Re: Q and Papias

• To: Michael_Thompson@housing.ucsd.edu
• Subject: Re: Q and Papias
• From: Larry Swain <lswain@billings.lib.mt.us>
• Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 11:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
• Cc: B-Greek@virginia.edu, kenneth@sybase.com
• In-Reply-To: <CC1867885@CCMail.UCSD.Edu>

On Thu, 27 Oct 1994 Michael_Thompson@housing.ucsd.edu wrote:

>      I agree and go a step further.  I may be naive, but I feel that 
>      assumption of a Matthean priority in the writing of the gospels goes a 
>      long way to plugging a lot of the Q holes (as it were).  I believe 
>      that is Farmer's position isn't it?
>      
>      Mike Thompson
> 
But Farmer-Griesbach has its own problems, as many on this list have 
pointed out and will continue to do so.  And as I stated before, positing 
a Quelle (n) which the Synoptics drew on stands alone.  There is a 
difference between recognizing this source material and the 2 Source 
Hypothesis.  Thus, arguing for Matthean priority means rejection of the 2 
Source, but not necessarily rejection of Q (s).

• Re: Q and Papias
• From: Michael_Thompson@housing.ucsd.edu

• Prev: Re: Mat. 19:17
• Next: Re: Q and Papias
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread