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

[Synoptic-L] Re: Carlson's Synoptic Problem Website

Expand Messages
  • Wieland Willker
    ... I can t see what these have in common. The transmission of NT texts has nothing to do with the history of scholarship. Well, unless you would define
    Message 1 of 9 , Oct 21, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Stephen Goranson wrote:
      > And where is the dividing line between history of
      > scholarship and transmission of NT texts?

      I can't see what these have in common. The transmission of NT texts has
      nothing to do with the history of scholarship. Well, unless you would
      define "scribe" = "scholar".

      History of scholarship CAN BE interesting, but IMHO the history of the
      Synoptic Problem is not very thrilling. Perhaps there are some
      anecdotes, but else ... Ok, it is always better to have something than
      to have it not. The question is, if it justifies the effort.
      What's in a name? The ideas, arguments, hypotheses itself are important.


      What we really need to come along with the Synoptic problem is
      1. new evidence
      2. new methods
      3. a new Streeter, who points out new directions.


      John C. Poirier wrote:
      > the best solutions to the synoptic problem are/will be
      > written by those most familiar with the history of the
      > synoptic problem.

      Delete "history of the". The best solutions in particle physics do not
      come from those who know most of the history of particle physics.


      Stephen C. Carlson wrote:
      > You mean something like "A Treatise on the Synoptic
      > Problem" ...?

      No, something like "The Four Gospels II".


      > By the way, I've just received an email from Albert Fuchs
      > announced the publication of his magnum opus.

      Man! 4 volumes, 1264 pages!
      Reading this, reminds me of an idea I had a long while ago that one
      should try to extract Mark from Mt and Lk like one extracted Q. The
      result could be interesting.
      Andreas Ennulat also recently postulated a Deutero-Mark (ISBN:
      3161457757).

      Best wishes
      Wieland
      <><
      ------------------------------------------------
      Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
      mailto:willker@...-bremen.de
      http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
      Textcritical commentary:
      http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html


      Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
      List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
    • Stephen C. Carlson
      ... Well, Goodacre has already written the book I wanted to write on Q... ... Actually, there s a book coming out soon that gets into that. ... Good to know.
      Message 2 of 9 , Oct 21, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        At 03:19 PM 10/21/2004 +0200, Wieland Willker wrote:
        >Stephen C. Carlson wrote:
        >> You mean something like "A Treatise on the Synoptic
        >> Problem" ...?
        >
        >No, something like "The Four Gospels II".

        Well, Goodacre has already written the book I wanted to
        write on Q...

        >> By the way, I've just received an email from Albert Fuchs
        >> announced the publication of his magnum opus.
        >
        >Man! 4 volumes, 1264 pages!
        >Reading this, reminds me of an idea I had a long while ago that one
        >should try to extract Mark from Mt and Lk like one extracted Q. The
        >result could be interesting.

        Actually, there's a book coming out soon that gets into that.

        >Andreas Ennulat also recently postulated a Deutero-Mark (ISBN:
        >3161457757).

        Good to know.

        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@...
      • John C. Poirier
        ... Actually, since I follow Karl Popper on particle physics (except where he mistakenly accepts Heisenberg s definition of the Copenhagen school ), I think
        Message 3 of 9 , Oct 21, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Wieland Willker wrote:

          > The best solutions in particle physics do not come from those who know
          > most of the history of particle physics.

          Actually, since I follow Karl Popper on particle physics (except where he
          mistakenly accepts Heisenberg's definition of "the Copenhagen school"), I
          think you're wrong about this. It was partly Popper's understanding of the
          history of particle physics, and of the philosophies directing it, that led
          him to what I think is a correct deconstruction of the so-called uncertainty
          principle.

          But back to the importance of a history of the synoptic problem: Robert
          McIver and Marie Carroll recently repeated a logical fallacy committed
          several decades ago by Theodore Rosche, a fallacy that had already been
          exposed by several scholars. If McIver and Carroll had had access to a
          truly useful history of the synoptic problem (such as does not yet exist),
          they might have saved themselves from this error. So I think there is a
          direct practical connection between the writing of a history of the synoptic
          problem and the writing of a sort of "new Streeter". I, for one, wish to
          learn whatever I can from past mistakes.


