Psalms 109:17 · Bible study
Psalms 109:17 Commentary: Curse Loved, Blessing Refused
Hebrew · 11 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Is this verse a prayer for God to curse the enemy, or a statement of the principle that we reap what we sow?
Research Summary
- Meaning: The enemy's love of cursing brings the curse upon him; his refusal to delight in blessing keeps blessing away. It is either a prayer for retribution or a statement of the principle of reaping.
- Key words: "loved" (אָהֵב, ạhav), "cursing" (קְלָלָה, qelalah), "delighted" (חָפֵץ, chafetz), "blessing" (בְּרָכָה, berakhah). The grammar (vav-consecutive imperfect) allows both narrative and volitional readings.
- Main debate: Is this a prayer for God to curse, or a statement that the enemy's sin carries its own punishment? Commentators are divided, with the context of imprecations leaning toward prayer, while the grammar of vv. 17, 18 in some manuscripts sounds historical.
- Theological theme: Divine justice as a reflection of human choice. The enemy's own actions determine his fate, and God's judgment is simply the ratification of what he chose.
- Best use: Teaching on the principle of sowing and reaping, the seriousness of cursing others, and the grace of the gospel that turns curses into blessings through Christ.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
The cursing that he loved, may it fall on him; the blessing in which he refused to delight, may it be far from him.
WEB World English Bible 2000
Yes, he loved cursing, and it came to him. He didn’t delight in blessing, and it was far from him.
KJV King James Version 1769
As he loved cursing, so let it come unto him: as he delighted not in blessing, so let it be far from him.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
Yea, he loved cursing, and it came unto him; And he delighted not in blessing, and it was far from him.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
And he loveth reviling, and it meeteth him, And he hath not delighted in blessing, And it is far from him.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And he loved cursing; so let it come unto him. And he delighted not in blessing; and let it be far from him.
Translations in other languages (9 available)
Y amó la maldición, y vínole; y no quiso la bendición, y ella se alejó de él.
Já que ele amou a maldição, então que ela lhe sobrevenha; e já que ele não quis a bênção, que esta se afaste dele.
Il aimait la malédiction: qu’ elle tombe sur lui!
Und er wollte den Fluch haben, der wird ihm auch kommen; er wollte den Segen nicht, so wird er auch ferne von ihm bleiben.
Dewijl hij den vloek heeft liefgehad, dat die hem overkome, en geen lust gehad heeft tot den zegen, zo zij die verre van hem.
Egli ha amato la maledizione, e questa gli è venuta addosso; non si è compiaciuto nella benedizione, ed essa si tien lungi da lui.
Ponieważ umiłował przeklęstwo, niechże przyjdzie na niego; niechciał błogosławieństwa niechże będzie oddalone od niego.
他愛 咒罵，咒罵就臨到他；他不 喜愛 福樂，福樂就與他 遠離！
As he took pleasure in cursing, so let it come on him; and as he had no delight in blessing, let it be far from him.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Psalms 109:17
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators differ on whether the verbs in this verse are prayers or statements of fact. Barnes notes that the Hebrew verbs are in the indicative mood ("he loved…it came…"), not the optative, but argues that the surrounding context of imprecations (vv. 6, 20) requires we understand them as wishes. Keil and Delitzsch treat the verbs as historical, the fate follows of inward necessity from the enemy's own choices: "he loved cursing, and it came to him" is the result that naturally unfolded. Matthew Henry and Gill apply the verse directly to Judas, seeing in it a prophetic description of how the betrayer's love of sin brought the curse upon himself. Most agree on the core principle: the enemy is not arbitrarily cursed; his own actions determine his fate. The grammar allows both readings, but the consensus holds that the verse expresses either a prayer for just retribution or a sober declaration that choices have consequences.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Prayer for retribution: Context of imprecations (vv. 6–20) and the optative rendering in many translations lead readers to see this as a request for God to curse.
- Statement of natural consequence: The Hebrew verbs (vav-consecutive imperfects) can be read as indicative past tense, implying that the curse and distance of blessing are the inevitable outcome of the enemy's own choices.
- Prophetic prediction: Early Christian tradition (citing Acts 1:20) sees the entire psalm as a prophecy of Judas, so the verse foretells his fate rather than expressing a wish.
