Psalm 128

Structurally, Psalm 128 has two sections: vv. 1–4 and vv. 5–6. The first 4 verses cohere as a result of the repetition (i.e., an inclusio) in v. 1 and v. 4, as shown below:


1 Blessed is everyone who fears the LORD, who walks in his ways!
2 You shall eat the fruit of the labor of your hands;
you shall be blessed, and it shall be well with you.
3 Your wife will be like a fruitful vine within your house;
your children will be like olive shoots around your table.
4 Behold, thus shall the man be blessed who fears the LORD. (ESV)

I did not highlight the term “blessed” in these two verses because we are dealing with two different words. The first (אַשְׁרֵי) is the same form used in Psalm 127:5 (“Blessed is the man …”) among other places in the Psalter (such as Pss. 1:1; 2:12). It is used here in Psalm 128:2, as well, in the phrase “you shall be blessed.” These verses imply a tangible happiness (or satisfaction) for the one who fears the Lord. Likewise, the psalmist describes the fear of the Lord tangibly as walking in the ways of Yhwh. Just as the one who fears the Lord—manifested by following his word—is blessed, so the reader is again invited to relate this to the opening two psalms. In Psalm 1, the one who mediates upon the teachings of the Lord is blessed; in Psalm 2, kings are exhorted to worship Yhwh “in fear” (v. 11), and blessing is found for those who take refuge in the Son. Moreover, the tangible evidences of this blessing in Psalm 128 (eating the fruit of the land as a result of work, a fruitful wife, prospering children) set this hope within the context of Genesis 1–3. These blessings show a virtual reversal of the curses of Genesis 3 within the context of the original creation blessing and mandate to “be fruitful and fill the land” (Gen 1:28).

The second term for blessing (יְבֹרַךְ) refers to blessing that is bestowed upon the one who fears the Lord. The presence of this term here prepares the reader for the second section of the psalm (vv. 5, 6), where such blessing is spoken over the individual. It thus links the physical blessings of vv. 2, 3 with the act of blessing done by Yhwh (v. 5, see below). This ensures that the source of this blessing is not missed.

4 Behold, thus shall the man be blessed who fears the LORD.
5 The LORD bless you from Zion!
May you see the prosperity of Jerusalem all the days of your life!
6 May you see your children’s children!
Peace be upon Israel! (ESV)

The promise of blessing upon the one who fears Yhwh in v. 4 has become the request for blessing upon the one over whom this blessing is spoken in v. 5. This request for blessing in v. 5 is echoed later in Psalm 134:3 verbatim.

Mt of Olives 016

Throughout the Songs of Ascents, there have been a number of connections with the Priestly Blessing of Numbers 6, and that trend continues in Psalm 128. Just as the priests were commanded to “bless” (using the latter term) the people of Israel, so the writer of Psalm 128 speaks with confidence of Yhwh’s blessing on those who fear Yhwh (v. 4) and also speaks a blessing upon the reader(s) (v. 5). As such, Psalm 128 acts as a rehearsal of the Priestly Blessing (in much the same way was Psalm 134 will also) but carefully places the origin of that blessing from Zion. The phrase, “peace upon Israel,” both enhances the connection to the Priestly Blessing and brings coherence within the Songs of Ascents as it echoes Psalm 125:5.

One of (if not the) central point of the psalm is to show that the blessing of one who fears Yhwh (vv. 1–4) manifests itself within the promise of a peaceful Zion/Jerusalem/Israel (vv. 5–6). As such, within the context of the Songs of Ascents and the Psalter, the blessing comes as part of the eschatological Messianic kingdom, which will continue to be described in the rest of the Songs of Ascents (see especially Psalm 132).

Psalm 127

Psalm 127 is the only Song of Ascents attributed to Solomon. As such, it invites the reader to interpret the psalm in relationship to Solomon, the son of David, the one with whom Yhwh has made a covenant. As Psalm 132 makes clear, the Songs of Ascents are concerned with the welfare of the land, people, nation within the context of the promises made to David, and in the context of the Psalter (e.g. Psalm 72) and the Old Testament (e.g. 1 Kings). Here, Solomon complements David in portraying the messianic hope of the writers of the Hebrew Bible. As such, when Solomon speaks of the house, city, and sons, the Solomonic context is important.

Megiddo 009

Like other Songs of Ascents that have been discussed, the author of Psalm 127 uses varying degrees of repetition and parallelism to highlight the theme of his song. Consider the repetition of the first two lines:

Unless the LORD builds the house, those who build it labor in vain.
Unless the LORD watches over the city, the watchman stays awake in vain.

Verse 1 demonstrates not only repetition of vocabulary (“if Yhwh does not” and “in vain”) but also repetition of grammatical structures. Even though he shifts from “builds the house” to “watches over the city,” the poet still uses the same verbal forms complemented with a direct object. Similarly in the second half of both lines, the term for “in vain”—which is placed first in the Hebrew text—is followed by the same verbal tense and a participle. As such, v. 1 serves as a great example of the way the psalmists employ different types of poetic parallelism. But the important interpretive question is why the parallelism is used.

