A SOCIO-RHETORICAL EXAMINATION OF

TWIN PSALM 111-112

by

RAYMON PAUL HANSON

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of

Luther Seminary

In Partial Fulfillment of

The Requirements for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA

2013

2013 by Raymon Paul Hanson

All rights reserved

LUTHER SEMINARY

ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA

PH.D. THESIS

Title of Thesis: A Socio-Rhetorical Examination of Twin Psalm 111-112

Author: Raymon Paul Hanson

Thesis committee:

Thesis Adviser Date

ii

ABSTRACT

A Socio-Rhetorical Examination of Twin Psalm 111-112

by

Raymon Paul Hanson

Since the time of the influential Hermann Gunkel and his form critical means of

evaluation, by and large, Psalms commentaries have tended to treat each psalm as an

individual unit. Nevertheless, observations made by past and modern scholarship

recognize that certain pairs of juxtaposed psalms throughout the Psalter have common

forms, literary features, structures, and interrelated theological themes that weave those

psalms together. In particular, current scholarship recognizes that certain pairs of psalms

called Zwillingspsalmen or twin psalms exist in the final canonical form of the Psalter.

The goal of this dissertation is to examine Twin Psalm 111/112 (TPs 111/112) as

a textual unit through the multi-perspective approach of socio-rhetorical interpretation

(SRI). This study examines TPs 111/112 from the four different textures of inner texture,

intertexture, social and cultural texture, and sacred texture. In so doing this dissertation is

particularly interested in the phenomenon of rhetoric. Through the employment of

multiple SRI perspectives, this dissertation seeks to explore how this twin psalm text unit,

as an artistic performance of speech, is designed to both rhetorically persuade the faithful,

and polemically defend against the wicked.

Although some modifications need to be made due to differences in literary genre

and the special interest given here to rhetorical speech, the paper concludes that the SRI

approach is a methodology which is useful to the field of Psalms scholarship. Overall the

iii

four SRI textures examined here worked well enough to move the examination forward

in a rhetorical examination of the text.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It is with a heart full of gratefulness that I acknowledge many who were

instrumental and supportive in the journey of the writing of this dissertation. First and

foremost I would like to express my thankfulness to the faculty and staff of Luther

Seminary. Over the years Dr. Lokken in the GTE office and the associate director Katie

Dahl were always kind and supportive in their role to direct and assist me through the

logistics of graduate studies and the dissertation itself. Bruce Eldevik and Judy Stone in

the library and Kristen Payne in IT were also very helpful along the way in this process. I

am especially thankful for the formative classroom instruction I received from many of

the professors at Luther Seminary: Terence Fretheim, Fred Gaiser, Mark Hillmer, Diane

Jacobson, Rolf Jacobson, Craig Koester, Alan Padgett and Mark Throntveit. From you

not only was I enriched academically but ministered to pastorally through your words and

the grace and demeanor through which you conducted your courses. I also enjoyed the

creativity, wit and humor you brought to the classroom experience. I especially want to

thank Rolf Jacobson for not only the direction and keen insights he provided along the

way through the process of writing this dissertation, but also for the encouragement he

gave as well. I also would like to thank Dr. David Howard from Bethel Seminary for his

advice and assistance in this dissertational process. Last but not least I want to thank my

friends and family who have been there to pray for me, encourage me, and love me. I

especially want to give special mention to my parents, Bob and Sherry Hanson, who

v

continually prayed, encouraged and supported myself and my family through this time.

The example of your Christ-like lives over the years has demonstrated to me reflections

of justice and generosity referred to in the content this dissertation. To my amazing wife

Wendy and my children Eric, Kjersti, and Robbie, you have always been my biggest

supporters and you know I am your biggest supporter as well. I want to thank you for the

personal sacrifices each of you had to make while your husband or father was busy

writing this dissertation. I am thankful for how God has beneficently worked in each one

of your lives and I am mindful and hopeful of the words spoken of in Psalm 112:2:

His posterity will be mighty in the land;

a generation of upright ones, he will be blessed.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................. iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ..............................................................................................x

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ xii

1. INTRODUCTION: HISTORY OF TWIN PSALMS ....................................................1

Purpose and Scope of the Study ............................................................................1 Problem: The Need for More of a Rhetorical Approach ................................1 A Socio-Rhetorical Interpretive Approach ....................................................4 The Defining and Delimiting of a Twin Psalm Unit ......................................6

Historical Survey of the Term Twin Psalms: 19th Century ..................................7 Ernst W. Hengstenberg ..................................................................................8

Joseph Alexander .........................................................................................12 Franz Delitzsch .............................................................................................15

Thomas K. Cheyne .......................................................................................18 H. D. M. Spence: The Pulpit Commentary ..................................................20

Summary ......................................................................................................20 Excurses: Gunkel and Mowinckel .......................................................................22 Walther Zimmerlis use of the Term: Twin Psalm ..............................................25 Psalm Pairs and the Need for Extended Classifications ......................................37 Marks of Twin Psalms: A Working Definition ...................................................39

The Twin Psalm Arrangement: Why does it Matter? ..........................................41

2. METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................43

A Statement of Methodological Considerations Involved in the Research and

Writing of the Thesis ...........................................................................................43 Restatement of the Thesis ............................................................................43 Introducing Socio-rhetorical Interpretation ..................................................44

Inner Texture .......................................................................................................47 Repetitive and Progressive Texture and Pattern ..........................................48

Opening-Middle-Closing Texture and Pattern .............................................49 Argumentative Texture and Pattern .............................................................50

Intertextual Texture .............................................................................................52 Oral-Scribal Intertexture ..............................................................................53 Cultural Intertexture .....................................................................................54

Social and Cultural Texture .................................................................................55 Specific Social Topics ..................................................................................56

Common Social and Cultural Topics ...........................................................59

vii

Final Cultural Categories .............................................................................60 Sacred Texture .....................................................................................................61

3. TRANSLATION OF PSALMS 111 AND 112 ...........................................................63

Critical Translation of Psalm 111 ........................................................................63 Critical Translation of Psalm 112 ........................................................................66 Twin Psalm 111 and 112 .....................................................................................68 Twin Psalm Marks in Twin Psalm 111/112 ........................................................69

4. AN INNER TEXTUAL EXAMINATION OF TWIN PSALM 111 AND 112 ..........74

Inner Texture in Psalm 111 .................................................................................76

Word/Phrase Repetition and Progressive Texture in Psalm 111 ..................76 Opening-Middle-Closing Texture in Psalm 111 ..........................................84

Stanza 1(Opening) .................................................................................84 Stanza 2 (Middle part 1) ........................................................................87

Stanza 3 (Middle part 2) ........................................................................88 Stanza 4 (Closing) .................................................................................90

Summary of Inner Texture in Psalm 111 ..............................................91 Outline of Psalm 111 .............................................................................92

Inner Texture in Psalm 112 .................................................................................93 Word/Phrase Repetition and Progressive Texture in Psalm 112 ..................93

Opening-Middle-Closing Texture in Psalm 112 ..........................................97 Stanza 1 (Opening) ................................................................................97 Stanza 2 (Middle part 1) ........................................................................99

Stanza 3 (Middle part 2) ......................................................................100 Stanza 4 (Closing) ...............................................................................101

Summary of Inner Texture in Psalm 112 ............................................101 Outline of Psalm 112 ...........................................................................102

Inner Texture in TPs 111/112 ............................................................................102

Word/Phrase Repetition and Progressive Pattern in TPs 111/112 .............103

Acrostic Repetition..............................................................................103 Repetition in the Superscription ..........................................................104 Repetition of Two Main Characters ....................................................104 Repetition of the Uprights Inner Disposition .....................................105 Mirroring Repetition ...........................................................................105

Other Twin Psalm Repetition ..............................................................107 Repetition in Psalm 111:3b; 112:3b and 9b ........................................108

Opening-Middle-Closing Texture in Twin Psalm 111 and 112 .................111 Argumentative Texture ..............................................................................112

SRI Argumentation Terminology .......................................................113

Argumentation in Yahwehs Initiation and Human Response ............114 Human Response Argumentation in the Seams of the Text ...............118

The Praise of Yahweh ................................................................. 119 Language of Delight ................................................................... 119 Torah-Wisdom Fear of Yahweh Theme ..................................... 120

viii

The Rhetological Contrast of the Wicked ................................... 121 Argumentation in the Speech of Testimony........................................122

