Old Testament 18a: Selected Texts: Psalms in Hebrew
Psalm 93
******************************************************************************
Introduction
This Psalm in a hymn to Yahweh the sovereign, as it can be seen in from the opening exclamation, Yahweh malak, “Yahweh is king” this is a prominent type of composition which many scholars connect it to the pre-exilic Jerusalem liturgy. This psalm is strategically placed in the Psalter, and it seems to be a “bridge psalm” between Psalms 90–92 and 94.[1] “Being situated between Psalms 92 and 94, where both psalms anticipate the destruction of the enemies, Psalm 93 proclaims Yahweh’s superiority over all chaos powers.”[2] Interestingly, the Mishnah agrees with the LXX that Psalm 93 was to be sung for the sixth day of the week.[3] Also, in terms of introduction, Briggs sees Psalm 93 being “dependent” on Isaiah 2, but this is unconvincing.[4]
However, Claus Westermann believes that Psalm 93 is totally disconnected from its context. He writes: “Ps 93 is already different from all others (enthronement psalms) in that the imperative (or jussive) call to praise is totally missing.”[5] But it seems abundantly clear that these psalms do, in fact, form a unit within the Psalter as a hole. They are strategically placed and obviously extolling the Kingship of Yahweh alone. We could summarise this Psalm as, His [Yahweh’s] Majesty and His Glory are seen, not only in controlling the powers of nature, and whatsoever exalts and opposes itself against Him, but in the faithfulness of His word, and in the holiness of His house.
Translation:
יְהוָה מָלָךְ גֵּאוּת לָבֵשׁ לָבֵשׁ יְהוָה עֹז הִתְאַזָּר אַף־תִּכּוֹן תֵּבֵל בַּל־תִּמּוֹט
Yahweh is king, He is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed, He is girded with strength. The world stands firm; it cannot be shaken.
מָלָךְ Hiphil Perfect 3rd person Masculine
לָבֵשׁ Pual Perfect 3rd Masculine Singular
הִתְאַזָּר Hithpael Perfect 3rd Person Masculine Singular
אַף־תִּכּוֹן Niphil Imperfect 3rd Person Feminine Singular + Particle Conjunction
בַּל־תִּמּוֹט Niphal Imperfect 3rd Person Feminine Singular
נָכוֹן כִּסְאֲךָ מֵאָז מֵעוֹלָם אָתָּה
Your throne is established from of old; you are from everlasting.
נָכוֹן Niphal Participle Masculine Absolute
נָשְׂאוּ נְהָרוֹת יְהוָה נָשְׂאוּ נְהָרוֹת קוֹלָם יִשְׂאוּ נְהָרוֹת דָּכְיָם
The floods have lifted up, O LORD, The floods have lifted up their voice; the floods lift up their pounding waves.
נָשְׂאוּ Qal Perfect 3rd Person Common Plural
יִשְׂאוּ Qal Imperfect 3rd Person Masculine Plural
מִקֹּלוֹת מַיִם רַבִּים אַדִּירִים מִשְׁבְּרֵי־יָם אַדִּיר בַּמָּרוֹם יְהוָה
More than the sounds of mighty waters, than the mighty breakers of the sea, The LORD on high is mighty.
מִקֹּלוֹת Participle Preposition + Noun Common Plural Construct
עֵדֹתֶיךָ נֶאֶמְנוּ מְאֹד לְבֵיתְךָ נַאֲוָה־קֹדֶשׁ יְהוָה לְאֹרֶךְ יָמִים
Your testimonies are very sure; Holiness befits your house, O LORD, forever.
נֶאֶמְנוּ Niphal Perfect 3rd Person Common Plural
Form
The Psalms 47; 93; 96:10-13; 97; 99, form the pattern of the enthronement psalms of YHWH. These psalms often begin with the words מלך יהוה, “Yahweh has become king” and this psalm also starts with the opening with the phrase “YHWH has become king” it contains a call to rejoice, and asking all to rejoice as THE LORD is enthroned as king. We see that there are brief references to Yahweh’s deeds, depicted as just now taking place. It gives descriptions of what his reign will mean to Israel and the world. And presents an idea that, a new world kingdom is coming.
