Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Karl,

It seems to me that the verb, however, does not mitigate the _direct  
discourse_ presented at the end of 2 Sam 24:1. YHWH, or perhaps more  
precisely the anger of YHWH, "says" (אמר )MR) to David, "Go,  
count ..." That is much more than "allowing."

Chris

On Aug 4, 2005, at 5:55 PM, Karl Randolph wrote:

> Let me add a lexicographic note: the verb used in 2 Samuel
> was not that God commanded David to number the people,
> rather that he instigated the action, i.e. allowed the
> temptation to occure. David could have resisted it, but
> didn't.
>
> The verb is SWT to instigate, rouse into action.
>
> True, this is understanding the text in the same manner as
> 1 Corinthians 10:13, which not everyone here agrees with.
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>
>
>
> > Dear Chris,
> >
> > ...
> > HH: The Chronicler relied on the documents in 1 & 2 Samuel, or to
> > sources from which 1 & 2 Samuel derived. So any reader would or could
> > discover that the "adversary" was God. All the Chronicler would have
> > done was obscure the truth, which the reader could eventually
> > discover anyway and still be left with the same theological issue. It
> > seems much more helpful that he clarified how God was acting only
> > indirectly through His providential permission of Satan's action. The
> > Chronicler made plain what the reader of 2 Samuel was supposed to
> > understand, that God is sovereign over all that happens, however it
> > happens. The words "God did such and so" allow for secondary agency
> > and even secondary will. By changing "God" to "Satan" the Chronicler
> > shed spiritual light on a text (1 Samuel 24) that required some
> > sophistication to read properly.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> >                     Yours,
> >                     Hariold Holmyard
>
> --
> ___________________________________________________________
> Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
> http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

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