Reading the Psalms as Scripture, by James Hamilton Jr. and Matthew Damico. Lexham, 142 pages, $14.99.

Many things factor into a proper interpretation of Scripture, or any book for that matter. Determining the genre of a book is vital to a right interpretation of its message. Alister Fowler, for example, in his significant book on genre writes,

Of all the literary codes . . . I have no hesitation in proposing genre as the most important, not least because it incorporates and organizes many others . . . there is no doubt that genre primarily has to do with communication. It is an instrument not of classification or prescription, but of meaning.[1]

I have no doubt that the above statement is true; however, genre identification of this small, newly published book on the Psalms is difficult to pin down. Is it classified as an introduction to the Psalter? Is it an exposition of select Psalms, something like a commentary? I would classify it as a book of hermeneutics; more precisely, I would suggest that the authors posture themselves to write a hermeneutics on reading the Psalter.

The book is relatively short, and it is written in easily accessible prose. It is not cluttered with footnotes as so often happens in an academic tome. Nevertheless, the authors have set out to address several weighty and significant introductory and hermeneutical issues. In chapter 1 they address the issue of reading the Psalter as a book, by which they mean a coherently delivered message that resembles a masterpiece. As is well-known, they acknowledge that the Psalter is divided into five books, with the first four concluding with doxologies that have many common elements embedded within them (Ps. 41:13; 72:18–19; 89:52; 106:48). They acknowledge that the Psalter included a protracted editorial process, that may have concluded with someone like Ezra being responsible for the Psalter’s final form (11). They note that a new author is introduced at the beginning of each book, and they highlight some of the themes in the Psalter and conclude that the canonical form of the psalter indicates intentional arrangement. At this point they also show sensitivity to dictional links which connect individual psalms, claiming that there is a deliberate building up and development within the flow of the psalter. Their thesis can be caught in the following:

The Psalter is not a random collection of disconnected poems but a strategically arranged set of carefully curated pieces that use and reuse common terminology, have clear signposts at the collection’s turning points, and evidence discernable flows of thought. (20)

Next, they take up the well-worn claim that Psalms 1 and 2 were meant to introduce the psalter. They note the emphasis on Torah meditation in Psalm 1 and the accent falling upon the theme of the king in Psalm 2. Even so, I wish they had demonstrated more awareness to the Jewish practice of asking the following extremely significant question regarding Psalms 1 and 2 “framing” the Psalter: What is the surest path to communion with God? Psalm 1, which is not a prayer, would say that pious study leads to communion with God. Psalm 2, which does fit with most Psalms, would say that acts of corporate worship and praise of the king would be the surest path to God. So, which is it? According to Jewish tradition, the editors of the psalter never fully resolved this tension, since piety in the Jewish mindset indicates that it is both study and prayer that bring one close to God.

Chapter 2 takes up the topic of the superscriptions in the Psalter. In this chapter they take up two critical questions: 1) “how should the superscriptions be regarded” (27) and 2) “how should the superscriptions guide our interpretations of the Psalms?” (27). Regarding the first point the authors consider the superscriptions as inspired by the Holy Spirit and therefore canonical. Although I do not recall them using the language of “inerrant,” I am inclined to think that they would hold this position as well. However, such a claim is not without difficulties. Certain Psalms and their associated titles and superscriptions present great difficulties in accepting them at face value and esteeming them to be on a par with Scripture itself. Psalm 30 with its title is a case in point. Rather, I would suggest the posture posed by E. J. Young years ago to be more sober minded:

In defending the essential trustworthiness of the titles, I do not mean to suggest that as they stand they are above investigation or criticism. But a cautious and reverent criticism, it seems to me, will be unable to dismiss them in their entirety as valueless witnesses of authorship.[2]

This leads to their second point, “how should the superscriptions guide our interpretation?” Since the authors esteem the titles and superscriptions so highly, they maintain that the patterning of the superscriptions reveals literary structuring devices. This holds, in their view, for both smaller units and larger ones that cut across Books 1–5 of the Psalter as well. Although I appreciate their sensitivity to the role of new exodus themes here, much of their observation of large patterns in this section of the book, especially given their emphasis on chiastic patterns, seems speculative without much evidence marshalled to support their observations.

