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

Re: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP

Expand Messages
  • Bob Schacht
    ... How about another alternative? That these two versions are both original, but with different factions within the followers of Jesus? e.g., between the
    Message 1 of 19 , Nov 28, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      At 08:28 AM 11/28/2012, Jgibson wrote:
      >As many of you know, a small number of witnesses to the text of Lk.
      >11:2 testify that the second petition in the Lukan version of the
      >version of the LP read not "May your Kingdom come" but "May your Holy
      >Spirit come upon us and purify us".
      >
      >I'm wondering how one should assess this variant. Is it original? Is it
      >commentary on what the kingdom petition is all about? Or is it
      >something else?.


      How about another alternative? That these two versions are both
      original, but with different factions within the followers of Jesus?
      e.g., between the zealots who may have been allied with Bar Kochba on
      the one hand, and the pentecostals of Acts and Paul on the other hand?

      Bob Schacht
      Northern Arizona University

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • David Mealand
      Jeffrey, you have probably already seen Leaney, R., Nov.T. 1.2 (1956) 103-111. Far from recent, but it puts the case, and cites a lot of relevant evidence for
      Message 2 of 19 , Nov 28, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Jeffrey, you have probably already seen
        Leaney, R., Nov.T. 1.2 (1956) 103-111.
        Far from recent, but it puts the case,
        and cites a lot of relevant evidence
        for Gregory of Nyssa's text at this point.

        David M.

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


        --
        The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
        Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
      • Chuck Jones
        Jeffrey, I don t have a USB handy to glance at the external evidence, but a look at the internal evidence would suggest May your holy spirit come upon us and
        Message 3 of 19 , Nov 28, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          Jeffrey,

          I don't have a USB handy to glance at the external evidence, but a look at the internal evidence would suggest "May your holy spirit come upon us and purify us" was the original reading.  First, it is the most difficult of the two readings, and second, it fits with the rule of thumb that scribes tend to smooth things out, not muddy them up.  Third, the phrase fits well with Lk's interests as demonstrated by several L-only phrases, and L readings vis a vis their parallels in Mk and Mt.

          Chuck

          Rev. Chuck Jones
          Atlanta, Georgia


          ________________________________
          From: Jgibson <jgibson000@...>
          To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
          Cc: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com; biblical-studies <biblical-studies@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 10:28 AM
          Subject: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP


           
          As many of you know, a small number of witnesses to the text of Lk.
          11:2 testify that the second petition in the Lukan version of the
          version of the LP read not "May your Kingdom come" but "May your Holy
          Spirit come upon us and purify us".

          I'm wondering how one should assess this variant. Is it original? Is it
          commentary on what the kingdom petition is all about? Or is it
          something else?.

          Any thoughts?

          Jeffrey

          --
          ---
          Jeffrey B. Gibson D.Phil. Oxon.
          1500 W. Pratt Blvd
          Chicago, IL
          jgibson000@...

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




          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Jgibson
          ... I believe I have. But my copy of the article is buried somewhere! Jeffrey -- ... Jeffrey B. Gibson D.Phil. Oxon. 1500 W. Pratt Blvd Chicago, IL
          Message 4 of 19 , Nov 28, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            On 11/28/2012 12:30 PM, David Mealand wrote:
            > Jeffrey, you have probably already seen
            > Leaney, R., Nov.T. 1.2 (1956) 103-111.
            > Far from recent, but it puts the case,
            > and cites a lot of relevant evidence
            > for Gregory of Nyssa's text at this point.

            I believe I have. But my copy of the article is buried somewhere!

            Jeffrey


            --
            ---
            Jeffrey B. Gibson D.Phil. Oxon.
            1500 W. Pratt Blvd
            Chicago, IL
            jgibson000@...
          • Keith Yoder
            There is a nice online summary of this variant in Wieland Willker s Luke volume of textual commentary, pages 295-296.  He also cites the Leaney article as
            Message 5 of 19 , Nov 29, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              There is a nice online summary of this variant in Wieland Willker's Luke volume of textual commentary, pages 295-296.  He also cites the Leaney article as well as this comment by Streeter.
              "Now in view of the immense pressure of the tendency to assimilate the two versions of this specially familiar prayer, and of the improbability that various orthodox Fathers should have adopted (without knowing it) the text of Marcion, the probability is high that the reading of 700, 162, which makes the Gospels differ most, is what Luke wrote."



