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

Re: [Synoptic-L] A Lukan expression in Mark?

Expand Messages
  • Maluflen@aol.com
    In a message dated 4/11/2004 8:05:27 AM Pacific Daylight Time, ... Thanks for the TLG database info, which is really helpful. My argument certainly
    Message 1 of 10 , Apr 11, 2004
      In a message dated 4/11/2004 8:05:27 AM Pacific Daylight Time, scarlson@... writes:


      Also, EP' ALHQEIAS shows up 257 times in the TLG database, mostly in Koine times, so I'd say that EP' ALHQEIAS is just an expression popular in Greek at the time.  Luke's usage is not so frequent, as a compared to Mark, to make it a Lukanism.



      Thanks for the TLG database info, which is really helpful. My argument certainly demonstrates a case where the evidence is compatible with the Two-Gospel Hypothesis, and is even illuminated by it, even if the expression is ruled out on technical grounds as being a "Lukanism". Apart from Mark, Luke is the only NT author who uses the expression EP'ALHQEIAS, and he uses it as many as five times all together. Mark only has the expression in a passage parallel to Luke, and in another passage in the same chapter, where he arguably was looking back to that passage as the beginning of a literary unit consisting of controversy stories. Recall that it is precisely an "unusual" word or expression that is usually regarded as most suitable material for a literary inclusion, and this has to rate as such, given the complete absence of the expression in the remainder of the NT, and in spite of the TLG data.

      Leonard Maluf
      Blessed John XXIII National Seminary
      Weston, MA
    • Tim Reynolds
      on 4/11/04 8:03 AM, Maluflen@aol.com at Maluflen@aol.com wrote: Since NT scholarship has no explanation for the presence of these Hebraisms in Luke (since he
      Message 2 of 10 , Apr 11, 2004
        Re: [Synoptic-L] A Lukan expression in Mark? on 4/11/04 8:03 AM, Maluflen@... at Maluflen@... wrote:

        Since NT scholarship has no explanation for the presence of these
        Hebraisms in Luke (since he is supposedly reliant upon Mark or
        Matthew), "Septuagintalisms" have proven to be a convenient (yet
        unproven) explanation.


        My own statement was slightly more cautious, though. I suggested that the expression came to Luke either "from the Septuagint or late Jewish usage."

        Or from a LXX-steeped informant.  I suggest Mary.

        tim
      • Stephen C. Carlson
        ... The problem is the relative lengths of the texts. Luke is already longer than Mark and adding Acts to the mix makes the Lukan corpus even longer. The
        Message 3 of 10 , Apr 11, 2004
          At 11:46 AM 4/11/2004 -0400, Maluflen@... wrote:
          >In a message dated 4/11/2004 8:05:27 AM Pacific Daylight Time, scarlson@... writes:
          >>Also, EP' ALHQEIAS shows up 257 times in the TLG database, mostly in Koine
          >>times, so I'd say that EP' ALHQEIAS is just an expression popular in Greek
          >>at the time. Luke's usage is not so frequent, as a compared to Mark, to
          >>make it a Lukanism.
          >
          >Thanks for the TLG database info, which is really helpful. My argument
          >certainly demonstrates a case where the evidence is compatible with the
          >Two-Gospel Hypothesis, and is even illuminated by it, even if the expression
          >is ruled out on technical grounds as being a "Lukanism". Apart from Mark,
          >Luke is the only NT author who uses the expression EP'ALHQEIAS, and he uses
          >it as many as five times all together.

          The problem is the relative lengths of the texts. Luke is already
          longer than Mark and adding Acts to the mix makes the Lukan corpus
          even longer. The frequency that Luke-Acts uses the expression has
          to be adjusted for the relative lengths of the corpora. According
          to Morganthaler, Mark (inc. 16:9-20) has 11242 words, while Luke has
          19428 and Acts 18382. Thus, Luke-Acts is almost 2.5 times longer
          than Mark. Crudely, this makes the comparison in terms of lengths
          of text, only one in Mark per 10,000 words to two per 10,0000 words
          of Luke-Acts. Not impressive.

          >Mark only has the expression in a
          >passage parallel to Luke, and in another passage in the same chapter, where
          >he arguably was looking back to that passage as the beginning of a literary
          >unit consisting of controversy stories. Recall that it is precisely an
          >"unusual" word or expression that is usually regarded as most suitable
          >material for a literary inclusion, and this has to rate as such, given the
          >complete absence of the expression in the remainder of the NT, and in spite
          >of the TLG data.

          I don't see anything "unusual" about the expression. It is not
          uncommon in Koine, and restricting the corpus to the NT, though
          easy to do, is artificial. There just isn't even data to justify
          any conclusion. The paucity of evidence makes this case "compatible"
          with any synoptic theory, including the Two-Gospel Hypothesis.

