Session 7 - Module 2 - Meditating on Psalms 1 and 2 Together - Reading the Bible as Meditation Literature

Okay, in this session, what we're going to do, and in the next, is zoom out at larger levels of scale by doing the same thing. We're going to do the exact same thing, comparing parts, noticing things that match, and then meditating on the match. So what I like to actually do physically these days, if I have a physical Bible or print out a translation of a section that I'm studying, and actually put them next to each other, and use colored markers and do this. For me, the tactile visual experience is really helpful. So whatever way is most helpful for you to get the whole of Psalm 1 and the whole of Psalm 2, but when you take them both in, and then we just spent the last while kind of uploading them and all of their parts, there were a number of things that, as we went through Psalm 2, you already noticed. And often what biblical authors will do, in my experience, is when they want to link together two parts, they'll give you a couple, like really metaphorically, like cookies on the bottom shelf, like bonk you over the head, kind of like, notice this. And then once you notice those, you are looking for it now. And then you will likely begin to notice a bunch of things that are perhaps more subtle. Let's hold Psalm 1 and 2 in front of us, remembering how things, especially placed at beginning and some ends, are helpful. Often the cookies are on the bottom shelf by comparing the beginning of something and the ends. Gesiah, you already noticed something in our last session, that the end of Psalm 2, how good is life for those who take refuge in the Son, that is the same phrase, ashray, as how good is life for the one who doesn't do those three things but does the light in Yahweh's instruction. So, should we start there, the beginning, literally the first word of the first line and the first word of the last line. There is something there. So let's upload, how is good life described in the beginning of Psalm 1, how is good life described at the end of Psalm 2, and what are we supposed to take away from those two

things next to each other? Like the good life is described as someone who doesn't walk in the counsel of the wicked, path of the sinners, doesn't stand, seat of the mockers, does not sit. And then it kind of seems like that's what the kings and rulers are doing over here in Psalm 2, rather than like finding their delight in the instruction of Yahweh. So the good life made you notice a bunch of other things, so I'm going to be a little pedantic and notice all the things that I saw you notice. So then that made standing, where people stand, and that led your attention up to the beginning of Psalm 2, yes? Am I right that that's what you were? So the kings taking their stand are in contrast to the good life of not standing with those kings and taking refuge in the Son. And that's an interesting relationship together to the good life of the one who doesn't stand with the wicked. Yeah, okay, so notice how Psalm 1 felt really personal and individual, we're talking about the life of a single person, a good life person, and then, you know, wicked, even though they're plural nouns, the wicked, sinners, it feels like the world of interpersonal relationships. Psalm 2 feels scaled and cosmic and huge, but the portraits are almost the same, aren't they? It's just one's a corporate and one's more individual, standing and not standing. So yes, any more you want to say on that after I noticed what you noticed? Can I piggyback on what you drew out regarding the individual versus the corporate? Just how the standing, the sitting, that starts from those private, personal moments, when you consider, it starts from the home, and then it becomes a community thing, and then it becomes masses, nations, and then... Yeah, like the scaled effect, when the same decision is made by many individuals. Similar to what you explained, to me, the comparison between the two seems as if there is a lens that focuses in on an individual. and what we see in that individual, good or bad, if you focus out, you see in the nations. So it's almost like the view God has of us as a whole

or as one, as an individual. Yeah, biblical authors are really interested in the relationships between the one and the many and the way that an individual human life can take a shape that's analogous to the shape of a community's life. And that the patterns are almost predictable. Like what we face as individuals are scaled in terms of what our communities face, but there is an important analogy between them. It's just that the effects are usually higher stakes and wider spread. Yeah. And you also see two images of community too. There is the community of nations or people who stand against God or versus community that we have with God. So we are in community with God. So verse two of Psalm one, which talks about the delight of that person is in God or in Torah, in his teaching or meditating in his word day and night. At the end of Psalm two is like taking refuge in him. So it's both not just following his instructions, but actually being like in his sacred protected community. Yeah, I'm gonna draw on that. In Psalm one, verse one, we had our kind of community of the non-good life, which is the counsel of the wicked, the path of sinners, the seat of mockers. And remember the good life man doesn't stand in the path of sinners, which implies the inverse

