Padlina i sępy. Czy logion Q 17,37 jest biblijnym cytatem (illud dictum), przysłowiem (proverbium) czy znakiem (signum)? Analiza egzegetyczno-teologiczna

The article proposes a detailed syntactic and semantic analysis of Mt 24:28 and Lk 17:37c for the purpose of hypothetical reconstructing of the original Semitic (Hebrew and Aramaic) form of the logion Q 17:37. Then it is offered the comparison between the three different hermeneutic opportunities in...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The biblical annals 2020-10, Vol.10 (67/4), p.563-598
1. Verfasser: Zawadzki, Arnold
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng ; pol
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 598
container_issue 67/4
container_start_page 563
container_title The biblical annals
container_volume 10
creator Zawadzki, Arnold
description The article proposes a detailed syntactic and semantic analysis of Mt 24:28 and Lk 17:37c for the purpose of hypothetical reconstructing of the original Semitic (Hebrew and Aramaic) form of the logion Q 17:37. Then it is offered the comparison between the three different hermeneutic opportunities in its understanding within the canonical context, as either biblical quotation/paraphrase (Job 39,30) or proverb or sign. This comparison helps to understand that Q 17:37 fits very well to its literary and theological context from these three points of view. It shows therefore a very great semantic flexibility and makes it difficult to establish its original meaning in the Document Q. However, the author of the article argues that the Semitic phrase Q 17,37 with a very high probability functioned both in the Document Q and in the canonical context as a quotation/paraphrase of Job 39:30 or as a sign (in the same way as the fig sign in Mt 24.32-33; Lc 21.29-31) rather than as a proverb. The article therefore undermines the classical view that would be consolidated in the modern exegesis on Mt 24:28; Lk 17,37c.
doi_str_mv 10.31743/BIBAN.11075
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>ceeol_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_ceeol_journals_951543</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ceeol_id>951543</ceeol_id><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_5e717254b8c5433e9fddeac93459cb73</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>951543</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c231t-a3665e64db81e6432687cdd7415e6a95e7a6d15576e7b639f7bcd69e66bb355b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkU1r3DAQhk1oISHNLcccdGxhvbEsS7JPZbO06ULoByRnMfqwkeu1jORtsY_9FyV_p_1f0W62LZ3LDPO-PCPNJMklzpYE84Jc32xuVh-XGGecniRneUFxmmNWvoh1VpI0j3GaXITQZjF4WWGanSWPn0F3tgdkUfj1c5iWaD1PqHONdT36gjBfEI5aE0Ykrexs209bpKYRRrNFr23X7TTSVo277ZsFGvw8hd8_3He7FwfvvhkvbZSQisy5h68HIdimj823aNVDZ2dApplNY8ZJzb1LR-P202MNr5KXNXTBXBzzefLw_t39-kN69-l2s17dpSoneEyBMEYNK7QscUwkZyVXWvMCxy5U1HBgGlPKmeGSkarmUmlWGcakJJRKcp5snrnaQSsGb7fgJ-HAikPD-UaAH63qjIgwzHNayFLRghBT1VobUBUpaKUkJ5G1eGYp70Lwpv7Lw5k43EnERUIvDneK9quj3cR_i9btfFxKEBXFe_4_2v_yn-dop45WMeiaPAEr16GZ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Padlina i sępy. Czy logion Q 17,37 jest biblijnym cytatem (illud dictum), przysłowiem (proverbium) czy znakiem (signum)? Analiza egzegetyczno-teologiczna</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><creator>Zawadzki, Arnold</creator><creatorcontrib>Zawadzki, Arnold</creatorcontrib><description>The article proposes a detailed syntactic and semantic analysis of Mt 24:28 and Lk 17:37c for the purpose of hypothetical reconstructing of the original Semitic (Hebrew and Aramaic) form of the logion Q 17:37. Then it is offered the comparison between the three different hermeneutic opportunities in its understanding within the canonical context, as either biblical quotation/paraphrase (Job 39,30) or proverb or sign. This comparison helps to understand that Q 17:37 fits very well to its literary and theological context from these three points of view. It shows therefore a very great semantic flexibility and makes it difficult to establish its original meaning in the Document Q. However, the author of the article argues that the Semitic phrase Q 17,37 with a very high probability functioned both in the Document Q and in the canonical context as a quotation/paraphrase of Job 39:30 or as a sign (in the same way as the fig sign in Mt 24.32-33; Lc 21.29-31) rather than as a proverb. The article therefore undermines the classical view that would be consolidated in the modern exegesis on Mt 24:28; Lk 17,37c.