The Meek Shall Inherit the Earth? Deciphering Meaning Through Layers of Context (Part 3 of 5)

The First Gospel, so called because of its positioning in the New Testament, is historically attributed to Matthew Levi, an apostle of Jesus Christ and former tax collector. There is no manuscript evidence indicating that the document ever circulated without “According to Matthew” as its title, and no other name was ever appended to it.¹ 

Seeing that Matthew’s Gospel betrays a strong Jewish orientation, the ethnic heritage of both the author and reading audience appears to have been Jewish. The terminology is decidedly Jewish.² A number of Aramaic expressions occur throughout the text, often without translation.³ Familiarity with Jewish history, politics, ideas, and customs is assumed.⁴ The Hebrew Bible has a prominent place, with about 40 quotations and over 100 allusions, demonstrating a mutual knowledge of and respect for these sacred writings. More fulfilled OT prophecies are cited than in any of the other Gospels.⁵ Matthew opens with the genealogy of Jesus and traces the line of decent back to Abraham (1:1-17).⁶

Palestine, particularly Judea, is a plausible location for the document’s origin and/or destination (cf. Jerome, De vir. ill. 3), although a more popular suggestion is Syria, specifically Antioch. The earliest clear usage of Matthew’s Gospel comes from Antioch in the early 2nd-century writings of Ignatius (ca. 35-107), who made much use of the text (see Smyrn. 1.1; Eph. 19.1-3; Polc. 2.2). The Gospel fits well into the setting of Syrian Antioch, which had a large Jewish population, a well-established Christian community, and a church committed to the discipleship of all nations (cp. Matt. 28:18-20; Acts 11:29; 13:1-3; 14:27-28; 15:40; 18:22-23). 

Contextual Layer #3: Matthew and His Reading Audience

Matthew was more than a biographer and historian. He was also an evangelist and theologian. While providing a reliable record of historical facts, he conveys doctrinal truth for developing faith in Christ and Christ’s teachings. The introduction of Matthew’s Gospel (1:1–4:16) is saturated with quotations from the Hebrew scriptures, confirming Jesus of Nazareth as the long-anticipated fulfillment of the messianic prophecies. The extensive narrative that follows is interspersed with five major sections of discourse material, beginning with the Sermon on the Mount in chapters 5–7. 

Chronologically, geographically, socially, ethnically, and culturally, Matthew’s initial reading audience would not have been too far removed from Jesus’ original listening audience. The teachings and influence of Christ’s earthly ministry had reached as far north as Syria, as far south as Idumea, as far east as the Decapolis and Perea, and all in between (Matt. 4:24-25; Mark 3:7-8). It is highly improbable that the contents of the Sermon on the Mount were limited to a solitary speech on a single occasion. We would surely expect the Lord to have regularly and repeatedly shared this information on multiple occasions. Matthew has captured the essence of what Jesus characteristically taught.

Matthew’s inclusion of this lengthy discourse, absent from the other Gospels, is indicative of authorial selectivity. Each Gospel writer, according to his immediate purpose, at times focuses on certain details ignored by others or omits particular elements highlighted by others.⁷ Consideration of both the similarities and differences is especially informative when comparing Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount with Luke’s record of the Sermon on the Plain (Luke 6:17-49). In Luke’s rendering of the beatitudes, blessings are pronounced on those who are literally poor and hungry (Luke 6:20-23), whereas Matthew’s record is more spiritually oriented (Matt. 5:3-12).

Rather than editorial modification, as some have suspected, authorial selectivity is more likely. Matthew and Luke emphasize different aspects of the Lord’s teachings for their respective readerships. Matthew’s inclusion of the Psalm 37:11 quotation, “Blessed are the meek, for ‘they shall inherit the land’” (Matt. 5:5), is particularly meaningful from a Jewish perspective. Luke’s account, directed to a non-Jewish audience, has no reference to it. Yet both include the Lord’s anticipatory assurance of the great reward in heaven (Matt. 5:12; Luke 6:23).

The Broader Christian Community

The striking parallels between the Sermon on the Mount and the epistle of James demonstrate the ongoing influence of Christ’s teachings in the early church.⁸ Nevertheless, when Jesus preached this impactful sermon, it was not the time to impart exclusively Christian doctrine, nor was it the time to set aside the Mosaic Law (Matt. 5:17-29; 7:12), but it was necessary to address the fallacies of hypocritical leaders (5:20; 6:2, 5, 16; 7:15-20, 29) and prepare for the approaching kingdom (cf. 6:10, 33; 7:21).

