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

[Synoptic-L] Speculation on 3SH, 200 and 202

Expand Messages
  • dgentil@sears.com
    I ve been thinking a little bit about the nature of the 4th document the statistics seem to indicate. If we assume Luke knew both Matthew and Mark, then there
    Message 1 of 19 , Feb 19, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      I've been thinking a little bit about the nature of the 4th document the
      statistics seem to indicate.
      If we assume Luke knew both Matthew and Mark, then there is little reason
      to place a full gospel
      (like a proto-Matthew) in the 4th document. On the other hand, it appears
      to contain both 200
      and 202. Since a lot of 200 is Matthew 1 and 2, this is a rather odd
      document.

      This leads me to wonder if it might be 2 documents.
      1) A infancy gospel with some 202 and probably some other stuff.
      2) A sayings source with some 200 and some 202.

      Since both documents have 202 and 200, 200 and 202 would show as closely
      related, even though both categories represented 2 documents.
      These 2 documents seem more reasonable looking than a document containing
      almost all of 200 and 202.

      How reasonable does this sound? What parts (if any) of 202 might be part of
      infancy gospel?

      Dave Gentile
      Riverside, Illinois
      M.S. Physics
      Ph.D. Management Science candidate






      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    • Ron Price
      ... Dave, Have I missed something here? If I m to follow your argument, you ll have to start from the evidence itself, rather than a supposed fourth document.
      Message 2 of 19 , Feb 20, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Dave Gentile wrote:

        >I've been thinking a little bit about the nature of the 4th document the
        >statistics seem to indicate.

        Dave,
        Have I missed something here?
        If I'm to follow your argument, you'll have to start from the evidence
        itself, rather than a supposed fourth document.

        Ron Price

        Weston-on-Trent, Derby, UK

        e-mail: ron.price@...

        Web site: http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm


        Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
        List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
      • dgentil@sears.com
        Hello Ron, The last set of results showed 4 distinct groupings. I realize that it is possible that there are more or less than 4 documents based on this, but 4
        Message 3 of 19 , Feb 20, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Hello Ron,

          The last set of results showed 4 distinct groupings.
          I realize that it is possible that there are more or less than 4 documents
          based on this, but
          4 is a least a logical starting point.

          I'm identifying 222-221-220-122-022-121-021-120-020 as Mark (everything
          with a 2 in the middle)
          212-211-210 I'm identifying as Matthew. I find the 212-211 connection
          persuasive evidence that
          Luke knew something at least very similar to Matthew.

          012-002-112 I'm identifying as Luke.

          200-201-202-102 I'm identifying as the 4th document.

          The difficulty with this face value interpretation is that "all of 200 +
          all of 202" does not form a very reasonable
          looking document. Actually it may not be any more unreasonable than a
          minimal Q, but I think minimal
          Q is a rather odd beast too.

          What I was proposing was that Matthew and Luke may have had, in addition to
          Mark and a sayings source,
          some sort of infancy gospel, probably with the baptism, and an unknown
          amount of additional material.
          I was just raising this as another possible way to interpret the results.
          However, on farther consideration, I'm not sure it explains much more that
          just K,M,L and a sayings source.

          For example, if the sayings source contained a large amount of 202, and
          large parts of 200 after Matthew 1&2,
          and if Matthew was the source of some 202 and the Matthew 1&2, we get
          something that seems to match the results well.

          The only thing that bothers me a little is that if 202/200 was at least in
          substantial part from Matthew, we might expect to see more of a connection
          to the 211 group. The only connection is a non-significant one between 201
          and 211.

          However, if 202/200 is mostly the sayings source, and it had a very
          distinct style, the lack of connection to the Matthew group, might be
          expected.

          What I'm looking for here, is the solution that is most probable based on
          the results. Rather that trying to say certain possibilities are
          eliminated, I'd rather say the results support certain types of solutions
          over others. Currently I'd say the simplest solution that is a candidate
          for the "most likely" is the 3SH with the 4th document containing something
          like an sQ & a lot of 200 as well.

          Dave Gentile
          Riverside, Illinois
          M.S. Physics
          Ph.D. Management Science candidate






          Dave,
          Have I missed something here?
          If I'm to follow your argument, you'll have to start from the evidence
          itself, rather than a supposed fourth document.

