Abstract
This is still an unresolved problem. Our aim is to investigate the question to see whether Paul's opponents are one group or more than one, and to ascertain the nature of their views.Five assumptions are made; they are taken as axiomatic, so a case for them in detail is not argued. First, the integrity of Phil. has been successfully defended against attempts to analyse it as containing three originally separate letters to the Philippians, especially by P. Schubert, V. Furnish, R. Jewett and T. E. Pollard, and supported by R. P. Martin. This does make it somewhat easier to maintain a single-front hypothesis, but only marginally makes it more probable. The principle of Occam's razor (entia non sint multiplicanda praeter necessitatem), tends to favour the assumption of a uniform view, but only if evidence for multiple opponents appears weak.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Religious studies,History
Reference51 articles.
1. The epistolary thanksgiving and the integrity of Philippians;Jewett;NovT,1970
Cited by
28 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. 1 Introduction Paul: A Circumcised Apostle;The Apostle to the Foreskin;2023-05-23
2. The Apostle to the Foreskin;Beih Z Neutestamentl;2023-05-16
3. Beware the Dogs! The Phallic Epithet in Phil 3.2;New Testament Studies;2020-12-15
4. In Search of Real Circumcision: Ritual Failure and Circumcision in Paul;Journal for the Study of the New Testament;2017-08-04
5. Philippians;The Blackwell Companion to the New Testament;2010-02-01