Ps. 4.4
Diag.
But know / that the Lord / has set aside / the godly / for himself!
The Lord / will hear / when I call / to him.
Depending on how one interprets vs. 3 (whether as a statement of sarcasm or of anguish) is crucial for how to understand this verse, and arguable the Psalm as a whole.
1) If vs. 3 was of anguish: verse 4 will be an abrupt and almost total change in perspective. The Psalm will then read like this: calling out for deliverance (vs.2), anguish of how long until the prayer is heard (vs. 3), and the assurance that the prayer will be answered (vs. 4). This, of course, is similar to what happened to David in Psalm 3. There was a deep and profound anguish at the “many” who were approaching him. David cried out to Zion
a. Source of assurance: the righteous man has re-membered that God has set apart for himself the righteous. His plight, then, must almost be at an end. The clock that had stalled is now moving again; time, justice, and covenant fidelity have been reignited in this righteous man’s prayer. It is as if a blocked stream has started flowing again; and what a torrent. Notice that this comes before the statement that the Lord hears his prayer. For this righteous man his being set apart is what provides the context for his prayer being heard; it doesn’t move in the opposite direction.
b. “…the godly for himself”: the picture obtained here is that of the righteous man being like a holy vessel, placed within the Temple
i. Notice that in this regard this righteous man has come to see that his ‘righteousness’ is his being an object of devotion of the Lord. It is, in this way, the Lord’s reputation. He is the Lord’s ‘image’ and just as the Lord cannot be in the presence of the profane, so to will the Lord ‘retrieve’ this man’s reputation from the vain men’s mouths, and return it to its proper owner. The thieves will be robbed of their prey.
ii. This is not merely an ‘interior’ sense of calm, that does not look for its ‘outer’ realization. This man is convinced that “the Lord will hear when [he] calls to him.” What this man has come to realize is not a ‘spiritual’ strength to withstand his reputation’s destruction. This man foresees his reputation being retrieved and returned to him. He envisions its cleansing.
2) If vs. 3 was of sarcasm: much of what has been said applies here, except for the fact that the confidence spoken of has been present throughout. This does change, rather profoundly, how one approaches the Psalm. One emerges from the sarcastic confidence into this directive issued at the men of renown. There is no emerging from darkness into the light of confidence.
3) I am tempted, in this regard, to attempt to see both of these experiences, the one of sarcastic confidence and the one of prayerful assurance, as being read together. I like this because it seems to cohere so well with the difference between the synoptic gospels (that embody a sense of prayer as providing assurance) and the gospel of John (which would be that of a sarcastic assurance of Jesus’ own deliverance). This, to me, seems very attractive because it would allow for incredibly different perspectives to still be perfectly valid expressions of man’s response to the Lord in the face of “vain men” and that they were both inhabited by Jesus. In our context, however, they must be read from their varying perspectives. What I mean is that forcing them together so that they are saying the same thing is impossible; it would be schizophrenic.
4) One final point, and more as an aside: there are two difficulties I think we may have with the confidence of this righteous man.
a. There is no where a breath of atheism in these or any other Psalm. The problem is not about whether the Lord exists. The problem is about whether he is listening or not. The divine realm as the source of the earth’s glory was simply assumed. When that glory shown one was aware that the god(s) were ‘listening’. When that glory withered (as in, here, a righteous man’s reputation being destroyed), one was aware that the god(s) was either deaf, unable to answer or angry (turning a deaf ear to the individual). Of course, there are other ways of understanding this silence (as in the book of Job and Isaiah) but this should help us realize that the issue is not one of existence of the god but of his willingness or ability to respond.
b. In the shadow of certain New Testament passages confidence seems to be associated not with the righteous man but the self-righteous man. Or, worse, with delusion and hardness of heart. In addition, doctrines of ‘original sin’ would seem to stamp out any sense that there is a ‘righteous man’ who even has the ability to ‘prick the Lord’s heart’ the way this man does. This man, though, never waivers, never questions that he is doing the right thing. There is a gulf between the two making it difficult to enter into this Psalm’s experience. I do not, here, have much to offer in this regard except to suggest that certain phrases in the New Testament should not be read so absolutely that they silence these Psalms or, perhaps worse, force them to be read as only applying to Christ (there are a whole host of problems seeing it that way, alone).
c. If both of these previous thoughts are combined, and this man’s assurance is deemed an impossibility, we should realize that what results is the continued oppression of the righteous, the stopping of time and a sense that man dwells on this earth underneath the canopy of a deaf god. We would become men of vanity and foolishness…
No comments:
Post a Comment