Is the phrase אם שׁלמים [ʾm šlmm] or משׁל מים [mšl mym] found in Nahum 1:12? The textual tradition is divided. The Septuagint (LXX) and the Peshitta support the reading משׁל מים [mšl mym] in Nahum 1:12, whereas the Masoretic text, the Targum, and the Vulgate preserve אם שׁלמים [ʾm šlmm] (‘though they are at full strength’ or ‘though they are complete’). This disagreement prompts significant inquiries regarding the verse’s initial phrasing, its interpretation, and the origins of the differing readings that arose during the transmission process. This article utilizes textual criticism as its main approach – analyzing manuscript evidence, assessing the likelihood of transcription and translation variations, and considering contextual and linguistic elements – to identify the most probable original text and to explore the potential explanations for the discrepancies among these ancient sources.
The purpose of this article is to present the concept of Divinity developed by American philosopher and theologian John D. Caputo. It is worth noting that, for Caputo, Divinity is not so much a personal God as a Mystery that appears as a spectre. Caputo emphasises the pluralism of approaches to the divine Mystery and encourages openness to its various manifestations. The path to understanding it is not through metaphysics, but through phenomenology and hermeneutics. In each case, it is narrowed down to the intra-world dimension. Divinity is thus considered in terms of event, the depth of being, call and promise. These four fundamental aspects are the subject of the analyses, determining also their structure. The specific object of the promise is a new moral order of the world. Its expression is an ideal social order, identified with perfect democracy. Divinity would be its symbol.
The aim of the current article is to highlight the original arguments through which the conspicuous 13th century Franciscan theologian Matteo d’Acquasparta (1240–1302) supports the belief in the Virgin Mary’s immediate resurrection and her assumption with body and soul into heaven. To this end, we methodologically resort to primary sources through a detailed analysis of our author’s Mariological writings on the subject. In this regard, we have followed his argumentative approaches step by step to base his defense of the Assumptionist thesis on the various essential aspects that structure it. Our analytical investigation thus reveals the originality and conviction with which this Franciscan scholar firmly defended the belief in the Assumption of Mary, with body and soul, into heaven.
This article explores a constructive dialogue between Friedrich Schleiermacher’s general hermeneutics and Karl Barth’s theological exegesis, aiming to move beyond their perceived opposition. While Schleiermacher emphasizes human understanding through grammatical and psychological interpretation, Barth insists on the priority of divine revelation and the theological content of Scripture. This paper argues that a theologically informed theory of understanding can reconcile these positions. By engaging with hermeneutical theorists such as Gadamer and Ricoeur, and incorporating theological categories like the role of the Holy Spirit, the communal nature of reading, and the doctrine of human as sinner and saint, the article proposes a more integrated approach. This approach affirms both divine initiative and human participation in the interpretive process, suggesting that Schleiermacher’s insights can enrich Barth’s exegesis, and vice versa. In doing so, it advocates for a theological hermeneutics that is both faithful to the Scripture and attentive to the realities of human understanding.
Wolność dla starożytnych Greków miała trzy aspekty: osobisty jako przeciwieństwo niewoli, polityczny w mieście-państwie (niepoddanym żadnemu imperium) oraz wewnętrzny mędrca, niezależny od sytuacji zewnętrznej. Wolność była rozumiana jako możność życia według własnej woli, ale znany był również problem jej granic. Filozofowie, a zwłaszcza stoicy, starali się uzgodnić wolność z etyką i mądrością, sądząc, że tylko mędrzec – jako dobry – jest naprawdę wolny, podczas gdy źli są z natury niewolnikami. Na tym tle łatwiej zrozumieć teksty Nowego Testamentu mówiące o wolności. Ga 3,28 zakłada wolność wewnętrzną dana przez Chrystusa jako coś ważniejszego niż stan prawny. W Ga 4,22–23 zniewolenie przypisane Żydom, choć ci uważają się za wolnych, pojęte jest jako zależność od kajdan wewnętrznych. W Ga 4,26 chrześcijanie są duchowo wolni. Teksty Ga 2,4 oraz 5,1 dotyczą wewnętrznej wolności danej przez Chrystusa. Chrześcijanie nie powinni wracać do swojego poprzedniego stanu. W Ga 5,13 wolność powinna się kierować miłością, a nie pragnieniami ciała. Dalsze teksty listu zawierają aluzje do wyzwolenia. 17 podobnych fragmentów z Nowego Testamentu idzie w zbliżonym kierunku, tworząc spójną koncepcję wolności.
