Abstract
The dynamics of retribution and divine characterisation in 2 Samuel 11–20 are compared and contrasted with the formulation of divine violence in 2 Samuel 21. The famine that breaks out in the land and the expiation of the land through the deaths of Saul’s sons are attributed to natural consequences of breaking an oath and incurring bloodguilt on the land. The famine is not a divine punishment, but a consequence for unatoned bloodguilt. The oath is sworn in God’s name, the land is a ‘possession of the LORD’ and the slaughter takes place ‘before the LORD.’ Yet overall there is little divine characterisation, and the famine takes place because of a lack of divine intervention, rather than a result of divine punishment.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
