Property: Text
From Psalms: Layer by Layer
"Text" is a predefined property that represents text of arbitrary length and is provided by Semantic MediaWiki. This property is pre-deployed (also known as special property) and comes with additional administrative privileges but can be used just like any other user-defined property.
P
* The clause in v. 30a seems incomplete: "I will make/put his offspring forever." There are three ways to resolve the difficutly.
#Assume some kind of elision. E.g., KJV: "His seed also will I make ''to endure'' for ever;" Radak: "I will put his offspring in power forever" (במלכות אשים זרעו לעד).
#Interpret לָעַד not as an adverbial but as the predicate complement of the שִׂים construction: "I will make his offspring perpetual." Cf. Jerome: et ponam perpetuum semen eius; Symmachus: καὶ ποιήσω διηνεκὲς τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ.
#Interpret the verb שִׂים to mean "establish." E.g., "I will establish his offspring forever" (ESV, cf. NIV, ELB, GNB, ZÜR; so BDB, DCH; cf. Exod 15:25; Deut 12:5; Josh 24:25; Isa 44:7; Ps 104:9; see esp. 2 Sam 23:5—בְרִ֨ית עֹולָ֜ם שָׂ֣ם לִ֗י). This last option is the most likely. It does not require any elision, and it allows us to interpret לָעַד according to its normal sense and שִׂים according to a fairly well-attested sense. Note also the parallel clause in v. 5: "I will establish his offspring" (אָכִין זַרְעֶךָ).
# Another option worth mentioning is that לָעַד might be revocalized to לְעֵד: "I will make his offspring a witness," anticipating the "witness" language in v. 38b.
+
* The clause in v. 30a seems incomplete: "I will make/put his offspring forever." There are three ways to resolve the difficutly.
#Assume some kind of elision. E.g., KJV: "His seed also will I make ''to endure'' for ever;" Radak: "I will put his offspring in power forever" (במלכות אשים זרעו לעד).
#Interpret לָעַד not as an adverbial but as the predicate complement of the שִׂים construction: "I will make his offspring perpetual." Cf. Jerome: et ponam perpetuum semen eius; Symmachus: καὶ ποιήσω διηνεκὲς τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ.
#Interpret the verb שִׂים to mean "establish." E.g., "I will establish his offspring forever" (ESV, cf. NIV, ELB, GNB, ZÜR; so BDB, DCH; cf. Exod 15:25; Deut 12:5; Josh 24:25; Isa 44:7; Ps 104:9; see esp. 2 Sam 23:5—בְרִ֨ית עֹולָ֜ם שָׂ֣ם לִ֗י). This last option is the most likely. It does not require any elision, and it allows us to interpret לָעַד according to its normal sense and שִׂים according to a fairly well-attested sense. Note also the parallel clause in v. 5: "I will establish his offspring" (אָכִין זַרְעֶךָ).
# Another option worth mentioning is that לָעַד might be revocalized to לְעֵד: "I will make his offspring a witness," anticipating the "witness" language in v. 38b.
+
* There is a textual issue in the first line of the poem. Consider the differences between the ESV and the NRSV:
#"I will sing of the steadfast love of the Lord, forever" (ESV) (see v. 2 preferred diagram).
#"I will sing of your steadfast love, O Lord, forever" (NRSV, cf. NEB) (see v. 2 alternative diagram).
