A Targumic Interpretation in the Mishnah?: Or a Case of Mistaken Identity?

‭Interpretations of Exod. 17.11 and Num. 21.9 juxtaposed in Mishnah Rosh Ha-Shanah 3.8 bear strong resemblances to the Fragment Targum of these verses, while exhibiting certain marked differences. The Mekhilta also juxtaposes these verses using language close to that of mRH 3.6 without, however, emp...

Description complète

Enregistré dans:  
Détails bibliographiques
Auteur principal: Hayward, Robert 1948- (Auteur)
Type de support: Électronique Article
Langue:Anglais
Vérifier la disponibilité: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Publié: 2013
Dans: Aramaic studies
Année: 2013, Volume: 11, Numéro: 2, Pages: 197-210
Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés:B Araméen / Source / Judaïsme / Christianisme / Targum / Araméen / Bibel / Traduction / Littérature rabbinique / Mishnah / Iustinus, Martyr, Heiliger -165 / Mose, Personnage biblique / Malerba, Luigi 1927-2008, Il serpente / Amalécites / Fête du Nouvel An / Polémique / Barnabae epistula
Classifications IxTheo:HA Bible
HB Ancien Testament
TC Époque pré-chrétienne
Sujets non-standardisés:B Fragment Targum Mishnah Rosh ha-Shanah Epistle of Barnabas Justin Martyr’s Apology Jewish-Christian polemic Moses’ stance against Amalek Moses and bronze serpent
Accès en ligne: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Édition parallèle:Non-électronique
Description
Résumé:‭Interpretations of Exod. 17.11 and Num. 21.9 juxtaposed in Mishnah Rosh Ha-Shanah 3.8 bear strong resemblances to the Fragment Targum of these verses, while exhibiting certain marked differences. The Mekhilta also juxtaposes these verses using language close to that of mRH 3.6 without, however, employing terminology common to Targum and Mishnah. The same verses are explicated in tandem by the early Christian writers ‘Barnabas’ and Justin Martyr. The article explores pre-Christian interpretations of these verses and examines the wording of the Mishnah and the Targum, concluding that these texts can be regarded as extended ‘conversations’ between exegetes of different persuasions.‬
Description matérielle:Online-Ressource
ISSN:1745-5227
Contient:In: Aramaic studies
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/17455227-13110209