Psalm 51:6-11 – God’s Power To Transform Sinners

1Curiously, only the 1587 Geneva Bible and the 2011 NIV, among all the English translations I surveyed, rendered either of these verbs as perfect/past tense. The latter, however, ignores the rest of the Psalm to interpret v.6 exclusively in terms of v.5, portraying an in utero conversion experience, which seems theologically-bizarre.

2cf. Matt. 10:26, “...nothing exists which, having been covered up [καλυπτω - synonyms for ἄδηλα in Psalm 51:6] will not be uncovered, and there is nothing secret [κρυπτ- = same root for “hidden/secret/concealed” in Ps. 51:6] which will not be known [γινωσκω synonym to δηλοω in Ps. 51:6].” (NAW)

3I can’t think of any basis in Hebrew grammar to justify taking a string of 6 imperfect verbs and interpreting the odd ones as commands and the even ones as indicative statements about the future, especially when the verbs before and after this string were also indicatives/preterites (in the Perfect tense).

4G. Wilson noted that the plant known in Europe as “hyssop” doesn’t grow in Israel, so he suggested that it was something like marjoram or thyme. He also suggested that the two words David chose (“purifying” and “washing”) symbolized “inner (invisible) and outer (visible) purification.”

5Delitzsch commented that David may be thinking of the moral sense rather than the ceremonial sense because he is anticipating God, rather than a priest, to do it.

6Calvin noted that the mention of hyssop narrowed down the meaning of “purify” to the offering of an animal sacrifice. cf. J. A. Alexander, quoted by F. Barker, “To purge with hyssop necessarily suggests the idea of purification founded on atonement.” Fausset also connected it with Num. 19, commenting, “the idea of atonement [i]s prominent…” So also Spurgeon, who connected it with the “atoning blood” of the “sin-offering.” Delitzsch, incredibly, denied this, maintaining that blood is not mentioned intentionally here, and therefore it is purely spiritual symbolism. However, he was quick to affirm that it ultimately pointed to the blood of Christ... which brings us back to the idea of atonement.

7This is the usual Hebrew word for washing clothes, not for washing persons. Anderson cited Manton, suggesting that this word was chosen to indicate a more thorough, inside-and-out cleansing that would include the heart, in contrast to a surface cleansing of the skin.

8There are other verses which speak of becoming “white” (such as Dan. 12:10 “Many shall be purified, made white, and refined, but the wicked shall do wickedly…”) or becoming “like snow” (mostly in the context of contracting leprosy, though).

9That is, the Greek word ἀγαλλίασις and εὐφροσύνη from the Greek Septuagint translation of Psalm 51:8.

10It shows up only one other place, and that is in Psalm 10 regarding the wicked crushing the weak.

11This English word is translated in the NKJV here from Ταπεινόω, the same Greek root used in the LXX of Psalm 51:8, and which literally means “lowly/humble.” (It is also used in Phil. 2:8 to describe the “humiliation” that Jesus had to undergo to save us.)

12This phrase is normally used in scripture of God’s disassociation from persons, which dooms them to hell (e.g. 1 Peter 3:12, Psalm 34:16, 1 Thess. 1:7-10).

13cf. Micah 7:19 “He will again have compassion on us; he will tread our iniquities underfoot. You will cast all our sins into the depths of the sea.” (ESV, cf. Psalm 103:12)

14Joshua and Caleb being the notable exceptions.

15The Greek words in Heb. 6 are ασφαλες and βεβαιος, roughly synonymous with the word εὐθὲς in the Greek translation of Psalm 51:10 (or Psalm 50:12, according to the LXX numbering).

16Viz. Psalm 10:13, 12:2, 14:1, 36:1, 41:6, etc.

17Barah is sometimes used to indicate creation out of nothing and other times used to indicate fashioning pre-existing materials, but chaddesh always means the repair of a pre-existing structure, so we take the meaning common to both. The doctrine of the “new creation” in 2 Cor., beautifully expounded in Spurgeon’s commentary on Psalm 51:10, is not denied, it just doesn’t seem to be the point of this particular verse.

18Delitzsch commented, “David's prayer has reference to the very same thing that is promised by the prophets as a future work of salvation wrought by God the Redeemer on [the hearts of] His people (Jer. 24:7; Ezek. 11:19; 36:26).”

