'Many Are Saying': The Function of Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Psalter (JSOT Supplement Series)

JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT SUPPLEMENT SERIES

397

Founding Editors

David J. A. Clines, Philip R. Davies and David M. Gunn Executive Editor

Cladia V. Camp, Texas Christian University Andrew Mein, Westcott House, Cambridge Editorial Board Richard J. Coggins, Alan Cooper, John Goldingay, Robert P. Gordon, Norman K. Gottwald, John Jarick, Andrew D. H. Mayes, Carol Meyers, Patrick D. Miller

For Amy

'Many are Saying' The Function of Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Psalter

Rolf A. Jacobson

T& T CLARK INTERNATIONAL A Continuum imprint LONDON

•

NEW YORK

Copyright © 2004 T&T Clark International A Continuum imprint Published by T&T Clark International The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NX 15 East 26th Street, Suite 1703, New York, NY 10010 www.tandtclark.com All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress Typeset by TMW Typesetting, Sheffield Printed on acid-free paper in Great Britain by CPI, Bath

ISBN 0-567-08193-1

CONTENTS Acknowledgments Abbreviations Introduction

xi xii 1

Chapter 1 THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS 5 1. Terminology 5 2. Quotation Theory 6 i. The 'Theatrical' Dimension of Quotation (Quotation as Role Play) 7 ii. Quotations as Demonstrations 9 Demonstrations as Nonserious Actions 10 Important Aspects of Quotations as Demonstrations 10 Functions of Quotations 11 Implications 13 iii. Meir Steinberg's 'Proteus Principle': Context is Everything 13 iv. Speech-Act Theory 16 v. Quotations as a Means of Characterizing 17 3. Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Psalter 19 i. Identifying and Marking Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Psalter 19 ii. The Relationship between the Quotation Inset and the Psalm 24 The Subordination of the Inset to the Frame 24 Chapter 2 'THEY WHET THEIR TONGUES LIKE SWORDS': THE FUNCTION OF ENEMY QUOTATIONS 1. 'They Set Their Mouths Against Heaven': Quotations in which the Enemies Attack God i. Quotations Asserting that God Lacks Effective Power to Save and Help Psalm 9/10 Psalm 12 Psalm 11 Psalms 14 and 53 Psalm 22 Psalm 59 Psalm 64

27 28 28 28 30 31 33 33 34 34

vi

Many are Saying Psalm 73 Psalm 78 Psalm 94 ii. Quotations Asserting that God Lacks Fidelity Psalm 3 Psalm 71 iii. Quotations Asserting that the LORD has been Defeated Excursus: 'Where is your/their God?' Isaiah 10.9-10 Isaiah 36.18b-20 Micah7.10 Joel 2.17 1 Kings 18.27 Conclusions regarding 'Where is Your/Their God?' Psalm 79 Psalm 115 Psalm 42/43 Psalm 74 Psalm 83 Psalm 137 Psalm 2 iv. Conclusions about the Formal Role of Enemy Quotations that Attack God 2. 'They Open Their Mouths Wide Against Me': Quotations in which the Enemies Attack the Psalmist i. The Formal Roles of Quotations in which the Enemies Attack the Psalmist Psalm 13 Psalms 35, 40, and 70 Psalm 41 ii. Conclusions about the Formal Role of Quotations that Attack the Psalmist 3. The Rhetorical Function of Enemy Quotations i. Enemy Quotations as Personal Lament ii. Enemy Quotations as Reperforming the Blasphemy of the Enemy iii. Enemy Quotations as Instruction

Chapter 3 'As FOR ME, I SAID' : THE FUNCTION OF SELF QUOTATIONS 1. The Formal Role of Self Quotations i. The Role of Self Quotations that Quote Words Spoken in the Past Psalm 30 Psalm 31 Psalms 32 ands 41 Psalm 39

35 37 38 38 39 39 40 40 40 40 41 41 42 42 42 44 44 46 46 47 48 48 49 50 50 50 51 52 52 52 56 58

60 61 61 61 62 63 64

Contents Psalm 116 Psalm 40 Summary ii. The Role of Self Quotations that Quote Words Spoken in the Present 'You are my God/Lord/My Refuge'— Psalms 16, 31, 140, 142 Psalm 38 Psalm 102 Psalm 42/43 Psalm 55 Psalm 77 Summary iii.The Role of Self Quotations that Quote Words Spoken in the Future (Psalm 35) iv. The Role of Self Quotations that Quote Hypothetical Words Psalm 73 Psalm 94 Psalm 139 Summary 2. The Rhetorical Function of Self Quotations i. Self Quotations as Reperformances of One's Own Speech ii. Self Quotations as Self-Characterizations The Self in Conversation with God The Self Assailed by Enemies

vii 65 66 67 67 68 69 70 70 71 72 73 74 75 75 75 76 76 77 77 79 80 81

Chapter 4 'THE LORD HAS SWORN' : THE FUNCTION OF GOD QUOTATIONS 82 1. A History of Interpretation of the God Quotations 83 i. J. Begrich 84 ii. S. Mowinckel 84 iii. H. Gunkel 86 iv. A. Johnson 87 v. A. Haldar 87 vi. J. Jeremias 88 vii. W. Bellinger Jr. 88 viii. H. Nasuti 89 ix. K. Koenen 90 x. S. Starbuck 90 xi. Conclusions 91 2. The Formal Role of God Quotations 98 i. The Role of God Quotations about the Davidic Monarchy or King 98 Psalm 132 98 Psalm 89 101 Psalm 2 103

viii

Many are Saying

Psalm 110 ii. The Role of God Quotations of Admonishment (in Festival and Liturgical Psalms) Psalm 50 Psalm 81 Psalm 95 Psalm 75 Summary and Conclusions iii. The Role of God Quotations that Precede Petitions Psalm 82 Psalms 60 and 108 Summary and Conclusions iv. The Role of God Quotations that Offer Assurance Psalm 46 Psalm 91 Psalm 12 Summary and Conclusions v. The Role of Quotations in which God's Word Represents God's Effective Power 3. The Rhetorical Function of God Quotations i. God Quotations Used to Construct Society ii. God Quotations Used to Challenge God iii. God Quotations as Characterizations of God God Speaks to the Community through the Cult The LORD of the Covenant Who Protects and Punishes Chapter 5 'LET ISRAEL SAY' : THE FUNCTION OF THE COMMUNITY QUOTATIONS 1. The Function of Quotations that Represent Liturgical Refrains or Responses Psalm 118 Psalms 124 and 129 Psalm 29 Psalm 66 Summary 2. The Function of Quotations that the Psalmist Desires the Community to Say Psalms 35, 40, and 70 Psalm 52 Psalm 58 Psalm 96 Psalm 91 Psalm 129 Summary 3. The Rhetorical Function of Community Quotations

105 106 107 108 109 109 110 113 113 114 118 118 118 120 121 122 123 124 125 127 128 128 129

131 131 131 133 134 135 136 136 136 138 139 139 140 141 141 142

Contents i. Community Quotations as Sociological Alignment ii. Community Quotations that 'Reproduce' Future Events iii. Community Quotations as the Voice of the Reader

CONCLUSION 1. Enemy Quotations 2. Self Quotations 3. God Quotations 4. Community Quotations Bibliography Index of References Index of Authors

ix 142 143 144

146 146 147 148 149 150 156 164

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This volume was originally formatted as my dissertation at Princeton Theological Seminary, and I wish to express my gratitude to all of my teachers there, especially to Patrick Miller, Dennis Olson, F.W. Dobbs-Allsopp, J.J.M. Roberts, ChoonLeong Seow, Katharine Doob Sakenfeld, Beverly Gaventa, Donald Juel, Richard Whitaker, and James Armstrong. I also owe a special debt to James Limburg, whose offhand comment planted the seed that grew into this project. I am grateful to my family for love and support beyond measure: Amy and Ingrid; Mom and Dad; Anne and Bill; Karen; Karl, Kristen, Hannah, and Sam; Derrald and Evon; Erich, Cari and Adam Josef; Gahlord and Megan; Helen; and Peona. I wish to express my thanks to Jen and Zach for proofreading parts of this manuscript, to Shane Berg for special assistance, and to Amy and Uwe for linguistic considerations. All mistakes and errors are my responsibility. This volume is for Amy.

ABBREVIATIONS ABD AfOB ANET BibLeb BT CAD CBQ CC ConBOT ExpTim

FB FOIL HALOT HAT HSM HTR HUCA IBC JBL JQR JSOTSup NEchtB NIBC NJPS NRSV SBLDS VT WBC

ww

ZAW

zs

Anchor Bible Dictionary Archiv fur Orientforschung: Beiheft Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament Bibel und Leben The Bible Translator The Chicago Assyrian Dictionary Catholic Biblical Quarterly Continental Commentaries Coniectanea Biblica: Old Testament Series Expository Times Forschung zur Bibel Forms of the Old Testament Literature The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament Handbuch zum Alten Testament Harvard Semitic Monograph Harvard Theological Review Hebrew Union College Annual Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching Journal of Biblical Literature Jewish Quarterly Review Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series Die Neue Echter Bibel New International Biblical Commentary New Jewish Publication Society Version New Revised Standard Version Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series Veins Testamentum Word Biblical Commentary Word and World Zeitschrift fur die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift fur Semitistik

This page intentionally left blank

INTRODUCTION 1. The Purpose of the Study In recent years, Old Testament scholars have come to see that the aesthetic and rhetorical richness of Hebrew poetry goes far beyond simple synonomous, antithetic, and synthetic parallelism.1 Scholars have gone a long way toward investigating the aesthetic qualities, syntactical complexity, and theological significance of Hebrew poetry.2 But the cruse is far from spent: many dimensions of Hebrew poetry have yet to be investigated. One aspect of Hebrew poetry that has yet to receive sustained treatment is the poetic device known as direct discourse or quotation—the direct citation of a person's speech. In fact, no serious discussion of the role of direct discourse in Hebrew poetry is available. Wilfred G.E. Watson, for example, in his encyclopedic study of Hebrew poetry, treats such poetic devices as parallelism, imagery, sound technique, repetition, envelope figure, keywords, refrain, allusions, ellipsis, irony, oxymoron, abstract for concrete, hyperbole, merismus, hendiadys, enjambment, delayed identification, and ballast variation. At the beginning of chapter 11, 'Poetic Devices', he writes, 'In a way this chapter collects together and examines all the poetic devices not already discussed and analysed.'3 Absent from his treatment of'all the poetic devices' is direct discourse. Direct discourse, therefore, is to date a neglected feature of biblical poetry. The present study seeks to fill this void and to make a contribution to Old Testament studies by offering a sustained investigation of the function of direct discourse in the Hebrew Psalter. This will lead to a greater understanding both of the poetic device of direct discourse and also of those psalms in which direct discourse occurs.

1. See for example, J. Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and its History (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981); A. Berlin, The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1985); M. O'Connor, Hebrew Verse Structure (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1980); W.G.E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry: A Guide to its Techniques (JSOTSup,26; Sheffield: University of Sheffield, 1984); R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Poetry (New York: Basic Books, 1985); S.E. Gillingham The Poems and Psalms of the Hebrew Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994). 2. Kugel and Alter exemplify the first, O'Connor, Watson, and Berlin the second, and P.O. Miller ('The Theological Significance of Biblical Poetry', in S.E. Balentine and J. Barton (eds.), Language, Theology, and the Bible (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994), pp. 213-30) the third. 3. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry, 173. Emphasis added.

2

Many are Saying

2. Assumptions and Methods One of the basic assumptions of this investigation is that when an author or speaker—in this case, the authors of psalms—chooses to use direct discourse to report the speech of another person, that choice will shape the rhetorical impact of the psalm differently than if the author had not used direct discourse. To understand this assumption, it is helpful to realize that authors are not limited to direct discourse when they wish to describe the speech of others. A person may report another's speech verbatim by means of direct discourse: 'The witness said, "He did it"'. Or a person may report another's speech by means of indirect discourse: 'The witness said that I did it.' Or a person may simply describe the content of another's speech without explicit reference to what the original speaker said: 'The witness accused me.' The present investigation assumes that the rhetorical impact will differ when an author chooses direct discourse rather than one of the other means of reporting on another person's speech. Note, for example, how it functions to create ambiguity and irony in the description of Jesus' trial before Pontius Pilate in the Gospel of Mark: 'Pilate asked Jesus, "Are you the King of the Jews?" He answered him, "You say so" ' (Mark 15.2-3). The words 'You say so' create ambiguity, in the sense that the words neither explicitly deny nor affirm Pilate's accusation. But these words also create irony, in the sense that Pilate unknowingly speaks the truth: Jesus is the king of the Jews, and Jesus' answer turns Pilate's accusing question into an ironic confession of the truth. Neither indirect discourse nor a simple description of Pilate's accusation would have had the same rhetorical impact as direct discourse. According to Bernard Lonergan's concise description, 'A method is a normative pattern of recurrent and related operations yielding cumulative and progressive results. '4 In this investigation, a pattern of recurrent and related interpretive operations are applied to a defined set of texts with the aim of yielding cumulative interpretive results. The interpretive operations may be described as formal historical-critical interpretation and rhetorical interpretation. The historical-critical interpretation assumes the validity of the form-critical study of the Psalms in Old Testament scholarship, and it is especially dependent on the work of Claus Westermann and Patrick D. Miller.5 In particular, the present investigation assumes that the psalms may be described in terms of formal categories (also known as genre or Gattungen) such as prayers for help (laments), songs of praise, or royal psalms. The rhetorical interpretation assumes that the theories of modern linguists who have studied the rhetorical function of quotations can be applied to the 4. B.J.F. Lonergan, Method in Theology (New York: Seabury, 1979), p. 4. 5. C. Westermann, Praise and Lament in the Psalms (trans. K.R. Crim and R.N. Soulen; Atlanta: John Knox, 1981); The Psalms: Structure, Content and Message (trans. R.D. Gehrke; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1980). P.D. Miller, Interpreting the Psalms (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986); They Cried to the Lord: The Form and Theology of Biblical Prayer (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994). A concise summary of this approach is J. Limburg, 'Psalms, Book of, in D.N. Freedman (ed.), ABD (6 vols.; New York: Doubleday, 1992), pp. 522-36. Compare E.S. Gerstenberger, Psalms Part 1, with an Introduction to Cultic Poetry (FOIL 14; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), pp. 5-39.

Introduction

3

occurrence of direct discourse in the Hebrew Psalter. The work of the most important of these modern linguists is surveyed in Chapter 1. The set of texts consists of those psalms in which direct discourse occurs. The recurrent nature of the methods of this investigation is that the historical-critical and rhetorical interpretation are applied to all of the passages in the Hebrew Psalter that contain direct discourse. Two specific issues must be mentioned in advance. The first is inclusive language. The present study does not use inclusive language when citing psalm texts because one of the main signals that a psalm passage is to be understood as direct discourse is a shift in the person and number of the subject of a clause.6 Sometimes the effort to provide inclusive language translations obscures. For example, the NRSV translation of Ps. 41.8 reads, 'They think that a deadly thing has fastened on me, that I will not rise again from where I lie.' A more literal translation of this verse might read: 'A deadly thing has latched onto him, once he sleeps he shall not again rise.' What has happened is that in order to avoid the third person masculine, singular pronouns of the Hebrew and provide an inclusive language translation, a passage of direct discourse has been turned into indirect discourse. The present study retains the person and number of the Hebrew pronouns and subjects in order to reflect clearly when a passage is direct discourse. However, in order to preserve the egalitarian goals of inclusive language translations, the present study alternates between referring to the psalmists as 'he' or 'she'. The second issue that needs to be addressed here is the term 'argument', which is used in the present study to describe the persuasive impact of many psalms. The present study assumes that many of the psalms were composed in order to persuade some audience—for example, God, the community, or a group of students—to act in some way or to adopt some belief or way of life. Patrick Miller, for example, has convincingly argued that the prayers for help, or laments, 'have as a primary function the effort to persuade and motivate God to act in behalf of the petitioner who is in trouble and need's God's help'.1 According to Miller, the 'form and rhetoric' of the prayers for help are designed to persuade God to act. Miller pointed to such frequent features of the prayers for help as the listing of reasons set before God as to why God should act (such as God's character) and the motivational structure of the prayers for help (such as the psalmists' protestations of innocence).8 Likewise, the wisdom psalms can be described as seeking to persuade their audience of certain beliefs, and some cultic psalms such as Psalms 15 and 24 can be described as seeking to persuade their audience to live according to certain ethical standards. When the term 'argument' is used in this study, it serves as a shorthand description of the persuasive aims of a particular psalm. 6. For more information on recognizing when a passage is to be understood as direct discourse, see chapter 1, section 3.i, 'Identifying and Marking Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Psalter'. 7. P.D. Miller, 'Prayer as Persuasion: The Rhetoric and Intention of Prayer', WWII (1993), 356-62. Emphasis in original. 8. Miller, 'Prayer as Persuasion', pp. 356-60. Miller writes, 'Rarely does a prayer not seek to lay a claim on God in some way' (p. 361).

4

Many are Saying

3. The Scope of the Study As has already been mentioned, the scope of this study is those psalms in the Hebrew Psalter in which direct discourse occurs. It has also been mentioned that Chapter 1 consists of a survey of the most important work of modern linguists who have studied how quotations function. In each of the following chapters, the work of these linguists is applied to the rhetorical interpretation of a specific corpus of psalm texts. Chapter 2 treats quotations of the enemies, Chapter 3 those quotations in which the psalmist quotes him or herself, Chapter 4 those quotations that report the words of God, and Chapter 5 investigates passages in which voices from the community are quoted.

Chapter 1 THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS Several basic issues concerning the function of quotations and the identification of quotations must be addressed before the actual psalm texts in which direct discourse occurs may be considered. First, the problem of terminology will be addressed in order to define a standard set of terms for the investigation. Second, the contributions of linguistic theories of quotation will be surveyed. One of the methodological assumptions of this investigation is that modern linguistic theory about quotations can make a contribution to interpreting the function of direct discourse in the Psalter. The intent is not to provide a comprehensive account of linguistic theories of quotations, but rather to describe those linguistic theories that best help to understand the function of quotations. Third, because all quotations occur within a specific historical-linguistic matrix, special issues pertaining to the identification and function of direct discourse in the Hebrew Psalter will be addressed. 1. Terminology One of the problems that has plagued linguistic analysis of the biblical text is a confusion of terms. This problem has arisen for a variety of reasons: different linguists use different terms for the same phenomena; different biblical scholars draw on different linguists and thus adopt different sets of terms (sometimes using the same term for different phenomena); different biblical scholars invent their own terms; and finally (and ironically), linguistic terms are often confusing. Because of this confusion, a set of standard terms is defined, which is then used throughout the investigation. These terms are used to describe the work of various scholars, even though those scholars may have employed divergent terminology. The focus of the investigation is the function of direct discourse in the Psalter. Direct discourse is an act of speech that is embedded in another act of speech. For example, 'The fool says in his heart, "There is no God"' (Ps. 14.1). The entire phrase is an act of speech that contains another act of speech ('There is no God'). In Ps. 14.1, there is only one layer of direct discourse. In theory, however, direct discourse is infinitely recursive; one could theoretically have an act of speech within another act of speech within another act of speech, and so on. In order to define further terms, a passage from Psalm 132 will be used:

6

Many are Saying A. B.

Inset: Frame: Reporter:

Implied Audience:

Original Speaker: Original Speech:

Original Audience: Verb of Speaking:

Unmarked Direct Discourse:

The LORD swore to David a sure oath, from which he will not turn back: 'One of the sons of your body 1 will set on your throne. If your sons keep my covenant and my decrees that I shall teach them, Their sons also, forevermore, shall sit on your throne.' (vv. 11-12)

The quoted words proper will be called the inset—in this example, the section labelled 'B' is the inset. The words that introduce the direct discourse will be called the frame—the section labelled 'A' is the frame. The voice reporting the direct speech will be called the reporter—in the example above and in almost all cases in this investigation, the reporter will be the psalmist. The audience to whom the psalm as a whole is addressed will be called the implied audience—because Psalm 132 is a prayer directed to God, God is the implied audience. For laments and praise psalms, the implied audience is God. For liturgies, the implied audience is the worshipping community. For wisdom psalms, the implied audience is one or more students. The voice that speaks the inset will be called the original speaker—in the example above, the original speaker is the LORD. The words that the original speaker spoke will be called the original speech—it is important to differentiate the original speech from the inset, because the inset consists of a selective portion of the original speech. If the psalm tells who heard the original speaker, that person will be called the original audience—here, David is the original audience. If the direct discourse is introduced by a specific verb, that verb will be called the verb of speaking—in Ps. 132.11, the verb of speaking is 'swore' . Note that a 'verb of speaking' does not necessarily connote speech; verbs such as 'to think', 'to rejoice', 'to hear', and the like also can introduce direct discourse. If no verb of speaking is present, then the direct discourse is said to be unmarked.

2. Quotation Theory In recent years, linguists have published a variety of studies about the function of quotations.1 These studies are useful for interpreting the function of direct 1.

One of the merits of this group of studies is that the linguists have not limited their work to

1. Theoretical Considerations

1

discourse in the Hebrew Psalter because they can shed light on why authors employ quotations and on how those quotations contribute rhetorically to an argument.

i. The 'Theatrical' Dimension of Quotation (Quotation as Role Play) Anna Wierzbicka has identified one essential feature of direct discourse as its 'theatrical', playful, imaginary character. The person who reports another's words by quoting them, temporarily assumes the role of that other person, 'plays his part', that is to say, imagines himself as the other person and for a moment behaves in accordance with this counter-factual assumption.2

She adds, 'The whole point of direct discourse is that the two [reporter and original speaker] are temporarily indistinguishable.'3 Thus in direct discourse, the reporter and the original speaker merge identities. In a similar vein, Florian Coulmas has argued that the fundamental difference between direct discourse and indirect discourse lies in a shift of perspective that takes place only in direct discourse: 'The fundamental difference between [indirect discourse and direct discourse] lies in the speaker perspective or point of view of the reporter: In direct speech the reporter lends his voice to the original speaker and says (or writes) what he said, one language, but have intentionally studied quotation in a broad array of languages. See, for example, the impressive set of studies published in F. Coulmas (ed.), Direct and Indirect Speech (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1986). In the vast body of work on quotations, many of the disputed issues are not relevant to this dissertation, and will not be treated. For example, see A. Wierzbicka, 'The Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', Papers in Linguistics 1 (1974), pp. 276-307, in which part of her argument concerns an ongoing dispute about whether indirect discourse can be derived linguistically from direct discourse, and if so, how it can. Other significant studies of the function of quotation that are not treated in-depth in this chapter include: B. Partee, 'The Syntax and Semantics of Quotation', in P. Kiparsky and S. Anderson (eds.), Festschrift for Morris Halle (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971), pp. 410-18; E. Goffman, Frame Analysis (New York: Harper & Row, 1974); Y. Hirose, 'Direct and Indirect Speech as Quotations of Public and Private Expression', Lingua 95 (1995), pp. 223-38; S. Morawski, 'The Basic Functions of Quotation', in A.J. Greimas et al. (eds.), Sign, Language, Culture (The Hague/Paris: Mouton, 1970), pp. 690-705 (Morawski's study suffers from two flawed assumptions. First, he assumes that the conventions of quotation derive from courtroom use, where quotations served as evidence. Second, he assumes that quotations are 'the literal reproduction of a verbal text...' (p. 691). Where appropriate, his analyses can supplement the better synthetic theories of other scholars, but his overall study is problematic); A. Church, in Introduction to Mathematical Logic (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1956); D. Davidson, 'Quotation', in F. Coulmas (ed.), Inquiries in Truth and Interpretation (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984); C. Li, 'Direct Speech and Indirect Speech: A Functional Study', in F. Coulmas (ed.), Direct and Indirect Speech (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1986), pp. 29-46. 2. Wierzbicka, 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', p. 272. Emphasis added. Li ('Direct Speech and Indirect Speech: A Functional Study', p. 38) has whole-heartedly agreed with Wierzbicka's view: Tn direct speech the reporter-speaker plays the role of the reported original speaker. The reporter-speaker intends for the hearer to believe that the form, the content and the non-verbal messages such as gestures and facial expressions of the reported speech originate from the reported speaker. That is where the theatrical feature noted by Wierzbicka comes in: the reporter-speaker acts as the reported speaker when s/he utters the direct quote.' Li argues that this quality makes direct discourse a natural vehicle for dramatic presentation. See also Wierzbicka's 'Descriptions or Quotations?' in Sign, Language, Culture, pp. 627-44. 3. Wierzbicka, 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', p. 273.

8

Many are Saying

thus adopting his point of view, as it were.'4 As an example of Coulmas' point, consider the instance of direct discourse in Ps. 12.4-5: May the LORD cut off all flattering lips, every tongue that boasts great things, that says, 'By our tongues we will prevail, our lips are ours, who is lord over us?'

The reporter (the psalmist in this case) speaks about the 'flattering lips' and 'every tongue that boasts great things'. But when the direct discourse begins, the psalmist takes on the perspective of the flattering lips and speaks from their perspective. One might even say that the psalmist speaks with them. In other words, reporters employ direct discourse because it allows them to shed their own perspective and clothe themselves with the perspective of some other original speaker. This shift in perspectives affords the reporter great flexibility. Every different perspective that exists is just one more perspective that a reporter can assume through the device of quotation! Furthermore, every way that a perspective can be different—different theologically, different temporally, different economically, and so on—gives the reporter a different way of taking on a new perspective. Another function of direct discourse, according to Wierzbicka, is that direct discourse has a double illocutionary impact as compared with other ways of reporting what an original speaker said. In direct discourse, 'I want to cause you to know what this person said, and I want to cause you to know how he said it. I believe that it is this double purpose which is responsible for the fact that in the case of direct speech both the meaning and the surface structure are syntactically and semantically relevant.'5 Indirect discourse communicates only the meaning of the quoted person's speech, while direct discourse communicates both the meaning and the form (that is, the actual words that the original speaker used). The reporter who quotes another's speech may feel unable to separate the meaning from the form and to state it in his own words. Surely this is one of the reasons why people sometimes prefer to quote rather than to paraphrase the speech of others. Quoting directly one undertakes to portray the meaning together with the form, thus avoiding the responsibility for a correct representation of the meaning as such.

This 'double illocutionary' function of direct discourse is related to the 'theatrical' character of direct discourse: In direct quotation one assumes the role of the original speaker, i.e. one imagines oneself as that original speaker; in indirect speech one undertakes to state the content of the speech as though one were to assert it oneself, that is to say one imagines that one wants to assert (ask, etc.) here, now, to the present addressee, whatever the first speaker asserted (asked, etc.) when he spoke to his addressee.7 4. F. Coulmas, 'Reported Speech: Some General Issues', in F. Coulmas (ed.), Direct and Indirect Speech (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1986), p. 2. 5. Wierzbicka, 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', pp. 274-75. 6. Wierzbicka, 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', p. 279. Emphasis in original. 7. Wierzbicka, 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', pp. 284-85.

1. Theoretical Considerations

9

The reporter wants the 'hearer to see for himself what [the quotation's form] is, that is to say, in a way, he shows this content (but not the naked content,...he shows the content still clothed in its original form)'.8 'Direct discourse is "show" as well as speech, indirect discourse is speech only.'9 ii. Quotations as Demonstrations In two studies that he has coauthored, Herbert H. Clark has argued that quotations are a form of demonstration.10 Clark also has written a full-scale theory of language, entitled Using Language (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). In this work, Clark pursued many of the same insights that he applied to his study of quotations (for example, that linguistic acts are made up of describing, indicating, and demonstrating) and argued that language is a joint action carried out by an ensemble of people acting together. In a 1990 study, he and Richard R. Gerrig wrote: 'When people communicate, they have three fundamentally different devices at their disposal. They can describe. They can indicate, or point. And they can demonstrate.'1[ An example will help clarify the difference between describing, indicating, and demonstrating as means of communicating. Imagine that someone wishes to communicate something of the way President William Clinton speaks, to a person who has never heard him speak. One has three options. First, one could describe Clinton's speech, which would consist of the reporter using appropriate verbs, nouns, and modifiers—but these words would be the reporter's own words, and Clinton would be described in the third person. Second, one could also indicate, which might consist of turning on a recording or a live broadcast of Clinton speaking. Third, one could demonstrate, which would consist of the reporter imitating Clinton's speech using Clinton's own words and perhaps his mannerisms. Clark and Gerrig wrote: 'Our contention is that quotations are a type of demonstration.'12 The important distinction for the purposes of this investigation is the one between description and demonstration. This is because in written discourse, the reporter (or author) does not have the option of indicating; this is even more the case in the written discourse of the Hebrew Psalter, where no pictures, figures, or images were available to 'depict' the original speakers. Thus the authors of the psalms had to choose between describing (using indirect discourse) and demonstrating (using direct discourse).

8. Wierzbicka, 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', p. 282. 9. Wierzbicka, 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', p. 300. 10. H.H. ClarkandR.R. Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations \Language 66(1990), pp. 764805; E. Wade and H.H. Clark, 'Reproduction and Demonstration in Quotations', Journal of Memory and Language 32 (1993), pp. 805-19. The first study relates to the function of quotations and directly informs this project. The second study is a social-scientific study designed to prove the accuracy of the first study. In this latter effort, Wade and Clark performed three experiments with

groups of people, the data of which supported the conclusion that people use quotations to demonstrate and not merely to reproduce. 11. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 802. 12. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 802.

10

Many are Saying

Demonstrations as Nonserious Actions. According to Clark and Gerrig, demonstrations differ from descriptions in two ways. First, they are 'nonserious' actions. 'Nonserious actions are "transformations" of serious actions.'13 An example of a serious action is when two people fight or when one person walks with a limp. An example of a nonserious action is when two people play at fighting or when someone imitates another person's limp.14 According to Clark and Gerrig, 'Demonstrations are nonserious actions... Demonstrations belong to a family of nonserious actions that includes practicing, playing, acting, and pretending.'15 Quotations are a nonserious subsection of a greater, serious whole. 'Demonstrations must be distinguished from the serious actions they are parts of. Their boundaries—their beginnings and ends—must be clear.' For example, in the statement, 'The fool says in his heart, "There is no God"' (Ps. 14.1), the whole of the statement is serious—because the psalmist is asserting that the fool (and not the psalmist!) says, 'There is no God.' The subsection, 'There is no God' is nonserious—because the psalmist is only demonstrating the words of the fool. The boundary between the inset and the frame must be clear so that the boundary between the nonserious subsection and the serious whole can be understood. If this boundary is obscured, the subsection will no longer properly serve the argument of the whole. Similar to the views of Wierzbicka and Coulmas, Clark and Gerrig recognized a 'presenting' or theatrical function to demonstrations. They argued that people use demonstrations in order for 'an event, state, process, or object to be present. By depicting how a thing looks, sounds, or feels, they can refer to the thing itself.'16 Important Aspects of Quotations as Demonstrations. Several unique elements of demonstrations that Clark and Gerrig identified are especially important for interpreting direct discourse in the Psalter. First, demonstrations (and thus quotations) depict selectively. This means that they depict only part of the original. The author can—indeed must—choose which aspects of the original speech to quote. Spoken words are by definition singular events that cannot be exactly repeated in every detail. Even if the original speaker repeats her own words, she cannot exactly replicate the pitch, rate, inflection, and context of her original speech. Thus a reporter is forced to choose which aspects of the original speech she wants to reproduce. Clark and Gerrig distinguished between the depictive, supportive, annotative, and incidental aspects of demonstrations. The depictive aspects comprise the demonstration proper, that is, what the reporter is trying to show the implied audience. The supportive aspects are not the demonstration itself, but are necessary to the demonstration. The annotative aspects consist of commentary on 13. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 766. 14. The terminology 'serious' and 'nonserious' comes from E. Goffman, Frame Analysis. This terminology is misleading, because ' imitations' can be performed for reasons that are not playful or humorous. Clark and Gerrig, however, retain this terminology, and in lieu of a better set of terms it is used here also. 15. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 766. 16. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 766.

1. Theoretical Considerations

11

the demonstration. The incidental aspects are irrelevant to the demonstration, and the implied audience knows to ignore them. For example, if a demonstrator is demonstrating how John McEnroe served a tennis ball, the way he positions his feet, the way he rocks his arms prior to tossing the ball, the way he wipes his forehead with his shirt sleeve, and the way he grunts when hitting the ball might be the depictive aspects. The way he arches his back to hit the ball and bends his knees to complete the serve are supportive aspects, because they are necessary to the demonstration but not what is being demonstrated per se. Any descriptions that accompany the imitation are the annotative aspects. And whether the demonstrator wore tennis shoes, had on a white or a blue shirt, actually tossed a ball and used a racket or merely used imaginary ball and racket might be the incidental aspects. In terms of quotations, the crucial point is that the reporter chooses which aspects of the original speech to quote based on the experience that the author wishes the reader to have. To return to the example of President Clinton speaking, if the reporter wanted to emphasize how Clinton speaks, then a Southern drawl and a gravelly tone might be the depictive elements of the quotation, and the content of the speech might be a supportive aspect. But if the reporter wanted to emphasize what Clinton said on a given topic, then the content of the choice of words might be the depictive aspects and the accent of the reporter would simply be supportive. The implied audience is expected to distinguish between the various aspects of a quotation, and every quotation must be considered individually. For example, in the Psalter enemies are quoted several times as saying 'Aha, aha!' to the psalmist (Pss. 35.21,25; 40.15; 70.3). Here, the content of the enemies' speech is incidental, and their mocking, triumphant attitude seems to be the depictive aspect. By contrast, in Psalm 71, when they say, 'God has abandoned him, pursue and capture him, for there is no deliverer' (v. 11), the content of the original speech is a depictive aspect. Again, it is important to stress that the reporter chooses which aspects of the original speech to quote based on the impact she wishes to have on her implied audience. Third, quotations usually depict illocutionary acts. 'An illocutionary act is "the making of a statement, offer, promise, etc. in uttering a sentence.'"17 The reason a reporter quotes an original speaker often has to do with the illocutionary act performed by the original speech, which may or may not be connected with the content of the original speech. In the example of the enemies saying 'Aha, aha', the illocutionary act of mocking or taunting is what is important, not necessarily the content of the enemies' original speech. In other cases, however, the content of the original speech is the crucial matter. Thus, when interpreting direct discourse in the psalms it will be useful to analyse the statement being quoted in order to determine what sort of speech act is being reported, and then to interpret the larger whole of the psalm in light of this. Functions of Quotations. Clark and Gerrig identified two classes of functions of direct discourse: detachment and direct experience. Note that within each of these 17. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 778. The citation within Clark and Gerrig is from S. Levinson, Pragmatics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), p. 236.

12

Many are Saying

classes of functions, several secondary functions are contained. The first class of function, detachment, arises because quotations are depictions. When speakers describe, they take responsibility for their wording except in opaque contexts. But when they quote, they take responsibility only for presenting the quoted matter—and then only for the aspects they choose to depict. The responsibility for the depicted aspects themselves belongs to the source speaker. So with quotations speakers can partly or wholly detach themselves from what they depict.18

This detaching function of quotations makes direct discourse valuable for three things: 1. Verbatim Reproduction, in which the words of the original speaker are reproduced as accurately as possible. 2. Dissociation of Responsibility, in which the reporter can express sentiments that might otherwise be deemed unacceptable: 'Many attitudes that are impolite or inappropriate for speakers themselves to express are quite acceptable in the mouths of others.'19 3. Solidarity, in which the reporter allies herself with the original speaker: 'To quote is to depict only part of a more extended event. This property allows direct quotations to serve well in the expression of solidarity, or positive politeness.'20 Note that the second function, dissociation of responsibility, and the third function, solidarity, are opposites! A reporter can use quotation to create distance between herself and reported speech but also can use quotation to claim ownership of reported speech. The context of a quotation is the only way to determine which of the various functions is in effect. The second class of functions of quotations that Clark and Gerrig identified is direct experience. This class of functions arises because quotations depict rather than describe. Quotations also differ from descriptions in the experience they give addressees. When we hear an event described, we interpret the speaker's words and imagine the event described. But when we hear an event quoted, it is as if we directly experience the depicted aspects of the original event.21

This direct experience function of direct discourse makes it useful for: 1. Ineffability, because it is easier to demonstrate (than describe) 'emotion, urgency, indecision, and sarcasm in tone of voice; gestures, facial expressions, or other body actions; level of formality; and disfluencies'.22 Since speakers try to minimize 18. 19. 20. 21.

Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 792. Emphasis added. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 792. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 793. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 793. Clark and Gerrig's theory is too

'realistic' at this point. Neither demonstrations or quotations allow the hearer to experience directly

even partial aspects of the original. However, a valid point still remains. Quotations direct the hearer/reader to a separate (albeit inaccessible) 'other' external to the speaker. Compare Meir Sternberg: 'In no form of quotation...not even in the direct style, may we identify the representation of the original act of speech or thought with that act itself... What is cited in the subject's name is one thing; what that subject originally said or thought is another.' 'Proteus in Quotation-Land: Mimesis and the Forms of Reported Discourse', Poetics Today! (1982), p. 108. Emphasis added. 22. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 793.

1. Theoretical Considerations

13

difficulty, ineffability is a major reason for direct discourse. 2. Engrossment, which is a concept similar to Coulmas' understanding of perception: 'Direct and indirect quotation contrast in whose perspective the addressees are to get engrossed in.'23 3. Impossible Demonstrations'. 'Some events are impossible to demonstrate in their entirety, yet speakers can depict some of their aspects.'24 Thoughts, body language, and the like are included here. Implications. One of the main implications of understanding quotations as demonstrations is that such an understanding undermines the assumption that when reporters quote an original speaker, they reproduce an original utterance verbatim.25 To understand correctly how quotations function, one must allow for the fact that a quotation can be true without assuming that a quotation must reproduce a prior speech act verbatim. In fact, in oral speech, verbatim repetition is impossible (recall the impossibility of perfectly recreating pitch, tone, inflection, exact words, precise context, and so on).26 Accuracy is certainly one aspect of the truth of a quotation, but it is not the only one, and may not even be the primary one. A second implication of understanding quotations as demonstrations is that the function of a quotation will depend on its context. In terms of this investigation, it is the context of the particular psalm and not any conjectured original context of a quotation that controls the meaning of the quotation, and is thus the primary point of investigation. When a reporter quotes an original speaker, the reporter imposes a new context on the original act of speech; it is this new context that primarily governs the meaning of the inset. No scholar has made this latter point more emphatically than Meir Sternberg. iii. Meir Sternberg's 'Proteus Principle': Context is Everything In a series of studies, Meir Sternberg has argued convincingly that when a reporter quotes an original speaker, the original speaker's perspective is erased and replaced 23. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 793. 24. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 794. 25. The assumption that quotations reproduce original words verbatim is widespread, and is connected with the less helpful ways in which other quotation theorists have studied quotations. W.V.O. Quine (Mathematical Logic (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1951)) and A. Church (Introduction to Mathematical Logic) understand quoting as a form of mentioning, relying in part on a verbatim understanding of quotation. This 'mention theory' approach to quotation fails to explore the depictive, supportive, annotative, and incidental aspects of the ways quotations cite original speech. D. Davidson ('Quotation', '^Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation) argues fora 'demonstrative' theory of quotations. He approaches the clarity of understanding expressed in Clark, Gerrig, and Wade. He understands the quotation marks of the frame to be referring to the inset, and the inset to be picturing, which one can see is very similar to Clark et al. But Davidson does not investigate how the inset pictures, and his analysis completely ignores the function of quotations. Further, Davidson makes the mistake of assuming the correspondence between linguistic structure and communicative act. For a devastating critique of this mistake (although not specifically of Davidson), see M. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', pp. 145-47. 26. The social scientific research of Wade and Clark ('Reproduction and Demonstration in Quotations') is especially important in showing the fallacy of the verbatim assumption of quotations.

14

Many are Saying

by the reporter's perspective.27 Sternberg has argued that representation of speech is always from a perspective. 'In no form of quotation, therefore, not even in the direct style, may we identify the representation of the original act of speech or thought with that act itself... What is cited in the subject's name is one thing; what that subject originally said or thought is another.'28 'Even if the original could be copied down to the last detail, its transplanting and framing in a new environment would impose on it a new mode of existence.'29 The new mode entails manifold shifts, indeed sometimes complete changes in meaning: The framing of an element within a text entails a communicative subordination of the part to the whole that encloses it. However accurate the wording of the quotation and however pure the quoter's motives, tearing a piece of discourse from its original habitat and recontextualizing it within a new network of relations cannot but interfere with its effect.30

Sternberg has argued that to imitate or to quote is to interfere with the perspective of the original speaker. Recall from the work of Wierzbicka and Coulmas that the perspective of the reporter and the original speaker become 'as one' in quotation. Sternberg augments this insight and argues that the duelling perspectives of reporter and original speaker can never exist peacefully; one must interfere with the other. According to Sternberg, the original speaker 'always subserves the global perspective' of the reporter, 'who adapts it to his own goals and needs'.31 Sternberg named this phenomenon 'perspectival montage'. Sternberg rejected any narrow definition of the function of this perspectival montage, and drew attention to 'the interplay of unity and variety in quotation... The many-to-many correspondence between linguistic form and representational function.'32 In order best to understand Steinberg's dynamic 'many-to-many' understanding of the function of quotations, it will be helpful to understand the rigid view of quotations that Sternberg criticized. Previous scholars, in Steinberg's opinion, had inadequately associated direct discourse with one set of rhetorical functions and indirect discourse with an opposite set of functions. A table of the typology that Sternberg was against might look like this.33

27. M. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', Poetics Today 3 (1982), pp. 107-56. See also

the following works by Sternberg: Expositional Modes and Temporal Ordering in Fiction (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978); The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987); 'Double Cave, Double Talk: The Indirections of Biblical Dialogue', in Not in Heaven (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1991), pp. 28-57. 28. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 108. 29. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 108. 30. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 108. 31. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 109. 32. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 112. 33. In one of his typically terse criticisms, Sternberg wrote that 'typology is less than useless where divorced from teleology'. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 130.

1. Theoretical Considerations

15

An Inadequate Typology of Direct Discourse Function of Direct Discourse

Function of Indirect discourse

Sympathetic Representation Specific Representation Realistic Representation Distinctive Representation Verbatim Reproduction

Distanced Representation Abstract Representation Unrealistic Representation Indistinctive Representation Summarizing Reproduction

Sternberg savaged any default identification of direct discourse with one set of functions and indirect discourse with the other. He argued convincingly that local context always governs the function of both direct discourse and indirect discourse: 'Given the appropriate conditions in the frame—and only these shape the inset— any form, whether polar or intermediate, may be made to go with any representational affect.'34 Sternberg suggested a specific logic for determining the function of a quotation: 'Where the function goes "against" the original, nondirect reporting becomes the natural choice, as the form giving the reporter the greatest freedom of interference and counteraction.'35 Steinberg's logic can only be accepted as a general rule of thumb and not as a rigid rule. And even then, it can only be accepted if we recognize that reporters not only use the frame to interfere with the perspective of the original speaker, but that they will also interfere directly and intentionally with the original speech itself—reporters will often retain the mode of direct discourse, but will summarize (and so interfere with) the original speech. Sternberg argued, then, that the task of the interpreter is to pay attention to the process in which the reporter recontextualized the original speech in the inset: Three facts about reported discourse are, I believe, beyond dispute. First, the reporting and reported event are (and remain) essentially distinct and independent entities... [Second,] that in transmission the reported event is never replaced or subsumed but only imaged by the reporting discourse, where the image takes the form of an inset version. Hence, third, the inset is simultaneously but differently related to both, as part to the framing whole and as image to the represented original.

It is the interplay between the old perspective and the new perspective that makes quotation such a versatile weapon in the reporter's arsenal. Because recontextualizing can subsume an original speech act in a completely new world, this makes quotation useful for more than merely giving information about what someone said. Recontextualization renders quotation useful for irony, parody, polemics, allusion, and even subtle lying. Sternberg's contribution to the understanding of quotation, then, is that there is a dynamic interplay between the context of the original speech and its new home as the inset of a quotation. The quotation has now, as it were, two natures; it lives 34. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 119. 35. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 122. 36. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 130.

16

Many are Saying

now, as it were, fully in both worlds. Sternberg coined this the 'Proteus Principle': 'In different contexts—reporting frames as well as nonreporting frameworks—the same form may fulfill different functions and different forms the same function.'37 iv. Speech-Act Theory In a series of lectures given at Harvard in 1955, the British linguist J.L. Austin introduced the world to a linguistic theory known as speech-act theory.38 Speechact theory does not deal specifically with direct discourse. However, speech-act theory's emphasis on the way words work can help us understand the effect of actually quoting speech, and for this reason it is an important theory for interpreting the function of direct discourse in the Psalter. According to Austin, for too long western philosophers assumed that speech merely describes, and as such, words effect meaning by referring to objects or concepts. Against this dominant view, Austin emphasized that words can do more than signify, words can perform events. Austin distinguished between words that state information and words that perform actions. Austin supported his theory by isolating first-person, singular, active, indicative utterances that neither describe nor state simple true/false statements, but rather perform actions. For example, consider utterances such as 'I do' (when spoken as part of a wedding), 'I name this ship the Queen Elizabeth' (when spoken at a ship christening), 'I give and bequeath' (when spoken as a last will and testament), or 'I bet you' (when making a wager). Austin called these performative sentences. According to Austin, each of these utterances 'is not normally thought of as just saying something', nor can they be thought of as true or false in a referential sense, rather each 'utterance is the performing of an action'.39 One could argue with this, that such actions can be performed without words or that the words in each case must be accompanied by other actions. But the uttering of the words is in each case the leading incident in the act.40 Austin said that performative utterances can either be contractual (I bet with you) or declarative (I declare war against you). Austin further distinguished between the locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary actions one can perform in speaking. First, there are locutionary acts, which are roughly equivalent to uttering a certain sentence with a certain sense and reference, which again is roughly equivalent to 'meaning' in the traditional sense. Second, we said that we also perform illocutionary acts such as informing, ordering, warning, undertaking, &c., i.e. utterances which have a certain (conventional)

37. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 148. 38. J.L. Austin, How to Do Things with Words (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1962). For a concise summary of speech-act theory, see D. Robinson, 'Speech Acts', in M. Grondenl and M. Kreiswirth (eds.), The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994). 39. Austin, How to Do Things with Words, pp. 6-7. 40. Against the objection that promises can be insincere or contracts can be broken, Austin distinguished between the concept of a voided contract and a false statement. Performative utterances, he argued, cannot be false but rather can only be void.

1. Theoretical Considerations

17

force. Thirdly, we may also performperlocutionary acts: what we bring about or achieve by saying something, such as convincing, persuading, deterring, and even, say, surprising or misleading.41

An example may help clarify the difference between these three types of acts. Consider the sentence: 'The house is on fire!' The locutionary action of this utterance is to convey meaning to a listener who will understand from this utterance that a particular house is on fire. The illocutionary action of this utterance is to warn the listener of a danger, namely fire. The perlocutionary action of this utterance is to produce certain actions on the part of the hearer, such as fleeing the house, and so on.42 These actions cannot be divorced from each other and the lines between them are often blurry, but it is heuristically helpful to distinguish between the three actions. The important point for the purpose of understanding the function of direct discourse in the Psalter is to understand that speech acts can do more than describe—they can perform actions—and these actions can be understood as contractual or declarative, and consist of locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary actions. When considering the function of direct discourse in the Psalter, it will be helpful to note that the original speech in any given psalm may consist of a speech act (contractual or declarative, with locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary actions) and also that the act of recontextualizing the quotation in a new frame may consist of a separate speech act (contractual or declarative, with locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary actions). v. Quotations as a Means of Characterizing In recent years, the literary study of biblical narrative has investigated the conventions and logic of biblical narrative. Literary approaches to studying the Old Testament have offered the helpful insight that direct speech is one of the central means that the biblical authors use to portray the inner thoughts and motives of a character.43 That is, often the main way that Old Testament authors characterize the men and women in their stories is by letting those characters speak. Quotations depict character well because they 'let the characters speak for themselves. For, of course, what characters say and how they say it may tell us much about the kind of

41. Austin, How to Do Things with Words, p. 108. Austin coined the term 'illocutionary act'. The concept has been the focus of much debate. For two studies, see J.R. Searle, 'Austin on Locutionary and Illocutionary Acts', Philosophical Review 77 (1968), pp. 405-24; B. Fraser, 'On Accounting for Illocutionary Forces', in Festschrift for Morris Halle, pp. 287-307. 42. See J.R. Searle, Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969), especially pp. 22-53. 43. See A. Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1983), especially pp. 23-82; Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative; D. Gunn and D.N. Fewell, Narrative in the Hebrew Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), especially pp. 6389; R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1983), especially Chapters 4 and 6; P. Trible, Rhetorical Criticism (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994); H.C. Brichto, Toward a Grammar of Biblical Poetics: Tales of the Prophets (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), especially Part I.

18

Many are Saying

people they are.'44 Quotations work so well to depict character that Adele Berlin concluded: 'Direct speech.. .is the most dramatic way of conveying the characters' internal psychological and ideological points of view.'45 In a sense, what Berlin and the other literary exegetes are doing is applying the types of conclusions drawn by Clark and Gerrig and the other quotation theorists to the biblical story. Berlin has written: 'The way a character is "shown" is through his own words—his speech—and his actions (these are in the words of the narrator, of course).'46 Herbert Chanan Brichto described the phenomenon similarly: 'A character will be made to show himself by the specificity of his direct discourse, as against our having to take the word of the narrator in the less concrete formulation of indirect discourse... '47 Both Berlin and Brichto use the word 'show' to describe how direct discourse functions to portray the inner character of an actor or actress, and both contrast showing with telling. These words 'show' and 'tell' are analogous to Clark and Gerrig's terms 'demonstrate' and 'describe', who argued that quotations demonstrate rather than merely describe. Berlin, Brichto, and the other literary theorists are operating along much the same lines as Clark and Gerrig because they point to the ability of quotations to show rather than merely tell. The crucial point to understand is that direct speech can be a more nuanced and more vivid means of portraying the inner character of a biblical figure than merely describing. While many biblical exegetes have fruitfully applied the above insight to the interpretation of biblical narrative, the potential that the insight holds for the interpretation of biblical poetry has been left untapped. In the Psalter, as in biblical narrative, direct discourse also functions to portray the character of those whose speech is quoted: the psalmist, the enemies, God, and the congregation. Just as in biblical narrative, in the Psalter the different characters speak with different motives, with different degrees of truthfulness, from different perspectives, with different faith perspectives, and with different authority. By putting different words in different characters' mouths, the psalmists portray people differently. Corresponding to this, by paying attention to what different characters say in different circumstances, the interpreter can navigate the tangled channels of the human character as the psalmists map it. Interpreting the character of the different people who are quoted in direct discourse in the Psalter, however, means more than simply lining up all of the quotation insets of the enemies, or of the psalmist, or of God. As Robert Alter has aptly noted, 'the biblical writers are quite as aware as any James or Proust that speech may reflect the occasion more than the speaker, may be more a drawn shutter than an open window'.48 Attention must therefore be paid not only to what people say, but to whom they say it, the circumstances in which they say it, and what actions accompany the bare words.49 Where more than once voice is quoted 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49.

