Psalms 50

Psalms 50UNDER the figure of a great judicial process, God himself is introduced, exposing and condemning the hypocrisy of formalists, and expounding the true nature of his law. After a striking introduction, Psalms 50:1-6, he reproves the perversion, and exhibits the true meaning, of the first table of the law, Psalms 50:7-15, and then of the second, Psalms 50:16-21, and closes with a solemn warning and a gracious promise, Psalms 50:22-23.

1. (Psalms 50:1) A Psalm. By Asaph. The Almighty, God, Jehovah, speaks, and calls the earth, from the rising of the sun unto the going down thereof. Asaph was one of David’s chief musicians (1 Chronicles 15:17; 1 Chronicles 15:19), and also an inspired psalmist (1 Chronicles 25:2, 2 Chronicles 29:30). In both these capacities the psalm might be Ascribed to him, nor is it possible either to prove or disprove that it was composed by him. Mighty or Almighty is not an adjective agreeing with the next word (the Mighty God), but a substantive in apposition with it.

Three divine names are put together in a kind of climax, El, Elohim, Jehovah. The first represents God as almighty, the second as the only proper object of worship and (by its plural form) as perfect, the third as self-existent and eternal, and at the same time as the peculiar God of Israel. The same combination occurs in Joshua 22:22. It is here intended to enhance the grandeur of the scene by setting forth the titles of the judge or sovereign. Speaks, or more exactly spoke, has spoken, by which, however, we may understand an act just past. The same remark applies to the word calls, which is here used in the sense of summoning or citing.

From sunrise to sunset, or from east to west, is a natural description of the earth in its whole extent, including its remotest bounds but not excluding that which lies between them. See above, on Psalms 2:8.

2. (Psalms 50:2) Out of Zion, the perfection of beauty, God hath shined. He comes forth, in a splendid and imposing manner, from his royal residence, the seat of the theocracy, which is described as perfectly beautiful, not only in a moral and spiritual sense, but in reference also to its lofty situation, celebrated in Psalms 48:3 (2) above. The Hebrew verb is borrowed from the sublime theophany in Deuteronomy 33:2; see also Psalms 80:2 (1), Psalms 94:1.

3. (Psalms 50:18) Our God shall come— and let him not be silent— fire before him shall devour, and around him it shall be tempestuous exceedingly. The future in the first clause may be rendered he is coming, as if the sound of his voice and the light of his glory had preceded his actual appearance. The imagery is borrowed from the giving of the law at Sinai, Exodus 19:16; Exodus 20:18. Consuming fire is a common emblem of God’s vindicatory justice (Deuteronomy 32:22, 2 Thessalonians 1:8), and of God himself considered as a righteous God (Deuteronomy 4:24; Deuteronomy 9:3, Hebrews 12:29).

4. (Psalms 50:18) He will call to the heavens above and to the earth, to judge his people. The future, as before, describes an act just about to be performed. It might even be translated, he is calling. The compound preposition, from over, is used adverbially in the sense of above. See for example Genesis 1:7. The strict sense, from, above, would here be inappropriate, since God is re presented not as speaking from heaven, much less from above it, but as appearing upon earth, and visibly coming out of Zion.

In our idiom these words would naturally mean that he summons heaven and earth to sit in judgment on his people. But according to Hebrew usage, the last clause may refer to the remoter antecedent, the subject of the principal verb, and be translated, so that he may judge his people. The heavens and earth, put for the whole creation, are summoned not as judges but as witnesses, as appears from ver. 6 below. See Deut. iv. 26, xxx. 19, xxxi. 28, and compare Isaiah 1:2.

5. (Psalms 50:5) Gather for me my saints, ratifying my covenant over sacrifice. Tho judge here addresses, as it were, the ministerial officers of justice. Compare Matthew 24:31. For me, as my messengers, acting in my behalf, or to me, i.e. to the place where I am, here, around me. My saints, the objects of my mercy, those whom I have called and specially distinguished. See above, on Psalms 4:4 (3).

The term is here descriptive of a relation, not of an intrinsic quality. Ratifying, literally cutting, striking, perhaps in allusion to the practice of slaying and dividing victims as a religious rite accompanying solemn compacts. See Genesis 15:10; Genesis 15:18. The same usage may be referred to in the following words, over sacrifice, i.e. standing over it, or on sacrifice, i.e. founding the engagement on a previous appeal to God. There is probably allusion to the great covenant transaction recorded in Exodus 24:4-8. This reference to sacrifice shews clearly that what follows was not intended to discredit or repudiate that essential symbol of the typical or ceremonial system.

6. (Psalms 50:6) And (now) the heavens have declared his righteousness, for God (is) judge himself. Selah. The heavens are witnesses of God’s judicial rectitude, for he himself (and not a delegated man or angel) is the judge (on this occasion). Or the last words may be rendered, he is judging, i.e. acting as a judge. The parties and the witnesses having been summoned, the judicial process now begins. The pause, denoted by the Selah, is one indicative of awe, excited by the dread solemnity of these proceedings.

7. (Psalms 50:7) Hear, my people, and let me speak, and let me testify against thee. God, thy God, am I. The introductory description being ended, the divine judgment now begins. Let me speak, or I will speak, the peculiar form of the Hebrew verb, sometimes expressing strong desire and sometimes fixed determination. See above, on Ps. ii. 3. God is himself the witness against Israel, by whom the charge is to be proved, the heavens and the earth being only witnesses of the judicial scene or spectacle.

I am not only God, but thy God, bound to thee by covenant, and reciprocally claiming thy allegiance. This may be added as a reason why he has a right to testify against them; or it may be the beginning of the testimony itself. “Let me testify against thee as thy God,” or, “I will testify against thee, that I am thy God,” although I am not so regarded or so treated.

8. (Psalms 50:8) Not for thy sacrifices will I reprove thee, and thy burnt-offerings before me always. The insertion of the words to have been, in the common version, seems to make the clause mean, that although they had neglected this external rite, it was of no importance, whereas the simple meaning of the Hebrew sentence is, that they were not chargeable with this neglect, implying that the observance was obligatory, which is in perfect keeping with the tenor of the psalm. “I do not charge thee with withholding the material offerings to which I am entitled, for in truth they are ever before me.” To the generic term sacrifices, animal oblations, he adds the more specific one, burnt-offering, the usual English version of a Hebrew term, denoting the principal and ordinary expiatory offering of the Mosaic ritual. See above, on Psalms 20:4 (3), Psalms 407 (6).

9. (Psalms 50:9) I will not take from thy house a bullock, (nor) from thy folds he-goats. Here begins the correction of the false and foolish notion, extensively prevalent among the heathen, and not unknown among the ancient Jews, especially in times of great corruption, that the sacrifices were designed to satisfy some physical necessity on God’s part, whether in the way of food or otherwise. In opposition to this impious absurdity, it is argued that, even if God needed such supplies, he would not be dependent on the worshipper, who is here addressed directly as an individual, with great advantage to the liveliness and force of the whole passage. “If I needed bulls and goats, as you imagine, I would not be under the necessity of seeking them at your hands.”

10. (Psalms 50:10) For to me (belongs) every beast of the forest, the cattle in hills of a thousand. This last idiomatic phrase may either mean a thousand hills, or hills where the cattle rove by thousands, with probable allusion to the hilly grounds of Bashan beyond Jordan. See above, on Psalms 22:13 (12). According to etymology, the noun in the first clause means an animal, and that in the second beasts or brutes in general. See above, on Psalms 49:13(12). But when placed in antithesis, the first denotes a wild beast, and the second domesticated animals or cattle.

Both words were necessary to express God’s sovereign propriety in the whole animal creation. Thus understood, the verse assigns a reason for the negative assertion in the one before it. Even if God could stand in need of animal oblations, for his own sake, or for their sake, he would not be under the necessity of coming to man for them, since the whole animal creation is his property and perfectly at his disposal.

11. (Psalms 50:18) I know every bird of the hills, and the population of the field (is) with me, i.e. in my presence, under my inspection, and within my reach. The past tense of the verb suggests not merely that it is so now, but that it has been so from the beginning. This is no newly acquired knowledge or authority, but such as are involved in the very relation between creature and creator. Population, literally movement, motion, i. e. animal motion, and by a natural metonymy that which lives and moves.

12. (Psalms 50:12) If I were hungry, I would not say (so) to thee; for to me (belongs) the world and its fulness, that which fills it, its contents and its inhabitants. See above, on Psalms 24:1. The first clause may be rendered, with a closer adherence to the form of the original, if I am hungry, I will not say (so) to thee. All this is said upon the supposition, that God may, in some sense, need supplies of this kind, although even then he would be wholly independent of man’s bounty or fidelity in furnishing them. But the supposition is of course a false one, and is so represented in the next verse.

13. (Psalms 50:13) Will I eat the flesh of bulls and drink the blood of goats? The future of the Hebrew verb is very expressive, suggesting the ideas of possibility, necessity, and desire. Do I desire the flesh and blood of beasts for my refreshment? Do I need them for my sustenance? Or is it even possible for me to use them in the way that you imagine? The negative answer, which is obviously expected to these questions, presupposes the great doctrine that Jehovah is a spirit, and as such exempt from all corporeal necessities.

