Matthew
Matthew
复制标题
马修
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1981
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
B. Nolan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
B. Nolan
这个词是宣布的福音和候选人的信仰专业。婚姻是基督的复活，“当他在他的精神身体，这是教会的适当领域上升”（145）。这最后一点可以通过在福音书和启示录中引入皇家婚礼的主题来加强，以及与复活的基督有关的歌的回声。在以弗所书5章2节6节中几乎没有提到后裔。不幸的是，汉森没有考虑到马库斯巴特的magnetic和对比的讨论，在他的锚圣经以弗所书（19 - 74）。无数的参考训诂的意见通常委托说明一吨结束的书。然而，它们有时会加重文本的负担，例如，pp. 1磅117，128，139。复杂的口头交织的圣经文本，所需要的累积环环相扣的论点，使困难，如果奖励阅读。摘要是wellnigh不可能的，虽然注意pp。18-20、30、93-95、102、121、154-155、165和175。上面已经对几个主题表达了不同意见。一个更准确的标题应该是，《圣经新约解释研究》。如果所有的希腊文本都使用斜体，这本书的高价可能会降低。汉森的方法比迈克尔·古德或约翰·德鲁里的方法更有控制力。他的分析进行了令人钦佩的敏感性对前提，感情，和方法的NT authois。这种学术上的普世主义导致了对约翰和保罗的真实的理解，这对我们来说逐渐有意义。Brian M.诺兰
word is the proclaimed Gospel and the candidate’s profession of faith. The marriage is Christ’s resurrection, ‘‘when he rose in his spiritual Body which is the Church’s proper sphere” (145). This last point could be strengthened by bringing in the theme of the royal nuptials in the Gospels and Revelation, as well as possible echoes of the song of Songs in relation to the risen Christ. There is scarcely an allusion to the descent in Eph 5 2 6 . Unfortunately, Hanson does not take account of Markus Barth’s magisterial and contrasting discussion in his Anchor Bible Ephesians ( 19 74). The myriad references to exegetical opinion are normally consigned to notes a t the end of the book. However, they sometimes weigh down the text, e.g., pp. 1 lb117, 128, 139. The intricate verbal interweaving of scriptural texts, required by the cumulative interlocking arguments, makes for dificult if rewarding reading. Summary is wellnigh impossible, though note pp. 18-20, 30, 93-95, 102, 121, 154-155, 165, and 175. Dissent has been expressed above about a few topics. A more accurate title would be, Studies in the New Testatilent Interpretation of Scripture. If italics were used for all the Greek texts the book’s high price might have been lowered. Hanson’s method is more controlled than that of, say, Michael Goulder or John Drury. His analyses are carried out with admirable sensitivity towards the presuppositions, feelings, and methods of N T authois. This ecumenism in scholarship leads to a real understanding of John and Paul on their own terms which gradually make sense for us. BRIAN M. NOLAN