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

Re: [Synoptic-L] Very early interpolations

Expand Messages
  • Ronald Price
    Jack, Perhaps you did not notice that my proposed rules were revised to utilize David Mealand¹s terminology, in which very early interpolations refers to
    Message 1 of 8 , Sep 8, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Jack,

      Perhaps you did not notice that my proposed rules were revised to utilize
      David Mealand¹s terminology, in which "very early interpolations" refers to
      posited interpolations for which there is no manuscript support. This
      disqualifies the Greek text about the kingdom, power and glory in some MSS
      of Mt 6 (which I have been unable to reproduce here as it seems to play
      havoc with my Entourage software).

      I have some sympathy for Bruce's desire to use the rules irrespective of
      whether there is manuscript support, but they would probably require
      significant extension to cope with this properly, and for the time being I
      would prefer to avoid this complication.

      Having said that, there *is* a mismatch with the Matthean context here, as
      clearly implied in Davies & Allison (Matthew, I, 615, n.54), for the
      juxtaposition of this undoubted interpolation with Mt 6:14-15 is bizarre.

      Ron Price,

      Derbyshire, UK

      http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/syno_home.html



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • David Inglis
      Would anyone care to comment on the status of vv. 19:47-48? To me they have at least some of the hallmarks of an interpolation: 1. Vv. 19:45-46, 20:1-8
      Message 2 of 8 , Sep 8, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Would anyone care to comment on the status of vv. 19:47-48? To me they have at least some of the hallmarks of an
        interpolation:

        1. Vv. 19:45-46, 20:1-8 are perfectly intelligible without them.

        2. It appears that vv. 19:47-28 and 20:1-8 take place in the same time period, with v. 20:1 repeating a lot of v.
        19:47.

        3. vv. 19:47-48 looks a lot like a very short summary of vv. 20:1-26, so perhaps Lk should have one or the other,
        but not both?

        4. The parallel passage at Mt 21:12-13 does not have an equivalent to these verses.

        Any thoughts?

        David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA_,_._,___



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Ken Olson
        David, That might make sense if you first reject the theories of Markan priority and Lukan authorship of Acts. Otherwise, it looks like Luke s use of Mark
        Message 3 of 8 , Sep 8, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          David,

          That might make sense if you first reject the theories of Markan priority and Lukan authorship of Acts. Otherwise, it looks like Luke's use of Mark 11.18-19, with his redactional "first men of the people" added (cf. Acts 25.2, 28.17 "first men of the Jews"; I think the plural PROTOI in the sense of "leading men" is unique to Luke among the gospels, though I could be wrong).

          Best,

          Ken Olson
          PhD Candidate, New Testament
          Duke University



          To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
          From: davidinglis2@...
          Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 15:37:46 -0700
          Subject: [Synoptic-L] Lk 19:47-48: An interpolation?




























          Would anyone care to comment on the status of vv. 19:47-48? To me they have at least some of the hallmarks of an

          interpolation:



          1. Vv. 19:45-46, 20:1-8 are perfectly intelligible without them.



          2. It appears that vv. 19:47-28 and 20:1-8 take place in the same time period, with v. 20:1 repeating a lot of v.

          19:47.



          3. vv. 19:47-48 looks a lot like a very short summary of vv. 20:1-26, so perhaps Lk should have one or the other,

          but not both?



          4. The parallel passage at Mt 21:12-13 does not have an equivalent to these verses.



          Any thoughts?



          David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA_,_._,___



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




















          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Jeffrey B Gibson
          ... Isn t PROTOI used with just this sense in Mk. 6:21? Jeffrey -- ... Jeffrey B. Gibson D.Phil. Oxon. 1500 W. Pratt Blvd Chicago, Il. jgibson000@comcast.net
          Message 4 of 8 , Sep 8, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            On 9/8/2011 6:05 PM, Ken Olson wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > David,
            >
            > That might make sense if you first reject the theories of Markan priority and Lukan authorship of Acts. Otherwise, it looks like Luke's use of Mark 11.18-19, with his redactional "first men of the people" added (cf. Acts 25.2, 28.17 "first men of the Jews"; I think the plural PROTOI in the sense of "leading men" is unique to Luke among the gospels, though I could be wrong).

