Re: Question on the Synoptic Gospel problem - an academic Quagmire
|
Hi Ian,
For the record, your earlier reply was sent out three times to the whole group: once with my email of 11 May attached, once with my email excised, and once as a forward of the first email.? You should have copies of each in your inbox (or spam file).
That said, I really appreciate your reply and feel blessed that the paper answered your initial question.??
Perhaps one of the reasons why much of modern Christianity seems to lack significance to most people is, as you note, that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.? Alas, religions tend to trivialize Christianity in order to get "bums on seats" who they feel might be turned off by deeper theological study.? It's interesting to contrast that with the muscular Christianity of the Bible where people were fully prepared to die in horrible ways for their beliefs.? I particularly like the quote attributed to Polycarp as he faced execution in Smyrna around AD 150:?
“Swear,” urged the Proconsul, “reproach Christ, and I will set you free.”? “86 years have I have served him,” Polycarp declared, “and he has done me no wrong. How can I blaspheme my King and my Savior?”? (Lightfoot translation)
I eagerly await your next question.
Blessings,
Ray
On Friday, 13 May 2022, 09:12:13 am AEST, ianmurray <imurray8@...> wrote:
Hello Ray,
?I have tried to send my reply to the whole group but for some reason my computer will not allow this.Hopefully you can send my reply to the whole group.
?Blessings,
?Ian Begin forwarded message:
Subject: Re: [b4uc] Question on the Synoptic Gospel problem - an academic Quagmire
Date: 13 May 2022 at 9:04:59 am AEST
Hello Ray,
WOW!!!!!!!!!?what a response to my question. I have read your three and half page explanation of document Q several times and I now have a full understanding of the theory.I agree with you that the theory does not change any of ?my Christian beliefs and I doubt that there is or was this hypothetical Document Q.?
I also read the two academic papers attached to your email. They are very complicated and I although I gained an impression of the arguments I certainly would not pass any examination on their contents.After reading these articles I again read your three and a half page explanation of document Q to clarify my thoughts.
The whole exercise has reinforced to me that?a little knowledge is dangerous thing.?I don’t remember where I read about document Q but obviously I did not really understand what the theory of document Q was all about.
?Your explanation raises another question that I will submit separately to avoid confusion. As always, thanks for all the work you have done in preparing your response.
?Blessings ,
?Ian
THE SYNOPTIC GOSPEL PROBLEM
– AN ACADEMIC QUAGMIRE G’day all, Although U3A Class R09
is on hiatus over Term 2, 2022, the discussion forum and website are still
open.? Please feel free to comment on or
ask anything.? This email addresses the following query: QUESTION FROM A
PARTICIPANT:
We don’t know who actually wrote the synoptic gospels whether it
was the disciples themselves or their scribes. Some books I have read written
by bible scholars refer to a hypothetical document “Q”.? This mystery document is supposed to be the
first ever written account of the synoptic gospels and these accounts have been
copied,? translated and modified down through the ages. Whether the theory
is that there were three documents “Q “, one for each disciple, or just one, I
am not sure.? I would appreciate your opinion on how the very first accounts
of each of the synoptic gospels have been identified and your thoughts on a
document or documents “Q”
Further to the preliminary answer provided a week or so ago, I have attached a 3-1/2 page PDF response (with lots of graphics) entitled "What About Q.pdf".
In addition, two academic papers are attached for those who may want to look deeper.?
- “The Lost?Gospel Of Q—Fact Or Fantasy?” by Dr. Eta Linnemann - educated among the very heart of the beast that originated this heresy (for that's what it is), she rebelled against the theory and gives a cogent discussion in this lengthy paper.? For the record, she published a shorter paper in the Biblical Archaeology Review that despite my membership I was unable to download.
- “The
Gospel of Q: A Public Domain Translation” by Dr. Mark Mattison.? This academic paper on the pro-Q side saves you from wading through all the convoluted jargon and gives you a look in English at what the Q-source issue is all about.
I really enjoyed doing this research.? Thanks heaps for the question.? I hope that I've answered your query okay.
Blessings,
Ray? Tutor U3A E09
|
