1,720,988 research outputs found
Reading World Upside Down: A Response to Matthew Sleeman and John Barclay
No full text This essay discusses the argument of C. Kavin Rowe, World Upside Down: Reading Acts in the Graeco-Roman Age by engaging with criticisms and comments by Matthew Sleeman and John Barclay. The response accepts several key points, including the locatedness of the early believing communities, the place of the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, and the importance of heaven for the early Christians. The response also clarifies and defends the view of Christianity’s cultural subversiveness and political engagement implied in Acts, as well as the claim that ‘tension’ is the right interpretive vocabulary needed to grasp the Christian political stance(s) in Acts. </jats:p
C. Kavin Rowe, Early Narrative Christology. The Lord in the Gospel of Luke, (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 139) Berlin – New York, Walter de Gruyter, 2006
No full textGerber Daniel. C. Kavin Rowe, Early Narrative Christology. The Lord in the Gospel of Luke, (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 139) Berlin – New York, Walter de Gruyter, 2006. In: Revue d'histoire et de philosophie religieuses, 87e année n°3, Juillet-Septembre 2007. p. 323
World Upside Down? A Conversation with C. Kavin Rowe
No full text An introduction to a discussion of C. Kavin Rowe’s World Upside Down: Reading Acts in the Graeco-Roman Age, which summarizes the book. </jats:p
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
