Abstract
This Handbook consists of thirty essays divided in to two parts. Part One, ‘The Problem and Nature of the Synoptic Gospels’, includes a selection of essays that will be of interest to two contrasting types of reader: those for whom the Synoptic Problem is of central interest and those who prefer to consign the Synoptic Problem to the periphery. The former group will find essays relevant to important questions of methodology, while the latter group will find ammunition for the argument that the Problem is unsolvable and, for this reason, deserves to be put to one side. Those in the first group, among whom I include myself, will have their attention caught by John S. Kloppenborg’s, ‘The History and Prospects of the Synoptic Problem’. Kloppenborg has been a pivotal player in the Synoptic Problem debate in past decades and so his overview is bound to be of interest. Alarm bells might begin to ring, however, when he uses the line, ‘At the end of the twentieth century’ (p. 17) to introduce a section entitled, ‘The Ways Forward’. It might seem as though nothing much has happened in the field of Synoptic Problem studies since the 2000’s but in fact two important developments have occurred. First, the rise of Markan priority. This means that the debate has shifted away from, ‘Was Mark first?’ and towards, ‘What is the relationship between Luke and Matthew?’. A second development, represented in other essays in the collection, is an ongoing exploration of ancient compositional practices. Several ancient authors, besides Matthew and Luke, created new narratives by recycling older versions of the same narrative. An understanding of how they did this should provide a yardstick against which to measure the plausibility of actions required of Matthew or Luke under any given (Markan priority) hypothesis. This methodological development is sound in theory but there have been some problems in practice. One obstacle, highlighted in Alan Kirk’s extensive output, has been a difficulty in grasping the complex interactions between oral and written sources in the creation of a new text. Sadly, Kirk’s essay in this handbook, ‘Oral Tradition, Writing, and the Synoptic Problem: Media Dualism and Gospel Origins’, is not an introductory guide to his highly influential work. Instead, it has a narrower focus; namely, the drawing of negative comparisons between the dualistic efforts of the past and Kirk’s own attempts at a more integrative approach. A different kind of methodological reset is proposed in James W. Barker’s, ‘The Use of Sources in Ancient Compositions’. Earlier pioneers in this field concluded that ancient authors did not generally engage in what has become known as ‘micro-conflation’ – an assessment repeated in Kloppenborg’s essay. More recent studies have, however, called this terminology, and accompanying assumptions, into question. In his essay, Barker re-examines the data and concludes that highly demanding combinatory actions were widespread both before and after the creation of the Synoptic Gospels. The particular value of Barker’s essay is that it provokes a re-examination of one of the most promising methods for discerning between competing hypotheses. The implication Barker actually draws, however, is that none of the major hypotheses may be ruled out. Such an openness is echoed in the other Synoptic Problem related essays in Part One, including Alexander Damm’s, ‘Ancient Rhetoric as an Evaluative Tool for Literary Dependence’.
Further essays in Part One might be taken as indicating not only that the Synoptic Problem is currently unsolved but also that it will probably never be solved, simply because the moving parts of the puzzle are too complex and too fluid. Initial evidence to this effect is offered by Brent Nongbri’s, ‘Manuscripts: The Problem with the Synoptic Problem’. Here Nongbri notes the impact of an imperfect manuscript tradition on the prospect of a solution. A more dramatic challenge is introduced by Matthew Larsen, ‘The Publication of the Synoptics and the Problem of Dating’. Larsen seeks to collapse the idea of discrete Gospels published by distinctive authors at precise dates, thereby challenging the whole idea of separate Synoptic Gospels. Janet E. Spittler opens things out in a different way in her, ‘The Synoptic Gospels and Apocryphal Narratives’. Here she explores the implications of Francis Bovon’s striking observation that: ‘at this earlier time the gospels were what the apocrypha never ceased to be’ (quoted on p. 205). This theme of fluidity continues in Melissa Harl Sellew’s, ‘The Gospel of Thomas and the Synoptics’. The cumulative effect of this sequence of essays might be to leave the reader feeling that the idea of ‘a solution’ is necessarily a naïve fantasy and, as such, attempts at a definitive solution should be abandoned. At very least, these essays create a headache for proposed solutions that require the word-for-word stability of these very ancient texts. Elsewhere in this Part: Lee A. Johnson explains the implications of performance criticism in, ‘Oral Performance of the Synoptics’, and, in, ‘Narrative Design of the Synoptics’, Michal Beth Dinkler, illustrates how the New Formalism’s openness of interpretation causes Mark’s ending to defy resolution and reduction in meaning. Paul Foster’s essay is very different in character, seeking to rekindle interest in, ‘The Minor Sources and Their Role in the Synoptic Problem’.
Part Two is titled, ‘Particular Features in Comparison’. Here, there is evidence of a conscious effort to engage with topics that are higher on the contemporary, rather than the traditional, agenda. Thus, in place of essays on topics like parables, discipleship, Christology, and so on, there are essays that consider issues of power (Sarah E. Rollens, ‘Violent Imaginaries’ and Michael Peppard, ‘Kingdom, Authority, and Power’) and the social consequences of power (Candida R. Moss, ‘Suffering and Sacrifice’; Thomas R. Blanton IV, ‘Wealth, Poverty, Economy’; Joshua M. Reno and Stephen P. Ahearne-Kroll, ‘Gender’; and Stephen Moore, ‘Body’). Essays with a social dimension include John Kampen, ‘Jewish Sectarianism’; Magnus Zetterholm, ‘Gentiles and Their Relations to Jews’; and Reno and Ahearne Kroll, ‘Gender’. The literary expression of these social realities is also considered by Susan E. Myers, ‘Portraits of Women’; Sarah Rollens’ essay, and that of Joshua Reno and Stephen Ahearne-Kroll. The ways in which the traditions of Israel shared the concerns of the Synoptic authors are explored in: Robin J. Whitaker, ‘Apocalyptic Eschatology’; Joshua Garroway, ‘Gospel’; Susan E. Doherty ‘Israel’s Scriptures’; and the essays of John Kampen and Magnus Zetterholm. Further essays in Part Two include: Alexey Somov, ‘Resurrection and Afterlife’; Timothy Luckritz Marquis, ‘Travel and Itinerancy’; Soham Al-Suadi, ‘Food and Meals’; Meghan Henning, ‘Healing and Exorcism’; Karen Wenell, ‘Sacred Space’; and Eve-Marie Becker, ‘History’. Once again, a theme that unifies these contributions is the sense that old certainties are now very much in question and past solidities are now fluid. Stephen Moore (p. 566), in his essay on bodies, refers to a quote from Mira Balberg that could apply to many studies in this collection: ‘[the] boundaries and constituent elements are not stable but are rather constantly mutating’.
The editorial decision to try to avoid the conventional and well-worn means that readers expecting a benchmark study of classic topics such as The Genre of the Gospels, The Historical Jesus, The Hypothetical Source Q, and so on, will need to look elsewhere. This Handbook’s more alternative approach means that the collection can sometimes feel disjointed, and its shelf-life may also be limited given the fluidity of the field and the unusually long period of this book’s production. In the meantime, this collection poses important questions relevant to the discussion of the Synoptic Problem. Furthermore, its essays will open up new areas of study to researchers interested to explore the underexplored and will offer a challenging workout for those seeking perspectives beyond the traditional norm.