Journal index

Job 19,25–27 are probably the most widely known verses from his book. This pericope is often evoked on funeral occasions, and many Christians undoubtedly ponder those while struggling with the issue of death. The current study does not aim to correct the Christian faith. From the perspective of systematic theology, the Redeemer of Job and that of the Christians is the very same Christ. This essay attempts to outline the meaning of the text through linguistic and poetical analysis. A text (including a spontaneous one) informs a reader even by the way it was created. That is emphatically true in case of a writing formed, handed down, redacted in a stabilized version. (Scribal mistakes, of course, cannot be excluded, but until proven let the principle of lectio difficilior be followed.) The present essay strives to understand the meaning of Job’s words about his Restorer, who is able to redeem even when the flesh and the heart are consumed.

The present study examines from the perspective of dogmatics Eduard Böhl’s book entitled Christologie des Alten Testamentes oder Auslegung der wichtigsten Messianischen Weissagungen published in 1882. The study deals mainly with the introductory chapter. E. Böhl, professor of Reformed Systematic Theology at the Protestant Theological Faculty in Vienna from 1864 to 1899, was strongly influenced by the theological vision of H. F. Kohlbrugge (1803–1875), a Reformed pastor from Elberfeld, Germany. As a systematic theologian he followed the orthodox Reformed position which emphasised the inseparable unity of Scripture. From this hermeneutic stance he defended the Christology of the Old Testament. Böhl testified that God in Christ, in fact, repeated, confirmed, and accomplished on a higher level what had happened in the lives of Old Testament confessors. Old Testament writings legitimize Jesus’ coming, incarnation, salvation, suffering, death, and resurrection. The essence of Böhl’s standpoint is that some of the messianic texts do not refer directly to Christ, but above all to “types”, figures who carry the promise of salvation. Other parts, however, such as the psalms discussed in detail in his book, are unequivocal pieces of evidence of the promises of the Messiah who is embodied in Jesus Christ. In support of his view, he cited “the exegesis of the New Testament,” the apostles and evangelists, and the Targums, the Book of Enoch, and the Talmud among the Jewish religious literature. With his theological vision and writings, through his Hungarian disciples, Böhl exerted a decisive influence on the Reformed theological thinking and the New Orthodoxy in Hungary. This theological trend took up the fight against the spread of theological liberalism with its centre in Debrecen during the second half of the nineteenth century. Böhl, as a defender of traditional Calvinism, was a sure point of reference with respect to important theological issues.

Eduard Böhl (1836–1903), a scholar of the second half of the nineteenth century, was professor of dogmatics at the Protestant Theological Faculty in Vienna for 35 years. His lifework was his “Dogmatics”, which he wrote for 23 years. In this unfairly forgotten work, he formulates cardinal Reformed beliefs providing the reader with accurate guidance regarding theology, anthropology, soterology, and eschatology. This study analyses Böhl’s teaching based on the last major chapter of his book, concerned with the “End of Times”. In order to gain a better understanding of the theological issues discussed by Böhl, this work parallels Gábor Szeremlei’s chapter on “Eschatology” which can be found in his book of Dogmatics entitled “Christian Religious Science”. A study of this issue provides insights into what theologians of the nineteenth century formulated in relation to this question, and how biblical approaches and ideas emerged within the debates of orthodox and liberal theology.

Job 29,18 is one of the most disputed verses from this chapter, especially with regard to the meaning of the Hebrew term lwx. This word can be rendered either as ‘palm’ (so, e.g. in the Septuagint and the Vulgate), or ‘sand’ (e.g. Saadiah Gaon), or ‘phoenix’ (e.g. Genesis Rabbah, B.Talmud Sanhedrin). Several Hungarian versions support both ‘sand’ and ‘phoenix’. This article shows that the Massora parva suggest that lwx is an example of talHin /double entendre. This means that the massoretes who fixed the text of the Leningrad Codex probably took for granted that lwx referred to both ‘sand’ and ‘phoenix’ as a bird-name.

This lecture endeavours to answer the following questions: In what sense was the 500th anniversary of the Reformation different from any previous celebrations? What is the relationship between modernity and the Reformation? Does the Reformation have a formative role in the contemporary society? This study breaks with the traditional and linear interpretation of modernity and offers reverse methodology. Starting from the vantage point of the modern society, it examines the religious and theological impulses, and those interfaith dynamics that can have a role in shaping/modelling a peaceful coexistence of cultures and religions. These impulses are: the necessary interaction between various branches of science and religion in the academic setting; the value of the spiritual/theological interpretation of reality in our society; the freedom of conscience and religious thought in the secular state and in the church; and the preservation of self-identity in the age of mass manipulation. Pondering over these issues can and will make our celebration more relevant in the contemporary setting.

