Download The One Who Crosses the Paths of the Seas - ACU Blogs

ABILENE CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY
THE ONE WHO CROSSES THE PATHS OF THE SEAS: THE DOMINION OF HUMANITY
IN PSALM 8
SUBMITTED TO DR. JONATHAN HUDDLESTON IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
BHEB 682 INTERMEDIATE HEBREW II
BY MATT FREDRICKSON
APRIL 12, 2012
1
INTRODUCTION
The working relationship between Ps 8 and the creation account in Gen 1 is relatively
clear.1 Robert Alter explains that while Gen 1 is the step-by-step account of the creation, “Psalm
8 assumes as a background this narrative process, but takes it up after its completion.”2 The
psalm, without a doubt, is connected to the Genesis passage in some way.3 Because of this
relationship, understanding the mythic background of Ps 8, rooted in Gen 1,4 is pertinent to the
translator’s understanding of the poem’s syntax and meaning. As such, Ps 8’s mythic paradigm
should be considered when making translation choices.5
Commentators of the Psalms are sometimes so consumed by the task of making sense of
the poetic structure that they forget to consider the mythic context of the psalmist. Analyzing the
form of Israelite religious poetry outside of this context is problematic. “The exegete should
always be aware of the fact that these texts integrate the customary (i.e. the everyday) into the
1
Ps 8:4 echoes Gen 1:14-18 in the creation of the moon and stars. Ps 8:9 refers to the fish
of the sea and the birds of the air as the works of YHWH’s hands, a resonance from the creation
in Gen 1:20-22; Ps 8:8 does the same with the land animals created in Gen 1:24-25. Perhaps the
strongest parallel is between Ps 8:6-7 and Gen 1:26 when humans are made to rule over the
aforementioned animals; there may also be a connection between Gen 1:26a, ‫אדמ בצלמנו כדמותנו‬
(humanity in our image, according to our likeness), and Ps 8:6a, ‫( ותחסרהו מעט מאלהימ‬you made
him lack little of God).
2
Robert Alter, The Art of Biblical Poetry (rev. and upd. ed.; Park Avenue, Ny.: Basic
Books, 2011), 147.
3
I assume that the psalmist barrowed material from Genesis; however it is also possible
that the author of Gen 1 was using Ps 8. For the purposes of this assessment, the arguments over
dating are less important than the connection itself, which seems undisputable. There is not room
here to discuss which came first.
4
Bernard Batto, Mythmaking in the Biblical Tradition: Slaying the Dragon (Louisville:
John Knox Press, 1992), 72.
5
Flip Schutte, “Myth as Paradigm to Read a Text,” Pages 1-8 in Psalms and Mythology
(New York: T & T Clark International, 2007), 1-8. Here, I accept Schutte’s definition of myth
and conclusion that spiritual texts cannot be read outside of their mythic context, or as he calls it,
their myth paradigm. I do not, however, wish to say that the meaning of text is predetermined by
the context. The implications of the conclusions of this assessment will require further
examination.
2
mythical.”6 In the case of Ps 8, the mythic nature surrounding the primeval history of Gen 1
should inform both the poem’s thematic and technical analysis. G. T. M. Prinsloo argues that
“extra-textual information,” such as mythology, has distracted interpreters from the key to Ps 8’s
interpretation, its “intratextuality.”7 While I agree that the intratextuality is valuable, a narrow
focus such as this could potentially misconstrue the Psalm altogether, especially when obscure
imagery is involved. The interpretation of Ps. 8 and others like it “can never be reduced to an
intellectual grasp of an objectifiable and isolated content.”8 In the case of Psalm 8, the
uncertainty surrounding its historical usage, authorship, and dating (like many of the psalms)
makes the mythic paradigm even more significant.9
KEY TEXTUAL PROBLEMS
Ps 8 has relatively few textual discrepancies or corruptions, but the places of debate are
disputed extensively. The most problematic verse in the MT is v. 2b (‫)אשר תנה‬. Thematically
difficult, is v. 3, “Out of the mouths of babes and infants, you have founded a bulwark because of
your foes, to silence the enemy and the avenger” (Ps 8:2 NRSV). Additional questions surround
the four verbs in vv. 6-7 and their relationship to complete and uncompleted time. Reading the
text of Ps 8 in light of its mythic context of the primordial history of Gen 1 helps resolve the
thematic problems of “babes and infants” and lends some clarity to the other textual issues at
Alphonso Groenewald, “From Myth to Theological Language,” Pages 9-25 in Psalms
and Mythology (New York: T & T Clark International, 2007), 24. 21-25 are especially helpful
for understanding the function of myth in the Psalms.
