Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

4890Re: [Synoptic-L] Error in Rethinking the Gospel Sources, Volume 2, The Unity and Plurality of Q, by D R Burkett?

Expand Messages
  • Ronald Price
    Jul 3 5:52 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      David Inglis wrote:

      > ... Mk 3:29a is actually a parallel to Mt 12:32b, so that, after the
      > table, Burkett is incorrect when he says that Luke "includes only the material
      > that Matthew would have added to Mark (Matt 12:32ab)." Therefore, aLk is not,
      > as he suggests, just following "Matthew's additions." Could someone please
      > check/confirm?


      Certainly Throckmorton's "Gospel Parallels" agrees with you here.
      However I'm not so sure. Matthew has a near-duplication in Mt 12:31a and
      12:32a, and I think it more likely that Mk 3:29a parallels the former
      because they both include 'blaspheme', 'spirit' and 'no forgiveness'.

      Nevertheless I don't understand Burkett's case. Why shouldn't Luke
      occasionally pick out and copy texts from Matthew that were not derived from

      Thanks for the google book reference. I note that Burkett posits *two*
      unattested documents, namely Q and proto-Mark. Also he tries to explain the
      MAs by assuming they were present in proto-Mark. But even if he could
      justify the existence of proto-Mark, it is highly unlikely that Mark would
      have gone to the trouble of changing the MAs, if only because that would in
      many cases involve replacing good Greek by somewhat cruder Greek.

      Ron Price,

      Derbyshire, UK


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 4 messages in this topic