Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Paul and the Gospels

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: yonder moynihan gillihan <ymgillih AT midway.uchicago.edu>
  • To: Corpus-paul <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Paul and the Gospels
  • Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 23:36:29 -0600 (CST)


T. Roche's comments about the ahistoricity of Q seem odd. Source
criticism is nothing if not a process of attempting to reconstruct the
history of texts. Do source critics fabricate "seams" in texts and
"evidence" of redactional activity because beyond all else they wish the
texts to be compilations of sources? Or do theories last because they are
enduringly useful and convincing descriptions of what we have before us?
I would venture the latter, and would not be surprised to see Q endure as
a hypothetical explanation of how Lk and Mt came to be, even if
nothing of material or other textual evidence ever surfaces.
Forgive my non-Pauline comments, and happy Easter.
Yonder Gillihan





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page