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

Re: [Synoptic-L] the failure of color coding

Expand Messages
  • Maluflen@aol.com
    In a message dated 8/1/2001 3:40:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time, brian@TwoNH.demon.co.uk writes:
    Message 1 of 19 , Aug 1, 2001
      In a message dated 8/1/2001 3:40:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
      brian@... writes:

      << To consider one instance. In the synopsis produced by H. F. D. Sparks,
      "The Anointing in Galilee" is set out in full (in English) as three
      parallel synoptic accounts in Mt 26.6-13, Mk 14.3-9 and Lk 7.36-50, the
      three passages being in long parallel columns and treated as variations
      of basically the same story. In Farmer's *Synopticon* however (pages
      165-166), this same "Anointing in Galilee" in Lk 7.36-50, is totally
      devoid of any words with coloured background!! Here Farmer has held back
      from showing in Luke the similarities with wording in the two Anointing
      passages in Matthew and Mark. Presumably he is here following his
      "general principle" that it is preferable to "leave some possibly
      significant agreements unmarked rather than to risk calling attention to
      imaginary ones". He does not have a definition of "complete verbatim
      agreement" between synoptic gospels that he can apply here, even though
      according to his Key to the Color Code the colors are supposed to
      indicate just such verbatim agreement. He does not know whether the
      agreements in the three synoptic accounts of the Anointing are
      significant or imaginary, and has no means of deciding the issue.>>

      Interesting, Brian. If I could give just one more example of the above
      phenomenon, at a more micro-level, it might provide food for thought or
      discussion. In Matt 27:50, Matthew writes AFHKEN TO PNEUMA, to describe the
      death of Jesus. Now TO PNEUMA is left entirely without color in Farmer's
      Synopticon, even though, at the death of Jesus in Luke, Luke has Jesus utter
      the words: "Father, into your hands PARATIQEMAI TO PNEUMA MOU". Besides the
      fact that Luke's phrase here, taken as a whole, could well be an
      interpretation of Matt's phrase, taken as a whole (as well as being a
      biblical citation), the word TO PNEUMA occurs in both Gospels here and could
      certainly have been colored in red, except for the principle of Farmer's to
      which you refer. Instead, Farmer has merely underlined PNEUMA in red in Matt
      27:50, to indicate a partial verbal agreement between Matthew's [AFHKEN] TO
      PNEUMA and Luke's ECEPNEUSEN, which are also certainly "parallel". I would
      have judged the verbal agreement here differently than Farmer has (I would
      have BOTH colored in full red TO PNEUMA in the two Gospel passages, AND
      underlined ECEPNEUSEN in red in Lk, suggesting that Luke was developing
      different meaning potentials in the text of Matt), but the grounds for this
      difference, I guess, ultimately involve subjective judgment as to what
      constitutes a "parallel" passage.

      Leonard Maluf

      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    • David B. Peabody
      ... At the simplest level, of course, it is possible to illustrate Lk-Jn agreements. That is, if the parallel is between Lk and Jn alone, one just adds another
      Message 2 of 19 , Aug 1, 2001
        Quoting Emmanuel Fritsch <emmanuel.fritsch@...>:

        >
        > > These are some of the most complex patterns for a set of only three
        > gospel
        > > contexts in parallel, but I hope you get the idea of how this system
        > works for
        > > less complex cases.
        >
        > And for more complex cas ? Is it possible for instance
        > to visualise in this system the Lk-Jn agreements ?
        >
        > a+
        > manu
        >
        > Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
        > List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...

        At the simplest level, of course, it is possible to illustrate Lk-Jn agreements.
        That is, if the parallel is between Lk and Jn alone, one just adds another color
        to the mix and maintains the distinction between full (verbatim agreements) and
        dotted underlining (verbal similarities; same lexeme, different grammatical
        form). I have done this, for instance, in Mk 16:9-20.

        If I would have had to indicate the verbal interrelationships among all four of
        the gospels, however, I am not sure how I would have dealt with that.

        Here is the note Tom Longstaff and I composed on the special color coding
        utilized only in Mk 16:9-20.

        -----------Quoting

        A more complex system of color coding has been adopted for this pericope.

        magenta identifies agreements between Mt and Jn;
        purple identifies agreements between Lk and Jn;
        cyan (agreements between Mt and Mk) is extended to agreements among Mt, Mk and
        Jn;
        blue (agreements among Mt, Mk and Lk) is extended to agreements among Mt, Mk, Lk
        and Jn
        green (agreements between Mk and Lk) is extended to agreements among Mk, Lk, and
        Jn;
        red (as always) identifies agreements beteen Mt and Lk.

        ---------End of Quotation.

        Given the results of our early experiments with colors on screen (see below), it
        will be interesting to find out what colleagues have to say about the color
        coding of this one pericope.

        Publishing in an electronic form has its limits. The color pallet in MS-WORD is
        rather limited and many of the colors, even in that pallet, are unsuitable for
        display on a screen with a white background. Of course, there would be
        comparable, but different, color-distinguishing problems on a dark background.

        In the color coding experiments we did, Tom and I had complaints from colleagues
        about not being able to distinguish magenta from red on screen. We, therefore,
        substituted cyan for magenta, but cyan appears rather light on screen and others
        had trouble reading it and/or distinguishing it from blue.

