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

Re: [Synoptic-L] Freudian slip?

Expand Messages
  • John C. Poirier
    Dear Karel, The diastasis between two continents that Leonard invokes is anything but imaginative . It is a very good objective description of the state
    Message 1 of 10 , Nov 7, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Karel,
       
      The "diastasis between two continents" that Leonard invokes is anything but "imaginative".  It is a very good "objective" description of the state of scholarship.

      Let me add, however, that while I think German scholarship has been deficient in its dealings with the synoptic problem, there are many respects in which I wish American scholarship were more German.  If it's a certain "fogeyism" that hurts German scholarship in this one area (and I'm not saying that that's necessarily what it is), I would point out that the same "fogeyism" also saves German scholarship from the sort of rampant trendiness that we find in American scholarship on a number of other issues.  All too often in American writing, citing the currency of a particular theory takes the place of actually arguing for that theory.  (Worst of all, when it comes to hermeneutical issues, many will consider an argument to be successfully refuted by someone simply by associating it with "Enlightenment thinking"!)

      I'm not saying that trendiness isn't a bit of a problem everywhere, but it's much bigger problem in North America.

      Interestingly, the current hegemony of the Two Source Theory seems to benefit from both "fogeyism" (in its neglect to seriously consider newer solutions) and trendiness (in its uncritical appeal to what's current).  I guess this only shows that scarcely any other idea has been so deeply rooted in the collective consciousness of scholarship for as long as the Two Source Theory.


      John C. Poirier
      Middletown, Ohio


    • Richard H. Anderson
      ... Leonard, Although your characterization, as modified, of German scholarship may be accurate, can I ask if you have read Hans-Herbert Stoldt, History and
      Message 2 of 10 , Nov 7, 2003
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In synoptic-l@yahoogroups.com, Maluflen@a... wrote:

        > As Mark noted, I was thinking mainly of German scholars.

        Leonard,

        Although your characterization, as modified, of German scholarship
        may be accurate, can I ask if you have read Hans-Herbert Stoldt,
        History and Criticism of Marcan Hypothesis (1977)(English 1980)?
        I believe Stoldt was born in Germany in 1901. It is a book I think
        you would enjoy.

        Richard H. Anderson


        Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
        List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
      • Emmanuel Fritsch
        ... Would it be possible to produce collectively (on that list or where else ?) a detailed summary of arguments for and against markan priority ? Such a
        Message 3 of 10 , Nov 7, 2003
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          "Richard H. Anderson" a écrit :
          >
          >
          > Leonard,
          >
          > Although your characterization, as modified, of German scholarship
          > may be accurate, can I ask if you have read Hans-Herbert Stoldt,
          > History and Criticism of Marcan Hypothesis (1977)(English 1980)?
          > I believe Stoldt was born in Germany in 1901. It is a book I think
          > you would enjoy.

          Would it be possible to produce collectively (on that list or where
          else ?) a detailed summary of arguments for and against markan
          priority ? Such a summary should contain text examples, references
          to main scholars, and considerations of methodology.

          Such an operation should in fact be leaded on all main synoptic
          hypotheses, but it would be even more usefull for Markan priority,
          since it is the root of all discussions about synoptics.

          a+
          manu

          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
        • Maluflen@aol.com
          ... I am certainly aware of Hans-Herbert Stoldt s book and should certainly have mentioned him as an outstanding exception within German Synoptic scholarship.
          Message 4 of 10 , Nov 7, 2003
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            In a message dated 11/7/2003 8:23:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, RAnderson58@... writes:

            > Although your characterization, as modified, of German scholarship
            > may be accurate, can I ask if you have read Hans-Herbert Stoldt,
            > History and Criticism of Marcan Hypothesis (1977)(English 1980)?
            > I believe Stoldt was born in Germany in 1901. It is a book
            > I think
            > you would enjoy.

            I am certainly aware of Hans-Herbert Stoldt's book and should certainly have mentioned him as an outstanding exception within German Synoptic scholarship. I have read in the book, though I never read it through systematically. By the way, the Dutch scholar I was thinking of when I wrote M.J.J. Menken was actually H. van de Sandt (if I remember the name right, and if I have the nationality right). Menken has also done some good stuff, though. Also, I didn't mean to omit reference to French scholarship which has certainly produced some giants of its own. I don't mean only the earlier twentieth century lights like Loisy, Benoit and Lagrange either. Augustin George, for example, was a brilliant and original Lukan scholar in his own right. Of course these French scholars, and perhaps most of the Swiss, Dutch, and Belgian scholars to whom I alluded, also accept Markan priority. The difference between them and the typical German scholar is that they do not hold it with the same ideological rigor, and their work on the Gospel texts is usually quite independent of, or relatively uninfluenced by this particular source theory.

