Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Dear Harold,

Citing lexicons is all fine and good, but how do the editors of  
HALOT, BDB, etc. _know_ that the Chronicler is using &+N as a  
personal name? Clearly, the authors of Numbers and 2 Kings used  
_exactly the same word_ and _nobody_ thinks they were using it as a  
proper noun. _Why_ should we think the Chronicler is using a proper  
noun? That may be the case, but what are the _reasons_ to believe it?

Best wishes,

Chris

On Aug 4, 2005, at 6:52 PM, Harold R. Holmyard III wrote:

> Dear Chris,
>
>
> > In the quotation below and the longer text of your post, you are
> > making theological claims, not exegetical or linguistic ones.
>
> HH: Here's a linguistic one. This is an entry for
> &+N ("Satan") from The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon
> of the Old Testament:
>
> -3. sía¦tˆa¦n as a personal name, without the
> article 1C 21:1; clearly also a celestial figure
> who incited David to make a census, see Rudolph
> Chr. 142f; THAT 2:823 (with bibliography).
>
> HH: The BAG lexicon has under &+N: "as n. pr.
> Satan 1 Ch 21:1 (interp. 2 Sam 24:1) . . . ."
>
> HH: It would be helpful to see how the word was
> used in intertestamental literature, but I do not
> have the resources with me.
>
>                     Yours,
>                     Harold Holmyard
> _______________________________________________
> 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