The Differences Between Psalms 14 and 53

From Psalms: Layer by Layer
Jump to: navigation, search

Introduction[ ]

Psalms 14 and 53 are nearly identical, yet they diverge at several points. The following table illustrates the points of difference:

Blue = text/content unique to psalm (i.e., present in one, absent on the other)
Green = differing text in corresponding locations (e.g., different names for God, different verbal inflection, etc.)
Verse Psalm 14 Psalm 53 Verse
1a לַמְנַצֵּחַ לְדָוִד לַמְנַצֵּחַ עַל־מָחֲלַת מַשְׂכִּיל לְדָוִד 1
1b אָמַר נָבָל בְּלִבּוֹ אֵין אֱלֹהִים הִשְׁחִיתוּ הִתְעִיבוּ עֲלִילָה אֵין עֹשֵׂה־טוֹב אָמַר נָבָל בְּלִבּוֹ אֵין אֱלֹהִים הִשְׁחִיתוּ וְהִתְעִיבוּ עָוֶל אֵין עֹשֵׂה־טוֹב 2
2 יְהוָה מִשָּׁמַיִם הִשְׁקִיף עַל־בְּנֵי־אָדָם לִרְאוֹת הֲיֵשׁ מַשְׂכִּיל דֹּרֵשׁ אֶת־אֱלֹהִים אֱלֹהִים מִשָּׁמַיִם הִשְׁקִיף עַל־בְּנֵי אָדָם לִרְאוֹת הֲיֵשׁ מַשְׂכִּיל דֹּרֵשׁ אֶת־אֱלֹהִים 3
3 הַכֹּל סָר יַחְדָּו נֶאֱלָחוּ אֵין עֹשֵׂה־טוֹב אֵין גַּם־אֶחָד כֻּלּוֹ סָג יַחְדָּו נֶאֱלָחוּ אֵין עֹשֵׂה־טוֹב אֵין גַּם־אֶחָד 4
4 הֲלֹא יָדְעוּ כָּל־פֹּעֲלֵי אָוֶן אֹכְלֵי עַמִּי אָכְלוּ לֶחֶם יְהוָה לֹא קָרָאוּ הֲלֹא יָדְעוּ פֹּעֲלֵי אָוֶן אֹכְלֵי עַמִּי אָכְלוּ לֶחֶם אֱלֹהִים לֹא קָרָאוּ 5
5 שָׁם פָּחֲדוּ פָחַד כִּי־אֱלֹהִים בְּדוֹר צַדִּיק שָׁם פָּחֲדוּ־פַחַד לֹא־הָיָה פָחַד כִּי־אֱלֹהִים פִּזַּר עַצְמוֹת חֹנָךְ 6a
6 עֲצַת־עָנִי תָבִישׁוּ כִּי יְהוָה מַחְסֵהוּ הֱבִשֹׁתָה כִּי־אֱלֹהִים מְאָסָם 6b
7 מִי יִתֵּן מִצִּיּוֹן יְשׁוּעַת יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּשׁוּב יְהוָה שְׁבוּת עַמּוֹ יָגֵל יַעֲקֹב יִשְׂמַח יִשְׂרָאֵל מִי יִתֵּן מִצִּיּוֹן יְשֻׁעוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּשׁוּב אֱלֹהִים שְׁבוּת עַמּוֹ יָגֵל יַעֲקֹב יִשְׂמַח יִשְׂרָאֵל 7

As an example of how one of these differences has influenced translation, compare the following:

Ps 14:1: "For the music director; by David. Fools say to themselves, "There is no God." They sin and commit evil deeds; none of them does what is right" (NET).
Ps 53:2(1): "For the music director; according to the machalath style; a well-written song by David. Fools say to themselves, "There is no God." They sin and commit evil deeds; none of them does what is right" (NET).

It is evident from the above example that, although the Hebrew term underlying the gloss "deeds" in Pss 14 and 53 differs, the NET prefers Ps 14's "deeds" (עֲלִילָה) in place of Ps 53's "iniquity" (עָוֶל). It should be kept in mind that for most of the differences, which consist of individual words, there is not a significant difference in meaning (e.g., סָר "turn away" [Ps 14:3] and סָג "turn back" [Ps 53:4]; however, there is one place (Ps 14:5-6 and Ps 53:6) in which the difference is more significant. Compare the following:

Ps 14:5-6: "There they are in great terror, for God is with the generation of the righteous. You would shame the plans of the poor, but the LORD is his refuge" (ESV).
Ps 53:6: "There they are, in great terror, where there is no terror! For God scatters the bones of him who encamps against you; you put them to shame, for God has rejected them" (ESV).

