History and Theology in the Gospels
The article discusses the translation of Ps 78 in Matt 13:35 which differs from the LXX translation. It explains all the changes in the New Testamnent translation through the specific ideological background and transaltion technique that are peculiar of the Qumran texts ideology.
The history of the first translation of the New Testament into the Korean language covers more than 10 years — from 1876 till 1887. The article follows the chronological principle of the translation process, deals with main characteristics of the process and makes its focus on the attribution of the authorship of the translation. The official author of the translation is considered to be John Ross — a Protestant missionary from the United Presbyterian Church of Scotland, but the question keeps to be open since the great part of the translation work was carried out by many Korean translations, whose names are still remain unknown. The article supplies at least a partial answer to it.
The article concerns the research of functional peculiarities of multilingual religious discourse in its diachronic aspect. The author considers the religious discourse as a means that conveys a complex of meanings of a sacral text regarding the mentality, religious experience and objective reality of the people speaking a certain language in a certain historic period, the discourse being consistently reproduced in time and space. Multilingual sacral texts are a significant part of the religious discourse. Their contrastive analysis is worthwhile only when historical, chronological, sociocultural and situational factors which have some impact on the meaning of a sacral text are taken into consideration, a sacral text being an object for translation. Since translators were traditionally expected to observe the compulsory rules of preserving the meaning and structure of the source text, their translations either distorted the text meaning or were not fully accurate in the meaning conveyed.
The book analyses the modes and methods of argumentation between the opponents in the ancient world.
The article discusses the question of the distribution of the first New Testament in Korean in the end of XIX c. when the native population of Korea while being under great pressure of political and moral decay strived for a new basis of social and private life organization. Through detailed study of the distribution of the first texts of the New Testament in the Korean language, the paper attempts to trace the main factors that played a decisive role in the further success of proselytizing Protestant activity on the Korean peninsula in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The translation of New Testament into the Korean language undertaken by a group of Korean translators headed by the missionary J.Ross and the following distribution of the texts has laid down the foundation for formation of a new social-religious movement which led to the emergence of the first protestant communities on Korean peninsula. The article is part of the source study devoted to previously unexplored monument of the late XIX century "Yesu Syeongyo Syeong-syeo" (Holy Scripture of the Jesus Teaching, 예수 셩교 셩셔) in the collection of Korean block prints and typographic printed editions of the St. Petersburg Institute of Oriental Manuscripts of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
The article analyzes cohesion concerns in sacral text. The paper outlines the main types of text cohesion such as lexical, grammatical and lexico-grammatical ones. Different ways and means of cohesion realization in the text of New Testament are considered particularly.
The article considers the Views of L. N. Tolstoy not only as a representative, but also as a accomplisher of the Enlightenment. A comparison of his philosophy with the ideas of Spinoza and Diderot made it possible to clarify some aspects of the transition to the unique Tolstoy’s religious and philosophical doctrine. The comparison of General and specific features of the three philosophers was subjected to a special analysis. Special attention is paid to the way of thinking, the relation to science and the specifics of the worldview by Tolstoy and Diderot. An important aspect is researched the contradiction between the way of thinking and the way of life of the three philosophers.
Tolstoy's transition from rational perception of life to its religious and existential bases is shown. Tolstoy gradually moves away from the idea of a natural man to the idea of a man, who living the commandments of Christ. Starting from the educational worldview, Tolstoy ended by creation of religious and philosophical doctrine, which were relevant for the 20th century.
This important new book offers the first full-length interpretation of the thought of Martin Heidegger with respect to irony. In a radical reading of Heidegger's major works (from Being and Time through the ‘Rector's Address' and the ‘Letter on Humanism' to ‘The Origin of the Work of Art' and the Spiegel interview), Andrew Haas does not claim that Heidegger is simply being ironic. Rather he argues that Heidegger's writings make such an interpretation possible - perhaps even necessary.
Heidegger begins Being and Time with a quote from Plato, a thinker famous for his insistence upon Socratic irony. The Irony of Heidegger takes seriously the apparently curious decision to introduce the threat of irony even as philosophy begins in earnest to raise the question of the meaning of being. Through a detailed and thorough reading of Heidegger's major texts and the fundamental questions they raise, Haas reveals that one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century can be read with as much irony as earnestness. The Irony of Heidegger attempts to show that the essence of this irony lies in uncertainty, and that the entire project of onto-heno-chrono-phenomenology, therefore needs to be called into question.
The article is concerned with the notions of technology in essays of Ernst and Friedrich Georg Jünger. The special problem of the connection between technology and freedom is discussed in the broader context of the criticism of culture and technocracy discussion in the German intellectual history of the first half of the 20th century.