PSALM 137

This is one of the imprecatory, or cursing, psalms found in the Psalter. But surprisingly, it starts out with some very haunting poetry in the first four verses. These verses have found their way in musical pieces ranging from William Walton's oratorio “Belshazzar's Feast” to a song in the rock opera Godspell (“On the Willows”). In addition, they served as the inspiration for Robert Short's book The Gospel According to Peanuts. The main theme arising from these four verses is the difficulty in translating God's Word from one culture and time period to another in a meaningful way for the new audience.

The overall logic of the psalm is as follows: The psalmist starts out in verses 1-4 by stating the situation that he found himself in and a description of his state of mind. Then he offers two responses: the first one in verses 5-6 is positive in tone while the rest of the poem gives a very negative response.

The time period that this psalm portrays is just after the events described at the end of II Kings, the fall of Jerusalem to Babylon in 587 BC. So the author obviously witnessed these events and reflected on them later on. That would place the writing of Psalm 137 as possibly the latest in the Psalter.

Verse 1: The setting appears to be near the Babylonian irrigation ditches where the Jewish captives were forced to work. They gathered for worship at the banks of the Tigris or Euphrates River. We can see this same practice later on in New Testament times (Acts 16:13). When Paul and his companions began evangelizing Philippi, Luke says, “On the sabbath day we went outside the gate by the river, where we supposed there was a place of prayer; and we sat down and spoke to the women who had gathered there.”

The reason for this practice is felt to be that the purifying properties of running water cleansed the unclean pagan lands in which they were living.

Verses 2-3: There is some interesting indirect archeological confirmation of these verses from the earlier Assyrian period :

a. During the siege of Jerusalem, male and female musicians were sent to King Sennacherib as a tribute.

b. There are pictures in King Sennacherib's palace in Nineveh showing captives being led into exile playing lyres.

The “songs of Zion” may have been similar to Psalms 76, 84, 87, 122, and 132. These psalms extolling the glory of Jerusalem and the temple would have been a mockery to sing in exile.

Verse 4: This is posed as a rhetorical question, but it is important to apply it to our situation today as “exiles.”

Verses 5-6: Here is the strongest clue that the author was one of the temple musicians led into exile (“let my right hand lose its cunning”). Those musicians, however, did not lose their skill in exile since they later returned and we have psalms such as this one preserved for us today.

Verse 7: The first negative response is against the Edomites. For the background of the Psalmist's complaint read Obadiah 10-14.

Verses 8-9: But the main target of hate is the Babylonians. Verse 8 poses some problems since the Babylonians were not utterly devastated when they were conquered by the Persians. However, it is possible to translate the phrase as “you devastator” instead, and that is the approach that the NRSV takes, for example.

Applications

1. From verses 1-4, we are prompted to ask ourselves how we can best praise God and reach others in our culture, which is totally foreign in every way from what the exiles faced. Or is our situation really that much different from theirs?

2. Contemplating verses 5-6 should prompt us to be reminded that even when God seems very far away, we shouldn't sink into despair and inaction.

3. It is the last part of this psalm that causes us the most problem. Three responses are to refuse to accept it, excuse it, or use it.

1. Refuse to accept these words as being the inspired word of God

Here is a quote from a scholar (who shall remain nameless) taking this approach:

“When psalms are clearly conditioned by the limitations of their time of composition, they are not worthy vehicles for the expression of Christian truth.” In support of this contention, one could even quote Jesus: “You have heard it said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'” Since there is no teaching in the Old Testament that actually is worded that way, some scholars feel that Jesus was referring to Psalm 137 or one of the other imprecatory psalms in order to contradict it.

That may well be true, and we do have to take into account the principle of God's progressive revelation to mankind. However, there are grave dangers in taking this approach to Scripture:

1. It is easy to get into the habit of picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to believe and follow.

2. Love of one's enemies is taught elsewhere in the Old Testament.

3. In deciding whether to find a replacement for Judas, Peter quoted one of the other imprecatory psalms (Psalm 69) in Acts 1:20 as inspired Scripture.

2. Excuse the wording

Here are some ways that people have taken to get around the clear meaning of the Psalmist's words in verses 8-9:

1. Since there are few stones in Babylon, this is just a hypothetical statement meaning: “How would you feel if your children...?” That is a strained interpretation.

2. Since the Jews knew little about the afterlife at that time, justice had to prevail on Earth in the here and now for there to be divine vindication.

3. These verses are not far from expressing what Jesus himself said in Luke 19:33-34 concerning Jerusalem: “Indeed, the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up ramparts around you and surround you, and hem you in on every side. They will crush you to the ground, you and your children within you, and they will not leave one stone upon another; because you did not recognize the time of your visitation from God.”

The difference, however, is that between expressing the desire for personal vengeance and a case of divine retribution.

4. Even if it were a case of vengeance, it was just an eye for an eye since that is how the Babylonians treated the Jews. Here again, progressive revelation prevails and we need to consider not only Jesus' words in the Sermon on the Mount, but also Paul's teaching in Romans 12: “Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them.”

5. The Psalmist didn't carry out his threats himself; he left it to others. However, that should not excuse his attitude of hatred.

Use this psalm

1. as an example of fulfilled prophecy. That may be one way to view this passage, but certainly not the main one. This is a lesson that many have not yet learned when they get sidetracked trying to predict the future in books like the Revelation, but totally ignore any spiritual lessons that it may contain.

2. C. S. Lewis in his Reflections on the Psalms utilizes this psalm symbolically to teach that we should destroy the “harmless” little sins in ourselves ruthlessly before they grow large enough to destroy us.

3. Note that the Psalmist doesn't deny the existence of evil. He recognizes that for good to triumph, evil has to be overthrown and wrong punished. Remember that “Thy kingdom come” also means vengeance and punishment on those who do not obey the gospel.” (II Thessalonians 1:8-10)

4. We may have trouble identifying with the last part of this psalm because we have trouble identifying with deep feelings toward God in the first place.

5. These words are equated with fanaticism. But maybe we have ceased to be concerned with the suffering of the innocent and don't see it as a reflection on God.

6. We can certainly learn from the fact that the Psalmist admitted his feelings, even of anger. But then he turned them over to God instead of denying them, brooding, burdening others, or personally getting even.

Years ago I saw a panel discussion on TV between a diverse group including a psychiatrist, a clergyman and Hugh Hefner (of all people). At one point in the program someone mentioned that it should be a top priority for researchers to develop a pill that would eliminate all anger from humanity. Surprisingly, all of the panelists agreed. By contrast, Paul in Ephesians 4:26 says, “Be angry and sin not.” He clearly recognized the difference between righteous anger and actual sin.