On the one hand, the repetition of vocabulary highlights an important element, which is the vanity of being part of a house or city that Yhwh has not had a part in building. Interpreted in light of the author, Solomon, the theological importance of this strategy comes clearly to bear, namely that the building of David’s house by any other means than with Yhwh’s help is useless.

On the other hand, the author also focuses on the one who builds and watches in vain. Even well-meaning efforts to build a house and watch a city are done in vain if done without the presence and power of the Lord. Yet, by bringing attention to those who build and watch, even though with vanity, the author prepares the reader for the next verses, which begin by returning to the same term “in vain.” As such, v. 2 demonstrates clearly what it means to live in this house in vain.

It is in vain that you rise up early and go late to rest,
eating the bread of anxious toil;
for he gives to his beloved sleep.

Without the security of a house that Yhwh builds and a city that he oversees, Yhwh’s beloved is left with nothing but anxiety. But in contrast to the anxious toil of the one who has no recourse to Yhwh, Yhwh’s “beloved” sleeps well and with purpose. Yet, the hope of the beloved one is provided by Yhwh, the one who builds and protects the house. This is similar to the hope that David expresses in Psalms 3 and 4. Moreover, it is also similar to the hope of the Priestly Blessing that is echoed in v. 1 with the phrase “watch over” (literally, “keep,” as in “Yhwh bless you and keep you”). So again, Numbers 6 is being expounded upon within the context of the Davidic household. Recognizing the significance of Solomonic authorship and its impact on the theological interpretation of the psalm makes the difficult task of reconciling the rest of the psalm with its first two verses slightly easier.

The psalms transitions in v. 3 with “behold,” which is used several other times in the Songs of Ascents (121:4; 123:2; 128:4; 132:6). In each case, this small element intends to draw the attention of the reader. In this case, it also functions as a transitioning element to a new topic, namely the sons that populate the household. The importance and blessing of sons will be painted in several images.

Beginning in v. 3, leveraging poetic parallelism, the writer turns to the description of “sons” or in parallel “fruit of the womb” as “a heritage from the Lord” and “a reward.” The first image is that of an inheritance (or heritage), which is used often in the OT to describe the land that Yhwh gives to Israel. As such, children are something that are deeded over to the parents by Yhwh himself.

But at the same time, they are described as a “reward,” which is used of Abraham (Gn 15:1) and in the explanation by Leah of the name for Issachar (Gn 30:18). On the one hand, the term can refer to a payment or wage that is earned as a servant (Gn 30:28) or soldier (Ezek 29:18); on the other hand, the term insinuates more of a reward for faithfulness. Placed in parallel to heritage, the implication is that sons are a gift from Yhwh but at the same time are a reward for faithfulness. Thus, the inheritance imagery fits, for the land of Canaan was given over to the people as a gift by Yhwh while at the same time there was a level of faithfulness that was expected.

In relationship to the household of Solomon, this psalm implies that the children of the Davidic household are gifts from Yhwh within the context of a faithful household (as in the story of Ruth).


Employing another analogy, the author describes in v. 4 the usefulness of these sons when they are described as “arrows in the hand of a warrior.” The sons of one’s youth are like implements of war that are wielded in battle. With such usefulness, the psalmist encourages the reader with the note that blessing is found when the quiver is filled with these arrows. A household of children brings blessing and a good reputation. Granted, the psalmist does not address the complexities of raising children. As was apparent even within the household of David, sons sin, rebel, and cause great commotion at times within even the kings household. Yet, Solomon is convinced that children are a source of great blessing and reputation.

As earlier, the psalm continues the connections to the Priestly Blessing by interpreting blessing (“Yhwh bless you and keep you”) within the context of the household, particularly within the auspices of the house of David/Solomon. Psalm 128 continues this pattern.

Psalm 126

Tears sown by the righteous in the wilderness will reap bountiful fruit.

Such is the message of Psalm 126. Before diving into the message in detail, I wanted to make sure that this truth rings clear.

Just as Psalm 125 began with a reference to Mount Zion, so Psalm 126 refers to Zion. As such, these two psalms bring to the forefront the importance of Zion to the theology of the Songs of Ascents.

Mt of Olives 012

Once again, the poet has wielded great skill in composing his song. The message of the psalm is carried along on parallelism between successive lines as well as larger structure of the whole. These comments will begin with the larger structure before moving to an explanation of the meaning and contribution of the individual lines. Consider first the following presentation of the first 4 verses, where the lines have been numbered to make discussion more clear [note that the numbers are not verses]:

1   When the LORD restored the fortunes of Zion,

2   we were like those who dream

3   Then our mouth was filled with laughter, and our tongue with shouts of joy;

4   then they said among the nations,

5   “The LORD has done great things for them.”