19This word ἀναγεννάω could be considered a synonym for the word “renew/ἐγκαίνισον/חַדֵּ֥שׁ” in Psalm 51:10.
cf. Ps. 119:88 “Revive [חיָה] me according to Your lovingkindness...” (NKJV)

20cf. the “casting out” of Satan in John 12:31 & Rev. 12:9, and of the bondwoman in Gal. 4:30. The verb in the NT for “cast out” (εκβαλλω) is a synonym of the one in the LXX in Psalm 51:11 (απορριψης).

21I say “special” because there is a sense in which God’s Spirit is generally present throughout the whole world and generally available to all who trust God, but the Bible makes a distinction between that general sense and this special work of the Spirit.

22Isaiah being the only other exception.

23John Calvin commented that this equates to God’s work of “adoption” in the New Testament.

AMy original chart includes the NASB, NIV, and ESV, but their copyright restrictions force me to remove them from the publicly-available edition of this chart. (NAW is my translation.) When a translation adds words not in the Hebrew text, but does not indicate it has done so by the use of italics (or greyed-out text), I put the added words in [square brackets]. When one version chooses a wording which is different from all the other translations, I underline it. When a version chooses a translation which, in my opinion, either departs too far from the root meaning of the Hebrew word or departs too far from the grammar form of the original text, I use strikeout. And when a version omits a word which is in the original text, I insert an X. (I also place an X at the end of a word if the original word is plural but the English translation is singular.) I occasionally use colors to help the reader see correlations between the various editions and versions when there are more than two different translations of a given word. The only known Dead Sea Scrolls containing Psalm 51 are 4Q85 Psalms^c (which contains parts of verses 1-3) and 4Q91 Psalms (containing parts of vs. 1-4), both of which date around 50 AD. Where the DSS is legible and reads the same as the MT, the Hebrew text is colored purple. Where the DSS and ancient versions support each other against the MT in such a way that I suspect they are the original reading, I have highlighted them with yellow.

BJerome's Latin Vulgate w/ Deuterocanon using Gallican Psalter, 405 AD. As published electronically by E-Sword.

CThis Greek New Testament (GNT) is the 1904 "Patriarchal" edition of the Greek Orthodox Church. The Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine majority text of the GNT and the Textus Receptus are very similar. The Westcott-Hort, Nestle-Aland, and UBS editions are a slightly-different family of GNTs developed in the modern era as a break from the traditional Greek Bible by compiling just a few of the oldest-known manuscripts, but even so, the practical differences in the text between these two editing philosophies are minimal.

DEnglish translation of the Septuagint by Sir Lancelot Charles Lee Brenton, 1851, “based upon the text of the Vaticanus” but not identical to the Vaticanus. As published electronically by E-Sword.

E1769 King James Version of the Holy Bible; public domain. As published electronically by E-Sword.

FFrom the Wiki Hebrew Bible https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%A1%D7%A4%D7%A8_%D7%AA%D7%94%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%9D.
DSS text comes from https://downloads.thewaytoyahuweh.com

GThe Leiden Peshitta, Copyright © 2012 by The Peshitta Foundation c/o Leiden University Institute for Religious Studies, as published electronically in BibleWorks.

HAquila: tw nikopoiw melwdhma tou Dauid

IAmong 2^nd century Greek re-translations, Theodotian supported the LXX, but Aquila uncharacteristically rendered the first verb differently from the MT (δωρησαι = “give”). Symmachus employed the synonym used later in the verse by the LXX (οικτειρον = “have compassion”).

JThe neuter accusative form in Greek is spelled the same in plural as it is in singular, so the LXX should be construed as plural in keeping with the MT. Brenton apparently defaulted to the singular without realizing that the context denied that option, even though in another situation it might have been a valid translation.

KGerald Wilson, in the NIV Application Commentary, noted that this is the 4^th of the 7 penitential psalms, the others being 6, 32, 38, 102, 130, and 143.
Augustine: “Let them hear that have not fallen, lest they fall; let them hear that have fallen, that they may rise.”

Lcf. 2 Sam .12:22 And David said, "While my newborn was still alive, I fasted and wept because I said, 'Who knows if Yahweh might have mercy and my newborn might live?'” (NAW)

MAlthough Vulgate and Septuagint insert “great” here, the Peshitta, Targum, and DSS do not. The Vulgate and LXX also insert “and” here, and the Peshitta joins them, but the DSS and Targum support the MT without the conjunction. Neither insertion changes the meaning of the statement, however.

