1998
DOI: 10.1515/9783110808254
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Die Entstehung des Zwölfprophetenbuchs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
8
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
8
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…It included the superscription in 1.1, the allusions to cultic practices in 1.4-6 that were part of a Josianic reform, the ‘futility curse’ in 1.13b, and the majority of the material in 2.1–3.13. The possibility of an exilic Book of the Four was suggested by Nogalski (1993a), expanded by Schart (1998), and refined by Albertz (2003a). It represents an influential approach to the book of Zephaniah among scholars who see the growth of Zephaniah as part of the growth of the larger corpus of the Book of the Twelve.…”
Section: Redactional Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It included the superscription in 1.1, the allusions to cultic practices in 1.4-6 that were part of a Josianic reform, the ‘futility curse’ in 1.13b, and the majority of the material in 2.1–3.13. The possibility of an exilic Book of the Four was suggested by Nogalski (1993a), expanded by Schart (1998), and refined by Albertz (2003a). It represents an influential approach to the book of Zephaniah among scholars who see the growth of Zephaniah as part of the growth of the larger corpus of the Book of the Twelve.…”
Section: Redactional Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Schart (1998) also allowed that Joel existed prior to its incorporation into the Book of the Twelve, speculating that it was created through ‘literary reformulation of prophetic tradition already fixed in writing’, producing ‘independent, small units’ (p. 278) that were joined by overlaying one image with another (e.g., locusts and army) so as to ‘stimulate the reader’s phantasy’ (p. 278 n. 44). Although he posited that Joel was modified for its current place (p. 279), particularly through the insertion of catchwords to Hosea 14 and Amos 1, he characterized Joel as ‘broadly unified literarily’, with only 4.4-8 unquestionably late, while 1.2-3 and 4.18-21 may exhibit modifications that fit Joel to its context (p. 278 n. 45).…”
Section: The Fate Of Nogalski’s Joelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1.4-16, 17aa, 2.4-12, 3.8a and Amos 5.18-20 (p. 173). While acknowledging that the ‘Day of the Lord ’ in Joel 1.15 and 2.2 betrays literary dependence on Zephaniah, Beck (p. 174) contested Schart’s depiction of the book as constructed as much from Zephaniah as by Isaiah 13 and Jeremiah 4–6 (Schart 1998: 278), with the latter two passages exerting greater influence on the composition of Joel (Beck 2005: 168-73). And whereas Schart considered Joel’s reuse of earlier tradition so piecemeal that ‘the composition little more than disintegrates into relatively independent, small units’ (p. 278), Beck (p. 174) contended that ‘Joel’s foundational composition is to be viewed as learnedly and literarily taking up other texts, but is to be regarded as an independent prophetic writing’.…”
Section: The Fate Of Nogalski’s Joelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Paul R. House and James W. Watts, JSOTSup 235 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996), 195–208; Erich Bosshard-Nepustil, Rezeptionen von Jesaia 1-39 im Zwölfprophetenbuch: Untersuchungen zur literarischen Verbindung von Prophetenbüchern in babylonischer und persischer Zeit , OBO 154 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997), 322–25; Anselm C. Hagedorn, “When Did Zephaniah Become a Supporter of Josiah’s Reform?,” JTS 62 (2011): 465, n.47; Heinz-Dieter Neef, “YHWH und die Völker: Beobachtungen zur Theologie der Bücher Nahum, Habakuk, Zephania,” TBei 31 (2000): 82–91. For noted links between Zephaniah and Joel, see: Nogalski, Literary Precursors , 194–95; Bosshard-Nepustil, Rezeptionen von Jesaia 1-39 , 325–26; Aaron Schart, Die Entstehung des Zwölfprophetenbuchs: Neubearbeitungen von Amos im Rahmen schriftenübergreifender Redaktionsprozesse , BZAW 260 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1998), 210–11; Martin Beck, Der “Tag YHWHs” im Dodekapropheton: Studien im Spannungsfeld von Traditions- und Redaktionsgeschichte , BZAW 356 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2005), 108. For parallels with Jeremiah and Ezekiel, see: William L. Holladay, “Reading Zephaniah with a Concordance: Suggestions for a Redaction History,” JBL 120 (2001): 671–84; Rachel Küng, “Eclairages sur la question des XII à partir du livre de Sophonie,” in Les recueils prophétiques de la Bible: origines, milieux, et contexte proche-oriental , ed.…”
unclassified