Introduction This purpose of book is to increase readers’ understanding of Psalm and deepen readers’ love for the Lord. Dr. Longman seeks to equip today’s Christian to better read the Psalms based upon the historical context and literary genre. This book includes detail suggestions for interpreting the Psalms and exercises for further study and reflection. The Psalms were composed thousands of years ago, therefore they are distant to modern readers historically and theologically. The author tries to bridge the gap to help readers to understand the psalms better. Dr. Longman serves as the Robert H. Gundry Professor of Biblical Studies at Westmont College. He earned his M. Div.
…show more content…
In the first part, seven genres of Psalms are introduced and the benefits of understanding the Psalms within these categories are explained. Then Longman explores questions of the origin, development and use of the Psalms to help modern Christian grasp how to apply the Psalms. Longman states that ‘the Psalms are the heart of the message of the Old Testament” (51) and “reading the Psalms touch the very core of our being” (52). Psalms reading can inform the reader’s intellect and arouse the …show more content…
His reason is that the titles of the Psalm are late additions and some titles seems to be in tension with the content of the psalm. In other words, Longman looks the historical titles as uncanonical because they are people’s addition in later days, not original words from the first author or editor. However, Longman uses two different standards to treat the cannon issue. In the same chapter, Longman mentions that Psalter is dynamic and open and people can see some signs that someone added a few verses at the end of an old psalm to make it more relevant. He offers the example of Psalm 51 and Psalm 69. Although they are both Davidic psalms, several verses refer to the postexilic situation of the people of God, four hundred or more years after the time of David. Then Longman states that “updating may be a new concept for some readers as applied to the Psalms.” (46) Here Longman does not say people should not treat Psalm 51 and Psalm 69 as canon because of the addition in later days. To support updating is not a new concept, Longman quotes the addition of the account of Moses’ death (Deuteronomy 34). Longman adopts a double standard in page 41 and page 46. If updating is old concept and acceptable, why the titles cannot be included into the canon? Another question is when the Psalter stopped “updating”? It is confusing to say that some biblical texts have been changed.
In the first part, seven genres of Psalms are introduced and the benefits of understanding the Psalms within these categories are explained. Then Longman explores questions of the origin, development and use of the Psalms to help modern Christian grasp how to apply the Psalms. Longman states that ‘the Psalms are the heart of the message of the Old Testament” (51) and “reading the Psalms touch the very core of our being” (52). Psalms reading can inform the reader’s intellect and arouse the …show more content…
His reason is that the titles of the Psalm are late additions and some titles seems to be in tension with the content of the psalm. In other words, Longman looks the historical titles as uncanonical because they are people’s addition in later days, not original words from the first author or editor. However, Longman uses two different standards to treat the cannon issue. In the same chapter, Longman mentions that Psalter is dynamic and open and people can see some signs that someone added a few verses at the end of an old psalm to make it more relevant. He offers the example of Psalm 51 and Psalm 69. Although they are both Davidic psalms, several verses refer to the postexilic situation of the people of God, four hundred or more years after the time of David. Then Longman states that “updating may be a new concept for some readers as applied to the Psalms.” (46) Here Longman does not say people should not treat Psalm 51 and Psalm 69 as canon because of the addition in later days. To support updating is not a new concept, Longman quotes the addition of the account of Moses’ death (Deuteronomy 34). Longman adopts a double standard in page 41 and page 46. If updating is old concept and acceptable, why the titles cannot be included into the canon? Another question is when the Psalter stopped “updating”? It is confusing to say that some biblical texts have been changed.