Texts, Tables and Tablets: A Response to John C. Poirier

Abstract

John C. Poirier, in ‘The Roll, the Codex, the Wax Tablet and the Synoptic Problem’ ( JSNT 35.1: 3-30), argues that Synoptic source critics, particularly F. Gerald Downing and Robert A. Derrenbacker, Jr, have exaggerated and misrepresented the problems with Luke’s use of Matthew on the Farrer Hypothesis, as well as failed to consider the role that the medium of wax tablet may have played in Luke’s use of Matthew on that theory. However, in several areas, Poirier’s argument is problematic, misleading and in need of revision.

Questioning the Feasibility of the Major Synoptic Hypotheses: Scribal Memory as the Key to the Oral–Written Interface

“…Clark 1963: 63-72; Small 1997: 151), scribal posture ‘was either squatting, with one’s tunic stretched, or seated, on a stool or bench with the writing surface (usually a scroll) propped up on one knee, which could be supported by a stool’. Although reading stands or some types of furniture might be used to support source texts, 11 Derrenbacker rightly indicates (2013: 383) that ‘this surface is not the same surface that supports the text being composed’. In other words, the source texts would not be in the same visual plane as the text being composed.…”