This article is ratedB-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

Christianity:BibleHigh‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofChristianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity High This article has been rated asHigh-importance on theproject's importance scale. This article is supported byWikiProject Bible (assessed asMid-importance). JudaismMid‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofJudaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism Mid This article has been rated asMid-importance on theproject's importance scale.

I've noticed some English translations including the KJV and the NIV only have 11 verses for this chapter instead of 12. It seems like they skipped the first verse. Is this common in Bible translation or is there a specific reason hey might have done this for this chapter?Rastanarcharismarx (talk)17:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be common for the KJV to skip the first verse of the original Hebrew text. I'm not sure why. PerhapsGerda Arendt can enlighten us here.Yoninah (talk)17:30, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. I just observe the same about the two versions. --Gerda Arendt (talk)17:45, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The first 'verse' isn't really a verse at all, but (to me) a dedication.Steepleman (t)10:34, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in the Hebrew original, it is considered a verse. Often it tells a lot about the theme of the psalm;Rashi and other classic commentators comment on the differences between the "ten types of song" exemplified in the designation at the beginning of the psalm (tehillah,mizmor,maskil,shir, etc.) and how the name of the musical instruments sometimes mentioned in the first verse sheds meaning on the nature of the psalm.Yoninah (talk)10:59, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following was added:

*Verse 5 is quoted inMatthew26:38;Mark14:34. - citingKirkpatrick, A. F. (1901).The Book of Psalms: with Introduction and Notes. The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges. Vol. Book IV and V: Psalms XC-CL. Cambridge: At the University Press. p. 838. RetrievedFebruary 28, 2019.

Problems: no context is given, the verse seems 6 rather than 5, the content is not equal, just similar, and the source should be given in Wikisource, not bibleverse (external). I commented it out for now, but it could easily be restored, fixing the problems. --Gerda Arendt (talk)19:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: How about this correction proposal below.JohnThorne (talk)21:07, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• TheSeptuagint rendering of some words in verse 5 (in English bible numbering; verse 6 in Hebrew bible numbering),ἵνα τίπερίλυπος εἶ,ἡ ψυχή, shows close resemblance to the words ofJesus during theAgony in the Garden as recorded inMatthew26:38^[1] orMark14:34^[2]:περίλυπός ἐστινἡ ψυχή μου.^[3][4]

I like that, and you don't even need to use the Greek letters. Instead of reflecting the different verse counting, I'd just repeat the line in question, and compare to the English of the New Testament. "Agony in the Garden" is the key, providing context! --Gerda Arendt (talk)21:36, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The issue of incipits is one that encompassesall of the psalm pages, not just this one. The problem is that every translation of a psalm will often create a new incipit. Listing all of these is not practical in the lead, but I feel that the major ones should be included. I question whether Tate and Brady's psalm translations are that widespread or important specifically, to deserve recognition in the lead. In my opinion, the major ones for the purposes of incipits at least are the KJV, Coverdale's BCP and the Vulgate, i.e. thePsalterium Gallicanum orVersio Gallicana. The BCP and Vulgate incipits are listed here:http://www1.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/Psalm.Steepleman (t)08:03, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, but more important than how prominent a bible translation is seems to be how that psalm is known (common name), and Palestrina's Sicut cervus is one of the best-known motets, ever. Redirects can be bold, but not all have to. --Gerda Arendt (talk)09:57, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are numerous sources which say "some ancient Hebrew manuscripts have this Psalm combined with Psalm 42". While perhaps this view is disputed and does not belong in the lead section of the article, it might be worth a mention somewhere. Which section could it fit best in?Jel3456 (talk)20:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In the section "Background and themes". Thanks,Yoninah (talk)22:25, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• B-Class Christianity articles
• High-importance Christianity articles
• B-Class Bible articles
• Mid-importance Bible articles
• WikiProject Bible articles
• WikiProject Christianity articles
• B-Class Judaism articles
• Mid-importance Judaism articles