Gunn and Fewell, Narrative in the Hebrew Bible, p. 63. Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative, p. 64. Berlin, Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative, p. 38. Brichto, Toward a Grammar of Biblical Poetics, p. 11. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, p. 117. M. Sternberg offers a list of the type of questions that an interpreter should ask: 'Who

1. Theoretical Considerations

19

in direct discourse in the same psalm, it will be useful to compare what the different voices say: 'Since biblical characters seldom appear alone, we can compare and contrast characters, take note of how they speak to each other, and, in the end, see how one person can help to define another.'50 It will also be useful to ask why the psalmist reported (demonstrated) a particular quotation in direct speech, as opposed to using indirect speech or simply describing the speaker's character: 'At every point, then, where the biblical narrator reports a character's thought (even God's, or perhaps especially God's), we should ask what subtle purport is conveyed in the direct discourse, as contrasted with a possible formulation in indirect discourse.'51 Some of the assumptions and methods that interpreters have found useful in interpreting biblical narrative cannot be applied to the interpretation of poetry. For example, in biblical narrative the narrator is assumed to be omniscient and aligned with God.52 In the Psalter, the psalmist is self-evidently not omniscient, and often believes that God has turned against him. One specific application this difference makes to the interpretation of direct speech is that in biblical narrative, quotations of thought or 'interior monologue' are assumed to contain the most trustworthy information about a person's character: 'With the report of inward speech, we enter the realm of relative certainty about character: there is certainty, in any case, about the character's conscious intentions, though we may still feel free to question the motive behind the intentions.'53 Such an assumption does not hold in the Psalter because whenever the psalmist quotes the thoughts or secret conversations of others, the psalmist is certainly not omniscient. 3. Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Psalter Two special aspects pertaining to direct discourse in the Hebrew Psalter need to be addressed. The first of these areas is the problem of the identification or marking of direct discourse in the Psalter. The second area is the relationship between the quotation inset and the psalm as a whole. i. Identifying and Marking Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Psalter In order to analyse the function of direct discourse, passages containing direct discourse must first be isolated from the poetry surrounding it.54 Every language stands behind this piece of language and what does it project? From what viewpoint does that action or description unfold, and why? Can the perceiver be identified and evaluated by the field of perception? Where does the subject end and the object begin? Is this particular reflector ironic or ironized, reliable or biased or even mendacious, or in short, how does his interpretation stand to the text's and ours? These are among the typical questions arising throughout.' The Poetics of Biblical Narrative, pp. 129-30. 50. Gunn and Fewell, Narrative in the Hebrew Bible, p. 63. 51. Brichto, Toward a Grammar of Biblical Poetics, p. 11. 52. See Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative. 53. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, p. 117. 54. Several studies that have been helpful in identifying direct discourse in Hebrew poetry and in evaluating criteria for making decisions about what is and what is not a quotation are: S.A.

20

Many are Saying

has its own conventions and customs for signalling the presence of direct discourse. English, for example, frequently uses a switch in tense as one of the signals of direct discourse, whereas German often uses the subjunctive mood to signal direct discourse. In Biblical Hebrew, which did not employ either of these customs for signalling direct discourse, a different set of indicators signals the occurrence of direct discourse. Michael O'Connor has written, Direct discourse is not consistently indicated in Classical Hebrew; shifts in and out of quotations are marked erratically in prose with I'mr 'saying' and the like, and, if there is enough material, in both verse and prose, by alterations in the anaphora network. A further guiding principle, useful in reading of prose, is that verses which introduce direct discourse other than 'mr are usually mediated by some form of it. The unspoken consensus has it that this principle fails for poetry, or at least that it is a less reliable guide; this consensus is reflected in any biblical translation, though not in systematic grammatical study.55

Samuel A. Meier has published a comprehensive treatment of the problems of marking direct discourse in the Old Testament. He points out that in poetry, direct discourse is often marked with a medially positioned or post-positioned verb instead of the customary pre-positioned verb (Ps. 12.5 contains an example of medially marked direct discourse). In addition, he has summarized the following tendencies that Hebrew poetry has in regard to direct discourse: 'a tendency to avoid , the possibility of no DD [direct discourse] marker at all (with the corollary of the frequent dispensability of the root ), parallelism permitting the double marking of speech with verbs in sequences unattested in prose, and medial marking of DD'.56 In Biblical Hebrew, direct discourse is indicated by a combination of external and internal markers. First, the external markers will be considered and then the internal markers. The most important external markers are verbs of speaking; other external markers include a subject other than the psalmist such as 'the fool', or 'my enemies', and a marking particle such as . The most common verb of speaking is , which marks direct discourse over seventy-five times in the Psalter. All of the other verbs of speaking combined mark direct discourse in the Psalter barely Meier, Speaking of Speaking: Marking Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Bible (New York: Brill, 1992); M. O'Connor, Hebrew Verse Structure; G.W. Savran, Telling and Retelling: Quotation in Biblical Literature (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988); C. Miller, The Representation of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: A Linguistic Analysis (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996); C. Miller, 'Introducing Direct Discourse in Biblical Hebrew Narrative', in R. Bergen (ed.), Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1994), pp. 199-241; C. Miller, 'Discourse Functions of Quotative Frames in Biblical Hebrew Narrative', in W.R. Bodine (ed.), Discourse Analysis of Biblical Literature (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995), pp. 155-82; R. Gordis, 'Quotations as a Literary Usage in Biblical, Oriental and Rabbinic Literature', HUCA 22 (1949), pp. 157-220; R. Gordis, 'Quotations in Wisdom Literature\JQR 30 (1939), pp. 123-47; M. Fox, 'The Identification of Quotations in Biblical Literature', ZAW92 (1980), pp. 416-31; K. Crim, 'Hebrew Direct Discourse as a Translation Problem', BT24 (1973), pp. 311-16. 55. O'Connor, Hebrew Verse Structure, pp. 409-10. Emphasis added. 56. O'Connor, Hebrew Verse Structure, pp. 49-50.

1. Theoretical Considerations

21

more than thirty times. These other verbs of speaking include , and . As mentioned above, these verbs of speaking may occur in the middle or at the end of a passage of direct discourse, but normally they precede the direct discourse that they mark. When a passage of direct discourse lacks a verb of speaking, it is considered unmarked. Examples of unmarked direct discourse in the Psalter include Pss. 2.3, 10.4, 46.10, 50.7-15, 59.7, 77.7, 87.7, 89.3-4, 91.14, 105.15, and 132.14-18. In these cases, the direct discourse is indicated by context and by internal indicators. These internal indicators may be divided into two types: deictic indicators and syntactic indicators.57 Deixis refers to the change in personal, temporal, spatial, or hierarchical perspective that is reflected when a different speaker is speaking. The primary deictic indicators of direct discourse are personal pronouns.58 For example, 'He said to me, "You are my son, today I have begotten you"' (Ps. 2.7a). The dual pronominal shifts—from 'he' to T and 'me' to 'you'—indicate that the speaker is now God rather than the psalmist; this is called pronominal deixis. An example of a shift in temporal deixis is found in Psalm 30. The psalm as a whole gives thanks to God for deliverance from peril. In vv. 8-10, however, the psalmist quotes her cry for help: 'What gain is there in my blood?.. .Hear, O Lord, and be gracious...' This cry only makes sense within the larger context of the psalm—if it has occurred in the past. Thus, it is an example of a shift in temporal deixis. An example of spatial deixis is found in Ps. 122.1-2: I was glad when they said to me, 'Let us go to the house of the Lord'. Our feet are standing within your gates, O Jerusalem!

Even though the pronouns do not shift but stay in the first person plural, the end of the direct discourse is indicated by a different spatial reference—the psalmist is not in Jerusalem. Finally, direct discourse can be signalled by a shift in hierarchical deixis.59 For example, note the beginning of the direct discourse in Ps. 89.2-3: I declare that your steadfast love is established forever; your faithfulness is as firm as the heavens. ' I have cut a covenant with my chosen I have sworn to David my servant...'

Neither the pronominal nor spatial deictic indicators necessitate a different speaker, but the shift of hierarchy between verses 2 and 3 does necessitate a different speaker—only God cuts covenants with 'my chosen' and 'David my servant'. In addition to these deictic indicators, syntactic indicators may signal that a phrase should be understood as direct discourse. These syntactic indicators consist 57. Miller, The Representation of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative, pp. 61-90. See also Miller's other works related to direct discourse listed in the above footnote. 58. Miller, The Representation of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative, p. 68. 59. Miller calls this type of deixis 'deferential', but I prefer the term 'hierarchical' because deference suggest merely politeness, while hierarchy suggests a difference in sovereignty between the psalmist and God.

22

Many are Saying

of a change in the syntax of a psalm that necessitates that direct discourse be understood. These syntactic changes include a verbal shift to the jussive (for example, Ps. 2.3) or to the imperative (Ps. 105.15). As was mentioned above, the most reliable indicator of when a quotation ends in Hebrew poetry is pronominal deixis (a shift in the person and/or number of the subject and object of the verbs). One problem that results from this, however, is that deciding where a quotation ends is more problematic for the self quotations than for the enemy quotations or God quotations because in self quotations this reliable indicator is missing. In the case of the self quotations, by definition the speaker is the same before, during, and after the quotation. Two examples illustrate the problem and point toward criteria for deciding the issue. The first example consists of three parallel self quotations from Psalms 16, 31, and 140: I say to the LORD, 'You are my Lord; I have no good apart from you'. As for the holy ones in the land, they are the noble, in whom is all my delight. (Ps. 16.2-3; NRSV)60 But I trust in you, O LORD; I say, 'You are my God'. My times are in your hand; deliver me from the hand of my enemies and persecutors. Let your face shine upon your servant; save me in your steadfast love. (Ps. 31.14-16; NRSV) I say to the LORD, 'You are my God; give ear, O LORD, to the voice of my supplications'. O LORD, my Lord, my strong deliverer, you have covered my head in the day of battle. Do not grant, O LORD, the desires of the wicked; do not further their evil plot. (Ps. 140.6-8; NRSV)

The NRSV translations are used here in order to show the difficulty in deciding where the self quotations end. All three quotations consist of the verb followed by a confession of trust in God: or NRSV consistently renders these as quotations but is less consistent in deciding where these quotations end.61 In Psalm 16, the parallel phrase that follows 'You are my Lord' is included in the quotation: 'You are my Lord, I have no good apart from you.'62 In Psalm 31, however, NRSV does not include the parallel phrase in

60. Most of the textual difficulties in Psalm 16 are not pertinent to this example. One is pertinent: The verb in MT should be read multiple Hebrew manuscripts support this reading and both LXX and Syriac presume this vocalization, morevoer, the quotation inset 'you are my Lord' necessitates T as the speaker. 61. Other versions are even less consistent. NJPS, for example, renders Pss. 16.2 and 31.14 as quotations but for some reason does not treat Ps. 140.6 as a quotation. 62. The meaning of the phrase is uncertain and widely debated. For the purposes of this example, it is enough to recognize that the phrase is clearly some sort of expression of trust in God and is the poetic parallel to the phrase, 'You are my Lord'.

1. Theoretical Considerations

23

the quotation: ' "You are my God." My times are in your hand.' In Psalm 140, a series of petitions follows the confession of trust. Strangely, the NRS V includes the first petition within the quotation, but not the following petitions (note that a series of petitions also follows the quotation in Psalm 31). The quotation in Psalm 140 should either be understood to consist only of 'You are my God' or to extend all the way through verse 8. The series of petitions should not be split; they should either be entirely included or excluded from the quotation. So where do the three self quotations end? Two solutions seem most likely. One option would be to end all three quotations immediately after the phrases 'You are my God/Lord'. A second option would be to include the parallel stichs that follow the quotations but not to include the series of petitions in Psalms 31 and 140. The second option would produce: 'You are my Lord; I have no good apart from you' (16.2) 'You are my God; my times are in your hand' (31.14-15a) 'You are my God' (140.6) In this solution, both Pss. 16.2 and 31.14-15a would be read as tricola: Protect me, O God, for in you I take refuge, I say to the LORD, 'You are my Lord; I have no good apart from you'.

But I trust in you, O LORD; I say, 'You are my God, my times are in your hand'.

The structure of Psalm 31 makes this solution unlikely, however, because the parallelism of 31.15 includes a play on the word 'hand' that suggests the verse should not be split: 'My times are in your hand; deliver me from the hand of my enemies and persecutors.' Thus, the best solution is to regard only the phrases 'You are my God/Lord' as quotations. A second example of the problem of determining the end of self quotations is found in Psalm 39. At the beginning of the psalm, the psalmist vows to keep quiet and says, 'I was silent and still' (v. 2). A quotation begins in verse 4, but it is unclear where it ends. NRSV understands the quotation to run the entire remainder of the psalm: Then I spoke with my tongue: 'LORD, let me know my end, and what is the measure of my days; let me know how fleeting my life is. You have made my days a few handbreadths, and my lifetime is as nothing in your sight. Surely everyone stands as a mere breath. Surely everyone goes about like a shadow. Surely for nothing they are in turmoil; they heap up, and do not know who will gather. And now, O LORD, what do I wait for? My hope is in you. Deliver me from all my transgressions. Do not make me the scorn of the fool.

24

Many are Saying I am silent; I do not open my mouth, for it is you who have done it. Turn your gaze away from me, that I may smile again, before I depart and am no more.' (vv. 3b-9, 13)

Three factors suggest that the NRSV is mistaken, and the quotation does not run the remainder of the psalm. First, in verse nine, the psalmist repeats the earlier statement, 'I am silent'. The psalmist was silent in verse 2, then began to speak starting in verse 4, and is silent again in verse 9. The repetition of the claim 'I am silent' signals that the quotation must end before verse 9. Second, verse 7 begins with one of the regular disjunctive markers in the psalms: 'And now' . It is unlikely that the quotation extends across this major disjunctive transition; it surely must end before verse 7. Third, if this quotation is compared to those self quotations for which the end of the quotation is clear, or indeed with any of the enemy quotations, one sees that quotations in the Psalter are normally quite short. If the quotation in Psalm 39 were to run from verses 4 through 13, its length would be unprecedented. One might legitimately enquire whether the psalmist's audience would have been able to follow a quotation of such length. The longer a quotation, the more likely it is that an audience will lose track of who is speaking. The quotation in Psalm 39 should be understood as comprising only verse 4: 'Lord, let me know my end, and what is the measure of my days; let me know how fleeting my life is!' Ps. 39.5-6 make better sense as the answer given to the petition asked in verse 4, rather than as a continuation of the petition (which is the sense if these verses are contained within the quotation). These examples illustrate several criteria for determining the end of a quotation. First, a comparison with other quotations helps determine where any given quotation ends. Second, the larger context of a psalm is important for determining the end of a quotation. The overall argument of the psalm gives clues as to where the quotations end; the quotations should work with, not against, the formal sections of a psalm (such as series of petitions, or major disjunctive markers such as 'and now', parallelism in the poetry, and so on). In later chapters, when specific texts are treated in which the end of a quotation is uncertain, the specific issues will be discussed in a footnote. ii. The Relationship Between the Quotation Inset and the Psalm The goal of this study is to assess the rhetorical function of direct discourse in the Psalter. That is, the goal is not just to study instances of direct discourse in the Psalter but to study and interpret how those instances of direct discourse contribute to the overall arguments of various psalms. In order to accomplish this goal, we need conceptual ways of analysing how the quotation inset interacts both with its immediate frame and with the rhetorical argument of the psalm in which it occurs. The Subordination of the Inset to the Frame. One of the most important conclusions that emerged from the above survey of quotation theory is that the quotation inset is subordinated to the frame. That is, the reporter constructs the

1. Theoretical Considerations

25

frame so as to control the original speech quoted in the inset and to interpret the inset for the implied audience. Cynthia Miller has argued persuasively that the reporter controls direct discourse no less than he or she controls indirect discourse. 'While the direct representation of speech adds a sense of vividness and immediacy to biblical narrative, direct speech, no less than indirect speech, remains ultimately within the control of the biblical narrator.'63 Direct discourse 'represents a metapragmatic interpretation on the part of the reporting speaker (or narrator) in terms of the syntactic shape of the quotative frame that introduces it'.64 Indirect discourse and direct discourse do not differ in that they control the original speaker's words; they merely differ in how they do so. 'Indirect speech is differentiated by the syntax of the quotation and its integration into the frame; varieties of direct speech, by contrast, are differentiated by the degree of syntactic complexity of the quotative frame.'65 That is, when a reporter quotes an original speaker's words, she interferes with those words by means of the frame in which she places the inset. Miller would certainly agree that the reporter also interferes with the inset by choosing which words and how much of the original speech to quote. Miller develops a complicated, hierarchical structure for defining how heavily the reporter interferes with the inset. She distinguishes between single-verb frames, multiple-verb frames, and frames. Although Miller's work is exceedingly thorough and very helpful, her typology cannot be applied directly to this study for two reasons. First, she did not consider quotations in the Psalter or Hebrew poetry when developing her typology. Second, she concentrated primarily on the verbs of speaking, and this limits her typology's application to Hebrew poetry, which has different syntactical conventions.66 Using Miller's thorough work as a departure point, I suggest that there are four aspects of a quotation by which the psalmist controls the inset. These four aspects govern the range of ways in which the frame interacts with the inset in order to control it. These four aspects are: the content of the inset, the verbs of speaking in the frame, the identity of the speaker, and any modifying words or phrases present in the frame. Initial explanations of these aspects are as follows: The Content of the Inset. Often, the content of the quotation inset is the most important of these four aspects. For example, the psalmist will often quote his enemies uttering blasphemous words: 'They say, "The Lord does not see, the God of Jacob does not perceive"' (94.7). Or, the psalmist quotes herself uttering pious words: 'I say to the Lord, "You are my lord, I have no good except by you"' (16.1).

63. 64. 65. 66. 398.

Miller, The Representation Miller, The Representation Miller, The Representation Miller, The Representation

of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative, p. of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative, p. of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative, p. of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative, pp.

144. 145. 145. 143-232 and 299-

26

Many are Saying

Verbs of Speaking. The verbs of speaking often interpret the inset for the implied audience. In Ps. 22.7-8, the audience would not know to interpret the content of the inset as sarcastic if the psalmist did not use the verb 'to mock': 'All who see me mock me, they make mouths at me, they wag their heads; "Commit to the Lord that he might deliver, may he rescue him who trusts in him."' Identity of the Speaker. In places, the identity of the speaker is a key to understanding the quotation. For example, 'the nations' are usually heard only speaking discouraging words such as 'Where is their God?' (Pss. 79.10, 115.2; compare 42.3). But in Ps. 126.2-3 we read: Then it was said among the nations, 'The Lord has done great things for them'. The Lord has done great things for us, and we rejoiced.

Note the irony of the situation—the nations praise the work of the Lord, and then 'we' speak those identical words. The irony of the passage is communicated by the identity of the speakers: the nations. Modifying Words and Phrases. Finally, the frame often contains words and phrases that modify the inset. 'The fool says in his heart, "There is no God"' (14.1). Or, 'I said in my prosperity, "I shall never be moved"' (30.6). Or, Ps. 35.8-10: Let ruin come upon [my adversaries] unawares, Then, all my bones shall say, 'O LORD, who is like you? You deliver the weak from those too strong for them, the weak and needy from those who despoil them'.

Such phrases often indicate the circumstances or conditions in which the quoted speech did occur or will occur and as such are vital to understanding the interaction between the frame and the inset.

Chapter 2

'THEY WHET THEIR TONGUES LIKE SWORDS' : THE FUNCTION OF ENEMY QUOTATIONS In the Psalter, the voice that is quoted most often in direct discourse is the voice of the enemy.1 The enemy is quoted thirty-four times in twenty-six different psalms.2 In this chapter, the function of these enemy quotations is considered. For the purpose of this analysis, the enemy quotations are divided into two groups: (1) quotations in which the enemies attack God, and (2) quotations in which the enemies attack the psalmist. First, an analysis of the psalm texts in which these two groups of enemy quotations occur is presented and conclusions are drawn about the formal function of each type of quotation (Sections 1 and 2). Second, the theoretical material from the previous chapter is drawn upon in order to analyse the rhetorical function of these quotations.

1. Included under the rubric of 'enemy quotations' are those quotations in which the original speaker is identified as 'the wicked', 'my enemy', 'my enemies', 'the fool', 'the speakers of lies', 'the people', 'those who seek to snatch away my life', 'my adversaries', 'those who watch for my life', 'the arrogant', 'your foes', 'their ancestors', 'the nations', 'all evil-doers', 'theEdomites',and 'our captors'. Also included are those quotations in which the speaker is not specifically identified, but in which the content of the quotation demands that the speaker be understood as a hostile party (such as the 'you' in Psalm 11). 2. Some passages that others have understood as enemy quotations should not be regarded as such. Ps. 4.6: It is unclear whether the voice quoted in Ps. 4.6 should be understood as that of the enemy or of friendly persons in the community. Because of that confusion, the citation is excluded from this study. Ps. 55.22-3: R. Gordis proposed that these verses be understood as a sarcastic enemy quotation, perhaps akin to Ps. 22.8 ('Quotations as a Literary Usage', 157-218). These verses contain no internal deictic or semantic markers, however, that support this reading. Ps. 109.6-19: Many commentators understand as a lengthy enemy quotation. Against this, there is no verb of speaking, and the accusations in vv. 6-19 better fit the psalmist's attack on his enemy than their attack on him. The switch to the singular for the collective is not an indication of direct discourse in this case; it is a common grammatical feature of the psalms. Furthermore, if this were an enemy quotation, its length would be unprecedented. It is better to understand these verses as the psalmist's imprecation against the enemy. Even if these passages were included, however, they would not materially affect the results of this investigation.

28

Many are Saying

1. 'They Set Their Mouths Against Heaven': Quotations in which the Enemies Attack God The first category of enemy quotations to be considered comprises those quotations in which the enemies attack God. This category of enemy quotations is the most significant numerically, including twenty-five different quotations in nineteen different psalms.3 This category is also the most significant theologically, because in these quotations the enemies assert the powerlessness of God. These quotations may be further divided into three groups of assertions: 1. Assertions that God lacks the effective power to save and help; 2. Assertions that God lacks fidelity; 3. Assertions that Israel's God has been defeated by foreign gods. First, an analysis of the psalm texts in which these three groups of enemy quotations occur is presented here in order to identify the formal role that these quotations play in the arguments of the psalms. In almost every psalm in which such quotations occur, the quotation either becomes the central formal and theological point around which the psalm turns, or it marks a major turning point in the argument of the psalm. This analysis further serves to identify a set of rhetorical devices by which the enemy quotations are integrated into the argument of the psalm. The analysis of the types of psalms and of the component elements of the 'lament' or 'prayer for help' is especially dependent on the analyses of Claus Westermann and Patrick D. Miller.4 i. Quotations Asserting that God Lacks Effective Power to Save and Help The most frequent charge that the psalmist quotes the enemies as making is that God lacks the ability to judge the wicked or save the innocent. The charge is characteristically stated in phrases such as 'God will not seek', 'God does not see', 'God does not hear', and 'There is no God'. Almost all of the psalms in which this type of enemy quotation occurs are individual prayers for help (individual laments) or individual psalms of trust, a type of psalm closely related to the individual prayer for help. Where these quotations occur in other types of psalms, it will be noted. Psalm 9/10.5 Psalm 9/10 is an excellent lead example of how quotations in which the enemies attack God function in the psalms because in Psalm 9/10 some of the 3. Pss.2.3;3.2; 10.4,6,11, 13; 11.1-3; 12.4-5; 14.1:22.8; 42.3, 10; 53.1; 59.7; 64.5-6; 71.10; 73.11; 74.8; 78.19; 79.10; 83.4, 12; 94.7; 115.2; and 137.3,7. 4. C. Westermann, Praise and Lament in the Psalms; The Psalms: Structure, Content and Message; P.O. Miller, Interpreting the Psalms; They Cried to the Lord. See also the introduction to J.L. Mays, Psalms (IBC; Louisville: John Knox, 1989). 5. Psalms 9 and 10 are treated here as a single unit. LXX has them as a single psalm. Together, the two psalms make up one continuous acrostic poem. Psalm 10 lacks a superscription, and no other psalm between Psalm 3 and Psalm 32 lacks one. For all of these reasons, Psalms 9 and 10 should be read as a single psalm. It is possible that Psalm 9 and 10 were once separate prayers, however. The opponents in Psalm 9 are plural and there is a sustained focus on the nations as a problem, whereas in Psalm 10 the opponent is singular and the one reference to the nations in v. 16 is of a completely different tone than the multiple references to the nations in Psalm 9. The

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

29

most common features of these quotations occur. The psalmist quotes 'the wicked' four times in the midst of an extended they-complaint (10.1-11): The wicked snorts in his pride, 'He will not seek, there is no God', are all his thoughts, (v. 4) He says in his heart, 'I shall not be made to stagger, from generation to generation there shall be no evil.' (v. 6) He says in his heart, 'God has forgotten, he has hidden his face, he will not see forever.' (v. 11) Why does the wicked renounce God, and say in his heart, 'You will not seek'? (v. 13)

One of the frequent features of the enemy quotations is that they occur at the end of an extended they-complaint. Earlier in the psalm, the wicked denounced God indirectly, 'He will not seek.' The they-complaint builds in intensity, however, and at the close the wicked dares to renounce God directly: 'You will not seek.' Another common feature of this type of quotation is closely related to its role as the culmination of the they-complaint: the quotation occurs at the turning point of the psalm, as the psalmist moves from complaint to petition or to confession of trust. In Psalm 9/10, immediately following the enemy quotation in verse 13, the psalmist moves to confession of trust. The psalmist takes the vocabulary of the enemy and reverses that vocabulary in the petition and confession of trust sections of the psalm. (As is demonstrated below, this rhetorical device is one of the most frequent features of the psalms in which enemy quotations occur.) The wicked had claimed that 'God has forgotten '. But the psalmist prays, 'Do not forget the poor' (v. 12). The wicked is confident in his plans because he believes that God 'will not see forever'. In contrast, the psalmist expresses her firm confidence in God: 'You, indeed you do see ' (v. 14).8 The wicked had twice affirmed that God 'will not seek ' evil-doers to punish them. Again, the psalmist confesses her confidence in God: 'You will seek

language and ideology of Zion theology are more pronounced in Psalm 9 than in Psalm 10. The technical plea for God to 'rise up' occurs in 9.19 and is repeated in 10.12, and in no other psalm is that plea repeated. Psalm 9 is a psalm of thanksgiving, while Psalm 10 is an individual lament. Finally, the rhetorical device of the enemies being quoted in direct discourse occurs four times in Psalm 10 and never in Psalm 9. 6. Although MT reads , the reading here follows Syriac, Targum, and multiple Hebrew manuscripts, which assume . The verb 'to snort' is supplied to make the prideful image of , literally 'his nose', more palpable. 7. The subject of the verb 'to seek' I might be understood as either of the two masculine singular nouns in the verse: the wicked, or God. In a parallel phrase in 10.13, however, it is clearly 'God' who does not seek: 'Why does the wicked renounce God, and say in his heart, "You will not seek ." ' This parallel indicates the subject of the verb in verse 4 should also be understood as God: 'He [God] will not seek.' 8. is translated as intensifying the subject of the verb , meaning something such as 'Yes, indeed you do see.'

30

Many are Saying

out his wickedness, until you find none'9 (v. 15). A final common feature of this type of enemy quotation that Psalm 9/10 exemplifies is that in the quotation, the enemies name the central theological problem that the psalm is addressing. The combined meaning of the four enemy quotations in this psalm is that God lacks the ability to judge the wicked or to save the innocent. The fourfold repetition suggests that this is the central theological problem of the psalm. The psalmist answers the problem by petitioning God to prove divine power and fidelity by acting to both judge the wicked and save the innocent, and the psalmist confesses her firm trust that God will act. Thus, Psalm 9/10 is a good example of several of the common features of quotations in which the enemies attack God. First, the enemies' assertion provides the central theological problem that the psalm addresses. Second, the enemy quotation serves as the culmination of the they-complaint. Third, the enemy quotation is found at the turning point between complaint and trust. Fourth, the vocabulary of the quotation inset is reversed in the petition and confession of trust. Psalm 12. In Psalm 12, the psalmist contrasts the speech of the enemy with the speech of God. The psalm is structured chiastically, with the speech of God standing as the answer to the speech of the wicked at the centre of the psalm: 1—Opening petition 2-3—Description of the wicked's speech 4—Speech of the wicked quoted in direct discourse 5—Speech of God quoted in direct discourse 6—Description of God's speech 7-8—Closing confession of trust

As can be deduced from verse 7, the psalm is a prayer on behalf of a community or group of individuals who have been falsely accused: 'You, O LORD, will protect us; you will guard us from this generation forever.' The community is suffering a threat posed by false accusations; note that the threat is described exclusively in terms of speech: 'They speak falsely' (v. 2), 'with flattering lips and a double heart they speak' (v. 2), 'May the LORD cut off all flattering lips, every tongue that boasts great things' (v. 3). Then the enemy quotation serves as the culmination of the they-complaint (w. 2-4): 'By means of our tongues we prevail,10 our lips are ours, who is lord over us?'11 9. The verse continues There is some debate as to how this clause should be understood. P. Craigie understands an affirmative use of (Psalms 1-50 (WBC, 19; Waco: Word Books, 1983), p. 123). See also: L. Koehler and W. Baumgartner, HALOT (5 vols.; New York: Brill, 1994) I, p. 131; B.K. Waltke and M. O'Connor, An Introduction to Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990), p. 660 n. 58; C.F. Whitley, 'The Positive Force of the Hebrew Particle \ZAW84 (1972), pp. 213-19. Another option is to supply some modifying word such as 'until' as does NRSV, 'seek out his wickedness until you find none'. This seems a better option, analogous to the use of in Isa. 44.8, 'I do not know [any]'. 10. The precise meaning of the hiphil of is not clear. The qal meaning is 'to be superior' or 'to be strong'. The only other attested use of the hiphil is Dan. 9.27, where there is a direct object ('he will establish a covenant'). 11. S. Mowinckel understands these quotations as curses: 'All such words were considered to

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

31

This quotation in which the wicked assert that the LORD lacks effective power to judge and punish also names the central theological problem of the psalm: Which reality and whose speech is stronger? The wicked, who surround the psalmist and whom the psalmist can hear? Or God, who is invisible and whose promises often seem meagre? The wicked assert that they trust in their own power. In the psalm's structure, the speech of the wicked is answered by the speech of God: 'Because of the hurt of the poor, because of the groaning of the needy,12 now I will arise!' says the LORD, 'I will put in safety the witness in his behalf.'13 It may be that the sense of the enemy quotation is again reversed by the psalmist. The enemy had boasted, 'Who is 'ddon over us?' The psalmist responds with the speech of the LORD, and in the confession of trust the psalmist says, 'You, O LORD, will protect us'. Later in the tradition, the proper name of the LORD was vocalized as 'ddon. More to the point, the content of God's speech directly counters the content of the wicked's speech: God does see the suffering of the downcast, God does have effective power to intervene on their behalf, and God will soon act.14 The psalmist does not merely juxtapose the speech of the wicked with that of the LORD. The psalmist thoroughly defines both the speech of the wicked and the speech of God. The wicked lie, they speak with flattering lips and a double heart, and their tongues make great boasts. The 'utterances of the LORD', on the other hand, are seven-times pure. Thus, Psalm 12 demonstrates some of the characteristic features of the enemy quotations. First, the quotation is the culmination of the they-complaint. Second, the quotation provides the central theological problem that the psalm addresses. Third, the quotation marks the turning point of the psalm.15 Psalm 11. In Psalm 11, a human voice quoted in direct discourse asserts that the wicked reign unchallenged on earth. As in the above psalms, this quotation becomes the central organizing feature of the psalm because it presents a theological viewpoint against which the remainder of the psalm argues. In Psalm 11, however,

be powerful and fatal "curses"... In the eyes of those who are the objects of such words, they are naturally looked upon as evil curses, unlawful supernatural harmful words and operations, "sorcery" and "devilry".' The Psalms in Israel's Worship (trans D.R. Ap-Thomas; 2 vols.; Nashville: Abingdon, 1962) I, p. 199. In order to sustain this interpretation, Mowinckel has to understand the individual laments in which these quotations occur as 'national psalms'. 12. For the causal use of the preposition , see Waltke and O'Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, p. 213. See also Ps. 59.12: 'Because of the curses and because of the lies that they recount...' See also Ezek. 28.18 and Lam. 3.18. 13. On the translation of ** as 'witness', see P.O. Miller, 'yapiah in Psalm XII 6', FT 29 (1979), pp. 495-500. 14. G.T.M. Prinsloo ('Man's Word—God's Word: A Theology of Antithesis in Psalm 12', ZA W110 (1998), pp. 390-402) proposes a similar reading of the function of the enemy and God quotations in Psalm 12, in which he argues that the psalm's turning point is the speech of God that answers the human speech. 15. The language of 'turning point' comes from Miller. He writes that the God quotation 'is the turning point of the Psalm as it announces Yahweh's decision to intervene in this situation... Yahweh will act because of the violence done to the poor and in response to their groaning under this oppression' ('yapiah in Psalm XII', p. 499).

32

Many are Saying

the speakers are not the wicked ones, but are misguided counsellors who tell the psalmist to flee because the innocent have no defence against the wicked: In the LORD I take refuge. How can you say to me, 'Flee like a bird to a mountain. For the wicked ones draw the bow, they have fixed their arrow upon the string, to shoot in the dark at the upright of heart. If the foundations are torn down, what can the righteous one do?'

In this psalm, the enemy quotation does not merely serve as the culmination of the they-complaint; it is the entire they-complaint. The misguided counsellors say something remarkably similar to what the wicked say in Psalms 9/10 and 12: There is no power on earth that can check the strength of the wicked. This statement provides the central theological problem of the psalm. But even before this speech is heard, the psalmist has already qualified it by the way that the quotation frame introduces the quotation inset: 'In the LORD I take refuge. How can you say to me...'. The psalmist subordinates the advice of the counsellors theologically by first confessing her own trust and also subordinates their advice grammatically by making it part of her question. Following the quotation, the remainder of the psalm consists of an extended confession of trust, in which the psalmist spells out her reasons for not fleeing. This is a rhetorical device that also occurs frequently: an enemy quotation opens the psalm, and the remainder of the psalm is an answer to the enemy's assertion. In Psalm 11, the psalmist's answer may be summed up in one phrase: 'The LORD'S eyes see, his gaze tests.' Note again that the enemy quotation assumes that God does not see wicked acts or punish them, but the psalmist answers that God does see and does act. In a variety of ways, the advice of the counsellors that was quoted in direct discourse is reversed in the rest of the psalm. In the quotation, the friends advised the psalmist to flee. But the psalmist says, 'I take refuge in the LORD'. Specifically, the friends tell her to flee to 'the mountain'. The psalmist responds that 'The LORD is in his holy temple'; in Zion theology the temple is 'the mountain of the house of the LORD' (Isa. 2.2), 'your holy mountain (Ps.15.1), or 'The mountain of the LORD' (Ps. 24.3). Thus, the counsellors advise that the psalmist flee to a mountain, and the psalmist responds that she takes refuge in the mountain. In the quotation, the counsellors warn that 'the wicked bend the bow' and they ask the question, 'What can the righteous one do?' The psalmist responds, 'The LORD tests the righteous and wicked alike'. In the quotation, the psalmist is warned that the wicked intend 'to shoot in the dark at the upright of heart ' The psalmist replies, 'the upright one will see [God's] face'. 16. There is a difficulty in the first phrase. MT consonants are: ('flee to your mountain, O bird'). LXX, Syriac, Qere, and multiple Hebrew manuscripts read the verb as "HI]. LXX reflects the following consonants: rendering the following reconstruction: 'flee like a bird to a mountain'. The translation in the text follows this reconstruction: lil "HI]

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

33

Psalms 14 and53. Because Psalms 14 and 53 are almost identical, they are treated together here.17 As in Psalm 11, the direct discourse is quoted in the first verse, and the rest of the psalm is an answer to the fool's belief that 'There is no God'.18 The propositional content of the fool's assertion that 'There is no God' should not be understood as theoretical atheism. Rather, the statement means that the fool believes God is not active and present in the world in any effective way. This is shown by the parallel occurrence of the phrase in Psalm 10: 'The wicked snorts in his pride, "[God] will not seek, there is no God," are all his thoughts' (v. 4). In response to this assertion, the psalmist again confesses his trust that God is present and active: 'The LORD looks down from heaven upon humanity, to see whether there is any who is wise, any who seeks God' (14.2). Against the fool's claim that God is not present, the psalmist asserts, 'God is with the generation of the righteous' (14.5). The psalmist offers up the petition, 'O that salvation might come from Zion for Israel' (14.7). The Hebrew root , 'help/save/ deliver', is one of the most frequent words in the Psalter, occurring in almost half of the psalms. The subject of the word is always God, except where the ability of humans to provide 'help' is denied.19 The word implies the coming of help to one who is in trouble.20 Salvation is understood as the present manifestation of the power of the lore? to judge the wicked and rescue the righteous. The fool denies the possibility of salvation when he says, 'There is no God'. But salvation is the hope that the psalmist confesses and the reality for which the psalmist prays. Psalm 22. In Ps. 22.8, the enemies are quoted: 'Commit to the LORD, let him rescue him, let him deliver him, for he delights in him.' The reader knows that this advice is sarcastic rather than sincere because in the quotation frame the psalmist defines these as mocking, scornful words. Once these words are recognized as mocking words, it is recognized that here the enemies are asserting that the LORD is not able to deliver those who trust in him. This is, of course, once again the central theological problem of the psalm. It would be too strong, however, to claim that in Psalm 22 the enemy quotation provides the theological issue for the psalm; the problem is present throughout the psalm even without the enemy quotation. But the quotation does provide a transitional point for the movement of the psalm. As has been the case in previous psalms the enemy quotation comes as the culmination of 17.There are two main differences between the two psalms. First, Psalm 14 uses the divine name ' while Psalm 53 substitutes . Second, there are differences between 14.4-5 and 53.4-6. 18. The 'fool' is often seen as a concept borrowed from Israel's wisdom tradition. However, in Psalm 74, a psalm that does not have motifs from the wisdom tradition, the foreign nation that taunts the LORD and despises God's name is twice called Since both Psalm 74 and Psalms 14 and 53 use the word in conjunction with enemy quotations that taunt God, it is better not to assume that the use of the word in these psalms is dependent on the wisdom tradition. 19. Cf. Pss. 60.13; 108.13; 146.3; 33.16-7; 44.4, 6. 20. See the articles on in G.J. Botterweck and H. Ringgren (eds.), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (trans. J.T. Willis; 13 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, rev. edn., 1977), VI, pp. 441-63; and in E. Jenni and C. Westermann (eds.), Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament (trans. M.E. Biddle; 3 vols.; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998), II, pp. 584-87.

34

Many are Saying

a section of they-complaint; a section of they-complaint occurs in w. 7-8, and the quotation comes at the end of the they-complaint, immediately before a confession of trust. Following the quotation, the psalmist takes up the vocabulary of the enemy and reverses it in his petition. The enemy mocked, 'let [God] deliver him . The psalmist prays, 'Deliver my life from the sword' (v. 20). Psalm 59.21 In Psalm 59, the enemy quotation occurs as the culmination of a section of they-complaint. The they-complaint is then followed by the confession of trust: They return every evening, they growl like dogs and surround the city; They belch forth22 sharp swords from their mouths: 'Who can hear us?' But you, O LORD, you laugh at them! (vv. 6-8a)

Once again, the force of the enemy quotation is that God is not an effective force in the world; God does not hear their taunts, God will not call them to account. As was the case in Psalm 22, it would be too strong to claim that the enemy quotation provides the central theological problem of the psalm. But, as in Psalm 22, the enemy quotation is an integral part of the theological problem and occurs at the turning point of the psalm. The shift from the enemy quotation to the confession of confidence occurs as the psalmist answers the assertion of the enemies: 'But you, O LORD, you laugh at them!' It is implicit in the statement 'you laugh at them' that God does hear the enemies' speech: Only if God hears their speech can God laugh at them. Again in this psalm, the enemy quotation conies as the culmination of the they-complaint. Psalm 64. In Psalm 64, the enemy quotation occurs at the end of an extended section of they-complaint: They whet their tongues like swords, they bend bitter words like arrows; To shoot from shelter at the blameless, they fire suddenly, they do not fear; They steel themselves to their evil word, they discuss in order to conceal traps, They say, 'Who can see us? Who can search out crimes?

21. H.-J. Kraus deletes the phrase in v. 7 that contains the direct discourse because it exceeds the meter of the psalm. This seems too facile a reason to omit this phrase because meter within Hebrew poetry is not so rigid as to allow this sort of emendation. Kraus, Psalms 1-59: A Commentary (trans. H.C. Oswald; CC; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1986), p. 239. 22. The hiphil of is also used of the enemy's speech in Ps. 94.4, see below. 23. is understood here as intensifying the speech, 'Indeed, who hears?' Compare Ps. 116.10.

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

35

We have perfected a scheme, the human interior and heart are deep.' God will fire an arrow at them; suddenly they will have their wound! (vv. 3-7)

As in previous psalms, the psalmist immediately follows the enemy quotation with a confession of trust in which she contradicts the enemy. As in other psalms, the psalmist employs the vocabulary of the quotation inset to show the reversal that God will effect. In the enemy quotation, they say, 'Who can see ( ) us?' In the confession of trust, the psalmist says, 'Everyone who sees ( ) them will shudder' (v. 8). And in a bit of ironic reversal, those who earlier had spoken in pride of their secret plots will now 'declare what God has done' (v. 9).25 Psalm 73. Psalm 73 is not an individual prayer for help, but is a psalm with wisdom elements in which the psalmist meditates on the process by which he came to grips with the problem of why the wicked flourish. In Psalm 73, the psalmist quotes both the wicked and himself in direct discourse. Before the enemy quotation, in an extended they-complaint the psalmist offers familiar lamentations about the enemies' speech: 'They scoff and speak evil; they speak oppression from on high. They set their mouths against heaven, and their tongues traverse the earth' (vv. 8-9). In verse 11, the psalmist quotes the wicked asserting the familiar charge that God is not present in any effective way: 'They say, "How can God know? And

24. The text of v. 6 is problematic. M. Tate has commented: 'The text of v. [6] is extremely difficult and no translation should be treated with confidence, including [his translation]. MT has literally "they search out/devise/think out evil acts; we have perfected a thought-out-device, and the inner part of a man and a heart is deep" ' (Psalms 51-100 (WBC, 20; Dallas: Word Books, 1990), p. 131). Syriac reads 'Who can see us?' Even though MT and other versions read'to them' (referring to the secret plots), it is better to read to 'to us'. Most likely, the mistake arose when was replaced by , the consonants being mistakenly transposed from the phrase at the beginning of the verse: . Some have emended to ; others, including JPS, amend to ('to hide') with some manuscripts. Kraus abandons his usual restraint and follows Gunkel's reconstruction , 'and sees through our secret plans' (Psalms 60-150: A Commentary (trans. H.C. Oswald; CC; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989), p. 23). This solution is not tenable. Another crux is the meaning of . HALOT understands this as 'disguise'. Finally, there is the question of where the direct discourse ends. NJPS limits the quotation to the phrase 'Who will see them?' NRSV extends it through v. 6b, but inexplicably does not include v. 6c. Verse 6c must be included, because the phrase makes little sense as the psalmist's own assertion but fits well with the content of the enemy quotation. serves double-duty for the first two questions: 'Who can see us? Who can search out crimes?' Because of the textual difficulties in the inset of the quotation, an extended section of the psalm is quoted above to clarify the role of the enemies' speech in the psalm. In spite of the enormous textual difficulties, it is clear that the direct discourse plays a key role in the psalm as a whole. 25. The reversal motif is not limited to the enemy quotation. In the they-complaint, the enemies whet their tongues. In the confession of trust, '[God] will cause ruin for them because of their tongues...' In the they-complaint, the enemies aim arrows I and 'fire suddenly' at the psalmist. In the confession of trust likewise, '[God] will fire an arrow at them ; suddenly they will have their wound.' In the they-complaint, the enemies 'do not fear'. In the confession of trust, 'all humanity will fear' (v. 9).

36

Many are Saying

is there knowledge in the Most High?"' The psalmist notes that in spite of their wickedness and in spite of their sin, the enemies seem to thrive, while the righteous suffer: Such are the wicked; eternally prosperous, they acquire strength. Surely in vain have I cleansed my heart, and washed my hands in innocence! And I am smitten all day long, and punished every morning. If I had said, 'I will talk on like them', I would then have been false to the generation of your children, (vv. 13-15)

Describing the movement of this psalm, Walter Brueggemann has said that the psalmist comes to the 'provisional conclusion' in verse 13 that' "pure heart" and "clean hands" are foolish virtues producing nothing... '.26 The psalmist is tempted to reject God's way of Torah obedience and fall in step with the wicked. In verse 15, the psalmist recalls how he resisted the temptation to speak like the wicked speak: 'If I had said, "I will talk on like them,"271 would then have been false to the generation of your children.' The turning point of the psalm follows this recollection. According to Brueggemann, this turning point comes as the psalm 'pivots' around the 'present reality of worship', as the psalmist recounts an epiphany he experienced in the temple: 'I perceived their end. Surely you set them in slippery places, you cause them to fall into ruin' (v. 17).28 The psalmist has passed through the temptation to become like the wicked and remained true to 'the generation of your children'. As Brueggemann concluded, 'In the accustomed place of worship where Israel's memory prevails and Israel's hope resides, the speaker reperceives reality'.29 Perhaps because this is not a prayer for help, but an instructional psalm, the psalmist's refusal to speak 'like them' replaces the enemy quotation at the turning point of the psalm. But the direct discourse of the enemies does play an important role in this psalm, because the hypothetical self quotation in which the psalmist 26. Brueggemann, 'Bounded by Obedience and Praise: The Psalter as Canon', in P.D. Miller (ed.), The Psalms and the Life of Faith (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), p. 207. 27. The 3ms suffix (lit.: 'like him') does not refer to the manner in which the enemies speak, but to the enemies themselves. Even though the enemies are plural in this psalm, it is common in Hebrew poetry for singular suffixed pronouns to refer to plural antecedents. In fact, later in Psalm 73, a 3ms suffix and a 3mp suffix occur in the same verse, both referring back to the plural antecedent: 'You set him in slippery places, you make them fall...'. See also Ps. 59.9: 'You laugh at him', with the 3ms suffix referring to the plural subject of verse 8. See also 59.12, where the 3ms and 3mp suffixes are mixed together: 'For the sin of his mouth, the word of his lips, may they be trapped in their pride." See also Ps. 59.13, Ps. 12.6, Isa. 28.6, etc. 28. Brueggemann, 'Bounded by Obedience and Praise', 207. Brueggemann argues that Psalm 73 is the turning point of the entire Psalter, and verse 17 is the turning point of Psalm 73: 'In this moment of fresh discernment, the psalm (and I dare say the Psalter as a whole) moves beyond the

central claim of Psalm 1 to a quite different agenda' ('Bounded by Obedience and Praise', p. 208). 29. Brueggemann, 'Bounded by Obedience and Praise', p. 208.

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

37

pointedly refuses to speak 'like them' depends on the previous enemy quotation to make sense. Further, the psalmist's vocabulary is reversed in the vow of praise. Whereas earlier the psalmist had said, 'If I talk on like him...', in the last words of the psalm, the psalmist vows 'to tell of all your works'. Psalm 78. Psalm 78 is also not an individual prayer for help but is one of the socalled historical psalms.30 The implied audience of the psalm is the Jerusalem community who are called by the psalmist to hear 'my instruction' (v. 1). The central problem that the psalm takes up is God's rejection of the northern tribes. The psalm rehearses the history of Israel in order to explain and defend God's rejection of the northern tribes and sanctuaries and God's choice of Judah, the Zion sanctuary, and the Davidic monarchy.31 A key part of the argument of the psalm is to explain the sins that the northern tribes committed, which 'provoked' God to anger. It is in this context that the psalmist quotes the 'children of Ephraim' in direct discourse: They spoke against God, they said, 'Is God able to spread a table in the wilderness? Although he smote rock and water gushed forth and streams flowed, is he also able to give food, or provide meat for his people?' Therefore when God heard, he became angry, and a fire was kindled against Jacob and also anger rose against Israel, Because they did not have faith in God, and they did not trust in his salvation, (vv. 19-22)

Several features of this quotation should be noted. First, even though the original speakers of this quotation are Israelites, it belongs with the enemy quotations because the passage is used to show why God rejected the northern tribes. It is one of the idiosyncracies of this psalm that only the Ephraimites are portrayed as turning back on the day of the battle (probably a reference to the tradition reported in Numbers 13), sinning in the wilderness, building high places, and so on. The psalmist is implying that by rejecting the Jerusalem temple and the Davidic monarchy, the northern tribes were rebelling against God in the same way that Israel's ancestors rebelled in the wilderness. Second, as we have come to expect, in the quotation the people deny the effective power of God to act; the key concept is again 'his salvation' (v. 22; ). Third, the passage with the direct discourse again marks a turning point in the psalm. Although the sins of the Ephraimites are mentioned as early as vv. 9-11 (turning back on the day of battle, forsaking the law, forgetting God's mighty deeds), it is not until after the enemy quotation in vv. 19-21 that the congregation is told 'therefore' God's rage was kindled. Thus, the direct discourse marks a key shift in the argument of the psalm. Fourth, the passage 30. See Westermann's discussion of historical psalms in Praise and Lament in the Psalms, pp. 214-49. See also Mays's comments on the historical nature of Psalm 78 (Psalms, pp. 254-55). 31. 'He abandoned his dwelling at Shiloh, the tent where he dwelt among mortals' (v. 60). 'He rejected the tent of Joseph, he did not choose the tribe of Ephraim; but he chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion, which he loves... He chose his servant David' (vv. 67-70a).

38

Many are Saying

specifically mentions that 'God heard'. This affirmation should be understood in light of the frequent assertion in the enemy quotations that God does not hear, does not see, and so on. As such, it shows another point of contact with the other enemy quotations in which the enemies assert the powerlessness of God. Psalm 94. In Psalm 94, the enemies again attack God: They belch forth, they speak arrogance, all the evildoers boast. They crush your people, O LORD, they persecute your inheritance. They slay the widow and the sojourner, and they murder orphans, They say, 'The LORD does not see, and the God of Jacob does not discern'. Discern, O dullest of people! The LORD knows human thoughts, that they are vanity, (w. 4-8a, 11)

Several comments are in order. First, as in earlier psalms, the direct discourse comes at the end, or at the culmination, of the they-complaint. Second, the content of the enemy quotation is again that God lacks the effective power to 'see' or 'discern' evil acts as well as the effective power to exact vengeance. Third, the enemy quotation marks the transition from complaint to trust, or in this case, the transition from complaint to instruction in trust. As in previous psalms, the vocabulary for the shift is provided by the quotation inset. The wicked say, 'the God of Jacob does not discern '. The psalmist immediately calls upon the people to 'discern!' . Fourth, the psalmist contradicts the wicked and confesses her faith that God does have the effective power to help the distressed and punish the wicked.33 ii. Quotations Asserting that God Lacks Fidelity Another charge that the psalmist quotes the enemies as making is that God has proven unfaithful to the psalmist. This charge is found in two psalms, both of them individual prayers for help. Perhaps the reason that this charge occurs less frequently is because the charge has a more narrow scale. The accusation that God lacks the power to judge the wicked and help the weak operates on a universal scale. But the charge that God is not faithful to the psalmist operates on an individual, or a personal scale. Here the issue is not that God would like to help the psalmist and is unable, but that God can help the psalmist and for some reason will not.

32. The hiphil of, is also used of the enemy's speech in Ps. 59.7, see above. 33. The self quotations examined in this section have parallels outside of the Psalter. The data outside of the Psalter do not contribute new insights into the function of such quotations, but they

do confirm the analysis presented above. See Jer. 5.12; 12.4; Isa. 14.12-14; 29.15.

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

39

Psalm 3. Psalm 3 begins with a threefold they-complaint that ends in an enemy quotation: O Lord, how many are my foes, Many are rising against me, Many are saying of me, 'There is no salvation for him in God',

(vv. 1-3)

The assertion of the enemies is not that God cannot save, but that God will not save the psalmist. In a word, this accusation is a charge against God's fidelity. Many of the common features of the enemy quotation are exemplified in this psalm. First, the enemy quotation provides the central theological problem that the psalm addresses.35 Second, the enemy quotation serves as the culmination of the theycomplaint. Third, the enemy quotation occurs at the turning point of the psalm, immediately before the confession of trust. Fourth, the psalmist borrows the vocabulary of the enemy's assertion and reverses it in the petition and in the confession of trust. Whereas the enemy declared 'there is no salvation for him', the psalmist prays 'save me '.36 The enemy's assertion is also reversed in the psalmist's confession of trust: 'To the LORD belongs salvation

Psalm 71. Psalm 71 is the prayer of an aged person in severe distress. For the psalmist, the issue is whether God has abandoned him in his old age. The enemy quotation occurs at the end of the they-complaint: For my enemies speak of me, those who watch over my life consult together, saying, 'God has abandoned him, pursue and capture him, for there is no deliverer', (v. 10)

The enemies name the theological problem of the psalm: Has God abandoned the psalmist in the time of his old age? The issue is not God's power but God's fidelity. This analysis is borne out by the fact that the psalmist never says the enemies have pitted themselves against God, a charge so frequent in the earlier psalms. Rather, the psalmist repeatedly argues that the enemies have pitted themselves against him (see vv. 4,7,10-11,13 and 24). Once again, the enemy quotation comes at the end 34. The Syriac has 'for you in your God'. LXX has 'for him in his God'. 'For him' in MT and LXX is to be preferred; the idea is that the 'many' are not talking to the psalmist, but about him as if he were not a person, as if he were not present. Both the 2fs suffix of the Syriac and the 3ms suffix of the LXX on 'God' are to be understood as expansionistic and not original. 35. Mays has put the issue well: 'The central theological issue of the prayer is what many are saying about the petitioner: "There is no salvation for him in God" (v. 2)' (Psalms, p. 52). 36. For the enemies God is simply God but for the psalmist God is 'the LORD.. .my God i '. This is a consistent distinction in the enemy quotations. When the enemies speak of God they consistently use and almost never use '. In those quotations that I have designated as enemy quotations, there are only two taunts in which the enemies use the name : 'Commit to the LORD, that he might deliver him; may he rescue him who trusts in him' 22.7-8), and 'The LORD does not see, and the God of Jacob does not discern' (94.7).

