Traumatized and Sleepless, the Psalmist Seeks Comfort in God’s Immanence

In an existential crisis, the author of Psalm 77 is so incapacitated by his troubles that he struggles to speak. He attempts to bring to mind past memories of God’s kindness, but God has changed and is no longer manifest in his life. In an unexpected turn, the psalmist focuses on Israel’s memory of the Sea crossing at the Exodus. How does this meditation help him move from despair to hope?

APA Style

Click to copy

"Traumatized and Sleepless, the Psalmist Seeks Comfort in God’s Immanence" (n.d.). TheTorah.com. Retrieved October 30, 2026, from https://www.thetorah.com/article/traumatized-and-sleepless-the-psalmist-seeks-comfort-in-gods-immanence

SBL Style

Click to copy

"Traumatized and Sleepless, the Psalmist Seeks Comfort in God’s Immanence." TheTorah.com. Accessed October 30, 2026. https://www.thetorah.com/article/traumatized-and-sleepless-the-psalmist-seeks-comfort-in-gods-immanence.

Traumatized and Sleepless, the Psalmist Seeks Comfort in God’s Immanence

The Psalmist in the style of Van Gogh, DALL·E 2

תהלים עז:א לַמְנַצֵּחַ עַל (יְדִיתוּן) [יְדוּתוּן] לְאָסָף מִזְמוֹר.
Ps 77:1 For the leader; on Jeduthun. Of Asaph. A psalm.[1]

Following this superscription, Psalm 77 moves through three stages:

1: Remembering God in a Time of Distress (vv. 2–4)
2: Remembering the Good Old Days (vv. 5–10)
  Pivot: The Core Issue—God Has Changed (vv. 11)
3: Remembering God’s Mighty Deeds—The Sea Crossing (vv. 12–21)

These stages are marked by literary indicators, and it is possible to discern shifting emotional dynamics in each stage, leading to a (potential) resolution or climax.

Stage 1: Remembering God in a Time of Distress

The psalm starts with a verbless opening phrase “My voice to God,” which conveys an initial note of desperation in the psalmist’s prayer—especially because it is repeated in the second line.

תהלים עז:ב קוֹלִי אֶל אֱלֹהִים וְאֶצְעָקָה
קוֹלִי אֶל אֱלֹהִים וְהַאֲזִין אֵלָי.
Ps 77:2 My voice to God—I shall cry out! My voice to God—that he may give ear to me.[2]

The cohortative first verb וְאֶצְעָקָה (ʾetzaqah) is not a statement of fact or a simple prediction but an exclamation of intent: “Let me cry out!” Or “I shall cry out!”[3] Nothing will stop me. The verse sets the tone of passionate pleading to come. The psalmist uses seven more cohortatives.

The speaker continues with a declaration of his intent to pray—actually, to continue praying, since the next verse suggests that he has been praying for a while. The psalmist is going to keep on raising his voice to God because he desperately wants to be heard, to be acknowledged, to be answered.

תהלים עז:ג בְּיוֹם צָרָתִי אֲדֹנָי דָּרָשְׁתִּי
יָדִי לַיְלָה נִגְּרָה וְלֹא תָפוּג
מֵאֲנָה הִנָּחֵם נַפְשִׁי.
Ps 77:3 In the day of my distress I sought the Lord; my hand at night has been stretched out without wearying; my soul refused to be comforted.

The psalmist has been stretching out his hand to God in the night. Because the verb נִגְּרָה (niggirah), rendered as “stretched out,” refers to something “poured out” or “flowing,” Robert Alter emends יָדִי (yadi), “my hand,” to עֵינִי (eyni), “my eye,” presenting the psalmist as in tears all night.[4] This emendation finds support in a similar image of prolonged weeping in Lamentations:

איכה ג:דט עֵינִי נִגְּרָה וְלֹא תִדְמֶה מֵאֵין הֲפֻגוֹת.
Lam 3:49 My eyes shall flow without cease, without respite.[5]

The NJPS translation of Psalm 77:3 combines both readings (putting the implied words in italics): “with my hand uplifted; my eyes flow all night without respite.” Although the text and its translation are uncertain, the psalmist is clearly in deep distress in the night hours.

