In the Old Testament the word na'ar occurs many times and in the Japanese translation or RSV it is generally rendered “servant” or “young man”. However, it must be called attention to the fact that this na'ar has many parallel aspects with Egyptian n'ryn, Ugaritic n'rm in the Amarna Age and koûpoi in Iliad and Odessey, and thus this shows that na'ar should be dealt with and understood in the same East Mediterranean background.
It is certain that in the Old Testament there are many cases in which this na'ar should be rendered simply “servant” or “young man”, but the more important point is that in Samuels, Judges, Kings etc. we also find out many other cases in which the word na'ar means a member of the élite-group of attendants or a gibbôr háyil given the special role in the political or military field. That is, n^e'arîm (plural form of na'ar) is to be dealt with as a sort of social stratum. The present study seems to indicate some support for C. H. Gordon's contention that Greek and Hebrew civilizations are parallel structures built upon the same East Mediterranean foundation. Hence, our translating of na'ar should be carefully made case by case, according to the above understanding.

抄録全体を表示

The Book of Chronicles has three aspects: the interpretation of Samuel-Kings, the history of Israel, and the Chronicler's own theology. To define its literary genre, it is essential to clarify how they relate to one another. Exegetical literature may deal with historical events or theological issues, but it must be in the end constrained by the sacred text. Historiography may reflect exegesis of the text or the author's theological view, but it must finally be controled by historical events. Theological literature may make use of exegesis or historical report, but it is free from both in expressing the author's theology. In this article we discuss the first point: whether Chronicles is dependent on the text of Samuel-Kings, and if it is exegetical literature.
Firstly, we will deal with 1Chr 18-20, where large portions of Samuel material (David's treatment of Mephibosheth, his sin with Bath Sheba, and rebellions against him by Abshalom and Sheba) are omitted. It is often explained that, though the Chronicler basically follows the text of Samuel-Kings, he attempts to conceal unfavourable parts of David. However, the Chronicler does include such accounts elsewhere (1Chr 13, 21), and their absence can be better understood by his own thematic presentation of Saul-David and David-Solomon relationship. Moreover, in 1Chr 18-20, David's victories are consciously collected from various parts of Samuel in order to constitute a literary unit. It is placed immediately after the Davidic Promise (1Chr 17) to show the beginning of its fulfillment and God's blessing upon David.
Secondly, we will discuss additional materials in the reign of Jehoshaphat (2Chr 17-20). They cannot be regarded as theological interpretation or expansion of Kings' text, because they are totally unrelated to it and the Chronicler's evaluation of Jehoshaphat is opposite. Rather these additions form the Chronicler's own retributional pattern, and the Chronicler's control over the material is evident.
These analyses lead to a conclusion that Chronicles is essentially independent from the text of Samuel-Kings. Although the Chronicler uses the interpretation of the sacred text, he does so only as far as it is relevant to his theme. Therefore, Chronicles should not be seen as exegetical literature.

抄録全体を表示

Sakuteiki is the first systematic record on gardening that shows how to set stones. In traditional Japanese gardens, the usage of stones has been considered important. This paper examines the usage of stone in the Old Testament, which was written before Sakuteiki. If we find the way stones were used, it may be beneficial for people associated with landscape design. Every section of the Bible (cooperative translated version of the Japan Bible Society) is examined and parts where stones were used in different manners are identified. In several cases, it shows setting stones. The following were observed: (1) Jacob, Moses, and Joshua set up stones from their own will on the place as a memorial where they could hear God’s voice. Jacob set a stone twic e, while both Moses and Joshua set twelve stones one time. It was not God’s command. (2) God ordered to set stones for a memorial for Him to make miraculous things. God asked Joshua to take twelve stones from the Jordan River and set them up on one mountain. (3) Moses commanded the Israelis to set great stones with law after crossing the Jordan River. (4) When people made the important contract for each other, they set up a stone there as memorial. They believed God would watch and guard people from the stone. (5) God asked his alter to be made not with cut stones but natural stones. This paper describes that stones were set when God’s existence needed to be proved.

