{"commentary":{"id":"keil-delitzsch","name":"Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary","website":"https://worthy.bible/commentaries/keil-delitzsch-commentary","licenseUrl":"https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/","licenseNotes":null,"licenseNotice":null,"englishName":"Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary","language":"eng","textDirection":"rtl","sha256":"bb5cc0f9cfe0a93b3c903bb6972c6bc8c4e9f2bd3be6c2a6d276737cf9c5edce","availableFormats":["json"],"listOfBooksApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/books.json","listOfProfilesApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/profiles.json","numberOfBooks":39,"totalNumberOfChapters":909,"totalNumberOfVerses":6516,"totalNumberOfProfiles":0,"languageName":"English","languageEnglishName":"English"},"book":{"id":"PSA","commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","name":"Psalms","commonName":"Psalms","introduction":"The Book of Psalms\n\nIntroduction to the Psalter\n\nΠάντα ὥσπερ ἐν μεγάλῳ τινὶ καὶ κοινῷ ταμιείῳ τῇ βίβλῳ τῶν ψαλμῶν τεθησαύρισται.\n\nBasil\n\n1. Position of the Psalter among the Hagiographa, and More Especially among the Poetical Books\n\nThe Psalter is everywhere regarded as an essential part of the Kethubim or Hagiographa; but its position among these varies. It seems to follow from Luk 24:44 that it opened the Kethubim in the earliest period of the Christina era.\n\n(Note: Also from 2 Macc. 2:13, where τὰ τοῦ Δαυίδ appears to be the designation of the כתובים according to their beginning; and from Philo, De vita contempl. (opp. II 475 ed. Mangey), where he makes the following distinction νόμους καὶ λόγια θεσπισθέντα διὰ προφητῶν καὶ ὕμνους καὶ τὰ ἄλλα οἷς ἐπιστήμη καὶ εὐσέβεια συναύξονται καὶ τελειοῦνται.)\n\nThe order of the books in the Hebrew MSS of the German class, upon which our printed editions in general use are based, is actually this: Psalms, Proverbs, Job, and the five Megilloth. But the Masora and the MSS of the Spanish class begin the Kethubim with the Chronicles which they awkwardly separate from Ezra and Nehemiah, and then range the Psalms, Job, Proverbs and the five Megilloth next.\n\n(Note: In all the Masoretic lists the twenty four books are arranged in the following order: 1) בראשׁית; 2) ואלה שׁמות; 3) ויקרא; 4) וידבר (also במדבר); 5) אלה הדברים; 6) יהושׁע; 7) שׁופטים; 8) שׁמואל; 9) מלכים; 10) ישׁעיה; 11) ירמיה; 12) יחזקאל; 13) תרי עשׂר; 14) דברי הימים; 15) תהלות; 16) איוב; 17) משׁלי; 18) רות; 19) שׁיר השׁירים; 20) קהלת; 21) קינות (איכה); 22) אחשׁורושׁ (מגלה); 23) דניאל; 24) עזרא. The Masoretic abbreviation for the three pre-eminently poetical books is accordingly, not מתא but (in agreement with their Talmudic order) אםת (as also in Chajug'), vid., Elia Levita, Masoreth ha-Masoreth p. 19. 73 (ed. Ven. 1538) ed. Ginsburg, 1867, p. 120, 248.)\n\nAnd according to the Talmud (Baba Bathra 14b) the following is the right order: Ruth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs; the Book of Ruth precedes the Psalter as its prologue, for Ruth is the ancestor of him to whom the sacred lyric owes its richest and most flourishing era. It is undoubtedly the most natural order that the Psalter should open the division of the Kethubim, and for this reason: that, according to the stock which forms the basis of it, it represents the time of David, and then afterwards in like manner the Proverbs and Job represent the Chokma-literature of the age of Solomon. But it is at once evident that it could have no other place but among the Kethubim.\n\nThe codex of the giving of the Law, which is the foundation of the old covenant and of the nationality of Israel, as also of all its subsequent literature, occupies the first place in the canon. Under the collective title of נביאים, a series of historical writings of a prophetic character, which trace the history of Israel from the occupation of Canaan to the first gleam of light in the gloomy retributive condition of the Babylonish Exile (Prophetae priores) is first attached to these five books of the Thra; and then a series of strictly prophetical writings by the prophets themselves which extend to the time of Darius Nothus, and indeed to the time of Nehemiah's second sojourn in Jerusalem under this Persian king (Prophetae posteriores). Regarded chronologically, the first series would better correspond to the second if the historical books of the Persian period (Chronicles with Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther) were joined to it; but for a very good reason this has not been done. The Israelitish literature has marked out two sharply defined and distinct methods of writing history, viz., the annalistic and the prophetic. The so-called Elohistic and so-called Jehovistic form of historical writing in the Pentateuch might serve as general types of these. The historical books of the Persian period are, however, of the annalistic, not of the prophetic character (although the Chronicles have taken up and incorporated many remnants of the prophetic form of historical writing, and the Books of the Kings, vice versa, many remnants of the annalistic): they could not therefore stand among the Prophetae priores. But with the Book of Ruth it is different. This short book is so like the end of the Book of the Judges (ch. 17-21), that it might very well stand between Judges and Samuel; and it did originally stand after the Book of the Judges, just as the Lamentations of Jeremiah stood after his prophecies. It is only on liturgical grounds that they have both been placed with the so-called Megilloth (Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and Esther, as they are arranged in our ordinary copies according to the calendar of the festivals). All the remaining books could manifestly only be classed under the third division of the canon, which (as could hardly have been otherwise in connection with תורה and נביאים) has been entitled, in the most general way, כתובים ,, - a title which, as the grandson of Ben-Sira renders it in his prologue to Ecclesiasticus, means simply τὰ ἄλλα πάτρια βιβλία, or τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν βιβλίων, and nothing more. For if it were intended to mean writings, written ברוח הקדשׁ, - as the third degree of inspiration which is combined with the greatest spontaneity of spirit, is styled according to the synagogue notion of inspiration-then the words ברוח הקדשׁ would and ought to stand with it.\n\n2. Names of the Psalter\n\nAt the close of the seventy-second Psalm (72:20) we find the subscription: \"Are ended the prayers of David, the Son of Jesse.