Download
Skip this Video
1 / 18
Source Criticism and the Synoptic Problem - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
- By urit
- Follow User
- 639 Views
- Uploaded on
Source Criticism and the Synoptic Problem. The Biblical Warrant for Source Criticism: Luke 1:1-4. Luke tells us clearly that there were many other gospels (1:1). Luke tells us that these attempts were according to the early oral traditions (1:2).
Download Presentation 
An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation
PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Source Criticism and the Synoptic Problem' - urit
An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.
While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
The Biblical Warrant for Source Criticism: Luke 1:1-4.
- Luke tells us clearly that there were many other gospels (1:1).
- Luke tells us that these attempts were according to the early oral traditions (1:2).
Luke numbers himself among the many and decides to investigate his sources and write an orderly account.
- We can surmise that the other gospels writers used the same procedures.
- Source criticism is nothing more than the attempt to discover from Luke and the other gospel writers their sources, with a view to better understanding their intentions.
General Solutions to the Synoptic Problem
- One can argue that the three gospels are totally independent of each other and that similarities are either coincidental or providential.
- One can argue that the three are related only because all have used common oral traditions .
One can argue that there is a literal relationship between the three, that one or two or three have copied from each other.
- At this point let me briefly state that one's position on this issue is not determined by one's view of inspiration unless that view be mechanical dictation.
The Answer
- Note that one’s answer must fulfill:
- Linguistic Choices
- Selection of Material Choices
- Choices of Order of Material
The Augustinian Hypothesis.
- Proponents: Augustine,
- The Basic Solution: Matthew was first, Mark used Matthew
The Griesbach Hypothesis
- Proponents: J.J. Griesbach, W.R. Farmer
- Basic Solution: Matthew was first, Luke was second and used Matthew, Mark was last and used both Matthew and Luke.
The Oxford Hypothesis (B.H. Streeter) Also known as the Two/Four Source Hypothesis.
Proponents: B.H. Streeter, The Four Gospels: A Study of Origins
- Basic Solution: Mark was first, Matthew was second and used Mk and Q, Luke was last and used Mark and Q. Both Matthew and Luke also had access to another source, called M and L respectively.
- Dominance: many scholars, even to this day, will speak of this solution as one "assured result" of gospel studies.
Mark QM LMatthew Luke
The Farrer Hypothesis
- Proponents: Austin Farrer, "On Dispensing with Q," in D.E. Nineham, Studies in the Gospels: Essays in Memory of R.H. Lightfoot (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1955), pp. 55-88.
- Basic Solution: Mark was first, Matthew was second and used Mark, Luke was last and used both Matthew and Mark.
Some Important Arguments for a Modified Oxford Hypothesis
- The Case for Markan Priority.
- Shared Content:
- Wording:
- Order:
- Primitivity:
- Expansion Tendency:
- Success:
The Case for Q: whether written or oral, or mixed.
- Wording:
- Order:
- Doublets:
- Independence of Matt and Luke:
- Nature:
Some Concluding Observations
- We will assume for the rest of the semester the general reliability of the Two/Four-Source Hypothesis.
- We must remember that the relationship was probably much more complex than we can trace with any degree of certainty.
- In the actual composition of each Gospel such factors as oral traditions, other written sources (cf. Lk 1:1-4), and redactional alterations are all at work.
