
	Where results make sense

Topic: Griesbach hypothesis

Related Topics

Synoptic problem

Farrer hypothesis

Johann Jakob Griesbach

Christian Hermann Weisse

Luke the Evangelist

New Testament

Ross rifle

Smethwick

Square kilometre

Fascism

Orion (constellation)

American Civil Rights Movement

Electric Light Orchestra

Civil Rights Act of 1964

Conscription Crisis of 1917

In the News (Fri 17 Feb 12)

EXECUTIVE POWER

Iran

ANALYSIS

Pakistan

Family compact

	Synoptic problem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		The Farrer hypothesis posits that Mark was written first and Matthew used Mark, but that Luke used both, thus dispensing with Q. The Griesbach hypothesis holds that Matthew was written first, and Luke used it in preparing his gospel.
		This lends strength to the Griesbach Hypothesis [scenario b(4)], but that support is weakened by Tuckett's mathematical observation that the relatively rare deviations of either Matthew or Luke from Mark's order means that this observation is not statistically significant.
		Griesbach's explanation of Mark's redactional procedure predicts that Mark should more agree with the Evangelist he currently is copying.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Synoptic_problem (1327 words)

	Encyclopedia: Griesbach hypothesis (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		The Griesbach hypothesis is a solution to the synoptic problem which gives priority to the Gospel of Matthew.
		Griesbach tried to meet the challenge given by Mark, and sees it mostly as a digest and a conflation that gives an account of the material where Matthew and Luke agree.
		Today this hypothesis is followed by an elect few ( W.R. Farmer 1964, B. Orchard, and D.L. Dungan), but the many problems it poses makes it a less credible hypothesis than the more common Two-source hypothesis supported by the majority of scholars.
	www.nationmaster.com /encyclopedia/Griesbach-hypothesis (311 words)

	Two source hypothesis (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		The Two-Source Hypothesis is the most commonly accepted solution to the synoptic problem among biblical scholars, which posits that there are two sources to Gospel of Matthew and Gospel of Luke : the Gospel of Mark and a lost,hypothetical sayings collection called Q.
		The Two-Source Hypothesis crossed the channel into England in the 1880s primarily dueto the efforts of WilliamSanday, but it was Burnett Hillman Streeter who definitively expressed the case in 1924.
		The Griesbach hypothesis continues to be the mainchallenger to the Two-Source Hypothesis in America, primarily due to the efforts of William R. Farmer ( 1965), but in England its most influential opponents favor the Farrer hypothesis (Mark →Matthew → Luke).
	www.therfcc.org /two-source-hypothesis-98625.html (186 words)

	Two-source hypothesis - Iridis Encyclopedia (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		The Two-Source Hypothesis was first articulated in 1838 by Christian Hermann Weisse, but it did not gain wide acceptance among German critics until Heinrich Julius Holtzmann endorsed it in 1863.
		The Two-Source Hypothesis crossed the channel into England in the 1880s primarily due to the efforts of William Sanday, but it was Burnett Hillman Streeter who definitively expressed the case in 1924.
		The Griesbach hypothesis of Johann Jakob Griesbach continues to be the main challenger to the Two-Source Hypothesis in America, primarily due to the efforts of William R. Farmer ( 1965), but in England its most influential opponents favor the Farrer hypothesis (Mark → Matthew → Luke).
	www.iridis.com /Two-source_hypothesis (181 words)

	The Little Known Literary Battles Between the Gospel Writers
		The latter hypothesis, now known as the "two-document" or "two-source" hypothesis, minimizes the most serious embarrassments for the church related to Mark and Luke while postulating and accepting as a lesser embarrassment that the Augustinian tradition was false in almost every respect.
		It shares with the Griesbach hypothesis the finding that certain evidence cannot be denied indicating that Matthew came first.
		It shares with the Augustinian hypothesis that Matthew was first written in the Hebrew tongue, and with the two-source hypothesis that Mark was the first gospel written in Greek.
	www.infidels.org /library/modern/james_deardorff/battles.html (3948 words)

