The Radically Distinct Lot of the Pious and the Ungodly
The collection of the Psalms and that of the prophecies of Isaiah resemble one another in the fact, that the one begins with a discourse that bears no superscription, and the other with a Psalm of the same character; and these form the prologues to the two collections. From Acts 13:33, where the words: Thou art My Son ... are quoted as being found ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ ψαλμῷ , we see that in early times Psalms 1:1-6 was regarded as the prologue to the collection. The reading ἐν τῷ ψαλμῷ τῷ δευτέρῳ , rejected by Griesbach, is an old correction. But this way of numbering the Psalms is based upon tradition. A scholium from Origen and Eusebius says of Psalms 1:1-6 and Psalms 2:1-12 : ἐν τῷ Ἑβραΐκῷ συνημμένοι , and just so Apollinaris:
Ἐπιγραφῆς ὁ ψαλμὸς εὑρέθη δίχα
Ἡνωμένος δὲ τοῖς παῤ Ἑβραίοις στίχοις .
For it is an old Jewish way of looking at it, as Albertus Magnus observes : Psalmus primus incipit a beatitudine et terminatur a beatitudine , i.e., it begins with אשׁרי Psalms 1:1 and ends with אשׁרי Psalms 2:12, so that consequently Psalms 1:1-6 and Psalms 2:1-12, as is said in B. Berachoth 9b (cf. Jer. Taanith ii. 2), form one Psalm ( חדא פרשׁה ). As regards the subject-matter this is certainly not so. It is true Psalms 1:1-6 and Psalms 2:1-12 coincide in some respects (in the former יהגה , in the latter יהגו ; in the former תאבד ... ודרך , in the latter ותאכדו דוך ; in the former אשׁרי at the beginning, in the latter, at the end), but these coincidences of phraseology are not sufficient to justify the conclusion of unity of authorship (Hitz.), much less that the two Psalms are so intimately connected as to form one whole. These two anonymous hymns are only so far related, as that the one is adapted to form the proaemium of the Psalter from its ethical, the other from its prophetic character. The question, however, arises whether this was in the mind of the collector. Perhaps Psalms 2:1-12 is only attached to Psalms 1:1-6 on account of those coincidences; Psalms 1:1-6 being the proper prologue of the Psalter in its pentateuchal arrangement after the pattern of the Tôra. For the Psalter is the Yea and Amen in the form of hymns to the word of God given in the Tôra. Therefore it begins with a Psalm which contrasts the lot of him who loves the Tôra with the lot of the ungodly, - an echo of that exhortation, Joshua 1:8, in which, after the death of Moses, Jahve charges his successor Joshua to do all that is written in the book of the Tôra. As the New Testament sermon on the Mount, as a sermon on the spiritualized Law, begins with maka'rioi, so the Old Testament Psalter, directed entirely to the application of the Law to the inner life, begins with אשׁרי . The First book of the Psalms begins with two אשׁרי Psalms 1:1; Psalms 2:12, and closes with two אשׁרי Psalms 40:5; Psalms 41:2. A number of Psalms begin with אשׁרי , Psalms 32:1-11; Psalms 41:1-13; Psalms 112:1-10; Ps 119; Psalms 128:1-6; but we must not therefore suppose the existence of a special kind of ashrê -psalms; for, e.g., Psalms 32:1-11 is a משׂיל , Psalms 112:1-10 a Hallelujah , Psalms 128:1-6 a שׁיר המעלות .
As regards the time of the composition of the Psalm, we do not wish to lay any stress on the fact that 2 Chronicles 22:5 sounds like an allusion to it. But 1st, it is earlier than the time of Jeremiah; for Jeremiah was acquainted with it. The words of curse and blessing, Jeremiah 17:5-8, are like an expository and embellished paraphrase of it. It is customary with Jeremiah to reproduce the prophecies of his predecessors, and more especially the words of the Psalms, in the flow of his discourse and to transform their style to his own. In the present instance the following circumstance also favours the priority of the Psalm: Jeremiah refers the curse corresponding to the blessing to Jehoiakim and thus applies the Psalm to the history of his own times. It is 2ndly, not earlier than the time of Solomon. For לצים occurring only here in the whole Psalter, a word which came into use, for the unbelievers, in the time of the Chokma (vid., the definition of the word, Proverbs 21:24), points us to the time of Solomon and onwards. But since it contains no indications of contemporary history whatever, we give up the attempt to define more minutely the date of its composition, and say with St. Columba (against the reference of the Psalm to Joash the protegé of Jehoiada, which some incline to): Non audiendi sunt hi, qui ad excludendam Psalmorum veram expositionem falsas similitudines ab historia petitas conantur inducere .