              Keith Yoder


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Jgibson
              ... Fascinating. Thanks! If the variant is original, it gives a new sense to the aim of the LP (keeping the disciples from apostasy) . And it shows, to my
              Message 6 of 19 , Nov 29, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                On 11/29/2012 6:36 AM, Keith Yoder wrote:
                > There is a nice online summary of this variant in Wieland Willker's Luke volume of textual commentary, pages 295-296. He also cites the Leaney article as well as this comment by Streeter.
                > "Now in view of the immense pressure of the tendency to assimilate the two versions of this specially familiar prayer, and of the improbability that various orthodox Fathers should have adopted (without knowing it) the text of Marcion, the probability is high that the reading of 700, 162, which makes the Gospels differ most, is what Luke wrote."
                Fascinating. Thanks!

                If the variant is original, it gives a new sense to the aim of the LP
                (keeping the disciples from apostasy) . And it shows, to my mind at
                least, that the notion that the LP is made up of You petitions and We
                petitions is a false one.

                Jeffrey

                --
                ---
                Jeffrey B. Gibson D.Phil. Oxon.
                1500 W. Pratt Blvd
                Chicago, IL
                jgibson000@...
              • David Inglis
                As Marcion has been mentioned WRT Lk 11:2, I think I should add this quote from Klinghardt, where he is investigating “the major examples where Luke seems to
                Message 7 of 19 , Nov 29, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  As Marcion has been mentioned WRT Lk 11:2, I think I should add this quote from Klinghardt, where he is investigating “the major examples where Luke seems to have a more primitive text than Matthew” (Mcn denotes Marcion’s gospel):



                  · The same is true for the Lord’s prayer where the Matthean version (6:9-13) is longer than Luke’s version with only five requests (11:2-4). Furthermore, the address also shows a particular Matthean addition (πάτερ ἡμῶν) ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. Thus the judgment seems inevitable that Matthew enlarged and re-edited the Lukan version.



                  · But again, this version is already attested for Mcn, which then would have contained the presumably oldest text of the Lord’s prayer. In his discussion of the Lord’s prayer, Tertullian does not provide exact quotations from his copy of Mcn but rather mere allusions to the text. Nevertheless, it is sufficiently clear that there is no trace of the second and seventh Matthean requests (on the fulfillment of God’s will and on the deliverance from evil).



                  · As a side-effect, this reconstruction of the history of tradition provides the solution for the old textual problem of Luke 11:2, where Mcn’s first request did not ask for the kingdom to come but for the spirit. The invocation of the spirit, which is attested for the early church and in some medieval manuscripts, most probably represents the Lukan version, which later was corrected according to the Matthean version. Since a textual influence from Mcn on some medieval manuscripts is only imaginable if it was mediated through bible manuscripts, this textual problem further corroborates the priority of Mcn.



                  Also, I second Keith’s reference to Wieland Willker. He is always worth a look where variants are concerned.



                  David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA

                  From: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Synoptic@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jgibson
                  Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 4:50 AM
                  To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP

                  On 11/29/2012 6:36 AM, Keith Yoder wrote:
                  > There is a nice online summary of this variant in Wieland Willker's Luke volume of textual commentary, pages 295-296. He also cites the Leaney article as well as this comment by Streeter.
                  > "Now in view of the immense pressure of the tendency to assimilate the two versions of this specially familiar prayer, and of the improbability that various orthodox Fathers should have adopted (without knowing it) the text of Marcion, the probability is high that the reading of 700, 162, which makes the Gospels differ most, is what Luke wrote."
                  Fascinating. Thanks!

