Latest / Reformed Thinking / Salvation Belongs to the Lord: Confidence in the Midst of Enemies (Psalm 3) | Carl Friedrich Keil et al.

Transcript

Salvation Belongs to the Lord: Confidence in the Midst of Enemies (Psalm 3) | Carl Friedrich Keil et al. · Reformed Thinking

0:00
You know, usually when we talk about medical diagnosis, there
0:02
is this expectation of absolute precision.
0:06
Right. Yeah.
0:07
You want a very clear answer? Yeah.
0:08
You go to a doctor, you say your arm hurts and they take an
0:11
X-ray. The image comes up on the
0:12
screen, the doctor points to a jagged white line and, well,
0:16
they tell you your bone is fractured.
0:17
It is a binary situation. It is either broken or it is not
0:21
broken, right? And that kind of clarity is
0:24
comforting. I mean, we like things to be
0:26
visible, to be categorized neatly, and to have a definitive
0:30
answer. But then you step into the world
0:32
of ancient texts, into historical and theological
0:35
analysis, and suddenly that X-ray machine, what feels like
0:39
it is malfunctioning. Oh, totally.
0:41
You were looking at a textual landscape that is honestly, it
0:44
is muddy. Muddy is a good word for it.
0:46
We get lost in the weeds of translation, historical
0:49
distance, and, you know, centuries of debate.
0:52
Welcome to reform thinking, by the way.
0:53
Glad to be here for this. Today we are taking a deep dive
0:57
into a classic piece of biblical scholarship that actually gives
1:01
us that X-ray precision back. We are looking at Karl Friedrich
1:05
Kiel and Franz de Lich's commentary on Psalm 3.
1:09
It is a phenomenal piece of scholarship.
1:12
What we are doing today is examining how a rigorous,
1:15
unyielding look at ancient Hebrew grammar radically changes
1:20
how we read a text. Because we are not looking at
1:22
broad themes from 10,000 feet out.
1:24
No, not at all. We are looking at the molecular
1:26
structure of the words themselves, analyzing the verbs,
1:30
the suffixes and the musical notations.
1:32
And the text we are putting under the microscope is a
1:34
morning prayer. But it is not a quiet, peaceful
1:37
morning with a cup of coffee and birds chirping.
1:40
Definitely not. This is a morning prayer written
1:42
by a king who is currently running for his life from his
1:44
own son. The stakes are incredibly high.
1:47
The king is David, the son is Absalom, and it is quite
1:50
literally a life and death situation.
1:52
OK, let's unpack this. Before we even get to the words
1:55
David is praying in verse 2, we have to look at where this text
1:58
sits in the book because texts do not exist in a vacuum.
2:01
Right. Their placement in a book
2:03
matters a lot. That is a crucial starting
2:05
point. So what does Keel say about the
2:07
placement here? Well, Keel points out a
2:09
fascinating detail about the architecture of the early
2:12
Psalter. He views Psalms one and two as a
2:15
prologue to the entire collection.
2:17
A prologue, so they set the stage.
2:19
Yeah, Psalm 1 operates from an ethical standpoint.
2:23
It contrasts the righteous and the wicked, which fits right
2:26
into the Hebrew Wisdom tradition.
2:27
And then Psalm 2. Psalm 2 operates from the
2:29
standpoint of redemptive history or prophecy.
2:33
It looks that God's anointed king and the rebellion of the
2:36
nations. So you have this massive
2:38
sweeping 2 part introduction. 1 focuses on personal ethics and
2:42
the law, and the other focuses on global redemptive history and
2:46
God's sovereign decree. Spot on.
2:48
And then we hit Psalm 3 right. According to Keel, Psalm 3 is
2:51
naturally the very first morning hymn in the book, which is then
2:54
immediately followed by an evening hymn in Psalm 4.
2:57
A morning and evening prayer back-to-back.
3:00
Yes, Keel argues that a morning and evening prayer are the very
3:04
first things you would expect to find in a prayer and hymn book
3:07
designed for the covenant community.
3:09
I am going to push back on Keel here though, just thinking about
3:11
the historical situation. OK, go ahead.
3:13
You are running for your life. Night falls, The woods are dark.
