Zeitschriftenartikel zum Thema „Commentaries - new testament“
Um die anderen Arten von Veröffentlichungen zu diesem Thema anzuzeigen, folgen Sie diesem Link: Commentaries - new testament.
Geben Sie eine Quelle nach APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard und anderen Zitierweisen an
Machen Sie sich mit Top-50 Zeitschriftenartikel für die Forschung zum Thema "Commentaries - new testament" bekannt.
Neben jedem Werk im Literaturverzeichnis ist die Option "Zur Bibliographie hinzufügen" verfügbar. Nutzen Sie sie, wird Ihre bibliographische Angabe des gewählten Werkes nach der nötigen Zitierweise (APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver usw.) automatisch gestaltet.
Sie können auch den vollen Text der wissenschaftlichen Publikation im PDF-Format herunterladen und eine Online-Annotation der Arbeit lesen, wenn die relevanten Parameter in den Metadaten verfügbar sind.
Sehen Sie die Zeitschriftenartikel für verschiedene Spezialgebieten durch und erstellen Sie Ihre Bibliographie auf korrekte Weise.
1
Lalleman, Pieter J. „Mark Through Old Testament Eyes Through Old Testament Eyes New Testament Commentaries“. European Journal of Theology 28, Nr. 2 (01.12.2020): 190–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.5117/ejt2019.2.016.lall.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
SummaryThis first commentary in a new, non-technical series is a very helpful contribution on the Gospel of Mark. Rather than engaging in discussion with other authors, LePeau interprets the text of the Gospel, but his emphasis is heavily on the influence of the Old Testament and on discipleship. For that reason the books will be an excellent counterpart to a more all-round commentary.RÉSUMÉVoici le premier commentaire dans une nouvelle série qui se veut non technique et c’est une contribution utile sur l’évangile de Marc. Plutôt que de discuter les opinions d’autres auteurs, Le Peau offre une interprétation du texte de l’évangile, mais en insistant fortement sur l’influence de l’Ancien Testament et sur le thème du discipulat. Ce livre sera ainsi un complément excellent à d’autres commentaires plus élaborés.ZusammenfassungDieser erste Kommentar einer neuen, nicht technischen Reihe stellt einen überaus nützlichen Beitrag zum Markusevangelium dar. Statt sich in eine Diskussion mit anderen Autoren zu begeben, legt LePeau den Text des Evangeliums aus; dabei legt er den Schwerpunkt besonders auf den Einfluss des Alten Testamentes und auf Jüngerschaft. Dies macht das Buch zu einem ausgezeichneten Gegenstück zu den sonstigen eher allumfassenden Kommentaren.
2
Clark, Neville. „Book Reviews : Three New Testament Commentaries“. Expository Times 112, Nr. 1 (Oktober 2000): 28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001452460011200113.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
3
Emerson, Matthew Y. „John. Paideia Commentaries on the New Testament“. Bulletin for Biblical Research 22, Nr. 3 (01.01.2012): 444–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/26424593.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
4
Jensen, Matthew D. „Mark. Paideia Commentaries on the New Testament“. Bulletin for Biblical Research 22, Nr. 4 (01.01.2012): 599–600. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/26424358.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
5
Morton, Russell. „Galatians. Paideia Commentaries on the New Testament“. Bulletin for Biblical Research 26, Nr. 3 (01.01.2016): 427–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/26371482.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
6
Foster, Paul. „Book Review: Two New Testament Library Commentaries“. Expository Times 119, Nr. 3 (Dezember 2007): 148–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00145246071190031121.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
7
Draper, Jonathan A. „Book Review: Pentacostal Commentaries on the New Testament“. Expository Times 117, Nr. 7 (April 2006): 305–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001452460611700730.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
8
CAMERON, EUAN. „HEROIC IDEAS AND HERO-WORSHIP“. Historical Journal 40, Nr. 1 (März 1997): 217–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x96007091.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Thomas Müntzer: apocalyptic mystic and revolutionary. By Hans-Jürgen Goertz. Translated by Jocelyn Jacquiery and edited by Peter Matheson. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1993. Pp. xxii+230. £22.50.The Reformation: roots and ramifications. By Heiko A. Oberman. Translated by Andrew C. Gow. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1994. Pp. xvi+232. £14.95.Calvin's Old Testament commentaries. By T. H. L. Parker. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1986 (reprinted 1993). Pp. viii+240. £13.95.Calvin's New Testament commentaries. By T. H. L. Parker. 2nd edition. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1993. Pp. x+258. £13.95.
9
Wilson, J. Christian. „The Problem of the Domitianic Date of Revelation“. New Testament Studies 39, Nr. 4 (Oktober 1993): 587–605. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0028688500011978.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
In the latter half of the nineteenth century no New Testament scholar in the English speaking world was more respected than J. B. Lightfoot. His New Testament commentaries and his magisterial five volume work on the Apostolic Fathers were models of the scholarly thoroughness of British erudition coupled with the humility of Anglican piety. Their influence would reach well into the twentieth century.
10
Gosnell, Peter W. „Ephesians and Colossians. Paideia: Commentaries on the New Testament“. Bulletin for Biblical Research 20, Nr. 1 (01.01.2010): 132–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/26423983.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
11
HUGHES, R. KENT. „The Sermon and the Greek New Testament“. Unio Cum Christo 2, Nr. 1 (01.04.2016): 127. http://dx.doi.org/10.35285/ucc2.1.2016.art11.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract: This article is a primer for pastors on how to engage the Greek text of the New Testament and faithfully construct a sermon that is true to the thrust and shape of the original in its ancient context and, as such, freighted with gospel power and wholly relevant and applicable to modern cultures. It provides instructions on engaging the Greek text, discerning the theme and symmetries of the text, consulting commentaries, finalizing the outline, and applying and illustrating the text.