            Isn't PROTOI used with just this sense in Mk. 6:21?

            Jeffrey

            --
            ---
            Jeffrey B. Gibson D.Phil. Oxon.
            1500 W. Pratt Blvd
            Chicago, Il.
            jgibson000@...
          • Chuck Jones
            David, The Markan passage does contain a parallel to vv. 47-48. Chuck Rev. Chuck Jones Atlanta, Georgia ________________________________ From: David Inglis
            Message 5 of 8 , Sep 9, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              David,

              The Markan passage does contain a parallel to vv. 47-48.

              Chuck

              Rev. Chuck Jones
              Atlanta, Georgia


              ________________________________
              From: David Inglis <davidinglis2@...>
              To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2011 6:37 PM
              Subject: [Synoptic-L] Lk 19:47-48: An interpolation?


               
              Would anyone care to comment on the status of vv. 19:47-48? To me they have at least some of the hallmarks of an
              interpolation:

              1. Vv. 19:45-46, 20:1-8 are perfectly intelligible without them.

              2. It appears that vv. 19:47-28 and 20:1-8 take place in the same time period, with v. 20:1 repeating a lot of v.
              19:47.

              3. vv. 19:47-48 looks a lot like a very short summary of vv. 20:1-26, so perhaps Lk should have one or the other,
              but not both?

              4. The parallel passage at Mt 21:12-13 does not have an equivalent to these verses.

              Any thoughts?

              David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA_,_._,___

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




              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Ken Olson
              Jeffrey, Indeed it does. Best, Ken Ken Olson PhD Cand. NT Duke University Isn t PROTOI used with just this sense in Mk. 6:21? Jeffrey scribe • Terms of Use .
              Message 6 of 8 , Sep 9, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                Jeffrey,

                Indeed it does.

                Best,

                Ken

                Ken Olson
                PhD Cand. NT
                Duke University



                Isn't PROTOI used with just this sense in Mk. 6:21?



                Jeffrey

                scribe � Terms of Use



















                .














                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • David Inglis
                The attached file will (hopefully) make it easier to get my point across. Lk 20 contains a number of passages (both narrative and parallels) that cause a
                Message 7 of 8 , Sep 10, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  The attached file will (hopefully) make it easier to get my point across. Lk 20 contains a number of passages (both narrative and parallels) that cause a reaction from the chief priests, scribes, and elders. These passages contain parallels in Mk and/or Mt, but the interesting point (for me, at least), is the reactions, some of which have clear parallels in Mk and/or Mt, while others are not so clear. However, we need to start with Lk 19:47-48, which contains the reaction to the ‘den of thieves’ passages. Both Mk and Mt have parallels to this passage, but only Mk has a reaction (as indicated by Chuck). However, the reaction is different to that in Lk (KJV translation):



                  Mk 11:18a And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was astonished at his doctrine.



                  Lk 19:47b … But the chief priests and the scribes and the chief of the people sought to destroy him,

                  Lk 19:48 And could not find what they might do: for all the people were very attentive to hear him.



                  In Mk the chief priests etc. feared him, because the people were astonished, while in Lk there is no mention of either fear or astonishment. This is the only place where it is suggested that the chief priests etc. feared Jesus. However, in the reactions in Mk 12:12, Mt 21:46, and Lk 20:19 they feared the multitudes (or people), but not Jesus . With regard to the astonishment, the multitude were astonished at his doctrine in Mt 22:33, but not so in Lk. There are other parallel reactions: Mk 12:17b, Mt 22:22, and Lk 20:26, where the people marveled, and in Mk 12:34b, Mt 22:46, and Lk 20:40, where no-one dared to ask any more questions. So, although there are several parallel sets of reactions, the reaction in Lk 19:48 appears to be an anomaly, and hence possibly an interpolation.

                  David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA

                  From: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Synoptic@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Jones
                  Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 4:50 AM
                  To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Lk 19:47-48: An interpolation?