that that is where the sinners stand. And then isn't it interesting that the sinners standing at the beginning of Psalm one is mirrored by the Kings and the rulers standing in Psalm two, but the mockers sit. They stand and they sit. Whereas in Psalm two, the standing of the Kings is in opposition to the one sitting in the skies. It's the same word. So it's a good example of how the same, and these are all the same words in Hebrew, but they're used in different ways. One is of God, one is a people, whereas in this is both used to people and they're both negative. Whereas here is the one of people is negative, so it's just, that's creative. This is Ulipo type of stuff. You're playing with words, but not just for artsy to be artsy. There's meaningful, very meaningful reflections being made here about the ways of God and the ways of humans. And that when humans sit in a pattern of behavior, especially a negative one, look at the effects. But then when Yahweh sits, that's an image of enthronement, he can do something about the negative effects of the sitting of the humans. It's so creative. It's a way of joining things in your mind

that you wouldn't necessarily think to join. What about the meditating? Let's meditate on the meditate. So conspicuous that word appears two times. I just, the whole three lines together, that there's a rage, there's a delight, there's a meditate to meditate, and that they're against Yahweh, but the others are enamored with the instruction of Yahweh. You wanna be under that. All of those jump off of each other or hit each other. Yes. Well, and I think that which they're meditating upon, the righteous meditates upon the instructions of Yahweh, whereas the wicked, they meditate upon empty matters. And so the quality of that which they're meditating upon will determine what will be produced from it. And for the wicked, it produces this frustration and this anger because in reality, their path goes to destruction, their path becomes folly, it becomes empty. Whereas the one who meditates upon the Torah, what happens is success, there's flourishing, there's happiness, there's transcendence. So good. Yeah, these portraits of the wicked in Psalm 1 are marked by their behavior. And the good life man is marked off by what he meditates on. And remember, there was that implicit, well, what does that result in? Well, kind of behavior, but it's the kind of behavior that's fruit-like.

It doesn't really come from itself. It's the result of something else. And the meditating was the key of the source. Let's zoom in on the Polaroid of that little panel of Psalm 2. It's humans who scheme ways to build what they think is an environment of goodness, of flourishing, maybe for some, not for all, and, well, if that's what it takes, that's what it takes. If you want to make an omelet, right, you've got to break some eggs, right? Here's how kings normally create their little realms of safety, and somehow never results in that for everybody. Then you get this individual picture of an Eden life, like the Torah meditator, and it raises this, well, man, what would happen if you had a king or kings that were more, they were all like the good life person? Like what would that look like? And the poems don't tell you, but it makes you wonder. It's like, I wish we had a king who was like the good life man. Actually, that's what I wish we had. He mentions it in verse 6 of Psalm 2, which is his anointed king, which is nice that he actually draws that contrast, that, yeah, there's a different kind of king, yeah, is a humble king, yeah, that's beautiful, that we have that hope. And we look forward to that. There is something interesting in the meditation on emptiness in Psalm 2, and the meditation on God's instruction, and juxtaposing that against the fruit-like, Eden-like metaphors of Psalm 1, 3, and Psalm 2, 3, and I was just thinking of where the good man, by meditating on the instructions of Yahweh, considers, like, he becomes planted, but the kings and the rulers and the people who are meditating on emptiness consider these, like, it's shackled almost, like, their perspective is distorted because of what they're meditating on. So the good man is, like, fruitful in his life and prosperous because he is planted in Yahweh, but those who do not meditate on Yahweh's instructions have a disdain for that, and they see it as, like, a cord and a bond they need to be broken and torn apart from.