3:18
Wouldn't a prayer right before trying to sleep make vastly more
3:22
psychological sense? Because the fear is higher at
3:24
night. Yeah, precisely.
3:26
Yeah. I mean, yes, if I am terrified,
3:28
I am praying at night when the danger feels closest.
3:31
Why start a prayer book with a morning prayer rather than an
3:34
evening one? You know, some older scholars
3:36
have made that very argument. They suggest Psalm 3 is actually
3:39
an evening hymn for the reasons you just mentioned.
3:42
But. Keel disagrees.
3:43
Keel rejects that idea entirely. He states that viewing Psalm 3
3:48
as an evening hymn rests on a grammatical misconception of the
3:51
Hebrew text. Oh, really?
3:53
A grammatical misconception. Yeah, which we will get into
3:57
later when we look at the specific verbs David uses
3:59
regarding waking up. But from a structural
4:02
standpoint, placing the morning hymn first establishes a daily
4:06
rhythm for the ancient believer. Thinking about it from that
4:09
structural angle, I guess starting with a morning prayer
4:12
makes a lot of sense, and you have the grand theological
4:14
prologue of Psalms 1 and 2, and then immediately the text
4:19
grounds that massive theology into the daily rhythmic life of
4:23
the individual. Morning and evening.
4:25
Right. It brings the cosmic truth of
4:26
redemptive history down to the moment you wake up and the
4:29
moment you go to sleep. It is sort of like setting the
4:32
tone for the day before stepping out the door rather than just
4:35
doing damage control at night. What's fascinating here is the
4:38
transition from the cosmic to the intensely personal.
4:42
But there is another transition occurring right at this spot in
4:45
the book. What's that?
4:46
Psalm 3 is the first text in the collection specifically arranged
4:50
for music. It has that superscription, a
4:52
Psalm of David. That brings us to a significant
4:55
discussion on decoding ancient musical terms.
4:58
Let us get into those terms. The superscription uses the
5:01
Hebrew phrase Miss Moore le David.
5:04
I know we often just translate that as a Psalm of David, but
5:07
Keel says there's a very technical distinction happening
5:09
with that word. Yes, Keel explains that Miss
5:12
Moore is a technical expression. It was likely coined by David
5:15
himself. Really.
5:17
By David. That is the thought, yeah.
5:19
It specifically signifies the music itself.
5:21
It refers to the melody, the instrumentation, and the musical
5:25
arrangement. OK, so it is the music.
5:27
What about the lyrics? Meanwhile, another Hebrew word
5:30
sure refers to the lyrics or the poetry.
5:33
That is a helpful distinction. So mismore is the arrangement
5:36
and sure is the lyric. Sheet precisely.
5:39
Keel digs into the root of the word mismore, which is the verb
5:42
zamar. Zamar right now.
5:44
Older scholars had some very different ideas about what this
5:47
root originally meant. Some argued that the root meant
5:51
to cut off or to prune vines. Wait, I have to stopping there?
5:55
How do you get from pruning a vineyard to playing a harp?
5:57
That feels like an incredible leap of logic.
5:59
It does seem like a stretch, doesn't it?
6:01
The older scholarly argument was that music involves rhythmical
6:05
division. Like cutting the time.
6:06
Yeah, you were cutting a continuous sound into pieces,
6:09
creating seesuras and individual syllables.
6:13
Or perhaps they thought it referred to the physical nipping
6:16
or plucking of the strings with the fingers.
6:19
I mean, I, I guess that sort of makes sense physically.
6:21
But Keel dismisses those ideas as entirely artificial.
6:25
He notes that the Hebrew language already had a specific
6:28
functional word for striking strings, which is niggen.
6:32
So if it is not about pruning vines or physically plucking a
6:35
string, what is Keel's explanation for zamar?
6:38
Following another prominent scholar named Huppfeld, Keel
6:41
points out that zamar is an onomatopoetic word.
6:44
Onomatopoetic. So the word sounds like the
6:47
action it describes, like a a bee's buzz or a snake's hiss.
6:51
Yes, that is the idea. Keel connects it to an Arabic
6:54
route, ZB. ZBR.
