Psalm 24: Introduction and Structure
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Most scholars agree that the 24th Psalm, despite its ambiguous compositional history, was employed in processional ceremonies pertaining to the return of the Ark to Jerusalem.[1] The antiphonal aspects of the Psalm, composing of two-thirds of its content, suggest a dramatic, liturgical movement between the priests within the city gates and those who bore the Ark back into the city.[2]
Traditionally, scholars thought the psalm originated in the initial relocation of the Ark from the residence of Obed-edom to Jerusalem by King David (2 Sam. 6:12). This association most likely accounts for the ascription, “A Psalm of David” (rAmðz>miñ dwI©d”l.), and while the psalm may have ancestry in that event and the early monarchy,[3] the ascription must nevertheless be questioned. The most likely explanation of authorship and composition is exilic or pre-exilic[4] monarchial priests.[5]
With that background in place, the remainder of these posts will concern themselves with working from within the text itself, beginning with a brief sketch of the structure of the psalm and concluding with a lengthier set of comments on the noteworthy features. The persistent premise throughout is that the proclamation pertaining to Yahweh’s acts in creation are the controlling thought for the entire psalm. The moral requirements and the kingship metaphor and inseparably linked to the idea of Yahweh’s defeat of the forces of chaos in creation.
STRUCTURE
The structure of the 24th Psalm is straightforward, splitting into three distinct elements: First, verses 1-2 herald Yahweh’s sovereign ownership of all creation. Second, verses 3-6 reveal the moral requirements of those who aspire to admission into the “holy place.” Finally, verses 7-10 are a declaration of the identity of the “King of Glory” as “Yahweh Sabaoth.”
While the structure of the psalm is easy enough to examine, the thematic intention of its arrangement is the crux of the interpretive process.[6] Most scholars suggest the central subject matter of the psalm is Yahweh’s kingship, secured in the first section by His subdual of the forces of chaos, strengthened in the second section by the maintenance of His moral requirements, and finally in the overt announcement of his kingship in the third section.
The principal theme, connected of course with Yahweh’s kingship, is Yahweh as creator. This theme substantiates the kingship metaphor, not the other way around. Thus Yahweh’s creative activities have exegetical priority in that all that follows should be read though that lens. This is supported, most specifically, in the first two verses, which, as I will argue, form a general assertion which gets particularized throughout the entirety of the psalm.
[1] One of the key indicators suggesting the connection between this psalm and the Ark is the divine title “Yahweh Sabaoth.” This was a popular designation when referring to Yahweh’s warrior-like actions, which were often associated with the presence of Ark of the Covenant during battle.
[2] Related to this, it has been suggested that this Psalm was a hymn used during the procession whereby the two voices the antiphonal liturgy are actually two choirs of alternating singers. Mitchell Dahood, Psalms I: 1-50. The Anchor Bible: Vol. 16. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006), 151.
[3] Anchoring the psalm in the early monarchy helps explain the otherwise unknown title “King of Glory” in vs. 7-10. Even if the psalm is not in its final compositional stage in the early monarchy, it seems clear enough that aspects of it go back that far. The priests in the early monarchy would have easily linked the rise of the monarchy with Yahweh’s kingship.
[4] Furthermore, a pre-exilic dating is indicated by the fact that the employment of antiphonal liturgical movements in this Psalm are well attested to long before the Exile and are imitated by both the prophets Micah and Hosea. Hermann Gunkel, An Introduction to the Psalms. (Macon: Mercer University Press, 1998), 318.
[5] Walther Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament. Vol. 1, (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1960), 196. Eichrodt also suggests the psalm is related to the royal festivals on Zion where by there was a “visitation of the people by their God.” The purpose was not to re-enthrone Yahweh, but to reaffirm Yahweh’s election of Zion and the establishment of Israel’s king (127).
[6] Gerald H. Wilson, Psalms. Vol. 1, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002), 446.
Tip of My Hat, Wag of My Finger: Onesie Edition
Tip of my hat to the person who invented the Onesie
Wag of my finger to the same person for not popularizing them for adult.
Theology Done Well (2): NT Wright on a Balanced View of the Atonement
HT: Dustin Fulton
Theology Gone Wild (2): If You Don’t Matter to God…
Why am I not surprised the Answers in Genesis people put this out?
Theology Done Well (1): The Jesus You Never Would’ve Guessed Existed
If figured if I was going to do a negative, cynical series on “Theology Gone Wild,” then I should probably do an accompanying series on Theology Done Well. Here’ the first installment. Normally I like to wait a few days between posts, but I thought this was a really interesting painting. This is a far cry from the “Jesus” we usually see interacting with politicians.
Theology Gone Wild (1): God Bless America
So, I think I’m going to start a new, unending, series called “Theology Gone Wild.” The series will catalog pictures, conversations, blog posts, etc. that set on display the humorous, disturbing, or completely contradictory aspects of Christian theology in American culture. For your viewing pleasure, here’s the first entry…
10pts. to anyone who can tell me what’s wrong with this slogan? 
