A transliteration of the Hebrew word for “destruction,” signifying the grave or the underworld. It occurs six times in the OT: three times along with “Sheol,” which refers to the grave or the underworld (Job 26:6; Prov. 15:11; 27:20), once with “death” (Job 28:22), once with the word for “bury” (Ps. 88:11), and once in Job 31:12. Most modern translations render this word “Destruction.” In the NT, the word is used in Rev. 9:11 as the equivalent to the Greek word “Apollyon,” which means “Destroyer,” to refer to the angel of the Abyss.

Death is commonly defined as the end of physical life, wherein the normal biological processes associated with life (such as respiration) cease. This definition, however, does not adequately encompass the varied nuances associated with death in the Bible.

The Beginning of Death

Death is introduced in the Bible as the penalty for transgressing the prohibition against eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil—a contrast to Mesopotamia, where death was part of the divine design of human beings. In Gen. 2:16–17 God tells the first man, “When you eat from [the fruit of the tree] you will certainly die.” The consequences of eating provide a useful basis for discussing the nature of death from a biblical perspective.

First, as is apparent from the subsequent narrative, neither the man nor the woman experiences physical, biological death immediately after eating the fruit. In this way, Gen. 2–3 reflects the common biblical notion that death refers to more than just biological death, pointing to the more significant aspect of death that embodies alienation and separation from the source of life, God. The point is presupposed by Jesus when he offers life to those who are dead (John 5:24), and by Paul when he proclaims that before Christ all were dead in their sins and transgressions (Eph. 2:1, 5). It is also reflected in the common punishment prescribed in the Pentateuch whereby offenders were cut off from the people (Gen. 17:14; Exod. 12:15, 19; 30:38; cf. Gen. 9:11; Exod. 9:15). Within Gen. 2–3, death arrives with loss of access to the tree of life in the garden. Biologically, the first man and woman may continue to live for a while outside the garden, but their fate is sealed when they are cut off from the garden and the intimate fellowship with the Creator that had been enjoyed therein.

Second, the strong implication of Gen. 2:16–17 is that human beings, as originally created, were not subject to death (see also Rom. 5:12; 6:23; 1 Cor. 15:21). This does not mean that they were immortal in the same manner as God (cf. 1 Tim. 6:16), but rather that they were contingently immortal: they were not subject to death but sustained by their relationship to the life-giving God through the provision of the tree of life (cf. Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14). Once they were cut off from the source of life, death ensued.

The account of the arrival of death in Gen. 3, however, tells us little about how death affected animals, since the Bible consistently presents a predominantly human focus. While Eccles. 3:21 affirms human ignorance over the relative postmortem fate of humans and animals, little else is said on the matter. Similarly, it is not entirely clear whether death is introduced as a punishment for sin for humans only (and so whether animals could have died prior to the fall) or whether animals were perceived as sharing in immortality prior to the fall.

Death in the Old Testament

Death is frequently depicted negatively throughout the OT. Aside from its initial presentation as a divine punishment for sin, it is presented as that which seeks out and devours life and is terrifying (Pss. 18:4–5; 55:4; Prov. 30:15–16; Hab. 2:5). For the author of Ecclesiastes, death is that which ultimately undermines any possible value that life may otherwise have (e.g., Eccles. 9:3). The tragedy of death, in the OT, is that it results in separation, from God (as noted above in the context of Gen. 2–3) and from people. The psalms, for example, frequently cite the finality and profundity of death’s effects (e.g., Pss. 6:5; 88:5; 115:17; cf. Isa. 38:18). Even those few passages that appear to present death more positively (e.g., Job 3:13, 17) ultimately serve to highlight the appalling circumstances of the speaker’s life rather than any blessed state of the dead (for a similar idea in the NT, see Rev. 9:6).

The OT does, however, depict death as the natural end of life, and a good death as one that arrives only after a long and prosperous life. So Abraham (Gen. 25:8), Isaac (Gen. 35:29), and Job (Job 42:16–17) are said to live long lives before they die. Furthermore, some passages refer to the person being “gathered to his people,” suggesting some form of reunion with previous generations in death, presumably in Sheol, although the location and state of the dead are never explicated. Isaiah can even include the idea of death within language used to describe the ideal future world (Isa. 65:20).

Although there are no laws relating to the manner in which the bodies of the dead were to be handled, all the descriptive indicators show that burial was normative, often in a family tomb or plot (e.g., Gen. 23; cf. 1 Kings 13:22). Indeed, the importance of an appropriate burial is apparent in Ecclesiastes’ comment that a stillborn child is better off than someone who lives a long life but receives no burial (Eccles. 6:3) and in the prophets’ presentation of those not buried as being accursed (Jer. 8:2; 14:16; 16:4).

Life after Death in the Old Testament

Belief in some form of postmortem existence was common in many parts of the ancient world. In Egypt, an elaborate set of beliefs relating to the state of those who had died included the possibility of an ongoing existence that could even surpass what one may have experienced before death (although such an opportunity was a reasonable expectation only for the upper classes, while the general population probably had more modest expectations of the nature of their existence in the afterlife). By way of contrast, Mesopotamian beliefs depicted a far darker and more troubling afterlife for all but the very few whose lives and deaths were sufficiently blessed to ensure them some degree of postmortem comfort. For the remainder, there was little hope for any positive experience following death.

The OT, however, has little to say about the state of those who have died. The widespread belief in some form of continued existence beyond biological death in the ancient world suggests that, in the absence of contrary data in the Bible, the people of Israel probably assumed that some aspect of a person persisted beyond death. Furthermore, there are hints that this may have been the case, such as the raising of Samuel’s shade by the medium at Endor (1 Sam. 28), the escape from death of Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2 Kings 2:11), the revivification of the body dropped on Elisha’s bones (2 Kings 13:21), and expressions used to refer to death such as “gathered to his people” (Gen. 25:8, 17; 35:29; 49:29; Num. 27:13; Deut. 32:50; cf. Gen. 47:30; Deut. 31:16). The dead (sometimes referred to by the term repa’im, “shades/spirits of the dead”) were thought to dwell in Sheol, generally described as under the earth (e.g., Ezek. 31:14). Beyond this, there are prophetic expectations that God will ultimately destroy death (e.g., Isa. 25:8), and that God does not take pleasure in anyone’s death (Ezek. 18:23, 32).

Death in the New Testament

The NT continues, and in some places expands upon, the negative view of death presented in the OT. The notion that death is a consequence of and punishment for the sinful state that imprisons all humanity is stated emphatically (e.g., Rom. 3:23; 6:23) and reinforced by the notion that, although biologically alive, sinful humans are dead in their sin and so incapable of reviving themselves (Eph. 2:1). Death, according to Paul, is the last enemy (1 Cor. 15:26), and yet to die is gain (Phil. 1:21–24) because it heralds being with Christ, which, explains Paul, “is better by far” than being alive in this body in this world.

Central to both the message of the Bible and to the significance of death in the Bible is the death of the Messiah, God’s Son. Jesus’ death provides the basis for countering the consequences of the original rebellion against God by the first couple (2 Cor. 5:21). Consequently, Paul could write that Jesus’ death itself destroyed death (2 Tim. 1:10). Furthermore, the life that Jesus offers—eternal life—is available to the believer in the present (John 3:36; 5:24), prior to the time when death is ultimately abolished, such that Jesus could assert that all those who believe in him will live even though they die (John 11:25–26).

The NT expands somewhat on the details relating to the state of the dead from the OT. For one thing, the existence of an afterlife is clearly presented. Furthermore, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19–31) reflects a more comprehensive understanding of the existence of distinctions among those who have died, such that the rich man is said to be suffering in Hades (Gk. hadēs, used in the LXX to translate Heb. she’ol in the OT), while Lazarus is far off with Abraham and being comforted. Although there is a danger in reading too much into a parable, the detail appears to reflect something of the expanded understanding of the afterlife among some in Jesus’ day.

The NT makes several references to a “second death” (Rev. 2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8; cf. Jude 12). The expression refers to the state of eternal judgment under God’s wrath, a death from which there will be no escape. But those who remain faithful to Christ will not experience this second death (Rev. 20:6), and in their dwelling place with God, the new Jerusalem, death will be no more (21:4).

