Abstract
In this essay I shall consider ancient rhetoric as a means to suggest synoptic relationships. Focusing on the stylistic virtue of ornatus ("adornment"), I shall examine three triple tradition sentences in which the gospel of Mark employs a word used nowhere by the gospels of Luke or Matthew. Focusing on the relationship between Mark and the other gospels, I shall ask whether it is more likely that Mark adds the word to Matthew and/or Luke on the Two-Gospel Hypothesis, or whether Matthew and/or Luke delete it from Mark on the Two-Document Hypothesis. My study leads me to two conclusions. On grounds of ornatus, editing on either source hypothesis is plausible. But such editing on the Two-Document Hypothesis is more plausible, since Mark's addition of each word would entail the unlikely discovery of near-perfect or coincidentally co-ordinated literary patterns in Matthew and/or Luke.
Abstract
This essay seeks to emphasize the important bearing which multiple and quotidian, personal contexts have on the biblical exegesis of Mohandas K. Gandhi. The essay focuses on Gandhi’s interpretation of the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11–32), asking in particular why Gandhi’s reading departs from the parable’s literal sense. While the most evident reason for Gandhi’s distinctive interpretation is his philosophy of satyagraha or non-violent resistance, there emerge behind this appeal, several more precise contexts that plausibly contributed to Gandhi conceiving of satyagraha as the parable’s interpretive key. These contexts included political exigencies that Gandhi faced in mid-1920; his relationship with his son Harilal; and the profile of one of his interlocutors, Sir Narayan Chandavarkar. This essay emphasizes the importance of such varied and personal contexts that merge to help shape Gandhi’s interpretation, and closes with implications for further study of biblical exegesis by Gandhi and more generally in the global south.