Thesis Chapters by Shamir Barnett
Abstract
As many texts from the ancient Near East, including the Hebrew Bible, demonstrate, pe... more Abstract
As many texts from the ancient Near East, including the Hebrew Bible, demonstrate, people made use of curses, and virtually anyone could pronounce one. Curses appeal to the supernatural realm to somehow injure an offender or enemy. Although the curse depends on the supernatural or the heavenly realm for its execution, it has been suggested in recent scholarship that the efficacy of a curse should be understood by means of speech act theory. From this perspective, the social setting in which a curse is pronounced determines its efficacy. It will be effective if the curse is performed by a person who is sanctioned for this function by the community; if all the persons who are affected by the curse are present and hear the curse pronounced; and if the name of the controlling deity is invoked. If any of these criteria is not met, the imprecation will not work.
It is the aim of the present study to challenge this relatively new approach to the biblical curse. Two test cases are studied at length: the curse of Saul on any soldier who would break the fast he called for in order to triumph in battle (1 Samuel 14); and the curse Jacob levelled on the person who stole Laban’s teraphim (Genesis 31). In the course of analysis attention is paid to: features of curses, how they operate, and the role of the deity and divine agents in activating the curses. It is found that, although the terms proposed within speech act theory may play some role in biblical curses, a malediction is not dependent on those terms in order to operate. In the case of Saul’s curse, it is unclear that it was Saul’s place to impose the curse and that Jonathan, on whom the curse landed, was present to hear it. The efficacy of the curse has much to do with its intractability. The same two deficiencies are present in the case of Jacob’s curse, which affected Rachel; and again, its efficacy seems to follow from its intractability.
Proquest, 2014
This work seeks to demonstrate that the sermon is imperative and comparative to the commandments.... more This work seeks to demonstrate that the sermon is imperative and comparative to the commandments. Also, that they are necessary for the life of every believer. Not only are they important but also their requirements are rooted in the heart. The areas that will be compared include: Israel's arrival at Mount Sinai and the similarities with Jesus' ascent to the mount; God's covenant with Israel announced and Jesus' discourse of the sermon; preparations prior to the third day and the preparations Jesus underwent before delivering the sermon; proclamation of the Decalogue and Jesus' giving of the beatitudes.
Papers by Shamir Barnett
Uploads
Thesis Chapters by Shamir Barnett
As many texts from the ancient Near East, including the Hebrew Bible, demonstrate, people made use of curses, and virtually anyone could pronounce one. Curses appeal to the supernatural realm to somehow injure an offender or enemy. Although the curse depends on the supernatural or the heavenly realm for its execution, it has been suggested in recent scholarship that the efficacy of a curse should be understood by means of speech act theory. From this perspective, the social setting in which a curse is pronounced determines its efficacy. It will be effective if the curse is performed by a person who is sanctioned for this function by the community; if all the persons who are affected by the curse are present and hear the curse pronounced; and if the name of the controlling deity is invoked. If any of these criteria is not met, the imprecation will not work.
It is the aim of the present study to challenge this relatively new approach to the biblical curse. Two test cases are studied at length: the curse of Saul on any soldier who would break the fast he called for in order to triumph in battle (1 Samuel 14); and the curse Jacob levelled on the person who stole Laban’s teraphim (Genesis 31). In the course of analysis attention is paid to: features of curses, how they operate, and the role of the deity and divine agents in activating the curses. It is found that, although the terms proposed within speech act theory may play some role in biblical curses, a malediction is not dependent on those terms in order to operate. In the case of Saul’s curse, it is unclear that it was Saul’s place to impose the curse and that Jonathan, on whom the curse landed, was present to hear it. The efficacy of the curse has much to do with its intractability. The same two deficiencies are present in the case of Jacob’s curse, which affected Rachel; and again, its efficacy seems to follow from its intractability.
Papers by Shamir Barnett
As many texts from the ancient Near East, including the Hebrew Bible, demonstrate, people made use of curses, and virtually anyone could pronounce one. Curses appeal to the supernatural realm to somehow injure an offender or enemy. Although the curse depends on the supernatural or the heavenly realm for its execution, it has been suggested in recent scholarship that the efficacy of a curse should be understood by means of speech act theory. From this perspective, the social setting in which a curse is pronounced determines its efficacy. It will be effective if the curse is performed by a person who is sanctioned for this function by the community; if all the persons who are affected by the curse are present and hear the curse pronounced; and if the name of the controlling deity is invoked. If any of these criteria is not met, the imprecation will not work.
It is the aim of the present study to challenge this relatively new approach to the biblical curse. Two test cases are studied at length: the curse of Saul on any soldier who would break the fast he called for in order to triumph in battle (1 Samuel 14); and the curse Jacob levelled on the person who stole Laban’s teraphim (Genesis 31). In the course of analysis attention is paid to: features of curses, how they operate, and the role of the deity and divine agents in activating the curses. It is found that, although the terms proposed within speech act theory may play some role in biblical curses, a malediction is not dependent on those terms in order to operate. In the case of Saul’s curse, it is unclear that it was Saul’s place to impose the curse and that Jonathan, on whom the curse landed, was present to hear it. The efficacy of the curse has much to do with its intractability. The same two deficiencies are present in the case of Jacob’s curse, which affected Rachel; and again, its efficacy seems to follow from its intractability.