\" The whole of the preceding Psalms are here comprehended under the name תּפלּות. This strikes one as strange, because with the exception of Psa 17:1-15 (and further on Ps 86; 90; 102; Psa 142:1-7) they are all inscribed otherwise; and because in part, as e.g., Psa 1:1-6 and Psa 2:1-12, they contain no supplicatory address to God and have therefore not the form of prayers. Nevertheless the collective name Tephilloth is suitable to all Psalms. The essence of prayer is a direct and undiverted looking towards God, and the absorption of the mind in the thought of Him. Of this nature of prayer all Psalms partake; even the didactic and laudatory, though containing no supplicatory address-like Hannah's song of praise which is introduced with ותתפלל (Sa1 2:1). The title inscribed on the Psalter is תּהלּים (ספר) for which תּלּים (apocopated תּלּי deta) is also commonly used, as Hippolytus (ed. de Lagarde p. 188) testifies: Ἑεβραῖοι περιέγραψαν τὴν βίβλον Σέφρα θελείμ.\n\n(Note: In Eusebius, vi. 25: Σέφηρ Θιλλήν; Jerome (in the Preface to his translation of the Psalms juxta Hebraicam veritatem) points it still differently: SEPHAR THALLIM quod interpretatur volumen hymnorum. Accordingly at the end of the Psalterium ex Hebraeo, Cod. 19 in the Convent Library of St. Gall we find the subscription: Sephar Tallim Quod interpretatur volumen Ymnorum explicit.)\n\nThis name may also seem strange, for the Psalms for the most part are hardly hymns in the proper sense: the majority are elegiac or didactic; and only a solitary one, Ps 145, is directly inscribed תהלה. But even this collective name of the Psalms is admissible, for they all partake of the nature of the hymn, to wit the purpose of the hymn, the glorifying of God. The narrative Psalms praise the magnalia Dei, the plaintive likewise praise Him, since they are directed to Him as the only helper, and close with grateful confidence that He will hear and answer. The verb הלּל includes both the Magnificat and the De profundis.\n\nThe language of the Masora gives the preference to the feminine form of the name, instead of תהלים, and throughout calls the Psalter ספר תהלות (e.g., on Sa2 22:5).\n\n(Note: It is an erroneous opinion of Buxtorf in his Tiberias and also of Jewish Masoretes, that the Masora calls the Psalter הלילא (hallla). It is only the so-called Hallel, Ps 113-119, that bears this name, for in the Masora on Sa2 22:5; Psa 116:3 is called הברו דהלילא (the similar passage in the Hallel) in relation to Psa 18:5.)\n\nIn the Syriac it is styled ketobo demazmûre, in the Koran zabûr (not as Golius and Freytag point it, zubûr), which in the usage of the Arabic language signifies nothing more than \"writing\" (synon. kitâb: vid., on Psa 3:1), but is perhaps a corruption of mizmor from which a plural mezâmir is formed, by a change of vowels, in Jewish-Oriental MSS. In the Old Testament writings a plural of mizamor does not occur. Also in the post-biblical usage mizmorı̂m or mizmoroth is found only in solitary instances as the name for the Psalms. In Hellenistic Greek the corresponding word ψαλμοί (from ψάλλειν = זמּר) is the more common; the Psalm collection is called βίβλος ψαλμῶν (Luk 20:42; Act 1:20) or ψαλτήριον, the name of the instrument (psantêrı̂n in the Book of Daniel)\n\n(Note: Νάβλα - say Eusebius and others of the Greek Fathers - παρ ̓ Ἑβραίοις λέγεται τὸ ψαλτήριον ὃ δὴ μόνον τῶν μουσικῶν ὀργάνων ὀρθότατον καὶ μὴ συνεργούμενον εἰς ἦχον ἐκ τῶν κατωτάτω μερῶν, ἀλλ ̓ ἄνωθεν ἔχων τὸν ὑπηχοῦντα χαλκόν. Augustine describes this instrument still more clearly in Psa 42:1-11 and elsewhere: Psalterium istud organum dicitur quod de superiore parte habet testudinem, illud scilicet tympanum et concavum lignum cui chordae innitentes resonant, cithara vero id ipsum lignum cavum et sonorum ex inferiore parte habet. In the cithern the strings pass over the sound-board, in the harp and lyre the vibrating body runs round the strings which are left free (without a bridge) and is either curved or angular as in the case of the harp, or encompasses the strings as in the lyre. Harps with an upper sounding body (whether of metal or wood, viz., lignum concavum i.e., with a hollow and hence sonorous wood, which protects the strings like a testudo and serves as tympanum) are found both on Egyptian and on Assyrian monuments. By the psalterium described by Augustine, Casiodorus and Isidorus understand the trigonum, which is in the form of an inverted sharp-cornered triangle; but it cannot be this that is intended because the horizontal strings of this instrument are surrounded by a three-sided sounding body, so that it must be a triangular lyre. Moreover there is also a trigon belonging to the Macedonian era which is formed like a harp (vid., Weiss' Kostmkunde, Fig. 347) and this further tends to support our view.)\n\nbeing transferred metaphorically to the songs that are sung with its accompaniment. Psalms are songs for the lyre, and therefore lyric poems in the strictest sense.\n\n3. The History of Psalm Composition\n\nBefore we can seek to obtain a clear idea of the origin of the Psalm-collection we must take a general survey of the course of the development of psalm writing. The lyric is the earliest kind of poetry in general, and the Hebrew poetry, the oldest example of the poetry of antiquity that has come down to us, is therefore essentially lyric. Neither the Epos nor the Drama, but only the Mashal, has branched off from it and attained an independent form. Even prophecy, which is distinguished from psalmody by a higher impulse which the mind of the writer receives from the power of the divine mind, shares with the latter the common designation of נכּא (Ch1 24:1-3), and the psalm-singer, משׁרר, is also as such called חזה (Ch1 25:5; Ch2 29:30; Ch2 35:15, cf. Ch1 15:19 and freq.); for just as the sacred lyric often rises to the height of prophet vision, so the prophetic epic of the future, because it is not entirely freed from the subjectivity of the prophet, frequently passes into the strain of the psalm.