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

Gospel of Thomas and the Farrer Theory

Expand Messages
  • Mark Goodacre
    As some of you may know, I am currently working on a book on the relationship between the Gospel of Thomas and the Synoptics. It occurs to me that I am not
    Message 1 of 5 , May 31, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      As some of you may know, I am currently working on a book on the
      relationship between the Gospel of Thomas and the Synoptics. It
      occurs to me that I am not aware of a single piece of scholarship on
      the Gospel of Thomas that engages with the Farrer Theory. The only
      piece I am aware of that even mentions it is Stephen Patterson, “The
      Gospel of (Judas) Thomas and the Synoptic Problem” in P. Foster, A.
      Gregory, J. S. Kloppenborg and J. Verheyden (eds.), New Studies in the
      Synoptic Problem (BETL, 239; Leuven: Peeters, 2011), 783-808.
      Patterson gives the theory a footnote (p. 790, n. 34), which I think
      may be a sign of future hope. Is anyone aware of anything else?

      Thanks
      Mark

      Cross-posting to the Gospel of Thomas list and Synoptic-L.

      --
      Mark Goodacre
      Duke University
      Department of Religion
      Gray Building / Box 90964
      Durham, NC 27708-0964    USA
      Phone: 919-660-3503        Fax: 919-660-3530

      http://www.markgoodacre.org
    • Judy Redman
      Not off the top of my head, Mark. Mind you, there’s not a huge amount written on Thomas and sources – even the Q stuff isn’t exactly extensive. Have you
      Message 2 of 5 , Jun 1, 2011
      • 0 Attachment

        Not off the top of my head, Mark. Mind you, there’s not a huge amount written on Thomas and sources – even the Q stuff isn’t exactly extensive. Have you looked at Reinhardt Nordsiek’s commentary, or Uwe-Karsten Plisch’s, though? There is a vague glimmer in the back of my mind that says that I might have read something in one of these, but I have been up waaaaay too long today to be able to skim read effectively even in English and Nordsiek’s German is definitely beyond me tonight. J

         

        Judy

         

        --

        Judy Redman
        PhD Candidate, School of Humanities
        University of New England
        Armidale 2351 Australia
        ph:  +61 2 6773 3401
        mob: 0437 044 579
        web: 
         http://judyredman.wordpress.com/
        email: 
         jredman2@...
         

         

        From: gthomas@yahoogroups.com [mailto:gthomas@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark Goodacre
        Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2011 6:25 AM
        To: gthomas
        Cc: Synoptic-L
        Subject: [GTh] Gospel of Thomas and the Farrer Theory

         

         

        As some of you may know, I am currently working on a book on the
        relationship between the Gospel of Thomas and the Synoptics. It
        occurs to me that I am not aware of a single piece of scholarship on
        the Gospel of Thomas that engages with the Farrer Theory. The only
        piece I am aware of that even mentions it is Stephen Patterson, “The
        Gospel of (Judas) Thomas and the Synoptic Problem” in P. Foster, A.
        Gregory, J. S. Kloppenborg and J. Verheyden (eds.), New Studies in the
        Synoptic Problem (BETL, 239; Leuven: Peeters, 2011), 783-808.
        Patterson gives the theory a footnote (p. 790, n. 34), which I think
        may be a sign of future hope. Is anyone aware of anything else?

        Thanks
        Mark

        Cross-posting to the Gospel of Thomas list and Synoptic-L.

        --
        Mark Goodacre
        Duke University
        Department of Religion
        Gray Building / Box 90964
        Durham, NC 27708-0964    USA
        Phone: 919-660-3503        Fax: 919-660-3530

        http://www.markgoodacre.org

      • Mark Goodacre
        Many thanks, Judy and Doug, for helpful suggestions. Good catch on Zeba Crook. Plisch appears to be ignorant of the Farrer Theory, as far as I can tell. I
        Message 3 of 5 , Jun 2, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Many thanks, Judy and Doug, for helpful suggestions. Good catch on
          Zeba Crook. Plisch appears to be ignorant of the Farrer Theory, as
          far as I can tell. I doubt that Nordsieck engages with it, but I look
          forward to double-checking next week. Cheers, Mark


          --
          Mark Goodacre
          Duke University
          Department of Religion
          Gray Building / Box 90964
          Durham, NC 27708-0964    USA
          Phone: 919-660-3503        Fax: 919-660-3530

          http://www.markgoodacre.org
        • Doug Milford
          I see I sent this straight to Mark. So here it is for the list ... __________________________ Mark, While peripheral and buried in footnotes, Zeba Antonin
          Message 4 of 5 , Jun 2, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            I see I sent this straight to Mark. So here it is for the list ...
            __________________________

            Mark,

            While peripheral and buried in footnotes, Zeba Antonin Crook engages Farrer somewhat iin "The Synoptic Parables of the Mustard Seed and the Leaven: A Test-Case for the Two-Document, Two-Gospel, and Farrer-Goulder Goulder Hypotheses," JSNT 78, 2000, 23-48.

            ... Goulder sees a parallelism between the two parables which indicates that Matthew created the parable of the Leaven rather than simply having selected it from Q. Hence, where we saw earlier the notion that the order of the two parables is unnecessary, as indicated by the Gospel of Thomas and Mark, Goulder sees a very deliberate pattern uniting them (p. 43).

            Crook goes on to note (f 82) that "this might well suggest that Mark thought so, but that the Gospel of Thomas has them separated suggests that the order is not necessary even if it is possible."

            Doug Milford


            On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Mark Goodacre <Goodacre@...> wrote:
            Many thanks, Judy and Doug, for helpful suggestions. Good catch on
            Zeba Crook.  Plisch appears to be ignorant of the Farrer Theory, as
            far as I can tell.  I doubt that Nordsieck engages with it, but I look
            forward to double-checking next week.  Cheers, Mark

          • Judy Redman
            Mark, I didn’t get the post from Phil and it doesn’t seem to have made it into my junk folder, which legitimate posts to lists sometimes do. Did he reply
            Message 5 of 5 , Jun 2, 2011
            • 0 Attachment

              Mark,

               

              I didn’t get the post from Phil and it doesn’t seem to have made it into my junk folder, which legitimate posts to lists sometimes do. Did he reply to you direct?  If so, Phil would you mind resharing, please?

               

              Judy

               

              --

              Judy Redman
              PhD Candidate, School of Humanities
              University of New England
              Armidale 2351 Australia
              ph:  +61 2 6773 3401
              mob: 0437 044 579
              web: 
               http://judyredman.wordpress.com/
              email: 
               jredman2@...
               

               

              From: gthomas@yahoogroups.com [mailto:gthomas@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark Goodacre
              Sent: Friday, 3 June 2011 12:41 AM
              To: gthomas
              Subject: Re: [GTh] Gospel of Thomas and the Farrer Theory

               

               

              Many thanks, Judy and Doug, for helpful suggestions. Good catch on
              Zeba Crook. Plisch appears to be ignorant of the Farrer Theory, as
              far as I can tell. I doubt that Nordsieck engages with it, but I look
              forward to double-checking next week. Cheers, Mark

              --
              Mark Goodacre
              Duke University
              Department of Religion
              Gray Building / Box 90964
              Durham, NC 27708-0964    USA
              Phone: 919-660-3503        Fax: 919-660-3530

              http://www.markgoodacre.org

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