40

Many are Saying

of the they-complaint at a transitional point in the psalm as the psalmist moves to petition. The psalmist borrows the enemies' vocabulary twice in his petitions: 'Do not discard me in the time of old age, do not abandon me as soon as my strength fails' (v. 9). And, 'O God, do not abandon me' (v. 18). iii. Quotations Asserting that the LORD has been Defeated A third charge that the psalmist quotes the enemies as making is that the LORD has been defeated. This type of enemy quotation occurs either in communal prayers for help (communal laments; Psalms 74, 79, and 83), or in psalms that have unmistakable liturgical characteristics (Psalms 2,42/43,115, and 137). The charge characteristically occurs in contexts where a conflict between the LORD and foreign gods is assumed, and it is characteristically made in taunts such as 'Where is your God?' or quotations in which the enemies express their intent to destroy the LORD'S sanctuary. Excursus: 'Where is your/their God?' 'Where is your/their God?' is a formulaic taunt in the Old Testament. The enemies are quoted as speaking these words in three different psalms ('Where is your God?' (Ps.42.3,10); 'Where is their God?' (Pss. 79.10; 115.2)). Similar enemy taunts are also found in Isa. 10.9-10; 36.18b-20; Mic. 7.10; Joel 2.17; and 1 Kgs. 18.27. Before discussing the formal role that this formula plays in Psalms 42/3, 79, and 115, a brief investigation of the use of this taunt in these other Old Testament passages can help define the formula's meaning. Isaiah 10.9-10. Isa. 10.5-19 is an oracle of judgement from Isaiah of Jerusalem directed against Assyria. As part of the oracle, Isaiah quotes the king of Assyria speaking boastfully against God: Are not my commanders all kings? Is not Calno like Carchemish? Is not Hamath like Arpad? Is not Samaria like Damascus? As my hand has reached out for the kingdoms of the idols, and their images were greater than those of Jerusalem and Samaria, shall I not do to Jerusalem and her graven images exactly what I have done to Samaria and her idols?

Note the similarity between the taunt, 'Where is their God?' and the Assyrian king's boast that the gods of Hamath, Arpad, Samaria, and Damascus were not able to save their lands from his power. The taunt assumes the powerlessness of the gods of those countries to save the countries from Assyrian conquest. It is important to note that the taunt occurs in the context of a conflict between two nations, in which the gods of the two nations were assumed to be involved. The defeat of the nation is understood as the defeat of the nation's gods, thus demonstrating the powerlessness of the nation's god(s). Isaiah 36.18b-20. In Isa. 36.18b-20 (see also 2 Kgs. 18.33-35 and 2 Chron. 32.1315), the commander of the Assyrian army taunts the defenders on the walls of Jerusalem: Has any of the gods of the nations saved his land from the hand of the king of Assyria? Where are the gods of Hamath and Arpad? Where are the gods of

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

41

Sepharvaim? Indeed, did they deliver Samaria from my hand? Who from among all the gods of these lands saved their land from my hand? Indeed, can the LORD save Jerusalem from my hand?

Note the similarity of the Assyrian taunt 'Where are the gods of...' to the taunt in the Psalter: 'Where is their God?' In Isaiah 36, the taunt is a rhetorical question asked following the defeat of the nation in question. The taunt asserts the powerlessness of the gods of those nations in the face of Assyrian power. Note also that the context of a conflict between nations is implicitly understood as a conflict between the gods of the opposing nations. Micah 7.10. Since 1924,Mic. 7.8-20 has normally been understood as an exilic or post-exilic prophetic liturgy.37 Within this liturgy, the enemy quotation occurs in the context of the people confessing their trust: Do not rejoice over me, O my enemy, although I fall, I shall rise, although I sit in darkness, the LORD is my light. I now bear the indignation of the LORD, because I have sinned against him, Until he adjudicates my dispute, and establishes my judgment. [The LORD] will bring me into the light, I shall see his righteousness. And my enemy will see, and shame will cover her who said to me, 'Where is the LORD your God?'

TO

The T in this passage is a collective, representing the nation of Israel. While Israel was defeated and in exile, the enemy, who is portrayed as a woman (perhaps 'daughter Babylon', see Ps. 137.8; Isa. 47.1; Jer. 50.42; 51.33; and Zech. 2.7), taunted Israel. The taunt assumes that Israel's defeat and exile are proof of the defeat of Israel's God. Joel 2.17. The Book of Joel describes a plague of locusts that is compared to an invading 'nation' (1.6) and an 'army' (1.4, 11; 2.20). In the face of the invasion, the prophet implores the people to turn to God in repentance. As part of a liturgy of repentance, the prophet says: The priests and ministers of the LORD shall weep, and they shall say, 'Spare your people, O LORD, Do not give your inheritance over to mockery, to become a proverb among the nations,

37. H. Gunkel, 'Der Micha-Schluss', ZS 2 (1924), pp. 145-78. See also D. Millers, 'Micah, Book of, in D.N. Freedman (ed.), ABD (6 vols.; New York: Doubleday, 1992), IV, p. 808; J. Limburg, Hosea-Micah (IBC; Atlanta: John Knox, 1988), pp. 193-98. 38. Among the reasons for a late exilic or post-exilic date for this passage are the understanding of Israel's shame as the result of its own sin (Mic. 7.9, compare Isa. 43.22-28), the motif of the incomparability of God (Mic. 7.18, compare Isa. 40.18,25), the motif of the rib (Mic. 7.9, compare Isa. 41.21-24), and the exchange of Israel's shame for Babylon's shame (Mic. 7.10, compare Isa. 45).

42

Many are Saying Why should it be said among the peoples, "Where is their God?"' (v. 17)

Within the context of the Book of Joel, the foreign taunt, 'Where is their God?' is part of Joel's rhetorical description of the locust invasion as an invading nation. As in the other passages, here the nations look upon Israel's devastation at the hands of this 'invading nation' as proof that Israel's God lacked the power to save it. 1 Kings 18.27. Another passage that sheds light on the semantic range of the taunt, 'Where is your God?' comes from 1 Kings 18. Here, however, a Yahwistic prophet taunts foreign prophets! 1 Kings 18 describes the conflict between Elijah and the prophets of Baal. As with the earlier passages, the earthly conflict between the human agents (the prophet Elijah versus the prophets of Baal) is understood as mirroring a larger conflict between gods (The LORD versus Baal). The fact that the prophets of Baal are killed is accepted as proof that Israel's God defeated Baal. While the prophets of Baal are receiving no answer from their god, Elijah mocks them: He said, 'Cry with a great voice! Surely he is the true god; either he is meditating, or he has wandered away,39 or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened.'

Elijah's taunt that perhaps Baal has gone off somewhere is equivalent to the taunt, 'Where is your God?' The context again underscores that the taunt assumes a duallevel conflict between nations and between their gods, and the taunting party assumes victory.40 Conclusions regarding 'Where is Your/Their God? The following conclusions may be drawn: First, the question is a victor's taunt that occurs during or after a conflict between nations. Second, the conflict between nations is understood also as a conflict between national gods, and the taunt is directed as much toward the defeated nation's god as it is toward the defeated nation itself. Third, the victors speak the taunt because they interpret the defeat of the foreign nation as the defeat of the foreign god. Psalm 79. In Ps. 79.10, the nations taunt Israel: 'Where is their God?' Psalm 79 is a communal lament, which scholars have often argued was composed following the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BCE.41 Walter C. Bouzard Jr, however, has argued that 39. The meaning of the phrase is disputed; see HALOT111.1319, 1321. The translation 'either he is meditating, or he has wandered away' reflects the NRSV. 40. The conflict in Exodus between Israel's God and Pharaoh has often been seen as a conflict to determine who is truly God, or at least to determine who is lord of Israel, since in Egyptian royal ideology Pharaoh was understood as a demi-god. In this context, Pharaoh's statement Exod. 5.2 might also be understood as a taunt similar to the 'Where is your God?' taunts: 'Who is the LORD, that I should heed him and let Israel go? I do not know the LORD, and I will not let Israel go.' 41. For example, Kraus concludes, 'it surely seems obvious to connect Psalm 79 with the catastrophe of the year 587 B.C.E.' Psalms 60-150, p. 134.

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

43

one can reasonably infer that actual historical incursion or invasions were not prerequisite to [Psalm 83] or the other communal lamentations' composition. That is, while these psalms provide what appears to be detailed and graphic historical reminiscences of actual foreign invasions and of destruction subsequent to those attacks, there is no inherent reason to suppose that a specific historical event stood behind the descriptions. Indeed, given a nearly identical phenomena [sic] in the Mesopotamian laments, one is led toward the conclusion that the references to foreign invaders had a cultic rather than an historical significance.

Although it seems likely to me that Psalm 79 and other communal laments were composed in response to specific invasions and incursions, Bouzard's emphasis on the possibility that these psalms were used cultically in a setting divorced from any historical invasion is well-taken. Bouzard interprets the enemies in these psalms as representing cosmic powers in conflict with Israel's God: The success of the enemies signals the triumph of chaos with which the alien invaders are aligned. Both the destructive activities of the foes and their taunts are in several instances explicitly coordinated with the manifestations of the primordial chaotic forces such as the raging sea monster, fire, and earthquake. The latter point provides an indication of why the foes' taunts play such a prominent role in these psalms. As a cosmogonic divine warrior, God engages in mortal combat with the chaos dragon as a means of establishing divine control of the world... One should therefore understand references to the foreign enemies and their destructive activities as a reemergence of the threat posed in the mythological past by the chaos dragon.

Even if the communal laments were composed in response to historical invasions of Israel, Bouzard's interpretation of the enemies as representing cosmic forces in conflict with the LORD is instructive for understanding the role of the enemy quotation: 'Where is their God?' Bouzard's conclusion places the nations' taunt within the same context of the conflict between Israel's God and foreign cosmic powers that we have seen in other passages that contain this formulaic taunt. Within the overall argument of the psalm, the taunt is the major reason that the psalmist gives for why God should answer the prayer. In verse 4, the psalmist complains: 'We are taunted by our enemies.'44 The actual taunt is quoted in verse 10, as a subordinate element of the petition (the petition runs from vv. 612) and functions as part of the motivating clause that supports the petition. In verse 12 the psalmist adds: 'Return to our neighbors sevenfold to their bosoms, their taunts with which they taunted vow '45 Patrick Miller has

42. W.C. Bouzard Jr, We Have Heardwith Our Ears, O God(SBLDS, 159; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), p. 131, see also pp. 138-40, 147-200. 43. Bouzard, We Have Heard, p. 170. Emphasis added. 44. The lamed in should not be translated as 'to', because it is surely not a directive lamed. Better to understand this as a lamed of agent, with the lamed marking the agent who taunts the psalmist. See R.J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2ndedn., 1976), pp. 48-51. 45. The plea to return their taunts sevenfold indicates completeness. Compare this with the sevenfold purity of God's speech in Psalm 12 (see above).

44

Many are Saying

argued persuasively that 'the term herpd, "reproach," "taunt," "insult" and its related verbal forms regularly refer to a challenge of the power of the one being taunted or of his or her god'.46 The second masculine singular pronomial suffix on the verb taunt shows that the psalmist understands the taunt in verse 10 as a taunt against the LORD, as an assertion that the LORD has been defeated. The enemies, who represent cosmic powers in conflict with the LORD, believe that the LORD has been defeated along with Israel. By quoting this enemy taunt, the psalmist names a pressing theological problem: Has the LORD been defeated, as some people believed? The psalmist, who believes otherwise, quotes the taunt in order to move God to establish salvation for Israel.47 One may conclude that, as in previous psalms, the enemy quotation is the key element in the argument of the psalm. Further, the enemy quotation and the plea to repay the enemies sevenfold are the last two references in the psalm to the enemies. Thus, as in some previous psalms, the enemy taunts occur as the culmination of the they-complaint. Psalm 115. Psalm 115 is a liturgical prayer in which the enemies' taunt is quoted in the opening thought of the psalm: Not to us, O LORD, not to us, but to your name give glory. Why do the nations say, 'Where is their God?' (vv. 1-2)

The psalm takes the nations' taunt literally and responds with a confession of trust in the LORD: 'Our God is in the heavens, he does whatever he pleases' (v. 3). Just as the nations' taunt asserts the powerlessness of Israel's God, Israel's answer asserts not only God's location but God's power to act effectively: 'he does whatever he pleases'. Then there follows a lengthy polemic against foreign gods (w. 4-8). This is not a surprising development because (as was argued above) the nations' taunt assumes a conflict between Israel's God and foreign gods; the polemic against the foreign gods is Israel's confession that her God is the true God. The enemy quotation functions in familiar ways in Psalm 115. First, in the same way that Psalms 14 and 53 are structured as an answer to the fool's assertion that 'There is no God', Psalm 115 is structured as a response to the nations' taunt: 'Where is their God?' Second, the enemy quotation attacks the LORD, and the psalmist reverses this both by literally answering the nations' question and in her polemic against the false gods. Psalm 42/43. Psalm 42/43 is a single poem with three stanzas (42.1 -4,6b-10; 43.1 4) and a refrain that is repeated three times (42.5-6a, 11; 43.5). Mays has argued that: The best clue to the social and theological setting is the taunting question that 46. Miller, They Cried to the Lord, 79. See also Miller, 'Psalms and Inscriptions', in J.A. Emerton (ed.), Congress Volume: Vienna 1980 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1981), 326-8, and Interpreting the Psalms, pp. 54-56. 47. It should be noted that the psalmist believes that the defeat had been caused by Israel's sins. The psalmist asks God, 'Will you be angry forever?' (v. 5), and prays, 'forgive our sins' (v. 10).

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

45

the singer puts in the mouth of the adversaries: "Where is your God?" (42.3,10)' ,48 As in the above psalms, the taunt implies a conflict between Israel's God and other powers. The poet locates himself, at least rhetorically, far from Jerusalem in 'the land of Jordan and of Hermon, from Mount Mizar' (42.6). It is unclear precisely what location is envisioned (Mount Hermon and the land of Jordan suggest a location in the north of Palestine), but the implication is that the psalmist is far from the temple (42.4) and far from the presence of Israel's God (43.3). The implication of this description is that the poet is stranded in the land of foreign gods. The psalmist also complains that he is surrounded by 'an ungodly nation' (43.1; NRSV translates 'people'), which implies that the psalmist is surrounded by non-Yahwists. The psalmist also complains of the 'enemies' and 'adversaries'. As Bouzard concluded: 'One should... under stand references to the foreign enemies and their destructive activities as a reemergence of the threat posed in the mythological past by the chaos dragon.'49 Based on the psalmist's complaints about his enemies and his separation from the temple, it may be reasonable to assume that his exile is enforced against his will. Within this context, the twice-repeated taunt 'Where is your God?' might best be heard as an assertion that Israel's God is powerless in this distant land. In terms of the structure of the psalm, the quotations direct the psalmist toward the dwelling of God. In response to the first time that the taunt of the enemies is quoted in the poem, the psalmist remembers previous pilgrimages made to the temple in Jerusalem (42.4). In response to the second time that the taunt is quoted, the psalmist petitions God to 'vindicate me' from the 'ungodly nation' and vows to go 'to your holy hill, to your dwelling place.. .to the altar of God' (43.3-4). Thus, each time the enemies ask where the psalmist's God is, the psalmist makes a mental pilgrimage to Zion. This mental journey spurs the psalmist to repeat the refrain of this psalm and exhort himself not to give up the hope that he will again find his way to the presence of God: Why are you cast down, O my soul? Why are you disquieted within me?

48. Mays, Psalms, 174. Mays continues: 'In all its occurrences in the Old Testament, the question appears in liturgical material (Pss. 79.10; 115.2; Joel 2.17; Mic. 7.10), where it is a feature of the description of trouble. The question is a formulaic motif used to characterize the situation in which those who trust in the LORD are put to shame in the presence of others because of some trouble that calls their faith into question.' It is true that the 'best clue to the social and theological setting is the taunting question that the singer puts in the mouth of the adversaries: "Where is your God?" ' As the above passages from Isaiah 10, Isaiah 36, and 1 Kings 18 show, however, not all instances of the question do occur in liturgical material. And even in its liturgical occurrences, the taunt is not necessarily a feature of the description of trouble, since in Joel 2.17 it is part of the petition and in Mic. 7.10 it is part of the confession of trust. As a formulaic motif, the taunt suggests a social and theological setting of conflict between Israel's God and the god(s) of a foreign nation. 49. Mays, Psalms, p. 170. The chaos motif may be present in the psalmist's description of his surroundings: 'Deep calls to deep at the sound of your cataracts, all your waves and your billows have passed over me' (42.7).

46

Many are Saying Hope in God! For I will again praise him my help and my God. (42.4, 11; 43.5)50

Psalm 74. In Psalm 74, the enemy quotation occurs as the culmination of an extended they-complaint. The they-complaint occurs in w. 4-8, with the enemy quotation occurring in the last verse: 'Let us destroy [the LORD'S sanctuaries] altogether, burn all the meeting places of God in the land! '51 This enemy quotation names the central theological problem that the psalm addresses. This issue is whether the LORD has been defeated by foreign gods; to destroy a god's dwelling (his or her temple) was to defeat that god. The enemies' boast that they will destroy all of the sanctuaries and meeting places of the LORD is an assertion of victory over the LORD. As in Psalm 79, the nations here represent cosmic forces in conflict with the LORD. This is substantiated by the fact that when the psalmist turns to the confession of trust, she returns to the motif of the cosmic conflict: 'You divided the sea by your might, you broke the heads of the dragons in the waters. You crushed the heads of Leviathan' (vv. 13-14a). Although the psalmist does not borrow the explicit vocabulary of the enemies' taunt to use in her petition, she does make those taunts of the enemies the central concern: 'Remember this: The enemy taunted , O LORD, a foolish people rejected your name!' (v. 18). And again, 'Remember how the fool taunts you all day long!' (v. 22b). Psalm 83. Psalm 83 is also a communal lament, which pleads with God to destroy the nations that have attacked. The nations are quoted twice. In verse 4 they say, 'Come, let us destroy them from being a nation, so that the name of Israel will not be remembered!' In verse 11 they say, 'Let us possess for ourselves the dwelling places of God.'52 If taken at face value, the first quotation need not be understood 50. Imperatives addressed to the self are rare in the psalms. Compare this self-exhortation with the one in Ps. 116.7: 'Return, O my soul, to your rest', which may also reflect the psalmist's decision to pay his vows in the temple. 51. The text of the quotation inset is very problematic. The first problem has to do with how one understands . MT literally reads 'their progeny altogether', but this makes little sense. Dahood preserves this, but has to change the following verb 'burn' to a passive to render 'Let their progeny be burned' (Psalms 51-100, p. 202). LXX has: 'Their kindred altogether, come and let us burn all of the feasts of God in the land.' NRSV, Tate and others read this as a simple Icp imperfect of ', with 3mp suffix: 'to oppress/destroy them' (Psalms 51-100, pp. 240-43). Kraus follows Gunkel and emends to 'We will destroy all their place'; Kraus understands as referring to God's residence (cf. Exod. 15.13; 2 Sam. 15.25; Jer. 25.30; Kraus, Psalms 60-150, pp. 94-96). It is tempting to agree with Kraus and Gunkel, because then the enemy quotation here would present a striking parallel with the quotations in Psalm 83, in which the enemies say 'let us destroy them ', and 'let us possess the dwellings , related to the root ] of God for ourselves'. This would be ideal for the present analysis. However, because this solution is not sure, a more conservative solution must be followed: the opinion of the majority of scholars that this is a verb meaning 'destroy'. However, the suffix must be taken as referring to the divine sanctuaries of Judah, both because of the preceding verses and because of the rest of the verse. Kraus, Dahood, and LXX are correct that the direct discourse extends to the end of the verse, but the verb should be pointed as a qal imperative. 52. The word is related to the root , which literally means 'pasture', but is used for the

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

47

as an assertion of God's impotence. However, in the quotation frame, the psalmist defines the quotation as precisely this; the speakers are 'your enemies' who 'hate you', who have attacked 'those you protect', and who conspire 'against you'. By setting the enemies against God in this way, the psalmist makes the enemies' statement an attack on God. Further, since it was God who called Israel into being as a nation and made them a people, in the quotation the enemies set themselves in God's place, unmaking what God has made. In the second quotation, the enemies express their intention to take possession of God's dwelling place. As in Psalm 74, this quotation is an assertion of victory over the LORD; the enemy boast that they will destroy the dwelling place of the LORD is a boast that assumes victory over the LORD. Against these enemies, in another allusion to the cosmic dimension of the conflict between the LORD and the enemies, the psalmist implores God to take control of creation in order to destroy the enemies. The psalmist prays for God to marshal fire, tempest, and hurricane to destroy the enemies. Psalm 137. Psalm 137 is set, at least rhetorically, in the Babylonian exile. The enemies are quoted twice. In verse 3, the captors mockingly ask for a song: 'Sing for us one of the songs of Zion.' In verse 7, the psalmist quotes the words that the Edomites spoke as they razed Jerusalem: 'Lay it bare! Lay it bare! Even unto its foundations!' In the first quotation, the captors ask for a 'song of Zion'. This most likely refers to those psalms that glorify Zion, such as Psalms 46, 48, 76, 84, 87, 122, and 132. In order to understand this taunt, it is helpful to understand the prominent features of the theology of the songs of Zion. In Zion theology: The LORD was celebrated as 'the great king' (Ps. 48.2); Zion was celebrated as the dwelling place of the LORD; and because of the LORD'S choice of Zion for a dwelling place, the Zion psalms celebrated the assurance that Jerusalem would be protected.53 Against this background, the enemy taunt to 'sing for us one of the songs of Zion' can be heard as ridiculing the power of Zion's God. To ask an exile to sing a song celebrating the LORD'S power and the LORD'S protection of the destroyed city is to mock the LORD'S power. As Mays has written:' [The taunt] was intended as an insult to the exiles' God, similar to the derogatory question, "Where is your God?" '54 The second quotation contains a quotation similar to those in Psalms 74 and 83, in which the nations express their intention to destroy God's dwelling place. The nations see the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple as evidence that the LORD has been defeated. As in previous psalms, these taunts name the central theological problem of the psalm: Has the LORD been defeated? The central role that these dwelling of the LORD in Exod. 15.13; 2 Sam. 15.25; Jer. 25.50; and perhaps in Ps. 74.8 (see above discussion). 53. See J.J.M. Roberts, 'Yahweh's Foundation in Zion', JBL 106 (1987), pp. 27-45; 'The Davidic Origin of the Zion Tradition', JBL 92 (1973), pp. 329-44; 'Zion in the Theology of the Davidic-Solomonic Empire', in T. Ishida (ed.), Studies in the Period of David and Solomon (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1982), pp. 93-108. 54. Mays, Psalms, p. 422.

48

Many are Saying

taunts play in the argument of the psalm is reflected by the fact that the only petition that the psalmist prays is for God to 'remember' what the enemy said. Psalm 2. Psalm 2 is a royal psalm that was probably used at the coronation of a new king in Jerusalem. The enemy quotation occurs at the beginning of the psalm and at the end of the they-complaint: Why do the nations agitate, and the peoples plot in vain? Earthly kings set themselves, and rulers conspire together, Against the LORD and against his anointed: 'Let us burst their bonds, and cast their chains off us!' (vv.1-3)

If the speech of the nations is taken at face value, it might not seem to be speech against God. But the quotation frame defines the plots of the nations as plots 'against the LORD'. Although it would be too strong to say that this quotation asserts that Israel's God has already been defeated, the speech of the nations does amount to a rebellion against God by the nations (and their gods). Similar to the structure of Psalm 115, the enemy quotation here occurs toward the beginning of the psalm, and the rest of the psalm is in effect an answer to the issue posed in the enemy quotation. The argument of this psalm turns immediately following the enemy quotation, when the psalmist refutes the rebellion of the nations: 'The One who dwells in the heavens laughs!' This response is reminiscent of the response in Psalm 59, where the enemies' question, 'Who hears?' is 'answered' by the assertion that God laughs. Psalm 2 also answers the enemy quotation with a God quotation (w. 6, 7b-9), as does Psalm 12 (more will be said about the speeches of God in the chapter on God quotations). Finally, the vocabulary of the enemies is reversed by the psalmist. The enemies plot to 'cast their chains off us', but the psalmist warns them: 'Serve the LORD' (v. 11).55 iv. Conclusions about the Formal Role of Enemy Quotations that Attack God Several conclusions may be drawn about the quotations in which the enemies attack God. First, the enemy quotations attack God in three ways. They assert the powerlessness of God to intervene as an effective presence in the world (to judge wickedness, to save the innocent, and so on); they attack the fidelity of God who allows God's servants to suffer; and the quotations assert that the LORD has been defeated. The accusations that God lacks power to protect the weak and that God is unfaithful are characteristic accusations of the individual prayer for help and of psalms related to the individual prayer for help (such as the psalm of trust, or instructional psalms that take up the motifs of the individual prayer for help). The

55. The psalmist may also be reversing the vocabulary of the enemy with a pun. The nations say,' Let us burst their bonds'. The verb burst is from the root . The psalmist warns the nations: . The meaning of this latter phrase is uncertain, but it is clearly a continuation of the warning to the nations, a reversal of their plot to escape servitude.

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

49

accusation that God has been defeated is characteristic of the communal prayer for help and psalms related to the communal prayer for help (such as psalms that have both liturgical and lament elements). Second, the enemy quotations often provide the central arguments that drive the psalms in which they occur, by naming a pressing theological problem and then addressing this problem through petition, confession of trust, and instruction. Examples of this are Psalms 2, 3, 9/10, 11, 12, 14 and 53, 64, 74, 79, 83, 94, and 115. Third, a variety of strategies are used to integrate the enemy quotations into the arguments of the psalms in which they occur. A common strategy is for the vocabulary of the enemy quotation to be reversed by the psalmist in the petition and the confession of trust. Prominent examples of this are Psalms 2, 3, 9/10, 11, 22, 59, and 94. Another common strategy is for the enemy quotation to occur in the opening phrase or thought of the psalm in order to set up a theological problem that the psalmist answers in the remainder of the psalm. Examples of this are Psalms 2, 3, 11, 14 and 53, and 115. Another rhetorical strategy is juxtaposing the enemy quotation with a God quotation, as in the chiastic structure of Psalm 12 or in Psalm 2. Fourth, the enemy quotations often come as the culmination of the they-complaint or comprise the entire they-complaint. Examples of this include Psalms 2, 9/10, 11, 12, 59, 64, 79, and 94. In these examples, the they-complaints gain momentum and build toward the concluding enemy quotations. The consistent occurrence of the enemy quotations as the culmination of the they-complaints suggests that the enemy quotations were considered among the strongest complaints that the psalmists could raise against the enemies. 2. 'They Open Their Mouths Wide Against Me': Quotations in which the Enemies Attack the Psalmist The second category of enemy quotations to be considered are those quotations in which the enemies express antagonism toward the psalmist. This type of enemy quotation occurs less frequently than the quotations in which the enemies assert God's powerlessness, consisting of only seven different quotations in five different psalms, all of them prayers for help.56 The fact that this type of quotation occurs so much less often than the quotations in which the enemies assert God's impotence can be accounted for by the fact that it is less theologically charged. And, perhaps for the same reason, this type of quotation plays a more subtle role in the arguments of the psalms in which it occurs.

56. Pss. 13.5; 35.21, 25; 40.15; 41.5, 8; 70.3. The classification of Psalm 41 is a problem. It appears that later beginning and ending verses (vv. 1-3, 11-13) have been added to a prayer for help, in effect transforming it into a song of thanksgiving. The direct discourse occurs within the older psalm.

50

Many are Saying

i. The Formal Role of Quotations in which the Enemies Attack the Psalmist Psalm 13. In Psalm 13, the enemy quotation is a subordinate element of the plea. The psalmist prays, 'Give light to my eyes, lest I sleep unto death, lest my enemies say, "I have prevailed over him"; my foes rejoice that I have stumbled'. If the quotation inset is considered by itself—'I have prevailed over him'—what the enemies say may have nothing to do with God, it may be considered as simply an expression of glee at the psalmist's demise. It is upon the basis of this glee that the psalmist forges the turning point of his argument: The psalmist contrasts the way the enemies rejoice and take glee at his downfall with the way he rejoices in God. The psalmist asks God to intervene lest the enemies 'rejoice that I have stumbled'. The psalmist confesses of himself: 'My soul shall rejoice | in your salvation.' The psalmist contrasts his piety with the enemies' lack of pity. He argues, in effect, that if the enemies prevail over him, then they also prevail over his God, in whom he trusts for help. Note that the words that the enemies speak do not name a theological problem per se, such as God's power or impotence, as did the quotations considered in Section 1. Nor does the psalmist reverse the enemies' vocabulary in the confession of trust. Rather, the argument of the psalm rests on the psalmist demonstrating that he is on God's side, while his enemies are not. Or, to put it another way, the psalmist argues in order to convince God to be on his side, over against the assumption of the enemies. Psalms 35, 40, and 70. Psalms 35,40, and 70 contain enemy quotations so similar that they are treated here together.57 In these psalms, the speech of the psalmists' enemies is contrasted with the speech of the righteous in the congregation. Because Psalm 40.13-17 is almost identical to Psalm 70, for the purposes of this analysis they are considered as being one psalm.58 Where the Hebrew text is parallel, the translation is italicized: Psalm 35

Psalms 40.13-17 and 70

Let them be put to shame and be confused ...who rejoice at my misfortune, (v. 26)

Let them be put to shame and be confused ...who delight in my misfortune. (40.15)

They open their mouths against me,

Let them be appalled because of their shame, who say, 'Aha, aha!' (40.16)

who say, 'Aha, aha! Our eyes have seen!' (v. 21)

57. The greatest difference between these psalms is their original setting. Psalm 35 appears to be the prayer of an individual who has been unjustly accused and is seeking justice from God and from the community. The original setting of Psalms 40 and 70 is less clear; like Psalm 35, however, the psalmist is clearly being beset by enemies of some sort and is seeking deliverance from God and from the community. Because of these different settings, the petitions of the psalms are different. In Psalm 35, the psalmist prays for God's help, using phrases such as 'say to my soul' and 'do not be silent'. In Psalms 40 and 70, the psalmist prays for deliverance, using phrases such as 'deliver me' and 'help me'. 58. Psalm 70 is the elohistic version of Ps. 40.13-17. The case is very similar to that of Psalms 14 and 53.

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

51

Let them not say in their hearts, 'Aha, our souls' [delight]!' Let them not say, 'We have swallowed him!' (v. 25) Let them shout and let them rejoice who delight in my vindication, Let them say continually, 'Great is the LORDl who delights in the welfare of his servant!' (v. 27)

Let them exalt and let them rejoice all who seek you Let them say continually, 'Great is the LORD\' all who love your salvation. (40.16)

In these psalms, the psalmist contrasts those who rejoice at her misfortune with those who rejoice at her vindication. The former say, 'Aha, aha!' while the latter say, 'Great is the LORD!' In these psalms, what the enemy says is less important than the spirit in which the enemies say it. That is, there is little or no noetic content to the exclamations, 'Aha, aha!' or 'Aha, aha! Our eyes have seen', or 'Aha, our souls' [delight]!' The word 'aha' is simply an exclamation of joy at another's downfall. The phrases, 'Our eyes have seen', and 'our souls' [delight]!' also express little more than the glee that the enemies take in the psalmist's demise. Even the exclamation, 'We have swallowed him!' is less important for its content (the assertion that the enemies destroyed the psalmist) than for the way it portrays the enemies as ravenous adversaries, who surround the psalmist with wide-open mouths. For certain, there is no theological content to what the enemies say. In contrast, there is theological content to what those who rejoice in the psalmist's vindication say: 'Great is the LORD!' By deftly placing these words of divine praise in the mouths of those who 'delight in my vindication' and 'love your salvation', the psalmist aligns herself with the community and with God. By extension, this means that the psalmist aligns both the worshipping community and God with herself and against her enemies. It should be noted that in Psalm 35, the vocabulary of the enemies is turned around in the plea. The enemies say, 'Aha, aha, our eyes have seen!' In the very next phrase, the psalmist reverses this vocabulary in a confession of trust: 'You see, O LORD!' Psalm 41. In Psalm 41, the enemies are quoted twice, both times as part of the they-complaint. In verse 5: 'When will he die and his name perish?' In verse 8: 'A deadly thing has latched onto him, once he sleeps he shall not again rise.' Neither of these enemy quotations broach upon the central theological issue of the psalm, which is the forgiveness of sins for which the psalmist prays (see vv. 4, 12). If the words of the enemies are considered by themselves, they have nothing to do with God but are strictly about the psalmist. More to the point, the words that the enemies speak need not be understood as mocking, or even as malicious. These words might simply be the words that any person who keeps vigil near a deathbed might say as death draws nigh: 'When will he die?', 'Death is near, once he sleeps he won't wake again.' The issue is not what the enemies say about God; the issue is rather who is saying things about the psalmist and what is being said about the

52

Many are Saying

psalmist. As in the previous psalms in which the enemies are quoted as attacking the psalmist, the psalmist does not cast the primary issue in theological terms but in sociological terms. That is, the psalmist quotes the enemies' words in order to establish for God that she has no one on her side but God. The psalmist's strategy is subtle. The psalmist calls upon God to act on her behalf because she is on God's side, rather than allow the enemies—who are not on God's side or her side—to outlive her. ii. Conclusions about the Formal Role of Quotations that Attack the Psalmist Because enemy quotations in which the enemies attack the psalmist are both less frequent and more subtle than the quotations in which the enemies attack God, less uniform conclusions can be drawn about their formal role. These quotations do not seem to occur as the culmination of the they-complaint nor do they function as significantly at the turning point of the psalm. Nor does the content of these quotations play a central role in the psalms in which they occur. In fact, the content of these quotations can be said to be extraneous to the argument of the psalms in which they occur. In Psalm 13, it is not what the enemies say but how they say it that matters. In Psalms 35, 40, and 70, the enemy quotations are less important for the content they have, than for the way they portray the enemies as brooding threats. In Psalms 40 and 70, the enemies merely say, 'Aha!', suggesting that it is not what the enemies say but the spirit in which they say it that is central to the psalmist's argument. The 'aha!' quotation is repeated in Psalm 35, along with quotations in which the enemies rejoice because they delight in the psalmist's misfortune. In Psalm 41, the enemies say something no different than anyone might say at a death vigil. All of this suggests that the function of enemy quotations in which the enemies attack the psalmist has less to do with what the enemies say and more to do with who speaks and how they speak. The psalmist bases her argument on the hope that God cares about what happens in society. The psalmist hopes that God will vindicate those who are on God's side and that God will vanquish all others. Perhaps these quotations should be understood as similar to the quotations in which the enemies attack God's fidelity. The issue appears to be whether God will be faithful to those who have been faithful to God. The psalmist expects this kind of covenant loyalty from God and bases her hope for the future upon it. 3. The Rhetorical Function of Enemy Quotations i. Enemy Quotations as Personal Lament One aspect of the function of quotations on which all of the modern linguists who were surveyed in the previous chapter agree, is that when a reporter quotes another speaker in direct discourse, she speaks from the perspective of that other speaker. Wierzbicka called this 'role play', highlighting the 'theatrical' dimension of direct discourse: 'The person who reports another's words by quoting them, temporarily assumes the role of that other person.'59 Coulmas pointed to the perspectival shift 59. Wierzbicka, 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', p. 272.

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

53

that occurs when one quotes: 'In direct speech the reporter lends his voice to the original speaker and says (or writes) what he said, thus adopting his point of view, as it were.'60 Sternberg made a similar point as part of his description of the 'perspectival montage' that occurs in quotation.61 According to Clark and Gerrig, one useful function that arises from this 'theatrical' quality of quotations is that when quoting, a reporter can dissociate herself from the content of the quotation inset: When speakers describe, they take responsibility for their wording except in opaque contexts. But when they quote, they take responsibility only for presenting the quoted matter—and then only for the aspects they choose to depict. The responsibility for the depicted aspects themselves belongs to the source speaker.

Because a reporter does not have to take responsibility for the content of the quotation inset, the reporter can use quotations to express sentiments that might otherwise be deemed unacceptable: 'Many attitudes that are impolite or inappropriate for speakers themselves to express are quite acceptable in the mouths of others.'63 And again, 'People who wouldn't ordinarily utter taboo words can do so as long as they attribute them to others'.64 Clark and Gerrig's statement can be altered slightly and combined with the work of Wierzbicka, Coulmas, and Sternberg, then applied to the Psalter to produce the following application: 'Many attitudes that are heretical or blasphemous for the psalmists themselves to express are quite acceptable when placed in the mouths of the enemies.' That is, through the device of quotation, the psalmists are able to speak words to God that would otherwise be impossible to speak. When the psalmist 'temporarily assumes the role' of the enemy of the LORD, the psalmist can speak words that no servant of the LORD can speak. The psalmist cannot say, 'There is no God'. But the psalmist can say, 'The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." ' The psalmist cannot say, 'The LORD does not hear us'. But the psalmist can say, 'They say, "The LORD does not hear them." ' When the psalmist quotes the enemy asserting that God is powerless, it is possible to hear in the psalmist's quotation an echo of his own unspoken and indeed unspeakable doubt— the doubt that God cares, the doubt that God sees, the doubt that God is an effective presence in the world. Through direct discourse, the psalmist is literally 'giving voice' to words to which the pious person cannot give voice. And yet, because the actual words belong to the fool, the enemy, the wicked, and so on, the psalmist bears no responsibility for speaking those words. Against this, some might argue that the psalmist does indeed utter strong words to God in laments such as Ps. 22.1, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' These are indeed strong words, but there is a delicate qualitative difference between asking, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' and asserting, 60. 61. 62. 63. 64.

Coulmas, 'Reported Speech', p. 2. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', pp. 108-09. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 792. Emphasis added. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 792. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 793.

54

Many are Saying

'There is no God', or 'God does not care'. The former is an outcry born of faith, the latter are acts of derision born of unbelief. There is a line the psalmist cannot cross on her own. She is, however, willing to place such words in the mouths of other people who have crossed the line on their own. The words that the psalmist attributes to the enemies are of a completely different class than any complaints that the psalmist speaks on her own behalf. Consider the following partial list of enemy quotations: 'He will not seek; there is no God.' (Ps. 10.4) 'God has forgotten; he has hidden his face, he will not see forever.' (Ps. 10.11) 'You will not seek.' (Ps. 10.13) There is no God.' (Pss. 14.1; 53.1) 'Who can see us? Who can search out crimes?' (Ps. 64.5-6) 'How can God know? And is there knowledge in the Most High?' (Ps. 73.11) 'The LORD does not hear us, and the God of Jacob does not perceive.' (Ps. 94.7)

Nowhere in the Psalter can statements like these be found, which assert the powerlessness of God, except in the mouths of the enemies. It is instructive that three times in the Psalter the phrase 'There is no God' occurs, and all three times it is placed in the mouths of the wicked or the fool. The same point can be made of phrases that assert that God cannot see or hear: They only occur in the mouths of the enemies. Several prophetic passages also support this interpretation. In Ezek. 8.7-13, the prophet condemns those 'elders of the house of Israel' who practise 'abominations' in the court, 'For they say, "The LORD does not see us, the LORD has forsaken the land" ' (v. 12). In Ezek. 9.10, the prophet reports that the 'guilt' of Israel and Judah is great, 'For they say, "The LORD has forsaken the land, and the LORD does not see." ' In Isa. 29.15, Isaiah mocks and condemns those who say, 'Who sees us? Who knows us?' In these passages, the vocabulary is identical to some of the words that the psalmists place in the mouths of the enemies. Such words as 'The LORD does not see us', 'There is no God', 'The LORD has abandoned/forsaken', or 'The LORD does not hear' apparently expressed forbidden beliefs. However, by placing these words in the mouths of the enemies and quoting them, the psalmist can speak them and make them part of her own complaint against God. If this analysis is correct, it has two implications for modern understanding of the genre of the lament psalm. First, the analysis suggests that these enemies' quotations should be recognized not only as part of the they-complaint, but also as part of the you-complaint of the lament psalms. The quotations are normally understood as part of the they-complaint, and as I argued above, the enemy quotations are a constituent part of the complaint against the enemy, often occurring as the culmination of the they-complaint. But the quotations serve double-duty, functioning both as complaint against the enemy and also as complaint against God. Second, this analysis suggests that in ancient Israel there were theologically determined limits that delineated how far the psalmist could go in her complaint against God. It is often said that in lament prayers, there were no limits on the accusations that the psalmist could level against God. But this study argues both that there were limits, and that the psalmist had means of circumventing those

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

55

limits. The theologically determined limits were that the psalmist could not accuse God of impotence or infidelity, or of having been defeated. The psalmist could accuse God of neglect and absence, but not of impotence or rank infidelity. But the psalmist had two ways to circumvent these theological limits that were set on his complaints. First, the psalmist could question God: question God's power, question God's strength, question God's care. As has long been recognized, the questions directed to God were a central element in the prayers for help: 'The heart of the lament.. .in ancient Israel lies in these accusatory questions and statements directed at God.'65 This is because although questioning God's fidelity and power may come perilously close to asserting that God is powerless or unfaithful, it falls just short of being such an assertion. Second, the psalmist could quote the enemy uttering genuine assertions of God's powerlessness because the act of quoting dissociates the psalmist from the responsibility for the assertions. It is, of course, impossible to prove that the psalmists used the device of quotation to speak these 'unspeakable' complaints against God. That is precisely the point of using quotations, to defer responsibility! The very reason for using quotation was that the psalmist could not be accused of speaking those words. But some textual alterations that were made to the Hebrew text of the Old Testament support the interpretation that quotation was a way for the psalmist to speak lamenting words that were otherwise beyond the theologically determined limits. These textual alterations show that for the ancients, there was an awareness that when a reporter quotes an original speaker's words, the content of those words becomes to some extent owned by the reporter. The textual alterations in question are those in which the scribes, who read the text out loud, altered the words of the text so that they would not have to speak blasphemous words. Two examples of the phenomenon will suffice. The first example comes from 1 Samuel 3. God announces that the house of Eli will be condemned because of the sins of Eli's sons: The NRSV translation of 1 Sam. 3.13 reads: 'For I have told him that I am about to punish his house forever, for the iniquity that he knew, because his sons were blaspheming God, and he did not restrain them.' The phrase that the NRSV translates as 'blaspheming God' literally reads 'blaspheming themselves' . Here, the text was altered so that no scribe would have to utter the phrase 'curse God'. The text must originally have read 'blaspheming God' The second example comes from Psalm 10. The NRSV translates, 'those greedy for gain curse and renounce God'. The word translated 'curse' is again literally 'bless' Once again, the text was altered so that scribes would not be forced to speak the words, 'curse God'. More examples could be added, but these suffice. These textual alterations bear witness to an awareness on the part of ancient Israelites that when a reporter quoted an original speaker (in this case the reporter being a scribe and the original speaker being the biblical text), the reporter bore some responsibility for the content of the quotation. And if awareness of the negative dangers of quoting impious statements existed, then it is plausible to conclude 65. Westermann, Praise and Lament in the Psalms, p. 177, see also, pp. 176-88.

56

Many are Saying

that there may have been a parallel awareness of the positive possibilities of quoting impious statements. It is impossible to know exactly when these texts were altered, and thus it is impossible to know when this awareness arose in Israel. But there is no reason to think that the ancients thought of quotation merely as a reporting device, and there is no reason not to think that the psalmists were employing quotation for the purpose of speaking unspeakable words. ii. Enemy Quotations as Reperforming the Blasphemy of the Enemy Austin's speech-act theory and Clark and Gerrig's understanding of quotations as demonstrations point to a second function of the enemy quotation in the Psalter. Austin argued that words can do more than refer to objects or concepts; words can perform actions. Not all words perform actions, but some words do. Austin distinguished between two types of acts that can be performed by words: illocutionary acts and perlocutionary acts. Illocutionary acts consist of 'informing, ordering, warning, undertaking', and the like. Perlocutionary acts consist of'what we bring about or achieve by saying something, such as convincing, persuading, deterring, and even, say, surprising or misleading'.66 In the example of the sentence, 'The house is on fire', the illocutionary act is to warn and the perlocutionary act is to persuade the hearer to flee the burning house and call for help.67 One use to which quotation can be applied, therefore, is that a reporter can quote the words of an original speaker that perform any given illocutionary act, but by quoting those words in a new context the reporter forces that old illocutionary act to serve her new perlocutionary goal. Recall again that Clark and Gerrig argued that quotations are a form of selective demonstration by means of which a reporter selectively demonstrates for an audience certain words that an original speaker once spoke,68 and that Sternberg argued that to quote is to re-contextualize. When quoting, 'even if the original could be copied down to the last detail, its transplanting and framing in a new environment would impose on it a new mode of existence'.69 When the insights of Austin, Sternberg, and Clark and Gerrig inform each other, it can be argued that sometimes when a reporter quotes an original speaker, what the reporter is achieving is the reproduction or re-creation of some illocutionary action that the original speaker's words performed in order to achieve some perlocutionary action that the reporter desires. The reporter is selectively demonstrating for an audience some action that the original speaker performed in the past. This will only be the case when the original speaker's words can be said to have originally performed an illocutionary act. In reference to enemy quotations in the Psalter, when the psalmist quotes words 66. Austin, How to Do Things with Words, p. 108. 67. See Searle, Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language, pp. 22-53. 68. Recall that Clark and Gerrig argued that demonstrations depict selectively. They distinguished between the depictive, supportive, annotative, and incidental aspects of a demonstration; the depictive aspects are the demonstration proper. They emphasized that a reporter chooses which aspects of the demonstration are depictive based on what experience the reporter wants the audience to have. 69. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 108.

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

57

in which the enemy originally performed an illocutionary act, the psalmist is reperforming that original illocutionary action for her current audience—God—in order to persuade God (perlocutionary act) to answer her prayer. In the enemy quotations that have been considered so far, the illocutionary action that the enemies performed with their assertions of God's impotence was that they attacked God; and when the psalmist quotes those words, she reperforms that action in order to serve her own perlocutionary goal: to persuade God to deliver her from danger, and rise up to judge the enemy. In Psalm 79, for example, the nations are quoted as saying 'Where is their God?' The psalmist then prays: 'Return to our neighbours sevenfold to their bosoms, their taunts with which they taunted you!' When the psalmist quotes to God the taunt of the nations, 'Where is their God?', the psalmist is reperforming for God the action in which the nations challenged the power of the LORD to save Israel. The psalmist believes that the LORD will be angered by this attack on the LORD'S power, and that God might respond by arising in power and wrath. By literally re-speaking the old speech-act of the enemy, the psalmist renews the old challenge in hopes of moving the LORD to take vengeance on the nations. The passages from Ezekiel 8 and 9 and Isaiah 29 that were cited above support this interpretation. In those passages, the prophets condemn people for speaking the same words that the psalmists place in their enemies' mouths: 'The LORD does not see us', 'The LORD has abandoned/forsaken', and 'The LORD does not hear us' (compare Pss. 10.11; 64.5-6; 94.7; and so on). By speaking the taunts of the enemies, the psalmists place the blasphemous words of the enemies before God in order to spur God to rise up against them. The account of Hezekiah's prayer to the LORD in Isaiah 37 supports this interpretation of the function of the enemy quotations. As was mentioned above, in Isaiah 36, the Rabshakeh had asserted that the LORD could not save Jerusalem from his army. King Sennacherib later sent a letter containing a similar challenge: Thus you shall speak to King Hezekiah of Judah: 'Do not let your God deceive you, in whom you trust, saying, "He will not give Jerusalem into the power of the king of Assyria." You have heard what the kings of Assyria have done to all the lands, completely destroying them. Shall you be delivered? Have the gods of the nations, which my ancestors destroyed, delivered them...? Where is the king of Hamath, the king of Arpad, the king of the city of Sepharvaim, the king of Hena, or the king of Ivvah?' (37.10-12a, 13)

Isa. 37.14-17 describes that in response to this taunt, Hezekiah went up to the temple of the LORD and he spread out [the letter] before the LORD. Hezekiah prayed to the LORD saying... 'Incline your ear, O LORD, and hear! Open your eyes, O LORD, and see! Hear all the words of Sennacherib, which he sent to taunt70 the living God.'

70. It is worth noting that as in so many of the psalms, the word used in Isa. 37.17 is again , denoting a challenge to God's power (see also Isa. 37.4). See Miller, They Cried to the Lord, p. 79.

58

Many are Saying

Hezekiah is said to have brought the letter that contained the taunt and spread it out before the LORD. He begged God: 'See! Hear all the words of Sennacherib, which he sent to taunt you.' He closed his prayer by asking God to 'save us.. .so that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that you alone are the LORD'. This description offers a striking parallel to the lament psalms in which the psalmists quote the blasphemous words of the enemies and then often call upon God to 'see' and 'hear!'. Just as Hezekiah presented the taunting words of the king of Assyria to God so that God would be moved to act against Sennacherib, the psalmists quote the taunting words of their enemies to God, in order to move God to act against those enemies.71 The account of Hezekiah's prayer in Isaiah 37 supports the interpretation that the psalmists quote their enemies' assertions of God's powerlessness in order to reperform for God the enemies' acts of blasphemy. The enemies' original speechact was one of blasphemy or one of challenging God's effective power. When the psalmists quote those words, the psalmists are reperforming that speech-act for God so that God will be moved to act on the psalmists' behalf. iii. Enemy Quotations as Instruction Clark and Gerrig's understanding of quotations as selective depictions that 'direct the experience of the audience', and Steinberg's view that to quote an original speaker is to rip an act of speech out of its context and to place it in a new context, also point the way toward understanding the enemy quotations as instruction for a human audience. In the above sections, the implied audience of the psalms was understood as God, and the psalms were understood as prayers to God. But in addition to being genuine prayers to God, the psalms are also religious texts that speak to human communities. As J. Clinton McCann has argued, as religious texts, the psalms are directed at an implied human audience. When the audience of the Psalter is imagined as a human audience, the enemy quotations within the psalms can be understood as instruction in how not to speak and how not to act.72 The enemy quotations in Psalms 73 and 78 are especially instructive for thinking about how such enemy quotations function as instruction. Psalms 73 and 78 are not prayers for help spoken to God but are psalms that were intentionally composed to instruct. Psalm 73 is an instructional psalm with wisdom elements, and Psalm 78 is a historical psalm. Psalm 78 explicitly begins: 'Give ear, O my people, to my teaching; incline your ears to the words of my mouth' (v. 1). In these psalms, the enemy quotations function as negative role models; they teach the audience how not to act. In Psalm 73, the psalmist instructs the audience not to speak 'like them'.

71. This description of Hezekiah's re-contextualization of Sennacherib's taunt confirms Sternberg's analysis of the function of quotations. The perlocutionary goal that Sennacherib pursued through his taunt was to demoralize the defenders of Jerusalem and perhaps to convince the people to rebel against Hezekiah. Hezekiah quoted Sennacherib's words, but toward an opposite perlocutionary goal: to persuade God to defend the city. 72. J.C. McCann, A Theological Introduction to the Book of Psalms (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1993), p. 21.

2. 'They Whet Their Tongues like Swords'

59

In Psalm 78, the psalmist instructs the audience what happens when a people speaks against God in rebellion. If the function of the enemy quotations in these psalms is taken as a clue to the interpretation of all of the enemy quotations, the other enemy quotations can also be understood as instruction. The audience is being instructed not to be like the unfaithful people whom God will surely 'call to account'. People should not say words such as 'There is no God', for those are the words of the fool. They should not say, 'We are our own lords', for those are the words of the wicked. Likewise, they should not taunt the sick and wish for the demise of others, nor should they take delight in the misfortune of others, for God will intervene to thwart such impious joy. The enemy quotations present the audience with a human option for speaking that is not an option for God's people. The enemy quotations also teach us that people should not place trust in false gods, as do the nations that believe the LORD has been defeated. In one ironic enemy quotation, the enemies actually serve as a positive role model. As was mentioned in the last chapter, Ps. 126.2-3 reads: Then it was said among the nations, 'The LORD has done great things for them'. The LORD has done great things for us, and we rejoiced.

