Reviewed Book: Stein, Robert H. The Synoptic Problem. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987

Arnal, William Edward

English

Scholars Commons

Consensus
Volume 15
Issue 2 Theology of the Cross: Theory and Practice Article 14
11-1-1989
The Synoptic Problem
William Edward Arnal
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus
This Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by an
authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.
Recommended Citation
Arnal, William Edward (1989) "The Synoptic Problem," Consensus: Vol. 15 : Iss. 2 , Article 14.
Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol15/iss2/14
128 Consensus
The Synoptic Problem: An Introduction
Robert H. Stein
Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1987
272 pp. H- glossary and indexes
There has always been a need for a good introductory work devoted
specifically to the synoptic gospels. Too often texts and courses dealing
with this area of biblical research assume a depth of knowledge that general
New Testament introductions simply do not have the space to provide. For
example, for the sake of brevity many New Testament introductions offer
verbal parallels as the primary (or only!) evidence for the two-source theory,
while more advanced courses and books may take the arguments from order
or redaction for granted. Robert Stein’s book, if put to use in the classroom,
could serve to rectify this unfortunate situation.
Despite its title, The Synoptic Problem does not deal exclusively with
source-criticism but functions as a general introduction to the scholarly
study of the first three gospels. The first half of the text, however, does
deal with source criticism in detail. The evidence for the two-source theory
is explained, objections to it and alternate theories are dealt with, and the
value of source-criticism is discussed. Stein comes down in favour of both
Marcan priority and the existence (in a general sense) of Q. The remainder
of the book is divided into discussions of form- and redaction-criticism. The
history, method, theory, and value of each is discussed in detail. A positive
attitude toward all three of these disciplines underlies the discussions of
their respective value.
The only critiques that can be made of Stein’s treatment involve specific
assertions of the author with which some readers will not be able to agree.
For example, Stein refuses to commit himself to a unified, written Q. Given
the startling theological, linguistic, and stylistic coherence of the double-
tradition material, however, this hesitancy seems rather too skeptical. Or
again, in his discussion of form-criticism, Stein argues at length that the
Jesus-tradition is more reliable than the form-critics have tended to assume.
But given the absence of any evidence that early Christians were more
concerned with the historical Jesus than with the risen Christ, and the
fact that the evangelists were so demonstrably free with written sources,
the mere possibility of accurate oral transmission in antiquity may fail to
convince one that the form-critics were too skeptical. It must be said,
however, that these questions are treated fairly and evenly. Stein cannot
be accused of not presenting the “other side” of any issue he addresses. As
well, these objections are obviously open to discussion. Many readers will
doubtless find themselves in agreement with Stein on these points.
These minor and qualified reservations aside. The Synoptic Problem is
an excellent introductory text. It is comprehensive and detailed. An entire
chapter is devoted to the “minor agreements” of Matthew and Luke against
Mark, with separate subsections dealing with the different types of agree-
ments. At the same time, amidst all this detail the book manages to be
Book Reviews 129
comprehensible and easily understood by someone with little or no back-
ground in this field. A glossary further enhances the discussion’s clarity.
Add to this fine work the sympathy and fairness of presentation mentioned
above, as well as the need for such an introductory book, and the result
is a text which ought to be used in the classroom extensively. There is
always the possibility, of course, that it could fall between the cracks of
general New Testament introductory and advanced work on the gospels. If
this happens, it will be a tragedy, especially for the student, who stands to
learn a great deal from this book.
William Arnal
Toronto, Ontario
Word Biblical Commentary: Hosea-Jonah
Douglas Stuart
Waco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher, 1987
xlv + 537 pp, $36.20
“There are all sorts of biblical commentaries” (preface). In the long
odyssey of biblical exegesis a variety of commentaries has been written
ranging from highly technical works to more broadly oriented theological
compositions. The Word Biblical Commentary represents another contribu-
tion in this discipline. When completed it will be comprised of 52 volumes
covering the canonical books of the Old and New Testament. Twenty-four
volumes are complete while two are being printed. The work under re-
view, no. 31, is a comprehensive study of 5 prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos,
Obadiah, and Jonah.
More than 8 pages of abbreviations for periodicals and reference works
occur at the beginning of the volume after the Table of Contents, followed by
a listing of biblical and apocryphal books consulted. A general bibliography
and introduction bring us to the prophets each of which are headed by their
own bibliographies and introductions. The latter includes such features as
message, form, structure, style, historical setting, provenance, and date of
composition. Of these form, structure, setting plus translation, appear for
the respective pericopes analyzed. The exegesis, carefully done based on
a keen study of the Hebrew, fills out the format for each prophetic book
allowing for variations found in the writings themselves.
While theological content is interwoven in the commentary (as it ap-
pears to this reviewer) Stuart hcis a section entitled “Explanation” as a
finale to a given lesson in which he develops the theological aspects further.
The reviewer could have wished for more in the “Explanations” but as Stu-
art notes there is a limitation allowed for space and selectivity governed by