Rethinking Sabbath: Abide in Me
For many Christians, their understanding of the Sabbath is limited to it being “a day of rest.” This is really unfortunate because, though it is certainly a day of rest, it is so much more than that. Partially this misunderstanding is because by ‘rest’ most of us mean a day of relaxation and leisure. But biblically speaking, Sabbath is much more than mere relaxation and leisure.
Sabbath is a weekly reminder that we are not what we do, a weekly reminder to us that we are created by God (see the first Sabbath in Genesis 1!) and that our value is in that reality, not in the reality of a 40 hr. work week or in what we produce. Our value is not in what we do “for a living” (as if “living” is encapsulated in a large 401k!). Our value is not in the amount of money we make. Our value is not in our contributions to society. Our value is solely and completely found in the fact that we are created in God’s image!
The weekly Sabbath is a reminder, in the midst of a hectic work week filled with schedules, deadlines, bills to pay, food to be put on the table, and chores to be finished that these things ultimately do not give us our identity. Sabbath is a weekly ritual that reminds us to just “be” who we are in God instead of being consumed with what others want us to “do.”
Sabbath is not about having one more thing to do. Sabbath is about finding our identity in the One who created us to rest in Him, not in our toils and labors. Sabbath is about seeing our own worth within the larger story of the God who created and redeemed us, not in the myth of a big paycheck or loaded billfold. Sabbath reminds me that my toils mean nothing, but my residing and abiding in God mean everything!
You see, when Christians find their identity primarily in what they do, then it is easy from there to hold contempt in our hearts for those who don’t “do” as much…those who are unemployed, those who are disabled, those on welfare, or stay-at-home moms (or dads). This leads to pride and arrogance because it assumes that “because I work I am more valuable to society and God than that person who doesn’t.”
But, you see, God does not see it that way. He does not find the most value in those who do the most for Him or for the nations. God finds the most value in the one who sits at His feet and abides, rests, and dwells with Him. Sure, this will produce “doing,” but it would be a mistake to assume that our value is attached to doing.
Sabbath is much more than about leisure. It’s much more than about attending worship services. It is much more than pot-lucks and Blue Laws. Sabbath is about resting in the God who created and redeemed us. It is about ceasing our labor for a single day each week to remind ourselves that our identity is not in the work week, but in the wonderful God who became incarnate in Jesus and now indwells us by His Spirit.
Why I Love Being a Father: Moral Values are a Distant Second
HT: JR Forasteros
God as Father: Rethinking the Proximity of God
During college I was completely convinced that people need first and foremost to hear about their sin and their depravity. My conviction was that we have a Christian culture too comfortable with God as “Father” and this coziness with the Father metaphor, I believed, led to lax ethical standards and an assumption that God is closer to Santa Claus than a wholly transcendent (removed) “Other.”
Today, I am not convinced that this conclusion is entirely off base. However, I am increasingly convinced that it is not entirely correct either. I believe this appealed more to my Calvinistic leanings which tended more toward seeing God as so transcendent and Other that immanence (closeness/intimacy) is almost beyond Him.
I want to suggest here that this over-emphasized image of a transcendent (removed) Father is actually hurtful in our culture. While it is important to maintain the transcendence of God, we live in a culture that experientially knows fathers as absent and removed from their children. Even fathers who are in the same home as their children are often mentally removed – thinking always of work, sports, or finances. They are there physically, but really there are anywhere but “there.”*
I’m not saying Christians should avoid discussion of sin or references to God as transcendent. I’m merely saying that we live in a culture which understands the brokenness of the world (the old notions of moral, spiritual, and material progress are nearly gone in the postmodern world), and the absence of father figures. No doubt, this brokenness needs a theological context, but that is to build people up in God’s great mercy, not to tear them down in violent fear of Him.
Because I am no longer convinced that we are cozy with the metaphor of God’s fatherhood I am convinced that we need a renewed interested in the immanence (closeness) of God. Because I’m convinced that we simply do not understand what it means for God to be our Father, we need a renewing of our teaching/understanding of the Trinity, what it means to be “in Christ,” and the Spirits indwelling work within us. A recovery of the transcendent necessitates a recovery of the immanent – both are at stake.
Rather than forsaking (in a reactionary theological move) the immanence of God, as some new-Calvinists and even Arminians have done, we need a reawakening, a re-defining of the immanent, close, and inviting Fatherhood of God. Jesus’ prayers to the Father were not cheap and neither do ours have to be. “Our father in heaven”. The immanence and transcendence of our God are both magnified in this statement. They are NOT held in tension – they are both accepted in their fullness. To understand God as transcendent we must understand Him as immanent. And to understand Him as immanent we must understand Him as transcendent. I’m not calling for balance – I’m calling for full realization of both un-opposing realities.
We need a re-awakening of our notions of God as Father in a world with absent, abusive, and faulty fathers. Fathers are both transcendent and immanent, which is why the metaphor works so well.
*And this doesn’t even take into account those who grow up with abusive fathers. It occurred to me recently that maybe some of these people have no problem with the wrath and violence of God because their own fathers were wrathful and violent. Their image of God, then might really be a perpetuation of a familial cycle of violence – they have found their identity in someone who abuses them and now they look for that same attention from God. They know of no other way to relate to father-figures.
