לַמְנַצֵּחַ עַל־שֹׁשַׁנִּים לִבְנֵי־קֹרַח מַשְׂכִּיל שִׁיר יְדִידֹת׃
רָחַשׁ לִבִּי ׀ דָּבָר טוֹב אֹמֵר אָנִי מַעֲשַׂי לְמֶלֶךְ
לְשׁוֹנִי עֵט ׀ סוֹפֵר מָהִיר׃
יָפְיָפִיתָ מִבְּנֵי אָדָם הוּצַק חֵן בְּשִׂפְתוֹתֶיךָ
עַל־כֵּן בֵּרַכְךָ אֱלֹהִים לְעוֹלָם׃
חֲגוֹר חַרְבְּךָ עַל־יָרֵךְ גִּבּוֹר הוֹדְךָ וַהֲדָרֶךָ׃
וַהֲדָרְךָ ׀ צְלַח רְכַב עַל־דְּבַר־אֱמֶת וְעַנְוָה־צֶדֶק
וְתוֹרְךָ נוֹרָאוֹת יְמִינֶךָ׃
חִצֶּיךָ שְׁנוּנִים עַמִּים תַּחְתֶּיךָ יִפְּלוּ בְּלֵב אוֹיְבֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ׃
כִּסְאֲךָ אֱלֹהִים עוֹלָם וָעֶד שֵׁבֶט מִישֹׁר שֵׁבֶט מַלְכוּתֶךָ׃
אָהַבְתָּ צֶּדֶק וַתִּשְׂנָא רֶשַׁע
עַל־כֵּן ׀ מְשָׁחֲךָ אֱלֹהִים אֱלֹהֶיךָ שֶׁמֶן שָׂשׂוֹן מֵחֲבֵרֶךָ׃
מֹר־וַאֲהָלוֹת קְצִיעוֹת כָּל־בִּגְדֹתֶיךָ מִן־הֵיכְלֵי שֵׁן מִנִּי שִׂמְּחוּךָ׃

"My heart overfloweth with a goodly matter;
I speak the things which I have made touching the king:
My tongue is the pen of a ready writer.
Thou art fairer than the children of men;
Grace is poured into thy lips:
Therefore God hath blessed thee forever.
Gird thy sword upon thy thigh, 0 mighty one,
Thy glory and thy majesty.
And in thy majesty ride on prosperously,
Because of truth and meekness and righteousness:
And thy right hand shall teach thee terrible things.
Thine arrows are sharp;
The peoples fall under thee;
They are in the heart of the king's enemies.
Thy throne, 0 God, is forever and ever:
A sceptre of equity is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated wickedness:
Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee
With the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
All thy garments smell of myrrh, and aloes, and cassia;
Out of ivory palaces stringed instruments have made thee glad" (Ps. 45:1-8).

In the superscription this composition is attributed to "the sons of Korah." No serious objections have been brought against the date and authorship. Hence we may omit a critical discussion of these points. All Scripture inspired of God has a certain spiritual ring. When this psalm is tested it is found to have the same true ring. As we shall presently see, the author claims inspiration for himself in writing this magnificent ode. It is truly a revelation of God.

Another bit of information gleaned from the superscription is that the hymn is one of loves. It purports to be a nuptial hymn of the King. What king? Scholars have engaged in much discussion as to what was the historical occasion which gave rise to this magnificent regal ode. Unanimity has not been reached on this point. It is not likely that such will ever be the case, since our data is indeed meager. Of this much, however, we may be certain: regardless of the historical background this poem sweeps out into the future (from the prophet's time) and describes the perfections, triumphs and glorious reign of the King. Of what King did the psalmists continually sing, the prophets unceasingly speak? Of whom do the Hebrews in their liturgical services repeatedly chant? I will let the Targumist answer. He paraphrases verse 2 thus: "Thy beauty, 0 King Messiah, is greater than that of the sons of men." Aben-Ezra makes this comment: "This Psalm treats of David, or rather of his son Messiah, for that is his name, Ezek. 34:24, 'And David my servant shall be their prince forever'." Two outstanding Hebrew scholars,--one in ancient and the other in medieval times--, therefore, have told us of whom the Psalmist sings. Without doubt they are correct on this point. Being assured of the subject of the poem, let us now begin an intensive study of the same.

In the first verse the sacred scribe lays claim to divine Inspiration. Having been privileged by the Spirit of God of seeing the different portraits of the King, the Psalmist was enraptured by the glories unfolded before him. His heart, like an overflowing artesian well of crystal thirst-quenching water, pours forth the "goodly matter" which pertains to the King. The inspired message welling up from his heart is indeed a "stream of living water." The statement "My tongue is the pen of a ready writer," is a figurative expression affirming the divine choice of the words to convey the Oracle. The statement of this verse is to the same effect as that found in II Samuel 23:2.