We are always seeking for the sense of the life, for ourselves and for the place in our family and community. Religion shows a new way to us, according to Jesus Christ’s principles. The son of God not only created a religion, but gave us an example how to live, and sacrifice himself for us. Sándor Karácsony reckons religion as a spiritual behavior, the base of our social contacts. We have to see into our lives and character according to the message of Jesus Christ. The right and appropriate personality can be evolved by individual training.

The views of Sándor Karácsony about religious education can be clearly discerned from his writings. The main task of reformed pedagogy is to activate continuously the divine notions in this continuously changing world. Protestant teachers must accomplish their daily work according to the Gospel of Christ. The Hungarian Reformed Church was a so-called “church of schools” for hundreds of years. This means that even between WWI and WWII it owned more schools than churches. The number of Reformed schools is significant even today. Sándor Karácsony claims that only Reformed people and communities are able to maintain Reformed schools by people who “are ready to serve and sacrifice themselves” for this cause (Karácsony, Sándor: A magyarok Istene. Széphalom Könyvműhely, Budapest 2004, 172).

This essay applies the method of semantic analysis for biblical metaphors. First it highlights the settled meanings of the lexemes of the metaphors under scrutiny. After establishing the sememes, the analysis focuses on the plain or hidden nominal predicative statement of the metaphor, namely only on the context of the tenor and vehicle, seeking for that conjunctive semes which can help us to understand the chosen metaphor. We can realise that the metaphor’s meaning is not definable, being imagined as a fuzzy set, where some semantic marks (or semes) are highlighted and others remain hidden. The larger context introduces other disjunctive semes too, not alluded to previously, thus enabling different connotations for metaphors.

Nach einem Vierteljahrhundert seit den gesellschaftlich-politischen Umwälzungen Ost- Mittel-Europas im Jahre 1989 sind die ungarischsprachigen reformierten Kirchen der Region immer noch vor die Frage gestellt: Mit welchen weitreichenden Konsequenzen ist zu rechnen, wenn die Verantwortung für die Geschichte und für die moralisch-sittliche Schuld erwähnt wird? Eine Reduktion der Schuldfrage auf die Feststellung, dass Kirchenleitende, Pfarrerinnen und Pfarrer bzw. kirchliche Mitarbeiter zu ihren persönlichen Taten (d.h. geheime Zusammenarbeit mit der Staatsmacht) und Versäumnissen stehen sollten, wird an sich der Sache nicht gerecht. Einerseits wird in dieser Studie gezeigt, warum eine solche Zusammenarbeit mit Repressionsorganen eines totalitären Staats als theologisch absurd und damit als Schuld zu betrachten sei. Andererseits wird betont, dass Versagen und Schuld nicht nur dort zu finden sind, wo man aus Furcht und Angst vor repressiven Maßnahmen oder aus erhofftem Eigennutz auf Protest, Fürsprache für Entrechtete, auf Kritik am politischen Regime oder an den eigenen kirchenpolitischen Kompromissen verzichtete, sondern auch dort, wo man die gesellschaftliche Realität verengt wahrnahm und auf eine theologisch-kritische Analyse dieser Wirklichkeit verzichtete. Verantwortlich sind ein Christ und die Kirche nicht nur für ihre Taten, sondern auch für ihre Sicht der Wirklichkeit, ja für ihre Theologie. Als Folge dieser theologischen Orientierungskrise blieb für die Kirche entweder eine unkritische Bejahung bzw. Begeisterung für das politischgesellschaftliche Sein der Wirklichkeit oder eine Reihe von politisch-ethischen und theologischen Zugeständnissen, um eventuell Schlimmerem vorzubeugen. Dieser Zusammenhang von anscheinend harmlosen Zugeständnissen, Kompromissen oder Verzichten auf theologische Deutungen der Wirklichkeit – ganz zu schweigen vom Mangel an gelebter Solidarität – hat zur persönlichen Schuldverstrickung des Einzelnen geführt. Nach der systemtheoretischen bzw. sozial-theologischen Darstellung der Schuld in der Vergangenheit bietet die Studie schließlich einige Kriterien für einen adäquaten Umgang mit der Vergangenheit im kirchlichen und gesellschaftlichen Raum: Die ethische Dimension des Aufarbeitungsprozesses, die Förderung einer Kultur des Mitleidens, die zwangsfreie Ermöglichung der Erinnerung und die Komplementarität der politisch-rechtlichen und religiös-moralischen Dimensionen der Versöhnung sollten dafür sorgen, dass nicht weitere Verletzungen (als „zweite oder dritte Schuld”) das Miteinander der Generationen trüben, sondern dass ein freies, friedliches und der historischen Wahrheit verpflichtetes Zusammenleben ermöglicht wird.