NDwight Zeller’s manuscript commentary on this passage noted that although the NET Bible translates the כ...כ construction as “because of… because of,” causality is not what is in view, but rather comparison: “according to the promises of God’s covenant to His people” or “according to the heinousness of my sins, so is the magnitude of God’s mercy.”

OThis verb is used of what God did to sinners by means of the flood of Noah. It is also described in the jealousy test of Numbers 5:23-24 "Then the priest shall write these curses in a book and wash^NAS,NIV,ESV/blot^KJV/scrape^NKJV them off into the water of bitterness.” Then there’s 2 Kings 21:13 “...I will wipe Jerusalem as a man wipeth a dish...” and Proverbs 30:20 “...she eateth, and wipeth her mouth...” and Isaiah 25:8 “...the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces.” (KJV. All other English versions also render the verb “wipe” in these verses.) In contemporary English, “blot out” primarily connotes covering a mistake with ink or with paint so as to become no longer readable, although it can mean dabbing with a wet cloth to wash out a stain. The latter appears to be the meaning of this Hebrew verb. Note that the next verb in the next verse is “wash.” (Numbers 34:11 is the most unusual use of this verb: “...and the border shall descend, and shall reach unto the side of the sea of Chinnereth eastward” ~KJV)

PSymmachus reduced it to one word, following the MT, pollakiV (“much”).

QThe Masoretic marginal note suggested that instead of this adverbial form “abundantly,” the spelling of this word should be changed to a Hiphil imperative form הֶרֶב (“make abundant”), basically dropping the final he. However, both of the Dead Sea Scrolls of this passage support the Kethib’s adverbial form. The LXX “fully” (and Symmachus “abundantly”), Vulgate “amply,” and Peshitta “completely” also support an adverb instead of a second imperative. Dwight Deller preferred the matching imperative forms, however.
Concerning the verb that follows (cabas), one of its first uses in the Bible was to describe how the Israelites were to “wash” their clothes before meeting God to receive the 10 Commandments at Mt. Sinai. It also describes all of the purification ceremonies in Leviticus where an unclean person had to “wash” their clothes (but only their clothes). In Numbers, it is part of the consecration of priests to wash their clothes, too. The root meaning of the word pictures the agitation action of washing. In Jeremiah, the action takes a turn of being applied figuratively to persons regarding cleansing from sin: Jeremiah 2:22 “Though you wash yourself with lye and use much soap, the stain of your guilt is still before me, declares the Lord GOD…” Jeremiah 4:14 “O Jerusalem, wash your heart from evil, that you may be saved. How long shall your wicked thoughts lodge within you?” and then at the end of the Old Testament, we have the prophecy from Malachi 3:2 that the Messiah will be the launderer/the washer-man/the fuller for God’s people: “But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner's fire and like fullers' soap.” (ESV)

RSymmachus came up with a one-word synonym for “continually” = endelecwV

SDwight Zeller made the case that this is an emphatic, rather than a causal כי, combined with the emphatic subject, “I am truly aware of my transgressions.”

TCompare with the 4 other instances in the O.T. of this word combined with tamid:
‎Psalm 16:8 ... שִׁוִּ֬יתִי יְהוָ֣ה לְנֶגְדִּ֣י תָמִ֑יד “I have put Yahweh before me continually...”
‎Psalm 38:18 וּמַכְאוֹבִ֖י נֶגְדִּ֣י תָמִֽיד׃ … “...and my shame is before me continually.”
‎Psalm 50:8 וְעוֹלֹתֶ֖יךָ לְנֶגְדִּ֣י תָמִֽיד׃ … “...and your whole-burnt-offerings are before me continually.”
‎Isaiah 49:16 חוֹמֹתַ֥יִךְ נֶגְדִּ֖י תָּמִֽיד׃ … “...your walls are before me continually.”

USymmachus = eneken tou dikaiwqhnai se en toiV logoiV sou (“in order for you to be justified by your words”).

VAquila = uperkriqhV (“judged over”), Symmachus = nikan krinonta (“victoriously judging”?), Q. = same as LXX (“conquering”). Romans 3:4 is an exact quote of the LXX here (at least in the vast majority of Greek New Testament manuscripts, including the Vaticanus. A handful of manuscripts change the last vowel to a similar-sounding diphthong, and that is followed in modern critical Greek New Testaments).

