Ps. 5:10-11

Ps. 5.10-11

 

Diag.

 

 

Destroy them  /  O God

Let them  /  fall  /  because of  /  their plans

Thrust them  /  out  /  because of  /  the multitude of  /  their transgressions

For they  /  have been  /  rebellious  /  against you.

 

These walking sepulchers still must be destroyed. And yet, one of the first things to notice here is how this destruction takes place. “Destroy them…let them fall…thrust them out.” It seems to be both something actively done by God (‘destroy them…thrust them out’) and something passive (“Let them fall…”), as if they were already tottering on the brink of destruction and the only thing necessary is for God to avoid propping them up. What we see here is a common ability on the part of Scripture to hold together in a unity what we tend to divide. It occurs throughout the OT: did God ‘harden Pharaoh’s heart’ or did Pharaoh harden his own heart? In the prophets, is God actually at the head of Syria or Babylon as it invades Israel, or is it the case that he merely does not come to protect Israel? Are these the same thing? It seems to me that the text says both without making them identical. It is simply not a ‘problem’ for the author. There are, however, certain things we can say about this.

“Let them fall…”. There is, in the wisdom literature, a common idea that the wicked “dig their own holes and fall in it themselves.” Likewise, in Psalm 1, we noticed how God actually does very little to the wicked; their judgment seems to be internal to their actions. In this regard, nothing needs to be “done”, although this does not mean that they are not judged by Yhwh. He has established, what appears to be, a natural order to things that carries out His judgments even though He does not actively pursue it. This is what we mean when we say that when men perform evil it is actually evil “performing” these men. The blessed man by contrast, perceives the ‘right order’ of things (and lives accordingly) and yet, he also, simultaneously, perceives the fact that all wisdom begins “in the fear of the Lord”. There is a dynamism to the blessed man (he actually achieves a real freedom by and through his recognition of Yhwh’s glory) in contrast to a type of ‘flat’ interpretation of the wicked. Much of this is grounded, I think, in a deep understanding of Yhwh as creator and not merely a participator in creation; when Yhwh is understood as both the initiator of creation (which includes the creation of time/history) he can be both passive and active in his judgments in a way that no other god could. I do not mean to imply that everything is merely a natural outworking of this ‘internal justice’; there is manifestly (as in Exodus) special acts of deliverance. What I mean to highlight is the fact that understanding both of these aspects is crucial. Those who see only God’s judgments as “active” tend to be blind to ‘natural’ requirements of using every human capacity to gain wisdom; this obviously plays into those who adhere strictly to a vision of ‘scripture alone’ or ‘faith alone’ apart from reason. On the other hand, those who see everything as simply the natural outworking (and no active participation of Yhwh), tend to reduce revelation (and this, not limited to scripture) to the merely human construct.  There is a large danger in describing things this way because there is almost always a tendency to say, “This, is wisdom….; this is revelation….”. The biblical authors though, as this passage shows, do not follow this pattern. More often than not, they are held together in a prior unity of perception; it is when we break them apart that ‘problems’ emerge. The only way I know how to avoid this is to simply drink in the scriptures, knowing they are grounded in a unity that can be knit together, in secret, within me (not that they have been; only that, in me, they only can be in a secret deeper than I am able know). This is crucial because I do not think every author of scripture moves along the same lines in regard to this; some will move more along the ‘wisdom’ lines and some more along the ‘revelation’ lines, but none of them, to my knowledge, ever operate solely on one side or the other. If I try and force them together, it simply doesn’t work; they do not compliment and build each other up but “butt heads” with each other; one might gain knowledge but looses wisdom entirely. If I assume they are united, although able to be distinguished, then I sense a unity I cannot adequately describe. I (try) and allow each author to provide his own unique perspective and, in their different voices, a drama unfolds. And, as to this “issue”, there is no ‘truth’ behind the drama—the drama is the truth. We must allow them to ‘play’ within us.  It is at times like this that I learn that one must speak in metaphors because this unity can only be seen in the mystery of metaphor and play.

“Thrust them out…”: this is a common phrase among the prophets for what Yhwh will do to Israel in regard to the land because of their sinsàthey will be sent into exile. If the promised land is Yhwh’s land, and they have polluted it because of their sins the only remedy is to kick out the offending party in order to reestablish the holiness/life that abides with the presence of Yhwh. Likewise, these men are infected with the “multitude” of their sins and are therefore ripe for exile. They need to be ‘thrust out’ in a type of personal exile because they, like Israel will become, are in rebellion against Yhwh.

This request for a ‘thrusting out’ cannot be appreciated without seeing this man being ‘admitted’ to Yhwh’s presence. As he moves closer into Yhwh, he prays, from within this proximity, that those around him be exiled away from Yhwh.