\n\nThe time of Moses was the period of Israel's birth as a nation and also of its national lyric. The Israelites brought instruments with them out of Egypt and these were the accompaniments of their first song (Ex 15) - the oldest hymn, which re-echoes through all hymns of the following ages and also through the Psalter (comp. Exo 15:2 with Psa 118:14; Exo 15:3 with Psa 24:8; Exo 15:4, Exo 14:27 with Psa 136:15; Ex 15: with Psa 78:13, Exo 15:11 with Psa 77:14; Psa 86:8; Psa 89:7.; Exo 15:13, Exo 15:17 with Psa 78:54, and other parallels of a similar kind). If we add to these, Ps 90 and Deut 32, we then have the prototypes of all Psalms, the hymnic, elegiac, and prophetico-didactic. All three classes of songs are still wanting in the strophic symmetry which characterises the later art. But even Deborah's song of victory, arranged in hexastichs, - a song of triumph composed eight centuries before Pindar and far outstripping him, - exhibits to us the strophic art approximating to its perfect development. It has been thought strange that the very beginnings of the poesy of Israel are so perfect, but the history of Israel, and also the history of its literature, comes under a different law from that of a constant development from a lower to a higher grade. The redemptive period of Moses, unique in its way, influences as a creative beginning, every future development. There is a constant progression, but of such a kind as only to develope that which had begun in the Mosaic age with all the primal force and fulness of a divine creation. We see, however, how closely the stages of this progress are linked together, from the fact that Hannah the singer of the Old Testament Magnificat, was the mother of him who anointed, as King, the sweet singer of Israel, on whose tongue was the word of the Lord.\n\nIn David the sacred lyric attained its full maturity. Many things combined to make the time of David its golden age. Samuel had laid the foundation of this both by his energetic reforms in general, and by founding the schools of the prophets in particular, in which under his guidance (Sa1 19:19.), in conjunction with the awakening and fostering of the prophetic gift, music and song were taught. Through these coenobia, whence sprang a spiritual awakening hitherto unknown in Israel, David also passed. Here his poetic talent, if not awakened, was however cultivated. He was a musician and poet born. Even as a Bethlehemite shepherd he played upon the harp, and with his natural gift he combined a heart deeply imbued with religious feeling. But the Psalter contains as few traces of David's Psalms before his anointing (vid., on Psa 8:1-9; Psa 144:1-15) as the New Testament does of the writings of the Apostles before the time of Pentecost. It was only from the time when the Spirit of Jahve came upon him at his anointing as king of Israel, and raised him to the dignity of his calling in connection with the covenant of redemption, that he sang Psalms, which have become an integral part of the canon. They are the fruit not only of his high gifts and the inspiration of the Spirit of God (Sa2 23:2), but also of his own experience and of the experience of his people interwoven with his own. David's path from his anointing onwards, lay through affliction to glory. Song however, as a Hindu proverb says, is the offspring of suffering, the חloka springs from the חoka. His life was marked by vicissitudes which at one time prompted him to elegiac strains, at another to praise and thanksgiving; at the same time he was the founder of the kingship of promise, a prophecy of the future Christ, and his life, thus typically moulded, could not express itself otherwise than in typical or even consciously prophetic language. Raised to the throne, he did not forget the harp which had been his companion and solace when he fled before Saul, but rewarded it with all honour. He appointed 4000 Levites, the fourth division of the whole Levitical order, as singers and musicians in connection with the service in the tabernacle on Zion and partly in Gibeon, the place of the Mosaic tabernacle. These he divided into 24 classes under the Precentors, Asaph, Heman, and Ethan = Jeduthun (1 Chron 25 comp. Ch1 15:17.), and multiplied the instruments, particularly the stringed instruments, by his own invention (Ch1 23:5; Neh 12:36)\n\n(Note: I tended, says David in the Greek Psalter, at the close of Ps, my father's sheep, my hands made pipes (ὄργανον = עוגב) and my fingers put together (or: tuned) harps (ψαλτήριον = נבל) cf. Numeri Rabba c. xv. (f. 264a) and the Targum on Amo 6:5.).\n\nIn David's time there were three places of sacrifice: on Zion beside the ark (Sa2 6:17.), in Gibeon beside the Mosaic tabernacle (Ch1 16:39.) and later, on the threshing-floor of Ornan, afterwards the Temple-hill (Ch1 21:28-30). Thus others also were stimulated in many ways to consecrate their offerings to the God of Israel. Beside the 73 Psalms bearing the inscription לדוד, - Psalms the direct Davidic authorship of which is attested, at least in the case of some fifty, by their creative originality, their impassioned and predominantly plaintive strain, their graceful flow and movement, their ancient but clear language, which becomes harsh and obscure only when describing the dissolute conduct of the ungodly-the collection contains the following which are named after contemporary singers appointed by David: 12 לאסף (Ps 50; 78:1-83:18), of which the contents and spirit are chiefly prophetic, and 12 by the Levite family of singers, the בני־קרה (Ps 42-49; 84:1-85:13; 87:1-88:18, including Psa 43:1-5), bearing a predominantly regal and priestly impress. Both the Psalms of the Ezrahite, Ps 88 by Heman and Ps 89 by Ethan, belong to the time of Solomon whose name, with the exception of Ps 72, is borne only by Psa 127:1-5. Under Solomon psalm-poesy began to decline; all the existing productions of the mind of that age bear the mark of thoughtful contemplation rather than of direct conception, for restless eagerness had yielded to enjoyable contentment, national concentration to cosmopolitan expansion. It was the age of the Chokma, which brought the apophthegm to its artistic perfection, and also produced a species of drama. Solomon himself is the perfecter of the Mashal, that form of poetic composition belonging strictly to the Chokma, Certainly according to Kg1 5:12 [Hebr.; Kg1 4:32, Engl.] he was also the author of 1005 songs, but in the canon we only find two Psalms by him and the dramatic Song of Songs. This may perhaps be explained by the fact that he spake of trees from the cedar to the hyssop, that his poems, mostly of a worldly character, pertained rather to the realm of nature than to the kingdom of grace.\n\nOnly twice after this did psalm-poesy rise to any height and then only for a short period: viz., under Jehoshaphat and under Hezekiah. Under both these kings the glorious services of the Temple rose from the desecration and decay into which they had fallen to the full splendour of their ancient glory. Moreover there were two great and marvellous deliverances which aroused the spirit of poesy during the reigns of these kings: under Jehoshaphat, the overthrow of the neighbouring nations when they had banded together for the exstirpation of Judah, predicted by Jahaziel, the Asaphite; under Hezekiah the overthrow of Sennacherib's host foretold by Isaiah. These kings also rendered great service to the cause of social progress. Jehoshaphat by an institution designed to raise the educational status of the people, which reminds one of the Carlovingian missi (Ch2 17:7-9); Hezekiah, whom one may regard as the Pisistratus of Israelitish literature, by the establishment of a commission charged with collecting the relics of the early literature (Pro 25:1); he also revived the ancient sacred music and restored the Psalms of David and Asaph to their liturgical use (Ch2 29:25.). And he was himself a poet, as his מכתב (מכתם?) (Isa 38) shows, though certainly a reproductive rather than a creative poet. Both from the time of Jehoshaphat and from the time of Hezekiah we possess in the Psalter not a few Psalms, chiefly Asaphic and Korahitic, which, although bearing no historical heading, unmistakeably confront us with the peculiar circumstances of those times.