John Calvin Commentary Psalms 8

Whether גתית, Gittith, signifies a musical instrument, some particular tune, or the beginning of some famous and well-known song, I do not take it upon myself to determine. Those who think that the psalm is so called because it was composed in the city of Gath offer a strained and far-fetched explanation of the matter.

Regarding the other three opinions I have mentioned, it is not very important which one is adopted. The main thing to consider is what the psalm itself contains and what its purpose is. David, it is true, contemplates the wonderful power and glory of God in the creation and government of the material universe; but he only briefly touches on this subject, as if in passing, and focuses mainly on the theme of God’s infinite goodness towards us.

The whole order of nature presents us with the most abundant material for displaying the glory of God. However, since we are undoubtedly more powerfully affected by what we ourselves experience, David here, very appropriately, specifically celebrates the special favor God shows towards humankind. For this, of all the subjects we can contemplate, is the brightest mirror in which we can behold His glory.

It is, however, strange that he begins the psalm with an exclamation, since the usual way is first to describe something and then to emphasize its greatness and excellence. But if we remember what is said in other passages of Scripture about the impossibility of expressing God's works in words, we will not be surprised that David, through this exclamation, acknowledges himself incapable of recounting them.

Therefore, when David reflects on the incomprehensible goodness God has graciously bestowed on the human race, and feels all his thoughts and senses overwhelmed by the contemplation, he exclaims that it is a subject worthy of admiration because it cannot be expressed in words.

Besides, the Holy Spirit, who directed David’s tongue, doubtless intended through him to awaken people from their common apathy and indifference, so that they would not content themselves with celebrating God's infinite love and the countless benefits they receive from Him in a meager and cold way, but would instead devote their whole hearts to this holy exercise and exert their utmost efforts in it. This exclamation by David implies that even when all the faculties of the human mind are fully exerted in meditation on this subject, they still fall far short of it.

The name of God, as I interpret it, is to be understood here as the knowledge of God's character and perfections, insofar as He makes Himself known to us. I do not approve of the subtle speculations of those who think the name of God means nothing other than God Himself.

It should rather be referred to the works and properties by which He is known, rather than to His essence. David, therefore, says that the earth is full of the wonderful glory of God, so that its fame or renown not only reaches to the heavens but ascends far above them.

The verb תנה, tenah, has been rendered by some in the preterite tense, hast set, but in my judgment, those who render it in the infinitive mood, to place or to set, provide a more accurate translation. This is because the second clause is simply an amplification of the subject of the first, as if he had said, the earth is too small to contain the glory or the wonderful manifestations of God's character and perfections. According to this view, אשר, asher, will not be a relative pronoun but will have the meaning of the explanatory particle even, which we use to clarify what has preceded.

He now begins to prove the subject he had undertaken to discuss, declaring that the providence of God, in order to make itself known to mankind, does not wait until men arrive at the age of maturity, but even from the very dawn of infancy shines forth so brightly as to be sufficient to refute all the ungodly, who, through their profane contempt of God, would wish to extinguish His very name.

The opinion of some, who think that מפי, mephi, out of the mouth, signifies כפי, kephi, in the mouth, cannot be admitted, because it improperly weakens the emphasis David meant to give to his language and discourse. Therefore, the meaning is that God, in order to commend His providence, does not need the powerful eloquence of rhetoricians, nor even distinct and formed language, because the tongues of infants, although they do not yet speak, are ready and eloquent enough to celebrate it.

But it may be asked, in what sense does he speak of children as the proclaimers of the glory of God? In my judgment, those reason very foolishly who think that this is done when children begin to articulate, because then the intellectual faculty of the soul also shows itself.

Granting that they are called babes, or infants, even until they arrive at their seventh year, how can such persons imagine that those who now speak distinctly are still hanging on the breast? Nor is there any more soundness in the opinion of those who say that the words for babes and sucklings are here used allegorically for the faithful, who, being born again by the Spirit of God, no longer retain the old age of the flesh.

