Repozitórium index

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.

According to Gen 1, the “classical” story of the origin of humanity, God began and finished the creation of man on the sixth day. In this view, creation is a one-time divine act dated to the dawn of history. Psalm 139,13-16 provides an alternative concept regarding human origins. The ideas permeating this Psalm are less widespread in the Bible, and they were far less influential for later theological works than the classical biblical accounts of creation. Nonetheless, these anthropological notions appear to be firmly rooted in folk religion. Making lavish use of motifs familiar from ancient Near Eastern mythological texts, the poem considers that a divine act of creation is performed in the process of birth of every individual. In contrast to the historicising interpretations of Gen 1-2, this text emphasises the personal character of creation. The present study examines the philological problems in Ps 139,13-16, as well as the Near Eastern background of its language.

This study argues that Isa 10,16–19, located in the context of the anti-Assyrian prophecy, provides essential clues in understanding the formation of the book of Isaiah. While current research often takes this text as a late redactional composition, it is more reasonable to argue that the pericope was relocated by the editors from a prophecy originally threatening Israel with destruction. This level of meaning is endorsed by the specific metaphors used, as well as arguments from the context, most notably vv. 20–23, which still regard vv. 16–19 as an anti-Israel text. As a result of this editorial process, the earlier message of judgment on Israel becomes a threat against Israel’s enemy. Restoring world order by inverting fates according to the measures of proportional retribution, often explicitly formulated in prophetic literature, elucidates the rationales behind inverting texts within the editorial process.

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.

This article argues that Isa 29,15-24 is composed of five coherent segments. The early Isaianic word, 29,15+21, was reinterpreted in a new way by an exilic author in 29,16-17+20. The presupposed blindness of Yhwh serving as a motivation for an ungodly life by those addressed in 29,15, is reconsidered as the ideology of desperate people who deem the blindness of Yhwh explains the present desolate condition of Jerusalem. The former injustice in Isaiah's society (29,21) is reinterpreted as the injustice of the foreign tyrant against the people of Yhwh. Isa 29,18+24 (the blindness of the people) and 29,19+23d-e (the oppressed Yhwh-fearing people) elaborate on the same theme in a larger context and presuppose a similar situation and author as implied by 29,16-17+21, probably to be identified with Deutero-Isaiah.