Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Trevor & Julie Peterson" <06peterson AT cua.edu>]

Bernie wrote:

> In Ezekiel 36:27 WC&YTM is transliterated "and-you-will-keep" my laws....

Just a picky point of terminology here. Transliteration normally refers to
the representation of one script through the use of another. I sympathize
with the desire to distinguish what you've given here in quotes from a
translation as such, but I don't know that there's a good term for it.
Transliteration probably is the best metaphor, and I've used it myself in
this way, although usually with enough explanation to distinguish it from
the more ordinary use of the term.

> Can this be construed to mean that these Israelites will be forced to keep
> God's laws whether they want to or not?

There are a couple of different issues here. One is the grammatical
relationship of this verb to the rest of the sentence; the other is the
meaning of the action depicted. On the first point, I like the sort of
analysis that seems to underly the NRSV--that asher governs everything that
follows--rather than taking umishpatay as the beginning of an independent
action (as in the NASB, for instance). The structure of the clauses after
asher forms a neat parallel this way, although that doesn't necessarily rule
out the other reading. So the main action is divine causation of two human
responses.

As for the second point, I think a lot more needs to be considered than
grammar. There is an element of divine causation and a certain degree of
passivity for the human agents--that, I think, is without question. As for
whether one can speak of them keeping laws against their will, this gets at
the somewhat knottier issue of human will. Can one person make another
person love against their will? We might be able to speak of love arising in
an unlikely situation, but when love actually happens, can it ever be
described as against the will of the lover? I think there's something of the
same issue potentially involved with keeping divine laws. Yes, an outward
compliance can be forced. But in the prophets ISTM that there's a dimension
to keeping divine law that is almost impossible to divorce from personal
will. That's where I think it's harder to say that the picture here is of
keeping laws unwillingly. For that matter, if giving someone a new heart
affects that person's will (i.e., if the heart and the will are somehow
bound, if not synonymous), then it would seem like the picture here is of
producing a changed will that results in changed action.

Trevor Peterson
CUA/Semitics