6:56
Right, and that Arabic route describes the buzzing noise of a
6:58
stylus or a Reed moving quickly across writing material.
7:01
Oh. Wow, so it is the sound of the
7:03
scratching or buzzing. From that initial buzzing sound,
7:06
the word evolved to mean making music in the widest sense.
7:10
It is not about agricultural pruning or articulated speaking.
7:14
That is fascinating. It is an indirect onomatopoeia
7:17
for making music, especially with an instrument.
7:19
So a Mizmourn is a hymn expressly designed for musical
7:23
accompaniment. I love that linguistic history,
7:26
the very word for the song, carries the buzzing, vibrating
7:30
sound of the instrument within its syllables.
7:33
It really brings the ancient world to life.
7:35
But if we are talking about musical terms in this text, we
7:39
cannot avoid the elephant in the room.
7:42
There is a mystery word that shows up three times in the
7:44
short text. I know where you're going with
7:46
this. You see it in the text, you read
7:48
it out loud and nobody really knows what to do with it.
7:50
You are referring to Salah. Salah, I am looking at the
7:54
English translations and if it is not a pause I am lost.
7:57
Does it mean play louder? It is a huge debate.
8:00
Because the traditional idea of whispering it or treating it
8:02
like a full stop often feels awkward in the middle of a
8:05
thought. What does Keel say about the
8:08
actual data we have on this word?
8:10
First, Keel looks at the sheer numbers.
8:13
Selah occurs 71 times in the Psalter and three times in the
8:17
Book of Hibakuk. So that is 74 times total in the
8:20
Old Testament. Correct.
8:22
He points out that it almost exclusively appears in psalms
8:25
inscribed with the name of David or the psalmists famous from
8:28
David's time. That is a very specific
8:31
clustering. It is furthermore, all the
8:33
Psalms with Selah, with just a few exceptions, also have the
8:36
superscription to the chief musician.
8:39
Oh, so that explicitly links the word to musical execution?
8:42
Yes, undeniably it is a musical notation.
8:45
But what does the notation instruct the musicians to do?
8:48
I feel like I have heard my entire life that Sela means to
8:51
stop and think about it. You know it is a moment of
8:54
silence. Keel vehemently rejects several
8:56
popular theories, including the pause theory.
8:58
First, he rejects the idea that it is an abbreviation for a
9:01
longer phrase instructing the singer to repeat a section.
9:04
Look at the capo in western sheet music.
9:06
Right. He notes that such abbreviations
9:08
simply lack any historical support in the Old Testament
9:11
manuscripts. OK, so it is not a repeat sign.
9:14
What about the pause? He rejects that entirely.
9:17
He says deriving it from a root meaning to be silent is
9:21
linguistically inadmissible because it is neither Hebrew nor
9:24
Aramaic in that sense. So the linguistics just don't
9:27
support a pause at all. No they do not.
9:30
Historically, the tradition of the Mishnah and several ancient
9:33
translations like the Targum, Aquila, and even Jerome rendered
9:37
it as a logical or lexical term, meaning forever or always.
9:43
But substituting the phrase forever in the middle of a
9:45
sentence completely breaks the grammar of the verse.
9:48
That is Keels main point. Well, his precise argument is
9:52
that translating it as forever converts an original musical
9:55
notation into a logical 1. Which completely misses the
9:58
point of it being a musical term.
10:00
Right. To find the true meaning, Keel
10:02
looks at the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the
10:04
Septuagint. OK, what did they do with?
10:06
It the 70 scholars who translated the Hebrew into Greek
10:08
centuries before Christ rendered Sela as dyabsalma.
10:12
Dyabsalma. What does that signify?
10:14
This Greek term indicates an interlude, especially of
10:17
stringed instruments or an intensified playing.
10:20
So the oldest translators viewed it as an instrumental interlude,
10:23
Not silence, but music, Yes. Tracing it back to the Hebrew,
10:28
Keel argues there is only one verbal stem it can be combined
10:32
with, and that is Sela. Let's break that down.
10:35
What does the root sell all actually mean in Hebrew?