The forty-fifth psalm may be compared to a series of portraits of an individual at different periods in his life or career. A superficial glance at these various pictures may fail to recognize the same sublime character in each; but a careful and prayerful study establishes the identity beyond a peradventure. As the ripened fruit lies in embryonic form in the blossom and awaits the genial influence of the summer days to come to its fullest fruition, so it is with the presentation of the King in the four portraits of this magnificent ode. In the first His human nature appears; nevertheless there are certain hints that point to His superhuman character. In each succeeding one His divine nature shines forth more resplendently than in the former. Finally, in the last He stands forth as the King of kings and Lord of lords, receiving homage from all nations.

"Thou art fairer than the children of men; Grace is poured into thy lips: Therefore God hath blessed thee forever." The word translated "fairer" is a reduplicated form of the verb, which device intensifies its meaning and with the following proposition could very properly be rendered "fairer, yea fairer." The Hebrew idiom used to express the comparative degree differs somewhat from the English expression. The person or thing whose superiority is to be shown is, by this special idiom, removed from its place in the class to which it belongs and is placed over against it in a position advantageous for showing the contrast. Thus the serpent (Gen. 3), though conceived of as a beast of the field, is removed from its class and is placed by itself in order that its superior understanding and subtlety might be seen. In this psalm the King, though fully recognized as a man, is by this idiom separated from men and placed alone in order that His superior excellencies may become known. He is a man--a real man in every sense of the word. Nevertheless He is entirely different from all men in that his fair form is free from the marks of sin.

Man was indeed fair, exceedingly fair, before he rebelled against God (Gen.1 and 2). Corresponding to the comeliness of his outward physical appearance was the moral perfection of his spiritual nature. When, however, he dared to disobey his Maker, a great change came unexpectedly and suddenly over his entire being. The altered relation with his Maker and Friend, which hitherto had been the source of his highest joys, made itself known to him in a painful consciousness of deep estrangement from God and a feeling of shame and guilt such as he had never experienced before. Designs of malice and hatred, desires of greed and power, feelings of lust and passion, impulses of selfishness and inconsideration, motives of revenge and murder, and purposes of pride and self-glorification surged, like an uncontrollable energy, throughout his entire being. Indeed little of his original purity and holiness appears in his conduct thereafter. Instead, these diabolical emotions control him in all of his activities. The Prophet Jeremiah gave a spiritual x-ray of the corrupt human heart. "The heart is deceitful above all things, and it is exceedingly corrupt: who can know it" (Jer. 17:9.)

Hence David, a man after God's own heart, correctly attributed his immoral relations with Bath-sheba and his subsequent sinful efforts to conceal this wicked deed to his fallen nature. "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity; And in sin did my mother conceive me" (Ps. 51:5). Though his sinful nature, inherited from his parents, was the cause of his wickedness, he was none the less guilty because he could have called upon the Lord for spiritual strength to resist the temptation, which thing he failed to do. Therefore he, like all other individuals, was held guilty by the Lord for his sins.

That which wrecked man's moral and spiritual natures likewise wrought havoc in his physical make-up. His body has been weakened and made subject to disease and death. On account of this fact men are born into the world with physical ailments, run their course quickly, and then disappear from the arena of human achievements into that great Beyond from which there is no return to this life.

Therefore, since all men are in the fallen state physically, morally and spiritually, they are in Psalm 45:2 grouped into one class. But this King, the subject of the hymn, though a man, is not placed in the group of fallen sinful men but, as shown above, is separated from them. He occupies a unique position, being in a class by Himself. This absolute separation from men, together with the emphasis laid upon His unqualified beauty and perfection, while admitting His human nature, seems to point to something supernatural in His personality. This freedom from sin and its destructive results, the common heritage of the race, would indicate that probably there is something extraordinary concerning His parentage and birth.

"Grace is poured into thy lips." This statement calls special attention to the mouth. All who can read human nature recognize that the condition and attitude of the soul is reflected in the facial expression. This truth Isaiah stated forcefully: "The show of their countenance doth witness against them" (Isa. 3:9). The mention of the lips, without doubt, is a reference to the messages which pass over them. This figure, metonomy, is in constant use. One understands that the statement, "The kettle is boiling," indicates the water in the kettle. Therefore, "grace is poured into thy lips" is a reference to the message of grace and kindness which He speaks to the people. Thus this pure holy one is kind and sympathetic towards those to whom He speaks. His attitude is that of grace. His message is pre-eminently one of grace and kindness to fallen man. Because of His purity and His noble service He is blessed forever.

