One of the few concepts that most scholars agree upon is that context is crucial for proper biblical interpretation. Canonical consciousness is certainly one of the most powerful contextual tools available to the interpreter. As opposed to focusing solely on comparative religious influences or the subjective nature of certain diachronic methodologies, canonical consciousness attempts to read Scripture holistically in light of the innertextual connections within the Psalter and between the Psalter and the remainder of the canon. Accordingly, the following analysis identifies several innertextual and intertextual links of the Psalter. It also identifies specific examples from Psalm 22 that allows for reflection upon how canonical consciousness provides a context for expositing the Psalter.
Although a comprehensive approach to innertextual analysis of the Psalter would likely require multiple volumes, it is difficult to engage in even a cursory analysis without recognizing the connections between the first two Psalms and the rest of the Psalter. Robert Cole explains that many scholars believe that the first two Psalms provide an integrated introduction to the Psalter as a whole.[1] The lack of superscription of the first two Psalms supports the assertion. Although Cole concedes that the first two Psalms may have been independently written, the “linguistic, structural, and thematic evidence” suggest that an integrated reading is most appropriate.[2] David Howard identifies several connections between the first two Psalms including the topic of righteousness versus wickedness, the kingship overtones, the ‘ashre clauses that focus on the blessed taking refuge in Yahweh, and the motifs of wisdom and Davidic covenant.[3] Importantly, the links between Psalms 1 and 2 provide a foundation for additional connections with the rest of the Psalter. For example, the topic of righteousness, the language of kingship, Yahweh’s characteristic protection, and covenant language all figure prominently throughout the Psalter. Accordingly, the interpreter must keep these key characteristics, which have been established in the introduction, at the forefront of the interpretive analysis of the entire book. Additional links between the first two Psalms and the rest of the Psalter provide important clues for interpretation. Michael Snearly asserts that Psalm 89 may provide the hinge upon which the entire Psalter rests.[4] The reason for the assertion is partially due to the innertextual connections with Psalms 1-2. Key words such as king, Torah, eternal, and covenant loyalty not only provide connections between the introduction and Psalm 89 at the end of Book III (Pss 73-89) but also provide links to the entire macrostructure of Book V (Pss 107-145).[5] Furthermore, according to Snearly, the kingship language is reflected within Books I-III, while Book IV continues to focus on Yahweh’s sovereignty established in Psalm 2.[6] In sum, by ignoring the innertextual links within the Psalter, the interpreter risks missing the author’s intended message by segregating the context of individual Psalms from its overall canonical context.
Intertextual analysis between the Psalter and the New Testament and the remainder of the Old Testament also provides important canonical context for interpreting the Psalms. Regarding both the Old and New Testaments, the echoes, allusions, and quotations are vast; a few examples will have to suffice. According to Walter Kaiser, one of the most prominent motifs within the Psalter is the lament or complaint; thus, intertextually reading the lament Psalms in light of the Old Testament book of Lamentations can assist in providing insight into reading both the individual and corporate laments within the Psalter.[7] The suffering experienced by the Jewish people upon the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple and the subsequent Babylonian exile caused great despair as noted in the exasperation of Lamentations 2:21, “In the dust of the streets like the young and old; my young women and my young men have fallen by the sword; you have killed them in the day of your anger, slaughtering without pity.” [8] Reading the lament Psalms in light of its links to the book of Lamentations provides insights in understanding a significant portion of the Psalter. Kaiser explains that the purpose of the individual and corporate laments in the Psalter match the purpose of Lamentations, which is to process grief, not by ignoring the pain or philosophically explaining the suffering, but by expressing and feeling the pain.[9] By ignoring the purpose of the lament Psalms in light of the broader context of the book of Lamentations, the interpreter again risks missing the message of the writer.
One of the most recognizable individual laments, especially for modern Christians, is Psalm 22, which laments the unjust suffering of a righteous Israelite. Overtones of the wisdom literature of Ecclesiastes is present, but the intertextual connections with the New Testament are what has made Psalm 22 famous. The Psalm commences with the writer expressing great distress of an individual, possibly David. The cry is not so much an accusation of Yahweh, but a belief in Yahweh, a belief that comes with an expectation that God would arrive at the time of need. However, Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34 clearly shed light on the ultimate meaning of Psalm 22:1 when Jesus asks the question, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” In other words, without an understanding of Jesus’s words, the meaning of Psalm 22:1 is missed. Without question, the previous statement is controversial within the broader context hermeneutical theory.
