A Few Thoughts on Psalm 1

[Josheb]

Greetings again Josheb,

I am still astounded and disappointed by your assessment. To continue to extract this from Psalm 1 and Jeremiah 17 in my estimation is being prejudiced.

Let's test that premise.

Prove a single statement I made about scripture I have posted incorrect.

Otherwise, concede to the facts of scripture and use them ALL when thinking about Psalm 1, and commend the practice to others.





I will address the rest of Post #20 and answer all the questions asked therein as soon as you either prove a single statement I posted about scripture incorrect or acknowledge what I have posted are the facts of scripture, as stated in scripture and not additions on my part the scriptures themselves do not support.

 

[Soyeong]

A Few Thoughts on Psalm 1

This is an impressive Psalm and is an introduction to the Book of Psalms. Two sets of people and two ways are revealed, summed up in the last verse, the way of the ungodly and the way of the righteous. The righteous class are introduced in the first phrase, but it is in the singular: “Blessed is the man”. Ultimately this one man is the Lord Jesus Christ.

At first his qualities are described by what he is not. The Psalmist gives us three poetic parallels, and when these are lined up, each of the three phrases seem to be a progressive decline in the character and position of the ungodly:
Psalm 1:1 (KJV): Blessed is the man
that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly,
nor standeth in the way of sinners,
nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
Thus the Psalmist by this method also introduces to us the ungodly, sinners and the scornful.

And this is contrasted with what the blessed man is:
Psalm 1:2 (KJV): But his delight is in the law of the LORD;
and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
Two key words are introduced, “delight” and “meditate”. Both of these qualities are not natural to man, but there needs to be an initial choice or persuasion that this course is worth embracing, then these qualities need to be cultivated and allowed to grow. The whole purpose of the Book of Psalms could be summarised in these two words. This Book of Psalms and the whole counsel of God is designed to develop this “delight” and a mind that “meditates” upon the word.

The ultimate destiny of these two classes of people are clearly depicted. The wicked or ungodly will become like chaff that the wind drives away, while the righteous will become like trees planted by rivers or streams of water bringing forth fruit.

The parallelism of verse 6 is condensed, and the following underlined phrases and words are required to complete the parallelism:
For the LORD knoweth (or regards) the way of the righteous and they shall live:
but God does not give regard to the way of the ungodly and they shall perish

Parallelism is a major feature of the OT Hebrew poetry. An advantage of this unique form is that the meaning of the poetry is not lost when translated into other languages. Modern translations usually show these parallel statements in verse form, while it is obscured in the KJV. The RV/KJV Interlinear Bible shows the KJV in verse form.

It appears that Jeremiah meditated upon this Psalm, and applied it to his own circumstances. He expands this Psalm and gives more detail to the difficult times and trials using the figure of drought:
Jeremiah 17:7-8 (KJV): 7 Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is. 8 For he shall be as a tree planted by the waters, and that spreadeth out her roots by the river, and shall not see when heat cometh, but her leaf shall be green; and shall not be careful in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit.

Jeremiah also gives the contrast as revealed in Psalm 1:
Jeremiah 17:5-6 (KJV): 5 Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD. 6 For he shall be like the heath in the desert, and shall not see when good cometh; but shall inhabit the parched places in the wilderness, in a salt land and not inhabited.

Jeremiah under Spirit guidance is very searching in his application of Psalm 1. We need to be humbled by the Word of God and the Gospel of Christ and allow the influence of the Word to awaken a delight in the Word and a desire to meditate therein. By this means our hearts and minds will direct us in the Way. Jeremiah adds another searching comment in v9 and Yahweh then speaks directly by means of a summary in v10, giving the final outcome, similar to the outcome of the two ways of Psalm 1:
Jeremiah 17:9-10 (KJV): 9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? 10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.

Many of the Psalms are written by David, the man after God’s own heart. They reveal his thoughts, prayers and praises. Some are written by his close associates such as Asaph who became the chief musician. Some are anonymous, and some of these seem to be by Hezekiah. A unique feature of the Psalms is that in some instances they reveal the thoughts of Jesus more than the thoughts and circumstances of David, for example Psalms 8, 16, 22 and 110 that are quoted in the NT and applied specifically to Jesus and his circumstances. Thus the partial revelation of God by the prophets anticipates the complete revelation of God in His Son Hebrews 1:1-2.

