Karl, I don’t think the reasoning you’ve given works. First of all, every book is its own unit. Yes, there may be deliberate connections to other books, but each book is it’s own unit with its own beginning. But that, I don’t think, is all that important in the larger scheme of things. It’s the concept of continuity of sequentiality that I have an issue with.
Take, for example, the narrator’s listing of Israel’s sins in 2 Kgs 17: V.7 ויהי...וייראו V.8 וילכו V.9 ויחפאו V.10 ויצבו V.11 ויקטרו V.12 ויעבדו etc. Are these sins in a sequence because they are all given in wayyiqtols? I think the notion of continuation or sequentiality can’t work in this passage. I would argue that the wayyiqtols here produce a narrative momentum that moves the storyline forward by basically letting you ‘watch’ the action happen ‘live’, as it were. Each new wayyiqtol brings you to another action to watch ‘live’. Now, in the average story, most actions happen to be told in sequence, but that’s not the result of the wayyiqtol; it’s just an incidental detail of the way narratives are told. Sequentiality certainly does not explain the wayyiqtols in 2 Kgs 17, where it’s an accumulation of things that are being brought to our attention. But, each action is being separated out for us to ‘watch’ and, therefore, share the narrator’s horror and evaluation of each and every sin being mentioned. It builds momentum, but it’s not about continuity or sequentiality. GEORGE ATHAS Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia) www.moore.edu.au _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
