Hebrew Corner 5: "hedge" (Psalm 139) by John H. Walton

Psalm 139 is one of the most well-known Psalms, but may perhaps also be one of the most misunderstood. One of the first things that any student learns in Psalm study is that there are categories of Psalms, the main ones being Praise and Lament. These are basically genres that help us to know what to expect as we read. Each type of Psalm has its characteristic features that help the reader identify where it fits in.

Psalm 139 is regularly read as a Praise Psalm, not surprising given the focus on God’s admirable attributes and forthright statements like that found in verse 14. Nevertheless, when one looks at the psalm in light of the standard genre features, everything about it proclaims it to be a lament. It begins with a vocative (“O Lord”), it ends with a petition (vv. 23-24) and, most importantly, it contains a section of cursing enemies (vv.19-22). All of these are hallmarks of a lament psalm.

When we look at the issue of translation, we find that the translator’s understanding of the genre will influence the translation. For example, verse 5 reads “You hem me in—behind and before; you have laid your hand upon me.” This could be read in a protective sense, but research would lead us to a different conclusion. Once we consider the possibility of reading this psalm as a lament, other supporting observations could be made. For instance, the “hemming in” of Psalm 139:5 is used in other passages as oppressive rather than protective (it is used for laying siege). Job uses different vocabulary but likewise speaks of hemming in negative terms (Job 3:23; 7:12). The second line of the verse uses language of capture (cf. Job 41:8; Ps 32:4 for the same concepts using slightly different language). The verb in v. 10 can be positive (“guide”) but can also be negative (“lead away captive”). Lastly, the verb in v.14 (NIV: “praise”) can also mean “thank”. If the psalm is a lament, this verse should be taken like the first twelve. The psalmist does not resent God’s attributes and deeds, but he finds them a basis for complaint. He is pointing out that as the perfect judge, God knows all and sees all. Nothing can be done in secret places and God, as creator, knows all of the thoughts and motives of the psalmist. When he exclaims “How precious to me are your thoughts” the idea is that God’s thoughts are inaccessible—not easily gained, thus the psalmist is confused: “What could you be thinking?”

The final example of the significance of identifying the psalm type is found in the last two verses of the psalm. If it is a praise psalm, these verses are read as a sinner’s plea: “Help me to discover the wrongs that I find it difficult to recognize in myself.” If it is a lament psalm, the verses are read as a righteous sufferer’s claim of innocence: “Probe as deeply as you want—you will not find offenses that justify my harsh treatment.” This latter sentiment occurs occasionally in other psalms (see Ps 17:3; 26:1-2, both using the same verb for “test”).

Whether a person agrees that Psalm 139 is a lament psalm or prefers to retain the traditional reading as a praise psalm, it undeniably serves as an illustration of how differently two readers, or two translators, could read the same psalm depending on which category they put it in. The tone and sentiment of the psalm, and especially the final petition, would take on a whole new sense if the lament indicators prevail.

Much of this material is taken from Walton and Hill, Old Testament Today, 348.

John H. Walton (PhD, Hebrew Union College) teaches Old Testament at Wheaton College Graduate School. He is the author or coauthor of several books, including Chronological and Background Charts of the Old Testament; Ancient Israelite Literature in Its Cultural Context and Covenant: God's Purpose, God's Plan.

Comments

[Sam Sutter]

If one takes deClaissé-Walford's focus of the Psalter, I wonder how thinking about psalms 138 and 140 inform a reading of the 139th? Singing a lament sandwitched between "Do not forsake the works of Your Hands" (138.8b) and "Rescue me, O Lord from evil men" (140.1) It's always a bit up in the air how much to think about the shape and shaping of the psalter, but even the super scripts (even 137) lend to a good lament reading of 139.

[Bob MacDonald]

Thanks for the notes. I have a problem imposing form criticism on the psalms. I agree with you that the words are more than simple praise piety. I doubt that the originators thought in terms of genre.

[Irving Salzman]

Though the blog postings are generally always good, Walton's post here on Psalm 135 is especially good. I tend to favor the arguments for viewing Psalm 139 as a lament psalm myself. But I would appreciate, all the more, if both Walton and Bill Mounce clearly identified their own views in addition to simply raising the interpretive issues. I realize full well that the point of these columns is to raise issues in interpretation (which is great and serves a need). But, at the same time, I would just like to see the two state, briefly, their own positions in these posts.

[John Walton]

I definitely see it as a lament. And I should also comment that even though authors may not consciously think in genre terms they tend to follow literary conventions. All the conventions observable in this psalm point to a lament. If we read it as if in the mouth of Job, we will get close to the sense of it.

John H. Walton

[Irving Salzman]

Thank you, Dr. Walton. Hesed v'Shalom. Irving Salzman