W“chiefly” ~A. R. Fausset, “especially” ~NET Bible and also Dwight Zeller in his paraphrase, despite the fact that he disagreed with the NET Bible’s explanatory note that it was hyperbole.

XDwight Zeller’s manuscript commentary elaborates on the challenges of translating this next word, but ends up settling on “so” (alongside the NET Bible) “...my confession, your determination of what is evil, and my petition for forgiveness will ultimately demonstrate that you are the just One...”

YThe simple Qal stem in the MT “be right” does not support the passive form used in many English translations (“be justified”). The prepositional phrase “in your speaking” in the MT uses an infinitive verb “speaking” (not the noun “word”) prefixed by a temporal beth. However, the LXX and Vulgate translated “justified” as a passive verb followed by noun phrase (“be justified in your words” – note the addition of plurality to “words” – which Symmachus agreed with, although apparently not Aquila), and the Targum also makes “word” a noun. I am not knowledgeable enough on Syriac to expound on the grammar of the Peshitta here, but Bauscher translated the Peshitta into English as “be just in your word,” and Lamsa as, “be justified in thy reproof.” No one outside of God can make God any more “just/right” than He already is. The NIV attempts to get around this with “proved right” instead of “made right,” although English can use the word “justified” in a self-referential sense when a person is proving to someone else why they were right to do what they did, so, understood in this way, there is no substantial difference in meaning.

ZThis verb in the MT means “clean/pure/innocent.” Cf. Proverbs 20:9 “Who can say, ‘I have made my heart clean, I am pure [טהר] from my sin?’” (NKJV) It only occurs a half-dozen other places in the O.T. In Job 15:14 and 25:4, it is in parallel with “righteous” (צדק), Psalm 73:13 puts it in parallel with “innocence” (‎נִקָּי֣וֹן), Isa. 1:16 parallels it with “washing” and “turning away from evil,” and Micah 6:11 contrasts it with “wickedness” and “falsehood/deceit.”
However, the LXX (supported by Symmachus and Theodotian, despite Aquila’s attempt to correct the Greek toward the MT), Vulgate, and Peshitta all read “overcome/conquer/be victorious,” as though the word were perhaps נכה instead of זכה. The DSS is obliterated at this point, so we can’t use it to resolve the dispute. Furthermore, when this verse is quoted in Romans3:4, the LXX of this Psalm is quoted word-for-word, so English versions of Romans 3:4 read “overcome/prevail” instead of “blameless/just/clear.”
A resolution may be found in the Hebrew Union College Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon which lists both “conquer” and “be innocent” as definitions of the root‎ זכי which is the word used in the Targums and Peshitta of this verse. English translators might do well to find a word which means both.
This is also sustained in Hammond’s commentary on this verse, quoted in a footnote in Calvin’s commentary: “[O]rdinarily rendered mundus fuit, clean, or clear, or pure. But this, as the context evinces, must be understood in a forensic sense, as pure is all one with free from guilt; and so there is a second notion of the word for overcoming, meaning that sort of victory which belongs to him that carries the cause in judicature… for he that doth overcome in the suit is fitly said to be cleared or quitted by the law.”

AALXX and Vulgate add a passive indicator “when you are judged,” and it is quoted that way in Romans. But this should not be construed as God being accountable to anyone else’s judgment. The Peshitta and Targums support the MT with the active “when you judge.” G. Wilson noted that this verse pictures God as both accuser (“when you speak”) and judge.

ABBauscher = “conquer,” Lamsa = “be triumphant”

ACSymmachus = (idou) eiV adikian wdinhqhn, kai en amartiaiV ekuhse me h mhthr mou. (Same meaning, synonyms underlined.)

ADLiddel-Scott defined this Greek word as “crave” not “conceive.”

AEThis word literally means “writhe,” and is occasionally related to birth pangs, but also to “anxious waiting,” “circle dancing,” “hand-made” items, and other actions. Prov. 8:24 contains the only other instance of this verb in the exact same spelling, and it refers to the eternal generation of the Wisdom of God, parallel with the verb נסך (“poured out/installed”).

