Blog

Meaning of “Meek” in Psalm 25:

Keeping One’s Eternal Covenants,

LeGrand Baker

A friend describes meekness as the ability to accept offence without being offended. That is an enjoyable perspective, and it works well in many scriptures. However there is another meaning of “meek” that makes it one of the most significant words in the subtextual language of the scriptures. It is one of those “code words” that was never intended to be a code word, because that meaning of “meekness” is clearly explained in the Psalms. In Psalm 37:11, we learn, “The meek shall inherit the earth: and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.” The Savior paraphrased that psalm when he spoke the Beatitude, “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” He may also have been referring to it with the Beatitude that reads, “And blessed are all the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.” In D&C 88:17 he explained much the same thing, that the earth was created so “the poor and the meek of the earth shall inherit it.” Those ideas are all amplified in the place where one finds the most complete discussion of what meekness means, the 25^th psalm.

It expands the blessings of meekness to include the doctrine of an eternal family—it promises that not just the meek, but also the children of the meek, will inherit the earth. It is that psalm that gives us the best explanation of who the meek are.

Psalm 25 is an intensely personal statement. The speaker may have been a single individual, or the psalm may have been sung by everyone in the congregation. The individual who sings it (even if there are many who sang simultaneously) is so very human that whether the psalm were sung by one person or the entire congregation would not change the personal nature of the hymn. The Lord’s statement, “For my soul delighteth in the song of the heart; yea, the song of the righteous is a prayer unto me, and it shall be answered with a blessing upon their heads” (D&C 25:12), can be true whether one is singing alone, with a congregation, or just listening.

Most other scriptures that tell about the Council in Heaven make it seem very distant and detached because the accounts are about supermen like Abraham, Isaiah, or Lehi. Psalm 25 is not just about the king, but it is about Everyman. It seems to bring the Council home to the fireside where its covenants are a central part of ordinary daily lives. It is a prayer in which one lifts one’s soul (not just one’s hands) as an evidence of one’s worthiness. In the prayer, the person unabashedly exposes his inner Self, making himself vulnerable to all those who can know the meaning of his words. He is one who has unbounded faith in the Lord—one who knows he had made some very serious covenants in the Council—and one who is trying to keep those covenants while muddling through the dreariness that is life in this lonely, dark world. In the Book of Mormon, Nephi’s psalm in 2 Nephi 4 is so much like Psalm 25 that one wonders if Nephi may have been reflection on its meaning when he wrote his own.

The Psalm reads:

1 Unto thee, O Lord, do I lift up my soul.

2 O my God, I trust in thee: let me not be ashamed

One would be ashamed if one had borne testimony of God’s covenant, but God didn’t keep them. The next lines suggest that the covenant he was asking God to keep is the promise that God would make a way for the psalmist to keep his own covenants:

let not mine enemies triumph over me

“Triumph,” in the context of this psalm, suggests that they would be able to prevent him from keeping those covenants:

3 Yea, let none that wait on thee be ashamed:

let them be ashamed which transgress without cause

The word “wait” appears three times in this psalm. Each is translated from the same Hebrew word that means to anticipate, “to look for eagerly.”¹ The shame mentioned would only come if the Lord did not appear and the person who waits is disappointed. The blessings of waiting on the Lord is taught by Isaiah, where he writes:

But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint (Isaiah 40:31).

That the psalmist had that same idea in mind is clearly demonstrated by his next phrase, where his words “ways” and “paths” have the same encoded connotation.

4 Shew me thy ways, O Lord; teach me thy paths.

5 Lead me in thy truth, and teach me

for thou art the God of my salvation; on thee do I wait all the day.

Psalm 25 is set in the context of our premortal covenants, and the next verse contains a word that brings those covenants into a deeply personal friendship/relationship. The word is translated “lovingkindnesses” and is from the Hebrew word hesed.² The Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament shows the power of that friendship/relationship:

We may venture the conjecture that even in cases where the context does not suggest such mutuality it is nevertheless implicit, because we are dealing with the closest of human bonds.³

An explanation and clarification of their phrase, “dealing with the closest of human bonds,” is found in a new edition of Strong’s Concordance:

hesed, unfailing love, loyal love, devotion. kindness, often based on a prior relationship, especially a covenant relationship.⁴

Even though the hesed relationship described in this psalm is between the king who speaks the words, and Jehovah to whom he addresses them, it must be remembered that in the Israelite temple drama the king represented every man in the congregation. Therefore, the hesed relationship described here also evokes the terms of the covenant between Jehovah and each worthy man. That being so, it follows that this same hesed relationship also exists as an eternal, fraternal bond of each man with Jehovah, perhaps with their prophet/king, and most certainly each other. Consideration of the this-worldly continuation of those fraternal relationships brings us back to Peter’s assurance that “brotherly kindness” (philadelphia) is prerequisite to making one’s calling and election sure (2 Peter 1:1-11).

6 Remember, O Lord, thy tender mercies and thy lovingkindnesses [hesed, plural];

for they have been ever of old.

Here is another example of where the phrase “of old” is a reference to the Council.⁵ The prayer bears testimony that he knows that his and Jehovah’s hesed relationship is now even as it was in the beginning, at the Council in Heaven, and remains forever—unchanged:

7 Remember not the sins of my youth, nor my transgressions:

according to thy mercy [hesed] remember thou me for thy goodness’ sake, O Lord.

It is apparent that the author of this psalm had an almost boundless knowledge of the whole plan of salvation, yet is burdened by his own human frailties as he asks the Lord to remember their former hesed relationship. Nephi’s psalm echoes a similar lament:

17 Nevertheless, notwithstanding the great goodness of the Lord, in showing me his great and marvelous works, my heart exclaimeth: O wretched man that I am! Yea, my heart sorroweth because of my flesh; my soul grieveth because of mine iniquities.

18 I am encompassed about, because of the temptations and the sins which do so easily beset me.

19 And when I desire to rejoice, my heart groaneth because of my sins; nevertheless, I know in whom I have trusted (2 Nephi 4:17-19).

The 25^th Psalm continues

: 8 Good and upright is the Lord: therefore will he teach sinners in the way

Here again, “the way” is the frequently used code in the psalms that refers to the sequence of the ordinances and covenants, and connotes the “way” or “path” by which one climbs the “mountain” that is symbolic of the Jerusalem Temple Mount, and/or the “way” one conducts his life after leaving the Temple. The generic “in the way” implies the introductory ideas taught to the initiate there. There is a subtle, but very real difference between teaching “sinners in the way,” and teaching the meek “his way,” as appears in the next verse. “Sinners,” apparently, are people who have yet to be taught to understand—adults who were repenting, or young adults who typically had been so absorbed in growing up in this world that their premortal covenants were not only lost from memory but also from seeming importance. As they mature such “sinners” must be taught “in the way”—the generic principles that have universal application. Then in “his way, as the focus of the prayer moves forward and the singer recounts his own spiritual maturation:

9 The meek will he guide in judgment:

In these words, we begin to understand the meaning of “meek.” That he will led them in judgment evinces that the singer has learned, and is still learning, to judge righteously. That represents the essence of the powers of both priesthood and kingship. The qualities of that judgment are described in the next verse and are enshrined in the Savior’s words, “Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy.”

and the meek will he teach his way

The person who sings this prayer is no longer taught in the generic “the way,” but is taught God’s way. He has learned how to judge with “mercy and truth,” and therefore can be taught what he otherwise could not know:

10 All the paths of the Lord are mercy [hesed] and truth

unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies

In the phrase, “the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth,” “mercy” is hesed and emphasize that covenant friendship relationship; “truth” is that criteria upon which the judgment is made.

“Covenant,”is another reference to the covenants made at the Council, sode in v. 14.

Scholars are not quite sure what “testimonies” mean. But it seems to be a physical testimony (a pistis⁶) of God’s covenants with man. In the Old Testament, the Ark of the Covenant is frequently called the Ark of the Testimony,⁷ and Johnson suggested that our verse is a reference to an embroidered copy of the Ten Commandments the king wore on his person.⁸ So verse ten might read, “All the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant and his commandments.”

