Psalm 29: Pre-intermediate discussion
by koot van wyk (DLitt et Phil; ThD)
Sangju Campus
conjoint lecturer of
5 October 2009
In our beginners edition of Psalm 29 we spoke about some theories regarding the content of the Psalm mentioning a few scholars and also William Shea. We also talked about the dating of the Psalm by some scholars as very early and others as very late. We could not exhaust the wealth of information on this Psalm in the previous treatment and it calls for a more in depth discussion to continue.
Content
We are back to the content of the Psalm since it should be clear by now that scholars saw all kinds of things in the Psalm. Some saw it as a poem honoring fertility. Others saw it as a Baal and El poem reworked for a Jewish audience. Others saw it as a real storm in bad weather over that area. Gunkel saw the Psalm as growing out of Deuteronomy 32 (Gunkel 125). Note, to connect it to Moses and his literature is not a bad idea. Dahood connected it to Canaanite Mythology (Dahood 175). Weiser connected it to the experience of
The year 1984 was important for two reasons relevant to this psalm: Oswald Loretz published his book on this Psalm (O. Loretz, Psalm 29. Kanaanäische El- und Baaltraditionen in jüdischer Sicht (Ugaritisch - Biblische Literatur, 2) [Soest: CIS Verlag, 1984]). Secondly, on the 24th of October 1984, William Shea presented his lecture on Psalm 29 at
Oswald Loretz
The best one can say about Loretz work is that it is the largest collection of bibliography on Psalm 29 available on the market. It appears very thorough and Germans can do that since they are daily in the world's best libraries. The problem with the book is that there are lots of unsatisfactory decisions by the author. Julius Wellhaussen is used as a standard for ideal historiography and chronology of biblical books. The last paragraph reveals the real Loretz and should be read first before the book is read. He claims that the purpose of the book is to prove William F. Albright wrong [to say that it is early] and to save Wellhaussen that the poem is post-exillic. Wellhaussen said that Psalm 29 is post-exillic. Albright said that Exodus 15 (Hymn of Deborah and Miriam) is old (10th century BCE). He also said that Psalm 29 is similarly to Exodus 15 also old. In one of his footnotes Loretz reveal his real mind that he fought with others against the thesis of Albright. The book of Loretz can only be used as a data supplying tool. The conclusions of Loretz, similarly to his conclusions on the Habiru book that he also wrote, is best to be evaluated critically by looking at alternatives. And alternatives do exist if time is taken on these matters. The essential problem with Loretz is that he serves hermeneutics of suspicion and not hermeneutics of affirmation. The navigational angle is thus always skew and one has to always adjust him according to the Word of God.
William Shea
William Shea presented the Psalm as a non-Israelite Psalm if one takes the Geography serious. He emphasized that it is not a fertility Psalm but a destructive Psalm. There is no rain, but there is shaking and destruction. The Kadesh that Shea had in mind was not the southern one that nearly all earlier scholars opted for since they wanted to end the Psalm at the
The concept by so many earlier scholars of presenting the qol "voice" as seven thunders or seven bolts, was not to strongly presented by Shea. For Shea it was not a mere storm but God in judgement. The voice of God destroys nature, is strong and majestic over the waters and moved towards the
van wyk
Delitzsch discussed the Psalm as the Psalm of the seven thunders (F. Delitzsch, Psalms in Commentary on the Old Testament in ten Volumes Vol. V by C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch [Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans], 366) but there is no indication in the Psalm of any rain (Shea) and then also the word qol means voice of God and not thunder. Thunder is too remote a meaning for qol. It is not just limited to a thunderstorm as Delitzsch is saying (Delitzsch 367). Later Judaism in the Byzantine period sources has invented a meaning for Psalm 29 to be used on the seventh day of the feast of tabernacles (Sohar section צ) and it is said that seven of the Sephiroth open the flood-gates of heaven (see Delitzsch 368 at footnote).
What is nice about Delitzsch is that he saw the opening verses of the Psalm as a scene in heaven and not on earth. The angels are called upon to give God glory in 29:1-2. For Delitzsch qol is the sound of thunder, the sound of an earthquake and the sound of the waves (Delitzsch 369). For us it is the voice of God. It is not nature but God Himself and the vision that the poet had is of similtudes to storms he experienced before, but just greater.
There is no indication that God will destroy through an army or intermediate agent the northern part of what we know as
This is an eschatological Psalm fitting in after the millennium when God will execute His Executive Judgement phase. The Judgement motif of biblical Theology has three phases: Investigative Judgement, Confirmative Judgement during the 1000 years and the Executive Judgement at the end of the 1000 years. Biblical prophets and poets sometimes focussed on one of the three or sometimes describe two intertwined. Daniel 7 focussed on the Investigative Judgement and Revelation 20 on the Executive Judgement. One has to be always clear in biblical theology as to what Judgement and what phase is meant in a given passage. Sometimes God carried out historical judgements on people, places or empires and that is normally clearly so understood by the context. Agents on earth is used to carry out these historical judgements. Psalm 29 is not a historical judgement.