To Save Whom They Can: Another Look at Philo and Missionary Deceit
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 Tor...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
[2020]
|
| In: |
New Testament studies
Year: 2020, Volume: 66, Issue: 4, Pages: 554-564 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Paul Apostle
/ Bible. Corinthians 1. 9
/ Philo, Alexandrinus 25 BC-40
/ Philo, Alexandrinus 25 BC-40, Quaestiones in Genesim
/ Mission (international law
/ Fraud
/ Lie
/ Chadwick, Henry 1920-2008
|
| IxTheo Classification: | HB Old Testament HC New Testament HD Early Judaism |
| Further subjects: | B
Missionary Activity
B noble lie B Deceit B Philo B Paul |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | 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. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1469-8145 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: New Testament studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S0028688520000119 |