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

Re: [Synoptic-L] Review of Stein

Expand Messages
  • David Barrett Peabody
    Right, Given the extensive verbatim agreements, one would have to conclude that there is some sort of literary dependence between these two documents. The
    Message 1 of 7 , May 4, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Right,

      Given the extensive verbatim agreements, one would have to conclude that
      there is some sort of literary dependence between these two documents.
      The question now is whether one has copied the other or whether both have
      made use of a common source. If the former, then one must utilize some
      reasonable criteria for determining the direction of literary dependence
      between Dungan and Matson, such as those suggested by Eduard Zeller in
      1843.

      I contacted the administration at RBL this morning, noting the verbal
      identities and asking the administrators to look into this literary
      puzzle and explain it and correct it, if necessary. In this instance, my
      working hypothesis is that we have a case of later electronic, scribal
      error of "cutting and pasting," rather than some actual literary
      relationship between the texts of the two original authors.

      David B. Peabody

      Quoting "John C. Poirier" <poirier@...>:

      > If you ask me, the extensive sequential agreements between Dungan
      > and
      > Matson show the use of a written source.
      >
      >
      > John C. Poirier
      > Middletown, Ohio
      >
      >
      > Mark Goodacre wrote:
      >
      > > Mark -- have you joined forces with David? : ) If I were to do
      > some
      > > literary analysis of author's style, I'd say this review was
      > Mark's
      > > and that SBL have accidentally reproduced it twice, no?
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      > List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
      >


      --
      David Barrett Peabody
      Professor of Religion
      Nebraska Wesleyan University
      5000 St. Paul Ave.
      Lincoln, NE 68504
      (402) 465-2302
      www.nebrwesleyan.edu/people/dbp


      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    • Thomas R. W. Longstaff
      ... David, You take a step in the right direction when you recognize that the two might have made use of a common source. What you fail to recognize is that
      Message 2 of 7 , May 5, 2003
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        > Right,
        >
        > Given the extensive verbatim agreements, one would have to
        > conclude that
        > there is some sort of literary dependence between these two
        > documents.
        > The question now is whether one has copied the other or
        > whether both have
        > made use of a common source. If the former, then one must
        > utilize some
        > reasonable criteria for determining the direction of literary
        > dependence
        > between Dungan and Matson, such as those suggested by Eduard
        > Zeller in
        > 1843.
        >
        > I contacted the administration at RBL this morning, noting the verbal
        > identities and asking the administrators to look into this literary
        > puzzle and explain it and correct it, if necessary. In this
        > instance, my
        > working hypothesis is that we have a case of later
        > electronic, scribal
        > error of "cutting and pasting," rather than some actual literary
        > relationship between the texts of the two original authors.
        >
        > David B. Peabody

        David,

        You take a step in the right direction when you recognize that the two
        might have made use of a common source. What you fail to recognize is
        that this is absolutely the best evidence that we have for the existence
        of Q. It proves, beyond a shadow of doubt, that that hypothetical
        document really existed! The problem is solved. Both Dungan and Matson
        used Q.

        Oh well, it IS Spring in Maine at last.

        Tom

        Dr. Thomas R. W. Longstaff
        Crawford Family Professor, Emeritus
        Department of Religious Studies
        Colby College
        4643 Mayflower Hill
        Waterville, ME 04901-8846
        Phone: (207) 872-6617
        FAX: (207) 872-3802



        Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
        List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
      • Matson, Mark (Academic)
        One could, of course, claim divine inspiration on the part of both of us. Although I am not sure I felt very inspired when I wrote it. And of course David
        Message 3 of 7 , May 5, 2003
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          One could, of course, claim divine inspiration on the part of both of us. Although I am not sure I felt very inspired when I wrote it. And of course David Dungan could have become highly sensitive to the Farrer theory.

          When I read Dungan's review, I thought "boy, that's a fairly cogent review!" Though it did sound vaguely familiar. :)

          But seriously I think some big mistake has been made at SBL in the posting of this. I hope David Dungan is not too embarrassed by having my review posted in his name! I have contacted SBL about the error.

          At least someone's reading these reviews.

          mark

          Mark A. Matson
          Academic Dean, Milligan College
          http://www.milligan.edu/Administrative/MMatson/personal.htm


          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: Mark Goodacre [mailto:M.S.Goodacre@...]
          > Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2003 5:57 PM
          > To: Synoptic-L@...
          > Subject: [Synoptic-L] Review of Stein
          >
          >
          > Anyone else puzzled by the review of Stein on the latest SBL Review
          > of Biblical Literature? The same review is presented twice, once
          > under Mark Matson's name and once under David Dungan's:
          >
          > http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=1478
          >
          > Mark -- have you joined forces with David? : ) If I were to do some
          > literary analysis of author's style, I'd say this review was Mark's
          > and that SBL have accidentally reproduced it twice, no?
          >
          > Mark
          > -----------------------------
          > Dr Mark Goodacre mailto:M.S.Goodacre@...
          > Dept of Theology tel: +44 121 414 7512
          > University of Birmingham fax: +44 121 414 4381
          > Birmingham B15 2TT UK
          >
          > http://www.theology.bham.ac.uk/goodacre
          > http://NTGateway.com
          >
          >
          > Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          > List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
          >
          > ---
          > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
          > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
          > Version: 6.0.476 / Virus Database: 273 - Release Date: 4/24/2003
          >
          >

          ---
          Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
          Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
          Version: 6.0.476 / Virus Database: 273 - Release Date: 4/24/2003


          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
        • John C. Poirier
          If you ask me, the extensive sequential agreements between Dungan and Matson show the use of a written source. John C. Poirier Middletown, Ohio ... Synoptic-L
          Message 4 of 7 , May 5, 2003
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            If you ask me, the extensive sequential agreements between Dungan and
            Matson show the use of a written source.


            John C. Poirier
            Middletown, Ohio


            Mark Goodacre wrote:

            > Mark -- have you joined forces with David? : ) If I were to do some
            > literary analysis of author's style, I'd say this review was Mark's
            > and that SBL have accidentally reproduced it twice, no?




            Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
            List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
          • Horace Jeffery Hodges
            Thomas R. W. Longstaff wrote: [T]his is absolutely the best evidence that we have for the existence of Q. It proves, beyond a shadow of doubt, that that
            Message 5 of 7 , May 5, 2003
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Thomas R. W. Longstaff wrote:

              "[T]his is absolutely the best evidence that we have
              for the existence of Q. It proves, beyond a shadow of
              doubt, that that hypothetical document really existed!
              The problem is solved. Both Dungan and Matson
              used Q."

              John C. Poirier wrote:

              "[T]he extensive sequential agreements between Dungan
              and Matson show the use of a written source."

              So, we have scholarly consensus. I guess that clinches
              it. Harnack, Luhrmann, and Kloppenborg (et al.) are
              all correct -- Q existed and was a written document.

              Jeffery Hodges

              =====
              Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges (Inv.) [Ph.D., U.C. Berkeley]
              Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
              447-791 Kyunggido, Osan-City
              Yangsandong 411
              South Korea

              __________________________________
              Do you Yahoo!?
              The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
              http://search.yahoo.com

              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.