Wazana, Nili. All the Boundaries of the Land: The Promised Land in Biblical Thought in Light of the Ancient Near East. Translated by Liat Qeren. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2013. xiv+352 pp. $59.50 (cloth).

2015 ◽  
Vol 95 (3) ◽  
pp. 389-391
Author(s):  
Stephen C. Russell
Keyword(s):  
Near East ◽  
Ancient Near East ◽  
Promised Land ◽  
Biblical Thought

“O Love, in (Your) Delights”

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-143
Author(s):  
Nikolas Kristiyanto
Keyword(s):  
Near East ◽  
General Structure ◽  
General Analysis ◽  
Song Of Songs ◽  
Ancient Near East ◽  
Christian Tradition ◽  
Spiritual Meaning ◽  
Early Christian ◽  
Promised Land ◽  
The Church

The interpretation of the Song of Songs has a long history. The traditional Jewish and early Christian interpreters apply the allegory method to find a “spiritual” meaning. For example, they try to understand the Groom as the Lord and the Bride as Israel. Furthermore, early Christian tradition interprets the Groom as Jesus and the Bride as the Church. Nevertheless, in this article, we try to read the Song of Songs in other perspective by understanding it in the light of Ancient Near East (ANE)’s background. We will focus on the exegesisand general analysis on Song 7:7-10a. This passage is a part of a big section of Song 6:4-7:11 (“New Songs of the Beloved Man”). Song 7:7-10a is an admiration-movement. We try to propose a new general structure of Song 7:7-10a and its meaning in the light of ANE’s background on royal ideology, temple, wisdom, promised land and love traditions.

Prologue to Genesis (1, 1-11, 26): Prophetic Revelation, History, Myth or Metahistory?

2020 ◽  
pp. 17-46
Author(s):  
Михаил Анатольевич Скобелев
Keyword(s):  
Mystical Experience ◽  
Near East ◽  
Literary Form ◽  
Traditional View ◽  
Ancient Near East ◽  
Symbolic Form ◽  
Near Eastern ◽  
The World ◽  
Genesis 1 ◽  
Book Of Genesis

В статье рассматриваются богословие, композиция и литературная форма сюжетов, входящих в состав Пролога книги Бытия (1, 1-11, 26). Во второй половине XIX - начале XX вв. в результате появления Документальной гипотезы и сопоставления Священного Писания с литературными памятниками Древнего Ближнего Востока большая часть сюжетов, составляющих Пролог, была объявлена мифами и древнееврейским фольклором (Ю. Велльгаузен, Г. Гунекель, Дж. Фрезер). Кроме выявленных ближневосточных параллелей, новому отношению к повествованиям Пролога книги Бытия способствовали: отсутствие в нём ясно выраженной исторической задачи и символичность изложения. Защищая традиционный взгляд на Пролог как на священную историю и пророческое откровение, епископ Кассиан (Безобразов) предложил рассматривать все библейские сюжеты, содержащие теофанию, как метаисторию. Протоиерей Сергий Булгаков, А. Ф. Лосев, Б. П. Вышеславцев, занимавшиеся феноменом мифотворчества, назвали библейское повествование о начале мироздания мифом, но в ином смысле, чем это делали Г. Гункель и Дж. Фрезер. Они обосновали новый положительный взгляд, согласно которому миф не есть выдумка или фантазия, а реальность, основанная на мистическом опыте. В статье анализируется каждый из перечисленных терминов: «история», «миф», «метаистория» применительно к Прологу, а также рассматривается возможность их согласования с традиционным церковным взглядом на эту часть книги Бытия. The article deals with the theology, composition and literary form of the narrations which constitute the prologue part of the book of Genesis (1, 1-11, 26). During the second half of the 19th and at the turn of the 20th cent., following the emergence of the Documentary hypothesis as well as the comparison of the Holy Scripture with the newly-discovered literary monuments of Ancient Near East, the greater part of the narrations that constitute the Prologue were labeled myths and ancient Hebrew folklore (J. Wellhausen, H. Gunkel, J. Frazer). In addition to the then detected Near Eastern parallels, this new attitude towards the narrations of the Prologue was fostered by its lack of a clearly expressed historical dedication and the symbolic form of their exposition. Defending the traditional view of the Prologue as sacred history and prophetic revelation, bishop Kassian (Bezobrazov) proposed to consider all the biblical narrations that contain theophanies as metahistorical. Archpriest Sergey Bulgakov, A. F. Losev and B. P. Vysheslavtsev, who analyzed the phenomenon of myth-making, called the Biblical narration of the origins of the world a myth, but in a sense different from that proposed by Gunkel and Frazer. They have founded a new and positive conception according to which a myth is not fiction but rather a kind of reality based upon mystical experience. The author of the article analyzes each of the terms enumerated - «history», «myth», «metahistory» - in their use relating them to the Prologue; he also examines the possibility of their harmonizing with the traditional ecclesiastical view of this part of the book of Genesis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document