REDACTION CRITICISM OF THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS: ITS ROLE IN THE INERRANCY DEBATE WITHIN NORTH AMERICAN EVANGELICALISM by RANDOLPH TERRANCE MANN submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF THEOLOGY in the subject NEW TESTAMENT at the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA PROMOTER: M T SPECKMAN JUNE 2007 I hereby declare that with the exception of the sources duly acknowledged in the text, this thesis is the original work of the author, and has never before been submitted to this or any other university for examination purposes. __________________________ Name Date ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sense of gratitude and thankfulness for the many who assisted and helped me in this endeavour. Many faithfully prayed for me as I sought to preserve in bringing this work to completion and I am thankful for the encouragement of those in the congregations I served as pastor during this period of time. The dear saints at both Bowmanville Baptist Church and Ajax Alliance Church, not only encouraged me in word and prayer but also provided me on several occasions an opportunity to devote a full week to writing when I desperately needed to complete work on specific chapters. My wife, my three children and I had the distinct pleasure of having my initial supervisor, Prof R Lemmer and his wife visit and stay with us in London, Ontario when I was in the initial stages of my doctoral program. It brings back pleasant memories as I recall our conversations about our differing cultures. Prof Dr Lemmer was a constant source of encouragement especially when I lagged behind in making significant progress and when I had doubts as to whether I should continue on in the program, although he did not know about my doubts. Beyond the careful and capable direction he provided me in my studies, he also evidenced a genuine interest in my family and my pastoral ministry demonstrating the graces of Christian scholarship and godliness. I am also particularly grateful for the willingness of Prof Dr Speckman to assume the role of my supervisor after Prof Dr Lemmer's untimely death. Prof Dr Speckman despite his own increased responsibilities in conjunction with his move from Unisa to the position of Dean of Students at the University of Pretoria, has faithfully encouraged and guided me to the completion of this work. His guidance, suggestions, and assistance have exemplified a gracious and generous spirit. Finally, I must acknowledge the patient endurance and support of my loving wife, Sylvia and my three, now teenage, children; Beverly, Kimberly and Jeffrey. My children at times reminded me that I was proceeding so slowly that they might complete their studies before me. I am especially thankful for their loving support and the sacrifices they made when I was required to divert time from them to complete this work. It is my prayer and hope that this work might in some small way bring glory to God. ii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AshTJ Ashland Theological Journal BBR Bulletin of Biblical Research BECNT Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament BSac Bibliotheca Sacra CH Church History ChrT Christianity Today CTJ Calvin Theological Journal CTR Criswell Theological Review DBSJ Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal DJG Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels [Marshall, Green, McKnight (eds)] EBC Expositor’s Bible Commentary ETS Evangelical Theological Society EuroJTh European Journal Of Theology EvQ Evangelical Quarterly FC Form Criticism GTJ Grace Theological Journal HC Historical Criticism IBR The Institute for Biblical Research ICBI The International Council on Biblical Inerrancy JBL Journal of Biblical Literature JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society JSHJ Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament NAC New American Commentary NIBC New International Biblical Commentary NICNT The New International Commentary On The New Testament NIGTC The New International Greek Testament Commentary NIVAC NIV Application Commentary NovT Novum Testamentum NTS New Testament Studies PNTC Pillar New Testament Commentary Presb Presbyterion RC Redaction Criticism RevExp Review & Expositor SBC The Southern Baptist Convention SBET Scottish Bulletin of Evangelical Theology SBJT The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology SJT Scottish Journal of Theology SwJT Southwestern Journal of Theology Them Themelios TJ Trinity Journal TMSJ The Master’s Seminary Journal TNTC Tyndale New Testament Commentaries TS Theological Studies iii TynB Tyndale Bulletin VE Vox Evangelica WBC Word Biblical Commentary WCF Westminster Confession of Faith WTJ Westminster