Ps. 89.30-34 (Pt. 2; when the king(s) act)

Our previous reflection focused largely on the form of these verses. Here, I want to look more closely at the words. The first thing to note is how severe is the failing of David’s descendants. They do not merely ‘stumble’; they do not merely ‘fail’. They “forsake my teaching” and “profane my requirements”. In other words, they rebel and prove faithless. I think, though, that the starkness of their description serves a deeper point. Up to this point in the psalm, Yhwh’s action on behalf of David (and his descendants) has been overwhelming. Heaven has opened up to earth, through David and the covenant. As we have seen, also, there has been an intense focus on the fact that it is Yhwh who performs these acts through David. The question then emerges, what happens if David (or his descendants) turns away? It is this reality that these lines address, and this is why, for the first time, the kings are made to be the sole actors. In other words, these lines serve as a contrast to what came before not only in the act of rebellion but in the fact that the actions are solely actions of the kings; this is not, as it has been up to this point, Yhwh ‘acting through (or for) the king’. There is another interesting wording that supports this. We note that David is Yhwh’s ‘firstborn’, implying that David’s sons will also be ‘sons of Yhwh’. Here, by contrast, they are not Yhwh’s but “his descendants”. What Yhwh does possess in these lines are “my teaching”, “my commandments”, “my requirements”.  The point is subtle but clear—sonship to Yhwh involves two components: election by Yhwh and faithfulness. And so, again, the question, if they are unfaithful do they cease to be sons? Do they lose their election and, more deeply, is heaven sealed off from the people because of their unfaithfulness? Are all of the actions performed by Yhwh up to this point revoked (or, stilled and silenced)? The previous reflection addressed this. The answer is clearly “No”. Their rebellion is ‘enveloped’ within Yhwh’s election, such that they will be punished, but the covenant won’t be revoked. Again, that is why these lines are painted in such stark hues. And, it is also why there are only two verses in the entire psalm (of 52 verses) that describe the kings’ failure and rebellion. In other words, these verses are here to pose the question as starkly as possible, answer it, and then to move on. Yhwh ‘spoke these words’ but the psalmist has arranged them in the order they are in order to highlight the fact that the people’s present plight is not the result of the kings’ rebellion; it can’t be. It must, then, lie with Yhwh and his turning away from the covenant. 

The Rod of Iron. One final reflection: when Yhwh punishes the kings rebellion he does so by way of the “rod of iron”. I hesitantly would refer back to Psalm 2 where, upon the king being declared Yhwh’s son he is given a ‘rod of iron’ by Yhwh to rule the nations. In this verse, that same ‘rod’ that had been the weapon of authority is turned upon the kings themselves. I think this actually falls in line with the previous two verses—just as the rebellion originates from “my commandments” so too is the “rod of iron” really Yhwh’s rod of iron that he can take back to himself when the kings rebel. In a sense, heaven is ‘contracting’ and now becoming the punishing force against the kings. Yhwh is taking back to himself that which he had granted, but not in order to retain it but to use it for the purpose of rectifying the kings. It is rehabilitative. And this, too, falls in line with the ‘rod’s’ purpose in Psalm 2—it was not simply to smash the nations but to coerce them into recognizing Yhwh and his anointed as the rightful kings of heaven and earth. Here, that rod serves the same purpose—to show the Davidic kings that Yhwh is the rightful king and to, thereby, bring them back into alignment with his commands so they can be the rightful earthly kings.