Hating in the Psalms

[Zimon]

Hello,
Probably a typical newbie question, but for I did not find an answer via the searching tool...
When I pray psalms that include hate against your enemys or the enemys of God, how should I interpete those?
For example:
"Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies." (Psalm 139,21-22)
My problem is whenever I read and pray verses like those, I think of my "enemys" and find myself expressing my hate for them... But this can hardly be how I should read those, I guess, for it would be of course better to pray for those who hate God or who hate me and ask God to change her heart than to "curse" them and hope for their soon death.
How should we interprete those?

 

[O'GodHowGreatThouArt]

We must remember that we were not different than our enemies at some point in our life. To hate our enemies as a person would be to call ourselves a hypocrite. Because of this, I don't think David was speaking from this angle.

I do believe though that David was speaking from the angle of the sinful nature; both against the person and against God almighty. It is that we should hate, since it defiles that which is holy and good (and something is wrong with a "Christian" if they can't find a reason to hate that aspect).

As we were once them though, we should pray for their salvation.

 

[Skyler]

My problem is whenever I read and pray verses like those, I think of my "enemys"

That's a problem right there.

The verse isn't talking about your enemies. It's talking about God's enemies.

 

[Zimon]

That's a problem right there.

The verse isn't talking about your enemies. It's talking about God's enemies.

Maybe that is not the case with this verse, but just think of Psalm 109:

"For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful are opened against me: they have spoken against me with a lying tongue. They compassed me about also with words of hatred; and fought against me without a cause. [...] Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out. [...] Let this be the reward of mine adversaries from the LORD, and of them that speak evil against my soul."

The Psalmist is directly speaking about his enemys, you can hardly deny that. Of course you can argue that the psalmists enemys are the enemys of God as well. But at least they are called his enemys and he is obviously "cursing" them.

 

[KMK]

Here is a spirited discussion from a few years ago: http://www.puritanboard.com/f103/imprecatory-prayer-29501/

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

The best stand alone book on this subject that I know of is this book.

War Psalms of the Prince by Jay E. Adams (not the Counseling guy)

 

[Jack K]

I concur that the War Psalms book is excellent.

As a brief response, I would say we need to recognize the difference between those who are our enemies because they are God's enemies and hate his people, and those who are our enemies in the sense that we don't get along with them and battle them militarily, politically, in business, socially, etc. That last sort of enemy Jesus told us to love and pray for.

Also, the majority of us Westerners approach these Psalms out of a life lived in relative safety and ease compared to much of the world in history, without much experience of really having been brutalized by our enemies. So these psalms, as prayers of the heart, may sometimes speak to heart issues we actually know little about.

 

[Zimon]

I would say we need to recognize the difference between those who are our enemies because they are God's enemies and hate his people, and those who are our enemies in the sense that we don't get along with them and battle them militarily, politically, in business, socially, etc

But aren't these two "sorts" of enemys overlapping? If somebody strikes down a friend of mine and a fellow believer, isn't he an enemy of God as well as of me? (He violated God's commandements, showed hate against one of God's elect, but also against a friend)
Of course there are people that might be only "my enemys" because of personal disagreements or their character I don't get along with for some minor reason - but these people are very few. 90% of "my enemys" are those who for example mock me because of my belief or hurt my dear ones deliberately - aren't those God's enemys as well?

 

[TimV]

While for years I've been as confused as you are and won't offer an opinion, I will throw out that David was a head of State surrounded by those who would gladly have enslaved his people. And (kind of like Jack said) even as a child I doubt he had an unrealistic view of Goliath, who would have done horrible things to his family had he not done his duty. I admit that would not account for every case, though.

