Biblical Hebrew Forum

[CS Bartholomew <jacksonpollock AT earthlink.net>]

On 8/28/03 11:26 AM, "Trevor Peterson" <06PETERSON AT cua.edu> wrote:

> That's how I would take it. I don't think we need to think too hard to come 
> up
> with examples where this sort of thing is done for dramatic effect. Even if 
> no
> one else in the story hears it, David and the reader do. Personally, I feel
> better about this sort of reading than trying to monkey with the regular 
> flow
> of the verb forms.


On 8/28/03 12:50 PM, "Paul Zellmer" <paul AT smcfm.org> wrote:

> Why couldn't he be speaking to the corpse?  It appears consistent with the
> fact that we have a summary execution in the heat of the moment.  David was
> not giving a reasoned, cautious judgment here.  Of course, the dead man
> could not hear, but those around would hear and report that David considered
> himself a revenger of God's anointed.  Looks to me like a sequential
> understanding is very plausible here.


Paul & Trevor,

I think you are right. The little speech, according to R.Alter (The David
Story, Norton 1999) is part of David's attempt to cover his posterior
anatomy. Killing the messenger and making the speech clears David of any
complicity in Saul's death. Also serves to put a little fear into anyone who
might want to make a quick stab at David, "the Lord's anointed."  Addressing
the speech to the dead man is rhetorical.

So the sequential reading works.

Thanks for the help with this,

Clay Bartholomew