Testimony in Confessing Thanksgiving ..................................... 123 Testimony of Yahwehs Beneficence ......................................... 125 Testimony in the Recounting of the Exodus Event .................... 125 Testimony of Israel as Yahwehs Obedient Partner ................... 128 Testimony in Yahwehs Act of Redemption .............................. 130 Testimony in Yahwehs Command ............................................ 132 Rhetographical Testimony of Yahwehs Holiness and Awesomeness .............................................................................. 133

The Role of Yahwehs Partner ............................................................134 Yahwehs Blessing is upon Yahwehs Partner ........................... 137 The Beneficence of Yahwehs Partner ....................................... 139 The Fruitfulness of Yahwehs Partner ........................................ 143

The Contrasting Way of the Wicked ...................................................146

Summarizing Argumentative Texture .................................................146 Summarizing Inner Texture ................................................................149

5. AN INTERTEXTUAL EXAMINATION OF TWIN PSALM 111 AND 112..........151

Oral-Scribal Intertexture ....................................................................................151

Reworking Language from the Exodus Account .......................................152

Gracious and Compassionate ..............................................................152 The Works of Yahweh ........................................................................153 Reused Words from the Song of Moses ..............................................154

Reworking Deuteronomic Speech ..............................................................157 Whole Hearted Speech ....................................................................157 Motivational Clauses ...........................................................................158

Reworking Language from a Mixed Mosaic-Wisdom Tradition ...............161 Reworking Psalmic Language ....................................................................163

The Works of Yahweh ........................................................................163 Motivational Speech Related to Performing/Doing ........................165 The Language of Delight ....................................................................166 Terminology from the Wisdom Tradition in the Psalter .....................167

Intertextuality in Sirach ..............................................................................171 Intertextuality with Hellenistic Sources .....................................................175

Intertextuality with Aristotles Nicomachean Ethics ..........................175 Intertextuality with Cleanthes Hymn to Zeus .....................................176

Summary of Oral Scribal Intertexture ........................................................182 Cultural Intertextuality ......................................................................................188

Defining Cultural Intertextuality ................................................................188

Cultural Intertexture in the Hebrew Bible ..................................................190 Cultural Intertexture in Sirach ....................................................................192

Cultural Intertexture in the Hymn to Zeus ..................................................193 Culture of Worship ..............................................................................193 Culture of Law ....................................................................................194 Culture of Dualism ..............................................................................194

ix

Summary ....................................................................................................195

6. SOCIAL AND CULTURAL TEXTURE IN TWIN PSALM 111 AND 112 ...........197

Specific Social Topics .......................................................................................198

A Torah-Wisdom Traditionalist Response .................................................199 The Rhetoric of Social Well-Being ............................................................200 The Way of Torah-Wisdom as a Means to Social Change ........................201

Common Social and Cultural Topics ................................................................202 Justice in Hellenistic Greek Society ...........................................................203

Justice in the Psalm 111/112 Text ..............................................................205

Generous Giving to the Poor and Needy ....................................................208

Summary of Common Social and Cultural Topics ....................................212 Final Cultural Categories ...................................................................................213

Subculture Rhetoric ....................................................................................214 Mimicking and Echoing the Hymn to Zeus .........................................218

Polemical Opening ...................................................................... 218 The Blending of Law/Torah with Reason/Wisdom .................... 219

Dualism: The Ignorant and the Enlightened; the Wicked and the

Righteous .................................................................................... 220 Torah-Wisdom Traditionalist Response ..................................... 221

Mimicking and Echoes in Aristotles Nicomachean Ethics ................222 The Contemplative Life .............................................................. 222 Accommodation to the Contemplative Life? .............................. 223

Summary of Social and Cultural Texture ...................................................224

7. SACRED TEXTURE IN TWIN PSALM 111 AND 112 ..........................................227

Deity and Divine History ...........................................................................228 Yahweh as Initiator .............................................................................229 The Work of Yahwehs Torah as Core Expression ............................230 Yahwehs Nature to Command ...........................................................231

Human Commitment ..................................................................................233 Ethics ..........................................................................................................236 Human Redemption ....................................................................................239

8. CONCLUSION ..........................................................................................................244

BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................250

x

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary

ANE Ancient Near East

Aram. Aramaic

BBR Bulletin for Biblical Research

BDB A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament

BHS Biblical Hebraica Stuttgartensia.

BN Biblische Notizen

EuA Erbe und Autrag

HALAT Hebraisches und aramaisches Lexikon zum Alten Testament

HSAT Die Heilige Schrift des Alten Testaments

HZ Hymn to Zeus

Int Interpretation

JBL Journal of Biblical Literature

JPS The Jewish Study Bible: Jewish Publication Society, Tanakh Translation

JSJSup Journal for the Study of Judaism Supplement

JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplication Series

LCL Loeb Classical Library

Let. Aris. Letter of Aristeas

LXX Septuagint

MS(S) Manuscript(s)

MT Masoretic Text

xi

NIB The New Interpreters Bible

NIBCOT New International Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

NIV New International Version

NRSV New American Standard Version

OT Old Testament

OTE Old Testament Essays

OTL Old Testament Library

PTL A Journal of Descriptive Poetics and Theory of Literature

SBLMS Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series

SRI Socio-Rhetorical Interpretation

Syr. Syriac

Tg(s). Targum(s)

TPs Twin Psalm

WBC World Biblical Commentary

ZABR Zeitschrift fr altorientalische und biblische Rechtesgeschichte

xii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Repetitive Words and Phrases in Psalm 111 ...................................................... 79

Table 2. Concentric Arrangement in Psalm 111 ............................................................... 83

Table 3. Repetitive Words, Phrases and Synonymous Themes in Psalm 112 .................. 96

Table 4. Straight across Repetition within TPs 111/112................................................. 107

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION: HISTORY OF TWIN PSALMS

Purpose and Scope of the Study

The main interest in this dissertation is to examine the rhetorical nature of speech

in the biblical text. The goal of this dissertation is to investigate the phenomenon of

biblical rhetorical speech in the twin psalm unit of Psalms 111 and 112 (hereafter cited as

TPs 111/112) to explore how it is persuasively structured to both guide and protect the

people of God.

Problem: The Need for More of a Rhetorical Approach

James Muilenburg in his 1968 presidential SBL address Form Criticism and

Beyond, paid his respects to the many grand accomplishments of form criticism (the

world behind the text), but then went on to challenge the guild of biblical scholarship to

now investigate a new methodology he termed rhetorical criticism. He stated:

What I am interested in, above all, is in understanding the nature of Hebrew

literary composition, in exhibiting the structural patterns that are employed for the

fashioning of a literary unit, whether in poetry or prose, and in discerning the

many and various devices by which the predications are formulated and ordered

into a unified whole. Such an enterprise I should describe as rhetoric and the

methodology as rhetorical criticism.1

This address opened the door to a new horizon of literary and rhetorical criticism in

biblical scholarshipthe world of the text. With regard to Psalms research, many

1 James Muilenburg, Form Criticism and Beyond, JBL 88 (1969): 8.

2

scholars have devoted their skill to examining the literary art involved in the composing

of this poetry, as well as the various structural patterns found throughout this genre of

literature. Here the literary critic pays close attention to literary features such as inclusio,

anaphora, meter, stanzas, lexical repetition, key word links (Leitworter), intertextual

thematic connections, structure and rhetorical elements.

Interest in a new post-Muilenburg literary and rhetorical criticism of the biblical

text has mounted over the past several decades. Much of the scholarly work done has

followed in the tradition and program initiated by Muilenburgs challenge. However,

there are also many who have become restless of rhetorical criticism being confined to a

close attention to stylistics in composition and the aesthetic value of the biblical text.

Phyllis Tribles critical analysis of the Muilenburg program cites scholars who voice

concern to his limited definition and have branched out to move beyond this approach.2

Her sub-chapter on The Art of Persuasion, gives examples of those in the guild who

demonstrate how biblical authors have structured their writings to affect their audience.3

David Howard is also uneasy with the restrictive scope of Muilenburgs program. He

observes how the OT rhetorical criticism accomplished by the scholarly guild after

Muilenburgs challenge primarily focused on the literary composition, structure, and

stylistics to be found in the text as opposed to how the text acts as a means of

persuasion.4 As a result, most of the work done initially in this area of study did not

2 Phyllis Trible, Rhetorical Criticism (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 48-52. Here she cites

dissatisfaction from Yehoshua Gitay, Wilhelm Wuellner, C. Clifton Black, et al.