Though one may conclude with Human, it seems more profitable to say that the theological meaning begins with Psalm 93 and includes Psalm 94.[6] Psalm 93, specifically, is the first of eight psalms within this community. It is here that this cluster of psalms extolling the glorious sovereignty of Yahweh takes shape within the book of Psalms as a whole. These psalms “affirm YHWH’s kingship, sovereignty, and everlasting presence.”[7] The royal reign of Yahweh is “the actual subject of the glorification and praise.”[8] Briggs takes this thought and appends one further remark by saying that these were songs of praise celebrating the advent of Yahweh for the purpose of judgment.[9] This, of course, makes sense when one considers the awesome holiness and impeccable righteousness of this sovereign King.
Sitz im Leben
These psalms were used as part of Israel’s worship, likely including an enthronement festival in which, Yahweh is glorified as king. These psalms were given a prophetic, eschatological, reinterpretation in their final stages. It was in the atmosphere of common worship that the glory of The Lord was evoked and revoked. This psalm is a song of praise of YHWH’s kingship, and it is being made clear through the acclamation of the king in the first verse denoting that ‘YHWH is become king’, which in turn points out to the acclamation on the occasion of the enthronement of the earthly king.
In this respect we see that this psalm is closely related to Psalm 47, 97, 99 etc. the enthronement of YHWH presumably constituted one of the rites of the covenant festival which was celebrated in autumn at the New Year and lasted several days. The ritual of enthronement ceremony has its origin not in Israel but in Mesopotamia. The mention of the creation in this connection can probably likewise be traced back to the Babylonian source of the Enthronement festival, where the celebration of the world’s new year included the enthronement of god Marduk as a victory over the powers of chaos at the creation of the world.
We still can see from the affinity of the psalm with documents from Ugarit, how the ideas that furnish the material for the psalm had reached Canaan and Israel at a comparatively early date. Taking everything into consideration the psalm with its hymnic style exhibits those typical features which are the hallmark of the Old Testament faith. The hope of the Kingdom of God, the coming of which is linked up with the enthronement of YHWH, and the emphatic linking of creation and eschatology within the idea of the eternal reign of God, have sprung from Old Testament soil and are the ripe fruit of its belief in God.
The Enthronement Festival
The kingship psalms extol the magnificent and splendid grandeur of the Most High King, Yahweh Himself. A theory regarding their origin has been proposed by fairly recent scholarship as being related to an “Enthronement Festival.” This enthronement Festival originates not from the Hebrew Scriptures, but from other ANE cultures and religions. For example, there is a tablet from Ugarit which proves to be important in this regard.[10] This text shows that there was an annual festival hailing Baal’s enthronement as King. Fisher and Knutson supply this insight when they write “[this Ugaritic text] is important for Biblical studies because Enthronement hymns have sometimes been denied their cultic setting, and anyone who is interested in the cultic setting should look to the Baal cult for comparative material.”[11] Mowinckel purports a theory and, consequently, the whole kingship motif, in light of examples from the ANE, especially from Babylon. Mowinckel supports this festival when he proposes that these psalms were originally meant for the Enthronement Festival.
Sigmund Mowinckel conjectured a theory from the ancient cultures where the people enthroned their deity—often on New Year’s Day. Because of these royal psalms (or as Mowinckel would phrase it, “enthronement psalms”), Mowinckel sees the same festival being practiced by the Israelites and that this is the immediate background of these psalms where Yahweh is declared to be (or “become”) king. Yet, Mowinckel’s hypothesis that “Yahweh was declared to have become king” is the proper translation because of other cultures in the ANE and the way that they worshipped their deities on the New Year festival presupposes if one is consistent with other ANE Enthronement Festivals that the deity actually loses for a period of time. Schmidt adheres to this view by asserting that the God of Israel like all other vegetation deities seems to be defeated and his supremacy in the natural rhythm of the season, and declares that ‘This is a myth similar to that of the periodic descent of the gods to the underworld and their resurrection. Yet, the unambiguous chorus of the kingship psalms refutes any notion that Yahweh has failed or has had any period of defeat whatsoever. Therefore, this hypothesis is totally speculative and must be discarded.
One has to wonder if these psalms were, in fact, integral to the New Year Feast why there is such a lack of evidence. For, “if this feast was particularly concerned with the Kingship of Jehovah, then we should surely expect to find that they had an important, if not a pre-eminent place in the liturgy of Rosh haShanah.”[12] To the present, no such evidence exists.
Contrariwise, rather than attempting to reconstruct a purely hypothetical festival which has no biblical support, it is best to maintain the objective truth that the kingship psalms focus on the “immovable mountain that towers above all theology,” namely, the sovereign reign of God.23 These psalms do speak of the absolute and exclusive reign of God representing his undisputed and unrivaled right to govern over all that he has created.
Interpretation
V1-2 Scripture repeatedly affirms that Yahweh has always existed and is therefore proper to suggest that the first phrase of this psalm encompasses the biblical truth that Yahweh is indeed enthroned on high! It is clear that verse 1 consists of a tricolon.[13] each of the three cola is balanced beautifully. The words compose a 4:4:3 patterns:יְהוָה מָלָךְ גֵּאוּת לָבֵשׁ לָבֵשׁ יְהוָה עֹז הִתְאַזָּר אַף־תִּכּוֹן תֵּבֵל בַּל־תִּמּוֹט Perhaps the atypical pattern on the final cola is leading into verse 2 which is a bicolon and the first cola in verse 2 is composed of three words.
The first phrase יְהוָה מָלָךְ has been subject to overwhelming study and critique.[14] Simply put, the first word is the noun יְהוָה and the second word is the verb מָלָך Though the word order is not as regular in Hebrew poetry as it is in Hebrew narrative, it is significant that the psalm begins with the covenant name of Yahweh. The reason for this irregular syntax is to show the supremacy of Israel’s God against other gods or powers. The verb מָלָך is a Qal perfect third masculine singular from מָלָך.
The interpretive question is whether the Qal verb is to be translated as a characteristic present (“reigns”), as an inceptive/ingressive (“has begun to reign”), or even expressing continuous action (“is reigning”). Of course the exegesis must be based upon context and, of course, the context of the royal psalms and of Psalm 93 points to the eternal sovereignty of God. Obviously, if the English rendered it in the past, “Yahweh reigned,” that would connote that Yahweh has ceased reigning and is, thus, impotent as the Sovereign King. However, contextually this is not a viable solution.
If someone were to assert that this simply means “Yahweh is King,” then the question arises as to why the psalmist did not write the noun ‘Melek’, instead of the verb ‘Malak’ He sees the “older translation” of “the LORD reigns” as misleading. Briggs concurs with Mowinckel for he believes that the opening phrase is “not the assertion of His everlasting royal prerogative, but the joyous celebration of the fact that He has now shown Himself to be king by a royal advent, taking His place on His throne to govern the world Himself, and no longer through inefficient or wicked servants.
Contrary to Mowinckel and a host of others who see the opening phrase, יְהוָה מָלָךְ as referring to a “coronation-type ceremony,” Kraus pulls the rug out from underneath Mowinckel’s theory when he also adds that “even the translation of יְהוָה מָלָך in the sense of an enthronement formula is questioned . . . many arguments support the idea that this call at the beginning of the psalm should be rendered ‘Yahweh is King.’ Therefore, it seems most appropriate to translate this phrase as “Yahweh reigns” as opposed to “Yahweh has begun to reign” for the following four reasons:
First, although the verbal statement מָלָך יְהוָה can refer to a lively and stirring event as in the act of enthroning a person23—such as may be found in 1 Kings 1:11 when Adonijah “becomes king” (WhY"ånIdoa] %l:ßm'). And though Isaiah 52:7 ultimately points to that Messianic age when the Messiah will reign from Zion and to the declaration that God has begun to reign `%yIh")l{a/ %l:ïm' !AYàcil. rmEïao, it must be stated that the grammar and syntax do not require this kind of interpretation.[15] In short, the meaning of the perfect verb (%l'm)' with Yahweh as subject is the same as the normal meaning, generally circumscribed by “to be king, become king, rule as king, reign,” without any partial aspect (e.g., “to become”) exhibiting any discernible priority or becoming fixed in any specific contexts. Therefore, this expression should not be seen as an “enthronement cry” (cf. Mowinckel) but rather like the frequently cited parallels from the Babylonian Marduk rituals as a “cry of acclamation or proclamation.” Therefore, the psalmist is acclaiming Yahweh’s reign as already existing (and continuing to exist forevermore).
Second, the word order of %l'm ' hwh"åy> seems to indicate a statement of “condition.” It is Yahweh who is emphasized as being the King (fronted for emphasis). In other words, the psalmist appears to stress that Yahweh, and no other deity, exercises kingship. As Seybold clarifies: “The x-qatal formulation (inverted verbal clause or compound nominal clause) accentuates x, i.e. ‘Yahweh, which—especially at the beginning of a psalm—generates strong emphasis. It is Yahweh who . . .; Yahweh—He . . .’” This is contrary to Kidner who asserts that this is an announcement rather than a timeless statement. Then he quickly glosses over the issue by saying: “but in the Psalms the word-order is reversed.”[16] Therefore, it is clear that this statement is not “a cry announcing the periodic reinstatement of Yahweh as king but a cultic-kerygmatic proclamation of the eternal kingship of Yahweh!” Third, verse 2 debunks the notion that verse 1 could even hint at the reality of Yahweh ever not reigning as it clearly says, “Your throne is established from of old; you are from everlasting.” God was never off the throne and so he could not ever be “enthroned.”[17]
In short, Yahweh has always existed. He has always been the King. He has always been on the Sovereign throne. The point is that the throne and nature of Yahweh are not incipient in time they are timelessly eternal! If there is one thing this verse points to, it is the theme of Yahweh’s permanence as King! In no way can this be “copied” from the Baal texts for they are decisively different. Baal became a king. Yahweh has always existed as the King. Yahweh needs no one to copy. He needs no attributes from another god or deity. Yahweh surely does not need to usurp Baal’s functions in any way. As Psalm 95:3 confirms: “For the LORD is a great God And a great King above all gods.”
V3 is a tricolon where each colon is very similar in nature. Obviously, as all commentators agree, verse 3 employs the Hebrew poetic feature of repetition for added emphasis.98 It is, though, the nature of—or the purpose of—that emphasis which is at question. Regardless, the parallel structure in verse 3 is unmistakable. It is an A+B+C//A+B+D//A+B+E pattern:[18] נָשְׂאוּ נְהָרוֹת יְהוָה נָשְׂאוּ נְהָרוֹת קוֹלָם יִשְׂאוּ נְהָרוֹת דָּכְיָם The psalmist first declared the sovereignty of Yahweh in verse 1. Then he asserted the eternality of Yahweh in verse 2. Here in verse 3 he will prove the utter omnipotence of Yahweh. The first colon in verse 3 is נָשְׂאוּ נְהָרוֹת יְהוָה “The tAr’hn'>have lifted up against Yahweh.” “The rivers have נָשְׂאוּ " is a Qal perfect third masculine plural from afn' ." The middle colon in verse 3 is נָשְׂאוּ נְהָרוֹת קוֹלָם." It is identical to the first colon except for the change in the final word. Here, instead of the vocative יְהוָה the psalmist uses the accusative קוֹלָם. obviously; the noun lAq refers to the great sound of the rivers lifting up. Dahood translates קוֹלָם as “thunderous roar.”[19]
The scene here the rising up of the roaring floods is borrowed from the mythological idea of the combat of the god against the primeval times, as It had been handed down in the Babylonian myth of the victory of the god Marduk over the primeval flood Tiamat, which was celebrated at the new year festival; in form of YHWH’s victory this still finds echoes in the Old Testament. The OT poet speaks of that battle of YHWH only in allusions which are considerably softened down, thus deliberately avoiding the impression that the myth still retained its original significance for him.[20] He sets the primeval rebellion of the floods over against their rebellion at the end of time; the beginning and the ends are drawn together so that they represent a threat to the world concentrated at that very moment when the sacral proceedings are taking place. The verse, does not sound a note of fear, ensuing from that threat, but rather rings with joy at the roaring of the seas; for behind them towers the mighty God, whose power gloriously proves itself in the taming of the raging elements.
