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

Re: [Synoptic-L] Re: Freudian slip?

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 10 , Nov 7, 2003
      "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 2 of 10 , Nov 7, 2003
        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 3 of 10 , Nov 7, 2003
          --- 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 4 of 10 , Nov 9, 2003
            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.