10:38
It means to lift up. We see derivatives of this root
10:41
in other Hebrew words for a ladder, an ascent, or a flight
10:45
of steps. A flight of steps.
10:47
Therefore, the general meaning for sela is a musical rise.
10:51
Here's where it gets really interesting.
10:53
It is not a pause where everyone goes quiet.
10:55
It is the complete opposite. It is a musical rise.
10:58
Yes, a massive volume increase. I think of it like the moment in
11:01
a modern film score where the tension has been building
11:04
quietly and suddenly the full brass section swells up to
11:07
heighten the emotion. It is a true Hebrew Forte.
11:10
That is a highly accurate comparison.
11:12
Keel argues. The current Masoretic pointing
11:15
of the vowel sounds, which gives us the pronunciation C law,
11:17
might be a later imitation by scribes.
11:20
So they might have changed how it sounded.
11:21
Yeah, originally it might have been pronounced sela,
11:23
specifically meaning an elevation.
11:25
So it is an elevation of sound. It is not a note for the singers
11:29
to sing higher or hold a note. It is a note for the
11:31
instrumental accompaniment. It means the orchestra joins in,
11:35
the instruments reinforce the sound, or there is a massive
11:38
transition from piano to Forte. That completely changes the
11:42
reading of the text. When you hit Sela, you should
11:45
not lower your voice or take a breath of silence.
11:48
You should imagine a blast of horns and a clash of cymbals.
11:52
It adds so much drama to the reading.
11:54
And having established that massive musical intensity, we
11:57
have to ask what real world event demanded such a loud,
12:01
aggressive musical score? The superscription of the text
12:04
provides the historical anchor for this entire analysis.
12:08
It reads a Psalm of David when he fled from Absalom, his son.
12:12
So this refers to the historical events recorded in Second
12:14
Samuel, chapters 15 through 17. Correct.
12:17
David's own son has launched a massive coordinated coup.
12:20
And David has been forced to abandon the throne in Jerusalem.
12:24
He's fleeing into the wilderness with a small group of loyalists.
12:26
Right and Keel argues that the specific details in the text of
12:29
the prayer aligned perfectly with that historical event.
12:32
Like what kind of details? Well, the text mentions the
12:35
mockery of one who is rejected by God.
12:38
This aligns historically with the curses hurled at David by a
12:42
man named Shymai in Sipa, the Samuel 16.
12:45
Oh right, Shymai threw stones and yelled.
12:48
The God had handed the Kingdom over to Absalom.
12:51
Spot on. I mean totally.
12:52
And the text also mentions danger by night.
12:54
Which connects to a Hithophel right?
12:56
Yes, that aligns with the tactical counsel of a Hithophel
12:59
who advised Absalom to attack David at night while he was
13:02
weary in Second Samuel 17. And what about the sheer numbers
13:05
of enemies? The prayer mentions multitudes
13:08
of people, which aligns with the massive numbers of Israelites
13:11
who defected to Absalom's side during the rebellion.
13:14
The context is incredibly specific to that moment in time.
13:17
It really is. But that raises A crucial
13:19
question for you, the listener, to consider.
13:22
If this entire crisis is centrally about Absalom, why is
13:26
Adflum's name completely missing from the actual text of the
13:29
prayer? It is a glaring omission.
13:31
Yeah, David mentions the enemies, the multitudes, the
13:34
oppressors, but he never names the son who is leading them.
13:37
Keel addresses that accents by pointing to the emotional tone
13:40
of Ten Samuel 18 when David eventually receives word of
13:44
Absalom's death. That is a heavy chapter.
13:46
Even after all the treason, David experiences intense,
13:49
paralyzing grief. He cries out.
13:52
Oh, my son Absalom. My son, my son Absalom.
13:55
So naming him in the prayer might have simply been too
13:59
painful for a grieving father. Yes, the personal agony of a
14:02
father betrayed by his own flesh and blood supersedes the
14:06
political reality of the coup. And it was not just a political
14:09
coup, it was a severe theological crisis.
14:12
How do you mean? Well, the enemies are mocking
14:14
him. They're saying there is no help
14:16
for him in God. We have to ask why that mockery
14:19
was so plausible to the general public.
