Yustinus Martir: Perbedaan antara revisi

Konten dihapus Konten ditambahkan
Baris 109:
Yustin kadang-kadang menggunakan Injil Matius langsung sebagai sumber nubuat-nubuat Perjanjian Lama untuk melengkapi sumber kesaksiannya.<ref name="Skarsaune 1987 pp. 130,163">Skarsaune (1987) ''The Proof From Prophecy'' pp.&nbsp;130,163; p.&nbsp;130 – "Yustin sometimes had direct access to Matthew and quotes OT texts directly from him.&nbsp;... (The direct borrowings are most frequent in the ''Dialogue''; in the ''Apology'', Mic 5:1 in ''1 Apol''. 34:1 may be the only instance.)" p.&nbsp;163 note: Diagram of the internal structure of the putative "kerygma source", showing the insertion of scriptural quotation of Mic 5:1 from Mt. 2:6</ref><ref name="Koester 1990 pp. 382–383">Koester (1990) ''Ancient Christian Gospels'' pp.&nbsp;382–383 – "In the discussion of the prophecy for the place of Jesus' birth (''1 Apology'' 34), Yustin only quotes the prophecy of Micah 5:1 and then remarks that Jesus was born in this 'village in the land of Judah which is 35 stades from Jerusalem' (''1 Apol''. 34:2). No actual narrative material from a gospel is quoted.&nbsp;... However, the quotation of the text of Micah 5:1 is not given in the text of the LXX; rather, Yustin follows the form of the text quoted in Matt. 2:6.&nbsp;... The form of the quotation that appears in Matt 2:6 departs considerably from both the LXX and the Hebrew text. It is, in fact, a combination of Micah 5:1 and 2 Sam 5:2; only the latter speaks of the prince's function as the Shepard of Israel. The conflated quotation was wholly the work of Matthew. There can be no question that Yustin is quoting this Matthean text."</ref> Namun, kutipan-kutipan penggenapan dari sumber-sumber ini lebih sering berbentuk harmonisasi Injil Matius dan Lukas.<ref name="Koester 1990 p. 365">Koester (1990) ''Ancient Christian Gospels'' p.&nbsp;365 – "Mayoritas besar perkataan yang dikutip dalam tulisan-tulisan Yustin adalah harmonisasi teks Matius dan Lukas. Harmonisasi ini bukan sekadarnya atau kebetulan, melainkan sistematis dan konsisten, (ini tentunya tidak termasuk ...kutipan dari ingatan quotation from memory as an explanation for Yustin's harmonizations) and they involve the composition of longer sections of parallel sayings from both gospels."</ref>
 
Koester berpendapat bahwa Yustin telah menyusun suatu harmoni Injil awal sejalan dengan baris-baris harmoni Injil karya muridnya, [[Tatian]], yaitu ''[[Diatessaron]]''.<ref name="Koester 2000 p. 344">Koester, (2000) ''Introduction to the New Testament: History and literature of Early Christianity.'' 2nd ed., 1982 1st ed., p.&nbsp;344 – "On the basis of the gospel quotations of the First Apology and the Dialogue with Trypho, one can conclude with great certainty that Yustin also had composed a harmony of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke (he did not know the Gospel of John), which is lost but was used by his student Tatian for the composition of his famous and influential four-gospel harmony known as the Diatessaron."</ref> Namun, keberadaan suatu harmoni yang sebagai suatu koleksi terpisah ditentang oleh sarjana [[:en:Arthur Bellinzoni|Arthur Bellinzoni]].<ref name="Bellinzoni 1967 p. 141">Bellinzoni (1967) ''Sayings of Jesus in Justin Martyr'' p.&nbsp;141 – "It must, however, be emphasized that there is absolutely no evidence that Yustin ever composed a complete harmony of the synoptic gospels; his harmonies were of limited scope and were apparently composed for didactic purposes. Whether the thought of a full gospel harmony ever occurred to Yustin can only be conjectured, but he apparently never undertook to compose such a work."</ref><ref name="Koester 1990 p. 370">Koester (1990) ''The Ancient Christian Gospels'' p.&nbsp;370 footnote 2: "Bellinzoni (''Sayings of Jesus in Justin Martyr'' p.&nbsp;100) collapses stage (1) [a systematic harmonization of the texts of Matthew and Luke] and (2) [the composition of a cluster of sayings that warn against false prophets] of this process. He assumes that the harmonizations were made specifically for the composition of a catechism. This assumption, however, cannot explain why also the narrative materials quoted by Yustin were drawn from a harmonized gospel text."