Abstract
In agreement with his East Syriac heritage, Išô`dâdh’s commentary on Ezekiel does not contain any direct messianic interpretations. There are, however, interpretations that link the text to Christ or are of importance for Išô`dâdh’s Christology. As far as Christology is concerned, his interpretation of Ezekiel 1:27–28 is important, where he rejects interpretations related to the two natures of Christ. The interpretation of Theodoret of Cyrus is especially relevant in this regard, but also others, such as Gregory. In addition to this, in some instances Išô`dâdh sees a double meaning in a text or a typological reference. These texts receive attention in this paper, with special attention to Išô`dâdh’s exegesis of Ezekiel 1 and 47. In his interpretation of Ezekiel 1, he looks in the first place at the time of the prophet, for example in referring to different interpretations of the living creatures and their faces, such as the four regions of the world, the four seasons, the four elements or kings of Babylonia, of the Medes, the Persians and the Greeks. It can, however, also refer to Christ, with the four creatures representing the Gospels. The river of Ezekiel 47 is also linked to the dispensation of the New Testament. These texts are studied in detail in this paper, especially in comparison to the interpretation of Theodoret.
Highlights
The importance of the work of Theodore of Mopsuestia for the interpretation of the Bible in the Syriac churches, and especially in the Eastern tradition, is well known. In this regard much attention has been given to the interpretation of the Psalms in the East Syriac tradition and the relationship of this interpretation with the tradition going back to Theodore
Except for the work done by Van der Eynde in the critical edition of this commentary, not much has been published about Išôdâdh’s Ezekiel commentary and its place in the history of East Syriac exegesis
This article will make a few remarks on Antiochene exegesis and its influence on East Syriac exegesis, with special attention to Theodore of Mopsuestia and Theodoret of Cyrus
Summary
The importance of the work of Theodore of Mopsuestia for the interpretation of the Bible in the Syriac churches, and especially in the Eastern tradition, is well known. Except for the work done by Van der Eynde in the critical edition of this commentary, not much has been published about Išôdâdh’s Ezekiel commentary and its place in the history of East Syriac exegesis. This will be followed by a discussion of the Syriac sources that Išôdâdh could have used, with special attention to Theodore Bar Koni and Isho Bar Nun. This will be followed by a discussion of some text from Išôdâdh’s commentary and the possibility of messianic interpretation of passages.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
