of the Jewish magistracy. The office of a Judge was, generally speaking, the ex-officio prerogative of the Heads of Families and the Levites. Under the former term were included two distinct classes of different rank "The more common name for the higher order is 'princes' and for the lower 'elders."" The Princes were, it would seem, the heads of tribes, the Elders heads of sections of tribes. The Levites joined to the practical experience of these secular functionaries the legal acumen attained in the study of the Law, and the religious feelings engendered by a sacred calling. Above these functionaries was the High-Priest, who constituted in himself a Supreme Court of Appeal. Such appears to have been the judicial machinery of the nation on taking possession of Canaan. Between that time and the regal period the supreme judicial power of the High-Priest seems to have been ceded to the reformers and deliverers, who have on this account given name to the Book of Judges. On the establishment of the Monarchy it was apparently designed that the king should be possessed of this judicial authority, and we find David and Solomon trying cases in person. The succeeding kings seem to have been content to transmit their prerogatives to the representative body of Levites, Princes and Elders. Now one, now the other, of these component parts of the magistracy rise into prominence in the regal period, until we reach the reigns immediately preceding the Babylonish captivity, when "the princes (sârîm) appear as a powerful political body, increasing in influence and privileges, and having a fixed centre of action at Jerusalem, till in the reign of Zedekiah they seem to exercise the duty of a privy council, and especially a collective jurisdiction (2 Chron. xxviii. 21, Jer. xxvi. 10, 16),” Bibl. Dict. Judges. Though, as we have observed above, there are no direct indications of the date of this Psalm, the fact of these unjust judges being addressed as sârîm (v. 7, n.), if granted, may perhaps suggest the era in which the "Princes" were the ruling elements in the magistracy. It may be that we have here a Psalm belonging to that period of distraction and disorganization which culminated in the Babylonish captivity, and that the Psalmist addresses his stinging reproof to that aristocratic order whose abuses drew down the pious indignation of Jeremiah and Ezekiel (cf. Jer. ii. 8, v. 1, vii. 5, xxi. 12, Ezek. xxii. 27, xlv. 8, 9). The analysis of the Psalm is easy. The court of judicature is declared to be under the guardianship and surveillance of Him who is Judge of all, the duties He requires the protection of the poor and needy are contrasted with the lying sentences and partiality of the professed administrators of justice. These are warned that notwithstanding the grandeur of their office-an office that indeed derived its lustre from a Heavenly antitype--they too are subject to the sors una of mortality. Lastly, God is entreated to exercise in person the functions which His representatives have so shamefully abused.

Hengst. and others suppose that God is the speaker from v. 2 to v. 7,

so that only vv. 1, 2 procced from the Psalmist in his own person.

This

is certainly possible; the Psalm would be then constructed after the fashion of Ps. 1., which it somewhat resembles in character. But on the whole, we think that as there are no obvious indications of a change of person, the whole is best taken as the utterance of the Psalmist himself.

OD standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked?. Selah.

