Psalms

Hamilton Jr., James M., and Matthew Damico. Reading the Psalms as Scripture. Bellingham, Wash.: Lexham Press, 2024. 142 pp.; Hb.; $19.99. Link to Lexham Press

James M. Hamilton, Jr. serves as Professor of Biblical Theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and as preaching pastor at Kenwood Baptist Church. He contributed a volume to the NSBT series, With the Clouds of Heaven: The Book of Daniel in Biblical Theology (IVP Academic 2014; see my review here). Hamilton has written extensively on biblical theology and typology, including What Is Biblical Theology? (Crossway, 2014). Matthew Damico is pastor of worship and operations at Kenwood Baptist Church in Louisville, Kentucky, where Hamilton is the senior pastor.

This new book is a short introduction to Hamilton’s method for reading the Psalms. This method is detailed in his recent monograph, Typology—Understanding the Bible’s Promise-Shaped Patterns: How Old Testament Expectations are Fulfilled in Christ (Zondervan Academic, 2022) and further demonstrated in his Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary on the Psalms commentary (Lexham Press, 2022, reviewed here).

Chapters 1-4 describe and support Hamilton’s first three theses. First, the Salter was intended to be read in sequence like any book. The psalms are strategically arranged, and the final form of the Salter has cohesive features that unify its message. Second, doxologies, changes and authorship, super prescriptions, and common vocabulary create cohesion and a “set of characters whose actions unfold a discernible plot.” Third, earlier scripture is the most significant backdrop that the Psalter must be read. The authors learned from Moses, and they believed in the promises made to David. In short, the Psalter reflects an “Old Testament worldview.” For the most part, scholarship now recognizes the hand of editors in the arrangement and final form of Psalms. For example, it is almost axiomatic to describe Psalms 1-2 as an introduction to the entire collection, highlighting eschatology and wisdom as key themes found throughout the Psalter.

Hamilton’s fourth thesis is perhaps more controversial. He believes David deserves much more credit for being well-versed in scripture as a brilliant theologian than he is typically given. Chapter 5 offers examples of this by examining Psalms 18, 72, and 78. Not every psalm draws on earlier scripture as much as these, but Hamilton uses them to sketch out allusions to earlier scripture, primarily Samuel. This kind of inner-canonical exes is always tricky because it is difficult (or impossible) to know precisely when Samuel or the Psalter were finally edited. Hamilton’s inner-canonical method works because he assumes traditional dates and authorship for the Psalms.

He goes further than this in his fifth thesis. Hamilton argues. David understood the patterns and promises of early Scripture, discerned how his own experiences fit into them, and prophetically presented himself as a type of the one to come. Hamilton traces key parallels between Moses, Joseph, and the next step in this pattern of events, king David. This raises several thoughts in my mind. What if Joseph is not a “type of Christ”? This classic view was recently argued by Samuel Emadi (From Prisoner to Prince: The Joseph Story in Biblical Theology. NSBT 59; Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2022, see my review here). However, Jeffrey Pulse recently called this into question (Figuring Resurrection: Joseph as a Death and Resurrection Figure in the Old Testament and Second Temple Judaism. Studies in Scripture and Biblical Theology; Lexham Academic, 2021; read my review here). A second concern: What if David did not write all of the “to David” Psalms? Many psalms are called a “Psalm of David,” or even more simply “of David” (לְדָ֫וִ֥ד). Most major commentaries on Psalms discuss what the preposition l^e means in a Psalm header.  Although authorship is an option, it is not the only way to understand the word. Therefore, messianic typology may have happened at the editorial level when the Salter was arranged in its final form. Does it necessarily have to go back to David?

Hamilton’s sixth thesis concerns reading the Psalms with a messianic typology. “Typology is a God-ordained, author-intended historical correspondence and escalation in significance between people, events, and institutions across the biblical storyline” (80, his monograph, Typology). The Kiefer Hamilton is the phrase “author intended.” He argues that Moses intentionally forged connections between himself and Joseph, and these connections and these connections look forward to David as a messianic type. Hamilton uses Psalms 2, 16, and 22 as examples. Psalm 16 is a miktam of David and the details drawn from 1 Samuel fit well into the life of David. Peter quotes this Psalm as the authentic voice of David in Acts 2:25-28 and applies the words to the resurrection of Christ.

It is undoubtedly true that scripture often reuses themes and motifs (the Exodus is a clear example). However, it is quite another thing to argue that David wrote Psalm 2 to connect himself intentionally to earlier messianic texts. It is difficult to say that David wrote Psalm 1 or Psalm 2. There is no header, so it is possible, but if the first two psalms are a “gateway” to the Psalter (as they are often described), then the two psalms may have been joined at the editorial level when the book of Psalms reached its final form.

Hamilton’s final thesis is that the maximum spiritual benefit for believers today comes from rightly understanding what the psalmists meant to communicate. This is true, but for Hamilton, their message is (only) fulfilled in Christ. While this may be true for Psalms 22 and 23. However, it is difficult to say this for every Psalm. In fact, it only works if the New Testament use of the Psalm is imported back into the Psalms or New Testament Theology is allowed to dictate the meaning of a Psalm. What was the point of Psalm 22 in its original context? To do so is to ignore the original setting of the psalm and the original author’s intention.

Conclusion. This guide to reading the Psalms is aimed at a popular audience. If anyone wants Hamilton’s detailed argument for this typological method, they will need to read his other work. If you like typology, then this book is a good introduction to reading the Psalms. Physically, this is a lovely small (5×8 inches) book.

NB: Thanks to Lexham Press for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.

Webster, Douglas D. The Psalms: Jesus’s Prayer Book. Grand Rapids, Mich. Kregel, 2023. 4 Vol. 1190 pp. Pb; $89.99.   Link to Kregel Academic

Douglas D. Webster (Ph.D., University of St. Michael’s College) serves as professor of pastoral theology and preaching at Beeson Divinity School. He has published numerous pastoral commentaries and books, including Soulcraft: How God Shapes Us Through Relationships (IVP, 1999), Test Messaging: A Conversation about Preaching (Clements, 2010), and The Parables: Jesus’s Friendly Subversive Speech (Kregel, 2021, reviewed here). As Webster explains in his preface, this four-volume commentary on Psalms is a companion to the Psalter for pastors and teachers and will serve as a devotional guide for any Bible reader.Following Athanasius, Webster suggests the Psalms are the “magnetic center” of the whole Canon of scripture. “Nearly every Psalm speaks about Christ,” and the Psalter gives us a picture of the spiritual life (1:13). His commitment to a Christological reading is clear in every part of this commentary. This is true even for Psalm 88, the “saddest prayer in the Psalter” (3:123). “we can imagine Jesus praying this psalm in the days leading up to the crucifixion” (3:127).

Each Psalm is treated in a few pages, including the full text of the Psalm. The Psalm text is distraction-free: Scripture is printed without verse numbers, allowing readers to see the words as originally intended. The length of chapters varies. The shortest Psalm (117) is only three pages, while the longest Psalm (119) is forty-two pages. Webster provides extensive footnotes to popular academic commentaries (Waltke, Ross, Kinder, Craigie, Goldingay, etc.). He also frequently cites historical writers (Calvin, Spurgeon) and popular writers (Peterson, C.S. Lewis).

The commentary takes Psalm headers seriously, and Webster frequently places Psalms into a historical context. For example, Psalm 3 refers to Absalom’s rebellion in 2 Samuel 13-18. He also occasionally speculates on a possible historical context. He calls Psalm 14 “Nabal’s Psalm” and Psalm 15 “Abigail’s Psalm.” He then connects both psalms to 2 Samuel 25. The warrant for this is the name Nabal, which means fool in Hebrew; Psalm 14:1 begins, “The fool says…” Since Abigail is a wise and intelligent woman, Webster connects her to the description of a righteous person in Psalm 15. Although this might work as an analogy, I am not convinced this was the original intent of these two psalms.

