Repozitórium index

Adorjáni Zoltán, a Kolozsvári Protestáns Teológiai Intézet újszövetséges professzora 2021. november 13-án töltötte a 65. életévét. A tiszteletére megjelent könyv 43 szerző tanulmányát tartalmazza. A kötet szerzői több szálon kötődnek az ünnepelthez: jelenlegi kollégák és egykori kollégák, testvérintézmények tanárai, tanítványok, barátok. Az itt megjelenített tanulmányok tartalmilag érintik a biblicum, a rendszeres teológia, a gyakorlati teológia, az egyháztörténet, a művészettörténet és művelődéstörténet területeit.

This article argues that Isaiah's so-called ‘refrain poem’ (Kehrvergedicht) in Isa. 9.7–20 is a composite text, going back to two early prophecies with different concerns. Isaiah 9.7–17* focused originally on the arrogant refusal of the divine word, while Isa. 9.18–20* reflected on the chaotic social circumstances in Samaria in the eighth century. The refrains in vv. 9,11cd, 16ef and 20cd were added to these two already connected prophecies at a later stage. The theological summary in v. 12 is yet another addition, closely affiliated with 5.24–25. Unlike v. 12, the refrains do not have the repentance of Israel in view, nor its final destruction, but the fall of Assyria in Isa. 10.5–15, 24–27. The refrains support the theory that the Isaianic collection was formed by means of reusing, restructuring and reinterpreting earlier material. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309089216690385

In Jeremiah 28, there is a dispute between the prophets Jeremiah and Hananiah over the (il)legitimacy of prophecies of salvation concerning Judah and prophecies of judgement regarding Babylon. On the eve of Jerusalem’s fall to the Babylonians, the prophet Jeremiah, who proclaims judgement on Judah at the hands of Babylon, appears to be the true, genuine, canonical voice of God. While this text does not preclude the eventual authenticity of prophecies of salvation in the event that they are proven valid by being fulfilled, it nevertheless is rather strange that the book of Jeremiah ends with a collection of prophecies against the Chaldaeans. The anti-Babylonian statements in Jeremiah 50-51 are ascribed to the very same prophet who had once dismissed Hananiah for uttering similarly worded – and presumably uninspired – invectives before the people of Jerusalem.

Isa 8:16 is considered a key reference regarding the formation of the book of Isaiah and the role of prophetic disciples in this process. This article argues, however, that originally this verse had a more limited significance. The instruction to which v. 16 refers is to be identified with vv. 12-15 rather than an early ‘book’ of Isaiah. The expression ‘the instructed ones’ (of YHWH rather than the prophet) is applied to the prophet’s audience. This term reflects Isaiah’s characteristic view of prophesying as an act of instruction and prophecy as a form of teaching, and it does not presuppose the existence of any prophetic school. The view that sealing the instruction would allude to preserving prophetic teaching for the posterity is discounted here in favour of understanding the symbolic act as a metaphor from the legal sphere refering to authentication, with no inherent temporal significance.

In studies on the composition of prophetic literature, the larger textual layers reinterpreting earlier texts, the so-called Fortschreibungen, received much attention. It is well-known that beside these larger literary elaborations prophetic books also contain shorter explanatory interpolations, often called glosses, which intend to clarify a particular imagery of the prophecy (e.g., Isa 9:14). A systematic reading of these short annotations has been neglected, however, in studying the formation of prophetic books. The present article reconsiders the Isaiah-Memoir from this perspective. It identifies editorial interpolations in three distinct pericopes, Isa 8:2, 8:6-7a and 8:23b. It is argued here that the identification of such explanatory additions is the key to understanding notorious textual complexities. Moreover, it points out that these interpolations tend to expose recognisable patterns and common hermeneutical principles.

Joggal feltételezhetjük, hogy az Ézs 10,16–19 verseit eredetileg nem erre a helyre írták. A perikópa egy Izrael elleni prófécia része volt. Ezt a hipotézist erősítik meg a szerző által használt metaforák, a szöveg intertextuális kapcsolatai más, Izraelre vonatkozó próféciákkal, illetve a perikópa környezetéből gyűjtött információk is. A relokalizáció révén az Ézs 10,16–19 eredeti értelme megváltozott: az ítélet, amely korábban Izraelre vonatkozott, Asszíria-ellenes beszéddé alakult, azaz azon hatalom ellen fordult, akin keresztül JHVH egykor a saját népe feletti ítéletét hajtotta végre. Az Ószövetségben több olyan kései prófétai szöveggel találkozunk, amelyek explicite is azt jelzik, hogy az igazságos világrend helyreállítása rendkívüli jelentőséggel bírt e kései szerzők teológiájában. Ez a koncepció nemcsak ilyen explicit textusokban érhető tetten, hanem implicit formában a prófétai könyvek egész újraszerkesztésének módszertani logikájában is.