</ref> TheApakah questionmateri ofharmoni whetherInjil theyang harmonizedditemukan gospeldalam materials found intulisan-tulisan Yustin's writingsberasal camedari fromharmoni aInjil preexistingyang gospelsudah harmonyada oratau weredikombinasi assembledsaat asmenyusun partteks ofbukti analkitabiah, integral process of creating scriptural [[prooftext]]s is an ongoing subject ofmasih scholarlyterus investigationditeliti.<ref name="Koester 1990 p. 378">Koester (1990) ''Ancient Christian Gospels'' p.&nbsp;378 – "The question is whether Yustin composed these harmonizations and inserted additional phrases just for the purpose of his demonstration of scriptural proof or whether he drew on a written gospel text that was already harmonized and expanded. It seems to me that we are not witnessing the work of an apologist who randomly selects pieces of various gospels and invents additional phrases for the purpose of a tight argument of literal fulfillment of scripture; nor can one solve the complex problems of Yustin's quotations of gospel narrative materials by the hypothesis of a ready-made, established text of a harmonized gospel as his source. Rather, his writings permit insights into a school of scriptural exegesis in which careful comparison of written gospels with the prophecies of scripture endeavored to produce an even more comprehensive new gospel text."</ref>
 
==== "Sumber kerygma" ====
Baris 123:
 
:"Dan kemudian, ketika Yesus datang ke [[sungai Yordan]] di mana [[Yohanes Pembaptis|Yohanes]] [[Baptisan|membaptis]], dan ketika Yesus turun ke dalam air, suatu api tersulut dalam Yordan, dan ketika Ia bangkit keluar dari air, [[Roh Kudus]] hinggap di atas-Nya dalam bentuk burung merpati, seperti <U>ditulis oleh para rasul</U> mengenai [[Kristus]] kita ini." (''Dial''. 88:3)
<!--
:"And when Jesus came to the Jordan, and being supposed to be the son of [[St. Joseph|Joseph]] the carpenter..., the Holy Spirit, and for man's sake, as I said before, fluttered down upon Him, and a voice came at the time out of the heavens – which was spoken also by [[David]], when he said, impersonating Christ, what the [[God the Father|Father]] was going to say to Him – 'You are [[Son of God|My Son]], [[Gospel of Luke#Disputed verses|this day I have begotten you]]'." (''Dial''. 88:8)<ref name="Skarsaune 1987 p. 198">Skarsaune (1987) ''The Proof From Prophecy'' pp.&nbsp;197–198,391–392; p.&nbsp;197 – "Yustin's narrative is a harmonization of the Synoptic accounts. There are other non-synoptic details in the context, however, which may indicate a non-synoptic source besides the Synoptic Gospels." pp.&nbsp;391–392 – "I have argued above that the narrative of Jesus' baptism in ''Dial''. 88:3 derives from the "recapitulation" source.&nbsp;... Men believed that Jesus was the son of Joseph, but the heavenly voice proclaimed him as God's son. Perhaps the mention of the fire is related to this idea: It may have been conceived of as a purifying or testing fire.&nbsp;... Jesus at his baptism was tested as God's son by the fire, but not made God's son at his baptism. This, I gather, is also the idea embodied in Yustin's narrative: Jesus was not made or established as God's son in his baptism, but he was proved to be God's son – proved by testing, or by conquering the fire."</ref>
 
:"AndDan whenketika JesusYesus camedatang toke the JordanYordan, anddan beingdianggap supposed to be the son ofputra [[St.Santo JosephYusuf|JosephYusuf]] thesi carpentertukang kayu..., the HolyRoh SpiritKuddus, anddan foruntuk man'skepentingan sakemanusia, as Isebagaimana saidkukatakan beforesebelumnya, flutteredhinggap downdi upon Himatasnya, and a voice camedan atsuatu thesuara timeterdengar outsaat ofitu thedari heavenssorgawhichyang wasjuga spokendiucapkan also byoleh [[DavidDaud]], whenketika heia saidberkata, impersonatingmewakili ChristKristus, what thebahwa [[GodAllah the FatherBapa|FatherBapa]] was going to sayakan tomengatakan Himkepada-Nya – 'You areEngkaulah [[SonAllah of GodPutra|My SonAnak-Ku]], [[Gospelhari ofini Luke#DisputedAku verses|this day I have begotten you]]memperanakkan-Mu'." (''Dial''. 88:8)<ref name="Skarsaune 1987 p. 198">Skarsaune (1987) ''The Proof From Prophecy'' pp.&nbsp;197–198,391–392; p.&nbsp;197 – "Yustin's narrative is a harmonization of the Synoptic accounts. There are other non-synoptic details in the context, however, which may indicate a non-synoptic source besides the Synoptic Gospels." pp.&nbsp;391–392 – "I have argued above that the narrative of Jesus' baptism in ''Dial''. 88:3 derives from the "recapitulation" source.&nbsp;... Men believed that Jesus was the son of Joseph, but the heavenly voice proclaimed him as God's son. Perhaps the mention of the fire is related to this idea: It may have been conceived of as a purifying or testing fire.&nbsp;... Jesus at his baptism was tested as God's son by the fire, but not made God's son at his baptism. This, I gather, is also the idea embodied in Yustin's narrative: Jesus was not made or established as God's son in his baptism, but he was proved to be God's son – proved by testing, or by conquering the fire."</ref>