14:22
Why would the people of Israel so readily believe that God had
14:24
abandoned their anointed king? Because of David's own public
14:28
history, Keel brings up the fact that David had plunged himself
14:31
into a deep abyss of wretchedness through his
14:34
adultery with Bathsheba. And the subsequent murder of her
14:37
husband Uriah. Right.
14:39
This catastrophic moral failure happened just when David had
14:43
reached the absolute pinnacle of his worldly strength.
14:46
So the rebellion of Absalom was recognized as a consequence of
14:49
that. Yes, it was part of the series
14:51
of dire calamities that the prophet Nathan told David would
14:54
come upon his house because of that specific sin.
14:57
So when the enemies yelled at, God has abandoned him.
14:59
David's own conscience probably agreed with him at first.
15:03
He had committed massive public sins.
15:05
He really had. He had given his political
15:07
enemies the ultimate theological ammunition to claim that God had
15:12
permanently rejected him. They look at the disaster of his
15:14
life, they see him running barefoot out of the capital
15:17
city, and they conclude that the covenant is broken.
15:20
It is a devastating place to be. Plausible reasons we're not
15:23
wanting for words that gave up his cause is lost.
15:27
The visible evidence all pointed to divine abandonment.
15:30
Which brings us directly into the first trophy, verses 2 and
15:33
three, and what Keel calls the Grammar of Despair.
15:37
Yes, let us look at how that despair is constructed in the
15:39
Hebrew. David starts by crying out Jave,
15:42
how many are my oppressors? Many rise up against me, many
15:46
say of my soul. There is no help for him in God.
15:48
And then we get our first Sayla. The orchestra blasts.
15:52
Notice the repetition of the word many.
15:54
The predicate is placed at the forefront of the sentence for
15:57
emphasis. David is completely overwhelmed
16:00
by the sheer volume of the opposition.
16:02
But the most devastating part of their attack is what they're
16:06
saying about his soul, about his personal, covenantal
16:09
relationship to God. They claim he is cut off and the
16:13
Hebrew word used for help or salvation here is fascinating.
16:16
Let's talk about that word. The word in the text is
16:19
Yeshuata. It is an intensive form of the
16:22
standard Hebrew word for salvation, which is Yeshua.
16:25
OK, Yeshuata instead of Yeshua. What does that change?
16:28
Keel notes that there is a debate among grammarians about
16:31
the suffix attached to this word.
16:33
Viata Part. Mostly the final ah.
16:35
Some view it as a double feminine termination, but Keel,
16:38
aligning with Hupfeld, argues it features an original accusative
16:41
AH of direction. An accusative AH of direction.
16:46
Let us break that down. For someone who does not read
16:47
Hebrew. Sure.
16:48
What is that mechanical grammar rule actually mean for the
16:51
feeling of the sentence? It implies A definitive movement
16:55
or trajectory. The AH suffix gives a
16:58
directional force to the noun. So it is not a static concept.
17:01
Right. The enemies are not just stating
17:03
a static present fact about his lack of military help, they are
17:06
pronouncing a final directional judgement on his inmost life.
17:11
That is heavy. God is the ground of all help,
17:14
and to have no more help in Him is equivalent to being
17:17
completely rooted out of favor with God.
17:20
They are declaring His trajectory is completely severed
17:22
from the divine presence. I think of this like being
17:25
mathematically plotted on a graph.
17:27
The enemies are not just plotting a single dot showing
17:29
where David is right now, they are drawing a heavy arrow
17:32
pointing straight down. That is a great visual.
17:34
They are pronouncing a final judgement on his soul, claiming
17:37
his relationship with God is permanently, decisively over.
17:41
It is like a modern cancel culture moment, but with eternal
17:45
stakes. And because of the Bathsheba
17:47
incident, the logic seems flawless to the crowd.
17:50
If you are listening to this right now and you have ever felt
17:53
completely outnumbered or had people use your past failures to
17:57
declare that your future is worthless, this is the
18:00
psychological space David is inhabiting.
18:02
This raises an important question regarding how a
18:04
believer reacts when both open enemies and disconcerted friends
18:08
agree that their cause is entirely lost.
18:11
Because David is facing an overwhelming consensus of doom.