          Ron Price





          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
        • Mark Goodacre
          ... Could this be an occasion where we need to remember genre issues alongside source issues? I d actually have expected to see results like this on the
          Message 4 of 19 , Feb 20, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            On 20 Feb 2002 at 10:22, dgentil@... wrote:

            > The only thing that bothers me a little is that if 202/200 was at
            > least in substantial part from Matthew, we might expect to see more of
            > a connection to the 211 group. The only connection is a
            > non-significant one between 201 and 211.
            >
            > However, if 202/200 is mostly the sayings source, and it had a very
            > distinct style, the lack of connection to the Matthew group, might be
            > expected.

            Could this be an occasion where we need to remember genre issues
            alongside source issues? I'd actually have expected to see results
            like this on the Farrer theory, for example, given the preponderance
            of sayings material in both 202 and 200. One would expect some
            distance from the triple tradition material, which has a
            preponderance of narrative.

            > What I'm looking for here, is the solution that is most probable based
            > on the results. Rather that trying to say certain possibilities are
            > eliminated, I'd rather say the results support certain types of
            > solutions over others. Currently I'd say the simplest solution that is
            > a candidate for the "most likely" is the 3SH with the 4th document
            > containing something like an sQ & a lot of 200 as well.

            Or is the simplest solution Farrer, once we've granted that the genre
            issues we were expecting to turn up have turned up?

            Mark
            -----------------------------
            Dr Mark Goodacre mailto:M.S.Goodacre@...
            Dept of Theology tel: +44 121 414 7512
            University of Birmingham fax: +44 121 414 4381
            Birmingham B15 2TT UK

            http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/goodacre
            http://NTGateway.com


            Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
            List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
          • dgentil@sears.com
            Well, first let me say I think the FH is not ruled out by the results, but I do think the version of the 3SH I described is more likely than the FH on a couple
            Message 5 of 19 , Feb 20, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Well, first let me say I think the FH is not ruled out by the results, but
              I do think the version of the
              3SH I described is more likely than the FH on a couple of points based on
              the results.

              First, I doubt that genre is a very large factor, and I do think it would
              have to be a large factor for the separation between the 211 group and 200
              group we observe to be called expected. But since I can't demonstrate that
              genre is of relatively minor importance, let's assume genre is a large
              factor for now. What might we expect on the FH and 3SH?

              One difference is the behavior of 102-002.
              On the FH 102 is written by Luke and mostly sayings.
              002 is written by Luke and partly sayings.
              We would expect a relation here, but find none.
              Compare this to 200-201 and 200-202 where 201/202 are mostly sayings, and
              200 is only partly sayings, and we see a relation. On the other hand, on
              the 3SH 102 is mostly Q, so we would expect it to group with 202, and not
              much with Luke.
              So whether genre is important or not, the 3SH does better here.

              The connection between 102-202 is quite natural on the 3SH. They are both
              mostly Q.
              On the FH we note that while 102 does connect to 202,
              it does not connect to 200 or 201, so besides genre we have to add that 102
              looks in particular like 202 because 202 contains "favored" words. Also 102
              has about the same connection to 202 as 201 does to 202. While genre might
              push 102 and 202 together, they should still be farther apart than 202-201
              on the FH. On the 3SH "about equal" is what we expect. So again the 3SH
              does better.

              I think the implications of the study for the FH are mixed. 212-211 and
              200-202 are certainly a big positives,
              but the behavior of 102 seems to be a negative.

              Dave Gentile
              Riverside, Illinois
              M.S. Physics
              Ph.D. Management Science candidate












              On 20 Feb 2002 at 10:22, dgentil@... wrote:

              > The only thing that bothers me a little is that if 202/200 was at
              > least in substantial part from Matthew, we might expect to see more of
              > a connection to the 211 group. The only connection is a
              > non-significant one between 201 and 211.
              >
              > However, if 202/200 is mostly the sayings source, and it had a very
              > distinct style, the lack of connection to the Matthew group, might be
              > expected.

              Could this be an occasion where we need to remember genre issues
              alongside source issues? I'd actually have expected to see results
              like this on the Farrer theory, for example, given the preponderance
              of sayings material in both 202 and 200. One would expect some
              distance from the triple tradition material, which has a
              preponderance of narrative.

