Donald F. Murray, «Under Yhwh’s Veto: David as Shedder of Blood in Chronicles», Vol. 82 (2001) 457-476
As grounds for Yhwh’s veto on David’s building the temple, the charge of shedding blood, in Chronicles made against David alone (1 Chr 22,8; 28,3), poses questions both about what is being referred to, and how the charge explains the veto, given that in the Hebrew Bible no other Israelite warrior incurs the charge for killing in warfare. This article explicates the charge, highlights how surprising it is, and then develops a line of argument, drawn principally from Num 31 and 35, that can explain how the Chronicler understood the charge both to be warranted, and to justify Yhwh’s veto.
second of the Kings passages (1 Kgs 8,16-20 // 2 Chr 6,5-10), the preface to Solomon’s prayer at the dedication of the temple, supplied the Chronicler with the negative statement form (1 Kgs 8,19a // 2 Chr 6,9a) that resolves into an unambiguous veto (1 Chr 17,4b) the pragmatically more open illocutionary force of Yhwh’s rhetorical question form in 2 Sam 7,5b10. The first of the Kings passages, Solomon’s message to Hiram of Tyre (1 Kgs 5,17-18 [5,3-4]; no Chr // )11, alerted the Chronicler to the idea that David’s involvement in war (1 Chr 17,7-10a // 2 Sam 7,8-11a) was a material factor in that veto. But in thus synthesizing into his own reading of Yhwh’s response to David in the Nathan oracle these two interpretations sanctioned by Solomon, unlike Solomon (1 Kgs 5,17-18 [5,3-4]) the Chronicler found in Yhwh’s references to David’s involvement in war no merely contingent explanation for why David could not build the temple12. For logically, time-consuming occupation with warfare can neither explain nor warrant a divine veto on his building the temple13.