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

RE: [Synoptic-L] Added a page to my site, an alternative to the3SH

Expand Messages
  • Matson, Mark (Academic)
    Ron: Perhaps you have discussed this already, but I would like to know a bit more fully how you discern between textual changes wrought by scribes/copying
    Message 1 of 10 , Mar 3, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Ron:

      Perhaps you have discussed this already, but I would like to know a bit
      more fully how you discern between textual changes wrought by
      scribes/copying (after Luke wrote) and those that occurred before Luke
      wrote (i.e. changes/variants of his sources)? That is what you are
      suggesting, right?

      In other words, how can you be sure what is "Luke" and what is "not"
      outside of the normal text critical procedure?

      mark



      Ron Price wrote:

      > But, as I tried to indicate in my previous posting, I can
      > identify fairly closely what the author of Luke wrote, and
      > can therefore rule out any "early substantial change(s)" of
      > the sort you mention.


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

      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    • Ron Price
      ... Dave and Mark, This last comment is along the right lines. If an archetype was sufficiently cohesive, then any change to it by adding or deleting a
      Message 2 of 10 , Mar 4, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Mark Matson wrote:

        > ..... how can you be sure what is "Luke" and what is "not"
        > outside of the normal text critical procedure?

        Dave Gentile wrote:

        > I suppose if the text was needed to form a cohesive whole with other parts
        > of Luke, that would be an argument for its original inclusion in Luke.

        Dave and Mark,

        This last comment is along the right lines. If an archetype was
        sufficiently cohesive, then any change to it by adding or deleting a
        substantial amount of text would ruin that cohesion. There are thus two
        issues. Were the original documents very cohesive? In what ways would that
        cohesion be manifest?

        A long and detailed study of the NT documents and their origins has
        convinced me that the archetypes were much more cohesive than anyone had
        realized. Probably the only widely recognized original structural features
        are the five-fold division of Matthew and the replies to questions in 1
        Corinthians, but these are just the tips of icebergs. Examples of very high
        cohesion in the reconstructions of original documents (relating to the early
        sayings source and the early editions of the gospel of John) can be found on
        my Web site.

        The cohesion of the major NT documents is not just in logical structure,
        but also in physical structure. For the way Paul wrote his letters, and the
        pioneering codex format used by Mark and copied by several other NT authors,
        involved self-imposed constraints relating to page size which have allowed
        me to deduce, for instance, that Luke was produced in two editions, with the
        'Western non-interpolations' substantially absent from both archetypes.

        Ron Price

        Derbyshire, UK

        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@...
      • dgentil@sears.com
        Ron Price writes: If an archetype was sufficiently cohesive, then any change to it by adding or deleting a substantial amount of text would ruin that cohesion.
        Message 3 of 10 , Mar 4, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Ron Price writes:
          If an archetype was sufficiently cohesive, then any change to it by adding
          or deleting a
          substantial amount of text would ruin that cohesion.

          Dave:
          That seems possible, but I would also worry about seeing patterns of our
          own creation, not in the original. Do you have any examples that we could
          discuss here?

          Many of the pericope you identify as originating in Matthew seem to
          reinforce the message that the Jews had rejected their messiah, and that
          Christianity with its outreach to Gentiles was the true continuation of the
          Jewish religion.

          If we could argue that the original autograph of Luke also supported that
          position, that would seem to favor Luke's direct use of Matthew. Luke makes
          Herod more responsible for both the death of John and Jesus. Are there
          other examples along the same lines?

          It seems to me, that short of digging up a previously unknown edition of
          Luke, the question is not answerable with any real certainty.


          David Gentile,
          M.S. Physics, M.S. Finance
          Hoffman Estates, IL





          Ron Price
          <ron.price@virgin To: Synoptic-L elist <Synoptic-L@...>
          .net> cc:
          Sent by: Subject: [Synoptic-L] Gospel archetypes (was: Added a page
          owner-synoptic-l@ to my site, an alternative to the3SH)
          bham.ac.uk


          03/04/2004 05:40
          AM






          Mark Matson wrote:

          > ..... how can you be sure what is "Luke" and what is "not"
          > outside of the normal text critical procedure?

          Dave Gentile wrote:

          > I suppose if the text was needed to form a cohesive whole with other
          parts
          > of Luke, that would be an argument for its original inclusion in Luke.

          Dave and Mark,

          This last comment is along the right lines. If an archetype was
          sufficiently cohesive, then any change to it by adding or deleting a
          substantial amount of text would ruin that cohesion. There are thus two
          issues. Were the original documents very cohesive? In what ways would that
          cohesion be manifest?