        Yellow is almost invisible and, therefore, unreadable against a white background.
        Many of the darker colors, on the other hand, are hardly distinguishable on
        screen from black.

        So, here we are. I believe Tom and I have done as well as can be done on a white
        background with the 256 "safe" colors available for good cross platform use, but
        even we are not completely satisfied. I wish we had a good alternative for cyan,
        for instance, but we don't, if magenta is not easily distinguishable from red.

        If screen resolutions improve and/or color pallets in major word processing
        programs expand in the future, we and/or others no doubt will be able to improve
        on our forthcoming work. For now, however, we offer to others what we believe to
        be the best of the possibilities we had available, given the current state of
        hardware and software development. Others will have to judge whether or not we
        have suceeded in this goal with this particular coding system.

        David Barrett Peabody






        Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
        List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
      • David B. Peabody
        Leonard, You call attention to an excellent example of the hundreds, perhaps, thousands of judgment calls one has to make in composing a synopsis. It seems
        Message 3 of 19 , Aug 1, 2001
          Leonard,

          You call attention to an excellent example of the hundreds, perhaps, thousands of
          "judgment calls" one has to make in composing a synopsis. It seems to me that
          this clearly illustrates Dungan's affirmation that no synopsis can be entirely
          "neutral" and/or "unbiased."

          Brian,

          The work of Tom and I differs here from that of my dissertation advisor. In our
          forthcoming synopsis, all three of these pericopae are set out side by side with
          the appropriate underlining and color codes presented.

          However, the relatively few and relatively insignificant verbal agreements
          between Mk and Lk alone, lead me to believe that Farmer's differing judgment on
          this matter is defensible and, on the 2GH, it believe it unlikely that Mark
          worked with Lk 7:36-50 in composing Mk 14:1-11. The best evidence for such a
          link, in my view, is found in the partial agreement on the use of katakeimai in
          Mk 14:3 and Lk 7:37.

          On the other hand, there is sufficient evidence, again in my judgement, to
          sustain a literary relationship not only between Mk 14:1-11 and Mt 26:1-16, but
          also between Mk 14:1-11 and Lk 22:1-6.

          In fact, I would judge that it is likely that Mark essentially utilized Lk 22:1-
          2//Mk 14:1-2 and Lk 22:3-6//Mk 14:10-11 to frame his work with Mt 26:4-13//Mk
          14:1end-9.

          David Barrett Peabody

          Quoting Maluflen@...:

          > In a message dated 8/1/2001 3:40:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
          > brian@... writes:
          >
          > << To consider one instance. In the synopsis produced by H. F. D. Sparks,
          > "The Anointing in Galilee" is set out in full (in English) as three
          > parallel synoptic accounts in Mt 26.6-13, Mk 14.3-9 and Lk 7.36-50, the
          > three passages being in long parallel columns and treated as variations
          > of basically the same story. In Farmer's *Synopticon* however (pages
          > 165-166), this same "Anointing in Galilee" in Lk 7.36-50, is totally
          > devoid of any words with coloured background!! Here Farmer has held back
          > from showing in Luke the similarities with wording in the two Anointing
          > passages in Matthew and Mark. Presumably he is here following his
          > "general principle" that it is preferable to "leave some possibly
          > significant agreements unmarked rather than to risk calling attention to
          > imaginary ones". He does not have a definition of "complete verbatim
          > agreement" between synoptic gospels that he can apply here, even though
          > according to his Key to the Color Code the colors are supposed to
          > indicate just such verbatim agreement. He does not know whether the
          > agreements in the three synoptic accounts of the Anointing are
          > significant or imaginary, and has no means of deciding the issue.>>
          >
          > Interesting, Brian. If I could give just one more example of the above
          > phenomenon, at a more micro-level, it might provide food for thought or
          > discussion. In Matt 27:50, Matthew writes AFHKEN TO PNEUMA, to describe the
          >
          > death of Jesus. Now TO PNEUMA is left entirely without color in Farmer's
          > Synopticon, even though, at the death of Jesus in Luke, Luke has Jesus
          > utter
          > the words: "Father, into your hands PARATIQEMAI TO PNEUMA MOU". Besides the
          >
          > fact that Luke's phrase here, taken as a whole, could well be an
          > interpretation of Matt's phrase, taken as a whole (as well as being a
          > biblical citation), the word TO PNEUMA occurs in both Gospels here and
          > could
          > certainly have been colored in red, except for the principle of Farmer's to
          >
          > which you refer. Instead, Farmer has merely underlined PNEUMA in red in
          > Matt
          > 27:50, to indicate a partial verbal agreement between Matthew's [AFHKEN] TO
          >
          > PNEUMA and Luke's ECEPNEUSEN, which are also certainly "parallel". I would
          > have judged the verbal agreement here differently than Farmer has (I would
          > have BOTH colored in full red TO PNEUMA in the two Gospel passages, AND
          > underlined ECEPNEUSEN in red in Lk, suggesting that Luke was developing
          > different meaning potentials in the text of Matt), but the grounds for this
          >
          > difference, I guess, ultimately involve subjective judgment as to what
          > constitutes a "parallel" passage.
          >
          > Leonard Maluf
          >
          > Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          > List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
          >





          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
        • Tim Reynolds
          Awesome. tim ... Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@bham.ac.uk
          Message 4 of 19 , Aug 1, 2001
            Awesome.