	A PIONEER NARRATIVE CRITIC AND HIS SYNOPTIC HYPOTHESIS: Austin Farrer and Gospel Interpretation
		Farrer did not advocate a complete repeal of the nineteenth century, as William R. Farmer and others have done by their revival of the Griesbach hypothesis, the dominant theory of Synoptic relationships from ca.
		Farrer's Synoptic hypothesis was ancillary to his principal interest, the literary interpretation of the Gospels, especially Mark.
		For the recent revival of the Griesbach hypothesis, see William R. Farmer The Synoptic Problem: A Critical Analysis (New York: Macmillan, 1964); Allan J. McNicol et al., Beyond the Q Impasse—Luke's Use of Matthew (Valley Forge, Penn.: Trinity, 1996); David B. Peabody et al., Mark's Use of Matthew and Luke (Valley Forge, Penn.: Trinity, forthcoming).
	personal1.stthomas.edu /dtlandry/peterson.html (4542 words)

	New Page 1
		While the theories of Augustine and Griesbach were proposed prior to the Two Source hypothesis, their authors accepted without question the patristic tradition that Matthew, as eyewitness testimony, was written first.
		Griesbach was the first to claim explicitly that Luke wrote second.
		Griesbach did not acknowledge the similarity of his position to earlier proposals of Henry Owen (1766); these were first pointed out in 1826 by his former student, W. de Wette (B. Reicke, "Griesbach’s answer to the Synoptic Question," p.
	virtualreligion.net /forum/q_canon.html (6580 words)

	Synoptic Gospels Primer - Glossary: J. J. Griesbach
		Pointing to discrepancies between gospel narratives, Griesbach dismissed traditional attempts to harmonize these accounts and focused attention on their literary dependence instead.
		Griesbach's thesis was championed by his student, W. de Wette.
		Thus, in Griesbach's view, Mark worked like a cross between a researcher and a Reader's Digest editor to produce for non-Jewish readers a single condensed version of two books, adding only minor details and 24 new sentences to passages quoted from his sources.
	www.virtualreligion.net /primer/griesb.html (758 words)

	THE SYNOPTIC QUESTION (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		On the two-source hypothesis, the additions to the triple tradition in Matthew and Luke are explained by postulating that neither the author of Matthew nor the author of Luke used the other as a source; rather both independently made additions to their Markan source from other another source or sources.
		This assumption is compatible with both the two-gospel or Griesbach hypothesis, with the Augustinian hypothesis and with the position represented by Farrer and Gould that the author of Matthew used Mark as a source and the author of Luke used both as sources.
		On the two-source hypothesis, close verbatim agreement in the double tradition is explained by postulating that the authors of Matthew and Luke had access to a source or sources of mostly sayings material, which was unavailable to the author of Mark or at least was not used by him.
	www.abu.nb.ca /courses/ntintro/synoptic.htm (10979 words)

	Mark: First Gospel or Pious Forgery? Christianity Revealed - Askwhy! Publications.
		The Griesbach hypothesis—Matthew was copied by Luke, and Mark conflated them both—can explain the alternating support in order of pericopes of Mark by Matthew and Luke without appeal to "lost sources." Its failing is providing a comprehensible account of Mark's composition, particularly explaining Mark's major omissions from his sources Matthew and Luke.
		Proponents of the Two-Gospel hypothesis take these passages to be agreements between Matthew and Luke against Mark, and should be added to that category of evidence against the Two-Source hypothesis, as if it is obligatory for editors to use all of the material at their disposal.
		The Two-Gospel hypothesis requires the author of Mark to rewrite Matthew and Luke omitting the miraculous birth of Jesus, the sermon on the mount, and the resurrection appearances, but adding the the young man fleeing naked, a difficult healing miracle for Jesus and the putative God supposed mad by his family.
	essenes.net /m50.htm (4279 words)

	Source_hypotheses_2 - Page: 1 of 1
		According to the Griebach Hypothesis, Matthew was the first gospel to be written, and Luke used Matthew as a source.
		This hypothesis was very popular for some time, but most scholars today do not think that it correctly accounts for the literary relationship between the Synoptic Gospels.
		The Four-Source Hypothesis adds two more sources: "M," which is a special source used by Matthew, and "L," which is a special source used by Luke.
	people.smu.edu /dwatson/source_hypotheses_2_001.htm (218 words)