During the Lord’s bodily presence on earth, God’s spiritual kingdom was soon to be realized, specifically within the lifetime of some of his personal disciples (Matt. 3:2; 4:17; 10:7; 16:28). Matthew and his readers, contemporaries of other NT writers and their readers, were in fact citizens of this promised kingdom as members of Christ’s church (Matt. 16:18-19). From the historical record of Acts 2 onwards, the church Jesus promised to build was existing and growing and recognized as “the kingdom of God.”⁹ 

At the time Matthew’s Gospel was produced,¹⁰ the residents of the Roman provinces of Judea and Syria (later combined as Syria Palestina) were subjected to the governing control of Rome. Those resisting compromise with foreign occupiers and pagan influences were generally suppressed and marginalized. Much of what Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount would have resonated with Matthew’s readers and other Christians at this time.

Concluding Thoughts

Why allude to Psalm 37:11? What significance would this have had to the respective audiences of the psalmist, of Jesus, and of Matthew? While the wicked appear to prosper, those deprived of dignity and resources seem to be missing out on the “good things” of this world. But the common theme of Psalm 37, the Sermon on the Mount, and Matthew’s Gospel is that the righteous, even when disenfranchised by the world, are the ones to whom God’s kingdom belongs (Matt. 5:3, 10). It is in this radically transcendent kingdom, where the social boundaries of honor and shame are reversed, that divine favor, comfort, and provision are afforded.¹¹

Matthew certainly does not overlook the Lord’s concern for people’s observable physical needs, but the primary focus is consistently heavenward in addressing their greater spiritual needs (cf. 9:6-8, 35-38; 12:28; 15:31). Matthew’s Jewish Christian community is repeatedly reminded of the enormous chasm between the earthly and the heavenly,¹² the temporary and the eternal,¹³ the physical and the spiritual.¹⁴ It is in this context the statement is made: “Blessed are the meek, for ‘they shall inherit the land’.” A temporal land inheritance, as some modern interpreters suggest, would be a major disappointment!

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:
      ¹ See K. L. Moore, Authorship of NT Gospels; also A Critical Introduction to the NT (Henderson, TN: Hester, 2009): 60-63.

     ² Matt. 2:20-21; 4:5; 5:35, 47; 6:7, 32; 10:6; 17:24-27; 18:17; 27:53.

     ³ Matt. 5:22; 6:24; 16:17; 27:33, 46.

     ⁴ Matt. 1:18-19; 2:1, 4, 22; 14:1; 17:24; 23:2; 26:3, 57, 59; 27:2, 11, 13.

     ⁵ Matt. 1:1, 22-23; 2:5-6, 15, 17-18, 23; 3:3; 4:14-16; 5:17; 8:16-17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15, 35; 21:4-5; 26:63-64; 27:9-10.

     ⁶ See K. L. Moore, Matthew's Audience, and Lineage of Jesus. The Lord’s recorded reference in the third person to “their synagogues” (10:17) is applicable to antagonistic nonbelieving Jews rather than implying anything about the ethnicity of Matthew’s readership. Compare the third person wording in 4:23; 9:35, and descriptions in 6:2, 5; 23:6, 34 of adversarial behavior in the synagogues.

     ⁷ See K. L. Moore, Synoptic Confusion.

     ⁸ See James B. Adamson, The Epistle of James NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976): 21-22; Virgil V. Porter, Jr., “The Sermon on the Mount in the Book of James, Part 1,” BibSac 162:647 (July 2005): 344-60; and “The Sermon on the Mount in the Book of James, Part 2,” BibSac 162:648 (Oct. 2005): 470-82.

     ⁹ Acts 1:2-8; 2:1-47; 8:12; 14:21-22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31; Eph. 2:19; Col. 1:13, 18; 4:11; Rev. 1:6, 9; 5:10. See K. L. Moore, The Kingdom of God (Part 3).

     ¹⁰ See K. L. Moore, A Critical Introduction to the NT 64. While a number of scholars propose AD 80-90 for the writing of this Gospel, the present author favors a more conservative date in the mid-60s. This is based, in part, on the testimony of Irenaeus, who reports that Matthew penned his Gospel while both Paul and Peter were in Rome (Adv. Haer. 3.1.1). The Magdalen Papyrus (P64), containing portions of Matthew 26, has been dated as early as ca. 66 (see Carsten P. Thiede and Matthew D’Ancona, The Jesus Papyrus [NY: Doubleday, 1996]), although this controversial dating is disputed.