            tim

            "David B. Peabody" wrote:
            >
            > Quoting Tim Reynolds <molad@...>:
            >
            > >
            > >
            > > "Brian E. Wilson" wrote:
            > > >
            > > > I think the interesting question arising from trying to color code
            > > > agreements between the synoptic gospels is why no attempt completely
            > > > succeeds.
            > > > >
            > > > I would suggest that accounting for the failure of color coding is
            > > > crucial to solving the synoptic problem.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > It fails because there is no possible coding for the crucial feature of
            > > the textual interrelation (ho exkhon ota akoueto v hos ekhei ota akouein
            > > akoueto v ho exkhon ota akouein akoueto). Any coding system now in use
            > > categorizes "pretty similar" as "identical" for coding purposes.
            >
            > Tim,
            >
            > Your concluding sentence seems to ignore some published material. Specifically,
            > William R. Farmer's *Synopticon* (Cambridge University Press, 1969) utilized a
            > color coding system that does distinguish between identical and similar wording.
            >
            > Specifically, verbatim agreements are overlined in color, as one might do in a
            > book with a (often yellow or pink) highlighter. That is, the words appear in a
            > block of color. Similar words (same lexeme, different grammatical construction)
            > are not overlined, but underlined, as one might do with a pencil. If each of the
            > three synoptic gospels has a different form of the same lexeme, that word in each
            > gospel would be underlined in two colors, one underlining for each of the two
            > parallels.
            >
            > If two are in verbatim agreement and the third uses the same lexeme, but a
            > different grammatical form of it, then the two in verbatim agreement are
            > overlined (in yellow, for instance, if the two in verbatim agreement happen to be
            > Mt and Mk; in green, if the two in verbatim agreement are Mk and Lk; or in red,
            > if the two in verbatim agreement are Mt and Lk. Then, there is also a different
            > colored underlining on these same word(s). If the overlining is yellow in two
            > gospels (Mt/Mk), then a single line in green would also appear under the same
            > word in Mk (partial agreement with Lk) and a single line in red would also appear
            > under the same word in Mt (partial agreement with Lk). In Lk, then, there would
            > be double underlining under the word in partial agreement. One line would be
            > green, for partial agreement with Mk and the other, red, for partial agreement
            > with Mt.
            >
            > These are some of the most complex patterns for a set of only three gospel
            > contexts in parallel, but I hope you get the idea of how this system works for
            > less complex cases.
            >
            > Tom Longstaff and I have developed and utilized a similar color-coding pattern
            > for our forthcoming Markan synopsis, but modifications of Farmer's system were
            > necessary, given certain limits imposed upon electronic publishing (such as the
            > impossibility of doing double underlining in two colors). First, we do always
            > color the letters of identical and/or similar words, but we use full underlining
            > for verbatim agreements and dashed/dotted underlining for partial agreements.
            >
            > Underlining between words indicates agreement in word order, as did Farmer's
            > system of overlining or underlining between words.
            >
            > If you have not done so, you can get an idea of what we will be publishing on CD-
            > ROM in November by browsing a now quite dated sampling of our work at
            >
            > http://www.colby.edu/rel/2gh/synopsis/synopsis3.html
            >
            > and other pericope synopses displayed in that area.
            >
            > Since we are publishing a new and improved version of this synopsis with Trinity
            > Press International this fall, we are not allowed to display the newer version on
            > the WEB. However, this new Markan Synopsis on CD-ROM is advertised in the fall
            > 2001 Trinity catalog to sell for $ 30.00. We, therefore, do not expect that this
            > price will prohibit anyone from purchasing and utilizing this new software.
            >
            > Best,
            >
            > David Barrett Peabody

            Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
            List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
          • Brian E. Wilson
            David Peabody wrote -- ... David, The question is whether any underlining is appropriate if you set out the three Anointing passages (Mt 26.6-12, Mk 14.3-9,
            Message 5 of 19 , Aug 2, 2001
              David Peabody wrote --
              >
              >The work of Tom and I differs here from that of my dissertation
              >advisor. In our forthcoming synopsis, all three of these pericopae are
              >set out side by side with the appropriate underlining and color codes
              >presented.
              >
              David,
              The question is whether any underlining is appropriate if you set
              out the three "Anointing" passages (Mt 26.6-12, Mk 14.3-9, Lk 7.36-50)
              side by side and compare them. On what criterion are the observable
              agreements in wording between the Lukan and the Markan versions, for
              instance, deemed not to be "imaginary", but significant? After all, we
              can put virtually any two synoptic passages alongside each other and
              observe at least some agreements in wording, such as KAI, or the
              definite article. Where do we draw the line between, on the one hand,
              similarities of wording that are objectively there and unlikely to be
              the result of mere coincidence, and, on the other hand, similarities
              that we may subjectively be reading into the situation, and that are
              "imaginary", in Farmer's terminology?

              It seems to me that in his *Synopticon* Farmer exercised caution in his
              "general principle" stated in the brief Introduction, that is --
              >
              >"to leave some possibly significant agreements unmarked rather than to
              >risk calling attention to imaginary ones".
              >
              It was on this basis that he decided that the observable similarities
              between "Anointing" in Luke and the versions of that story in Matthew
              and Mark should be not be considered significant, so that there are no
              color coded words at all in the Lukan version of the Anointing, Lk
              7.36-50, in his *Synopticon*.