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2083-2222</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2451-2168</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.31743/BIBAN.11075</identifier><language>eng ; pol</language><publisher>John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin - Faculty of Theology</publisher><subject>Mt 24,28 ; padlina i sępy ; Q 17,37 ; Theology and Religion ; Łk 17,37 ; źródło Q ; ἀετοί</subject><ispartof>The biblical annals, 2020-10, Vol.10 (67/4), p.563-598</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0002-7827-7881</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Uhttps://www.ceeol.com//api/image/getissuecoverimage?id=picture_2020_60659.jpg</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,864,2100,27915,27916</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zawadzki, Arnold</creatorcontrib><title>Padlina i sępy. Czy logion Q 17,37 jest biblijnym cytatem (illud dictum), przysłowiem (proverbium) czy znakiem (signum)? Analiza egzegetyczno-teologiczna</title><title>The biblical annals</title><addtitle>The Biblical Annals</addtitle><description>The article proposes a detailed syntactic and semantic analysis of Mt 24:28 and Lk 17:37c for the purpose of hypothetical reconstructing of the original Semitic (Hebrew and Aramaic) form of the logion Q 17:37. Then it is offered the comparison between the three different hermeneutic opportunities in its understanding within the canonical context, as either biblical quotation/paraphrase (Job 39,30) or proverb or sign. This comparison helps to understand that Q 17:37 fits very well to its literary and theological context from these three points of view. It shows therefore a very great semantic flexibility and makes it difficult to establish its original meaning in the Document Q. However, the author of the article argues that the Semitic phrase Q 17,37 with a very high probability functioned both in the Document Q and in the canonical context as a quotation/paraphrase of Job 39:30 or as a sign (in the same way as the fig sign in Mt 24.32-33; Lc 21.29-31) rather than as a proverb. The article therefore undermines the classical view that would be consolidated in the modern exegesis on Mt 24:28; Lk 17,37c.</description><subject>Mt 24,28</subject><subject>padlina i sępy</subject><subject>Q 17,37</subject><subject>Theology and Religion</subject><subject>Łk 17,37</subject><subject>źródło Q</subject><subject>ἀετοί</subject><issn>2083-2222</issn><issn>2451-2168</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>REL</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkU1r3DAQhk1oISHNLcccdGxhvbEsS7JPZbO06ULoByRnMfqwkeu1jORtsY_9FyV_p_1f0W62LZ3LDPO-PCPNJMklzpYE84Jc32xuVh-XGGecniRneUFxmmNWvoh1VpI0j3GaXITQZjF4WWGanSWPn0F3tgdkUfj1c5iWaD1PqHONdT36gjBfEI5aE0Ykrexs209bpKYRRrNFr23X7TTSVo277ZsFGvw8hd8_3He7FwfvvhkvbZSQisy5h68HIdimj823aNVDZ2dApplNY8ZJzb1LR-P202MNr5KXNXTBXBzzefLw_t39-kN69-l2s17dpSoneEyBMEYNK7QscUwkZyVXWvMCxy5U1HBgGlPKmeGSkarmUmlWGcakJJRKcp5snrnaQSsGb7fgJ-HAikPD-UaAH63qjIgwzHNayFLRghBT1VobUBUpaKUkJ5G1eGYp70Lwpv7Lw5k43EnERUIvDneK9quj3cR_i9btfFxKEBXFe_4_2v_yn-dop45WMeiaPAEr16GZ</recordid><startdate>20201007</startdate><enddate>20201007</enddate><creator>Zawadzki, Arnold</creator><general>John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin - Faculty of Theology</general><general>Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II - Wydział Teologii</general><general>The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin</general><scope>AE2</scope><scope>BIXPP</scope><scope>REL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7827-7881</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20201007</creationdate><title>Padlina i sępy. Czy logion Q 17,37 jest