The Synoptic Problem

Wilfrid Laurier University

ConsensusVolume 15Issue 2 Theology of the Cross: Theory and Practice Article 1411-1-1989The Synoptic ProblemWilliam Edward ArnalFollow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensusThis Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by anauthorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.Recommended CitationArnal, William Edward (1989) "The Synoptic Problem," Consensus: Vol. 15 : Iss. 2 , Article 14.Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol15/iss2/14128 ConsensusThe Synoptic Problem: An IntroductionRobert H. SteinGrand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1987272 pp. H- glossary and indexesThere has always been a need for a good introductory work devotedspecifically to the synoptic gospels. Too often texts and courses dealingwith this area of biblical research assume a depth of knowledge that generalNew Testament introductions simply do not have the space to provide. Forexample, for the sake of brevity many New Testament introductions offerverbal parallels as the primary (or only!) evidence for the two-source theory,while more advanced courses and books may take the arguments from orderor redaction for granted. Robert Stein’s book, if put to use in the classroom,could serve to rectify this unfortunate situation.Despite its title, The Synoptic Problem does not deal exclusively withsource-criticism but functions as a general introduction to the scholarlystudy of the first three gospels. The first half of the text, however, doesdeal with source criticism in detail. The evidence for the two-source theoryis explained, objections to it and alternate theories are dealt with, and thevalue of source-criticism is discussed. Stein comes down in favour of bothMarcan priority and the existence (in a general sense) of Q. The remainderof the book is divided into discussions of form- and redaction-criticism. Thehistory, method, theory, and value of each is discussed in detail. A positiveattitude toward all three of these disciplines underlies the discussions oftheir respective value.The only critiques that can be made of Stein’s treatment involve specificassertions of the author with which some readers will not be able to agree.For example, Stein refuses to commit himself to a unified, written Q. Giventhe startling theological, linguistic, and stylistic coherence of the double-tradition material, however, this hesitancy seems rather too skeptical. Oragain, in his discussion of form-criticism, Stein argues at length that theJesus-tradition is more reliable than the form-critics have tended to assume.But given the absence of any evidence that early Christians were moreconcerned with the historical Jesus than with the risen Christ, and thefact that the evangelists were so demonstrably free with written sources,the mere possibility of accurate oral transmission in antiquity may fail toconvince one that the form-critics were too skeptical. It must be said,however, that these questions are treated fairly and evenly. Stein cannotbe accused of not presenting the “other side” of any issue he addresses. Aswell, these objections are obviously open to discussion. Many readers willdoubtless find themselves in agreement with Stein on these points.These minor and qualified reservations aside. The Synoptic Problem isan excellent introductory text. It is comprehensive and detailed. An entirechapter is devoted to the “minor agreements” of Matthew and Luke againstMark, with separate subsections dealing with the different types of agree-ments. At the same time, amidst all this detail the book manages to beBook Reviews 129comprehensible and easily understood by someone with little or no back-ground in this field. A glossary further enhances the discussion’s clarity.Add to this fine work the sympathy and fairness of presentation mentionedabove, as well as the need for such an introductory book, and the resultis a text which ought to be used in the classroom extensively. There isalways the possibility, of course, that it could fall between the cracks ofgeneral New Testament introductory and advanced work on the gospels. Ifthis happens, it will be a tragedy, especially for the student, who stands tolearn a great deal from this book.William ArnalToronto, OntarioWord Biblical Commentary: Hosea-JonahDouglas StuartWaco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher, 1987xlv + 537 pp, $36.20“There are all sorts of biblical commentaries” (preface). In the longodyssey of biblical exegesis a variety of commentaries has been writtenranging from highly technical works to more broadly oriented theologicalcompositions. The Word Biblical Commentary represents another contribu-tion in this discipline. When completed it will be comprised of 52 volumescovering the canonical books of the Old and New Testament. Twenty-fourvolumes are complete while two are being printed. The work under re-view, no. 31, is a comprehensive study of 5 prophets: Hosea, Joel, Amos,Obadiah, and Jonah.More than 8 pages of abbreviations for periodicals and reference worksoccur at the beginning of the volume after the Table of Contents, followed bya listing of biblical and apocryphal books consulted. A general bibliographyand introduction bring us to the prophets each of which are headed by theirown bibliographies and introductions. The latter includes such features asmessage, form, structure, style, historical setting, provenance, and date ofcomposition. Of these form, structure, setting plus translation, appear forthe respective pericopes analyzed. The exegesis, carefully done based ona keen study of the Hebrew, fills out the format for each prophetic bookallowing for variations found in the writings themselves.While theological content is interwoven in the commentary (as it ap-pears to this reviewer) Stuart hcis a section entitled “Explanation” as afinale to a given lesson in which he develops the theological aspects further.The reviewer could have wished for more in the “Explanations” but as Stu-art notes there is a limitation allowed for space and selectivity governed by

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1988&amp;context=consensus

The Synoptic Problem

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Scholars Commons

Wilfrid Laurier University