Psalms 107:34

107:34 and a fruitful land into a barren place, ¹ 

because of the sin of its inhabitants.

Psalms 105:35

105:35 They ate all the vegetation in their land,

and devoured the crops of their fields. ² 

Psalms 107:37

107:37 They cultivated ³  fields,

and planted vineyards,

which yielded a harvest of fruit. ⁴ 

Psalms 127:3

127:3 Yes, ⁵  sons ⁶  are a gift from the Lord,

the fruit of the womb is a reward.

Psalms 148:9

148:9 you mountains and all you hills,

you fruit trees and all you cedars,

Psalms 58:11

58:11 Then ⁷  observers ⁸  will say,

“Yes indeed, the godly are rewarded! ⁹ 

Yes indeed, there is a God who judges ¹⁰  in the earth!”

[107:34]  ¹ tn Heb “a salty land.”

[105:35]  ² tn Heb “the fruit of their ground.”

[107:37]  ³ tn Heb “sowed seed in.”

[107:37]  ⁴ tn Heb “fruit [as] produce.”

[127:3]  ⁴ tn or “look.”

[127:3]  ⁵ tn Some prefer to translate this term with the gender neutral “children,” but “sons” are plainly in view here, as the following verses make clear. Daughters are certainly wonderful additions to a family, but in ancient Israelite culture sons were the “arrows” that gave a man security in his old age, for they could defend the family interests at the city gate, where the legal and economic issues of the community were settled.

[58:11]  ⁵ tn Following the imperfects of v. 10, the prefixed verbal form with vav (ו) conjunctive probably indicates a result or consequence of what precedes.

[58:11]  ⁶ tn Heb “man.” The singular is representative here.

[58:11]  ⁷ tn Heb “surely [there] is fruit for the godly.”

[58:11]  ⁸ tn The plural participle is unusual here if the preceding אֱלֹהִים (’elohim) is here a plural of majesty, referring to the one true God. Occasionally the plural of majesty does take a plural attributive (see GKC 428-29 §132.h). It is possible that the final mem (ם) on the participle is enclitic, and that it was later misunderstood as a plural ending. Another option is to translate, “Yes indeed, there are gods who judge in the earth.” In this case, the statement reflects the polytheistic mindset of pagan observers who, despite their theological ignorance, nevertheless recognize divine retribution when they see it.