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.
other than ‘the house of rest for the ark of Yhwh’s covenant’ (hwhy-tyrb Nwr)l hxwnm tyb [1 Chr 28;2ba]) that David planned to build, the very house Yhwh prevented David from building because as a warrior he had shed blood (tkp# Mymdw ht) twmxlm #y) yk [28,3b]).
To understand why Yhwh prevented David from building we need the last piece of our jigsaw-style argument, the middle term through which the Chronicler linked the #pn grh of Num 31,19 with the Md Kp# of Num 35,33. We saw above that, as the rituals for corpse contamination were motivated by reference to Yhwh’s presence among his people, the rules concerning the Md Kp# in Num 35 were similarly motivated:
yn) r#) hb Myb#y Mt) r#) Cr)h-t) )m+t )lw
l)r#y ynb Kwtb Nk# hwhy yn) yk hkwtb Nk#
But in detailing these rules Num 35,30 uses the expression #pn-hkm-lk ‘everyone who strikes someone dead’ to define the Md Kp#, an expression which semantically is essentially equivalent to #pn grh lk ‘everyone who kills someone’ used in Num 31,19 of the warrior who incurs corpse contamination45. Accordingly Chronicles identified #pn grh lk with #pn-hkm-lk and thus with the Md Kp# of Num 35,33, by a syllogistic form of argument not unlike, though rather looser than, the later Rabbinic geze4ra= s$a4va=. That is how the Chronicler saw David’s involvement in war as warranting the charge of Md Kp# in 1 Chr 22,8; 28,3.
Why just this charge disqualifies David from building the temple is then clear from Num 35,34, where the Md Kp# contaminates the land where Yhwh dwells among his people. Hence Chronicles finds against a David who, as a #pn grh in battle, necessarily incurs the contamination of Md Kp#, a ritual objection to his building for Yhwh the ‘house of rest’, chosen and consecrated ‘so that my name may be there in perpetuity’ (2 Chr 7,16). This objection is highly appropriate for Yhwh to make, and one that is commensurate with the enormity of the fact that Yhwh thus prevents the great David from fulfilling what was otherwise the highly commendable desire of his heart (2 Chr 6,8). Moreover, on this account David’s offence is no mere private offence against Yhwh, but one that patently also involves the interests of the community as a whole. For if one accepts that for Chronicles the