Weiter zum Inhalt

Abomination in the Legal Code of Deuteronomy: Can an Abomination Motivate?


Seiten 249 - 260

DOI https://doi.org/10.13173/zeitaltobiblrech.13.2007.0249




Wien

1 Besides the Deut 12–26 the formulation appears also in 7:25, in exactly the same form as in 17:1.

2 G. Braulik, „Die Funktion von Siebengruppierungen im Endtext des Deuteronomiums“ in Studien zum Buch Deuteronomium, SBAB 24, Stuttgart 1997; 63–79; Braulik, „Die Sieben Säulen der Weisheit im Buch Deuteronomium“ in Studien zu den Methoden der Deuteronomiumsexegese, SBAS 42, Stuttgart 2006; 77–109.

3 G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments. Die Theologie der geschichtlichen Überlieferungen Israels, Vol. I, Chr. Kaiser 101992, 210; M. Noth, „Die Gesetze im Pentateuch. Ihre Voraussetzungen und ihr Sinn“ in Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament, ThB 6, Chr. Kaiser, 31966, 39.

4 The term תועבה in the legal code of Deuteronomy was close examinated by P. Humbert, „L'Étymologie du substantive to'eba“ ZAW 72 (1960) 217–237 and by J. L'Hour, „Les interdits to'eba dans le Deutéronome“ RB 71 (1964), 481–503; To the dissertation of W.H. Pickett, The Meaning and Funktion of „T'B/TO'EVAH“ in the Hebrew Bibel, Ohio, Hebrew Union College, 1985, I had no access. – For a similar term on the Egyptian space see B. Couroyer, „L'origine égyptienne de la Sagesse d'Amenemopé“, RB 70 (1963) 208–224. In the Babylonian cultic language there is also a similar formulation, as the article of W. Hallo, „Biblical Abominations and Sumerian Taboos“ JQR 76 (1985) 21–40 discusses.

5 To „keep“ or „do“ Torah Prescriptions is in Deut signed by a special law terminology. see N. Lohfink, Das Hauptgebot. Eine Untersuchung literarischer Einleitungsfragen zu Dtn 5–11, AnBib 20, Pontificio Instituto Biblico 1963, 68–70; G. Braulik, „Ausdrücke für das ‚Gesetz‘ im Buch Deuteronomium“, in Studien zur Theologie des Deuteronomiums, SBAB 2, Stuttgart 1988, 11–38.

6 „… Will Rhetorik doch alle Seelenbereiche gewinnen. Deutlicher Ausdruck dieser Absicht ist z.B. die mit höchster Emphase vorgetragene Beschwörung des drohenden Landverlustes in V. 26, wenn Israel der grundlegenden Verpflichtung des ausschließlichen Jahwedienstes nicht gehorchen sollte.“ (G. Braulik, Die Mittel Deuteronomischer Rhetorik erhoben aus Deuteronomium 4,1–40, AnBib 68, Pontificio Instituto Biblico 1978, 142f.)

7 To the Greek word parainein underlie the meaning „to exhort“, „recommend“, „counsel“, „advice“.

8 Cf. T.A. Lenchak, „Chose Life.“ A Rhetorical-Critical Investigation of Deuteronomy 28,69–30,20, AnBib129, Pontificio Istituto Biblico 1993, 6.

9 Lohfink, „Hauptgebot“, 90–97, 271–285.

10 On motive clauses see the study by R. Sonsino, Motive Clauses in Hebrew Law. Biblical Forms and Near Eastern Parallels, SBL Dissertation Series 45, Scholars Press, 1980.

11 Cf. G. Braulik, Die deuteronomischen Gesetze und der Dekalog. Studien zum Aufbau von Deuteronomium 12–26, SBS 145, Stuttgart 1991, 23.