7
G. T. M. Prinsloo, “Polarity as dominant textual strategy in Psalm 8,” Old Testament
Essays 8 (1995): 370-387. Prinsloo does admit that that his intratextual analysis “does not render
other extra-textual analysis redundant” (383); however, if they are to be ignored from the
beginning, only to be brought in later, the influence of the mythic tradition may well be lost.
8
Schutte, Psalms, 7.
9
Alastair G. Hunter, Psalms (London: Routledge, 1999), 121. Commentators are
obligated to speculate about such dating. Here, Hunter’s uncertainty about the dating of the text
suggests that the speculative historical background is not as helpful as the cultural mythic
context.
6
3
hand, which in turn, actually inform a coherent theological structure. The poetic arrangement of
Ps 8 is better understood, and the makeup of its integrated narrative more natural, in light of this
paradigm. Below is my translation of Ps 8, as well as a visual aid that helps explain my thesis.
1. To the supervisor concerning the Gittites, a psalm of David.
2. YHWH our Lord
How majestic is your name in all the earth
May I serve your victory in the heavens!
3. You founded a stronghold (to guard) from the mouths of Sucking
Babes,
on account of your harassers, to put an end to the Avenging
Enemy.
4. For I see your heavens, the works of your fingers,
moon and stars which you affixed.
5. What is mankind that you remember him?
or the son of man humanity that you get involved with him?
6. Yet you made him little less than a divine being,
and you will crown him with glory and majesty.
7. You will make him rule over the works of your hands.
All of them, you put under his feet.
8. Sheep and cattle, all of them.
And even the beasts of the field.
9. Birds of the sky and the fish of the sea
The one who crosses the paths of the seas.
10. YHWH our lord
how majestic is your name in all the earth.
COSMIC
HUMAN
COSMIC
The MT of verse 2b begins with the relative pronoun ‫אשר‬, followed by the infinitive
construct of ‫נתנ‬.10 Some attempt to preserve the awkward MT based on other occasions where the
next line of a prayer is introduced by the particle ‫( אשר‬i.e. Ps 71:10);11 however, the ensuing
form of the verb creates a word pair that is incomprehensible without emending the text.
Mark Smith, “Psalm 8:2b-3: New Proposals for Old Problems,” CBQ 59 (1997), 683.
Janet Dyk, ed., Give Ear to My Words: Psalms and Other Poetry in and around the
Hebrew Bible (Amsterdam: Societas Hebraica Amstelodamensis, 1996), 13n.
10
11
4
“‘Which give’ is possible neither syntactically nor according to sense.”12 The only solution that
preserves all of the consonants in the MT, proposed by Mitchell Dahood, is to move ‫אשר תנה‬
together, forming the piel imperfect (cohortative with the energic ending13) of ‫שרת‬, to make
‫אשרתנה‬, (may I serve).14
Verse 3 is the most interesting in the poem. The strange imagery of nursing infants is
continually problematic for translators. Some relate the metaphors to God’s strength in
weakness.15 Others have suggested that YHWH’s putting an end to the enemy allows the babes
to be heard.16 The infant imagery, however, is misleading. Mark Smith wrote an article
suggesting that the babes/sucking ones (ynqm) refer to the “goodly gods” of CTA 23.17 In the
Ugaritic myth, they are regarded as “cosmic foes, known also to be children of the God El.”18
Smith says that while there is certainly some connection between the two, the relationship need
not be to this particular myth.19 The purpose, therefore, of the ‫ עוללים‬and ‫ ינקים‬is to introduce the
struggle between YHWH and the foes of chaos that must be put to rest in order for creation to
12
Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalms 1-59: A Continental Commentary (Minneapolis: Fortress
Press, 1993), 178. Others suggest the Ugaritic root tny (to reiterate). Syr and Targ read ‫נתתה‬.
13
For an explanation of the energic ‫ נ‬and the cohortative, see: Bruce K. Waltke and M.
O’Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990), 347.
