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

[Synoptic-L] Neville [was: Osbourne in Rethinking]

Expand Messages
  • Maluflen@aol.com
    ... If I am not mistaken, David J. Neville comes to a similar conclusion (favoring, if anything, Matthean priority with respect to Mark)in a recent Sheffield
    Message 1 of 3 , Jan 31, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 1/30/2003 3:52:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, scarlson@... writes:

      > It looks like Osborne (sans "u") really got it wrong here. Yes, if
      > Osborne's characterization of the data was accurate (and they're quite
      > a bit more complicated in real life), then the shorter
      > reading canon
      > would tend to favor Matt. over Mark.

      If I am not mistaken, David J. Neville comes to a similar conclusion (favoring, if anything, Matthean priority with respect to Mark)in a recent Sheffield publication that studies in depth the so-called "argument from order". I haven't had time to read the book in full, so someone who has might wish to review it for the list. All arguments converge... though see, of course, Peter Head for an opposite tending argument based on apparent theological development in Matt. By the way, I found a copy of Peter's book in a second-hand store recently, and bought it for $15. When I have time, I would like to take up some of his interesting arguments in favor of Markan priority on this list.

      Leonard Maluf

      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    • Stephen C. Carlson
      ... I m reading through the new Neville now, and I don t quite see (yet) what you are referring to. Rather, Neville is analyzing the argument from order (both
      Message 2 of 3 , Feb 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        At 10:27 AM 1/31/03 -0500, Maluflen@... wrote:
        >In a message dated 1/30/2003 3:52:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, scarlson@... writes:
        >
        >> It looks like Osborne (sans "u") really got it wrong here. Yes, if
        >> Osborne's characterization of the data was accurate (and they're quite
        >> a bit more complicated in real life), then the shorter
        >> reading canon
        >> would tend to favor Matt. over Mark.
        >
        >If I am not mistaken, David J. Neville comes to a similar conclusion
        >(favoring, if anything, Matthean priority with respect to Mark)in a recent
        >Sheffield publication that studies in depth the so-called "argument from
        >order". I haven't had time to read the book in full, so someone who has
        >might wish to review it for the list.

        I'm reading through the new Neville now, and I don't quite see (yet)
        what you are referring to. Rather, Neville is analyzing the argument
        from order (both formal and compositional) and comes to the conclusion
        that this set of argumentation is indecisive with respect to solving
        synoptic problem. Whether that is true or whether that is a failure
        of nerve, I'll need more study to see, but I don't quite see Neville
        as being pertinent to Osborne's mistake -- they seem to address different
        arguments.

        I see to recall, though, that there as a proponent of the Griesbach
        hypothesis who did point out that the expansive nature of the Markan
        text should be considered an indication of Markan posteriority precisely
        on account of the text critical rule, but I cannot recall now exactly
        who it was who made that argument.

        >All arguments converge... though see,
        >of course, Peter Head for an opposite tending argument based on apparent
        >theological development in Matt. By the way, I found a copy of Peter's book
        >in a second-hand store recently, and bought it for $15. When I have time, I
        >would like to take up some of his interesting arguments in favor of Markan
        >priority on this list.

        I would like to see this.

        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@...
      • Peter M. Head
        ... Me too. Pete Peter M. Head, PhD Research Fellow Tyndale House 36 Selwyn Gardens Phone: (UK) 01223 566607 Cambridge,
        Message 3 of 3 , Feb 3, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          At 12:33 PM 2/1/03 -0500, Stephen C. Carlson wrote:
          >At 10:27 AM 1/31/03 -0500, Maluflen@... wrote:
          > >All arguments converge... though see,
          > >of course, Peter Head for an opposite tending argument based on apparent
          > >theological development in Matt. By the way, I found a copy of Peter's book
          > >in a second-hand store recently, and bought it for $15. When I have time, I
          > >would like to take up some of his interesting arguments in favor of Markan
          > >priority on this list.
          >
          >I would like to see this.

          Me too.

          Pete


          Peter M. Head, PhD
          Research Fellow
          Tyndale House
          36 Selwyn Gardens Phone: (UK) 01223
          566607
          Cambridge, CB3 9BA Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
          http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Staff.htm


          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.