Charles Ellicott Commentary Psalms 16

For in you. —Better, for I have found refuge in you (Psalms 11:1). The verb is in the preterite.

You have said. —The text of this passage is extremely corrupt. This is apparent from:

1. The actual existence of various readings.
2. The variations in the ancient versions, both from the Hebrew and from each other.

It is best to consider Psalms 16:2-3 together first. The consensus of the ancient versions, favoring the first person “I said” instead of “you have said” (the italicized words O my soul, are a mere gloss from the Chaldee), provides the following clear and understandable rendering for Psalms 16:2:

I said to Jehovah, You are my Lord,
I have no good besides you.

Psalms 16:3 also requires emendation, as it is quite unintelligible as it stands. The simplest approach is to omit the conjunction and recognize one of those changes of person so agreeable to Hebrew. The verse would then run as follows:

“And of the saints who are in the earth,
They are the excellent in whom is all my delight.”

The Authorized Version, by inserting “extendeth,” introduces the fine thought that:

“Merit lives from man to man,
And not from man, O God, to You;”

However, this could not have been the thought of the original, since “my good,” as Psalms 16:5-6 show, means “happiness,” not “conduct.”

Their sorrows. —This verse also offers great variation in the ancient versions. The literal text reads: Their sorrows [or, idols] (feminine) are multiplied (masculine); another they hasten [or, change]. I will not pour out their libations from blood, and will not take their names upon my lips. With one or two slight changes in punctuation, this becomes:

“They shall multiply their sorrows
Who change to another god:
I will not pour out their bloody libations,
Nor take their names on my lips.”

At the same time, it seems the psalmist had the common prophetic figure for idolatry—namely, adultery—in his mind. This is suggested by the evident allusion to the curse on Eve in Genesis 3:16 and by the fact that the verb translated “hasten” (compare margin) means “to buy a wife.”

However, because he is not speaking of the Church as a whole, he does not develop this figure as the prophets do, by portraying idolaters as adulteresses.

The “libations of blood” seem to refer to the ghastly rites of Moloch and Chemosh. For the last clause, compare Exodus 23:13. To the Hebrews, the very name of a god included an assertion of his power.

Hence, they avoided even mentioning Baal, instead substituting bosheth (that is, “shameful thing”) for it, even in proper names.

The portion. — There is an allusion here to the Levitical portion (Numbers 18:20): I am thy portion and thine inheritance. The poet, whom we must imagine exiled from his actual inheritance in Canaan, consoles, and more than consoles himself, with the sublime thought that this “better part” could not be taken away from him. Perowne quotes Savonarola’s fine saying, “What must not he possess who possesses the possessor of all!” and St. Paul’s, All things are yours; for ye are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s; which rather recalls Deuteronomy 32:9, where the correlative truth to Numbers 18:20 occurs.

For the figure of the cup, see Psalms 11:6. It had already become a synonym for “condition in life.”

Thou maintainest. — The Hebrew word is peculiar and causes grammatical difficulties, but the sense is clear. God not only disposes (casts) the lot of the man in covenant relation to Him—He does that even for unbelievers—but holds it fast in His hand. (See this use of the verb, Amos 1:5; Amos 1:8; Proverbs 5:5.) At the same time, Hitzig’s conjecture (tômîd for tômîkh), is very plausible, “Thou art ever my lot.”

The lines are fallen unto me. —The allusion is to the “measuring cords” by which allotments of land were measured, and they are said to “fall” possibly because after the measurement the portions were distributed by “lot” (Joshua 17:5; Micah 2:5).