Glossary entry (derived from question below)
English term or phrase:
assumed
English answer:
implicitly meant and understood
Added to glossary by
Ana Juliá
Apr 21, 2016 08:33
8 yrs ago
2 viewers *
English term
kingship assumed
English
Art/Literary
Religion
About the book of Proverbs
25:2–3 The glory of kings (v. 2) is set here as subordinate to and derived from the glory of God because the king’s searching is a function of his role under the overall governance of God, who keeps some things hidden (see Deut. 29:29). Proverbs 25:3 further describes the king from the perspective of his subjects and asserts by implication (reference to the heavens and the earth) that though his heart is hidden to those under him, it remains
subject to the Creator (cf. 21:1–2). The references to Solomon and Hezekiah (25:1) indicate that, as usual in Proverbs, the ***kingship assumed*** is Davidic (14:28, 35; 16:10–15; 19:12; 20:2, 8, 26, 28; 21:1; 22:11, 29; 25:2–7b; 29:4, 14). to search things out. According to Proverbs, the ideal king will both govern through the use of his wisdom and investigate and understand the world and its people.
subject to the Creator (cf. 21:1–2). The references to Solomon and Hezekiah (25:1) indicate that, as usual in Proverbs, the ***kingship assumed*** is Davidic (14:28, 35; 16:10–15; 19:12; 20:2, 8, 26, 28; 21:1; 22:11, 29; 25:2–7b; 29:4, 14). to search things out. According to Proverbs, the ideal king will both govern through the use of his wisdom and investigate and understand the world and its people.
Responses
4 +1 | implicitly meant and understood | Charles Davis |
4 +2 | the (type of) kingship taken up | Yvonne Gallagher |
Responses
+1
53 mins
Selected
implicitly meant and understood
I think "assumed" here means that it is assumed (understood without being explicitly stated) that kingship refers to Davidic kingship.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 hrs (2016-04-21 16:28:20 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
To answer Lincoln's comment, and expand on my explanation, which I probably should have done before:
On the basis of past questions on this text, of which we've had quite a few now, it often expresses things strangely. That, of course, is why Ana is having to ask all these questions. So to me, the fact that I wouldn't have used that word to express that idea doesn't mean that's not the idea the author wants to express.
For the record, I too thought immediately of assume in the sense of take up — I think most people would — but I rejected it on the grounds that nowhere in the passages cited is taking up kingship an issue; it is simply a list of the verses that refer to "the king" or "kings" (I have checked all of them). Not one of them is about someone becoming a king.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 hrs (2016-04-21 16:31:47 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Indeed, Gallagy has quoted the first ones on the list, and it is quite obvious that they are all statements about properties and qualities of kings, what they're like and how they behave. So "assume" in the sense of "take up" is entirely irrelevant to them and cannot be the sense of the word intended by the author.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 8 hrs (2016-04-21 16:48:16 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
In other words, taking on the role or dignity of a king is not involved anywhere; in every case the verses refer to people who simply are kings. So, as I say, what the writer means by saying that "the kingship assumed is Davidic" is that when Proverbs mentions kings it is assumed (understood, taken as read) that it means Davidic kings.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 hrs (2016-04-21 16:28:20 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
To answer Lincoln's comment, and expand on my explanation, which I probably should have done before:
On the basis of past questions on this text, of which we've had quite a few now, it often expresses things strangely. That, of course, is why Ana is having to ask all these questions. So to me, the fact that I wouldn't have used that word to express that idea doesn't mean that's not the idea the author wants to express.
For the record, I too thought immediately of assume in the sense of take up — I think most people would — but I rejected it on the grounds that nowhere in the passages cited is taking up kingship an issue; it is simply a list of the verses that refer to "the king" or "kings" (I have checked all of them). Not one of them is about someone becoming a king.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 hrs (2016-04-21 16:31:47 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Indeed, Gallagy has quoted the first ones on the list, and it is quite obvious that they are all statements about properties and qualities of kings, what they're like and how they behave. So "assume" in the sense of "take up" is entirely irrelevant to them and cannot be the sense of the word intended by the author.
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 8 hrs (2016-04-21 16:48:16 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
In other words, taking on the role or dignity of a king is not involved anywhere; in every case the verses refer to people who simply are kings. So, as I say, what the writer means by saying that "the kingship assumed is Davidic" is that when Proverbs mentions kings it is assumed (understood, taken as read) that it means Davidic kings.
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Thank you!"
