@JonathanChell I was hoping you would NOT make value judgements about Crossan. For our purposes here, I don't care what his theology is, or his presuppositional framework. All that matters is that he is a "leading scholar" with access to the views of his peers and knows that there is a massive consensus for Markan priority.
@JonathanChell This consensus is important because it reflects many years of research by those scholars. If we ignore this, we could be left with just posting our own opinions, for example: Matthew wrote Matthew, Mark wrote Mark and so on, although there is no actual evidence for this.
@JonathanChell I could, of course, summarise some of the research in every answer I write, but such summaries would be far longer than the answers themselves, which would be pointless. Markan priority is now mainstream to the extent that it can stand alongside authorship traditions as a reasonable alternative.
@Jonathan Dick has replied in the chat room - I don't think he's aware that you won't be notified of his message because you haven't been in there recently. — Jack Douglas1 min ago
:)
As far as I understand the comment thread, Jonathan is suggesting you edit your answer to indicate Crossan's critical presuppositional framework. That seems to be a reasonable request and correct use of comments, but of course you are under no obligation to do so and others often do not when they cite scholors.
@JackDouglas Thanks for your advice. But as I see it, there is no critical presuppositional framework. Crossan merely reports that nearly all scholars support Markan priority. Whether they are right or wrong is another matter.
Also, while my views are very different to yours, I appreciate the effort you put into your answers here and benefit from their logic and research, thanks.
@JackDouglas Thank you for your support. I try to be neutral and steer between divergent views. This can be stressful at times, when some express strong dissent, so a little support does help.
@Susan AFAIK, the Wikipedia article is fair enough (one or two inconsequential oddities). This blog post (in my feed reader - often interesting tidbits) worth a read through. Silluq/Sof pasuq could be as early as 8th C CE; "chapters" come much later, and aren't coincident with petuchot/setumot, as you will know. HTH!
@Davïd Thanks, hadn’t even looked at wikipedia. Also didn’t know the words for petuchot/setumot but I get the idea. While searching to confirm the singulars of those, I ran across a Judaism.SE Q&A that may be of interest to @disciple given an inquiry of his that I’m not sure we ever answered here.
@Davïd And thanks for those links. Haven’t read the other but that Tov chapter is (predictably) interesting. I like the next-to-last paragraph: "Only very rarely the translators were sophisticated enough to leave words untranslated.” :-) (Probably a link to that would be relevant on the other Ps 19 answer/comments trail, but I’m not going there.) Do you know what is “TCU” that he references a few times? It doesn't seem to be defined within that chapter. And what is the book, by the way?
@Susan I suppose I shouldn't assume that you know that Tov has put a lot of his stuff online. But I am assuming that!
You'll enjoy getting to know Aejmelaeus's stuff, too. She was director of the Göttingen Septuaginta Unternehmen and brings a slightly different perspective (from the so-called "Finnish School", having studied under Soisalon-Soininen).
I know! For that slightly different summer holiday, you could do the Göttingen LXX Summer School! What fun! B-)
@Davïd Looks like fun to me! Somehow I think the lack of any academic background in Greek or Biblical studies (let alone LXX studies) may be a barrier. But I’d love to be a fly on the wall.
@Davïd That’s sort of like one of those, “Needless to say...” sentences. Anyway, sort of, but links are appreciated.
Question
In Phil 2:12, What is the Linguistic Justification Behind the Modern Translation?
Phil 2:12, NASB - .. continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling,
Phil 2:12, NA - .. μετὰ φόβου καὶ τρόμου [with fear and trembling] τὴν ἑαυτῶν σωτηρίαν [of your own salvation] κατ...
Philippians 2:12 (ESV)
12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling,
What did Paul mean when he said, "work out your own salvation?"
Verb: stir the pot (third-person singular simple present stirs the pot, present participle stirring the pot, simple past and past participle stirred the pot)
To cause unrest or dissent.
@DickHarfield An expression that I learned recently. ;)
Philippians 2:12 (ESV)
12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling,
What did Paul mean when he said, "work out your own salvation?"
The Library
The Library