Albert Barnes Commentary Psalms 16:10

"For thou wilt not leave my soul to Sheol; Neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption." — Psalms 16:10 (ASV)

For you will not leave - The language used here implies, of course, that what is here called the soul would be in the abode to which the name hell is given, but how long it would be there is not indicated. The thought simply is that it would not be left there; it would not be allowed to remain there. Whether it would be restored to life again in a few days, or after a longer period, is not implied in the term used. It would be fulfilled, though, as in the case of the Lord Jesus, the resurrection should occur in three days; or though, as in the case of David, it would occur only after many ages; or though, as Abraham believed of Isaac if he was offered as a sacrifice (Hebrews 11:19), he should be restored to life at once. In other words, there is no reference in this language to time.

It is only to the fact that there would be a restoration to life.

My soul - DeWette renders this, my life. The Hebrew word—נפשׁ nephesh—which occurs very frequently in the Scriptures, properly means breath; then, the vital spirit, life; then, the rational soul, the mind; then, an animal, or animated thing—that which lives; then, oneself. Which of these senses is the true one here must be determined from the connection.

The meaning could probably be determined by a person asking themselves what they would think of if they used similar language of themselves: "I am about to die; my flesh will go down to the grave and will rest in hope—the hope of a resurrection; my breath—my soul—will depart, and I shall be dead. But that life, that soul, will not be extinct: it will not be left in the grave, the abode of the dead; it will live again, live on forever." Therefore, it seems to me that the language here would embrace the immortal part—that which is distinct from the body—and that the word used here may be properly understood of the soul as we understand that word.

The psalmist probably understood by it that part of his nature which was not mortal or decaying; that which properly constituted his life.

In hell - —לשׁאול lish^e'ôl—to Sheol. (Isaiah 5:14). This word does not necessarily mean hell in the sense in which that term is now commonly used, as denoting the abode of the wicked in the future world, or the place of punishment. Instead, it means the region or abode of the dead, to which the grave was regarded as the door or entrance—the underworld.

The idea is that the soul would not be allowed to remain in that underworld—that dull, gloomy abode ()—but would rise again to light and life. This language, however, gives no sanction to the words used in the creed, he descended into hell, nor to the opinion that Christ went down personally to preach to the spirits in prison—the souls that are lost (compare 1 Peter 3:19). Instead, it is language derived from the prevailing opinion that the soul, through the grave, descended to the underworld—to the abodes where the dead were supposed still to reside . As a matter of fact, the soul of the Savior at his death entered into paradise. .

Neither will you suffer - literally, you will not give; that is, he would not give him over to corruption, or would not allow him to return to corruption.

Your Holy One - . The reading here in the text is in the plural form, your holy ones; the marginal reading in the Hebrew, or the Qeri, is in the singular, your Holy One. The singular form is followed by the Aramaic Paraphrase, the Latin Vulgate, the Septuagint, the Arabic, and in the New Testament (Acts 2:27). The Masoretes have also pointed the text as if it were in the singular. Many manuscripts and earlier editions of the Bible, and all the ancient versions, read it in the same manner. Therefore, it is probable that this is the true reading.

The Hebrew word rendered holy one—חסיד châsı̂yd—properly means kind, benevolent, liberal, good, merciful, gracious, pious (Gesenius, Lexicon). It would be applicable to any persons who are pious or religious, but it is here restricted to the one whom the psalmist had in view—if the psalm referred to himself, then to himself; if to the Messiah, then to him. The term is several times given to the Savior as being especially adapted to him (Luke 4:34; Acts 3:14). It is applied to him as being eminently holy, or as being one whom God regarded as especially his own. As the passage here is expressly applied to him in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 2:27), there can be no doubt that it was intended by the Spirit of inspiration to designate him in this place, whatever reference it may have had primarily to David himself.

To see - That is, to experience; to be acquainted with. The word is often used to denote perceiving, learning, or understanding anything by experience. Thus, to see life (Ecclesiastes 9:9); to see death (Psalms 89:48); to see sleep (Ecclesiastes 8:16); to see famine (Jeremiah 5:12); to see good (Psalms 34:12); to see affliction (Lamentations 3:1); to see evil (Proverbs 27:12). Here it means that he would not experience corruption; or would not return to corruption.