In addition to ocean depths, the biblical text refers to the depths of the earth (Ps. 63:9) and of the grave (86:13). The different terms translated “depths” are employed figuratively to represent God’s incomprehensibility (Job 11:8) and omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience (Ps. 95:4), dire and distressing situations (Pss. 30:1; 88:6; 130:1), death and near death (Ps. 71:20; Prov. 9:18), and hidden places, such as the mother’s womb (Ps. 139:15). See also Deep, The.

This name occurs in 1 Kings 4:31 and in the superscriptions to Pss. 88–89. “Ezrahite” possibly signifies a clan name. Ethan and Heman, wise men worthy of mention as a standard for measuring the wisdom of King Solomon, were Ezrahites. Some have suggested that the name means “native.” If so, then “Ezrahite” would have signified someone of Canaanite origin, and Ethan and Heman would have been pre-Israelite sages.

The grave or place of the afterlife. Nearing death, the psalmist asks whether God can be praised by the dead, and if God’s wonders and deliverance can be known in the grave (Ps. 88:10–12).

The grave or place of the afterlife. Nearing death, the psalmist asks whether God can be praised by the dead, and if God’s wonders and deliverance can be known in the grave (Ps. 88:10–12).

The classification of thirteen psalms (Pss. 32; 42; 44–45; 52–55; 74; 78; 88–89; 142). All are associated with “authors” (David, the sons of Korah, Asaph, Heman, and Ethan) (see also Superscription). They include individual and communal laments, royal psalms, instruction, and psalms of mixed type, but none are hymns of praise. The root of maskil pertains to understanding or skill. There are two main views as to its meaning. As it relates to “making prudent,” the maskil may be meditative or instructive. Or maskil may be a designation that skilled musicians were required for proper performance.

A collection of 150 poems. They are the hymnbook of the OT period, used in public worship. Psalms contains songs of different lengths, types, and dates. The earliest psalm (Ps. 90) is attributed to Moses (mid-second millennium BC), while the content of Ps. 126 and Ps. 137 points to the latest periods of the OT (mid-first millennium BC). They continue to be used as a source of public worship and private devotion.

Historical Background

Most psalms have a title. In the Hebrew text this title comprises the first verse, whereas English translations set it off before the first verse. Titles vary. Many name an author (e.g., David [Ps. 3]; Asaph [Ps. 77]; sons of Korah [Ps. 42]), while others provide information about genre (e.g., Psalms of Ascent [Pss. 120–134]), tune (e.g., “Do Not Destroy” [Ps. 75]), use in worship (Ps. 92), and a circumstance that led to composition (Ps. 51). Information in the title gives hints concerning how psalms were written and brought into a final collection.

Composition

As mentioned, the titles of the psalms often give indications of authorship and occasionally name the circumstance that led to the writing of the psalm. A good example is Ps. 51, where the title states, “For the director of music. A psalm of David. When the prophet Nathan came to him after David had committed adultery with Bathsheba.” The title connects the psalm with the events recorded in 2 Sam. 11–12 and suggests that David wrote the song in response to his sin and Nathan’s confrontation.

Although only a handful of the psalms have such a historical title, it is likely that most psalms were composed in response to some specific circumstance that encouraged the author to write. Interestingly, though, the psalmists do not speak about the specific circumstance in the psalm itself. Psalm 51, for instance, fits perfectly with the situation that the title describes in that it expresses guilt toward God and asks for forgiveness, but nowhere does it speak specifically about adultery. The psalmists do this intentionally because they are writing the song not as a memorial to an event, but rather as a prayer that others who have had similar though not identical experiences can use after them. Thus, Ps. 51 has been used as a model prayer for many penitents, whether they have sinned like David or in another way.

Most modern hymns have a similar background. John Newton, for instance, was inspired to write “Amazing Grace” because of awe that he felt at his conversion to Christianity from the evil of being a slave trader. However, when he wrote it, he wanted others to sing it as reflecting not on his conversion but on their own.

Collection

The psalms were composed over a thousand-year period. Thus, it appears that the book of Psalms was a growing collection until it came to a close at an unknown time between the writing of the two Testaments.

In 1 Chron. 16:7–36 we may get a glimpse of how the process worked. The text describes David turning a musical composition over to the Levitical musician Asaph and his associates. It is likely that the priests kept an official copy of the book of Psalms in the holy place (the temple while it stood). The psalms, after all, were the hymns of ancient Israel. Their primary function was as a corporate book of prayer, though certainly they could be used in private devotions (note Hannah’s prayer in 1 Sam. 2:1–10 and its relationship to Ps. 113).

Organization and Structure

The psalms have no obvious organization that explains the location of all the psalms. They are not organized in terms of genre, authorship, time of composition, or length. There is only one statement about organization, found in Ps. 72:20: “This concludes the prayers of David son of Jesse.” In the light of this comment, it is surprising that a number of Davidic psalms appear in subsequent sections (Pss. 101; 103; 108–110; 122; 124; 131; 133; 138–145). The best explanation is that at one point Ps. 72 concluded the Davidic psalms, but there was a reorganization before the canonical order was permanently closed.

A number of contemporary theories try to find some deep structure to the book, but it is best to refrain from speculation in regard to the overall structure. Nonetheless, a few structural characteristics are obvious. First, the division of Psalms into five books seems to reflect the fivefold division of the Pentateuch:

I. Book 1 (Pss. 1–41)

II. Book 2 (Pss. 42–72)

III. Book 3 (Pss. 73–89)

IV. Book 4 (Pss. 90–106)

V. Book 5 (Pss. 107–150)

Each book ends with a doxology. Such an intentional association with the Pentateuch would lend support to the Psalter’s claim to authority. Although these are prayers to God, they are also God’s word.

Second, within the Psalter there are subcollections. That is, there are psalms that came into the book not individually but as a group. The best-known such group are the Psalms of Ascent (Pss. 120–134), probably so named because worshipers sang them while going up (ascending) to the Temple Mount during one of the annual religious festivals in Jerusalem.

Third, it appears that psalms are intentionally placed at the beginning and at the end of the book to serve as an introduction and a conclusion. Psalms 1–2 serve as an introduction that alerts the reader to the twin important themes of law and messiah. Psalm 1 pronounces a blessing on those who love God’s law. The psalms, after all, are an intimate and personal conversation with God. One must be on the side of the godly to enter such a holy textual space, just as one must be godly to enter the precincts of the temple. After the reader enters, Psalm 2 provides an encounter with God and his anointed one (messiah). At the end of the book, the last five psalms (Pss. 146–150) constitute a tremendous doxology of praise.

This leads to the final observation on structure. Psalms of lament predominate at the beginning of the book, but they give way to hymns of praise toward the end. It is almost as if one enters the Psalter mourning and leaves it praising. Indeed, the Psalter brings the reader into contact with God and thus transforms the reader from sadness to joy.

Literary Considerations

Genre. The individual psalms may be identified as songs, prayers, or poems. Specifically, they are lyric poems (expressing the emotions of the poet), often addressed to God, and set to musical accompaniment. Although the categories overlap, seven different types of psalms can be recognized, with the first three being by far the most common.

• Lament. The largest single group of psalms are the laments, characterized by the expression of unhappy emotions: sadness, disappointment, anger, worry. The lamenters call on God to save them, even while at times complaining about God’s actions toward them (Ps. 42:9–10). Some laments contain petitions for forgiveness (Ps. 51), while others assert innocence of any wrongdoing (Ps. 26). A few laments even contain curses directed toward the enemies who are trying to harm the psalmist (Ps. 69:19–28). Most laments end by praising God or reaffirming confidence in God (Ps. 130:7–8). Usually the reason for the change from mourning to rejoicing is not given, but Ps. 77 pinpoints the reason as the memory of God’s great salvation events in the past (vv. 10, 16–20). One psalm, Ps. 88, laments but never makes the turn, remaining in the pit of despair. Yet even here we have a glimmer of hope in that the one who laments is still speaking to God.

• Thanksgiving. When God answers a lament, the response is thanksgiving. Psalms of thanksgiving are very similar to hymns (see below), but they cite an earlier problem that God has addressed. Psalm 30 praises God for restoring the psalmist’s good fortune and health after he suffered due to his earlier arrogance that led him to forget God (vv. 6–7).

• Hymn. Hymns are psalms of unalloyed praise directed toward God. The psalmists often call for others to join their worship of God (Ps. 100).

