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

Re: [Synoptic-L] The coherence of Q (was: "the originallanguage of Q")

Expand Messages
  • Jeffrey B. Gibson
    ... I think it should be noted that not everyone who deals closely with Q buys into K-V s argument about the incoherence of the form, style, and theology of
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 18, 2001
      "Stephen C. Carlson" wrote:

      > However, the Temptation's inclusion in Q is shaky. Kloppenborg
      > (Formation, 248) says that it "does not share the form, style
      > or theological orientation of either the two mahor redactional
      > strata outlined in the preceding chapters. Nor is there an
      > indication that it existed in the early stages of Q. It has
      > every appearance of a later interpolation."
      >
      > If it is so apparent that the Temptation does not belong to Q,
      > then why it is assigned to Q in the first place at the source
      > critical stage?

      I think it should be noted that not everyone who deals closely with Q buys
      into K-V's argument about the incoherence of the form, style, and theology of
      the "temptation" story with that of the rest of Q or any of its reputed
      layers. Tuckett, for example, in his seminal article on the Temptation
      Narrative in the Neryrink FS, argues to the contrary and shows just how many
      of the characteristic theological themes and concerns of Q the Temptation
      account shares. I have argued that, because of certain (and to my view
      misguided) assumptions about the meaning that the title Son of God has in Q
      4:1-13 and what Jesus is presumably being asked by the Devil to do
      particularly in Q 4:3, K-V's thesis about the theology of the Temptation
      narrative, particularly with respect to its alleged view of Jesus as a
      thaumaturge and its view of miracle, misrepresents what that view actually
      is (see my "A Turn on `Turning Stones to Bread': A New Understanding of the
      Devil's Intention in Q 4.3", Biblical Research 41 [1996] pp. 37-57] and
      therefore sees an incoherence between the Temptation narrative and the rest
      of Q that is not really there.

      Yours,

      Jeffrey .
      --
      Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)
      7423 N. Sheridan Road #2A
      Chicago, Illinois 60626
      e-mail jgibson000@...



      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.