{"title":"保罗会写这样的东西吗?腓立比书3:12的称义条款和最后的审判","authors":"R. Giffin","doi":"10.1163/18712207-12341465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nA reading that has Paul claiming he has not already been justified (οὐχ … ἢ ἤδη δεδικαίωμαι) appears in some important witnesses to the text of Phil 3:12 (e.g., P46, 06, Irenaeus [Latin translation], Ambrosiaster). Known as “the justification clause,” this variant reading is often dismissed as spurious based (in part) on the assumption that Paul would not have written any such thing. In this article the author challenges this assumption. Included is an overview of Paul’s wider theology of justification, an examination of the four texts in the Pauline Letters in which verbal forms of justification terminology appear in the future tense, and a discussion of three additional Pauline texts in which future justification is implied. These analyses clarify that the reading is compatible with Paul’s use of justification language elsewhere and is coherent as a reference to final justification at the last judgment.","PeriodicalId":40398,"journal":{"name":"Horizons in Biblical Theology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Would Paul Have Written Something Like This? The Justification Clause of Philippians 3:12 and the Last Judgment\",\"authors\":\"R. Giffin\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18712207-12341465\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nA reading that has Paul claiming he has not already been justified (οὐχ … ἢ ἤδη δεδικαίωμαι) appears in some important witnesses to the text of Phil 3:12 (e.g., P46, 06, Irenaeus [Latin translation], Ambrosiaster). Known as “the justification clause,” this variant reading is often dismissed as spurious based (in part) on the assumption that Paul would not have written any such thing. In this article the author challenges this assumption. Included is an overview of Paul’s wider theology of justification, an examination of the four texts in the Pauline Letters in which verbal forms of justification terminology appear in the future tense, and a discussion of three additional Pauline texts in which future justification is implied. These analyses clarify that the reading is compatible with Paul’s use of justification language elsewhere and is coherent as a reference to final justification at the last judgment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40398,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Horizons in Biblical Theology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Horizons in Biblical Theology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18712207-12341465\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Horizons in Biblical Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18712207-12341465","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
保罗声称他还没有被证明是正当的(ο ο χ…丶ν δη δεδικα rain - ωμαι)出现在腓立比书3:12的一些重要见证中(例如,P46, 06, Irenaeus[拉丁翻译],Ambrosiaster)。这种不同的解读被称为“称义条款”,通常被认为是虚假的,(部分地)基于保罗不会写任何这样的东西的假设。在本文中,作者对这一假设提出了挑战。包括对保罗更广泛的称义神学的概述,对保罗书信中四个文本的考察,其中称义术语的口头形式以将来时态出现,并讨论另外三个隐含未来称义的保罗文本。这些分析表明,这段经文与保罗在其他地方使用的称义语言是一致的,并且作为最后审判时的最终称义的参考是连贯的。
Would Paul Have Written Something Like This? The Justification Clause of Philippians 3:12 and the Last Judgment
A reading that has Paul claiming he has not already been justified (οὐχ … ἢ ἤδη δεδικαίωμαι) appears in some important witnesses to the text of Phil 3:12 (e.g., P46, 06, Irenaeus [Latin translation], Ambrosiaster). Known as “the justification clause,” this variant reading is often dismissed as spurious based (in part) on the assumption that Paul would not have written any such thing. In this article the author challenges this assumption. Included is an overview of Paul’s wider theology of justification, an examination of the four texts in the Pauline Letters in which verbal forms of justification terminology appear in the future tense, and a discussion of three additional Pauline texts in which future justification is implied. These analyses clarify that the reading is compatible with Paul’s use of justification language elsewhere and is coherent as a reference to final justification at the last judgment.