* The ESV follows the MT, which reads חַֽסְדֵ֣י יְ֭הוָה (a construct chain): "YHWH's acts of loyalty" (cf. Symmachus, Aquila, Jerome, Peshitta, Targum). Instead of חַסְדֵּי, the NRSV is reading חֲסָדֶיךָ (with a 2ms suffix), which requires interpreting יְהוָה as a vocative. The NRSV claims to be following the Septuagint (footnote: "Gk"). According to Rahlfs' 1931 edition, the Septuagint says: "Of your mercies, O Lord (τὰ ἐλέη σου, κύριε), I will sing forever" (NETS; cf. Theodotion). It is likely, however, that the Septuagint originally agreed with the MT and read "the Lord's mercies" (τὰ ἐλέη τοῦ κυρίου, so Ra 2110 %5Bunknown to Rahlfs%5D) and that the reading "your mercies, O Lord" (τὰ ἐλέη σου, κύριε) is an inner-Greek corruption (see Barthélemy 2005, 614). This reading probably represents an attempt to smooth out the text—to make the otherwise third-person reference to YHWH in the a-line match the second person reference in the b-line (cf. Barthélemy 2005, 612–614). Some idiomatic modern translations do the same: "O LORD, I will always sing of your constant love; I will proclaim your faithfulness forever" (GNT, cf. CEV, HFA, GNB). The person-shifting in the MT (third person in the a-line --> second person in the b-line), although unusual in English, is a characteristic feature of Hebrew poetry and happens sometimes at the beginnings of psalms (see e.g., Pss 9:2; 92:2).
+
* BHS proposes emending יָרוּמוּ to either יְרַנֵּנוּ ("they shout for joy;" cf. v. 13) or יָרוּמוּ קוֹלָם ("they raise their voices"). But there is no manuscript evidence for these emendations. The MT is clearly supported by all of the ancient witnesses (see Barthélemy 2005, 622-3), and it makes sense in the context. The clause either says that the people are/will be "exalted by your righteousness" (CSB, cf. KJV, CEV, NET, NJPS; so LXX, Targum, Jerome %5Biuxta Hebr.%5D) or that the people "celebrate your righteousness" (NIV, cf. NRSV, NLT; cf. Dahood 1966, 315).
+
* There is a textual issue in v. 3. The MT reads the first person verb אָמַ֗רְתִּי: "I said" (cf. Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, Quinta, Targum; so most modern translations %5Bsee vv. 3-5 preferred diagram%5D). The Septuagint, Jerome (iuxta Hebr.), and some manuscripts of the Peshitta read the second person verb אָמַרְתָּ: "you said" (LXX: εἶπας; Jerome: dixisti; Peshitta: ܐܡܪܬ, see Taylor 2020, 362–3 %5Bsee vv. 3-5 alternative diagram%5D; other Peshitta manuscripts read a third person verb %5Bܐܡܪ%5D, see Leiden Peshitta).
** The first-person reading of MT (אָמַרְתִּי) results in a complex participant-reference situation: the psalmist speaks in v. 3, and then YHWH speaks (without introduction) in vv. 4-5. The second-person reading (אָמַרְתָּ) appears to simplify the situation. According to this reading, vv. 3-5 have a single speaker ("YHWH") who is clearly introduced in v. 3 ("you said"). Yet the second-person reading introduces a new participant-reference problem: "you said 'loyalty will be built up forever. The sky, you set up your faithfulness (אֱמוּנָתְךָ) in it.'" If God were the speaker in v. 3 (as implied by the 2ms reading אָמַרְתָּ), then we would expect "my faithfulness" (אֱמוּנָתִי) instead of "your faithfulness" (אֱמוּנָתְךָ). There are two ways around this problem. The first is to emend the text to אֱמוּנָתִי (cf. BHS), but there is no manuscript or versional evidence for this reading. The second is to understand the b-line as the psalmist's own speech interrupting YHWH's speech: "because you said, 'Forever mercy will be built.' In the heavens your truth will be prepared" (NETS; cf. Baethgen 1904, 274). But this explanation not only disrupts the otherwise clear parallelism in v. 3, it also interrupts YHWH's speech, which continues through vv. 4-5.