What is clear: The enemy's love of cursing and rejection of blessing are the grounds for whatever judgment comes—whether as prayer, principle, or prophecy.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose of the verse | The verse explains why the enemy should suffer: because he loved to curse and rejected blessing. His fate matches his choices. | Some traditions (Reformed, evangelical) see it as a prayer invoking God's judgment; others (many modern commentators) read it as a statement of the natural consequence of sin, not a request. |
| Application to Judas and Israel | The New Testament applies v. 8 to Judas (Acts 1:20), showing that the psalm has a prophetic dimension. | Some Christians (Calvin, Matthew Henry) apply the entire imprecation to Judas and the Jewish leaders who rejected Christ. Others limit the prophetic connection to v. 8 and see the rest as David's personal cry for justice. |
| Compatibility with Christian ethics | Christians agree that personal revenge is forbidden and that we must love enemies. | Some see the imprecatory psalms as expressions of righteous anger that can be redirected into prayers for God's justice to be done. Others argue these psalms are best understood as the voice of Christ or as prophetic warnings, not as models for personal prayer. |
Historical & Cultural Context
Psalm 109 belongs to the lament genre, but with an unusually long section of imprecations (vv. 6, 20). The psalmist has been attacked by deceitful enemies (vv. 2, 5) who repay his love with hatred. In the ancient Near East, blessing and cursing were understood as powerful forces, often invoked in covenant contexts (Deuteronomy 27, 28). The psalmist is a righteous sufferer, perhaps David, as the superscription indicates, who appeals to God as the judge who sees the truth. The sudden shift to the singular in v. 6 suggests a ringleader, the most guilty.
Interpreters across traditions have seen this psalm as prophetic. Peter quotes v. 8 in Acts 1:20 of Judas. Calvin and Matthew Henry follow this, applying the whole psalm to Christ and his enemies. The verbs in v. 17 are framed with the conjunction vav attached to a prefix-conjugation verb, which in Hebrew poetry can express either past narration or a wish (the so-called jussive). That ambiguity is the root of the interpretive debate. The following verses (18, 19) pile up metaphors: cursing becomes a garment, water, oil, a belt, something the enemy wears and absorbs completely. The psalm ends with a personal plea for deliverance and a vow of praise, showing that the imprecations are not the final word; trust in God’s mercy is.
For a congregation today, the historical context warns us against using these verses as a license for personal revenge. The psalmist is not speaking out of private vendetta but out of a covenantal concern for justice, and he leaves the outcome to God.
Textual Notes
The supplied sources note no significant textual variants for Psalm 109:17. The Masoretic Text is consistent across manuscripts, with the verb forms as vav-consecutive imperfects. Some Greek manuscripts (LXX) render the verbs as optatives, which influenced the KJV and other translations that treat the verse as a prayer. The reading is not seriously contested.
Reception History
Early Christian interpreters, beginning with Peter's use of v. 8 in Acts, read the psalm as prophetic of Judas Iscariot. Augustine and Jerome followed this line, treating the imprecations as predictions of divine judgment on the betrayer and, by extension, on those who reject Christ. During the Reformation, Luther and Calvin saw the psalm as expressing the righteous indignation of Christ himself, and they applied it to the enemies of the gospel. In the modern period, many readers feel tension with Jesus' command to love enemies. Some pastors teach the psalms as honest prayers that can be purified by the gospel, while others avoid them or reinterpret them as warnings about the consequences of sin rather than models for prayer. The African-American spiritual tradition has often used imprecatory psalms to cry out for justice in the face of oppression, seeing in them a biblical language for lament and protest.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The enemy's love for cursing, He delighted in wishing evil on others. The Hebrew word for "loved" (אָהֵב) is the same word used for God's love for his people; here it reveals a deeply twisted heart.
- What you love, you get, The curse he loved came home to him. This is not God capriciously punishing; it is the natural outcome of a life set against blessing. Proverbs 14:14 states the same truth: "The unfaithful will be repaid for his own ways."
- Blessing refused, blessing lost, He did not delight in blessing others, so blessing stayed far from him. The Hebrew word for "delight" (חָפֵץ) implies a settled pleasure. When we train ourselves to hate good, we lose the capacity to enjoy it.
Five-point outline
- Identify the enemy (vv. 6, 20): the one who rejects mercy and persecutes the poor.
- His sin: loving cursing, not delighting in blessing.
- His punishment: the curse he loved overtakes him; the blessing he refused stays far away.
- The principle: what we sow, we reap (Matthew 7:2; Galatians 6:7).
- The gospel: Christ took the curse we deserved so that blessing could come near to us (Galatians 3:13, 14).
Illustration hooks
- A student who constantly cheats on exams eventually develops such a habit that she cannot trust her own knowledge; the dishonesty she loved consumes her confidence.
- In a workplace, a person who habitually gossips about coworkers eventually finds everyone suspicious of them; the distrust they spread comes back to isolate them.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Is it okay to pray imprecatory psalms today?
- How do I handle anger toward someone who has hurt me deeply without becoming bitter?
- Does this verse mean that God sends curses on people?
Leading a Discussion
Psalm 109:17 sits in a passage that many Christians find hard to read, a psalm that asks God to curse an enemy. Before we dismiss it as "Old Testament revenge," consider what the verse actually says: the curse comes because the person loved cursing. The blessing stays far because he refused to delight in it. This is less a prayer for God to do something arbitrary than a recognition that our choices shape our destiny. How does this truth sit alongside Jesus' command to love our enemies? Let's explore together.