14
Mitchell Dahood, Psalms 1: 1-50 (AB 16; New York: Doubleday, 1966), 49. Also,
Peter Craigie, Word Biblical commentary: Psalms 1-50 (WBC 19; Waco: Word books, 1983),
105. Craigie translates “I will worship.” My translation, “May I serve” may seem less intelligible
at first glance, but will be explained later; for my explanation see note 32. Another likely
solution uses the same method, only with the root ‫“( שיר‬I will sing…”); however this does not
account for all the consonants of the MT. The rational for my choice will become clear later in
the assessment.
15
Arthur Weiser, The Psalms (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962), 142.
16
Dyk, 13-14.
17
Smith, 639. Also see his commentary on this Ugaritic text: The Rituals and Myths of
the Goodly Gods of KTU/CAT 1.23: Royal Constructions of opposition, Intersection, Integration,
and Domination (Atlanta: SBL, 2006).
18
Ibid, 639.
19
Ibid. Smith suggests that the tradition of the “goodly gods” stretches beyond the extant
Ugaritic records.
5
flourish. If this proposal is true, then the ‫ עז‬that YHWH establishes (‫ )יסד‬could represent the
created order (i.e. contra chaos), established as a result of YHWH defeating his enemies, a
common theme in the Psalms.20 If Dahood’s suggesting for v.2b is correct, and the ‫ עוללים‬and
‫ ינקים‬are understood as mythic foes of YHWH who challenge the created order, then a more
intuitive sequential layering of the poetry is required. Kraut argues that this change creates too
unnatural of a construction.21 However, even if the shift does create more tension in the line, it
seems the interpreter must decide between strained grammar and a peculiar reference to infants
praising YHWH - of which there is no record in the Hebrew Bible whatsoever.22 Kraus says,
“The content of this verse is in the OT without even the remotest parallel passage,”23 and in his
treatment of the verse continues,
Did children sing along in this song of praise? Or does the singer have something like a
parable, or even an episodic conception, in the mind? These possibilities can only be
suggested, for every attempt to delineate them ends in a tortuous interpretation.24
YHWH never establishes creation (or ‫ )עז‬from the mouths of nursing infants; However, YHWH
does establish the stronghold of the created order on account of his victory over the cosmic foes
20
For example, see Richard Clifford, Creation Accounts in the Ancient Near East and in
the Bible (Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1994), 151-162.
21
Judah Kraut, “The Birds and the Babes: The Structure and Meaning of Psalm 8,” CBC
100 (2010): 13.
22
John Goldingay, Psalms Volume 1: Psalms 1-41 (Grand Rapid, Mich: Baker
Academic, 2006), 156. On this page, Goldingay cites Oystein Lund, “From the Mouths of Babes
and Infants You Have Established Strength,” SJOT 11 (1997): 85. “The OT mentions ‘babies’
twenty times, usually as victims of oppression, war, and death. ‘Sucklings’ appear eleven times,
often alongside ‘babies’ and again usually as victims.”
23
Kraus, 181.
24
Ibid., 181.
6
of chaos. It seems more likely that the poet would use seemingly awkward syntax to evoke
mythic imagery, than to invent a new tradition all together.25
The four verbs in the MT’s vv. 6-7 have confused commentators. The sequence is wawconsecutive-imperfect, imperfect (v.6), and imperfect, perfect (v.7). The tendency has been for
translations to render each of these verbs in completed time. Some scholars, such as Dahood,
use methods of linguistic dating and Ugaritic evidence in order to attribute a sense of completed
time to ‫( תעטרהו‬v.6) and ‫( תמשילהו‬v.7).26 Others point to the citation of the text in Hebrews 2 as a
reason for rendering the verbs this way.27 Craigie points out a chiastic structure of the four verbs
(past, future, future, past), in order to support the idea that the human “role is not static, but
requires continuous human response and action.”28 I support the verbal chiasm suggested by
Craigie. However, given the overall structure and mythic nature of the Psalm, this verbal chiasm
points, perhaps, not only to a daily anthropocentric response to YHWH’s appointment but a
predestined eschatological cosmic authority. While humanity has already received a portion of
God likeness, they have yet to receive the fullness of their eschatological divine agency. This
tension between having received honor but not yet fully crowned is depicted in vv. 8-9.
