By Hector M Patmore
The oracle opposed to the King of Tyre, present in Ezekiel 28.12-19, is a tough textual content that encouraged different interpretations in overdue Antiquity. for instance, in keeping with one rabbinic culture the textual content noted the 1st guy, Adam, whereas the Church Fathers present in an identical textual content an outline of the autumn of devil. This publication reports the rabbinic resources, patristic literature, the Targum, and the traditional translations, and seeks to appreciate the explanations for the various interpretation, the interplay among the exegetical traditions and the groups of interpreters, particularly among Jews and Christians, and the impression the explicit shape and wording of the textual content had at the formation and improvement of every interpretation.
Read Online or Download Adam, Satan, and the King of Tyre: The Interpretation of Ezekiel 28:11-19 in Late Antiquity (Jewish and Christian Perspectives) PDF
Best criticism & interpretation books
Joan of Arc and Richard III loom huge within the histories in their nations, however the myths surrounding them have consistently obscured simply who they have been and what they was hoping to complete. during this ebook, medieval historian Charles wooden brings those interesting figures to lifestyles via an unique mixture of conventional biography and wide-ranging dialogue of the political and social international within which they lived.
This quantity illuminates the complete quantity of the corpus of historical and mediaeval apocryphal Daniel literature. it's the first examine to envision the Daniel legenda, the apocryphal apocalypses, and the prognostica as discrete different types of texts and to judge their normal dating to the biblical publication of Daniel.
One of the newly released texts of the Qumran Library there are an outstanding quantity with eschatological content material. a few of these texts relate the eschatological job of sure figures who appear to play an enormous function within the occasions of the eschaton. This research explores those figures. the fabric of this research is split into major components.
In Christian Origins and Greco-Roman tradition , Stanley Porter and Andrew Pitts gather a global crew of students whose paintings has interested in reconstructing the social matrix for earliest Christianity by utilizing Greco-Roman fabrics and literary types.
Additional resources for Adam, Satan, and the King of Tyre: The Interpretation of Ezekiel 28:11-19 in Late Antiquity (Jewish and Christian Perspectives)
Levi said in the name of R. Hama the son of Hanina: the Holy One, blessed be He, tied thirteen canopies for him in the Garden of Eden, as it says, You were in Eden, the garden of God, every precious stone was your hedge: carnelian, topaz, and onyx; yellow jasper, beryl, and jasper; sapphire, nophek, and emerald, and gold; [The] handiwork of your drums and your pipes on you. On the day you were created; they were established. (Ezek 28:13). R. Simeon b. Lakish said [there were] eleven [canopies], and our Rabbis say [there were] ten.
Yalkut Shimoni (Parasha Lech Lecha, 247). 4 records a dispute over whether the Hirah mentioned in Gen 38:1 is one and the same as Hiram mentioned in Kings/Chronicles. Both parties presuppose that the figure mentioned in Ezekiel 28 is the same Hiram. 4: “And turned in to a certain Adullamite, whose name was Hirah” (Gen 38:1). The Rabbis said: The Hirah mentioned here is the same that lived in the days of David; For Hiram was ever a lover of David (1 Kgs 5:15)—this man was well accustomed to be a lover of this tribe [Judah].
Nowhere is the great splendour enjoyed by Adam prior to his expulsion more apparent than in the tradition that God created a number of ‘canopies’ for Adam. The dispute between the rabbis as to the enumeration of the canopies is well attested throughout rabbinic literature. Leviticus Rabbah, a work the present form of which was probably initially redacted in the 5th century ce, and which is based principally on citations of other rabbinic sources,17 presents the rabbinic debate with the greatest clarity: R.