Scholars have approached the differences between Psalms 14 and 53 in one of two ways:[1]

  1. They use the differences to identify/reconstruct an original text (reconstruction approach).[2]
  2. They understand the differences as contributing to the unique message of each psalm (text-as-received approach).[3]


Approach #1 views most of the differences as the product of scribal errors, that is, they are accidental. One of the psalms (typically Ps 53) is viewed as defective/corrupted, the other (typically Ps 14) containing the less corrupted text. Approach #2 views most of the differences as intentional, not accidental. According to approach #2, the differences contribute to the unique message of each psalm.

Argument Maps[ ]

Reconstruction Approach[ ]

The reconstruction approach views certain differences between Psalms 14 and 53, especially those in Psalms 14:5-6 and 53:6, as scribal errors, which are analyzed in service of reconstructing an original text. 


===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        rankdir: LR
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[Reconstruction]: The differences between Psalms 14 and 53, especially those in Psalms 14:5-6 and 53:6, are to be analyzed in service of reconstructing an original text.#dispreferred
 + <Aural Similarity>: Certain words/letters in Pss 14:5-6 and 53:6 sound similar and therefore could have been confused (see Baethgen 1904, 158 :C:; Duhm 1899, 40 :C:).#dispreferred
  + [בדור and פזר]: The first consonants of each word (bet and pe) are both labio-dentals; the second consonants (dalet and zayin) are both dentals; and the last consonants of each word (resh and resh) are the same, both sonorants (cf. Blau 2010, 64-65 :M:).#dispreferred
  + [עצת and עצמות]: Regarding the consonants of both words, the first (ayin), second (tsade), and last (taw) are the same (cf. Duhm 1899, 40 :C:).#dispreferred
  + [מחסהו and מאסם]: The first consonants of each word (mem and mem) are the same, both bilabials, and the third consonants (samekh and samekh) are the same, both sibilants (cf. Blau 2010, 65 :M:).#dispreferred
 + <Graphic Similarity>: Certain words/letters in Pss 14 and 53 are graphically similar and therefore could have been confused (see Hupfeld 1855, 291 :C:).#dispreferred
   + [סר and סג]: In the Adon Letter, an Aramaic letter from the late 7th c. BCE, gimel and resh are graphically similar (the leftward extension of gimel is at the top of the letter, like resh, rather than at the bottom as in later scripts; Porten and Yardeni 1986, 6-7). Therefore the resh of סר "turn away" (Ps 14:3) and the gimel of סג "slide back" (Ps 53:4) could have been confused. #dispreferred
  + <v. 6 הבישׁו>: In v. 6, the 2mp hiphil yiqtol in Ps 14 (תָבִישׁוּ) and the 2ms hiphil qatal in Ps 53 (הֱבִשֹׁתָה) can both be explained as scribal errors from a common source that read הבישׁו (cf. Baethgen 1904, 38 :C:). #dispreferred
   + <LXX>: The LXX of Ps 53(52):6 preserves the original reading — the 3p κατῃσχύνθησαν "they were put to shame" — reflecting a source which read הבישׁו (cf. Baethgen 1904, 38 :C:). #dispreferred
    - <Assimilation to Context>: Because the LXX does not reflect the sg. participle (חנה) nor the 2ms suffix (ך) of חֹנָךְ, it is likely that the LXX's reading for the 2ms הֱבִשֹׁתָה — the 3p verb κατῃσχύνθησαν "they were put to shame" — represents an assimilation to context and does not reflect a Hebrew source which read a 3p הבישׁו (cf. Barthélemy 2005, 324 :C:).
   + <תָבִישׁוּ in Ps 14:6>: Because the hiphil form of בושׁ only collocates with personal objects, never factual objects (cf. Baethgen 1904, 37-38 :C:; Duhm 1899, 40 :C:), the hiphil תָבִישׁוּ "you put to shame" in Ps 14:6 cannot take the factual object עֲצַת־עָנִי "insight of the oppressed" and so represents a corrupted reading.#dispreferred
   + <הֱבִשֹׁתָה in Ps 53:6>: That the hiphil הֱבִשֹׁתָה is 2nd person is "strikingly out of place in the midst of 3 pers. sg. in previous and subsequent lines, all pers. alike referring to God" (Briggs and Briggs 1906, 108 :C:).#dispreferred
 - <Literary Specificities>: The differences between Psalms 14:5-6 and 53:6 cannot be adequately explained as scribal errors, rather the differences represent "irreducible literary specificities" (Barthélemy 2005, 59 :C:).
  + [לֹא־הָיָה פָחַד in Ps 53:6]: The phrase לֹא־הָיָה פָחַד "where there was no terror," which is present in Ps 53:6 but absent in Ps 14:5, is not likely to have been omitted in the latter. Its presence in the MT of Ps 53:6 and in the ancient versions suggests that it is intentional, uniquely contributing to the message of Ps 53.
   + [Ancient Versions]: LXX: οὗ οὐκ ἦν φόβος "where there was no fear" (NETS); Syr.: ܐܬܪ ܕܠܝܬ ܗܘܐ ܕܚܠܬܐ "where there was nothing to fear" (Taylor 2022, 207 :M:); TgPs.: דלית בהון צרוך למדלח "which there is no need to fear" (Stec 2004, 110 :M:); Iuxta Hebr.: ubi non est timor "where there is no fear."
  + [עלילה and עול]: The divergent readings עֲלִילָה "deed" (Ps 14:1) and עָוֶל "iniquity" (Ps 53:2) are not likely the product of scribal error but represent an intentional intensification from the more neutral term "deed" to the more more pointed term "iniquity." The effect of such intensification is to "sharpen(s) the condemnation" of the actions of the fool in Ps 53 (Hossfeld and Zenger 2005, 41 :C:; cf. Tate 1998, 40 :C:).
  + [יהוה and אלהים]: Whereas Ps 14:6b includes the divine name יהוה "YHWH" (כִּי יְהוָה מַחְסֵהוּ), which emphasizes Israel's close relationship with YHWH, Ps 53:6e mentions אלהים "God" (כִּי־אֱלֹהִים מְאָסָם), emphasizing God's "relationship to enemies who incur (his) judgment" (Burnett 2017, 135 :A:).


