{"title":"对彼得-纳格尔文章的思考","authors":"Chris Jones","doi":"10.17570/stj.2024.v10n1.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This is a response to an article written by South African New Testament scholar, Peter Nagel. The article draws on the thoughts of another South African New Testament scholar Andries van Aarde and of German theologian Bernhard Lohse, on the history of the doctrine of the Trinity. Concluding observations include inquiring as to how the church will effectively address this type of study in its deliberations and decisions. ","PeriodicalId":508967,"journal":{"name":"Stellenbosch Theological Journal","volume":"85 24","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reflections on Peter Nagel’s article\",\"authors\":\"Chris Jones\",\"doi\":\"10.17570/stj.2024.v10n1.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This is a response to an article written by South African New Testament scholar, Peter Nagel. The article draws on the thoughts of another South African New Testament scholar Andries van Aarde and of German theologian Bernhard Lohse, on the history of the doctrine of the Trinity. Concluding observations include inquiring as to how the church will effectively address this type of study in its deliberations and decisions. \",\"PeriodicalId\":508967,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Stellenbosch Theological Journal\",\"volume\":\"85 24\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Stellenbosch Theological Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17570/stj.2024.v10n1.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stellenbosch Theological Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17570/stj.2024.v10n1.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
这是对南非新约学者彼得-纳格尔（Peter Nagel）所写文章的回应。文章借鉴了另一位南非新约学者安德里斯-范-阿尔德（Andries van Aarde）和德国神学家伯恩哈德-洛塞（Bernhard Lohse）关于三位一体教义历史的思想。文章的结论意见包括询问教会在审议和决策中将如何有效地处理这类研究。
This is a response to an article written by South African New Testament scholar, Peter Nagel. The article draws on the thoughts of another South African New Testament scholar Andries van Aarde and of German theologian Bernhard Lohse, on the history of the doctrine of the Trinity. Concluding observations include inquiring as to how the church will effectively address this type of study in its deliberations and decisions.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
