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

Re: [Synoptic-L] accepting arguments

Expand Messages
  • Maluflen@aol.com
    In a message dated 8/23/2000 9:39:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time, brian@TwoNH.demon.co.uk writes:
    Message 1 of 5 , Aug 23, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 8/23/2000 9:39:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
      brian@... writes:

      << My hesitation at accepting them [arguments proving that Matt 20:20-23 is
      prior to its Markan parallel], however, is that I suspect advocates of
      Markan priority provide at least as many equally convincing reasons why
      Matthew is secondary to Mark here.

      Is this the case?

      And if so, does this tell us anything about trying to use redaction
      criticism to answer source-critical questions?>>


      It tells me that one must exist from this style of "redaction critical"
      argument and move to another that is more solidly based on objective criteria
      and less tied to psychological analysis of a presumed redactor in his use of
      a presumed existing source. I have illustrated what I mean in my previous
      post.

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