     ¹¹ See Seung Ai Yang, “Sermon on the Mount/Plain,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, 2nd ed., eds. J. B. Green, J. K. Brown, and N. Perrin (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2013): 847-48. Also K. L. Moore, Honor and Shame.

     ¹² Matt. 5:3, 10, 12-16, 34-35; 6:9-10, 19-21; 11:25; 16:19; 18:10, 18-19; 23:9; 25:31-46; 28:18.

     ¹³ Matt. 5:18; 6:25-34; 7:13-14, 24-27; 10:22, 32-33; 11:20-24; 12:6-8; 23:21-22; 24:35

     ¹⁴ Matt. 6:11-15, 22-23; 8:20; 9:2-8, 12-13, 15-17; 10:28; 11:28-30; 12:25-30, 39-45, 48-50; 16:6-12, 24-28; 17:20; 18:1-14; 19:14, 21-30; 21:21-22; 22:29-33; 23:13, 23; 26:26-29, 41.

Related Posts: The Meek Shall Inherit the Earth? Part 1, Part 2, Part 4, Part 5

Related articles:

Image credit: Adapted from https://truemeaningoflifeis.com/is-the-bible-true/

The Meek Shall Inherit the Earth? Deciphering Meaning Through Layers of Context (Part 2 of 5)

On a Galilean slope near Capernaum, the Lord Jesus delivered his celebrated discourse traditionally known as “the Sermon on the Mount,” recorded in chapters 5–7 of Matthew’s Gospel.¹ In his mission of “proclaiming the good news of the kingdom” (4:23), Jesus would have been speaking in the Aramaic language to a large gathering of Aramaic-speaking Jews, inclusive of but not limited to his disciples (4:25; 5:1; 7:28; cf. 10:5-6; 15:24). The message, having been preserved in Greek translation, uses imagery and comparisons with which the Lord’s immediate audience would have been familiar (5:13-15, 21-22, 25-27, 31, 33, 38, 43, 46-47), addressing topics particularly relevant to them (5:20, 23-24, 28, 32, 34-37, 39-42, 44-48), while preparing for the advent of God’s spiritual kingdom (3:2; 4:17, 23; 5:3, 10, 19, 20; 6:10, 33; 7:21). 

As part of the lengthy address, Jesus quotes, alludes to, and echoes multiple passages from the Hebrew scriptures.² In the present study our focus is on the segment recorded in Matthew 5:5, “Blessed are the meek, for ‘they shall inherit the land,’” a quote from Psalm 37:11a.³ While the Greek noun gē can be used in various senses (“land,” “ground,” “earth,” etc.; see BDAG 196), most English translations inconsistently render it “earth” in this passage but “land” in the OT text from which it is quoted.⁴ As observed in our previous post, “the land” of Psalm 37:3, 9, 11, 22, 29, 34 is contextually the promised land of the Israelites. To “inherit the land,” from an ancient Hebrew perspective, is idiomatically synonymous with God’s providential care, provision of needs, security, peace, empowerment, averting shame, and salvation (or deliverance), offering the psalmist’s Hebrew audience assurance and hope. From this initial layer of context, we move on to the next.

Contextual Layer #2: Jesus and His Listening Audience

Speaking to a crowd of Jewish contemporaries still amenable to the old-covenant system of Moses (Matt. 5:17-19), the Lord pronounces blessings (“beatitudes”) on those exhibiting certain virtues (vv. 2-11). Included is the quote from Psalm 37:11a. What would be a reasonable expectation for how this statement would have been received by this particular audience?

Those whom Jesus addressed were already residing in the land of promise, albeit under the occupation and control of a foreign power (Matt. 22:17; Luke 2:1; 3:1). When Judea was annexed as a Roman province in AD 6 (incorporating Samaria, Idumea, and at times Galilee), the local Jews begrudgingly transitioned from an autonomous nation to a subjugated and suppressed people. It was in this environment that the defiant Zealot movement was born,⁵ prompting Jesus to observe on another occasion, “but from the days of John the baptizer until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent forcefully seize it” (Matt. 11:12).

In his epic sermon Christ repeatedly challenges the status quo of his day and promotes an alternative way of thinking (“but I say to you …”).⁶ When he affirms, “blessed are the meek” (Matt. 5:5a), to what kind of persons is he alluding? The standard lexical definition of the Greek adjective praüs is “gentle, humble, considerate, meek” (BDAG 861). It would be the opposite of angry hostility (vv. 21-26), lack of self-control (vv. 27-32), lack of integrity (vv. 33-37), retribution (vv. 38-42), and hatred (vv. 43-48). In the original context of Psalm 37, from which Jesus draws the allusion, the description applies to those oppressed but still showing mercy, generosity, righteousness, and faithfulness, trusting in Yahweh, practicing goodness, and obeying his will. 