6   The LORD has done great things for us;

7   we are glad.

8   Restore our fortunes, O LORD,

9    like streams in the Negeb!

Several observations are pertinent.

First, in lines 1 and 8, the author has turned a recollection about Yhwh restoring the fortunes of Zion into a plea for Yhwh to do the same thing again. Using the same vocabulary enhances this connection.

Second, line 2, which describes the state of those to whom fortune had been returned, is complemented by line 7, which describes the state of the people for whom Yhwh has done great things. The same verb form is used “we were”;[1] plural descriptions (specifically participles) are used (“dreamers” and “rejoicers”[2]). Structurally, the verses seem to work from the outside in, like a chiasm, in that lines 1 and 8 are complements like lines 2 and 7.


Between these sets of “bookends” are four other lines of poetry (lines 3 to 6). So, third, lines 3 and 4 both begin the same way with “then” followed by the same tense verb. The restoration of Zion’s fortunes had two responses. One by the people of God, whose tongues shouted for joy at what Yhwh had done. The other by the nations, who responded with recognition of what Yhwh had done for Israel.

Fourth, the announcement by the nation in line 5 is immediately echoed by the psalmist in line 6, the only change being “them” for “us.” The poet personalizes the statement for the congregation.

Yet, what is interesting about the author’s use of structure here is this. After returning in v. 4a to the vocabulary of v. 1a (i.e., restore, Yhwh, fortune), the plea to Yhwh, “Restore our fortunes,” is set in parallel with the line, “like streams in the Negeb,” in v. 4b. This phrase also makes a connection to “like those who dream” in v. 1b. Thus, the conclusion can be drawn that v. 4a, which along with v. 1 and 3b encloses statements in vv. 2 and 3, also functions to begin a new section that is initially carried on by v. 4b. In other words, v. 4a strategically closes the first half of the psalm while beginning the second. What could easily be missed here is the enclosing aspect of this structure. It is quite simple to see that the author makes the statement of v. 1 personal to the congregation by shifting to the imperative.[3]


By linking the second half of the psalm so tightly to the first, it invites the reader to understand the second half in relationship to the first. In this light, then, the second half of the verse is an extended analogy of the expectation of the psalmist that is less about literal sowing and reaping and more about Yhwh’s accomplishing a work among his people that correlates to the work in bringing them back to Zion (v. 1).

But the next two verses break from this design and contain their own forms of parallelism and imagery. As such, v. 5 could be structured this way:[4]

Those who sow

in tears

with[5] shouts of joy

shall reap!

As has been seen other places in the Songs of Ascents, this chiasm highlights the sharp contrast between “tears” and “shouts of joy.” Moreover, it highlights the importance for the psalm as a whole for the term “shout of joy,” which also appears in v. 2 in reference to their tongue and in v. 6 about those returning from the harvest.

The psalmist also leverages poetic parallelism but in a way that differs from v. 5 Note the repetition:

He who goes out weeping, bearing the seed for sowing,
shall come home with shouts of joy, bringing [lit. bearing] his sheaves with him.

Although not as apparent in translation, the grammatical form for the first part of both lines is the same in Hebrew. Thus, the author does not repeat vocabulary; rather, the author repeats grammar. This is quite typical in Hebrew poetry.

Taken together, then, the author uses various poetic parallelism in vv. 5 and 6 to highlight different things. V. 5 focuses the reader on the tears and shouts of joy. V. 6 seems to bring focus primarily on the individual, who first sows with weeping and then reaps with shouts of joy. Moreover, the author also highlights the positive return by contrasting what is borne (or lifted up). The weeper goes out bearing seed; the rejoicer returns bearing sheaves.


The theological richness of this Song of Ascents avails itself to the one who reaches beyond this psalm and the Songs of Ascents to the larger hope of the Psalter. For there, the author of the book of Psalms has left the reader with the hope initially framed in Psalms 1 and 2. In those psalms, the gateway to the Psalter was framed by a wise, victorious king through whom refuge was promised to those who would worship him. As such, the hope the Psalter is not a hope in a return from Babylonian exile (see those psalms that imply that return was in the past) but rather in an eschatological return in which the kingdom of this king would be established. Yet, as is common in the OT, hope for such a return is patterned from past acts of Yhwh. Thus, those who long in tears for their redemption can place their faith in the one who has already demonstrated his power to do great things for them. The psalmist has penned a lasting paradigm: Sowing in tears means reaping with a ringing cry.[6]

While we wait for the figurative “streams in the Negeb,” a potent image of hope for our redemption and satisfaction, we should remember that our tears sown even while in the wilderness will reap bountiful fruit. And we will return from that wilderness carrying our harvest of sheaves.