Kind regards
Trevor

The Psalms express an extremely positive view of the Mosaic Law, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved in and delighted in obeying it, so if we consider the Psalms to be Scripture and to therefore express a correct view of the Mosaic Law, then we will share it as Paul did (Romans 7:22). For example, we can't believe in the truth of Psalms 1:1-2 while not allowing them to shape our view of the Mosaic Law. Moreover, the NT authors considered the Psalms to be Scripture, so they should be interpreted as though they were in complete agreement with the view of the Mosaic Law expressed in the Psalms.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings Soyeong,

The Psalms express an extremely positive view of the Mosaic Law, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved in and delighted in obeying it, so if we consider the Psalms to be Scripture and to therefore express a correct view of the Mosaic Law, then we will share it as Paul did (Romans 7:22). For example, we can't believe in the truth of Psalms 1:1-2 while not allowing them to shape our view of the Mosaic Law. Moreover, the NT authors considered the Psalms to be Scripture, so they should be interpreted as though they were in complete agreement with the view of the Mosaic Law expressed in the Psalms.

I can accept that David had a great respect for The Law of Moses, but when I considered Psalm 1:2 in the OP I extended the term "the law" which is mentioned twice, I expanded this to suggest that we need to delight in the word and we need to meditate upon the word:

Psalm 1:2 (KJV): But his delight is in the law of the LORD;
and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
Two key words are introduced, “delight” and “meditate”. Both of these qualities are not natural to man, but there needs to be an initial choice or persuasion that this course is worth embracing, then these qualities need to be cultivated and allowed to grow. The whole purpose of the Book of Psalms could be summarised in these two words. This Book of Psalms and the whole counsel of God is designed to develop this “delight” and a mind that “meditates” upon the word.

I suggest that the term "the law" here can include the Law of Moses, but it is a more general term and can apply to the whole of the Scriptures. I am not sure where I sourced the following summary but I have had this in my notes for many years.

Although the term Torah can be used of the law, or of the Pentateuch, or even (at a later date) of the whole OT, its significance here is the most fundamental one. Basically, the word Torah means “instruction”; specifically, it is the instruction which God gives to mankind as a guide for life. Thus it may include that which is technically law, but it also includes other more general parts of God’s revelation.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Soyeong]

Greetings Soyeong,

I can accept that David had a great respect for The Law of Moses, but when I considered Psalm 1:2 in the OP I extended the term "the law" which is mentioned twice, I expanded this to suggest that we need to delight in the word and we need to meditate upon the word:

I suggest that the term "the law" here can include the Law of Moses, but it is a more general term and can apply to the whole of the Scriptures. I am not sure where I sourced the following summary but I have had this in my notes for many years.

Although the term Torah can be used of the law, or of the Pentateuch, or even (at a later date) of the whole OT, its significance here is the most fundamental one. Basically, the word Torah means “instruction”; specifically, it is the instruction which God gives to mankind as a guide for life. Thus it may include that which is technically law, but it also includes other more general parts of God’s revelation.B

Kind regards
Trevor

I agree that delight is the view that we should have towards the whole OT even if that wasn't specifically what David had in mind, such as whether he considered other psalms that he had not yet written to be included in what he was referring to. However, Psalms 1:2 is inclusive of the Law of Moses either way, which means that anything less than the view that we should delight in obeying it is incompatible with the view that the Psalms are Scripture. Moreover, people often interpret the NT authors as though they held a negative view of obeying the Mosaic Law that is incompatible with the view that the Psalms are Scripture in spite of the fact that they are the OT book that is quoted them most by the NT. If someone delights in obeying the Law of Moses, then they should voluntarily want to obey it even if they didn't consider themselves under any obligation to do so.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Soyeong,

If someone delights in obeying the Law of Moses, then they should voluntarily want to obey it even if they didn't consider themselves under any obligation to do so.