If that is correct, it appears the meek are those who keep the covenants they made at the Council (and that they re-made here), and also keep the commandments they receive in this world. One gets the same idea from psalms where the “testimony” is related to the experience on Sinai: “He spake unto them in the cloudy pillar: they kept his testimonies, and the ordinance that he gave them” (Psalm 99:7). Keeping the commandments associated with the testimony seems to be a kind of authorization or ratification on the part of men and women, so that God can bless them according to those covenants:

11 For thy name’s sake, O Lord, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.

“For thy name’s sake” is another instance of the covenant-name’s being used to represent the covenant itself. The meaning of that phrase would remain almost the same if the word were changed so it read: “For thy covenant’s sake.”

It is significant that at this point in this psalm that celebrates man’s eternal success, there is an expression of one’s total dependence upon the principle of repentance and the Savior’s Atonement:

12 What man is he that feareth the Lord?

him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose

That reads: “What man is he that feareth [honor, respect] the Lord? him [the man] shall he [the Lord] teach in the way [same temple codeword as path] that he [the Lord] shall choose.”

That is different from “in the way.” This is no longer the generic teachings, ordinances, and covenants taught to “sinners.” Rather, it is the “way” the Lord “shall choose”—it is individually a teaching from the Spirit, designed to enable one to fulfill the covenantal assignments made at the Council:

13 His [the person’s] soul shall dwell at ease;

and his seed shall inherit the earth

This is the promise of eternal family. Here is the covenant that the children of the meek, rather than just the meek themselves, shall inherit the earth. As discussed above, the new name given to the dead in the coronation passage of Isaiah 61 is another example of the Old Testament teachings of eternal increase.

14 The secret [sode] of the Lord is with them that fear him;

and he will shew them his covenant.

The word “secret” is translated from the Hebrew word sode, so the verse reads, “The secret [sode] of the Lord is with them that fear him [“Fear” means respect, honor, revere]. The verse says: Those who honor the Lord will know the secrets of the Council; and the Lord will show them [the meek] his [the Lord’s] covenant. That is, he will show them the covenants they made with him at the Council. Such information is an ultimate empowerment. One can not know where he is going unless he knows where he as been and what purpose he has in the journey.

As we have already observed, a sode experience is when an individual has a vision in which he is returned to the Council in Heaven to be re-taught about the assignment he received, and to re-affirm the covenants he made there. But, as the scriptures make clear, the Lord need not take Everyman back to the Council in order to teach each his premortal covenants—that was what the New Year festival temple drama was for; and of course, among other things, that is what the Holy Ghost is for.

The whole meaning of the 25^th psalm is focused on that single verse. Indeed, the whole meaning of the New Year festival drama may also do so. Those words define the “meek” and put everything else in the 25th Psalm into its proper context. Verse 14 fits well with the ideas in verse 10 where one learned, “All the paths [codeword] of the Lord are mercy [being a righteous judge] and truth [knowledge things as they were, are, and will be] unto such as keep his covenant [the covenant made at the Council].”

The meek, then, are those who keep the covenants they made at the Council in Heaven. In that definition, the ordinary meaning of the word “meek” is not lost, but in these contexts, “meekness” has only to do with one’s being meek before the Lord, and has nothing whatever to do with being meek before men. Thus it was written of the prophet who defied Pharaoh and defeated all the armies of Egypt, “Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth” (Numbers 12:3). What that meant was explained by the Lord to Miriam and Aaron, in the next few verses. The King James Version gives a somewhat muddled translation of that explanation, but the Tanakh makes that explanation very clear:

The Lord came down in a pillar of cloud, stopped at the entrance of the Tent, and called out, “Aaron and Miriam!” The two of them came forward; and He said, “Hear these My words: When a prophet of the Lord arises among you, I make Myself known to him in a vision, I speak with him in a dream. Not so with My servant Moses; he is trusted throughout My household. With him I speak mouth to mouth, plainly and not in riddles, and he beholds the likeness of the Lord. How then did you not shrink from speaking against My servant Moses!”⁹

The important statement is that Moses “is trusted throughout My household.” The “household” of God would be the same as the “household” of a king. That is, it would consist of not only his immediate family but also his official entourage—the inner circle of his counselors and court leaders. In the case of God, his “household” would be the members of the Council in Heaven. So the Lord’s statement that Moses “is trusted throughout My household” is a reference to the fact that Moses was originally called—and is presently sustained—by the other members of the Council. The statement that “Moses was very meek, above all the men,” simply means he kept with care and rectitude the covenants he made with God. One of the best examples in the Book of Mormon of a prophet who was truly meek is Abinadi standing before King Noah, defiantly asserting that Noah cannot have the power to kill him until after the prophet has delivered the message the Lord has sent him to deliver!¹⁰

To return to Psalm 25; the verse we are discussing reads:

14 The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him;

and will shew them his covenant.

That verse posits that the sode—the secret decisions of the Heavenly Council, made, sanctioned, and sealed by covenant in the presence of the Lord—is made known to those who honor him because the Lord would show them what that covenant was. That was done in generic form during the festival temple drama. Thereafter, by the power of the Holy Ghost each individual could be led to understand the intent of the specific covenant he had made. Then he might know what to do and how to live to fulfill that covenant.

An excellent illustration is the story of Jean Wunderlich.¹¹ At the end of World War II, he was called to be the first post-war mission president in West Germany. His assignment would be to find the remnants of the Saints there and help them come together and make the church a viable organization again. After receiving the call, he and his wife traveled to Salt Lake City where he was to be set apart by President David O. McKay. When they entered the prophet’s office, President McKay stood, came from behind his desk, welcomed his guests, and invited them to sit down. Jean’s wife sat in a chair by the door. Jean sat in a chair that the prophet had moved to the center of the room.

President McKay placed his hands on Jean’s head and began to give him a blessing. Here, Jean stopped his narrative, his eyes lit up, and he said, “When the prophet has his hands on your head, you listen—and I was listening!” However, Jean said that President McKay had spoken only a few sentences when he gave a command that introduced Jean into the most powerful spiritual experience of his life. He saw a beautiful light, and other things which he did not describe. Jean said he again became aware of the prophet and the room, only when the blessing was finished, and he felt President McKay’s hands lift from his head. Baker recalls, “Jean said that was the most significant experience of his whole life, and his telling me became one of the most significant conversations of mine. He said he was not telling me a story, he was giving me a gift. The gift he gave me was the words of the command which the prophet spoke, which initiated Jean’s profound experience. Those words were these: ‘Be true to the Law of your own Being.’”

Jean commented that in LDS theology “law” has an eternal connotation, and the command to be true to that law suggests that one might also apostatize from it—that one may be at variance with who and what one really is. As Jean understood it, “the law of one’s own being” is simply what one IS—the individual personalities we each have developed and nurtured from the beginnings of our premortal cognizance.

He suggested that sin is simply one’s being in violation of the eternal law that is one’s Self—defying the law of one’s own being. He said that there are some things which none of us can do without doing violence to our Selves, such as stealing, blaspheming, and hurting other people. These generic sins are all covered by the basic commandments. But there are also things that are specific sins to only one individual, and are not sins to everyone else. He said he believed that a chief function of the Holy Ghost is to help one bring one’s earthly life into perfect accord with that law.

The phrase “law of one’s own being” is not found in the scriptures, but the concept is there, and the word “law” is used in connection with that concept.¹² It seems that if one is to comprehend the law of one’s own being, one must first seek to understand its origin, objective, and primary consequences—its relationship to the preliminaries of one’s foreordination; its relationship to one’s keeping the laws and commandments of the Lord while we were intelligences, then spirits, now in this life, and again in the next. It appears that is what the psalmist meant when he wrote:

14 The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him;

and will shew them his covenant.

