Re: [Synoptic-L] Lk 11:27-28
- Leonard Maluf wrote:
> ..... if this IS an instance of "Luke's FULASSW", then you shouldLeonard,
>be thinking of Luke as the author of the verses.
It's not quite so simple. I am positing an Aramaic source which Luke
would have had to translate. In this scenario Luke chose FULASSW to
represent some original Aramaic word. So the word can relate both to a
source and to Luke's usage.
>In fact, however, Luke is the only Synoptic evangelist who frequently usesI can't see any relevance in those usages such as 'keeping watch over
>FULASSW in a way entirely unconnected with the Law or special Deuteronomic
(sheep)' which are "unconnected with the Law".
> It is simplistic ..... to speak of "Lukan use" as though this were,The other similar uses (i.e. where it doesn't mean "guard") *are* in a
>or need be monolithic.
sense monolithic as I've already pointed out twice, but you have never
commented specifically on the texts to which I referred.
>Why on earth should there need to be "a direct quotation from Deuteronomy"There needn't be. But it would have helped your case that we should
>for Luke to be allowing Deuteronomic language to influence his own?
interpret the word against its use in Deuteronomy rather than against
its use in Luke-Acts.
Weston-on-Trent, Derby, UK
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@...