AFThis is not the usual Hebrew word for “conceive” (הרה). There are only two other passages in the O.T. agreed-upon by all to contain this verb, and they are Gen. 30:41, and 31:10, describing the mating and conception of Jacob’s sheep in heat. The BibleWorks search engine adds Gen. 30:38 &39 (also describing Jacob’s sheep), and the E-Sword KJV with Strong’s numbers also adds Deut. 19:6 (a hot-hearted man taking revenge), 1Kings 1:1 (David unable to get warm), and Eccl. 4:11 (Two lying down together keeping warm). BDB defines its root meaning as to “be hot.”

AGThe Syriac word here means “formed.”

AHLXX and Theodotian = “loved,” Aquila chose a Greek word more like the MT eboulhqhV (“desired”), as did Symmachus qeleiV (“willed”).

AILXX & Vulgate place the major punctuation mark here, forcing “inner and secret” together as the object of the second verb, but MT punctuation places the break after “inner,” forcing it to modify “truth” in the first half. (viz. https://hb.openscriptures.org/structure/OshbVerse/index.html?b=Ps&c=51&v=8)

AJThe Hebrew word is singular, and the LXX spelling could be singular or plural, but since it is also plural in the Vulgate and Peshitta, it was probably intended to be plural.

AKBoth verbs in this verse are Perfect tense, and the Peshitta, LXX, and Vulgate also translate with verb forms equivalent to English Past tense, so it is strange that almost all English versions translate this verse in the Present or Future tense. The old Geneva Bible rendered the second verb in Past tense, and the new 2011 NIV changed the verbs to Past tense (they were Present tense in the 1985 NIV).

ALThis word only occurs one other place in the Bible, and that is Job 38:36 “Who has put wisdom in the inward parts^KJV,ESV/ibis^NIV/mind^NKJ/innermost being^NAS/heart^NLT or given understanding...?”
Augustine interpreted it in terms of the “uncertainty” of the future and how God does away with the old and graciously builds anew, ideas which don’t seem to flow from this text.
Calvin interpreted it in terms of God’s “wisdom had been discovered to his mind in a secret and intimate manner” thus not only was David culpable due to his corruption, he was also guilty of violating what had been revealed to him. Again, this does not seem to flow from the actual text.
Henry interpreted it in terms of God’s “good-will towards us (...[that we be] honest and sincere...”) and His good work in us,” which does seem to flow from the application of text, if not its technical wording.
Spurgeon and G Wilson also interpreted it in terms of heart-piety vs. outward religion and how God moves us toward the former.
Delitzsch, quoting Geier, interpreted it as David “praying” for “mystical wisdom,” which would require interpreting the non-imperative verbs in this verse as imperative, which is oddly imprecise for Delitzsch.

AMThis word is only used of “plugging up” springs and wells (Gen. 26:15, 18; 2 Ki. 3:19, 25; 2 Chr. 32:3-4, 30), until the time of the Exile when it is used in a figurative sense regarding knowledge (Ezek. 28:3) and in Aramaic literature to denote the “sealing” of a document (Dan. 8:26; 12:4, 9). It is also used once in post-exilic literature to denote holes in a wall being plugged up (Neh. 4:1). It is a passive participle in the MT (denoting what has “been plugged/sealed”); it is masculine, so it can’t be an adjective modifying the feminine “wisdom” or the feminine “truth,” and it is singular, but in the Peshitta and Vulgate, and presumably in the LXX, it is plural.

ANPeshitta, Vulgate, and LXX all add the pronoun “your.”

AOBoth Lamsa and Bauchner omitted “in the inner parts” in their English translations, but it seems to be here in the Peshitta.

