1 Sam 31:5: was Saul necessarily dead?

Ian Hutchesson mc2499 at mclink.it
Thu Dec 30 20:11:09 EST 1999


>Well, here's an interesting question. Does the phrase in 1 Sam 31:5:
>
>WAY.AR:) ... KIY M"T $F)UWL
>
>necessarily mean that Saul was actually dead, or can it mean simply 
>that
he appeared to the armour bearer to be dead?
>
>This is actually a question of Hebrew!

Dear Peter,

Would you doubt that Jacob was dead in Gen 50:15 (which uses quite similar
wording and progression of verb forms)? What about Nabal's death in 1Sam25:39?


Ian




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list