Readers' Disgust in the Case of Rebekah, Jacob, Isaac, and Esau: Perverters of Justice?

Q2 Arts and Humanities
G. Snyman
{"title":"Readers' Disgust in the Case of Rebekah, Jacob, Isaac, and Esau: Perverters of Justice?","authors":"G. Snyman","doi":"10.17159/2312-3621/2020/V33N3A6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Popular readings, for example, sermons appear to exonerate Rebekah and Jacob (Gen. 25: 19–34; Gen 27–29, 33), as if they want to salvage the relation between faith and good character. Scholarly readings are more ready to question Rebekah and Jacob on a continuum between Rebekah and Jacob as deceitful and rescuing the Abrahamic covenant. Who are to be regarded as the perpetrators perverting justice in this narrative? In this essay, I would opt for Esau as the injured party of the fraud perpetrated by his mother and brother. The argument starts with the notion of moral perversity as framed by the concept of moral injury as well as disgust expressed at moral digressions. This discussion will be followed by an explanation of four sermons on Jacob, Esau, Rebekah, and Isaac. The argument will be directed to a discussion of selected scholarly interpretations of the story cycle.\n \nhttps://doi.org/10.17159/2312-3621/2020/v33n3a6","PeriodicalId":19713,"journal":{"name":"Old Testament essays","volume":"33 1","pages":"445-472"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Old Testament essays","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/2312-3621/2020/V33N3A6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Popular readings, for example, sermons appear to exonerate Rebekah and Jacob (Gen. 25: 19–34; Gen 27–29, 33), as if they want to salvage the relation between faith and good character. Scholarly readings are more ready to question Rebekah and Jacob on a continuum between Rebekah and Jacob as deceitful and rescuing the Abrahamic covenant. Who are to be regarded as the perpetrators perverting justice in this narrative? In this essay, I would opt for Esau as the injured party of the fraud perpetrated by his mother and brother. The argument starts with the notion of moral perversity as framed by the concept of moral injury as well as disgust expressed at moral digressions. This discussion will be followed by an explanation of four sermons on Jacob, Esau, Rebekah, and Isaac. The argument will be directed to a discussion of selected scholarly interpretations of the story cycle.   https://doi.org/10.17159/2312-3621/2020/v33n3a6
读者对利百加、雅各、以撒、以扫案件的厌恶:正义的歪曲者?
通俗读物,例如,布道似乎免除了利百加和雅各(创25:19 - 34;创27 - 29,33),好像他们想挽救信心和良好品格之间的关系。学术读物更倾向于质疑利百加和雅各之间的连续性,认为他们是欺骗和拯救亚伯拉罕之约。在这种叙述中,谁被视为歪曲正义的肇事者?在这篇文章中,我将选择以扫作为他母亲和兄弟所犯下的欺诈行为的受害方。争论从道德变态的概念开始,由道德伤害的概念以及对道德偏离的厌恶表达。在这个讨论之后,我们会解释四个关于雅各、以扫、利百加和以撒的讲道。辩论将被引导到对故事周期的学术解释的讨论中。https://doi.org/10.17159/2312-3621/2020/v33n3a6
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
Old Testament essays
Old Testament essays Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Old Testament Essays functions as a vehicle which publishes Old Testament research from various points of view. Its primary aim is to regulate and propagate the study of the Old Testament in Africa. Various fields related to the study of the Old Testament are covered: philological / linguistic studies, historical critical studies, archaeological studies, socio-historical studies, literary studies and rhetorical studies.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信