Matthean posteriority: an exploration of Matthew's use of Mark and Luke as a solution to the synoptic problem
Table of Contents -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Further Arguments for Matthean Posteriority -- 3. Some Challenges for Matthean Posteriority -- 4. Conclusion -- Bibliography -- Index
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Book |
| Language: | English |
| Subito Delivery Service: | Order now. |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| WorldCat: | WorldCat |
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
New York
Bloomsbury International Clark
2015
|
| In: | Year: 2015 |
| Reviews: | [Rezension von: MacEwen, Robert K., Matthean posteriority] (2017) (Howes, Llewellyn, 1980 -)
|
| Edition: | 1 [edition] |
| Series/Journal: | Library of New Testament studies
501 |
| IxTheo Classification: | HC New Testament |
| Further subjects: | B
Bible. Matthew
Criticism, interpretation, etc
B Synoptic Problem |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (doi) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Table of Contents -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Further Arguments for Matthean Posteriority -- 3. Some Challenges for Matthean Posteriority -- 4. Conclusion -- Bibliography -- Index This book explores the Matthean Posteriority Hypothesis (MPH), a largely neglected solution to the Synoptic Problem which holds that the author of the Gospel of Luke used the Gospel of Mark as a source, and that the author of the Gospel of Matthew used both the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Luke as sources. MacEwen begins with a survey of the scholars who have defended various forms of the MPH. Chapter 2 discusses two key lines of evidence which support the MPH. The first line of evidence is textual - demonstrating that Matthew could have known the contents of Luke's Gospel beyond merely the double tradition material. The second line of evidence, involving a study of strings of verbatim agreements in the Gospels, supports the view that Matthew depended directly on Luke. Chapter 3 explores evidence and arguments which can be seen as problematic for the MPH. MacEwen concludes that the MPH has been neither definitely proved nor disproved, and deserves further scholarly scrutiny |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Includes bibliographical references and index |
| ISBN: | 0567662403 |
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.5040/9780567662408 |