12 Although v. 4 is a beginning of a new section (vv. 4–7), it is thematically related to the preceding law. Besides this relation the last law of Deut 12 in 12:29–31 refers to both laws (vv. 2–3 and 4–7), as Braulik described in his: „Gesetze“, 28.

13 See Braulik, „Gesetze“, 23–30; M. Arneth, „Die Hiskiareform in 2 Reg 18,3–8“, ZAR 12 (2006), 190–195.

14 Cf. Braulik, „Gesetze“, 47; Arneth, „Hiskiareform“, 196–198

15 The clause אשׁר שׁנא יהרה occurs only in these two texts in Deut.

16 For the similarities in the structure of Dtn 12:29–31 and 16:21–17:7 cf. J.C. Gertz, Die Gerichtsorganisation Israels im deuteronomistischen Gesetz, FRLANT 165, Göttingen 1994, 54ff.

17 Cf. G. Braulik, „Das Deuteronomium und die Gedächtniskultur Israels. Redaktionsgeschichtliche Beobachtungen zur Verwendung von lmd“, in Studien zum Buch Deuteronomium, SBAB 24, Stuttgart 1997, 137f; K. Finsterbusch, Weisung für Israel. Studien zu religiösem Lehren und Lernen im Deuteronomium und in seinem Umfeld, FAT 44, Tübingen 2005, 263–267. 271–279.

18 C.M. Carmichael, „A Common Element in Five Supposedly Disparate Laws“, VT 29 (1979), 129–142; Braulik, „Gesetze“, 73; G. Barbiero, L'Asino del nemico. Rinuncia alla vendetta e amore del nemico nella legislazione dell'Antico Testamento (Es 23,4–5; Dt 22,1–4; Lv 19,17–18), AnBib 128, Pontificio Istituto Biblico 1991, 149f, 152f.

19 Cf. Römer, Thomas, „Randbemerkungen zur Travestie von Deut. 22,5“ in Van Voss, H., Ten Cate, H., Van Uchelen, (ed.), Travels in the World of the Old Testament. Studies Presented to Professor M.A. Beck on the Occasion of his 65 TH Birthday, Van Gorcum & comp, Assen 1974, 217–222; V. Hallo, „Biblical Abomination and Sumerian Taboos“ JQR 76 (1985), 21–40; Ch. Stark, Kultprostitution“ im Alten Testament? Die Qedeschen der Hebräischen Bibel und das Motiv der Hurerei, OBO 221, Göttingen, 2006.

20 Cf. The Treaty between KTK and Arpad (Aramaic treaty text about 750 B.C) Sfire III: „… If one of my officials or one of my brothers or one of my eunuchs or one of the people under my control flies from me and becomes a fugitive and goes to Aleppo, you must not provide food for them and you must not say to them: Stay peacefully in your place, and you must not cause them to be disdainful of me. You must placate them and return them to me. If not, they shall [remain] in your land to be quiet there until I come and placate them. If you cause them to be disdainful of me and provide food for them and say to them: Stay where you are and pay no attention to him, you will have betrayed this treaty.“ (ANET, 660).

21 Both interest as an accepted limited profit from lending money or products and usury as a forbidden enrichment from lending were practiced in the ancient Near East. The interest is attested in several ancient legal sources in the form of restrictions on interest-taking (cf. Eshnunna Laws, Codex Hamurapi …). In Biblical law interest and usury are strictly forbidden. The restrictions dealing with interest were in force continuously as a fixed part of the Israel's social rules.

22 „Seven sets“ cf. J.-M. Carriére, Théorie du politique dans le Deutéronome. Analyse des unités des structures et des concepts de Dt 16,18–18,22, ÖBS 18, Lang 2001, 198f; Braulik, „Funktion“, 82f.

23 Braulik, „Funktion“, 83.

24 Braulik, „Gesetze“, 80, 98.

25 L'Hour, „Interdits“, 502.

26 Explicit in Deut 12:29–31 and 18:9–13; 24:1–4.

Empfehlen


Export Citation