Protestant Theological Faculty

The article deals with the judicial proceedings with Apostle Paul. The first part quotes the circumstances of Paul´s life and discusses in detail his status of Roman citizen. The second part pays attention primarily to the Paul´s judicial proceedings, as it describes the author of the Acts of apostles. Besides contextual description of historical Roman judicial procedures and laws the study pursues also specific understanding of the author Luke, his view on Roman Empire and its judicial practice and theological aspects, brought by the author into Paul´s case. Here are primarily concerned the structure of the process and the function of Jewish king as processional element. All this happens in comparison with an other process described by the author, i. e. with the Jesus´ process in the Gospel of Luke.

"The contribution deals with Paul’s trial. It pursues the analysis of the historical background of
Paul’s trial, the development of Roman law and trial elements with emphasis on the appeal
(appellatio)  practice  and  deals  with  problems  of  historical  resources,  too.  The  focus  of  our
attention are the Acts of Apostles as the only preserved period resource of this kind of trial.
With respect to the character of this book the attention is paid to the structure of the book in
connection with the intention of its author. In this connection the theological aspects of Paul’s
trial are discussed, too. Marginally are mentioned problems of Paul’s Roman citizenship. "

Der Artikel befasst sich mit dem christlichen Apologeten Arnobius von Sicca, der in der Zeit der diokletianischen Christenverfolgung wirkte, und mit seinem apologetischen Werk Adversus nationes. Nachdem die historischen Quellen und biographische Angaben des Autors analysiert worden waren, informieren wir über den wichtigsten Editionen des Werkes Adversus nationes. Weitere Absätze des Artikels umfassen vor allem die Strukturell- und Inhaltscharakteristik und natürlich auch die Problematik der literarischen Quellen des Arnobius. Im letzten Abschnitt wurde der Umriß der wichtigsten theologischen Themen des Schriftes behandelt. Es handelt sich hier primär um Arnobius’s Gottesverständnis, seine Charakteristik des Wirkens Christi und um die Verständnis der Trinitätslehre im ganzen. Weiter wurden auch die Auffassung der Seele und die Möglichkeit des Gotteserkenntnis erwähnt. In dem Text wurde ganz kurz auch die Argumentationsmethode des Arnobius beschrieben, mit der auch die Problematik der philosophischen Quellen eng zusammenhängt, weil gerade durch heidnische Philosophie das logische Konzept des Werkes beeinflusst wurde.

The paper aims to present a Christian author Arnobius of Sicca, that is relatively not much known in our country and who lived at the turn of the 3rd and 4th century in North African Sicca. Although Arnobius’ apology Adversus nationes raises in the scholarly research still many questions and contradictions, and the author himself with his literary style, as well as with some doctrinal inconcreteness looks more like an habitual windbag than like a Christian apologist, he uncovers in his work a series of problems that can contribute to understanding the situation of Christianity just before the tolerance edict of the Emperor Constantine.
Proceeding from the testimony of ancient authors (Jerome) about Arnobius itself, and especially from the testimony of the author itself, ergo from the text of Adversus nationes, we shall try to analyze the historical influences that shaped Arnobius as author, the role and importance of the historical context in Arnobius’ argumentation, the author’s method of description and evaluation of historical events and his work with them.

This paper presents the anthropological issues of the Arnobius’ work Adversus nationes as captured in the first two books of that work. Arnobius of Sikka, African rhetorician of the time of Diocletian, is an author of a comprehensive apologia known as Adversus nationes.
He focuses in it on a famous controversy with pagan cults and also on some aspects of contemporary philosophy and Christian theology. Pivotal are in this respect the sections of the second book in which he presents his conception of man and a totally unique concept of soul whose basic characteristic is qualitas media, ergo mediocrity, which represents Arnobius’ attempt to deal with the ancient philosophical and theological ideas and it is also a specific of the author. Proceeding primarily from the Arnobius’ text itself and from the historical context of his life and work, we shall attempt to analyze the author’s theological position on this matter, an attention will be further paid to the motives and methods of Arnobius’ argumentation.
These specific aspects of Arnobius’ thinking give an unusual nature to his apologetical method, constisting, inter alia, in the degradation of the significance of pagan philosophy in its relation to faith and in highlighted conception of the Christian God. Arnobius therefore also in philsosophical consideration pursues primarily an apologetic intent and so his conception of the soul as qualitas media is not a philosophical speculation, but an apologetic instrument. Just the reflections of the human soul are in theological perspective closely associated with Arnobius’ conception of Christ, and therefore we consider it is appropriate to examine them in detail.

