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

Re: How Luke used Matthew and Mark, and GOT origin

Expand Messages
  • Antonio Jerez
    ... I agree about using Occam s razor as much as possible. I see little need to start multiplying a lot of hypothetical documents to explain the phenomena in
    Message 1 of 2 , Feb 19, 1998
      Antonio Jerez wrote:

      >>>My point of view is that Mark is the first gospel written,
      >>>Matthew later used Mark and even later Luke used both Mark and

      Paul Miller replied:
      > This sits well with Occam's razor. There being no source ,(Q), document
      >other than Mark also pleases the Razor. In my view the added material in
      >Matthew and Luke amounts to agenda driven literary elaboration and
      >redaction. John is late and deals with the ( Christ ), and early church
      >burgeoning theology. We can learn much from these documents, but IMO
      >Mark is primary, the other gospels secondary. Mark is the earliest
      >cleanest gospel record of Jesus.

      I agree about using Occam's razor as much as possible.
      I see little need to start multiplying a lot of hypothetical
      documents to explain the phenomena in the synoptics.
      Much of the extra material in Matthew and Luke was written
      by the authors themselves. I think it is time to take into
      consideration the creativity of the evangelists and not smell
      a special source as soon as Matthew or Luke come up with
      something new.

      > In so saying I would like to point out that the GOT is a late document
      >in my view, but when the writer sat down to compose the GOT I believe he
      >had before him several very early sayings of Jesus. These few early
      >sayings were not enough for a document themselves, but could have been
      >enough to want to preserve them in a larger late document written partly
      >for that reason. Sayings like # 12 " The followers said to Jesus, We
      >know that you are going to leave us. Who will be our leader? Jesus said
      >to them, No matter where you are you are to go to James the Just, for
      >whose sake heaven and earth came into being." This and a few other early
      >sayings of Jesus I believe formed a nucleus around which a later Thomas
      >could be built.

      I agree that Thomas is a relatively late document. I would
      guess around 100-150. Where I appear to differ with Paul
      Miller is if the redactor of Thomas had access to a lot of
      independent Jesus sayings. I think not. My inclination is that
      Thomas mostly used Matthew and Luke to construct his sayings with
      proto-gnostic inclinations. I even think the author of Thomas knew
      and used 1 Corinthians. I doubt very much that logion 12 goes back
      in any way to the historical Jesus. James the Just appears to
      have been a cult figure in later gnostic circles. Just like with Mary
      Magdalene you could use these wellknown figures to market
      your gnostic ideas through special heavenly revelations.

      Best wishes

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.