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

Delbert Burkett Paper

Expand Messages
  • Mark Matson
    Dear List: There had been some interest a while ago on the paper which Delbert Burkett was planning on giving at the Southeastern Regional SBL meeting in
    Message 1 of 44 , Mar 15, 1999
      Dear List:

      There had been some interest a while ago on the paper which Delbert
      Burkett was planning on giving at the Southeastern Regional SBL
      meeting in Chapel Hill, entitled "Conclusive Evidence Against Markan
      Priority".

      Having just attended, I thought I would give a quick update.
      Delbert's paper was well argued, and indeed stuck close to the title.
      He argued that there is substantial evidence against Markan
      priority, mainly in the following areas:

      1. Mark's use of "polus", which is not replicated at all in the
      other synoptics (Mark uses polla 9X, alloi polloi 3x, toiauto polla
      2x, and polus in the Jairus daughter episode 7X. He asks- how likely
      is it if Mark is 1st that Mt and Lk never use this word, which is
      perfectly good greek?

      2. Luke's use of "circular" language:
      periblepomai
      peri in local sense
      kuklo

      of these, Luke alone uses some, 2X (vs. 13X in Mk), never in Mt.

      Again, why would Luke and Matthew so studiously avoid this?

      3. Markan theme of Jesus' desire for Privacy

      4. Markan theme of teaching, didaskein and didaxh, very frequently
      not picked up in Luke and Matt, even where it would seem to make
      sense.

      5. Then followed an extensive discussion of evidence that Mark was
      conflating information in Luke and Matt.
      - dual temporal and local expressions (e.g. the famous Mk 1:32 and
      parr. passage, " when it was evening, when the sun was setting" in
      which both parts are found differently in others.

      He ultimately argued that the possibility of Mt and Luke differently
      picking up two expressions can be expressed as a probability
      function, and he calculated the odds against so many passages each
      having this possibility to be very high (I don't remember the figure
      -- one in a thousand perhaps).

      At the end, he expressed equally disagreement with the Griesbach
      hypothesis. He argued ultimately that the closest theory to fit what
      he is thinking is the Rolland theory (which none of us had heard of
      before). Briefly:

      a Proto gospel gives rise to Revision A and Revision B.
      Mark uses both Revision A and Revision B, conflating them to produce
      Mark.

      Mt uses Revision A, plus Q & M for Matthew.
      Lk uses Revision B, plus Q and L for Luke.

      voila. Nice and complex -- kind of like Boismard.

      I spoke with Delbert, and he will be posting the paper on his web
      site soon for a closer reading.

      http://www.artsci.lsu.edu/phil/faculty/burkett/index.html



      Your handy scribe,

      Mark Matson
      Mark A. Matson, Ph.D.
      Asst. Director, Sanford Institute of Public Policy
      Adjunct Professor of New Testament
      Duke University
      Durham, NC 27713
      (919) 613-7310
    • Brian E. Wilson
      ... Stephen Carlson commented - ... Stephen, I would agree with both of you on this particular statement. Please see my reply to Jeff. Best wishes, BRIAN
      Message 44 of 44 , Apr 9, 1999
        Jeff Peterson wrote:
        >Any previously articulated narratives about Jesus that Mark retained in
        >his Gospel are retained as expressing something Mark cared to express.
        >
        Stephen Carlson commented -
        >
        >I would agree with this, if the notion that the evangelists were authors
        >(as implied by their converting disconnected notes into a narrative) means
        >anything at all.
        >
        Stephen,
        I would agree with both of you on this particular statement.
        Please see my reply to Jeff.

        Best wishes,
        BRIAN WILSON

        E-MAIL : brian@... homepage -
        SNAILMAIL ; Rev B. E. Wilson,
        10 York Close, Godmanchester, http://www.twonh.demon.co.uk
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.