Repozitórium index

În Vechiul Testament, Regatul de Nord este adesea considerat o regiune vinova-tă în care poporul s-a îndepărtat de Dumnezeu. Cu toate acestea, este notabil faptul că în descrierea întemeierii cultului din 1 Împărați 12, zeul venerat nu este numit, ci doar definit prin faptul că el a fost responsabil de exod. Un alt aspect deosebit de important este că acest cult nu era centralizat, ci Ieroboam a ridicat altare pentru această divinitate în întreaga țară, inclusiv, foarte probabil, în capi-tală, Samaria, unde exista un templu pentru această divinitate. Bazându-ne pe faptul că exodul este atribuit în toate textele lui Iahve, zeul venerat în Israel nu poate fi altul decât Iahve. El era zeul național și dinastic, inclusiv în Regatul de Nord. Acest lucru este susținut de prezența elementului teoforic iahvist în majo-ritatea numelor regale. Cu toate acestea, cel mai probabil erau tolerate și alte zeități canaanite. De exemplu, regele Ahab a introdus altarul lui Baal în templul lui Iahve.

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.

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.

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.

E tanulmány célja nem az, hogy eldöntse az olvasó helyett a kérdést: milyen típusú isten volt kezdetben JHWH? Hanem hogy a bemutatott argumentumok alapján hozzásegítse az olvasót saját véleménye kialakításához, illetve a bibliográfia segítségével megkönnyítse a további kutatást. Az első fontos felismerés az, hogy az ókori Közel-Keleten és az Ószövetségben is nagyon tág az „isten” fogalma. Minden, amely meghaladja az im-manens szférát, már a mennyeihez tartozik, és istennek tekinthető. A mi istenfogalmunk más logikára épül, és ez megnehezíti vizsgálódásunkat.