1 / 12

euangelion = gospel = “good news”, as used in Mk 1:1

euangelion = gospel = “good news”, as used in Mk 1:1 Mt, Mk, Lk = synoptic gospels = “gospels seeing things alike,” from Greek synoptikos (“seen together”) Synoptic problem = how to explain agreements and disagreements of wording in Mt, Mk, Lk. Proto-gospel theory.

duena
Download Presentation

euangelion = gospel = “good news”, as used in Mk 1:1

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. euangelion = gospel = “good news”, as used in Mk 1:1 Mt, Mk, Lk = synoptic gospels = “gospels seeing things alike,” from Greek synoptikos (“seen together”) Synoptic problem = how to explain agreements and disagreements of wording in Mt, Mk, Lk

  2. Proto-gospel theory “proto-gospel” in Greek, Aramaic or other language, e.g. apocryphal Secret Mark or Gospel of Peter Matthew Mark Luke

  3. Multiple proto-gospel theory Matthew Mark Luke

  4. Augustine of Hippo (d. 430) But why did Mk cut out so much of Mt? Matthew Mark Luke

  5. J.J. Griesbach (1789) But if Mk is digest of material shared by Mt and Lk, why is there much material that they share that Mk omits? Matthew Luke Mark

  6. J.J. Griesbach (1789) Also, why do Mt and Lk contradict each other? Why do they diverge in order of events when not matching Mk? Why does Lk omit material shared by Mt and Mk? Matthew Luke Mark

  7. 4-Source Hypothesis Mark Q (Quelle) M Matthew Luke L

  8. Arguments for the Priority of Mark Pattern of Agreement 1. All three agreeing 2. All three differing 3. Two out of three agreeing: Mk and Mt or Mk and Lk, but very rarely Mt and Lk if story is also in Mk, suggesting that Mk is original source

  9. Arguments for the Priority of Mark Sequence of Narrative Mt and Lk present Markan material in same order, but present shared material not found in Mk in different order. Suggests used Mk then plugged in other material where seemed appropriate. If Mt or Lk used each other, why would they change order of non-Markan material but keep Markan material in same order?

  10. Arguments for the Priority of Mark Characteristics of the Changes Mt and Lk improving on Mk’s Greek Mk is shortest gospel; why cut out material? Not summary, because presents longer versions of stories found in Mt

  11. Q = Explanation for material shared by Mt and Lk but not in Mk Mostly sayings of Jesus, but also narratives of temptation (Mt 4: 1-11; Lk 4: 1-13) and healing of centurion’s servant (Mt 8: 5-10; Lk 7: 1-10) Probably written document, to explain long passages of shared wording. Possibly had different editions. Lk’s version as closest to original sequence?

  12. M and L = Explanation for material only known to Mt (M) or Lk (L) Not known if one source each or many, or written or oral Synoptic problem important because if we know an author’s source, we can see how he modified it to suit own agenda, giving us insight into an author’s concerns

More Related