The quoted blessing, “they shall inherit the land,” is poetry, not theology.⁷ For a Jewish person in antiquity this was a comforting affirmation of divine favor. Anticipating improved circumstances (cp. Psa. 25:13), the expression was “emblematic of the better prosperity and happiness of life.”⁸ But what kind of prosperity? With the provision of physical needs understood (Matt. 6:11, 25-34), note Christ’s weighty emphasis on the heavenly nature of God’s kingdom (5:3, 10, 19, 20; 7:21), the priority of heavenly treasures (6:19-21), and the heavenly reward (5:12) in the presence of the heavenly Father (5:16, 34, 45, 48; 6:1, 9, 26, 32; 7:11). The greatest benefits are by far spiritual in nature (6:1, 4, 6, 9-10, 12-14, 18). A clear distinction is consistently made between the materialistic cares of the world and the loftier ways of God (6:19-24, 33; 7:6, 13-21, 24-27, 29). 

To isolate and literalize the statement in Matthew 5:5 to advocate a literal, futuristic, earthly habitation is a form of “physicalism” that runs contrary to the rest of the Lord’s teachings. Focusing on the temporal to the virtual disregard of the heavenly was characteristic of the vain externals of hypocrites (6:1, 5, 16), the empty ritualism of the heathen (6:7), the materialism of pagan Gentiles (6:32), and the deceptive appeal of false teachers (7:15). It ignores Christ’s persistent contrast between physical and spiritual realities (5:3, 10, 12-16, 34-35; 6:9-10, 19-21). 

Concluding Thoughts

Known for his emblematic and parabolic teaching style, Jesus routinely used earthly examples to convey spiritual truths, particularly with regard to “the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 7:24-27; 9:12-17; 16:6-12; 18:23-35; 20:1-16; 21:28-45; 22:1-14; 24:45-51; 25:1-30), a.k.a. “the kingdom of God” (19:23-24). It is also helpful to remember the common usage of physical types from the OT to illustrate spiritual antitypes in the NT, e.g., Jonah, Nineveh, Solomon, Elijah (12:39-42; 16:4; 17:10-13), to name a few.⁹ To “inherit the land” (5:5b), as a historical symbol, does not replace or counter the spiritually-explicit affirmation, “for great is your reward in heaven” (v. 12b).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ The traditional site is Mount Eremos, just northwest of the Sea of Galilee and west of the Jordan River on the southern slopes of the Korazim Plateau in northern Israel, also known as the Mount of Beatitudes (cf. Matt. 14:23; 15:29; 28:16; Mark 3:13). Seeing that the material in the first thirteen chapters of Matthew’s Gospel is arranged more topically than chronologically, this sermon was likely delivered at the height of the Lord’s Galilean ministry, as indicated by the large crowds. Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² See Craig L. Blomberg, “Matthew,” in Commentary on the NT Use of the OT, eds. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007): 20-30.

     ³ That this is a direct quote from Psalm 37:11 is seen by comparing Matthew’s Greek translation of Jesus’ words with the LXX version of the Hebrew text, showing parallel usage of the nominative masculine plural hoi praeîs (“the meek [ones]”), the future active indicative klēronomēsousin (“shall inherit”), and the accusative feminine gēn (“land”). Also note the inclusion in Matt. 5:5 of the conjunction hóti, which is functionally equivalent to quotation marks. See BDAG 732; H. E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek NT (Toronto: Macmillan, 1955): 252. 

     ⁴ The Douay-Rheims Bible, New American Bible (revised), Young’s Literal Translation, Orthodox Jewish Bible, and Easy-to-Read Version render the word “land” in Matt. 5:5, while the King James and New King James Versions employ “earth” in both passages.

     ⁵ See K. L. Moore, Ancient Terrorists, Barabbas, Historical Background: Jewish Subgroups, Historical Background: Roman Authority. It has also been suggested that the idea of a separate, organized group of rebels was invented by Josephus in order to divert the hostile attention of the Romans away from the general Jewish populace (see M. Smith, “Zealots and Sicarii,” HTR 64.1 [1971]: 5). It is true there is little evidence of the Zealots as an organized group prior to the revolt of AD 66 (see Josephus, War 4.129-62). Nevertheless, the earlier presence and activities of these freedom fighters, whether organized or not, are evident in passages like Mark 15:7; Luke 6:15; 23:19, 25; Acts 5:36-37; 21:38.

