There is certainly that idea of Ṣéḏeq actually being an epithet of a certain divinity worshipped in pre-Israelite Jerusalem (I would hardly put it as “the scholars’ point of view,” as if there is a 100% agreement on this). We do have evidence for a god named Sydyk recorded by the Roman-era Phoenician writer Philo of Byblos (ca. 64-141), whose name is translated by him in Greek as dikaion “righteousness,” and who is paired with Misor, the two being credited as being the first to discover salt. It has also been thought by some that the Assyro-Babylonian deity Kittu “righteousness/justice” is related to Sydyk (the former was also referred to as Ṣidqu, and was also paired with a deity named Misharu “law”). The idea that goes that perhaps Jerusalem was originally a cultic center for a related deity named or titled Ṣéḏeq, perhaps the god El Elyon (’ēl ‘eləywōn) whom Melchizedek serves. The fact that the Jebusite king of Jerusalem in Joshua 10:1-3 is named Adonizedek (“my lord is ṣdq”) is telling for those who hold this view. Some would even argue that Zadok the priest’s name is a continuation of this tradition, thus holding him to be a priest of the pre-Israelite cult whom David chose to retain alongside Abiathar (who in this idea is the priest of the Yhwist cult) as a means to legitimize his reign amongst the native Canaanite populace. That being said, there are some problems with the ideas.