Chapter 3 notes the importance of careful attention to individual psalms, especially the mechanisms of Hebrew prosody. They begin with some eloquent comments on the importance of poetry for communicating in compressed, evocative imagery, which is meant to deepen the impact of the message being conveyed. Nevertheless, they are stuck in the “traditional” approach to Hebrew poetry which is committed to Robert Lowth’s paradigm, which understands parallelism as the essence of Hebrew poetry. Although it is true that parallelism is an important literary trope in Hebrew poetry, many Psalms commentators today do not understand the complexity of parallelism or are blind to other features of Hebrew poetry that mark when one is in the ambit of poetry vis-à-vis prose (e.g., verb gapping, loosening of prose syntactic constraints). Since the linguistic turn in studies of Hebrew poetry in the last several decades, huge advances have been made in understanding the workings of Hebrew poetry and how it functions. However, the authors of this book limit their discussion to parallelisms and acrostic forms, which are present in the Psalms, but by no means exhaust the dynamics of Hebrew poetry found therein.

Chapter 4 engages the reader on the topic of reading the Psalter as a whole, like a book. We can call this a “canonical approach,” since it is attempting what many studies have done in recent years: not myopically merely reading isolated individual Psalms but paying attention to contiguous Psalms in our interpretation and the flow of a narrative in the whole Psalter that may influence the individual parts. This is the kind of approach that was begun by Brevard Childs (Barthian) and continued by more conservative scholars like O. Palmer Robertson.[3] The authors suggest that slow, prayerful pondering of reading the whole Psalter will lead one into the same insights of interconnectedness that they have observed. Indeed, “walking into the Psalter,” they say, is “not unlike the experience of walking into a great cathedral” (65), a metaphor originally invoked by D. Kidner years ago. Although I appreciate their attempts to read the Psalter as a coherent whole, I was left unsatisfied that the patterns they identify can be supported by the sparse evidence they cite.

Chapter 5 maintains that attention should be given to citations and allusions in the Psalter to earlier Scripture. They emphasize this over and against the constant tendency to find the backdrop for Psalms in ancient Near Eastern parallels. This is welcome, and one can appreciate their allusion competence especially, for example, in noticing the recurring exodus motif in the Psalms.

Chapter 6 delves into the topic of interpreting the Psalter messianically. The authors set out to instruct the reader in the school of typology. The authors enjoin paying attention to pronoun usage, which is often the gateway to a legitimate messianic interpretation (84ff). They briefly touch upon the sensitive topic of imprecations in the Psalms (89ff). Next, the authors segue into a discussion of Psalms as interpreted by later Old Testament authors and New Testament authors in chapters 8 and 9. Thankfully, in an age when C. Hays and Pete Enns have emphasized “christotelic” hermeneutics (each in their own manner), Hamilton and Damico land their feet on the stable ground of apostolic hermeneutics. That is to say that we have an obligation to read the Psalms as the New Testament authors read and interpretated them, since they are inspired Apostles.

Finally, Hamilton and Damico make an outstanding appeal in chapter 9 for why Christians should return to and practice customarily singing Psalms in worship to the Triune God. This will lead the Christian into celebrating the deeds and character of God, repeating the sweet promises of God, and internalizing the Psalms, which will necessarily lead to changing and transforming us. The final short section of this book ends with “Seven Theses on How to Read the Psalms” (127–30), which accurately summarizes and recounts the highpoints of their argument.

I began this review by saying that its genre was hard to pin down. It is written in clear and accessible prose; indeed, the authors and publishers are to be commended for producing a simple, clear, and attractively published book. There is only one typographical error I found on page 128, where “the” should be “they.” I think that the book is worth reading for the person who has an interest in reading the Psalter as a coherent whole. Several significant introductory and hermeneutical issues are discussed. I have tried to register where I demur from the authors’ positions and hope that I have introduced the reader of this review to some of the complex but fascinating interpretive issues found in today’s discussions surrounding what is arguably the most influential Old Testament book on the theology of the church since the Reformation.

Endnotes

[1] Alastair Fowler, Kinds of Literature: An Introduction to the Theory of Genres and Modes (Harvard University, 1982), 22.

[2] E. J. Young, An Introduction to the Old Testament (Eerdmans, 1965), 302 [footnote 3].

[3] See, e.g., O. Palmer Robertson, The Flow of the Psalms: Discovering Their Structure and Theology (P & R, 2015).

Bryan D. Estelle is a minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and serves as professor of Old Testament at Westminster Seminary California in Escondido, California. Ordained Servant Online, April, 2025.