John Calvin Commentary Psalms 58

Do ye indeed speak righteousness? In putting this question to his enemies by way of challenge, David displays the boldness of conscious rectitude. It argues that the justice of our cause is demonstratively evident when we venture to appeal to the opposing party himself; for if there were any ground to question its justice, it would show an absurd degree of confidence to challenge the testimony of an adversary.

David comes forward with the openness of one who was supported by a sense of his integrity and repels, by a declaration forced from their own lips, the base charges with which they blackened his character in the estimation of those who were simple enough to believe them. “You yourselves,” as if he had said, “can attest my innocence and yet persecute me with groundless slanders. Are you not ashamed of such gross and gratuitous oppression?”

It is necessary, however, to determine who they were whom David here accuses. He calls them a congregation, and again, sons of men. The Hebrew word אלם, elem, which I have rendered congregation, some consider to be an epithet applied to righteousness and translate it as dumb; but this does not express the meaning of the Psalmist.

Interpreters differ as to what we should understand by the term congregation. Some think that he alludes, by way of accusation, to the meetings his enemies held (as is usual with those who entertain wicked designs) for the purpose of concerting their plans. I am more inclined to the opinion of those who believe that he here gives (although only in courtesy) the usual title of honor to the counselors of Saul, who met professedly to consult for the good of the nation but, in reality, with no other intention than to accomplish his destruction.

Others read, in the congregation — a translation that gives the same meaning to the passage we have already assigned to it, but is not supported by the natural construction of the words. The congregation David addresses is that assembly Saul convened, ostensibly for lawful objects, but really for the oppression of the innocent.

The term sons of men, which he immediately afterwards applies to them — taking back, as it were, the title of courtesy formerly given — would seem to be used in contempt of their character, as they were a band of public robbers rather than a convention of judges.

Some, however, may believe that in employing this expression, David had in mind the universality of the opposition that confronted him — almost the whole people inclining to this wicked faction — and that he here issues a magnanimous defiance to the multitude of his enemies. Meanwhile, the lesson taught us by the passage is apparent.

Although the whole world is set against the people of God, they do not need to fear, so long as they are supported by a sense of their integrity, to challenge kings and their counselors, and the indiscriminate mob of the people. Should the whole world refuse to hear us, we must learn, by the example of David, to rest satisfied with the testimony of a good conscience and with appealing to the tribunal of God. Augustine, who only had the Greek version available, is led by this verse into a subtle disquisition on the point that the judgment of men is usually correct when called to decide upon general principles but fails egregiously in the application of these principles to particular cases, through the blinding and warping influences of their evil passions. All this may be plausible and, in its own place, useful, but it proceeds upon a complete misapprehension of the meaning of the passage.

Yea, rather, in heart you plot wickedness. In the former verse he complained of the gross shamelessness manifested in their conduct. Now he charges them both with entertaining wickedness in their thoughts and practicing it with their hands. I have accordingly translated the Hebrew article אף, aph, yea, rather—for it is evident that David proceeds, after first repelling the calumnies of his enemies, to the further step of challenging them with the sins they had themselves committed.

The second clause of the verse may be rendered in two different ways: you weigh violence with your hands, or, your hands weigh violence; and as the meaning is the same, it is immaterial which the reader may adopt. Some think that he uses the figurative expression to weigh in allusion to the pretense of equity under which he was persecuted, as if he were considered a disturber of the peace and chargeable with treason and defiance towards the king. In all probability, his enemies glossed over their oppression with plausible pretenses, such as hypocrites are never slow to discover. But the Hebrew word פלס, phalas, admits of a wider signification, to frame or set in order; and nothing more may be meant than that they put into shape the sins which they had first conceived in their thoughts. It is added, upon the earth, to denote the unbridled license of their wickedness, which was done openly, and not in places where concealment might have been practiced.

They are estranged, being wicked from the womb. To emphasize the severity of their character, he points to the fact that they were not recent sinners, but individuals born to commit sin. We see some people, whose disposition is otherwise not so depraved, who are drawn into evil ways through thoughtlessness, bad example, the enticement of their appetites, or similar circumstances; but David accuses his enemies of being imbued with wickedness from the womb, alleging that their treachery and cruelty were born with them.

