| Record ID | marc_claremont_school_theology/CSTMARC2_barcode.mrc:124114360:3498 |
| Source | marc_claremont_school_theology |
| Download Link | /show-records/marc_claremont_school_theology/CSTMARC2_barcode.mrc:124114360:3498?format=raw |
LEADER: 03498cam a2200541 i 4500
001 on1002072650
003 OCoLC
005 20200617075413.9
008 170825s2017 gw a b 001 0 eng
010 $a 2017366582
040 $aDLC$beng$erda$cDLC$dHEBIS$dCBC$dISB$dICW$dEMT$dOCLCF$dDTM$dYDX$dLNT$dBTCTA$dYDXCP$dQGE$dBHA$dSTF$dCOO$dPTS$dOHX$dOCLCQ$dOCLCA$dUKMGB$dOCLCA
016 7 $a1066335990$2DE-101
016 7 $a018478136$2Uk
019 $a904183380$a907143719$a1004483313
020 $a9783161529832$q(pbk. ;$qalk. paper)
020 $a3161529839
024 3 $a9783161529832
029 1 $aUKMGB$b018478136
035 $a(OCoLC)1002072650$z(OCoLC)904183380$z(OCoLC)907143719$z(OCoLC)1004483313
042 $apcc
050 00 $aBT1392.A752$bC74 2017
072 7 $aBS$2lcco
049 $aMAIN
100 1 $aCreech, David,$eauthor.
245 14 $aThe use of scripture in the Apocryphon of John :$ba diachronic analysis of the variant versions /$cDavid Creech.
264 1 $aTübingen :$bMohr Siebeck,$c[2017]
300 $axi, 148 pages ;$c24 cm.
336 $atext$btxt$2rdacontent
337 $aunmediated$bn$2rdamedia
338 $avolume$bnc$2rdacarrier
490 1 $aWissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament. 2. Reihe,$x0340-9570 ;$v441
500 $aSlight Revision of the author's thesis (doctoral)--Loyola University Chicago, 2011.
504 $aIncludes bibliographical references (pages 121-133) and indexes.
505 0 $aHistory of research -- Brief overview of the argument -- The Apocryphon and the biblical text: two common misperceptions -- The biblical text as foundational -- Moses the unreliable witness -- Not a Moses said ... but just as Moses said -- An outline of the parameters -- The apocryphon of John in the second century -- The Apocryphon of John after Irenaeus of Lyons -- The Apocryphon of John at Nag Hammadi.
520 $aDavid Creech explores at length the Apocryphon of John's ambivalent treatment of the Jewish and Christian scriptures. Although Moses is explicitly corrected at five points in the text, Genesis' account of creation is nonetheless the basis for the Apocryphon's cosmogony and anthropogony. Its uneven treatment of the biblical text is the result of a dispute between the authors of the Apocryphon and other early Catholics. At the earliest stage of the text the Christians who wrote and read the Apocryphon worshiped alongside other early catholic Christians without any sense of contradiction or inconsistency. The key shift in the Apocryphon occurred after Irenaeus of Lyons' assault on "Knowledge Falsely So-Called." In response to his concerted effort to bring the church under the authority of early catholic bishops, the framers inserted corrections to Moses. The corrections are primarily rhetorical and used to refute early catholic identity markers.
590 $bArchive
630 00 $aApocryphon of John$xCriticism, interpretation, etc.
630 07 $aApocryphon of John.$2fast$0(OCoLC)fst01363151
630 07 $aBibel$pAltes Testament$2gnd
630 07 $aApokryphon des Johannes$2gnd
650 7 $aRezeption$2gnd
655 7 $aCriticism, interpretation, etc.$2fast$0(OCoLC)fst01411635
830 0 $aWissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament.$n2. Reihe ;$v441.$x0340-9570
938 $aBaker and Taylor$bBTCP$nBK0016622175
938 $aOtto Harrassowitz$bHARR$nhar150093041
938 $aYBP Library Services$bYANK$n12315699
994 $a92$bCST
976 $a10017052964