              In my view, ultimately any color coding fails whatever criteria are used
              for determining the line between "imaginary" and significant verbal
              agreements. This is because the vaguer similarities of wording that are
              not sufficiently strong to meet the criteria being used, must be
              accounted for just as much as those clear similarities that meet the
              criteria. Color coding cannot point definitively to a solution to the
              synoptic problem, therefore. It can provide limited data only.

              A solution to the synoptic problem would, in fact, reveal the failure of
              any color coding system to pin-point all similarities of wording
              resulting from the documentary relationship between the synoptic gospels
              it posits. I would suggest that identifying the failure of any color
              coding to code all similarities of wording between synoptic gospels, is
              crucial to solving the synoptic problem.

              Best wishes,
              BRIAN WILSON

              >HOMEPAGE *** RECENTLY UPDATED *** http://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@...
            • Stephen C. Carlson
              After reading this thread, I have no idea, if any, what the failure of color coding is supposed to be. The purpose of color coding is to indicate the words
              Message 6 of 19 , Aug 4, 2001
                After reading this thread, I have no idea, if any, what the
                failure of color coding is supposed to be. The purpose of
                color coding is to indicate the words and lemmata that are
                the same in two or more parallel traditions. Once there is
                an agreement that two passages are to be color-coded with
                respect to one another, then there is no difficulty and no
                failure in color coding.

                This necessarily presupposes some notion that the traditions
                are indeed parallel. Since different people have different
                standards for determining this, usually while being informed
                by a particular source theory, it is not surprising that
                different color coders will produce different results.

                Back to Dungan's notion that synopses are biased, one of the
                ways that synopses are biased is in the identification of
                parallel traditions and the primacy one gives to which of
                many possibles parallels and non-parallels. This problem
                exists prior to the color coding exercise.

                Stephen Carlson
                --
                Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
                Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
                "Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35

                Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
              • Brian E. Wilson
                Stephen Carlson wrote -- ... Every color code system fails to code all significant similarities of wording between the synoptic gospels. W. R. Farmer saw the
                Message 7 of 19 , Aug 5, 2001
                  Stephen Carlson wrote --
                  >
                  >After reading this thread, I have no idea, if any, what the failure of
                  >color coding is supposed to be.
                  >
                  Every color code system fails to code all significant similarities of
                  wording between the synoptic gospels.

                  W. R. Farmer saw the truth of this, and admitted that it applied to his
                  *Synopticon*.

                  Best wishes,
                  BRIAN WILSON

                  >HOMEPAGE *** RECENTLY UPDATED *** http://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@...
                • Stephen C. Carlson
                  ... You said this before. It didn t make sense then, and it still does not make sense now even after being repeated. It might be more helpful to explain what
                  Message 8 of 19 , Aug 5, 2001
                    At 02:45 PM 8/5/01 +0100, Brian E. Wilson wrote:
                    >Stephen Carlson wrote --
                    >>After reading this thread, I have no idea, if any, what the failure of
                    >>color coding is supposed to be.
                    >>
                    >Every color code system fails to code all significant similarities of
                    >wording between the synoptic gospels.

                    You said this before. It didn't make sense then, and it still does
                    not make sense now even after being repeated. It might be more helpful
                    to explain what is meant and address the valid points others brought
                    up, rather than to repeat oneself in pretty much the identical words.

                    >W. R. Farmer saw the truth of this, and admitted that it applied to his
                    >*Synopticon*.

                    It does not seem valid to generalize Farmer's admission of
                    leaving "some POSSIBLY significant agreements unmarked"
                    (emphasis added) in his synopticon to "EVERY color code
                    system fails to code ALL SIGNIFICANT similarities"
                    (emphasis added) as asserted and reiterated in this thread.

                    Farmer's flaw, which was later discovered by Dungan, was
                    that his attempt to "determine the nature and extent of
                    the verbatim agreements among the Synoptic Gospels WITHOUT
                    ANY REFERENCE TO A PARTICULAR SOURCE THEORY" (emphasis
                    added) is impossible. That, I submit is the problem,
                    not the color coding.

                    Therefore, it seems that the imaginary failure of color
                    coding has no relevance to solving the synoptic problem.

                    Stephen Carlson
                    --
                    Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
                    Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
                    "Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35

                    Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                    List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                  • Brian E. Wilson
                    David B. Peabody wrote -- ... Congratulations in advance to yourself and Tom Longstaff. What name is the work given in the catalog of Trinity Press
                    Message 9 of 19 , Aug 7, 2001
                      David B. Peabody wrote --
                      >
                      >Since we are publishing a new and improved version of this synopsis
                      >with Trinity Press International this fall, we are not allowed to
                      >display the newer version on the WEB. However, this new Markan Synopsis
                      >on CD-ROM is advertised in the fall 2001 Trinity catalog to sell for $
                      >30.00. We, therefore, do not expect that this price will prohibit
                      >anyone from purchasing and utilizing this new software.
                      >

                      Congratulations in advance to yourself and Tom Longstaff.

                      What name is the work given in the catalog of Trinity Press
                      International, please?

                      Would you be prepared to say in what sense you see the work as a "Markan
                      Synopsis"?

                      Am I right that in your country a printed synopsis with no colors would
                      cost more than $30? Printed synopses tend to be on the more expensive
                      side in the UK because of their large pages. The price of the CD is
                      surely very reasonable.