[1] This is not clear in the ESV, since it translate the same form as “we were” in v. 1 and “we are” in v. 3.

[2] Again, this is not clear in the English. Perhaps a more literal translation would be “we were rejoicers.”

[3] What makes this argument compelling is that vv. 5 and 6 contain their own poetic structures. That is, the overwhelming structure of the first half is abandoned for different types of parallelism in the final two verses.

[4] Note that this does not maintain the order of the ESV.

[5] The same preposition is used before “tears” and “shouts of joy.”

[6] I found the following summary helpful: “The song poignantly expresses the mourning of God’s people and their subsequent return to the land as a fulfillment of their hope in Yahweh’s deliverance and the tangible realization of their return as a manifestation of their special relationship to God as his covenant people.” (Klouda, 939)

Psalm 122

The significance of Jerusalem stems from the presence of the house of Yhwh in its midst. In this Song of Ascents, David will express excitement that should be inherent to any who go to Jerusalem, for the thrones of the house of David and house of Israel’s God reside there. As such, this psalm perpetuates the hope in a restored Jerusalem and a restored Davidic kingdom. Moreover, the psalmist provides the ways by which the reader can respond to this hope, namely, by praying for the peace of the city of peace.

AlthougSONY DSCh there is some disagreement on attributing the psalm to David,[1] the title at least expects the reader to hear the speaker as David.[2] Thus, when the psalm opens, “I was glad when they said to me, ‘Let us go to the house of the Lord!’”, the “I” and “me” should be understood as David. This provides an interesting perspective for the psalm, because the psalm reflects on the importance of Jerusalem for both the worship of the people at the house of Yhwh and the judgment that would take place in the house of David. The psalm highlights the importance of the house of Yhwh by virtue of a literary device called inclusion, whereby the psalm opens with a reference to the house of Yhwh (v. 1) and closes with it (v. 9). Yet, during the lifetime of David, only the kingdom was residing at Jerusalem. The house of Yhwh had not yet been built, and the city had not yet taken on the status of “the city.” As a result, the psalm takes on a note of anticipation and hope for the fulfillment of what Yhwh had promised to David. In other words, David could only hope to go to the house of Yhwh in Jerusalem as an anticipation of a future fulfillment of the Davidic covenant (see 2 Samuel 7). This fact accentuates the larger scheme within the Songs of Ascents in which after the exile, the Songs interpret eschatologically the promises made to David.


In the greater context of the Psalter, this psalm (1) joins the resounding voice of expectation for the coming King and (2) provides an important hermeneutical clue for a proper reading of the Songs of Ascents. The former has been established in the Psalter by Psalms 1 and 2; the latter will be confirmed among other places in Psalm 132, a psalm about David and his kingdom. Subsequent readers, then, join David’s hope for God’s faithfulness to these promises, specifically in establishing a kingdom of David’s Son in a peaceful, worshiping Jerusalem.

V. 2 elucidates our understanding of v. 1 as David’s anticipation of going to the house of Yhwh in Jerusalem: “Our feet have been standing within your gates, O Jerusalem!” Moving from singular to plural brings corporate implications to the psalmist’s words. Joy can be found by the congregation as they simply stand within Jerusalem’s gates.[3] On the one hand, the help and security hoped for in Psalm 121 at the hands of Yhwh, their keeper, would be tangibly realized in Jerusalem’s walls and spiritually enjoyed by the presence of God in her midst. On the other hand, joy in Jerusalem would also be found in the presence of the monarchy, as vv. 4–5 make clear.

Once again, the writer connects vv. 2 and 3 through step parallelism, where v. 2 ends with Jerusalem and v. 3 begins with it. The first person hope and recollection of vv. 1 and 2, respectfully, gives way to a general description of Jerusalem’s importance and status among the nation.[4]

First, Jerusalem is described as being “built as a city that is bound firmly together” (v. 3). This is another difficult verse to understand or translate exactly, but the focus seems to be on the compactness or security of the city as it was built. Thus, the poet highlights the hope that comes as being found within the gates of this well-built, secure city.

Mt of Olives 012Second, Jerusalem is described as the place “to which the tribes go up” (v. 4). The place to which the nation would go to worship Yhwh was anticipated in Deuteronomy 12; it was confirmed to be Jerusalem at the end of 2 Samuel. Interestingly, v. 4 uses the verb for “go up” that is also used within the titles of the Songs of Ascents. The general conclusion can therefore be made that these songs were perhaps intended to speak of the congregation’s going up to Jerusalem. At the same time, this may have not just a physical understanding of returning to Jerusalem as part of the nation’s responsibility during the feasts, but it may also join in the larger hope of the Psalter for the culmination of David’s kingdom by the Son, in whom the nation and the nations will find their refuge (see Ps 2:12).