As implied from the book’s subtitle, Webster focuses on how the Psalms point forward to Jesus. I will give one example: Commenting on Psalm 22, Webster suggests, “the Holy Spirit uses David to carry us forward to Golgotha and the passion of Christ” (1:181). The commentary is not interested in any potential background for Psalm 22 or literary genre such as a funeral lament. Everything in the Psalm points ahead to the crucifixion. He entitles 22:22-31 “the fifth gospel” (1:190).

He is also aware of a redemptive flow in the arrangement of the Psalter. For example, he links Psalms 18-23 as describing the life, death, and vindication of Jesus. Psalm 23 ends with the anointing of the servant, who celebrates a victory banquet in the presence of his enemies. Webster suggests that Jesus drew on Psalm 23 when he responded to Peter in John 21: 15-17, “Follow me” (1:195). He goes further: “Only the Eucharist meal does justice to the Psalmist’s imagery of the table prepared in the presence of our enemies” (1:202).

Commentaries on the Psalms must deal with interpreting (and applying) the imprecatory (curse) Psalms. Commenting on Psalm 137:9, “Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock,” Webster suggests that it is important to “see the value of venting hatred to God in prayer rather than taking matters into our own hands” (4:232). Following Calvin, “dashing babies” looks forward to the fall of Babylon, but Christians can pray Psalm 137 “in the light of God’s final judgment” (4:234).

Conclusion. I am often frustrated with commentaries on psalms because each Psalm is treated so briefly. Webster’s comments on each Psalm seem to me to be neither too short nor too long; they are “just right.” I am impressed by his extensive footnotes to academic resources indicating that Webster has done his homework. This certainly shows in his clear, well-written comments on each Psalm. Given the pastoral emphasis for this commentary, it could serve well as devotional reading for a layperson as they work their way through the Psalms. Certainly, pastors and teachers preparing sermons on the Psalms will find Webster’s commentary valuable. One potential problem: The four volumes are only available as a set. Perhaps readers would like to purchase individual volumes?

NB: Thanks to Kregel Academic for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.

Hamilton Jr., James M. Psalms 1-72. Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary. Bellingham, Wash.: Lexham Press, 2022. xxxiii+677 pp.; Hb.; $49.99. Link to Lexham Press

Hamilton Jr., James M. Psalms 73-150. Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary. Bellingham, Wash.: Lexham Press, 2022. xxix+569 pp.; Hb.; $49.99. Link to Lexham Press

James M. Hamilton, Jr. is Professor of Biblical Theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and serves as preaching pastor at Kenwood Baptist Church. He contributed a volume to the NSBT series, With the Clouds of Heaven: The Book of Daniel in Biblical Theology (IVP Academic 2014, see my review here), and a commentary on Revelation in the Preaching the Word series. Hamilton has written extensively on biblical theology and typology, including What Is Biblical Theology? (Crossway, 2014) and a recent monograph, Typology-Understanding the Bible’s Promise-Shaped Patterns: How Old Testament Expectations are Fulfilled in Christ (Zondervan, 2022). This commentary on the Psalms combines his interest in biblical theology with a pastor’s heart. In fact, the commentary has its origins in a sermon series at Kenwood Baptist Church. Hamilton began this two-volume Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary when B&H published the series. When Lexham picked up the series a few years ago, he completed the commentary. Hamilton intends to study the Psalms as a whole. The book is a purposeful collection of poems that build on one another and interpret one another. “The psalms are true history, fulfilled prophecy, and enduring praise” (2)

He begins his eighty-eight-page introduction by stating he is interested only in the canonical form of the Psalms in the Hebrew Bible as preserved in the Masoretic text. Unlike many commentaries on the Psalms, Hamilton is not interested in speculating on the form or content of the Psalms prior to the final form. This means he rarely comments on the differences between the MT and the Septuagint.

