To Save Whom They Can
Another Look at Philo and Missionary Deceit
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19292953 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Alex Macdonald (0000-0001-6999-7441, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 66 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 554-564 |
| Publication date | 2020-10-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | New Testament Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0028-6885 • E-ISSN: 1469-8145 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0028688520000119 |
| OpenAlex | W3089033707 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 1 |
Henry Chadwick proposed in the 1960s that Philo's Questions and Answers in Genesis 4.69 is important for understanding Paul's mission strategy in 1 Cor 9. In 2011 David J. Rudolph revisited that ‘missionary-apologetic’ reading of QG 4.69 in a discussion of Paul's observance of the Torah but refrained from drawing firm conclusions. This article subjects the missionary-apologetic hypothesis to closer scrutiny, especially regarding its plausibility as a reading of Philo. It argues that Chadwick's hypothesis lacks both evidence and explanatory power. QG 4.69, therefore, contributes little to our understanding of 1 Cor 9 and of Paul's missionary strategy and Torah observance
Epistemology · Explanatory power · Judaism · Linguistics · Power (physics) · Reading (process) · Scrutiny · Theology · Torah · Biblical Studies and Interpretation · Christian Theology and Mission · Philosophy · Religion, Society, and Development
| Highly cited | No |
|---|