No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
In attempts to provide a sounder basis for the solution of the Synoptic problem some scholars have sought to apply statistical methods to the Synoptic data. Here some observations will be made concerning certain of the attempts. The study of C. E. CARLSTON and D. NORLIN 1) was based on a sampling of the material which they classified as triple tradition and double tradition. Their purpose was to see how closely Lk. and Mt. correspond to one another when, according to the authors' hypothesis, Mt. and Lk. used Mk. However, they made a mistake in handling the material of the gospels when they assume that for statistical purposes one can consider equivalent words synonyms 2). It is not that their judgment is necessarily wrong when they so identify different words; rather there is no statistical control for such a judgment. Thus they find, for example, as common to both gospels twenty-one words in Mt. viii 2-4 and twenty-five in Lk. v I2b-I4, whereas in actual fact thirty-seven words in each passage are the same 3); in Mt. vi 25-33; Lk. xii 22-31 they find 130/128 words common 4), but the actual number of complete agreements is II3 5); they count thirty-three words as common to Mt. v 3.6.II-I2; Lk. vi 20-2Ia.22-23 6), whereas
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.