** In the end, it seems best to follow the traditional reading אָמַרְתִּי. There are other clear examples in the Psalms of the psalmist reporting his past speech in this way (cf. כִּי אָמַרְתּי in Ps 38:17; see also Pss 16:2; 30:7; 31:15, 23; 41:5; 82:6; 116:11). Furthermore, although the shift to YHWH as speaker in vv. 4-5 is rather abrupt, the shift corresponds with the poetic structure; vv. 4-5 represent a new poetic sub-section, distinct from (though still closely bound to) vv. 2-3. "The words I have said, imply that the truth which the inspired writer propounds was deeply fixed in his heart. Whatever, as if he had said, has hitherto happened, it has never had the effect of effacing from my heart the undoubted hope of experiencing the Divine favor as to the future, and I will always continue steadfastly to cherish the same feeling" (Calvin).
** Some propose to emend the text to read כְּאַדְמַת instead of כִּי אָמַרְתִּי (so e.g., BHS; NEB: "Thy true love is firm as the ancient earth"), but there is no manuscript support for this reading.
* The MT reads "your servants" (plural; cf. ESV, NLT, NET, NJPS; so LXX, Aquila, Symmachus, Quinta, Jerome %5Biuxta Hebr.%5D). Some translations read "your servant" (singular; cf. NRSV, NIV, GNT, REB; so Peshitta %5Bܕܥܒܕܟ%5D).
* For textual and grammatical issues in the second half of this verse, see %5B%5BThe Text, Grammar, and Meaning of Ps 89:51b%5D%5D.
+
* The word אַף is a discourse marker governing multiple clauses (see BHRG §40.14(1)).
+
* The pronominal suffix "them" (ם) resumes the left-dislocated nouns צָפוֹן וְיָמִין (cf. BHRG §36.1.5.2(c)).
+
* The form שׂוֹא is unique in the Bible. Most interpreters understand it to be an infinitive construct from the common verb נשׂא ("rise"): "when its waves rise, you still them" (ESV; cf. KJV, NIV) >> "When its waves surge, you calm them" (NET). Elsewhere, however, the infinitive construct of נשׂא is usually שֵׂאת and sometimes נְשֹׂא, but never שׂוֹא (cf. GKC 76b). Furthermore, the qal of נשׂא is usually transitive ("to lift something"), whereas here it is intransitive or reflexive ("to be lifted, to lift themselves;" cf. Rashi: "%3D בהנשא גליו"; Ibn Ezra and Radak: "%3Dבהתרומם;" Targum: מִתְנַטְלִין גַלוֹי) (though for examples of intransitive נשׂא qal, see e.g., Ps 24:9b; Nah 1:5). For these reasons, some interpreters emend בְּשׂוֹא ("at the rising") to בִּשְׁאֹן ("at the roaring," BHS, HALOT; so NEB; cf. the phrase שְׁאֹון גַּלֵּיהֶם in Ps 65:8; see also Isa 17:12; Jer 51:55). It is possible that the Septuagint supports this reading (בִּשְׁאֹן). The Septuagint uses the noun σάλος, which refers to the "surge" or "rolling swell of the sea" (Liddell, Scott, Jones, et al., 1996, 1582): "and the surge of its waves you calm" (LXX, trans. NETS). It is also possible, however, that the Septuagint is giving a dynamic equivalent of בְּשׂוֹא (so also Symmachus, Jerome %5Biuxta Hebr.%5D). In either case—whether the waves are "rising" or "roaring"—there is little difference in meaning.
+
* There is a ketiv-qere issue in the MT of v. 18. The ketiv ("what is written," i.e., the consonantal text) reads תרים (hiphil, תָּרִים), but the qere ("what is read," i.e., the vowels) reads תָּרוּם (qal). Some translations follow the ketiv: "you exalt our horn" (NIV; so Jerome: elevabis cornu nostrum). Others follow the qere: "our horn is exalted" (ESV, cf. KJV, CSB, CEV, NET; so LXX: ὑψωθήσεται τὸ κέρας ἡμῶν). The qere has the earliest attestation (LXX) and makes for a good parallel with the b-line of the previous clause: "in your righteousness they rise... // in your favor our horn rises." The qere reading also appears in some Hebrew manuscripts outside of the Tiberian tradition (e.g., JTS 631, BL Or 1477).
