Re: Mark Re: Bruce RE: [Synoptic-L] Surprising synoptic discoveries (or not)
- On 4 May 2011 14:42, Bob Schacht <r_schacht@...> wrote:
> >(4) On the general issue of directionality, I think it is important to avoidThanks, Bob. Perhaps the most accessible version is in The Case
> >what I regard as another widespread error, the confusion between literary
> >priority and age of traditions, about which I have occasionally written.
> Illustration #2 about the perils of not engaging with the scholarship
> and "starting from scratch."
> Mark, please remind me of where you have "occasionally written" about
> this issue.
> And thanks for the helpful illustrations! :-)
Against Q, 63-66, from which this is a quotation:
"The difficulty is that scholars have routinely confused issues of
literary priority with issues over the relative age of traditions.
The theory of Luke’s literary dependence on Mark and Matthew does not
necessitate the assumption that his material is always and inevitably
secondary to Matthew’s and Mark’s. Few scholars today would deny the
likelihood that Luke creatively and critically interacted with the
living stream of oral tradition when he was working with Mark, so too
we should not think it odd that he might have interacted with Matthew
in the light of his knowledge of similar material in oral tradition."
Department of Religion
Gray Building / Box 90964
Durham, NC 27708-0964 USA
Phone: 919-660-3503 Fax: 919-660-3530