Closing Soon! Classic Studies on the Synoptic Problem
Place your bids here:
http://www.logos.com/product/34088/classic-studies-on-the-synoptic-problem
- Oxford Studies in the Synoptic Problem edited by William Sanday
- The Corrections of Mark Adopted by Matthew and Luke by Edwin A. Abbott
- Horae Synopticae: Contributions to the Study of the Synoptic Problem, 2nd ed., Revised and Supplemented, by John C. Hawkins
- The Common Tradition of the Synoptic Gospels in the Text of the Revised Version by Edwin A. Abbott and William George Rushbrooke
- Observations on the Four Gospels: Tending Chiefly, to Ascertain the Times of Their Publication; and to Illustrate the Form and Manner of their Composition by Henry Owen
Comments
-
It's a good collection but honestly I think I have enough to discuss the problem in a Bible study. Plus, how many times does a preacher really discuss the "synoptic problem" indepth with his church? Most of those type of studies are for the preacher's own learning, but then again is just my opinion. I know I've touched the basics with the churches I've worked with and it pretty much boils down to all being inspired and supplement one another. Scripture supplements itself.
Blessings!
DAL
0 -
I haven't met many (uhum, any) preachers who had a good grip on the synoptic problem. This set is for students, scholars, and researchers. Just seeing the name of William Sanday was enough to sell it for me.
0 -
Dean053 said:
I haven't met many (uhum, any) preachers who had a good grip on the synoptic problem. This set is for students, scholars, and researchers. Just seeing the name of William Sanday was enough to sell it for me.
Well I think if we take the Bible for what it is: "The Inspired Word of God" then it becomes apparent that the so called synoptic problem is just a man made charade to try to sow doubt in the hearts of people. I honestly don't even worry about it because true seekers take the simple answer, Matthew, Mark and Luke supplement one another and even though they are similar they wrote being guided by the Holy Spirit. The other "technicalities" become worthless because nobody even knows where "Q" came from anyway (assuming Q is real, which is not somebody made it up). But like I mentioned before, I already have enough material on the subject and I don't think I need to have a good grip on it to make it to heaven anyway, so I'll leave the synoptic problem to its own problem - lack of actual evidence to make it a real problem.
Blessings!
DAL
0 -
Well, I believe it's inspired as well, and certainly don't think the Synoptic problem is supposed to be digested by everyone. But we do have whole chunks of text which are identical, and there does seem to be a complex literary relationship between the Gospels, and Luke himself said he had multiple sources (even though only Matthew and Mark had written before him), so I don't see anything particularly 'liberal' in trying to untangle that, and in fact men like William Sanday were quite conservative. Sometimes we need to oppose the notions of the critics, but other times I prefer to turn their arsenal upon them.
0 -
Dean053 said:
Well, I believe it's inspired as well, and certainly don't think the Synoptic problem is supposed to be digested by everyone. But we do have whole chunks of text which are identical, and there does seem to be a complex literary relationship between the Gospels, and Luke himself said he had multiple sources (even though only Matthew and Mark had written before him), so I don't see anything particularly 'liberal' in trying to untangle that, and in fact men like William Sanday were quite conservative. Sometimes we need to oppose the notions of the critics, but other times I prefer to turn their arsenal upon them.
True what you say. I guess in a sense you gotta know "your enemies" so you can know where they're coming from and refute them. Thanks for the conversation!
Blessings!
DAL
0 -
Time's running out on this one--last chance to get these at a great price!
0 -
The set might reach $20.
0
