Ps. 35.15 (the tearing of the messiah)

“But / when I stumbled / they rejoiced / and gathered together – they gathered together / against me! – Oppressors / I didn’t even know them! – they tore me apart / and would not desist.” This ‘gathering together’ occurs after David’s faithful enactment of his covenantal (or, treaty) obligations. It is the ‘repayment’ offered to David for his ‘services’/intercession on their behalf. The line should read, “When I stumbled they put on sackcloth and fasted…” (as David did). Instead, they repay ‘evil for good’ (vs. 12). Immediately one senses the threat as embodied in the phrase ‘gathered together’: in any Davidic psalm, or any psalm generally, this term usually carries connotations of the wicked uniting to attack the righteous. Psalm 2 begins with the ‘nations’ ‘congregating’ and the ‘kings joining together’ to make war on Yhwh and the anointed; this could be traced in many other psalms as well. There are several points to make about this—as in Psalm 2, this ‘gathering together’ is something instigated purely as an attempt to wage war on a righteous man (here, as there, the anointed). One senses that these ‘kings’ would not otherwise unify if not for that purpose. In Daniel this will transform itself, or be embodied, in the terrifying image of the statute made of several different metals; it is a single statute (it is ‘gathered together’) whose sole purpose is to wage war against the world and Yhwh and his anointed (hence, it is impure and made up of many different metals). Here, this is confirmed by its repetition and the concluding phrase: “they gathered together against me!” Secondly, this ‘gathering together’ stands in marked contrast to the singular “I” and “me” of the anointed. David, as in Psalm 2, is alone; he is ‘one’ while they are many. There is this sense of impending doom, of a crushing and suffocating force that is bearing down on David as “repayment” for his goodness. Earlier, it may be that these were the men referred to when David said Yhwh delivered the weak and poor from “the one too strong for weak” and “the one who robs”. (vs. 10). Here something much more violent is at work. Not only do they ‘rob’ him, but they ‘tear him apart’. This incredibly vivid description is reminiscent of previous psalms describing the effect of a lion as it pursues the righteous. These wicked men, though, are not satisfied and “do not desist” in their tearing—a rather disturbing image that conjures up both images of blood-lust (the sense that once these men begin to see David being subjected to their blows, it only increases their lust to see more) and of shame (a continuous beating of a king is meant not simply as an act of punishment but of public humiliation; because his entire flock is represented in him, it humiliates the entire nation).  A third point to make is that these kings engage in a dark (and mocking) liturgy: they rejoiced and gathered together. This term is used frequently throughout the psalm. Twice it is used of David’s rejoicing at Yhwh’s deliverance (vs. 9, 27). Four times it is used to describe what David’s enemies do, or potentially do, over David (vs. 15, 19, 24, 26). All of these point to ‘rejoicing’ being a response to victory over another. It is formally interesting to note though that its first and last reference are to David (vs. 9, 27). His praise overcomes, surrounds, and is the ‘beginning and end’ (the alpha and omega), of his enemy’s praise. And, lastly, David claims he ‘does not know them’—are we to hear in these words that these men, in their repayment, have become ‘unknown’ to David? Or, is it that David truly does not ‘know’ these men because they were only treaty partners? Regardless, the import is twofold: first, David enacted his covenant obligations for these men ‘he didn’t know’ as he would have ‘for a brother’ (an incredible act of generosity on David’s part); second, it shows that when these men attack David is, in a sense, blind. He cannot appeal to any of them as he “doesn’t know them”. They stand entirely outside, and over-against, him. Essentially, he has no ‘friends’ (vs. 14). This is not only the crucifixion, but the abandonment of the anointed to the ‘tearing’ of his enemies (those men he exemplified nothing but covenantal solidarity with and to whom he was without sin).