synoptic similarities

[Jan Klein]

I have a question about the synoptic problem. Many books deal with the underlying philosophy, but few actually on the textual problems. Does anyone have a suggestion where in Accordance I can find a solution for for example the remarkable similarity between mt 3: 7ff and I 3: 7ff (and other similarities) treated without Q as stopgap.

[Joe Weaks]

I interpret your question as asking which Matt/Luke commentaries in the Accorance library deal with synoptic issues? Hard to say. Some commentaries by series do more redactional/source stuff, for sure, like the NIGNTC.

I do not think there is a book on dissecting Synoptic Problem issues in the Accordance library. However, you can purchase the archive of the Journal of Biblical Literature which will have several articles which do so.

 

FYI, an excellent book on the Synoptic Problem, giving a great overview of the textual issues, has recently been made available for free.

Mark Goodacre's The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze. It does not assume a hypothetical Q as a stopgap. I can recommend the book very highly.

[Jan Klein]

Joe, Thank you very much for your comment and your hints.

I think the NIGNTC is good, but not extensive enough in this.

Thanks also for your reference to Goodacre.

In his book he gives a clear explanation of the problem. But in the end, his stopgap Farrer instead Q ...

But thanks again!!

[Joe Weaks]

But in the end, his stopgap Farrer instead Q 

Just to clarify for other readers, Farrer is the name of a scholar who explains Luke's use of Matthew. He is not a proposed hypothetical gospel such as Q (so I do not understand the response).

[Jan Klein]

To explain my response, I call it a stopgap because any signaled agreement can be solved posing that Luke has used Mark or Matthew, without the idea that there can be other reasons for the agreement. A kind of Deus ex Machina. I like to think about other solutions.