Re: [Synoptic-L] A pleasing literary arrangement?
- Leonard Maluf wrote:
>Ron, I was making a purely logical point, to which I do not believe youLeonard,
>have responded. If the "evidence" you cite from Brown that the Logia of
>Papias, on the basis of the meaning of the term syntassein, could refer to
>a text with "a persuasive or *pleasing literary arrangement* or even to a
>fuller account" amounts to saying that sQ as you define it could qualify,
>this is not really the same as saying that Brown's quote "supports" your
>identification of sQ with the Logia.
Let's say that it provides a measure of support. For a document which
has a pleasing literary arrangement is *more likely* to match Papias'
description than a document which does not have such an arrangement.
>Also, remind me: do you see sQ and/or the Logia of Papias as possibly to beI suppose it's possible that someone in the tradition misunderstood
>identified with the Hebrew Matt of tradition?
Papias' statement about TA LOGIA, thinking it referred to Matthew's
gospel. If this was so, then there is a link, though no identity.
Even R.E.Brown concedes that Matthew's gospel was originally written
in Greek. But interestingly he wrote that we shouldn't too facilely
dismiss Papias' statement as complete fiction or ignorance. Sadly, many
modern scholars seem to have done just that. Thus e.g. Kloppenborg
wrote: "The origin of the speculation, Papias' statement about Matthew,
is legendary at best" (_Excavating Q_, p.80). The only evidence
Kloppenborg appears to provide for this slur is that Papias' statement
does not fit his deductions from the Two Source Theory. He is thus using
a questionable theory to dismiss a crucial piece of evidence. Need I say
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@...