As a consequence of my endeavor to produce a Modern Hebrew translation of the Gospel of Mark I began to develop a different picture of the interrelationship of the Synoptic Gospels than that which is espoused by most New Testament scholars.
Character Profile: Who Was John Mark?
Professor David Flusser on R. L. Lindsey’s “revolutionary step” in New Testament scholarship, showing that the Gospel of Mark, which made Jesus “less of a Jew,” was written latter than Luke.
Lindsey Interview Rediscovered!
On May 11, 1970 in Richmond, Virginia, Ms. Johnni Johnson of the International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention conducted an interview with Dr. Lindsey shortly after the publication of his groundbreaking work, A Hebrew Translation of the Gospel of Mark. In the interview entitled “R. L. Lindsey’s Source Theory of the Gospels,” Dr. Lindsey reveals many of the insights he had gained into the origins of the Synoptic Gospels from translating Mark’s Gospel from the original Greek to Modern Hebrew.
Measuring the Disparity Between Matthew, Mark and Luke
A solution to the synoptic problem involves, among other things, the measurement of the disparity we find between parallel texts in Matthew, Mark and Luke.
Lord’s Prayer
David Bivin and Joshua Tilton envision how the Lord’s Prayer might have been formulated in its original language and explore the ancient Jewish context to which the Lord’s Prayer belongs.
Preparations for Eating the Passover Lamb
Careful analysis shows that a Hebraic source ultimately stands behind the Synoptic Gospels and that this source is best preserved in Luke. Luke’s version of the Preparations for Eating Passover Lamb preserves details—such as Jesus taking the initiative to send the two disciples, commanding the disciples to prepare the lamb, and using Hebraic idiom—that fit the cultural context of first-century Judaism.
Introduction to The Life of Yeshua: A Suggested Reconstruction
Purpose and goals of the LOY Commentary.
Is the Search for Literary Sources of the Synoptic Gospels Futile?
Indeed, the search for literary sources that may be reflected in a piece of writing can be risky business. In the case of the Synoptic Gospels, however, we possess multiple accounts of the same events—events that originally occurred in a Hebrew-speaking environment, but were eventually recorded in Greek.
Evidence of an Editor’s Hand in Two Instances of Mark’s Account of Jesus’ Last Week?
It has been noted that in instances where Mark’s editorial hand restructured his story, Luke has preserved a more primitive form of the account, a form that is independent of Mark’s influence. Gospel scholars need to properly evaluate Mark’s editorial style and acknowledge that frequently a theological agenda influenced his rewriting.
Over and Under-Familiarity with Matthew 6:11
Hearing something repeatedly can diminish its significance. I suspect that this is particularly true of Scripture. Overfamiliarity with a biblical passage can contribute to its misunderstanding. Sometimes it can reduce a profound saying to nothing more than a cliché.
Scholars and Saints: A Critical Collaboration
Most academics would question the value of attempting to identify material originating from the historical Jesus because Matthew, Mark and Luke are not historical narratives in the modern sense.
“They Didn’t Dare” (Matt 22:46; Mark 12:34; Luke 20:40): A Window on the Literary and Redactional Methods of the Synoptic Gospel Writers
Mark’s placement of Jesus’ “no longer dared” comment is very awkward: first, because the comment comes in the middle of a lovefest between Jesus and a scribe; and second, because the comment immediately follows Jesus’ appreciation of the scribe’s wisdom: “You are not far from the Kingdom of God.”
Another Look at the “Cleansing of the Temple” Story
Based on archaeological excavations near the southern wall of the temple, the research of Shmuel Safrai, and a nuance of the Hebrew verb that is one of the equivalents for Greek ekballein (drive out, banish; throw out; throw away, reject; cast out of a place, expel; remove, get rid of; put out), it may be necessary to reinterpret the gospel accounts of Jesus’ “cleansing” of the temple, even suggesting a different location for Jesus’ action.
Selected Examples of Rewriting in Mark’s Account of Jesus’ Last Week
It has been noted that in instances where Mark’s editorial hand restructured his story, Luke has preserved a more primitive form of the account, a form that is independent of Mark’s influence. Gospel scholars need to properly evaluate Mark’s editorial style and acknowledge that frequently a theological agenda influenced his rewriting.
“Prophets and Kings”: The Evangelist Luke’s Curious Doublet
In a beautiful statement that probably referred to the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus proclaimed to his disciples, according to Luke, that “many prophets and kings” desired to see and hear what they (his disciples) are seeing and hearing. Matthew preserves the same saying, but in Matthew’s account the doublet is, “prophets and righteous persons.” The wording of Jesus’ saying in these two accounts is so similar that it appears likely that their slight differences reflect literary, or editorial, changes rather than different versions of the saying uttered by Jesus on different occasions. If so, which of these gospel accounts preserves the more original form of Jesus’ saying? Did Jesus say “prophets and kings” or “prophets and righteous persons”?
The Synoptic Problem Home Page and Other Internet Resources
The most ambitious of these reference materials is a four-color Greek synopsis, which is designed to highlight the agreements and differences in wording between Matthew, Mark and Luke.
Robert L. Lindsey and His Synoptic Theory
In this article, Finnish scholar Risto Santala appraises the synoptic theory of Robert L. Lindsey and its importance for New Testament studies.
Paraphrastic Gospels
As Robert Lindsey realized in 1962, Mark reworked Luke’s Gospel in writing his own. Mark liked to substitute synonyms for nearly anything that Luke wrote. If, for instance, Luke used the singular of a noun, Mark substituted the plural form of the same noun in writing his Gospel. And vice versa: if Luke used the plural, Mark substituted the singular. In this article, Robert Lindsey surveys a unique substitution category found in Mark’s Gospel: the replacing of one verse of Scripture with another.