With these issues in order, the rest of the poetry can be assessed with more clarity. Verse
2 begins with YHWH’s sovereignty over all creation and humankind’s desire to participate in
YHWH’s activity in the cosmos. Then, verse-by-verse, the poet leads the reader down the comic
However, Hunter (120-121) does point out that every paring of ‫ עוללימ‬and ‫ ינקימ‬in the
Hebrew Bible refers to humans and never enemies or supernatural beings. This may be equally
problematic for the thesis of this assessment; however, the possible ANE support of the infant
imagery (see 120) is much more contrived than the comparisons made to the “goodly gods.”
And, although the term ‫ עוללימ‬is not found in CTA 23, (see 121), the association with the chaos
myth, via Gen 1 and the Psalms, is highly suggestive.
26
For an overview of this discussion, see Craigie, 110-113.
27
Dyk, 16-19.
28
Craigie, 105, 108.
25
7
stair ladder to humanity and YHWH’s appointment of them. Each step is sequentially intensified,
describing the process of creation, while sharpening YHWH’s actions. Each action is depicted in
relationship to YHWH’s activity: his majesty over all the earth, his subduing of cosmic foes in
order to establish the stronghold, the setting of the moon and stars, and, finally, his relationship
to humanity. Then, the psalmist continues to describe the rule of humanity (present and future),
starting with the humanly subduable creations and moving back up the steps to the realms of the
cosmos, where (currently) only YHWH has full authority - where his majesty rests upon all the
earth.
With the critical issues in place and the general scope in mind, I will address the
intricacies of the poetry.
VERSE 1
The translation of Gittites here appears in just two other psalms (81, 84). It may refer to a
musical instrument or perhaps the wine press during the feast of booths.29 It is likely that the
psalm served a liturgical purpose given the inclusio (vv. 2ab, 10); however, because of the
ambiguity, it is better left transliterated.
VERSE 2
While the main character here is YHWH, his primary activity surrounds the mythic
temporal tension of divine agency shared with humans. Because of this shared sense of
dominion, it seems plausible that the psalmist would introduce the human perspective from the
onset of the psalm, with a desire to join in YHWH’s cosmic action – or at least share in the
victory characterized by human flourishing (Isa 27). In this way, 2c compliments 2ab, declaring
the greatness of YHWH in all the earth and humanity’s desire to serve in his now-but-not-yet
29
See: F. Brown, S. R. Driver, C. A. Briggs, “‫ ”גתית‬BDB 388.
8
cosmic victory. Gerstenberger shows that ‫( אדיר‬v.2b; MT 2a) communicates cosmological power
(also Pss 76:5, 93:4).30 It is YHWH’s powerful vigor in victory (‫ – )הוד‬and/or the results of that
victory)31 – that the psalmist, representing humanity, desires to participate in.32
VERSE 3
Now that the Psalmist has introduced the force of the poem, the author begins to detail
(through sequentiality and intensification) YHWH’s acts in the cosmos, from the consuming
mouths of the “goodly gods,” YHWH founded a stronghold by putting an end to these harassing
foes. As a result, the enemy and the avenger have been put to rest.33
30
Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Psalms Part 1: with an Introduction to Cultic Poetry (FOTL
14; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1983), 68.
31
N. Wyatt, in Myths of Power: a Study of Royal Myth and Ideology in Ugaritic and
Biblical Traditions (Munster: Ugaritisch-Bibliche Literatur, 1996), 241. Here, Wyatt argues that
‫“ הוד‬means ‘victory’ rather than ‘glory’, according to the usage of 1 Chron 29:11, Job 40:9-10,
Isa 30:30 and frequently in the psalms (21:6, 45:4, 96:6 [ = 1Chron 16:26], 104:1, 145:5 and
148:13.” Another workable translation of ‫( הוד‬for my present thesis) may “vigor.” Note the usage
of ‫ הוד‬in Dan 10:8b, ‫( והודי נהפך עלי למשחיה ולא עצרתי כח‬And my vigor was overturned upon me for
ruin, and I did not retain strength). Here, the speaker’s ‫ הוד‬has been overturned “‫עלי‬.” The
deactivation of the speaker’s ‫ הוד‬leads to demise and loss of strength. In the case of Ps 8, the
psalmist wishes to serve YHWH’s ‫הוד‬, which is ‫על שמים‬. (It is likely that the forces of Chaos
wish to see YHWH’s ‫ הוד‬rendered ‫ נהפך‬upon him.). Sequentially, in Ps 8:3, (perhaps) it is
YHWH’s ‫( הוד‬vigor) upon the heavens that establishes the strong hold and puts an end to the
cosmic enemies. This is the vigor, or force, that humanity wishes to serve, a desire they are both
given and promised in vv. 5-9. Also, see Zech 10:3b, ‫( ושם אותם כסוס הודו במלחמה‬And [YHWH]
will set them as the horse of his vigor in the battle.) Here, ‫ הוד‬is used in the context of combat.
