Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
Advanced Search
Author
Subject
Message
Special notice only

1,187 results from messages in synoptic-l

Advanced Search
  • In a message dated 7/5/2005 4:03:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, chuckjonez@^$1 writes: explored this line of thought, too, and can't make the hypothesis work out. Lk actually emphasizes Jesus' Davidic descent repeatedly. For brevity's sake, I'll simply list references here, but in their context these are places where Lk goes out of his way to cast Jesus as the resumption of the...
    Maluflen@aol.com Jul 6, 2005
  • Chuck Jones writes to Bruce Brooks: << While this is a rhetorically powerful and attractive thought, Bruce, it ignores a foundational observation about Mt, Mk and Lk that arises when comparing them to each other. They were in the habit of only slightly modifying the wording of their source(s) when incorporating the material in their books. (This observation holds up regardless of...
    maluflen@aol.com Jul 6, 2005
  • In a message dated 7/4/2005 11:25:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, brooks@^$1 writes: LEONARD: You are right, although it is clear that -- while following Lk here as his primary source -- Mark at least found the parallel passage in Matt 14 before beginning to write, and allowed it to influence his formulations, especially in 6:14. This was simply SOP for Mark, so no special motive is...
    Maluflen@aol.com Jul 5, 2005
  • Fetching Sponsored Content...
  • In a message dated 7/4/2005 3:04:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jlupia2@^$1 writes: Perhaps, but the image seems broader to me than the narrower take you have. Mk is saying the name (obviously the result of his fame) of Jesus was widespread, giving the impression he was now a household word, not merely confined to fame at Herod's court. Mk places this as an Introduction to Herod...
    Maluflen@aol.com Jul 5, 2005
  • In a message dated 7/4/2005 9:23:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rickr2889@^$1 writes: Leonard says that Mark was racing through the Gospel of Matthew to create his work: You seem to read my posts about as carefully as you read the gospel texts. I never said what you attribute to me above. So the sarcasm in the remainder of your response is misplaced, even if it felt good at the time...
    Maluflen@aol.com Jul 4, 2005
  • In a message dated 7/4/2005 8:14:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time, brooks@^$1 writes: BRUCE: Let's see if I can restate this for beginners like myself. (1) The conjunction of Jesus's going forth with the advice to the Twelve is found only in Mt 9:35 / 10:1f and in Mk 6:6b / 7f. On the hypothesis that GMk in general is derivative from GMt and GLk, he can only have picked up this sequence...
    Maluflen@aol.com Jul 4, 2005
  • In a message dated 7/4/2005 12:15:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time, brooks@^$1 writes: . In 6:14-16 we have a reaction to preaching, a reaction by Herod and apparently, by several of his advisors. Herod is concerned at the wonders being wrought, and wants to know who is doing them. Our question is this: do Herod and his advisors react to the wonders wrought by many, or to wonders...
    Maluflen@aol.com Jul 4, 2005
  • n a message dated 7/3/2005 4:37:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kenolson101@^$1 writes: Matthew adds that they don't need to take sandals or staves either, because those will *also* be provided by the congregation; this is the point of "the worker is worthy of his maintenance." You are stretching the meaning of TROFH in this verse beyond tolerable limits, don't you think? The Latin...
    Maluflen@aol.com Jul 3, 2005
  • In a message dated 7/3/2005 9:27:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, dolfin@^$1 writes: Kia Ora, Regurgitation on behalf of Markan priority.... Mark's instructions for the road being minimal and therefore less radical and indicating a later period, is accommodated by the Q hypothesis. Q is arguably earlier than Mark and contains a more radical set of instructions. Alternatively Mark...
    Maluflen@aol.com Jul 3, 2005
  • In a message dated 7/3/2005 12:07:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, brooks@^$1 writes: I quite agree, as a general principle, that prohibitions imply previous practice of the thing prohibited. But it seems to me that the Markan version of the travel instructions very easily comes under this general principle. What GMk prohibited is likely to have been, not the prescription of a rival...
    Maluflen@aol.com Jul 3, 2005