- Home
- A-Z Publications
- NTT Journal for Theology and the Study of Religion
- Previous Issues
- Volume 41, Issue 2, 1987
NTT Journal for Theology and the Study of Religion - Volume 41, Issue 2, 1987
Volume 41, Issue 2, 1987
-
-
Amos 5:13- Een omstreden tekst
More Less*Ik wil graag drs. F. Postma (Amstelveen) en dr. P. B. Dirksen (Leiden) bedanken voor hun opmerkingen bij eerdere versies van dit artikel.
AbstractIn this article the view is defended that Am. 5:13 together with Am. 5:12 form a unit, with Am. 5:13 functioning as the conclusion of Am. 5:12. So the maśkīl can be seen as a victim of the injustice of Amos’ days, just as the maśkīl was a victim in the days of Antiochus IV Epifanes as witnessed in Dan. 11:33.35. The verse Am. 5:13 is held to be an authentic part of the message of the prophet Amos.
-
-
-
Figuurstudies
More LessAbstractThis article offers an analysis of Bernard’s treatise De gradibus humilitatis et superbiae on the basis of a description of Benedictine monastic life as codified in the Rule.
On the one hand the Rule of Benedict sums up the main elements of monastic life, on the other hand, it leaves room for experiments. It is this flexibility which Bernard fully exploits in this treatise. Rearranging monastic and religious images and places (imagines and loci) he creates a framework in which the meaning of life and death changes slightly compared with their position in the Benedictine context. Above all, it is the possibility of failure and death which is introduced by Bernard in order to illustrate the emotional setting of monastic life.
-
-
-
‘Quaestie Oort’ of ‘Quaestie Tai’?
More LessAbstractHenricus Oort was an internationally respected Hebrew and Biblical scholar, as well as a liberal and enlightened Christian. In 1880 a popular publication on the Talmud led him into a fierce controversy with the Amsterdam rabbi Tobias Tal. The case got much publicity and Tal became famous by his resolute attack on a respected member of the intellectual establishment. Today, however, not the Jewish side of the argument, but rather the complicated position taken by Oort is the one that needs comment.
Oort was a critical and competent scholar. His knowledge of rabbinics was limited, but sufficient for the purposes of his research and certainly far above the average level in his circles. He was in no way liable to feelings of antisemitism or to unreasonable attitudes towards his Jewish fellow-men. Yet his research of rabbinic literature was mainly devoted to a scholarly revision of the old Christian anti-Jewish arguments against early Jewish spirituality, and bent upon belittling the moral value of the Talmud and related writings. Why? Oort’s deepest convictions as a Christian were based on the ethics of Jesus’ teachings and on the revolutionary morality of the Gospels. Critical study of the Bible – his own contributions included – had shown the intimate relationship between the NT and its Jewish environment. In order to maintain the superiority of NT teaching, he was forced to describe contemporary Judaism as standing in the shadows of the great light which had shone in Jesus of Nazareth. It is sad irony that this open-minded and sincere Christian failed to understand not only the motives and feelings of his Jewish colleagues, but the essence of early Judaism, to which he devoted so much energy, as well.
-
-
-
The moral status of the embryo:
By Peter ByrneAbstractThe aim of this paper is to determine the licitness of research on human embryos by suggesting an answer to the question of their moral status. The paper begins by considering and rejecting various indirect ways of determining the licitness of embryo research or the status of the embryo. These are rejected in favour of tackling directly the question if and when embryos are to be treated as persons. Arguments based on the notions of nature, potentiality and history are developed for the conclusions that a. personhood can be taken back into embryonic life and b. that embryos cannot be considered as persons until some of the early stages of embryonic development are completed. These arguments are also intended to show the links between Aristotelian ideas about the animation of the embryo and certain strands in contemporary philosophy. Research on embryos is then arguably licit prior to the completion of early stages of development.
-
Volumes & issues
-
Volume 78 (2024)
-
Volume 77 (2023)
-
Volume 76 (2022)
-
Volume 75 (2021)
-
Volume 74 (2020)
-
Volume 73 (2019)
-
Volume 72 (2018)
-
Volume 71 (2017)
-
Volume 70 (2016)
-
Volume 69 (2015)
-
Volume 68 (2014)
-
Volume 67 (2013)
-
Volume 66 (2012)
-
Volume 65 (2011)
-
Volume 64 (2010)
-
Volume 63 (2009)
-
Volume 62 (2008)
-
Volume 61 (2007)
-
Volume 60 (2006)
-
Volume 59 (2005)
-
Volume 58 (2004)
-
Volume 57 (2003)
-
Volume 56 (2002)
-
Volume 55 (2001)
-
Volume 54 (2000)
-
Volume 53 (1999)
-
Volume 52 (1998)
-
Volume 51 (1997)
-
Volume 50 (1996)
-
Volume 49 (1995)
-
Volume 48 (1994)
-
Volume 47 (1993)
-
Volume 46 (1992)
-
Volume 45 (1991)
-
Volume 44 (1990)
-
Volume 43 (1989)
-
Volume 42 (1988)
-
Volume 41 (1987)
-
Volume 40 (1986)
-
Volume 39 (1985)
-
Volume 38 (1984)
-
Volume 37 (1983)
-
Volume 36 (1982)
-
Volume 35 (1981)
-
Volume 34 (1980)
Most Read This Month
