Re: [Synoptic-L] A case for pMark
- LM wrote:
> I chose these two motifs ['immediately' and 'amazement'] because of theirLM,
> excessive repetition and thus indicate an aspect of authorial style. It does
> proceed from the evidence of a redaction of an underlying narrative, which I
> find to be quite compelling.
> Would you not agree?
At this stage I can neither agree nor disagree. You have pointed to certain
stylistic features common in Mark's gospel and said that they are secondary
to ("proceed from") the evidence of redaction. So what exactly is the
evidence for redaction of an underlying narrative? Quoting examples is not
the same as supplying evidence. If you have set out evidence for redaction
which is independent of these stylistic features, I must have missed it.
(The page you pointed to on the 'Early Christian Writings' web site provides
evidence of what certain scholars believed about the extent of a supposed
pre-Markan passion narrative, but not why they believed in its historicity.)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]