                      I find that I use different synopses for different purposes. Each seems
                      to have its own particular advantages. I would want to add your synopsis
                      to my collection. I anticipate that your new creation will have its own
                      special uses and be widely used and quoted.

                      Best wishes,
                      BRIAN WILSON

                      >HOMEPAGE *** RECENTLY UPDATED *** http://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@...
                    • Brian E. Wilson
                      Brian Wilson wrote -- ... Stephen Carlson replied -- ... Stephen, I think I may have covered this point in my posting to Michael Grondin, albeit with some
                      Message 10 of 19 , Aug 7, 2001
                        Brian Wilson wrote --
                        >
                        >Every color code system fails to code all significant similarities of
                        >wording between the synoptic gospels.
                        >
                        Stephen Carlson replied --
                        >
                        >You said this before. It didn't make sense then, and it still does
                        >not make sense now even after being repeated. It might be more helpful
                        >to explain what is meant and address the valid points others brought
                        >up, rather than to repeat oneself in pretty much the identical words.
                        >
                        Stephen,
                        I think I may have covered this point in my posting to Michael
                        Grondin, albeit with some repetition of what I had already said.

                        Brian Wilson continued --
                        >
                        >W. R. Farmer saw the truth of this, and admitted that it applied to his
                        >*Synopticon*.
                        >
                        Stephen Carlson responded --
                        >
                        >It does not seem valid to generalize Farmer's admission of leaving
                        >"some POSSIBLY significant agreements unmarked" (emphasis added) in his
                        >synopticon to "EVERY color code system fails to code ALL SIGNIFICANT
                        >similarities" (emphasis added) as asserted and reiterated in this
                        >thread.
                        >

                        I entirely agree. I am not sure why you pursue this line of thought. I
                        did not produce my statement by generalizing your quotation from Farmer.
                        Farmer argues that the inadequacy of his *Synopticon* is the result of
                        "cases where two or more passages in one gospel may be parallel to one
                        or more passages in another". His conclusion is that this entails that a
                        color coding of the text of Matthew, Mark and Luke is in danger of
                        either being incomplete or of calling attention to imaginary agreements
                        of wording between synoptic gospels.

                        Stephen continued --
                        >
                        >Farmer's flaw, which was later discovered by Dungan, was that his
                        >attempt to "determine the nature and extent of the verbatim agreements
                        >among the Synoptic Gospels WITHOUT ANY REFERENCE TO A PARTICULAR SOURCE
                        >THEORY" (emphasis added) is impossible. That, I submit is the problem,
                        >not the color coding.
                        >
                        I think you are very confused here. Farmer's *Synopticon* is not a
                        synopsis. It is a color mapping of the verbal agreement between the
                        texts of Matthew, Mark and Luke. Farmer explicitly states in the brief
                        Introduction that *Synopticon* can be used in conjunction with "those
                        several excellent modern synopses which facilitate comparison of
                        passages by arranging them in parallel columns after the manner of
                        Griesbach". He thus indicates that his book is not intended to do the
                        job they do. Constructing a color coding of the text of the synoptic
                        gospels does not require the existence of any synopsis at all. A color
                        coding of the verbal agreements between the synoptic gospels could be
                        produced by a computer processing the text of the synoptic gospels with
                        no reference to any synopsis.

                        Dungan's thesis is that it is not possible to construct a synopsis that
                        is unbiassed with respect to particular synoptic documentary hypotheses.
                        This has nothing whatsoever to do with color coding the text of the
                        three synoptic gospels to high-light verbal agreements between them. It
                        has rather to do with, for instance, the various pericope divisions that
                        can be followed by those constructing a synopsis.
                        >
                        >Therefore, it seems that the imaginary failure of color coding has no
                        >relevance to solving the synoptic problem.
                        >
                        Again, I think I may have covered this point in my posting to Michael
                        Grondin. In my view the synoptic problem is to put forward a hypothesis
                        that accounts well for the non-parallelism similarities, as well as for
                        the parallelism similarities, between the synoptic gospels.

                        Best wishes,
                        BRIAN WILSON

                        >HOMEPAGE *** RECENTLY UPDATED *** http://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
                        If I may respond .... ... In the Fall 2001 issue of the Trinity Press International catalog you will find the work referred to on page 6. At the top of the
                        Message 11 of 19 , Aug 7, 2001
                          If I may respond ....

                          > David B. Peabody wrote --
                          > >
                          > >Since we are publishing a new and improved version of this synopsis
                          > >with Trinity Press International this fall, we are not allowed to
                          > >display the newer version on the WEB. However, this new Markan Synopsis
                          > >on CD-ROM is advertised in the fall 2001 Trinity catalog to sell for $
                          > >30.00. We, therefore, do not expect that this price will prohibit
                          > >anyone from purchasing and utilizing this new software.
                          > >
                          >
                          > Congratulations in advance to yourself and Tom Longstaff.
                          >
                          > What name is the work given in the catalog of Trinity Press
                          > International, please?

                          In the Fall 2001 issue of the Trinity Press International catalog you will
                          find the
                          work referred to on page 6. At the top of the page is the announcement of a
                          book entitled ONE GOSPEL FROM TWO: MARK'S USE OF MATTHEW
                          AND LUKE. This work follows-up the earlier volume, BEYOND THE Q
                          IMPASSE. Each of these works is a commentary on the Gospel using the
                          Two Gospel (or Griesbach) hypothesis. Thus it responds to those who have
                          asked for such a fuller treatment of the gospels, rather than discussions of
                          one (or only a few) pericopae.

