?Keil & Delitzsch Commentary ? Psalms (Vol. 1)?(Karl F. Keil, etc.)

?Keil & Delitzsch Commentary - Psalms (Vol. 1)?(Karl F. Keil, etc.)

Commentator
Karl Fredreich Keil (1807-1888) was a German Protestant exegetist. Several
years after finishing his theological studys in Dorpat and Berlin, he
accepted a call to the theological faculty of Dorpat, where he labored for
twenty-five years as lecturer and professor of Old and New Testament
exegesis and Oriental languages. In 1859 he settled at Leipsic, where he
devoted himself to literary work and to the practical affairs of the
Lutheran Church. In 1887 he moved to Rodlitz, continuing his literary
activity there until his death.
He belonged to the strictly orthodox and conservative school of
Hengstenberg. Ignoring modern criticism almost entirely, all his writings
represent the view that the books of the Old and New Testaments are to be
retained as the revealed word of God. He regarded the development of German
theological science as a passing phase of error. His chief work is the
commentary on the Old Testament (1866), which he undertook with Franz
Delitzsch. To this work he contributed commentaries on all the books from
Genesis through Esther, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and the minor prophets.

Franz Delitzsch
Franz Delitzsch (1813-1890) was a Lutheran, from Leipsic. He came of Hebrew
parentage; studied at Leipsic where he became a private lecturer in 1842;
held the position of professor in Rostock in 1846; then in Erlangen in
1850; and then again in Leipsic in 1867.
His exegetical activity began in earnest at Erlangen, where he prepared
independently and in connection with Karl Keil some of the best
commentaries on the Old Testament (Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Solomon,
Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, 1866) which had been produced in Germany. These were
soon translated into English and published at Edinburgh.
Delitzsch opposed the idea "of fencing theology off with the letter of the
Formula of Concord." In an introduction to commentary on Genesis published
in 1887, he made it clear that the Bible, as the literature of a divine
revelation, can not be permitted to be charged with a lack of veracity or
to be robbed of its historic basis.
In 1886 he founded a seminary at Leipsic in which candidates of theology
are prepared for missionary work among the Jews, and which in memory of him
is now called Institutum Judaicum Delitzschianum.
Biographical text adapted from The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of
Religious Knowledge.

