Verses 1-11
II. BOOK 2: CHS. 42-72
In Book 1, all the psalms except 1, 2, 10, and 33 claimed David as their writer. It is likely that he wrote these four as well, even though they do not bear his name (cf. Acts 4:25). In Book 2, the titles identify David as the writer of 18 psalms (Psalms 51-65, 68-70). He may also have written those bearing the notation, "of the sons of Korah" (Psalms 42, 44-49). The sons of Korah (cf. Numbers 26:10-11) were distinguished musicians (1 Chronicles 6:31-48). Korah was a great-grandson of Levi who rebelled against Moses’ leadership (Numbers 16:1-2). Some scholars believe David wrote these psalms for the sons of Korah to perform. Others believe the sons of Korah composed them. There is great similarity between the content of these psalms and the ones David wrote. Asaph wrote Psalms 50, and Solomon composed Psalms 72. Psalms 43, 66, 67, , 71 are anonymous.
The name "Elohim" occurs 164 times in this section of the Psalms, and the name "Yahweh" ("LORD") appears only 30 times. [Note: Merrill, "Psalms," p. 428.] Thus one might think of this book as "the book of Elohim."
Some ancient Hebrew manuscripts united Psalms 42, 43 as one. This is understandable since the same refrain occurs in both of them (cf. Psalms 42:5; Psalms 42:11; Psalms 43:5). Psalms 42 expresses the writer’s yearning for God. [Note: For the meaning of Maskil, see my note on Psalms 32.] It consists of two stanzas, each of which ends with the same refrain. Both psalms are individual laments.
The superscription identifies the sons of Korah as the writers (or recipients) of this psalm.
"Korah, Asaph, Heman, and Ethan are all associated with the service and music of the sanctuary in David’s reign. During Ezra and Nehemiah’s time (fifth century B.C.), the temple singers were still called the ’sons of Asaph.’ In view of the long and continued service of these temple servants, we cannot be absolutely sure when these psalms were composed, but whether they were written in the time of David or as late as Ezra, they are still Davidic associates, and that seems to reinforce the Davidic nature of these collections." [Note: Bullock, p. 63.]
Be the first to react on this!