The first stage of the psalm concludes with an affirmation of the psalmist’s intent to “remember,” or call to mind, God and to “meditate,” to muse, think about, or reflect.

תהלים עז:ד אֶזְכְּרָה אֱלֹהִים וְאֶהֱמָיָה
אָשִׂיחָה וְתִתְעַטֵּף רוּחִי סֶלָה.
Ps 77:4 I shall remember God, and I shall complain; I shall meditate, though my spirit faints. Selah.

Like the verb for “cry out” in verse 2, the verbs זָכַר (zakar) and שִׂיחַ (siach) are in the cohortative; they communicate the psalmist’s resolve: “I shall remember God.” And “I shall meditate” (v. 4). These two verbs will also later signal the second and third movements of the psalm.

The intent to remember is immediately followed by another verb in the cohortative—אֶהֱמָיָה (ʾehemayah), possibly meaning to “groan” or even to “roar,” though it is often translated as “I shall complain.” In other words, the psalmist is so desperate, he plans to make a lot of noise so God will pay attention to him.

The verse ends by acknowledging how tiring and difficult prayer has been: “I shall meditate,” the psalmist says, וְתִתְעַטֵּף רוּחִי (ve-titʿatteph ruchi), “though my spirit faints.” Taking the second clause as contrasting with the first, and thus rendering the conjunction vav as “though,” makes the best sense of the psalm’s movement.

The word Selah occurs three times in the psalm.[6] It demarcates the ending of the two main sections at the end of verses 4 and 10. In verse 16, it signals the transition from the bicola (verses composed of two paired lines) of verses 2–16 to tricola (three-line verses) in the final section of the psalm (vv. 17–21).[7]

Stage 2: Remembering the Past—The Good Old Days

The second movement begins with the psalmist unable to sleep or talk. For the first time (and the only time in the first eleven verses), we find words of his prayer, addressed directly to God:[8]

תהלים עז:ה אָחַזְתָּ שְׁמֻרוֹת עֵינָי
נִפְעַמְתִּי וְלֹא אֲדַבֵּר.
Ps 77:5 You grasped my eyelids; I was troubled and could not speak.

Although the statement that God has grasped the שְׁמֻרוֹת (shemurot), “guards” (that is, lids), of his eyes may suggest that God is forcing the psalmist’s eyes shut (meaning that he is exhausted and can’t stay awake), it makes better sense to think that God is keeping his eyes open: He is finding sleep difficult and blames God for his insomnia. Indeed, he is so troubled or overwrought by his thoughts about God that he is unable to talk.

Then comes the psalmist’s memory of earlier times.

תהלים עז:ו חִשַּׁבְתִּי יָמִים מִקֶּדֶם
שְׁנוֹת עוֹלָמִים.
Ps 77:6 I considered the former days,
years of long ago.

This leads to a new commitment to “remember” and “meditate,” also with cohortative verbs.

תהלים עז:ז אֶזְכְּרָה נְגִינָתִי בַּלָּיְלָה
עִם לְבָבִי אָשִׂיחָה וַיְחַפֵּשׂ רוּחִי.
Ps 77:7 I shall remember my song in the night! With my heart I shall meditate and my spirit will search.

The psalmist intends to search through his memory of the good old days, perhaps when he went to the temple and participated in communal songs of praise,[9] in the hope of finding comfort. It doesn’t work, however, and instead only plunges him deeper into distress, since the reflection on the past leads to greater awareness of the immense gulf between then and now.[10]

The psalmist asks himself a series of rhetorical questions related to his sense that God’s mercy towards him has ended.[11]

תהלים עז:ח הַלְעוֹלָמִים יִזְנַח אֲדֹנָי
וְלֹא יֹסִיף לִרְצוֹת עוֹד.
עז:ט הֶאָפֵס לָנֶצַח חַסְדּוֹ
גָּמַר אֹמֶר לְדֹר וָדֹר.
עז:י הֲשָׁכַח חַנּוֹת אֵל
אִם קָפַץ בְּאַף רַחֲמָיו סֶלָה.
Ps 77:8 Will the Lord reject forever?
and no longer show favor?
77:9 Has his steadfast love ceased forever? Is his word permanently ended? 77:10 Has God forgotten to be gracious? If he has in anger stifled his compassion....[12] Selah

He uses multiple expressions for duration to focus the issue on whether any of God’s past goodness or favor will continue into the future: “forever” (ʿolamim) and “no longer” (loʾ yosiph ʿod) in verse 8, “forever” (netsach) and “permanently” (ledor vador) in verse 9.

