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

RE: [Synoptic-L] What is the early evidence for Luke chapters 1-3?

Expand Messages
  • David @ Comcast
    Perhaps I could ask the question in a slightly different form: What early references are there to the contents of Luke chapters 1-3? David Inglis _____ From:
    Message 1 of 9 , Aug 18, 2009
      Perhaps I could ask the question in a slightly different form: What early
      references are there to the contents of Luke chapters 1-3?



      David Inglis



      _____

      From: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Synoptic@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
      Of Chuck Jones
      Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 11:39 AM
      To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] What is the early evidence for Luke chapters 1-3?

      As far back as we can trace chapters 3 - 24.
      Rev. Chuck JonesAtlanta, Georgia

      --- On Tue, 8/18/09, David @ Comcast <davidinglis2@
      <mailto:davidinglis2%40comcast.net> comcast.net> wrote:

      From: David @ Comcast <davidinglis2@ <mailto:davidinglis2%40comcast.net>
      comcast.net>
      Subject: [Synoptic-L] What is the early evidence for Luke chapters 1-3?
      To: Synoptic@yahoogroup <mailto:Synoptic%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
      Date: Tuesday, August 18, 2009, 2:35 PM

      What evidence is there (mss, patristic references, anything else) for the

      early existence of Luke chapters 1-3? To put it another way round, how far

      back in time can we trace the existence of these specific chapters?

      David Inglis

      Lafayette, CA, 94549

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]















      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      No virus found in this incoming message.
      Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      Version: 8.5.408 / Virus Database: 270.13.56/2302 - Release Date: 08/15/09
      06:10:00




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Stephen C. Carlson
      ... Off the top of my head, Justin Martyr and the protevangelium of James in the mid second century. Stephen -- Stephen C. Carlson Ph.D. student, Religion,
      Message 2 of 9 , Aug 18, 2009
        On Aug 18, 2009 3:50 PM, "David @ Comcast" <davidinglis2@...> wrote:
        >Perhaps I could ask the question in a slightly different form: What early
        >references are there to the contents of Luke chapters 1-3?

        Off the top of my head, Justin Martyr and the protevangelium of James
        in the mid second century.

        Stephen

        --
        Stephen C. Carlson
        Ph.D. student, Religion, Duke University
        Author of The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark (Baylor, 2005)
      • E Bruce Brooks
        To: Synoptic In Response To: Dave Inglis On: Evidence for Lk 1-3 From: Bruce That s an interesting way to ask the question. Why exactly 1-3? 1. I would have
        Message 3 of 9 , Aug 18, 2009
          To: Synoptic
          In Response To: Dave Inglis
          On: Evidence for Lk 1-3
          From: Bruce

          That's an interesting way to ask the question. Why exactly 1-3?

          1. I would have expected Lk 1-2, given that a very plausible original
          beginning for Lk exists at Lk 3:1. The question would then be: at what point
          was Lk 1-2 added? I can't see that anything is made of it in the rest of
          Lk-Acts; rather the contrary. So it is not part of Lk's Jerusalem-Rome
          master plan. It certainly leaves the corresponding part of Mt literarily
          nowhere, and it has the same faint recollection of Mt's wording at the part
          where they make contact at all, as is seen elsewhere when Lk is writing
          freely, so I don't consider it necessarily alien to Luke's procedures, but
          still, when can we prove it was there? There is of course no counterpart
          here in John, so that possibility is out. I can't answer the question.

          2. More generally, can we give a terminus ante quem for anything in Lk? Are
          any of the John parallels helpful, that is, do they include wording which,
          among the Synoptics, could have come only from Lk? Yes, but not many.

          2a. Thus, in the Nazareth episode, John has "Is this not Jesus, the son of
          Joseph? Mk has "the carpenter, the son of Mary, and Mt has "the son of the
          carpenter," whereas Lk has "Is this not Joseph's son?" The above Mk/Mt
          passages are the only places in the Gospels where the word "carpenter" is
          used. Perhaps it was too realistic for Luke, and also for John.

          2b. Again, in the story of the woman and the ointment, Mk/Mt lack a detail
          which Lk has, and Jn also has, namely that the woman wiped Jesus's feet with
          her hair.

          But the latter is a matter of pious legend, something that any late 1c
          writer could have known without taking Luke off the shelf, and one hesitates
          to put any very heavy weight on it.

          2c. In the Gethsemane scene, Mk/Mt have one of the Jesus party cutting off
          the ear of one of the arresting party; Lk specifies the right ear, and so
          does Jn.

          2d. The burial of Jesus was specified in Lk as the Day of the Preparation,
          and so does Jn.

          2e. Only Lk of the Synoptics has Peter run to the tomb and "stoop to look
          in;" so also Jn.

          2f. There are several spots in the Recognition scene, as when Jesus suddenly
          appears and says "Peace to you." Thus Lk, also Jn. The latter adds that the
          doors were shut at the time. He leaves out Lk's detail about the fish;
          perhaps too vulgar. Or too clinical.