18:15
The visible circumstances, running for his life, losing his
18:19
throne, hearing the curses, they all heavily validate the enemy's
18:23
theological claim. That brings us to verses four
18:25
and five and how David mentally survives that next minute.
18:29
How does he counter this visible reality?
18:31
Well, he says, but thou, O Javi, art a shield for me, my glory
18:35
and the lifter up of my head. I cried unto Javi with my voice,
18:38
and he answered me from his holy hill.
18:40
And then another sailor. Another massive orchestral
18:43
swell. This is where David's posture
18:45
completely shifts. He is physically stripped of his
18:47
Kingdom, his crown and His glory.
18:49
But he declares God is his shield.
18:51
Yes, using the Hebrew word Megan and the lifter of his head, Keel
18:56
points out a very specific preposition used alongside the
19:00
word shield here. What preposition is that?
19:02
It is BOD. It translates to behind and
19:06
before signifying total coverage total.
19:08
Coverage. I love that.
19:10
Think about David walking up the Mount of Olives.
19:12
We know from the historical account in Second Samuel 15 that
19:16
he was weeping. His head was covered in shame.
19:19
And he was walking barefoot. His physical posture is complete
19:22
humiliation. Yet in that exact moment, he
19:25
calls God the lifter of his head.
19:27
He cannot physically lift his head in front of the people
19:30
because of his shame, but spiritually God is lifting it
19:33
for him. It is a beautiful contrast.
19:35
And the shield this begin with the begin preposition.
19:39
It is not just a piece of metal you hold in front of.
19:41
You No, it is not a directional defense against a single arrow
19:43
coming from the front. It is a 360° force field.
19:46
It covers him behind and before. It is like something out of
19:50
science fiction. The enemy is everywhere, but the
19:52
protection is absolute. And Keel notes that the grammar
19:55
of verse 5 reinforces this absolute confidence.
19:59
The text reads. I cried unto Jave, and he
20:02
answered me. What does the grammar tell us
20:04
there? Keel argues that the Hebrew verb
20:06
for answered here is not just recording a chronological
20:09
historical fact. So is not David saying I prayed
20:12
yesterday and God sent an answer yesterday?
20:15
Then what is the verb doing if it is not just recounting
20:19
history? Wait, sorry.
20:20
I mean, that is precisely what it is not doing.
20:22
Right, So what is it doing? It is expressing an absolute
20:25
confidence in a future answer based on past faithfulness.
20:29
Oh, I see. The grammar does not require a
20:31
purely historical sequence. It is the assurance that when he
20:34
prays, the answer is already a reality.
20:37
And the answer comes from a very specific place, His Holy hill.
20:41
This spatial dynamic is so critical to understand.
20:44
David had to leave Jerusalem. He had to leave the physical ark
20:47
of the covenant behind. He actually told the priest to
20:50
take the ark back into the city, saying if I find favor in the
20:53
eyes of the Lord, he will bring me back.
20:55
So David is physically separated from the resting place of the
20:59
divine Presence. Yes, the hostile force of
21:02
Absalom's army stands between David and the Ark of the
21:05
Covenant. But Keel makes a brilliant
21:07
observation here. He notes that prayer forces its
21:09
way to the Heavenly Cherubim throne.
21:12
Even from the wilderness. David may be physically cut off
21:15
from the earthly sanctuary in Zion, but there is no spatial
21:18
barrier between God and the believer.
21:20
The earthly ark is left behind, but the heavenly reality it
21:24
represents is immediately accessible.
21:26
The answer comes from the true Holy Hill.
21:29
That spatial freedom, the idea that you cannot be
21:31
geographically exiled from God's presence, leads directly to the
21:35
most physical bodily action in the entire text.
21:38
After declaring this theological confidence, what does David
21:42
actually do? He goes to sleep versus 6 and
21:45
seven say I laid me down and slept.
21:47
I awakened for Java sustaineth me.
21:50
I will not be afraid of 10 thousands of the people who have
21:52
set themselves against me roundabout.
21:54
The physiological response to sheer terror is usually
21:56
insomnia. Your adrenaline is pumping, your
21:59
heart is racing, you are hyper vigilant to every snapping twig.
22:03
But David, surrounded by 10s of thousands of people trying to
22:06
kill him, just lies down and goes to sleep.
22:09
It is an act of sheer defiance. Heel breaks down the specific
22:14
Hebrew grammar of this sequence, specifically the word Why Shana?
22:17
Why Shana? Which translates to and thus I
22:20
fell asleep. Once again we see the AH of
22:23
direction attached to a verb. We saw that earlier with the
22:26
word for salvation, the directional AH, that the enemies
22:29
used to say he was going down. Yes, here, attached to the first
22:33
person verb, the awe of direction gives the sequence a
22:36
subjective intensity. So it is an intense action.
22:39
It is not a passive falling unconscious due to exhaustion.
22:42
It is an active intentional yielding to sleep.
22:45
Keel translates it, and thus I then fell asleep.
22:49
It is a choice. It is a retrospective glance at
22:51
the past night. Waking up in health and safety
22:54
is the undeniable proof that Javed is actively supporting
22:57
him. The text says Java of his
22:59
sustaineth me. God's hand is literally acting
23:02
as David's pillow. Because that hand is beneath his
23:05
head, he is inaccessible to the myriads of troops outside.
23:08
But there's a structural anomaly here that we have to point out.
23:10
You are looking at the missing sela.
23:12
Right. We had a sailor after verse 3.
23:15
The orchestra played loud. We had a sailor after verse 5
23:19
when God answered from the holy hill.
23:20
But here at the end of verse 7, after David wakes up sustained
23:24
by God, there is nothing. The orchestra is quiet.
23:28
Keel's observation on this submission is brilliant.
23:31
If the instrument struck up boldly and suddenly here, if
23:34
there was a loud musical blast, it would ruin the tone of this
23:38
trophy. It would shatter the peace of
23:40
the Sleeping King. Spot on Keel states that this
23:43
section is not a triumphant shout.
23:45
The phrase I will not be afraid is a quiet, meek expression of
23:49
calm trust. A loud Forte would clash with
23:52
the reality of a man resting in the quiet assurance of God's
23:55
protection. Furthermore, the crisis is not
23:58
over. The troops are still out there.
24:00
A bold, conclusive musical swell would imply the battle is
24:03
finished, but David still has to offer a cry for help.
24:06
Waking up in peace does not mean the threat has vanished.
24:10
Action is still required, right? Verse 8 says, Arise, O Jaffe,
24:14
help me, O my God, for thou smitest all mine enemies on the
24:17
cheek. Thou break us the teeth of the
24:19
ungodly. This trophy opens with a bold
24:22
command. Arise or kuma in Hebrew.
24:26
Keel traces this specific cry back to the mouth of Moses in
24:29
Numbers 10. OK, what is the context in
24:32
numbers? Whenever the Ark of the Covenant
24:34
set out on the March in the wilderness, Moses would shout,
24:37
Arise, O Lord, and let your enemies be scattered.
24:40
So David is linking his current wilderness experience to the
24:43
historical wilderness experience of Israel.
24:46
He is calling on the God of the Exodus to take the field.
24:48
And Keel notes a very specific pronunciation detail.
24:51
Here the word kuma is accented as milra.
24:55
Milra. Meaning the accent is placed on
24:57
the final syllable. Why does the accent matter?
24:59
Why do we care where the emphasis falls on an ancient
25:01
Hebrew word? Because the the next word in the
25:03
text begins with a guttural letter.
25:05
A guttural letter requires A harsher sound from the back of
25:08
the throat. Right, by accenting the final
25:10
syllable of kuma, the final ah sound is sharply cut off from
25:14
the guttural initial of the following word.
25:16
It creates a hard break. This separation ensures a clear,
25:19
precise articulation of the cry for help.
25:22
It forces the speaker's mouth to pronounce it as a sharp,
25:25
distinct battle cry. God has said to arise when he
25:29
takes a decisive part in the events of this world.
25:32
And the imagery David uses for God taking action is violently
25:35
graphic. Thou smitest all mine enemies on
25:38
the cheek. Thou breakest the teeth of the
25:40
ungodly. Breaking teeth is an intense
25:43
visual. How does Keel interpret this
25:45
imagery? Keel explains that the enemies
25:47
are being conceptualized as biting monsters.