12
Gutierrez, W. Ryan. „New Testament Theology and the Production of Theological Commentaries: Trends and Trajectories“. Religions 12, Nr. 11 (01.11.2021): 949. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel12110949.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The past two decades have witnessed an explosion of new theological commentary series and theological commentaries. As we near the end of the second decade of theological commentary production, it is beneficial to take a step back to evaluate the contributions of each theological commentary series and how the commentary genre continues to be a helpful form for the development of NT theology. This paper reviews and evaluates four commentaries from each of the Belief, Brazos Theological, and Two Horizons New Testament commentary series according to (1) the aims and goals of the series, and (2) how each commentary attempts to actualize the stated ends of the series.
13
Grzywaczewski, Józef. „Christ as the Persona Speaking according to Origen’s First Homily on Psalm 15(16)“. Collectanea Theologica 92, Nr. 2 (28.05.2022): 65–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.21697/ct.2022.92.2.03.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The discovery of Origen’s commentaries on Psalms in 2012 was an event for patristic studies. These commentaries are prepared in the form of homilies. It is said that Origen published them at the end of his life. In preparing his homilies, he applied the allegorical method as he used to do in many of his works. The implied author of Psalm 15(16) speaks in the first person. For Origen, it was evident that the persona speaking in Psalm 15(16) was Christ. Indeed, this Psalm belongs to the messianic Psalms. The article draws attention to three points: 1) Christ as the persona which has seen no corruption after the death in body; 2) Christ speaking about the Church; 3) Christ’s double inheritance corresponding to His double nature: Divine and human. The Son of God (eternal Logos) is connected ontologically to the Father. He is also connected to the people, especially to Christians. The Son of God acts for Christians in the Church. When the Son prays for protection, He prays for Himself and for the faithful. In his commentary on Psalm 15(16), Origen wanted to expose the unity of the Old Testament with the New Testament: God’s Son, Logos, Messiah and Christ is the center of both Testaments.
14
Ascough, Richard S. „Hermeneia On CD-Rom 2.0: New Testament Including Continental Commentaries“. Religious Studies Review 38, Nr. 2 (Juni 2012): 93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0922.2012.01601_2.x.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
15
Cameron, Euan. „The September Testament and Its Predecessors: How Was Luther’s New Testament Translation Different from Previous German Versions?“ Bible Translator 73, Nr. 3 (Dezember 2022): 335–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20516770221134943.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Luther’s first New Testament in German, issued in September 1522, forms a landmark in the history of Bible translation. Yet how precisely did Luther’s work diverge from and build on received biblical scholarship, and on previous translations into German? This article compares John’s Gospel in the September Testament with Anton Koberger’s German Bible of 1483 and Erasmus’s Greek and Latin New Testament of 1519. Luther’s 1522 Testament differed in format from its predecessors: Luther discarded Jerome’s prefaces in favour of his own, and added expository commentaries and paragraph breaks to help the reader. Compared to Koberger, Luther aspired to more fluent and elegant language. He avoided importing Latin terms into German and strove for rhetorically powerful German. He adopted several of Erasmus’s philological interventions, though not uncritically. Luther worked continuously to make his German New Testament embody what he saw as the essential gospel.
16
Engammare, Max. „John Calvin’s use of Erasmus“. Erasmus Studies 37, Nr. 2 (2017): 176–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18749275-03702008.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
It is well known that Calvin made important use of Erasmus—the most quoted author in Calvin’s Commentaries on the New Testament—although he criticized him and contested his position more than regularly. This paper is focusing on a philological use of Erasmus by Calvin in his commentaries to the Canonical Epistles, particularly in the first Epistle of John with the Comma Joanneum (chapter 5). Two questions emerge. First, in which places (loci) did Calvin quote Erasmus in an exegetical or philological way of commenting the New Testament? Second, what did Calvin take and leave from Erasmus’s annotations? At the end of the demonstration, Max Engammare proves that Calvin did not read 1 John 5 with Erasmus’ help. The Reformer was well acquainted both with the problem and Erasmus’ solution, but he accepted the Comma Joanneum without any reservation as something good, even excellent for Christians.
17
Bloemendal, Jan. „Praised and Maligned: Receptions of Erasmus’ Paraphrases on the New Testament“. Erasmus Studies 44, Nr. 1 (06.03.2024): 5–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18749275-04401004.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract Erasmus was not only the first to have the Greek text of the New Testament printed together with his Latin translation, but he also paraphrased the books of the New Testament—with the exception of the Apocalypse. These Paraphrases were highly successful as evidenced by their many editions and translations. Even an English translation was to be found in every parish in the Church of England. There was also opposition. Theologians from Spain and France scrutinized them for Lutheran ideas, and, of course, found them. However, the interest in the paraphrases was not diminished by this criticism and they had an intense reception in the sixteenth century and a long-lasting one stretching after Erasmus’ death. Parts were included in commentaries on the New Testament, sometimes with reference to the original author, more often without his name.
18
Conway-Jones, Ann. „Challenging anti-Judaism in the New Testament: a case study from Luke“. Theology 123, Nr. 6 (November 2020): 424–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0040571x20970150.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
What are the most troubling New Testament verses for Jewish–Christian relations? Matthew 27.25 or John 8.44 perhaps? I am increasingly disturbed by Luke 4.28–30, particularly after hearing sermons that take the story at face value, seeking to explain why the Nazareth synagogue worshippers turned into a lynch mob, rather than questioning why Luke published such a calumny. This article examines the explanations given in biblical commentaries for the behaviour of the Nazareth congregation. It argues that we ought to be looking instead to Luke’s context, and the complex dynamics involved in Gentiles adopting Israel’s Scriptures, prepared to acknowledge the violence of New Testament rhetoric.
