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

[Synoptic-L] Traditions Resource

Expand Messages
  • JFAlward@aol.com
    Is anyone aware of a web site which places the triple and double traditions in parallel columns for comparision? Joe Alward Synoptic-L Homepage:
    Message 1 of 10 , Mar 25, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Is anyone aware of a web site which places the triple and double traditions
      in parallel columns for comparision?

      Joe Alward

      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    • Daryl F. Jefferies
      Joe, I find the following presentation very useful. http://www.utoronto.ca/religion/synopsis/ Daryl Jefferies ... -- ***************************** Daryl
      Message 2 of 10 , Mar 25, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Joe,

        I find the following presentation very useful.

        http://www.utoronto.ca/religion/synopsis/

        Daryl Jefferies


        >Is anyone aware of a web site which places the triple and double traditions
        >in parallel columns for comparision?
        >
        >Joe Alward
        --
        *****************************
        Daryl Jefferies
        djefferi@...
        http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~djefferi

        Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
        List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
      • Brian E. Wilson
        Joe Alward asked -- ... Daryl Jefferies commented -- ... Joe, The Toronto site simply displays the five gospels, Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn, Thomas, in English in five
        Message 3 of 10 , Mar 25, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Joe Alward asked --
          >
          >Is anyone aware of a web site which places the triple and double
          >traditions in parallel columns for comparison?
          >
          Daryl Jefferies commented --
          >
          >I find the following presentation very useful.
          >
          >http://www.utoronto.ca/religion/synopsis/
          >
          Joe,
          The Toronto site simply displays the five gospels, Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn,
          Thomas, in English in five parallel columns. It seems to me that you
          want an on-line synopsis that displays the "Mark-Q Overlaps" by using
          five columns, two columns to set out the double tradition, and three
          columns to set out the triple tradition alongside.

          In such a synopsis, the following five synoptic versions of the same
          saying would be in five parallel columns, the first two being double
          tradition, and the other three being triple tradition --

          (1) Mt 10.39 "He that findeth his life shall lose it; and he that
          loseth his life for my sake shall find it." (Double tradition)

          (2) Lk 17.33 "Whosoever shall seek to gain his life shall lose it; but
          whoever shall lose his life shall preserve it." (Double tradition)

          (3) Mt 16.25 "For whosoever would save his life shall lose it: and
          whosoever shall lose his life for my sake shall find it." (Triple
          tradition)

          (4) Mk 8.35 "For whosoever would save his life shall lose it; and
          whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's shall save
          it." (Triple tradition)

          (5) Lk 9.24 "For whosoever would save his life shall lose it; but
          whosoever shall lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it."
          (Triple tradition)

          I do not know of any synopsis, printed or on-line, that does this.

          I would suggest that if such a synopsis exists, it would be heavily
          biassed towards the Two Document Hypothesis if this is its only use of
          five columns. A more neutral synopsis would, I think, have six columns,
          so that it could, for instance display the five similarly-worded
          accounts of the "Feedings" - three of these being the Feeding of the
          Five Thousand (in Mt 14.13-21, Mk 6.30-45, Lk 9.10-17) and two of them
          being of the Feeding of the Four Thousand (Mt 15.32-39 and Mk 8.1-10).

          Such a six-column synopsis would then also be able to show the saying
          that occurs six times in the synoptic gospels --

          (1) Mt 3.17 "This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased"

          (2) Mk 1.11 "You are my beloved Son, in you I am well pleased"

          (3) Lk 3.22 "You are my beloved Son, in you I am well pleased"

          (4) Mt 17.5 "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased"

          (5) Mk 9.6 "This is my beloved Son, hear him"

          (6) Lk 9.35 "This is my Son, my chosen: hear him."

          Such a synopsis would also be able to show all instances of two-fold
          repetitions within a synoptic gospel, and any parallels to these in
          either of the other synoptic gospels, so using anything from two to six
          columns in all sorts of combinations, depending on how many times the
          material is repeated and in which synoptic gospel(s).

