Pub Date : 2006-10-25DOI: 10.1515/9783110186604.21
Markus Witte
... erst dadurch, daß der Mensch denkend, überdenkend, vergleichend, trennend, zusammenschließend jenes unhistorische Element einschränkt, erst dadurch, daß innerhalb jener umschließenden Dunstwolke ein heller blitzender Lichtschein entsteht, – also erst durch die Kraft, das Vergangene zum Leben zu gebrauchen und aus dem Geschehen wieder Geschichte zu machen, wird der Mensch zum Menschen ... (Friedrich Nietzsche)1
{"title":"From Exodus to David – History and Historiography in Psalm 78","authors":"Markus Witte","doi":"10.1515/9783110186604.21","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110186604.21","url":null,"abstract":"... erst dadurch, daß der Mensch denkend, überdenkend, vergleichend, trennend, zusammenschließend jenes unhistorische Element einschränkt, erst dadurch, daß innerhalb jener umschließenden Dunstwolke ein heller blitzender Lichtschein entsteht, – also erst durch die Kraft, das Vergangene zum Leben zu gebrauchen und aus dem Geschehen wieder Geschichte zu machen, wird der Mensch zum Menschen ... (Friedrich Nietzsche)1","PeriodicalId":393675,"journal":{"name":"Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126767103","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The term “notion” in the title is applied not so much to the history of Israel’s development in its religious, moral, social, juridical and political institutions traced in the texts of the Hebrew Bible as to the interpretation that these texts make of such institutions and the characters connected to them. The intention here is to understand the historiography of the Bible: the way Israelites understood themselves at different points in their history. For the modern West, historiography is one of the natural activities concerned with the understanding of its own existence. In this aspect, westerners are heirs and disciples of both Greek and Biblical historiography. The majority of ancient cultures did not feel the need to adopt this form of understanding their existence. The fact of living a history did not pose any problem for them. Therefore they never produced a true historiography. Certainly, these cultures created a great diversity of historical documents: court diaries, annals of kingdoms, lists of kings and marvellous inscriptions of every kind. Nevertheless, this is not a true historiography. Ancient Israel, profoundly influenced by the radiating culture of Mesopotamia and Egypt, and in possession, after being installed in Canaan, of a poorly defined heritage, succeeded to produce, even in the field of historiography, a markedly personal literature. Perhaps for a classical reading of the problem, it would be acceptable to contemplate an Assyrian stone slab. The King of Assyria Assaraddon, on his return from a victorious expedition in the year 671 BC, in which he crushed the revolt which broke out after the death of Sennacherib, had a stone slab sculptured depicting the conquered Abdi-Milkutti, King of Sidon, and Ushanahoru son of the Ethiopian pharaoh Taharqa1, tethered on a leash. The profane language on the triumphal stone of Zengirli would have us believe that either Assaraddon was a giant, or the King of Sidon and the Ethiopian prince were pygmies. But this is not true. The artist, following the canons of Mesopotamian art, has minimized the conquered ones simply to express the idea of the superiority, even the transcendency of the Assyrian monarch. Not so many years ago, this kind of argument would have been faced with certain requirements of “objectivity” in order to present the facts as they really happened, but now the problem is not so simple2.
{"title":"The Notion of History in the Hebrew Bible","authors":"F. Raurell","doi":"10.1515/9783110186604.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110186604.1","url":null,"abstract":"The term “notion” in the title is applied not so much to the history of Israel’s development in its religious, moral, social, juridical and political institutions traced in the texts of the Hebrew Bible as to the interpretation that these texts make of such institutions and the characters connected to them. The intention here is to understand the historiography of the Bible: the way Israelites understood themselves at different points in their history. For the modern West, historiography is one of the natural activities concerned with the understanding of its own existence. In this aspect, westerners are heirs and disciples of both Greek and Biblical historiography. The majority of ancient cultures did not feel the need to adopt this form of understanding their existence. The fact of living a history did not pose any problem for them. Therefore they never produced a true historiography. Certainly, these cultures created a great diversity of historical documents: court diaries, annals of kingdoms, lists of kings and marvellous inscriptions of every kind. Nevertheless, this is not a true historiography. Ancient Israel, profoundly influenced by the radiating culture of Mesopotamia and Egypt, and in possession, after being installed in Canaan, of a poorly defined heritage, succeeded to produce, even in the field of historiography, a markedly personal literature. Perhaps for a classical reading of the problem, it would be acceptable to contemplate an Assyrian stone slab. The King of Assyria Assaraddon, on his return from a victorious expedition in the year 671 BC, in which he crushed the revolt which broke out after the death of Sennacherib, had a stone slab sculptured depicting the conquered Abdi-Milkutti, King of Sidon, and Ushanahoru son of the Ethiopian pharaoh Taharqa1, tethered on a leash. The profane language on the triumphal stone of Zengirli would have us believe that either Assaraddon was a giant, or the King of Sidon and the Ethiopian prince were pygmies. But this is not true. The artist, following the canons of Mesopotamian art, has minimized the conquered ones simply to express the idea of the superiority, even the transcendency of the Assyrian monarch. Not so many years ago, this kind of argument would have been faced with certain requirements of “objectivity” in order to present the facts as they really happened, but now the problem is not so simple2.","PeriodicalId":393675,"journal":{"name":"Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130649316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2006-10-25DOI: 10.1515/9783110186604.187