1. Rend. "God is stationed in His Assembly: in the midst of the E'lôhîm He judges:" i. e. in the Assembly of Judges God is ever present; and records a decision ever righteous, be theirs what it may. a. His Assembly, lit. "Assembly of God," H. a'dath êl, not "mighty congregation," after such phrases as har êl, "mighty mountain," ar❜zê êl, “mighty cedars," still less "assembly of Gods," LXX., Vulg., Arab., Æth. The phrase "congregation of Jehovah," as applied to Israel generally, is of frequent occurrence (Numb. xxvii. 17, xxxi. 16, Josh. xxii. 16, 17; cf. Ps. lxxiv. 2), and, which is especially noteworthy, the judicial assembly is, in Judg. xx. 2, styled the "Assembly of the people of God,” k’hal am hâ-e'lôhîm. The assembly of judges is called God's Assembly because convoked in His Name and on behalf of His people; just as the judges are in the 2nd hemist. called e'lohim as His representatives. b. At least three times elsewhere we find the term e' lôhîm "Gods" applied to the national magistracy. In Ex. xxi. 6, xxii. 8, e'lôhîm is rightly rendered "judges" in A. V. It were to be wished they had given the same rendg. in Ex. xxii. 28. Here however, and more especially in v. 6, the significance given to the title would be lost by a freer rendering. The application of the title of divinity to the magistrates of Israel is intelligible enough when we consider the theocratic sentiment of the nation. The judge in all monarchical countries is regarded as the direct representative of the sovereign: Israel's only sovereign at the period when the term was first thus applied was Jehovah; and the judicial office borrowed alike responsibility and dignity from a typical relation to the prerogatives of the "Judge of all the earth." Bacon, with this Ps. apparently in mind, treats of the grandeur of earthly monarchs as representatives of God. But in the commonwealth of Israel, even during the regal era, it is the judge who is "a mortal god upon earth, unto whom the living God hath lent His own Name as a great honour, but withal told him he should die like a man, lest he should be proud, and flatter himself

3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy. 4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.

5 They know not, neither will they

understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

that God hath with His name imparted unto him His nature also." (Bacon's Essays. "Of a King.")

2. "Accept the persons of," i.e. take the side of, shew partiality to. The H. nâsâ pânîm primarily involves the act of raising the face of another with the view of comforting him. Cf. Gen. iv. 6, 7. Hence by a kind of familiarised metaphor it expresses the indication of peculiar favour or partiality to another. The LXX. rendg. πрóσжлоv λaußável passes into the N.T. idiom, and originates the subst. πроσwroλnyia of S. Paul and S. James.

3. "Do justice to." There is no occasion to render “acquit,” as Del. p hitsdîk may denote merely the act of "doing justice to" the person tried (cf. Is. 1. 8, 2 Sam. xv. 4).

66

66 The earth," or 5.6. the land,” i.e. the Hebrew realm. Its foundations are shaken by the prevalent injustice, i. e. there is a bouleversement of all social order, of which justice is the prop. As Rabban Simeon says, "Upon three things the duration of the world depends, upon Truth, and Justice and Peace, as it is said, 'Truth and Judgment of Peace judge ye in your gates' (Zech. viii. 16).” (Âvôth. i.)

6. Ye are indeed, says the Psalmist, styled E'lôhîm, and verily, as representatives of the Divine tribunal, ye are of a higher grade than your fellow-men. Yet must your powers cede one day to those of death, and yourselves be arraigned before a Higher Tribunal.

66

The expression e'lôhim has been already explained-"Children of the Most High." B'nê e'lôhîm, sons of God," is a designation of the angels (Gen. vi. 2, Dan. iii. 25): this title therefore denotes an elevation above the rank of ordinary human beings, but the elevation is only ex officio, not personal, as the Psalmist proceeds to shew. Luther well remarks, “Just as father, mother, preacher, minister, etc. are in every respect holy divine situations, although the persons who are in them may be knaves and rogues; thus......magistrates are correctly called gods and the children of God, on account of their divine condition, and the Word of God, although they are really vile knaves, as he complains that they are."

In John x. 34-36, our Lord replies to the Jews, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, Ye are gods'? If he called them gods, unto whom the Word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken, say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the

7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth; for thou shalt inherit all nations.

world, 'Thou blasphemest ;' because I said, I am the Son of God?" Here the argument turns on the words ἡγίασε καὶ ἀπέστειλε. The title E'lohîm was allowed to those who were officials by mere accident of birth, and in this case personally unholy. A fortiori was the title "Son of God" appropriate to Him Whose office and personal character were directly of God. A further distinction between those to whom ó λóyos Toû beοû came merely in utterance (i. e. in their being appointed to office according to the sacred Tôrâh), and Him who was Himself ó λóyos roû beoû, and came in that character to men, may possibly be included.

