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

Beloved Disciple and "Petrine Monopoly"

Expand Messages
  • Fred Guyette
    Normally I m just a lurker on the list, but Piet s comments have drawn me out of the shadows enough to ask a question about Hengel s view -- Were there
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 11, 2001
      Normally I'm just a "lurker" on the list, but Piet's comments have drawn me out
      of the shadows enough to ask a question about Hengel's view --

      Were there "normative" objections to "the growing Petrine monopoly," or was it
      more a case of
      the larger community wanting to welcome other views? If Hengel develops the
      theme of substantive differences, I would like to explore his argument in more
      detail (could you provide citations?).

      Thanks for the interesting post...

      Fred Guyette
      Erskine Seminary
      Due West, SC

      Piet van Veldhuizen wrote:

      > In Hengel's view as I understand it, the FG is meant to break not a dominant
      > position of Peter himself as a witness, but the monopoly of 'Petrine'
      > written tradition, as the Gospels of Luke and Matthew draw for a substantial
      > part on Mark who is (and was at a very early stage) thought of as a giving
      > Peter's version of the Jesus story.
      > Part of the theory is an awareness of the influence and rapid spreading of
      > written texts in the early days of the church. You need not assume a
      > personal dominance of, or reverence towards Peter himself, to acknowledge
      > that the so-called Petrine witness could gain dominance in the church just
      > because it was spread in writing. Even if Luke from his 'Pauline' viewpoint
      > might not have been a strong supporter of Peter, he helped strengthen the
      > 'Petrine' tradition by using Markan material, and doing so contributing to
      > what is now called the synoptic tradition.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.