Argument Mapn0ReconstructionThe differences between Psalms 14 and 53, especially those in Psalms 14:5-6 and 53:6, are to be analyzed in service of reconstructing an original text.n1בדור and פזרThe first consonants of each word (bet and pe) are both labio-dentals; the second consonants (dalet and zayin) are both dentals; and the last consonants of each word (resh and resh) are the same, both sonorants (cf. Blau 2010, 64-65 🄼).n9Aural SimilarityCertain words/letters in Pss 14:5-6 and 53:6 sound similar and therefore could have been confused (see Baethgen 1904, 158 🄲; Duhm 1899, 40 🄲).n1->n9n2עצת and עצמותRegarding the consonants of both words, the first (ayin), second (tsade), and last (taw) are the same (cf. Duhm 1899, 40 🄲).n2->n9n3מחסהו and מאסםThe first consonants of each word (mem and mem) are the same, both bilabials, and the third consonants (samekh and samekh) are the same, both sibilants (cf. Blau 2010, 65 🄼).n3->n9n4סר and סגIn the Adon Letter, an Aramaic letter from the late 7th c. BCE, gimel and resh are graphically similar (the leftward extension of gimel is at the top of the letter, like resh, rather than at the bottom as in later scripts; Porten and Yardeni 1986, 6-7). Therefore the resh of סר "turn away" (Ps 14:3) and the gimel of סג "slide back" (Ps 53:4) could have been confused. n10Graphic SimilarityCertain words/letters in Pss 14 and 53 are graphically similar and therefore could have been confused (see Hupfeld 1855, 291 🄲).n4->n10n5לֹא־הָיָה פָחַד in Ps 53:6The phrase לֹא־הָיָה פָחַד "where there was no terror," which is present in Ps 53:6 but absent in Ps 14:5, is not likely to have been omitted in the latter. Its presence in the MT of Ps 53:6 and in the ancient versions suggests that it is intentional, uniquely contributing to the message of Ps 53.n16Literary SpecificitiesThe differences between Psalms 14:5-6 and 53:6 cannot be adequately explained as scribal errors, rather the differences represent "irreducible literary specificities" (Barthélemy 2005, 59 🄲).n5->n16n6Ancient VersionsLXX: οὗ οὐκ ἦν φόβος "where there was no fear" (NETS); Syr.: ܐܬܪ ܕܠܝܬ ܗܘܐ ܕܚܠܬܐ "where there was nothing to fear" (Taylor 2022, 207 🄼); TgPs.: דלית בהון צרוך למדלח "which there is no need to fear" (Stec 2004, 110 🄼); Iuxta Hebr.: ubi non est timor "where there is no fear."n6->n5n7עלילה and עולThe divergent readings עֲלִילָה "deed" (Ps 14:1) and עָוֶל "iniquity" (Ps 53:2) are not likely the product of scribal error but represent an intentional intensification from the more neutral term "deed" to the more more pointed term "iniquity." The effect of such intensification is to "sharpen(s) the condemnation" of the actions of the fool in Ps 53 (Hossfeld and Zenger 2005, 41 🄲; cf. Tate 1998, 40 🄲).n7->n16n8יהוה and אלהיםWhereas Ps 14:6b includes the divine name יהוה "YHWH" (כִּי יְהוָה מַחְסֵהוּ), which emphasizes Israel's close relationship with YHWH, Ps 53:6e mentions אלהים "God" (כִּי־אֱלֹהִים מְאָסָם), emphasizing God's "relationship to enemies who incur (his) judgment" (Burnett 2017, 135 🄰).n8->n16n9->n0n10->n0n11v. 6 הבישׁוIn v. 6, the 2mp hiphil yiqtol in Ps 14 (תָבִישׁוּ) and the 2ms hiphil qatal in Ps 53 (הֱבִשֹׁתָה) can both be explained as scribal errors from a common source that read הבישׁו (cf. Baethgen 1904, 38 🄲). n11->n0n12LXXThe LXX of Ps 53(52):6 preserves the original reading — the 3p κατῃσχύνθησαν "they were put to shame" — reflecting a source which read הבישׁו (cf. Baethgen 1904, 38 🄲). n12->n11n13Assimilation to ContextBecause the LXX does not reflect the sg. participle (חנה) nor the 2ms suffix (ך) of חֹנָךְ, it is likely that the LXX's reading for the 2ms הֱבִשֹׁתָה — the 3p verb κατῃσχύνθησαν "they were put to shame" — represents an assimilation to context and does not reflect a Hebrew source which read a 3p הבישׁו (cf. Barthélemy 2005, 324 🄲).n13->n12n14תָבִישׁוּ in Ps 14:6Because the hiphil form of בושׁ only collocates with personal objects, never factual objects (cf. Baethgen 1904, 37-38 🄲; Duhm 1899, 40 🄲), the hiphil תָבִישׁוּ "you put to shame" in Ps 14:6 cannot take the factual object עֲצַת־עָנִי "insight of the oppressed" and so represents a corrupted reading.n14->n11n15הֱבִשֹׁתָה in Ps 53:6That the hiphil הֱבִשֹׁתָה is 2nd person is "strikingly out of place in the midst of 3 pers. sg. in previous and subsequent lines, all pers. alike referring to God" (Briggs and Briggs 1906, 108 🄲).n15->n11n16->n0