I do not accept that we are under the Mosaic Law, the Old Covenant. Most of the moral concepts are endorsed in the New Covenant.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Josheb]

Greetings Soyeong,

I can accept that David had a great respect for The Law of Moses, but when I considered Psalm 1:2 in the OP I extended the term "the law" which is mentioned twice, I expanded this to suggest that we need to delight in the word and we need to meditate upon the word:

I suggest that the term "the law" here can include the Law of Moses, but it is a more general term and can apply to the whole of the Scriptures.

Great considerations.

It's important because there's never any inconsistency between the written word, the incarnate word, and the revealed word (rhema, etc.). It's also important to remember "the whole of scripture" in David's time did not include most of the histories of 1 &2 Chronicles and 1 &2 Kings. Nor did it include any of the exilic and post-exilic prophets and all the books written during that part of history. There was no Ecclesiastes, no Songs, and little of Psalms (they hadn't yet been written when the first psalm was penned). The Law does certainly extend beyond Moses, and it does so in both directions (the first two commands spoken to Adam count) but none of the future iterations existed in David's era.

We think on Psalm 1 with a much greater canon applicable than David.

I am not sure where I sourced the following summary but I have had this in my notes for many years.

Although the term Torah can be used of the law, or of the Pentateuch, or even (at a later date) of the whole OT, its significance here is the most fundamental one. Basically, the word Torah means “instruction”; specifically, it is the instruction which God gives to mankind as a guide for life. Thus it may include that which is technically law, but it also includes other more general parts of God’s revelation.

Kind regards
Trevor

If you're Jewish, especially of the more conservative kinds) then Torah is the Pentateuch. Only later did the term come to have synonymity with Tanakh (see the link "Torah in 24 books"), little of which David would have known when he penned Psalm 1.

 

[Josheb]

Greetings again Soyeong,

I do not accept that we are under the Mosaic Law, the Old Covenant. Most of the moral concepts are endorsed in the New Covenant.

Kind regards
Trevor

Certainly not as a means of attaining justification and righteousness. Paul and James make this very clear.

 

[Josheb]

I agree that delight is the view that we should have towards the whole OT even if that wasn't specifically what David had in mind, such as whether he considered other psalms that he had not yet written to be included in what he was referring to. However, Psalms 1:2 is inclusive of the Law of Moses either way, which means that anything less than the view that we should delight in obeying it is incompatible with the view that the Psalms are Scripture. Moreover, people often interpret the NT authors as though they held a negative view of obeying the Mosaic Law that is incompatible with the view that the Psalms are Scripture in spite of the fact that they are the OT book that is quoted them most by the NT. If someone delights in obeying the Law of Moses, then they should voluntarily want to obey it even if they didn't consider themselves under any obligation to do so.

Greetings again Soyeong,

I do not accept that we are under the Mosaic Law, the Old Covenant. Most of the moral concepts are endorsed in the New Covenant.

Kind regards
Trevor

We know things the original audience did not know. One of the things we know the original OT readers may not have known is that David understood more of the Pentateuch than the literal reading of the words would indicate. The gospel was preached to Abraham. Isaac is a monogene son of promise (foreshadowing Christ). David understood God's promise of a resurrection. By the time Jeremiah prophesied many new covenant was pending, one that indicted the disobedient and availed itself of Gentiles.

 

[Arial]

The Psalms express an extremely positive view of the Mosaic Law, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved in and delighted in obeying it, so if we consider the Psalms to be Scripture and to therefore express a correct view of the Mosaic Law, then we will share it as Paul did (Romans 7:22). For example, we can't believe in the truth of Psalms 1:1-2 while not allowing them to shape our view of the Mosaic Law. Moreover, the NT authors considered the Psalms to be Scripture, so they should be interpreted as though they were in complete agreement with the view of the Mosaic Law expressed in the Psalms.

I do not know exactly what you include or the way in which you include it when you say the Mosaic Law. Whether you are indicating that Christians are to keep it's covenant stipulations such as the feasts, dietary laws, those things that had to do with washings, and those things that had to do with the land itself, or not.

We are always obligated by being a creature made by God and in His image and likeness, to obey those moral laws and the teachings within the other laws, though they are not given as covenant Laws in the new covenant, but imperatives of righteousness.

