• Login
    View Item 
    •   KovsieScholar Home
    • KovsieJournals
    • Acta Theologica
    • AT 2002 Volume 22 Issue 1
    • View Item
    •   KovsieScholar Home
    • KovsieJournals
    • Acta Theologica
    • AT 2002 Volume 22 Issue 1
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    A literary-historical analysis of Daniel 2: two powers in opposition

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    theolog_v22_n1_a6.pdf (72.89Kb)
    Date
    2002
    Author
    Nel, M.
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    This article investigates some aspects of Daniel 2 and attempts to demonstrate the value of the literary-historical approach to biblical texts. The literary-historical approach consists of three elements: a structural, a historical and a narrative analysis of the text. Firstly, the structural investigation uses Propp’s model for a functional analysis of the text, followed by a semiotic analysis to identify the functions and qualifications in the text. A description of the functions and qualifications is essential in order to identify the text’s pertinent transformations as well as its underlying semiotic squares. The latter enables the researcher to formulate the theological values or persuasions which the writer wished to convey to her readers. Secondly, synchronic and diachronic insights are integrated in an analysis of the text. Lastly, the results of the study are concluded in a narrative synthesis, in terms of the narrator, setting, characters, plot and style. In Daniel 2 the Babylonian king, shortly after being enthroned, dreams about his political insecurity. The narrator emphasises that it is God who appoints and dethrones kings. He reveals the future (Dan. 2:29, 47). He rules over the world (Dan. 2:21, 37, 44), and He cares for His people (Dan. 2:48-49). Israel will rule over the world once God destroys all other kingdoms (Dan. 2:44-45). The narrator of Daniel 2 conveys two persuasions to her readers: she emphasises the sovereign rule of God, not only in Jerusalem but also in Babylon, and the responsibility of the faithful.3 Most researchers accept that the tale in Daniel 2 is not literally true. It should be read as a literary text. However, the tale has also functioned in various historical contexts and should be read from a historical-critical perspective
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/11660/7172
    Collections
    • AT 2002 Volume 22 Issue 1

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback
     

     

    Browse

    All of KovsieScholarCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2016  DuraSpace
    Contact Us | Send Feedback