     ⁶ Matt. 5:20-22, 27-28, 31-34, 38-39, 43-44; cf. also 6:2, 5, 7, 16, 32; 7:15, 29.

     ⁷ See Douglas Stuart, “The Psalms: Israel’s Prayers and Ours,” in How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, by G. D. Fee and D. Stuart (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2014): 215-16. 

     ⁸ Al Novak, Hebrew Honey: A Simple and Deep Word Study of the Old Testament (Houston, TX: C & D International, 1987): 140.

     ⁹ Discussed further in Part 5. We could add to the discussion the emblematic appeal to “the shepherd” and “the sheep” (Matt. 26:31), or the emblems of the Lord’s Supper representing far greater spiritual concepts (26:26-29).

Related Posts: The Meek Shall Inherit the Earth? Part 1, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5

Related articles:

Image credit: https://en.light-of-truth.org/sermon-on-the-mount-the-beatitudes.html

The Meek Shall Inherit the Earth? Deciphering Meaning Through Layers of Context (Part 1 of 5)

A single verse in the Bible is like an isolated piece of a jigsaw puzzle: the whole picture is indiscernible unless all the pieces are joined together. To focus on a biblical text without considering its surrounding context almost certainly guarantees distortion of meaning. While the twofold emphasis of contextual studies involves the particular environments within which biblical narratives and discourses took place and within which the biblical writings themselves were produced, there are other contextual matters that must not be overlooked. 

Multiple Layers of Context 

The Bible is fundamentally a compilation of sixty-six separate documents representing a variety of literary genres and subgenres. When any passage of scripture is examined, the type of literature through which it is conveyed dictates its purpose and meaning.

If a historian records someone’s public speech that contains quotations from other sources, there are at least three layers of context to consider: (1) the quoted material, including the original speaker or writer, his targeted audience, and their immediate circumstances; (2) the oral discourse, including the orator, the listening audience, and their immediate circumstances; and (3) the written account, including the author, the projected reading audience, and their immediate circumstances. 

The Lord’s Sermon on the Mount, recorded in Matthew 5–7, comprises all three layers: (1) scripture quotations, (2) Jesus and his listening audience, and (3) Matthew and his reading audience. All these layers of context are helpful in discerning the Spirit-inspired message, enabling interpreters to handle God’s word accurately and make application to a fourth layer: the present-day church and world.

Contextual Layer #1: Psalm 37 

The biblical psalms, as a collection of prayers and hymns, are more likely to contain words spoken to or about God than from God. They are poetic by nature and characteristically composed with figurative language. Their function is not primarily for the teaching of doctrinal absolutes.¹ In the genre of Hebrew poetry, the imagery is familiar to the psalmist’s contemporary Hebrew audience and creates associations that stir the emotions and engage the mind. A psalmist should therefore be afforded appropriate leeway to create a work within the parameters of his own literary conventions. The more we appreciate the poetry and cultural environment of the psalms, the better we understand the intended message.²

Psalm 37 can be subcategorized as a wisdom (sapiential) psalm, contrasting the respective plights of the righteous and the wicked, along with assurances of blessings and judgments. Lost in English translation is the poem’s acrostic structure, with two lines given to each letter of the Hebrew alphabet. Easier to detect is the synonymous parallelism, where the second line repeats or reinforces the preceding line, with meaning drawn from the combination of both. Parallelism is not two separate ideas but one main idea expressed in two different ways. It is important in analyzing any poem to discover its theme and how each part contributes to the whole. The entirety of the psalm, not just a single verse or stanza, supplies the interpretive framework. 

Of particular interest to our present study is the recurring blessing involving the Hebrew verbs shakan (“abide,” “dwell,” “settle down,” vv. 3, 27, 29) and yarash (“inherit,” “possess by inheritance,” vv. 9, 11, 22, 29, 34), along with the noun erets (“land,” vv. 3, 9, 11, 22, 29, 34).³ These familiar concepts would immediately call to the Jewish mind the Abrahamic promises (Gen. 12:1-7; Psa. 105:42-45), the physical aspect of which was realized in Abraham’s biological descendants – the Israelites (Gen. 12:2a, 7; 15:5-7; Ex. 32:13; Deut. 1:8).⁴ This provided a national setting for the fulfillment of the spiritual messianic promise: “in you [your seed, 22:18; 26:4] all the families of the earth [adamah] shall be blessed” (Gen. 12:3b; cf. Acts 3:25-26; Gal. 3:8-29; 4:4-7).