That's a great insight. One person's life-giving guidance is another person's oppressive restriction, something like that. And God will honor that, like, you don't have to choose me, which is interesting. In terms of comparing parts and parts, I did find it interesting that the middle section of each poem, that you have about a tree producing fruit, and then you have the image of the heavenly Father and the Son of God, and fruit is a primary metaphor in the Hebrew Bible for children. Now when you read Psalm 1 by itself, it doesn't tell you that the fruit is children. It seems more related to life choices that produce a different kind of end result than like the bad guys. But when you set them alongside, it is interesting that the tree producing fruit is in the same parallel slot as the Father birthing the Son. That's just interesting. That was my thought, too, that I wanted to share. I was just, like, looking at them side by side, and I love that you told us to do that because if you just compare them, on my first sheet for Psalm 1, I had written, like, the biggest thing that stuck out to me in 1 was how it was like a movement sandwich in a way, but then in the middle it's permanence. And the only thing that was permanent was the planted by the streams of water. And I was thinking, like, we talked about prospering earlier, and then you look at this side on Psalm 2, and the only thing in the middle that is permanent is Christ. And just like that, yeah, exactly the same thing. I just was, like, thinking, oh, that's such an interesting comparison. And thinking of Christ as, like, the seed of Jesse, right? Seed planted. Yes. Yeah, actually, I'm reminded of Psalm 53 where it says... he grew up before him like a root out of dry ground. So yeah, there is that analogy between describing him as a plant.

That is a core metaphorical kind of framework in the Hebrew Bible. I think it comes from the Eden narrative because the plants come up out of the ground and the human comes up out of the ground. And so you can talk about the fruit of the plants or the fruit of humans. And it's the same word, fruit, peri is what it is in Hebrew. Fruit of the womb and fruit of the tree. Could you provide the Hebrew word for birthed? In my mind, I wanna engage in a theological discussion regarding Trinity, but this word birthed throws in a theological wrench that creates problems. Yeah, yeah, it's the Hebrew word yalad. Okay, yalad, okay, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's the standard word for birth. And what's interesting is birthing used as a God giving birth, God being depicted as a mother birthing someone or something is a pretty productive metaphor in the Hebrew Bible. It's an image of creation. There's birth imagery used for God birthing creation before the hills were birthed is also used in Proverbs. And this did cause challenges. Well, it caused intense conversations in the early centuries among church theologians about how this language describes the relationship between the eternal son and the eternal father. And the end result of that was the doctrine of eternal generation of the son.

So with humans, the moment I am birthed, I exist and actually existed in the womb, but it speaks to a moment of there was a time when I was not and then I was birthed and then I was. And that's true of creatures. But when you're talking about the one who is creator, there was no time when the son was not. That was Athanasius' famous response to Arius. So what Psalm 2 is pointing us to is must be, but the son comes from the father and is sustained as son by the father. So we have to just create a new category on its surface level, meaning it can generate some tensions. Yeah. So thank you, yeah, for flagging that. Could it mean the manifestation of Jesus who is eternal on earth? So by his physical birth, and even though this happens later in life, but it's like a prophetic picture of that happening, like as the psalmist has recorded it, because they were all waiting for the Messiah's coming. Oh, sure. Could it be that? Yeah, in other words, is this a hint forward to the moment of incarnation? Yeah, sure. Yeah, so let's, on its level within the little narrative world of the poem, it's coronation day.

I think we're using metaphorical language to talk about the coronation day, the appointment of the king. So unless the king is inaugurated the moment he comes out of the womb, which I suppose that's probably happened in human history. And there are some kid kings who end up being under guardians until then. But remember 2 Samuel 7, when God says, your seed will be a son to me. It's like, there's a moment when God appoints one and today I birth you. Most of our English translations are so nervous about how to render this, where they maybe are afraid of what readers will do. They actually translate it as today I've become your father. But it's the word birth. So another fascinating piece of the puzzle here is this line, Psalm 2 is crucially important in all of the gospel accounts, but especially in the baptism of Jesus. When Jesus comes up out of the water, what the father says is, you are my son, whom I love, with you I am well pleased. That's what the father says as the spirit comes to the baptism. So every one of these words is copied from three different Hebrew Bible texts.

