John Calvin Commentary Psalms 62:11

"God hath spoken once, Twice have I heard this, That power belongeth unto God." — Psalms 62:11 (ASV)

God hath spoken once. The Psalmist considered that the only effective method of drawing the minds of men away from the vain delusions in which they are inclined to trust was bringing them to acquiesce implicitly and firmly in the judgment of God. Usually, they are swayed in different directions, or at least inclined to waver, just as they observe things changing in the world; but he presents to them a surer principle for the regulation of their conduct when he recommends a deferential regard for God’s Word.

God himself dwells in the light which is inaccessible (1 Timothy 6:16); and since no one can come to him except by faith, the Psalmist calls our attention to his word, in which he testifies to the truth of his divine and righteous government of the world. It is of great consequence that we are established in the belief of God’s Word, and we are here directed to the unerring certainty that belongs to it.

The passage allows for two interpretations; but its scope is plainly this: that God acts consistently with himself and can never swerve from what he has said. Many understand David to say that God had spoken once and a second time, and that by this explicit and repeated assertion of his power and mercy, he had confirmed the truth beyond all possibility of contradiction.

There is a passage much to the same effect in Job 33:14, where the same words are used, only the conjunction is interposed. However, if anyone should prefer it, I have no objections to the other meaning: God has spoken once; twice have I heard this.

This interpretation agrees with the context and suggests a practical lesson of great importance. For when God has once issued his word, he never retracts. On the other hand, it is our duty to ponder on what he has said, long and deliberately. David’s meaning, in this case, would be that he considered the Word of God as a decree, steadfast and irreversible, but that, regarding his own engagement with it, he meditated upon it again and again, lest the passage of time might obliterate it from his memory.

But the simpler and preferable reading seems to be that God had spoken once and again. There is no force in the ingenious conjecture that allusion may be made to God’s having spoken once in the Law and a second time in the Prophets. Nothing more is meant than that the truth referred to had been amply confirmed, as it is usual to consider anything certain and fixed that has been repeatedly announced.

Here, however, it must be remembered that every word that may have issued forth from God is to be received with implicit authority, and no support given to the abominable practice of refusing to accept a doctrine unless it can be supported by two or three texts of Scripture. This has been defended by an unprincipled heretic among us, who has attempted to subvert the doctrine of a free election and of a secret providence.

It was not David’s intention to say that God was bound by the necessity of repeating what he might choose to announce, but simply to assert the certainty of a truth that had been declared in clear and unambiguous terms. In the context that follows, he himself exemplifies that deferential reverence and regard for the word of God that all should extend to it, but which so few actually do.

We might now put together, in a connected form, the particular doctrines that he has singled out for special notice. It is essential, if we would fortify our minds against temptation, to have suitably exalted views of the power and mercy of God, since nothing will more effectively preserve us on a straight and undeviating course than a firm persuasion that all events are in the hand of God, and that he is as merciful as he is mighty.

Accordingly, David follows up what he had said on the subject of the deference to be given to the word, by declaring that he had been instructed by it in the power and goodness of God. Some understand him to say that God possesses power to deliver his people and of clemency inclining him to exercise it.

But he seems rather to mean that God is strong to restrain the wicked and crush their proud and nefarious designs, but ever mindful of his goodness in protecting and defending his own children.

The person who disciplines himself to the contemplation of these two attributes—which ought never to be separated in our minds from the idea of God—is certain to stand erect and immovable under the fiercest assaults of temptation. While, on the other hand, by losing sight of the all-sufficiency of God (which we are too apt to do), we leave ourselves open to be overwhelmed in the first encounter.

The world’s opinion of God is that he sits in heaven, an idle and unconcerned spectator of passing events.

Need we wonder that people tremble under every misfortune when they thus believe themselves to be the sport of blind chance?

No security can be felt unless we satisfy ourselves of the truth of divine superintendence and can commit our lives and all that we have to the hands of God.

The first thing we must look to is his power, so that we may have a thorough conviction of his being a sure refuge to those who cast themselves upon his care.

With this, confidence in his mercy must be joined to prevent those anxious thoughts that might otherwise arise in our minds.

These may suggest the doubt: What though God governs the world? Does it follow that he will concern himself about such unworthy objects as ourselves?

There is an obvious reason, then, for the Psalmist coupling these two things together: his power and his clemency.

They are the two wings with which we fly upwards to heaven, the two pillars on which we rest and may defy the surges of temptation.

In short, if danger springs up from any quarter, then let us simply call to remembrance that divine power which can banish all harms; and as this sentiment prevails in our minds, our troubles cannot fail to fall prostrate before it.

Why should we fear—how can we be afraid—when the God who covers us with the shadow of his wings is the same who rules the universe with his nod, holds in secret chains the devil and all the wicked, and effectively overrules their designs and intrigues?

The Psalmist adds, Thou wilt certainly render to every man according to his work. And here he brings what he said to bear still more closely upon the point that he would establish, declaring that the God who governs the world by his providence will judge it in righteousness. The expectation of this, duly cherished, will have a beneficial effect in composing our minds, allaying impatience, and checking any disposition to resent and retaliate for our injuries.

In resting himself and others before the great judgment seat of God, he would both encourage his heart in the hope of that deliverance that was coming and teach himself to despise the insolent persecution of his enemies, when he considered that every person’s work was to come into judgment before Him, who can no more cease to be Judge than deny himself.

We can therefore rest assured, however severe our wrongs may be, though wicked men should consider us the filth and the offscourings of all things, that God is witness to what we suffer, will intervene in due time, and will not disappoint our patient expectation.

From this and passages of a similar kind, Papists have argued, in defense of their doctrine, that justification and salvation depend upon good works; but I have already exposed the fallacy of their reasoning.

No sooner is mention made of works than they seize upon the expression as amounting to a statement that God rewards men based on merit. It is with a very different design than to encourage any such opinion that the Spirit promises a reward to our works—it is to encourage us in the ways of obedience, and not to inflame that impious self-confidence that cuts up salvation by the very roots.

According to the judgment that God forms of the believer’s works, their worth and valuation depend, first, upon the free pardon extended to him as a sinner, by which he becomes reconciled to God; and, next, upon the divine condescension and indulgence that accepts his services, notwithstanding all their imperfections.

We know that none of our works can be considered perfect or pure in the sight of God, and without taint of sin.

Any recompense they receive must therefore be traced entirely to his goodness.

Since the Scriptures promise a reward to the saints with the sole intention of stimulating their minds and encouraging them in the divine warfare—and not with the remotest design of detracting from the mercy of God—it is absurd for Papists to allege that they, in any sense, merit what is bestowed upon them.

As regards the wicked, no one will dispute that the punishment awarded to them as violators of the law is strictly deserved.