Such a description of this noble character excites in the reader the greatest anticipations to learn more of Him. A careful study of the three following pictures of this one will cause Him to stand before us in all His beauty.

With the close of the second verse the picture of "The Fairest of Men" disappears. With the first words of the third another picture appears and remains to the conclusion of the fifth verse. This scene is one of carnage, bloodshed and war. On the one side the nations are seen drawn up in battle array; on the other, this mighty warrior marches forth alone. But the scene opens with an exhortation from the Sacred Penman to this Great Warrior to gird his sword upon his thigh and to charge against his foes. It closes with the Hero victorious over all of his enemies.

In Hebrew literature only strong courageous warriors are called "Mighty Ones." Therefore He is what the name implies. The nations having assumed a warlike attitude and having marshaled their forces for the decisive battle, the inspired prophet exhorts this one to gird Himself with His "glory and majesty." These words are forceful and quite suggestive as to the character of this great Hero. Occasionally one of them is, in an accommodated sense, applied to the great and good kings who sat upon David's throne (I Chron. 28:5; I Chron. 29:23-25) but never are both used together with reference to any mortal man. They are the regular words which the Lord uses to refer to Himself: "Thou are clothed with honor and majesty" (Ps. 104:1; 96:6). Hence when He is urged to gird on His "glory and majesty," the conviction is borne in upon the truth-seeker that this Hero is more than an ordinary man of valor. Irresistible is the conclusion that He is either a great Warrior whom the Lord clothes with His own Divine Majesty and glory as He has done for no other, or that He is indeed One of the Divine Personalities in human form battling against the allied armies of the world. The intimations, seen in the study of the first portrait, concerning the supernatural character of this one favor definitely the latter presumption.

The reason for this summons to the conflict is that truth, meekness and righteousness have been suppressed. It is not in defense of these virtues in the abstract sense but in behalf of those who embody them in their lives and who are oppressed in consequence of their exemplifying them that He throws down the gauntlet of war. The situation presupposed here is graphically set forth in such passages as Isaiah 59:1-15a. Probably the ones in view are the faithful remnant of Israel which refuses to make a covenant with the evil world-ruler (Dan. 9:27).

For corroborative evidence of this prophecy see Deuteronomy 32:39-42 and Isaiah 59:15b-21; 63:1-6. In these passages are definite pictures of the Almighty's warlike activities in the suppression of His foes. The scenes are identical.

In verse 5 the battle is seen raging. The vast armies of the nations appear in a death grapple with this mighty warrior who charges their disciplined divisions, shooting His sharp and efficient arrows at His foes. With a deadly aim they speed on their way to the hearts of His enemies. At the conclusion of the battle the field is strewn with the dead. Thus the King has triumphed over all opposition and is master of the situation. In the conflict He was alone. The fact that He unaided conquers the armies of the world and all opposition is additional proof of His Divine character. With the superhuman overthrow of all His enemies the picture of warfare disappears from the screen.

In verses 6 to 8 appears the third of this series of portraits. In the description of the first hints at the supernatural character of this Mighty Victor were seen in His perfect physical appearance and in His sublime moral and spiritual nature. In the second these assumptions were reinforced by exhortations to Him to gird on His "glory and majesty." In this third portrait His divine nature is recognized.

With all opposition suppressed, this Mighty Hero mounts His Throne and administers a reign of righteousness and equity. Hence in the ordinary English versions He is by the inspired writer addressed as "God."

This sentence has been the occasion of much controversy inasmuch as it has been variously rendered.
1. "Thy throne is the throne of God forever and ever."
2. "Thy throne of God is forever and ever."
3. "Thy throne is God forever and ever."
4. "Thy throne is of God forever and ever."
5. "Thy throne, 0 God, is forever and ever."

In our quest for the truth we must honestly and thoroughly examine each of the proposed renderings in the light of both Hebrew Syntax and the facts presented in the context. Confirmation should be sought for the translation adopted by resort to the larger context of Scripture, that is, by comparison with other unambiguous statements. Only in this way can one arrive at the truth of this most important passage.