+
* Another issue in v. 8 is whether אֵל is in apposition to ליהוה from the previous line, the subject of a new clause, or a vocative. Contrast, for example, the following three translations:
#"Who... is like the LORD, '''a God''' greatly to be feared..." (ESV) (see the alternative reading in the vv. 7-8 preferred diagram).
#"Who is like the LORD...? ...'''God is''' greatly feared" (NIV; cf. LXX) (see vv. 7-8 preferred diagram)
#"Who is like the Lord...? '''O God''' (θεὲ), fearsome one..." (cf. Symmachus) (see v. 8 alternative diagram).
* The apposition interpretation (so ESV) seems unlikely, not only because there is an intervening constituent between the two phrases (לַ֝יהוָ֗ה בִּבְנֵ֥י אֵלִֽים׃ אֵ֣ל), but also because לַיהוָה is a prepositional phrase and אֵל is a noun phrase. If אֵל were in apposition to לַיהוָה, then we might have expected לְאֵל. The vocative interpretation is possible, but this would be a very long vocative phrase (all of v. 8), and there is no clear signal in the text that it should be understood as such. By contrast, the third-person references to YHWH in the previous line (לַיהוָה) make it more natural to read v. 8 as a third-person statement about God, rather than a vocative. The NIV interpretation is the most viable syntactically. The only issue with this interpretation is that the divine epithet אֵל reads more naturally as a description the kind of "god" YHWH is (cf. Pss 5:5 %5B"a god who delights in wickedness"%5D; 7:12 %5B"a god who expresses indignation"%5D; 29:3; 31:6; 42:3, 9; 50:1; 57:3; 94:1; etc.), than as a bare reference to YHWH himself (though see, e.g., Pss 10:12; 16:1; 17:6; 19:2; 78:18; etc.). Thus, a fourth option (here preferred) is to interpret אֵל as a predicate complement with the subject elided: "%5BHe is%5D a god who is terrifying in the council of holy ones."
+
* In addition to the 2ms reading אָמַרְתָּ, the Septuagint gives two other variants in vv. 3-5.
** First, it vocalizes תכן as תִּכֹּן (niphal, instead of hiphil תָּכִן): "truth will be prepared (ἑτοιμασθήσεται)" (NETS; cf. Symmachus: ἑδρασθήσεται). The hiphil vocalization of MT is supported by Jerome (fundabis), the Targum (תתקין), and the numerous medieval manuscripts that read תכין (see Kennicott 1776, 384; including some outside of the Tiberian tradition, e.g., BL Or 1477, Neubauer 154, JTS 631). It is also guarded by the Masorah Parva, which notes that this is the only time this particular form appears with defective spelling (תָּכִן rather than תָּכִין). But the defective spelling of the consonantal text argues against the hiphil vocalization, since there are no other examples of hiphil הכין, יכין, תכין, מקין that are defective (see also the verb קום). Although the defective spelling is also rare with the niphal—we would have expected תִּכּוֹן—there are clear examples of it: 2 Kgs 2:12 (וַתִּכֹּ֥ן); 2 Chr 8:16 (וַתִּכֹּן֙). The niphal vocalization of תכן also makes for a nice parallel with יִבָּנֶה (niphal) in the a-line (see NEB for this vocalization). Thus, following the Septuagint, we have preferred the niphal vocalization.
** The Septuagint also vocalizes לבחירי as לִבְחִירַי (plural suffix, instead of singular suffix לִבְחִירִי): "with my chosen ones (τοῖς ἐκλεκτοῖς μου)" (NETS). The singular vocalization (לִבְחִירִי) makes better sense in the context, which is about YHWH's oath to David (so also Aquila, Symmachus, Quinta, Jerome %5Biuxta Hebr.%5D, Targum %5B"with Abraham, my chosen one"%5D).