          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@...
        • Jeffrey Glen Jackson
          As it just so happens, my synopsis on my home page (using the NET translation) does in fact show the Mt 3.17 et al passages in 6 columns. I don t, however,
          Message 4 of 10 , Mar 26, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            As it just so happens, my synopsis on my home page (using the NET
            translation) does in fact show the Mt 3.17 et al passages in 6
            columns. I don't, however, show the feeding of the 5000 parallel
            to the feeding of the 4000. I just don't see a case there for a
            literary dependency (one on the other nor both on a common
            source).

            ><> Jeffrey Glen Jackson, son of Albert, son of George, son of <><
            ><> Henry, son of Miles, son of Randolph, son of Ephraim, son of <><
            ><> Thomas, son of John, son of Thomas, .... sonne of Jack. <><
            mailto:jeff@... http://www.jeff-jackson.com
            "The blithe 'reconstruction' not only of Q, not only of its different stages of
            composition, but even of complete communities whose beliefs are
            accurately reflected in these different stages, betokens a naive
            willingness to believe in anything as long as it is nothing like Mark
            (let alone Paul)." N. T. Wright



            >
            > Such a six-column synopsis would then also be able to show the saying
            > that occurs six times in the synoptic gospels --
            >
            > (1) Mt 3.17 "This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased"
            >
            > (2) Mk 1.11 "You are my beloved Son, in you I am well pleased"
            >
            > (3) Lk 3.22 "You are my beloved Son, in you I am well pleased"
            >
            > (4) Mt 17.5 "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased"
            >
            > (5) Mk 9.6 "This is my beloved Son, hear him"
            >
            > (6) Lk 9.35 "This is my Son, my chosen: hear him."
            >
            > Such a synopsis would also be able to show all instances of two-fold
            > repetitions within a synoptic gospel, and any parallels to these in
            > either of the other synoptic gospels, so using anything from two to six
            > columns in all sorts of combinations, depending on how many times the
            > material is repeated and in which synoptic gospel(s).


            Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
            List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
          • Brian E. Wilson
            Jeffrey Jackson wrote -- ... Jeffrey, Nor do I. My understanding is that originally the similarity between the two narratives is redactional. That is, someone
            Message 5 of 10 , Mar 27, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              Jeffrey Jackson wrote --
              >
              >As it just so happens, my synopsis on my home page (using the NET
              >translation) does in fact show the Mt 3.17 et al passages in 6
              >columns. I don't, however, show the feeding of the 5000 parallel to
              >the feeding of the 4000. I just don't see a case there for a literary
              >dependency (one on the other nor both on a common source).
              >
              Jeffrey,
              Nor do I. My understanding is that originally the similarity
              between the two narratives is redactional. That is, someone first wrote
              out the Five Thousand and then, in the same document, chose to use some
              Greek wording from this to expand a short story concerning "little
              fish" to produce the Four Thousand. In my view, therefore, the
              similarities originated not as the result of literary dependency on two
              similarly-worded and documentarily-related sources, but are the
              consequence of deliberate repetition of some wording by one writer
              within the same document. Originally it was a "redaction doublet" and
              not a "source doublet".

              I think you will find that advocates of the Farrer Hypothesis consider
              that some of the "doublets" in Matthew are supposed to be the result of
              deliberate repetition by Matthew. They might say that the doublets are
              simply Matthew repeating the bits he liked. On this view, the Matthean
              "doublets" in your synopsis are not the result of literary dependency
              either, but were deliberately created by Matthew.

              I don't see a case for a literary dependency for all the doublets in
              your synopsis, including the Mt 3.17 et al passages.

              If we are constructing a synopsis, what criterion should we use for
              displaying two pieces of material as a "doublet" within a synoptic
              gospel?

              How can you tell whether a doublet in a synoptic gospel began life as a
              "redaction doublet", or whether it originated as a "source doublet"?

              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@...
            • Thomas R. W. Longstaff
              I have been traveling and have not been able to follow all of this thread. It is true that synopses (by the nature of them) always favor one or another
              Message 6 of 10 , Mar 27, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                I have been traveling and have not been able to follow all of
                this thread. It is true that synopses (by the nature of them)
                always favor one or another "solution" to the synoptic problem
                (see David Dungan's excellent publications making this point)
                but even so, many are useful to people who hold or investigate
                other options.

