From:
                                                           6/12/2000 5:54 AM
Subject: [Synoptic-L] First Edition of
LukeTo: Synoptic-L <Synoptic-L@bham.ac.uk>

 There are several indications that the gospel of Luke as we have it is the
*second* edition.
Among these are the following:
(1) The very formal introduction (1:1-4) and the equally formal setting of
the historical context (3:1-2) are separated by the birth narratives.
Judging by its formality, 3:1-2 sounds as if it was originally designed to
follow 1:1-4. So it looks as if the birth narratives were added later. Yet
the similarity in style as compared with the rest of Luke-Acts indicates the
same author for both. Therefore our present gospel appears to constitute a
Second Edition by the same author.
(2) In 3:2 John the Baptist is introduced as if for the first time. (I am
indebted to G.B.Caird, _Saint Luke_, for this point.)
(3) It is illogical to place Jesus' genealogy after the birth narratives.
Even Matthew gets these the right way round, and Luke appears to have been
more of a scholar than Matthew. But given the existence of a first edition
without them, it is difficult to find a better place to insert them than
after 1:4.
(4) In Marcion's text of Luke, 3:1 followed immediately after 1:4. Perhaps
he had a copy of the First Edition.
(5) It is quite amazing that John did not appear to have been aware of the
virgin birth (1:45; 6:42) in spite of other evidence of the dependence of
John on Luke (see e.g. Barrett; Goulder). This would be explained if the
Johannine Evangelist had been familiar only with a *first* edition of Luke
lacking the birth narratives.

  I have recently found yet another piece of evidence (with apologies to
anyone who might already have discovered this independently):
(6) In Acts, Luke's presentation of the coming of the Holy Spirit at
Pentecost is followed by numerous descriptions of the Holy Spirit inspiring
various followers of Jesus. This is clearly a well thought-out theology, for
if we look at Luke 3-24 we find not a single instance of the Holy Spirit
inspiring any individual apart from Jesus himself. Admittedly there are the
promises in 11:13 and 12:12. But notwithstanding their setting in the life
of Jesus, the author was here evidently looking forward to the
post-Pentecost age of the Holy Spirit.
  However when we turn to the birth narratives, the Holy Spirit is said to
have inspired John the Baptist, Mary, Elizabeth, Zechariah and Simeon, thus
driving a coach and horses through the otherwise well-planned timescale for
the coming of the Holy Spirit.
  The best explanation would be the publication order: First Edition of
Luke; Acts; Second Edition of Luke, which would allow a significant lapse of
time between the two editions. If this was, say, five or ten years, it would
to some extent explain why the author was prepared to disfigure his original
plan. (Because over a period of time the author changed his mind, or lost
sight of his original idealistic view.)

Ron Price

Weston-on-Trent, Derby, UK

e-mail:  ron.price@virgin.net

Web site:  http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm


From:
                                                          6/13/2000 10:40 AM
Subject: [Synoptic-L] Re: First Edition of
LukeTo: Synoptic-L <Synoptic-L@bham.ac.uk>

I wrote:

>> In Marcion's text of Luke, 3:1 followed immediately after 1:4.

Peter Head replied:

>I do not think this is correct. Harnack has Marcion begining from 3.1a and
>4.31 (in combination). What evidence do you have for Marcion's knowledge of
>Luke 1.1-4??? Or indeed, anything between 3.2 and 4.30?

Peter,

  I was relying on J.A.Fitzmyer, _The Gospel according to Luke, I-IX_
(Garden City, NY, Doubleday, 1981) p.311, where he quotes F.C.Conybeare
as writing:

"But when he [Marcion] allowed 3.1 to follow on 1.4, he simply preserved
the original form of the gospel."

  I think this may have meant the original form of the *beginning* of
the gospel, though it's not entirely clear. At any rate I did not mean
to claim that Marcion accepted Luke's First Edition in its entirety, but
only that he might have used it as a basis for his own version.

Ron Price

Weston-on-Trent, Derby, UK

e-mail:  ron.price@virgin.net

Web site:  http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm