PSALMS
They
look
beyond
the
present
which
for
the
writers
is
often
full
of
oppression
and
affliction,
to
a
future
which
is
sometimes
described
with
some
fulness
(.e.g.
Ps
72),
but
is
often
merely
suggested
by
the
call
on
God
to
arise,
to
awalce,
to
reveal
Himself;
or
by
some
other
brief
but
pregnant
phrase.
We
cannot
here
discuss
how
far
the
Psalms
anticipate
a
particular
Messianic
individual;
it
must
suffice
to
say
that
the
original
sense
of
many
passages
has
been
obscured
by
specific
applications
to
the
life
of
Christ
—
applications
which
in
some
Instances
have
been
built
on
a
very
questionable
Hebrew
text
or
an
illegitimate
translation,
and
that
in
some
Psalms
(e.g.
Ps
2)
the
°
Messiah
'
is
perhaps
rather
the
nation
of
Israel,
supreme
among
the
nations
of
the
world
(cf.
Dn
7),
than
an
individual
ruler
or
deliverer,
whether
of
Israel
or
of
the
world.
But
where
fuller
expression
is
given
to
the
hope,
it
often
takes
the
form
of
the
establish-ment
of
the
Kingdom
of
God,
without
reference
to
any
other
king
than
God
Himself
;
the
overruling
thought
is
of
the
manifestation
of
His
supreme
sovereignty
and
the
consequent
promotion
of
righteousness
and
equity
among
all
people
(so
pre-eminently
Pss
96-100).
Even
in
the
broadest
form
of
this
thought,
it
is
true
that
Israel
occupies
a
central
position
and
Zion
is
to
become
for
the
whole
world
what
it
has
long
been
for
Israel
—
the
centre
of
religion,
the
place
where
Jahweh
will
be
worshipped
(cf.
esp.
Ps
87).
No
Psalmist
has
attained
to
the
standpoint
of
our
Lord's
teaching
in
Jn
i""-.
(5)
From
the
thought
of
the
Psalmists
about
God
and
their
hope
in
Him.
we
may
turn
to
their
thought
of
men,
which
is
for
the
most
part
primarily
of
Israel,
and
in
particular
to
their
sense
of
sin.
Judged
by
their
attitude
towards
sin,
the
Psalms
fall
into
two
great
groups:
the
extreme
representatives
of
each
group
are
very
different
in
thought,
tone,
and
temper
;
the
less
extreme
approximate
more
or
less
closely
to
one
another.
In
the
one
group
the
writers
claim
for
themselves,
and,
so
far
as
they
identify
themselves
with
Israel,
for
their
nation,
that
they
are
righteous,
and
in
consequence
have
a
claim
on
God's
righteousness
to
deliver
them
from
present
afflictions
(so,
e.g.,
Pss
7.
17.
26.
28.
44.
86).
In
the
other
group,
confession
is
made
of
great
iniquity:
the
appeal
for
help,
if
made,
can
be
made
to
Gods
mercy
and
lovingkindness
alone
(see
Pss
25.
32.
40.
51.
65.
85.
etc.).
The
first
group
stand
far
removed
from
the
early
Prophets;
but
they
have
considerable
resemblance
in
thought
to
Habak-kuk;
the
second
group,
again,
differ
from
the
early
Prophets;
for
though
both
recognize
the
sinfulness
of
Israel,
yet
the
Prophets
complain
that
Israel
does
not
recognize
Its
sin,
whereas
these
Psalms
make
con-fession
of
sin
on
behalf
of
the
nation
(cf.
the
late
confession
in
Is
63'-64'2).
(6)
The
view
taken
of
sin
in
both
groups
of
Psalms
is
best
appreciated
by
noticing
how,
with
all
their
differ-ence,
they
are
yet
related.
Some
sense
of
sin
is
perhaps
never
altogether
absent
from
the
Psalms
that
lay
claim
to
righteousness,
and
a
strong
sense
of
relative
right-eousness
generally
accompanies
the
most
fervent
con-fession
of
sin.
Even
in
such
Psalms
as
the
32nd
and
the
51st,
where
the
difference
is
most
clearly
felt
between
God's
standard
and
man's
performance,
the
sense
is
also
present
of
a
sharp
difference
between
those
who.
in
spite
of
sin,
yet
pursue
after
righteousness,
and
those
who
constitute
the
class
of
'the
wicked'
or
the
trans-gressors."
This
attitude
towards
sin
might
doubtless
without
much
difficulty
become
that
of
the
Pharisee
in
the
parable;
but
it
is
also
closely
akin
to
the
highest
Christian
consciousness,
in
which
the
shadow
of
sin
shows
darkest
in
the
light
of
the
righteousness
and
love
of
God
as
revealed,
In
Christ,
and
which
leads
the
truest
followers
of
Christ,
with
all
honesty,
to
account
them-selves
the
chief
of
sinners.
And
it
is
because
the
'
peni-tential
'
Psalms
are
confessions,
not
so
much
of
grosser
sins
open
to
the
rebuke
of
man,
but
of
the
subtler
sins
which
are
committed
in
the
sight
of
and
against
PSYCHOLOGY
God
only,
of
the
sins
which
stand
in
the
way
of
the
nation
called
of
God
fulfllling
its
missionary
destiny,
that
these
Psalms
have
played
so
conspicuous
a
part
in
forming
the
habit
and
moulding
the
form
of
the
con-fession
of
the
Christian
man
and
the
Christian
Church.
