specifically applies this psalm to the defeat of the Assyrians, titling it "A Song for the Assyrian". God was "known" at that time by His salvation of His people from the Assyrians. The idea is that He had thereby "made Himself known in her palaces as a sure refuge" (Ps. 48:3). And the principle remains- to experience God's salvation, which is Yahoshua, 'Jesus', is to know God.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>His tabernacle is also in Salem; His dwelling place in Zion-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Salem" is used for "Jerusalem" because the idea was that now the temple was in peace, now that the Assyrians had been destroyed. But note LXX "His place has been in peace", referring to how the temple mount didn't fall to the Assyrians. The Hebrew words for "tabernacle" and "dwelling place" are used of lions 'dwelling' in their covert or hidden camp (Job 38:40 "they crouch in their dens, and lie in wait in the thicket"; Am. 3:4; Ps. 104:22 "lay down in their dens"). A lion isn't in the lair all the time. Whatever their original historical background, the Asaph psalms were used at the time of the exile to help resolve the conflict between faith and expectation of how God should work in the here and now. The temple was destroyed, and the restoration didn't happen as was potentially possible. God had left His preferred dwelling place or lair in Zion. But the imagery of a lion suggests that in faith, the believers saw Him as still a lion, but out prowling around, and definitely at some time to return to His favourite haunt. At the time of Hezekiah, God was like a lion who came out fearlessly from His den in Jerusalem to destroy His enemies: "As the lion and the young lion growling over his prey who will not be dismayed if a multitude of shepherds is called together against him, nor will he abase himself for their noise, so Yahweh of Armies will come down to fight on Mount Zion and on its mount" (Is. 31:4).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>There He broke the flaming arrows of the bow, the shield and the sword and the weapons of war. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Not an arrow was shot by the Assyrians in Zion (<a href='B:290 37:33'>Isa 37:33</a>); for "there" they were destroyed by just one Angel slaying 185,000 soldiers. "Arrows" here can be translated "lightnings". So the idea may be that God destroyed all the fearsome weaponry which struck fear into the hearts of the Israelites.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Glorious are You and excellent, more than mountains of game-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Mountains" may be an intensive plural for the one great mountain, Zion, where in the temple treasuries the "prey" ("game") of booty from the destroyed Assyrian army was laid up. But far beyond that was the glory which God brought to Himself by the defeat of the Assyrians. And for this, Yahweh was to be "feared" or 'made glorious' by the surrounding Gentiles (s:w. :7).  LXX reads this as referring to the miraculous shining forth of Yahweh from the temple in order to destroy the Assyrians: "Thou dost wonderfully shine forth from the everlasting mountains". GNB suggests this is God's victory procession after the victory: "How glorious you are, O God! How majestic, as you return from the mountains where you defeated your foes". The "mountains" would then be an intensive plural for mount Zion where the Assyrians were defeated. The people of Judah did nothing in the battle against the Assyrians- it was totally all of God. He goes out to war for us without us being aware, and wins victories whilst we sleep. The language of God as a lion [see on :2] at the time of the victory over Assyria is found in Is. 14:25, “I will break the Assyrian in My land, and upon My mountains tread him under foot” .</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Valiant men lie plundered-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Plundered by the inhabitants of Zion coming out to strip the corpses of the 185,000 soldiers slain by the Angel.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They have slept their last sleep. None of the men of war can lift their hands-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The judgment of these Gentiles is presented as an eternal sleep. Death was therefore understood by the psalmist as unconsciousness, and eternal death was the punishment of these people rather than eternal conscious torment.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>At Your rebuke, God of Jacob, both chariot and horse are cast into a deep sleep-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is the language of the victory at the Red Sea ["rebuke... chariot and horse... cast... the deep"], but it is reapplied to the Assyrian defeat. The psalmist perceives a continuity in God’s actions. And as noted on :5, the judgment of the invaders was eternal sleep, unconsciousness rather than any idea of conscious torment.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You, even You, are to be feared. Who can stand in Your sight when You are angry?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Feared" is s:w. "excellent" in :4. Yahweh was to be "feared" or 'made glorious' by the surrounding Gentiles; but instead, Hezekiah fraternized with them and accepted their gods, rather than bringing them to fear Israel's God, knowing that they must make peace with Him rather than face His anger.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You pronounced judgment from heaven: the earth feared and was silent-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A reference to the judgment from heaven being operationalized by one Angel going forth from heaven to slay the 185,000 Assyrian soldiers encircling Jerusalem. The intention was that the entire eretz promised to Abraham would fear God and be silent before Him because of thIsa. But Hezekiah tragically failed to make use of that potential. The kingdom prophecies in earlier Isaiah could have come to fulfilment in him, in some form; but he would not.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>when God arose to judgment, to save all the afflicted ones of the earth. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The judgment of the Assyrians was a saving of the "afflicted ones". It was a foretaste of the day when God shall finally arise in judgment, and the afflicted / meek shall eternally inherit the earth (<a href='B:230 37:11'>Psa 37:11</a>; <a href='B:230 37:29'>Psa 37:29</a> s:w:). <a href='B:290 11:4'>Isa 11:4</a> spoke of how the Messianic king would judge the abusers of "the meek / afflicted ones of the earth" (s:w:). This "Kingdom" prophecy could have come true in Hezekiah's time, but he sadly was happy to have 15 years to enjoy himself in mortal life, and turned away from the Kingdom potential.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Surely the wrath of man praises You. The survivors of Your wrath are restrained-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX points this differently: "For the inward thought of man shall give thanks to thee: and the memorial of his inward thought shall keep a feast to thee". We see the constant interest of God in the inward man; the idea would be that God's saving activity would permanently affect the inward thoughts of those who saw it, and would lead them to keep a feast of celebration to Him- just as we keep the breaking of bread feast from the same basic motives and experience. 
GNB "Human anger only results in more praise for you; those who survive the wars will keep your festivals". The idea may be that after the outpouring of wrath, those who survive it will praise Yahweh. This is what the prophetic intention was for the aftermath of the destruction of the Assyrians and later, after the fall of Babylon. But Hezekiah and later the exiles let the baton drop and didn’t fulfil the potential. The whole scenario was reapplied and rescheduled to the last days. "Restrained" is the usual word for "girded", and it parallel with "praises You"; so the idea may be an allusion to the metaphor of being 'girded with praise'.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Make vows to Yahweh your God, and fulfil them!<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>An invitation to the surrounding nations to enter into covenant relationship with Yahweh as their God.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Let all of His neighbours bring presents to Him who is to be feared-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This was fulfilled at Hezekiah's time, but Hezekiah misused this and didn’t bring those neighbours to Israel's God as was prophetically intended.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For the Chief Musician. To Jeduthun. A Psalm by Asaph-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This "Asaph" could be the Asaph of Hezekiah's time (<a href='B:290 36:3'>Isa 36:3</a>) who used the Psalms in the context of the events of the Assyrian invasion. The Asaph Psalms all have parts in them relevant to that context (Psalms 50, 73-83). Or the "Asaph" may have been the singers who were relatives of Asaph, prominent at the restoration (<a href='B:160 7:44'>Neh 7:44</a>; <a href='B:160 11:17'>Neh 11:17</a>; <a href='B:160 11:22'>Neh 11:22</a>). It could mean that the psalms were a part of a collection from the Asaphites, and the name "Asaph" was therefore simply used to identify the temple singers. And again, parts of the Asaph psalms also have relevance to the restoration. The fact the Asaph Psalms speak of elohim rather than Yahweh would support the idea that they were used in the exilic / restoration period. But Asaph was the "chief" of the Levites to whom David assigned the ministry of praise before the ark (<a href='B:130 16:4-5'>1Ch 16:4-5</a>). It seems he did compose his own Psalms, which were used by Hezekiah at his time (<a href='B:140 29:30'>2Ch 29:30</a>). So I would again suggest that all the Asaph Psalms were composed originally by David "for" [not necessarily "by"] Asaph, but were rewritten and edited for later occasions.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>My cry goes to God! Indeed, I cry to God for help, and for Him to listen to me-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This Psalm is similar to Habakkuk 3, which is a lament of God’s apparent inaction at the time of the Babylonian devastation of Judah, and the context may be the same here. And there was the same sense that God wasn't hearing prayer. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>In the day of my trouble I sought the Lord. My hand was stretched out in the night, and didn’t retract. My soul refused to be comforted-</p><h2>The intention of David’s Psalms were to share his experience of God’s grace and salvation with others. The idea is 'May this be true for you as it was for me'. And this is really the basis of all our witness. It was David who had been answered in his 'days of trouble', and set on high (<a href='B:230 20:1'>Psa 20:1</a>). His desire was fulfilled- for this verse of the Psalm clearly was reapplied to the "day of trouble" of the Assyrian invasion (s:w. <a href='B:290 37:3'>Isa 37:3</a>) and also to the Babylonian traumas of the exiles (s:w. <a href='B:300 16:19'>Jer 16:19</a>; <a href='B:300 30:7'>Jer 30:7</a>; <a href='B:410 1:7'>Nah 1:7</a>; <a href='B:420 3:16'>Hab 3:16</a>). See on <a href='B:20 25:8'>Exo 25:8</a>.</h2>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Troubles" is the word used of Jacob's time of trouble (<a href='B:10 35:3'>Gen 35:3</a>; <a href='B:300 30:7'>Jer 30:7</a>; <a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a>). David’s experience of trouble was representative of how the exiles and all God’s people could ultimately follow the path of Jacob to deliverance out of exile and from his strong enemies. But in <a href='B:230 71:20'>Psa 71:20</a> David sees his deliverance from the day of trouble as ultimately being in the resurrection of the body, being 'brought up again from the depths of the earth'.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I remember God, and I groan-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is the word used of the exiles groaning and apparently getting no relief (<a href='B:290 59:11'>Isa 59:11</a>). The Psalm may have begun with David expressing his groaning to God (s:w. <a href='B:230 42:11'>Psa 42:11</a>; <a href='B:230 43:5'>Psa 43:5</a>). But the truth was that God likewise groaned for the suffering of His people (s:w. <a href='B:300 31:20'>Jer 31:20</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I complain, and my spirit is overwhelmed. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As noted above, this may have begun as a Psalm recording how David complained (s:w. <a href='B:230 55:17'>Psa 55:17</a>) and felt overwhelmed (s:w. <a href='B:230 61:2'>Psa 61:2</a>; <a href='B:230 142:3'>Psa 142:3</a>; <a href='B:230 143:4'>Psa 143:4</a>). It becomes the basis for how Habakkuk likewise 'complained' (see on :1) regarding the Babylonian dominance of Judah.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You hold my eyelids open. I am so troubled that I can’t speak-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>In deep sickness or depression it can simply be that we find formal, verbalized prayer impossible. <a href='B:230 77:4'>Psa 77:4</a> speaks of this: "I am so troubled that I cannot speak" (formally, to God). It's in those moments that comfort can be taken from the fact that it is our spirit which is mediated as it were to God. Tribulation is read as prayer- hence even the Lord's suffering on the cross, "the affliction of the afflicted", was read by the Father as the Lord Jesus 'crying unto' the Father (<a href='B:230 22:24'>Psa 22:24</a>). This is sure comfort to those so beset by illness and physical pain that they lack the clarity of mind to formally pray- their very affliction is read by the Father as their prayer.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>We must enquire why the Psalmist felt so troubled and overwhelmed when thinking about God and meditating upon the present exile of His people. The answer may be in that he perceived that all this had come upon them for their sins, and restoration would only come from repentance; which seemed very far from the exiles. He comes to realize that they should cease bemoaning their lot, and accept what the prophetic explanation for their sufferings- they had grievously sinned. This would explain why upon thinking about these things, he feels unable to talk to God, just as Daniel felt when realizing the same things.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I have considered the days of old, the years of ancient times-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The psalmist has realized that the exile is due to the sin of his people, and the full enormity of it now dawns upon him (see on :4). But he considers God’s saving hand in history, and takes comfort from the fact that God still acts for His people even when they are far from Him and impenitent. His purpose is not ultimately thwarted by human sin.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I remember my song in the night. I consider in my own heart; my spirit diligently inquires-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This may preface a quotation from one of his songs of the night, which we have in :7-9. And in that song he asks the questions we too have done at times: Will God’s whole salvation project with humanity be declared a failure because of the persistent human propensity to sin and reject Him?</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Will the Lord reject us forever? Will He no more be gracious?-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The questions of :7-9 are perhaps rhetorical questions, intentionally begging the answers "No!". His "song in the night" (see on :6) which we have in :7-9 was not therefore a song of doubt, but rather of praise, confident that God will not reject His people, and that His grace is eternal- as the Psalms elsewhere celebrate.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Has His grace vanished forever? Does His promise fail for generations?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God’s grace is eternal (s:w. <a href='B:230 18:50'>Psa 18:50</a>; <a href='B:230 52:8'>Psa 52:8</a>). His promises will not fail (<a href='B:50 31:6'>Deu 31:6</a>; <a href='B:50 31:8'>Deu 31:8</a>; <a href='B:110 8:25'>1Ki 8:25</a>; <a href='B:230 89:33'>Psa 89:33</a>). The answer was "of course not". Jeremiah finally came to accept, even in the ruins of Jerusalem, that His purpose would not fail (<a href='B:310 3:22'>Lam 3:22</a>). And this "song in the night" of this psalmist is saying the same.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Has God forgotten to be gracious? Has He, in anger, withheld His compassion? Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As explained on :6, the questions of :7-9 were not doubts, but rather rhetorical questions which were answered with a resounding "No!" each time. The connection with Habakkuk 3 (see on :1) is in the conclusion that in anger God remembers mercy (<a href='B:420 3:2'>Hab 3:2</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Then I thought, I will appeal to this: the years of the right hand of the Most High-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Hebrew is difficult, but the sense seems to be that the appeal or prayer of the psalmist will result in as the LXX puts it "the change of the right hand of the Most High". God is open to change, He is highly responsive to human prayer and repentance; and that was exactly what was needed to bring about the restoration of Judah.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will remember Yah’s deeds; for I will remember Your wonders of old-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Asaph lived at the time of the restoration (<a href='B:150 2:41'>Ezr 2:41</a>). All his Psalms draw on the past dealings of God with His people and encourage them on this basis to make the wilderness journey back&nbsp; to the land, just as they had done at the Exodus. As explained earlier on this Psalm, God’s wonders of old were in that He had worked with an impenitent and apostate people, towards their salvation. This is the wonder of His history with men, and it is this history which is developed in Psalms 78. I suggest that again we have a pairing of the Psalms, here of Psalms 77, 78. The salvation history outlined in Psalms 78 is a development of this theme of Psalms 77. Hence <a href='B:230 77:20'>Psa 77:20</a> ends with Israel being led as a flock, and Psalms 78 continues this theme.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will also meditate on all Your work, and consider Your doings-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As in <a href='B:230 143:5'>Psa 143:5</a>, the Divine work and doings being considered are His historical grace to His people. For all His work for Israel was by grace, seeing that for the most part they didn’t strongly believe in Him and were unfaithful to His covenant; and yet He had still worked for them so mightily, towards their salvation.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Your way, God, is in the sanctuary-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is the same phrase as in <a href='B:290 35:8'>Isa 35:8</a> "The way of holiness", the path back to Zion which God would create for those who wanted to travel it. So "in" could as well be "to":&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>What god is great like God?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The uniqueness of Yahweh, in the context, is that He continues to work for His sinful people by grace, doing great things for them; whereas pagan gods were thought to disown their people for any disloyalty.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You are the God who does wonders-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The wonders in the context are God’s desire to continue working with His people even when they are grossly disloyal to Him. It is the wonder of His grace which is in view, and not just His material miracles.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have made Your strength known among the peoples-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God’s strength was declared at the exodus (s:w. <a href='B:20 15:2'>Exo 15:2</a>; <a href='B:20 15:13'>Exo 15:13</a>) and the surrounding nations knew this, as witnessed by Rahab's words to the spies. The redemption from Babylon was intended to have the same effect, resulting in the surrounding nations 'knowing' Yahweh as their God. But this didn’t happen, for Judah didn’t repent, most of them remained in Babylon and refused their great redemption, and continued worshipping the local gods.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have redeemed Your people with Your arm, the sons of Jacob and Joseph. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This reference to both Judah and the ten tribes, "Ephraim and Manasseh", reflects the prophetic intention for the regathering of both kingdoms from captivity. Tragically, the ten tribes didn’t respond, and most of Judah preferred Babylon to Zion. God’s "arm" redeemed them all from Egypt, despite their worshipping of idols and carrying of the tabernacle of their idols through the desert. And that arm was potentially outstretched to redeem them from Babylon. "Redemption" is a major theme of the prophecies of the restoration in later Isaiah.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The waters saw You, God, the waters saw You, and they writhed, the depths also convulsed-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The miraculous redemption of Israel from Egypt could have been the prototype for the restoration of the exiles from Babylon. This point is frequently made in later Isaiah. But the restoration wasn't accompanied by such miracles; because most of Judah didn’t want to participate, and remained in Babylon. This is a frequent tragedy in God’s dealing with us all; such huge Divine potentials are wasted by human indifference and shortsightedness. The waters of the Red Sea are spoken of as living entities, because those "waters" are intended to be understood as representing the nations who would have fled before God’s saving purpose of restoring His people to their land.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It is also possible to understand the apparent "living" nature of the waters because there is an "Angel of the waters" (<a href='B:730 16:5'>Rev 16:5</a>). That a specific Angel controls “the waters” in an area is also implied by the way flood waters are described as praising God (<a href='B:230 42:8'>Psa 42:8</a>; <a href='B:230 148:7'>Psa 148:7</a>), water trembling at God’s presence (<a href='B:230 77:17'>Psa 77:17</a>; <a href='B:420 3:10'>Hab 3:10</a>), and the deep waters mourning (<a href='B:330 31:15'>Eze 31:15</a>). These figures of speech may in fact be based upon the real existence of a personal “Angel of the waters”.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The clouds poured out water. The skies resounded with thunder, Your arrows also flashed around-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This continues the description of what happened at the Red Sea, although the historical record doesn't much mention the thunder, lightning and theophany which was experienced, according to this and other later descriptions of what happened (e.g. <a href='B:230 77:17-18'>Psa 77:17-18</a>; <a href='B:230 97:4'>Psa 97:4</a>). The clouds pouring out water also recalls the flood; as if the judgment upon Egypt would likewise be seen upon Babylon. But Babylon fell only very slowly, and not in the dramatic, miraculous way envisaged in the prophecies of the fall of Babylon. This was again because the Divine potential wasn't realized because the exiles didn’t repent and most actually chose to remain in Babylon.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The voice of Your thunder was in the whirlwind, the lightnings lit up the world, the earth trembled and shook-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The driving back of the Red Sea, and its return, is explained in Exodus by a "wind" (<a href='B:20 14:21'>Exo 14:21</a>). But here we find that the wind was in fact a whirlwind, associated with an earthquake and lightnings- all language of a theophany.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Your way was through the sea, Your paths through the great waters; Your footsteps were not known-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The allusion is to the way that there are no footsteps seen in water. God’s ways are known by their effect, but the process is often not discernible. "Footsteps" is literally "heels"; the reference is to <a href='B:10 3:15'>Gen 3:15</a>. The seed of the serpent was being trodden underfoot in primary fulfilment of that prophecy. It was Israel who walked through the great waters, but the waters returned and there was no trace of their passage. This speaks of the apparent mystery of God’s ways; <a href='B:500 3:8'>Joh 3:8</a> may even allude here.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A contemplation by Asaph-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This "Asaph" could be the Asaph of Hezekiah's time (<a href='B:290 36:3'>Isa 36:3</a>) who used the Psalms in the context of the events of the Assyrian invasion. The Asaph Psalms all have parts in them relevant to that context (Psalms 50, 73-83). Or the "Asaph" may have been the singers who were relatives of Asaph, prominent at the restoration (<a href='B:160 7:44'>Neh 7:44</a>; <a href='B:160 11:17'>Neh 11:17</a>; <a href='B:160 11:22'>Neh 11:22</a>). It could mean that the psalms were a part of a collection from the Asaphites, and the name "Asaph" was therefore simply used to identify the temple singers. And again, parts of the Asaph psalms also have relevance to the restoration. The fact the Asaph Psalms speak of elohim rather than Yahweh would support the idea that they were used in the exilic / restoration period. But Asaph was the "chief" of the Levites to whom David assigned the ministry of praise before the ark (<a href='B:130 16:4-5'>1Ch 16:4-5</a>). It seems he did compose his own Psalms, which were used by Hezekiah at his time (<a href='B:140 29:30'>2Ch 29:30</a>). So I would again suggest that all the Asaph Psalms were composed originally by David "for" [not necessarily "by"] Asaph, but were rewritten and edited for later occasions.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Asaph lived at the time of the restoration (<a href='B:150 2:41'>Ezr 2:41</a>). All his Psalms draw on the past dealings of God with His people and encourage them on this basis to make the wilderness journey back&nbsp; to the land, just as they had done at the Exodus. Asaph says he will “utter hidden things</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>what our fathers have told us</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>we will not hide them from their children” (:2,4 NIV). He speaks as if these things had been known by the fathers but not repeated to Asaph’s generation, and now Asaph as a teaching priest was going to teach them to the present generation. This would imply that after initially pining for Zion, the Jewish community in Babylon got on with life and forget their historical roots; for “the things” of which the Psalm speaks are a recounting of the covenant history of God with His people. In this context Asaph reminds them that Yahweh had chosen Zion for His temple (:60,68), and now at the restoration “The Lord awoke from sleep, as a man wakes” (:65). Asaph warns them that He has “rejected the tents of Joseph, he did not chose the tribe of Ephraim” (i:e. the 10 tribe Kingdom had been scattered and were not returning at that time), but he chose the tribe of Judah”. The final verses must surely be read as prophetic perfect, i:e. speaking about what was going to happen as if it had: “He beat back his enemies, he put them to everlasting shame</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He built his sanctuary</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>he chose David his servant (the same phrase recurs in Ezekiel’s temple prophecies)</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> and David shepherded them with integrity of heart” (:67-72). It could have been so that the surrounding Arab enemies of Judah were eternally destroyed (this has never yet happened, so it can’t be describing a previous historical event), the temple built on Zion, and a David-like Messiah appeared. This was potentially possible; but it wasn’t to be. The people preferred to live in ignorance of Asaph’s appeal to their previous history:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Hear my teaching, my people; turn your ears to the words of my mouth-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The initial author of this Psalm appears to be David, at the time when the sanctuary was moved from Shiloh in Ephraim (<a href='B:60 18:1'>Jos 18:1</a>) to Zion in the tribe of Judah. The Psalm emphasizes the rejection of Ephraim, the largest tribe; and the historical account finishes with David. This suggests at best it was written by Solomon, or in his time; but most of the Psalms appear to have originated with David. There is a political pretext to it, however- which is to underline that Judah is the royal tribe and not Ephraim, which was the largest tribe. And the king of the kingdom is to be David and his line, not anyone else. In this opening verse, David appeals to "my people" to accept his appeal to accept him as their king, and his interpretation of the history of Ephraim and Judah.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will open my mouth in a parable, I will utter dark sayings of old-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>What follows is a salvation history of Israel. History is a riddle or parable, but it is uttered or revealed by appreciating that it is really a reflection of God’s desire to save and show grace to His sinful people. This is the ultimate interpretation of human history.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told us-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The idea may be that David is going to reveal the riddle of the historical stories which Israel had heard and known from their fathers (:2).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>We will not hide them from their children-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "They were not hid from their children to a second generation; the fathers declaring the praises of the Lord".</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Telling to the generation to come the praises of Yahweh, His strength, and His wondrous works that He has done-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As explained on Psalms 77, the intention of Israel's history is to reveal Yahweh's amazing grace and patience to such a weak and sinful people. His strength was in His grace. The great physical miracles were noteworthy even moreso for their revelation of God’s grace unto salvation.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For He established a testimony in Jacob and appointed a teaching in Israel, which He commanded our fathers, that they should make them known to their children-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This was to be the lead characteristic of the family of Abraham; the true seed would make known God’s teaching to their children (<a href='B:10 18:18'>Gen 18:18</a>). Even in Old Testament times, the basic idea of spreading God’s ways was implicit in God’s commands, although each time it seems to have met with resistance. Adam and Eve were to multiply and fill the earth, but it seems they didn’t even have intercourse , or at least Eve wasn’t pregnant, before they sinned. Noah was given the same command after the flood, but the next we know he is lying there dead drunk. And the incident at Babel shows that effectively, his children had not taken seriously the command to spread throughout the earth. Israel were to be a missionary nation, but they so evidently failed in thIsa. The law given to Israel was intended to be a “testimony”, a witness, as the Hebrew word implies. By living out that law, Israel were to have been a witness to the world, a light to the Gentiles (<a href='B:230 78:5'>Psa 78:5</a>). The prophets are full of invitations for the whole ends of the earth to turn to Israel’s God, yet the nation produced few real missionaries.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>that the generation to come might know, even the children who should be born; who should arise and tell their children-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David is saying that "we" (:4), he and his descendants, would continue declaring God’s mighty acts to their children. But he is building up to a contrast with the descendants of Ephraim, whom he will insist had forgotten God’s mighty acts, implying they had not taught them to their children. David is correct in viewing attitudes to teaching children as a highly significant indicator as to whether we are the seed of Abraham (<a href='B:10 18:18'>Gen 18:18</a>). But his own house / family was not right with God either, so it seems David is madly pressing ahead with a line of reasoning to justify the establishment of his family line and tribe before God, rather than that of Ephraim, the largest tribe.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>that they might set their hope in God, and not forget the works of God, but keep His commandments-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David often takes strength from God’s previous deliverances to cope with whatever he was now facing (<a href='B:230 61:3'>Psa 61:3</a>). This may sound natural, but in fact it isn't; because we are inclined to forget the great things He has done for us, as Israel did in the desert.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>and might not be as their fathers-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>To condemn and differ from your fathers was a radically counter-cultural position in David’s world.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A stubborn and rebellious generation-</p><h2>The "stubborn and rebellious" were to have been disciplined and rejected from the family (s:w. <a href='B:50 21:18'>Deu 21:18</a>). But lack of obedience to this led to the attitudes of youth becoming the hallmark of an entire generation, as we see today. The grace of it all is seen in how God gave gifts and His Spirit to His people "to the rebellious also" (<a href='B:230 68:18'>Psa 68:18</a> s:w:), that He might dwell among&nbsp; them. Israel both before (<a href='B:290 1:23'>Isa 1:23</a>; <a href='B:300 5:23'>Jer 5:23</a>) and after the exile (<a href='B:290 65:2'>Isa 65:2</a>) were rebellious. David’s hope for his natural seed wasn't realized:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A generation that didn’t make their hearts loyal, whose spirit was not steadfast with God-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The heart and the spirit are clearly paralleled here. The gift of a holy spirit is therefore the gift of a psychology, an attitude of heart, which is what we all so desperately need. Yet here, the essence of their rebellion was in their hearts. "Steadfast" is s:w. "established" in the promise to David about his kingdom being established by God (<a href='B:100 7:16'>2Sa 7:16</a>). The idea is that they did not allow their heart or spirit to be established / stabilized by God; the same word is translated "nurse" (<a href='B:100 4:4'>2Sa 4:4</a>). He is willing and eager to confirm the hearts of men; but that generation didn’t allow Him to do so. The word is also translated 'to have faith', and in this sense faith is also not of ourselves, but is the gift of God to those who want it (<a href='B:560 2:8'>Eph 2:8</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The children of Ephraim, being armed and carrying bows, turned back in the day of battle-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The idea is that they had the weapons, the potential, but turned back. It is our wasting of Divine potential which is indeed so grievous. But what is the historical reference? There appears to be none, unless Ephraim's general failure to drive out the Canaanites is referenced. But that was true for many of the tribes. There is a reference to some individual Ephraimites being defeated by the Philistines of Gath (<a href='B:130 7:20-22'>1Ch 7:20-22</a>). David instead gloriously conquered the Philistine of Gath, Goliath. I suggest that David is slanting history to present Ephraim as far more sinful than Judah, to justify his moving the ark from Shiloh in Ephraim (<a href='B:60 18:1'>Jos 18:1</a>) to Jerusalem in Judah. He is painting Ephraim's failures as of a far worse nature than those of Judah and the rest of Israel- in order to establish his point, that he and his tribe had been chosen. Twisting the incident in 1 Chronicles 7 as if it involved all Ephraim is typical of thIsa. Indeed God did choose David and his line. But that didn’t need David or Solomon to justify it by presenting themselves as righteous and the rest of Israel as so deeply unworthy and sinful. Likewise our salvation is by the grave of Divine election, but that doesn't mean that we have to pull down others to demonstrate our own worthiness.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The observation has been made that :8 and :10 flow on together and the rhythm of the passage is interrupted by :9; as if this history of God’s grace with His people has been used by David or Solomon and had had the rhetoric against Ephraim crudely inserted into it at various points, in order to justify David’s line. See on :17.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They didn’t keep God’s covenant, and refused to walk in His law-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is presented as at variance with the lead characteristic of the seed of Abraham, which was to keep and teach the covenant to others (:5); and which David is insisting he and his line will do.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They forgot His doings, His wondrous works that He had shown them-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The contrast is with :4, where the true seed of Abraham are to declare "His wondrous works" and not forget them. Our attitudes to teaching God’s ways to our children and others remains the litmus test of being within the covenant (see on :5).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He did marvellous things in the sight of their fathers, in the land of Egypt, in the field of Zoan-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "In the plain of Tanes", which was the capital of Egypt, where Pharaoh's palace was, where Moses and Aaron did the miracles. The "fathers" have been defined in :8 as disbelieving. Yet despite this, they experienced miracles and deliverance (:13). Again the idea is that the rebellious were delivered by grace, and the mystery of history is that God has repeatedly saved the undeserving:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He split the sea, and caused them to pass through. He made the waters stand as a heap-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "he made the waters to stand as in a bottle". This great deliverance looks forward to Christian baptism (<a href='B:530 10:1'>1Co 10:1</a>). This great salvation was to the "fathers" (:12), who have been defined in :8 as disbelieving. So this then refers to a salvation by grace. It was of God’s 'causing' that they passed through; for they were fearful and seemed to prefer death or return to Egypt, than passing through the waters. Our salvation likewise is of God’s causing (see on :8).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>In the daytime He also led them with a cloud, and all night with a light of fire-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I suggest that again we have a pairing of the Psalms, here of Psalms 77, 78. The salvation history outlined in Psalms 78 is a development of this theme of Psalms 77. Hence <a href='B:230 77:20'>Psa 77:20</a> ends with Israel being "led" as a flock, and Psalms 78 continues this theme (<a href='B:230 78:14'>Psa 78:14</a>; <a href='B:230 78:53'>Psa 78:53</a> s:w:).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He split rocks in the wilderness, and gave them drink abundantly as out of the depths-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The generosity of God to those disbelieving 'fathers' is emphasized. They were fed to the full, and given abundant water, which tasted like cool water springing up from the depths of the earth. The splitting of the Red Sea (:13 s:w:)continued in essence, with the daily splitting of the rock, as it were, from which their water source flowed. God’s redemptive action was not only seen in bringing us from the world (Egypt) to the waters of baptism and onto the Kingdom path; but that same activity is in fact a daily occurrence.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He brought streams also out of the rock, and caused waters to run down like rivers-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The verbs in this section speak of the incessant activity of God; splitting, causing, bringing forth, leading, feeding, giving to drink. And this same level of hyperactivity is going in our lives as we are led towards the Kingdom after accepting baptism.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yet they still went on sinning against Him, rebelling against the Most High in the desert-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The "they" in the context is Ephraim (:9). But these were the sins of the majority of Israel. So it would appear that David is painting Ephraim as bad as possible, blaming them for Israel's sins in the desert, in an attempt to justify his own kingdom of Judah. And yet as noted on :7, it could be argued that we have here in this Psalm a salvation history of Israel, into which has been inserted rhetoric against Ephraim. That rhetoric inserted in :9 then throws the rest of the Psalm out of kilter; because fairly obviously, we are reading here in this section of the general sins of Israel in the desert, rather than of Ephraim alone.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They put God to the test in their heart by asking food according to their lust-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Psalms, along with the entire Biblical record, emphasize the importance of the heart. Their request for food was a testing of God in their hearts. Spiritual mindedness is of the essence; the theme of the spirit is therefore very major in the New Testament. But it reflects the emphasis of the Old Testament upon the huge significance of the human heart and thinking. This was in radical contrast to the way in which religions of the time focused purely upon the external.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yes, they spoke against God. They said, Can God prepare a table in the wilderness?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This happened to David when fleeing from Absalom, when a kind supporter gave David a feast in the wilderness, as he celebrates in Psalms 23. Perhaps a later hand [Solomon?] has included this in order to present David as the believer, compared to Ephraim.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Behold, He struck the rock, so that waters gushed out, and streams overflowed. Can He give bread also? Will He provide flesh for His people?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "or prepare a table for his people". See on :19. The idea seems to be that they tested God (:18) by challenging Him to not merely produce food but a feast for them in the desert. Their argument was that producing gushing water from the rock was but a minor miracle; but could He produce flesh and bread? This was asked without faith (:23), not as a request, but as a reflection of their cynical lack of trust and faith.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Therefore Yahweh heard, and was angry. A fire was kindled against Jacob, anger also went up against Israel-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The reference is to the burning of God’s wrath at Taberah. If the "they" in the previous verses is intended to refer to Ephraim (as the flow of the grammar from :9 suggests it does), then David is trying to wrongly blame Israel's misfortunes upon Ephraim. This was an exaggeration and reflects David by all means marshalling all possible excuses for making his Judah the lead tribe rather than Ephraim.</p>