	Direction: The Synoptic Problem and the Genre Question
		In what later became known as the Griesbach hypothesis, he sought to establish the priority of Matthew and the subsequent sequence of Luke and Mark.
		By the middle of the present century the hypothesis of Markan priority had become dogma, one of the “assured results” of modern biblical study.
		The fourth was “The Cambridge Griesbach Conference” held in Cambridge, England, August, 1979.
	www.directionjournal.org /article?396 (3437 words)

	The Present State of the Synoptic Problem (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		Traditionally, defenses of one hypothesis over against another had been made on the basis of careful detailed analyses of one or more texts, or on the basis of some particular criterion, for example whether one Gospel is more or less Jewish and/or Palestinian than another.
		Yet, in another publication appearing in the same year (1995), it was possible for highly regarded specialists in Gospel studies to state that the research of the team of scholars who were responsible for the conclusions in the publication concerned, rested in part on the two pillars of Marcan priority and the existence of ‘Q’.
		The Two-source hypothesis, then, must maintain (1) the independence of Matthew and Luke--against the strong evidence that one knew the other; and (2) the independence of Mark and Q--despite the numerous "overlaps." It is not adequate to the task.
	www.upco.es /personal/jmmoreno/cursos/lucas/2Gospels.htm (8934 words)

	Alternative: alternative ... (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		Against be wind anderson darling hypothesis testing regression what is a joint normal distribution alternative hypothesis, alternate hypothesis sas correlation jarque bera latin hypercube contingency tables griesbach binomial statistical.
		Chisquare land certain quasi orthogonal hypothesis analysing duncan's jarque bera alternative hypothesis, weibull normal distribution studentized error error regression multiple comparison exponential chisquare.
		R squared a need research binomial entropy systematic tukey's hipotesis alternative hypothesis, griesbach multiple cochran's quasi forming binomial flwelder tabulate r squared.
	alternative0.blogspot.com /2005/02/alternative-hypothesis.html (195 words)

	The Two Source Hypothesis
		By the1830s, when the consensus was coalescing around the Griesbach hypothesis, especially in the work of the Tübingen school, two scholars, F. Schleiermacher and Karl Lachmann, laid the groundwork for what would become the two fundamental tenets of the 2SH.
		Schleiermacher operated within the perimeters of the Fragmentary Hypothesis, which held that the synoptic gospels were composed from a multiplicity of shorter documents.
		He was a lone voice during a period that was dominated by the Tübingen school, who found the Griesbach hypothesis amenable to their rigid conception of the development of history in accordance with the Hegelian dialectic.
	www.mindspring.com /~scarlson/synopt/2sh (2655 words)

	Griesbach hypothesis (Synoptics criticism) - The Bible - What's Been Published (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		The Griesbach hypothesis and redaction criticism / Sherman E. Johnson.
		Old Testament quotations in the Synoptic Gospels, and the two-document hypothesis / by David S. New.
		Beyond the Q impasse : Luke's use of Matthew : a demonstration by the research team of the International Institute for Gospel Studies / preface by William R. Farmer ; Allan J. McNicol, editor ; with David L. Dungan, and David B. Peabody.
	www.pitbossannie.com /rps-bs-griesbach-hypothesis-synoptics-criticism.html (117 words)

	Amazon.ca: Books: Revival of the Griesbach Hypothesis (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		There has recently been strong support for the hypothesis that, contrary to the formerly accepted view that Mark's gospel was the first to be written, Mark was in fact the last synoptic gospel to appear.
		This book is a detailed examination of the arguments used to support this view, which constitutes a revival of that put forward by J. Griesbach at the end of the eighteenth century.
		Since Markan priority and the Two-Document hypothesis have been basic presuppositions for much modern gospel study, all attempts to question them must be taken very seriously.
	www.amazon.ca /exec/obidos/ASIN/052123803X/medfools01-20 (215 words)