          Here's a list of words I once analyzed that I would consider "Lukan":
          <pre>
          U(POSTRE/FW (0/0/21) Matt-100% Mark-100% Luke+151%
          XA/RIS (0/0/8) Matt-100% Mark- Luke+151%
          FI/LOS (1/0/15) Matt-083% Mark-100% Luke+135%
          *)IEROUSALH/M (2/0/27) Matt-082% Mark-100% Luke+134%
          *ZAXARI/AS (1/0/10) Matt- Mark- Luke+128%
          EU)AGGELI/ZW (1/0/10) Matt- Mark- Luke+128%
          DE/OMAI (1/0/8) Matt- Mark- Luke+123%
          PI/MPLHMI (2/0/13) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+118%
          E)PAI/RW (1/0/6) Matt- Mark- Luke+115%
          NOMIKO/S (1/0/6) Matt- Mark- Luke+115%
          SUNE/XW (1/0/6) Matt- Mark- Luke+115%
          E)/TOS (1/2/15) Matt-085% Mark- Luke+109%
          PARAXRH=MA (2/0/10) Matt- Mark- Luke+109%
          U(PA/RXW (3/0/15) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+109%
          PLH=QOS (0/2/8) Matt-100% Mark- Luke+101%
          QOBE/OMAI (1/1/8) Matt- Mark- Luke+101%
          *MARIA/M (4/0/13) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+092%
          E(/TEROS (10/0/32) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+091%
          TE/ (3/0/9) Matt- Mark- Luke+088%
          EI)RH/NH (4/1/14) Matt- Mark- Luke+085%
          DE/KA (3/1/11) Matt- Mark- Luke+084%
          O(MOI/WS (3/1/11) Matt- Mark- Luke+084%
          R(H=MA (5/2/19) Matt- Mark- Luke+084%
          PLH/N (5/1/15) Matt- Mark-079% Luke+079%
          SU/N (4/6/23) Matt-068% Mark- Luke+075%
          A)NH/R (8/4/27) Matt-045% Mark- Luke+074%
          LAO/S (14/2/36) Matt- Mark-083% Luke+074%
          KLAI/W (2/3/11) Matt-067% Mark- Luke+073%
          E)RWTA/W (4/3/15) Matt- Mark- Luke+071%
          NU=N (4/3/14) Matt- Mark- Luke+067%
          OU)XI/ (9/0/18) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+067%
          *)ABRAA/M (7/1/15) Matt- Mark-081% Luke+064%
          E)GGI/ZW (7/3/18) Matt- Mark- Luke+061%
          POREU/OMAI (29/0/51) Matt- Mark-100% Luke+060%
          A(MARTWLO/S (5/6/18) Matt-054% Mark- Luke+056%
          </pre>

          Stephen Carlson
          --
          Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
          Weblog: http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/hypotyposeis/blogger.html
          "Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35


          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
        • Joseph Weaks
          ... No. Not at all. In fact, this represent a tremendous inadequacy in method. The point of the TLG data reveals that the phrase is common in koine (according
          Message 4 of 10 , Apr 11, 2004
            On Apr 11, 2004, at 10:46 AM, Maluflen@... wrote:
            > Recall that it is precisely an "unusual" word or expression that is
            > usually regarded as most suitable material for a literary inclusion,
            > and this has to rate as such, given the complete absence of the
            > expression in the remainder of the NT, and in spite of the TLG data.

            No. Not at all. In fact, this represent a tremendous inadequacy in
            method. The point of the TLG data reveals that the phrase is common in
            koine (according to SC; I didn't run the search myself). I'm sure there
            are a tremendous number of words or short phrases that only occur in
            two, independent works.

            Joe Weaks


            Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
            List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
          • Maluflen@aol.com
            For Stephen Carlson and Joseph Weaks, I am unable to respond properly to your posts, since I am without access to sources and good emailing capabilities where
            Message 5 of 10 , Apr 13, 2004
              For Stephen Carlson and Joseph Weaks, I am unable to respond properly to your posts, since I am without access to sources and good emailing capabilities where I am vacationing this week. I will pick up the discussion again when I return, if I have time and/or the inclination. In the meantime, thanks for your comments and contributions.

              Leonard Maluf
              Blessed John XXIII National Seminary
              Weston, MA

              Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
              List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
            • Emmanuel Fritsch
              ... Did they once answer the list of lukanisms proposed by Boismard ? Do they address the special case of Egeneto ? a+ manu Synoptic-L Homepage:
              Message 6 of 10 , Apr 14, 2004
                Maluflen@... wrote:

                > Fitzmyer and others who reject the Two Gospel Hypothesis often use the
                > argument that there are no Lukanisms in Mark,

                Did they once answer the list of lukanisms proposed by Boismard ?

                Do they address the special case of "Egeneto" ?

                a+
                manu



                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.