text:
<h2>because they didn’t believe in God, and didn’t trust in His salvation-</h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Although God opened the doors of Heaven to rain manna upon Israel, they “trusted not in his salvation”. The manna, as in John 6, became a symbol of their salvation; and yet the repetitious ordinariness of it all meant they missed the point. Every time we read God’s word, take again the bread of Heaven each week, the more familiar we are with it, the more likelihood there is that this can happen to us:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yet He commanded the skies above, and opened the doors of heaven-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The "yet" continues the theme of God’s grace. Although they didn’t believe nor trust (:22), yet God poured His gifts upon them. The "command" was to the Angels, who produced the food (:25).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He rained down manna on them to eat, and gave them food from the sky-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "The bread of heaven", a phrase clearly alluded to by the Lord Jesus concerning Himself, and used by Him to represent God’s salvation. This was rained upon them; just as the water was abundant and the food fully satisfied them. This amazing outpouring of grace was given although they didn’t believe nor trust (:22), and this was the background to God’s gift of His Son, "the bread of heaven".</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Man ate the bread of angels; He sent them food to the full-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :29. The bread was created by the Angels, who had been commanded to bring it for Israel (see on :23). But the word translated "angels" here is not malak. It rather means 'the mighty ones'. It parallels "food to the full"; they were given a feast, fit for the great and mighty. Such was God’s grace to those who didn’t believe in Him (:22) and mocked whether He could provide any more than free water (:21).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He caused the east wind to blow in the sky, by His power He guided the south wind-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The idea may be that the quails were blown in by a south easterly wind. He had likewise caused the east wind to operate in bringing locusts upon Egypt and in causing the miracle at the Red Sea. The Hebrew idea of "spirit" and "wind" is connected, and God makes His Angels winds (<a href='B:230 104:4'>Psa 104:4</a>). Clearly He was using Angels to bring about these miracles with winds; see on :23:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He rained also flesh on them as the dust-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The raining down of quails was again typically generous, just as the water was abundant, the food fully satisfied them "to the full" (:25).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Winged birds as the sand of the seas-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Appropriate, seeing that the seed of Abraham were to be as the sand of the sea and dust of the land. Clearly there was here a reference to the primary fulfilment of the promises to Abraham. It was always a case of 'now but not yet'; all God’s plans for salvation have some primary fulfilment in this life.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He let them fall in the midst of their camp, around their dwelling places-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yet again God’s grace is emphasized, because the quail dropped right next to their tents. They just had to pick them up and cook them, rather than having to wander around the desert picking them up. And this was all for those who refused to trust and believe in Him (:22) and mocked whether He could provide any more than free water (:21).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>So they ate, and were well filled; He gave them their own desire-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The complete satisfaction and filling of the Israelites was quite a theme (:25 also), looking forward to how the Lord's later feeding miracles left the people completely satisfied. It is a theme of the Bible that in essence, God gives men their own desires, just as the prodigal son was given what he wrongfully demanded. Here, Israel lusted (s:w. <a href='B:40 11:4'>Num 11:4</a>) and God gave them what they lusted after. This is to point up the huge importance of our innermost desires, our heart, our dominant passions- being upon the things of God and His Kingdom. David could say that all his desire was for the things of God (s:w. <a href='B:230 38:9'>Psa 38:9</a>; <a href='B:290 26:8'>Isa 26:8</a>). More than anything else we should desire to please Him and be in His Kingdom. And all who thus love the Lord's appearing will be eternally with Him (<a href='B:620 4:8'>2Ti 4:8</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They didn’t turn from their cravings. Their food was yet in their mouths-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Those who lusted for meat were given it; yet “they were not estranged from their lust” (AV):&nbsp; Sin never satisfies. Giving in to temptation will not lead to the craving being permanently resolved.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>when the anger of God went up against them, killed some of their fattest, and struck down the young men of Israel-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Significantly, it was the "fattest" who complained about lack of food. God had not let them really suffer from lack of food. And it is those fat ones who are particularly recorded as being struck down. "Struck down" is often used in the sense of making to bow down in homage (s:w. <a href='B:230 72:9'>Psa 72:9</a>; <a href='B:230 95:6'>Psa 95:6</a>). Perhaps there is the hint that the younger ones repented:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For all this they still sinned, and didn’t believe in His wondrous works-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Those "wondrous works" typically refer to God’s saving miracles especially at the Red Sea. Despite being taught that God is for real, they refused to learn the lessons of their wonderful history. The problem was in their hearts, their attitude of mind deep within them. For Israel refused to be obedient, were stiff-necked, because they were "not mindful of Your wonders" (<a href='B:160 9:17'>Neh 9:17</a>):&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Therefore He consumed their days in vanity, and their years in terror-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "anxiety". That vanity and anxiety which fills the lives of those who don't want God is in fact given by Him. Again we see evidence of God’s ability to work directly upon human hearts, positively [by the Holy Spirit] and [in this case] negatively.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>When He slew them, then they inquired after Him; they relented and sought God earnestly-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This could refer to the time of the judges, but in :40 we are still as it were in the wilderness with Israel, so I suggest this refers to their occasional responses to God during the various judgments in the desert. But this earnest seeking of God was just for a moment as they faced judgment. For generally they did not seek Him (<a href='B:520 3:11'>Rom 3:11</a>):&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They remembered that God was their rock, the Most High God their redeemer-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As noted on :34, this was but a passing awareness; for the wilderness generation, and Israel generally, did not remember God as their redeemer. "The most high God" could suggest that they believed in many gods, but in their desperate moments, recognized Yahweh as the "most high" of them all. And this was why they did not permanently have Yahweh as their only rock. Let us remember that Israel carried the tabernacle of their god Remphan through the desert as well as that of Yahweh.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But they flattered Him with their mouth, and lied to Him with their tongue-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The language of flattery and deceit could suggest that God was so in love with them that He as it were restrained His omniscience, just as at times He restrains His omnipotence; in order to enter fully into relationship with His people, in real time (in human terms).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For their heart was not right with Him, neither were they faithful in His covenant-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Faithfulness to the covenant is here presented as a matter of the heart, rather than ritualistic obedience and assent to bullet points of theology. This was the stuff of the idol cults; Yahweh sought an intimate relationship with the hearts of His worshippers.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But He, being merciful, forgave iniquity, and didn’t destroy them-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>There is no suggestion that He forgave them because they repented and remained penitent; to show mercy forgive iniquity is what God is good at, it is part of His fundamental character intrinsic to His Name (<a href='B:20 34:4-6'>Exo 34:4-6</a>). It was all of grace and love and desperate desire to save them.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yes, many times He turned His anger away, and didn’t stir up all His wrath-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This seems to suggest He Himself controlled His anger, Himself turning that anger away, rather than being like a pagan deity whose anger was appeased by blood sacrifice. God turned from His anger due to Moses' intercession (<a href='B:20 32:12'>Exo 32:12</a> s:w:), but this is not to say that He cannot in any case turn away His anger. Just as we may control our anger from within ourselves, or at other times we may do this because of the appeal of another to us, or because there is repentance from the one who provoked us. And there were times when this was the case with God (s:w. <a href='B:40 25:4'>Num 25:4</a>; <a href='B:60 7:26'>Jos 7:26</a>; <a href='B:140 12:12'>2Ch 12:12</a>; <a href='B:140 29:10'>2Ch 29:10</a>; <a href='B:140 30:8'>2Ch 30:8</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He remembered that they were but flesh, a wind that passes away, and doesn’t come again-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The impression is that God forgave them not because they repented- but because of His compassion, His remembering of His covenant with them [‘remember’ is often used of God in a covenant context], and simply because He recognized the frailty of their humanity. In other words, He forgave them because of His grace. We dare not allow this wonderful fact to work in us any sense of ease with sin, nor any shrugging off of the importance of repentance. But all the same, the grace of God is wonderful, and this grace is what we must show to others. And this means, forgiving without demanding specific repentance. Family life is full of the lesson that this is how we have to live if we are to live in peace with both God and men.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>How often they rebelled against Him in the wilderness, and grieved Him in the desert!-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God was and is so sensitive, hence He can be "grieved", broken hearted (s:w. <a href='B:10 6:6'>Gen 6:6</a>), because of the behaviour of otherwise insignificant little people on the face of this planet. This extreme sensitivity is a function of His intense love. In the desert, Israel grieved God in that they grieved His Holy Spirit (s:w. <a href='B:290 63:10'>Isa 63:10</a>). This is quoted about us in the New Testament (<a href='B:560 4:30'>Eph 4:30</a>). God wishes us to be saved, and the work of His Spirit is propelling us towards salvation. But we can resist it, and thereby we grieve the very saving heart of God:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They turned around and put God to the test, and provoked the Holy One of Israel-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God can do anything, He is omnipotent. But He chooses to limit His omnipotence in order to allow man total freewill. Therefore effectively, how far God will fulfil His purpose depends upon how far we are obedient to Him. Thus Israel limited the Holy One of Israel (<a href='B:230 78:41'>Psa 78:41</a> AV). Only at the return of the Lord Jesus will God 'take to Himself His great power' (<a href='B:730 11:17'>Rev 11:17</a>)- which language of itself suggests that God has chosen to limit His omnipotence for the moment.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Asaph lived at the time of the restoration (<a href='B:150 2:41'>Ezr 2:41</a>). All his Psalms draw on the past dealings of God with His people and encourage them on this basis to make the wilderness journey back&nbsp; to the land, just as they had done at the Exodus. It is this, an Asaph Psalm, that warns Israel about the danger of limiting what God is potentially prepared to do for His people. The refusal of the exiles to participate in the restoration was the parade example of thIsa.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They didn’t remember His hand, nor the day when He redeemed them from the adversary-</p><h2>This is in contrast to how the true seed of Abraham were to remember the Red Sea deliverance and teach it to their children (:4,5). Israel kept their Passovers throughout the wilderness years, one would assume- but they never remembered the day that God brought them out of Egypt (<a href='B:230 78:42'>Psa 78:42</a>)- although notice how although Israel didn’t remember God, yet He remembered them in His grace (<a href='B:230 106:7'>Psa 106:7</a>; <a href='B:230 106:45'>Psa 106:45</a>). We can read of the cross, of the utter certainty of our salvation, sing and speak of it; and yet totally fail to personally realize the powerful imperatives which abound in this wonderful news.</h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>We can so easily be like Israel, who (presumably, under Moses) kept the Passover throughout their forty years in the wilderness; but never in all that time remembered the day that the Lord brought them forth from Egypt (<a href='B:230 78:42'>Psa 78:42</a>). Yet this was what the Passover was intended for, to remind them of that day of their redemption! They kept the Passover, but never really grasped what it was all about; they never really remembered that day of salvation, they forgot the wonder of their redemption and the future direction which it should have imparted to their lives. And so we can so easily break bread without due attention to the real import of the cross.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>how He set His signs in Egypt, His wonders in the field of Zoan-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "In the plain of Tanes", which was the capital of Egypt, where Pharaoh's palace was, where Moses and Aaron did the miracles. The "wonders" were not simply the miracles of the plagues, but the fact that this was done to deliver "the fathers" (:12) who have been defined in :8 as disbelieving. Yet despite this, they experienced miracles and deliverance (:13). Again the idea is that the rebellious were delivered by grace, and the mystery of history is that God has repeatedly saved the undeserving:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He turned their rivers and streams into blood so that they could not drink-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The plagues upon Egypt are cited here in the context of a history of Israel which emphasizes His grace to His people. This is the lens through which we must view the plagues upon Egypt. They were intended to be part of God’s saving plan, both for His people and also for those Egyptians who were provoked by them to accept His great salvation.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He sent among them swarms of beetles, which devoured them; and frogs, which destroyed them-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As noted on Exodus, the plagues were all aimed at different gods of Egypt. Those of the frogs and beetles were typical of thIsa. The intention of the plagues was to deconstruct the entire religion of Egypt, and bring her people to accept Yahweh's great salvation; to quit Egypt along with His people, and travel towards His Kingdom.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He gave also their increase to the caterpillar, and their labour to the locust-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The loss of the results of human labour are often used to bring people to accept God’s saving work, which is by grace and not human works. See on :44. This principle works to this day. The man who spends his life building his house and finds it burnt down overnight... may thereby be provoked to turn to God and His works and salvation.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He destroyed their vines with hail, their sycamore fig trees with frost-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :45,46. The Hebrew for "frost" could also refer to some insect plague. If literally "frost", then we have the picture of extremely low temperatures hitting the Egyptians but not the Israelites, just as there was light for the Israelites but darkness for the Egyptians, and hail in some areas but not in others where the Israelites were. The message was that Yahweh was in complete control of the elements, and can single out individuals to spare from His judgments.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He gave over their livestock also to the hail, and their flocks to hot thunderbolts-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :45,46. God "gave over" or 'shut up unto' the Egyptians to judgment (:48,50), but the same word is used of how He did the same to His people Israel (:62). They were judged for acting as the Egyptians in their hearts. Likewise the unspiritual and worldly amongst the new Israel will be "judged / destroyed [along] with the world" (<a href='B:530 11:32'>1Co 11:32</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He threw on them the fierceness of His anger, wrath, indignation, trouble, and a band of angels of evil-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "a message of evil angels". All the Angels in the sense of supernatural beings are obedient to God. There is no Biblical division of Angels into sinful ones and good ones. Angels are immortal (<a href='B:490 20:35-36'>Luk 20:35-36</a>), and seeing as the wages of sin is death (<a href='B:520 6:23'>Rom 6:23</a>), this means that they cannot sin. However, "evil" in the sense of disaster is from God (<a href='B:290 45:5-7'>Isa 45:5-7</a>; <a href='B:370 3:6'>Amo 3:6</a>). And it seems this work of bringing disaster or "evil" is specifically in the hands of Angels:&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Angels never affect our freewill, but nevertheless provide the necessary arrangement of circumstances to encourage us to do God’s will, and affecting the lives of unbelievers to this end too. In order for unbelievers to present the necessary trials to us in order to bring this about, the&nbsp;Angels harden the hearts of these people. The plagues were due to Pharaoh's heart being hardened by God (<a href='B:20 4:21'>Exo 4:21</a>)- i:e. by the Angels of evil. <a href='B:20 9:14'>Exo 9:14</a> speaks of the plagues being sent upon Pharaoh's heart, and here we have Angels of evil being sent. Angels affect human hearts- for good and bad, operationalizing the upward or downward spirals into which human beings must inevitably enter.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'><a href='B:530 10:10'>1Co 10:10</a> speaks of an Angel called “the destroyer” who brought about Israel’s punishments in the wilderness. And yet <a href='B:230 78:49'>Psa 78:49</a> speaks of these as being executed by “A band of Angels of evil”. Likewise <a href='B:730 9:14'>Rev 9:14</a> has one Angel controlling others, perhaps as our guardian Angel has control over many others to effect his plans for us. The one Angel had control over others, Angels specifically used to bring evil upon those whom God rejects. It may be they will be used again in the judgment of the last day. Or it could be that ‘Angels’ in <a href='B:230 78:49'>Psa 78:49</a> is an intensive plural, and the AV reading is correct: “by sending evil angels</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>”. The one great Angel of evil is “the destroyer” of <a href='B:530 10:10'>1Co 10:10</a>. This could imply that some of the references to a “Satan” who brings disaster, as in Job, refer to one specific Angel who does these things, or co-ordinates them.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He made a path for His anger, He didn’t spare their soul from death, but gave their life over to the pestilence-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God would have spared them had they identified with Israel and followed the Passover ritual, trusting in the blood of the lamb. See on :48. The idea may be that unlike supposed angry deities and the wrath of man, God’s wrath was channeled and directed in a specific way. The death of the firstborn was the specific path or channel for His wrath. And it was intended to be creative, leading towards repentance.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>and struck all the firstborn in Egypt, the chief of their strength in the tents of Ham-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The death of the firstborn was because either the individuals or their parents refused to be obedient to God’s offer of salvation. It was therefore a result of human sin; and part of "sin" is that it hurts others. "The chief of their strength" is another way of saying 'the firstborn' (s:w. <a href='B:10 49:3'>Gen 49:3</a>). The idea is that human strength was to be taken away, because Egypt was not trusting in God’s strength. But God did the same to His own "strength", His people (:61).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Mizraim or Egypt was the descendant of Ham (<a href='B:10 10:6'>Gen 10:6</a>; <a href='B:230 105:23'>Psa 105:23</a>; <a href='B:230 105:27'>Psa 105:27</a>; <a href='B:230 106:22'>Psa 106:22</a>). There may be an allusion to Khem, one of the main Egyptian gods. For the purpose of all the plagues was to demonstrate that Yahweh was the only God, and the Egyptian gods had no real existence.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But He led forth His own people like sheep, and guided them in the wilderness like a flock-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'><a href='B:230 78:52'>Psa 78:52</a> and <a href='B:290 63:9'>Isa 63:9</a>; <a href='B:290 63:11'>Isa 63:11</a> describe God as leading Israel out of Egypt as an obedient flock of sheep, suggesting that they were all accounted righteous then, by grace; even though Ezekiel says they left Egypt still carrying the gods of Egypt, and carried the tabernacle of Remphan as well as that of Yahweh:&nbsp;Similarly, Balaam said that at the Exodus God did "not behold iniquity in Jacob" (<a href='B:40 23:21-22'>Num 23:21-22</a>):&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He led them safely so that they weren’t afraid, but the sea overwhelmed their enemies-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "He guided them with hope", in that through the law of Moses He continually reminded them of how things would be in Canaan. They were afraid at the Red Sea; but they were counted righteous (see on :52), and so are described as being unafraid. We too are counted righteous at baptism. The intended lack of fear was a psychological miracle, the result of the gift of God’s Spirit in the human spirit. But they did fear (<a href='B:20 14:10-12'>Exo 14:10-12</a>). Surely we must read in some conditions here- God’s care for them was such that they need not have feared, but they failed to discern His care and power and therefore they did fear.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He brought them to the border of His sanctuary, to this mountain, which His right hand had purchased-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"The mountain" usually refers to mount Zion, where the sanctuary was. But the idea is that the entire eretz promised to Abraham was to be as equally holy. "This mountain" suggests that this Psalm was to be recited in the sanctuary services on mount Zion. <a href='B:20 15:17'>Exo 15:17</a> envisaged all the redeemed Israel as dwelling in the mountain of the sanctuary. The "purchase" is elsewhere stated as being of the people, not the land or sanctuary itself (s:w. <a href='B:50 32:6'>Deu 32:6</a>; <a href='B:230 74:2'>Psa 74:2</a>; Is 1:3). But David is unduly focusing upon the issue of the sanctuary. It could be argued from <a href='B:130 21:24'>1Ch 21:24</a> that David had "purchased" mount Zion (s:w:), and he likes to think that in fact God has done thIsa. But his obsession with building a temple there was initially rebuked by God:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He also drove out the nations before them, allotted them for an inheritance by line, and made the tribes of Israel to dwell in their tents-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Hebrew implies He made them take their inheritance. But here we have a case of potential enablement; for the tribes didn’t inherit much of the land allotted despite God willing it upon them. Just as many whom God wishes to inherit the Kingdom will not take their inheritance because they refused to believe Him and were distracted by the immediate and secular rather than focusing upon the spiritual.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yet they put to the test and rebelled against the Most High God, and didn’t keep His testimonies-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This appears to refer to their departure from Yahweh at the time of the Judges. The same words are used of their testing and rebellion in the desert. This was the overall character of Israel.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>but turned back, and dealt treacherously like their fathers-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "Broke covenant". The reference seems to be to their unfaithfulness at the time of the Judges.</p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They were turned aside like a deceitful bow-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>In the very context in which we read that Israel "limited the Holy One of Israel" (<a href='B:230 78:41'>Psa 78:41</a>), we find Israel described as "a deceitful bow" (<a href='B:230 78:57'>Psa 78:57</a>). In whose hands was that bow? Surely in God’s. In the same way as the quality of the bow limits the power of the archer, and causes hurt to him if it backfires on him, so were Israel to God; and so we are to Him.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For they provoked Him to anger with their high places, and moved Him to jealousy with their engraved images-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The language of provocation and God noticing and becoming angry (:59) is on one hand inappropriate to the God who sees and knows all things. Yet it seems to me that just as He at times limits His omnipotence, so He limits His omniscience. This is in order to enter into legitimate, real time [from our human viewpoint] relationship with man.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>When God heard this, He was angry, and greatly abhorred Israel-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :58. Israel abhorred God’s laws (s:w. <a href='B:30 26:15'>Lev 26:15</a>; <a href='B:30 26:43'>Lev 26:43</a>) and therefore His abhorrence of them was appropriate. And yet by grace God did not "utterly abhor" Israel when He judged them (s:w. <a href='B:30 26:44'>Lev 26:44</a>) but restored them. So He did not treat them as they treated Him; and in this again we see His abiding grace. But the psalmist chooses to ignore this grace, and claim that as a sign of that abhorrence He removed His "tent" from Shiloh to Jerusalem (:60,67,68). But I am inclined to see this as David’s wilful interpretation of what happened. For it is too much to say that God’s abhorrence of Israel was just because Ephraim had sinned. They all sinned. And in any case, His abhorrence of them was not total and there was grace in the way that He did not abhor them as they did to Him. So it seems to me that the history is being twisted to blame Ephraim alone for all Israel's 'falling out' with God. Grace is overlooked. Judah's sin is likewise overlooked. And the ark went from Shiloh into captivity because all Israel had sinned, not just Ephraim. And its return to Kirjath Jearim and thence its coming to Zion was of David’s doing rather than God’s. God’s abhorrence of "Israel" is defined as His abhorrence or 'rejection' (s:w:) of "Joseph" (:67). The history is being presented as if God’s anger with "Israel" was in fact His anger with Joseph / Ephraim:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>so that He forsook the tent of Shiloh, the tent which He placed among men-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Shiloh was in Ephraim (<a href='B:60 18:1'>Jos 18:1</a>). It was David who moved the sanctuary from there to Jerusalem; but he is arguing that God did this, implying His shekinah glory / presence was withdrawn from Shiloh but reappeared once the sanctuary was established in Jerusalem. It is hard to know the degree to which David is being an accurate historian, or over interpreting to suit his own narrative and justification of his own tribe, Judah.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David’s mistaken interpretation seems to be corrected in <a href='B:300 7:12-14'>Jer 7:12-14</a>; <a href='B:300 26:6'>Jer 26:6</a>. There we learn that there was indeed some kind of physical structure built for the sanctuary at Shiloh, which was destroyed; although the historical records don't record thIsa. But it was destroyed because "Israel" had sinned, and no blame is placed particularly upon Ephraim. And there is the repeated warning that the Jerusalem temple was no better than that in Shiloh and would likewise be destroyed. Yet David’s vision here is that the Jerusalem sanctuary was going to last eternally (see on :69). Jeremiah is saying that in fact Judah were no better than Ephraim in the end.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>There could be here the implication that the Angel was physically present in the tabernacle, and that God’s displeasure was shown by this Angel literally being withdrawn. The shekinah glory associated with the Angel's presence was no longer seen. A number of other references support this idea of an Angel physically being present in the tabernacle / temple, and therefore being the source of the glory which sometimes shone forth; 1 Chronicles 15 and Psalms 68 describe the entrance of the ark into Jerusalem in terms of the Angelic march through the wilderness at the Exodus, thus connecting the Ark with the Angels. See on <a href='B:130 13:6'>1Ch 13:6</a>; <a href='B:20 25:8'>Exo 25:8</a>; <a href='B:20 33:3'>Exo 33:3</a>; <a href='B:30 4:17'>Lev 4:17</a>; <a href='B:40 14:42'>Num 14:42</a>; <a href='B:250 5:1-7'>Ecc 5:1-7</a>; <a href='B:140 31:2'>2Ch 31:2</a>; <a href='B:290 8:18'>Isa 8:18</a>; <a href='B:400 1:3'>Mic 1:3</a>; <a href='B:340 8:11'>Dan 8:11</a>; <a href='B:330 8:4'>Eze 8:4</a>; <a href='B:470 23:21'>Mat 23:21</a>.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>and delivered His strength into captivity, His glory into the adversary’s hand-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"His strength... glory" is paralleled with "His people" (:62), although David also has in view His glory manifest over the ark going into captivity with the Philistines. See on :51. Frederick Buechner remarked upon the "folly of preaching”: “to choose for His holy work in the world... lamebrains and misfits and nitpickers and holier-than-thous and stuffed shirts and odd ducks and egomaniacs...". Yet weak Israel are described as God’s “strength”, the channel through which His strength would be shown to the nations; and they failed Him.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He also gave His people over to the sword-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God "gave over" or 'shut up unto' the Egyptians to judgment (:48,50), but the same word is used of how He did the same to His people Israel (:62). They were judged for acting as the Egyptians in their hearts. Likewise the unspiritual and worldly amongst the new Israel will be "judged / destroyed [along] with the world" (<a href='B:530 11:32'>1Co 11:32</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>And was angry with His inheritance-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>There is a mutuality between God and man. God and His Kingdom are our inheritance (:55); but we are His inheritance. A man's inheritance was the essence of Himself, all He had in the world. And this is how we are to Him.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Fire devoured their young men, their young women had no wedding song-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This Psalm seems to conclude with the time of David, but perhaps this has been edited to make it relevant to the exiles (as :64). For this is the language of Lamentations about what happened at the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem. The allusion is to the young men who were Job's sons being devoured by fire, representing Divine judgment:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Their priests fell by the sword, and their widows couldn’t weep-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is again the language of Lamentations about the Babylonian desolation; see on :63. This doubtless happened at the time of the Judges, but there is no particular record of the priests being destroyed. Although the book of Judges records the deep apostasy of the priesthood at that time.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Then the Lord awakened as one out of sleep, like a mighty man who shouts by reason of wine-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>We have here language which we may think inappropriate being used to describe and express the sudden, violent awakening of God to judgment. And we wonder whether David is really correct to suggest God was as it were asleep and inactive whilst the ark was not with Israel; for the next verse seems to speak about God’s rescue of the ark from the Philistines. David often expresses in the Psalms how he was just as close to God far from the sanctuary as when present in it. He often speaks of how he actually lived in the wilderness in the shadow of the cherubic wings, with God’s glory above him and the blood of atonement as it were beneath him on the mercy seat. But all that is rather forgotten in his obsession with the sanctuary being literally in Jerusalem, in Judah, and the rejection of Ephraim.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He struck His adversaries backward, He put them to a perpetual reproach-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Hebrew is as in the AV- He smote them in the private parts. This refers to how the ark was taken from Shiloh in Ephraim into the land of the Philistines, who were smitten in their private parts with tumours (<a href='B:90 5:6'>1Sa 5:6</a>); but then the ark was returned, not to Shiloh in Ephraim, but to Kirjath Jearim in Judah, and thence to Jerusalem in Judah. But the question for us is the degree to which God ordered this transferal of the ark from Shiloh to Jerusalem; or whether David manipulated it that way, and God went along with it.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Moreover He rejected the tent of Joseph-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God’s abhorrence of "Israel" is defined as His abhorrence or 'rejection' (s:w:) of "Joseph" (:59). The history is being presented as if God’s anger with "Israel" was in fact His anger with Joseph / Ephraim:&nbsp;See on <a href='B:230 80:1'>Psa 80:1</a>; <a href='B:230 81:5'>Psa 81:5</a>.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>And didn’t choose the tribe of Ephraim-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This claims that God did not choose Ephraim- whereas Jacob did (<a href='B:10 48:14'>Gen 48:14</a>). The implication could well be that even at the end of his life, Jacob's choice of Ephraim over Manasseh reflected some sort of weakness, a being out of step with God. This attitude that he could bring about the fulfillment of God’s promises through his own efforts was the outcome of Jacob's self-righteousness. The blessing of the firstborn came upon Joseph, and Jacob had chosen Ephraim, Joseph's son, as the one who should effectively carry this blessing of the firstborn (<a href='B:130 5:1-2'>1Ch 5:1-2</a>; <a href='B:10 48:1'>Gen 48:1</a>). Ephraim marched closest to the ark (<a href='B:40 2:18-24'>Num 2:18-24</a>). Yet there seems no specific statement that God rejected Ephraim in favour of Judah.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The implication of the argument is that this rejection of Ephraim and choosing of Judah happened when God 'awoke' and destroyed His enemies (:65,66). But it is hard to locate this historically. It would seem that David is again guilty of over interpretation of some unrecorded victory, in order to justify his own tribe. See on :59.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><h2>but chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion which He loved-</h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David clearly loved mount Zion and the sanctuary there, pining for it in so many of his psalms of exile. But he seems to transfer his love for Zion onto God. This is a very common failure of men, to create God after their own image and likeness rather than accepting Him solely for who He reveals Himself to be. See on :59.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He built His sanctuary like the heights, like the earth which He has established forever-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But the sanctuary was later destroyed, it was not in fact "established forever". See on :60. Again we see David dogmatically imagining that the future building of a sanctuary would be sanctioned by God to the point that God would be the builder. And therefore it would be eternal. He uses the prophetic perfect to describe what was yet future as having already happened. But God’s response to David’s desire to build a temple was that this was not at all what He wished:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He also chose David His servant and took him from the sheepfolds-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This was indeed the case; but the Divine choice of David didn’t have to mean that He had thereby rejected Ephraim and Shiloh, and considered Judah to be His righteous, premier tribe. It seems that David and Solomon, or whoever authored the Psalm, was slanting history to defend and justify Judah and the Davidic line, and at times over interpreting.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>from following the ewes that have their young, He brought him to be the shepherd of Jacob His people, and Israel His inheritance-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :72. This is the language used of the Messianic seed who could have arisen at the restoration, and which was ultimately realized in the Lord Jesus (<a href='B:290 40:11'>Isa 40:11</a>). The allusion is clearly to <a href='B:10 49:24'>Gen 49:24</a>, which says that Joseph (and therefore his son Ephraim) was to be shepherded by the God of Jacob. Whilst all David says here is true as far as it goes, he is always subtly arguing that he has been chosen to lead Ephraim and "Joseph". See on <a href='B:230 80:1'>Psa 80:1</a>. Solomon's Proverbs tend to do the same thing; inspired truth in themselves, and yet also clearly written by Solomon with a view to justifying himself and the Davidic line against his potential competitors for the throne.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A Psalm by Asaph-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This "Asaph" could be the Asaph of Hezekiah's time (<a href='B:290 36:3'>Isa 36:3</a>) who used the Psalms in the context of the events of the Assyrian invasion. The Asaph Psalms all have parts in them relevant to that context (Psalms 50, 73-83). Or the "Asaph" may have been the singers who were relatives of Asaph, prominent at the restoration (<a href='B:160 7:44'>Neh 7:44</a>; <a href='B:160 11:17'>Neh 11:17</a>; <a href='B:160 11:22'>Neh 11:22</a>). It could mean that the psalms were a part of a collection from the Asaphites, and the name "Asaph" was therefore simply used to identify the temple singers. And again, parts of the Asaph psalms also have relevance to the restoration. The fact the Asaph Psalms speak of elohim rather than Yahweh would support the idea that they were used in the exilic / restoration period. But Asaph was the "chief" of the Levites to whom David assigned the ministry of praise before the ark (<a href='B:130 16:4-5'>1Ch 16:4-5</a>). It seems he did compose his own Psalms, which were used by Hezekiah at his time (<a href='B:140 29:30'>2Ch 29:30</a>). So I would again suggest that most of the Asaph Psalms were composed originally by David "for" [not necessarily "by"] Asaph, but were rewritten and edited for later occasions. However, Psalms 79 is clearly relevant to the Babylonian desolation of Jerusalem and may well have been written especially concerning that. If it was written originally by David, it would have been very heavily rewritten. Parts of it are very similar to Jeremiah's words (see on :7) and there are allusions to his Lamentations, so it could be that Jeremiah either wrote it or appropriated it, although it was performed by the clan of Asaph.