Questions from a setback in war

Psalm 108 is a prayer that mixes confident praise with requests for help in conflict, moving from worship to warfare-related petition. Verses 10–11 sit in the asking-and-need section, where the speaker turns from declaring trust to confronting the practical question of how victory will happen. The repeated “Who…?” questions express both determination and dependence: the goal is clear, but human ability is not enough. The second verse (v. 11) interprets the situation as divine withdrawal, setting up a plea for renewed help that continues beyond these lines.

The lines assume a setting where Israel is engaged in organized warfare with identifiable opponents and strategic targets, including Edom to the southeast. Reference to “the fortified city” suggests siege warfare and the importance of capturing strongholds that control territory and trade routes. The speaker views battle outcomes through the lens of God’s support or absence, a common outlook in Israel’s war poetry and royal prayer. The wording fits the kind of national crisis where an earlier defeat forces leaders and people to ask why progress has stalled and what must change for success.

Shared ground

These lines assume that military success is not just a matter of tactics and strength. The speaker faces a “fortified city” and the campaign toward Edom, and treats both as goals that require guidance he cannot supply on his own (explicit in the two “Who…?” questions).

The questions quickly become an accusation framed as a question: it seems God has rejected “us,” because God is not “going out” with the armies (explicit). In other words, the setback is interpreted as a relational problem with God, not only a strategic problem.

Where interpretation differs

What is “the fortified city”? Some read it as a specific well-known stronghold in the conflict with Edom; others take it as a general image for any seemingly untakeable target.

“Who has led me to Edom?” past or future? The wording can be heard as recalling earlier guidance (“Who has led…?”) while also functioning as a fresh plea for the next stage. Others read it mainly as future-oriented (“Who will lead…?”), parallel to the first question.

Does “rejected us” mean permanent abandonment? Many read it as a crisis complaint about a temporary withdrawal of help, because the psalm continues as a prayer for renewed aid. Others hear the language as severe, emphasizing how total the defeat feels, even if the speaker still prays.

What does it mean that God doesn’t “go out with our armies”? Some take this as God’s active help in battle being absent; others stress the idea of God’s presence and favor being withheld, whether or not a miracle is envisioned.

Why the disagreement exists The passage uses short, emotionally loaded war-language without naming the exact city, without describing the battle, and without explaining why God seems absent. That leaves interpreters weighing whether the language is literal geography or poetic shorthand, and whether the verb tenses lean toward recollection or request.

What this passage clearly contributes It shows a biblical pattern where a defeat is processed theologically: the speaker connects stalled progress (fortified city, Edom) with perceived divine withdrawal (“rejected us,” not going out with the army). It also presents prayer as candid speech: the psalmist brings hard questions directly to God instead of treating the setback as meaningless or purely human.