抄録全体を表示

The aim of this paper is to clarify the theological development of St. Gregory of Nyssa. Gregory seems to be treated as an exegete in recent studies. Gregory's two works, De vita Moysis(MOY)and In Canticum Canticonum(CAN), are both indeed exegetical works of the Old Testament, but they are different in nature. While the former, MOY is a commentary on the historia, of Moses in Exodus and Deuteronomy, the latter, CAN, is a mystical interpretation of Song of Songs, as a dialogue of love between a bridegroom, Christ, and a bride, the Church. How can these two, somewhat heterogeneous works of Gregory be connected in the context of his theological development? Here, I would like to consider two of Gregory's former works, In inscriptiones Psalmorum (IPS) and In Ecclesiasten (ECC). According to Gregory, Moses and David are both figures of Christ in the Old Testament. In IPS, Gregory interprets the meaning of David's action in the Books of Samuel, along with the explanation of the inscriptions of Psalms. So IPS assumes the character of a commentary on historia concerning David. Accordingly, MOY can be treated in comparison with IPS as a point of the typological interpretation of Gregory. Then, in ECC, Gregory interprets the ekklesiastes as Christ preaching to the Church and, in CAN, Gregory regards the bride as the Church. Therefore, we may say that ECC and CAN have an ecclesiological character in common. As a result of the comparison of IPS with MOY, it becomes clearer that in IPS Gregory has not deepened his typological interpretation of David, while in many passages in MOY, he explains the actions of Moses, especially in contemplation the Incarnation of Christ and the Virgin Mary's conception through the Holy Spirit. As a result of the comparison of ECC with CAN, it becomes clear that in the transition from one to the other Gregory develops the view of 'church community as the body of Christ' in his ecclesiology. This view and the contemplation of the Incarnation are similar, as the Church embodies Christ in this world. In addition, CAN abruptly ends in the commentary on Songs 6 : 9, 'One is my dove, my perfect one'. Moreover, ekklesia occurs less frequently in the last homily of CAN that in the two antecedent homilies. How can Gregory's intentions be explained? I think that Gregory intends 'one dove' to mean the ideal unity of all people through the Holy Spirit beyond the church community. This is because the unity of the Father, the Son, and all people in Johannine Evangel(chap. 17)is regarded as the ideal in the last homily of CAN. I conclude that the Holy Spirit played an increasingly important role in the theological development of Gregory, in his ecclesiology as well as in his typological interpretation. I also conclude in this context that Gregory actually drafted the Creed of the Holy Spirit in the Constantinople Council (381).

抄録全体を表示

The first aim of this paper is to examine the verb חָרַד in Biblical Hebrew by the semantic componential analysis, and to make comparisons between medieval Jewish interpretations and modern interpretations, including modern Bible translations. And the second aim is to illuminate the differences between Jewish interpretations and modern interpretations. The verb חָרַד belongs to the semantic fields “fear” and “movement”, and the semantic components by which the verb is characterized are as follows:
(S=semantic component, sememe).
S₁ = Feeling of fear S₂ = Agent [God, man, animal, inorganic] S₃ = The cause of fear
S₄ = Strength of fear S₅ = Trembling S₆ = Movement S₇ = Caring
S₈ = Astonishment
For the four syntactic structures examined in this paper, the Jewish commentators regarded S6 as the main semantic component, emphasizing the aspect of spatial movement, whereas modern interpretations regarded all of the three semantic components S1, S5, and S6 to be active in these structures, understanding this verb in terms of fear and trembling.

抄録全体を表示

The concluding section of the “Succession Narrative” in 1 Kings 1-2 is an apologetic composition from the early days of Solomon, aiming at legitimatizing not only his irregular succession but also his purge of his adversaries. Two conflicting elements in the Solomonic legitimation are blended in the congratulation offered to David by his servants on the occasion of Solomon's accession:“May your God make the name of Solomon more famous than yours, and make his throne greater than your throne” (1 Kings 1:37, 47). The words imply that, though Solomon legitimately succeeded to the throne of David, he assumed a critical attitude toward the old regime of David. We can find a comparative analogue of this double structure of the Solomonic legitimation in a propagandistic inscription of Kilamuwa, king of Y'DY-Sam'al, in the latter half of the ninth century B. C. It offers a close parallel to the Solomonic legitimation in the following three items: a) the emphasis on the father's throne as the foundation of the legitimate kingship; b) the negative evaluation to his father; c) the establishment of the kingship based on the restoration of social justice or order. Besides, a historical analysis of the Kilamuwa inscription shows that the pattern of the royal succession in the early monarchies in Y'DY-Sam'al provides us a remarkable parallel to that of transfer of the royal throne in early Israel. The characterization of the first five kings in both kingdoms is summarized as the following chart. The comparison indicates that there were common features in the political development in the early, inexperienced monarchies in the national kingdoms of Syro-Palestine at the beginning of the first millennium B. C.

抄録全体を表示

The present study examined by both the Old Testament and archaeological materials using a historical method, in an attempt to describe the social structure of Ancient Israel, not based upon either of the opinions of the so-called European School and Soviet School.
In the first place the author examined three main terms for slaves in the Old Testament, and then based on the Old Testament he tried to reconstitute the classes of slaves in forms of ownership which had private slaves and state slaves, the former being domestic slaves, the latter temple slaves and royal slaves, in comparison with the institutions in the ancient countries in the Near East. The institution of royal slavery existed in Ancient Israel from the period of David down to the period of Nehemia and Ezra, and the same is attested by the technical terms in the Old Testament: mas, mas 'obed and 'obdê šelômô (twenty-three passages).
The author checked the terms mas is employed in a threefold sense, and mas 'obed means Royal Slave. However Royal Slave has been know little as Temple Slave.
In conclusion the author studied based on above mentioned method on the mas 'obed during the period of the United Monarchy of Israel, especially Solomon (ca. 961-22 B. C.), and its historical position in relation to the social development in the Ancient Israel. In reference to the sources of slavery in the Ancient Israel see Journal of Dokkyo University Studies, No. 1. in pp. 34-55. by the present writer.

抄録全体を表示