Revealing the Unknown God: Acts 17:16-34 as Luke's Paradigm for Evangelism in a Biblically Illiterate Culture

Timothy Paul Wilson M.A.

Etd

Revealing the Unknown God: Acts 17:16-34 as Luke's Paradigm for Evangelism in a Biblically Illiterate Culture

Öffentlichkeit Deposited

MLA citation style (9th ed.)

Timothy Paul Wilson M.A. Revealing the Unknown God: Acts 17:16-34 As Luke's Paradigm for Evangelism In a Biblically Illiterate Culture. rim.ir.atla.com/concern/etds/7a55cd8c-5fd5-40de-84e6-18f445723d47?locale=de.

APA citation style (7th ed.)

T. P. W. M.a. Revealing the Unknown God: Acts 17:16-34 as Luke's Paradigm for Evangelism in a Biblically Illiterate Culture. https://rim.ir.atla.com/concern/etds/7a55cd8c-5fd5-40de-84e6-18f445723d47?locale=de

Chicago citation style (CMOS 17, author-date)

Timothy Paul Wilson M.A. Revealing the Unknown God: Acts 17:16-34 As Luke's Paradigm for Evangelism In a Biblically Illiterate Culture. https://rim.ir.atla.com/concern/etds/7a55cd8c-5fd5-40de-84e6-18f445723d47?locale=de.

Note: These citations are programmatically generated and may be incomplete.

Schöpfer

Timothy Paul Wilson M.A.

Stichwort

Rechteerklärung

In Copyright

Abstrakt

This dissertation suggests that Acts 17:16-34 is intended by Luke as a paradigm for evangelism among the biblically illiterate and seeks to identify the methodology that is set forward as a paradigm. In the first section, two arguments against seeing Acts 17:16-34 as a Lucan paradigm are examined. Chapter two examines the arguments of those who claim that this speech is in no way an example of Pauline preaching but is rather the work of Luke or some later redactor. It is argued that there are no ultimately persuasive reasons to accept this view of the reliability of the speech. Chapter three presents the ideas of those who believe that the speech was a failure on the basis of issues such as the small number of converts and insights from the early Chapters of 1 Corinthians. These commentators believe Paul later repented of the approach he took at Athens. Again the essay examines these arguments and ultimately concludes that there is no reason to see the speech as anything other than successful. Section two asks what example Acts 17:16-34 sets for readers. Commentators have differed over their understanding of what Paul is doing here. Some argue that the speech represents a work of assimilation with Greek philosophy, others a critique of Greek idolatry and other groups some combination of the two. This essay will argue for a contextualised critique methodology. It sees critique as Paul’s primary purpose in the speech but acknowledges the way that his message is contextualised to be understandable to his hearers.

Jahr