Silent Consent
One who walks with integrity, practices righteousness, and speaks truth in his heart. Psalm 15:2 NASB
In his heart – “Speaks truth in his heart.” What is that? Unvoiced agreement? Inner affirmation? What good is it in the public arena to speak the truth in the heart? If you don’t say a word, who would know? What would it matter? When the poet spends so much effort on elucidating the public necessity of integrity (tāmîm) and the outward acts of righteousness (ṣedeq), why does he suddenly shift to inner speech?
Unfortunately, our modern translation of lēbāb has a different nuance than the ancient idea of “heart.” We think of “heart” metaphorically as the inner man, that place where we hear our own inner voice of conscience, but in the ancient world, “heart” wasn’t just conscience. “By far the majority of the usages of lēb refer either to the inner or immaterial nature in general or to one of the three traditional personality functions of man; emotion, thought, or will.”[1] When the poet uses the term, he isn’t describing Freud’s idea of the id. He’s depicting the whole combination of emotion, thought, and will—everything that gives rise to external acts. In other words, in this word he captures what Yeshua later elaborated as the inside of the cup. “ You blind Pharisee, first clean the inside of the cup and of the dish, so that the outside of it may also become clean” (Matthew 23:26) or “There is nothing outside the person which can defile him if it goes into him; but the things which come out of the person are what defile the person” (Mark 7:15). The ancient idea of the heart is everything that contributes to what is outwardly observable. If a person speaks the truth in the heart, outward acts will be ṣedeq. It is the spiritual law of inevitable consequences.
Of course, we should have guessed this was the case when we read the verb dābar (to speak) because this Hebrew word includes “declare, converse, command, promise, warn, threaten, sing, etc.”[2] Furthermore, dābār can also mean “word, speech,” and “thing.” Its wide range of meaning includes both internal and external occurrences. Speaking the truth, even if it is “in the heart,” necessarily involves things spoken, the speech itself, and the action it produces. And while we’re at it, we should notice that “truth” is not about correct declarations. ʾĕmet is about what is reliable, what is dependable, what can be counted on as a foundation. It does not necessarily include our modern idea of being correct. It is a word about relational connections, not factual affirmations. The “truth in his heart” is a statement about the utter reliability of his emotion, will, and volition, and that, of course, can only be accomplished if the heart is in alignment with God.
So, there you have it. If you want your gate pass to God’s company, you’ll need to walk with total commitment, do what the will of God demands, and maintain an inner purity that motivates outward observance. Head, heart, and hand working together to follow the Lord’s orders. Simple, right? Well, maybe in theory, but I suspect that if this is the requirement, we all fall short. Is that what the poet wants us to conclude—that there’s little hope for us? I don’t think so, but to see why this poem isn’t merely condemnation, we’ll have to look at the rest of its stanzas, beginning, of course, with a clear view of these ultimate requirements.
Topical Index: lēbāb, heart, dābar, speak, thing, inner voice, Matthew 23:26, Psalm 15:2
[1] Bowling, A. (1999). 1071 לָבַב. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 466). Chicago: Moody Press.
[2] Kalland, E. S. (1999). 399 דָּבַר. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 178). Chicago: Moody Press.