Text-as-Received Approach (preferred)[ ]

The text-as-received approach views certain differences between Psalms 14 and 53 as purposeful contributions to the message of each psalm. 


===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        rankdir: LR
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[Text-as-Received]: The differences between Psalms 14 and 53, especially those in Psalms 14:5-6 and 53:6, are to be treated as purposeful, contributing to the unique message of each psalm.
 + <Literary Specificities>: The differences between Psalms 14:5-6 and 53:6 represent "irreducible literary specificities" and cannot be explained as textual corruptions (Barthélemy 2005, 59 :C:).
  + [לֹא־הָיָה פָחַד in Ps 53:6]: The phrase לֹא־הָיָה פָחַד "where there was no terror," which is present in Ps 53:6 but absent in Ps 14:5, is not likely to have been omitted in the latter. Its presence in the MT of Ps 53:6 and in the ancient versions suggests that it is intentional, uniquely contributing to the message of Ps 53.
   + [Ancient Versions]: LXX: οὗ οὐκ ἦν φόβος "where there was no fear" (NETS); Syr.: ܐܬܪ ܕܠܝܬ ܗܘܐ ܕܚܠܬܐ "where there was nothing to fear" (Taylor 2022, 207 :M:); TgPs.: דלית בהון צרוך למדלח "which there is no need to fear" (Stec 2004, 110 :M:); Iuxta Hebr.: ubi non est timor "where there is no fear."
  + [עלילה and עול]: The divergent readings עֲלִילָה "deed" (Ps 14:1) and עָוֶל "iniquity" (Ps 53:2) are not likely the product of scribal error but represent an intentional intensification from the more neutral term "deed" to the more more pointed term "iniquity." The effect of such intensification is to "sharpen(s) the condemnation" of the actions of the fool in Ps 53 (Hossfeld and Zenger 2005, 41 :C:; cf. Tate 1998, 40 :C:).
  + [יהוה and אלהים]: Whereas Ps 14:6b includes the divine name יהוה "YHWH" (כִּי יְהוָה מַחְסֵהוּ), which emphasizes Israel's close relationship with YHWH, Ps 53:6e mentions אלהים "God" (כִּי־אֱלֹהִים מְאָסָם), emphasizing God's "relationship to enemies who incur (his) judgment" (Burnett 2017, 135 :A:).
 + <Placement in the Psalter>: The differences between Psalms 14:5-6 and 53:6 relate to their respective placements in the Psalter, that is, one or both psalms were likely edited to align/cohere with neighboring psalms.
  + ["Refuge" in Ps 14:6]: "Refuge" (מַחְסֵהוּ from the root חסה) in Ps 14:6, which is absent in Ps 53:6, is a recurring theme throughout Pss 3-7 and 11-14 in which "laments and petitions" are "arranged as a corpus of petitionary 'search for refuge' with YHWH" (Hossfeld and Zenger 2005, 38 :C:; cf. חסה in Pss 5:12; 7:2; 11:1).
  + [The "poor" in Ps 14:6]: The "poor" (עָנִי) in Ps 14:6, absent in Ps 53:6, is a recurring participant(s) within Pss 11-14 which is "a cohesive group of 'psalms of the poor'" (Hossfeld and Zenger 2005, 39 :C:; cf. עני in Pss 10:2, 9; 12:6 (pl.)).
  + [Militaristic Language in Ps 53:6]: The militaristic language of Ps 53:6 (פִּזַּר עַצְמוֹת חֹנָךְ "scattered the bones of those encamping against you"), which is absent in Ps 14:5-6, coheres with the militaristic theme of David and Saul's battles in Pss 52-55 (cf. Botha 2013, 593-601 :A:).
