Nie 'n kans vat of 'n kans vermy nie, maar alle kanse benut! 'n sosio-retoriese waardering van Prediker 11:1-6
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
A sociorhetorical interpretation of the text of Ecclesiastes 11:1-6 is given in this paper, where it is concluded that it adheres to the values of protest wisdom, but mnrkedly cynical and pessimistic.Abstract:
No taking or avoiding of chances, but utilising all chances! A sociorhetorical appreciation of Ecclesiastes 11:1-6. The book of Vemon K Robbins, Exploring the texture of texts: A guide to sodo-rhetorical interpretation (Valley Forge: Trinity Press, 1996), is used to analyse the short, but complicated text, Ecclesiastes 11:1-6. Sodorhetorical criticism provides for a sophisticated grasp on the complex phenomenon, "text". The analysis of the different textures of a text (inner, inter-, sodal and cultural, ideological and sacred) creates a rich environment of meaning, within which interpretation can take place. The conclusion reached on Ecclesiastes 11:1-6 is that it adheres to the values of protest wisdom, but mnrkedly cynical and pessimistic. It advocates a "carpe diem" lifestyle, however, without escaping uncertainty. No interpretation is value-free and neither is this one. Hopefully it is sound within the created environment of meaning.read more
Citations
More filters
The land issue and Qoheleth.
Abstract: This mini-dissertation is an investigation into wealth and poverty, land and class issues. These issues are very topical in the current South African political debate. The land issue, especially, is and will for the foreseeable future remain, a contentious issue especially on the African soil (cf. for instance the Zimbabwe situation, Khoi-San land claims). The question asked is, can the Bible make a valuable contribution to solving these problems? This study investigates whether Qoheleth can make a meaningful contribution to issues such as wealth and poverty, class and land. The book Qoheleth was chosen for its apparent “revolutionary” stance against traditional wisdom. In wisdom literature and tradition, the sages are known to situate themselves between the wealthy and the poor. Forming part of the protest phase of development of wisdom thought, it was necessary to evaluate Qoheleth to determine on whose side he is on, the haves or have-nots? Does he also protest against economic injustice? An ideological appreciation of Qoheleth was done to determine this. It was found that Qoheleth reinscribes the status quo of his time in terms of established hierarchies. He disappoints on the issue of the haves and the have-nots and does not provide a way out of social injustice. He certainly is not much of a voice for the havenots. Qoheleth’s apparent “revolutionary” stance is rather an intellectual reaction against the doctrine of retribution, but not in a political or social sense. The Old Testament prophets might be far more useful in addressing current issues on social injustice.
References
More filters
The land issue and Qoheleth.
Abstract: This mini-dissertation is an investigation into wealth and poverty, land and class issues. These issues are very topical in the current South African political debate. The land issue, especially, is and will for the foreseeable future remain, a contentious issue especially on the African soil (cf. for instance the Zimbabwe situation, Khoi-San land claims). The question asked is, can the Bible make a valuable contribution to solving these problems? This study investigates whether Qoheleth can make a meaningful contribution to issues such as wealth and poverty, class and land. The book Qoheleth was chosen for its apparent “revolutionary” stance against traditional wisdom. In wisdom literature and tradition, the sages are known to situate themselves between the wealthy and the poor. Forming part of the protest phase of development of wisdom thought, it was necessary to evaluate Qoheleth to determine on whose side he is on, the haves or have-nots? Does he also protest against economic injustice? An ideological appreciation of Qoheleth was done to determine this. It was found that Qoheleth reinscribes the status quo of his time in terms of established hierarchies. He disappoints on the issue of the haves and the have-nots and does not provide a way out of social injustice. He certainly is not much of a voice for the havenots. Qoheleth’s apparent “revolutionary” stance is rather an intellectual reaction against the doctrine of retribution, but not in a political or social sense. The Old Testament prophets might be far more useful in addressing current issues on social injustice.