[Opinion] The book of psalms used for cursing.

[jkeller293]

In the book "River Lux - Book of Curses" it states:

"The Holy Bible is one of the wickedest books in existence and a very powerful grimoire. It contains imprecatory prayers and incantations which may be employed to strike down enemies. King Solomon, a pagan king, is attributed with most of the book of Psalms, where the most powerful prayers and incantations are found. A King James version of the bible is preferred. The following psalms may be applied to an enemy alone as an incantation, or to add potency to other works. These can be used to petition dark spirits, written upon paper and sewn into a doll representing thy enemy or they can be placed in a curse jar along with other rotting things, potions and several personal items of your enemy (a photo will work also)."

This is the first time I ever heard of such a thing. Does anyone here agree with this?

 

[HoldAll]

There is Psalm 137 which starts with the popular "By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down..." (which is also a song) but which ends:

O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.
Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. (KJV)

Daughter Babylon, doomed to destruction, happy is the one who repays you according to what you have done to us.
Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks. (NIV)

A good fit for a vengeance curse, I'd say. Pretty gruesome.

 

[beardedeldridge]

Yeah the use of psalms for cursing is well documented. Including using them with dolls and jars. I’ve used them myself. Tho Solomon is only attributed with writing a couple of them. David gets credit with like half, the rest are anon or various priestly families. Never read the book you’re quoting but an odd detail for an author to get completely wrong.

*some of my personal favorites aren’t even in psalms

-Eld

Post automatically merged: Mar 31, 2025

*mostly musicians not priests (doh, I’ll go hang my head in shame now)

 

[Lurker]

Tho Solomon is only attributed with writing a couple of them. David gets credit with like half, the rest are anon or various priestly families. Never read the book you’re quoting but an odd detail for an author to get completely wrong.

-Eld

Also, calling Solomon a pagan doesn't make sense. He was the son of David, he became the king if Israel and Judah, built the first temple at Jerusalem, and he was a Jewish prophet.

 

[jkeller293]

Also, calling Solomon a pagan doesn't make sense. He was the son of David, he became the king if Israel and Judah, built the first temple at Jerusalem, and he was a Jewish prophet.

Agreed, i wonder where the author got that idea from.

 

[beardedeldridge]

Agreed, i wonder where the author got that idea from.

Well he did seem to like pagan women .

I just went and downloaded the book that @HoldAll uploaded for us (thank you) other than the couple of points we made here, the cursing with Psalms/Bible section just seems really light. Nothing wrong with it just not much there.

-Eld

 

[jkeller293]

Well he did seem to like pagan women .

I just went and downloaded the book that @HoldAll uploaded for us (thank you) other than the couple of points we made here, the cursing with Psalms/Bible section just seems really light. Nothing wrong with it just not much there.

-Eld

Like the Queen of Sheba?

 

[beardedeldridge]

Like the Queen of Sheba?

Yeah and his large harem of foreign wives and concubines, according to the biblical account.

 

[Xenophon]

Also, calling Solomon a pagan doesn't make sense. He was the son of David, he became the king if Israel and Judah, built the first temple at Jerusalem, and he was a Jewish proph

The Old Testament does note that, in his dotage, Solomon's foreign wives* led him astray somewhat and he built altars to strange gods. To that degree he was "pagan." This however represents a departure from his root tradition that includes the Psalms.

(An ancient illustration of diversity's bitter fruits. Though, oddly, Solomon's descendants figure prominently among those foisting diversity onto the West.)

 

[SkullTraill]

Stay on the topic of this thread.

 

[Xingtian]

Yeah they're sometimes called "imprecatory psalms". I imagine the original authors meant them quite straightforwardly, but over the centuries they have been given "spiritual meanings" (e.g. they are directed against demons, deluding thoughts, or passions). I believe these psalms are mostly cut from the lectionary/ public readings in modern Catholic and Protestant churches. But I remember singing "Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones" at Orthodox lent services, and everyone squirming a little bit.

 

[Practitioner]

Agreed, i wonder where the author got that idea from.

Also, calling Solomon a pagan doesn't make sense. He was the son of David, he became the king if Israel and Judah, built the first temple at Jerusalem, and he was a Jewish prophet.

From a purely historical POV Solomon, if he actually existed, wasn't a strict monotheist. For the largest part of its history, Israel was monolatric, not monotheist, which is why there's still mentions of other gods around the Bible, or even the beginning of Psalm 84 in which YHWH presides over the assembly of gods (pretty much just like Zeus does in the Illiad - or in other pagan poems).


But I don't think the author had this in mind when he called Solomon a pagan.

Other than this -- Yes. Christians tend to find this weird, but consider God himself admits to do both good and evil in Isaiah 45:7

 

[jkeller293]

Yeah they're sometimes called "imprecatory psalms". I imagine the original authors meant them quite straightforwardly, but over the centuries they have been given "spiritual meanings" (e.g. they are directed against demons, deluding thoughts, or passions). I believe these psalms are mostly cut from the lectionary/ public readings in modern Catholic and Protestant churches. But I remember singing "Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones" at Orthodox lent services, and everyone squirming a little bit.

That would be psalm 137:9 which is exactly mentioned in River Lux - Book of Curses.

It says under it "Terrible curse of vengeance that draws down God’s ire upon entire families and employs military means to do so"

 

[beardedeldridge]

or even the beginning of Psalm 84 in which YHWH presides over the assembly of gods (pretty much just like Zeus does in the Illiad - or in other pagan poems).

Not really disagreeing with most of what you said but that’s a bit of a stretch on 84.

*all right no more off topic comments from me.

 

[Xenophon]

From a purely historical POV Solomon, if he actually existed, wasn't a strict monotheist. For the largest part of its history, Israel was monolatric, not monotheist, which is why there's still mentions of other gods around the Bible, or even the beginning of Psalm 84 in which YHWH presides over the assembly of gods (pretty much just like Zeus does in the Illiad - or in other pagan poems).


But I don't think the author had this in mind when he called Solomon a pagan.

Other than this -- Yes. Christians tend to find this weird, but consider God himself admits to do both good and evil in Isaiah 45:7

"El Shaddai," the term that generally gets translated as "The Almighty" could easily well be rendered "the All-Destroyer." That being the case, the imprecatory Psalms take on a less "spiritual" aspect. Contrary my pussy-foosing seminary profs, the Psalmist quite likely was not just "venting." When he wrote he wanted the Deity to bust, bugger, and bleed the Babylonians or whomsoever, he meant just exactly literal destruction. So, yes. OP's "River Lux" book is quite likely spot-on.

Post automatically merged: Friday at 7:31 AM

Stay on the topic of this thread.

I'm suffering an attack of goethe.

"Und mich ergrieft ein laengst entwoehntes Sehnen/ Nach jenem ernsten stillen You're Banned Reich/...was ich besitze, seh' ich wie im Weiten/ Und was verschwand, wird mir zu Wirklichkeiten."