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

Re: [Synoptic-L] Youtie supports Goulder hypothesis

Expand Messages
  • Ken Olson
    If Youtie is primarily a scholar of Jewish Studies, he might also have in mind the Jewish NT scholar Samuel Sandmel. I don t have the citation handy, but
    Message 1 of 4 , Jan 2, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      If Youtie is primarily a scholar of Jewish Studies, he might also have in
      mind the Jewish NT scholar Samuel Sandmel. I don't have the citation handy,
      but Sandmel describes himself as siding with the (unspecified) minority who
      believe Luke used Matthew against those who believe Luke and Matthew used Q.
      I think this was in either _Jewish Understanding of the NT_ (1956, 1974) or
      _Judaism and Christian Beginnings_ (1978) or possibly both.

      Best Wishes,

      Ken

      kaolson@...


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "John C. Poirier" <poirier@...>
      To: <Synoptic-L@...>
      Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 5:58 PM
      Subject: [Synoptic-L] Youtie supports Goulder hypothesis


      > I recently ran across the following passage in Herbert C. Youtie,
      "Response," in
      > *Jewish Languages: Theme and Variations*, ed. Herbert H. Paper (Cambridge
      MA:
      > Association for Jewish Studies, 1978) 155-57: "In considering the problem
      raised
      > by the Christian Gospels, we may leave aside Matthew and Luke as being, in
      all
      > probability, derivative. They are so close to Mark in wording and
      incident that
      > the best current opinion takes Matthew as having used Mark in the
      construction
      > of his life of Jesus, and Luke as having used both Mark and Matthew."
      >
      > Youtie's words are not footnoted, but considering their date, "best
      current
      > opinion" probably refers to Goulder (having recently been endorsed by
      Sanders in
      > a *JBL* review).
      >
      > Anyone have any insight into Youtie's views or influences?
      >
      >
      > John C. Poirier
      > Middletown, Ohio
      >
      >
      >
      > 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@...
    • John C. Poirier
      I recently ran across the following passage in Herbert C. Youtie, Response, in *Jewish Languages: Theme and Variations*, ed. Herbert H. Paper (Cambridge MA:
      Message 2 of 4 , Jan 2, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        I recently ran across the following passage in Herbert C. Youtie, "Response," in
        *Jewish Languages: Theme and Variations*, ed. Herbert H. Paper (Cambridge MA:
        Association for Jewish Studies, 1978) 155-57: "In considering the problem raised
        by the Christian Gospels, we may leave aside Matthew and Luke as being, in all
        probability, derivative. They are so close to Mark in wording and incident that
        the best current opinion takes Matthew as having used Mark in the construction
        of his life of Jesus, and Luke as having used both Mark and Matthew."

        Youtie's words are not footnoted, but considering their date, "best current
        opinion" probably refers to Goulder (having recently been endorsed by Sanders in
        a *JBL* review).

        Anyone have any insight into Youtie's views or influences?


        John C. Poirier
        Middletown, Ohio



        Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
        List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
      • Maluflen@aol.com
        Another early supporter of the Goulder hypothesis is Morton Scott Enslin, who predates even Farrer, if I am not mistaken, in rejecting the Q hypothesis, while
        Message 3 of 4 , Jan 4, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Another early supporter of the Goulder hypothesis is Morton Scott Enslin, who predates even Farrer, if I am not mistaken, in rejecting the Q hypothesis, while exhibiting premature triumphalism in touting as a "conquest" of modern scholarship the theory of Markan priority.

          Leonard Maluf

          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
        • Tim Reynolds
          ... Surely Markan priority predates the Q idea. It s the default hypothesis. tim Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l List Owner:
          Message 4 of 4 , Jan 4, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            on 1/4/03 9:45 AM, Maluflen@... at Maluflen@... wrote:

            > Another early supporter of the Goulder hypothesis is Morton Scott Enslin, who
            > predates even Farrer, if I am not mistaken, in rejecting the Q hypothesis,
            > while exhibiting premature triumphalism in touting as a "conquest" of modern
            > scholarship the theory of Markan priority.
            >
            > Leonard Maluf
            >
            > Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
            > List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...

            Surely Markan priority predates the Q idea. It's the default hypothesis.

            tim


            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.