James Hely-Hutchinson suggests how we are to view the fact of the Psalms being divided into five books
How do you react when you hear of a proposed ‘exciting new discovery’ in the Bible?
If warning signs start flashing in your mind, that’s a healthy sign. Mature Christian believers will have ‘noble Berean’ instincts, that is, they will want to examine the Scriptures to check up on what’s being claimed (cf. Acts 17.11). Does it stand up to scrutiny? Several questions will spring to mind in relation to the alleged ‘discovery’; we will briefly consider five at the end.
Over the last 30 years or so, Old Testament scholars have made an exciting new discovery. It concerns the implications of the way in which the Book of Psalms (the Psalter) is arranged. There is nothing new or controversial in the observation that the Psalter reflects some degree of logical configuration. You are probably aware that it contains five Books (each with a concluding flourish of praise), and you may have instinctively noticed: an editorial comment following Book II (Psalm 72.20); various groups of psalms, such as the Songs of Ascents (Psalms 120–134); twin psalms found side by side (such as Psalms 105 and 106), psalms that demonstrably link up from one to the next (such as Psalms 134, 135 , 136).
What is new is the tendency to attach significance to such structural indicators – to draw inferences from them – and to be on the lookout for other, less obvious indicators of shaping. The consensus scholarly conviction today is that the compiler(s)/editor(s) of the Psalter intended to communicate a message at the overall, ‘macro’ level. Opinions vary regarding many aspects of this message. The following outline is intended to provide a rough guide as to what a ‘macro reading’ of the Psalter looks like.
Introduction (Psalms 1–2): ‘Happy are those who take seriously Psalm 2!’
The opening two psalms both speak of the ‘happy’, wise person who avoids the ‘way of perishing’. By meditating on God’s instruction (Psalm 1) and, in particular, the truths of Psalm 2, the happy are driven to find refuge in the LORD’s Son. Indeed, it is this king who is installed on Zion, in line with the promises to David (Psalm 2.7; cf. 2 Samuel 7.14) – and ultimately the owner and judge of the nations. But who is he?
Book I (Psalms 3–41): ‘David is a reverse type of the king!’
From one angle, the Psalm 2 king seems to be David – a righteous king whose supremacy is absolute (Psalms 18; 20-21). Yet the overriding perspective of Book I tells another story: David is having to face up (cumulatively, across the Book) to enemy opposition, personal sin and personal sickness. Whether fleeing from Absalom (as at the start of the Book – Psalm 3) or on his sickbed (as at the end – Psalm 41), he is not established on Zion.
Book II (Psalms 42–72): ‘Bring on Solomon!’
The gap between David and the Psalm 2 king widens: he is an adulterer and a murderer in the opening ‘psalm of David’ (Psalm 51); at the end of the Book (Psalms 70, 71), he is an old man whose ‘strength is gone’; in between, he is (according to the titles) on the run, in a cave, in captivity, in the desert – almost anywhere but Jerusalem. Following the introductory crisis of enemy oppression and spiritual depression (Psalms 42–44), the Book is framed by psalms that pin their hopes on Solomon as the supreme and righteous king (Psalms 45 and 72). In line with the promises to Abraham, all nations are to be blessed; but this blessing can come about only through the righteous king of kings (Psalm 72.17b; cf. Psalms 65–68)!
Book III (Psalms 73–89): ‘Exile means crisis!’
Once Solomon’s sons have led the nation into exile, there is no Davidic king to speak of. Book III is bounded by near despair, the truth of Psalm 1 being called into question at the start (first half of Psalm 73) and the truth of Psalm 2 being called into question at the end (second half of Psalm 89). Has God cancelled his solemn promise that David’s throne would be established for ever? Anguished questioning (‘why?’; ‘how long?’) echoes through the Book. There are, however, shafts of light – including, notably, in relation to those Israelite institutions that are lacking in exile: temple (Psalm 84), land (Psalm 85), king (Psalm 86), city (Psalm 87). Yet some transpositions are in order: the king is seemingly a new David, and Zion is where many Gentiles were born…
Book IV (Psalms 90–106): ‘Meditate on the Law of Moses!’
What justification can there be for those shafts of light when the people are in exile? The answer comes from the first five books of the Bible on which Book IV meditates. The beginning and end of the Book present the same scenario: major rebellion on the part of the Israelites is followed by mediation on the part of Moses (or Phineas) that partially and temporarily assuages God’s wrath; this mediation is grounded in the promises to Abraham (Psalms 90; 105, 106). Those promises remain firmly on the agenda – even in exile – although the problem of sin will ultimately require a solution that is fully-orbed and permanent. The LORD’s covenant loyalty can be relied upon (Psalms 91, 92; 103) and, as creator-ruler-judge, he is powerful to orchestrate a new exodus (Psalms 93–100) and the coming of the new David, the king who is also a suffering servant (Psalms 101, 102).
Book V (Psalms 107–144/145 ): ‘His covenant loyalty endures for ever!’
The closing Book contains a repeated summons to ‘praise the LORD’ and (by way of refrain, with crescendo) to ‘give thanks to the LORD, for he is good, for his covenant commitment endures for ever’. The promises to Abraham and David find fulfilment: a glorious new exodus takes place thanks to the king-priest-servant (Psalms 110; 118; 132; 144 are given structural prominence). This figure is superior to David in status (as David’s ‘lord’), in the degree to which he suffers and in the scope of the victory he secures. His throne is definitively established on Zion. He is also superior to Moses, for his intercession is fully and permanently effective. Those who participate in the new exodus – forgiven sinners (Psalm 130) – are drawn from all nations (e.g. Psalm 117). This journey to Zion (Psalms 120–134) is tough, with scoffers lining the way; but these pilgrims are supplied with the resources needed for the journey, namely the all-sufficient Word of God which they savour and on which they meditate (Psalm 119).
Conclusion (Psalms 145/146–150): ‘Praise the LORD’!
Praise is offered up by the gathered people in Zion – and by the entire created order. The Psalm 2 king has been raised up for his people (Psalm 148.14)!
Back to our Berean questions. (1) Is this the fruit of responsible Bible handling? There are, inevitably, subjective judgments (as is also the case, for example, when we try to work out how episodes in the gospels link up from one to the next), but the above approach cannot be faulted for failing to take seriously the text of the Psalter in the form in which it comes down to us in God’s Word. (2) Does it fit with the gospel? Without a doubt! (3) Why was it not discovered before? Previous generations were more interested in matters of liturgy or the literary genres of individual psalms. But many of the foundations for a macro reading were laid by scholars of earlier centuries. There is, to some extent, a parallel here with the discipline of biblical theology (understood as the theology of the progressive revelation of salvation history through Scripture) for which new vistas have recently opened up. (4) How important is it that we pay attention to it? Not especially! But it does yield deep appreciation of the gospel (cf. Luke 24.32). (5) What dangers might there be in jumping on the bandwagon? That we overplay the notion of Psalter context; that we cease to study psalms at the ‘micro’ level; that we cease to benefit from the words of the psalms in personal and corporate prayer and praise.
So, yes, this discovery does stand up to scrutiny, and gospel-shaped excitement is not forbidden... provided we continue to be Berean. Noblesse oblige…
