My persistent opinion is - there is something academically disagreeable with the techniques promoted by this site.
A few months earlier in another answer, I proposed that [אשר] actually meant regard, which has then been used as a preposition.
- so that "regard" can be used relatively,
hence the preposition [אשר] = which, whom, whose
- And therefore, as my answer to Psalm 1,
Being honoured/regarded is the man who does not go in counsel of the wicked.
Because, your English translations have been struggling between translating [אשר] as "happy is" and "blessed is".
But "Blessed" is [ברוך]. What does "blessed" even mean? It is an empty meaningless concocted English word whose meaning is built on shifty sand. [ברוך] otoh means being knelt to, and thence its idiomatic usage.
In fact, now I have changed my mind. I now believe that due to the absence of any suggestive passive, the meaning is now in the active form, where the masc plural is frequently a gerund
Regards/honouring the man who does not go in counsel of the wicked.
So for this question, a case which is much easier -- did you notice this is a simple passive form [נשבע]? Which is the simple passive form of ... what?
Tada ... [שבע] = completion, perfection.
One must be willing to perform a grammatical analysis and then figure out if the prevalent meaning had actually mutated thro idiomatic means. Do you relegate your responsibility to make reasonable grammatical analysis to "authoritative scholarship" ("authoritative" !!) and simply accept their presumptuous opinions, which themselves had exhibited no real scholarship?
I mean there are many reasonably upvoted answers here where they did evangelical conjectures, original but reasonable and logical conjectures - so then why are ya'll not willing to accept reasonable and logical grammatical conjectures?
Now that I have spoken my long-winded, but reasonable persuasion preamble ....
there is high possibility that many of the instances where [נשבע] is found, it is not the mutated idiomatic meaning that was intended, but the original simple passive meaning of [שבע] is intended.
The most basic principle of a Bible fundamentalist is -- always go back to ground zero even if it means questioning "authority". Dig out the truth.
- Genesis 24:7
- ואשר דבר לי ואשר נשבע לי
- who spoke to me and by whom I am assured
- [נשבע] being assured, given a fulfillment, which idiomatically implies a promise.
- Which in latter scriptures allowed for the mutatated negative sense of abuse of false promise - a mockery of a promise = swearing.
- There is a linguistic terminology of the phenomenon where a word mutates into a negative/opposing meaning of its own, and I can't recall that term.
Go thro every occurrence of [נשבע] and you will find that the simple passive of given a feeling of completion, given a closure is a more reasonable meaning than "swearing".
Biblical Hebrew is not a lifeless monochromatic language.
- Psalm 15:4
- נבזה בעיניו נמאס
ואת יראי יי יכבד
נשבע להרע ולא ימר
- being loathed in his eyes are the undesirables (l'miserables)
and those who fear HaShem he honours
his intention towards that who cause evil and/then will he not risk compromise
Where [ימר] is the uncompleted of [המר] = laying down to the odds, placed before the odds.