We are discussing Psalm 3 and the narrative found in 1st Samuel intertextually (see the post earlier today). This is not the entire response, but just something I wanted to share:
Just as a building is not just the completed product, neither is Scripture. Both have a process which enables a final outcome, but if we ignore the grand design, we ignore the real beauty of what we are looking at. Biblical scholars enable us to see the grand design of God’s master craftsman’s hand in putting together what we know as Scripture. Just as a building requires architects, contractors, construction workers, various building materials and stages, so too Scripture was built over time, assembled in stages,with different materials, but always according to the grand design by the Supreme Architect of the universe. At each level, we see the expectation of the next. Sometimes, we see that it has been reworked, refined, or redoubled, but the building, just as Scripture, arrives at the goal of the Architect. To see the building absent of how it got there is to miss the real beauty of that structure and so too with Scripture. This is where Biblical Scholars come in at.
The fact is, is that regardless if David wrote the psalm attributed to him, the compilers of the text, then of Scripture, and then of Canon, believed that the Psalm was Davidic in some way, inspired, and provided a needed understanding of the story not found in the Samuel narrative. This is, in my opinion, requires a canonical interpretation, wherein our interpretation requires us to consider the canonical nature as we have received it. Thus, we are allowed to read Psalm 3 intertextually with the narrative in 1st Samuel because that is what the compilers of Holy Writ intended. (Joel L. Watts – The Bomb-diggity)
Also, this other quote –
He who quotes himself on the internet, via a blog post dedicated only to that post which is not academic in anyway, is a dullard – Joel L. Watts