When we read the Psalms, whether written by David or someone else, we must remember that they come from the viewpoint of one who is under the Mosaic covenant law, and therefore speak of that covenant relationship as the Law. As such, many, if not all, of the Psalms have both an application to current events and circumstances of that time, and an application to future times now fulfilled in the coming of Christ and the new covenant. But in all cases the things being said are grounded in covenant relationship of God to His covenant people. No matter what covenant that is.

 

[Soyeong]

Greetings again Soyeong,

I do not accept that we are under the Mosaic Law, the Old Covenant. Most of the moral concepts are endorsed in the New Covenant.

Kind regards
Trevor

In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts.

Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's commands are inherently moral commands. All legislators give laws according to what they think ought to be done and no one knows better than God what ought to be done. For someone to claim that some of God's commands are not moral commands is to claim that God made a moral error about what ought to be done when He gave those commands and for them to claim to have greater moral knowledge than God.

God is sovereign, therefore we are all under His law and obligated to obey it, but even if He were not, then all those who consider the Psalms to be Scripture should nevertheless still delight in obeying it voluntarily.

 

[Soyeong]

Certainly not as a means of attaining justification and righteousness. Paul and James make this very clear.

The Mosaic Law was never given as a means of earning our righteousness as a wage even through perfect obedience (Romans 4:1-5), so that was never the reason why we should obey it. Moreover, Paul also said that only doers of the Mosaic Law will be declared righteous (Romans 2:13), so there must be a reason that our righteousness requires us to obey it other than in order to earn it as a wage, such as faith insofar as the faith by which we are declared righteous does not remove our need to obey it, but rather our faith upholds it (Romans 3:31).

We know things the original audience did not know. One of the things we know the original OT readers may not have known is that David understood more of the Pentateuch than the literal reading of the words would indicate. The gospel was preached to Abraham. Isaac is a monogene son of promise (foreshadowing Christ). David understood God's promise of a resurrection. By the time Jeremiah prophesied many new covenant was pending, one that indicted the disobedient and availed itself of Gentiles.

In Matthew 4:15-23, Christ began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Mosaic Law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message, which is in accordance with Christ being sent in fulfillment of the promise to bless us by turning us from our wickedness (Acts 3:25-26), which was the Gospel that was made known in advance to Abraham in accordance with the promise (Galatians 3:8), and which he preached to Gentiles in Haran in accordance with the promise (Genesis 12:1-5).

In Genesis 18:19, God knew Abraham that he would teaching his children and those of his household to walk in His way by doing righteousness and justice that the Lord may bring to him all that He has promised. In Genesis 26:4-5, God will multiply Abraham's children as the stars in the heaven, to his children He will give all of these lands, and through his children all of the nations of the earth will be blessed because he heard God's voice and guarded His charge, His commandments, His statutes, and His laws. In Deuteronomy 30:16, if the children of Abraham will love God with all of their heart by walking in His way in obedience to His commandments, statutes, and laws, then they will live and multiply and God will bless them in the land that they go to possess. So the promise was made to Abraham and brought about because he walked in God's way in obedience to His law, he taught his children and those of his household to do that in accordance with spreading the Gospel, and because they did that in obedience to the Mosaic Law.

In Jeremiah 31:31, the New Covenant was made only with the house of Judah and the house of Israel, so it is only through becoming joined to Israel through faith in Christ that Gentiles are able to partake of the New Covenant.

 

[Soyeong]

We are always obligated by being a creature made by God and in His image and likeness, to obey those moral laws and the teachings within the other laws, though they are not given as covenant Laws in the new covenant, but imperatives of righteousness.

A chip off the old block is someone who is in the same image or has the same nature as their father expressed through doing the same works, and this is the concept of sonship in the Bible, such as in John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works as him. So this is the sense that Jesus is the Son of God insofar as he is the exact image of God's nature (Hebrews 1:3), which he expressed through setting an sinless example of how to walk in obedience to the Mosaic Law, and the sense that we are sons of God in His image when we are partaking in the divine nature through following his example. This is why those who do not practice righteousness in obedience to the Mosaic Law are not children of God (1 John 3:4-10) and why those who are born again of the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Mosaic Law (Romans 8:4-14)

Morality is based on the nature of God and all of God's laws divide between what is in accordance with or contrary to His nature, so all of His laws are inherently moral laws. The Bible often uses the same terms to describe aspects of the nature of God as it does to describe aspects of the nature of God's law, which is because it is God's instructions for how to act in accordance with those aspects of His nature, such as with it being holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) or with justice, mercy, and faithfulness being weightier matters of God's law, and aspects of God's nature are the basis of morality.

