Comments on: Powell’s “Introducing the NT” and the Synoptic Problem http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2009/10/powells-introducing-the-nt-and-the-synoptic-problem/ Biblical Studies, Exegesis, Theology, etc. by Josh Mann Tue, 01 Jun 2010 23:16:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Biblical Studies Carnival XLVII « Paul of Tarsus http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2009/10/powells-introducing-the-nt-and-the-synoptic-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-756 Biblical Studies Carnival XLVII « Paul of Tarsus Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:11:59 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=814#comment-756 [...] Josh Mann provides an annotated list of “… introductory textbooks on the NT deal with synoptic problem.” [...] [...] Josh Mann provides an annotated list of “… introductory textbooks on the NT deal with synoptic problem.” [...]

]]> By: Josh Mann http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2009/10/powells-introducing-the-nt-and-the-synoptic-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-596 Josh Mann Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:34:32 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=814#comment-596 I think the primary issue at stake has to do with how NT introductions cover the synoptic problem. Goodacre's complaint was that they too often present the two-source theory as a 'slam-dunk' without giving other theories (esp. Farrer) a fair shake. On either side of the theological spectrum, scholars recognize that sources were used by the Gospel writers (cf. Luke 1:1-4). The call here is for authors of NT introductions to present the possible solutions fairly, recognizing how recent scholarship has contributed to the issues. I think the primary issue at stake has to do with how NT introductions cover the synoptic problem. Goodacre’s complaint was that they too often present the two-source theory as a ‘slam-dunk’ without giving other theories (esp. Farrer) a fair shake. On either side of the theological spectrum, scholars recognize that sources were used by the Gospel writers (cf. Luke 1:1-4). The call here is for authors of NT introductions to present the possible solutions fairly, recognizing how recent scholarship has contributed to the issues.

]]> By: Andrew http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2009/10/powells-introducing-the-nt-and-the-synoptic-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-595 Andrew Fri, 23 Oct 2009 02:43:51 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=814#comment-595 I would say that my assessment is just that: much like the distancing from JEDP among liberal scholars after Cassuto's critique in 1951, conservatives are shying away from the messier aspects of the Synoptic solution they hold to...sadly, we cannot refer back to a single author here to reconcile the differences! I would say that my assessment is just that: much like the distancing from JEDP among liberal scholars after Cassuto’s critique in 1951, conservatives are shying away from the messier aspects of the Synoptic solution they hold to…sadly, we cannot refer back to a single author here to reconcile the differences!

]]> By: Josh Mann http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2009/10/powells-introducing-the-nt-and-the-synoptic-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-587 Josh Mann Wed, 21 Oct 2009 23:41:35 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=814#comment-587 Mike, I noticed this, too, but I'm not sure I have an answer. To be more certain, one would probably need to investigate another 20 textbooks. I think you may be right, but I don't think that the main issue is one of 'openness' so much as inclusion. Mike, I noticed this, too, but I’m not sure I have an answer. To be more certain, one would probably need to investigate another 20 textbooks. I think you may be right, but I don’t think that the main issue is one of ‘openness’ so much as inclusion.

]]> By: Mike Koke http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2009/10/powells-introducing-the-nt-and-the-synoptic-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-586 Mike Koke Wed, 21 Oct 2009 22:21:34 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=814#comment-586 Josh, this is a very interesting post. One thing I noticed from your list is that it seems to me that the scholars who were most open to Markan priority without Q in these introductory textbooks tended to be much more conservative (Blomberg, Kostenberger, Moo/Carson). Could this be somewhat influenced by their disagreement with the direction some scholarship on Q has taken? Josh, this is a very interesting post. One thing I noticed from your list is that it seems to me that the scholars who were most open to Markan priority without Q in these introductory textbooks tended to be much more conservative (Blomberg, Kostenberger, Moo/Carson). Could this be somewhat influenced by their disagreement with the direction some scholarship on Q has taken?

]]> By: Josh Mann http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2009/10/powells-introducing-the-nt-and-the-synoptic-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-584 Josh Mann Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:58:36 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=814#comment-584 Interesting. It's certainly a maze! Interesting. It’s certainly a maze!

]]> By: mike http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2009/10/powells-introducing-the-nt-and-the-synoptic-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-583 mike Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:28:25 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=814#comment-583 good post josh. so you came through mbts without holding to matthean priority? i'm impressed, though i think i've made the move from markan to matthean priority myself. i used to agree with the philosophy that the shorter work came first, but the dating of luke-acts has changed my mind. i tend to date acts not long after the situation in acts 28, so if luke came first, then it's relatively early. and i'm buying more and more into the idea that mark put together a snappier, more concise, literary masterpiece for a community in rome. i don't know, lots to think about. for me personally, it's a good discussion with lots of room for disagreement AND good conversation, nothing to cry "liberal!" or "fundamentalist!" about. again, good post! good post josh. so you came through mbts without holding to matthean priority? i’m impressed, though i think i’ve made the move from markan to matthean priority myself. i used to agree with the philosophy that the shorter work came first, but the dating of luke-acts has changed my mind. i tend to date acts not long after the situation in acts 28, so if luke came first, then it’s relatively early. and i’m buying more and more into the idea that mark put together a snappier, more concise, literary masterpiece for a community in rome.

i don’t know, lots to think about. for me personally, it’s a good discussion with lots of room for disagreement AND good conversation, nothing to cry “liberal!” or “fundamentalist!” about.

again, good post!

]]> By: Stephen C. Carlson http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2009/10/powells-introducing-the-nt-and-the-synoptic-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-581 Stephen C. Carlson Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:29:03 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=814#comment-581 Thanks for mentioning my website, Josh. Thanks for mentioning my website, Josh.

]]> By: Ken Mullins http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2009/10/powells-introducing-the-nt-and-the-synoptic-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-580 Ken Mullins Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:56:06 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=814#comment-580 I agree, but the synoptic problem is very difficult to summarize in a few paragraphs or even a few pages. I agree, but the synoptic problem is very difficult to summarize in a few paragraphs or even a few pages.

]]> By: Josh Mann http://www.sakeoftruth.com/2009/10/powells-introducing-the-nt-and-the-synoptic-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-579 Josh Mann Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:15:04 +0000 http://www.sakeoftruth.com/?p=814#comment-579 Andrew, a brief summary can be found <a href="http://www.hypotyposeis.org/synoptic-problem/" rel="nofollow">here</a>. If you had NT Survey with Dr. Tomlinson, you likely used the Carson/Moo text. Chapter 2 deals with the synoptic problem in greater detail. Andrew, a brief summary can be found here. If you had NT Survey with Dr. Tomlinson, you likely used the Carson/Moo text. Chapter 2 deals with the synoptic problem in greater detail.

]]>