Repozitórium index

The Textual and Redactional History of Genesis 46:8–27 -- Genesis 46:8–27 lists the names of those who went down along with Jacob to Egypt during the famine in Canaan. However, this passage has some features that inspire to further study. These include seemingly pointless repetitions, tensions within the text and contradictions with other verses in the book of Genesis, which lead us to conclude that the text of the pericope in question has undergone significant changes over time. In this study, we will attempt to deduce possible textual layers and reconstruct the sources used, starting from the canonical text and working backwards in time.

This article discusses the MT of Isa 33,12 and argues that the verse line "the nations will be burned to lime (שִׂיד)" is difficult in its context and distorts the parallelism, describing the fall of the enemy of Judah with the help of plant-imagery. Although Am 2,1 is often mentioned in connection with Isa 33,12, closer analysis shows that there are differences between the two texts. It is suggested that the LXX should be followed here, which goes back to a Hebrew text reading שָׂדַי, "field", "(agricultural) land" instead of שִׂיד, "lime". This emendation (metathesis) is most likely also supported by the independent tradition of the Targum (ניר, "field, land (to be ploughed)" < נור). The metaphor of burning field not only fits its present context well, but it has biblical parallels and it is supported by agricultural customs known from the Near East.

The Book of Habakkuk is well-known for using a very sophisticated language in terms of semantics, poetics, or rhetorical structure, causing tremendous difficulties to later interpreters, both ancient and modern. For this reason, from a diachronic perspective, textual deviations from the canonical Massoretic tradition could be mere relics of the perplexity of confused translators or scribes. This study argues, however, that there are cases where the independent, divergent textual traditions coalesce into a reading that could be considered a historically more reliable variant than the reading survived within the Massoretic Text. This appears to be the case with בגוים in Hab 1:5 and היין in Hab 2:5, for which three independent traditions presuppose a common pre-Massoretic ancient alternative reading.

This study argues that the phrase פָּרָשָׁיו וּפָרָשָׁיו should be emended to פָּרָשָׁיו וּפָרְשׂוּ, "their horses (or: horsemen) swarm out (or: spread out)". This reading is indirectly supported by some of the ancient witnesses (LXX and 1QpHab) and is better suited to its context than the Massoretic version.

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.

Ebben a tanulmányban két olyan vitatott szövegrészt vizsgálok meg Habakuk könyvéből (Habakuk 1,5 és 2,5), ahol a Masszoréta Szövegnél korábbi verziók egy, a masszoréta hagyománynál korábbi szövegvariánsba engednek betekintést. Az elemzésben Habakuk könyvének két legrégebbi tanúját hívom segítségül, a Septuagintát és a qumráni Habakuk pešert (illetve elemzem a hasonló irányba mutató szír Pesittát is). Az elemzésre kerülő szövegrészek esetében nagy valószínűséggel nem kései, hanem korai olvasatokról kell beszélnünk.

Der Tempelweihspruch (I Reg 8,12–13) ist in einer längeren Version in der LXX (III Bas 8,53) überliefert. Wie verhalten sich die beiden Fassungen zueinander? Dieser Artikel argumentiert dafür, dass sowohl der MT als auch die LXX auf eine gemeinsame fehlerhafte Quelle zurückgehen, die der Herausgeber des MT dahingehend korrigierte, dass er Sätze des ursprünglichen Spruches wegließ, während der Übersetzer der LXX den Spruch möglichst wörtlich zu übersetzen versuchte. Dies wirft auch ein Licht auf die rätselhafte Aussage über die Sonne, die nach dieser Hypothese wie folgt gelautet haben dürfte: שֶמֶשׁ הוֹדִיעַ לָשֶבֶת בַשָמַיִם The temple dedication poem (1 Kgs 8,12–13) has a longer version in the LXX (III Bas 8,53) than the MT. How do the two versions relate to each other? This article argues that both the MT and the LXX go back to a common source containing scribal errors.

Nagyon régi kérdés, talán egyidős az őskeresztyénséggel. Chrys0stomus, Hieronymus, Gázai Procopius már megjegyzik, hogy az a széfer hattorah, melyet Kr. e. 621-ben Hilkiás főpap a jeruzsálemi templomban megtalált, csak a debarim = a Deuteronomiam = (Mózes V. könyve) lehetett. Ez a megtalált törvénykönyv századokon át foglalkoztatja a kedélyeket. 1805—6-ban „Dissertatio Critica“ címen De Wette határozottan állítja, hogy az a törvénykönyv = thoragyűjtemény, melyet Josiás király kultuszreformja végrehajtásához alapul vett: a Deuteronomium volt. Majd Kuenen és Wellhausen munkái nyomán a Deut. kérdése az ótest. bibl. tudományok egyik pillérévé, kulcsává lett. Mások (strassburgi iskola: Vernes, D'Eichthal, Horst, Cullen) azt vallják, hogy a Josiás reformja jelentéktelen, Ezékiás király reformjánál is (719—691 Kr. e.) kisebb méretű, így a Deut. a Josiás reformjával nincs is összefüggésben. Ismét mások (Fries) a Josiás reformját jóval a Deut.