In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law.

I do not know exactly what you include or the way in which you include it when you say the Mosaic Law. Whether you are indicating that Christians are to keep it's covenant stipulations such as the feasts, dietary laws, those things that had to do with washings, and those things that had to do with the land itself, or not.

In Matthew 4:17-23, Christ began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, and the Mosaic Law was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message. Furthermore, Jesus set a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to the Mosaic Law, and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked (1 John 2:6). So Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example and Christians people to seek by faith to follow what Christ taught.

In 1 Peter 1:16, we are told to be holy for God is holy, which is a quote from Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to do that, which includes keeping God's holy days (Leviticus 19:2-3) and refraining from eating unclean animals (Leviticus 11:44-45).

When we read the Psalms, whether written by David or someone else, we must remember that they come from the viewpoint of one who is under the Mosaic covenant law, and therefore speak of that covenant relationship as the Law. As such, many, if not all, of the Psalms have both an application to current events and circumstances of that time, and an application to future times now fulfilled in the coming of Christ and the new covenant. But in all cases the things being said are grounded in covenant relationship of God to His covenant people. No matter what covenant that is.

Indeed, I agree that the Psalms were written from the viewpoint of someone who is under the Mosaic Covenant law, though that does not mean that anything that he said was any less true, but rather the NT authors did not hesitate to quote from the Psalms.

 

[Josheb]

The Mosaic Law was never given as a means of earning our righteousness as a wage...

Please read the Forum's Rules. Note Rule #3 contains an expectation of topical discourse and NOT off-topic digressions. This thread is not about the Mosaic Law. It is not about means of obtaining righteousness. This op is about Psalm 1 and to lesser extents how other writers (like Jeremiah) used the psalm. Nothing more.

The only reason Moses, Adam, Paul, James and any others were mentioned is for the single solitary point of showing David's inclusion of "whole Scripture" was limited; it did not contain even half of the books we now consider "scripture." Mothing more.

I am not going to discuss the Law of Moses with you. I am not going to discuss means of earning righteousness with you. I am not going to collaborate with digressing far afield of this op and I am most definitely not going to collaborate with any unintentional or intentional hijacking of Trevor's op. Please remember this in future threads.

One of the goals of this forum is that it will not be like many others wherein every single thread is a free for all where everyone can post off-topically and ignore a member's opening post and the specific subject(s) or inquiry posted.

 

[Soyeong]

Please read the Forum's Rules. Note Rule #3 contains an expectation of topical discourse and NOT off-topic digressions. This thread is not about the Mosaic Law. It is not about means of obtaining righteousness. This op is about Psalm 1 and to lesser extents how other writers (like Jeremiah) used the psalm. Nothing more.

The only reason Moses, Adam, Paul, James and any others were mentioned is for the single solitary point of showing David's inclusion of "whole Scripture" was limited; it did not contain even half of the books we now consider "scripture." Mothing more.

I am not going to discuss the Law of Moses with you. I am not going to discuss means of earning righteousness with you. I am not going to collaborate with digressing far afield of this op and I am most definitely not going to collaborate with any unintentional or intentional hijacking of Trevor's op. Please remember this in future threads.

One of the goals of this forum is that it will not be like many others wherein every single thread is a free for all where everyone can post off-topically and ignore a member's opening post and the specific subject(s) or inquiry posted.

According to Psalms 1:1-2, blessed are those who delight in the Torah of the Lord and who mediate on it day and night, and the OP quoted these verses, so discussing whether that is the correct view of the Torah that we should share is within the topic of the OP. You brought up denying that the Mosaic Law is a means of justification and righteousness and the Gospel being preached to Abraham, so it is not clear to me why you are criticizing me as going off topic by responding to what you said, though it is fine to refrain from those topics in this thread.

