Death and Divine Judgement in Ecclesiastes

IF 0.4 4区 哲学 0 RELIGION Tyndale Bulletin Pub Date : 2016-11-01 DOI:10.53751/001c.29419
K. Takeuchi
{"title":"Death and Divine Judgement in Ecclesiastes","authors":"K. Takeuchi","doi":"10.53751/001c.29419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The current scholarly consensus places Ecclesiastes’ composition in the postexilic era, sometime between the late Persian and early Hellenistic periods, leaning towards the late fourth or early third centuries BCE. Premised on this consensus, this thesis proposes that the book of Ecclesiastes is making a case for posthumous divine judgement in order to rectify pre-mortem injustices. Specifically, this thesis contends that issues relating to death and injustice raised by Qohelet in the book of Ecclesiastes point to the necessity of post-mortem divine judgement. Judging from its implied social and historical context, the book of Ecclesiastes also may have served as perhaps a provocative voice for, or as a catalyst to, the emergence of apocalyptic eschatology and later sectarian conflicts within Judaism during the mid-Second Temple period. \nSome people in postexilic Israelite society began to raise questions about traditional views of death, Sheol, and divine judgement at a time when retributive justice appears not to be assured or to be absent. One may well ask: what is the book of Ecclesiastes doing, if it appeared on the cusp of the Persian-Hellenistic transition period when the traditional idea of theodicy was perhaps becoming a serious issue in Israelite society, before full-blown apocalyptic eschatology surfaced? \nThe answer seems to be inseparable from questions of how best Ecclesiastes as a book is to be read. Contemporary approaches to reading the book as a unified whole are examined, and a “frame-narrative” reading is argued to be the best approach. The key to unravelling the book’s puzzle lies in realizing that the author probably intended the frame-narrator to have the last say. The role of this “third person” is pivotal for explaining the paradoxes within Qohelet’s monologue and its relationship to the epilogue and uncovering the book’s overall purpose.","PeriodicalId":23462,"journal":{"name":"Tyndale Bulletin","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tyndale Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.29419","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The current scholarly consensus places Ecclesiastes’ composition in the postexilic era, sometime between the late Persian and early Hellenistic periods, leaning towards the late fourth or early third centuries BCE. Premised on this consensus, this thesis proposes that the book of Ecclesiastes is making a case for posthumous divine judgement in order to rectify pre-mortem injustices. Specifically, this thesis contends that issues relating to death and injustice raised by Qohelet in the book of Ecclesiastes point to the necessity of post-mortem divine judgement. Judging from its implied social and historical context, the book of Ecclesiastes also may have served as perhaps a provocative voice for, or as a catalyst to, the emergence of apocalyptic eschatology and later sectarian conflicts within Judaism during the mid-Second Temple period. Some people in postexilic Israelite society began to raise questions about traditional views of death, Sheol, and divine judgement at a time when retributive justice appears not to be assured or to be absent. One may well ask: what is the book of Ecclesiastes doing, if it appeared on the cusp of the Persian-Hellenistic transition period when the traditional idea of theodicy was perhaps becoming a serious issue in Israelite society, before full-blown apocalyptic eschatology surfaced? The answer seems to be inseparable from questions of how best Ecclesiastes as a book is to be read. Contemporary approaches to reading the book as a unified whole are examined, and a “frame-narrative” reading is argued to be the best approach. The key to unravelling the book’s puzzle lies in realizing that the author probably intended the frame-narrator to have the last say. The role of this “third person” is pivotal for explaining the paradoxes within Qohelet’s monologue and its relationship to the epilogue and uncovering the book’s overall purpose.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
《传道书》中的死亡和神的审判
目前学术界的共识是,《传道书》的创作是在流放后的时代,介于波斯晚期和希腊化早期之间,倾向于公元前4世纪末或3世纪初。在这个共识的前提下,这篇论文提出,传道书是在为死后的神审判做一个案例,以纠正死前的不公正。具体地说,这篇论文认为,在传道书中提出的关于死亡和不公正的问题,指向了死后神审判的必要性。从其隐含的社会和历史背景来看,《传道书》也可能是一种挑衅性的声音,或者是一种催化剂,在第二圣殿中期,启示录末世论的出现,以及后来犹太教的宗派冲突。在被流放后的以色列社会中,一些人开始对死亡、地狱和神的审判的传统观点提出质疑,当时报复性正义似乎不确定或不存在。有人可能会问:如果《传道书》出现在波斯-希腊化过渡时期的风口上,当传统的神正论观念在以色列社会中成为一个严肃的问题时,在全面的末世论浮出水面之前,它在做什么?答案似乎与如何最好地阅读《传道书》这个问题密不可分。当代的方法来阅读这本书作为一个统一的整体进行了审查,“框架叙事”的阅读被认为是最好的方法。解开这本书的谜题的关键在于认识到作者可能希望框架叙述者有最后的发言权。这个“第三人称”的角色对于解释柯莱特独白中的悖论及其与结语的关系以及揭示本书的总体目的至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Tyndale Bulletin
Tyndale Bulletin RELIGION-
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Tyndale Bulletin is a bi-annual peer-reviewed academic journal for biblical scholarship and related disciplines.
期刊最新文献
The Uses of ‘Bēlu’ and ‘Marduk’ in Neo-Assyrian Royal Inscriptions and other Sources from the First Millennium BC The Divine Christology of ‘Remember Me’ (Luke 23:42) in Light of Lament An Analysis of the Concept of ‘Peacemaking through Blood’ in Colossians 1:20b: The Graeco-Roman and Jewish Background Why is John’s Apocalypse so Bloody? John’s Use and Subversion of Combat Myths in Revelation 19:11–20:10 An Invitation to a New Era of Biblical Theology: Towards an Old Testament Theology of Hospitality
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1