19
Hilkens, Andy. „‘The planks of the Ark’: Isho‘dad of Merv, John Malalas and the Syriac chronicle tradition“. Byzantinische Zeitschrift 112, Nr. 3 (01.08.2019): 861–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/bz-2019-0035.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract In the middle of the ninth century, Isho‘dad of Merv, the East Syrian bishop of Haditha wrote extensive commentaries on all of the books of the Old and the New Testament, using a variety of sources, not only exegetical ones. This article offers the first (partial) reconstruction of Isho‘dad’s Syriac chronographic source, on the basis of a comparison of material in his commentaries on the Old Testament with two Syrian Orthodox chronicles (Michael the Syrian and the Anonymous Chronicle of 1234) and one Arabic Melkite chronicle (Agapius of Mabbug). It will be argued that this Syriac chronicle was written between the middle of the sixth century and the middle of the ninth century and was influenced by a variety of sources, most notably the Syriac Chronicle of Andronicus and the Chronicle Epitome of John Malalas.
20
Ruff, Tibor. „The Problem of Monogamy vs. Polygamy and Its Regulation in the Mosaic Law as well as in Later Jewish and Christian Commentaries“. DÍKÉ 6, Nr. 2 (17.06.2023): 155–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.15170/dike.2022.06.02.11.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The essential difference between the Jewish and the Christian traditions is, that the Mosaic Law, the Torah has been regarded in Judaism as a legal and state-creating, constituent factor, i.e. as a source of law; whereas in the Christian tradition, in accordance with the strict hermeneutic specified in the epistles of the Apostle Paul, it is not binding on non-Jewish believers and is only of a teaching nature. All the other books of the Old Testament are understood by both traditions as commentaries of divine origin and authority for the correct interpretation of the Torah, while the rest of the Jewish commentary literature on the whole Old Testament from antiquity to the present is known collectively as rabbinic literature. A – Christian – commentary of the Torah is also the New Testament itself, which also has divine authority in the Christian tradition. Through the Pauline hermeneutic, the Mosaic Law could only have influenced indirectly the development of medieval European ecclesiastical and secular legal systems as wisdom literature and exemplary texts reinterpreted by the New Testament, and not as a direct source of law. This paper examines the question of monogamy and polygamy in Mosaic Law and its commentaries. The Torah suggests monogamy as an ideal state, while at the same time allowing polygamy both ethically and legally. Nowhere does the New Testament explicitly prohibit polygamy except in the case of presbyters. Therefore, there was already a debate on the issue even in antiquity, in the vast textual ocean of rabbinic tradition, but the clearly lenient Torah rules made the obligatory abolition of polygamy out of the question.
21
Manafis, Panagiotis. „A New Witness to the Catena of Codex Zacynthius “. Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum / Journal of Ancient Christianity 26, Nr. 3 (01.12.2022): 371–401. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/zac-2022-0034.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract The so-called Codex Zacynthius (Cambridge, University Library, MS Add. 10062) is believed to be the earliest surviving Byzantine manuscript bearing commentaries on the New Testament; it preserves a series of commentaries on the Gospel of Luke consisting of quotations from writers of the early Christian period. The present article demonstrates that Codex Zacynthius must no longer be deemed the only witness to this collection of exegetical passages: the same collection for Luke 1:1–2:35 is found on four pages at the beginning and end of a 12th-century manuscript (Codex Vaticanus Palatinus graecus 273). This manuscript not only helps us to read parts of Codex Zacynthius that are now illegible, but it also provides us with the text of seven pages of the collection that are missing from Codex Zacynthius. These include commentaries by seven of the ten authors cited in this collection, including Greek passages from Severus of Antioch. The article includes the editio princeps of these previously unknown parts of the collection.
22
Spensley, Barbara E. „Book Review: Tyndale Commentary on John’s Gospel; Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: John“. Expository Times 116, Nr. 2 (November 2004): 69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001452460411600219.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
23
Balla, Peter. „Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary“. European Journal of Theology 29, Nr. 1 (01.12.2020): 82–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.5117/ejt2020.1.013.ball.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
RÉSUMÉIan Paul a rédigé un excellent commentaire sur l’Apocalypse, bien argumenté, pour la série renouvelée des commentaires Tyndale du Nouveau Testament. L’introduction détaillée traite des diverses approches d’interprétation du livre et aborde les principales questions d’introduction. Le commentaire par péricopes s’organise en trois points : le contexte, le commentaire et la théologie. Il considère que l’Apocalypse présente un genre littéraire mélangé : c’est une apocalypse, une lettre et un écrit prophétique. Il aide les chrétiens à vivre, affermis par l’espérance future, dans leur époque contemporaine.ZUSAMMENFASSUNGIan Paul schrieb einen wohl begründeten, hervorragenden Kommentar zum Buch der Offenbarung in der Reihe der revidierten Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. In einer detaillierten Einleitung erörtert er Ansätze zur Offenbarung und die damit verbundenen grundlegenden Einleitungsfragen. Der Kommentar zu den einzelnen Perikopen ist jeweils in drei Überschriften mit den dazugehörigen Abschnitten eingeteilt: Kontext, Erläuterung und Theologie. Die Offenbarung ist genreübergreifend: Apokalypse, Brief und Prophetie. Dieses Buch hilft Christen, in ihrer eigenen Zeit und Welt zu leben und dabei in ihrer Hoffnung auf die Zukunft gestärkt zu werden.SUMMARYIan Paul has written a well-argued, excellent commentary on Revelation in the series of revised Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. In a detailed Introduction he discusses the questions of approaches to Revelation and its major introductory matters. The commentary on the pericopes is arranged under three headings: context, comment and theology. Revelation has a mixed genre: apocalypse, letter and prophecy. The book helps Christians to live in their own present time strengthened by hope for the future.
