Salt and Q
- Good morning (for those of you for which it is morning),
First, I've noticed I'm not getting a lot of response. I'm not sure how
to interpret this.
3) Mild interest but I think you're wrong.
4) Interest, but how do you prove it?
5) I'm speechless.
Private feedback as to which category you fit in would be greatly
For non-Q fans -
I was just considering the implications for Q, of my salt reading.
Q shrinks in general, and almost completely disappears from Mark, and
one could easily argue it does disappear.
Things that look Q-like in Mark are explained by Matthew and Luke having
similar re-write agendas.
There are a few things left, like the sending of the 12 and the 72, that
still could be Q, but could be argued the other way too.
And if Luke only knew part of Matthew, this gives us a good reason that
he would have known some of the specific parts that he did.
Finally for yesterday's summary of salt agreement outline, the section
on direct support for the sacrifice metaphor should contain one more
important point -
the basic fact that Mark has told us to salt in us right after comparing
us to sacrifices. I'll be adding that argument summary to the webpage
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]