This is clearly an ironic reversal of the normal use of the enemy quotations. Normally the vocabulary of the enemies is borrowed but reversed by the psalmist. Here, the statement of the nations is borrowed word for word. The nations look on the help that the LORD has given Israel, and they praise the work of the LORD! The irony of the passage continues as Israel then takes up the praise of the nations: 'The LORD has done great things for us!'

Chapter 3 'As FOR ME, I SAID': THE FUNCTION OF SELF QUOTATIONS

The psalmist frequently quotes her own voice.' The psalmist quotes herself twentyfive times in twenty different psalms.2 1. Included under the rubric of self quotation' are those quotations that are marked by a first person singular verb of speaking, such as or as well as Ps. 35.10, where the speaker is identified as 'my bones'. 2. Several passages that are often understood as self quotations should not be and are excluded from this investigation. Even if these passages were understood as self-quotations, they would not materially affect the conclusions of this study. These passages follow. Ps. 27.8: MT reads: :. Dahood and others emend twice: to and to , This translates:' "Come," my heart says, "seek his face!"' LXX seems to be reading 'I have sought your face'. NJPS, 'In your behalf my heart says, "Seek my face,"' interprets the MT as it stands. The text is corrupt and no solution is satisfactory. Ps. 40.5: The verbs could be understood as marking direct speech, but the syntax of the phrase is better understood as 'I would declare and tell [of your wondrous deeds] but they are too many to recount.' Ps. 77.7-9: There is no verb of speaking in the passage, and no internal or syntactic signals that demand this be understood as a quotation. It is better to understand this passage in continuity with the preceding verses (vv. 4-6). Ps. 119.82: The infinitive should be deleted as a dittography from the previous word is out of place as a marker of direct discourse in poetry, certainly in the middle of a verse. As Meier has pointed out, 'in the 300 chapters represented by Psalms, Hosea 1-2,4-14, Joel, Obadiah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Isaiah 40-66, Jeremiah 46-51, Lamentations, Song of Songs, Job 3-41, and Proverbs' only marks direct discourse five times (Speaking of Speaking, p. 49, cf. p. 97). Further, Ps. 119.123, a parallel to Ps. 119.82, lacks direct discourse. Ps. 120.2: It is possible to understand1 in 120.1 as marking direct speech (thus NRSV), but not necessary. The verse is best understood in continuity with the preceding verse. Ps. 122.8-9:

Based on the parallel structure, the phrase at the end of v. 8 should not be translated as direct discourse. Rather, the verses should be translated similar to the phrase 'They do

3. 'As for Me, I Said'

61

In this chapter, the function of these self quotations is considered. First, as in the chapter on enemy quotations, an analysis of the psalm texts in which these quotations occur is presented. Second, following the procedure of the last chapter, the theoretical material from Chapter 1 is engaged in order to analyse the rhetorical function these quotations play. Because self quotations are, by definition, quotations in which an individual speaker quotes her own voice, it follows that all of the self quotations in the Psalter occur within psalms where the voice quoted in direct discourse is also the speaker of the larger psalm. Because the reporter and the original speaker are the same person, self quotations tend to place less emphasis on the identity of the original speaker than do those quotations in which the psalmist quotes the enemies or in which the psalmist quotes God. Rather, self quotations tend to highlight other aspects of the original speech act: the circumstances of the words that are quoted, the time frame—past, present, or future—of the words that are quoted, the content of the words that are quoted, and the like. Because of this, the following analysis of the psalm texts is organized mainly according to the time frame of the quotations: (1) The role of self quotations that quote words spoken in the past. (2) The role of self quotations that quote words spoken in the present. (3) The role of self quotations that quote words spoken in the future. (4) The role of self quotations that quote hypothetical words. 1. The Formal Role of Self Quotations i. The Role of Self Quotations that Quote Words Spoken in the Past Eleven times in seven different psalms, the psalmist quotes words that were spoken in the past.3 As will be shown, when words spoken in the past are quoted, the main function of the quotation is to narrate some event that happened in the past in order to support the present argument of the psalm. Psalm 30. Psalm 30 is built around three speech acts of the psalmists: two old speech acts that are reported in self quotations and the current speech of the psalmist, which comprise the present psalm as a whole. The first speech act of the psalmist is the first self quotation, which recounts the psalmist's earlier attitude of self-confident arrogance.4 For this speech act, the psalmist is her own audience; she talks to herself: 'As for me, I said in my

not speak peace', in Ps. 35.10: 'For the sake of my kindred and neighbours, I will pray for your well-being. For the sake of the house of the LORD our God, 1 will seek good for you.' 3. Pss. 30.6, 9-10; 31.22; 32.5; 39.1, 4; 40.7; 41.4; 116.4, 10, 11. 4. J.C. McCann ('The Book of Psalms: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections', in L. Keck(ed.), The New Interpreter's Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes (Nashville: Abingdon,

1996), IV, p. 796) calls this first speech act 'a sort of flashback in which the psalmist reviews the former distress (vv. 6-10) and deliverance (vv. 11-12), even quoting a portion of the prayer for help mentioned in v. 2 (vv. 9-10)'. McCann notes that although the psalmist had earlier said he would never be shaken, he was in fact shaken by the distress that he faced.

62

Many are Saying

prosperity, "I shall not be made to stagger forever" ' (v. 6). This quotation should not be understood merely as an expression of an earlier attitude of security but as the expression of an earlier sin that led to trouble. By reporting her previous boast, the psalmist here acknowledges that the boast was a sin. In the Old Testament, the phrase 'I shall never be made to stagger ' occurs both as a correct expression of trust in God and as an incorrect expression of over-confidence in one's self. The key is whether one bases one's confidence on God or on one's self. If one bases one's confidence on God, the phrase is a correct expression of trust: 'Because God is at my right hand, I shall not be made to stagger ' (Ps. 16.8b; see also Pss. 62.2; 96.6; 121.3). But if one bases one's confidence in oneself, the phrase is a sinful boast: '[The enemy] says in his heart, "I shall not be made to stagger " ' (Ps. 10.6; cf. Deut. 8.17). The boast that the enemy issues in Ps. 10.6 is exactly the same sin that the psalmist confesses in Ps. 30.6. In the quotation frame, the psalmist qualifies her earlier boast as something she said 'in my prosperity . This qualification is important for two reasons. First, it will be seen that such qualifications are frequent features of self quotations that quote words spoken in the past. Second, by qualifying her boast as something she said 'in prosperity', the psalmist underscores that the old boast was said at a different time, one in which she trusted in her own powers rather than in God's. The second speech act of the psalmist is the second self quotation, which recounts words that the psalmist spoke after her powers failed her: 'What gain is there in my blood...? Hear, O LORD, be gracious to me; O LORD be my helper!' (vv. 9-11). Within the narrative in which the psalmist tells of her distress and deliverance from that distress, this quotation marks the point at which her fortunes were reversed for the better. Once she prayed to God for help, God delivered her from trouble: 'You have turned my mourning into dancing' (v. 11). As the psalmist now recalls her journey from prosperity to distress to deliverance; the negative turning point came because she spoke sinfully, and the positive turning point came when she cried to the Lord. The third speech act of the psalmist is the psalm as it now stands: a song of thanksgiving that praises God for turning mourning into dancing. Note that the praise sections of the psalm bracket the description of distress and deliverance: Praise of God (vv. 1-5) Account of the psalmist's distress and deliverance (vv. 6-8) Praise of God (vv. 9-10)

The earlier speech acts serve the larger purpose of the psalm, which is to praise. Both the arrogant sin and the penitent confession are now surrounded by and subsumed within the praise of God. Psalm 31. Psalm 31 is an individual prayer for help that closes with an extended song of thanksgiving (Ps. 31.19-24). Similar to Psalm 30, the song of thanksgiving at the end of Psalm 31 is composed in an envelope structure:

3. 'As for Me, I Said'

63

Praise of God (vv. 19-2la) Account of the psalmist's distress and deliverance (vv. 21b-22) Praise of God (vv. 23-24)

Within the psalmist's account of his distress and deliverance, a self quotation occurs: 'As for me, I said in my panic, "I am cut off from your sight."' The use of this self quotation shares several features with Psalm 30. First, the psalmist qualifies his old words as something that he spoke in a different situation; in this case, they were spoken 'in my panic '.5 Second, as the psalmist narrates his journey through the valley of the shadow of death, he describes his cry to God as the turning point: 'But you heard my voice and had mercy on me, when I cried to you for help' (v. 22). Although the quotation inset does not recall an explicit request for help, its formulaic lament language ('I am cut off from your sight', (compare with Jon. 2.4 and Lam. 3.546)) certainly implies a plea to God in time of distress. And because God heard that cry and delivered the psalmist, he now praises God. Psalms 32 and 41. Psalms 32 and 41 share many features. Both begin with 'Happy are' sayings ( ; 32.1-2; 41.1-3); both recount a past time of illness and recovery (32.3-7; 41.4-12); both understand the illness as the result of sin; both include self quotations (32.5b; 41.4); both close in praise of God (32.11; 41.13). Both psalms also are probably composite poems, in which beginning and ending verses were added to an existing psalm to create a new psalm. Although the 'earlier' prayers within Psalms 32 and 41 are recognizable as a song of thanksgiving and a prayer for help, respectively, both psalms as they exist now are best understood as songs of thanksgiving. The self quotations in the two psalms occur in the middle of descriptions of illness (understood as caused by some sin) and recovery (granted through God's forgiveness). In Psalm 32, the psalmist says that because she refused to confess her sin to God, her illness grew worse: 'Because I kept silent, my bones withered while I groaned all day. For day and night your hand weighed heavily against me' (vv. 34a). The psalmist then quotes how she broke her silence, which made all the difference: 'I said, T will confess my transgressions to the LORD,' and you indeed forgave the guilt of my sin' (v. 5b). In Psalm 41, the psalmist also quotes an earlier confession of sin: 'As for me, I said, "O LORD, be gracious to me; heal me, for I

5.

The phrase is repeated verbatim in Ps. 116.11 (see below). The word has the sense of panic, an emotion that includes both fear and haste (see Deut. 20.3; 1 Sam. 23.26; 2 Sam. 4.4; 2 Kgs. 7.15; Pss. 48.6; 104.7; Job 40.23). 6. There is a dispute about how to handle' which would be a hapax legomenon, but is probably corrupt. One option is to read , meaning '1 am cut off (cf. Ps. 88.5; Isa. 53.8; Lam. 3.54!). An equally likely option is to read meaning 'I am driven out' (cf. Jon. 2.4: . Both readings have manuscript support, although more manuscripts support ; LXX seems to be r e a d i n g B a s e d on the metaphor in v. 21 of the city under siege, the meaning of 'cut off would fit slightly better. In either case, the meaning of the phrase is roughly equivalent.

64

Many are Saying

have sinned against you'" (41.4). Although the psalmist does not specify the confession of sin as the moment when the tide turned, the fact that she does recall the earlier confession marks it as an important moment in her journey from distress to recovery. Psalm 39.1 Psalm 39 is a composition in which the psalmist narrates his journey from silence to speech to renewed silence and from guarding against sin to giving in to sin, to repenting from sin. Similar to Psalm 30, this journey is narrated by means of three speech acts of the psalmist: two old ones and the current prayer for forgiveness. The first speech act is the first self quotation, which consists of an old vow that the psalmist made: 'I said, "I will guard my ways, to keep from sinning with my tongue". '8 As in Psalm 30, for this first speech act the psalmist is his own audience, he speaks to himself. His trust is in his own ability to 'keep from sinning'. He reports that for a time he did 'remain silent', but then his heart grew hot, fire burned inside of him, and he spoke.9 Then the psalmist quotes a second speech act. The psalmist reports, Then I spoke with my tongue 'LORD, make me to know my end, and what is the measure of my days; let me know how fleeting my life is.' (vv. 3b-4)

In the first quotation, the psalmist had vowed not to sin 'with my tongue '. The fact that the psalmist introduces his second self quotation with these exact words suggests that the psalmist viewed his second speech as sinful. This interpretation is supported by the fact that later in the psalm, the psalmist speaks of his sufferings as the result of sin (v. 1 la) and he asks for forgiveness (v. 8a). It is difficult to understand what might have been sinful about a request to 'know my end'.10 Perhaps the psalmist's demand to know 'my end' was a demand for forbidden knowledge of the future, which is reserved only for God. Or perhaps the demand 'make me to know' was in itself sinful. Job also confronted God with the demand to know Job 10.2; 13.23). God threw that demand back in Job's face (38.3; 40.7), and in the end Job confessed that, 'I uttered that

7. On the question of where the quotation that begins in verse 4 ends, see the discussion in Chapter 1, section 3.i. 8. Gerstenberger refers to this quotation of an old vow 'a rather strange meditation' (Psalms: Part ], p. 165). McCann sees the psalmist as wanting to avoid the sin of accusing God of wrongdoing ('The Book of Psalms', p. 837). 9. Some commentators, such as Gerstenberger (Psalms: Part J, p. 166) have seen a parallel between the sequence of keeping silent and then speaking in this psalm with a similar sequence in Exek. 3.26-27; 24.27; 33.22; and Dan. 10.15. In this psalm, however, the speaker keeps silent of his own accord, whereas in the cited passages, God keeps the speakers silent and then opens their mouths as part of prophetic revelation. Thus the supposed parallels exemplify quite different phenomena. 10. See, for example, McCann, 'The Book of Psalms', p. 838.

3. 'As for Me, I Said'

65

which I did not understand, things too marvellous for me, which I did not know, [when I said]...cause me to know pDlTTin]' (40.3b-4). If Job is an adequate parallel, perhaps the psalmist's sin was simply his demand to know. When the psalmist quotes his second speech act, he is quoting words that he regarded as sinful. By quoting that old speech, the psalmist acknowledges the old sin and asks for forgiveness. The third speech act of the psalmist is the psalm as it now stands (especially vv. 5-13), in which he asks for forgiveness. The psalmist started in silence and has returned to silence; yet it is no longer a proud silence based on trust in his own ability to keep from sinning, but it has become a humble silence based on hope in God's mercy. The 'audience' of the psalmist's earlier silence was himself. The audience of his renewed silence is God: I am silent; I do not open my mouth, because you have done it. Remove your punishment from me, because of the blows of your hand I am perishing. You chastise a human in punishment for sin. (vv. 9-1 la)

There is an important difference to note between the three speech acts of Psalm 30 and the three speech acts of Psalm 39. In Psalm 30, the first speech was the act of sin, the second speech was the act of repentance, and the third speech is praise for forgiveness and deliverance. In Psalm 39, the psalmist is, as it were, one step behind: The second speech was the act of sin, and the third speech is the act of repentance. The author of Psalm 39 awaits the mercy that the author of Psalm 30 has already received. Psalm 116.u The psalmist quotes himself three times in Psalm 116. All of the quotations occur in the midst of descriptions of distress and deliverance, and all are the quotations of the psalmist's earlier prayer: And on the name of the LORD I cried, 'O LORD, save my life!' I kept faith, even when I said, 'Indeed, I am greatly afflicted', As for me, I said in my panic, 'Every human is a liar', (vv. 4, 10-11)

11. According to the LXX, a new psalm begins at v. 10. If this division were followed, the two psalms would both be individual psalms of thanksgiving, and both psalms would have self quotations in which the psalmist quotes his old prayers in times of distress. The division of MT is followed here. As Mays and others have argued, the psalm should be read as a whole with parallel parts: 'Each part.. .concludes with a performance statement: going to the house of the Lord (v. 7); offering of libation, the cup of salvation (v. 13; cf. the "drink offerings" in Numbers 28); offering of thanksgiving sacrifice (v. 17). Each part is introduced by a report of salvation combined in chiastic arrangements with statements of praise.' Mays, Psalms, p. 369. 12. The translation and meaning of v. 10 is very uncertain. LXX translates the verbs as aorists and understands the link between believing and speaking as causal: 'I believed, therefore I said, "I have been greatly humiliated".' Many other options have been proposed. It seems clear, however,

66

Many are Saying

The three quotations each recall a different element of the psalmist's earlier prayer: The first quotation recalls the petition, the second quotation recalls the I-complaint, and the third quotation recalls the they-complaint. Together, they constitute the psalmist's report of the prayer he spoke, which God answered: 'I was weak, and he saved me' (v. 6b). It is worth noting that in addition to reporting his earlier prayer, the psalmist also insists that the prayer was spoken as an act of faith ('I kept faith') and in a situation of dire need ('in my panic'; cf. Ps. 31.22). Most importantly, as the psalmist narrates his escape from 'the snares of death', he remembers his prayer to God as the turning point of his struggle. Psalm 40. The meaning of the self quotation in Ps. 40.7-8 is widely disputed, therefore it is treated last in this section. Because of the uncertainty of the quotation's meaning, its contribution to our understanding of the function of self quotations must be qualified. I follow the interpretation that the quotation reflects words that the psalmist spoke as part of a liturgy in which she fulfilled her vow to praise God for help that she had received.13 The psalmist comes forward and presents a written record that describes her distress and deliverance: Then I said, 'Here, I have come, in this scroll is recorded what happened to me.' I delight to do your will, my God, and your instruction is within me. I have told the righteous event in the great congregation, I have not swallowed my words, O LORD, surely you know it! I have not hidden your righteous help within my heart, Your faithfulness and your deliverance I have declared, I did not hide your steadfast love, or your faithfulness from the great congregation, (vv. 7-10)

If this passage does indeed describe a liturgy of thanksgiving, then the scroll that the psalmist presented stands in place of the description of distress and deliverance that the psalmist normally narrates in psalms of thanksgiving. Rather than quoting the words of petition or complaint that she spoke in distress, the psalmist quotes the words that she spoke when she brought forward the record of how God delivered her. The reason for the difference may be that the argument of Psalm 40 builds towards a renewed prayer for help in w. 13-17. Therefore, rather than reporting a deliverance from distress, which is a regular feature of a song of thanksgiving, this psalm reports vows of thanksgiving that the psalmist faithfully fulfilled. This

that the verse must be understood in parallel with verse 11. Both quotations are quotations of past complaints. As was the case in Ps. 31.22, the words were spoken in panic. 13. I find the suggestion of E. Zenger a particularly appealing interpretation. He compares the passage with the writing of the law on the heart in Jeremiah 31: 'That this is the sense of v. 7, v. 8 confirms: The doing of the Torah is the 'Offering' with which the pray-er will give thanks for his rescue; with the Torah in his heart, his steps have a firmness, of which v. 2 tells.' (F.-L. Hossfeld and E. Zenger, Psalmen I: Psalm 1-50 (NEB; Wiirzburg: Echter Verlag, 1993), p. 256), my translation.

3. 'As for Me, I Said'

67

would make sense, since the main issue on the psalmist's agenda is the present situation of distress, from which she seeks deliverance.14 Summary. Several conclusions can be drawn about the role of self quotations in which the psalmist quotes words that were spoken in the past. As was mentioned above, when words that were spoken in the past are quoted, the main function of the quotation is to narrate some event that happened in the past in order to support the present argument of the psalm. The most important variable concerning these quotations, therefore, is what type of argument the psalm as a whole is making. On the one hand, when these quotations occur in psalms where the main point is to give thanks, they occur as part of the description of distress and deliverance. In these cases, the psalmist quotes some part of the prayer that he prayed and that God heard and answered in order to fuel the praise that he is currently singing. The psalmist often qualifies these past words as spoken 'in panic', 'in prosperity', 'in anger', and so forth. As the psalmist narrates the time of distress and deliverance, he describes the turning point of his plight as the moment when he raised his voice to God in prayer. On the other hand, when these quotations occur in psalms where the main point is to pray for help, the psalmist quotes either his earlier act of faithfulness in fulfilling a vow to praise (Psalm 40) or quotes his earlier act of sin for which he is now asking forgiveness (Psalm 39) in order to drive the current request for help. ii. The Role of Self Quotations that Quote Words Spoken in the Present Nine times in nine different psalms, the psalmist quotes words that are spoken in the present.15 As will be shown, when words that are spoken in the present are quoted in a psalm, one of the main functions of the quotation is to emphasize some aspect of the quotation. Biblical Hebrew could express emphasis in a number of ways. In prose, the most common means to express emphasis were to use the infinitive absolute and a finite verb of the same verbal root, or to use a finite verb and an independent personal pronoun.16 This second means of emphasizing a phrase is essentially emphasis through repetition: the subject of the verb is repeated. A speaker who quotes words that she is speaking in the present creates emphasis in an analogous fashion: both the fact of the speech and the subject who is speaking are repeated. For example, Ps. 31.14: 14. The self quotations examined in this section have parallels outside of the Psalter. The data outside of the Psalter do not contribute new insights into the function of such quotations, but they do confirm the analysis presented above. See, for example, the quotation spoken in the past that occurs in the context of the song of thanksgiving in Jon. 2.4. 15. Pss. 16.2; 31.14; 38.16; 42.9; 55.6-8; 77.10; 102.24; 140.6; 142.5. One must take care, of course, in speaking of tenses or time frames in Hebrew poetry. Especially in poetry, one cannot assume that perfect and imperfect verbs correspond with past and perfect tenses. In these psalms, however, there seems to be enough warrant to describe the quotations as citing words spoken in the present. 16. Emphasis could also be expressed through the use of inverted word order, adverbs, prepositions, or repetition. See Williams, Hebrew Syntax, §§ 16,106,205,314,325,379,385,393, 438, 573-75.

68

Many are Saying

('But I, in you do I trust O LORD; I say, "You are my God."') The identity of the 'you are my God') and speaker is already contained both in the phrase twice in the first clause ('But I, in you do I trust, O LORD').17 Likewise, since the entire psalm is speech directed to God, the verb is not necessary to mark the words as speech. The main function of is to provide emphasis. Exactly what these self quotations emphasize and how they emphasize depends on the contexts in which they occur. In the following passages, the different ways that quotations of words spoken in the present emphasize is one of the main issues that is explored. 'You Are My God/Lord/My Refuge'—Psalms 16, 31, 140,142. In three prayers for help, the psalmist says, 'I say, "You are my God/Lord"' (Pss. 16.2; 31.14; 140.6).18 In a fourth prayer for help, the psalmist says something almost identical, 'I say, "You are my refuge, my portion in the land of the living"' (Ps. 142.5). In all of these psalms, the quotation consists of the verb plus a verbless clause: The phrase, 'You are my God/Lord/my refuge' is a typical confession of trust that occurs in many prayers for help (Pss. 22.10; 25.5; 43.2 (see below); 63.2; 86.2, 5, 15; 118.28). In Psalms 16, 31, and 140, however, the phrase is additionally marked as a self quotation: '/ say, "You are my God."' The effects of marking these confessions as quotations in these psalms are twofold. First, by quoting his own words, the psalmist emphasizes that these are his words over against the words that others speak. In each of these psalms, the psalmist's faith is juxtaposed with the infidelity of others. In Psalm 31, the quotation immediately follows and is contrasted with the scheming whispers of those who plot against the psalmist. In Psalm 16, the quotation immediately precedes and is contrasted with the ritual actions of the unfaithful.19 In Psalm 140, the quotation immediately follows and is contrasted with the scornful accusations of false witnesses. In Psalm 142, the quotation is bracketed by and contrasted with descriptions of the psalmist's persecutors. Second, by quoting these words of trust, the psalmist emphasizes that he trusts in God in spite of the distress that he suffers. In each of these psalms, some evil grips the psalmist: illness, persecution, slanderous accusations, and the like. In spite of his suffering, the psalmist trusts.

17. Many commentators interpret the function of the self-quotations as creating emphasis. On Psalm 31, for example, see McCann, 'The Book of Psalms', p. 801. 18. See the discussion in Chapter 1, sections.i. Especially note the rationale for understanding each of the quotations as simply consisting of the phrase, 'You are my God'. 19. The exact meaning of Ps. 16.2b-4 is uncertain. It does seem certain, however, that the psalmist is contrasting her own faithfulness with the infidelity either of those who choose false gods or with Yahwists who engage in forbidden cultic acts:

3. 'As for Me, I Said'

69

Frequently in the psalms, the confessions of trust are set off by disjunctive particles such as 'But...', 'Yet...', 'As forme...', 'Nevertheless...', and the like. The effect of prefacing the confession of trust with these disjunctive particles is to set them over against the description of distress or over against the taunts and jibes of the enemies. That is, compared to the enemies who taunt and deride, the psalmist emphasizes that 7 trust'. And compared to the situation of distress in which he finds himself, the psalmist emphasizes that 'I trust''. The act of quoting performs the same syntactic function in these psalms as these disjunctive markers. By quoting his present confession of trust, the psalmist sets it off and emphasizes that '/trust' in the midst of those who do not, and that 'I trust' in the midst of an uncertain situation. Psalm 38. Frank-Lothar Hossfeld makes note that the four verses of Ps. 38.15-18 all begin with For I am waiting upon you, O LORD, only you can answer, my Lord, my God, For I say, 'Lest they rejoice over me, lest they exalt over me when my foot staggers!' For I am ready to fall, and my pain constantly before me. For I will confess my sin, I am sorry for my sin.

As Hossfeld has also noted, these verses are motivational clauses, in which the psalmist lists the reasons why God should heal him of his disease.20 Hossfeld's insights can be augmented by noting that these four motivational clauses correspond to the three typical dimensions of the complaint. The complaint sections of the prayers for help typically have three elements: you-complaints pertaining to God, I-complaints pertaining to the self, and they-complaints pertaining to the enemies. The first clause concerns God, the second clause concerns the enemies, and the third and fourth clauses concern the self. But only the clause that concerns the enemies is quoted in direct discourse. The main request of the psalm, as can be seen in vv. 1-4, and 18, is a request for forgiveness. By quoting this motivational clause, however, the psalmist places an added urgency and emphasis upon it, and in so doing gives God an extra reason to forgive his sin: to forestall the rejoicing of the enemies.21 That is to say, the use of attributed speech here functions to emphasize the reason the psalmist holds before God in his attempt to persuade God to answer the plea. Hossfeld has aptly interpreted the logic of this reason: 'Where enemies triumph, the pray-er and his God have lost.'22 20. Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalmen I, p. 244. 21. The psalmist is not quoting a prayer he spoke in the past (thus Craigie, Psalms 1-50, p. 304). The syntax of the four verses is parallel in that in the first clause of vv. 16, 17, and 18, there is a first person perfect verb, and in the second clause of each verse there is a first person imperfect verb. In these clauses, the aspects of these verbs do not indicate tense; thus the quotation should not be understood as a past prayer. 22. Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalmen /, p. 244, my translation. Gerstenberger (Psalms: Part 1), on

70

Many are Saying

Psalm 102. Although Psalm 102 as it now stands is most likely a composite poem comprised of two strands, it has an impressive overall unity based on the motif of time. A motif of time runs through the whole. The theme of days that vanish opens and closes the description of trouble (w. 3,11) and is resumed in verses 23-24. God's everlasting reign is set in direct contrast to the ephemeral time of the psalmist twice (w. 12, 24b-27), as if in that contrast lay some resolution for the distress. The psalm asserts that the time has come for the LORD to have compassion on Zion (v. 13). And the psalm looks forward to a future time when coming generations. . .will praise him and dwell in security (w. 18-20,28). Further, the prayer of the afflicted one in strand two (v. 17) corresponds to the prayer of the afflicted one in strand one (v. 1); and those doomed to die (v. 20) correspond to the one about to die in the midst of his days (v. 24).23

The one 'about to die in the midst of his days' is the one whose voice is heard in self quotation: [God] has broken my strength in midcourse, He has shortened my days, I say, 'My God, do not take me up in the middle of my days!' (vv. 23-24a)

Once again, the direct discourse is not the quotation of an older prayer, as some have interpreted it, but is the quotation of a present cry to God. By quoting her present outburst, the psalmist emphasizes the urgency of her prayer. Psalm 42/43. Psalm 42/43 is a single poem with three stanzas (42.1 -4,6b-10; 43.1 4). Twice in the psalm, the psalmist quotes the enemies asking, 'Where is your God?' (42.3, 10).25 In the second stanza, the psalmist quotes himself questioning God. One signal of the function of this self quotation is that the second half of the quotation is repeated in the third stanza.26 Compare the passages:

the other hand, understands vv. 16-17 as 'a sort of liturgical interlude, meant to express confidenc in Yahweh's helping and revenging power'. Rather than expressing confidence, it makes more sense to see the quotation as functioning to emphasize that God's enemies will triumph if God allows the psalmist to die. 23. Mays, Psalms, pp. 323-24. 24. The end of this self quotation is again an issue. NRSV translates: ' "O my God," I say, "do not take me away at the mid-point of my life, you whose generations endure throughout all gene-

rations." ' Kraus has helpfully pointed out that the closing hymn of praise actually starts in v. 24b which means that v. 24b should not be severed from the rest of the hymn (Psalms 60-150, p. 286). NJPS agrees with this and includes the entire remainder of the psalm in the direct discourse, treating the closing five verses as a response to the shortening of the psalmist's days. A better solution is to understand only the petition as direct discourse. This solution does not sever the hymn of praise in two parts and it clearly sets off the petition as a desperate cry to God. 25. See the discussion of the enemy quotations in this psalm in Chapter 2, section 1 .iii. 26. The only difference between the two passages is that the stem of the verb changes. In 42.9 it is ; in 43.2 it is . Some have proposed emending the verb in 42.9 so that both verses would be identical. This harmonization should be avoided. The switch in 43.2 to the

3. 'As for Me, I Said'

I say to God, my rock, 'Why have you forgotten me? Why must I walk about mournfully, oppressed by the enemy?' (42.9)

71

For you are my God, my refuge, Why have you cast me off? Why must I walk about mournfully, oppressed by the enemy? (43.2)

The two passages are almost completely parallel: the final clauses are identical; the questions—'Why have you forgotten me?' and 'Why have you cast me off?'—are virtually indistinguishable;28 the introductory clauses both refer to God as 'my' (my God, my refuge, my rock). The main difference between the two passages is in the first line of each. The first phrase in Ps. 43.2 is clearly a confession of trust. If it is assumed that the two opening lines are also approximately equal in meaning, then the self quotation in Ps. 42.9 also functions as a confession of trust. The self quotation emphasizes to whom the psalmist speaks. Thus, the quotation of words directed to God fulfils essentially the same function as confessing trust in God: The psalmist underscores that he is speaking to God.29 In spite of his suffering and the enemies who torment him, he has not given himself over to despair and he is still in dialogue with 'God, my rock'. Furthermore, the self quotation anchors the psalmist's complaints against God in his trust in God. The complaining questions 'Why...?' are themselves expressions of faith. Psalm 55. In Psalm 55, the psalmist quotes words that he cries in the grip of despair. The psalmist first describes the fear that wells up within him and then breaks into speech. The verb, 'I say', shows that the speech that the psalmist cries out is the result of terror that has accumulated within: My heart is in anguish within me, the terrors of death have fallen upon me. Fear and trembling come upon me, and horror overwhelms me, So that I say, 'O that wings like a dove were given to me, so that I might fly away and come to rest! Surely, I would flee far away, I would lodge in the wilderness!

hithpael suggests an intensification of the psalmist's complaint, reflecting the heightening of the complaint as the poem builds to its conclusion. 27. Some commentators understand only the initial question, 'Why have you forgotten me?' as direct discourse. This would break up the parallel structure of the poetry, however. It is better to extend the direct discourse through the end of both questions. 28. The verbs and are both typical vocabulary of the lament psalms. 29. Two aspects of the prayers for help—the confession of trust and the complaint—are closely related. To complain to God is not a sign of lack of trust in God, but a sign of trust that the psalmist believes God will hear and respond to the psalmist's plea. Thus the complaint of 42.9 and the confession of trust in 43.2, although technically different, function similarly to express confidence in God's deliverance. Compare Gerstenberger (Psa/ms: Part 1, p. 180)on42,9: '[The verse] seems

to serve as a confident reflection on the presence of the Lord in the community.'

72

Many are Saying I would hurry to find a shelter from the wind and the storm!' (vv. 4-8)

The quotation functions to distinguish between the symbolic wishes of w. 6-8 and the literal requests of the rest of the psalm. The psalmist does not literally pray to be given the wings of a bird, nor should this be understood as a desire to escape. Rather, the self quotation expresses the despair that has seized him because of the betrayal of his friends. Jeremiah employs similar symbolic language (9.1-2) when he complains of the treachery of his people. The literal request of the psalmist is for God to intervene against his neighbors (w. 9, 15, 23; compare Jer. 9.3-9). What the self quotation does is emphasize the wish to 'fly away' as hypothetical rather than as literal. In a sense, the function of the quotation may even be described as de-emphasizing the quotation inset: these are the psalmist's spontaneous thoughts, his instinctive 'reaction' to danger; they reflect his emotions. But they do not reflect his faith or the resolution of his will, once he has decided to stay and wait on the deliverance of the Lord: But I will call upon God, and the LORD will save me. Evening and morning and at noon I consider and I meditate. He will hear my voice and redeem my life in peace, (vv. 16-18a)

Psalm 77. Psalm 77 is a prayer for help, but even more it can be described as a meditation on the nature of God. There are no petitions for help and no complaints against the enemies or the self; there is only a description of distress followed by a meditation on God's saving deeds of old on Israel's behalf. A further indication that the psalm is essentially a meditation on the nature of God is found in the proliferation of the verbs of reflection: The distress that drives the psalmist to this mediation is presumably some national tragedy, such as the Babylonian exile. The national disaster leaves the psalmist with difficult questions about God: Will the Lord spurn forever? Will he no longer be gracious? Has his steadfast love ceased forever? Has the promise failed from generation to generation? Has God forgotten to be gracious? Has he shut up his mercy in anger? I say, 'This is my affliction: The right hand of the Most High has changed.' (vv. 7-10)

30. That this is a quotation is marked by the verb of speaking in v. 6: 'I say'. The end of this quotation is signalled by a shift in the verbs of v. 9. The verbs shift from the first person, singular, indicative verbs of the quotation to third person imperative verbs: 'Confuse, O LORD! Confound their speech!' 31. Once again, the self quotation consists of a difficult passage, the meaning of which is uncertain. At the end of a lengthy passage in which the psalmist questions God's fidelity, the

3. 'As for Me, I Said'

73

The self quotation functions to indicate the conclusion that the psalmist's meditations produced: The God who called Israel into being has turned away from Israel—there is no visible evidence that God is acting on Israel's behalf. Thus, in this psalm, the self quotation functions to express the psalmist's thoughts: this is not a petition, or even a complaint, but simply the one thought to which the psalmist's reflections have been reduced. In terms of the whole psalm, however, the self quotation represents only an intermediate conclusion for the psalmist. Following the quotation, the psalmist meditates on the past and recalls the Exodus, when humans could not see God acting, but God was nevertheless present: 'The waters saw you, O God, the waters saw you and trembled.. .yet your footprints were unknown' (w. 16a, 19b). Thus, the psalm essentially has three parts. In part one, w. 1-9, the psalmist meditates on the present in which there is no visible evidence of God's presence. In part two, verse 10, the psalmist comes to the conclusion that God has turned against Israel. In part three, vv. 11-20, the psalmist meditates on a time in the past in which there was also no visible evidence of God's presence, but in which God was proven to be present, nevertheless. Thus, the psalm viewed as a whole actually de-emphasizes the psalmist's conclusion that was quoted in direct discourse. The second half of the psalm undermines the rationality of the psalmist's conclusion. It is therefore important that the psalmist marked his earlier conclusion as his own speech or thought, because by doing such, he set up the possibility that it could be incorrect—human thought being by nature ever incomplete. Similar to Psalm 55, what the quotation actually emphasizes, therefore, is the fallibility of the thought expressed in the quotation inset. Summary. Several conclusions can be drawn about the role of self quotations in which the psalmist quotes words that are spoken in the present. This type of self quotation occurs in individual prayers for help. These self quotations function in several ways. First, when the quotation inset contains a confession of trust, the self quotation emphasizes this expression of trust as the psalmist's trust over against both his dire circumstance and the psalmist's trust over against others who lack trust. In Psalm 42/43 the quotation emphasized that the complaint of the quotation inset was itself an act of trusting faith. Second, when the quotation inset contains a petition for help, the quotation emphasizes the plea by weighting it with extra urgency. Third, as in Psalms 55 and 77, the self quotations serve to de-emphasize the quotation inset. Thus, self-quotations can both emphasize and de-emphasize; the context in which a self quotation occurs determines its function.

psalmist says: . The versions offer little or no help to attempts to emend the text (the versions either do not support suggested emendations or only one or two minor witnesses support any given emendation). NJPS implies a confession of guilt: 'It is my fault that the right hand of the Most High has changed.' This is an attractive solution, but unfortunately it is one that cannot be accepted because it is very unlikely that can be construed as an admission of guilt. The above translation understands as apiel infinitive of with ales suffix (compare Deut. 29.21).

74

Many are Saying

iii. The Role of Self Quotations that Quote Words Spoken in the Future (Psalm 35) Only in Psalm 35, an individual prayer for help, does the psalmist employ direct discourse in a vow of praise: Then my soul shall rejoice in the LORD, exulting in his salvation. All my bones shall say, 'O LORD, who is like you? Delivering the weak from the one stronger than him, and the weak and needy from the one who robs him.' (vv. 9-10)

Two aspects of this quotation are interesting. First, if the psalmist's plight is understood as an illness (see w. 13-15), then the vow that 'all my bones' will praise you may be a poetic flourish that plays on the psalmist's illness; in both Job and Lamentations, 'bones' are a site of extreme pain. But in Psalm 35, the 'bones' that are sick now will praise you after you heal them. Second, the stanza of praise that the psalmist vows to sing is so typical of the songs of thanksgiving (compare Exod. 15.11; 1 Sam. 2.2-8; Pss. 71.18; 89.8; 113.5), that here it can be said that the psalmist is actually quoting a song of thanksgiving. This means that the quotation here is more than a rhetorical device—it is an actual borrowing from a praise psalm that functions as an allusion to such a hymn of praise.33 The vow of praise would have been complete without the quotation, if the psalmist had stopped with the promise to 'rejoice in the LORD'. But by quoting the song of praise, the psalmist in a sense ups the ante: She has begun singing the hymn! She made a down payment on her vow; she trusts so greatly in God's help that she has begun to sing God's praise even before God has delivered on the help.

32. Psalm 35 is arranged in three roughly equal parts, each of which features direct discourse and each of which culminates in a vow of praise: vv. 1-10, 11-18, 19-28. 33. The vow of praise is a typical element not only in the biblical prayers for help but also in the prayers of Israel's neighbours. In the Akkadian prayers for help, the vow to praise is regularly the closing element of the composition. The 'Great Prayer to Ishtar' may end with a similar self quotation in the vow to praise. I do not, however, regard this as a self quotation analogous to the ones being investigated in the Hebrew Psalter, because there is no verb of speaking and no syntactical feature that demands that this be understood as anything but a continuation of the normal voice of the poet. u ana-ku ana al-mat qaqqadi ilu-ut-ki it qur-di-ki lu sa2~pi ^is-tar-ma i-rat ^is-tar-ma sar-rat "beltu-ma i-rat "beltu-ma sar-rat "ir-ni-ni ma-rat "sin qa-rit-ti ma-ha-ri la tisi And that I too may proclaim your divinity and valour to the black-headed folk, 'Ishtar is preeminent, Ishtar is queen, 'The lady is preeminent, the lady is queen, 'Irnini, the valiant daughter of Sin, has no rival.' Transliteration from E. Ebeling (ed.), Die Akkadische Gebetsserie 'Handerhebung' (Berlin: Akademie, 1953), pp. 134-36. Translation from B.R. Foster (ed.), Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature (Bethesda, MD: CDL Press, 2nd edn., 1996), II, p. 509.

3. 'As for Me, I Said'

75

iv. The Role of Self Quotations that Quote Hypothetical Words One of the functions of direct discourse is that it can quote words that never have been and never will be spoken. In three psalms, the psalmist employs self quotations to that end. In these psalms, the self quotation is introduced by ,34 Psalm 73. As was mentioned in the last chapter, Psalm 73 is a wisdom psalm in which the psalmist meditates on the process by which he came to grips with the problem of why wicked people seem to flourish while good people suffer. In this psalm, the psalmist quotes both the wicked and herself in direct discourse. First the wicked are quoted, expressing the belief that God lacks effective power on earth: 'How can God know? And is there knowledge in the Most High?' (v. 11). Then the psalmist recalls how she surveyed the lay of the land and came to the conclusion that fidelity to God has no reward: Such are the wicked; eternally prosperous, they acquire strength. Surely in vain have I cleansed my heart, and washed my hands in innocence! And I am smitten all day long, and punished every morning. If I had said, 'I will talk on like them', I would then have been false to the generation of your children, (vv. 13-15)

As I argued in the last chapter, the turning point of the psalm follows upon the heels of this hypothetical self quotation, as the psalmist recounts how she went to the temple and realized that God does cause the wicked to fall to ruin. As I also suggested in the last chapter, perhaps because this is a wisdom psalm, the self quotation replaces the enemy quotation at the turning point of the psalm. As the psalmist looks back on her journey through temptation, she identifies the point where others went astray—but where she managed to tread the safe path—at the moment when she refused to 'talk on like them'. The hypothetical self quotation establishes that when she refused to buckle to the temptation to speak that sort of blasphemy, she found her way to the temple to behold the truth of God's ways. Rather than talking on I like the enemies, the psalmist learned the wisdom of talking on about the wondrous deeds of God. Psalm 94. In Psalm 94, a prayer for help, the self quotation expresses a hypothetical prayer for help: If the LORD is not my help, I would dwell in silence.

34. Pss. 73.15; 94.18; 139.11. In Psalm 139, the particle is found in verse 8 and the self quotation in verse 11. From the syntax of the psalm, however, it is clear that serves multiple duty for all of the hypothetical clauses in vv. 8-11. Compare also the hypothetical self quotations introduced by in 2 Kgs. 4.24; 7.4.

76

Many are Saying If I say, 'My foot is slipping!' your steadfast love, O LORD, would uphold me.

Psalm 94 as a whole is an individual prayer for help. The particular passage in which the quotation occurs is a lengthy confession of trust (w. 12-23). The psalmist expresses the reasons for his confidence in the deliverance of God in a variety of ways: unequivocal declarations, rhetorical questions, conditional clauses, and the like. The conditional clause in which the self quotation occurs may reflect past experiences of God answering petitions in times of distress. More likely, it simply reflects confidence in the mercy of God upon those who cry out in times of need. In this context, the function of the hypothetical self quotation is to confess trust in God. Psalm 139. The final hypothetical self quotation occurs within the well-known passage in Psalm 139 that praises the universal presence and power of God. The psalmist asks a rhetorical question of God and then provides his own answers: Where can I go from your spirit? And where can I flee from your presence? If I ascend to heaven, there you are. If I descend to Sheol, there you are again. If I take the wings of the dawn, and lodge in the farthest limits of the sea, Even there your hand will lead me, and your right hand will hold me fast. If I say, 'Surely the darkness will cover me, and the light around me turn to night', Even the darkness is not dark for you, night is as light as day, the darkness is as the light to you. (vv. 7-12)

The function of this self quotation is clear enough. The psalmist uses it to express the hypothetical 'possibility' of hiding from God, which the psalmist then dismisses as impossible. The psalmist does not, of course, wish to pass out of God's presence—the self quotation simply functions to set up a false premise, which the psalmist can then deny. Summary. Hypothetical self quotations are such a flexible device, that their function should not be defined too narrowly. Their basic function is to posit a possibility that has not yet come into existence so that the psalmist can play off of this 'possibility' in some way. In the case of Psalm 77, the quotation posits a way of life that the psalmist rejected. In Psalm 94, the quotation posits a prayer that God would answer if the psalmist asked. In Psalm 139, the quotation posits something about God, which the psalmist confesses to be an impossibility.

35. For the pleonastic use of compare Isa. 1.9. normally functions in a conditional sense. To translate it as 'when' lends the clause a temporal sense that is inappropriate. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 74.

3. 'As for Me, I Said'

77

2. The Rhetorical Function of Self Quotations i. Self Quotations as Reperformances of One's Own Speech One of the most important features of direct discourse is that it allows a reporter to take on the point of view of a different speaker and to reperform the speech act of another person.36 With the device of self quotation, however, the reporter and the original speaker are the same person: a speaker quotes herself as if she were another person. This rhetorical device, therefore, allows a speaker to take on a point of view that she may have held at a different time, under different circumstances, and to reperform speech acts that she performed in those different circumstances. The best way to describe the impact that these self quotations create is to describe the contrast that they create. Although the concept of contrast does not do complete justice to the impact of this sort of self quotation, contrast hints well at the way in which these self quotations recreate times that are now gone and the manner in which these self quotations literally give voice to words spoken in different circumstances. No rigid typology can adequately summarize the dynamic fashion in which the psalmists employ this ability of self quotations to contrast circumstances. Sternberg correctly stated that 'typology is less than useless where divorced from teleology' .37 Therefore, rather than proposing a typology for the way self quotations create contrast in the psalms, a short exposition of Psalm 30 is offered as an example of the way self quotations reenact words that the psalmist spoke in previous circumstances, with an eye on the way these quotations create contrast. Brief comments on several other psalms follow. Psalm 30 is a song of thanksgiving in which the psalmist praises God for delivering him from danger. But the psalmist does more than simply describe his past fall into sin and deliverance from trouble. The psalmist transports the audience back in time to the moment of sin—or rather, the psalmist transports the past moment of sin forward in time to the audience by reenacting the moment through quotation: 'I said in my prosperity, "I shall not be made to stagger forever"' (v. 6). The psalmist takes on the point of view of his earlier 'prosperity' (note that the former circumstance is explicitly described—'in my prosperity') and speaks from that perspective: 'I shall not be made to stagger'. The effect of this exchange of perspectives is that the old speech act of boasting in the context of the psalmist's prosperity is spoken again, giving it new life in the present. The psalmist's sin led to a new circumstance—'you hid your face'—and a new speech act of repentant prayer. Once again, the psalmist takes on the point of view of his earlier circumstance—this time the circumstance of suffering—and speaks from that perspective: 'What gain is there in my blood...? Will the dust praise you?

36. See Wierzbicka, 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse'; Coulmas, 'Reported Speech'; Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land'; Austin, How To Do Things With Words; Searle, Speech Acts. 37. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 130.

78

Many are Saying

Will it tell of your faithfulness? Hear, O LORD, be gracious to me; O LORD, be my helper!' (w. 9-10). By speaking in the present moment as if he were still in the circumstance of need, the facts of the old circumstance exist again for a moment in the present.38 But this exchange of perspectives is only brief, and both of these old speech acts are, of course, subsumed in the present moment of the psalm. As Sternberg adamantly maintained, the perspective of the reporter always dominates the perspective of the original speaker.39 This is no less true when the reporter and the original speaker are the same person. The present point of view and circumstance dominate the previous points of view and circumstances. In Psalm 30, of course, the present circumstance is health and the present speech act in which the psalmist is engaging is praise: 'You have taken off my sackcloth and clothed me with joy, so that my soul may praise you and not be silent. O LORD my God, I will give thanks to you forever' (w. 1 lb-12). The earlier speech acts and points of view are reenacted in order to fuel the fire of the psalmist's praise. They function to highlight the contrast between the present moment and the psalmist's earlier speech act of self-confidence born out of prosperity as well as his earlier speech act of repentant prayer born of suffering. The different times and circumstances of the psalm could have been merely described: pride and prosperity, sin and trouble, health and thanksgiving. But by quoting the words spoken at each of these moments, the contrasting moments are more vivid and real. In several other psalms, self quotations are employed to create vivid contrasts between past and present circumstances. Similar to Psalm 30, in Psalm 39, the psalmist reenacts past circumstances of confidence and sin through self quotations and contrasts those times with the present moment. In Psalm 39, however, the past circumstances are reenacted in order to serve as a prayer for help rather than a song of thanksgiving. In Psalm 32, a self quotation reenacts the moment when it dawned upon the psalmist that the path from sickness to health is to be found in confessing one's sin to God: 'I said, "I will confess my transgressions to the LORD. .."' (v. 5). In Psalm 116, a past circumstance of trouble is re-enacted with three different self quotations. The past circumstance is specifically described as a time of 'panic' in which the psalmist nevertheless 'kept faith', and the old speech acts vividly recreate the psalmist's cry in that moment: 'I am greatly afflicted', 'Every human is a liar!' and 'O LORD, save my life!' (vv. 4, 10, 11). In each of these psalms, rather than simply describing old circumstances, the self quotations recreate such circumstances. The psalmist uproots words that were spoken in one circumstance, and replants them in a new context. The result is a poetic depth that exceeds mere description.

38. Recall that in Wierzbicka's theory of quotations as theatrical role play, when a person

quotes another, he 'imagines him as the other person and for a moment behaves in accordance with this counter-factual assumption'. 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', p. 272. 39. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 108. Clark and Gerrig make a similarpoint when they insist that reporters choose what to quote and how much to quote based on the impact that they wish to have on their audience. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations'.

3. 'As for Me, I Said'

79

It would be inappropriate to close the analysis of self quotations as reperformances of the psalmist's own speech without mentioning Psalm 35, the only psalm in which the psalmist quotes words that she intends to speak in the future. As was argued above, in Psalm 35, the psalmist's self quotation is actually a quotation from, or an allusion to a hymn sung in the temple: Then my soul shall rejoice in the LORD, exulting in his salvation. All my bones shall say, 'O LORD, who is like you? Delivering the weak from the one stronger than him, and the weak and needy from the one who robs him', (vv. 9-10)

In this passage, the different circumstance that the psalmist 'reenacts' is a moment that has not yet occurred. This vow to praise is a promise; only if and when God delivers the psalmist from her woes will she be able to fulfil her promise to join the choir and sing, 'O LORD, who is like you?' In this sense, the psalmist is reenacting an event that cannot be reenacted because it has not yet been acted! The contrast here is not between the present and some circumstance in the past but between the present and some hoped-for time to come. ii. Self Quotations as Self-Characterizations A second way that self quotations function in the Psalter is to characterize the psalmists for their audiences. Biblical scholars who employ literary techniques to interpret Old Testament narrative have agreed that direct speech was one of the main devices that biblical authors used to portray the inner character of the men and women of their tales.40 According to David Gunn and Danna Nolan Fewell, direct speech is useful for characterization, because it lets the characters speak for themselves. For, of course, what characters say and how they say it may tell us much about the kind of people they are. Furthermore, close attention to the context of a character's speech, the circumstances in which the speech takes place, can help us to decide what to make of it. Since biblical characters seldom appear alone, we can compare and contrast characters, take note of how they speak to each other, and, in the end, see how one person can help to define another.

