Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadJohn Kitto Evening Bible Devotions: March 2
Today is: Saturday, December 21st, 2024 (Show Today's Devotion)
Select a Day for a Devotion in the Month of March: (Show All Months)
From the important and curious information which these titles contain, most readers of the Bible are desirous of knowing on what authority they rest—in short, whether or not they are of the same authority as the sacred text itself. The use of summaries at the head of the different chapters in many editions of the common Bible, which are known to be of no authority, has led many to place the titles in the same rank, and perhaps not a few suppose that these also were added by translators or editors; while, on the other hand, the occurrence of them in the Hebrew words, together with the knowledge that, as this fact implies, the title exists in the Hebrew copies, has led many to regard them as of the same authority with the text itself. The results of critical investigations have led to similar conclusions. Some support their authority absolutely; others declare them to be unconditionally spurious; while many, who allow their general authority and correctness, admit that some of them cannot be relied upon. We apprehend this last to be the general opinion; but the reader will probably like to see the principal reasons on both sides of the question.
In behalf of the titles, the evidence of their antiquity is much pressed. The translators of the Old Testament into Greek, about 250 years before Christ (the Septuagint), found the titles as we have them; but they were even then so antiquated that the tradition of the real signification of some of them had been lost, as we may judge from the translations which they furnish being often destitute of meaning. If, however, the translators were Egyptian Jews, their remoteness from the temple and its services, producing a comparative unacquaintance with many matters respecting the devotional and musical services of the temple, may adequately account for their being sometimes at a loss in regard to the titles—distance of place having often in such matters the same effect as distance of time.
It is also alleged to have been always customary with the poets of the East to affix their names to their songs; and to show that this was an ancient custom among the Hebrews, we are referred to Exodus 15, Deuteronomy 32, 33, and Judges 5. But although the poets are in these instances named, the name is historically produced in the narrative, and cannot be said to be exhibited in a title. It is, however, allowed, that the inscription to Hezekiah’s song of praise in Isa_38:9 : “The writing of Hezekiah, king of Judah, when he had been sick, and was recovered of his sickness,” is in favor of this opinion, as is also the practice among the prophets of designating their predictions by their names.
Many of the titles agree very well with the subject-matter of the Psalms to which they are prefixed. The number of those, however, in which no such accordance can be traced, is considerably greater.
It is the belief of many that the titles were inserted from probable conjecture, or from tradition, by later hands; but those who contend for the high and original authority of the titles, ask how it happens, if this were the case, that all the Psalms were not provided with titles? If the titles were so supplied, they might as easily have been provided for those that have them not, as for those that have them; and hence this is urged as a proof that nothing has been transmitted to us but what was found already existing. Closely considered, however, this argument, on the one side, has not more weight than that of the advocates for the late and conjectural insertion on the other, who simply remark, that with regard to the Psalms that want inscriptions, the authors of the titles had no conjectures to offer.
The most powerful argument against the titles is, that many of them are undoubtedly incorrect. Sometimes the author is incorrectly specified—as when several Psalms are ascribed to David or to Asaph, which undeniably belong to a later age. The reader who compares, for instance, the titles with the contents of Psalms 34; Psalms 51; Psalms 54; Psalms 56; Psalms 57; Psalms 60, will be satisfied of this. Many of these titles are taken from the historical books, from which they are sometimes literally transcribed: yet why Psalms 56 should be referred to the time “when the Philistines took him (David) in Gath;” or the next Psalm to the time “when he fled from Saul in the cave,” is not very apparent from the contents of these Psalms. The author of these titles seems to have somewhat blindly followed the course of the narrative in the First Book of Samuel. If, then, several of the titles can be proved to be false, who shall answer for the genuineness of the rest? This circumstance exposes them all to the suspicion of being spurious.
Most of the recent writers and expositors who have given heed to this curious and not unimportant subject, have been inclined to take a middle course. It is to suppose that to the ancient genuine titles of some of the Psalms, additions were in the course of time made of others, conjectural and often wrong, by means of marginal glosses and interpolations. The difficulty of distinguishing the genuine from the spurious titles still, however remains—though to those experienced in critical inquiries, it is not altogether so great as might be supposed. Some good authorities regard all the titles that relate to music as being, without exception, of late origin. This we doubt: but there seems some probability in the notion, that the erroneous titles sprung from particular collections of Psalms, bearing the names “The Psalms of David,” “Psalms of the sons of Korah,” etc. as being principally by them, but also containing Psalms by ether hands; and when these special collections were combined in the present grand collection, each sacred song was ascribed to the author after whom the whole of the collection was named—just as in the Chronicles and in the New Testament, the anonymous Psalms are ascribed generally to David.
Upon the whole, while so much obscurity hangs over the subject, while it is certain that many of the titles are incorrect. and while it is impossible in all cases to distinguish the genuine titles from the spurious, it may not be safe to rely upon the titles as of any canonical authority or value, though the indications which they offer are in many cases probable, and in some undoubtedly true.