                          At the bottom of the page, under the heading "Also Available," you will find
                          reference to A SYNOPSIS OF MARK. David Dungan's two essays on
                          synoptic construction will also appear on this CD.

                          > Would you be prepared to say in what sense you see the work as a "Markan
                          > Synopsis"?

                          That question is easily answered. The Synopsis of Mark that will be
                          available
                          later this year includes the complete text of Mark's gospel with the
                          parallel
                          texts in Matthew in Luke in adjacent columns. Those who look at this
                          synopsis
                          will see that we have taken a different approach than the standard synopses
                          to those places where multiple parallels might be identified. The structure
                          of
                          this synopsis reflects the structure of the analysis of Mark in the book to
                          which
                          it is related. Material common to Matthew and Luke but not in Mark (which,
                          on
                          the Two Document Hypothesis would be identified as Q material) does not, of
                          course, appear at all. Neither does material unique to Matthew or Luke. In
                          that sense the synopsis is a limited one, a synopsis that highlights the
                          parallels
                          to Mark - and in that sense it is a "Markan synopsis."

                          As we have noted, David Peabody and I intend to follow-up this synopsis of
                          Mark (with the parallels in Matthew and Luke) with a more conventional and
                          complete synopsis, including all of the material in Matthew, Mark and Luke.
                          It will be necessary for us to use a different structure (following Mark's
                          outline
                          might not produce the best modern synopsis - although it works well for an
                          analysis of Mark). The synopsis of the synoptic gospels, unlike the Markan
                          synopsis, will include the material common to Matthew and Luke not found in
                          Mark as well as the material unique to each of those gospels.

                          Needless to say, David Peabody and I are following the current discussion
                          with a good deal of interest and taking seriously many of the comments about
                          color-coded synopses. Obviously, we are less pessimistic about their
                          usefulness than some participants in the discussion - which does not mean
                          that we do not consider the comments made by those contributors. We
                          appreciate the discussion and are informed by it.

                          > Am I right that in your country a printed synopsis with no colors would
                          > cost more than $30? Printed synopses tend to be on the more expensive
                          > side in the UK because of their large pages. The price of the CD is
                          > surely very reasonable.

                          This is probably correct although I acknowledge that my voice is not an
                          authoritative one on this issue.

                          > I find that I use different synopses for different purposes. Each seems
                          > to have its own particular advantages. I would want to add your synopsis
                          > to my collection. I anticipate that your new creation will have its own
                          > special uses and be widely used and quoted.

                          The synopsis coming out this fall will have special use in connection with
                          the Gospel of Mark and parallels to that gospel in Matthew and Luke.
                          While we acknowledge that we have made no attempt to create this
                          synopsis free of a presumed solution to the synoptic problem, we are
                          convinced that it will be useful to those working with the text of Mark,
                          even if they are working with a different hypothesis. We think that we
                          have created the most exhaustive (and exhausting) display of the parallels
                          to Mark that has yet been produced.

                          How widely it will be used or cited remains to be seen.

                          With good wishes,

                          Thomas R. W. Longstaff
                          Crawford Family Professor
                          Department of Religious Studies
                          Colby College
                          Waterville, ME 04901
                          tlongst@...




                          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                        • Stephen C. Carlson
                          ... Yes, your response to Mike Grondin has clarified your point. Nevertheless, I still take umbrage at characterizing the lack of indicating non-verbatim
                          Message 12 of 19 , Aug 7, 2001
                            At 09:32 AM 8/7/01 +0100, Brian E. Wilson wrote:
                            >Brian Wilson wrote --
                            >>Every color code system fails to code all significant similarities of
                            >>wording between the synoptic gospels.
                            >>
                            >Stephen Carlson replied --
                            >>You said this before. It didn't make sense then, and it still does
                            >>not make sense now even after being repeated. It might be more helpful
                            >>to explain what is meant and address the valid points others brought
                            >>up, rather than to repeat oneself in pretty much the identical words.
                            >>
                            > I think I may have covered this point in my posting to Michael
                            >Grondin, albeit with some repetition of what I had already said.

                            Yes, your response to Mike Grondin has clarified your point.

                            Nevertheless, I still take umbrage at characterizing the lack of
                            indicating non-verbatim similarities by color coding as a "failure"
                            of color coding. Color coding also does not give me your email
                            address, but I would not call that a "failure" because it is
                            outside of its intended purpose. Similarly, color coding's non-
                            indication of certain similarities where there is no lexical
                            agreement is not a "failure," because color is not intended to
                            capture that information. That information is instead captured
                            by the arrangement of the material in parallel columns, as Mike
                            pointed out.

                            >Brian Wilson continued --
                            >>W. R. Farmer saw the truth of this, and admitted that it applied to his
                            >>*Synopticon*.
                            >>
                            >Stephen Carlson responded --
                            >>It does not seem valid to generalize Farmer's admission of leaving
                            >>"some POSSIBLY significant agreements unmarked" (emphasis added) in his
                            >>synopticon to "EVERY color code system fails to code ALL SIGNIFICANT
                            >>similarities" (emphasis added) as asserted and reiterated in this
                            >>thread.
                            >
                            >I entirely agree. I am not sure why you pursue this line of thought. I
                            >did not produce my statement by generalizing your quotation from Farmer.