J. M. Asurmendi
The book of Baruch is neither one of the most familiar nor one of the most frequently read books; yet, for all that, it is of real interest. The first question posed is that of the book’s nature as such. The thesis of PierreMaurice Bogaert1, arguing that the book of Baruch should be taken not as an autonomous text but as an appendage to the short version of Jeremiah (LXX)2, is well known. Despite this claim, the majority of authors prefer to read the book of Baruch as an independent text with its own identity and particular characteristics, though no one questions the close relationship that exists between the book of Baruch and that of Jeremiah, in theological as well as in literary terms3. We will have to keep this question in mind as we examine whether these different positions concerning the origin of the text can be discerned in the historical construction drawn in the book of Baruch. The structure of the book is straightforward and clear, and its general outline is broadly accepted. The thesis of O.H. Steck4 can serve as a point of reference. According to Steck, 1:1-15aa is a narrative introduction in which Baruch, known from the book of Jeremiah as secretary-scribe of the prophet, presents himself as author of a book which he reads to the exile community and its leaders in Babylon. The rest of Baruch may then be taken as the content of the said book, though those who favour reading Baruch as an appendix to Jeremiah would not agree5. Be that as it may, 1:15ab–3:8 contains a prayer of penitence (with confession of sins, acknowledgement of their consequences, and petition for forgiveness with remembrance of divine promises), while 3:9–4:4 contains an exhortation to conversion within the explicit context of fidelity to the Law. The last section of the book (4:5–5:9) offers, above all, promises of return and consolation.
{"title":"Baruch: Causes, Effects and Remedies for a Disaster","authors":"J. M. Asurmendi","doi":"10.1515/9783110186604.187","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110186604.187","url":null,"abstract":"The book of Baruch is neither one of the most familiar nor one of the most frequently read books; yet, for all that, it is of real interest. The first question posed is that of the book’s nature as such. The thesis of PierreMaurice Bogaert1, arguing that the book of Baruch should be taken not as an autonomous text but as an appendage to the short version of Jeremiah (LXX)2, is well known. Despite this claim, the majority of authors prefer to read the book of Baruch as an independent text with its own identity and particular characteristics, though no one questions the close relationship that exists between the book of Baruch and that of Jeremiah, in theological as well as in literary terms3. We will have to keep this question in mind as we examine whether these different positions concerning the origin of the text can be discerned in the historical construction drawn in the book of Baruch. The structure of the book is straightforward and clear, and its general outline is broadly accepted. The thesis of O.H. Steck4 can serve as a point of reference. According to Steck, 1:1-15aa is a narrative introduction in which Baruch, known from the book of Jeremiah as secretary-scribe of the prophet, presents himself as author of a book which he reads to the exile community and its leaders in Babylon. The rest of Baruch may then be taken as the content of the said book, though those who favour reading Baruch as an appendix to Jeremiah would not agree5. Be that as it may, 1:15ab–3:8 contains a prayer of penitence (with confession of sins, acknowledgement of their consequences, and petition for forgiveness with remembrance of divine promises), while 3:9–4:4 contains an exhortation to conversion within the explicit context of fidelity to the Law. The last section of the book (4:5–5:9) offers, above all, promises of return and consolation.","PeriodicalId":393675,"journal":{"name":"Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134456917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2006-10-25DOI: 10.1515/9783110186604.359
Agustí Borrell
Abraham is presented in the book of Genesis as the great ancestor of the people of Israel. Through Isaac and Jacob, the Israelites are his direct offspring. In the first century after Christ, the Jews continued to see themselves as the descendants of Abraham and the heirs of the divine promises associated with him. The apostle Paul, in his controversy with the Judaizers with regard to the basis of justification (faith or works), elaborates a personal re-reading of the history of Abraham. In his arguments, Paul does not limit himself to considering Abraham as a model of faith or as a paradigm of justification received outside the Law, but presents him as the ancestor of all who believe in Christ, whatever their origin. Our objective in this short exposition is to observe the texts where Paul deals with this theme (above all Rom 4 and Gal 3–4) in order to understand a little more the logic of his thinking. In particular, our analysis reflects on the contributions of the so-called “new perspective” in Pauline studies, which aims to consider first-century Judaism on its own terms, not in the context of Protestant-Catholic debates of the sixteenth century, and which thinks that Paul’s doctrine of justification has more to do with Jewish-Gentile issues than with the individual’s status before God1.