32
Brown, “‫ ”הוד‬BDB 217. Note the usage of ‫ הוד‬in Dan 10:8b, ‫עלי למשחיה ולא עצרתי כח‬
‫( והודי נהפך‬And my vigor was overturned upon me for ruin, and I did not retain strength). Here,
the speaker’s ‫ הוד‬has been overturned “‫עלי‬.” The deactivation of the speaker’s ‫ הוד‬leads to demise
and loss of strength. In the case of Ps 8, the psalmist wishes to serve YHWH’s ‫הוד‬, which is ‫שמים‬
‫על‬. (It is likely that the forces of Chaos wish to see YHWH’s ‫ הוד‬rendered ‫ נהפך‬upon him.).
Sequentially, in Ps 8:3, (perhaps) it is YHWH’s ‫( הוד‬vigor) upon the heavens that establishes the
strong hold and puts an end to the cosmic enemies. This is the vigor, or force, that humanity
wishes to serve, a desire they are both given a promised in vv. 5-9. Also, see Zech 10:3b, ‫במלחמה‬
‫( ושם אותם וסכס הודו‬And [YHWH] will set them as the horse of his vigor in the battle.) Here, ‫ הוד‬is
used in the context of combat.
33
In Smith’s article, he suggests further emendations to support the presence of the ‫ינקימ‬
by means of Ugaritic syntactical parallels that I find intriguing, but unnecessary.
9
VERSE 4
Verse 4 follows this arrangement more sequentially than what the MT proposes and
continues the movement present in the first half of the psalm. The sequentially and the
intensification continue from the first three verses by describing the further development of the
stronghold, with YHWH fixing the stars in the sky. The verbs ‫( יסד‬v.3) and ‫( כונ‬v.4) help to
emphasize YHWH stabilizing his created order.34
VERSE 5
I owe my analysis of v. 5 to Alter’s The Art of Biblical Poetry. Here the Psalmist (again)
takes the reader another step down on the celestial chain and ends the “downward vertical
movement in the picture of cosmic hierarchy.”35 Altar continues to explain that while all the lines
up to this point feature sequential movement, focusing, and or heightening, v. 5 - at the center of
the poem - brings the momentum to a screeching halt. Here ends the flow from cosmic to
anthropocentric.
Here, by contrast, at the exact thematic center and in the fifth of the poem’s 10 lines,
semantic movement is slowed to allow for the strong, stately emphasis of virtual
synonymity, noun for noun and verb for verb in the same syntactical order.36
VERSE 6
Here, the sequentiality and specification are picked up again in the opposite direction, with
the “now but not yet” quality described above by means of the verbal chiasm. If vv. 1-5 are a
downward movement from the cosmos to humanity, then vv. 5-10 are an upward ascent from the
anthropocentric, back to the cosmic. This movement is initiated by the promotion of humanity in
the cosmos and the future promise to crown all of humanity with ‫הדר‬, a possible synonym of ‫הוד‬
34
Alter, 148.
Alter, 150.
36
Ibid., 150.
35
10
and a similar characteristic of YHWH that the Psalmist wishes to serve in v. 2.37
VERSE 7
Verse 7 completes the verbal chiasm, sequentially intensifying the nature of humanity’s
appointment. The position of humanity described in v. 6 is articulated in v. 7. At some point in
the future, YHWH will cause humanity to rule over the works of his hands; however, in the
present, all of them have been subjugated to ‫ אנוש‬in some way.
The explanation of this seemingly paradoxical verb structure follows in the intensifying
movement from anthropocentric to cosmic (vv. 8-9). Richard Whitekettle suggests that animals
in vv. 8-9 are listed in order of descending subordination to humans.38 Consider the following in
light of this idea; the progression of decreased subordination that follows is somewhat selfexplanatory: sheep, cattle, wild beasts, birds, fish, and the One who crosses the paths of the seas.