APAll the verbs in this verse are imperfects; there are no imperatives in this verse in the MT, LXX, or Vulgate (so not in Augustine or Calvin). But in the Peshitta and almost-all the English versions, the first and third are interpreted as imperatives (so it is in commentaries by Henry, Cohen, Spurgeon, and Delitzsch). The 2011 NIV at least gives a tip of the hat to this discrepancy by changing the 5^th verb in this series from imperative to jussive. Delitzsch’s explanation that they are “optatives” (“I wish you would purify me...”) doesn’t explain the choice to interpret every other verb spelled in the same tense and mood as futures.) I see no compelling reason why verses 7-8 have to be a repetition of the request instead of a statement of faith (after already having made his request in vs. 1-2, using 4 bona fide imperatives: Grace, blot, wash, and cleanse) that God would indeed “wash” and “cleanse” and “blot” him from sin. The only reason I can see for interpreting them as imperatives would be to match the imperatives in vs. 1-2 and in vs. 9-11 (“hide,” “blot,” “create,” “renew” and “restore” in vs. 9-11 are imperatives).
As for this particular verb, it is the same root as the one in v.4 “against you I have sinned,” but the spelling change here from Qal to Piel stem changes the meaning to “undo sin,” and it carries and even more specific meaning in most of the Bible of “offering a sin-offering” (Gen. 31:39; Exod. 29:36; Lev. 6:19; 8:15; 9:15; 14:49, 52; Num. 19:19; 2 Chr. 29:24; Ezek. 43:20, 22-23; 45:18).
“Hyssop” was a bushy plant with lots of little branches to which liquid could adhere, so it made a convenient tool for dipping and sprinkling ceremonies. It is mentioned in the painting of sacrificial blood on doorframes at the first Passover (Ex. 12:2) and in the ceremony of cleansing from leprosy (Leviticus 14:4 “Then the priest shall command that someone get two living, pure (טהר) gamebirds and a stick of cedar and crimson scarlet thread and a hyssop-plant for the one who is being purified [מִּטַּהֵ֛ר].” ~NAW The end of the chapter also applies it to cleansing an unclean house). The only other significant instance of hyssop in the O.T. is in the ordinance of the red heifer in Numbers 19, where hyssop was burned along with the burnt offering of the heifer, then lye-water was made with the ashes to be used in cleansing anyone who became unclean through contact with death in any way. Num. 19:17-20 “And for an unclean person they shall take some of the ashes of the heifer burnt for purification from sin [piel of hatah], and running water shall be put on them in a vessel. A clean [tahur] person shall take hyssop and dip it in the water, sprinkle it on the tent, on all the vessels, on the persons who were there, or on the one who touched a bone, the slain, the dead, or a grave. The clean person shall sprinkle the unclean on the third day and on the seventh day; and on the seventh day he shall purify himself, wash his clothes, and bathe in water; and at evening he shall be clean [tahur]. But the man who is unclean and does not purify himself, that person shall be cut off from among the assembly, because he has defiled the sanctuary of the LORD…” (NKJV) Finally, although hyssop is not mentioned in the Exodus 24 account of the initial covenant-making ceremony of God with Israel where the people were sprinkled with blood, Hebrews 9:19 assures us that hyssop was used for that ceremony.

AQIn all the writings previous to this Psalm, this verb means “to make brick” (Gen. 11:3; Exod. 5:7, 14), but, in all the writings after this Psalm, it means figuratively “to make white/clean” (Isa. 1:18; Dan. 11:35; 12:10; Joel 1:7). The only other verses which speak of cleansing from sin in terms of “making white” are Daniel 12:10 “Many shall be purified, made white, and refined, but the wicked shall do wickedly…” and Isaiah 1:18 “...Though your sins are like the scarlet, like the snow they will be whitened, Though bloody, like the crimson, like the wool they will become.” (NAW) In the New Testament, the only persons spoken of as being (or having clothes) “white as snow” are Jesus in His glorified state in the transfiguration (Matt. 17:2/Mark 9:3/Luke 9:29) and in heaven (Rev. 1:14), and the Angel of the Lord at Jesus’ resurrection (Mat. 28:3). But in many places throughout the Bible, God’s people are pictured as wearing white, symbolizing purity from sin, from the priests in Exodus to the saints in Revelation.

ARSymmachus added a helping verb to “hear” like Jerome did (akousthn poihson moi) and used synonyms for “joy” and “rejoice” (euqumian kai eufrosunhn, ilarunqhtw – following the MT which uses a third root for “joy” in that verb rather than repeating the first root word as the LXX did), and introduced a relative pronoun after “bones” (‘a sun­eqlasaV – following the MT more closely with the meaning of “shattered/crushed together” instead of the LXX word “depressed/humiliated.” Symmachus followed the LXX, however, in moving away from the MT’s attribution of God having done the crushing by making the verb a participle without an explicit subject, although, in Symmachus’ version, the subject is masculine and singular, meaning God could still be the one who did the crushing as the MT explicitly says, and in the LXX, the participle is passive and plural, forcing the subject to be “bones,” but the passive form still allowing the possibility of God doing it to the bones, so, despite the variants, the meaning is not essentially different.