              > What I'm looking for here, is the solution that is most probable based
              > on the results. Rather that trying to say certain possibilities are
              > eliminated, I'd rather say the results support certain types of
              > solutions over others. Currently I'd say the simplest solution that is
              > a candidate for the "most likely" is the 3SH with the 4th document
              > containing something like an sQ & a lot of 200 as well.

              Or is the simplest solution Farrer, once we've granted that the genre
              issues we were expecting to turn up have turned up?

              Mark
              -----------------------------
              Dr Mark Goodacre mailto:M.S.Goodacre@...
              Dept of Theology tel: +44 121 414 7512
              University of Birmingham fax: +44 121 414 4381
              Birmingham B15 2TT UK





              Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
              List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
            • Stephen C. Carlson
              ... The interesting thing about the saying material is that it is one part of the gospels that the evangelists present as not their own words. Rather, the
              Message 6 of 19 , Feb 20, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                At 09:14 PM 2/20/2002 -0000, Mark Goodacre wrote:
                >Could this be an occasion where we need to remember genre issues
                >alongside source issues? I'd actually have expected to see results
                >like this on the Farrer theory, for example, given the preponderance
                >of sayings material in both 202 and 200. One would expect some
                >distance from the triple tradition material, which has a
                >preponderance of narrative.

                The interesting thing about the saying material is that it is
                one part of the gospels that the evangelists present as not their
                own words. Rather, the saying material is presented as Jesus's
                words. Unless Goulder is correct that many of the sayings are
                the evangelists' own creation, we should not expect the sayings
                to have the same style as the surrounding narrative.

                Perhaps the commonality behind the 202-102 connection is
                simply oral tradition. Where Luke deviates from Matthew's
                version of the sayings, Luke follows oral tradition instead,
                which is Matthew's source.

                The reason why the 200-202 is there is due to oral tradition
                rather than Matthean creation. The reason why the 202-002 is
                not there is due to the large amount of narrative material
                in Luke 1-2, which would obliterate the commonality effects
                with Luke's special saying material (alternatively, attest
                to Luke's creation of some of the L material).

                Perhaps we could test these ideas by looking at which words
                are responsible for the connection.

                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@...
              • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                ... Farrer ... This is an interesting point. Would it imply conservatism in the early church concerning sayings attributed to Jesus? Or: Would it imply use of
                Message 7 of 19 , Feb 20, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Mark Goodacre wrote:

                  > >Could this be an occasion where we need to remember
                  > >genre issues alongside source issues? I'd actually
                  > >have expected to see results like this on the
                  Farrer
                  > >theory, for example, given the preponderance of
                  > >sayings material in both 202 and 200. One would
                  > >expect some distance from the triple tradition
                  > >material, which has a preponderance of narrative.

                  Stephen C. Carlson replied:

                  > The interesting thing about the saying material is
                  > that it is one part of the gospels that the
                  > evangelists present as not their own words. Rather,
                  > the saying material is presented as Jesus's words.

                  This is an interesting point.

                  Would it imply conservatism in the early church
                  concerning sayings attributed to Jesus?

                  Or:

                  Would it imply use of the same oral tradition about
                  Jesus's sayings?

                  Also, would it be possible to use Dave's statistical
                  approach to compare this style mentioned above to the
                  style of sayings attributed to Jesus in other NT
                  writings? Or what about Jesus's sayings in "The Gospel
                  of Thomas"?

                  Jeffery Hodges

                  =====
                  Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                  Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                  447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                  Yangsandong 411
                  South Korea

                  __________________________________________________
                  Do You Yahoo!?
                  Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
                  http://sports.yahoo.com

                  Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                  List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                • Stephen C. Carlson
                  ... I thought about this, but the problem is that the bulk of Thomas is preserved only in Coptic and Dave s method requires Greek words. Stephen Carlson --
                  Message 8 of 19 , Feb 20, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    At 09:28 PM 2/20/2002 -0800, Horace Jeffery Hodges wrote:
                    >Also, would it be possible to use Dave's statistical
                    >approach to compare this style mentioned above to the
                    >style of sayings attributed to Jesus in other NT
                    >writings? Or what about Jesus's sayings in "The Gospel
                    >of Thomas"?

                    I thought about this, but the problem is that the
                    bulk of Thomas is preserved only in Coptic and
                    Dave's method requires Greek words.

                    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@...
                  • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                    ... mentioned ... in ... Yes ... I suppose that this does pose a problem. One might want to take a look anyway since Christian Coptic uses a great number of
                    Message 9 of 19 , Feb 20, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I asked:

                      > >Also, would it be possible to use Dave's
                      > >statistical approach to compare this style
                      mentioned
                      > >above to the style of sayings attributed to Jesus
                      in
                      > >... "The Gospel of Thomas"?

                      Stephen C. Carlson replied:

                      > I thought about this, but the problem is that the
                      > bulk of Thomas is preserved only in Coptic and
                      > Dave's method requires Greek words.

                      Yes ... I suppose that this does pose a problem.

                      One might want to take a look anyway since Christian
                      Coptic uses a great number of Greek words and might
                      follow fairly closely the Greek text being translated.

                      Has anyone checked the Greek fragments and the Coptic
                      version of "Thomas" to see about the degree to which
                      the Greek is carried over? (I well imagine that
                      someone has done this.)

                      Jeffery Hodges

                      =====
                      Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                      Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                      447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                      Yangsandong 411
                      South Korea

                      __________________________________________________
                      Do You Yahoo!?
                      Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
                      http://sports.yahoo.com

                      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                    • dgentil@sears.com
                      I think working with the Coptic Thomas would probably not be very useful. Some of the more dramatic signature differances, are when one author uses word A,
                      Message 10 of 19 , Feb 21, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I think working with the Coptic Thomas would probably not be very useful.
                        Some of the more dramatic "signature" differances, are when one author
                        uses word A, and another uses B, and A and B are near synonyms.
                        It might be difficult to tell from the Coptic which Greek word underlies
                        it.
                        Still, it would be interesting to see if anything could be learned from it.
                        The few Greek fragments might be able to give small hints too.

                        Dave Gentile
                        Riverside, Illinois
                        M.S. Physics
                        Ph.D. Management Science candidate




                        I asked:

                        > >Also, would it be possible to use Dave's
                        > >statistical approach to compare this style
                        mentioned
                        > >above to the style of sayings attributed to Jesus
                        in
                        > >... "The Gospel of Thomas"?

                        Stephen C. Carlson replied:

                        > I thought about this, but the problem is that the
                        > bulk of Thomas is preserved only in Coptic and
                        > Dave's method requires Greek words.

                        Yes ... I suppose that this does pose a problem.

                        One might want to take a look anyway since Christian
                        Coptic uses a great number of Greek words and might
                        follow fairly closely the Greek text being translated.

                        Has anyone checked the Greek fragments and the Coptic
                        version of "Thomas" to see about the degree to which
                        the Greek is carried over? (I well imagine that
                        someone has done this.)

                        Jeffery Hodges






                        Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                        List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                      • Ron Price
                        Dave, Thanks for the explanation. ... If this is a distinct group, it looks more like Matthean redaction . It surely can t be labelled Matthew if it
                        Message 11 of 19 , Feb 21, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Dave,
                          Thanks for the explanation.

                          >212-211-210 I'm identifying as Matthew.

                          If this is a distinct group, it looks more like 'Matthean redaction'.
                          It surely can't be labelled 'Matthew' if it excludes 200.

                          >200-201-202-102 I'm identifying as the 4th document.

                          Perhaps this is a mixture of Matthew and the sayings source, though
                          why these should be grouped together I have no idea. Certainly if 200
                          correlates with 102, then I can offer no explanation, for I wouldn't
                          expect them to be at all similar.

                          Ron Price

                          Weston-on-Trent, Derby, UK

                          e-mail: ron.price@...

                          Web site: http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm

                          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                        • dgentil@sears.com
                          ... If this is a distinct group, it looks more like Matthean redaction . It surely can t be labelled Matthew if it excludes 200. ======== Dave: Sure it
                          Message 12 of 19 , Feb 21, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Ron Price wrote:

                            >212-211-210 I'm identifying as Matthew.