                David Peabody and I have just finished an exhaustive
                synopsis of the Gospel of Mark with the parallels in Matthew
                and Luke. This will be available from Trinity Press International
                on CD by the end of the year. We will reorganize this synopsis
                and produce a complete synopsis of the synoptic gospels in
                the near future - including the material common to Matthew
                and Luke (not in Mark) and the material unique to each gospel.
                We do display the text, in parallel columns (occasionally as
                many as 9 columns - but usually 3) with a system of color
                coding and underlining to indicate the patterns of agreement
                and disagreement. The text is, of course, the UBS Greek NT.

                Poor samples (we have spent our time polishing the interface
                and synopses for the CD) are available on our web-site
                (http://www.colby.edu/rel/2gh). We demonstrated the product
                at the last AAR/SBL meeting (at the Trinity booth) and a
                number of people are looking forward to the publication of
                this CD. It is in Trinity's newest catalogue.

                To be honest, I don't know anything quite like this - which
                is why David and I decided to produce it.

                Best wishes,

                trwl

                Dr. Thomas R. W. Longstaff
                Crawford Family Professor of Religious Studies
                Colby College
                4643 Mayflower Hill
                Waterville, ME 04901-8846
                Tel: (207) 872-3150
                FAX: (207) 872-3802


                > Joe Alward asked --
                > >
                > >Is anyone aware of a web site which places the triple and double
                > >traditions in parallel columns for comparison?
                > >
                > Daryl Jefferies commented --
                > >
                > >I find the following presentation very useful.
                > >
                > >http://www.utoronto.ca/religion/synopsis/



                Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
              • JFAlward@aol.com
                My thanks to Brian Wilson, Thomas R. W. Longstaff, and Jeffrey Glen Jackson for their synopsis advice and contributions. I see value in each of the approaches
                Message 7 of 10 , Mar 27, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  My thanks to Brian Wilson, Thomas R. W. Longstaff, and Jeffrey Glen Jackson
                  for their synopsis advice and contributions. I see value in each of the
                  approaches suggested, but I'm looking for a synopsis which makes much more
                  explicit the differences among the several authors and which permits one to
                  see at a glance inconsistencies with commentary.

                  The type of synopsis I would like to see published is similar to the one
                  shown at the site http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/Feedings_Parallels.htm

                  There's a table there that compares fifty-four features of the five feeding
                  stories and provides evidence that all three synoptic "authors" rewrote the
                  same source.


                  Regards,

                  Joe Alward
                  ==============
                  Joseph F. Alward, Ph.D.
                  Assistant Professor
                  Department of Physics
                  University of the Pacific
                  Stockton CA 95211

                  Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                  List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                • Jeff Peterson
                  ... Shouldn t the criterion be a significant degree of agreement in wording? The purpose of a synopsis is to exhibit the significant similarities between
                  Message 8 of 10 , Mar 27, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "Brian E. Wilson" wrote:

                    > If we are constructing a synopsis, what criterion should we use for
                    > displaying two pieces of material as a "doublet" within a synoptic
                    > gospel?

                    Shouldn't the criterion be a significant degree of agreement in wording?
                    The purpose of a synopsis is to exhibit the significant similarities
                    between pericopes, however these may be explained. (Theorists on the
                    list: please note that I'm not claiming objectivity for synopses or
                    their makers; I'm simply maintaining that the goal of a synopsis ought
                    to be to set before the reader the pericopes in the Synoptics that are
                    significantly parallel to one another. Then, let the explanations commence!)

                    Jeff
                  • Jeffrey B. Gibson
                    ... May I ask if the table is based on the Greek text of the material compared, or is it only constructed from an (and a particular) English translation of
                    Message 9 of 10 , Mar 27, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      JFAlward@... wrote:

                      > My thanks to Brian Wilson, Thomas R. W. Longstaff, and Jeffrey Glen Jackson
                      > for their synopsis advice and contributions. I see value in each of the
                      > approaches suggested, but I'm looking for a synopsis which makes much more
                      > explicit the differences among the several authors and which permits one to
                      > see at a glance inconsistencies with commentary.
                      >
                      > The type of synopsis I would like to see published is similar to the one
                      > shown at the site http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/Feedings_Parallels.htm
                      >
                      > There's a table there that compares fifty-four features of the five feeding
                      > stories and provides evidence that all three synoptic "authors" rewrote the
                      > same source.
                      >

                      May I ask if the table is based on the Greek text of the material
                      compared, or
                      is it only constructed from an (and a particular) English translation of
                      this
                      material?

