Confirming Scripture through Eyewitness Testimony (2 Peter 1.19a): Resolving a Crux Interpretum
Responding to objections raised against the parousia, the author of 2 Peter seeks to defend the validity of Jesus’ return by pointing to the experience of the apostles at the Transfiguration (1.16-18) and to prophetic scripture (1.19-21). But how these two proofs relate to one another has been a mat...
| Otros títulos: | Special Issue: Paul and the Praetorium, Guest Editors: Ryan S Schellenberg and Heidi Wendt |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Tipo de documento: | Electrónico Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Verificar disponibilidad: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Gargar...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publicado: |
Sage
2021
|
| En: |
Journal for the study of the New Testament
Año: 2021, Volumen: 43, Número: 4, Páginas: 605-624 |
| (Cadenas de) Palabra clave estándar: | B
Testigo ocular
/ Trasfiguración de Cristo (Motivo)
/ Parusía
/ Bibel. Petrusbrief 2. 1,16-18
/ Bibel. Petrusbrief 2. 1,19-21
|
| Clasificaciones IxTheo: | HC Nuevo Testamento KAB Cristianismo primitivo |
| Acceso en línea: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Sumario: | Responding to objections raised against the parousia, the author of 2 Peter seeks to defend the validity of Jesus’ return by pointing to the experience of the apostles at the Transfiguration (1.16-18) and to prophetic scripture (1.19-21). But how these two proofs relate to one another has been a matter of dispute since the earliest days of critical scholarship. Standing behind this disagreement is a difficult grammatical construction involving the comparative adjective βεβαιότερον (2 Pet. 1.19a). This article seeks to bring resolution to the debate through a comprehensive assessment of the force and function of this key term. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1745-5294 |
| Obras secundarias: | Enthalten in: Journal for the study of the New Testament
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/0142064X211004451 |