However, the immediate purpose for going up to Jerusalem is to fulfill a decree that Israel was to be a nation that came to Jerusalem for the purpose of giving thanks to Yhwh. V. 4 speaks of Jerusalem as the city “to which the tribes go up, the tribes of the Lord, as was decreed for Israel, to give thanks to the name of the Lord.” The pattern established for God’s people was to travel to the central location where Yhwh would be worshiped. Although not specifically decreed in a particular passage, this expectation of giving thanks was centered on “the name of Yhwh,” a phrase that is often used of David’s and Solomon’s building of a house “for the name of Yhwh” (see e.g. 1Kgs 8:17; 1Chr 22:7).

Third, Jerusalem was the place where thrones of justice were established. V. 5 states, “There thrones for judgment were set, the thrones of the house of David.” By using poetic parallelism in which the first line is further described by the second, the thrones for judgment are identified as the thrones set up for the house of the David. Here, David anticipates a series of kings, a series of thrones, as part of his house. An important responsibility of those who would sit on those thrones is to administer justice (see Psalm 72 and Isaiah 11). In the prophetic promises regarding the kingdom of David and his sons, Jerusalem would be the place where Yhwh judges the nations (see e.g. Isaiah 2). This continues the pattern that David sees established in his days and in the days of his sons.

In that David describes in vv. 3–5 the security, the true worship, and the administration of justice to be found in Jerusalem, this provides the proper basis from which to make the requests of vv. 6–7:

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem! “May they be secure who love you!
Peace be within your walls and security within your towers!”

David beckons the readers to pray for the peace of Jerusalem, and he provides the words that they should pray.[5] For Jerusalem to be this haven of rest, it must be characterized by peace, a theme that has already been established in the Songs of Ascents (see e.g. 120:6–7). As such, Psalm 122 joins the chorus of reflection on the Priestly Blessing in expressing peace from Yhwh as specifically related to Jerusalem and the security (or perhaps prosperity) that she provides.

David closes his psalm with two commitments. First, in v. 8 he calls upon himself to speak: “For my brothers and companions’ sake I will say, ‘Peace be within you!’” Peace in Jerusalem will mean security not just for the future of his kingdom, but also for those who are his brothers and friends. Second, in v. 9 he calls upon himself to seek the good of the city: “For the sake of the house of the Lord our God, I will seek your good.” So David, the king, commits himself (1) to promote peace and (2) to work for the good of Jerusalem. Moreover, he focuses on those who populate his kingdom and the house of Yhwh, the God who is personally related to David’s people (“our God”).

In essence, then, Psalm 122 gives us a clearer picture of the expectations of the Davidic kings and of the Son of David to come. There existed (and would exist) a close relationship between the king and the worship of Yhwh at Jerusalem in the house of Yhwh. Both the king and the congregation would work toward that end. The former would administer justice as part of a reign that promoted peace and goodness; the latter would pray for the peace of the city within which they would gives thanks to the name of their God. Thus, the hope that David had in the establishment of the central sanctuary of worship and justice becomes the hope of all who subsequently read this psalm. “To pray for the peace of Jerusalem (v.6) is to pray for the coming of the Promised Seed of David, the Messiah.”[6]


[1] For example, a couple Hebrew manuscripts do not contain it, as well as the Septuagint and Targums.

[2] Zenger points out that Psalm 122, the middle psalm in the first 5, has a reference to David in the title, as does the middle psalm in the last 5 (Psalm 132). Moreover, the title of Psalm 127 refers to Solomon.

[3] Zenger, 458: “Dass der Psalm nicht den Gottesberg Zion als den mythischen Thronsitz des Weltkönigs JHWH, sondern die Stadt Jerusalem mit dem ‘Haus JHWHs’ in seiner Mitte beschreibt, ist typisch für seine nachexilische Entstehung.” That the psalm does not describe Zion, the mountain of God, as the mythical throne of the king of the world, Yhwh, rather the city of Jerusalem with the “house of Yhwh” in its midst, is typical for its post-exilic origin.

[4] Zenger, 458: “Der zweite Teil V 3–5 nennt drei Gründe, die die Stadt Jerusalem zu einer besonderen Stadt und zum ‘Realsymbol’ der Gegenwart JHWHs in einer feindlichen Welt machen.” The second part in vv. 3–5 gives three reasons that make the city of Jerusalem a significant city and the “real symbol” of the presence of Yhwh in a hostile world. He goes on to say that Jerusalem was not just any city of Israel, rather took on the title of “the city,” especially in post-exilic texts (see 1Kgs 8:44, 48; Jer 8:16; Lam 1:19; 2:12; Ezek 7:23; 9:4, 9; Mic 6:9).

Zenger, 460: “Nur wenn und insofern JHWH selbst Jerusalem ‘baut,’ kann und wird es seine ‘Stadt-Funktion’ erfüllen können.” Only when and if Yhwh himself “builds” Jerusalem can and will it be able to fulfill its “city-function.”