What need, then, is there to wrest the words of David, when their true meaning is so clear and suitable? He says that babes and sucklings are advocates sufficiently powerful to vindicate the providence of God. Why does he not entrust this business to men, if not to show that the tongues of infants, even before they are able to pronounce a single word, speak loudly and distinctly in commendation of God’s liberality towards the human race?

From where is it that nourishment is ready for them as soon as they are born, if not because God wonderfully changes blood into milk? From where, also, do they have the skill to suck, if not because the same God has, by a mysterious instinct, fitted their tongues for this? David, therefore, has the best reason for declaring that even if the tongues of all who have arrived at the age of manhood should become silent, the speechless mouth of infants is sufficiently able to celebrate the praise of God.

And when he not only introduces babes as witnesses and preachers of God’s glory, but also attributes mature strength to their mouth, the expression is very emphatic. It means the same as if he had said: These are invincible champions of God who, when it comes to the conflict, can easily scatter and defeat the whole host of the wicked despisers of God and those who have abandoned themselves to impiety. We should observe against whom he assigns to infants the office of defending the glory of God: namely, against the hardened despisers of God, who dare to rise up against heaven to make war upon God, as the poets said of the giants in ancient times.

Since, therefore, these monsters, with furious violence, pluck up by the roots and overthrow whatever godliness and fear of God there is in the world, and through their audacity endeavor to do violence to heaven itself, David, in mockery of them, brings into the field of battle against them the mouths of infants, which he says are furnished with armor of sufficient strength and endowed with sufficient fortitude to lay their intolerable pride in the dust.

He, therefore, immediately adds, On account of the adversaries. God is not under the necessity of making war with great power to overcome the faithful, who willingly listen to His voice and show ready obedience as soon as He gives the smallest intimation of His will. The providence of God, I confess, shines forth principally for the sake of the faithful, because only they have eyes to behold it. But as they show themselves willing to receive instruction, God teaches them with gentleness, while, on the other hand, He arms Himself against His enemies, who never submit to Him except by constraint.

Some take the word founded as meaning that, in the very birth or generation of man, God lays foundations for manifesting His own glory. But this sense is too restricted. I have no doubt that the word is used for to establish, as if the prophet had said: God does not need strong military forces to destroy the ungodly; instead of these, the mouths of children are sufficient for His purpose.

To put to flight. Interpreters differ with respect to the word השבית, hashebith. It properly signifies to cause to cease, for it is in the conjugation Hiphil of the neuter verb שבת, shabath, which signifies to cease. But it is often taken metaphorically for to destroy or to reduce to nothing, because destruction or death brings to an end.

Others translate it that you may restrain, as if David meant that they were put to silence, so that they desisted from cursing or reviling God. However, as there is here a beautiful allusion to a hostile combat, as I explained a little before, I have preferred the military phrase to put to flight. But it is asked: How does God put to flight His enemies who, by their impious slanders and detractions, do not cease to strike at and violently rush forward to oppose all the proofs of a Divine Providence which daily manifest themselves?

I answer: They are not routed or overthrown in the sense of being compelled to become more humble and unassuming, but rather because, with all their blasphemies and canine barkings, they continue in the state of abasement and confusion to which they have been brought. To express the whole in a few words: as early as the generation or birth of man, the splendor of Divine Providence is so apparent that even infants who hang upon their mothers’ breasts can bring down to the ground the fury of the enemies of God.

Although His enemies may do their utmost, and may even burst with rage a hundred times, it is in vain for them to endeavor to overthrow the strength that manifests itself in the weakness of infancy. A desire of revenge reigns in all unbelievers, while, on the other hand, God governs His own children by the spirit of meekness and benignity. But, according to the scope of the present passage, the prophet applies this epithet, the avenger, to the despisers of God, who are not only cruel towards man but also burn with frantic rage to make war even against God Himself.