3 Ibid., 41-48.

4 David M. Howard, Jr., Rhetorical Criticism in Old Testament Studies, BBR 4 (1994): 87-104.

3

address how the author, editor, text, and audience were involved in the rhetorical

persuasion provided by the biblical text. In this regard he states:

For the most part, Old Testament rhetorical criticism has been only tangentially related to the rhetorical criticism of departments of speech or rhetoric. The intersection occurs at the place where the latter do close readings of texts or else

in those few cases where Old Testament rhetorical studies actually focus upon the

suasive and/or oratorical aspects of the biblical texts.5

Howard ends his article by challenging biblical scholars to turn to a more classical

rhetorical criticism based on speech and persuasion.6 Just as the term literary criticism

needed to be redefined to distinguish it from source criticism, so too he urges that it

would behoove the discipline of Old Testament rhetorical criticism to redefine itself in

terms of speech and (especially) persuasion, taking into account the label rhetorical.7

Donald Berry also notes the limitations exhibited by this more literary, stylistic

emphasis in rhetorical criticism which can result in it . . . becoming a mere catalog of the

literary devices of a text.8 He goes on to encourage a more holistic approach as he states:

Once the literary devices of a text have been identified, preoccupation with these

features can cloud the genuine aim of biblical interpretationtextual explication. Rhetorical criticism generates information which needs to be processed within

some other system.9

In light of all of this it seems reasonable to state that the more literary methodology,

forwarded by Muilenburg and those who have followed him, can be enhanced by those

who now wish to make a broadening next step in scholarship toward the more

5 Ibid., 99.

6 Ibid., 87.

7 Ibid., 102-3.

8 Donald K. Berry, The Psalms and their Readers (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993),

143.

9 Ibid.

4

persuasive side of rhetorical criticism. Indeed, making such a move in interpretation can

be viewed as being more holistic.

A Socio-Rhetorical Interpretive Approach

In the attempt then to move in this more holistic direction which is inclusive of a

rhetorical approach, this dissertation will examine the TPs 111/112 through a multi-

perspective socio-rhetorical method of interpretation (hereafter cited as SRI). According

to Robbins, socio-rhetorical interpretation:

views texts as performances of language in particular historical and cultural

situations. The socio- refers to the rich resources of modern social, cultural, and cognitive sciences. The rhetorical refers to the way language in a text is a means of communication among people. SRI presupposes that a text is a tapestry

of interwoven textures, including inner texture, intertexture, social and cultural

texture, ideological texture and sacred texture.10

As will be demonstrated, these textures interweave with one another, as one texture will

build upon the information drawn out in another texture. For example, in the final

texturesacred texturethe three preceding textures will be drawn upon to provide a

thicker interpretation of the text.11

The goal of this dissertation is to examine TPs 111/112 as a textual unit through

the multi-perspective approach of SRI. In so doing this dissertation is particularly

interested in the phenomenon of rhetoric and persuasive speech. Through the

10

Vernon K. Robbins, The Invention of Christian Discourse, ed. Vernon K. Robbins and Duane F.

Watson, vol. 1, Rhetoric of Religious Antiquity Series (Blandford Forum: Deo Publishing, 2009), xxviii-

xix.

11 In this regard Robbins states in the conclusion to his book: As an interpreter works carefully

with the nature of language itself in a text, with the relation of a text to other texts, and with the material,

social, cultural, and ideological nature of life, a thick description of the sacred texture of a text emerges.

This description is truer to the rich complexity of a sacred text than exploration that limits itself to only one

texture of a text. See Vernon K. Robbins, Exploring the Texture of Texts (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1996), 130.

5

employment of four12

SRI perspectives, this dissertation seeks to explore how the artistic

performance of speech in this twin psalm unit both rhetorically persuades the faithful and

polemically defends against the wicked.

This twin psalm text is intriguing because the two psalms rhetorically say so

much more when they are read together and examined as a unit. The text is typically

dated by scholars to a postexilic timeframe13a period of time the author has always

personally held in great interest.14

It is hoped that those reading this dissertation will

enjoy the richness of reading this twin psalm text through the lens of SRI. The author

invites all those reading this dissertation to join with him in wondering about future

directions to which the implications of this study may potentially lead.

The first step in literary analysis is finding the limiting bounds of a literary unit of

speech. In the case of this dissertation, the subject matter of this rhetorical investigation is

the TPs 111/112 unit of text. Since the mid-19th century there has been a bewildering

amount of varying ways in which this twin psalm designation has been used. To date

no formal definition for this term twin psalm has been developed. So before entering

into an examination of two psalms together as one unit, one may question if such a

joining of two psalms together as a unit is legitimate and also what limitations can be

placed upon what defines a twin psalm unit. Therefore, before entering into the main

12

The SRI texture of ideology will not be examined in this dissertation since its subject matter is

not concerned with the rhetorical nature of a text, but instead departs from the text to deals with an analysis

of the readers (you and I) and what ideological baggage we as readers bring to the reading of the text.

13 See e.g. Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101-150, ed. Bruce M. Metzer et al., WBC (Nashville: Thomas

Nelson Publishers, 2002), 122; Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalms 60-150, trans. Hilton C. Oswald

(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 357.

14 The author spent a year abroad studying at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and there took

part in history classes taught by Dr. Isaiah Gafni and Dr. Daniel Schwartz pertaining to the Judaism of the

Second Temple period.

6

body of the dissertations concern with rhetorical speech, an excursus will first define a

twin psalm unit and show what warrant there is for us to consider TPs 111/112 together

as one literary unit of speech.

The Defining and Delimiting of a Twin Psalm Unit

Following the influential lead of Hermann Gunkel, much of the scholarly work

during the 20th century focused on form criticism and the classification of individual

psalms according to their specific genre, and speculation was made determining how

each psalm may have historically fit into the cultic life of the Hebrew people. For the

most part, the Psalter was viewed as a collection of 150 individual psalms, with each

psalm being treated separately from the other psalms surrounding it. Even each psalm in

the collection of psalms in the Psalms of Ascent (Pss 120-34) according to Gunkel

belong to very different genres.15 In this same manner, commentaries on the Psalter

after Gunkel tended to ignore how some psalms or collection of psalms seemed to work

together and focus was placed upon each psalm as an individual unit.

Nevertheless, observations made by pre-Gunkel and more recent scholarship

recognize that certain pairs of psalms throughout the Psalter have common forms, literary

features, structures, and interrelated theological themes which weave those psalms

together. The degree to which these psalm pairs are stitched together by form, common

words, phrases and themes varies from pair to pair. Some are tacked together by a very

moderate light literary stitching, while others are intricately woven together by a wide

variety of literary features, and theological themes.

15

Hermann Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms: The Genres of the Religious Lyric of Israel, trans.

James D. Nogalski (Macon: Mercer University Press, 1998), 17.

7

Current scholarship recognizes that certain pairs of psalms called

Zwillingspsalmen16

or twin psalms exist in the final canonical form of the Psalter. As

we will see, this term twin psalm lacks a formal definition. This presents a difficulty

because if one is going to do methodological research on twin psalms one must be able to

first define what a twin psalm is and is not. The purpose of this initial selective historical

survey then will be to examine how the term twin psalm has been used in the past and

then use this information to define and delimit what defines a twin psalm unit.

However, this information is only background information for the real study in this

dissertation, which is concerned with the role of rhetoric and how a twin psalm textual

unitPsalm 111 and 112is fashioned as an artistic performance of speech, to both

rhetorically persuade the faithful and polemically defend against the wicked.

Historical Survey of the Term Twin Psalms: 19th Century

Since a twin psalm text is to be examined closely in this dissertation, a working

definition of how a twin psalm unit is to be defined is in order. The term twin psalm

has never been formerly defined. Unfortunately, as one surveys the various manners in

which this designation is put into use, it appears, to quote from the book of Judges, that

every man did what was right in his own eyes.17 Particularly in recent years the

designation twin psalm has been used in a wide variety of ways. Because of this it is

evident that there is some amount of confusion and disagreement in Psalm scholarship

16

Walther Zimmerli, Zwillingspsalmen, In Wort, Lied und Gottesspruch: Festschrift fr Joseph Ziegler, ed. Josef Schreiner, Forschung Zur Bibel; Bd. 2. ([Wrzburg] Echter Verlag: Katholisches

Bibelwerk, 1972). This work by Zimmerli has popularized this term Zwillingspsalmen in more recent years.

