Albert Barnes Commentary Psalms 16

Preserve me, O God - Keep me; guard me; save me. This language implies that there was imminent danger of some kind - perhaps, as the subsequent part of the psalm would seem to indicate, danger of death. See (Psalms 16:8–10). The idea here is, that God was able to preserve him from the impending danger, and that he might hope he would do it.

For in thee do I put my trust - That is, my hope is in you. He had no other reliance than God; but he had confidence in him - he felt assured that there was safety there.

O my soul, thou hast said unto the Lord - The words “O my soul” are not in the original. A literal rendering of the passage would be, “You have said to the Lord,” etc., leaving something to be supplied. De Wette renders it: “To Yahweh I call; you are my Lord.” Luther: “I have said to the Lord.” The Latin Vulgate: “You, my soul, have said to the Lord.” The Septuagint: “I have said unto the Lord.” Dr. Horsley: “I have said unto Jehovah.”

The speaker evidently is the psalmist. He is describing his feelings toward the Lord, and the idea is equivalent to the expression “I have said to the Lord.” Some word must necessarily be understood, and our translators have probably expressed the true sense by inserting the words, “O my soul.”

The state of mind indicated is one where a person carefully examines themselves—their own perils and their own basis for hope. It is when they find within themselves a just confidence that they have placed their trust in God, and in God alone. We have such a form of appeal in (Psalms 42:5), (Psalms 42:11), and (Psalms 43:5), Why art thou cast down, O my soul?

Thou art my Lord - You have a right to rule over me; or, I acknowledge you as my Lord, my sovereign. The word here is not Yahweh, but Adonai—a word of more general significance than Yahweh. The sense is, I have acknowledged Yahweh to be my Lord and my God. I receive him and rest upon him as such.

My goodness extendeth not to thee - This passage has been rendered in various ways. Prof. Alexander translates it: “My good (is) not besides you (or, beyond you);” meaning, as he supposes: “My happiness is not beside you, independent of, or separable from you?” So DeWette: “There is no success (or good fortune) to me out of you.” Others render it: “My goodness is not such as to entitle me to your regard.” And others, “My happiness is not obligatory or incumbent on you; you are not bound to provide for it.” The Latin Vulgate renders it: “My good is not given unless by you.” Dr. Horsley: “You are my good - not besides you.”

I think the meaning is: “My good is nowhere except in you; I have no source of good of any kind—happiness, hope, life, safety, salvation—but in you. My good is not without you.”

This accords with the idea in the other member of the sentence, where he acknowledges Yahweh as his Lord. In other words, he found in Yahweh all that is implied in the idea of an object of worship—all that is properly expressed by the notion of a God. He renounced all other gods, and found his happiness—his all—in Yahweh.

But to the saints that are in the earth - This verse has also been interpreted very differently. Our translators seem to have understood it, in connection with the previous verse, as meaning that his “goodness,” or piety, was not of so pure and elevated a character that it could in any way extend to God to benefit Him, but that it could be of service to the saints on earth, and that in this way, by benefiting them, he might show his attachment to God Himself. But if the interpretation of the previous verse proposed above is the correct one, then this interpretation cannot be accepted here.

This verse is probably to be regarded as a further statement of the evidence of the psalmist’s attachment to God. In the previous verse, according to the interpretation proposed, he states that his happiness—his all—was centered in God. He had no hope of anything except in Him; none beyond Him; none besides Him.

In this verse he states, as a further proof of his attachment to Him, that he regarded with deep affection the saints of God; that he found his happiness, not in the society of the wicked, but in the friendship of the excellent of the earth. The verse may be rendered this way: “As to the saints in the earth (or in respect to the saints in the earth), and to the excellent, all my delight is in them.”

In the former verse he had stated that, as to God, or in respect to God, he had no source of blessing, no hope, no joy, beyond Him, or independent of Him. In this verse, he says that in respect to the saints—the excellent of the earth—all his delight was in them. Thus, he was conscious of true attachment to God and to His people.

Thus, he had what must always be the essential evidence of true piety: a feeling that God is all in all, and real love for those who are His; a feeling that there is nothing beyond God, or without God, that can meet the wants of the soul, and a sincere affection for all who are His friends on earth.

DeWette has well expressed the sense of the passage: “The holy, who are in the land, and the noble—I have all my pleasure in them.”

In the earth - In the land; or, perhaps, more generally, ‘on earth.’ God was in heaven, and all his hopes there were in Him. In respect to those who dwelt on the earth, his delight was with the saints alone.

And to the excellent - The word used here properly means “large, great,” mighty; then it is applied to “nobles, princes, chiefs;” and then to those who excel in moral qualities, in piety, and virtue. This is the idea here, and so it corresponds with the word “saints” in the first part of the verse. The idea is that he found his pleasure, not in the rich and the great, not in princes and nobles, but in those who were distinguished for virtue and piety. In heaven he had no one but God; on earth he found his happiness only in those who were the friends of God.