+2
2 hrs
the (type of) kingship taken up
My first thought, and, having checked the various passages from Proverbs I think that this "assuming" is taking up the role of a Davidic-type kingship i.e. to assume the mantle or role
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/assume_the_mantle
http://www.ligonier.org/blog/davidic-covenant-unfolding-bibl...
"David's Kingship was to be God's representative on earth, a wise leader who would ensure that God's laws were followed
The Davidic king would be the expression of God’s theocratic rule in Israel. He was to reflect the righteous rule of the divine King. He was also to lead Israel in the faithful observance of the Mosaic law. The Abrahamic covenant had promised a realm and a people for God’s kingdom. The Mosaic covenant provided the law of the kingdom. The Davidic covenant now provides a human king for the kingdom. God’s creational purpose to establish his kingdom with his image-bearer exercising dominion now reaches a new stage in its progressive accomplishment.xi
One of the major emphases of the Davidic covenant is the idea of perpetuity. David had wanted to build for God a permanent dwelling place, but God instead promised that he would establish for David a permanent dynasty.xii The Hebrew term ‘ad -‘olam, or “forever,” is found eight times in this chapter emphasizing the significance of this aspect of the covenant. As Anderson explains, “The main feature of this kingship will be its permanent stability: it will last forever (2 Sam. 7:13b, 16).”xiv... "
and some of these proversb about good/wise kingship
Prov 14
28 In a multitude of people is a king’s glory,
But in the dearth of people is a prince’s ruin.
35 The king’s favor is toward a servant who acts wisely,
But his anger is toward him who acts shamefully.
Prov 16
10 The lips of a king speak as an oracle,
and his mouth does not betray justice.
11 Honest scales and balances belong to the LORD;
all the weights in the bag are of his making.
12 Kings detest wrongdoing,
for a throne is established through righteousness.
13 Kings take pleasure in honest lips;
they value the one who speaks what is right.
14 A king’s wrath is a messenger of death,
but the wise will appease it.
15 When a king’s face brightens, it means life;
his favor is like a rain cloud in spring.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/assume_the_mantle
http://www.ligonier.org/blog/davidic-covenant-unfolding-bibl...
"David's Kingship was to be God's representative on earth, a wise leader who would ensure that God's laws were followed
The Davidic king would be the expression of God’s theocratic rule in Israel. He was to reflect the righteous rule of the divine King. He was also to lead Israel in the faithful observance of the Mosaic law. The Abrahamic covenant had promised a realm and a people for God’s kingdom. The Mosaic covenant provided the law of the kingdom. The Davidic covenant now provides a human king for the kingdom. God’s creational purpose to establish his kingdom with his image-bearer exercising dominion now reaches a new stage in its progressive accomplishment.xi
One of the major emphases of the Davidic covenant is the idea of perpetuity. David had wanted to build for God a permanent dwelling place, but God instead promised that he would establish for David a permanent dynasty.xii The Hebrew term ‘ad -‘olam, or “forever,” is found eight times in this chapter emphasizing the significance of this aspect of the covenant. As Anderson explains, “The main feature of this kingship will be its permanent stability: it will last forever (2 Sam. 7:13b, 16).”xiv... "
and some of these proversb about good/wise kingship
Prov 14
28 In a multitude of people is a king’s glory,
But in the dearth of people is a prince’s ruin.
35 The king’s favor is toward a servant who acts wisely,
But his anger is toward him who acts shamefully.
Prov 16
10 The lips of a king speak as an oracle,
and his mouth does not betray justice.
11 Honest scales and balances belong to the LORD;
all the weights in the bag are of his making.
12 Kings detest wrongdoing,
for a throne is established through righteousness.
13 Kings take pleasure in honest lips;
they value the one who speaks what is right.
14 A king’s wrath is a messenger of death,
but the wise will appease it.
15 When a king’s face brightens, it means life;
his favor is like a rain cloud in spring.
Peer comment(s):
agree |
Lincoln Hui
: See my discussion entry above.
4 hrs
|
Many thanks...yes, I took this meaning before even reading the question...and didn't have any doubts after reading the proverbs mentioned
|
|
agree |
Daryo
9 hrs
|
Thanks:-)
|
Discussion
However, I would make the observation that, if I were writing this passage and I meant "assume" as in Charles Davis' answer, I would probably try to find another word, because "assume" in association with kingship has a rather specific connotation, and I would want to avoid confusion on that. On the other hand, if I meant "assume" as in Gallagy's answer, I would feel that substitutes are harder to come back - any other synonyms I can think of would sound somewhat inferior.