Arnobius ze Sikky je jedním z méně známých latinsky píšících křesťanských autorů. Je autorem jediného dochovaného díla, apologie Adversus nationes, kterou sepsal pravděpodobně v ob-dobí Diokleciánova pronásledování křesťanů nebo krátce po něm. Zvláštní pozornost zasluhuje Arnobiovo jedinečné poje-tí křesťanství. Dílo bylo totiž zřejmě psáno krátce po autorově konverzi a zachycuje proto zcela specifi ckým způsobem, jakoby zvnějšku, pohled na křesťanské společenství. Z tohoto důvodu se autor nevěnuje většině dobových věroučných otázek, není in-formován o interním dění v církvi. Jeho situace je tedy v mno-hém podobná situaci dnešní společnosti, mající nevelký vhled do situace a věroučných specifi k církve. Na druhé straně je však Arnobius coby původem pohan velice dobře vzdělán v pohanské mytologii a teologii. Právě pro tyto znalosti, jež neváhá ve svém textu demonstrovat, je Arnobius cenným pramenem informací také pro zájemce o antické náboženství, religionisty, fi losofy a historiky starověku. Naším cílem bylo nabídnout českému čtenáři studii o Arnobi-ově postoji ke křesťanství, řecké fi losofi i a náboženství, doplně-nou o historický kontext. Nedílnou součástí této práce je také historicky první překlad apologie Adversus nationes do češtiny. Navzdory svému názvu neobsahuje kniha překlad Minuciova dialogu Octavius. Ten je však pro svou dialogickou formu a te-matické zaměření užit v textu studie jako stěžejní materiál pro komparaci teologických motivů.

The article discusses two related textual differences between MT and LXX in Zech 11:7a,11b. While MT reads ‫ן‬ ֵ‫כ‬ ָ‫ל‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫יּ‬ ִ‫נ‬ ֲ‫ע‬ ‫ֹאן‬ ‫צּ‬ ַ‫ה‬ (v. 7) and ‫ן‬ ֵ‫כ‬ ‫י‬ ֵ‫יּ‬ ִ‫נ‬ ֲ‫ע‬ ‫ֹאן‬ ‫צּ‬ ַ‫ה‬ (v. 11), LXX has εἰς τὴν Χαναανῖτιν and οἱ Χαναναῖοι τὰ πρόβατα. It is often believed that the original text read ‫לכנעניי‬ ‫הצאן‬ in v. 7 and ‫כנעניי‬ ‫הצאן‬ in v. 11. The article brings new observations in favor of this reconstruction and clarifies the processes that led to the appearance of the readings attested in MT and LXX. Za 11,7.11 présente un problème textuel bien connu : d'après le TM du v. 7, le prophète s'est mis à paître « les plus misérables du troupeau » (ainsi LSG), tandis que dans la LXX, Dieu lui-même mènera paître les brebis en Canaan ; similairement, au v. 11, le TM parle de nouveau des misérables du troupeau, alors que dans la LXX apparaissent les Cananéens, en lien avec d'autres différences textuelles. Il est généralement reconnu qu'à la base de cette divergence se trouve une division différente des mots. Tandis que le TM lit les lettres) ‫ל‬ (‫כן‬ séparément des lettres suivantes, ‫,עניי‬ la LXX les lit toutes (ou au moins un groupe similaire) comme un seul mot (au v. 7 avec une préposition proclitique). La plupart des chercheurs s'accordent sur la reconstruction de la leçon qui serait la plus ancienne et qui parlerait des « trafiquants du troupeau » (ainsi la TOB au v. 11, et similairement la Bible de Jérusalem), mais les raisons de l'apparition des variantes du TM et de la LXX ne sont pas entièrement claires. Cet article apporte en premier lieu de nouvelles observations pour soutenir la reconstruction tex-tuelle mentionnée, et il s'efforce d'éclairer les processus menant à l'apparition des leçons attestées dans le TM et la LXX.

