Global ETD Search

1	Problematika sexuality v Pentateuchu / Problems of the Lechery and Adultery in the Pentateuch CHOCOVÁ, Blanka January 2012 (has links) The work deals with exegetic-ethical analysis of sexual motives in the Pentateuch. It aims to analyse as well as to systematize the issue of human sexuality in the Five Books of Moses, and to create a compact illustration of the problem. The major part of the work includes an analysis of sexual motives in significant legal regulations - the Ten Commandments, the Covenant Code, the Holiness Code and the Deuteronomic Code. However, the other parts of the Pentateuch must not be left out of consideration and are covered in a separate chapter. The final part tries to synthesize the obtained findings and evaluate systematically the basic sexual questions appearing in the Five Books of Moses.
2	“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” (Lev 18:22, 20:13) – Come again? Hedlund, Simon January 2016 (has links) This paper investigates Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 from the perspective of the hermeneutical implications of their historical context appropriated into a modern contextual understanding and possible application. To do this, four prominent historical theories (relating the ban to procreation, idolatry, against nature/the order of creation, and Canaanite practices) of the origin of the verses, and the ban therein, are chosen to be analysed. The analysis will be based on a theoretical framework which is modelled to present a theory of how historical knowledge and its derived hermeneutical implications enables a dynamically equivalent cultural appropriation. The investigation poses two questions – (1) what are the hermeneutical implications, and (2) what might a dynamically equivalent cultural appropriation into a modern context look like? In answering these question, it is found that when understanding the historical context as giving clues to the cultural world of the author and first reader(s), the four theories produce different results, but in none of them is it said to be either impossible or always possible to apply the ban. Further, even the group of people that are concerned by the ban differs. There is also a note of warning given, as these theories and others on the matter are very hard, if not impossible, to choose between, and therefore one has to motivate quite well why one selects one over the other in creating an interpretation and appropriation, since such a choice might, but should not, be more based on preference than on facts. Questions are in this paper sometimes posed but not answered, which runs in line with the overarching goal to rather draw some lines of interpretation than to hold an interpretation to be certain, while still exemplifying a transparent and theoretically well founded way to appropriate these verses. / Denna uppsats undersöker Leviticus 18:22 och 20:13 med fokus på den historiska kontextens hermeneutiska implikationer approprierade till en modern förståelse och eventuell applikation av verserna. För att göra detta kommer fyra vanligt förekommande historiska teorier till varför verserna med deras förbud finns (teorier som relaterar förbudet till fortplantning, avgudadyrkan, en handling mot naturen/skapelsens ordning, och kananeiska sedvänjor) analyseras. Analysen tar sin grund i ett teoretiskt ramverk som utformas för att visa hur en historisk kontext och dess hermeneutiska implikationer möjliggör en dynamiskt ekvivalent kulturell appropriering. Uppsatsen ställer två frågor: (1) Vilka är de hermeneutiska implikationerna, och (2) hur skulle en dynamiskt ekvivalent kulturell appropriering till en modern kontext kunna se ut? Dessa frågor besvaras utifrån ett perspektiv på den historiska kontexten som bidragande till att förstå författarens (eller författarnas) och de första läsarnas kulturella värld, och de fyra teorierna producerar ganska olika resultat. Det kan dock sägas att i inget av fallen blir slutsatsen att förbudet inte går att använda, eller att det alltid kan användas. Vidare framgår det att till och med vilka som berörs av förbudet skiftar beroende på anledningen till att förbudet finns. Ett varningens finger lyfts också för att påpeka att det är svårt, om inte omöjligt, att välja en av dessa teorier (eller de många andra som finns) som bättre. Därför måste sådana val, vilka sedan ligger till grund för tolkningar och tillämpningar, vara väl motiverade. Det finns annars en risk att sådana val kan ske mer baserat på preferens än fakta. Vidare ställs det frågor som inte alltid besvaras, vilket ligger i linje med viljan att snarare påvisa några tolkningsramar än att se en tolkning som korrekt, samtidigt som ett teoretiskt välgrundat och genomskinligt sätt att appropriera dessa verser exemplifieras. Leviticus 18:22 Leviticus 20:13 homosexuality cultural appropriation hermeneutics Old Testament Hebrew Bible male same-sex bans third book of Moses Holiness Code implications Leviticus 18:22 Leviticus 20:13 homosexualitet kulturell appropriering hermeneutik Gamla testamentet Hebreiska Bibeln samkönat sex förbud tredje Mosebok Helighetslagen implikationer
3	The role of the priests in Israelite identity formation in the exilic/post-exilic period with special reference to Leviticus 19:1-19a / Rol van die priesters in die Israelitiese identiteitsvorming tydens die ballingskaps-/ na-ballingskapstydperk met spesiale verwysing na Levitikus 19:1-19a Beer, Leilani 07 1900 (has links) Bibliography: leaves 289-298 / Source-criticism of the Pentateuch suggests that the priests (Source P) alone authored the Holiness Code – the premise being that Source P forms one religious, literate and elite group of several. Through the endeavor to redefine Israelite identity during the Neo-Babylonian Empire of 626–539 BCE and the Achaemenid Persian Empire of 550–330 BCE, various ideologies of Israelite identity were produced by various religious, literate and elite groups. Possibly, the Holiness Code functions as the compromise reached between two such groups, these being: the Shaphanites, and the Zadokites. Moreover, the Holiness Code functions as the basis for the agreed identity of Israel as seen by the Shaphanites and the Zadokites. Specifically, in Leviticus 19:1-19a – as being the Levitical decalogue of the Holiness Code, and which forms the emphasis of this thesis – both Shaphanite and Zadokite ideologies are expressed therein. The Shaphanite ideology is expressed through the Mosaic tradition: i.e., through the Law; and the Zadokite ideology is expressed through the Aaronide tradition: i.e., through the Cult. In the debate between the supremacy of the Law, or the Cult – i.e., Moses or Aaron – the ancient Near Eastern convention of the ‘rivalry between brothers’ is masterfully negotiated in Leviticus 19:1-19a. / Old Testament and Ancient Near Eastern Studies / D. Phil. (Old Testament) Biblical tradition Biblical history Priestly factions Levites Zadokites Aaronites Ezekiel tradition Source P Shaphanites Jeremiah tradition Pentateuch Prophets Deuteronomic history Law codes Covenant code Priestly code Deuteronomy code Holiness code Pentateuchal decalogues Decalogue Ten Commandments Exodus 20:1-17 Diachronic Historical-critical method Literary-criticism Pentateuchal-criticism Documentary hypothesis Sources JEDP Textual analysis Synchronic Final-form Immanent reading Narrative-criticism Hebrew patterning Israelite identity-formation Babylonian exile of 586 BCE Neo-Babylonian Empire of 626–539 BCE Achaemenid Persian Empire 559–331 BCE Second-Temple period Persian Province of Yehud Judah Jerusalem Solomon’s Temple Land-promise Cult Aaron Law Moses Social justice Holiness Sinai tradition Mosaic Saga 296.495 Priests, Jewish -- Biblical teaching Priests, Jewish -- History Zadokites Levites

1

Page generated in 0.0825 seconds