                            If this is a distinct group, it looks more like 'Matthean redaction'.
                            It surely can't be labelled 'Matthew' if it excludes 200.

                            ========

                            Dave:

                            Sure it could, if Matthew was dependant on a source for 200, and wrote
                            211-210-212 himself.

                            ========

                            Ron:

                            >200-201-202-102 I'm identifying as the 4th document.

                            Perhaps this is a mixture of Matthew and the sayings source, though
                            why these should be grouped together I have no idea. Certainly if 200
                            correlates with 102, then I can offer no explanation, for I wouldn't
                            expect them to be at all similar.

                            ========

                            Dave:

                            202 is very closely related to 200, and less related to 201 and 102.
                            201-200 is also a strong relation. 200-102 does not show a relation.

                            I do see the group 200-201-202-102 as mostly saying source, and partly
                            Matthew. (and 102 as a small part Luke)
                            That's why I'm placing a large amount of 200 in the sayings source.
                            Although I doubt Matthew 1 and 2 belong in it.

                            Dave Gentile
                            Riverside, Illinois
                            M.S. Physics
                            Ph.D. Management Science candidate





                            Dave,
                            Thanks for the explanation.

                            >212-211-210 I'm identifying as Matthew.

                            If this is a distinct group, it looks more like 'Matthean redaction'.
                            It surely can't be labelled 'Matthew' if it excludes 200.

                            >200-201-202-102 I'm identifying as the 4th document.

                            Perhaps this is a mixture of Matthew and the sayings source, though
                            why these should be grouped together I have no idea. Certainly if 200
                            correlates with 102, then I can offer no explanation, for I wouldn't
                            expect them to be at all similar.

                            Ron Price





                            Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                            List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                          • dgentil@sears.com
                            Basically, what you describe sounds like oral tradition playing the same role that I m speculating the sayings source played. I suppose a strong oral tradition
                            Message 13 of 19 , Feb 21, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Basically, what you describe sounds like oral tradition playing the same
                              role that I'm speculating the sayings
                              source played. I suppose a strong oral tradition and a written source would
                              be virtually indistinguishable.

                              The argument I've seen for Q being a document is the correlation in order
                              between Luke and Matthew,
                              but if Luke knew Matthew I don't think we could use that argument. So, it
                              may be very difficult to distinguish
                              between an oral and written source.

                              I agree that looking at the individual words, in detail, is a good idea.

                              Dave Gentile
                              Riverside, Illinois
                              M.S. Physics
                              Ph.D. Management Science candidate







                              The interesting thing about the saying material is that it is
                              one part of the gospels that the evangelists present as not their
                              own words. Rather, the saying material is presented as Jesus's
                              words. Unless Goulder is correct that many of the sayings are
                              the evangelists' own creation, we should not expect the sayings
                              to have the same style as the surrounding narrative.

                              Perhaps the commonality behind the 202-102 connection is
                              simply oral tradition. Where Luke deviates from Matthew's
                              version of the sayings, Luke follows oral tradition instead,
                              which is Matthew's source.

                              The reason why the 200-202 is there is due to oral tradition
                              rather than Matthean creation. The reason why the 202-002 is
                              not there is due to the large amount of narrative material
                              in Luke 1-2, which would obliterate the commonality effects
                              with Luke's special saying material (alternatively, attest
                              to Luke's creation of some of the L material).

                              Perhaps we could test these ideas by looking at which words
                              are responsible for the connection.

                              Stephen Carlson




                              Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                              List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                            • Brian E. Wilson
                              Dear List Readers, I m posting now after many years of silently enjoying observing the list. My father, who has been coping with cancer for many years, has now
                              Message 14 of 19 , Feb 21, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Dear List Readers,

                                I'm posting now after many years of silently enjoying observing the
                                list. My father, who has been coping with cancer for many years, has now
                                been diagnosed with a new terminal secondary cancer. He is still reading
                                printouts of these messages in hospital and, when he has the energy, he
                                dictates replies with his usual vigour.

                                However, the illness is likely to take him away from this list and the
                                more physical world in the all too near future. In the meantime, I'll
                                post what he manages to express.