Corruption - —שׁחת shachath. This word is frequently used in the Scriptures. It is translated ditch in (Job 9:31; Psalms 7:15); corruption (as here) in (Job 17:14; Psalms 49:9; Jonah 2:6); pit in (Job 33:18, 24, 28, 30; Psalms 9:15; Psalms 30:9; Psalms 35:7; Proverbs 26:27; Isaiah 38:17; Isaiah 51:14; Ezekiel 19:4; Ezekiel 28:8); grave in (Job 33:22); and destruction in (Psalms 55:23). Therefore, the common idea, according to our translators, is the grave, or a pit. The derivation seems not to be certain.

Gesenius supposes that it is derived from שׁוח shûach—to sink or settle down; hence, a pit or the grave. Others derive it from שׁחת shāchath—not used in Qal, to destroy. The verb is used in various forms frequently, meaning to destroy, to ruin, to lay waste. It is translated here by the Latin Vulgate, “corruptionem;” by the Septuagint, διαφθοράν diaphthoran—corruption; by the Arabic in the same way.

The same word used by the Septuagint is also used in quoting the passage in the New Testament, where the argument of Peter (Acts 2:27) and of Paul (Acts 13:35–37) is founded on the supposition that such is the sense of the word here. It does not mean merely the pit, or the grave; the idea in the psalm is not that the person referred to would not go down to the grave, or would not die, but that he would not decay back to dust in the grave, or that the change would not occur to him in the grave which happens to those who lie long in the tomb.

Peter and Paul both regard this as a distinct prophecy that the Messiah would be raised from the grave without returning to corruption. They argue from the fact that David did return to corruption in the grave like other men, that the passage could not have referred mainly to himself. Instead, it had a proper fulfillment, and its highest fulfillment, in the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. The believer in the inspiration of Peter and Paul is bound to defend this interpretation, and in reference to this it may be remarked:

1. That it cannot be demonstrated that this is not the meaning of the word. The word may be as fairly derived from the verb 'to corrupt' as from the verb 'to sink down,' and, indeed, more naturally and more obviously. The grammatical form would rather suggest this derivation than the other.
2. It is a fair construction of the original word. It is such a construction as may be put upon it without any forced application, or any design to defend a theory or an opinion. In other words, it is not a mere catch, or a grasp at a possible meaning of the word, but it is a rendering which, on every principle of grammatical construction, may be regarded as a fair interpretation. Whatever may have been the exact idea in David's mind—whether he understood this as referring only to himself and to the belief that he would not always remain in the grave and under the power of corruption; or whether he understood it as referring primarily to himself, and ultimately and mainly to the Messiah; or whether he understood it as referring solely to the Messiah; or whether he did not at all understand the language which the Holy Spirit led him to use (compare 1 Peter 1:11–12)—it is equally true that the sense which the apostles put on the words, in their application of the passage to the Messiah, is a suitable one.
3. The ancient versions, as has been seen above, confirm this. Without an exception, they give the sense of corruption—the very sense which has been given to the word by Peter and Paul. The authors of these versions had no theory to defend, and it may be presumed that they had a just knowledge of the true meaning of the Hebrew word.
4. It may be added that this interpretation accords with the connection in which the word occurs. Though it may be admitted that the connection would not necessarily lead to this view, this interpretation is in entire harmony with the statements in the previous verses and in the following verse. Thus, in the previous verse, the psalmist had said that his flesh would rest in hope,—a sentiment which accords with either the idea that he would at some future period be raised from the grave and would not perish forever (though the period of the resurrection might be remote), or with the idea of being raised up so soon that the body would not return to corruption (that is, before the change consequent on death would take place).

Therefore, I infer that the apostles Peter and Paul made a legitimate use of this passage. The argument which they urged was derived from a proper interpretation of the language. The fair construction of the psalm, and the fact that David had returned to corruption, fully justified them in the application which they made of the passage. Therefore, it was the design of the Holy Spirit to convey the idea that the Messiah would be raised from the dead without undergoing the change which others undergo in the grave. It was thus predicted in the Old Testament that he would be raised from the dead in the manner in which he was.