VERSE 8
In verse 8a, ‫צנה‬39 and ‫אלפימ‬40 refer to small and large cattle-like animals respectively.
The intensification in 8b follows with ‫בהמות שדי‬,41 referring to the wild beasts of the field. Flocks
and cattle are animals frequently domesticated by humans. The wild beasts, although able to be
controlled by humans, are more formidable and typically more difficult for humanity to rule
over.
VERSES 9 AND 10
In v. 9a, birds and fish are certainly more elusive to the clutches of man than slower
37
In Ez 27:10, ‫ הדר‬attributes majesty on account of warlike equipment. See Brown, “‫”הדר‬
BDB.
Richard Whitekettle, “Taming the Shrew, Shrike, and Shrimp: The Form and Function
of Zoological Classification in Psalm 8,” JBL 125 (2006): 764.
39
Brown, “‫ ”צנה‬BDB 856.
40
Brown, “‫ ”אלפימ‬BDB 48.
41
Brown, “‫ ”בהמה‬BDB. Also, Whitekettle, 764. In this verse, ‫ וגם‬works to set this animal
group apart, in addition to the beasts being of the ‫שדי‬.
38
11
moving - or at least less illusive and more visible - land animals (i.e. sheep and cattle).
The Intensification of 9b completes the movement from anthropocentric, back to cosmic in
vv. 5-10. Similar to the intensification of v.8 (wild beasts of the field), 9b should be understood
as the wild beast of the sea. However, the One who crosses the paths of the seas should not be
understood as just any ordinary sea beast. Alter rightly draws attention to the active participle
‫ עבר‬in 9a. “Interestingly, it is the only active verb in the poem attached to a created thing.”42
Alter suggests that the poet uses ‫ עבר‬to express “a teeming vitality, surging through the most
inaccessible reaches of the created world, over which man has been appoint to rule,”43 as a kind
of artistic conclusion. I agree that ‫ עבר ארחות ימים‬represents a power surging through the most
inaccessible reaches of the created world – but not a “nice intimation”44 of flourishing life –
rather, the embodiment Chaos itself. This translation of v. 9b highlights the singular active
participle in the poetry and mirrors the theme of chaos in v.3, aiding in the poem’s overall
chiastic structure. God has given humankind authority to rule over the animals of the natural
world. Chaos, however, remains a force to be reckoned with, a force that YHWH slew in
creation to establish the stronghold, and a force that even ‫אנוש‬, alongside YHWH, will crush
under their feet in the eschaton.45
Because v. 10 stands alone, it seems that the identical refrain that forms the inclusio (2ab)
ought to be separated from 2c. However, when ‫ אשר תנה‬is read ‫( אשרתנה‬the best appropriation of
the otherwise unintelligible MT of v. 2b), the third line of v. 2 is not as “unnatural” as Kraut
42
Alter, 151.
Ibid., 151.
44
Ibid., 151.
45
For a thorough discussion of this theme, see Jon D. Levenson, Creation and the
Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1994), 1-182, esp. 27-50.
43
12
claims. 46 Read this way, the sequential structure of v. 2, 4, and 10 comes into new light. While
the reader may expect one more proclamation from the psalmist in v. 9 or 10, having spoken up
in vv. 2 and 4, the voice of the psalmist is silenced before the presently uncontrollable. Verse 10
intuitively returns the reader to the cosmic scope of YHWH’s reign, praising him for the now but
not yet defeat of chaos and his partnership with the human race.
IMPLICATIONS
If this poetic analysis is accurate and Ps 8 indeed echoes Gen 1 within the mythic
structure I have proposed, then we must explore the implications concerning the “the dyarchy of
God and humanity”.47 What does it mean for humanity to serve God’s vigor/victory48 in the
cosmos, and of what consequence is it for humans to a little less than a divine being? If humanity
is being granted power over Chaos, what might God expect humanity to do with that power?
The dominant theme of the previous study suggests a connection between creation and
the defeat of enemies, past, present, and future. George M. Landes argues in his essay, “Creation
and Liberation,”49 that “for Israel, Yahweh’s creation power in history was at the same time his
46
Kraut, 13.
John Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine
Omnipotence (New York: Harper & Row, 1988), 111. This is the subheading of a chapter
entitled “Rest and Re-Creation.” See: 111-117 for an especially helpful understanding of this
concept in relation to Ps 8, even though my translation choices differ from his.
