The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

khazarzar.skeptik.net
from khazarzar.skeptik.net More from this publisher
18.07.2013 Views

CHILTON Aramaic and Targumic Antecedents of 'Justification' 391 to be understood as positing a formal replacement of the cult by Jesus' death. 39 The standard references to similar usages in 2 Maccabees (3.33) and 4 Maccabees (6.28, 29; 17.20-22) ought to have warned commentators long ago against any reading which involves such notions, whether in the key of Hebrews (as in Cranfield's reading) or in the key of a transcendent eschatology (as in Michel's reading). 2 Mace. 3.33, after all, simply speaks of a high priest 'making appeasement' (TioioDio.evo'u 5e TOV dpxiepecoq TOV l^aajiov) by cultic means. That usage is an extension of the Septuagintal equation between I'Xeox; and such verbs as n'po, nrn and K03, Drn, and "is?, where the emphasis falls on the divine affect involved in forgiveness. 40 Even 4 Maccabees, which is probably too late a composition to be used to represent the milieu which was the matrix of Paul's thought, maintains a distinction between God's pleasure in sacrifice, and the means of that sacrifice. In 6.28, God is asked to be pleased with his people (iXecoq yevoo) TW e9vei) by Eleazar, and on that basis to make his blood their purification and his life their ransom (6.29). Then, in chapter seventeen, it is said of the seven brothers that, in the manner of Eleazar, they purified the homeland in that they became a ransom for the sin of the nation (v. 21, mi IT\V mTp{5a Ka9apia6fivat coarcep avti\|A)%ov Y£YOv6ia

392 The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context The usage of the Septuagint, and particularly of 2 Maccabees and 4 Maccabees, militates against the complete identification of the iA,cxaTT|piov of Rom. 3.25 with the mss of Leviticus 16, as, of course, does the absence of the definite article in Paul's usage. There is a relationship between the two, because the iXaaif|piov of Leviticus 16 (vv. 2,13, 14,15) is where the high priest makes appeasement (e^iXdaetai, v. 16, cf. vv. 17, 18, 20); that connection is achieved in both the Masoretic Text and Neophyti by means of the root ISD. Taken together, Neophyti and the Septuagint demonstrate that the rnsD/iA,acrrf|piov was understood to be the place where God was appeased, 41 the occasion of efficacious sacrifice. That also explains why the Greek term appears for rrutf at Ezek. 43.14, 17, 20. Jesus for Paul is a iA,aarf|piov because he provides the occasion on which God may be appeased, an opportunity for the correct offering of sacrifice in Jerusalem. This rectitude lies behind the emphasis upon God's righteousness. 'The righteous', after all, are held within the Targum of Isaiah to be the recipients of that joy whose epicenter is the sanctuary (cf. 24.16; 38.11, and 5.17; 66.24). 42 More particularly, the establishment of correct worship in the Temple is signalled in Dan. 8.14 with the use of the verb pljsjj. Other usages of the root follow (9.7, 14, 16, 18), perhaps most notably with the verb ns? in 9.24. God within this section of Daniel is literally both righteous and making righteous. The association of those two ideas is by no means innovative. Righteousness and purity are paradigmatically associated in Pss. 18.21 (v. 20 in English versions); 24.3-6; 26.4-7; 51.4,8,9,12 (English vv. 2,6,7,10); 119.9. The reference in Ps. 24.5 to the person who is just receiving righteousness (together with blessing) from God is especially apposite. But the usages of Daniel are striking in that they formally present God as both righteous (cf. 9.7,14,16) and making righteous (9.24, and cf. 12.3) an unrighteous nation (9.7,16,18). The link to the establishment of correct worship in the Temple in Dan. 8.14 is striking, but such is the tendency to isolate the cult from ethics within Western interpretation that critics have suggested accepting the emendation of the versions to 'cleanse' here. Andre 41. Cf. also '115? n'3 at Lev. 16.2 in Onqelos, and the use of psso in respect of the altar in 2QJN 8.5. 42. Cf. The Glory of Israel, 'II. B "The Righteous" («'pns)', pp. 18-24. For an earlier usage, cf. 4QTestuz.