          John C. Poirier
          Middletown, Ohio



          Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
          List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
        • Ron Price
          ... Wieland, Stephen et al., 1. There is no significant new evidence, so we ll have to make do with what is currently available. 2. I have a new method. It
          Message 4 of 9 , Oct 21, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Wieland Willker wrote:

            > What we really need to come along with the Synoptic problem is
            > 1. new evidence
            > 2. new methods
            > 3. a new Streeter, who points out new directions.

            Wieland, Stephen et al.,

            1. There is no significant new evidence, so we'll have to make do with what
            is currently available.

            2. I have a new method. It could be seen (conceptually but not
            chronologically) as one way of developing Stephen Carlson's tentative
            exploration of Matthew's non-Markan sources in his recent 'Blog'. It
            involves the hypothesis that some of the double tradition came from Matthew,
            and some from a sayings source. Indications as to what came from Matthew can
            be found by studying the writings of Michael Goulder and Mark Goodacre. To
            find what came from the sayings source we can start with those doublets in
            Matthew and Luke which look as if they could have resulted from Matthew or
            Luke retaining a saying from *both* Mark and the sayings source. These
            sayings form the core of the draft source. They can be used as a guide to
            its teaching and its genre. Other sayings of a similar type can be added if
            (a) they are from the double tradition, or (b) they are not from the double
            tradition, but we can see why they would have been omitted by Matthew and/or
            Luke.

            3. Far be it from me to comment on this one. :-)

            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@...
          • Tim Reynolds
            ... I bet they do. tim ... Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@bham.ac.uk
            Message 5 of 9 , Oct 21, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              on 21/10/04 6:19 AM, Wieland Willker at willker@...-bremen.de wrote:

              > Stephen Goranson wrote:
              >> And where is the dividing line between history of
              >> scholarship and transmission of NT texts?
              >
              > I can't see what these have in common. The transmission of NT texts has
              > nothing to do with the history of scholarship. Well, unless you would
              > define "scribe" = "scholar".
              >
              > History of scholarship CAN BE interesting, but IMHO the history of the
              > Synoptic Problem is not very thrilling. Perhaps there are some
              > anecdotes, but else ... Ok, it is always better to have something than
              > to have it not. The question is, if it justifies the effort.
              > What's in a name? The ideas, arguments, hypotheses itself are important.
              >
              >
              > What we really need to come along with the Synoptic problem is
              > 1. new evidence
              > 2. new methods
              > 3. a new Streeter, who points out new directions.
              >
              >
              > John C. Poirier wrote:
              >> the best solutions to the synoptic problem are/will be
              >> written by those most familiar with the history of the
              >> synoptic problem.
              >
              > Delete "history of the". The best solutions in particle physics do not
              > come from those who know most of the history of particle physics.

              I bet they do.

              tim
              >
              >
              > Stephen C. Carlson wrote:
              >> You mean something like "A Treatise on the Synoptic
              >> Problem" ...?
              >
              > No, something like "The Four Gospels II".
              >
              >
              >> By the way, I've just received an email from Albert Fuchs
              >> announced the publication of his magnum opus.
              >
              > Man! 4 volumes, 1264 pages!
              > Reading this, reminds me of an idea I had a long while ago that one
              > should try to extract Mark from Mt and Lk like one extracted Q. The
              > result could be interesting.
              > Andreas Ennulat also recently postulated a Deutero-Mark (ISBN:
              > 3161457757).
              >
              > Best wishes
              > Wieland
              > <><
              > ------------------------------------------------
              > Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
              > mailto:willker@...-bremen.de
              > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
              > Textcritical commentary:
              > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
              >
              >
              > 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@...
            • Tim Reynolds
              ... On the contrary, much of the impasse results from failure to incorporate Smith s Clement letter, found in 1958, published in 1973, too late for Streeter.
              Message 6 of 9 , Oct 21, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                on 21/10/04 1:43 PM, Ron Price at ron.price@... wrote:

                >> What we really need to come along with the Synoptic problem is
                >> 1. new evidence
                >> 2. new methods
                >> 3. a new Streeter, who points out new directions.
                >
                > Wieland, Stephen et al.,
                >
                > 1. There is no significant new evidence, so we'll have to make do with what
                > is currently available.