48
N. Wyatt, in Myths of Power: a Study of Royal Myth and Ideology in Ugaritic and
Biblical Traditions (Munster: Ugaritisch-Bibliche Literatur, 1996), 241. Not choosing the
possible translation of “victory” for ‫ הוד‬in my first paper, The One Who Crosses the Paths of the
Seas: Mythic Structure and the Dominion of Humanity in Psalm 8, was an oversight on my part.
Here, Wyatt argues that ‫“ ודה‬means ‘victory’ rather than ‘glory’, according to the usage of 1
Chron 29:11, Job 40:9-10, Isa 30:30 and frequently in the psalms (21:6, 45:4, 96:6 [ = 1Chron
16:26], 104:1, 145:5 and 148:13.”
49
Bernard W. Anderson, ed., Creation in the Old Testament (Issues in Religion and
Theology: 6; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), 135-151.
47
13
liberation power, and they must be held together.”50 This is certainly true of Pss 74 and 89, in
which YHWH’s defeat of mythical chaos monsters is accompanied by the pronouncement of
YHWH’s creative power. Jon D. Levenson says, “that throughout the ancient Near Eastern
world, including Israel, the point of creation is not the production of matter out of nothing, but
rather the emergence of a stable community in a benevolent and life sustaining order.”51 This is
liberation by means of creation.
In Ps 8, humanity is drawn into this cosmic drama. The royal psalms, 2 and 110, help
illustrate this transition. Both psalms, by use of the combat myth, attribute power to the divinely
appointed king. “They portray YHWH together with the Davidic king (as divine father and
earthly son) ruling from Zion and subduing Israel's enemies in a joint-conquest motif.”52 Themes
of creation are not explicit in Pss. 2 and 110; however, Ps 89 brings creation, chaos and kingship
all together, and in vv. 25-26, promises YHWH’s liberating power to a human being.
I will set his hand on the sea
and his right hand on the rivers.
He shall cry to me, “You are my Father,
my God, and the Rock of my salvation!” (Ps. 89:25-26 NRSV)
This is also what appears to be going on in Ps 8. YHWH has made humanity with lesser power
than his own but has put the works of his hands under their feet. However, in the future, YHWH
will crown humans with greater glory, making them to rule over all the works of his hands. Here,
“…all the works of your hands” (Ps 8:7) may even echo the placing the appointed human’s hand
50
Ibid., 137.
Levenson, 12.
52
J. Richard Middleton, “Created in the image of a violent God? The Ethical Problem of
the Conquest of Chaos in Biblical Creation texts,” Interpretation 58 (2004): 348.
51
14
“on the sea and his right hand on the rivers,” (Ps 89:25) as the acts of YHWH’s hands are
transferred to the human king. This helps illustrate how Pss 8 and 89 advocate “the dyarchy of
God and humanity,” as a means to liberation.
In Ps 89, it seems clear that this authority is given specifically to the appointed king and
not to humanity as a whole; however, Ps 8 and Gen 1 aid in what Levenson calls the
“democratization” of kingship.53 He argues that in Ps 8 humans are made to be agents of
YHWH’s mastery in the world, “ruling with the authority of the king”54 and acting as his
representatives. Levenson points out that the same transfer of power occurs in Gen 1:26. He
shows that the “image” language used in Gen 1:26 is reminiscent of twenty-second century
B.C.E Egyptian kingship myths, in which all of humanity is imprinted with the divine “image.”55
This democratization gives the authority of liberation described above, not just to YHWH’s
kingly representatives but also to all of humankind. As a result, all of God’s people become
agents of liberation.
Richard Middleton is very cautious about using this democratization as a means to
liberate. He fears that allowing individuals to reach for this kind of power will cause oppressed
groups of people to begin lashing out in unhealthy ways. He compares Levenson’s comment that
“Some things exist that ought not to, and these deserve to be blasted from the world,”56 to alQaeda terrorist philosophy.57 While this may be true at face value, the theme of YHWH blasting
chaos out of the cosmos is not rooted in religious hate mongering, but in the one true God, who
53
For the complete discussion, see: Levenson, 114-120.
Ibid., 115.
55
Ibid., 115.
56
Jon D. Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine
Omnipotence (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988; rev. ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press, 1994), xxiv.
57
Middleton, 354.
