The mind of Matthew, or the text?: retrieving Eusebius’ intertextual proposal on the crux interpretum of Matthew 28:1
The translation of Matthew 28:1 is notoriously difficult (ὀψὲ δὲ σαββάτων τῇ ἐπιφωσκούσῃ εἰς μίαν σαββάτων). Following a survey of proposals that place the discovery of Jesus’ resurrection at dawn or during the night, and finding these solutions wanting, this article highlights overlooked evidence i...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
De Gruyter
2020
|
| In: |
Journal of the bible and its reception
Year: 2020, Volume: 7, Issue: 2, Pages: 147-165 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Bible. Matthäusevangelium 28,1
/ Bible. Psalmen 22
/ Resurrection
/ Reception
/ Exegesis
/ History
/ Patristics
/ Intertextuality
|
| IxTheo Classification: | HC New Testament KAB Church history 30-500; early Christianity |
| Further subjects: | B
Resurrection
B Psalm 22 B Intertextuality B history of interpretation B Gospels B Philology |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | The translation of Matthew 28:1 is notoriously difficult (ὀψὲ δὲ σαββάτων τῇ ἐπιφωσκούσῃ εἰς μίαν σαββάτων). Following a survey of proposals that place the discovery of Jesus’ resurrection at dawn or during the night, and finding these solutions wanting, this article highlights overlooked evidence in this passage’s long reception history. Some of this evidence is intratextual, namely, passages which could favor a day-night schema (Matt 4:2; 12:40) or in which Matthew discusses commerce and travel at night (Matt 14:15; 25:1-13). The second, intertextual set of evidence is found in the works of Eusebius, Didymus of Alexandria, Jerome, and Theodoret. These patristic authors provide a forgotten proposal whereby the resurrection is connected with the “dawn” of Ps 21:1 LXX. Since Matthew’s Passion Narrative appeals to this psalm in so many other instances, this patristic insight helpfully reframes the debate on this crux around the text and its reception history (intentio operis) rather than the elusive category of authorial intent (intentio auctoris). |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2329-4434 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of the bible and its reception
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1515/jbr-2020-0005 |