Because he takes the canonical form of the Psalter seriously, he pays careful attention to psalm superscriptions. These are the short headings that appear before verse one in English translations. Hamilton says he “will be working from the hypothesis that a psalm’s superscription comes from the hand of the psalm’s author and that the editor/anthologist who put the Psalter in its final form exercised a light editorial touch that followed trajectories he discerned in the materials” (50).

Regarding David as an author, he quotes Mark 12:35-37, where Jesus says David wrote Psalm 110. “I do not believe Jesus could have been wrong about this” (42). Nor does Hamilton believe Jesus was accommodating himself to his audience. Hamilton rejects arguments that David would not write psalms using the third person. He also rejects the common view that psalms with “of David” (לְדָוִֽד) are “about David” or “dedicated to David” (citing Peter Craigie’s WBC commentary). He also dismisses the view that the headers are often anachronistic. For example, he disagrees with DeClaissé-Walford, Jacobson, and Tanner (NICOT; Eerdmans, 2014, see my review here), who argued Psalm 23:6 refers to the Temple, which was not built when David was alive. For Hamilton, the superscriptions are not later editions and are, in fact, integral to the original composition of the Psalms. Remember, Hamilton accepts the Masoretic text as the canonical form; since the headers are in that text, he accepts them as authoritative.

The Book of Psalms was purposefully arranged so that the individual psalms fit together to tell a wider story. He suggests the Psalms are like a collage of photographs telling an overall story. Given his lack of interest in the origins of individual psalms, it is striking that Hamilton argues this arrangement was David’s own idea, which later psalmists understood and added to enrich the project that David had begun (50).

• Book 1, Pss 1-41, The Suffering of the Historical David
• Book 2, Pss 42-72, The Reign of the Historical David
• Book 3, Pss 73-89, The End of the Historical Davidic House
• Book 4, Pss 90-106, Moses Intercedes for the Davidic Covenant
• Book 5, Pss 107-150, The Conquest of the Future Davidic King

Hamilton finds chiasms grouping psalms around themes within the five books. He begins with the observation that Psalms 15 and 24 are very similar, suggesting “who may ascend?” brackets for a chiastic structure for Psalms 15-24. (In order to make this work, Psalms 20-21 are placed together in his outline.) Hamilton then works out chiasms for the sections of the entire book. Hamilton’s evidence for these connections is found in the section on context, introducing the exposition of each Psalm. There, he points out verbal and thematic links to surrounding psalms. Two examples will suffice. First, Psalms 15-24 describe the ways of a righteous king; they follow Psalms 3-9 (Absalom’s rebellion, a wicked king) and Psalms 10-14, which contemplate the ways of the wicked. Second, Psalms 51-72 is a unit beginning with Bathsheba and ending with her son, Solomon. The plot of this unit tracks with David’s struggles against traitors and other enemies, climaxing in Psalm 61 (“Prolong the life of the king”) and Psalm 62 (waiting in silence for salvation). The rejected king is then restored, concluding with David’s son Solomon on the throne forever.

The introduction concludes with several biblical and theological themes. The Psalms are first the prayers of David, the messiah. But Israel also sang the psalms as the people of the Messiah. The psalms, therefore, find their fullest meaning in Jesus the Messiah, the ultimate righteous sufferer. Hamilton briefly summarizes the master narrative of the biblical worldview (a creation-fall redemption scheme). In the Psalms, David interpreted his own experience in the light of earlier scripture. “He identifies with Abel, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and Moses, and he identifies his enemies with their enemies” (77). Hamilton contends David saw himself as the “seed of the woman” struggling against the “seed of the serpent” from Genesis 3:5. “What I am proposing can also be understood as a biblical-theological and typological way of getting at ‘prosopology,’ the idea that David assumes the perspective of Christ as he speaks in the Psalms” (87).

“I contend that the authors of earlier Scripture intended their audience to see the enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent, and further that they wanted to encourage God’s people to stand fast as the seed of the woman against the seed of the serpent. For David to see the outworking of the pattern in his own life, then, was in keeping with the intent of earlier biblical authors, and likewise for later kings-including the man from Nazareth-to identify with David’s experience, even to see David’s experience fulfilled in his own, would be fully in line with David’s intent” (77).

