首页> 外文学位 >Amending the Covenant: How and Why the Authors of Deuteronomy Responded to Textual Sources
【24h】

Amending the Covenant: How and Why the Authors of Deuteronomy Responded to Textual Sources

机译:修订盟约:申命记的作者如何以及为什么回应原文

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

One of the defining features of Deuteronomy is its responsiveness to textual sources. Many of Deuteronomy's laws rewrite the laws of the Covenant Collection, also known as the Covenant Code (Exod 20:22--23:19). The purpose of the rewriting is disputed: was Deuteronomy designed to stand alongside the Covenant Collection as a supplement to it, or to stand alone as a replacement for it? This study proposes a mediating model of amendment: Deuteronomy was designed to change how the Covenant Collection would be understood by its readers.;The competing models of replacement and supplementation emphasize different aspects of the relationship between Deuteronomy and the Covenant Collection: models of "replacement" focus on discontinuity (contradictions and tensions), whereas models of "supplementation" focus on continuity (presupposition, reference, and complementation). An amendment model accounts both for the seriousness of the disagreements between Deuteronomy and the Covenant Collection and for the extent to which Deuteronomy requires reference to the Covenant Collection.;In addition to examining how Deuteronomic texts responded to the Covenant Collection, I analyze the internal growth of laws within Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy's authors responded to their own growing text in a range of ways that parallels their responses to the Covenant Collection: they contradicted it and changed its meaning at certain points, but also presupposed it and referenced it. This similarity in interpretive results suggests a similarity in purpose, suggesting that Deuteronomy's authors sought to amend the Covenant Collection even as they continued to amend their own growing text. I analyze the responses to source texts evident in three sets of Deuteronomic laws: its laws of cultic place, sacrifice, and slaughter (Deut 12:1--28; cf. Exod 20:24--26); its tithe and firstling regulations (Deut 14:22--29; 15:19--23; 26:12--15; cf. Exod 22:28--29); and its asylum legislation (Deut 19:1--13; cf. Exod 21:12--14).
机译:申命记的定义性特征之一是它对文本来源的响应能力。申命记的许多法律都重写了《公约》的法律,也称为《公约》(出埃及记20:22--23:19)。重写的目的是有争议的:申命记是设计成与《圣约》收藏并存还是作为其补充?这项研究提出了一个修正模型的中介模式:申命记旨在改变读者对圣约收藏的理解。;替代和补充的竞争模型强调申命记与圣约收藏之间关系的不同方面:“替代”模型”着重于不连续性(矛盾和张力),而“补充”模型则着重于连续性(预设,参考和互补)。修正模型既考虑了申命记与圣约收藏之间的分歧的严重性,也考虑了申命记需要参考圣约收藏的程度。除了研究申命记文本如何回应圣约收藏之外,我还分析了内部增长申命记内的法律申命记的作者以与《圣约收藏》相若的回应,回应了他们自己不断增长的文本:他们在某些方面与它相抵触并改变了它的含义,但也预设并引用了它。解释结果的相似之处表明目的相似,这表明申命记的作者在继续修订自己不断增长的经文的同时,也试图修订《公约》。我分析了对申命记三组律法中源文本的回应:申命律,祭祀和宰杀定律(申命记12:1--28;出埃及记20:24--26);它的什一税和初等法规(申命记14:22--29; 15:19--23; 26:12--15;出埃及记22:28--29);及其庇护法(申命记19:1--13;出埃及记21:12--14)。

著录项

  • 作者

    Mattison, Kevin J.;

  • 作者单位

    The University of Wisconsin - Madison.;

  • 授予单位 The University of Wisconsin - Madison.;
  • 学科 Biblical studies.;Judaic studies.;Near Eastern studies.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2017
  • 页码 269 p.
  • 总页数 269
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号