24
Osek, Ewa. „Chryzostomowa terminologia wychowania“. Vox Patrum 53 (15.12.2009): 337–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.31743/vp.4475.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This paper is the study of the Greek terms using by John Chrysostom on rearing, upbringing, training and teaching of children. The analyse of these terms and their use in all the John Chrysostom's writings shows as strong influence of the Atttic writers' vocabulary (especiallty Platoʼs), even in his commentaries on the Scriptural verses, as of the early Christian literature (New Testament, Clement of Alexandria, Gregory of Nyssa).
25
Balla, Peter. „Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary“. European Journal of Theology 29, Nr. 1 (01.12.2020): 82–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.5117/ejt2020.1.013.ball.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
RÉSUMÉ Ian Paul a rédigé un excellent commentaire sur l’Apocalypse, bien argumenté, pour la série renouvelée des commentaires Tyndale du Nouveau Testament. L’introduction détaillée traite des diverses approches d’interprétation du livre et aborde les principales questions d’introduction. Le commentaire par péricopes s’organise en trois points : le contexte, le commentaire et la théologie. Il considère que l’Apocalypse présente un genre littéraire mélangé : c’est une apocalypse, une lettre et un écrit prophétique. Il aide les chrétiens à vivre, affermis par l’espérance future, dans leur époque contemporaine. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Ian Paul schrieb einen wohl begründeten, hervorragenden Kommentar zum Buch der Offenbarung in der Reihe der revidierten Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. In einer detaillierten Einleitung erörtert er Ansätze zur Offenbarung und die damit verbundenen grundlegenden Einleitungsfragen. Der Kommentar zu den einzelnen Perikopen ist jeweils in drei Überschriften mit den dazugehörigen Abschnitten eingeteilt: Kontext, Erläuterung und Theologie. Die Offenbarung ist genreübergreifend: Apokalypse, Brief und Prophetie. Dieses Buch hilft Christen, in ihrer eigenen Zeit und Welt zu leben und dabei in ihrer Hoffnung auf die Zukunft gestärkt zu werden. SUMMARY Ian Paul has written a well-argued, excellent commentary on Revelation in the series of revised Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. In a detailed Introduction he discusses the questions of approaches to Revelation and its major introductory matters. The commentary on the pericopes is arranged under three headings: context, comment and theology. Revelation has a mixed genre: apocalypse, letter and prophecy. The book helps Christians to live in their own present time strengthened by hope for the future.
26
Pastorelli, David. „Le Paraclet dans la notice antimontaniste du PseudoHippolyte, Refutatio omnium haeresium VIII, 19 Les commentaires prophétiques de Priscilla et Maximilla“. Vigiliae Christianae 62, Nr. 3 (2008): 261–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157007208x281261.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractThe anti-Montanist notice of Pseudo-Hippolytus, Ref. VIII, 19 is often quoted in research in order to show that the Phrygian prophets wrote numerous books to complete the New Testament. It is, however, marked by an obvious editorial activity: the motive of countless books belongs to the author's heresiological arsenal and should not be counted as a testimony for the history of the New Testament canon. The author is more concerned about the issue of women's ministry : the conflict is on the one hand about the status of Priscilla and Maximilla as prophetic teachers, based on the prophetic office of the Paraclete, and on the other hand about their claims to write « prophetic » commentaries. The underlying principle is the Pauline prohibition that women teach, a fortiori that they write books.
27
Vandergriff, Kenneth A. „Book review: Luke. Paideia Commentaries on the New Testament, by Mikeal C. Parsons“. Review & Expositor 114, Nr. 2 (Mai 2017): 311–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0034637317702788.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
28
Benjamin, David E. „Commentaries on Hebrews for Pastors and Teachers“. Review & Expositor 102, Nr. 2 (Mai 2005): 303–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/003463730510200209.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Hebrews provides a significant challenge to the pastor or teacher. There is first the task of properly understanding the structurally and theologically complex letter. Then the communicator must find ways to help the modern audience connect with the ancient message. This article surveys seven commentaries which may assist in this process, focusing on three significant exegetical commentaries: William Lane's two volume contribution to the Word Biblical Commentary series, Paul Ellingworth's commentary in the New International Greek Testament Commentary series, and Harold Attridge's volume in the Hermenia series. Four additional works are examined: Edgar McKnight's recently released work in the Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary series, David deSilva's socio-rhetorical commentary, George contribution in the NIV Application Commentary series, and Thomas Long's work in the Interpretation commentary series. The article concludes that pastors and teachers should consult at least one of the three major commentaries and then select from the others to assist in application.
29
Ross, J. M. „FURTHER UNNOTICED POINTS IN THE TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT“. Novum Testamentum 45, Nr. 3 (2003): 209–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685360360683253.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
AbstractProfessor J.K. Elliott (Leeds/UK) writes: J.M. Ross contributed many articles to the religious and academic press for over fifty years including three in this journal: "Some Unnoticed Points in the Text of the New Testament" (25 [1983] 59- 72), "Another Look at Mark 8:36" (29 [1987] 97-99) and "The Extra Words in Acts 18:21" (34 [1992] 247-9). These and his other text-critical notes are regularly to be seen referred to in commentaries and elsewhere in the literature. Mr. Ross died aged 88 in 1997. I have inherited his unpublished textual papers, from which a selection of eighteen further "Points" is edited here as a sequel to his 1983 article. This article appears with the approval of his family. John MacDonald Ross was a rara avis in the text-critical field, being a selfconfessed amateur. Having graduated in Greats (classics) at Oxford, he worked as a civil servant in the British Home Office (the interior ministry) and before his retirement was decorated as Commander of the British Empire for his services to the Crown. His hobby of text-critical studies was recognised by his election to the exclusive academic society Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas, at the annual meetings of which he attended the textual criticism seminars. His published textual notes are modelled on the taut reporting style in B.M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London/New York, 1971; Stuttgart, 21994). In editing these notes I have maintained this style: further treatment of all the issues would of course require fuller cross-references to other authorities and a greater discussion of alternative solutions, but Ross has the happy knack of spotlighting the essentials in many a complex text-critical crux and wrestles to achieve a resolution that betrays an essentially commonsense approach. We may not always agree with all his arguments but he often succeeds in making us revisit and appraise many an 'unnoticed' point.