To “dwell in the land” (Psalm 37:3) meant so much more than mere territorial occupancy. Reprobates, void of divine favor, physically inhabited the land of Israel for generations (Lev. 20:2-5; Judg. 1:19-21, 27-35; 2:2-3; Ezek. 33:23-26). In the context of Psalm 37, the land dwellers are those exhibiting trust in God, goodness, and allegiance to the divine will, thereby benefitting from his faithfulness and provision (vv. 3-4). They are further identified as the “meek” [anav] (v. 11), those oppressed (v. 14) yet merciful and generous (vv. 21, 23), righteous and faithful (vv. 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 21, 23, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 37, 39, 40).⁵

To “inherit the land” (Psalm 37:9, 11, 22, 29, 34),⁶ therefore, is an expression of comfort and hope (vv. 1, 7, 8). It is idiomatically synonymous with providential care (vv. 3, 5, 6, 17b, 18, 19b, 24, 26b, 28, 31b, 40), including provision (v. 4, 25), protection (v. 33, 40a), peace (vv. 11, 37), fortification (vv. 17, 19, 24, 39b), rising above shame (vv. 19a, 34), and salvation (v. 39a, 40b). In old covenant Judaism, the sacred land (centralized in Jerusalem) represented Yahweh’s presence among his people (Ex. 33:1, 14; Psa. 27:4-6; 65:4; 140:13; Isa. 2:3). But to literalize the poetic imagery is to miss the spiritual significance of the divine purpose, more clearly revealed in the New Testament.

Concluding Thoughts

The psalmist essentially encourages his readers to trust in the Lord for improved circumstances. Traditionally ascribed to David, apparently in his later years (v. 25), Psalm 37 is thus placed in the historical context of the united kingdom of Israel during the first half of the 10th century BC. In another Davidic psalm (25:13), to “inherit the land” parallels towb, “goodness” or “well-being.” Just to hear the expression would have offered a great deal of consolation to any Jewish persons in antiquity, especially the disadvantaged and oppressed, irrespective of when or where they lived.

While some have posited the dating as late as the 4th century BC,⁷ whoever was responsible for the Psalter’s ancient inscriptions would have had access to information unavailable to subsequent generations.⁸ Moreover, the Davidic titles assume readers know who David is and are familiar with his life and poetry. Whether the psalm was originally intended for pre-exilic Jews, who already inhabited the land, or those in exile, who longed to return to the land, or post-exilic Jews of the diaspora, it offers the same assurances and hope. 

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Douglas Stuart, “The Psalms: Israel’s Prayers and Ours,” in How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, by G. D. Fee and D. Stuart (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2014): 212-16. At the same time, however, we still acknowledge “the importance of understanding the instructional function of the Psalms as a book. This is because the very process of canonical collection means that the 150 psalms now gathered together are seen as playing a special role within the life of Israel. Their place within the canon also means that they have a further role …. their very status as scripture means that they now have a teaching role” (David G. Firth, “The Teaching of the Psalms,” in Interpreting the Psalms: Issues and Approaches, eds. D. Firth and P. S. Johnston [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2005]: 162).

     ² Mark D. Futato, Interpreting the Psalms: An Exegetical Handbook (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007): 24-42. Ancient near-eastern literature, even when translated, is very different from the literature to which modern readers are accustomed. A poem’s rhetorical effect on a targeted audience, far removed from our own, should not be ignored. See David Petersen and Kent Harold Richards, Interpreting Hebrew Poetry (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1992): 1-16.

     ³ Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation. The Hebrew noun erets (vv. 3, 9, 11, 22, 29, 34) is consistently translated “land” in most English versions (e.g. ASV, CSB, ESV, ISV, NIV, NASB, NET, N/RSV, YLT), but varyingly rendered in the N/KJV “land” (vv. 3, 29, 34) and “earth” (vv. 9, 11, 22). It is flexible enough to apply to the entire planet (Gen. 18:18, 25), earth’s inhabitants (Psa. 33:8; 66:4), a regional or territorial section of land (Gen. 10:10, 11; 11:28; Psa. 42:6), particularly the land of Canaan (Gen. 11:31; 12:1, 5; Psa. 105:11; 135:12; 136:21) often designated simply “the land” (Gen. 1:8, 21; 12:6; Deut. 17:14; 18:9; Psa. 35:20). In addition to usage in Davidic psalms (incl. 101:6, 8), see also 44:3; 80:9; 85:1, 9, 12; 106:38; cp. 74:8. 

