未经证实的、非正式的、谬误的、为马可福音而提出的Preterist论点13:24-27

IF 0.1 4区哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY

HEYTHROP JOURNAL Pub Date : 2023-10-19 DOI:10.1111/heyj.14260

Elton L. Hollon

{"title":"未经证实的、非正式的、谬误的、为马可福音而提出的Preterist论点13:24-27","authors":"Elton L. Hollon","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14260","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Abstract: The following article evaluates two common arguments for preterist interpretations of Mark 13:24-27, collectively dubbed the ‘time-text’ argument. These two arguments support symbolic and/or historicised interpretations. Our thesis is that the first argument is unsound and the second commits the informal fallacy of false dilemma. Owing to these problems, the arguments and preterist interpretations should be rejected in favour of more plausible futurist interpretations.</p>","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unsound and Informally Fallacious Preterist Arguments for Mark 13:24-27\",\"authors\":\"Elton L. Hollon\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/heyj.14260\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Abstract: The following article evaluates two common arguments for preterist interpretations of Mark 13:24-27, collectively dubbed the ‘time-text’ argument. These two arguments support symbolic and/or historicised interpretations. Our thesis is that the first argument is unsound and the second commits the informal fallacy of false dilemma. Owing to these problems, the arguments and preterist interpretations should be rejected in favour of more plausible futurist interpretations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54105,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HEYTHROP JOURNAL\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HEYTHROP JOURNAL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/heyj.14260\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/heyj.14260","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要：以下文章评估了对马克福音13:24-27的前验主义解释的两个常见论点，统称为“时间文本”论点。这两个论点支持符号化和/或历史化的解释。我们的论点是，第一个论点是不健全的，第二个论点犯了错误困境的非正式谬论。由于这些问题，这些论点和未来主义的解释应该被拒绝，而支持更合理的未来主义解释。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Unsound and Informally Fallacious Preterist Arguments for Mark 13:24-27

Abstract: The following article evaluates two common arguments for preterist interpretations of Mark 13:24-27, collectively dubbed the ‘time-text’ argument. These two arguments support symbolic and/or historicised interpretations. Our thesis is that the first argument is unsound and the second commits the informal fallacy of false dilemma. Owing to these problems, the arguments and preterist interpretations should be rejected in favour of more plausible futurist interpretations.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

HEYTHROP JOURNAL Multiple-

CiteScore

0.30

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Founded on the conviction that the disciplines of theology and philosophy have much to gain from their mutual interaction, The Heythrop Journal provides a medium of publication for scholars in each of these fields and encourages interdisciplinary comment and debate. The Heythrop Journal embraces all the disciplines which contribute to theological and philosophical research, notably hermeneutics, exegesis, linguistics, history, religious studies, philosophy of religion, sociology, psychology, ethics and pastoral theology. The Heythrop Journal is invaluable for scholars, teachers, students and general readers.