{"title":"Abraham and His Offspring in the Pauline Writings","authors":"Agustí Borrell","doi":"10.1515/9783110186604.359","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110186604.359","url":null,"abstract":"Abraham is presented in the book of Genesis as the great ancestor of the people of Israel. Through Isaac and Jacob, the Israelites are his direct offspring. In the first century after Christ, the Jews continued to see themselves as the descendants of Abraham and the heirs of the divine promises associated with him. The apostle Paul, in his controversy with the Judaizers with regard to the basis of justification (faith or works), elaborates a personal re-reading of the history of Abraham. In his arguments, Paul does not limit himself to considering Abraham as a model of faith or as a paradigm of justification received outside the Law, but presents him as the ancestor of all who believe in Christ, whatever their origin. Our objective in this short exposition is to observe the texts where Paul deals with this theme (above all Rom 4 and Gal 3–4) in order to understand a little more the logic of his thinking. In particular, our analysis reflects on the contributions of the so-called “new perspective” in Pauline studies, which aims to consider first-century Judaism on its own terms, not in the context of Protestant-Catholic debates of the sixteenth century, and which thinks that Paul’s doctrine of justification has more to do with Jewish-Gentile issues than with the individual’s status before God1.","PeriodicalId":393675,"journal":{"name":"Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114845548","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2006-10-25DOI: 10.1515/9783110186604.171
Maurice Gilbert
The purpose of these pages is to show the importance and meaning which, in his reflection, the author of Wisdom of Solomon attaches to the origins. To put the question more clearly, what role does recalling the origins have in the argumentation of this author? It is evident that throughout his book he refers to what happened in the beginning. Already in the first pages of his book, he appeals to the divine plan when God created all things (Wis 1:13-14; 2:23). Then his presentation of the wise man is inspired by the biblical tradition concerning the first wise man in Israel, Solomon (Wis 7:1-21; 8:2-21), whose famous prayer pronounced at Gibeon forms the basis of a re-reading or relecture (Wis 9). Finally, the second half of the book (Wis 10–19) is a re-reading of the Exodus events, introduced by a brief reminder of the great figures of Genesis. My purpose is not to recall all this1, but to show how three kinds of beginning belong together. In other words, the origins of the world and humanity, the constitutive origin of Israel during the Exodus, and biblical wisdom’s origin in the figure of Solomon are not three separate themes, independent from one another, but all of them together form the basic argumentation of the author of Wis. It is then this argumentation which concerns me in the present article. Such a study has no sense unless, at the level of historical criticism, we can assert the unity of the book, directly written in Greek by only one author. On this point, recent commentators agree, even if they disagree about the literary genre of the book. A majority of them acknowledges the “epideictic” genre of the Greek rhetoric, but for some of them, following J.M. Reese2, Wis is a “protreptic”, whereas for others, like myself, it is an “encomium”, a eulogy. Let me also add that, according to our author, history includes the first pages of the Bible. The creation narratives of Gen 1–3 and even Gen 1–11 are for him as historical as the narratives about the Patriarchs, the Exodus or Solomon.
