Hide me from the secret plots of the wicked,
from the throng of evildoers,
who whet their tongues like swords,
who aim bitter words like arrows,
shooting from ambush at the blameless,
shooting at him suddenly and without fear.
—Psalm 64:2–4
This song moves from prayer to praise and surprisingly, it does so not only as it looks at man, but as it looks at wicked men. This psalm is an inverted image of the 63rd Psalm. We can well imagine they were both written on the same occasion, but whereas the muse of the 63rd Psalm is God, that of the 64th is wicked men. The tone is different, but they harmonize. Michael Wilcock explains it this way, “His circumstances could be similar, perhaps identical, to those of Psalm 63. The difference is that there he was… seeing them as white on black, while here they are black on white. That is, in 63 he and his security in God were in the foreground and his enemies and their schemes loomed in the background; here in 64 it is the other way round.”
The 64th Psalm is not only an inversion of the 63rd, it is inverted itself—that is, it is a chiasm. But is it a chiasm not of parallels, but of contrasts. On the outside, prayer stands opposite of praise (vv. 1, 10). Further in, the secret conspiracy of men stands opposite of the public proclamation of God’s acts (vv. 2, 9). Tongues, arrows, and shooting are present in vv. 3–4 and vv. 7–8, but first man shoots and then God shoots. And at the center, is the deep and dark evil of David’s enemies. The central focus of this psalm is the deep and dark evil of David’s enemies, and still it turns from prayer to praise.

Often, in such situations, our prayer fails to turn to praise precisely because we focus on man. Normally, it is a problem when we put man in the foreground and God in the background. Prayer fails to turn to praise, because we make much of man and little of God. David’s meditation here doesn’t fail, because he thinks of man rightly. He thinks of man in light of God. God is in the background, but He is big in the background. Man is the foreground, but he is small in the foreground.
The real problem at any particular moment is not that we think on man more than God, but that we think of man as more than God. Certainly, it should be our delight and desire to think on God more, and thinking on God more, helps us to think more of God. All of this is necessary so that when man does come to the fore, we see how small he is compared to our great God in the background. You are free to think much on man, when you think much of God.








