Re: [XTalk] first modern scholar to note the shorter and longer forms of the LP
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeffrey B. Gibson" <jgibson000@...>
To: "biblical-studies" <email@example.com>
Cc: "Textual Criticism List" <firstname.lastname@example.org>;
"NewSynoptic" <Synoptic@yahoogroups.com>; "Crosstalk2"
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 5:00 PM
Subject: [XTalk] first modern scholar to note the shorter and longer forms
of the LP
> With apologies for cross posting:
> Today no one (save perhaps some KJV advocates) accepts the testimony of
> the TR and the translations based upon it that text of the Lord's Prayer
> as Luke gave it at Lk. 11:2-4 was basically, sans the doxology in Mt.
> 6:14, the text of Mt. 6:1-14.
> But when did this change of view, this awareness that the LP has come
> down to us in two forms/versions, occur? Who was the first modern
> scholar to argue that the TR was wrong in its presentation of the text
> of Lk 11:2-4? and that what Luke gave us was quite different from what
> Matthew recorded? Anyone know?
Two of the most notable have been Joachim Jeremias, Abba. Studien zur
Neutestamentlichen Theologie und Zietgeschichte, 1966, Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, Gottingen; and Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Gospel according to Luke,
1981, 1985 Doubleday, Garden City, NY. The scholarly opinion is that the
original version of the Lord’s Prayer was a short version, like Luke’s, but
contained wording closer to that embedded in the expanded version of
Matthew. The works of these scholars are summarized in John P. Meier’s "A
Marginal Jew, rethinking the historical Jesus" Vol. 2, 1994, Doubleday, NY.