Framework interpretation (English Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Framework interpretation" in English language version.

refsWebsite
Global rank English rank
3rd place
3rd place
1st place
1st place
6th place
6th place
2nd place
2nd place
1,286th place
698th place
low place
low place
6,465th place
4,591st place
26th place
20th place
826th place
452nd place
low place
low place
462nd place
345th place
441st place
311th place
5th place
5th place
low place
low place
938th place
658th place
low place
low place
2,050th place
1,396th place
487th place
842nd place
low place
9,527th place
low place
low place
low place
low place
3,523rd place
2,490th place

archive.org

asa3.org

bib-arch.org

members.bib-arch.org

  • The term myth is used here in its academic sense, meaning "a traditional story consisting of events that are ostensibly historical, though often supernatural, explaining the origins of a cultural practice or natural phenomenon." It is not being used to mean "something that is false".
    Scholarly writings frequently refer to Genesis as myth (Dolansky 2016). While the author of Genesis 1–11 "demythologised" his narrative by removing the Babylonian myths and those elements which did not fit with his own faith, it remains a myth in the sense of being a story of origins. (Hamilton 1990, pp. 57–58) Dolansky, Shawna (2016). "The Multiple Truths of Myths". Biblical Archaeology Review. 42 (1): 18, 60. Archived from the original on 31 January 2016. Retrieved 22 January 2016. Hamilton, Victor P (1990). The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1–17. New International Commentary on the Old Testament (NICOT). Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. p. 540. ISBN 0-8028-2521-4.
  • The term myth is used here in its academic sense, meaning "a traditional story consisting of events that are ostensibly historical, though often supernatural, explaining the origins of a cultural practice or natural phenomenon." It is not being used to mean "something that is false".
    Scholarly writings frequently refer to Genesis as myth (Dolansky 2016). While the author of Genesis 1–11 "demythologised" his narrative by removing the Babylonian myths and those elements which did not fit with his own faith, it remains a myth in the sense of being a story of origins. (Hamilton 1990, pp. 57–58) Dolansky, Shawna (2016). "The Multiple Truths of Myths". Biblical Archaeology Review. 42 (1): 18, 60. Archived from the original on 31 January 2016. Retrieved 22 January 2016. Hamilton, Victor P (1990). The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1–17. New International Commentary on the Old Testament (NICOT). Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. p. 540. ISBN 0-8028-2521-4.

biblegateway.com

biblehub.com

biblicalstudies.org.uk

books.google.com

comcast.net

home.comcast.net

creation.com

dbts.edu

doi.org

ehrmanblog.org

encyclopedia.com

gordon.edu

faculty.gordon.edu

hathitrust.org

catalog.hathitrust.org

jstor.org

  • Lambert 1965. Lambert, W. G. (1965). "A New Look at the Babylonian Background of Genesis". The Journal of Theological Studies. Vol. 16, no. 2. pp. 287–300. JSTOR 23959032.
  • Hutton 2007, p. 274. Hutton, Jeremy (2007). "Isaiah 51:9–11 and the Rhetorical Appropriation and Subversion of Hostile Theologies". Journal of Biblical Literature. 126 (2). Society of Biblical Literature: 271–303. doi:10.2307/27638435. JSTOR 27638435.

mechon-mamre.org

oremus.org

bible.oremus.org

oxfordbibliographies.com

oxfordreference.com

web.archive.org

worldcat.org

search.worldcat.org