     ⁴ Historically the Abrahamic land inheritance (Gen. 12:7; 13:14-17; 15:7-18; Deut. 4:1; 16:20) was fulfilled (Acts 7:2-5, 17, 45; Josh. 3:14-17; 21:43-45; 1 Kings 4:21; Neh. 9:7-8), albeit conditionally (Lev. 20:22, 24; Deut. 28:1-2, 15; Josh. 23:13-16; 1 Kings 9:6-7; 2 Chron. 20:7). Nevertheless, Abraham’s descendants did not remain faithful to the covenant (1 Kings 19:10; Jer. 31:32) and eventually lost the land (Josh. 23:13-16). The Hebrew olam (“forever”) occurs three times in Psalm 37, in conjunction with the righteous ones’ inheritance (v. 18), abiding (v. 27), and preservation (v. 29). Even though the Abrahamic land inheritance was promised “forever” (Gen. 13:15, ESV, NASB, NIV, NKJV), this must be understood not only as a conditional promise but also in view of the fact that olam signifies simple duration and applies to that which continues as long as it was intended (cp. Gen. 17:13; Ex. 12:14; 21:6; 29:42; 30:8; Lev. 23:14; 1 Kings 9:3-5; et al.). Irrespective of what may or may not result on the other end, olam is merely a durative term expressing something that lasts its allotted time. See K. L. Moore, Will the Earth Last Forever?.

     ⁵ The masculine noun anav is descriptive of the humble and gentle (Psa. 10:12, 17; 25:9; 34:2; 69:32), the afflicted and oppressed (Psa. 22:26; 147:6; 149:4; Isa. 11:4; 29:19; 53:4; 61:1), those who seek the Lord, uphold his justice, seek righteousness, and seek humility (Zeph. 2:3).

     ⁶ Except for the infinitive construct in v. 34, the future form of this verb is repeatedly employed (vv. 9, 11, 22, 29), although verbal tense in Hebrew, unlike modern languages, refers more particularly to action than time. The Hebrew future tense expresses what is unfinished, whether future or present, something anticipated or continued at any point of time. See William Wilson, Wilson’s Old Testament Word Studies (McLean, VA: Macdonald, n.d. [rev. ed., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1990]): i-ii.

     ⁷ Elmer A. Leslie, The Psalms: Translated and Interpreted in the Light of Hebrew Life and Worship (Nashville; NY: Abingdon, 1949): 412. Samuel L. Terrien posits a 6th-century date for Psalm 37, from late-exilic or early-postexilic times (The Psalms: Strophic Structure and Theological Commentary [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003]: 322). Whether or not a specific time period can be determined, the psalms reflect “the spiritual insight and religious heritage of a small number of ancient Israelites ...” (David Firth and Philip S. Johnston, eds., Interpreting the Psalms: Issues and Approaches [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2005]: 17).

     ⁸ When and by whom the collection of canonical psalms was compiled is unknown, though it is not outside the range of plausibility that the titles were appended by the original authors themselves. See Franz Delitzsch, “Biblical Commentary on the Psalms,” Vol. 1, in Biblical Commentary on the OT by C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968): 23. Prefixing authorial titles to songs was an ancient practice among the Hebrews (Deut. 31:30; Isa. 38:9; Hab. 3:1; cp. Ex. 15:1, 21; Num. 24:3; Judg. 5:1), inclusive of David (2 Sam. 1:17-18; 22:1; 23:1; cp. Psa. 72:20). Moreover, Davidic authorship of selected psalms is confirmed in the NT (Matt. 22:45; Mark 12:36-37; Luke 20:42-44; Acts 1:16, 20; 2:25-28, 34-35; 4:25-26; [cf. 13:33, 35]; Rom. 4:6-8; 11:9-10; Heb. 4:7); viz. Psalms 2, 16, 32, 69, 95, 110. 

Related Posts: The Meek Shall Inherit the Earth? Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5

Related articles:

