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

Re: [textualcriticism] A folklore view on the NT text

Expand Messages
  • Dave Washburn
    ... When are people going to get over this? More recent research - like the last 30 years or so, perhaps even longer - has shown that the whole oral
    Message 1 of 2 , Nov 19, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      On Friday 19 November 2004 06:20, Wieland Willker wrote:
      > I played around a bit with the new "Google Scholar" and it brought to
      > light the following interesting piece:
      >
      > INVENTING THE TEXT: A CRITIQUE OF FOLKLORE
      > EDITING David E. Gay
      > Folklore Vol. 14 (2000)
      > http://haldjas.folklore.ee/folklore/vol14/pdf/editing.pdf
      >
      > Several pages of the article deal with the NT text and present a
      > "Parkerian view" of the "original text". He concludes:
      > "Through their effort to reconstruct the original New  Testament, then,
      > the work of New Testament scholars leads us away from an understanding
      > of the New Testament as a book that had its origins in oral tradition
      > and that has existed in literally thousands of manuscripts and oral
      > variants in Greek and in other languages since the early Christian
      > period - and from an understanding of the culture and people who
      > produced it."

      When are people going to get over this? More recent research - like the last
      30 years or so, perhaps even longer - has shown that the whole "oral
      tradition" thing was probably very short, if there was one at all, and hence
      it's unlikely that it had any real influence on the text. In addition, this
      idea only works - insofar as it works at all, which is questionable - for the
      gospels. The Paulines alone reduce it to absurdity, since with most of them
      we know the rough dates of writing, provenances, recipients, and all the
      rest. So for the epistles "oral tradition" doesn't even come into play. And
      in the case of the gospels, it's clear that somebody, somewhere, at a
      specific time, produced a "first edition." This quote makes it sound as
      though several hundred well-meaning idiots cranked out compilations of their
      "oral tradition" that just happened to coalesce into the synoptics. I don't
      know of any reputable New Testament scholar who still holds such an idea.

      > PS: I think nobody would have found this article using traditional
      > tools?
      > Try here: http://scholar.google.com/
      > (Note that Google was allowed to search all(?) scholarly journals, but
      > you have access only to those for which your institution has a
      > subscription!)

      And I suppose that pretty well cuts out those of us who aren't
      institutionalized :-)

      --
      Dave Washburn
      http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
      "No good. Hit on head." -Gronk
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.