PSALM 151

When I was a teenager, it was common for youth speakers at our church to ask us to turn to Acts 29. Of course, we would be embarrassed to realize that there are only 28 chapters to it. The point usually made was that we were in fact living out Acts in our own lives. So when I first heard of Psalm 151, I figured that it must refer to something along those same lines. But it turns out that there is indeed a 151^st Psalm, at least sort of.

The standard Old Testament text in Hebrew is referred to as the Masoretic Text (MT), and it certainly does not contain any material in the Psalter past Psalm 150. However, the Greek Septuagint translated from the Hebrew roughly around 250 BC-100 AD does include one more short Psalm. The two most important early witnesses to the Septuagint are the Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus manuscripts, dating from the 4^th and 5^th centuries AD, respectively.

At the conclusion of the Alexandrinus Septuagint, it reads “The 151 Psalms of David.” But in the Sinaiticus, Psalm 151 is given as an appendix preceded by the words: “This psalm is ascribed to David as his own composition (though it is outside the number) after he had fought in single combat with Goliath.” This final psalm also appears in a manuscript of a Syriac version dating from the 12^th century AD.

Since there was no Hebrew manuscript of the psalm in evidence, it was widely assumed that it was an original composition in Greek. That was the situation up to the last half of the twentieth century when the Dead Sea scrolls began to be found and published. In Cave 11 at Qumran, a first-century AD Psalms Scroll (known among scholars as 11QPs) was uncovered in 1956 and published in 1963. It was a unique compilation of 39 canonical psalms; II Samuel 23:17; Sirach 51:13-30; Psalms 151, 154, and 155; and additional material not previously known. (Sweeney)

So all of the above brings up the important question: Should we consider Psalm 151 part of the official canon of the Bible? There are a number of key factors to consider in the determining the canonicity of a book, chapter, or verse in the Bible. For those more interested in this subject, I highly recommend The Canon of Scripture by F.F. Bruce as an excellent source of information. Basically, there are external factors such as the manuscript evidence and acceptance by the early church, as well as internal considerations such as theology, historicity, and style. Let's deal with the manuscript evidence first.

Williamson cites the Sinaiticus manuscript in order to state, “the fact that this additional psalm is described as being 'outside the number' (i.e., the canonical Psalter) makes it less likely, despite the Qumran evidence, that the Psalter was still in a state of canonical flux in the second century BC. Rather, a collection comprising 150 psalms...clearly was recognized prior to its Greek translation for the LXX [i.e. Septuagint].” A.A. Anderson agrees with that assessment and states that “this figure must have been fixed before the Greek translation of the Psalter.” Holladay adds, “In spite of the strong conviction, then, that the Psalms numbered 150, there was a contrary tendency to add 'just one more' or 'just a few more'!”

But what about the evidence of the Dead Sea scrolls? We first must consider what the purpose was for the collection known as 11QPs as used for among the Qumran community. Holladay lays out two possibilities: “One is that such a scroll might simply offer a given collection of psalms that were used in the community and that the notion of 'only 150 psalms' and 'only these psalms' had not taken over...The other possibility is that what we have here...could simply be an arrangement of psalms for liturgical recitation. Given the paucity of our data, it is impossible to decide for sure what we have before us.”

By contrast, Flint first reviews the scholarly opinions on the subject including the possibilities that 11QPs was material supplementary to Scripture or an instruction book for new Levite choristers. He reaches the conclusion that it was a true Psalter, thus demonstrating that the Hebrew Psalter had not been finalized by the second century BC. Holladay's more cautious view is to be preferred on this subject.

Another important caveat to keep in mind before using the 11QPs as definitive proof that Psalm 151 was considered to be canonical at an early date is the fact that Psalm 151 does not actually exist in the Dead Sea manuscript. Instead, what he have are two different psalms, known as 151A and 151B. Flint points out that these two psalms had already been known from later Greek, Syriac and Latin translations. Here is how 151A reads:

I was the smallest among my brothers

the youngest of my father's sons.

He made me shepherd over his flock,

ruler over their young. (1)

My hands made a harp,

My fingers fashioned a lyre.

Let me give glory to the LORD

I thought to myself. (2)

The mountains cannot witness unto God,

The hills cannot proclaim Him,

But the trees have cherished my words,

the flocks my deeds. (3)

Who can proclaim,

who can announce,

who can declare His deeds?

God has seen everything,

God has heard everything,

God has listened. (4)

God sent his prophet to anoint me;

Samuel to make me great.

My brothers went out to meet him,

Handsome in form and appearance. (5)

Their stature tall,

Their hair beautiful,

but the LORD God did not chose them. (6)

Instead he sent and took me

from following the flock;

God anointed me with Holy oil;

God made me leader for his people,

ruler over the children of His covenant. (7)

By now, you may be curious how Psalm 151 actually reads. Here is one possible translation:

I was small among my brothers

and the youngest in my father's house.

I tended my father's sheep (v. 1)

My hands made a harp,

My fingers fashioned a lyre. (v. 2)

And who will tell my Lord?

The Lord himself; it is he who hears. (v. 3)

It was He who sent this messenger

and took me from my father's sheep

and anointed me with His anointing oil. (v. 4)

My brothers were handsome and tall

but the LORD was not pleased with them. (v. 5)

-------------

I went out to meet the Philistines

and he cursed me by his idols. (v. 6)

But I drew his own sword

I beheaded him,

and took away disgrace from the people of Israel. (v. 7)

The last two verses are almost word-for-word what is known as 151B in 11QPs. Psalm 151:1-5 are obviously derived from 151A although the latter is written in much better poetic style and is more understandable than the somewhat cryptic v. 3 above. Thus, it appears obvious that what is known as Psalm 151 is really a cobbled-together, “truncated amalgamation of the two Hebrew psalms.” (Sanders)

Regarding the acceptance of this new psalm in the church, it was never considered canonical by the Roman Catholic church or any Protestant churches. However, the Orthodox tradition, which accepts the whole Septuagint as canonical, has always included it in their Scripture as well as within their liturgy.

There is little more we can say concerning internal factors such theology and historical content. However, it is worth considering its place within the Psalter as to to whether it is a good fit or not. The first thing to note is that it is located right after the collection of stirring praises to God in 145-150, especially Ps. 150 which most commentators treat as an apt conclusion to the whole Psalter. Thus, the rather pedestrian Ps. 151 constitutes a colossal anti-climax in that position that practically ruins the whole impact of the Psalter.

In addition, from a structural point of view, Psalm 151 not only adds nothing to the overall literary arrangement the Psalter, but actually disrupts it entirely. Read my post “The Psalms: Introduction to the Literary Structure” and see if you don't agree with that assessment.

And despite attempts by John Breck to show that it possesses a chiastic structure, it is really 151A that has that distinction:

    A. David compared to his brothers (v. 1a)

        B. David tended his father's sheep (v. 1b)

            C. David makes praise music to God (v. 2)

            C'. Will God hear it? (v. 3)

        B'. David taken away from his father's sheep (v. 4)

A'. David compared to his brothers (v. 5)

By piecing together 151A and 151B, the author of Psalm 151 not only took away some of the sense of 151A but also disrupted its mirror-image organization.

In conclusion, the best we can say regarding Psalm 151 is that it is neither heretical in teaching nor unhistorical in content. In that respect, it can be classed alongside many of the other OT and NT apocryphal and pseudepigraphical writings.