You are my son, you can just see it right here. literally, copy-paste from Psalm 2. The one whom I love is what God says about Isaac when he asks Abraham to surrender him as an offering. Isaac, your son, the one whom you love. And then, with you I am well pleased, comes right out of Isaiah 42, describing the suffering servant. So it's as if the Father's bringing together three moments in the Hebrew Bible talking about the King from the line of David, who's going to surrender and suffer for his people and surrender his life as an act of love. And he is the beloved one. So my point here is that here's a place that reflects how Psalm 2 was thought about. And the baptism is this pivotal moment in the Gospels where Jesus's eternal identity is being announced publicly, as it were, like an inauguration. It's kind of like a coronation. And then it's from here into the wilderness, and then it's kingdom of God on earth as it is in heaven. So this is an interesting echo of Psalm 2 that I think can help us see how Psalm 2 was read and understood. So that was a long response to say, I think incarnation is in the orbit of ideas here, but I think we're talking about a metaphorical kind of birthing of the eternal Father's relationship to the Son. And the baptism story is a key place to go for that. Maybe just while we're on the center, here's just other things that I noticed that I maybe wouldn't notice. If we have this pairing between the fruit as metaphorical offspring, and then the Father's offspring in the person of the Son of God, think about the good life guy's success on the scene. It's so interesting that the Son's success will be in bringing the kingdom of God on earth as it is in heaven.

So the inheritance or the possession. So success is always future oriented, usually about productivity and in the agrarian mindset for the Hebrew Bible, it's like you get a farm, you have a family, productive crops, you can give to the poor and celebrate in the temple. That's kind of like the good life. And so here it's about inheriting the land and securing the family estate, something like that. That's interesting. The vessels of a potter are made of clay, which is an image of fragility and dryness and chaff. The wicked are like chaff, and the rebel kings are like a potter's vessel. That feels suggestive. And even the shattering and the driving away by the wind. Is there any connection that you see with the, regarding inheritance and possession regarding Levitical inheritance, whereas because they didn't worship the calf, they didn't receive an inheritance of the land because their portion was God himself? Yes, totally. Yeah. The way the Levites' inheritance works as being God himself has to be this interesting way of reflecting the image of God and the inheritance of subduing the land. So the Levites getting God as their inheritance and the Israelites getting land as their inheritance in a way is talking about something at work in the image of God itself in Genesis 1, isn't it? So you rule over the land, God says, of the humans, so in essence inheritance is the land. But like why? And to what end ultimately? Well, if you're an image of God, then like the ultimate delight is union with the one who made you and commissioned you to rule the land. So the land really isn't the thing. I've wondered if the Levites' inheritance and the rest of the tribe's inheritance isn't

two ways of thinking about what it means to be a human being. And maybe both of those are at work here too, but in an interesting way. Thank you for naming that. It's something I've been puzzling on but haven't come to the end of my puzzlings. Just a couple thoughts on the last panel that lead to the poems, the last section, our paragraph. I know I've been using lots of different terms. Here's how the last... bit of each Psalm 1 and 2 was about the separation in a moment of divine justice. So the judgment that separates the righteous and the wicked. And remember the two paths? The path will perish. Here you have kings and judges. It's the same word. Those who are supposed to bring justice or judgment. And Yahweh will do the sorting. And not taking refuge in the Son will result in perishing in the path. It's the same exact Hebrew phrases. So conspicuous. And then you get how good is life. So let's back out. Both poems depict a distinction between the way humans usually operate and then one who is distinct from how humans usually operate. Here's how kings usually run the world. And then Yahweh has set apart one king who's separate from those kings. It almost leads you to think like there's this interesting parallelism between good life man and the king. Both are set apart. You have the fruitfulness of the tree. You have the son as the fruit of the son of the father. Then you have this final reckoning where here it's God bringing justice that separates the righteous and the path of the wicked perish. But here the one bringing justice is the son who's appointed by the father. And then how you respond to the son will determine whether your path perishes or you have refuge. Isn't that interesting? So the son now is in the place of how you respond to God's instruction. And then the good life comes along and it's like so the good life is defined by this guy. But then it ends here by saying wouldn't you love to take refuge in a king like good life man? It joins the two. So maybe a simple way to draw it is to say so here's a guy who loves to haggah on Torah. And you know in the quiet moments he's just reciting Torah aloud