30
Edmondson, Stephen. „The biblical historical structure of Calvin's Institutes“. Scottish Journal of Theology 59, Nr. 1 (Februar 2006): 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0036930605001602.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Recent work on Calvin's theology has focused on the integral relationship between his Institutes and his biblical commentaries. Particularly significant have been the claims that we can understand the development of the structure of the Institutes only in relationship to Calvin's work on his commentaries and that we can understand the content of the Institutes best through a recognition of the traces of the commentaries that are found therein. This article will extend this work, arguing that we best understand the final form of the 1559 Institutes through its relationship to Calvin's recently completed commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament and the gospels. These commentaries, with their focus on the history of God's covenant with God's people, fulfilled in Christ's history, provide this covenant history as a framing device by which the first two books of the 1559 Institutes are shaped. This framing is evident in the new ordering of material in the text, in Calvin's provision of new chapters to fill out this narratively structured order, and in the traces of his scriptural work within the text. Once the structural role of the covenant history is recognised within Books I and II, then Calvin's exposition of Christ's redeeming work through his exegesis of Christ's gospel history II.xvi is seen as the culmination of the theological developments of the first half of the Institutes, completing Calvin's depiction of the broader covenant history as a thoroughly christological reality.
31
Ковшов, Михаил Всеволодович. „Osvaldo Padilla THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. TYNDALE NEW TESTAMENT COMMENTARY“. Вопросы богословия, Nr. 1(9) (20.05.2023): 53–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.31802/pwg.2023.9.1.004.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Недавнее издание из серии комментариев Тиндейла к Новому Завету (IN1C) охватывает все три послания св. ап. Навла, называемые пастырскими. Данный том фактически является заменой предыдущего комментария Тиндейла на эти новозаветные письма, первоначально опубликованный в 1957 году известным библеистом Дональдом Гатри.Автор рецензируемого издания Освальдо Падилья - доктор философии Абердинского университета, профессор Бисоновской школы богословия Сэмфордского университета (The Beeson Divinity School of Samford University), ранее известный в среде академической библеистики по своим книгам: The Speeches of Outsiders in Acts (Cambridge, 2008) и The Acts of the Apostles: Interpretation, History and Theology (IVP Academic, 2016). A recent edition of Tyndale's series of Commentaries on the New Testament (IN1C) covers all three epistles of St. Paul, called pastoral. This volume is actually a replacement for Tyndale's previous commentary on these New Testament letters, originally published in 1957 by the renowned biblical scholar Donald Guthrie. The author of the peer-reviewed publication, Osvaldo Padilla, is a Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Aberdeen, professor at The Beeson Divinity School of Samford University (The Beeson Divinity School of Samford University), previously known among academic biblical studies for his books: The Speeches of Outsiders in Acts (Cambridge, 2008) and The Acts of the Apostles: Interpretation, History and Theology (IVP Academic, 2016).
32
Quarles, Charles L. „Colossians 1.12a: A Case for the Reading of the Earliest Witnesses“. Bible Translator 72, Nr. 3 (Dezember 2021): 380–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20516770211031619.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The evidence favoring the reading ἅμα τῷ πατρι in Col 1.12 is more compelling than is generally recognized. This variant is the reading supported by the earliest extant witnesses (P46 B), the more difficult reading, and the reading that best explains the origin of the other readings. Scholars who have viewed the reading as a palpable error are likely misreading the variant in the same manner that prompted early scribes to omit the ἅμα. This earliest attested reading supports Tischendorf's punctuation of the verse, the translation adopted by many major English versions, and the structure and exegesis of the passage affirmed by most recent commentaries. These versions and commentaries demonstrate how suitable this reading is in this context. Critical editions of the Greek New Testament should reconsider adopting this reading in their base text.
33
Clea Moreno-Szypowska, Jadwiga. „Żydowska metoda hermeneutyczna na podstawie egzegezy Pieśni nad Pieśniami Abrahama Ibn Ezra i brata Luisa de León“. Filozofia Chrześcijańska 17 (30.07.2021): 115–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/fc.2020.17.6.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The aim of these article is to present the more important rules of Jewish exegesis developed mainly by Hillel on the example of a commentary on the Song of the Songsof Abraham Ibn Ezra and Luis de León. The text tries to show how traditional Jewishhermeneutics is used in the innovative commentaries of a scholar from Tudela from the XIth century and a theologian from Belmonte from the XVIth century and how the first infl uenced the second. Interpretative methods developed in the most important centers of Judaic thought of the beginning of our era have been used for centuries to explain biblical texts, especially such as Song of Songs, which is recognized by both Old Testament and New Testament commentators as one of the most diffi cult and most mystical Scriptures.
