The (In)authenticity of 1 Thessalonians 2.13-16: A Review of Arguments

IF 0.6 0 RELIGION Currents in Biblical Research Pub Date : 2019-08-30 DOI:10.1177/1476993X19860671
Matthew D. Jensen
{"title":"The (In)authenticity of 1 Thessalonians 2.13-16: A Review of Arguments","authors":"Matthew D. Jensen","doi":"10.1177/1476993X19860671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article critically reviews the arguments for and against the view that 1 Thess. 2.13-16 is a post-Pauline interpolation. It starts with the four arguments that are forwarded to promote the view that it is an interpolation: form-critical/literary, grammatical/syntactical, historical, and theological. After this, a briefer second section outlines the four arguments defending the authenticity of the verses: textual, contextual, traditional, and rhetorical.","PeriodicalId":43066,"journal":{"name":"Currents in Biblical Research","volume":"18 1","pages":"59 - 79"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1476993X19860671","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Currents in Biblical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1476993X19860671","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article critically reviews the arguments for and against the view that 1 Thess. 2.13-16 is a post-Pauline interpolation. It starts with the four arguments that are forwarded to promote the view that it is an interpolation: form-critical/literary, grammatical/syntactical, historical, and theological. After this, a briefer second section outlines the four arguments defending the authenticity of the verses: textual, contextual, traditional, and rhetorical.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
帖撒罗尼迦前书2:13 -16的真实性:论证回顾
这篇文章批判性地回顾了支持和反对帖前书2.13-16是后保罗插值的观点。它从四个论点开始,这些论点被转发,以促进这一观点:形式批评/文学,语法/句法,历史和神学。在此之后,简短的第二部分概述了捍卫经文真实性的四个论点:文本,上下文,传统和修辞。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊最新文献
Abbreviation List The Amanuensis Hypothesis in New Testament Scholarship: Its Origin, Evidential Basis, and Application Editorial Foreword Becoming god: Interpreting Pauline soteriology as deification Abbreviation List
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1