b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Re: 1 Sam 31:5: was Saul necessarily dead?

From: Ian Hutchesson <mc2499 AT mclink.it>
To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Subject: Re: 1 Sam 31:5: was Saul necessarily dead?
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 02:11:09 +0100

>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

1 Sam 31:5: was Saul necessarily dead?, peter_kirk, 12/30/1999
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: 1 Sam 31:5: was Saul necessarily dead?, Ian Hutchesson, 12/30/1999
- Re: 1 Sam 31:5: was Saul necessarily dead?, Dave Washburn, 12/31/1999
- RE: 1 Sam 31:5: was Saul necessarily dead?, Niels Peter Lemche, 12/31/1999
- Re[2]: 1 Sam 31:5: was Saul necessarily dead?, peter_kirk, 12/31/1999
- RE: Re[2]: 1 Sam 31:5: was Saul necessarily dead?, Niels Peter Lemche, 12/31/1999
- RE: Re[2]: 1 Sam 31:5: was Saul necessarily dead?, Dave Washburn, 12/31/1999
- RE: Re[2]: 1 Sam 31:5: was Saul necessarily dead?, Ian Hutchesson, 12/31/1999