As an example, in his commentary on Psalm 16, David is a righteous sufferer, foreshadowing as a “promissory type” the experience of a future king in his line, Jesus. Hamilton finds scriptural warrant for this typological interpretation in Acts 2:20-31, where Peter quotes Psalm 16 as fulfilled in Jesus (217-18). The enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent grows and develops so that David, inspired as a prophet by the Holy Spirit, “understood the patterns that typified him” (218). David “meant to describe his own experience in such a way that the one to come was prefigured, foreshadowed, typified (87, italics original).

Commenting on Psalm 96, Hamilton suggests David composed 1 Chronicles 16:23-33 when he brought the ark to Jerusalem. Later, when he set the Psalms in order, David used parts of his earlier composition in different places, making what we know now as Psalm 96. What is remarkable is that in this case, Hamilton uses the header from the Septuagint to imply that David wrote Psalm 96 (despite there being no header in the Masoretic text). He then engages in speculation about the origins of the Psalm, something he would not do according to the introduction.

Hamilton begins his exposition of each Psalm with an overview and an outline of the structure of the psalm. Often, these are in the form of a chiasm. The section then begins with the CSB translation alongside Hamilton’s own translation in parallel columns. Hamilton stated in the introduction his intention was to be overly literal in drawing parallels to other psalms intended by the author. There are no footnotes to Hamilton’s translation offering explanations for his translation choices. For example, on 14:7, the CSB has “let Jacob rejoice”; Hamilton translates the phrase “will rejoice.” The CSB (and most modern Bibles) translates the imperfect as a jussive (“let”). Hamilton uses the future “will rejoice.” Why?

The next unit prior to the exposition is Context: Verbal and Thematic Links with Surrounding Psalms. Hamilton connects the Psalm to the context to support his overall chiastic structure. Occasionally, he arranges parallels in a chart. Since chiasms are often in the eye of the beholder, he often provides an alternative to his own structure in a footnote.

In the commentary proper, sections follow his outline of the Psalm. The commentary is based on the English text, and he rarely uses Hebrew. When Hebrew appears, it is unpointed and not transliterated. He makes very few references to syntax, grammar, or textual issues (and then only in footnotes). On a few occasions, he refers to the Septuagint, mostly when there are differences in a superscription. For example, in Psalm 71, he has a footnote describing the header in the Septuagint, which is missing in the Masoretic Text. There is little interaction with other exegetical commentaries, which is not surprising. Hamilton is providing an exposition of the text to assist Christian preaching and teaching, not to collate the views of other commentators on the Psalms. The result is a distraction-free exposition of the biblical text, which is a joy to read.

The last section of the commentary is entitled Bridge. These are often brief single paragraphs summarizing the psalm’s content and connecting it to its surrounding context. Here, Hamilton makes larger Christological observations. In addition, he draws reasonable applications from the psalm to contemporary Christian theology. After the heavy emphasis on typology in the introduction, I found these bridge units to be less typological than expected.

Conclusion: At 1200+ pages, this is a substantial commentary on the Psalter. Hamilton’s exposition of each Psalm is clear and concise and will be helpful to pastors and teachers preparing to present sermons on individual psalms. Hamilton writes from a solid evangelical perspective, and he is quite clear on inerrancy (47) and inspiration of the Psalms (52). He is doggedly committed to the Davidic authorship of most of the psalms.

I would strongly recommend this commentary as an excellent addition to any pastor’s library.

Reviews of other Commentaries in this Series:

• David G. Firth, Joshua
• James M. Hamilton, Jr. Psalms (two volumes)
• Joe Sprinkle, Daniel
• Barry G. Webb, Job
• Charles Quarles, Matthew
• Matthew S. Harmon, Galatians

NB: Thanks to Lexham Press for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.