The article tries to show that 2 Sam 7 is a complete reinterpretation of Judean royal ideology for the needs of the exilic situation of the Davidic royal house. A more ancient form of the ideology is attested in Ps 132 (even if the psalm itself, at least in its present form with the conditioning of the dynastic promise , can hardly be pre-exilic). In the same way as many other texts from the ancient Near East, Ps 132 exhibits a close relationship between the temple and the kingship: David receives the dynastic promise as a reward for his care of Yhwh's sanctuary (vv. 1-6.10), and the eternity of the dynasty is guaranteed by Yhwh's eternal presence on Zion (vv. 12–14). Contrary to that, 2 Sam 7 rejects both the concept of the gift of the dynasty in reward of the merits for the sanctuary (5b + 11bβ), and the idea of the temple as God's dwelling place and guarantee of the dynasty (5b + 13a). The purpose of the dynastic promise being linked to the polemic against the traditional significance of the temple in royal ideology is to preserve – or to establish – the validity of the promise after the fall of the temple. The Dtr author of 2 Sam 7 struggles hard to deny the traditional connection between the temple and the dynasty so as to render the hope feasible that the dynasty would not share the fate of the temple.

This book is a study of the texts referring or alluding to the dynastic promise to David in the books of Samuel and Kings (and the "Law of the King" in Deut 17,14-20). Attention is paid to the textual problems of some of the studied passages, especially 2 Sam 7 which has different meanings in the most important textual witnesses (MT, LXXB, LXXL, 1 Chr 17MT, 1 Chr 17LXX). Although the most ancient retrievable text of 2 Sam 7 is not to be identified with MT, this text form corresponds to the original basic meaning of the chapter. Special attention is given to the value of 1 Chr 17 for the reconstruction of the oldest text of 2 Sam 7. There are many "synonymous" differences between 2 Sam 7 and 1 Chr 17, which cannot be explained as resulting from "mistakes" or "tendentious" (e.g. ideologically motivated) changes in one of the two traditions. A statistic study of the patterns of agreements among the witnesses leads to the conclusion that evaluating these differences "case by case" would lead to arbitrary decisions; the great majority of these differences are a result of the Chronicler's relatively free approach to his source. The emergence of 2 Sam 7,1-17 may be construed in two historical contexts. In the "exilic" period, the purpose of the dynastic promise being linked to the polemic against the traditional significance of the temple in royal ideology might be to preserve-or to establish-the validity of the promise after the fall of the temple. Alternatively, 2 Sam 7,1-17 might have been written at the time after Zerubbabel (at the end of the 6th / beginning of the 5th c.?), during the period when the temple of Jerusalem was restored, but the Davidides could not derive their legitimacy from it, since the cult and the temple were understood as the domain of priests under the auspices of Persian rule. The author of 2 Sam 7,1-17 may also be thought to be responsible for 1 Sam 10,8 + 13,7b-15a and 1 Sam 25, the texts that primarily emphasize, in accordance with 2 Sam 7,14-15, the unconditional nature of the dynastic promise once it is given. In the books of Kings, 1 Kgs 2,24.33.45; 1 Kgs 11,29-38*; 15,4; 2 Kgs 8,19 could be ascribed to this hand as well. All these texts could have been written in both the Neo-Babylonian and Persian period, similarly to 2 Sam 7,1-17. However, some other references to the dynastic promise in Samuel (1 Sam 2,27-36; 2 Sam 7,18-29; 22,51; 23,1-7) cannot be dated to the Neo-Babylonian period (or even the very beginning of the Persian period). Theoretically, these texts could belong to the same redactional layer as 2 Sam 7,1-17, but only in case we adopt the later one of the two suggested dates of its origin. In contrast, if the earlier date is accepted for the first group of texts, the second group must have been added later (in one or several stages). At any rate, whereas all these texts may be regarded as a defense of actual political interests of the ex-royal family in the exilic and/or post-exilic period, this does not hold for 1 Kgs 2,4; 8,25; 9,4-5 where the power of the Davidic kings is explicitly conditional upon the eternal loyalty of David's descendants to Yhwh. These passages cannot be ascribed to the same author(s) as the other references to the dynastic promise in Samuel-Kings; on the other hand, this redaction in Kings was perhaps not driven by actual anti-Davidic political interests, representing rather an attempt to explain the unfulfillment of the dynastic promise. Following W. Oswald (and building on the work of S. McKenzie), we ascribe the oracles against the founders of the dynasties (or, in the case of Ahab, the dynasty's other "prominent" member) ruling in northern Israel and the related fulfillment notices (