 

[Jack K]

I would say we need to recognize the difference between those who are our enemies because they are God's enemies and hate his people, and those who are our enemies in the sense that we don't get along with them and battle them militarily, politically, in business, socially, etc

But aren't these two "sorts" of enemys overlapping? If somebody strikes down a friend of mine and a fellow believer, isn't he an enemy of God as well as of me? (He violated God's commandements, showed hate against one of God's elect, but also against a friend)
Of course there are people that might be only "my enemys" because of personal disagreements or their character I don't get along with for some minor reason - but these people are very few. 90% of "my enemys" are those who for example mock me because of my belief or hurt my dear ones deliberately - aren't those God's enemys as well?

I admit it isn't easy and there's much overlap. It's not like there are two distrinct categories and our job is to figure out which "enemies" belong in which one. But I still think one helpful way to work through the issue is to consider whether we're chiefly concerned about personal affront, national/political success and the like, or concerned about God's Kingdom in the world. At the same time we need to keep in mind that the Kingdom in our era does not usually go forth by means of the sword but, with the cross now in view, more often through the sacrificial lives of God's people. These are just two of many factors to consider.

You're right that it's tricky. The command to love our enemies and the desire to hate those who hate God are both commended in the Bible. And Christians ought to be conforming to Christ so that, increasingly, our enemies and those who hate God are the same people. All this would seem not to fit. But it doesn't have to. Our experiences, desires and emotions are not designed to fit a formula. They are complex, often passionate, and the Bible allows for this. It pictures a life with God that includes extraordinary love for our enemies, yet affirms the legitimate desire to see evil men crushed and wrongs against us avenged. That seems like a logical inconsistency. Yet it's remarkably consistant with the complexities of human emotion and experience, and with a life filled with forgiveness, self-examination and righteous anger—all at the same time. Part of the beauty of the psalms is that they delve into this complexity, taking every aspect of it to God in prayer. And I suspect those of us who've suffered least at the hands of enemies are also least able to understand and appreciate this.

Also, keep in mind that Jesus displayed this sort of complexity. There were those diatribes against the Pharisees and the clearing of the Temple, plus there will be a coming judgment at his hands. At the same time, he loved his enemies to the utmost and was remarkably calm in the face of personal affront. I think one way to work through the issue would be to study the person of Jesus with these things in mind.

 

[py3ak]

Maybe that is not the case with this verse, but just think of Psalm 109:

"For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful are opened against me: they have spoken against me with a lying tongue. They compassed me about also with words of hatred; and fought against me without a cause. [...] Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out. [...] Let this be the reward of mine adversaries from the LORD, and of them that speak evil against my soul."

The Psalmist is directly speaking about his enemys, you can hardly deny that. Of course you can argue that the psalmists enemys are the enemys of God as well. But at least they are called his enemys and he is obviously "cursing" them.

I believe the key is in seeing Christ as the speaker in the Psalms. He will execute vengeance on His enemies - it is hardly inconsistent for Him to curse them before the fact. David was an appropriate vehicle for those concepts because of his typological relationship to Christ.

 

[Pergamum]

so, can we uninspired writers hate anyone today?

Or must we read the psalms of David, knowing that we could never utter those words ourselves towards anyone?

And if so, what use do the psalms have as models for prayer, devotion and singing for us today?

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

What do you think about the following reasoning?

1) David the Psalter lived long before Christ and hence was not introduced to His love-your-enemies thinking (hence, imprecatory prayers).

2) The Old Testament period was foremost about revealing God's justice and hatred against sin (hence, imprecatory prayers), the New Testament period was foremost about revealing God's love and forgiveness of sins (hence, Christ taught us not to pray for justice, but forgiveness -- though there is nothing wrong with praying for justice, nor is there anything wrong with the eye-for-eye principle).

3) There is also the possibility that the contents of these imprecatory prayers were actually sinful. That these prayers were inspired by God doesn't mean they were necessarily benevolent. There are a lot of sayings that are inspired, but also foolish and unloving.

 

[jwithnell]

When I'm praying through these Psalms, I pray along covenant lines: God's enemies are my enemies. I hate those who are killing Christians and brutalizing their children in the name of Allah. They are my enemies because they are God's enemies.