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God, the nations have come into Your inheritance, they have defiled Your holy temple, they have laid Jerusalem in heaps-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The "inheritance" may refer specifically to the land of Judah. But the argument of the psalmist seems to disregard the fact that the prophets had clearly stated that God had sent the nations into the land; and the temple was defiled by them in response to the way that Judah had themselves defiled the temple. Micah had used the very same word in saying that Jerusalem would become heaps (<a href='B:400 3:12'>Mic 3:12</a>; <a href='B:300 26:18'>Jer 26:18</a>). Yet there seems shocked outrage when it actually happened. See on :13.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They have given the dead bodies of Your servants to be food for the birds of the sky, the flesh of Your saints to the beasts of the land-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"The beast" in the Bible refers to the neighbouring nations of Judah (:12) who come to judge her. The "saints" refers not so much to the righteous, but to God’s people Israel who are His set apart people. The symbology of this verse is used in this sense in Revelation; these things are to be fulfilled on a far worse scale in the latter day desolation of Jerusalem.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Their blood they have shed like water around Jerusalem, there was no one to bury them-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Again the lament seems to forget that this was what the prophets had predicted would happen because of all the blood shed in Jerusalem and around it by the apostate people of Judah, especially in their offerings of their own children to their gods.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>We have become a reproach to our neighbours, a scoffing and derision to those who are around us-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This again was exactly as God so repeatedly warned would happen. But instead of acceptance of this fulfilment of prophecy and repentance, there is simply a sustained appeal for God to remove the promised consequence of their sin. And this is how we can all tend to be; wanting the problems and consequences removed, whilst in denial of the fact that they have come about as a result of sin, and have a far wider context than we care to see.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>How long, Yahweh? Will You be angry forever?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Instead of accepting that His anger had a reason and purpose, the psalmist simply wants the consequence of sin removed; as noted on :4, there is no hint at repentance. The prophetic answer to the question "How long?" was clearly 'When you repent'.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Will Your jealousy burn like fire?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Hebrew word translated "zeal" in the context of God’s zeal for us (<a href='B:290 9:7'>Isa 9:7</a>) really means the jealousy which flares up in a man for a woman (the same word is in <a href='B:40 5:14-15'>Num 5:14-15</a>; <a href='B:240 6:34'>Pro 6:34</a>; <a href='B:260 8:6'>Son 8:6</a> etc:). That jealousy burning like fire (<a href='B:230 79:5'>Psa 79:5</a>) is His passion for us His people; even if as here, it is reflected in His anger with His cruelly unfaithful people. He is a jealous God in His zeal for us; and therefore any other relationships with the things of this world cannot be contemplated by us. That zeal of God will be poured out upon us at the second coming, resulting in a consummation with Him as the wife of His covenant (<a href='B:290 42:13-14'>Isa 42:13-14</a>; <a href='B:290 64:1'>Isa 64:1</a>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Pour out Your wrath on the nations that don’t know You, on the kingdoms that don’t call on Your name-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The continual desire for "vengeance" (:10,12) is out of step with the God who takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (<a href='B:330 33:11'>Eze 33:11</a>), but wishes all to come to repentance. But repentance is not given any great stress in these psalms. Vengeance and immediate removal of the consequences of sin are in central place.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>for they have devoured Jacob, and destroyed his homeland-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The same words as in <a href='B:300 10:25'>Jer 10:25</a>, supporting the suggestion made on :1 that Jeremiah may have written this Psalm. That their homeland would be "destroyed" was the clear agreement they had&nbsp; made in accepting covenant with Yahweh; for the same word is used there of the consequence of breaking the covenant (<a href='B:30 26:22'>Lev 26:22</a>; <a href='B:30 26:31-32'>Lev 26:31-32</a> etc:). Judah had made their own land desolate / destroyed (s:w. <a href='B:300 12:11'>Jer 12:11</a>). It was Yahweh who had desolated the land (s:w. <a href='B:310 1:13'>Lam 1:13</a>; <a href='B:330 20:26'>Eze 20:26</a>). Rather like David in his psalms of the Absalom period, there is a deep desire for the promised consequence of sin to be removed, without referencing repentance and guilt.</p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Don’t hold the iniquities of our forefathers against us; let Your tender mercies speedily meet us, for we are in desperate need-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Ezekiel repeatedly labours the point that the exiles are not suffering for the sins of their fathers, but for their own sins. And yet the psalmist apparently ignores this, and seems to use this idea as a preface for the general plea for "forgiveness" which follows in :9. But that plea is hardly repentance when "our sins" have just been defined as those of their fathers, which God apparently wrongly counts to them; according to the psalmist.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Help us, God of our salvation, for the glory of Your name. Deliver us and forgive our sins-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As noted on :8, this is not much of a plea of repentance, because "our sins" have been defined in :8 as not their sins, but those of their fathers- which the psalmist accuses God of wrongly holding against them. The LXX uses the word translated “propitiation” in the NT with reference to how God forgave / propitiated for Israel’s sins for His Name’s sake (<a href='B:20 32:14'>Exo 32:14</a>; <a href='B:230 79:9'>Psa 79:9</a>). God did not forgive only once the red blood of His Son was offered; He forgave anyway, as part of His Name, His essential personality, which is so deeply forgiving. He is no pagan deity who requires to see red blood of human sacrifice before forgiving. The Lord's death was therefore largely to persuade us of how serious God is in His project for our personal salvation. He commended His love toward us, in that whilst we were yet sinners, His Son died for the ungodly, the just for the unjust.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For Your name’s sake-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Yahweh Name was linked with the Messiah: King of the Jews. The Name was declared in the Lord’s death, as He had foretold (<a href='B:500 17:26'>Joh 17:26</a>). Forgiveness of sins is through baptism into the Name (<a href='B:510 2:38'>Act 2:38</a>), as even in OT times forgiveness was for the sake of the Name (<a href='B:230 79:9'>Psa 79:9</a>). And yet through the cross and blood of Christ is forgiveness made possible. His blood and death therefore was the supreme declaration of God’s Name; through His cross the grace and forgiveness, love, salvation and judgment implicit in the Name was all enabled and revealed in practice.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Why should the nations say, Where is their God? Let it be known among the nations, before our eyes, that vengeance for Your servants’ blood is being poured out-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The prophetic intention was that the restoration of Jerusalem and judgment of her abusers would lead the nations to know God, i:e. to come into relationship with Him. The Psalmist is arguing that the desolate state of Jerusalem is in fact an invitation to denial of Yahweh's existence, an encouragement to atheism. But whilst there is a mention of repentance in :9, the deep concern of the psalmist is for vengeance upon the Babylonians, even asking for them to be punished seven times more than what they had done to Judah (:12). This fails to factor in the fact that they were God’s 'servants', sent by Him to do what they did. The pouring out of blood was in fact what they had done, in pouring out the blood of their children to Baals. The desire for "vengeance" is out of step with the God who takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but wishes all to come to repentance. But repentance is not given any great stress in these psalms. Vengeance and immediate removal of the consequences of sin are in central place.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Let the sighing of the prisoner come before You. According to the greatness of Your power, preserve those who are sentenced to death-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The restoration prophecies of Isaiah offer freedom for the prisoners, the exiles, and the lifting of their death sentence. But the reality was that the majority of the exiles chose to remain within their "prison" in exile. The book of Esther concludes with the Jews wealthy and prosperous there, not at all perceiving that Babylon / Persia was a prison cell, in spiritual terms.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Pay back to our neighbours seven times into their lap their reproach with which they have reproached You, Lord-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This perspective rather fails to appreciate the repeated prophetic teaching that Israel were to be judged and Jerusalem destroyed because of their sins; and all that was done to Jerusalem by the invaders had been done to it in spiritual terms by Judah themselves. God had judged His people less than their iniquities deserved (<a href='B:150 9:13'>Ezr 9:13</a>); if that had been perceived, then surely it would have militated against this request for the punishers to be punished seven times more than they punished Judah.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For the Chief Musician. To the tune of The Lilies of the Covenant. A Psalm by Asaph-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This "Asaph" could be the Asaph of Hezekiah's time (<a href='B:290 36:3'>Isa 36:3</a>) who used the Psalms in the context of the events of the Assyrian invasion. The Asaph Psalms all have parts in them relevant to that context (Psalms 50, 73-83). Or the "Asaph" may have been the singers who were relatives of Asaph, prominent at the restoration (<a href='B:160 7:44'>Neh 7:44</a>; <a href='B:160 11:17'>Neh 11:17</a>; <a href='B:160 11:22'>Neh 11:22</a>). It could mean that the psalms were a part of a collection from the Asaphites, and the name "Asaph" was therefore simply used to identify the temple singers. And again, parts of the Asaph psalms also have relevance to the restoration. The fact the Asaph Psalms speak of elohim rather than Yahweh would support the idea that they were used in the exilic / restoration period. But Asaph was the "chief" of the Levites to whom David assigned the ministry of praise before the ark (<a href='B:130 16:4-5'>1Ch 16:4-5</a>). It seems he did compose his own Psalms, which were used by Hezekiah at his time (<a href='B:140 29:30'>2Ch 29:30</a>). So I would again suggest that all the Asaph Psalms were composed originally by David "for" [not necessarily "by"] Asaph, but were rewritten and edited for later occasions.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Asaph lived at the time of the restoration (<a href='B:150 2:41'>Ezr 2:41</a>). All his Psalms draw on the past dealings of God with His people and encourage them on this basis to make the wilderness journey back&nbsp; to the land, just as they had done at the Exodus. Psalms 80 is a psalm of Asaph, written [or re-edited] in Babylon. He speaks much of the cherubim- of how God dwelt between the cherubs, and still lead His people in that way (<a href='B:230 80:1'>Psa 80:1</a>). Asaph grasped Ezekiel's fundamental point- that God hadn't forgotten His people, but the cherubim was just as actively leading and protecting God’s people in Babylon as they had been in the land of Judah. Asaph asks God in this context to "restore us" to the land (<a href='B:230 80:3'>Psa 80:3</a>; <a href='B:230 80:14'>Psa 80:14</a>; <a href='B:230 80:19'>Psa 80:19</a> RVmg:), lamenting how the walls of Zion are broken down (<a href='B:230 80:12'>Psa 80:12</a>). He speaks of how the faithful people weep tears "in great measure" (<a href='B:230 80:5'>Psa 80:5</a>), a reference to their weeping by the rivers of Babylon, and the theme of tears and weeping amongst the exiles which we meet so often in Lamentations. But in this context, Asaph speaks of how a "branch" or "son" (<a href='B:230 80:15'>Psa 80:15</a>) would be made strong by God, and this Messiah figure would be the man of God’s right hand as well as "the son of man whom you make strong for yourself" (<a href='B:230 80:17'>Psa 80:17</a>). Clearly Asaph prayed for and expected a Messiah figure to arise at the same time as the restoration from Babylon. But none did; those who could've played that role, such as Zerubbabel "the branch", ultimately failed. And the cherubim Angels are hovering above us, too, enabling so, so much.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Psalms 80 appears to be paired with Psalms 79. Psalms 79 has urged God to immediately relieve Judah from their sufferings and take vengeance on the Babylonians, but with little emphasis upon repentance and the fact they were suffering for their sins. Psalms 80 continues to ask for this relief from suffering, but with more spiritual insight and reflection upon their situation.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Hear us, Shepherd of Israel, You who lead Joseph like a flock-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This appears to put right some of the reasoning in Psalms 78, which presents David more than God as the shepherd of Israel (see on <a href='B:230 78:71'>Psa 78:71</a>), and presents "Joseph", especially the tribe of Ephraim his son, as rejected by God in favour of Judah (see on <a href='B:230 78:67'>Psa 78:67</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You who sit above the cherubim, shine forth-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is a significant profession of faith in the context of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem and the exile. The glory of God had shone forth from between the cherubim over the ark; but the ark had disappeared, and the glory of God was not seen in the sanctuary. But Ezekiel had published his vision of the cherubim of glory; they were still in existence, although departed from Jerusalem. So here we find faith that although there were no visible symbols of religion, still God was known to be "there", in all His glory.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David often expresses in the Psalms how he was just as close to God far from the sanctuary as when present in it. He often speaks of how he actually lived in the wilderness in the shadow of the cherubic wings, with God’s glory above him and the blood of atonement as it were beneath him on the mercy seat.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>All this prepared the way for Israel to understand God’s glory in His now invisible Son. "In him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” (<a href='B:580 2:9'>Col 2:9</a>) would have been easily perceived as an allusion to the way that Yahweh Himself as it were dwelt between the cherubim on the mercy seat (<a href='B:120 19:15'>2Ki 19:15</a>; <a href='B:230 80:1'>Psa 80:1</a>). And yet the Lord Jesus in His death was the “[place of] propitiation” (<a href='B:650 2:17'>Heb 2:17</a>), the blood-sprinkled&nbsp; mercy seat. “There I will meet with you, and I will commune with you from above the mercy-seat... of all things which I will&nbsp; command you” (<a href='B:20 25:20-22'>Exo 25:20-22</a>). In the cross, God met with man and communed with us, commanding us the life we ought to lead through all the unspoken, unarticulated imperatives which there are within the blood of His Son. There in the person of Jesus nailed to the tree do we find the focus of God’s glory and self-revelation, and to this place we may come to seek redemption. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Before Ephraim and Benjamin and Manasseh, stir up Your might! Come to save us!<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As noted on :1, the mistaken assumption that Judah and Benjamin were better than Ephraim and Manasseh is now corrected. For they are mentioned together, in the hope that not only Judah but also the scattered ten tribes will be restored together. The language of stirring up and coming to save is used in later Isaiah of God’s eagerness to do just that in the form of a Messianic deliverer for the exiles. But the reality was that all the various options tried, e.g. Zerubbabel and Joshua, all failed; and the exiles preferred to remain in exile for the most part. And so these things were reapplied and rescheduled to the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Turn us again, God. Cause Your face to shine, and we will be saved-</p><h2>"Turn us again" is the word used for the 'return' of the exiles, both to their land to their God. But the psalmist has the insight to realize that most didn’t want to repent, and so he asks God to elicit that repentance, to work by His Spirit to actually give them repentance and a turning again to Him, so that there might be a turning again of Judah's fortunes. Repentance itself is therefore a gift (<a href='B:510 11:18'>Act 11:18</a>). This is indeed the grace shown by the work of the Holy Spirit upon human hearts.</h2>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yahweh God of Armies, How long will You be angry against the prayer of Your people?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The "God of armies" typically refers to the Angels. The psalmist perceived that the Angels had been used to bring about the scattering, and could likewise be used to answer these prayers for restoration.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have fed them with the bread of tears, and given them tears to drink in large measure-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Despite the apparent complaint, the psalmist recognizes that God was still active with the exiles; He was giving them food and drink, even if it was unpleasant. It was David who had been fed with the bread of tears in consequence of his sin with Bathsheba (s:w. <a href='B:230 42:3'>Psa 42:3</a>); if Judah followed his pattern of repentance, then they too would be restored to Zion as he was after having to go into exile from Absalom. "In large measure" is literally "three times over". And yet God had punished the exiles less than their iniquities deserved (<a href='B:150 9:13'>Ezr 9:13</a>). These prayers for restoration so often seem to present pictures which are not to true to reality, and which fail to take account of the fact Judah had sinned and were being given the consequences of their sin:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You make us a source of derision to our neighbours, our enemies laugh among themselves-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This was indeed the case, but the prophets had so often said that this was what would happen if Judah continued in their rejection of God; and indeed this was the fulfilment of the curses for breaking the covenant. But the psalmists seem to always put the blame on God and try to as it were guilt trip Him for the situation- instead of accepting that the people were the ones who had caused this to happen.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Turn us again, God of Armies. Cause Your face to shine, and we will be saved-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This repeats :3, and as noted there, this is a request for God to give repentance [and not just forgiveness] to the exiles. But here "God" is defined as "God of Armies". Perhaps the idea is that the Angels would operationalize this request for God to act upon human hearts and make them repentant. The shining forth of God’s face perhaps alludes to the situation on the day of atonement, when forgiveness was pronounced and the shekinah glory supposedly shone forth. The exiles at this point were without the temple and the ark, so we see them coming to realize what David did when in exile from those things- that the presence of God can be found anywhere, including outside of visible religious symbols and structures:&nbsp; </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You brought a vine out of Egypt, You drove out the nations and planted it-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As God had brought Israel out of Egypt and cleared out the Canaanite nations, so the psalmist is asking that God does this for the exiles, clearing away the Samaritan opposition as He did the Canaanites. But Israel at that point were still worshipping idols, taking the idols of Egypt with them through the Red Sea (so Ezekiel says), and carrying the tabernacle of Remphan along with that of Yahweh. Their bringing out and placing back in their land was then an act of grace, and the psalmist asks God to do the same with the exiles.</p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You cleared the land for it. It took deep root, and filled the land-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The vine and vineyard was a symbol of the people of Israel (<a href='B:230 80:15'>Psa 80:15</a>; <a href='B:290 1:8'>Isa 1:8</a>; <a href='B:290 5:7'>Isa 5:7</a>; <a href='B:290 27:2'>Isa 27:2</a>; <a href='B:300 12:10'>Jer 12:10</a>; <a href='B:470 21:41'>Mat 21:41</a>). The land was "cleared" for them to live there, but again, they didn’t make full use of the potential; they didn’t drive out all the tribes living there, even though potentially the land had been cleared for them. See on <a href='B:230 81:14'>Psa 81:14</a>. And the same was true at the restoration. The way back to Zion was "prepared" (<a href='B:460 3:1'>Mal 3:1</a>; s:w. "cleared"); but most of the exiles chose to remain in exile. And so the land was not filled by the exiles, the vine of Israel didn’t fill the face of the promised land with literal and spiritual fruit (<a href='B:330 34:27'>Eze 34:27</a>; <a href='B:290 27:6'>Isa 27:6</a>). These things were therefore reapplied and rescheduled to the acceptance of the gospel of restoration by Gentiles in Christ:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>the mountains were covered with its shadow. Its boughs were like God’s cedars-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Cedars are associated with the Jerusalem temple; the idea was that the nations ["mountains"] within the eretz promised to Abraham would come under the shadow of the restored kingdom of God in Judah, so that the entire land became as the sanctuary in Zion. But this didn’t happen, just as the picture is exaggerated here of what actually happened when Israel established their kingdom on entering the land. For they were constantly under pressure from their neighbours within that land and hardly brought the surrounding nations under the shadow of Israel's God. Instead they accepted their gods.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It sent out its branches to the sea, its shoots to the River-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>An allusion to the extent of the promised land, from the sea to the River Euphrates. But apart from briefly in Solomon's time, this great potential was not experienced by Israel, and the returning exiles likewise didn’t achieve anything like the potential Divinely set up for them. And so these things are rescheduled to the things of God’s Kingdom under the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Why have You broken down its walls, so that all those who pass by the way pluck it?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The answer to that question is given clearly in the prophets. The walls were broken down by God’s people themselves, and the walls of the vineyard were in turn removed by God because they refused to bring forth spiritual fruit (Isaiah 5). But the psalmists seem too focused upon the removal of the consequences for sin, rather than facing up to the sin and appealing for repentance.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The boar out of the wood ravages it, the wild beasts of the field feed on it-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Again we might reflect that the psalmist ought to have given more weight to the prophetic pictures of the surrounding nations (the Biblical "beast") coming into the land because Israel had failed to keep them out; they had welcomed them in, and placed their gods within the Jerusalem temple. But the focus seems all upon lamenting the consequence of sin, rather than repentance and humility.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Turn again, we beg You, God of Armies. Look down from heaven and see, and visit this vine-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>What Judah prayed for by the rivers of Babylon was indeed heard. There they had asked that God would “visit” them and “return” them (<a href='B:230 80:14'>Psa 80:14</a>). The same two Hebrew words are to be found in <a href='B:300 27:22'>Jer 27:22</a>, where we read that God would exile His people to Babylon and then “visit” them and make them “return”. We meet the same two words in <a href='B:430 2:7'>Zep 2:7</a>, where God would ‘visit and return’ the captivity of the remnant of Judah. But when God did “visit” His people, just as when He ‘visited’ His people in the gift of His Son, they didn’t want to ‘return’ or respond. Those who had desired ‘the day of the Lord’ at that time had been praying for it, when it was ‘to no end’ for them. And we have to ask ourselves whether we really mean our prayers for the Lord’s return.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'><a href='B:300 27:22'>Jer 27:22</a> predicted that God would “visit” His people and “bring them up”. Those very two words are found in the declaration of Cyrus as recorded in <a href='B:140 36:23'>2Ch 36:23</a>: “God hath charged [s:w. “visited”] me to build him a house in Jerusalem</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> who is there among you of all his people? The Lord his God be with him, and let him go up [s:w. “bring them up”]”. The most powerful monarch in the Middle East made the humanly bizarre and inexplicable command to “go up” to the land. ‘Going up’ and ‘visiting’ are language associated with Angels. The people were being encouraged to follow the cherubim-Angel. But most of the people said ‘No that’s fine, we’ll give some money, but we’ll stay here thanks. We won’t be ‘going up’’. And in essence, we are so similar as a community.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The design of the temple which Ezekiel communicated to the captives featured the motif of cherubim all over it, especially in the holy place. This wasn't mere decoration. The idea was clearly that if the captives returned and built the temple as specified, then the cherubim would again dwell there. It was up to them. But there's no indication that they were very obedient to the pattern given them; hence perhaps it was the more spiritually perceptive who wept when the foundation of the second temple was dedicated, knowing how far it was from Ezekiel's commands (<a href='B:150 3:12'>Ezr 3:12</a>). Ezekiel saw the temple as if it were already there, located at Jerusalem; he wasn't transported to Heaven to view it (<a href='B:330 40:2'>Eze 40:2</a>). And it was there, potentially, that whole glorious temple. But the captives had to return and build it. turning the prophetic word into flesh, the logos into reality. But they didn’t.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>the stock which Your right hand planted, the branch that You made strong for Yourself-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This paves the way for :17. The palmist perceives that the restoration will come through a specific "branch". The potential fulfilment in Zerubbabel, the 'branch from Babylon', didn’t come about; and so the fulfilment was rescheduled to the Lord Jesus Christ as the branch (<a href='B:290 11:1'>Isa 11:1</a>; <a href='B:300 23:5'>Jer 23:5</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Asaph lived at the time of the restoration (<a href='B:150 2:41'>Ezr 2:41</a>). All his Psalms draw on the past dealings of God with His people and encourage them on this basis to make the wilderness journey back&nbsp; to the land, just as they had done at the Exodus. <a href='B:230 80:16-17'>Psa 80:16-17</a> asks God to strengthen a Son of Man to be Messiah, seeing that the temple is in ruins; the raising up of a Messiah was perceived as potentially possible at the time.</p>


text:
<h2>It’s burned with fire. It’s cut down. They perish at Your rebuke-</h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Although in :15 and :17 the psalmist has a specific individual in view, he perceives that this individual will be a personification and embodiment of God’s people. The branch was also Israel and Zion, who were at that time cut down and burnt. Salvation in our age is likewise predicated upon being "in Christ". The suffering servant was both Israel and finally the Lord Jesus, who suffered as their representative:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Let Your hand be on the man of Your right hand, on the son of man whom You made strong for Yourself-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The psalmist perceives that the restoration will come through an individual Messianic figure. There were various possible potential fulfillments of this, such as Zerubabbel and Joshua, but they all let the baton drop. The final fulfilment is therefore in the Lord Jesus, who allowed Himself to be made strong by God’s hand (s:w. <a href='B:230 89:21'>Psa 89:21</a>). Whilst His utter moral perfection was in a sense His own achievement, and that must never be taken away from the Lord, the path there involved allowing God to make Him strong for Himself. And this is our pattern too, in allowing the work of the Holy Spirit to do likewise with us, paralleled here with God’s hand being upon us, making us strong. The prophecy could have had an earlier fulfilment in Hezekiah, 'made strong by Yah', but he too disallowed it and went off to this present world. The lead characteristic of Jacob was that he and his descendants would be 'made strong' (s:w. <a href='B:10 25:23'>Gen 25:23</a>), even though they were so spiritually weak. So many times Israel are encouraged to be "of good courage", s:w. "made strong" (<a href='B:50 31:6-7'>Deu 31:6-7</a> etc:), so that they might inherit the promised kingdom. But they generally didn’t make use of this potential strengthening. The exiles likewise were potentially "made strong" but they refused to make use of that, remaining in Babylon for the most part (s:w. <a href='B:290 35:3'>Isa 35:3</a>; <a href='B:290 41:10'>Isa 41:10</a>).</p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>So we will not turn away from You; accept us, and we will call on Your name-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The appeal is for God to turn His people to Himself, giving them repentance (see on :3,7,19) and psychological strengthening, so that they would never again turn away from Him. And only then would they call upon His Name. We would frankly expect the order to be the other way around; calling upon God’s Name, vowing not to turn away again, and then being accepted. But the psalmist perceives God’s grace is such that He is willing to turn men to Himself, accept them- and then in awe at such grace, they call upon His Name.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For the Chief Musician. On an instrument of Gath. By Asaph-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This "Asaph" could be the Asaph of Hezekiah's time (<a href='B:290 36:3'>Isa 36:3</a>) who used the Psalms in the context of the events of the Assyrian invasion. The Asaph Psalms all have parts in them relevant to that context (Psalms 50, 73-83). Or the "Asaph" may have been the singers who were relatives of Asaph, prominent at the restoration (<a href='B:160 7:44'>Neh 7:44</a>; <a href='B:160 11:17'>Neh 11:17</a>; <a href='B:160 11:22'>Neh 11:22</a>). It could mean that the psalms were a part of a collection from the Asaphites, and the name "Asaph" was therefore simply used to identify the temple singers. And again, parts of the Asaph psalms also have relevance to the restoration. The fact the Asaph Psalms speak of elohim rather than Yahweh would support the idea that they were used in the exilic / restoration period. But Asaph was the "chief" of the Levites to whom David assigned the ministry of praise before the ark (<a href='B:130 16:4-5'>1Ch 16:4-5</a>). It seems he did compose his own Psalms, which were used by Hezekiah at his time (<a href='B:140 29:30'>2Ch 29:30</a>). So I would again suggest that all the Asaph Psalms were composed originally by David "for" [not necessarily "by"] Asaph, but were rewritten and edited for later occasions.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Sing aloud to God, our strength! Make a joyful shout to the God of Jacob!<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Psalm begins in :1-5 with a call to joyfully celebrate a feast, probably Passover or Tabernacles. We note the Levites are called to make music (:2), and the priests to blow the trumpets (:3). But the Psalm then abruptly changes. God answers this call for joyful celebration with a rebuke of His people for their sinfulness. This Psalm is therefore a commentary and exemplification of the frequent prophetic complaint that God found Israel's keeping of the feasts to be a smoke in His nostrils. It was mere external religion; and from :5 onwards we have His commentary upon their desire to keep the feast.</p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Raise a song, and bring here the tambourine, the pleasant lyre with the harp-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :1. The tambourine may have been to recall the rejoicing of Miriam and the women of Israel after the Passover deliverance of Israel through the Red Sea. This may therefore be a call to keep Passover, although it would be just as appropriate for Tabernacles.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Blow the trumpet at the New Moon, at the full moon, on our feast day-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As noted on :1, this was an invitation for the priests to blow the trumpet to begin the feast. The mention of "New Moon" may simply mean the start of the month, so perhaps :1-4 is a generic text for use at any feast or religious celebration.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For it is a statute for Israel, an ordinance of the God of Jacob-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As noted on :1, we have here a call to keep one of the feasts, and there is pride in their obedience to God’s commands about thIsa. But His response from :5 onwards dashes this exuberant spirit, in condemning Israel for being apostate and impenitent. We must take the lesson that apparent external obedience and religious joy and praise- are no guarantee of our real standing with God, nor are they necessarily the same as true spirituality.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He appointed it in Joseph for a testimony-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The mention of Joseph appears to put right some of the reasoning in Psalms 78, which presents "Joseph", especially the tribe of Ephraim his son, as rejected by God in favour of Judah (see on <a href='B:230 78:67'>Psa 78:67</a>). God’s response to Judah's desire to keep a feast to Him is that actually He had chosen Joseph / Ephraim as much as them.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>When he went out over the land of Egypt, I heard a language that I didn’t know-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This reference to the Passover Angel going forth over Egypt suggests that :1-4 was a liturgy to be used in summoning the people to keep the Passover feast (cp. <a href='B:290 37:36'>Isa 37:36</a>). But now begins God’s response to their feast keeping. He begins by stressing His identification with His people and His grace towards them, for what will follow after this is a deep criticism of them. God so identified Himself with Israel that in Egypt, He Himself heard a language which He understood not (AV). He could have understood it, and in a sense He did; but so identified is Yahweh with His people that He allows Himself to be limited by their perceptions.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I removed his shoulder from the burden, his hands were freed from the basket-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This reflects the degree to which God was intensely aware of His peoples' sufferings; and that is just as true today. He saw their shoulders and hands at work. But the RV speaks of the people as being delivered from the basket, alluding to the personal deliverance of Moses. The people were for the most part spiritually weak, taking the idols of Egypt with them through the Red Sea (Ezekiel), and carrying through the desert the tabernacle of Remphan as well as that of Yahweh. The idea is that God saved Israel by grace on account of their identification with Moses, just as we are baptized into Christ and counted righteous in Him, as Israel were baptized into Moses (<a href='B:530 10:1-2'>1Co 10:1-2</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Thus there is a parallel drawn in <a href='B:230 103:7'>Psa 103:7</a>: "He made known His ways unto Moses, His acts unto the children of Israel". "After the tenor of these words have I made a covenant with thee [Moses] and with Israel" (<a href='B:20 34:27'>Exo 34:27</a>). <a href='B:290 63:11'>Isa 63:11</a> (Heb:) is even more explicit: "He remembered... Moses his people" . Moses seems to have appreciated fully his representative role on that last glorious day of life when he addressed Israel: " The Lord said unto me... I will deliver [Og] into thy hand... so the Lord our God delivered into our hands Og" (<a href='B:50 3:2-3'>Deu 3:2-3</a>). David recognized this unity between Moses and Israel; David describes both Israel and Moses as God’s chosen (Psa. 16:5,23). Moses is described as encamping in the wilderness, when the reference clearly is to all Israel (<a href='B:20 18:5'>Exo 18:5</a>). Moses recalled how “the Lord said unto me, Behold, I have delivered up Sihon and his land before thee [you singular- i:e. Moses]; begin to possess it, that thou [you singular again!] mayest inherit his land”. Yet Moses then comments that therefore God “delivered” Sihon “before us” (Deuteronomy 31, 33 RV). The land and victory that Moses personally could have had- for it was God’s wish to destroy Israel and make of him a new nation- he shared with Israel. <a href='B:20 7:16'>Exo 7:16</a> brings out the unity between them by a play on words: “The LORD God of the Hebrews hath sent me [lit. ‘let me go’] unto thee, saying, Let my people go”. “Let go” translates the same Hebrew word as “sent me”. Just as Moses had been let go by Yahweh, so Israel were to be.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You called in trouble, and I delivered you. I answered you in the secret place of thunder-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "I heard thee in the secret place of the storm". Despite their sinfulness and worship of the idols of Egypt in the desert, God still answered their calls for help in distress. The reference may be to how Israel at the Red Sea called to God in their trouble, and He answered them out of the pillar of cloud (<a href='B:20 14:10'>Exo 14:10</a>; <a href='B:20 14:24'>Exo 14:24</a>); apparently that cloud appeared at times as a storm cloud.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I tested you at the waters of Meribah. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The weakness of Israel at Meribah is juxtaposed with God’s enduring grace to them in the first half of the verse. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Hear My people and I will testify to you, Israel, if you would have listened to Me!<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The theme of God’s appeal is that so much potential had been wasted by them ["if you would have..."], because for all their external obedience in keeping feasts (see on :1), they were not truly listening to Him. And so He repeats His appeals made so often in Deuteronomy, to "hear, O Israel", 'testifying' to them as He also did in Deuteronomy (s:w. <a href='B:50 4:26'>Deu 4:26</a>; <a href='B:50 8:19'>Deu 8:19</a> etc:).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>There shall be no strange god with you, neither shall you worship any foreign god-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The people were for the most part spiritually weak, taking the idols of Egypt with them through the Red Sea (Ezekiel), and carrying through the desert the tabernacle of Remphan as well as that of Yahweh. And they were no better at the point of this Psalm. God urges them not to abuse His grace and to quit idolatry.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I am Yahweh your God who brought you up out of the land of Egypt. Open your mouth wide, and I will fill it-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God speaks of Israel as if they were His beloved baby child; for these are the words of a man seeking to feed his child. But the child refused to respond (:11). The feeding was with His voice and word (:11). And they turned away from it This passage alone makes me want to plead with Israel to return to their so loving Father.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But My people didn’t listen to My voice, Israel desired none of Me-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :10. They were as the young child who is estranged from the loving father even from early childhood. <a href='B:290 28:12'>Isa 28:12</a>; <a href='B:290 30:9'>Isa 30:9</a>; <a href='B:290 30:15'>Isa 30:15</a> seem to allude here. It was exactly because Israel "would not" (s:w. "desired none of Me") that they were not allowed to continue in the land.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>So I let them go after the stubbornness of their hearts, that they might walk in their own counsels-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>On their journey to Canaan, the Israelites worshipped idols. Because of this, "God turned, and gave them up (over) to worship the host of heaven... I gave them up to the hardness of their hearts" (<a href='B:510 7:42'>Act 7:42</a>; <a href='B:230 81:12'>Psa 81:12</a> AVmg:). God reached a stage where He actually encouraged Israel to worship idols; He confirmed them in their rejection of Him. And throughout their history, He encouraged them in their idolatry (<a href='B:330 20:39'>Eze 20:39</a>; <a href='B:370 4:4'>Amo 4:4</a>). But there was a point where His Spirit was working on their hearts to stop them from idolatry; but they reached a point where they so grieved His Holy Spirit that He gave up doing this, and instead psychologically confirmed them in the mental path of the heart which they wished to go.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Oh that My people would have listened to me, that Israel would have walked in my ways!<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God’s pain is because they had not used the potential He had set up for them, described on :14. Grief is so often a function of considering what might have been; thus we grieve harder at the death of a child than for the passing of a peaceful 90 year old. And God passes through this same intense grief because of all the failed possibilities.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I would quickly have subdued their enemies, and turned My hand against their adversaries-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God had potentially cleared the land of all the Canaanites, victory could have been very quick. And indeed thus it began at Joshua's time; but they failed to drive out the majority of the Canaanites, they failed to make use of God’s hand which was turned against their enemies. See on <a href='B:230 80:8-9'>Psa 80:8-9</a>.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The haters of Yahweh would have cringed before Him, and their punishment would have lasted forever-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The victories won by Joshua were not permanent; the same areas he conquered and tribes he defeated rose up to dominate Israel later. Because they failed to make use of the Divine potential. Just as the Lord Jesus has won the battle and assured us of a place in the Kingdom; but we have to capitalize upon that. Asaph lived at the time of the restoration (<a href='B:150 2:41'>Ezr 2:41</a>). All his Psalms draw on the past dealings of God with His people and encourage them on this basis to make the wilderness journey back&nbsp; to the land, just as they had done at the Exodus. <a href='B:230 81:15-16'>Psa 81:15-16</a> says that if Israel had been obedient, their neighbouring enemies would soon have submitted to them, and they would have experienced the blessings potentially in store for them. Just as God would have fed Israel with honey from the rock rather than just water (:16).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A Psalm by Asaph-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This "Asaph" could be the Asaph of Hezekiah's time (<a href='B:290 36:3'>Isa 36:3</a>) who used the Psalms in the context of the events of the Assyrian invasion. The Asaph Psalms all have parts in them relevant to that context (Psalms 50, 73-83). Or the "Asaph" may have been the singers who were relatives of Asaph, prominent at the restoration (<a href='B:160 7:44'>Neh 7:44</a>; <a href='B:160 11:17'>Neh 11:17</a>; <a href='B:160 11:22'>Neh 11:22</a>). It could mean that the psalms were a part of a collection from the Asaphites, and the name "Asaph" was therefore simply used to identify the temple singers. And again, parts of the Asaph psalms also have relevance to the restoration. The fact the Asaph Psalms speak of elohim rather than Yahweh would support the idea that they were used in the exilic / restoration period. But Asaph was the "chief" of the Levites to whom David assigned the ministry of praise before the ark (<a href='B:130 16:4-5'>1Ch 16:4-5</a>). It seems he did compose his own Psalms, which were used by Hezekiah at his time (<a href='B:140 29:30'>2Ch 29:30</a>). So I would again suggest that all the Asaph Psalms were composed originally by David "for" [not necessarily "by"] Asaph, but were rewritten and edited for later occasions.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God presides in the great assembly. He judges among the gods-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Elohim has taken His place in the divine council</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>In the midst of the elohim He holds judgment". This is a reference to the court of Heaven, into which we have a peek in 1 Kings 22. Elohim can refer to both Angels and men, such as the judges of Israel. They were intended to be a reflection of the court of heaven. And their assemblies were in turn judged by Yahweh, who was among them in judgment. The word elohim  is used about Israel's judges in Ex. 21:6; 22:7-8,27. The idea is that the judges of Israel had judged wrongly and now God is holding a judgment of the judges.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>How long will you judge unjustly, and show partiality to the wicked? Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God judges the judges of His people. Showing partiality in judgment was condemned under the Mosaic law (<a href='B:50 1:17'>Deu 1:17</a>; <a href='B:50 16:19'>Deu 16:19</a>). God’s "How long…?" may be an echo of the "How long…?" common in the Asaph psalms at the time of the exile. The answer was "When you repent and start behaving rightly", and here God is making that same point.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Defend the weak, the poor, and the fatherless, maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This psalm may have originated in David’s lament at the unjust judgment of Saul or the men around Absalom, who fancied himself as judge of Israel (<a href='B:100 15:3-6'>2Sa 15:3-6</a>). David had seen himself as "poor and needy", needing grace after his sin with Bathsheba and its consequences (<a href='B:230 40:17'>Psa 40:17</a>; <a href='B:230 70:5'>Psa 70:5</a>; <a href='B:230 86:1'>Psa 86:1</a>; <a href='B:230 109:16'>Psa 109:16</a>; <a href='B:230 109:22'>Psa 109:22</a>). He wished Solomon to likewise have pity on the "poor and needy" amongst the Gentiles, those who had likewise repented (<a href='B:230 72:13'>Psa 72:13</a>). And David was especially desirous to himself see the "poor and needy" blessed and accepted as he had been (<a href='B:230 82:3-4'>Psa 82:3-4</a>; <a href='B:230 113:7'>Psa 113:7</a>). It is our personal experience of needing grace which leads us to have a heart for those like us, the poor and needy. Any other motivation will ultimately not abide. Solomon appears to glorify his mother Bathsheba for likewise pitying the poor and needy (<a href='B:240 31:9'>Pro 31:9</a>; <a href='B:240 31:20'>Pro 31:20</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Rescue the weak and needy, deliver them out of the hand of the wicked-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This may have originated in his thoughts about Saul, then reapplied to David’s need for salvation from Absalom and Ahithophel, but, it becomes the intended appeal of the exiles for deliverance from Babylon, then Haman, and indeed from all their captors. "The hand of the wicked / unrighteous" is the term used for the Babylonians in <a href='B:330 7:21'>Eze 7:21</a>. Yet these are God’s words to His people. They were not being delivered because they themselves were not delivering the weak from the wicked. It seems the Jews had some autonomy in Persia, and perhaps this is a criticism of how they operated their local courts in the exile:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They don’t know, neither do they understand; they wander back and forth in darkness. All the foundations of the earth are shaken-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The judges of Israel were living out their condemnation even in this life; for wandering in darkness is the language of condemnation at the last day.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I said, You are gods, all of you are sons of the Most High-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As explained on :1, the elohim who were the judges of Israel were to reflect the elohim of the divine court room above them in heaven. But lest this Psalm be seen as merely a judgment of the judges, the point is made that all Israel were intended to be elohim. All Israel were intended to be priests, who are also called elohim; for they were to be a "nation of priests". <a href='B:230 135:19-20'>Psa 135:19-20</a> parallels all Israel with the priestly family: “Bless the Lord, O house of Israel: bless the Lord, O house of Aaron: bless the Lord, O house of Levi: ye that fear the Lord, bless the Lord... praise ye the Lord”. All Israel were to aspire to the spirit of priesthood. Indeed, the Psalms often parallel the house of Aaron (i:e. the priesthood) with the whole nation (<a href='B:230 115:9-10'>Psa 115:9-10</a>; <a href='B:230 115:12'>Psa 115:12</a>; <a href='B:230 118:2-3'>Psa 118:2-3</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As it was God’s intention that Israel were to be a nation of priests to the rest of the world, so the new Israel likewise are to all discharge the priestly functions of teaching their brethren (<a href='B:20 19:6'>Exo 19:6</a> cp. <a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a>; <a href='B:730 1:6'>Rev 1:6</a>; <a href='B:730 5:9-10'>Rev 5:9-10</a>). Under the new covenant, we should all teach and admonish one another (<a href='B:580 3:16'>Col 3:16</a>). Further, <a href='B:230 96:9'>Psa 96:9</a> makes the paradigm breaking statement that even the Gentiles could come before Yahweh of Israel in holy, priestly array- they too could aspire to the spirit of priesthood (<a href='B:230 96:9'>Psa 96:9</a> RVmg:). Moses spoke of how all Israel should pray that God would establish the work of their hands (<a href='B:230 90:17'>Psa 90:17</a>)- but this was in fact his special request for the blessing of Levi, the priestly tribe (<a href='B:50 33:11'>Deu 33:11</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Lord Jesus quotes these words in <a href='B:500 10:34'>Joh 10:34</a>: "Is it not written in your law: I said, you are gods?". The Lord Jesus is really saying ‘In the Old Testament men are called ‘gods’; I am saying I am the Son of God; so why are you getting so upset and claiming it is blasphemous if I use God’s Name of Myself?’. The Lord Jesus is quoting from here in Psalms 82, where the judges of Israel were called ‘gods’. And yet the context is critical of those judges; to bear the name of 'God' didn’t mean one was acceptable to God. And it is no accident that the Lord chose to quote an example of where Israel's leaders bear God’s Name but are apostate. He was turning the tables on the Jewish leadership who were accusing Him of claiming to be God. It was in fact they who bore the name of God- and yet were to be condemned for not responding to the word / logos of God which had come to them.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Lord continued in <a href='B:500 10:35'>Joh 10:35</a>: "If he called those men gods, to whom the word of God came (and the scripture cannot be broken)...". The coming of the word of God to these men made them elohim, in the sense that the judges of Israel were to judge according to God's word. And yet despite that, they were fallible. Men were elohim because God's word came to them. They were not created as elohim but were made elohim / judges because God's word came to them- which was a qualification for being a judge (Dt. 1:17; 2 Chron. 19:6 etc.). And yet the word / logos of God had come to the audience of Jesus in Himself, the word made flesh. They also could be gods / elohim and judge rightly if they accepted His word. So they should not, the Lord is saying, be so hasty to condemn a man for being a god. </p><p> The apostate leaders of Israel were the ones who bore the Name of God. The word / logos of God had come to them in that as pictured in the prologue to John's gospel, the logos of God in Jesus of Nazareth had 'come' to Israel and they had rejected it. The word of God came to the Old Testament judges of Israel [the context of Psalms 82] in that they were to judge according to His word. The Lord may also have in mind the LXX of <a href='B:140 19:6'>2Ch 19:6</a> where the judges of Israel are warned to judge rightly, because the logos of God is with them, had been given them, to judge rightly. The same idea is found in <a href='B:50 1:17'>Deu 1:17</a> where again the judges of Israel are warned in the LXX to judge according to the logos of God and not reject it in favour of human sympathies. In this sense perhaps <a href='B:650 4:13'>Heb 4:13</a> speaks of being judged by the logos of God. In the person of the Lord Jesus, the logos of God had come to the judges of Israel- and they were refusing to judge rightly because of their own agendas and personal investments.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Nevertheless you shall die like men, and fall like one of the rulers-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Thrown down" or "fall" was to be the fate of the unjust princes of Israel (s:w. <a href='B:230 73:18'>Psa 73:18</a>) just as it had been the fate of Korah and the princes / rulers with him (<a href='B:40 16:2'>Num 16:2</a>). The fact these elohim were to die means they were not immortal. Because if you're immortal, you can't die. The Psalm speaks of God doing this judgment at the time of the Psalm. It isn't therefore a reference to anything before Biblical history, nor is it speaking of Angels losing immortality- one cannot lose immortality, otherwise one would not be immortal. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A Psalm by Asaph-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This "Asaph" could be the Asaph of Hezekiah's time (<a href='B:290 36:3'>Isa 36:3</a>) who used the Psalms in the context of the events of the Assyrian invasion. The Asaph Psalms all have parts in them relevant to that context (Psalms 50, 73-83). Or the "Asaph" may have been the singers who were relatives of Asaph, prominent at the restoration (<a href='B:160 7:44'>Neh 7:44</a>; <a href='B:160 11:17'>Neh 11:17</a>; <a href='B:160 11:22'>Neh 11:22</a>). It could mean that the psalms were a part of a collection from the Asaphites, and the name "Asaph" was therefore simply used to identify the temple singers. And again, parts of the Asaph psalms also have relevance to the restoration. The fact the Asaph Psalms speak of elohim rather than Yahweh would support the idea that they were used in the exilic / restoration period. But Asaph was the "chief" of the Levites to whom David assigned the ministry of praise before the ark (<a href='B:130 16:4-5'>1Ch 16:4-5</a>). It seems he did compose his own Psalms, which were used by Hezekiah at his time (<a href='B:140 29:30'>2Ch 29:30</a>). So I would again suggest that all the Asaph Psalms were composed originally by David "for" [not necessarily "by"] Asaph, but were rewritten and edited for later occasions.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God, don’t keep silent. Don’t keep silent and don’t be still, God-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The statement that God will not "rest" for Zion's sake (<a href='B:290 62:1'>Isa 62:1</a>) must be understood in the context of the faithful at that time urging God not to "be still" [same Hebrew word translated "rest"] for His people (<a href='B:230 83:1'>Psa 83:1</a>; <a href='B:290 64:12'>Isa 64:12</a>). This is an allusion to Boaz not being at rest until he had redeemed Ruth and Naomi. God is not at rest, He is not distant from us; and yet His people in Babylon felt that He was. It's no wonder that we are tempted to feel the same. Yet we must give <a href='B:290 62:1'>Isa 62:1</a> it's full weight- God is answering the complaint of His people by stating that no, He will never rest for them. In this same context we read that He that keeps Israel will "neither slumber nor sleep" (<a href='B:230 121:4'>Psa 121:4</a>). The fact that God will never 'hold His peace' for His people's sake (<a href='B:290 62:1'>Isa 62:1</a>) means that we should likewise not 'hold our peace' for them (the same Hebrew is used in <a href='B:290 62:6'>Isa 62:6</a>). In our prayers for them, we are to give God no rest (<a href='B:290 62:7'>Isa 62:7</a>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For, behold, Your enemies are stirred up, those who hate You have lifted up their heads-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I suggest that Psalms 83 originated at the time of David’s war with Ammon (<a href='B:100 10:1-19'>2Sa 10:1-19</a>). It was at this time that the children of Lot (Ammon) were helped by Assyria (<a href='B:100 10:16'>2Sa 10:16</a>; <a href='B:130 19:6'>1Ch 19:6</a>; <a href='B:130 19:16'>1Ch 19:16</a>), as required by :8. Although nations like Amalek and Assyria passed away, their political and geographical descendants continued. The Psalm could therefore also apply to the confederacy of Moab, Ammon and Edom in the reign of Jehoshaphat (<a href='B:140 20:1-37'>2Ch 20:1-37</a>). It could also apply to the attempt to destroy the revived Judah by Sanballat, Geshem and Tobiah. And relevance can also be seen to the confederacy of attacked described in 1 Maccabees 5, which was put down by Judas Maccabaeus.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Psalm has much language appropriate to a latter day fulfilment; the fact it had multiple primary fulfillments leads us to expect this. The revival of Arab nationalism seems especially appropriate. They are to lift up / exalt the rosh, the head- they set up an individual leader over them. This could be “Gog</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> the chief prince” of Ezekiel 38, “the king of the north” of Daniel, “the man of sin” of 2 Thessalonians 2, and all the other references to a latter day Nebuchadnezzar / antiChrist figure.</p><p>"Stirred up" is hamah, recalling 'Hamas', the terrorist organization prominent in leading opposition to Israel. The word literally means 'rage', and the Palestinians often talk of 'days of rage' against Israel. AV "make a tumult" exactly captures the spirit of the Palestinian rage against Israel.  </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They conspire with cunning against Your people, they plot against Your cherished ones-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>There could be an application of this to Isaiah's time. Rezin's invasions were a result of 'taking evil counsel against' Israel (<a href='B:290 7:5'>Isa 7:5</a>), just as Assyria and her supporters were to do:&nbsp; "They have taken crafty counsel against thy people" (<a href='B:230 83:3'>Psa 83:3</a>). Rezin's plan was to "set a king in the midst of (Judah), even the son of Tabeal" (<a href='B:290 7:6'>Isa 7:6</a>), meaning 'pleasing to God':&nbsp;This supports the suggestion that the "fierce anger" of the invaders, both then and in the future, will be fuelled by quasi-religious reasoning- in this case 'You Jews are so displeasing to God, we're going to put a truly God-pleasing Muslim ruler in the holy city of Jerusalem:'&nbsp;The double emphasis on "Damascus" as being the nerve centre of Rezin's operations (<a href='B:290 7:8'>Isa 7:8</a>), may also be significant in that this very city is now a centre for terrorism against Israel.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Psalms 83 provides a list of ten areas around Israel who will form a covenant against her in the last days. It’s tempting to associate them with the ten toes of the Daniel 2 image and the ten horns of the beasts we meet in Daniel 7 and Revelation. What’s significant about the specific areas listed in Psalms 83 is that the list roughly corresponds to the places where exiled Palestinians have settled. The ‘covenant’ which is mentioned in Psalms 83 would therefore be the Palestinian Covenant, which calls for the destruction of Israel. The way the Islamists will seek to bind together their divided state is made clear in Psalms 83, where we have ten neighbouring nations, mostly in Al-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Sham, Greater Syria, who unite themselves with a common aim of capturing the holy places in Jerusalem and blotting out the name of Israel:</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>“They conspire with cunning against Your people, they plot against Your cherished ones. Come, they say, and let’s destroy them as a nation, that the name of Israel may be remembered no more:&nbsp; For they have conspired together with one mind, they form an alliance against You. The tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites; Moab, and the Hagrites; Gebal, Ammon, and Amalek; Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre; Assyria also is joined with them” (<a href='B:230 83:3-8'>Psa 83:3-8</a>). Note that ‘Philistine’ and ‘Palestinian’ are the same word</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This ‘conspiring together with one mind’ and ‘forming an alliance’ is exactly what we see coming out of the uniting of the disparate Islamist factions in Syria and elsewhere. “Form an alliance” translates a Hebrew phrase more commonly translated ‘to cut a covenant’ (<a href='B:230 83:5'>Psa 83:5</a>). The Palestinian Covenant unites these groups, and that covenant emphasizes the aim of overrunning Israel. Psalms 83 mentions ten nations- perhaps corresponding with the ten toes of Daniel’s image, and the ten horns on the beast which will dominate God’s people in the last days (Daniel 7, Revelation 13). <a href='B:360 3:9'>Joe 3:9</a> is another prophecy of the invasion which happens just before Christ’s return, and it speaks of how the invaders will make a ‘proclamation’ to “sanctify war”- a jihad, a holy war. And that is exactly the rhetoric of the groups now calling for Islamist unity based around a jihad against Israel in order to establish Al-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Sham. Syria, then known as Aram, frequently invaded Israel in Bible times. The invasions under the Syrian king Rezin were a result of 'taking evil counsel against' Israel (<a href='B:290 7:5'>Isa 7:5</a>), just as Assyria and her supporters are to do in <a href='B:230 83:3'>Psa 83:3</a>: "They have taken crafty counsel against Your people”:&nbsp;The double emphasis on "Damascus" as being the nerve centre of Rezin's operations (<a href='B:290 7:8'>Isa 7:8</a>), may also be significant in that this very city is now a centre for terrorism against Israel.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The intentions of the P:L:O. are “crafty” in that there is the impression given that they seek co-existence with Israel; they are plotting the destruction of Israel and the Jews under the guise of humanism and peaceful intentions. But the Confederacy&nbsp; seeks to destroy Israel, as is evident:</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>“The Palestinian Covenant declares as its central themes a total repudiation of the existence of Israel</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> the claim that Israel should not exist is implied in almost half of its 33 articles</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> the demand for the demise of Israel becomes a matter of inevitable necessity... Israelis are barely human creatures who may be tolerated in the Palestinian state as individuals, with their numbers reduced... The question of how to reduce the number of Jews in a Palestinian state</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> is highlighted by the use of murderous terms against the Israelis” (Y. Harkabi, The Palestinian Covenant And It’s Meaning (Totowa, N:J: Valentine, Mitchell & Co:, 1979) pp:11,13,48). Article 8 of the Palestinian Covenant: “The conflicts among the Palestinian national forces are secondary, and should be ended for the sake of the basic conflict that exists between Zionism</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> and the Arab people”. Article 9:&nbsp; “Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine. It is the overall strategy”. Yet a willfully naïve world overlooks these statements because they prefer to believe the “crafty counsel” of the Arabs- that they seek for peaceful co-existence with the Jews in Israel.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Come, they say, and let’s destroy them as a nation, that the name of Israel may be remembered no more-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Muslims argue that Israel / the Jews are not a people: “Israeli Jews</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> can only be nationals of (other) states, where nationality is not Jewish. The demand for the liquidation of Israel thus also stems directly as a necessary conclusion from the definition that the Jews are (already) not a nation</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> since the state of Israel is not based on true nationalism, it is often described in Arabic as an ‘artificial entity’</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>the theory that the Jews do not constitute a nation is also recited for the claim of exclusive Arab nationality of the Palestinian state” (Naji Alush, The Road To Palestine p:141). </p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>“Victory for the Arabs is possible only in the liquidation of Israel; anything else is capitulation... The Jews are not a nation and thus on principle do not deserve to have a state of their own</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>there is no atrocity that cannot be justified in order to bring about the liquidation of Israel” (Y. Harkabi, The Palestinian Covenant And It’s Meaning (Totowa, N:J: Valentine, Mitchell & Co:, 1979) p:12). The desire to “cut them off from being a nation” runs counter to God’s clear statement in <a href='B:10 25:23'>Gen 25:23</a>: “Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>”. Note that they were not to be of a different ethnicity, as both Jews and Arabs often claim [for they were from the same parents], but different types of people.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For they have conspired together with one mind, they form an alliance against You-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The nations are listed here according to their geographical position, starting in the East and then passing around clockwise to the south and up to the north east. The idea is that all the nations surrounding Israel are involved in this confederacy- which is exactly the situation Israel is currently in.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The surrounding Muslims will unite themselves against Israel. The ‘Palestinian National Covenant’ uses the Arab word Qawmi for ‘National’ – i:e. pan-Arab. Note the RV of <a href='B:230 83:5'>Psa 83:5</a>: “Against thee do they make a covenant”. “The Palestinian National Authority will strive to achieve a union of the confrontation countries [i:e. “all nations around about” Israel]</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> or a step along the road to comprehensive Arab unity” – Political Programs of the P:L:O:, Article 8. “The Palestinian National Council calls upon the Arab nation [singular!] to shoulder its pan-Arab responsibilities and to pool all its energies to confront</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> Zionism” – Political Resolution of the 13th Palestinian National Council, Article 4:&nbsp;The Palestinian Liberation Army is under an “inter-Arab High Command” (Y. Harkabi, The Palestinian Covenant And It’s Meaning (Totowa, N:J: Valentine, Mitchell & Co:, 1979) p:1) p. 62. “The Palestinians will have three mottoes:&nbsp; national unity, pan-Arab mobilization, and liberation” (Are these the three unclean spirits of Revelation 16 that gather the nations around Israel to battle?) – Political Resolution of the 13th Palestinian National Council, Article 11.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>“Nasser used to argue that Arab unity is a pre-requisite for </p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>enabling the initiation of an all-out war against Israel”... “The Arab ‘nation’ is made up of ‘peoples’ and the (one) Arab homeland comprises the national homeland of these peoples</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>the relationship of the people and the individual to the overall Arab homeland and nation is called in modern Arabic Qamwiyya (nationalism)</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>like the trunk of a tree that branches off into offshoots of local patriotism</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>the splitting up of the Arab region into separate states carved out by the colonial powers:&nbsp; However, once Arab unity is achieved and the frontiers wiped out</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>” (Harkabi, pp. 70,31). “As for the Egyptians, the Iraqis</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> they are nothing but the peoples and branches of one nation, the Arab nation” (Sati Al-Husri, Arabism First, (Beirut Lebanon: P:L:O. Research Centre) p. 13). “Colonialism shattered the unity of our Arab nation and the unity of our Arab homeland</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>but this has not prevented the masses</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> from feeling they are one people” -Resolution of Palestinian National Council, 1971 (As recorded in Anne Zahlan, International Documents on Palestine (Beirut, Lebanon:&nbsp; Institute for Palestine Studies, 1974) p. 398).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The intention is to create a single nation which is home for all the Arab peoples. This may include not only Palestine but all of the land promised to Abraham. “Palestine is inseparable from the Arab homeland”... “King Hussein’s plan for the establishment of a so-called United Arab Kingdom”... “This crisis has captivated the whole Arab nation throughout the greater Arab homeland” (Harkabi, pp. 99,135,136) – i:e. the earth/land promised to Abraham.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It could well be that the entire area promised to Abraham is briefly confederated into one Arab super state once Israel is over-run. In this sense all the prophecies about the eretz (the land / earth) being dominated by Israel’s enemies would then come true. Not only will the Arabs unite amongst themselves but they will unite many other world forces in their anti-Judaism. This must be, for if there is to be a time of trouble for Jacob such as never was, the millions of Jews living in North America are going to have to be persecuted even worse than they were by Nazi Germany. Things are going to have to change- dramatically, and in a very short time. The god of this world is humanism, and it seems that all the world will be united by the Arabs against Israel under this guise. “The enemy of humanity’ is a phrase&nbsp; found in Arab writing to designate Israel... Such a description is designed to mobilize support from all peoples, because Zionism is portrayed as an imperialist base that threatens them too” (Harkabi, p. 90). Article 16 of the P:L:O. National Covenant:&nbsp; “The liberation of Palestine, from a spiritual point of view, will provide the Holy Land with an atmosphere of safety and tranquility, which in turn will safeguard the country’s religious sanctuaries</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>. accordingly, the people of Palestine look to all spiritual forces in the world for support."</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites; Moab, and the Hagrites-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The way the Islamists will seek to bind together their divided state is made clear in Psalms 83, where we have ten local nations (cp. the ten invading nations of Ezekiel 38, the ten horns of the beast and ten toes of the Daniel 2 image), mostly in Al-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Sham, Greater Syria, who unite themselves with a common aim of capturing the holy places in Jerusalem and blotting out the name of Israel.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Gebal, Ammon, and Amalek; Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Note that ‘Philistine’ and ‘Palestinian’ are the same word</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> Tyre and Gebal speak of present day Lebanon. All the strong differences and rivalries will for a moment be forgotten in the common hatred of Israel.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Assyria also is joined with them. They have helped the children of Lot. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :1 for the primary fulfilment of this in Assyria helping Ammon at the time of David. The prophecies of Assyria clearly have a latter day fulfilment. It seems "Assyria" refers to an umbrella state or coalition which gives power and identity to these various disparate factions. We could translate to the effect that they will be joined together as "Assyria". In this case we view with interest the attempts to revive Al-Sham, greater Syria, by Islamic extremist groups. I suggest they will succeed, and will unite together in their common hatred of Israel. And thus this invasion will happen in the last days.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Do to them as You did to Midian, as to Sisera, as to Jabin, at the river Kishon-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>In these incidents, the surrounding invaders destroyed themselves. As Sisera was the leader of the confederacy at this time, so there will be a rosh or head over the latter day confederacy (see on :2). There is plenty of evidence that the Islamist solidarity against Israel is very shallow; they are deeply fractured, and a victory against the Jews could well bring out those differences immediately, in a very bitter and self-destructive way. This final destruction is likely that spoken of in Revelation, where after a brief period of unity against God’s people, “The horns hate the whore”- the final form of the coalition against Israel. The final phase of domination of the land of Israel foretold in Daniel 2 was by a confederacy of “iron and clay”, nations that don’t mix together well; although in the context of dominating Israel, they are united. Particularly the Palestinians and other Arabs are mutually suspicious of each other; and there is ample tension between Iraq [latter day Babylon] and its Arab neighbours. “Expressions of suspicion toward the Arab states abound in Palestinian writings:&nbsp;They contain sharp criticism of discrimination against the Palestinians in the form of restrictive decrees in employment and travel. Expressions of hatred can even be found against the Arab states”... “The P:L:O. will retaliate against the Arab states</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> if they take a line of policy which the P:L:O. regards as inimical to it’s cause”... “Arab governments (are) suspicious of the plan to organize the Palestinians into the Palestinian entity” (Harkabi, pp. 72,96,10).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'>who perished at Endor, who became as dung for the earth-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Even "dung for the earth" is a condemnation still pregnant with hope. For the intention is that through the judgment of this confederacy, the "earth" / land promised to Abraham will again become fertile. For dung is spread upon the earth to make it fertile.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Make their nobles like Oreb and Zeeb; yes, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They were defeated as a result of God making their troops turn on each other (<a href='B:70 7:22-25'>Jdg 7:22-25</a>):&nbsp;As noted on :10, self-condemnation and self judgment is God’s preferred way of dealing with His enemies. "Zeeb" is the word for "wolf"; let's not forget that the final picture of the Kingdom is of the wolf living at peace with the lamb on mount Zion, referring to the wild animals of the surrounding nations being reconciled to God and His people (<a href='B:290 11:6'>Isa 11:6</a>; <a href='B:290 65:25'>Isa 65:25</a>). See on :16.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>who said, Let us take possession of God’s pasturelands-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'><a href='B:230 83:11-12'>Psa 83:11-12</a> records how the leaders of the Midianite invasion said, " Let us take to ourselves the houses of God in possession" (AV):&nbsp;The raw lust of the surrounding peoples for Israel's riches is currently camouflaged in the same way:&nbsp;And we see a similar focus upon the holy places of Jerusalem, which is attaining an ever higher status in Islamist theology, beginning to replace Mecca in their thinking as the most holy city of Islam. Before the final onslaught in Gideon's time, those nations had "encamped against" Israel:&nbsp;The Hebrew literally meaning 'to incline a pole' has an uncanny relevance to the pointing of missiles towards them. There can be little doubt that the vast arsenals of missiles will come into use soon.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"The Chaldeans... shall... possess the dwellingplaces that are not theirs" (<a href='B:420 1:6'>Hab 1:6</a>) sounds like <a href='B:230 83:12'>Psa 83:12</a>, concerning the latter-day confederacy saying, "Let us take to ourselves the houses of God in possession" (AV). The implication is that Babylon, too, wished to possess the holy places of Jerusalem for religious reasons.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Clearly enough, the specific focus of the P:L:O. has been on taking control of Jerusalem’s holy places. This was evident in all of Arafat’s speeches. The P:L:O. refuses to cease hostilities against God’s people until they are in possession of Jerusalem. It seems that the ideal of the P:L:O. is to establish a fake Kingdom of God in the land promised to Abraham, with Jerusalem as the capital, a new ‘temple’ built there, and some antiChrist figure ruling there. Their dream is of a land of plenty and true tolerance and equality, glorifying all the principles of humanism- and yet excluding God’s people. All Arabs and Muslims world-wide would be encouraged to return and live in this Arab superstate, mimicking how the true seed of Abraham will be gathered home in the last days. The P:L:O. plan to send the Jews out of the land into captivity- Saddam Hussein once said just the same.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Babylonian captivity will be re-enacted, and then in a ‘second exodus’ the Jews will return and perhaps build the temple which they were instructed to build in Ezekiel 40-48. This expulsion of the Jews from the land is foretold in Deuteronomy 28 - where disobedient Israel are to be taken into Egypt again by ships, something which has never yet occurred; and also in Zechariah 14, where in the last days Jerusalem is to be captured by her enemies and half the city go off into captivity. And then, the Lord returns to the Mount of Olives from which He left. “Only Jews who undertake to be loyal to the Palestinian state shall be recognized</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> the recurring motif in Palestinian literature which insists that the Jews who would be allowed (to remain) should relinquish Zionism” (Harkabi, p. 46). “Peace in the land of Palestine and the neighboring countries is our heart’s desire:&nbsp; Above all, a precondition for this is the liberation of Palestine” (Fayez Sayegh, A Handful of Mist (Beirut, Lebanon: P:L:O. Research Centre) p:19). “The right to return includes the right to get back all former Arab property, the return of which will cause the mass eviction of Israelis from Jaffa, Nazareth, etc. ... The establishment of the Palestinian state is bound up with a mass evacuation of Jews from their homes, and they will be thus forced to emigrate” (Harkabi, pp. 157,56).</p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Shuqairy, founder of the P:L:O:, often made the proposal to send the Jews back to their countries of origin:&nbsp; Naji Alush repeats the proposal and asks, “Why not ask the U:N. to finance this plan?” (p. 219) . If accepted, this would unite “all nations” against Israel and her Messiah. Article 11 of the Constitution of Saddam Hussein’s Ba’ath Party read:&nbsp; “Whoever emigrated to the Arab homeland (Palestine) with a colonialist aim shall be expelled”. Naji Alush defines “the stand of the Arab national movement on Palestine concerning the Jews” as being that the same number of Jews that were in Palestine before 1914 (i:e. 20,000) should be allowed to remain, and own the 1% of the land they then owned – and the rest be extradited (Naji Alush, The Palestinian National Movement (Beirut, Lebanon, 1969) p. 170):&nbsp; “Permission to stay in Palestine should be granted to the Jews who shall declare that they are giving up the idea of the Jewish state” (Niqula Al-Dor (one time member of the P:L:O. Executive), Thus Lost and Thus to be Returned (Beirut, Lebanon: Al-Hawadith Press)).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It is significant that the Arabs demand that the minority of Jews who they would let remain become ‘Arabs’. “Such a state</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> should be explicitly & emphatically an Arab state with a minority of Jews, who from a national viewpoint, would become Arabs” (Harkabi, p:52). It could be that this meant they accepted Islam. In this case we would have an analogous situation to that in countless historical types of the last days: Israel accept the idols of the surrounding Arab world and are judged because of it.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>My God, make them like tumbleweed; like chaff before the wind-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The idea of a whirlwind sweeping away Israel's enemies is the picture of Daniel 2, where the image is broken and swept away at the return of Christ. The image therefore seems to speak of a latter day domination of Israel by her surrounding enemies who for a brief time dominate eretz Israel.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Asaph lived at the time of the restoration (<a href='B:150 2:41'>Ezr 2:41</a>). All his Psalms draw on the past dealings of God with His people and encourage them on this basis to make the wilderness journey back&nbsp; to the land, just as they had done at the Exodus. In this context, Psalms 83 concerns the neighbouring nations who were wanting to cut off the people of Judah who had returned at the restoration. Verse 13 asks for the prophecy of <a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a> to be fulfilled against them in the form of Messiah’s coming. But this prophecy has been deferred to our last days, when a returned Israel seek the same deliverance:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As the fire that burns the forest, as the flame that sets the mountains on fire-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It would only be supernaturally intense heat which could melt and destroy a mountain. This is the language of the last days, used in <a href='B:730 8:8'>Rev 8:8</a> about the burning mountain of the latter day invader of Israel being cast into the sea in permanent destruction. This intense heat, approaching like a forest fire, is intended to elicit repentance from Israel's latter day abusers; see on :16,17.