This, then, is another refutation of the gross and impious error that he needed their oblations. If they were necessary in themselves, he could obtain them elsewhere; and that they are not necessary follows, as an inevitable consequence, from the spirituality of the divine nature. This is not the language of dry and formal ratiocination, which, on such a subject and in such a connection, would be not only misplaced but revolting. It is rather the language of impassioned. and indignant expostulation, holding up the absurdities, to which the error of the formal worshipper inevitably tended, as a refutation of the error itself,

14. (Psalms 50:14) Sacrifice to God thanksgiving, and (so) pay unto the Most High thy vows. The first word means something more than offer, and contains a distinct allusion to the animal sacrifices mentioned in Psalms 50:8 above. This is not an exhortaton to offer thanks or praise instead of material sacrifices, which would. be inconsistent with the express requisition of the latter, but to offer them as expressions of thanksgiving, or in other words, to offer these as they were intended to be offered, not as a meritorious operation, nor as gross attempts to feed the Deity, but as symbolical expressions of devout affection, repentance, faith, and love, all which we may suppose to be represented, or at least suggested, by the single act of praise or thanksgiving, here explicitly enjoined. The imperative in the last clause may, according to a very common Hebrew idiom, be resolved into a future, and the whole verse paraphrased as follows: “If you offer your material sacrifices, not merely as such, but as the prescribed expression of inward. spiritual exercises, you will thereby really discharge your obligations to the being whom you worship.”

15. (Psalms 50:15) And call upon me in a day of distress; I will free thee and thou shalt honour me. The imperative in the first clause, is dependent upon that in the preceding verse. The connection may be rendered clearer by substituting then for and. Offer such sacrifices, and you will really discharge your obligations; then, when you call upon me, I will hear you. Thou shalt honour me, thou shalt have occasion to renew thy praises and. thanksgivings for new benefits received. With this encouraging assurance closes the divine exposition of the sacrificial system.

16. (Psalms 50:16) And to the wicked God saith, What hast thou (to do) to declare my statutes, and take thy covenant into thy mouth? Thus far the doctrine of the psalm has had respect to the formal worshipper, whose rites are, mere external services, expressive of no inward faith or love. But now it is applied.to him who actually violates the law which he professes to acknowledge. The wicked, the man of vicious life, who is afterwards described with more particularity. He is not necessarily distinct in real life from the formalist of the foregoing context. The description is not of two individuals, but of two classes, to which one and the same person may belong, or two characters, which one and the same person may exhibit.

Saith, said, or hath said, on the same ideal occasion. What (is) to thee, the only Hebrew mode of saying, what hast thou, i.e. what right or reason hast thou? To declare, either by profession of one’s own faith, or by authoritative teaching of others. There may perhaps be some allusion to the primary meaning of the Hebrew verb, which is to count or number. See above, on Psalms 40:6 (5). To count off or reckon up God’s statutes is a very natural expression for censorious or ostentatious iteration, especially in this connection, where an obvious reference to the ten commandments follows.

My covenant, my law considered as conditional, or as involving reciprocal engagements upon my part. See above; on Psalms 50:5. To take into the mouth, or more literally, to take up on the mouth, is a strong idiomatic phrase for uttering, pronouncing. See above, on Psalms 16:4.

17. (Psalms 50:17) And thou hast hated instruction, and hast cast my words behind thee. The very person who enforces the law, in all its rigour, upon others, refuses to submit to it himself, and treats its precepts not only with neglect but with contempt. This passage seems to have been present to the mind of Paul, in that remarkable series of interrogations, “Thou therefore which teachest another teachest thou not thyself,” etc. Romans 2:21-23.

18. (Psalms 50:18) If thou sawest a thief, thou consentedst with him, and with adulterers (has been) thy portion. The first clause conveys far more than the simple idea of consent. The expression if thou sawest implies great eagerness and an instinctive drawing towards the thief as a congenial spirit. The second verb in Hebrew denotes a cordial and complacent acquiescence. Thy portion or participation, common interest, communion. These particular sins are mentioned with reference to their prohibition in the seventh and eighth commandments (Exodus 20:14-15).

19. (Psalms 50:19) Thy mouth thou hast given up to evil, and thy tongue will weave (or frame) deceit. The ninth commandment is now added to the other two, as being habitually violated by the person here addressed. Given up to, literally sent out with (or into) evil. The first clause is descriptive of mere evil speaking, the second of more artificial and ingenious lying. Both verbs include present time, but the first with the additional idea of an early habit, formed and settled in time past, the other with that of an inveterate habit, not likely to be broken or reformed hereafter.