 

[Josheb]

You brought up denying that the Mosaic Law is a means of justification and righteousness and the Gospel being preached to Abraham, so it is not clear to me why you are criticizing me as going off topic by responding to what you said, though it is fine to refrain from those topics in this thread.

Then go back to the post to which I was replying (Post 25) and the post that prompted Post 25, because that is where the thread digressed. Paul and the book of Romans were brought into the conversation in a manner completely agreeable and consistent with comments I've been making to Trevor since the beginning of the thread: Our contemplation of Psalm 1 is better informed than David's, or Jeremiah's, BUT when we consider whole scripture, we should consider the "bad" AND the "good" and not use scripture selectively or romanticize Daivd or Psalm 1. I clarified the matter simply and solely to illustrate these were NOT texts David had available to him when he wrote Psalm 1 (which was an op-relevant matter that has run throughout the thread).

....so it is not clear to me why you are criticizing me as going off topic by responding to what you said, though it is fine to refrain from those topics in this thread.

Then I encourage a re-reading of the post because there's no criticism of anyone personally. None. What I did say is I'm not going to collaborate with you in digression. If there's no intent to digress then there is no need whatsoever to feel criticized. I did not say a single unkind word about anyone. Go back and see. However, if you would like me to criticize you I can, but it would be better to stick to the op.

The fact remains: Post 27 is relevant to a whole scripture view of Psalm 1 as informed by the thread as a whole but Post 32 is not. It digresses far afield of the op. The post was addressed to me, and I said I was not going to discuss the Law, means of obtaining righteousness, or and other digression. That's about my side of the conversation; not anyone else.

....you are criticizing me....

Never happened. Re-read the post. I simply stated that with which I would not collaborate.

And if that post had been correctly understood we wouldn't be having this off-topic exchange .

A Few Thoughts on Psalm 1

This is an impressive Psalm and is an introduction to the Book of Psalms. Two sets of people and two ways are revealed, summed up in the last verse, the way of the ungodly and the way of the righteous. The righteous class are introduced in the first phrase, but it is in the singular: “Blessed is the man”. Ultimately this one man is the Lord Jesus Christ.

At first his qualities are described by what he is not. The Psalmist gives us three poetic parallels, and when these are lined up, each of the three phrases seem to be a progressive decline in the character and position of the ungodly.............. Thus the Psalmist by this method also introduces to us the ungodly, sinners and the scornful.

And this is contrasted with what the blessed man is...........

One of the ironies of the psalm being David, the author of the psalm, did both (godly and ungodly).


Would you like to discuss the op?

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Soyeong and Josheb,

One of the ironies of the psalm being David, the author of the psalm, did both (godly and ungodly).

If someone delights in obeying the Law of Moses, then they should voluntarily want to obey it even if they didn't consider themselves under any obligation to do so.

I decided to address the first phrase of Psalm 1 "Blessed is the man" and in the process respond to your two different digressions. Looking at the word "Blessed", this speaks of the enduring quality of happiness, blessedness not just the occasional happy occasion or experience. Many people are obsessed with the pursuit of happiness. I will be happy when I am rich, or have a better job, or home, or car, or holiday. But here the ultimate blessedness will only come through a delight and meditation on the word of God, and this results in being like a tree planted by rivers of water and producing fruit.

The word "Blessed" occurs again in that most important Psalm that is quoted in Romans 4 which considers salvation and justification by faith.
Psalm 32:1–2 (KJV): 1 Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. 2 Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.
We can think here of the example of how David was forgiven his sin.

The next occurrence of the word "Blessed" that comes to mind is with the opening words of Jesus in Matthew 5. It is as if he takes hold of Psalm 1 and describes the qualities of the man who is to be blessed:
Matthew 5:1–12 (KJV): 1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: 2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,
3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. 5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. 6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. 7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. 8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. 9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. 10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. 12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

On our way through the Teaching of Jesus in Matthew chapters 5-7 we may pause to consider the remarkable teaching of Jesus compared to the Law of Moses:
Matthew 5:21–26 (KJV): 21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. 23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; 24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. 25 Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. 26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.
The Law of Moses condemned the act of killing, but Jesus examines the very motives. The teaching or torah of Jesus is very much more searching Hebrews 4:12.