Theological Journal WUNT Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament ZTK Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments ii List of Abbreviations iii Table of Contents v 1. CHAPTER ONE 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Events Leading to the Present Debate on Inerrancy 1 1.2 The Incentives for, and Importance of this Research 3 1.3 The Outline of the Thesis 5 2. CHAPTER TWO 10 EVANGELICALS AND THE INERRANCY DEBATE 10 2.1 Defining Evangelicalism 10 2.2 Inerrancy and the autographa 14 2.2.1 Inerrancy, inspiration and the autographa 14 2.2.2 The relationship of the autographa and the apographa 19 2.2.3 The preservation of the text 22 2.2.4 Inerrancy and historical certainty 25 2.3 Paradigm Shifts in Biblical Studies 26 2.3.1 The reformation paradigm 27 2.3.2 The historical-critical paradigm 28 2.3.3 The literary studies paradigm 33 2.3.4 Evangelicals, the inerrancy debate and paradigm shifts 34 2.3.5 The Inerrancy Debate in the SBC 37 2.3.6 Summary of evangelical responses to paradigm shifts 39 3. CHAPTER THREE 40 EVANGELICALS AND REDACTION CRITICISM 40 3.1 The Pioneers of Redaction Criticism 40 3.2 Evangelicals, Inerrancy and Redaction Criticism 42 3.2.1 The early efforts 42 3.2.2 Pivotal publications 46 3.2.3 Refining redaction criticism 50 3.2.4 Voices of dissent 54 3.2.5 The current situation 56 3.2.6 Issues arising from the debate 57 4. CHAPTER FOUR 60 ISSUES IN THE DEBATE CONCERNING REDACTION CRITICISM 60 4.1 The Role of Presuppositions 60 4.1.1 A “modified” use of historical-criticism and presuppositions 60 4.1.2 The “apologetic dialogue” argument and presuppositions 64 4.2 Theories of Gospel Sources 67 4.2.1 The relationship between source and redaction criticism 67 4.2.2 Theories concerning the sources of the Synoptics 68 4.2.3 Defining the role of “Q” 69 4.2.4 The literary independence theory 70 4.2.5 The Markan priority theory 72 v 4.3 The Role of Harmonization 75 4.3.1 Rejection of harmonization in biblical studies 75 4.3.2 The argument for a variety of harmonization approaches 76 4.3.3 Traditional harmonization and redactional harmonization 77 4.4 Chronology of Events 79 4.5 The ipsissima verba or ipsissima vox of Jesus 80 4.5.1 The argument for ipsissima vox 81 4.5.2 The argument for ipsissima verba 83 4.6 The Role of Form and Tradition Criticism 84 4.6.1 The relationship of form and tradition criticism to redaction criticism 84 4.6.2 Defining composition criticism 86 4.6.3 The criteria of authenticity 86 4.7 Were the Gospel Writers Historians or Theologians? 92 4.7.1 The Gospel writers as faithful historians not creative theologians 92 4.7.2 The Gospel writers as faithful historians and creative theologians 95 5. CHAPTER FIVE 99 SELECT PASSAGES IN THE DEBATE 99 5.1 The Temptations of Jesus (Mt 4:1-11; Mk 1:12-13; Lk 4:1-13) 99 5.2 The Rich Young Ruler (Mt 19:16-30; Mk 10:17-31; Lk 18:18-30) 103 5.3 Giving “Good Gifts” / “The Holy Spirit” (Mt 7:11; Lk 11:13 104 5.4 The Introduction of Luke's Gospel (Lk 1:1-4) 106 5.5 The Great Commission (Mt 28:16-20) 110 5.6 Peter Denies Jesus (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:55-62; Jn 18:15-18, 25-27) 114 5.7 Summary 119 6. CHAPTER SIX 121 ANALYSIS OF THE ISSUES IN THE DEBATE 121 6.1 The Role of Presuppositions 121 6.1.1 A “modified” use of historical-criticism and presuppositions 121 6.1.2 The “apologetic dialogue” argument and presuppositions 123 6.2 Theories of Gospel Sources 128 6.2.1 The use of the hypothetical source “Q” 128 6.2.2 Theories of sources and the doctrine of inspiration 130 6.2.3 The agreements between the Gospels 131 6.2.4 The role of orality in the time of Jesus 135 6.2.5 The evidence of Luke 1:1-4 144 6.2.6 Gospel sources and inerrancy 14̣8 6.3 The Role of Harmonization 150 6.3.1 Evaluation of different approaches to harmonization 150 6.3.2 The rich young ruler (Mt 19:16-30; Mk 10:17-31; Lk 18:18-30) 152 6.3.3 Peter denies Jesus (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:55-62; Jn 18:15-18, 25-27) 154 6.4 Chronology of Events 157 6.4.1 Recognizing the Gospels do not provide a ‘strict’ chronology 157 6.4.2 Chronology and harmonization of details in parallel accounts 159 6.4.3 The temptations of Jesus (Mt 4:1-11; Mk 1:12-13; Lk 4:1-13) 163 6.5 The ipsissima verba or ipsissima vox of Jesus 165 vi 6.5.1 Evaluating three arguments in support of ipsissima vox 165 6.6 The Role of Form and Tradition Criticism 175 6.6.1 Evaluation of the criteria of authenticity 175 6.6.2 The merits of composition criticism 181 6.7 Were the Gospel Writers Historians or Theologians? 183 6.7.1 The Gospel writers as faithful historians and theologians 183 6.7.2 A different methodology for handling the Jesus tradition 187 6.7.3 History and theology and the role of faith 193 7.