[5] Although the repetition of the words “peace” and “secure/security” can be seen, an element of the poetic artistry is missing in the English. Six of the ten words in the verse have the consonantal sounds “sh” and “l” in order. This has been observed by Allen, 158, as a play on the name of Jerus(h)alem, describing here as a city of peace (see Hebrews). Zenger, 452, also notes the alliteration and assonance in vv. 6–9.

[6] Sailhamer, 218.

Psalm 120 (part 2)

SONY DSCIn a previous post, I discussed how Psalm 120:1-2 lays the theological foundation for this individual psalm as well as the collection of Songs of Ascents. According to v. 1, the speaker has called to Yahweh in the past and received an answer. Thus, he calls once again to Yhwh for deliverance from a specific enemy: deceptive lips (v. 2). The rest of the psalm will show the speaker’s expectation of Yhwh’s response and how the speaker responds from the midst of distress.

Addressing the Tongue of Deceit (vv. 3–4)

3 מַה־יִּתֵּ֣ן לְ֭ךָ וּמַה־יֹּסִ֥יף לָ֗ךְ לָשׁ֥וֹן רְמִיָּֽה׃
4 חִצֵּ֣י גִבּ֣וֹר שְׁנוּנִ֑ים עִ֜֗ם גַּחֲלֵ֥י רְתָמִֽים׃

3 What shall be given to you, and what more shall be done to you, you deceitful tongue?
4 A warrior’s sharp arrows, with glowing coals of the broom tree! (ESV)

The phrase, “tongue of deceit,” with which v. 2 ends, also is the last phrase in v. 3. However, as the speaker transitions from addressing Yhwh to addressing his enemies, the phrase clarifies to whom the psalmist speaks in v. 3.[1] While v. 2 addresses Yhwh, v. 3 addresses the wicked one directly, raising the specter of what should be done to him. Most English versions follow the LXX and translate the verbs of v. 2 in the passive. However, as an alternative, the Masoretic Text implies Yhwh as the subject of the verbs, as translated by the NIV: “What will he do to you, and what more besides, you deceitful tongue?”[2] Since vv. 2 and 3 are tied closely with their balanced parallelism and the repetition of deceitful tongue, it would seem that the speaker understands the fate of the deceitful speakers comes from Yhwh. Thus, perhaps the active verbs convey this more appropriately.


Either way, v. 4 provides the answer to the question: “A warrior’s sharp arrows, with glowing coals of the broom tree!” Leaving the difficult details of the broom tree aside, the point seems to be figurative, as Yhwh responds in kind to the deceitful speaker (see Ps 2:5 as a possible background to this). On v. 4, Allen states, “The reference to weapons presupposes their metaphorical usage for slander, as in 52:4 (2); 57:5 (4); Jer 9:2, 7 (3, 8). Cf. especially 64:4, 8 (3, 7) where arrows of divine retribution are promised to arrowlike words.”[3]

Woe to Me (vv. 5–7)

5 אֽוֹיָה־לִ֭י כִּי־גַ֣רְתִּי מֶ֑שֶׁךְ שָׁ֜כַ֗נְתִּי עִֽם־אָהֳלֵ֥י קֵדָֽר׃
6 רַ֭בַּת שָֽׁכְנָה־לָּ֣הּ נַפְשִׁ֑י עִ֜֗ם שׂוֹנֵ֥א שָׁלֽוֹם׃
7 אֲֽנִי־שָׁ֭לוֹם וְכִ֣י אֲדַבֵּ֑ר הֵ֜֗מָּה לַמִּלְחָמָֽה׃

5 Woe to me, that I sojourn in Meshech, that I dwell among the tents of Kedar!
6 Too long have I had my dwelling among those who hate peace.
7 I am for peace, but when I speak, they are for war! (ESV)

In v. 5, the text returns to the first person with the attention getting, “Woe to me!”, which introduces a further description of the psalmist’s plight, echoing the cry with which the psalm begins: “the distress that came to me.” On the one hand, the cry is, “I sojourn in Meshech”; on the other, “I dwell among the tents of Kedar.” The identity of these two references is difficult, not least of which because they are not the same place. It seems to be that the psalmist speaks of two separate places in order to focus attention on the vastness of the suffering. In other words, the point is not so much to describe a literal residence in Meshech and Kedar,[4] but rather to describe how the psalmist has often resided with those who in Scripture are identified as having military prowess.[5] This interpretation fits the military metaphors of vv. 4 and 7 quite well. In addition, reference to Meshech and Kedar identify the psalmist’s residence as outside the land.

