Page Content (OCR)
impossible to decide what idea the author desired to express with the “my son.” We have no right to see it in a GTR nor to see in it the one who is GTR, the chief one of those who are the children of God, as Israel is requently called, e.g. 2 Sam. vii. 14. If the latter is the case, it can easily be understood from the author’s Messianic idea, for here the Messiah grows out as a prominent one from among the faithful in Israel, and has nothing of the supernatural that characterizes him in the Parables. We can see no reasons for making any more separations from the book. There can scarcely be a cause or doubting that 72-105 are from the author of 1-37, nor for considering the dream visions 83 sqq. (Tideman) out of connection (cf. notes). The conclusions, then, on the probable division of the work are these: In addition to the Noachic ragments 54:7-55:2, 60; 65-69:25 (106-107) and the Parables 37-71 (with the exception of the interpolations), which are parts most certainly foreign to the original groundwork, 108 is clearly an independent addition, and 20; 70; 75:5; 82:9-20; 93 and 91:12-17 are, in all probability, later interpolations. In 105 not even a probability pro or con can be decided upon. § 4. THE GROUNDWORK 1-36 and 72-105. a. Object. —The author writes out of his time and for his time, and hence, before learning what his object is, we must discover the characteristics of his period, the grievances and wants of his people, and then what solutions he has for the problems that were suggested by the condition of affairs. In the pursuit of this effort the parenetic chapters 94-105 furnish us with the best material, and here again it is especially the address in 103:9-15 that gives us the clearest idea. The author is one of the faithful in Israel, one of the Chasidim, and his work is written principally for them. He finds them a disappointed and despondent party. God’s promises given of old to those that would adhere to his law were clear and defined. Although these did not distinctly remove the veil from eternity and offer retribution and reward beyond the grave, they had opened up to the just all the glories and wealth that this world afforded. The retribution taught by the Old Testament (at least as it was conceived by the Jews) was a purely terrestrial one, and the degree of happiness on earth was made the index to moral worth and fidelity to God. External advantages, fruitful harvests, victory over enemies, quiet possession of the land, long life, numerous descendants, were what the faithful had a right to expect. For his faithfulness it “should be well with him in the land that the Lord his God had given him.” But how different was his condition at the time the author writes! In 103:11 the faithful complain, “We hoped to be the head, and became the tail, and the unrighteous have made their yoke heavy for us.” They are subjected to the will of their enemies, for ver. 12 laments that their haters had become their rulers, and they are the objects of the rapine, injustice, and persecution of the sinners. The Chasidim are a persecuted race; yes, they are often killed, and must descend into Sheol in sorrow, 102:5. No charge is more frequently made than that of persecution and oppression of the righteous by the unrighteous 94:6; 95:7; 96:7, 8; 97:6; 99:13, etc., and the undercurrent of thought is this, that at the time of the author the just were as a minority under the tyranny of the sinners as the dominant party. It is important to notice this fact, not only because it explains why the period of the sword, the time of vengeance on the unrighteous, is so horribly pictured, but because it will give an important hint as to the time when the author wrote. In other respects the righteous do not possess what had been promised, for in addition to the political power all the honor and wealth of the earth belong to the unrighteous, so that they appear as the just, 96:4, i.e. they are in possession of that which God had promised to the righteous. To their crimes of sin against the faithful is added the great one against God, that of reviling him; in fact “sinners” and “revilers” are almost constantly spoken of in the same breath (cf. 5:4; 81:8; 91:7, 11; 94:9; 96:7; 97:6; 98:11 sq. (15); 99:1; 100:9, etc.), and they go so far as to betray the “inheritance of the fathers,” 99:14, i.e. the God of Israel. With these data on hand it becomes clear what the writer wanted. Under the heavy yoke of the supremacy and persecution of the sinners, and seeing these “eat the marrow of the wheat and drink the root of the fountain,” 96:5, they are beginning to doubt the promises of God, to question the truth of God’s justice and his faithfulness in carrying out what had been prophesied by Moses and the prophets. That such doubt was beginning to grow in the hearts of the cruelly wronged band is only too certain from 103:9-15. To wipe this