20. (Psalms 50:20) Thou wilt sit (and) against thy brother speak; at the son of thy mother thou wilt aim a blow. To the general charge of falsehood is now added the specific one of slander, not against strangers, but his nearest friends. The idea suggested by the future is that such behaviour may be confidently looked for on the part of such a character. Thou wilt sit, in the company of others, or more specifically of the wicked, or of other wicked slanderers, as one of them. See above, on Psalms 50:18. As brother might be understood as meaning merely any other man, it is determined by the unambiguous phrase, thy mother’s son.

This is mentioned merely as an extreme case, not as excluding other relations and friends, but rather comprehending them. Aim a blow, literally give a thrust, so as to cast him down. The blow meant is a stroke of the tongue. Compare Jeremiah 18:18.

21. (Psalms 50:21) These things hast thou done, and I have held my peace; thou hast imagined I was just like thyself. I will reprove thee, and array (thy sins) before thine eyes. God is described as silent when he does not interpose with his reproofs or manifest his displeasure. See above, on Psalms 28:1. Imagined; the Hebrew verb originally means to liken or compare, and another of the same form to be silent, so that it is peculiarly appropriate in this place, where the mention of God’s silence immediately precedes, and the imagining referred to was a false assimilation of the Most High to the sinner himself. Just like, or exactly like, the intensive adverb corresponding to the emphatic repetition of the verb in Hebrew.

In our idiom, an adversative particle is almost indispensable between the clauses; but the more abrupt transition is congenial with the spirit and usage of the Hebrew language. Array, arrange, set in order, so that none shall be omitted or overlooked. See above, on Psalms 5:4 (3). Before thine eyes, literally to thine eyes, or to thy face, again implying that the sight of them is not to be avoided. This declaration of severe fidelity forms an appropriate conclusion to the second lesson of the psalm, or that in which the mask is stripped off from the vicious hypocrite, who professes to serve God while he lives in the grossest violation of his precepts, as in the first part (ver. 7-15) it was torn from the formal hypocrite, who satisfies himself with a mere outward and mechanical performance of rites designed to be significant of spiritual and devout affections.

22. (Psalms 50:23) Oh consider this, forgetters of God, lest I rend and there be no deliverer. To both the argumentative invectives which precede there is added in conclusion a solemn exhortation, including both a warning or admonitory threatening and a promise. This verse contains the warning. The Hebrew particle of entreaty is not so well expressed by the now of the English Bible as by the Oh of the Prayer Book version. The image presented in the last clause is that of a ravenous beast, and more especially a lion. See above, on Psalms 22:14 (13).

No deliverer, or more literally none delivering. The description of those addressed, as forgetting (or forgetters of) God, suggests that both forms of hypocrisy exhibited in this psalm owe their origin to ignorance, mistaken notions, or oblivion, of God’s attributes and purposes and former acts.

23. (Psalms 50:23) (The man) sacrificing praise shall honour me, and prepare a way that I may shew him the salvation of God, that of which he is the author. This phrase is used instead of my salvation, for the sake of a more sonorous close. The common version of the first clause makes it an identical preposition: whoso offereth praise glorifieth me. At the same time it greatly weakens the expression by the use of the ambiguous term offer. The words are all borrowed from Psalms 50:14-15, to which there is therefore a direct allusion, and by which the clause must be interpreted. It is really a promise that he whose offerings are genuine expressions of thanksgiving shall have cause or occasion to praise God for his mercies.

The rest of the sentence is more doubtful. According to the construction above given, which sums to be required by the accents, the meaning is, that he who offers the right kind of sacrifice, as before explained, prepares the way, literally sets or lays a way, by which he shall himself attain to the experience of salvation. But as this confines the promise to the observance of the first great lesson taught in the psalm, we may give it a wider application, and the sentence a more regular form, by rendering the last clause thus, and (the man) ordering (his) way, I will shew the salvation of God. The man ordering his way, i.e. placing it, defining it, marking it out, is then contrasted with such as turn aside unto their crooked ways (Psalms 125:5). The precise form of the construction is, (as to the man) ordering (his) way, I will shew him the salvation of God. This clause then has reference to the second lesson of the psalm (ver. 16-21), as the other to the first (ver. 7-15).

The preposition before salva-tion in Hebrew often gives the verb to see the pregnant sense of gazing at or viewing with delight. See above, on Psalms 22:18 (17), Psalms 37:34.