However, this term dates back much earlier to the 19th century.

17 Unless noted otherwise, all scriptural quotes are taken from the New Revised Standard Version

of scripture.

8

over what actually constitutes a twin psalm unit. In light of this, we shall first conduct a

chronological history surveying how this term has been utilized amongst Psalms scholars

in both older pre-Gunkel and more recent scholarship. We will then synthesize this

information to propose a definition regarding what qualifies two psalms as being a twin

psalm unit.

Ernst W. Hengstenberg

The origin of two psalms being depicted as a pair, double pair, twin pair, or twin

psalms is detected early on in the scholarly writings of the 19th century. Ernst W.

Hengstenberg (1802-1869) wrote his first Psalms commentary in 1844.18

Here we are

introduced to reading about pairs of psalms which are meant to be read as a unit. The

commentarys introduction is quick to observe that Psalm 1 and 2 were placed together in

order that they might serve as an introduction to the Psalter. One indication that they are

united as a whole is shown by observing how both psalms do not have Davidic

superscriptions as are found in most of the other psalms in book onenothing divides

them. Also, the theme of the righteous versus the wicked found in Psalm 1 seems to act

foundationally as an introduction to the same subject matter found in Psalm 2 with a

special application to the Messiah and His adversaries.19 Much like contemporary

Psalms commentaries, Hengstenberg draws attention to how Psalm 1 opens with a

blessed statement while Psalm 2 closes with a blessed statement and to how the word

18

Ernst W. Hengstenberg, Kommentar ber die Psalmen (Berlin: Berlag von Eubwig Dehmigte,

1844).

19 Ernst W. Hengstenberg, Commentary on the Psalms, trans. P. Fairbairn and J. Thomson, 4th ed.,

3 vols. (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1863), 1:6.

9

perish used in the final verse of both psalms depicts the fate of the wicked.20 He ends

his analysis with an interesting contrast of how the words The nations meditate vain

things in [the second Psalm], acquire additional force, if viewed as a contrast to the

meditation of the righteous on the law of the Lord, mentioned in the first Psalm.21 The

argument that these psalms are indeed a paired unit is further strengthened by additional

examples of pairs of Psalms found elsewhere in the Psalter.22

As one of those examples, Hengstenberg ranks Psalms 14 and 15 as a psalm pair

(psalm paar in German) due to the juxtaposed contrast which is depicted between the

wicked in the former with the righteous in the latter. He cites how Luthers commentary

originally concluded that This Psalm [15] follows the preceding one in the finest order.

For, just as in that the form and pattern of the ungodly was described, so now in this the

pattern of the godly is described.23 This attention to an intentional editorial ordering to

illicit a theological contrast, illustrates how both Luther and Hengstenberg sought to

pastorally reveal patterns which teach theological lessons throughout the Psalter.

His commentary on Psalm 33 recognizes that there exists what we might call a

literary stitching joining the ending Psalm 32 and the beginning of Psalm 33. In this

regard he states that Psalm 33 along with the one before it, forms one pair [paar]. The

chief reason for adopting this view is that the Psalm begins in the same strain as that

20

Ibid.

21 Ibid. Again, it is interesting to note how his commentary sounds so similar to many of the

commentaries today.

22 Ibid.

23 Ibid., 1:220.

10

which the preceding one concludes, namely, an exhortation to rejoice in the Lord.24

Hengstenberg goes on to suggest that this unit makes a movement from an individual

prayer of David (Ps 32) to be a prayer which can be shared by the whole believing

community of Israel (Ps 33).25

In other words, Psalm 32 acts as an introduction to Psalm

33. Also, in support of this claim that these psalms form a pair, he notes that there is no

superscription dividing these psalms like the ones surrounding it.26

He notes as well that

structurally Psalm 32 is in a 22 line acrostic form, and that Psalm 33 mirrors this with its

own 22 verse albeit non-acrostic structure. As an interesting side note to the development

of this pair/twin psalm designation, David Johnson a short time later agrees with

Hengstenbergs assessment of Psalms 32 and 33 as being meant to be read together as a

unit and he refers to them as twin songs.27

Another example of a psalm pair from Hengstenberg is found in his commentary

on Psalms 42 and 43. His reasoning is based upon how the five verse stanza in Psalm 43

is patterned after the two 5 verse stanzas found in Psalm 42.28

He then goes on to point

out how Psalm 42:9 mirrors 43:2 and the ending of 42:11 mirrors 43:5. Furthermore, just

24

Ibid., 1:523.

25 Again, we see here Hengstenbergs purpose to lay out a manner in which the juxtaposed reading

of two psalms reveals a practical principle of interpretation which can be applied to the life of the believing

community.

26 We already saw this inference from a lack of a superscription in Pss 1 and 2. Psalms 9 and 10

are the only other psalms in book one which do not have a superscription between them. This pair of

psalms is also without doubt intended to be read together as a unit as they were originally composed as a

single acrostic psalm with every other line beginning with the next successive letter of the Hebrew

alphabet.

27 David Johnson, A Treatise on the Authorship of Ecclesiastes (London: MacMillian & Co, 1880),

376.

28 Hengstenberg, Commentary on the Psalms, 2:85. He states that Ps 42:6 acts as a prelude and

thus divides these five verse strophes.

11

like the previous pairs of Psalms 1 & 2; 9 & 10; and 32 & 33, there lacks a superscription

dividing these psalms.29

The paired unit of the acrostic Psalms 111 and 112 is the last example we will

look at from Hengstenberg before we move on to look at other scholars from this time

period. Structurally, he notes how the fear of the LORD theme in the first verse of

Psalm 112 connects with the final verse of Psalm 111 and may be considered a

commentary on it.30 In addition: The formal arrangement in both Psalms is completely

the sameproof enough that we have before us a pair of Psalms.31 Hengstenberg raises

a theological connection which is implicit in paired unit and states:

This Psalm [112] is a praise of God as the true Recompenser. In the preceding

Psalm, courage had been imparted to those who failed to observe the recompense,

by pointing to the glorious deeds of God in times past; and here the recompense to

be expected is described at length. There the basis is assigned to the that if the recompense, and here to the how God will not be wanting to himself;this is the fundamental thought;let a man sow faithfully, though it be in tears, in due season he shall reap in joy.

32

This ability to see an interrelated theological message running through two adjacent

psalms when read as a unit is well illustrated here by Hengstenbergs analysis. This

implicit editorial design to integrate a theological message through the joint reading of a

psalm pair as a unit will be important to keep in mind for our present definition of a twin

psalm and also in the latter stages of discussion in this dissertation.

29

Ibid.

30 Ibid., 3:349. Once more we see here an illustration of how Hengstenberg now directs the reader

of Ps 112 to receive practical instruction on what the fear of the LORD looks like as live it is lived out by the righteous God fearer described in this psalm.

31 Ibid.

32 Ibid., 3:348-49.

12

Joseph Alexander

Joseph Alexander (1809-1860) was a contemporary scholar with Hengstenberg

and in the preface to his commentary he pays a huge debt of gratitude to the German

scholar with the acknowledgment, that his work is the basis of the one now offered to

the public, and that more has been directly drawn from that source than from all others

put together.33 Alexander is quick to acknowledge that his commentary is aimed

exclusively at explanation, the discovery and statement of meaning. . . because this is

really the point in which assistance is needed by the readers of the Psalter34 and lastly,

because he had especially in view the want of ministers, who are better able than himself

to erect a doctrinal, devotional, or practical super structure on the exegetical basis he has

endeavored here to furnish.35 Consequently, he makes clear that he is not concerned

with any attempt to give the history of the interpretation, or to enumerate the advocates

and authors of conflicting expositions.36 Adding to this he also avoids full discussions

of the various questions, as to the age and the authors of the various psalms, the origin

and principle of their arrangement, the best mode of classification, and the principles on

which they ought to be interpreted.37 Like Hengstenberg before him, Alexander seeks to

exegetically interpret the Psalms in a manner which will practically enrich the believing

community which stands in front of the text rather than delving into background

33

Joseph A. Alexander, The Psalms Translated and Explained, 3 vols. (New York: Baker and

Scribner, 1850), 1:iii.

