In Defense of Yhwh's Unmerited Grace in Judges: A Response to Frolov and Stetckevich

Q2 Arts and Humanities
J. Hoyt
{"title":"In Defense of Yhwh's Unmerited Grace in Judges: A Response to Frolov and Stetckevich","authors":"J. Hoyt","doi":"10.1353/hbr.2020.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:The analysis and interpretation of the roles of repentance and grace within the book of Judges is complicated by a variety of narrative and lexical features. Often repentance is assumed to precede the deliverance from oppression in each of the cycles. A prior article, Reassessing Repentance in Judges by Hoyt concludes that the narrator of Judges focuses on communicating a theology of Yhwh's grace and compassion, not a theology of repentance, and provides hints that the Israelites may not have repented. A more recent article by Frolov and Stetckevich, \"Repentance in Judges: Assessing the Reassessment,\" engages in this discussion by arguing against Hoyt and concludes that the narrator does communicate repentance. This article continues the conversation by analyzing Frolov and Stetckevich's conclusions and correcting their misrepresentations of Hoyt's prior research. This article concludes that their argument is not compelling and that they have not provided sufficient evidence to show that repentance is communicated in Judges. But, rather, Hoyt's prior conclusion, that the narrator focuses on communicating a story of Yhwh's grace, while hinting that Israel may not have repented, is still worthy of consideration.","PeriodicalId":35110,"journal":{"name":"Hebrew Studies","volume":"61 1","pages":"197 - 211"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hebrew Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hbr.2020.0009","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: 0

Abstract

Abstract:The analysis and interpretation of the roles of repentance and grace within the book of Judges is complicated by a variety of narrative and lexical features. Often repentance is assumed to precede the deliverance from oppression in each of the cycles. A prior article, Reassessing Repentance in Judges by Hoyt concludes that the narrator of Judges focuses on communicating a theology of Yhwh's grace and compassion, not a theology of repentance, and provides hints that the Israelites may not have repented. A more recent article by Frolov and Stetckevich, "Repentance in Judges: Assessing the Reassessment," engages in this discussion by arguing against Hoyt and concludes that the narrator does communicate repentance. This article continues the conversation by analyzing Frolov and Stetckevich's conclusions and correcting their misrepresentations of Hoyt's prior research. This article concludes that their argument is not compelling and that they have not provided sufficient evidence to show that repentance is communicated in Judges. But, rather, Hoyt's prior conclusion, that the narrator focuses on communicating a story of Yhwh's grace, while hinting that Israel may not have repented, is still worthy of consideration.
为耶和华在法官中的不当恩典辩护:对Frolov和Stetckevich的回应
摘要:对《士师记》中忏悔和恩典角色的分析和解释,由于各种叙事和词汇特征而变得复杂。在每个循环中,忏悔通常被认为先于从压迫中解脱出来。霍伊特之前的一篇文章《重新评估士师记中的悔改》得出结论,士师记的叙述者专注于传达耶和华恩典和怜悯的神学,而不是悔改的神学,并暗示以色列人可能没有悔改。Frolov和Stetckevich最近的一篇文章,“法官的忏悔:评估重新评估”,通过反对Hoyt的论点参与了这一讨论,并得出结论,叙述者确实传达了忏悔。本文通过分析Frolov和Stetckevich的结论并纠正他们对Hoyt先前研究的错误陈述来继续对话。这篇文章的结论是,他们的论点不令人信服,他们没有提供足够的证据表明,悔改是在士师记中传达的。但是,霍伊特先前的结论,叙述者专注于传达耶和华恩典的故事,同时暗示以色列可能没有悔改,仍然值得考虑。
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
Hebrew Studies
Hebrew Studies Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.20
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