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

Re: [Synoptic-L] If Luke knew Matthew - part two

Expand Messages
  • Maluflen@aol.com
    In a message dated 10/31/2001 7:43:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, Maluflen@aol.com writes:
    Message 1 of 18 , Nov 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 10/31/2001 7:43:15 PM Eastern Standard Time,
      Maluflen@... writes:

      << Diegesis means not only narrative but also exposition. Luke
      doesn't say, though he probably implies, that he himself will produce an
      alternative diegesis to those produced before him. The infinitive grapsai is
      in the absolute, modified only by the adverb kathexes -- and by the purpose
      clause that constitutes the climax of the prologue.>>

      My last statement here presupposes a phrase division of the text that I
      thought was quite universally agreed upon. I now note, however, that a
      coherent (though I believe ultimately unconvincing) argument has recently
      been made again for dividing the text differently: specifically, for taking
      the adverb akribos as also modifying grapsai. See the article by David Balch,
      which is chapter 9 in a very interesting collection of essays on Luke-Acts
      under the title "Jesus and the Heritage of Israel", (ed. David P. Moessner;
      Trinity Press International 1999, pp. 229-250). The quality of the essays in
      this volume suggests that Trinity Press Int. will be a worthy forum for the
      upcoming publication of Dr. Goodacre.

      Leonard Maluf

      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    • Emmanuel Fritsch
      ... Is it not possible to say that in order , for Luke, means in fact in an order , ie Luke means that several documents for the different tradition about
      Message 2 of 18 , Nov 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Mark Goodacre wrote :

        > > "The adverb KAQEXHS lets the reader into Luke's reason for writing
        > > and his way of going about it. At Luke 8.1 and Acts 18.23 he uses it
        > > of Jesus and Paul travelling from place to place, at Acts 3.24 of a
        > > succession of prophecy beginning with Samuel which foretold the events
        > > he narrates, and at Acts 11.4 of Peter telling in orderly succession
        > > the events which led him to support the admission of the gentiles.
        > > Its meaning emerges as 'in succession', 'connectedly' or 'in
        > > historical order'. It testifies to Luke's enthusiasm for temporal
        > > succession as his vehicle for theology, a conviction inherited from
        > > the Old Testament and, above all, from the Deuteronomistic historian
        > > whose Succession Narrative, well so called, deployed it on an equally
        > > epic scale."
        >
        > More broadly in relation to Luke's order, I simply find it difficult to
        > imagine Luke creating that feeling of narrative continuity, of
        > movement, of biographical plausibility, while retaining the huge
        > Matthaean structures. I'm just not sure how it would have been
        > possible to do that.

        Is it not possible to say that "in order", for Luke, means
        in fact "in an order", ie Luke means that several documents
        for the different tradition about Jesus is "disorder", ie
        not 'connected', not 'in succession' ?

        With other words : May "in order" be just the mix of all information
        that come to Luke into a single documents, presenting a BION of Jesus
        in continuity, and thus, "in order" would just represent the trend
        to merge stories ?

        a+
        manu

        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.