392 <strong>The</strong> <strong>Aramaic</strong> <strong>Bible</strong>: <strong>Targums</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>their</strong> <strong>Historical</strong> <strong>Context</strong><br />

<strong>The</strong> usage of the Septuag<strong>in</strong>t, and particularly of 2 Maccabees and<br />

4 Maccabees, militates aga<strong>in</strong>st the complete identification of the<br />

iA,cxaTT|piov of Rom. 3.25 with the mss of Leviticus 16, as, of<br />

course, does the absence of the def<strong>in</strong>ite article <strong>in</strong> Paul's usage. <strong>The</strong>re<br />

is a relationship between the two, because the iXaaif|piov of<br />

Leviticus 16 (vv. 2,13, 14,15) is where the high priest makes appeasement<br />

(e^iXdaetai, v. 16, cf. vv. 17, 18, 20); that connection is<br />

achieved <strong>in</strong> both the Masoretic Text and Neophyti by means of the<br />

root ISD. Taken together, Neophyti and the Septuag<strong>in</strong>t demonstrate<br />

that the rnsD/iA,acrrf|piov was understood to be the place where God<br />

was appeased, 41 the occasion of efficacious sacrifice. That also expla<strong>in</strong>s<br />

why the Greek term appears for rrutf at Ezek. 43.14, 17, 20.<br />

Jesus for Paul is a iA,aarf|piov because he provides the occasion on<br />

which God may be appeased, an opportunity for the correct offer<strong>in</strong>g<br />

of sacrifice <strong>in</strong> Jerusalem. This rectitude lies beh<strong>in</strong>d the emphasis upon<br />

God's righteousness. '<strong>The</strong> righteous', after all, are held with<strong>in</strong> the<br />

Targum of Isaiah to be the recipients of that joy whose epicenter is the<br />

sanctuary (cf. 24.16; 38.11, and 5.17; 66.24). 42 More particularly, the<br />

establishment of correct worship <strong>in</strong> the Temple is signalled <strong>in</strong><br />

Dan. 8.14 with the use of the verb pljsjj. Other usages of the root<br />

follow (9.7, 14, 16, 18), perhaps most notably with the verb ns? <strong>in</strong><br />

9.24. God with<strong>in</strong> this section of Daniel is literally both righteous and<br />

mak<strong>in</strong>g righteous.<br />

<strong>The</strong> association of those two ideas is by no means <strong>in</strong>novative.<br />

Righteousness and purity are paradigmatically associated <strong>in</strong> Pss. 18.21<br />

(v. 20 <strong>in</strong> English versions); 24.3-6; 26.4-7; 51.4,8,9,12 (English<br />

vv. 2,6,7,10); 119.9. <strong>The</strong> reference <strong>in</strong> Ps. 24.5 to the person who is<br />

just receiv<strong>in</strong>g righteousness (together with bless<strong>in</strong>g) from God is<br />

especially apposite. But the usages of Daniel are strik<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> that they<br />

formally present God as both righteous (cf. 9.7,14,16) and mak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

righteous (9.24, and cf. 12.3) an unrighteous nation (9.7,16,18).<br />

<strong>The</strong> l<strong>in</strong>k to the establishment of correct worship <strong>in</strong> the Temple <strong>in</strong><br />

Dan. 8.14 is strik<strong>in</strong>g, but such is the tendency to isolate the cult from<br />

ethics with<strong>in</strong> Western <strong>in</strong>terpretation that critics have suggested<br />

accept<strong>in</strong>g the emendation of the versions to 'cleanse' here. Andre<br />

41. Cf. also '115? n'3 at Lev. 16.2 <strong>in</strong> Onqelos, and the use of psso <strong>in</strong> respect of<br />

the altar <strong>in</strong> 2QJN 8.5.<br />

42. Cf. <strong>The</strong> Glory of Israel, 'II. B "<strong>The</strong> Righteous" («'pns)', pp. 18-24. For an<br />

earlier usage, cf. 4QTestuz.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!