Quotations that occur in the Psalter can also be interpreted as a means of depicting the inner character of the men and women that the psalmists encountered. Because Hebrew narrative and Hebrew verse differ significantly in certain features, it cannot be assumed that rhetorical features of Hebrew narrative (such as the use of quotations to depict character) can automatically be extended to Hebrew verse. In the case of self quotations, however, there is legitimate warrant for such an extension. Because the psalmists regularly use self quotations to narrate past

40. See the discussion in Chapter 1, section 2.v. 41. Gunn and Fewell, Narrative in the Hebrew Bible, p. 63.

80

Many are Saying

events, the narrative functions of quotations can be applied to the interpretation of self quotations in the Psalms. Character may be an individual trait, but it is a social phenomenon—personal character is defined in relation to norms that are established within community and in relation to the needs, vices, and virtues of others in community. Therefore, in order to interpret the self-characterizations of the psalmists, as the above quotation from Gunn and Fewell suggests, an interpreter must examine more than just the words quoted in the inset. An interpreter must also consider the context of a character's speech, consider the circumstances in which the speech takes place, and compare what the psalmist says with the speech of other voices quoted in the same psalm. In addition, the concern for character in the Psalter is not limited to the self quotations. Rather, the self quotations are part of a larger concern for internal character. In many psalms, the psalmists reflect upon their inner life: they assert their innocence, confess their guilt, complain about their mental state, express their confidence, and so on. Character is extremely significant to the psalmists—both for them and for the God to whom they pray. The self-characterization effected by self quotations must be understood within the context of the larger concern for character. The self quotations consistently portray the psalmists as people in conversation with God and as people assailed by enemies. The Self in Conversation with God One of the important aspects of character that the self quotations establish is that the psalmists are people in conversation with God. Or, to put the thesis negatively (as the psalmists do), those who fall out of conversation with God fall into danger. The self quotations in Pss. 30.6 and 39.1 illustrate this point: As for me, I said in my prosperity, 'I shall not be made to stagger forever'. (Ps. 30.6) I said, 'I will guard my ways, to keep from sinning with my tongue'. (Ps. 39.1)

As was argued above, in both of these quotations, the psalmist talks to herself, and both quotations reflect points in life in which the psalmist relies on herself and her own abilities. In both of these psalms, the psalmist moves away from reliance on herself toward reliance on God, and in both psalms the psalmist moves from talking to herself to talking to God. Later in both psalms, the psalmist quotes words that she spoke directly to God, and these later words are recalled as the turning points in the psalmist's suffering. The danger of falling out of conversation with God is also illustrated by the enemy quotations, in which characteristically they talk to themselves. The psalmist often quotes words that the fool or the enemy speaks'in his heart' ; Pss. 10.6, 13; 14.1; 35.25; 53.1; compare Job 1.5). These quotations are important not only for what they reveal about the content of the enemy's speech but also because they characterize the fool and the enemy as people who have fallen out of conversation with God, as those who trust in

3. 'As for Me, I Said'

81

themselves. Recall also that one of the characteristic assertions of the enemy is that God does not hear what humans say. The Self Assailed by Enemies. As the above comparison of the psalmist's self quotations with the enemy quotations suggests, the self quotations also characterize the psalmists as people surrounded by and assailed by enemies. Gunn and Fewell advise interpreters to 'compare and contrast characters, [and] take note of how they speak to each other'.42 The psalmists often play off present speech against past speech in order to show change and growth. In the last section, the quotations in Psalms 30 and 39 were treated, in which the psalmist recalls earlier sinful words. In these psalms, the psalmists show growth in character over time. A similar development of character occurs in Psalm 32, where the psalmist quotes his past resolve to confess his sins to God (v. 5). The psalmists also often play off their own speech against the speech of the enemies—the psalmists establish their own innocence, faith, and piety in part by playing themselves off against the enemies, who are shown to be guilty, unfaithful, and impious.

42. Gunn and Fewell, Narrative in the Hebrew Bible, p. 63.

Chapter 4 'THE LORD HAS SWORN': THE FUNCTION OF GOD QUOTATIONS

The psalmist often quotes the speech of God. God is quoted twenty-seven times in eighteen psalms.1 Unlike the enemy quotations and the self quotations, for which 1. Pss. 2.4-6, 7-9; 12.6; 35.3; 46.10; 50.5, 7-15,16-23; 60.6-8; 68.22-23; 75.2-5, 10; 81.6-16; 82.2-4,6-8; 89.3-4,19-37; 90.3; 91.14-16; 95.10-11; 105.11,15; 108.7-9; 110.1,4; 132.11-12,1418. Once again, some passages that others have understood as God quotations are excluded from this investigation. If these passages were included, they would not materially affect the conclusions that are reached. Ps. 14.5 //Ps. 53.5: Many commentators (see Hossfeld, 'Das Prophetische in den Psalmen: Zur Gottesrede der Asafpsalmen im Vergleich mit des der ersten und zweiten Davidpsalters', in F. Diedrich and B. Willmes (eds.), Ich bewirke das Heil und erschaffe das Unheil (Jesaja 45.7), Studien zur Botschaft der Propheten: Festschrift fur Lothar Ruppert zum 65. Geburtstag (FB, 65; Wurzburg: Echter, 1998), pp. 223-43) understand these verses as the speech of God spoken by a priest in answer to the petition of the psalmist. There is no verb of speaking, however, and no internal deictic signal to suggest a change in speaker. It is better to understand these verses as the psalmist's own answer to the theological question posed by the psalm. Ps. 27.8: Hossfeld ('Das Prophetische in den Psalmen', p. 232) understands this verse as the voice of God. His reading is not accepted here. See the comment in the previous chapter. Ps. 32.8-9: These verses may be plausibly understood either as the speech of God or as the psalmist's instruction about proper living. There is no verb of speaking to mark a shift in speakers. It is possible to interpret the phrase, 'I will counsel you with my eye upon you' as a shift in hierarchical deixis, indicating that God is now speaking. But the case is ambiguous. Note that the passage is similar to Pss. 32.6-7 and 34.11-14 (see below), which are best understood as the instruction of the psalmist. Because the passage is ambiguous, it is best to leave it out of this investigation of the function of direct discourse in the Psalter. (See R.J. Tournay, Seeing and Hearing God with the Psalms: The Prophetic Liturgy of the Second Temple in Jerusalem (JSOTSup, 118; Sheffield: Sheffield University Press, 1991), pp. 167-68.) Ps. 34.11-14: These verses also may be plausibly understood either as the speech of God or as the psalmist's instruction about proper fear of the LORD. Because the LORD is referred to in the third person and because there is no verb of speaking to mark a change in speakers, it is preferrable to understand this as the psalmist's instruction. Note also that there is no hierarchical deixis to mark a change to God speaking. Ps. 68.12: The verse probably quotes the speech of God, but this is not certain; therefore the verse is excluded from the investigation (see P. Miller, The Divine Warrior in Early Israel (HSM, 5; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973), p. 108). Ps. 87.6: NRSV and others understand this passage as describing what God records in a divine book. As such, this could be understood as a God quotation. The meaning of the verse is far from

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

83

there is little or no history of scholarly investigation, the God quotations have been the subject of a tremendous amount of research. It is necessary, therefore, to review some major features of this history of interpretation before addressing the psalm passages in which the God quotations occur. The history that follows does not seek to be comprehensive. Rather, it seeks to be representative of the state of research and especially seeks to review important methodological contributions. I . A History of Interpretation of the God Quotations Old Testament scholars have been uncharacteristically uniform in their approach to the God quotations in the psalms. First, these God quotations have been consistently labelled as 'oracles'. The term oracle is problematic, because it denotes forms and functions of divine communication that do not do justice to some of the God quotations in the Psalter. More will need to be said about the term 'oracle' later. At this point, it is enough to note that the term is a fixed feature of scholarship. Second, scholars have largely interpreted these oracles in relation to mediating figures who are understood to have been active in the ancient Israelite cult. That is, the God quotations are usually understood as 'oracles' that were delivered by a cultic prophet or priest. While scholars have offered differing reconstructions of the activities and identities of such cultic prophets, the recourse to such prophets as the best way to explain the function of the God quotations is a widely held position. As W.H. Bellinger has noted, 'Today it is virtually the orthodox position to understand cultic prophecy as the explanation of prophetic elements in the Psalms.'2 At the outset, it should be noted that the history of interpretation reviewed here is not the history of interpretation of the God quotations in the Psalter per se, but a history of scholarly theories regarding the relationship between psalmody and prophecy. Because the God quotations in the Psalter are routinely understood under the rubric of the relationship between psalmody and prophecy, this history is relevant to the current study. But it must be stressed that the scholars certain, however, and it is best excluded from the present study. (See H.P. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms ofAsaph (SBLDS, 88; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988), pp. 127-36.) Ps. 110.3b: Kraus argued that this verse is an oracle to the king, similar to the oracles in Ps 110.1 and 4. He translated the phrase: 'On holy mountains, from the womb of the rosy dawn, have I begotten you like the dew' (Psalms 60-150, p. 344; cf. Ps. 72.6). Unlike the other two God quotations in Psalm 110, however, this verse has no introductory verb of speaking. The psalm as a whole is fraught with textual problems, including this verse. Understanding this as a God quotation disrupts the balanced twofold structure of the psalm (vv. 1-3, 4-7) in which each half of the psalm begins with a quotation formula ('The LORD says' and 'The LORD has sworn'), followed by divine speech, and then 'a declaration of the LORD'S policy with respect to the addressee' (Mays, Psalms, p. 350). Although the meaning of v. 3 is obscure, it is better not to understand it as the speech of God. S. Starbuck's atomizing interpretation of the psalm as containing seven different God quotations is too conjectural to follow (Court Oracles in the Psalms: The So-CalledRoyal Psalms in their Ancient Near Eastern Context (SBLDS, 172; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1999), pp. 142-61). 2. W.H. Bellinger, Psalmody and Prophecy (JSOTSup, 27; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984), p. 16.

84

Many are Saying

reviewed below did not conduct synthetic studies of divine speech in the Psalter. It is a safe historical conclusion that Israelite prophets did operate in and around the cult, as passages such as 1 Samuel 1-3 and Isaiah 6 make clear. Furthermore, prophetic activity in the cult was a common feature of religious life in the ancient Near East, as prophetic texts from Mari and Neo-Assyrian prophetic texts attest.3 The precise roles and identities of these prophets is, however, far from certain. More to the point, the automatic recourse to such cultic prophets as the best way to explain the function of the God quotations needs to be re-evaluated. i. J. Begrich In an extremely influential article, Joachim Begrich argued that the turn of mood from complaint and petition to trust and the intention to praise that occurs at the end of lament psalms is best explained by supposing that a priest spoke an oracle of salvation or an oracle of assurance to the petitioner.4 Begrich argued: When an individual, who had entered into a sanctuary with a lament for Yahweh, had exhausted his laments and prayers, then a priest came out. Perhaps on the basis of an offertory answer, he would turn to the pray-er with an oracle of Yahweh and, referring to his laments and prayers, he would assure him of God's hearing and help.5

Begrich drew upon texts from Second Isaiah and elsewhere in order to reconstruct these priestly oracles of salvation.6 According to his reconstruction: the priest employed direct address to deliver God's message of assurance,7 some reference to the petitioner's situation or complaint was often incorporated into the divine answer, the oracle began with 'fear not' or 'peace', a sentence followed that began with listing the basis for the assurance given, and often the oracle mentioned the specific way in which the LORD would help the petitioner. ii. S. Mowinckel Mowinckel largely agreed with Begrich's interpretation, but rather than focusing on psalms of the individual, Mowinckel shifted his attention to psalms that seemed to indicate a liturgical context (such as Psalms 2, 50, 53, 72, 81, 82, 89, 110, and 132). Mowinckel assigned these psalms to the New Year's festival, and he interpreted the God quotations within them as fixed prophetic elements that were

3. See R.R. Wilson, Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), pp. 98-123. 4. J. Begrich, 'Das priestliche Heilsorakel', ZAW 52 (1934), pp. 81-92. For an excellent discussion of pertinent issues, including the form of the salvation oracle, extra-biblical salvation oracles, oracles in Old Testament prose texts, and oracles in the psalms, see Miller, They Cried to the Lord, pp. 135-77. 5. Begrich, 'Das priestliche Heilsorakel', p. 82, my translation. 6. ThetextsthatBegrichcitesare:Isa.41.8-13, 14-16; 43.1-31,5; 44.2-5; 48.17-19; 49.7, 1415; 51.7-8; 54.4-8; Jer. 30.10-1 (= 46.27-8); Ps. 35.3; and Lam. 3.57. 7. Note that some of the passages that are often cited as examples of this type of oracle are address to an audience, but are not direct discourse (cf. Pss. 21.8-12; 27.14; 34.7-10; 85.8-13).

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

85

spoken by priestly/prophetic figures.8 Mowinckel pointed out that prophetic guilds were active in the temple, and that priest and prophet were overlapping categories. As Begrich had reconstructed a salvation oracle as an answer to an individual's prayer, Mowinckel proposed that the ritual of a particular festival would provide that at a certain point the prophet was to announce Yahweh's answer to the [communal] prayer, and that the substance of the answer was prescribed by the festival, whereas the wording and composition were left to the free and instantaneous inspiration of the prophet. But it is just as possible that the wording of the promise would be prescribed by the ritual...9

Mowinckel pointed out that the God quotations in the Psalter did not follow the typical apodictic style of the priestly writing, but 'distinctly kept in the usual prophetic style. This seems to show a likelihood that they arose within the prophetic circles and the basis of prophetic style and traditional ideas, consequently that they were also announced by one of the temple prophets in the cult liturgy.'10 Thus, Mowinckel concluded that the oracles had a 'permanent place within the ritual framework of the festal cult', that they 'gave expression to the psalmist's evident consciousness of being inspired', but also show that the prophet was allowed a certain degree of 'free, spontaneous prophetic inspiration'.11 It is important to note that in Mowinckel's interpretation, the moment of divine 'inspiration' occurred as the psalm was performed in the cult. That is, the prophetic figure who spoke in God's voice was inspired during the cultic liturgy. Mowinckel understood these psalms as generic liturgies that were used again and again in different years—he even called Psalm 132 'the libretto of a holy drama'.12 Mowinckel's location of the God quotations within the liturgy is very important. While these psalms cannot be used—as Mowinckel thought they could—to reconstruct the liturgies of the Jerusalem temple, a liturgical setting of some sort is often implied by the psalms. His understanding of the function of the quotation within the liturgy (to give an affirmative answer to a congregational prayer), his understanding of the 'inspired moment' taking place during the liturgy, and his interpretation of a prophetic figure as the speaker of these passages remain problematic.

8. On the New Year's Festival, see S. Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien II: Das Thronbesteigungsfest Jahwas und der Ursprung der Eschatologie (Kristiania: Jacob Dybwald, 1923); The Psalms in Israel's Worship, I, pp. 106-192. On the prophetic element in the psalms, see Mowinckel, Psalmenstudien III: Kultprophetie undProphetische Psalmen (Kristiania: Jacob Dybwald, 1922); The Psalms in Israel's Worship, II, pp. 53-73. Mowinckel was not the first scholar to locate the God quotations in the cultic liturgy, but he offered the first comprehensive study and his theories have been the most influential. 9. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, II, p. 57. 10. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, II, p. 58. 11. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, II, p. 65. 12. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, II, p. 76.

86

Many are Saying

iii. H. Gunkel Gunkel understood the 'prophetic' elements in the psalms largely in terms of a supposed 'eschatological' theme.13 According to Gunkel, this eschatology was comprised of seven 'joys': the restoration of Zion and the people of Israel, 'the overthrow of the nations', 'the great natural calamities of the end time', the 'overthrow' of the eschatological chaos waters, the establishment of'the kingdom of righteousness' without war, the universal extension of Zion's domain, and the sovereignty of the LORD in heaven.14 Gunkel dated all of these prophetic/eschatological psalms to the postexilic period.15 Gunkel thought that this eschatological element in the cult (and thus in the psalms) was not evidence of prophetic activity in the cult, but of prophetic influence on the cult. According to Gunkel, the cultic psalms imitated prophetic speech, but had broken away from prophecy: 'Their external situation is not affected by the prophets.'16 When Gunkel imagined the cultic settings of the psalms with God quotations, he assigned them to cultic performances. He identified these psalm types mainly as liturgies (Psalms 50, 53, 72, 81, 82, and so on). Gunkel agreed with Mowinckel that the quoted 'word of YHWH' in these psalms betrays a 'cultic reality',17 but he strongly objected to the idea of cultic prophets.18 Gunkel could discover 'nothing more than prophetic influence upon the postexilic cult'.19 He also pointed out that the speech forms of the God quotations (admonitions, warnings) mimic not the cultic prophets but the prophets of judgement, who 'do not presuppose the holy site'.20 These speech forms were 'adopted' in the liturgy. The adoption of these speech forms into the liturgies suggests that one accept that the prophetic words were spoken by the same persons who would otherwise have proclaimed the oracle in the liturgy. One should thus think of a priest or a temple singer, but not a prophet.. .This consideration gains weight when one realizes that these prophetic psalms were designed for repeated performances, requiring that their content be fixed.

Thus, Gunkel interpreted the God quotations mainly as imitations of prophetic speech forms. Gunkel, like Mowinckel, understood these psalms as the generic texts of 'stock liturgies' that could be reused. Another of Gunkel's important contributions is his stress on ancient Near Eastern parallels that shed light on the God

13. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms: The Genres of the Religious Lyric of Israel (completed by J. Begrich; trans. J.D. Nogalski; Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1998), pp. 251-92. 14. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, pp. 251-63. 15. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, pp. 290-92 16. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, p. 282. 17. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, p. 284. 18. Gunkel accused Mowinckel of confusing form and setting. According to Gunkel, Mowinckel collapsed the offices of priest and prophet, failing to see that priests and prophets obtained their divine revelations in different manners and thus performed in different settings. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, pp. 284-87. 19. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, p. 286. 20. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, p. 286. 21. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, p. 287. Emphasis in original.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

87

quotations in the psalms. He pointed out that the ancient Near Eastern corpus contains many oracles to rulers, prayers for kings, royal laments, hymns to kings, and so on.22 Gunkel's reconstruction of psalmic eschatology cannot be accepted, nor can his postexilic dating of many of these psalms, but his understanding of liturgy— especially his understanding of the 'repeated performance' of the God quotations— is a contribution that must be considered in any interpretation of the God quotations in these psalms. To be more specific, if a psalm in which a passage of divine speech occurs shows signs that it was a liturgy that was used repeatedly in the cult, then one's interpretation of the divine speech must make allowances for such repeat performances—it is unlikely that a prophet under the influence of any sort of trance would have functioned in this sort of setting; thus divine speech in liturgies will have to be explained in some other way. It is important to note at this point, that between Begrich and Gunkel, descriptions of the God quotations as 'oracles' were applied to divine direct discourse that occurs in both individual and communal psalms. iv. A. Johnson In a series of studies over a long career, Aubrey Johnson interpreted the speaking voice of the God quotations mainly as prophetic figures.23 Johnson was primarily interested in the relation of prophecy to kingship and cult and not in the psalms per se. He began his argument about the relationship of prophecy to cult with the God quotations to show the activity of prophets in the psalms, and then argued for an expanded role for those prophets. The relevant point for the purposes of the present investigation is that Johnson interpreted the speakers of the God quotations as prophetic figures, and he imagines that the psalms in which the quotations occur were performed in a liturgical setting. v. A. Haldar In 1945, Alfred Haldar published an important study in which he compared the cultic activity of prophetic figures in various ancient Near Eastern cultures.24 Haldar argued that Israelite prophecy was part of a larger Sumero-Akkadian prophetic phenomenon. He concluded that the in Israel, like the 'baru', 'salu', 'sabru', and 'mahhu' in Mesopotamia, were 'ecstatic' figures who often operated within the cult. The ecstatics were organized in groups under a prophetic or royal leader. Haldar did not treat the God quotations in the Psalter explicitly, but did cite them as evidence of prophetic activity in the cult. Haldar's study is dated and in many of

22. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, pp. 113-34. 23. A. Johnson, 'The Prophet in Israelite Religion', ExpTim 47 (1935-36), pp. 312-19; The Cultic Prophet in Ancient Israel (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1944); The Cultic Prophet and Israel's Psalmody (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1979); see also Johnson's Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1955). 24. A. Haldar, Associations of Cult Prophets among the Ancient Semites (Uppsala: Almqvist andWiksells, 1945).

88

Many are Saying

the specific conclusions cannot be followed, but remains important to the extent that the God quotations in the psalms are understood in relation to prophetic activity in the cult. Robert Wilson's later study of prophecy is both more careful and more up to date, and it reached similar conclusions.25 vi. J. Jeremias Jorg Jeremias argued that the cult prophets in the Jerusalem temple reported the word of God through oracles and interceded on behalf of people.26 They sought to purify the nation of sin in order to save the nation. The activity of these prophets is exhibited in certain Klageliturgien ('lament liturgies') such as Psalms 12, 14, and 75, in which the prophets sought an oracle from the LORD. In terms of the oracles in three psalms, however, Jeremias argued that Psalms 50, 81, and 95—'the great festival psalms'—arose in Levitical circles, and their speakers would have been Levitical priests, rather than cult prophets. Jeremias's contribution is important because of his sensitivity to the different functions of God quotations within different psalm genres (a sensitivity that Gunkel also showed). In terms of methodology, Jeremias's study implied that both the form of the psalm in which a God quotation occurs and the specific role of that God quotation within the psalm must be considered. vii. W. Bellinger Jr. In 1984, Bellinger published a study of the prophetic elements within the psalms of lament.27 Bellinger argued for a cultic setting for the individual laments (Psalms 7, 9/10,28,31,36, 55,57, and 64) and the communal laments (Psalms 12, 14,60, 85, and 126). Bellinger followed Begrich in understanding an oracular 'certainty of a hearing' as a 'uniform phenomenon in the laments'.28 An important contribution of Bellinger is his focus on the function of the oracular saying, rather than on the identity of the speaker: It is important to note that it is not the identity of the cultic functionary who delivered the expression of certainty, nor any type of assurance leading to that expression, which determines that the text has a prophetic character. It is rather primarily the function which the language of the text conveys and that function in this case can be considered prophetic... However, it is important to note that the function in this case is also clearly in a liturgical context rather than an explicitly historical one. So the function of the certainty of a hearing in the individual laments in Israel's cult is to anticipate deliverance for the worshippers and the ?Q downfall of the enemies.

25. Wilson, Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel. It should be noted that Wilson conceived of the Mesopotamian oracular speakers as far more peripheral to the cult than Haldar did. 26. J. Jeremias, Kultprophetie und Gerichtsverkundigung in der spdten Konigzeit (WMANT, 35; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1970). 27. Bellinger, Psalmody and Prophecy. 28. Bellinger, Psalmody and Prophecy, p. 91. 29. Bellinger, Psalmody and Prophecy, pp. 58-59.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

89

Although Bellinger identified the God quotations as 'oracular forms' in the Psalter, he denied both that these forms necessarily involved a prophet and that the 'originally cultic forms' were always bound to the cult.30 viii. H. Nasuti In a study of tradition history in the Psalms of Asaph, Harry Nasuti made important methodological contributions to the study of the God quotations in the Psalter.31 Nasuti employed 'formal criteria' to distinguish between a 'quotation type' of divine direct discourse in the psalms and a 'non-quotation type'. Nasuti pointed out that the quotation frames that mark some of the God quotations imply that the divine speech that is quoted occurred in the past rather than the present. He cited such quotation formulas as in Ps. 2.7, in Pss. 60.8 and 108.7, and in Pss. 110.4 and 132.11, as well as similar formulas in Psalms 68,108, and possibly Psalms 12 and 89, as implying a past communication from the deity rather than a present encounter with the deity.32 'In contrast to these quotation examples are those cases of divine speech which seem to imply a.present encounter with the Deity.,'33 To this category, Nasuti assigned the divine speeches in Psalms 46, 50, 75, 81, 82, 85, 91, 95, and perhaps 87. He pointed out that all of these psalms betray a communal or liturgical-cultic character, and that almost all of these psalms belong to the Psalms of Asaph or Korah—the singer groups of the temple. According to Nasuti, This [type] is not a mere quotation used to buttress an ongoing argument. Rather, it is only by envisioning a cultic situation in which the speech of the Deity is a present reality that one can explain such a verse. Put in another way, it is the expectations of the original cultic audience which allow such a transition to be meaningful.34

Nasuti classified these non-quotation divine speeches as 'oracles or proclamations of salvation', and concluded on the basis of comparative ancient Near Eastern data that 'possession' or some sort of 'trance behavior' was the best way to explain them.35 Nasuti's main contribution to the present study lies in his use of the 'formal criteria' of the quotation frames to distinguish between those God quotations that imply a past communication and those that imply a present communication from God. Nasuti is correct that the quotation formulas in some psalms imply that the quoted divine speech occurred in the past rather than in the present. Nasuti's methodological concern for 'the expectations of the original cultic audience' is also to be commended. Nasuti's attention to the formal analysis of the psalms and his methodological concern may be pushed further than he pushed them, however. There are other important formal markers in addition to the quotation formulas that

30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.

Bellinger, Psalmody and Prophecy, p. 93. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms of Asaph. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms of Asaph, pp. 128-30. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms of Asaph, p. 130. Emphasis added. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms of Asaph, p. 130. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms of Asaph, pp. 140-49.

90

Many are Saying

may indicate a given divine speech represents the quotation of a past communication from the deity. For example, as Gunkel warned, if a psalm is in the form of a liturgy, then interpretation of the divine speech within that psalm will have to allow for the repeated quotation of that divine speech as the liturgy was reused over time.36 ix. K. Koenen In a 1996 form-critical study of the God quotations in the Psalter, Klaus Koenen analysed the function of the God quotations in the psalms.37 Koenen paid particular attention to the function that the God quotations play in different contexts: 'The words of God in the psalms are very diverse and have in their individual contexts different functions.'38 For the present study, this attention to function is especially important. Similar to Nasuti, Koenen distinguished between those God quotations whose function he understood as being spoken in the psalmist's present moment and those quotations that consisted of quotations from an older tradition. Koenen divided the quotations spoken in the present moment into two groups: announcements of salvation (in Psalms 12, 32, 35, 46, 87, and 91) and exhortations (in Psalms 50, 75, 81, and 95). Koenen thought that these present-moment quotations are best explained by prophetic activity in the cult. According to Koenen, the quotations that cite from earlier tradition were often used in situations of need and preceded petitions directed to God. This function might be best described as theological reflection.39 The psalmist would cite earlier oracular promises in order to motivate God to act in the present. An approach very similar to Koenen's is followed below. x. S. Starbuck In a study of the royal psalms, Scott R. A. Starbuck argued that the oracles in Psalms 2, 89, 110, and 132 are not original to those psalms, but had been 'reappropriated' from other contexts.40 Starbuck pointed out that the royal psalms of the Hebrew Psalter bear one marked difference from the royal hymns and prayers of the ancient Near East: they never mention the personal name or regnal name of a sovereign. Starbuck argued that this lacuna points to a 'reworking' of these hymns and

36. Hossfeld ('Das Prophetische in den Psalmen', pp. 223-43) holds that most of the speeches attributed to God in the Asaph psalms do not reflect cultic prophecy but rather theological reflection. 37. K. Koenen, Gottesworte in den Psalmen: Eine Formgeschichtliche Untersuchung (BTS, 30; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1996). 38. Koenen, Gottesworte in den Psalmen, p. 67, my translation. 39. A similar view is taken by Hossfeld ('Das Prophetische in den Psalmen') and H. Spieckermann ('Rede Gottes und Wort Gottes in den Psalmen', in K. Seybold and E. Zenger (eds.), Neue Wege der Psalmenforschung: Fur Walter Beyerlin (Herders Biblische Studien, 1; Freiburg: Herder, 1994), pp. 157-73). Spieckermann investigated some of the God quotations in the Psalter as a way of getting at the theology of the Psalms as the Word of God. 40. Starbuck, Court Oracles in the Psalms, especially chapter 4. Starbuck also argued that Psalm 91 contains a democratized royal oracle that had been reappropriated for common worship.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

91

prayers.41 Starbuck marshalled an impressive array of ancient Near Eastern parallels to the 'royal oracles' of the Psalter. He discovered that all of the extrabiblical ancient Near Eastern royal oracles specifically mention the king to whom the oracle was given by name. Therefore Starbuck concluded that the oracular sections in the Psalter (which never mention any king by name except David, the founder of the dynasty) had been reworked to eliminate specific mention of personal and regnal names. Starbuck rejected Gunkel's idea that the lack of royal names in the royal psalms (including those with oracular sections) indicates that these psalms comprised generic 'stock liturgies' that were used for many different kings.42 Instead, in each case where the reuse and reappropriation of royal materials can be observed, the reappropriation has occasioned significant alterations of the original text. Given the fact that the [royal psalms] do not name the protagonist king, it is clear that the [royal psalms] are not simply historical artifacts that have been copied into the Psalter.43

Starbuck's proposal is important to the present study because it underscores the fact that the oracles in such psalms as Psalms 2, 89, 110, and 132 may have been reworked prior to their inclusion in those psalms. This means that rather than basing the interpretation of the function of these God quotations on any imagined or reconstructed 'original' liturgical or enthronement setting, the function of these God quotations must be determined based on their role within the final forms of the psalms in which they occur.44 xi. Conclusions Several methodological conclusions may be drawn from this history of interpretation. First, the function of the God quotations must be evaluated primarily based on the role that the quotations play in the final form of the psalms, rather than on

41. According to Starbuck, the reworking of these texts shifted the propagandistic effects of the texts away from a specific king or royal house to the 'office' of kingship in general. Starbuck also argued that the reworking of these texts should be understood as functioning to democratize the concept of kingship. 42. Starbuck, Court Oracles in the Psalms, p. 94: 'According to the remains of the ancient Near East, and according to what is attested in the Hebrew Bible, monarchs did not reuse in toto hymns and prayers from other monarchs.' See Gunkel, Introduction to the Psalms, pp. 99-120. 43. Starbuck, Court Oracles in the Psalms, p. 98. 44. The interpretation of R. J. Tournay (Seeing and Hearing God with the Psalms) should at least be noted. Tournay argued that the speaking voice of both the 'oracles' and the psalms in which those oracles occur should be understood as 'Levitical singer(s)' (p. 93). Using the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and 1-2 Chronicles, Tournay reconstructed the proper 'place in the religious life of the Jewish people' in which the psalms were performed (p. 29). Tournay argued that in the postexilic period, the Levitical singers took over both royal functions that had previously belonged to the king and oracular functions that had previously belonged to the prophets. He interpreted the Davidic superscriptions as evidence that the speaking voice of the psalm should be understood prophetically, since David spoke prophetically. He interpreted the oracles that occur in liturgical psalms as answers to the community's prayers.

92

Many are Saying

any reconstructed original setting.45 In some psalms, it is evident that a God quotation from an older tradition has been quoted in a later psalm. While the older tradition is a valid topic of research, the focus here is on the rhetorical function of the God quotations in the final forms of the psalms. This does, however, relate to a second methodological conclusion. As Nasuti and Koenen argued, at least some God quotations seem to imply the quotation of a past divine communication rather than a present communication from the deity through some oracular speaker. This insight is accepted here, and is taken as a point of departure for the present investigation. This has ramifications for how an interpreter understands the 'moment of revelation' of the relevant divine speeches: for those speeches that quote older material, the moment of revelation should not be understood as occurring simultaneously with the performance of the psalm. Nasuti's attention to the formal features of the psalms and his methodological warning about the expectations of the original cultic audiences also lead to two more conclusions. Third, where the formal features of a psalm indicate an implied liturgical setting for a given psalm, the interpretation of the divine speech in that psalm must account for the repeated performances of the psalm. This also has ramifications for how the moment of revelation is understood, since a God quotation that is repeated numerous times in the liturgy will not imply a present communication from God. Fourth, the way that a God quotation interacts with the formal elements of the psalm types will be important. For example, the 'oracles of salvation' as Begrich imagined them were supposed to have occurred between the petition and the final confession of trust. The present investigation pays significant attention to the placement of the God quotations within the psalms, and especially to their placement with respect to the petitions in the prayers for help. Two other issues raised by the history of interpretation merit more discussion here: the use of the term oracle to describe the God quotations in the psalms and the extent to which ancient Near Eastern parallels can be considered 'similar' to the God quotations found in the psalms. Are the God quotations 'oracles'? The term oracle should only be applied to the God quotations in the Psalter with the greatest care. This is because—for better or worse—the term usually implies a present communication from the deity, often in response to specific questions or concerns.46 For example, the NRSV consistently uses 'oracle' to translate the Hebrew word in contexts that imply a present communication from God in a specific situation (see 2 Kgs. 9.25-26; Isa. 13.214.23; 14.29-32; Zech. 9.1-11.3; and so on). The term is used in the secondary 45. Hossfeld applied this functional analysis to the God quotations of the first and second Davidic Psalters and the Asaph psalms. It is striking that by asking the question of thefunction of the God quotations in these psalms, Hossfeld reversed at least one of his earlier published opinions on the God quotations (the opinion in question being whether a priest spoke the oracle mentioned in Ps. 35.3; 'Das Prophetische in den Psalmen', pp. 223-43). 46. See 'Orakel', in H.Haag(ed.),Bibel-Lexikon (Zurich: Benziger, 1968), p. 1271;R.D. Weis, 'Oracle: Old Testamet', inABD V, pp. 28-29; F.T. Miosi, 'Oracle: Ancient Egypt', ABD V, pp. 2930; C. Westerman, Prophetic Oracles of Salvation in the Old Testament (trans. K.R. Crim; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991).

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

93

literature for the sort of enquiring of God through Urim and Thummim (a practice specifically associated with priests, it should be noted; see Exod. 28.30; Lev. 8.8; Deut. 33.8; Ezra 2.63; Neh. 7.65), through mediums (such as Saul is described as doing in 1 Samuel 28), or through lots (such as the sailors are described as doing in Jonah 1), or through various sorts of divination and omens (such as the many prophetic texts at Mari and throughout Mesopotamia bear witness). As Starbuck pointed out, even in the case of ancient Near Eastern royal oracles, the communication from the deity was a communication to a particular sovereign in a particular context, as the following text makes clear: Thus did he (Sennacherib) ask of Samas and Adad by divination [ina biri]: 'Is this the heir to my throne?' and they responded to him with a strong affirmative: 'He is your successor. ,47

Note that in this text the divine communication is in response to a specific question and gives a specific, time-bound answer. Begrich's original theory of the 'salvation oracles' delivered by cultic prophets also understood the concept of 'oracle' as a specific communication to a specific individual—he based his theory on the belief that a cultic figure addressed an oracle to a petitioner in the midst of the petitioner's prayer. All of this suggests that the term oracle often implies a present communication from the deity. This connotation is not appropriate for all of the God quotations in the Psalter, because most of them cannot be understood as a present communication from God. The terms 'oracle' and especially 'oracle of salvation'48 are also inappropriate to many of the God quotations of the Psalter from a form-critical perspective. According to Begrich's reconstruction of the oracle of salvation, 'The oracle normally begins with the words, "Do not fear" '.49 Begrich is surely correct that one of the formal indicators of the oracle of salvation is the opening imperative ('fear not!'). However, the phrase occurs only twice in the entire Psalter (Pss. 49.16; 91.5) and never in one of the God quotations. Moreover, Begrich developed this theory to account for the shift in mood ('Umschwung der Stimmung') between the petition and the confession of trust that occurs in individual lament psalms.50 Only one of the God quotations in the Psalter occurs at this position in a psalm (Psalm 12, see below). It is true that some of the God quotations, such as Pss. 46.10 and 91.14-16, do function to assure the cultic audience of God's protection. But neither of these passages occurs in a prayer for help, and both quotations come at the end of their respective psalms, rather than at a turning point within the psalm. For these reasons, the terms 'oracle' and 'oracle of salvation' should only be applied to the God quotations of the Psalter with the greatest care. 47. Starbuck, Court Oracles in the Psalms, p. 122. Starbuck cites R. Borger, Die Inschriften Asarhaddons, Konigs von Assyrien (AfDB, 9; Osnabriick: Biblio-Verlag, 1967), p. 40. Starbuck multiplies the example, see pp. 68-82, 122. 48. Against Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms ofAsaph, pp. 140-49. 49. Begrich, 'Das priestliche Heilsorakel', p. 83, my translation. See also Westermann, Prophetic Oracles of Salvation in the Old Testament. 50. Begrich, 'Das priestliche Heilsorakel, p. 81.

94ManyareSaying

Many are Saying

To what extent do the God quotations have ancient Near Eastern parallels? It will be recalled that an important aspect of the history of interpretation is the reliance on ancient Near Eastern parallels to explain the God quotations: Gunkel argued that the parallels bear 'a great deal of similarity' to the God quotations of the royal psalms;51 Mowinckel used such parallels in his reconstruction of the Israelite New Year's festival;52 Haldar used them to argue for prophetic involvement in the cult and in his understanding of the organization of prophetic groups;53 Nasuti concluded on the basis of the comparative data that those divine speeches that imply a 'direct encounter' with the deity can best be explained by prophetecstatic behaviour;54 and Starbuck used the comparative data to argue that the 'oracles' in the royal psalms had been reworked prior to their 'reappropriation' in those psalms.55 There is no question that comparative material from ancient Near Eastern cultures is helpful in understanding many aspects of the God quotations in the Psalter. The comparative material can help modern interpreters to understand mythological language and symbols, to reconstruct historical contexts, to decipher images and metaphors, to understand royal language, to interpret poetic genres, and so on. But most ancient Near Eastern parallels are not perfect parallels. That is, the parallel material usually is both similar and dissimilar to the biblical material to which it is being compared. This means that the interpreter needs to be honest about both the similarity and the dissimilarity of the comparative data. Five examples can illustrate this issue in terms of the God quotations. First, in Ps. 2.7, God says to the king: 'You are my son, today I have begotten you.' Egyptian parallels help to explain the concept of the king as God's son, the mythological conception of a deity begetting the king, and possible historical situations (such as the king's enthronement) in which Psalm 2 might have been used.56 An example of such an Egyptian parallel is an oracle from the god PtahTatenen to Ramses III: I am thy father. I begot thee, so that thy entire body is of the gods, for I assumed my form as the Ram, the Lord of <Mendes>, and I cohabited with thy August mother.. .1 begot thee, appearing like Re, and I exalted thee before the gods; the King of Upper and Lower Egypt: Usermare-Meriamon; Son of Re: Ramses III.57

51. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, pp. 113-14. 52. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, I, pp. 106-92. 53. Haldar, Associations of Cult Prophets among the Ancient Semites, especially chapter 1. 54. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms ofAsaph, pp. 140-49. 55. Starbuck, Court Oracles in the Psalms, especially chapter 4. 56. See G. von Rad, 'The Royal Ritual in Judah', in The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays (trans. E.W. Trueman Dicken; London: SCM Press, 1966), pp. 222-31; and J.J.M. Roberts, 'Whose Child Is This? Reflections on the Speaking Voice in Isaiah 9.4', HTR 90 (1997), pp. 11529. 57. W.F. Edgerton and J.A. Wilson, Historical Records of Ramses III: The Texts in Medinet Habu (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization, 12; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1936), pis. 105-106 Ins. 3-5. Cited in Starbuck, Court Oracles in the Psalms, p. 152.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

95

Second, in Psalm 2, the nations are described as preparing to revolt 'against the LORD and his anointed' and God responds by promising the king: 'I will give the nations as your inheritance' (v. 8a). An Assyrian oracle regarding Ashurbanipal can help to explain the social phenomenon of rebelling vassals, the language in Psalm 2 of the king as God's son, and the role of God in granting victory over those nations: [The kings] of the countries confer together (saying), 'Come, (let us rise) against Ashurbanipal.. .The fate of our fathers...' [Nin]lil answered saying, '[The kings] of the lands [I shall overthrow, place under the yoke, bind their feet in [strong fetters]... 'Ninlil is his mother. Fear not! The mistress of Arbele bore him. Fear not. Fear not, my son, whom I have raised.'5

Even more importantly, the Assyrian parallel can explain the role of the deity as the one who supports and legitimates the king in the face of rebelling vassals. Third, in Ps. 110.1, 'The LORD says to my lord, "Sit at my right hand, until I have made your enemies into your footstool."' Egyptian iconography provides helpful images that illumine the meaning of God's speech here. In one image, Pharaoh Horemheb and the god Horus are shown sitting next to each other on a throne—Horemheb is literally sitting on the right hand of Horus.59 Another widely attested iconographic motif depicts a king sitting on his throne, with his feet resting on a footstool—in the footstool, there appear nine human figures representing defeated enemies.60 These parallels help the interpreter to understand the symbolism of Ps. 110.1, and they make it clear that the figure to whom God speaks in Ps. 110.1 must be the king. Fourth, in Ps. 91.15, God announces: 'When he calls to me, I will answer him; I will be with him in distress, I will deliver him and grant him honour.' A stela erected by King Zakkur of Hamath is often cited as an important parallel for understanding this God quotation and various other aspects of the speech of God in the Psalter.61 In the stela, the king describes help that he received from his god. The stela begins, 'I am [Zakkur], king of Hamat and Lu'ath. A humble man I am. Be'elshamayn [helped me] and stood by me...' The king tells of an enemy coalition that besieged him in his city. But I lifted up my hand to Be'elshamayn, and Be'elshamayn heard me. Be'elshamayn [spoke] to me through seers and diviners. Be'elshamayn [said to me]: Do not fear, for I made you king, and I shall stand by you and deliver you from all [these kings who] set up a siege against you.. , 62

58. 'Oracle of Ninlil Concerning Ashurbanipal', ANET, p. 451. 59. See the drawing of this image in O. Keel, The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms (trans. T. J. Hallett; New York: Seabury Press, 1978), p. 263. 60. Keel, The Symbolism of the Biblical World, pp. 254-56. 61. For example, see Miller, They Cried to the Lord, pp. 150-52. 62. 'Zakir of Hamat and Lu'ath', ANET, p. 655.

96

Many are Saying

The king later reports how in gratitude for Be'elshamayn's help, 'I built houses for the gods everywhere in my country'.63 As Miller has pointed out, the Zakkur inscription shows the same sequence as Ps. 91.15: calling out to a god, receiving an answer from the god (evidently through a seer or oracular speaker), and experiencing deliverance. 1 Miller specifically noted that the two passages use the same verb 'deliver' (j*7r7/hls), which 'appears in the Bible almost exclusively in the psalm prayers for help'.64 Delbert Hillers pointed out that the self-designation of king Zakkur as a humble man whose prayer was answered is similar to the sequence in Psalm 132 (a royal psalm that contains two God quotations), in which David is described as humble, and then God is petitioned 'for the sake of David' not to turn away from 'your anointed'.65 Further, Zakkur's claim to have built temples for the gods in his land is similar to Ps. 132.3-7, which describes David's efforts to bring the ark of the LORD to a new resting place. Fifth, Ps. 69.35-36 has been described by Miller as alluding to a 'salvation oracle'.66 Miller argued that two inscriptions written on the wall of a cave at Khirbet Beit Lei near Samaria in the sixth century BCE are parallel to the opening and closing verses of Psalm 69:

cr ™

Khirbet Beit Lei hwsc [yjhwh Save, O LORD!67

Psalm 69 Save me, O God (v. 1)

f'n(k)y] yhwh 'Ihykh . 'rsh c ry yhdh wg 3lty yrslm [I am] the LORD your God. I will accept the cities of Judah I will redeem Jerusalem.

For God will save Zion and rebuild the cities of Judah (v. 35)

•TO

According to Miller, 'The petition at the beginning of Psalm 69 is answered in an oracle of salvation, not preserved in the psalms itself but alluded to in the verse quoted above (Ps. 69.35)'.69 Miller concluded from this that an individual prayer for help could be and was answered by 'a salvation oracle referring to Jerusalem and the cities of Judah... '.70 This parallel may also explain the divine speech at the end of Psalm 60: 63. 'Zakir of Hamat and Lu'ath', ANET, p. 656. 64. Miller, They Cried to the Lord, p. 151. Miller also pointed out that the description of the king as 'humble' mirrors the frequent self-designation of those who pray the prayers for help as1]!?. 65. Hillers, The Ritual Procession of the Ark and Ps. 132', CBQ 30 (1968), p. 53. 66. Miller, They Cried to the Lord, p. 152; see also Miller, 'Psalms and Inscriptions'. 67. J. Renz and W. Rollig (eds.), Handbuch der althebrdischen Epigraphik (3 vols.; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche, 1995-), I, p. 249. 68. Miller, They Cried to the Lord, pp. 104, 152-53. Compare the reading ofthis inscription in Renz and Rollig, Handbuch der althebrdischen Epigraphik, I, p. 245:

69. Miller, They Cried to the Lord, p. 152 70. Miller, They Cried to the Lord, p. 152. Emphasis in original.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

97

God has promised in his sanctuary: 'I will exult, I will divide Shechem, I will measure out the vale of Succoth. Gilead belongs to me, Manasseh belongs to me, Ephraim is my helm, Judah is my stylus, Moab is my wash basin, upon Edom I cast my shoes, and over Philistia I rejoice.' (vv. 6-8)

Psalm 60 is a communal prayer for help. In Ps. 60.5, the request of the community is spoken: 'Give victory with your right hand, and answer us, so that those whom you love may be rescued.' It is plausible to understand the speech of God in w. 6-8 as the answer to the community's petition, spoken by priest or prophet in a cultic setting. These five examples could be multiplied, but there is no need, because these examples suffice to show both the similarity of comparative material and the dissimilarity. In spite of the great similarity of these parallels, two questions should be asked about the dissimilarity. First, it is legitimate to ask whether it might not be possible for an interpreter to draw inadequate conclusions by failing to account sufficiently for the dissimilar genres in which the speeches of the deities occur. Second, it is legitimate to ask if there are not aspects of the function of the God quotations in the psalms to which no adequate parallels exist in the ancient Near Eastern corpus. To address the first question, it is necessary to begin with the routine observation that every quotation of a deity's speech has to occur in some context. As Sternberg argued so forcefully, the context in which a quotation occurs largely determines the function of that quotation.71 It follows, therefore, that some degree of care must be taken when comparing quotations of gods that are contextualized in different genres. In the above biblical and ancient Near Eastern examples, the speech of deities are attested in a number of different genres: The Zakkur inscription is a royal monument; the speech of Ptah-Tatenen to Ramses III occurs in a royal ceremony text (but not an enthronement text!); the iconographic data cited above is taken from a variety of different settings including reliefs in temples, tombs, and pyramids; the Khirbet Beit Lei inscription was written on the wall of a cave that apparently served as a hiding place in a time of danger;72 Psalms 60, 69, and 91 may be classified as a communal prayer for help, an individual prayer for help, and a wisdom psalm, respectively; the life settings of (royal) Psalms 2, 110, and 132 are widely debated, but all seem to imply some sort of royal liturgical setting. Further, speeches of gods are quoted in prophetic texts in biblical and extrabiblical texts (for example at Mari), in royal legitimation texts, in building inscriptions, and so on. One cannot assume that identical deity quotations will function the same in a prayer for help, a tomb inscription, a royal monument, a temple building inscription, and so on. Because the goal of the present investigation is to analyse the rhetoricalfunction of the God quotations in various psalms, this observation must 71. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', see the discussion of Sternberg in Chapter 1. 72. See Miller, 'Psalms and Inscriptions', p. 320.

98

Many are Saying

serve as a methodological warning to take care when applying parallels to the interpretation of a God quotation. The citation of parallels needs to be aware of similarities and differences in both the content of God quotations and also the context and function of God quotations. The point being made here is that an interpreter has not finished interpreting a passage once an appeal to an ancient Near Eastern parallel has been made. An interpreter must also account for the present context of a passage. The second question is whether there are some aspects of the God quotations in the Psalter to which no adequate parallels exist. Another way of putting this is to ask whether the speech of any deity is attested asfunctioning in a similar manner in a similar or identical genre. The answer to this is that no adequate parallel can be found for some of the uses of the God quotations in the Psalter. In Psalm 89, for example, a lengthy 'royal oracle' regarding the Davidic monarchy precedes a prayer for help. While there are numerous parallels that shed light on the language, symbolism, and ideology of the 'royal oracle' itself, no adequate parallel exists for the reuse of such an oracle prior to a prayer for help. Or again, Psalm 82 quotes a judgement speech of the LORD in the divine council, but the psalm closes with a petition for help. There are numerous parallels for helping understand the idea of the divine council, the juridical concepts of the ancient world, the specific charges that the LORD levels against the other gods, the description of those gods as 'children of the Most High', and so on. However, no adequate parallel can be found to the psalm as a whole; specifically, no parallel can be found to explain the placement of the petition at the end of the psalm. 2. The Formal Role of God Quotations For the purposes of analysing the formal function of the God quotations, the quotations are divided into the following groups according to content: quotations about the Davidic monarch or monarchy (in royal psalms), quotations of admonishment (in festival or liturgical psalms), quotations that precede petitions, quotations that offer assurance, and quotations in which God's word represents God's effective power. i. The Role of God Quotations about the Davidic Monarchy or King Four psalms contain quotations in which God speaks about David, the Davidic monarchy, or the Davidic king: Psalms 2, 89, 110, and 132. Because the God quotations function differently in each of these four psalms, the function of each God quotation is evaluated separately. Psalm 132. Psalm 132 is a poem with two halves often lines each: w. 1-10 and 11-18.73 The second half consists entirely of two God quotations (see below). The 73. This is the common understanding of the psalm's structure. The two strophes share many parallel features: The words (literally: 'The LORD to David') occur in the first phrase of each strophe (vv. 1 and 11); identical oath formulas feature prominently near the beginning of each strophe (vv. 2 and 11); the two oaths share similar structure w. 3-5

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

99

first half begins with a petition: 'O LORD, remember for David's sake' (v. 1). The petition is for God to recall David's fidelity to an old promise. The psalm then quotes that old promise, in which David swore to the LORD that he would not sleep until he found a place for the LORD (vv. 3-5). Next, the psalm quotes a tradition about how David rediscovered the ark and relocated it to Jerusalem: 'Rise up, O LORD, to your resting place Let your priests be clothed with righteousness, and let your faithful rejoice (vv. 6-9). C. L. Seow is most likely correct in understanding the ark material of w. 6-9 as the reuse of older liturgical material in the composition of the psalm: 'I believe that the psalm contains an old liturgy used with the procession of the ark under David.'74 The first half of the psalm then closes with a second petition: 'For the sake of David, your servant, do not turn away from the face of your anointed one (v. 10). Both petitions call on God to be faithful to David's descendants for the sake of the fidelity that David showed to God in the past. The first half contains two quotations: an oath of David and the fulfilling of that oath. The second half of the psalm also contains two quotations: an oath of God to David about the Davidic monarchy (vv. 11-13), and an oath of God to David about God's dwelling on Zion (vv. 14-18). The first quotation echoes the language of the first half of the psalm, especially the language of the oath and the closing petition: 'The LORD has sworn to David a true oath, he will not turn away from it' (v. 11 a). The petition had been for 'your anointed'. This language is also echoed—albeit more faintly—in God's oath: 'One from among the fruit of your loins will I set upon your throne. If your sons keep my covenant... their sons also shall forever sit on your throne' (w. 1 Ib-12a). The second quotation also echoes the language of the first half of the psalm: 'This is my resting place its priests will I clothe with salvation and its faithful shall greatly rejoice ' (w. 14-16); and 'I have prepared a lamp for my anointed one (v. 17). The second half of the psalm in essence quotes God's promises to the effect that God will never turn away from David's descendants or break the covenant with them. Given the numerous ways in which the second half of the psalm takes up the language of the first half, and especially given the way that the language of the petition of v. 10—'do not turn away' is immediately 'reversed' by God's oath in v. 11—'he will not turn away' -it is clear that the divine and 12); the first strophe ends with the petition 'do not turn away from...' ; v. 10) and the second strophe likewise begins with the assurance that God 'will not turn away from' God's oath v. 11); both strophes depict 'priests clothed' in righteousness/salvation and the faithful rejoicing (parallel uses of the words , vv. 9 and 16); the important words 'rest' and 'anointed one' appear in both strophes vv. 8, 10, 14, and 17). T. Fretheim argued that the psalm should be divided into three parts: vv. 1-9,10-16, with 17-18 as a conclusion ('Psalm 132: A Form-critical Study', JBL 86 (1967), pp. 289-300). Fretheim's proposal is appealing, but it would require that the continuous speech of God in vv. 1418 be separated into two parts (vv. 14-16 and 17-18). This seems unlikely. 74. C.L. Seow, Myth, Drama, and the Politics of David's Dance (HSM, 46; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989), p. 174.

