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

Re: [Synoptic-L] Why not Mt used Lk?

Expand Messages
  • Ron Price
    ... Chuck, That s a fair question. Firstly compared to the nearest documents: the synoptic gospels, all of which have a definite structure and a story line
    Message 1 of 18 , Dec 4, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Chuck Jones wrote:

      > Q is a mess compared to what?

      Chuck,

      That's a fair question.

      Firstly compared to the nearest documents: the synoptic gospels, all of
      which have a definite structure and a story line which develops logically
      from a dramatically sensible start to a dramatically sensible end.

      Secondly compared to what are perhaps the theologically closest collections
      of sayings/poetry: the psalms, the proverbs and GTh. All three of these
      appear to exhibit a remarkable uniformity of style. I would expect any
      sayings collection produced by the earliest followers of Jesus to have had
      at least this degree of stylistic uniformity.

      > It seems to me that a natural trajectory of gathering and retaining memories
      > from the career of Jesus would be something like (1) the community told,
      > retold and created stories about the sayings and deeds of Jesus, (2) they
      > began to write the stories down, (3) the stories were gathered into
      > collections, (4) at some point those collections were arranged thematically,
      > and then (4), evidently with Mark, they were arranged into a career/life-of
      > narrative framework.
      >
      > If Mt and Lk drew from a document produced at stage (3), is it fair to call
      > that document a mess?

      I'm not happy with your trajectory, for it seems to me to demand a leisurely
      timescale which would not fit into the time available. Don't forget that
      Paul had met Peter, and Mark was probably written less than ten years after
      Paul's death. Another problem is that the death and destruction associated
      with the Jewish rebellion would have cut across any chain of oral tradition.
      Finally another barrier becomes apparent when we take together the fact that
      Paul showed relatively little interest in the sayings of Jesus, and the fact
      that Pauline Christianity rapidly became the norm. It seems to me that the
      only way a large number of Jesus' sayings could have been reliably
      transmitted to posterity is if the twelve committed them to writing before
      ca. 60 CE whilst Jerusalem was at peace (which indeed is just what I am
      proposing). Furthermore I would expect them to put in the requisite
      expertise and effort to make a good job of it right from the start, once
      they had decided that Jesus' return was not quite so imminent as to make the
      job pointless.

      Ron Price

      Derbyshire, UK

      Web site: http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm
    • Chuck Jones
      Ron, My reconstruction implies no particular elapsed time. In fact a compressed time frame would make it more likely that Mt and Lk would have a stage 3
      Message 2 of 18 , Dec 5, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Ron,

        My reconstruction implies no particular elapsed time. In fact a compressed time frame would make it more likely that Mt and Lk would have a stage 3 document (collected sayings that had not been placed into any thematic order) at their disposal.

        Chuck

        Rev. Chuck Jones
        Atlanta, Georgia

        Chuck Jones wrote:

        > It seems to me that a natural trajectory of gathering and retaining memories
        > from the career of Jesus would be something like (1) the community told,
        > retold and created stories about the sayings and deeds of Jesus, (2) they
        > began to write the stories down, (3) the stories were gathered into
        > collections, (4) at some point those collections were arranged thematically,
        > and then (4), evidently with Mark, they were arranged into a career/life-of
        > narrative framework.
        >
        > If Mt and Lk drew from a document produced at stage (3), is it fair to call
        > that document a mess?

        Bruce replied:
        I'm not happy with your trajectory, for it seems to me to demand a leisurely
        timescale which would not fit into the time available. Don't forget that
        Paul had met Peter, and Mark was probably written less than ten years after
        Paul's death. Another problem is that the death and destruction associated
        with the Jewish rebellion would have cut across any chain of oral tradition.
        Finally another barrier becomes apparent when we take together the fact that
        Paul showed relatively little interest in the sayings of Jesus, and the fact
        that Pauline Christianity rapidly became the norm. It seems to me that the
        only way a large number of Jesus' sayings could have been reliably
        transmitted to posterity is if the twelve committed them to writing before
        ca. 60 CE whilst Jerusalem was at peace (which indeed is just what I am
        proposing). Furthermore I would expect them to put in the requisite
        expertise and effort to make a good job of it right from the start, once
        they had decided that Jesus' return was not quite so imminent as to make the
        job pointless.



        .







        ---------------------------------
        Access over 1 million songs - Yahoo! Music Unlimited.

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