25:50
They are wild beasts looking to devour David.
25:53
So striking the cheek or the jawbone is not just an insult,
25:56
like slapping someone's face in a duel.
25:57
No, it is a functional strike. Striking the jaw renders the
26:00
monster harmless. It breaks the teeth that are
26:03
meant to tear him apart. David is appealing to previous
26:06
experience here. He is saying that an ignominious
26:09
end has always come upon the ungodly who rise up against
26:12
God's order. It is a plea for God to act
26:15
consistently with His nature. If we connect this to the bigger
26:18
picture, it changes how we view the final verse.
26:21
Verse 9 says To Jave belong to salvation.
26:24
Upon thy people be thy blessing. And we get our final sela, our
26:27
final orchestral swell. Keel defines the root of
26:30
salvation here, which is Yeshua, by looking at its Arabic cognate
26:34
Wasya. Which means to be wide or ample.
26:37
He defines salvation as breath. Breath like a wide open space,
26:41
Yes. Freedom of motion, removal of
26:44
all straightness and oppression, Unclouded prosperity at God's
26:47
free disposal. Salvation is not just survival.
26:50
It is absolute freedom from confinement, and David declares
26:54
that this complete freedom belongs exclusively to Jave.
26:58
So what does this all mean? Look at the climax of this text.
27:00
The final line is upon thy people, be thy blessing.
27:03
We have to pause and feel the shock of this statement.
27:06
It is incredibly unexpected. David is running from 10s of
27:09
thousands of Israelites. His own subjects have rebelled
27:12
against him. They want him dead.
27:13
They are the biting monsters he just asked God to break the
27:16
teeth of. And his concluding thought is to
27:18
pray for a blessing to fall upon them.
27:20
It is an incredible display of a King's heart.
27:23
Instead of cursing his faithless people, he implores a blessing
27:27
upon those who have been piteously LED astray and
27:30
deceived by Absalom. Keel makes a striking comparison
27:33
here. Doesn't.
27:34
He he does. He compares this moment to
27:36
Christ on the cross, praying Father, forgive them.
27:39
It shows the King's heart for his rebellious subjects.
27:42
Even in his deepest distress as the true King, he cannot think
27:46
of himself before God without also connecting himself with his
27:49
people. He does not want their
27:51
destruction, He wants their deliverance from the deception
27:54
they are under. The one concluding word of the
27:56
Psalm casts a bright light into the very depths of his soul.
28:00
It is the absolute peak expression of faith.
28:03
He leaves the judgement of the leaders to God, the breaking of
28:06
the teeth, but pleads for grace for the masses.
28:09
It is a highly theological response to trauma.
28:12
It really is. To briefly recap what we have
28:15
covered today. Looking at the ancient grammar
28:17
really brings this morning prayer to life.
28:19
From the directional AH that shows the enemy is trying to
28:22
cancel his eternal trajectory. To the realization that Selah is
28:25
not a quiet pause, but a massive, brassy musical rise.
28:30
And the subjective intensity of lying down and sleeping as an
28:33
act of defiance. We see a king who is physically
28:36
stripped of everything, relying on a 360° force field of divine
28:41
protection. And we see that rigorous textual
28:43
study does not drain the emotion out of the text, it actually
28:48
amplifies it. Knowing the pronunciation of
28:50
Kuma or the Onamata poetic roots of zamar helps us hear the text
28:55
the way the original audience heard it.
28:56
It clears up the Muddy Waters and gives us that X-ray
28:59
precision back. I want to leave you, the
29:02
listener, with a final thought to Mull over building on the
29:05
source material we discussed today.
29:06
It is a challenging thought. We looked at how David prayed
29:10
for the very people trying to destroy him.
29:12
When you find yourself surrounded by opposition or
29:14
people acting maliciously against you, what would it look
29:17
like to genuinely pray for a blessing to fall upon them,
29:20
trusting that your safety and vindication belong entirely to a
29:23
sovereign God? Thank you for joining this deep
29:26
dive on Reformed thinking.