Discussion questions
- Read the verse aloud from two different translations (e.g., WEB and KJV). Which one sounds more like a prayer, and which like a statement of fact? Why does that difference matter?
- What does it mean to "love cursing"? Can you think of modern equivalents, words, attitudes, or habits that reflect a love for what harms?
- The Hebrew word for "delight" (חָפֵץ) carries the idea of taking pleasure in something. How can a person train themselves not to delight in blessing? Have you ever noticed yourself growing uncomfortable with good news for someone else?
- How does this verse connect to the larger biblical theme of sowing and reaping? Read Proverbs 14:14 and Matthew 7:2. What do these passages teach about God's justice?
- The New Testament tells us to bless those who persecute us (Romans 12:14). Does that mean the imprecatory psalms have no place in a Christian's life, or is there a way to pray them in a godly manner?
- If someone has genuinely been wronged, what is the difference between asking God for justice and cursing the offender in your heart? How can prayer guard against bitterness?
- Verse 21 shifts from imprecation to prayer for mercy: "But deal with me, Yahweh the Lord, for your name's sake, because your loving kindness is good." How does this turn shape the meaning of the whole psalm?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Psalms 52:4 | You love all devouring words, you deceitful tongue. |
| Psalms 52:5 | God will likewise destroy you forever. He will take you up, and pluck you out of your tent, and root you out of the land of the living. Selah. |
| Psalms 59:12 | For the sin of their mouth, and the words of their lips, let them be caught in their pride, for the curses and lies which they utter. |
| Psalms 59:13 | Consume them in wrath. Consume them, and they will be no more. Let them know that God rules in Jacob, to the ends of the earth. Selah. |
| Proverbs 14:14 | The unfaithful will be repaid for his own ways; likewise a good man will be rewarded for his ways. |
| Ezekiel 35:6 | therefore, as I live,” says the Lord Yahweh, “I will prepare you for blood, and blood will pursue you. Since you have not hated blood, therefore blood will pursue you. |
| Matthew 7:2 | For with whatever judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with whatever measure you measure, it will be measured to you. |
| II Thessalonians 2:10 | and with all deception of wickedness for those who are being lost, because they didn’t receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
11 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke connects the principle of a curse returning on its speaker directly to the Jewish leaders' cry at Jesus' trial. He sees the words "His blood be on us and our children" as a self-imprecation that history confirms was fulfilled in the most terrible way imaginable.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes highlights that the original Hebrew uses the indicative mood, stating what has come to pass, not the optative or wish-form as in English translation. Yet he argues the context still requires understanding these as a prayer or desire from the psalmist, not a simple declaration of what has already happened.
Calvin's Commentaries Reformed 1564
Calvin insists this psalm is not merely about David but prophetically about Christ and His enemies, with the curses pointing to the judgment that fell on the Jewish nation for rejecting Him. David's personal grievances become a pattern for how the faithful, as members of Christ, cry out to God for justice.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentator notes how the psalmist, overwhelmed by the enormity of the enemies' ingratitude, abruptly shifts into a passionate prayer for retribution. The change from plural to singular language likely singles out the chief offender, the real leader bearing the guilt for the gang's actions.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The note stresses that the punishment matches the person's own preferences: because he loved cursing, cursing comes to him, and because he did not love blessing, blessing stays far away. His own heart's inclination becomes the measure of his fate.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill emphasizes the principle of just retaliation: those who love cursing, like Judas seeking Christ's accursed death, receive the curse themselves. Those who reject blessing also find it removed from them. It is a righteous divine response to their own desires.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB sees the curses in this passage as a vivid picture of sin recoiling on the sinner. The wicked man's own cursing returns to fill him completely, like water and oil saturating his body, then clings to him as a permanent garment he cannot shed.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch stress that the curse in this passage is not a wish but the inevitable result of the wicked man’s own choice and actions. He who refused to show kindness after receiving it brings the doom upon himself; the curse penetrates his very bones as oil, and his sin is satanic, beyond forgiveness.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange treats the curses as neither wholly poetic nor justified in Christ's mouth, but as a typico-prophetical foreshadowing of Judas. He acknowledges the imprecations display a spirit not free from carnal passion, yet argues such prayers for Divine retribution remain legitimate when uttered by God's servants against hardened evil.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry reads these harsh curses not as David's personal revenge but as a devout, prophetic imprecation against Christ's enemies, especially Judas. He stresses that David speaks from holy zeal for God, singling out a ringleader whose deliberate betrayal made his sin greater than Pilate's.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Delighted not - In desiring and promoting the welfare of others.