                      Yours,

                      Jeffrey Gibson

                      --
                      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@...
                    • Brian E. Wilson
                      Brian Wilson wrote -- ... Jeff Peterson replied -- ... Jeff, I would want to distinguish between horizontal and vertical agreements in the synoptic
                      Message 10 of 10 , Mar 28, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Brian Wilson wrote --
                        >
                        >If we are constructing a synopsis, what criterion should we use for
                        >displaying two pieces of material as a "doublet" within a synoptic
                        >gospel?
                        >
                        Jeff Peterson replied --
                        >
                        >Shouldn't the criterion be a significant degree of agreement in
                        >wording? The purpose of a synopsis is to exhibit the significant
                        >similarities between pericopes, however these may be explained.
                        >
                        Jeff,
                        I would want to distinguish between "horizontal" and "vertical"
                        agreements in the synoptic gospels. The basic purpose of a synopsis is
                        "horizontal" only. It is to show not only the similarities but also the
                        differences in wording and order of material *between* the synoptic
                        gospels, that is, looking horizontally across the three columns of Mt,
                        Mk and Lk. It is because this "horizontal" relationship exists that Mt,
                        Mk and Lk are called "synoptic" gospels, of course. I agree that "a
                        significant degree of agreement in wording" should be the criterion for
                        regarding a pericope in one synoptic gospel as a parallel to a pericope
                        horizontally across in another synoptic gospel.

                        In synopses, however, it has been customary to display also, as extra
                        information, some occurrences of "vertical" repetition in the synoptic
                        gospels, that is, some instances of two similarly-worded pieces of
                        material in the *same* synoptic gospel. Thus the two sayings about
                        "taking up the cross" in Mt 10.38 and Mt 16.24 are usually regarded as a
                        "doublet" or "two-fold repetition" in Matthew. They can be viewed
                        "vertically" within the same column, the one for the gospel of Matthew
                        only. I agree that "a significant degree of agreement in wording" should
                        be the criterion for regarding such pieces of material as a doublet
                        occurring vertically within the same synoptic gospel.

                        In the case of doublets or two-fold repetitions, however, the question
                        is what degree of agreement of wording is to be laid down. Synopses
                        differ **wildly** on which "vertical" repetitions within a gospel are to
                        be displayed as a doublet, and which are to be ignored. It is bizarre,
                        in my view, that most synopses display dozens of doublets of sayings
                        material, and yet ignore narrative doublets. Most weird is the almost
                        total lack of recognition in synopses of the largest doublet in the
                        synoptic gospels, that formed by the Feeding of the Five Thousand and
                        the Feeding of the Four Thousand within the gospel of Mark, and
                        similarly by the same two stories within the gospel of Matthew.

                        In my own study of "two-fold repetitions" (as I prefer to call them), I
                        have produced a criterion that seems to be useful. I define a "two-fold
                        repetition" (or "doublet") as the occurrence of two pieces of material
                        in separate pericopes in the same synoptic gospel such that one piece of
                        material has at least six (Greek) word roots the same and in the same
                        order within a string of no more than 15 words as six corresponding word
                        roots also within a string of no more than 15 words in the other piece
                        of material. The figures are arbitrary, of course. The important thing
                        in any study is to state a clear definition and stick to it
                        consistently. I find that this criterion works reasonably well and
                        covers most two-fold repetitions (doublets) displayed in synopses. It is
                        a totally objective criterion and could be used in a computer program.

                        I wonder whether we need a new sort of reference work in the study of
                        the synoptic gospels? In addition to a "synopsis" I would suggest that
                        we need a "verticalis". This work would display all vertical "two-fold
                        repetitions" within the individual synoptic gospel, and give also any
                        parallel in any other synoptic gospel to either of the two pieces of
                        material of the vertical repetition. A verticalis would therefore
                        complement a synopsis. It would give priority to vertically-observed
                        agreements, whereas a synopsis gives priority to horizontally-observed
                        similarities.

                        The question could then be asked whether any particular synoptic
                        documentary hypothesis fits the data observed in a verticalis.

                        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.