The final line is usually also translated as a question: “Has he in anger stifled his compassion?” If, however, we read the line as beginning an if-then, conditional statement, then the sentence would have a protasis—“If he has in anger stifled his compassion...”—but would break off, as if the psalmist ran out of steam, because the apodosis is missing. I imagine one could add “then what shall I do?” Or, more abrasively, “then WTF.”[13]

Pivot: The Core Issue—God Has Changed

The statement of the core issue in the next verse is transitional between the second and third stages of the psalm.

תהלים עז:יא וָאֹמַר חַלּוֹתִי הִיא
שְׁנוֹת יְמִין עֶלְיוֹן.
Ps 77:11 And I said, “This is my pain:
The right hand of the Most High has changed.”

The NJPS renders חַלּוֹתִי הִיא (chaloti hiʾ) as “this is my fault,” and Robert Alter similarly has “it is my failing,” which casts blame on the psalmist.[14] But this does not make the best contextual sense: The psalmist’s point is that God’s “right hand”—God’s power and favor—are no longer manifest in his life.[15]

Stage 3: Remembering God’s Mighty Deeds—The Sea Crossing

Previously, the only time that the psalmist has spoken directly to God was in verse 5, but from here on, the rest of psalm is a prayer, addressed to the very One he feels has abandoned him. Clearly, the psalmist has not given up on God. This significant transition is signaled once more by the key verbs for remembering and meditating (zakar and siach), which the psalmist has used twice before (vv. 4 and 7).[16]

תהלים עז:יב (אַזְכִּיר) [אֶזְכּוֹר] מַעַלְלֵי יָהּ כִּי אֶזְכְּרָה מִקֶּדֶם פִּלְאֶךָ.
עז:יג וְהָגִיתִי בְכָל פָּעֳלֶךָ
וּבַעֲלִילוֹתֶיךָ אָשִׂיחָה.
Ps 77:12 I will remember the deeds of Yah;[17] Indeed, I shall remember your wonders of old! 77:13 I will muse on all your work, and on your mighty acts I shall meditate!

Instead of thinking back on his own personal story, the psalmist now decides to call to mind God’s “deeds,” “wonders,” “work,” and “mighty acts” in the communal story of God’s redemption of Israel.[18] When he says “I will remember the deeds of Yah (יָהּ),” he uses the short form of the tetragrammaton, one of several examples of shared language suggesting a connection with the Song of the Sea, which Moses and Miriam sang at the crossing of the Sea.[19]

שׁמות טו:ב עָזִּי וְזִמְרָת יָהּ
וַיְהִי לִי לִישׁוּעָה.
Exod 15:2 Yah is my strength and my might; He is become my deliverance.

Then the psalmist focuses on the distinctive character of Israel’s God.

God’s Character at the Sea

Israel’s God, who is holy—that is, unique and distinct from other gods—has manifested his strength among the nations.

תהלים עז:יד אֱלֹהִים בַּקֹּדֶשׁ דַּרְכֶּךָ
מִי אֵל גָּדוֹל כֵּאלֹהִים.
עז:טו אַתָּה הָאֵל עֹשֵׂה פֶלֶא
הוֹדַעְתָּ בָעַמִּים עֻזֶּךָ.
Ps 77:14 Your way, O God, is in holiness.
Who is a deity as great as God?[20] 77:15 You are the deity who does wonders;you made known your strength among the peoples.

The psalmist echoes the affirmation of YHWH’s incomparability celebrated in the Song at the Sea, using the language of בַּקֹּדֶשׁ (ba-qodesh; “in holiness”) and עֹשֵׂה פֶלֶא (ʿoseh peleʾ; doing/working wonders).