34 Ibid., iv.

35 Ibid.

36 Ibid., v.

37 Ibid., vi.

13

speculation concerning authorship and the possible Sitz im Leben of a psalm, or in our

case, paired psalms.

One development Alexander makes with regard to these juxtaposed psalms is that

he refers to them both as pairs or double psalms.38

With regard to these he speaks of

incidences in which two psalms bear so intimate and obvious a mutual relation, that they

seem to constitute a pair or double psalm, either because they were originally meant to

match each other or because one has been subsequently added for the purpose.39

Another development is that he goes on in Hengstenbergs footsteps to postulate

new possibilities of there being additional psalm pairs. His first commentary in 1850

makes reference to five different pairs or double psalms: 1 & 2; 3 & 4; 9 & 10; 16 & 17;

23 & 24; and 25 & 26.40

A brief survey of the newer additions, beyond those given by

Hengstenberg already, demonstrates his rationale for what constitutes these units.

Due to a similarity of structure and the mirroring of the lie down and sleep

phrase found in both Psalm 3:5 and Psalm 4:8, he states that like Psalms 1 and 2 they

were meant to form a pair or double psalm.41 Psalm 17 is said to be a pair or double

psalm with Psalm 16 due to the resemblance of its subject, tone and diction.42

38

With regard to the purposeful arrangement of the psalms in the Psalter he states: The collection is by no means so unmeaning and fortuitous as may at first sight seem to be the case, but that in many

instances at least, a reason may be found for the juxtaposition, in resemblance or identity of subject or

historical occasion, or in some remarkable coincidence of general form or of particular expressions. Ibid., ix.

39 Ibid.

40 Hengstenberg has already treated Pss 1 & 2; 9 & 10, so these will not be reexamined here.

41 Alexander, The Psalms Translated and Explained, 26. He also states that Ps 3 should be

considered a morning psalm due to the I awake phrase found in Ps 3:5 whereas Psalm 4 should be considered an evening psalm due to the I will lie down phrase found in Ps 4:8.

42 Ibid., 120.

14

Alexander hypothesizes that Psalms 23 and 24 historically were arranged to be sung

upon the same occasion; the first, it may be, as the ark left its former resting-place, the

second as it drew near to its new one.43 Psalms 25 and 26 are probably a pair/double

psalm due to a certain similarity of form.44 It appears that Alexander was keenly aware

of these new found double psalms in the beginning of this commentary but then his

awareness of them vanishes from this point on in this commentary and one is left to

wonder if the luxury of slowing down to notice other psalm pairs was over ridden by the

rush to get this initial commentary to press.

A subsequent revised commentary was published in 1864 with additional sets of

proposed double Psalms 88 & 89; 92 & 93; and 95 & 96.45

Here Alexander posits that the

only explanation for the unresolved despondency of Psalm 88 is that the laments found

there are merely introductory to the cheering expectations of Psalm 89.46 Psalm 93 is

possibly a double psalm with Psalm 92 if we see the latter as being an amplification of

the laconic dictum in Ps. xcii 9 (8).47 The rationale for the pairing of Psalm 95 with 96 is

due to the former being an admonition for the Jews to sing joyfully to the LORD while

43

Ibid., 198. See 2 Sam 6 and 1 Chr 15. This is one place where Alexander dips his toe into the

waters of historical speculation somewhat like we will later see with Delitzsch. However, different from

Delitzschs historical concern for an actual timeframe of dating, Alexander seems to be more concerned with a possible historical purpose. His historical comments here are uncharacteristic with the rest of the

general pastoral tone found in his commentary and one may take pause to wonder if his speculative

reasoning is perhaps getting a bit too fanciful in the historical joint reading of these two psalms.

44 Ibid., 214. It appears that by form he means here that these are both psalms of trust.

45 Joseph A. Alexander, The Psalms Translated and Explained (Edinburgh: A. Elliot, J. Thin,

1864).

46 Ibid., 366.

47 Ibid., 388. That laconic dictum being: But you O LORD are exalted forever.

15

the latter encourages the Gentiles throughout all the earth to sing out a new song.48

One

implicit precedent regarding what constitutes a psalm pairs set by both Hengstenberg and

Alexander, is that these psalm pairs or double psalms must be arranged alongside of one

another.

Franz Delitzsch

Nine years after Alexanders work, Franz Delitzsch (1813-1890) published a two

volume commentary (1859-60) on the Psalms49

which was later republished in the 1867

Biblischer Commentar ber das Alte Testament series.50

Like Hengstenberg, Delitzsch

observes that Psalms 42 and 43 are to be read together as a unit. In this regard he states:

The similarity of the situation, of the general impress, of the structure, and of the refrain,

is decisive in favour of these Psalms, which are commonly reckoned as two, being

one.51 Earlier in the introduction to this commentary in his remarks on arrangement, he

speaks of Psalm 43 as being an independent twin psalm to Psalm 42.52 This appears to

be the first place the term Zwillingspsalm is used.

Another twin psalm reference is made regarding Psalms 69 and 40 which

Delitzsch says are closely related as twin psalms [Zwillingspsalmen].53 His reasoning

for this assessment with regard to Psalms 40 and 69 is as follows: In both the poet

48

Ibid., 396.

49 Franz Delitzsch, Kommentar ber die Psalmen, 2 vols. (Leipzig: Dorffling und Franke, 1859).

50 Franz Delitzsch, Biblischer Commentar ber die Psalmen (Liepzig: Dorffling und Franke,

1867).

51 Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Psalms, 3 vols., Clarks Foreign Theological

Library (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1871), 2:54.

52 Ibid., 2:21.

53 Ibid., 2:275.

16

describes his suffering as a sinking into a miry pit: in both we meet with the same

depreciation of ceremonial sacrifice: the same method of denoting a great multitude

more that the hairs of my head, [Pss 69:5, 40:13]; and the same prospect of the faith of

saints being strengthened [Pss 69:7, 33; 40:4, 17].54 Like his predecessors, Delitzsch

uses these like phrases to identify a pair of psalms. However, these psalms are not

juxtaposed alongside of one another as we saw in all the examples given above.

Furthermore, unlike Hengstenberg and Alexander who focus more upon theological,

literary and pastoral connections between adjacent psalms, Delitzschs purpose in

observing connections between psalms adds in a concern for determining the authorship

and for the historical timeframe of when they were written. Indeed, he devotes about

eight pages related to The History of Psalm Composition in his introductory remarks.55

The timeframe and origins of the various psalms in the Psalter then range from the early

psalms of Moses and David to latter possible dates in the Maccabean period. This more

historically based approach of Delitzsch, away from Hengstenberg and Alexanders more

literary approach, is an important distinction to take note of here when considering what

constitutes a psalm pair or twin psalm.56

In this case, he postulates that the similar miry

pit language in these psalms points to the prophet Jeremiah as being the original author.

This then identifies the identical timeframe when these two psalms were composed and

allows us to view them as twins.

54

Ibid.

55 Ibid., 1:7-14.

56 This is not to say that Hengstenberg and Alexander totally neglected historical possibilities in

their commentaries because they did not. This is saying that their time-frame emphasis was of a very minor concern when compared to Delitzsch.

17

In like manner, Delitzsch also speaks of Psalm 3957

and Psalm 62 as being a twin

pair (ein Zwillingspaares).58 He first bases this upon the like superscriptions which

name both Jeduthun and David.59

He goes on to point out how both psalms use the word

Selah twice and use the word indeed multiple times.60 Furthermore, both describe

the nothingness of everything human in the same language.61 More importantly

however, these psalms are a twin pair because they are a product of the time of the

persecution by Absalom.62 Here again we see Delitzschs historical concerns are

instrumental in determining what constitutes a twin psalm or twin pair.

One final twin reference is made in this commentary regarding the acrostic

Psalms 111 and 112. Here Delitzsch states: The two Psalms are twin in form as in

contents.63 He later refers to them as a twin pair (Zwillingspaares).64 His commentary

on the form aspect of these psalms points to their obvious 22 line acrostic structure and

how the first verse of each psalm sets forth the theme which follows.65 He also notes

57

Interestingly Delitzsch begins his remarks regarding Ps 39 by observing a thematic connection it

has with the previous psalm. Both Ps 38:14 and Ps 39:3 &10 depict the poet as a dumb person, who opens not his mouth (Delitzsch, Psalms, 2:26-27). This characteristic fully warranted their being placed together as a pair (Delitzsch, Psalms, 2:27). However, in his opinion, Pss 39 and 62 are still more closely related since they have a similar historical background (Delitzsch, Psalms, 2:27).