V4 is, however, a complicated verse to construe because of its structure. This verse is a tricolon as is most of this psalm (except for v. 2). The following arrangement displays this structure and shows the balance and symmetry of a 3+3+3 pattern: מִקֹּלוֹת מַיִם רַבִּים אַדִּירִים מִשְׁבְּרֵי־יָם אַדִּיר בַּמָּרוֹם יְהוָה The phrase מִקֹּלוֹת מַיִם רַבִּים begins the tricolon in verse 4. מִקֹּלוֹת is fronted with the preposition ‘min’ which appears to carry a comparison nuance in this context: “More than the sounds of many waters.” Dahood takes, however, a loose translation when he renders this phrase: “Stronger than thundering waters.” Part of his reasoning rests on parsing rabbim parses as a plural adjective referring to God, and, since the syllable count of this verse is 7:7:7, “there is sufficient reason,” states Dahood, “for employing the plural of majesty in this context.”156 It is ironic that the plural from the noun lAq is used to portray the loud “sound” (lit. “voices”) of the many waters, yet “the utmost of their power is to him but a sound and he can readily master it, therefore Yahweh calls it a noise by way of contempt!” Even the strongest voices, the greatest of sounds, the most tumultuous of powers or armies cannot match the supreme power of God. One interesting fact is that even though some are confident of the influence of the Ugaritic texts on this psalm because of its theme and style, the OT phrase ~yBiªr: ~yIm:Ü does not occur in the Ugaritic texts as a designation for Yam at all.
Given the Masoretic accents of verse 4 and the poetic structure of the psalm (largely composed of tricola), it is best to leave it as the MT stands as three cola escalating in meaning and imagery until the final colon exclaims with all certainty: “Mighty on high is Yahweh!” The word order must not be ignored, here. Similar to the very first phrase of the psalm יְהוָה, מָלָךְ here the reader finds אַדִּיר בַּמָּרוֹם יְהוָה . If one concluded that verse 1 was an emphatic acclamation that Yahweh and no one else! reigns, then here it could have that same inference: “Mighty on high is Yahweh and no one (or nothing) else!
V5 some commentators have seen a great disconnect between verse 5 and the rest of Psalm 93. For instance, Tate believes that “verse 5 is an add-on.”180 Furthermore, because of verse 5, some believe that Psalm 93 cannot be composed from an “early date.” Kselman also sees the sharp change in tone and, hence, concludes that it is a “somewhat banal and flat statement, out of harmony with the artistry and drama of the rest of the poem.”[21] But in actuality and when observed more carefully, it fits perfectly in the context of this psalm as well as in the greater context of the kingship psalms. Even though the transition from verse 4 to verse 5 may appear abrupt, the connection consists of God’s majesty seen in His dominion over the world of nature (vv. 1–4). But now, Yahweh’s self-revelation is manifested in His own Word (v. 5).
Verse 5 nicely divides into three parts on the basis of the familiar tricolon structure observed throughout the psalm.עֵדֹתֶיךָ נֶאֶמְנוּ מְאֹד לְבֵיתְךָ נַאֲוָה־קֹדֶשׁ יְהוָה לְאֹרֶךְ יָמִים The first phrase affirms the sufficiency and infallibility of the Word of God, עֵדֹתֶיךָ נֶאֶמְנוּ מְאֹד The fact that the psalmist brings the concept of the Word of God to bear at this point in the psalm does not suggest a disconnect. In fact, the whole of Psalm 93 recalls the rest of the Psalter and how the biblical testimony as a whole portrays the sovereignty of Yahweh God. Human suggests that verse 5 has a “hymnic character” to it. The psalmist here deliberately commends the absolute trustworthiness of the law of God. There are two main reasons to preserve verse 5 (and, hence, the MT) without emendation.