                  If the variant is original, it gives a new sense to the aim of the LP
                  (keeping the disciples from apostasy) . And it shows, to my mind at
                  least, that the notion that the LP is made up of You petitions and We
                  petitions is a false one.

                  Jeffrey

                  --
                  ---
                  Jeffrey B. Gibson D.Phil. Oxon.
                  1500 W. Pratt Blvd
                  Chicago, IL
                  jgibson000@... <mailto:jgibson000%40comcast.net>



                  _____

                  No virus found in this message.
                  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                  Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2629/5425 - Release Date: 11/28/12



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Bob Schacht
                  ... Willker has been a sometimes member of the XTalk (and Synoptic-L?) email groups. Perhaps he can be enticed to comment. Bob Schacht Northern Arizona
                  Message 8 of 19 , Nov 29, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    At 08:52 AM 11/29/2012, David Inglis wrote:
                    >...I second Keith’s reference to Wieland
                    >Willker. He is always worth a look where variants are concerned....


                    Willker has been a sometimes member of the XTalk
                    (and Synoptic-L?) email groups. Perhaps he can be enticed to comment.

                    Bob Schacht
                    Northern Arizona University

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Ken Olson
                    ... I don t see how either of these points makes the case. A later text could either expand or abridge an earlier one (see Charlesworth The Lord s Paryer and
                    Message 9 of 19 , Nov 29, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      David Inglis quoted Matthias Klinghardt ("Marcionite Gospel" NovT 50 2008):

                      >>The same is true for the Lord’s prayer where the Matthean version (6:9-13) is longer than Luke’s version with only five requests (11:2-4). Furthermore, the address also shows a particular Matthean addition (πάτερ ἡμῶν) ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. Thus the judgment seems inevitable that Matthew enlarged and re-edited the Lukan version.<<

                      I don't see how either of these points makes the case. A later text could either expand or abridge an earlier one (see Charlesworth The Lord's Paryer and Other Prayer Texts from the Greco-Roman Era 1994 for examples). The "particular Matthean addition" could alternatively be a Lukan subtraction. The first time Luke has Jesus address the Father in Lk. 10.21, he calls him "Lord of Heaven and Earth", but in every subsequent case the word Father is unmodified (n.b., the second use in 10.21 has the article). And ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς is not "particularly" Matthean. It's found as a description of the Father in Jesus' instruction on prayer in Mk. 11.25.









                      >>But again, this version is already attested for Mcn, which then would have contained the presumably oldest text of the Lord’s prayer. In his discussion of the Lord’s prayer, Tertullian does not provide exact quotations from his copy of Mcn but rather mere allusions to the text. Nevertheless, it is sufficiently clear that there is no trace of the second and seventh Matthean requests (on the fulfillment of God’s will and on the deliverance from evil).<<
                      Does "but again" presume some prior argument in Klinghardt that establishes Mcn is earlier than Luke? Because otherwise the lack of reference to the second and seventh position would follow quite naturally on the theory that Mcn used Luke and Luke's version of the Lord's Prayer and would have no effect on the question of whether Matthew expanded Luke's version or Luke abbreviated Matthew's.
                      Best wishes,
                      Ken
                      Ken OlsonPhD Candidate, ReligionDuke University



















                      .














                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Chuck Jones
                      Ken, By very, very quick count, Mt uses heaven just under 80 times to Lk s 25.  I didn t check Mk because of its shorter overall length.  Much of the
                      Message 10 of 19 , Nov 29, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Ken,

                        By very, very quick count, Mt uses heaven just under 80 times to Lk's 25.  I didn't check Mk because of its shorter overall length.  Much of the increase comes from Mt changing "kingdom of god" into "kingdom of heaven."

                        Chuck

                        Rev. Chuck Jones
                        Atlanta, Georgia


                        Ken wrote:

                         "And ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς is not "particularly" Matthean. It's found as a description of the Father in Jesus' instruction on prayer in Mk. 11.25." 