In order to make this translation possible כִּסֵּא throne must be supplied and אֱלֹהִים must be assumed to be in the genitive (possessive) case. Since the idioms and words of different languages do not always correspond, that is, there is not always an exact equivalent by which some special idiom or word in another tongue may be rendered, it often becomes necessary in translating to supply a word or phrase in order to convey the original idea. But never should one resort to this method until he is absolutely sure that the case positively demands it. This principle, most essential to accurate scholarly work, can become, in the hands of an unscrupulous partisan, an efficient means to obscure truth and to advance his own peculiar ideas.

But the translation under consideration does not fall under this head. The additional words are not supplied in order to convey to the English reader an idea wrapped up in a special Hebrew idiom with which there is no corresponding English equivalent. The facts are that the Hebrew Syntax involved in this sentence corresponds exactly to the English except that the copula is must be supplied in our translation in order to make smooth English. This principle is acknowledged by all Hebrew grammarians. Innumerable instances of this principle occur throughout the Hebrew Bible. Since, therefore, the principles involved agree in these two languages, the translator can not be loyal to the text and faithful to his readers if he supplies the throne of in his rendering.

But cannot this sentence be elliptical and therefore demand the supplying of the word throne? No sentence should be considered thus unless there is something in the context that indicates such a fact. The style of the Hebrew poet is always to condense his expression and at the same time to make the thought clear. Another characteristic of the poet, when under the impulse of strong emotions, was that of ejaculation. These facts are recognized by Hebrew scholars. In view of the further fact that this poem is indeed an excellent model of epic poetry and that the emotions of the writer are in a state of exaltation, one naturally expects the ejaculatory style, especially at the climax, and would be disappointed if it were not used. As shall be seen in the discussion of the fifth translation of this sentence, the plain literal common unstrained rendering is the one that accords with all the facts of the context. Hence since there is no necessity of assuming that the sentence is elliptical, one does well to adhere to the text without any addition or subtraction.

If the sentence is translated "Thy throne of God is forever and ever," what is its meaning? Professor Delitzsch correctly declares that it "sounds tautological, inasmuch as that which the predicate asserts is already implied in the subject." Taken apart from its context and forced into the mould of one's preconceptions, it could possibly be understood to affirm that the throne occupied by this hero is God's, providentially established, and that He guarantees its perpetuity. Confirmation is sought in the statement that Solomon sat "on the throne of Jehovah as king instead of David his father" (I Chron. 29:23). The context of the Chronicles passage will admit of no other construction, but there is nothing in the context of this Psalm to indicate such a secondary or derived meaning. Nor would one for a moment think of construing such passages as Psalm 10:16 and Lamentations 5:19 as other than references to God's throne since the contexts do not indicate otherwise. Since nothing in Psalm 45 indicates a secondary or derived meaning for this sentence, the primary import should be accepted without question.

Professor Delitzsch notes the fact that this sentence has been rendered, "Thy throne of God is forever and ever." Immediately he adds, "but it cannot possibly be so expressed after the analogy of 'the altar of wood-wooden,' or 'the time of showers of rain-rainy' (Ezra 10:13), since God is neither the substance of the throne, nor can the throne itself be regarded as a representation or figure of God," etc.

Again, to render the first two words, "Thy throne of God" is to give to them a strange, forced and unnatural meaning. The force of this statement is apparent to one when he notes the fact that in the first, second and fourth scenes the Psalmist addresses the King directly. It would seem rather strange if he did not address him in the same manner in the third also. If the word God is in the case of address, this translation cannot be supported. But this question will be fully discussed under the examination of the fifth translation.

What is the meaning of the words, "Thy throne is God forever and ever?" They could mean only that "thy throne is divine forever and ever." But what is the significance of such a statement? Certainly the throne cannot be considered as possessing the nature of the divine Occupant, neither can it be considered as a symbol of the Divine Being. Therefore this rendering must be ruled out of consideration.

The translation, "Thy throne is of God forever and ever," would indicate that the King receives it from God. Such an interpretation is possible from the standpoint of the English, but it cannot be supported from the original text. Whenever the sacred writers wished to express the idea that anything was from God in the sense that He gave it or brought it about, they never used the idiom found in this sentence but always resorted to the use of a preposition, as may be seen in the Hebrew text of the following passages, Judg. 14:4; I Kings 12:15,24; Ps. 28:8; 35:3; 37:39; Prov. 21:31; Isa. 43:11; Jer. 3:23; Jonah 2:9. Therefore this rendering cannot be accepted.

Having seen from the preceding examinations that four of the proposed translations listed above cannot survive the acid test of true grammatical exegesis, we will now examine the last possible rendering, subjecting it to the same rigid tests as in the former cases.