During the presentation of the festival temple drama, for each individual the basic covenants were the same, but for each the individual meaning was specific, and the expanse of those covenants was among the biggest ideas one’s mind could reach around. It was probably in response to the bigness of the idea, that the next line recalls the Lord’s covenants of invulnerability, and expresses thanks for the fulfillment of those covenants:

15 Mine eyes are ever toward the Lord

for he shall pluck my feet out of the net.

The “net” would be the people or other obstacles that seek to entangle one’s feet to prevent one from “walking” in the “way” and from keeping one’s covenants. Those impediments are very real, and once again, in this psalm which is a celebration of the blessings of eternal life, one is brought face to face with the difficulty of just muddling through this lonely, dark world.

We have wandered so far in our discussion of the 25^th Psalm, that it seems a good idea to read it again without all the interruptions, and also to add the concluding verses which evoke the promises of the covenant of invulnerability. The Psalm reads in full:

1 Unto thee, O Lord, do I lift up my soul.

2 O my God, I trust in thee: let me not be ashamed,

let not mine enemies triumph over me.

3 Yea, let none that wait on thee be ashamed:

let them be ashamed which transgress without cause.

4 Shew me thy ways, O Lord; teach me thy paths.

5 Lead me in thy truth, and teach me:

for thou art the God of my salvation; on thee do I wait all the day.

6 Remember, O Lord, thy tender mercies and thy lovingkindnesses [hesed];

for they have been ever of old.

7 Remember not the sins of my youth, nor my transgressions:

according to thy mercy [hesed] remember thou me for thy goodness’ sake, O Lord.

8 Good and upright is the Lord:

therefore will he teach sinners in the way.

9 The meek will he guide in judgment:

and the meek will he teach his way.

10 All the paths of the Lord are mercy [hesed] and truth

unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies.

11 For thy name’s sake, O Lord, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.

12 What man is he that feareth the Lord?

him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.

13 His soul shall dwell at ease;

and his seed shall inherit the earth.

14 The secret [sode]of the Lord is with them that fear him;

and he will shew them his covenant.

15 Mine eyes are ever toward the Lord;

for he shall pluck my feet out of the net.

16 Turn thee unto me, and have mercy upon me;

for I am desolate and afflicted.

17 The troubles of my heart are enlarged:

O bring thou me out of my distresses.

18 Look upon mine affliction and my pain;

and forgive all my sins.

19 Consider mine enemies; for they are many;

and they hate me with cruel hatred.

20 O keep my soul, and deliver me:

let me not be ashamed; for I put my trust in thee.

21 Let integrity and uprightness preserve me;

for I wait on thee.

22 Redeem Israel, O God, out of all his troubles (Psalm 25:1-22).

The final three verses return the audience to the place where the psalm began. It is a prayer for strength to retain one’s integrity, so that the Lord can keep his part of the covenant.

1Strong 6960.

2Katherine Doob Sakenfeld of Princeton University Seminary wrote a dissertation on “hesed” in which she argued that it meant “to do what is expected of one.” With regard to the covenant, God does what is expected (keep his covenant promises); man should also maintain “hesed” (keep his covenant promises).

Katherine Doob Sakenfeld, The Meaning of Hesed in the Hebrew Bible: A New Inquiry (Missoula, Montana; Scholars Press for the Harvard Semitic Museum, 1978).

3G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, eds., trans. Davod E. Green, Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, 15 vols. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1986), article about hesed, 5:45-48). The Greek equivalent is Philadelphia, fraternal love, as explained in fn 905, p. 680.

4John R. Kohlenberger III and James A. Swanson, The Strongest Strong’s, Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), Hebrew dictionary # 2617.

5Examples of scriptures that use the phrase “of old” as reference to events in the Council in Heaven are: Deuteronomy 32:7-8; Psalms 25:6-7, 68:32-33, 93:1-2, 102:24-25, Micah 5:2 is another example. The most convincing modern example is this statement in the 76^th section of the Doctrine and Covenants: “And to them will I reveal all mysteries, yea, all the hidden mysteries of my kingdom from days of old.” (D&C 76:6) When the Prophet Joseph wrote a poetic version of his vision, he made its meaning even more clear.

I’ll surely reveal all my myst’ries to them—

The great hidden myst’ries in my kingdom stor’d;

From the council in Kolob, to time on the earth, (Joseph Smith, “A Vision,” in Times and Seasons, February 1, 1843.)

6See the chapter called, “Meaning of Faith—pistis.”

7Examples are: Exodus 25:16, Numbers 7:89, and Joshua 4:16.

8Johnson, Sacral Kingship, 23-24.

9Tanakh, Numbers 12:5-8.

10“Touch me not, for God shall smite you if ye lay your hands upon me, for I have not delivered the message which the Lord sent me to deliver; neither have I told you that which ye requested that I should tell; therefore, God will not suffer that I shall be destroyed at this time” (Mosiah 13:3).

11The story is as LeGrand Baker remembers Jean told it to him. Jean died several years ago so we cannot ask him to check the details.

12Many of these scriptures also emphasize free agency: D&C 88:28-33, 93:29-38; 2 Nephi 2:11-30, 9:14-16, 26:10; Alma 13:3, 40:24-26, Alma 42:7; Moses 4:3-4; Moroni 7:15-17; Ether 12:27-35; Moroni 10:32-33; 2 Ne. 10:23-24 Abraham 3:22-28. At the funeral of Jedediah M. Grant, Heber C. Kimball reported: “He said that after he came back [from the spirit world] he could look upon his family and see the spirit that was in them, and the darkness that was in them; and that he conversed with them about the Gospel, and what they should do, and they replied, ‘Well, brother Grant, perhaps it is so, and perhaps it is not,’ and said that was the state of this people, to a great extent, for many are full of darkness and will not believe me.” (Journal of Discourses 4:136).

Psalm 23 — LeGrand Baker — A Temple Text

Twenty-Third Psalm

The 23^rd Psalm is very short, but remarkably complete:

The Lord is my shepherd;

I shall not want.

He maketh me to lie down in green pastures:

he leadeth me beside the still waters.

He restoreth my soul:

he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name’s sake.

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,

I will fear no evil: for thou art with me;

thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.

Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies:

thou anointest my head with oil;

my cup runneth over.

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life:

and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever.

Its surface text is almost universally acknowledged to be one of the most beautiful poems ever written. Its sub-text is awesome. The sub-text is not hidden, it is only not apparent to those who do not know the language. It is a short play, divided into three acts: 1) the pre-mortal existence; 2) “the valley of the shadow of death;” and 3) “I shall dwell in the house of the Lord forever.”

Act One

The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.

Almost all of the accounts we have of fore-ordinations contain the principles and promises expressed in these words. The Lord is in charge. It is he who gives instructions and foreordains one to a specific task; he and his Father make enabling covenants regarding the fulfillment of those tasks; and it is by his sustaining power that one is enabled to perform one’s task and keep one’s covenants – “The Lord is my shepherd” – the one whom I shall follow.

The second part, “I shall not want,” is the same assurance as Paul’s, which was also set in the context of the covenants of the pre-mortal world: “ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession.” (Ephesians 1)

Jeremiah is a good example.

Then the Lord put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the Lord said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth. See, I have this day set thee over the nations. (Jeremiah 1:9-10)

Not everyone is set over the nations, but everyone is given an equivalent guarantee of success – and perhaps an equivalent guarantee of “easy” success. King Zedekiah didn’t like Jeremiah and caused him to be lowered into a pit of mire up to his neck. He was left to stand there until he was exhausted, when it was expected he would simply sink into the morass and drown in the mud. (Jeremiah ch. 38:5-6) Someone pulled him out and he didn’t die then, but it is reported he was later taken to Egypt and murdered there. The point is, he wasn’t drowned in the mud, but lived to fulfill his mission. The Lord hadn’t promised his assignment would be a piece of cake, only that he could not be prevented from doing it.

