Re: [Synoptic-L] New way to misrepresent Goulder
- Thanks for this, Ken. An interesting footnote to this: when Goulder
criticised the coining of the term "Two Gospel Hypothesis", he added
that 'my own theory, which is well-known to the Griesbachians, is
also a Two-Gospel hypothesis, with Mark and Matthew the sources for
Luke. So there are at least two Two-Gospel hypotheses. Griesbach
has been known as the originator of the theory for two centuries, and
his honourable name should be maintained.' ('Luke's Knowledge of
Matthew' in George Strecker, ed., Minor Agreements. Symposium
Göttingen 1991 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993), pp. 143-60
(p. 143, n. 1).). I think my own feeling, the more I reflect on
this, is that one of the best ways of avoiding polemic is to stick
with the names that the defenders of the hypothesis themselves
prefer, so I use Two-Source, Farrer, Two-Gospel and so on, after what
the defenders of each prefer.
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
Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
- Thanks for this insight, Ken. I have always felt that the label "Two-Gospel Hypothesis" was confusing, although for a different reason: it sounds too much like "Two-Source Hypothesis" (but I understand that that's the point of the label).
John C. Poirier
Ken Olson wrote:
Turner may have been confused by the fact that Goulder referred to his own theory as a Two-Gospel hypothesis, though Goulders point was that the label was inadequate as a description for a synoptic source theory. Goulder said:
>>The hypothesis, advocated here by William Farmer, is sometimes referred to by its defenders as the _Two-Gospel Hypothesis_. This practice is confusing, and should be discontinued. The name is intended to stand in contrast with the _Two-Source (=Standard) hypothesis_, and to emphasize that Marks sources were our two Gospels, Matthew and Luke. But then my own theory, which is well-known o the Griesbachians, is also a Two-Gospel hypothesis, with Mark and Matthew the sources for Luke. So there are at least two Two-Gospel hypotheses. Griesbach has been known as the originator of the theory for two centuries, and his honourable name should be maintained<< [Michael D. Goulder, "Lukes Knowledge of Matthew," in Minor Agreements: Symposium Goettingen 1991 (Goettingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1991) 143 n. 1.