          3. All in all, I would say that there is a case that Jn knew Lk, and was a
          little more comfortable in Lk's company when nobody else (Mk, Mt) was
          around, but was shy to the point of contrary elsewhere.

          4. I thus come out with the idea that the sequence Lk > Jn can be
          maintained, not only as temporal, but as literarily related. This however
          does not apply to the exiguous material in Lk 1-2.

          For which I join with Dave in awaiting any further suggestions.

          Bruce

          E Bruce Brooks
          Warring States Project
          University of Massachusetts at Amherst
        • Dennis Dean Carpenter
          Justin seems to use Matthew in his first apology, chapter 33. He seems to be using Luke in the next chapter: .And hear what part of earth He was to be born
          Message 4 of 9 , Aug 18, 2009
            Justin seems to use Matthew in his first apology, chapter 33. He seems to be using Luke in the next chapter: ".And hear what part of earth He was to be born in, as another prophet, Micah, foretold. He spoke thus: "And thou, Bethlehem, the land of Judah, art not the least among the princes of Judah; for out of thee shall come forth a Governor, who shall feed My people."(5) Now there is a village in the land of the Jews, thirty-five stadia from Jerusalem, in which Jesus Christ was born, as you can ascertain also from the registers of the taxing made under Cyrenius, your first procurator in Judaea." He doesn't seem to mention "Luke" as a gospel or as a gospeleer.

            Dennis Dean Carpenter
            Dahlonega, Ga.


            ----- Original Message -----
            From: Stephen C. Carlson
            To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com ; Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 4:10 PM
            Subject: RE: [Synoptic-L] What is the early evidence for Luke chapters 1-3?


            On Aug 18, 2009 3:50 PM, "David @ Comcast" <davidinglis2@...> wrote:
            >Perhaps I could ask the question in a slightly different form: What early
            >references are there to the contents of Luke chapters 1-3?

            Off the top of my head, Justin Martyr and the protevangelium of James
            in the mid second century.

            Stephen

            --
            Stephen C. Carlson
            Ph.D. student, Religion, Duke University
            Author of The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of Secret Mark (Baylor, 2005)




            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • David @ Comcast
            BRUCE: That s an interesting way to ask the question. Why exactly 1-3? DAVID I: I m looking for evidence of any of these 3 chapters prior to Marcion s gospel,
            Message 5 of 9 , Aug 18, 2009
              BRUCE: That's an interesting way to ask the question. Why exactly 1-3?



              DAVID I: I'm looking for evidence of any of these 3 chapters prior to
              Marcion's gospel, in order to try to figure out whether Marcion is likely to
              have known these chapters or not.



              David Inglis

              Lafayette, CA, 94549



              No virus found in this incoming message.
              Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
              Version: 8.5.408 / Virus Database: 270.13.56/2302 - Release Date: 08/15/09
              06:10:00




              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • David Mealand
              As well as Justin Apol. 34, J.M.Creed cites Dial. 78, 88, 100, 103, 105 and 106 in a footnote to the dating section in the intro to his commentary on Luke,
              Message 6 of 9 , Aug 19, 2009
                As well as Justin Apol. 34, J.M.Creed cites Dial. 78, 88,
                100, 103, 105 and 106 in a footnote to the dating section
                in the intro to his commentary on Luke, where he lists
                passages from Luke 1-3 (and from later) as used by Justin.

                Quite a bit later, of course, we have p75 and p4
                see NA 27 pp 684 & 688, both have bits of Luke 1-3.

                David M.


                ---------
                David Mealand, University of Edinburgh


                --
                The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
                Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
              • Emmanuel Fritsch
                ... A well known argument on gospels datation is : since there is a prediction of Jerusalem fall, the stuff was writen after the fall. But I liked also the
                Message 7 of 9 , Aug 21, 2009
                  > 2. More generally, can we give a terminus ante quem for
                  > anything in Lk?

                  A well known argument on gospels datation is : since there is a
                  prediction of Jerusalem fall, the stuff was writen after the fall. But I
                  liked also the reverted argument : Is the description of Jerusalem fall
                  fitting the real one ? If not, then the stuff is prior to the fall.

                  Who buy it ?

                  > Are any of the John parallels helpful,
                  > that is, do they include wording which,
                  > among the Synoptics, could have come only
                  > from Lk? Yes, but not many.
                  > [..]
                  > 2a. - 2b. - 2c. - 2d. - 2e. - 2f.

                  If I well remember, Boismard listed many other John-Luke connections,
                  using previous older references. See his proto-Luke.

                  > 3. All in all, I would say that there is a case that Jn
                  > knew Lk, and was a little more comfortable in Lk's company
                  > when nobody else (Mk, Mt) was around, but was shy to the
                  > point of contrary elsewhere.

                  Or Luke and John shared a common source.

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