The title of this psalm, in the original, is simply “For Solomon.” The words “a psalm” are supplied by the translators. In the margin this is “of” to wit, of Solomon - as if Solomon were the writer. Prof. Alexander renders it, “By Solomon,” and supposes, of course, that he was the author. The Septuagint renders it, “For” - εἰς eis - “Solomon.” So the Latin Vulgate: “In Salomonem.” The Syriac: “Of David; when he constituted Solomon king.” Luther: “Of Solomon.” It is true that the Hebrew in the title is the same which is used in other psalms where the author is designated, as in Psalms 68; Psalms 69; Psalms 70:1-5, and elsewhere, “of David;” in Psalms 73; Psalms 74, and elsewhere, “of Asaph,” etc.; and it is true that the mode of expression would most naturally convey the idea that Solomon was the author; but it is also true that this construction is not necessary as is shown by the fact that it is understood otherwise by the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate, the Syriac, and by the author of the Chaldee Paraphrase. No one can doubt that the Hebrew is susceptible of this latter interpretation, (see Gesenius on the Hebrew letter lamedh (ל l), which is an inseparable preposition and that the translation “for Solomon” is a fair rendering. The contents of the psalm also demand this construction here. It is wholly improbable that Solomon would pen the predictions in the psalm as referring to himself; but not at all improbable that David would utter these predictions and prayers in reference to his son about to ascend the throne. The language of the psalm is every way appropriate to the supposition that it was composed by David in view of the anticipated glories and the peaceful reign of his son and successor, as an inspired production indicating what that reign would be, and looking onward to the still more glorious and peaceful reign of the Messiah as king. It seems to me, therefore, that the evidence is sufficiently clear that the psalm was composed in reference to Solomon, and not by him; and, if so, the most natural supposition is that it was composed by David. The evidence, indeed, is not positive, but it is such probable evidence as to leave little room for doubt.
It is a question of much importance whether the psalm had original reference to Solomon alone, or whether it had a reference to the Messiah, and is to be reckoned among the Messianic psalms. That it was applicable to the reign of Solomon, as a reign of peace and prosperity, there can be no doubt, and there seems to be as little reason to doubt that it was intended to describe his reign, and that the principal images in the psalm are taken from what it was foreseen would characterize his government; but that it also had reference to the Messiah, and to his reign, will be apparent, I think, from the following considerations:
(1) The testimony of tradition. Thus the ancient Chaldee Paraphrase, which undoubtedly gives the prevailing opinion of the ancient Jews, regards it as referring to the Messiah. The first verse of the psalm is thus rendered in that Paraphrase: “O God, give the knowledge of thy judgments to the king the Messiah - משׁיחא למלכא lemalekâ' meshı̂yachâ' - and thy righteousness to the sons of David the king.” The older Jewish writers, according to Schottgen, agreed in applying it to the Messiah.
(2) The fact that it is not applicable, in the fullness of its meaning, to the reign of Solomon. It is true that the psalm describes the general characteristics of that reign as one of peace and prosperity; but it is also true, as will be seen in the progress of the explanation of the psalm, that there are passages in it which cannot be well applied to him, or which have a fullness of meaning - an amplitude of signification - which requires an application to some other state of things than that which occurred under his rule.
(3) The psalm “is” applicable to the Messiah, and accords in its general character, and in the particular expressions, with the other descriptions of the Messiah in the Old Testament. Compare Psalms 72:2, Psalms 72:4, with Isaiah 11:4; Psalms 72:3, with Isaiah 9:6; Psalms 72:5, with Isaiah 9:7. See also Psalms 72:8, Psalms 72:11, Psalms 72:17. It will be shown in the exposition of these verses that they accurately describe the state of things under the Messiah, and that they cannot be literally applied to the reign of Solomon.
(4) it may be added that this interpretation is in accordance with the prevalent style of the Old Testament. No one can doubt, however the fact may be explained, that the writers of the Old Testament “did” look forward to a remarkable personage who was to appear in the future. Whether the reality of the inspiration of the prophets is admitted or denied, they somehow had conceived “that notion,” and this idea is constantly manifesting itself in their writings. They delight to dwell upon the prospect of his appearing; they dwell with pleasure on his characteristics; they turn to him in times of national trouble; they anticipate final deliverance under him alone. They describe him as clothed with regal magnificence; they exalt him to the highest rank; they represent him as most beautiful in character, and most mighty in power; they apply to him the most exalted names; priest; prophet; prince; king; warrior; angel; “God.” We are not surprised to find the sacred writers recurring to this idea at any time, whatever may be the subject on which they are writing; and to think of the Old Testament “without a Messiah,” would be much the same as to think of the Iliad without Achilles; or the AEneid without AEneas; or “Hamlet” without Hamlet. It is for those who deny the inspiration of the prophets to explain how this idea sprang up in their minds; they cannot deny the fact that it was there. There is, perhaps, no part of the Old Testament where this is more manifest than in the psalm before us. It bears all the marks of having been composed under the influence of such an idea.
The psalm consists of two parts:
I. A description of the reign of the “king” - the Messiah, Psalms 72:1-17.
II. A doxology, Psalms 72:18-19.
I. A description of the reign of the “king” - the Messiah. That reign would be
(1) A reign of righteousness. justice would be done to all; the poor and down-trodden would be protected; prosperity would attend the righteous; the whole course of the administration would be in favor of virtue and religion, Psalms 72:1-7.
(2) The reign would be universal, Psalms 72:8-11. The king would have dominion from sea to sea, foreign princes would send him presents; all kings would bow down before him; and all nations would serve him.
(3) it would be a reign of benevolence; a reign that would have special regard for the poor; the needy, and the oppressed, Psalms 72:12-14.
(4) it would be perpetual; it would spread afar, and endure forever,Psalms 72:15-17 Psalms 72:15-17.
II. The doxology, Psalms 72:18-19; a doxology eminently appropriate in view of the prospective glories of the reign of the Messiah. For such a kingdom, for such a reign of glory and beneficence, for such mercy shown to mankind in the prospect of setting up such a dominion, it was meet that the heart should be filled with adoration, and that the lips should pour forth blessings on the name of God.
To the psalm a postscript is added, Psalms 72:20, intimating that this was the close of the collection of psalms ascribed to David. On the meaning of this, see the notes at the verse.