שׁמות טו:יא מִי כָמֹכָה בָּאֵלִם יְ־הוָה
מִי כָּמֹכָה נֶאְדָּר בַּקֹּדֶשׁ
נוֹרָא תְהִלֹּת עֹשֵׂה פֶלֶא.
Exod 15:11 Who is like You, O YHWH, among the celestials; Who is like You, majestic in holiness, Awesome in splendor, working wonders!

Other biblical writers also focus on YHWH’s incomparability. Some make forthright assertions that Israel’s God is unique (1 Kgs 8:23; Jer 10:1–16; Ps 86:8), while others affirm God’s incomparability by asking rhetorical questions (like Psalm 77 and Exodus 15), either addressed directly to God (Exod 15:11; Ps 35:10; Ps 89:9; Mic 7:18) or phrased in the third person (Ps 77:14; 89:7; 113:5–8).[21]

In all these texts YHWH’s distinctive holiness consists in a synergy of God’s incomparable power and covenantal solidarity with his people, which results in the salvation of Israel.[22] This result is explicitly stated in both Psalm 77 and Exodus 15.

תהלים עז:טז גָּאַלְתָּ בִּזְרוֹעַ עַמֶּךָ בְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב וְיוֹסֵף סֶלָה.
Ps 77:16 With your arm you redeemed your people, the children of Jacob and Joseph.[23]
שׁמות טו:יג נָחִיתָ בְחַסְדְּךָ עַם זוּ גָּאָלְתָּ נֵהַלְתָּ בְעָזְּךָ אֶל נְוֵה קָדְשֶׁךָ.
Exod 15:13 In Your love You lead the people You redeemed; In Your strength You guide them to Your holy abode.

The Waters’ Response at the Coming of God to Save Israel

Following the selah at the end of verse 16, the psalmist shifts from bicola to tricola, describing a vivid theophany, a dazzling poetic account of how God manifested his glory and power at the Sea.

תהלים עז:יז רָאוּךָ מַּיִם אֱלֹהִים
רָאוּךָ מַּיִם יָחִילוּ
אַף יִרְגְּזוּ תְהֹמוֹת.
Ps 77:17 The waters saw you, O God,
the waters saw you, they writhed;
indeed, the deeps quaked.

In the Song of the Sea, the waters function as God’s instrument of judgment against Pharaoh and his army.[24] In the psalmist’s version of the Sea crossing, the waters themselves writhe and tremble as if they are terrified of God. He even describes a violent storm with booms of thunder and flashes of lightning, described as God’s arrows:

תהלים עז:יח זֹרְמוּ מַיִם עָבוֹת
קוֹל נָתְנוּ שְׁחָקִים
אַף חֲצָצֶיךָ יִתְהַלָּכוּ.
Ps 77:18 The dark clouds poured out water; the clouds gave voice; indeed, your arrows flew about.

Accompanying the thunder and lightning is a whirlwind (galgal), literally a “wheel,” perhaps imagining a wheel on God’s chariot,[25] and the earth shakes at God’s coming to save his people.[26]

תהלים עז:יט קוֹל רַעַמְךָ בַּגַּלְגַּל
הֵאִירוּ בְרָקִים תֵּבֵל
רָגְזָה וַתִּרְעַשׁ הָאָרֶץ.
Ps 77:19 The voice of your thunder was in the whirlwind; lightnings lit up the world; the earth quaked and trembled.

This sort of poetic license in describing the Sea crossing echoes imagery found elsewhere (see Addendum below), but the question is: Why does the author of Psalm 77 remember the Sea crossing in this way? What is his particular angle of vision?

God Led Israel through the Waters of Chaos

It is likely that the psalmist is experiencing his own life as being submerged in an experience of chaos where he can’t find a way out, so he focuses not on God’s defeat of Pharaoh’s army (the focus of Exodus 15), but on God making a path through what seemed like an impenetrable dead end for Israel.

The next verse is key to the psalm:

תהלים עז:כ בַּיָּם דַּרְכֶּךָ
(וּשְׁבִילֶיךָ) [וּשְׁבִילְךָ] בְּמַיִם רַבִּים
וְעִקְּבוֹתֶיךָ לֹא נֹדָעוּ.
Ps 77:20 Your way was through the sea, your path through the mighty waters; yet your footprints were not known.