First, the shift from the celestial scene to the earthly one is not uncommon in the Psalter. Psalm 24 is one that speaks of human subjects (vv. 4–6) who laud God as Creator (vv. 1–2) in His “holy” place (v. 3b). Psalm 98 describes human subjects praising Yahweh (vv. 4–6) alongside the sea and its floods that praise Him (vv. 7–8). Finally, in Psalm 96, one finds human beings (vv. 7–9, 11b), the seas, and floods joining with the “gods” themselves praising God (vv. 4–5)! Second, the concern with divine decrees and the earthly temple priesthood reflected in the traditional rendering of verse 5 occurs elsewhere in the royal psalms (Ps 95–100). In Psalm 99, the psalmist speaks of Yahweh as King (vv. 1–5), setting the stage for his testimonies and statutes (v. 7).[22]
Psalm 97 is similar in that the reference to God’s judgments (v. 8c) appears in a context extolling God’s celestial kingship (vv. 1–5, 9). Scholars recognize that in Hebrew poetry, word order is more fluid than in narrative which is most frequently verb-subject-object word-order. But here the verse fronts ^yt,’d[e( to draw the reader’s attention to this new—yet still connected—theme to bring the psalm to a close, namely, the Word of God. The noun עֵדֹתֶיךָ occurs 194 times in the OT and always in the plural when referring to Yahweh’s tWd[ Twenty-nine of these occurrences occur in the psalter. Only two occurrences of tWd[ appear in the royal psalms (93:5 and 99:7). Oftentimes, when the modern interpreter sees this “testimony,” one is inclined to think of something that happened in the past and there is now “testimony” or “evidence” to prove that fact.
Another misconception is Kselman’s take that tWd[ ought to be rendered as a “covenant” (cf. Num 9:15; 17:22). Psalm 93 concludes with the reality which has been affirmed throughout the whole psalm, namely, that Yahweh always has been, is presently, and always will be the King. The final phrase is יְהוָה לְאֹרֶךְ יָמִים and it expresses the temporal reference of Yahweh’s Kingship. “This temporal description puts an exclamation mark behind the realization that Yahweh’s kingship is durable and can be experienced as reality in history.”
Application
The interpretation of this short, five verse psalm is also hampered by the debate over the place of the ancient near eastern mythological background that may or may not dominate the central verses. Some see this imagery as an indication that Israel has transformed an ancient Canaanite myth in which Baal becomes king following his defeat of Yam, the rebellious sea-god. Others deny such a connection and explain the psalm in terms of God's creative activity, as in Genesis one, with regard to the natural oceans. If such Canaanite mythology actually lies behind this psalm, the translation "Yahweh has become king" would seem to make the most sense, at least here, where the mythological imagery may be present.
A minor indication of liturgical usage may be seen in the unusual shift in address displayed in the psalm. God is addressed directly in verses 2, 3, and 5, but is spoken about in verses 1 and 4. One chuckles at the thought of old school pastoral presence in the days when altars were fastened to the East wall of the sanctuary and the minister was required to face the altar when representing the people, but turning to face the people when representing God. Such liturgical representation would require four turns in the space of five verses. In the psalm, however, such changes in addressee suggest a distribution of speaking roles among the liturgical officiants.
The interpretation of Psalm 93, apart from the vexing problems of setting and context above, is straightforward. Declarations of the eternal nature of Yahweh's reign ("from everlasting" verse 2; "forevermore," literally "for length of days" verse 5), as well as its stability ("established" verse 1 and "never be moved" verse 2 are the same word in Hebrew; "very sure" verse 5) frame two verses employing watery imagery, whether of a mythological or natural quality (3), to reassert the supreme majesty of Yahweh (4). Thus, Psalm 93 serves as a hymn that praises Yahweh's kingship.
