[Synoptic-L] Re: AP
- on 3/14/03 12:33 PM, Ted Reynolds at tedrey@... wrote:
> Tim,Thank you.
> It strikes me that you might try dividing the Mark-in-Alexandria theme from
> that of Oral Piracy; at least point out sometimes that they are separate
> issues. Oral piracy (although the term "piracy" is inappropriate in this
> context) should also be considered germane to anyone who considers the gospels
> as being promulgated by word of mouth by, for example, traveling apostles.
> Since that is precisely what Paul did, I'm surprised no-one's picked up on
> that possibility for the gospels. Apostle A may have heard Apostle B give a
> version of his gospel at an open-air meeting without having a chance to see a
> manuscript (which might not yet have existed).
> I'm not saying the Mark aspect of it isn't valid; I still buy that myself. I
> am saying that some of the scholars you're dealing with (each of whom seems to
> already have his own personal view of the provenance of Mark) might find value
> in considering the way in which spoken language is absorbed in ways leading to
> synoptic-gospel type variations, without being spooked by the need to accept
> your Mark hypothesis right off. They might be more willing to consider that
> Just a thought.
> brother ted
Jeepers, you send this to Synoptic-L?
I don't like "auditory piracy" either, but since that was already the
Shakespearean term I needed to use it to emphasize that I'm not making this
phenomenon up, less calcified disciplines have been discussing it for years.
There exists a literature on oral transmission. AP is more specific.
There are, as you note, two aspects, but they reinforce each other. On the
one hand, you have these texts with the fingerprints of AP transmission, and
on the other Morton Smith's Clementine, describing the oral venue that would
generate such texts. Each predicts the other.
Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...