Although the Book of Judith has been thought to reflect a historical situation, this is not necessarily the case, and more recent literary critical studies have provided greater access to its intricacies. Judith contains a number of direct speeches, and direct speech in Hebrew literature in general, influences both plot development and characterization. This thesis is a discussion of how the direct speeches in Judith influence both its plot development and characterization. Since a number of the speeches contain irony, special attention has been given to this literary device.

This thesis explores the interaction of literature and theology by means of archetypal criticism with specific reference to certain characters in the Gospel of John. Northrop Frye's system of archetypal literary criticism consisting of the four mythoi or archetypes of romance, tragedy, irony and satire, and comedy forms the governing framework and means of exchange between literature and theology. This synchronic interaction is centered on Jesus, an innocent man acting on behalf of others, as romance; Pilate, unable or unwilling to act justly in an unwanted and unavoidable particular circumstance, as tragedy; Thomas and the Jews, variations on the theme of seeing and not seeing as irony; and Peter, who denies Christ and later recovers, as comedy. These characters' function as points of exchange, each reaching their defining literary and theological climax during the crucifixion events. Within the FG's narrative these characters also serve as imaginative points of contact and identification for the reader at which the reader's own faith response may be placed within the literary and theological milieu of the Fourth Gospel. Conceptually, Jesus and romance, Pilate and tragedy, Thomas, the Jews, and irony, and Peter and comedy may be characterized by representation, reduction, negation, and integration, respectively. The variable between these four mythoi and between these characters is the relationship between a belief or an ideal and experience or reality assumed by the work as a whole and/or assumed and displayed by each character.

This thesis considers the evidence for current assertions that the book of Ecclesiastes is a deterministic work composed during the Hellenistic period. It reviews the linguistic and socioeconomic arguments for its dating either to Persian or Hellenistic times, and concludes in favour of the latter (Chapter 1). An examination of key terms occurring in passages thought to be deterministic follows. The contexts in which these terms are used support the thesis that Qohelet was a determinist, and that this concept is expressed in the catalogue of seasons in 3:1-8 (Chapter 2). Recently, Joseph Blenkinsopp has challenged deterministic readings of 3:1-8 on new grounds: this thesis provides a response to the specific criticisms raised by his article (Chapter 3). Thereafter, it goes on to discuss the question of whether "the work of God" and "the work which is done under the sun" are equivalent, providing fresh evidence is produced to demonstrate that this is indeed the case (Chapter 4), and offering a new explanation as to how Qohelet may have reconciled the concept of determinism with free will (Chapter 5). Thereafter, it considers the activity of God in the sphere of human emotions and concludes that the ultimate decision not just about what human beings do, but about what they feel, rests with God (Chapters 6, 7). Finally, this thesis views the determinism of Ecclesiastes against its Jewish background and possible Stoic sources : it reaches the conclusion that Qohelet's thought and manner of expression is fundamentally Hebraic but that he probably had some knowledge of Stoic determinism as well (Chapters 8, 9). The apparent connection with early Jewish deterministic texts and Stoicism supports the current consensus that the book of Ecclesiastes was composed in the period 250-225 B.C.E.

No description available.

No description available.

In spite of the wealth of material on Mark 13:14 the phrase [greek characters] has not been syntactically exegeted sufficiently in respect to chapter 13, nor its place assessed in the formation of Mark's gospel. Our study demonstrates the fundamental significance of v.14 as the syntactical focal point of vv.5-13, that content, temporal indicators and link words are shaped syntactically in w.5-13 to peak at v.14, and that [greek characters] is uniquely to of v.4. A realization of this connection is the single indispensable clue unlocking eschatological notions in chapter 13. Further, by positing that v.14, coupled with v.26-27, produces a double focus in the chapter, we demonstrate its importance for vv.15-37. The advent of [greek characters] is the sign launching the end-time setting in motion an imminent parousia. This sign is connected with the Jerusalem temple's destruction by the Roman commander Titus in September 70 C.E. Titus is the referent in 13:14, though our contention is that originally in pre-Markan material in v.l4, the reference was to the crisis in 39-41 C.E. when the emperor Gaius Caligula attempted to erect an image of himself in the temple in Jerusalem. Mark obtained material from this episode and adapted it to indicate not the deified image of a Roman emperor but an individual abominator, Titus, who was [greek characters]. An examination of Josephus' War demonstrates that Judeans inhabiting the region after September 70 C.E. were in a position to flee according to 13:14b. Mark's Jewish Gentile community, located in Syria or one of the Transjordanian Hellenistic cities, must brace itself for a worsening period of turmoil in the light of the operational end-time sign in the temple in Jerusalem. The task of the community is to proclaim the gospel among the nations (13:10). Their final vindication will occur with the parousia of the Son of Man.