Despite the ambiguity that the Meshech and Kedar references raise, the parallelism extending into v. 6 clarifies what the psalmist intends to convey. The picture painted in v. 5 receives a direct explanation in v. 6: “Too long have I had my dwelling among those who hate peace.”[6] These verses are connected by the verb “dwell” and the preposition “with.” In a sense, the phrase “tents of Kedar” parallels “those who hate peace,” giving the impression that the tents of Kedar were characterized by lack of peace (or perhaps propensity for war). As such, the poetic parallelism brings about the comparison: Like one who dwells outside the land among the tents of my enemies, so I have dwelled too long with those who are against peace. The point is not so much where the one praying is found, but how the one praying is found (see Ps 61:2–3).

And with the mention of peace (shalom), the author gets to a vital aspect of the prayer, as the importance of the concept is highlighted by poetic parallelism. Characteristic of the Songs of Ascents is a literary device called step parallelism, in which a word or phrase that concludes one line is taken up at the beginning of the next.[7] Not only does this bring focus upon this word or phrase, but it also functions as a binding element between lines. Here, then, the author uses several poetic features to connect vv. 5–7, which are an extended expression of the speaker’s dire circumstances.

In addition, a greater concern seems to be at play here in the larger context. Peace is one of four words that connect the Songs of Ascents with the Priestly Blessing (Num 6:24–26):[8]

The Lord bless you and keep you;
the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
the Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace.

Each of the highlighted words comes to the forefront of the theology of the Songs of Ascents. In this particular case, peace plays an important role (as the parallelism highlights) and will later be connected to the future of Jerusalem.[9] In this way, the Songs of Ascents, beginning with the first one, act as a virtual commentary on what the enacting of this blessing looks like as well as how to pray in light of it.

Brought to the front of v. 7 is the personal pronoun, “I,” giving the literal understanding, “I am (for) peace.” In the second half of v. 7 is the personal pronoun, “they,” with the understanding, “they are for war.” Yet, the phrase, “but when I speak,” falls between these two phrases, causing an issue for translation and interpretation.[10] Whatever the case, v. 7 brings focus on the distinct contrast of the words of the psalmist with that of his enemies, who are personified as “lying lips” and “a deceitful tongue” (v. 2).[11] The psalmist, like the priests commissioned to speak a blessing on the people of Yhwh, speaks of and for peace. As such, his words not only reflect the pattern of speaking of peace as a blessing of Yhwh but also as a hope for that blessing. Yhwh desires to bless his people with peace as his name is spoken over them (Numbers 6); the exiled psalmist speaks of that peace as well, longing for the time when such peace would banish ongoing distress.

Thus, the psalm ends with this contrast between speaking peace and speaking war. Despite the peace-speaking of the psalmist, a lack of peace (i.e., the presence of distress) still exists. One cannot help but feel that the psalm is somewhat incomplete. Yes, the psalmist believes that Yhwh hears his call and therefore prays for deliverance. And yes, the psalmist recognizes explicitly the punishment needed upon those who speak falsely. Yet, the psalm never shows the response. Two explanations can elucidate this.

Perhaps, first, as the gateway to the Songs of Ascents, the writer pens a psalm intended to be timeless and always applicable to those who long for and are seeking refuge back in the land. God’s exiled people should always call out to him wherever they find themselves. There is at the beginning, then, a pattern by which all the faithful of subsequent generations might appeal to God’s faithfulness in answering their cry for help until the eschaton.

But perhaps, second, the psalm simply begins a path toward peace subsequently paved by the rest of the Songs of Ascents. In other words, the situation of God’s displaced people, as represented by the individual psalmist (the lost sheep from Psalm 119) who seeks peace, serves as the foundation from which to understand the rest of the Songs. Moreover, the answer to the psalmist’s plea for deliverance from Yhwh finds an answer in lifting one’s eyes to a powerful helper who keeps his people, i.e. the helper described in Psalm 121. If this proves to be the case, then the answer to the psalmist’s prayer would not be found in the person of the suppliant (or in any other human’s efforts for that matter), even if the answer to what will be given to the wicked one is war. Rather, the help needed is not so much from a warrior, as depicted metaphorically (or not?) in Psalm 120, but from Yhwh, the one who secures the psalmist’s (and listeners’) feet.


[1] There is some debate over whether this phrase in v. 3 is a gloss. However, I believe it is a necessary element to show who the “you” of v. 3 actually is. The reason this is needed is because of the change in address from Yhwh to the wicked. So while it certainly lies outside the strict, grammatical parallelism of the rest of v. 3, it certainly applies these phrases to the deceitful one the writer addresses. Moreover, the phrase causes vv. 2 and 3 to be balanced.

[2] Zenger states that Yhwh is the subject of the verb “to give” as in “what more shall he [Yhwh] give” (408–409). In this, he is following the MT, as the NIV does.

[3] Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101-150, 146.

[4] Although there would probably be exiles in both, therefore the statement would be universally applicable. This highlights the conclusion later that this is intended as a timeless prayer for all who find themselves outside the land.

