Zu den religionsgeschichtilichen Hintergründen der jüdischen und christlichen Satanologie: Eine Antwort auf John J. Collins, zugleich Sondierungen zum Verhältnis zwischen der Zwei-Geister-Lehre in 1 Q S III,13-IV,26 und dualistischen Konzepten iranischer Herkunft

In some former contributions I have derived the Early Jewish myth about the eschatological fall of the devil (as attested by the War Scroll, the Apocalypse of Moses and the Assumption of Moses) from exegetical work on Dan 12,1. Collins has criticized this theory in an article devoted to my work on s...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Dochhorn, Jan 1968- (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:German
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Peeters [2020]
In: Ephemerides theologicae Lovanienses
Year: 2020, Volume: 96, Issue: 2, Pages: 199-260
Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains:B Zoroastrianism / Early Judaism / Devil / Dualism / History of religion studies (Subject)
RelBib Classification:AA Study of religion
BC Ancient Orient; religion
HD Early Judaism
NBH Angelology; demonology
Online Access: Volltext (Resolving-System)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1734303824
003 DE-627
005 20201016121158.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 201001s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||ger c
024 7 |a 10.2143/ETL.96.2.3288273  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1734303824 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1734303824 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a ger 
084 |a 0  |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)130097039  |0 (DE-627)490298311  |0 (DE-576)188661824  |4 aut  |a Dochhorn, Jan  |d 1968- 
109 |a Dochhorn, Jan 1968-  |a Dochorn, Jan 1968- 
245 1 0 |a Zu den religionsgeschichtilichen Hintergründen der jüdischen und christlichen Satanologie  |b Eine Antwort auf John J. Collins, zugleich Sondierungen zum Verhältnis zwischen der Zwei-Geister-Lehre in 1 Q S III,13-IV,26 und dualistischen Konzepten iranischer Herkunft 
264 1 |c [2020] 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a In some former contributions I have derived the Early Jewish myth about the eschatological fall of the devil (as attested by the War Scroll, the Apocalypse of Moses and the Assumption of Moses) from exegetical work on Dan 12,1. Collins has criticized this theory in an article devoted to my work on satanological traditions stating that rather a dualistic myth with Iranian backgrounds is underlying the scenario in the War Scroll. He warns about imagining revelation as a separate stream of tradition regarding it rather as human bricolage undertaken in a context where diverse cultural and religious traditions interfere. He obviously defends a paradigm according to which innovation in a religion (e.g. Judaism) is not at least prompted by external influence. Called back to a religion historical interpretation of Jewish and Christian texts by Collins I try to demonstrate in this article how interesting such research can be – and how meagre the results. Mythogenetic processes and religious innovation are far more often than by external influence incited by discourses within a religion, not at least by exegesis of authoritative tradition - in Judaism and in Iranian religion as well. Demonstrating this I present - by the way - some particular views concerning Jewish and Iranian religion, among others: 1. Jewish (and Christian) satanology is originally not dualistic. Dualistic traits tendentially emerge in satanology where Iranian religion already has disappeared as a potentially influential cultural power. One of the strongest versions of dualistic satanology is the dualism of modern exegetes who again and again denote - probably not really knowing what they do – the Devil as God’s enemy. 2. The famous dualistic passage in Yasna 30,3-6 which already Kuhn (cited by Collins) has compared with the Treatise on the Two Spirits in 1 QS III,13-IV,26 is highly debated in Gatha philology. I demonstrate that it was also debated by ancient Iranian exegetes. The standard version of Archaemenide Zoroastrianism (a dualism of Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu as the principles of good an evil, both being able to create) was derived from this text (cf. Yasna 57,17; Yašt 13,76) as well as the subordinate dualism propagated by Zurvanism. 3. Zurvanism is older than the Sassanides: Already Eudemos (according to Damascius) and Theopomp (according to Plutarch) attest in the 4th century BC concepts similar to the Zurvanite myth reported by Eznik of Kolb. This myth is interpreted here as being based upon exegetical work on Yasna 30,3-6. Rather than explaining the unhappiness of life (which it also does) it establishes Yašt (the liturgy) as the highest principle of the cosmic order (a concept which has parallels in the Brahmanas). 4. The reception of Iranian dualism by Plutarch and Alexander Polyhistor may indicate that Neopythagoreanism was a prominent context in which Greeks debated Iranian traditions (without being influenced considerably; they already knew what they believed they or their dualistic hero Pythagoras have received from Zoroaster). A milieu similar to Neopythagoreanism in Judaism (dualistic wisdom teachers?) could have been the context in which the author of the Treatise on the Two Spirits took up some hints of Iranian dualism. 
