![]() ![]() ![]() (Also, I apologize for the layout, it still seems rough looking after having tinkered with it for some time). Whatever failings there are whether in presentation or representation of Hays’ argument are certainly my own. Thus, I offer this as something of a general summary, focusing more on methodological considerations than actual exegetical argument. ![]() He is an exceptional scholar and his work was and continues to be a profound contribution to Pauline studies and intertextuality in biblical criticism. You will note, Hays’ exegetical arguments were certainly not highlighted in their entirety or weight. At best, it is an outline underscoring several features of the text in order to lead a discussion on the text by those who have engaged the text itself. Moreover, what is offered below is not a “review” in the technical sense. Also, I have lost several footnotes clarifying some of my own use of terms. As a relatively new wordpress user, I have faced several difficulties in translating this outline from Word (that demonic processor) to the WordPress interface. Several caveats are necessary at the outset. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |