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

Re: [Synoptic-L] Fallacies

Expand Messages
  • Maluflen@aol.com
    In a message dated 12/2/2000 4:54:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, brian@TwoNH.demon.co.uk writes:
    Message 1 of 43 , Dec 2, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 12/2/2000 4:54:18 AM Eastern Standard Time,
      brian@... writes:

      << To put the point another way, the arguments that have (very)
      traditionally been used for the theory of Markan Priority are, in my
      view, just as much arguments for the theory of the Non-Priority of any
      synoptic gospel. Taylor's six "reasons" are no more reasons for
      affirming the theory of Markan Priority than for affirming the theory of
      Non-Priority. >>

      Brian, I wonder why you state this as strongly as you do. You are making a
      valid point generally -- which amounts to distinguishing, rightly, between
      the term "priority" in a purely temporal sense, and "priority" in the more
      philosophical sense, according to which that which is "secondary" depends for
      its existence on what is "prior" -- but I think it is an overstatement to
      affirm that valid arguments for the temporal priority of Mark would be "just
      as much" arguments for the non-priority (in a philosophical sense) of any of
      the Synoptic gospels. I would simply say that such arguments are
      non-conclusive for the question of the dependence of Matt and Lk on Mark.

      A more fundamental problem with the classical arguments in favor of Markan
      priority (in either sense) is their "reversibility" (to use Mark Goodacre's
      term) or their non-conclusivity for other logical reasons, and especially
      their failure to take into account the evidence of clearly secondary features
      of Mark. (I will admit, for the moment, that these secondary features do not
      conclusively prove the dependence of Mark on Matt and Lk either).

      Leonard Maluf

      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    • Brian E. Wilson
      Leonard Maluf asks -- ... Yes, much more narrowly. Best wishes, BRIAN WILSON E-mail; brian@twonh.demon.co.uk HOMEPAGE www.twonh.demon.co.uk Rev
      Message 43 of 43 , Dec 4, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Leonard Maluf asks --
        >Or do you in fact define more narrowly what you mean by "story
        >dualities" in your article?
        >
        Yes, much more narrowly.

        Best wishes,
        BRIAN WILSON

        E-mail; brian@... HOMEPAGE www.twonh.demon.co.uk

        Rev B.E.Wilson,10 York Close,Godmanchester,Huntingdon,Cambs,PE29 2EB,UK
        > "What can be said at all can be said clearly; and whereof one cannot
        > speak thereof one must be silent." Ludwig Wittgenstein, "Tractatus".
        _

        Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
        List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.