I have now discharged the duty of a faithful interpreter in explaining the mind of the prophet. There is only one difficulty remaining: Christ (Matthew 21:16) seems to give this passage a different meaning when He applies it to children ten years old. But this difficulty is easily removed. Christ reasons from the greater to the less in this manner: If God has appointed children even in infancy as the vindicators of His glory, there is no absurdity in His making them the instruments of showing forth His praise by their tongues after they have arrived at the age of seven years and older.

As the Hebrew particle כי, ki, often has the same meaning as because or for, and simply affirms a thing, both the Greek and the Latin fathers have generally read the fourth verse as if it were a complete sentence by itself. But it is, doubtless, closely connected with the following verse; and, therefore, the two verses ought to be joined together.

The Hebrew word כי, ki, might be very properly translated into the disjunctive particle, although, making the meaning to be this: Although the infinite majesty of God shines forth in the heavenly bodies, and justly keeps the eyes of men fixed on the contemplation of it, yet his glory is beheld in a special manner, in the great favor which he has for men, and in the goodness which he manifests towards them.

This interpretation would not be at variance with the scope of the passage; but I prefer to follow the generally received opinion. My readers, however, must be careful to mark the design of the Psalmist, which is to enhance, by this comparison, the infinite goodness of God; for it is, indeed, a wonderful thing that the Creator of heaven, whose glory is so surpassingly great as to fill us with profound admiration, condescends so far as graciously to take upon himself the care of the human race.

That the Psalmist makes this contrast may be inferred from the Hebrew word, אנוש, enosh, which we have rendered man, and which expresses the frailty of man rather than any strength or power he possesses. We see that miserable men, in moving upon the earth, are mingled with the vilest creatures; and, therefore, God, with very good reason, might despise them and reckon them of no account if he were to consider only his own greatness or dignity.

The prophet, therefore, speaking interrogatively, abases their condition, intimating that God’s wonderful goodness is displayed the more brightly because so glorious a Creator, whose majesty shines resplendently in the heavens, graciously condescends to adorn a creature so miserable and vile as man is with the greatest glory, and to enrich him with numberless blessings.

If he wished to exercise his liberality towards any, he was under no necessity of choosing men, who are merely dust and clay, in order to prefer them above all other creatures, since he had a sufficient number in heaven towards whom to show himself liberal. Whoever, therefore, is not astonished and deeply affected at this miracle, is more than ungrateful and stupid.

When the Psalmist calls the heavens God’s heavens, and the works of his fingers, he refers to the same subject and intends to illustrate it. How is it that God comes forth from so noble and glorious a part of his works, and stoops down to us, poor worms of the earth, if it is not to magnify and to give a more illustrious manifestation of his goodness?

From this, also, we learn that those are guilty of a very presumptuous abuse of the goodness of God, who take it as an occasion to be proud of the excellence they possess, as if they had either obtained it by their own skill, or as if they possessed it on account of their own merit. Whereas their origin should rather remind them that it has been gratuitously conferred upon those who are otherwise vile and contemptible creatures, and utterly unworthy of receiving any good from God. Whatever estimable quality, therefore, we see in ourselves, let it stir us up to celebrate the free and undeserved goodness of God in bestowing it upon us.

The verb, at the close of the third verse, which others translate to prepare, or to found, or to establish, I have chosen to translate to arrange; for the Psalmist seems to refer to the very beautiful order by which God has so appropriately distinguished the position of the stars, and daily regulates their course.

When it is said, God is mindful of man, it signifies that he has a fatherly love for him, defends and cherishes him, and extends his providence towards him. Almost all interpreters translate פקד, pakad, the last word of this verse, to visit; and I am unwilling to differ from them, since this sense suits the passage very well.

But as it sometimes signifies to remember, and as we often find in the Psalms the repetition of the same thought in different words, it may here be very properly translated to remember; as if David had said, This is a marvelous thing, that God thinks of men, and remembers them continually.