to himself. And then you've got you know the community of the of the wicked and they're just bad. They're bad dudes all the way around. They're plotting evil things. Okay so that's Psalm 1. And then Psalm 2 comes along and paints this parallel picture of a king who's set apart from the community of wicked kings. And they're bad guys right? And they're like rah rah rah and they're empty meditations and so on. And so remember how meditate was used here of this guy and then meditate is used here of these guys. So in your mind what you begin to do is like join the two together. And it's so interesting our translations often want to make gender neutral the good life man. And for understandable reasons because this is about the people of God learning to become like this. But it is interesting the word used for man is not the general Hebrew term Adam for human. But it's the specific word Ish. And I wonder if that isn't on purpose because what we are supposed to see is that the good life man is the Messiah. And that the good life man becomes a model for me in as much as I find myself taking refuge in the Messiah. So it's a good example where because I am all for representing pronouns or the way gender works in our translations to make sure that males and females can see themselves where they are both intended by the biblical authors. But I think that move in Psalm 1 1 can hide the messianic focus of both of the Psalms read together. Because the way I think that all of God's people sons and daughters are brought in is through gender. He's us. He was a man. But by being a human man, that's how we all become sons and daughters, inclusively. So that's something that, that was a little puzzle about Psalm 1 that I, at least I got a little resolution on personally. That was kind of cool. Is that why, like, it says how, it uses man in 1-1, but then in 2-12, it's for all. It's not how good is life for the man.

Yeah, totally. That's great. Yeah. That's great. Why? Because the all, all humans are made up, are male and female. Yeah. In other words, the specificity, if you get a, if you get a good life Messiah who really lives out the vision of Psalm 1, then you finally have a king who can do the Psalm 2 business in a way that's just and right. And he will provide refuge for everybody who wants to take refuge in him. Yeah. It's the one and the many. That that I thought was really sweet. The ending of Psalm 1, 6, because Yahweh knows the path of the righteous, but the path of the wicked will perish. And Psalm 2, 12, kiss the son, which speaks of an intimacy and being known. Like you don't just kiss people you're not familiar with. And so just what it, like Yahweh knows the path because he set the path. And he knows that if you are in that, like taking refuge in the son, that you will not perish away because he will not become angry at you. And so I thought it was just interesting to see even the symmetry and how the panels

are speaking to one another. Yeah, totally. Yeah. So we could continue, but for practical purposes, do you see how what we're doing is no different than when we just looked at one verse and noticed the parts and it sends your mind? There's something about when you get to this level where it feels often more exciting because you're starting to compare things. I compare parts of the paragraph, compare parts of a poem, but to compare two poems that I thought were just separate poems about different things, but are they? Somebody put these two poems here and set them apart to get certain ideas on the brain and to send you off into the rest of the psalm scroll to then keep developing the ideas. What I'd like to do now is zoom out even more because this is the beginning of the psalm scroll. You remember how there's two portraits of the good life person who meditates day and night? You had psalm one and the other one was Joshua. So was that just coincidence that it happens to be at the beginning of a scroll that's at the seam and transition between the Torah and the prophets? Or is this another moment where we're zooming out and things are matching each other at matching spots perhaps?

So let us end our meditations by going at the largest scale possible. But for now, let's take a break.