ancient use of the criterion of multiple attestation
"Ancient use"? Does this appear in Greek legal contexts, too?
ancient use of the criterion of multiple attestation
"Ancient use"? Does this appear in Greek legal contexts, too?
Within this passage Origen gives as clear a statement as we could wish of theagonistic paradigm of interpretation: one needs to bring the scriptures aswitnesses, “For without witnesses our interpretations and exegeses are incred-ible” (1.7).
How is this "agonistic" though? There is no contention about Origen's exegesis in the same way that Paul's apostleship is under attack.
efineshermeneutics within an agonistic paradig
What does this mean? Isn't it Paul's apostleship, not his reading of scripture, that is at stake here?
opueqeApior)sauaSounayyfasnpeonoeadapiyjosemwuayscspayydunssiy
Why?