Keil and Delitzsch Commentary - Psalms 106:24 - 106:24

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary - Psalms 106:24 - 106:24


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

The fact to which the poet refers in Psa 106:24, viz., the rebellion in consequence of the report of the spies, which he brings forward as the fourth principal sin, is narrated in Num 13, Num 14. The appellation אֶרֶץ חֶמְדָּה is also found in Jer 3:19; Zec 7:14. As to the rest, the expression is altogether Pentateuchal. “They despised the land,” after Num 14:31; “they murmured in their tents,” after Deu 1:27; “to lift up the land” = to swear, after Exo 6:8; Deu 32:40; the threat לְהַפִּיל, to make them fall down, fall away, after Num 14:29, Num 14:32. The threat of exile is founded upon the two great threatening chapters, Lev 26; Deu 28:1; cf. more particularly Lev 26:33 (together with the echoes in Eze 5:12; Eze 12:14, etc.), Deu 28:64 (together with the echoes in Jer 9:15; Eze 22:15, etc.). Eze 20:23 stands in a not accidental relationship to Psa 106:26.; and according to that passage, וּלְהַפִיל is an error of the copyist for וּלְהָפִיץ (Hitzig).

Now follows in Psa 106:28-31 the fifth of the principal sins, viz., the taking part in the Moabitish worship of Baal. The verb נִצְמַד (to be bound or chained), taken from Num 25:3, Num 25:5, points to the prostitution with which Baal Peôr, this Moabitish Priapus, was worshipped. The sacrificial feastings in which, according to Num 25:2, they took part, are called eating the sacrifices of the dead, because the idols are dead beings (nekroi', Wisd. 13:10-18) as opposed to God, the living One. The catena on Rev 2:14 correctly interprets: τὰ τοῖς εἰδώλοις τελεσθέντα κρέα.

(Note: In the second section of Aboda zara, on the words of the Mishna: “The flesh which is intended to be offered first of all to idols is allowed, but that which comes out of the temple is forbidden, because it is like sacrifices of the dead,” it is observed, fol. 32b: “Whence, said R. Jehuda ben Bethêra, do I know that that which is offered to idols (תקרובת לעבדה זרה) pollutes like a dead body? From Psa 106:28. As the dead body pollutes everything that is under the same roof with it, so also does everything that is offered to idols.” The Apostle Paul declares the objectivity of this pollution to be vain, cf. more particularly 1Co 10:28.)

The object of “they made angry” is omitted; the author is fond of this, cf. Psa 106:7 and Psa 106:32. The expression in Psa 106:29 is like Exo 19:24. The verb עָמַד is chosen with reference to Num 17:13. The result is expressed in Psa 106:30 after Num 25:8, Num 25:18., Num 17:13. With פִּלֵּל, to adjust, to judge adjustingly (lxx, Vulgate, correctly according to the sense, ἐξιλάσατο), the poet associates the thought of the satisfaction due to divine right, which Phinehas executed with the javelin. This act of zeal for Jahve, which compensated for Israel's unfaithfulness, was accounted unto him for righteousness, by his being rewarded for it with the priesthood unto everlasting ages, Num 25:10-13. This accounting of a work for righteousness is only apparently contradictory to Gen 15:5.: it was indeed an act which sprang from a constancy in faith, and one which obtained for him the acceptation of a righteous man for the sake of this upon which it was based, by proving him to be such.

In Psa 106:32, Psa 106:33 follows the sixth of the principal sins, viz., the insurrection against Moses and Aaron at the waters of strife in the fortieth year, in connection with which Moses forfeited the entrance with them into the Land of Promise (Num 20:11., Deu 1:37; Deu 32:51), since he suffered himself to be carried away by the persevering obstinacy of the people against the Spirit of God (הִמְרָה mostly providing the future for מָרָה, as in Psa 106:7, Psa 106:43, Psa 78:17, Psa 78:40, Psa 78:56, of obstinacy against God; on אֶת־רוּחֹו cf. Isa 63:10) into uttering the words addressed to the people, Num 20:10, in which, as the smiting of the rock which was twice repeated shows, is expressed impatience together with a tinge of unbelief. The poet distinguishes, as does the narrative in Num. 20, between the obstinacy of the people and the transgression of Moses, which is there designated, according to that which lay at the root of it, as unbelief. The retrospective reference to Num 27:14 needs adjustment accordingly.