• Remembrance. While many psalms evoke memories of God’s actions in the past (as the lament in Ps. 77 recalls the exodus), certain psalms focus on rehearsing the actions of God in the past. Psalm 136 is one of the most memorable examples. As a liturgical psalm, it recites a divine action (“[God] swept Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea” [v. 15]) followed by a congregational response (“His love endures forever”).

• Confidence. These psalms are defined by their mood of quiet trust in God even in the midst of trouble. They often present a reassuring image of God. The picture of God as a shepherd in Ps. 23 or as a mother in Ps. 131 are good examples.

• Wisdom. Some psalms meditate on the law (Pss. 1; 119) or have interests similar to those of wisdom literature, such as Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes (Pss. 49; 73).

• Kingship. A number of psalms praise God as king (Ps. 47) or the human king as his agent (Pss. 20–21) or both (Ps. 2).

Style. The psalms are poems, and so their style is characterized by the use of parallelism and figurative language. Poetry is also notable for its short lines. A poet packs a lot of meaning into very few words. So it is important to slow down and reflect on a psalm in order to derive its maximum effect. Besides brevity of expression, parallelism, and figurative language, poets create interest by using other literary tools. The psalmists use these poetic devices not only to inform their readers’ intellect but also to stimulate their imagination and arouse their emotions. (See also Acrostic; Imagery; Poetry.)

Theological Message

Although the psalms are not theological essays, readers can learn about God and their relationship with God from these poems. The book of Psalms is a bit like a portrait gallery of God, using images to describe who he is and the nature of our relationship with him. Some examples include God as shepherd (Ps. 23), king (Ps. 47), warrior (Ps. 98), and mother (Ps. 131), and the list could be greatly expanded. Each one of these picture images casts light on the nature of God and also the nature of our relationship with God. After all, the aforementioned psalms explicitly or implicitly describe God’s people as sheep, subjects, soldiers, and children.

Connection to the New Testament and Today

Jesus himself draws attention to Psalms as a book that anticipated his coming suffering and glorification (Luke 24:25–27, 44). The Gospels recognized that Jesus’ zeal for God was well expressed by Ps. 69:9 (John 2:17). When at the apex of his suffering on the cross, Jesus uttered the words found in Ps. 22:1 (Matt. 27:46). The NT writers also saw that Jesus was the fulfillment of the covenant that promised that a son of David would have an everlasting throne (2 Sam. 7:16). Accordingly, the royal psalms (e.g., Pss. 2; 110) often were applied to Jesus, who is the Messiah (the Christ, “the anointed one”).

Today we read Psalms not only as an ancient witness to the coming work of Christ but also, as John Calvin put it, as a mirror of our souls. The psalms were written for worshipers who came after them with similar though not identical joys and problems. The psalms should become models of our prayers.

Spirits of the dead. In modern Bible translations, “shades” is most often used in poetry, especially in parallel to “the dead” (e.g., Ps. 88:10; Isa. 26:14 NRSV; cf. Prov. 2:18; Isa. 14:9). See also Sheol.

In the OT, an underworld place to which all were destined after death. The Hebrew word she’ol is generally translated as “the grave” in modern versions of the Bible, including the NIV. Sheol appears in the OT most frequently in songs and prayers (David’s song [2 Sam. 22:6]; Hannah’s prayer [1 Sam. 2:6]; many references in Psalms), as well as in the wisdom books of Job and Proverbs. The ancient Israelites visualized the cosmos as comprised of three distinct realms: heaven, the realm of the divine; earth, the realm of humanity and God’s creation; and Sheol, a place underneath the earth and the seas, the realm of the dead (Job 11:8; 26:5–7).

The Realm of the Dead

In the OT, Sheol is not a place of judgment or of God’s wrath, but rather a realm that harbored those who had died. Sheol was the great equalizer in the OT, as it was thought to be inhabited not only by the masses, but also by the rich and powerful (Job 3:19; Isa. 5:14; 14:9, 11), the bravest of warriors (Ezek. 32:21), the righteous (Gen. 37:35; Isa. 38:10; Ps. 30:3, 9), the wicked (Num. 16:30, 33), indeed everyone (Ps. 89:48; Eccles. 9:10). Although Sheol itself is not a place of judgment, it is connected to God’s wrath in the OT. The consequence of God’s wrathful judgment is frequently an early descent into Sheol (Num. 16:30; 1 Kings 2:6; Job 24:19; Ps. 31:17; Isa. 38:10; Ezek. 31:17). Premature death is the result of God’s wrath and judgment in the OT, not the descent into Sheol, which itself is inevitable.

Descriptions of Sheol do not occur in third-person narratives or in legal material, but are found only in first-person speeches throughout the OT. Moreover, Sheol is never described in full detail but is referred to only occasionally. Similar to depictions in other ancient Near Eastern cultures, descriptions of Sheol in biblical texts locate it in the farthest depths beneath the earth (Job 11:8; 26:6–13; Ps. 139:8) and the seas (Ezek. 31:15; Jon. 2:4), as contrasted with the heavens above. Sheol is portrayed as a watery underworld (Ps. 69:1–2, 13–15; Jon. 2:6), a place of darkness (Job 17:13; Ps. 88:3, 6, 12), of silence (Pss. 6:5; 31:17; Isa. 38:18), with gates at its entrance (Isa. 38:10; Jon. 2:7). By contrast, Sheol is also portrayed as a place of peace (1 Kings 2:6; Job 21:13), a place where greetings and conversations might take place (Isa. 14:9), where one would be reunited with a loved one who had already died (Gen. 37:35).

Sheol is a place where the fullness of joy in life no longer abides, for one cannot praise God in Sheol (Ps. 6:5; Isa. 38:18–19). Indeed, the book of Ecclesiastes encourages readers, “Eat your food with gladness. . . . Enjoy life with your wife, whom you love. . . . For in the realm of the dead [Sheol] . . . there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom” (9:7–10). In a similar manner, the book of Sirach in the Apocrypha states that one must fully enjoy one’s earthly life, for no pleasures are to be found in Sheol (14:16). Job, however, views Sheol as a positive alternative to his tragedies, and he imagines Sheol to be a peaceful place where earthly struggles give way to rest, even for the wicked (Job 3:1–19).

Sheol often is personified along with the figure of Death, particularly in the prophetic literature and Proverbs. Portrayals of Sheol generally are synonymous with those of Death and match iconographic representations of the god Death (Motu) in the ancient Near East. Sheol is portrayed as a monster with formidably large jaws (Isa. 5:14) and clutching hands (Ps. 89:48; Hos. 13:14), employing plagues and scourges to slay its victims (Hos. 13:14), as well as snares and traps (2 Sam. 22:6; Ps. 116:3) to feed its insatiable appetite (Prov. 1:12; 27:20; 30:16; Song 8:6; Hab. 2:5).

Sheol is not, however, a place outside the authority and power of Yahweh. Indeed, it is a place that is open to God’s vision (Job 26:6) and within the reach of God’s hand (Amos 9:2). The realm of Sheol is under the purview of God’s authority, and those who dwell there are not separated from God’s presence: “If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths [Sheol], you are there” (Ps. 139:8). Yet the OT maintains that one’s life of faith in God is altered in Sheol. According to Ps. 6:5, “Among the dead no one proclaims your name. Who praises you from the grave [Sheol]?” And, indeed, “those who go down to the pit cannot hope for your faithfulness” (Isa. 38:18). These texts imply that although Yahweh’s presence remains with those who dwell in Sheol, the dead are unable to respond to God in praise and trust as they did in life.

The Afterlife and Resurrection

Belief in the afterlife was common in the ancient Near East. Thus, it is remarkable that the OT is so restrained in the hope that it offers for life after death. Most OT texts affirm that no one returns from Sheol (Job 7:9; Isa. 38:10, 18; cf. Sir. 48:5). Yet the question remains open. God’s limitless sovereignty is acknowledged in the prayer of Hannah: “The Lord brings death and makes alive; he brings down to the grave [Sheol] and raises up” (1 Sam. 2:6). Thus, Yahweh has the power to raise people up from Sheol, but whether he will choose to do so is a question unanswered in the OT.