The major peculiarities of the language of the Apocalypse related to the usage of the Verb and of the Clause are here explained as due to the influence of the Hebrew and Aramaic languages, not to the author's lack of familiarity with Greek. The approach has been to isolate in each case the usage which is not compatible with Hellenistic Greek syntax, and then to extract from the Septuagint identical constructions. The next step was to determine the type of Hebrew/ Aramaic construction responsible for the anomaly in the Septuagint, and then to apply the same explanation to the identical construction in the Apocalypse. While this method has proven to be fundamentally sound and reliable, it is a strange fact that previous treatments of the Semitic element in the language of the Apocalypse have failed to apply it consistently. Another basic presupposition of this thesis is that the research should not be restricted to a single-Greek manuscript or printed text of the Apocalypse. Instead, an eclectic approach is made, which respects any manuscript evidence supporting the more semitised construction. The study included every significant facet of verbal usage from that of lexicography, Voice, Mood, Tenses of the Finite Verb, case additions to the verb, and the Infinitive and Participle. Included in the section on Clauses were Noun - and Verbal - Clauses, plus the Subordinate Clauses such as Relative, Circumstantial, Conditional, Temporal, Final, and Consecutive. Specific types of Semitic influence were seen to be present in each section listed. In at least some cases the Semitic influence was of such a direct nature that it could be explained only as due to direct translation from a Semitic source. While the evidence points predominantly to Hebrew sources underlying the Apc., the case for Aramaic influence at some points cannot be ruled out without doing an injustice to the facts. The results of this study, based as they are on directly observable Semitic influence on the Greek of the LXX, can be applied to any Jewish translation Greek text, to serve as a syntactical survey of that language. The study also demonstrated that the eclectic approach to the text of the Apocalypse is the only sound one, because no single manuscript or family of manuscripts has preserved a majority of the semitised (and therefore more nearly original) readings.

No description available.

This thesis investigates an aspect of the first complete translation of the Bible into French. It shows how the study of the Gospels glosses, hitherto considered of secondary importance by scholars, increases our understanding of the date and context of this translation. This thesis takes two complementary approaches to the gloss material: (a) a study of the likely Latin sources for these glosses, and (b) an investigation into their recurring themes and rhetorical construction, as a way of showing how far they fit into the tradition of Latin exegesis. Chapter one surveys existing scholarship and presents the methodology of the thesis. Chapter two is a handlist of Latin commentaries consulted. In chapters three to six, the main body of the thesis, a comparison is made between Latin gloss material from these commentaries and corresponding glosses in the French Gospels, Chapter seven presents the broad patterns which have emerged from this study, discussing the use of material and rhetorical techniques, as well as identifying remaining problems, namely, those of other types of source-text, and the question of multiple translators. Chapter eight contains a summary of the conclusions reached, and discusses the implications of these for our knowledge of this Bible translation. The glossator is revealed as someone with access to exegesis from several different traditions, not just commentaries, and as a person trained in Latin commentary technique, which he adapted for writing in the vernacular. The glossator is shown not to have copied literally from commentaries or other texts, but to have used material thoughtfully, and reworked it for his own purposes. That the glossator was learned, and that his glosses fit into the Latin exegetical tradition, are the major findings of this thesis, challenging previously-held views as to the fundamental worthlessness of these glosses.

Of the three major groups in Matthew's gospel, the disciples, the Jewish leaders and the crowds, it is the last of these, the crowds, which is most ambiguous. While the disposition of the disciples and the Jewish leaders toward Jesus is readily apparent, it is less so with the crowds. They have been characterized as ambivalent in their relationship to Jesus, and this ambivalence is borne out by the fact that some scholars have readily interpreted them in a negative light, others in a more positive light. As neither of these interpretations is especially compelling, the problem of the crowds has reached a critical impasse. It is the intention of this work to resolve this impasse, and explain the ambiguities of Matthew's portrayal, by offering a full-fledged examination of Matthew's understanding of the ὄχλοι. It begins by analyzing Matthew's use of the word ὄχλος, and determines that this word alone is used to refer to the crowds, and denotes a specific group. Matthew does rely on his sources for his portrayal of the crowds, but he has both clarified and stylized the portrayal. When Matthew's contradictory mission directives are analyzed, it emerges that the crowds are Jewish. After defining the crowds, it goes on to examine the crowds' actions and statements. It begins with a discussion of the crowds following of Jesus, and determines that the crowds follow Jesus not out of a "qualitative allegiance", but because they are needy. The crowds' astonishment in the face of Jesus' words and deeds does not indicate commitment on their part, but rather an incipient favourable response to Jesus. Their use of the title "Son of David" indicates a growing insight into Jesus' true nature, but one that ultimately fails to develop. Their designation of Jesus as "a prophet" indicates the inadequacy of their perceptions. It also adumbrates their final rejection of Jesus, a rejection which culminates in their joining with their leaders to accept responsibility for Jesus' death. The reproaches levelled against the crowds by Jesus in chapter 13 do not readily fit in with this portrayal of the crowds of Jesus' day, and are best seen as referring to the experience of Matthew's church. When the crowds are examined in the timeframe of Matthew's church, they are best regarded as Jews, and not members of Matthew's church. They are attracted to the church because of its authority to heal and forgive sins. They attach themselves to the community in large numbers, listen to the church's kerygma, but ultimately fall away when the church loses its thaumaturgic ability. Persecution by the Jewish leaders, particularly the Pharisees, may have provoked this crisis. After this, the crowds no longer heed the community's message, and appear to fall back under the sway of the Pharisees. Matthew's church reproaches the crowd for its obduracy, and embarks on its mission to all nations. The ambiguity in Matthew's depiction of the crowds is the result of two factors. In his portrayal of the crowds of Jesus' day, the ὄχλοι are used with two contradictory intentions in mind. On the one hand, they are used christologically to enhance the picture of Jesus, and to represent the side of Israel which welcomes its messiah. On the other hand, they are used apologetically, to show how Israel missed its messiah and ended up putting him to death. The second reason for the ambiguity of Matthew's account, is that the crowds sometimes, particularly in Matthew 13, represent the crowds of Matthew's day. This juxtaposition of the two temporal levels produces a refracted picture of the crowds, which also makes them appear ambiguous.