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

tc-list muratorian canon

Expand Messages
  • Roderic L. Mullen
    Query for the cognoscenti: would anyone care to share an opinion about G. M. Hahneman, THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CANON (Oxford:
    Message 1 of 4 , Oct 8, 1998
    • 0 Attachment
      Query for the cognoscenti: would anyone care to share an opinion about G.
      M. Hahneman, THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CANON
      (Oxford: Clarendon, 1992), in which he suggests redating the Muratorian
      Canon to the Fourth Century? I'll reserve my own comments for now. Thanks,
      Rod Mullen
    • Stephen C. Carlson
      ... I ve read it about two years and was persuaded that the late second century is not the best dating for the Muratorian Canon. Stephen Carlson -- Stephen C.
      Message 2 of 4 , Oct 8, 1998
      • 0 Attachment
        At 09:51 PM 10/8/98 -0400, you wrote:
        >Query for the cognoscenti: would anyone care to share an opinion about G.
        >M. Hahneman, THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CANON
        >(Oxford: Clarendon, 1992), in which he suggests redating the Muratorian
        >Canon to the Fourth Century? I'll reserve my own comments for now. Thanks,
        >Rod Mullen

        I've read it about two years and was persuaded that the late second century
        is not the best dating for the Muratorian Canon.

        Stephen Carlson
        --
        Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
        Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
        "Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35
      • Mike Logsdon
        Hahneman s work, though it is difficult to follow at times, does deal with the issue at hand--strengthening the case for a late fourth-century date and an
        Message 3 of 4 , Oct 8, 1998
        • 0 Attachment
          Hahneman's work, though it is difficult to follow at times, does deal with
          the issue at hand--strengthening the case for a late fourth-century date
          and an eastern provenance designation of the fragment. Nevertheless one of
          his weaknesses from the outset is his overstatement regarding the
          Muratorian fragment to canon study. As such, he does not demonstrate why a
          later date necessitates a revised canon history toward a more gradual
          process, but instead his own dating of the Muratorian canon seems to be
          predicated upon this gradual process of canon formation. Still other
          weaknesses do occur. His argumentation is largely based on speculative
          postulations rather than concrete demonstrations about the contents of the
          fragment. Nowhere does he demonstrate a peculiarity or other aspect of the
          fragment that absolutely requires a fourth century dating. When he does
          attempt to offer a concrete characteristic, he erroneously concludes that
          the fragment is completely synonymous to the other fourth century
          catalogues. In fact, the lists in the fourth century catalogues are just
          that, lists. The Muratorian list, comparatively, is an expanded or
          apologetic commentary. What is more, Hahneman's dating is questionable
          since he so quickly accepts Sundberg's translation of nuperrime that is at
          best a mere plausible choice. In fact, Hahneman does not offer a critique
          of the traditional view that the reference is in fact not about the
          Shepherd of Hermas and Pius, but the Muratorian fragment and Pius.
          Hahneman rightly identifies the need to view the canon process as gradual,
          but over emphasizes the distinction between canon and scripture in
          reference to the fourth-century. In the end, Hahneman's conclusion appears
          plausible and his argumentation is good, but at the same time his own
          rejection of traditional conclusions offers little reason to completely
          accept his position thereby leaving readers cynical towards all positions
          concerning the Muratorian fragment. When one considers the abrupt ending
          and beginning of the fragment, cynicism towards conclusive remarks about
          the fragment might be a good position to maintain.

          At 09:51 PM 10/8/98 -0400, you wrote:
          >Query for the cognoscenti: would anyone care to share an opinion about G.
          >M. Hahneman, THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CANON
          >(Oxford: Clarendon, 1992), in which he suggests redating the Muratorian
          >Canon to the Fourth Century? I'll reserve my own comments for now. Thanks,
          >Rod Mullen
          >
          >
          >
        • Michael Holmes
          ... My review of the book is in CBQ 56 (1994) 594-5. The last lines of it read: H. has rightly highlighted the problematic character of the traditional
          Message 4 of 4 , Oct 9, 1998
          • 0 Attachment
            At 09:51 PM 10/8/98 -0400, Rod Mullen wrote:
            >Query for the cognoscenti: would anyone care to share an opinion about G.
            >M. Hahneman, THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CANON
            >(Oxford: Clarendon, 1992), in which he suggests redating the Muratorian
            >Canon to the Fourth Century? I'll reserve my own comments for now. Thanks,
            >Rod Mullen
            >

            My review of the book is in CBQ 56 (1994) 594-5. The last lines of it read:
            "H. has rightly highlighted the problematic character of the traditional
            dating, but nothing he has presented eliminates it or requires a later
            dating. His own case for a fourth-century date is just as problematic; in
            support of it he offers many possibilities and some probabilities, but
            nothing more certain than the case for the traditional date. The book, well
            written and engagingly presented, leaves this reviewer skeptical of all
            dates sugested for the MC, but of H.'s more than of the traditional one."

            Mike Holmes
            Bethel College
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.