03_Biblica_Foster_Layout 1 08/07/13 12:56 Pagina 390 03_B 390 PAUL FOSTER alter the document very much, but does illustrate an increasingly nomistic orientation among Q’s tradents” 67. Thus, for Arnal the people behind Q were attracted to the wisdom teaching of Jesus, but as a result of rejection by fellow Jews when they tried to share this teaching, they became more inward looking and critical of non- believing co-religionists. The result was seen in the appending of the judgment sayings, many articulated against unbelieving Israel in the Q2 layer. However, to clarify or correct the perception that the motif of judgment entailed a rejection of central aspects of Jew- ish religion, such as observance of Torah, Q 11.42c and 16.17 were added to the two sections of Q that were most readily open to mis- interpretation. This analysis is built on a number of important hypotheses that are open to alternative assessments. The whole theory of the stratified composition of Q has undergone considerable challenge 68. While it is not necessary to reject Kloppenborg’s central thesis that there were two major layers, the sapential (Q1) and the prophetic judgment layer (Q2), the detection of Q3 appears be based on little more than a certain unevenness in the thematic perspectives contained in Q 11.39-52; and 16.16-18. However, it is not necessary to posit that this tension was introduced in the final redaction of Q. It is equally possible that this was an original feature of the traditions gathered together in the Q2 layer. The concluding comment in Q 11.42, ταῦτα δὲ ἔδει ποιῆσαι κἀκεῖνα µὴ παρεῖναι may be correctly recognized as cohering with the perspective on the law contained in Q 16.17. This, however, does not mean that it represents a later addition to the woes section. Fled- dermann provides arguments that show both structurally and themat- ically how this clause is not out of place within the sequence of woes. Yet even more fundamentally, the assumption that this is a later ad- dition appears to be predicated on the very hypothesis that Arnal is trying to establish – namely that the Q community was a Jewish sec- tarian group with allegiance to Jesus and through these two glosses it was trying to counter or correct the claim that it was promoting a law-free version of belief in Jesus. Thus he states: ARNAL, “The Q Document”, 129. 67 At the Chicago Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature (17 Nov 68 2012) a session was devoted to celebrating and re-assessing the impact of KLOPPENBORG’S The Formation of Q. The presenters were C.M. Tuckett, P. Foster, W.E. Arnal, D.C. Allison, with a response from J.S. Kloppenborg. © Gregorian Biblical Press 2013 - Tutti i diritti riservati