Stephen Fowl

417 total citations
21 papers, 115 citations indexed

About

Stephen Fowl is a scholar working on Religious studies, Sociology and Political Science and Archeology. According to data from OpenAlex, Stephen Fowl has authored 21 papers receiving a total of 115 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 16 papers in Religious studies, 7 papers in Sociology and Political Science and 2 papers in Archeology. Recurrent topics in Stephen Fowl's work include Biblical Studies and Interpretation (14 papers), Christian Theology and Mission (5 papers) and Historical and Linguistic Studies (4 papers). Stephen Fowl is often cited by papers focused on Biblical Studies and Interpretation (14 papers), Christian Theology and Mission (5 papers) and Historical and Linguistic Studies (4 papers). Stephen Fowl collaborates with scholars based in United States and United Kingdom. Stephen Fowl's co-authors include L. Gregory Jones, H. G. M. Williamson, David J. A. Clines, Stanley E. Porter, George A. Lindbeck, A. K. M. Adam, Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Francis Watson and Lewis Ayres and has published in prestigious journals such as Vetus Testamentum, Theological Studies and New Testament Studies.

In The Last Decade

Stephen Fowl

18 papers receiving 70 citations

Peers

Stephen Fowl
Douglas J. Moo United States
Stephen Fowl
Citations per year, relative to Stephen Fowl Stephen Fowl (= 1×) peers Douglas J. Moo

Countries citing papers authored by Stephen Fowl

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Stephen Fowl's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Stephen Fowl with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Stephen Fowl more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Stephen Fowl

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Stephen Fowl. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Stephen Fowl. The network helps show where Stephen Fowl may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Stephen Fowl

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Stephen Fowl. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Stephen Fowl based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Stephen Fowl. Stephen Fowl is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Fowl, Stephen. (2017). Theological Interpretation of Scripture and Its Future. Anglican Theological Review. 99(4). 671–690. 1 indexed citations
2.
Fowl, Stephen. (2017). Editor's Notes. Anglican Theological Review. 99(4). 645–650. 1 indexed citations
3.
Fowl, Stephen. (2014). Ephesians: Being a Christian, at Home and in the Cosmos. Medical Entomology and Zoology.
4.
Fowl, Stephen. (2012). Ephesians: A Commentary. Medical Entomology and Zoology. 6 indexed citations
5.
Fowl, Stephen. (2009). The Theological Interpretation of Scripture. 10 indexed citations
6.
Adam, A. K. M., Stephen Fowl, Kevin J. Vanhoozer, & Francis Watson. (2006). Reading Scripture with the Church: Toward a Hermeneutic for Theological Interpretation. Medical Entomology and Zoology. 5 indexed citations
7.
Fowl, Stephen. (2005). Philippians. 7 indexed citations
8.
Fowl, Stephen. (2002). Know Your Context. Interpretation A Journal of Bible and Theology. 56(1). 45–58.
9.
Ayres, Lewis & Stephen Fowl. (1999). (Mis)Reading the Face of God: The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church. Theological Studies. 60(3). 513–528. 2 indexed citations
10.
Fowl, Stephen. (1998). Engaging Scripture: A Model for Theological Interpretation. 26 indexed citations
11.
Lindbeck, George A. & Stephen Fowl. (1996). The story-shaped church: Critical exegesis and theological interpretation. 39–52. 4 indexed citations
12.
Fowl, Stephen, et al.. (1996). Feminist theological hermeneutics: Canon and christian identity. 53–69. 1 indexed citations
13.
Fowl, Stephen. (1995). Who Can Read Abraham's Story? Allegory and Interpretive Power in Galatians. Journal for the Study of the New Testament. 17(55). 77–95. 3 indexed citations
14.
Fowl, Stephen. (1993). Receiving the Kingdom of God as a Child: Children and Riches in Luke 18.15ff.. New Testament Studies. 39(1). 153–158. 2 indexed citations
15.
Williamson, H. G. M., David J. A. Clines, Stephen Fowl, & Stanley E. Porter. (1991). The Bible in Three Dimensions. Essays in Celebration of Forty Years of Biblical Studies in the University of Sheffield. Vetus Testamentum. 41(4). 489–489. 12 indexed citations
16.
Fowl, Stephen & L. Gregory Jones. (1991). Reading in Communion: Scripture and Ethics in Christian Life. Medical Entomology and Zoology. 21 indexed citations
17.
Fowl, Stephen. (1990). A Metaphor in Distress a Reading of NHΠIOI in 1 Thessalonians 2.7. New Testament Studies. 36(3). 469–473. 1 indexed citations
18.
Fowl, Stephen. (1990). Incarnate Love: Essays in Orthodox Ethics. By Vigen Guroian. Notre Dame, Indiana, Notre Dame University Press, 1987. Pp. xii + 212. $24.95.. Scottish Journal of Theology. 43(1). 142–143. 1 indexed citations
19.
Fowl, Stephen. (1989). Reconstructing and Deconstructing the Quest of the Historical Jesus. Scottish Journal of Theology. 42(3). 319–333. 1 indexed citations
20.
Fowl, Stephen. (1985). The Canonical Approach of Brevard Childs. The Expository Times. 96(6). 173–176. 2 indexed citations

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026