1
THE PSALMS AND WISDOM LITERATURE
Mints International Seminary
Dr. Donald F. Ritsman, D.Min.
STUDENT MANUAL
14401 Old Cutler Rd Miami, FL 33158 786.573.7001 www.mints.edu
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LESSONS
One: Hebrew Poetic Literature Pages 3-22
Two: The Psalter: Its Origin and Composition Pages 23-46
Three: The Psalter: Its Theology Pages 47-72
Four: The Song of Songs and Lamentation Pages 73-102
Five: Hebrew Wisdom Literature Pages 103-121
Six: The Book of Job Pages 122-147
Seven: The Book of Proverbs Pages 148-174
Eight: The Book of Ecclesiastes Pages 175-203
Lesson One:
Hebrew Poetic Literature
CHARACTERISTICS OF HEBREW POETRY
James Kugel, in his book, The Idea of Biblical Poetry, denies that there is any sharp distinction to be made between poetry and prose in the Hebrew Bible, he prefers rather to speak of “elevated prose” rather than poetry. Few scholars, however, accept his conclusion that it is not possible to recognize a form of Hebrew literature that may be classified as “poetry” in distinction from “prose.”
One of Kugel’s reasons for denying a true distinction between prose and poetry is the fact that Hebrew has no word for poetry. In response to this Francis Landy asserts that this lack of the actual word “poetry” is not because the Hebrews had no concept of poetry, they simply used a variety of words to describe what we classify as “poetry.” As Robert Alter points out, the very way a portion of biblical text is introduced may indicate that something other than prose is about to follow. For instance, in Exodus 15:1 we read, “Then Moses and the Israelites sang this song to the Lord.” This leads us to expect that what follows will be different from the normal prose speech. In fact, the word, “song,” in Hebrew can refer to a wide range of poetic forms, ranging from the Psalmist’s prayer (Psl. 42:9) to the babblings of a fool (Eccl. 7:5.)[1] To name just a few other such passages, one may take note of the prophet Habakkuk’s directions, given at the conclusion of his prophecy (Hab. 3:19d), or King Hezekiah’s hope that his “writing” (Isa. 38:9) would be sung with stringed instruments in the temple of the Lord (Isa. 38:20.)
What then are some of the major differences scholars find between Hebrew prose and poetry? First, there is a difference in the sense of time in prose and poetry. Prose generally assumes sequential time. Poetry, on the other hand, has an air of timelessness, being more concerned with recurrent patterns. A notable exception would be those psalms that recount the history of God’s dealings with His covenant people, such as Psalms 78, 105, and 106. Second, in prose, the distinction between the writer, the subject matter, and the reader are usually clearly preserved. In poetry, the writer’s feelings and sensations are expressed in a way that seeks to draw the reader in to share them. Third, prose presents the world through relationships of time and space. Poetry tends to present the world through relationships of likeness or difference.[2]
Before considering the unique characteristics of Hebrew poetry, it would be well to make a few important observations. As R.K. Harrison points out, “in the matter of Hebrew poetic compositions, there are fundamental differences between what [Middle Easterners] understood by poetry and that which is commonly denoted by that term in the Western world.” Most significant, Hebrew poetry does not make use of rhyme, a feature that is very prevalent in Western poetry. Stated another way, whereas in Western poetry the units of speech are based upon sounds (i.e.; rhyming lines,) in Hebrew poetry the units were formulated in terms of concepts or ideas (i.e.; successive lines communicating parallel or balanced thoughts.) In Harrison’s words, “The fact that the phenomenon of parallelism is so consistent an element in Hebrew poetry will be sufficient to indicate the importance to the ancient Semites of the balance of thought or logical rhythms as distinct from the concept of meter in many modern languages, which involves a balance of sound or phonic rhythm. Every other stylistic or rhetorical feature of Hebrew poetry … must … be regarded as being consistently subordinate to the parallel expression of thoughts [or, ideas.]”[3] A second consideration we must bear in mind is the didactic purpose of all Hebrew poetry. The express purpose of the poetic literature of the Old Testament is to either elicit praise to God offered up by the worshiper or to deepen the worshiper’s relationship with the Lord his God. Referring to David and his circle—including, beside himself, Solomon and those men of the Levite families who took part in the composition of the Psalms, the nineteenth century biblical scholar, Patrick Fairbairn, writes,
The purpose of this poetic literature was to infuse life and vigor into the Mosaic institutions [i.e.; the temple worship with all of its symbolic ritual,] promoting the devotion and the righteousness those institutions were designed to produce. Their calling was to be used by the Holy Spirit as the medium of providing the people of God with didactic and devotional poetry.
