创世纪2:7对话:保罗、非罗和荷大约的注释

IF 0.3 2区 哲学 Q2 Arts and Humanities
M. O'Connor
{"title":"创世纪2:7对话:保罗、非罗和荷大约的注释","authors":"M. O'Connor","doi":"10.1515/ZNW-2019-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis article places three Jewish exegetes of Gen 2:7 in conversation—Paul, Philo, and the authors of the Hodayot. This exercise of comparative exegesis hopes to caution overly ambitious parallels between Paul and his contemporaries. When discussions of Philo or the Hodayot serve the end of clarifying Paul’s otherwise cryptic treatise on the resurrection, the results have yielded, at times, similarities between Paul and his contemporaries at the cost of evaluating each author’s critical differences. Instead, this article examines the exegesis of three Jewish readers of one text, Gen 2:7, each on his own terms, in an attempt to avoid mapping one interpreter’s exegesis onto another’s. Each of these three Jewish readers appeal to Gen 2:7 for answers related to anthropology and the afterlife. By placing Paul alongside two other Jewish readers of the same text, this article highlights their similarities while also appreciating their differences.","PeriodicalId":44277,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR DIE NEUTESTAMENTLICHE WISSENSCHAFT UND DIE KUNDE DER ALTEREN KIRCHE","volume":"1940 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Genesis 2:7 in Conversation: The Exegesis of Paul, Philo, and the Hodayot\",\"authors\":\"M. O'Connor\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/ZNW-2019-0004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThis article places three Jewish exegetes of Gen 2:7 in conversation—Paul, Philo, and the authors of the Hodayot. This exercise of comparative exegesis hopes to caution overly ambitious parallels between Paul and his contemporaries. When discussions of Philo or the Hodayot serve the end of clarifying Paul’s otherwise cryptic treatise on the resurrection, the results have yielded, at times, similarities between Paul and his contemporaries at the cost of evaluating each author’s critical differences. Instead, this article examines the exegesis of three Jewish readers of one text, Gen 2:7, each on his own terms, in an attempt to avoid mapping one interpreter’s exegesis onto another’s. Each of these three Jewish readers appeal to Gen 2:7 for answers related to anthropology and the afterlife. By placing Paul alongside two other Jewish readers of the same text, this article highlights their similarities while also appreciating their differences.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44277,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR DIE NEUTESTAMENTLICHE WISSENSCHAFT UND DIE KUNDE DER ALTEREN KIRCHE\",\"volume\":\"1940 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR DIE NEUTESTAMENTLICHE WISSENSCHAFT UND DIE KUNDE DER ALTEREN KIRCHE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/ZNW-2019-0004\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR DIE NEUTESTAMENTLICHE WISSENSCHAFT UND DIE KUNDE DER ALTEREN KIRCHE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ZNW-2019-0004","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","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

这篇文章将创世纪2:7的三位犹太注释者——保罗、非罗和《何大约》的作者——置于对话中。这种比较释经的练习,希望能警告保罗和他同时代人之间过于雄心勃勃的相似之处。当讨论菲罗或《何达约》的目的是为了澄清保罗关于复活的晦涩论文时,结果有时会产生保罗和他同时代人之间的相似之处,而代价是评估每个作者的关键差异。相反,这篇文章考察了三位犹太读者对同一段经文(创世记2:7)的注释,每个人都有自己的解释,试图避免将一个解释者的注释映射到另一个解释者的注释上。这三位犹太读者都从创世记2:7中寻求与人类学和来世有关的答案。通过将保罗与另外两位阅读同一文本的犹太读者放在一起,本文强调了他们的相似之处,同时也欣赏了他们的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Genesis 2:7 in Conversation: The Exegesis of Paul, Philo, and the Hodayot
This article places three Jewish exegetes of Gen 2:7 in conversation—Paul, Philo, and the authors of the Hodayot. This exercise of comparative exegesis hopes to caution overly ambitious parallels between Paul and his contemporaries. When discussions of Philo or the Hodayot serve the end of clarifying Paul’s otherwise cryptic treatise on the resurrection, the results have yielded, at times, similarities between Paul and his contemporaries at the cost of evaluating each author’s critical differences. Instead, this article examines the exegesis of three Jewish readers of one text, Gen 2:7, each on his own terms, in an attempt to avoid mapping one interpreter’s exegesis onto another’s. Each of these three Jewish readers appeal to Gen 2:7 for answers related to anthropology and the afterlife. By placing Paul alongside two other Jewish readers of the same text, this article highlights their similarities while also appreciating their differences.
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
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
33.30%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: A highly reputed journal published since 1900, the ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR DIE NEUTESTAMENTLICHE WISSENSCHAFT is an international journal for the exegesis of the New Testament and knowledge of the early church (patristics). Appearing annually in two issues of 150 pages each plus supplements, it features original contributions in German, English, and French which have been written by well-known scholars worldwide. By accepting only high quality research papers which advance scholarship, the editors seek to retain the recognizably high niveau of the journal.
×
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