石头、纸莎草、剪刀

Silas Klein Cardoso
{"title":"石头、纸莎草、剪刀","authors":"Silas Klein Cardoso","doi":"10.15448/0103-314x.2020.2.39481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article problematizes the use of different disciplines in the interpretation of the so-called “Biblical World.” Arguing that a first step towards the critical biblical interpretation is the decision of a framework on which sources and related disciplines work, it presents different methodological frameworks for the juxtaposition, intersection, transcendence, or avoidance of disciplines to favor the critical biblical interpretation. Ultimately, the article presents a taxonomy of historical sources to tentatively propose an antidisciplinary framework to fuel innovation by focusing the research object.","PeriodicalId":30005,"journal":{"name":"Teocomunicacao","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rock, Papyrus, Scissors\",\"authors\":\"Silas Klein Cardoso\",\"doi\":\"10.15448/0103-314x.2020.2.39481\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article problematizes the use of different disciplines in the interpretation of the so-called “Biblical World.” Arguing that a first step towards the critical biblical interpretation is the decision of a framework on which sources and related disciplines work, it presents different methodological frameworks for the juxtaposition, intersection, transcendence, or avoidance of disciplines to favor the critical biblical interpretation. Ultimately, the article presents a taxonomy of historical sources to tentatively propose an antidisciplinary framework to fuel innovation by focusing the research object.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30005,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Teocomunicacao\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Teocomunicacao\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15448/0103-314x.2020.2.39481\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teocomunicacao","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15448/0103-314x.2020.2.39481","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

这篇文章对不同学科在解释所谓的“圣经世界”中的使用提出了质疑。文章认为,走向批判性圣经解释的第一步是决定来源和相关学科的工作框架,它提出了并置、交叉、超越的不同方法论框架,或者回避有利于批判性圣经解释的学科。最后,本文提出了一个历史来源的分类法,以尝试性地提出一个反学科框架,通过关注研究对象来推动创新。
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
Rock, Papyrus, Scissors
The article problematizes the use of different disciplines in the interpretation of the so-called “Biblical World.” Arguing that a first step towards the critical biblical interpretation is the decision of a framework on which sources and related disciplines work, it presents different methodological frameworks for the juxtaposition, intersection, transcendence, or avoidance of disciplines to favor the critical biblical interpretation. Ultimately, the article presents a taxonomy of historical sources to tentatively propose an antidisciplinary framework to fuel innovation by focusing the research object.
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
25
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
God's kingdom, but no Planet B? Teologia como intellectus fidei Igreja Católica e a cultura digital como espaço de evangelização missão como modelo de renovação da Igreja Spirituality and digitality
×
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