                                I would personally like to thank you all for being such a rich part of
                                his life, and particularly the moderators for having made this possible.
                                I won't put words into my father's keyboard, but I suspect he would see
                                the above as a gross understatement.

                                --
                                Peter Wilson

                                Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                                List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                              • Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                ... author ... the ... What I meant was that the Coptic text might contain enough Greek words to enable an analysis. Christian Coptic texts have very many
                                Message 15 of 19 , Feb 21, 2002
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Dave Gentile wrote:

                                  > I think working with the Coptic Thomas would
                                  > probably not be very useful. Some of the more
                                  > dramatic "signature" differances, are when one
                                  author
                                  > uses word A, and another uses B, and A and B are
                                  > near synonyms. It might be difficult to tell from
                                  the
                                  > Coptic which Greek word underlies it.

                                  What I meant was that the Coptic text might contain
                                  enough Greek words to enable an analysis. Christian
                                  Coptic texts have very many Greek words, and the Copt
                                  translating "The Gospel of Thomas" might have simply
                                  retained a great number of the Greek terms.

                                  Still, you're probably right -- just wishful thinking
                                  on my part. The reason that I suggested this was that
                                  "The Gospel of Thomas" gives the strong impression of
                                  drawing from a sayings source that has elements in
                                  common with the Synoptic Gospels even though the
                                  sayings differ in interesting ways.

                                  > Still, it would be interesting to see if anything
                                  > could be learned from it. The few Greek fragments
                                  > might be able to give small hints too.

                                  I think that this would be well worth attempting.

                                  Jeffery Hodges

                                  =====
                                  Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
                                  Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
                                  447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
                                  Yangsandong 411
                                  South Korea

                                  __________________________________________________
                                  Do You Yahoo!?
                                  Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
                                  http://sports.yahoo.com

                                  Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                                  List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                                • dgentil@sears.com
                                  I think Thomas is very interesting too. I m most familiar with Stephen Patterson s work on it. Does anyone happen to know how many Greek words we have from the
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Feb 22, 2002
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    I think Thomas is very interesting too. I'm most familiar with Stephen
                                    Patterson's work on it.

                                    Does anyone happen to know how many Greek words we have from the fragments?
                                    I'm not sure if I have anything with the Greek fragments in it. I know I've
                                    got a book with the Coptic text.

                                    Another interesting thing to do would be to see how the Thomas parallels in
                                    Mark compare
                                    to other Thomas parallels in the synoptics, to Mark in general, and to 202
                                    in general.

                                    Dave Gentile
                                    Riverside, Illinois
                                    M.S. Physics
                                    Ph.D. Management Science candidate





                                    Still, you're probably right -- just wishful thinking
                                    on my part. The reason that I suggested this was that
                                    "The Gospel of Thomas" gives the strong impression of
                                    drawing from a sayings source that has elements in
                                    common with the Synoptic Gospels even though the
                                    sayings differ in interesting ways.

                                    > Still, it would be interesting to see if anything
                                    > could be learned from it. The few Greek fragments
                                    > might be able to give small hints too.

                                    I think that this would be well worth attempting.

                                    Jeffery Hodges





                                    Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                                    List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                                  • Brian E. Wilson
                                    Many thanks for the personal notes that were sent. My father understood and enjoyed them when I read them to him on his final evening yesterday. Once again,
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Feb 23, 2002
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Many thanks for the personal notes that were sent. My father understood
                                      and enjoyed them when I read them to him on his final evening yesterday.

                                      Once again, thank you all for enriching his life.

                                      Peter.

                                      In message <hPwF9MABdWd8EwlC@...>, Brian E. Wilson
                                      <brian@...> writes
                                      >
                                      >Dear List Readers,
                                      >
                                      >I'm posting now after many years of silently enjoying observing the
                                      >list. My father, who has been coping with cancer for many years, has now
                                      >been diagnosed with a new terminal secondary cancer. He is still reading
                                      >printouts of these messages in hospital and, when he has the energy, he
                                      >dictates replies with his usual vigour.
                                      >
                                      >However, the illness is likely to take him away from this list and the
                                      >more physical world in the all too near future. In the meantime, I'll
                                      >post what he manages to express.
                                      >
                                      >I would personally like to thank you all for being such a rich part of
                                      >his life, and particularly the moderators for having made this possible.
                                      >I won't put words into my father's keyboard, but I suspect he would see
                                      >the above as a gross understatement.
                                      >


