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

[Synoptic-L] ho hum

Expand Messages
  • Tim Reynolds
    I m going to sleep on this tonight and send it to Synoptic-L tomorrow. * Farrer: ³the Q hypothesis ... wholly depends on the incredibility of St. Luke s
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 17, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I'm going to sleep on this tonight and send it to Synoptic-L tomorrow.

      *


      Farrer: ³the Q hypothesis ... wholly depends on the incredibility of St.
      Luke's having read St. Matthew's book.²

      More specifically, it¹s the incredibility of Luke¹s doing to Mt what he in
      fact did.

      It¹s a 3-pipe problem. The backstory:

      Mark¹s interrupted manuscript, following his lynching, remains at
      Alexandria, where (per Clement per Smith) it is kept ³under guard² and read
      only to ³advanced catechumens². Matthew attends these readings and (I
      hypothesize), appalled that this document should be withheld from
      Christendom, reproduces it as best he can from memory, supplementing it from
      his own memories. Mt is made available.

      Luke (I hypothesize), disturbed that Alexandria should have its own gospel
      while Rome had none, determined to get his hands on the Alexandrian Mk so he
      could, as it were, use it to create a Roman gospel. I bet he was surprised
      to learn that he had been anticipated.

      So Luke works Mt over, uniformly substituting his own version of Mk for
      Luke¹s. *The point is to distinguish his gospel from Mt.* ³Many have
      undertaken accounts of Jesus. Why, you may ask, another?² Because Luke can
      offer a whole batch of new material from either Mary or a close associate of
      Mary¹s. Plus he¹s done homework; the chronological confusion of fake
      messiahs, someone has pointed out, makes sense if Luke had worked from
      memory of a live reading of Josephus in Rome.

      What you statisticians might do is check the (ex hype) Mk material in Lk
      against the Mk/Lk material in Mt. While both bodies of text exhibit endemic
      textual differences, these differences are of two sorts: Mt¹s differences
      from Mk (with a few readily apparent additions) are the inadvertant result
      of human memory limitations, while Lk¹s are conscious alterations.

      If this prediction is wrong I¹ve blown a quarter century but at least I¹ll
      know where I¹m at. And you will be rid of me at last.

      Tim Reynolds
      Long Beach CA


      Heck, I'll send it now.


      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.