Rashi's Commentary on Genesis 1 - 6 in the Context of Judeo-Christian Controversy
The exegesis of Scripture in the Middle Ages is not purely an expression of intellectual activity for itself, but essentially a taking of position in regard to the social and religious problems of the time. The evolution of a peshat movement among Jewish scholars in the twelfth century (the "Sc...
| Published in: | Hebrew Union College annual / Jewish Institute of Religion |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Print Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
College
1990
|
| In: |
Hebrew Union College annual / Jewish Institute of Religion
|
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Judaism
/ Christianity
|
| IxTheo Classification: | HB Old Testament |
| Further subjects: | B
Shelomoh ben Yitsḥaḳ (1040-1105)
B Bible. Genesis 1,1-6,22 |
| Parallel Edition: | Electronic
|
| Summary: | The exegesis of Scripture in the Middle Ages is not purely an expression of intellectual activity for itself, but essentially a taking of position in regard to the social and religious problems of the time. The evolution of a peshat movement among Jewish scholars in the twelfth century (the "School of Rashi") is essentially the reaction of the Jews to the Renaissance of this century and to the resurgence of religious controversy between Christians and Jews. The present article develops this thesis and intends to show that Rashi's commentary on Genesis 1—6 contains obvious signs of polemics with Christians: 1. The commentary on Genesis 1:1 is the response of Rashi to the conquest of Jerusalem by the Crusaders. 2. The explanation of Rashi to the verse "and the ruaḥ of God moved upon the face of the waters" is intended to counter the identification of this ruaḥ with the Christian Holy Spirit. 3. Rashi's commentary on the story of Adam's sin rejects the Christian dogma of Original Sin and the prefigurative approach about many details of the story. 4. In his commentary to the creation story, Rashi intends to reject philosophical and theological approaches. 5. Rashi develops a strict angelology for reasons equally didactic and polemical. 6. Rashi's commentary to the creation of Adam is obviously polemical. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0360-9049 |
| Contains: | In: Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, Hebrew Union College annual / Jewish Institute of Religion
|