FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page The Synoptic Problem.
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 4 of 4 « First 23 4
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-08-2006, 07:39 AM   #31
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUmike
My only concern about the Didache is, if its author was using GMatt, why did he not credit any of the sayings to Jesus? That seems odd to me.
Could it not almost seem as it was Jesus teaching it to his twelve?
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 07:49 AM   #32
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Washington, DC (formerly Denmark)
Posts: 3,789
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUmike
My only concern about the Didache is, if its author was using GMatt, why did he not credit any of the sayings to Jesus? That seems odd to me.
Not to mention a completly different eucharist, which is one of the reasons why I think that Didache must come before GMatt.
Julian is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 08:38 AM   #33
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,146
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith
So do you think that Matthew copied from Mark or vice versa? Those two have a lot in common that a proto-gospel that looks like Luke would not explain on its own.

Ben.
Hi, Ben,

My basic views on this are stated here,

Evolutionary View of the Gospels (May 13, 2003)
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...threadid=53550

There's a chart there that postulates "M" as the source of both Mt and Mk.

Perhaps we can say that M is reflected more faithfully in Mk than in Mt. But in some passages, Mt seems to be preserving M better.

The basic rule of thumb AFAIAC is that those passages in Mk that are unique to it (i.e. Mk Special Material) are most likely to be very late.

Best,

Yuri.
Yuri Kuchinsky is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 08:56 AM   #34
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,146
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakejonesiv
Yes, that is a possibility. The date you gave above of 100 CE is also conceivable. Can you provide a link where you explain more about this? It is very promising IMHO.
Hi, Jake,

The date ca 100 CE is something that I've borrowed from Alfred Loisy. This is his view; he was quite a late dater of the gospels.

He explains this some more in his books, that are available online.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jakejonesiv
I wonder what the proto gospel would look like?
I've already answered this above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jakejonesiv
Obviously, the gospels have been padded by taking texts from the Hebrew Bible (or more often the Septuagint) to supply details.
Yes, and they've been padded some more by later editors. According to Loisy, there are a great many later interpolations in the gospels... And in Paul even more so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jakejonesiv
Someone once went through Mark's passion narrative and removed every conceivable reference or allusion to the "Old Testament" on the theory that it was later addition. Also, literary doublings and multiplications (such as Peter's three denials, and the two trials) were collapsed into one. The result was a very sparse but compelling narrative. If I remember correctly, the chief priests (or chiefs) transmuted into archons.

I can't recall this approach being taken with a whole gospel, but it would be interesting with Luke.

Jake Jones IV
It seems like the Hebrew Bible was the main source of the NT. If you remove all such passages, you won't have all that much left. But still, what you'll have left remains very important.

From my point of view, the association with John the Baptist is the single most important historical fact about Jesus. But unfortunately, some modern NT scholars are doing their best to minimise this association...

Regards,

Yuri.
Yuri Kuchinsky is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 12:52 PM   #35
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakejonesiv
That is very interesting. Garrow's book is $135 on Amazon. (gulp) Could you give us a few high points?

Jake
Hey, it's discounted from $150!

Besides the review posted on Amazon by Aaron Rose-Milavec,[listed also as Aaron Milavec, Professor Emeritus, Piqua, OH 45356 ( owner of www.didache.info )], there are two other reviews linked here. (none of these 3 reviews seem to think that Garrow is very convincing, but all appreciate the analysis.)

The review by James P. Sweeney is very thorough; the review by David Sim agrees that Garrow has not established his thesis.
Toto is offline  
Old 02-09-2006, 11:20 AM   #36
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
Default Epistle, InterCalations, Epistle
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kirby
I have written an essay about Markan priority a long time ago:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/mark-prior.html

regards,
Peter Kirby
JW:
Hi Peter. Intercalations is not mentioned in your Article. I guess it would go into the The Argument from Sequence of Incidents Argument.

"Intercalations". Kind of sounds like a Pauline Epistle:

To the Intro Calatians:

Christ, Jesus, Christ



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page
JoeWallack is offline  
 
Page 4 of 4 « First 23 4

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:33 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.