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

[Synoptic-L] literary dependence - epileptic boy

Expand Messages
  • Tim Lewis
    Stephen, Thank you for all your patient responses so far. I would be interested in seeing that private essay on the Synoptic Problem as a literary question,
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 20, 2004
    • 0 Attachment

      Stephen,

      Thank you for all your patient responses so far. I would be interested in seeing that private essay on the Synoptic Problem as a literary question, because I still think it looks like only minimal literary influence for largely oral materials and that positing direct literary connections is demanded only by solving an already presumed literary problem. Is not this how the Synoptic Question is posed and construed? (I.e.: How can we explain these literary agreements? Answer: Literary dependence!) Is not the solution presupposed by the type of question?

      Let's take Mt 17:14-21// Mk 9:14-29 // Lk 9:37-43 (The demon-possesed/epileptic boy healed). I can see that Mt is possibly dependent on Mk here (e.g. KAT' IDIAN 17:19) and Lk seems reasonably indebted to Mk (esp. DIDASKALE ...EXAIFNHS ...SUNESPARASSEI...TW PNEUMATI TW AKAQARTW)

      In looking for Matthean influence on Lk I found five minor anti-Markan agreements:

      1) Agreements in omission of Mk 9:14-16, 20b-25b

      2) OUK HDUNHQHSAN (Lk 9:40)

      3) (LEGEI->) EIPEN (Lk 9:41)

      4) KAI DIESTRAMMENH (Lk 9: 41)

      5) WDE (Lk 9:41)

      Most Matthean "influence" appears to be concentrated in two verses. But the anti-Markan agreements are not seemingly very significant:

      1) Omission of Mk's detailed intro is not surprising, jointly omitting the father's discussion is less explicable, however.

      2) Changing the Markan term "not strong" to "not able" is understandably an independent change.

      3) Aorist = more standard Greek

      4) "perverse and crooked generation" interesting but (cf. Deut 32:5, Phil 2:15) a common enough complaint (more "Matthean" is "evil and adulterous generation" Mt 12:39, 16:4)

      5) "here" is perhaps significant.

      Why does Lk not include Mt's final saying about "if you have faith the size of a mustard seed..." in this story but has it later? And is Lk unimpressed by Mt's diagnosis of the boy's problem as being "moon-struck"? Does this pericope really demonstrate enough literary dependence between Mt-Mk and Mt-Lk?

      Also, I'm still unsure of any clear Markan redactional features turning up in Mt or Lk. Do you have any examples?

       

      Tim Lewis.



      Timothy M. Lewis
      Cranbourne, VIC 3977
      Part-time Greek Tutor at Whitley College,
      Melbourne College of Divinity, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.



      Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.