2 He maketh me to lie down in green pastures

There are two likely meanings here which easily merge into one. The first meaning is explained by Nephi as a declaration of the Saviour’s ultimate kingship.

v. 25 And he gathereth his children from the four quarters of the earth; and he numbereth his sheep, and they know him; and there shall be one fold and one shepherd; and he shall feed his sheep, and in him they shall find pasture.

v. 26 And because of the righteousness of his people, Satan has no power; wherefore, he cannot be loosed for the space of many years; for he hath no power over the hearts of the people, for they dwell in righteousness, and the Holy One of Israel reigneth. (1 Ne. 22:21-31)

The second probable meaning is deduced from what follows:

he leadeth me beside the still waters.

The waters of life are moving, living, tranquil waters.¹ They give life as rain, rivulets, and great rivers, but they are never stagnant and never salty. Nephi wrote that the waters of life and the fruit of the tree of life represent the love of God. If that was so in Nephi’s day, it would have been so in Adam and David’s as well. The symbolism of the tree and waters of life are fundamental to the Feast of Tabernacles drama. In the 23^rd Psalm we do not have a tree that sustains life because the symbolism is of sheep, rather than of people. So in conjunction with the waters of life we have “green pastures” instead.²

He restoreth my soul.

In section 88 of the Doctrine and Covenants, when the Lord was explaining resurrection and exaltation, he used the word “soul,” and in that context defined it as the body and spirit of man. (D&C 88:15) But elsewhere – almost everywhere else – in the scriptures the “soul” is the spirit which animates one’s physical body and gives it life.³ It seems that both ideas are the same, and that a “soul” is an intelligence clothed with a body. Whether that body is a spirit, or both spirit and physical, the definition still holds.

The “soul” in the 23rd Psalm is “restored.” But this happens before it falls from the world of light into the world of darkness in the valley of the shadow of death. So this “He restoreth my soul” happened in the pre-mortal spirit world. In that life we could sin, as is evinced by the seriousness with which a third of the hosts of heaven sinned. Then as now, the consequence of sin was uncleanliness, and no unclean thing can be in the presence of God.

Our options before we were born into this world seem to have been about as complex as our options are now. The eternal importance of free agency and of the value of experience suggests that if one had the option of choosing some wrong thing at every point along the way, as one has in this life – Well, I, for one, probably made some really stupid choices there, just as I have here. But notwithstanding whatever I did wrong back then, I was born into this mortal world as an innocent baby, pure and clean. I brought no baggage and no sin from my pre-mortal life. I was an innocent baby because the atonement made me innocent. In the Doctrine and Covenants the Lord explains how that was done.

Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning; and God having redeemed man from the fall, man became again, in their infant state, innocent before God. (D&C 93: 38)

So we were “innocent in the beginning” – that would be when we were born to our heavenly parents as spirits. And we become innocent again, a second time when we are born to our earthly parents. In order for us to become innocent again, something had to happen to make us un-innocent after “the beginning.” It’s easy to know what. Free agency is meaningless unless there are real choices. Experience in knowing the difference between correct and incorrect choices is necessary for growth, even though making wrong choices subjects one to the laws of justice. That is what repentance is for, and notwithstanding the wrong choices we made in the pre-mortal spirit world, the atonement made it possible for us to be born into this world as innocent little babies. I don’t know if that was what King David had in mind when he wrote, “He restoreth my soul,” but that’s what I think when I read it.

he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name’s sake.

“Paths of righteousness” are the “way,” the system of steps, ordinances and covenants, through which one must pass in order to return to God. As mentioned above, the word “righteousness” (zedek) identifies the path as the ancient priesthood and temple ordinances and covenants. We have already discussed that, but may I quickly review.

“Righteousness” is a key word which has popped up again and again in our discussion. In English, its root means to be “right,” to be at “right angle” to something, to be square with, plumb with, literally to bring something to the square. The Hebrew word which is translated “righteousness” means the same thing, being altogether just, justified, true, square, but it also has singular and very important priesthood and temple connotations. It is the same word as the name Zadok, the High Priest in the days of David and Solomon. Throughout the history of Solomon’s temple, tradition says, only Zadok and his descendants could hold the office of High Priest, enter the Holy of Holies and officiate in the sacred temple ordinances. So as an adjective, zedek has to do with that kind of priesthood propriety. So “righteousness” does not mean just doing nice things, it means doing appropriate temple things with legitimate priesthood authority, which is the authority of Zadok, Melchizedek, and other High Priests. As one examines the use of the word “righteousness,” in the Doctrine and Covenants, it is apparent that the Lord used the word there the same way it is used in the other scriptures, with strong connotations of priesthood propriety. For example the phrase, “robes of righteousness” has a specific and consistent meaning throughout the scriptures. In the phrase “works of righteousness” are the quintessence of obedience. Such works were obedience to correct laws, principles, covenants, ordinances, and rules of clothing. For one to do “works of righteousness,” he must do precisely the right thing, in precisely the right way, for precisely the right reason, dressed in precisely the right clothing, in the temple and with precisely the right priesthood authority. Its meaning is fully brought into play in the Beatitudes in the phrase, “Blessed are all they who do hunger and thirst after righteousness….” Alma explains this principle, not only in terms of being unclean, but also in terms of eating the wrong food and drinking the wrong water, in contrast to his frequent mention of the fruit of the tree of life and the waters of life.

But behold, an awful death cometh upon the wicked; for they die as to things pertaining to things of righteousness [Note: Alma does not say, “die as to righteousness,” he says, “die as to things pertaining to things of righteousness.”]; for they are unclean, and no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of God; but they are cast out, and consigned to partake of the fruits of their labors or their works, which have been evil; and they drink the dregs of a bitter cup (Alma 40:26).

The “paths of righteousness” in the 23rd Psalm are the way by which one may come unto Christ, but the context is still in act one, which is the pre-mortal existence. Speaking of that, President Joseph Fielding Smith wrote that there were “ordinances” in our pre-mortal life.

During the ages in which we dwelt in the pre-mortal state we not only developed our various characteristics and showed our worthiness and ability, or the lack of it, but we were also where such progress could be observed. It is reasonable to believe that there was a Church organization there. The heavenly beings were living in a perfectly arranged society. Every person knew his place. Priesthood, without any question, had been conferred and the leaders were chosen to officiate. Ordinances pertaining to that pre-existence were required, and the love of God prevailed.⁴

In support of the idea that there was a church organization with enabling ordinances in the pre-mortal spirit world, President Smith quoted Ephesians 1:3-4.⁵ He might also have used I Nephi 20, Isaiah 61:1, D&C 93:21-23, Alma 12-13, Isaiah 6, and lots of others. So there was, in the pleasantness of the world of “green pastures” and “still waters,” a clearly defined “way” which King David calls “the paths of righteousness.”

for his name’s sake.

As mentioned above, “name” is another key word. New covenants are almost always associated with new names. Abram received the “Abrahamic covenant” and his name was changed to Abraham. Jacob made a covenant and the Lord changed his name to Israel. In First Nephi 20, when the people who were called Jacob made a covenant with the Lord, their name was also changed to Israel. In many instances in the scriptures the word “name” can be replaced by “covenant” without changing the meaning of the statement.

The paalm’s “he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name’s sake,” is about as straightforward as it can be. “Paths” equal ordinances, “righteousness” is zedek, and name is “covenant.” “He leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name’s sake” might read, “He leads me through the ordinances of the priesthood for the sake of the covenants we have made together.”

Act 2

4 Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,

I will fear no evil: for thou art with me;

There is not a voice change here, but there is a change in the way the king speaks about God. Throughout act one the king is rehearsing the story of his own past, and God is spoken of as “He.” But when one enters the world of “the valley of the shadow of death,” the psalm becomes a prayer, and God is addressed as “thou.” That prayer is an expression of hope and confidence that God will fulfill his part of the covenant so the king may fulfill his: One’s assignment may be difficult, but in the fulfillment of that assignment, one is never alone.

thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.

As observed above, a rod is a symbol of kingship.⁶ It is the same as the royal scepter which is the branch of the Tree of Life. An ancient tradition says that the rod of Moses was a branch of the tree of life – an interesting idea, since he received its power at the time he saw the burning bush.

