Dr. Dean Pielstick writes,
".I am working on a document for Westar regarding
Crossan's Common Sayings Tradition and would like to hear
your thoughts on CST as the (a?) source for Q (and Thomas)."
I must confess that I don't know what this means (not because Crossan or you
are unclear, but merely because I haven't worked though much of Crossan's
works since The Historical Jesus). Is this the overlap between Q and Thomas,
an overlap that then might be traced back to some common Vorlage? Are we
talking about a written Vorlage, or a set of oral materials?
I recall that Stephen Patterson has worked with Q/Thomas overlaps as a way
of getting back to the Jesus of history, and Benny Viviano has proposed
something similar for Q/Mark overlaps. Neither, as far as I know, posits a
written source for the overlaps. Rather, the overlaps function as a form of
If you are speaking of some (written?) source that will help you account for
the composition of Q and Thomas, I'd have to see details to know whether it
would work as an explanation or not. My initial instinct is that accounting
for the compilation of Q and Thomas from a source representing the common
sayings would probably not work any better than, e.g., doing something
analogous for Johnand Mark. There are too many other elements in John and
Mark that are part of the early compositional stages of those documents that
would not appear in the overlap sections.
Sorry for a scattered and unhelpful response.
This is the _Excavating Q_ Seminar (Oct. 23 -- Nov. 10 2000).
Please send your messages to Synoptic-S@...
Please send all other correspondence to Synoptic-S-Owner@...