{"title":"路加福音","authors":"C. Blomberg","doi":"10.1163/27725472-09302001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n I. Howard Marshall broke fresh ground with his Luke: Historian and Theologian in 1970 when the reigning critical methodology was a form of redaction criticism that largely assumed that theology and history were mutually exclusive. Not only did Marshall contest this assumption but he stressed that a historian was as good as his sources, and Luke had good ones. A half-century later, scholarship has significantly progressed, with Marshall’s views having left an important legacy. Multiple critical tools may be combined. Theology and history can work in tandem. Redaction criticism need not be antithetical to the historical reliability of a Gospel.","PeriodicalId":355176,"journal":{"name":"Evangelical Quarterly","volume":"77 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Luke\",\"authors\":\"C. Blomberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/27725472-09302001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n I. Howard Marshall broke fresh ground with his Luke: Historian and Theologian in 1970 when the reigning critical methodology was a form of redaction criticism that largely assumed that theology and history were mutually exclusive. Not only did Marshall contest this assumption but he stressed that a historian was as good as his sources, and Luke had good ones. A half-century later, scholarship has significantly progressed, with Marshall’s views having left an important legacy. Multiple critical tools may be combined. Theology and history can work in tandem. Redaction criticism need not be antithetical to the historical reliability of a Gospel.\",\"PeriodicalId\":355176,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evangelical Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"77 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-16\",\"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/10.1163/27725472-09302001\",\"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/10.1163/27725472-09302001","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
1970年，霍华德·马歇尔(Howard Marshall)的《路加福音:历史学家和神学家》(Luke: historical and Theologian)开辟了新天地，当时主流的批评方法是一种修订批评形式，在很大程度上认为神学和历史是相互排斥的。马歇尔不仅对这种假设提出了质疑，而且强调历史学家的资料来源和他的资料来源一样好，而路加有很好的资料来源。半个世纪后，学术有了显著的进步，马歇尔的观点留下了重要的遗产。多个关键工具可以组合在一起。神学和历史可以协同工作。修订批评不必与福音书的历史可靠性对立。
I. Howard Marshall broke fresh ground with his Luke: Historian and Theologian in 1970 when the reigning critical methodology was a form of redaction criticism that largely assumed that theology and history were mutually exclusive. Not only did Marshall contest this assumption but he stressed that a historian was as good as his sources, and Luke had good ones. A half-century later, scholarship has significantly progressed, with Marshall’s views having left an important legacy. Multiple critical tools may be combined. Theology and history can work in tandem. Redaction criticism need not be antithetical to the historical reliability of a Gospel.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
