The Origins According to the Wisdom of Solomon

Maurice Gilbert
{"title":"The Origins According to the Wisdom of Solomon","authors":"Maurice Gilbert","doi":"10.1515/9783110186604.171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of these pages is to show the importance and meaning which, in his reflection, the author of Wisdom of Solomon attaches to the origins. To put the question more clearly, what role does recalling the origins have in the argumentation of this author? It is evident that throughout his book he refers to what happened in the beginning. Already in the first pages of his book, he appeals to the divine plan when God created all things (Wis 1:13-14; 2:23). Then his presentation of the wise man is inspired by the biblical tradition concerning the first wise man in Israel, Solomon (Wis 7:1-21; 8:2-21), whose famous prayer pronounced at Gibeon forms the basis of a re-reading or relecture (Wis 9). Finally, the second half of the book (Wis 10–19) is a re-reading of the Exodus events, introduced by a brief reminder of the great figures of Genesis. My purpose is not to recall all this1, but to show how three kinds of beginning belong together. In other words, the origins of the world and humanity, the constitutive origin of Israel during the Exodus, and biblical wisdom’s origin in the figure of Solomon are not three separate themes, independent from one another, but all of them together form the basic argumentation of the author of Wis. It is then this argumentation which concerns me in the present article. Such a study has no sense unless, at the level of historical criticism, we can assert the unity of the book, directly written in Greek by only one author. On this point, recent commentators agree, even if they disagree about the literary genre of the book. A majority of them acknowledges the “epideictic” genre of the Greek rhetoric, but for some of them, following J.M. Reese2, Wis is a “protreptic”, whereas for others, like myself, it is an “encomium”, a eulogy. Let me also add that, according to our author, history includes the first pages of the Bible. The creation narratives of Gen 1–3 and even Gen 1–11 are for him as historical as the narratives about the Patriarchs, the Exodus or Solomon.","PeriodicalId":393675,"journal":{"name":"Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Yearbook","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature. Yearbook","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110186604.171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

The purpose of these pages is to show the importance and meaning which, in his reflection, the author of Wisdom of Solomon attaches to the origins. To put the question more clearly, what role does recalling the origins have in the argumentation of this author? It is evident that throughout his book he refers to what happened in the beginning. Already in the first pages of his book, he appeals to the divine plan when God created all things (Wis 1:13-14; 2:23). Then his presentation of the wise man is inspired by the biblical tradition concerning the first wise man in Israel, Solomon (Wis 7:1-21; 8:2-21), whose famous prayer pronounced at Gibeon forms the basis of a re-reading or relecture (Wis 9). Finally, the second half of the book (Wis 10–19) is a re-reading of the Exodus events, introduced by a brief reminder of the great figures of Genesis. My purpose is not to recall all this1, but to show how three kinds of beginning belong together. In other words, the origins of the world and humanity, the constitutive origin of Israel during the Exodus, and biblical wisdom’s origin in the figure of Solomon are not three separate themes, independent from one another, but all of them together form the basic argumentation of the author of Wis. It is then this argumentation which concerns me in the present article. Such a study has no sense unless, at the level of historical criticism, we can assert the unity of the book, directly written in Greek by only one author. On this point, recent commentators agree, even if they disagree about the literary genre of the book. A majority of them acknowledges the “epideictic” genre of the Greek rhetoric, but for some of them, following J.M. Reese2, Wis is a “protreptic”, whereas for others, like myself, it is an “encomium”, a eulogy. Let me also add that, according to our author, history includes the first pages of the Bible. The creation narratives of Gen 1–3 and even Gen 1–11 are for him as historical as the narratives about the Patriarchs, the Exodus or Solomon.
所罗门智慧的起源
这些页面的目的是显示重要性和意义,在他的反思中,所罗门智慧的作者重视起源。更清楚地说,回顾起源在作者的论证中起了什么作用?很明显,他在整本书中都提到了开头发生的事情。在他的书的第一页,他就呼吁上帝创造万物时的神圣计划(威1:13-14;23)。然后,他对智者的描述受到圣经传统关于以色列第一个智者所罗门的启发(威7:1-21;8:2-21),他著名的祈祷在基遍宣布形成重读或演讲的基础(Wis 9)。最后,书的后半部分(Wis 10-19)是对出埃及记事件的重读,通过简要提醒创世纪的伟大人物来介绍。我的目的并不是要回顾这一切,而是要说明三种开始是如何相互关联的。换句话说,世界和人类的起源,《出埃及记》中以色列的构成起源,以及《圣经》中所罗门形象中智慧的起源,并不是三个独立的主题,彼此独立,而是所有这些共同构成了《威斯》作者的基本论证。因此,本文所关注的正是这一论证。这样的研究是没有意义的,除非在历史批判的层面上,我们可以断言这本书的统一性,直接用希腊文写成,只有一个作者。在这一点上,最近的评论家们都同意,即使他们对这本书的文学类型有不同的看法。他们中的大多数人承认希腊修辞的“流行病”类型,但对他们中的一些人来说,在J.M. rees2之后,这是一个“保护”,而对其他人来说,比如我,这是一个“赞歌”,一个颂词。我还要补充一点,根据作者的说法,历史包括《圣经》的前几页。创世纪1-3,甚至是创世纪1-11,对他来说,和先祖,出埃及记,所罗门一样,都是历史性的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书