:"...the [[Devil]] himself,...[was] called [[Serpent (Bible)|serpent]] by [[Moses]], the Devil by [[Job (Biblical figure)|Job]] and [[Zechariah (Hebrew prophet)|Zachariah]], and was addressed as [[Satan]]as by Jesus. This indicated that he had a compound name made up of the actions which he performed; for the word "Sata" in the [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]] and [[Aramaic language|Syrian]] tongue means "[[Apostate#Christianity|apostate]]", while "[[Serpent (Bible)|nas]]" is the word which means in translation "serpent", thus, from both parts is formed the one word "Sata-nas". It is narrated in the <U>memoirs of the apostles</U> that as soon as Jesus came up out of the river Jordan and a voice said to him: 'You are My Son, this day I have begotten you', this Devil came and tempted him, even so far as to exclaim: 'Worship me'; but Christ replied: 'Get behind me, Satanas, the Lord your God shall you worship, and Him only shall you serve'. For, since the Devil had deceived [[Adam]], he fancied that he could in some way harm him also." (''Dial''. 103:5–6)<ref name="Skarsaune 1987 pp. 222–23,238,383–84,393">Skarsaune (1987) ''The Proof From Prophecy'' pp.&nbsp;222–23,238,383–84,393; p.&nbsp;384 – "In the temptation story, Christ as the Son of God, the second Adam, is tested. The temptation follows immediately after the heavenly voice has proclaimed 'Thou art my son...'. This is especially clear in ''Dial''. 103:5f.&nbsp;... The special relevance of this passage is that it proves how deeply the recapitulation idea is integrated into Yustin's inherited material. The etymology given for Satanas has a special function: It proves that the 'Satanas' encountered by Jesus in his temptation was the same as the 'serpent' encountered by Adam – Satanas means 'apostate serpent', i.e. the serpent of Gen. 3. In other words: Jesus met the same adversary as the first Adam." p.&nbsp;393 – "It is interesting to notice that only two Semitic etymologies provided by Yustin both refer to the temptation story: 'Satanas' and 'Israel' (''Dial''. 103:5 and ''Dial''. 125:4) – and as we have seen already, they presuppose a harmonistic version of the temptation story which is not created ''ad hoc'' by Yustin. The gist of the whole material is succinctly summarized in ''Dial''. 103:6: As the devil led Adam astray, he thought he could seduce the second Adam also."</ref>
 
:"...the [[DevilIblis]] himselfsendiri,...[wasyang] calleddisebut sebagai [[:en:Serpent (Bible)|serpentular]] byoleh [[MosesMusa]], theIblis Devil byoleh [[Job (Biblical figure)|JobAyub]] and [[ZechariahZakharia (Hebrewnabi prophetIbrani)|ZachariahZakharia]], and was addresseddan asdisebut [[SatanSetan]]as byoleh JesusYesus. Ini Thismengindikasikan indicatedbahwa thatia hemempunyai hadsuatu anama compoundmajemuk nameyang madedibentuk updari of the actions which he performedperbuatan-perbuatannya; forkarena the wordkata "Sata" in thedalam [[Hebrewbahasa language|HebrewIbrani]] anddan [[Aramaicbahasa language|SyrianAram]] tongue meansberarti "[[:en:Apostate#Christianity|apostateapostat ("sesat")]]", whilesedangkan "[[:en:Serpent (Bible)|nas]]" isadalah thekata wordyang whichditerjemahkan means in translationsebagai "serpentular", thusjadi, fromdari bothkedua partsbagian isitu formedterbentuk thesatu one wordkata "Sata-nas". Ditulis It is narrated in thedalam <U>memoirscatatan ofkenangan thepara apostlesrasul</U> thatbahwa assegera soonsetelah asYesus Jesuskeluar camedari upsungai outYordan ofdan thesuatu riversuara Jordanberkata and a voice said to himkepada-Nya: 'YouEngkau are My SonAnak-Kku, thishari dayini IAku have begotten youmemperanakkan-Mu', thisIblis Devilini camedatang anddan temptedmencobai himDia, evenbahkan sosampai far as to exclaimberseru: 'WorshipSembahlah meaku'; buttetapi ChristKristus repliedmenjawab: 'GetEnyahlah behind medaripada-Ku, Satanas, theTuhan LordAllahmulah youryang Godharus shallengkau you worshipsembah, anddan Himhanya onlyDia shallyang youharus serveengkau layani'. ForKarena, sincesejak theIblis Devil had deceivedmenipu [[Adam]], heia fanciedmengira thatdengan hesejumlah couldcara indapat some way harm himmelukai-Nya alsojuga." (''Dial''. 