  + [Superscriptions]: Compared to superscriptions in the first Davidic Psalter (Pss 3-41), the superscriptions in the second Davidic Psalter (Pss 51-72) are typically longer. The shorter superscription of Ps 14 (לַמְנַצֵּחַ לְדָוִד), which is within the first Davidic Psalter, and the longer of superscription of Ps 53 (לַמְנַצֵּחַ עַל־מָחֲלַת מַשְׂכִּיל לְדָוִד), which is within the second Davidic Psalter, support this notion. The superscriptions of both psalms were likely edited to conform to their respective placements within the Psalter (cf. Hossfeld and Zenger 2005, 36 :C:).
  + [Elohistic Psalter]: The psalms within the Elohistic Psalter (Pss 42-83) display a propensity for the term אלהים "God" over against the divine name יהוה "YHWH" (see Burnett 2017, 134-136 :A:). The exclusive preference for אלהים "God" in Ps 53, which is within the Elohistic Psalter, conforms with the preference for אלהים elsewhere in this collection.
 - <Aural Similarity>: Certain words/letters in Pss 14:5-6 and 53:6 sound similar and therefore could have been confused (see Baethgen 1904, 158 :C:; Duhm 1899, 40 :C:).#dispreferred
  + [בדור and פזר]: The first consonants of each word (bet and pe) are both labio-dentals; the second consonants (dalet and zayin) are both dentals; and the last consonants of each word (resh and resh) are the same, both sonorants (cf. Blau 2010, 64-65 :M:).#dispreferred
  + [עצת and עצמות]: Regarding the consonants of both words, the first (ayin), second (tsade), and last (taw) are the same (cf. Duhm 1899, 40 :C:).#dispreferred
  + [מחסהו and מאסם]: The first consonants of each word (mem and mem) are the same, both bilabials, and the third consonants (samekh and samekh) are the same, both sibilants (cf. Blau 2010, 65 :M:).#dispreferred
 - <Graphic Similarity>: Certain words/letters in Pss 14 and 53 are graphically similar and therefore could have been confused (see Hupfeld 1855, 291 :C:).#dispreferred
  + [סר and סג]: In the Adon Letter, an Aramaic letter from the late 7th c. BCE, gimel and resh are graphically similar (the leftward extension of gimel is at the top of the letter, like resh, rather than at the bottom as in later scripts; Porten and Yardeni 1986, 6-7). Therefore the resh of סר "turn away" (Ps 14:3) and the gimel of סג "slide back" (Ps 53:4) could have been confused. #dispreferred
 - <v. 6 הבישׁו>: In v. 6, the 2mp hiphil yiqtol in Ps 14 (תָבִישׁוּ) and the 2ms hiphil qatal in Ps 53 (הֱבִשֹׁתָה) can both be explained as scribal errors from a common source that read הבישׁו (cf. Baethgen 1904, 38 :C:). #dispreferred
  + <LXX>: The LXX of Ps 53(52):6 preserves the original reading — the 3p κατῃσχύνθησαν "they were put to shame" — reflecting a source which read הבישׁו (cf. Baethgen 1904, 38 :C:). #dispreferred
   - <Assimilation to Context>: Because the LXX does not reflect the sg. participle (חנה) nor the 2ms suffix (ך) of חֹנָךְ, it is likely that the LXX's reading for the 2ms הֱבִשֹׁתָה — the 3p verb κατῃσχύνθησαν "they were put to shame" — represents an assimilation to context and does not reflect a Hebrew source which read a 3p הבישׁו (cf. Barthélemy 2005, 324 :C:).
  + <תָבִישׁוּ in Ps 14:6>: Because the hiphil form of בושׁ only collocates with personal objects, never factual objects (cf. Baethgen 1904, 37-38 :C:; Duhm 1899, 40 :C:), the hiphil תָבִישׁוּ "you put to shame" in Ps 14:6 cannot take the factual object עֲצַת־עָנִי "insight of the oppressed" and so represents a corrupted reading.#dispreferred
  + <הֱבִשֹׁתָה in Ps 53:6>: That the hiphil הֱבִשֹׁתָה is 2nd person is "strikingly out of place in the midst of 3 pers. sg. in previous and subsequent lines, all pers. alike referring to God" (Briggs and Briggs 1906, 108 :C:).#dispreferred


