Jayhawker Soule

See my response to spin above.

Jayhawker Soule

Once, again, you gather what you will. Of course, when I use the term "gather", it doesn't mean what the word literally suggests.

Thanks for your response. I'll let others judge the relative value of the two posts. Shalom.

Amaleq13

I agree with his response entirely. It is not clear whether there was a delay between the actual trip and Solomon's knowledge of it but it seems obvious to me that he killed Shimei the same day he found out about it.

Jayhawker Soule

But not "on the day (that) [Shimei goes] out".

S.C.Carlson

Yes, but doesn't v. 37 relate to the day that Shimei exits town, not the day when Solomon found out about it?

spin

And we are talking of a king giving a sentence, a king who did his human best to carry out his promise. If you want to read in a lag of more than a day between the time that Shimei left Jerusalem till the time he was killed, does that change the the significance of the text so as to justify the sorts of meaning change sought for Gen 2:17?


spin

S.C.Carlson

Because Gath is about 30 miles away from Jerusalem, I would say that the most reasonable reading of the 1 Kings 2 text is that there was indeed a lag of time of more than a day between the exit and the execution.

As for Gen 2:17, I haven't been following that aspect closely enough to offer more than an unsubstantiated guess.

Stephen

GakuseiDon

I think that example in 1 K 2:36-46 supports the interpretation. It's like saying "The day you sleep with my wife, you're a dead man". I know that something in English doesn't necessarily transfer across, but as I said earlier, it just makes so much sense in the context of Genesis.

In 1 K 2:40-42, we have:

40. And Shimei arose, saddled his ass, and went to Gath to Achish, to seek his slaves, and Shimei went, and brought his slaves from Gath.
41. And it was told to Solomon, that Shimei had gone from Jerusalem to Gath and had returned.
42. And the king sent and called for Shimei, and said to him, "Did I not make you swear by the Lord, and forewarned you, saying, "On the day that you go out and go here or there, know for certain, that you shall surely die, and you said to me, "The word is good (that) I have accepted."

"Know for certain that you shall surely die" seems to indicate "know what your fate will be", rather than "you will die that day". At least as it seems to me, a liberal Christian with no knowledge of ancient Hebrew.

Amaleq13

No, it relates to the authority of the king which can only be expressed in the threat of immediate death upon the subject's disobedience. There is no trial or due process or any reason to assume a delay that would only detract from the already insulted royal authority.

What is the authority of the one making the threat? If it is Tony Soprano, I would humbly suggest that he would fully intend that the sun not set with your body breathing.

This is a threat coming from a king. The immediacy of the threatened consequences is as axiomatic as the lack of effort needed to accomplish the task.

GakuseiDon

I agree, but that ignores that it's reasonable to conclude that it wasn't expected to happen the same day, esp given that the threat was dependent on Shimei leaving town and the king actually capturing him first. IMHO it lends support that it was an expression to mean "you are doomed", along the lines of "The day you do it, you're a dead man".