Notice the intersection of God’s power and solidarity with Israel. Twice the psalmist speaks of God’s “way”; it is not only “in holiness” (v. 14), which suggests transcendence; it is also “through the sea” (v. 20), which portrays God’s nearness to Israel, who were also in the midst of the sea. Indeed, some texts affirm that YHWH is distinctive from other deities precisely in his care for Israel (Ps 35:10; 113:5–8).

But that is not quite the end of the verse. The last phrase adds, “yet your footprints were not known.” Whereas the waters saw God (mentioned twice in v. 17), the divine presence was invisible to human beings. Even at the Sea crossing, God’s leading was mysterious. And this fits the psalmist’s experience as well; he can’t see where God can be found in his life.

Yet even if Israel couldn’t see God’s footprints at the Sea, the final verse of the psalm affirms God’s presence:

תהלים עז:טו אנָחִיתָ כַצֹּאן עַמֶּךָ
בְּיַד מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן.
Ps 77:21 You led your people like a flock by the hand of Moses and Aaron.[27]

An Unfinished Ending

These are the last words of the psalm, and it seems like an abrupt ending. Yes, God led his people through the Sea. But did this memory impact the psalmist in any way? I think that the psalmist was hoping that God would take him by the hand and lead him through his darkness and chaos to the other side. But he doesn’t tell us this in so many words. He doesn’t connect the big story to his own experience.

So the psalm feels unfinished to me. This isn’t just a matter of my perception. At the formal level of Hebrew poetry, the psalm is incomplete. Up to verse 16 (with one exception) the psalm consists in bicola, but starting with verse 17, we have tricola.[28] The last verse (v. 21) is different, however, with only two lines. Where is the third line?

I have come to think that Psalm 77 is unfinished so that we, the readers, can write our own final colon.[29]

My Ending to the Psalm

As I have wandered through this psalm I have wondered what sort of ending the psalmist would write. Of course, I can’t know this. But then I reflected on how I would conclude this open-ended psalm. My conclusion would be something like:

אולי אתי אל היבשה תנהל.
Perhaps you might lead even me to dry ground.

A genuine immersion in Psalm 77—remembering it and meditating on its significance—means slowing down and taking the time to savor the text’s meaning. It is too easy to do a quick drive by, admiring the biblical landscape from a distance. What happens when we get out of the car and walk slowly through the text, on pilgrimage through its amazing pathways?[30]

In my pilgrimage, I have come to love Psalm 77.[31]

Addendum

Shared Poetic Imagery with Other Theophanies

Imagery similar to that of Psalm 77 is found also in Psalms 18 (with its parallel text in 2 Samuel 22) and 114 and in Habakkuk 3. The first twenty verses of Psalm 18 contain a vivid description of God coming from heaven in a theophany to save an individual from the pit or the waters. Compressing the journey from Egypt to the Promised Land, Psalm 114 blends the crossing of the Sea and the Jordan and poetically asks the waters and the mountains why they fled from God. Habakkuk 3 describes God coming from Teman and Paran to deliver his people (v. 13).[32] In these theophanies, God coming to save his people (whether an individual or the nation) is portrayed in terms of rescuing them out of the waters of chaos, which are engulfing them. And the waters are personified.

Numerous thematic and even lexical links exist between Psalm 77 and these three theophanic texts. For example, Habakkuk 3:10 says that the mountains saw (רָאָה) God and writhed (חָלָה, from the root ח.י.ל), while Psalm 77:17 speaks of the waters looking at God and writhing (using the same verbs). The verb חָלָה is also used Psalm 114:7 for the trembling of the earth before God.[33]

Two of the verbs used Psalm 18:8 for the earth rocking (רָעַשׁ) and the mountains trembling (רָגַז) are found in Psalm 77:17 and 19 for the quaking or trembling of the deeps and the earth. Habakkuk 3:7 also uses רָגַז for the trembling of the tent-curtains of Midian and twice in verse 16 for the poet’s own trembling in response to the theophany.[34]

There are also similarities in the use of storm imagery—thunder, rain clouds, and lightning. God is said to thunder in Psalm 18:14 (using the verb רָעַם) and the voice of God’s thunder is mentioned in Psalm 77:19 (using the noun רַעַם). Both Psalm 18:12–13 and Psalm 77:18 use the same two words for clouds, שְׁחָקִים and עָב (or the plural עָבִים or עָבוֹת). And whereas the deep gives forth its voice in Habakkuk 3:10, the clouds give forth their voice in Psalm 77:18 (using the same words for “give” and “voice,” נָתַן and קוֹל).