[5] On Meshech, see Ezek 32:26; 38:2–4; 39:1–3. On Kedar, see Isa 21:16, 17. Like those described in the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah, the psalmist’s enemies are “for war” (v. 7). Although, see Goldingay, Psalms, 3:452: “These two peoples were not thought of as more warlike or hostile to Judeans than many others. They are simply alien, mysterious, far-off peoples. They might then simply stand for typical places where Judeans might live as a scattered people as a result of ‘the’ exile.”

[6] Regarding poetic parallelism, v. 6 demonstrates how the poet writes about similar (synonymous?) thoughts using a variety of expressions. In this case, the writer could have simply continued the verbal forms from v. 5 (“I sojourn” and “I dwell”). Yet, instead v. 6 begins with an adverbial modifier and expresses “I dwell” with the more literal and complex “my soul makes its dwelling.” On the one hand, this breaks what could be redundancy from v. 5; on the other hand, it begs the question of why this occurs. From a poetic side, by using this phrase, the poetry seems to make even more clear that the phrases “with the tents of Kedar” and “with those who hate peace” should be read in parallel, because v. 6a balances the verse (see the Hebrew text and accenting) with the expression “for I sojourn in Meshech.” As such, it sets v. 6 in a position as dependent (or following from) the introductory phrase “woe to me” of v. 5. Could be set in parallel like this:

Woe to me,
that I sojourn in Meshech, that I dwell      among the tents of Kedar!
Too long have I had my dwelling                among those who hate peace.

So, whereas “I sojourn” and “I dwell” are clearly the same tense and therefore call for asking why they are put in parallel, the author seems to have done more by using a more complex parallelism across vv. 5–6. This is also highlighted by the similarity in the sounds in Hebrew of “tents of” and “who hate.” And this extends via step parallelism into v. 7. It is fascinating, the way that poetry allows the writer to make such intricate and subtle expressions.

[7] Another example is the use of “help” in 121:1, 2.

[8] See Liebreich, “The Songs of Ascents and the Priestly Blessing,” JBL, 33.

My thought: The Songs of Ascents are an eschatological (or royal?) interpretation/application of the Priestly Blessing based upon the psalmists’ hope in Yhwh’s faithfulness to fulfill the promises of the Davidic Covenant. Building off of Zenger’s notion of the purpose of the first 5 Songs of Ascents, this group would contribute to this larger purpose by connecting lament and cry for help from their souls with the trusting search for “blessing” (cf. 124:6; 134:1). Psalm 121 certainly helps cement the relationship to the Priestly Blessing with the use of “keep.”

Question to ask, Where is the eschatological emphasis in these first 5 psalms? See 121:8; 125:2; 131:3, where in each case the phrase “from now to forever” occurs. Cf. also 2Chr 36:23 (go up, house for Yhwh, Yhwh with him) as a parallel passage speaking of an eschatological return from exile.

This quote from Hutchinson makes a good point regarding the whole Psalter: “[T]here is an eschatological or teleological thrust to the book of Psalms, as signaled right from the start by the introductory and programmatic Ps. 2. The community of Israelites into whose hands the Psalter first came may have been back in the land, but they were still liable to be bewildered by Yahweh’s apparent cancellation of his promises to David. The Psalter insists that the king of Ps. 2 will appear – an absolutely supreme righteous ruler who will be greater than Solomon (Pss. 45; 72), in whom the Abrahamic promises will find fulfilment (72:17b), a ‘horn . . . for David’ (132:17) whose coming will prove that Yahweh has not renounced his commitment to the Davidic covenant. Book V couches this glorious prospect in the imagery of a return from exile (Ps. 107), a new exodus (Pss. 114; 135–136) and a journey to Zion (Pss. 120–134); yet post-exilic worshippers, despite being physically present in Jerusalem, must await the fulfilment of these realities.” (97–98) In James Hely Hutchinson, “The Psalms and Praise,” Interpreting the Psalms: Issues and Approaches.

Thus, adding these thoughts to my thesis above, the eschatological fulfillment of the Davidic covenant provides the basis for understanding the journey to Zion that is painted in these psalms not as a simple, historical pilgrimage theme but as a journey toward an idealized Zion in the eschaton (consider the relationship with Isaiah 2). Some points of emphasis about this: (1) 124:8, (2) Psalm 126 and the desire for Yhwh to do what he did when he brought them back to Zion before [thus the return from exile is still future], and (3) 131:3; 133:3.

[9] Consider 122:6–9; 125:2, 5; 128:5–6.

[10] Most English versions simply take it as a contrast with v. 7b: “But when I speak, they are for war.” Michel’s translation would be represented by the English translation, “When I begin to speak peace, they are for war.”

[11] Also, as Zenger (411) notes, v. 7 is a tricolon (unique within the psalm), which lends particular weight to the verse. He also makes the point that the psalm would have 15 colons, which would mirror the 15 psalms of the collection. Is this something to consider significant?