+
* The אֲשֶׁר at the beginning of v. 22a has been understood in a number of ways. It could have its normal value as a relative particle: "I found David my servant; with holy oil I anointed him; with whom my hand will be established..." (cf. KJV; so Jerome iuxta Hebr.: cum quo manus meus firma erit) (here preferred). Alternatively, it could be a more loosely connected subordinating conjunction, indicating result (cf. ESV: "so that...") or an explanation (cf. LXX trans. NETS: "for %5Bγὰρ%5D my hand shall sustain him"). (For these proposed non-prototypical uses of אֲשֶׁר, see the helpful summary in Holmstedt 2016, 233). Because אֲשֶׁר almost always functions as a relative particle (c. 97% of the time; cf. Holmstedt 2016, 232) it is probably best to interpret אֲשֶׁר as a relative particle if this interpretation is plausible in the context. In our specific case, it is plausible that אֲשֶׁר in v. 22a functions as a relative particle with דוד עבדי in v. 21a as its antecedent. Some might object to this interpretation, noting that there is an intervening clause/line (v. 21b) that the relative particle would have to skip over in order to connect back to דוד עבדי. This would be a problem in a prose text, but not in poetry, where the thought units do not occur contiguously, one after another (– – – –), but in parallel groups (%3D %3D) (cf. Gray 1915, 54). For a relative particle in one a-line to have its antecedent in the preceding a-line would not be an issue. See Ps 139:19-20 for another possible example. Alternatively, the antecedent could be the 3ms suffix in מְשַׁחְתִּיו.
+
* Some translations interpret the second line as a complete clause without any constituent from the previous line being elided: "Shall thy wrath burn like fire?" (KJV, cf. CSB, NET, NJPS, ELB, ZÜR, EÜ). It makes more sense, however—and it is true to the nature of parallelism—that an adverbial from the first line be elided in the second line, either "how long?" (so NIV, NLT, ESV, NRSV, REB, NGÜ, GNB) or "forever" (see e.g., Stec 2004, 170): "will your wrath burn like fire %5Bforever%5D?"
+
* Some translations read the b-line as an exclamation: "For what futility you have created all humanity!" (NIV, cf. ESV). Others read it as a question: "Have you created everyone for nothing?" (CSB, cf. NET). Others think that the verb "remember" is elided in the b-line: "Remember how short my life is, how empty and futile this human existence!" (NLT, cf. LUT, ZÜR; so Sforno). This last view results in the best sense and is true to the nature of parallelism.
* "In v. 48b על מה does not belong together ('why have you created for nothing?'), but rather מה שׁוא (cf. Ps 30:10; Job 26:14)" (Baethgen 1904, 279).
+
* The b-line is an asyndetic relative clause: "which you swore to David in your faithfulness" (NJPS; cf. NRSV, NIV, REB, etc.; so also all the ancient versions—see, e.g., the LXX: ἃ ὤμοσας—"which you swore").
+
* Most modern translations agree on the syntax of this verse: "For our shield belongs to the Lord, our king to the Holy One of Israel" (NETS, cf. NIV, ESV, NRSV, CSB, NJPS, REB, LUT, ELB, EÜ, ZÜR; see v. 19 preferred diagram). According to this interpretation, "shield >> protection" %3D "king" (so Radak; cf. HFA: "to you belongs our king who protects us;" cf. NGÜ). The Septuagint gives a different interpretation of the grammar when it translates the phrase the whole verse as a single clause in which "our king" is in apposition to "the Holy one of Israel": "because support is of the Lord and of the Holy one of Israel, our king" (LXX, trans. NETS; cf. Jerome %5Biuxta Hebr.%5D; see v. 19 alternative diagram). The parallelism and the focus in the following verses on the human "king" supports the interpretation of the modern translations above.