God’s arrows travelling (referring to lightning) are described in Habakkuk 3:11 and Psalm 77:18, using the same words for arrows חֵץ (pl. חִצִּים) and travel הָלַךְ. And finally, the psalmist’s dire situation is depicted in Psalms 18:17 and 77:20 as מַיִם רַבִּים, “mighty waters,” which parallels the churning of the Sea.

These lexical links do not mean that the author of Psalm 77 drew on these particular texts (or vice versa, that any of these texts drew on Psalm 77). Rather, there was likely a shared stock of poetic imagery that the ancient Israelite poets used to describe theophanies.[35]

View Footnotes

Published 2024-01-17

  1. According to Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger (Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51–100, trans. Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia [Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005], 276), Jeduthun may refer to someone associated with the singers of this psalm (cf. Ps 39:1, 62:1). The phrase לְאָסָף מִזְמוֹר, “of Asaph, a psalm” reverses the typical word order of such attributions (cf. מִזְמוֹר לְאָסָף, “a psalm of Asaph,” in Ps 50:1; and מַשְׂכִּיל לְאָסָף, “a maskil of Asaph,” in Ps 74:1).

  2. The translation of Psalm 77 is mine. Unless otherwise indicated, translations of other Bible passages follow the NJPS, with modifications.

  3. The cohortative form expresses a wish or indirect command. Bill T. Arnold and John H. Choi (A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 2nd ed. [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018], 3.3.3, pp. 78–79) suggest interpreting the form as conveying a statement of “resolve,” as here (e.g., I must/will cry out), a “wish” (e.g., let me cry out), or, in the plural form, an “exhortation” (e.g., let us cry out).

  4. Robert Alter, The Book of Psalms: A Translation with Commentary (New York: Norton, 2007), 268.

  5. Lamentations 3:49 also uses the noun הֲפֻגוֹת (haphugot) related to the verb for being wearied תָפוּג (taphug) in Psalm 77:3, so it is a close parallel.

  6. Admittedly, it is not always decipherable why Selah occurs where we find it in particular psalms; nor is there any agreement among scholars about what the term means.

  7. There are two exceptions: verse 3 is a tricolon and verse 21 is a bicolon.

  8. The Septuagint version of this verse does not contain this shift to the second person:

    LXX Ps 76:5 προκατελάβοντο φυλακὰς οἱ ὀφθαλμοί μου, ἐταράχθην καὶ οὐκ ἐλάλησα.

    LXX Ps 76:5 (4) With watches [of the night] my eyes were preoccupied; I was troubled and did not speak (NETS).

    Thus, in the LXX, the psalmist’s direct address to God appears only in the final section of the psalm (vv. 12–21).

  9. The writer of Psalm 42 specifically calls to mind his participation in the temple, using the cohortatives of zakar (remember) and shaphakh (pour out).

    תהלים מב:ה אֵלֶּה אֶזְכְּרָה וְאֶשְׁפְּכָה עָלַי נַפְשִׁי כִּי אֶעֱבֹר בַּסָּךְ אֶדַּדֵּם עַד בֵּית אֱלֹהִים בְּקוֹל רִנָּה וְתוֹדָה הָמוֹן חוֹגֵג.
    Ps 42:5 “I shall remember this and/as I pour out my soul: that I walked with the throng, leading them to the house of God with joyous shouts of thanksgiving, a multitude keeping festival” (my translation).
  10. Jon Levenson uses the phrase “yawning gap” to describe the divergence between the liturgical affirmation of God’s sovereignty and the psalmist’s experience of unchecked evil in Psalm 74. Jon D. Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988; repr. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), 19.