34
Berglund, Carl Johan. „Understanding Origen: The Genre(s) of the Gospels in Light of Ancient Greek Philology and Modern Genre Theory“. Scrinium 12, Nr. 1 (17.11.2016): 181–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18177565-00121p11.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The reflections of Origen of Alexandria (ca. 185–254 CE) concerning the nature of the New Testament Gospels may be better understood if viewed in relation to a scheme of standard introductory questions used by ancient Greek philologists in their commentaries on classical Greek literature. While this scheme did not include questions about the form or genre of the writings to be analyzed, Origen repeatedly added such reflections when he adapted the scheme in his commentaries on biblical writings. These reflections inform us of his expectations of the Gospels. Using a modern concept of genre as a system of expectations shared between author and reader, and frequently intended to shape the worldview of the readers, Origen’s views of the nature of the Gospels can be expressed as their simultaneous participation in two genres: Christian teaching and ancient historiography.
35
Roukema, Riemer. „The Reception of the Hebrew Prophets in Ancient Christianity“. Religions 13, Nr. 5 (29.04.2022): 408. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel13050408.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This contribution discusses the ways in which the Hebrew prophets in Greek and Latin translations were received by Christians from the second to fifth centuries CE, preceded by an impression of the New Testament use of these prophets. Besides the vast amount of ecclesiastical references and commentaries, it also deals with Marcionite and Gnostic views. It demonstrates that Christians most often read the prophets as testimonies to Christ and the communities of those who believed in him. Allegorical readings came up soon and were justified by Origen of Alexandria (185–254 CE), whose interpretations were most influential in subsequent centuries. In the fourth century, a reaction against the allegorical reading of the prophets arose in Antioch, Syria; the “Antiochene school” rather limited its approach to the historical context of the prophets, except for texts read Christologically in the New Testament. This article also considers the question whether the Christian appropriation of the Hebrew prophets may be deemed legitimate.
36
Karlberg, Mark W. „Paul’s Letter to the Romans in the New International Commentary on the New Testament and in Contemporary Reformed Thought“. Evangelical Quarterly: An International Review of Bible and Theology 71, Nr. 1 (12.09.1999): 3–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/27725472-07101003.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This comparative review of the commentaries of John Murray and Douglas Moo on Paul’s Letter to the Romans gives focal attention to the controversial topic in contemporary biblical and theological study addressing the apostle’s understanding of the relationship between the Mosaic and new covenants. Summary analysis of the similarities and differences in the interpretations of Murray, an advocate of Reformed theology, and Moo, a ‘modified Lutheran,’ highlights current directions in evangelical and Reformed thought at the close of the twentieth century. Lively debate on Paul and the law can be expected to continue for many years to come. The question of an emerging consensus of opinion remains largely unanswered.
37
Wojciechowska, Kalina, und Mariusz Rosik. „Having the Father and the Son – the Structure, Main Theological Idea and Hermeneutical Principle of the Second Epistle of John“. Biblical Annals 13, Nr. 1 (27.01.2023): 133–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.31743/biban.13808.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The Second Epistle of John is one of the least commented on New Testament writings, with the vast majority of existing commentaries being linear. The authors of this article attempted to take a structural view of this short book. After discussing the structures of the letter proposed by scholars (part one), they proposed their own structure of the book, thanks to which the main theological idea of the letter (2 John 9) (part two) could be determined, along with a hermeneutical principle allowing for new interpretative insights into the book as a whole (part three). This principle can be put into the words: “having the Father and the Son.”
38
Liberatoscioli, Davide. „The New Testament and the Qur'an as Depicted in Abraham Silveira's ‘Telling’ Mute Book“. European Judaism 56, Nr. 2 (01.09.2023): 47–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.3167/ej.2023.560206.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract Interfaith controversies and disputes regarding the role of reason in interpreting the Scriptures characterised scholarly discussion in the Low Countries between the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The Jewish author Abraham Gómez Silveira contributed to this discussion with an eclectic body of literature. This article focuses on his Libro Mudo (Mute Book), which embodies his efforts to present the Jewish religion as the only rational one and the Christian dogma as irrational. In order to corroborate his reading, Silveira mostly bases his argumentation on non-Jewish texts. By selecting passages from the New Testaments, Christian religious commentaries as well as Qur'anic excerpts, Silveira aims to demonstrate that even non-Jewish sources prove the rationality of the Jewish theological system. The novelty of Silveira's approach consists in confuting Christian dogma by accepting the Gospels as reliable historical sources. In this argumentative structure, the Qur'an has a similar although not identical function.
39
Koivisto, Jussi Kalervo. „Martin Luther’s Conception of fascinare (Gal. 3:1)“. Biblical Interpretation 19, Nr. 4-5 (16.04.2011): 471–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156851511x595521.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The evil eye belief is a universal phenomenon and present in the Bible, both in the Old and the New Testament. Christian scholars have usually discussed this phenomenon in their comments on Gal. 3:1. Luther, for example, concentrated on the manifold notion of the bewitchment of the evil eye (Gr. βασκαίνω, Lat. fascinare, Ger. bezaubern; Gal. 3:1) in his Scholia (1516), Commentary (1519), and Large Commentary (1531/1535) on Galatians. Luther understood fascinare as a higher-level concept that included witchcraft (e.g. harming through the evil glance) and both psychic and spiritual disturbance. Luther’s interpretation of this concept is fascinating mix of folklore, Biblical scholarship and the perspectives of ancient authors. In spite of the many similarities between the different Commentaries, there were also differences—especially between early Commentaries (1516, 1519) and the Large Commentary (1531/1535). I will prove in detail how Luther contextualized the evil eye belief to his various comments on Gal. 3:1 and who and what were his models in doing this.
