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

Re: [GTh] Matthaen Redaction in Thomas

Expand Messages
  • sarban
    ... From: Steve To: Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 9:27 AM Subject: [GTh] Matthaen Redaction in Thomas ...
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 13, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Steve" <dermarc@...>
      To: <gthomas@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 9:27 AM
      Subject: [GTh] Matthaen Redaction in Thomas


      > I have seen it stated before that Thomas exhibits some of Matthew's
      > editing style. If so this would prove a later-than-Matthew provenance
      > for Thomas, it seems to me. I could allow for the presence of one or
      > two places that could be due to subsequent harmonization, however.
      > But no more.
      >
      > Are there examples of this? And, how many?
      >
      > Steve Allison
      >
      The examples usually suggested would be
      Saying 40 is probably related to Matthew 15:13 which may
      well be Matthean redaction of the parallel passage in Mark
      Saying 57 (wheat and tares) is related to Matthew 13:24-30
      the parable as a whole is possibly a Matthean creation.
      Saying 90 (bearing Jesus's yoke) is related to Matthew 11:28-30
      possibly a Matthean creation
      Saying 93 (pigs and pearls) is related to Matthew 7:6
      also possibly a Matthean creation.
      Sayings 33, 34 and 99 have parallels in more than one synoptic
      gospel but are in Thomas closest to the form found in Matthew.

      Whether this sort of evidence proves Thomas knew Matthew
      depends on how much in Matthew is Matthean redaction.
      IMHO it does not prove Thomas knew Matthew (although
      I suspect that at least the final redactor of Thomas did.)
      What IMHO it does tend to show is that Thomas knew
      Matthean 'special material' as well as Q type and Markan type
      material which had been modified along a Matthean trajectory.
      Possibly the evidence might be explained by Thomas using the
      ancient Aramaic Gospel the 'Gospel of the Nazoreans' which
      appears to have been closely related to our Matthew but does
      not seem to have been a direct descendant of it.

      Andrew Criddle
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.