We all come into the world stained with sin, possessing, as Adam’s descendants, an essentially depraved nature, and, in ourselves, incapable of aiming for anything good. However, there is a hidden restraint upon most people which prevents them from going to every extreme in wickedness.

The stain of original sin clings to all humanity without exception. Yet, experience proves that some are characterized by modesty and decency in outward behavior, that others are wicked but still within moderate limits, while a third class are so depraved in disposition as to be intolerable members of society.

Now, it is this excessive wickedness—so pronounced that it cannot escape condemnation even amid the general corruption of humanity—which David ascribes to his enemies. He brands them as monsters of iniquity.

Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder. He continues his description; and, though he might have insisted on the fierceness which characterized their opposition, he charges them more particularly, here as elsewhere, with the malicious virulence of their disposition. Some read, their fury; but this does not suit the figure by which they are here compared to serpents.

No objection can be drawn to the translation we have adopted from the etymology of the word, which is derived from heat. It is well known that while some poisons kill by cold, others consume the vital parts by a burning heat. David then asserts of his enemies, in this passage, that they were as full of deadly malice as serpents are full of poison.

To more emphatically express their consummate subtlety, he compares them to deaf serpents, which shut their ears against the voice of the charmer — not the common kind of serpents, but such as are famed for their cunning and are on their guard against every artifice of that description.

But is there such a thing, it may be asked, as enchantment? If there were not, it might seem absurd and childish to draw a comparison from it, unless we suppose David to speak in mere accommodation to mistaken, though generally received, opinion. He would certainly seem, however, to insinuate that serpents can be fascinated by enchantment; and I can see no harm in granting it.

The Marsi in Italy were believed by the ancients to excel in the art. Had there been no enchantments practiced, where was the necessity of their being forbidden and condemned under the Law? (Deuteronomy 18:11). I do not mean to say that there is an actual method or art by which fascination can be effected.

It was doubtless done by a mere sleight of Satan, whom God has suffered to practice his delusions upon unbelieving and ignorant men, although he prevents him from deceiving those who have been enlightened by his word and Spirit. But we may avoid all occasion for such curious inquiry by adopting the view already referred to: that David here borrows his comparison from a popular and prevailing error. According to this view, he is to be understood as merely saying that no kind of serpent was imbued with greater craft than his enemies, not even the species (if such there were) which guards itself against enchantment.

Break their teeth, O God! in their mouth. From this part of the psalm, he assumes the language of imprecation and implores the vengeance of God, whose unique prerogative it is to repel oppression and vindicate injured innocence. It is necessary, however, that we consider the manner in which this is done.

He does not claim the judgment or patronage of God for his cause until he had first asserted his integrity and stated his complaint against the malicious conduct of his enemies, for God can never be expected to take up a cause that is unworthy of defense. In the verse before us, he prays that God would crush the wicked and restrain the violence of their rage.

By their teeth, he implies that they resembled wild beasts in their desire to rend and destroy the victims of their oppression. This is shown more clearly in the latter part of the verse, where he likens them to lions. The comparison denotes the fury with which they were bent on his destruction.

In the next verse, and in the several succeeding verses, he pursues the same purpose, employing a variety of apt comparisons. He prays that God would make them flow away like waters, that is, swiftly. The expression indicates the greatness of his faith. His enemies were before his eyes in all the array of their numbers and resources; he saw that their power was deeply rooted and firmly established; the whole nation was against him and seemed to rise up before him like a hopeless and formidable barrier of rocky mountains.

Praying that this solid and immense opposition should melt down and disappear demonstrated considerable courage. Such an outcome could only appear credible to one who had learned to exalt the power of God above all intervening obstacles.

In the comparison that immediately follows, he prays that his adversaries' attempts would be frustrated, meaning that when they bent their bows, their arrows would fall powerless, as if broken.

Driven as they were by relentless cruelty, he requests that God would thwart their undertakings. In this, we are again called to admire his unshaken courage, which allowed him to see the formidable preparations of his enemies as completely at God's disposal, and their entire power as lying at His feet.

Let his example in this regard be considered.

Let us not cease to pray, even after the arrows of our enemies have been fitted to the string and destruction might seem inevitable.