I think we need to distinguish between "hate" in terms of what God has determined is evil and the kind of "hate" that Jesus was referring to, where we have mentally killed someone over triffling things, or where we could extend basic human kindness. If I saw a veiled woman fall, I'd run to help her

David's kingly role, as someone mentioned, is also an important distinction. I cannot take it into my own hands to fight God's enemies, nor can I avenge myself if I have been wronged, even if someone dear to me was killed for his faith in Jesus. That is rightly in the hands of civil authority, and ultimately, in God's hands.

 

[Skyler]

What do you think about the following reasoning?

1) David the Psalter lived long before Christ and hence was not introduced to His love-your-enemies thinking (hence, imprecatory prayers).

It stinks.

But no, seriously--the "love-your-enemies thinking" wasn't solely New Testament. The Old Testament contains a lot of it as well. Proverbs 25:21-22 is a glaring example.

2) The Old Testament period was foremost about revealing God's justice and hatred against sin (hence, imprecatory prayers), the New Testament period was foremost about revealing God's love and forgiveness of sins (hence, Christ taught us not to pray for justice, but forgiveness -- though there is nothing wrong with praying for justice, nor is there anything wrong with the eye-for-eye principle).

While that may be true, love and forgiveness are also found in the Old Testament, just as justice and hatred for sin are found in the New Testament.

Imprecatory prayers, incidentally, are not limited to the Old Testament. See also the martyrs' prayer in Revelations:

They cried out with a loud voice, "O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?"

3) There is also the possibility that the contents of these imprecatory prayers were actually sinful. That these prayers were inspired by God doesn't mean they were necessarily benevolent. There are a lot of sayings that are inspired, but also foolish and unloving.

I don't think this is tenable, especially given the reference to imprecatory prayer in Revelations. Even besides that, though, there's no reason in the text to assume that David is saying something sinful--unlike Job, for instance, or other similar cases.

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

What do you think about the following reasoning?

1) David the Psalter lived long before Christ and hence was not introduced to His love-your-enemies thinking (hence, imprecatory prayers).

It stinks.

But no, seriously--the "love-your-enemies thinking" wasn't solely New Testament. The Old Testament contains a lot of it as well. Proverbs 25:21-22 is a glaring example.

2) The Old Testament period was foremost about revealing God's justice and hatred against sin (hence, imprecatory prayers), the New Testament period was foremost about revealing God's love and forgiveness of sins (hence, Christ taught us not to pray for justice, but forgiveness -- though there is nothing wrong with praying for justice, nor is there anything wrong with the eye-for-eye principle).

While that may be true, love and forgiveness are also found in the Old Testament, just as justice and hatred for sin are found in the New Testament.

Imprecatory prayers, incidentally, are not limited to the Old Testament. See also the martyrs' prayer in Revelations:

They cried out with a loud voice, "O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?"

3) There is also the possibility that the contents of these imprecatory prayers were actually sinful. That these prayers were inspired by God doesn't mean they were necessarily benevolent. There are a lot of sayings that are inspired, but also foolish and unloving.

I don't think this is tenable, especially given the reference to imprecatory prayer in Revelations. Even besides that, though, there's no reason in the text to assume that David is saying something sinful--unlike Job, for instance, or other similar cases.

Prov 25:21 If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink:
Prov 25:22 For thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head, and the LORD shall reward thee.

Well, this is not the kind of "love thinking" I'm referring to -- I mean replacing judgment with forgiveness (that's not the case in Prov 25:21-22). That's basically what Jesus was teaching to the Jews, who were so accustomed to do justice without mercy (to demonstrate how serious God is about sin):

"Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also." (Matt 5:38-40)

 

[Skyler]

Well, this is not the kind of "love thinking" I'm referring to -- I mean replacing judgment with forgiveness (that's not the case in Prov 25:21-22). That's basically what Jesus was teaching to the Jews, who were so accustomed to do justice without mercy (to demonstrate how serious God is about sin):

What the Jews were doing could hardly be called "justice" in any meaningful sense of the word. It wasn't following the Law, to be certain. That was Jesus' point throughout the Sermon on the Mount--the Pharisees were relaxing God's law and teaching others to do the same. Jesus demanded perfect obedience, perfect judgment, and perfect mercy.