{"title":"The Origins According to the Wisdom of Solomon","authors":"Maurice Gilbert","doi":"10.1515/9783110186604.171","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110186604.171","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of these pages is to show the importance and meaning which, in his reflection, the author of Wisdom of Solomon attaches to the origins. To put the question more clearly, what role does recalling the origins have in the argumentation of this author? It is evident that throughout his book he refers to what happened in the beginning. Already in the first pages of his book, he appeals to the divine plan when God created all things (Wis 1:13-14; 2:23). Then his presentation of the wise man is inspired by the biblical tradition concerning the first wise man in Israel, Solomon (Wis 7:1-21; 8:2-21), whose famous prayer pronounced at Gibeon forms the basis of a re-reading or relecture (Wis 9). Finally, the second half of the book (Wis 10–19) is a re-reading of the Exodus events, introduced by a brief reminder of the great figures of Genesis. My purpose is not to recall all this1, but to show how three kinds of beginning belong together. In other words, the origins of the world and humanity, the constitutive origin of Israel during the Exodus, and biblical wisdom’s origin in the figure of Solomon are not three separate themes, independent from one another, but all of them together form the basic argumentation of the author of Wis. It is then this argumentation which concerns me in the present article. Such a study has no sense unless, at the level of historical criticism, we can assert the unity of the book, directly written in Greek by only one author. On this point, recent commentators agree, even if they disagree about the literary genre of the book. A majority of them acknowledges the “epideictic” genre of the Greek rhetoric, but for some of them, following J.M. Reese2, Wis is a “protreptic”, whereas for others, like myself, it is an “encomium”, a eulogy. Let me also add that, according to our author, history includes the first pages of the Bible. The creation narratives of Gen 1–3 and even Gen 1–11 are for him as historical as the narratives about the Patriarchs, the Exodus or Solomon.","PeriodicalId":393675,"journal":{"name":"Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129067006","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2006-10-25DOI: 10.1515/9783110186604.43
A. Passaro
The analysis of the historical motifs present in Psalms 105 and 106 demands that it not be limited to the descriptive level alone. It is true that some of the final pages in Erik Haglund’s essay2, published in 1984, attempt an explanation of the meaning of the rehearsal of the historical motifs in the Psalms and of their Sitz im Leben. Fundamentally, however, he is interested in taking up and pointing out the traditions, that is the texts that stand as the basis for the reworking carried out in the Psalms. This is a route which is only apparently simple but rather frequently difficult because it tries to combine inner Biblical interpretation, with its need to set out refrains, allusions etc. – often conjectural – with a kind of historico-social analysis which undertakes to resolve the dates of composition of the text – an wavy operation, certainly necessary, to which the reader is referred, precisely for the descriptive level. This contribution is concerned, instead, with understanding the relecture of some segments of history carried out in Psalms 105-106 as something that reveals a hermeneutico-theological complex that emphasises a matter of principle in the history, the berît with the patriarchs which recalls and underlines the unilateral commitment of Yhwh to his people – a commitment whose unique attribute is !lw[ (Ps 105:10). To recall the commitment of God in praise, in the words of prayer, is, for Israel, to participate in the berît. The revisiting of history is thus a word/speech about God who is contemplated as involved in history in a role of solidarity, not of complicity (cf. Ps 106). This fundamental element throws light on and interprets the narrative routes of the two psalms, the one concerned with presenting, in almost elegiac terms, the action of God in history and his perennial fidelity, the other with underlining, with disarming frankness, the reality of the sin of Israel, its history of unfaithfulness, of non-reply to a rbD (cf. Ps 105:8) which knows neither limitations nor regrets and which is to become a “statute” and “law” to be kept (wytrwtw wyqj wrmvy: Ps 105:45).
{"title":"Theological Hermeneutics and Historical Motifs in Pss 105-106","authors":"A. Passaro","doi":"10.1515/9783110186604.43","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110186604.43","url":null,"abstract":"The analysis of the historical motifs present in Psalms 105 and 106 demands that it not be limited to the descriptive level alone. It is true that some of the final pages in Erik Haglund’s essay2, published in 1984, attempt an explanation of the meaning of the rehearsal of the historical motifs in the Psalms and of their Sitz im Leben. Fundamentally, however, he is interested in taking up and pointing out the traditions, that is the texts that stand as the basis for the reworking carried out in the Psalms. This is a route which is only apparently simple but rather frequently difficult because it tries to combine inner Biblical interpretation, with its need to set out refrains, allusions etc. – often conjectural – with a kind of historico-social analysis which undertakes to resolve the dates of composition of the text – an wavy operation, certainly necessary, to which the reader is referred, precisely for the descriptive level. This contribution is concerned, instead, with understanding the relecture of some segments of history carried out in Psalms 105-106 as something that reveals a hermeneutico-theological complex that emphasises a matter of principle in the history, the berît with the patriarchs which recalls and underlines the unilateral commitment of Yhwh to his people – a commitment whose unique attribute is !lw[ (Ps 105:10). To