Aaron’s staff was a symbol of priesthood authority. When Aaron’s authority was challenged, he put his staff in the ground and the next morning it had blossomed. Thereafter that staff was kept in the Ark of the Covenant in the Holy of Holies.

“Comfort” is the same word used in Isaiah 61:1-3 to introduce the coronation sequence: to wash, anoint, clothe, crown, and give a new name. That coronation may be a this-world re-play of the earlier “he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name’s sake. “

So what this verse apparently says is, “Even though I am in the darkness of this world, I have no reason to fear, for I am enthroned by the symbols of kingship (rod) and of priesthood (staff).”

Thou preparest a table before me.

The table prepared is the temple feast. Its symbolism is much older than the Law of Moses, and it represents something far more important than a temporal meal. A possible example is when Melchizedek met Abraham returning from rescuing Lot. He received tithes from Abraham and brought bread and wine to serve to him. Melchizedek was High Priest of Salem. Not only did he build a temple there, but he also gave the city a new name, Jerusalem, city of peace.⁷

Perhaps the most remarkable example of this feast was with Moses on Mt. Sinai.

Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel: And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness. And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink (Exodus 24:1-18).

The meal in the 23^rd Psalm might also refer to the meat that was taken from the seething pot at the temple in Jerusalem. There the people who offered the sacrifice sat with the priests and ate the meat of the sacrifice. If these are the meals David refers to by the words, “Thou preparest a table before me,” then he is probably talking about symbolically eating in the presence of the Lord – a royal banquet, where Jehovah confirms the rule of the king.⁸

In Third Nephi, after the Saviour came to the temple and gave the lecture (Beatitudes and Sermon on the Mount), the people brought bread and wine and it was multiplied so that it filled all those present (3 Nephi 18:1-12). Then on the following day, Christ himself provided the bread and wine that satisfied an even greater multitude. (3 Nephi 20:5-9) That is the same sequence as the 21^st and 22^nd days of the New Year festival, and probably the same ceremonial feasts.

Thou anointest my head with oil.

That is a clear reference to the kingship coronation rites.

My cup runneth over.

To have one’s cup run over is to have so many blessings that there is not room enough to receive them. That blessing is a logical – even necessary – conclusion to the anointing and the sacred meal.

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life

These are the words which constitute the conclusion of Act 2. In English, goodness has to do with how one acts, and mercy has to do with how one judges. Dan Belnap tells me, that the word for mercy in Hebrew is hesed, but its meaning is debated. He said that some scholars believe it is the Hebrew equivalent for the New Testament concept of charity – “Eternal lovingkindness.” In his video, Faith of an Observer, Hugh Nibley says the law of the gospel is to repent and to forgive⁹ – it’s that idea.

Barre and Kselman translate the line as: “Henceforth may only (your) covenant blessings pursue me all the days of my life.”¹⁰ However, Freedman believed that “goodness and mercy” were proper actually name-titles, and probably represented guardian angels who were members of the Council and who had covenanted to come to the earth to assist the king during his lifetime. The quote reads:

The association of the divine virtues…here is distinctive and exceptional. . . . In the background is the mythological picture of the principal deity accompanied by lesser divine beings who . . . will leave their posts in the heavenly court, and accompany the Psalmist throughout his life (1980: 297-98). ¹¹

all the days of my life

If “goodness and mercy” are the blessing the king receives, then the words “all the days of my life” are a promise that God will bless one that he may have sufficient opportunity and resources to fulfill the covenants he made at the Council. If “goodness and mercy” are the characteristics of the king, that he may bless others, then the promise is essentially the same. But there is also another connotation which cannot be ignored: “all the days of my life” sounds very much like “endure to the end”– and that also fits, no matter which way one interprets “goodness and mercy.”

Act 3

and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever.

As is frequently the case in the scriptures, act three and the end of act two are represented by the same words. “I shall dwell in the house of the Lord for ever” is the perfect ending for act two. But “forever” lasts longer than this earth life, so that same sentence also stands for all we need wonder about act three.
—————————–

FOOTNOTES

1 James Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. #4496: peaceful, quiet, rest.

2 Please note my earlier comment that in Israelite tradition the most frequent symbol of the tree of life is the Olive tree. However grape vines, palm trees, and an ear of wheat were also used as symbols of the tree of life. One finds this in: Ad de Vries in Dictionary of Symbols and Imagery (London, North-Holland, 1974), 474.

3 For examples see: Alma 29:16, 36:15, 40:11, 41:2; Matthew 10:28; 2 Nephi 1:22; D&C 59:19).

4 Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection (Genealogical Society of Utah,1949), p.50-1.

5 Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection (Genealogical Society of Utah,1949), p.50-1; and also his Doctrines of Salvation, Salt Lake City, 1954, Vol. 1, p. 66

6 James Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. #7626: “a stick (for punishing, writing, fighting, ruling, walking, etc.) or (fig) a clan: – correction, dart, rod, sceptre, staff, tribe.”

7 Josephus, the Essential Writings, translated by Paul L. Maier, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1988, p. 367.

8 In an extended discussion of the question, Barre and Keslman write that “… the banquet scene is properly a royal banquet, where the (divine) overLord reconfirms the rule of his vassal-king….” Michael L. Barre & John S. Kselman, “New exodus covenant in Psalm 23,” in Carol L. Meyers and M. O’Connor, ed., The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth, Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration of His Sixtieth Birthday (Published for the American Schools of Oriental Research by Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, Indiana 1983) , p. 104-106.

9 Nibley doesn’t say where he came up with that idea, but it seems to say it in the first few verses of the Sermon on the Mount. See 3 Nephi 12:21-24. The rest of the sermon goes through the remainder of the sequence, so it is reasonable to suppose that is correct.

10 Michael L. Barre & John S. Kselman, “New exodus covenant in Psalm 23,” in Carol L. Meyers and M. O’Connor, ed., The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth, Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration of His Sixtieth Birthday (Published for the American Schools of Oriental Research by Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, Indiana 1983) , p. 89-100.

11 Michael L. Barre & John S. Kselman, “New exodus covenant in Psalm 23,” in Carol L. Meyers and M. O’Connor, ed., The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth, Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration of His Sixtieth Birthday (Published for the American Schools of Oriental Research by Eisenbrauns, Winona Lake, Indiana 1983) , p. 102. (The parts left out of the quote are explanations of Hebrew words.)

They give as their source: David N. Freedman, “The Twenty-Third Psalm.” Pp. 275-302 in Pottery, Poetry, and Prophecy.’ Studies in Early Hebrew Poetry. 1980 [Originally, 1976, pp.139-66 in Michigan Oriental Studies in Honor of George Cameron. ed. L. L. Orlin et al. Ann Arbor, MI: Department of Near Eastern Studies, University of Michigan.), p. 297-98.

They also include a footnote (# 18, on p. 117) about guardian angels. It reads: “So also J. H. Eaton, Kingshzp and the Psalms. Studies in Biblical Theology 2/32. London: SCM, 1976: 153: “A tendency to personify the covenant-graces appears fairly clearly in a number of passages; they take the form of angelic beings commissioned by God to accompany and guard his king.” In addition to Ps 23: 6, Eaton cites Pss 21: 4; 40: 12; 42: 9; 43: 3; 54: 7; 59: 11; 61: 8; 91: 4. On Pss 40: 12 and 61: 8, see below.”

The full quote from David Noel Freedman, “Twenty – Third Psalm,” in Pottery, Poetry, and Prophecy, Studies in Early Hebrew Poetry (Winona Lake, Indiana, Eisenbrauns, 1980), p. 275 – 302, reads as follows:

In Ps. 23, the situation is reversed: the Psalmist will be accompanied by divine goodness and mercy. We may compare this passage with Ps. 43:3, where the divine attributes, “your light and your truth” will guide the poet. In the background is the mythological picture of the principal deity accompanied by lesser divine beings who serve him as retinue and bodyguard. The pre Israelite tradition has been preserved almost intact in Hab. 3:5 where Pestilence (deber) and Plague (res>p) are described as marching before and behind the Deity. Elsewhere the accompanying figures have been demythologized in the form of divine attributes, as e.g., in Ps. 96:6

Honor and majesty are before him

Strength and beauty are in his sanctuary.