In this translation אֱלֹהִים is recognized as being in the case of address. In all languages the one addressed is always in the second person. In verses 2-9 the personal pronouns, second person, singular number, occur in nearly every line. In verse 3 the speaker addresses the King as the "Mighty One." In this same sentence he urges Him to prepare for the inevitable conflict, saying, "Gird thy sword upon thy thigh," -- "thy glory and thy majesty." All translators and commentators correctly render "Mighty One" as being in the case of address. They also recognize that the personal pronoun thy refers to this Mighty One. Since the same viewpoint is maintained throughout these eight verses, as even a casual glance will reveal, one should translate אֱלֹהִים in the case of address unless there are weighty and unmistakable reasons for doing otherwise. But the preceding investigation has proved that it is impossible to translate this word differently. Hence one is compelled to recognize it as a vocative.

An examination of parallel passages using the Divine Name shows that the translators accepted the normal plain common sense meaning and invariably translated the name of God as being in the case of address. (See such passages as Ps. 3:1; 36:5,7; 40:5; 71:19; 119:156.)

Since there has been no hesitation on the part of the translators and commentators to recognize the vocative case in the passages which are parallel to this one and concerning which there is no dispute, one is forced to the conclusion that the difference of opinion with reference to Psalm 45:6 is due not to grammar or the meaning of אֱלֹהִים but to some other consideration. The difficulty, therefore, must be of a theological or philosophical nature. The history of the controversy concerning it shows that the perplexity has arisen because of the inability of certain ones to understand how he who in verse two is recognized and addressed as a man can be addressed as God in verse six.

Since the facts show that God in this verse is in the vocative case, the earnest truth-seeker, still being unable to understand how the King of this passage can be both man and God, may ask if אֱלֹהִים cannot have a secondary meaning in this passage and refer to others than the Supreme Being. In reply I wish to state that in Exodus 21:6; 22:8; and Psalm 82:1 it is used in such an accommodated sense to refer to certain judges and specially chosen representatives of God. But the context in each of these passages shows unmistakably that it is used in this lower and secondary sense. Unless the context indicates otherwise, this word, and all others, must be taken in their primary, ordinary and literal meaning.

Does not this context show unmistakably that the one thus addressed is not to be recognized as God but as one of the judges of Israel concerning whom similar language was used? An honest investigation of the facts set forth in the context must decide the question. As noted above, the King, though recognized as a man, is separated from all men. His unique physical appearance and his moral and spiritual perfections indicating his extraordinary nature. His being clothed with the divine "glory and majesty" strengthens the hypothesis concerning his unique character. His taking the field alone and conquering all opposition gives additional evidence concerning His true nature. A comparison of this passage with such others as Deut. 32:39-43 and Isa. 59:15-21 shows that He personally performs the very acts foretold of God Himself. Positive proof for the identification of this Mighty Victor as God lies in the fact that the dominant characteristics of divine holiness, "love of righteousness and hatred of iniquity" (Ps. 5:4; Isa. 61:8; Jer. 9:23) are the foundations of the throne and government of this King. Therefore from the cumulative evidence of the context there is but one conclusion to which the facts and logic based thereupon lead, namely, that the victorious King whose triumphs are celebrated in this poem is in deed and in truth the divine-human Messiah of whom the prophets constantly spoke. Hence the Psalmist was absolutely correct in addressing Him as God.*

Footnotes:

* In my volume The God of Israel it has been shown that אלהים is in the plural number and means Gods. But in Psalm 45:6 this plural noun unmistakably refers to King Messiah, who, as seen in chapter seven of The Eternal God, is one of the Divine Personalities clothed in human form. The inquirer, therefore, asks if there is not a contradiction between this passage and the facts which prove that Israel's God is a Triune Being. No, there is perfect harmony. In the first verse of Genesis the plurality of God is seen in the use of the plural noun and the unity in the use of the verb in the singular number. At the beginning of God's dealing with Israel nationally, Moses, as has also been shown, explained (Deut. 6:4) that The Lord, Israel's Gods, are not like the heathen gods but that they constitute a unity. After this explanation had been given, the word God is seemingly used indiscriminately both in the singular and in the plural by the psalmists and the prophets. The survival and use of these two forms kept constantly before the minds of the people the facts concerning the plurality of personalities in the Trinity and at the same time their unity. In time they came to be used interchangeably. It is not surprising, therefore, to see the plural form used in referring to one of these Divine Personalities. Although the distinction between the singular and plural with this word was lost, the fact that there are the three Personalities was never lost sight of by the prophets, as is evidenced by their frequent mention of them or allusions to them. Such an allusion to them will be seen presently.

(Continued on the next page)