Adam, Satan, and the King of Tyre: The Interpretation of Ezekiel 28:11-19 in Late Antiquity (Jewish and Christian Perspectives)

Adam, Satan, and the King of Tyre: The Interpretation of Ezekiel 28:11-19 in Late Antiquity (Jewish and Christian Perspectives)

Hector M. Patmore

Language: English

Pages: 262

ISBN: 9004207228

Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub


The oracle against the King of Tyre, found in Ezekiel 28.12-19, is a difficult text that inspired diverse interpretations in Late Antiquity. For example, according to one rabbinic tradition the text spoke of the first man, Adam, while the Church Fathers found in the same text a description of the fall of Satan. This book studies the rabbinic sources, patristic literature, the Targum, and the ancient translations, and seeks to understand the reasons for the diverse interpretation, the interaction between the exegetical traditions and the communities of interpreters, in particular between Jews and Christians, and the effect the specific form and wording of the text had on the formation and development of each interpretation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the garden of God . . .” claims that Adam was punished for Hiram’s future claims of divinity, foreseen by God: R. Hama b. R. Hanina37 said: Adam was worthy not to taste death, so why then was the penalty of death decreed against him? Because the Holy One, blessed be He, foresaw that Nebuchadnezzar and Hiram King of Tyre would make themselves into gods. Therefore was death decreed against him. Thus it is written, You were in Eden, the garden of God (Ezek 28:13): was then Hiram in Eden? Surely not!

against unwarranted human pride. In a homily on Ezekiel, now preserved only as a fragment in catenae, Origen reflects on the phrase “you bound on (ἐνδέδεσαι) every precious stone” (28:13). The high priest, he observes, was adorned with these stones (denoting the twelve sons of Israel and the trees of paradise), and the gates of Jerusalem were built with them. The prince of Tyre too received this material glory, but his error was to mistake a gracious gift for his own achievement. The prince of

על‬, later corrected to ‫ על‬28:13). Analysis of Textual Variants Excluding these minor errors we are left with around 30 variants requiring further consideration. In weighing these variants we bear in mind that, in the absence of Babylonian witnesses, the Yemeni text-traditions are generally considered to stand closer to the Babylonian type, Sephardi and Italian witnesses take second place, while Ashkenazi witnesses are thought most distant. Secondly, we know that the text of Targum Jonathan

at 28:13 ‫ואת ]ברם‬. 28:14 ‫ דקודשא ]קדשא‬First Rabbinic Bible; MS Solger 1–7. fol. Nuernberg; MS Or. Fol. 1–4 Berlin MS Solger 1–7. fol. Nuernberg is related to the Vorlage of the First Rabbinic Bible.47 The witnesses and examples of similar usage (cf. TgEzek 17:23; 20:40; 34:14; 37:22) lead to the conclusion that this reading is secondary. 28:15 ‫ מן יומא ]מיומא‬MS Barberini Or. 161–164 Vatican | ‫ ביומא‬MS Parm. 3187–3189 Parma The reading ‫ מן יומא‬probably originates with the scribe of MS

and Hebrew Bible, 203–218. 1 134 chapter five of the work of the translator was to consider how the text might best be vocalized and broken up into syntactically coherent units, though it is possible that they were guided in this by established oral traditions.4 Besides the interpretative element necessitated by the process of translation itself—a element Tov has termed ‘linguistic exegesis’—the translators also altered the text to reflect what they thought the Hebrew meant in light of their

Download sample

Download