Download Free Some Principles Of Literary Criticism And Their Application To The Synoptic Problem Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Some Principles Of Literary Criticism And Their Application To The Synoptic Problem and write the review.

The problematic literary relationship among the Synoptic Gospels has given rise to numerous theories of authorship and priority. The primary objective of Rethinking the Synoptic Problem is to familiarize students with the main positions held by New Testament scholars in this much-debated area of research. The contributors to this volume, all leading biblical scholars, highlight current academic trends within New Testament scholarship and updates evangelical understandings of the Synoptic Problem.
This book makes a major contribution to the ongoing debate about the synoptic problem, especially concerning the question of which gospel was written first. The scholarly consensus, developed over two hundred years of discussion, has favoured Markan priority and the dependence of both Matthew and Luke upon Mark. In an ongoing contemporary revival of the Griesbach hypothesis, some scholars have advocated the view that Mark used, conflated and abbreviated Matthew and Luke. The author explores the role played by arguments connected with christological development in support of both these views. Deploying a comparative redaction-critical approach to the problem, Dr Head argues that the critical basis of the standard christological argument for Markan priority is insecure and based on anachronistic scholarly concerns. Nevertheless, in a through-going comparative reappraisal of the christological outlooks of Matthew and Mark the author finds decisive support for the hypothesis of Markan priority, arguing that Matthew was a developer rather than a corrector of Mark.
Excerpt from Some Principles of Literary Criticism and Their Application to the Synoptic Problem Matt. And Mark agree against Luke in the placing of two sections in which the narrative is evidently threefold: The true kindred of Christ, recorded in Mark 3 31 - 35 and Matt. - 50 immediately preceding the parables by the sea (mark - 34; Matt. In Luke follows these parables; the imprisonment of John the Baptist, recorded in Mark 18 and Matt. 4 in connection with the results of the missionary journey of the Twelve, is given by Luke at the close of his account of the preaching of John, Luke 20. In the arrangement of paragraphs within a section Matt. And Mark agree against Luke in the account of the last supper and in the narrative of the trial. Besides these instances there are three in which Luke, though recording an event similar to that of Mark and Matt., evidently gives a wholly independent account unrelated in a literary way; and one in which Luke's account is, in the main at least, independent of Mark, and Matt. Is partly parallel to Mark, partly to Luke. These passages - Luke - 30; - 11; - 50 and - 32 - do not concern us at this point. Mark and Luke agree against Matt. In the location of thirteen sections, which lie between Matt. And Within these limits there are certain groups of two or three sections the sections of which succeed one another in the same order as in Mark and Luke, but the groups themselves are differently located. In respect to the narratives which precede and follow these limits, Matt. Agrees with Mark in the order of sections except in the transposition of the conversation between Jesus and his disciples con cerning the withered fig tree to a place in immediate connection with the cursing of the tree. But as Luke omits both of these sections, the transposition does not result in a disagreement of Matt. With both Mark and Luke. Matt. And Luke never agree against Mark in order of sections or paragraphs. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
The most common explanation for the material shared by Matthew and Luke (the double tradition) is that Matthew and Luke both used a source now lost, called Q. If we adopt the Q hypothesis to account for the double tradition, then what theory best accounts for the material that Matthew and Luke share with Mark? Three main theories have been proposed: Matthew and Luke used the Gospel of Mark as a source (the standard theory of Markan priority), Matthew and Luke used a revised version of Mark's gospel (the Deutero-Mark hypothesis), or all three evangelists used a source similar to, but earlier than, the Gospel of Mark (the Proto-Mark hypothesis). Delbert Burkett provides new data that calls into question the standard theory of Markan priority and the Deutero-Mark hypothesis. He offers the most comprehensive case to date for the Proto-Mark hypothesis, concluding that this theory best accounts for the Markan material.