לַמְנַצֵּ֥חַ
אַל־תַּשְׁחֵ֗ת לְדָוִ֥ד מִכְתָּֽם׃ הַֽאֻמְנָ֗ם
אֵ֣לֶם צֶ֭דֶק תְּדַבֵּר֑וּן מֵישָׁרִ֥ים תִּ֜שְׁפְּט֗וּ בְּנֵ֣י
אָדָֽם
<To the chief Musician, Altaschith,
Michtam of David.> Do ye indeed speak righteousness, O congregation? Do ye
judge uprightly, O ye sons of men? (KJV)
The interpretation of the psalm
is dependent upon the answer to the question who is meant in vs. 2f. How is the
word אֵלֶם in vs. 2 to be understood?
1. ‘quiet’;
the Masoretic vocalization אֵלֶם hardly makes sense: ‘to silence’, ‘in quiet’
(? cf. Ps. 56:1). Aquila translates with ἀλαλία (= אֵלֶם).
2. ‘yet’;
LXX (ἆρα), Peshitta and Hieronymus (utique) read the adverb אֻלָם (= אֻלָם)
‘yet’, ‘all the same’, ‘nevertheless’. From a syntactic perspective this
reading would be striking.⁴⁷⁵
3. ‘congregation’;
an ancient translation (Symmachus, Kimchi, Calvin, SV, KJV) is ‘congregation’,
derived from אֵלֶם I ‘to bind’. However, this would be a hapax.
4. ‘mighty
ones’; the word אֵלֶם must be read as אֵילִם (= אֵילִים) ‘rams’, in the
figurative sense ‘mighty ones’ (Exod. 15:15; 2 Kings 24:15; Ezek. 17:13, 31:11
and 32:21). This would fit well, but the presupposed double scriptio
defectiva within one word weakens this option.
5. ‘gods’;
many exegetes (J.D. Michaelis as the first) accept the conclusion that אֵלֶם is
to be read as ‘gods’ (= אֱלֹהִים).
The last reading is probably the
correct one. Tipping the scales in favour of this choice is not only the
realization that the reading ‘gods’ provides the simplest solution, but
especially the great affinity between Ps. 58 and Ps. 82.
Assuming that in vs. 2 it is gods
who are addressed, the question must still be answered as to their precise
identity. Two opposing views are defended.
According to most exegetes, the
speaker in vs. 2f. addresses people, and the designation ‘gods’ is an
allusion to judges or officials who enact justice. The word ‘gods’ is
understood as either an honorary title for those who uphold justice in God’s
name (cf. Deut. 1:17; Rom. 13:1) or as an expression of sarcasm. However, this
interpretation is not entirely convincing. Aside from the question whether the
presupposed parallel texts can carry the burden of proof for this use of the
word ‘gods’, this exegesis does not do justice to the clear correspondence
between the beginning and the end of the psalm, as well as the comparisons with
Ps. 82, where an interpretation of ‘gods’ as judges would appear to be forced
(note especially vs. 6f.).
In Ps. 58:2 the word אֵלֶם
appears to refer to gods rather than to people. It refers to gods who do not
properly exercise their assigned task, the administration of justice amongst
the people (בני־אדם), but instead of justice they perpetrate violence (חמס) on
earth. In a heavenly tribunal, they are called to accountability by God (אלהים,
vs. 12). Ps. 82 contains the same imagery, only there the forensic situation is
clearer. The gods are condemned by God in a gathering of the gods because of
their unjust judging. Extra-biblical literature, especially Ugaritic, provides
illuminating parallels for this complex of ideas.
With the determination that the
word אֵלֶם refers to gods and not people, everything is not yet said. The most
important question is how this element functions in the psalm. The address in vss.
2-3 is usually interpreted in a realistic sense. The psalmist would then be
seeking the reason for corruption of justice and the general breakdown of
society in the heavenly sphere. The transcendant origin is indicated with the
(lower) gods who do not act as God’s functionaries of justice but manifest
themselves as demonic powers. If the godless on earth can simply go their own
way, something must be wrong in heaven!
This realistic interpretation,
however, clashes with the seamless transition from ‘gods’ (vss. 2-3) to
‘godless’ (vs. 4ff.) and with the fact that no word is spoken about a
punishment of the gods. Evidently, the psalmist is not thinking of gods but
people. Vss. 2-3 should be viewed, therefore, as a mytho-poetic fragment,
which the writer employs to typify the diabolic driving force of the godless.
Just as the psalmists and prophets could rework the mythological material of
the chaos struggle (e.g. Ps. 74:12ff.; Isa. 51:9f.), so too the writer of Ps.
58 (and that of Ps. 82) does the same with mythological descriptions of a
heavenly tribunal where God judges the unrighteous gods. These descriptions are
well-suited to be applied to the people who, by their abuses of justice,
destroy the foundation of society, so that the question of theodicy arises. The
anti-godly dimension of the godless receives a particular emphasis through this
mythological illustration.
The complaint lodged against the
godless in vss. 4-6 is metaphorical and stereotypical. That is also true of the
prayers and wishes for cursing in vss. 7-10. It is certainly justified to
assume that this terminology reflects ancient, well-known curse formulae. The
conclusion of the psalm speaks about the results of God’s punishing
intervention: the joy of the righteous (vs. 11) and the theodicy (vs. 12).
The צדיק, the opposite of the רשע,
is the unnamed subject of the complaint and prayer in vss. 4-10. That is the
one who is oppressed and persecuted, who sees justice on earth being destroyed
by the fury of the unrighteous, yet he does not grasp at vengeance himself but
in the midst of his deepest need he calls upon God, his God who is the Judge of
the earth. It is a situation of ‘do or die’. Is there still a God who does
justice on earth? Does it still make sense for the צדיק to trust in Him, or
does evil ultimately triumph? The foundational principles of existence are on
trial.
It is against this background
that the joy (שמח) of the righteous in vs. 11 must be understood. Following
this exegesis of vs. 2f., the joy expressed at the witnessing of vengeance can
no longer be explained – somewhat apologetically – as rejoicing over the fall
of the demonic powers. Nor is this rejoicing a form of personal malice. The
righteous one rejoices when God comes in vengeance to break the rule of the
wicked, to punish injustice and through this restoration of justice to put to
rest all doubts and questions. It is the joy and the eternal relief to see (היה)
the liberation, the restoration of justice, and the acquittal of God.
This motif has a secure place in
the Old Testament. Vs. 11b, so offensive to modern ears, simply intends to
employ a powerful image, borrowed from the all too realistic situation of the
battlefield following the fight (wading through the blood), to highlight the
total destruction of the godless.
The subject of דם in vs. 11 is
not the righteous one himself, but God. The righteous one had prayed for God’s
vengeance. Through the vengeance of God, who punishes the evil ones, it appears
that the case of the צדיק is a righteous one, which bears fruit. Vs. 12 is the
conclusion of the psalm and expresses its scope; apart from vs. 12, vs. 11
would be unintelligible. In the mythology, the gods commit injustice on earth;
in reality the godless commit injustice on earth; but in faith the צדיק knows
that there is a God who does justice on earth. ‘The cry of the afflicted he
does not forget’ (Ps. 9:13): God is God and justice is justice. When that
finally becomes evident in the vengeance of God, he rejoices. (H. G. L. Peels, The
Vengeance of God: The Meaning of the Root NQM and the Function of the NQM-Texts
in the Context of Divine Revelation in the Old Testament [Oudtestamentische
Studiën 31; Leiden, Brill, 1995], 215-19)
