| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles
The historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles, the principal historical source for the Apostolic Age, is a major issue for biblical scholars and historians of Early Christianity, with the debate on the historicity of Acts becoming most vehement between 1895 and 1915.〔"In the period approximately 1895–1915 there was a far reaching, multi-facted, high-level debate over the historicity of Acts.", Hemer & Gempf, "The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History", p.3 (1990). Mohr Siebeck.〕 German theologian Adolf von Harnack in particular was known for being very critical of the accuracy of Acts, though his allegations of its inaccuracies have been described as "exaggerated hypercriticism" by some.〔"It is difficult to acquit Harnack here of an exaggerated hypercriticism. He constructed a lengthy list of inaccuracies(Harnack, ''Acts'' pp. 203–31), but most of the entries are bizarrely trivial:", Hemer & Gempf, "The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History", p. 7 (1990). Mohr Siebeck.〕 Attitudes towards the historicity of Acts range widely across scholarship in different countries.〔"British scholarship has been relatively positive about Acts' historicity, from Lightfoot and Ramsay to W.L. Knox and Bruce. German scholarship has, for the most part, evaluated negatively the historical worth of Acts, from Baur and his school to Dibelius, Conzelmann, and Haenchen. North American scholars show a range of opinion. Mattill and Gasque align with the British approach to Acts. Cadbury and Lake take a moderate line and to some degree sidestep the question of accurate historicity.", Setzer, "Jewish responses to early Christians: history and polemics, 30–150 C.E.", p. 94 (1994). Fortress Press.〕
Three early writings that mention Jesus and the origins of Christianity are the ''Antiquities of the Jews'' by the Roman-Jewish historian Josephus, ''Church History'' of Eusebius of the 4th century, and ''Luke–Acts'', a two-part historiography, sometimes ascribed to Luke who was believed to be a follower of Paul.
A key contested issue is the historicity of the depiction of Paul in Acts. According to the majority viewpoint, Acts described Paul differently from how Paul describes himself, both factually and theologically.〔"Acts presents a picture of Paul that differs from his own description of himself in many of his letters, both factually and theologically." biblical literature (2010). In Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. Retrieved November 25, 2010, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online: ().〕 Acts differed with Paul's letters on important issues, such as the Law, Paul's own apostleship, and his relation to the Jerusalem church.〔"That an actual companion of Paul writing about his mission journeys could be in so much disagreement with Paul (whose theology is evidenced in his letters) about fundamental issues such as the Law, his apostleship, and his relationship to the Jerusalem church is hardly conceivable." biblical literature (2010). In Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. Retrieved November 25, 2010, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online: ().〕 Scholars generally prefer Paul's account over that in Acts.〔"Paul's own account is generally regarded as the more reliable." Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. p. 316.〕 Representing a more conservative view, however, some prominent scholars and historians view the book of Acts as being fairly accurate and corroborated by archaeology, and in general agreement with the Pauline epistles.〔Bruce, F.F. (1981). "The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?" Ch. 7–8. InterVarsity Press.〕
==Composition==
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|