Browsing by Author "Paulo, Bonifacio"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
- ItemThe abolition of intermarriage in Ezra 10 and the ethnic identity of the postexilic Judean community : a hermeneutic study(Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2014-12) Paulo, Bonifacio; Jonker, Louis C.; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Theology. Dept. of Old and New Testament.ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The present study seeks to examine the abolition of intermarriage according to Ezra 10 by asking the question as to what were the compelling reasons for such a social crisis, and to demonstrate its possible implications to ethnic identity in the postexilic Judean community. In order to accomplish this purpose, the researcher has chosen to use an integrated method which allows him to bring different exegetical approaches into dialogue, bearing in mind that the canonical narratives are an outcome of a long process of redaction of both oral and written traditions done by different editors from different socio-historical contexts. It is through this method that this research highlights the following outcomes: first, from a canonical point of view, the final editors understood the exilic experience as an objective outcome of the intermarriage phenomenon which led the Israelites into a complete loss of their group identity, namely – being a Yahwistic community, and it was, therefore, the responsibility of the returnees to avoid, at any cost, letting history repeat itself. Second, the phenomenon of intermarriage in the Hebrew Bible has to be approached from a diachronic perspective. Unlike the patriarchal and deuteronomistic traditions in which intermarriage was about morality and apostasy respectively, in the context of the postexilic community this topic was all about purity – a strong zeal for temple and worship, as particularly witnessed in the priestly tradition. Third, from the fact that these canonical narratives took shape in socio-historical settings where, in addition to the religious factor, there were also other reasons such as political and socio-economic, which contributed significantly not only to the dismissal of those intermarriages, but also to the negotiation of a group identity of the Second Temple addressee. In other words, in response to those socio-historical circumstances, the returnees were compelled to divorce and dismiss their foreign wives and, at the same time, they were shaping their group identity, which came to be known as Judaism.
- ItemThe centralization of the worship of Yahweh according to the Jewish and Samaritan Pentateuchs : a textual and theological study(Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2017-12) Paulo, Bonifacio; Jonker, Louis C.; Kotze , Gideon; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Theology. Dept. of Old and New Testament.ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The aim of the present study is, firstly, to understand the theological implications of the phenomenon of centralization of worship in Deuteronomy 12 according to the Jewish and Samaritan Pentateuchs; secondly, to investigate the different wording between the two readings and the possible factors that contributed to their development; and thirdly, given these different sectarian readings, to understand what might be the place of the Samaritan Pentateuch in the enterprise of Bible translation. To address these objectives, the researcher chose to use an integrated method, which gives him the freedom to bring different approaches, such as historical-scientific, textual/literary, and theological, into conversation. It is through this method that the outcome of this study is outlined as follows: From a historical-scientific viewpoint, it is most likely that the origin of ancient Israel is to be placed in the context of the Mediterranean region in the Iron Age I period. Furthermore, despite their belligerent relations, both Judean and Samaritan populaces are likely to be genetically related and, therefore, from the same ancestral origins. Theologically, the centralization of worship had, to some extent, contributed significantly to the shaping of the ideologies of the Jerusalem temple and Davidic/Israel’s election. In response to these ideologies, the Samaritans rejected any tradition related to Jerusalem temple and to Davidic kingship and put an exclusive claim on the Mosaic tradition as the only authoritative script. Addressed from a textual/literary approach, the two Pentateuchs share the same roots – the Mosaic tradition – and the differences between them are mainly due to editorial activities, where editors acted in favour of their respective site of worship. Lastly, with regard to the place of the Samaritan Pentateuch in the work of Bible translation, it is noted that, despite the different emphases on the place of worship, it has much in common not only with the Jewish Pentateuch but also with other textual witnesses such as the Septuagint and the Dead Seas Scrolls. Moreover, like other textual witnesses, the Samaritan Pentateuch held a significant level of authority over ancient Israeli communities, including Qumran and the early church. If this is the case, then the place of the Samaritan Pentateuch in the enterprise of Bible Translation needs to be reconsidered.