02_VanWieringen_179_197 15/07/14 12:15 Pagina 190 190 A.L.H.M. VAN WIERINGEN V. The “I”-character acts as the “David” in the heading of Psalm 65 Now that the “I”-character has received the features of David due to the heading of the Psalm, a new window onto the mechanism of non-appropriation opens up. The semantic parallels between Psalm 65 and the David narrations in the books of Samuel make it clear that self-appropriation is not the road David is allowed to travel. When he appropriates to himself the wife of someone else, this is regarded as a sin. His confession, however, leads to forgive- ness. When he plans to build a house for the Lord, appropriating, as it were, the Lord’s temple, God makes it clear that not David but God himself will build a house and that David is not allowed to self-appropriate the task of building the temple. The semantic parallels between Psalm 65 and David are even stronger. According to the theology of the Ketuvim, David becomes the ideal king. In this capacity, he receives the features of a second Moses: just as Moses sees the Promised Land but does not enter into it, so David announces the building of the temple but does not build the house of God himself. A comparison between the descriptions of the commencement of the construction of the temple in 1 Kgs 6,1 and in 2 Chr 3,1-2 makes this new vision clear. In 1 Kgs 6,1, the date of the start of the construction of the temple is connected to the exodus from Egypt. In this way, the plot which starts in the book of Exodus reaches its completion. 2 Chr 3,1-2 instead contains a connection to David by using the proper name David, even twice: the location of the house of God is the location where the Lord appeared to David; the location of the house of God is the location which has been designated by David himself; however, David himself is not the one who builds the house of God 22. David plays the part of a second Moses here, parallel to the part of the “I”-character in Psalm 65. Just as the “I”-character in Psalm 65 can neither appropriate being chosen nor appropriate the Prom- 22 Cf. R.K. DUKE, The Persuasive Appeal of the Chronicler. A Rhetorical Analysis (JSOT.S 88; Sheffield 1990) 63; for the location of the temple in Chronicles, see also S.J. SCHWEITZER, “The Temple in Samuel-Kings and Chronicles”, Rewriting the Biblical History (eds. J. CORLEY – H. VAN GROL) (Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature Studies 7; Berlin 2011) 133-134.