  11. Rhetorical questions addressed to God are typical of lament psalms. E.g., Psalms 10:1; 13:2–3; 22:1; 35:10; 42:10; 43:2; 60:12; 74:1; 79:5; 80:5; 85:6–7; 88:15; 89:47; 94:3.

  12. The psalmist questions the central attributes revealed about YHWH when He appears to Moses:

    שׁמות לד:ו וַיַּעֲבֹר יְ־הוָה עַל פָּנָיו וַיִּקְרָא יְ־הוָה יְ־הוָה אֵל רַחוּם וְחַנּוּן אֶרֶךְ אַפַּיִם וְרַב חֶסֶד וֶאֱמֶת.
    Exod 34:6 YHWH passed before him and proclaimed: “YHWH! YHWH! a God compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness.
  13. In this verse, the אִם in line two follows a question that begins with the interrogative particle, הֲ, on line one. In such cases, אִם often introduces a second question (Paul Joüon, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, trans. and rev. by T. Muraoka, 2 vols. [Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1991], §161e). The reading offered here, however, takes the shift to אִם as indicative of a more forceful idea. A similar unfinished if-then statement is found in Psalm 27:

    תהלים כז:יג לוּלֵא הֶאֱמַנְתִּי לִרְאוֹת בְּטוּב יְ־הוָה בְּאֶרֶץ חַיִּים.
    Ps 27:13 If not for the fact that I believe that I will see YHWH’s own virtue while still alive—.”

    Translation from Benjamin D. Sommer, “A Faith that Includes Doubt – Psalm 27,” TheTorah.com (2017).

  14. Alter, Book of Psalms, 269.

  15. Even the King James Version (KJV) rendering of “my infirmity” is more open-ended:

    KJV Ps 77:10 And I said, “This is my infirmity: but I will remember the years of the right hand of the most High.”

    Note also that while the NJPS translation above takesשְׁנוֹת  (shenot) as the infinitive of the verb שָׁנָה (to “change”), the KJV, followed by both the NIV and ESV, interpret it as the plural of the noun שָׁנָה (thus, “years”). The result is that the psalmist is wounded by his memory of the past (good) years he spent with God (at God’s right hand). But the alternative translation does not actually yield a different meaning, since the good years are now gone; they have changed. The use of shenot might well be an intentional double entendre on the psalmist’s part.

  16. In fact, the verb for remembering occurs twice in verse 12, first as a statement of fact then as a cohortative, while the next verse adds the cohortative of meditate.

  17. At this point the Masoretic Text has a ketiv-qere. The ketiv (in parentheses), which is written in the Masoretic Text, reads “I will cause to remember” (suggesting that the psalmist has an audience in view), but the qere (given in square brackets), simply states “I will remember.”

  18. Many biblical commentaries treat Psalm 77 as a lament about a national crisis, based on the psalmist’s recollection of the Sea crossing (vv. 12–21). For example, see Mitchel Dahood, Psalms II: 51–100: Introduction, Translation, and Notes, Anchor Bible 17 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1968), 224; and Beat Weber, “‘They Saw You, the Waters—They Trembled’ (Psalm 77:17b): The Function of Mytho-Poetic Language in the Context of Psalm 77,” in Psalms and Mythology, ed. Dirk J. Human, Library of Hebrew Bible / Old Testament Studies 462 (New York: T&T Clark, 2007), 108–109, 124. Although it is certainly possible that Psalm 77 addresses a national crisis, there is no evidence for this in the psalm itself. The psalm is quite open-ended, which allows it to speak to multiple situations of crisis (whether individual or communal).

    Another scholarly proposal is that Psalm 77 originated as two separate compositions: an individual lament (vv. 2–10 or 2–11) joined to a hymnic poem or theophany (vv. 11–21 or 12–21), which retells a corporate event—the crossing of the Sea. Sometimes the theophany (vv. 17–20) is viewed as a later interpolation in the psalm. See, e.g., Dahood, Psalms II, 224, 231; Hermann Gunkel, Die Psalmen, 5th ed. (Gőttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1968), 333. Whether or not the psalm began as two originally separate compositions, the interesting question is: why has the “hymn” (with the theophany) been joined to the lament in this particular case? On moving beyond observations of genre, to what biblical scholar James Muilenburg called the rhetorical “actuality” of the particular text in front of us, see James Muilenburg, “Form Criticism and Beyond,” Journal of Biblical Literature 88 (1969) 1–18, esp. 18.