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>so pursue them with Your tempest, and terrify them with Your storm-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The purpose of this pursuit and terror is intended to elicit repentance from Israel's latter day abusers; see on :16,17. Those who do not want this will be swept away like chaff by the wind of God’s judgments; which is exactly the scene of the destruction of the image in Daniel 2. See on :13.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Fill their faces with confusion, that they may seek Your name, Yahweh-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The intention of these judgments is always so that God’s enemies may repent. See on :11. Confusion or "dishonour" (AV) is required, being shamed for sin, before people guilty of this level of abuse will really repent.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Let them be disappointed and dismayed forever. Yes, let them be confounded and perish-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The emphasis upon "let them..." may suggest they are to be faced with condemnation right before their face, but in order that they seek Yahweh (:16). Their being confounded is the "confusion" of :16 which is intended to elicit their repentance. As ever, there is positive intention in God’s judgments, and not at all the explosion in wrath of an offended deity. Only those who face condemnation in the face and say "yes" to it will be condemned. See on :18.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>How lovely are Your dwellings, Yahweh of Armies!-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This appears to be a psalm of David whilst in exile either from Saul or Absalom, longing to be back in the sanctuary. But it has likely been reused and reapplied under inspiration to the exiles.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>My soul longs and even faints for the courts of Yahweh. My heart and my flesh cry out for the living God-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David’s desire for the sanctuary has been rewritten with reference to the "courts" of the temple, which didn’t exist in his time. "The living God" can be 'the God of the living ones', perhaps a reference to the glory of the cherubim seen over the ark. Yet in the wilderness Psalms, David often says that he lives under the shadow of those cherubic wings, as if even without seeing the ark and whilst far from the sanctuary, he felt as if he lived beneath God’s glory, under the shadow of the cherubic wings, over the blood of atonement on the cover of the ark. But despite that awareness, he still longs for the physical, external symbols of faith, and so longs to be at the sanctuary again. It was this failure to learn his lesson that led to his obsession with building a physical temple, which God responded to negatively, initially. And it became a stumbling block for later generations because of the emphasis upon the physical symbols of religion, rather than the essence.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yes, the sparrow has found a home and the swallow a nest for herself where she may have her young, near Your altars, Yahweh of Armies, my King, and my God-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David recalls how wild birds flew into the sanctuary and even nested there. And he in his exile is jealous of them. He often likens himself to a bird, which is being hunted. Often David likens his enemies' plans to catch him as snares, gins etc. set for birds (e.g. <a href='B:230 84:3'>Psa 84:3</a>; <a href='B:230 102:6'>Psa 102:6</a>; Psalms 124; Psalms 7; <a href='B:230 140:5'>Psa 140:5</a>)- all the language of hunting birds. He had probably done plenty of this as a youngster caring for the sheep, and the influence of those formative years remained. But extending the likeness of himself to a bird, he now wishes he could just fly into the sanctuary and nest there.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Blessed are those who dwell in Your house; they are always praising You. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David seems to assume that those who lived in the temple precincts were blessed because they were always praising God. But he is overlooking the principle so often expressed in his wilderness Psalms- that he could continually praise God wherever he was. It seems that like us, he learned the lesson at the time and in theory, but failed to apply it in later life, such was his human hankering after the external symbols of religion.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Blessed are those whose strength is in You; who have set their hearts on a pilgrimage-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"In whose hearts are the highways (to Zion)". The LXX has "goings up", an idea always associated with 'going up' to Zion and 'coming down' from it after attending a feast. This idea would have been appropriate for the exiles; all whose heart was set on the way back to Zion would be blessed. But most preferred to remain in Babylon.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Passing through the valley of Weeping, they make it a place of springs. Yes, the autumn rain covers it with blessings-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This valley of Baca (AV) was some "waterless and barren valley through which pilgrims passed on their way to Jerusalem". But it was transformed by the autumn rains, bursting forth into life. The same language is used for what could have happened to the exiles if they followed David’s path of restoration. For <a href='B:290 35:6'>Isa 35:6</a>; <a href='B:290 41:18'>Isa 41:18</a> use the same ideas concerning the restoration, whereby dry valleys would come alive with water and new growth. LXX "The lawgiver shall give blessings". In Psalms 23 David likens his exile to passing through the valley of the shadow of death, and yet confidently hopes for restoration.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They go from strength to strength-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This again is language appropriate to the returning exiles, who would "renew their strength" (<a href='B:290 40:31'>Isa 40:31</a>):&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Each one of them appears before God in Zion-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Appearing before God is the language of attending a feast, and it was also David’s desire in <a href='B:230 42:2'>Psa 42:2</a>. And yet the wilderness Psalms claim that he felt just as close to God as ever before, even though he could not keep the feasts whilst on the run. But he seems to be jealous of those who could. The power of religion and the desire to perform religious ritual is seen very strongly in David, and as with us, the pole of religiosity struggles against that of personal spirituality.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yahweh, God of Armies, hear my prayer; listen, God of Jacob. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The reference to "Armies" may suggest an understanding that God’s Angels would guide David back to the sanctuary; "God of Jacob" is likewise an Angelic phrase (<a href='B:10 48:16'>Gen 48:16</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Behold, God our shield, look at the face of Your anointed-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It was David who was the anointed of God, and so this Psalm likely originated whilst he was anointed but not crowned, on the run from Saul, in exile therefore from the sanctuary. The reference to God as shield is another reminder to himself that he was of the true seed of Abraham (<a href='B:10 15:1'>Gen 15:1</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For a day in Your courts is better than a thousand. I would rather be a doorkeeper in the tent of my God-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This reflects the feelings of the righteous remnant in Babylon- e.g. the thought that just one day in God’s temple is better than a thousand days in Babylon's "tents of wickedness" (<a href='B:230 84:10'>Psa 84:10</a>). Doorkeepers in the house of their God was exactly what the sons of Korah were (<a href='B:130 9:19'>1Ch 9:19</a>; <a href='B:130 26:1'>1Ch 26:1</a>; <a href='B:130 26:12-19'>1Ch 26:12-19</a>); perhaps this Psalm was appropriated by them whilst in Babylon. Dwelling in the tents of wickedness would be therefore a disassociation from their ancestor Korah (<a href='B:40 16:26'>Num 16:26</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Than to dwell in the tents of wickedness-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Perhaps the reference is the same as in <a href='B:230 120:5'>Psa 120:5</a>, where David laments that he must dwell among the tents of Kedar, when he would far rather be in the sanctuary. Kedar was the second son of Ishmael (<a href='B:10 25:13'>Gen 25:13</a>), one of the wild roaming tribes whose hand was against every man (<a href='B:10 16:13'>Gen 16:13</a>). Perhaps there was a time when fleeing from Saul when David had to live amongst them, and he longs to be back in Zion. Or perhaps he simply means that he has to live among hostile and barbarous people, who are characterized as the wild Kedar and Meshech.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Whatever the primary reference of this Psalm, it is a reworking of David’s feelings when persecuted by Saul and likewise on the run from him. For circumstances repeat in our lives, and it would be natural for David to reconsider Psalms written at the time of one exile and apply them to another, just as these Psalms were also used for others in their times of exile. "Wickedness" is the word used about Saul's persecution in <a href='B:90 24:13'>1Sa 24:13</a>. Perhaps he felt that whilst working as a musician in Saul's palace he was living in tents of wickedness.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For Yahweh God is a sun and a shield-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Another reminder to himself that he was of the true seed of Abraham (<a href='B:10 15:1'>Gen 15:1</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yahweh will give grace and glory. He withholds no good thing from those who walk blamelessly-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>We wonder at David’s possible arrogance in assuming that he or any man can walk blamelessly. Only the Lord Jesus fits thIsa. And yet this is the phrase used in God’s command to Abraham and his seed (<a href='B:10 17:1'>Gen 17:1</a>). It was only possible for Abraham to do so by his faith in imputed righteousness, by grace through faith. But it's questionable as to whether David at this point realized that; he had to learn it through reflection upon the wonder of how God had counted him righteous after the sin with Bathsheba.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For the Chief Musician. A Psalm by the sons of Korah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"By" can as well be "for", so the Psalm may still be Davidic, but is dedicated to the memory of the sons of Korah. Korah had died in rebellion against God, but his children had been preserved (<a href='B:40 26:9-11'>Num 26:9-11</a>); they therefore became representative of all who had overcome bad background to worship Yahweh independently, regardless of the sins of their fathers. They were therefore inspirational to the righteous remnant amongst the exiles in Babylon. Or these "sons of Korah" may refer to a group of musicians who were to perform the Psalm, the Levitical singers mentioned in <a href='B:130 26:1-2'>1Ch 26:1-2</a>; <a href='B:140 20:19'>2Ch 20:19</a>. Or if we insist on reading "by", it could have been a Davidic Psalm edited and as it were released by a group called "the sons of Korah" during the captivity in Babylon.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yahweh, You have been favourable to Your land. You have restored the fortunes of Jacob-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This may be an example of the 'prophetic perfect', speaking of that yet future, that being asked for, as if it had already happened. Or we could call this language 'fantasy', of the kind we may enjoy when looking forward to the kingdom age. The rest of the Psalm makes it clear that they were not at that time restored, and were still under God’s wrath.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But the phrase for 'favourable to Your land' is that used of how during the exile, the land would "enjoy" her Sabbaths (<a href='B:30 26:34'>Lev 26:34</a>; <a href='B:30 26:41'>Lev 26:41</a>)- until the people repented. But there is no emphasis upon repentance, just a passionate belief that God ought to remove the consequences of their sin. Likewise 'restoring the fortunes' is the phrase for 'return the captivity', which would happen only when Israel returned to Yahweh (<a href='B:50 30:2-3'>Deu 30:2-3</a>). But there is no mention of the need for this returning to Yahweh.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have forgiven the iniquity of Your people; You have covered all their sin. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Asaph lived at the time of the restoration (<a href='B:150 2:41'>Ezr 2:41</a>). Psalms 85 reflects how that faithful remnant believed that God had forgiven them (<a href='B:230 85:2'>Psa 85:2</a>), and therefore they asked for His anger to cease and for Him to lead their feet in the way which would lead back to Zion (<a href='B:230 85:4'>Psa 85:4</a>; <a href='B:230 85:13'>Psa 85:13</a> RV). But we note that there is a plea for forgiveness and faith this would be granted; but little emphasis upon repentance. The prophets required that Judah 'return' to their God in repentance [s:w:] so that they might return to the land.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>We also note that forgiveness is seen as 'covering' of sin. This was absolutely possible in Old Testament times, even without the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus. That sacrifice was to as it were flag human attention and elicit faith in the fact that God really does forgive sin and save people. For God is not a pagan deity requiring the blood of a human before He can forgive. David spoke of the blessedness of the man like him whose sin was covered, because he had not himself covered or hid it (<a href='B:230 32:1'>Psa 32:1</a>; <a href='B:230 32:5'>Psa 32:5</a>). But the exiles needed to follow the pattern of David in repentance and restoration.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have taken away all Your wrath, You have turned from the fierceness of Your anger-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This and <a href='B:230 78:38'>Psa 78:38</a> seems to suggest God Himself controlled His anger, Himself turning that anger away, rather than being like a pagan deity whose anger was appeased by blood sacrifice. God turned from His anger due to Moses' intercession (<a href='B:20 32:12'>Exo 32:12</a> s:w:), but this is not to say that He cannot in any case turn away His anger, simply by His grace. Just as we may control our anger from within ourselves, or at other times we may do this because of the appeal of another to us, or because there is repentance from the one who provoked us. And there were times when this was the case with God (s:w. <a href='B:40 25:4'>Num 25:4</a>; <a href='B:60 7:26'>Jos 7:26</a>; <a href='B:140 12:12'>2Ch 12:12</a>; <a href='B:140 29:10'>2Ch 29:10</a>; <a href='B:140 30:8'>2Ch 30:8</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Turn us, God of our salvation, and cause Your indignation toward us to cease-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The psalmist believed that God could turn the hearts of men to repentance; for repentance is itself a gift of God (<a href='B:510 11:18'>Act 11:18</a>). God is able to work directly upon human hearts to bring about repentance. But we wonder whether the psalmist would not have been better in confessing their sin as Daniel does in Daniel 9, and Ezra likewise; rather than as it were asking God to do the work of repentance for them.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Will You be angry with us forever? Will You draw out Your anger to all generations?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The same words are used in <a href='B:300 17:4'>Jer 17:4</a> about how God’s anger would indeed burn for ever because of what Judah had done. Again we enquire why there is not an acceptance of this and a confession of sin, rather than repeatedly asking simply for the consequence of sin to be taken away. It was because of this lack of repentance that the envisaged restoration didn’t take place as was potentially possible.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Won’t You revive us again, that Your people may rejoice in You?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The implication seems to be that they would not rejoice in their God unless He revived them, by removing the consequence of their sins irrespective of their repentance. Israel would live or be revived if they repented (<a href='B:330 33:19'>Eze 33:19</a> s:w:). And yet by grace, God did speak of how His Spirit would revive the dead bones of Israel (s:w. <a href='B:330 37:5-6'>Eze 37:5-6</a>; <a href='B:330 37:9'>Eze 37:9</a>). Seeing they had not repented, this was amazing grace to even offer that. The work of the Spirit does the same today; for repentance is itself a gift of God (<a href='B:510 11:18'>Act 11:18</a>). But like the exiles, we can refuse even that, and remain in exile from God because the old and familiar seems somehow better than revival with Him. See on :7:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Show us Your grace, Yahweh. Grant us Your salvation-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This was the grace spoken of in :6; to revive them through the Spirit even whilst impenitent (<a href='B:330 37:5'>Eze 37:5</a>), even though such revival was predicated upon repentance (<a href='B:330 33:19'>Eze 33:19</a>). Such grace is the giving of salvation, but even that we have to accept and actually want it:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will hear what God, Yahweh, will speak, for He will speak peace to His people, His saints; but let them not turn again to folly-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The psalmist may here be finally hinting that at least he personally will hear or be obedient to God’s word. But only in faith that God would grant the peace of forgiveness to His people. Such grace ought to mean that they never against turned to "folly", probably a reference to idolatry. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Surely His salvation is near those who fear Him, so that glory may dwell in our land-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The glory of God had been seen by Ezekiel leaving Jerusalem and going into captivity; but the prophetic hope was that it would return. But Israel had to "fear Him" to receive that great salvation, and Ezekiel records how the exiles continued in idolatry.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Mercy and truth meet together, righteousness and peace have kissed each other-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The idea may be that God’s mercy would be given to those who were faithful ["truth"] to the covenant. "Mercy and truth" often refer to the promises to Abraham, which were the basis of the new covenant offered to the exiles in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, seeing they had broken the old covenant. Peace with God would come if the people devoted themselves to righteousness. This was the prophetic vision of the psalmist, but the reality was that the exiles didn’t abide in the covenant, they tried to keep the broken old covenant and rejected the new covenant. And they were hardly characterized by a love of righteousness, as the history in Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, Malachi and Esther reveals.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Truth springs out of the earth, righteousness has looked down from heaven-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The idea is that Israel would abide in truth, in faithfulness to the new covenant; and God’s righteousness would come from heaven in faithful response to that. See on :10.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yes, Yahweh will give that which is good. Our land will yield its increase-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The revived spiritual state of the people would be reflected in the prophesied kingdom conditions coming in the land. But there were famines when the exiles returned; this great prophetic potential was reapplied and rescheduled to Judah's final repentance in the last days.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A Prayer by David.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Hear, Yahweh, and answer me, for I am poor and needy-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David had seen himself as "poor and needy", needing grace after his sin with Bathsheba and its consequences (<a href='B:230 40:17'>Psa 40:17</a>; <a href='B:230 70:5'>Psa 70:5</a>; <a href='B:230 86:1'>Psa 86:1</a>; <a href='B:230 109:16'>Psa 109:16</a>; <a href='B:230 109:22'>Psa 109:22</a>). He wished Solomon to likewise have pity on the "poor and needy" amongst the Gentiles, those who had likewise repented (<a href='B:230 72:13'>Psa 72:13</a>). And David was especially desirous to himself see the "poor and needy" blessed and accepted as he had been (<a href='B:230 82:3-4'>Psa 82:3-4</a>; <a href='B:230 113:7'>Psa 113:7</a>). It is our personal experience of needing grace which leads us to have a heart for those like us, the poor and needy. Any other motivation will ultimately not abide. Solomon appears to glorify his mother Bathsheba for likewise pitying the poor and needy (<a href='B:240 31:9'>Pro 31:9</a>; <a href='B:240 31:20'>Pro 31:20</a>). </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Preserve my soul, for I am Godly. You, my God, save Your servant who trusts in You-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Psalms 86 is a Psalm where David constantly speaks of his need for God’s forgiveness (<a href='B:230 86:3'>Psa 86:3</a>; <a href='B:230 86:5'>Psa 86:5</a>; <a href='B:230 86:15-16'>Psa 86:15-16</a>). And yet David in the same Psalm can say: “Preserve my soul; for I am holy” (<a href='B:230 86:2'>Psa 86:2</a>). He again has this sense of his own integrity and imputed righteousness, in the midst of realizing his need for God’s grace and forgiveness:&nbsp;&nbsp; David’s repentance is a pattern for ours, day by day. See on <a href='B:230 41:12'>Psa 41:12</a>.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Be merciful to me Lord, for I call to You all day long-</p><h2>Prayer is part of the atmosphere of spiritual life, not something hived off and separate- it is an expression of our spirit. Thus there are verses which speak of many daily prayers as being just one prayer (<a href='B:230 86:3'>Psa 86:3</a>; <a href='B:230 86:6'>Psa 86:6</a>; <a href='B:230 88:1-2'>Psa 88:1-2</a>); prayer is a way / spirit of life, not something specific which occurs for a matter of minutes each day. The commands to "pray without ceasing" simply can't be literally obeyed (<a href='B:590 5:17'>1Th 5:17</a>). "Watch and pray always" in the last days likewise connects prayer with watchfulness, which is an attitude of mind rather than something done on specific occasions. This is not to say that prayer in no sense refers to formal, specific prayer. Evidently it does, but it is only a verbal crystallization of our general spirit of life.</h2>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Bring joy to the soul of Your servant, for to You, Lord, do I lift up my soul-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>There is a repeated Biblical theme that the believer's relationship with the Father too is essentially mutual. David lifts himself up to God (<a href='B:230 25:1'>Psa 25:1</a>; <a href='B:230 28:2'>Psa 28:2</a>; <a href='B:230 86:4'>Psa 86:4</a>), and asks God to lift up Himself in response (<a href='B:230 7:6'>Psa 7:6</a>; <a href='B:230 10:12'>Psa 10:12</a>; <a href='B:230 94:2'>Psa 94:2</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For You, Lord, are good and ready to forgive; abundant in grace to all those who call on You-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As noted on :1, David feels he can say he is "holy" ["Godly"], and yet feels in need of forgiveness and grace. His sense of holiness was therefore because he believed righteousness could be imputed. Or we could conclude that one can still feel basically "Godly" even when having sinned and needing forgiveness.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Hear, Yahweh, my prayer; listen to the voice of my petitions-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David’s prayer for help in time of trouble (:7) was therefore associated with a feeling the need for forgiveness (:5). Presumably this Psalm dates from a time when he faced distress and danger as a consequence of his sin with Bathsheba. He believed his sin had been forgiven, and at the time rejoiced in the grace shown him. And yet he still feels the need to ask for forgiveness. This is not necessarily a collapse of faith (although it could be). Rather is it a quite normal abiding realization that he has sinned and needs forgiveness. Just as we may sin against a person and be forgiven, and yet still feel the need later to again ask their forgiveness for that sin. This is not necessarily a lack of faith in the forgiveness granted, but a quite natural abiding awareness of our status before that person.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>In the day of my trouble I will call on You, for You will answer me-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :6. He asks God to save him in the language of Israel’s Red Sea deliverance, speaking of it as “the day of my trouble” (<a href='B:230 86:7-8'>Psa 86:7-8</a> = <a href='B:20 15:11'>Exo 15:11</a>). He saw how their circumstances and his were in principle the same; he personalized the Scripture he had read. Likewise David invites us to come and see the works God did at the Red Sea, commenting: “there did we rejoice in him” (<a href='B:230 66:5-6'>Psa 66:5-6</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The intention of David’s Psalms was to share his experience of God’s grace and salvation with others. This Psalm is very clear- David is saying 'May this be true for you as it was for me'. And this is really the basis of all our witness. It was David who had been answered in his 'days of trouble', and set on high (<a href='B:230 20:1'>Psa 20:1</a>). His desire was fulfilled- for this verse of the Psalm clearly was reapplied to the "day of trouble" of the Assyrian invasion (s:w. <a href='B:290 37:3'>Isa 37:3</a>) and also to the Babylonian traumas of the exiles (s:w. <a href='B:300 16:19'>Jer 16:19</a>; <a href='B:300 30:7'>Jer 30:7</a>; <a href='B:410 1:7'>Nah 1:7</a>; <a href='B:420 3:16'>Hab 3:16</a>). See on <a href='B:20 25:8'>Exo 25:8</a>.</p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Troubles" is the word used of Jacob's time of trouble (<a href='B:10 35:3'>Gen 35:3</a>; <a href='B:300 30:7'>Jer 30:7</a>; <a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a>). David’s experience of trouble was representative of how the exiles and all God’s people could ultimately follow the path of Jacob to deliverance out of exile and from his strong enemies. But in <a href='B:230 71:20'>Psa 71:20</a> David sees his deliverance from the day of trouble as ultimately being in the resurrection of the body, being 'brought up again from the depths of the earth'.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>There is no one like You among the gods, Lord, nor any deeds like Your deeds-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is a tacit recognition that there was a tendency to idolatry at David’s time; and through this song he teaches against thIsa. His argument is that Yahweh is so great that if there are any other gods around, they are insignificant. Likewise the Lord Jesus didn’t state in so many words that demons don't exist; but the scale of His miracles indicated that even if they did they were effectively powerless. See on :10.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>All nations You have made will come and worship before You, Lord. They shall glorify Your name-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David was perhaps the greatest example of all the Old Testament figures of wanting to see the conversion of the Gentiles, implicit as it was within the promises to Abraham. And he used his music ministry to try to spread this message. He makes this request in the context of asking for forgiveness (see on :6), and so many of the Bathsheba Psalms feature this desire to use his sin and forgiveness as an opportunity to reach out to the entire world with the message of God’s grace for them.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For You are great, and do wondrous things-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As discussed on <a href='B:230 71:19'>Psa 71:19</a>, the "great / wondrous things" performed by God were His forgiveness and salvation of a condemned sinner like David (see on :6,9). This is described in <a href='B:230 71:19'>Psa 71:19</a> as God doing "great things", the phrase used of the great things worked in visible miracles in Egypt (<a href='B:230 106:21'>Psa 106:21</a>) and at creation (<a href='B:230 136:7'>Psa 136:7</a>). But the forgiveness of people like David is no less a great miracle. Such great things are done because of His mercy / grace (<a href='B:230 136:4'>Psa 136:4</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You alone are God-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As noted on :8, this is a tacit recognition that there was a tendency to idolatry at David’s time; and through this song he teaches against thIsa.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Teach me Your way, Yahweh; I will walk in Your truth-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A passing sense of wonder at the night sky as a man glances at it for a few moments longer than usual one evening from his balcony... needs to lead to the questions in response to God’s questions: Who or what is He? What is His Name, His hope for me, His ability... how should I respond? And the answers to those questions aren't in nature itself, but in God’s word. "You are great and do wonders... teach me Your way, O Lord; I will walk in your way" (<a href='B:230 86:10-11'>Psa 86:10-11</a>). The moments of wonder which God affords His creatures aren't intended to lead them into wild speculation; but rather to incite them to seek His revealed truth in His word.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Make my heart undivided to fear Your name-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :12. Again we see a clear faith in God’s ability to work directly upon the human heart, giving us a new psychology. This is what we most urgently need, and is what the gift of the Holy Spirit is all about:&nbsp;"Undivided" is literally "one". Perhaps James is alluding here when he warns against having a double heart or mind (<a href='B:660 1:8'>Jas 1:8</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will praise You, Lord my God, with my whole heart; I will glorify Your name forever-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David has just asked for an undivided heart (:11), and so this promise to praise God with his "whole heart" is not because he considers he has a "whole heart". But he asks for it, and believes he will receive; and vows to give this heart to God.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For Your grace is great toward me, You have delivered my soul from the lowest Sheol-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The undivided heart David has asked for in :11 is because God’s grace has been so great to him, in saving him from death. He wanted his heart to be totally full of awareness of God’s grace, for ever (:12), far beyond just a passing gasp of gratitude for salvation from death. David believed death was unconsciousness, as we have often noted in the Psalms. Yet he appears to use a common term, "the lowest sheol", meaning the worst kind of death. As with the language of demons, or our usage of English words like "Monday" [moon day], language of the day can be used without actually believing in it.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God, the proud have risen up against me; a company of violent men have sought after my soul, and they don’t hold regard for You before them-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The reference may be to Saul and his men, or to the Absalom conspiracy. See on :6. The implication is that these men were not true believers in God; I noted on :8,10 David’s concern that there was idolatry within Israel, and maybe this included Absalom.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But You, Lord, are a merciful and gracious God, slow to anger, and abundant in grace and truth-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Mercy and truth" often refer to the promises made to Abraham. David appeals to basics in his desperate straits; the promises to Abraham, and the character of God as revealed to Moses in <a href='B:20 34:4-6'>Exo 34:4-6</a>.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Show me a sign of Your goodness, that those who hate me may see it and be shamed, because You, Yahweh, have helped me and comforted me-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Again David is using the prophetic perfect, speaking of future things as if they are already received; for he asks in :17 for urgent attention and mercy from God. His request for some visible sign was in order that his enemies might be "shamed", and perhaps from that shame led to repentance.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A Psalm by the sons of Korah; a Song-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"By" can as well be "for", so the Psalm may still be Davidic, but is dedicated to the memory of the sons of Korah. Korah had died in rebellion against God, but his children had been preserved (<a href='B:40 26:9-11'>Num 26:9-11</a>); they therefore became representative of all who had overcome bad background to worship Yahweh independently, regardless of the sins of their fathers. They were therefore inspirational to the righteous remnant amongst the exiles in Babylon. Or these "sons of Korah" may refer to a group of musicians who were to perform the Psalm, the Levitical singers mentioned in <a href='B:130 26:1-2'>1Ch 26:1-2</a>; <a href='B:140 20:19'>2Ch 20:19</a>. Or if we insist on reading "by", it could have been a Davidic Psalm edited and as it were released by a group called "the sons of Korah" during the captivity in Babylon.</p><p>Mahalath Leannoth can be translated "the suffering of affliction", or it could be "Dancing with all the might". According to the theory of J.W. Thirtle, some Psalm titles got attached to the Psalm ahead of them. The Hebrew words for dancing with all the might  would then allude to how David brought the ark to Zion (2 Sam. 6:14). And Ps. 87 is clearly about this.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>His foundation is in the holy mountains-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Perhaps an intensive plural for the one great mountain, Zion, which he now speaks of in :2. He believes that God has founded Zion, and ultimately she will not be moved. Given the tragic history of the Jerusalem temple and the city itself, this takes some faith to believe.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yahweh loves the gates of Zion more than all the dwellings of Jacob-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As discussed on Psalms 78, we wonder whether Yahweh had indeed loved Zion as much as David did. He appears to transfer his own excessive fondness for Zion onto God. For God made it clear to David that He doesn't live in specific geographical locations and sacred spaces, but in the hearts of men. And in Psalms 78 David argued, perhaps too far, that God had rejected Ephraim and Shiloh, and chosen Judah, David and Zion. See on <a href='B:230 78:51'>Psa 78:51</a>; <a href='B:230 78:68-69'>Psa 78:68-69</a>; <a href='B:230 78:72'>Psa 78:72</a>.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Glorious things are spoken about you, city of God. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>What exactly had God spoken specifically about Zion, given His statements that He doesn't live in specific geographical locations and sacred spaces, but in the hearts of men? See on :2. It could be that this verse is simply a preface for the revelations about Zion which David now makes. But we wonder whether this is actual revelation from God, or just the inspired record of what David wished to be true of Zion. The word for "glorious things", things of "honour", is used of how God honours persons and behaviour rather than geographical locations and spaces:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will record Rahab and Babylon among those who acknowledge me. Behold, Philistia, Tyre and also Ethiopia: This one was born there-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The vision is of the Gentiles from all points of the compass [that appears to be the reason behind the choice of the nations here listed] accepting Zion and being born within her. The Gentiles were to come and dwell in Zion, and this would be a cause of joy to the spiritually minded Israelite (see on :7). This "birth" in Zion may be another way of saying that they were equally Israelite as the ethnic Jews who were born there. God’s Israel would be predicated upon spiritual and not ethnic lines.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yes, of Zion it will be said, This one and that one was born in her; the Most High Himself will establish her-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As explained on :4, the birth of Gentiles in Zion is to be understood as their conversion to the God of Israel there in Zion, presumably through visiting the temple which David envisaged being built there and being taught there. The promise to David was that his kingdom and his throne, reigned upon by his great Messianic seed, would be "established" by God eternally (<a href='B:130 17:11-12'>1Ch 17:11-12</a>; <a href='B:130 17:14'>1Ch 17:14</a> s:w:). But he appears to have become over literal and religious in interpreting this as meaning that Zion itself would be eternally established. The account of bringing the ark to Zion is prefaced by the record of David's sons who were born in Jerusalem. But we read nothing further about them. This could all be read as part of David's attempt to establish his own dynasty in Zion, which God responded to in 2 Sam. 7 by saying that He would establish David's Kingdom in His own way, through David's seed, the Lord Jesus. Likewise in Ps. 132:17  David puts words in God's mouth: "There [in Zion / Jerusalem] will I make the horn of David to bud". But the budding of David's horn was fulfilled by God in the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, the great "son of David", rather than in David having many sons in Jerusalem.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yahweh will count, when He writes up the peoples, This one was born there. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The idea may be that at the final count at judgment day, God would accept as His true people those Gentiles who had been "born" in Zion, who had there made a commitment to His covenant (see on :4,5). But David may be hinting that his dynasty was going to reign eternally from Zion and his long line of kings which he envisaged would all be born there. God interjected His promises of 2 Sam. 7 onto David's plans. David's line was indeed long but it was broken, the temple was destroyed, and Zion was ploughed over. The eternal dynasty only came true through the Lord Jesus and God's grace, not through David's efforts to self establish. </p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But this had specific potential reference to the restoration. <a href='B:150 2:62'>Ezr 2:62</a> records Judah being ‘reckoned by genealogies’, using the same Hebrew word which is the hallmark of 1 Chron. (4:33; 5:1,7,17; 7:5,7,9,40; 9:1,22). And in this context, <a href='B:290 40:26'>Isa 40:26</a> compares God’s ‘bringing out’ of Judah from Babylon with His ‘bringing out’ the stars by their individual names, all wonderfully known to Him. <a href='B:230 87:6'>Psa 87:6</a> had prophesied something similar about the restoration of Zion’s fortunes: “The LORD shall count, when he writeth up the people, that this man was born there”. The Kingdom of God was to be the restoration of Israel’s Kingdom- but they had to actually get on and restore it rather than wait for it to come. This is another reason for understanding Ezekiel’s temple as being broadly of the same dimensions as that of Solomon:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A Song. A Psalm by the sons of Korah. For the Chief Musician. To the tune of The Suffering of Affliction. A contemplation by Heman, the Ezrahite-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Psalm is clearly by David, probably referring to his illness when suffering for his sin with Bathsheba; there are various parallels with Psalms 22 which is from this background. It is "by" or "for" Heman and the sons of Korah to perform, or perhaps musically arranged by Heman, who appears to have lived in Solomon's time (<a href='B:110 4:31'>1Ki 4:31</a>).</p><p>Psalm 88 is another psalm of the sons of Korah, whose father and relatives perished in sheol. But they recognize that this was their rightful end to, and they can only be saved from it by grace: "‘My soul has come to Sheol... I am reckoned with those [Korah and his rebellious family] that descend to the Pit...like the pierced-through [the rebels in the family of Korah] who lie in the grave... You have laid me in the Pit below, in darkness, in the depths... separated from my companions [family members]". They felt their death was in essence that of their rebellious relatives. They were no better, but saved by grace. We see here their humility in recognizing that as the Lord put it in Lk. 14, the dramatic death of some doesn't mean that we ourselves are not also sinners who shall also die. Only grace can save us, and they came to that conclusion.