In Ps. 23, there is a further adaptation. The divine virtues will leave their posts in the heavenly court, and accompany the Psalmist throughout his life. There is a hint that something approaching divine honors is being accorded to the Psalmist. Perhaps we have here an early form of the later doctrine of guardian angels.

Psalm 21 — LeGrand Baker —  the song of redeeming love

This was originally written as a comment on Alma 5:8-9

Alma 5:8-9
8 And now I ask of you, my brethren, were they destroyed? Behold, I say unto you, Nay, they were not.
9 And again I ask, were the bands of death broken, and the chains of hell which encircled them about, were they loosed? I say unto you, Yea, they were loosed, and their souls did expand, and they did sing redeeming love. And I say unto you that they are saved. (Alma 5:8-9)

– – – – – – – – – – – – –

8. And now I ask of you, my brethren, were they destroyed? Behold, I say unto you, Nay, they were not.

If, as I suggested last week, Alma was speaking to a temple worshiping people, and the destruction he is talking about here has nothing to do with the danger the Lamanates placed them under. Rather it is the destruction he describes in the next verse as “the bands of death and the chains of hell.” This destruction, he reminds his listeners, was not about physical death, but a “this-world” spiritual death. Samuel the Lamanite later explained

16 Yea, behold, this death bringeth to pass the resurrection, and redeemeth all mankind from the first death—that spiritual death; for all mankind, by the fall of Adam being cut off from the presence of the Lord, are considered as dead, both as to things temporal and to things spiritual.
17 But behold, the resurrection of Christ redeemeth mankind, yea, even all mankind, and bringeth them back into the presence of the Lord.
18 Yea, and it bringeth to pass the condition of repentance, that whosoever repenteth the same is not hewn down and cast into the fire; but whosoever repenteth not is hewn down and cast into the fire; and there cometh upon them again a spiritual death, yea, a second death, for they are cut off again as to things pertaining to righteousness.
19 Therefore repent ye, repent ye, lest by knowing these things and not doing them ye shall suffer yourselves to come under condemnation, and ye are brought down unto this second death.
20 But behold, as I said unto you concerning another sign, a sign of his death, behold, in that day that he shall suffer death the sun shall be darkened and refuse to give his light unto you; and also the moon and the stars; and there shall be no light upon the face of this land, even from the time that he shall suffer death, for the space of three days, to the time that he shall rise again from the dead. (Helaman 14:16-20.)

To return to Alma 5:

9a. And again I ask, were the bands of death broken, and the chains of hell which encircled them about, were they loosed?

We usually consider that the prophets have defined death in three different ways.

1) The one, of course, is when one’s spirit leaves this mortal body and goes into the spirit world to await the resurrection.

2) Another is the transition we experienced between leaving the pre-mortal spirit world and entering this mortal experience. The first to do that were Adam and Eve, but just as they became mortal as a result of their choices, so did we. Each of us came to this world because we chose to, and none was sent to a time or place that he or she objected to. President McKay taught. “Of this we may be sure, happy to come through the lineage to which he was attracted and for which, and only which, he or she was prepared.” {1}

But because we lost our memory of our previous relationships with God, the prophets also call our birth into this a death, because we were separated from God.

3) That same definition is applied by the prophets to describe a kind of death that is reserved to those who will spend eternity outside the presence of God.

But here in this sermon in Zarahemla, Alma is talking about what appears to be a fourth kind of death. It is also a separation from God, but it is one that occurs while one lives in this world. With reference to those who came to Zarahemla with his father, he asks,

9a. And again I ask, were the bands of death broken, and the chains of hell which encircled them about, were they loosed? I say unto you, Yea, they were loosed.

In chapter 7, he will use that same phrase, bands of death, to mean the “temporal death,” but in our verse 9 he was not talking about a physical death, as is evinced in verse 10 where he asks, “What is the cause of their being loosed from the bands of death, yea, and also the chains of hell?” Here he is equating the “bands of death’ with “the chains of hell.” In chapter 12, he defines “the chains of hell”as not knowing (or choosing not to know) the mysteries of God. So the death that he is describing in verse 9 is one from which the members of his father’s church were redeemed while they were still alive in this world.

That seems to me to be important in light of his next statement to the saints at Zarahemla:

9b . I say unto you, Yea, they were loosed, and their souls did expand, and they did sing redeeming love. And I say unto you that they are saved.

Later in his sermon, Alma will ask:

26 And now behold, I say unto you, my brethren, if ye have experienced a change of heart, and if ye have felt to sing the song of redeeming love, I would ask, can ye feel so now?

While a friend and I were reading this chapter, he asked me a question I had never asked before: “What song is that?” It had never occurred to me that it might actually be a song that they really sang. My mind ran quickly over those few psalms that I know, and I came upon one that can actually be identified as a “song of redeeming love.” It is Psalm 21.

First, a quick review of the meaning of “redeem” may be useful. In the Greek, the word translated redeem means to purchase or ransom. The Hebrew word translated redeem means the same thing except in the Hebrew it is done by a member of one’s family. In the story of Ruth, Boaz is described as Naomi’s “kinsman”; and in Job’s testimony, “I know that my Redeemer liveth,” both “kinsman” and “redeemer” are translated from the same Hebrew word. (Strong # 1350)

The oldest of all the biblical uses of that word is in Job. His full testimony is:

25 For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:
26 And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God. (Job 19:25-26)

The connotation of Job’s testimony: that to be redeemed is to see God, is the usual meaning of that word in the Book of Mormon. Here are four quick examples:

The Saviour said to the Brother of Jared:

13b. Because thou knowest these things ye are redeemed [present tense] from the fall; therefore ye are brought back into my presence; therefore I show myself unto you. (Ether 3:14)

Lehi said to his son Jacob:

3b-4a. Wherefore, I know that thou art redeemed [present tense], because of the righteousness of thy Redeemer; for thou hast beheld that in the fulness of time he cometh to bring salvation unto men. And thou hast beheld in thy youth his glory.(2 Nephi 2:3b-4a)

Lehi testified of himself:

15. But behold, the Lord hath redeemed my soul from hell [past tense]; I have beheld his glory, and I am encircled about eternally in the arms of his love. (2 Nephi 1:15)

Samuel the Lamanite used “redeem” to describe the final judgement.

16. Yea, behold, this death bringeth to pass the resurrection, and redeemeth all mankind from the first death—that spiritual death; for all mankind, by the fall of Adam being cut off from the presence of the Lord, are considered as dead, both as to things temporal and to things spiritual.
17. But behold, the resurrection of Christ redeemeth mankind, yea, even all mankind, and bringeth them back into the presence of the Lord. (Helaman 14:16-17)

Employing that definition of redeem as used by Job and the prophets of the Book of Mormon, now let us consider what might be the “song of redeeming love.” If to redeem, means to be brought into the presence of God, then I suspect it may be the psalm that celebrates one who stands at the veil and is invited into the presence of God. Let’s read Psalm 21 together. It is only 13 verses long. I suggest we do it as we would if we were together, that is, read it in full to catch its full content, then read it bit by bit.