Thou hast made him little lower. The Hebrew copulative ki, I have no doubt, should be translated as the causal particle for, since the Psalmist confirms what he has just said concerning the infinite goodness of God toward men, by showing Himself near to them and mindful of them.

In the first place, he represents them as adorned with so many honors as to render their condition not far inferior to divine and celestial glory. In the second place, he mentions the external dominion and power which they possess over all creatures, from which it appears how high the degree of dignity is to which God has exalted them.

Indeed, I have no doubt that he intends, by the first, the distinguished endowments which clearly show that men were formed after the image of God and created for the hope of a blessed and immortal life.

The reason with which they are endowed, by which they can distinguish between good and evil; the principle of religion which is planted in them; their social interaction, which is preserved from breaking up by certain sacred bonds; the regard for what is proper, and the sense of shame that guilt awakens in them, as well as their continued governance by laws—all these are clear indications of pre-eminent and celestial wisdom.

David, therefore, not without good reason, exclaims that mankind is adorned with glory and honor. "To be crowned" is used here metaphorically, as if David had said that man is clothed and adorned with marks of honor, which are not far removed from the splendor of the divine majesty.

The Septuagint renders אלהים (Elohim) as angels, and I do not disapprove of this, since this name, as is well known, is often given to angels. I explain David's words to mean the same thing, as if he had said that the condition of men is nothing less than a divine and celestial state. However, as the other translation seems more natural and is almost universally adopted by the Jewish interpreters, I have preferred to follow it.

Nor is it a sufficient objection to this view that the apostle, in his Epistle to the Hebrews (Hebrews 2:7), quoting this passage, says, little less than the angels, and not than God. For we know the freedoms the apostles took in quoting texts of Scripture—not, indeed, to twist them to a meaning different from the true one, but because they considered it sufficient to show, by a reference to Scripture, that what they taught was sanctioned by the word of God, even if they did not quote the precise words. Accordingly, they never hesitated to change the words, as long as the substance of the text remained unchanged.

There is another question which is more difficult to solve. While the Psalmist here discusses the excellency of men, and describes them, in this respect, as approaching God, the apostle applies the passage to the humiliation of Christ. In the first place, we must consider the propriety of applying to the person of Christ what is spoken here concerning all mankind; and, secondly, how we may explain it as referring to Christ being humbled in His death, when He lay without form or beauty, and, as it were, disfigured under the reproach and curse of the cross.

What some say—that what is true of the members may be properly and suitably transferred to the head—might be a sufficient answer to the first question. But I go a step further, for Christ is not only the first begotten of every creature but also the restorer of mankind.

What David here relates belongs properly to the beginning of creation, when human nature was perfect. But we know that, by the fall of Adam, all mankind fell from their primeval state of integrity. For by this, the image of God was almost entirely effaced in us, and we were also stripped of those distinguishing gifts by which we would have been, as it were, elevated to the condition of demigods. In short, from a state of the highest excellence, we were reduced to a condition of wretched and shameful destitution.

In consequence of this corruption, the liberality of God, of which David here speaks, ceased, at least to the extent that it no longer appears in the brilliancy and splendor in which it was manifested when man was in his unfallen state. It is true that it is not altogether extinguished; but, alas, how small a portion of it remains amidst the miserable overthrow and ruins of the fall!

But as the heavenly Father has bestowed upon His Son an immeasurable fullness of all blessings, so that all of us may draw from this fountain, it follows that whatever God bestows upon us through Him belongs by right to Him in the highest degree. Indeed, He Himself is the living image of God, according to which we must be renewed, and upon this renewal depends our participation in the invaluable blessings spoken of here.

Someone might object that David first asked the question, "What is man?" because God has so abundantly poured forth His favor upon such a miserable, contemptible, and worthless creature; and that, by contrast, there is no cause for such admiration of God’s favor toward Christ, who is not an ordinary man but the only begotten Son of God.