          A long and detailed study of the NT documents and their origins has
          convinced me that the archetypes were much more cohesive than anyone had
          realized. Probably the only widely recognized original structural features
          are the five-fold division of Matthew and the replies to questions in 1
          Corinthians, but these are just the tips of icebergs. Examples of very high
          cohesion in the reconstructions of original documents (relating to the
          early
          sayings source and the early editions of the gospel of John) can be found
          on
          my Web site.

          The cohesion of the major NT documents is not just in logical structure,
          but also in physical structure. For the way Paul wrote his letters, and the
          pioneering codex format used by Mark and copied by several other NT
          authors,
          involved self-imposed constraints relating to page size which have allowed
          me to deduce, for instance, that Luke was produced in two editions, with
          the
          'Western non-interpolations' substantially absent from both archetypes.

          Ron Price

          Derbyshire, UK

          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@...






          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
        • Ron Price
          ... Dave, It s certainly a worry, and great care has to be taken to avoid falling into that trap. ... The only case for which I ve made the analysis available
          Message 4 of 10 , Mar 4, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Dave Gentile wrote:

            > .....I would also worry about seeing patterns of our
            > own creation, not in the original.

            Dave,

            It's certainly a worry, and great care has to be taken to avoid falling
            into that trap.

            > Do you have any examples that we could discuss here?

            The only case for which I've made the analysis available so far is that of
            John's gospel (see my Web site). This document has had a more complex
            history than any other in the NT and I've had to posit three editions.

            I'd be happy to discuss this case, though it would have to be off-list as
            it's not appropriate for Synoptic-L.

            Ron Price

            Derbyshire, UK

            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@...
          • Ron Price
            ... Mark, In broad terms the procedure does not involve detecting the archetype directly, but positing a structure and a page model for the archetype, then
            Message 5 of 10 , Mar 4, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Mark Matson wrote:

              > Can you give us some example, for instance, of a place where you see
              > modification from the "original" Lukan material -- or to use your terms,
              > where you detect the "archetype" behind our Lukan text? And perhaps
              > some clues as to how you have evaluated that particular text.

              Mark,

              In broad terms the procedure does not involve detecting the archetype
              directly, but positing a structure and a page model for the archetype, then
              finding out how closely the structure fits the model using the UBS text. If
              there is no fit, or if the fit is not good enough, are there any plausible
              changes to the text which would give a better fit? In the case of Luke, the
              removal of the 'Western non-interpolations' was quite plausible (c.f. e.g.
              NEB, REB, and D.C.Parker, _The living text of the Gospels_, 1997, p.148ff.)
              and transformed a non-existent fit into quite a good fit with the chosen
              structure and model.

              The only archetype investigation I have made available so far is that of
              John's gospel. So if you want to see how the technique works, have a look at
              the relevant part of my Web site. Judge for yourself whether the page size
              patterns portrayed help to reveal the history of that document's
              composition, or whether they are sheer imagination. However you will need to
              bear in mind that the analysis of John is atypical insofar as it tackles the
              problem of text displacements. I am not suggesting that there were any text
              displacements in the other gospels. But as in John it's possible in the
              other gospels to find a logical structure which matches a page model using a
              text not too far from the UBS text.

              Ron Price

              Derbyshire, UK

              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@...
            • David Gentile
              Ron, O.K. let s assume that for Luke we can reconstruct a document that fits nicely into page-sized divisions. How do we know that it represents the original
              Message 6 of 10 , Mar 5, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Ron,
                O.K. let's assume that for Luke we can reconstruct a document that fits
                nicely into page-sized divisions. How do we know that it represents the
                original Luke?

                Another scenario would be that the original of Luke is written on a scroll.
                It gets copied into a codex, with logical divisions. Now each page starts
                with a new topic, but the text may not always fill the page. That blank spot
                at the bottom of the page would seem to be an open invitation <your text
                here>. The result would be a version of Luke that has logical page-sized
                divisions.

                That might be interesting to investigate. - If the Matthian sections always
                appear at what appears to be the bottom of a page sized section, that might
                argue for their late inclusion.


                Dave Gentile
                Riverside, Illinois
                M.S. Physics
                M.S. Finance

                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "Ron Price" <ron.price@...>
                In the case of Luke, the
                > removal of the 'Western non-interpolations' was quite plausible (c.f. e.g.
                > NEB, REB, and D.C.Parker, _The living text of the Gospels_, 1997,
                p.148ff.)
                > and transformed a non-existent fit into quite a good fit with the chosen
                > structure and model.
                >



                Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
              • Ron Price
                ... Dave, If the detailed structure which matches the page boundaries is sufficiently convincing (better than anything yet published?!), and the numerical
                Message 7 of 10 , Mar 5, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  Dave Gentile wrote:

                  > Ron,
                  > O.K. let's assume that for Luke we can reconstruct a document that fits
                  > nicely into page-sized divisions. How do we know that it represents the
                  > original Luke?