100

Many are Saying

speech of the second half of the psalm in some way corresponds to the prayer for help voiced in the first half. But in what way? The interpretations of scholars can be divided into two groups. One interpretation understands the second half of the psalm as divine response or answer to that petition. Gunkel is characteristic of this interpretation: 'A voice then proclaims YHWH's response. It accepts the people's petition and praises David's endeavors. It speaks of David's dynasty enduring and the enduring majesty of Zion (132.11-18).'75 A second—less common—interpretation understands the second half of the psalm as motivating and urging God to answer the petitions of the first half. This view is reflected in Mettinger's statement: 'That Ps. 132 is an intercession for the king is all too often overlooked but appears from v. 1 and v. 10.. .The reference to the two divine oracles in Ps. 132 is made as part of the argument of the intercessor.'76 The main difference between the two interpretations of the psalm concerns the 'implied audience' that the interpreters imagine for the psalm. If the implied audience of the psalm is God, then the divine speech of the second half is likely to be understood as a motivating reason for God to answer the prayer. If the implied audience of the psalm is the worshipping community, then the second half is likely to be understood as an answer to the prayer. There is no reason to choose between these two options—both interpretations are valid for their respective implied audiences, and neither implied audience need exclude the other. In fact, both implied audiences (and both interpretations) are necessary to an adequate understanding of worship. In public worship, a person who leads a prayer at once directs a genuine prayer to God and at the same time speaks to the congregation. To account for the dual audience of a public prayer it is helpful to understand the second half of the psalm as both 'answering' the first half in that it assures the congregation that God will do what God has promised, and motivating God by reminding God of promises made in the past. It is important to note that when the second half of the psalm is considered an 'answer' to the community's prayer, then this answer is taken from the religious tradition of the Jerusalem temple. The authority is not located in the present in any sort of ecstatic revelation or priestly divination; rather, it is lodged in the past, in God's previous promise to David. As Gunkel concluded, the promise that is placed in the LORD'S mouth 'requires no special revelation. Rather the material rests upon.. .the word of YHWH to David given in 2 Sam 7.'77 The God quotation in this psalm therefore is a quotation that has been reappropriated from some (lost?) original context and placed here to serve a new function—either to answer the community's prayer or to urge God to answer a prayer. In either case, one can witness the process of reappropriating an old promise of God. 75. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, p. 316. Many scholars follow this interpretation including A. Weiser (Psalms, A Commentary (trans. H. Hartwell; OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962), pp. 779-80); Leslie Allen, Psalms 101-150 (WBC, 2; Waco, TX: Word Books, 1983), p. 204); Fretheim ('Psalm 132', p. 299); Mays (Psalms, p. 410); and Seow (Myth, Drama, and the Politics of David's Dance, p. 201). 76. T.N.D. Mettinger, King and Messiah: The Civil and Sacral Legitimation of the Israelite Kings (ConBOT, 8; Lund: CWK Gleerup, 1976), p. 100 n. 7. 77. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, p. 316.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

101

Psalm 89. Psalm 89 is a composite poem comprising three different sections: vv. 1-18 are a hymn of praise in which a God quotation concerning the Davidic monarchy (vv. 3-4) occurs; vv. 19-37 quote a lengthy God quotation concerning the Davidic monarchy; vv. 38-51 are an anguished prayer for help by (or for) the Davidic king. The hymn of vv. 1-18 praises God's steadfast love. This section of the psalm can be divided into four parts: vv. 1-4 begin the hymn and quote God's covenantal promise to David; vv. 5-8 extol the LORD for his incomparability among the gods; vv. 9-14 rehearse the LORD'S victory in the chaos conflict; and w. 15-18 return to the theme of the LORD'S work through the Davidic king: By means of your favor our horn is exalted, For our shield belongs to the LORD, Our king belongs to the Holy One of Israel.78 (vv. 17b-18)

The parallel terms 'our horn' (compare Ps. 132.17) and 'our shield' are metaphors for the king. The hymn of praise, therefore, begins and ends by extolling God's work through the Davidic king. The God quotation in vv. 3-4 places the basic promises of Davidic monarchy in God's mouth. That this quotation comes from an older Davidic tradition and does not imply a present revelation in the cult can be seen from the fact that the 'you' of the quotation must refer to David himself, to whom God speaks: I have made a covenant with my chosen one, I have sworn to David my servant. 'Forever will I establish your seed, I will build your throne for all generations.' (vv. 3-4)

By opening and closing the hymn of praise with the motif of the Davidic monarchy, the hymn links the power of the God who is incomparable and victorious in the chaos conflict with the fortunes and fate of the Davidic kings. This royal motif also provides a point of contact between the hymn and the second section of the psalm, which is another God quotation about the Davidic monarchy. One other aspect of the hymn of praise worth noting is the stress on the permanent nature of God's work: it is 'forever' three times, vv. 1, 2, and 4); 'as firm as the heavens' (v. 2); 'for all generations' (v. 4, see also v. 1). The extended description of God's work in the chaos battle in vv. 5-14 implies both the eternal duration and universal scope of God's work. This motif of the permanence of God's work sets up a contrast that is exploited in the prayer for help in vv. 38-51. The second section of the psalm consists entirely of a second, extended promise of God regarding the Davidic monarchy. The quotation is introduced: 'Then you spoke in a vision to your faithful ones, and you said... (v. 19a).79 The quotation 78. P.M. Cross is probably correct that v. 17a, not included above, should read 'For you are the glory of our strength', rather than 'their strength'. Cross (Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973), p. 161 n. 71) argued that the mem and nun were often confused orthographically, especially in the seventh and sixth centuries. 'Our strength' is thus a metaphor for the king. 79. ('then') also introduces the God quotation of Ps. 2.5. It probably implies a past

102

Many are Saying

that follows cites the basic promises of the Davidic covenant. The central promise of the quotation is that God promised David that his dynasty was to be permanent: Forever will I keep my steadfast love for him, my covenant with him will be firm. I will establish his seed forever, and his throne for as long as the heavens, (vv. 28-29)

The language of permanence, which was central to the first section of the psalm, is repeated throughout the quotation and culminates in a concluding promise: Once and for all I have sworn by my holiness, I shall certainly not lie to David! His seed will remain forever and his throne as the sun before me. It will be established forever like the moon, which is an eternal witness in the skies, (vv. 35-37)

Other aspects of the quotation include the following: the covenant is partly conditional—God will punish Davidic kings for disobedience but will not completely reject them or break the covenant (vv. 30-34); God promised victory in battle (vv. 22-23); the king is God's son and God is the king's father (v. 26); and the king may ask freely of the LORD and the LORD will answer (v. 26). It is also worth noting that throughout the quotation, attributes that are similar or identical to those that were applied to the LORD in the first section of the psalm are applied to the king: I will set his hand on the sea, his right hand on the rivers, (v. 25, compare vv. 9-10) I will make him the firstborn, the most high of the kings of the earth, (v. 27, compare vv. 6-7) My hand shall always remain with him, my arm shall also strengthen him. (v. 21, compare v. 13) My faithfulness and steadfast love will be with him, and in my name shall his horn be exalted, (v. 24, compare vv. 14 and 17)

The term especially bears theological weight; here it is applied to the king, but everywhere else in the Psalter it refers only to the LORD. This transfer of divine attributes and language to the Davidic king functions to link the power and sovereignty of the LORD to the duration of the Davidic monarchy. The logic of this connection, as Tate has correctly seen, is that 'the stability of the Davidic dynasty should be as lasting as the faithfulness of God in the heavenly realm... '.80 The third and final section of the psalm contains a prayer for help for the king,

communication in both contexts. , 'to your faithful ones', reading with the majority of Masoretic texts, although some have the singular has 'your holy ones', 4QPs 89 has , both of which reflect the plural rather than singular. It is possible that the original read and that later scribes altered the text to and for the apologetic reason that speaking of God's 'sons' came to be seen as blasphemous. 80. Tate, Psalms 51-100, p. 420. Emphasis added.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

103

which is the key element in the psalm: 'The key to the interpretation of the psalm in its present form is found in the lament in vv. 39-52. The hymn and oracle must be read in relation to the distress reflected in these verses.'81 The prayer for help begins with a shocking outcry: You! You have spurned! You have rejected! You are wroth with your anointed. You have renounced the covenant of your servant, You have defiled his crown in the dirt. (vv. 38-39)

This opening complaint borrows the vocabulary of the God quotation—'covenant' 'anointed' ,'servant' ,'crown' which should also be read in v. 19 instead of —and turns it against God. In the verses that follow, the prayer continues to complain that promises that God made have not been kept: the king is scorned by his neighbours, rather than being the 'most high' among them (vv. 40-42, compare v. 27); the right hand of the enemy is exalted rather than the hand of the king (v. 42, compare vv. 21 and 25); God did not deliver victory in battle (vv. 43-45, compare vv. 22-24). Then comes the request: 'Remember!' (vv. 47 and 50). The prayer calls on God to remember how brief human life is, to remember the steadfast love that was promised to David, and to remember the taunts that 'your enemies' have directed against 'your servant', against 'your anointed'. And with that bleak petition, the psalm ends.82 The two important God quotations in Psalm 89 function to set up the final prayer for help and give motivational reasons for God to answer that prayer. There are several reasons for this conclusion. First, the God quotations precede the prayer for help and the prayer for help reverses the vocabulary of God in flat accusations against God. Second, the semi-conditional nature of the Davidic covenant is used against God: God had promised that disobedience by the king would be disciplined—note that the psalmist does not maintain the king's innocence—but that the covenant would never be broken. Having quoted God's promise regarding the conditional nature of the covenant, the psalmist accuses God of having gone too far in divine discipline. Third, the eternal nature of God's work that was so heavily accented in the first and second sections of the psalm contrast sharply with the finality of the king's humiliation. As Mays has seen, 'God's everlasting reign and the oracle concerning David have been introduced to form a precise and unbearable contrast to the present'.83 Finally, because the only petition in the psalm is to remember, the implication is that God should remember the promises that were made to David—promises that the psalmist has conveniently quoted in case God has forgotten them—and God should prove faithful to these promises. Psalm 2. Psalm 2 is a poem made up of four strophes: vv. 1-3,4-6,7-9, 10-11. As was discussed in the chapter on the enemy quotations, the first strophe culminates 81. 82. Psalter 83.

Tate, Psalms 51-100, p. 416. The doxology of v. 52 is an editorial insertion that marks the end of Book Three of the and should not be considered a part of Psalm 89. Mays, Psalms, p. 287.

104

Many are Saying

by quoting the rebellious intentions of the 'kings of the earth': 'Let us burst their bonds, and cast their chains off us!' (v. 3). The next two strophes effectively provide the LORD'S answer to this rebellion. As the first strophe ends in the enemy quotation, so the second and third strophes end with God quotations: The One who sits enthroned in heaven laughs! The Lord derides them! Then he spoke in his anger, in his wrath he terrified them.85 'I have consecrated my king upon Zion my holy mountain.'

84

I will recount the decree of the LORD, he said to me, 'You are my son, today I have begotten you. Ask of me and I will give nations as your inheritance, the ends of the earth as your possession. You shall break them with an iron rod, and like potter's vessels you shall dash them.' (vv. 4-9)

The function of the God quotations is to 'answer' the speech of the enemies. Similar to the ideology attested in the first two sections of Psalm 89, God is understood as working through the Davidic king. The way that God manifests anger and fury on earth is to anoint a king on Zion. Also similar to Psalm 89 are the following: the king is the LORD'S son (v. 7); the king can 'ask' of the LORD and the LORD will answer (v. 8a); the LORD places the king over the kings of other nations, which are to be the king's possession (v. 8); and the LORD will grant the king victory. The psalm ends with warnings for those considering rebellion: 'Now therefore, O kings, be wise.. .serve the LORD with fear' (vv. 10-11). The speaker of the entire psalm should be understood as a Davidic king, as the phrase 'He said to me' indicates.87 The setting of the psalm is probably the day of coronation, as the phrase 'today I have begotten you' indicates.88 It is also possible, however, to understand the psalm as a cultic text for use in a ceremony related to 84. For the translation of the epithet as 'the One who sits enthroned', see S. Paul, Amos: A Commentary on the Book of Amos (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), pp. 5152. See Pss. 9.8; 29.10; 123.2; Mic. 1.5. See also F.W. Dobbs-Allsopp, 'The Syntagma of bat Followed by a Geographical Name in the Hebrew Bible: A Reconsideration of Its Meaning and Grammar', CBQ 57 (1995), p. 465. 85. also introduces the speech Of God in Ps. 89.19. The verbs and are to be understood as preterite forms, as is often the case when a yqtl form follows (see Waltke and O'Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, p. 558). 86. The translation of' as'anoint'assumes that the Hebrew root has a meaning that has to do with rulers. There is no need to assume the root as does Dahood (Psalms 1,10), who repoints to The LXX also assumes a passive, which would make this the speech of the human king rather than God. Biblical Hebrew has a noun 'leader, chieftain' (Josh. 13.21; Ezek. 32.30; Ps. 83.11; Mic. 5.4). The noun is of the qatil pattern, which 'is used for professional terms, some passive in sense' (Waltke and O'Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, p. 88). Akkadian attests a similar noun, nasiku, 'chieftain' (CAD A, 11.27). 87. See Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, II, p. 136. 88. See von Rad, 'The Royal Ritual in Judah', and Roberts, 'Whose Child Is This?'

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

105

the coronation of the king, such as Mowinckel's New Year's Festival or Kraus's Royal Zion Festival. For the purposes of this study, it is enough to recognize a worship setting in which the king addresses the community and in which representatives of foreign nations are at least symbolically addressed. In such a setting, the function of the God quotation as an 'answer' to the intention of the nations to rebel is quite clear. Thus the God quotation in Psalm 2 functions in comparison with the parallel quotation from the oracle to Ashurbanipal that was quoted above. In the Ashurbanipal text, no public setting is implied, the deity's speech is designed to assure the king of his security: Ashurbanipal's oracle repeats 'fear not' several times, and the oracle is directed to the king. In Psalm 2, a public setting is implied and the distinctive sign of the oracle of salvation—'fear not'—is missing. In the implied cultic setting of Psalm 2, the oracle functions both to warn the nations not to rebel and to legitimate the Davidic king's reign by stating that God has chosen him. Psalm 110. Psalm 110 also contains God quotations related to the Davidic monarch. Unfortunately, the confused nature of the text renders a confident assessment of the function of the God quotations in Psalm 110 impossible. As Kraus has aptly put it, 'No other psalm has in research evoked so many hypotheses and discussions as Psalm HO'. 89 The proliferation of interpretive suggestions is evidence of the confused nature of Psalm 110: the identity of the implied speaker of the psalm and the implied setting of the psalm are both unclear.90 Given this reality, the interpretation that is offered here can only be provisional. The psalm consists of two parts (vv. 1-3 and 4-7), each part contains an introductory quotation frame (vv. la and 4a), a quotation of the speech of God (vv. Ib and 4b), and an interpretation of the quotation with respect to the king (vv. 2-3 and 5-7).91 The first part of the psalm reads: The LORD said concerning my lord: 'Sit at my right hand, until I place your enemies as a footstool for your feet.' The sceptre of your strength, the LORD will send out from Zion. Rule in the midst of your enemies! Your people are willing on the day of your strength. In holy splendour, from the womb of the dawn, your youth shall be dew for you. (vv. 1-3) 89. Kraus, Psalms 60-150, p. 345. 90. Among the many proposals, Mowinckel represents the most widely accepted. 'In Ps. 110 the situation is that the poet-prophet stands before the king, who is sitting on his throne...'; Psalm 110 has its place within the anointment ritual, belonging 'to the moment when the king is led forth to ascend his throne' (The Psalms in Israel's Worship, I, pp. 48, 63). Another widely held interpretation of the setting is that of preparations for battle (for example, see K. Seybold, Die Psalmen (HAT, 15; Tubingen: Mohr, 1996), pp. 436-40; Starbuck, Court Oracles in the Psalms, pp. 142-61). Space is not permitted here for a discussion of the legion of textual problems. For discussions of the textual problems and various solutions, see the standard commentaries as well as Starbuck, pp. 142-61. For a recently suggested solution, see W.G. Brown, 'A Royal Performance: Critical Notes on Psalm 110.3a-b', JBL \\1 (1998), pp. 93-96. 91. Thus Mays, Psalms, p. 350.

106

Many are Saying

According to the interpretation followed here, v. 2 quotes a promise of God, most likely quoted from the enthronement ceremony of the king. The next verses then interpret that promise as a promise of success in battle. Note that the promise of success in battle has already been seen to be a central element of the promises that God makes to the Davidic king (see Psalms 2 and 89). The second part of the psalm reads: The LORD has sworn, and he will not renounce: 'You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek.' The Lord is at your right hand. He will shatter kings on the day of his anger. He will judge the nations, filling them with corpses. He will shatter heads over the wide earth. From the stream on the way he will drink, therefore he will raise up heads, (vv. 4-7)

Again, a promise of God that probably stems from the enthronement of the king is quoted and then explicated. The promise recalls that the LORD conveyed to the king the office of priesthood. The interpretation of the divine promise interprets this in terms of victory in battle. Given the manifold problems, it is wise to cite Mays's warning that 'the perspicuity of Scripture is missing here'.92 If the above interpretation is correct, however, the God quotations in Psalm 110 originated in a cultic ceremony of the king but were reused and reinterpreted in the psalm. If this is the case, the God quotations are cited because of their authority. That is, the authoritative voice of God as revealed in the cult (in the past) is quoted in Psalm 110 and interpreted in relation to new circumstances (probably impending battle). This process of reappropriating older oracular material that is witnessed in Psalm 110, as well as in Psalms 89 and 132, might be described as the 'scripturalization' of the God quotations. The God quotations—most likely drawn from the theological tradition— are functioning as authoritative texts and are being used and reused in new contexts for new rhetorical goals. ii. The Role of God Quotations of Admonishment (in Festival and Liturgical Psalms) Psalms 50, 81, and 95 are very similar and are often treated in relation to each other as the 'great festival psalms'.93 Among the similarities in these psalms are an implied cultic worship setting, a 'sermonic tone' with admonitions, the call for the people to 'hear/obey' as God testifies against them, the call to follow God's 'ways', the placement of the God quotation as the culmination and main point of the psalm, and the actualization of divine commandments within the God quotations. Psalm 75, which also contains God quotations, is so similar in form, content, and function to the God quotations in these 'festival psalms', that it is treated with them here. 92. Mays, Psalms, p. 352. 93. Kraus, Psalms 1-59, p. 61. Kraus borrows the term from Jeremias, Kultprophetie und Gerichtsverkundigung in der spdten Konigszeit Israels, p. 125.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

107

Because the God quotations in these psalms share a similar function, that function is evaluated after all four psalms are treated. Psalm 50. Psalm 50 has three sections. In each of the three sections, God speaks: God issues a summons for judgement (vv. 1-6); God speaks about correct sacrifice and worship (vv. 7-15); God speaks about proper obedience (vv. 16-23). In the first section of the psalm, God summons 'his people' for judgement: 'Gather before me my faithful ones, those who made a covenant with me by sacrifice' (v. 5). The coming of God employs theophanic language: 'God shines forth' (v. 2b) and 'a fire devours in front of him, a great tempest surrounds him' (v. 3b). The heavens and earth are called as witnesses (vv. 1, 4, 6; this language presumably is a monotheistic adaptation of the role of the gods as witnesses to covenant agreements). The role of God as judge is emphasized. The second and third sections of the psalm consist of extended speeches by God. The second section (vv. 7-15) is addressed to 'my people'. The imperative 'Hear, O my people' is reminiscent of Deut 6.4, where God also directs commandments to the people in the context of the covenant. Both passages rely on the well-known double meaning of as both 'listen' and 'obey': the implication here is that the people have failed to obey. Then God declares 'I will testify against you' But God is testifying against the people not because they have neglected to offer sacrifices, but because the people have reduced their relationship with God to only sacrifice, imagining that God can be controlled through sacrifices. The psalm makes the point that sacrifice is a legitimate part of the covenantal relationship with the LORD, but sacrifice is only apart of the relationship with God and not the entire relationship. Sacrifice was how the covenant was made (v. 5), and sacrifice is part of the ongoing covenant relationship: Sacrifice to God thanksgiving, and fulfil your vows to the Most High. Call on me in the day of distress, I will deliver you and you will glorify me. (vv. 14-15)

The tone of judgement or warning is much more pronounced in the third section of the psalm (vv. 16-23). Although this section of the psalm is addressed to 'the wicked', the term here does not signify a group separate from 'my people' (v. 7). Rather, 'the wicked' are a subset of God's people, those within the chosen people who 'forget God' (v. 22), who know the statutes and commandments of God but do not obey them, who sacrifice to God but ignore God's commandments: Why do you recite my statutes and lift my covenant upon your mouth? Surely you hate discipline, and you cast my words behind you. If you see a thief, you befriend him, and you take up with adulterers. With your mouth you scatter evil, and with your tongue you harness deceit. You sit and speak against your relative, against the child of your mother, you give slander, (vv. 16b-20)

108

Many are Saying

The covenant offences with which the people are explicitly charged relate to the commandments against stealing, committing adultery, and bearing false witness (see Exod. 20.14-16). Then God is quoted as saying, 'These things you have done and I remained silent; you thought I was like you' (v. 21). This verse is a helpful clue to the interpretation of the God quotation. God's admission of past silence in the face of the sin of the wicked is a response to the frequent accusation that the wicked make in the enemy quotations: 'God does not hear.' It is also an answer to the typical plea that the supplicants make in the prayers for help: 'Answer me!' God now breaks silence and does answer. The LORD'S closing words promise punishment for those who forget God and salvation for those who 'determined in 94 the right way [of God]' and who keep the covenant. Psalm 81. In Psalm 81, similar to Psalm 50, after an introductory section, God speaks. Psalm 81 is also similar to Psalm 50 in that it implies a worship setting. In contrast to Psalm 50, however, in which the introductory section describes the coming of the LORD for judgement, the introductory section may be classified as a hymn: 'Sing to the God of our strength, shout to the God of Jacob' (v. 1). The language of this hymn permits a more precise construal of the implied setting: Blow the horn at the new moon, at the full moon, on our festal day For it is a statute for Israel, an ordinance of the God of Jacob, (vv. 3-4)

The phrase is normally taken to refer to the Festival of Tabernacles, the autumn festival (see Exod. 23.16-19; Lev. 23.24-25, 33-43).95 Even if an interpreter wishes to deny such a precise liturgical setting for the psalm, the psalm certainly implies a communal worship gathering. In this gathering, the speaker of the psalm declares, 'I hear a voice that I did not know' (v. 5c). Then the speech of God is quoted. The quotation begins by rehearsing the divine deliverance of the Exodus and the waywardness of the generation in the wilderness. 'In distress you called, and I rescued you.. .1 tested you at the waters of Meribah' (w. 6-7). Then the voice turns to admonition: Hear, O my people I will testify against you O Israel, if you would only obey me. You shall not have any strange god, You shall not worship any foreign god. I am the LORD your God who brought you up out of the land of Egypt. Open wide your mouth and I will fill it. (vv. 8-10)

The vocabulary here is almost identical to Ps. 50.7: 'Hear, O my people...I will testify against you.' The call to 'obey/hear' is repeated in the God quotation to the 94. The interpretation of the phrase is disputed. Craigie's suggestion is followed here (Craigie, Psalms 1-50, p. 363). Kraus, following Gunkel, emends to 'he who prepares the way' (Kraus, Psalms 1-59, p. 488). 95. See Kraus, Psalms 60-150, p. 148.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

109

point that it can be considered the quotation's 'unifying theme'.96 'My people did not obey my voice' (v. 1 la); 'O that my people would obey me' (v. 13a). God's plea 'that Israel would walk in my ways repeats the motif of the 'way' found in Ps. 50.23. Also similar to Psalm 50, the call to 'hear/obey' is followed by a citation of part of the Decalogue, in this case, the first and second words (according to the Jewish reckoning). God laments the waywardness of the people, and the psalm ends with the promise of the good that God would do for those who obeyed the commandments: defeat their enemies and feed them the choicest foods. Psalm 95. Like Psalm 81, Psalm 95 consists of a hymn of praise followed by a God quotation. The psalm begins with two parallel sections that consist of calls to praise (vv. 1-2 and 6) followed by reasons for praise (vv. 3-5 and 7). Then the speech of God follows: O that today you would obey his voice! 'Do not harden your hearts as at Meribah, as on the day at Massah in the wilderness. Then your ancestors tested me, and tempted me although they had seen my work! For forty years I loathed that generation, and said, "They are a people of wandering heart, they do not know my ways Then I swore in my anger, "You will never enter into my rest." ' (vv. 7c-l 1)

The quotation is introduced by the injunction to obey/hear God. The speech of God consists of the command for the people not to harden their hearts, followed by a rehearsal of the tradition in which the people did harden their hearts and failed to obey. The psalm ends by citing the punishment that the wilderness generation earned for not obeying God. This ending serves to warn the present generation to choose a better way. Several motifs from the previous two psalms occur in Psalm 95: The call to obey/hear the voice of God (v. 7c), the citation of the failure of the people at Meribah in spite of God's 'works' on their behalf (vv. 8-9), the citation of an apodictic commandment (v. 8: 'do not harden your hearts', although in this case the commandment is not part of the Decalogue), the admonishing tone of the God quotation (especially vv. 10-11), and the call for the people to follow God's ways (v. 10). (A special feature of this God quotation is the two embedded quotations in vv. lOb and lib, in which the voice of God quotes words God spoke to the wilderness generation.) Psalm 75. Like the previous two psalms, Psalm 75 begins with a praise introduction (v. I) 97 that leads into a God quotation (vv. 2-5, 10). The God quotation is 96. So Mays, Psalms, p. 81. 97. MT has which can be translated either as 'your name is near, they tell of your wonder', or 'your name is near, your wonders tell of it', or if the phrase is understood as an impersonal passive, 'your wonders are recounted'. LXX and Syriac, both of

110

Many are Saying

interrupted by the words of an individual who reflects on the glory of God's judgement (w. 6-9). Those who call on your name tell of your wonders: 'I will take action at an appointed time, with equity I will judge. When earth totters, with all its inhabitants, I, indeed, I keep steady its pillars. I say to the boastful, 'Do not boast.' To the wicked, 'Do not exalt your horn, Do not exalt your horn on high, or speak with a stiff neck.' (vv. 2-5)

The psalmist describes the judgement of God as a 'wonder' to which the faithful of God look forward and for which they give praise. As in the above psalms, God's words contain commandments ('Do not exalt your horn') and, again, although God's words are directed explicitly to the wicked, they are meant for the entire community: serving both as admonishment and warning to the wicked and as promise to the righteous. In w. 6-9, God's judgement is pictured as a cup, and 'the wicked of the earth will drink it all!'98 But the psalmist says, 'I, indeed, I will rejoice forever, I will sing praises to the God of Jacob.' Then the psalm closes with the voice of God: 'All the horns of the wicked I will cut off, but I will exalt the horns of the righteous' (v. 10). Part of the logic of the psalm is that the moment of God's judgement is unknown; it is in the future and it is God who sets the time (v. 2). The mystery of the time of the judgement feeds the dual threat-promise with which the psalm ends, because mystery and the unknown feed fear. And, of course, the threat of punishment and promise of reward are intended to induce obedience to the commandments. The leading motif of the psalm is 'exalting' or 'lifting up', especially of 'the horn'. God commands the wicked not to exalt their own horn (v. 5), the psalmist preaches that 'exaltation' comes not from the desert (v. 6) but it is God who puts down one and 'exalts' another (v. 7), God threatens that the horns of all the wicked will be cut off, and God promises to exalt the horns of the righteous. The familiar themes of obedience, an apodictic commandment realized in God's speech, the punishment of the wicked, and God's speech as the culmination of the psalm are repeated here. Summary and Conclusions. In Psalms 50, 75, 81, and 95, the God quotations function primarily to admonish and teach the gathered community: the dominant which have 1 st person plural forms, may presuppose ' calling on/in your name, one will recount'. If this is followed, the 'one' who speaks might be thought of as a prophet/priest speaking in God's name. This requires moving the beth from the end of the first word and affixing to the second word, and dropping the wow off of the third word. Many commentators make the first change but not the second, reading: 'those who call on your name tell of...'. (See, for example, Kraus, Psalms 60-150, pp. 102-03). This reading is adopted here. 98. As many have pointed out, the image may rely on the cultic judicial ordeal in which an accused was forced to drink a toxic mixture; see Num. 5.11-28.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

111

theme is the call for the people to obey. In the latter three psalms, the God quotations follow hymnic introductions, while in Psalm 50, there is a liturgical introduction that describes God's coming in judgement. Too much should not be made of this different beginning of Psalm 50, because all four psalms imply a worship setting. Three points are stressed here. First, the function of the God quotations in these implied cultic settings transfers the act of worship out of the purely human realm and into the divine realm. The God quotations function to emphasize that in worship, worshippers encounter God (not simply other humans). The God quotations in effect 'realize' the encounter with the deity, because in them God 'speaks' to the community. Second, in all four psalms, the God quotations are responses to liturgical actions of the people, such as praising God, and in all four psalms a commandment or commandments are included in the God quotation. This functions to connect the liturgical and ethical dimensions of life. The two responses that God demands of the people—sacrifice/worship and obedience/ethics—are not separated but are rather held together. Third, the God quotations in these psalms function as a response to the theological problem of sin. These psalms are aware that law-breakers thrive in God's world, and even within God's covenant community. By placing the accusations, warnings, commandments, and threats in the mouth of God, these psalms give a divine answer to the problem of sin and the seeming absence of God. It is especially noteworthy that in the three 'festival psalms' God calls for the people to obey and to follow 'the way'. In these psalms God also cites the apodictic law and recalls the people's rebellion in the wilderness (cited in Psalms 81 and 95). When the context of the entire Psalter is considered, these divine answers can be heard as God's response both to the frequent charge of the enemies that 'God does not hear' and to the frequent plea of the psalmist, 'Answer me, O God!' The fact that God's answer occurs during worship in response to the people's praise reminds one of the epiphany that the writer of Psalm 73 experienced. That person, it will be recalled, considered 'talking on' in the 'way' of the enemies, 'untill went into the sanctuary of God...' (vv. 15, 17)." One other issue about the God quotations in these psalms needs to be addressed. It will be recalled that Nasuti (followed by Koenen and Hossfeld) argued that the introductory formulae of the quotation frames in psalms such as 2, 89, 110, and 132 suggest that the divine speeches in those psalms are 'quotations' of past oracular communications rather than present oracular experiences mediated through the cult. For Psalm 50, 75, 81, 91, however, Nasuti argued that the divine speeches should be understood as 'present cultic' realities.100 Nasuti's argument about Psalm 81 can be taken as illustrative of his position. Nasuti argued that Psalm 81's quotation frame—'I hear a voice I had not known'—because 'it is a 99. Brueggemann ('Bounded by Obedience and Praise', pp. 203-10) interprets Ps. 73.17 as the 'turning point' of the entire Psalter. It is worth noting that when the divine answer of Psalm 50 is considered from a canonical point of view, it is seen to follow Psalm 49, which contains a human answer to the same problem. This placement is also similar to the shape of the Book of Job, which culminates when God finally breaks silence and speaks following lengthy human 'answers' to the questions of Job's suffering. 100. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms ofAsaph, p. 131.

112

Many are Saying

"voice previously unknown"', indicates the presence of an intermediary who was receiving a divine speech to deliver to the community.101 There are two problems with this view. First, it takes the poetic utterance 'I hear a voice I had not known' too literally (too much like prose). Poetic utterances should not be forced into such rigid logical frameworks. Poetry means in different ways than prose means. Expressions that might imply strict logical sequence in prose need not imply such things in poetry. The poetic expression 'I hear a voice I had not known' need not imply that the speaker is speaking words that had literally never been heard before. The fact that the quotation that follows seems to be drawing upon the Decalogue suggests, in fact, that both the speaker (God) and the content of the divine quotation were previously known to the psalmist: the commandments had been 'heard before' by the community. Second, this interpretation does not give sufficient weight to the forms of these psalms. The four psalms are clearly liturgical compositions, and in all likelihood, they were used repeatedly in the cult (as Ps. 81.1-5 suggests). As Mays noted, 'The divine speech would be repeated every time the psalm was performed.'102 This led Mays to conclude that 'the sentence represents more a liturgical than a prophetic phenomenon'.103 It should also be noted that Nasuti drew on comparative ancient Near Eastern material to aid his conclusion: These [extrabiblical] texts clearly show that.. .such [divine] speech had a definite role in the near eastern cult, where it was actualized by a number of prophetic or quasi-prophetic figures. This speech often seems to have occurred in response to both an inquiry (or prayer) and sacrifice. Such a response could be positive or 104 negative.

In terms of form, Psalms 50, 81, 75, and 95 do not fit this pattern because they contain no enquiries and the speeches of God do not consist of 'positive or negative' responses.105 It is better to understand these divine speeches either as quotations of words of God that had been communicated in the past (as the occurrence of the commandments in these speeches indicates) or as artistic liturgical compositions that drew upon the theological traditions of Israel's past. None of this is to suggest that quoting the words of God in the cult would not be interpreted or experienced by the worshippers as a present encounter with God. The opposite is the case! The God quotations in these psalms and the royal psalms treated above suggest that in the cult, quotation of divine speech from the tradition functioned precisely to effect for the community a present encounter with the deity. 101. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms of Asaph, and personal communcation from Nasuti (13 March 2000). 102. Mays, Psalms, p. 266. Emphasis added. This view, of course, agrees with the view of Gunkel that interpretation of the divine speeches of the Psalter should take into account the repeated use of the liturgical psalms. 103. Mays, Psalms, p. 266. 104. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms of Asaph, p. 144. 105. It might be possible to argue that the introductory praise sections of Psalms 81 and 95 could have been considered 'sacrifices' of praise, as Ps. 50.23 might suggest, and that in response to these sacrifices God speaks. This interpretation would require an understanding of the evolution of sacrifice in Israel that is widely disputed, however. Moreover, the speeches of God still do not fit the forms of 'positive or negative' answers to which the comparative material attests.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

113

iii. The Role of God Quotations that Precede Petitions Psalm 82. According to Miller, 'Psalm 82 is one of the most overtly mythological texts in Scripture...'.106 The psalm could well be included with the above four psalms because, as will be seen, it shares several important characteristics with those psalms.107 It is treated separately here, however, because of the important difference in the way the psalm ends: Psalm 82 closes with a petition. The psalm begins with the statement: 'God has taken his place in the divine council, in the midst of the gods he judges' (v. 1). Mowinckel and others may be correct in seeing this as an allusion to the ancient Near Eastern concept that at the new year, the gods met in assembly to determine the destiny of the year.108 The psalm may play on that notion by depicting God (Yahweh) rising in such a New Year's assembly to judge the other gods, who have failed in their responsibilities: 'How long will you judge unjustly, and show favour to the wicked? Judge justly for the poor and the orphan, for the poor and the destitute, establish righteousness.' Rescue the poor and the needy, from the hand of the wicked ones, deliver them! (vv. 2-4)

Similar to the speeches of God in the festival psalms, God functions here as judge: God both accuses the other gods of sin (v. 2) and gives the commandments that they should follow (w. 3-4). Unlike those psalms, however, God's accusations are directed against other gods and not against humans. (Another important difference is that Psalm 82 contains no explicit language necessitating a liturgical setting.) Perhaps v. 5 continues the speech of God to the other gods, but because of the shift in pronomial deixsis from second to third person, the verse should more likely be understood as the perspective of the human speaker of the psalm, who interrupts the speech of God to comment on the false gods: 'They do not know, they do not discern. They wander around in darkness, all of the foundations of the earth tremble.' The false gods are declared to be incapable of knowing or discerning.109 The speech of God resumes: 'I say,110 "You may be gods, sons of the Most High, all of you, however, like humans you shall die, and like one of their princes you shall fall."' Rise up, O God! Judge the earth! For you possess all the nations! (vv. 6-8) 106. Miller, Interpreting the Psalms, p. 120. 107. Jeremias does relate Psalm 82 to those psalms (Kultprophetie und Gerichtsverkundigung in der spaten Konigszeit Israels, pp. 120-25). 108. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, II, p. 132. 109. Note that these accusations are similar to the accusations that the enemies make about God in the enemy quotations, who assert that God cannot see, does not know, etc. 110. The repetition of the subject in is understood here as emphatic (see Waltke and O'Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, pp. 293-97). K. Budde ('Ps. 82.6 ff.\JBL 40 (1921), pp. 39-42) understands to be a standing formula that always introduces

114

Many are Saying

The phrase 'I say' that begins v. 6 indicates that the character of vv. 6-7 differs from the words that God spoke earlier: this is the juridical sentence that God is imposing upon the gods. The sentence consists of consigning the gods to mortality. Because the gods have not fulfilled their divine responsibilities to judge with equity, the LORD condemns them to share the fate of mortals. The most important element of the psalm in its present form, however, is the final verse of the psalm in which the psalmist calls on God to rise up and judge the earth. It is unclear whether this verse is a later addition to the psalm or was part of the original composition. Most likely, the petition was added to an earlier composition, which in effect turned a mythic poem into a prayer for help. In the final form of the psalm, w. 1-7 serve as a mythic prelude to the request of v. 8: 'Rise up, O God! Judge the earth!' In this appeal, the psalmist reverses the vocabulary of the first portion of the psalm: God stood to judge the gods (v. 1; compare also v. 3); the psalmist now asks God to arise and judge because of the neglect of the gods the earth was made to shake, God is now asked to judge the earth . Even more important than these transformations of vocabulary are two conceptual transformations that occur in v. 8. First, God had effectively judged the gods, now God is asked to accomplish the lesser task of judging the earth. Second, the logic of the sentence that God passed on the gods was that because they had failed to judge equitably, divinity and immortality were removed from them. The petition of v. 8 implies a similar threat to God: if God does not respond to the prayer and establish the justice for which the psalmist prays, God will have proven that God has no more right to divinity than the gods! It is this closing petition that makes the God quotations of Psalm 82 function so differently from those of Psalms 50, 75, 81, and 95. In those psalms, the God quotations function primarily to instruct and warn the congregation. In Psalm 82, similar to Psalm 89, the God quotation functions primarily to urge God to respond to the closing petition. Psalms 60 and 108. An identical passage that contains a God quotation occurs in Pss. 60.5-12 and 108.6-13. In both cases, the twin sections are the final verses of the psalm. The difference between the psalms is found in the opening verses of the two psalms: Psalm 60 begins as a communal prayer for help, and Psalm 108 begins as an individual hymn of praise. It can be concluded that in Psalm 108, the passage has clearly been used secondarily, because the first verses (1-4) of Psalm 108 are a false conception. Budde cites Isa. 49.4; Jer. 3.19-20; Zeph. 3.7; Ps. 31.23; and Job 32.7 as examples of this formula. He translates Ps. 82.6 as 'Ich hatte gedacht, ihr waret Gotter / Und Sohne des Hochsten allesamt...'. (p. 39). It is unlikely that Budde is correct about being a fixed formula that necessarily introduces a false conception. In the passages he cites, the formula does not introduce statements that are all unequivocally false (see especially Ps. 31.23; Job 32.7). The formula can introduce a false conception (as can any verb of speaking) but does not inevitably do so. Moreover, the speech introduced by Ps. 82.6 should not be understood as a condition contrary to fact, as Budde's use of the German Konjunktiv suggests. Compare also J.H. Neyrey, ' "I said: You are Gods": Psalm 82.6 and John 10', JBL 108 (1989), pp. 647-63; H.-W. Jiingling, Der Tod der Gotter: Eine Untersuchung zu Psalm 82 (Stuttgarter Bibelstudien, 38; Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1969), especially pp. 72-78; 94-104.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

115

also borrowed (from Ps. 57.7-11), making the entire psalm a composite poem. This does not mean, however, that the passage with the divine speech is original to Psalm 60. It is very possible that the passage was used secondarily in Psalm 60 as well and that the original context of the God quotation is lost. The passage as it occurs in Psalm 60 reads: In order that your beloved ones may be delivered, save with your right hand, answer us! [Ps. 108.6 reads 'answer me'] 1 ' l 117 God promised by his holiness. 'I will exult, I will divide Shechem, the valley of Succoth I will parcel out. Gilead belongs to me, Manasseh belongs to me, Ephraim is the helmet of my head, Judah my sceptre. Moab is my washing bowl, on Edom I throw my shoe; over Philistia I triumph.' O, that he would bring me to the fortified city!113 O, that he would lead me against Edom! Have you not rejected us, O God? Do you not go out with our armies? Give to us your help against the foe, for human help is worthless. With God we can prove mighty, he will trample our foes. (vv. 5-12; compare Ps. 108.7-13)

The structure of the passage is fairly clear: petition (v. 5), a quotation of a divine speech (vv. 6-8), complaint (vv. 9-10), petition (v. 11), and confession of trust (v. 12). The interpretation of the passage—especially the interpretation of the function of the God quotation—is less clear. As one might guess, there are two major views: those who view it as a 'salvation oracle' in response to the petition of v. 5, and those who view it as an older oracular tradition that is quoted to motivate God to answer the petition of v. 11. Those who see the God quotation as a salvation oracle can cite several data in support of their view. First, the passage ends (and thus both of the psalms that contain the passage end) with a confident expression of trust (v. 12) that can be explained as a response to a word of assurance spoken by a priest or prophet in the cult: This is not merely a motivation of the prayer, like the declaration of confidence found in the body of the psalm... [the closing expression of confidence] cannot merely be explained psychologically, by saying that through his prayer the suppliant has now achieved confidence and assurance.. .it was part of the very ritual of the penitential festivals that (the priest or) the temple prophet would promise the suppliant salvation and the granting of his prayer by means of an oracle or a promise to that effect.

111. A qere here agrees with Ps. 108.6, which has 'answer me', rather than This change was introduced in Psalm 108 to conform to the individual voice in the opening verses of that psalm. The communal voice of Ps. 60.1-4 demands a plural. 112. For this translation of see below. 113. Reading with Ps. 108.10. 114. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, I, pp. 217-18. Emphasis in original.

116

Many are Saying

Second, the divine speech follows immediately upon the petition of v. 5, as if in answer to it. Third, the quotation frame can be translated, 'God has promised in his sanctuary', indicating an oracle delivered by a priest or prophet in the sanctuary, for which there are many biblical and extrabiblical parallels. Fourth, the divine speech contains God's territorial claim on neighbouring lands. Writing specifically about the use of the passage in Psalm 60, Miller wrote, One must assume that parts of the northern kingdom had been taken over by foreign powers, and the salvation oracle is God's promise to take them back but also to take possession of nations that have oppressed Israel and Judah. The community prayer is answered by a promise of salvation that speaks to the national situation broadly but appropriate to the petition that precedes it.115

Fifth, the salvation oracle inscribed on the walls of the cave at Khirbet Beit Lei, 'I will accept the cities of Judah, I will redeem Jerusalem', offers a convincing parallel for understanding how such a geographically specific oracle could function as a response to both the communal petition 'answer us' of Ps. 60.5 and the individual petition 'answer me' of Ps. 108.6. Sixth, the repetition of the passage in the two psalms can be viewed as evidence that cultic prophets relied on 'stock oracles of salvation': From Pss. 60 and 108 we can see that the same promise might reappear in different psalms, at different times. Oracles might, in other words, be used over again. This very fact shows that they made up a permanent feature of the liturgy itself, and that the wording would usually be rather stereotyped and according to pattern...116

Those who understand the divine speech as a quotation of an older tradition that functions here to motivate God can point to equally impressive arguments. First, the God quotation immediately precedes the complaint of vv. 10-11 and the petition of v. 11. In this sequence, the quotation functions to remind God of God's promises. The description of those who pray in Isa. 62.6-7 supports such a view: 'You who remind the LORD, take no rest, and give him no rest until he establishes Jerusalem...'117 Second, the closing confession of confidence is typical of all the prayers for help. There is no firm evidence for assuming that a word of assurance has to precede such expressions of trust. Even Gunkel himself—an advocate of the salvation oracle interpretation—understood this: 'There are numerous complaint songs which have never presumed such an oracle, those without cultic ties. One has to consider these as the consequences of a fixed style.''' 8 It can also be pointed out that Begrich's original argument was that oracles of assurance explain the sudden shift from petition to trust. But the speech of God in this context does not occur between the petition and the confession of trust but between two petitions. Third, the formal marker of the oracle of salvation in both biblical and extrabiblical

115. Miller, They Cried to the Lord, p. 172. 116. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, II, p. 59. 117. See Tate, Psalms 51-100, p. 107. 118. Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms, p. 183.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

117

material—the injunction to 'fear not' or its equivalent—is missing here. This can be explained by assuming that the original oracle included such an injunction but that it was removed when it was used secondarily in these psalms. Note that this line of argument parallels Starbuck's argument about the removal of regnal names as part of the reappropriation of royal oracles in the royal psalms. Fourth, the quotation frame can be translated,' God has promised by his holiness', as a parallel in Ps. 89.35 attests: 'I have sworn by my holiness Note that this parallel occurs precisely within a God quotation about the Davidic monarch (see also Ps. 105.49; Jer. 23.9; and Amos 4.2). If this translation is adopted, it is likely that the quotation frame implies the quotation of an older oracular tradition, similar to Ps. 2.5.119 Fifth, because the content of the divine speech assumes Judean hegemony over both the northern tribes and the vassal nations of Edom, Moab, and Philistia, the tradition from which the oracle is quoted probably dates to the early monarchy, the only time such southern hegemony makes sense.120 Neither Psalm 60 nor 108 can be dated so early (one reason for this is that the complaint of Ps. 60.1 -5 makes no sense in Davidic times). Therefore the God quotation here appears to represent an older tradition that has been reappropriated in a later psalm. Sixth, it is even possible to understand the Khirbet Beit Lei inscriptions as support for this interpretation. At Khirbet Beit Lei, below the inscription that quotes God's voice, a second inscription records a petition: pqd yh '1 nn nqh yh yhwh Be mindful, Yah Gracious God; Absolve, Yah Yahweh.

If the sequence on the cave walls is taken seriously, then the God quotation precedes this petition. It can also be noted that the divine speech on the cave walls lacks the assurance to 'fear not'. Rather than understand these inscriptions as a prayer that is answered by an assuring oracle, they should perhaps be understood as a reminder to God of the divine promise, followed by a petition. This sequence and logic would certainly make sense of the setting: refugees hiding in a cave while the land is being overrun. Seventh, the repetition of the passage in two psalms can be interpreted as evidence that the divine speech was a part of a tradition that was reused in many contexts. Aubrey Johnson, a champion of understanding the God quotations as oracles spoken through prophets in the cult, concluded that the divine speech of Psalm 60 should be understood as 'an appeal to an earlier divine utterance, whether quoted verbatim or not, which has been used here as a basis for hope in connection with the present urgent plea that Yahweh should abandon His obvious anger towards His followers and thus deliver those who are really so dear to Him...' 122 Both of the possible interpretations of the role of the God quotation in Psalms 60 and 108 are plausible, neither is definitive, and perhaps, both are valid (see below). 119. Thus Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms ofAsaph, p. 129. 120. See Kraus, Psalms 60-150, p. 5. 121. Miller, 'Psalms and Inscriptions', p. 328. The twoy/7 words may be vocative rather than proper nouns. See also Renz and Rollig, Handbuch der althebrdischen Epigraphik, I, p. 248. 122. Johnson, The Cultic Prophet and Israel's Psalmody, p. 171.

118

Many are Saying

Summary and Conclusions. In these psalms, the God quotation precedes the petition in the argument of the psalm (although in Psalms 60 and 108, the God quotation both precedes and follows petitions). Scholars have debated whether these God quotations should be understood as reminding God of God's promises— and thus motivating God to answer the prayer for help—or as a salvation oracle designed to assure a petitioner that her prayer will be answered. As was suggested above in relation to Psalm 132, the function of the God quotations that precede the petitions depends more on which audience an interpreter imagines for the psalm than upon any other variable. If the implied audience for a psalm is thought of as God, then the quotation is to be interpreted as a reminder to God of promises made in the past that now seem endangered. If the implied audience for a psalm is imagined as a community praying to God, then the quotation is to be understood as an assurance of God's fidelity. One interpretation need not exclude the other. In a communal worship setting, for a worship leader to include a quotation of God's earlier promises in a prayer will serve both to remind God that God should keep those promises, and also serve to remind the community that God has made such a promise and—presumably—that God will keep those promises. Seen in this light, an interpreter is mistaken if he forces a choice between these two interpretations. iv. The Role of God Quotations that Offer Assurance The above conclusion should not be taken to suggest that there are no divine speeches in the Psalter that unequivocally offer assurance. Such God quotations occur in Psalms 46, 91, and 12. Psalm 46. The main theme of Psalm 46 is the assurance that the LORD promises to Zion. This is clear from the confession of trust that begins the psalm: 'God is our refuge and strength...Therefore we will not fear' w. l-2a). Note especially the positive reformulation of the normal injunction 'fear not'. The psalm moves from an indicative confession of confidence, to an imperative call to behold the works of the LORD, to the quotation of a divine promise of protection: Indicative

1-7

Imperative

8-9 10

Confession of trust (vv. 1-3) Reasons for trust (vv. 4-6) Refrain (v. 7) Imperative call to behold the works of the LORD God quotation

The confident assurance of the confession of trust in vv. l-2a has already been cited. The psalm follows this confession with a rehearsal of threatening images that would normally consist of good reasons to fear, but which do not evoke fear because of the protection that the LORD affords Zion. The images of the list—the earth melting, the mountains shaking, the seas raging, and so on—are borrowed from the motifs of the chaos conflict. The cosmic instability of these images also implies a historical instability that is symbolized by the images of nations and kingdoms in chaos (v. 6a). At v. 4, the psalm lists the main reason for Zion's safety: the LORD dwells there. Verses 7 and 11 contain a refrain that repeats this

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

119

assurance: 'The LORD of hosts is with us, the God of Jacob is our refuge.'123 Similar to Psalm 50, the psalm speaks of God's coming in theophanic terms: 'He utters his voice, the earth melts' (v. 6b). The psalm then turns from the indicative to the imperative: 'Come! See the works of the LORD, what devastation he wreaks on earth!' (v. 9). The divine speech of v. 10 then follows: 'Be silent! Know that I am God! I am exalted throughout the nations! I am exalted throughout the earth!' The LORD'S assertion of exaltation over the nations on one hand, and over the earth on the other, is not merely poetic parallelism. The LORD figuratively stills the raging of the dual threats that were cited earlier in the psalm: that of the nations and kingdoms (v. 6, compare v. 9), and that of creation (the waters, the mountains, the earth, see vv. 2b-3, 6b). The psalm ends with a repetition of the refrain: 'The LORD of hosts is with us, the God of Jacob is our refuge.'124 As one might anticipate, interpreters differ as to whether the divine speech of v. 10 should be understood as spoken by a prophetic voice under the influence of some sort of immediate inspiration, or as a literary and liturgical device that does not imply a present encounter with the deity in the cult. Nasuti, for example, interprets the lack of any introductory quotation formula as a sign that the passage implies a present encounter: in Psalm 46, the transition from the preceding descriptive verses to the divine speech of v. 10 is totally abrupt, with nothing to prepare the audience for such a shift in perspective. This is not a mere quotation to buttress an ongoing argument. Rather, it is only by envisioning a cultic situation in which the speech of the Deity is a present reality that one can explain such a verse.125

As noted above, Nasuti understands the 'mechanics' of the divine speech to have occurred through some sort of 'possession' or 'trance behavior' ,126 Two facts argue against this view. First, the theophanic description of the LORD'S coming as described in v. 6b can be understood as an introduction to the divine speech: 'He utters his voice the earth melts!' While the clause is separated from the God quotation by vv. 7-9, it certainly excludes the view that the psalm contains 'nothing to prepare the audience for' the divine speech of v. 10. Second, the refrains of w. 7 and 11 probably indicate that this is a liturgical composition designed for repeated use in the cult. As such, explanations of the God quotation must account for repeated performances. This would seem to exclude any sort of possession or trance explanation. Craigie's judgement on the matter should be followed: 'the divine words of [v. 10] might more appropriately be interpreted in

123. It is possible that this refrain once also followed v. 3, and some scholars restore it there. This restoration would create a balanced psalm of three strophes, each of which ends with the refrain. 124. Many commentators interpret the imperatives of vv. 8 and 10 to be directed not only at the worshipping community but also at the nations. Building on this interpretation, E. Zenger has suggested that Israel alone speaks the refrain in v. 7, but that the nations and Israel speak the refrain of v. 11 together (Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalmen I, p. 288). 125. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms ofAsaph, p. 130. 126. Nasuti, Tradition History and the Psalms ofAsaph, p. 144.

120

Many are Saying

literary terms'. 'The divine words.. .are probably not in the form of an oracle.'127 Just because the mechanics of the divine speech should not be thought of in terms of possession or trance behaviour, however, does not mean that the God quotation would not have effected an encounter with the LORD in the cult. The use of the God quotations in the psalms considered above, as well as in Psalm 46, suggests that in the Jerusalem cult, the quotation of divine speech by a priestly figure effected precisely such an encounter for the community. One of the central tenets of Zion theology was that God was present in the temple. The quotation of a divine speech in the temple would most likely have been understood by the ancient Israelites as no less of an encounter with the deity than would the transmission of an oracle through a seer. At any rate, the function of the God quotation in Psalm 46 seems clear. It literally 'answers' and 'silences' the raging sounds of the nations and the earth, and it assures the worshipping community of divine protection against such threats. It is interesting that this God quotation follows the community's confession of trust that 'We will not fear' (v. 2a). Dating back to Begrich, the assumption has been that oracles of salvation precede confessions of trust. The fact that this divine utterance follows the confession of trust again argues against understanding the divine speech as a 'salvation oracle' designed to assure petitioners that God has heard their prayer. Psalm 91. Psalm 91 may be divided into two parts. Verses 1-13 are a didactic poem addressed to an individual; the poem assures the individual of the protection of God. Verses 14-16 are a passage of divine speech that seconds the assurance promised in vv. 1-13.128 The poem of the first thirteen verses contrasts images of danger with images of safety. The snare of the fowler is contrasted with wings that surround and protect. The image of flying arrows is contrasted with the image of the shield. A thousand warriors falling at one's side is contrasted with the image of the safe tent and the image of guardian angels. And so on. The poem as a whole is an eloquent series of promises spoken in the third person: 'he will cover you with his pinions', 'he will command his angels concerning you', and so on. In the last three verses of the psalm, however, the verbs shift into the first person: For he who loved me, I will deliver, I will set him on high because he knew my name.

