Psalm 77:13 – Answering a Question about Translation

I am frequently asked questions about the translation of a specific word, often because there is a difference in English translations. Frequently, the specific wording of a text means a great deal to the person who asked, as it may be part of the exposition of some other doctrine or chain of thought. Sometimes it is even a proof text to support such a doctrine.

In this context, consider the translation of Psalm 77:13:

Thy way, O God, is in the sanctuary: who is so great a God as our God? (KJV)

In the NRSVue, however, we read:

Your way, O God, is holy. What god is so great as our God? (NRSVue)

Presenting just two translations in this case may give a wrong impression. So running a list of all English translations available on Bible Gateway, I find that KJ21 (21st Century King James Version), ASV (American Standard Version), AMPC (Amplified Bible, Classic Edition), BRG (Blue, Red, and Gold-based on the KJV), DARBY, GNV (Geneva Bible), and KJV read “sanctuary” while most others read “holy” or something very similar.

Let me outline the process I use (loosely) to answer this sort of question. What I am not going to do is simply give you my preferred translation.

Differences in translation can result from:

1. Differences in the text that is translated.
2. Differences in approach to translation. Some common terms for this include functional equivalence, featured in versions such as the New Living Translation and Formal Equivalence, use in translations such as the New American Standard Bible and New King James Version.
3. Choice of a different English gloss from within the source word’s semantic range.
4. Accommodation, such as the effort to make Old Testament passages match New Testament quotations. This one is fairly rare.
5. Different understandings of the context.

I avoid the use of the term “translation error” unless there is simply no basis for that translation. I prefer to call an odd translation that is even remotely possible a difference of opinion and characterize it according to what evidence I see that would justify that translation.

Let’s run through this one in order.

People often imagine textual differences where there are none. This generally results from not understanding the process of translation in which many English renderings can legitimately be derived from the same text. Usually the problem is not finding a translation, but rather figuring out which possible rendering is best in a particular context. In this case, the fact that the versions that read “sanctuary” tend to center around the King James tradition might suggest such a thing, especially if one forgets that this is Old Testament, and thus the Textus Receptus vs other texts does not apply. In fact, there are no significant textual issues here.

Also, all of the translations that read “sanctuary” lean toward the formal equivalence end of the spectrum, but those that read “holy” (or related terms) span the spectrum. This is not a difference in overall approach. There is also no New Testament quotation to which one might hope to accommodate the verse.

This leaves us with a choice of a different English gloss, which might well be based on a different understanding of the context.

In fact, the Hebrew word used in this passage can properly be translated either “holy” or “sanctuary,” and there are numerous instances of both in the Hebrew Bible. In fact, it may be used to refer to other holy objects or even sacrifices. If Hebrews 9 is a parallel to the LXX in this regard, it could also be regarded as a reference to just the first compartment of the tabernacle, though I think the overall context would be against that reading.

As I read the Psalm we have a prayer that, after a first introductory verse, begins with a lament. God is not answering as was hoped, but in disappointment, the psalmist recounts prior acts of God and speaks of God’s greatness. This unfolds in two parts, the first affirming miracles, and the second point to God as savior, with the water imagery evoking both creation and the exodus from Egypt. We conclude with the victory, not in an individual way, but affirming that God has led and guided God’s people. We know that the psalmist’s prayer was answered because he affirms that in the first introductory verse.

The most interesting contextual element in all that is that we have God’s way or path through the sea, which evokes the imagery of creation. So we have God’s way both in the Qodesh (holy/sanctuary) and in the sea within the same Psalm.

The bottom line is that either translation is possible here and that the context doesn’t explicitly make one more likely than the other. I suspect most translators find it hard to connect God’s way and the sanctuary, whether tabernacle or temple.

I would have to consider “sanctuary” a potentially valid translation nonetheless if we consider the cosmic quality of the sanctuary introduced in Hebrews. That would not be definitive, but looking at the idea of a new and living way which leads right to the presence of God, and which sees the sanctuary as a shadow of heavenly reality, divine movement in that heavenly reality is not impossible. If this were the idea here, I would see an intended contrast between verse 13 (14 in Hebrew) and verse 19 (20 in Hebrew) telling us that God has his path/way everywhere, in the chaos represented by the sea and the perfection represented through the sanctuary imagery.

Having said all of that, the evidence behind my comment is far too thin to be regarded as more than suggestive. I do see a sanctuary pattern in the book of Revelation as well, however, which probably tends me to see it as a live option.

(Featured image generated by Jetpack AI.)