Re: [Synoptic-L] The Lukan Great Omission
- Wow. Interrupting a transition line is hardly the same as interrupting a pericope. Lk would have known that the transitions were Mk's work, the pericope contain the actual tradition. I wonder what the statistical odds are that two pages ended and began with transition lines, which are rare in Mk, vs in the middle of some story.
And is there a way we know Lk's source was a book, not a scroll?
Rev. Chuck Jones
--- On Wed, 5/13/09, Dave Gentile <gentile_dave@...> wrote:
From: Dave Gentile <gentile_dave@...>
Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] The Lukan Great Omission
Date: Wednesday, May 13, 2009, 11:20 AM
I see that Streeter is available on-line, so I'll go do my homework and read it. But I will raise my previous objections (and perhaps Streeter answers these).
The argument seems to rest on the idea that Luke breaks off following Mark in the middle of a pericope, and then resumes in the middle of a pericope. But I objected that pericope boundaries did not yet exist. If I go through Mark and try to divide the material I might do this:
"short-story/ transition line or lines/short- story/transition line or lines"
That is - there will be a short bit of connecting material which moves the group from the setting of one story to the setting of the next. Luke then leaves off contact in the middle of these transition lines and not in the middle of a story, which seems expected. After all, in the first break Luke still is moving them *from* the same place Mark was, but now *to* a new location of Luke's choosing. And the opposite is true when Luke resumes contact.
Thus - I've never found this an attractive conjecture. But now I'm off to read Streeter.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 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.
>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.
> 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've not had a chance to look at the rest yet. Probably Tuesday, if not before then.