Worthy.Bible » Commentaries » Keil & Delitzsch Commentary » Commentary on Psalms 1
Commentary on Psalms 1 Keil & Delitzsch Commentary
The Radically Distinct Lot of the Pious and the Ungodly
The collection of the Psalms and that of the prophecies of Isaiah resemble one another in the fact, that the one begins with a discourse that bears no superscription, and the other with a Psalm of the same character; and these form the prologues to the two collections. From Acts 13:33, where the words: Thou art My Son ... are quoted as being found ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ ψαλμῷ , we see that in early times Psalms 1:1-6 was regarded as the prologue to the collection. The reading ἐν τῷ ψαλμῷ τῷ δευτέρῳ , rejected by Griesbach, is an old correction. But this way of numbering the Psalms is based upon tradition. A scholium from Origen and Eusebius says of Psalms 1:1-6 and Psalms 2:1-12 : ἐν τῷ Ἑβραΐκῷ συνημμένοι , and just so Apollinaris:
Ἐπιγραφῆς ὁ ψαλμὸς εὑρέθη δίχα
Ἡνωμένος δὲ τοῖς παῤ Ἑβραίοις στίχοις .
For it is an old Jewish way of looking at it, as Albertus Magnus observes : Psalmus primus incipit a beatitudine et terminatur a beatitudine , i.e., it begins with אשׁרי Psalms 1:1 and ends with אשׁרי Psalms 2:12, so that consequently Psalms 1:1-6 and Psalms 2:1-12, as is said in B. Berachoth 9b (cf. Jer. Taanith ii. 2), form one Psalm ( חדא פרשׁה ). As regards the subject-matter this is certainly not so. It is true Psalms 1:1-6 and Psalms 2:1-12 coincide in some respects (in the former יהגה , in the latter יהגו ; in the former תאבד ... ודרך , in the latter ותאכדו דוך ; in the former אשׁרי at the beginning, in the latter, at the end), but these coincidences of phraseology are not sufficient to justify the conclusion of unity of authorship (Hitz.), much less that the two Psalms are so intimately connected as to form one whole. These two anonymous hymns are only so far related, as that the one is adapted to form the proaemium of the Psalter from its ethical, the other from its prophetic character. The question, however, arises whether this was in the mind of the collector. Perhaps Psalms 2:1-12 is only attached to Psalms 1:1-6 on account of those coincidences; Psalms 1:1-6 being the proper prologue of the Psalter in its pentateuchal arrangement after the pattern of the Tôra. For the Psalter is the Yea and Amen in the form of hymns to the word of God given in the Tôra. Therefore it begins with a Psalm which contrasts the lot of him who loves the Tôra with the lot of the ungodly, - an echo of that exhortation, Joshua 1:8, in which, after the death of Moses, Jahve charges his successor Joshua to do all that is written in the book of the Tôra. As the New Testament sermon on the Mount, as a sermon on the spiritualized Law, begins with maka'rioi, so the Old Testament Psalter, directed entirely to the application of the Law to the inner life, begins with אשׁרי . The First book of the Psalms begins with two אשׁרי Psalms 1:1; Psalms 2:12, and closes with two אשׁרי Psalms 40:5; Psalms 41:2. A number of Psalms begin with אשׁרי , Psalms 32:1-11; Psalms 41:1-13; Psalms 112:1-10; Ps 119; Psalms 128:1-6; but we must not therefore suppose the existence of a special kind of ashrê -psalms; for, e.g., Psalms 32:1-11 is a משׂיל , Psalms 112:1-10 a Hallelujah , Psalms 128:1-6 a שׁיר המעלות .
As regards the time of the composition of the Psalm, we do not wish to lay any stress on the fact that 2 Chronicles 22:5 sounds like an allusion to it. But 1st, it is earlier than the time of Jeremiah; for Jeremiah was acquainted with it. The words of curse and blessing, Jeremiah 17:5-8, are like an expository and embellished paraphrase of it. It is customary with Jeremiah to reproduce the prophecies of his predecessors, and more especially the words of the Psalms, in the flow of his discourse and to transform their style to his own. In the present instance the following circumstance also favours the priority of the Psalm: Jeremiah refers the curse corresponding to the blessing to Jehoiakim and thus applies the Psalm to the history of his own times. It is 2ndly, not earlier than the time of Solomon. For לצים occurring only here in the whole Psalter, a word which came into use, for the unbelievers, in the time of the Chokma (vid., the definition of the word, Proverbs 21:24), points us to the time of Solomon and onwards. But since it contains no indications of contemporary history whatever, we give up the attempt to define more minutely the date of its composition, and say with St. Columba (against the reference of the Psalm to Joash the protegé of Jehoiada, which some incline to): Non audiendi sunt hi, qui ad excludendam Psalmorum veram expositionem falsas similitudines ab historia petitas conantur inducere .