Saturday, May 06, 2006

Rethinking the Synoptic Problem

I am reading the book by Black and Beck, interesting, they present both the Two Gospel hypothesis and the two-source hypothesis (Oxford hypothesis). It is interesting, but pro-Markian, which most are. But for some strange reason I feel more comfortable with the pre-Matthian view.

But what I wanted to share was the last two sentences in a chapter by Scot McKnight titled "A Generation who knew not Streeter" "Griesbach and Oxford proponents differ substantially; and the differences are enormous in implication. But they are united in this: the problem is worthy of study, and it makes a difference for interpretation, for history, for theology, and for pastoral theology. My question is does it? I can see the history, but the other three I have never come across. Any comment or examples where the synoptic problem affects the interpretation, theology, or pastoral theology?


Blogger dan said...

When I was studying the so called "wisdom" material in the synoptics, the argument of some scholars was that Q, Mark, and Luke did not make an explicit identification between Jesus and the alledged Wisdom figure of Second Temple Judaism. It was, according to them, Matthew who later made this explicit connection. I treat this whole issue in chapter 4, "Jesus as Wisdom in the Synoptic Gospels." My conclusion was that scholars were overreading the Matthew material and seeing an identification of Jesus with Wisdom where it did not exist. But this illustrates the type of phenomenon which Scott may have had in mind. I guess one would have to scour the scholarship to find other examples. I suspect that at the end of the day much would have been made of little. But I may need to be corrected. Interesting question.

1:31 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home