5013RE: [Synoptic-L] A problem of consistency?
- Jan 6, 2014
I’m never happy with questions of the form: Why would A do B, because short of asking A, we have no knowledge of A’s thought process. However, it would appear to help in this case if the author of Lk 1-2 was not the author of Lk 3-24. From my perspective I find it hard to believe that it could be otherwise.
David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA
Here is Luke 22:28-30: "You are those who have stood by me in my trials; 29 and I confer on you, just as my Father has conferred on me, a kingdom, 30 so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and you will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Luke argues through Luke and Acts that after the resurrection and Pentecost, Israel has been spiritualized and now = The Way, the followers of Jesus.
Rev. Chuck Jones
On Monday, January 6, 2014 1:52 PM, David Mealand <D.Mealand@...> wrote:
Well perhaps the view that Lk1-2 was added later might solve some problems, but does it solve this one?
Why should the author of Lk1-2 allow a reliable narrator (an angel) to endorse the notion that Jesus would occupy the throne of his ancestor David, as King of a state known as the house of Jacob? This is particularly odd if the final chapter (24) of the previously written 22 chapter text had a reliable narrator gently deflating this type of expectation and offering a less materialistic one.
This is a problem whether or not the first two chapters were added later to the text is it not?
David Mealand, University of Edinburgh
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>