依纳爵书信的日期和真实性:最近讨论的大纲

IF 0.6 0 RELIGION Currents in Biblical Research Pub Date : 2020-10-01 DOI:10.1177/1476993x20914798
Jonathon Lookadoo
{"title":"依纳爵书信的日期和真实性:最近讨论的大纲","authors":"Jonathon Lookadoo","doi":"10.1177/1476993x20914798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines recent studies of the date and authenticity of the letters of Ignatius of Antioch. Although the debate has a long history, this article focuses on the most recent period of this debate—from roughly 1997 through 2018. While not wanting to diminish the differences between contributors to this debate, three general views can be adduced. This article begins by highlighting the major players and formative contributors to each view. Of particular note in this most recent phase of debate is the separation of the date of the letters from the question of their authenticity. The article next turns to consider the primary pieces of evidence that are utilized when considering Ignatius’s date: the historical value of the Eusebian evidence, the possibility of interpolations within Polycarp’s Philippians, and Ignatius’s interactions with Second Sophistic rhetoric. The conclusion inquires about whether there is other evidence that might be utilized to aid scholars in dating and evaluating the Ignatian letters more securely.","PeriodicalId":43066,"journal":{"name":"Currents in Biblical Research","volume":"19 1","pages":"88 - 114"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1476993x20914798","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Date and Authenticity of the Ignatian Letters: An Outline of Recent Discussions\",\"authors\":\"Jonathon Lookadoo\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1476993x20914798\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines recent studies of the date and authenticity of the letters of Ignatius of Antioch. Although the debate has a long history, this article focuses on the most recent period of this debate—from roughly 1997 through 2018. While not wanting to diminish the differences between contributors to this debate, three general views can be adduced. This article begins by highlighting the major players and formative contributors to each view. Of particular note in this most recent phase of debate is the separation of the date of the letters from the question of their authenticity. The article next turns to consider the primary pieces of evidence that are utilized when considering Ignatius’s date: the historical value of the Eusebian evidence, the possibility of interpolations within Polycarp’s Philippians, and Ignatius’s interactions with Second Sophistic rhetoric. The conclusion inquires about whether there is other evidence that might be utilized to aid scholars in dating and evaluating the Ignatian letters more securely.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43066,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Currents in Biblical Research\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"88 - 114\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1476993x20914798\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Currents in Biblical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1476993x20914798\",\"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/10.1177/1476993x20914798","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

本文考察了最近对安条克的伊格纳修斯信件的日期和真实性的研究。尽管这场辩论有着悠久的历史,但本文关注的是这场辩论的最近一段时间——大约从1997年到2018年。虽然不想减少本次辩论的贡献者之间的分歧,但可以提出三种普遍观点。本文首先强调了每个观点的主要参与者和形成因素。在最近这一阶段的辩论中,特别值得注意的是,将信件的日期与信件的真实性问题分开。接下来,文章将考虑在考虑伊格纳修斯的日期时使用的主要证据:尤西比安证据的历史价值,在Polycarp的Philippians中插入的可能性,以及伊格纳修斯与第二复杂修辞的互动。结论询问是否有其他证据可以用来帮助学者更安全地确定伊格纳提字母的年代和评估。
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
The Date and Authenticity of the Ignatian Letters: An Outline of Recent Discussions
This article examines recent studies of the date and authenticity of the letters of Ignatius of Antioch. Although the debate has a long history, this article focuses on the most recent period of this debate—from roughly 1997 through 2018. While not wanting to diminish the differences between contributors to this debate, three general views can be adduced. This article begins by highlighting the major players and formative contributors to each view. Of particular note in this most recent phase of debate is the separation of the date of the letters from the question of their authenticity. The article next turns to consider the primary pieces of evidence that are utilized when considering Ignatius’s date: the historical value of the Eusebian evidence, the possibility of interpolations within Polycarp’s Philippians, and Ignatius’s interactions with Second Sophistic rhetoric. The conclusion inquires about whether there is other evidence that might be utilized to aid scholars in dating and evaluating the Ignatian letters more securely.
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