127. Craigie, Psalms 1-50, pp. 343, 345. 128. MowinckePs view was that this psalm is a liturgy spoken by a priest to a worshipper who has come to the cult in a time of suffering (The Psalms in Israel's Worship, II, pp. 50-51). While the psalm may rely on such a liturgy for its background and content, the present form of the psalm is clearly not a liturgy. Following a similar line of thought, H.D. Preuss argued that the closing verses contain a salvation oracle delivered to a petitioner in the form of a quotation ('... ich will mit dir sein', ZAWSO (1968), pp. 139-73). This view is unlikely, because the closing verses are not directed to a specific individual (not 'you') but to a generic individual ('him'). Starbuck advanced the view that Psalm 91 is a democratized version of a royal psalm, in which all royal court motifs have been transferred to common usage (Court Oracles in the Psalms, pp. 195-203).

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

121

He will call on me and I will answer him. I will be with him in distress, I will rescue him and I will glorify him. I will satisfy him with length of days, and 1 will show him my salvation, (vv. 14-16)

This closing passage is not a response to a petitioner's trust, but functions to emphasize and underscore what was taught in vv. 1 -13.129 As Tate noted, the shift to God's speaking voice lends 'added authority and intensity' to what is taught throughout the psalm. 'The whole is given divine authenticity in the form of the oracle in w. 14-16, where God declares that he does indeed do what the speaker has said.'130 The function of this God quotation can therefore be described as both giving assurance and lending credibility. It gives assurance to those who hear the poem, because it promises safety. It lends authority to the speaker of the psalm, because it supports what she has taught in vv. 1-13. Psalm 12. As was mentioned in an earlier chapter, Psalm 12 contrasts the speech of the enemy with the speech of God. In the psalm's chiastic structure, the speech of God stands at the centre of the psalm as the answer to the speech of the wicked: 1—Opening petition 2-3—Description of the wicked's speech 4—Speech of the wicked quoted 5—Speech of God quoted 6—Description of God's speech 7-8—Closing confession of trust

The enemy quotation identifies the central theological problem that the psalm addresses: Will the false accusations of the wicked—the violence that the wicked do against the poor by uttering false testimony—be allowed to stand? The threat that the enemies pose to the weak and poor is portrayed completely in terms of speech: They speak falsely, each man to his neighbour, with flattering lips and a double heart they speak. May the LORD cut off all flattering lips, every tongue that boasts great things, Those who say, 'By means of our tongues we prevail, our lips are ours, who is lord over us?' (vv. 2-4)

The lips, voices, and tongues of the wicked are the weapons with which they oppress the poor and exert themselves against the LORD. The speech of the wicked is answered by the speech of God: 'Because of the hurt of the poor ones, because of the groaning of the needy ones, now I will arise!' says the LORD,

'I will establish in safety the witness in their behalf. (v. 5) 129. Thus Brueggemann, The Message of the Psalms: A Theological Commentary (Augsburg Old Testament Study Series; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984), pp. 156-59. 130. Tate, Psalms 51-100, pp. 450, 458. 131. On the translation of as 'witness', see Miller, 'yapiah in Psalm XII 6', pp. 495-500.

122

Many are Saying

In terms of the structure of the psalm, the speech of God answers the speech of the wicked, and thus the speech of God also answers the theological problem raised by the speech of the wicked. The LORD promises to provide an upright witness who will testify truthfully on behalf of the innocent. Moreover, the content of God's speech directly contradicts the assertion that the wicked make: God does see the suffering of the downcast, God does have effective power to intervene on their behalf, and God will soon act. As Miller has noted, the God quotation is the turning point of the Psalm as it announces Yahweh's decision to intervene in this situation... Yahweh will act because of the violence done to the poor and in response to their groaning under this oppression. The detailed description in verses 3-5 of that violence entirely in terms of what and how people speak leads quite naturally to the divine promise to protect the one who speaks truly and with integrity for the poor and the afflicted, the one who is a witness in his or her behalf

over against any [false witness].

The psalm closes with a confession of trust. Because the divine speech of v. 5 precedes the confession of trust of v. 7 and because the divine speech promises a specific salvific action, the God quotation in Psalm 12 fits the category of an oracle of assurance. The function of God's speech here is certainly to assure the community of faith that God will not abandon the innocent to the violence of false witnesses. It should be noted that this is a prayer for the community and not for an individual petitioner. The psalmist prays: 'You, O LORD, will protect us; you will guard us from this generation forever' (v. 7). In the God quotation, the referents should also be understood as communal: ' "Because of the hurt of the poor ones [1T'']U], because of the groaning of the needy ones now I will arise!" says the LORD, "I will establish in safety the witness in their133 behalf."' Psalm 12, therefore, is best understood as a psalm in which the voice of God promises salvation to the community.134 Summary and Conclusions. In these psalms, the divine speech comes either at the end of the psalm (91) or prior to a confession of trust (12 and 46). Because of this placement within the argument of these psalms, these God quotations can be described as functioning to give assurance and confidence. It is worth noting that these three psalms have different genres: Psalm 12 is a prayer for help, Psalm 46 is a communal psalm of trust, and Psalm 91 is a wisdom psalm. Miller notes that the wordypyh = 'witness' is attested in Ugaritic as well as Prov. 6.19; 12.5; 24.5, 25; 19.5, 9; Ps. 27.12; and Hab. 2.3. He also notes that the Targum's translation of with the verb shd ('witness, testify') may reflect an understanding of as 'witness'. 132. Miller, 'yapiah in Psalm XII 6', p. 499. 133. The3mssufnx (lit: 'for him') refers to a plural and not a singular antecedent and should be translated, 'on their behalf. It is common in Hebrew poetry for singular suffixed pronouns to refer to plural antecedents; see Pss. 73.18; 59.9; 12; 12.6; Isa. 28.6, and so on. 134. See Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, II, 60. Mowinckel understood v. 6—'The promises of the LORD are promises that are pure...'—as the petitioner's thanksgiving, which was spoken after the oracle was delivered (I, p. 218). Gunkel thought of the psalm not as a liturgy but as an imitation of a prophetic liturgy. Craigie is surely correct that an original setting for the psalm cannot be recovered (Psalms 1-50, p. 137).

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

123

v. The Role of Quotations in which God's Word Represents God's Effective Power The God quotation that can most accurately be described as an oracle of salvation is found at the beginning of Psalm 35: Dispute, O LORD, against those who dispute against me, fight against those who fight against me! Grab hold of shield and buckler, and rise up to help me! Draw the spear and javelin to meet my pursuers, say to my soul, 'I am your salvation!' (Ps. 35.1-3)

Most scholars understand the quotation in Ps. 35.3 as a petitioner's request for an oracle of salvation. For example, Hossfeld: 'In [v. 3b] the pray-er requests a healing oracle.'135 The God quotation does lack the diagnostic injunction 'Do not fear/Fear not!', but perhaps this can be explained by the fact that this is a request for a salvation oracle. The similarity of the language of this request to language that is found in undisputed oracles of salvation makes it clear that the psalmist is requesting an oracle of salvation: 'Do not be afraid, for I am your God' (Isa. 41.1 Ob); 'Do not fear...I will help you' (Isa. 41.14); and 'Do not fear...For I am the LORD your God' (Isa. 43.Ib, 3a). It must be stressed, however, that the God quotation in Psalm 35 is not an oracle of salvation but a request for one. That is, in the context of Psalm 35, the request for salvation oracle is a request for the effective power of God.136 The words of God represent the decision of God to be on the psalmist's side. If the words are spoken, they do more than represent a promise or a hope for the psalmist. Rather, they represent the action of God on the psalmist's behalf. In two other psalms, God quotations serve similarly to refer to God's effective power. That is, in order to indicate the action that God takes, the psalmist uses the device of divine speech. Consider the following examples: You turn humans back to dust, and you say, 'Return, O mortals!' (Ps. 90.3) [God] did not allow any human to oppress them [Israel], and he rebuked kings on their behalf, 'Do not touch my anointed ones, and do not harm my prophets.' (Ps. 105.15)

The point of the divine speech in each of these passages is not literally to refer to words that God speaks, but to refer to an action that God takes or can take. The quotations serve to represent God's will or God's intention to take a particular action. In Ps. 90.2, for example, God does not literally say, 'Return, O mortals!'

135. Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalmen /, p. 220, my translation. This view goes back at least as far as Begrich ('Das priestliche Heilsorakel', p. 81). Compare C.G. Broyles, Psalms (NIBC, 11; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1999), p. 170. Hossfeld wrote, 'A cultic prophet may have mediated it' (p. 204, my translation). He later partially withdrew this interpretation ('Das Prophetische in den Psalmem', p. 23). 136. See Craigie, Psalms 1-50, p. 286.

124

Many are Saying

Rather, the quotation indicates that mortality is God's will for humans, the fate that God confers upon humans. Likewise, in Ps. 105.15, the quotation does not indicate any literal commandment that God gave to nations that threatened Israel. The quotation merely expresses the protection that the LORD gave to Israel in the days 'when they were few in number'. Perhaps the God quotation in Ps. 68.22-23 should also be understood as speech that indicates God's action: 'The LORD said, "From Bashan I will bring them back, I will bring them back from the depths of the sea, in order that you may wash137 your feet in their blood, the tongues of your dogs may have their portion138 of the enemies".' The meaning of the verses is obscure, but apparently it refers to God's defeat of the enemies. The quotation, it should be noted, does not refer to any verbal communication that God had with humans; rather, it serves to refer to the action God took in defeating the enemies of Israel. It can be recalled here that Clark and Gerrig argued that one of the functions for which quotations are useful is performing 'impossible demonstrations'.139 The actions of God certainly fall under the category of impossible demonstrations. It would, for example, be impossible for a reporter to 'demonstrate' God's will to impose mortality upon human beings, but the psalmist can convey that meaning by use of direct discourse. Because these quotations serve primarily to indicate some action that God takes, however, does not mean that the quotations are not formally important in the psalms in which they occur (although the God quotations in Psalms 68 and 105 do not seem to play as significant a role in those psalms). The command of God that is quoted in Ps. 90.3, for example—'Turn back O mortals'—is precisely the word that the psalmist uses in the psalm's petition: 'Repent , O LORD!' (v. 13). Thus, the vocabulary of God is reversed by the psalmist and returned to God as a request. As such, the vocabulary of the God quotation becomes the key rhetorical device around which the argument of the psalm pivots. 3. The Rhetorical Function of God Quotations If the above analyses are correct, then many—if not most—of the God quotations of the Psalter are quotations from earlier tradition. This is the case with the four royal psalms (2, 89,110, and 132), which draw on older material about the Davidic covenant. This also seems to be the case with the God quotations in the festival psalms (50, 75, 81, and 95), which quote older legal material related to the Decalogue; and with the God quotations that precede petitions (82, 60, and 108), which quote older mythic and covenantal material respectively. One can also make the case that this is the situation in Psalms 12, 46, and 91, psalms in which the divine speech functions to give assurance. 137 , 'shatter', makes little sense. Reading here with LXX and Syr, both of which have passive verbs with the sense 'to wash/dip'. 138. is problematic, but is read here a s ' h i s [the dogs'] portion'. 139. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 794: 'Some events are impossible to demonstrate in their entirety, yet speakers can depict some of their aspects.'

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

125

One way to describe the function of these God quotations that represent earlier tradition is to say that they are bearing the authority of the theological tradition. That is, the God quotations from the tradition are quoted in later psalms because they carry the authority of the tradition. To be precise, the God quotations carry authority because they purport to be the speech of God: they are God's words, and thus they bear God's authority. The psalmists quote these God quotations because they wish to draw upon this authority; they wish to use the power of God's authority in their psalms. But having said that, one has not said enough. A more important question is: Toward what rhetorical goals do the psalms employ the authority borne in the God quotations! As Sternberg argued so forcefully, rhetorical effect depends primarily on context.140 Because of this, in different contexts, quotations that are nearly identical can have almost opposite rhetorical effects. i. God Quotations Used to Construct Society One of the primary uses to which the psalms put the God quotations is the construction of an ordered, ethical society. The best examples of this use are the four quotations from the communal/festival psalms (50,75, 81, and 95), as well as Psalm 2. In these psalms, the voice of God is used to restrain the wicked impulses of the community by threatening punishment to the wicked and to encourage the virtues of covenant obedience by promising reward to the good. The God quotations are an incredibly powerful rhetorical device for these purposes because in them God directly addresses the gathered 'you' of the community. Note especially the rhetorical power of God speaking to the congregation using second person pronouns and verbs: 'You hate discipline.. .you cast my words behind you.. .you take up with adulterers', and so on (Ps. 50.17-18). The purpose of the speech is to encourage proper behaviour (behaviour beneficial to society) and to discourage improper behaviour (behaviour that would damage society). A wide range of undesirable behaviour is discouraged: adultery, false witness, theft, disobedience, rote performance of sacrifice, worship of foreign gods, following of human counsel, despising the LORD, testing God, having hard hearts, boasting, pride, and so on. All four of the psalms seek to enforce the prohibitions against these things by promising punishment for those who do them. It must be underscored that these vices are prohibited because of the negative social impact they have: they destroy community and the structures that promote the common good. An equally wide range of desirable behaviour is encouraged: fulfilment of vows and sacrifices, obedience to God's 'ways', joyful participation in worship, faithful fulfilment of festival obligations, joy in God's judgement, trust in God's providence, thanksgiving, and the like. Psalms 50, 75, and 81 promise rewards for those who follow God's ways. In a similar fashion, Psalm 2 is concerned with the social order. It has often been pointed out that in Psalm 2, the speech of God legitimates the rule of the Davidic king, and this is certainly

140. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land'.

126

Many are Saying

correct.141 But there is a social concern in the psalm and a societal function to the divine speech. It promises punishment for those who rebel against the LORD'S anointed and happiness for those who obey. This function of divine speech is not unique to the Psalter or to the Old Testament. In the Pentateuch—especially in the second half of Exodus and throughout Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy—commandments and laws are placed in the mouth of God. Most notably, Moses speaks face-to-face with God in order to receive God's laws (and the Decalogue from God was 'written with the finger of God' (Exod. 31.18)). Many more examples of this phenomenon could be given, but the point has been made: the authority of God is used to establish proper and improper behaviour for the good of the community. The use of the God quotations to comfort and assure may also be considered as functioning to construct an ordered society. As was argued above, in Psalms 12, 46, and 91, the God quotations assure the community of God's protection, and the God quotations in Psalms 132, 60 and 108, and 82 function partly to assure the community. All of these psalms are communal psalms, with the exception of Psalm 91, which is an instructional psalm to a generic individual. These psalms assure that God will not abandon Zion, nor will individuals who place their trust in God be abandoned. To focus only on the fears and emotions of individuals when interpreting the function of these assuring God quotations is to miss the point that fear and assurance also have public aspects. Recall that Jeremiah was both punished and then jailed because his prophecies made the authorities uneasy (see, for example, Jer. 20.1-6; 32.1-3), Elijah was branded the 'troubler of Israel' because of the content of his prophecies (1 Kgs. 18.17), and Amos was warned not to prophesy any more (Amos 7.12-13). The point is that there was (and is) a public character to security and confidence on the one hand, and fear and insecurity on the other. The fact that these 'assuring' divine speeches have survived mainly in communal psalms suggests that their public effect of helping to create a stable society was important in antiquity. In terms of the theories of quotation that were presented in Chapter 1, this function of the God quotations draws upon the ability of quotations to confer 'solidarity' and also upon the ability of quotations to effect 'engrossment'. Clark and Gerrig argued that solidarity and engrossment are two of the functions of quotations. The first of these functions draws upon the character of quotations as 'depictions' of a speech event, and refers to the ability of quotation 'to serve well in the expression of solidarity... '.142 The psalmists use the God quotations to claim ownership of reported speech, that is, to apply the God quotations to the purposes that they desire. They are, in effect, co-opting the voice of God to say what they want to say to the community. The second function, engrossment, draws upon the 141. There have been many valuable studies into the Judean royal theology that is characteristic of Psalms 2, 89, 110, and 132. The quotations in these psalms—especially because they preserve ancient ideological aspects of the Jerusalem temple ideology—are valuable resources for this line of research. The focus here, however, is on the rhetorical function of the quotations in the final form of the psalms. 142. Steinberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 793.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

127

ability of quotations to shift perspectives so that the audience temporarily hears the words of an absent or unavailable speaker as they are spoken through a man or woman who is present. This 'engrossment' function of quotations accounts for the rhetorical power of God directly addressing the congregation as 'you' . Rather than hearing a human priest tell them what to do and not to do, the device of quotation allows the congregation to become engrossed in the perspective of God, and so to

rom God what they should do and should not do.143 ii. God Quotations Used to Challenge God A second use of the God quotations in the Psalter is the use of the God quotations to motivate God to answer the requests of the supplicant. In the above analysis of the God quotations, it was argued that those God quotations that precede petitions—Psalms 60 and 108, 82, 89 —function to remind God of God's promises, and thus function to motivate God to act on the supplicant's behalf. Two aspects of the linguistic theories that were presented in Chapter 1 can help illumine this function of the God quotations. The first relevant linguistic theory is Austin's speech-act theory. It will be recalled that according to Austin, some utterances do not function simply by referring, but function by performing events.144 According to Austin, one type of events that words can perform is 'contractual' events. Two examples of contractual speech acts are the words 'I bet you five dollars', or 'It's a deal, I will buy it for two hundred dollars'. The first phrase, when uttered while agreeing to a wager, creates a wager (a type of contract) between a speaker and a listener. Note that the speech act not only creates the wager, but also commits the participants to a specific financial investment: five dollars. The second phrase also creates a contract that includes specific actions on the part of the participants. In this case, one participant agrees to pay two hundred dollars for some undefined 'it', and the other agrees to sell 'it'. A part of Wierzbicka's theory of quotations as role-play also illumines the God quotations that are used to motivate God to answer prayer. Wierzbicka argued that when a person quotes, her utterance has a double illocutionary force: According to Wierzbicka, in direct discourse, a reporter wants an audience to know what an original speaker said, and under what circumstances the original speaker said it.145 In terms of the God quotations that are turned backed against God, the psalmist can be understood as saying to God in effect: 'I want you to remember what you said, and I want you to remember that when you said it, you were committing yourself to a covenant. ' To use the example of Psalm 89, the psalmist wants God to remember that when God spoke to David, God performed the contractual speech act of making a covenant with David. That covenantal speech act, furthermore, included specific commitments on God's part: You promised to punish David's heirs, but never to break the covenant with them (vv. 30-34); you promised that David's heirs would

143. Sternberg, 'Proteus in Quotation-Land', p. 793. 144. Austin, How to Do Things with Words. 145. See Wierzbicka, 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', pp. 274-75.

128

Many are Saying

be as sons to you and you as fathers to them, that they could cry to you and you would answer (v. 26); and you promised that you would give David's heirs victory in battle (w. 22-23). In the same way that the English word 'bet'—in the phrase 'I bet you five dollars'—functions as the legally binding word that performs the contractual speech act, the Hebrew word can be taken as the legally binding word that God spoke and that committed God to the covenant: 'I have sworn by my holiness' v. 35; compare also: 'The LORD has sworn' Ps. 110.4 and Ps. 132.11)). The fact that the psalmist quotes exactly that phrase back to God can be interpreted as the citation of the legally binding element in the covenantal contract. Presumably, the psalmist holds out hope that God will 'remember' the covenant that was made with David, and will intercede on behalf of David's heir. iii. God Quotations as Characterizations of God A third way that God quotations function in the Psalter is to characterize God. In the same way that the self quotations characterize the self and the enemy quotations characterize the enemies, the God quotations help to image the character of God for those who read and pray the psalms. As noted in the previous chapter, direct speech is useful for characterization, because it lets 'the characters speak for themselves. For, of course, what characters say and how they say it may tell us much about the kind of people they are.'146 Several aspects of the God quotations have significant impact upon the way that God has been imagined by those who use the Psalter. God Speaks to the Community through the Cult. One of the most important aspects of the character of God has to do with whom God speaks and through whom God speaks. The God quotations portray a God who speaks to the king and through the cult. Even though the analysis presented here has declined the usual interpretation of the God quotations as oracles delivered by prophetic figures, the cultic or communal nature of the psalms in which many of the God quotations occur has been emphasized. Psalms 2, 12, 46, 60 and 108, 50, 75, 81, and 95 all are communal psalms in which God speaks. It might be tempting to explain away these details of the God quotations either as residual traces of the cultic setting for which many of the psalms were composed (which the God quotations are!) or as indications of the ancient Near Eastern milieu from which the Old Testament stems (which is certainly the case!). But such genetic explanations - as accurate as they surely are - fail to acknowledge the ongoing theological effects that the God quotations have for modern communities that still use the Psalter. People today still pray the psalms, and therefore their images of God are still being constructed in part by the God quotations. It will be helpful to recall again the frequent cry by the supplicants, 'Answer me, O God', and the frequent attack by the enemies, 'God does not hear'. These two outcries both touch upon a common human desire to be in communication with God, to be 146. Gunn and Fewell, Narrative in the Hebrew Bible, p. 63.

4. 'The Lord Has Sworn'

129

spoken to by the Other. The implicit message of the God quotations is that God is encountered primarily in the cult. The message is that God's law, a relationship with God, God's forgiveness, and God's help are all mediated primarily through the cult. God is also portrayed as speaking to the king. In Ps. 2.7, the king reports, 'He said to me...' In Ps. 132.11 the psalmist recalls that 'The LORD swore to David...' (see also Pss. 89.3 and 110.1). The only specific individual to whom God is portrayed as speaking in the Psalter is David. And in addition to speaking to the gathered community (as noted above), God speaks to the king. This has had a lasting effect on how Christian communities of faith have understood the will of God to be mediated. Since New Testament days, Christians have interpreted God's speech to the king christologically (see, for example, Acts 2.34-35; 13.32-34; and so on). The LORD of the Covenant Who Protects and Punishes. A second aspect of the character of God that is portrayed by the God quotations concerns the type of actions that God takes when God acts. In the divine speeches of the royal psalms (2, 89, 110, and 132), the festival psalms (50, 75, 81, and 95), as well as in the psalms where God's speech offers assurance (12,46, and 91), God's speech shows the LORD to be a God who protects and punishes. These dual aspects are, of course, understood as part of God's covenantal role - God promised to do these things in the covenant with David. On the one hand, God protects the innocent and rewards fidelity. Recall that in the royal psalms, God promises to establish the monarchy forever, treat the Davidic king as a son, give victory in battle, answer when the king calls, and give the king dominion over nations. Corresponding to this, God promises to discipline the Davidic kings when they prove unfaithful and to punish enemies who rise up against the kings. Similarly, in the communal psalms, God promises to protect Jerusalem, protect the weak and falsely accused, establish peace, and reward those who follow God's ways. On the other hand, God promises to punish the wicked, defeat foreign nations who rise up against Jerusalem, and judge those who break God's laws. One aspect of this characterization of God should be underscored. In these quotations, the LORD claims to have the sovereign power both to protect and to punish. In antiquity, in modernity, and at times in between, there have been people who have argued that the LORD exists but does not possess the necessary power to protect or to punish. In antiquity, one way in which people denied that the LORD had such power was to assert that other gods were stronger or had proved victorious. In modernity, many sceptics have argued that the existence of suffering and evil prove either that God exists or that God lacks effective power to intervene in human affairs. In times in between, the Deists were another group that denied the effective power of God: They believed in a watchmaker God who created the earth and set it running but no longer interferes with its operations. Against these and other similar views, the God quotations stand—at least in the literary world of the Psalter—as God's assertion of power:

130

Many are Saying 'Mark this, then, you who forget God, or I will tear you apart, and there will be no one to deliver. Those who bring thanksgiving as their sacrifice honour me; to those who go the right way, I will show the salvation of God.' (Ps. 50.22-23)

Chapter 5

'LET ISRAEL SAY': THE FUNCTION OF THE COMMUNITY QUOTATIONS A final set of quotations that occurs in the Psalter consists of those instances in which a voice or voices from the psalmist's community is quoted. Various voices from within the psalmist's community are quoted explicitly fourteen times in twelve different psalms.1 These explicit 'community quotations' may be divided into two groups. First, some quotations consist of a literal liturgical refrain or response spoken by a choir or the congregation. Second, some quotations consist of words that the psalmist desires or imagines people within the community to say. 1. The Function of Quotations that Represent Liturgical Refrains or Responses The first group of quotations attributed to the community consists of liturgical actions explicitly assigned to members of the community. In addition to the five psalms treated in this section, various parts of other psalms may represent words spoken by the community. For example, Pss. 115.9-11; 46.7, 11; and the second half of each verse in Psalm 136 likely represent liturgical refrains spoken by the community. In addition, some scholars have proposed that various verses of certain psalms were once spoken by either a priest or a liturgical leader (for example Ps. 32.8-9) or by a choir (118.20, 25-27). The present investigation is limited to those places where liturgical speech is specifically attributed to a group. One reason for this limitation is that the various proposals for understanding individual verses as communal speech are so legion that they exceed the scope of this project. Psalm 118 Psalm 118 is a good example of those psalms in which a liturgical response or refrain is quoted, because it demonstrates well the function that the voice of the community plays in these psalms. Psalm 118 may be divided into two sections: a hymnic frame (vv. -4,29), 1 and amainbody that consists of anindividual song of

1. Pss. 29.9; 35.27; 40.16; 70.4; 52.7; 58.11; 66.3; 91.2; 96.10; 118.2, 3,4; 124.1; and 129.1. The NRSV renders community quotations in Ps. 87.4,5,6, and 7. These quotations, however, may be more the result of the obscure text of Psalm 87 than of genuine direct discourse in the psalm. Because the overall meaning of the psalm is obscure and because the individual quotations are in doubt, the psalm is excluded from this investigation.

132

Many are Saying

thanksgiving (w. 5-28). In the hymnic frame, the community is quoted intoning a formulaic response: Give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; for his steadfast love is eternal. Let Israel say: 'For his steadfast love is eternal.' Let the house of Aaron say: 'For his steadfast love is eternal.' Let those who fear the LORD say: 'For his steadfast love is eternal.' Give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; for his steadfast love is eternal, (vv. 1-4, 29)

Three groups are mentioned in w. 2-4: Israel, the house of Aaron, and those who fear the LORD. These three groups most likely represent the congregation as a whole, the priesthood, and non-Israelite Yahwistic worshippers, respectively.2 In terms of the function of the direct discourse in Psalm 118, the important thing is that the psalmist expects his call to praise to be answered by groups of people from his larger community. The phrase that the community voices—'for his steadfast love is eternal'3—is the most typical hymnic refrain in the Psalter.4 It is a condensed formula that contains in nuclear form the basic reason why Israel praises God: because God has shown steadfast love to Israel. The body of the psalm (vv. 5-28) consists of an individual song of thanksgiving, in which the psalmist tells that the LORD rescued him from desperate danger: 'The LORD punished me indeed, but did not give me over to death' (v. 18). The psalmist does not use the term 'steadfast love' in the body of the psalm, but the framework of the hymn indicates that he calls upon the community to recognize that the LORD 2. The same groups are also mentioned in Ps. 115.9-11, in which they also respond to a call to praise: O Israel, trust in the LORD! He is their help and their shield. O house of Aaron, trust in the LORD! He is their help and their shield. O fearers of the LORD, trust in the LORD! He is their help and their shield. 3. F. Crusemann (Studien zur Formgeschichte von Hymnus und Danklied in Israel (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1969)) has argued that in phrases such as in the hymns of praise, the particle should not be translated as causal ('because' or 'for') but rather emphatic ('indeed' or 'surely'; pp. 32-35). Crusemann bases his analysis largely on the occurrence of the phrase as a communal refrain in Psalms 118 and 136. Crusemann is most likely correct that in Psalms 118 and 136 the phrase does represent a communal refrain, but his understanding of as emphatic rather than causal is questionable. One may translate the phrase as 'for his steadfast love is everlasting' and still understand it as a refrain. For a more detailed critique of Criisemann's argument, see Miller, They Cried to the Lord, pp. 358-62. It should be noted that in Psalm 118, it is possible that only in vv. 2-4 is the phrase a communal refrain, and in vv. 1 and 29 the refrain is sung only by an individual leader. One must admit that it is impossible to know exactly how this psalm may have been performed, and that it may have been performed in more than one fashion. 4. SeePss. 106.1; 107.1; 117.1; and 136 (the second half of each verse).

5. 'Let Israel Say'

133

has indeed shown him 'steadfast love'. That is, the psalmist is calling upon the community to affirm that God has shown him steadfast love. The sense that the psalmist is seeking validation of his experience from the community is confirmed by the implied setting of the psalm. Two passages in the body of the psalm imply that this song of thanksgiving is part of a procession into the temple: Open to me the gates of righteousness, that I may enter by means of them and give thanks to the LORD. This is the gate of the LORD; the righteous shall enter through it. Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the LORD. We bless you from the house of the LORD. The LORD is God, and he shined light upon us. Bind the festival procession with branches, even up the horns of the altar, (vv. 19-20, 26-27)

The implied processional setting of the psalm indicates that in both conceptual and spatial terms, the psalmist is approaching the community of faith and asking that the community welcome him on the basis of the welcome that the LORD has shown him. Thus, the call and response quotations of vv. 1-4 and 29, in which the community voices its affirmation of God's steadfast love, are symbolic of a more specific social response that the psalmist is seeking: that the community would accept and affirm him as one whom the LORD has accepted. Psalms 124 and 129 Psalms 124 and 129 begin in parallel fashions. A liturgical leader speaks a sentence and calls on the congregation ('Israel') to repeat the sentence, which the congregation dutifully does: 124 129 If the LORD had not been for us, Often have they assailed me since my youth, —let Israel say— —let Israel say— If the LORD had not been for us, Often have they assailed me since my youth, when a people rose up against us, yet they have not defeated me. (vv. 1 -2) then they would have swallowed us alive. (vv. 1-3 a)

The quotation formula—'let Israel say' -found in these psalms is identical to that of Ps. 118.2. These two psalms share other features. Although the first person subject of Psalm 124 is plural while that of Psalm 129 is singular, both psalms are communal songs of thanksgiving; the first person singular subject of Psalm 129 represents the community.5 Both psalms have as their subject 5. Criisemann (Studien zur Formgeschichte von Hymnus undDanklied in Israel, pp. 160-68) takes the opposite view. He argues that both psalms were originally individual psalms, and based upon vocabulary and features in psalm 124 that are normally found in individual rather than communal psalms, that the first person plural language of that psalm is secondary. Criisemann

134

Many are Saying

matter the history of attacks that Israel has suffered. Both psalms credit the LORD with preserving Israel through this history of oppression. Both psalms use the formula 'in the name of the LORD' in their closing verses.6 The function of the liturgical quotations in each of these psalms is for the community to take the words of the quotation and make them their own: 'Israel should make these expressions its own.'7 In other words, a liturgical leader speaks a sentence and the community echoes the sentence, and in the process, adopts the respective ideas. This is similar to the function of the community quotations in Psalm 118, in which the community was approached and asked to adopt the belief that the psalmist had been welcomed by God. In Psalms 124 and 129, by repeating the words offered by the liturgical leaders, the community is to confess the belief that it owes its history deliverance from attacks to God's saving help. Psalm 29 The structure of Psalm 29 is simple: an introductory call to praise (w. 1-2), a main body (w. 3-8), and a closing confession of trust (w. 9-10). The direct discourse in the psalm comes in v. 9b, and functions as a bridge between the main body and the confession of trust.8 The introductory call to praise consists of a fourfold injunction for the heavenly council to ascribe honour to the LORD. The leitmotif of the psalm—the LORD'S 'glory' is introduced here: 'ascribe to the LORD glory and strength; ascribe to the LORD the glory of his name' (w. lb-2a). The main body of the psalm is constructed of seven verses that begin with 'the voice of the LORD', representing the coming of God's glory in a thunderstorm. The glory motif appears in the first and last of these seven verses (w. 3 and 9). Although 'the voice of the LORD' is named seven times, no words are attributed to it. Rather, the LORD'S voice is a speechless voice. There is one word that characterizes this speechless voice, however. The community recognizes the LORD'S appearance in the thunderstorm

admits that the phrase 'let Israel say' stems from the cult, but argues that it is secondary in Psalms 124 and 129 and thus doubts whether these are authentic communal psalms. Whether the psalms are genuine or not, it seems clear that in their present form that they functioned communally: 'The positioning of the summons... seems to imply that v. 1 ab is to be repeated and that vv. 2-8 are to be recited communally or by a choir representing the community' (Allen, Psalms 101-150, p. 164). 6. It is possible that both psalms in their entirety were to be repeated in antiphonal fashion. This is the view of Schreiner, 'Wenn nicht der Herr fur uns ware: Auslegung von Psalm 124', BibLeb 10 (1969), pp. 16-25; and Allen, Psalms 101-150, p. 164. 7. Criisemann, Studien zur Formgeschichte von Hymnus undDanklied in Israel, p. 167, my translation. See also Kraus, Psalms 60-150, p. 440: 'Israel is to make specific (cited) statements and their insights its own.' 8. Cross does not understand the verse to contain direct discourse (Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic, pp. 151 -56). He reconstructs the psalm in Canaanite orthography. He eliminates as a dittography and repoints as a stative-passive with the meaning 'to see', thus garnering the translation, 'In his temple (his) glory appears.' This may be a plausible reconstruction of a Vorlage of the verse, but the phrase as it stands without question contains direct discourse. Further, Cross's solution obscures the way that the quotation functions as a communal response to the opening summons to praise.

5. 'Let Israel Say'

135

and speaks the proper word: 'and in his temple all say, "Glory!" '9 The community hears the call to praise 'the glory of his name', witnesses 'the voice of the LORD' proclaiming glory in nature, and then responds with the appropriate exclamation: 'Glory!' This communal affirmation of the presence of God's glory in the thunderstorm provides the transition to the closing confession of trust, in which the community confesses God's power: 'The LORD sits enthroned over the flood' (v. lOa). The community quotation in Psalm 29, therefore, functions similarly to those above. By speaking the prescribed words, the people acknowledge some reality (in this case God's glory), and thus adopt some belief (in this case the belief that God reigns over heaven and earth). Psalm 66 In Psalm 66, a song of thanksgiving, the speech attributed to the community does not indicate an actual liturgical action of the community, but a liturgical action that the psalmist desires of the community. In this psalm, the concept of speech plays a significant role. The psalm begins with a standard call to praise: 'Make a joyful noise to God, all the earth!' (the identical summons occurs in Pss. 98.4 and 100.1; compare also Pss. 47.2 and 81.2). Then the psalmist supplies the words that the community is to say: Say to God, 'How wondrous are your works! Because of the greatness of your power, your enemies cringe before you. All of the earth worships you; they sing to you, they sing to your name!' (vv. 3-4)

These words are not to be understood as a literal liturgical response by the congregation. Rather, the psalmist is explicitly stating the liturgical response that the congregation is to sing. She offers two reasons that the congregation should join her in praise. First, she rehearses the history of the LORD'S saving acts on behalf of Israel (vv. 5-12). Second, she rehearses the specific saving help that she has received from God (vv. 13-19). Speech features prominently in the psalmist's account of God's actions on her behalf. She recalls that while in danger, she spoke vows to God: 'I will fulfil to you my vows, which my lips uttered and my mouth

9. Many interpreters have disputed over the years about whether those ' in his temple' refers to the divine council in the heavenly sanctuary (corresponding to v. 1) or the human congregation in the earthly temple (corresponding to the geographic names—Lebanon, Sirion, Kadesh—in vv. 57). See, for example, Craigie's discussion of the issue in Psalms 1-50, p. 348. The supposed dispute between heavenly and earthly locales is over a false issue, however, as Hossfeld has correctly seen: 'One can ask whether the heavenly or the earthly temple-palace is meant. But according to the ancient Near Eastern conviction, the heavenly and earthly sanctuary belong together' (Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalmen I, p. 185, my translation). The earthly sanctuary was viewed as a microcosm of the heavenly sanctuary. Any actions performed in the earthly sanctuary were understood as happening simultaneously in the heavenly sanctuary. This is clear from many iconographic renderings in which mirror images of the same action are portrayed as occurring simultaneously in both sanctuaries. For more on this issue and for a thorough discussion of the iconographic data, see Keel, The Symbolism of the Biblical World, p. 179.

136

Many are Saying

spoke to you while I was in trouble' (vv. 13b-14). Then she calls on the congregation to 'hear' her account of the deliverance God performed for her (v. 16), and she reports that God listened when she spoke: 'To him my mouth cried out, I exalted him with my tongue.'10 The psalmist then asserts that 'God listened; he gave heed to the sound of my prayers' (v. 19). The psalmist then closes with a brief sentence of praise (v. 20). The function of the direct discourse in this psalm, similar to the liturgical quotations treated above, might best be described as serving to second or affirm the psalmist's confession that God has saved her. The psalm contrasts several different speech acts of the psalmist. In the past, she cried to God for help and made vows to praise. God listened to her cries. Therefore, in the present, she is both fulfilling those vows and telling others about God's actions on her behalf. On the basis of these present and past words, she calls on the community to join her in praise of God. If one assumes that the community joins in the praise, then it affirms both her experience of rescue and also the steadfast love (v. 20) of the God who rescued her. Summary In all of these psalms—118, 124,129,29, and 66—the community quotations can be described as functioning to second or affirm some belief that the psalmist wishes the community to adopt. By speaking the appropriate refrain, the community accepts the proffered belief and takes ownership of it. 2. The Function of Quotations that the Psalmist Desires the Community to Say A second group of community quotations consists of words that the psalmist attributes hypothetically to the community—either as words that the psalmist adjures the community to speak or as words that the psalmist imagines the community to speak. Psalms 35, 40, and 70 As was argued in the chapter on enemy quotations, sections of Psalms 35,40, and 70 are nearly identical. As was the case in the earlier chapter, these psalms will be treated together. Because Psalm 40.13-17 is almost identical to Psalm 70, for the purposes of this analysis, they are considered as being one psalm.11 In these three psalms, the psalmist experiences some situation of crisis from which she desires rescue. She contrasts the speech of those in the community who are her enemies with the speech of those in the community who are not her enemies. The enemies speak words of derision and glee over the psalmist's demise. Others in the community speak words of praise for the God who rescues her. Where the texts of the psalms are identical in Hebrew, the translation is italicized:

10. MT's , literally'he was exalted under mv tongue', makes little sense. The reading here follows LXX, which reflects 11. Psalm 70 is the elohistic version of Psalm 40.13-17.

5. 'Let Israel Say'

137

Psalm 35 Psalms 40.13-17 and 70 May they be put to shame and be confused May they be put to shame and be confused .. .who rejoice at my misfortune, (v. 26) .. .who delight in my misfortune. (40.15) They open their mouths against me, who say, 'Aha, aha! Our eyes have seen!' (v. 21)

May they be appalled because of their shame, who say, 'Aha, aha!'(40.16)

May they shout and may they rejoice who delight in my vindication, May they say continually, 'Great is the LORD.' who delights in the welfare of his servant!' (v. 27)

May they exalt and may they rejoice all who seek you May they say continually, 'Great is the LORD!' all who love your salvation. (40.16)

As was argued in the earlier chapter, there is no theological content to the speech attributed to the enemies. They say nothing about God, rather, they take delight in the misfortunes of the psalmist: 'Aha, aha!' In contrast, there is theological content to what those who rejoice in the psalmist's vindication say: 'Great is the LORD!' 'Great is the LORD' is typical of praise spoken by those who behold God's righteous deeds and acknowledge them (compare 2 Sam. 7.26; Mai. 1.5; 1 Chr. 17.24). By attributing two sets of contrasting speeches to her enemies and to the rest of the community, the psalmist seeks to move both God and community to side with her and against her enemies. Her strategy is intricate and subtle. She does not simply contrast those for her with those against her. Rather, she constructs a world in which those for her are those for God. Using the text of Ps. 40.13-17, note the way the psalmist draws the lines: All who seek to snatch away my life Those appalled by their shame Those who say, 'Aha aha!'

All who seek you [God] Those who love your salvation Those who say, 'Great is the Lord'

The comparison that the psalmist sets up functions to align God with those who are on the psalmist's side (note that in Ps. 35.27 God is specifically 'God who delights in the welfare of his servant') and to align those who are on God's side (who else praises God?) with the God who is already on the psalmist's side. The psalmist thus has created an 'unbalanced' comparison. Rather than having both groups say contrasting things about herself (perhaps 'aha, aha' compared with 'she is righteous') or having both groups say contrasting things about God (perhaps 'There is no God' compared with 'Great is the Lord'), the psalmist uses an unbalanced comparison in which her enemies simply scorn her but her supporters praise God. The community quotations in these psalms thus have two functions. On a sociological level, these quotations function to align the community with the psalmist and God. On a theological level, the quotations function to align God with both the psalmist and those who praise God. One of the common reasons that the psalmists use to convince God to answer a prayer is in effect, 'If I die, there will be one less voice in the choir.' For example, one psalmist recalls praying, 'What profit is there in my death? Will the dust praise you? Will it tell of your faithfulness?' (Ps. 30.9).

138

Many are Saying

The community quotations in these three psalms amount to a sophisticated development of that type of reason. The psalmists argue that if God acts, not only will they sing God's praises, but the entire community will join in song. If God chooses not to act, however, then the derisive mocking of the enemies will be the only refrain. Psalm 52 Psalm 52 is a confession of trust that the present unjust state of the world will be transformed by God, who will judge the wicked. The psalm begins in the style of direct address to a person who trusts in his own power: 'Why do you boast, O mighty one , of evil against the faithful All day long you plot destruction ' (w. 1 -2a).12 The concept of speech is a significant motif in the psalm. Three different types of speech are contrasted. The first type of speech is the violent speech of the mighty one: 'Your tongue is like a sharpened razor... You love all words that devour, O deceitful tongue' (vv. 3b, 4b). This violent speech of the mighty one is a present reality for the psalmist. The second type of speech in the psalm is the mocking joy that the psalmist imagines the righteous will speak when God has intervened to judge the mighty one: 'The righteous will see and fear, and they will laugh at him: "The man who did not make God his refuge, but trusted in the abundance of his wealth, who sought to prevail through his destruction °"' (v. 9). This second type of speech will be the mocking laughter of the righteous. This is the only place in the Psalter where the subject of is anyone other than God (compare Pss. 2.4; 37.13; 59.9; 104.26). The verb normally reflects the victory of one party over another—in this case, the victory of the LORD over the wicked.14 By characterizing the future speech of the righteous as laughter over the judgement of the mighty one, the psalmist casts the conflict between the psalmist and his persecutors as a conflict in which God is an active agent on the psalmist's side. The imagined speech of the righteous assumes a transformation of the present order. The mighty one who now flourishes through destruction will become the man who was judged because he trusted in his destruction The psalm closes with a third type of speech: the faithful confession of trust of the psalmist in w. 8-9. This confession is no longer direct address to the wicked, but direct address to God. It is no longer the hypothetical future speech of the righteous, but the present confession of trust of the psalmist. The theme of transformation is continued in this closing speech, as vocabulary introduced earlier in the psalm is retrieved. In v. 1, the psalmist had asked the mighty one why he did evil against 'the faithful' In v. 9, the mighty one was said to t r u s t i n his wealth. The psalmist now confesses: 'I trust in the steadfast love of God... I will proclaim your name, for it is good, in the presence of your faithful ul ' (w. 1 Ob-lib). The psalm thus ends with the psalmist 12. This translation follows the Svriac, which reflects MT reads probably reflects for at the end of v. 1 is read with v. 2. 13. Syriac reads 'in his wealth'. The above translation retains MT. 14. See Seow, Myth, Drama, and the Politics of David's Dance, pp. 93-97.

LXX

5. 'Let Israel Say'

139

contrasting his own present confession of faith with the present violent speech of the enemies. It should be stressed that the future speech of the righteous is hypothetical; it does not yet exist. By quoting the hypothetical, future speech of the righteous in the present moment, however, the psalmist lends those future words a reality that functions to deny apparent present victory of the wicked. Quoting the future words of the righteous also functions to motivate God to act. As was the case with the direct discourse in Psalms 35, 40, and 70, the community quotation will only become a present reality when God has acted. That is, only when God acts to judge the wicked, will the communal choir sing. Psalm 58 Psalm 58 is similar to Psalm 52. This psalm also begins in the style of direct address to a third party—this time to the gods who are accused of plotting violence against the earth (vv. 1-2). The psalm continues with a description of the wicked (vv. 3-5) and then a plea for God to judge the wicked (w. 6-9). The theme of speech is again prominent. The wicked 'speak lies' (v. 3) and their mouths are filled with 'venom' (v. 4). God is implored to 'break their teeth' and 'tear out the fangs' (v. 6). The psalm ends with a promise of the praise that the community will speak once God has judged the wicked: 'A man will say, "Surely there is a fruit [a reward] for the righteous; surely there is a God who judges on earth"' (v. 11). Similar to the hypothetical quotations of Psalms 35, 40, 70, and 52, this quotation is a development of the frequent argument that God should act in order to receive praise. Once God judges the wicked, the psalmist promises, people will acknowledge that there is both a reward for righteousness and a God who judges on earth. Psalm 96 Psalm 96, one of the enthronement psalms, is a call to praise addressed to 'all the earth' (v. 1). The enthronement formula itself— —is the phrase that is quoted in direct discourse: 'Say among the nations, "The LORD reigns!"' (v. 10).15 One of the most prominent features of the psalm is the universal sphere claimed for the LORD'S dominion. The psalm repeatedly asserts the universal scope of Israel's God: 'sing to the LORD, all the earth' (v. 1), 'declare his glory among the nations... among all the peoples' (v. 2), 'all the gods of the peoples are idols' (v. 5), 'Ascribe to the LORD, O families of the peoples' (v. 7), 'tremble before him, all the earth' (v. 9), 'he will judge the people with uprightness' (v. 10), and 'he will judge.. .the peoples in his faithfulness' (v. 13). Within the psalm's insistence on the universal scope of the LORD'S rule, the key 15. NRSV translates most of v. 10 as a quotation: 'Say among the nations, "The LORD is king! The world is firmly established; it shall never be moved. He will judge the people with equity."' It is a better solution to understand the quotation to be limited only to the assertion, 'The LORD reigns', as, for example, does NJPS. The primary reason for limiting the quotation is that constitutes a well-known, well-defined formula that occurs often in the Psalter (see Pss. 47.1; 93.1; 97.1; and 99.1).

140

Many are Saying

assertion of the psalm is found in verse 10: 'The LORD reigns'. This verse is important because the formula, 'The LORD reigns', is a compact announcement that Israel's God is the true God. It is difficult to capture all of the contours of the verb in any English translation. The syntax of the Hebrew allows both a nominal denotation—The LORD has become king—and a verbal denotation—The LORD reigns (actively). The explosive nature of the formula can be seen by the fact that the identical formula was used when new kings usurped the throne: 'Absalom has become king' 2 Sam. 15.10), and 'Jehu has become king' 2 Kgs. 9.13).16 In the same way that the heralds that Absalom sent to the tribes of Israel were to announce, 'Absalom reigns', so the people of the community were to become messengers who would announce among the nations that 'The LORD reigns'. 'To say "the LORD rules" is to say that the gods whom other nations worship do not. In the thought world of the ancient Near East, nations were thought of as religious as well as political communities; each had its particular god for whom it made claims.'17 The function of the direct discourse in Psalm 96, therefore, can be described as emphasizing the general claim of the psalm. The verb 'to say' marks the following formula as a specific proclamation that Israel is to issue throughout the world. The formula, 'the LORD reigns', announces that Israel's God is the true ruler of the universe. The qualification that Israel is to proclaim this formula 'among the nations' means that the community is to deny the reality of all other gods and teach all nations to do the same. Psalm 91 Psalm 91 is a wisdom psalm in which the psalmist instructs the audience in proper trust of God. The psalm may be divided into two parts. Verses 1-13 are a didactic poem addressed to an individual; the poem assures the individual of the protection of God. Verses 14-16 are a passage of divine speech that seconds the assurance promised in vv. 1-13. The community quotation functions as a description of the trusting attitude toward God that the psalmist desires the community to adopt. The psalmist says that 'those who dwell in the shelter of the Most High' say to God: 'My refuge and my fortress.'18 The words that the community speaks here are typical of the words spoken in psalms of trust or in the confessions of trust that are found in individual prayers for help. That is, those whom God protects, show a corresponding trust in God. In vv. 9-10 of the psalm, the psalmist repeats the same theme using the same vocabulary: 'Because you have made the Lord your refuge, the Most High your dwelling place, no evil shall befall you.' The psalmist desires the community to take on such a trusting stance. As Broyles correctly notes, the psalmist 'seeks to elicit from the hearers a confession' of trust.19 16. See Mowinckel, Psalmen studien, II, pp. 6-10. 17. Mays, Psalms, p. 308. Mays has, in fact, argued persuasively that the formula, 'The Lord reigns', is the 'organizing center for the theology of the psalms' (The Lord Reigns: A Theological Handbook to the Psalms (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994), p. 13). 18. is pointed here as a third-person, qal, imperfect (following LXX) rather than as a firstperson, imperfect as in MT. 19. Broyles, Psalms, p. 361.

5. 'Let Israel Say'

141

Psalm 129 A final community quotation is a unique case. As was argued above, the first verse of Psalm 129 contains a liturgical quotation in which the community takes up the words, 'often have they assailed me since my youth'. The last verse of Psalm 129 also contains a community quotation, but of a very different sort. One of the aspects of direct discourse that makes it such a flexible literary device is that, through direct discourse, one not only can quote what a person does say but also what a person does not say. Such a quotation occurs at the end of Psalm 129. The community asks that all who hate Zion may be like grass that withers, which reapers do not pick up and binders do not tie: 'And those who pass by do not say, "The blessing of the LORD be with you!" We bless you in the name of the LORD' (v. 8).20 As Ruth 2.4 makes clear, reapers in the field would exchange the greeting, 'The LORD be with you', 'the LORD bless you'. Psalm 129, however, envisions the enemies as dead grass, over which such blessing are not spoken. The quotation here is used to voice a non-entity—that which is not said. The ending to Psalm 129 thus creates a unique play of real and unreal, spoken and unspoken words. The literal sense of the text is that the quoted words of blessing are not spoken. If taken in this sense, the words are not real words. Rather, they signify a particular type of silence: a silence consisting of the absence of blessing. However, the words of the psalm were indeed spoken, perhaps by a liturgical leader and perhaps responsively by the community also.21 Therefore the 'unreal' words of the blessing were actually spoken by members of the community to each other—thus making the words real words of blessing. By saying aloud the blessing that the fictive reapers and binders do not say to each other, the people in fact do bless each other 'in the name of the LORD'. Summary In many of these psalms—35, 40, 70, 52, 58—the community quotations can be described as functioning to motivate God to answer the psalmist's prayer. They perform this function by arguing that God should rescue the psalmist in order to receive praise from the community. These quotations are similar to the vow to praise found in the prayers for help; they are promises of praise issued against the time when God intervenes on the psalmist's behalf. The quotation in Psalm 91 describes the stance of faith that the psalmist wants the community to adopt. The hypothetical community quotations in Psalms 96 and 129 are each unique. The quotation in Ps. 96.10 is a command to proclaim the reign of the LORD among the nations. The citation in 129.8 quotes words of blessing that people will not say over the enemies, but by speaking this non-quotation, the community in fact blesses itself in the name of the LORD.

20. Mays argues that the second half of the verse is not part of the community quotation, but a separate final blessing spoken by the community (Psalms, p. 405). 21. This is the view of Schreiner, 'Wenn nicht der Herr fur uns ware: Auslegung von Psalm 124', pp. 16-25; and Allen, Psalms 101-150, p. 164.