103:5–6)<ref name="Skarsaune 1987 pp. 222–23,238,383–84,393">Skarsaune (1987) ''The Proof From Prophecy'' pp.&nbsp;222–23,238,383–84,393; p.&nbsp;384 – "In the temptation story, Christ as the Son of God, the second Adam, is tested. The temptation follows immediately after the heavenly voice has proclaimed 'Thou art my son...'. This is especially clear in ''Dial''. 103:5f.&nbsp;... The special relevance of this passage is that it proves how deeply the recapitulation idea is integrated into Yustin's inherited material. The etymology given for Satanas has a special function: It proves that the 'Satanas' encountered by Jesus in his temptation was the same as the 'serpent' encountered by Adam – Satanas means 'apostate serpent', i.e. the serpent of Gen. 3. In other words: Jesus met the same adversary as the first Adam." p.&nbsp;393 – "It is interesting to notice that only two Semitic etymologies provided by Yustin both refer to the temptation story: 'Satanas' and 'Israel' (''Dial''. 103:5 and ''Dial''. 125:4) – and as we have seen already, they presuppose a harmonistic version of the temptation story which is not created ''ad hoc'' by Yustin. The gist of the whole material is succinctly summarized in ''Dial''. 103:6: As the devil led Adam astray, he thought he could seduce the second Adam also."</ref>
<!--
The quotations refer to the fulfillment of a prophecy of [[Psalm 2|Psalm 2:7]] found in the [[Western text-type]] of Luke 3:22.<ref name="Koester 1990 pp. 394–395">Koester (1990) ''Ancients Christians Gospels'' pp.&nbsp;394–395 – "In ''Dial''. 88, Yustin twice reports the coming of the holy spirit upon Jesus at his baptism. He gives this report in order to demonstrate the fulfillment of the prophecies of Isa 11:1–3 and Joel 2:28–29 about the coming of the spirit which he had quoted in ''Dial''. 87:2 and 6.&nbsp;... Finally, the heavenly voice is given by Yustin in a citation of Ps. 2:7, while Mark and Matthew present a wording of the heavenly voice which is a conflation of Isa 42:1 and 44:2. Only the Western text of Luke 3:22 presents the heavenly voice in the form that must be presupposed for Yustin's source. Yustin cannot have been the author of this form of the heavenly voice; he had no special interest in proving the fulfillment of this scriptural text, although he is quite aware of its appearance in scripture as a word of David, i.e., a psalm that David wrote. That Yustin's source already contained this form of the heavenly voice is confirmed in ''Dial''. 103:6, where he refers to it once more in passing; introducing a remark about Jesus' temptation, he again quotes the exact text of Luke 3:22 D = Ps. 2:7."</ref> Yustin's mention of the fire on the Jordan without comment suggests that he was relying on an intermediate source for these gospel quotations,<ref name="Koester 1990 p. 395">Koester (1990) ''Ancients Christians Gospels'' p.&nbsp;395 – "In order to prove the fulfillment of the prophecies of Isa 11:1–3 and Joel 2:28–29, Yustin only had to report the coming of the spirit upon Jesus. But not only does he add the report about the heavenly voice, he also mentions 'that a fire was lit in the Jordan'. Nothing in the context of Yustin's discussion requires a mention of this phenomenon. It must have been part of the text Yustin was quoting."</ref> and his literal interpretation of a pseudo-etymology of the Hebrew word Satan indicates a dependence on a testimony source with a knowledge of Hebrew, which was probably the ''Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus''.<ref name="Rokeah 2002 pp. 20–21">Rokeah (2002) ''Justin Martyr and the Jews'' pp.&nbsp;20–21 – "The accepted view is that Justin did not know Hebrew. There is clear-cut and overwhelming evidence for Justin's absolute reliance upon the Septuagint. The explanation for any apparent acquaintance or knowledge of Hebrew in Justin's writings should be sought elsewhere: in his sources.&nbsp;... ''Dial''. 103:5 contains the only two Hebrew–Aramaic etymologies in the entire work: of ''satan'', and of ''yisrael''. The source of these is apparently the work of Aristo of Pella, ''The Altercation of Jason and Papiscus''."</ref>