58 Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Psalms, 2:206. It is interesting to note that in his

previous commentary on Ps 39 he speaks of them, like Hengstenberg and Alexander before him, as being

simply a pair (see ibid., 2:27).

59 Ibid., 2:27.

60 Ibid.

61 Ibid.

62 Ibid., 2:206.

63 Ibid., 3:197. Die zwei Psalmen. sind Zwillenge in Form wie Inhalt.

64 Ibid.

65 Ibid., 200.

18

how in the third verse of both psalms we find the phrase and his righteousness endures

forever.66 His commentary of these psalms lacks an overt historical concern, but their

side by side acrostic arrangement and the mirroring of certain phrasing may implicitly

have led him to believe they were from the same time period. His description of what

connects this twin pair here sounds a bit more like how Hengstenberg and Alexander

before him described psalm pairs or double psalms.

It appears that Delitzsch is the first to evoke the terms twin psalms and twin

pairs and he uses these terms interchangeably. Unlike his predecessors, he uses the term

twin psalm to denote psalms, juxtaposed or not, which were authored by the same author

during a similar timeframe.

Thomas K. Cheyne

Thomas K. Cheyne (1841-1915) is a late19th century Psalms scholar who also

makes use of twin psalm terminology. In 1888 he makes his first published mention of

this phrase and states:

Pss. cxi and cxiii are twin psalms. They are both alphabetical in the full sense, each of the three-toned lines beginning with one of the twenty-two Hebrew letters

taken in order; and in both psalms the last two verses are tristichs. In contents they

are still more closely akin. Ps. cxii. is a heilige Parodie (as Hengstenberg phrases it) of Ps. cxi., designed to suggest the lesson of Matt. v. 48.

67

Thus, Cheyne in his initial reference to a twin psalm, seems to pick up on Delitzschs

terminology but then goes on to make a theological connection between these psalm

much like Hengstenberg and Alexander.

66

Ibid.

67 Thomas K. Cheyne, The Book of Psalms: Or the Praise of Israel (London: Kegan, Paul, Trench

& Co., 1888), 303. Matt. 5:48 of course is based upon the Lev 19:2 passage, Be holy because I, the LORD your God, am holy.

19

In an 1889 publication, Cheyne suggests other twin psalm units which we will list

here.68

He connects Psalms 75 and 76 together as twin psalms due to their common theme

surrounding Gods judgment upon the wicked.69 In 1892, he finds that both Psalms 16

and 17 thematically anticipate an immediate admission to the divine presence after

death70 and thus are designated as twin-psalms.71

However, also in 1892, Cheyne began to no longer limit twin psalms to be only

those which are juxtaposed alongside of one another. In this manner he uses a great deal

of creativity by asserting that Psalms 26 and 28 are twin-psalms and reflect upon each

other.72 He bases this upon there being a theme of two levels of self-confidence which

are evident in the attitudes of the speakers in these two psalms. Later in 1898, he casually

speaks of Psalm 2 and Psalm 18 as being twin psalms due to their common use of a

Davidic theme with wider implications of a future Messianic age.73

Unlike Delitzsch,

Cheynes connections in these two instances of non-juxtaposed psalms are based strictly

on common themesthere is no concern for the historical timeframe in which these

Psalms were written.

In 1904 his comments revert back to dealing solely with juxtaposed psalms. Here

he views Psalms 20 and 21 as twin psalms because they both speak of Gods favor which

68

These references are chronologically according to their date of publication.

69 Thomas K. Cheyne, The Origins and Religious Contexts of the Psalter (London: Kegan, Paul,

Trench & Co., 1889), 166.

70 Thomas K. Cheyne, Aids to the Devout Study of Criticism (London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1892),

265.

71 Ibid., 266.

72 Ibid., 291. Earlier J. Alexander asserted that Pss 25 and 26 were psalm pairs.

73 Thomas K. Cheyne, Jewish Religious Life after the Exile (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons,

1898), 111.

20

rests upon the king.i Concerning the acrostic Psalm 34, he states: The earliest editor

probably considered it to be the twin-psalm to Psalm [35].74 This was due to the foe

connection as seen in the superscription of Psalm 3475

tying in with the foes spoken

against in Psalm 35. It appears that for Cheyne, there are many different ways in which

similar themes may join various psalms together to become twin psalms.

H. D. M. Spence: The Pulpit Commentary

The Pulpit Commentary (1896) also make reference to the twin psalms 56 and 57.

After identifying them as twin psalms the commentary states:

They begin with the same words, are nearly of the same length, and have each a

refrain which divides them into two portions . . . . Both psalms were written under

circumstances of great distress, and the tone of thought in them is very similar.

Each begins with a complaint, and earnest prayer for deliverance, while each ends

with praise and triumph.76

This description is the nearest we come to finding an actual definition of twin psalms

during this time period. Here these juxtaposed psalms are considered to be a twin psalm

text due to their having: the same opening phrase, a similar length, a similar refrain, a

similar tone, and a similar theme of distress is noted as existing in the pair.

Summary

In many cases the terms psalm pair, double psalm, twin song, twin pair and twin

psalm appear to be analogous with one another. It is apparent from the above survey that

74

Thomas K. Cheyne, The Book of Psalms, 2 vols. (New York: Thomas Whittaker, 1904), 1:140. I

have changed Cheynes Roman numeral xxxv to our Arabic number 35 here.

75 Of David, when he pretended to be insane before [his foe] Abimelech, who drove him out, and

he went away.

76 H. D. M. Spence, ed., Psalms, vol. 2, The Pulpit Commentary (London: Kegan Paul, Trench,

Trubner & Co., 1869), 1.

21

these terms were used interchangeably in the 19th century.77

For example, Psalms 111

and 112 were called a psalm pair by Hengstenberg, a twin-pair by Delitzsch, and

twin psalms by Cheyne. In every case these terms identify that there is some type of

bond which exists between two psalms, be that a similar tone, theme, similar structure or

a historical time frame. Less often the juxtaposed psalms may have an interrelated

contrasting theological theme, as in Psalms 14 and 15. Others pairs have a similar

Gattung or form which helps to unite them.78

Hengstenberg and Alexander were the first

to list various psalm pairs and all these initial examples were of juxtaposed psalms. Both

of these scholars made it clear that these psalms were editorially placed alongside of one

another in order that they might be read together. Of the nineteen sets of psalms we

examined79

all but four sets were juxtaposed alongside one another. These nineteen psalm

pairs illustrate the many ways in which adjacent psalms may be literarily, theologically,

and thematically stitched together.80

In light of the above survey it is clear that these different scholars have different

opinions with regard to what criteria warrant two separate psalms to be recognized as

twin psalms or psalm pairs. There are many places of agreement amongst these scholars

where they recognize the similar words, phrases, forms, and theological themes which

exist between twin psalms or psalm pairs. In most cases they limited these twin pairs to

77

Because of this the remainder of this survey will also use these terms in an interchangeable

fashion.

78 To this list we might add Delitzschs historical timeframe concern, but the two examples given

were unique at this time and would not fall under the category of what we would call typical.

79 The thirty-eight psalms we considered in this short overview make up approximately twenty-

five percent of the Psalter.

80 In Delitzschs case the psalms may be stitched together by authorship and historical timeframe

as well.

22

juxtaposed psalms. However, there were differences as well. Both Delitzsch and Cheyne

departed from the adjacent psalm pair approach of Hengstenberg and Alexander. On the

one hand, Delitzsch was driven in this direction by his zeal to establish the historical

timeframe in which psalms 39 with 62, and also 40 with 69, were originally written.

While one may admire the plausibility of his scholarship, it appears that this historically

driven manner of identifying twin pairs takes away from the importance of being able to

read a psalm pair as a unit. Cheyne on the other hand, uses creative license to

thematically connect Psalm 26 with Psalm 28, and also Psalm 2 with Psalm 18. Creativity

is needful and its use applauded in the art side of interpretation. The problem is that

creativity is often very subjective and interpreters can imagine endless thematic

connections between disparate psalms throughout the Psalter. This appears to be the case

with Psalms 26 and 28 which Cheyne envisions illustrating two different levels of trust.