\n\n(Note: With regard to the time of Jehoshaphat even Nic. Nonne has acknowledge this in his Diss. de Tzippor et Deror (Bremen 1741, 4to.) which has reference to Psa 84:4.)\n\nWith the exception of these two periods of revival the latter part of the regal period produced scarcely any psalm writers, but is all the more rich in prophets. When the lyric became mute, prophecy raised its trumpet voice in order to revive the religious life of the nation, which previously had expressed itself in psalms. In the writings of the prophets, which represent the λεῖμμα χάριτος in Israel, we do indeed find even psalms, as Jon 2:1-10, Isa 12:1-6; Hab 3:1, but these are more imitations of the ancient congregational hymns than original compositions. It was not until after the Exile that a time of new creations set in.\n\nAs the Reformation gave birth to the German church-hymn, and the Thirty years' war, without which perhaps there might have been no Paul Gerhardt, called it into life afresh, so the Davidic age gave birth to psalm-poesy and the Exile brought back to life again that which had become dead. The divine chastisement did not fail to produce the effect designed. Even though it should not admit of proof, that many of the Psalms have had portions added to them, from which it would be manifest how constantly they were then used as forms of supplication, still it is placed beyond all doubt, that the Psalter contains many psalms belonging to the time of the Exile, as e.g., Ps 102. Still far more new psalms were composed after the Return. When those who returned from exile, among whom were many Asaphites,\n\n(Note: In Barhebraeus on Job and in his Chronikon several traditions are referred to \"Asaph the Hebrew priest, the brother of Ezra the writer of the Scriptures.\")\n\nagain felt themselves to be a nation, and after the restoration of the Temple to be also a church, the harps which in Babylon hung upon the willows, were tuned afresh and a rich new flow of song was the fruit of this re-awakened first love. But this did not continue long. A sanctity founded on good works and the service of the letter took the place of that outward, coarse idolatry from which the people, now returned to their fatherland, had been weaned while undergoing punishment in the land of the stranger. Nevertheless in the era of the Seleucidae the oppressed and injured national feeling revived under the Maccabees in its old life and vigour. Prophecy had then long been dumb, a fact lamented in many passages in the 1st Book of the Maccabees. It cannot be maintained that psalm-poesy flourished again at that time. Hitzig has recently endeavoured to bring forward positive proof, that it is Maccabean psalms, which form the proper groundwork of the Psalter. He regards the Maccabean prince Alexander Jannaeus as the writer of Psa 1:1-6 and Psa 2:1-12, refers Ps 44 to 1 Macc. 5:56-62, and maintains both in his Commentary of 1835-36 and in the later edition of 1863-65 that from Ps 73 onwards there is not a single pre-Maccabean psalm in the collection and that, from that point, the Psalter mirrors the prominent events of the time of the Maccabees in chronological order. Hitzig has been followed by von Lengerke and Olshausen. They both mark the reign of John Hyrcanus (b.c. 135-107) as the time when the latest psalms were composed and when the collection as we now have it was made: whereas Hitzig going somewhat deeper ascribes Ps 1-2; Psa 150:1-6 with others, and the arrangement of the whole, to Hyrcanus' son, Alexander Jannaeus.\n\nOn the other hand both the existence and possibility of Maccabean psalms is disputed not only by Hengstenberg, Hvernick, and Keil but also by Gesenius, Hassler, Ewald, Thenius, Bttcher, and Dillmann. For our own part we admit the possibility. It has been said that the ardent enthusiasm of the Maccabean period was more human than divine, more nationally patriotic than theocratically national in its character, but the Book of Daniel exhibits to us, in a prophetic representation of that period, a holy people of the Most High contending with the god-opposing power in the world, and claims for this contest the highest significance in relation to the history of redemption. The history of the canon, also, does not exclude the possibility of there being Maccabean psalms. For although the chronicler by Ch1 16:36 brings us to the safe conclusion that in his day the Psalter (comp. τὰ τοῦ Δαυίδ, 2 Macc. 2:13)\n\n(Note: In the early phraseology of the Eastern and Western churches the Psalter is simply called David, e.g., in Chrysostom: ἐκμαθόντες ὅλον τὸν Δαβίδ, and at the close of the Aethiopic Psalter: \"David is ended.\")\n\nwas already a whole divided into five books (vid., on Psa 96:1-13; 105:1-106:48): it might nevertheless, after having been completely arranged still remain open for later insertions (just as the ספר הישׁר cited in the Jos 1:1 and 2 Sam 1, was an anthology which had grown together in the course of time). When Judas Maccabaeus, by gathering together the national literature, followed in the footsteps of Nehemiah (2 Macc. 2:14: ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ Ἰούδας τὰ δεισκορπισμένα διὰ τὸν πόλεμον τὸν γεγονότα ἡμῖν ἐπισυνήγαγε πάντα, καὶ ἔστι παρ ̓ ἡμῖν), we might perhaps suppose that the Psalter was at that time enriched by some additions. And when Jewish tradition assigns to the so-called Great Synagogue (כנסת הגדולה) a share in the compilation of the canon, this is not unfavourable to the supposition of Maccabean psalms, since this συναγωγή μεγάλη was still in existence under the domination of the Seleucidae (1 Macc. 14:28).