俄巴底亚追溯到公元前801年

C. Riding
{"title":"俄巴底亚追溯到公元前801年","authors":"C. Riding","doi":"10.53521/a286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Currently, Old Testament scholars have accepted that it is virtually impossible to ascertain the provenance and date of the biblical book of Obadiah confidently. The majority views the date as soon after the fall of Jerusalem in 587 BC, but this is acknowledged to be tentative. Post-exilic and pre-exilic dates are also advocated. This article re-examines the evidence and introduces some more considerations, concluding that an early pre-exilic date for Obadiah is most likely. Elsewhere, the author has redated Joel to 773 BC. Since Joel quotes Obadiah, the book of Obadiah should be dated earlier than that.\nThis article then examines all nine attacks on Jerusalem recorded in the Old Testament to see if what Obadiah describes can be matched to any of them. This leads to the conclusion that Obadiah should be dated to 801 bce, in conjunction with the raid on Jerusalem by a small band of Syrian soldiers as described in 2 Chronicles 24:23–25:24. I propose that some Edomites aided and abetted them in this attack. Obadiah prophesied in between the events recorded in 2 Chronicles 25:16 and 17.\nIf this is so, it sheds light on Amaziah’s attacking Edom, not Syria, for justice and/or revenge (2 Chr 25:11–14). It also offers an explanation for Amaziah’s apostasy to Edomite, not Syrian gods (2 Chr 25:14), and his challenge to Jehoahaz, king of Israel (2 Chr 25:17–24). Other confirming data are presented, and some corollaries are then deduced.","PeriodicalId":188810,"journal":{"name":"Reformed Theological Review","volume":" 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dating Obadiah to 801 BC\",\"authors\":\"C. Riding\",\"doi\":\"10.53521/a286\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Currently, Old Testament scholars have accepted that it is virtually impossible to ascertain the provenance and date of the biblical book of Obadiah confidently. The majority views the date as soon after the fall of Jerusalem in 587 BC, but this is acknowledged to be tentative. Post-exilic and pre-exilic dates are also advocated. This article re-examines the evidence and introduces some more considerations, concluding that an early pre-exilic date for Obadiah is most likely. Elsewhere, the author has redated Joel to 773 BC. Since Joel quotes Obadiah, the book of Obadiah should be dated earlier than that.\\nThis article then examines all nine attacks on Jerusalem recorded in the Old Testament to see if what Obadiah describes can be matched to any of them. This leads to the conclusion that Obadiah should be dated to 801 bce, in conjunction with the raid on Jerusalem by a small band of Syrian soldiers as described in 2 Chronicles 24:23–25:24. I propose that some Edomites aided and abetted them in this attack. Obadiah prophesied in between the events recorded in 2 Chronicles 25:16 and 17.\\nIf this is so, it sheds light on Amaziah’s attacking Edom, not Syria, for justice and/or revenge (2 Chr 25:11–14). It also offers an explanation for Amaziah’s apostasy to Edomite, not Syrian gods (2 Chr 25:14), and his challenge to Jehoahaz, king of Israel (2 Chr 25:17–24). Other confirming data are presented, and some corollaries are then deduced.\",\"PeriodicalId\":188810,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reformed Theological Review\",\"volume\":\" 2\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reformed Theological Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53521/a286\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reformed Theological Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53521/a286","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前,旧约学者已经承认,确定《圣经》《俄巴底亚书》的出处和日期几乎是不可能的。大多数人认为日期是在公元前587年耶路撒冷陷落之后不久,但这被认为是暂定的。流放后和流放前的日期也被提倡。这篇文章重新检查了证据,并介绍了一些更多的考虑,结论是俄巴底亚被流放前的时间是最有可能的。在其他地方,作者把约珥的年代定为公元前773年。因为约珥书引用了俄巴底亚的话,所以俄巴底亚书的年代应该更早。这篇文章接着检查了旧约中记录的对耶路撒冷的九次攻击,看看俄巴底亚所描述的是否与其中任何一次相匹配。由此得出结论,俄巴底亚应该追溯到公元前801年,与历代志下24:23-25:24中描述的一小群叙利亚士兵袭击耶路撒冷有关。我认为是一些以东人帮助他们发动了这次袭击。俄巴底在历代志下25:16和17所记载的事件之间预言。如果是这样的话,它揭示了亚玛谢攻击以东,而不是叙利亚,是为了正义和/或报复(代下25:11-14)。这也解释了为什么亚玛谢背叛了以东的神,而不是叙利亚的神(代下25:14),以及他对以色列王约哈斯的挑战(代下25:17-24)。本文还提供了其他的证实数据,并推导出一些推论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Dating Obadiah to 801 BC
Currently, Old Testament scholars have accepted that it is virtually impossible to ascertain the provenance and date of the biblical book of Obadiah confidently. The majority views the date as soon after the fall of Jerusalem in 587 BC, but this is acknowledged to be tentative. Post-exilic and pre-exilic dates are also advocated. This article re-examines the evidence and introduces some more considerations, concluding that an early pre-exilic date for Obadiah is most likely. Elsewhere, the author has redated Joel to 773 BC. Since Joel quotes Obadiah, the book of Obadiah should be dated earlier than that. This article then examines all nine attacks on Jerusalem recorded in the Old Testament to see if what Obadiah describes can be matched to any of them. This leads to the conclusion that Obadiah should be dated to 801 bce, in conjunction with the raid on Jerusalem by a small band of Syrian soldiers as described in 2 Chronicles 24:23–25:24. I propose that some Edomites aided and abetted them in this attack. Obadiah prophesied in between the events recorded in 2 Chronicles 25:16 and 17. If this is so, it sheds light on Amaziah’s attacking Edom, not Syria, for justice and/or revenge (2 Chr 25:11–14). It also offers an explanation for Amaziah’s apostasy to Edomite, not Syrian gods (2 Chr 25:14), and his challenge to Jehoahaz, king of Israel (2 Chr 25:17–24). Other confirming data are presented, and some corollaries are then deduced.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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