Argument Mapn0Text-as-ReceivedThe differences between Psalms 14 and 53, especially those in Psalms 14:5-6 and 53:6, are to be treated as purposeful, contributing to the unique message of each psalm.n1לֹא־הָיָה פָחַד in Ps 53:6The phrase לֹא־הָיָה פָחַד "where there was no terror," which is present in Ps 53:6 but absent in Ps 14:5, is not likely to have been omitted in the latter. Its presence in the MT of Ps 53:6 and in the ancient versions suggests that it is intentional, uniquely contributing to the message of Ps 53.n14Literary SpecificitiesThe differences between Psalms 14:5-6 and 53:6 represent "irreducible literary specificities" and cannot be explained as textual corruptions (Barthélemy 2005, 59 🄲).n1->n14n2Ancient VersionsLXX: οὗ οὐκ ἦν φόβος "where there was no fear" (NETS); Syr.: ܐܬܪ ܕܠܝܬ ܗܘܐ ܕܚܠܬܐ "where there was nothing to fear" (Taylor 2022, 207 🄼); TgPs.: דלית בהון צרוך למדלח "which there is no need to fear" (Stec 2004, 110 🄼); Iuxta Hebr.: ubi non est timor "where there is no fear."n2->n1n3עלילה and עולThe divergent readings עֲלִילָה "deed" (Ps 14:1) and עָוֶל "iniquity" (Ps 53:2) are not likely the product of scribal error but represent an intentional intensification from the more neutral term "deed" to the more more pointed term "iniquity." The effect of such intensification is to "sharpen(s) the condemnation" of the actions of the fool in Ps 53 (Hossfeld and Zenger 2005, 41 🄲; cf. Tate 1998, 40 🄲).n3->n14n4יהוה and אלהיםWhereas Ps 14:6b includes the divine name יהוה "YHWH" (כִּי יְהוָה מַחְסֵהוּ), which emphasizes Israel's close relationship with YHWH, Ps 53:6e mentions אלהים "God" (כִּי־אֱלֹהִים מְאָסָם), emphasizing God's "relationship to enemies who incur (his) judgment" (Burnett 2017, 135 🄰).n4->n14n5"Refuge" in Ps 14:6"Refuge" (מַחְסֵהוּ from the root חסה) in Ps 14:6, which is absent in Ps 53:6, is a recurring theme throughout Pss 3-7 and 11-14 in which "laments and petitions" are "arranged as a corpus of petitionary 'search for refuge' with YHWH" (Hossfeld and Zenger 2005, 38 🄲; cf. חסה in Pss 5:12; 7:2; 11:1).n15Placement in the PsalterThe differences between Psalms 14:5-6 and 53:6 relate to their respective placements in the Psalter, that is, one or both psalms were likely edited to align/cohere with neighboring psalms.n5->n15n6The "poor" in Ps 14:6The "poor" (עָנִי) in Ps 14:6, absent in Ps 53:6, is a recurring participant(s) within Pss 11-14 which is "a cohesive group of 'psalms of the poor'" (Hossfeld and Zenger 2005, 39 🄲; cf. עני in Pss 10:2, 9; 12:6 (pl.)).n6->n15n7Militaristic Language in Ps 53:6The militaristic language of Ps 53:6 (פִּזַּר עַצְמוֹת חֹנָךְ "scattered the bones of those encamping against you"), which is absent in Ps 14:5-6, coheres with the militaristic theme of David and Saul's battles in Pss 52-55 (cf. Botha 2013, 593-601 🄰).n7->n15n8SuperscriptionsCompared to superscriptions in the first Davidic Psalter (Pss 3-41), the superscriptions in the second Davidic Psalter (Pss 51-72) are typically longer. The shorter superscription of Ps 14 (לַמְנַצֵּחַ לְדָוִד), which is within the first Davidic Psalter, and the longer of superscription of Ps 53 (לַמְנַצֵּחַ עַל־מָחֲלַת מַשְׂכִּיל לְדָוִד), which is within the second