Smith DTh Thesis (final).pdf - South African Theological Seminary

Chapter 4: Analysis of Psalms 3-8singular) in verse 7, all references to the enemy, direct and implied, are קושְ‏ שָ‏ יhad accused him of some sort of betrayal (vv. 4-6). One who was formerly his“ally” מִ‏ י)‏ ‏,שולְ‏ v. 5a) had become his “adversary” שִ‏ י)‏ ‏,קושְ‏ v. 5b). Although notdiscussed in the literature consulted, the word play on שולְ‏ מִ‏ י and קושְ‏ שִ‏ י seemsto identify them as the same person, that is, a former ally who had nowbecome an adversary. The enemy had accused the psalmist of plunderinghim without cause. 71 If, as suggested above, we give weight to thesuperscription, the enemy was not a foreigner or a foreign power, but “one ofhis [David’s] Israelite brothers” (Hughes and Laney 2001:209), possibly one ofSaul’s servants or kinsmen (so Keil and Delitzsch 2002:84). If less credenceis given to the superscription, “The life setting seems to be that of a man who,persecuted by enemies, takes refuge in the Temple and proclaims hisinnocence; he calls upon the Lord, as a just judge, for aid” (Murphy 1996,1:577). The psalmist denied all charges against him and appealed Yahweh tobetween individual, corporate and general experiences” point towards “its probable liturgicalorigins”.71 An alternate interpretation changes קושְ‏ שִ‏ י (“my enemy”) to קושְ‏ שו (“his enemy”) and interpretsas “delivered”, implying that the fallout between the psalmist and his former ally had חָ‏ לַ‏ צresulted from the psalmist helping the ally’s enemy. See §4.5.5 for a fuller analysis.152