	Bibliography
		William R. Farmer, "The Statement of the Hypothesis" in Interrelations of the Gospels ( Dungan 1990a : 125-56).
		Frans Neirynck, "Introduction: The Two-Source Hypothesis" in Interrelations of the Gospels ( Dungan 1990a : 3-22).
		David Peabody, "The Late Secondary Redaction of Mark's Gospel and the Griesbach Hypothesis: A Response to Helmut Koester" in Colloquy on New Testament Studies ( Corley 1983 : 87-132).
	www.mindspring.com /~scarlson/synopt/catalog.htm (8220 words)

	PROBLEMS WITH THE SYNOPTIC PROBLEM (This Rock: March 1994)
		The Griesbach hypothesis achieved a certain celebrity in the early nineteenth century, and then it fell out of style as the Marcan hypothesis took hold.
		This meant that the Griesbach hypothesis, as well as the Augustinian and all others which made Matthew the earliest of the Gospels, simply could not provide a viable solution to the source problem.
		Here, however, we are dealing with a hypothesis that has to be true--indeed, has to be considered certain--because it is the only hypothesis capable of explaining all the features that we find in the Greek text of the Gospels.
	www.catholic.com /thisrock/1994/9403fea2.asp (7181 words)

	A Monopoly on Marcan Priority
		But while it is true that the Q hypothesis can only stand if Marcan Priority is first affirmed, the converse is certainly not the case: Marcan Priority does not require the existence of Q in order to make good sense of the Gospels.
		The cause for concern is that the Q hypothesis is artificially bolstered in the mind of many scholars and students of the Gospels because they are unaware of the major alternative that would enable them to dispense with Q at the same time as affirming and building on Marcan Priority.
		It is an hypothesis that as part of the Two-Source Theory has allowed us the means to get familiar with Marcan Priority, to work with it, to test it and to re-imagine Christian origins with it.
	personal1.stthomas.edu /dtlandry/goodacre.html (8500 words)

	Robert Derrenbacker: Review of Allan McNicol (et al), Beyond the Q Impasse
		The majority of these source critics hold to the Two-Document (or "Two-Source") Hypothesis (2DH): that is, Mark and the Sayings Gospel Q are the sources for Matthew and Luke.
		Others advocate a variety of competing "solutions": for example, the Farrer-Goulder Hypothesis (Mark is a source for Matthew and Luke, but Luke also has access to Matthew); the so-called "Jerusalem School" hypothesis that envisions a Hebrew ur-gospel behind all three Synoptics, Luke being the earliest to make use of this source; M. É.
		Boismard’s "Multiple-Stage" hypothesis, etc. Yet by far, the most significant competitor to the 2DH has been the "Two-Gospel" (or "Griesbach") Hypothesis (2GH), since William R. Farmer’s publication of The Synoptic Problem: A Critical Analysis (New York: Macmillan, 1964; repr.
	www.bham.ac.uk /theology/synoptic-l/derrenba.htm (1971 words)

	bible.org: The Synoptic Problem (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		On an independent hypothesis, either John or the synoptics are wrong, or else John does not record the same events at all in the life of Jesus.
		On the other hand, according to the Griesbach Hypothesis, we must explain two equally strong but opposite tendencies: Luke sought to avoid the historical present in his Matthean source, and Mark sought to add the historical present to his Matthean source, even though his Lukan source avoided it.
		The Griesbach Hypothesis also has difficulties in explaining why Mark, with his strong inclination toward using the historical present, did not follow Matthew in the following instances when he has the historical present in the triple tradition: Matthew 8:26; 9:28; 15:12; 17:20; 19:7, and 8.
	www.bible.org /page.asp?page_id=669 (13390 words)

	Bibliography, Part 4: Gospels and Other New Testament Books (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-11-06)
		Orchard and Riley discuss internal and historical evidence for the Owen-Griesbach hypothesis, which proposed that Matthew was the first gospel, Luke was written second as a"Gentile gospel,"and Mark was written third, combining elements of both.
		This is a highly readable presentation of the modern evidence supporting the Owen-Griesbach hypothesis, and suggests a motivation for the writing of Mark.
		Reicke offers a new synoptic table from which he concludes that the order of Matthew and Luke cannot be explained by their using Mark as a source.
	solon.cma.univie.ac.at /~neum/sciandf/fellow/bib4.html (640 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)