40
Boaheng, Isaac. „Adamic Christology and its Implications for Christian Soteriology“. International Journal of Social Science Research and Review 6, Nr. 12 (06.12.2023): 78–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.47814/ijssrr.v6i12.1805.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The subject of Christology is indispensable in Christianity because the entire Christian gospel centers on the person and works of Jesus Christ. One of the Christological models espoused in the New Testament is Adamic Christology with its focus on the striking analogy between Adam’s sin and Christ’s atoning sacrifice. While allusions of the Adam-Christ comparison appear elsewhere in the New Testament (Luke 3–4; Heb. 2:5–18), the most explicit articulation is found in Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15. Most of the existing literature on the subject focus more on exegetical issues and fail to provide adequate theological analysis on the Adam-Christ comparison. Current interest in theological implications of the Adam-Christ comparison has prompted this paper which explores Adamic Christology based on a theological reading of Romans 5:12-21 and other relevant texts on subject. The researcher used a literary research design comprising textual, theological and historical analyses of data collected from commentaries, articles, books, and dissertations/theses. The main thesis of the paper is that despite remarkable continuities between Adam and Christ on the basis of an ontological inclusivity of all humankind in their vicarious humanity, Christ exceeds Adam in all soteriological respects as the one who reverses the effect of Adam’s sin and its effect on humanity by bestowing salvific benefits on all who express belief in his saving person and works. The paper is an interdisciplinary study that contributes to the fields of Systematic theology (particularly on the issues of hamartiology and soteriology) and New Testament studies (especially Pauline studies).
41
Sweeney, James P. „On the Writing of New Testament Commentaries: Festschrift for Grant R. Osborne on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday. Texts and Editions for New Testament Study 8“. Bulletin for Biblical Research 24, Nr. 1 (01.01.2014): 139–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/26371260.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
42
Barclay, John. „Colossians and Philemon by N. T. Wright (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Leicester: IVP, 1986. 192 pp. £3.50)“. Evangelical Quarterly: An International Review of Bible and Theology 60, Nr. 3 (06.09.1988): 275–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/27725472-06003014.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
43
Malone, Andrew S. „Cautious about Conatives“. Novum Testamentum 62, Nr. 3 (18.06.2020): 302–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685365-12341668.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Abstract It has long been recognized that the imperfect and present tenses can communicate a conative sense. The category is sufficiently established that New Testament commentaries can brusquely identify “a conative imperfect” or “imperfectum de conatu” as if (1) the terminology conveys a uniform meaning and (2) such meaning is established by the verb’s tense. A fresh inspection of the phenomenon suggests neither assumption is accurate. With worked examples we can observe that at least two competing nuances are understood by the label “conative” and that the verb’s tense is far from the determinative factor. Whether in generating claims about the conative sense or in digesting others’ analyses, interpreters need to be alert to the pitfalls associated with this category.
44
Głowacki, Paweł. „PRIMACY OF THE APOSTLE PETER IN THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW 16,18-19“. Studia Pelplińskie 54 (30.12.2020): 107–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/splp.2020.005.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The paper discusses the problem of the proper interpretation of the Petrine text from the Gospel of Matthew 16,18-19. It is based on the mainly protestant but also orthodox and catholic commentaries to these verses. Jesus Christ bestowed on the apostle Peter the unique and supreme authority in the Kingdom of God. He changed his name from Simon to Peter to show him and others that this apostle received new dignity and mission, which is to be the rock for the future community of believers. What is more, Jesus also entrusted to Peter the “Keys of the Kingdom” in the same way like in the Old Testament king of the house of David appointed his own prime mister, royal steward by giving to him the “Key of the House of David”. Therefore Peter occupies the same office with the same supreme authority under the new jewish king, Jesus Christ. Due to this fact it also means that this office is transferred from one prime minister to another. Furthermore, to Peter was given the power of “binding and loosing” with the special protection of God called infallibility. For these reasons, the Catholic interpretation which does not ignore the jewish context and the Old Testament allusions to this passage is truly shedding the new light on the proper interpretation of this Matthew’s fragment and the role of the Apostle Peter.
45
Gravely, Edward D. „Revelation Ian Paul Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2018. 371 pp. pb. $25.00, ISBN 9780830843008“. Evangelical Quarterly 90, Nr. 4 (26.04.2019): 372–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/27725472-09004008.