Davidic Psalter, support this notion. The superscriptions of both psalms were likely edited to conform to their respective placements within the Psalter (cf. Hossfeld and Zenger 2005, 36 🄲).n8->n15n9Elohistic PsalterThe psalms within the Elohistic Psalter (Pss 42-83) display a propensity for the term אלהים "God" over against the divine name יהוה "YHWH" (see Burnett 2017, 134-136 🄰). The exclusive preference for אלהים "God" in Ps 53, which is within the Elohistic Psalter, conforms with the preference for אלהים elsewhere in this collection.n9->n15n10בדור and פזרThe first consonants of each word (bet and pe) are both labio-dentals; the second consonants (dalet and zayin) are both dentals; and the last consonants of each word (resh and resh) are the same, both sonorants (cf. Blau 2010, 64-65 🄼).n16Aural SimilarityCertain words/letters in Pss 14:5-6 and 53:6 sound similar and therefore could have been confused (see Baethgen 1904, 158 🄲; Duhm 1899, 40 🄲).n10->n16n11עצת and עצמותRegarding the consonants of both words, the first (ayin), second (tsade), and last (taw) are the same (cf. Duhm 1899, 40 🄲).n11->n16n12מחסהו and מאסםThe first consonants of each word (mem and mem) are the same, both bilabials, and the third consonants (samekh and samekh) are the same, both sibilants (cf. Blau 2010, 65 🄼).n12->n16n13סר and סגIn the Adon Letter, an Aramaic letter from the late 7th c. BCE, gimel and resh are graphically similar (the leftward extension of gimel is at the top of the letter, like resh, rather than at the bottom as in later scripts; Porten and Yardeni 1986, 6-7). Therefore the resh of סר "turn away" (Ps 14:3) and the gimel of סג "slide back" (Ps 53:4) could have been confused. n17Graphic SimilarityCertain words/letters in Pss 14 and 53 are graphically similar and therefore could have been confused (see Hupfeld 1855, 291 🄲).n13->n17n14->n0n15->n0n16->n0n17->n0n18v. 6 הבישׁוIn v. 6, the 2mp hiphil yiqtol in Ps 14 (תָבִישׁוּ) and the 2ms hiphil qatal in Ps 53 (הֱבִשֹׁתָה) can both be explained as scribal errors from a common source that read הבישׁו (cf. Baethgen 1904, 38 🄲). n18->n0n19LXXThe LXX of Ps 53(52):6 preserves the original reading — the 3p κατῃσχύνθησαν "they were put to shame" — reflecting a source which read הבישׁו (cf. Baethgen 1904, 38 🄲). n19->n18n20Assimilation to ContextBecause the LXX does not reflect the sg. participle (חנה) nor the 2ms suffix (ך) of חֹנָךְ, it is likely that the LXX's reading for the 2ms הֱבִשֹׁתָה — the 3p verb κατῃσχύνθησαν "they were put to shame" — represents an assimilation to context and does not reflect a Hebrew source which read a 3p הבישׁו (cf. Barthélemy 2005, 324 🄲).n20->n19n21תָבִישׁוּ in Ps 14:6Because the hiphil form of בושׁ only collocates with personal objects, never factual objects (cf. Baethgen 1904, 37-38 🄲; Duhm 1899, 40 🄲), the hiphil תָבִישׁוּ "you put to shame" in Ps 14:6 cannot take the factual object עֲצַת־עָנִי "insight of the oppressed" and so represents a corrupted reading.n21->n18n22הֱבִשֹׁתָה in Ps 53:6That the hiphil הֱבִשֹׁתָה is 2nd person is "strikingly out of place in the midst of 3 pers. sg. in previous and subsequent lines, all pers. alike referring to God" (Briggs and Briggs 1906, 108 🄲).n22->n18