The teaching of Jesus in Matthew chapters 5-7 is also similar to Psalm 1, as it starts with "Blessed is the man" analysed by dissecting into different qualities, and concludes with the destiny of the two classes, those that delight and meditate upon the words and teaching of Jesus:
Matthew 7:24–27 (KJV): 24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. 26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Josheb]

Greetings again Soyeong and Josheb,


I decided to address the first phrase of Psalm 1 "Blessed is the man" and in the process respond to your two different digressions. Looking at the word "Blessed", this speaks of the enduring quality of happiness, blessedness not just the occasional happy occasion or experience.

I do not mean to read as if I am a constant critic but that second sentence is not correct. Blessed and happy are not interchangeable, synonymous, or identical terms and there are plenty of occasions where a blessing might not make one happy, especially not enduringly. It is a blessing that we are alive, even though we live as wheat among weeds. It is a blessing God loves us enough to correct, chastise, and/or discipline us.

The "delight" of verse 2 is not in any blessing received from God. The delight is in God's law. Blessing and law are not interchangeable terms, either.

Many people are obsessed with the pursuit of happiness.

Yep

But here the ultimate blessedness will only come through a delight and meditation on the word of God, and this results in being like a tree planted by rivers of water and producing fruit.

Again, I disagree. There is no "ultimate" in the psalm. The ultimate blessedness is life in Christ, not meditation on the law. Not only does this risk a works doctrine, but it is dangerously close to the problem seen in the Jewish leaders of Jesus' day where they pent so much time taking delight in the law they completely missed the One of whom the law spoke whenhe was standing right in front of them commanding creation.

The word "Blessed" occurs again in that most important Psalm that is quoted in Romans 4 which considers salvation and justification by faith.
Psalm 32:1–2 (KJV): 1 Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. 2 Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.
We can think here of the example of how David was forgiven his sin.

The move from Psalm 1 to Psalm 32 then to Romans 4 based on the word "blessed" is selective and haphazard. It is also ironic because Psalm 1 says the blessing comes from meditating on the law, but Psalm 32 says the blessing comes to the lawless when forgiven - the blessing is due to forgiveness, not meditating on the law. Furthermore, the point Paul is making in Romans 4 is an open, blunt rebuke of the works mentality with which the law was read in OT times.

The next occurrence of the word "Blessed" that comes to mind is with the opening words of Jesus in Matthew 5.

Why is that the next mention that comes to mind?

Are you aware every single one of the statements can be found elsewhere in the Old Testament? Jesus was teaching Tanakh.

It is as if he takes hold of Psalm 1 and describes the qualities of the man who is to be blessed:

No, he is surveying a large swath of the Tanakh and reminding his audience of the true view of God's law, not the legalistic view taught by the Jewish leaders of their day.

On our way through the Teaching of Jesus in Matthew chapters 5-7 we may pause to consider the remarkable teaching of Jesus compared to the Law of Moses............. The Law of Moses condemned the act of killing, but Jesus examines the very motives. The teaching or torah of Jesus is very much more searching Hebrews 4:12.

Yes, Jesus did call attention to motive (sometimes over act), but what does that have to do with Psalm 1?

The teaching of Jesus in Matthew chapters 5-7 is also similar to Psalm 1, as it starts with "Blessed is the man" analysed by dissecting into different qualities, and concludes with the destiny of the two classes, those that delight and meditate upon the words and teaching of Jesus.......

You've said some excellent things in this thread (and some things I find problematic) but this is the best of the bunch. The contrast between David and Jesus is worth contemplating. So too is the contrast between Jewish leaders like Caiaphas and Paul (or Saul and Paul) because the former took delight in God's law but not in the same way as the latter.

 

[Soyeong]

Greetings again Soyeong and Josheb,


I decided to address the first phrase of Psalm 1 "Blessed is the man" and in the process respond to your two different digressions. Looking at the word "Blessed", this speaks of the enduring quality of happiness, blessedness not just the occasional happy occasion or experience. Many people are obsessed with the pursuit of happiness. I will be happy when I am rich, or have a better job, or home, or car, or holiday. But here the ultimate blessedness will only come through a delight and meditation on the word of God, and this results in being like a tree planted by rivers of water and producing fruit.

