Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Heard, Christopher" <Christopher.Heard AT pepperdine.edu>]

Dear Harold,

In the quotation below and the longer text of your post, you are  
making theological claims, not exegetical or linguistic ones. I don't  
in any way wish to be insulting, and I ask that this next statement  
not be taken as either agreeing or disagreeing with your theological  
views, but your theological views (and the same goes for mine or  
anyone else) about what God is or is not capable of do not illuminate  
the Chronicler's use of language, _unless_ you (or I or whoever) can  
_demonstrate_ that the Chronicler shared those views.

Best wishes,

Chris

On Aug 4, 2005, at 3:04 PM, Harold R. Holmyard III wrote:
> HH: The text in 2 Samuel obliges one to insert an agency like Satan,
> even though it is not stated. For God could hardly command someone
> directly to do something and then punish him for doing it (2 Sam
> 24:13-17). And David could easily have exonerated himself on the
> grounds of obedience if God had directly commanded him to act, but
> instead he feels guilt (2 Sam 24:10). He feels he has sinned (v. 17),
> acting contrary to God, not in obedience to Him. What is implicit in
> the Samuel account is made explicit by the Chronicler.

--
R. Christopher Heard
Assistant Professor of Religion
Pepperdine University
Malibu, California 90263-4352
http://faculty.pepperdine.edu/cheard
http://www.iTanakh.org
http://www.semioticsandexegesis.info