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

Re: [Synoptic-L] RE: [GPG] Matthew and "Q"

Expand Messages
  • Chuck Jones
    Bruce,   Interesting.  I ll be dragging my old seminary textbooks, as I ve forgotten about this theory.   Rev. Chuck Jones Atlanta, Georgia ... From: E
    Message 1 of 34 , May 11, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Interesting.  I'll be dragging my old seminary textbooks, as I've forgotten about this theory.
      Rev. Chuck Jones
      Atlanta, Georgia

      --- On Mon, 5/11/09, E Bruce Brooks <brooks@...> wrote:

      From: E Bruce Brooks <brooks@...>
      Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] RE: [GPG] Matthew and "Q"
      To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
      Cc: "GPG" <gpg@yahoogroups.com>
      Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 11:57 AM

      To: GPG
      Cc: Synoptic
      In Response To: Chuck Jones
      On: Mt and Lk use of Mk
      From: Bruce

      CHUCK: Since Mt used 90% of Mk while Lk used only 60%, . . .

      BRUCE: Misleading figure. A large part of the difference is in the "Great
      Omission," which as Streeter irrefutably showed (cf The Four Gospels), was
      missing in Lk's copy of Mk. The disposition of later commentators to regard
      Luke's omission of this material as literarily or doctrinally motivated
      simply ignores the details of Streeter's demonstration. The key point is
      that Luke's omission does not coincide with pericope boundaries, but
      overlaps them at both ends. This is not how an anthologist, or in Luke's
      case a supposed disanthologist, operates.

      If we accept Streeter's result, and for those willing to track the exact
      points, in the Greek text, at which Luke loses and then regains contact with
      Mark, I don't think there is really any alternative, then there are next
      steps to be taken. Those next steps are virgin territory, which is at least
      a novelty in the overtraversed Synoptic domain.

      I won't go into any of them at this point, but thought it worthwhile to
      contradict this often quoted, and much relied on, "60%" statistic. It
      doesn't tell us anything about Luke the author, because it doesn't correctly
      describe the situation in the first place.


      E Bruce Brooks
      Warring States Project
      University of Massachusetts at Amherst

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Dave Gentile
      ... Dave: Better , is a subjective judgment. Personally I d prefer a version without the fire and brimstone, but that s just my subjective judgment.
      Message 34 of 34 , May 15, 2009
      • 0 Attachment

        > Dave,
        > What you propose is clearly not impossible. But it is certainly not as good
        > as the original. What you present here is a brief general call to
        > repentance, followed by scenarios of people eager to repent. In our extant
        > Luke there is a warning of wrath and fire, so that by verse 10 one can sense
        > the crowds feeling guilty and ready to make amends. It parallels an
        > evangelistic meeting where there is a lengthy build-up of emotion before a
        > challenge to commitment. Luke was a good storyteller!


        'Better', is a subjective judgment. Personally I'd prefer a version without the fire and brimstone, but that's just my subjective judgment.

        Consistency, and sticking with a theme is a less subjective measure.


        > But there remains the jump in the opposite direction, between verses 3 & 4.
        > In the extant text vv. 4-6 represent a temporary departure from the theme of
        > repentance so that Luke can portray the Jewish scriptures as hinting at the
        > salvation of the Gentiles (v.6).

        I really don't see this as much of a jump, if any. v3 mentions forgiveness (group not named), and the quote from Isaiah's 'punchline' is about salvation (for all). "Forgiveness -> salvation" seems like theme continuity to me.

        I've not had a chance to look at the rest yet. Probably Tuesday, if not before then.

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.