Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Psalms 73:11

And they say, How doth God know? and is there knowledge in the most High?

11. The speakers in this verse are not ‘the wicked,’ but the deluded mass of their followers described in Psa 73:10. They adopt the language of their leaders, and question God’s knowledge of their doings in particular, and even His omniscience in general. Cp. Psa 10:4; Psa 10:11; Psa 10:13. The names of God El, the Mighty One, ‘ Elyn, the Supreme Ruler of the Universe are chosen so as to accentuate the blasphemy of their scepticism.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

And they say – His people say. The connection demands this interpretation. The meaning is, that his people, as they return again and again to this subject Psa 73:10, are constrained to put this question. They are compelled by these facts to start such painful inquiries about God; and distressing as the inquiries are, and as are the doubts which they involve, these thoughts will pass through their mind, even though to avoid giving needless pain to those who have no such perplexities and difficulties they keep these thoughts to themselves, Psa 73:15.

How doth God know? – That is, How can these facts be reconciled with Gods omniscience? How can it be that he sees all this, and yet suffers it to occur, or that he does not interpose to prevent it? Is it not a fair inference from these facts that God does not see them, and that he is not an Omniscient Being? Can it be explained, can it be believed, that God sees all this, and that he calmly looks on, and does nothing to prevent it? If he sees it, why does he not interpose and put an end to it? These perplexities were not confined to the psalmist. They are such as have been felt by good people in all ages; and no one yet has been able to furnish a solution of them that is wholly free from difficulty.

And is there knowledge in the Most High? – Can there be in God a knowledge of these facts? Are we not driven to the conclusion that he must be ignorant of them? for, if he knew them, would he not interpose to prevent them? How can it be consistent with the idea that he knows them, and sees them, that he does not interpose, and that he suffers these things to take place without any attempt to check such evils? Who, even now, can answer these questions?

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 11. They say, How doth God know?] My people are so stumbled with the prosperity of the wicked, that they are ready in their temptation to say, “Surely, God cannot know these things, or he would never dispense his favours thus.” Others consider these words as the saying of the wicked: “We may oppress these people as we please, and live as we list; God knows nothing about it.”

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

They; either,

1. The godly. Or rather,

2. Those wicked ones, whose words and actions he hath been hitherto describing, or the people confederate with them. For these and such-like opinions are oft ascribed to the wicked in Scripture, but never, as far as I know; to any good man. And Job, though he used many intemperate speeches, and though some such expressions as this were charged upon him by his friends, as Job 22:13, yet he utterly disowned them. Is there knowledge in the Most High? seeing these cursed and impudent blasphemers of God, and enemies of all goodness, are crowned with so many blessings, how is it credible that there is a God who sees and orders the affairs of this lower world? for if God did know these things, certainly he neither could nor would suffer them to be thus managed.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

And they say, how doth God know?…. Owning there is a God, but questioning his knowledge; for the words are not an inquiry about the way and manner of his knowing things; which is not by the senses, as hearing and seeing; eyes and ears are improperly ascribed to him; nor in a discursive way, by reasoning, and inferring one thing from another; for he knows things intuitively, beholding all things in his own eternal mind and will: but they are a question about his knowledge itself, as follows:

and is their knowledge in the most High? they acknowledge God to be the most High, and yet doubt whether there is knowledge in him; and indeed the higher with respect to place, and at the greater distance he was from them, the less they imagined he knew of affairs below; see

Job 22:13 for the knowledge called in question is to be understood of his providential notice of human affairs, which they thought he did not concern himself with, as being below his regard; see Eze 9:9 and therefore concluded that their acts of oppression and violence, and their insolent words against God and men, would pass unobserved, and with impunity. If these are the words of good men, of the people of God under affliction, they are to be considered as under a temptation from their affliction, and the prosperity of the wicked, to call in question the providence of God in the government of the world, and his love to them, which is sometimes expressed by his knowledge of them, Ps 1:6.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The persons speaking are now those apostates who, deluded by the good fortune and free-thinking of the ungodly, give themselves up to them as slaves. concerning the modal sense of , quomodo sciverit , vid., Psa 11:3, cf. Job 22:13. With the doubting question is continued. Bttcher renders thus: nevertheless knowledge is in the Most High (a circumstantial clause like Pro 3:28; Mal 1:14; Jdg 6:13); but first of all they deny God’s actual knowledge, and then His attributive omniscience. It is not to be interpreted: behold, such are (according to their moral nature) the ungodly ( , tales, like , Ps 48:15, Deu 5:26, cf. , Isa 56:11); nor, as is more in accordance with the parallel member Psa 73:12 and the drift of the Psalm: behold, thus it befalleth the ungodly (such as they according to their lot, as in Job 18:21, cf. Isa 20:6); but, what forms a better connection as a statement of the ground of the scepticism in Psa 73:11, either, in harmony with the accentuation: behold, the ungodly, etc., or, since it is not : behold, these are ungodly, and, ever reckless (Jer 12:1), they have acquired great power. With the bitter , as Stier correctly observes, they bring forward the obvious proof to the contrary. How can God be said to be the omniscient Ruler of the world? – the ungodly in their carnal security become very powerful and mighty, but piety, very far from being rewarded, is joined with nothing but misfortune. My striving after sanctity (cf. Pro 20:9), my abstinence from all moral pollution (cf. Pro 26:6), says he who has been led astray, has been absolutely ( as in 1Sa 25:21) in vain; I was notwithstanding (Ew. 345, a) incessantly tormented (cf. Psa 73:5), and with every morning’s dawn ( , as in Psa 101:8, cf. in Job 7:18) my chastitive suffering was renewed. We may now supply the conclusion in thought in accordance with Psa 73:10: Therefore have I joined myself to those who never concern themselves about God and at the same time get on better.