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Ken Olson
                        Chuck, Ok. 80 is bigger than 25. And 80 is even more times greater than the 1 example I cited from Mk. 11.25. But could you explain what would suggest to you
                        Message 11 of 19 , Nov 29, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Chuck,

                          Ok. 80 is bigger than 25. And 80 is even more times greater than the 1 example I cited from Mk. 11.25.

                          But could you explain what would suggest to you that the number of times Matthew uses the word heaven is more relevant to judging the relative priority of a saying of Jesus in which he instructs his disciples in how to pray and includes the entire phrase describing the father as "who is in the heavens" than the one example in Mk. 11.25, which predates both Matthew and Luke?

                          And while you're looking at numbers, you might compare how many times Jesus uses the unmodified (no appositive, article, or further descriptor) vocative PATER in the various synoptic gospels.

                          Best,

                          Ken


                          To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
                          From: chuckjonez@...
                          Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 11:32:49 -0800
                          Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP


























                          Ken,



                          By very, very quick count, Mt uses heaven just under 80

                          times to Lk's 25. I didn't check Mk because of its shorter overall length. Much of the increase comes from Mt changing "kingdom of god" into "kingdom of heaven."



                          Chuck



                          Rev. Chuck Jones

                          Atlanta, Georgia



                          Ken wrote:



                          "And ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς is not "particularly" Matthean. It's found as a description of the Father in Jesus' instruction on prayer in Mk. 11.25."



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


















                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Chuck Jones
                          Ken, You and I have access to the same data.  And I m sure you re aware that a standard interpretation of data like this is that it is more likely that Mt
                          Message 12 of 19 , Nov 29, 2012
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Ken,

                            You and I have access to the same data.  And I'm sure you're aware that a standard interpretation of data like this is that it is more likely that Mt added a favorite word to Lk than Lk omitted the phrase.  I can add nothing new to the standard argument (which I find persuasive in this case).

                            Chuck

                            Rev. Chuck Jones
                            Atlanta, Georgia


                            ________________________________
                            From: Ken Olson <kenolson101@...>
                            To: "synoptic@yahoogroups.com" <synoptic@yahoogroups.com>
                            Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 3:20 PM
                            Subject: RE: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP


                             

                            Chuck,

                            Ok. 80 is bigger than 25. And 80 is even more times greater than the 1 example I cited from Mk. 11.25.

                            But could you explain what would suggest to you that the number of times Matthew uses the word heaven is more relevant to judging the relative priority of a saying of Jesus in which he instructs his disciples in how to pray and includes the entire phrase describing the father as "who is in the heavens" than the one example in Mk. 11.25, which predates both Matthew and Luke?

                            And while you're looking at numbers, you might compare how many times Jesus uses the unmodified (no appositive, article, or further descriptor) vocative PATER in the various synoptic gospels.

                            Best,

                            Ken


                            To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
                            From: chuckjonez@...
                            Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 11:32:49 -0800
                            Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP


























                            Ken,



                            By very, very quick count, Mt uses heaven just under 80

                            times to Lk's 25. I didn't check Mk because of its shorter overall length. Much of the increase comes from Mt changing "kingdom of god" into "kingdom of heaven."



                            Chuck



                            Rev. Chuck Jones

                            Atlanta, Georgia



                            Ken wrote:



                            "And ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς is not "particularly" Matthean. It's found as a description of the Father in Jesus' instruction on prayer in Mk. 11.25."



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


















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




                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • David Mealand
                            Though I was not wholly persuaded by the 1956 article by Leaney, I was surprised at the range of evidence he cited in favour of Gregory of Nyssa s variant, and
                            Message 13 of 19 , Nov 30, 2012
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Though I was not wholly persuaded by the 1956
                              article by Leaney, I was surprised at the range
                              of evidence he cited in favour of Gregory of
                              Nyssa's variant, and the fact that there is much
                              more to be said for it both in terms of its Jewish
                              context, and its place in early Christian practice.
                              I was surprised by the extent of the evidence, not
                              by the fact that Leaney did a thorough job on it -
                              though I only had time to give it a very quick read.

                              David M.

