Református Szemle 112.4 (2019)

This article discusses aspects related to the Jewish self-governance in the 1st century A.D. We attempt to inquire into the following questions: What powers did the Sanhedrin who condemned Jesus have during the Roman rule? Did it have any authority to inflict death penalty? What were the rules of procedure in case of the Sanhedrin?

This poem was composed by an unknown author to be sung according to the Geneva tune of the 45th Psalm (first published in 1545). The poem has never been published previously, having survived in an 18th century collection of biblical histories, in versified form, together with other prayers and Reformed church hymns. The main ideas of this poem clearly differ from the earlier version of the Song of songs composed in 1584 by an unitarian poet, Miklós Bogáti Fazakas. The 18th century poet was possibly a young minister or a college teacher. It is uncertain, but not impossible, that the author was a former student of the Debrecen Reformed College, since more than twenty members of the family, which preserved this manuscript, had studied in Debrecen bet-ween the middle 17th and the 19th centuries. This poem is the closest possible versification of the Hungarian version of the biblical text according to the Bible of Vizsoly from 1590, available in later editions. The poem does not emphasise that this biblical book would refer to the relationship between Christ and his Church. However, the Latin titles added all over the sections, identified as belonging to Bride and Bridegroom, or Sponsus and Sponsa, reflect the same allegorical view, following father Origen, and usually adopted by Protestant commenta-tors, including Calvin.

As a theologian Niebuhr is best known for his “Christian Realism” which emphasized the persistent roots of evil in human life. In his works he stressed the egoism, the pride and hypocrisy of nations and classes. Later he saw these as ultimately the fruit of the insecurity and anxious defensiveness of humans in their finiteness. On the political field, his activities were influenced by his socialist-Christian convictions. Later he broke with the Socialist Party over its pacifist and non-interventionist attitude in foreign policy. He also constantly criticized the so-ciety dehumanized by the technological era.

Minucius’ excellent dialogue, “Octavius” details the accusations of paganism addressing Christianity, as well as the criticism of Christianity encountering paganism. He speaks quite openly about the attitude of Christians to Rome and the attitude of the Romans to Christianity. Our study is primarily concerned with the purpose and intent of the author in presenting in this quasi-dialogue how Gentiles saw Christians and respectively Christians saw Gentiles in the early third century. To what extent did the author achieve his goal(s)? And if not, or not at all, where did his dialogue fail? In this study we also examine whether there was any truths in pa-gan accusations against Christians, and if so, to what extent?