                            Then why do you continue to cite Farmer in this connection?

                            >Farmer argues that the inadequacy of his *Synopticon* is the result of
                            >"cases where two or more passages in one gospel may be parallel to one
                            >or more passages in another". His conclusion is that this entails that a
                            >color coding of the text of Matthew, Mark and Luke is in danger of
                            >either being incomplete or of calling attention to imaginary agreements
                            >of wording between synoptic gospels.

                            This illustrates the failure in choosing only one passage as the
                            parallel. It is not a color-coding failure; it is a parallelism
                            failure. Generally, as Dungan later discovered, it is impossible
                            to choose which one passage to be "the" parallel, because different
                            source theories may view different parallels as the primary parallel.

                            >Stephen continued --
                            >>Farmer's flaw, which was later discovered by Dungan, was that his
                            >>attempt to "determine the nature and extent of the verbatim agreements
                            >>among the Synoptic Gospels WITHOUT ANY REFERENCE TO A PARTICULAR SOURCE
                            >>THEORY" (emphasis added) is impossible. That, I submit is the problem,
                            >>not the color coding.
                            >>
                            >I think you are very confused here. Farmer's *Synopticon* is not a
                            >synopsis. It is a color mapping of the verbal agreement between the
                            >texts of Matthew, Mark and Luke. ***

                            True, but irrelevant. Dungan's criticisms, although discussed in
                            reference to synopses, are not limited to synopses but to any tool
                            that purports to show the literary relationships between parallel
                            synoptic texts. This is true whether Dungan realized it or not.

                            >Dungan's thesis is that it is not possible to construct a synopsis that
                            >is unbiassed with respect to particular synoptic documentary hypotheses.
                            >This has nothing whatsoever to do with color coding the text of the
                            >three synoptic gospels to high-light verbal agreements between them. It
                            >has rather to do with, for instance, the various pericope divisions that
                            >can be followed by those constructing a synopsis.

                            Actually, Dungan makes three independent criticisms of biased synopses:
                            text, arrangement, and pericope subdivision. Focusing only on the last
                            criticism does not tell the full story, especially when my argument was
                            directed to the second criticism.

                            However, all three criticisms are applicable to Farmer's Synopticon.
                            Farmer had to choose a text for his synopticon. That text, NA 25,
                            was partly established under the assumption of Markan priority. Farmer
                            had to decide which parallel passage is be the color coding reference.
                            That decision presupposes a particular arrangement. Farmer's decision
                            of whether to color code to another parallel in the same paragraph, e.g.
                            Mark 1:2, presupposes a particular pericope decomposition. All of
                            Dungan's criticisms are readily applicable to Farmer's Synopticon,
                            even though Farmer's Synopticon is technically not a synopsis.

                            >>Therefore, it seems that the imaginary failure of color coding has no
                            >>relevance to solving the synoptic problem.
                            >>
                            >Again, I think I may have covered this point in my posting to Michael
                            >Grondin. In my view the synoptic problem is to put forward a hypothesis
                            >that accounts well for the non-parallelism similarities, as well as for
                            >the parallelism similarities, between the synoptic gospels.

                            Phrased in this manner (though the term "non-parallelism similarity"
                            is a bit too infelicitous), the issue may have more relevance to
                            the synoptic problem, but it is important to remember that the
                            synoptic problem exists in the first place because of the so-called
                            "parallelism similarities," without which the so-called "non-parallelism
                            similarities" may be insufficient to establish that some literary
                            relationship exists between and/or among the synoptics.

                            Stephen Carlson
                            --
                            Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
                            Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
                            "Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35

                            Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                            List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                          • David B. Peabody
                            Brian, I have interleaved some responses below. ... Thank you. Tom and I look forward to critical responses to this work, particularly from persons like
                            Message 13 of 19 , Aug 7, 2001
                              Brian,

                              I have interleaved some responses below.

                              Quoting "Brian E. Wilson" <brian@...>:

                              > David B. Peabody wrote --
                              > >
                              > >Since we are publishing a new and improved version of this synopsis
                              > >with Trinity Press International this fall, we are not allowed to
                              > >display the newer version on the WEB. However, this new Markan Synopsis
                              > >on CD-ROM is advertised in the fall 2001 Trinity catalog to sell for $
                              > >30.00. We, therefore, do not expect that this price will prohibit
                              > >anyone from purchasing and utilizing this new software.
                              > >
                              >
                              > Congratulations in advance to yourself and Tom Longstaff.

                              Thank you. Tom and I look forward to critical responses to this work,
                              particularly from persons like yourself who have done some serious thinking about
                              the Synoptic Problem and the making of synopses. Certainly we would hope that the
                              membership of Synoptic-L would have some interest in what Tom and I have
                              composed.

                              > What name is the work given in the catalog of Trinity Press
                              > International, please?

                              The title of this synopsis, as indicated on page 6 of the fall 2001 Trinity Press
                              International catalog, is "A Synopsis of Mark. A Synopsis of the First Three
                              Gospels Showing the Parallels to the Markan Text.

                              > Would you be prepared to say in what sense you see the work as a "Markan
                              > Synopsis"?