</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yahweh, the God of my salvation, I have cried day and night before You-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Prayer is part of the atmosphere of spiritual life, not something hived off and separate- it is an expression of our spirit. Thus there are verses which speak of many daily prayers as being just one prayer (<a href='B:230 86:3'>Psa 86:3</a>; <a href='B:230 86:6'>Psa 86:6</a>; <a href='B:230 88:1-2'>Psa 88:1-2</a>); prayer is a way / spirit of life, not something specific which occurs for a matter of minutes each day. The commands to "pray without ceasing" simply can't be literally obeyed (<a href='B:590 5:17'>1Th 5:17</a>). "Watch and pray always" in the last days likewise connects prayer with watchfulness, which is an attitude of mind rather than something done on specific occasions. This is not to say that prayer in no sense refers to formal, specific prayer. Evidently it does, but it is only a verbal crystallization of our general spirit of life.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David’s first waking moments were naturally of prayer to God. And this is our pattern. He often mentions his habit of regular prayer morning and evening (<a href='B:230 5:3'>Psa 5:3</a>; <a href='B:230 55:17'>Psa 55:17</a>; <a href='B:230 59:16'>Psa 59:16</a>; <a href='B:230 88:3'>Psa 88:3</a>; <a href='B:230 119:147'>Psa 119:147</a>). This&nbsp; should not have to be enforced upon us, but rather the natural outcome of a life lived in constant connection with God. David perceived that the Mosaic ritual of morning and evening sacrifice taught the sacrifice of prayer should be made in daily life, even though at the time of many of the Psalms, David was exiled from the sanctuary. This exile from organized religion led him to make this connection, as it can for us too.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Let my prayer enter into Your presence, turn Your ear to my cry-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David imagined the words of prayer as entering into the very presence of God in heaven. This is an awesome conception; that the words of a man at a bus stop in south London can enter to the very presence of God’s throne room.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>for my soul is full of troubles, my life draws near to Sheol-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :4. The Lord’s soul was likewise sorrowful unto death in Gethsemane, as if the stress alone nearly killed Him (<a href='B:480 14:34'>Mar 14:34</a>). "My soul is full of troubles, and my life (therefore) draweth nigh unto the grave" (<a href='B:230 88:3'>Psa 88:3</a>). <a href='B:290 53:10-12'>Isa 53:10-12</a> speaks of the fact that the Lord's soul suffered as being the basis of our redemption; the mind contained within that spat upon head, as it hung on that tortured body; this was where our salvation was won. Death is the ultimately intense experience, and living a life dedicated to death would have had an intensifying effect upon the Lord's character and personality.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I am counted among those who go down into the pit. I am like a man who has no help-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David sees sheol (:3) as "the pit", the grave, not as a place of conscious existence. Like Job, he feels he is facing imminent death with no helper or comforter.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>set apart among the dead, like the slain who lie in the grave, whom You remember no more-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> they are cut off from Your hand-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Clearly, David sees death as unconsciousness, with no torment nor reward from God at that point. "Set apart" or "cast out" suggests David imagined his corpse amongst others, waiting to be thrown into a hastily dug pit (:5).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have laid me in the lowest pit, in the darkest depths-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David believed death was unconsciousness, as we have often noted in the Psalms. Yet here and in <a href='B:230 86:13'>Psa 86:13</a> he appears to use a common term, "the lowest sheol", meaning the worst kind of death. As with the language of demons, or our usage of English words like "Monday" [moon day], language of the day can be used without actually believing in it. These "depths" are those of <a href='B:230 69:2'>Psa 69:2</a>, another Bathsheba psalm.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Your wrath lies heavily upon me; You have afflicted me with all Your waves. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This again is the language of the Bathsheba <a href='B:230 69:2'>Psa 69:2</a>. He feels he is going to die because of God’s wrath. And yet he had earlier rejoiced at the certainty of God’s forgiveness and grace. But his faith in forgiveness seems to have wavered, as our does so easily. This was partly because he was so reluctant to accept the consequences of his sin; to endure consequence is not to say that God’s wrath is upon us. But David had repeatedly badgered God to remove all consequences, but He was not willing to do so.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have taken my friends from me, You have made me an abomination to them; I am shut in and I can’t escape-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Heb. 'far from me', as in :18. The plea for God not to "be far from me" is common (<a href='B:230 22:11'>Psa 22:11</a>; <a href='B:230 22:19'>Psa 22:19</a>; <a href='B:230 35:22'>Psa 35:22</a>; <a href='B:230 38:21'>Psa 38:21</a>; <a href='B:230 71:12'>Psa 71:12</a>). The emphasis perhaps is to be placed upon David not wanting God to be far from him, seeing that he felt others were 'far' from him (s:w. <a href='B:230 88:8'>Psa 88:8</a>; <a href='B:230 88:18'>Psa 88:18</a>). He accepted his social and psychological isolation from others, but he didn’t want God to be likewise far off from him. In the context of the exiles, God was willing to not be 'far off' from the exiles if they repented (<a href='B:290 46:13'>Isa 46:13</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The "friends" may be a reference to his great friend, maybe Bathsheba, or Ahithophel. Perhaps it is a reference to a falling out with Bathsheba soon after their sin, and the way that on account of what he had done, David’s own relatives ["friends"] turned against him, as did Ahithophel, who was Bathsheba's grandfather. David loved his parents, especially caring for their safe keeping in his wilderness years; only to be forsaken by them (the Hebrew means just that), and to be rejected by his brothers and sisters ("friend"; <a href='B:230 27:10'>Psa 27:10</a>; <a href='B:230 38:11'>Psa 38:11</a>; <a href='B:230 69:8'>Psa 69:8</a>; <a href='B:230 88:18'>Psa 88:18</a>). And yet despite these breakdowns of relationship being totally David’s fault, he appears to blame God for it, and doesn't conclude the Psalm with any ascription of praise or contrition.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>My eyes are dim from grief; I have called on You daily, Yahweh. I have spread out my hands to You-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The dimness of eyesight may refer to a result of a stroke or illness he suffered after the sin with Bathsheba. But it appears to have been brought on by his desperation at not having his prayers answered. Yet those prayers were for the removal of the consequences of his sin, and much of his distress was because he simply could not accept Nathan's prophetic word about the consequences of his sin. And therefore he was not praying according to God’s will and word.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Do You show wonders to the dead? Do the dead rise up and praise You? Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Did David’s faith in the resurrection collapse in <a href='B:230 88:10'>Psa 88:10</a>? Job's did likewise at some points. David asks to be preserved from death so that he can continue praising God. He saw this as the purpose of life and existence. He clearly did not imagine death as meaning going to heaven and singing praises. God does indeed show wonders to the dead believers in resurrection, yet it seems David’s faith and understanding in this collapsed temporarily.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Is Your grace declared in the grave? Or Your faithfulness in Destruction?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The praise David wanted to live in order to offer (:10) was praise of God’s grace, righteousness and faithfulness to him (:12). God’s forgiveness of his sins of adultery and murder was by grace, seeing he was condemned for these things under the law; but yet God’s righteousness was not impugned by that. Paul labours this point throughout Romans 1-8.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Are Your wonders made known in the dark? Or Your righteousness in the land of forgetfulness?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>See on :11. Death was the place of forgetfulness in that God has no conscious intercourse with the dead, He does not in that sense remember them (:5). But as noted on :10, it appears that David is overlooking completely the resurrection of the body, in a form which reflects that God has not at all forgotten our essential spirit and personality.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But to You, Yahweh, I have cried. In the morning, my prayer comes before You-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As noted on :1, David still prays to God even in depression and collapse of faith in resurrection (:10,12). He still has a strong faith that his words actually enter the very presence of God in heaven.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yahweh, why do You reject my soul? Why do You hide Your face from me?-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The prototype of Christ feeling forsaken was in David feeling forsaken by God when he fled from Absalom (<a href='B:230 42:9'>Psa 42:9</a>; <a href='B:230 43:2'>Psa 43:2</a>; <a href='B:230 88:14'>Psa 88:14</a>); but clearly he was not actually forsaken. In David’s case, as discussed on :7, the apparent silence of God was because David was praying for the wrong things- David had repeatedly badgered God to remove all consequences of his sin, but He was not willing to do so. Nathan had spoken to him from God about this, and David just would not accept it.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I am afflicted and ready to die from my youth up; while I suffer Your terrors, I am distracted-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David seems to consider that his life had been one of continual risk of death; from wild animals as a shepherd, from Goliath and the Philistines, from Saul, from Gentile armies, and now from Absalom. He appears to consider God is unfair to him. His complaint about God terrifying him is taken from Job (<a href='B:220 6:4'>Job 6:4</a>; <a href='B:220 9:34'>Job 9:34</a>; <a href='B:220 13:21'>Job 13:21</a>). But although clearly knowing the book of Job well (for David so often alludes to it), he fails to factor in that Job finally realizes that he has not spoken rightly about God. David failed to see the end of the Lord with Job, that He is very pitiful and of tender mercy (<a href='B:660 5:11'>Jas 5:11</a>):&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Your fierce wrath has gone over me. Your terrors have cut me off-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As explained on :16, David was wrong to consider that God was using terrors against him. The words of Job came to mind and he hastily quotes them (see on :16), but without reflection upon the context and final conclusion of Job:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>They came around me like water all day long, they completely engulfed me-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is another connection with Psalms 22, this time to <a href='B:230 22:16'>Psa 22:16</a> where the same word for "engulfed" is used (see on :1). But the idea of being engulfed by God’s terrors is again alluding to the book of Job (s:w. <a href='B:220 19:6'>Job 19:6</a>). But again he fails to factor in that Job finally realizes that he has not spoken rightly about God. David failed to see the end of the Lord with Job, that He is very pitiful and of tender mercy (<a href='B:660 5:11'>Jas 5:11</a>):&nbsp; </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A contemplation by Ethan, the Ezrahite-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"By" can as well be "for"; the author seems clearly to be David, so it may be that Ethan was the one responsible for publishing it or setting it to music. This Psalm praises and expounds God's covenant with David, but then from :38 onwards accuses God of breaking that covenant. It seems we have here the kind of thing we are used to in electronic communication; the reply to the accusation includes the original accusation beneath the text of the reply. The complaint about breaking the covenant was rooted in a misunderstanding- that the covenant implied an unbroken line of kings from David onwards, literally reigning on Zion. But now that line has been broken, and Zion destroyed and ploughed as a field. The covenant with David promised that David's throne and kingdom would continue eternally because the resurrected ["set up"] Messiah, Son of God and Son of David, would reign eternally from Zion, and David would be resurrected to see this "before [him]", in David's presence. The first part of the Psalm explains this. And so all the complaint about Divine fickleness and injustice was in fact based on a misreading of what He had promised, and interpreting God's words of promise according to the narrative of what David and others wished or fantasized to be true.</p><p>The thoughts of the complainer from :38 ff. are very similar to Lamentations; we wonder whether these are Jeremiah's reflections, answered by "Ethan". The final verse of the complaint concludes with an expression of trust in Yahweh despite all the doubts, which is typical of Jeremiah. However if Ethan is the Ethan of 1 Kings 5:11; 1 Chron. 2:6, then he was contemporary with David and Solomon. It could be that his inspired commentary on the promises to David is appended with a complaint from Jeremiah, because actually the complaints had already been answered centuries earlier in Ethan's commentary on the Davidic covenant.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will sing of the grace of Yahweh forever. With my mouth I will make known Your faithfulness to all generations-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The point of "forever" and stressing God's eternal faithfulness is in answer to the complaints which begin in :38. Despite all seeming injustice and lack of God coming through, the Psalmist still believes God's grace is eternal. God's grace and faithfulness to the covenant are paralleled. The fulfilment of the promises is by His grace; and therefore to question whether His word is true is to question His grace. "In mercy shall the throne be established" (Is. 16:5). The building up of David's throne, with Messiah ruling on it, will be eternal. Because as Paul says, God will then lavish His grace upon us throughout the eternal ages.</p><p>This Psalm is originally David’s reflection upon the promises to him in 2 Samuel 7, and his struggles with believing and understanding parts of them. But it has been reworked by later inspired hands in the context of the exiles, struggling to believe that the Davidic covenant still has meaning. Yet the Psalm is introduced as being about grace. For that is what those promises reveal; and it begins and ends with praise, despite David’s struggle with how God was apparently fulfilling them. We can therefore note that David’s greatest insight into the promises was at the time he doubted them the most. Those who have these crises know the love of God in the way that the prodigal son knew it far more than the son who stayed at home, living in obedience each day. And for all his doubts and struggles, David wishes to declare God’s faithfulness to all and for all time. And he chose this song to do so.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I indeed declare, Love stands firm forever because You established the skies; Your faithfulness is in them-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The solid existence of all creation is seen as evidence enough that the love of God, as expressed through the Davidic covenant, would remain firm likewise. We need only look at the natural creation for evidence that God is going to keep the promises found in the Bible. The same idea is found in :37. In answer to the complaints which begin in :38, the answer is that God is love and keeps His promises, and the natural creation proves this. The idea is that in Heaven, God's faithfulness to His covenant with David is total and immutable. It is only to the observers on earth, whose complaints are from :38, that there appears anything wrong. </p><p>The promise to David declared that even if the Son of David sinned, God would never withdraw His love from Him. The complainers expected a Davidic dynasty of kings to last eternally, but God never promised that. He promised that His Son would reign eternally on the throne of David, at a future point. And that parental, paternal never to be withdrawn love would indeed never be withdrawn. But those focused on seeing blessing in the here and now didn't see the wonder of that. They demanded a fulfilment before their eyes, and refused to see that "hidden love of God". Just as God maintains constantly His covenant with the natural creation, so He maintains His covenant with David. He is not a liar nor covenant breaker. He is working ceaselessly towards fulfilling the covenant with David in the return of His resurrected son, and the eternal establishment of Him upon David's throne (:4). </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I have made a covenant with My chosen one, I have sworn to David My servant-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It's hard to know whether this is a direct revelation from God, or whether these words are as it were put in God’s mouth by the poetry of the psalmist. David was clearly the "chosen one... My servant" (<a href='B:230 89:3'>Psa 89:3</a>), but these very terms are applied to Israel as a whole (<a href='B:230 105:6'>Psa 105:6</a>; <a href='B:230 105:43'>Psa 105:43</a>; <a href='B:230 106:5'>Psa 106:5</a>) and to the "servant" of later Isaiah, who refers to both Israel and their Messiah as their embodiment (<a href='B:290 42:1'>Isa 42:1</a>; <a href='B:290 45:4'>Isa 45:4</a>). David’s path of sin, repentance and restoration was intended to be that of all God’s people, as he himself recognizes in Psalms 32. But the exiles refused to repent and therefore their restoration was precluded. They were not therefore treated as His "chosen one".</p>


text:
<h2>‘</h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will establish Your seed forever, and build up Your throne to all generations’. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This was true, but only if his seed had the characteristics of David. As noted on :3, David’s path of sin, repentance and restoration was intended to be that of all God’s people, as he himself recognizes in Psalms 32. But the exiles refused to repent and therefore their restoration was precluded. And so the eternal establishment of his throne didn’t come true as it could have done at the time of the exiles.</p><p>It will become true in the Lord Jesus, whose throne will be eternally built up in that His rulership will eternally expand. That opens up a vista of us eternally extending His rule- in our own hearts, over other beings and dimensions. "Build up" is also translated "to obtain children". It's as if the seed continues to grow eternally, the throne is built up in that more people submit to the king, so His "kingdom", those beneath His dominion, increase eternally. This suggests we will spend eternity bringing other beings beneath that dominion, and we can begin living that spirit now in our witness and bringing others into that dominion. The contrast was with David wanting to "build [up]" a house for God. His response was that He didn't want David spending a few years building up a house for Him; but rather He would spend eternity building up David's house in the sense of his family, who would also be God's family and kingdom (2 Sam. 7:5,7 etc.). Solomon totally missed the point of all this in reasoning that David could not build the house because of his bloodshed, but therefore he [Solomon] was intended to physically build a house for Yahweh (1 Kings 5:3,5). Perhaps this is why we read several times that Solomon built [up] the house and finished it (1 Kings 6:9,14), he was building the house seven years and then finished it (1 Kings 6:38), which appears to be stating the obvious until we see the intended contrast- Yahweh's building up of David's house, which was also to be His house, would be eternal and never finish. And 1 Kings 8:13 is almost comical in the contrast; Solomon proudly says that "I have surely built [up] for You a house to dwell in, a settled place for You to abide in for ever". But no, Yahweh is about eternally building up a house for David where He will live, in the hearts of an ever and eternally expanding group of people who would be David's true seed. Solomon built a physical house for God's Name... but how can a Name, Yahweh's characteristics, abide in a cold stone building? They can only be found in the hearts of humans made in His image. This is why Ps. 89:2,4 parallel the "building up" of the throne and "Mercy shall be built up for ever". The ever expanding dominion of God in hearts and minds is all of His grace and mercy, and that will continue to grow and be magnified for ever. Although David set Solomon up for failure with his insistence on building up a physical house rather than let Yahweh build up his spiritual house, David does also 'get it' that it is Yahweh who is the builder and not him. He does often admit this in his Psalms: "Do good unto Zion, build Thou the walls of Jerusalem... Yahweh built up His sanctuary... Jerusalem is builded up as a city compacted together... Except Yahweh builds up the house they labour in vain who build... Yahweh builds up Jerusalem... " (Ps. 51:18; 78:69; 122:3; 127:1; 147:2). And this time of building up would not be until the Lord Jesus returned: "When Yahweh shall build up Zion, he shall appear in His glory" (Ps. 102:16). This is the time of the new covenant: "I will build you [up] and you shall be built, O virgin of Israel... I will watch over them to build them up... I will build them [up] as at the first... I Yahweh build up the ruined places / people... in that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David and will build it [up]" (Jer. 31:4,28; 33:7; Ez. 36:36; Am. 9:11).<p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The skies will praise Your wonders, Yahweh; Your faithfulness also in the assembly of the holy ones-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is a reference to the court of Heaven. Although the exiles on earth couldn't see the progression of God’s purpose according to His covenant with David, the Angels in heaven perceived it and rejoiced. And our perspective is to be theirs. The implication is that those on earth who considered God to have broken His promises were out of step with the Angels in the court of Heaven above, who praise Him for fulfilling the promises.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For who in the skies can be compared to Yahweh? Who among the sons of the heavenly beings is like Yahweh-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Here again we seem to have a criticism of idolatry. The idols are often not baldly stated to be non-existent, but rather Yahweh is so highly exalted and powerful that effectively they have no real existence. Likewise the Lord Jesus didn’t specifically state that demons don't exist; rather the supreme power of His miracles showed that effectively they don't, as they have no real power even if they do exist. Idolatry was an abiding problem in Israel at David’s time, and also at the start of the exile, as Ezekiel makes clear.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>a very awesome God in the council of the holy ones, to be feared above all those who are around Him?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The awesome nature of the court of heaven is stressed, into which we have a glimpse in 1 Kings 22. God has a "council", discussing His plans with the Angels. This is because although the exiles on earth couldn't see the progression of God’s purpose according to His covenant with David, the Angels in heaven perceived it and rejoiced. And our perspective is to be theirs.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yahweh, God of Armies, who is a mighty one like You? Yah, Your faithfulness is around You-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Any suspicion that God hasn't come through for us is effectively a disbelief in His Almightiness. Any lack of 'coming through' is not because He lacks the power.</p><p>The Angels around the throne in :7 are here equated with God’s faithfulness. They would surely bring about the fulfilment of the Davidic covenant, in their time and way. The apparent lack of fulfilment of the covenant was not therefore because of any inability on God’s part; which leaves the implication that it was due to failure on Israel's part on earth.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You rule the pride of the sea; when its waves rise up, You calm them-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As so often in the Psalms, in times of doubt and depression concerning why God doesn't come through as we think or hope He should, thoughts turn to how God has acted mightily in the past, and the Red Sea deliverance is the favourite of the psalmists; and of how His constant activity is seen in the natural creation. If He rules the sea, thought by the ancients to be the home of mysterious powers and Satan-like monsters, then how much more can He control the movements of the nations, represented by the seas. The complainers from :38 ff. seem to have attributed the disaster of Zion's overthrow and the ending of the Davidic line of kings as being due to God being somehow powerless against the cosmic forces of evil. But the answer is that Yahweh rules over all any such supposed powers and has shown this abundantly in His past behaviour. The God who had historically calmed the seas at creation and at the Red Sea would just as easily calm the seas before the Son of David (:25). But the complainers thought that what God had historically done He was bound to do at any time, on demand, as if God is a cash machine. They assumed God should act now as He had historically: “Where are your deeds of steadfast love of old, O Lord?” (:50). But He is not bound by man. His power is unlimited and He can do this again- through His Son, but when He wishes and not simply on demand.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have broken Rahab in pieces, like one of the slain. You have scattered Your enemies with Your mighty arm-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>As noted on :9, the appeal is to the fact that God had destroyed the might of Egypt ("Rahab") and scattered the tribes of Canaan. Faith continues that He can do the same again with Babylon. In answer to the complaints which begin in :38, the Psalmist recalls God's historical actions and fulfilment of His promises. Even though the deliverance from Egypt appeared much delayed and long drawn out. Verses 10 and 11 clearly allude to the victory song over Egypt of Ex. 15. The complainers were perhaps arguing that Yahweh had indeed rescued Israel from Egypt, so why could He not do so from Babylon? He would, ultimately, although it was a redemption largely refused by Judah. And He would do so spiritually in the establishment of the eternal Kingdom of His Son. But the complainers didn't care to accept that the temporary triumph of Babylon was because of their sins, and they failed to focus upon the future establishment of Yahweh's eternal Kingdom on earth.</p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The heavens are Yours, the earth also is Yours; the world and its fullness; You have founded them-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The fact that "the earth is the Lord's" is used to highlight the wonder of the fact that therefore how much moreso do His people belong to Him, and are cared for by Him with such sensitivity (<a href='B:20 19:5'>Exo 19:5</a>; <a href='B:50 10:14'>Deu 10:14</a>; <a href='B:230 50:12'>Psa 50:12</a>; <a href='B:230 89:11'>Psa 89:11</a>). Just as the eretz / earth / land promised to Abraham is Yahweh's, so is in fact the entire planet (<a href='B:230 24:1'>Psa 24:1</a>), and His purpose was perceived by David as incorporating the entire planet and not just Israel. The 'founding' of the physical planet is compared to how God has 'founded' Zion <a href='B:290 14:32'>Isa 14:32</a>). Zion had apparently been removed; but that meant that it must be founded again eternally. But the response of the exiles was to think that if Zion had been removed, then God’s purpose was over. They failed to appreciate that just as Abraham was promised eternal inheritance of the land but didn’t receive that in his lifetime, so likewise the fulfilment of God’s promises requires a future time of restoration and resurrection.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The north and the south, You have created them; Tabor and Hermon rejoice in Your name-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "North and the west", which would better fit Tabor and Hermon as the great mountains of the west and north. AV "shall rejoice..." reflects faith that finally the land and kingdom would be restored, and rejoice instead of mourning. Reflection on God's extreme power shows that the fears expressed from :38 that God has failed to 'come through' are not due to any lack of power His side. </p><p>It has been noted that "north and south" can be translated "Zaphon and Yemin". These are "the traditional Ugaritic mountains of the gods, namely Zaphon and Amanus"; the idea is that Yahweh is supreme over the gods and the supposed powers of evil. Any blaming of the end of the Davidic line on cosmic forces of evil was therefore impossible; for Yahweh was clearly king over them, to the point they effectively didn't even exist.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have a mighty arm, Your hand is strong and Your right hand is exalted-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God’s apparent inaction was never to be interpreted as meaning that He was too weak to fulfil His purpose. God’s power remains permanent and ultimate, even in the face of our defeats and before death itself. Again, the logic of this demands that the apparent lack of progress with God’s purpose isn't due to any deficiency on His part; and therefore it means that we are the reason for that lack of progress.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne; grace and truth go before Your face-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Never should Israel think that because the throne of David was apparently cast down, so therefore was God’s throne. His throne is eternal, and before His face, always in His awareness, is "grace and truth", a phrase often used of His promises to Abraham and David:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>If God's promises are grace and truth, then it's unthinkable that they should be broken- otherwise they wouldn't be "truth". Those from :38 who claimed God's "truth" had been broken were therefore saying God is untruthful. But He is fundamentally truthful, and so their positions were arrived at due to misinterpretation of His word and interjecting their own narratives onto His word. The eternal establishment of the Messianic Son of David, Son of God, would be by grace and truth. To argue that seeing there was no human Davidic king was to posit that God's grace and truth were no longer. But they are. It's just they are not immediately visible before our eyes. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Blessed are the people who learn to acclaim You; they shall walk in the light of Your face, Yahweh-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David often asks for forgiveness and restored fellowship with God in terms of walking again in the light of God’s face. As noted above, his path of repentance and restoration was to be that of the exiles; if they acclaimed God in repentance, which the exiles generally didn’t. The people who praise God are those who are praising Him for faithfully fulfilling His word- whereas those who don't perceive this, those speaking from :38 onwards, are miserable and not at all blessed / happy. Those who do perceive God's faithfulness "learn to acclaim You". Perceiving His faithfulness is something that must be learnt and is beyond any surface level observation of life.  </p><p>"Learn to acclaim You" is the language of the acclamation at a coronation. Although there was no visible Davidic king at that point, blessed were those who still perceived that Yahweh was still their king, and His throne was to be given to David when His promised Son reigned upon it. We too acclaim Yahweh as King and ourselves as His Kingdom, although the literal visible evidence of that isn't there in our current situation. But that is a 'learnt' position and the Psalmist wishes it for us all. The complainers hadn't learnt that.  </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>In Your name they rejoice all day. In Your righteousness, they are exalted-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This again alludes to how David was forgiven for his sins through the imputation of God’s righteousness. The exiles were to follow his path to restoration; and like David, rejoice in this imputation of righteousness. But they refused. Experiencing God's grace (:17) leads to the possibility of living in constant rejoicing at our high status before God- regardless of whether we consider He hasn't come through for us right now as much as we would like (as the complainers from :38 onwards felt).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For You are the glory of their strength. In Your favour, our horn will be exalted-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The idea of the horn of the righteous being exalted is used about what David envisaged happening for God’s people in this life (s:w. <a href='B:230 148:14'>Psa 148:14</a>), although the final fulfilment was to be at the last day, when the horn of the wicked is cut off (<a href='B:230 75:10'>Psa 75:10</a>). But there are potential foretastes of the last day in this life. Jeremiah appears to struggle with the Psalms which taught that the horn of the righteous would be lifted up, lamenting that instead the horn of their enemies had been lifted up (s:w. <a href='B:310 2:17'>Lam 2:17</a>). This confirms the suggestion made on :1 that the complainer from :38 ff. is Jeremiah. The truth was that the horn of God’s people would only be lifted up if they were identified with the lifting up of the horn which was Messiah (<a href='B:230 89:17'>Psa 89:17</a>; <a href='B:230 89:24'>Psa 89:24</a>). And because this didn’t happen, their horn was not exalted.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For our shield belongs to Yahweh; our king to the Holy One of Israel-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This may be commentary upon the fact that the Davidic line had been temporarily overthrown. God was the ultimate king of Israel, and so there was no need to think that Israel were left without a king. "Shield" is a metaphor for "king" (as in <a href='B:230 47:9'>Psa 47:9</a>). Even in exile, Israel were not without a king who would protect them. AV "The Holy One of Israel is our king" is the answer to the complainers of :38 ff. lamenting that there was now no Davidic king on the throne. They were making the mistake Israel had historically made- to forget Yahweh was their king, and thus resign themselves from being His Kingdom. For a kingdom is a group of persons who have a king. He was still their king and shield, even with Zion ploughed and no Davidic king on the throne. All they could see was what was immediately in front of their eyes- they had no human king and so they thought they were now not a kingdom. The answer is that Yahweh was still their king, and His throne was paralleled with the throne of David in the Davidic covenant. And that throne and kingdom would be eternal- in the future, when the Son of David was resurrected and David too was resurrected to see that eternal throne and kingdom established "before [him]".</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Then You spoke in vision to Your saints and said, I have bestowed strength on the warrior. I have exalted a young man from the people-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Dahood renders: “I made a lad king in preference to a warrior, I exalted a youth above a hero”, with reference to Saul.</p><p>2 Sam. 7 says that the vision appeared to Nathan by night and he shared it with David. But here we read that the vision is to all "Your saints". Is. 55:3-5 call individuals to choose to personally enter the Davidic covenant: "Incline your ear, and come to me; Listen so that you may live. I will make with you an everlasting covenant, My steadfast, sure love for David". The complainers just assumed that their interpretation of the Davidic covenant must come true for them automatically. See on :51. </p><p>The bestowal of strength refers to David (<a href='B:230 20:2'>Psa 20:2</a>; <a href='B:230 21:5'>Psa 21:5</a>). The "chosen man" (AV) is clearly David (<a href='B:230 78:70'>Psa 78:70</a>; <a href='B:230 89:3'>Psa 89:3</a>; <a href='B:110 8:16'>1Ki 8:16</a>). The "saints" or "holy one[s]" who were told of the choosing of David were the Angels in the court of heaven (see on :5-7), and was reflected upon earth by Samuel the prophet being told to choose and anoint David whilst still a young man. We appear to have here the record of a vision given to Samuel, on the basis of which he went seeking for David to anoint him:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Angels in the court of heaven were going to bring about God's purpose with David and the complainers should not have considered them impotent to perform it.   </p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Samuel appeared to have assumed that Eliab must be Yahweh's anointed, seeing he was tall and handsome (<a href='B:90 16:7'>1Sa 16:7</a>). But he had not learnt the lesson he should've learnt from his experience with Saul, who was exceptionally tall, and yet was no true leader of God’s people. God tries to remind Samuel of this by saying of Eliab: "I have rejected him"; God had used the very term about Saul very recently (<a href='B:90 16:1'>1Sa 16:1</a>; <a href='B:90 16:7'>1Sa 16:7</a> RV). <a href='B:230 89:19-20'>Psa 89:19-20</a> imply that God had specifically told Samuel to anoint David- so his desire to anoint tall, handsome Eliab appears to have been a failure on Samuel's part, rooted in simply not joining the dots. And even when David was brought in, Samuel seems to have somewhat failed in his judgment- for he was impressed by David’s fair appearance (<a href='B:90 16:12'>1Sa 16:12</a>), when God had just laboured the point to Samuel that the choice of a ruler was not to be based upon his appearance (<a href='B:90 16:7'>1Sa 16:7</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>However, the account of this "vision" about David then goes on later to repeat and expand parts of the promises to David given to him by Nathan the prophet in 2 Samuel 7. So it could be that here we are being given an account of a vision given to Nathan which included parts of what Samuel had been told. Or it could be that we are reading here the inspired commentary of the psalmist upon those visions, which are largely unrecorded in the historical records.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I have found David My servant, I have anointed him with My holy oil-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Bible reveals that God is in search of man. "Like grapes in the wilderness, I found Israel" (<a href='B:350 9:10'>Hos 9:10</a>); "He found him in a desert land…he encircled him, he cared for him" (<a href='B:50 32:10'>Deu 32:10</a>); "I have found David my servant" (<a href='B:230 89:20'>Psa 89:20</a>). Jeremiah's search for believers was a reflection of God’s: "Run to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, look and take note! Search her squares to see if you can find a man, one who does justice and seeks truth" (<a href='B:300 5:1'>Jer 5:1</a>). God hunts for us like a lion, Job came to realize; and in this "You show yourself wonderful to me" (<a href='B:220 10:16'>Job 10:16</a>). And we are searching for God. God is not indifferent to our searching for Him. Those awestruck moments of wonder, of radical amazement, are where God finds us at the time we are searching for Him. Both sides are seeking each other; and in those moments, they meet. As a Jewish poet put it: "And going out to meet thee / I found thee coming toward me". In those moments, heaven and earth kiss each other. There is a click, a flash, between Almighty God and us- as we stand at a bus stop, turn left into Acacia Avenue, lay there on our bed meditating.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>with whom My hand shall be established; My arm will also strengthen him-</p><h2>This hand of God made a specific branch "strong". This branch was the Lord Jesus (<a href='B:290 11:1'>Isa 11:1</a>; <a href='B:300 23:5'>Jer 23:5</a>; <a href='B:450 3:8'>Zec 3:8</a>; <a href='B:450 6:12'>Zec 6:12</a>). The psalmist perceives that the restoration will come through an individual Messianic figure, who would as it were be a spiritual reincarnation of the historical David. There were various possible potential fulfillments of this, such as Zerubabbel and Joshua, but they all let the baton drop. The final fulfilment is therefore in the Lord Jesus, who allowed Himself to be made strong by God’s hand (s:w. <a href='B:230 80:17'>Psa 80:17</a>). Whilst His utter moral perfection was in a sense His own achievement, and that must never be taken away from the Lord, the path there involved allowing God to make Him strong for Himself. And this is our pattern too, in allowing the work of the Holy Spirit to do likewise with us, paralleled here with God’s hand being upon us, making us strong. The prophecy could have had an earlier fulfilment in Hezekiah, 'made strong by Yah', but he too disallowed it and went off to this present world. The lead characteristic of Jacob was that he and his descendants would be 'made strong' (s:w. <a href='B:10 25:23'>Gen 25:23</a>), even though they were so spiritually weak. So many times Israel are encouraged to be "of good courage", s:w. "made strong" (<a href='B:50 31:6-7'>Deu 31:6-7</a> etc:), so that they might inherit the promised kingdom. But they generally didn’t make use of this potential strengthening. The exiles likewise were potentially "made strong" but they refused to make use of that, remaining in Babylon for the most part (s:w. <a href='B:290 35:3'>Isa 35:3</a>; <a href='B:290 41:10'>Isa 41:10</a>).</h2>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>No enemy will tax him, no wicked man will oppress him-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The initial reference was to the terrible taxation of Saul, which David avoided through killing Goliath (<a href='B:90 17:25'>1Sa 17:25</a>). The reminder is that despite this interpretation or implication of the promises to David, the "wicked man" Saul did indeed "oppress" him; for these phrases are used throughout the wilderness Psalms about Saul. But the point was, the Davidic covenant did come finally true for David, despite periods when apparently it failed for him. And the exiles were bidden likewise look to the end of things, rather than demand immediate and constant experience of God’s promises coming true in this life. This is a lesson for all those tempted to believe the "prosperity Gospel".</p><p>The complainers from :38 onwards felt that the enemies were oppressing them. But what God had promised was a time when no enemy would ever oppress God's people, under the rulership of the Son of David. So the complainers were wanting the Kingdom situation right now, and felt it unreasonable that they didn't have their jam both today and tomorrow.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will beat down his adversaries before him, and strike those who hate him-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This again only came true for David in the longer term and not immediately. Absalom and Saul both died from being 'struck down' but this was only after they had appeared to be in the ascendancy over David. And so it was to be true for all in covenant relationship with God:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But My faithfulness and My grace will be with him; in My name, his horn will be exalted-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It was in this exaltation of the Messianic horn that the horn of the people would be exalted (s:w. :17). There existed even in these earlier days the idea of being "in Christ", the Messiah, and those in Him being blessed with the experience of His exaltation and glory. But the various possibilities of a Messiah figure in the period of the restoration all came to nothing. Knowing this openness of God, women like Hannah clearly hoped and prayed that their sons would be Messiah (<a href='B:90 2:10'>1Sa 2:10</a> = <a href='B:230 89:24'>Psa 89:24</a>); for they perceived that God’s purpose was open to such a thing. But finally the fulfilment was to come in the person of the Lord Jesus, after all the other potential fulfillments had let the baton drop:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will set his hand also on the sea and his right hand on the rivers-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"The rivers" can be understood as an intensive plural, referring to the great river, Euphrates. From the sea to the Euphrates was the territory promised to Abraham. The fulfilment of the Davidic covenant was to be understood as involving the complete fulfilment of the promises made to Abraham. This didn’t happen in David’s time, but this was the promise. We appear to have here an extension of the promises to David, perhaps given to the psalmist by direct revelation from God, although the promises recorded in 2 Samuel 7 are alluded to and expanded.</p><p>Seeing the Son of David had not yet reigned from the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, the complainers of :38 ff. were wrong to think that a Kingdom of God situation had ever come about. </p><p>This is a response to :42 "You have exalted the right hand of his adversaries". But the eye of faith looked to the day when the Son of David would have His hand on the full extent of the land promised to Abraham. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He will call to me, ‘You are my Father, my God, and the rock of my salvation!’<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Lord Jesus appears to allude to this in calling God his Father and his God (<a href='B:500 20:17'>Joh 20:17</a>); hard proof against the "Jesus = God" theology of Trinitarians. We note too the need for salvation of David’s Messianic seed; hardly appropriate if that seed were to be God Himself:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will also appoint him My firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The fulfilment of the Davidic covenant was to be primarily in a person, who would rule over all kings and would be God’s firstborn; the first child He ever had. <a href='B:100 7:12-14'>2Sa 7:12-14</a> implies this would have to be through a woman in David’s line becoming pregnant not from man but from God Himself, through His Spirit. And this was to have ultimate fulfilment in the virgin birth (<a href='B:490 1:31-35'>Luk 1:31-35</a>). But the exiles focused instead upon a visible restoration of the Davidic throne and kingdom before their eyes at that time. We too must be Jesus centered more than Kingdom centered. Otherwise we too will start to complain that God appears not to be coming through for us personally in this life.  The complainers of :38 ff. observed that God's people were now beneath all the nations, and not above them. But this was because they didn't have the firstborn, only begotten Son of God reigning over them in God's Kingdom. They wanted and indeed expected the full Kingdom blessings to be experienced in this life. Just like many today who complain of God not coming through. This language is applied to the Lord Jesus "the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth" (Rev. 1:5). But it was to come true in His resurrection and later in the full establishment of His Kingdom on earth. But the complainers wanted the Kingdom life here and now, and didn't factor in the "Jesus" issue.
