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

Found a Farrerite

Expand Messages
  • Stephen C. Carlson
    I was recently reading Michael J. Cook, MARK S TREATMENT OF THE JEWISH LEADERS, (Suppl. Nov. Test. LI) (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1978), and was pleasantly surprised
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 4, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      I was recently reading Michael J. Cook, MARK'S TREATMENT OF THE
      JEWISH LEADERS, (Suppl. Nov. Test. LI) (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1978),
      and was pleasantly surprised to find out that he endorsed the
      Farrer Hypothesis.

      On page 3, note 2, he writes "At this juncture, we indicate our
      belief that Luke depended on Matthew as well as Mark. While
      this matter is somewhat peripheral to our major concerns, it does
      surface occasionally. The analysis penned several decades ago
      by M. S. Enslin merits citation at length:" Cook went on to cite
      A. M. Farrer (1955) and S. Petrie (1959).

      Cook's monograph is devoted though to a redaction critical analysis
      of Mark, finding at least three different sources based on how the
      enemies of Jesus are titled. He noted that there were two mostly
      disjoint sets of opponents: Chief priests+scribes+elders and
      Pharisees+Herodians, and then proposes that this is due to the use
      of different sources. I suppose this kind of theorizing goes
      against Goulder's grains.

      Stephen Carlson
      --
      Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
      Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
      "Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.