                                      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                                      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                                    • Stephen C. Carlson
                                      Like many of you on Synoptic-L, I have been saddened from the news of Brian E. Wilson s passing. As many of you know, Brian has one of the regulars of
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Feb 23, 2002
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Like many of you on Synoptic-L, I have been saddened
                                        from the news of Brian E. Wilson's passing. As many of
                                        you know, Brian has one of the regulars of Synoptic-L
                                        from the very beginning. This message is a brief
                                        appreciation of an extraordinary mind.

                                        I have never met Brian in person and I only know him from
                                        his on-line presense. I first interacted with Brian in 1996,
                                        almost 6 years ago, in a discussion of his Two Notebook
                                        Hypothesis. Although I had been studying the synoptic problem
                                        for quite some time, I thought I had encountered every
                                        possible theory and variation. Not so with Brian. Brian
                                        had the rare ability to think outside the box and come
                                        up with solutions that are both novel and non-obvious to
                                        the ordinary researchers in the field.

                                        A case in point is the Two Notebook Hypothesis, in which Brian
                                        postulated that each of the authors of the synoptic gospels
                                        independently combined two related notebooks. Even though
                                        dozens of differnt synoptic theories have been proposed over
                                        the past 200 years, Brian was able to formulate a solution
                                        that was strikingly different from those of his predecessors and
                                        still managed to be viable. Brian later simplified his theory
                                        into the present Greek Notes Hypothesis, in which all three
                                        gospels are derived from a translated notebook that was prone
                                        to redundancies.

                                        Brian's argument for the singularity of authorship behind the
                                        Greek Notes Hypothesis was ingenious: he looked for an authorial
                                        fingerprint that he felt could only have come from a single
                                        mind. What is amazing about this line of argument is that he
                                        was able to connect a wide-ranging set of phenomena that people
                                        thought were unrelated and fashion a common explanation for them.
                                        These include: the nomina sacra, the use of Greek numerals (ciphers
                                        as he called them), the adoption of the codex as the preferred
                                        Christian medium, and the use of Aramaic in the gospels. Although
                                        Brian's theses and arguments have not yet been adopted by other
                                        scholars, it is important to point out that David Trobisch has
                                        appealed to much of the same evidence and has used a similar
                                        argument to support Trobisch's idea that the New Testament was
                                        published in a 2d century edition.

                                        Another memorable aspect of Brian was his initiative. Even
                                        though Brian was not a salaried professor, he nonetheless managed
                                        to publish articles in peer-reviewed journals and present papers
                                        at international congresses. He demonstrated that the field of New
                                        Testament studies is not a guild for insiders only but that articles
                                        and papers are accepted on the basis of merit instead of professional
                                        position.

                                        For these and other reasons, I am thankful for Brian's accomplishments
                                        and saddened at his passing.

                                        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@...
                                      • Thomas R. W. Longstaff
                                        ... I will add my voice to those who are saddened by the news of Brian s death. As others have noted, he was a valued participant in Synoptic-L from its
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Feb 25, 2002
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          At 12:17 AM 2/24/2002 -0500, Stephen C. Carlson wrote:

                                          >Like many of you on Synoptic-L, I have been saddened
                                          >from the news of Brian E. Wilson's passing. As many of
                                          >you know, Brian has one of the regulars of Synoptic-L
                                          >from the very beginning. This message is a brief
                                          >appreciation of an extraordinary mind.

                                          I will add my voice to those who are saddened by the news of
                                          Brian's death. As others have noted, he was a valued participant
                                          in Synoptic-L from its beginning. His contributions to the list
                                          were highly valued. We will all miss his postings and keep
                                          him - and those close to him - in our thoughts and prayers.


                                          Dr. Thomas R. W. Longstaff
                                          Crawford Family Professor of Religious Studies
                                          Director, Jewish Studies
                                          Colby College
                                          4643 Mayflower Hill
                                          Waterville, ME 04901
                                          Telephone: (207) 872-3150
                                          FAX: (207) 872-3802
                                          Email: tlongst@...


                                          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.