54
15
ultimately desires, in some way or another,58 to bless all nations and to allow all of creation to
flourish.
Levenson compares the notion of democratization with the call for Israel to be a kingdom
of priests and a holy nation (Ex 19:6).59 This is a very helpful for thinking about the way the
divine image functioned and, what appears to be, the force of Ps 8. Just as all of Israel was called
to be priestly and holy, they were also called to be royal representatives of YHWH and co-agents
of creation and liberation.
I suggest that Ps 8 describes humanity’s desire to live into their liberative and heavenly
appointed protagonist roles. It helps humans to assume “their destiny in history, forgoing and
fulfilling themselves by continuing the work of creation though working to transform the work
and build a just society by struggling against every form of human misery and exploitation.”60
The discussions above, although not formally directed by scholars, to Ps 8, works to
illuminate the poems function. Ps 8’s connection to the image of God is not merely about rule
and authority over creation; it is about receiving YHWH’s creative and liberating power to join
the fight against chaos, in order that life may flourish.
58
Here, I would refer to the ambiguity concerning Gen 12:3b as a missional text for the
chosen people of God. The possible reflexive reading of the niphal verb ‫ ברך‬poses problems for
those who desire to read it as such. If the reflexive meaning is preferred (“through you all the
families of the earth will bless themselves”), it would appear to weaken the ability of this text to
validate the call of God upon God’s people to act missionally, or in the present context, to be
liberationists. Read this way, it seems that the families of the earth will bless themselves with
(perhaps) God’s help and in light of Abram’s example, rather than his or his descendents’
actions. This reading would not necessarily, however, detract completely from the notion of a
missional/liberative God. For a thorough examination of Gen 12:3, see: Keith Gruneberg,
Abraham, Blessing and the Nations: A Philological and Exegetical Study of Genesis 12:3 in Its
Narrative Context (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2003).
59
Ibid., 115.
60
Anderson, 145.
16
Bibliography
Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Poetry. rev. and upd. ed.; Park Avenue, Ny.: Basic Books,
2011.
Brown, Francis., et al. eds. The Brown-Driver-Brigs Hebrew and English Lexicon. Peabody,
Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers Inc., 2008.
Clifford, Richard. Creation Accounts in the Ancient Near East and in the Bible. Washington,
DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1994.
Craigie, Peter. Word Biblical commentary: Psalms 1-50. WBC 19; Waco: Word books, 1983.
Dahood, Mitchell. Psalms 1: 1-50. AB 16; New York: Doubleday, 1966.
Dyk, Janet, ed., Give Ear to My Words: Psalms and Other Poetry in and around the Hebrew
Bible. Amsterdam: Societas Hebraica Amstelodamensis, 1996.
Gerstenberger, Erhard S. Psalms Part 1: with an Introduction to Cultic Poetry. FOTL 14; Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1983.
Goldingay, John. Psalms Volume 1: Psalms 1-41. Grand Rapid, Mich: Baker Academic, 2006.
Human, Dirk J., ed., Psalms and Mythology (New York: T & T Clark International, 2007)
Hunter, Alastair G., Psalms. London: Routledge, 1999.
Kraus, Hans-Joachim, Psalms 1-59: A Continental Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress Press,
1993.
Kraut, Judah. “The Birds and the Babes: The Structure and Meaning of Psalm 8,” CBC 100
(2010): 10-24.
Levenson, Jon D. Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine
Omnipotence. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994.
Lund, Oystein.“From the Mouths of Babes and Infants You Have Established Strength.” SJOT
11 (1997): 78-99.
Prinsloo, G. T. M. “Polarity as dominant textual strategy in Psalm 8,” Old Testament Essays 8
(1995): 370-387.
Smith, Mark. “Psalm 8:2b-3: New Proposals for Old Problems,” CBQ 59 (1997): 637-641.
Smith, Mark. The Rituals and Myths of the Goodly Gods of KTU/CAT 1.23: Royal Constructions
of opposition, Intersection, Integration, and Domination. Atlanta: SBL, 2006.
17
Waltke, Bruce K. and O’Connor, M. Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake,
Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990.
Weiser, Arthur. The Psalms. OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962.
Whitekettle, Richard. “Taming the Shrew, Shrike, and Shrimp: The Form and Function of
Zoological Classification in Psalm 8.” JBL 125 (2006): 749-765.