Re: [Synoptic-L] how much of Q is in M?
- Chuck Jones wrote:
> If I understand this paragraph correctly, the material you're referring toChuck,
> could (should?) be investigated further as possible Q material. Is that
Not really, for I think the hypothetical Q comes from a simplistic and
flawed understanding of the Double Tradition. My reconstruction of the logia
differs quite a lot from Q (details on my Web site). The diverse nature of Q
is such that it is impossible to define useful criteria as to what sayings
from outside the Double Tradition should be added to it. The Double
Tradition is the wrong place to start. If we start with the doublets, which
is a cohesive group of aphorisms, it is much easier to see which other
synoptic sayings should be added to the group.
Web site: http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm