Ps. 44.2 (why does the story begin here?)

“By your hand / you dispossessed nations / but planted them – you crushed peoples / but / set them free.” Here we have the narrative, the content of the story. It begins, importantly with “your hand”, “you dispossessed them”, “[you] planted them”, “your crushed peoples”, and “[you] set them free.” The action is decidedly and entirely God’s. In a way, we could say that God is the main character of the story. One is given the impression in these lines of every other character in the story being simply swept up in the movement of God. This will come to have significant consequences later in the psalm, however, when history seems to stall. The focus is epic (“nations” and “peoples”). The intent and purpose is redemptive (“planted them” and “set them free”). God is here portrayed as a divine gardener, uprooting weeds and planting his own horticulture. He is also portrayed as a liberator (“set them free”). Interestingly the order seems reversed; shouldn’t it be that God ‘set them free’ (from Egypt) and then planted them (in the conquest)? Furthermore, there is the interesting dynamic of “planting” and “setting free”, two movements that seem almost at odds with each other. The answer I believe is in the contrast that the actions serve to the wicked: dispossessed – planting; crushing – setting free. In essence, whatever dynamic was employed to deliver his people the reverse was employed as to their enemies. This is summarized in the wonderful use of the ‘hand’ of God. Generally, the ‘hand’ represents a type of conquering power and strength. Here, it carries that connotation; however, the same hand that dispossesses also ‘plants’ (i.e., it nurtures and protects). In the context of the psalm we must ask why it begins in this manner. As indicated in our previous reflection, the king (and the nation) have just suffered a significant defeat from their enemies even though they have maintained covenantal fealty with God. In this light, the memory of the nation/king begins with this very dramatic focus entirely on God which seems in utter contrast to the present. Here, at the beginning, God is active, both in his judgment of their enemies and in his careful regard for his people. By contrast, in the present God seems as if he is asleep (vs. 23) and negligent in his duties. In other words, God seems to be operating in the total opposite of how he did in the past; he is not actively against his people as much as he seems indifferent to them. Whereas before every movement was accomplished (and understood as such) as coming from God, now, his people seem to be running entirely on their own steam (and, hence, are roundly defeated). This is why the focus is so one-sided (on God)—precisely because he seems so entirely one-sidedly disinterested in them now. As we will come to see, the covenant itself is what engenders this approach, both as it relates to the king’s memory of the past and of his perception of the future.