601 |a Antwort 
601 |a Collins, John J. 
601 |a Konzeption 
601 |a Herkunft 
652 |a AA:BC:HD:NBH 
689 0 0 |d s  |0 (DE-588)4173393-9  |0 (DE-627)104382805  |0 (DE-576)209949899  |2 gnd  |a Parsismus 
689 0 1 |d s  |0 (DE-588)4071487-1  |0 (DE-627)106097563  |0 (DE-576)209184124  |2 gnd  |a Frühjudentum 
689 0 2 |d s  |0 (DE-588)4059588-2  |0 (DE-627)106142992  |0 (DE-576)209131365  |2 gnd  |a Teufel 
689 0 3 |d s  |0 (DE-588)4130223-0  |0 (DE-627)105704148  |0 (DE-576)209617152  |2 gnd  |a Dualismus 
689 0 4 |d s  |0 (DE-588)4177739-6  |0 (DE-627)104674296  |0 (DE-576)209979801  |2 gnd  |a Religionsgeschichte  |g Fach 
689 0 |5 (DE-627) 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Ephemerides theologicae Lovanienses  |d Leuven : Peeters, 1985  |g 96(2020), 2, Seite 199-260  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)389124699  |w (DE-600)2147927-6  |w (DE-576)112891160  |x 1783-1423  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:96  |g year:2020  |g number:2  |g pages:199-260 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.96.2.3288273  |x Resolving-System 
951 |a AR 
BIB |a 1 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 3764616075 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1734303824 
LOK |0 005 20201016121222 
LOK |0 008 201001||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixzo 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1442043377  |a BC 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1442044160  |a HD 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1442052120  |a NBH 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1442042966  |a AA 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
STA 0 0 |a Devil,Devil,Satan,Devil in literature,Dualism,Dualism,Dualism in art,Early Judaism,Intertestamental Judaism,Zoroastrianism,Parsee religion,Mazdaism,Parsi religion 
STB 0 0 |a Diable,Diable,Dualisme,Dualisme,Judaïsme primitif,Parsisme 
STC 0 0 |a Diablo,Diablo,Dualismo,Dualismo,Judaísmo primitivo,Zoroastrismo 
STD 0 0 |a Diavolo,Diavolo,Dualismo,Dualismo,Giudaismo ellenistico,Giudaismo (II secolo a.C. -II secolo d.C.),Medio-giudaismo,Giudaismo,Medio-giudaismo,Parsismo 
STE 0 0 |a 二元论,二元论,早期犹太教,琐罗亚斯德教,拜火教,魔鬼,魔鬼 
STF 0 0 |a 二元論,二元論,早期猶太教,瑣羅亞斯德教,拜火教,魔鬼,魔鬼 
STG 0 0 |a Diabo,Diabo,Dualismo,Dualismo,Judaísmo primitivo,Zoroastrismo 
STH 0 0 |a Дуализм (мотив),Дуализм,Дьявол (мотив),Дьявол,Парсизм,Ранний иудаизм 
STI 0 0 |a Διάβολος <μοτίβο>,Διάβολος,Σατανάς,Σατανάς (μοτίβο),Δυισμός <μοτίβο>,Δυισμός,Δυαδισμός,Δυαδισμός (μοτίβο),Ζωροαστρισμός,Παρσισμός,Πρώιμος Ιουδαϊσμός 
SUB |a BIB  |a REL 
SYG 0 0 |a Mazdaismus,Zoroastrismus,Zarathustrismus , Spätjudentum , Satan , Doppelung,Dualität