 | GetTextbooks.co.uk Compare Prices & Save up to 90% | | |
|
| Login | Sign up | Settings | New! iPhone App | My Wish List | My iBundle |
 | | The New Testament: History, Literature, and Social Context by Dennis C. Duling ISBN-10: 9780155078567 ISBN-10: 0-15-507856-9 ISBN-13: 9780155078567 ISBN-13: 978-0-15-507856-7 Paperback 2002-12-03 Wadsworth Publishing Find Lowest Price |
Editorials | ||
Product Description The latest edition of THE NEW TESTAMENT: PROCLAMATION AND PARENESIS, like its predecessors, takes it primary orientation from recent developments in the social sciences. With reference to the most seminal anthropological models, sociological perspectives, and archaeological discoveries, this text provides a rigorous, yet readily engaging, introduction to the New Testament and the early development of the Christian faith. Incorporating, too, the most current hermeneutic schemes, this title illuminates the New Testament in the light of today's leading interpretive methodologies. | ||
Reviews | ||
The New Testament: History, Literature, and Social Context The approach is helpful and informative to the average reader..My main criticism is the lack of a Bibliography after each chapter..I realize this would have made the book longer..Perhaps, a comprehensive Bibliography at the end of the book arranged in order by chapters | ||
Interesting but very biased I found the information provided in this book to be very thought provoking. The historical side of Christianity is one you rarely hear mentioned within the modern church. But in reading this book the author is found to entertain many ideas involved in "modern criticism" that are much more philosophically related rather than truly historically related. Some of the author's statements are purely contradictory to all accepted Christian doctrine, thus throwing doubt onto other claims made by the author. At the same time the author never allows himself to entertain any commonly believed Christian views, further displaying his bias. I would not recommend this book because of the repeated failures to equally evaluate all potential views. | ||