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


                              --
                              The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
                              Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
                            • Jgibson
                              ... I can t seem to locate the article in my files.. JSTOR has only the first page of it available. Does anyone here has a scan of it? Jeffrey -- ... Jeffrey
                              Message 14 of 19 , Nov 30, 2012
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On 11/30/2012 4:40 AM, David Mealand wrote:
                                > Though I was not wholly persuaded by the 1956
                                > article by Leaney, I was surprised at the range
                                > of evidence he cited in favour of Gregory of
                                > Nyssa's variant, and the fact that there is much
                                > more to be said for it both in terms of its Jewish
                                > context, and its place in early Christian practice.
                                > I was surprised by the extent of the evidence, not
                                > by the fact that Leaney did a thorough job on it -
                                > though I only had time to give it a very quick read.
                                >
                                > David M.
                                >
                                > ---------
                                > David Mealand, University of Edinburgh
                                >
                                >
                                I can't seem to locate the article in my files.. JSTOR has only the
                                first page of it available. Does anyone here has a scan of it?

                                Jeffrey

                                --
                                ---
                                Jeffrey B. Gibson D.Phil. Oxon.
                                1500 W. Pratt Blvd
                                Chicago, IL
                                jgibson000@...



                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • will
                                There aren t any You petitions or We petitions in the prayers of Enoch and the Angel [found in 1 Enoch] either. The phrase Hallowed be Thy name occurs at
                                Message 15 of 19 , Dec 2, 2012
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  There aren't any "You petitions or We petitions" in the prayers of Enoch and the
                                  Angel [found in 1 Enoch] either.

                                  The phrase "Hallowed be Thy name" occurs at the beginning of the Enochian prayer
                                  [61.12] and "thy will be done" seems to me to be implied in the phrase "so shall
                                  it be unto thee" [71.15].

                                  So, is it possible that the original "first edition" of Jesus's "Lord's prayer"
                                  is connected with Enoch?

                                  --------------------------------------
                                  [Enoch says]
                                  God,
                                  61.12: We bless, and glorify, and extol, and hallow Thy blessed name,
                                  We glorify and bless Thy name for ever and ever.

                                  61.13: For great is the mercy of God, and He is long-suffering,
                                  And all His works and all that He has created
                                  He has revealed to the righteous and elect In the name of God.

                                  [The Angel says]
                                  71.14: This [Enoch] is the Son of Man who is born unto righteousness,
                                  And righteousness abides over him,
                                  And the righteousness of the Head of Days forsakes him not.

                                  71.15: He proclaims unto thee peace in the name of Heaven,
                                  For from hence has proceeded peace since the creation of the world,
                                  And so shall it be unto thee for ever and for ever and ever.

                                  71.16: And all shall walk in his ways since righteousness never forsakes him:
                                  With him will be their dwelling-places, and with him their heritage,
                                  And they shall not be separated from him for ever and ever and ever.

                                  71.17: And so there shall be eternal life with that Son of Man [Enoch],
                                  And the righteous shall have peace and an upright way
                                  In the name of God for ever and ever.
                                  --------------------------------------

                                  REF: The Book of Enoch - R. H. Charles


                                  William Penrhiw
                                  Cardiff, UK





                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  From: "Jgibson" <jgibson000@...>
                                  To: <Synoptic@yahoogroups.com>
                                  Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 12:50 PM
                                  Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP


                                  > On 11/29/2012 6:36 AM, Keith Yoder wrote:
                                  >> There is a nice online summary of this variant in Wieland Willker's Luke
                                  >> volume of textual commentary, pages 295-296. He also cites the Leaney
                                  >> article as well as this comment by Streeter.
                                  >> "Now in view of the immense pressure of the tendency to assimilate the two
                                  >> versions of this specially familiar prayer, and of the improbability that
                                  >> various orthodox Fathers should have adopted (without knowing it) the text of
                                  >> Marcion, the probability is high that the reading of 700, 162, which makes
                                  >> the Gospels differ most, is what Luke wrote."
                                  > Fascinating. Thanks!
                                  >
                                  > If the variant is original, it gives a new sense to the aim of the LP
                                  > (keeping the disciples from apostasy) . And it shows, to my mind at
                                  > least, that the notion that the LP is made up of You petitions and We
                                  > petitions is a false one.
                                  >
                                  > Jeffrey
                                  >
                                  > --
                                  > ---
                                  > Jeffrey B. Gibson D.Phil. Oxon.
                                  > 1500 W. Pratt Blvd
                                  > Chicago, IL
                                  > jgibson000@...
                                  >
                                  >
                                • Jack Kilmon
                                  I think it is very likely, Will. I am convinced that Jesus was an Enochian, not a Mosaic, Jew. I think little brother Jimmy entered the fray after the
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Dec 2, 2012
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    I think it is very likely, Will. I am convinced that Jesus was an Enochian,
                                    not a Mosaic, Jew. I think little brother Jimmy entered the fray after the
                                    crucifixion to "rehabilitate" his big brother posthumously.
                                    Jack

                                    Jack Kilmon
                                    Houston, TX

                                    -----Original Message-----
                                    From: will
                                    Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2012 4:32 AM
                                    To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
                                    Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP

                                    There aren't any "You petitions or We petitions" in the prayers of Enoch and
                                    the
                                    Angel [found in 1 Enoch] either.

                                    The phrase "Hallowed be Thy name" occurs at the beginning of the Enochian
                                    prayer
                                    [61.12] and "thy will be done" seems to me to be implied in the phrase "so
                                    shall
                                    it be unto thee" [71.15].

                                    So, is it possible that the original "first edition" of Jesus's "Lord's
                                    prayer"
                                    is connected with Enoch?

                                    --------------------------------------
                                    [Enoch says]
                                    God,
                                    61.12: We bless, and glorify, and extol, and hallow Thy blessed name,
                                    We glorify and bless Thy name for ever and ever.

                                    61.13: For great is the mercy of God, and He is long-suffering,
                                    And all His works and all that He has created
                                    He has revealed to the righteous and elect In the name of God.

                                    [The Angel says]
                                    71.14: This [Enoch] is the Son of Man who is born unto righteousness,
                                    And righteousness abides over him,
                                    And the righteousness of the Head of Days forsakes him not.

                                    71.15: He proclaims unto thee peace in the name of Heaven,
                                    For from hence has proceeded peace since the creation of the world,
                                    And so shall it be unto thee for ever and for ever and ever.

                                    71.16: And all shall walk in his ways since righteousness never forsakes
                                    him:
                                    With him will be their dwelling-places, and with him their heritage,
                                    And they shall not be separated from him for ever and ever and ever.

                                    71.17: And so there shall be eternal life with that Son of Man [Enoch],
                                    And the righteous shall have peace and an upright way
                                    In the name of God for ever and ever.
                                    --------------------------------------

                                    REF: The Book of Enoch - R. H. Charles


                                    William Penrhiw
                                    Cardiff, UK





                                    ----- Original Message -----
                                    From: "Jgibson" <jgibson000@...>
                                    To: <Synoptic@yahoogroups.com>
                                    Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 12:50 PM
                                    Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP


                                    > On 11/29/2012 6:36 AM, Keith Yoder wrote:
                                    >> There is a nice online summary of this variant in Wieland Willker's Luke
                                    >> volume of textual commentary, pages 295-296. He also cites the Leaney
                                    >> article as well as this comment by Streeter.
                                    >> "Now in view of the immense pressure of the tendency to assimilate the
                                    >> two
                                    >> versions of this specially familiar prayer, and of the improbability that
                                    >> various orthodox Fathers should have adopted (without knowing it) the
                                    >> text of
                                    >> Marcion, the probability is high that the reading of 700, 162, which
                                    >> makes
                                    >> the Gospels differ most, is what Luke wrote."
                                    > Fascinating. Thanks!
                                    >
                                    > If the variant is original, it gives a new sense to the aim of the LP
                                    > (keeping the disciples from apostasy) . And it shows, to my mind at
                                    > least, that the notion that the LP is made up of You petitions and We
                                    > petitions is a false one.
                                    >
                                    > Jeffrey
                                    >
                                    > --
                                    > ---
                                    > Jeffrey B. Gibson D.Phil. Oxon.
                                    > 1500 W. Pratt Blvd
                                    > Chicago, IL
                                    > jgibson000@...
                                    >
                                    >



