Psalm 16:10 - Resurrection

 PREFACE – REGARDING SHEOL

If you look throughout all of the writings of the Tanach that were written before their exile to Babylon and their interactions with the Zoroastrians, there is no mention of Hell, Purgatory, or Heaven as supernatural locations for eternal punishment, burning away of evil, or as a place for the good to reside. These were all later inventions that would then lie at the periphery of Jewish thought, even until today.

Rather than “Heaven”, there’s “Gan Eden”, a supernatural Garden of Eden for those who are righteous to wait for the final resurrection of the dead. Rather than “Purgatory”, there’s a “Gehinnom” where everyone goes for some period of time to purge away one’s sins with fire. And there is no Hell. Although, I expect that if your sins were horrific, that Gehinnom could be a rather long enough time where it would be indistinguishable from Hell.

In any case, those supernatural states and places were never in the Tanach. And, therefore, when one reads a narrative in the Tanach that predates those beliefs, then projecting those later views upon those earlier views is reading into the text (eisegesis) rather than pulling out from the text (exegesis).

Sheol, while similar to Hades in some ways, was not Hades even though the Septuagint would use the word “Hades” to refer to Sheol. We find a description in Psalm 6, which many orthodox Jews recite during the contrition part of the morning service, “tachanun”. The text reads:

“For in death there is no memory of You, in Sheol who will give you thanks?” (verse 6)

And as we read in Ecclesiastes 9:5:

“As for the living, they know that they will die. And the dead? They don’t know anything at all.”

It is a grey colorless place where one knows nothing, not even God, there is no memory of Him, nor of anything. It’s a rather dismal view of death, but it is consistent with the view in the Tanach prior to the Babylonian exile. And, so, when I use the term “Tanach”, I am talking about texts composed prior to the Babylonian experience.

Remember that.

IMPOSING MEANING

While it is natural is see something based upon one’s own life experience, one needs to keep in mind that the Tanach was written by an ancient people who had a different view of the world. And, so, when one reads about the rqia (רקיע) or “firmament” which was a solid protective covering over the earth that encircles it, keeping the upper waters at bay, more sophisticated people will dismiss that as part of the ancient view of the world. Loyal literalists, however, will redefine the Biblical view, either claiming that רקיע means “horizon” or that the Bible was describing the OORT Cloud that encircles our solar system, something of which the ancient writers had no knowledge.

Another example is the expression of “right hand” or “right side” of God or anyone else. Biblically, that term is an expression of trust, devotion, and partnership. Sometimes the Psalmists will speak of God being at the right side of the speaker, and sometimes the speaker will be on the right side of God, changing the source of devotion or success from one source to the other. It does not mean sitting in heaven with God because, as I have already mentioned, there is no “Heaven” in the Tanach. There are the “heavens” overhead, which is another term for the raqia, but no “Heaven”.

One final example of this is the term “soul”.

There are a number of words that are translated into “soul” or “spirit”, and it is often inappropriate to do so. For example, the word “nefesh” (נפש) when applied with a personal pronoun is simply a poetic way of speaking of a physical entity, his very being of which is represented by his physical body. And when you cast away one’s nefesh, it is a poetic expression for killing. And “You will not abandon my nefesh” means “you will keep me safe”. While later philosophers attempted to categorize the three typical terms for “soul” into supernatural ideas of differing levels, the ancient authors were singers, not sophisticated philosophers, and one is simply imposing a view of “soul” that wasn’t a Tanach view, into a verse of the Tanach.

ACTS 2:24-32

In chapter 2 of the Christian book of Acts, Peter imposes a Jesus narrative unto more than one Psalm, and to do so, he imposes a non-Tanach view of the supernatural and of a messiah.

In one of these, Peter quotes from Psalm 16:8-11 and tells his audience (KJV):

29. Men and brethren, let me speak freely unto you of the Patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.

30. Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn an oath to him, that the fruit of his loins according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

31. He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

32. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

33. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted…

 So, the claim by Peter is that Psalm 16 speaks of Hell, of being buried, and of being resurrected, and that it cannot be about David because we have David’s tomb (which, ironically enough, is as empty as the ones claimed to be the tombs of Jesus).