            Leonard Maluf
            Blessed John XXIII National Seminary
            Weston, MA
          • Richard H. Anderson
            ... where ... It sounds like you would like me to write a book! I first read this book perhaps ten years ago and have glanced at it when I have a particular
            Message 5 of 10 , Nov 7, 2003
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In synoptic-l@yahoogroups.com, Emmanuel Fritsch
              <emmanuel.fritsch@i...> wrote:
              >
              > Would it be possible to produce collectively (on that list or
              where
              > else ?) a detailed summary of arguments for and against markan
              > priority ? Such a summary should contain text examples, references
              > to main scholars, and considerations of methodology.
              >
              > Such an operation should in fact be leaded on all main synoptic
              > hypotheses, but it would be even more usefull for Markan priority,
              > since it is the root of all discussions about synoptics.
              >
              It sounds like you would like me to write a book!

              I first read this book perhaps ten years ago and have glanced at it
              when I have a particular question. I think its value in that it is
              meticulous. However, the definition of meticulous includes "careful
              about trivial matter" which say lot about the debate on the synoptic
              problem and this book's view of the minor agreements. Stoldt thinks
              the minor agreements are significant and a problem for the Marcan
              Hypothesis while the true believers think the minor agreements are
              trivial. The full length book will have to wait another day. At
              quick goggle search reveals you can buy this book used for nine
              dollars in paperback plus shipping and handling.

              Richard H. Anderson


              Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
              List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
            • Karel Hanhart
              Dear Leonard, Since I responded to you first, I address these remarks to you; they are meant for all who have responded to Freudian slip thus far. 1. As to
              Message 6 of 10 , Nov 9, 2003
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Leonard,

                Since I responded to you first, I address these remarks to you; they are
                meant for all who have responded to Freudian slip thus far.

                1. As to Dutch scholars, yes, Maarten Menken is a Dutch Catholic scholar and
                so is Huub van de Sandt. I certainly recommend Huub's work on the Didache.
                Menken specializes in John.
                2. Concerning Fritsch's request. We could start with the summary on "The
                Synoptic Problem" by Daniel B. Wallace of Dallas Theological Seminary. It
                was reproduced in the Synoptic-L list on 9-11-98 21:35. He offered a good
                and relatively lengthy statement in favor of Markan priority. I wonder if
                the directors of this list could reproduce it again. The next step could be
                that opponents would make clear, point by point, where amd why Daniel
                went wrong. It might be helpful to identify scholars who support
                one theory or another.

                cordially yours, . .
                Karel Hanhart


                ----- Original Message -----
                From: <Maluflen@...>
                To: <RAnderson58@...>; <Synoptic-l@...>
                Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 3:28 PM
                Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] Re: Freudian slip?


                > In a message dated 11/7/2003 8:23:32 AM Eastern Standard Time,
                RAnderson58@... writes:
                >
                > > Although your characterization, as modified, of German scholarship
                > > may be accurate, can I ask if you have read Hans-Herbert Stoldt,
                > > History and Criticism of Marcan Hypothesis (1977)(English 1980)?
                > > I believe Stoldt was born in Germany in 1901. It is a book
                > > I think
                > > you would enjoy.
                >
                > I am certainly aware of Hans-Herbert Stoldt's book and should certainly
                have mentioned him as an outstanding exception within German Synoptic
                scholarship. I have read in the book, though I never read it through
                systematically. By the way, the Dutch scholar I was thinking of when I wrote
                M.J.J. Menken was actually H. van de Sandt (if I remember the name right,
                and if I have the nationality right). Menken has also done some good stuff,
                though. Also, I didn't mean to omit reference to French scholarship which
                has certainly produced some giants of its own. I don't mean only the earlier
                twentieth century lights like Loisy, Benoit and Lagrange either. Augustin
                George, for example, was a brilliant and original Lukan scholar in his own
                right. Of course these French scholars, and perhaps most of the Swiss,
                Dutch, and Belgian scholars to whom I alluded, also accept Markan priority.
                The difference between them and the typical German scholar is that they do
                not hold it with the same ideological rigor, and their work on the Gospel
                texts is usually quite independent of, or relatively uninfluenced by this
                particular source theory.
                >
                > Leonard Maluf
                > Blessed John XXIII National Seminary
                > Weston, MA
                > K¦,zz§Ãjº.¢³¦"´zž?Âni




                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.