Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Raymond de Hoop <rdehoop AT keyaccess.nl>]

Title: Re: the law of mankind

At 27-05-2001 20:41 John Ronning <ronning AT xsinet.co.za> wrote:

> David Stabnow asked 
> (w.r.t. 2 Sam 7:19: WZ)T TWRT H)DM )DNY YHWH_ "And this is
> the law of mankind, Lord YHWH."
>> 
> ....
>> 
>> My main question is whether Kaiser's position is tenable, and whether it
>> has been established or demolished since 1974.
>> 

[Snip]  
> I've proposed interpreting *torat-ha'adam* as a reference
> back to the creation mandate - the blessing given to Adam
> and Eve to be fruitful, multiply, and have dominion (Gen
> 1:28).  The twin elements of this mandate (fruitfulness and
> dominion) show up again to Noah after the flood (Gen 9:1ff),
> and then as a promise to Abraham (Genesis 17), and now (as
> David recognizes) in 2 Samuel 7 as well.

John,

In your interpretation I've found no explanation of to what <Hebr> WZ)T <endH> in verse 19c refers. This seems crucial to me, because we find this word also in verse 19a. There <Hebr> Z)T <endH>(v. 19a)  refers to the preceding words in verse 18bc:

He said: Who am I, Lord Y-H, and what is my house
    that you have brought me thus far?

It seems reasonable that <Hebr> WZ)T <endH> also refers to the preceding verse (v. 19b):  <Hebr> WTDBR GM )L-BYT-(BDK LMRXWQ <endH> "and you spoke also concerning your servant's house of its far future". IMO we find in this phrase what <Hebr> TWRT H)DM <endH> is. There are two possibilities, which are closely related:

First: <Hebr> WTDBR .... LMRXWQ <endH>  "[G-d] speaking .... of the far future", that is the direction/instruction of man(kind). So, what G-d has to say concerning the future is an instruction for man.

Secondly, more specific:  <Hebr> WTDBR ... )L-BYT-(BDK LMRXWQ <endH> "and you spoke concerning your servant's house of its far future". So, what G-d has said concerning the far future _of Davids house_ is a direction/instruction of/for man. So, whether mankind likes it or not, they have to follow it.   

Of course this does not say anything of 1 Chron. 17, but that has its own problems. 

Regards,
Raymond