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

11. And they say, How doth God know? Some commentators maintain that the Prophet here returns to the ungodly, and relates the scoffings and blasphemies with which they stimulate and stir up themselves to commit sin; but of this I cannot approve. David rather explains what he had stated in the preceding verse, as to the fact that the faithful fall into evil thoughts and wicked imaginations when the short-lived prosperity of the ungodly dazzles their eyes. He tells us that they begin then to call in question, Whether there is knowledge in God. Among worldly men, this madness is too common. Ovid thus speaks in one of his verses:

“

Sollicitor nullos esse putare deos;” “I am tempted to think that there are no gods.”

It was, indeed, a heathen poet who spake in this manner; but as we know that the poets express the common thoughts of men, and the language which generally predominates in their minds, (181) it is certain that he spake, as it were, in the person of the great mass of mankind, when he frankly confessed, that as soon as any adversity happens, men forget all knowledge of God. They not only doubt whether there is a God, but they even enter into debate with, and chide him. What else is the meaning of that complaint which we meet with in the ancient Latin Poet-

“

Nec Saturnius haec oculis pater adspicit aequis :”

“

Nor does the great god, the son of Saturn, regard these things with impartial eyes,” — but that the woman, of whom he there speaks, accuses her god Jupiter of unrighteousness, because she was not dealt with in the way which she desired? It is then too common, among the unbelieving part of mankind, to deny that God cares for and governs the world, and to maintain that all is the result of chance. (182) But David here informs us that even true believers stumble in this respect: not that they break forth into this blasphemy, but because they are unable, all at once, to keep their minds under restraint when God seems to cease from executing his office. The expostulation of Jeremiah is well known,

“

Righteous art thou, O Lord! when I plead with thee; yet let me talk with thee of thy judgments: Wherefore doth the way of the wicked prosper? Wherefore are all they happy that deal very treacherously?” (Jer 12:1)

It appears from that passage that even the godly are tempted to doubt of the Providence of God, but at the same time that doubts on this subject do not go very deep into their hearts; for Jeremiah at the outset protests the contrary; and by doing so, puts, as it were, a bridle upon himself. Yet they do not always so speedily anticipate the snares of Satan, as to avoid asking, under the influence of a doubting spirit, how it can happen, if God really regards the world, that he does not remedy the great confusion which prevails in it? Of those who impiously prate against God by denying his Providence, there are two sorts. Some openly pour out their blasphemies, asserting that God, delighting in ease and pleasure, cares about nothing, but leaves the government of all things to chance. Others, although they keep their thoughts on this subject to themselves, and are silent before men, yet cease not secretly to fret against God, and to accuse him of injustice or of indolence, in conniving at wickedness, neglecting the godly, and allowing all things to be involved in confusion, and to go to wreck. But the people of God, before these perverse and detestable thoughts enter deep into their hearts, disburden themselves into the bosom of God, (183) and their only desire is to acquiesce in his secret judgments, the reason of which is hidden from them. The meaning of this passage, therefore, is, that not only the wicked, when they see things in the world so full of disorder, conceive only of a blind government, which they attribute to fortune or chance; but that even true believers themselves are shaken, so as to doubt of the Providence of God; and that unless they were wonderfully preserved by his hand, they would be completely swallowed up in this abyss.

(181) “ Et les discours qui regnent communeement en leur cerveaux.” — Fr.

(182) “ Que tout vient a l’aventure.” — Fr.

(183) “ En la presence de Dieu.” — Fr. “In the presence of God.”

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(11-14) The mutual relation of these verses has been the subject of many conflicting opinions. The following is the arrangement that seems preferable
And people say, How shall God know?
And does the Most High take notice of it?
Lo! there are wicked men, And yet, always at ease, they amass riches.
It is in vain then that I have kept my heart pure.
And washed my hands in innocence;
For I have been plagued every day,
And my punishments (come) every morning.

this reflection being put into the mouth of the public who are onlookers at the career of these timeservers. But the poet immediately goes on to disclaim it for himself.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

11. They say, How doth God know If these words are supposed to be spoken by God’s people they simply express their wonder, not how God should know, but how his certain knowledge of these outrageous doings could be reconciled with his goodness; as if they would say, How can God know these things and yet allow them? But if they are the words of the wicked, as seems most natural, we must suppose them to be heathen, with whom limited knowledge and local jurisdiction of the gods were admissible facts; or, taking knowledge here in its judicial sense of legal cognizance, it may be only a denial by the wicked that God notices with a view to punish their acts, as Psa 11:4-5. Knowledge, in the second member of the verse, is to be taken in the sense of omniscience.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments