The Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism (2018)

1. The Genre and Structure of Psalm 104 Although the issue of literary genre (literary type) has raised its head in the current evangelical debates over the historical reliability of Genesis 1 (e.g., Halton 2015), the matter affects how one understands Psalm 104 as well. Does poetic genre eliminate a text from being accurate and historical? According to P. Enns (2012), “narrative is not an automatic indication of historical veracity, either in the Bible or any other literature, ancient or modern” (p. 53). Exodus 15 (“the Song of Moses”), Judges 5 (“the Song of Deborah”), and Psalm 105 may be counted as historical texts. Tennyson’s “Charge of the Light Brigade” proves to be one of the most accurate historical accounts available on a particular battle in the Crimean War. J.K. Hoffmeier in Halton (2015) argues that history can be written “in a sober annalistic style, as an epic poem, or as a family genealogical history . . . The present-day western historian simply cannot dictate to an ancient culture how they should record their history” (p. 148). In actuality, the genre issue is nothing but a red herring. Psalm 104’s structure allows (but does not demand) the first three strophes to present the topics of earth and water in regard to the creation (vv. 2–4), the Flood (vv. 5–9), and the post-Flood world (vv. 10–13). Kidner (1975) identifies the psalm’s strophes with the seven days of creation — thereby eliminating the Flood (p. 368). Others, like Boice (1996, p. 840) and Mays (1994, p. 331), disagree with such a strict pattern of days. As Barker (1986) observes, the attempt to relegate the psalm to such strictures is artificial. Some emend the text to fit their preconceived structure, while others excuse sections that do not precisely fit the pattern on the basis of an exuberant style or poetic license. (p. 62) Even though the full seven-day pattern proves absent in Psalm 104, Boice (1996) concludes, the patterns are close enough to show that the psalmist had Genesis in mind as he worked on his composition. We will not be far wrong if we think of Psalm 104 as a poetic reflection on the more factual account in Genesis. (p. 840) A number of literary elements contribute to the structure of Psalm 104: verses 1–4 verse 1: Tricolon. Repetition of Psalm 103:1a and 22b — refrain; see verse 35. “Yahweh,” 2x. Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. verse 2: Hymnic participles, 2x. Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. verse 3: Tricolon. Hymnic participles, 3x. verse 4: Hymnic participle — “work” ( ‘āsāh ). verses 5–9 verse 5: Commences with a third person verb (“established,” yāsad ) and verses 5–9 continue to use the usual Hebrew verbs (both perfect and imperfect verb forms) a total of thirteen times (five perfects and eight imperfects). “Earth” ( ’erets ). verse 6: Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. “Cover” ( kāsā ); “mountains” ( hārīm ). verse 7: Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. Imperfect verb forms with the nun suffix (paragogic nun ), 2x. verse 8: Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. “Mountains” ( hārīm ); “established” ( yāsad ). verse 9: Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. Imperfect verb forms with the nun suffix (paragogic nun ), 2x. “Cover” ( kāsā ); “earth” ( ’erets ). Chiasm. verses 10–13 verse 10: Hymnic participle. “Mountains” ( hārīm ). Imperfect verb form with the nun suffix (paragogic nun ). Chiasm. verse 11: “Every beast of the field” (cp. vv. 12 and 20). verse 12: “The birds of the heavens” (cp. vv. 11 and 20). verse 13: Hymnic participle. “Mountains” ( hārīm ); “satisfy” ( sāva‘ ); “work” ( ‘āsāh ); “earth” ( ’erets ). verses 14–18 verse 14: Tricolon. Hymnic participle. “Man” ( ’ādām ) and “labor” ( ‘ a vodāh ) — cp. verse 23. “Earth” ( ’erets ). verse 15: Tricolon. “Man’s heart” ( l e vav ’ e nōsh ), 2x. verse 16: “Satisfy” ( sāva‘ ); “Yahweh.” verse 17: verse 18: “Mountains” ( hārīm ). verses 19–23 verse 19: “Work” ( ‘āsāh ). verse 20: “All the beasts of the forest” (cp. vv. 11, 12). verse 21: verse 22: Imperfect verb forms with the nun suffix (paragogic nun ), 2x. verse 23: “Man” ( ’ādām ) and “labor” ( ‘ a vodāh ) — cp. verse 14. verses 24–26 verse 24: Tricolon. Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. “Work” ( ‘āsāh ), 2x. “Yahweh”; “earth” ( ’erets ). verse 25: Tricolon. Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. verse 26: Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. Imperfect verb form with the nun suffix (paragogic nun ). verses 27–30 verse 27: Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. Imperfect verb form with the nun suffix (paragogic nun ). verse 28: Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. Imperfect verb forms with the nun suffix (paragogic nun ), 2x. “Satisfy” ( sāva‘ ). verse 29: Tricolon. Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. Imperfect verb forms with the nun suffix (paragogic nun ), 2x. verse 30: Second person (“You”) as a reference to God. Imperfect verb form with the nun suffix (paragogic nun ). verses 31–35 verse 31: “Work” ( ‘āsāh ); “Yahweh,” 2x. verse 32: Hymnic participle. “Earth” ( ’erets ); “mountains” ( hārīm ). verse 33: “Yahweh.” verse 34: “Yahweh.” verse 35: Tricolon. Refrain as in verse 1. “Earth” ( ’erets ); “Yah” ( hal e lū-yāh ). Tricolons (vv. 1, 14, 15, 24, 25, 35) and chiasms (vv. 9, 10) often mark the opening or closing of stanzas in Hebrew psalms (Watson 1986, pp. 183, 205). Several vocabulary repetitions in the structure above produce inclusios (envelope structures), which bracket sections by starting and ending a section with the same word, root, form, or construction (Watson 1986, pp. 284–285). Clusters of the same word or grammatical form can characterize a section (e.g., “mountains”/ hārīm in vv. 10 and 13, imperfect verb forms with the nun suffix in vv. 27–30, and “Yahweh” in vv. 1 and 30–35). One inclusio (acting as a refrain) marks off the entire psalm (“Bless Barrick ◀ Exegetical analysis of Psalm 104:8 ▶ 2018 ICC 96