+
* There is an insignificant ketiv-qere issue in v. 29. The ketiv ("what is written," i.e., the consonants) reads אשמור, and the qere ("what is read," i.e., the vowels) reads אֶשְׁמָר. The distinction is only orthographic; the morphology is the same in either case (1cs yiqtol).
+
* Translations disagree on the line division (and thus on the syntax) of this verse. See, for example, the following translations:
#"Who is like you, Lord God of heavenly forces? Mighty Lord, your faithfulness surrounds you!" (CEB; cf. Jerome iuxta Hebr.; Dahood 1968, 308; see v. 9 preferred diagram, though, in addition to reading "Mighty Lord" as a vocative, the preferred diagram sees the question "who is like you" elided in the b-line).
#"O Lord God of hosts, who is as mighty as you, O Lord? Your faithfulness surrounds you" (NRSV, cf. NJPS, NLT, ESV, GNT, ELB, HFA, GNB; so also Peshitta, Targum; see v. 9 alternative 2 diagram).
#"O Lord God of hosts, who is like you? You are powerful, O Lord, and your truth is around you" (LXX, trans. NETS; cf. NIV, LUT, NGÜ, EÜ, ZÜR; so Baethgen 1904, 275; see v. 9 alternative 3 diagram).
#"Lord God of Hosts, who is like you? Your strength and faithfulness, Lord, are all around you" (REB, emending the text to חָסְנְךָ)
* The Masoretic accents suggest the following line division (cf. de Hoop and Sanders 2022, §6.2): יְהוָ֤ה ׀ אֱלֹ֘הֵ֤י צְבָא֗וֹת // מִֽי־כָֽמ֖וֹךָ חֲסִ֥ין ׀ יָ֑הּ // וֶ֝אֱמֽוּנָתְךָ֗ סְבִיבוֹתֶֽיךָ׃. According to this division, we would understand the text as NRSV et al. above. Cf. Exod 15:11—מִֽי־כָמֹ֤כָה בָּֽאֵלִם֙ יְהוָ֔ה מִ֥י כָּמֹ֖כָה נֶאְדָּ֣ר בַּקֹּ֑דֶשׁ.
* The Septuagint preserves a different line division: יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי צְבָאוֹת מִי־כָמוֹךָ // חֲסִין יָהּ וֶאֱמוּנָתְךָ סְבִיבוֹתֶיךָ. The line division of the Septuagint, which probably preserves an ancient Hebrew line division, is a better fit in the poetic context: every other verse in vv. 2-19 is a two-line verse. If we follow the Septuagint's line division, then there are three options for interpreting the syntax.
** We could understand the text similar to how the LXX and the NIV have understood it (with an elided 2ms pronoun): "Who is like you, Lord God Almighty? You, Lord, are mighty, and your faithfulness surrounds you" (NIV).
** We could understand "Yah" (rather than an elided 2ms pronoun) as the subject of the clause: "Yah is mighty, and your faithfulness is all around you." The sudden shift in person within the same line (3rd person "Yah" --> 2nd person "you") is somewhat jarring but not totally unprecedented (see e.g., Gen 49:4c %5BMT%5D; Ps 22:9 %5BMT%5D).
** We could understand חֲסִין יָהּ as a vocative, "Mighty Yah" (cf. Jerome iuxta Hebr.: fortissime Domine), resulting in a nice AB//AB parallelism for v. 9. It could be that חֲסִין modifies יָהּ as an adjective, or, more likely, it could be that חֲסִין is a substantival adjective ("mighty one") in apposition to יָהּ: "Mighty one, Yah >> "Mighty Yah." For a substantival adjective functioning as a vocative, see e.g., Ps 32:11 (צַדִּיקִים); Ps 33:1 (צַדִּיקִים); Prov 1:22 (פְּתָיִם).