Hints of resurrection from the grave can be found in the metaphoric use of Sheol in the psalms and the prophetic literature to represent dire struggle and sin from which the psalmist or Israel receives healing and deliverance: “I will deliver this people from the power of the grave [Sheol]; I will redeem them from death. Where, O death, are your plagues? Where, O grave [Sheol], is your destruction?” (Hos. 13:14 [see also Job 14:13; Pss. 16:10–11; 30:2–3; 49:13–15; 86:13; Jon. 2:3]). However, it is unclear whether these texts portray salvation after descent into Sheol has already taken place or, rather, Yahweh’s deliverance experienced as a protection from descending into Sheol in the first place. Stronger hints at a bodily resurrection come from the narratives in which the prayers of Elijah and Elisha result in a resurrection from the dead (1 Kings 17:17–24; 2 Kings 4:17–37).

When the OT was translated into Greek for Hellenized Jewish readers, “Sheol” was translated as “Hades,” importing a similar Greek concept of the underworld into the biblical text. The NT uses the words “Hades” and “hell” interchangeably; however, the distinction between the grave and hell is maintained. The grave is simply a place to which all are destined, as was Sheol. Thus, it is not until the NT that firm conceptualizations of a place for eternal punishment, as well as a place of eternal reward, emerge. Jewish literature written between the OT and the NT demonstrates a stronger hope in the resurrection, yet these texts largely parallel the OT usage of Sheol as simply an underworld abode of the dead. It is not until the coming of Christ that the resurrection from the dead transforms from a glimmer of hope to a resplendent promise in the Bible.

Death is commonly defined as the end of physical life, wherein the normal biological processes associated with life (such as respiration) cease. This definition, however, does not adequately encompass the varied nuances associated with death in the Bible.

The Beginning of Death

Death is introduced in the Bible as the penalty for transgressing the prohibition against eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil—a contrast to Mesopotamia, where death was part of the divine design of human beings. In Gen. 2:16–17 God tells the first man, “When you eat from [the fruit of the tree] you will certainly die.” The consequences of eating provide a useful basis for discussing the nature of death from a biblical perspective.

First, as is apparent from the subsequent narrative, neither the man nor the woman experiences physical, biological death immediately after eating the fruit. In this way, Gen. 2–3 reflects the common biblical notion that death refers to more than just biological death, pointing to the more significant aspect of death that embodies alienation and separation from the source of life, God. The point is presupposed by Jesus when he offers life to those who are dead (John 5:24), and by Paul when he proclaims that before Christ all were dead in their sins and transgressions (Eph. 2:1, 5). It is also reflected in the common punishment prescribed in the Pentateuch whereby offenders were cut off from the people (Gen. 17:14; Exod. 12:15, 19; 30:38; cf. Gen. 9:11; Exod. 9:15). Within Gen. 2–3, death arrives with loss of access to the tree of life in the garden. Biologically, the first man and woman may continue to live for a while outside the garden, but their fate is sealed when they are cut off from the garden and the intimate fellowship with the Creator that had been enjoyed therein.

Second, the strong implication of Gen. 2:16–17 is that human beings, as originally created, were not subject to death (see also Rom. 5:12; 6:23; 1 Cor. 15:21). This does not mean that they were immortal in the same manner as God (cf. 1 Tim. 6:16), but rather that they were contingently immortal: they were not subject to death but sustained by their relationship to the life-giving God through the provision of the tree of life (cf. Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14). Once they were cut off from the source of life, death ensued.

The account of the arrival of death in Gen. 3, however, tells us little about how death affected animals, since the Bible consistently presents a predominantly human focus. While Eccles. 3:21 affirms human ignorance over the relative postmortem fate of humans and animals, little else is said on the matter. Similarly, it is not entirely clear whether death is introduced as a punishment for sin for humans only (and so whether animals could have died prior to the fall) or whether animals were perceived as sharing in immortality prior to the fall.

Death in the Old Testament

Death is frequently depicted negatively throughout the OT. Aside from its initial presentation as a divine punishment for sin, it is presented as that which seeks out and devours life and is terrifying (Pss. 18:4–5; 55:4; Prov. 30:15–16; Hab. 2:5). For the author of Ecclesiastes, death is that which ultimately undermines any possible value that life may otherwise have (e.g., Eccles. 9:3). The tragedy of death, in the OT, is that it results in separation, from God (as noted above in the context of Gen. 2–3) and from people. The psalms, for example, frequently cite the finality and profundity of death’s effects (e.g., Pss. 6:5; 88:5; 115:17; cf. Isa. 38:18). Even those few passages that appear to present death more positively (e.g., Job 3:13, 17) ultimately serve to highlight the appalling circumstances of the speaker’s life rather than any blessed state of the dead (for a similar idea in the NT, see Rev. 9:6).

The OT does, however, depict death as the natural end of life, and a good death as one that arrives only after a long and prosperous life. So Abraham (Gen. 25:8), Isaac (Gen. 35:29), and Job (Job 42:16–17) are said to live long lives before they die. Furthermore, some passages refer to the person being “gathered to his people,” suggesting some form of reunion with previous generations in death, presumably in Sheol, although the location and state of the dead are never explicated. Isaiah can even include the idea of death within language used to describe the ideal future world (Isa. 65:20).

Although there are no laws relating to the manner in which the bodies of the dead were to be handled, all the descriptive indicators show that burial was normative, often in a family tomb or plot (e.g., Gen. 23; cf. 1 Kings 13:22). Indeed, the importance of an appropriate burial is apparent in Ecclesiastes’ comment that a stillborn child is better off than someone who lives a long life but receives no burial (Eccles. 6:3) and in the prophets’ presentation of those not buried as being accursed (Jer. 8:2; 14:16; 16:4).

Life after Death in the Old Testament

Belief in some form of postmortem existence was common in many parts of the ancient world. In Egypt, an elaborate set of beliefs relating to the state of those who had died included the possibility of an ongoing existence that could even surpass what one may have experienced before death (although such an opportunity was a reasonable expectation only for the upper classes, while the general population probably had more modest expectations of the nature of their existence in the afterlife). By way of contrast, Mesopotamian beliefs depicted a far darker and more troubling afterlife for all but the very few whose lives and deaths were sufficiently blessed to ensure them some degree of postmortem comfort. For the remainder, there was little hope for any positive experience following death.

The OT, however, has little to say about the state of those who have died. The widespread belief in some form of continued existence beyond biological death in the ancient world suggests that, in the absence of contrary data in the Bible, the people of Israel probably assumed that some aspect of a person persisted beyond death. Furthermore, there are hints that this may have been the case, such as the raising of Samuel’s shade by the medium at Endor (1 Sam. 28), the escape from death of Enoch (Gen. 5:24) and Elijah (2 Kings 2:11), the revivification of the body dropped on Elisha’s bones (2 Kings 13:21), and expressions used to refer to death such as “gathered to his people” (Gen. 25:8, 17; 35:29; 49:29; Num. 27:13; Deut. 32:50; cf. Gen. 47:30; Deut. 31:16). The dead (sometimes referred to by the term repa’im, “shades/spirits of the dead”) were thought to dwell in Sheol, generally described as under the earth (e.g., Ezek. 31:14). Beyond this, there are prophetic expectations that God will ultimately destroy death (e.g., Isa. 25:8), and that God does not take pleasure in anyone’s death (Ezek. 18:23, 32).

Death in the New Testament

The NT continues, and in some places expands upon, the negative view of death presented in the OT. The notion that death is a consequence of and punishment for the sinful state that imprisons all humanity is stated emphatically (e.g., Rom. 3:23; 6:23) and reinforced by the notion that, although biologically alive, sinful humans are dead in their sin and so incapable of reviving themselves (Eph. 2:1). Death, according to Paul, is the last enemy (1 Cor. 15:26), and yet to die is gain (Phil. 1:21–24) because it heralds being with Christ, which, explains Paul, “is better by far” than being alive in this body in this world.

Central to both the message of the Bible and to the significance of death in the Bible is the death of the Messiah, God’s Son. Jesus’ death provides the basis for countering the consequences of the original rebellion against God by the first couple (2 Cor. 5:21). Consequently, Paul could write that Jesus’ death itself destroyed death (2 Tim. 1:10). Furthermore, the life that Jesus offers—eternal life—is available to the believer in the present (John 3:36; 5:24), prior to the time when death is ultimately abolished, such that Jesus could assert that all those who believe in him will live even though they die (John 11:25–26).