That kingly power is illustrated in three ways: 1. Verses 1-2 announce the stability the world enjoys as a direct result of God's rule. 2. Verses 3-4 attest God's defeat of the chaos represented by the watery abyss. Their power is indicated through the device of "staircase" parallelism in which the scheme is ABC, ABD, ABE where A is the "flood," B is the verb "lift up," and C, D, and E move to a climax after the repeated initial subject and verb. Nevertheless, Yahweh is "more majestic" than even this most powerful and unpredictably chaotic force. 3. Verse 5 subtly shifts from creation to governance. Yahweh's "decrees" match his reign in stability as they are "very sure."
Briggs, Charles Augustus and Emilie Grace Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Book of Psalms, 2 vols., ICC (repr., Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1960)
Dahood, Mitchell, S.J. Psalms II 51–100, (New York: Doubleday & Company Inc. 1968)
Danby, Herbert The Mishnah:Translated from the Hebrew with Introduction and Brief Explanatory Notes [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1933],
Fisher, Loren R. and F. Brent Knutson, “An Enthronement Ritual at Ugarit,” (July 1969)
Goulder, Michael D. The Psalms of the Sons of Korah, (Sheffield: Press),
Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar and Erich Zenger, Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51–100, trans. by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005),
Howard David M. Jr., “Psalm 94 among the Kingship-Of-Yhwh Psalms,” (Oct 1999)
Howard David M. Jr., The Structure of Psalms 93–100 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997)
Human, Dirk J. ed., “Psalm 93: Yahweh Robed In Majesty and Mightier Than the Great Waters,” in Psalms and Mythology, (New York: T&T Clark, 2007),
Kidner, Derek Psalms 73–150: An Introduction and Commentary on Books I and II of the Psalms, TOTC (London: Inter-Varsity Press, 1975),
Kraus, Hans-Joachim Psalms 60–150, CC, trans. by Hilton C. Oswald (Minneapolis:Fortress Press, 1993),
Kselman, John S. “Sinai and Zion in Psalm 93,” in David and Zion: Biblical Studies in Honor of J. J. M. Roberts, ed. by Bernard F. Batto and Kathryn L. Roberts (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2004),
Mowinckel, Sigmund The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 2 vols., trans. by D. R. Ap-Thomas (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962),
Westermann, Claus The Praise of God in the Psalms, trans. by Keith R. Crim (Richmond, VA: John Knox Press, 1965),
in Psalms and Mythology, (New York: T&T Clark, 2007), 154.
Translated from the Hebrew with Introduction and Brief Explanatory Notes [Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1933], 589
The Book of Psalms, 2 vols., ICC (repr., Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1960),
VA: John Knox Press, 1965), 150
Fortress Press, 1993), 232
on The Book of Psalms, 2 vols., ICC (repr., Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1960), 296–97
[11] Loren R. Fisher and F. Brent Knutson, … 66
[12] Snaith, The Jewish New Year Festival, 195
[13] Frank-Lothar Hossfeld, and Erich Zenger, Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51–100, trans. by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005), 447.
[14] Sigmund Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 2 vols., trans. by D. R. Ap-Thomas (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962), 107;
[15] Frank-Lothar Hossfeld, and Erich Zenger, Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51–100, trans. by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005),
Psalms, TOTC (London: Inter-Varsity Press, 1975), 337.
[17] Frank-Lothar Hossfeld, and Erich Zenger, Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51–100, trans. by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005), 447.
[18] Dahood, Psalms 51–100, 341.
[19] Dahood, Psalms 51–100, 341.
[20] Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalms 60–150, CC, trans. by Hilton C. Oswald (Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 1993), 232
[21] John S. Kselman, “Sinai and Zion in Psalm 93,” in David and Zion: Biblical Studies in Honor of J. J. M. Roberts, ed. by Bernard F. Batto and Kathryn L. Roberts (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2004),69.
[22] Frank-Lothar Hossfeld, and Erich Zenger, Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51–100, trans. by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005), 447.
No comments:
Post a Comment