Alec j lucas (15 resultados)

Condición: New. Print on Demand.

HRD. Condición: New. New Book. Shipped from UK. Established seller since 2000.

Hardcover. Condición: New.

Condición: new.

Buch. Condición: Neu. Druck auf Anfrage Neuware - Printed after ordering - This study proposes that both constitutively and rhetorically (through ironic, inferential, and indirect application), Ps 106(105) serves as the substructure for Paul s argumentation in Rom 1:18 2:11. Constitutively, Rom 1:18 32 hinges on the triadic interplay between they (ex)changed and God gave them over, an interplay that creates a sin retribution sequence with an a-ba-ba-b pattern. Both elements of this pattern derive from Ps 106(105):20, 41a respectively. Rhetorically, Paul ironically applies the psalmic language of idolatrous (ex)change and God s subsequent giving-over to Gentiles. Aiding this ironic application is that Paul has cast his argument in the mold of Hellenistic Jewish polemic against Gentile idolatry and immorality, similar to Wis 13 15. In Rom 2:1 4, however, Paul inferentially incorporates a hypocritical Jewish interlocutor into the preceding sequence through the charge of doing the same, a charge that recalls Israel s sins recounted in Ps 106(105). This incorporation then gives way to an indirect application of Ps 106(105):23, by means of an allusion to Deut 9 10 in Rom 2:5 11. Secondarily, this study suggests that Paul s argumentation exploits an intra-Jewish debate in which evocations of the golden calf figured prominently.…

Condición: New. pp. 312.

Condición: New. pp. 312.

Hardcover. Condición: Brand New. digital original edition. 268 pages. 9.25x6.25x1.00 inches. In Stock.

Condición: New. 2014. Hardcover. . . . . .

Hardback. Condición: New. This study proposes that both constitutively and rhetorically (through ironic, inferential, and indirect application), Ps 106(105) serves as the substructure for Paul's argumentation in Rom 1:18-2:11. Constitutively, Rom 1:18-32 hinges on the triadic interplay between "they (ex)changed" and "God gave them over," an interplay that creates a sin-retribution sequence with an a-ba-ba-b pattern. Both elements of this pattern derive from Ps 106(105):20, 41a respectively. Rhetorically, Paul ironically applies the psalmic language of idolatrous "(ex)change" and God's subsequent "giving-over" to Gentiles. Aiding this ironic application is that Paul has cast his argument in the mold of Hellenistic Jewish polemic against Gentile idolatry and immorality, similar to Wis 13-15. In Rom 2:1-4, however, Paul inferentially incorporates a hypocritical Jewish interlocutor into the preceding sequence through the charge of doing the "same," a charge that recalls Israel's sins recounted in Ps 106(105). This incorporation then gives way to an indirect application of Ps 106(105):23, by means of an allusion to Deut 9-10 in Rom 2:5-11. Secondarily, this study suggests that Paul's argumentation exploits an intra-Jewish debate in which evocations of the golden calf figured prominently.…

Condición: New. In English.

Hardback. Condición: New. This study proposes that both constitutively and rhetorically (through ironic, inferential, and indirect application), Ps 106(105) serves as the substructure for Paul's argumentation in Rom 1:18-2:11. Constitutively, Rom 1:18-32 hinges on the triadic interplay between "they (ex)changed" and "God gave them over," an interplay that creates a sin-retribution sequence with an a-ba-ba-b pattern. Both elements of this pattern derive from Ps 106(105):20, 41a respectively. Rhetorically, Paul ironically applies the psalmic language of idolatrous "(ex)change" and God's subsequent "giving-over" to Gentiles. Aiding this ironic application is that Paul has cast his argument in the mold of Hellenistic Jewish polemic against Gentile idolatry and immorality, similar to Wis 13-15. In Rom 2:1-4, however, Paul inferentially incorporates a hypocritical Jewish interlocutor into the preceding sequence through the charge of doing the "same," a charge that recalls Israel's sins recounted in Ps 106(105). This incorporation then gives way to an indirect application of Ps 106(105):23, by means of an allusion to Deut 9-10 in Rom 2:5-11. Secondarily, this study suggests that Paul's argumentation exploits an intra-Jewish debate in which evocations of the golden calf figured prominently.…

Condición: New. 2014. Hardcover. . . . . . Books ship from the US and Ireland.

Buch. Condición: Neu. This item is printed on demand - it takes 3-4 days longer - Neuware -This study proposes that both constitutively and rhetorically (through ironic, inferential, and indirect application), Ps 106(105) serves as the substructure for Paul s argumentation in Rom 1:18 2:11. Constitutively, Rom 1:18 32 hinges on the triadic interplay between they (ex)changed and God gave them over, an interplay that creates a sin retribution sequence with an a-ba-ba-b pattern. Both elements of this pattern derive from Ps 106(105):20, 41a respectively. Rhetorically, Paul ironically applies the psalmic language of idolatrous (ex)change and God s subsequent giving-over to Gentiles. Aiding this ironic application is that Paul has cast his argument in the mold of Hellenistic Jewish polemic against Gentile idolatry and immorality, similar to Wis 13 15. In Rom 2:1 4, however, Paul inferentially incorporates a hypocritical Jewish interlocutor into the preceding sequence through the charge of doing the same, a charge that recalls Israel s sins recounted in Ps 106(105). This incorporation then gives way to an indirect application of Ps 106(105):23, by means of an allusion to Deut 9 10 in Rom 2:5 11. Secondarily, this study suggests that Paul s argumentation exploits an intra-Jewish debate in which evocations of the golden calf figured prominently. 292 pp. Englisch. …

Buch. Condición: Neu. This item is printed on demand - Print on Demand Titel. Neuware -This study proposes that both constitutively and rhetorically (through ironic, inferential, and indirect application), Ps 106(105) serves as the substructure for Paul's argumentation in Rom 1:18 2:11. Constitutively, Rom 1:18 32 hinges on the triadic interplay between they (ex)changed and God gave them over, an interplay that creates a sin retribution sequence with an a-ba-ba-b pattern. Both elements of this pattern derive from Ps 106(105):20, 41a respectively. Rhetorically, Paul ironically applies the psalmic language of idolatrous (ex)change and God's subsequent giving-over to Gentiles. Aiding this ironic application is that Paul has cast his argument in the mold of Hellenistic Jewish polemic against Gentile idolatry and immorality, similar to Wis 13 15. In Rom 2:1 4, however, Paul inferentially incorporates a hypocritical Jewish interlocutor into the preceding sequence through the charge of doing the same, a charge that recalls Israel's sins recounted in Ps 106(105). This incorporation then gives way to an indirect application of Ps 106(105):23, by means of an allusion to Deut 9 10 in Rom 2:5 11. Secondarily, this study suggests that Paul's argumentation exploits an intra-Jewish debate in which evocations of the golden calf figured prominently.De Gruyter Mouton, Genthiner Straße 13, 10785 Berlin 292 pp. Englisch. …