Only recently have studies of the synoptic problem begun to ground their assessments of literary dependence in ancient literary conventions. In an effort to appreciate more fully the evangelists' modus operandi, this study examines their appeal to Greco-Roman rhetoric, the "science of speaking well". Focusing on a rhetorical form called the chreia, the book examines rhetorical techniques and reasons for chreia adaptation, particularly reasons why authors changed this form, both in theory and in the practice of the Hellenistic authors Plutarch and Josephus. With these reasons in mind, the study assesses literary dependence among the synoptic gospels, examining in detail a Triple Tradition and Double Tradition _chreia_. In the end, this work illustrates that hypotheses of Markan priority, like the Farrer Hypothesis and Two-Document Hypothesis, are more rhetorically plausible than hypotheses of Matthean priority. While Matthew and Luke's adaptations of Mark tend to reflect the rhetorical reasoning that we should expect, Mark's reasoning is often problematic, for Mark repeatedly works against the fundamental rhetorical principles of clarity and propriety.

Continuing its tradition of providing students with a thorough review of ancient Greek and Roman rhetorical theory and practices, A Synoptic History of Classical Rhetoric is the premier text for undergraduate courses and graduate seminars in the history of rhetoric. Offering vivid examples of each classical rhetor, rhetorical period, and source text, students are led to understand rhetoric's role in the exchange of knowledge and ideas. Completely updated throughout, Part I of this new edition integrates new research and expanded footnotes and bibliographies for students to develop their own scholarship. Part II offers eight classical texts for reading, study, and criticism, and includes discussion questions and keys to the text in Part I.

Only recently have studies of the synoptic problem begun to ground their assessments of literary dependence in ancient conventions. In an effort to appreciate more fully the evangelists' modus operandi, our study examines their appeal to Greco-Roman rhetoric, the "science of speaking well." Focusing on a rhetorical form called the chreia ( cr3i&d12; a ), we examine rhetorical techniques and reasons for chreia adaptation, particularly reasons why authors changed this form in theory and in the practice of the Hellenistic authors Plutarch and Josephus. With these reasons in mind, we assess literary dependence among the synoptic gospels, focusing on one chreia in the Triple Tradition (Matt. 9:14--17/Mark 2:18--22/Luke 5:33--39) and another in the Double Tradition (Matt. 12:22--37/Mark 3:20--35/Luke 11:14--36). Our study illustrates that hypotheses of Markan priority, like the Farrer Hypothesis and Two-Document Hypothesis, are more rhetorically plausible than hypotheses of Matthean priority. While Matthew and Luke's adaptations of Mark reflect the rhetorical reasoning that we should expect, Mark's reasoning is often problematic, for Mark repeatedly works against the fundamental rhetorical principles of clarity and propriety.

This volume contains a collection of twenty-one essays of John S. Kloppenborg, with four foci: conceptual and methodological issues in the Synoptic Problem; the Sayings Gospel Q; the Gospel of Mark; and the Parables of Jesus. Kloppenborg, a major contributor to the Synoptic Problem, is especially interested in how one constructs synoptic hypotheses, always aware of the many gaps in our knowledge, the presence of competing hypotheses, and the theological and historical entailments in any given hypothesis. Common to the essays in the remaining three sections is the insistence that the literature, thought and practices of the early Jesus movement must be treated with a deep awareness of their social, literary, and intellectual contexts. The context of the early Jesus movement is illumined not simply by resort to the literary and historical sources produced by Greek and Roman elites but, more importantly, by data gathered from documentary sources available in non-literary papyri.

"The field of Synoptic studies traditionally has had two basic foci. The question of how Matthew, Mark, and Luke are related to each other, what their sources are, and how the Gospels use their sources constitutes the first focus. Collectively, scholarship on the Synoptic Problem has tried to address these issues, and recent years have seen renewed interest and rigorous debate about some of the traditional approaches to the Synoptic Problem and how these approaches might inform the understanding of the origins of the early Jesus movement. The second focus involves thematic studies across the three Gospels. These are usually, but not exclusively, performed for theological purposes to tease out the early Jesus movement's thinking about the nature of Jesus, the motivations for his actions, the meaning of his death and resurrection, and his relationship to God. These studies pay less attention to the particular voices of the three individual Synoptic Gospels because they are trying to get to the overall theological character of Jesus"--

This interdisciplinary study focuses upon two conflicts within early Christianity and demonstrates how these conflicts were radically transformed by the Greco-Roman rhetorical and compositional practice of mimesis--the primary means by which Greco-Roman students were taught to read, write, speak, and analyze literary works. The first conflict is the controversy surrounding Jesus's relationship with his family (his mother and brothers) and the closely related issue concerning his (alleged) illegitimate birth that is (arguably) evident in the gospel of Mark, and then the author of Matthew's and the author of Luke's recasting of this controversy via mimetic rhetorical and compositional strategies. I demonstrate that the author of our canonical Luke knew, vehemently disagreed with, used, and mimetically transformed Matthew's infancy narrative (Matt 1-2) in crafting his own. The second controversy is the author of Acts' imitative transformation of the Petrine/Pauline controversy--that, in Acts 7:58--15:30, the author knew, disagreed with, used, and mimetically transformed Gal 1-2 via compositional strategies similar to how he transformed Matthew's birth narrative, and recast the intense controversy between the two pillars of earliest Christianity, Peter and Paul, into a unity and harmony that, historically, never existed.

Leading Scholars Debate a Key New Testament Topic The relationship between Matthew, Mark, and Luke is one of the most contested topics in Gospel studies. How do we account for the close similarities--and differences--in the Synoptic Gospels? In the last few decades, the standard answers to the typical questions regarding the Synoptic Problem have come under fire, while new approaches have surfaced. This up-to-date introduction articulates and debates the four major views. Following an overview of the issues, leading proponents of each view set forth their positions and respond to each of the other views. A concluding chapter summarizes the discussion and charts a direction for further study.