Talk:Synoptic II

The paper you've written contains a substantial amount of novel ideas and presents a fresh theological and linguistic perspective on the Synoptic Problem. In terms of the density of unique ideas, the thesis introduces several key concepts:

   Sensus plenior as a guiding principle for understanding Scripture and how it informed the development of the Gospels.
   The role of Hebrew word formations in understanding Old Testament prophecy, particularly in relation to the Yeshua/Emmanuel prophecy and how the Greek-speaking Christians' limited Hebrew skills impacted their interpretation.
   Luke's omission of the Yeshua/Emmanuel prophecy, not as a theological denial but as a practical decision based on the linguistic challenges faced by his Greek-speaking audience.
   The disciples’ theological development, particularly following their experience on the road to Emmaus, and how that triggered their application of Christ-centered interpretative methods to the Old Testament.
   The long ending of Mark as a riddle, explaining its removal and later reinsertion due to misunderstandings about its figurative meaning.
   The progressive unveiling of Christ in the Gospels, with each Gospel representing a stage in the disciples’ growing understanding of Jesus as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy.

Given the richness of these ideas, the length of the paper feels appropriate, but it may benefit from further elaboration in certain areas to strengthen the clarity and depth of the arguments:

   The Role of Hebrew Word Formations: While the paper briefly touches on the importance of Hebrew word formations (e.g., Yeshua and Emmanuel), expanding this section could deepen the reader's understanding of how these specific words functioned in the Hebrew Scriptures and their prophetic significance. Additional biblical examples of Hebrew word formations in prophecy could further clarify their role in the disciples' interpretation of the Old Testament.

   Luke's Omission of the Yeshua/Emmanuel Prophecy: This argument could be further developed by exploring other instances in which Gospel writers tailor their messages to specific audiences (e.g., the genealogies in Matthew and Luke). You could also delve into how Luke's Gospel demonstrates a growing understanding of the connection between Old Testament prophecy and Jesus, even without this particular prophecy.

   The Disciples' Experience on the Road to Emmaus: Expanding on how the disciples’ newfound interpretative methods were applied in the writing of the Gospels could provide more insight into the transition from oral tradition to written Scripture. You could highlight specific examples of how the disciples’ understanding of Old Testament passages evolved over time.

   The Long Ending of Mark: The section on Mark 16:9-20 could benefit from more exploration of early manuscript evidence and the theological implications of interpreting this passage figuratively. Clarifying why early Christians may have found this passage problematic, especially in relation to its symbolism, would add further weight to your argument.

   The Gradual Unveiling of Christ in the Gospels: While you present a succinct outline of how each Gospel reflects a deeper theological understanding, elaborating on specific examples of Old Testament fulfillment in each Gospel would strengthen this argument. It might be helpful to show how each Gospel's unique emphasis (e.g., Mark's action, Matthew's Old Testament references, Luke's focus on universality) contributes to a cumulative, Christ-centered reading of Scripture.

In conclusion, while the paper is already dense with novel and well-articulated ideas, adding more detail in these areas would enhance the depth and persuasive power of your arguments. The length is sufficient for presenting the key points, but elaborating on these points would make the thesis even more compelling.