Psalms 72

Psalms 72:1-20

Salvation for the Earth. For Solomon. The last psalm of the salvation-book of the Psalms shows the full extent of the salvation in its earthly aspect, in the Melchizedek reign of Christ, King of righteousness and peace; peace being the effect of righteousness, and thus abiding. And this is a true picture of what is come, although there are things which the New Testament adds to it, which are not seen here, nor in the Old Testament at all. For the Old Testament does not reveal the full and final, eternal condition of things, even for the earth, as the New Testament reveals it, save in that brief intimation of “new heavens and a new earth,” with which Isaiah closes. Types and dark sayings, of course, there are, but no plain speech otherwise. For the Old Testament the kingdom of Christ ends all; which is true in a most important sense, but incomplete: for we have not the millennial limitation, the uprise of evil at the end, the judgment of the dead, and the change of the kingdom of the Son of man into the kingdom of the Father, when, having brought all things into the full final condition of blessing, the Son gives up that preparatory millennial rule into the Father’s hand. All this could scarcely be revealed till Christ had come; and it is the manner of revelation to increase in fullness to the end.

Yet, as Christ, after all, does reign for ever and ever, -the eternal throne being still “the throne of God and the Lamb,” the kingdom to which the Old Testament looks on is, after all, eternal; and its view is simply (and necessarily) incomplete, not (of course) wrong. Yet this merging of the millennial in the eternal is that which no doubt has confused the minds of some who think they see more clearly, and have lately come to believe in two successive kingdoms of Christ as man: the millennial being merely introductory (as the Davidic) to the true Solomon reign of uninterrupted peace and much longer duration which yet precedes the eternal blessedness. But the twentieth of Revelation certainly finds no place for such a reign in the brief interval between the millennium and the judgment of the great white throne; while we are told that “when all enemies shall be subdued under Him,” -and the last enemy to be subdued is death, -“then shall the Son also Himself be subject to Him that put all things under Him” (1 Corinthians 15:28): thus excluding this reign of glory from the other side of it. However, let us take up the psalm.

1. The first section shows the principle of the kingdom, -peace as the effect of righteousness. This is what the apostle speaks of in relation to the antitypical Melchizedek, and which he draws from the language of the history in a way so deeply instructive for the interpretation of Scripture, and so declaring the divine perfection which is found throughout this. “For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, . . . first being by interpretation ‘king of righteousness,’ and after that, king of Salem; that is, ‘king of peace.’” Melchizedek being as the translation of his own name “king of righteousness,” similarly this must come before his official title, “king of Salem,” which being similarly translated means “king of peace.” The meaning and order of these two Hebrew names are made in this way to define for us the principle that “righteousness” must go before “peace.” This is only what Scripture elsewhere declares (in plain words) of that glorious time “when the work of righteousness shall be peace, and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance forever” (Isaiah 32:17). But the apostle thinks evidently that there is no need of confirmation of what these two names declare. What an insight into the breadth of Scripture, and what a revelation of its glory, he gives us by this method of proof! This first section of our psalm, as we shall see, declares the same thing. First of all, in a prayer, the psalmist asks: “O God, give the king Thy judgments; and Thy righteousness unto the king’s Son.” Christ is both, as we know. Son of David, He takes the throne of David legally as that. But He is King also in a far higher way, and as such, divine righteousness belongs to Him by nature. No merely human hands can be trusted to hold in perfect equipoise this sceptre: and yet they are truly human hands: His of whom as Man, after a life of thirty years in this world, God could give testimony, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Now we have His careful discrimination in judgment, the first line speaking of strict equity; the second, bringing in (as lexicographers tell us), or at least allowing in it, the element of mercy also: “Thine afflicted, with judgment.” Then the effect is found: “The mountains,” types of firmly established power, “shall bring peace to the people; and the hills” (the smaller magistracies), “by righteousness.” The perfect equity of the Head reflects itself in all that are His representatives. And while no persons are favored in the judgment, the “afflicted” are tenderly considered, and “the children of the needy” cared for; while He breaks in pieces the oppressor.