1 The king shall joy in thy strength, O LORD;
and in thy salvation how greatly shall he rejoice!
2 Thou hast given him his heart’s desire,
and hast not withholden the request of his lips.
3 For thou preventest him with the blessings of goodness:
thou settest a crown of pure gold on his head.
4 He asked life of thee, and thou gavest it him,
even length of days for ever and ever.
5 His glory is great in thy salvation:
honour and majesty hast thou laid upon him.
6 For thou hast made him most blessed for ever:
thou hast made him exceeding glad with thy countenance.
7 For the king trusteth in the LORD,
and through the mercy of the most High he shall not be moved.
8 Thine hand shall find out all thine enemies:
thy right hand shall find out those that hate thee.
9 Thou shalt make them as a fiery oven in the time of thine anger:
the LORD shall swallow them up in his wrath,
and the fire shall devour them.
10 Their fruit shalt thou destroy from the earth,
and their seed from among the children of men.
11 For they intended evil against thee:
they imagined a mischievous device, which they are not able to perform.
12 Therefore shalt thou make them turn their back,
when thou shalt make ready thine arrows upon thy strings against the face of them.
13 Be thou exalted, Lord, in thine own strength:
so will we sing and praise thy power. (Psalms 21:1-13)

Now let’s read it more carefully:

During the ceremonies the king and queen were the main actors, but theirs were not the only parts. There must have been other actors on stage as well. This was a participatory drama in which all played an important part, for what the king and queen were doing, symbolically the members of the audience were doing also. We do not know the extent of their participation, but one may surmise that parts or all of the audience sang many, if not most, of the Psalms as a part of the ceremonies. {2}

In ancient Israel, a king was, by definition, one who had been foreordained in the Council in Heaven, and anointed in this life. {3} In this psalm, as in many of the others, the words are spoken by different voices. There are no stage directions, as there are in modern plays, so one has to pay attention to the words in order to know who is talking. Our psalm begins by one speaking who is describing the action on the stage. This may be a chorus, as in a Greek play, or it might be a narrator, or it may be the entire audience that sings this part.

1. The king shall joy in thy strength,
O Lord; and in thy salvation how greatly shall he rejoice!
2. Thou hast given him his heart’s desire,
and hast not withholden the request of his lips.

So the king has asked the Lord for something, and the Lord has granted that request. In the next verse there is an unusual word, “preventest.” The footnote in the LDS Bible helps with that. It says that the words “thou preventest him” might be translated “thou wilt meet him.” Using that phrase, this is the Lord’s response to the king’s request:

3. For thou wilt meet him with the blessings of goodness:
thou settest a crown of pure gold on his head.

This is the concluding scenes of a coronation as performed by God himself — it is the confirmation of one’s kingship and priesthood. (Psalms 110:4 says of the king: “The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.”) In the next verse we are to learn what blessing the king requested.

4. He asked life of thee, and thou gavest it him,
even length of days for ever and ever. [i.e. through all eternity]
5. His glory is great in thy salvation:
honour and majesty hast thou laid upon him.

“Honour and majesty” are the names of the clothing that represents his kingship and priesthood. “Majesty” clearly represents his kingship, just as it does elsewhere in the scriptures. In Psalm 45:3-4 the king is told by God: “Gird thy sword upon thy thigh, O most mighty, with thy glory and thy majesty.” In Job 40:10 the fact that the Lord is talking about clothing is made even more clear: “Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.”

In his sode experience, Enoch is dressed properly so he can be in the presence of God.

8 And the Lord said to Michael: ‘Go and take Enoch from out his earthly garments, and anoint him with my sweet ointment, [Charles’ footnote reads: “oil” ] and put him into the garments of My glory.’
9 And Michael did thus, as the Lord told him. He anointed me, and dressed me, and the appearance of that ointment is more than the great light, and his ointment is like sweet dew, and its’
10 smell mild, shining like the sun’s ray, and I looked at myself, and was like one of his glorious ones. (“The Book of the Secrets of Enoch,” 22:8-10, in R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, vol. II, (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1976). The sode experience is in vol. 2:442-445.)

In our psalm the words, “honour and majesty hast thou laid upon him” suggests that God himself has dressed the king in royal garments.

6. For thou hast made him most blessed for ever:
thou hast made him exceeding glad with thy countenance.

The king has received a blessing that reaches “for ever,” and now the king is “exceeding glad” because he has seen the countenance of God.

7 For the king trusteth in the LORD,
and through the mercy of the most High
he shall not be moved. [i.e. the king will keep the covenants he has made with the Lord.]

The next 5 verses in the psalm are spoken by God to the king. It is easy for us to read them in the context of our own time — and that without much understanding. In the context of our time, these words sound like a battle hymn, whose emphasis is victory in war. But when one recalls that they were written in a time very unlike our own, then they have a different ring altogether. In the days of ancient Israel, there were no police forces that kept one safe as he traveled. People built walls around cities, and the wealthy built fortifications on their own estates. The words in our psalm, and many like them in the psalms and in Isaiah, are promises of protection — of invulnerability — the same kind of invulnerability he promises us, if we keep his commandments.

8 Thine hand shall find out all thine enemies:
thy right hand shall find out those that hate thee.
9. Thou shalt make them as a fiery oven in the time of thine anger:
the LORD shall swallow them up in his wrath, and the fire shall devour them.
10. Their fruit shalt thou destroy from the earth,
and their seed from among the children of men.
11. For they intended evil against thee:
they imagined a mischievous device, which they are not able to perform.
12. Therefore shalt thou make them turn their back,
when thou shalt make ready thine arrows upon thy strings against the face of them.

The final verse is an anthem of praise, sung by the people who sang the first verses of the psalm.

13. Be thou exalted, LORD, in thine own strength:
so will we sing and praise thy power. (Psalms 21:1-13)

I do not know whether this psalm was Alma’s referent in his sermon when he said: “If ye have felt to sing the song of redeeming love, I would ask, can ye feel so now?”

In any case, the psalm provides a relevant context in which one might ask one’s Self that question.

The consequences of one’s not knowing the mysteries of God, and of not keeping one’s eternal covenants, are very severe. Yet, we wander about in this world of darkness, going through life half awake, and uncertain about where and how to walk. After much thought and a good deal of watching other people, I have come to believe I have found the answer to the great question: “As one repents, what should one try to become?” I believe the answer is this: One should seek to be happy — that means to live according to the law of one’s own being – to become again one’s eternal Self and cover that Self with no facade that prevents family and friends from filling one’s life with companionship and joy. I believe that the object of this life is to demonstrate to one’s Self and to God, that what one was at the Council in Heaven, and what one is in this earthly environment are the same — and I believe that the major function of the Holy Ghost is to teach one the truth about who one is, and that the whole purpose of the principles and ordinances of the gospel is to give one the tools to be that.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
HERE IS THAT BIG LONG FOOTNOTE. It is also full of footnotes.

Frederick H. Borsch, after reviewing the symbolism of Adam’s role in the ancient New Year’s enthronement drama, asks,

Who, then, is the Perfect Man imaged from the one above, who yet must himself be saved by passing through the gate and being born again? Of course, in one sense it is this Adam below, but the implications are also vairly strong that this is not really the Primal Man on earth (for there is a way in which the true Man, or at least his counterpart, always seems to remain above). Rather is it the believer, the individual who himself would be saved by following in the way of the First Perfect Man. {4}

Mowinckel asserted that the congregation participated in the events of the drama through the actions of the king.

But both in Ps. cxxxii and in other cultic contexts, Israel’s king generally appears as the representative of the congregation before Yahweh, not as the representative of Yahweh before the congregation. He dances and sings and plays ‘before Yahweh’, and leads the festal procession (2 Sam. vi, 5, 14ff.; cf. Ps. xlii, 5). In the cultic drama he represents David: Yahweh is represented by His holy ark, by the ‘footstool’ before the throne on which He [God] is invisibly seated….
“It is the king who receives Yahweh’s promises, His blessings, and His power; and he transmits them to the community which he represents. {5}

Widengren observed,

…a covenant was made between Yahweh and the king and his people, as well as between the king and his people.” When David was anointed king of all Israel, the people made a covenant with the king, thus, “the king’s enthronement is coupled with the making of a covenant between him and his people. But David’s election by Yahweh to be king also implies a covenant between Yahweh and David.” So the whole foundation of the Kingdom as well as the relationship between God, the king, and the people was based on the principle of obedience to the terms of the covenant. {6}

Aubrey Johnson, during his discussion of Psalm 72, “which is one of the more famous of the so-called royal Psalms,” observed,

The parallelism of the opening line makes it clear that we are here concerned with no simple portrayal of some future scatological [eschatological] figure (although this is not to say that the Psalm is in no way scatological), but with a prayer for the ruling member of an hereditary line of kings which bears every appearance of having been composed for use on his ascension to the throne; and the whole Psalm admirably depicts the literally vital role which it was hoped that he might play in the life of the nation….What is more, it is clear from the outset that the king is both dependent upon and responsible to Yahweh for the right exercise of his power; for his subjects, whatever their status in society, are one and all Yahweh’s people. {7}

In that same study, Johnson commented on Psalm 149.