The NT expands somewhat on the details relating to the state of the dead from the OT. For one thing, the existence of an afterlife is clearly presented. Furthermore, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19–31) reflects a more comprehensive understanding of the existence of distinctions among those who have died, such that the rich man is said to be suffering in Hades (Gk. hadēs, used in the LXX to translate Heb. she’ol in the OT), while Lazarus is far off with Abraham and being comforted. Although there is a danger in reading too much into a parable, the detail appears to reflect something of the expanded understanding of the afterlife among some in Jesus’ day.

The NT makes several references to a “second death” (Rev. 2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8; cf. Jude 12). The expression refers to the state of eternal judgment under God’s wrath, a death from which there will be no escape. But those who remain faithful to Christ will not experience this second death (Rev. 20:6), and in their dwelling place with God, the new Jerusalem, death will be no more (21:4).

The question of undeserved suffering has plagued humanity for as long as we have written records, as is demonstrated by several ancient Mesopotamian literary compositions going back to Sumerian times. Today too we wonder why bad things happen to good people. The book of Job raises this issue in the person of Job, a pious and blameless man who suffers unspeakable tragedies. However, the question of why Job suffers leads to an even more important question: Where can wisdom be found?

Structure, Genre, and Message

The structure of the book helps the reader understand its genre and message:

I. Prose Prologue: A Conversation in Heaven and Job’s Testing (1:1–2:13)

II. Poetic Debate: Who Is Wise? (3:1–42:6)

A. Job’s lament (3:1–26)

B. The debate between Job and his three friends (4:1–31:40)

C. Elihu’s claim to wisdom (32:1–37:24)

D. Yahweh’s speech and Job’s repentance (38:1–42:6)

III. Prose Epilogue: Resolutions in Blessing (42:7–17)

The genre of the book is a debate, the topic being the nature and source of wisdom. The various parts of the book contribute to this debate.

I. Prose prologue: a conversation in heaven and Job’s testing (1:1–2:13). The first two chapters introduce most of the main characters and the plot complication. First on the scene is Job himself. He is introduced as the perfect wise man: “This man was blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil” (1:1). This assessment is repeated by the next two major characters, none other than God himself (1:8) and even Job’s opponent, “Satan” (1:9–10). The latter, though, believes that Job is motivated by the fact that he receives rewards for his obedience. Take away Job’s family, prosperity, and eventually his health, Satan argues, and Job will crumble and grumble.

We know who God is, but who is this Satan? It is unlikely that Satan is the devil. After all, what would the devil be doing in heaven, and why would God listen to him? Also, the Hebrew prefixes the definite article to “Satan” (hassatan), so a literal translation is “the Satan.” The Hebrew verb satan means “to accuse,” and that is how we are to understand the term in question here; he is “the accuser.” Indeed, the book of Job has the form of a certain type of debate or disputation, a courtroom scene, and the Satan is an angel who takes the place of the prosecuting attorney.

The Satan persuades God to first take away family and wealth from Job. Even so, Job maintains his innocence and does not complain against God. Unsatisfied, the Satan goes further and persuades God to take away Job’s health. Still, however, Job persists in his proper attitude toward God.

At the end of the prologue, Job—though he is suffering—is in a good place. He is still innocent and has not complained. We also hear of Job’s three friends, who move in to offer sympathy and comfort. They sit there with him for seven days without a word.

II. Poetic debate: who is wise? (3:1–42:6). The body of the book is a debate among Job and his friends, composed as poetry.

A. Job’s lament (3:1–26). Job is the first to speak, and what he says unsettles his friends. His suffering has reached the point where he wants to die. While his speech is properly understood as a lament, it contrasts with the laments of the psalms (e.g., Ps. 69). The latter are directed toward God; Job speaks about God but not to him. The laments of the psalms typically end with a note of optimism (Ps. 88 is an exception); Job’s does not.

B. The debate between Job and his three friends (4:1–31:40). Job’s lament triggers the debate. After Job complains about God, the three friends feel obligated to speak in defense of God’s integrity. The debate has three cycles, with each of the three friends speaking in turn, each followed by a response from Job. The third cycle breaks down with a speech by Eliphaz (chap. 22) and a short one by Bildad (chap. 25), but no speech by Zophar. The friends have run out of steam.

After all, each of the three repeats the same basic argument: if you sin, then you suffer; therefore, if you suffer, then you must have sinned. Since Job was suffering, he must be a sinner. To escape his suffering, he needs to repent (4:7–11; 11:13–20). Job, however, knows that he has not sinned. But this creates a theological problem for him, since he too believes in the same theology of retribution held by the three friends. Thus, in his mind, God is unjust (9:21–24). Accordingly, his solution is to find God and present his case before him (notice the legal language again [23:2–7]).

Although the subject of their debate is Job’s suffering, the heart of it concerns wisdom. Who is wise? Who has the correct insight into Job’s suffering? Both Job and the friends set themselves up as sources of wisdom and ridicule the wisdom of the other (11:12; 12:1–3, 12; 13:12; 15:1–13). The question “Who is wise?” dominates the book.

The interactive debate between Job and his friends ends without resolution to this question. The friends have repeated their arguments many times but have not convinced Job, so they grow silent. In chapter 28 Job suddenly changes tone in a way that has puzzled interpreters for a long time. Rather than complaining or asserting his own wisdom, Job beautifully proclaims God as the sole source of wisdom, anticipating the conclusion. However, this attitude does not hold beyond the chapter, since in chapters 30–31 Job returns to bitter complaint and protests of his innocence. To the end of this section, he maintains his innocence and a sense of God’s injustice. He wants an audience with God to set him straight (31:35–37). Job will soon learn that he should be careful about what he wishes for.

C. Elihu’s claim to wisdom (32:1–37:24). Here a new character surprisingly emerges from the background. Elihu has observed the debate silently, but now he feels compelled to speak. He is young and thus has deferred to the wisdom of the elderly, but he has been sorely disappointed. Now he realizes that wisdom is not always a matter of age, but comes from “the spirit in a person” (32:8). The reader expects a new argument from this brash young man, but instead Job is treated to another blast of the retribution theology of the three friends: Job suffers because he is a sinner (34:11, 25–27, 37).

Elihu represents another type of person who claims wisdom. Rather than age, he believes the spirit in a person gives wisdom. However, he comes up with the same old descriptions and solutions. This viewpoint is critiqued by silence; he is ignored. No one responds to his unpersuasive opinion.

D. Yahweh’s speech and Job’s repentance (38:1–42:6). When we left Job at the end of chapter 31, he had expressed his wish for an audience with God. Now he gets his wish. God appears in a whirlwind, an indication of his displeasure, and challenges Job’s purported wisdom: “Who is this that obscures my plans with words without knowledge?” (38:2). God then bombards Job with a series of questions that he cannot possibly answer, since he is not God. God also describes how he is the one who distributes and withholds power and wisdom to his creatures.

He never addresses the reasons for Job’s suffering or the question of suffering in general. That is not the main purpose of the book. He asserts his wisdom, thus answering the question of the book: “Who is wise?” Only God is wise. What is the proper response to God’s wisdom and power? Repentance and submission, and thus Job responds two times (40:3–5; 42:1–6).

III. Prose epilogue: resolutions in blessing (42:7–17). The epilogue raises a number of interesting questions for the interpreter. After Job repents, God restores his health and prosperity beyond what he had enjoyed at the beginning of the book. Does this not concede to the argument of the three friends and Elihu? All along they have been urging him to repent and be restored. However, such an interpretation misses a key point. Job has not repented of any sin that had led to his suffering in the first place. No, he has passed that test. However, as time wore on, he had grown impatient with God. He never takes the counsel of his wife to “curse God and die” (2:9), but he does question God’s justice without ever breaking relationship.

A second issue concerns God’s statement that Job has “spoken the truth about me” (42:8). Did God not just spend two chapters criticizing him? The best way to understand this comment is to understand it as God’s affirmation not of every word that Job has spoken about him, but rather of how Job has responded to God in the end. After all, he had never abandoned God, even in his darkest hour.

Historical Background

The book of Job is anonymous, and there is no statement in the book concerning date of writing. The setting of the story of Job is early. Job’s hometown of Uz is outside the promised land, leading to the conclusion that Job himself was not an Israelite. This fact, along with the way his wealth is described, suggests a time before God narrowed the covenant in relationship to Abraham and his descendants. However, the date of the story does not tell us when it was written, and indications within the book are mixed, some pointing to an early date and some to a late date. The dating of the book makes no difference to its interpretation.

Ancient Near Eastern Background

The ancient Near East produced a number of compositions that explore the issue of undeserved suffering. These texts come from Sumer, Egypt, Ugarit, and Babylonia, but the two that are most similar to Job come from Babylonia.

The first, Ludlul bel nemeqi (“I will praise the Lord of wisdom”), is often referred to as the Babylonian Job. The main character of the story, Subshi-meshre-shakkan, is a sufferer who complains about his situation because he has been blameless in his devotion to god and king. He feels that he does not deserve the suffering that has come upon him. The form of the book is a monologue, and the focus is on his restoration by Marduk. He never really questions the gods about his problems. The best guess concerning the time of its composition is the middle of the second millennium BC.

The second text is the Babylonian Theodicy, likely written about 1000 BC. Formally, this composition is closer to Job in that it is a dialogue between a sufferer and a friend who represents the orthodox piety of Babylon. The sufferer questions the justice of the gods. The friend cautions him against blasphemy, but in the end he comes around to the view that the gods have made humanity perverse.

The existence of these and other texts related to Job does not necessarily mean that Job was directly influenced by them. Although the Babylonian Theodicy’s dialogue form may have suggested a literary vehicle to the author, the fact that all peoples in all times and places struggle with undeserved suffering is explanation enough for the similarities.

Contemporary Significance

Even today, unthinking people may attribute the suffering and poverty of others to their sin. Indeed, those who suffer may blame themselves and their actions for their bad circumstances. True, the Bible teaches that sin has consequences, some of which offenders suffer in this life. But the Bible is also consistent in its message that sometimes bad things happen to good people and good things happen to bad people. The book of Job reminds us that not all suffering is the result of sin.

The book’s response to suffering is not to give a logical answer to the question of why people suffer, but rather to simply assert the power and wisdom of God over against it. We may not know why we suffer, but we do know that God is in charge and knows what he is doing. The NT gives God’s ultimate answer to pain in life: Jesus Christ, God himself, who suffered and died for the sins of his people. Jesus both compares and contrasts with Job, since Jesus’ suffering was voluntary and undertaken on behalf of other people. It is not surprising that the early church adopted the practice of reading the book of Job during Easter Week.

A collection of 150 poems. They are the hymnbook of the OT period, used in public worship. Psalms contains songs of different lengths, types, and dates. The earliest psalm (Ps. 90) is attributed to Moses (mid-second millennium BC), while the content of Ps. 126 and Ps. 137 points to the latest periods of the OT (mid-first millennium BC). They continue to be used as a source of public worship and private devotion.

Historical Background

Most psalms have a title. In the Hebrew text this title comprises the first verse, whereas English translations set it off before the first verse. Titles vary. Many name an author (e.g., David [Ps. 3]; Asaph [Ps. 77]; sons of Korah [Ps. 42]), while others provide information about genre (e.g., Psalms of Ascent [Pss. 120–134]), tune (e.g., “Do Not Destroy” [Ps. 75]), use in worship (Ps. 92), and a circumstance that led to composition (Ps. 51). Information in the title gives hints concerning how psalms were written and brought into a final collection.

Composition

As mentioned, the titles of the psalms often give indications of authorship and occasionally name the circumstance that led to the writing of the psalm. A good example is Ps. 51, where the title states, “For the director of music. A psalm of David. When the prophet Nathan came to him after David had committed adultery with Bathsheba.” The title connects the psalm with the events recorded in 2 Sam. 11–12 and suggests that David wrote the song in response to his sin and Nathan’s confrontation.

Although only a handful of the psalms have such a historical title, it is likely that most psalms were composed in response to some specific circumstance that encouraged the author to write. Interestingly, though, the psalmists do not speak about the specific circumstance in the psalm itself. Psalm 51, for instance, fits perfectly with the situation that the title describes in that it expresses guilt toward God and asks for forgiveness, but nowhere does it speak specifically about adultery. The psalmists do this intentionally because they are writing the song not as a memorial to an event, but rather as a prayer that others who have had similar though not identical experiences can use after them. Thus, Ps. 51 has been used as a model prayer for many penitents, whether they have sinned like David or in another way.

Most modern hymns have a similar background. John Newton, for instance, was inspired to write “Amazing Grace” because of awe that he felt at his conversion to Christianity from the evil of being a slave trader. However, when he wrote it, he wanted others to sing it as reflecting not on his conversion but on their own.

Collection

The psalms were composed over a thousand-year period. Thus, it appears that the book of Psalms was a growing collection until it came to a close at an unknown time between the writing of the two Testaments.

In 1 Chron. 16:7–36 we may get a glimpse of how the process worked. The text describes David turning a musical composition over to the Levitical musician Asaph and his associates. It is likely that the priests kept an official copy of the book of Psalms in the holy place (the temple while it stood). The psalms, after all, were the hymns of ancient Israel. Their primary function was as a corporate book of prayer, though certainly they could be used in private devotions (note Hannah’s prayer in 1 Sam. 2:1–10 and its relationship to Ps. 113).

Organization and Structure

The psalms have no obvious organization that explains the location of all the psalms. They are not organized in terms of genre, authorship, time of composition, or length. There is only one statement about organization, found in Ps. 72:20: “This concludes the prayers of David son of Jesse.” In the light of this comment, it is surprising that a number of Davidic psalms appear in subsequent sections (Pss. 101; 103; 108–110; 122; 124; 131; 133; 138–145). The best explanation is that at one point Ps. 72 concluded the Davidic psalms, but there was a reorganization before the canonical order was permanently closed.

A number of contemporary theories try to find some deep structure to the book, but it is best to refrain from speculation in regard to the overall structure. Nonetheless, a few structural characteristics are obvious. First, the division of Psalms into five books seems to reflect the fivefold division of the Pentateuch:

I. Book 1 (Pss. 1–41)

II. Book 2 (Pss. 42–72)

III. Book 3 (Pss. 73–89)

IV. Book 4 (Pss. 90–106)

V. Book 5 (Pss. 107–150)

Each book ends with a doxology. Such an intentional association with the Pentateuch would lend support to the Psalter’s claim to authority. Although these are prayers to God, they are also God’s word.

Second, within the Psalter there are subcollections. That is, there are psalms that came into the book not individually but as a group. The best-known such group are the Psalms of Ascent (Pss. 120–134), probably so named because worshipers sang them while going up (ascending) to the Temple Mount during one of the annual religious festivals in Jerusalem.

Third, it appears that psalms are intentionally placed at the beginning and at the end of the book to serve as an introduction and a conclusion. Psalms 1–2 serve as an introduction that alerts the reader to the twin important themes of law and messiah. Psalm 1 pronounces a blessing on those who love God’s law. The psalms, after all, are an intimate and personal conversation with God. One must be on the side of the godly to enter such a holy textual space, just as one must be godly to enter the precincts of the temple. After the reader enters, Psalm 2 provides an encounter with God and his anointed one (messiah). At the end of the book, the last five psalms (Pss. 146–150) constitute a tremendous doxology of praise.

This leads to the final observation on structure. Psalms of lament predominate at the beginning of the book, but they give way to hymns of praise toward the end. It is almost as if one enters the Psalter mourning and leaves it praising. Indeed, the Psalter brings the reader into contact with God and thus transforms the reader from sadness to joy.

Literary Considerations

Genre. The individual psalms may be identified as songs, prayers, or poems. Specifically, they are lyric poems (expressing the emotions of the poet), often addressed to God, and set to musical accompaniment. Although the categories overlap, seven different types of psalms can be recognized, with the first three being by far the most common.

• Lament. The largest single group of psalms are the laments, characterized by the expression of unhappy emotions: sadness, disappointment, anger, worry. The lamenters call on God to save them, even while at times complaining about God’s actions toward them (Ps. 42:9–10). Some laments contain petitions for forgiveness (Ps. 51), while others assert innocence of any wrongdoing (Ps. 26). A few laments even contain curses directed toward the enemies who are trying to harm the psalmist (Ps. 69:19–28). Most laments end by praising God or reaffirming confidence in God (Ps. 130:7–8). Usually the reason for the change from mourning to rejoicing is not given, but Ps. 77 pinpoints the reason as the memory of God’s great salvation events in the past (vv. 10, 16–20). One psalm, Ps. 88, laments but never makes the turn, remaining in the pit of despair. Yet even here we have a glimmer of hope in that the one who laments is still speaking to God.