On
the
poetical
form
of
the
Psalms,
see
Poetry
and
Acrostic.
The
first
edition
of
T.
K.
Cheyne's
Book
of
PsaZms(1882).withitsfineoriginaUransIationandtersenotes
full
of
insight,
is
one
of
the
best
boolcs
the
student
can
use;
in
1:he
second
edition
the
translation
is
based
on
a
very
radical
re-construction
of
the
Hebrew
text,
which
has
not
obtained
general
approval.
Other
translations
are
Well-hausen-Fumess's
in
the
Polychrome
Bible
a,iidS.
R.
Driver's
Parallel
Psalter
(Prayer-Book
version
and
a
revised
version
based
thereon).
The
most
important
Com.
in
English
is
by
C.
A.
Briggs
(ICC,
1906-7)
.
Other
useful
commentaries
are
W.
F.
Co
do
(with
independent
translation),
Kirkpatrick
on
AV
(in
Cambridge
Bible),
and
W.
T.
Davison
and
T.
W.
Davies
on
R
V
(Century
Bible)
.
The
most
exhaustive
treatise
on
the
Hterary
criticism
and
religious
thought
of
the
Psalter
is
T.
K.
Cheyne's
Origin
of
the
Psalter
(1891:
many
details
implicitly
withdrawn
or
corrected
in
the
author's
later
wntings;
see,
e.g.,
art.
'Psalms'
iaEBi).
For
briefer
treat-ment
of
the
literary
questions
see
W.
R.
Smith's
chapter
(vii.)
on
the
Psalter
in
OTJC,
and
S.
R.
Driver's
LOT.
G.
B.
Ghat.
PSALMS
OF
SOLOMON.—
See
Apocaltptic
Litera-ture,
3.
PSALTERY.—
See
Music,
etc.,
§
4.
PSYCHOLOGY.—
The
Bible
does
not
contain
a
science
of
psychology
in
the
modern
sense;
but
there
is
a
definite
and
consistent
view
of
man's
nature
from
the
religious
standpoint.
This
being
recognized,
the
old
dispute,
whether
it
teaches
the
bipartite
or
the
tripartite
nature
of
man,
loses
its
meaning,
for
the
distinction
of
soul
and
spirit
is
not
a
division
of
man
into
soul
and
spirit
along
with
his
body
or
flesh,
but
a
difference
of
point
of
view
—
the
one
emphasizing
man's
individual
existence,
the
other
his
dependence
on
God.
The
account
in
Gn
2'
makes
this
clear.
The
breath
or
spirit
of
God
breathed
into
the
dust
of
the
ground
makes
the
living
soul.
The
living
soul
ceases
when
the
dust
returns
to
the
earth
as
it
was,
and
the
spirit
returns
to
God
who
gave
it'
(Ec
12').
The
soul
is
not,
as
in
Greek
philosophy,
a
separate
substance
which
takes
up
its
abode
in
the
body
at
birth,
and
is
released
from
its
bondage
at
death,
but
is
matter
animated
by
God's
breath.
Hence
no
pre-existence
of
the
soul
is
taught
(except
in
Wis
7"-
'»),
nor
is
the
future
life
conceived
as
that
of
a
disembodied
soul.
Man
is
the
unity
of
spirit
and
matter;
hence
the
hope
of
immortality
involves
the
belief
in
the
resurrec-tion
of
the
body,
even
though
in
St.
Paul's
statement
of
the
belief
the
body
raised
is
described
as
spiritual
(1
Co
15").
The
OT
has
not.
In
fact,
a
term
for
the
body
as
a
whole;
the
matter
to
which
the
spirit
gives
life
is
of
ten
referred
to
as
■
flesh.'
This
term
may
be
used
for
man
as
finite
earthly
creature
in
contrast
with
God
and
His
Spirit.
Man
is
flesh,'
or
'soul,'
or
'spirit,'
according
to
the
aspect
of
[his
personality
it
is
desired
to
emphasize.
The
varied
senses
in
which
these
terms
are
used
are
discussed
in
the
separate
articles
upon
them;
here
only
their
relation
to
one
another
is
dealt
with.
These
are
the
three
principal
psychological
terms;
but
there
are
a
few
others
which
claim
mention.
Heart
is
used
for
the
inner
life,
the
principles,
motives,
purposes
(Gn
6=,
Ps
51'»,
Ezk
36»>,
Mt
15",
2
Co
3'),
without
precise
distinction
of
the
intellectual,
emotional,
or
volitional
functions;
but
it
can
never,
as
the
preceding
terms,
be
used
for
the
whole
man.
St.
Paul,
influenced
probably
by
Greek
philosophy,
uses
nous
for
mind
as
man's
intellectual
activity
(Ro
72^-25),
and
even
con-trasts
it
with
the
ecstatic
state
(1
Co
14"-
"),
and
adopts
other
terms
used
in
the
Greek
schools.
Another
Greek
term,
syneidlsis,
rendered
'
conscience,'
is
used
in
the
NT
consistently
for
what
Kant
called
the
practical
reason,
man's
moral
consciousness
(Ac
23'
24i«,
Ro
2«
91
13»,
1
Co
8'-
'»•
"
10"-
"•
28.
89^
2
Co
1"
42,
1
Ti
