Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professors, theologians, and those interested in exegetical analysis of biblical texts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am looking at Amos 3:6 and I expected a permissive rather than causative verb but I found a perfect qal. Does this qal actually mean cause here?

Amo 3:6 Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?

share|improve this question
up vote 6 down vote accepted

According to Waltke/O'Connor, "the simple semantically in that notions of causation are absent." (p. 362). Qal is kinda like the Greek aorist of Hebrew (btw the LXX translates it with an aorist). There is no idea causation being communicated in the stem. This is not to say there is none being implied by the broader context. However, the parsing only gets you so far in this case. You will need to do three things. (1) Do a lexical study of רָעָה ("evil") to make sure you know the full semantic range and usage here, (2) Look for similar constructions, and (3) consider theological implications.

share|improve this answer
thank you i now understand that Qal's do not imply causation and can be permissive – user2134 Mar 19 '13 at 2:37

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.