The recent thread about Ps 110 made me think about the Psalms and their dating. Anyone doing a search online will find that there is as usual a great difference of opinion between religiously motivated and secular writers. I thought it a good idea to toss out a few thoughts that might stir a discussion.
First of all supersciptions are agreed by all to be a late additions to the work. IOW the ascribing a poem to David or Asaph for example means nothing about the date of writing or the actual author. These notes are from the 2nd century BC when the book was compiled.
So then are there early Psalms? Yes, it seems evident that some Psalms retain a very early tradition and account of life in ancient Israel. Ps 29 for example seems to be one of the oldest parts of the OT, with relatively little editing. Possibly dating to 10th century BC. Other Psalms are composite works of very old material incorporated into a new setting.
Psalms were a very ancient aspect of Canaan cult worship. Ugarit poetry bears striking resemblence to certain Psalms in structure and content. So it is not well founded to suggest that all the Psalms are complete late compositions.
Some of the Psalms however are obviously later works. Ps 74:2-8, 79:1-3, 126,137 for example look back to a time when the temple was destroyed and a return to Israel for the priestly elite. This necessitates a post exodus date. This makes the superscriptions rather anachronistic, as they are attributed to David or Asaph (in David story). The WT passively admits this in the Insight volume under 'Asaph' yet has repeatedly forgotten this when writing WT articles that refer to these passages as written by Asaph or David.
Other Psalms reflect theology of the closing centuries Bc. This suggests that the book is a collection that spans over 700 years of developing religious tradition. I would enjoy and appreciate any comments that would contribute to this discussion.
Psalms when-who?
by peacefulpete 4 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
peacefulpete
-
Love_Truth
Here's a good place to start:
-
peacefulpete
Thanks Love-truth for the link. The section subheaded , "Critcal view" is most relevant to the discussion and presented some intereting views. The Catholic appeal to authority of "Fathers" and "God's Word" are not pertinent to sincere questions of authorship. I always marvel at the Catholic Encyclopedia's readiness to admit modern scholarship then offhandedly dismiss it when it touches Catholic dogma. That article admits that extensive redaction has occured to the whole of the Psalms yet not to the extent that the 'inspired' message is compromised. To objective readers this is nothing but apologetic rhetoric WT style.
-
Leolaia
Here is S. R. Driver's synthesis (in INTRODUCTION TO THE LITERATURE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT), based on linguistic and allusional evidence:
pre-exilic: Psalm 2, 18, 20, 21, 28, 29, 45, 46, 61, 63, 72, 76 (possibly from 701 B.C.), 90, 91, 101, 110.
exilic: Psalm 22, 25, 33-34, 51, 66-70, 102.
early post-exilic: Psalm 37, 77, 78, 80, 93, 96-99.
late post-exilic: Psalm 103, 124, 129, 133, 135, 137, 144, 146 (most of these are heavily Aramaic)
Maccabean: Psalm 44, 74, 79, 83
This, of course, is based on evidence prior to the discovery of the Ras Shamra texts and the Dead Sea Scrolls.
-
Narkissos
Note the Catholic Encyclopedia displayed on Love_Truth's link is the 1914 edition... Since 1943 (Divino Afflante Spiritu) Catholic scholars are allowed to engage in critical study of the Bible -- and many of them are doing a pretty good work at it...
One of the best commentaries of Psalms I have enjoyed is H.J. Kraus' (Augsburg collection).