</p><p>Possibly the allusion is to Ex. 4:22 "Israel is My son even My firstborn‟. God's intentions for Israel had now been replaced by focusing them in His Son. Or it could be that His Son is presented as the ideal Israel. Likewise in Ps. 89 the son of David is the highest of all kings on the earth, but this is the language of Dt. 26:19; 28:1 about Israel “high above all nations that He has made". The Son of David is to reign "as the days of heaven", for ever (:29). But Israel's days were to be "as the days of heaven" (Dt. 11:21). Again, the Messiah becomes the epitome and representative of God's true Israel. Salvation and eternal days are to be found in Him, and not through some eternal line of Davidic kings.</p><p>2 Sam. 5:12 and 1 Chron. 14:2 observe that "David perceived that Yahweh had established him king over Israel; for his kingdom was exalted on high, for His people Israel’s sake". The establishment of the Davidic kingdom was for Israel's sake (as noted also in 1 Kings 10:9; 2 Chron. 2:11). Ez. 21:25-27 comments that the last king in the Davidic line was a "profane, wicked prince" and therefore the continuation of the Davidic line of kings was not good for the sake of Israel. It had to be removed and replaced with the Davidic son of David. But the complainers of :38 ff. could not see any other narrative than their desire to see a Davidic king reigning on Judah's throne, no matter how profane and wicked he was.  </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will keep My grace for him forever. My covenant will stand firm through him-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The exiles were complaining that the Davidic covenant wasn't being fulfilled in their experience. But they failed to perceive that it required the appearance of a Messianic seed for this covenant to be realized in practice. And those who might have partially fulfilled it in their time (especially Zerubbabel) had all failed. The fulfilment was to be "through him" and not simply through the exile being ended.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will also make his seed endure forever and his throne as the days of heaven-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Again the point is made as on :28, that the Davidic covenant didn’t promise immediate blessing for the kingdom of David. It was primarily focused upon an individual seed of David who would have an eternal throne; and personal blessing and salvation was only to be found through association with this seed, becoming "in Him". See on :24.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>If his children forsake My law and don’t walk in My ordinances-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I have noted on :24,28,29 that the blessings of the covenant were to come particularly and specifically upon the singular seed of David; blessings for the rest of Israel would depend upon their association with this seed. This is why the promises about the seed in the singular (the Lord Jesus) are now applied to God’s people in the plural (<a href='B:100 7:14'>2Sa 7:14</a> cp. <a href='B:230 89:30-35'>Psa 89:30-35</a>). This is now realized through baptism into the Lord Jesus. Baptism is not an initiation into a church. It isn't something which just seems the right thing to do. And even if because of our environment and conscience, it was easier to get baptized than not- now this mustn't be the case. We really are in Christ, we are born again; now we exist, spiritually! And moreover, we have risen with Him, His resurrection life, His life and living that will eternally be, is now manifest in us, and will be articulated physically at the resurrection.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But this plan of salvation through identification with the seed was conditional. Both he personally and those "in him" had the possibility of sinning and thereby nullifying the covenant. And the exiles had done just thIsa. We note that the Lord Jesus had the possibility of sinning [otherwise His temptations were fake]. This again disproves any idea that He was God Himself in person.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>if they break My statutes and don’t keep My commandments-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The covenant was broken (:34 s:w:) because they had broken the laws which were part of that covenant. The law repeatedly stated that if Israel didn’t keep God’s commandments, they would be exiled from their land (<a href='B:30 20:22'>Lev 20:22</a> s:w:). After centuries of patience with them, this finally happened. Any complaint at the consequence for sin was therefore unreasonable. It would be as unreasonable as Adam complaining that he had been exiled east of Eden.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is the development of the clause about David’s individual seed in 2 Samuel 7 : "If he [Jesus] commit iniquity...". Here in Psalms 89, the individual seed is spoken of as the community. There are many connections with Isaiah 53, in this case to the way that "the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all". The Lord Jesus was so identified with the sinful seed of Abraham and David that He bore the curse for their sins, despite being personally innocent.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>then I will punish their sin with the rod-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is the equivalent of "I will chasten him with the rod of men" in 2 Samuel 7. Ultimately this connection between the singular seed and the community of God’s people led to the Lord's death on the cross: "For the transgression of my people was he stricken" (Isaiah 53).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>And their iniquity with stripes-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is the equivalent of "And with the stripes of the children of men" in 2 Samuel 7, resulting in the final truth of what was achieved on the cross: "With his stripes we are healed" (Isaiah 53).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The point of all this is to show how our sins were somehow born by Jesus, to the extent that He suffered for them. But how was this actually achieved? It is one thing to say it, but we must put meaning into the words. I suggest it was in that the Lord&nbsp; so identified with us, His heart so bled for us, that He felt a sinner even though He of course never sinned. The final cry “My God, why have You forsaken me?” clearly refers back to all the many passages which speak of God forsaking the wicked, but never forsaking the righteous. The Lord, it seems to me, felt a sinner, although He was not one, and thus entered into this sense of crisis and fear He had sinned. He so identified with us. In the bearing of His cross, we likewise must identify with others, with their needs and with the desperation of their human condition</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> and this is what will convert them, as the Lord’s identification with us saved us.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But I will not completely take My grace away from him, nor allow My faithfulness to fail-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I have noted on :31,32 that the promises of 2 Samuel 7 about the singular seed of David are interpreted as applying to the entire community of God’s people, and therefore the singular in 2 Samuel 7 is changed to the plural here in Psalms 89. But now there is a reversion to talking about "him", the singular seed. He personally would always receive God’s faithful covenant grace; and the implication is that God’s sinful people must therefore identify with Him. We now do this by baptism into the Lord Jesus, but until He came, it was impossible for God’s people to make this connection with the seed.</p><p>Remember that the reasoning here is in answer to the complaints from :38 ff. that God was not preserving His people from their enemies, and therefore was breaking His promise to David. But the answer is here in :30-33- if David's children sinned they would be punished. And that was happening. But God's grace would never depart from the Messianic son of David once His Kingdom was established. A lack of acceptance of personal sin and its consequence is often at the root of complaints about God's supposed injustice. Several of the Psalms which lament God's inaction and judgment totally fail to make any reference to human sin (Ps. 44 especially), or tend to gloss over this factor. Thus Ps. 44:18 complains "our hearts have not gone astray" when Jer. 17:9; 18:16,17 specifically blames the tragedy of the exile on the state of Judah's heart. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will not break My covenant, nor alter what My lips have uttered-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "profane my covenant". The covenant was broken (:31 s:w:) because they had broken or profaned the laws which were part of that covenant. But there had been no change on God’s side, as they perhaps imagined. God on His side had not broken covenant. Their complaint that He had broken covenant (:39 s:w:) was completely overlooking that it was they and not Him who had broken the covenant. The exiles are specifically described as breaking the covenant in <a href='B:460 2:10-11'>Mal 2:10-11</a> s:w. We note the intimacy of God in saying that the covenant was uttered by His "lips". The words of the covenant were from His very mouth and liPsa.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Once have I sworn by My holiness that I will not lie to David-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>To claim that God has broken His side of the covenant is tantamount to calling God a liar. This is what we are doing if we doubt our ultimate salvation. Paul seems to have this in mind in his reasoning in <a href='B:520 3:3-7'>Rom 3:3-7</a>. The fact some like the exiles didn’t want to believe Him doesn't make Him a liar, because His promises to them weren't experienced by them. That was their choice, and they as it were put God in the dock and accused Him of being a liar. And in the revelation of God’s final judgment, all who have done so will be revealed as liars.</p><p>"I will not lie", in the context of David's throne / kingship (:36), is an allusion to 1 Sam. 15:29 "The Strength of Israel will not lie nor change His mind". The context is Saul and possibly Samuel too, wanting to change God's mind about rejecting Saul and choosing David as king. Saul's "kingdom", either his personal kingship or his dynasty, had already been removed in 1 Sam. 13:13,14- but God had been open to ammending that. Saul's behaviour in 1 Sam. 14 and then with the Amalekites in 1 Sam. 15 meant that the window of opportunity was now closed. And meantime, it seems God had "found" David as a replacement; we are given the impression that God began searching in 1 Sam. 13:13,14, and then in 1 Sam. 15:28 He says that He has given the kingdom to Saul's neighbour. The statement that God will not lie i.e. retract is perhaps referencing the choice of David as a replacement: "Once I have sworn by My holiness; I will not lie to David” (Ps. 89:35). And yet despite these apparently final words of rejection of Saul and replacement with David, Samuel mourns for Saul with the implication that he is begging God to even so, rethink and find a way for Saul (1 Sam. 15:31); hence God's rebuke of Samuel, "How long will you mourn for Saul... since I rejected him", 1 Sam. 16:1. He knew God well enough to know that He does rethink. We have many examples likewise in the prophets. 'This is it... no re-thinking, no about turn again... I will save you no more'. But still God does. </p><p>"I will not lie", in the context of David's throne / kingship (:36), is an allusion to 1 Sam. 15:29 "The Strength of Israel will not lie nor change His mind". The context is Saul and possibly Samuel too, wanting to change God's mind about rejecting Saul and choosing David as king. Saul's "kingdom", either his personal kingship or his dynasty, had already been removed in 1 Sam. 13:13,14- but God had been open to amending that. Saul's behaviour in 1 Sam. 14 and then with the Amalekites in 1 Sam. 15 meant that the window of opportunity was now closed. And meantime, it seems God had "found" David as a replacement; we are given the impression that God began searching in 1 Sam. 13:13,14, and then in 1 Sam. 15:28 He says that He has given the kingdom to Saul's neighbour. The statement that God will not lie i.e. retract is perhaps referencing the choice of David as a replacement: "Once I have sworn by My holiness; I will not lie to David” (Ps. 89:35). And yet despite these apparently final words of rejection of Saul and replacement with David, Samuel mourns for Saul with the implication that he is begging God to even so, rethink and find a way for Saul (1 Sam. 15:31); hence God's rebuke of Samuel, "How long will you mourn for Saul... since I rejected him", 1 Sam. 16:1. He knew God well enough to know that He does rethink. We have many examples likewise in the prophets. 'This is it... no re-thinking, no about turn again... I will save you no more'. But still God does. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>His seed will endure forever, his throne like the sun before Me-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The emphasis is upon "will". The promises to David will come true. His Messianic seed would indeed have an eternal throne and kingdom. The fact that was not being immediately fulfilled in the experience of the exiles at their time didn’t mean that God was a liar (:35) or incapable of doing what He has said. Rather the problem was with the exiles, in that they didn’t want to believe that at some point, fulfilment would come. A demand that God’s promises must come fully true for us in this life is really a lack of faith in His future Kingdom. Faith in the things of the Kingdom and the name of the Lord Jesus is faith in a future reality as well as a present one. If all the focus is upon our immediate blessing, then like the exiles we will have a crisis of faith.</p><p>It was "his seed", Messiah, Son of David, who would "endure forever" with an unending throne. The complainers from :38 ff. were assuming that there would be an unbroken line of Davidic kings in order to fulfil God's promise to David. But this was a typical case of interjecting a human narrative, what we would wish to be true, into the reading and interpretation of God's word.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It will be established forever like the moon, the faithful witness in the sky. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The solid existence of all creation is seen as evidence enough that the love of God, as expressed through the Davidic covenant, would remain firm likewise. We need only look at the natural creation for evidence that God is going to keep the promises found in the Bible. The same idea is found in :2.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But you have rejected and spurned, You have been angry with Your anointed-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This may originally have begun with David in depression feeling that although he had been anointed king, his persecution by Saul and later by Absalom indicated that God had changed His plans. These thoughts of David are now developed by the exiles and exaggerated and expanded to refer to the breaking up of Zion.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have renounced the covenant of Your servant; You have defiled his crown in the dust-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The covenant was broken (:31 s:w:) because they had broken or profaned the laws which were part of that covenant. But there had been no change on God’s side, as they perhaps imagined. God on His side had not broken covenant. Their complaint that He had broken covenant (:39 s:w:) was completely overlooking that it was they and not Him who had broken the covenant. The exiles are specifically described as breaking the covenant in <a href='B:460 2:10-11'>Mal 2:10-11</a> s:w. They are acting like a serial adulterer who laments the break up of his marriage. But I have argued above that additionally, they failed to correctly understand what the covenant was promising- it was not promising what they assumed [an unbroken line of Davidic kings], but spoke specifically of fulfilment in the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have broken down all his hedges, You have brought his strongholds to ruin-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The vineyard of Israel was indeed broken down by God and its protective wall removed by Him (Isaiah 5). But this was because they had refused to bring forth fruit to Him, and had themselves introduced the Gentiles into that vineyard, worshipping their idols in His temple. The complaint against God focuses upon the consequences of sin, rather than recognition of sin and repentance.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>All who pass by the way rob him-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The same word for "rob" is used to the exiles in warning them that even the restored Jerusalem is to fall and the houses robbed (<a href='B:450 14:2'>Zec 14:2</a>). God’s purpose with David’s seed was no guarantee that in this life, that seed would not suffer. The exiles were refusing to understand that what they were complaining about was merely the consequence of their sins, and not due to God’s unfaithfulness. These same exiles had been reminded that they had committed fornication with all those who "pass by the way" (s:w. <a href='B:330 16:15'>Eze 16:15</a>; <a href='B:330 16:25'>Eze 16:25</a>). It was as if they had hardened their hearts against all these prophetic messages. And Malachi accuses them of robbing God.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He has become a reproach to his neighbours-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This Psalm may have originated in David’s complaint that he had become a reproach to his neighbours and family after his sin with Bathsheba (s:w. <a href='B:230 22:6'>Psa 22:6</a>; <a href='B:230 31:11'>Psa 31:11</a>). But such complaints were a wilful disregard for Nathan's prophetic word to David about the consequence of his sins. And it seems that the exiles were making the same mistake in refusing to accept that their situation was a result of consequence of sins.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have exalted the right hand of his adversaries, You have made all of his enemies rejoice-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This seems an intentional repost to the statement in :13 that God’s own right hand is exalted (s:w:). The exiles refused to see that God’s hand can be exalted even in His apparent silence; and went further to imply God was being somehow vindictive and unreasonable. This is the classic mistake made by all who stumble at the problem of evil.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yes, you turn back the edge of his sword and haven’t supported him in battle-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This however was exactly what was promised as a consequence of breaking the covenant. Israel had signed up to that, and God had been patient in bringing those consequences for centuries. And when it came, finally, they accuse Him of hating them. Again, all stumbling over the problem of evil results is rooted in a denial of the consequences of human sin [whether it be our own or the sin of others]. And as a result, God ends up being falsely accused.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have ended his splendour, and cast his throne down to the ground-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This again fails to factor in the reality that God can fulfil His promises at a later date, even through resurrection from the dead. Abraham died in full faith that the promises to him would be fulfilled at the resurrection, although he didn’t receive them in this life (<a href='B:650 11:13'>Heb 11:13</a>; <a href='B:650 11:39-40'>Heb 11:39-40</a>). But the exiles didn’t have this faith; they considered God was only any good if they had it all now. And they went further to almost mock God when they didn’t get what they expected, with no account of their own sins and the consequence of sin. They also failed to consider that David’s throne was the throne of Yahweh; and He remained enthroned as king in heaven, with the earth [s:w. "ground"] as His footstool (<a href='B:290 66:1'>Isa 66:1</a>):&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>The complainer saw the throne as cast down to the ground, presumably from some symbolic 'heaven' of power. But earlier in the Psalm we have seen the assurance that God is still king in Heaven, in Heaven He and His Angels are still faithful to the covenant, and His throne will be eternally established through the Son of David resurrected and enthroned. But the complainer saw only the situation on earth and lacked the eye of faith to see Heaven's perspective. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have shortened the days of his youth, You have covered him with shame. Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "the days of his throne". This reflected a total lack of faith and wilful lack of understanding of the fact that the promises of an eternal throne depended upon the revelation of the individual Messianic seed of David. He had not come at that point, but the exiles still demanded the blessings promised to Him:&nbsp;</p><p>The complainer may have the sons of Zedekiah and especially Jehoiachin in mind, who was only 18 (2 Kings 24:8), or according to 2 Chron. 36:9, only 8 years old, when he came to the throne, and he reigned only three months and ten days. The prime of his life was spent in exile, apparently in actual confinement in which he was literally ‘clothed with dishonour’ (2 Kings 25:29). Likewise the complaint in :51 that the footsteps of the anointed were mocked could allude to Jehoiachin as he was led through the streets of Babylon in the conqueror’s triumph. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>How long, Yahweh? Will You hide Yourself forever? Will Your wrath burn like fire?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The answer was that God had hidden His face from His people because they had hidden their faces from Him. They were as Cain, exiled from Eden [the promised land] to the east, hidden from God’s face (<a href='B:10 4:14'>Gen 4:14</a>). This was the specific curse for breaking the covenant (<a href='B:50 31:17'>Deu 31:17</a>). <a href='B:290 40:27'>Isa 40:27</a>; <a href='B:290 45:15'>Isa 45:15</a> specifically rebuke the exiles for saying that "My way is hid from Yahweh", because they should rather have faith that ultimately God’s face would in due time shine forth. It was their sins which had hidden God’s face from them (<a href='B:290 59:2'>Isa 59:2</a>; <a href='B:300 33:5'>Jer 33:5</a>; <a href='B:330 39:23'>Eze 39:23</a>; <a href='B:400 3:4'>Mic 3:4</a>). Again there is a focus simply upon removing the consequence of sin, rather than repenting of sin.</p><p>God's wrath was indeed like fire, but that fire had a purpose. It was to purify the dross from God's people. But they didn't respond: “in vain did the smelter smelt - the dross is not separated out” (Jer. 6:29). Likewise Jer. 2:29,30: “in vain I have beaten your sons; they would not accept correction”. But the complainers only saw the suffering and refused to accept that human sin was the essential problem. We note the parallel: "How long will You hide... how long will Your wrath burn?". The complaint considers God hiding unless He stops being angry about sin and basically dishes up all the good stuff. Anything less than that warrants criticism of Him. This is man at his most petulant, spoilt, autistic and unreasonable. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Remember how short my time is! For what vanity have You created all the children of men!<strong>- </strong></p><h2>This may well have been based upon an original prayer of David, lamenting the brevity of his life as in <a href='B:230 39:5'>Psa 39:5</a> (s:w:). But the exiles are reasoning as if this life is all we have; and therefore to not see the restoration in their lifetime was tragic. And they considered God somehow cruel to not bring about the restored kingdom in their lifetimes. Because life is short, they therefore expected Him to act very quickly; or else, they accused Him of creating people for "vanity". This is the kind of unreasonable talk which comes from all who stumble over the problem of evil. David’s perspective was that it is "men of the world" who have "their portion [s:w. "short"] in this life" (<a href='B:230 17:14'>Psa 17:14</a>). The exiles were totally devoid of the hope of resurrection and final fulfilment then. This lack of faith in the things of the future Kingdom of God, sometimes encouraged by theological misunderstandings, is often at the root of stumblings over the problem of evil. If the perception is that man only has this life, then the problems of evil within that life will indeed weigh heavy, as life then appears a mere lottery, with some people getting a better deal than others:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</h2><p>Indeed if we expect the fulfilment of God's promises in this life, we will come to consider life as vain. Life ends with unsatisfied longing for every man. But our labour is not in vain exactly and only because of the hope of resurrection to a future Kingdom (1 Cor. 15:58, in context). As happens today, those who complain about God's apparent injustice go on to complain that life itself is vain, why did God create man and only give him a limited lifespan? So many such complainers live futile lives, ever struggling with man's search for meaning. The answer to man's limited life is, in one word, sin. And facing the consequences of sin isn't what the complainers want to do. By contrast, :10-15 cite God's creation as evidence that He will therefore be faithful, ultimately, to that creation. He keeps it all in existence and active, and likewise He will actively keep His covenant through the generations, coming to its fulfilment in the enthronement of His Son for ever upon David's throne.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>What man is he who shall live and not see death, who shall deliver his soul from the power of Sheol? Selah-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This continues the false argument of :47; that because life is short and there is only hope for this life and no further, therefore God should hurry up and restore their kingdom. David’s temporary crisis of faith in God’s power to resurrect is repeated by the exiles, in stronger terms. They seem to have no sense of any future fulfilment of the covenant; they wanted to see it all now, just as many do today.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It is in the context of God promising David eternity that he questions: "Shall He (God) deliver his soul from the grave? What man is he that liveth and shall not see death?" (AV). He goes so far as to feel that God’s "former graces (a word often used about the promises), which You swore to David" had been at best suspended (<a href='B:230 89:49'>Psa 89:49</a> AV).</p><p>The reasoning of :47,48 is that death and the brevity of human life is unfair. God should act because life is brief and He is somehow forgetting the brevity of human life. But this arises from a total failure to perceive that the promises to David are about resurrection, and the fulfilment of His covenant is set in the future not now. And God has not forgotten the nature of how we are. The Son of David would be "set up" or resurrected, as Acts 2:30 interprets this, at a point after David has "slept with [his] fathers". And yet David would see all this "before you", in his presence, again implying David's resurrection. But instead, the complainers were focusing upon a fulfilment right now in this life, of an unbroken line of kings. There was no appreciation that the wages of sin is death, and that the eternity promised to David was all on account of making identity with His greater "son" who would live and reign eternally.</p><p>The complainer is answering how own question really. No man can resurrect himself. But resurrection is at the heart of the Davidic covenant which the complainers wrongly claim has been broken. The complainer likewise answers his own question by asking "What  / which man" lives for ever? What man can save himself from the grave? Not one apart from the Son of David, the resurrected Lord Jesus, who never sinned, and so death had no power over Him. And those who are in Him and choose to accept the Davidic covenant, as Is. 55:3-5 invites.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Lord, where are Your former graces which You swore to David in Your faithfulness?<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Surely David is close to the edge here; there almost seems to be a sense of mocking in his comments on the promise that his throne would endure for ever as the sun: "His throne (shall endure) as the sun... but... Thou hast cast his throne down to the ground", rather than it being like the sun (<a href='B:230 89:36'>Psa 89:36</a>; <a href='B:230 89:44'>Psa 89:44</a> AV). Yet truly in the spirit of Job, he was able to praise God in this very same context: "Blessed be the Lord for evermore. Amen, and amen" (<a href='B:230 89:52'>Psa 89:52</a>). Presumably this Psalm was written (or thought out) whilst fleeing from Absalom, or possibly during one of the later rebellions, when it seemed that all hope of holding on to the throne was lost. Here is David in depression, making hasty comments about the faithfulness of God, reacting to the position of the moment. This is surely an indication of his mental make up. One cannot be persuaded that the Lord Jesus did not experience the temptations which go along with this kind of personality. "My God, why have You forsaken me?" (<a href='B:470 27:46'>Mat 27:46</a>) and the following thoughts in Psalms 22 seem to be Christ's equivalent of David’s crisis in Psalms 89:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Remember, Lord, the reproach of Your servants, how I bear in my heart the taunts of all the mighty peoples-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is the language of earlier Psalms concerning how David so took to heart the words of his enemies at the time of Saul and Absalom's rebellion. But his feelings are now reapplied by the exiles to the taunts of the "peoples", the Gentiles, such as those recorded in <a href='B:230 137:1-3'>Psa 137:1-3</a>.</p><p>"Your servants" assumes that all Israel are Yahweh's servants. But at the time they were serving idols as well. Again there is no awareness of personal failure and breakage of their covenant with Yahweh. The promises to David were to "My servant David" and David responds to them by agreeing that he was indeed "Your servant David". To be truly one of the servants meant identifying with David. We noted on :19 that individuals were called to accept the covenant and become "servants" of Yahweh in that they were "in" His servant David and especially "in" the Messianic Son of David, achieved in our age through faith and baptism into the Lord Jesus. But the complainers just assumed they were Yahweh's servants and failed to see the promises in the Davidic covenant concerned the Messianic Son of David and all who chose to be "in" Him.  </p><p>The complaint about "reproach" or shame is typical of those who feel shame because of the gap between expectation and reality. But the problem was that the expectation was wrong because it was founded upon a wrong interpretation of what God had actually promised. The full wonder of it, eternal life in and with David's Son in the future, had been ignored and instead the complainers had settled for a very human narrative of their own creation, about an unbroken line of Davidic rulers in Zion.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>with which Your enemies have mocked, Yahweh, with which they have mocked the footsteps of Your anointed one-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>David was God's anointed one and so supremely was his Messianic son, Jesus the Christ. But the complainers assumed they were the "anointed one" by reason of physical descent. They failed to perceive, as noted on :19, that to be truly the "anointed one" they must personally identify with David and his Messianic Son, like David having a heart after God's own heart. But they shied away from such personal relationship with God and assumed they had some kind of collective status as God's anointed one.</p><p> LXX "wherewith they have reviled the recompense of thine anointed" could imply that David’s enemies mocked the promises to David as now having no chance of fulfilment. And the exiles felt that the mocking of their captors in Psalms 137 was a mocking of David, seeing they considered themselves to be his seed. Their "steps" may refer to their steps from Judah to Babylon, mocked at every step:&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>These things had application to the Lord Jesus, the "Christ", the "anointed one", who bore Israel's judgment. Every step of the way along the Via Dolorosa, Yahweh's enemies reproached every stumbling footstep of His anointed, just as they did every step of Judah as they were marched into captivity.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Book IV </p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>A Prayer by Moses, the man of God-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The Psalms 90 and 91 are full of language found in Deuteronomy, the address Moses gave at the very end of his life. Dt. 33, the final song of Moses, has many connections. Thus Dt. 33:1 also calls Moses the man of God, as does the title of Ps. 90; Dt. 33:15 speaks of the ancient mountains as does Ps. 90:2. So I see Psalm 90 as his prayer of depression at the end of life, wishing so much to change God's mind and let him enter Canaan, and to have had mercy on Israel who died in the desert. Moses is depressed- he had earlier changed God's mind about destroying Israel, but now he laments he cannot change God's mind about himself nor Israel. And he comes to the end of his life depressed and perhaps not as spiritually strong as he earlier was- just as Gideon, John the Baptist, David, Jacob etc. were all spiritually weaker at the end of their lives than they were at some points during their earlier lives. God's answer is in Ps. 91- that he should rejoice that Joshua and others would enter the land, and that because Moses had loved Yahweh's Name, for all his depression and struggle with God, he was assured of great honour and eternal salvation. Ps. 91:16, the final verse of these two Psalms, is therefore the climax to it all. Although Moses felt his prayer of Ps. 90 was unanswered, Ps. 91:14 comforts him that "When he calls to me, I will answer him". The essence of his prayer was that he would be saved- and that would be eternally granted.</p><p>I suggest this is inserted at this point in the Psalter because it is being used in the context of the exiles. Although Psalms 89 is in book 3 of the Psalms and Psalms 90 begins book 4, there are connections between the two Psalms; not least <a href='B:230 89:47-48'>Psa 89:47-48</a> = <a href='B:230 90:3-10'>Psa 90:3-10</a>. This prayer of Moses is an appeal for God to rethink His condemnation of Israel to not entering the promised land, and to the 40 year period of exile from it before they could enter it. This of course meant that the generation which had left Egypt would die without entering the land. And Moses seeks to change God’s mind about this, just as he had changed God’s mind about His intention to destroy Israel completely; and just as Moses sought to have his own rejection from entering the land abrogated. This was exactly relevant to the exiles, who wanted the 70 years exile to be shortened, and for their generation to reenter the land and see the restoration of the Kingdom of God there. As noted on <a href='B:230 89:47-48'>Psa 89:47-48</a>, they did not want to die before seeing this happen. But as Moses' intercession for these things was not answered as he wished, so the exiles were to largely die in exile. Psalms 91 however is connected to Psalms 90, and speaks of how the salvation of Israel was to be through Joshua - Jesus. This was the answer to Moses' struggle and for that of the exiles.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Lord, You have been our dwelling place in all generations-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The allusion may be to Moses' words that God was the safe dwelling place of Israel (<a href='B:50 33:27'>Deu 33:27</a>). Joshua is commended for making Yahweh his dwelling place (<a href='B:230 91:9'>Psa 91:9</a>). But He was not the point of refuge for Israel in all their generations, in that they had chosen other gods.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>There is a repeated Biblical theme that the believer's relationship with the Father too is essentially mutual. For example, we dwell in God (<a href='B:230 90:1'>Psa 90:1</a>), and He dwells in us (<a href='B:530 3:16'>1Co 3:16</a>). Thus "he that dwells in love dwells in God, and God in him" (<a href='B:690 4:15-16'>1Jn 4:15-16</a>). We respond to God’s call of us by calling upon Him (<a href='B:530 1:2'>1Co 1:2</a>).</p><p>The relevance to the exiles, who had no temple, is that God has always been the temple / dwelling place of His people, even when there was no temple. The lack of external religious symbols like a church building don't mean that God has no dwelling place. For He dwells in human hearts and those hearts dwell in Him. But it could be that Moses is trying to argue with God that His people have always dwelt in Him, and so He should cut them some slack and relent on banning them from entering the land because of their refusal to enter the land in Num. 14. What Moses says is true only on one level.