…Psalm cxlix, which apparently introduces the worshipers as themselves sharing in this ritual performance….What is more, we have to note that they are summoned to sing a ‘new song’; and this, one need hardly say, is a thought which is particularly appropriate to our festival with its exultant anticipation of a new era of universal dominion and national prosperity.{8}

The scriptures focus on the role men played in the ceremonies, but in her study of “Women in Ancient Israel,” Grace Emmerson insists that women also played a vital role.

It is commonplace to remark that male members only of the community were required to attend the three major annual festivals (Exod. 23.17; Deut. 16.16). But difference of obligation does not necessarily imply inequality, and in this case probably arose from practical considerations attendant on the birth and care of children. Certainly Deuteronomy makes it clear that women were present at the festivals, sharing in the rejoicing (Deut. 12.12), and participating in the sacrifices (Deut. 12.1`8). The feasts of weeks and booths are specifically mentioned (Deut. 16.10f., 13f.). This may well represent an advance on earlier law in the direction of equality, a feature which seems to be characteristic of Deuteronomy. This book presents women as participants in the covenant ceremony (Deut. 29.10-13), and consequently under full obligation to observe Yahweh’s law (Deut. 31.12). Equally with men they could be held guilty of transgressing the covenant, for which the penalty was death (Deut. 130-11; 17.2-5). The evidence suggests that it was deuteronomic law which first explicitly brought them within the covenant. The view that women are fully accountable before Yahweh continues in the post-exilic period (2 Chron. 15f.; Neh. 8.2).

Was there discrimination against women within the covenant community? It seems not. Although in general the male head of the household represented the family in the offering of sacrifice, where an individual offering was stipulated a woman was expected personally to fulfill the requirement (Lev. 12.6; 1 Sam. 1.24)….The exceptional consecration entailed under the Nazirite vow was open to women (Num. 6.2-21). Indeed, this passage with its single feminine reference (v.2) is a timely reminder that grammatically masculine forms may be intended in any inclusive sense, and the linguistic convention must not be misunderstood. We may compare also Deut. 29.18ff. Where women are specified inv. 18, but masculine forms are used thereafter in vv. 19f.

The one role in worship from which women were certainly excluded was the priesthood, as also were the majority of men….Female members of priestly families were permitted, however, to eat of the ‘holy things’ set aside for the priests (Lev. 22.13). It is open to debate whether there were women who had an official place in worship. Exod. 38.8 speaks of ‘women who ministered at the door of the tent of meeting’. Although the nature of their service is not clear….Whether officially or not, women shared in cultic worship, dancing, singing and playing musical instruments (Exod. 15.20; Jud. 21.21; Ps. 68.26).

The regular involvement of women in the cult is implied by the strict regulations concerning their ritual purity….Though the examples are few, there are several instances in the Old Testament of women in encounter with God. {9}

Robert Davidson does not mention women apart from men, but implies the same thing.

In Isa. 55.3 there seems to be an attempt to democratize this everlasting Davidic covenant and to transfer its privileges and responsibilities to the community as a whole and thus to ensure that its continuing validity was not permanently tied to the continuance of the Davidic dynasty….Unless we are prepared to see nationalism and particularism as the key to second Isaiah’s thinking, the description of the purpose of this covenant in Isa. 55.4-5 may be interpreted in a universalistic sense. This is also the case with the occurrence of covenant in Isa. 42.6 where Servant-Israel is summoned to be ‘a covenant of the people, and a light to the nations’. Yet this promise of a Davidic covenant for ever could also find a new and rich future within the hope of a Davidic king still to come, who would renew the old royal covenant temporarily annulled by events. {10}

ENDNOTES

{1} Llewelyn R. McKay, Home Memories of President David O. McKay [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1956], 230.

{2} The best book I know about the ceremonial importance of the Israelite king is: Aubrey R. Johnson, Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel (Cardiff, University of Wales Press, 1967) For a discussion of how and when some of the Psalms were used, see Sigmund Mowinckel, translated by A.P. Thomas, The Psalms in Israel’s Worship, 2 Vols., Abingdon, Nashville, 1962, vol. 1, p. 2-3. Also, Johnson, A. R., “Hebrew Conceptions of Kingship,” in S. H. Hooke, ed., Myth, Ritual, and Kingship, Oxford, 1958, p. 215-235.

{3} Widengren quotes Pseudo Clement to further elaborate on the idea of an anointing with the oil from the Tree of Life. He writes,

This idea of an anointing with oil from the Tree of Life is found in a pregnant form in the Ps. Clementine writings, from which some quotations may be given. In the passage concerned, the author (or rather his original source) discusses the problem of the Primordial Man as Messiah. He is represented as stressing the fact that the Primordial Man is the Anointed One:

But the reason of his being called the Messiah (the Anointed One) is that, being the Son of God, he was a man, and that, because he was the first beginning, his father in the beginning anointed him with oil which was from the Tree of Life.

Ps. Clem. Recognitions syriace, ed. Frankenberg, I, 45, 4

Primordial Man, who had received the anointing, thanks to which he had been installed in the threefold office of king, high priest, and prophet, is then paralleled with every man who has received such anointing:

The same, however, is every man who has been anointed with the oil that has been prepared, so that he has been made a participant of that which is possessed of power, even being worth the royal office or the prophet’s office or the high priest’s office. Ps. Clem. Recognitions syriace, ed. Frankenberg, I, 47, 1-3

(Geo Widengren, “Baptism and Enthronement in Some Jewish-Christian Gnostic Documents,” in, S. G. F. Brandon, ed., The Saviour God, Comparative Studies in the Concept of Salvation Presented Edwin Oliver James [New York, Barns & Noble, 1963], 213-214.)

{4 } Frederick H. Borsch, The Son of Man in Myth and History, SCM Press Ltd., London, 1967, p. 184.

{5} Sigmund Mowinckel, He that Cometh (New York: Abingdon Press, 1954), 84. As examples Mowinckel’s footnote gives Psalms 132:11ff; 82; cf. 20:8f; 21:10; and Isaiah 55:3. (The word “cult” has received bad connotations since Mowinckel wrote. It simply means an organization which employs ordinances in its ceremonies. Used that way, the Baptists with their practice of baptism are as cultic as the Mormons with their temple rites.)

{6} Widengren, Geo, “King and Covenant” in Journal of Semitic Studies, Vol. II, No. I, 1957, p. 21-22.

{7} Aubrey R. Johnson, Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel, Cardiff, University of Wales Press, 1967, p. 7-8.

{8} Aubrey R. Johnson, Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel, Cardiff, University of Wales Press, 1967, p. 91.

{9} Grace I. Emmerson, “Women in Ancient Israel,” in R. E. Clements, ed., The World of Ancient Israel, Sociological, Anthropological and Political Perspectives (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989,371-394. This is an exceptionally insightful article which deals with many facets of the woman’s position in ancient Israel. The above quotes are taken from pages 378-379. On page 382 she writes, “Still more significantly, the imagery of marriage is considered appropriate to describe both Yahweh’s love relationship with Israel (Hos. 1-3; Jer. 2.2), and Israel’s joy when redeemed by the Lord (Isa. 62.4f.). Here is the Israelite ideal of marriage, from which in practice many no doubt fell short. The crude idea of ownership is entirely inappropriate here, as it is also in Jer. 31.32. To suggest that a wife was little better than a slave is certainly incorrect.”

{10} Robert Davidson, “Covenant Ideology in Ancient Israel,” in R. E. Clements, ed., The World of Ancient Israel, Sociological, Anthropological and Political Perspectives (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1989), 342-343.