FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W188858939> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W188858939 abstract "This thesis posits the idea that the author of Acts intentionally creates a literary parallel between Stephen and Moses. Comparative analysis seemingly confirms that Stephen is being portrayed as a parallel of Christ. However, little scholarly attention has been given to the possibility that the author of Acts 6-7 intentionally creates a connection between Stephen and Moses. Following an attempt to provide an objective foundation for asserting such parallels, the Stephen-Moses connections will be presented. Two implications follow from this parallel which impact the Stephen episode as well as the larger Acts narrative. The pertinent literature involves commentaries on the Stephen episode, books regarding Moses parallels throughout Christian literature, and works that help establish an objective framework through rhetorical criticism. Stephen and Moses Parallels 4 You Could Say that Again Examining the Probability of Parallels Between Stephen and Moses in Acts 7 Introduction The narrative units of Luke and Acts continue to provide adequate ground for interpretational debate. These two books are comprised of diverse forms including narrative, historiography, speeches, and prophecy. However, these two works provide a singular perspective on the person of Jesus Christ and the results of His life and teachings. Without the book of Acts in particular, any history of the early church would be nearly impossible to reconstruct. Understanding this author‟s purposes and theology requires examining the intentional narrative progression in the book of Acts. 1 Stephen, in Acts 6-7, serves as a crucial figure in the Acts narrative. In these chapters, Stephen enters as one of the seven men chosen to help serve the Grecian widows. The author records Stephen as demonstrating “signs and wonders” among the people as he apparently teaches them about the Messiah. Some Jewish leaders concoct false charges against this man and accuse him of blasphemy against God, Moses, and the temple. Acts 7:1-53 records Stephen‟s response to these charges. Stephen‟s speech is the longest in the entire book of Acts, and he intentionally recites a theological perspective of Israel‟s history. After his condemnation of false Jewish beliefs and practices, his accusers stone him in a fit of rage. In his dying moments, Stephen sees the glory of God and the risen Christ while praying for the sins of his accusers. These chapters appear in a 1. The issue of authorship for Luke-Acts falls outside the scope of the present discourse. The generic word author will be used throughout to denote the original writer of the narratives. Stephen and Moses Parallels 5 crucial location in the book‟s progression. Accurately understanding this episode provides an important key for understanding the book. Properly understanding the Stephen episode has long served as a topic for scholarly scrutiny. Many New Testament scholars see multiple parallels between Stephen and Christ. 2 However, consideration that the author of Acts might be establishing parallels between Stephen and Moses is left unconsidered. 3 Comparative analysis between the texts of Acts 6-7 and passages relating to Moses in the Septuagint suggests no less than four distinct verbal comparisons. These parallels are not direct citations from the Septuagint, rather they are verbal and thematic echoes which demonstrate a degree of similarity that reveals intentionality. Further, internal evidence within Acts 6-7 provides strong intimations of Mosaic parallels. The author of Acts seems to intentionally create verbal parallels between Stephen and Moses, and these parallels provide a crucial element to properly understanding this pivotal episode. 2. F.J. Jackson-Foakes, “Stephen‟s Speech in Acts,” Journal of Biblical Literature 49 (Fall 1930): 285-286, http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx?direct=trued John B. Polhill, vol. 26, Acts, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 209. The connection between Stephen and Jesus will be considered on page 7 providing the grounds for the assertion of a dual-parallel. 3. The word “typology” has been intentionally avoided. This term proves controversial and difficult to define. The terms parallel and connection are used synonymously throughout to mean, an intentional authorial connection in narrative literature between one person or circumstance and another known person or circumstance for a literary purpose. This literary purpose provides for an implicit thematic connection between different ages and people. Samuel Sandmel in “Parallelomania,” Journal of Biblical Literature 81 (1962):1-14 seems to be in accord with this definition as his work suggests parallels are author intended similarities for a purpose. Stephen and Moses Parallels 6 The work of Richard Hays helps to provide clarity to the definition of an echo as used in the New Testament. 4 Although Hayes never offers a precise definition for an echo, he clearly asserts that it is an intertextual allusion. 5 Further, these allusions are not direct quotes, but rather “fragments of an earlier text” which might share similar vocabulary or syntax. 6 Clearly, Hayes suggests that a legitimate echo must reference a previous work and does not have to be a direct quotation but should mirror similar vocabulary or style. The result of such echoes is “an intertextual fusion that generates new meaning.” 7 More specifically, “allusive echo functions to suggest to the reader that text B [the more recent text] should be understood in light of a broad interplay with text A [the earlier text – the referent], encompassing aspects of A beyond those explicitly echoed.” 8 An echo must be appropriate to further the intended meaning of the text given the interplay between the two distinct works. Extrapolation from Hayes‟s work suggests a feasible definition for a biblical echo: a subtle, intertextual allusion to a previous work reflecting vocabulary and/or style which helps express the author‟s intended meaning through the textual interplay. The proposed echoes between Stephen in Acts and Moses in the Septuagint follow this working definition in an attempt to partially found the assertion of an intentional Stephen-Moses connection. 4. Richard Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul, (Binghamton: Vail-Ballou Press, 1989), 1-33. 5. Ibid., 14. 6. Ibid., 14. 7. Ibid., 26." @default.
• W188858939 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W188858939 creator A5036701494 @default.
• W188858939 date "2009-01-01" @default.
• W188858939 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W188858939 title "You Could Say that Again: Examining the Probability of Parallels Between Stephen and Moses in Acts 6-7" @default.
• W188858939 cites W1502655292 @default.
• W188858939 cites W1591413056 @default.
• W188858939 cites W186389931 @default.
• W188858939 cites W1978002655 @default.
• W188858939 cites W2031543577 @default.
• W188858939 cites W2209989493 @default.
• W188858939 cites W2585412528 @default.
• W188858939 cites W2796628201 @default.
• W188858939 cites W2991359183 @default.
• W188858939 cites W3129643906 @default.
• W188858939 cites W45197673 @default.
• W188858939 cites W594111493 @default.
• W188858939 cites W600287425 @default.
• W188858939 cites W630674603 @default.
• W188858939 cites W2484498611 @default.
• W188858939 hasPublicationYear "2009" @default.
• W188858939 type Work @default.
• W188858939 sameAs 188858939 @default.
• W188858939 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W188858939 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W188858939 hasAuthorship W188858939A5036701494 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C111919701 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C166957645 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C192562157 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C199033989 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C2775922551 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C29598333 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C33566652 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C75291252 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C78519656 @default.
• W188858939 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C111472728 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C111919701 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C124952713 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C127413603 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C138885662 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C142362112 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C166957645 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C192562157 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C199033989 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C2775922551 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C29598333 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C33566652 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C41008148 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C41895202 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C75291252 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C78519656 @default.
• W188858939 hasConceptScore W188858939C95457728 @default.
• W188858939 hasLocation W1888589391 @default.
• W188858939 hasOpenAccess W188858939 @default.
• W188858939 hasPrimaryLocation W1888589391 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W1491455267 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W1566700682 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W2089669669 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W2097677441 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W2262298234 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W227821157 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W2309303084 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W239839904 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W2406837782 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W2486097217 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W262970127 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W287776774 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W2990182649 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W3003749382 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W561080125 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W576245902 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W589717429 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W594689174 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W765630155 @default.
• W188858939 hasRelatedWork W2615527038 @default.
• W188858939 isParatext "false" @default.
• W188858939 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W188858939 magId "188858939" @default.
• W188858939 workType "article" @default.