00 Introduction

The Book of Psalms
Introduction to the Psalter
?????? ??????? ??? ???????? ????? ???? ??????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????
??????? ??????v??????? .
Basil
1. Position of the Psalter among the Hagiographa, and More Especially among
the Poetical Books
The Psalter is everywhere regarded as an essential part of the Kethubim
orHagiographa; but its position among these varies. It seems to follow
fromLuke 24:44 that it opened the Kethubim in the earliest period of
theChristina era.
(Note: Also from 2 Macc. 2:13, where ??? ??v? ??v??? appears to be the
designation of the ?????? according to their beginning; and from Philo, De
vita contempl. (opp. II 475 ed. Mangey), where he makes the following
distinction ?????v? ???? ?????? ???????????? ???? ????????? ???? v?????v?
???? ??? ?????? ????? ?????????? ???? ?v???????? ?v??v??????? ????
??????v????? .)
The order of the books in the Hebrew MSS of the German class, uponwhich our
printed editions in general use are based, is actually this:Psalms,
Proverbs, Job, and the five Megilloth. But the Masora and theMSS of the
Spanish class begin the Kethubim with the Chronicles whichthey awkwardly
separate from Ezra and Nehemiah, and then range thePsalms, Job, Proverbs
and the five Megilloth next.
(Note: In all the Masoretic lists the twenty four books are arranged in the
following order: 1) ???????; 2) ???? ?????; 3) ?????; 4) ????? (also
?????); 5) ??? ??????; 6) ??????; 7) ???????; 8) ??????; 9) ?????; 10)
??????; 11) ?????; 12) ??????; 13) ??? ????; 14) ???? ?????; 15) ?????; 16)
????; 17) ?????; 18) ???; 19) ???? ???????; 20) ????; 21) ????? (????); 22)
????????? (????); 23) ?????; 24) ????. The Masoretic abbreviation for the
three pre-eminently poetical books is accordingly, not ??? but (in
agreement with their Talmudic order) ??? (as also in Chajug'), vid., Elia
Levita, Masoreth ha-Masoreth p. 19. 73 (ed. Ven. 1538) ed. Ginsburg, 1867,
p. 120, 248.)
And according to the Talmud (Baba Bathra 14b) the following is the right
order: Ruth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs; the Book of Ruth precedes the Psalter
as its prologue, for Ruth is the ancestor of him to whom the sacred lyric
owes its richest and most flourishing era. It is undoubtedly the most
natural order that the Psalter should open the division of the Kethubim,
and for this reason: that, according to the stock which forms the basis of
it, it represents the time of David, and then afterwards in like manner the
Proverbs and Job represent the Chokma-literature of the age of Solomon. But
it is at once evident that it could have no other place but among the
Kethubim.
The codex of the giving of the Law, which is the foundation of the old
covenant and of the nationality of Israel, as also of all its subsequent
literature, occupies the first place in the canon. Under the collective
title of ??????, a series of historical writings of a prophetic character,
which trace the history of Israel from the occupation of Canaan to the
first gleam of light in the gloomy retributive condition of the Babylonish
Exile (Prophetae priores) is first attached to these five books of the
Thôra; and then a series of strictly prophetical writings by the prophets
themselves which extend to the time of Darius Nothus, and indeed to the
time of Nehemiah's second sojourn in Jerusalem under this Persian king
(Prophetae posteriores). Regarded chronologically, the first series would
better correspond to the second if the historical books of the Persian
period (Chronicles with Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther) were joined to it; but
for a very good reason this has not been done. The Israelitish literature
has marked out two sharply defined and distinct methods of writing history,
viz., the annalistic and the prophetic. The so-called Elohistic and so-
called Jehovistic form of historical writing in the Pentateuch might serve
as general types of these. The historical books of the Persian period are,
however, of the annalistic, not of the prophetic character (although the
Chronicles have taken up and incorporated many remnants of the prophetic
form of historical writing, and the Books of the Kings, vice versa, many
remnants of the annalistic): they could not therefore stand among the
Prophetae priores. But with the Book of Ruth it is different. This short
book is so like the end of the Book of the Judges (ch. 17-21), that it
might very well stand between Judges and Samuel; and it did originally
stand after the Book of the Judges, just as the Lamentations of Jeremiah
stood after his prophecies. It is only on liturgical grounds that they have
both been placed with the so-called Megilloth (Canticles, Ruth,
Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and Esther, as they are arranged in our
ordinary copies according to the calendar of the festivals). All the
remaining books could manifestly only be classed under the third division
of the canon, which (as could hardly have been otherwise in connection with
???? and ??????) has been entitled, in the most general way, ?????? ,, - a
title which, as the grandson of Ben-Sira renders it in his prologue to
Ecclesiasticus, means simply ??? ?????? ??????? ??????? , or ??? ??????
???? ???????? , and nothing more. For if it were intended to mean writings,
written ???? ?????, - as the third degree of inspiration which is combined
with the greatest spontaneity of spirit, is styled according to the
synagogue notion of inspiration-then the words ???? ????? would and ought
to stand with it.
2. Names of the Psalter
At the close of the seventy-second Psalm (72:20) we find the
subscription:"Are ended the prayers of David, the Son of Jesse." The whole
of thepreceding Psalms are here comprehended under the name ?????. This
strikes one as strange, because with the exception of Psalm 17:1-15
(andfurther on Ps 86; 90; 102; Psalm 142:1-7) they are all inscribed
otherwise; andbecause in part, as e.g., Psalm 1:1-6 and Psalm 2:1-12, they
contain no supplicatory addressto God and have therefore not the form of
prayers. Nevertheless thecollective name Tephilloth is suitable to all
Psalms. The essence of prayeris a direct and undiverted looking towards
God, and the absorption of themind in the thought of Him. Of this nature of
prayer all Psalms partake;even the didactic and laudatory, though
containing no supplicatoryaddress-like Hannah's song of praise which is
introduced with ?????? (1 Samuel 2:1). The title inscribed on the Psalter
is ????? (???) for which ???? (apocopated ??? deta) is also commonly used,
asHippolytus (ed. de Lagarde p. 188) testifies: ÅðåñéåôçâéÓåèåëåéf0.
(Note: In Eusebius, vi. 25: ?????? ??????? ; Jerome (in the Preface to his
translation of the Psalms juxta Hebraicam veritatem) points it still
differently: SEPHAR THALLIM quod interpretatur volumen hymnorumAccordingly
at the end of the Psalterium ex Hebraeo, Cod. 19 in the Convent Library of
St. Gall we find the subscription: Sephar Tallim Quod interpretatur volumen
Ymnorum explicitf0.)
This name may also seem strange, for the Psalms for the most part are
hardly hy