Psalms Old and New_ Exegesis, Intertextuality, and Hermeneutics
However, the meaning of Psalm 22:1 is, at minimum, expanded once Jesus utters his desperate words and the cry takes on messianic overtones that foreshadows future events. The intertextual connections between Psalm 22 and the New Testament move beyond the first verse. Ben Witherington links verse 2 with Jesus’s rhetorical question in Luke 18:7, links verse 5 with Paul’s desire in Philippians 1:20 not to be put to shame, and links verses 6-7 with Jesus’s words in Mark 9:12 regarding being treated with contempt.[10] Many more connections between Psalm 22 and the New Testament writers exist. However, the point is that the New Testament forcefully communicates that Psalm 22 continues to be relevant to their situation.
Canonical consciousness may inform the exposition of Scripture in several ways. First, when teaching any of the Psalms, including the example of Psalm 22, the original context remains a critical aspect of all exegesis and exposition. Second, the broader canonical context of wisdom literature must be taken into consideration. Sometimes the righteous suffer and the wicked prosper. Juxtaposing the message of Proverbs with the book of Ecclesiastes and Job highlights that the righteous do not always experience blessing. Placing Psalm 22 within this broader context of the Old Testament can convey an extremely important message for the modern Christian sucked into the guilt and shame that necessarily results from modern prosperity gospels. Finally, and most poignantly, reading Psalm 22 in light of the contextual tapestry of echoes, allusions, and quotations from the New Testament assists listeners in recognizing that the message of Psalm 22 provides two additional insights. First, it foreshadows a messianic reality, a reality where the Righteous One suffers greatly. Second, it highlights the message that the righteous suffer, which was not only applicable during Old Testament times but also continued into the New Testament with Jesus, Paul, and many other disciples. The message that the righteous suffer also continues into modernity. Although this brief analysis is only the tip of the iceberg, without question, canonical consciousness informs the proper interpretation of the Psalter.
_______________________________
[1] Robert L. Cole, “Psalms 1 and 2: The Psalter’s Introduction,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago: Moody, 2013), 183–188.
[2] Ibid., 185, 193.
[3] David M. Howard Jr., “Divine and Human Kingship: As Organizing Motifs in the Psalter,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago: Moody, 2013), 200–201.
[4] Michael K. Snearly, “The Return of the King: Book V as a Witness to Messianic Hope in the Psalter,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago: Moody, 2013), 211.
[5] Ibid., 211–212.
[6] Ibid., 212.
[7] Walter C. Kaiser Jr., “The Laments of Lamentations: Compared to the Psalter,” in The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, ed. Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr. (Chicago: Moody, 2013), 127.
[8] Unless otherwise noted, all biblical passages referenced are in the English Standard Version (Wheaton: Crossway, 2008).
[9] Kaiser Jr., “The Laments of Lamentations: Compared to the Psalter,” 132.
[10] Ben Witherington, Psalms Old and New: Exegesis, Intertextuality, and Hermeneutics (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2017), 104–105.
Bibliography
- Cole, Robert L. “Psalms 1 and 2: The Psalter’s Introduction.” In The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, edited by Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr., 183–196. Chicago: Moody, 2013.
- Howard Jr., David M. “Divine and Human Kingship: As Organizing Motifs in the Psalter.” In The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, edited by Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr., 197–207. Chicago: Moody, 2013.
- Kaiser Jr., Walter C. “The Laments of Lamentations: Compared to the Psalter.” In The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, edited by Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr., 127–133. Chicago: Moody, 2013.
- Snearly, Michael K. “The Return of the King: Book V as a Witness to Messianic Hope in the Psalter.” In The Psalms: Language for All Seasons of the Soul, edited by Andrew J. Schmutzer and David M. Howard Jr., 209–218. Chicago: Moody, 2013.
- Witherington, Ben. Psalms Old and New: Exegesis, Intertextuality, and Hermeneutics. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2017.
