Psalms 96 - Introduction

This psalm is similar in structure and design to Psalms 95:1. It is an exhortation to universal praise, and was doubtless designed to be used in public worship - in the service of the sanctuary.

The psalm has no title in the Hebrew, and its authorship cannot with any certainty be determined. There is, however, a very marked similarity between this psalm and a portion of that which was composed and sung at the removal of the ark by David, as recorded in 1 Chronicles 16, and of which it is said 1 Chronicles 16:7, “Then on that day David delivered first this psalm to thank the Lord, into the hand of Asaph and his brethren.” Of the original psalm, therefore, David was undoubtedly the author. Psalms 96:1 is merely an abridgment of that one, or more properly an extract from it, since it is essentially similar to one portion of it, and is taken from it with very slight variations, 1 Chronicles 16:23. But by whom the extract and the slight alterations were made, and on what occasion this was done, we have no certain means of ascertaining. The title in the Septuagint is, “When the house was built after the captivity. An ode by David.” The same is the title in the Latin Vulgate. According to this, it is supposed that on the dedication of the temple, when it was rebuilt after the Babylonian captivity, a portion of a psalm composed by David was selected and arranged for that purpose.

Hence, it might be properly called “A Psalm of David;” though not, of course, composed by him for that particular occasion. This seems to me to be a very probable account of the origin of the psalm, and of the reason why it has its present form. In the original 1 Chronicles 16 there were things which would not be particularly appropriate to the dedication of the temple, while the portion which is extracted is eminently suited for such a service. DeWette doubts the genuineness of the psalm in 1 Chronicles 16; and Hengstenberg supposes that that psalm was made up of parts taken from psalms which were then in common use. But it seems to me that the suggestion above is the most natural, and sufficiently explains the origin of this psalm. It would be very appropriate to the re-dedication of the temple; and it is appropriate to be used in similar services at all times.

The structure of the psalm is very simple, and it does not admit of any particular analysis.