ASThere are only a few times in the Bible previous to this Psalm, when God “caused” someone “to hear” something (using shema’ in the Hiphil stem as it is here): We first see it in the giving of the law at Mt. Sinai to the Israelites (Deut. 4:10), Next it is in the announcement to Manoah and his barren wife that they would have a child, Sampson, who would deliver Israel from oppression (Judges 13:23), It comes again when the prophet Samuel lets Saul know that he will become king (1 Sam. 9:27), Then, when David appointed Levites to lead music in temple worship, they “caused joy to be heard” (1 Chron. 15:16-16:42).

ATThe only instances of this word in the Bible previous to this psalm are Psalm 45:7 (“You loved righteousness and you hated evil, therefore, God – your God - anointed you with oil of gladness beyond your associates.” ~NAW) and the end of Esther 8, where both of these words “joy and gladness” appear (“15 ...the city of Shushan rejoiced and was glad. 16 The Jews had light and gladness, joy and honor. 17 And in every province and city, wherever the king's command and decree came, the Jews had joy and gladness, a feast and a holiday...” ~NKJV). Calvin suggested it simply meant “He prays, in general, for testimonies of the divine favor.”

AUcf. Numbers 10:10 "Also in the day of your gladness, in your appointed feasts, and at the beginning of your months, you shall blow the trumpets..." (NKJV)
1 Samuel 18:6 “Now, it happened when they were on parade - when David was returning from striking down the Philistine, that the women from all the towns of Israel came out to sing and circle-dance to greet King Saul with tambourines {and} with cheering and with triangles.” (NAW)
2 Samuel 6:12 “...David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obed Edom to the City of David with happiness.”
Psalm 4:5-8 “Y'all should sacrifice sacrifices of righteousness and trust to Yahweh. Many are saying, ‘Who will cause us to see good?’ Lift upon us the light of your face, Yahweh! You gave joy to my heart more than a time when their grain and their juice were abundant...” (NAW)
Psalm 16:8-11 “I have kept Yahweh dead-level in front of me always, because I will never be overthrown from my right hand. Therefore my heart has been happy and my glory has been rejoicing. Moreover, my flesh will settle down confidently, because You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; you will not destine Your godly man to the Pit. You will cause me to know the path of life; fullness of happinesses is with Your presence; endless pleasures are in Your right hand!” (NAW)
Psalm 21:6-7 “...You will make him glad with happiness close to Your face. Because the king is trusting in Yahweh and in the lovingkindness of the Most High…” (NAW)
Cf. 30:12, 43:4, 45:16 for remaining instances of simkhah previous to Ps. 51. For all remaining instances of both sasown and simkhah subsequent to Psalm 51, see Isa. 22:13; 35:10; 51:3, 11; Jer. 7:34; 15:16; 16:9; 25:10; 33:11; and Zech. 8:19.

AVPrevious instances of this verb in the Psalms: 2:11, 9:13-14, 13:5, 14:7, 16:8-9, 21:1, 32:11, 35:9-10 (which also mentions “bones”), and 48:11.

AWThis verb only shows up 4 other places in the O.T.: Psalm 10:10 (where the wicked “crush” the weak”), Psalm 38:8, 44:19 (“you have crushed us in a place of jackals...” ~NAW), and 51:19.
Delitzsch calls the verb “crushed” “an attributive clause like יפעל in Psam 7:16,” but Hebrew grammar is irregular here to posit a perfect verb in the place of an adjective modifying the object of the previous verb without a relative pronoun (in other words one would expect to see asher before this verb if it were meant to be interpreted “which you crushed” – the Targums do add the Aramaic relative pronoun prefix “d-” here, as did Symmachus in his 2^nd century Greek version). Peshitta, LXX, and Vulgate all read instead “humbled bones” (without a relative pronoun).
Calvin: “When he speaks of his bones as having been broken, he alludes to the extreme grief and overwhelming distress to which he had been reduced.”

AXBy changing one letter, the Peshitta changed the meaning from “hear” to “satisfy.” The LXX and Vulgate support the MT “hear.” Peshitta also adds pronouns to the next two words to render “Your joy and Your gladness.” This doesn’t change the overall gist of the verse, however.

AYSymmachus rendered with a word more like the one in the MT, kruyon (“hide”).

