Showing papers in "Bulletin of the John Rylands Library in 1954"
[...]
TL;DR: The origins and composition of the Lucan Nativity and Infancy Narrative are discussed in this article. But they do not deal with the complex problem of how the two songs were modified to the use to which they were put by successive writers, but deal exclusively with the songs themselves and with their original character and function.
Abstract: I a forthcoming study on The Origins and Composition of the Lucan Nativity and Infancy Narrative I advance for consideration the view that Luke i. 46b-55 (Magnificat) and Luke i. 68-75 (first part of Benedictus) are Maccabaean war songs which found their place in the Third Gospel by way of a JewishChristian (Nazarene) adaptation of the " Baptist Document", i.e. a first century literary record emanating from the circle of followers of John the Baptist and dealing with John's birth. The language of these writings was Hebrew. The present paper will not deal with the complex problem of how the two songs were modified to the use to which they were put by successive writers, but will deal exclusively with the songs themselves and with their original character and function. Our knowledge of post-canonical Hebrew poetry is incomplete. That being so we do not sufficiently appreciate the fact that the generation of Jews who were living in Palestine in New Testament times possessed a much fuller knowledge of the literature in question than we do. Post-canonical Hebrew poetry from the second century B.C. was known, and was still remembered by Jews in the first, and even in the second, century of our era. This fact may be illustrated by comparing fragments of Hebrew songs from 1 Maccabees with poems from 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. Amongst the lyrics that are interspersed in the narrative account of the First Book of Maccabees we read :
5 citations
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, it was suggested that two important qualities of thought are commonly overlooked, namely: (i) its historical character, (ii) its individual distinctiveness, and (iii) its mode of development and operation.
Abstract: TN a previous paper 1 I suggested that two important qualities of thought are commonly overlooked, namely: (i) its historical character, (ii) its individual distinctiveness. In the present paper I propose to consider in more detail the second of these qualities. In the psychological study of thought we are not concerned with the logical, moral or social quality of the final product of thinking, but primarily with its mode of development and operation. It is not the business of the psychologist to classify the \" ripe apples \" of thought. Nor does historical or causal analysis of the end-product of thought provide any criterion of its value. We may enquire, as Piaget 2 has done, whether there are laws governing the changing structures of thought through different stages from birth to maturity, or we may study particular ideas or systems of ideas and trace their origin and manner of growth. It is this second problem which I wish here to discuss. Since there can be no thoughts without a thinker, thinking must be taken to mean some person-thinking. The form of one's thought, the sort of explanation or suggestion that occurs to a person's mind, the specific hypothesis he entertains or feels moved to explore, and the amount of effort he exerts, must, we may assume, be characteristic of him as an individual with a distinctive life history. For the psychologist, everything a person says or does must be seen as an item in a context, the context of personal history and present situation.3 In seeking