An Overview of the Jerusalem School Hypothesis
An Overview of the Jerusalem School HypothesisIn 1922 William Lockton suggested a theory of Lukan priority. According to his hypothesis Luke was written first, copied by Mark, who was in turn copied by Matthew who copied from Luke as well.1
Forty years later Robert L. Lindsey independently reached a similar solution to the synoptic problem. He proposed a theory of Lukan priority which argues that Luke was written first and was used by Mark, who in turn was used by Matthew who did not know Luke's Gospel.2 This theory postulates two non-canonical documents that were unknown to the synoptists -- a Hebrew biography of Jesus and a literal Greek translation of that original -- and two other non-canonical sources known to one or more of the synoptists.
According to Lindsey, Matthew and Luke, and probably Mark as well, were acquainted with an anthology of Jesus' words and deeds taken from the Greek translation of the Hebrew biography. Luke alone was acquainted with a second source, a Greek biography that attempted to reconstruct the story order of the original Hebrew text and its Greek translation. Mark used Luke while only rarely if at all referring to the anthology, while Matthew used Mark and the anthology. Luke and Matthew did not know each other's gospels, but independently used the anthology. As in the more popular Two-Document Hypothesis, Mark is the middle term between Matthew and Luke. (See diagram.)
Lindsey arrived at his theory unintentionally. Attempting to replace Franz Delitzsch's outdated Hebrew translation of the New Testament, he began by translating the Gospel of Mark, assuming it to be the earliest of the synoptic gospels. Although Mark's text is relatively Semitic, it contains hundreds of non-Semitisms, such as the oft-repeated "and immediately," which are not present in Lukan parallels. This suggested to Lindsey the possibility that Mark was copying Luke and not vice versa; with further research Lindsey came to his solution to the synoptic problem.
A number of scholars in Israel, most prominently Prof. David Flusser of the Hebrew University, have espoused Lindsey's source theory.3 These scholars, now collaborating as the Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research, believe that a Hebrew Vorlage lies behind the Greek texts of the gospels. They maintain that by translating the Greek texts back into Hebrew and interpreting how this Hebrew text would have been understood by first-century readers, one gains a fuller understanding of the text's original meaning.
In their emphasis on the importance of Hebrew, the Jerusalem School scholars are a product of the pioneering work of Hebrew University professor M. H. Segal, who suggested as early as 1909 that Mishnaic Hebrew showed the characteristics of a living language, and that the Jewish people in the land of Israel at the time of Jesus used Hebrew as their primary spoken and written language.4 Segal's conclusions have been confirmed by the discovery of the Bar Kochva letters and other documents from the Dead Sea area. The most recent contribution to this subject is the two-part article by Hebrew University professor Shmuel Safrai, "Spoken Languages in the Time of Jesus," Jerusalem Perspective 4.1 (1991), 3-8, 13, and "Literary Languages in the Time of Jesus," Jerusalem Perspective 4.2 (1991), 3-8.
Lindsey's hypothesis not only emphasizes the priority of Luke and/or Matthew when using their shared source, the Anthology, it draws particular attention to the Hebraic nature of the Greek text of the synoptic gospels and the importance of translating that text into Hebrew before evaluating it. The recognition of the importance of Hebrew in understanding the gospels is a new contribution to grappling with the synoptic problem, and is a harbinger of much fruitful research.