Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,435 Year: 3,692/9,624 Month: 563/974 Week: 176/276 Day: 16/34 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is it moral for God to punish us?
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17825
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


(3)
Message 105 of 145 (772107)
11-06-2015 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by kbertsche
11-06-2015 12:47 AM


quote:
There is good evidence that the four canonical gospels had been distributed and read by the early second century. I believe they were all widely accepted. I don't believe any other "gospels" had been written at this time, so there was nothing else to choose from.
Luke 1:1 talks of many accounts - which can hardly be true if the author knew only of Mark and Matthew (and he may not have known Matthew). We have fragments of the Oxyrnchus 1224 and Egerton Gospels, which have similar dates, and are otherwise unknown. The idea that only the canonical four existed by the early 2nd Century is rather unlikely to be true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by kbertsche, posted 11-06-2015 12:47 AM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by kbertsche, posted 11-06-2015 2:20 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17825
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 109 of 145 (772122)
11-06-2015 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by kbertsche
11-06-2015 2:20 PM


quote:
You raise a good point about Luke 1:1. Was Luke referring to Q? To other collections of sayings? It's hard to tell, but this would be interesting to try to understand.
Luke 1:1 seems to be talking about narratives. (And I would add that Q is proposed on the grounds that Luke did not have access to Matthew, so I would be reluctant to count both)
As for sayings, Q is thought to be primarily a collection of sayings, and Papias attributes a collection of sayings to Matthew. So I don't think that disparaging collections of sayings is entirely justified either.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by kbertsche, posted 11-06-2015 2:20 PM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by kbertsche, posted 11-06-2015 4:44 PM PaulK has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17825
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 115 of 145 (772146)
11-07-2015 5:03 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by kbertsche
11-06-2015 9:54 PM


With regard to sayings I don't think there's much confusing them with narratives - aside from the fact there's a spectrum rather than a clear divide. Either a collection of sayings or a largely narrative account can be called a Gospel
quote:
But think about this a bit more deeply. Why don't we have a similar rich body of early copies and written references for the gnostic writings? I can see only two explanations; either these gnostic writings had not been written yet, or they were not generally accepted.
Why must we speculate about Luke's sources? Why are the documents represented by the Egerton and Oxyrynchus 1224 fragments otherwise unknown?
We don't have much from the 1st or 2nd centuries from either the Gnostic or the orthodox camps in terms of actual manuscripts, and we can be sure that many documents have been completely lost and forgotten.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by kbertsche, posted 11-06-2015 9:54 PM kbertsche has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024