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Before the mountains were brought forth, before You had formed the land and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>We are reading here the "prayer" of Moses (:1). But these opening verses make it clear that prayer is meditation before God, and not simply requests. "Brought forth... formed [Heb. 'give birth to']" suggests that the world was formed out of God. The idea of literal creatio ex nihilo isn't Biblical. This world is made out of God and is therefore not separate from Him. Man is not alone; we aren't cut adrift from our creator. God is so closely with us. He isn't far from every one of us. The fact God is in Heaven and we on earth doesn't mean He is far from us. In human terms, spatiality means apartness; but not for God, who fills Heaven and earth. His being in space and time breaks in to our experience of space and time. Note too that God is perfect / complete in and of Himself; He didn’t "need" us. But He created us and then speaks as if He does in some sense "need" us. The point is, creation was an act of grace. All complaints at the seeming injustice and suffering of creation miss this point. Note too that "brought forth" implies God as a mother / female. His nature is such that He is able to identify with both male and female.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You turn man to destruction saying, Return, you children of men-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'><a href='B:230 90:3'>Psa 90:3</a> implies that each person dies as a result of a conscious, specific command from God; not just because of natural processes. The specific reference is to God’s command that Israel were to die in the wilderness. Moses is begging God to change this judgment; hence LXX "Turn not man back to his low place, whereas thou saidst, Return, ye sons of men". But the Hebrew for "destruction" means 'to pulverize to dust', and we wonder whether Moses is wrongly considering that the sentence of Gen. 3, to return to dust, is somewhat unfair- that the punishment is as it were brutally executed by God, out of proportion to the sin committed. Moses likewise always blames his not entering the land upon Israel's provocation of him, rather than accepting the consequence of his sinful response to their provocation. Moses himself died by the mouth / kiss of the Angel, surrounded by God's love, rather than being brutally pulverized by God as he here describes death.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>And yet the allusion is also to the curse in Eden; it is as if God speaks <a href='B:10 3:19'>Gen 3:19</a> to each person who dies. In this sense the Bible is a living word; the Red Sea and other salvations of God are as it were performed in an ongoing sense to us each one today. Likewise Abel "is yet spoken of" (<a href='B:650 11:4'>Heb 11:4</a> AVmg:):The passage in the scrolls that said "I am the God of Abraham" was "spoken unto you by God", Jesus told first century Israel (<a href='B:470 22:31'>Mat 22:31</a>). And so Moses really provides his own answer. He is desperate for the 40 year condemnation period to be changed so that he and his generation could enter Canaan. But in fact they were all going to return to the dust anyway, in accordance with <a href='B:10 3:19'>Gen 3:19</a>. And the conclusion really is that our focus ought to be upon a resurrection from the dead, rather than seeking some kind of kingdom now.</p><p>"Return" to dust is picked up by Moses later on in his prayer when he asks God to "return" to His people (:13), to return or repent of His intention for Israel to return to dust in the desert, and for Moses to return to dust before entering Canaan. But Moses is overlooking the fact that man must return to dust by the nature of who he is. Even if he and Israel were to enter Canaan, they would still die. But perhaps he has the idea that God could return / relent from His purpose of returning man to dust- through a resurrection, "in the morning" (:14). That is what Moses is implying, and God's final answer in Ps. 91:16 is that indeed, He will show Moses His great salvation, through saving him from the plague of death (Ps. 91:3- alluded to by Paul when he talks of how the resurrection saves from the plague of death). So we see here how prayer works- by stating the problem and our inner longings, we come to some kind of answer. In this case, Moses reflects that although God will indeed return man to dust, He can also return or relent from that- through resurrection of the body. </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For a thousand years in Your sight are just like yesterday when it is past, like a watch in the night- </p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Was Moses right to imply that God forgets about His creatures, just as we sleep through the night watch unaware of its passing? Psalms 90 is Moses' prayer asking for God’s judgment against Israel and himself in the wilderness to be changed. He had reasoned with God and changed His earlier decision to destroy Israel and make of Moses a great nation. But this prayer of Moses went unanswered- "speak no more unto Me of this matter" (<a href='B:50 3:26'>Deu 3:26</a>). But here Moses is doing just that- speaking again to God of this matter.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>However, this Psalm is an example of how intimate a man can become with God. Moses pleads that man only lives 70 years, maybe 80- so, cut us some slack, God, and reverse our judgment (<a href='B:230 90:10'>Psa 90:10</a>). He waxes very poetic and eloquent about our humanity. But fails to persuade God. And he also rather oddly seems to ignore the fact that he was blessed with 120 years of life with his youthful vigour unabated. He describes our return to dust as being a result of God’s wrath and anger (<a href='B:230 90:3'>Psa 90:3</a>; <a href='B:230 90:7'>Psa 90:7</a>)- suggesting some resentment at God’s judgment of man in Genesis 3, just as Moses resented how God had judged him and Israel. He argues that they had already suffered quite enough evil in Egypt (<a href='B:230 90:15'>Psa 90:15</a>) and asks if God can't give that generation just a little joy in life.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'><a href='B:230 90:4'>Psa 90:4</a> could be seen as Moses arguing 'You've got eternity; we only have a delicate, fragile, grief-filled 70 years. So please, relent on your idea of filling all our human lives with grief by not letting us into the promised land'. <a href='B:230 90:8'>Psa 90:8</a> sounds like Moses objected to God scrutinizing our "secret sins", and <a href='B:230 90:11'>Psa 90:11</a> speaks as if God’s anger and wrath were just too much. He clearly had a problem accepting the justice of God’s punishment against sin, as did the exiles; hence this prayer wasn't answered. But it's the intimacy with God, that a man feels he can speak like this to God, which is the exhortation.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You sweep them away as they sleep; in the morning they sprout like new grass-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "Years shall be vanity to them: let the morning pass away as grass". Moses is complaining that the 40 years of wandering would just be wasted years of vanity. But that is indeed what condemnation will be like, and Moses and the exiles (in different contexts) all come over as railing against consequence of sin, rather than focusing upon repentance and the final fulfilment of God’s purpose. The language here is that used of the destruction of the Egyptians at the Red Sea (<a href='B:230 77:17'>Psa 77:17</a> is the only other occurrence of "You sweep them away"), where "in the morning" the Egyptians were dead (<a href='B:20 14:24'>Exo 14:24</a>; <a href='B:20 14:27'>Exo 14:27</a>) and had to be replaced by a new generation ["new grass"]. Moses is complaining that the condemned generation were being treated like the Egyptians slain at the Red Sea. But that was indeed appropriate; for in their hearts they had returned to Egypt, and Ezekiel records that they had taken the idols of Egypt with them through the Red Sea. But again, the consequence of sin is focused upon, rather than admission of sin:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>In the morning it sprouts and springs up; by evening, it is withered and dry-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Indeed this is the case. Moses seems to be arguing that the condemned generation would have a tragically vain life experience, as if they were grass which grew up in the morning and then was dead by evening. But this therefore leads the condemned sinner [which is all of us] to a desire for forgiveness and resurrection to eternity. But that connection isn't made here as the prophets intended it to be made.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But all this is interpreted in <a href='B:660 1:11'>Jas 1:11</a> so positively. If we are indeed so fleeting and weak, then don't worry about getting rich. Don't trust in man nor in wealth. Because man is so weak. Likewise in <a href='B:230 90:12'>Psa 90:12</a> - numbering our days, realizing their brevity, will help us get a heart of wisdom.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For we are consumed in Your anger, we are troubled in Your wrath-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>God had earlier wanted to "consume" Israel, but the intercession of Moses had stopped this (<a href='B:40 16:21'>Num 16:21</a>; <a href='B:40 16:45'>Num 16:45</a> s:w:), as did that of Phinehas (<a href='B:40 25:11'>Num 25:11</a> s:w:). The threat of being "consumed" by God’s anger was part of the covenant Israel had made with Him (s:w. <a href='B:50 28:21'>Deu 28:21</a>). They were suffering the agreed consequence of sin, and yet Moses presents this as being unreasonably harsh (:6). And so Moses' request was not answered, at least not as he then desired. For God did indeed "consume" Israel with vanity, a vanity they themselves had chosen (s:w. <a href='B:230 78:33'>Psa 78:33</a>). But this was only after vowing to "consume" them both in Egypt and in the wilderness, and then He had relented out of pure pity and grace for them (<a href='B:330 20:13-14'>Eze 20:13-14</a>; <a href='B:330 20:21-22'>Eze 20:21-22</a>). He had relented multiple times before; but Moses was not allowed this time to cash in on that. And this was true of the exiles, whom God also "consumed" for their sins (s:w. <a href='B:300 5:3'>Jer 5:3</a>; <a href='B:300 9:16'>Jer 9:16</a>; <a href='B:300 14:12'>Jer 14:12</a> and very often). o</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You have set our iniquities before You, our secret sins in the light of Your face-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Moses perceived that Israel [and his?] rejection from the land wasn't just due to one incident, but because of their secret sins being viewed by God. Moses himself had been often in the light of God’s countenance. David in his penitential Psalms concerning Bathsheba and Uriah likewise at times perceives that there were many other sins involved than "just" adultery and murder.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is not Moses reproaching God; rather is it him soberly recognizing why they were barred from the land. Notice "our iniquities... our sins". Moses was completely at one with condemned Israel, he knew exactly how they felt- just as the Lord Jesus with us. It is a fundamental, if neglected, doctrine that the Lord Jesus was our representative. This really ought to be a source of comfort to us, as we sense the involvement of the Son of God in our lives, one who can truly empathize (rather than just sympathize) with our spiritual struggle. This is so clearly taught by the typology of Moses as a type of Christ. Although he spoke to God as a friend, with an open-faced relationship, he still took upon himself the sin of Israel, he felt as condemned as they felt (<a href='B:20 34:9'>Exo 34:9</a> cp. <a href='B:20 33:11'>Exo 33:11</a>); when he pleaded for God’s sentence on him to be lifted, he pleaded for the same sentence on Israel to be lifted too (<a href='B:230 90:8'>Psa 90:8</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>So here in Psalms 90 Moses pleads for his rejection and that of his people to be reversed. He says that the reason for their rejection was God setting their "secret sins" in the light of His countenance. He felt his rejection was due to his secret sins- not the one painfully public failure. The Hebrew for "secret" means 'that behind the veil'; it is from the same root as the Hebrew for 'young girl', i:e. a veiled one. He felt the sins he had committed behind the veil he wore before Israel had been exposed in the light of the Angel's face. Remember that Moses always appeared to Israel with a veil (<a href='B:20 34:33-35'>Exo 34:33-35</a>; <a href='B:540 3:16-18'>2Co 3:16-18</a> RV), only removing it when he spoke face to face with the Angel, radiating the light of God’s glory to him. It seems Moses is alluding to this in <a href='B:230 90:8'>Psa 90:8</a>; he felt that he had many secret sins of the heart, hidden to Israel, but completely open to the Angel when he met with him. Likewise Israel were rejected because of the sins of their heart rather than their grosser failures (<a href='B:510 7:39'>Act 7:39</a>; and see the reason for their condemnation given in many other passages).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For all our days have passed away in Your wrath, we bring our years to an end as a sigh-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is clearly relevant to the wilderness generation, who spent their years suffering God's wrath. They were ever complaining, and ended their years with a groan, just as the first sound they heard on entering the world was the groan of their mother bringing them forth. God swore in His wrath that Israel should not enter into His rest. But Moses seems to resent that wrath, despite sharing it and understanding it when he returned to witness the golden calf apostasy, and broke the tables of the covenant. But a man can rise to great peaks of spirituality and perception, yet fall away from them at the end of his life. I suggest this is what has happened here to Moses as it did with  Gideon and John the Baptist. But Ps. 91 assures Moses that despite this, he will be saved. </p><p>"Bring... to an end" is s:w. "consumed" in :7; see note there. It seems Moses is making this prayer towards the start of the forty years wandering and exile from the land. Otherwise there would be little point in begging for the judgment to be reversed. So he may be speaking imagining how things would be at the end of the period; their days would have been wasted in vanity, coming to an end with a sigh of regret. But he fails to see the possibility of being resurrected to eternity in a future, restored Kingdom situation.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"As a sigh" is AV "As a tale that is told", perhaps a reference to the tradition of giving a summary of the deceased's life at their funeral? <a href='B:290 53:8'>Isa 53:8</a> laments that this wasn't done at the death of Messiah. The idea perhaps is that as it takes a mere 20 minutes to summarize a person's life, so in the context of infinity, that is indeed how brief it Isa.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The days of our years are seventy, or even by reason of strength eighty years-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Lifespans were still relatively long at Moses' time; his father Amram apparently lived to over 130 years, and Moses to 120. The mention of 70 years may have been the result of an edit by the exiles, lamenting that the 70 years of exile from the land would be pointless living; just as Moses had complained about the 40 years of exile from the land at his time. As noted on :1, Moses is speaking in depression- for he appears unmindful and ungrateful of the fact he has come to 120 years with full faculties.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX "As for the days of our years, in them are seventy years; and if men should be in strength, eighty years: and the greater part of them would be labour and trouble; for weakness overtakes us, and we shall be chastened". The idea is that there is just no point in life if they could not enter the land. Normally, we would prefer to die at 80 rather than 70. But in the context of the argument here, if they weren't going to enter the land, then living another ten years in exile was vanity and worthless.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yet their pride is but labour and sorrow, for it passes quickly, and we pass away-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Labour and sorrow" is the phrase translated "iniquity and perverseness" (<a href='B:40 23:21'>Num 23:21</a>), which initially God saw in the wilderness generation, but did not count against them. But they chose to live in it, and so they were made to live like that for 40 years. The same phrase is used of how the exiles chose to live in "mischief and iniquity" (<a href='B:290 59:4'>Isa 59:4</a>), and so their glory flew away (s:w. "pass away") as a bird (s:w. <a href='B:350 9:11'>Hos 9:11</a>).</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Who knows the power of Your anger, Your wrath according to the fear that is due to You?<strong>- </strong></p><h2>David could be saying that God’s anger was incomprehensible, out of proportion to the sin committed, too much wrath for Israel not showing Him enough fear. And of course he would have been wrong in thIsa. Or it could be that he is musing that according to our perceptions of God we will be judged. God’s mercy is upon us according as we trust in Him. And His wrath according as we fear it, Moses appears to be saying. The way the servant was judged out of his own mouth, with the Lord being the kind of "hard man" he thought He was (<a href='B:470 25:24'>Mat 25:24</a>), is surely the principle of <a href='B:230 90:11'>Psa 90:11</a> AV: "Even according to thy fear, so is thy wrath" (in practice).</h2></p><p>Moses had previously interceded with God for His anger to turn away. But now he realizes more what God's anger. "Who can plumb the extent of His anger?" is really asking "Who can plumb the extent of His love?". Because indeed "the wrath of God is the love of God". He revealed Himself to Moses as jealous, very jealous- and that jealousy, with its associated wrath, is a function of the extent of His love for Israel. In an age that likes to speak so much of God's grace, we must not forget to try to plumb the extent of God's wrath with our sin and unfaithfulness. Unfashionable as it may be to say this. Because only then will we perceive the full wonder of His grace, and apply our hearts to wisdom and a focused, commited usage of our brief life (:12).</p><p>
One translation is: "Who knows Your wrath, so as to fear You?". In this case, for the first time, Moses perhaps accepts Israel were guilty. God's wrath did not make them fear Him. Or perhaps this too reflects resentment; as if to say, 'Despite all this wrath, did it lead a single person to fear You? So it was pointless...'.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>So teach us to number our days so that we may gain a heart of wisdom-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The condemned generation knew that within 40 years they would be dead. And so they could number their days. But the time to be wise had passed; they had chosen not to be, hence the lament: "O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their latter end!" (<a href='B:50 32:29'>Deu 32:29</a>). So we could read this as Moses sarcastically asking them to be given a heart of wisdom, when he knew actually they had not attained this in their time of opportunity.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>LXX presents this as a another plea for God to become active in the salvation of His people immediately, rather than after the 40 years wandering: "And who knows how to number his days because of the fear of thy wrath? So manifest thy right hand". This would suggest that numbering days was pointless because they were under God’s wrath. They were indeed, but instead of pestering God to change their condemnation, the focus instead might have been upon confession of sin and hope in the resurrection of the body to the restored Kingdom at the last day.</p><p>The other references to people having a heart of wisdom are also in Moses' experience, when the wise of heart make things for the tabernacle (Ex. 35:25). Perhaps Moses is answering his own question here- given their brief lives, the 25,600 days that make up 70 years, they should put their best effort into the Lord's work. Which at their time was the making of the tabernacle.  True wisdom is therefore not academic, but rather perceiving our brief life and earnestly devoting every day to His service, knowing our work for Him will be blessed and endure.  </p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Relent, Yahweh! How long? Have compassion on Your servants!<strong>- </strong></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is the "How long?" asked by the exiles so often in the Psalms. They wanted immediate restoration, just as Moses wanted the 40 year period to be cut short. This 'prayer of Moses' (title) is lamenting how Israel were being destroyed by the Angel as they wandered in the forty year period of punishment. It may even be that the Angel left Israel in a sense (hence "Return O Lord") although still leading them. Thus there are different degrees of the Angelic presence- as at the restoration the Angel did in a limited sense return to the temple, having left them when the cherubim departed from Zion (as Ezekiel records).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Yet Moses clearly believed that this period of decreed punishment could be shortened ("satisfy us early with Thy mercy") by the Angel repenting. Previously his prayers had succeeded in making the Angel repent of the evil that He had planned to do to Israel, and Moses evidently hoped the Angel would again repent:&nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>"Relent" is s:w. <a href='B:20 32:12'>Exo 32:12</a> "Turn from Your fierce wrath". <a href='B:230 90:11'>Psa 90:11</a> has just spoken of God’s fierce wrath. Moses' hope was always that God would "repent" if He perceived the depth of Israel's suffering (<a href='B:50 32:36'>Deu 32:36</a> "The Lord will repent Himself for His servants when He sees that their power is gone"]. "Return" may also be a request for God’s presence to return again to the tabernacle rather than being outside it. All this was exactly what the exiles were asking; and yet they failed to focus upon the fact they had sinned, failed to give much emphasis to repentance, and seem more concerned about the immediate removal of the consequence of sins, rather than looking ahead to the last day.</p><p>"Relent... have compassion" are the same words as in Ex. 32:12,  "Turn and change Your mind from Your wrath". Ps. 90:11 has just spoken of God's fierce wrath. God was persuaded by Moses after the sin with the golden calf, but now Moses is struggling to do so again- in appealing for Israel's punishment to be changed, and perhaps for his own ban on entering Canaan to be lifted. He is failing to realize that judgment is still part of God's Name as declared in Ex. 34:5-7. Sin still has consequences. And he himself struggled with this when he continually blames Israel for his not entering the land- true as that was, he still was responsible for his words and his sin at that time. Those who make others stumble are guilty, but so is he who thereby stumbles. And Moses is struggling to accept this. He is depressed, and died depressed, that he could not achieve what he had done earlier... which is typical of the old man's depression syndrome.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Satisfy us in the morning with Your grace, that we may rejoice and be glad all our days-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>AV has "satisfy us early", i:e. 'reduce the time period of judgment upon us, and let us enter the land'. Or [Heb:], Moses may be asking for an answer "in the morning", immediately, right after his night of prayer.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Make us glad for as many days as You have afflicted us, for as many years as we have seen evil-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The thoughts of Moses here were reflected in the exiles; but they all failed to perceive that they had been judged less than their sins deserved (<a href='B:150 9:13'>Ezr 9:13</a>). Whereas the reasoning here seems to be that God needs to as it were put right what He did in judging His people. The "afflicted" years would refer to the entire sojourn in Egypt (s:w. <a href='B:10 15:13'>Gen 15:13</a>; <a href='B:20 1:12'>Exo 1:12</a>). But this "affliction" was intended to bring them to repentance (<a href='B:110 8:35'>1Ki 8:35</a>; <a href='B:230 119:67'>Psa 119:67</a>; <a href='B:230 119:71'>Psa 119:71</a>). The affliction could therefore be ended by repentance; but instead of that, there is simply a demand that God simply overturn the consequence of sin.</p><p>Moses seems to be asking God to now make up for His affliction of His people by giving them a commensurate blessing. But surely Moses is failing to perceive that the afflictions were just, a result of human sin, as God's answer in Ps. 91 will explain. And likewise he is not seeing that God's blessings of salvation are not a kind of apology for His affliction of us, they are not deserved because we suffered- they are by pure grace, seeing we deserve only death. It may be that Moses is saying that since God's affliction had lasted for 40 years, could Israel, and himself, not be given 40 years of blessing in the land. But again, he fails to accept the affliction as the consequence of sin, and that the wages of sin is death. So many complaints about God are the same- focusing upon the consequence of human sin, rather than accepting human sin and begging for the grace of resurrection and the Kingdom of God.</p>


text:
<h2></h2><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Let Your work appear to Your servants-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>But God’s work had appeared to them all, but they had chosen to disbelieve it (s:w. <a href='B:230 95:9'>Psa 95:9</a>); and the phrase is used of how the exiles had done likewise and were therefore in exile (<a href='B:290 5:12'>Isa 5:12</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Your glory to their children-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Moses desired that God’s glory would “appear</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> upon / unto” the children of God’s servants. He wanted all God’s children to have the same experience of glory appearing to them as he had had. And according to <a href='B:540 3:18'>2Co 3:18</a>, this desire is fulfilled every time a man turns to the Lord Jesus, and like Moses, with unveiled face, beholds that same glory. In the immediate context, he wanted the visible glory of God to appear not just to him in his separate tabernacle, but to all God’s people. For as explained on :17, the Angel of glory no longer was going in their midst (<a href='B:20 33:3'>Exo 33:3</a>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He who dwells in the secret place of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This follows on from Psalms 90, where Moses had begged for God’s condemnation of the wilderness generation to be abrogated, and for that generation to enter the land. It was the same plea of the exiles; they didn’t want to wait the required 70 years in exile, as the wilderness generation didn’t want to wait 40 years. The answer from God is here in Psalms 91. He speaks about Joshua as one of the very few who would not perish in the wilderness, and bids all Israel follow his example. It all has relevance to the Lord Jesus; for "Jesus" is the Greek form of "Joshua". In the context of the exiles, the Joshua the High Priest of Zechariah's prophecies could have been a Messiah figure who would have led the exiles back to Judah. But he failed, as did Zerubbabel, and so the prophecy was rescheduled and reapplied to the Lord Jesus.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Joshua dwelt in the tabernacle where Moses met with God, "without the camp" of Israel. This was "the secret place", where the word was spoken (see the connections between the "secret" place and God’s word: <a href='B:220 15:8'>Job 15:8</a>; <a href='B:220 29:4'>Job 29:4</a>; <a href='B:230 25:14'>Psa 25:14</a>; <a href='B:240 3:32'>Pro 3:32</a>; <a href='B:290 45:19'>Isa 45:19</a>; <a href='B:340 2:18'>Dan 2:18</a>; <a href='B:370 3:7'>Amo 3:7</a>). It was because of this love of the word that Joshua was preserved in those wilderness years, as the bodies of his peer group were abandoned in mass graves in the Sinai scrub: "A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee". Joshua calmly looked at those sights, knowing whom he had believed: "Only with thine eyes shalt thou behold and see (i:e. meditate upon) the reward of the wicked" (<a href='B:230 91:7-8'>Psa 91:7-8</a>).</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>Joshua had been charged to be strong, of good courage, not fearful nor be dismayed. Yet he had a tendency to forget those charges, the implications of his having been called by God for a purpose; and needed to be reminded of them as he forgot or lost faith in them. Perhaps this is why he is an otherwise surprising omission from the list of faithful men and women in Hebrews 11. And here of course is the challenge to us. We too have been given commissions and callings. Whether it be to raise a Godly family, to establish an ecclesia in a certain place, to overcome a specific vice</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'> the obstacles will flee before us, every place where the soles of our feet rest, will be blessed</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>if we truly believe in God’s purpose with us. Yet like Joshua, we usually fail to have a full faith in thIsa. We get distracted by the views of others, peer pressure, worried by lack of resources, discouraged by setbacks; when it is belief in God’s most basic initial promises to us that will overcome them. Joshua’s fear is all the more reprehensible when we consider the testimony of Psalms 91. Here Moses speaks about Joshua, the one who dwelt in the secret place or tabernacle of God (<a href='B:230 91:1'>Psa 91:1</a> = <a href='B:20 33:11'>Exo 33:11</a>), and who therefore was miraculously preserved throughout the wilderness wanderings. Thousands of Joshua’s generation died at his side from the various plagues which wasted out his generation during those wanderings; but they never came near him (<a href='B:230 91:5-8'>Psa 91:5-8</a>). As a result of this, he was commanded by Moses to “not be afraid” (<a href='B:230 91:5'>Psa 91:5</a>); perhaps Moses was thinking specifically about peer pressure, with the assurance that truly God would hear Joshua’s prayers (<a href='B:230 91:14-15'>Psa 91:14-15</a>). His amazing preservation during the wilderness years ought to have instilled a faith and lack of fearfulness within him; and yet the implication is that he did very often fall prey to fearfulness in later life. Just as with us, the circumstances of earlier life are controlled by the Father to give us faith with which to cope with later crises; but we don’t always learn the lessons we are intended to.</p><p>This Psalm is God's response to Moses' depressive prayer of Psalm 90. He is asked to remember that Joshua will enter the land, but that all the same, God will take due note of Moses' love of His Name and will eternally save him- :16 is the climax of the whole answer. Moses argued in Ps. 90:1 that God's people have always dwelt in God, and so, He should relent of His judgment and condemnation of them. God's reply here is that whoever dwells beneath His cherubim, trusting in Him and not idols (:2), will be saved. It's a kind of correction of Moses' assumption that all Israel had always dwelt in God. God is saying that He deals with individuals and their personal relationship with Him, and will not therefore save "Israel" on a collective basis. </p><p>
Moses' point is that because He has no beginning nor end, by nature, He therefore cannot understand how awful it is to have your existence terminated. Moses lived 120 years with full faculties, but begrudged God not letting him enter Canaan. He had so set his mind on this short term dream that he had lost the perspective of the eternal Kingdom. When he complains man only lives 70 or 80 years maximum, he seems to forget he has lived 120 years with full faculties- and hardly comes over as grateful, because he is so focused upon his own obsessive, self declared dream of changing God's mind so he could cross over into Canaan himself.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>I will say of Yahweh, He is my refuge and my fortress; my God, in whom I trust-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This was the attitude which God wished to see from Joshua in his own self talk; and if others in Israel had displayed this, they too would not have perished in the desert but would have lived to enter the land. And yet only twice does Joshua use the phrase "my God" or "my Lord". It seems that he didn’t fully live up to these things.</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It has been observed that this Psalm has an "antiphonal arrangement- the first speaker delivering <a href='B:230 91:1-2'>Psa 91:1-2</a>; the second, <a href='B:230 91:3-4'>Psa 91:3-4</a>; then the first responding with <a href='B:230 91:5-8'>Psa 91:5-8</a>; and again the second with <a href='B:230 91:9-13'>Psa 91:9-13</a>. In conclusion, a third speaker, making himself the mouthpiece of Jehovah, crowns all by declaring the blessings which God himself will bestow upon his faithful ones (<a href='B:230 91:14-16'>Psa 91:14-16</a>)". The Psalm was to be recited, because every man was intended to follow Joshua's intended pattern.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>For He will deliver you from the snare of the fowler, and from the deadly plague-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The exiles were intended to follow Joshua's example. For the Babylonian captivity was "the snare of the fowler" (<a href='B:230 124:7'>Psa 124:7</a>). The plague is that of :6, which destroyed many of the wilderness generation but didn’t touch Joshua.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>He will cover you with His feathers, beneath His wings you will take refuge; His faithfulness is your shield and rampart-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>It would be as if Joshua was located beneath the wings of the cherubim, over the blood of atonement, and beneath the shekinah glory of God seen between the cherubim. This was the intimacy with God which was possible for him. He would be shielded by God from all the plagues which slowly wiped out the wilderness generation. But this promise of being covered with God’s wings and feathers was equally to all God’s people who chose to go the way of faith of Joshua and Caleb (<a href='B:20 19:4'>Exo 19:4</a>; <a href='B:50 32:11'>Deu 32:11</a>).</p><p>LXX has "He will overshadow thee between his shoulders", "alluding to the custom of parents carrying their weak or sick children on their backs, and having them covered even there with a mantle". Elsewhere God is presented as having carried His child Israel through the wilderness. This theme is continued in :12, where we read that the Angels will seek to ensure that we don't even trip up over a stone- language appropriate to guiding a young child in its first steps. Indeed, Hosea uses the same figure- "When Israel was a child...", God took them by the arms and taught them to walk.</p><p>
God is comforting Moses that he has in fact been preserved through the 40 years wanderings, and didn't die along with that generation.  </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>You shall not be afraid of the terror by night, nor of the arrow that flies by day-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>The terror at night may refer to marauding tribes of Bedouin who attacked the Israelites and also contributed to the destruction of the wilderness generation. The arrow of the day time would be the arrows of God, even if they were shot by the Bedouin, as in <a href='B:220 6:4'>Job 6:4</a>.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1:415em'></p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>nor of the plagues that stalks in darkness, nor of the destruction that wastes at noonday-</p><p style='margin-left:1:415em'>This is the destruction threatened for those who break covenant (s:w. <a href='B:50 32:24'>Deu 32:24</a>). The plagues were personified as stalking in the dark. But equally at noonday they were to be destroyed by the plagues. LXX "from ruin and the demon of the midday" perhaps refers to sunstroke. Whatever belief in demons the people held, the simple truth was that God destroyed the wilderness generation; all was under His absolute control. There is no radical evil in the cosmos. The exiles were comforted likewise in <a href='B:230 121:6'>Psa 121:6</a>, "The sun shall not smite you by day". They were to follow the path intended for Joshua, and earnestly believe they could participate in the restored kingdom of God:&nbsp;</p>