AZLXX, Peshitta, Targums (סליק), and Vulgate all read as though the Hebrew root were סור instead of סתר. Nowhere else in the Hebrew Old Testament is it a good thing for God to hide His face (For instance: Job 13:24 “Why do You hide Your face, And regard me as Your enemy?” Deut. 31:17 “Then My anger shall be aroused against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide My face from them, and they shall be devoured. And many evils and troubles shall befall them, so that they will say in that day,`Have not these evils come upon us because our God is not among us?'” Ezekiel 39:24 “According to their uncleanness and according to their transgressions I have dealt with them, and hidden My face from them.” ~NKJV), so perhaps this is either proof that it is not the original Hebrew word or an explanation for why the ancient translators were so hesitant to use the word “hide.”

BAThis concept of “turning the face away” to disassociate oneself from another is less common in the NT, but the sense of it is in 1 Thess. 1:7-10 and 1 Peter 3:12. Augustine connected it with v.3 (“my sin is ever before me”) and commented to his listener, “Do thou turn sin before thy face, if thou wilt that God thence turn away His face; and then safely thou askest, and He heareth.”

BBSee v.1 and accompanying note.

BCThe MT word is centered around the idea of “established,” but the LXX word is centered on the idea of “directness,” cf. Aquila and “E” = etoimon (“prepared/ready”), and Symmachus = ‘edraion (“seated” – most like the MT in literal meaning).

BDcf. Psalm 24:3-5, Prov. 20:9, Isa. 48:8, 57:15-19, 1 Tim. 1:5, Matt. 5:8, 2 Tim 2:22, James 4:8, and 1 Peter 1:22-25.

BEAugustine noted that this “steadfast, upright” position is the opposite of the one “bowed down” by sin in Psalm 57:6.

BFNote contrast with David’s enemies in Psalm 5:9 “Because in [every] mouth there is nothing that will stand; their innards are empty-desires…” (NAW) The only other place in the O.T. that cun and ruach appear together in the same verse is in the negative description in Psalm 78:8. The Hebrew word kun, translated “steadfast/right” pictures a foundation that is deep and wide (cf. Hebrews 6:19).

BGIn the N.T. only in Acts 27:43, describing an order to “jump overboard” off a ship.

BHLiddell & Scott defined this Greek verb in the LXX as “to take away from the opposite sides of an account, to cancel,”
cf. synonymous renderings of Aquila: labhV ex emou (“take out of me” – this is the closest match in Greek to the verb used in the MT), Symmachus: arhV ap’ emou (“lift from me”), and Theodotian: afelhV ap’ emou (“dismiss from me”).

BIThis is covenantal language, speaking of termination of the covenant. This Hiphil verb “cast out” is found in the curses of the Mosaic law in Deut. 29:27-28 (“Then the anger of the LORD was aroused against this land, to bring on it every curse that is written in this book. And the LORD uprooted them from their land in anger, in wrath, and in great indignation, and cast them into another land, as it is this day.”) and it appears to have been reiterated to David and Solomon as part of the Davidic covenant (2 Chron. 7:18-20 "then I will establish the throne of your kingdom, as I covenanted with David your father… But if you turn away and forsake My statutes and My commandments which I have set before you, and go and serve other gods, and worship them, then I will uproot them from My land which I have given them; and this house which I have sanctified for My name I will cast out of My sight, and will make it a proverb and a byword among all peoples.”). God did not invoke that clause in Jehoahaz’s reign (2 Kings 13:23), but He did so later under Hoshea’s reign in the northern kingdom of Israel, and even later for the southern kingdom of Judea during the reign of Zedekiah when Jerusalem was overthrown by Babylonians and taken into exile. (2 Ki. 17:19-20 “Also Judah did not keep the commandments of the LORD their God, but walked in the statutes of Israel which they made. And the LORD rejected all the descendants of Israel, afflicted them, and delivered them into the hand of plunderers, until He had cast them from His sight…. 24:19-20 He [Zedekiah] also did evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that Jehoiakim had done. For because of the anger of the LORD this happened in Jerusalem and Judah, that He finally cast them out from His presence…” Jeremiah 7:14 “therefore I will do to the house which is called by My name, in which you trust, and to this place which I gave to you and your fathers, as I have done to Shiloh. And I will cast you out of My sight, as I have cast out all your brethren-- the whole posterity of Ephraim.” (NKJV)

BJThis refers to 1 Samuel 16:13-14, which explains the phrase “holy spirit” (found in the O.T. only here and in Isa. 63:10-11) as well as David’s fear that the Spirit would leave him as it had left Saul.

10