  19. For other language shared by Psalm 77 and Exodus 15:1–18, see J. Clinton McCann, “The Book of Psalms: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections,” in The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 4, ed. Leander E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996), 641–1280, here 984.

  20. Lit. “Who is an ʾel as great ʾelohim?” To distinguish between ʾel and ʾelohim, both of which can be translated as “God,” many Bible versions follow the Septuagint and insert “our” for clarity: “Who is a god as great as our God?” The implied answer is, No-one. He then affirms, “You are the ʾel who does wonders” (v. 15), using the same word for “wonders” (peleʾ) from verse 12.

  21. For a succinct analysis of the theological claims of YHWH’s incomparability in these texts, see Walter Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dispute, Advocacy (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997), 139–144. For a more sustained study, see C. J. Labuschagne, The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament (Leiden: Brill, 1966).

  22. This point is emphasized by Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, 143.

  23. Attention to Jacob and Joseph appears to be characteristic of Asaph psalms (cf. Ps 75:10, 76:7, 78:67, 80:2), perhaps under the influence of traditions from the Northern kingdom of Israel (Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 2, 279).

  24. שׁמות טו:י נָשַׁפְתָּ בְרוּחֲךָ כִּסָּמוֹ יָם צָלֲלוּ כַּעוֹפֶרֶת בְּמַיִם אַדִּירִים.
    Exod 15:10 You made Your wind blow, the sea covered them; they sank like lead in the majestic waters.

    Similarly, in the plague story God uses the forces of nature to judge Egypt.

  25. HALOT, s.v., “גַּלְגַּל,” 1:190.

  26. Such imagery is typical of theophanies. For examples, see the Addendum below.

  27. The psalm presents both Moses and Aaron as leaders of Israel during the Exodus and may be connected to a similar conception in the Priestly source (Hossfeld and Zenger, Psalms 2, 280.

  28. The three-line structure of each verse in 17–20 is clear in almost any contemporary Bible translation.

  29. Of course, it is possible that verses 17–20 (the section with tricola) constitutes an insertion into the psalm. Indeed, verse 21 follows nicely immediately after verse 16. However, I am interpreting the psalm in its present form.

  30. I am interested here not so much in the world behind the text (excavating its original historical context or the psychological intentions of the author) as in the world of the text (the rhetorical or symbolic world internal to the text) and indeed the world in front of the text (the reader’s existential engagement with the relevance of the text for their own context). These categories, which are widely used in biblical interpretation, derive from the work of Paul Ricoeur (Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences, ed. and trans. John B. Thompson [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981], 140–44). In Ricoeur’s view, the world in front of the text is inseparable from the world of the text. That is, if an interpreter takes a text seriously, seeking to understand its symbolic world, the text presents this world to the interpreter, inviting them to inhabit and engage it at a level beyond the merely theoretical.

  31. I realize that this study of Psalm 77 is not grounded in any formal methodology or theory of reading Hebrew poetry. Given that theory can be an artificial construct, and that texts always exceed the parameters of any theory, I tend to follow the wisdom of Catherine Wallace: “What is theory, after all, but explaining what it is you do by instinct, by instinct and through love?” Catherine M. Wallace, Motherhood in the Balance: Children, Career, Me, and God (Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse, 2001), 157.

  32. The vision in Habakkuk 3 is a response to Habakkuk’s earlier laments in the book about his own people’s evil and the violence of the Babylonians as God’s judgment.

  33. The cognate noun חִיל is used in Exodus 15:14 for the anguish that gripped the Philistines when they heard of the Sea crossing.

  34. The verb רָגַז is also used for the trembling of the nations in Exodus 15:14.

  35. On theophanic imagery, see George W. Savran, Encountering the Divine: Theophany in Biblical Narrative (London: T & T Clark International, 2005); and George W. Savran, “Theophany as Type Scene,” Prooftexts 23.2 (2003): 119–149.