• Thanksgiving. When God answers a lament, the response is thanksgiving. Psalms of thanksgiving are very similar to hymns (see below), but they cite an earlier problem that God has addressed. Psalm 30 praises God for restoring the psalmist’s good fortune and health after he suffered due to his earlier arrogance that led him to forget God (vv. 6–7).

• Hymn. Hymns are psalms of unalloyed praise directed toward God. The psalmists often call for others to join their worship of God (Ps. 100).

• Remembrance. While many psalms evoke memories of God’s actions in the past (as the lament in Ps. 77 recalls the exodus), certain psalms focus on rehearsing the actions of God in the past. Psalm 136 is one of the most memorable examples. As a liturgical psalm, it recites a divine action (“[God] swept Pharaoh and his army into the Red Sea” [v. 15]) followed by a congregational response (“His love endures forever”).

• Confidence. These psalms are defined by their mood of quiet trust in God even in the midst of trouble. They often present a reassuring image of God. The picture of God as a shepherd in Ps. 23 or as a mother in Ps. 131 are good examples.

• Wisdom. Some psalms meditate on the law (Pss. 1; 119) or have interests similar to those of wisdom literature, such as Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes (Pss. 49; 73).

• Kingship. A number of psalms praise God as king (Ps. 47) or the human king as his agent (Pss. 20–21) or both (Ps. 2).

Style. The psalms are poems, and so their style is characterized by the use of parallelism and figurative language. Poetry is also notable for its short lines. A poet packs a lot of meaning into very few words. So it is important to slow down and reflect on a psalm in order to derive its maximum effect. Besides brevity of expression, parallelism, and figurative language, poets create interest by using other literary tools. The psalmists use these poetic devices not only to inform their readers’ intellect but also to stimulate their imagination and arouse their emotions. (See also Acrostic; Imagery; Poetry.)

Theological Message

Although the psalms are not theological essays, readers can learn about God and their relationship with God from these poems. The book of Psalms is a bit like a portrait gallery of God, using images to describe who he is and the nature of our relationship with him. Some examples include God as shepherd (Ps. 23), king (Ps. 47), warrior (Ps. 98), and mother (Ps. 131), and the list could be greatly expanded. Each one of these picture images casts light on the nature of God and also the nature of our relationship with God. After all, the aforementioned psalms explicitly or implicitly describe God’s people as sheep, subjects, soldiers, and children.

Connection to the New Testament and Today

Jesus himself draws attention to Psalms as a book that anticipated his coming suffering and glorification (Luke 24:25–27, 44). The Gospels recognized that Jesus’ zeal for God was well expressed by Ps. 69:9 (John 2:17). When at the apex of his suffering on the cross, Jesus uttered the words found in Ps. 22:1 (Matt. 27:46). The NT writers also saw that Jesus was the fulfillment of the covenant that promised that a son of David would have an everlasting throne (2 Sam. 7:16). Accordingly, the royal psalms (e.g., Pss. 2; 110) often were applied to Jesus, who is the Messiah (the Christ, “the anointed one”).

Today we read Psalms not only as an ancient witness to the coming work of Christ but also, as John Calvin put it, as a mirror of our souls. The psalms were written for worshipers who came after them with similar though not identical joys and problems. The psalms should become models of our prayers.

(1) A worship leader during the time of King David (1 Chron. 16:42), a descendant of Levi through Kohath and Joel (1 Chron. 6:33). Heman was one of King David’s seers, which involved prophesying as well as musical worship (1 Chron. 25:1, 4–5). Two of Heman’s famous colleagues were Asaph and Jeduthun. (2) A descendant of Judah through Zerah (1 Chron. 2:6) whose name appears in the inscription of Ps. 88 as “Heman the Ezrahite.” He was known for his wisdom (1 Kings 4:31). Some have suggested that he is the same person as in 1 Chron. 6:33; 16:42; 25:1, 4–5).

The descendants of the Le-vite Korah, grandson of Kohath (Exod. 6:24; Num. 16:1; 26:11, 58), not the Edomite Korah (Gen. 36:5, 16). They were a guild of temple singers during the monarchic period, residing certainly in the southern kingdom but also possibly in the northern kingdom. They appear in the superscriptions of Pss. 42–49; 84–85; 87–88, which focus on the themes of Zion, rescue from trials and estrangement from God, and God’s faithfulness as a refuge for his people. In postexilic times they were gatekeepers at the temple and bakers of the sacred bread (1 Chron. 9:19, 31).

The descendants of the Le-vite Korah, grandson of Kohath (Exod. 6:24; Num. 16:1; 26:11, 58), not the Edomite Korah (Gen. 36:5, 16). They were a guild of temple singers during the monarchic period, residing certainly in the southern kingdom but also possibly in the northern kingdom. They appear in the superscriptions of Pss. 42–49; 84–85; 87–88, which focus on the themes of Zion, rescue from trials and estrangement from God, and God’s faithfulness as a refuge for his people. In postexilic times they were gatekeepers at the temple and bakers of the sacred bread (1 Chron. 9:19, 31).

The descendants of the Le-vite Korah, grandson of Kohath (Exod. 6:24; Num. 16:1; 26:11, 58), not the Edomite Korah (Gen. 36:5, 16). They were a guild of temple singers during the monarchic period, residing certainly in the southern kingdom but also possibly in the northern kingdom. They appear in the superscriptions of Pss. 42–49; 84–85; 87–88, which focus on the themes of Zion, rescue from trials and estrangement from God, and God’s faithfulness as a refuge for his people. In postexilic times they were gatekeepers at the temple and bakers of the sacred bread (1 Chron. 9:19, 31).

According to the superscription of Ps. 88, the psalm was to be performed according to “mahalath leannoth,” possibly a musical tune (NIV note: “The Suffering of Affliction”). The meaning of the Hebrew phrase is uncertain, but the word leannoth here seems to refer to affliction.

(1) A granddaughter of Abraham and the daughter of Ishmael who married Esau (Gen. 28:9). In Gen. 36:3 she is named “Basemath.” (2) A wife of King Rehoboam. She was the daughter of David’s son Jerimoth and Abihail (2 Chron. 11:18). (3) A term of uncertain meaning found in the superscriptions of Pss. 53; 88. The term is likely a musical or choreographic instruction. In Ps. 88 the term is followed by le’annot (which can mean either “to inflict” or “to sing out”) and may indicate a kind of lamentation rite, a type of responsive performance by two groups, or a completed rite of affliction.

(1) A granddaughter of Abraham and the daughter of Ishmael who married Esau (Gen. 28:9). In Gen. 36:3 she is named “Basemath.” (2) A wife of King Rehoboam. She was the daughter of David’s son Jerimoth and Abihail (2 Chron. 11:18). (3) A term of uncertain meaning found in the superscriptions of Pss. 53; 88. The term is likely a musical or choreographic instruction. In Ps. 88 the term is followed by le’annot (which can mean either “to inflict” or “to sing out”) and may indicate a kind of lamentation rite, a type of responsive performance by two groups, or a completed rite of affliction.

The classification of thirteen psalms (Pss. 32; 42; 44–45; 52–55; 74; 78; 88–89; 142). All are associated with “authors” (David, the sons of Korah, Asaph, Heman, and Ethan) (see also Superscription). They include individual and communal laments, royal psalms, instruction, and psalms of mixed type, but none are hymns of praise. The root of maskil pertains to understanding or skill. There are two main views as to its meaning. As it relates to “making prudent,” the maskil may be meditative or instructive. Or maskil may be a designation that skilled musicians were required for proper performance.