                  Dave,

                  If the detailed structure which matches the page boundaries is
                  sufficiently convincing (better than anything yet published?!), and the
                  numerical match is sufficiently good, then we can be pretty sure that it
                  isn't either a coincidence or a modern artificial construct.

                  > Another scenario would be that the original of Luke is written on a scroll.
                  > It gets copied into a codex, with logical divisions. Now each page starts
                  > with a new topic, but the text may not always fill the page. That blank spot
                  > at the bottom of the page would seem to be an open invitation <your text
                  > here>. The result would be a version of Luke that has logical page-sized
                  > divisions.

                  Perhaps. But I don't see a strong enough motive. Why bother to adjust each
                  section, when it would be much easier, if he thought it necessary, to add a
                  filler at the end?

                  If he did go to this trouble, the interpolator would have to do a very
                  good job in (a) simulating the original author's style and interests and (b)
                  not allowing the extra text to interfere with the structure if the original
                  was highly structured. Any half page insertion by a stranger is likely to be
                  repetitive, idiosyncratic, or a mismatch with the section's theme. Besides,
                  your scenario would involve interpolations at the majority of section
                  boundaries, so the resulting text is even more likely to end up in a mess.

                  Ron Price

                  Derbyshire, UK

                  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@...
                • dgentil@sears.com
                  Ron, What I mean is - suppose we have a version of Luke in front of us (the original) with some blank bits at the bottom of some pages. If we are interested in
                  Message 8 of 10 , Mar 5, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Ron,
                    What I mean is - suppose we have a version of Luke in front of us
                    (the original) with some blank bits at the bottom of some pages. If we are
                    interested in adding some Matthian material to promote our own view, it
                    seems quite natural to just find a bit of empty space that is approximately
                    the right size for what we want to add, and then place it there.

                    Ron: the interpolator would have to do a very
                    good job in (a) simulating the original author's style and interests

                    Dave: Not in this case. The interpolator is adding something from Matthew
                    to Luke. The result is a section of Luke that has the Matthian style we
                    see.

                    Ron: (b)
                    not allowing the extra text to interfere with the structure if the original
                    was highly structured.

                    Dave: If we are just talking about page sized structure, then the
                    interpolator is actually helping to create that. If there is a larger
                    thematic structure, the added text could interfere with that, but then
                    again, the interpolator would not want to place the added text somewhere it
                    very clearly did not fit thematically.


                    Dave Gentile
                    M.S. Physics, M.S. Finance
                    Hoffman Estates, IL







                    Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                    List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                  • Ron Price
                    ... Dave, In my opinion this is a wholly unrealistic scenario. If this version is supposed to be the archetype, then the author/scribe would have been crazy to
                    Message 9 of 10 , Mar 6, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dave Gentile wrote:

                      > What I mean is - suppose we have a version of Luke in front of us
                      > (the original) with some blank bits at the bottom of some pages.

                      Dave,

                      In my opinion this is a wholly unrealistic scenario. If this version is
                      supposed to be the archetype, then the author/scribe would have been crazy
                      to leave such an open invitation to interpolation. If it is supposed to be a
                      copy of the archetype with newly introduced blank bits, then as I indicated
                      in my last posting, I can't see a plausible motivation for producing the
                      copy in this peculiar format.

                      Ron Price

                      Derbyshire, UK

                      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@...
                    • David Gentile
                      ... a ... indicated ... Why produce it in that format? The scribe may have wanted the pages to be logical divisions. That is, he wanted each page to start at
                      Message 10 of 10 , Mar 6, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        >
                        > In my opinion this is a wholly unrealistic scenario. If this version is
                        > supposed to be the archetype, then the author/scribe would have been crazy
                        > to leave such an open invitation to interpolation. If it is supposed to be
                        a
                        > copy of the archetype with newly introduced blank bits, then as I
                        indicated
                        > in my last posting, I can't see a plausible motivation for producing the
                        > copy in this peculiar format.
                        >
                        > Ron Price
                        >

                        Why produce it in that format? The scribe may have wanted the pages to be
                        logical divisions. That is, he wanted each page to start at the beginning of
                        a topic and not somewhere in the middle of a topic. I suppose, given the
                        relatively high cost of the material, this would not have been done often,
                        but it still strikes me as something that quite possibly could have been
                        done.


                        Dave Gentile
                        Riverside, Illinois
                        M.S. Physics
                        M.S. Finance


                        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.