2. Such is the character, then, of this government, so unique as it is among the sons of men. We now are called to see the kingdom in progress. Years do not change it: “They shall fear Thee as long as the sun, and while the moon endureth, -for all generations.” Those glowing orbs of heaven are indeed the typical representatives of such power as this, the underived and the reflected; lights that have never erred from their appointed place since the day they were commissioned to “give light upon the earth.” But no figures suffice to show Him forth aright; the next verse speaks of tender and reviving ministry: “He shall come down like rain on the mown grass” -the field that needs replacement of that which has been removed: “as showers that water the earth.” There is no sweeter figure of spiritual influence than this which is the Spirit’s own type. And the Spirit indeed it is, who works in unity with this glorious King; so that again we have righteousness and peace, though after a different manner, connected together: “In His days shall the righteous flourish, and there shall be abundance of peace till the moon be no more.” All this is as simple as it is blessed to contemplate: this is the progress of the kingdom in time; now we are to see its progress in extent; and here we naturally begin from the centre -from the land itself. The fourth verse of this section plainly defines the limits of the land itself, of Israel’s land. “From sea to sea” is not the way in which dominion over the whole earth would be defined; nor again “from the River to the ends of the earth.” The River, without any other definition, naturally means the Euphrates; and this was Israel’s limit in one direction, according to the promise given to Abraham (Genesis 15:18). From this point, the “ends of the land” -for so we should evidently understand it -reach to Egypt in the one direction, and to where the land ends, in the opposite direction eastward from this. And there is in this direction, and southward from it, everywhere a coast-line which is its “end.” If the number of the verse (4), as that of earthly universality, seems to speak rather of world-wide dominion, all the terms of the description are against this. Must we not take it, then, as what there is little difficulty in applying it to, the whole land? This, let us remember, is what Israel never yet has got -the land according to the promise to Abraham, -supplemented and explained by many an after-assurance. “From sea to sea,” cannot be here from the Mediterranean to the Salt Sea, which would not be in any case a definition save for the very southernmost portion of her narrow possessions, -a straitness to which she limited herself, through unbelief. This could not be the extent of what is spoken of to them as “a good land and a large.” The land of the Sidonians, which was promised to them, they never did possess, nor Mount Lebanon, which was a part of it. Edom. Moab, Ammon, Philistia, are all to belong to them, and never did. Though David’s empire reached at one point to the Euphrates, it was only over tributary kings, and that land never was Israel’s possession. And finally, if we are to interpret (and how can we avoid it?) “all the land of the Hittites,” by what we are beginning to realize of what their land was, how far northward in that direction must we carry their boundary-line? (Comp. Genesis 15:18-21; Exodus 23:31; Joshua 1:2-4; Ezekiel 47:13-23.) It is not for us here to attempt a solution of the many difficulties which beset this subject, and which (if the Lord permit us to take up the book of Ezekiel) we must do there; but it ought to be evident already that as a definition of the land “from sea to sea” can be no less than from the Mediterranean to the Persian gulf. It is meant to be, and is, a wide dominion; from the Euphrates to the Nile and the Red Sea giving other limits. But this land, as we find it today, contains many different people, and wide desert tracts. Notice, therefore, in connection with this, the perfect naturalness of the next verse, which speaks of the competency of the King to take possession of this wide and varied tract: “The dwellers in the deserts (or parched lands) shall bow before Him; and His enemies shall lick the dust” how well does this account for the special mention of such as these in connection with the progress of a victorious King, when one would expect rather to find mention of strong peoples, -foes that it would need special might to subdue! A glance at the map will show its appropriateness, and this “desert shall rejoice and blossom as the rose” (Isaiah 35:1). Naturally, now, we are told of “conquests” (as the number would show) in foreign lands. “The kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall bring presents: the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts.” Tarshish and the isles lie west from Palestine; Sheba and Seba south-east. The “isles,” at least, speak of Japhet; Sheba may be Joktanite -Shemitic; Seba, Cushite -Hamitic: all the families of the earth seem thus to be represented in the homage rendered here. The conquests may be entirely peaceful ones. Nothing else is suggested. The names have no certain meaning. The people represent apparently the commerce of the world, which now, for the first time in its history, owns Christ. Its gain is consecrated unto the Lord of the whole earth. But the tide of homage swells: “all kings bow down before Him: all nations serve Him.” The universal empire is at last complete. The cross is really at last the symbol of power and imperial sway, under which the earth reposes, quiet in sabbatic rest.
3. Again, before the book closes. we are called to look at the blessing of a rule which is service, -a glory unflecked with stain or shadow, -a David who is free to show the “kindness of God” to the maimed and ruined children of shame wherever they may be found. “For He shall deliver the needy when he crieth, and the afflicted, and him that has no helper.” That is what the sign of the cross denotes, and by this we know the Lord. None that has owed salvation to Him but must know that there was no help possible for him beside, and that it could be found in no other. And “He shall have compassion on the impoverished and needy, and shall save the souls of needy men.” Faithful, compassionate, He is thus the sanctuary refuge from the evil of the world, “deceit,” the sin of the weak, and “violence” of the strong: and as the refuge-cities of Israel declared of old, “precious shall their blood be in His sight.” Such is He, and such was He in all essential reality, when He was among men, and in their hands, to do with Him as they would. Such was He whom they crucified: and now, though He be Lord of all, how do their hearts respond to this glory of His? How, but as is appreciated the need which He is always meeting, -the grace, therefore, which has come in to meet it. And this is what the fifteenth verse (the fourth of this section) gives, as I believe; although, as so frequently in the case of Old Testament evangel, there is a certain mystery about it, which the loose grammatical structure of Hebrew favors, and with which the character of the psalm as prophecy, and especially as typical prophecy, harmonizes; by which we must not be thrown back, but only made to look more closely at what is before us. It seems impossible that the whole of the verse can be applied to the Lord. Whether we translate, “he shall live,” (with the common version,) or “let him live,” as many others, it seems trivial,* and out of keeping with the context, if so applied. On the other hand, the connection with the verse before is too obvious to have escaped notice, even where the full meaning has not been grasped. The revised version gives even “they shall live,” which is the meaning, although in a verse like the present, too interpretative, perhaps, to be adopted, especially as it makes a similarly interpretative rendering necessary in the remainder of the verse.** But the “he” is merely a specific example of the delivered ones just spoken of whose blood was precious in the sight of the King.
