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

RE: [GPG] RE: [Synoptic-L] Cup-Bread in Luke 22:15-19a

Expand Messages
  • Bob Schacht
    ... I think Dennis is on to something here. That is, the original motivation for this thread was a concern with *sequence,* whereas Luke s (and other s)
    Message 1 of 22 , Dec 24, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      At 02:00 AM 12/24/2011, Dennis Goffin wrote:

      >Confirmation that Bruce's view is correct is found in Luke's
      >omission of Mark 10:45b - a Beta interpolation shoehorned into an
      >Alpha passage, which clashed with Luke's view on salvation theology.Dennis

      I think Dennis is on to something here. That is, the original
      motivation for this thread was a concern with *sequence,* whereas
      Luke's (and other's) primary concerns may be elsewhere, e.g.
      salvation theology.

      Bob Schacht
      Northern Arizona University


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Ronald Price
      ... Dennis, There is a better explanation for Mk 10:45. Mark was himself a Beta believer (c.f. Goulder who took Mark as a Pauline ). He made use of an Alpha
      Message 2 of 22 , Dec 24, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Dennis Goffin wrote:

        > Confirmation that Bruce's view is correct is found in Luke's omission of Mark
        > 10:45b - a Beta interpolation shoehorned into an Alpha passage, which clashed
        > with Luke's view on salvation theology.

        Dennis,

        There is a better explanation for Mk 10:45.

        Mark was himself a Beta believer (c.f. Goulder who took Mark as a
        "Pauline"). He made use of an Alpha source in the form of the logia produced
        by the early Jesus movement. But being a Beta by conviction, he omitted
        about half of this source, and the remainder he generally adapted to suit
        his (Pauline) gospel. Thus in the case under discussion, he incorporated the
        Alpha aphorism Mk 10:42-44 (You know that ..... slave of all", then
        carefully blended it (v.45a) into the climax of the passage: his take on the
        Pauline gospel (v.45b). In other words, the aphorism served as a convenient
        introduction to the message Mark was most keen to get across to his
        audience.

        Ron Price,

        Derbyshire, UK

        http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/syno_home.html
      • David Inglis
        I’m getting into some email weirdness. Basically, I didn’t receive any copies of Bruce’s posts from Synoptic, although I did see copies he posted on
        Message 3 of 22 , Dec 24, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          I’m getting into some email weirdness. Basically, I didn’t receive any copies of Bruce’s posts from Synoptic, although I did see copies he posted on another list. Consequently I may have read some of the responses out of order, so I’m not sure who to address this to. I think I may have been confusing things by not reinforcing something I wrote in my first post:



          “The simplest answer is that after the original text of Lk was written, someone (either aLk or someone else) wanted to include 1 Cor 11:24-25 in this passage. This required just two steps:
          1. Merge 1 Cor 11:24-25 with the words originally from (e.g.) Mt 26:26, 28, editing existing words as desired, to form what we see as 19-20.
          2. Join the remaining text from (e.g.) Mt 26:27, 29 to form a second unit (that we see as 17-18), and place it before the merged text.”
          In other words, I’m suggesting that Lk could have originally contained just the Mk/Mt wording, and that the words from 1 Cor 11 were added later by someone else. So, that would mean that cup-bread-cup was the result of a later (beta?) interpolation. It would also mean that (depending on the timing) the other variants could have been created either from the original, or the interpolated cup-bread-cup version.

          David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • David Inglis
          A simple question: Is there any evidence that any part of Lk 19b-20a existed in the Old Latin? I can’t find any. David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA
          Message 4 of 22 , Jan 9, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            A simple question: Is there any evidence that any part of Lk 19b-20a existed in the Old Latin? I can’t find any.

            David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.