\n\nIt is utterly at variance with historical fact to maintain that the Maccabean period was altogether incapable of producing psalms worthy of incorporation in the canon. Although the Maccabean period had no prophets, it is nevertheless to be supposed that many possessed the gift of poesy, and that the Spirit of faith, which is essentially one and the same with the Spirit of prophecy, might sanctify this gift and cause it to bear fruit. An actual proof of this is furnished by the so-called Psalter of Solomon (Ψαλτήριον Σαλομῶντος in distinction from the canonical Psalter of David)\n\n(Note: First made known by De la Cerda in his Adversaria sacra (1626) and afterwards incorporated by Fabricius in his Codex Pseudepigraphus V. T. pp. 914ff. (1713).)\n\nconsisting of 18 psalms, which certainly come far behind the originality and artistic beauty of the canonical Psalms; but they show at the same time, that the feelings of believers, even throughout the whole time of the Maccabees, found utterance in expressive spiritual songs. Maccabean psalms are therefore not an absolute impossibility - no doubt they were many; and that some of them were incorporated in the Psalter, cannot be denied priori. But still the history of the canon does not favour this supposition. And the circumstance of the lxx version of the Psalms (according to which citations are made even in the first Book of the Maccabees) inscribing several Psalms Ἀγγαίου καὶ Ζαχαρίου, while however it does not assign the date of the later period to any, is against it. And if Maccabean psalms be supposed to exist in the Psalter they can at any rate only be few, because they must have been inserted in a collection which was already arranged. And since the Maccabean movement, though beginning with lofty aspirations, gravitated, in its onward course, towards things carnal, we can no longer expect to find psalms relating to it, or at least none belonging to the period after Judas Maccabaeus; and from all that we know of the character and disposition of Alexander Jannaeus it is morally impossible that this despot should be the author of the first and second Psalms and should have closed the collection.\n\n4. Origin of the Collection\n\nThe Psalter, as we now have it, consists of five books.\n\n(Note: The Karaite Jerocham (about 950 a.d.) says מגלות (rolls) instead of ספרים.)\n\nΤοῦτό σε μὴ παρέλθοι, ὦ φιλόλογε - says Hippolytus, whose words are afterwards quoted by Epiphanius - ὅτι καὶ τὸ ψαλτήριον εἰς πέντε διεῖλον βιβλία οἱ Ἑβραῖοι, ὥστε εἶναι καὶ αὐτὸ ἄλλον πεντάτευχον. This accords with the Midrash on Psa 1:1 : Moses gave the Israelites the five books of the Thτra and corresponding to these (כנגדם) David gave them the book of Psalms which consists of five books (ספר תהלים שׁישׁ בו חמשׁה ספרים). The division of the Psalter into five parts makes it the copy and echo of the Thפra, which it also resembles in this particular: that as in the Thפra Elohistic and Jehovistic sections alternate, so here a group of Elohistic Psalms (42-84) is surrounded on both sides by groups of Jehovistic (1-41, 85-150). The five books are as follow:-1-41, 42-72, 83-89, 90-106, 107-150.\n\n(Note: The Karaite Jefeth ben Eli calls them אשׁרי ספר, כאיל ס etc.)\n\nEach of the first four books closes with a doxology, which one might erroneously regard as a part of the preceding Psalm (Ps 41:14; Psa 72:18., 89:53; Psa 106:48), and the place of the fifth doxology is occupied by Ps as a full toned finale to the whole (like the relation of Ps 139 to the so-called Songs of degrees). These doxologies very much resemble the language of the liturgical Beracha of the second Temple. The אמן ואמן coupled with ו (cf. on the contrary Num 5:22 and also Neh 8:6) is exclusively peculiar to them in Old Testament writings. Even in the time of the writer of the Chronicles the Psalter was a whole divided into five parts, which were indicated by these landmarks. We infer this from Ch1 16:36. The chronicler in the free manner which characterises Thucydides of Livy in reporting a speech, there reproduces David's festal hymn that resounded in Israel after the bringing home of the ark; and he does it in such a way that after he has once fallen into the track of Ps 106, he also puts into the mouth of David the beracha which follows that Ps. From this we see that the Psalter was already divided into books at that period; the closing doxologies had already become thoroughly grafted upon the body of the Psalms after which they stand. The chronicler however wrote under the pontificate of Johanan, the son of Eliashib, the predecessor of Jaddua, towards the end of the Persian supremacy, but a considerable time before the commencement of the Grecian.\n\nNext to this application of the beracha of the Fourth book by the chronicler, Psa 72:20 is a significant mark for determining the history of the origin of the Psalter. The words: \"are ended the prayers of David the son of Jesse,\" are without doubt the subscription to the oldest psalm-collection, which preceded the present psalm-pentateuch. The collector certainly has removed this subscription from its original place close after Psa 72:17, by the interpolation of the beracha Psa 72:18, but left it, as the same time, untouched. The collectors and those who worked up the older documents within the range of the Biblical literature appear to have been extremely conscientious in this respect and they thereby make it easier for us to gain an insight into the origin of their work, - as, e.g., the composer of the Books of Samuel gives intact the list of officers from a later document Sa2 8:16-18 (which closed with that, so far as we at present have it in its incorporated state), as well as the list from an older document (Sa2 20:23-26); or, as not merely the author of the Book of Kings in the middle of the Exile, but also the chronicler towards the end of the Persian period, have transferred unaltered, to their pages, the statement that the staves of the ark are to be found in the rings of the ark \"to this day,\" which has its origin in some annalistic document (Kg1 8:8; Ch2 5:9). But unfortunately that subscription, which has been so faithfully preserved, furnishes us less help than we could wish. We only gather from it that the present collection was preceded by a primary collection of very much more limited compass which formed its basis and that this closed with the Salomonic Ps 72; for the collector would surely not have placed the subscription, referring only to the prayers of David, after this Psalm if he had not found it there already. And from this point it becomes natural to suppose that Solomon himself, prompted perhaps by the liturgical requirements of the new Temple, compiled this primary collection, and by the addition of Ps 72 may have caused it to be understood that he was the originator of the collection.