Jesus considered mercy to be an important part of the Law. He scolded the Pharisees for neglecting it:

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others." (Matthew 23:23)

It wasn't something new that he was implementing. It was there the whole time.

 

[earl40]

God by His providence allowed us to pray Ps. 139 today in church.

 

[Peairtach]

We do hate the enemies of Christ's cause and kingdom i.e. the Devil and his angelic and human minions as our enemies. We hate what they are doing and to the extent that they embody what is evil we hate them.

We would wish that they would stop what they are doing and get on Christ's and our side. The moment that they changed sides we would love them as brothers.

If they don't change sides then our deepest desire is that appropriate divine justice be executed on them.

As often in the Psalms David is talking from an ideal perspective as the representative of God's people.

With a proper understanding of these Psalms, the true Christian is singing along with Christ, His Covenant Head, and his deepest moral principles which are antithetical to those of those who are not true Christians are being strengthened.

The Israel of God (Gal 6:16) doesn't get this spiritual fibre, among many other things, from post-canonical hymns, whatever their place or virtue.

 

[Pergamum]

If the psalms actually contained sinful sentiments, that would certainly hinder the EP position. And would really cast doubt on our use of the psalms for any moral instruction.

 

[Jack K]

If the psalms actually contained sinful sentiments, that would certainly hinder the EP position. And would really cast doubt on our use of the psalms for any moral instruction.

Right. Although it's very important to see that the Psalms speak of Christ, and part of understanding the imprecatory psalms is seeing how they point to Christ's judgment, they also contain sentiments that are appropriate for Christians as they live in this world.

What I would add is this: Although all these sentiments are appropriate for some Christians in some situations, not all are appropriate in every situation. Such is often the nature of wisdom literature. It must be applied with care, taking account of the circumstances. So the fact that some psalms express hate for enemies does not mean God has a rule that every response to every enemy must be hateful. It simply means that when this is appropriate, the psalms are there to give voice to our righteous anger.

 

[py3ak]

so, can we uninspired writers hate anyone today?

Or must we read the psalms of David, knowing that we could never utter those words ourselves towards anyone?

And if so, what use do the psalms have as models for prayer, devotion and singing for us today?

We must sing them along with our Head. His enemies are cursed; and we can pray, as Paul did, that the Lord may reward them according to their works. What we must not do is confuse people we dislike with enemies of Christ.

 

[KMK]

Can one hate the 'old man' and love the 'new man'? If our enemies are the world, the devil, and the flesh, can't we hate sinful flesh?

 

[Peairtach]

Can one hate the 'old man' and love the 'new man'? If our enemies are the world, the devil, and the flesh, can't we hate sinful flesh?

We hate and loathe the sin that remains in us, and to that extent we hate and loathe ourselves. Likewise with other sinners.

The Psalms are speaking in ideal and absolute and antithetical terms, and they bring to the surface the way that we view the world in an ultimate sense, as a war between good and evil.

The New Covenant Israel of God is in a battle with God's enemies, not over the Land of Israel but over the whole earth.

Joshua and David often waged this Holy War with the sword of iron, but we wage it with the Sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God. The Word of God is an agent of judgment; it either slays the old man - and brings new resurrection life to the heart and life of the person who is slain by it, or it adds judgment to judgment in the person that resists it.

Pergy

If the psalms actually contained sinful sentiments, that would certainly hinder the EP position. And would really cast doubt on our use of the psalms for any moral instruction.

The Psalms are the only manual of praise that God has given to His Old Covenant and New Covenant Israel. Any other songs should at best be supplemental to these. There are no sinful sentiments in the Psalms.

EP, along with Reformed and Puritan theology, is the wave of the future. These guys were years ahead of their time.