Many today question whether the headings of the Psalms are inspired Scripture, and whether they accurately ascribe authorship to David, Asaph, and so on.  The headings to the psalms are inspired, just like the rest of the Bible, and when they say that a psalm was composed by David, Asaph, Heman, or Moses, they record God’s inspired truth.  A “Psalm of David” was actually written by David. A “Psalm of Asaph” was actually written by Asaph.

Here are some reasons why the psalm headings should be trusted:

[Theological liberal] Brevard Childs says, “A wide consensus has been reached among critical scholars for over a hundred years that the titles are secondary additions, which can afford no reliable information toward establishing the genuine historical setting of the Psalms.”⁵ As a result, psalm studies for more than a century have been adrift in conflicting opinions about their dates and meaning[.] … Fortunately, the tide of academic opinion concerning the antiquity and reliability of the superscriptions is slowly changing under the gravity of evidence. … Sumerian and Akkadian ritual texts dating from the third millennium contain rubrics corresponding to elements in the superscription,⁸ and so do Egyptian hymns from the Eighteenth Dynasty and later.⁹ Some psalms ascribed to David contain words, images, and parallelism now attested in the Ugaritic texts (ca. 1400 BC).¹⁰ Though many technical terms in the superscriptions were obscure to the Greek and Aramaic translators (which suggests a loss of a living tradition and an extended gap of time between their composition and the Tannaitic period, 70–200 AD), they neither alter nor omit them. No ancient version or Hebrew manuscript omits them. With regard to the antiquity of some psalms, there can scarcely be a question. … Linguistic, stylistic, structural, thematic, and theological differences are so great between the Psalter and its imitative thanksgiving psalm at Qumran as to leave no doubt of the far greater antiquity of the Psalter. … Authorship of the Psalms and of their historical backgrounds depends in part on the meaning of the Hebrew preposition l^e with a proper name, usually David.¹¹ Though l^e can mean “belonging to a series,”¹² it commonly denotes authorship in the Semitic languages.¹³ Within other literary genres l^e in superscriptions signifies “by” (cf. Isa. 38:9; Hab. 3:1). In the Old Testament as in other ancient Near Eastern literature, poets, unlike narrators, are not anonymous (cf. Exod. 15:1; Judg. 5:1). The meaning “by” is certain in the synoptic superscriptions of 2 Samuel 22:1 and Psalm 18:[1].

Other Scriptures abundantly testify that David was a musician and writer of sacred poetry. Saul discovered him in a talent hunt for a harpist (1 Sam. 16:14–23). Amos (6:5) associates his name with temple music. The Chronicler says that David and his officers assigned the inspired musical service to various guilds and that musicians were led under his hands (i.e., he led them by cheironomy—hand gestures indicating the rise and fall of the melody—as pictured in Egyptian iconography already in the Old Kingdom; 1 Chron. 23:5; 2 Chron. 29:26; Neh. 12:36).¹⁴ The Chronicler also represents King Hezekiah as renewing the Davidic appointments of psalmody. Hezekiah directed the sacrifices and accompanying praises in which the compositions of David and his assistant Asaph were prominent (2 Chron. 29:25–30). J. F. A. Sawyer says, “In the Chronicler’s day … it can scarcely be doubted that the meaning was ‘by David.’ ”¹⁵ This was the interpretation of Ben Sirach (47:8–10), the Qumran scrolls (11QPs^a), Josephus,¹⁶ and the rabbis.¹⁷ The interpretation is foundational for the New Testament’s interpretation of the Psalter as testimony to Jesus as the Messiah (Matt. 22:43–45; Mark 12:36–37; Luke 20:42–44; Acts 1:16; 2:25, 34–35; 4:25–26; Rom. 4:6; 11:9–10; Heb. 4:7). …

This royal interpretation of the Psalter affects biblical theology in several ways. (1) It allows the reader to hear the most intimate thoughts of Israel’s greatest king. (2) It validates the New Testament attribution of select psalms to David as their author. And (3) it provides the firm basis of the grammatico-historical method of interpretation for the New Testament’s messianic interpretation of the Psalter. …

According to their superscriptions, Psalms 34, 52, 54, 56, 57, 59, 142 date from the time of David’s exile (1 Sam. 16–31); 18 and 60, from the time he is under blessing (2 Sam. 1–10); and 3, 51, 63, from when he is under wrath (2 Sam. 11–20). Psalms 7 and 30 are unclassified as to their precise dates (cf. 2 Sam. 21–24; for this threefold division of David’s career, see chaps. 22–23). In addition to the arguments given above for the credibility of the superscriptions, we ask, Why, if they are secondary additions, are the remaining fifty-nine Davidic psalms left without historical notices, especially when many of them easily could have been ascribed to some event in David’s life?²² Also, why would later editors introduce materials in the superscriptions of Psalms 7, 30, and 60 that are not found in historical books and not readily inferred from the Psalms themselves? Finally, why should it be allowed that psalms in the historical books contain superscriptions with historical notices (see Exod. 15:1; Deut. 31:30 [cf. 32:44]; Judg. 5:1; 2 Sam. 22:1; Jonah 2; Isa. 38:9) but those in the Psalter do not, even though the syntax is sometimes similar? (Bruce K. Waltke and Charles Yu, An Old Testament Theology: An Exegetical, Canonical, and Thematic Approach [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007] 871–874).

So don’t doubt the psalm inscriptions. Receive them as infallible truth, just like you do the rest of the Bible.

–TDR

⁵ Brevard S. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 520.

⁸ Gerald H. Wilson, The Editing of the Hebrew Psalter (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985), 13–24.

⁹ ANET, 365–81.

¹⁰ Mitchell Dahood, Psalms 1:1–50, AB (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1995), xxix–xxx.

¹¹ Moses (Ps. 90), David (73 times), Solomon (Pss. 72, 127), Korah, 42–49, 84–87), Asaph (50, 73–83), Heman (88), and Ethan (89).

¹² BDB, 513, entry 5b.

¹³ GKC, 129c.

¹⁴ J. Wheeler, “Music of the Temple,” Archaeology and Biblical Research 2 (1989).

¹⁵ J. F. A. Sawyer, “An Analysis of the Context and Meaning of the Psalm,” Transactions 22 (1970): 6.

¹⁶ Josephus, Antiquities, 9.13.3.

¹⁷ Charles A. Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms (New York: Scribner, 1906–7), liv.

²² Gleason L. Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Chicago: Moody, 1964), 28.

The link to Waltke’s OT theology is an affiliate link with Amazon.com.