\n\nBut to the question whether the primary collection also contained only Davidic songs properly so called or whether the subscribed designation תהלות דוד is only intended a potiori, the answer is entirely wanting. If we adopt the latter supposition, one is at a loss to u","order":19,"numberOfChapters":146,"sha256":"e4faeedf9f4a36317a2f2a1f443740f9dc8b384666dc222941d9b34a3f96b6d6","firstChapterNumber":1,"firstChapterApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/PSA/1.json","firstChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","book":"PSA","chapter":1},"lastChapterNumber":150,"lastChapterApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/PSA/150.json","lastChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","book":"PSA","chapter":150},"totalNumberOfVerses":650},"chapter":{"number":2,"content":[{"type":"verse","number":1,"content":["The Psalm begins with a seven line strophe, ruled by an interrogative Wherefore. The mischievous undertaking condemns itself, It is groundless and fruitless. This certainty is expressed, with a tinge of involuntary astonishment, in the question. למּה followed by a praet. enquires the ground of such lawlessness: wherefore have the peoples banded together so tumultuously (Aquila: ἐθορυβήθησαν)? and followed by a fut., the aim of this ineffectual action: wherefore do they imagine emptiness? ריק might be adverbial and equivalent to לריק, but it is here, as in Psa 4:3, a governed accusative; for הגה which signifies in itself only quiet inward musing and yearning, expressing itself by a dull muttering (here: something deceitful, as in Psa 38:13), requires an object. By this ריק the involuntary astonishment of the question justifies itself: to what purpose is this empty affair, i.e., devoid of reason and continuance? For the psalmist, himself a subject and member of the divine kingdom, is too well acquainted with Jahve and His Anointed not to recognise beforehand the unwarrantableness and impotency of such rebellion. That these two things are kept in view, is implied by Psa 2:2, which further depicts the position of affairs without being subordinated to the למה. The fut. describes what is going on at the present time: they set themselves in position, they take up a defiant position (התיצּב as in Sa1 17:16), after which we again (comp. the reverse order in Psa 83:6) have a transition to the perf. which is the more uncoloured expression of the actual: נוסד (with יחד as the exponent of reciprocity) prop. to press close and firm upon one another, then (like Arab. sâwada, which, according to the correct observation of the Turkish Kamus, in its signification clam cum aliquo locutus est, starts from the very same primary meaning of pressing close to any object): to deliberate confidentially together (as Psa 31:14 and נועץ Psa 71:10). The subjects מלכי־ארץ and רוזנים (according to the Arabic razuna, to be weighty: the grave, dignitaries, σεμνοί, augusti) are only in accordance with the poetic style without the article. It is a general rising of the people of the earth against Jahve and His משׁיח, Χριστὸς, the king anointed by Him by means of the holy oil and most intimately allied to Him. The psalmist hears (Psa 2:3) the decision of the deliberating princes. The pathetic suff. êmō instead of êhém refers back to Jahve and His Anointed. The cohortatives express the mutual kindling of feeling; the sound and rhythm of the exclamation correspond to the dull murmur of hatred and threatening defiance: the rhythm is iambic, and then anapaestic. First they determine to break asunder the fetters (מוסרות = מאסרות) to which the את, which is significant in the poetical style, points, then to cast away the cords from them (ממּנוּ a nobis, this is the Palestinian mode of writing, whereas the Babylonians said and wrote mimeenuw a nobis in distinction from ממּנוּ ab eo, B. Sota 35a) partly with the vexation of captives, partly with the triumph of freedmen. They are, therefore, at present subjects of Jahve and His Anointed, and not merely because the whole world is Jahve's, but because He has helped His Anointed to obtain dominion over them. It is a battle for freedom, upon which they are entering, but a freedom that is opposed to God. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":4,"content":["Above the scene of this wild tumult of battle and imperious arrogance the psalmist in this six line strophe beholds Jahve, and in spirit hears His voice of thunder against the rebels. In contrast to earthly rulers and events Jahve is called יושׁב בּשּׁמים: He is enthroned above them in unapproachable majesty and ever-abiding glory; He is called אדני as He who controls whatever takes place below with absolute power according to the plan His wisdom has devised, which brooks no hindrance in execution. The futt. describe not what He will do, but what He does continually (cf. Isa 18:4.). למו also belongs, according to Psa 59:9; Psa 37:13, to ישׂחק (שׂחק which is more usual in the post-pentateuchal language = צחק). He laughs at the defiant ones, for between them and Him there is an infinite distance; He derides them by allowing the boundless stupidity of the infinitely little one to come to a climax and then He thrusts him down to the earth undeceived. This climax, the extreme limit of the divine forbearance, is determined by the אז, as in Deu 29:19, cf. שׁם Psa 14:5; 36:13, which is a \"then\" referring to the future and pointing towards the crisis which then supervenes. Then He begins at once to utter the actual language of His wrath to his foes and confounds them in the heat of His anger, disconcerts them utterly, both outwardly and in spirit. בּהל, Arab. bhl, cogn. בּלהּ, means originally to let loose, let go, then in Hebrew sometimes, externally, to overthrow, sometimes, of the mind, to confound and disconcert.\nPsa 2:5-6\nPsa 2:5 is like a peal of thunder (cf. Isa 10:33); בּחרונו, Psa 2:5, like the lightning's destructive flash. And as the first strophe closed with the words of the rebels, so this second closes with Jahve's own words. With ואני begins an adverbial clause like Gen 15:2; Gen 18:13; Psa 50:17. The suppressed principal clause (cf. Isa 3:14; Ew. 341, c) is easily supplied: ye are revolting, whilst notwithstanding I.... With ואני He opposes His irresistible will to their vain undertaking. It has been shown by Bttcher, that we must not translate \"I have anointed\" (Targ., Symm.). נסך, Arab. nsk, certainly means to pour out, but not to pour upon, and the meaning of pouring wide and firm (of casting metal, libation, anointing) then, as in הצּיג, הצּיק, goes over into the meaning of setting firmly in any place (fundere into fundare, constituere, as lxx, Syr., Jer., and Luther translate), so that consequently נסיך the word for prince cannot be compared with משׁיח, but with נציב.