                              This synopsis is Markan in the sense that we have utilized the running text of
                              the whole of Mark as the "lead gospel," if you will. Hopefully, next to this
                              running text of Mark, we have displayed all of the contextual parallels to Mark
                              and quite a few, if not all, of the non-contextual, verbal parallels, as well.
                              For instance, in one pericope, we utilized nine columns to display all of what we
                              would consider to be the relevant evidence.

                              This synopsis may, therefore, primarily be described as "Markan" because we have
                              not yet included in it the complete texts of Matthew and Luke, only those
                              passages in Mt and Lk that relate, sometimes even rather "loosely," to a parallel
                              in Mark. As soon as we can complete the work, we will offer an "upgrade" to this
                              synopsis in which the entirety of the texts of Matthew and Luke will be included.

                              Nevertheless, even in its current form, we have already included a considerable
                              amount of material common to Matthew and Luke that is not also found in Mark.
                              Such material appears, or instance, in passages that some advocates of the Two
                              Document Hypothesis would label "Mark-Q overlaps".

                              This synopsis was also constructed for the primary purpose of illustrating the
                              argumentation made in *One Gospel From Two. Mark's Use of Matthew and Luke.* This
                              form of the synopsis is, therefore, also "Markan" because that book focuses on
                              the composition of Mark.

                              This forthcoming volume is also advertised on page 6 in the fall 2001 TPI
                              catalog. In the book we say that our "ideal reader" will have our electronic
                              color-coded synopsis open as he or she reads this book. Such, at least, are the
                              hopes of this forthcoming volume's co-authors, Lamar Cope, editor, David L.
                              Dungan, William R. Farmer+, Thomas R. W. Longstaff, Allan J. McNicol, editor,
                              David B. Peabody, lead editor, and Philip L. Shuler.

                              Unfortunately, this book will not now be published as soon as the synopsis, which
                              should be available for purchase for the first time at the Annual Meeting of the
                              SBL in Denver, November 2001 and from TPI, of course, anytime thereafter. The
                              book will appear as soon as possible after that, now probably sometime in the
                              spring or summer of 2002.

                              > Am I right that in your country a printed synopsis with no colors would
                              > cost more than $30?

                              Yes. For instance, Aland's Greek synopsis is currently listed for sale at $ 69.99
                              in the on-line catalog for the American Bible Society.

                              Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum. Greek Synopsis of the 4 Gospels - K. Aland,
                              editor. The Nestle-Aland 26th edition text, with full critical apparatus and
                              parallels from the apocryphal Gospels and Patristic sources. Key to sigla. GBS,
                              Stuttgart, 1990 14th revised edition, 4th printing. Cloth, 27 x 22 cm., xxxii,
                              590 p.

                              Since the same volume is distributed world-wide, it has the same large pages you
                              note as characterizing printed, black and white, synopses available in the UK
                              (cf. Bernard Orchard's synopsis). Of course, Aland's synopsis also includes the
                              Gospel of John, a rich collection of annotations relating to textual variants, a
                              complete text of the Gospel of Thomas, excerpts in Greek from Patristic texts
                              relating to the gospels, etc. It is certainly worth its price.

                              However, I understand that all texts of the Bible distributed by the American
                              Bible Society, including Aland's synopsis, are subsidized. That is, the buyer
                              does not pay the total cost of the publication of text of the Bible or "portions"
                              of it. Handbooks on the Bible or parts of it or commentaries on the Bible,
                              however, even if extensive amounts of Biblical text are quoted, are not
                              subsidized.

                              > Printed synopses tend to be on the more expensive
                              > side in the UK because of their large pages. The price of the CD is
                              > surely very reasonable.

                              As you have quoted me above, Tom and I would agree and hope that cost will not
                              prohibit anyone from using this new synopsis.

                              > I find that I use different synopses for different purposes. Each seems
                              > to have its own particular advantages. I would want to add your synopsis
                              > to my collection. I anticipate that your new creation will have its own
                              > special uses and be widely used and quoted.
                              >
                              > Best wishes,
                              > BRIAN WILSON

                              I also use a variety of synopses for various purposes and, of course, hope that
                              you and others will find a place for this new synopsis in whatever collection of
                              tools or aids for the study of the gospels you may have.

                              Best,

                              David Barrett Peabody





                              Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                              List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                            • Brian E. Wilson
                              Brian Wilson wrote -- ... Stephen Carlson replied -- ... Stephen, I agree with what you say here, including the comment that non- parallelism similarity is a
                              Message 14 of 19 , Aug 8, 2001
                                Brian Wilson wrote --
                                >
                                >In my view the synoptic problem is to put forward a hypothesis that
                                >accounts well for the non-parallelism similarities, as well as for
                                >the parallelism similarities, between the synoptic gospels.
                                >
                                Stephen Carlson replied --
                                >
                                >Phrased in this manner (though the term "non-parallelism similarity"
                                >is a bit too infelicitous), the issue may have more relevance to
                                >the synoptic problem, but it is important to remember that the
                                >synoptic problem exists in the first place because of the so-called
                                >"parallelism similarities," without which the so-called "non-
                                >parallelism similarities" may be insufficient to establish that some
                                >literary relationship exists between and/or among the synoptics.
                                >

                                Stephen,
                                I agree with what you say here, including the comment that "non-
                                parallelism similarity" is a bit too infelicitous. I will try and do
                                something about that.

                                Best wishes,
                                BRIAN WILSON

                                >HOMEPAGE *** RECENTLY UPDATED *** http://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.