Sources of the Synoptic GospelsPatton, Carl S. (Carl Safford)
Religion
Sources of the Synoptic Gospels
Patton, Carl S. (Carl Safford)
Bible. Gospels -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
Dr. Robinson, in his _Study of the Gospels_,[104] maintains, quite
correctly, that Matthew's chap. vi breaks the connection in his Sermon on
the Mount. If it is omitted, the connection is not only better, but is the
same as that of Luke's in his Sermon on the Plain. He also considers that
Mt vi, 7-15, breaks the connection between the verses that immediately
precede and immediately follow them. He therefore concludes that Mt vi,
1-5, 16-18, at one time had a separate existence of its own. This is not
impossible. The disarrangement by the insertion of chap. vi is indeed
obvious. Bacon, in his _Sermon on the Mount_, and Votaw, in his article
under the same title in Hastings' _Dictionary of the Bible_, bring out the
same composite character of the Sermon as Matthew has it. But much of this
material which Matthew has inserted in his Sermon on the Mount is
duplicated word for word in other connections in Luke, and so is uniformly
accredited to Q. This creates a presumption that the rest of this
interpolated material, especially where it is obviously homogeneous in
character with the Q material generally, was taken by Matthew from his
recension of Q. It is not contended that none of this material which
Matthew has here inserted and which is nowhere duplicated in Luke was in
Luke's recension; it is only contended that since Matthew's recension and
Luke's recension are demonstrated to have been different from each other
in certain passages, it is fair to press the argument from this difference
to its reasonable limit, and assume that much if not most of this logian
matter peculiar to Matthew stood before him in his source. In the case of
the verses now before us, however, it seems extremely improbable that Luke
with his interest in alms-giving (see Lk xi, 41; xii, 33) should have
found them in his source and have omitted them.
ABOUT PRAYER
(Mt vi, 5-8)
This sounds like a "midrash" on the Lord's Prayer. There are several
Matthean words in the passage. Μισθός is used ten times by Matthew as
against once by Mark and thrice in Luke's Gospel. Βατταλογέω is found here
only in the New Testament, and not in the Septuagint. Πολυλογία is found
here only in the New Testament. Εἰσακούω is an infrequent word in the New
Testament, being used only in this passage, in Luke's chap. i, once in
Acts, and twice in the Epistles. Ἀποδίδωμι is used eighteen times by
Matthew; seven of these uses are found in the section xviii, 25-34, and
three in the unduplicated verses vi, 4, 6, 18. It is used once by Mark and
eight times by Luke in his Gospel. These facts are hardly enough to
establish any verdict as to the origin of the section now in question, tho
they would rather look toward Matthew's derivation of it, with its
corresponding sections vi, 1-4, and vi, 16-18, from some written source.
Such being the case, Matthew's recension of Q will certainly fit the
requirements better than any other known document.
ABOUT FASTING
(Mt vi, 16-18)
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account