There is a personal creative subjectivism also evident in Cheynes linking of Psalm 2

with Psalm 18 by means of the Davidic/Messianic theme found in these psalms. By what

criteria is Psalm 18 to be judged as a better twin psalm to link with Psalm 2 than Psalm

110? Another problem is that because the final editors did not arrange these psalms

alongside of one another, we cannot imagine that these psalms were intended to be read

together as a unit. A more definitive description of what makes up a twin psalm must

take this intentional theological joint relationship into account.

Excurses: Gunkel and Mowinckel

After the work accomplished by the above mentioned scholars, references to

psalm pairs or twin psalm for the most part fell out of sight. Much of OT scholarship in

relationship to the Psalms throughout the twentieth century now became dominated by

23

the form-critical approach of Hermann Gunkel (1862-1932).81

Gunkels methodology

prompted him to identify various psalm genres and to then speculate upon the possible

Sitz im Leben out of which the various forms of lament, hymn, royal, thanksgiving or

praise psalms occurred. This approach divided the psalms up into individual sub-genres

or types of poetry such as individual laments, community laments, thank offering songs,

hymns, entrance liturgies, Torah songs, and royal psalms, many which corresponded to

various cultic functions in Israels corporate worship. Other psalms (e.g. Ps 50) he

designated as Spiritual Songs presuppose no particular cultic acts82 and could be sung

by an individual anywhere.83

Gunkels student Sigmund Mowinckel (1884-1965) redirected the emphasis and

made the hypothesis that almost all of the psalms were composed specifically for the

liturgical worship of the Temple cult.84

Much of his theory surrounded the central

significance of the fall festival of the Enthronement Festival (see Pss 47, 95-100) which

honored Yahweh as King. Like Gunkel, his hypothesis addressed the Sitz im Leben

historical dimension so important to the methodology of this timeframe. Both of the

form-critical approaches forwarded by Gunkel and Mowinckel, by their very nature,

place the emphasis of their study on how the text fit into the life and cult of the original

believing community back then. This emphasis of looking back into the various

81

Gunkel, Introduction to Psalms: The Genres of the Religious Lyric of Israel.

82 Hermann Gunkel, The Psalms: A Form-Critical Introduction, trans. Thomas M. Horner

(Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967), 26.

83 While many of the older psalms were written for use in the worship service of the cult, others,

according to Gunkel, the pious poet composed for his own use. See ibid., 5.

84 Sigmund Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship, trans. D. R. Ap-Thomas, 2 vols.

(Nashville: Abingdon, 1962).

24

literary forms and how they fit into historical past is very different from the more

pastorally oriented interests we found in Hengstenbergs and Alexanders commentaries.

Also, unlike the preceding 19th century scholars, there was during this time in the 20th

century only limited attention given to any kind of an inner relational structure within the

Psalter.

The upshot of all of this is that psalms scholarship since the seminal work of

Gunkel and Mowinckel takes a turn towards genre and the form critical analysis of each

individual psalm. As a result, Psalms commentaries for the most part joined in with this

form critical approach and limited their analysis to each psalm as an individual unit.

David Howard points out how the introductions to many psalms commentaries follow the

lead of Gunkel and merely speak of the standard grouping of the psalms into five books,

each which end with a doxology, as well as the sub-grouping of various psalm collections

such as the psalms of Asaph (50, 73-83), Korah (42-49; 84-85; 87-88); and the Songs of

Accent 120-134 and so forth.85

The problem is that there has been no real interest in the

internal structures of these collections, except the casual comments that they were

probably liturgical collections of one type of another. 86 Howard points out that due to

the influence of Gunkel and Mowinckel more specific questions of organization and

structure within these groupings largely have gone unaddressed.87

85

David M. Howard, Jr., The Structure of Psalms 93-100 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997),

2.

86 Ibid.

87 Ibid.

25

Walther Zimmerlis use of the Term: Twin Psalm

For many years after Gunkel, terms like psalm pair, and twin psalm made

infrequent appearances in Psalms scholarship. It is not until a work entitled

Zwillingspsalmen published in 1972 by Walther Zimmerli, that this term seems to

resurrect from a distant past. Zimmerlis article reawakened the scholarly guild to the

many instances where psalms seemed to be interlinked and stitched together. Zimmerlis

work is pivotal. In this article he wrestles with the various manners in which pairs of

psalms relate to one another. Although he entitles this work Zwillingspsalmen, as we

will see, one must be careful not to assume that every example of psalm pairs he

mentions in this essay are in fact twin psalms.

As we have already seen, there are many ways in which adjacent psalms may be

literarily and thematically stitched together. Psalms may signal a literary connection by

using similar words and phrases. Quite often, juxtaposed psalms have an interrelated

theological theme. Others pairs have a similar Gattung or form which unites them. The

question at hand is this: At what point do such similarities warrant our designating two

adjacent psalms as being twin psalms? Zimmerlis treatment of these various psalm pairs

is the most extensive one which has been given to date. His essay both implicitly and

explicitly deals with this question of what constitutes a twin psalm unit. Many Psalms

scholars refer back to Zimmerlis essay as a standard bearer when giving their own

opinion regarding twin psalms.88

Because of this, it behooves us to first survey his

88

See e.g. William P. Brown, Seeing the Psalms: A Theology of Metaphor (Louisville:

Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), 225n14; J. Clinton McCann, Jr., ed., Shape and Shaping of the

Psalter, JSOTSup (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 65; Gerald T. Sheppard, Theology and the Book of Psalms, Int 46 (1992): 149.

26

observations regarding these interconnected psalms before we move on to examine the

remarks other scholars after him make regarding twin psalms.

Like Howards remarks above, Zimmerli begins his essay acknowledging that the

scholarly commentary work on Psalter has been performed in a manner which treats each

psalm as if it were a closed unit in itself.89

However, contrary to this view, he points to

how there are many points of connection between the individual psalms.90

His essay

demonstrates this by cataloguing many different manners in which various psalms are

interconnected throughout the Psalter. Examples are given of how Psalms 9 and10 are an

acrostic psalm which has been divided,91

and how in Psalms 42 and43, the three

repetitive strophes beginning with the why are you cast down, O my soul refrains,

leave little doubt that these psalms are to be read together as one psalm.92

He also points

out how Psalm 53 duplicates Psalm 14.93

The interconnections here between these psalms

are plain to see, but Zimmerli does not refer to these as twin psalms.

He then moves on to point out how some psalms may have been assembled from

other psalms. For example, Psalm 108 is formed by Psalms 57:7-11 and 60:5-12, and the

wording of Psalm 40:13-17 is restated in Psalm 70.94

Other similarities in word and

theme are seen when comparing Psalm 115:4-8 with Psalm 135:15-18, and he colorfully

89

Zimmerli, Zwillingspsalmen. 105.

90 Ibid.

91 Psalm 9-10 are a single psalm in the LXX.

92 Zimmerli, Zwillingspsalmen. 105.

93 Ibid.

94 Ibid. These references have been changed from those given from a German version of the Bible

and have been made to correspond with an English translation here and in some places below.

27

states that Psalm 144 exploits Psalm 18 like a stone quarry.95 Stark similarities in

wording and thematic connections exist in all the above examples and further examples

of interconnected psalms are footnoted below.96

The word for word repetition of

language found in these psalms is remarkable. Without doubt there are many strong

literary connections which exist in the examples he gives. However, Zimmerli does not

refer to any of these examples as Zwillingspsalmen. These initial examples of verbal

repetition among mainly scattered psalms appear to be just a warm up for where

Zimmerli eventually wishes to take us.

He next begins to narrow his focus strictly to connections which arise between

psalms which coexist beside one another. Like Hengstenberg, he gives examples of how

Psalms 1:2 and 2:1 share the key word (meditate), and further duplicate the words

(perish/destroy) and (way) in Psalms 1:6 and 2:12.97 Likewise, the many are saying

statement in Psalm 3:2 is also found in Psalm 4:6, a phrase not found anywhere else in

the Psalter.98

Psalm 32 ends with you righteous, sing all you who are upright in heart

and Psalm 33 begins with a synonymous phrase sing joyfully to the LORD you

95

Ibid. This is the authors translation. This is another possible twin psalm we can add as a possibility to pair with Ps 18 according to Cheynes criteria.