                                    ------------------------------------

                                    Synoptic-L homepage: http://markgoodacre.org/synoptic-lYahoo! Groups Links
                                  • David Inglis
                                    The same argument would suggest that Marcion’s (shorter) version of the LP pre-dates the one in Lk, and if we had just Marcion’s gospel text (and not the
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Dec 2, 2012
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      The same argument would suggest that Marcion’s (shorter) version of the LP pre-dates the one in Lk, and if we had just Marcion’s gospel text (and not the pleadings of Tertullian and Epiphanius regarding his supposed motives) then I feel sure that is how it would be regarded. Anyway, I have written a fair amount on the variants in the LP here https://sites.google.com/site/inglisonmarcion/Home/marcion/marcion-s-gospel-compared-verse-by-verse-with-luke/lk-11 .



                                      David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA



                                      From: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Synoptic@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Jones
                                      Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 12:32 PM
                                      To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
                                      Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP

                                      Ken,

                                      You and I have access to the same data. And I'm sure you're aware that a standard interpretation of data like this is that it is more likely that Mt added a favorite word to Lk than Lk omitted the phrase. I can add nothing new to the standard argument (which I find persuasive in this case).

                                      Chuck

                                      Rev. Chuck Jones
                                      Atlanta, Georgia



                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • Jack Kilmon
                                      Matthew, who was not competent in Hebrew or Aramaic, first used a Greek translation of an Aramaic source and tweaked it a bit to expand/explain certain
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Dec 2, 2012
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Matthew, who was not competent in Hebrew or Aramaic, first used a Greek
                                        translation of an Aramaic source and "tweaked" it a bit to expand/explain
                                        certain petitions. Luke used an Aramaic document which he translated
                                        himself, also looked at Matthew and created a shorter version (as was the
                                        original from Jesus' lips), but also tweaked a bit to explain Aramaic idiom
                                        in one petition. However we try to disentangle the Matthean and Lukan LP to
                                        find a form critical version, if one does not appeal to the Aramaic that
                                        left the lips of Jesus in the first place, one is paddling without an oar. I
                                        give no credence to a mid second century dualist/docetist. Of course,
                                        Marcion is the darling of the Jesus mythists.
                                        Jack

                                        Jack Kilmon
                                        Houston, TX

                                        -----Original Message-----
                                        From: David Inglis
                                        Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2012 11:31 AM
                                        To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
                                        Subject: RE: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP

                                        The same argument would suggest that Marcion’s (shorter) version of the LP
                                        pre-dates the one in Lk, and if we had just Marcion’s gospel text (and not
                                        the pleadings of Tertullian and Epiphanius regarding his supposed motives)
                                        then I feel sure that is how it would be regarded. Anyway, I have written a
                                        fair amount on the variants in the LP here
                                        https://sites.google.com/site/inglisonmarcion/Home/marcion/marcion-s-gospel-compared-verse-by-verse-with-luke/lk-11
                                        .



                                        David Inglis, Lafayette, CA, 94549, USA



                                        From: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Synoptic@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                                        Of Chuck Jones
                                        Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 12:32 PM
                                        To: Synoptic@yahoogroups.com
                                        Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Variant in Lukan version of LP

                                        Ken,

                                        You and I have access to the same data. And I'm sure you're aware that a
                                        standard interpretation of data like this is that it is more likely that Mt
                                        added a favorite word to Lk than Lk omitted the phrase. I can add nothing
                                        new to the standard argument (which I find persuasive in this case).

                                        Chuck

                                        Rev. Chuck Jones
                                        Atlanta, Georgia



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



                                        ------------------------------------

                                        Synoptic-L homepage: http://markgoodacre.org/synoptic-lYahoo! Groups Links
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.