                On the contrary, much of the impasse results from failure to incorporate
                Smith's Clement letter, found in 1958, published in 1973, too late for
                Streeter. It entered the picture after the paint had dried:

                "Clement replies that Mark had written two gospels. His original gospel,
                intended for beginners, was written at Rome [where the existing consensus
                placed Mk]. The second gospel, Mark wrote sometime later in Alexanria,
                Egpt. This second gospel, Clement says, is an expanded version of the
                original gospel ..."

                No one has ever, to my knowledge, made any attempt to analyze Mk in terms of
                Smith's model. It just sits there.

                Mk as ongoing process, begun with Peter in Rome, continued in Alexandria
                after after the Neronian persecution, and left unfinished at Mark's death in
                68 fits all our data comfortably and has the added bonus of elucidating the
                Synoptic Muddle.

                This whole auditory business is just a footnote to Streeter anyhow.

                tim



                Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
              • Stephen C. Carlson
                ... It seems like you might be interested in these: Helmut Koester, ANCIENT CHRISTIAN GOSPELS: Their History and Development (Philadelphia: Trinity, 1990),
                Message 7 of 9 , Oct 21, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  At 03:57 PM 10/21/2004 -0700, Tim Reynolds wrote:
                  >On the contrary, much of the impasse results from failure to incorporate
                  >Smith's Clement letter, found in 1958, published in 1973, too late for
                  >Streeter. It entered the picture after the paint had dried:
                  >
                  >"Clement replies that Mark had written two gospels. His original gospel,
                  >intended for beginners, was written at Rome [where the existing consensus
                  >placed Mk]. The second gospel, Mark wrote sometime later in Alexanria,
                  >Egpt. This second gospel, Clement says, is an expanded version of the
                  >original gospel ..."
                  >
                  >No one has ever, to my knowledge, made any attempt to analyze Mk in terms of
                  >Smith's model. It just sits there.

                  It seems like you might be interested in these:

                  Helmut Koester, ANCIENT CHRISTIAN GOSPELS: Their History and Development
                  (Philadelphia: Trinity, 1990), 273-86.
                  John Dominic Crossan, FOUR OTHER GOSPELS: Shadows of the Contours of the
                  Canon (Sonoma, Calif.: Polebridge, 1992), 61-83.
                  Hans-Martin Schenke, "The Mystery of the Gospel of Mark," SecCen 4 (1984):
                  65-82.

                  It's a shame that Smith passed away before Crossan's book came out. I'm
                  positive that he would have enjoyed reading it.

                  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@...
                • John C. Poirier
                  ... Actually, Crossan s book (*Four Other Gospels*) was originally published in 1985 (by Winston Press), six years before Smith died. I m not sure whether
                  Message 8 of 9 , Oct 22, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Stephen C. Carlson wrote:

                    > It's a shame that Smith passed away before Crossan's book came out. I'm
                    > positive that he would have enjoyed reading it.

                    Actually, Crossan's book (*Four Other Gospels*) was originally published in
                    1985 (by Winston Press), six years before Smith died.

                    I'm not sure whether Smith commented on *Four Other Gospels* (although we
                    might assume that he would have deplored Crossan's uncritical reliance on an
                    English translation throughout, which led him in at least two places to
                    assert things about the text or its context which simply were not true at
                    the Greek level).


                    John C. Poirier
                    Middletown, Ohio



                    Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
                    List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
                  • Eric Eve
                    ... This is essentially the approach I take in Reconstructing Mark: A Thought Experiment in Goodacre and Perrin (eds) _Questioning Q_ (which should be coming
                    Message 9 of 9 , Oct 22, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > Wieland Willker wrote:

                      > Reading this, reminds me of an idea I had a long while ago that one
                      > should try to extract Mark from Mt and Lk like one extracted Q. The
                      > result could be interesting.

                      This is essentially the approach I take in "Reconstructing Mark: A Thought
                      Experiment" in Goodacre and Perrin (eds) _Questioning Q_ (which should be
                      coming out in Britain around now, published by SPCK). I don't think anyone's
                      going to set up an International Mark Project to do this in the same depth
                      and thoroughness that's been applied to the reconstruction of Q, so my essay
                      can hardly compete with The Critical Edition of Q, but I do explore what I
                      consider are some of the shortcomings of a Mark that's reconstructed this
                      way.

                      Regards,

                      Eric
                      ----------------------------------
                      Eric Eve
                      Harris Manchester College, Oxford




                      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.