\n(Note: Even the Jalkut on the Psalms, 620, wavers in the explanation of נסכתי between אמשׁחתיה I have anointed him, (after Dan 10:3), אתיכתיה (I have cast him (after Exo 32:4 and freq.), and גדלתיו I have made him great (after Mic 5:4). Aquila, by rendering it καὶ ἐδιασάμην (from διάζεσθαι = ὑφαίνειν), adds a fourth possible rendering. A fifth is נסך to purify, consecrate (Hitz.), which does not exist, for the Arabic nasaka obtains this meaning from the primary signification of cleansing by flooding with water (e.g., washing away the briny elements of a field). Also in Pro 8:23 נסּכתּי means I am cast = placed.)\nThe Targum rightly inserts וּמניתיהּ (et praefeci eum) after רבּיתי (unxi), for the place of the anointing is not על־ציּון. History makes no mention of a king of Israel being anointed on Zion. Zion is mentioned as the royal seat of the Anointed One; there he is installed, that He may reign there, and rule from thence, Psa 110:2. It is the hill of the city of David (Sa2 5:7, Sa2 5:9; Kg1 8:1) including Moriah, that is intended. That hill of holiness, i.e., holy hill, which is the resting-place of the divine presence and therefore excels all the heights of the earth, is assigned to Him as the seat of His throne. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":7,"content":["The Anointed One himself now speaks and expresses what he is, and is able to do, by virtue of the divine decree. No transitional word or formula of introduction denotes this sudden transition from the speech of Jahve to that of His Christ. The psalmist is the seer: his Psalm is the mirrored picture of what he saw and the echo of what he heard. As Jahve in opposition to the rebels acknowledges the king upon Zion, so the king on Zion appeals to Him in opposition to the rebels. The name of God, יהוה, has Rebia magnum and, on account of the compass of the full intonation of this accent, a Gaja by the Sheb (comp. אלהי Psa 25:2, אלהים Psa 68:8, אדני Psa 90:1).\n(Note: We may observe here, in general, that this Gaja (Metheg) which draws the Sheb into the intonation is placed even beside words with the lesser distinctives Zinnor and Rebia parvum only by the Masorete Ben-Naphtali, not by Ben-Asher (both about 950 a.d.). This is a point which has not been observed throughout even in Baer's edition of the Psalter so that consequently e.g., in Psa 5:11 it is to be written אלהים; in Psa 6:2 on the other hand (with Dech) יהוה, not יהוה.)\nThe construction of ספּר with אל (as Psa 69:27, comp. אמר Gen 20:2; Jer 27:19, דּבּר Ch2 32:19, הודיע Isa 38:19): to narrate or make an announcement with respect to... is minute, and therefore solemn. Self-confident and fearless, he can and will oppose to those, who now renounce their allegiance to him, a חק, i.e., an authentic, inviolable appointment, which can neither be changed nor shaken. All the ancient versions, with the exception of the Syriac, read חק־יהוה together. The line of the strophe becomes thereby more symmetrical, but the expression loses in force. אל־חק rightly has Olewejored. It is the amplificative use of the noun when it is not more precisely determined, known in Arabic grammar: such a decree! majestic as to its author and its matter. Jahve has declared to Him: בּני אתּה, \n(Note: Even in pause here אתּה remains without a lengthened ā (Psalter ii. 468), but the word is become Milel, while out of pause, according to Ben-Asher, it is Milra; but even out of pause (as in Psa 89:10, Psa 89:12; Psa 90:2) it is accented on the penult. by Ben-Naphtali. The Athnach of the books תאם (Ps., Job, Prov.), corresponding to the Zakeph of the 21 other books, has only a half pausal power, and as a rule none at all where it follows Olewejored, cf. Psa 9:7; Psa 14:4; Psa 25:7; Psa 27:4; Psa 31:14; Psa 35:15, etc. (Baer, Thorath Emeth p. 37).)\nand that on the definite day on which He has begotten or born him into this relationship of son. The verb ילד (with the changeable vowel i)\n(Note: The changeable i goes back either to a primary form ילד, ירשׁ, שׁאל, or it originates directly from Pathach; forms like ירשׁוּה and שׁאלך favour the former, ē in a closed syllable generally going over into Segol favours the latter.))\nunites in itself, like γεννᾶν, the ideas of begetting and bearing (lxx γεγέννηκα, Aq. ἔτεκον); what is intended is an operation of divine power exalted above both, and indeed, since it refers to a setting up (נסך) in the kingship, the begetting into a royal existence, which takes place in and by the act of anointing (משׁח). Whether it be David, or a son of David, or the other David, that is intended, in any case 2 Sam 7 is to be accounted as the first and oldest proclamation of this decree; for there David, with reference to his own anointing, and at the same time with the promise of everlasting dominion, receives the witness of the eternal sonship to which Jahve has appointed the seed of David in relation to Himself as Father, so that David and his seed can say to Jahve: אבי אתּה, Thou art my Father, Psa 89:27, as Jahve can to him: בּני אתּה, Thou art My son. From this sonship of the Anointed one to Jahve, the Creator and Possessor of the world, flows His claim to and expectation of the dominion of the world. The cohortative, natural after challenges, follows upon שׁאל, Ges. 128, 1. Jahve has appointed the dominion of the world to His Son: on His part therefore it needs only the desire for it, to appropriate to Himself that which is allotted to Him. He needs only to be willing, and that He is willing is shown by His appealing to the authority delegated to Him by Jahve against the rebels. This authority has a supplement in Psa 2:9, which is most terrible for the rebellious ones. The suff. refer to the גּוים, the ἔθνη, sunk in heathenism. For these his sceptre of dominion (Psa 90:2) becomes a rod of iron, which will shatter them into a thousand pieces like a brittle image of clay (Jer 19:11). With נפּץ alternates רעע (= רעץ frangere), fut. תּרע; whereas the lxx (Syr., Jer.), which renders ποιμανεῖς αὐτοὺς ἐν ῥάβδῳ (as Co1 4:21) σιδηρᾷ, points it תּרעם from רעה. The staff of iron, according to the Hebrew text the instrument of punitive power, becomes thus with reference to שׁבט as the shepherd's staff Psa 23:4; Mic 7:14, an instrument of despotism. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":10,"content":["The poet closes with a practical application to the great of the earth of that which he has seen and heard. With ועתּה, καὶ νῦν (Jo1 2:28), itaque, appropriate conclusions are drawn from some general moral matter of face (e.g., Pro 5:7) or some fact connected with the history of redemption (e.g., Isa 28:22). The exhortation is not addressed to those whom he has seen in a state of rebellion, but to kings in general with reference to what he has prophetically seen and heard. שׁפטי ארץ are not those who judge the earth, but the judges, i.e., rulers (Amo 2:3, cf. 1:8), belonging to the earth, throughout its length or breadth. The Hiph. השׂכּיל signifies to show intelligence or discernment; the Niph. נוסר as a so-called Niph. tolerativum, to let one's self be chastened or instructed, like נועץ Pro 13:10, to allow one's self to be advised, נדרשׁ Eze 14:3, to allow one's self to be sought, נמצא to allow one's self to be found, Ch1 28:9, and frequently. This general call to reflection is followed, in Ch1 28:11, by a special exhortation in reference to Jahve, and in Psa 2:12, in reference to the Son. עבדוּ and גּילוּ answer to each other: the latter is not according to Hos 10:5 in the sense of חילוּ Psa 96:9, but, - since \"to shake with trembling\" (Hitz.) is a tautology, and as an imperative גילו everywhere else signifies: rejoice, - according to Psa 100:2, in the sense of rapturous manifestation of joy at the happiness and honour of being permitted to be servants of such a God. The lxx correctly renders it: ἀγελλιᾶσθε αὐτῷ ἐν τρόμῳ. Their rejoicing, in order that it may not run to the excess of security and haughtiness, is to be blended with trembling (בּ as Zep 3:17), viz., with the trembling of reverence and self-control, for God is a consuming fire, Heb 12:28.\nThe second exhortation, which now follows, having reference to their relationship to the Anointed One, has been missed by all the ancient versions except the Syriac, as though its clearness had blinded the translators, since they render בר, either בּר purity, chastity, discipline (lxx, Targ., Ital., Vulg.), or בּר pure, unmixed (Aq., Symm., Jer.: adorate pure). Thus also Hupfeld renders it \"yield sincerely,\" whereas it is rendered by Ewald \"receive wholesome warning,\" and by Hitzig \"submit to duty\" (בּר like the Arabic birr = בּר); Olshausen even thinks, there may be some mistake in בר, and Diestel decides for בו instead of בר. But the context and the usage of the language require osculamini filium. The Piel נשּׁק means to kiss, and never anything else; and while בּר in Hebrew means purity and nothing more, and בּר as an adverb, pure, cannot be supported, nothing is more natural here, after Jahve has acknowledged His Anointed One as His Son, than that בּר (Pro 31:2, even בּרי = בּני) - which has nothing strange about it when found in solemn discourse, and here helps one over the dissonance of פּן בּן - should, in a like absolute manner to חק, denote the unique son, and in fact the Son of God.\n(Note: Apart from the fact of בר not having the article, its indefiniteness comes under the point of view of that which, because it combines with it the idea of the majestic, great, and terrible, is called by the Arabian grammarians Arab. 'l-tnkı̂r lt'dı̂m or ltktı̂r or lthwı̂l; by the boundlessness which lies in it it challenges the imagination to magnify the notion which it thus expresses. An Arabic expositor would here (as in Psa 2:7 above) render it \"Kiss a son and such a son!\" (vid., Ibn Hishâm in De Sacy's Anthol. Grammat. p. 85, where it is to be translated hic est vir, qualis vir!). Examples which support this doctrine are בּיר Isa 28:2 by a hand, viz., God's almighty hand which is the hand of hands, and Isa 31:8 מפּני־חרב before a sword, viz., the divine sword which brooks no opposing weapon.)\nThe exhortation to submit to Jahve is followed, as Aben-Ezra has observed, by the exhortation to do homage to Jahve's Son. To kiss is equivalent to to do homage. Samuel kisses Saul (Sa1 10:1), saying that thereby he does homage to him.\n(Note: On this vid., Scacchi Myrothecium, to. iii. (1637) c. 35.)\nThe subject to what follows is now, however, not the Son, but Jahve. It is certainly at least quite as natural to the New Testament consciousness to refer \"lest He be angry\" to the Son (vid., Rev 6:16.), and since the warning against putting trust (חסות) in princes, Psa 118:9; Psa 146:3, cannot be applied to the Christ of God, the reference of בו to Him (Hengst.) cannot be regarded as impossible. But since חסה בּ is the usual word for taking confiding refuge in Jahve, and the future day of wrath is always referred to in the Old Testament (e.g., Psa 110:5) as the day of the wrath of God, we refer the ne irascatur to Him whose son the Anointed One is; therefore it is to be rendered: lest Jahve be angry and ye perish דּרך. This דּרך is the accus. of more exact definition. If the way of any one perish. Psa 1:6, he himself is lost with regard to the way, since this leads him into the abyss. It is questionable whether כּמעט means \"for a little\" in the sense of brevi or facile. The usus loquendi and position of the words favour the latter (Hupf.). Everywhere else כּמעט means by itself (without such additions as in Ezr 9:8; Isa 26:20; Eze 16:47) \"for a little, nearly, easily.\" At least this meaning is secured to it when it occurs after hypothetical antecedent clauses as in Psa 81:15; Sa2 19:37; Job 32:22. Therefore it is to be rendered: for His wrath might kindle easily, or might kindle suddenly. The poet warns the rulers in their own highest interest not to challenge the wrathful zeal of Jahve for His Christ, which according to Psa 2:5 is inevitable. Well is it with all those who have nothing to fear from this outburst of wrath, because they hide themselves in Jahve as their refuge. The construct state חוסי connects בו, without a genitive relation, with itself as forming together one notion, Ges. 116, 1. חסה the usual word for fleeing confidingly to Jahve, means according to its radical notion not so much refugere, confugere, as se abdere, condere, and is therefore never combined with אל, but always with בּ.\n(Note: On old names of towns, which show this ancient חסה. Wetzstein's remark on Job 24:8 [Comm. on Job, en loc.]. The Arabic still has hsy in the reference of the primary meaning to water which, sucked in and hidden, flows under the sand and only comes to sight on digging. The rocky bottom on which it collects beneath the surface of the sand and by which it is prevented from oozing away or drying up is called Arab. hasâ or hisâ a hiding-place or place of protection, and a fountain dug there is called Arab. ‛yn 'l-hy.) \n"]}]},"thisChapterLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/PSA/2.json","thisChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","book":"PSA","chapter":2},"nextChapterApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/PSA/3.json","nextChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","book":"PSA","chapter":3},"previousChapterApiLink":"/api/c/keil-delitzsch/PSA/1.json","previousChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"keil-delitzsch","book":"PSA","chapter":1},"numberOfVerses":4}