Christ’s resurrection is the foundational event for the Christian faith. Paul goes so far as to say that if Christ did not rise, then the Christian faith is futile and Christians are to be pitied more than all others (1 Cor. 15:17–19). Resurrection’s climaxing position in all four Gospel narratives yields the same understanding. Christ came not merely to die, as some claim, but to conquer death. Resurrection gives everything that Christ did before his death an “of God” significance, and it establishes everything that follows as a guarantee of God’s eschatological promises. Without the resurrection, Jesus would have been just another “prophet hopeful” who died a tragic peasant death in Jerusalem. However, as it is, evidenced by the resurrection, he is the Son of God. According to the NT, the resurrection is the triumphant cry that God indeed did come to visit his creation and conquer the power of sin and death.

Old Testament

Resurrection hope is poorly attested by the OT, especially in earlier sections. References are made to death that seem to indicate that the dead have not ceased to exist, but such passages refer (at best) to death as a shadowy, nonlife existence (Job 26:5; Ps. 88:10; Ezek. 32:21). When early OT texts suggest that certain individuals experience everlasting life, they do so by escaping death altogether. Enoch (Gen. 5:24) walked with God and was simply taken away, while God dramatically picked up Elijah in a chariot of fire (2 Kings 2:11). Saul’s attempt at Endor to reawaken Samuel from death to receive his counsel (1 Sam. 28:3–14) speaks more to the superstition and disobedience of Saul than it does to Israel’s faith in life after death.

Some OT prophetic texts hint at a corporate restoration of life beyond the grave. It is a promise not of resurrection from death to life for the individual but of God’s unceasing love for corporate Israel that ultimately results in the redemption of his people from the snares of death (Hos. 6:1–3; 13:14). Although these texts are difficult to separate from Israel’s vision of postexilic national restoration, as in the vision of the valley of dry bones (Ezek. 37:1–14), they do indicate a growing sense of hope that God will restore Israel to renewed life in his presence after death. A similar trend may lie behind Job 14:14, where Job, after affirming the finality of individual death (14:12), still raises the question of a possible life after death. The basis for this notion rests on the affirmation that the living God, Job’s gracious redeemer, has power over death and will allow Job to see life after death (Job 19:25–26; cf. Ps. 16:10).

Daniel 12:2, which on the surface looks like a full-fledged teaching on individual resurrection, still falls short as a beneficial comparison to the teaching of Jesus. Although the Pharisees (along with a number of modern interpreters looking for OT foundations for individual resurrection) later used this as a proof text for individual resurrection, its context (Dan. 11) clearly suggests a struggle between nations, to which God eventually will reveal his eternal judgment. God will vindicate his people. Notwithstanding, OT language of eternal awakening to a new reality, good or bad, opens the door for further reflection on God’s eternal purpose and how it relates to human experience beyond death.

Intertestamental Period

The speculations of the intertestamental period portray a vast array of philosophical influences that affected the thinking of Second Temple Judaism. The conservative Sadducees, who may have accepted only the Torah as Scripture, understood Sheol (the state or abode of the dead) to be a place of unending sleep and thus denied resurrection (cf. Sir. 17:27–28; 30:17; Acts 23:8). Other groups, such as the Pharisees and the Essenes, were to a greater or lesser extent influenced by Hellenistic thinking on the relationship between spirit and matter. The lack of unity among these groups, especially the Pharisees, created a plethora of understandings concerning resurrection. Some, influenced by the Platonic idea that the soul/spirit is immortal and will be released at the death of the body, turned reflections on the afterlife into an issue of immortality (4 Macc. 14:5; 18:23). Others seem to have affirmed a physical resurrection but restricted it to either Israel or a righteous remnant thereof. This latter perspective easily connected to the view that all would be raised, the unrighteous for punishment, the righteous for reward and bliss.

It proves impossible, therefore, to determine to what extent Christian reflections during the first century influenced Jewish writers rather than vice versa. Sociologically speaking, the early Christians were one of the many parties of Judaism developing during that period. As the Gospels seem to suggest, they interacted, maybe especially, with the Pharisees.

New Testament

The OT’s relative silence on the issue of resurrection stands in stark contrast to the central position that it holds in the NT. All four Gospels build their narrative portrayal of Jesus’ ministry toward this climaxing event, and Jesus himself argued against the view of the Sadducees (Mark 12:18–27). Beyond the Gospel narratives, Paul makes resurrection the very heart of the Christian faith (1 Cor. 15); Hebrews understands resurrection as part of Christian elementary teaching (Heb. 6:1–2); James plays on the word “raise” as he explains the connection between faith and strength of life (James 5:15); Peter sees resurrection as the basis for Christian hope (1 Pet. 1:3); Revelation details the quality of the resurrected life (Rev. 21–22). In short, every part of the NT affirms the reality of a resurrection after death. It is the climactic evidence that God’s kingdom now dwells among people. God brings life; death will no longer have the last word.

The Gospels. The Gospels give four accounts of raisings from the dead. Strictly speaking, these are not resurrections but resuscitations. The people in question are not raised to eternal life but rather are brought back to life in their historical circumstances; they will later die again. The Gospels’ intertwining of the raising of Jairus’s daughter with the healing of the hemorrhaging woman (Mark 5:21–43 pars.) underscores the conceptual connection between life and God’s presence. First-century Judaism had come up bankrupt and could do nothing to help a woman whose bleeding made worship of God impossible. Now, however, life could be restored after death. Even the leader of the worship center, who could do nothing to help this woman, now saw his own daughter raised from the dead.

The raising of the widow’s son from Nain (Luke 7:11–17) similarly indicates that the days of the prophet Elijah had returned (1 Kings 17:8–24). God was again visiting his people and bringing life after death. Most spectacularly, Lazarus’s raising after four days in the grave (John 11:1–44) speaks directly to God’s power to bring life out of death in connection with OT understandings of the afterlife. The emphasis on the four days in the grave, along with Jesus’ pronouncement of himself as “resurrection and life” and his application of God’s revelatory name (“I am”) to himself, make this event stand out as anticipating what is soon to come in full. The same holds true in the unleashing of power at Jesus’ death, when graves spring open and the dead are raised (Matt. 27:51–53).

Paul’s letters. Paul’s teaching on resurrection anchors in eschatology, or vice versa. The reality and finality of death, introduced by Adam’s disobedience, are now overcome by Christ through his resurrection (1 Cor. 15:21–22). Christ’s resurrection evidences that God has ended death’s reign; it heralds the imminent coming of the end, a time when all who belong to Christ will be raised in like manner, and death will be no more (15:23–24).

Although at times Paul uses the language of body, soul, and spirit, he never falls prey to a Platonic dualism that separates body from soul, claiming that only the body dies while the soul remains immortal (1 Tim. 6:15b–16a). Rather, following Hebraic thinking, he understands resurrection as total transformation of the whole person, comparing it to what happens to a seed put in the ground. It must die before something completely new comes up (1 Cor. 15:36). The promise of resurrection is the promise that the death-marked human who is buried will, at the time of resurrection, be transformed and suited to live eternally in God’s presence. What is now perishable will become imperishable (1 Cor. 15:42–44). To Paul, this is not about getting rid of matter (the body) that is created by God, but about Christ’s restoration of what Adam destroyed (1 Cor. 15:49). It is the same understanding expressed in Rev. 21:1–5a, where John prophesies the transformation of both heaven and earth when God reestablishes his covenant relationship with his people.

Summary. Although the Gospels’ presentations of Jesus’ resurrection vary in some detail (probably due to purpose and audience), all of them treat the event as the theological centerpiece of the Gospel narrative. The resurrection story launches God’s eschatological work and opens the door, as the postresurrection appearances show, for a connection between the Jesus story and the church story. It is the foundation both for the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18–20) and for Pentecost (Luke 24:49). All people of all nations can now meet the living Christ.

A heading applied to the beginning of some psalms. These superscriptions may refer to people, historical circumstances, musical aspects, or classifications. The precise meaning of many of the terms in the superscriptions is unclear.

Fifty-five psalms are said to be for the music director and are also identified as a psalm of David, of Asaph, or of the sons of Korah (e.g., Pss. 11; 44; 75). Other persons mentioned by name include Solomon, Moses, Ethan, Heman, and possibly Jeduthun (Pss. 39; 62; 72; 77; 88; 89; 90; 127). These associations do not necessarily indicate authorship. Historical references suggest a background for understanding a psalm, but they are not necessarily original. The main classifications are “song” (shir), “psalm” (mizmor), and maskil (translation uncertain). Additionally, they may have information about tunes, styles, or instruments, though the specifics are now unknown.