Conclusion (A)[ ]

One's reading of Psalms 14 and 53 will be determined, at least in part, by their preferred approach. If the reconstruction approach is adopted, the differences between the psalms are viewed as a stepping stone en route to identifying/reconstructing an original text. The result of this approach is that both psalms are subject to no shortage of emendations. On the other hand, the text-as-received approach does not analyze the psalms' differences in hopes of recovering an original text. Rather, the differences are viewed as purposeful, contributing to the unique message of each psalm.

Although it is possible that the text of one or both psalms is corrupt at certain points (e.g., the omission of כָּל [Ps 53:5]; confusion of graphically similar סר [Ps 14:3] and סג [Ps 53:4]),[4] the reconstruction approach as a whole cannot adequately account for the differences between the psalms. The most notable differences — those at Ps 14:5-6 and Ps 53:6 — are more likely the product of intentional editorial activity than scribal error. That these differences display intentional editorial activity is indicated not only by certain "irreducible literary specificities" that cannot be attributed to scribal error but by their respective placements within the Psalter.[5] Psalm 14 is located within a sub collection of psalms (Pss 3-7, 11-14) which feature themes like "refuge" and the "poor," themes which are present in Ps 14 but not in Ps 53. Psalm 53 is located within a sub collection of psalms known as the Elohistic Psalter (Pss 42-83), and more narrowly within the sub collection of the second Davidic Psalter (Pss 51-72). It is not surprising then that Ps 53 displays affinities with these sub collections, namely, the exclusive use of אלהים in line with the propensity for the same term within the Elohistic Psalter, and the militaristic language in Ps 53:6 which is reminiscent of David's conflicts with Saul, as indicated by the superscriptions of Pss 52-54.

That most of Psalms 14 and 53 are identical renders it likely that either one is dependent on the other, whether literarily or orally/aurally, or that both are dependent on a common source.[6] Although we do not see this issue as crucial to understanding the meaning of each psalm, perhaps Ps 53 is dependent on Ps 14 based on the intensification of עֲלִילָה "deed" (Ps 14:1) to עָוֶל "iniquity" (Ps 53:2).

Research[ ]

Translations[ ]

Ancient[ ]

Modern[ ]

Secondary Literature[ ]

Baethgen, Friedrich. 1904. Die Psalmen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.
Barthélemy, Dominique. 2005. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament. Vol. Tome 4: Psaumes. Fribourg, Switzerland: Academic Press.
Botha, Phil J. 2013. “Psalm 53 in Canonical Perspective.” Old Testament Essays 26 (3): 583–606.
Briggs, Charles A., and Emilie Briggs. 1906. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms. Vol. 1. ICC. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.
Budde, Karl. 1928. “Psalm 14 Und 53.” Journal of Biblical Literature 47 (1/2): 160-183.
DeClaissé-Walford, Nancy L., Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth LaNeel Tanner. 2014. The Book of Psalms. NICOT. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Duhm, Bernhard. 1899. Die Psalmen. Vol. XIV. Kurzer Hand-Commentar Zum Alten Testament. Leipzig und Tübingen: Mohr (Paul Siebeck).
Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar, and Erich Zenger. 2005. Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51-100. Translated by Linda M. Maloney. Hermeneia. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress.
Hupfeld, Hermann. 1855. Die Psalmen. Vol. 1. Gotha: Friedrich Andreas Perthes.
Tate, Marvin E. 1998. Psalms 51-100. WBC 20. Dallas, TX: Word Books.
Wardlaw, Terrance Randall. 2015. Elohim within the Psalms: Petitioning the Creator to Order Chaos in Oral-Derived Literature. London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark.
Weiser, Artur. 1962. The Psalms: A Commentary. Philadelphia: Westminster Press.

References[ ]

53:5

  1. ↑ Cf. the four approaches listed in Hossfeld and Zenger 2005, 36-37 in which the differences are due to: 1) both psalms being "variant traditions of a 'primitive text' that can be reconstructed"; 2) "faulty transmission" by which "one of the versions is to be regarded as the 'original,' or the better text"; 3) "deliberate alteration that took place when the original version of the psalm acquired a new Sitz im Leben"; 4) "different literary contexts within which Psalms 53 and 14 are embedded" (i.e., redaction criticism). Approaches 1 and 2 are sufficiently similar to warrant combining them into a single approach which views the differences as accidental, as an afterthought (our Approach #1); approaches 3 and 4 are also similar enough to combine as they view the differences as intentional, as a forethought (our Approach #2).
  2. ↑ See Baethgen 1904; Briggs and Briggs 1906; Budde 1928; Duhm 1899; Hupfeld 1855; Weiser 1880.
  3. ↑ See Botha 2013; Hossfeld and Zenger 2005; Tanner 2014; Tate 1998.
  4. ↑ For a discussion of the omission of כָּל at Ps 53:5, see note at Grammar layer.
  5. ↑ Barthélemy 2005, 59.
  6. ↑ Wardlaw, Jr. 2015, 115 views Ps 53 as secondary, orally formulated or adapted for its canonical position within the Psalter.
Retrieved from "https://psalms.scriptura.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=The_Differences_Between_Psalms_14_and_53&oldid=60931"