Image credit: Adapted from https://pxhere.com/en/photo/669722

The Meek Shall Inherit the Earth

Sermon on the Mount by Deborah Coombs

      From a mountain near Capernaum, the celebrated "Sermon on the Mount" was preached by our Lord Jesus, recorded in chapters 5–7 of Matthew’s Gospel. In the opening words blessings ("beatitudes") are pronounced on those exhibiting certain virtues, with the affirmation in 5:5, "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth" (NKJV).
      The term "blessed" is translated from the Greek makarios, signifying those who are "fortunate" and consequently "happy" due to having received a blessing. The blessed ones in this verse are the "meek" (praeis), namely those whose strength is under control and is exercised in a gentle, kind, benevolent manner. And in what way are they blessed? "For they shall inherit the earth."
      This statement has generated a great deal of confusion and debate over the centuries, especially when wrenched from its context and interpreted through the distorted lens of popular premillennial theories. But by removing our 21st-century spectacles and viewing the words of Jesus from the perspective of his original audience, the message becomes much clearer.
      The blessings of verses 4-9 are bracketed between the repeated blessing of verses 3 and 10: "For theirs is the kingdom of heaven." Matthew alone employs the expression "the kingdom of heaven," which is synonymous with "the kingdom of God" (cf. 19:23-24), underscoring the heavenly or spiritual nature of God’s kingdom. This spiritual kingdom, equated with the church that Jesus promised to build (16:18-19), was to be realized within the lifetimes of the Lord’s immediate disciples (3:2; 4:17; 16:28; cf. Mark 1:15; 9:1). Not long after these affirmations were made, the church of Christ was established (Acts 2:37-47) and its members are recognized as citizens of the heavenly kingdom (Colossians 1:13; 4:11; Ephesians 2:19; Philippians 3:20; etc.).
      The promised blessings of Matthew 5:3-10, rather than being withheld from God’s people for millennia into the future, are most certainly available to citizens of the Lord’s kingdom in the here and now. They shall be comforted (2 Corinthians 1:3-4), they shall be filled with righteousness (Romans 1:17; 5:17), they shall obtain mercy (Romans 11:30-31), they shall see (comprehend) God with purity of heart (John 1:18; 14:7-9), and they shall be called sons of God (Galatians 3:26). To then interpret the promise of Matthew 5:5 as something that is unavailable until the distant future in a yet-to-be-established earthly kingdom is to miss the point!
      Note how the Lord goes on to describe the future dwelling place of his faithful ones: "for great is your reward in heaven . . ." (v. 12, emp. added), i.e. the spiritual realm where the heavenly Father resides (vv. 16, 34). Note also the contrast Jesus makes further into the discourse: "Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also" (6:19-21, emp. added).
      What, then, is meant by the statement, "For they shall inherit the earth"? Throughout the sermon familiar sentiments are echoed from the Hebrew scriptures which the Jewish listeners could relate to and readily understand. The audience to whom Jesus was speaking would have recognized the words of Matthew 5:5 as a quotation of Psalm 37:11a. If we want to hear the message as they heard it, we need to appreciate the significance of this familiar passage.
      Traditionally the 37th Psalm is attributed to David and generally understood as a prophetic exhortation for the Jewish captives in Babylon. The Hebrew term arets occurs throughout the text, although it is not consistently translated in many of our English versions. Sometimes it is rendered "land" and sometimes it is rendered "earth." But by recognizing the fact that it was their homeland from which these exiles were separated, it is apparent that it was "the land" in which they longed to dwell (vv. 3, 29b) and "the land" to which they would return (vv. 9, 11, 22, 29a, 34). From this perspective, to "inherit the land" is synonymous with God’s favor, protection, blessings, and providential care (vv. 3-9, 11, 16-18, 22-29, 33-34, 37-40).
      As a brief side note, the Hebrew word ‘olam, translated "forever" in many English versions (vv. 18, 29), is a simple term of duration that describes something which lasts as long as it is intended to last (cf. Genesis 17:7-19; Exodus 21:6; 28:43; 29:9; 31:16-17). Remember that the land promise was conditioned upon the Israelites remaining faithful to God, and without living up to their end of the agreement there was no guarantee that it would remain in their possession (Deuteronomy 28:15, 63; Joshua 23:11-16; 1 Kings 9:6-7).
      Now back to Matthew 5. The Jewish audience to whom Jesus was speaking already inhabited the land, albeit under Roman occupation. Many of their contemporaries (e.g. the Zealots) were attempting to reclaim their sovereignty with aggression and brute force. But Jesus called for a different approach. "Blessed are the meek," i.e. those who refrain from hostility and violence. "For they shall inherit the earth [ge = land]." The meek, while inhabiting the land or dwelling upon the earth, are the ones who truly enjoy divine favor, protection, blessings, and providential care (cf. 6:9-13, 25-34).
      The Lord develops this idea further in a later discourse: "Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel’s, who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time–houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions–and in the age to come, eternal life" (Mark 10:29-30, emp. added; cf. Matthew 5:5, 12; 19:29).
      Surely we can appreciate why the meek are so blessed!
--Kevin L. Moore

Related Posts: Leaving All to Follow Jesus, Will the Earth Last Forever?