66

7. Like one of the princes. H. d'achad hassârîm : this expression is difficult: it can hardly bear the meaning “like any other of the princes," for there has been a distinction drawn between these e'lôhîm and mankind, which makes c'âdâm in hemist. a equiv. to “as if mere men," and besides, Judg. xvi. 7, 11 is the only other passage that could be understood to warrant such a form of expression. On the other hand, the rendering "like one of the princes," justifiable enough as far as construction is concerned, introduces a comparison lacking in point. What princes? "Any one of the princes who in the course of history have been cast down by the judgment of God," according to Del. and Hengst. But all princes are not so brought down, and hissârîm must denote the whole genus of princes. All princes die, it is true but if the hemist. refer to death, why such an anticlimax-you are indeed exalted above humanity, even to Divinity, but you must die like a mere human being, like a mere prince. Searching for another meaning for c'achad we find that the form achad occurs sometimes exactly in the signif. of the absol. echâd (i.e. not as a constructive, nor as a quasi-constructive followed by the prepos. ¡ min). Thus it is used in Gen. xlviii. 22, Ez. xxxiii. 30, Zech. xi. 7. possible that just as in Zech. xi. 7 l'achad twice occurs in the sense of l'echâd, so here c'achad is equiv. to the common c'echâd, "together," "in like manner." If this be granted, the difficulty of the v. vanishes. "But ye must die like mortal men: yea, even in the same way [as they], O ye Princes, shall ye fall," is a rendg. well suited to the context, and free from anticlimax. There is no occasion to read c'echâd, as Ewald, nor does his rendering "and fall, O ye princes, together," or "like one man," seem so appropriate as the above. For c'echâd, "in like manner," cf. Eccl. xi. 6, Is. lxv. 25. On the application of the title "princes," sârîm, to the national judges, see Introd.

It is at least

8. Rend. "Arise, O God, judge Thou the land: for all the nations are Thine inheritance."

b. Lit. "for Thou hast all the nations as Thine inheritance." There is no reason to infer from this hemist. that the Ps. is a protest against the tyranny of Gentile rulers. De Wette. The logical connection with the foregoing is obvious enough. All nations are the inheritance of the God of truth and justice, therefore it concerns Him that injustice is done in any single country, as now in Israel. He is implored to "judge" the land in person, and thus quell the prevalent injustice.

INTRODUCTION TO PSALM LXXXIII.

A PRAYER AGAINST A CONFEDERACY OF HOSTILE NATIONS.

TITLE. "A Song, a Psalm, to Asaph."

WHEN did this confederacy take place? Nowhere in Old Testament history have we any event that precisely harmonizes with the formidable onslaught which terrifies the Psalmist, no fewer than ten distinct tribes being here set before us as preparing a conspiracy which has for its aim the utter extermination of Israel. How difficult it is to associate any invasion recorded in Scripture with that here depicted, may be seen from the following compendium of attempts at identification:

I. Ewald supposes that the attempts of “the Arabians and the Ammonites, and the Ashdodites," under Sanballat the Moabite, and Tobiah the Ammonite, to hinder the rebuilding of the Temple, in the time of Nehemiah, are the subject of the Psalmist's protest (cf. Neh. iv. 7). Obj. 1. In this case there would probably be mention made of the Samaritans, the most virulent of Nehemiah's opponents. 2. There would not be mention made of the Amalekites, the last remnant of that nation having been exterminated under Hezekiah, 1 Chron. iv. 43. 3. Asshur moreover was at that time no longer a nation; the Assyrians were subjugated by the Medes cir. B. C. 625. It has been suggested in answer to this that Asshur may perhaps denote Syria. But nowhere do we find Syria so designated. 4. The object of these nations was simply to prevent the rebuilding of the Temple. Even in this they were not particularly strenuous, and it is pure assumption to suppose that they wished to cut off Israel from "being a nation," so that Israel should be no more "in remembrance," v. 4.

II. In 1 Macc. v. we read that when the "surrounding nations" (specified afterwards as the sons of Bean, Esau and Ammon) "heard that the