recall the commitment of God in praise, in the words of prayer, is, for Israel, to participate in the berît. The revisiting of history is thus a word/speech about God who is contemplated as involved in history in a role of solidarity, not of complicity (cf. Ps 106). This fundamental element throws light on and interprets the narrative routes of the two psalms, the one concerned with presenting, in almost elegiac terms, the action of God in history and his perennial fidelity, the other with underlining, with disarming frankness, the reality of the sin of Israel, its history of unfaithfulness, of non-reply to a rbD (cf. Ps 105:8) which knows neither limitations nor regrets and which is to become a “statute” and “law” to be kept (wytrwtw wyqj wrmvy: Ps 105:45).","PeriodicalId":393675,"journal":{"name":"Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115292944","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2006-10-25DOI: 10.1515/9783110186604.57
P. Beentjes
{"title":"Israel’s Earlier History as Presented in the Book of Chronicles","authors":"P. Beentjes","doi":"10.1515/9783110186604.57","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110186604.57","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":393675,"journal":{"name":"Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123909178","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2006-10-25DOI: 10.1515/9783110186604.341
Oda Wischmeyer
In the early 30s of the first century CE, during the reign of the Emperor Tiberius, a Jew of the Diaspora named Stephen1 was stoned to death near the walls of Jerusalem in an act of lynch law. A young Pharisee named Saul watched the stoning with approval. This very Saul is himself later stoned by Jews in the town of Lystra in Asia Minor. But he survives the punishment. He mentions it in one of his letters (2 Cor 11:25). This Saul, who now calls himself Paul, is executed much later in Rome. We learn about the events concerning Stephen from the Christian author who mentions the name of his patron but not his own name2. He writes a work in two volumes about Jesus and the effects of the Spirit in the Imperium Romanum3. In the first volume, which is devoted to the life and work of Jesus, he makes Jesus already during his journey to Jerusalem formulate the following lamentation: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets And stones those who are sent to it!”4 (Luke 13:34) Jesus’ accusation refers particularly to Jeremiah who, according to early Jewish tradition, was stoned either in Taphnas in Egypt – so the Vitae Prophetarum Jer 1:15 – or died from being stoned in Jerusalem – so the Paralipomena Jeremiou 9:21ff6. Earlier in the history of the Kings of Israel a man functioning as a prophet was stoned in Jerusalem: Zechariah the son of the priest Jehoiada in the reign of King Joash (2 Chr 24:20f)7.
{"title":"Stephens Speech Before the Sanhedrin Against the Background of the Summaries of the History of Israel (Acts 7)","authors":"Oda Wischmeyer","doi":"10.1515/9783110186604.341","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110186604.341","url":null,"abstract":"In the early 30s of the first century CE, during the reign of the Emperor Tiberius, a Jew of the Diaspora named Stephen1 was stoned to death near the walls of Jerusalem in an act of lynch law. A young Pharisee named Saul watched the stoning with approval. This very Saul is himself later stoned by Jews in the town of Lystra in Asia Minor. But he survives the punishment. He mentions it in one of his letters (2 Cor 11:25). This Saul, who now calls himself Paul, is executed much later in Rome. We learn about the events concerning Stephen from the Christian author who mentions the name of his patron but not his own name2. He writes a work in two volumes about Jesus and the effects of the Spirit in the Imperium Romanum3. In the first volume, which is devoted to the life and work of Jesus, he makes Jesus already during his journey to Jerusalem formulate the following lamentation: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets And stones those who are sent to it!”4 (Luke 13:34) Jesus’ accusation refers particularly to Jeremiah who, according to early Jewish tradition, was stoned either in Taphnas in Egypt – so the Vitae Prophetarum Jer 1:15 – or died from being stoned in Jerusalem – so the Paralipomena Jeremiou 9:21ff6. Earlier in the history of the Kings of Israel a man functioning as a prophet was stoned in Jerusalem: Zechariah the son of the priest Jehoiada in the reign of King Joash (2 Chr 24:20f)7.","PeriodicalId":393675,"journal":{"name":"Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121322166","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2006-10-25DOI: 10.1515/9783110186604.321
S. Reif
This paper will assess the degree to which the mention of the past plays a part in the early rabbinic liturgy and how this relates to the general notion of history to be found in earlier Hebrew literature. Prayers or parts of prayers that include historical elements will be discussed and an attempt will be made to identify their precise sense and purpose. The analysis will also deal with the question of whether what is relevant to the early rabbinic liturgy also holds good for its post-talmudic development.
{"title":"The Function of History in Early Rabbinic Liturgy","authors":"S. Reif","doi":"10.1515/9783110186604.321","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110186604.321","url":null,"abstract":"This paper will assess the degree to which the mention of the past plays a part in the early rabbinic liturgy and how this relates to the general notion of history to be found in earlier Hebrew literature. Prayers or parts of prayers that include historical elements will be discussed and an attempt will be made to identify their precise sense and purpose. The analysis will also deal with the question of whether what is relevant to the early rabbinic liturgy also holds good for its post-talmudic development.","PeriodicalId":393675,"journal":{"name":"Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115921689","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：