Re: [Synoptic-L] What is the early evidence for Luke chapters 1-3?
- To: Synoptic
In Response To: Dave Inglis
On: Evidence for Lk 1-3
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
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
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.
E Bruce Brooks
Warring States Project
University of Massachusetts at Amherst
- 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
----- 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 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]
- 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.
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
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- 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 Mealand, University of Edinburgh
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
> 2. More generally, can we give a terminus ante quem forA well known argument on gospels datation is : since there is a
> anything in Lk?
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,If I well remember, Boismard listed many other John-Luke connections,
> 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.
using previous older references. See his proto-Luke.
> 3. All in all, I would say that there is a case that JnOr Luke and John shared a common source.
> 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.