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

Salt and Q

Expand Messages
  • Gentile, David
    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. 1)
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 17, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      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.

      1) Annoyance.

      2) Disinterest.

      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
      appreciated.



      ========



      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
      soon.



      Dave Gentile

      Riverside, IL







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