Thesis (Ph.D.) - University of St Andrews, May 2010.

Chapter one: A perennial (if controversial) concern in both theology and philosophy of religion is whether religious belief is ‘reasonable’. Austin Farrer (1904-1968) is widely thought to affirm a positive answer to this concern. Chapter One surveys three interpretations of Farrer on ‘the believer’s reasons’ and thus sets the stage for our investigation into the development of his religious epistemology. Chapter two: The disputed question of whether Farrer became ‘a sort of fideist’ is complicated by the many definitions of fideism. Chapter two thus sorts through these issues so that when ‘fideism’ appears in subsequent chapters a precise range of meanings can be given to it, and the ‘sort of fideist’ Farrer may have become can be determined more accurately. Chapter three: Although Farrer’s constant goal was to develop ‘a viable and sophisticated natural theology,’ an early moment of philosophical illumination involved recognising the limits of reason. Chapter three begins with a sketch of Farrer’s life, looks at his undergraduate correspondence where some ‘fideistic’ themes are first articulated, and then focuses on his classic text of ‘rational theology,’ *Finite and Infinite* (1943). Chapter four: In subsequent years, Farrer became increasingly open to placing a greater emphasis on faith. And yet, he continued to press the question: ‘Can reasonable minds still think theologically?’ Chapter four argues that, stimulated by Diogenes Allen’s doctoral dissertation and citing it explicitly, Farrer’s *Faith and Speculation* (1967) attempts to blend Allen’s more fideistic position with a continuing concern for legitimate philosophical critique. Chapter five: The fifth chapter evaluates the significance of Farrer’s final position in the context of contemporary religious epistemology and the current wide-spread interest in spirituality. In conclusion, Farrer finally seems to locate theistic evidence not primarily in nature or reason, but in holy lives and our own attempts to live by faith: ‘It is solved by sacrifice’.

This study concerns the composition of the Synoptic Gospels—Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and is part of a scholarly discussion within New Testament studies known as the “Synoptic Problem.” In this study, the composition of the Gospels is considered in light of ancient compositional practice, a field of study within the Synoptic Problem that has grown in popularity in recent decades. It specifically looks at the way that Matthew and Mark and Luke would have moved through their sources or exemplars (source-utilization movement) when they composed, presuming that some sort of direction of dependence is the case. Each of the Simple Solutions is considered in this regard—the Augustinian Hypothesis, the Büsching Hypothesis, the Farrer Hypothesis, the Griesbach Hypothesis, the Lockton Hypothesis, and the Wilke Hypothesis, as well as the Two-Document Hypothesis. It may be presumed some sort of direction of dependence is the case between the Synoptic Gospels, whatever direction this might be, and the form these sources took would have likely been bookrolls (or scrolls). The thesis introduces a neglected factor in Synoptic Problem studies. Whereas historically each Gospel text has been presumed to be a single bookroll, in this study, a multiple-bookroll hypothesis is also tested. Instead of there being one bookroll per Gospel, the possibility that each Gospel was distributed over several bookrolls is also tested. Additionally, the study takes into consideration the role of memory and memory-access of traditions in the process of composition. Several other matters concerning ancient compositional practice is also treated throughout. When the various Hypotheses are examined in terms of how the Gospel-authors would have moved through their texts, in light of a multiple bookroll hypothesis, among other factors, the result seems to favour strongly Lukan Absolute Posteriority (i.e., the Augustinian and Farrer Hypotheses). / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) / This study concerns the composition of the Synoptic Gospels—Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and is part of a scholarly discussion within New Testament studies known as the Synoptic Problem. It considers the composition of the Gospels in light of ancient compositional practice. It specifically looks at the way that Matthew and Mark and Luke would have moved through their sources or exemplars during composition (source-utilization movement), according to a number of different hypotheses. Each Gospel may be presumed to have used sources when their authors composed, and the sources would have likely been bookrolls (or scrolls). A number of Hypotheses have been presented over the last two centuries concerning how the Gospels were composed and what direction of dependence that composition took. When these various Hypotheses are examined in terms of how the Gospel-authors would have moved through their texts, the result seems to favour two possibilities above others. Both of these possibilities have it that the author of Luke was the utilizing author of both Matthew and Mark.