biblijnym cytatem (illud dictum), przysłowiem (proverbium) czy znakiem (signum)? Analiza egzegetyczno-teologiczna</title><author>Zawadzki, Arnold</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c231t-a3665e64db81e6432687cdd7415e6a95e7a6d15576e7b639f7bcd69e66bb355b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng ; pol</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Mt 24,28</topic><topic>padlina i sępy</topic><topic>Q 17,37</topic><topic>Theology and Religion</topic><topic>Łk 17,37</topic><topic>źródło Q</topic><topic>ἀετοί</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zawadzki, Arnold</creatorcontrib><collection>Central and Eastern European Online Library (C.E.E.O.L.) (DFG Nationallizenzen)</collection><collection>CEEOL: Open Access</collection><collection>Central and Eastern European Online Library</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>The biblical annals</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zawadzki, Arnold</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Padlina i sępy. Czy logion Q 17,37 jest biblijnym cytatem (illud dictum), przysłowiem (proverbium) czy znakiem (signum)? Analiza egzegetyczno-teologiczna</atitle><jtitle>The biblical annals</jtitle><addtitle>The Biblical Annals</addtitle><date>2020-10-07</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>67/4</issue><spage>563</spage><epage>598</epage><pages>563-598</pages><issn>2083-2222</issn><eissn>2451-2168</eissn><abstract>The article proposes a detailed syntactic and semantic analysis of Mt 24:28 and Lk 17:37c for the purpose of hypothetical reconstructing of the original Semitic (Hebrew and Aramaic) form of the logion Q 17:37. Then it is offered the comparison between the three different hermeneutic opportunities in its understanding within the canonical context, as either biblical quotation/paraphrase (Job 39,30) or proverb or sign. This comparison helps to understand that Q 17:37 fits very well to its literary and theological context from these three points of view. It shows therefore a very great semantic flexibility and makes it difficult to establish its original meaning in the Document Q. However, the author of the article argues that the Semitic phrase Q 17,37 with a very high probability functioned both in the Document Q and in the canonical context as a quotation/paraphrase of Job 39:30 or as a sign (in the same way as the fig sign in Mt 24.32-33; Lc 21.29-31) rather than as a proverb. The article therefore undermines the classical view that would be consolidated in the modern exegesis on Mt 24:28; Lk 17,37c.</abstract><pub>John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin - Faculty of Theology</pub><doi>10.31743/BIBAN.11075</doi><tpages>36</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7827-7881</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2083-2222
ispartof The biblical annals, 2020-10, Vol.10 (67/4), p.563-598
issn 2083-2222
2451-2168
language eng ; pol
recordid cdi_ceeol_journals_951543
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
subjects Mt 24,28
padlina i sępy
Q 17,37
Theology and Religion
Łk 17,37
źródło Q
ἀετοί
title Padlina i sępy. Czy logion Q 17,37 jest biblijnym cytatem (illud dictum), przysłowiem (proverbium) czy znakiem (signum)? Analiza egzegetyczno-teologiczna
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T07%3A31%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-ceeol_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Padlina%20i%20s%C4%99py.%20Czy%20logion%20Q%2017,37%20jest%20biblijnym%20cytatem%20(illud%20dictum),%20przys%C5%82owiem%20(proverbium)%20czy%20znakiem%20(signum)?%20Analiza%20egzegetyczno-teologiczna&rft.jtitle=The%20biblical%20annals&rft.au=Zawadzki,%20Arnold&rft.date=2020-10-07&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=67/4&rft.spage=563&rft.epage=598&rft.pages=563-598&rft.issn=2083-2222&rft.eissn=2451-2168&rft_id=info:doi/10.31743/BIBAN.11075&rft_dat=%3Cceeol_cross%3E951543%3C/ceeol_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ceeol_id=951543&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_5e717254b8c5433e9fddeac93459cb73&rfr_iscdi=true