No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Polemics against Child Sacrifice in Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic History
... Peterson notices the basic but also the positive side of the polemics, describing them as "work on ideas of verbal warfare and destructive debate," while he says that in his study, however, polemical discussions were actually productive forms [12]. Other authors also recognize complex but with positive intent formed debates within polemics, which aim to produce new ideas and improve the future [13][14][15][16]. ...
Inclusive education needs constant support for its development and improvement. It is a long and demanding process that requires many changes, both in society and its attitude toward the rights and needs of all children to education, as well as in the management of the education system, which certainly implies the provision of various forms of support for inclusive education. From the position of an approach based on human rights, requirements move in the direction of the complete derogation of all segregated environments for children with disabilities; such attitudes are not emphasized on positive experiences in segregation (separate and stimulating education of the gifted, for example). We cannot ignore the need for children with different abilities for additional educational support. But is it reasonable to expect that teachers can respond to all the challenges that inclusive education sets before them in the context of the requirement to adapt the approach to the needs of each child? In polemic, we discuss the power and weakness of mainstream schools to respond to the requirements of the modern concept of inclusive education for all children and the need to keep professional individual educational support services for children who need them.
In the proposed article, the author tries to find the theological meaning of the noun νίκη, ‘victory’, present in the text of 1 Macc 3:19. In the entire book, it appears only in this verse, constituting one of its many interpretation puzzles. The analysis will go through several stages, starting with providing dictionary meanings of the term. A review of other terms used to describe the victories that the book uses will also be helpful in the inquiry. In this context, the question arises about the reason for their replacement in v. 19 by this hapax. On the other hand, a brief analysis of individual verses of the Septuagint containing νίκη will raise the question of whether the author could have been inspired by any of them using the noun in his text. Finally, it will be necessary to analyze selected works of Greek ancient literature, against which the meaning of the studied noun presence in the inspired text will become clearer.
This article investigates the justifications of mass violence in Deuteronomistic historiography through the lens of cultural trauma. The analysis concentrates on the representation and justification of mass violence, that is mass killings and other forms of violence against non-combatants, in Israel’s conquest of the promised land in the books of Deuteronomy and Joshua as well as during the loss of the land at the hand of the Assyrian and Babylonian armies, as narrated in 2 Kings 17–25. A comparison of these texts and their respective historical backgrounds helps to profile the contrasts and continuities between them. Trauma theory sheds light on both narratives as media to recover agency and to reconstruct collective identity for emerging Judaism via the historiographical representation of cultural trauma.
Scholars have used the regnal formulae in Kings to reconstruct at least three successive editions at work—a Hezekian version of Kings, a Josianic redaction, and an exilic redaction. Nevertheless, there have only rarely been examinations of how the evaluation of a particular king interacts with the narrative account of that king’s tenure. This paper will examine the ways in which Ahaz’s evaluation is at odds with the narrative depiction of his reign. By analyzing each element of his evaluation, this paper argues that there is evidence that a Josianic or later redactor modified an originally positive evaluation of this king. When taken on its own terms, the narrative account of Ahaz presents a king who rescued his nation, installed a large altar for public use, and removed iconography from the Jerusalem temple. Given this analysis, Ahaz should be understood as a precursor to, rather than a foil of, Hezekiah’s reform program.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.