* The word צוּר in v. 44, which usually means "rock" (i.e., a large rocky hill or cliff) is difficult to understand in the context—what is the meaning of this word and what is its syntactic function? There are four main options:
** Interpret the phrase צוּר חַרְבּוֹ as a construct chain: "the flint of his sword >> the sharpness of his sword >> his sharp sword" (see v. 44 preferred diagram). According to this view, the word צוּר is not understood as "large rocky hill" or "cliff" but as a by-form of the word צֹר ("stone" or "flint"). This by-form occurs also in Josh 5:3 (חַרְבוֹת צֻרִים, "flint knives," NIV) and perhaps also in Job 22:24 (וּבְצוּר נְחָלִים, "%5Bsmall%5D stones in the wadis," CSB). So Rashi, Radak, and Ibn Ezra, all of whom paraphrase the construction as חידוד חרבו ("the sharpness of his sword") and connect it to the form in Josh 5:3. See also Targum: "you have also turned back his sharp sword" (Stec 2004, 170, תתיב לאחורא סייפיה חריפא). All of the ancient versions likewise interpreted the phrase as a construct chain, though they ascribe various meanings to צוּר. E.g., LXX: "you turned away the help of his sword (τὴν βοήθειαν τῆς ῥομφαίας αὐτοῦ)" (LXX, trans. NETS); Symmachus: "the strength of his sword" (τὴν στερρότητα τῆς μαχαίρας αὐτοῦ); Quinta: "the strength of his sword" (τὴν στερρότητα τῆς ῥομφαίας αὐτοῦ); Peshitta: "you have turned back the help of his sword (ܥܘܕܪܢܐ ܕܣܦܣܝܪܗ)" (Taylor 2020, 370-1); Jerome (iuxta Hebr.): "you have turned away the strength of his sword" (avertisti robur gladii eius). This option seems the most plausible.
** Revocalize צוּר as צֹר/צוֹר and interpret the phrase צוֹר חַרְבּוֹ as a construct chain: "flint of his sword >> the sharpness of his sword >> his sharp sword" (DCH, HALOT; Gesenius 2013, 1136; see v. 44 alternative 1 diagram,). The end-result of this interpretation is the same as the previous interpretation. Most modern translations either reflect this option or the previous option—it is usually impossible to tell which one a modern translation reflects. E.g., "the edge of his sword" (NRSV, cf. KJV, ESV, NIV), "the blade of his sword" (NJPS), "the power of his sword" (LUT), "his sharp sword" (ZÜR). It seems better to interpret צוּר as a by-form of צֹר than to revocalize the text to צֹר/צוֹר, since all of our ancient witnesses appear to have vocalized the text as צוּר. The LXX translation τὴν βοήθειαν reflects צוּר, see Ps 19%5B18%5D:15. The second column of Origen's Hexapla also presents this vocalization: σουρ.
** Emend צוּר to מִצָּר ("from the adversary"): "You turn back his sword from the adversary" (NET; see v. 44 alternative 2 diagram). See NET note: "The present translation reflects the latter, assuming an original reading תָּשִׁיב מִצָּר חַרְבּוֹ, which was changed to תָּשִׁיב צָר חַרְבּוֹ by virtual haplography (confusion of bet/mem is well-attested) with צָר (“adversary”) then being misinterpreted as צוּר in the later tradition." This view makes sense, but there is no manuscript evidence to support it.
** Interpret צוּר as a vocative: "You, O Rock, turn back his sword" (Irvine 2019; see v. 44 alternative 3 diagram). But this is an awkward way of reading the text, and it is not reflected in any of the ancient or modern translations we consulted. When the psalmist addresses God elsewhere as צוּר, there is a pronominal suffix (e.g., "my rock") (e.g., Ps 19:15; perhaps the closest parallel to the interpretation proposed here is Deut 32:4: הַצּוּר֙ תָּמִ֣ים פָּעֳל֔וֹ). Also, the psalmist usually calls God his "rock" when he is expressing trust and confidence in YHWH (see e.g., Ps 18:3, 32, 47; 19:15; etc.), which does not make sense in this instance.