142

Many are Saying

3. The Rhetorical Function of Community Quotations i. Community Quotations as Sociological Alignment One of the most important rhetorical functions of community quotations is that they function to align the psalmist with the community of which she is a part. That is, the words that the psalmist calls on the community to speak require that the community affirm both what the psalmist says, and by extension, affirms his place in society. According to the above analysis, in the explicit liturgical quotations, the community affirms or seconds something that the psalmist says, and makes the belief its own by repeating it. For example, in Psalm 118, the community acknowledges that the LORD has shown steadfast love to the psalmist, and thus, the community acknowledges the psalmist as a legitimate and full member of the community. The hypothetical community quotations in certain psalms—35,40,70, 52,58—perform the same function. In these psalms, the psalmist's distress is either caused by or aggravated by the presence in the community of people hostile to the psalmist. In these psalms, the psalmist does not directly call on the community to side with her against these hostile enemies, but looks ahead to the time when the community will join in praise of God. Without denying that the psalmist genuinely desires God to act on her behalf, one can interpret these hypothetical quotations as functioning to align the community with her. The linguistic theorists who were discussed in the first chapter offer two theories that illumine why community quotations might function in this fashion. First, according to Clark and Gerrig, one of the functions of quotation is to effect solidarity between the reporter and the original speaker: 'quotations.. .serve well in the expression of solidarity, or positive politeness'.22 Second, and related to this, one of the most important features of direct discourse is that it involves a shift in perspective. Wierzbicka wrote: 'The person who reports another's words by quoting them, temporarily assumes the role of that other person.'23 Coulmas described the perspectival shift in terms of point of view: 'In direct speech the reporter lends his voice to the original speaker and says (or writes) what he said, thus adopting his point of view, as it were.'24 When some reporter takes on the perspective of some original speaker in that original speaker's hearing (as is the case with the community quotations) one effect of this might be for the original speaker to feel sympathy for the position of the reporter. This will especially be the case when the reporter quotes the words of the original speaker in a positive or affirming way or when the psalmist takes words that the community normally would say and casts those words as supporting her position. These are frequently the cases in the community quotations. For example, in Psalm 35, the psalmist invites 'those who desire my vindication' to say, 'Great is the LORD'. Anyone who is accustomed to saying 'Great is the LORD'—as one may assume is the case with the worshipping

22. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 793. 23. Wierzbicka, 'Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', p. 272. 24. Coulmas, 'Reported Speech', p. 2.

5. 'Let Israel Say'

143

community—would be cast in a position where repeating that refrain becomes a simultaneous affirmation of the psalmist. The community quotations—especially the explicit liturgical quotations—also effect this 'alignment' of the community with the psalmist in reverse, by taking the perspective of the psalmist and asking the community to 'quote' it by repeating it in a refrain. This effect may be described from a semantic perspective by saying that when the psalmist invites the community to quote him by repeating a refrain, he is seeking to merge the first person singular T of his own perspective with the first person plural 'we' of the community. He is creating a pattern of call and response in which the dividing wall that separates the T and 'we' can be broken down. For example, Psalm 129 begins, 'Often have they attacked me since my youth'. If the congregation repeats this phrase, as they are invited to do, the distinction between the psalmist's person and the community's person is erased— both are the 'me' who has been attacked since youth. This rhetorical function of community quotations may be summed up by saying that they function to create solidarity or allegiance between the reporter and the original speaker by creating syntax in which the original speaker speaks from the perspective of the reporter and the reporter speaks from the perspective of the original speaker. ii. Community Quotations that 'Reproduce' Future Events In the formal analysis of the community quotations, it was argued that some of the quotations function to motivate God to answer the psalmists' prayers. This function was seen as an extension of the common argument in the psalms that God should save the psalmist because God will be pleased by the psalmist's praise. The community quotations are rhetorically useful for this purpose because they reproduce words that have not yet been spoken. By doing so, the hypothetical community quotations can literally speak in the present that which is promised for the future. Two of the functions of quotations that Clark and Gerrig pointed out illustrate this rhetorical effect. First, Clark and Gerrig argued that quotations are useful for verbatim reproduction^ In this function, the words of the original speaker are reproduced as accurately as possible. Second, they pointed out that quotations are also useful for reproducing impossible demonstrations: 'Some events are impossible to demonstrate in their entirety, yet speakers can depict some of their aspects.'26 The reproduction of that which does not exist, or does not yet exist, certainly qualifies as an impossible demonstration. But note that quotations can reproduce impossible demonstrations, and thus the psalmists can quote speech that has not yet been spoken.27 And the psalmists can use quotation to quote that speech verbatim. In so doing, the psalmists can report to God the exact praise that God will receive if God acts on the psalmists' behalf. 25. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 792. 26. Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 794. 27. The quotation of the non-speech in Ps. 129.8, in which the words that the reapers will not say to each other are quoted, is another example of quotation functioning to reproduce an impossible demonstration.

144

Many are Saying

Psalm 58 is a good example of this function. After petitioning God to judge the wicked, the psalmist reproduces the future: The righteous one will rejoice when he has seen vengeance. He will wash his feet in the blood of the wicked one. A man will say, 'Surely there is a reward for the righteous; surely there is a God who judges on earth', (vv. 10-11)

The psalmist quotes verbatim the words that she tells God cannot be spoken in the present, the words that will only be spoken after God has done what she wants God to do—judge the wicked. iii. Community Quotations as the Voice of the Reader A third rhetorical function of community quotations is that they provide a voice for modern readers who approach the psalms. Readers, which is a term that is used here to signify those who read the psalms silently, pray them aloud, or perform them in worship, seek to find themselves in texts. Mieke Bal has observed that 'literature is written by, for, and about people'.28 One ramification of this simple observation is to realize that the people who read literature will read it as being literature, in part, about themselves. Gunn and Fewell speak of the power of literature 'to evoke a world that is like ours.. .to recreate people that we understand and to whom we relate'.29 Because Gunn and Fewell are describing biblical narrative, they concentrate on 'people' or 'characters'. This emphasis is less appropriate to poetry such as the psalms than to narrative, however, since the psalms do not function by creating characters and plots. But poetry does create voices. These voices do evoke responses in readers and readers will tend to resonate more strongly to those voices that are like them. One rhetorical function of the community quotations is that they create a voice to which readers can relate. The psalms are often written from perspectives that do not resonate immediately with a modern reader's life situation. At any given moment, a modern reader may not be in a situation of desperate need such as those presupposed by the lament psalms, or in a situation of confident trust such as those presupposed by the trust psalms. A reader may find little resonance with the royal ideology of those psalms written from the king's perspective, or little affinity with those psalms that are composed from God's perspective. But when the psalms explicitly invite a response from the community, it may be that such quotations lend a language that the psalmist can borrow in order to join in the conversation between the psalmists and God. For example, in Psalm 96, the psalmist commands the community: 'Say among the nations, "The LORD reigns"' (v. 10). Many communities that have continued to read, pray, and sing the Psalter have heard the imperative—say!—as directed at themselves. In a like manner, readers may hear the trifold call to praise of

28. M. Bal, Narratology: Introduction to the Theory ofNarrative (Toronto: Toronto University Press, 1985), p. 80. 29. Gunn and Fewell, Narrative in the Hebrew Bible, p. 47.

5. 'Let Israel Say'

145

Ps. 118.2-4 not as directed at three vanished groups who once inhabited the temple in Jerusalem, but as imperatives directed at themselves: Let Israel say: 'For his steadfast love is eternal.' Let the house of Aaron say: 'For his steadfast love is eternal.' Let those who fear the LORD say: 'For his steadfast love is eternal.'

Readers may even hear the non-blessing that is quoted at the end of Psalm 129 as words that they can take upon their lips and speak to each other in parting: 'The blessing of the LORD be upon you! We bless you in the name of the LORD!' (v. 8)

CONCLUSION The purpose of this study has been to map the contours of direct discourse in the Hebrew Psalter. The quotations were analysed according to who speaks them: the enemies, the self, God, or the community. Specific attention was paid to the rhetorical function that various quotations play in different psalms and different psalm types. The insights of modern linguists who have studied the nature and function of quotations were drawn upon in order to help describe the rhetorical function of quotations in the Psalter. 1. Enemy Quotations The enemy quotations belong to two categories: those that attack God and those that attack the psalmist. The enemy quotations that attack God assert the powerlessness of God to intervene as an effective presence in the world; or they attack the fidelity of God, who allows God's servants to suffer; or they assert that the LORD has been defeated. The accusations that God lacks power or fidelity are characteristically found in the individual prayer for help (and psalms related to the individual prayer for help), while the accusation that God has been defeated is characteristically found in the communal prayer for help (and psalms related to the communal prayer for help). These enemy quotations often function to provide the central arguments that drive the psalms in which they occur, by naming a pressing theological problem and then addressing this problem through petition, confession of trust, and instruction. A variety of strategies is used to integrate the enemy quotations into the arguments of the psalms in which they occur. A common strategy is for the vocabulary of the enemy quotation to be reversed by the psalmist in the petition and the confession of trust. A second common strategy is for the enemy quotation to occur in the opening phrase or thought of the psalm in order to set up a theological problem that the psalmist answers in the remainder of the psalm. A third rhetorical strategy is the juxtaposing of the enemy quotation with a God quotation (the God quotation carries more authority and thus acts to refute or respond to the enemy quotation). The enemy quotations also often come as the culmination of the they-complaint or comprise the entire they-complaint. The consistent occurrence of the enemy quotations as the culmination of the they-complaints suggests that the enemy quotations were considered among the strongest complaints that the psalmists could raise against the enemies. The enemy quotations that attack the psalmist display a less consistent pattern of use. They are less about what the enemies say and more about to whom and how the enemies are speaking. These quotations are primarily quoted in order to move

Conclusion

147

God to side with the psalmist (who is being attacked by people unfaithful to God). The issue appears to be whether God will be faithful to those who have been faithful to God. The psalmist expects this kind of covenant loyalty from God. Several functions of the enemy quotations can be discerned on the basis of modern linguistic theory. First, the enemy quotations can function as the personal lament of the psalmists. The psalmists place words in their enemies' mouths that they cannot speak themselves. By placing those words in their enemies' mouths, however, the psalmists are able to expand the range of the complaints that they can level against God. Second, the enemy quotations can function as the re-performance of the enemies' blasphemy. That is, the psalmists quote what the enemies say so that God will hear the blasphemous words of the enemies and (the psalmists hope) will take vengeance on the enemies. 2. Self Quotations The self quotations report words spoken in the past, in the present, in the future, or hypothetical words. When words that were spoken in the past are quoted, they mainly function to narrate some prior event in order to support the present argument of the psalm. The most important variable concerning these quotations, therefore, is what type of argument the psalm as a whole is making. When these quotations occur in psalms where the main point is to give thanks, they occur as part of the description of distress and deliverance. In these cases, the psalmist quotes some part of an earlier prayer that God had heard and answered. When these quotations occur in psalms where the main point is to pray for help, the psalmist either quotes an earlier act of faithfulness in fulfilling a vow to praise or quotes an earlier act of sin for which forgiveness is now being sought. Self quotations reporting words spoken in the present occur in individual prayers for help. In some cases, self quotations function to emphasize the quoted words. When the quotation reports a confession of trust, it emphasizes this expression of trust as both the psalmist's trust over against the dire present circumstance and the psalmist's trust over against others who lack trust. When the quotation reports a petition for help, the quotation emphasizes the plea by weighting it with extra urgency. The self quotations can also serve to de-emphasize the quotation inset— as in Psalms 55 and 77. In such cases, the quotation performs the function of showing the limited human perspective from which the words are spoken. Thus, self-quotations can both emphasize and de-emphasize; the context in which a self quotation occurs determines its function. Psalm 35 is the only example of a self quotation that reports words to be spoken in the future. In this psalm, the quotation functions as a down payment on the praise the psalmist promises to speak if God will save the psalmist. Hypothetical self quotations are a very flexible device, so much so, that their function cannot be defined too narrowly. The basic function of such quotations is to posit a possibility that has not yet come into existence so that the psalmist can play off of this 'possibility' in some way. The quotation may posit a way of life

148

Many are Saying

that the psalmist rejects, or posit a prayer that God would answer if the psalmist were to ask it, or posit something about God that the psalmist denies. Self quotations re-perform past actions that the psalmist wants God to experience again. They also serve to characterize the psalmists in certain ways for their audiences. By quoting particular words, the psalmists 'show' a specific side of themselves that they want their audiences—usually God—to see. The enemy quotations and self quotations also both function to instruct—to teach the reader what to say and what not to say. 3. God Quotations The quotations that concern the monarchy, that occur in festival psalms, or that precede petitions are cited because of their authority. The God quotations in these psalms—most likely drawn from the theological tradition—function as authoritative texts and are being used and reused in new contexts for new rhetorical goals. In the festival psalms, the God quotations are responses to liturgical actions of the people, such as praising God, and in all four psalms a commandment or commandments are included in the God quotation. This functions to connect the liturgical and ethical dimensions of life. The two responses that God demands of the people— sacrifice/worship and obedience/ethics—are not separated but are rather held together. The God quotations in these psalms also function as a response to the theological problem of sin. In these psalms, God is not silent or absent as the enemies so often assert, but speaks and takes action. These psalms give a divine answer to the problem of sin and the seeming absence of God. These divine answers can be heard as God's response both to the frequent charge of the enemies that 'God does not hear' and to the frequent plea of the psalmist, 'Answer me, OGod!' In those psalms in which the God quotations precede the petition, the function of the God quotations that precede the petitions depends more on which audience an interpreter imagines for the psalm than upon any other variable. If the implied audience of a psalm is thought of as God, then the quotation is to be interpreted as a reminder to God of promises made in the past that now seem endangered. If the implied audience for a psalm is imagined as a community praying to God, then the quotation is to be understood as an assurance of God's fidelity. One interpretation need not exclude the other. In a communal worship setting, for a worship leader to include a quotation of God's earlier promises in a prayer will serve both to remind God that God should keep those promises, and also serve to remind the community that God has made such a promise and—presumably—that God will keep those promises. Seen in this light, it is a mistake to force a choice between these two interpretations. In those psalms in which a God quotation offers assurance, the divine speech comes either at the end of the psalm or prior to a confession of trust. This type of quotation does not occur in any fixed type of psalm, but is found in a prayer for help, a communal psalm of trust, and a wisdom psalm. Last, the God quotations can serve as a representation of the power of God. That

Conclusion

149

is, they describe God's ability or intention to do some action. Clark and Gerrig argued that one of the functions for which quotations are useful is performing 'impossible demonstrations'.1 The actions of God certainly fall under the category of impossible demonstrations. It would, for example, be impossible for a reporter to 'demonstrate' God's will to impose mortality upon human beings, but the psalmist can convey that meaning by use of direct discourse, as in Ps. 90.3, where the psalmist quotes the word of God: 'Turn back O mortals.' God quotations function in the Psalter first to construct society. The voice of God carries more authority than that of human beings, so ethical instruction is placed in God's voice. Second, God is characterized through these quotations: God is characterized to God (in those quotations that precede petitions) and to humans (in those quotations that offer assurance or represent God's power). These quotations especially function to emphasize that the cult is the medium of God's intervention in the world and that God does take action to protect the weak and powerless. 4. Community Quotations The community quotations fall into two categories: those that represent the liturgical voice of the community and those that represent what the psalmist wishes the community to speak. The former quotations function to second or affirm some belief that the psalmist wishes the community to adopt. By speaking the appropriate refrain, the community accepts the proffered belief and adopts it as its own. The latter quotations function to motivate God to answer the psalmist's prayer. They perform this function by arguing that God should rescue the psalmist in order to receive praise from the community. These quotations are similar to the vow to praise found in the prayers for help (and to the self quotation of Psalm 35 that reports future speech of the psalmist); they are promises of praise issued against the time when God intervenes on the psalmist's behalf. In accord with linguistic theories of quotation, the quotations function to align the community with the psalmist—merging the T of the psalmist with the 'we' of the community. These quotations also serve to 'reproduce' future words—that is, to praise God for what God has not yet done (and to promise more such praise once God has done it). Finally, the quotations help the reader find a place in the psalms. Such quotations are often introduced by verbs of speaking in the imperative mood. The reader can understand such imperatives as directed at himself or herself. In Psalm 96, for example, the psalmist commands the community: 'Say among the nations, "The LORD reigns" ' (v. 10). A reader could do worse than to echo such a thought.

1.

Clark and Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', p. 794.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Allen, L., Psalms 101-150 (WBC, 21;Waco, TX: Word Books, 1983). Alter, R., The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1983). —The Art of Biblical Poetry (New York: Basic Books, 1985). Austin, J.L., How to Do Things with Words (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1962). Bal, M., Narratology: Introduction to the Theory of Narrative (Toronto: Toronto University Press, 1985). Begrich, J., 'Das priestliche Heilsorakel', ZAW52 (1934), pp. 81-92. Bellinger, W.H., Psalmody and Prophecy (JSOTSup, 27; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984). Berlin, A., Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1983). —The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1985). Borger, R.,DieInschriftenAsarhaddons, Konigs vonAssyrien (AfOB, 9; Osnabruck: BiblioVerlag, 1967). Botterweck, G.J. and H. Ringgren (eds.), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (13 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, rev. edn, 1977). Bouzard, W.C. Jr., We Have Heard with Our Ears, O God (SBLDS, 159; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997). Braude, W.G., The Midrash on the Psalms (Yale Judaica Series, 13; 2 vols.; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959). Brichto, H.C., Toward a Grammar of Biblical Poetics: Tales of the Prophets (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992). Brown, W.G., 'A Royal Performace: Critical Notes on Psalm U0.3a-b',JBL 117(1998), pp. 93-6. Broyles, C.C., Psalms (NIBC, 11; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1999). Brueggemann, W., 'Bounded by Obedience and Praise: The Psalter as Canon', in P. Miller (ed.), The Psalms and the Life of Faith (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995). —The Message of the Psalms: A Theological Commentary (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984). Budde, K., 'Ps. 82.6 ff.', JBL 40 (1921), pp. 39-42. Church, A., Introduction to Mathematical Logic (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1956). Clark, H.H. and R.R. Gerrig, 'Quotations as Demonstrations', Language 66 (1990), pp. 764805. Clark, H.H., Using Language (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). Coulmas, F., (ed.), Direct and Indirect Speech (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1986). —'Reported Speech: Some General Issues', in F. Coulmas, (ed.), Direct and Indirect Speech (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1986), pp. 1-12. Craigie, P.C., Psalms 1-50 (WBC, 19; Waco, TX: Word Books, 1983). Crim, K.R., 'Hebrew Direct Discourse as a Translation Problem', BT24 (1973), pp. 311-36.

Bibliography

151

Cross, P.M., Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of Religion of Israel (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973). Criisemann, F., Studien zur Formgeschichte von Hymnus undDanklied in Israel (NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener, 1969). Dahood, M., Psalms (3 vols.; The Anchor Bible; Garden City: Doubleday, 1966-70). Davidson, D., 'Quotation', in F. Coulmas (ed.), Inquiries in Truth and Interpretation (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984). Dobbs-Allsopp, F.W., 'The Syntagma of bat Followed by a Geographical Name in the Hebrew Bible: A Reconsideration of Its Meaning and Grammar', CBQ 57 (1995), pp. 451-70. Ebeling, E. (ed.), Die Akkadische Gebetsserie 'Handerhebung' (Berlin: Akademie, 1953). Edgerton, W.F. and J.A. Wilson, Historical Records of Ramses III: The Texts in Medinet Habu (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization, 12; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1936). Foster, Benjamin R. (ed.), Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature (2 vols; Bethesda, MD: CDL Press, rev. edn, 1996). Fox, M., 'The Identification of Quotations in Biblical Literature', ZAW92 (1980), pp. 416-31. Fraser, B., 'On Accounting for Illocutionary Forces', in P. Kiparsky and S. Anderson (eds.), Festschrift for Morris Halle (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971), pp. 287307. Freedman, D.N., (ed.). Anchor Bible Dictionary (6 vols.; New York: Doubleday, 1992). Fretheim, T.E., 'Psalm 132: A Form-Critical Study', JBL 86 (1967), pp. 289-300. Gerstenberger, E.S., Psalms: Part 1, with an Introduction to Cultic Poetry (FOTL, 14; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988). Gillingham, S.E., The Poems and Psalms of the Hebrew Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994). Goffman, E., Frame Analysis (New York: Harper & Row, 1974). Gordis, R., 'Quotations as a Literary Usage in Biblical, Oriental and Rabbinic Literature', HUCA 22 (1949), pp. 157-220. —'Quotations in Wisdom Literature', JQR 30 (1939), pp. 123-47. Gunkel, H., 'Der Micha-Schluss', ZS2 (1924), pp. 145-78. —Introduction to Psalms: The Genres of the Religious Lyric of Israel (completed J. Begrich; trans. J.D. Nogalski; Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1998). Gunn, D. and D.N. Fewell, Narrative in the Hebrew Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993). Haag, H. (ed.), Bibel-Lexikon (Zurich: Benziger, 1968). Haldar, A., Associations of Cult Prophets among the Ancient Semites (Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksells, 1945). Killers, D., 'Michah, Book of, in D.N. Frredman (ed.), ABD (New York: Doubleday, 1992), pp. 807-10. —'The Ritual Procession of the Ark and Ps 132', CBQ 30 (1968), pp. 48-55. Hirose, Y., 'Direct and Indirect Speech as Quotations of Public and Private Expression', Lingua 95 (1995), pp. 223-38. Holladay, W.L., The Psalms through Three Thousand Years: Prayerbook of a Cloud of Witnesses (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993). Hossfeld, F.-L., 'Das Prophetische in den Psalmen: Zur Gottesrede der Asafpsalmen im Vergleich mit des der ersten und zweiten Davidpsalters', in F. Diedrich and B. Willmes (eds.), Ich bewirke das Heil und erschaffe das Unheil (Jesaja 45.7). Studien zur Botschaft der Propheten: Festschrift fur Lothar Ruppert zum 65. Geburtstag (FB, 65; Wiirzburg: Echter, 1998), pp. 223-43.

152

Many are Saying

Hossfeld, F.-L. and E. Zenger, Psalmen I: Psalm 1-50 (Neue Echter Bibel; Wiirzburg: Echter Verlag, 1993). Jenni, E. and C. Westermann (eds.), Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament (3 vols.; trans. M. Biddle; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998). Jeremias, J., Kultprophetie und Gerischtsverktindigung in der spdten Konigzeit Israels (Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament, 35; NeukirchenVluyn: Neukirchener, 1970). Johnson, A., The Cultic Prophet and Israel's Psalmody (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1979). —The Cultic Prophet in Ancient Israel (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1944). —Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1955). —'The Prophet in Israelite Religion', ExpTim 47 (1935-36), pp. 312-19. Jungling, H.-W., Der Tod der Cotter: Eine Untersuchung zu Psalm 82 (Stuttgarter Bibelstudien, 38; Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1969). Keel, O., The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms (trans. T.J. Hallett. New York: Seabury Press, 1978). Koehler, L. and W. Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (5 vols.; New York: Brill, 1994-1999). Koenen, K., Gottesworte in den Psalmen: Eine Formgeschichtliche Untersuchung (Biblisch Theologische Studien, 30; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1996). Kraus, H-J., Psalms 1-59: A Commentary (CC; trans. H.C. Oswald; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1986). —Psalms 60-150: A Commentary (CC; trans. H.C. Oswald; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989). Kugel, J., The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and its History (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981). Levinson, S., Pragmatics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983). Li, C., 'Direct Speech and Indirect Speech: A Functional Study', in F. Coulmas (ed.), Direct and Indirect Speech (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1986), pp. 29-46. Limburg, J., Hosea-Micah (IBC; Atlanta: John Knox, 1988). —'Psalms, Book of, in D.N. Freedman (ed.), ABD (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 522-36. Lonergan, B.J.F., Method in Theology (New York: Seabury, 1979). Mays, J.L., Psalms (IBC; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994). —The Lord Reigns: A Theological Handbook to the Psalms (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994). McCann, J.C. Jr., A Theological Introduction to the Book of Psalms (Nashville: Abingdon, 1993). —'The Book of Psalms: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections', in L. Keck (ed.), The New Interpreter's Bible: A Commentary in Twelve Volumes (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996), IV, pp. 639-1280. Meier, S.A., Speaking of Speaking: Marking Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Bible (New York: EJ. Brill, 1992). Mettinger, T.N.D., King andMessiah: The Civil and Sacral Legitimation of the Israelite Kings (ConBOT, 8; Lund: CWK Gleerup, 1976). Miller, C., 'Introducing Direct Discourse in Biblical Hebrew Narrative', in R. Bergen (ed.), Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1994), pp. 199-241. —'Discourse Functions of Quotative Frames in Biblical Hebrew Narrative', in W.R. Bodine (ed.), Discourse Analysis of Biblical Literature (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995), pp. 15582.

Bibliography

153

—The Representation of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: A Linguistic Analysis (HSM, 55; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996). Miller, P.D., Interpreting the Psalms (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986). —'Prayer as Persuasion: The Rhetoric and Intention of Prayer', WW13 (1993), pp. 356-62. —'Psalms and Inscriptions', in J.A. Emerton (ed.), Congress Volume: Vienna 1980 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1981), pp. 326-28. —'The Theological Significance of Biblical Poetry', in S.E. Balentine and J. Barton (eds.), Language, Theology, and the Bible (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994), pp. 213-30. —They Cried to the Lord: The Form and Theology of Biblical Prayer (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994). —The Divine Warrior in Early Israel (HSM, 5; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973). —'yapiah in Psalm XII 6', VT29 (1979), pp. 495-500. Miosi, F.T., 'Oracle: Ancient Egypt', in D N. Freedman (ed.), ABD (New York: Doubleday, 1992), V, pp. 29-30. Morawski, S., 'The Basic Functions of Quotation', in A.J. Greimas et al. (eds.), Sign, Language, Culture (The Hague: Mouton, 1970), pp. 690-705. Mowinckel, S., Psalmenstudien (5 vols; Kristiania: Jacob Dybwald, 1923). —The Psalms in Israel's Worship (2 vols.; trans. D.R. Ap-Thomas; Nashville: Abingdon, 1962). Nasuti, H.P., Tradition History and the Psalms ofAsaph (SBLDS, 88; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988). Neyrey, J.H., '"I said: You are Gods": Psalm 82.6 and John \V,JBL 108 (1989), pp. 647-63. O'Connor, M., Hebrew Verse Structure (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1980). Oppenheim, A.L. et al. (eds.), The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago (Chicago: Oriental Institute, 1956). Partee, B., 'The Syntax and Semantics of Quotation', in P. Kiparsky and S. Anderson (eds.), Festschrift for Morris Halle (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971), pp. 410-18. Paul, S., Amos: A Commentary on the Book of Amos (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991). Preuss, H.D., '...ich will mit dir sein', ZAW8Q (1968), pp. 139-73. Prinsloo, G.T.M., 'Man's Word—God's Word: A Theology of Antithesis in Psalm \2\ZAW 110 (1998), pp. 390-402. Pritchard, J.B. (ed.), Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 3rd edn, 1978). Quine, W.V.O., Mathematical Logic (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1951). Renz, J. and W. Rollig (eds.), Handbuch der althebrdischen Epigraphik (3 vols.; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche, 1995). Roberts, J.J.M., 'The Davidic Origin of the Zion Tradition', JBL 92 (1973), pp. 329-44. —'Whose Child Is This? Reflections on the Speaking Voice in Isaiah 9.5', HTR 90 (1997), pp. 115-29. —'Yahweh's Foundation in Zion', JBL 106 (1987), pp. 27-45. —'Zion in the Theology of the Davidic-Solomonic Empire', in T. Ishida (ed.), Studies in the Period of David and Solomon (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1982), pp. 93-108. Robinson, D., 'Speech Acts', in M. Grodeni and M. Kreiswirth (eds.), The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994). Savran, G.W., Telling and Retelling: Quotation in Biblical Literature (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988).

154

Many are Saying

Schreiner, J., 'Wenn nicht der Herr fur uns ware: Auslegung von Psalm 124', BibLeb 10 (1969), pp. 16-25. Searle, John R., 'Austin on Locutionary and Illocutionary Acts', Philosophical Review 77 (1968), pp. 405-24. —Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969). Seow, C.L., Myth, Drama, and the Politics of David's Dance (HSM, 46; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989). Seybold, K., Die Psalmen (HAT, 15; Tubingen: Mohr, 1996). Spieckerman, H., 'Rede Gottes und Wort Gottes in den Psalmen', in K. Seybold and E. Zenger (eds.), Neue Wege der Psalmenforschung: Fur Walter Beyerlin (Herders Biblische Studien, 1; Freiburg: Herder, 1994), pp. 157-73. Starbuck, S.R.A., Court Oracles in the Psalms: The So-Called Royal Psalms in their Ancient Near Eastern Context (SBLDS, 172; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1999). Sternberg, M., 'Double Cave, Double Talk: The Indirections of Biblical Dialogue', in J.P. Rosenblatt and J.C. Sitterson, Jr (eds.), Not in Heaven (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1991), pp. 28-57. —Expositional Modes and Temporal Ordering in Fiction (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978). —'Proteus in Quotation-Land: Mimesis and the Forms of Reported Discourse', Poetics Today 3 (1982), pp. 107-56. —The Poetics of Biblical Narrative: Ideological Literature and the Drama of Reading (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987). Tate, M., Psalms 51-100 (WBC, 20; Dallas: Word Books, 1990). Tournay, R. J., Seeing and Hearing God with the Psalms: The Prophetic Liturgy of the Second Temple in Jerusalem (JSOTSup, 118; Sheffield: Sheffield University Press, 1991). Trible, P., Rhetorical Criticism (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994). von Rad, G., 'The Royal Ritual in Judah', in The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays (trans. E.W. Trueman Dicken; London: SCM Press, 1966), pp. 222-31. Wade, E. and H.H. Clark, 'Reproduction and Demonstration in Quotations', Journal of Memory and Language 32 (1993), pp. 805-19. Waltke, B.K. and M. O'Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990). Watson, W.G.E., Classical Hebrew Poetry: A Guide to its Techniques (JSOTSup, 26; Sheffield: University of Sheffield, 1984). Weis, R.D., 'Oracle: Old Testament', in D.N. Freedman (ed.), ABD (6 vols.; New York: Doubleday, 1992), V, pp. 28-29. Weiser, A., Psalms, A Commentary (OTL; trans. H. Hartwell; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962). Westermann, C., Praise and Lament in the Psalms (trans. K.R. Crim and R.N. Soulen; Atlanta: JohnKnox, 1981). —Prophetic Oracles of Salvation in the Old Testament (trans. K.R. Crim; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991). —The Psalms: Structure, Content and Message (trans. R.D. Gehrke; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1980). Whitley, C.F., 'The Positive Force of the Hebrew Particle ^D', ZAW84 (1972), pp. 213-19. Wierzbicka, A., 'Descriptions or Quotations?', in A.J. Greimas (ed.), Sign, Language, Culture (The Hague: Mouton, 1970), pp. 627-44.

Bibliography

155

—'The Semantics of Direct and Indirect Discourse', Papers in Linguistics 1 (1974), pp. 267307. Williams, R.J., Hebrew Syntax: An Outline (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2nd edn, 1976). Wilson, R.R., Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1980).

INDEXES INDEX OF REFERENCES

BIBLE

Genesis 2.5

67

Exodus 5.2 15.11 15.13 20.14-16 23.16-19 28.30 31.18

42 74 46, 47 108 108 93 126

Leviticus 8.8 23.24-25 23.33-43

93 108 108

Numbers 5.11-28 13 28 Deuteronomy 6.4 8.17 20.3 29.21 33.8 Joshua 13.21 Ruth 2.4

110 37 65

107 62 63 73 93

7 Samuel 1-3 2.2-8 3 3.13 23.26 28

84 74 55 55 63 93

2 Samuel 4.4 7 7.26 15.10 15.25

46, 47

1 Kings 9.13 18 18.17 18.27

140 42, 45 126 40, 42

2 Kings 4.24 7.4 7.15 9.25-26 18.33-35

75 75 63 92 40

7 Chronicles 17.24

137

2 Chronicles 32.13-15

40

63 100 137 140

104

141

Ezra 2.63

93

Nehemiah 7.65

93

Job 1.5 10.2 13.23 32.7 38.3 40.3-4 40.7 40.23

80 64 64 114 64 65 65 63

Psalms 2

2.1-3 2.3 2.4-9 2.4-6 2.4 2.5 2.6

40, 48, 49 84, 90, 91 94, 95, 97 98, 103, 105, 106, 111, 12426, 128, 129 48, 103 21, 22, 28, 104 104 82, 103 138 101, 117 48

157

Index of References 157 2.7-9 2.7 2.8 2.10-11 3 3.1-3 3.2 7 9-10 9 9.8 9.19 10

10.1-11 10.4

10.6 10.11 10.12 10.13 10.14 10.15 10.16 11 11.1-3 12

12.1 12.2-4 12.2-3 12.2 12.3 12.4-5 12.4

48, 82, 103 21, 89, 94, 104, 129 95, 104 103, 104 28, 39, 49 39 28, 39 88 29, 30, 32, 49, 88 28, 29 104 29 28, 29, 33, 55 29 21, 28, 29, 33, 54 28, 29, 62, 80 28, 29, 54, 57 29 28, 29, 54, 80 29 30 28 27, 31, 33, 49 28 30-32, 43, 48, 49, 88-90, 93, 118, 121, 122, 124, 126, 128, 129 30, 121 30, 121 30, 121 30 30 8, 28 30, 121

12.5 12.6 12.7-8 12.7 12.11 13 13.5 14

14.1 14.2 14.4-5 14.5 14.7

15 15.1 16 16.1 16.2-4 16.2-3 16.2

16.8 21.8-12 22 22.1 22.7-8 22.8 22.10 22.20 24 24.3 25.5 27.8 27.12 27.14 28 29 29.1-2 29.1 29.3-8 29.3 29.5-7 29.9-10

20, 30, 121, 122 30, 36, 82, 121, 122 30, 121 30, 122 48 50, 52 49 33, 44, 49, 50, 88 5, 10, 26, 28, 54, 80 33 33 33, 82 33 3 32 22, 68 25 68 22 22, 23, 67, 68 62 84 33, 34, 49 53 26, 34, 39 27, 28, 33 68 34 3 32 68 60, 82 122 84 88 134-36 134 135 134 134 135 134

29.9 29.10 30

30.1-5 30.2 30.3-4 30.6-10 30.6-8 30.6 30.8-10 30.9-11 30.9-10 30.9 30.11-12 30.11 31 31.14-16 31.14-15 31.14 31.15 31.19-24 31.19-21 31.21-22 31.21 31.22 31.23-24 31.23 32 32.1-2 32.3-7 32.3-4 32.5 32.6-7 32.8-9 32.11 33.16-17 34.7-10 34.11-14 35

131, 134 104, 135 21,61, 63-65, 77, 78, 81 62 62 64 62 62 26, 61, 62, 77, 80 21 62 61, 62, 78 137 62, 78 62 22, 23, 62, 68, 88 22 23 22, 67, 68 23 62 63 63 63 61, 63, 66 63 114 28, 63, 78, 81, 90 63 63 64 61, 63, 64, 78, 81 82 82, 131 63 33 84 82 50-52, 74, 79, 90, 123, 136,

158

Many are Saying

Psalms (cont.)

35.1-10 35.1-3 35.3 35.8-10 35.9-10 35.10 35.11-18 35.13-15 35.19-28 35.21 35.25 35.26 35.27 36 37.13 38 38.1-4 38.15-18 38.16-17 38.16 38.17 38.18 39

39.1 39.2 39.3-9 39.4 39.5-13 39.5-6 39.7 39.8 39.9-11 39.9 39.11 39.13 40

137, 139, 141, 142, 147, 149 74 123 82, 84, 92, 123 26 74, 79 60, 61 74 74 74 11, 49,50, 137 11,49,51, 80 50, 137 51, 131, 137 88 138 69 69 69 70 67, 70 70 69, 70 23, 24, 64, 65, 67, 78, 81 61, 80 23, 24 24 23, 24, 61 65 24 24 64 65 24 64 24 50, 52, 66, 67, 136,

40.2 40.5 40.7-10 40.7-8 40.7 40.8 40.13-17 40.15 40.16 41

41.1-3 41.4-12 41.4

41.5 41.8 41.11-13 41.12 41.13 42-43 42.1-4 42.3

42.4 42.5-6 42.6-10 42.6 42.7 42.9 42.10 42.11 43-43 43.1-4 43.1 43.2 43.3-4 43.3 43.5 44.4

139, 141, 142 66 60 66 66 61, 66 66 50, 66, 136, 137 11, 49, 50, 137 50, 51, 131, 137 49, 51, 63, 64 49, 63 63 51, 61, 63, 64 49, 51 3,49, 51 49 51 63 40, 44, 70, 73 44, 70 26, 28, 40, 45, 71 45, 46 44 44, 70 45 45 67, 70 28, 40, 45, 71 44, 46 40 44, 70 45 68, 70 45 45 44, 46 33

44.6 46

46.1-7 46.1-3 46.1-2 46.2-3 46.2 46.3 46.4-6 46.4 46.6 46.7-9 46.7 46.8-9 46.8 46.9 46.10

46.11 47.1 47.2 48 48.2 48.6 49 49.16 50

50.1-6 50.1 50.2 50.3 50.4 50.5 50.6 50.7-15

33 47, 89, 90, 118, 120, 122, 124, 126, 128, 129 118 118 118 119 120 119 118 118 118, 119 119 118, 119, 131 118 119 119 21, 82, 93, 118, 119 118, 119, 131 139 135 47 47 63 111 93 84, 86, 88-90, 106-12, 114, 119, 124, 125, 128, 129 107 107 107

107 107 82, 107 107 21, 82, 107

159

Index of References 50.7 50.14-15 50.16-23 50.16-20 50.17-18 50.21 50.22-23 50.22 50.23 52

52.1-2 52.1 52.2 52.3 52.4 52.7 52.8-9 52.9 52.10-11 53 53.1 53.4-6 53.5 55

55.4-8 55.6-8 55.6 55.9 55.15 55.16-18 55.22-23 55.23 57 57.7-11 58 58.1-2 58.3-5 58.3 58.4 58.6-9 58.6 58.10-11 58.11 59

107, 108 107 82,107 107 125 108 130 107 109, 112 138, 139, 141, 142 138 138 138 138 138 131 138 138 138 33, 44, 49, 50, 84, 86 28, 54, 80 33 82 71, 73, 74, 88, 147 72 67 72 72 72 72 27 72 88 115 139, 141, 142, 144 139 139 139 139 139 139 144 131, 139 34, 48, 49

59.6-8 59.7 59.9 59.12 59.13 60

60.1-5 60.1-4 60.5-12 60.5 60.6-8 60.8 60.9-10 60.10-11 60.11 60.12 60.13 62.2 63.2 64 64.3-7 64.5-6 64.6 64.8 64.9 66 66.3-4 66.3 66.5-12 66.13-19 66.13-14 66.16 66.19 66.20 68 68.12 68.22-23 69 69.35-36 69.35

34 21,28, 34, 38 36, 122, 138 31, 36, 122 36 88, 96, 97, 114-18, 124, 12628 117 115 114, 115 97, 115, 116 82, 97, 115 89 115 116 115, 116 115 33 62 68 34, 49, 88 35 28, 54, 57 35 35 35 135, 136 135 131 135 135 136 136 136 136 89, 124 82 82, 124 96, 97 96 96

70

70.3 70.4 71 71.4 71.7 71.9 71.10-11 71.10 71.11 71.13 71.18 71.24 72 72.6 73

73.8-9 73.11 73.13-15 73.13 73.15 73.17 73.18 74

74.4-8 74.8 75

75.1 75.2-5 75.2 75.5 75.6-9 75.6 75.7 75.10 76

50, 52, 136, 139 141, 142 11, 49 131 11,39 39 39 40 39 28, 39 11 39 40, 74 39 84, 86 83 35, 36, 58 75, 111 35 28, 35, 54 75 36, 75 36 36, 75, 111 36, 111 122 33, 40, 46 47, 49 46 28, 47 88-90, 106, 10912, 114, 124, 125 128, 129 109 82, 109, 110 110 110 110 110 110 82, 109, 110 47

160 Psalms (cont.) 77 72, 74, 76, 147 77.1-9 73 77.7-10 72 77.7-9 60 77.7 21 77.10 67, 73 77.11-20 73 77.16 73 77.19 73 78 37, 58, 59 78.1 37, 58 78.9-11 37 78.19-22 37 78.19-21 37 78.19 28 78.22 37 78.60 37 78.67-70 37 79 40, 42, 43, 46, 49, 57 79.4 43 79.5 44 79.6-12 43 79.10 26, 28, 40, 42-45 79.12 43 79.13-14 46 79.18 46 79.22 46 81 84, 86, 88-90, 106, 10812, 114, 124, 125, 128, 129 81.1-5 112 108 81.1 81.2 135 81.3-4 108 81.5 108 81.6-16 82 81.6-7 108 81.8-10 108 81.11 109 81.13 109 82 84, 86, 89,

Many are Saying

89.1-18 89.1-4 89.1 89.2-3 89.2 89.3-4

98, 113, 114, 124, 126, 127 114 113, 114 82, 113 113 113 114 113 82, 113 114 114 114 40, 43, 46, 47, 49 28, 46 46, 104 28 47 88, 89 84 68 68 68 47, 89, 90, 131 131 131 82, 131 21, 131 63 84, 89-91, 98, 101, 103, 104, 106, 111, 114, 124, 126, 127, 129 101 101 101 21 101 21, 82,

89.3 89.4

129 101

82.1-7 82.1 82.2-4 82.2 82.3-4 82.3 82.5 82.6-8 82.6-7 82.6 82.8 83 83.4 83.11 83.12 84 85 85.8-13 86.2 86.5 86.15 87 87.4 87.5 87.6 87.7 88.5 89

101

89.5-14 89.5-8 89.6-7 89.8 89.9-14 89.9-10 89.13 89.14 89.17-18 89.17 89.19-37 89.19 89.21 89.22-24 89.22-23 89.24 89.25 89.a26 89.27 89.28-29 89.30-34 89.35-37 89.35 89.38-51 89.38-39 89.39-52 89.40-42 89.42 89.43-45 89.47 89.50 89.52 90.2 90.3 90.13 91

91.1-13 91.2 91.5 91.9-10

101 101 102 74 101 102 102 102 101 101, 102 82, 101 101, 103, 104 102, 103 103 102, 128 102 102, 103 102, 128 102, 103 102 102, 127 102 117,128 101 103 103 103 103 103 103 103 103 123 82, 123, 124, 149 124 89, 90, 97, 111, 118, 120, 122, 124, 126, 129, 140, 141 120, 121, 140 131 93 140

161

Index of References 91.14-16

91.14 91.15 93.1 94

94.4-8 94.7 94.11 94.12-23 94.18 95

95.1-2 95.3-5 95.6 95.7-11 95.7 95.8-9 95.8 95.10-11 95.10 95.11 96 96.1 96.2 96.5 96.6 96.7 96.9 96.10

96.13 97.1 98.4 99.1 100.1 102 102.1 102.3

82, 93, 120, 121, 140 21 95, 96 139 38, 49, 75, 76 38 25, 28, 39, 54, 57 38 76 75 88-90, 106, 10912, 114, 124, 125, 128, 129 109 109 109 109 109 109 109 82, 109 109 109 139-41, 144 139 139 139 62 139 139 131, 13941, 144, 149 139 139 135 139 135 70 70 70

102.11-13 102.17 102.18-20 102.20 102.23-24 102.24-27 102.24 102.28 104.7 104.26 105 105.11 105.15 105.49 106.1 107.1 108

108.1-4 108.6-13 108.6 108.7-13 108.7-9 108.7 108.10 108.13 109.6-19 110

110.1-3 110.1 110.2-3 110.2 110.3 110.4-7 110.4

110.5-7 113.5 115

70 70 70 70 70 70 67, 70 70 63 138 124 82 21, 22, 82, 123, 124 117 132 132 89, 11418, 124, 126-28 114 114 115, 116 115 82 89 115 33 27 83, 84, 90, 91, 97, 98, 105, 106, 111, 124, 126, 129 83, 105 82, 83, 95, 105, 129 105 106 83 83, 105, 106 82, 89, 105, 128 105 74 40, 44, 48, 49

115.1-2 115.2 115.3 115.4-8 115.9-11 116 116.4 116.6 116.7 116.10-11 116.10

116.11 116.13 116.17 117.1 118 118.1-4 118.1 118.2-4 118.2 118.3 118.4 118.5-28 118.18 118.19-20 118.20 118.25-27 118.26-27 118.28 118.29 119.123 119.82 120.1 120.2 121.3 122 122.1-2 122.8-9 122.8 123.2 124 124.1-3 124.1

44 26, 28, 40, 45 44 44 131, 132 65, 78 61, 65, 78 66 46, 65 65 34, 61, 66 78 61, 63, 66 78 65 65 132 131, 132 136, 142 131-33 132 132, 145 131, 133 131 131 132 132 133 131 131 133 68 131-33 60 60 60 60 62 47 21 60 60 104 133, 134 136 133 131

162 Psalms (cont.' 126 88 126.2-3 26, 59 129 133, 134, 136, 141, 143, 145 129.1-2 133 129.1 131 129.8 141, 143, 145 132 5, 6, 47, 84, 85, 90, 91, 96-98, 100, 106, 111, 118, 124, 126, 129 132.1-10 98 132.1-9 99 132.1 98-100 132.2 98 132.3-7 96 132.3-5 98, 99 132.6-9 99 132.8 99 132.9 99 132.10-16 99 132.10 99, 100 132.11-18 98, 100 132.11-13 99 132.11-12 6, 82, 99 132.11 6, 89, 98, 99, 128, 129 132.12 99 132.14-18 21, 82, 99 132.14-16 99 132.14 99 132.16 99 132.17-18 99 132.17 99, 101 136 131, 132 137 40, 47 137.3 28 137.7 28 137.8 41 139 75-77 139.7-12 76

Many are Saying 139.8-11 139.8 139.11 140 140.6-8 140.6 142 142.5 146.3

75 75 75 22, 23, 68 22 23, 67, 68 68, 69 67, 68 33

Proverbs

6.19 12.5 19.5 19.9 24.5 24.25

122 122 122 122 122 122

43.1 43.3 43.5 43.22-28 44.2-5 44.8 45 47.1 48.17-19 49.4 49.7 49.14-15 51.7-8 53.8 54.4-8 62.6-7

123 123 84 41 84 30 41 41 84 114 84 84 84 63 84 116

Jeremiah Isaiah

1.9 2.2 6 10 10.5-19 10.9-10 13.2-14.23 14.12-14 14.29-32 28.6 29 29.15 36 36.18-20 37 37.4 37.10-12 37.13 37.14-17 37.17 40-66 40.18 40.25 41.8-13 41.10 41.14-16 41.14 41.21-24 43.1-31

76 32 84 45 40 40 92 38 92 36, 122 57 38, 54 41, 45, 57 40 57, 58 57 57 57 57 57 60 41 41 84 123 84 123 41 84

3.19-20 5.12 9.1-2 9.3-9 12.4 20.1-6 23.9 25.30 25.50 30.10-11 31 32.1-3 46-51 46.27-28 50.42 51.33

114 38 72 72 38 126 117 46 47 84

66 126 60 84 41 41

Lamentations

3.18 3.54 3.57

31 63 84

Ezekiel 3.26-27 8 8.7-13 8.12 9 9.10 24.27

64 57 54 54 57 54 64

Index of References Ezekiel (cont.) 28.18 31 32.30 104 33.22 64 Daniel 9.27 10.15 Hosea 1-2 4-14

Joel 1.4 1.6 1.11 2.17 2.20

30 64

60 60

41 41 41 40-42, 45 41

Amos 4.2 7.12-13 Jonah 1 2.4 Micah 1.5 5.4 7.8-20 7.9 7.10 7.18 Habakhuh 2.3

117 126

93 63, 67

104 104 41 41 40, 41,45 41

163 Zephaniat 3.7

114

Zechariah 2.7 9.1-11.3

41 92

Malachi 1.5

137

NEW TESTAMENT Mark 15.2-3

2

Acts 2.34-35 13.32-34

129 129

QUMRAN 4QPs 89

102

122

INDEX OF AUTHORS

Allen, L. 100, 134, 141 Alter, R. 1, 17-19 Austin, J.L. 16, 17, 56, 77, 127

Fox, M. 20 Fraser, B. 17 Fretheim, T. 99, 100

Bal,M. 144 Baumgartner, W. 30 Begrich, J. 84, 85, 87, 88, 92, 93, 120, 123 Bellinger, W.H. 83, 88, 89 Berlin, A. 1, 17, 18 Borger, R. 93 Botterweck, G.J. 33 Bouzard, W.C. Jr. 42, 43 Brichto,H.C. 17-19 Brown, W.G. 105 Broyles, C.G. 123, 140 Brueggemann, W. 36, 111, 121 Budde, K. 113, 114

Gerrig, R.R. 9-13, 18, 53, 56, 58, 78, 124, 126, 142, 143, 149 Gerstenberger, E.S. 2, 64, 70, 71 Gillingham, S.E. 1 Goffmann, E. 7, 10 Gordis,R. 20, 27 Gunkel, H. 35, 41, 46, 86, 87, 90, 91, 94, 100, 108, 116 Gunn, D. 17-19, 79-81, 128, 144

Church, A. 7, 13 Clark, H.H. 9-13, 18, 53, 56, 58, 78, 124, 126, 142, 143, 149 Coulmas, F. 7, 8, 10, 14, 52, 53, 77, 142 Craigie, P.C. 30, 69, 108, 119, 120, 123, 135 Crim,K.R. 20 Cross, F.M. 101, 134 Criisemann, F. 132-34 Dahood, M. 46 Davidson, D. 7, 13 Dobbs-Allsopp, F.W. 104 Ebeling, E. 74 Edgerton, W.F. 94 Fewell, D.N. 17-19, 79-81, 128, 144 Foster, B.R. 74

Haldar, A. 87, 88, 94 Killers, D. 41, 96 Hirose, Y. 7 Hossfeld, F.-L. 66, 69, 70, 82, 90, 92, 111, 119, 123, 135 Jermi, E. 33 Jeremias, J. 88, 106, 113 Johnson, A. 87, 117 Jungling, H.-W. 114 Keel,O. 95, 135 Koehler, L. 30 Koenen, K. 90, 92, 111 Kraus, H.-J. 34, 35, 42, 46, 70, 83, 105, 106, 108, 110, 117, 134 Kugel,J. 1 Levinson, S. 11 Li, C. 7 Limburg, J. 2, 41 Lonergan, B.J.F. 2 Mays, J.L. 28, 37, 39, 45, 47, 65, 70, 83,

Index of Authors 100, 103, 105, 106, 109, 112, 140, 141 McCann, J.C. 58, 62, 64, 68 Meier, S.A. 20, 60 Mettinger, T.N.D. 100 Miller, C. 20, 21, 25 Miller, P.D. 1-3, 28, 31, 43, 44, 57, 82, 84, 95-97, 113, 116, 117, 121, 122, 132 Miosi, F.T. 92 Morawski, S. 7 Mowinckel, S. 30, 84-86, 94, 104, 105, 113, 115, 116, 120, 122, 140 Nasuti, H.P. 83, 89, 90, 92-94, 111, 112, 117, 119 Neyrey, J.H. 114 O'Connor, M. 1, 20, 30, 31, 104, 113 Partee, B. 7 Paul, S. 104 Preuss, H.D. 120 Prinsloo, G.T.M. 31 Quine, W.V.O. 13 Renz, J. 96, 117 Ringgren, H. 33 Roberts, J.J.M. 47, 94 Robinson, D. 16 Rollig, W. 96, 117

165

Savran, G.W. 20 Schreiner, J. 134, 141 Searle,J.R. 17, 56, 77 Seow, C.L. 99, 100, 138 Seybold, K. 105 Spieckermann, H. 90 Starbuck, S.R.A. 83, 90, 91, 93, 94, 105, 117, 120 Sternberg, M. 12-19, 53, 56, 58, 77, 78, 97, 125-27 Tate, M. 35, 46, 102, 103, 116, 121 Tournay, R.J. 82, 91 Trible, P. 17 vonRad, G. 94, 104 Wade, E. 9, 13 Waltke, B.K. 30, 31, 104, 113 Watson, W.G.E. 1 Weis,R.D. 92 Weiser, A. 100 Westermann, C. 2, 28, 33, 37, 55, 92, 93 Whitley, C.F. 30 Wierzbicka, A. 7-10, 14, 52, 53, 77, 78, 127, 142 Williams, RJ. 43, 67, 76 Wilson, J.A. 94 Wilson, R.R. 84, 88 Zenger, E. 66, 69, 119, 123, 135