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

Fwd: Re: [Synoptic-L] The "2 1/2 source" hypothesis

Expand Messages
  • Chuck Jones
    Chuck Jones wrote: Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 05:21:51 -0800 (PST) From: Chuck Jones Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] The
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 10, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Chuck Jones <chuckjonez@...> wrote: Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 05:21:51 -0800 (PST)
      From: Chuck Jones <chuckjonez@...>
      Subject: Re: [Synoptic-L] The "2 1/2 source" hypothesis
      To: Emmanuel Fritsch <emmanuel.fritsch@...>

      Manu,

      Thanks for your post.

      Yes, so little is said about M and L that I wonder if their existence is so broadly accepted nothing needs to be said, so widely rejected nothing needs to be said or so beside the main points of contention nothing tends to be said.

      I would love to hear from those practicing in the field their impressions of which of the above seems to be the case.

      Chuck

      Emmanuel Fritsch <emmanuel.fritsch@...> wrote:
      Nobody answered. Perhabs the existence of M and L is accepted by the
      whole Mark-priorist community ?
      In that case, only debated sources are counted ;-)

      ---------------------------------
      Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!


      ---------------------------------
      Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.