   But if this be what we start with, to whom shall he give of the gold of Sheba (as the Hebrew literally), and who is this “he?” If it be the delivered one who gives to the King, this (remembering Who the King is) is surely feeble enough, though the expression of thankfulness; and if it he indefinite, there is the loss of connection with what precedes altogether. The receiver of the gift would then be the delivered man; and this is not unsuited to our King of kings. Nay, we have heard of Him in the end psalm of the previous series, as One who has “led captivity captive, and received gifts for men,” and understand it to be His manner to enrich those whom He delivers; and the “gold of Sheba” will be still better fitted to express this, if it mean, as seems to be the fact, “the gold of the ‘Captor.’”* Typically we take “gold” to be the revelation of divine glory; and this is just the Captor’s gold, with which He enriches those whom He sets free. The spiritual application therefore furnishes a consistent and worthy sense all through. Does any other?
   But we have still the second part of the verse to interpret and account for: and here the general consent of commentators seems to apply both clauses to the King. It is the King then that is prayed for, and the King that is blessed. In application to a merely human king, also, this would be simple enough, and by such as fully hold the Messianic one it is urged that “‘prayer shall be made continually for him’ shows simply that the blessings enjoyed through Him raise the desire and request for His glory and continuance in power.” But both this interpretation and the request, even so interpreted, seem to me unnatural. If men know who the King is, -and this, surely, cannot be unknown, -how can they doubt the continuance of it? how can they imagine that the kingdom of God, once come, will pass, save as dawn, perhaps, into full day? I have no other alternative, therefore, but to believe that we have here expressed the priestly office of the true Melchizedek. Would it not be strange if this were altogether omitted? And if we have had at the beginning of the psalm, and variously through it, the plain reference to this character of royalty, is it not even to be expected that we should have somewhere in it the intercessory work of the “priest of the most high God”? The same objections do not apply to the common understanding of the last clause of the verse. Consistent rendering throughout would seem to make this also the blessing of the needy one; and thus it would be the answer to the prevailing intercession of the Royal Priest on his behalf. The whole verse would thus be uniform, and any apparent inconsistency be taken away. Such then being the glorious Mediator who stands for man Godward as for God manward, it is no marvel to find the divine government in response, with marvelous fertility of the ground, and men filling the cities with corresponding increase. The fields of corn shall rustle like the forests of Lebanon. Who can picture the blessing when the earth shows to the full the powers that now lie almost dormant in it? Thus the King’s Name which guarantees all this blessing, shall endure for ever: His name shall continue like the life-giving Sun, His image; and men shall bless themselves in Him; as being the highest possible thought of blessing. All nations shall call Him blessed. Thereupon follows that outburst of praise with which the second book ends: every line of truth having its natural end and outcome in this joy in God and worship. The Eternal God, the God of Israel, is He who alone doeth wonders. May the whole earth be filled with His glory! In this, as an eighth verse, there is perhaps an intimation of the overflow of this blessedness beyond the bounds of time and into the true eternity which, as we have seen, the Old Testament can hardly be said to enter. The double Amen is here appended to the prayer in testimony of the steadfast longing of the heart for it. The Lord takes it up as His “verily, verily,” to make it the token of the steadfastness of the blessed truths with which He connects it, the assurance and rest of the heart which enters into them. Does not this show us also the character of that final word which has been surely so much misunderstood by the great body of critics, who have shown in the way they have taken it up, how much they are critics of manuscripts -biblio-technics, if I may coin the word for them, -rather than judges of the spirit which pervades Scripture. What simpler way of reading the end of David’s prayers than by comparison with the “last words,” as we find them in the history? He even calls himself, there as here, “David the son of Jesse,” and there also the “sweet psalmist of Israel.” And of what are his last words full! Of “A righteous Ruler over men; A Ruler in the fear of God;” and then in some of the images which this very psalm suggests, — “Even as the morning-light when the sun ariseth, A morning without clouds: From the brightness after rain The herb springeth from the earth.” Nor did he speak with any thought of his mere human house; for he tells us directly that that house was not so with God." Yet he speaks of “an eternal covenant” as to the future, “ordered in all, and sure;” and he adds: “for this is all my salvation and all of delight, though” -as yet in that sorrowful house that he had had, “He maketh it not to grow.” All David’s heart then was wrapped up in that glorious prospect: the very same that he has shown us here! What wonder, then, that when he has poured his heart out in the contemplation of this glorious scene, he should express himself in this thankful ejaculation: “The prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended”! What more simple, heart-felt, and natural? These are not, we may be sure, the words of a collector who thought he had got together in these first two books of the Psalms all that David had written, and was mistaken. This is but their mistake who have not learned that “the foolishness of God is wiser than man,” and that “the Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.”