Repozitórium index

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 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.

Pál apostol mindkét Thesszalonikai levélben hivatkozik az apostoli hagyomány átadására és átvételére. Milyen felvilágosítással szolgálnak ezek a hivatkozások az apostoli tradíció jellegzetes vonásaira nézve? Formailag és tartalmilag mennyiben hasonlított e folyamat a korabeli bölcseleti és vallási irányzatok tanítói gyakorlatához, illetve mennyiben tért el azoktól? Milyen témakörben hivatkozik az apostol a hagyományozás folyamatára? Milyen szerepe van a tradíciónak az igaz hit kialakulásában? Vajon a szóbeli és írásbeli hagyományra történő hivatkozás (2Thessz 2,15) alátámasztja-e a római katolikus egyháznak a tradícióról alkotott felfogását, vagy igazolja-e a protestáns egyházak tanítását? Ezekre a kérdésekre kívánok felelni az első és második Thesszalonikai levél vizsgálata rendjén.