The thing is, Psalm 16 does not say that the subject of the song ever died. That is an imposed view by Peter who forces a resurrection narrative.

PSALM 16

1.      A michtam of David: “Protect me, EL, for I took refuge in You”

This alone should dismiss the idea that this is about a resurrection rather than about God’s protection and the speaker having taken refuge. Nobody is certain what a michtam is, although many suggest that it is a style of song, but are uncertain about the style.

2.      “I said to YHVH, “You are my Lord. My good is nothing without you.””

Again, he cannot be speaking from Sheol. The last half of the verse is difficult and I simplified it., The gist is that he is saying to God as YHVH, that he relies upon him.

3.      “As for the holy ones in the land, they and the mighty ones, I had delighted in all of them.”

This is speaking of fellow devotees, some of whom are fighters. It’s not entirely clear who they are. These are not dead people, and I have seen some Christian translations render this as “in the earth” instead of “in the land”, which is a problem contextually. The Greek version has “On behalf of the saints that are in his land, he has magnified all his pleasure in them”, which is a version that Peter would have been using.

4.      “May the sorrows increase on those who hasten to an “other”. Their drink offerings of blood, I will not pour out as an offering, nor will my lips utter their names.”

This is an opposing verse to verse 3. To emphasize how he is devoted and would never even think of speaking aloud the names of one of the Elohim Acherim (“other Gods”). “Acher” is used in the singular form here and refers to some other God. It may also be a generic term for a deity that others follow and serve. It can also mean “after”, as in “one that they hasten after”.

5.      “It is YHVH, a portion of my inheritance and my share. You maintain my lot in life.”

The text literally has “cup” rather than “share”, but we see “cup” used as an expression of counting and portion determining. Still no mention of dying yet. Rather, it’s an expression of hope and faith in a continued blessed life.

6.      “The portions have fallen upon me in pleasant areas. Indeed, a pleasant inheritance has fallen unto me.”

7.      “I will bless YHVH who as counselled me. Indeed, in each of the nights I am moved, emotionally”

The verse literally ends with “in the nights, my kidneys afflict me”. In ancient times, the kidneys were considered the center where emotional stirrings reside, and with the heart, the center of thinking, it was one of the most important organs in having a balanced life. While modern views might see it as having to get up at night to use the bathroom, this was not the ancient view of this expression. This verse is about emotionally tinged gratitude. Again, nothing about dying.

8.      “I have set YHVH before me always. For He is by my right side and will not be moved.”

This is an expression of devotion, with YHVH being on the right side as being the most important one. Later, sides will switch. It does not mean that the singer is in Heaven next to God, since that would be an anachronistic view of the text. And there is nothing in the text to even suggest that he has died, but instead, has been protected from death and rewarded for his loyalty.

9.      “Therefore, my heart is glad, and my glory has rejoiced. My flesh also dwells in safety.”

He is safe, secure, and hasn’t died yet. Now we come to the verse that claims that he resurrected:

10.   “For you will not abandon me to Sheol, and you will not give your devoted one to see the place of death.”

Basically, this is “You are protecting me and won’t let me die.” Not “I’m dead, so beam me up!” I translated שחת as “place of death”, which can refer to a grave, tomb, or even a variant of Sheol. And as part of his gratitude, the singer ends with:

11.   “You have shown me the path of life. In your presence is the fullness of joy.  At your right hand is bliss for evermore.”

Again, “right hand is an expression of devotion and loyalty”. And here it changed from God being at the right hand of the one who is devoted to him, to God being devoted to the man.

It’s actually a beautiful song even though is has nothing to do with dying, and certainly nothing to do with resurrection.

So, no, Jesus didn’t fulfill this unless one wants to say that Jesus was devoted to YHVH and served YHVH who was Jesus’ Lord.

But that’s not the claim.

So, no. Jesus didn’t fulfill Psalm 16:10, which has nothing to do with resurrection.

Style: Like many of the others, it has nothing to do with a messianic prophecy, and therefore it was never “fulfilled” by Jesus as a “resurrection” narrative, which it isn’t.

 Meme used: