Psalm Titles and the Doctrine of Original Authorship

In the Hebrew Scriptures, the titles of various psalms are numbered with the verses of the psalm:

תהלים 3 1 מִזְמֹ֥ור לְדָוִ֑ד בְּ֝בָרְחֹ֗ו מִפְּנֵ֤י׀ אַבְשָׁלֹ֬ום בְּנֹֽו׃​

In English, the titles are separate from the text:

Psalm 3:title
A Psalm of David, when he fled from his son Absalom.​

In Hebrew the verse numbers are different than in our English Bibles.
The numbering of the verses was a late addition to our Scriptures and not considered inspired.
But the titles of the Psalms themselves are considered inspired - or are they?

The Septuagint (LXX) has many more titles than those of found in the Hebrew text.

The titles of various Psalms were obviously not written by their original author but added at a later date.

How does this affect the doctrine of Original Authorship of the Scriptures?

Rob

 

I'm not writing about the introductions or the section or paragraph titles found in many versions like the NASB or ESV.
These are generally in italics and are generally noted as "valuable features" of a version rather than inspired text.

EXAMPLE:

PSALM 3
>>>>> Morning Prayer of Trust in God. (NASB expository title). <<<<<<
A Psalm of David, when he fled from his son Absalom.​

Rob

 

The added Psalm titles are considered an inspired part of Scripture, even though there is evidence that they were added much later in the history of the text.
This causes me to question the various forms of the New Testament text, [i.e. earliest manuscripts verses textus receptus/ Majority text].

When we debate about what the "ORIGINAL TEXT" is, are we making a mountain about a molehill?
Can they both be considered inspired?

There are places in the OT that indicate additions to the text that occurred at a date later than might be expected in an original composition.

Most of the Torah (the five Books of Moses) was written in the third person ('and this is what Moses did...'), not as if Moses himself had written it.

There are many additions, an obvious one can be found in Genesis 36:31;

"Now these are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the sons of Israel." (NASB 2020)​

Aramaic words in Genesis is indicative of later editing. In fact, the alphabet itself changed dramatically; in the time period of Moses the alphabet was quite rudimentary, some of the letters were not present.
By the time of the Babylonian conquest of Judah, the alphabet and the language itself had progressed, requiring a re-write of the original Scriptures.
The text was foreign to the people and had to be explained in a way those from the exile could understand:

Nehemiah 8:7b–8 (NASB 2020)
"...the Levites explained the Law to the people while the people remained in their place.
They read from the book, from the Law of God, translating to give the sense so that they understood the reading."​

Should we consider the subtile changes we observe in the NT Majority text simply a refinement of the original text to make it more 'acceptable' to a growing community of believers?

Should we consider the many forms of the NT text inspired?

Rob

 

My position is that the preponderance of evidence leads to the conclusion that the titles should be considered canonical. They are as much a part of the Hebrew text as are the titles in 2 Samuel 22:1, Isaiah 38:9, and Habakkuk 3:1, or the editorial notes in Proverbs 10:1, 22:17, and 24:23. The ancient tradition of the Masoretes accents the titles along with the text and thus does not separate the titles from the rest of the text. And the New Testament is at times willing to base a theological argument on information in a title (see Acts 2:29–31). Authenticity does not, however, require a given title to have been written by the original poet (Kidner 1973a:33 and Longman 1995:208 n. 22), any more than it requires Deuteronomy 34:5–8 to have been written by Moses. Authenticity as used here means the titles record accurate information with regard to the particular psalm.
Mark D. Futato, “The Book of Psalms,” in Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, Vol 7: The Book of Psalms, The Book of Proverbs (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2009), 5.​

Although ancient but not original, the titles are part of the canonical text for several reasons: (1) The New Testament at times treats the titles as Scripture and builds arguments on this material (see Mark 12:35–37; Acts 2:29–35; 13:35–37). (2) The title to Psalm 18 is embedded in the canonical text of 2 Samuel at 22:1. It seems that the canonical nature of this material in 2 Samuel 22:1 entails the canonical nature of this material in the title in Psalm 18. (3) The standard phrase לַמְנַצֵּחַ (“For the director of music”) is embedded in the canonical text of Habakkuk at 3:19. Again, it seems that the canonical nature of לַמְנַצֵּחַ in Habakkuk 3:19 entails the canonical nature of this material in its occurrences in the titles of the various psalms.
Mark D. Futato, Interpreting the Psalms: An Exegetical Handbook, ed. David M. Howard Jr., Handbooks for Old Testament Exegesis (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic & Professional, 2007), 120.​