For and Against (2)

My eye grows dim from misery; I have called upon You every day, LordI have spread out my hands to You.  Psalm 88:9  NASB

Called upon – Internal contradiction!  Yes, Hebrew has a few words that mean exactly the opposite depending on the circumstances.  When an author takes advantage of this, his choice can mean either one—or both.  Perhaps that’s what we have here.  Something odd needs to be expressed; something counterintuitive but phenomenologically real.  God is good—and yet He seems to not care.  In fact, sometimes it feels as if the good God is really toying with us by producing all kinds of evil in our lives.  All of this is emotionally captured in the little word qārāʾ.

Here are the two opposing senses of this root:

  1. The root qrʾ denotes primarily the enunciation of a specific vocable or message. In the case of the latter usage it is customarily addressed to a specific recipient and is intended to elicit a specific response[1]
  2. This root denotes a planned encounter wherein the subject intentionally confronts the object . . . This word can represent friendly encounters like that of a host rushing out to meet a prospective guest (Gen 18:2; Jud 4:18), or going out to meet someone in order to recognize or gain (II Sam 19:15 [H 16]) him as an ally (cf. Josh 9:11; II Kgs 10:15; Ps 59:4 [H 5]). Such meetings are purposeful and intentional. In the cultic use the subject confronts the divine (Ex 5:3; 19:17; Num 23:3).

Hostile usages entail a formal confrontation of enemies martially (cf. II Kgs 23:29; Josh 8:5, 22) and non-martially (Ex 5:20; 7:15).[2]

Is the psalmist “calling upon” God as friend or enemy?  Hard to say.  He cries that he has been doing everything right—spreading out his hands in prayer and worship.  He expects the response of the “good” God.  But all he gets back is enemy actions.  He “calls upon” the particular god of Israel, the One Who promises covenant protection and rescue.  His address is quite specific (1. qārāʾ).  This is the God who is supposed to show up.  But, at the same time, his experience is more like 2. qārāʾ, hostility.  How can we possibly explain this?

Well, maybe we can’t.  Maybe we’re left with our emotional reality in the face of God’s interactive mystery.  Maybe not everything makes sense.  The experience is real.  We know what it feels like.  But that doesn’t mean it is rational, that is, subject to some external justification based on theological propositions.  It just is—as it is.  Hurting, traumatizing, inexplicable.  The biblical authors reflect a great and deep truth.  Life is messy.  Are you asking for more?

Topical Index:  qārāʾ, call upon, rational, Psalm 88:9

[1] Coppes, L. J. (1999). 2063 קָרָא. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 810). Chicago: Moody Press.

[2] Coppes, L. J. (1999). 2064 קָרָא. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer Jr., & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (electronic ed., p. 811). Chicago: Moody Press.

Subscribe
Notify of
3 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Richard Bridgan

“The biblical authors reflect a great and deep truth. Life is messy. Are you asking for more?”

Yes, life is messy… and… intrinsically… I am enabled to continue with God only by asking him to overwhelm my unbelief… and having my faith in him affirmed.

Richard Bridgan

Moreover, this is the proper stance of faith that is dependent upon the sinful weakness of human being for its percipient subjective response to God’s self-revelation by those means framed for our human reception and understanding. This includes God’s framing for understanding consisting both in Rabbinic Judaism’s co-operative theological frame and in Christianity’s rationalistic theological frame.

Richard Bridgan

In my opinion, Saul/Paul incorporated the essential nature of each in his theological applications of each… fit for reception by his primary audiences both respectively and respectfully… yet without compromisng either party’s need of God’s own theological framing.