96 Here Zimmerli points out that Ps 144:1 coincides with Ps 18:2, 34; Ps 144:5 with Ps 18:9;

Ps144:14 with Ps 18:14; Ps 144:10 with Ps 18:50. Zimmerli further goes on to note the great similarity in

how words are phrased in Ps 6:1 and Ps 38:1; Ps 9:8 with Pss 96:13 and 98:9; Ps 23:6 with Ps 27:4; Ps

27:14 with Ps 31:24 (amended here into English references differing from Zimmerlis German Bible references).

97 Zimmerli, Zwillingspsalmen. 106. Brown states in that in an earlier study Walther Zimmerli

referred to Psalms 1 and 2 as twin psalms. Brown, Seeing the Psalms: A Theology of Metaphor, 225 n14. This dissertation disagrees with Browns assessment of Zimmerli that these are twin psalms and this will be explained further below.

98 Zimmerli, Zwillingspsalmen. I have changed Zimmerlis original German Bible references

here to match those found in an English translation. We saw earlier how J. Alexander recognized Psalms 3

and 4 to be a psalm pair or double psalm.

28

righteous.99 Neighboring Psalms 30:6; 31:14, 22; and 32:5 and later Psalms 38:16; 39:1;

40:7; 41:4 all contain (I said) statements.100 Many more examples are given by

Zimmerli in this regard but let these suffice here for now.101

These examples illustrate that many neighboring psalms contain several key

words or phrases that loosely stitch them together. Because the verbal bonding in many

of these cases is so minimal, Zimmerli ponders the possibility of what role chance or

coincidence may have played in there being a similar word or phrase stated in two

juxtaposed psalms.102

It may be granted that chance could have played a factor in some of

these neighboring psalms but the sheer volume of these many examples shown above

warrants that perhaps the majority of these examples demonstrate an intentional

arrangement of these psalms by the editor. Indeed, it appears that these verbally stitched

pairs were editorially placed in their respectful places for reasons about which we can

99

Ibid. We already saw above how Hengstenberg recognized several other indicators that these

psalms were to be read as a psalm pair.

100 Ibid. I have again changed Zimmerlis German Bible references here to those found in an

English translation.

101 Ibid. The following is my translation of other examples Zimmerli gives in regard to how some

adjacent psalms are connected by similar words and phrases. I have again changed Zimmerlis German Bible verse references here to those found in an English translation: Pss 38 and 39 are connected by the strong statements of the silent one who is praying (Pss 38:13; 39: 2, 9), Pss 39 and 40 for their part are

linked by the theme word "waiting" (39:7; 40:1). . . . The mention of the soul of the prayer being bent down

in 44:25 is found again in the expression of the refrain of the soul cast down in Pss 42 and 43. The

expressions of lowness in Ps 69:29, is formulated completely in the same way as the lowness statement in

70:5 connecting both of these neighboring psalms. The [Hebrew] vocabulary word (ruins) is in the whole Old Testament only found in the neighboring Pss 73:18 and 74:3. The key word (meeting/worship place) is found in Ps 74:4, 8 and at an emphasized place in Ps 75:3 (appointed time). Is

that just by chance? One would like to believe in a deliberate arrangement of Pss 77 and 78 with their

stressing of particular thinking back to the earlier time [from old] in 77:5 and 78:2. The mention of Joseph

in the Asaph Psalms 80:2 and 81:6 leads one back undoubtedly to the common source of these two songs.

The picture of the flock connects the beginning of the Ps 80:1 with the final v. of the preceding Ps (79:13).

In the same way the praising word [ / happy] connects the end of Ps 127 and the beginning of Ps 128 and those psalms are in the middle of the pilgrimage psalms. In addition, the blessing of having sons in

127:3-5 is likewise in 128:3.

102 Ibid., 105-6.

29

only speculate. However, although these psalms are loosely stitched together, from

Zimmerlis perspective these are not Zwillingspsalmen. He waves his hand at all the

previously mentioned psalms and concludes: one will have to go beyond the simple

recognition of a list of key words at each and every place before one can suppose that a

real mutual influence is being worked out in the editorial process.103 So far he has

inductively eliminated all the interconnected psalms he mentioned before as being twin

psalms since they do not possess this real mutual influence. He now turns to two

examples of paired psalms which have what he calls a clear mutual relationship104

TPs 111/112 and TPs 105/106.

Zimmerli leaves the introduction of his essay to now move into the main body of

his examination of what are in his opinion, two clear examples of Zwillingspsalmen. The

intentional pairing of these neighboring psalms results in such a strong mutual

relationship that the paired psalms theologically are intended to be read as a single unit.

For Zimmerli, the acrostic Psalms 111/112 and the historical Psalms 105/106, are the sole

examples in this essay of psalms that he explicitly refers to as Zwillingspsalmen. The

support for why he takes the view that they have a clear mutual relationship 105 is where

we must now turn.

Zimmerli begins with the physical literary evidence within the acrostic Psalms

111 and 112 to demonstrate how these psalms are joined together. Both psalms begin

with hallelujah but he warns that one must not give too much weight to this similarity

103

Ibid., 106. Here in one long paragraph Zimmerli gives examples of juxtaposed psalms which

share a few common words or phrases: Psalms 1-2, 3-4, 32-33, 30-32, 38-39, 39-40, 43-44, 42-44, 69-70,

73-74, 74-75, 77-78, 79-80, 80-81, and 127-128 as is shown above.

104 Ibid.

105 Ibid.

30

since the following Psalm 113 begins this way as well. Like Hengstenberg, Delitzsch and

Cheyne, he states that the first obvious sign that we have here a twin psalm is the physical

side by side acrostic format. Like his 19th century counter-parts, he gives examples of

similar forms of vocabulary which exist between the two (see below).106

He also shows

how these psalms are knit together by the fear of the LORD in Psalm 111:10 with the

one who fears the LORD in Psalm 112:1, and we also find a repetitious use of the phrase

his righteousness endures forever (Pss 111: 3 with 112:3 & 9), and repetition in the

phrase gracious and compassionate (Pss 111:4 and 112:4).107 With all this

interconnecting evidence Zimmerli concludes that the song [of Psalm 112] is a twin of

Psalm 111 with regard to content and form.108

Much like Hengstenberg, he also points out the the fear of the LORD word

stitching109

which unites these psalms (Pss 111:10 and 112:1), and he then hypothesizes

that this stitching of the end of Psalm 111 with the wisdom Psalm 112 shows that these

psalms are then to be understood and be read together as coming out of the form of the

wisdom circle of literature.110

However, beyond all the similarities in content and form

which exists between these twin psalms, Zimmerli states that there is a deeper study

which is taking place internally between these psalms which can only be understood

106

Ibid., 107. Here Zimmerlis list is a bit more extensive than his counter-parts as he gives examples of five words which are shared between these psalms: upright (Pss 111:1 and 112:2 and 4; delight

(Pss 111:2 and 112:2); remember (Pss 111:4 and 112:6); justice (Pss 111:7 and 112:5); and steadfast/secure

(Pss 111:8 and 112:8).

107 Ibid.

108 Ibid. Zimmerli quotes Heinrich Herkenne, Das Buch Der Psalmen, vol. 2, HSAT (Bonn:

Hanstein, 1936), 369. Das Lied ist ein Zwilling des Ps 111 nach Inhalt und Form.

109 Zimmerli, Zwillingspsalmen. Here Zimmerli states: das Sitchwort von der Gottesfurcht vom

Ende des Ps 111 zu Beginn von Ps 112.

110 Ibid., 108.

31

when they are read as a unit.111

This deeper interrelated study beyond form and content,

to more of the rhetorical message implicit in the connected text, is reminiscent of how

Hengstenberg viewed the righteous in Psalm 15 to be a contrast to the wicked found in

Psalm 14, and also how the prayer of the individual David in Psalm 32 was seen to be an

encouraging model for the believing community of Israel in Psalm 33. We also saw

above how Alexander also saw likely connective messages, and a development or

amplification of meaning between the Psalm pairs 88 & 89, 92 & 93, and 95 & 96. For

Zimmerli, he finds a threefold inter-connective tension in the twin pair112 which depicts

praise for the works of Yahweh (Ps 111); the blessedness for the one who fears Yahweh

(Ps 112:1-9), and the fate of the wicked (Ps 112:10).113

This threefold message is abruptly

broken if each psalm is only read by itself.114

Zimmerlis essay next addresses the Zwillingspaar115 105 and 106. He begins

by observing the how these psalms ar