Keil claims that the psalm’s language “is still such as is without precedent in the Davidic age” (808). He also mentions one manuscript of the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, that attributes the psalm to Zechariah during the time of the dispersion (Keil 808; Elwell 1: 315). These claims are highly suspect. The Aramaic used in the psalm could easily belong to David (Spurgeon 258). It is also difficult to prove a post-exilic date for the psalm based on one manuscript out of the hundreds that suggest otherwise. Another objection to David’s authorship is that it has too many similarities to Job, but this neither proves nor disproves anything (Kidner
Keil claims that the psalm’s language “is still such as is without precedent in the Davidic age” (808). He also mentions one manuscript of the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, that attributes the psalm to Zechariah during the time of the dispersion (Keil 808; Elwell 1: 315). These claims are highly suspect. The Aramaic used in the psalm could easily belong to David (Spurgeon 258). It is also difficult to prove a post-exilic date for the psalm based on one manuscript out of the hundreds that suggest otherwise. Another objection to David’s authorship is that it has too many similarities to Job, but this neither proves nor disproves anything (Kidner