As Fairbairn expresses it, “Popular and sacred song, chanted first upon the lyre of the son of Jesse, and afterward continued by a band of like-minded companions, breathed forth in lofty strains the spiritual essence of the Mosaic rituals.” By consecrating these literary productions to the interest of religion, and even associating them with the temple worship (as, for instance, that group of Psalms classified as The Songs of Ascents,) the believing Israelite was supplied with forms of thought and feeling suited to all the moods of his soul. The inspired Psalms thus provided the worshipers with the means by which to guide and express their own personal and corporate devotion to the Lord their God.[4]
We are now prepared to consider the unique characteristics of Hebrew poetry, the first of which, as indicated above, is Parallelism. Parallelism may be defined as “the practice of balancing one thought or phrase by a corresponding thought or phrase containing approximately the same number of words, or at least a correspondence in ideas.”[5] As previously pointed out by Harrison, parallelism is the chief characteristic of biblical poetry, all other literary devices being subservient to it. Once again, the reason for this is to be found in the purpose of biblical poetry. In the words of E.J. Young,
… [parallelism] lends a peculiar intensity of force and beauty to the poetry of the Old Testament and admirably serves as a vehicle for the communication of truth. In other words, it is a true handmaid [or, servant] of didactic poetry, for it serves to impress upon the mind the content of the poetry.[6]
Such a reiterative device as parallelism “is a remarkable adjunct [or, assistant] to didactic poetry, for it enables the mind to absorb the content of the composition through insistent emphasis upon the basic concepts enshrined in the work. At the same time, the repetition is so amenable to skillful literary variation that the underlying theme never becomes commonplace or boring.”[7]
The understanding that parallelism is the chief feature of Hebrew poetry is an important insight for the proper exposition of the biblical poetic literature. As F.F. Bruce notes, due appreciation for the role of parallelism will prevent the expositor from thinking that the biblical writer is making two separate statements, when he is actually reiterating and expanding upon the same basic theme.[8] Parallelism serves to emphasize the importance of the subject under consideration, as well as bringing out the nuances of that subject.
Although parallelism, so characteristic of Hebrew poetry, had been long observed, the first modern systematic study was made by Robert Lowth, Professor of Poetry at Oxford University and later Bishop of London. His epochal work, Academic Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews, was first published in Latin in 1753.[9] Lowth indentified three forms of parallelism. The first of which he labeled “Synonymous Parallelism.” In this form of parallelism the same idea that is expressed in the first line is repeated in the second, only in a different way. One example of synonymous parallelism is Psalm 49:1,
Hear this, all you peoples,
Listen, all who live in this world.
The second form of parallelism identified by Lowth was what he called, “Antithetic Parallelism.” In this type of parallelism what is said in the second line contrasts in some way with what had previously been said in the first line. This type of parallelism is especially prominent in the Book of Proverbs, but one example from the Psalter is found in Psalm 30:5,
… his anger lasts for a moment,
but his favor lasts for a lifetime;
weeping may remain for a night,
but rejoicing comes in the morning.
The third form of parallelism Lowth classified as “Synthetic Parallelism.” In this category of parallelism the second member of the couplet completes the thought of the first. As an example, we may refer back to Psalm 30, where verse 5 completes the thought introduced in verse 4,
Sing to the Lord, you saints of his,
Praise his holy name,
5for his anger lasts for a moment,
but his favor lasts for a lifetime;
weeping may remain for a night,
but rejoicing comes in the morning.
But, as other scholars have pointed out, in this third category of parallelism Lowth included all those couplets in which the second line either did not repeat the first or contrast with the first. In a sense, this third category became a “catch all” for whatever piece of Hebrew poetry did not conform to either of the first two categories. As E.C. Lucas notes, many scholars have accepted Lowth’s basic analysis of Hebrew poetry with its predominant emphasis on parallelism, but criticize his third category as being far too broad, and hence, unsatisfactory.[10] The reason Lowth wound up with a third category of parallelism that is far too inclusive to be meaningful is due to the fact that his analysis of Hebrew poetry was too limited, concentrating on the semantic aspect of the literature to the exclusion of the syntactic. We must consider the poetic literature not only in terms of semantic parallelism, but also in terms of syntactic parallelism. Syntactic parallelism, dealing with syntax, has to do with the structure of the sentences; semantic parallelism, dealing with semantics, has to do with the meaning of the sentences. Syntactic parallelisms are more difficult to represent in English (or any other language into which the original Hebrew is translated) because they pertain to the very structure of the Hebrew language, especially its word order. If the original Hebrew word order were directly converted into English the translation would be difficult or cumbersome, or even at times unclear as to its meaning. Semantic parallelism, dealing with the meaning of the poetic sentences, is far more easily transferred from the Hebrew original into the receptor language.
Building upon Lowth’s work, A. Berlin expanded it by taking into account the matter of syntactical parallelism. Berlin maintains that parallelism operates on many different levels, and consequently, is an even more pervasive and dominant element in Hebrew poetry than would be indicated by Lowth’s original analysis. In her book, The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism, she identifies the following forms of parallelism. First, she lists what she calls, “Grammatical Parallelisms.” She subdivides this category into two parts: 1) morphological and 2) syntactical. Morphological parallelisms can be formed by replacing one word with another that serves the same function, for example, a noun may be replaced by a pronoun (as in Psalm 33:8,) a feminine word may be replaced by a masculine one, or vice versa (as in Psalm 51:17,) or one verb form may be replaced by another (as in Psalm 29:10):
Let all the earth fear the Lord,
Let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. (Psl. 33:8)
The sacrifice acceptable to God is a broken (feminine) spirit,
A broken (masculine) and contrite heart O God, you will not despise. (Psl. 51:17)
The Lord sits (Heb. Perfect tense) enthroned over the flood,
The Lord sits (Heb. Imperfect tense) enthroned as king forever.
(Psl. 29:10)
Syntactical parallelisms can be formed by employing different linguistic forms but causing them to function in the same way, for example, a verbal clause may be replaced by a noun (as in Psalm 34:1,) the mood of a verb may be changed (as in Psalm 6:5,) or the subject of one line may become the object in the next (as in Psalm 2:7):
I will bless the Lord at all times,
His praise shall continually be in my mouth. (Psl. 34:1)
For in death there is no remembrance of you, (a statement clause)
In Sheol who can give you praise? (a question clause) (Psl. 6:5)
You (subject) are my son;
Today I have begotten you (object). (Psalm 2:7)
In addition to “Grammatical Parallelisms,” Berlin also identifies what she calls “Lexical Parallelisms.” This category of parallelism features the use of word pairs, such as man/woman, earth/heaven, loyalty/truth, etc. Psalm 115:16 is one example from this category, in which not one, but two, word pairs occur:
The heavens are the Lord’s heavens,
But the earth he has given to the children of men.
Next Berlin speaks of “Semantic Parallelisms.” In this category the second line of the couplet is a progression of the thought introduced in the first line. This category is very similar to what Lowth labeled as “Synthetic Parallelism,” an example of which is Psalm 30:4-5, referenced above.