为不可辩护辩护:乔安娜·霍伊特和法官的忏悔

Q2 Arts and Humanities

Hebrew Studies Pub Date : 2021-12-03 DOI:10.1353/hbr.2021.0011

Serge Frolov, Mikhail S. Stetckevich

{"title":"为不可辩护辩护:乔安娜·霍伊特和法官的忏悔","authors":"Serge Frolov, Mikhail S. Stetckevich","doi":"10.1353/hbr.2021.0011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Responding to JoAnna Hoyt's article in the 2020 volume of Hebrew Studies, as well as to her earlier publication, we discuss her insistence that Israel's repentance plays no role in the book of Judges as an example of theologically driven eisegesis, sustainable only by cherry-picking of evidence and faulty philology and leading to absurdity and self-contradiction on multiple counts.","PeriodicalId":35110,"journal":{"name":"Hebrew Studies","volume":"31 1","pages":"73 - 93"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defending the Indefensible: Joanna Hoyt and Repentance in Judges\",\"authors\":\"Serge Frolov, Mikhail S. Stetckevich\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/hbr.2021.0011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Responding to JoAnna Hoyt's article in the 2020 volume of Hebrew Studies, as well as to her earlier publication, we discuss her insistence that Israel's repentance plays no role in the book of Judges as an example of theologically driven eisegesis, sustainable only by cherry-picking of evidence and faulty philology and leading to absurdity and self-contradiction on multiple counts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35110,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hebrew Studies\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"73 - 93\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-03\",\"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.2021.0011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hebrew Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hbr.2021.0011","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

摘要

摘要:针对乔安娜·霍伊特(JoAnna Hoyt)在《希伯来研究》(Hebrew Studies) 2020年版上的文章，以及她之前的出版物，我们讨论了她的观点，即以色列人的悔改在《士师记》中并没有作为神学驱动的启示的例子，只有通过挑选证据和错误的文献学来维持，并在多个方面导致荒谬和自相矛盾。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Defending the Indefensible: Joanna Hoyt and Repentance in Judges

Abstract:Responding to JoAnna Hoyt's article in the 2020 volume of Hebrew Studies, as well as to her earlier publication, we discuss her insistence that Israel's repentance plays no role in the book of Judges as an example of theologically driven eisegesis, sustainable only by cherry-picking of evidence and faulty philology and leading to absurdity and self-contradiction on multiple counts.

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

Hebrew Studies Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory

CiteScore

0.20

自引率

0.00%

发文量