Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

4616RE: [Synoptic-L] J and P (with Excursus on Mk 13 and the Gentiles)

Expand Messages
  • Dennis
    Nov 13, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Chuck, yes there was analytical work, but what was it based upon? It seems
      to me it was based on the idea that Luke and Matt, in order to have so much
      the same yet so much different, could not have been interdependent. (?) This
      (to me) is a fictive assumption. It is creating a "problem" when one might
      or might not exist. It seems more "faith based," possibly based on the
      assumption that the authors were faithful scribes who would have not varied
      so much, had they known of each other's work. I'm not sure this is an
      assumption of merit.

      Dennis Dean Carpenter

      Dahlonega, Ga.

      From: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Synoptic@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
      Of Chuck Jones
      Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 9:01 AM
      To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] J and P (with Excursus on Mk 13 and the Gentiles)


      Thanks for addressing J and P for me. Your remarks do help me get a bigger
      picture of your approach to the scholarship of others.

      Separately, Miriam-Webster defines "fictive" this way:

      1. Not genuine
      2. Relating to imaginative creation
      3. Relating to fiction.

      It seems to me that the hypothesis that Mt and Lk were independent and
      relied on two shared sources--right or wrong, persuasive or not--is the
      result of analytical work, not the product of pure imagination.


      Rev. Chuck Jones
      Atlanta, Georgia

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 4 messages in this topic