The answer is easy, and it is this: What was bestowed upon Christ’s human nature was a free gift. Indeed, even more, the fact that a mortal man, and a son of Adam, is the only Son of God, the Lord of glory, and the head of angels, provides a bright illustration of God's mercy.

At the same time, it should be observed that whatever gifts He has received should be considered as proceeding from the free grace of God, all the more so because they are intended primarily to be conferred upon us. His excellence and heavenly dignity, therefore, are extended to us also, since it is for our sake He is enriched with them.

Therefore, what the apostle says in that passage concerning the abasement of Christ for a short time is not intended by him as an explanation of this text. Instead, for the purpose of enriching and illustrating the subject he is discussing, he introduces and adapts to it what had been spoken in a different sense.

The same apostle did not hesitate, in Romans 10:6, in the same manner to enrich and to employ, in a sense different from their original one, the words of Moses in Deuteronomy 30:12:

Who shall go up for us to heaven and bring it to us, that we may
hear it and do it?

And so on. The apostle, therefore, in quoting this psalm, was not so much focused on what David meant. Instead, making an allusion to these words, Thou hast made him a little lower, and again, Thou hast crowned him with honor, he applies this diminution to the death of Christ, and the glory and honor to His resurrection. A similar explanation can be given for Paul’s declaration in Ephesians 4:8, in which he does not so much explain the meaning of the text (Psalms 68:18) as he devoutly applies it, by way of accommodation, to the person of Christ.

You have set him over. David now comes to the second point, which I have just now spoken of: namely, that from the dominion over all things which God has conferred on mankind, it is evident how great is the love He has had for them, and how highly He has valued them.

As He Himself does not need anything, He has destined all the riches, both of heaven and earth, for their use. It is certainly a unique honor, and one that cannot be fully appreciated, that mortal man, as God's representative, has dominion over the world, as if it belonged to him by right, and that wherever he turns his eyes, he sees nothing lacking that may contribute to the convenience and happiness of his life.

As this passage is quoted by Paul in his First Epistle to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 15:27), where he speaks about the spiritual kingdom of Christ, some may object and say that the meaning he assigns to it is very different from the sense I have given. But it is easy to answer this objection, and the answer I give is this: that generally, the whole order of this world is arranged and established for the purpose of contributing to the comfort and happiness of mankind.

In what way the passage may properly apply to Christ alone, I have already explained a little earlier. The only thing that now remains to be considered is how far this declaration extends—that all things are subjected to mankind. Now, there is no doubt that if there is anything in heaven or on earth that is opposed to mankind, the beautiful order which God had established in the world at the beginning is now thrown into confusion.

The consequence of this is that mankind, after they were ruined by the fall of Adam, were not only deprived of so distinguished and honorable a status and dispossessed of their former dominion, but are also held captive under a degrading and ignominious bondage. Christ, it is true, is the lawful heir of heaven and earth, by whom the faithful recover what they had lost in Adam; but He has not yet actually entered into the full possession of His empire and dominion.

Therefore, the apostle concludes that what David says here will not be perfectly accomplished until death is abolished. Accordingly, the apostle reasons in this manner: “If all things are subdued to Christ, nothing ought to stand in opposition to His people. But we see death still exercising its tyranny against them.

It follows then, that there remains the hope of a better state than the present.” Now, this flows from the principle I have spoken of: that the world was originally created for this purpose, that every part of it should contribute to the happiness of mankind as its primary goal.

In another part of his writings, the apostle argues on the same principle when, to prove that we must all stand at the last day before the judgment seat of Christ, he brings forward the following passage: Unto me every knee shall bow (Romans 14:10). In this syllogism, what logicians call the minor proposition must be supplied: namely, that there are still too many who proudly and obstinately cast off His yoke and are averse to bowing the knee as a sign of their submission to Him.