Der volle Inhalt der Quelle
46
Harman, Allan M. „Matthew Henry’s Preaching and Pastoral Ministry at Hackney, 1712–1714“. Unio Cum Christo 7, Nr. 1 (01.04.2021): 9. http://dx.doi.org/10.35285/ucc7.1.2021.art1.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
From Chester, Matthew Henry moved to Hackney (then on the northern border of London) for the final two years of his life and ministry. As a leading dissenter, he was immediately called to preach extensively beyond his congregation. In addition, he was working on his Exposition and publishing sermons. But various challenges faced him, in particular ill-health and tensions within his family. As at Chester, he had no formal elders or deacons to assist him. His extant diary from 1705 to 1713 gives a detailed account of his ministry. He displayed the Puritan ideal of a pastor/preacher, together with involvement in other dissenting interests. His ministry shows his deep devotion to New Testament teaching on the role of shepherding God’s flock. KEYWORDS: Puritans, Matthew Henry, dissenters, non-conformists, Chester, commentaries, Hackney, Puritan spirituality
47
Iatan, Cristinel. „The Gospel of Matthew and the Pesher Interpretation“. Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Theologia Orthodoxa 68, Nr. 2 (30.12.2023): 21–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.24193/subbto.2023.2.01.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
This study explores the pesher interpretation, a method of biblical exegesis used by the Qumran community, and whether early Christians like the author of Matthew's Gospel employed similar techniques. Since the 1950s, scholars have analysed the so-called “formula quotations” in Matthew, finding parallels with the pesharim commentaries found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Krister Stendahl argued Matthew comes from a “school” using pesher to radically reinterpret Old Testament passages as fulfilled in Jesus. Others like Richard Longenecker also find Matthew employing this Second Temple Jewish method, especially in texts with “fulfilment formulae”. However, objections have been raised. Joseph Fitzmyer notes the differences between Qumran pesharim and Matthew's use of scripture. Norman Hillyer wonders if the fulfilment formula indicates a distinct hermeneutic, not pesher. Ulrich Luz stresses Matthew proclaims fulfilment, not hidden meanings like pesharim. In conclusion, applying the ideas of pesher from Qumran to the New Testament raises problems. Similarities between pesher and Patristic exegesis are noted, but determining dependence requires examining the original historical meaning versus the contemporary application of prophecies. More analysis of whether early Christian use of scripture mirrors Qumran pesher or develops its fulfilment hermeneutic is needed. Keywords: pesher, fulfilment, formula quotations, Midrash, exegesis, Qumran, Eschatology, Second Temple, Matthew's Gospel, hermeneutics
48
Nesterova, Olga. „Figurative interpretation of the story of the Lord’s entry into Jerusalem in the Christian tradition: a donkey with her colt as an image of Jews and Christians“. St. Tikhons' University Review 103 (31.10.2022): 11–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.15382/sturi2022103.11-36.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
The article contains an overview of Christian commentaries on the Gospel accounts about Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, presenting a particularly noteworthy case of intersection of two principal exegetical traditions, namely the typological and the allegorical one. The story is cited in the Gospels as an incontestable proof of the literal fulfillment of the Old Testament messianic prophecy on the forthcoming King, sitting upon a donkey and its colt (Zech 9:9 according to Matth 21:1-11). Later exegetes come to search a figural meaning of this story by associating two mounts respectably with the Jewish people and the Christians (representing the new God’s chosen people). Such an interpretation was obviously inspired by the solid tradition typological exegesis, where the topic of two rival peoples, represented by the pairs of the biblical patriarchs’ rival sons, have being treated constantly. But the formal transferring of the standard typological meaning to the Gospel story on the Lord’s entry into Jerusalem attested a lacking comprehension of the practical value of the typological method, which was primary aimed to reveal the hidden prophetic and not simply symbolic sense of the Sacred history. The only attempt to connect these interpretations with a typological norm was made by John Chrysostom, who admitted the possibility of discovering a particular kind of prophecies, announced through deeds, not only in the Old, but also in the New Testament. However, even he does not take in account another essential feature of typological interpretations, which not only expanded the range of the so called Tesimonia, proving the validity of Christian belief in the actual coming of the Messiah, but also aimed to provide a justification of Christian claims to the role of the new God-chosen people for the Jewish opponents, for whom the reference to the allegorical meaning of the events of the New Testament history could not have served as a convincing argument.
49
Grenzer, Matthias, und Francisca Antonia De Farias Grenzer. „O VÉU DE MOISÉS E O SUDÁRIO DE JESUS (Ex 34,33-35; Jo 20,7)“. PARALELLUS Revista de Estudos de Religião - UNICAP 10, Nr. 23 (02.12.2019): 109. http://dx.doi.org/10.25247/paralellus.2019.v10n23.p109-120.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
Os autores neotestamentários, ao contemplarem o mistério presente na pessoa de Jesus, usam as imagens pertencentes à literatura veterotestamentária; estas, em geral, estão carregadas de conotações teológicas. Possivelmente, isso vale também para o sudário que estava sobre a cabeça de Jesus. Mencionado somente em Jo 20,7, o sudário talvez possa ser compreendido a partir do véu que estava sobre a face de Moisés: peça têxtil três vezes mencionada em Ex 34,33-35. O estudo aqui apresentado visa investigar tal paralelismo, o qual é pouco valorizado nos Comentários sobre o Evangelho segundo João publicados em língua portuguesa. Além disso, por mais que seja investigado um paralelismo já visto por outros, comumente surgem novos detalhes e novas compreensões ao se procurar de novo pelo sentido do texto.Palavras-chave: Véu, sudário, Moisés, Jesus. AbstractThe New Testament authors, in contemplating the mystery present in the person of Jesus, use the images belonging to the Old Testament literature, which are, in general, loaded with theological connotations. Possibly, this also applies to the shroud that was on Jesus’ head. Mentioned only in John 20:7, the shroud may perhaps have understood from the veil that was on the face of Moses, textile piece three times mentioned in Ex 34:33-35. The study presented here proposes to investigate such parallelism, which is little valued in the Commentaries on the Gospel according to John, published in Portuguese language. Moreover, however a parallelism already has been investigated by others, new details and new understandings often emerge when one looks again for the meaning of the text.Keywords: Veil, shroud, Moses, Jesus.
50
Levinsohn, Stephen H. „The Relevance of Greek Discourse Studies to Exegesis“. Journal of Translation 2, Nr. 2 (2006): 11–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.54395/jot-xj6kn.
Der volle Inhalt der QuelleAnnotation:
At least three discourse-related areas of exegesis tend not to be handled satisfactorily in many commentaries: the order of constituents in the clause and sentence, the presence versus absence of the article with nouns, and the significance of the conjunctions used. This paper first shows how insights from the work of Simon Dik, Jan Firbas and Knud Lambrecht have contributed to our understanding of the significance of variations in constituent order. Other insights that bear on constituent order are the Principle of Natural Information Flow and the distinction between default versus marked ordering. The paper then outlines how recent insights about the presence versus absence of the article may help us to choose between alternative exegeses of the same passage. The final section shows how insights from the work of Diane Blakemore and Reboul and Moeschler have revolutionized our understanding of the most common conjunctions used in the New Testament.