伦理不再空虚:马可福音与新约伦理

IF 0.6 0 RELIGION Currents in Biblical Research Pub Date : 2022-02-01 DOI:10.1177/1476993X221077506
John-Patrick O'Connor
{"title":"伦理不再空虚:马可福音与新约伦理","authors":"John-Patrick O'Connor","doi":"10.1177/1476993X221077506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The following article offers an overview of studies on the ethics of Mark in the last four decades. A longstanding tradition in biblical studies has been to render the second Evangelist void or nearly void of all ethical interest. Such disparaging conclusions in regard to the apparently ethically vacuous Gospel are representative in the comment by James Leslie Houlden: ‘For [Mark], as for John, it appears that facing and settling moral problems, in the everyday sense, was not a primary concern’ (Houlden, J.L. 1973 Ethics and the New Testament [Harmondsworth: Penguin]: 45). Scholarship on the Gospel of Mark has since turned a corner: a foray of studies has overturned the conclusion by James Houlden and countless others. The following article offers a summary of ethically sensitive studies of the Gospel of Mark with suggestions for further inquiry.","PeriodicalId":43066,"journal":{"name":"Currents in Biblical Research","volume":"20 1","pages":"165 - 185"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Void of Ethics No More: The Gospel of Mark and New Testament Ethics\",\"authors\":\"John-Patrick O'Connor\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1476993X221077506\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The following article offers an overview of studies on the ethics of Mark in the last four decades. A longstanding tradition in biblical studies has been to render the second Evangelist void or nearly void of all ethical interest. Such disparaging conclusions in regard to the apparently ethically vacuous Gospel are representative in the comment by James Leslie Houlden: ‘For [Mark], as for John, it appears that facing and settling moral problems, in the everyday sense, was not a primary concern’ (Houlden, J.L. 1973 Ethics and the New Testament [Harmondsworth: Penguin]: 45). Scholarship on the Gospel of Mark has since turned a corner: a foray of studies has overturned the conclusion by James Houlden and countless others. The following article offers a summary of ethically sensitive studies of the Gospel of Mark with suggestions for further inquiry.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43066,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Currents in Biblical Research\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"165 - 185\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Currents in Biblical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1476993X221077506\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Currents in Biblical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1476993X221077506","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: 0

摘要

下面的文章概述了近四十年来关于马克伦理学的研究。在圣经研究中,一个长期的传统一直是使第二福音传教士无效或几乎无效的所有伦理利益。这种贬低福音的结论在詹姆斯·莱斯利·霍尔登(James Leslie Houlden)的评论中很有代表性:“对于[马克],对于约翰来说,在日常意义上,面对和解决道德问题似乎不是主要关注的问题”(霍尔登,J.L. 1973 Ethics and the New Testament [Harmondsworth: Penguin]: 45)。此后,关于马可福音的学术研究出现了转折:一系列研究推翻了詹姆斯·霍尔登(James Houlden)和无数其他人的结论。下面的文章提供了对马可福音的伦理敏感研究的总结,并提出了进一步研究的建议。
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
Void of Ethics No More: The Gospel of Mark and New Testament Ethics
The following article offers an overview of studies on the ethics of Mark in the last four decades. A longstanding tradition in biblical studies has been to render the second Evangelist void or nearly void of all ethical interest. Such disparaging conclusions in regard to the apparently ethically vacuous Gospel are representative in the comment by James Leslie Houlden: ‘For [Mark], as for John, it appears that facing and settling moral problems, in the everyday sense, was not a primary concern’ (Houlden, J.L. 1973 Ethics and the New Testament [Harmondsworth: Penguin]: 45). Scholarship on the Gospel of Mark has since turned a corner: a foray of studies has overturned the conclusion by James Houlden and countless others. The following article offers a summary of ethically sensitive studies of the Gospel of Mark with suggestions for further inquiry.
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
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