Deuteronomistic History or Deuteronomic Debate? (A Thought Experiment)
This study intends to replace Martin Noth’s Deuteronomistic History hypothesis with an approach that makes better use of all available data. Three thesis statements establish a new paradigm for future research. First, to the extent that they have Deuteronomy in view, the Former Prophets represent no...
| Главный автор: | |
|---|---|
| Формат: | Электронный ресурс Статья |
| Язык: | Английский |
| Проверить наличие: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Загрузка...
|
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Опубликовано: |
2007
|
| В: |
Journal for the study of the Old Testament
Год: 2007, Том: 31, Выпуск: 3, Страницы: 311-345 |
| Другие ключевые слова: | B
Samuel
B Deuteronomy 12 B Former Prophets B Judges B King Josiah B Formation of Canon B Deuteronomistic History B Kings B Joshua |
| Online-ссылка: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Итог: | This study intends to replace Martin Noth’s Deuteronomistic History hypothesis with an approach that makes better use of all available data. Three thesis statements establish a new paradigm for future research. First, to the extent that they have Deuteronomy in view, the Former Prophets represent not a deuteronomistic ideology, but a Deuteronomic debate. Second, the like-minded intellectuals who produced these scrolls did not intend to create authoritative scripture because their writings were not intended for mass consumption. Third, each book of the Former Prophets presents a distinctive pattern of response to Deuteronomy, usually negative but occasionally positive. In sum, what we have in the Former Prophets is a conversation with Deuteronomy. What we do not have, except for a few late glosses, is deuteronomism. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1476-6728 |
| Второстепенные работы: | Enthalten in: Journal for the study of the Old Testament
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/0309089207076357 |