In whom is all my delight - I find all my happiness in their society and friendship. The true state of my heart is indicated by my love for them. Everywhere, and at all times, love for those who love God, and a disposition to find our happiness in their friendship, will be a characteristic of true piety.

Their sorrows shall be multiplied - The word here translated “sorrows”—Hebrew עצבוּת (‛atstsebôth)—may mean either idols or sorrows. (Psalms 139:24; Job 9:28; Psalms 147:3). Some propose to translate it, “Their idols are multiplied;” that is, many are the gods whom others worship, while I worship one God only. Gesenius understands it this way, and the Aramaic Paraphrase also translates it thus. But the common interpretation is probably the correct one. This view means that sorrow, pain, and anguish must always accompany the worship of any gods other than the true God. Therefore, the psalmist would not be found among their number or united with them in their devotions.

That hasten after another god - Professor Alexander translates this, “Another they have purchased.” Dr. Horsley translates it, “Who betroth themselves to another.” The Septuagint, “After these things they are in haste.” The Latin Vulgate, “Afterward they make haste.” The Hebrew word—מהר (mâhar)—properly means to hasten; to be quick, prompt, inclined. It is used twice (Exodus 22:16) in the sense of “buying or endowing”—that is, procuring a wife by a price paid to her parents—but the common meaning of the word is to hasten, and this is clearly the sense here. The idea is that the persons referred to show a readiness or willingness to forsake the true God and to serve other gods.

Their conduct shows that they do not hesitate to do this when it is proposed to them; they embrace the first opportunity to do it. Men hesitate and delay when it is proposed to them to serve the true God; they readily embrace an opposite course—following the world and sin.

Their drink-offerings of blood - It was usual to pour out a drink-offering of wine or water in the worship of idol gods, and even of the true God. Thus Jacob (Genesis 35:14) is said to have set up a pillar in Padan-aram and to have poured a drink-offering thereon. (Exodus 30:9; Leviticus 23:13; Numbers 15:5).

The phrase “drink-offerings of blood” would seem to imply that the blood of the animals slain in sacrifice was often mixed with the wine or water that was poured out in the services of the pagan gods. Jarchi, Aben Ezra, and Michaelis suppose this. It would also seem that the worshippers themselves drank this mixed cup. According to DeWette, they did this when they bound themselves by a solemn oath to perform any dangerous service. The eating, and consequently the drinking, of blood was solemnly forbidden to the Israelites (Leviticus 3:17; Leviticus 7:26; Leviticus 17:10). The idea here is that the psalmist had solemnly resolved that he would not partake of the abominations of the pagans or be united with them in any way in their worship.

Nor take up their names into my lips - As objects of worship. That is, I will not in any way acknowledge them as gods or render to them the homage that is due to God. The very mention of the name of any other god than the true God was solemnly forbidden by the law of Moses (Exodus 23:13): And make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of your mouth. So the apostle Paul says (Ephesians 5:3): But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not once be named among you, as becometh saints. The idea in these passages seems to be that the mere mention of these things would tend to produce a dangerous familiarity with them, and through such familiarity, something of the repugnance and horror with which they should be regarded would be diminished. They were, in other words, to be utterly avoided; they were never to be thought of or named; they were to be treated as though they were not.

No one can safely familiarize himself with vice so much as to make it a frequent subject of conversation. Pollution will flow into the heart from words that describe pollution, even when there is no intention that the use of such words should produce contamination. No one can be familiar with stories or songs of a polluted nature and still retain a pure heart. “The very passage of a polluted thought through the mind leaves pollution behind it.” How much more is the mind polluted when the thought is dwelled upon, and when it is given utterance in language!

The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance - In contradistinction from idols. The margin here is, “of my part.” The word properly means “lot, portion, part;” and is applicable to the portion of booty or plunder that fell to anyone, or to the portion of land that belonged to anyone in the division of an estate (2 Kings 9:10; 2 Kings 9:36–37). The meaning here is that Yahweh was the being whom the psalmist worshipped as God, and that he sought no possession or comfort which did not proceed from him.

And my cup - The allusion here is to what we drink; and hence, the term is used in the sense of “lot” or “portion.” See the notes at (Isaiah 51:17). Compare the notes at (Psalms 11:6). The idea here is this: “The cup that I drink—that cheers, refreshes, and sustains me—is the Lord. I find comfort, refreshment, happiness, in him alone; not in the intoxicating bowl, not in sensual joys, but in God—in his being, perfections, friendship.”

Thou maintainest my lot - You defend my portion, or that which is allotted to me. The reference is to what he specifies in the following verse as his inheritance, and he says that that which was so valuable to him was sustained or preserved by God. He was the portion of his soul; he was the source of all his joy; he maintained or preserved all that was dear to his heart.