The word "Blessed" occurs again in that most important Psalm that is quoted in Romans 4 which considers salvation and justification by faith.
Psalm 32:1–2 (KJV): 1 Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. 2 Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.
We can think here of the example of how David was forgiven his sin.

The next occurrence of the word "Blessed" that comes to mind is with the opening words of Jesus in Matthew 5. It is as if he takes hold of Psalm 1 and describes the qualities of the man who is to be blessed:
Matthew 5:1–12 (KJV): 1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: 2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,
3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. 5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. 6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. 7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. 8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. 9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. 10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. 12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

On our way through the Teaching of Jesus in Matthew chapters 5-7 we may pause to consider the remarkable teaching of Jesus compared to the Law of Moses:
Matthew 5:21–26 (KJV): 21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. 23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; 24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. 25 Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. 26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.
The Law of Moses condemned the act of killing, but Jesus examines the very motives. The teaching or torah of Jesus is very much more searching Hebrews 4:12.

The teaching of Jesus in Matthew chapters 5-7 is also similar to Psalm 1, as it starts with "Blessed is the man" analysed by dissecting into different qualities, and concludes with the destiny of the two classes, those that delight and meditate upon the words and teaching of Jesus:
Matthew 7:24–27 (KJV): 24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. 26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

Kind regards
Trevor

In Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from the Mosaic Law, so Jesus did not do that, but rather everything that he taught in Matthew 5-7 and in the rest of his ministry was deeply rooted in the OT. For example, we are commanded not to hate our brother in Leviticus 19:17, so Jesus was not teaching anything brand new.

 

[Soyeong]

The ultimate blessedness is life in Christ, not meditation on the law.

That is contradictory because Jesus lived in sinless obedience to the law. We can't meditate on God's word made flesh without also meditating on God's word.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Soyeong and Josheb,

The "delight" of verse 2 is not in any blessing received from God.

I consider the blessing is from God.

Again, I disagree. There is no "ultimate" in the psalm. The ultimate blessedness is life in Christ, not meditation on the law. Not only does this risk a works doctrine

I suggest that the ultimate destiny of the righteous is pictured in the tree, and the rejection of the wicked is likened to chaff that is blown away by the wind. I question what you are saying with "a works doctrine". I do not accept Luther's "faith alone" or similar. I believe in "faith that works by love" Galatians 5:6.

The move from Psalm 1 to Psalm 32 then to Romans 4 based on the word "blessed" is selective and haphazard.

Yes, it was very selective and not haphazard to counteract your extremely wrong view about David and the role of kings.

Why is that the next mention that comes to mind?

The repeated use of the word "Blessed" in Matthew 5 reminded me of Psalm 1 and the fact that it prefaces this important portion of Jesus' teaching is similar to the importance of Psalm 1 prefacing The Book of Psalms.

Yes, Jesus did call attention to motive (sometimes over act), but what does that have to do with Psalm 1?

I added this in response to @Soyeong and his emphasis on the Law of Moses. Jesus takes the Law of Moses and expands this commandment in a remarkable way.

You've said some excellent things in this thread (and some things I find problematic) but this is the best of the bunch.

I appreciate the partial endorsement, but I am not very fluent in explaining my perspective. I am a technical person and not a speaker in our lay fellowship. We had a study/fellowship meeting last weekend for our 8 meetings in my region and the speaker gave 5 studies and was very clear and comprehensive.

In Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from the Mosaic Law, so Jesus did not do that, but rather everything that he taught in Matthew 5-7 and in the rest of his ministry was deeply rooted in the OT. For example, we are commanded not to hate our brother in Leviticus 19:17, so Jesus was not teaching anything brand new.

Jesus' teaching is much more comprehensive than the Law of Moses. Could I ask if we need to obey the Law of Moses and be circumcised? What about the sacrifices? I would also be interested in your view of the following Law, and how it needs to be obeyed today.
Deuteronomy 14:21 (KJV): Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk.
I understand that, in say Tel Aviv, that you cannot be served a glass of milk if you ordered a dinner with meat. How do you apply this, and is there some spiritual meaning in this command? I hold one opinion.

Kind regards
Trevor