                  David,

                  The Markan passage does contain a parallel to vv. 47-48.

                  Chuck

                  Rev. Chuck Jones
                  Atlanta, Georgia
                  ________________________________
                  From: David Inglis <davidinglis2@... <mailto:davidinglis2%40comcast.net> >
                  To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Synoptic%40yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2011 6:37 PM
                  Subject: [Synoptic-L] Lk 19:47-48: An interpolation?

                  Would anyone care to comment on the status of vv. 19:47-48? To me they have at least some of the hallmarks of an interpolation:
                  1. Vv. 19:45-46, 20:1-8 are perfectly intelligible without them.
                  2. It appears that vv. 19:47-28 and 20:1-8 take place in the same time period, with v. 20:1 repeating a lot of v. 19:47.
                  3. vv. 19:47-48 looks a lot like a very short summary of vv. 20:1-26, so perhaps Lk should have one or the other, but not both?
                  4. The parallel passage at Mt 21:12-13 does not have an equivalent to these verses.
                  Any thoughts?
                  David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • E Bruce Brooks
                  To: Synoptic In Response To: David Inglis On: Lk 19:47-48 From: Bruce The corresponding passages as David present them are: Mk 11:18a And the scribes and chief
                  Message 8 of 8 , Sep 10, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    To: Synoptic
                    In Response To: David Inglis
                    On: Lk 19:47-48
                    From: Bruce

                    The corresponding passages as David present them are:

                    Mk 11:18a And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they
                    might destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was
                    astonished at his doctrine.

                    Lk 19:47b . But the chief priests and the scribes and the chief of the
                    people sought to destroy him, / 19:48 And could not find what they might do:
                    for all the people were very attentive to hear him.

                    Personally, I have trouble seeing the Lk passage as much more than a
                    restatement of the Mk passage. We may then ask: Does Luke restate Mark
                    elsewhere in this section? Manifestly, since among other things he much
                    abbreviates the violence of the immediately preceding moneychanger scene
                    (and especially the implied group violence, since it takes more than one man
                    to prohibit passage of goods through the Temple; this detail also eliminated
                    in Mt). Mt/Lk also agree in dropping "for all nations" from "house of
                    prayer" in that passage, presumably because, though a correct enough
                    citation, it is irrelevant to the narrative contrast between praying and
                    robbing, and thus needlessly impedes the narrative.

                    Matthew, following the money changer scene in Mt 21:12-13, omits this
                    following section, replacing it (at Mt 21:14-16) with a transfer of the
                    Hosanna to the Son of David passage; for Luke's version, see Lk 19:39-44.

                    Why all this moving around, and all this restatement, by the Second Tier
                    people? I should think: because we are here at the heart of Jesus's
                    Messianic actions in Jerusalem; the ones that most clearly show a King of
                    the Jews intention, and the later Evangelists are concerned to spiritualize
                    and redefine this as much as they conveniently can. Matthew, going Jesus
                    himself one better, accepts and proclaims Jesus's Davidic ancestry, but not
                    in order to legitimize a literal move on the Temple which would bring on
                    God's intervention and Israel's restoration. Rather, in a more abstract and
                    adjusted sense; in fact, the sense still current today. The several moves
                    and omissions have in part the effect of toning down the violence, and
                    permitting reinterpretation of what is left.

                    It was surely much in the interest of later preaching to do this, since
                    Jesus's Messianic experiment in Jerusalem (a) was anti-Roman, and thus very
                    dangerous, as his own death demonstrated, and (b) had failed in real life,
                    and was thus considerably embarrassing.

                    But it would have been even more embarrassing to abandon Mark altogether
                    even here, since the behavior of Mt and Lk seems to show that Mk was by then
                    known and accepted among at least the Antiochan vicinity churches. Canons
                    are not normally adjusted by omission. Within that limit, I think the Mt and
                    Lk operations on the Markan text are intelligible. Not that I could not have
                    done it better, but then, I have the benefit of their example.

                    Bruce

                    E Bruce Brooks
                    University of Massachusetts at Amherst
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.