夺回火星山

Danielle Wiley
{"title":"夺回火星山","authors":"Danielle Wiley","doi":"10.1163/27725472-09204003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Presuppositionalists argue that Paul’s address at Mars Hill offers biblical grounds for presuppositional apologetics and that evidentialists misinterpret the same address in support of their own position. A critical evaluation of this claim requires the examination of six issues in Acts 17:16–34 which have implications for apologetic method: (1) Paul’s pre-Mars Hill ministry in Athens; (2) The captatio benevolentiae of Paul’s exordium; (3) The Unknown God; (4) The parallels to Greek philosophical thought in the body of Paul’s address; (5) Paul’s citation of Greek poets; and (6) Paul’s appeal to the resurrection as proof. A correct interpretation of these issues will prove that the presuppositional criticism of evidentialism is unsubstantiated and that Paul’s Mars Hill address better fits a broad evidentialist apologetic than a presuppositional apologetic.","PeriodicalId":355176,"journal":{"name":"Evangelical Quarterly","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retaking Mars Hill\",\"authors\":\"Danielle Wiley\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/27725472-09204003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Presuppositionalists argue that Paul’s address at Mars Hill offers biblical grounds for presuppositional apologetics and that evidentialists misinterpret the same address in support of their own position. A critical evaluation of this claim requires the examination of six issues in Acts 17:16–34 which have implications for apologetic method: (1) Paul’s pre-Mars Hill ministry in Athens; (2) The captatio benevolentiae of Paul’s exordium; (3) The Unknown God; (4) The parallels to Greek philosophical thought in the body of Paul’s address; (5) Paul’s citation of Greek poets; and (6) Paul’s appeal to the resurrection as proof. A correct interpretation of these issues will prove that the presuppositional criticism of evidentialism is unsubstantiated and that Paul’s Mars Hill address better fits a broad evidentialist apologetic than a presuppositional apologetic.\",\"PeriodicalId\":355176,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evangelical Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evangelical Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/27725472-09204003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evangelical Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27725472-09204003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

预设论者认为保罗在马尔斯山的演讲为预设护教学提供了圣经依据,而证据论者为了支持自己的立场而曲解了同样的演讲。对这种说法的批判性评价需要考察使徒行传17:16-34中的六个问题,这些问题对护教方法有影响:(1)保罗在马尔斯山之前在雅典的事工;(2)保罗驱魔时的仁慈俘获;(3)未知的上帝;(4)保罗演讲正文与希腊哲学思想的相似之处;(5)保罗引用希腊诗人;(6)保罗呼吁复活作为证据。对这些问题的正确解释将证明,对证据主义的预设批评是没有根据的,保罗的马尔斯·希尔演讲更适合广泛的证据主义辩护,而不是预设的辩护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Retaking Mars Hill
Presuppositionalists argue that Paul’s address at Mars Hill offers biblical grounds for presuppositional apologetics and that evidentialists misinterpret the same address in support of their own position. A critical evaluation of this claim requires the examination of six issues in Acts 17:16–34 which have implications for apologetic method: (1) Paul’s pre-Mars Hill ministry in Athens; (2) The captatio benevolentiae of Paul’s exordium; (3) The Unknown God; (4) The parallels to Greek philosophical thought in the body of Paul’s address; (5) Paul’s citation of Greek poets; and (6) Paul’s appeal to the resurrection as proof. A correct interpretation of these issues will prove that the presuppositional criticism of evidentialism is unsubstantiated and that Paul’s Mars Hill address better fits a broad evidentialist apologetic than a presuppositional apologetic.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Conversation between a Muslim and a Christian, by Peter Barnes and Mohamad Younes ‘You Never Stop Working’ From Creation to Abraham: Further Studies in Genesis 1–11, by John Day What Hath Darwin to Do with Scripture? Comparing the Conceptual Worlds of the Bible and Evolution, by Dru Johnson Establishing Recapitulation as a Unique and Fully-Fledged Atonement Model
×
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