{"title":"论L的信度","authors":"Lee Hagewood","doi":"10.1163/27725472-09403001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines the historicity of Luke 13:10–17 and 14:1–6, both of which contain healing miracles of Jesus attested only in Luke. The article proceeds by first considering the coherence of these pericopes with material widely accepted as reflecting activity of the historical Jesus. Details within these pericopes are then examined for their potential historical significance. Finally, common objections to historicity are considered. Although the evidence for these singly attested healings is incapable of ‘proving’ their historicity, it suggests that Luke’s source for these healings contains historical information that he handled no more or less responsibly than he handled Mark.","PeriodicalId":488869,"journal":{"name":"The Evangelical quarterly","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Reliability of L\",\"authors\":\"Lee Hagewood\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/27725472-09403001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article examines the historicity of Luke 13:10–17 and 14:1–6, both of which contain healing miracles of Jesus attested only in Luke. The article proceeds by first considering the coherence of these pericopes with material widely accepted as reflecting activity of the historical Jesus. Details within these pericopes are then examined for their potential historical significance. Finally, common objections to historicity are considered. Although the evidence for these singly attested healings is incapable of ‘proving’ their historicity, it suggests that Luke’s source for these healings contains historical information that he handled no more or less responsibly than he handled Mark.\",\"PeriodicalId\":488869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Evangelical quarterly\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Evangelical quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/27725472-09403001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Evangelical quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27725472-09403001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article examines the historicity of Luke 13:10–17 and 14:1–6, both of which contain healing miracles of Jesus attested only in Luke. The article proceeds by first considering the coherence of these pericopes with material widely accepted as reflecting activity of the historical Jesus. Details within these pericopes are then examined for their potential historical significance. Finally, common objections to historicity are considered. Although the evidence for these singly attested healings is incapable of ‘proving’ their historicity, it suggests that Luke’s source for these healings contains historical information that he handled no more or less responsibly than he handled Mark.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
